What is your opinion of "Abd al-Rahman Abd al-Khalq" and his stance toward the Islamic groups?

The questioner: I mean, for example, we have not seen what these organizers have written, for example.The Shaykh : "Abd al-Rahman Abd al-Khalq" in his book "The Legitimacy of Collective Jihad," and many of them, "Sourour" as well in his writings, I mean, they say that the Shaykhs of the Salafis, whether contemporary Salafi or old Salafi, likeThe Shaykh : "Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab"; I mean, they argue that he had a gathering, he established a gathering through his da'wah, and he defended his da'wah from al-Dar'iyyah and went outside the Peninsula, I mean.

The Shaykh: No problem, my brother, the word "gathering," the word "gathering," we can say it is a stretchable word, a word of politicians, I mean; if you narrow it, it narrows, and if you widen it, it widens. We are now, as we said earlier, are we not gathered?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: Now, is there anyone who denies this gathering?

The questioner: No.

The Shaykh: But the gathering we referred to earlier, which is in reality the party blocs today in the Islamic lands, an attempt to establish a small state within a large state; because they have views concerning this state; some of them explicitly declare that the rulers are disbelievers, some of them say that if they are not disbelievers, then it is obligatory to rebel against them, and so on of such statements. These do not stem from the scholarly and organizational gatherings we referred to, but rather they stem from political blocs and partisanship. Then, these political partisanship and blocs, over time, if they have some of the pure Islamic culture, they begin to fade and dissolve and dissolve; because the effort will be directed toward pure politics.
So this gathering, this bloc, this partisanship, it is not befitting for us to be unaware that this is one thing, and what Islam commands and all the Islamic groups have carried out throughout the ages is another thing.
Look now, our brother "Abd al-Rahman Abd al-Khalq," "Abd al-Rahman Abd al-Khalq" is our companion and our brother, and he is my student at the Islamic University, and he has words, I mean, in which he mentions me or mentions me with good; but nevertheless, over time, the Salafi aspect in him has developed; because political work necessitates that the one who carries out this work and goes out, even if only a little, and the going out may be more and more in the future. He, for example, approves of the Tabligh Jama'ah with all its flaws and imperfections.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: Why? Because they work for Islam, is this not enough? And I say: that the Tabligh Jama'ah as a group, many of them are sincere, but the path they are walking on will never, ever lead this group. First, if their time comes to die, will they die upon the correct tawhid (the oneness of Allah) and upon a correct 'aqidah (creed)? And what matters to the Muslim if he cannot establish the state of Islam on the land of Islam, but he can establish the state of Islam in his heart? So what matters to him if the state of Islam is not established on the earth if he has established it in his heart? But the exact opposite, the state of Islam was established, but the state of Islam in his heart was not established; what is the benefit of that?
So the Tabligh Jama'ah, as you know, and I think you do not need me to elaborate, they do not study tawhid (the oneness of Allah), they do not study hadith and the Sunnah, each of them is like the Muslim Brotherhood, as they say in our land of the Levant: "Everyone is on his own religion, may Allah help him," I mean, this one is a Hanafi, this one is a Hanbali, this one is a Maliki, this one is a Shafi'i, this one is a Sufi, this one is a Salafi, all of this, there is no difference between them; because they do not have the goal of following His saying, the Exalted: , this matter is possible, the Tabligh Jama'ah do not strive for it. What does the Tabligh Jama'ah strive for? For something easy and lenient, which is most like, and I hope I am not held accountable for this statement, the da'wah of the Christians, monasticism, characterizing oneself with good morals; do not commit zina (unlawful sexual intercourse), do not steal, do not lie, do not... and so on. As for 'aqidah (creed), if it is in ruins, then there is no harm in that. This is not Islam.
We left the Tabligh Jama'ah aside and took, for example, the Muslim Brotherhood; about half a century has passed for them and they have not advanced, neither to the Islam they aspire to be the judge on earth, nor to the Islam their first leader ordered them by saying: "Establish the state of Islam in your hearts and it will be established for you on your land." They have established neither this nor that, and they will not be able to do so unless they walk on the path.
Our brother "Abd al-Rahman" came and wanted to reconcile, I mean, to make Salafi Muslim Brotherhood, this is impossible, it is not possible to combine between the two paths ever; , I actually observe some observations, I find that the young Muslim Brotherhood in the past used to dress in the European dress; why? Because their leader Hassan al-Banna lived this way, but he was able, with some literary boldness, to contradict the Egyptian atmosphere there in one thing; and that is that he let grow, I do not say his beard, he let grow some of his beard, okay? Then the Muslim Brotherhood ran in all the Islamic lands to dress in his dress, you will not find a man from the Muslim Brotherhood with a long beard, it became their symbol, yes?

The questioner: Mostly, yes.

The Shaykh: No, I have not seen anyone.

The questioner: In the past, perhaps, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh: I have not seen anyone from them, I mean, from the Muslim Brotherhood with a full beard, it is possible that before, and peace be upon you, before he became a Muslim Brotherhood member, it is possible that he had a beard... then he became what? One of the Muslim Brotherhood, but did he grow up and be raised in the ranks of the Muslim Brotherhood and yet follow the Sunnah and not follow the Sunnah of Hassan al-Bana?! This is what I know!!
So all the young Muslims now, especially in the lands of Europe, dress in the dress of Hassan al-Banna; why? Because they were influenced by his methodology, and they were not influenced by the methodology of their Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and this partisanship, according to you, is an example of what it leads its people to, and among that, also, that it does not matter to them if you find a Salafi from the Muslim Brotherhood, you will not find him a Salafi da'iyah (caller), but rather he is for himself and his own self, as for the others, as we said earlier: "Everyone is on his own religion, may Allah help him," like that.
This is not the intention, so if all the groups agree to walk on what the righteous Salaf used to do; then every group works as if we assume individuals, this one works in hadith, this one in fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), this one in tafsir (Qur'anic exegesis), this one in language, this one in economics, this one in politics.
Without a doubt, if we assume the sciences are twenty sciences, hypothetically, and twenty people carried out these sciences, in the Islamic world it is not enough, it is obligatory that hundreds carry out each science, that there be hundreds in each science to carry out this collective obligation, but they are not except a single bloc that unites them by saying "Allah said" and "The Messenger of Allah said." If they do this, it is good work, and good...

The questioner: I mean, this does not mean that a group from them specializes in politics, works for politics or works in politics?

The Shaykh: They work in politics, but within the circle of Islam, the Book and the Sunnah, so it does not mean partisanship and blocs in this work such that we do not recognize the other groups and we oppose them and we fight them; and therefore we say: among the merits of the Salafi Islamic da'wah is that it is expansive for all the groups, and there is no group that is expansive for all the groups except this group that holds fast to the da'wah to the Book and the Sunnah. So whoever is like this and works in an aspect of this Islam, we do not blame him, and we do not take him to task; because it is not possible except this, clear?

The questioner : Yes, it is clear.

The Shaykh: May Allah help.

Another questioner: ... they permit the work; because they have a doubt in the rule: "What is not completed except by it, it is obligatory," I mean, what is the criterion of this rule? Here.

The Shaykh: We do not differ in this.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: Now, my brother, my speech is clear in this, I mean, now am I a specialist in language? Am I a specialist in language?

The questioner: No, in hadith.

The Shaykh: I may be a specialist in the science of hadith, but if you are a specialist in language, do you oppose me?

The questioner: No.

The Shaykh: Oppose you?

The questioner: No.

The Shaykh : Do you form factions and cliques, you and your group who work in the field of language? No, each of us complements the other; every group complements the other group, and so on. When the groups are in this state, we say: this is Islamic work, this is collective work, and it is not factionalism.

Another questioner : They mean they belong to specific parties, they work and seek political work. For example, you find among them a person or a preacher who specializes, for example, in hadith, and this one specializes in language. Is this part of your speech? Do we understand from it that we cooperate with them and work with them, and they view da'wah work through the party under its shadow?

The Shaykh : Yes, yes, I cooperate with them; but what is their position toward me? And toward my like? Do they cooperate with him? The answer is: No.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : We cooperate with them, and therefore, when I was in Syria, I was with the Muslim Brotherhood as if I were one of them; because I was calling them to the Book and the Sunnah, and there were among them many who responded to me. For example, Isam al-Attar, who is well-known in Amman, and Zuhayr al-Shawish, and so on. But factionalism inevitably overcomes them; they do not call to the Book and the Sunnah; because they believe that calling to the Book and the Sunnah causes division. And I say with complete frankness: Yes, it causes division; but it divides between the truth and falsehood, it divides between the one who is wrong and the one who is right; this is necessary, and the Messenger was not sent except for this. Therefore, I like a hadith in "Sahih al-Bukhari": , the Messenger is a divider; meaning: a divider between the truth and falsehood.
So these people, because of their unscientific clustering, fight knowledge. And they say, like the Tabligh Jama'ah, perfectly: if you go with them and call to what they call to, only the prohibition of lying, theft, talebearing, and so on, they are satisfied with you. But if you talk about tawhid, you talk about the Sunnah, you talk about warning against bid'ah, they also say—using a Syrian expression—"the side of... do not approach"; meaning the side of the sensitive thing, they say do not approach it.
So how do these people understand each other if we are extending our hands to them for cooperation, each in his field, and they refuse to cooperate with us? This is a very important point, so we must be aware of it.

Another questioner : Shaykh, there is a topic I suggested asking about, but now after the brother spoke, an idea came to me: the Algerian youth will keep coming to you and coming to you in every place you go, and asking you about the issue. I wish you would clarify the understanding and clarify it now, or at any time, and speak frankly. For example, we have our brother Al-Aid, who is trusted by us—if Allah wills—and by the Algerians. He can explain to you that what is called the Front or the "Islamic Front" arose in Algeria. Why does not the brother volunteer to tell you about its actions as he sees them, and how it was built, and what it aims for? Then you say everyone in Algeria is waiting for the answer, then you say, excuse me, then you guide the youth and advise them: what is their position toward it? How do they view it? Meaning, you give them general guidance; in that case, the topic will not be raised again. But like this, with generalities, everyone... everyone will understand from your words according to his own intention, and according to what he is directed toward. Perhaps the brother Al-Aid will volunteer now, or tomorrow, or since he is residing here and he is your student—if Allah wills—and he follows your books, and he knows this "Front" by virtue of being with it, and it was established while he was present, and he knows its goals, and he knows this. This is what I want to say.