Does the public call to the Salafi methodology divide the Muslim community?

The Shaykh : Exactly as I said before, I say: As long as Allah (Mighty and Majestic) has stated in the Noble Qur'an that it is not His will or intention for people to be one single community, then Islamic callers should focus their efforts and not disperse or waste them in the path of unifying all groups and all sects; because if they do that, they are attempting an impossible thing. Rather, they should direct their energies and ambitions to unification, as I mentioned earlier, among individuals and groups that are united by one school of thought, one idea, or one belief. The meaning of this statement is that it is obligatory for them to care for Muslims, and this is the first thing. But I do not mean the broad sense understood from the word "Muslims" today; because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) informed us that the Muslims themselves will split into many paths, many sects and schools of thought. And you have all certainly heard at some point his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): . They said: Who are they, O Messenger of Allah? He said: .
Following this hadith comes the hadith of al-'Arba' ibn Sari'ah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) gave us a sermon that caused our eyes to shed tears and our hearts to tremble. So we said: O Messenger of Allah, give us advice. He said: . The point of this hadith is his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): to the end of it. So the Muslims, as these two hadiths attest, are divided to the greatest extent of division, and as reality attests both in the past and the present. In the past, many sects existed; the most cultured people must have heard of the Mu'tazilah, for example, and the Khawarij, and the Rafidah Shi'ah, and so on, of many, many sects. People differ in the breadth or narrowness of their knowledge of them according to their insight and knowledge.
So the Muslims today, living in this humiliating situation where the disbelievers dominate them in every land of Islam, either by direct colonial domination and making their lands lawful as was the case recently in the past, or by intellectual and directional domination as is the case in this time. And the worst of the occupations they suffered is the occupation of the most noble of Islamic lands by the most humiliated of nations, namely the Jews, and that is the land of Palestine. So this means that the Muslims are in need to unify their efforts, to gather their ranks, and to abandon their division and unify their word if they truly want to repel the enemy from their lands, in the two forms of colonialism or occupation we mentioned earlier. But on what basis should these divided Muslims unite? Allah (Mighty and Majestic) established this basis when He said: . We know that the difference among Muslims today has two aspects: one aspect has been known since ancient times, which is their difference in their understanding of their religion in principles and branches, and not only, as some sheikhs think and state, that the difference is only in the branches and not the principles. This is contrary to reality.
The reality is that the difference in the past was, and still is, even in the principles, and the principle of principles is the tawhid (oneness of Allah) of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) and worshipping Him. And we explained to you earlier, before the Maghrib prayer, tawhid in its three categories: tawhid al-rububiyyah (oneness of lordship), tawhid al-uluhiyyah (oneness of worship) or worship, and tawhid al-asma' wa al-sifat (oneness of the names and attributes), and how many Muslims today do not know this tawhid and thus fall into shirk (associating partners with Allah) and kufr (disbelief) regarding Allah (Mighty and Majestic) without realizing it. So this is a difference in principles, not in branches. And I do not want to repeat the previous statement, I am only reminding you. So the Muslims today differ in two aspects: the first aspect is old, and this is its example, and there are many, many examples. The other aspect is new, which is their difference in the path that Islamic callers must follow to be able to establish the rule of Allah and the system of Allah on earth, and thereby they can keep the disbelievers away from their lands in the two forms mentioned earlier. And after... today they differ in this to the greatest extent of difference, while remaining in their difference which they inherited from the many long past centuries.
And we believe that the previous difference is much more dangerous than the later difference that exists now; because the previous difference is a fundamental, principled, creedal difference, whereas the current difference is a difference in means: how do we expel the foreigner from the lands? How do we establish the Muslim state? This is a difference and it has its bad effect too, but much worse than that is the difference of Muslims today, this difference which they inherited from what has passed of time. And let me give you an example of this: Today, the masses of Muslim scholars, and I do not say the majority, and among them the masses of Islamic callers, have not understood the Islamic creed, the creed. I do not say: they do not know the prayer that the Messenger prayed, nor do I say: they do not know the fasting that the Messenger fasted, nor do I say: they do not know the Hajj that the Messenger performed. These are things they do not actually know, but I say: the matter is much more dangerous; they do not know the tawhid that the Messenger of Allah brought from his Lord, and clarified in his hadith, and his Lord established in His Book. Let me give you an example of this:
If you asked, and we have asked and known and tested, and whoever loves to test, let him test, if you asked most of the Islamic callers the following question regarding the existence of Allah (Mighty and Majestic), which is the principle of principles and the principle of creeds, if they were asked: Where is Allah? They could not give an answer. And yet they are divided into two groups: some of them rush to deny this question, saying: What is this question? This is not permissible, this is misguidance, and some may say: This is kufr (disbelief). And some do not deny this question but are confused in the answer, they are perplexed and do not know what to say. And a third group gives you the answer, but this third group is divided into two: some say: "Allah exists in all existence," or they say the opposite of the other and the meaning is the same: "Allah exists in every place," and they are unaware that this is kufr (disbelief) itself. And some say the opposite of this statement, and they are the people of knowledge. And I heard this from one of my sheikhs in Damascus, saying on the pulpit openly before the witnesses: Allah—he says—"Allah is not above, nor below, nor to the right, nor to the left, nor in front, nor behind, not inside the world nor outside it." They describe their worshipped with the attributes of the non-existent. If it were said to the most eloquent of the Arabs in expression: Describe for us the non-existent, he would not be able to describe it with more than what these Muslims describe their worshipped with: "Not above, not below, not to the right, not to the left, not in front, not behind, not inside the world nor outside it"; so this is the non-existent!!

The questioner : Rather...

The Shaykh : That, that, no, this is something else.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : That is another matter.

Eid Abbasi : ... .

The Shaykh : Yes, yes, this is something else. They judged their Lord with non-existence when they described Him with these descriptions which the scholars of kalam (theology) call negation. Negation, no, no, no, we want, yes, yes, yes, we want you to give us positive attributes. No, no, no, no. A person, what is his color? He tells you: He is not white, nor brown, nor such and such. My brother, then no, no, no? If you spend from morning to evening saying "no," you have not presented us with anything. Just tell us what his color is. Say, for example: Yellow, brown, say anything that matches reality. The Lord of the worlds, as He said: , but He did not say "not only." Then what did He say? ; so it is not enough for us to say "not, not, not, not, not, not." We must say: He is, He is such and such and such and so on. There is nothing.
Therefore, I greatly appreciate a precise observation that came from one of the princes of Damascus in the time of the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him). Ibn Taymiyyah in his time was the bearer of the banner of calling to the Book and the Sunnah, upon the methodology of the righteous Salaf. For that reason, the masses of shaykhs, judges, muftis, and rulers, and so on, were against him. They constantly stirred up problems in his path and his da'wah, and they constantly filed complaints with the governor, saying that he does such and such, and that he divides the people, and causes fitnah, and so on. In one of the episodes, one of the princes there—the wise and intelligent ones—complained about him to him. So he asked them to debate with him in his presence. They gathered for a great day in the presence of the prince, and the discussion took place between the two parties. Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) described Allah as He has described Himself in many noble verses and many noble Prophetic hadiths. In brief, I do not want to investigate this specific issue in detail; rather, I mentioned it as an example of how far Muslims, even the callers among them, are from the correct Islamic 'aqidah. So I do not want to mention the verses and hadiths, but rather the idea.
Ibn Taymiyyah used the verses and hadiths as evidence that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) has the attribute of being above, as He said: I was going to mention two verses to you, just: , and the other verse: ; so Allah has the attribute of being above. It is not said: He is below, or to the right, or behind, or inside the world. But it is said: Allah is above the Throne, He has istawa (risen above the Throne). The Most Merciful Himself has istawa. Here, what did they bring to him? They were from the second group, not the first group that says: "Allah exists in every place." The shaykhs who were debating Ibn Taymiyyah were from the second group. So they said, and the prince was listening—and here is the point: "Allah is not described as being above." They were refuting Ibn Taymiyyah: "Allah is not described as being above or below, or to the right or to the left, or behind or in front, and so on, not inside the world nor outside it." What did the wise, astute prince say? He said: "These are a people who have lost their Lord." This is the truth! They have lost their Lord!
Now, when you say in prostration, "My Lord, the Most High," are you not envisioning the majesty and greatness of Allah? Are you envisioning that He is dissolved in every place, in the tents, in the bars, in the taverns, in the inns, in the sewers, and so on? Far be it from Allah! I seek refuge in Allah! So you are envisioning it as those misguided ones who lost their Lord said: not above, not below; so this is non-existent. But you say, or you do not know what you are saying: "Glory be to my Lord, the Most High." What does "the Most High" mean? The One above whom is nothing, the One who is above everything. So you must know your Lord. These who say today and before today: "Allah is not above, not below," have lost their Lord. And among them are groups of the great scholars today and of the Islamic callers.
Where did the many verses that came in this regard go for them? They did not study 'aqidah in the way of the righteous Salaf. The righteous Salaf have many statements in this regard. And I also do not want to lengthen the research, but I will convey to you one phrase because it gathered and contained, with its brevity. This is the phrase of 'Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak, from the most honored of the shaykhs of Imam Ahmad. Ibn al-Mubarak said: "Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) is above His Throne with His Self, separate from His creation, and He is with them with His knowledge." "Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) is above His Throne with His Self, separate." This is, of course, like the previous verse: , separate from His creation; meaning: He is not inside the world as the first group says: "That Allah exists in every place." Place is a created thing that did not exist, and Allah was, and there was no time and no place. And if these people say: "Allah exists in every place," it means He crammed Himself into this creation which is lowly compared to the Great Lord of the worlds. Allah is greater than everything.
We say: We say "Allah is the Greatest" so many times in the prayer, and we do not grasp what the meaning of "Allah is the Greatest" is. One who says: "Allah exists in the tents, the caves, the rooms, the bathrooms, and so on" does not believe in "Allah is the Greatest." In refutation of these and in refutation of those, Ibn al-Mubarak said: "Allah (Mighty and Majestic) is above His Throne with His Self." Those said: He is not above. He says: above, in the meaning of the Qur'an, and He is the Subduer above His servants. In the Noble Qur'an, He describes His believing servants with this attribute: , so the one who does not fear Allah is observed to be above him, so he is not among these believing servants.
In refutation of these who said: "Allah is not above," Ibn al-Mubarak said: "Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) is above His Throne with His Self." And in refutation of the other group that says: "Allah exists in every place," he said: "And He is separate from His creation"; meaning separated, meaning as He (Blessed and Exalted is He) said in the Noble Qur'an: And He is the Rich, what is the verse? The Rich with respect to the worlds.

Another questioner : ... .

The Shaykh: In several verses in this regard.

Eid Abbasi : .

The Shaykh: Yes, so Allah is Rich with respect to the worlds; so He is not in need of a house to take refuge in, as is the case of slaves, for example. In refutation of these who say: "Allah exists in every place," he said: "Separate from His creation." And so that no one might imagine that because Allah (Mighty and Majestic) is above His Throne with His Self, separate from His creation, that He does not hear them or know what they are talking about, he said: "And He is with them with His knowledge." Three sentences gathered the many, very many texts of the Book and the Sunnah in these three sentences. He said: "Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) is above His Throne with His Self, separate from His creation, and He is with them with His knowledge."
The Hafiz Imam al-Dhahabi, the Damascene, has a specific treatise on this issue, printed in several editions, titled "Al-'Uluww li-l-'Ali al-Ghaffar" (The Exaltation of the Exalted, the Forgiver). Ibn al-Mubarak gathered it in these three words: "Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) is above His Throne with His Self, separate from His creation, and He is with them with His knowledge."
This is one of the issues in which they differed in the past, and they are still differing today, except whom your Lord has shown mercy. Today, the Islamic callers are differing. So what is the way out, first: to correct their 'aqidah, and second: to unify the line to escape from this humiliation that has befallen the Muslims?!
We believe with certainty and we will declare it openly to all people, so we say: The way out is as He (the Exalted) said: , and we know that every group of differing people, if they want to be sincere in unifying, they must place a methodology that gathers them and a constitution and system that unifies them. We find that the most distant of nations and countries from each other, when they feel the necessity of closeness, agreement, and union, even for a limited time, they gather and place a methodology they agree upon and stand upon it. How then are we, Muslims, when Allah (Mighty and Majestic) has relieved us from occupying our minds and intellects with placing a constitution and methodology upon which the differing Muslims gather? Allah (Mighty and Majestic) has made us rich in this with the Book of Allah and the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah, these two primary sources, in which the Messenger (may the prayers and peace of Allah be upon him) informed us with truth that the Muslims will not go astray and will not perish as long as they hold fast to them, as he (may the prayers and peace of Allah be upon him) said in the authentic hadith: .
So if the Muslims differ, the way to unify them and to escape from this humiliation that has settled upon them is none other than the call to the Book and the Sunnah. Then, the intended meaning here—this is an important observation—the intended meaning of the call, our brothers, and let the witness inform the absent one—the intended meaning of the call to the Book and the Sunnah is not the call to the name of the Book and the Sunnah. Here is a very important truth: the intended meaning of the call to the Book and the Sunnah is the call to acting upon the Book and the Sunnah =
-- Do you want to lengthen your patience a little with me? What do you think? Do you want to lengthen your patience, if Allah wills --
The intended meaning of calling to the Book and the Sunnah is acting upon what is in the Book and the Sunnah. Therefore, it is not sufficient for us to call to the Book and the Sunnah while our scholarly, intellectual, practical, and social conditions remain as they have been for centuries. We call to the Book and the Sunnah, but in reality, we are staying in our place. You are moving, but you are not moving forward. Rather, the intended meaning of the Book and the Sunnah is acting upon what is in the Book and the Sunnah. Then, here is another observation: the intended meaning of acting upon the Book and the Sunnah is not acting upon what I, you, Zayd, and Bakr understand from the Book and the Sunnah. If that were the case, people would return to disagreement in interpreting the Book and the Sunnah as well. Rather, the intended meaning of acting upon the Book and the Sunnah is understanding them according to the methodology of the righteous Salaf.
Do you hear me, Professor Mustafa?
Mustafa: Yes, yes.

The Shaykh : The intended meaning of acting upon the Book and the Sunnah is understanding them according to the methodology of the righteous Salaf, not understanding them according to my understanding or yours or Zayd’s and Bakr’s and ‘Umar’s. In that case, we would go back to square one, and we would increase in disagreement upon disagreement, and we would bring new disagreements on top of the old ones. For this reason, we find in the Noble Qur’an the saying of the Lord of the Worlds: . Here is a point: Why did our Lord say: ? Why did He not limit it to saying: “And whoever opposes the Messenger after the clear proof has come to him, We will turn him to what he has turned to” to the end of the verse? But He added to the opposition of the Messenger the saying: ? Here is a great secret; it is a reference to the fact that there are people who claim that they follow the Book and the Sunnah, but according to their own concept. From here came the Islamic sects. There is no sect among the seventy-three sects that the Messenger (peace be upon him) referred to; there is no sect that says: “We are disavowed of the Book and the Sunnah forever.” The most misguided of the Islamic sects today, I say it openly and clearly, in terms of calling as a group, are the Indian “Qadiyyaniyyah” who claim that Allah sent a prophet in the last of times, seventy years ago, named “Mirza Ghulam Ahmad al-Qadiyyani,” to the end of their misguidance. These people say: “We are upon the Book and the Sunnah.” But when it is said to them: How do you believe that there is a prophet after the Messenger, while Allah says in the Qur’an which you claim to believe in: ?!
They came to us with a meaning that the Salaf never knew at all! They said: does not mean the last of the prophets. What would the meaning be? Khatam al-Nabiyyin means the adornment of the prophets; just as the ring is the adornment of the finger, so the Prophet Muhammad is the adornment of the prophets. It does not mean the last of the prophets in the verse. So these people believe in the verse, but what did this belief benefit them?

The questioner : ... This topic does not fall into that.

The Shaykh : What did this belief benefit them?

The questioner Professor.

The Shaykh : Yes?

The questioner : .

The Shaykh : Likewise; no, they also have a strange interpretation. They said: with me, with me.
...

The Shaykh : As for after him, with me...
...

The Shaykh : Yes, now we are not researching the Qadiyyaniyyah; we are bringing examples quickly as we go.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Quickly, yes, that is right.
The other sect does not call, but it spreads its ideas in a very dangerous way, and they are the extreme Sufis who claim the unity of existence, among whom one says:
“And the dog and the pig are nothing but our God *** And God is nothing but a monk in a church”
Among whom one says: “When the Majus worshipped the fire, they did not worship anything but the One, the Subduer”!! Among whom one says: “The Jews and the Christians only erred because they confined their Lord to: the Jews to ‘Azir, and the Christians to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” He said: “As for us—meaning these Sufis—we generalized them in everything!!” You have gone astray because they confined them to three, but we have generalized them in everything. Therefore, to confirm this meaning, one of them said: “Everything you see with your eye is Allah.” Also, it is not my intention to research the Sufis and their misguidance and superstitions, but do you hear a Sufi say: “I am disavowed of the Book and the Sunnah”? Never. Therefore, we must hold fast to what do we call it? The safety valve. What is it? That we understand the Book and the Sunnah as the righteous Salaf did. Otherwise, all Muslims, despite their disagreement and misguidance, say: “I am upon the Book and the Sunnah.” As the poet said in a different context:
“And every one claims a connection to Layla *** And Layla does not approve of that for them”
All of them claim that they are upon the Book and the Sunnah, but who testifies for them that they are upon the Book and the Sunnah? The one who came in the previous hadith, they said: Who is it, O Messenger of Allah? He said: . Like the previous verse: . So if he followed the Qur’an and the Sunnah by his claim, but he contradicted the way of the Muslims, the method of the Muslims, then this also applies to him: .
Here we reach the conclusion that it is not sufficient for us to call to the Book and the Sunnah with a call that is abstract from practical application. It is not sufficient for us to call to acting upon the Book and the Sunnah according to our desires and our private concepts. Rather, it must be based on understanding the Book and the Sunnah as the righteous Salaf did, from the Companions, the Tabi‘un, and the mujtahid imams who are from the three centuries testified to as the best.
Finally: What is the way to know what the righteous Salaf were upon?
It is the Sunnah. The Sunnah is what indicates to us what the Messenger (peace be upon him) was upon first, and what the Companions were upon from what they received from the Messenger second, and what the rest of the righteous Salaf were upon from what they received from those before them. This is the safety valve, if the expression is correct, and it is the guarantee that Muslims do not deviate from the Book and the Sunnah in the name of holding fast to the Book and the Sunnah.
If you know these facts, then we believe with all sincerity and openness that we must be open with the Muslims who share with us the faith in the Book of Allah and the hadith of the Messenger of Allah. We must be open with them that it is not sufficient...
... The Islamic sects belong to the Book and the Sunnah as we mentioned, but none of them dares to say: “We are upon what the righteous Salaf were upon,” ever, except one sect that is called in the Levant “the Salafiyyin,” called in Egypt “the Supporters of the Muhammadan Sunnah,” called in India and Pakistan “the People of the Hadith.” Only these are the ones who hold fast to the Book and the Sunnah according to the methodology of the righteous Salaf.
And a distinguishing example between these Salafiyyin on one hand and the others on the other hand is that important creed: Where is Allah? Ask anyone you want other than the Salafiyyin; they do not know the answer. The answer is mentioned in the Sunnah, and it was inherited by the scholars of the Salaf. The question is established in the Sunnah with the answer, but other than the Salafiyyin, they do not know the question or the answer; because they do not take the Shari‘ah, even in creed, upon the path of the righteous Salaf, but according to what appears to their opinions. And their opinions are divided into what we mentioned: “Allah is present in every place,” or “He is not inside the world—in brief—nor outside of it.”
Holding fast to what the righteous Salaf were upon is the guarantee that Muslims do not deviate to the right or to the left. To clarify this fact, it is necessary to declare the truth to the people and to pay attention to this principle; that is: understanding the Book and the Sunnah according to the methodology of the righteous Salaf. And after that, calling the Muslims to understand the tawhid (oneness of Allah) by which they are saved from falling into shirk (associating partners with Allah), which its owner deserves eternal abode in the Fire. If the Muslims set out in their calling upon this foundation and this methodology, it is possible that they will agree and then think about solving the existing problem from the political side; which is the occupation of the disbelievers of the Islamic lands in the manner previously mentioned.
So when it is said, as mentioned at the beginning of the question, that this divides the Muslims; we say it clearly: Yes, yes, always and forever. The call to the truth divides the people of truth from the people of falsehood. And so was the case of the Messenger (peace be upon him) when he was sent among his people, Quraysh. What was the result? Quraysh divided and split up; some believed in Allah and His Messenger, and others disbelieved in Allah and His Messenger. So the disbelieving son would meet the believing father in the same battle. Is this not division? Yes, but it is division by the truth. Therefore, we should not be deceived by a call we sometimes hear that the Salafi call is a call to the truth, but it divides people, and we want to unite people. We say: Yes, we want to unite people, but on the basis of the call to the truth, not on the basis of erasing the truth and eliminating it.
Therefore, it came in "Sahih al-Bukhari" regarding the Messenger (peace be upon him) that among his descriptions is that he is a divider; a divider between truth and falsehood, a divider between the people of truth and the people of falsehood. Therefore, it does not concern us at all that it is said: Your call is a call to the truth, but it divides. We say: As long as it is a call to the truth, it does not concern us that it divides. But all that concerns us is that our call is based on Islam, which is the Qur'an and the Sunnah, and particularly in my understanding of the answer to this question, that this call is based on His saying (Blessed and Exalted is He): . But beware that truth is mixed with falsehood; that some people think that it is part of the truth and wisdom in calling to the truth to delay the call to the truth, and to postpone the call to the truth to a time that you determine. This is not of wisdom at all, ever.
does not mean delay the call to the way of your Lord, but rather it means pair your call with wisdom and good exhortation.
This is what I have in answering the previous question. So whoever has a question now, please proceed, with thanks.