When can we say that the argument has been established against a group and that the call has reached them?

The questioner : ... There is no doubt that the call has reached many people, but these people differ. Some studied alongside this distorted call; they studied the Qur'an and the Arabic language with its sciences, from rhetoric and eloquence to grammar and morphology. They understood the language clearly and understood the Qur'an. They looked into some of the interpretations of the Salaf. There is also an existing call that affirms the principles and rules of tawhid (the oneness of Allah) that the Noble Qur'an brought. All of this is present in many people, including Arabs. So do we say that the argument has not been established against these people and that the call has not reached them?

The Shaykh : Who says this!

The questioner : I fear that it might come to mind.

The Shaykh : ... The second group, the call has reached them.

The questioner : Which second group?

The Shaykh : The one that contrasts with the group I described.

The questioner: No, no.

The Shaykh : This is the important point, may Allah reward you.

The questioner : No, I do not say this. For example, now a school like al-Azhar teaches Islamic sciences in their languages, their creeds, and their heritage, and so on. Do we say that the argument has been established against these people as well? Some foreign schools also study these sciences; they study the Qur'an and its sciences and its language in its various forms. Do we say that the call has reached these people, though it was distorted through the Asha'irah or others? But there remains what establishes the argument against them: their understanding of the Arabic language, their understanding of the sciences of the Qur'an and the sciences of hadith, and the heritage of the righteous Salaf. Does this mean we say that the argument has truly reached them and been established against them, or do we say there is a possibility that the argument has not reached them?

The Shaykh : I believe, may Allah reward you, that in all matters we must take the clearest examples, not the most obscure ones.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : So let us say, regarding the non-Arab Muslims, the non-Arab Muslims. We are not talking about their scholars, but let us say regarding the Arabs, the nation of Arabs who are not scholars. Has the call reached them? Because the important thing is to speak about the nation we call a Muslim nation, whether they are Arabs or non-Arabs. We do not want to speak about a select few from them, specifically this Arab or non-Arab elite, but rather about the common people of this nation. Has the call reached them in this era? You mentioned the al-Azharis specifically. Do you see the Egyptians as a nation, as a people, excuse me, has the call reached them as the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) brought it to the Companions, and as the Companions transmitted it to the Tabi'un, and so on? I am certain that this people, as a people, have not had the call reach them as it came and as it was revealed. But without doubt, some of the specific individuals among them, as you explained just now, have had the call reach them and the argument established against them. And our purpose in this explanation is to exempt the common Muslims, and especially the non-Arabs among them, from our rushing to apply the sword of takfir (declaring someone a disbeliever) against them. We know that they live among scholars, many of whom did not understand the call as it should be understood, and a portion of them, as you pointed out, understood it as it came, but they followed their desires, just as happened with the first Arabs, to whom the Messenger was sent directly. Therefore, I distinguished between the call in the first way, where a Messenger comes and conveys it to his people directly; here there is no room for the conveyance to be poor or deficient. Whereas the transmission of the call in the other way, something of this deficiency or poor conveyance can occur. So there is a difference between the first way and the other way, completely. And we are still living today, and we have conveyed the call through intermediaries, and especially between us and the Messenger who was sent directly to the Companions, there are fourteen centuries. So we must imagine that the call to the general Muslim community today, even the Arabs, has not reached them as it came and as it was revealed from the scholars, because they are scholars of evil, and those whom the Messenger (peace be upon him) described in the authentic hadith when he said: So my purpose in this is not to offer an excuse for those who have no excuse, and they are the minority, but rather to offer an excuse for those who have an excuse that the call has not reached them as it came. Today, for example, the Egyptians, and many of our Arab Syrians, claimed, has the call of tawhid (the oneness of Allah) reached them as it reached the first Arabs? I say no. The common people, the common Muslims, Arabs, let alone non-Arabs, have not had the call reach them. Because those who are supposed to be a means of guidance and direction, those who claim to be from the scholars, are supposed to be a means of guidance and direction for the common people, but they are a means of misguidance and corruption for the common people, because their knowledge is ignorance itself. Because they interpret for them the clear texts from the Book and the Sunnah that explicitly state that what they call tawassul (seeking nearness to Allah through a means) is shirk (associating partners with Allah) itself. So where do the common people get this correct understanding that I do not say every individual in this land, but I say many individuals in this land, have uniquely understood tawhid (the oneness of Allah) correctly, because of the call of the sincere callers to them? As for those lands, it is rare to find in them a scholar in the true sense who conveyed to them the correct call. Then they turned away from it. This is the reality of the Muslim world, let alone the Western world. Let us move now to the West, Europe or America. Have these individuals, who are disbelievers, had the call of Islam reach them as Allah (Mighty and Majestic) revealed it to the heart of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him)? Unfortunately, with great regret, it has not reached them. So I give you a very recent example that we know, even if from many years ago, and I do not know what the situation is now. The Qadiani sect, which emerged from Islam with its false beliefs, is one of the most active sects that adopts Islam as a religion in calling Europeans to Islam. And hundreds, indeed thousands, of Europeans, whether German, British, or American, responded to the call of the Qadianis and became Qadiani Muslims. And of the belief of these people is that prophethood was not sealed, and that the saying of Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) does not mean what we understand, i.e., the last of the prophets and that there is no prophet after him. Rather, they interpreted for these non-Arab Europeans and Americans that "Khatam al-Nabiyyin" means the adornment of the prophets, and not that the verse means he is the last of the prophets. So the Europeans embraced the religion of the Qadianis. Have these people had the call reach them as Allah (Mighty and Majestic) revealed it? The answer is no. As for those who deviated among the scholars, their matter is clear, there is no doubt in it. Please.

Another questioner : The same statement we make, that the Arab polytheists did not have the call reach them as it came from the previous Messenger, does he not have the right to that?

The Shaykh : No, he does not have the right to that. First, this statement is not the problem. The problem is with the first Arabs, not the other Arabs. The problem is those whom you called opponents, it is their rejection of the explicit hadiths, some of which we mentioned just now.

Another questioner : The Prophet's father and mother. Some of the superstitious say that they cannot be in the Fire. Why do we say that we are a nation commanded to believe in the unseen, and Allah praised us for believing in the unseen? So we say that Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) is most knowledgeable about His servants. He knows that the Prophet's father and the Prophet's mother, and everyone who was among the people of the period (ahl al-fatra), and Allah informed His Prophet that he is among the people of the Fire and that he deserves it, even if a Messenger were sent to him. And we rest from these difficulties so that nothing is brought back to us?

The Shaykh : I did not understand much of what you are saying?

Another questioner : I am saying that those who say that the people of the period (ahl al-fatra), these, that some of the people of the period about whom the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) informed that they are in the Fire, have these not had the call reach them?

The Shaykh : We have finished with this. We said that those whom the call did not reach are not punished. But did the call not reach all the people of the period (ahl al-fatra)?

Another questioner : No, I am not saying specifically about these people?

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you. I am not asking you.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : I am asking about those people: do they believe that every person of the period of ignorance (al-fatra) to whom the call did not reach, or do they believe that some of them received the call and some did not? I am asking you about them.

Another questioner : They say that some did and some did not. They claim that the father of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and those who came before the mission of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) were confused, as happened with 'Umar ibn al-Khattab the Khaza'i, who brought the idols to Makkah and did such and such, and they covered up the call of the previous prophets. They say that the call did not reach these people, including the father and mother of the Prophet. We say to them: The father and mother of the Prophet are mentioned in authentic texts that clarify the matter. We are a community that believes in the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). When the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) informs us of something, can we say that this matter contains such and such, or that it suggests that the call reached them or did not reach them? We must submit, because we are Muslims.

The Shaykh : Who are you speaking about, O Shaykh? Are you speaking about those who believe in the authenticity of the hadiths, or those who deny them?

Another questioner : They believe in them but deny them. They say that these hadiths are authentic, but...

The Shaykh : Please answer me: are you speaking about those who believe in these hadiths and accept them, saying as he (peace be upon him) said , or are you speaking about those who deny these hadiths?

Another questioner : I am speaking about those who believe in them and then distort them. They say that "father" means "uncle." They say that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said his father is in the Fire, but "father" means "uncle"?

The Shaykh : Now you have strayed. May Allah reward you. You have gone off track. You have entered the topic of interpreting (ta'wil) the hadiths.

Another questioner : Yes, exactly.

The Shaykh : Fine, we have brought other hadiths that are explicit in their indication that some of those who died in the pre-Islamic age of ignorance (jahiliyyah) are being tormented in the grave.

Another questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Fine, how do they interpret these hadiths except by submitting to the fact that there were some among the Arabs to whom the call reached, and therefore they were tormented? We do not want to enter into labyrinths that take us away from what we are discussing. Our response is clear, but what we have before us now is a person who says: "I believe that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said , but I interpret 'father' here to mean 'uncle.'" Then we would start and respond to him, but we are not on that track. We would say: "How do you explain the hadith of the mother? " Perhaps he would say...

Another questioner : He would say that these are fabricated hadiths.

The Shaykh : Fine, is this the position of a Muslim?

Another questioner : This is not the position of a Muslim. I am speaking on behalf of these people. How do we respond to them?

The Shaykh : We have already discussed how to respond to them. Now we have brought explicit hadiths that some of those who died in the pre-Islamic age of ignorance (jahiliyyah) are being tormented.

Another questioner : Yes, exactly.

The Shaykh : Do they believe in them?

Another questioner : It is obligatory for them to believe in the unseen...

The Shaykh : My brother, may Allah reward you. You are saying "it is obligatory for them," but this is not the subject of the dispute. We are asking about their reality: do they believe in them, or does their unbridled emotion, which does not stop, drive them... Yes.

Another questioner : It drives them not to believe in them.

The Shaykh : Fine, they do not believe in them.

Another questioner : One who believes in the unseen is not worthy of being debated.

Another questioner : If you would allow me, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Please go ahead.

Another questioner : There is no doubt that the Salafi call has activity in the Arab and Islamic world in general.

The Shaykh: Yes.

Another questioner : And among the effects of this call, you find that Muslims in India number in the millions of Salafis. For example, twelve million in Bangladesh, twelve million in Pakistan, twelve million in India. Most of them are common people, meaning they understood the call.

The Shaykh : Praise be to Allah, that is what we desire.

Another questioner : That is one thing.

The Shaykh : Okay.

Another questioner : These Salafis, their common people have a culture that enables them to spread translated books that reach the common people and others. This, my brother, is one level. A common person comes to the book. This one calls him to the oneness of Allah (tawhid) and warns against associating partners with Allah (shirk). My brother, at the same level or lower than me, reads this and does not accept it. Is this brother excused?
The Shaykh : He is not excused if the correct creed was presented to him as it came.

Another questioner : It was presented correctly.
The Shaykh : He is not excused.

Another questioner : In Egypt, there is very strong Salafi activity. In Sudan, there is strong Salafi activity. In Syria, there is good Salafi activity. In Jordan, at the level of books and the call in mosques and sermons... One hears this sermon and says: "The word of truth clarifies the oneness of Allah (tawhid), associating partners with Allah (shirk), and religious innovation (bid'ah)." He says, "By Allah, this is the truth," and he responds and submits. This is a person of one level, or smarter than him, who hears this truth that explains "La ilaha illa Allah" and clarifies the oneness of Allah (tawhid) from associating partners with Allah (shirk), and he does not accept it. The proof has been established against him, or it has not.

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you. This is a life we lived in Syria.

Another questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : But why do you leave aside the negative side, which is certainly present?

Another questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : We gave you an example of the Qadianis and their call. Did the proof become established against these Europeans to whom the Islamic call came through the Qadianis?

Another questioner: No.

The Shaykh : Yes, that is it.

Another questioner : I do not know about that. I know about those to whom the call reached in the correct manner.

The Shaykh : And I agree with you on this, may Allah reward you. But the problem is not with this type. The problem is with the second type.

Another questioner : Many common people are before me in this mosque, in this school, in this place. One is preaching to them, presenting books. They are all at the same level. This one accepts the truth, and this one rejects it, accusing it of being Wahhabi. This speech he is making means misguidance and distortion of the Book of Allah. While the other says, "By Allah, this is sound speech, this is the truth," based on "Allah said" and "The Messenger of Allah said." One accepts this and the other rejects it. Does this mean we understand that our brothers, even if we call them common people, have minds? Even if we call them common people, the proof has been established against them, and their commonness was not an excuse for them, as long as the call reached them in the correct manner, through books or through...?

The Shaykh : We are going around in circles.

Another questioner : May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : The call reached them.

Another questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : The call reached them, and the matter is ended.

Another questioner : May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : The call reached them correctly, and the matter is ended. The call reached them incorrectly, and the matter is ended. The call did not reach them at all, and the matter is ended.

Another questioner : This is the speech.

The Shaykh : So the matter is very clear.