The Story of Shaykh Al-Albani with the Maronite Priest

The Shaykh : Therefore, the scope of the disbelievers' opposition is sufficient for us, relieving us of the need to convince these debaters who argue with falsehood. And to conclude, I will tell you my story with that priest. One day, a train traveling from Damascus to a resort called Mada'a in our Syria brought us together. I was riding in one of the train's compartments with some young men when one of them whispered to me, saying, "A priest has just boarded the train and entered the compartment in front of ours." I understood his meaning, so I stood up and pretended that I had also just entered. He was sitting in a corner over there, and I sat here so that he would not feel that I had come to confront him. I sat thinking about how to start a conversation with him, since I did not know him and he did not know me. In truth, I do not like improvising like that, with surprises. And our Lord, Mighty and Majestic, as if He is announcing what is in the breasts—excuse me—as if He knows, or rather, He certainly knows, what is in my heart, so He sent the opportunity in a way that involved no artifice. The man boarded at the same station where the priest had boarded: a young man from the Muslim Brotherhood at the time. I had gotten to know him, and a close relationship developed between us for the sake of da'wah, as you know. I was among all the young men, and they were from the Muslim Brotherhood group. I was the only one who learned recently that he had married. And there he was, boarding and appearing before me, greeting the group. I said to him, "I congratulate you," and I said to the group, "Congratulate him as well, with what the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) used to congratulate his companions with." So I said And I will not tell you that it was like the first age of ignorance and the ignorance of the twentieth century, which spoke of luxury and sons, and so on and so on. How much of a calamity these sons were for the husband and wife! I delved into this topic, and as I was speaking, I reached some of the rulings of the legislation, including the Prophet's prohibition of drinking from a cracked vessel, and how the Companions responded to this legal ruling with obedience and worship, not with medicine and philosophy, and now the wisdom has become apparent. And so one should submit to the rulings of the Shari'ah, because people do not know. Until I felt that the priest was filled up, so I deliberately fell silent. And there he was, launching into speech without any planning, exactly as I had done. You can tell by his surprise to me; he said, "If Islam is of this nature, why did the Muslims declare Ataturk a disbeliever?" Look, there was no occasion for directing such a question! The point is, the conversation was long and very long, so long that you can measure its length by the fifty-kilometer distance. I was in discussion with him until we reached the station where we were to get off at the Mada'a resort. Among the topics of the conversation was the issue of imitation, because he had raised the topic of the Muslims declaring Ataturk a disbeliever. So I said, "The Muslims did not declare him a disbeliever because he imposed the hat on the Turkish people. And even if this is not permissible in Islam, he committed something more heinous than that, where he made inheritance equal between the male and the female. And Allah says From this speech, he found in his opinion a basis for the topic: what is the problem with imitation? He said, "What is wrong with the hat? It has become a universal garment." I had mentioned something with real precision. I told him that this Ataturk, who refused to continue with his previous name, Mustafa, if he wanted good for the Turkish people and saw that imposing the hat as a system and law on them was beneficial, whether economically, health-wise, or otherwise, he could have made a difference between the Muslim's hat and the disbeliever's hat. He could have made, for example, a green or white ribbon on the Muslims' hats, and the problem would have been solved, because the Muslim would be distinguished from the disbeliever. But he did not want anything except to develop the Turkish people and make them a European people. So he exploited this point: what is wrong with this? It is a universal garment, and so on. So I seized the opportunity and said to him, "Do I understand from you that there is no objection?" I forgot to tell you that this was a Lebanese Maronite priest. Their clothing is black on black, and even their cap is like the cap of some Sufi dervishes who spin and turn; they have a very long cap, but the priest's cap is a dark black with a very wide brim. So I said to him, "In my opinion, based on your view, this clothing has no connection to religion. Is there any objection for you to take off the cap and put a red fez on your head, with a white turban on top of it, so that you look exactly like a Muslim shaykh?" He said, "No, no, no." I said to him, "Why? This is clothing that has no connection to religion. What is it with us?" He said to me, "We are men of religion, and we have a specific uniform." I said to him, "This is the difference between us and you. We, the Muslims, have absolutely no difference between us. The greatest scholar and the most ignorant fool are united by Islam, and it gives them one ruling. But as for you, in your own explicit words, you have men of religion and men who have no religion. What is forbidden for them is permissible for the others, and what is obligatory for you is not obligatory for the others. But Islam has made all people equal ."