We have to make a distinction between that which is being ascribed to – which is the way of the Salaf – and the o*!ne who is ascribing himself to this. In absolute terms, that which is being subscribed to, that is the way of the Salaf, is nothing but the truth embodied, in both general specific terms, in issues of aqidah and manhaj, usool and furoo’ – and no-one denies or negates this save a heretic.
As for the o*!ne who subscribes himself to the Salafi Way, then in the basis of his ascription – which is to that which cannot err – then he is correct in that, and what is in opposition to this, is but error and misguidance. We mean here from the point of view of the generality of aqidah and manhaj and the usool of the religion. This is because the aqidah and the manhaj and the usool of the Salaf of all the ages is the same and they are united upon all of that.
Hence, o*!ne who is a Salafi and is true in his ascription to the Salaf and who proceeds upon knowledge and action, imitating their way, then he is correct in all of that inshaa’allah. And this person will either know the way of the Salaf in general terms, and he knows it to be correct, even though he may be ignorant of its particulars, yet he is still correct in considering their way – and his way of following and imitating them – to be the truth and whatever is in opposition to it, to be falsehood. Or he will know the way of the Salaf in both general and specific terms, in terms of aqidah and manhaj and usool and furoo’ and he will be correct in the majority of that which he holds o*!nto and acts upon, and all of this is dependent upon his sincerity in learning and his zeal for acquiring knowledge and acting upon it.
As for the individual being correct in every single issue from the subsidiary matters, then if o*!ne makes that claim, then he is in error. Since it is not possible for any o*!ne to be correct in every single subsidiary issue of the religion, since firstly, it is not possible for him to have knowledge of all of that, and secondly, when the Imaams of the past did not attain that, it is hardly likely that any of the followers of the latecomers will ever reach that. Hence, in the subsidiary matters it is possible for the Salafi to be in error, yet that does not negate his being correct in his aqidah and manhaj, and in general terms to be upon that which takes him out from being within the seventy-two sects of innovation and misguidance.
However, it is often the case that the o*!ne subscribing to the way of the Salaf and making an outward display of that is in fact upon the astray methodologies, yet he proclaims orthodoxy and pleads a sound aqidah and manhaj. Though he may be of sound aqidah, he may upon an adulterated manhaj. In this situation, such a o*!ne is not correct or truthful in his ascription, since he has a manhaj other than that of the Salaf, and this is determined by looking and seeing: Does he defend Sayyid Qutb? Does he subscribe to the view and scandal of Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq? Does he praise Mohammad Qutb and take him as a guide and leader. Does he defend and aggrandise Hasan al-Bannaa? Does he speak with the terms and phrases of the Innovators, “al-Ummah al-Ghaa’ibah” (The Absent Ummah), “Shabaab us-Sahwah” (The Youth of the Awakening), “Tawhid ul-Haakimiyyah”, “al-Muwaazanah” and other such phrases which have become the slogans of the Innovators. So we look and see, what other affiliations does he have, who does he mix with, who does he talk to, what are the books that he refers to, and in this manner we come to know of his true orientation in his manhaj, and from this we come to know whether he is an imposter, claiming the way and manhaj of the Salaf, yet upon other than it.
As for the o*!ne who subscribes himself to the Salafi Way, then in the basis of his ascription – which is to that which cannot err – then he is correct in that, and what is in opposition to this, is but error and misguidance. We mean here from the point of view of the generality of aqidah and manhaj and the usool of the religion. This is because the aqidah and the manhaj and the usool of the Salaf of all the ages is the same and they are united upon all of that.
Hence, o*!ne who is a Salafi and is true in his ascription to the Salaf and who proceeds upon knowledge and action, imitating their way, then he is correct in all of that inshaa’allah. And this person will either know the way of the Salaf in general terms, and he knows it to be correct, even though he may be ignorant of its particulars, yet he is still correct in considering their way – and his way of following and imitating them – to be the truth and whatever is in opposition to it, to be falsehood. Or he will know the way of the Salaf in both general and specific terms, in terms of aqidah and manhaj and usool and furoo’ and he will be correct in the majority of that which he holds o*!nto and acts upon, and all of this is dependent upon his sincerity in learning and his zeal for acquiring knowledge and acting upon it.
As for the individual being correct in every single issue from the subsidiary matters, then if o*!ne makes that claim, then he is in error. Since it is not possible for any o*!ne to be correct in every single subsidiary issue of the religion, since firstly, it is not possible for him to have knowledge of all of that, and secondly, when the Imaams of the past did not attain that, it is hardly likely that any of the followers of the latecomers will ever reach that. Hence, in the subsidiary matters it is possible for the Salafi to be in error, yet that does not negate his being correct in his aqidah and manhaj, and in general terms to be upon that which takes him out from being within the seventy-two sects of innovation and misguidance.
However, it is often the case that the o*!ne subscribing to the way of the Salaf and making an outward display of that is in fact upon the astray methodologies, yet he proclaims orthodoxy and pleads a sound aqidah and manhaj. Though he may be of sound aqidah, he may upon an adulterated manhaj. In this situation, such a o*!ne is not correct or truthful in his ascription, since he has a manhaj other than that of the Salaf, and this is determined by looking and seeing: Does he defend Sayyid Qutb? Does he subscribe to the view and scandal of Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq? Does he praise Mohammad Qutb and take him as a guide and leader. Does he defend and aggrandise Hasan al-Bannaa? Does he speak with the terms and phrases of the Innovators, “al-Ummah al-Ghaa’ibah” (The Absent Ummah), “Shabaab us-Sahwah” (The Youth of the Awakening), “Tawhid ul-Haakimiyyah”, “al-Muwaazanah” and other such phrases which have become the slogans of the Innovators. So we look and see, what other affiliations does he have, who does he mix with, who does he talk to, what are the books that he refers to, and in this manner we come to know of his true orientation in his manhaj, and from this we come to know whether he is an imposter, claiming the way and manhaj of the Salaf, yet upon other than it.
No comments:
Post a Comment