AN ASSOCIATE of Maḥmūd al-Ḥaddād, known as ʿAbd al-Laṭīf Bāshmīl, claimed that the Shaykhs of Madīnah, such as Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī (رحمه الله) were calling to a deviant political methodology in complete secrecy built upon the errors of Shaykh al-Albānī (رحمه الله). He accused them of being infiltrators, working on the inside for political objectives. He also claimed that they were following the ways of the Ikhwānīs by not making tabdīʿ of certain callers in Saudi Arabia. These Ḥaddādis had exaggeration in matters of tabdīʿ and tajrīḥ, aiming to incite discord and chaos within the ranks of Ahl al-Sunnah. To support their claims, they attached themselves to well-known scholars in Saudi because they opposed Shaykh al-Albānī in various issues, and they leveraged this attachment to attack Shaykh Rabīʿ and others. Bashmīl is from the first wave Ḥaddādīs, and even though Maḥmūd al-Ḥaddād is the origin, and he disappeared into obscurity after being expelled from Saudi, Bāshmīl became the main promulgator, spokesman and caller to the ideology. After them, came Fāliḥ al-Ḥarbī, then Fawzī al-Baḥraynī and they carried on the methodology with their own infusions.

In his refutation of the Ḥaddādī, ʿAbd al-Laṭīf Bāshmīl, Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hadī (رحمه الله) said:^[1]

Notes

01  Ahl al-Sunnah call to unity around the Book, the Sunnah and the way of the Salaf, without attaching themselves to a shaykh or a personality and they do not call to blind-following. This is the way of the people of taḥazzub whose love and loyalty revolve around personalities, ideas, political calls or goals of the ahzab (factions).

02  From the identifiable traits of those who follow the Ḥaddādī methodology is to accuse others what they themselves are guilty of and engaged in, which is partisanship and amassing followers around an idea or a person. ʿAbd al-Laṭīf Bāshmīl accused Shaykh Rabīʿ and others of having partisanship (taḥazzub) for Shaykh al-Albānī and of being engaged in secretive call around the mistakes of al-Albānī.

03  When they are unable to provide evidence for their claims and their approach which in the case of Bāshmīl were centered around unjustified or premature tabdīʿ, or false claims such as accusing others of working secretly against the rulers and scholars, or severe attacks against Shaykh al-Albānī, they make it appear as if their opponents have bigotry towards an idea or a person (in this case, towards Shaykh al-Albānī), when in reality, they are the ones whose call is centered around an idea, a person, or a particular call with certain objectives.

04  One of the clear signs of this path is that they will wage a more severe and intense war against those who reject their taḥazzub and takattul (around a particular shaykh or an idea) than they do against the outright innovators and deviants, such as the heads of the Khārijites, or the Ashāʿirah, or the Muʿtazilah, and if you look at their history, you will hardly find an instance, if at all, where they have engaged in such an intense war. Rather, their most severe and intense war is against those from Ahl al-Sunnah who oppose their partisan ways.

05  The followers they amass in the process are turned into soldiers to fight against those who reject their taḥazzub and takattul and stand between them and their goals, which are often tied to partisan (ḥizbī) and political agendas.

06  In contrast, Ahl al-Sunnah, the people of wuḍūḥ (clarity), wage a truthful war—with Allāh’s permission—against all forms of taḥazzub and takattul, around creeds and methodologies and figureheads and personalitie. Hence, when you look at their speech, their writings, lectures and so on, they have speech against the Khārijites, Rāfiḍah, Muriʿah, Qadariyyah, Jaḥmiyyah, Muʿtazilah, Ṣūfiyyah, Ikhwāniyyah, Quṭbiyyah, Tablīghiyyah, the Ḥaddādiyyah, the Mumayyiʿah and refutations of the foundations of all of these sects and groups, and likewise against their leading figureheads and callers.

This is what you find in the speech and writings of Shaykh al-Albānī and Shaykh Rabīʿ and those who are upon this way, which proves a truthful, consistent rejection of any type of taḥazzub and takattul, rather than a narrow, particular one fuelled by motives and agendas.

07  While they are engaged in these intense wars against the people of innovation and misguidance, along come the Ḥaddādiyyah and preoccupy people with their harshness, severity, tabdīʿ and taḍlīl, all under the guise of zeal for the religion. They cause schisms and divisions and wage the fiercest of wars which perhaps has never been seen from them against any other faction, sect, group or individual. No, their most fierce war is against the people of the Sunnah who fight taḥazzub and takattul in all its forms, whether among the people of Islām or other than them.

08  The reason for this likely returns back to the fact that they have undeclared goals which they work towards, and which they do not disclose to the followers whom they amass for that purpose. So when those goals are exposed or hindered, their enmity surfaces. Otherwise, there is no explainable reason why such enmity should arise from them. There has to be some partisan goal tied to some person, religious idea, or some worldly affair or another.

Arabic text:

Footnotes