In the late 1990s, Imām al-Albānī (رحمه الله), who was the Reviver and Aider of the Sunnah in the 20th century, said about Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī (رحمه الله): “Indeed the carrier of the flag of al-Jarh wat-Taʿdīl today, in this present time— and in truth—is our brother Rabīʿ and those who refute him do not refute him on the basis of knowledge ever, rather the knowledge is all with him.” This was in the cassette titled “Manhaj al-Muwāzanāt”, which we translated and spread at the time, in refutation of those who were attacking Shaykh Rabīʿ for speaking against the Ḥizbiyyīn, and their false principles and methodologies.

Shaykh Rabīʿ is known for truthfulness, precision, accuracy, honesty, integrity and justice in his criticisms and refutations, which is why his detractors were unable to accuse him of lying and dishonesty and were unable to refute his refutations, except with lies, fabrications and slanders, and casting aspersions upon his intentions.

With respect to his criticisms and refutations, here is an illustration regarding his writings against Sayyid Quṭb:^[1]

Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī (حفظه الله) was asked:^[2] “Is it permissible to lie upon the People of Innovations and others from the People of Misguidance?”

He answered:

This makes it clear why he was referred to as the “Carrier of the Flag of al-Jarḥ wal-Taʿdīl in the present time”, and not by any ordinary person or a partisan follower, but by an Imām and Muḥaddith, a Reviver of the Sunnah, whose words hold tremendous weight.

However, from the humility of Shaykh Rabīʿ is that he renounced this title, and advised against it and warned from exaggeration (ghuluww), and explained that he is a mere critic who criticised certain people for their errors (with their actual words, with honesty and integrity). He also advised people against this and to leave off these exaggerations. He (رحمه الله) said:^[3]

Notes

On the above there are some points and observations:

01  Shaykh Rabīʿ’s refutations are based on objective critical evaluations of the speech of the opposers, founded upon academic integrity, intellectual honesty, truth and justice. This is why the Shaykh could never be accused of lying, and his refutations could not be refuted. Instead a variety of schemes were used to attack him and discredit him. This is why Shaykh al-Albānī (رحمه الله) said: “Those who refute him do not refute him on the basis of knowledge ever.”

Shaykh Rabīʿ said:^[4]

This is far removed from criticisms and refutations based on lies, fabrications, exaggerations, and accusing and judging people’s intentions, all devoid of evidence, and relying on appeal to authority. This does not satisfy or quench the thirst of anyone, except those who pay no value to these matters. It also causes confusion, not clarity.

02  The one who referred to Shaykh Rabīʿ as “The Carrier of the Flag of al-Jarḥ wal-Taʾdīl” is himself an Imām, a Carrier of the Flag al-Jarḥ wal-Taʿdīl, a Reviver of the Sunnah, whose rulings upon ḥadīths have gained acceptance by the ummah, such that it has been said for a long time, “Al-Albānī authenticated it” in books, sermons and lectures all over the world. Hence, this carries tremendous weight.

03  Despite this, Shaykh Rabīʿ (رحمه الله), due to his humility and his knowledge that this leads to exaggeration, was averse to it and disliked it. He prohibited it and warned others from saying this and falling into the likes of this, whether with respect to himself, or others, and he gave examples of what has been said about past Imāms with what may exceed the limits, and noted that the Companions, never had such titles and are referred to by their first names.

And this is keeping in mind that, even though the Shaykh is averse to all of this, there is indeed truth in what Shaykh al-Albānī said, that Shaykh Rabīʿ did carry the flag of disparagement and evaluation of individuals, groups and sects in a critical junction in time, when these people were infiltrating the Salafī daʿwah, thereby delivering it from great trials.

04  From the reasons and wisdoms that a great scholar may give such praise to another scholar is to give reassurance that he is upon the truth, to encourage him in his endeavours and to support him, especially if he has been unjustly attacked. And the scholar being praised knows and understands that, he knows these realities. And this is what happened, because Shaykh al-Albānī did not know the realities about Sayyid Quṭb, Safar and Salmān, the Quṭbiyyah and Surūriyyah, and the realities of the Jamʿiyyāt and their figureheads, such as Iḥyā al-Turāth, and ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ʿAbd al-Khāliq and others. All of these people tried to dilute and pollute Salafiyyah, and invent new renditions of Salafiyyah, and when Imām al-Albānī realised this, and saw that these people had been lying and unjustly attacking Shaykh Rabīʿ, and that the truth was with Shaykh Rabīʿ, he aided the Shaykh and his writings with words of praise and support.

So the people who have been nurtured upon this manhaj, the manhaj of these great scholars, they will understand and appreciate these things.

05  No sooner had Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī (رحمه الله) passed away, literally on the same day, we started seeing a race, a competition, as to who is declared the new “Imām of al-Jarḥ wal-Taʿdīl”, the “Khalīfah”, (successor), as if this was a new position, a vacancy that Imām al-Albānī created when he said what he said over a quarter of a century ago, a position that has to be filled and can’t remain empty. All of a sudden, people from different lands, started saying that this person in Algeria, or that person in Yemen, or that person in Saudi is the new “Imām of al-Jarḥ wal-Taʿdīl”, as if this is an official post, or something inherited or passed on, or a vacancy that needs to be filled, without which Salafiyyah is incomplete can't continue.

06  As for the truth, then it is that everyone who speaks with truth, with evidence, and who disparaged, criticised or evaluated, with evidence, with integrity, and who established proofs and evidences, devoid of doubts and uncertainties, then his speech is taken and accepted. There are many people of knowledge, many shaykhs, and likewise students in their own lands, who abide by these principles and this methodology in criticising and evaluating individuals, callers and groups, being guided in that by the senior scholars, and following their way. Whoever abides by this methodology, then it is accepted from him, and all of this is upon the foundations of honesty, integrity and justice, free of motives and desires.

There were numerous other scholars who also criticised and disparaged, from them Shaykh Aḥmad al-Najmī, Shaykh Muqbil bin Hādī, Shaykh Muḥammad Amān al-Jāmī, Shaykh Zayd al-Madkhalī, Shaykh ʿUbayd al-Jābirī and others (رحمهم الله), even if Shaykh Rabīʿ spoke and authored the most.

07  As for scholars recommending others, whether:

• for taking knowledge from them, or
• to praise them to give them firmness and to encourage them further, or
• speaking in praise of them after they have been attacked and spoken ill of, as a means of silencing the opposers and deviants

then we know that these are objectives that scholars have when they praise others from those who are lesser than them in knowledge and status. So we accept these types of statements and we understand them and what is intended by them and keep them in their place and context.

However, some people do not understand these realities and wisdoms and fall into things that have been cautioned against.

08  Never for one day, did Shaykh Rabīʿ say: “I am the Imām of al-Jarḥ wal-Taʿdīl so whomever I disparage, you must accept it from me, otherwise, you are reviling me and denying my scholarship.” And never for one day, did we accept these refutations merely because of titles and praises. Rather, it was because of the clear evidence and truth they contained. Shaykh Rabīʿ made clear that criticism and refutation must be based on evidence, on truthfulness and integrity, and far removed from lies, fabrications, distortions, doubts and uncertainties. That it is the evidence that must be accepted, and whoever does not bring that will not be aided by titles.^[5]

09  It is a sign of Shaykh Rabīʿ’s truthfulness and uprightness that he renounced this title and this tremendous praise (even though he deserved it and was worthy of it). He warned against it because it can lead to exaggeration, and it can lead to a situation where people, in particularly Salafīs, are disparaged by appeal to authority, rather, than actual evidences. A person is criticised and disparaged with evidences, with honesty and integrity, following the Salafī methodology, especially when it relates to Ahl al-Sunnah.

This way was neglected by those who accepted titles and lavish praises from their followers. This is what happened with the likes of Fāliḥ al-Ḥarbī, Yaḥyā al-Ḥajūrī and Muḥammad bin Ḥādī. Those partisan to them began to shower them with lavish titles and praises to make up for the mistakes they fell into in terms of the unwarranted or hasty disparagements they made, devoid of evidence and truth, consisting of accusations, revilements and abuse, which were never found in the writings and refutations of Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī (رحمه الله), because truth stands on its own.

10  Finally, around 12 years ago, the Ḥajāwirah, among others, tried to use this humility and modesty of the Shaykh to deny him the rank and status given to him by the great scholars of the era, not just Imām al-Albānī (رحمه الله). So we wrote a refutation against them, outlining the great difference between the praise of the major scholars for Shaykh Rabīʿ and the ghuluww of the Ḥajāwirah for Yaḥyā al-Ḥajūrī, and one can refer to the publication, “Shaykh ʿAllāmah Rabīʿ bin Hādī’s Advice to the Callers” for details.

It was not just Imām al-Albānī who praised Shaykh Rabīʿ but also Shaykh Bin Bāz, Shaykh Ibn ʿUthaymīn, Shaykh Muqbil bin Hādī, Shaykh Aḥmad al-Najmī, Shaykh Zayd al-Madkhalī, Shaykh Muḥammad al-Bannā, Shaykh Ṣaliḥ al-Luḥaydān, Shaykh ʿUbayd al-Jābirī (رحمهم الله) and others, which means that this is a consensus of the senior scholars of the era, and is not just a reflection of partisanship or exaggeration or bias, as is found with those who seek inflation and magnification of personalities and figureheads.

Conclusion

In short, the great scholars of the era were all in agreement and concurred upon the praise of Shaykh Rabīʿ for what he did in demolishing the foundations of the Quṭbī, Surūrī, Takfīrī, Khārijī ideology and the Ikhwānī Bannāʾī Tamyīʿī methodology, thereby purifying the Salafī daʿwah from various infiltrators and their false principles, lies and deceptions. So between them all, they described Shaykh Rabīʿ with various descriptions and titles of praise and recommendation. This was over 20 years ago, and since that time the Shaykh continued in the same path for another quarter of a century.

As for those who think that “Imām of al-Jarḥ wal-Taʿdīl” is an open position, a vacancy, a station that needs filling, with each party rushing to nominate his shaykh as the candidate for the position, then this indicates their lack of understanding.

There are scholars and shaykhs who will fulfil the duty of criticising and diparaging the innovators, the opposers and the errant ones, alḥamdulillāh, this has happened since the time of the Companions (رضي الله عنهم), it will not stop and does not require a title.

As for the description given to Shaykh Rabīʿ of being the “Carrier of the Flag of al-Jarḥ wal-Taʿdīl”, that was unique to the shaykh due to his outstanding, unrivalled efforts at a critical junction in time, it was not intended as a general vacancy within the Salafī daʿwah to be taken up by others, through nomination and social media campaigns, as a form of succession.

Shaykh Rabīʿ was indeed the Carrier of the Flag of al-Jarḥ wal-Taʿdīl, despite his humility and modesty and disliking it and renouncing it. As for the attempts we are seeing these days to give certain people this title , it should be seen as a form of belittling the Shaykh’s unique status and his tremendous efforts, and it almost seems like an attempted usurpation of this unique description and title given to Shaykh Rabīʿ (رحمه الله).^[6]

Footnotes