There is a claim made by the Muṣaʿfiqah that Muḥammad bin Hādī was, in fact, correct when he disparaged such-and-such individuals and warned against them. Furthermore, these people have gone so far as to gloat over (what is happening among) the Salafis. Is there a response to this?

Regarding these two questions, the brief answer to the first is that Ibn Hādī was not correct. He spoke against certain individuals at that time without any proof or evidence. When asked to provide such evidence, he remained silent. This is one of the transgressions and criticisms levelled against Ibn Hādī.

He would frequently repeat the phrase “Arafat is evil—Arafat is evil,” yet he never explained the source of this alleged evil (at the time), nor did he justify why he applied such a harsh description. He failed to present the Salafīs with any proof or evidence to substantiate this claim.

Had he clearly demonstrated to the Salafis, and to all of us, the nature of Arafat’s “evil,” and had he provided evidence confirming such vileness and danger, the Salafīs would have undoubtedly supported his judgment and critique, out of religious devotion to Allah, the Sublime and Exalted, and in aid of His religion, and to protect (the Salafīs) from Arafat’s evil, vileness and harm.

However, Ibn Hādī was neither truthful nor honest with the Salafīs. He did not even respond when a leading authority in the field of al-Jarh wa Taʿdil requested that he provide the evidence for his criticisms of these people, some of whom are, without a doubt, part of this new faction (al-ḥizb al-jadīd).

The Salafis acted in accordance with Sharīʿah and its principles, judging based on outward appearances. At the time, it was not apparent that these individuals harboured such deviations.

They had infiltrated the Salafi ranks, lying in wait, essentially biding their time until the passing of the eminent scholars al-Rabīʿ and al-Jābirī, before finally revealing the true extent of their deviation. It is also possible that some of them were initially on the correct path, only to change and shift their stance after the death of al-Rabīʿ.

Therefore, Ibn Hādī was neither a sincere advisor nor truthful in his claims. Rather, he betrayed the Salafīs and their daʿwah, as he failed to provide detailed, precise evidence of the deviations of these individuals. He may have offered some general remarks, which he perhaps considered to be evidence at the time, but the Salafīs did not view them as valid proof or substantiation for his assertions.

This is one of the points of criticism directed at Ibn Hādī. We demand that he clarify what he meant when he labelled ʿArafat as “ʿArafāt al-Sharr” back in the past. This is merely one of several serious issues regarding Ibn Hādī, he has undergone a change, beginning to draw close to ḥizbīs (partisans) and those who have deviated.

His actions, bringing people of innovation close, such as Muzammil al-Faqirī and his faction, into his circle, nearly incited fitnah in our country, Sudan. Previously, he used to criticise these individuals, challenge them, warn others against them, mock their deviations, and view them as being in a state of misguidance, noting their introduction of innovated practices like public debates in marketplaces and other forms of deviation.

He also condemned them for their conduct regarding Tawḥid, which contradicted the call of the scholars. He used to condemn them for their involvement in photography, a practice he once deemed a grave sin. Yet, Ibn Hādi now engages in photography himself without offering any comment on the matter, despite having previously classified it as a major transgression.

Therefore, he was not in the right, nor did he adhere to the Salafī methodology in criticising those who are flawed or deviant. He has been neither honest nor truthful in presenting the evidence and proofs for his claims regarding their misguidance.

He labelled ʿArafāt as “Arafāt al-Sharr” without ever providing the sharʿiyy evidence for this “evil,” and he dubbed al-Bukhārī a “cave of fitnah” without explaining what this “cave” entails or what specific evils and harms reside within it to warrant such a description of being a “cave of fitan”.

Until now, he remains obligated to provide this clarification. It is unacceptable for him to make such reckless, unsubstantiated assertions, expecting Salafīs—who have already critiqued these deviant, partisan figures of the new faction with clear evidence and proof—to simply accept his claims, or for his fanatical followers to insist that he was right all along.

Such behaviour is a form of ignorance, an act of injustice, and an expression of the kind of reprehensible partisanship and blind factionalism that we must reject.

And Allāh knows best.