did shaykh yahya al-hajooree ‘slander the name of the companions’ by fabricating upon them that...

1 | P a g e

Did Shaykh Yahya Al-Hajooree Slander the name

Of the Companions by fabricating upon them that they

participated in the Killing of Uthman ?

(A Reply to the Falsehood which Abu Khadija and his Companions have

taken from the People of Innovation of old)

2 | P a g e

:

A series of articles have been being posted on Manhaj.com filled with much deceit,

lying and malice. From amongst these articles was one titled; "Yahyaa al-Hajuri Establishes Himself a Liar by Trying to Cover up His Accusation that the Companions

Participated in the Murder of Uthman". In this article the unknown author pitifully tried to establish that the noble Shaykh Yahya Al-Hajooree may aid him- fabricated

about Ibn Katheer what he did not say in an attempt to free himself from the

accusation of slandering1 the Companions of the Messenger of .

However, if one carefully examines this inadequate refutation which the author

most likely had prepared long ago silently waiting for an opportunity to let loose his venomous tongue, then his frightening level of ignorance as well as his

harboring of a severe grudges towards Shaykh Yahya may aid him- will become clear permitting. Not to mention his attempts in trying to deceive the reader by

taking the speech out of context and refuting the Shaykh on issues that Shaykh Yahya - may aid him- never even mentioned so that reader perceives that the

author possess knowledge and Shaykh Yahya is an ignorant individual and the aid of is sought.

On the other hand, what should one expect from the students of the veiled shaykh

of deviation himself Arafaat Al-Barmaki who has surpassed some of the well-known innovators the likes of the Soofiyah and the Ikhwaan Al-Muslimeen of Yemen

and elsewhere in relation to this. For those who are unaware, Arafaat Al-Barmaki is the swamp of stagnant water where Abu Khadija, his counterparts and their likes drink their foul doubts, whereupon they begin spreading these doubts amongst the

Salafees seeking the downfall of Al-Hajooree and far indeed is that which they desire.

1 Abu Khadija also mentioned as the second point in his article about the 'destructive deviations' of Shaykh Yahya Al-Hajooree that

he falsely accused the Sahabah of participating in the killing of 'Uthman . In turn, this article is also a response to his wrongful

claim.

3 | P a g e

Throughout this article and others, Abu Khadija and his comrades persist in concealing this shaykh of theirs most probably fearing the disapproval of the

Salafees. So instead they hint at him -which is a known method of the people of falsehood in concealing whom they take from-. Therefore, you notice them using statements such as: Al-Hajuri's attempts to cover this matter up, has (have not has) been followed up by some of the people of knowledge and students of

knowledge

Al-Imam Muslim reported in his forward to his book Saheeh Muslim (1/11) the statement of Ibn Seereen where he said:

They never use ask the people for the chain of narration. However, when the fitnah occurred they said state your men (narrators) to us. Then it is looked and Ahlus-

Sunnah and it was taken from them and it was looked at Ahlul-Bida and it was not taken from them their narrations.

O Abu Khadija, why then do you and your companions not mention these people

and students of knowledge so that the people may see whom it is you take from?!

Another matter which the members of Salafi Publications have been repeatedly advised about -but has sadly been of no avail- is to cease writing articles or

refutations whilst concealing from the readers who the author is. Abu Khadija and his comrades should follow the way of Ahlul-Sunnah and mention their names in the

articles they write so that it is known to the readers who the author is, however they continue upon this baseless methodology. This deviated manner of writing

refutations that Salafi Publications persists upon in spite of them being advised and criticized for it clearly shows their stubbornness and their opposition to the

Quraan, Sunnah and the Methodology of the Salafus-Saalih with regard to this.

As for the Quran:

Then mentions that his Messenger Sulayman when he wrote the letter to the Queen of Saba may have mercy on her- he said as mentioned;

4 | P a g e

:

"Verily, it is from Sulaimn (Solomon), and verily, it (reads): In the Name of Allh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful; Surah 27:30

And as for the Sunnah:

Then the proofs for this are many from them is the hadeeth reported Al-Bukhari (7)

and Muslim (4707) that the Messenger when he wrote to Heraqal the

Leader of the Romans he said:

From Muhammad the slave of and His Messenger

To Hareqal the great of Rome, peace upon he who follows the guidance.

While Muslim also reported in his Saheeh (4732) on the authority of Anas bin Malik

that when Quraesh made a treaty with the Messenger and at the time from

amongst (those representing) Quraesh was Suhail bin Amr. The Messenger then

told Ali bin Abi Talib to write:

Which Quraesh refused. He then said write:

From Muhammad the Messenger of

Whereby they responded to by saying if we knew you were the Messenger of we would have followed you, but instead write your name and the name of your

father. The Messenger then replied to their request by saying:

5 | P a g e

Write from Muhammad bin Abdullah.

Therefore the proofs that establish this from the Sunnah are plenty. It is clear to see from the previous hadeeth even the disbelievers of Quraesh realized the benefit in mentioning the author. Being that it was mentioned in the previous hadeeth that

they said to the Messenger if we knew you were the Messenger of we

would have followed you but instead write your name and the name of your father.

In addition to this, in the story of K'ab bin Maalik which was reported by Al-

Bukhari (4418) and Muslim (2769) when the ruling came from the heavens for K'ab and his two companions Murarah bin Arrabee' and Hilaal bin Umayah to be

boycotted, several days into their boycotting a Nabatean (an individual from the Christians who are) from Shaam came to Medina with a message for K'ab bin

Maalik . After he we was directed by the people to K'ab bin Maalik , K'ab

said;

... : ...

he came to me and presented to me a letter from the king of Ghasaan; and behold there was in it.

As to Proceed;

Indeed it has reached me that your companion (i.e the Messenger ) has surely

treated you with harshness

However, today we find Abu Khadija and his comrades the renowned callers to Ad-Dawah As-Salafiyah following a way that was not known even to the

disbelievers of who fought against the Messenger and rejected the truth

sent down by and the aid of is sought.

And finally the opposition of this writing method to the way of the Salafus-Saalih is something which no Salafee who has read the books of the scholars of Ahl-Sunnah

6 | P a g e

should have any doubt about. Rather I challenge Abu Khadija and his comrades and their supporters in falsehood to bring forward a single Salafee scholar past or present who has promoted or even condoned the writing of articles whilst

the is concealing himself.

As a matter of fact, this methodology that Abu Khadija and his counterparts have adopted is in reality from the ways of the people of innovation, the likes of Abul-

Hassan Al-Maribi, Falih Al-Harbee and their likes from the people of falsehood that Abu Khadija and his comrades seem to have benefited from.

While the scholars of the Sunnah may reward them with goodness- have consistently disapproved of this and have written clarifications in the

disparagement of the articles written by the majaaheel (the unknown authors) as well as those who write under fictitious names in order to remain unidentified. From the noble scholars who openly voiced their objection to this unfounded

writing style was AlAlaamah Rabee' bin Haadee may grant him success and good health-. In several of his refutations of Abul-Hassan as well as Faalih Al-

Harbee along with their followers he said whilst clarifying the falsity of this methodology:

And there should not speak nor write, except one who has knowledge of what he is writing about may bless you all- and with genuine names. Considering

that many of the people hide behind these anonymous names and they inflame whatever they desire and they say whatever they want. And this by has

harmed Ad-Dawah As-Salafiyah very much. As it has harmed its people and separated them and torn them apart. And every day you do not see other than division and differing between only the Salafees and they have left speaking about the people of innovation. Therefore, I hope from the Mashaaykh of Medinah all of them as well as elsewhere that they confront this danger which has befallen As-

Salafiyah. And that they ward off from it (i.e. As-Salafiyah) the harms, while none should speak in this affair other than the scholars and there should not speak ( )

2 under anonymous names (whilst) the intent behind this is unclear. By ,

no one conceals their name except an evil individual I seek forgiveness from the All-Mighty-. Why do you conceal your name!? If the truth is with you then

mention your name! You are upon falsehood! Do not speak, for there is no

2 An expression used by the Arab equivalent to in English the phrase "every Tom, Dick and Harry."

7 | P a g e

need to hide the names. There is no need for this ever, ever. This was not known to the Salaf3

Whilst Shaykh Rabee' bin Haadee may grant him success and good health- also said in a refutation of Faalih Al-Harbee and his followers in his book 'Al-Majmoo Al-

Waadhih fi Rad Manhaj was Usool Faalih' Page.352

And surely them (i.e. Faalih and his supporters) resorting to this approach -which is their hiding behind unknown names- is a proof of their cowardliness and their

weakness and them sensing that they are upon falsehood.

Where then is Salafi Publications from statement the of Shaykh Rabee -may grant him success and good health- or do they only take from him that which is in

accordance to their desires?

Furthermore, I would like to point out to the noble readers that the articles written by unknown individuals are not to be read let alone believed. This is because they hide behind these names in order for them to inflame whatsoever they desire and

say whatever they want, as Shaykh Rabee may grant him success- mentioned.

Additionally, from the methodology of Ahlul-Hadeeth in dealing with the narrations which are reported by an individual who is totally unknown is that they are to be rejected with the majority Ahlul-Hadeeth and is mentioned in the books of the

sciences of Hadeeth4.

This is because the unknown individual can be a weak narrator, a liar (as is the case with this article and shall be made clear willing), or even a shaitan that is looking for a way to mislead the Muslims. Therefore, if the ahaadeeth of the

Messenger are rejected due to the presence of unknown narrators found in the

chain, then the articles of the majaaheel (unknown authors) are more deserving of rejection.

3 Taken from the transcription of the advice given by Shaykh Rabee' titled "An-Nasiha Al-'Aamah lis-Salafiyeen" Pgs.11-12 on the

year of 7th

of Dhul-Hijjah 1423 Hijiri which corresponds with 9th

of February 2003. 4 Ikhtisaar 'Aloom al-Hadeeth pg.92, Sunan Ad-Daaraqutni 3/174, Tahdeed As-Sunan 1/176, Sheda Al-Fiyah 1/248, Sharh At-Tabsirah

wat-Tadhkirah 1/350, Nuzhatu An-Nadhr 102

8 | P a g e

Abu Khadija and his counterparts know very well also, that it is nearly impossible to legally cash a five dollar check -let alone anything greater in value- if the

contributor is unknown. How then do they expect the people to believe the lies and fabrications of this unidentified author!? Or do they assume that the honor of a

Muslim, let alone a Salafee Shaykh known for goodness is of less value than this.

What is clear from what has passed is that Abu Khadija and his comrades have opposed in this the Quraan, Sunnah and the Methodology of the Salafus-Saalih

as well as the scholars of the Sunnah in every era, those who have rejected this mendacious practice like the likes of Shaykh Rabee bin Haadee may grant him success and good health-whom they claim to love, respect and follow and the aid of

is sought.

Benefit: An individual may ask we do not know who wrote the article so why is Salafi Publications being blamed for it?"

The answer to this is as follows, if we are in agreement that the site Manhaj.com falls under the management of Salafi Publications and they have not rejected or

made any disavowal of what has been posted whilst they possess the capability of doing so, then this shows their pleasure to what is being posted. What further indicates their pleasure and support of this feeble refutation is that members of Salafi Publications themselves have put forward refutations and clarifications

similar to this post.

Therefore, they are also to be held responsible for the articles on Manhaj.com even if the author dwells on the other side of the earth.

Al-Imam As-Shinqeeti said in Adhwaa ul-Bayaan (11/57) his explanation of the

statement of :

: But they called their comrade and he took (a sword) and killed (her). Surah 54:29

9 | P a g e

and this noble ayah points out the elimination of a common difficulty (found) in the ayah5. And the explanation of this is that the Most High ascribed the killing

(of the she camel) to one (person) not a group being that He said;

: and he took (a sword) and killed (her). Surah 54:29

In the singular sense, even though He ascribed the killing of the she camel in other aayaat to all of (the people of) Thamud like His statement in the surah Al-

'Araaf

: So they killed the she-camel and insolently defied the Commandment of their Lord,Surah 7:77

: And His statement in (surah) Hud

: But they killed her. So he said: "Enjoy yourselves in your homes for three days.Surah 11:65

:And His statement in (surah) As-Shu'ara

: : But they killed her, and then they became regretful. Surah 26:157

And His statement in (surah) As-Shams

: Then they denied him and they killed it.Surah 91:14

And the point of view by which the ayah (in Surah 54 Ayah 29) has pointed out the

elimination of this difficulty is that the statement of :

5 i.e. different aayaat of the Quraan that contain the mention of the people of Thamud and their killing of the she camel.

10 | P a g e

: But they called their comrade and he took (a sword) and killed (her). Surah 54:29

(It) indicates that (the people of) Thamud all of them agreed upon the killing of the she camel so they summoned one (individual) from amongst themselves to carry

out what they agreed upon, on his own accord and on their behalf. And it is known that those who assisted one another in killing the she camel they are all (to be considered) killers and it is correct to attribute (this act) to the one who

directly performed the killing as it is also correct to attribute it (killing) to them all

To their Refutation

Their statement we looked at " insinuates that this came from their own efforts however, they have taken this point like several others from their veiled shaykh of

deviation Arafaat Al-Barmaki again without any credit.

Salafi Publications then said:

where he accuses the Companions of participating in the murder of

Uthman." This was in the first edition of his book

The question which Abu Khadija and his comrades must answer is: where did

Shaykh Yahya say that the companions participated in the killing of Uthman in

the first edition of Ahkaam ul Jumuah or any other book? Being that this in actuality

implies that ALL of them participated in his murder. Sadly, The Maktabah will

have no answer to this as it is nothing more than a fabrication on their part. While

11 | P a g e

they unintentionally contradict themselves just a few lines after this paragraph by

saying recall that al-Hajuri explicitly stated in his book the following, "And the

participation of some of the Sahaabah in the killing of Uthman (radiallaahu

anhu)...

Furthermore, the book that Salafi Publications claims that they looked at, as they

mentioned, is the first print of the book however they again intentionally conceal

the year the book was printed blindly following in this claim their veiled shaykh of

deviation. The book Ahkaam ul-Jumuah in which the statement of Shaykh Yahya

may aid him- is found in it was printed in 1423 Hijri calendar which corresponds

with 2002 of the Gregorian calendar. The question that should instinctively come

to the mind of any seeker of the truth is why have Abu Khadija and his comrades

waited for more than a decade in order to warn the people today of this major

error?

It is reported by Muslim (186) on the authority of Abu Saeed Al-Khudhri that the

Messenger said:

Whosoever sees an evil then let him change it with his hand and if he is not

capable then with tongue and if he is not capable then let him hate it in his heart

and that is the weakest of Eeman.

O defenders of the Salafee Methodology what has held all of you back nearly

twelve years from changing this evil as you claim to be doing today and warning the

people from this so-called deviation? Is it other than the following of your desires?

Imperative Facts:

From the first people to exaggerate and go beyond bounds against Shaykh Yahya

may aid him- with regard to this claimed error were the supporters of Abul-

Hassan Al-Marabi in whom Abu Khadija and his comrades and those who

fanatically support them in this fitnah strikingly resemble. During this time

Abdurahman Al-'Adeni -who is the main reason for this current fitnah and is a close

and personal acquaintance of Ubaid Al-Jabiri- was present in Darul-Hadeeth in

Damaaj during the fitnah of Abul-Hassan and afterwards. Rather, up until the fitnah

12 | P a g e

ended, Abdur-Rahman Al-'Adeni still remained in Damaaj for approximately

another five years from the time this criticism first began to be mentioned.

Yet today his supporters beginning with Ubaid Al-Jabiri mention this point against

Shaykh Yahya may aid him- and not only do they criticize him for this but

Ubaid al-Jabari unjustly deemed it to be from the reasons why Shaykh Yahya is

an innovator. While as we mentioned Ubaids bosom friend Abdurahman Al-

Adeni and many of the students6 who joined sides with him in this current fitnah

were present in Damaaj the first times this point was criticized against Shaykh

Yahya and they never made anything of it until the fitnah of Abdurahman Al-Adeni

began. Then they returned to these frail criticisms of old and brought them back to

life.

Also another overlooked fact is that Ubaid Al-Jabiri himself when he came to

Darul-Hadeeth in Damaaj in the year of 2005. Ubaid Al-Jabiri was welcomed and

greeted well by Shaykh Yahya and the students of knowledge present at that time

in Damaaj and no one mentioned this "great deviation and major innovation" to

Ubaid Al-Jabiri not Abdur-Rahman Al-'Adeni nor anyone else. On the other hand,

when Abdur-Rahman Al-'Adeni began his fitnah in Yemen years after this, he and

his supporters began to bring back to life these doubts which had previously been

spread years before against Shaykh Yahya by the people of innovation the likes of

Abul-Hassan Al-Maribi and Salih Al-Bakry and their supporters. My brothers in

Islaam I ask you all, is this from the way the Salafus-Salih? Is this from the way of

Ahlul-Sunnah? By , this is from the ways of the people of desires.

This is also the case with many of their criticisms against the noble Shaykh Yahya

Al-Hajooree -may aid him against the lies and conjecture of the deviants.-

6 These being the likes of Shaakir Al-Kanadi, who left Dammaaj towards the beginning of the fitnah of Abdur-Rahman Al-'Adeni but

were present in Damaaj after this accusation that Shaykh Yahya 'slandered' the Sahabah for nearly 6 years and after Shaykh Fowzan supposedly warned against studying under the likes of Shaykh Yahya for nearly 3 years and yet today they want to criticize Shaykh Yahya for these issues and deceive the people by saying Shaykh Fowzan warned against him. Yaa Miskeen, why didnt you leave Dammaaj as soon as Shaykh Fowzan spoke if you are honest? Why didn't you leave Dammaaj when they said "Shaykh Yahya has 'belittled' the Messenger of . What caused you to remain in Dammaaj studying under and defending "an innovator" whilst you knew all of this?! The reality is Shakir and his likes know well that these criticisms against Shaykh Yahya are pathetic but their desires have caused them to become deaf and blind towards the truth.

13 | P a g e

Likewise, Abu Khadija and his counterparts in another article stated as individuals

who were nearly moved to tears over the dishonoring and degrading done by

Shaykh Yahya towards the status of the Sahabah This is a clear revilement of the

Sahaabah and is a falsification of history and is also fuel for the Raafidah.

If Abu Khadija and his counterparts truly possessed a real concern over the Sahabah

and their esteemed status, then they themselves would have refuted Shaykh

Yahya may preserve him- ages ago, however they have blindly followed the

footsteps of their veiled shaykh of deviation Arafaat Al-Barmaki and his affiliates.

It has now become clear from this the true concern of Abu Khadija and his

comrades towards the honor of the Sahabah .

Not to mention the unavoidable reality that it is Abu Khadija, his comrades and

their veiled shaykh Arafaat of misguidance who have given fuel to the Raafidah,

being that they knew of this clear revilement of the Sahaabah and falsification of

history and chose to remain silent for all these years only to come forward nearly

twelve years later to mention it. And the aid of is sought against the people of

desires.


What is important to know, is why Shaykh Yahya mentioned this and what his intent was in doing so. Being that if this becomes clear to the reader then the

amazement will disappear as the saying goes. Shaykh Yahya towards the end of his book Ahkaam ul-Jumuah wa Bidaihaa, disproved several doubts that some of the

people cling onto whilst seeking to justify the legitimacy of the first aadhan on the day of Jumuah. From the doubts that he mentioned was the hadeeth which is related

that the Messenger said in it:

14 | P a g e

My companions are like the stars whosoever you follow from

Them, you will be guided.

Shaykh Yahya may aid him- then clarified the weakness of the previous hadeeth from three angles. The second of the three angles that the Shaykh stated was that the wording of the hadeeth was rejected and untrue. He then mentioned

the statement of Ibn Hazm - may have mercy on him- which is found in his book Al-Ihkaam (6/244) where he invalidated the authenticity of the previous hadeeth by mentioning several evidences which clearly indicate that a single individual from

the Sahabah cannot be infallible so as for us to be guided by whomsoever we follow from amongst them.

Shaykh Yahya then mentioned a number of errors7 which occurred from the

different Sahabah as to solidify the fact that this hadeeth is totally false and in contradiction to reality. And from the errors which the Shaykh mentioned in the

first print of the book which was in the year of 1423 which corresponds with 2002 on the Gregorian calendar, was the participation of some of the Sahabah in the

murder of 'Uthman may be pleased with them all-. Thus, this is how this

statement came along and it was based upon what the Shaykh had come across in some of the different historical books of Al-Islaam throughout the course of his research and was not something he mentioned based upon his own whims and

fancies as Abu Khadija and his comrades try and make it seem.


In this statement, Abu Khadija and his comrades again clearly fabricate upon Shaykh Yahya what he is clearly free from. It has come to pass in the previous

paragraphs the reason why Shaykh Yahya stated that some of the companions participated in the killing of Uthman and that this was while he was clarifying

the weakness of the hadeeth;

7 Ibn Hazm in his book Al-Ihkaam 6/83 whilst clarifying the total weakness of the previous hadeeth he surpassed Shaykh Yahya in

mentioning numerous mistakes which occurred from the different Sahabah While Al-Imam Al-Albani in his book "Asilsilah Ad-

Da'eefah pg.150-151 mentioned some of Ibn Hazm's speech in a manner indicating his pleasure with what Ibn Hazm stated.

15 | P a g e

My Companions are like the stars whosoever you follow from

Them, you will be guided.

While in the course of clarifying the weakness of this hadeeth he mentioned a

number of mistakes that occurred from the different Companions and from the mistakes he mentioned was that some of them participated in the killing of

Uthman . In the audio which Salafi Publications translated and transcribed

purposely not mentioning where they took the audio from, fearing that their lies will become exposed, Shaykh Yahya - may aid him - explains the reason why he

mentioned this statement.

Note: Abdul-Wahid and his counterparts have deliberately poorly translated Shaykh Yahyas speech in order for following statements of theirs to become

believable to reader;

And they stated at the end of their translation;

The audio which Salafi Publications translated has reviewed and edited in order for the truth to become manifest and for the sincere reader to see if it is Shaykh Yahya

'who has blatantly tried to deny what he said and has followed the way of Abul- Hassan Al-Maribi in slandering the companions' or is this a mere clarification from

the Shaykh as to why he said what he said. And it is Abu Khadija and his counterparts who have co-operated with one another upon sin and transgression in

order to label the noble Shaykh may grant him success- with what he is free from.

Shaykh Yahya said in the audio;

16 | P a g e

I say: This saying that, I say that the Companions participated in the killing of

Uthman, this occurred because Ibn Katheer and a group of the people of knowledge

mentioned that Muhammad bin Abi Bakr al-Siddeeq and specifically this one

only, then they mentioned this (i.e. his involvement in the killing of Uthman ),

then we researched the issue and found that within (the matter) are (reports)

whose chains are not authentic and we said, this was only in the context of the

research, not that we ourselves decided that they participated in the killing of

'Uthman, rather (this was) in the context of the research according to what was

mentioned by Ibn Katheer in al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah and Ibn Sa'd in At-

Tabaqaat. Then when Shaykh al-Islaam indicated that the chains of narration are

not authentic, we did not say this (i.e. some of the Sahabah participated in the

killing of Uthman) except upon the (basis of) what was apparent from the

statements. As for it being said that we uttered this (i.e. from our own selves),

then never, I seek refuge from , the Companions did not participate in the

killing of Uthman , rather the Khawaarij killed him.

After reading this translation of Shaykh Yahyas speech, then it becomes quite clear

to the sincere reader as was previously mentioned, that the Shaykh only said this

based upon what some of the people of knowledge mentioned with regard to the

involvement of Muhammad bin Abi Bakr in the killing of Uthman .

These scholars being the likes of Ibn Katheer in his renowned book Al-Bidaayah

wan-Nihaayah as well as Ibn Sad in his book At-Tabaqaat. However, when he

researched the issue and it became clear to him that the chains which initially

appeared to him to be authentic that he based his judgment on were actually weak

and that they were criticized by Shaykh ul-Islaam he retracted from his statement.

This is the gist of the matter in short. It also becomes clear from this that Salafi

Publications statement:

Is nothing more than an attempt to deceive the reader and to pull the wool over his

eyes.

17 | P a g e


Who are these people of knowledge and students of knowledge who have followed

up Al-Hajuri's attempts to cover this matter up so it may be known to all whom you take

knowledge from and who you consider to be people of knowledge.

Know well O noble reader if Abu Khadija and his counterparts truly knew a person

of knowledge or student of knowledge known for goodness and steadfastness upon

the way of the Salaf who had honestly followed up this affair they would not

hesitate in mentioning him. However, because they have taken from majaaheel

(unknown individuals) and bold liars who lack decency the members of Salafi

Publications have chosen to conceal these individuals whom they take from and

instead mention them with these flamboyant titles in order to deceive the readers.

It seems like Abu Khadija and his comrades have also benefitted this from their

veiled shaykh of deviation Arafaat Al-Baramaki.

Compare between this past statement of theirs and the statement of their shaykh

Al-Barmaki when he said in his deplorable refutation of Shaykh Yahya titled Al-

Bayaan Al-Fawree pg.6 when he said:

... ...

as I also point out that I have certainly fortified this refutation with a group of

honorable scholars and noble mashaayikh from Ahlus-Sunnah As-Salafiyeen...

Why did Abu Khadija and his comrades's veiled shaykh Al-Barmaki not mention who this ' group of honorable scholars and noble mashaayikh from Ahlus-Sunnah' are?!

Take note of how the people of falsehood strikingly resemble one another.

: Then take admonition, O you with eyes (to see).Surah 59:2

18 | P a g e


Here Abu Khadija and comrades openly declare Shaykh Yahya may aid him- to

be an innovator and an individual who has brought something new into the

religion. All of this based upon what? Their false claim that Shaykh Yahya may

aid him- slandered the Sahabah while the Shaykh has freed himself from this clear

fabrication years ago.

What should also be known to the reader is that from the foundations of the

Hadaadiyah which Abu Khadija and his comrades are attempting to label those who

are free from their slander with, is that if they mark a person with a statement that

he is free from and he proclaims his innocence from it, they continue to accuse that

individual with what they labeled him with.

Shaykh Rabee' may grant him good health and wellbeing- said;

,

. , 8

The Hadadiyah have an evil principle which is, that if they label a person with a

statement that he is free from and he declares his innocence, then surely they

persist upon continuing to accuse that the oppressed (individual) with what they

labeled him with. And they with this principle (of theirs) surpass the

Khawaarij.

Therefore, it is Abu Khadija and his comrades who have yet again resembled the

people of innovation and are attempting to blemish the honor of the noble Shaykh

Yahya - may aid him - with what they themselves are upon.

8 Taken from Shaykh Rabee's website, link: http://rabee.net/show_book.aspx?pid=3&bid=260&gid=0 via Oloom.net, link:

http://aloloom.net/show_book.php?id=465

19 | P a g e

has said with regard to this:

:

And whoever earns sin, he earns it only against himself. And Allh is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise. And whoever earns a fault or a sin and then throws it on to someone innocent, he has indeed burdened

himself with falsehood and a manifest sin. Surah 4: 111-112


This is statement of theirs is a clear evidence and an ideal example of what was

mentioned towards the beginning, that the members of Salafi Publications have in

this article purposely taken Shaykh Yahyas speech out of context and attempted to

refute him on issues that the Shaykh has never even mentioned. This is either due

their ignorance of the Arabic language or is another pitiful attempt of trying to

delude the reader. What further makes evident that this is nothing more than an

attempt to deceive the reader is the approach they have taken.

For instance Abu Khadija and his counterparts stated;

The question that should pose itself to every just reader is; what is this claim that

Shaykh Yahya Al-Hajooree may preserve him- has made about Ibn Katheer

which is a lie? And why have they not mentioned it?

Sadly to say what Abu Khadija and his comrades are trying to establish here is that

the noble Shaykh Yahya stated in the audio that Ibn Katheer declared

20 | P a g e

Muhammad bin Abi Bakr to be from the companions. However, if you listen

to the audio or look at the translation of Shaykh Yahyas speech it becomes as clear

as day that Shaykh Yahya never stated this about Ibn Katheer and this is why Abu

Khadija and his comrades never mentioned it and have instead said:

To we belong and to Him we shall return, take heed O noble readers at what

injustice, oppression and malice amongst other things lead to from lying and deceit.

However, they did not stop here; rather they went on for several pages trying to

establish that this statement which Shaykh Yahya never even uttered is a lie

upon Ibn Katheer. I challenge Al-Maktabah Al-Khalafiyah as well as those aiding

them this upon falsehood to bring forth from this audio that they poorly translated

where Shaykh Yahya said: Ibn Katheer declared Muhammad bin Abi Bakr to be

a companion if they are truthful. As has deemed the presenting of evidence

to be a sign of honesty.

: :

Say (O Muhammad [sal-Allhu 'alayhi wa sallam]), "Produce your proof if you are truthful." Surah

2:111

However, if Abu Khadija and his comrades are not capable of presenting a clear proof for their statement, then let it be known to all that they are unjust,

deceitful individuals who have will not hesitate to lie upon an innocent person what he is free from in order mislead the people.

And let it be known that it is their statement;

Which is mere waffle and nothing of substance!

This first point of Salafi Publications is summarized as follows;

21 | P a g e

Firstly: In the audio Shaykh Yahya DID NOT ascribe to Ibn Katheer that he

declared Muhammad bin Abi Bakr to be from the Sahabah. This is nothing more

than a lie which Abu Khadija and his comrades have contrived which they are not

capable of proving.

Secondly: Shaykh Yahya clearly stated that the reason why he mentioned that

some of the Sahabah participated in the murder of 'Uthman is that he based his

judgment on what was mentioned by a group of the people of knowledge the likes

of Ibn Katheer in Al-Bidayah wan-Nihaayah and Ibn Sad in At-Tabaqaat Al-Kubra

and after researching the affair and realizing the weakness of those chains he left

that position.

Thirdly: Abu Khadija and his counterparts may ask where did Shaykh Yahya get

that Muhammad bin Abi Bakr was a companion if Ibn Katheer did not mention

this?

The answer to this is quite simple, being that Ibn Katheer does not declare him to

be a companion does not necessitate that no other scholar has declared Muhammad

bin Abi Bakr to be a companion either and this is obvious.

After this, then it is well-known to any student of knowledge that a group of the

scholars9 have mentioned Muhammad bin Abi Bakr from amongst the companions

and some of them have entered him into their books which they have written

specifically about the Sahabah of the Messenger of . From amongst these

scholars is Abul-Hassan Ali bin Muhammad Al-Jazari who is well known as Ibnul

Atheer is his book Usd Al-Ghaabah 2/488 he said;

"Al- Muhammad bin Abdullah bin 'Uthman and he is Muhammad bin Abi Bakr As-

Sadeeq and his mother is Asmaa bint 'Umaes Al-Khath'amiyah. (The mention) of

his lineage passed when (the biography of) his father has mentioned. He was born

at (the time of) the farewell pilgrimage in Dhil-Hulaefah five days remaining from the

month of Dhul-Q'iadah. His mother departed whilst performing Hajj and delivered

9 What the brother Abu Layth Yusuf Al-Britaani complied and translated is sufficient for anyone seeking an increase in this affair.

Return to this link; http;//aloloomenglish.net/vb/showthread.php/99

22 | P a g e

him (on the way). So Abu Bakr sought a fatwa (Islaamic verdict) from the

Messenger of . Then he (the Messenger ) ordered her (Asmaa bint 'Umaes) to

bath and perform ihlaal10 and that she does not circumambulate the Ka'bah until she

becomes pure


In this second point Abu Khadija and his comrades babbled on for several

paragraphs trying to prove that Ibn Katheer exempted Muhammad bin Abi Bakr

from participating in the killing of Uthman . This again attests to fact of their

vain attempts of creating for themselves something to criticize against Shaykh

Yahya.


In these previous paragraphs Abu Khadija and his counterparts in their hopeless

attempts in proving Shaykh Yahya to be 'a liar' have rather established themselves as calculated liars who do not feel ashamed of fabricating stories against those

whom are innocent of their accusations and then making these fabrications a basis to slander and deem the people to be innovators and we seek refuge in from this

wicked, deviated methodology.

10

Al-ihlaal has been defined by the scholars the likes of An-Nawawi in his explanation of Saheeh Muslim (8/89) as raising the voice with at-talbiyah (i.e. labaik allaahuma) upon entering the ihram.

23 | P a g e

Firstly it has become quite clear from what has passed that Shaykh Yahya may

preserve him- did not slander a single one of the Sahabah let alone 'the name of

the companions' and that this is from the fabrications of the members of Salafi

Publications which they are attempting to label Shaykh Yahya with. Even though

he has clarified his innocence from this evil slander years ago, so by this Abdul-

Wahid and his comrades resemble the Hadadiyah who they are attempting to label

the people with.

Secondly their statement:

This consists of several lies and speaking frankly it is quite saddening to see

individuals who ascribe themselves to this blessed ad-Dawah as-Salafiyah steep as

low as this. Here not only have they lied upon Shaykh Yahya but they have

attempted to deceive the readers with regard to what Ibn Katheer mentioned in Al-

Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah about the involvement of Muhammad bin Abi Bakr in the

killing of 'Uthman .

As for their lie upon Shaykh Yahya, then at this point, they fabricate upon Shaykh

Yahya that he;

Abu Khadija and his counterparts falsely claim that Shaykh Yahya stated about Ibn

Katheer that he affirmed Muhammad bin Abi Bakr to have participated in

the killing of 'Uthman .

Fear your Lord! I repeat Fear your Lord! And remember that these lies and

fabrications you are trying to label the innocent with there will come a day

when you will wish you were as far away from them as possible.

24 | P a g e

:

On the Day when every person will be confronted with all the good he has done, and all the evil he has

done, he will wish that there were a great distance between him and his evil. And Allh warns you

against Himself (His punishment) and Allh is full of kindness to (His) slaves. Surah 3:30

So repent to and rectify this oppression before it's too late and a Day comes

where your good deeds are given to those whom you have wronged or their

sins are placed upon you. Al-Bukhari (6534) reported on the authority of Abu

Huraira that the Messenger said;

"Whoever has oppressed another person concerning his reputation or anything else, he should beg him to forgive

him before the Day of Resurrection when there will be no money (to compensate for wrong deeds), but if he

has good deeds, those good deeds will be taken from him according to his oppression which he has done,

and if he has no good deeds, the sins of the oppressed person will be loaded on him."

If we return to Shaykh Yahya's speech again the noble reader will see the reality of

this lie.

Shaykh Yahya said; I say: This saying that, I say that the Companions participated

in the killing of Uthman, this occurred because Ibn Katheer and a group of the

people of knowledge mentioned that Muhammad bin Abi Bakr al-Siddeeq and

specifically this one only, then they mentioned this (i.e. his involvement in the

killing of Uthman ), then we researched the issue and found that within (the

matter) are (reports) whose chains are not authentic and we said, this was only in

the context of the research, not that we ourselves decided that they

participated in the killing of 'Uthman, rather (this was) in the context of the

research according to what was mentioned by Ibn Katheer in al-Bidaayah wan-

25 | P a g e

Nihaayah and Ibn Sa'd in At-Tabaqaat. Then when Shaykh al-Islaam indicated

that the chains of narration are not authentic, we did not say this (i.e. some of the

Sahabah participated in the killing of Uthman) except upon the (basis of) what

was apparent from the statements. As for it being said that we uttered this (i.e.

from our own selves), then never, I seek refuge from , the Companions did not

participate in the killing of Uthman , rather the Khawaarij killed him

Note in the above sentences that Shaykh Yahya does not say not a single time

that Ibn Katheer affirmed Muhammad bin Abi Bakr to have participated in the

in murder of 'Uthman. Rather Shaykh Yahya uses the word mentioned in three

occasions. After this there should not remain any doubt that this is a clear lie on

the part Abu Khadija and his comrades which has no interpretation. They

themselves in their poor translation of Shaykh Yahya's speech never use the word

affirm but have rather used the word mention.

Why then have Abu Khadija and his comrades told this bald-faced lie or do they

assume the people are too foolish to realize this?

As for Salafi Publications' deceit with regard to the speech of Ibn Katheer then this

is found in their statement;

Let us take a look now at what Ibn Katheer mentioned in Al-Bidaayah wan-

Nihaayah so as to see if their statement "when Ibn Katheer said nothing of

the sort.." is a reality or another clear lie and the aid of is sought.

Before mentioning the narration present in Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah which

indicates Muhammad bin Abi Bakrs involvement in the murder of Uthman I

remind Abu Khadija and his comrades to fear and repent from their

transgression and injustice. The Messenger of said whilst clarifying the

26 | P a g e

frightening outcome of injustice in the hadeeth reported by Abu Dawood (4904) and

others on the authority of Abu Bakrah ;

- - .

There is not a sin more deserving that the Most High hastens in punishing the one who does it in the dunya added to what He () has preserved for him in the Hereafter (of punishment)-

like injustice and cutting the ties of kinship.

This hadeeth was authenticated by Al-Imam Muqbil Al-Wadiee in his Jami as-

Saheeh (3294).

Returning to the topic at hand, Ibn Katheer stated in Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah

(Daar Hajr 10/305):

Khalifa bin Khiyaat reported to us that Ibn Ulayah said it was reported to me by Ibn Auwn on the authority of Al-Hasan who said I was informed by Wathaab who

said; Uthman sent me, so I summoned Al-Ashtar for him. So he (Uthman) said

what do the people want? He (Al-Ashtar) said three (things) there is no escape from (accepting) one of them. He (Uthman) said what are they? He (Al-Ashtar)

said they are giving you the choice between you leaving their affair to them by saying; this is your affair, chose whomsoever you desire (as a leader) or chose

between you punishing yourself. And if you refuse, then the people will surely kill you.

27 | P a g e

He (Uthman ) then said as for me leaving for them their affair then I could

(never) disrobe myself of a garment that has adorned me with. And as for me taking revenge for them against myself, then By , I certainly know that my two Companions (i.e. Abu Bakr and Umr ) before me use to inflict punishment, but

my body is not capable of withstanding the (pain) of the retaliation. And if you kill me then you will not love one another after me nor will you pray after me (in)

congregation nor will you fight an enemy together after me ever.

He said (the narrator) and there came a small man as if he was a wolf, he looked into from a door and then returned. And Muhammad bin Abi Bakr came in (a

group) of thirteen men. He (Muhammad) grabbed his (i.e. Uthmans) beard and he did (this) up until I heard the clacking of his molar teeth and he then said

Muawiyah has been of no use to you, Ibn Aamir has bee of no use to you, your

books have been of no use to you". He (Uthman ) said release my beard O son of

my brother, he (the narrator Wathaab) said, then I saw him (Muhammad) seek the assistance a man from the people with his eyes-meaning he pointed towards him-. So he went up towards him with a wide blade of an arrow and slashed his

head with it,

I (Al-Hassan from the chain of narrators) said then what? He said (the reporter

Wathaab) then they gathered together upon him until they killed him.

This report mentioned by Ibn Katheer in Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah, the exact source that Shaykh Yahya - may preserve him - stated and is a sufficient proof

for any just reader that Salafi Publications are treading a devious, treacherous path filled with lies and deception which will only harm them sooner or later if they do

not return to in repentance.

28 | P a g e

Important Note:

Abu Khadija and his comrades again following the ways of the people of innovation in concealing the truth have purposely not mentioned the complete statement of

Ibn Katheer or translated it, when they reported his statement from his book Al-

Baith Al-Hatheeth (pg.187). Rather, they intentionally did not mention the beginning of Ibn Katheers speech or the ending of it. This because they realized it

is not in favor of what they are attempting to prove, so instead they mentioned from his speech what is in their favor and from we seek from all deviations.

Ibn Katheer in this statement of his, was bringing to light the fact that some of the

scholars have deemed Muhammad bin Abi Bakr to be from amongst the Sahabah

while it is has been authentically reported that the Messenger placed a date

which he had chewed in the mouth of Abdullah bin Abi Talha after his birth and

blessed him. As a result, Ibn Katheer said:

And the likes of this (i.e. Abdullah bin Abi Talha ), it should be that he is counted

from (amongst) the younger Sahabah for just seeing him (i.e. the Messeger )

Then Ibn Katheer said:

and they (i.e. the scholars) have deemed Muhammad bin Abi Bakr As-Siddeeq to

be from amongst them (i.e. the Sahabah ), while he has born near the tree at

the time of ihraam in the Farewell Pilgrimage and he did not reach from the

lifetime of the Messenger except approximately a hundred days and they

29 | P a g e

(i.e. the scholars) have not mentioned that he was brought before the

Messenger nor that he (Muhammad bin Abi Bakr) saw him

Ibn Katheer then finished his statement by saying:

... .

Therefore, Abdullah bin Abi Talha is more entitled to be counted from (amongst)

the younger Sahabah then Muhammad bin Abi Bakr and knows best.

However, Abu Khadija and his comrades after realizing that this speech of Ibn

Katheer was not in their interest they avoided translating it and only

mentioned from it what was in their favor as is the methodology of the people

of falsehood.


The context Shaykh Yahya stated that Muhammad bin Abi Bakr participated in the

killing of 'Uthman has already passed however we shall mention it again

for the in order for the falsehood in Salafi Publications upcoming statements

to become crystal clear. Shaykh Yahya said;


Uthman, this occurred because Ibn Katheer and a group of the people of

knowledge mentioned that Muhammad bin Abi Bakr al-Siddeeq and

specifically this one only, then they mentioned this (i.e. his involvement in

the killing of Uthman ), then we researched the issue and found that within

(the matter) are (reports) whose chains are not authentic and we said, this

was only in the context of the research, not that we ourselves decided

that they participated in the killing of 'Uthman, rather (this was) in the

context of the research according to what was mentioned by Ibn Katheer

in al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah and Ibn Sa'd in At-Tabaqaat. Then when

30 | P a g e

Shaykh al-Islaam indicated that the chains of narration are not authentic, we

did not say this (i.e. some of the Sahabah participated in the killing of

Uthman) except upon the (basis of) what was apparent from the

statements

From the previous paragraphs the following become evident;

1. Shaykh Yahya stated what he did about the involvement of Muhammad bin

Abi Bakr in the murder of 'Uthman only in the context of what he came

across throughout the course his research according to what was

mentioned by some of the scholars the likes of Ibn Katheer and Ibn Sa'd .

2. Shaykh Yahya did not state this from his own desires, nor is this false or

baseless as Salafi Publications have falsely claimed.


Salafi Publications in the previous sentences claim about the errors that transpired

from the Sahabah which Shaykh Yahya mentioned are something that al-Hajuri

says the Companions fell into. However, these mistakes are errors which have

occurred11 from the mentioned Sahabah and most, if not all of what Shaykh Yahya

has stated can be found in Al-Bukhari and Muslim. Nevertheless, due to the

ignorance of Salafi Publications, or in their endless attempts of deceiving the people

they said;

Praise is due to who has unveiled treachery of these individuals to all.

11

Other then what Shaykh Yahya mentioned about the involvement of some of the Sahabah (i.e. Muhammad bin Abi Bakr) in the

murder of 'Uthman .

31 | P a g e

Salafi Publications said:

It is important to know that Shaykh Yahya was not the first to mention some of the

errors which have transpired from the different Sahabah in order prove their

infallibility as individuals. Rather we mentioned previously that Ibn Hazm in his

book Al-Ihkaam (6/83) whilst clarifying the weakness of the exact same hadeeth12

surpassed Shaykh Yahya in mentioning the different mistakes of the Sahabah

.While the Imam Al-Albani after quoting several paragraphs from the speech of

Ibn Hazm -may have mercy on him- where he also mentioned some of the

errors which occurred from certain Sahabah said in his book Silsilahtul Ahaadeeth

Ad-Da'eefah (1/ 151)

(6 /66 : ) !

Then he (Ibn Hazm spoke) at length in clarifying some of the opinions which

occurred from the Sahabah which they did not achieve the Sunnah in them,

and that was whilst he was alive and after his death. Then he (Ibn Hazm)

said; (6/86) "How then is it permissible to blind follow a people who (at

times) err and are correct (at other times). 13

Hence what Shaykh Yahya mentioned is neither an error nor does it contain the

slightest slander of the Sahabah otherwise the scholars would have refuted

Ibn Hazm and Al-Albani for this as well.


12

i.e. the hadeeth; "My companions are like the stars whosoever you follow from them, you will be guided."

13 This was mentioned by some of the brothers who have written refutations on 'Arfaat al-Barmaki.

32 | P a g e

By , this is from their never-ending falsehood and deception. Abu Khadija and his

comrades should be asked; when Ibn Hazm also mentioned these errors and

the Imam Al-Albani quoted from him were they also using this to set the stage to

allow his accusation against Uthman (radiallaahu anhu) that he made a bid'ah into the deen

of Islaam through sanctioning the second aadhaan for Jumu'ah?

Fear and leave off these pitiful attempts of labeling the people with falsehood.


Due to Abu Khadija and his comrades' lack of comprehension they have wrongfully

assumed that Shaykh Yahya did not believe some of the Sahabah (i.e. Muhammad

bin Abi Bakr) participated in the murder of 'Uthman . However, there are

three matters which clearly indicate that Shaykh Yahya initially believed that

some of the Sahabah participated in the murder of 'Uthman ;

Firstly Shaykh Yahya himself after listing the errors which transpired from the

Sahabah said; And all of these evidences which we have pointed to, we have not mentioned

anything except that which is saheeh (authentic), as Al-Matktabah Al- Khalafiyah is

33 | P a g e

quite aware of this and this contradicts their false claim. Being that Shaykh

Yahya not believing this to be true actually necessitates that he knew these

chains were weak. How then is it possible that he refers to them as

authentic?!!

Secondly Shaykh Yahya referred to the errors as; a clear evidence that as individuals

they are not infallible from making grave mistakes or minor ones, whether that is regarding

Uthman or other than him.

Finally Shaykh Yahya did not at any point say he did not believe that some

of the Sahabah actually participated in the killing of 'Uthman. Rather this

is from the ignorance of Abu Khadija and his comrades. What the Shaykh

said was that he did not decide that some of the Sahabah participated in the

killing of Uthman from his own self. Otherwise let them bring forward

where Shaykh Yahya states that he did not actually believe it.

It is quite clear from this that Shaykh Yahya firstly did believe that Muhammad bin

Abi Bakr played a part in the murder of 'Uthman. However, due to poor

understanding of the Arabic language or again attempting to delude the readers

they unjustly claim that Shaykh Yahya did not at any point believe Muhammad bin

Abi Bakr had any involvement in the killing of 'Uthman .

Furthermore, what also demonstrates their deep-rooted ignorance is their

statement; that he only mentioned the "apparentness" (whatever that means) "of

statements14"

If Abu Khadija and his comrades do not know what it means for a scholar to deem a

narration to be authentic based upon what is apparent to him, then they are in dire

14

Abu Khadija and his counterparts here say; that he only mentioned the "apparentness" (whatever that means) "of statements. While in their translation of Shaykh Yahya's speech they previously said; we did not say this except upon the (basis of) the apparentness of statements. It is not clear if this is a genuine error or another attempt to deceive the readers.

34 | P a g e

need of discontinuing these feeble refutations, taking a pen and notebook and

sitting in the gatherings of knowledge until this affair is made clear to them.

As for the people of knowledge then what is known is they may deem a narration to

be authentic which is totally weak, or maybe even fabricated15` based upon what is

apparent to them from it. Let us look at the statement of Shaykh Yahya may

preserve him- for a final time as to see what lead him to say what he did.


Uthman , this occurred because Ibn Katheer and a group of the people of

knowledge mentioned that Muhammad bin Abi Bakr al-Siddeeq and specifically

this one only, then they mentioned this (i.e. his involvement in the killing of

Uthman ), then we researched the issue and found that within (the matter)

are (reports) whose chains are not authentic and we said, this was only in the

context of the research, not that we ourselves decided that they participated in

the killing of 'Uthman, rather (this was) in the context of the research according to

what was mentioned by Ibn Katheer in Al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah and Ibn Sa'd

in At-Tabaqaat, then when Shaykh al-Islaam indicated that the chains of narration

are not authentic, we did not say this (i.e. some of the Sahabah participated in the

killing of Uthman) except upon the (basis of) what was apparent from the

statements. As for it being stated that we uttered this (from our own selves), then

never, I seek refuge from , the Companions did not participate in the killing of

Uthman, rather the Khawaarij killed him.

After this there should remain no doubt to any just reader to see that Shaykh Yahya

based his judgment in the involvement of Muhammad bin Abi Bakr upon what

was apparent to him from the narrations and statements of a group people of

15

The brother Rasheed Al-Jizaairee mentioned a good example of this with regard to Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr who undoubtedly is from the Muhaditheen of Islaam. This being the case he has authenticated a hadeeth referred to as the story of Al-Garaneeq summary of

this story being, that while the Messenger was reciting the Quraan the Shaitan spoke upon the tongue of the Messenger and

praised some idols of the mushrikeen. Many of the scholars have declared this story to be of falsehood and disproved its authenticity. These scholars being the likes of Al-Albani, Ash-Shinqeeti, Al-Qurtubi, As-Shokaani, Ibn Al-'Arabi and others and with this it is not known that the scholars said that he was an innovator because of this like these individuals are doing.

35 | P a g e

knowledge amongst them Ibn Katheer and Ibn Sa'd16. As for the narration found in

al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah which Abu Khadija and his counterparts attempted to

conceal then it passed on page 25-2617, and as for what was mentioned by Ibn Sa'd

in his book At-Tabaqaat Al-Kubra then look no further than the following

narration. Ibn Sa'd said in his book at-Tabaqaat (Daar Saadir 3/83);

: . : : :

. . . .

.

Ibn Sa'd said I was informed by 'Amr bin 'Asim Al-Kilaabi who said I was

informed by Abul-Ashab who said I was informed by Al-Hassan (Al-Basri the honorable Imam) who said; when they were met with a punishment -meaning the

killers of 'Uthman bin 'Affaan - he (Al-Hassan Al-Basri) said Al-Faasiq bin Abi Bakr

was taken. - Abul-Ashab said Al-Hassan never used to refer to him18 by his name rather he used to call him Al-Faasiq (The sinful one) he said (Al-Hassan Al-Basri) he (Muhammad) was taken then put inside of a (dead) donkey then he

was burnt.

What should be made clear after this is that if a scholar deems a chain to be

authentic based upon what is apparent to him, and then it becomes clear to him

that the chain is actually weak and retracts from his previous statement then there

is nothing else upon him. Rather this indicates his eagerness in achieving the truth.

Al-'Allaamah Al-Albani himself a researcher gathered a compilation of ahaadeeth

which reach two volumes19 that Al-Albani at one point deemed to be authentic

or weak and then retracted from his previous opinion towards those ahaadeeth.

What then is preventing Abu Khadija and his counterparts refuting Al-Albani

16

Some of the scholars who also mentioned the narrations that point towards Muhammad bin Abi Bakr's involvement in the killing

of 'Uthman are; Abu Nu'aym in Ma'rifatus-Sahabah, Ibn 'Asaakir in Taarikh Dimishiq, Al-Imaam Ad-Dhahabi in Seer 'Alaam. 17

Ibn Sa'd also mentions this exact narration in At-Tabaqaat (3/72). 18

i.e. Muhammad bin Abi Bakr As-Sadeeq the son of Abu Bakr . 19

The book is titled Taraaju Allaamatu Al-Albani fima nasa alahi Tasheehan wa Tadeefan wa Taraajuihi fima lam yanus alahi. Complied by Muhammad Hassan Abdul-Hameed. Printed by: Maktabahtul Maaarif.

36 | P a g e

and all the other scholars who have also retracted from their rulings upon ahaadeeth,

if this is the methodology that they are upon.

It appears that Abu Khadija and his comrades hurtling after insignificant

glimmer of this worldly life has occupied much of their time and busied them from

seeking knowledge and as a result they have fallen into this enormous blunder. I

take this opportunity to remind them of the statement of ;

:

Say: "Short is the enjoyment of this world. The Hereafter is (far) better for him who fears Allh, and you

shall not be dealt with unjustly even equal to the Fatl (a scalish thread in the long slit of a date stone).

Surah 4:77

And knows best whether they are really this ignorant or this was another

one of their hopeless attempts of misguiding the people.

As a final point it is also important to know that even if Shaykh Yahya was

genuinely mistaken in ascribing the involvement of Muhammad bin Abi Bakr

in the murder of 'Uthman to Ibn Katheer , then this does not necessitate

at any point that Shaykh Yahya lied upon him. This is because Shaykh

Yahya stated that Ibn Katheer was amongst a group of the scholars who

mentioned Muhammad bin Abi Bakr's involvement in the murder of 'Uthman

and the Shaykh is from the children of Aadam and is not free from error

or forgetfulness.

Furthermore how many scholars do we find who have declared a hadeeth to be

in Saheeh Al-Bukhari or Muslim or in any other book and the reality of the

matter is that they are mistaken in this20. Abu Khadija and his comrades must

be asked, does this necessitate that these scholars have also lied? I believe the

answer is quite obvious. Therefore, what was befitting for them to say if their

20

The noble brother Shaykh Adnan Al-Masqari may preserve him- has written a treatise about this issue titled; At-Tanbihaat Al-Muhimah 'ala Ohaam Al'aimah.

37 | P a g e

claim was true is "Shaykh Yahya has erred in ascribing this to Ibn Katheer" and

this would have been respectable.

However, due to their evil intent in trying to label him with what he is free

from, they've altered his statements, fabricated upon him then deemed him to

be a liar and an innovator. And by , this is clearly the path of those who have

been deprived justice, equity and truthfulness. Abu Khadija and his comrades

should know well that no matter how much they try sooner or later the truth

will become manifest to all and it shall be known who the insolent liar is.

:

Tomorrow they will come to know who the liar is, the insolent one! Surah 54:26

Written by: Mahmood bin Muhammad As-Somali

did shaykh yahya al-hajooree ‘slander the name of the companions’ by fabricating upon them that...

Documents