Back to As-Sunnah

Warning Against the Innovators

The Crime of Tamyee' upon the Salafee Manhaj
Questions and Answers with Shaykh `Ubayd al-Jaabiree1



Note: Tamyee' means "to soften, to melt". It refers to the manhaj adopted by the contemporary false claimants
to Salafiyyah towards the Hizbiyyeen, the Ahl ul-Bid'ah. One of leniency and softness, and which involves
breaking down the social and methodological barriers that separate Ahl us-Sunnah from Ahl ul-Bid'ah. This
manhaj has been around and operative in the behaviour of people for quite a few years, but has not really been
identified and nor has it caught the attention of many people (except of course the Imaams of Jarh and
Ta'deel), but in light of the fitnah of Abul-Hasan al-Misree al-Mubtadi', the Salafees are now clear about this
particular destructive behavioural pattern, and they have been able to reflect back in the years gone by, and
actually recognise and recall this pattern of Tamyee' that was observed in the behaviour of many in the midst of
numerous tribulations.

Part 3

Question 4: When the condition of a man is unknown, or hidden (mastoor ul-
haal), and nothing is known about him, is it permissible to ask about him in
order to know his condition, or is it not permissible?

Shaykh `Ubayd: There is no doubt that in every time and in every place [it
often occurs that] a person who is not known comes to the people. And this
person who is not known, if he is one who remains silent and is reserved, and
does not manifest any opposition, then he remains mastoor (hidden,
unknown). However, when the people have doubts about this man or they
desire anything of the (worldly or religious) affairs from him, then it is their
right to investigate into his condition.

And amongst the evidences for this is what Muslim and others have reported
from Mu'aawiyah bin al-Hakam (radiallaahu anhu), that he used to have a
female slave who used to tend to the flock of sheep. And then a wolf came and
snatched a sheep from the flock. Mu'aawiyah came and slapped her, and then
this became heavy upon him. So he went to the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi
wasallam) and informed him of the incident. He said, "Bring her to me so I can
see if she is a believer or not?" So he brought her, and the Prophet (sallallaahu
alaihi wasallam) said, "Where is Allaah?" She said, "Above the heaven". He said

1 Taken from the transcript made by Abu Hafsah and posted on Sahab.Net

1
to her, "Who am I?" She said, "You are the Messenger of Allaah". He said,
"Free her, for she is a believer".

And in the long past, they ­ meaning the Scholars ­ used to say, "Test the
people of Madinah with Maalik bin Anas, and the people of Shaam with al-
Awzaa'ee, and the people of Misr with al-Layth bin Sa'd, and the people of
Mawsul with Mu'aafee bin Imraan".2

Hence, when doubts arise about a person, or something of the affairs is desired
from him, then he is to be tested (yumtahana). And this is a matter that the
people cannot do without, until even in their dealings with each other. If a
man was to propose to a woman, then they are required to ask about his
condition. Is he a person whose deen and character is pleasing, or not? This is
necessary, and it is not to be said that there is nothing known about this
person.


2 [Translator's Note]: LOVE OF SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS OR HATRED OF THEM
SEPARATES AHL US-SUNNAH FROM AHL UL-AHWAA AND TESTING PEOPLE BY
THE LOVE AND HATRED OF THE AHL US-SUNNAH IS NOT A BID'AH

Ibn al-Madeenee said, "I heard Abdur-Rahmaan bin Mahdee say: Ibn `Awn is a test for the
people of Basrah. If you see a person from them loving him, then incline and be secure with
him. For the people of Kufah, Maalik bin Mighwal and Zaa'idah bin Qudaamah are a test. If
you see a man loving them then seek his goodness. And for the people of Shaam, al-
Awzaa'ee, and Abu Ishaaq al-Fazaaree are a test. And for the people of Hijaaz, Malik bin
Anas." (al-Laalikaa'ee 1/62).

Ibn Mahdee said, "When you see a person from Shaam loving al-Awzaa'ee and Abu Ishaaq
al-Faraazee, then he is a person of the Sunnah". (al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel of Ibn Abi Haatim,
1/217). Ahmad bin Yunus narrates from Sufyaan ath-Thawree who said, "Test the people of
Mawsul by Mu'aafi bin Imraan." (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb of Ibn Hajar, 10/180).

Al-Barbahaaree said, "To set up trials in Islaam is an Innovation. As for today, people should
be tested for the Sunnah, because of his saying, "This is the knowledge of the religion, so
look from whom you take your religion..." (Sharh us-Sunnah, no. 152, and the latter part of
the narration is that of Muhammad bin Seereen, the Taabi'ee).

Ahmad bin Zaheer said, "I heard Ahmad bin Abdullaah bin Yoonus say: Test the people of
Mawsul with Mu'aafi bin Imraan. If they love him, then they are Ahl us-Sunnah, and if they
hate him, then they are Ahl ul-Bid'ah ­ just as the people of Koofah are to be tested by
Yahyaa." (al-Laalikaa'ee 1/66).

2
So by this, the falsehood of the statement, "The basis with respect to a person is
`adaalah (uprightness, integrity)" becomes clear.3 The affair is not like this. This
statement is falsehood, and the books of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel are a witness to
what we say. If the original basis with respect to Muslims was that they are all
upright, sound, trustworthy (`adaalah), then the people would not have
required Scholars and Imaams who disparage whom they disparaged and give
appraisal to those whom they appraised.

Question 5: When a student of knowledge is compelled to quote from the
books of the people of knowledge, or to take from them, then what are the
Sharee'ah guidelines regarding this in the view of the Scholars of Tawheed and
Sunnah?

Shaykh `Ubayd: The books of the people of knowledge, if the authors of these
books are amongst those from Ahl us-Sunnah, then there is no problem in this
matter for me, except that he should quote from them only the clear
expressions that the people which understand and those being addressed will
understand, and that whilst quoting he should choose expressions that are
appropriate to the situation and the speech at hand.

As for when the one being quoted from is from Ahl ul-Bid'ah, then the matter
varies and is not all at the same level. It is for this reason that the Scholars
divided the books of the Innovators into three categories:

The first: That which is a pure innovation, and does not have any Sunnah in
it, or it only has a very small amount of Sunnah in it, then it is not lawful to
look into it except for a firmly-grounded scholar, who desires to refute the
people from their own books. And amongst the examples of these books are
those of the Raafidah, such as al-Kaafee, and Usool al-Kaafee ad Fasl ul-
Khitaab.


3 [Translator's Note]: Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said, "As for the saying of the one who
says, "The base rule (asl) concerning Muslims is al-'adaalah (uprightness, trustworthiness,
integrity, honesty), then it is baatil (false, futile). Rather, the base rule concerning the Son of
Aadam is dhulm (oppression) and jahl (ignorance), just as the Most High has said, "...But
man took it upon himself (i.e. the trust that was refused by the Heavens and Earth).
Verily, he was unjust (to himself) and ignorant (of its results)." (Ahzaab 33:70). And the
mere utterance of the two testimonies of faith does not necessitate that a person has moved
from oppression and ignorance into al-'adl (integrity, justice, honesty)." (Majmoo' al-
Fataawaa 15/357). And refer also to MNJ150004 for an explanation by Shaikh Rabee' of
this statement.
3
The second: That in which Sunnah and Bid'ah is mixed. So they say that it is
not lawful to look into this except for the firmly-grounded Scholar who can
differentiate between the sound from the unsound and the corrupt from the
straight, upright and the truth from the falsehood. Then it is lawful for such a
person. Since, he is able to distinguish, and he knows what he will quote of the
truth. And I hold that he should not engage in this much, because when he
engages in this a lot, and this becomes spread then it might lead to confusion,
and then perhaps those who listen or read might think that that which has
been quoted from is the Sunnah. Rather, I see that it is obligatory upon him in
the footnotes to explain the condition of this man and to explain his
misguidance and that he quoted from him whatever he quoted because it was
appropriate or that it agrees with the saying of Ahl us-Sunnah.

However, in my view, I hold that it is better to be free of this, especially in the
time of turmoil, as occurs in our time today, when the various (false)
methodologies have flared up and caused commotion. For the manhaj of the
truth, and the people of truth clashes with the false methodology and its
people, so I hold that we not be in need of them, since in the books of the
Salaf, and all praise is due to Allaah, is what makes one free of need of the
books of those people. However, some of the noble Scholars, we have seen
them quote from the Innovators, but we are not able to say about them that
they are Innovators, or that they have made themselves a ladder for the
Innovators (i.e. allowing the Innovators to be propped up). No, far be it from
them. However, I do hold that being without need of this is far better, since the
books of the Salaf are replete with the truth. However, perhaps this Scholar saw
it fit to quote a sound, correct expression from a book of a misguided,
misguiding innovator, because it agreed with the truth, and it agreed with what
he has of the truth, and thus he quotes it from the angle of seeking it as an
(additional, supportin) witness, not from the angle of independent (proof or
support).

The third: That which is free from innovation, and its author has no concern
in spreading innovation (by way of it), or calling to it, but his concern is
tahqeeq (verification, corroboration) of a book from the books of Ahl us-
Sunnah. As if he is a person of trade, or a person of commodities, and he
desires to subsist and be sustained, so he verifies this book or that book, and he
does not include within it any of his innovations or his deviations. So this
affair is a vast one (contain much room).

So from the examples of the second type (mentioned above) is al-Kashshaaf of
az-Zamakhsharee and az-Zamakhsharee, I think his name is Mahmood bin
4
`Umar, labelled Jaarullaah, then he is pure hardcore Mu'tazilee, however the
Scholars quote from him in the meanings (of the Qur'aan) and in language, so
they quote these statements of support from him.

And examples of the third type (mentioned above), then I am not able to say
with certainty, but to found amongst it, perhaps is the tarteeb (arrangement,
organisation) of Abu Ghuddah of Sunan an-Nisaa'ee. Abu Ghuddah is a
blazing Soofee, rather he is the Kawtharee of this Era, an enemy of Ahl us-
Sunnah.

Question 6: What is the difference between their saying, "This is a person of
innovation (saahibu bid'ah)" and "this is an innovator (mubtadi')"?

Shaykh `Ubayd: In my view the difference is clear and I will explain it to you:
That which we know from the expressions of the People of Knowledge, and
their way and methodology in their saying "Mubtadi'", is that they do not apply
it absolutely, except for the one upon whom the proof has been established,
and who is a person of misguidance, and who is misguided, misguiding others.
So they say, "Mubtadi'". And sometimes they may also use it unrestrictedly, but
from the angle of rebuke, reprimand. However, overwhelmingly, they do not
say "Mubtadi' (Innovator)" except for the one who traversed upon innovation
and the proof was established upon him. As for "person of innovation (saahibu
bid'ah)", then the condition of the proof being established does not apply to it.
And they say, "this is a person of innovation", meaning he traverses upon
innovations (or something from them), and this is more general. "Person of
innovation" is something more general, and as for "Mubtadi'", then it is more
specific. Meaning a word that is more specific. So understand this well, may
Allaah bless you.






5
From SP