The Clarification of Contemporary Sects

Over subsequent years, the brothers at Al-Maktabah As-Salafiyyah drew close to Al-Halabi (as they did to the other mashayikh) and he would praise and commend the efforts of Salafi Publications in the da’wah. Ali Al-Halabi’s final visit to Salafi Publications was in August 2000 when he attended our conference at Hamd House in Birmingham.

So it is true, we were close to Al-Halabi and we considered him to be from our scholars, and he considered us to be trustworthy, and at the forefront of the da’wah in the West, as he himself would often say, —and as he made clear in a gathering with us in the presence of Shaikh Husayn Aalush-Shaikh at that QSS conference.

Unfortunately, the truth is (as Shaikh Rabee’ Ibn Hādī and the other scholars have pointed out) that Ali Hasan Al-Halabi did not speak in the issues of Imān (Faith) and Kufr (unbelief) at the beginning of the affair with a firm grounding in the knowledge, unlike Shaikh Al-Albānī who spoke with sure-footed principles and depth of knowledge that was clear. So, in the beginning, Al-Halabī fell into irjā’ by speaking with principles as and when the comments of people would reach him. For this reason, we saw Al-Halabī, in the beginning, agreeing with the book of Murād Shukrī called Ihkām At-Taqrīr Li Ahkām At-Takfīr (1998). In this book, Murād Shukrī justifies and propounds the Madhhab of Irjā’ without any dispute – and in particular by restricting Kufr (unbelief) to merely to takdhīb (denial), juhūd (rejection), and istihlāl (making lawful what is unlawful) and he removed actions from the essence of Imān! Ahlus-Sunnah recognises this to be from the Madhhab of the Murji’ah. On the cover of the book were printed the words, “Read, reviewed, revised, and printed under the supervision of Shaikh Ali Al-Halabī”!!

When the book reached Al-Lajnah Ad-Dā’imah under the chairmanship of the Muftī, the Imām of Sunnah and Salafiyyah, Shaikh Abdul-‘Azīz Ibn Bāz (rahimahullāh), they ruled that the book supported the Madhhab of the Murji’ah, so they warned against the book and the author.

So some people presented Al-Halabī’s book, At-Tahdhīr min Fitnat At-Takfīr (the first edition) with his commentary and notes, and his book Sayhat Nadhīr bi Khatrit-Takfīr, to the Lajnah Ad-Dā’imah (the Permanent Committee) in Saudi Arabia. After looking at the two books in detail, they stated (as occurs at the end of their judgement), “The Permanent Committee holds that these two books are not permissible to be printed, distributed or spread due to what they contain of falsehood and distortion.” Dated 14/6/1421 AH (no. 21517) coinciding with 12 September 2000. And with this began the dispute between Al-Halabī and the Permanent Committee.

Therefore what we hold to be correct and is obligatory upon everyone to affirm (even in hindsight), is that the Permanent Committee was actually correct in its criticism on the commentary of Al-Halabī in At-Tahdhīr min Fitnat At-Takfīr (the first edition).

By 2002, the scholars had refuted the well-known Abul-Hasan Al-Ma’ribī (an Egyptian who moved to Yemen), a close companion of Ali Al-Halabī. They declared him to be an innovator. However, Al-Halabi and his cohorts persisted upon defending him openly, and they started criticising the stances of the scholars towards Al-Ma’ribi. It was, therefore, not too long before Al-Halabī fell foul of the Scholars of Madīnah, Riyādh, Sāmitah and Yemen as well as many other lands. More and more errors of Al-Halabī, his deviations and oppositions were uncovered and eventually he was declared an open innovator (in the mid-2000s). By early 2002, Salafi Publications were well-clear of Ali Hasan Al-Halabī and his band of partisan youth in the West who fanatically followed him, headed by Brixton Mosque and CTI Luton.

Salafi Publications became aware Al-Halabī’s errors in affairs of Manhaj shortly after 2001 (independent of the refutations of the Lajnah) such as his defence and companionship of certain innovators whom the scholars had warned against (such as his praise of Adnān Ar’ūr, Muhammad Al-Hassān, etc), and his insinuations against the senior Salafi scholars. The Salafis who had an understanding of the Manhaj realised that Ali Hasan Al-Halabī and those with him were deceiving the people and the Salafi youth in the West -and raising large amounts of money in the process, through paid seminars at Brixton Mosque, Luton CTI and through QSS in the USA for which they received criticism.

Al-Allāmah Ahmad An-Najmī wrote a lengthy refutation against Ali Hasan Al-Halabī (dated 9th Ramadān 1427H/12 October 2006) refuting his doubts and misconceptions concerning the two innovators, Muhammad Al-Maghrāwī and Abul-Hasan Al-Ma’ribī. Shaikh Ahmad An-Najmī had previously advised the Jordanians (Ali Hasan, Saleem Al-Hilālī etc.) to cease their support, recommendation and praise of Abul-Hasan the Ikhwānī innovator, and Al-Maghrāwī the Takfīrī. Ali Hasan cast doubts at this advice, so Shaikh Ahmad responded to those doubts.

Al-Halabī said: “However, it is possible that the point of differing is that our recognition of the errors of Abul-Hasan and Al-Maghrawi – some of which, we have shown them – yet alongside that, we do not remove them from Salafiyyah.”

Shaikh Ahmad An-Najmī said: “This is an admission from Shaikh Ali Al-Halabi of his lax and lenient attitude with Al-Ma’ribi and Al-Maghrāwi that his renunciation of them is not serious or significant…” As for his saying, “We do not remove them from Salafiyyah.” What is correct is that we do remove them from Salafiyyah.

Deviants such as Salmān al-ʿAwdah, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ʿAbd al-Khāliq, ʿAdnān ʿArʿūr, Abū al-Ḥasan al-Maʾribī, ʿAlī Ḥasan al-Ḥalabī and Ibrāhīm al-Ruḥaylī were some of those who played a role in undermining the way of the Salaf in refuting and warning against the deviants and innovators.

For example, some of them tried to justify it by invoking the principle of the maṣlaḥah, the beneficial interest, or the need. Meaning, that to make the criticism more acceptable to people, you speak about the good points of the one being refuted, and this comes down to the determination, the evaluation, the ijtihād of the one refuting or advising. However, this is an error, and comprises an attempt to justify what these people of ḥizbiyyah were doing of working with the Jamʿiyyāt, or taking money from them, or maintaining ties with those disparaged and refuted by the Major Scholars. They tried to water down the angle of disparagement, refutation and warning and the objectives behind them.

This language (and what it relies upon of vagueness, ambiguity, generalisation and equivocation) represents a new manifestation of the Ḥalabī-Ruḥaylī methodology which seeks to undermine legitimate criticism of methodological violations and to discourage Salafīs from truth-discovery. This is coming from certain directions and being infused into the UK, and its effects are already visible...

There is no doubt in the mind of any Salafi who has any share in the understanding of the Manhaj and ‘Aqeedah that Ali Hasan Al-Halabi is a misguided innovator. And anyone who knows his innovations and persists in defending him, and claiming that he is upon sound Manhaj and ‘Aqeedah is to be counted alongside him, and abandoned. From the foremost of the Scholars who exposed the misguidance of Ali Hasan Al-Halabī (after years of patience and constant advising) is our Shaikh Al-Allāmah Rabee’ Al-Madkhalī (may Allah preserve the scholars of Sunnah). Here are just a few of the refutations on Al-Halabi:

There are many more refutations that Shaikh Rabee’ and other scholars have written against this corrupt innovator, Ali Hasan Al-Halabi. There is no doubt that when the scholars of Sunnah and Hadīth of the calibre mentioned above speak with the evidences, and with strong words, it is upon the Ummah to take heed and follow their stance. Those who persist in aiding and supporting this innovator after knowing these stances and rulings of the Scholars is to be abandoned and counted alongside Al-Halabi, Al-Maghrāwi and Abul-Hasan.

This is the most strange of affairs from both sides because how can al-Ma'ribee and al-Halabee claim to have been fighting against ghuluww and extremism in jarh and tabdee' for all those years, and then come to the most extreme arch-Haddadi of them all, Yahya al-Hajuri, the one who has wreaked havoc on the land and let his tongue loose upon the Sahaabah, the usool of the Sunnah, and the Scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah, those in Yemen, and those in Saudi, with evil, disgusting speech. How can this be and what such blatant contradiction.

And when this is the case with all of these people like al-Hajuri, al-Halabi and al-Ma'ribee then you would not be surprised to see that those who sit on the fence or are aligned with these innovators here in the West or sympathetic to them, they praise and commend al-Hajuri the Innovator with praises aimed at instilling love and respect in the hearts for him (see this episode for example). This is despite the fact that they claim to be opposed to ghuluww and extremism in tabdee' and jarh and the rest of this type of speech.