The Lies of the Neo-Sabaʾites Upon Imām al-Albāni in the Matter of Palestine and a Refutation of ‘Madkhali Zionism’

 

Muslims against Khawarij

16 س  · 

The Lies of the Neo-Sabaʾites Upon Imām al-Albāni in the Matter of Palestine and a Refutation of ‘Madkhali Zionism’

https://abuiyaad. com/a/zalghi-khan-haqiqatjou-zionism/print

IN A PREVIOUS ARTICLE we spoke about the neo-Sabaʾites, who represent an active, subversive group consisting of Hypocrites donning Islam, apostates, infiltrators and sell-outs acting as agent provocateurs, infiltrating various currents and movements in the Muslim lands, or present in non-Muslim lands, doing agitprop[1] as a means of serving foreign interests and agendas, to the detriment of Sunni Muslim nations, or Sunni Muslim communities and their interests.

The overarching agenda in all of this being the dispossession of land—from the Nile to the Euphrates—through war, genocide and ethnic-cleansing against Muslim populations as one side of the coin, and Machiavellian schemes and pretence of peace as the other side of the coin.

The role of the neo-Saba’ites is to market, shield, facilitate and advance these agendas and to shape public opinion. This is on the ideological and philosophical front. And on the practical ground level, the Khārijites (ISIS, al-Qaeda), the Rāfiḍah, Hamas, are strategic assets, as pawns in the game, used to advance the military front.

From the neo-Sabaʾites who have sprung into action in the last couple of weeks is one Zalghi Khan.[2] It is almighty strange that in only a few weeks, between 7 to 28 December 2023, he has written a total of 16 articles for the Times of Israel Blog, all aimed at shilling for Bibi Mileikowsky's genocide and ethnic-cleansing of Gaza. This is highly unusual and shows something is afoot. We are concerned about the lies he told against Shaykh al-Albānī in his latest propaganda article titled: "Is Madkhalism a friend of the State of Israel?"

Further, Zalghi Khan is an acquaintance and fan of Daniel Haqiqatjou, and they comprise a tag team of anti-Salafi propaganda. Zalghi Khan writes articles on the Times of Israel Blog, and then hands it over to Daniel Haqiqatjou for the theatrics.

Given that they clearly know each other, it appears, and Allāh knows best, that they have both colluded in this attempted hit-piece. Zalghi Khan writes 15 pro-Zionist articles in the Times of Israel, and then seals them with the article on ‘Madkhalism’, and Daniel Haqiqatjou jumps on the opportunity to try and cement his lies and slanders.

In his article, Zalghi Khan makes numerous claims against the so-called ‘Madkhalis’, that they give unquestioned, absolute obedience to the rulers, that Shaykh al-Albānī effectively gave a fatwā ordering Palestinians to permanently hand over their land to the Jews, and that combining these affairs ‘Madkhalism’ is allegedly pro-Zionist. We will address these in more detail below.

Zalghi Khan's Misrepresentation of Shaykh al-Albānī’s View

This neo-Sabaʾite has no clue or idea about the actual view of Shaykh al-Albānī and all of its details and intricacies and it is clear he is simply relying upon the gross simplifications made by other writers. Upon that, he wrote:

Sheikh Al-Albani, the foremost respect Sunni Salafist has advocated the most famous judicial verdict that called for the removal of all Palestinians, including most of the terrorists, to be permanently removed from the West Bank.

And he also cites:

But Albani’s fatwā seems to be acknowledgement of de facto Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank and Gaza, which is evidenced by military soldiers that occupy the West Bank, and the Israeli military’s blockade of Gaza.

He also claims:

Shockingly, it openly promotes the idea of removing all Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza, and they legitimize the authority and power of modern State of Israel.

And

...they legitimize the authority and power of modern State of Israel over all the territories that are considered Palestinian territory.

Basically, he is trying to portray Shaykh al-Albānī’s view as: Just leave and abandon the entirety of Palestine, never to come back, and just hand it over to the Jewish Zionists, permanently. This is how it was received and misrepresented decades ago by the Ikhwānīs, Takfīrīs and others who are shallow-minded ignoramuses, driven by emotions.

The Essence of Shaykh al-Albānī’s View

Here is a general overview of the view of Shaykh al-Albānī on the issue of Palestine, and this is clear to anyone who has read his fatwās on the subject or listened to his cassettes and the recorded discussions and debates that Palestinians and others would have with him on the subject during the 1990s:

That the command to hijrah (emigration) comes into effect because of the difficulty in practicising religion and fear for one’s life.[3] It is clear that many Palestinians live in constant fear of being shot or having one’s home bombed, or children kidnapped and the likes. Shaykh al-Albānī explains that if the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) left Makkah with his religion, and that is superior to Bayt al-Maqdis, then it is much lighter and easier that hirjah be made from those areas in Palestine to other than it, whether in Palestine or outside of it, in order to safeguard life and religion.

The Shaykh (رحمه الله) said: “We do not say ‘vacate, leave’ (khurūj), we say ‘hijrah’ (emigrate). Every Muslim who is oppressed in a land which is governed by the disbeliever and a Muslim does not have freedom therein, having to fear for his life between the evening and morning, due to a direct or indirect cause of having his blood spilled, then it is obligatory upon him to emigrate. Emigrating from Palestine to another land in which a Muslim is secure with respect to his self, his religion and his honour, then emigrating from this land is not greater than the emigration of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) from Makkah to Madīnah.”[4]

The Shaykh makes a distinction between different areas of Palestine, stating that Gaza is the best of the places and those cities or places that have been taken over pretty much, such Haifa, Jaffa and others, Muslims from there should emigrate to Gaza in order preserve their religion.

The Shaykh also clarified that this ruling relates to individuals. Thus, for whomever it becomes difficult to practice his religion freely, and he is able to preserve his religion by making emigration then he should do so. And whoever is not able to do so, he must have patience and remain firm upon his religion in the circumstances, just like the Muslims who were unable to emigrate from Makkah.

The Shaykh denies repeatedly and rejects that his advice and ruling on emigration amounts to “leaving the land for the Jews to take”, and this was a lie that was spread against him back then, in the 1990s. On the contrary, the Shaykh says that when the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) had to leave Makkah because of hardships, with the intention that he will come back after having mustered strength, does not mean that he has just left the land for the polytheists.

See: Shaykh al-Albānī Responds to Criticisms of his Fatwā Regarding Hijrah from Palestine

The Shaykh (رحمه الله) said: “Why do they explain (our view) that we mean by emigration to vacate the land for the Jews? In that case, does it mean that when the Messenger emigrated and when he commanded his Companions to emigrate from Makkah to Abyssinia twice, and then from Makkah to Madinah, can this be interpreted as vacating the land for the polytheists? The answer is no. So from here, the transgression of this oppressive man upon al-Albānī becomes apparent when he interprets his command of emigration from Palestine to mean that he calls for vacating the land for the Jews.”[5]

The Shaykh also clarified that if at present (back in the 90s) the Palestinians do not have the strength to repel the occupation and take back stolen lands, and they do not receive help in this regard from neighbouring Muslim countries (the Shaykh bemoaned this), then their situation will only get worse and worse. As such, to remain there and to fight back by killing one or two soldiers and then the Jews come back and kill hundreds given their military might and backing of strong Western nations, then this is from foolishness.

In reality, the Shaykh (رحمه الله) spoke too many bitter realities that feeble minds were unable to comprehend and appreciate, and all of this exposes the difference between a deeply-rooted scholar who fears not the blame of the blamers and thousands of emotion-ridden, opiniated philosophers and politicians.

The essence of the view of the Shaykh is that hijrah, for preservation of life and religion, is obligatory for those with ability and it is with the intent of preparing strength, that is both religious strength and military strength, in order to return to expel the occupiers, and this should be with the assistance of the surrounding Arab nations. However, the Shaykh frequently bemoans the fact that the Palestinians do not receive this type of assistance from the neighbouring countries, and are pretty much left alone, weak. Thus, sadly, the situation over time, can only worsen for them. Over the three decades that have transpired since then, the realities bear witness to the truth of what Shaykh al-Albānī said. And one has to truly admire and respect the tremendous courage and bravery the Shaykh had in speaking truths that he knew would bring him much animosity and grief.

Who Helped Vacate Palestine for Whom?

They tried to accuse Shaykh al-Albānī (رحمه الله) of saying that Palestine should be vacated for the Jews, lying about his position, and here we are some decades later, from Divine justice, the lie returns back upon them and exonerates the Shaykh.

The video above of a Gaza liberated by Iran and Hamas. That is, liberated of its Palestinian Muslims and vacated for the Jewish Zionists. Over 2 million people displaced, their properties destroyed, and their land uninhabitable. And allegedly, its all the fault of the so-called ‘Madkhalis’! This is tremendous injustice.

It is appropriate here to listen to the short speech of Prince Turki al-Faisal in October 2023 in which he asserts the right of Palestinians to resist occupation, condemns Hamas for giving the Zionist regime the justification for this latest round of ethnic-cleansing, and condemns the Zionist regime for all of its atrocities. He also lambasts Western politicians for ‘shedding tears’ when Israelis are killed, but ‘refuse to even express sorrow’ when Palestinian lives are lost. This is hardly a pro-Zionist stance.

This position is very clear, and it is only in the world of mental retardation of Haqiqatjou-types that this position can be framed as “pro-Zionist.” However, it is clear that there other reasons for all of this hatred shown towards anyone who holds a realistic, pragmatic viewpoint on this issue, and it is not really about Palestine. Palestine and the suffering of its inhabitants is simply an issue these people have found expedient for their hatred and sectarian agendas.

Regarding ‘Madkhali Zionism’

This is the newest fabrication. They first tried to discredit the refutations of Ahl al-Sunnah against the Khārijite Takfīrīs—the precursors to ISIS (Daesh)—the Quṭbiyyah, Surūriyyah in the 1990s with the label of ‘Madkhalis’ and ‘Jāmis’,[6] and despite this propaganda, they are the ones who perished and withered away. This new accusation is an evident lie, and all that is happening is that they are opportunistically using certain events on the world stage for sectarian revenge and one-upmanship, it is not driven by a sincere desire for truth.

Where is the daʿwah of Salmān al-ʿAwdah today, and what did he fall into after he failed to achieve what he and his likes failed through the manhaj of the Khārijites in the 1990s? He followed the path of Civil Islām and Liberalism! If you can’t fulfil your lusts for power and authority one way (Takfīrī Khārijism), then why not try it through another way (Murjīʾ Liberalism)![7]

So they have invented ‘Madkhali Zionism’ as the latest slander, and these people will also perish in the same way, along with their lies.

The original Sabaʾites and their misguided ignorant followers whom they beguiled, they were the first to lay these types of charges against the Caliph ʿUthmān (رضي الله عنه), they accused him of being a Jew.

The Khārijite terrorists would address ʿUthmān (رضي الله عنه) with names of Jewish and Christian leaders to imply he was somehow working for them or aligned with them or like them.[8] They had accused ʿUthmān of injustice, nepotism and the likes. During their revolt against ʿUthmān in Madīnah, one of them stood up whilst ʿUthmān was delivering a sermon and said to him, “Stand O Naʾthal and come down from this pulpit.” Naʿthal was the name of one of the Jewish leaders in Madīnah. And when the murderers eventually broke into his house they said to him, “Which religion are you upon O Naʾthal?” ʿUthmān replied, “Upon the religion of Islām and I am not Naʾthal, but I am the Chief of the Believers (amīr al-muʾminīn).”[9]

This is because they constantly revolve around the issues of wealth and its disposal and governance of affairs, and the perceived or actual errors or injustices that they see from the ruler(s). They do not see what the people of Tawḥīd and Sunnah see, in accordance with Divine revelation and law, which is that the ruler is simply a physical manifestation of the deeds of the subjects.

In the case of ʿUthmān (رضي الله عنه) he was free of what they accused him of. This indicates that if this was done to ʿUthmān (رضي الله عنه), then they will most certainly make these accusations against rulers who actually do have sins, transgressions, injustices and erroneous or harmful or miscalculated policies, and use that to engage in excesses with respect to them, and mislead the ignorant people towards harmful and destructive methodologies of alleged rectification, those that return much greater evil, than that of the ruler himself.

Within this context, the neo-Sabaʾite in question, Zalghi Khan has a clear understanding in his mind—and this is among the reasons for his article—that if he can portray the so-called ‘Madkhalis’ in the way that he has, with lies, distortions and fabrications, then he can help amplify the activities of others who come under the general neo-Sabaʾite umbrella more broadly speaking (the Khārijites, the Rāfiḍah and Haqiqatjou-types), leading to the desired outcome, which is promoting civil strife, sedition, and turmoil in the Muslim lands, similar to what happened in Iraq, Syria and Libya, in which the Khārijites and the Rāfiḍah are strategic assets against Sunni Muslim populations. This then facilitates third-party intervention to take affairs to the next level.

So in effect we have a tag-team here between Zalghi Khan and Daniel Haqiqatjou.

Zalghi makes use of three issues, which he misrepresents, in order to fabricate and promote the idea of ‘Madkhli Zionism’ and they are:

The firmly-established foundation of the religion of Islām, and of the Prophetic Sunnah, of obedience to the sinful and/or tyrannical, unjust ruler in whatever is maʿrūf (good) and not rebelling against him, or inciting rebellion, and this is for the protection of society from further more widespread evil, not in acceptance or accommodation of any of his evil.

Since Salafis adhere to this principle for the realisation of the wisdoms and benefits for which it was legislated, then it is used against them by shallow-minded dimwits who oppose and revile Divine legislation, through their opinions and intellects. Zalghi Khan tries to present this principle of the Sunnah as being useful for the Zionist regime, because as he argues, if there is turmoil and civil strife, it allows groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda to emerge, and this will be harmful for the Zionist regime. However, the complete opposite is true. Groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda are tools or agents of the Zionists, and they help weaken and destabilize Muslim nations, which is precisely what the Zionist regime secretly desires.

The fatwā given by Shaykh al-Albānī for Palestinians who are put to trial in their religion to emigrate to other places in Palestine, or other nearby countries, in order to srengthen their īmān and to prepare strength to recover their stolen land.

There are truths, realities and wisdoms in the fatwā of Shaykh al-Albānī and they have been proven true with the passing of time. While this may not necessarily be the view of every scholar, it comprises numerous bitter realities.

The approach of certain nations in the Gulf or trying to stabilise the region by “normalizing” relations and this includes relations with Iran, Syria and Israel, in order to end hostilities and stop suffering. As we have explained elsewhere, the Sharīʿah allows time-bound, or open-ended treaties with warring nations, so long as they are revokable, and we only condone what remains within the confines of the Sharīʿah.

This approach—perfectly legitimate within the Sharīʿah, so long as treaties are revokable—is one that puts an end to the warmongering spirit and removes any justification for Zionist militarism and Rāfiḍī sedition and expansionism from gaining ground. This approach contrasts with the approach with the Rāfiḍah of Iran who, through their proxies, such as Hezbollah, the Houthis and Hamas, work to advance their own interests in the region, which converge with those of the Zionists, which are to conquer Sunni Muslim lands.

All of this is with our clear recognition, upon what our Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) informed us, about the nature of the rulers to come after him, their shortcomings, errors, injustices, tyranny, preservation of self-interests and so on, and in which we have to be on guard against those who exaggerate and lie in these issues for ulterior motives and those who belittle and ignore these issues. For we are commanded to obey the rulers in what is maʾrūf (good) in order to maintain order and unity (to protect the nation from internal weakness), without this necessitating agreement and acceptance of what they fall into of error, sin and oppression, and from which we free ourselves.

Refuting ‘Madkhali Zionism’

As we said above, the notion of ‘Madkhali Zionism’ has been constructed by shallow-minded dimwits using current events for sectarian revenge and one-upmanship, and not out of a sincere, truthful desire to reach the truth.

As they are far removed from the methodology of the Prophets in calling to Allāh, which they are averse to, making mockery of any suggestion that Tawḥīd, the correct creed and righteousness are key factors in generating the fabric upon which Divine aid is guaranteed, then they are the most misguided of people in making accurate analysis and arriving at the inner realities of affairs.

From their dimwittedness is that they propagate lies and exaggerations that give them short-lived pleasure and satisfaction, but which eventually expire and expose their insincerity.

So there is no better way to demolish these lies except through the speech of the very scholar around whom their anger and derangment is constructed.

Shaykh Rabīʿ on the Rulers

In his recorded commentary of al-Ājurrī’s al-Sharīʿah, Shaykh Rabī’ bin Haḍi al-Madkhalī (حفظه الله) said:

By Allāh we free ourselves from the misguidances of the rulers and their deviations and we do not support them in any falsehood among their falsehoods, ever.

And he is referring here to those rulers and groups who deviate and import democracy which brings many other affairs of disbelief and misguidance with it, while they, these groups consider democracy as “the spirit of Islām”. He is referring to people like ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ʿAbd al-Khāliq from the misguided evil scholars, and likewise, those rulers who fall into these snares and change the type of rule in their nation, in order to “please the West” as Shaykh Rabīʿ said.

And in his printed commentary:[10]

By Allāh, we free ourselves from the errors of the rulers and other than them, and we love the one who implements the Sharīʿah of Allāh ,and we hate opposition to this Sharīʿah, and we do not support any opposition, or falsehood ever. And the Noble Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said—as occurs in the ḥadīth of Umm Salamah—“There will be rulers, you will see good and see evil, so whoever acknowledged that will be exonerated and whoever rejected it will be safe, but [sin, danger is for] the one who became pleased and followed.”[11]

So we reject the evils, if Allāh wills, to the extent that we are able, with our hearts, with our tongues, and with our pens, within the limits of our ability, and if we are unable in any matter, then we reject it with our hearts [at minimum] and we are not pleased with it, ever, however [caution and danger is for], “the one who became pleased and followed.”

The claim of the neo-Sabaʾites that Salafis give unquestioning and absolute obedience to the rulers, and the impression they create that the Salafis consider the rulers to be more or less infallible is patently false. These are slanders and falsehoods they spread due to sectarian hatred and partisanship.

So that's the issue of rulers.

Shaykh Rabīʿ on Palestine

The term ‘Madkhali Zionism’ will perhaps become the most retarded, ridiculous and laughed at term to emanate from the cyber-kennels of the innovators during 2023. We’ll leave you with Shaykh Rabīʾs position on the issue, and this is way back from October 2000.

Shaykh Rabīʿ Bin Hādī’s Advice to the Palestinians and to the Ummah, Rulers and Ruled (2000)

View PDF File

(10 pages)

Closing Notes

In this article we exposed the tag team of the neo-Sabaʾite, pro-Zionist known as Zalghi Khan and the Takfīrī, ṣaḥīḥ bootlicker and shielder of the Rāfiḍah Daniel Haqiqatjou.[12] There is unusual and suspicious activity between the two of them, and Allāh is the Knower of all things.

The three issues raised by the Zalghi Khan pertaining to Shaykh al-Albānī’s fatwā regarding hijrah, the lie of unquestioning, absolute obedience and agreement with the rulers and the laughable fabrication of ‘Madkhali Zionism’ have been addressed and ultimately, they will end up in the waste-bin of history. In reality, this is simply a trial and tribulation through which Allāḥ cements misguidance for whoever has perversion and deviation in his heart because he is willing to soak up lies, and cements guidance in the matter for whoever is sincere and desires truth.

Lies never stand the test of time, they are always exposed in the end.

Note: The term neo-Sabaʾite is used as an umbrella term for various types of people, such as outright hypocrites, apostates, both the Khārijites and the Rāfiḍah (as they are both products of an original Sabaʾite nucleus), and likewise, infiltrators, sell-outs and the ignorant rabble and riff-raff who fall into their snares. This term is by no means defined on the basis of Islām, or kufr, or nifāq, but it is intended as an umbrella term to refer to anyone and everyone who is caught up in anti-Sunni sedition, those engaged in sedition in Sunni Muslim lands and activities that internally weaken Sunni Muslim nations for the benefit of Jewish ethnosupremacists and Rāfiḍī hypocrites.

Footnotes

1. A political strategy in which the techniques of agitation and propaganda are used, often intensively, to influence and mobilize public opinion.

2. We can only judge and describe people on the basis of what they make apparent in their speech and action.

3. Fatāwā ʿibar al-Hātif wal-Sayyārah (no. 280).

4. Fatāwā ʿibar al-Hātif wal-Sayyārah (no. 280).

5. Fatāwā ʿibar al-Hātif wal-Sayyārah (no. 243).

6. Keep in mind that the daʿwah of the Quṭbiyyah, Surūriyyah during the 80s and 90s was the foundation for the eventual emergence of ISIS (Daesh), and despite all the efforts of the Salafi scholars and their followers against the Quṭbiyyah and their doubts regarding Takfīr and Ḥākimiyyah, this movement still appeared, much to the delight of Western, pro-Zionist nations, creating the desired havoc.

7. This is similar to the Capitalists using Communism to take over nations. They realised that the bloody, violent method is not effective, too messy and destructive, and they also expose themselves in the public eye. So they adopted another approach after WWII, which is the use of Fabian Socialism, the step by step imperceptible approach in taking control over the economy, politics and subjects of nations, in order to reach full-blown Communism and Collectivism.

8. Al-Bidāyah wal-Nihāyah, 10/282.

9. Refer to al-Bidāyah 10/307.

10. Al-Dharīʾah ilā Bayān Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿah (1/98-99).

11. Reported by Muslim.

12. While Haqiqatjou may have positions against extremism academically speaking, practically speaking he is upon the manhaj of blanket takfīr of Muslims.

كل التفاعلات:

١١أنت و١٠ أشخاص آخرين