You are on page 1of 14

The Adequate Answer to

the One Who Asks

About the Satisfactory
Remedy for the Fitnah
of Abdurahman;
Written by
Abu Ishaaq Ayoob Bin Mahfoodh AlDaqeel
Translated by: Ehsan Bin Manzoor and Yusuf Al-Biritaanee

All praise is for Allah the lord of all that exists, and I testify that none has the right to be
worshipped besides Allah alone without any partners, and I testify that Mohammed is his
slave and messenger

As for what follows:

Imam Muslim narrated in his Saheeh, on the authority of Tameem Ad-Daaree that the

said: The religion is advice, we said: (i.e. the companions that were present) To

whom? He

said: To Allah, to His book, to His messenger and to the heads of the Muslim's

and to their general folk

So the well-being of the Dunya and the religion is built upon advice. And it is for that
reason, the religion has been brought together with advice, so therefore it is incumbent upon

the people of the truth that they establish this great obligation, enforcing the truth, and
bringing about the downfall of falsehood.
And if it wasn't for that (i.e. the advice) after the aid of Allah Misguidance would prevail
upon the land. And the truth would become hidden, the good would become (seen as) evil,
and the evil would become (seen as) good. So it is not permissible for the people of the truth
that they slack from this, otherwise that would be considered as treachery in the religion.
Imam Al-Barbahaaree, may Allah have mercy upon him, said in Sharh us-Sunnah:

It is not permissible to hide sincere advice from any of the Muslims, whether pious or
impious, in matters of the religion. Whoever hides that, has acted deceitfully towards the
Muslims. Whoever acts deceitfully towards the Muslims has done so towards the religion.
Whoever acts deceitfully towards the religion has behaved treacherously
And from this matter, I have presented to my Muslim brothers this advice which comprises
of a clarification to some of the problems which some of the conspirators use to deceive

(others) with, in what is related to the Fitnah of Abdurrahman Al-'Adanee and what derives

from it from commotion of the unknown people, who are in charge of the finances1 of this
infatuated individual (i.e. Abdurrahman) and those with him in it from corrupt business.

The author of this treatise is striking a parable and is referring to the Fitnah as a business.

Those in charge of finances (i.e. those leading the Fitnah) are meagre and miserable (and

they are) [unknown people], and the product (that this business offers) is corrupt (i.e.)
[Abdurrahman], and the market that they enter into (to sell their product) is destitute and
abandoned [], and the one purchasing this product doesn't have

recompense [The idle one with time to waste]. And the gain, if you are not guarding
yourselves is [the departure of the Sunnah and the loss of knowledge], truly to Allah we
belong and truly, to him we shall return.

So I made this research urgent and summarised upon a formula of questions and answers, as

an advice to the Muslims and a warning to them from the actions of those unknown biased
forgers, and also as an explanation to the truth and a removal of the doubts. So I undertook
this as a defence of the truth and an abolishment of falsehood. Allah the Most High says:

And say: "Truth (i.e. Islmic Monotheism or this Qur'n or Jihd against polytheists) has
come and Btil (falsehood, i.e. Satan or polytheism, etc.) has vanished. Surely! Btil is ever
bound to vanish." (Al-Isra 17:81)
And from the wisdom of Allah, glorified be He, the Most High, is that He tests the people of
the truth by way of the people of falsehood in order for the occurrence of jihad in the way of
Allah with the weapon, with the pen and with the tongue in defence of the truth and
warding off the falsehood. Allah the Most High said:

but if it had been Allh's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without
you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed
in the Way of Allh, He will never let their deeds be lost, (Muhammad 47:4)
And He the Most High said:

And We have made some of you as a trial for others: will you have patience? And your Lord
is Ever All-Seer (of everything). (Al-Furqan 25:20)

And He the Most High said:

And thus do We explain the ayat in detail, that the way of the criminals may become
manifest (Al-An'am 55)
And He the Most High said:

Thus do We explain the ayat in detail, so that they may turn (to the truth) (Al-A'raaf 174)
I ask Allah that He benefits by way of it Islaam and the Muslims, and progression towards
what was intended (i.e. towards clarification).

Q 1): If it is said to you, Do you doubt concerning the Hizbiyyah of Abdurrahman Al'Adanee and the Hizbiyyah of the one who is fanatical towards him and is in opposition
towards the people of the truth?

A): We don't have any doubt concerning the Hizbiyyah of Abdurrahman Al-'Adanee, and

those that are with him. Just like there is no doubt with us concerning the Hizbiyyah of
Abul-Hasan (Al-Ma'ribee) and those that are with him at the time in which some of
them ordered with the stopping of the articles whilst they would also have praise for
Abul-Hassan and we didn't have at that time the smallest of doubt in regards to his
Hizbiyyah, and just like that today with the likes of him so be gentle with yourselves!

Q 2): If it is said to you, Has anyone from the people of knowledge said this, or are they
the dispositions of some from amongst the students?

A): Yes, As-Shaykh Al-Alaamah Yahya Bin Ali Al-Hajooree has said this, and he is from

the people of knowledge who understand the reasons for Al-Jarh Wa At-Ta'deel1. And he
is (also) from the people of Al-Jarh wa Al-Ta'deel with attestation of the people of
knowledge. And some of the scholars, who have seen the Fitnah in Dammaj, and in other

than Dammaj and they have lived it, agree with the Shaykh on this (i.e. concerning the
Hizbiyyah of Abdurahman).

The praise and disparagements of individuals.

Q 3): If it is said to you, Why did you accept the disparagement of Shaykh (Yahya) AlHajooree?

A): I accepted it for many reasons, from them:

1. Because he is from the scholars of this affair.
2. Because his disparagement is detailed, and the Islamic principle states: ' The detailed

disparagement takes precedence over the (general) appraise, even if the disparager is on his
own and those appraising are in a group'. As we have accepted before the disparagement of
our Shaykh Muqbil, may Allah have mercy upon him, in regards to a group (of people), and
we didn't search to see who agrees with him. Rather, we found those who opposed him in

regards to some of them (i.e. those who were disparaged) and we didn't turn our faces
towards them.
Just like that it is today, and from the examples of these (people) (i.e. those whom Shaykh
Muqbil disparaged) is: Al-Zindaanee, Mohammed Rasheed Ridaa, Abdur-Rahman AbdulKhaaliq, Mohammed Suroor, Ahmad Al-Mu'allim, Mohammed Al-Mahdee and (Aqeel) AlMuqtaree and more. So Ahlus-Sunnah accepted his disparagement together with the
authentication of others because his disparagement was detailed, i.e. clarified.
3. Shaykh Yahya has more knowledge of this man, and of this Fitnah than other than him
and the native man is more understanding (in regards to his country) than other than him,
and his statement proceeds over the statement of other than him because this man (i.e.

Abdurrahman) was there (i.e. in Dammaj), and the Fitnah came from there. And whoever
has inspected an affair, and has witnessed it knows it with what those who didn't observe it
know. And with this, the Prophet

said: The news is not like observation1.

And just as it is said: 'the owner of the house is more knowledgeable of what is inside it' and
'the people of Makkah are more knowledgeable of its paths'. So then we are in no need of a
statement from other than him and neither are we waiting for anyone to make us aware of it
(i.e. his Hizbiyyah). For it is clear to us like the clearness of the sun at midday.

4. We have witnessed and inspected this Hizb and its signs with our own eyes. Just as we have
witnessed and inspected what came before him from the various innovated sects which
attacked the Salafi Da'wah.

The full part of the Hadeeth is The news is not like observation. Musa

did not smash the tablets when His

Lord told him what his people were doing. But when he saw what the people were doing, it was only then
that he smashed the tablets.

5. Since we have known the Shaykh (i.e. Shaykh Yahya), he has not disparaged anyone with his
evidence and then abandoned him except that (that same person) was disparaged and
abandoned by others (i.e. from the Mashaayikh) due to that evidence, and not due to blind
following. This shows a clear proof that Allah has bestowed upon him perception of Fitnah,

and some examples of that are: Abul-Hasan Al-Misree (Al-Ma'ribee), Saalih Al-Bakree,
Faalih Al-Harbee, Abdullah Al-Mar'ee and the last of them, Abdurahmaan Al-Mar'ee, which
will come to an end, with the permission of Allah.

And with that we say: We cannot except imitate the example of what Ibn Hajr, may Allah
have mercy upon him, said in the biography of Yahya Bin Sa'eed Al-Qattaan:

The heads (of the people of knowledge) would use him as a proof, and would say: 'whoever
Yahya abandons, then we abandon him too'
And likewise we say: whoever Yahya (i.e. Shaykh Yahya Al-Hajooree) has abandoned then
we abandon him too. And Abdurrahman Al-'Adanee is one who is abandoned (due to the
fact that); Al-Alaamah Al-Hajooree abandoned him.

Q 4): If it is said to you: Has anyone opposed him in this?


Verily, those before them said it, yet (all) that they had earned availed them not. (Al-Zumar
Then I say to you: Had a consensus occurred concerning other than him (i.e. Abdurahman)

from the disparaged ones, like the ones who have previously been mentioned. Just like them,
the example of: Sayed Al-Qutb, Hasan Al-Banna, Mohammad Al-Ghazaalee, AlMaghraawee, 'Ar'oor, Abu Ishaaq Al-Huwaynee and Abul-Hasan Al-Masree and....
So this is an obsolete argument, something the Hizbiyyeen used before, up until it

deteriorated, and it didnt come to benefit them and neither will it benefit these (people)
today. And if we were to act upon it (i.e. the argument), we wouldn't have abandoned
anybody. Then I say to you Oh' brother, may Allah Bless you: this is the way of Allah in His
Creation, this one disparages and this one attests to the righteousness of someone. But the

people of knowledge have laid down for us principles that remedy this doubt. And from
them are:

* That the detailed disparagement if it is issued clearly from one who knows its reasons
then it takes precedence over the appraise. Just as they (i.e. the people of knowledge) gave
precedence to the disparagement (of the disparagers) concerning Imam Ash-Shaafiees

Shaykh (Ibraheem Bin Abee Yahya) whilst (at the same time) Ash-Shaafi'ee declared him to
be reliable and defended him about the affair related to lying and he said: That him falling

from a distance is more beloved to him than he lies , but the people of knowledge did not
turn to his (As-Shaafiees) statement due to the disparagement concerning him being

* The native man is more knowledgeable of who is in his land, than other than him, because
he has with him an increase of knowledge. Hammaad bin Zayd used to say:

A man would come to us from different lands and would mention a man and we would
narrate from him, and we would present praise upon him. And if we were to ask the people
of his land (regarding him), we would find him upon a different (condition) than what we
would say (he was upon), and he (i.e. Hammaad) would say: the people of a land of a man
are more knowledgeable in regards to the man.
Al-Khateeb (Al-Baghdaadee) said (in regards to the aforementioned narration)

When they had with them an increase of knowledge concerning his affair over what the
foreigner knew from the apparentness of his reliability, Hammaad made the ruling in
accordance to what the people (of that individuals land) knew of disparagement relating to
him, disregarding what he had been informed of by the foreigner regarding his reliability.

[The end of Al-Khateeb's statement from his book: Sufficiency in Knowledge in What Relates
to Narrating].
Alee Bin Al-Madeenee said:

Every man from Madinah whom Imam Maalik didn't narrate from, then in his hadeeth is

something (i.e. some kind of weakness). (End of Al-Madeenee's statement) i.e. he (Imaam
Maalik) didn't abandon him (the narrator from Madinah), except due to what was within
him (from defect) whilst he (Imaam Maalik) was the most knowledgeable in regards to him.
Because a man can beautify himself to the people of hadeeth who are not from his land, so
(as a result) they are deceived by him, just as Ibn Abdul-Barr said regarding Abdul-Kareem

Bin Abee Al-Makhaariq: (he is a) Basree1, they (people of Hadeeth) do not differ in regards
to his weakness (in Hadeeth), he misled Maalik (i.e. Imam Maalik) by way of his character.

I.e. that he was from Basrah a city in Iraq.

And he (Imaam Maalik) wasn't from the people of his (Abdul-Kareems) land so that he may

have known him. As Ash-Shaafi'ee was also misled by Ibraheem Bin Abee Yahya due to his
mastery and eminence, and there was a consensus upon his (Ibraheem Bin Abee Yahyas)
weakness [end of the statement from Meezaan Al-I'tidaal].

So it has become evident from that which has passed, that the differing (that occurs

concerning an individual) does not wipe out and neither does it produce any effect with that
which relates to the acknowledged disparagement because the disparager has with him an
increase of knowledge.

Q 5): If it is said to you: However, we do not see them inclining towards the Hizbiyyeen and
neither do they affiliate themselves to any Hizb

A): You have narrowed something vast thing, this is a confined understanding in identifying

Hizbiyyah, do you restrict Hizbiyyah to this characteristic, so if it is not found within them
then they are not Hizbiyyeen?! This indicates towards a lack of knowledge concerning the

signs of Hizbiyyah and this is not except from searching for them (the Hizbiyyeen) innocent
ways out in order to defend them, so I say, may Allah bless you, indeed many signs from the
signs of Hizbiyyah have appeared within these Hizbiyyeen. And also, it is not a condition that
all of them (i.e. the signs of Hizbiyyah) have to combine within a particular group, (so as to
say) if they (the signs) do not come together then it is not (considered) a Hizb.
Then I also say: indeed Abul-Hasan and those that are with him and Faalih Al-Harabee and
those that are with him did not affiliate with any Hizb from the Ahzaab and likewise the

followers of Abul-Hasan, they (i.e. the scholars) warned from all of them whilst they are

were not like that1. And those that have inclined (towards a particular group from the
followers of Abul-Hasan) then (they have only done so) recently and some of them
(followers of Abul-Hasan) still do not cease to remain separated (from deviant groups) yet
the Mashaayikh do not cease to be advising (the people) with distancing from them (i.e. the

aforementioned Hizbee leaders and their followers), so do we (now) say that they are not
Hizbiyyeen because they do not incline towards or.

Q 6): If it is said to you: what are these signs that have appeared within this Hizb?
A): I will quote to you them in summarization and I refer you for more detail with proof to

the section that our brother Maaafa has wrote, which is entitled Clear proofs and here are
some of them (i.e. signs of Hizbiyyah):

I.e. - inclining towards any of the Hizbiyyeen, neither affiliating themselves to any Hizb.

(1) Restricted allegiance and dissociation (2) Lying (3) Deception and deceit (4) Incitement
(5) Slandering the people of the truth (6) Repulsive fanaticism (7) Relying upon narrations

of unknown narrators and spreading them (i.e. the narrations) (8) Disunity (9) Warning
from Dammaj, its people and its Shaykh and we have not known of this except from the

Hizbiyyeen (10) Slackness in giving Dawah, teaching and seeking knowledge (11) Being
preoccupied with the Dunya and being ardent in gathering wealth even at the expense of

the Dawah and even at the expense of loss of knowledge (12) Their harm to the Salafis (13)
Secretiveness1 (14) The appearing of unknown writers (15) The wasting of time, effort and
wealth in that which does not benefit, rather in that which harms from spreading of Fitnah.

Q 7): If it is said to you this is a differing between Abdurahman and Shaykh Yahya and the
judgement (that is to be made) is for the Mashaayikh.

A): This is speech that one is calling to with ignorance, heedlessness and deception.
I say:
Firstly: The disparager is Shaykh Yahya only, as for Abdurahman then he is by no means a
disparager and neither is he fit for that, rather Abdurahman was advised so he refused and

therefore was disparaged. So if he retracts (from his Hizbiyyah) and rectifies (himself) and
makes Tawbah then the disparagement will cease and the affair will end. And how can you
call this a differing? This statement of yours means that if a scholar disparages a (particular)

person and (that person) defends himself, you would call it differing? This is what the
companions of Abul-Hasan had deceived the general folk with, (they would say) This is a
differing between the scholars and these (people)2 are getting involved.

Secondly: This is deep ignorance of the science of Hadeeth, and we have the right to imitate
Shaykh Muqbils statement as a note upon the likes of these despicable statements, (where he

would say): this speech would make a man laugh about it from his knees3 because the
meaning of this gullible speech is: if a scholar disparages a person and someone else opposes
him (in that disparagement) then we (would) destroy the principle of disparagement and
appraisement and we (would) say this differing is (an issue of) adjudication and the (final)

From the secretiveness that was carried out was many of the Adanee students and other than them that were
fanatically attached to Abdurahman Al-Adanee would gather in sittings and mock Shaykh Yahya, the other
Mashaayikh present in Dammaj, the students and anyone close to the Shaykh, whether that be in their
houses, the farms, on the mountains and valleys. Even to the extent that they would carry this out in Shaykh
Yahyas lessons in front of him!!!

I.e. the Mashaayikh and students of knowledge that are refuting Abul-Hasan.

The meaning of this is one would laugh so excessively about it that he would not be able to control himself.

statement (which is to be considered) is the statement of the people of adjudication, which is

in reality appraisement!!! What strange and weird affairs?

Thirdly: We say to you, no problem, no one is going to delude you, for Abdurahman did not

differ with Shaykh Yahya in anything, neither any land, nor any wealth, nor anything
elserather it was violations that emanated from Abdurahman not differing, so if Shaykh
Yahya was to praise Abdurahman after his retraction then Abdurahman would become
pleased and it would become apparent to you that Abdurahman does not request anything
except silence over his falsehood.
Fourthly: know, that from the newly invented matters that which is intended by it the

falsification of the principle of disparagement and appraise is the changing of the

appraisers to adjudicator, never did we hear such a thing among our fathers of old. If the
affair was as this deceitful one says, then there would not remain anyone disparaged,

because the person that says this, (he himself) has people that oppose him concerning those
that he sees to be disparaged, so would he be pleased if the one that opposes him is placed as
an adjudicator and that his statement be (made as) a statement that is adjudicated?!!

Q 8): If it is said to you that the speech of Shaykh Yahya concerning Abdurahman is speech
of the peers and that the speech of the peers should be kept quiet about and not narrated.

A): Know that most of the occurring disparagements that which the people of knowledge
have acted upon is of this kind and it is that: the disparager being a contemporary to the
disparaged and the speech of the contemporary (about his peer) is more worthy (in being
taken from) than speech from other than him.
Because he (the disparager) is more knowledgeable about him (the disparaged) than the one
that comes after him due to the nearness of contact with him, and the only thing intended by

this feeble doubt is; the falsification of the principle of disparagement in totality, and with
this doubt the people of desires wanted to repel the disparagement away from Abdurahman

Abdul Khaaliq, Az-Zindaani, Al-Qaradaawi, Muhammad As-Suroor and those that are like
Yes, the scholars say: if the disparagers reason (for disparaging) is due to jealousy, enmity,
and personal gains, then it (i.e. the disparagement) is not to be accepted for this reason, (and)
not due to him being his peer, so understand this! Our Shaykh Yahya may Allah preserve


him, with the testimony of the Mashaayikh1 (and Abdurahman Al-Adanee also) have said:
He (Shaykh Yahya) does not speak with an incentive of envy or resentment and neither does

he speak with an incentive of desiring to bring down anyone from Ahlus-Sunnah, rather it
is with an incentive of jealousy upon the Sunnah and its people.
It was for this reason that his speech was accepted, may Allah preserve him, so then what is
remaining? Here is some speech for you of Imaam Al-Waadiee which is similar to this; he,
may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

the peer is more knowledgeable about you than other than him, so it is incumbent that he is

given precedenceso if it is known that there is some competition or materialistic enmity

between them (i.e. the two peers) then it (the speech of one peer about the other) is not
accepted, as for if he speaks against him and says (for example) he is a liar! And there is no
enmity between them, then speech of the peer about his fellow peer is the most reliable and
most significant (type of speech) because he is most knowledgeable about his condition.
[Taken from the tape: Al-Ajwibah An-Nadiyyah Alaa Al-Asilah Al-Holandiyyah].

Q 9): If it is said to you, why do we not be patient and slow down until the remainder of the
scholars have spoken?

A): I say to you:

Firstly, these are oh my brother Khalafiyyah2 statements and not Salafiyyah statements, there
is no presence of them amongst our pious predecessors from the earlier of them and from
the latter ones of them, so we say to this speaker, you have erred, so due to this, this is a
newly invented statement.
Secondly, this doubt has also come from the people of desires. The infatuated ones from this

Hizb and those before them from the various Ahzaab have blindly followed them (in saying
this), so that they may preserve the status of the one being disparaged in front of the general

folk. The summary of (what) this doubt (entails) is: no matter how much speech occurs
concerning anyone that is disparaged, then he will not be abandoned, (this is) because he is
excused due to (the absence) of speech of (all of) the scholars being gathered (against him)

Note oh noble reader that this testimony was carried out by the following: Muhammad Bin Abdul-Wahhaab
Al-Wassaabi, Shaykh Muhammad Al-Imaam, Shaykh Abdul-Aziz Al-Buraee, Abdullah Bin Uthmaan

Adhamaaree, Shaykh Muhammad As-Sawmali, Abdurahman Al-Adanee (Al-Hizbee) and others.

The word Khalaf is the opposite of Salaf which literally means the people who came after, in opposition to the
word Salaf which is commonly translated as predecessors.


and the absence of them obligating disparagement against him and this is from what is

So according to this, it means that reliability remains affirmed for him (i.e. one that is
disparaged) as long as the scholars have not agreed (in disparaging him), and this is from
mockery in the legislation of Islam and the principles of the religion, and the one that (says)
this doubt, (then) he (himself) has abandoned people; whom an agreement (till now) has not

(yet) occurred concerning (i.e. their Hizbiyyah). So then (according to the way he is acting
now) he is obliged to wait, (and if he waits) then he has now exited from the methodology of
the Salaf.
So then there occurred to him this disorder, and glory be to Allah, how much the followers
of Abul-Hasan have exhausted us concerning this affair, and now they themselves are

repeating this doubt which they have by way of it stirred up many people against us, then
they made Tawbah after extreme disorder, after them being a reason for the deviation of
many due these fabrications. And now today they are confused just like they were confused
the first time, may Allah save us from their evil, and may he protect those that are deceived
by them from their Fitnah. For indeed the ones that are confused in this Fitnah were mainly
the ones that were confused in the Fitnah of Abul-Hasan, this shows lack of success and lack
of understanding, and lack of benefiting from what has preceded, all praise is for Allah upon
(having) well being.
And let us go back a little bit and remember when Shaykh Yahya spoke against Abul-Hasan,

they (the followers and defenders of Abul-Hasan) said: the rest of the scholars of Yemen
remain (to speak), so when they spoke, they said the scholars of Madeenah are remaining, so
when they spoke, they said the scholars of Makkah are remaining, so when they spoke, they

said the scholars of Shaam are remaining and Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin is remaining and
Shaykh Fawzaan is remaining and he remainsand he remainsand like this they
exhausted the people because they were not searching for the truth, rather they were people
of desires, so it is binding (upon us) to be aware of these people and to keep a distance from
them, because they will (try) to make your religion unclear for you.
And here is some delightful speech of Al-Imaam Muqbil concerning this, may Allah have
mercy upon him and forgive him and his parents, it is a reply to a question:
The question: some of the people reject the statement of the disparager from Ahlus-Sunnah
concerning some of the innovators, with the excuse that the rest of the scholars of the

Sunnah have not yet spoken about this disparaged one, (whilst saying) where is so and so,

why are they not speaking?! If it was true (i.e. what is said concerning the disparaged one)


then they would have surely followed him (i.e. the disparager), so is it a condition in

speaking concerning a person and disparaging him, that the majority of Ahlus-Sunnah or
that all of them have to disparage him (in order for it to be accepted)?
The answer: Naam, Naam, oh brothers the affair is that the people have not read the

science of Hadeeth, or they have read it but they are trying to deceive people. We say to you
with what is greater than this, suppose Imaam Ahmad says (a particular person is)
trustworthy and Yahya Bin Maeen says he is a liar, then does it affect Yahyas statement?
When Ahmad Bin Hanbal had apposed him, so then what? Leave this, if Yahya Bin Maeen

disparaged him alone (it would be sufficient). So upon this, if a scholar arises from the
scholars of today and they bring forth the evidences upon the misguidance of Muhammad

Al-Ghazaalee and Yusuf Al-Qaradaawee or the methodology of the Ikhwaan Al-Muflisoon,

then we accept it and it is obligatory to accept it:

O you who believe! If a rebellious evil person comes to you with a news, verify it, lest you
harm people in ignorance, and afterwards you become regretful to what you have done. (AlHujurat 49:6)

What is important is if there comes to us someone just (with some disparagement) then we

accept it, as is the understanding of this Aayah, so where are you from this Aayah? So what
matters is that these people are deceivers and are ones that oppose our scholars, the earlier
of them and the latter of them, and all praise is for Allah (for indeed) the people do not
depend on you or your speech, oh crazy one!.

Q 10): If it is said to you: I have difficulty in understanding a part of the issue, which is...
Why do some of the scholars say Abdurrahman is upon earnestness and if they are asked
about the purchasing of land in Fuyoosh1 and the seeking of knowledge there, they will
answer with prohibition and advise with abandoning that (i.e. that issue)?

A): Allah Knows best, perhaps this question could be directed towards them.
Q 11): If it is said to you: I have another issue I find difficult in understanding, which is...

Why do we hear from some of the scholars that they say: Shaykh Al-Hajooree doesn't
speak from desire and We don't say Shaykh Al-Hajooree made a mistake completely or in

a particular aspect and Shaykh Al-Hajooree doesn't speak with falsehood and then they
say Don't spread these articles and Abdurrahman is upon earnestness, why is this?

Fuyoosh is the name of Abdurahman Al-Adanees Markaz in 'Aden.


A): Allah Knows best, perhaps this question could be directed towards them.
Q 12): If it is said to you: I have a third problem pertaining to this issue, which is... Why do

the scholars make an equal comparison between the writings of the scholars and well
known students of knowledge and between the writings of the unknown foolish ones?

A): Allah Knows best, perhaps this question could be directed towards them.
Q13: If it is said to you: What do you know about the website ''?

A): If you mean the one named 'Wahlain1' then the answer is: the website itself doesn't
know who posts on it, even the administrator isn't known and neither are the members, so
then how are we to know anything about it?

The Website is called Wahyain, the author used the word Wahl as degradation, and it can be translated as
mud or dirt.