Bismillahi Wal hamdullillah Was Salaatu Was Sallaamu ‘alaa Rasoolillahi

Ammaa Ba’d:

In continuing with these ‘Observations’

21. Him holding assassination of foreigners permissible (In the tape ‘As’ilatu Ashaab Hais’ he was asked about a Christian woman living in a region known as Abs who was teaching women to play football in a specific place so he responded by saying “Allahul Musta’aan wallahi this is fitna! The call to Christianity is fitna! I ask Allah to make it easy for someone to assassinate her! Yes True! I ask Allah to make it easy for someone to Assassinate her!…)

22. From the evidence of his weakness in Aqeedah:

• His statement in Al Mabaadee Al Mufeedah (a book he authored wherein he poses questions related to aqeedah then he answers them himself) p 25: Q: What do you believe concerning the Qur’aan that is in the Mushaf? Then say: “ I believe It is the book of Allah – Azza Wa Jal – and it isn’t created” End quote.

Ahlus Sunnah do not restrict their belief in the Qur’aan being the speech of Allah to that which is in the Mushaf alone, whether it is in the Mushaf, recited, listened to or written. We do not restrict it to that which is in the Mushaf alone as Al Hajoori does here. Which is an issue that could easily be misunderstood by the beginner, the like of whom this book was written for.

23. His affirmation of the statement of Al Busairi: ‘Oh most Noble of creation I have none that I resort to other than you! When comes the appearance of general calamities…” He responded by saying “ ‘Oh most noble of creation’ This is correct!..There is no doubt that the Messenger IS the Most Noble of creation but when this statement is connected to the statement of shirk that follows it is not correct.

24. Him holding onto the deviated principle of Abul Hasan that: “General speech should he held in the light of that which is specific” He mentions in Al Kanzuth Thameen (4/461): “ If the origin with that scholar is (that he is upon) the Sunnah and (known for) defending it, but there came from him some statements in some places (i.e. in his speech or books) that opposes what he believes, then this statement of his that opposes the correct clear believe of his is understood in the light of his correct belief..” this is a false principle, rather the correct position is that the one who errs in statement or action then it is said to him you have made a mistake even if he is from Ahlus Sunnah and we do not view his incorrect statement in the light of that which we know from his correct belief.

25. Instances of him opposing the Qur’aan:

From the statements that have come from him in opposition to the Qur’aan:

He mentions in ‘Al Arba’een Al Hisaan li tanbeeh al Anaam ilaa fadhlil Ijtimaa’ ‘alat Ta’aam’ P6: “Indeed while upon a journey I undertook to Britain for da’wah, I met some callers who I consider people of Sunnah and Itibaa’ and we had gather for Dinner. The host then began presenting each person with individual plates as is the culture of the Kufaar over there, a man and his household and his guests all eat separately, they gather around the food individually, each person sitting away from the other not calling anyone else to participate with him. This is a blameworthy custom, and evil western cultural practice.”

Here he describes it as being:
1. From the culture of the Kufaar
2. Blameworthy and evil cultural practice
3. He speaks ill of it

And this is in opposition to the Qur’aan. Allah the most high says:

“There is no sin upon you whether you eat together or apart” (Suratun Nur Vs 61)

Ibn Katheer mentions concerning the verse:

“In this is an allowance from Allah for a man to eat by himself or with a group even though eating together is better and more blessed” (Tafseer Ibn Katheer 6/86)

Shaikh Abdur Rahmaan Ibn Naasir As Sa’dee mentions:

“All of this is permissible, that the people of a household eat together or that each individual eats by himself, and in this is removal of harm..” (Tafseer Sa’dee P575)

(Note: The reference here is to a gathering with Shaikh Abdur Razaaq Ibn Abdul Muhsin Al Abaad, I had accompanied Al Hajoori to the dinner so I remember it well, since his manner of correcting what he ‘thought’ was evil was terrible and in all honesty extremely embarrassing!)

26. From the statements that have come from him in opposition to the Qur’aan:

He mentions in the tape: “tahdheeru Ahlil Yemen” – “Indeed the people of Saalih, when they were ALL UNITED upon rejecting him, Allah destroyed them ALL”

This is in opposition to that which is in the Qur’aan:

Allah the the most high says:

“Indeed we sent to Thamood their brother Saalih saying ‘Worship Allah! Then Lo! They became two parties (believers and disbelievers) quarrelling with each other” (Suratun Naml Vs 45)

Ibn Katheer mentions in his Tafseer (10 /414):

“..Mujaahid said (about the verse) “Believer and disbeliever”

Allah the most high likewise mentions:

“So when our command came we saved Saalih and those who were with him by a mercy from us and from the disgrace of that day. Verily your lord he is the All strong the All mighty. And the Awful Cry of punishment overtook the wrongdoers, so they lay dead prostrate in their homes” (Suratul Hood Vs 66-67)

27. Al Hajoori mentions in the tape: An Nahy ‘Anil Fasaad: “It is not befitting that we are heedless about any affair from the affairs of the deen regardless of how the people consider it from the simple affairs, or regardless of whether it is as a simple affair in their view. For indeed Allah destroyed a nation from the nations due to weights and measures and them slighting people in regards to weights and measures. A(nother) nation Allah destroyed due to homosexuality and a nation Allah destroyed due to a She-Camel”

This statement is in opposition to that which is clear in the Qur’aan since Allah mentions:

“The Ashaabul Ayka rejected the Messengers” (Suratush Shu’araa Vs 176)

And Allah says: “The people of Loot rejected the Messengers” (Suratush Shu’araa Vs 160)

And Allah says:

“The people of Thamood rejected the Messengers” (Suratush Shu’araa vs 141)

These then, were not the main reasons for their destruction, rather their committing shirk, Kufr and rejection of the Messengers.

28. Al Hajoori mentions in the tape ‘Meeraathul Anbiyaa’ The Messenger inherited from those who came before him and Abu Bakr and Umar inherited from the Messenger – Sallallahu alaihi Was salam”

Allah the most high says:

“Neither did you (Oh Muhammad ) read any book before it (the Qur’aan) nor did you write any book (whatsoever) with your right hand. In that case the followers of falsehood might have doubted” (Suratul Ankaboot Vs 48)

29. His applying verses concerning killing and waging war against Allah and his messenger upon one who commits Gheebah (backbiting) and Nameemah (Talecarrying):

He mentions in his lecture ‘An Nahyu ‘Anil Fasaad’ (The Prohibition against causing corruption):

“Yes Indeed the one who traverses through the earth causing corruption between the people, with any type of corruption of Fasaad then it is as though he has killed them! Allah, The Might and Majestic has informed us of this in the story of Bani Israa’eel and concerning their affair He says:

“Because of that We ordained for the children of Israel that if anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) due to spreading mischief in the land, then it would be as if he had killed all mankind. and if anyone saved a life it would be as if he saved the life of all of Mankind..”(Suratul Maa’idah Vs 32) (He continues) for this reason Allah multiplied the punishment upon those who cause corruption upon the earth.

(Allah says):

“The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and his Messenger and do mischief in the land is that they shall be killed or crucified of their hands and their feet cut off from opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world and a great torment is theirs in the hereafter” (Suratul Maa’idah Vs 33) then he continues: “..Yes! for them is disgrace in the life of this world, for indeed there is nothing more disgraceful than one who traverses among people backbiting and spreading false tales. Backbiting, Talecarrying and lieing! Gathering between various types of sin in the same instance! there is nothing more disgraceful than these types (of individuals)!

While the great Imaam of tafseer Ibn Jareer At Tabari has mentioned in his tafseer (10/321-323):

“.. The meaning of this statement then is due to the transgression of the son of adam (Kane) who killed his brother (Abel), we passed a verdict upon the Children of Israel, that whosoever kills a soul oppresively, without another soul being killed, then he will be killed in retribution due to that. (As for the statement of Allah) “Or due to (it) spreading mischief in the land” ..that is whosoever kills a soul without that soul having caused corruption in the earth thus warranting that it be killed due to that. A soul causes corruption in the earth by waging war against Allah and his Messenger and causing fear to be struck upon the pathways (i.e stripping them of safety and security). And that which we have mentioned here concerning this is what scholars of interpetation of the Qur’aan say”

Thus the only thing the verse indicates is that a life may be taken (as dictacted by the laws of corporal punishment administered by the governor of an Islamic State), if that individual had murdered or caused corruption in the earth. It does not indicate that one who causes fitna due to backbiting and talecarrying then his action is as enormous as or like unto taking a life!

30. He says in a lecture entitled: ‘Naseehatun lil Jawaasees Was Sahafiyeen’ “The one who killed the She-Camel (of Saalih – alahis Salaam) was one person, THE REST OF THEM WERE ALL SILENT, however they were pleased with his action..” End quote

Allah – Jalla Jalaalahu said: “But they called their comrade and he took a knife and he killed her” (Suratul Qamar Vs 29)

Imaamut Tabari mentions in his tafseer (22/593):

“The (correct) interpretation concerning the statement of the most high: “..But they called their comrade..” is that he, the most high, mentions that Thamood called their companion, the one who killed the She-Camel, Qidaar Ibn Saalif, to kill the She-Camel WHILE THEY ALL ENCOURAGED HIM TO DO SO. the statement:

“..and he took a knife and he killed her”

He mention that he took the camel with his hands and killed her..”

Wallahu A’lam

Part 3: https://ah-sp.com/2013/08/19/100-observations-on-al-hajoori-3-31-106/