Is criticizing the Ruler in Public against the Manhaj of the Salaf? - Shaykh alAlbani

[@redman1300]

Disclaimer: The Shaykh warned against revolts of any kind and he warned against Takfeer of the Rulers and it was not his manhaj to speak about Rulers all the time. I only translated this because some brothers call you a Khariji for the slightest criticism against the Muslim Ruler.

[@somedude6334]

I agree with the noble shaykh may Allah Azawajal have mercy upon him, aameen ya Rabb. Islam is a balanced way of life. Its main purpose other than establishing Tawheed was to establish Divine Justice among mankind. And as always… Allah Azawajal Knows Best. Asalamu Alaykum Akhii. -)

[@redman1300]

@@somedude6334 indeed islam is a balanced way of life akhi alhamdulillah. May Allah reward you wassalamu alaykum brother

[@somedude6334]

@@redman1300 Aameen ya Rabb and wa iyyaka Akhii. -)

[@redman1300]

@@LearnTawhid scholars or people close to them on deen should teach them in shaa Allah if they are ignorant.

[@LearnTawhid]

@@redman1300 I commented that when I was very ignorant, Alxamdulilah I found salafiyyah. I advice you delete some of your videos for the sake of Allah. you have ikhwani/khaariji deviant people who were refuted by scholars such as Shaykh ruhayli and others. You might not know may Allah guide you amiin.

[@weirdstrafer9263]

Narrated AbuSa'id al-Khudri: The Prophet (ﷺ) said: The best fighting (jihad) in the path of Allah is (to speak) a word of justice to an oppressive ruler. Sunan abi dawud 4344

[@falsesectslikeshiaarejudeo6543]

to his face not behind his back btw, like Musa!

[@user-user-user-user.]

I find that this issue (to criticize or not to criticize) is one of the most controversial. We know that despotic leaders (Ramzan Kadryov in Chechnya for example) use the don’t-criticize-the-ruler argument to silence opposition. On the opposite end of the spectrum you have unbridled criticism of rulers based on slippery-slope logic (example: Saudi Arabia’s economy is usury-based hence the rulers have entered into a state of kufar and public criticism is justified). It’s a fascinating topic and I really appreciate these short videos of our scholars.

[@Lzali10469]

With Saudi rulers, we really don’t have much choice. We have to make dua for them

[@redman1300]

Indeed akhi good insights.

[@redman1300]

@@Lzali10469 indeed we should also be just because tbh saudi is one of the best islamic countries in comparison with the rest.

[@MrAhmedUA]

in the case of Kadryov i saw one of his commanders that fight in ukraine said the putin is the ruler of the muslims ( wali al amr ) 😅😅

[@user-user-user-user.]

@@MrAhmedUA Kadryov is a munafiq and we pray to Allah (SWT) that the people of Chechnya and Dagestan are delivered from the evil of false rulers.

[@ignoranceremoved3450]

If someone has a habit of criticizing the ruler unnecessarily, for sure they need to be questioned and could possibly have deviancy in them. However, speaking against clear cut violations of the shariah that affects the masses perception of Deen and their practice is not the same. There must be a level of accountability too just as there must be Knowledge and so on for the one to speak about these issues. in general, we agree that revolutionary ideas and ideologies are dangerous and are against the Manhaj of the Salaf. But this is not absolute in a sense that specific cases are open to further investigation. This is where the tabdee group has erred

[@redman1300]

Totally agree.

[@user-user-user-user.]

What would you define as “revolutionary?”

[@Lzali10469]

@@user-user-user-user. getting rid of him, and replacing him with a better ruler. With the choice of the scholars since that’s how Islamic rulers where originally chosen not linage

[@briancordero7674]

@@Lzali10469 Accountability, rectification, enjoing the good and forbidding the evil are often all conflated with revolution ,because of socialist ideas in the Islamic world ,Imperialist influences and the extremist ideas of both the Khawarij and the Murjia .And the Fiqh involved with the details of the issue has been made into a form of political conformists and Dissidents religious ideologies.

[@ahmedyusuf3396]

@@redman1300 Can one not criticize the Saudi government for celebrating Halloween ( one of the Druids practices during this holiday was building huge sacred bonfires, where the people gathered to burn crops and animals as sacrifices to the Celtic deities. During the celebration, the Celts wore costumes, typically consisting of animal heads and skins, and attempted to tell each other’s fortunes) and rewarding people with free tickets to the event if they wear the halloween costumes? How about organizing concerts? One part of their "saudi vision 2030" is: Key goals include reinforcing economic and investment activities, increasing non-oil international trade, and promoting a SOFTER AND MORE SECULAR IMAGE of the Kingdom. On these premises, one should be allowed to criticize the ruler, right??

[@pcneststayinformed]

My dear brother who uploaded this video has a very balanced approach that goes along with the teachings of the Quran and Sunnah. His response in the comments is fair and balanced. He doesn't hold that you can rebel against the ruler and at the same time he affirms that you can advise or criticize the ruler if he goes against Shariah. Sahih Muslim 1847b: In the near future there will be Amirs and you will like their good deeds and dislike their bad deeds. One who sees through their bad deeds (and tries to prevent their repetition by his band or through his speech), is absolved from blame, but one who hates their bad deeds (in the heart of his heart, being unable to prevent their recurrence by his hand or his tongue), is (also) fafe ( so far as God's wrath is concerned). But one who approves of their bad deeds and imitates them is spiritually ruined. People asked (the Holy Prophet): Shouldn't we fight against them? He replied: No, as long as they say their prayers. This hadith permits acknowledging and forbidding the bad deeds of the rulers but at the same time forbids us to rebel against the rulers. By abiding with this hadith, you are not becoming a khariji or an ikhwani. Instead, you are following the path of the salaf.

[@HellllooKittttyyyyy]

Allah swt guide and open the eyes of the brothers who still belive that Secularist Dictators and Kings who rules by Kufr Laws and fight The Sharia are To Be Obeyed🤦

[@amaanivand.8455]

It's a shame these days people have no idea about the Shariah and are "calling out" the leaders of Muslim countries on the basis of things that aren't even haram or even true. They take from the newspapers or haters of particular countries without any checking, which is the sunnah. They call them out on the basis of their emotions and deficient intellect and knowledge, not because they want to defend the Deen of Allah. For many perhaps well meant, but the damage is huge.

[@yousseffahmy3068]

I don’t understand what would be considered criticizing vs advising?

[@todamoon8832]

Criticizing is enticing aggression and unrest with the government. Advising respectfully but firmly is seeking to help the government reform and rectify their policies to improve the society. Peace is always the best and 1st option.

[@yousseffahmy3068]

Sheikh Ibn Al Uthaymeen said it is not permissible to Criticize the Muslim ruler and so does Sheikh Salih Al Fawzan

[@redman1300]

Ok but shaykh muqbil and shaykh abdul muhsin al abbad say otherwise.

[@yousseffahmy3068]

@@redman1300 i am a layman so I will follow the first opinion which is not to criticize them as I also live in the west so I cannot judge because I have to see what the issue might me with my eyes instead of the internet

[@Zual-Kifl]

Ibn Uthaymeen r.h was a great scholar, don't forget that he is a human and there is also no black and white answer on every question.

[@muneeburrehman4690]

As a layman, Sheikh ibn Uthaymeen's opinion is far more safer otherwise there will be fitna. You're doing right In sha Allah.

[@Zual-Kifl]

@@muneeburrehman4690 I agree in this case but only because Ibn Uthaymeen r.h specialized in fiqh whereas Al-Albani r.h didn't. It would be equivalent to taking hadith gradings from Ibn Uthaymeen r.h. over Al-Albani r.h which would be incorrect.

[@aeejazkhan]

Full debunk regarding speaking against ruler openly with Quran and Hadith and aqwal of Salaf: kzbin.info/www/bejne/opLLgaOwjaaseNEsi=Htvht5lXSv5bKdVg

[@redman1300]

So ur debunking Albani?

[@aeejazkhan]

@@redman1300 I can't but scholars can he is not infallible nor does he has any backing from Salaf regarding this watch the full video then you will understand my bro May Allah guide you.

[@redman1300]

@@aeejazkhan ur not infallible either akhi nor are the scholars whos opinion u follow. He has backing from salaf even shaykh AbdulMuhsin al Abbaad said this and others but u ignore the other evidence so may Allah guide you. Ahlus sunnah take what is for them and against them but u ignore what is against you

[@aeejazkhan]

@@redman1300 I never claim that if they had backing from Salaf they would have quote rather you are just assuming... Imam Ahmed and other scholars from Salaf and their words and interepration are clear nowhere they took ruling from that (what you are mentioning as proof) Rather they went to ruler spoke against him even thou their were wiped and killed and even prisoned.

[@redman1300]

@@aeejazkhan thats ur problem akhi you say they would have mentioned it but they did mention it in their books and the books of fiqh and hadith! Ur knowledge is limited and only listen to videos while not studying from the books of the scholars nor investigate their evidence.

[@kab1r]

Lets not forget this is same Abu Said al Khudri who pledged allegiance to Yazid ibn Muawiyah and advised Husain rahimahullah against leaving Madinah.

[@CordobaGeneral1234]

Let's not forget you are speaking about a Sahabi

[@kab1r]

@@CordobaGeneral1234 exactly. So be fair with his words and actions. Don't take one story and leave out the other.

[@cryptogenie01]

It's always right to criticize ruler. They were Sahabas now kings are puppets

[@anoniem012]

I don't understand the fatwa of sheikh does he allow or not, when does he allow Public inkar of haram of ruler?

[@Mashalalanazi123]

he is saying this is the perspective of ibn saeed. He doesnt agree with it and his other hundred recordings prove his point. People who love fatwa shopping will take this to their own advantage

[@redman1300]

@@Mashalalanazi123 nah stop lying cause Albani criticized saudi and other rulerships multiple times in his recordings and ur mentioning "ibn saeed" as if hes just a regular person. These are the fatwas u guys hide from the people who dont speak arabic. Alhamdulillah those of us who do understand arabic expose your false manhaj. As ibn taymiyyah said the true ahlus sunnah mention what is for them and against them. U guys hide what is against you.

[@Abdul_Wakeel_Ghuraba]

Did the Shaykh really repeat this 3 times or was that editing? Just curious.

[@redman1300]

I found the video like this Allah knows best.

[@Mashalalanazi123]

deff edited by people of desire who love fatwa shopping. Sheikh albani was very very clear in his opposition to speaking publicly against the rulers and revolting against them. He has hundreds of recordings proving this. but people love taking things out of context. This is ibn saeeds perspective not sheikh albanis.

[@redman1300]

@@Mashalalanazi123 accept reality Albani said criticizing the ruler publicly is from the manhaj of the salaf 😂👍 u guys are following ur desires by hiding such fatwas from the people

[@redman1300]

​@@Mashalalanazi123his name isnt even ibn saeed its abu saeed al khudri and hes a sahabi but ur putting albani above him on a pedestal thats how jahil u guys are

[@userxyz1511]

​@@Mashalalanazi123lol sheikh albani himself criticize gulf rulers when he leave saudi arabia

[@SA-ux4qt]

And as for advising the Rulers of the Muslims, then its m anner and procedure is well known to the lowest student of knowledge, let alone being firmly established with the leading scholars of the ummah. ’Iyaad ibn G hunm reports that the Messenger of Allaah (Peace and blessings be upon him,) said, "Whoever desires to advise the one with authority then he should not do so openly. Rather he should take him by the hand and take him into seclusion (and then advise him). And if he accepts from him (the advice) then (he has achieved his objective), and if not then he has fulfilled that which was a duty upon him." 1 Reported by Ahmad , 3 /403 and IbnAbee ’Aasim , 2 /521 with an authentic chain of narration. And Shaikh Muhammad Naasirud-Deen al Albanee (Jk J - '“>) declared it authentic (saheeh) in Zilaalil-Jannah fee Taklneejis-Sunnah, 5 /2 2 9 .

[@redman1300]

So Albani is going against the hadith in this video

[@SA-ux4qt]

@@redman1300 a number of scenarios could apply. Maybe he wasn't aware of the hadith at the time this video was made. Or maybe he did know but he forgot about the hadith since he's not infallible. Anyway, the statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is a proof for us and a scholar can make a mistake and Allah is most Forgiving

[@SA-ux4qt]

@@redman1300 or maybe he meant that you can criticise the ruler publicly but in the presence of the ruler and not behind his back because publicly criticising the ruler by mentioning his name behind his back would incite hatred and involve backbiting and eventually lead to a rebellion. Even those sahaba who criticised the ruler public did so in his presence but we should still follow the statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) which is to advise him privately and his statement is a proof for us.

[@redman1300]

@@SA-ux4qt lol Albani not aware but you are? xD or maybe he has knowledge about the manhaj of the salaf and hadith which you dont have.

[@SA-ux4qt]

May Allah have mercy on you

[@AbdulWahhab-2024]

The madkhalis must be crying over this video 😂

[@MR.FlyingMonkey]

Akhi your name 👽👌🏻

[@aminmez119]

​@@MR.FlyingMonkeyyour name as well👍

[@aminmez119]

I cringe whenever they say medkhalis, cuz it doesn't exist 😂

[@bjornexyaziz2055]

Advising the leaders? Nowadays, sheikh can't even deliver a khutbah without the scrutiny of the state. And WALA and BARA true meaning is slowly being diluted by those in authority and supporters.

[@Abdul_A_Motin]

Muslim ruler or caliph? What does the hadith say (in arabic, not in english translation)? The mighty "Muslim rulers" are the root cause of the problems in muslim countries. Just look at Egypt, turkey, etc. They could have helped the gazans.

[@thesalafislav]

If you are using Muslim outrage over what is happening in Gaza, not against those actually carrying out the oppression, but against the Muslim rulers responsible for the well-being of millions of Muslims, then I think you have evil intentions at heart.

[@aeejazkhan]

This is False and their are number of hadith against what he is saying and no scholars from Salaf criticized Leader openly exception are their due to their own interepration of scholars from later Rather Scholars went to Ruler and then criticized them even thou they were wipped, put in jahil and even persecuted. Openly is allowed but by going to him not behind his back.

[@redman1300]

Nah ur wrong and limited in ur knowledge. Salaf literally fought each other did you forget what happened between Ali and Muawiya? Go research

[@aeejazkhan]

@@redman1300 that was his ijthad and he was wrong and no Salaf scholars took ruling from that and how many times i should repeat this

[@redman1300]

@@aeejazkhan if sahaba who were closest to the Prophet can be wrong in ijtihad so can we all. But nowadays u call everyone khariji for their ijtihad so u should call sahaba khawarij for their ijtihad!

[@aeejazkhan]

@@redman1300 first of all ijthad is not a peanut as imam Ahmed (r.a) said atleast 400k to 500k hadith should be mesmerized for doing Ijthad and expert in Arabic, mixing of hadith etc Second point khwarij were unlearn and they used to learn from each other and they left the scholars. When someone who is not eligible for ijthad and does ijthad then he is wrong in first place and today 99% of time those people are not eligible who are calling people against any Muslim ruler. Thirdly I didn't call someone khwarij nor I label as it is work of scholars I just try to convey the signs. Fourthly Moaviya (r.a) just wanted qital for the death of Usman (r.a) and he never called people against Muslim Ruler and it was misunderstanding and he has his own interepration on which he did his ijthad. I used to also think like you guys(due to my ignorance ) but now I understood their is no proof from Salaf Alhamdulillah.

[@redman1300]

@@aeejazkhan so you think that muslims who fought against Ali memorized 500k hadith and did wrong ijtihad? Doesnt make sense. I know why he did it. Thats what im telling you but nowadays u guys label anyone as khawarij even if he doesnt make takfeer nor fight the muslims. U have forgotten rulings about the bughat and other rulings like muslims fighting each other because of your weakness in fiqh and label anything as khawarij. Were the abbasids khawarij when they fought against the umayyads?