A decisive refutation of Al Maqdasi’s Publications

by Abu Urwa As-Somalee

This article Was written on 19/7/2014 as a refutation to some of the articles that were authored by sheykh Abu Muhammad Al Maqdasi.In the articles he wrote, he would discredit the legitimacy of The Khilafah and its call to dissolve all the groups in the land under its control.He would go further and ask the members in The Islamic State to deffect to evil groups such as Jabhat An-Nusrah.He would also call the Islamic State ghulaat(Extremists) that should be boycotted by all jihadi Medias and forums.

NOTE: Refer to this: http://justpaste.it/AbuBaseer for the full text of the hadeeth on the story of Abu Baseer

All praise is due to Allah and peace and blessings be on his Messenger Muhammad(saw).As to what follows;

I was keenly following the writings of the Ulamaa(scholars) on the issue of Shaam and I always prayed to Allah for the unity of the Mujahideen. However, I noticed some mistakes some of them so grave that I thought I will be sinning by letting them pass without correcting them. It should be understood that it is the duty of anyone who guards the knowledge to clarify issues pertaining the religion to the people and not to conceal anything as Allah says; “To make it known and clear to mankind and not to hide it” (Ale Imran 187).

O shaykh you used the story of Abu Baseer(ra) to term the call of the Amirul muuminiin Abubakar Al Baghdadi to the people unorthodox. And we say to you; The situation of Abu Baseer is different from the one we are seeing today and it is wrong to use it in judging what is happening today. It’s amazing to see you use such an incident to legitimize the continuity of these fighting groups despite the Khalifah calling for their disbandment.

The difference between Abu Baseer & Jabhat An-Nusrah(JaN) and these other groups:

1.Abu Baseer considered the Islamic state in Madinah a legitimate state while JaN & these other groups don’t in fact they call them khawarij

2.Abu Baseer wanted to be part of the Jama’ah while JaN and these other groups never want to be part of the Jama’ah

3. The reason Abu Baseer was out of the jama’ah is because of the agreement the prophet had with Quraysh while JaN and these other groups have no valid reason to stay out of the Jama’ah

4. Abu Baseer never fought The Islamic state in Madinah while JaN and Most of these groups constantly fight The Khilafa

It is clear to anyone who has some knowledge of the shariah and even to the junior student of knowledge that the example of Abu Baseer’s incident cannot be used as a shar’i evidence to what you are calling for.It leaves the sane mind with questions as to what would drive a shaykh of your caliber to be unjust thus, to say the least.

O shaykh, please give us any unequivocal evidence from the Qur’an or the sunnah that it is haraam for the Khalifah to declare war on the likes of those who decline to swear allegiance to him. Assuming that you believed that the Khilafah was legitimate, would you still endorse the existence of factions under the umbrella of the Khilafah? And that any group that is up to fighting the crusaders should be granted autonomy and that if the Khalifah tries to fights them, to bring them back to the Jama’ah he would be deemed as an oppressor? O shaykh if this is the case, then why dichotomize the situation that Ameerul Muuminiin Ali(ra) faced and the situation we are seeing today? Ali fought Muawiyyah and his folk with the sole intention of bringing them back into the body of the Muslim Jama’ah.

O Shaykh, why didn’t you as well disapprove the actions of Ali when he fought Mu’awiyyah? Doesn’t the hadith of Abu Baseer also apply to him? Why didn’t he allow them to remain? Why did he call for their disbandment? Wasn’t he also wrong? No! wallahi he was not wrong and you are the one who is wrong. The Khalifah should be given bayah or else you will be fought, and this is not an issue two goats butt their heads upon.


1. Mu’awiyyah wanted the vegengeance for Uthman(ra) before he gives bay’ah to the new Khalif(Ali), similarly Jawlani wants revenge for the killing of Abu Khalid Asuri and others before he swears his allegiance to the new Khalif(Abubakar Al Baghdadi)

2. Mu’awiyyah vowed to fight & not giving allegiance to the new Khalif until the scores were settled,the same is true for Jawlani

3. Mu’awiyyah had some noble men in his ranks among them the great sahabas Amr bin Al Aas,Habeeb ibn Maslamah, Abdulrahman ibn Khalid ibn Waleed, ‘Ubaydullah ibn ‘umar ibn Al-Khataab, Jawlani also has some of the great Mujahideen and Ulamaa backing him and fighting for him

4. Mu’awiyyah thought that bringing The killers of Uthman to justice took precedence over giving allegiance to the khalifah, the same can be said about Jawlani

Despite all that I have mentioned, despite the fact that Mua’wiyyah thought he was right in declining to give his bayah to the Khalifah, despite him believing that he was right in facing amirul muuminin in the battlefield, despite the fact that he had great Sahabas in his ranks, still he was WRONG and he was the transgressing one. In Bukhari, it is narrated that Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri(ra) said:

“We would carry one brick, and ‘Ammar would carry two bricks that time. The prophet(saw) saw him, and he wiped the dust from him and he said: ‘poor ‘Ammar; he will be killed by the group that is in the wrong. He will call them to paradise, and they will call him to hell.’ Ammar said: ‘I seek refuge with Allah from tribulations.’”

Ibn ‘Abdul-Barr said: There are many reports that the prophet(saw) said: “‘Ammar will be killed by the group that is in the wrong.” This is an example of the prophet’s giving news of the unseen. It is one of the signs of his prophethood, and it is one of the soundest hadith. Adh-Dhahabi said after quoting the hadith : “This was narrated from a number of the companions, and thus reaches the level of being mutawaatir.”

So the least we can say about Jawlani and his comrades is that they are bughaat who revolt against the Khilafah and need to be fought so that they come into the Jama’ah.

O shaykh, you keep on reiterating words that Ashaykh Al-Mujahid Abu Muhammad Al Adnani(ha) did not speak; you say that he ordered that the head of those that differ with them should be split open with bullets! Nay! rather he said so about those who want to disunite the Mujahideen of the Khilafah, and that shouldn’t surprise you, not after he quoted the hadith:

The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “And whoever pledges allegiance to a leader giving his hand in oath with the sincerity of his heart, then he must obey him when he can. If someone else comes and tries to dispute with the leader [over leadership] then strike the neck of the latter.” {Sahih Muslim}

O shaykh do you have any textual evidence, be it from the Qur’an or from the sunnah that it is haraam for the Khalifah to call on the unity of all the Muslims in the world, by asking for the dissolving of the mujahideen groups worldwide and asking them to come under one burner of ‘There is no god except Allah and Muhammad is his messenger’ as one united structure? Have you forgotten the ayah: “Verily Allah loves those who fight in his cause in rows (ranks) as if they were a solid structure” (Saff verse 4)

Weren’t all these groups formed as mere means to the greater goal which is the kHilafah? Is it the Khilafah that is calling for the disunity of the ummah or You?

You say that there is not a single scholar that backed the Khilafah! What a bizarre statement! So you & Abu Qatada are the only scholars who speak the truth today and the rest who supported the Khilafah are either illiterate or deviants?! So What do you say about these ‘Ulamaa who supported the Dawlah even before it declared the Khilafah?:

1. Sheikh Mamun AbdelHameed Hatim
2. Sheikh Abu Huthayfah bin AbdelRahman al- Harabi al- Libi
3. Sheikh Nassir al- Thaqeel
4. Sheikh Abu Usamah al- Azadi
5. Sheikh AbdelMajeed Bin Mahmoud al- Hatari al- Raymi
6. Sheikh Abu Ubaidah al- Shinqiti
7. Sheikh Abu al- Munthir Umar Mehdi al- Zaydan
8. Sheikh Abu AbdelRahman Amad bin Hussein al- Masri al- Filistini
9. Sheikh Abu AbdAllah Anais
10. Sheikh AbdelRazzaq Ajha
11. Sheikh AbdAllah bin Abdelrahman al- Shinqiti
12. Sheikh Abu Sa’d al- Amili
13. Sheikh Abu Usamah al- Ghareeb
14. Abu al- Qassim al- Asbahi
15. Sheikh Abdulrahman Ubaidah al- Athbaji
16. Sheikh Zakari BuQararah Abu SayfAlIslam Al Maghrebi
17. Sheikh Abu AbdelQahar al- Husseini al- Quraishi
18. Sheikh Abu Ubaidah al- Tunisi

O shaykh, since when did differing with the scholars become disrespect? Are the scholars infallible? Subhanallah! Isn’t this what the four Imams combated throughout their lives? You say that Adnani has no respect for the scholars! Whom did he disrespect and how? Is calling a spade a spade disrespect? All praise is due to Allah that we are not Bani Israil to blind follow our scholars.

There are so many sayings censuring what you are calling for – blind following! Which you euphemistically refer to as “respecting the scholars”. I will only quote you the words of Imam Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama’ah Ahmad Ibn Hanbal(rh) for brevity where he said:

“Do not follow my opinion; neither follow the opinion of Maalik, nor Shaafi’i, nor Awzaa’i, nor Thawri, but take from where they took.” [Fulaani (p. 113) & Ibn al-Qayyim in I’laam (2/302).]

O Shaykh where are you in combating the Murtadeen that fight the Islamic state? Where are your writings in boycotting Hamawi’s gang and the Mercenaries of Zahran Aloush? Where is your ‘fearless’ tongue when it comes to Murtad Jamal ma’aruf? Don’t these people deserve more of boycotting than the state which you wrongly called deviants?! Have you already forgotten what the sahawat did with the Jihad of Iraq? Don’t you learn from history that these are the greatest impediment on the path of Jihad?

O Shaykh haven’t you heard that your champion Jawlani aided the Murtadeen against the Islamic state? Or is it that you ignore that and deem it trivial as not so deserving of your ‘concern’ as compared to the ‘deviants’ killing the Muslims? “What is the matter with you, how is it that you judge?” (As-Safaat 154) Don’t you know that the former is an issue of Iman and kufr while the latter is a mere sin?

O Shaykh, if you deem the Khilafah to be an illegitimate one, and one that is blood thirsty and cares less about spilling the blood of the Mulims, won’t simple logic demand that you ask people to join it to save the blood of the Muslims? The Muslims’ blood that is ‘wrongly spilt’ was your main worry or wasn’t it? Will asking the people to boycott it cause less bloodshed or more?

I conclude by reminding you the words of Allah:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا كُونُوا قَوَّامِينَ لِلَّهِ شُهَدَاءَ بِالْقِسْطِ وَلَا يَجْرِمَنَّكُمْ شَنَآنُ قَوْمٍ عَلَى أَلَّا تَعْدِلُوا اعْدِلُوا هُوَ أَقْرَبُ لِلتَّقْوَى وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ خَبِيرٌ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ

“O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah as just witnesses; and let not the enmity and hatred of others make you avoid justice. Be just: that is nearer to piety; and fear Allah. Verily Allah is well-acquainted with what you do” (Al Maidah verse 8)

Written by the Slave of Allah Abu Urwa As-Somalee On the night of 21st of Ramadhan