Deceptive ways of Salafi Publications to misguide the readers and followers, may Allaah protect us from this ameen Responds to the Unfounded Accusations – 4

Download PDF version here

Maintaining Integrity, Honesty & Justice in Criticism, as Opposed to the Deception of Salafi Publications – D

2. Examples where questions or information has been deceitfully concealed.

Having addressed the rare occasions where the questions or audio recordings have been presented to the readers, and providing evidence for the deceptive nature that Salafi Publications have applied in presenting misinformation to either the Scholars and their readers, we will now, by the permission of Allaah, address the occasions where the questions and audio recordings have been concealed, and evidence of deception is found in their very own translations of a Scholar’s response.

Example One

One such example is the now oft-referred to letter[1] from Shaykh Ahmad as Subay’ee, may Allaah preserve him, to; included in it the Shaykh states:

“…and that they give preponderance to the maslahah (beneficial interest) of the religion and of calling to the Sunnah above over any other affair… And let not those (people) rejoice with the proceeding of some of those ascribing themselves to knowledge in strengthening and aiding them (in their activity), especially from those from whom not even a single letter of revilement upon baatil (falsehood) has been known over the passing of [many] years.”

The reader can see, yet again, that something has been concealed from the Shaykh’s speech and replaced with ‘…’[2]

It is the following paragraphs that were replaced by ‘…’:

“And those responsible for this website[3] are able to proceed in calling to the Sunnah, and aiding the religion without clashing with their brothers. And it is not permissible for them that they make binding upon their brothers[4] that they commend them, and if they do not commend them that they speak about them. For tazkiyyah (commendation) requires a detailed knowledge, just as jarh (revilement and disparagement) requires a detailed knowledge.

I hope from Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, and I ask Him that He grants these brothers of ours to withhold from reviling their brothers with dhulm (oppression), [which is] a strange, unexpected manifestation [of behaviour] within a Salafi community.

The world is vast enough to accommodate everyone, and aiding the call to the Sunnah is not specific to anyone. So we do not restrict the affair in which there is vastness, and we do not make vast the affair which is restricted which is the honour of a Muslim and his due right. ”

We would like to make the following observations:

a) This part of the Shaykh’s response was also deceitfully concealed, as you will not find it in the letter Salafi Publications published in their response[5]. Again, the concealed portion of the Shaykh’s response is where evidence of the deliberate misinformation conveyed to the Shaykh is found. Deliberately concealing this crucial portion of the response from the reader implies that the perpetrator is well aware of the shame and guilt of transmitting misinformation to extract a desired response, which is why an effort was made to maintain the deception by concealing the evidence for it. It is from the trust of conveying knowledge to convey the speech of the people of knowledge fully as they intended it without cutting out parts and tailoring it to fit the desire of the translator.

Salafi Publications have previously been addressed concerning this type of behaviour of selecting from the speech of the Scholars what agrees with their desires and discarding what doesn’t:

“What is even stranger is that they are selective. They select from the sayings of the Mashaayikh and the students of knowledge that which is in agreement to their way and their Manhaj.”[6]

b) The chain of misinformation continues yet again: is making it binding upon Salafi Publications to commend them, otherwise will refute them?! This is the type of deliberate misinformation Salafi Publications pass on to the Scholars to derive a favorable response of support on their behalf, or against their imaginary “attackers”. It is clear from the Shaykh’s response that this is what he was being informed of, yet Salafi Publications conceal the information being conveyed to the people of knowledge to derive a response, and further prove their untrustworthiness by deceptively concealing parts of his response; the very parts in-fact, that bring to light the blatant misinformation they are conveying.

c) The only way this deception was revealed was because – after Allaah’s decree – the very same letter was also sent to back in 2007. Were this not the case, the reader would have no choice but to trust Salafi Publications to convey information from the Scholars accurately and in a trustworthy manner, but they have disappointingly proven treacherous concerning this trust as the evidence affirms. Despite having a copy of this letter since 2007 and knowing full well the deceptive nature Salafi Publications were employing in this affair, we chose to remain silent and maintain patience hoping for rectification. However they only grew in injustice and we are now only making this public after they themselves had done so.

d) The fact that Salafi Publications are attempting to make a case with feeble and petty evidences is only further proof that they have no case. What was the purpose in bringing up something that took place years ago and subsequently resolved, and then whining ‘O they didn’t send any evidence to the Shaykh.’ It has been claimed that the translators of are playing political games by jumping from Shaykh to Shaykh[7] with other than those who were initially involved with this affair, yet the reality renders these claims as pure falsehood.

Who is involving other Mashaayikh who were not only not initially involved, but are from other countries with no direct contact with the translators?

Who involved Shaykh Ahmad as-Subay’ee – may Allaah preserve him?

Who involved Shaykh Falah Isma’eel – may Allaah preserve him?

It is they who are involving Maskhayikh who had no prior involvement in the affair and being that they live in other countries only makes it that much more difficult to reach a resolution. But then again, was rectification ever intended to begin with? The evidence shows that had made concerted efforts to request to sit with the very same three Mashaayikh who were initially involved, but it was Salafi Publications who were avoiding, and continue to avoid, such a gathering, opting instead to present misinformation to other Scholars who are unfamiliar with the situation, then deceptively concealing the questions and presenting cut-and-paste and cunningly tailored portions of the translated response.

e) Re-read the concealed portion of the Shaykh’s letter and see to whom it really applies to.


Example Two

Concerning the letter that was recently posted on SalafiTalk[8], we have the following observations:

a) This letter was deceitfully presented as a ‘response’ to the recent documents (1A[9] and 1B[10]) published on When initially published, the date it was written on was concealed to portray that the Shaykh was responding to these particular documents; the date which it was actually penned by the Shaykh was later added without any note the post was edited, revealing that the letter was written by the Shaykh close to a year before the documents were published on Despite the documents being compiled much later than the Shaykh’s speech, they entitled the post as: ‘Shaykh Ahmad Subayee Responds to Those Who Use His Speech In Their Criticisms Upon Salafi Publications’. It should also be noted that Shaykh Ahmad, may Allaah preserve him, dated the letter 19th Muharram 1431H which corresponds to the 4th January 2010[11], yet to this day, SalafiTalk continue to maintain the letter was written on 25th December 2010!

So the Shaykh’s statement:

“Then there is no proof for some of the students, may Allaah the Mighty and Majestic guide them, to attack and expose and be rude in regards to their brothers (at al-Maktabatus-Salafiyyah).”

Clearly, the Shaykh could not have been referring to these documents as he made this statement before these documents were published. In either case, both dates (the date it was penned by the Shaykh and the one posted by Salafi Publications) reveal that the letter was written before the documents were published on

b) The reader can clearly ascertain what the Shaykh is being informed; that Salafi Publications are, yet again, being ‘attacked’. An allegation that has been too difficult for them to prove. Dare we suggest this treacherous path Salafi Publications have pursued is in emulation of what William James, the father of modern Psychology, said: “There’s nothing so absurd that if you repeat it often enough, people will believe it.”?

c) In essence, the message being given by the Shaykh, may Allaah preserve him, is the very same message we have conveyed in our “Madeenah.Com Responds to the Unfounded Accusations” series of responses; Shaykh Ahmed mentions:

“So the mistake of the Scholar or student is refuted in masaa’ilul-’Ilm or the knowledge based issues, but he is not attacked or warned against or treated severely in the way the people of innovation and desires are treated. And upon this the people of knowledge have proceeded.”

He also states:

“I hope from Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, and I ask Him that He grants these brothers of ours to withhold from reviling their brothers with dhulm (oppression), [which is] a strange, unexpected manifestation [of behaviour] within a Salafi community.

The world is vast enough to accommodate everyone, and aiding the call to the Sunnah is not specific to anyone. So we do not restrict the affair in which there is vastness, and we do not make vast the affair which is restricted which is the honour of a Muslim and his due right. ”

This is the same message we have conveyed; Salafi Publications’ allegations are being responded to in a knowledge based manner, without them being warned against, or treated severely. We have also addressed the issue of restricting the Salafi Da’wah to a select number of individuals or a select organization.

Why do they not contemplate the advice of the Shaykh and realise how it applies to themselves more than anybody else?

We hope that they implement this exact same advice upon themselves as it is apparent they are greatly lacking in this regard. They are applying the opposite as is clearly evident; applying tactics that harm not the truth, but only those who are employing such tactics and those being pressured by them. Yet they have been unable, in their relentless efforts spanning more than six years, to establish with knowledge-based proofs anything from what they are claiming emanating from specifically, as they have demonstrated in their latest feeble attempts.

Concerning the note placed in place of the article by Shaykh Waseeullaah ‘Abbaas[12], may Allaah preserve him, this is what Salafi Publications had to say concerning it:

“This is talbees (deception) and khiyaanah (treachery), it is deception of their audience…”

“Those who wrote this short but deceptive piece are extremely dishonest….”

“this is a bold faced lie and they know it full well…”

“Note this bait and switch and this great deception and cunning being employed. Look at how they deceived the masses by saying “… to which the Mashaayikh suggested the following response be provided….” What they are doing here is “perception management…”[13]

The author of the note was actually Shaykh ‘Abdullaah Al-Bukhaaree – may Allaah preserve him – who dictated verbatim to us the exact response we should publish.

We would now like to make the following observations:

1. The fact that they have analyzed, and then reanalyzed such a short note that was written more than four years ago shows how much time Salafi Publications have on their hands and how truly absurd their state of affairs is. They have written more than 2,500 words concerning this short note on the basis of sheer speculation; that the students wrote it, thereby wasting their time and whoever had the misfortune of wasting their time reading such nonsense. They even went so far as to rewrite the letter to suit their desire, may Allaah aid them and rectify their affairs as this is bordering on being comical.

2. This highlights a very important affair in their methodology, that they speculate and then build a case based upon evil speculations. Refer to their documents to see the case they built on the basis of speculation that the students wrote this ‘deceptive and treacherous’ note, and the majority of their documents are much the same; building a baseless case and adding wings and a tail to it – as Shaykh Saaleh As-Suhaymee describes such behaviour – based upon the forbidden evil suspicions they harbor against others.

3. The Mashaayikh and students in Madeenah are not aware of and have never studied concepts such as ‘perception management’ that they are accusing us – or in this case the Shaykh – of applying, but this surely sheds a great deal of light on the strategies of our accusers, it makes one wonder what other strategies are being employed here. One thing is for sure, their response is void of any legislated texts or knowledge based principles; Hence, as the saying goes ‘one who does not posses something cannot convey it to others’.


Example Three

In examples concerning the statements of Shaykh ‘Ubaid Al-Jabiree, may Allaah preserve him, where the questions or information being passed on to him has been omitted, the Shaykh says:

“And I emphasize that you do not pay attention to this hateful, large-scale attack, from some of those who ascribe to the Sunnah. And we know them to be students from the Islamic University (of Madeenah). And we know others, but we do not like to name anyone.”

In another example:

“And these (people), I don’t know what has carried them to (make) thisaudacious attack.”

Later the Shaykh states:

“And some trustworthy brothers have informed me”[14]

The phrase ‘this hateful attack’, clearly indicates that the Shaykh, may Allaah preserve him, is referring to something he has been informed of. Thus far, Salafi Publications have proven they are utterly incapable of providing evidence for this ‘hateful, large-scale, audacious attack’ they are informing the people of knowledge of. Salafi Publications have finally come to the realization that they have wantonly melodramatised a dispute which is void of evidence, and therefore completely avoided the issue, opting instead to proceed in anonymously authoring documents built upon delving into the hearts and seeking to judge the intentions of others, filling them with unverifiable narrators along with their equally unverifiable narrations.

Is there a need to continue to request evidence for their claims, or has the documented evidence made it clear for everyone to see for themselves? Salafi Publications have shamelessly lied to the Scholars about the activities of, then hastily published their cunningly tailored responses, selectively concealing the parts that allude to the misinformation they have passed on, as well as concealing and tampering with the questions themselves after they had already been posed to the Scholars. This also explains why they have been unable to provide a direct link to or even list the URL in any of their documents, as any impartial reader who decides to look for themselves will quickly realise this glaring reality.

The question that must be asked here is: What other information is being passed on to the Scholars?

Are they being told the truth that some of the people of knowledge sat with Salafi Publications and advised them before finally resorting to publicly criticizing them for specific errors they themselves admitted to? Or are they being informed that there are ‘hateful people launching a large scale attack against ‘the Salafees’?

See for yourself what the reality is, what the people of knowledge themselves are saying regarding advising Salafi Publications about their errors, their admittance of guilt and unfulfilled promises to retract from them:

..rather it was an advice directed to Salafi Publications and those who are in charge of it, which consisted of some of the issues that they fell into from Ghuloo, being hasty in some issues, and also what relates to putting oneself forward to teaching and giving Fatwaa by those who are neither qualified to do so nor have the ability to engage in this affair. And so we had given them advice, and they promised us that they would write something to show that they have retracted from a lot of these issues, and we are still waiting for them to proclaim publicly their retraction as well as their Taubah from some issues and errors that they fell into…”[15]


“I [would like to] bring attention to the point that I have advised the owners of this site – Salafi Talk – may Allaah guide them, that they stay away from spreading ‘Qeel wa Qaal’ (it was said and he said) on this site of theirs, and that they remove a lot of the statements and opinions that contain a lot of Ta’addee (excessiveness) and ignorance. In these statements as well, is a lot of injustice, making incorrect judgments/rulings as well as hastily spreading narrations. I have advised them about this, and they promised that they would remove a lot of these issues from their website.”[16]

So when evidence is presented to the people of knowledge in their presence, they admit their errors and promise to write a retraction. They then take the issue to a Shaykh in another country who was not initially involved and start complaining that the evidence was not sent to him. Does this not leave one in a state of amazement at the juvenile games being played in the name of the Da’wah?

Another question that needs to be posed: Why do they conceal the information they pass on to the Scholars and only provide their tailored translation of the responses? Why is there so much ambiguity and secrecy from a people who claim to be upon so much clarity?[17] Is there something they are hiding? Whom from amongst the people of the Sunnah have preceded them in this methodology?

Revealing the question and information being passed on to the Scholars sheds necessary light on the response, allowing the reader to understand why such a response was made. It has become apparent why it is in their best interests to continue to practice the shameless act of concealing the questions and information they pass on to the Scholars as they themselves have proven their treachery and untrustworthiness in this regard.

Being faced with numerous requests for tangible evidence, upon discovering they actually have none, it is befitting for them to humble themselves to the truth and publicly retract their false allegations; This will only raise them in rank in the Sight of Allaah, and certainly not lower them. Yet it is most unfortunate that due to the lack of any tangible evidence, they opt to use the statements of the Scholars as their evidence, when the reality of the affair is – the Scholars issued their statements based upon the misinformation Salafi Publications conveyed to them in the first place!

Al-Imaam Ibn ‘Abd Al-Barr stated:

“It is an obligation to seek the evidence from the Book, the Sunnah, Consensus and Qiyaas when the Scholars differ.”[18]

Shaykh Muhammad ibn ’Uthaymeen, may Allaah have mercy upon him, stated:

“It is obligatory upon the Muslim to follow the evidence, because the statements of the Scholars are only used to understand the evidence”[19]

Shaykh Saaleh Al-Fawzaan, may Allaah preserve him, stated:

“Whoever takes the statements of the Scholars without evidence because they coincide with their desires will be afflicted with deviance.”[20]

The Permanent Committee, may Allaah preserve them, stated:

“It is not permissible for a Muslim to follow the statements of the Scholars if they contradict the evidence.”[21]

Shaykh ‘Abdul-’Azeez ar-Raajhee, may Allaah preserve him, stated:

“Indeed the statements of the Scholars need evidence to support them, they are not to be used as evidence within themselves.”[22]

The principle that a Scholar’s statement is not evidence within itself is a well known principle amongst Ahlus Sunnah, yet Salafi Publications continue to act upon the opposite; when faced with requests for evidence, their response is only to repeat that ‘the Shaykh said it’ in an attempt to use this as evidence within itself. The truth is, as has been proven, that it is they themselves who are passing that information to the Shaykh, and they are the source of the narrations. If you were to challenge anyone from amongst the people of innovations to provide evidence for their baseless beliefs, the response would be along the same lines; ‘but the Shaykh said it.’ All that is needed from them is to provide the evidence for their claims; anonymously writing pages after pages and inserting names of Masjids and deviants only indicates that they are incapable of simply doing just that. Just copy-and-paste the evidence from and publish it, this will only take a minute and we are still waiting for it.

These are just some examples where the original Arabic text or translated questions were made available, or the material they published was found without alteration elsewhere, which begs the question, what about the cases where the questions were concealed and only the responses were published without any means of verifying the truthfulness or authenticity of what they propagate? The few examples we have used are from what they themselves have made public, and Allaah knows best what is taking place with what has not been made public.

{And fear the Day when you shall be brought back to Allaah}[23]

Al-Imaam Muslim and others narrated that Bishr ibn Ka’b approached ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbaas – may Allaah be pleased with them – narrating Ahadeeth to him. ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbaas paid no attention to him, so Bishr stated: “I narrate to you upon the authority of the Messenger of Allaah – صلى الله عليه و سلم – and you do not pay attention or listen!?”

‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbaas responded:

“There used to be a time in which if we heard a man narrating on the authority of the Messenger of Allaah, we would give him all our attention, but after people stopped caring about being meticulous concerning what they narrate, we only took from those whom we knew…”[24]

It was also collected by Al-Imaam Muslim that Ibn Sereen stated:

“They never used to ask about the chains of narrations, but after the Fitnah, they started saying; name your men for us.”

Ibn ‘Abbaas, may Allaah be pleased with him, was not questioning the Ahadeeth of the Messenger – صلى الله عليه و سلم , he was questioning the narrators who were narrating the Ahadeeth!

Ibn Sereen, may Allaah have mercy upon him, did not say they were questioning the narrations, they were questioning the narrators and therefore rejecting the narrations due to the untrustworthiness of the narrators!

Based upon this, we are no longer going to waste time with, or even accept narrations by ambiguous narrators whose untrustworthiness in this affair has been proven in this document, and we advise the readers with the same; to stop wasting valuable time reading such nonsense and instead busy themselves with beneficial knowledge. The evidence in documents 1C[25] and 1D[26] clearly demonstrate that Salafi Publications have broken the trust of conveying knowledge and the speech of the Scholars by:

a) Conveying lies and misinformation to the people of knowledge;

b) Tampering with questions posed to the people of knowledge by deliberately concealing the portion that sheds light on the misinformation being conveyed in the question;

c) Presenting the responses of the people of knowledge, while totally concealing the questions or misinformation being passed on to extract the response;

d) Deliberate omission and deception concerning their translations of the statements of the people of knowledge, to conceal evidence of the misinformation passed on to extract the response;

e) Deception concerning the dates in which documents have been written by the people of knowledge, to cunningly conceive a scenario that a Scholar is addressing events that he is not.

Shaykh Saaleh As-Suhaymee, may Allaah preserve him, stated:

“Beware of twisting the statements of the Scholars to mean what they did not intend. One of them would come to a noble Scholar – a dignified Shaykh – and ask a seemingly knowledge-based question, but then says, “O Shaykh, what is your opinion of one who says such and such?”

The Shaykh, may Allaah grant him success, then replies with a well-grounded, strong, appropriate response. This person then goes to some websites, via some of the internet’s garbage, and posts it – unjustly – with a title [like]: ‘The noble Shaykh so and so refutes so and so’. The person who is supposedly being refuted here may be a Scholar or a student of knowledge upon the methodology of the Scholars.[27]

This is an extremely dangerous affair, and constitutes [blatant] distortion of the intended meanings of words. Websites are filled with this type of garbage, so beware of this. Be extremely cautious of this way! Be extremely cautious of this way!”[28]

Salafi Publications have only proven the truthfulness of the statement ofShaykh Waseeullaah ‘Abbaas, may Allaah preserve him, when he said:

“I have experience in dealing with them (Salafi Publications) and have found that they are deceitful and conniving in the questions they ask; they twist the statements of others and present them to the Scholars of Saudi Arabia (may Allaah preserve them).

It is known that the one being questioned could be deceived by the speech of the questioner, whereby he responds with a fatwa based on what is apparent [from the question]. The Prophet – صلى الله عليه و سلم – informed us of this when he said about himself;

“You present your cases to me, and some of you may be more eloquent and persuasive in presenting their argument. So, if I (wrongly) give someone’s right to another because of the latter’s (tricky) presentation of the case, I am really only giving him a piece of fire; so he should not take it.”[29]

This is a statement by one of the senior Scholars of Makkah concerning his personal experience with Salafi Publications’ behaviour, and our last two documents contain the evidence for it from outside his experience – from their very own posts on their websites. So there is no longer any excuse for rejecting this reality; specific criticism by the people of knowledge with specific evidence to support it.

We would also like to note that we do not go about asking Scholars for their opinions of Salafi Publications nor do we have time to waste in this regard on them. The Scholars are speaking of their own personal experiences and knowledge of them, and can be contacted to ascertain this fact.

So we are no longer interested in what Salafi Publications are narrating to the Scholars and will pay no attention to it after the completion of these documents, as they have proven themselves to be untrustworthy in this regard – whether they are narrating to the Scholars or narrating the Scholars speech to the public – and the evidence, which actually happens to be from their very own sources – speaks for itself.

Considering the juvenile stubbornness with which they continue to repeat and subsequently propagate their false “reality”, we have now decided to refrain from requesting evidence for their deluded reality that “ attacks the Salafees”. Their condition is further exacerbated since they have consistently proven they are incapable of providing any tangible evidence for it. Judging by what we have seen so far from the behaviour of Salafi Publications, we anticipate they will propagate more of their tabloid-standard rhetoric which has now become their ‘trademark; privately speaking to Scholars, passing on misinformation, lies and half truths, writing pages upon pages which are void of any direct evidence, rarely quoting any legislated text from the Quraan, Sunnah or statements of the Salaf, filling it with philosophical arguments, connecting dots with twisted lines and inserting names of innovators whenever possible to magnify the affair and the likes of such substance-less propaganda.

They are only cunningly hiding through ambiguity to avert liability, and the fact that they cannot provide evidence for their main accusations levied against, and have instead embarked upon the endeavor to ‘kill the messenger before the message gets out’ is sufficient proof of guilt. It is nothing but a smoke screen that we have, until now, allowed to go unchallenged, hoping for praiseworthy results and keeping the greater benefit of the Da’wah in mind, hoping that the people can be given the opportunity of putting this foolishness aside and embark upon learning their religion without being hindered by such adolescent nonsense.

Likewise we had hoped to avoid dealing with this affair publicly, but Salafi Publications have refused any other method of rectification, except that they be responded to publicly, and until this day, they continue to repeat their hollow accusations over and over while ignoring requests for evidence or calls to sit with the people of knowledge to resolve this affair. Yet again, after we have publicly challenged them to sit with the Scholars to resolve this issue before their trip to Madeenah this year[30], and provide us with the dates that they would like to address these issues with all Scholars involved, they came all the way to Madeenah and left, yet again, without responding to the challenge.

They wrote:

“Salafi Publications are happy to sit with Shaykh Waseeullaah in the presence of Shaykh Rabee’ Shaykh Ubayd, or Shaykh Muhammad bin Haadee (or all three!) ….”[31]

Yet we have spoken to Shaykh Waseeullaah who had agreed to sit with them together with the aforementioned Mashayikh, and we have requested that they provide us the dates on which they would like to address these issues, yet they arrived in Madeenah and Makkah and left without so much as a whimper concerning these affairs.

They have been busying people with this affair for over six years, they have had numerous stickies on their SalafiTalk forum concerning it over these years, they have written endless pages about it, and now when faced with dealing with the issue in the presence of both parties and the people of knowledge, they have no time for it and are busy with beneficial knowledge?!?

Utter nonsense! The Salafi Da’wah is not a playing field for childish games!

Interestingly, note what they posted on SalafiTalk when publicly challenging others to sit with the Scholars:

‘Every Salafi should know that these new-comers and boys were challenged to bring whomever they want with them to house of Shaikh Rabee’ to deal with their accusations…BUT they keep refusing claiming that they are upon certainty and not in need of referring back to these Scholars… more like they are cowards who know that the Scholars will speak out against their exaggerations and lies…’

This post has since been deleted from their forum but can – at the time of publishing this document – be found through a simple Google search. It highlights how they view their own actions if others were to practice them.

It is also interesting to note that in their dispute with some of the students of Dammaj, they are keen on challenging them to sit with the Scholars, while the difficulties for the students of Yemen to travel to Saudi Arabia for a sitting are common knowledge. Yet in their disputes with some of the students of Madeenah, to where they make yearly visits, they have not once requested a sitting or issued a similar challenge, choosing instead to ignore our numerous requests to do so and contacting scholars outside of Saudi Arabia requesting evidence to be sent to them.

If what they claim about is indeed true, then during their numerous visits to Saudi Arabia over the years – why do they shy away from proving it and exposing this in a gathering with the people of knowledge as well as the accused students from


The Way Forward

It is important to note, we have not highlighted the shameless methods employed by Salafi Publications simply for the sake of exposing this heinous catalog of treachery, rather we have brought conclusive evidence of calculated deception from their very own sources concerning this affair, in order to reach a positively constructive conclusion that will, insha Allaah, minimise this type of Fitnah in the future for the greater benefit of the Da’wah; whether it involves Salafi Publications or other than them. This type of Fitnah only serves to waste precious time and effort that is much needed in other areas in calling the creation to the correct understanding of Islam. Therefore, in light of what has preceded, we would like to encourage the adoption of the following recommendations with complete sincerity, hoping by it to minimize the hindrances that have plagued this noble Da’wah of for so long:

1. Should two parties adhering to the Prophetic Sunnah have cause to dispute, and attempts to reach a mutually acceptable solution are unsuccessful, their affair should be taken to a mutually recognized Salafee Scholar, or better yet, a number of Scholars, for guidance and mediation – with the condition that the disputing parties, or their appointed representatives, are all present[32]. This will help ensure the dispute is presented fairly, insha Allaah, thereby minimizing the opportunity for those who have corrupt and personal agendas to pass on misinformation and lies to the Scholar.

2. As it relates to the verdicts of the Scholars concerning such affairs being published; They are only to be accepted upon the following conditions being met:

a) Either the scanned Arabic writing of the Shaykh or the audio recording of the question and answer be provided to ascertain the accuracy of the translation; we have provided sufficient evidence of deliberate omissions and flagrant deception to warrant this necessary stipulation.

b) The questions and information being passed on to the Scholar seeking his guidance and response must be published as well. We have cited sufficient evidence regarding the practice of calculated deception in this regard. How simple it is to ask a question about the deviance of an individual and the falsity of what he calls to, and then conceal the question and the information which was passed to the Scholar once the desired response has been extracted; Add to that the reckless chaos caused by publishing such a verdict or response against this particular individual who may well be free of such errors mentioned in the cunningly concealed question. The responses[33] by the Scholars are directly dependant upon the information provided in the questions or information put to them; Certainly, concealing this is treachery and deception.

c) The translator (of the question and subsequent verdict or response of the Scholar) must be clearly identified. It is not sufficient to hide behind names of organizations and websites. Anyone is able to publish material under the name of a website, but the specific writers names must be stated to indicate that the signatories bear full responsibility for what is being translated or written, and that other translators or contributors to a website are not held liable for the errors of the signatories if any, as we have done with these documents and others. Hiding behind the names of websites, publishing companies and organizations is only a way to avert liability, and we affirm that only the signatories of these series of documents are liable for what is within them, and the rest of the translators for are not to be held liable for what they contain.

3. Unverifiable narrators and narrations must not be accepted. He said this, she said that[34] and it is well known that this[35], is not the way of the students of knowledge, it is the way of those who desire Fitnah and turmoil while not having sufficient evidence to support it. This is the exact type of qeel wa qaal that our Scholars have been warning against for many years.

InshaAllaah, abiding by these simple recommendations will minimize the Fitnah that has been plaguing some of the Salafees in the West, and pave the way for justness acting upon the statement of Allaah:

{O you who believe! Stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allaah, even if it be against yourselves, your parents, and your relatives, or whether it is against the rich or the poor…}[36]

These recommendations will be read to and commented on by a number of scholars and we reiterate, after the completion of these documents – in repelling their baseless allegations, we shall no longer pay attention to the puerile nonsense and qeel wa qaal that Salafi Publications are spouting – if it is not in accordance with these simple recommendations, as this is only a waste of time; We advise the readers to do the same, and to be keen upon busying themselves with beneficial knowledge.

If Salafi Publications were serious about arriving at a solution at the feet of the Scholars or really believed they had a strong case, they would have rushed to answer the calls by to sit together with the Scholars, but they declined in one case and were a no show in the other.

The only time both parties were present with some of the Mashaayikh was in Madeenah – back in 2005 – which resulted in Salafi Publications admitting their errors and promising the Mashaayikh to write a retraction when they returned to the UK, as clarified earlier.

We also realise that sadly there are those who live for this type of Fitnah and busy themselves and others with it, we pray that Allaah alleviates them from this perpetual calamity, and allow them to disembark from this type of ‘roller coaster ride’ Salafi Publications has them riding on.

And to Allaah alone belongs all praise.

To be continued…



Prepared by:

Abu ‘Abdul-Waahid Nadir Ahmed

Abu ‘Abdur-Razzaaq Tahir Wyatt

Abu ‘Abdullaah Mohammed Akhtar Chaudhry

Have you read Part A, Part B and Part C yet?

Uncovering the Absurdities behind the Claim of ‘Attacking the Salafees’ – A

Uncovering the Absurdities behind the Claim of ‘Attacking the Salafees’ – B

Uncovering the Absurdities behind the Claim of ‘Attacking the Salafees’ – C



[1] Which we received via email on 12 November, 2007.

[2] Page 5 of Salafi Publications’ second response.


[4] Salafi Publications

[5] This letter was published on page 5 of Salafi Publications’ second response, without the aforementioned paragraphs.


[7] “All they are doing is “Shaykh hopping”, moving from one, or one set of Shaykhs to another .” Page 6 of Salafi Publications’ first response.




[11] Dates can easily be checked from the various Hijri-Gregorian date conversion websites.


[13] Salafi Publications’ second response.




[17] “… their likes are averse to a da’wah which is based upon clarity, because if that type of clarity becomes rooted in the hearts and minds of the Salafis in the West in general.” Page 13 of Salafi Publications’ first response.

[18] Jaami’ Bayaan Al-’Ilm wa Fadlihi: 2/81

[19] Noor ‘ala ad-Darb.

[20] Sharh Kitaab at-Tawheed, dated: 12-05-1431

[21] Fataawa Al-Lajnah Ad-Daa.imah lil-Buhooth Al-’Ilmiyyah wal-Iftaa

[22] Taqyeed ash-Shawaarid min Al-Qawaa’id – Page 378

[23] Al-Baqarah: 281

[24] Saheeh Muslim: 1/13



[27] Is this not precisely what Salafi Publications have done with the ‘Shaykh Ahmad responds…’ post?




[30] “And we now request, once again, in their current visit to Madeenah, to repeat their allegations against the site and its translators in the presence of both parties…all they need to do is provide us with the dates when they will be addressing these issues and we will be there insha’Allaah” Refer to Document 1 D:

The dates they were present in Saudi can be found here:

[31] Page 3 of Salafi Publications’ second response.

[32] For the sake of convenience, if they are unable to meet together with the people of knowledge, then they can meet at a pre-arranged location to telephone them via a speakerphone – as if they are actually present before the people of knowledge.

[33] The published fataawa of the Scholars in this regard are a clear proof; We have the likes of Shaykh Ibn Baaz, The Permanent Committee and others, when asked a question, they often begin their response with“If what you say is true, then…”; This etiquette is derived from the guidance of the Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), an example of which occurs in the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah as listed in Saheeh Muslim/2589, where he narrates that the Prophet – صلى الله عليه و سلم – said: “Do you know what gheebah is?” They said: “Allaah and His Messenger know best.” He said: “That you say something about your brother that he dislikes.” He was asked: “What if what I say about my brother is true?” He said: “If what you say is true, then you have gossiped about him, and if it is not true then you have slandered him.” Note the words of Allaah’s Messenger – صلى الله عليه و سلم – “If what you say is true, then…” thereby affirming that his response to Abu Hurayrah’s question is based upon what Abu Hurayrah has told him, wAllaahu A’lam.

[34] “Some of them have admitted this in writing to us in the past..” Page 2 of Salafi Publications’ first response.

[35] “This is a well-known matter to all involved…” Page 6 of Salafi Publications’ first response.

[36] An-Nisaa: 135

Authored by : Madeenah.Com Administration

Date Published: Wednesday, 01 June 2011

These notes have been read 503 times

Print these notes

The author of these notes affirms the accuracy of his notes in accordance with the Noble Qur.aan and the Authentic Sunnah. Should you have any comment(s) and/or correction(s) to suggest, please write to us at:


…and your email will be passed on to him, inshaa.-Allaah.