I was asked privately to clarify the brief point I made HERE recently by asking an unknown "Athari":
To clarify the question asked, let me provide some clear cut evidence on what some of the pseudo-Salafiyya say about this major Muhaddith and Historian in Islamic History.Have you read about Falih al Harbi saying that Imam al-Dhahabi is not from Ahlus-Sunna? Why didn’t the anti-Falih camp mention that even the likes of Bin Baz are allegedly on record as making some negative criticism of Imam al-Dhahabi, or how about other names and their drivel on al-Dhahabi?!
For those who are unfamiliar with this Imam, who was once a student of ibn Taymiyya's, and died in the year 748 AH, let them look HERE
A few days ago I also said about Imam al-Dhahabi, HERE :
The Hashwiyyatul Asr are fond of quoting Imam al-Dhahabi when it suits them! I say: Al-Dhahabi is a double edged sword for you! You quote him when it suits you and ignore or hide his statements when it refuted you. As for us, we know al-Dhahabi went via some phases after the days his Master: ibn Taymiyya departed this world. I have already mentioned that al-Dhahabi had no problem with Tafweed al-Ma'nawiyya (quote to come later Insha'Allah), he had no problem with Ziyara to the blessed Qabr of Allah's Nabi (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), his Nasiha to ibn Taymiyya was seen by Imam al-Sakhawi (who never rejected its authenticity from al-Dhahabi, especially since both he and his Shaykh Ibn Hajar - took Hadith from al-Dhahabi's own son: Abu Hurayra, so they could have easily verified its authenticity)..
I add now: Al-Dhahabi also declared Sahih the narration which establishes Ta'wil of the Saaq as narrated and authenticated by al-Hakim (but weakened by the distorter: Amr Abdal Munim Salim from Egypt, and conveyed on by AR Qadri via taqleed, and NOTE: Ibn Hajar declared this very narration: Hasan, also quoted by al-Karmi the Hanbali in his Aqawil, and Shaykh Shu’ayb al-Arna'ut knew all this and never questioned the authenticity given to it by these named Imams. Alhamdulillah!). Al-Dhahabi also rejected the concept of Istiwa "bi-Dhatihi" - in his Kitab al-Uluw and his later Siyar a'lam an-Nubala - but the Hashwiyya usually hide all this!
Now, we challenge them: If this is your Imam and was really on the way of Ibn Taymiyya till the end of his days: Produce for us if you care scans from his Kitab al-Uluw and tell us all here or at ahwa.org - what he said about: ISTIQRAR - under the notes to: Abu Ahmad al-Qassab (p. 259 of the Mukhtasar edn by al-Albani) and under: al-Baghawi (p. 280 of the Mukhtasar edition again)!
Now, let us look at what the contemporary Pseudo-Salafiyya of this age say about this major Imam in Hadith.
One of the people who has recently attacked Imam al-Dhahabi, is a man by the name of Falih al-Harbi. This individual was not too long ago a highly regarded figure at the pseudo-Salafi sites like spubs.com/tro.id.org/salafitalk etc. Until this man fell out with another controversial figure: Rabi al-Madkhali, the mistakes and high handed talk of Falih al-Harbi and his associates were left to the way side by the above named sites.
When al-Madkhali started to expose al-Harbi, that was the signal for his muqallids in the West under the cover of those websites just listed to drop al-Harbi like a hot coal. Before this, the rabble rousers at certain websites (like ahwa.org) – knew of the calamities surrounding al-Harbi and those who had spoken negatively of him already in written format (like: Abdal Muhsin al-Abbad et al).
To cut a long story short, the likes of al-Harbi have gone to the brazen levels of exposing and criticising what they are unhappy with, regarding the well documented views of Hafiz al-Dhahabi in contradistinction to what pseudo-Salafiyya have been spreading these days! One wonders why they took so long to identify what Imam al-Dhahabi really stood for in his last years?!
So from the enormities in Kalam of this al-Harbi is his open declaration that Imam al-Dhahabi is not from Ahlus Sunna wal Jama’a! I will mention where this was mentioned from him in the words of his former friends and now his avowed foes! We will keep our Kalam to the bare minimum and mention in their own words what is said by these claimants to the Salaf, regarding the status of Imam al-Dhahabi, rahimahullah!
It will also been shown that this man did not stop there, BUT – he also took the likes of the following Huffaz of Hadith out from Ahlus Sunna wal Jama’a: Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Nawawi and Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani.
Do not be surprised to learn and read that al-Harbi is not unique in throwing these Imams out of the Sunni Path, but even before he raised his voice and his opponents seized hold of this Kalam, there are others from his Ilk who did the same with these Imams (like; Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Nawawi and ibn Hajar) – this will be shown later -Insha’Allah!
Point 1 - Al-Harbi and his Kalam that al-Dhahabi, ibn al-Jawzi, al-Nawawi and ibn Hajar are not from Ahlus Sunna:
Said the former friends of al-Harbi, but now in total bias to the way of Rabi al-Madkhali: salafitalk.net, in a heading entitled:
These people said on - 04-28-2005 @ 10:30 AM the following:Faalih al-Harbee Expels Imaam adh-Dhahabee From Ahl us-Sunnah and Nullifies His Testimony
Faalih al-Harbee Expels Imaam adh-Dhahabee From Ahl us-Sunnah and Nullifies His Testimony
Faalih al-Harbee said, "Adh-Dhahabee, his speech is not to be depended upon, he has with him what is with him by his own self, so his testimony is not to be accepted... so they (mentioning adh-Dhahabee along with Ibn Hajar, an-Nawawee and Ibn al-Jawzee), are not from the a'immah of Ahl us-Sunnah..."
Now, if one clicks onto that link to sahab.net, one may see some highlighted passages! Of concern is his declaration here:
قال الشيخ فالح : الذهبي لايعتمد على كلامه ! الذهبي عنده ماعنده بنفسه !؛ فلا تقبل شهادته ؟!! ، ولا يقبل كل كلامه في أهل السنة ، وأنتم تعلمون أن الذهبي له قدح في أهل (1) السنة وله مخالفة ، مخالفات لمنهج أهل السنة ، وعنده مشاكل وبلايا في كتبه ! على رغم في إمامته ، وكذلك في الجرح والتعديل
، وعلى الرغم من حفظه وعلمه وخدمته للإسلام
إلا عنده هناك وهناك في عقيدته وفي منهجه ؟! ومثله يؤخذ منه العلم وينتفع به ، ولا يقبل كلامه في أهل السنة وفي أئمتهم ( ؟!! )؛ لا هو ! ولا ابن حجر ! ولا النووي ! ولا ابن الجوزي ! ، يعني ـ هؤلاء مع إمامتهم ومع حفظهم ـ لايقبل كلامهم في أهل السنة ولا كرامة !!؛ فليس هم من أئمة أهل السنة (2) !
Let the reader decide what kind of Ta’assub this is from a man whose fame seems to be mere notoriety in his high-handed Kalam, and no substantial knowledge to his credit.
Now, is this the end of it? Was Falih al-Harbi the first to make negative criticism on Imam al-Dhahabi from his contemporary “Salafiyya”?!
The friends and students of al-Harbi are notoriously visitors and posters at a disastrous pseudo-Salafi website called: alathary.net! This website is critically despised by Rabi al-Madkhali and his cohorts!
The question is: Did the Western pseudo-Salafiyya hide anything about those who criticised al-Dhahabi either alongside al-Harbi, or even before him?! What will they say about what the Harbiyyin claim that it was Abdal Aziz ibn Baz – the “Shaykh al-Islam” and “Father of the Salafi Da’wah” – who is on record himself as holding some negativity to the way of Imam al-Dhahabi! Or how about others, like: Salih Aal-Shaykh (from the descendants of Muhammad ibn Abdal Wahhab) in this age?!
Let us minimise our own Kalam, and quote the Kalam of the last 2 named with quoted claims and even a recording!
Point 2: Bin Baz and his view on Imam al-Dhahabi
A faction of pseudo-Salafism said here:
Take note of this quote attributed to Bin Baz and the attached recording on him saying words in critique of Imam al-Dhahabi (as spread by some one from the above site). The quote is claiming that al-Dhahabi is not from the People of Fiqh (jurisprudence), but only a scholar of Mustalah al-Hadith and not being dependable in the Shari’a!
لا الذهبي ليس من اهل الفقه الذهبي مو من اهل البصيره الذهبي عالم من علماء الوسط يعتني بمصطلح الحديث فقط لا يعتمد به في الشريعة
Point no. 3 - Salih ibn Abdal Aziz Aal-Shaykh on Imam al-Dhahabi
Once again, the defenders of al-Harbi said here:
that Salih Aal-Shaykh said:
أمّا الذهبي رحمه الله تعالى فهو في توحيد العبادة جيّد؛ على طريقة شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية وفي الأسماء والصفات، وعقائد السلف في الإيمان والقدر وغيره، هو كذلك على عقيدة السلف الصالح، وله في ذلك مؤلفات كثيرة كالعلو والأربعين وما أشبه ذلك، وأما في وسائل الشرك فإنه حصل له عدم تحرير فيها رحمه الله، خاصة في كتابه هذا الأخير ”السِّيَر“ الذي ألفه بعد وفاة شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية؛ بعد وفاة وشيخ الإسلام بعشر سنين، فعنده بعض العبارات التي فيها تساهل بوسائل الشرك؛ كالدعاء عند القبور، والصلاة عندها، والتبرك برؤية الصالحين، أو التبرك بالدعاء عند القبور أو بالأماكن؛ المشاهد أوأشباه ذلك، فعنده تساهل في هذا راجع إلى عدم تحريره لمسألة الوسائل؛ وسائل الشرك
From those words, this man Salih is claiming that al-Dhahabi was on the way of Ibn Taymiyya in al-Asma wal-Sifat, the beliefs of the Salaf on Iman, al-Qadr etc, but as for what is in Imam al-Dhahabi’s later book compiled after the time of ibn Taymiyya there are things mentioned in it that (seem to be promoting I guess to these folk): “Al-Shirk” “Du’a near graves,” Salah near them, Tabarruk connected to the pious, Tabarruk with graves etc!!
I say: Salih is incorrect that al-Dhahabi totally agreed with Ibn Taymiyya in all aspects of Tawheed, like the understanding of Allah’s Sifat, but I do know what he is trying to say about the contents of the Siyar a’lam an-Nubala, and it containing anecdotes connected to what these people would object to when it has narrations connected to issues like Tabarruk, graves and what they think may be clear cut Shirk!
Note: At the beginning of the above link there is also a refutation quoted from Hamud al-Tuwayjiri on al-Albani’s claim that Al-Risalah al-Salah is by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Al-Tuwayjiri claimed that Imam al-Dhahabi had rejected the authenticity of that book of Salah being attributed to Imam Ibn Hanbal.
Alhamdulillah, this is enough for now. If a man like Falih al-Harbi can be open enough to attack the likes of Imam al-Dhahabi, will he be open and frank enough to analyse the works of Ibn Taymiyya and ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, then quote what is not to their way of thinking today, as well as quote the major Ulama of the last 7 centuries who made some form of Jarh on Ibn Taymiyya and his student Ibn Qayyim?! Time will tell how further these people will go in refuting and exposing each other in their vitriolic and farcial tone – as we are witnessing in this very age!