The Holy Grail of the Super Salafees / Madkhalis (Khurooj) will always be defended by the cultists. Abdulrahman Hassan staying true to his plastic methodology attempts to claim Imam Bukhari cited a consensus on the prohibition of Khurooj against an oppressive Muslim ruler. In this 50 minute video, we will systematically deal with his claims, as well his Manipulation and Distortions. We will demonstrate once again, one should never accept any references cited by a Super Salafee / Najdi. #BroHajji #UstadhAbdulRahmanHassan #AMAU
Khurooj is completely haram,you must always obey the ruler even if he abuses you since you must obey him as long as he prays 🤲 ‘Iyad ibn Ghanam reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Whoever intends to advise one with authority on a matter, he should not do so publicly. Rather, he should take him by the hand and advise him in private. If he accepts the advice, all is well. If he does not accept it, he has fulfilled his duty.” Source: Musnad Aḥmad 14909 Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Al-Albani
Most Madkhalis (AKA 'Najdi ultras') don't realise that: A) Those rules about fealty to a ruler was created at a time, and particularly for, when the muslims globally (i.e. whole ummah, not one particular 'nation state') had a widely accepted single 'caliph' (e.g. Abu Bakr/Umar during Rashidun period, Sultan Suleyman during the Ottomans etc), those rules weren't for local tribal rulers and pledging blind loyalty to a tribal chief (e.g. a nation state ruler) is a type of mental tribalism. B) By making MBS/Saudis their 'moral lodestar' (i.e. what they judge the right or wrong of all political action by) they're setting themselves up a dangerous trap. How? Imagine ten years from MBS turns himself into a type of Ataturk and imposes secularism through the barrel of a gun (e.g. making teaching of atheism mandatory but under a euphemism like 'free thinking' and imprisoning any alim that speaks against like Imam Ahmad was when the Abbasid sultan instigated the fitnah about the quran) then on what grounds could they peddle their nonsense about being loyal to a ruler? Especially if the ruler lays the groundwork for the destruction of Islam (e.g. banning adhan whilst allowing night club music to blast through the night) that his successor can finish? Of course this raises another point: Most Madkhalis don't realise the implications (i.e. end point) of their belief because, as Bro Hajji states, most Madkhalis can't or don't want to critically and logically think about their beliefs because if they did they'd have to accept alot of bitter truths (e.g. nature of the Madkhali dawah, the history of MIAW etc) that a intellectually honesty and emotionally mature person will have no difficulty acknowledging.
Assalamu Aleykum wa rahmatullah wa Barakatuh. A point i wanted to mention is that, you said ”Imagine ten years from now MBS turn himself into a type of Ataturk and imposes secularism through the barrel of a gun” if that would be true, that a muslim leader would start teaching atheism and leading its country away from islamic- monotheism then he is no longer a muslim country as he is teaching, embracing and publicly showing himself as a kaffir (atheist) Umar R.A reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Whoever imitates a people is one of them.” (and so is for the muslim leader as the likes of Ataturk) Source: Sunan Abī Dāwūd 4031 Wa Salamu Aleykum
SubhanAllah, from the first time I saw and listened to ARH my heart told me that there was something smug and arrogant about him, and coupled with an aura of dishonesty. But I feared that maybe I might be mistaken, and I gave him the benefit of the doubt. Then I heard this long podcast, and I knew that it was laced with BS all throughout, and my impression only solidified further. Thank you Bro Hajji for showing that my subjective impression is objectively backed by the facts, namely, that ARH is intellectually dishonest.
Bro Hajji, you have many videos on this topic. Can you make a comprehensive video, one stating all their arguments and all the hadith/Ayah they use, versus the rebuttal. Jzzkkhair
You said ”kharooj rebellion is like there holy grail “ but I just see you talking about it 24/7 way more than them atleast people get beneficial knowledge from them …what do we get here ? Attacks on people calling out names …I don’t even think they said your name more than once …
I support you in your claims against the madkhalis, but brother, don’t speak ill about the ulama, like Shaykh Al-Fawzan. He is an alim, other ulama has praised him. You can disagree with them respectfully, but don’t call them names. May Allah reward you for the good your doing, and keep you firm on the straight path. Ameen.
@@mohamedmo8128 Ibn Abdul Wahab was no scholar, Shaykh Al-Fawzan is. The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: "It is not one of us, he who does not respect old people, show mercy to young people, and know the right of scholars." [Reported by Imam Ahmad and Al Hakim in Sahih Al Jami` As-Saghir, 5443]. Therefore, a Muslim should know the rights of scholars to respect them.
19:40 In fairness, it would have been better to finish reading the sentence where it makes an exception where there are clear signs of disbelief so not obedience in all circumstances.
Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: التَّغْيِيرُ بِالْيَدِ لَيْسَ بِالسَّيْفِ وَالسِّلَاحِ Changing evil with one’s hand is not done with swords or weapons. Source: Jāmi’ al-‘Ulūm wal-Ḥikam34
May Allah keep you steadfast on this path where you face the governments and its minions. Even now after all the outrages that have happened in Saudi Arabia in recent times, these rats will continue to defend and say it is still the land of tawheed.
Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said: مَنْ خَرَجَ مِنَ الطَّاعَةِ وَفَارَقَ الْجَمَاعَةَ فَمَاتَ مَاتَ مِيتَةً جَاهِلِيَّةً وَمَنْ قَاتَلَ تَحْتَ رَايَةٍ عُمِّيَّةٍ يَغْضَبُ لِعَصَبَةٍ أَوْ يَدْعُو إِلَى عَصَبَةٍ أَوْ يَنْصُرُ عَصَبَةً فَقُتِلَ فَقِتْلَةٌ جَاهِلِيَّةٌ وَمَنْ خَرَجَ عَلَى أُمَّتِي يَضْرِبُ بَرَّهَا وَفَاجِرَهَا وَلاَ يَتَحَاشَ مِنْ مُؤْمِنِهَا وَلاَ يَفِي لِذِي عَهْدٍ عَهْدَهُ فَلَيْسَ مِنِّي وَلَسْتُ مِنْهُ Whoever rejects obedience to the ruler and divides the community and dies will have died upon ignorance. Whoever fights under the banner of one who is blind, raging for the sake of tribalism, or calling to tribalism, or supporting tribalism, and is killed will have died upon ignorance. Whoever rebels against my nation, striking the righteous and wicked alike and sparing not even the believers and does not fulfill the pledge of security, then he has nothing to do with me and I have nothing to do with him. Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1848, Grade: Sahih When I read this I can't help but think of the early Najdis!
Muslim 1854 and 1855 suggests we cant raise the sword against an oppressive ruler as long as they establish the prayer. So from this Muhammad ibn Al Wahab and ibn Saud were wrong to do what they did, however we should also be patient with regards to the fasiq Saudi, Emirati, Turkish etc rulers.
@@randyfloss1922 then they would be guilty of dividing the Ummah, being tribal, sectarian, not granting protection of non combatants and killing indiscriminately sinner and believer alike which goes against Quran (3:103, 6:159) and Sunnah (Sahih Muslim 1848). If we are to assume the Najdis were Muslims, then all of those hadeeth do apply to them, regardless of who their leader was, especially seeing as raising the sword is not even the correct way to advise a leader (Ahmad 14909). The Najdis also had an agreement with the Ottomans which they broke, instead of reconciling, which is a massive sin in Islam, so Ottomans were right to fight them as a result (Quran 49:9). All of these clear evidences from Quran and Sunnah prove that the Najdis were wicked people who were sent as a curse on the Ummah. Ultimately they failed in their endeavours, got defeated by Ottomans, and they had to wait 100 years later taking the non-believers as their awliya, which is again a massive sin in Quran, but it is confirmation that the Saudis are rogue. Regardless the Ummah had to come back to the Arabs for Al Mahdi to come to power, but Mahdi is not a Banu Rabi'a Najdi rather he is Qurayshi Ahlul Bayt and will rid the injustice and tyranny of KSA and surrounding dajjali leaders. Regarding the early Najdis and Saudi leadership: "Allah will use wicked men to defend his religion" (Bukhari 6606).
@@randyfloss1922 also by saying they werent under the Caliph and implying hadeeth does not apply to them, you're basically admitting that the Najdis were not Muslims.
Brother you are wasting time with these exposing mistakes videos. You seemed to be obsessed with abdur rahman hasan and his mistakes. Instead of these videos, give a lecture on aqeeda or hadith. That would be 1000 times more beneficial.
The Holy Grail of the Super Salafees / Madkhalis (Khurooj) will always be defended by the cultists.
Abdulrahman Hassan staying true to his plastic methodology attempts to claim Imam Bukhari cited a consensus on the prohibition of Khurooj against an oppressive Muslim ruler.
In this 50 minute video, we will systematically deal with his claims, as well his Manipulation and Distortions.
We will demonstrate once again, one should never accept any references cited by a Super Salafee / Najdi.
#BroHajji
#UstadhAbdulRahmanHassan
#AMAU
Khurooj is completely haram,you must always obey the ruler even if he abuses you since you must obey him as long as he prays 🤲
‘Iyad ibn Ghanam reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Whoever intends to advise one with authority on a matter, he should not do so publicly. Rather, he should take him by the hand and advise him in private. If he accepts the advice, all is well. If he does not accept it, he has fulfilled his duty.”
Source: Musnad Aḥmad 14909
Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Al-Albani
Most Madkhalis (AKA 'Najdi ultras') don't realise that: A) Those rules about fealty to a ruler was created at a time, and particularly for, when the muslims globally (i.e. whole ummah, not one particular 'nation state') had a widely accepted single 'caliph' (e.g. Abu Bakr/Umar during Rashidun period, Sultan Suleyman during the Ottomans etc), those rules weren't for local tribal rulers and pledging blind loyalty to a tribal chief (e.g. a nation state ruler) is a type of mental tribalism.
B) By making MBS/Saudis their 'moral lodestar' (i.e. what they judge the right or wrong of all political action by) they're setting themselves up a dangerous trap. How? Imagine ten years from MBS turns himself into a type of Ataturk and imposes secularism through the barrel of a gun (e.g. making teaching of atheism mandatory but under a euphemism like 'free thinking' and imprisoning any alim that speaks against like Imam Ahmad was when the Abbasid sultan instigated the fitnah about the quran) then on what grounds could they peddle their nonsense about being loyal to a ruler? Especially if the ruler lays the groundwork for the destruction of Islam (e.g. banning adhan whilst allowing night club music to blast through the night) that his successor can finish?
Of course this raises another point: Most Madkhalis don't realise the implications (i.e. end point) of their belief because, as Bro Hajji states, most Madkhalis can't or don't want to critically and logically think about their beliefs because if they did they'd have to accept alot of bitter truths (e.g. nature of the Madkhali dawah, the history of MIAW etc) that a intellectually honesty and emotionally mature person will have no difficulty acknowledging.
Assalamu Aleykum wa rahmatullah wa Barakatuh. A point i wanted to mention is that, you said ”Imagine ten years from now MBS turn himself into a type of Ataturk and imposes secularism through the barrel of a gun” if that would be true, that a muslim leader would start teaching atheism and leading its country away from islamic- monotheism then he is no longer a muslim country as he is teaching, embracing and publicly showing himself as a kaffir (atheist)
Umar R.A reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Whoever imitates a people is one of them.” (and so is for the muslim leader as the likes of Ataturk)
Source: Sunan Abī Dāwūd 4031
Wa Salamu Aleykum
SubhanAllah, from the first time I saw and listened to ARH my heart told me that there was something smug and arrogant about him, and coupled with an aura of dishonesty. But I feared that maybe I might be mistaken, and I gave him the benefit of the doubt. Then I heard this long podcast, and I knew that it was laced with BS all throughout, and my impression only solidified further. Thank you Bro Hajji for showing that my subjective impression is objectively backed by the facts, namely, that ARH is intellectually dishonest.
Bro Hajji, you have many videos on this topic. Can you make a comprehensive video, one stating all their arguments and all the hadith/Ayah they use, versus the rebuttal. Jzzkkhair
You said ”kharooj rebellion is like there holy grail “ but I just see you talking about it 24/7 way more than them atleast people get beneficial knowledge from them …what do we get here ? Attacks on people calling out names …I don’t even think they said your name more than once …
Distortion's of Islamic knowledge is beneficial? Are you serious!!!!
Someone have to counter these rats.
I support you in your claims against the madkhalis, but brother, don’t speak ill about the ulama, like Shaykh Al-Fawzan. He is an alim, other ulama has praised him. You can disagree with them respectfully, but don’t call them names. May Allah reward you for the good your doing, and keep you firm on the straight path. Ameen.
Lol
Bro Haji has already gone after Mohammed Ibn Abdel Wahab. You think Fawzan is too much for him. 😂
@@mohamedmo8128 🤣🤣🤣🤣
hes not ulema. just hyped by certain sects
@@mohamedmo8128 Ibn Abdul Wahab was no scholar, Shaykh Al-Fawzan is.
The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: "It is not one of us, he who does not respect old people, show mercy to young people, and know the right of scholars." [Reported by Imam Ahmad and Al Hakim in Sahih Al Jami` As-Saghir, 5443].
Therefore, a Muslim should know the rights of scholars to respect them.
19:40 In fairness, it would have been better to finish reading the sentence where it makes an exception where there are clear signs of disbelief so not obedience in all circumstances.
In all fairness, I presented الابي who explained in the video that the مراد الكفر هنا المعصية - Please watch the video attentively بارك الله فيك
Ahmad ibn Hanbal said:
التَّغْيِيرُ بِالْيَدِ لَيْسَ بِالسَّيْفِ وَالسِّلَاحِ
Changing evil with one’s hand is not done with swords or weapons.
Source: Jāmi’ al-‘Ulūm wal-Ḥikam34
May Allah keep you steadfast on this path where you face the governments and its minions.
Even now after all the outrages that have happened in Saudi Arabia in recent times, these rats will continue to defend and say it is still the land of tawheed.
Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:
مَنْ خَرَجَ مِنَ الطَّاعَةِ وَفَارَقَ الْجَمَاعَةَ فَمَاتَ مَاتَ مِيتَةً جَاهِلِيَّةً وَمَنْ قَاتَلَ تَحْتَ رَايَةٍ عُمِّيَّةٍ يَغْضَبُ لِعَصَبَةٍ أَوْ يَدْعُو إِلَى عَصَبَةٍ أَوْ يَنْصُرُ عَصَبَةً فَقُتِلَ فَقِتْلَةٌ جَاهِلِيَّةٌ وَمَنْ خَرَجَ عَلَى أُمَّتِي يَضْرِبُ بَرَّهَا وَفَاجِرَهَا وَلاَ يَتَحَاشَ مِنْ مُؤْمِنِهَا وَلاَ يَفِي لِذِي عَهْدٍ عَهْدَهُ فَلَيْسَ مِنِّي وَلَسْتُ مِنْهُ
Whoever rejects obedience to the ruler and divides the community and dies will have died upon ignorance. Whoever fights under the banner of one who is blind, raging for the sake of tribalism, or calling to tribalism, or supporting tribalism, and is killed will have died upon ignorance. Whoever rebels against my nation, striking the righteous and wicked alike and sparing not even the believers and does not fulfill the pledge of security, then he has nothing to do with me and I have nothing to do with him.
Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1848, Grade: Sahih
When I read this I can't help but think of the early Najdis!
Muslim 1854 and 1855 suggests we cant raise the sword against an oppressive ruler as long as they establish the prayer. So from this Muhammad ibn Al Wahab and ibn Saud were wrong to do what they did, however we should also be patient with regards to the fasiq Saudi, Emirati, Turkish etc rulers.
@@randyfloss1922 then they would be guilty of dividing the Ummah, being tribal, sectarian, not granting protection of non combatants and killing indiscriminately sinner and believer alike which goes against Quran (3:103, 6:159) and Sunnah (Sahih Muslim 1848). If we are to assume the Najdis were Muslims, then all of those hadeeth do apply to them, regardless of who their leader was, especially seeing as raising the sword is not even the correct way to advise a leader (Ahmad 14909). The Najdis also had an agreement with the Ottomans which they broke, instead of reconciling, which is a massive sin in Islam, so Ottomans were right to fight them as a result (Quran 49:9).
All of these clear evidences from Quran and Sunnah prove that the Najdis were wicked people who were sent as a curse on the Ummah. Ultimately they failed in their endeavours, got defeated by Ottomans, and they had to wait 100 years later taking the non-believers as their awliya, which is again a massive sin in Quran, but it is confirmation that the Saudis are rogue. Regardless the Ummah had to come back to the Arabs for Al Mahdi to come to power, but Mahdi is not a Banu Rabi'a Najdi rather he is Qurayshi Ahlul Bayt and will rid the injustice and tyranny of KSA and surrounding dajjali leaders. Regarding the early Najdis and Saudi leadership: "Allah will use wicked men to defend his religion" (Bukhari 6606).
@@randyfloss1922 also by saying they werent under the Caliph and implying hadeeth does not apply to them, you're basically admitting that the Najdis were not Muslims.
Great work brother. Keep exposing this fraudster. It's time his community came out and took a stance against his distortion's.
How can the be closet takferi it’s either he is or ain’t
u no making sense
Do you understand what “closet” means?
Brother you are wasting time with these exposing mistakes videos. You seemed to be obsessed with abdur rahman hasan and his mistakes. Instead of these videos, give a lecture on aqeeda or hadith. That would be 1000 times more beneficial.
Well seid brother
Akhi you seem obsessed with the Ustadh. Focus ur time on something else
Bro hajj is sufi.so u stop making videos on islam because Sufis are sirk and bidah in your heart that makes a muslim permanantly jahanami.
Is he sufi?
It's my third d video, when I saw your 1st video and I belive you are a Fitnah.