Exposing the Cult: PART TWO

16. Abandonment of Jihad in our time and its attribution to Salafiyyah

Br. Ali then said:

Among the notions this group raised: * That there is no jihad without the existence of an imam (i.e., khalifa) over the Muslims and that to die in defense of Islam, the
Muslims, and their lands was equivalent to suicide This is a lie and fabrication - Our position is same as the Prophet (s) and the Sahaabah - That is, that the Prophet (s) did not take the war to the kuffaar (ie offensively) until he was the Imaam or leader of the Muslims. So our position is the same as that which is that jihaad is behind a Muslim Ruler of a Muslim nation. As for if one wishes to go and defend and aid some Muslims in a different land where the disbelievers are taking their land and lives, then this is something fine if one has ability and will benefit the situation as the Allaah says: Help one another upon piety and righteousness... and the Prophet (s) said: The one who dies protecting his property is a martyr... This is the postion of Shaykh Albaanee and Shaykh Ali Hasan and Shaykh Saleem - So brother Ali has been beguiled and misunderstood this simple concept.

Again he twists the facts. Muhammad Shaqra clearly writes in his book, "Hiya as-Salafiya Nisbatan wa 'Aqidatan wa Manhajan" (It is Salafiya as an Appellation, Creed and Methodology):

"None may open the door for jihad nor raises its banner; nor permit it, nor called for it - except a single imam [over the Muslims], whether the people like that or not." (p. 200)

And he also writes:

"We ask as to why the umma cannot stand up to fulfill the issue of the obligation of jihad? This is because jihad ... is not to be [allowed] except with [the existence of] an imam and his [subsequent] permission. In this, it is similar to the hudud and punishments. These are not to be applied or established except by the general imam [ruling over all the Muslims]." (p. 194)

[Muhammad Shaqra] also gives a fatwa that the umma will not sin if it forsakes jihad these days, by saying:

"And hence, if it is not in the ability of the umma, to stand up in [fulfillment of] the duty of jihad due to the lack of a [single] amir (khalifa) [over the Muslims] who ties its banner, permits [its undertaking], and places a leader over the army; jihad [then] becomes among the impossible obligations [to fulfill]. And hence the umma does not sin by forsaking jihad." (p. 196)

Unfortunately, the author [Muhammad Shaqra] comes to the following conclusion regarding the ruling on jihad today:

"The best jihad today ... is to hold back from jihad." (p.204)

Shaqra also rules that the contemporary mujahid is open to Allah's anger and punishment and [if killed in battle] has then committed an act of suicide, whereas he says verbatim:

"He [who goes forth for jihad] is escaping to sin, going forth to [Divine] punishment, committing suicide with an arrow of Allah's wrath which he reaches for and thrusts into his breast." (pp. 199-200

In all of these ideas, Shaqra has gone against the ijma' of the ummah of Islam. Specifically, that jihad is a continual obligation till the Day of Resurrection. It does not require the permission of an imam over the Muslims. Indeed, jihad is obligatory upon everyone of us when the Muslims are attacked in their lands. Indeed, in such circumstances, jihad becomes obligatory for a woman to go forth even without the permission of her husband, the slave even without the permission of his master, the son even without the permission of his father.

Moreover, refer to the tape to which Abu Zubair mentioned, where Saleem al-Hilali also clearly denies contemporary jihad in the world today. Also refer to al-Farsi's statements in the UK, equating the Bosnian jihad with terrorism.

17. Declaration of Muslim masses as innovators

When Br. Ali said:

* That the Islamic movements (like the Ikhwan, Jama'at at-Tabligh, etc.) were more dangerous to Islam and the Muslims then the Jews and the Christians Yes and this is true, these Islamic Movements are sometimes more dangerous than the Jews and Christians. We should not be fooled by emotions. This does'nt mean that these Muslims are worse than jews and christians in that the tableeghis or ihkwaanees are kuffaar and in the eternal Hell - not they are not kuffaar - What this means is that these types of innovated movements and sects destroy Islaam from within like a cancer without even the ummah realising it until very late. Whereas the danger of the jews and christians is apparent and open as it was in the time of the Prophet (s)
and we see how the Allaah and His Prophet (s) dealt with them. But the cancer within the ummah which spreads without being noticed is far worse. This is why we find the statement of Imaam Ibnul Qayyim al-Jawziyyah (d 756H): The war against the innovators is greater than the war against the mushrikeen. And as Yahyaa ibn Maeen (companion of Imaam Ahmed ibn Hanbal) was asked: Is the one who defends the Sunnah better than the one who fights on the battle field getting injured and dusty? Ibn Maeen replied: Yes, by a great deal. And Ibn Wazeerah said: Fighting against the innovators is better than fighting against the Mushrikeen because fighting against the
mushrikeen preserves the borders of Islaam, yet fighting against the innovators preserves the capital of the whole Islamic nation.... And Shaykhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah saw the threat from a group of innovators greater than the threat from the Jews and Christians...This does'nt mean however that the Salafis or the Imaams of the Salaf make takfeer of the deviant Muslim sects - It does, however mean that we are aware that if these sects are allowed to continue unchecked, then soon there would be no Islaam to fight the Christians and jews for, nor any light of Islaam to
call them to !! (Please refer to Muslim Unity in light of the Numerous Sects and Parties by Shaykh Ali Hasan al-Halabee in English translation - Salafi Publications). So Jamaatut-Tableegh and Ikhwaan Muslimeen (and many others) are clearly deviated sects that must be warned against.

Abuz-Zubair clearly refuted this. The question is not warning about the deviations of the Ikhwan, the Tabligh, or the followers of Rabi. Rather the question is this group's Khawarij-like tendencies of making takfeer and tabdee of the Muslims as I demonstrated in the sound clip of Falah Ismail. Besides, Abu Khadeejah merely parrots Sh. Rabi Al-Madkhali who said during Shawwal 1416 during the 2nd Spring Camp in Kuwait:

* "The Ikhwan al-Muslimin are more harmful to Islam than the clear kuffaar as the Muslims are not deceived by the kuffaar; but they are deceived by these astray mubtadi'een. [The Muslims] are deceived by them and fall into bid'a and various errors (dalaalat) because of them."

* "The Ikhwan al-Muslimin and the Qutbis and those who orbit in their circles have invaded (i.e., perhaps he means infiltrated) [those] Salafi jama'aat which have destroyed the world ... The Ikhwan al-Muslimin don the garments of the truth but they are the furthest of people from it. They are the furthest away from the truth and Islam."

* When asked if the Ikhwan and Jamaat at-Tabligh are among the 72 sects destined for Hell, he replies "Yes."

* "Tabligh fight tawhid and the adherents of tawhid; the Ikhwan fight tawhid and the adherents of tawhid. They fight the Salafi minhaj and they fight its upholders; they are people of bid'a and dalaal."

* "Whoever defends these jama'aat and says in them there is good and that they have positive aspects, this individual sets people astray and calls to dalaalah."

* Regarding Sayyid Qutb, he says: "He did not leave a bid'a but adopted it nor a fundamental of Islam but destroyed it." (Al-Madkhali has written four books against Sayyid Qutb accusing him of kufr on more than ten counts. When Sh. Bakr Abu Zayd wrote a four page letter to al-Madkhali after reading the manuscript of the first book, advising him to drop the project, al-Madkhali came back with a book refuting Sh. Bakr and accusing him of being soft with the people of bida, etc.)

And finally (and this not all), observe his extremism. When asked regarding the permissibility of executing the members of Jama'at at-tabligh, al-Madkhali responds:

* "I possess the fatawaa and the deeds of the scholars to prove such. Didn't they execute Ja'd ibn Dirham. He was better than the Ikhwan, better than Sayyid Qutb a thousand times."

18. Prohibition of being aware of the current events

Ali then said:

* That to be aware of current events (fiqh al-waqi') was equivalent to studying the corrupted scriptures like the Torah

To which Abu Khadeejah says:

My response: This is lie and a corruption of the reality of what scholars like Albaanee, Ibn Baaz, Rabee, Muqbil etc say. Rather, the Muslim should be balanced, not being extreme in anything - a Muslim should know that Islaam is comprehensive and its call is based upon the Quraan and Sunnah from which eminate the principles and guidelines of calling. Studying the tawheed and correct aqeedah is its core hand in hand following the complete guidance and example of the Messenger (s) with the understanding of the Sahaabah, followed by making purification of our souls. All of this involves also knowing the state of the Ummah - Read 'The Methodology Of the
Prophets in Calling to Allaah' by Shaykh Rabee ibn Haadee (now in English) read Fiqhul-Waaqi of Shaykh Albaanee and Shaykh Ali Hasan and read Muslim Unity by Shaykh Ali Hasan and you will clearly see the reality of the false accusation of brother Ali. If it not the Salafi scholars who are always talking about how to revive the ummah according to the guidance of the Sunnah and the sahaabah, then it is noone !!

We will show who is the true liar, insha' Allah. Muhammad Shaqra says regarding insight into the status quo of the umma, which some of the du'at today refer to as fiqhul-waqi', Shaykh Muhammad Shaqra says:

"Abandon fiqhul-waqi', so that you may understand the contemporary situation (waqi')." (p. 148)

Muhammad Shaqra also said some words which he apparently deems to be words of eloquence:

"Indeed the fiqh of fiqhul-waqi' is that you leave fiqhul-waqi' so that fiqhul-waqi' may be perfected in your mind and you will then become the most knowledgeable of people and possessing the most fiqh regarding fiqhul-waqi'." (p. 148)

By such a statement, Muhammad Shaqra negates a communal obligation which is incumbent upon the scholars of the ummah. Namely, that there must be among them those who will enlighten the rest regarding the situation of the umma, and how in light of the Book and the Sunna, to cure the ummah's problems and deviations.

Indeed [Muhammad Shaqra] reduces [fiqhul-waqi'] to:

"An intellectual pastime which has enamoured the hearts of some groups who have received a modern education."

Muhammad Shaqra also declares (on p. 135) that the concern shown by the scholars of the Muslims with respect to the status of their umma is forbidden and is equivalent to the Messenger of Allah forbidding 'Umar to read the Torah of the Jews.

Muhammad Shaqra apparently did not realize that the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - rebuked 'Umar because 'Umar saw in the Torah admonition and good. While the truth regarding the Torah, is that it has been changed by the Jew's lies. Furthermore, Allah has sufficed us with the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Moreover, the Torah even if it were uncorrupted is an abrogated sharia.

However, as for reading the Torah with the aim of refuting its followers or compelling them to act in accordance with the truth found within it, and which is in agreement with our sharia, this is within the Qur'an. The Messenger did such when the Jews of Medina denied the incumbency of stoning the adulterer.

Unfortunately, these individuals, like Muhammad Shaqra due to their lack of fiqh and their inability to distinguish the difference between a command and prohibition, and reading the Torah in order to seek guidance from it and reading the Torah for the purpose of refutation of the Jews or for the purpose of having them comply in accord with its unaltered teachings.

Likewise, is it true to say that among the principles of the contemporary Salafis is to "render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's?" Anyway, just what are these things which are Caesar's, but not Allah's? Whatever happened to "inna salaatiy wa nusukiy..."?

Moreover, Rabi Ibn Hadi writes that fiqh al-waqi' "divides the youth of the umma; and implants among its supporters spite [for their fellow Muslims] and corrupt character (like, falsely accusing the innocent, belying and abandoning the truth, abandoning the supporters of the truth, believing in lies and disinformation, spreading of such lies and disinformation in the form of raging waves which results in a flood of tribulations which has not left a single household or tent but penetrated it);" they then declared that fiqh al-waqi' is among the specific duties of rulers and therefore "it is impermissible to mobilize the scholars and students of knowledge for this task." Lest, they interfere in the responsibilities of the rulers, and hence, "enter into something which they are unable to perceive its consequences and magnitude, as this interference and contention results in such harm to themselves and their umma, regarding which only Allah knows its repercussions." When students of knowledge preoccupy themselves with fiqh al-waqi', they conclude this results in "giving a task to those who are unfit." (See his Hiwar with Salman al-Awda, pp. 94-102)

By "students of knowledge" they mean all who disagree with their political stances irrespective of how knowledgeable he may be. This is why it is well known that prior to the Gulf War, Rabi would publicly refer to Safar as "the Ibn Taymiya of our age" and then after the Gulf War began to refer to him as posing "a greater harm to the umma than the Jews and the Christians."

19. The claim that to rule by secular laws is only a major sin and not Kufr

Ali then said:

"Also among their deviant concepts was that the removal of the sharia and its replacement by secular law was only sin, albeit kufr duna kufr, and not apostasy and moreover to preach to the necessity of Allah's sharia being supreme and that all judgment be by His sharia and to His sharia was among the ways of the Khawarij and an innovation in the religion. My response: by Allaah, brother Ali should fear Allaah - All the Salafi scholars I have mentioned above call for the full implementation of the
Islamic shareeah but they call for it upon the methodology of the Salaf not based upon entering into parliament or democrasy or demonstrations in the streets or by rebellious over throw. I sincerely ask my brothers and sisters to refer to the last two chapters of 'The Methodology Of the Prophets in Calling to Allaah' by Shaykh Rabee ibn Haadee (now in English) and you will see the truth of what I am saying."

Notice how Abu Khadeejah dances around Ali's point due to either his ignorance or his desires. Abu Zubair has clarified this issue in Ali's defense. And Ali clarified this two years ago when he showed the ignorance of Amjad Rafiq regarding this issue. And what are they now going to say when the fatwa of the Permanent Committee of the Council of Leading Scholars in the Kingdom which refers to those who call themselves Salafis in Jordan (specifically in reference to Murad Shukri and Ali al-Halabi) as passing off the madhhab of the Murjia as that of Ahl as-Sunna (Fatwa number 20212, dated 7/2/1419 AH). Or is this (in Abu Khadeejah's words) like Ibn Baz's praise of the Kuwaiti declaration, "another Suroori forgery"?

Ali then said:

To support this end, this group initially began to pick on a phrase first coined in this century by al-Mawdudi and Sayyid Qutb, i.e., hakimiya. They argued that the term from both alinguistical and religious perspective was a bid'a and hence it is forbidden to use the term. They also raised the issue regarding the permissibility of dividing tawhid into more categories than the traditional 3 categories found in the books of the scholars. My response: Yes, this is true - because the term Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah as a fourth category was not used by the Salaf and was innovated by the innovators like Syed Qutb - this term is not to be found in any of the books of the great Imaams or even lesser than them. And every good is in following the Salaf and every evil is in the innovation of the Khalaf (those of later times)! All the scholars mentioned above like Ibn Baaz, Ibn Uthaymeen, Albaanee etc., have clearly mentioned that separating this term into a fourth category is and innovation and that the one who does so is a deviant innovator !! See www.salafipublications.com for
the statements of these shaykhs. However it does means that these scholars deny the obligation that judgement is only for Allaah as their fatwas clearly state.

(see previous response).

20. Rabee is allowed to preach Salafiyah in the Baatini state of Qadhaafi - Libya

Ali then said:

Their efforts was not as they portrayed to defend the aqida from
innovation, but rather they sought to introduce into the aqida their
false notions which in the end only seeks to acknowledge the secular
status quo of the Middle East. And hence wqe witnessed amazing events
and statements during the past few years. To the degree that their
doctrinal leader was able to visit and preach the "Salafi" aqida and
manhaj in the lands of the Batini, apostate state of North Africa. A
nation which its kufr idealogy and war againts the din espoused by its
desert (false) prophet can only bring back memories of the Fatimid
state of al-Hakim who in the end pronounced himself to be Allah. My Response: I dont know what brother Ali is referring to here...

So why argue? Anyway, Ali is referring to Qadhdhafi's Libya. Is Qadhdhafi now Muslim? but however, this cannot be considered a proof of ones falsehood no more than assuming that Bill Clinton supports brother Ali and his dawah just because brother Ali lives in the heart of kufr empire in Washington DC...??!!

This is such a ridiculous statement. Ali is an American citizen and the United States is a secular country which hence maintains that it does not care if people are Muslims or whatever. Indeed, The United States supports aspects of Islam at times in order to further its various short and long term policy goals. Qadhdhafi on the other hand, is an apostate and tyrant who openly fights Islam and ridicules the Sunnah. When Qadhdhafi allows Rabi Ibn Hadi to publically preach Salafiyah in Libya, then something is up. In the same way, Saddam in the 80's would invite Sh. Ehsan Elahi Zaheer to make public statements on Iraqi radio against the Shiites. At that time of course, the Saudis would not tolerate criticism of Saddam or Baathism, only Khomeini and Shiism. My, my, how times change. So I ask you Abu Khadeejah, where is the the aqeedah and the manhaj of the Salaf in all this? Be truthful...if you can!

21. Kibaar condemn Muraad Shukri and his supporter Ali al-Halabi, of Irjaa

Ali then said:

The first to respond to these deviant ideas were a number of students of knowledge. When Ali al-Halabi printed Murad Shukri's book Ihkam
at-Taqrir fi Ahkam at-Takfir, a Saudi student of knowledge Abu Abdur-Rahman as-Subai'i published a short essay entitled Bara'a Ahl as-Sunna. Then when al-Anbari printed his book al-Hukm bi ghayr Ma Anzala Allah, other students of knowledge wrote works refuting it. And when Ali al-Halabi printed his book Fitna at-Takfir wa l-Hakimiya again we found a professor of Islamic studies Dr. Abu Ruhayyim refuting it. My Response: As for Shaykh Alee Hasan printing the book of Muraad Shukree, then he has clearly and PUBLICLY stated that he was wrong
to print the book of an amuteur like Muraad Shukree, and Shaykh Ali Hasan published this in numerous newspapers and magazines.

This again is a misrepresentation. Ali Al-Halabi was very specific with his words, he distanced himself from what he said "might" be misunderstood. He further placed the words "might" in parenthesis. So what does that mean? Also Ali al-Halabi's notes not his warning from "the fitna of Takfir and Hakimiyah" and his further defense against Dr. Ab Ruhayyim's refutation of Him, show that he holds the same views of Murad Shukri. So where is the difference in belief?

Abu Khadeejah then says:

As for the other two books, then they have clear references from the great scholars like Al-Albaanee and Saleh Fawzaan, Ibn Uthaymeen etc., so it is going to take more than two unknown names (regardless of how you promote them) to refute.

Do not misrepresent the facts. These references mean nothing, as they do not give tazkiya to the two aforementioned books. Anyway you call yourself a Salafi so where is your manahj here? It is not a matter of names, but rather the arguments and their evidences.

Also just to mention that thay have been refuted by a "professor" gives a false impression to the laymen, so fear Allaah. And just because someone has refuted another does'nt mean much in itself - because then we would have to say Imaam Ahmed ibn Hanbal was wrong in his aqeedah because he was refuted by Bishr
Mireesee !!. Also that Imaam Barbahaaree (d 329H) is wrong because he was refuted by Hishaam (the innovator) Kibbaanee from downtown somewhere in Canada - and that Shaykh Al-Albaanee is wrong because he was refuted by Hasan (the innovator) as-Saqqaaf and Nah Haah (the innovator) Meem Keller. And what a calamity all this would be!!

This is again ignorance that does not require any comment. He then says:

22. Who truly refutes the innovators, and who aids them?

And who as matter of interest in so-called enlightened USA where Sunnah is supposed to be strong has answered in detail to the likes of Kibbaanee, Keller and
Hamza Yusuf or are the so-called duaat like brother Ali more interested in the goings on in the palaces of the Kings ? (See www.salafipublications.com for replies to these deviants).

This is such a bombastic lie and a total distortion. It is well known that it was The Society for Adherenc to the Sunnah who in 1992 first printed and distributed quotes from Naqshbandi texts, exposing their worship of dogs and saints. These same quotes were later posted on the Internet as early as 1994, and have been a thorn in the side of the Sufis ever since. And it was the brothers in Australia who set up the
first web site dedicated to exposing Kabbani's world wide web of deception and war on the deen. And it is these same groups who are today drawing constant fire from Kabbani and his minions. And since you have raised the issue of Kabbani and the others, it was us who first responded to the ideas of Hamza Yusef and Nuh Keller four years ago on your own "Salaf-net", when you were either incapable of responding to queries, or you were too busy calling Muslims "Khawarij" and "Surroori". Indeed, your pompous self praise has done little to stem the migration of British youth from your da'wah to the ranks of Keller, et al; to the extent that some now refuse to be identified with Salafiah.

Besides, what exactly is your position regarding the fatwa of the expelled Imam of Masjid Nabawi, Sh. Hudhayfi? Do you say the same about him that he was "interested in the goings on in the palaces of the Kings"? Do you regard him as a
Khariji and a fattaan because he disagrees with your ideas by criticism of the Jews, his call for the expulsion of US forces in Saudi Arabia and his criticism of Saudi Arabia's benevolence toward the Shia of Iran? If so, then you and Kabbani share a distinct commonality, since it is Kabbani who in the latest issue of his magazine, openly praises the Jews and the Shia while attacking Sh. Hudhayfi as a "Wahhabi fanatic" and a fattaan. So please answer the question my brother, who is correct here, Hudhayfi or Kabbani?

23. Do the scholars agree with everything that Rabee has to say?

Ali then said:

However, this group insisted that their teachings were supported by
the major scholars of the day and that their teachings was in the end the pure doctrine of Ahl as-Sunna. My response: Not only supported by the major scholars of today but also by the creed and methodology of the Salaf.

Then bring your proofs if you are truthful. There is no evidence that any of the major scholars support any of your views. Just the opposite. All you have are just general statements of praise of Rabi ibn Hadi by which you take and interpret that it means full support of all what they say. Yet in reality, those who have studied Sh. Rabi in detail like Bakr Abu Zaid and Ibn Jibreen have both refuted him. Besides, answer the following question, if Rabi was such a great scholar then why was he never placed on Hay'a Kibar al-Ulama'? Why was he virtually unknown, even in Saudi Arabia, until after the Gulf War when he began attacking the mashaykh? Why is it that today his books are not sold in any of the major book stores of Makkah and Medinah? Why is it that his own students, like ad-Dawish, have turned against him? He was manipulated by the state and has now been cast aside. And I guarantee you that it will be a simple matter of a time when his da'wa will be forgotten once and for all.

24. The scholar’s criticism of Rabee’s attacks on Sayyid Qutub

Ali then said:

Those of us who were familiar with this group and its origins and
teachings knew otherwise. For we had seen that when they attacked
Sayyid Qutb, may Allah be merciful with him., the major scholars pointed out the extremism of their view points. There was the letter
of Bakr Abu Zaid and then the fatwa of Ibn Jibrin, two members of
Saudi Arabia's Hay'a Kibar al-Ulima'. There was also al-Albani's
statements and comments on tape which went to the degree of praise
regarding Sayyid Qutb's tafsir saying that sections of it were inspired by Allah and that all Salafis should read a certain chapter in Milestones. My Response: If anyone wants to know the truth of this affair - I sincerely encourage you to look to www.salafipublications.com about what the scholars say about Syed Qutb. Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd and Ibn Jibreen's very short words have no basis with the weight of evidence against Syed Qutb and the
sayings of the likes of Al-Albaanee, Ibn Baaz, Ibn al-Uthaymeen, Rabee, Muqbil etc.. so again I say: just because someone responds (and in the case of Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd, just a small pamphlet) to another does'nt mean that the response is correct ! Shaykh Rabee has brought
over 700 pages of proof against the methodology of Syed Qutb and gave him the Jarh (criticism) that was just and correct and as I said before Al-Albaanee said that Shaykh Rabee is the Imaam of Jarh (criticism) and tadeel of this age.... So my brothers and sisters justice is hard to find in these times - so look at www.salafipublications.com and you will find the truth in this affair.

Again look at Abu Khadeejah's "Salafi" manhaj. Notice how he weighs truth and falsehood based on the fact that Bakr Abu Zaid refuted Rabi in a few pages and Rabi then wrote hundreds of pages. Also why do you run away from al-Albani's praise of Sayyid Qutb and his disparging remarks of what Rabi wrote in the section read to him by Adnan Aroor? Why run and hide?

25. Differentiation between the Saved and the Victorious group

Ali then said:

And when this group attacked Salman al-'Awda for distinguishing
between the saved sect and the victorious group, we heard the statements of Ibn Jibrin and we read the concurrence of what Salman opined by both al-Albani and Muqbil b. Hadi. My Response: Let us see what Albaanee said, that Salmaan al-Awdah's manhaj is hizbee/Ikhwaanee (i.e. deviated) and i've already told you above what Ibn Baaz said and there are too many tapes of Muqbil against the Surooree/hizbee/dawah of Salmaan and Safar to mention here and you can phone him if you wish or visit him and ask him. Again I ask you to refer to www.salafipublications.com and you will see what the scholars said about Salmaan al Awdah - Also distinguishing between saved sect and victorious group as Salmaan al-Awdah did is bidah that was not done
by the Imaams of the Salaf - And Ibn Baaz rebuked him for that.

Why run away again from what Ali said? The point is that al-Albani and Muqbil agreed with Salman. Ibn Baz and Safar disagree. Ibn Jibrin sees it as a matter of ijtihad. Yet Rabi writes a whole book on the topic and his ignorant followers establish wala and bara on an issue which is ultimately one of ijtihad. So where is your manhaj now Abu
Khadeejah?

The final part coming soon insha-Allah...