Thread by @Aal_Moalim

.@BroHajji says that he “takes knowledge from Shaykh Abdul Aziz Al Turayfi”

The Najdi Imams and I were labelled Takfeeri & ISIS forefathers/sympathisers by this ignoramus for saying that you cannot be a Muslim and a Mushrik at the same time

Let’s see if he is consistent

Abdul Aziz Al Turayfi says:

ولهذا نقول: نثبت الأسماء على من ظهر منه موجبها, ونُتْبِع الحكم إذا قامت الحجة عليه

Here we learn two points

1/ Al Turayfi affirms the name upon whomever we see doing something that necessitates that name being attached unto them

2/ Al Turayfi says we then follow up the giving of this name with the [relevant] ruling when the Hujjah is established

What Ruling?

He says just a couple lines prior:

إذا حكمت على أحد بالكفر لا يلزم من ذلك أن تقوم بقتله أو أن تستبيح دمه أو عرضه أو غير ذلك، فهذا حكم زائد عن الاسم،

We learn from this two points:

1/ Just because you judge a specific person with Kufr doesn’t necessitate that you go and kill them or make their blood & honour halal etc

Why?

2/ Because this is a HUKM (ruling) that is extra to the name

Give us an example O Turayfi!

Al Turayfi says:

إذا كان مثلاً هناك شخص تلبس بالكفر، طرأ, هذا كافر لتلبسه بالكفر, لكن قد تقوم قرينة تحتاج في ذلك أن تنزل الحكم عليه، تقيم الحجة عليه،

Here we learn three points:

1/ A person in the state of Kufr is not a Muslim.

2/ Al Turayfi says he is a Kafir due to being in the state of Kufr

Remember we said there’s Khilaf as to what to label a person we know is in the state of Kufr but the Hujjah hasn’t been established

But that there’s consensus that such a person is not a Muslim.

See:

https://twitter.com/aal_moalim/status/1436620595588907010

3/ However, there may be an external factor that you need to establish before placing the ruling [ie making the blood halal etc] upon this individual ie establish the Hujjah Al Risaaliyyah upon them

Al Turayfi says:

الذين يطوفون على القبور والأضرحة وغير ذلك في بلدان المسلمين ويسجدون لها من دون الله وينذرون ويسألونها من دون الله سبحانه وتعالى هؤلاء مشركون، لكن هل للإنسان أن ينزل عليهم حكم الله لمجرد نزول الاسم؟ لا، لا يلزم من ورود الاسم ورود الحكم حتى يكون موجب الحكم أيضاً

We learn two points:

1/ He gives examples of matters that he deems shirk and that those individuals who fall into them are not Muslim

Why?

Because they’re in the state of Shirk

2/ He says they’re Mushrikeen (remember we mentioned why this is the case here & the Khilaf)

https://twitter.com/Aal_Moalim/status/1436620597304438784

2/ But just because the name is applied doesn’t necessitate applying the Hukm of Kufr until what necessitates the application of this Hukm is found.

What is this that’s required for the Hukm to be applied?

Establishment of the Hujjah Al Risaaliyyah

Now I ask the reader to read this thread and then read the attached thread to this tweet and see what is the difference between the Najdi Imams and I (the Takfeeri ISIS forefathers/sympathisers) and the Shaykh of @BroHajji

The only difference is the Khilaf I spoke about above

https://twitter.com/Aal_Moalim/status/1436652050075594753

Reference for Turayfi’s quote:

audio.islamweb.net/audio/index.ph…

After this, we now have a few questions for the ignoramus:

Is your shaykh, whom you proudly boast to take knowledge from, a Takfeeri & ISIS sympathiser for saying what the Najdi Imams and myself said?

If you ask me, I believe this Fuwaysiq is a Deobandi larper who has never read a complete work of this “Shaykh” whom he claims to take knowledge from.

He just said that he takes knowledge from him to aid him in his squabble with SPUBs and ARH over the issue of Khuruj

And so it would not surprise me if Turayfi is labelled by this Fuwaysiq Takfeeri/ISIS sympathiser.

But doing this will make it even worse for him as it will confirm that he claimed to be a “student of a Takfeeri/ISIS sympathiser” 🤣🤣

And this is just the start. There will more Ilzaamaat coming for this “Athari Hanafi” Fuwaysiq.

And Allah knows best