What are your comments on the visit of Shaykh Falāḥ Al-Mundakār and Sālim aṭ-Ṭawīl to Shaykh Rabī‘?
The response to this is from several angles.
The first angle: Shaykh Rabī‘ حفظه الله allows entrance to everyone, from the [likes of] those who desire advice and those who are working, ya‘nī, toward rectification and guidance. Thus, it is not befitting [for one] to infer a recommendation [from] Shaykh Rabī‘ as a result of [someone] merely visiting him.
And here I say, and this is the second matter, as Shaykh Rabī‘ constantly says:
A persons actions and statements are a recommendation for him.
[So] it is these [things] that are an endorsement [for him]; if Shaykh Rabī‘ recommended him and he does or practices evil, [then] the recommendation of Shaykh Rabī‘ does not benefit him.
The third matter, ya‘nī, is that one dreads [the fact that] many of those who are in opposition crave these recommendations, ya‘nī, to obtain or in an effort to [receive] a pardon from many of the people with the likes of a great deal of these acts, visiting the mashāyikh, or, or, to simply praise the shaykh. So surely this is not considered a recommendation, even if a scholar recommends him, until his actions endorse him. Even if a scholar recommends him, [NOT] until his statements and actions endorsed him.
The fourth matter, naturally some of them infer, based upon these visits, an accusation upon Aḥmad Bāzmūl of lying in his quoting from Shaykh Rabī‘. [That is Shaykh Aḥmad saying:] "Indeed Shaykh Rabī‘ said such and such and so forth." So, I say firstly, as has preceded with us, I nor Shaykh Rabī‘ [have anything to do] with this quote. We have disregarded [this]. I disputed with Sālim aṭ-Ṭawīl in relation to [some] verbal or written speech of his. And I clarified his errors. Also, I requested from everyone, whether Sālim aṭ-Ṭawīl or anyone who admonishes me in regards to that refutation. If you find in my speech exceeding the boundaries, or oppression, or injustice, or an error, then indeed I [will] recant from it. If it was the truth [meaning that which is correct], then surely it is obligatory upon all of us to follow the truth.
The subsequent matter, Shaykh Rabī‘, this visiting him is not considered a recommendation for Sālim aṭ-Ṭawīl. And it is not correct to infer that by it. And they infer, as a result of Shaykh Rabī‘ saying to Sālim aṭ-Ṭawīl write on [the website] Saḥāb; we say Shaykh Rabī‘ constantly says, and this well known from him, to those in opposition, do such and such if you are truthful. When Shaykh Rabī‘ requested from Shaykh Sālim aṭ-Ṭawīl to write a refutation upon ‘Aly al-Ḥalaby, post it on Saḥāb and rule ‘Aly [al-] Ḥalaby an innovator(1). Sālim aṭ-Ṭawīl did not do any of this, rather he posted refutations upon ‘Abd-ur-Raḥmān ‘Abd-ul-Khāliq or other than him. So he did not comply to the request of Shaykh Rabī‘. He did not comply to the request of Shaykh Rabī‘. Consequently, and with this matter I will complete [my] speech. From the wisdom of Allāh, تباركَ وتعالى, [that He سبحانه وتعالى allowed] one of the brothers, and he is Ḥasan ash-Sharrāḥ, [to] record the entire meeting. And therein is the advice from Shaykh Rabī‘ to Sālim aṭ-Ṭawīl, [Shaykh Rabī‘] reminding him, it is upon you to rule al-Ḥalaby an innovator, upon you is such and such, refute al-Ḥalaby and post it on Saḥāb. And Saḥāb is open for you to do so. This recording is on hand and it is a vocal recording in voice of Shaykh Rabī‘. And Shaykh Rabī‘ was informed about the recording and thus he affirmed it. So, he affirmed it, may Allah reward him, and did not disapprove of it. When the brothers went to him, he agreed with them and confirmed it, and he did not disapprove of them [doing] this recording. Hence, it is not befitting to infer, by this visit, a recommendation for Sālim aṭ-Ṭawīl until, our brother, Shaykh Sālim aṭ-Ṭawīl's statements and actions, [which] conform to the salafy minhaj, endorse him; so if he has not ceased to [remain] in his state of falsehood, then he is humiliated/shaded beneath the advice of the scholars and a recommendation is not direct at him. And there is no doubt [that] the brothers in Kuwait, may Allāh reward them, indeed ya‘nī, came [forward] with some dangerous recordings of Sālim aṭ-Ṭawīl's disapproval and condemnation of the methodology of refutations. And he says,
I am upon [or from] the school of Shaykh ‘Uthaymīn, not upon [or from] the school of Shaykh Rabī‘. As though he intends [by this that] Shaykh ‘Uthaymīn [did] not transverse upon the [path and] methodology of refuting. And this is an error. Surely, if we looked at the methodology of Shaykh ‘Uthaymīn, ya‘nī, in relation to principles of salafiyyah in refuting ahl-ul-bid‘ah, he refuted them in many places, rather he refuted them with severe refutations. Ya‘nī his position رحمه الله on this topic was unwavering, [strict]! In opposition to the false impression [taken from Sālim aṭ-Ṭawīl's] speech, that refutations are not from the school of Shaykh ‘Uthaymīn, and there was no refutation of those who were in opposition [to that which is correct]. This contradicts the reality [of the affair]. It is this speech, the same speech I recorded or rather that I refuted Sālim aṭ-Ṭawīl [about] in previous gatherings. Indeed this is a form of reminding and review. Peace and blessing of Allāh upon our Prophet Muḥammad and upon his family and all his companions.
We refer the reader to the speech of our shaykh Muḥammad Bāzmūl حفظه الله refuting a doubt that has emerged.
- Aqeedah and Minhaj