is stephane lacroix truly an expert on salafism?

THE TALES OF LACROIX COMMENTED BY THE WORKS OF SHAIKH AL-ALBANI The Response the Sciences Po Institution does not want you to read…

Clarifying the Islamophobic Fallacies of Stéphane Lacroix, self-proclaimed “Salafi-expert”

and Professor at Sciences Po University

THE TALES OF LACROIX COMMENTED BY THE WORKS OF SHAIKH AL-ALBANI

1

Here at Sciences-Po in Paris, professors have been known to exploit the lucrative industry of islamophobia to start off their careers

hroughout Nicolas Sarkozy’s presidential term,

France has not only witnessed an outburst of

islamophobia in its mass media and on its political

scene, even its most ‘prestigious’ universities have been

contaminated with this century’s new plague.

“Sarkozysm” has produced a large number of self-

proclaimed ‘Islamic experts’ who are openly waging a

campaign aimed at discrediting the French Muslim

community.

Today, ‘academic articles’ on Islam

and its various groups have clearly

revealed that any ignoramus can

thrust himself headlong into the

complex field of Islamic sects and

their religious differences without

having the slightest idea of what

they're writing about. While studying

the works of these so-called

islamologists and pseudo Middle East

specialists, one can only conclude

that the overwhelming majority of

them are incompetent charlatans

exploiting valuable research money from universities like

Princeton, Cambridge, Oxford, la Sorbonne and

Sciences-Po by issuing amateurish articles that often

contain self-invented stories, unverified facts or even

blatant lies. In France, an elite of secular

fundamentalists1 have engaged upon a media vendetta

against Muslims who refuse to assimilate to the French

über-culture and abide by its norms. Exploiting the

ignorance of the masses, these new generation

orientalists have succeeded in demonizing a specific part

of France’s Muslim community, describing them in

French mainstream media as Islamists, fanatics,

fundamentalists etc.2

Reporting on Islam and its sects has become a “profit

guaranteed” business; but amazingly, almost every single

one of these ‘Islam experts’ is unable to perform routine

academic research in the original Arabic books and

studies which are the prime source for anyone who

wishes to study the origins, influence and development of

contemporary Islamic sects. There is probably no other

1 Considered from amongst the most active French islamophobes are

Jacques Myard, André Gerin, Jean-Marie Le Pen, Manuel Valls,

Bernard Rougier, Caroline Fourest, George Freche, Jean-François

Copé, Bernard Henry Lévy, Nicolas Sarkozy, Alain Finkielkraut,

Fadela Amara, Marine Le Pen and Siham Habchi. 2 Note that religious Jews, contrary to the Muslims who overtly

practice Islam, are always described as ‘orthodox’, not as

‘fundamentalists’.

domain of specialization in academic circles where

illiteracy of the primal language on which its study is

based doesn’t seem to pose a problem with becoming an

“expert” in the field. Moreover, their incapacity to

perform basic or proper research doesn't seem to bother

them in the least. The militants of French islamophobia

mainly recycle the old ambiguities of their orientalist

predecessors, adding their own personal touch and setting

out farfetched argumentations. They are well aware that

they can write down unsubstantiated articles without

having to either justify themselves for it, or take into

consideration the feelings of the Muslims they write

about as they have become France’s new second-class

citizens.

In this article we’re taking a closer

look into the works of French

‘political Islam specialist’ Stéphane

Lacroix, who is a well-known and

fervent opponent of the Saudi Royal

family and of French Salafis, since

they all refuse to blindly comply with

French secularism and Western

values. As many Sciences-Po

professors, Mr. Lacroix has a problem

with Islam, and even more with those

practicing it3. In his articles, he often portrays Muslims

who put their religion into practice as intellectually

bankrupt people who have left behind rational thinking.

On the other hand, he describes Arab secularists who

have blindly assimilated themselves into Western ideals

as very courageous and daring intellectuals4.

While scrutinizing the writings of Stéphane Lacroix, one

regrettably comes to the conclusion that this Sciences-Po

professor has no qualms about fabricating stories in order

to sustain his distorted islamophobic ideologies…

3 In March 2007, Stéphane Lacroix participated in the xenophobic and

islamophobic seminar “The Role of Civil Society in Advocating

Reform in the Arab World” organized by the Foreign Policy Centre

(FPC) in London. As all good islamophobes, Lacroix claims “civil

societies” have the right to impose reforms on the "primitive

societies" of the Arabs. 4 In his crusade to liberalize the holy places occupied by the Muslims,

Stéphane Lacroix gave a speech at the Norwegian Institute for

International Affairs he named “The Prospects for Religious-Political

Liberalization in Saudi Arabia”.

T


2

After having fled Albania, al-Albani’s family first settled in this house in Damascus.

…and this is the house in which Shaikh al-Albani was raised as a child.

The Revenge of Shaikh Nasir Al-Din Al-Albani

Muhammad Ibn Nuh Nadjati, better known as Shaikh

Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani was undoubtedly one

of the most cherished and notable Islamic scholars of the

20th century. As a young boy, he fled Albania with his

family due to the religious oppression of the brutal

dictator Ahmed Zogolli5 in much the

same way French Muslims who wish

to openly practice their religion are

currently emigrating to Muslim

countries to escape Sarkozy’s anti-

Muslim policies. Al-Albani’s family

chose Syria to be their new homeland

and very soon Muhammad Nasir al-

Din buried himself in the study of

hadith sciences. In Damascus, he

eventually became known for his

tremendous zeal in the field of hadith

research to such a degree that the

administration of the Thahiriya-

library placed a private room at the

Shaikh’s disposal and granted him a

key to the library in which he spent

most of his time6. Al-Albani, who

became a world recognized scholar in

the field of hadith sciences, later

traveled to Saudi Arabia, where he

taught at the esteemed Medina

University, and eventually to Jordan

where he finally died in the midst of

his books doing that which was most precious to him:

researching hadith. As al-Albani passed away, Muslims

from all over the world lost one of the greatest men of

knowledge and many mourners turned out for the funeral

of this exceptional scholar.

During his life, Shaikh al-Albani was harassed by

numerous islamophobes, polytheists and sectarian

fanatics for calling to the prophetic tradition and

exposing the false teachings of deviant Islamic sects. In

his books, al-Albani spent quite some time defending

himself against the numerous false allegations he had to

cope with and which, as he stated on many occasions,

took a lot of his precious time:

5 This Albanian secularist dictator, known to have his political rivals

assassinated, pursued a policy of close collaboration with Fascist

Italy. His royal dictatorship was characterized by a combination of

despotism and Western secularist reform in which he practiced

oppressive policies adopting Western-style civil, commercial, and

penal codes. 6 See Official Biography of Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani:

www.alalbany.net/albany_serah.php

“It has now been more than half a century during which

we notice the slander taking on a new form every year.

Each year something repeats itself, something is again

made up (against me) and none of these people ever

come to me directly…”7

Regrettably, the slander against Shaikh al-Albani also

continued after his death. A few years

ago, an attempt was made to

indirectly link him to the cruel 1979

Muhammad al-Qahtani attack of the

Mecca Mosque8. Others have

portrayed this erudite scholar as

someone rejecting independent

reasoning, and recently in France the

Albanian scholar has been viciously

libeled in a critique written by

Stéphane Lacroix entitled “Al-

Albani’s Revolutionary Approach to

Hadith”9.

The works of Shaikh al-Albani

provide sufficient material to unravel

the slanderous accusations in Lacroix'

article. This reply shall therefore

mainly be confined to the words of

Shaikh al-Albani which, even after his

death, still prove to be a strong

refutation of islamophobic articles

written by the bigoted proponents of

French secularism who attempt to

undermine the reputation of the Muslim faith by

slandering Islam’s leading lights.

Origins of Salafism…?

As most institutionalized islamophobes, Professor

Lacroix labels orthodox Islam as ‘Wahhabism’, thus

portraying it to be an Islamic sect based on the teachings

of Shaikh Muhammad Abdul-Wahhab. In his article, he

described ‘Wahhabism’ as:

“…the discourse produced and upheld by the official

Saudi religious establishment.”

In the first instance, Stéphane Lacroix considers

‘Wahhabism’ a discourse produced by the official Saudi

religious establishment, he then makes a distinction with

Salafism and states:

7 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “As-Salafiya wal Madhahib”

[Salafiya and Madhabs], p.103 8 See ‘Part 1’ of the “Thomas Hegghammer under the

Sledgehammer”-series (forthcoming). 9 See ISIM Review 21, p.6-7

http://www.alalbany.net/albany_serah.php


3

The store of al-Albani’s father where the Shaikh learned the trade of repairing watches.

Later on, al-Albani became independent and opened his own watch repair shop in Damascus.

“As opposed to Wahhabism, Salafism refers here to all

the hybridations that have taken place since the 1960s

between the teachings of Muhammad bin ‘Abdul-Wahhab

and other Islamic schools of thought.”

So ‘Wahhabism’ is a school of thought and Salafism took

place in the 1960’s…very interesting10

. This reminds me

of an earth-shattering statement made by Dounia

Bouzar11

when invited to speak in

front of the 2009 fact-finding

mission12

set up to deprive French

Muslim women of their right to dress

according to their religion. In her

declaration, she stated, that the niqab13

was an innovation that was forced

upon women by certain Saudi scholars

at the beginning of the 20th century!

Islamophobia and the documented

history of Islam are clearly

incompatible and this explains why

islamophobes are unable to place

Salafism in a historical context.

In several of his articles, Mr. Lacroix

uses the term ‘Wahhabi

jurisprudence’. For him to come up

with a newly invented madhab which

is not mentioned in a single book of

Islamic jurisprudence is putting his

reputation of ‘Islam-researcher’ at

stake. It becomes clear that due to

their lack of serious study and

thorough research, many ‘Islamic and Middle East

historians’ are confusing their readers even more when

attempting to describe Salafism. Therefore, let us leave

10 Lacroix’ claim that ‘Salafism refers to all the hybridations that have

taken place since the 1960s’ is in contradiction with his own statement

in an interview with the French islamophobic newspaper “Le Figaro”

where he recently alleged that ‘Salafism’ was born in the 18th century

(See article « Les Salafistes en France restent dans leur bulle » Le

Figaro, 12/10/2012). This is only one of the numerous contradictions

that shows the incompetence of professor Lacroix who, throughout his

articles, falls further and further into a quagmire of confusion. 11 Dounia Bouzar is a former youth leader who became ‘Islam-

specialist’ thanks to her experience with French Suburban juvenile

delinquents. 12 In June 2009 the French National Assembly appointed an assembly

of 32 MPs to a six-month fact-finding mission which turned into a

modern day inquisition Tribunal in which a group of fanatic

xenophobes demonized niqab-wearing women in order to justify an

anti-niqab law. Eric Raoult, the person who shaped the fact-finding

mission against the Islamic full-body veil, was arrested on October

12th 2012 after his wife lodged several complaints of domestic

violence against him. During the fact-finding mission, Eric Raoult

declared on several occasions he wanted to defend the ‘oppressed

women under their niqab’. 13 The niqab is what is currently being described as the Islamic full-

body veil.

behind Stéphane and Dounia in secularist-wonderland

and see what the true specialists from within the Islamic

sciences have to say on the issue. In his works, Shaikh al-

Albani made it clear on many occasions that the origins

of Salafiya are historically anchored going all the way

back to the beginning of Islam:

“In past and present, many scholars have used the

nomination of ‘The call to Salafiya’.

Some might call it the Call of those

who advocate the prophetic Sunnah,

others may name it the Call of Ahl al-

Hadith. And these are all nominations

that indicate a single meaning. A lot

of people in the Muslim community,

today as well in the past, have often

been unmindful of it; or maybe they

were aware of it but didn’t foster it in

the way it deserved to be.”14

Indeed, the affiliation to Salafiya is

very ancient; it is widely known and

can be traced back in the works of the

earliest scholars as well as in present-

day Islamic literature. But if Salafism

doesn’t refer to Lacroix’ imaginary

hybrids that took place since the

1960s, then what is it? Shaikh al-

Albani explains it in a simple and yet

very clear manner:

“Salafiya is Islam in its correct

understanding; it invites people to hold on to their

original Islamic belief and doesn’t single out one group

without the other. In its call to the Quran and the

prophetic tradition, it doesn’t distinguish between the

cultivated person and the illiterate, between the educated

person and the uneducated”15

Indeed, Salafiya is nothing new. Al-Albani explains the

misconception of many who consider that the origins of

Salafism go back to Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-

Wahhab or Ibn Taymiya:

“Some might say that the call of Salafism is new, or a

development, and that the first person who affiliated

himself to it was Shaikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiya and after

him Ibn Abdul-Wahhab in the present era. This

conception is entirely wrong. Rather, it is a fabrication

14 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Ousoul Al-Da’wa Al-Salafiya”

[Principles in the Call of Salafiya], p. 13 15 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Shubah Hawl Al-Salafiya”

[Ambiguities about Salafiya] p.130


4

The entrance of the “al-Thahiriya” library in Damascus in which the Shaikh did his research.

In the library-room that was put at Shaikh Al-Albani’s disposal, he would often spend more than 15 hours a day.

since the call of Salafism is the correct original call of

Islam itself...”16

Salafiya and Sectarianism

Salafism differs with Islamic sects in the fact that it refers

back to the understanding of the Prophet’s companions

and major scholars of the first three centuries after the

revelation17

:

“The Call of Salafiya is based upon the

knowledge of the Quran and the

Sunnah following the understanding of

the pious predecessors who were

present during the (first) three

generations of whom their

righteousness the Prophet testified to

in the famous hadith: ‘The best of

people are those of my generation, then

the generation following them and then

the generation after them’. The four

Imams18

and the other scholars who

lived before, during or a little after

their time all belong to the great

scholars of the pious predecessors. And

they are the ones we follow in our call

to Islam.”19

Hence, Salafiya can simply be defined

as orthodoxy or as Islam in its original

form since it is based on the

understanding of the people who were

closest to the period of revelation.

However since the three first

generations passed, Islamic sects have increased in

number and have developed their own specific way of

understanding the Quran and the prophetic Sunnah. But,

as Shaikh al-Albani explains, all Islamic sects will still

always claim their affiliation to the two sources of

Islamic revelation:

“The characteristic of this group of people (i.e. Ahl al-

Sunnah) is not restricted to their affiliation of applying

the Quran and Sunnah because not one sect, in the past

or present, could ever disassociate themselves from being

affiliated to the Quran and the Sunnah…and therefore I

say that all the Islamic groups and sects mentioned by

the Prophet or to whom he referred in the (previous)

16 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Durus Lil Shaikh Nasir Al-

Din Al-Albani” (Shabaka al-Islamiya) 17 Several Islamic sects also claim to adhere to Salafiya, but their

actions nullify their claim of correct adherence. 18 Imam Abu Hanifa, Malik , al-Shafi’ee and Ahmed. 19 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Shubah Hawl Al-Salafiya”


hadith, all of them agree upon affiliating themselves to

the Quran and the Sunnah”20

There indeed seems to be no difference amongst sects as

far as their attachment to the Quran and Sunnah.

However, they greatly differ in their comprehension:

“In today’s society we live with many groups which all

claim true affiliation to the religion of Islam and all

believe that Islam is based upon the Quran and the

Sunnah. However, the vast majority of

them do not agree on following the way

of the companions and those who

followed them in righteousness…”21

A typical trait of Islamic sects is that

they follow their founder in their

understanding of Islam; Salafis, on the

other hand, do not only base their

comprehension on the most authentic

of Islamic sources, they also study the

works of the scholars in the first three

generations so as to attain the proper

and original understanding of their

religion. They don’t blindly follow

these scholars but use their works in

order to attain a correct understanding

of Islam:

“We consider the great scholars as

being a means and we see them as

intermediaries who convey knowledge

of Allah and his Prophet . We do not

follow them for who they are (but for

what they were upon). Moreover, we do not consider

following them as one of our objectives since the only

intention is to know what the Prophet was upon.

Meaning that the objective is to know what has been

revealed to him in the Quran or what he has clarified in

his Sunnah.”22

According to al-Albani, all the alien ways of

understanding the two religious sources have led to the

Muslim community being divided as it is today:

“Therefore I say that the lack in returning to the

understanding, ideas and views of our pious

20 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Ousoul Al-Da’wa Al-Salafiya”

[Principles in the Call of Salafiya], p.18 21 Ibid, p.35 22 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Shubah Hawl Al-Salafiya”



5

The primary school Shaikh al-Albani attended before his father taught him the Quran and the Hanafi madhab.

The entrance of the same school in Damascus which was initially an orphanage.

predecessors, constitutes the main factor in the division

of the Muslims into various sects and ‘madhabs’.”23

Al-Albani repeatedly stated that the reason why the

Islamic community needs to return to the understanding

of the first three generations is because they are the ones

who conveyed Islam to the rest of the world in its correct

and original form24

. He understood that, in order to avoid

division and friction in the Muslim Ummah, it is essential

to have one united way of understanding Islam.

It needs to be stressed that this way of

understanding Islam has always been

present and can be found in the works

of the notable Islamic scholars

throughout the past fourteen centuries.

Returning to the understanding of the

first three generations is indeed nothing

new and Shaikh al-Albani often

referred back to the statement of one of

the earliest scholars of Islam, Imam

Malik, in which he said: “What was

not part of the religion in the past,

cannot be part of the religion today,

and the later generations of our

community will only be rectified by that

which has rectified the first

generations”25

. Al-Albani followed the

traditional way of the salaf in knowing

that this was the only way the Muslim

community would remove itself from

its wretched situation.

But if Salafiya is as old as the religion

of Islam itself, or indeed the original

form of the religion itself, then why are Muslims so

unfamiliar with it these days? Shaikh al-Albani explains

that the causes of this primarily lay in the fact that so

many are blindly following a particular school of

thought:

“The reason for this is that our community underwent

many centuries in which a solidified form of ‘Madhabic’

blindly following got embedded into the hearts of the

people who affiliate themselves with Ahl al-Sunnah.”26

23 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, ”Ousoul Al-Da’wa Al-Salafiya”

[Principles in the Call of Salafiya], p.35 24 Ibid, p.46 25 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Al-Fatawa Al-Manhajihya Lil-

Albany” [al-Albani’s Fatawa on Manhaj issues] p.85 26 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Ousoul Al-Da’wa Al-Salafiya”

[Principles in the Call of Salafiya], p. 14

Shaikh al-Albani often complained about the widespread

ignorance amongst his fellow Muslims which occurred

after having neglected their religion and its study. He

stated that many have fallen into deep ignorance to such

an extent that they are no longer affected while reading

the Quran or studying the source texts of the prophetic

Sunnah.27

It needs to be said that ignorance in the Muslim society

always had pernicious and historic consequences and

even facilitated Western colonization of the Muslim

world. Shaikh al-Albani explained that

it is not permissible for Muslims to be

satisfied with their situation in which

they are unaware of their fundamental

religious beliefs. Following the

teachings in the Quran and Sunnah, al-

Albani always asserted that today’s

ignorance within the Muslim

community is what is keeping them in

humiliation.28

Debunking the Wahhabi Myth

Stéphane Lacroix would have done a

much better job in writing his article

had he at least read some of Shaikh al-

Albani’s books. He probably would’ve

avoided all the trouble in falsely

defining Salafiya and certainly

wouldn’t have attributed the statements

of Shaikh al-Albani relating to

‘Wahhabism’ which the professor

describes as an Islamic sect founded by

Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab and his heirs:

“Wahhabism initially refers to the religious tradition

developed over the centuries by the ulama of the official

Saudi religious establishment founded by the heirs of

Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab.”

If ‘Wahhabism’ is a religious tradition developed over

the centuries after Shaikh Ibn Abdul-Wahhab, then it

would be interesting to know in what way it is different

from the original teachings of Islam conveyed by the

Prophet and in which aspects it contradicts the Quran

and prophetic Sunnah. Islamophobes have always refused

to address this issue and are accused by many of labeling

orthodox Islam as ‘Wahhabism’ as it allows them to

obliquely denigrate the Muslim belief without having to

mention the term Islam. It isn’t surprising that the

27 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “As-Salafiya wal Madhahib”

[Salafiya and Madhabs], p.101 28 Ibid, p.106


6

The interior court of the “al-Thahiriya”-library where Shaikh al-Albani received al-Ghimari

Here inside the library, al-Albani informed al-Ghimari of the contents of the books.

modern origins of the term Wahhabism29

can be traced

back to the insulting poetry of the Deobandee sect in

Pakistan and India in the beginning of the 20th century

30.

Shaikh al-Albani went even further back in history and

mentioned that the term 'Wahhabi' was used as a

propaganda tool by the Ottomans:

“The use of this term was part of the politics conducted

by the Ottoman Empire after a man of

knowledge and reform named

Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab

started to call the people in some parts

of the Najd region”31

The use of ‘Wahhabism’ was later

adopted within the bigoted works of

Islamophobes and modern-day

orientalists. It has become a very

popular term in today’s anti-Islam

propaganda machine. Some use the

term to describe Takfiris, those who

wrongly declare others disbelievers

without using the guidelines of Islam,

others use it in general to label bearded

men and niqab-wearing women, and a

few even consider it to be a political

system. Every ‘islamologist’ has his

own personal way of defining and

understanding what they call

‘Wahhabism’. In his article, Stéphane

Lacroix begins by portraying al-Albani

as a Wahhabi and states:

“Common knowledge considers Shaikh Nasir al-Din al-

Albani to be a staunch proponent of Wahhabism.”

Rather, it is common knowledge that Mister Lacroix is

obviously mistaken in his statement. Shaikh al-Albani,

and all other Sunni scholars do not use the term Wahhabi

and see it to be an offense. In his well-known explication

of ‘Tahawiya’ Shaikh al-Albani mentions:

“And amongst the prime evidences that prove the Shaikh

(i.e. al-Tahawi) to be a salafi, is that his enemies call him

29 Previously, the term Wahhabiya had already been used in the 9th

century to describe the followers of the Moroccan Kharidji Abdul-

Wahhab Ibn Abdul-Rahman Ibn Rustum who lead the I’badiya sect in

Morocco. 30 The enmity of the Deobandi-sect towards Shaikh Abdul-Wahhab

lies in the fact that the Shaikh established that Islam forbids the

worshipping of graves, trees etc. See al-Shams al-Salafi al-Afghani

“Al-Maaturidya wa Mawqifuhum min Al-Asmaa wa Al-Sifaat” Vol.3,

p.312, 313 31 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Fatawa Al Shaikh Al-Albani

wa Muqaranatuha bi Fatawa Al-Ulema” [Shaikh Al-Albani's Fatwa's

compared to those of other scholars], p. 12

a ‘Wahhabi’. This term is a concocted accusation

directed towards anyone who follows the path of the

predecessors, calls to the prophetic tradition and rejects

blindly following.”32

In his “Silsila al-Ahadith al-Da’ifa”, Shaikh al-Albani

mentions a fragment of a letter dating back to 1959 in

which one of his opponents described him as follows:

“Nasir al-Din al-Albani then arrived

in Damascus where he learned Arabic

and began studying the science of

Hadith in which he gained mastery. He

greatly benefitted from a library that

contained precious hadith

manuscripts. Last year, when I paid a

visit to this library, he was the one who

provided me the books I requested and

he informed of what they dealt with.

And he, Shaikh al-Albani, is a wicked

man and a pure Wahhabi Taymi…And

if it were not for his vicious madhab

and stubbornness, he would’ve been

one of the unique people in his time in

the field of Hadith science, despite the

fact that he is still running a watch

repair store…”33

Shaikh al-Albani and all other

contemporary orthodox scholars of

Islam have regularly been named

Wahhabis by their enemies. Equally, in

his book “Tahdhir al-Sajid Min Ittigadh al-Qubur

Masajid”, al-Albani illustrated how some of today’s

orientalists describe the people of the Sunnah as

Wahhabis.34

The Swindle of a French Neo-Orientalist Professor

Further on, Stéphane Lacroix attributes the following

statement to Shaikh al-Albani:

“More importantly, al-Albani’s claim of being more

faithful to the spirit of Wahhabism than Ibn ‘Abdul-

Wahhab himself made the former’s ideas very popular

among Salafi youth.”

32 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Sharh Aqida Al-Tahawiya”

[Explanation of the Creed of Tahawi], p.53 33 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-Da’ifa

Wal Madou’a Wa Atharouha Al-Sayyi’ Fil Umma” [Collection of

weak or invented hadiths and their evil effects on the Muslim

community] 4/6 34 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Tahdhir Al-Sajid Min Ittigadh

Al-Qubur Masajid” [Warning the Muslims against Turning the

Graves into Mosques], p. 102


7

Manuscript of “al-Thamar al-Mustatâb fi Fiqh al-Sunnah wal Kitab”, the first hadith evaluated book of Shaikh al-Albani.

Firsty, Salafi youth totally reject the Wahhabi-term

making it impossible for this statement to be true.

Secondly, Shaikh al-Albani never pronounced these

words and anyone who is acquainted with the writings of

Shaikh al-Albani knows that this could never have been

one of his claims. So where did Mr. Lacroix get this

statement from? Since he never mentioned any references

of Shaikh al-Albani’s statements, I personally contacted

him to ask where he found this statement. I repeated my

demand several times on several occasions35

.

Unfortunately, the professor stubbornly

refused to provide his sources. I

therefore performed additional research

into the works of al-Albani and came

across one of his statements in which

he complains about some grotesque

slurs of Ahmed al-Ghimari36

that were

aimed at him. Shaikh al-Albani

concluded this section in his book by

mentioning the following denigrating

statement of al-Ghimari:

“The one who considers Shaikh al-

Albani to be a Wahhabi is wrong, since

he is more partial to the spirit of

Wahhabism than Ibn Abdul-Wahhab

himself and more stubborn…”37

Here, Shaikh al-Albani explains that one of his biggest

opponents accuses him of being ‘more partial to the spirit

of Wahhabism than Ibn Abdul-Wahhab himself’. Mr.

Lacroix intentionally distorted this statement and

presented it as being a claim of al-Albani himself. Our

French ‘researcher’ simply took an insult of al-Ghimari

which he then attributed to Shaikh al-Albani to persuade

the reader that Shaikh al-Albani considered himself a

Wahhabi. The reason Lacroix didn’t reply to my several

requests for a reference of Shaikh al-Albani’s statement

is because he deliberately made up a lie which he then

used to trick the reader into believing that Salafi youth

were fond of Shaikh al-Albani since he called himself

more faithful to the spirit of ‘Wahhabism’ than Ibn

Abdul-Wahhab himself. In France, if you steal from one

author it is called plagiarism, if you steal from many, it is

research and if you make up statements the author never

said, it becomes ‘specialization’.

But why would Stéphane Lacroix tell such a flat-out lie?

Simply because he is obsessed with the term

35 Professor Lacroix was contacted by email at

[email protected] 36 Moroccan Shaikh who, according to al-Albani, leaned towards the

Shia-ideology. See Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Silsila Al

Ahadith Al-Da’ifa...”, Vol.6, p.212 37 Ibid, Vol.3, p. 15

‘Wahhabism’ and without depicting al-Albani as a self-

declared Wahhabi, a major part of his article would

become meaningless and his imaginary conjectures

would all fall apart.

One might wonder what Shaikh al-Albani’s reaction

would’ve been to this French professor who dared to call

him a staunch proponent of ‘Wahhabism’ and attributed

the insults of the Shaikh’s enemies to the Shaikh himself.

It is important to understand that the scholars of Saudi

Arabia fully agree with al-Albani in

his disapproval of the use of the term

‘Wahhabism’. For instance, the

previous Mufti of the Saudi Kingdom,

Shaikh Adbul-Aziz Ibn Baz, said that

the term ‘Wahhabi’ is only used by the

biased and ignorant opponents of

Islam38

. Shaikh Saleh al-Fawzan,

another major Saudi scholar, explicitly

stated that ‘Wahhabism’ doesn’t exist

due to the fact that Shaikh Muhammad

Ibn Abdul-Wahhab didn’t come up

with anything of his own as to

attribute this call to him. As a result, it

is clear that ‘Wahhabism’ is merely an

invented nickname to alienate people

from the works of Muhammad Ibn

Abdul-Wahhab and to portray him as

someone contradicting the previous Imams and having

his own madhab39

.

Wahhabism has today become a very popular myth in

islamophobic circles. One of the apparent reasons why

these new unrecognized terms are being used by

islamologists is simply because they aren’t scholastically

able to carry out comparative studies between the

ideologies of Islamic sects on one hand and the historic

works of Muslim scholars in past and present on the

other. History shows that Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab

didn’t come with a new religious tradition as many still

seem to think. To understand the reality of Muhammad

Ibn Abdul-Wahhab’s call to Islam, one first needs to go

back in history and study the condition of the Arabian

Peninsula in his time.

The Call of Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab al-Najdi

Prior to the call of Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-

Wahhab, the Najd-region found itself in a state of

widespread ignorance of most of Islam’s fundamental

teachings. These were Arabia’s ‘Dark Ages’, as many of

Islam’s core beliefs were scarcely taught and illiteracy

38 Abdul-Aziz Ibn Baz, “Fatawa Al-Shaikh Ibn Baz” [Fatwa

collection of Shaikh Ibn Baz], 3/1306 39 See the official website of Shaikh al-Fawzan under think link.

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.alfawzan.ws/AlFawzan/FatawaSearch/tabid/70/Default.aspx?PageID=2838


8

The Najd-region where Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab revived the call to Islam.

widely spread. People worshipped graves, statues and

trees, they used the dead as intermediaries between them

and their Lord and as a whole, their situation was in

many ways very similar to the original pre-Islamic period

of paganism40

.

It seems islamologists deliberately refuse to comment on

this era and if they do, they might describe it as

‘culturally rich’. This of course, constitutes an easy way

to simply ignore the fabulous achievements of Shaikh

Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab on an educational,

structural and political level.

Yet, it is in this historical context

that Ibn Abdul-Wahhab revived the

prophetic Sunnah, brought back the

original teachings of Islam and

started educating his people. Creed,

jurisprudence, Hadith, Tafsir and all

other religious sciences were revived

and taught again and greatly

benefited the community41

. Just like

Imam Ahmed, Ibn Taymiya and

others, Ibn Abdul-Wahhab was one

of Islam’s revivers who strived to

bring his community back to the correct practice and

understanding of Islam. Al-Albani mentions:

“It was Shaikh al-Islam Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab

who then revived this call in Najd, at a time the region

found itself in a state of tenebrous wickedness with

paganism being predominant throughout the country.

The region became enlightened due to the teachings of

Shaikh al-Islam (Ibn Taymiya) who he (i.e. Ibn Abdul-

Wahhab) benefited from by reading his books… ”42

Looking at these developments in the Najd-region within

a historical context, the call of Ibn Abdul-Wahhab

appears to be no more than an extension of the long

succession of Ahl al-Sunnah scholars starting out from

the Prophet’s companions, the major scholars in the three

first generations, the four Imams, the Muhaddithin and

then continuing on through Ibn Taymiya and his students

and all other major Islamic scholars43

. The teachings of

these scholars stand upon the same fundamental

ideological foundation to such a degree that several

40 Madiha Darwish, “Tarigh Al-Dawal Al-Sa’udiya” [History of the

Saudi State] 41 Dr. Abdul-Aziz Ibn Muhammad al-Hujaylan, “Al-Fiqh Wal-

Fuqaha Fil-Mamlaka Al-Arabiya Al-Sa’udiya...” [Jurisprudence and

Fiqh-Scholars in The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia], p.37 42 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Haqiqatu Al-Da’wa Al-

Salafiya” [The Reality of the Call to Salafiya] p.156 43 Saleh Ibn Muhammad Aal al-Shaikh, “Al-Minhaj Al-Fiqhi Li

A’imma Al-Da’wa Al-Salafiya Fi Najd” [The Jurisprudence-

Methodology of the Major Salafi Scholars in Najd], p. 93

Western ‘Islam specialists’ have described scholars like

Ibn Taymiya and al-Suyuti as Wahhabis despite Shaikh

Ibn Abdul-Wahhab being born several centuries after

them44

! If the call to Islam of all these scholars is

identified as Wahhabism, then the Prophet Muhammad

and his companions may as well be called Wahhabis

by such Islam specialists.

Nevertheless, professor Lacroix has another way of

seeing things. In his article, he builds up a conspiracy

theory by claiming that Shaikh al-Albani got into trouble

with the Saudi scholars because he supposedly

questioned their methodological

foundations:

“However, the opposition al-Albani

encountered from the Wahhabi

religious establishment was not

merely intellectual. By putting into

question the methodological

foundations upon which the

Wahhabis had built their

legitimacy, he was also challenging

their position in the Saudi religious

field.”

Here we see that as Lacroix’ scholastic hallucinations or

deceptions get more intense, Shaikh al-Albani is being

portrayed as having challenged the position of the Saudi

‘Wahhabi’ scholars by questioning their foundations and

this after allegedly being ‘more faithful to the spirit of

Wahhabism than Ibn Abdul-Wahhab himself’. Were they

afraid that this Albanian scholar was going to become the

Mufti of Saudi Arabia, the Minister of Religious Affairs,

or did they see him as a potential heir to the throne? In

any case, let’s have a closer look at the methodological

foundations Mr. Lacroix is talking about.

Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab, the successive

Najd-scholars as well as all other Saudi scholars didn’t

have independent principles; rather, they merely followed

the well-known methodological foundations45

exemplified by the Companions, the four Imams and the

scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah in the past46

. These happen to

be exactly the same principles Shaikh al-Albani

followed.

44 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-Sahiha”

[Collection of Correct Hadiths], 8/1 45 These foundations are: the Quran and Sunnah, the consensus, the

rulings of the prophet’s companions and juristic reasoning deduction

by analogy, See Saleh Ibn Muhammad Aal al-Shaikh, “Al-Minhaj Al-

Fiqhi…”, p.252-268 46 Saleh Ibn Muhammad Aal al-Shaikh, “Al-Minhaj Al-Fiqhi Li


Methodology of the Major Salafi Scholars in Najd], p. 251-256


9

The front cover of the first Islamic review for which Shaikh al-Albani wrote some articles.

‘Wahhabi’ Foundations?

The achievements of Shaikh Ibn Abdul-Wahhab will not

be understood — never mind appreciated — by those

who haven’t studied them along with the basic teachings

of Islam through the works of the orthodox Islamic

scholars by which proper correlation could be made

between their indistinguishable creed and methodology.

This leads many simple-minded analysts to consider the

works of Shaikh Ibn Abdul-Wahhab to be a new religion

which they then label as ‘Wahhabism’. Due to their

disregard for a comprehensive study of the texts of

revelation, they see the call of Ibn Abdul-Wahhab as

being a religious tradition that

wasn’t based on the major Islamic

references but on some other later

books. Stéphane Lacroix mentions

that:

“From its inception, Wahhabism has

established itself as a religious

tradition—at the core of which laid

a number of key books, both in creed

and law.”

Professor Lacroix is depicting the

legacy of Ibn Abdul-Wahhab as a

new independent religious tradition

based on his own works and those of his heirs. Shaikh

Ibn Abdul-Wahhab was definitely a reformer who

revived the Islamic sciences in the Arabian Peninsula, but

most of the books that lay at the core of the call of the

Saudi scholars, from the time of Shaikh Muhammad Ibn

Abdul-Wahhab until this very day, are works that date

back prior to the time of Ibn Abdul-Wahhab. As a whole,

the scholars of Najd benefited from the Ahl al-Hadith

scholars47

as can easily be deducted from their writings,

fatwas and statements48

.

More specifically, the books that are being taught in the

Kingdom are from major scholars all over the world. In

creed they didn’t only rely on the works of Ibn Abdul-

Wahhab but also greatly depended on Ibn Taymiya

(Syria 13th century C.E.) and his student Ibn Qayim

(Syria 13th century C.E.) as those who carried and upheld

the original beliefs of Islam. In the Arabic language one

of their main references is “al-Ajurrumiya” written by

the famous Moroccan scholar Muhammad Ibn Ajurrum

47 Al-Shafi’ee, Malik, Ahmed, Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, al-

Tirmidhi, al-Awza’i, al-Darimi, al-Dar al-Qutni, al-Bayhaqi, Ibn

Hazm, Ibn Hajr, Ibn Abdul-Bar, Ibn Taymiya, Ibn Qayim and other

scholars who showed consideration to hadith 48 Saleh Ibn Muhammad Aal al-Shaikh, “Al-Minhaj Al-Fiqhi Li


Methodology of the Major Salafi Scholars in Najd], p. 241-242

(14th century C.E.) and in jurisprudence they depended

significantly on the works of the Palestinian Shaikh

Abdul-Ghani al-Maqdisi (12th century C.E.). In hadith

they returned to the works of the Syrian scholar al-

Nawawi (13th century C.E.) and the Egyptian Muhaddith

Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (15th century C.E.) and in the

science of inheritance they primarily relied on “al-

Rahabiya” of the Iraqi scholar Muhammad al-Rahabi

(12th century C.E.).

49

This shows that the works of Najd-scholars throughout

time have always had an international dimension and

weren’t restricted, as mistakenly claimed, to some key

books of a Saudi religious tradition.

A Tribal Mob Taking Control of the

Arabian Peninsula!?

Yet professor Lacroix stubbornly

persists in his misrepresentation and

explains how the conspiracy of the

Saudi scholars took off with an

aristocracy:

“This tradition had been

monopolized by a small religious

aristocracy from Najd, first centered

around Muhammad bin ‘Abdul-

Wahhab and his descendants (known as the Al al-Shaikh)

before opening up to a small number of other families...

the members of this aristocracy would become the only

legitimate transmitters of the Wahhabi tradition; in this

context, independent scholars were excluded because

they had not received “proper ‘ilm” from “qualified”

ulama.”

He further implies that al-Albani’s “revolutionary

approach to hadith” was contrary to Saudi standards

since it led to the fact that:

“...the science of hadith can be measured according to

objective criteria unrelated to family, tribe, or regional

descent, allowing for a previously absent measure of

meritocracy.”

Stéphane Lacroix portrays the revival of Islam in Najd as

a religious aristocracy formed by an upper class family

endeavoring to monopolize Islam by favoring local

tribes. Hence, the Saudi state is all but a meritocracy due

to the self-imposed control of the religious ‘Wahhabi

mafia’. For sure, imagination can lead to many things and

49 Dr. Abdul-Aziz Ibn Muhammad al-Hujaylan, “Al-Fiqh Wal-


Fiqh-Scholars in The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia], p.39, 44.


10

Manuscript of al-Albani’s evaluation of the hadith collection ‘Sahih Abu Dawud’

then any means become acceptable in order to demonize

the Saudi scholars.

However, history disputes this claim, since records of the

Najd-scholars clearly establish that the only criterion for

achievement amongst the ulema has always been

knowledge of the various sciences of Islam. Tribal

descent or family connections have never turned anyone

into a religious scholar. We might for instance mention

King Abdul-Aziz who had great respect for the people of

knowledge and was known to give preference to the

scholars over his own brothers and sons50

.

Likewise, the large number of foreign

scholars who made it up to the highest

ranks of the Saudi religious

establishment51

is a clear proof that

tribalism and regional descent play no

role in being accepted as a scholar in

Saudi-Arabia. Moreover, professor

Lacroix is well aware that Sorbonne and

all other French universities would never

accept a Saudi-Arabian or Yemeni

professor teaching in their institute.

Islamophobes often try to 'arabize' the

religion of Islam by representing it as

being based on nationalism or tribalism.

Yet, never in the history of Islam has its

sciences been measured according to family, tribe, social

class, origin or descent. The greatest Islamic scholars and

hadith-narrators are a perfect illustration of this since the

majority of them were non-Arab and often very poor.

This however, hasn’t kept them from becoming the

holders and transmitters of the prophetic tradition. They

are the ones who conveyed hadith and other Islamic

knowledge to the rest of the world. Al-Bukhari, Muslim,

Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nassa’i, Ibn Majih were all

non-Arabs who laid down the foundational books of

hadith on which the entire Islamic Ummah depends

today.

Lacroix’ Haddadi Critique: Al-Albani vs. the Saudis

In proceeding to examine his article’s many claims we

see that Lacroix is now coming to the core message of his

article in which his conspiracy takes form throughout a

profound conflict between al-Albani and the Saudi

scholars:

50 Al-Zarkali, “Al-Wajiz”, p.197 51 Shaikh Muhammad Aman al-Jami (Ethiopia), Shaikh Abdul-Razzaq

al-A’fifi (Egypt), Shaikh Muhammad Ameen al-Shinqiti

(Mauretania), Shaikh Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani (Albania),

Shaikh Hammad al-Ansari (Mali), Shaikh Badiuddin Shah Sindi

(Pakistan), Shaikh Muhammad al-Harras (Egypt)...

“Al-Albani strongly disagrees with the Wahhabis—and

especially with their chief representatives, the ulama of

the Saudi religious establishment—when it comes to fiqh

(law).”

As a whole, Shaikh al-Albani didn’t disagree with the

Saudi scholars when it comes to fiqh, since their

methodology in proof-deduction was identical52

. He

definitely did differ with them in certain fatwas in the

same way all Sunni scholars differ with each other in

affairs of jurisprudence. This is nothing exceptional to

anyone who has a cursory knowledge of Islamic

scholarship through the centuries, and

merely shows that they make their own

ijtihad and are not blind-followers of a

certain historical school of juristic

principles or madhab. Moreover, these

differences didn’t lead to any enmity

between al-Albani and his Saudi co-

scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah as becomes

clear in the praise of the two chief

representatives of the Saudi ‘religious

establishment’ in al-Albani’s time. The

first one is Shaikh Ibn Baz who stated

that he never saw a hadith scholar in his

time like Shaikh al-Albani. The mufti

even admitted he benefitted a lot from

him and considered him to be as one of

the best scholars of his era53

. The second

one is Shaikh Ibn Uthaymin who called him the

Muhaddith of his era54

as well as the Muhaddith of the

Sham-region55

and praised him for his works in both

creed and jurisprudence56

.

The scholars in the Saudi Kingdom who refuted al-

Albani all explicitly made it clear in their responses that

their differences weren’t based on fundamental

contradictions and that they respected and loved Shaikh

al-Albani57

. One of them, Shaikh Muhammad Aman al-

Jami, stated in his two-tape refutation against al-Albani:

“Allah, the angels, and those who are present bear

witness for me that I state that I love Shaikh al-Albani for

the sake of Allah”58

.

52 Saleh Ibn Muhammad Aal al-Shaikh, “Al-Minhaj Al-Fiqhi Li


Methodology of the Major Salafi Scholars in Najd], p. 90 53 Shaikh Abdul-Aziz Ibn Baz, “Durus Lil Shaikh Abdul-Aziz Ibn

Baz” (Shabaka al-Islamiya), Lesson 17 54 Muhammad Ibn Salih al-Uthaymin, “Sharh Aqidatul Safariniya”

[Explanation of the Creed of Safarini] p.185 55 The Sham-countries are Lebanon, Palestine, Syria and Jordan 56 Muhammad Ibn Salih al-Uthaymin, “Al-Diya’ Al-Lami’ min

Khutab Al-Jawami’” [Glittering Lights from Friday Sermons] p.446 57 See Rabi’ Bin Hadi al-Madkhali, “A Lighthouse of Knowledge

from a Guardian of the Sunnah”, p.41 58 Ibid, p.39

http://www.troid.ca/store/product.php?productid=18803&cat=250&page=1

http://www.troid.ca/store/product.php?productid=18803&cat=250&page=1


11

Ibn Taymiya was confined in this fortress, more than seven centuries prior to al-Albani’s incarceration.

Likewise, Shaikh Al-Tuwayjari stated while refuting the

Albanian scholar, that ‘speaking against al-Albani

facilitates speaking against the Sunnah’59

. Despite

refuting al-Albani, these scholars all shared his

methodology and never accused him of having a

revolutionary approach to hadith.

More than a decade ago, a notorious Haddadi60

and

ruthless enemy of Shaikh al-Albani named Abdul-Lateef

Bashmel

attempted to exploit the

refutations of some Saudi scholars

against the Albanian Muhaddith to

tarnish his image and turn people away

from him. He tried to deceive people

into believing that the refutations of the

Saudi scholars against Shaikh al-Albani

were motivated by enmity and total

opposition. In doing so, he vigorously

strove to divide the unity amongst Salafi

scholars61

. The latter scholars exposed

Abdul-Lateef Bashmel’s deviations and

openly warned against him.

Today, Stéphane Lacroix is walking in

the footsteps of Abdul-Lateef Bashmel

following indistinguishable Haddadi

principles. In the same way, he is keen

on emphasizing the differences between al-Albani and

the Saudi scholars to tarnish their image. On one hand the

Saudi scholars are portrayed as being bigoted evildoers

who do not tolerate differences in opinion while al-

Albani is represented as a scholar whose revolutionary

approach to hadith formed an ideological basis for

extremists who end up committing terrorist attacks.

One might also wonder why Mr. Lacroix insists on

portraying all this ‘Saudi hostility’ that stretches all

imagination without ever making any mention on how al-

Albani truly clashed with the Syrian religious

establishment. Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani was

jailed twice in Syria after his opponents slanderously

reported him to the authorities. In the beginning of the

sixties he was imprisoned for a one month-period in the

fortress of Damascus, the very same place Ibn Taymiya

had been locked up seven centuries before. In 1967, al-

Albani was incarcerated for a second time, doing eight

months in the prison of al-Hasakah in the north-east of

Syria. All this seems to be of no importance to professor

Lacroix who only slanders the Saudi Kingdom in his

articles while praising westernized Saudis who advocate

59 Ibid 60 The Haddadi sect was founded by the Mahmoud al-Haddad, an

Egyptian accountant who was mainly known to libel the Sunni

scholars 61 Ibid, p.41

the import of an occidental constitution to get rid of

Islamic values in the Saudi Kingdom.

Understanding Ibn Abdul-Wahhab’s Adherence to

Hanbalism

Stéphane Lacroix considers that al-Albani differed with

his Saudi co-scholars due to their reliance on Hanbalism:

“There, al-Albani points to a

fundamental contradiction within the

Wahhabi tradition: the latter’s

proponents have advocated exclusive

reliance on the Quran, the Sunnah, and

the consensus of al-salaf al-salih (the

pious ancestors), yet they have almost

exclusively relied on Hanbali

jurisprudence for their fatwas—acting

therefore as proponents of a particular

school of jurisprudence, namely

Hanbalism.”

In another article of his he even alleges

that al-Albani reproaches blind-

following Hanbalism to the Saudi

scholars:

“The late Hanbalis, however, increasingly tended to

imitate (taqlid) former rulings by members of their

school, instead of practicing their own interpretation

(ijtihad) based on the Quran and the Sunna. This was one

of Albani’s main reproaches to the Wahhabis who

claimed ijtihad but tended to act as Hanbalis…”62

From the 16th C.E. century onwards, the scholars in the

Saudi Kingdom have been adhering to the madhab of

Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal concerning fiqh, while taking

into consideration the verdicts of Ibn Taymiya and Ibn

Qayim63

. Initially, the influence of Hanbalism was due to

the easy travel conditions encountered by the Saudi

students who, prior to Ibn Abdul-Wahhab, traveled to

Damascus (Syria) and Nablus (Palestine) where they took

knowledge from Hanbali scholars. They then returned to

the Najd-region to teach their people64

. However, one

needs to understand what is meant by their adherence to

Hanbalism. In a letter from Shaikh Abdullah al-Sana’ni

to Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab, the Yemeni

62 S. Lacroix and T. Hegghammer, “Rejectionist Islamism in Saudi

Arabia: The Story of Juhayman al-‘Utaybi Revisited”, p.4 63 Dr. Abdul-Aziz Ibn Muhammad al-Hujaylan, “Al-Fiqh Wal-


Fiqh-Scholars in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia], p.223 64 Dr. Abd-Allah al-Turki, “Al-Madhab Al-Hanbali” [The Hanbali

Madhab], Vol.1, p.291-295


12

Shaikh al-Albani’s manuscript of his “Collection of weak and invented hadiths”

scholar asked him in which way the Najd-scholars

adhered to the Hanbali madhab:

“What do you mean when you say that you are upon the

madhab of Imam Ahmed? Do you blindly follow him or

do you follow his methodology in making ijtihad?”

Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab

replied by saying that:

“All statements and actions should be

measured by the words and deeds of the

Prophet . That which agrees with it is

accepted, and that which opposes it is

rejected, no matter who it comes from.

There should be no precedence of

anyone’s opinion over the Quran and

prophetic Sunnah…We follow the

principles of Imam Ahmed in the way

Ibn Qayim has mentioned in his book

I’lam al-Muwaqi’in…this is what we

mean when we say that our madhab is

the madhab of Imam Ahmed.”65

Although the scholars of the Arabian

Peninsula have always given a lot of scholastic

consideration to the works of Imam Ahmed, they didn’t

blindly follow his madhab. Historic records all point to

the fact that they would abandon the madhab-ruling if it

was in contradiction with a hadith or any other clear

proof66

. The Hanbali madhab was used as a foundation in

jurisprudence since this was considered to be a

facilitating factor or mechanism. However, Shaikh Ibn

Abdul-Wahhab explicitly stated that his fatwas weren’t

restricted to a specific madhab:

“We do not confine ourselves to a specific madhab. If we

discover a solid proof in any of the four madhabs, we

accept it and cling to it.”67

He also mentioned that precedence should be given to the

Quran and prophetic Sunnah over the rulings of his

madhab:

65 Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab, “Al-Durar Al-Saniya Fil

Ajwiba Al-Najdiya”, [Exalted pearls in the replies of Najd] Vol.4,

p.21 66 Dr. Abdul-Aziz Ibn Muhammad al-Hujaylan, “Al-Fiqh Wal-


Fiqh-Scholars in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia], p.43 and Saleh Ibn

Muhammad Aal al-Shaikh, “Al-Minhaj Al-Fiqhi Li A’imma Al-Da’wa

Al-Salafiya Fi Najd” [The Jurisprudence-Methodology of the Major

Salafi Scholars in Najd], p. 361 67 Dr. Abdul-Muni’m Abdul-Athim Khayrah, “Al-Qada Fil-Mamlaka

Al-Arabiya Al-Sa’udiya” [The Judiciary in the Kingdom of Saudi

Arabia], p.68

“If we come across a clear text from the Quran or

Sunnah that hasn’t been abrogated nor specified, a text

that doesn’t contradict anything more substantial and

has been consented to by one of the four Imams68

, then

we accept this ruling and abandon the madhab…we do

not blindly follow the scholars in any issue because

everybody’s statement may be accepted or rejected,

except the words of the Prophet .”69

Ibn Abdul-Wahhab was followed by

the scholars of the Saudi Kingdom

who required their students to abandon

the madhab if any conflicting religious

proof had become clear to them70

.This

coincided with the methodology of

Shaikh al-Albani who mentioned:

“We therefore say that by clinging on

to everything of the Sunnah that proves

to be correct, even if it contradicts

some rulings of the imams, one cannot

be accused of intentionally

contradicting their madhab, nor their

methodology …”71

Just like al-Albani72

, Ibn Abdul-Wahhab would benefit

from all of the four madhabs and just like Shaikh al-

Albani73

, he rejected the narrow-mindedness of madhabic

blind-following by always giving precedence to the

proofs of the Quran and Sunnah over the madhab-ruling.

His books contain many fatwas in which he opposed the

rulings of the Hanbali School74

; and this is also the

methodology of the Saudi scholars who came after him

until this very day75

. They adhered to Hanbalism as a

general framework of juristic principles without zealotry

or blindly following and their concluding reference

would always be the Quran and the hadiths of the

68 Shaikh al-Albani didn’t see this part to be a condition. However, the

fatwas in which al-Albani contradicted the four madhabs all together

are so few that they never could have led to a profound conflict with

the Saudi scholars. 69 Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab, “Al-Durar Al-Saniya Fil

Ajwiba Al-Najdiya”, [Exalted pearls in the replies of Najd] Vol.4,

p.10 70 Saleh Ibn Muhammad Aal al-Shaikh, “Al-Minhaj Al-Fiqhi Li


Methodology of the Major Salafi Scholars in Najd], p.364-366 71 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Asl Sifat Salat Al-Nabi”, [The

Description of the Prophet’s Prayer, Original Version], p.32 72 Ibid, p.23 73 See Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Haqiqatu Al-Da’wa Al-



Methodology of the Major Salafi Scholars in Najd], p.363 and “Al-

Durar...”, Vol.7, p.285 75 Sayid Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim, “Tarigh Al-Mamlaka Al-Sa’udiya”,

[History of the Saudi Kingdom], p.136


13

Just like the Saudi scholars, al-Albani based himself on the Quran and the Sunnah following the understanding of the first generations.

prophetic Sunnah following the understanding of the

pious predecessors76

.

All this invalidates Lacroix’ allegation that al-Albani

pointed to a fundamental contradiction within the

‘Wahhabi’ tradition. The aspect that the Albanian scholar

reproved was the trend in which people blindly follow a

madhab without diverging from it in any aspect and

without asking for any proof while abandoning objective

interpretative judgment (ijtihad).77

There surely would’ve

been a fundamental contradiction between al-Albani and

the Saudi scholars had the latter been blind-followers of

the Hanbali-madhab. But this wasn’t the case with

Shaikh Ibn Abdul-Wahhab who paved

the way for the reopening of the doors

of ijtihad after they had been closed

with the fall of Bagdad during the first

half of the 13th century C.E. Ironically,

in his lifetime the Shaikh was accused

of making ijtihad and it was only after

he passed away that his enemies

falsely accused him of blindly

following a madhab78

.

One needs to understand that there are

two groups of people adhering to the

Hanbali madhab. The first ones – to

whom the Saudi scholars belong– make their own

objective ijtihad and give precedence to the religious

proofs over the madhab-rulings if they fall into

contradiction. The second category consists of

individuals who are bound to the methodology of

madhabic blind-following79

. Given professor Lacroix

hasn’t been able to perceive this distinction, he imagined

that the methodology of Shaikh al-Albani was in

fundamental contradiction with the approach of the Saudi

scholars due to their adherence to the Hanbali School.

Had Mr. Lacroix read a basic overview of some of the

fatwas of the Saudi scholars he’s talking about or looked

into the foundations of Hanbali jurisprudence, these

misconceptions wouldn’t have taken place. But clearly

that goes back to the question of whether or not he in fact

possesses the fundamental ability to study Arabic source

texts of the subject he claims to comprehend the

historical trends of, which I touched on previously.

76 Dr. Abdul-Aziz Ibn Muhammad al-Hujaylan, “Al-Fiqh Wal-


Fiqh-Scholars in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia], p. 227 77 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Haqiqatu Al-Da’wa Al-



Methodology of the Major Salafi Scholars in Najd], p. 406 79 Ibid, p. 172,173

Al-Albani’s Conveniently Forgotten Recantation

Mr. Lacroix then brings an argument that should prove

the alleged ‘fundamental contradiction’ between al-

Albani and the Saudi scholars:

“According to al-Albani, this also applies to Muhammad

bin ‘Abdul-Wahhab whom he describes as “salafi in

creed, but not in fiqh.”

On one single occasion, Shaikh al-Albani stated that

Shaikh Ibn Abdul-Wahhab’s engagement in his call to

Tawheed in a region utterly infected with polytheism was

so time-consuming; he wasn't able to

pay enough attention to the science of

hadith80

. According to al-Albani, he

therefore would’ve given incorrect

hadith-judgments in the field of

jurisprudence. To sustain his claim,

al-Albani reprimanded Shaikh Ibn

Abdul-Wahhab for rendering a hadith

authentic (sahih)81

that the vast

majority of Hadith scholars had

weakened82

and of which al-Albani

criticized both the chain of narrators

and its content (matn). He further

stated that he didn’t intend to slur the

character of the Shaikh since this could only be expected

from the enemies of Islam83

. However, Shaikh al-Albani

later realized these words from him were incorrect84

. He

80 Before the arrival of Shaikh Ibn Abdul-Wahhab, the main canonical

books of Hadith were absent in the Najd-region. It is only with the

da’wa of the Shaikh that these books were massively spread in the

region. Furthermore, the children of Shaikh Ibn Abdul-Wahhab were

Muhaddithin who taught books of hadith like Sahih al-Bukhari.

Therefore, the books of hadith have only been dispersed in Najd

because the scholars of the region attached a major importance to

them. The reason why these scholars treated the fiqh-books more than

the books of hadith is because the people at that time were more in

need of jurisprudence than of hadith-science. Source: Shaikh Saleh

Aal al-Shaikh "Al-farq Bayn Kutub Al-fiqh Kutub wal Hadith" [The

Difference between the books of Jurisprudence and the books of

Hadith] 81 The hadith in question has been narrated by Abu Said al-Khudri and

mentions the supplication of the one who leaves his home to go to the

mosque (Ahmed 11156). Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab

mentioned this hadith in his book "Aadab Al-Machi Ila Al-Masjid"

[The Etiquette of the one who Walks to the Mosque] 82 Shaikh al-Albani had criticized this hadith both in chain of narrators

(sanad) and text (matn) ("Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-Da'ifa" no.24) 83 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Haqiqatu Al-Da’wa Al-

Salafiya” [The Reality of the Call to Salafiya] p.183-186 84 Shaikh Saleh Aal al-Shaikh responded to the assertion of Shaikh al-

Albani by explaining that this was the personal opinion of the Shaikh

(al-Albani) and that other Muhaddithin of the past, like al-Hafidh Ibn

Hajr (and al-Hafidh al-Dimyata), had also declared this hadith to be

sound. Shaikh Saleh concluded by saying that these differences of

assessment in hadith should not lead to this kind of critique. Source:

Shaikh Saleh Aal al-Shaikh "Al-Farq Bayn Kutub Al-fiqh wa Kutub


14

Scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah like Shaikh al-Albani all considered Hadith a major source of legislation in Islam.

apologized for what he said about Shaikh Ibn Abdul-

Wahhab and recanted his statement85

. In the past, several

hadith scholars attested that the works of Ibn Abdul-

Wahhab are a proof that he did pay a lot of attention to

hadith in all his rulings86

. And until this very day the

Muhaddithin still bear witness to the Shaikh’s hadith-

knowledge and prowess87

.

In his works, Shaikh al-Albani wouldn’t

miss an opportunity to praise Ibn Abdul-

Wahhab. On numerous occasions, he

called him the reviver of Tawheed in the

Arabian Peninsula and defended him

against those who would criticize him88

.

Curiously, Lacroix neglected all these

positive statements about Ibn Abdul-

Wahhab and picked out the only

statement in which al-Albani criticized

Ibn Abdul-Wahhab –and later recanted

from– to make it the central argument in

his article. By emphasizing this criticism

of Shaikh al-Albani, Lacroix portrayed a

fictional conflict between Shaikh al-

Albani and Shaikh Ibn Abdul-Wahhab

based on fundamental contradictions in the approach of

hadith.

But professor Lacroix proceeds further, indulging into

issues he is unable to grasp:

“For al-Albani, moreover, being a proper “salafi in

fiqh” implies making hadith the central pillar of the

juridical process, for hadith alone may provide answers

to matters not found in the Quran without relying on the

school of jurisprudence.”

As we already mentioned, Shaikh Ibn Abdul-Wahhab

and all other Saudi scholars considered hadith together

with the Quran the central pillar of all religious verdicts.

Therefore, this cannot be seen as a distinctive

‘revolutionary’ trait of Shaikh al-Albani. However, in

issues of fiqh where there wasn’t any clear proof in the

prophetic hadiths or Quranic verses, the Saudi scholars

Al-Hadith" [The Difference between the books of Jurisprudence and

the books of Hadith] 85 See Shaikh Rabi’ Bin Hadi al-Madkhali, “Sharh Kitab Al-Iman Li

Sahih Al-Boukhari”, Tape #2, side B 86 Saleh Ibn Muhammad Aal al-Shaikh, “Al-Minhaj Al-Fiqhi Li


Methodology of the Major Salafi Scholars in Najd], p. 244-246 87 The hadith-scholar of this era, Shaikh Abdul-Mohsin al-Abbad is

one amongst many contemporary hadith scholars who declared Ibn

Abdul-Wahhab to be amongst the Muhaddithin. Another example is the statement of the great Muhaddith Badiuddin Shah Sindhi, see

“History of Ahlul Hadeeth”. 88 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-Sahiha”

[Collection of Correct Hadiths], Vol.5, p.302, Vol.1, p.8, etc.

would rely on the different rulings within the Hanbali

school of jurisprudence whereas Shaikh al-Albani would

widen his reliance to all of the recognized madhabs.

Stéphane Lacroix interprets this difference of application

in this specific – and very rare – scenario as a difference

in methodology. This is an obvious misconception since

we’re talking about a situation of a religious issue in

which there are no clear hadiths that would deliver the

requested decisive proof. Despite this

difference, the Saudi scholars, as well as

al-Albani, all used hadith as a principle

tool in fiqh for clarifying rulings. Their

difference had nothing to do with making

hadith the central pillar or with hadith

providing answers not found in the Quran

since we’re talking about a specific

situation in which there are no decisive

hadiths available to provide a clear

answer to a juridical matter.

It is also known that in his refutations,

Shaikh al-Albani always mentioned the

specific deficiencies in the methodology

of the people he was refuting. Had the

Saudi scholars’ secondary reliance on the Hanbali

madhab, in this case, been a fundamental contradiction or

deficiency, then al-Albani certainly would’ve pointed this

out in one of his refutations. Yet this never happened.

Finally, it needs to be mentioned that the ijtihad-rulings

in which al-Albani opposed the conclusions of all four

madhabs are so few that it is very implausible this ever

could’ve led to any form of alleged conflict.

A Revolutionary Approach to Hadith?

After having claimed to have established the ‘Albani-

Wahhabi conflict’ based on the alleged differences in

hadith-methodology, Lacroix makes another attempt to

prove al-Albani had a revolutionary approach to hadith:

“How did al-Albani, with his undistinguished social and

ethnic origins, come to occupy such a prestigious

position in a field long monopolized by a religious elite

from the Saudi region of Najd? The answer, as we shall

see through the example of al-Albani himself and some of

his disciples, lies in his revolutionary approach to

hadith.”

He then claims that al-Albani promoted ‘a new approach

to the critique of hadith’ which would challenge ‘the very

monopoly of the Wahhabi religious aristocracy’ and that

his method had ‘revolutionary power’. This is all very

impressive but, unfortunately, far from reality.

http://z9.invisionfree.com/Al_Muttaqoon/ar/t836.htm


15

In his book “Al-Tawheed Awalan”, al-Albani explained that Tawheed is the most important science.

In comparatively analyzing the methodology of the great

hadith scholars, it can easily be said that al-Albani never

had a revolutionary approach to hadith. He didn’t come

up with any new principles in the science of Hadith, nor

did he invent new rules in the methodology of the

critique of hadith. However, Lacroix mentions a number

of arguments which he thinks prove his claim. He first

states:

“The mother of all religious sciences therefore becomes

the “science of hadith,” which aims at re-evaluating the

authenticity of known hadiths.”

In his works Shaikh al-Albani always mentioned that all

religious sciences are based on the Quran and the

prophetic Sunnah (hadith) according to

the understanding of the pious

predecessors. As for what he

considered the most important of

sciences, then Shaikh al-Albani

considered it to be the science of

Tawheed89

. He therefore composed a

book entitled “Tawheed comes first”90

in which he explains that the ‘mother’

of all religious sciences is the study of

monotheism, the exclusive worship of

Allah without attributing any partners

in all forms of worship. The science of

Quranic exegesis, hadith and all other

Islamic sciences were all considered by

him as merely a means to fulfill the

objective of man’s creation: Tawheed.

Therefore, since Mr. Lacroix repeatedly

fails to bring forth explicit statements

of Shaikh al-Albani elevating hadith science above the

study of the Quran, its explanation, and so forth

regarding the many other sciences of Islam, either he is

ignorant of Shaikh al-Albani’s actual position and words

or scholastically deceitful. This is not even to mention

the literally hundreds of statements of Shaikh al-Albani

affirming the specific conclusions and general

methodology of the leading hadith scholars throughout

the centuries which his books are filled with– all clearly

proving the obviously fabricated claim of an alleged

“revolutionary approach to hadith”.

89 Singling out Allah in worship without associating anything in this

worship. The call to Tawheed was the core-message of all Prophets. It

is the first of five Islamic pillars and the first of Ten Commandments

in Christianity (Thou shall worship no other gods besides me). 90 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Al-Tawheed Awalan Ya Du’at

Al-Islam” [Preachers of Islam: Tawheed comes First], p.6-11

Al-Albani and Independent Reasoning

According to professor Lacroix, the first aspect of al-

Albani’s revolutionary approach to hadith is the omission

of reason:

“According to al-Albani, however, independent

reasoning must be excluded from the process: the

critique of the matn (the content of the hadith) should be

exclusively formal, i.e. grammatical or linguistic; only

the sanad (the hadith’s chain of transmitters) may be

properly put into question.”

These again, are a series of fictitious allegations. Shaikh

al-Albani has always been a proponent of independent

reasoning, both generally in the scope

of Islamic science as well as within the

sciences of hadith. It is widely known

that al-Albani incited his students not

to blindly follow him but to conduct

their proper independent research. The

Shaikh would then compare the results

of his students with his own and they’d

all benefit from each other91

.

More specifically, Stéphane Lacroix

continues to talk about things he simply

doesn’t comprehend. By stating that

Shaikh al-Albani, did not analyze the

hadith content92

(matn) in the prophetic

tradition, Mr. Lacroix is only recycling

an old element of orientalist

propaganda against the Muhaddithin.

Indeed, this was a way for orientalists

like Ignác Goldziher93

and Alfred Guillaume94

to depict

hadith scholars as being people who do not use

91 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Al-Rawda Al-Dani Fil

Fawa’id Al-Hadithiya Lil-Allama Al-Albani”, p.9 92 In the prophetic Sunnah every hadith is preceded by a chain of

narrators going from the last Muhaddith who compiled the hadiths

(like Bukhari or Muslim) all the way up to the companions and finally

to the prophet Muhammad . 93 Ignác ‘Yitzhaq Yehuda’ Goldziher was a Jewish Hungarian

orientalist who rejected the methodology of the Muhaddithin

pretending it didn’t deal with the study of the matn. He therefore

invented his own personal approach in analyzing the matn weakening

the hadith that mentions the virtues of visiting the sacred Aqsa

Mosque. See “Muhammedanische Studien”, 2nd imp. Hildesheim

1961. 94 An English Orientalist whose critique of the matn led him to the

fantastic ‘discovery’ that the al-Aqsa Mosque isn’t located in

Jerusalem but in Jirana (40 kilometers from Mecca). See “Where was

Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa?” Al-Andaluse, Madrid, 1953 p. 323-336. The

matn-critique of both Goldziher and Guillaume were religiously

motivated since they weakened hadiths in order to depict Palestine as

having no Islamic heritage whatsoever. Other bigoted orientalists like

Joseph Schacht and Arent Jan Wensinck also developed a self-


16

A hadith contains a chain of narrators (sanad) and a text (matn) containing a narration of the Prophet’s Sunnah

independent reasoning and always and indiscriminately

adopt the matn as long as the chain of narrators (sanad) is

correct95

.

At first sight, it might appear that the efforts of the

Muhaddithin were directed only towards the chain of

narrators without addressing the matn. Orientalists would

therefore accuse them of not using reason. Yet, this is

contrary to the reality since the critique of the hadith

content or text (matn) has always existed and can only be

made through the proper use of sound reasoning96

.

A basic study into the science of hadith

will staunchly uphold that during the

past fourteen centuries, the methodology

of the Muhaddithin in judging hadiths

has always encompassed an analysis of

the chain of narration as well as an

analysis of the matn97

. The critiques of

the chain and matn each have different

conditions and are evaluated in an

independent way98

. Moreover, the

critique of the matn is far from being

simply grammatical99

as Stéphane Lacroix presumes.

Hence, the matn may be put into question scholastically

and empirically just as the sanad and this can only be

done as a result of independent reasoning100

. And this

was exactly the methodology of Shaikh al-Albani who, in

his collection of weak hadiths, has judged numerous

hadiths to be weak solely because of a flaw in the

matn101

.

Additionally, the scholars of Hadith have always applied

the rule which states that the correctness of the chain

doesn’t necessarily imply the correctness of the

content102

. And al-Albani was also of this opinion103

.

Likewise, al-Albani and other hadith scholars detailed

imposed critique of the matn by which they affronted the Muslim

belief. 95 Dr. Muhammad Mustafa al-A’thami, “Minhadj Al-Naqd A’nd Al-

Muhaddithin” [The Methodology of Critique used by The

Muhadithin], p. 127-149. 96 Ibid, p. 81, 83 97 Ibid, p. 82 98 Dr. Abdullah Bin Dayfullah al-Ruhayli, “Manhadj Al-

Muhadditheen Fi Naqd Al-Riwayat Sanadan wa Matnan”. [The

Methodology of the Muhaddithin in the Critique of Narrations in

Chain and Matn], p.14. 99 Ibid, p.24-25. 100 Ibid, p.22. 101 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-Da’ifa

Wal Madu’a Wa Atharuha Al-Sayyi’ Fil Umma” 102 Dr. Abdullah Bin Dayfullah al-Ruhayli, “Manhadj Al-



Chain and Matn], p.21. 103 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-Sahiha”

[Collection of Correct Hadiths], See introduction

several situations in which a hadith can be judged as

invented (mawdu’) basing this solely upon the matn104

,

despite having evaluated the chain as being correct.

As such, Lacroix’ claim that Shaikh al-Albani’s critique

of the matn was restricted to a linguistic perspective is

another fantasy or skillful deception of our new French

wannabe Muhaddith since the works of al-Albani’s,

which have been published for several decades, and

many of which are available on the internet, are filled

with examples that fully contradict this claim105

.

It is very strange that our professor isn’t

aware that Shaikh al-Albani weakened

hadiths due to their content because in

his same article he mentions that

Shaikh al-Albani weakened hadiths in

the canonical collections of Bukhari

and Muslim. Anyone who has made

even a brief reading of Shaikh al-

Albani’s critique of the selected hadiths

found in the collections of Bukhari and

Muslim, knows that he criticized quite

a few of them due to a weakness in the matn, not the

sanad! This again shows us that Stéphane Lacroix is

utterly unable to conduct proper research and limits

himself to blindly parroting statements from others,

totally ignoring the content and veracity, which could

easily be affirmed or disproved. Another example of this

can be found in this statement from Lacroix:

“As a consequence, the central focus of the science of

hadith becomes ‘ilm al-rijal (the science of men), also

known as ‘ilm al-jarh wa-l-ta‘dil (the science of critique

and fair evaluation), which evaluates the morality—

deemed equivalent to the reliability—of the

transmitters.”

This is likewise a gross attempt at deceit as the science of

men or ‘I’lm al-rijal’ has always been the central focus

of hadith to all Muhaddithin in all times. It protected the

Sunnah from distortion by exposing liars and unreliable

hadith-narrators due to their memory deficiencies or

immorality.

104 Dr. Abdullah Bin Dayfullah al-Ruhayli, “Manhadj Al-



Chain and Matn], p.42. 105 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-

Da’ifa…” – “Rhayatoul Maram” – “Ta’liqat A’la Mukhtasir Sahih

Muslim Lil-Mundhiri”, etc.


17

The collections of al-Bukhari and Muslim have been subjected to re-evaluation by more than sixty Muhaddithin

Al-Albani’s Critique of Bukhari and Muslim

Lacroix continues by mentioning that al-Albani had a

unique approach to hadith because he weakened hadiths

of Bukhari and Muslim:

“At the same time—and contrary to earlier practices—

al-Albani insists that the scope of this re-evaluation must

encompass all existing hadiths, even those included in the

canonical collections of Bukhari and Muslim, some of

which al-Albani went so far as to declare weak.”

Shaikh al-Albani did indeed re-evaluate some narrations

in the collections of Bukhari and Muslim but Lacroix’

allegation that he weakened some of them is false. After

having given a lengthy explanation of a hadith in his

‘Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-Sahiha’, al-Albani mentions:

“I deliberately took some extra time to comment on this

hadith and its narrators. I did this in order to defend the

prophetic Sunnah so that nobody will fabricate lies

against me and so that the ignoramus,

envious or biased person won’t say:

‘Al-Albani defamed ‘Sahih al-Bukhari’

and weakened its hadiths’…”106

The allegation that al-Albani weakened

hadiths in Bukhari and Muslim can

only come from an ignoramus,

someone envious or a biased person -

and I surely don’t consider Mr. Lacroix

to be envious. Shaikh al-Albani greatly

esteemed the Bukhari and Muslim

collections and praised them for their

accuracy:

“The collections of Bukhari and Muslim are the two most

authentic books after the Book of Allah according to the

consensus of the Islamic hadith scholars and others. They

have an advantage over other hadith collections due to

their distinction in collecting the most authentic of

correct hadiths and omitting the weak hadiths and those

with a very weak matn…It has become generally known

that all the hadiths in the collections of Bukhari and

Muslim, or in either one of them, have reached the

highest possible level and are considered to be sound and

correct without any doubt. That is our basic stance on

these two books. However, this doesn’t mean that every

letter, word or expression in Bukhari and Muslim should

be placed at the same level (of correctness) as the Quran.

It is possible that some hadiths contain a false impression

or an error in some aspect by some of its narrators.

106 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-

Da’ifa”, Vol.4, p.465.

Indeed, we do not consider any book to be infallible

except for the Quran…”107

This shows us that Shaikh al-Albani didn’t weaken any

hadiths in Bukhari and Muslim; he only criticized a few

terms and expressions in the matn of the hadith and also

criticized some chains of narrators. One needs to

understand that there is a distinct difference between

weakening a hadith as a whole and criticizing (not

weakening!) a specific hadith narration from the aspect

of defects in its chain. For example, a chain of a specific

hadith may be criticized due to a certain form of criticism

of one of its narrators but this wouldn’t make the hadith

text weak because other hadiths with the same content

and a different chain would consolidate and strengthen

the first hadith, which would therefore reach the level of

‘Hassan’ (good) or ‘Sahih’ (correct) despite the criticism

of its chain. This holds for all the hadiths Shaikh al-

Albani has criticized in Bukhari and Muslim since he

always concluded that they were correct in their textual

context. This is how al-Albani explained this form of

criticism:

“A hadith which is found in ‘Sahih al-

Bukhari’ isn’t easy to challenge in its

correctness only because of a certain

weakness in its chain since there is a

possibility that the hadith has been

narrated with another chain by which

they will consolidate each other.”108

The second allegation of Stéphane

Lacroix is that Shaikh al-Albani’s

critique or re-evaluation, contrary to

earlier practices, encompasses all

existing hadiths. Let’s have a look to

what the last century’s Muhaddith had to say about those

earlier practices of previous hadith scholars. In several of

his books Shaikh al-Albani mentioned the following:

“One needs to know that Sahih al-Bukhari, despite its

magnificence and the scholars’ consensus over its

acceptance as we mentioned in the introduction, the book

has been criticized in the past by some of the

scholars…”109

107 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Sharh Aqida Al-Tahawiya”

[Explanation of the Creed of Tahawi], p.22-23 108 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-Sahiha”

[Collection of Correct Hadiths], Vol.4, p.185 109 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Mukhtasir Sahih Al-

Boukhari” [Summary of Sahih Al-Boukhari], 2/4


18

Shaikh al-Albani had proved, as others have, that the opinion of the majority of scholars could sometimes be contrary to an alleged consensus

Indeed, al-Albani has been preceded in the re-evaluation

of the canonical collections of Bukhari and Muslim by

more than sixty different Hadith scholars110

. Amongst the

early scholars, several Muhaddithin have composed

independent books in which they re-evaluated the

Bukhari and Muslim-hadiths. The most famous amongst

them is al-Dar al-Qutni (10th century C.E.) who wrote the

famous “Al-Ilzamaat wal Tattabu’”. Others like

Muhammad al-Shaheed111

(9th century C.E.), Yahya al-

Attar112

(13th century C.E.), Abdul-Rahim al-Iraqi

113 (14

th

century C.E.) and Abu Zura’ al-Iraqi114

(15th century

C.E.) also compiled separate critical works on the same

issue. Moreover, amongst some of the classical scholars

who criticized certain hadiths in Bukhari or Muslim we

find Imam Ahmed, Ibn Khuzayma, Ibn Hazm, al-

Nawawi, al-Qurtubi, Ibn al-Qayim, Ibn Hajr, Ibn

Taymiya, Imam al-Dhahabi, al-Zarqashi, al-Suyuti and

Ibn Kathir115

. These are all

recognized scholars of hadith from

the scholars of the previous centuries

of Islamic scholarship. Additionally,

al-Albani certainly wasn’t alone in his

time since more than a few

contemporary hadith scholars,

regardless of them being Sunni or not,

preceded or followed him in his

critique: al-Mu’allimi, Muqbil, Rabi’

Ibn Hadi, Shu’ayb al-Arna’out, Tariq

Ibn I’wadillah, al-Kawthari, Hassan

al-Saqqaf …116

. So why did Lacroix

see the critique of Bukhari and

Muslim as being unique to Shaikh al-Albani?

Once again, simple research confirms that there is

nothing ground-breaking about Shaikh al-Albani’s

approach to the science of Hadith as was falsely claimed,

since all the hadiths of Bukhari and Muslim that he

criticized had already undergone a form of criticism in

the past by other hadith scholars.

110 Muhyi al-Din al-Samarqandy, “Naqd Matn Al-Hadith Fi Daw

Nata’ij Al-Ulum Al-Tajribiya” [The critique of the Matn in Hadith in

the Light of Experimental Sciences], p.113 111 Muhammad Ammar al-Shaheed, “I’lal Sahih Muslim”,

[Deficiencies in Sahih Muslim] 112 Yahya Ali al-Rasheed al-Attar, “Gharar al-Fawa’id al-Majmou’a

fi Bayan ma Waqa’a fi Sahih Muslim...” 113 Abdul-Rahim Ibn al-Hussein al-Iraqi, “Al-Ahadith Al-Mughrija fil

Sahihayn Allati Takallama fiha” [Selected Hadiths of Bukhari and

Muslim that have been criticised] 114 Abu Zura’ Ahmed Ibn Abdul-Rahim al-Iraqi, “Al-Bayan wal

Tawdih Liman Kharaja lahu fil Sahih wa Qad Massa Bi Darb Min Al-

Tajrih” [Clarification Of the Hadiths in Sahih El Bukhari that are

subject to a certain form of Critisism] 115 Muhyi al-Din al-Samarqandy, “Naqd Matn Al-Hadith Fi Daw

Nata’ij Al-Ulum Al-Tajribiya” [The critique of the Matn in Hadith in

the Light of Experimental Sciences], p.115-140 116 Ibid, p.144-148

When al-Albani was asked about a certain person who,

just like Mr. Lacroix, pretended that the hadiths of

Bukhari and Muslim were no longer subject to criticism

and that their re-evaluation was contrary to earlier

practices, this was his reply:

“This statement by itself is enough to convince the reader

of the ignorance of this clever trickster and proves his

slander of the earlier scholars and contemporary ones by

pretending that there is a consensus on this issue. As

until this very day, the scholars still criticize some of the

hadiths in the collections of Bukhari and Muslim…”117

Lacroix’ Revolutionary Misconceptions

Stéphane Lacroix then quotes a list of what he calls

‘revolutionary interpretations’ by

Shaikh al-Albani. He starts off by

saying:

“As a consequence of the peculiarity

of his method, al-Albani ended up

pronouncing fatwas that ran counter

to the wider Islamic consensus, and

more specifically to

Hanbali/Wahhabi jurisprudence.”

Mr. Lacroix’ imagination seems to be

boundless. He first grasps onto the

idea that al-Albani’s approach to

Hadith was peculiar, and he then exploits and builds

upon this initial false claim to make another hollow

assertion in which he accuses al-Albani of having

pronounced fatwas that ran counter to the wider Islamic

consensus of the scholars.

Some critics have already preceded Lacroix in this claim

which would tremendously upset Shaikh al-Albani. In his

book “The Etiquette of Marriage”, al-Albani responded

to Isma’il al-Ansari who accused him of contradicting the

Islamic consensus:

“In the beginning of his book “Al-Ibaha”, this poor man

accused me of contradicting the Islamic consensus. On

page 57, he even explicitly mentions that I reprove the

consensus…”118

It is unfeasible for al-Albani to have pronounced fatwas

contradicting the established consensus amongst the

scholars, since he himself used to consider the Islamic

117 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Aadab Al-Zifaf” [The

Etiquette of Marriage], p. 54 118 Ibid, p.41-42.


19

In his book “Asl Sifat Salat al-Nabi”, al-Albani was preceded in all of his judgments by other scholars.

consensus as being an irrefutable proof in the derivation

of rulings.

What professor Lacroix wasn’t able to grasp due to his

lack of research, is that al-Albani would put into question

the claimed consensus pronounced by some scholars.

Due to his remarkable knowledge, Shaikh al-Albani was

able to put forth evidence showing that the proclaimed

consensus in certain issues was void and did not in fact

occur119

. Furthermore, what was considered to fall under

the Islamic consensus in these specific issues was

therefore no longer seen as being an accepted consensus

as al-Albani established that they had been contradicted

and questioned by scholars in the past:

“I certainly did examine numerous

issues in which a consensus has been

related and I found that these were

known issues the scholars differed about.

I even found that the opinion of the vast

majority of scholars would run counter

to the alleged consensus in these

issues.”120

People unaware of the differences

between scholars where consensus has

been claimed will therefore have the

misconception that al-Albani would

challenge the recognized Islamic

consensus. As for Lacroix’ claim that al-

Albani pronounced fatwas running

counter to the Hanbali jurisprudence, we know there is

nothing revolutionary about this since the Saudi scholars

would also do the same.

In his quest for revolutionary examples of al-Albani’s

approach to hadith, Lacroix comes up with this one:

“For instance, he wrote a book in which he redefined the

proper gestures and formulae that constitute the Muslim

prayer ritual “according to the Prophet’s practice”—

and contrary to the prescriptions of all established

schools of jurisprudence.”

The book in question here is “The Description of the

Prophet’s Prayer” and it certainly would’ve been nice

had Mr. Lacroix at least skimmed through this

masterpiece before commenting on it in this ludicrous

manner. The reality is that in this study, Shaikh al-Albani

only contradicted the collective judgments of the four

119 Ibid, p.44-47 – p.238-239 120 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Ahkam Al-Jana’iz wa

Bida’uha”, [Judgments concerning funeral processions and their

innovations], p.219

schools altogether in a few cases121

. In his introduction,

al-Albani confirms that there is an established consensus

in many aspects of the Muslim prayer122

. This alone is

enough to debunk Lacroix’ claim that al-Albani, while

redefining the proper prayer-gestures, contradicted the

prescriptions of all established schools of jurisprudence.

At the end of his introduction, he explicitly states that his

work doesn’t contain a single ruling by which he hasn’t

been preceded in the past by another scholar, nor which

runs counter to what the scholars have agreed upon123

.

Furthermore, Shaikh al-Albani mentions the following in

the introduction:

“This book will gather all dispersed

elements from the books of hadith and

jurisprudence including the differences

amongst the madhabs which are related

to this subject”124

Al-Albani strongly criticized those who,

just like Lacroix, accused him of not

considering the rulings of the four imams

as a whole:

“This accusation is as farfetched as is

possible. It is a false accusation in every

aspect as became clear through my

previous statements which all indicate

the contrary to be true. All we ask is to

no longer turn a certain madhab into

religion by elevating that madhab to the

status of the Quran and Sunnah…”125

In following the methodology of the previous Hadith

scholars, al-Albani refused to blindly follow a specific

madhab but would take the best of each madhab basing

himself first and foremost on direct proof from the

Sunnah. In his book, al-Albani first makes a judgment on

each separate issue and then compares it to the ruling of

the four different schools in order to conclude which

were in agreement with and which would oppose his

investigative conclusion:

“I believe that this is the best approach since it is the

way Allah has ordered the believers and His Prophet

Muhammad to follow. This is the methodology of the

pious predecessors who include the Companions and the

generations after them amongst whom we find the four

121 In his book, over ninety percent of al-Albani’s rulings coincide

with at least one of the four schools. 122 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Asl Sifat Salat Al-Nabi”,

[The Description of the Prophet’s Prayer, Original Version], p.21 123 Ibid, p.52 124 Ibid, p.22 125 Ibid, p.48


20

Al-Albani and many other scholars have declared the mihrab to be an innovation in the religion.

Imams. They all agreed on the obligation of returning

and clinging to the Sunnah and agreed that every claim

contradicting it should be renounced.”126

To support his statement, al-Albani then mentions

numerous statements of the four Imams in which they

admonish those who blindly follow their rulings or

madhab without balancing them against the Quran and

Sunnah127

. This was an ingenious way for the Albanian

Muhaddith to prove that those who follow

a specific Madhab in each and every

single fiqh judgment weren’t following

the teachings of any of the four imams.

These very statements of Ahmed, al-

Shafi’ee, Malik and Abu Hanifah also

provided a justification for the

methodology of Shaikh al-Albani and the

Muhaddithin:

“We therefore say that by clinging on to

everything of the Sunnah that proves to be

correct, even if it contradicts some rulings

of the imams, one cannot be accused of

contradicting their madhab, nor their

methodology. Rather by doing so, one will

then be following the distinct methodology

they were all upon...This cannot be said of those who

abandon that which is correct of the Sunnah by blindly

following one of their rulings from their school of

jurisprudence…”128

As a result, al-Albani’s decisions were in perfect

harmony with the methodology of the four imams who

until today each have a madhab attributed to them.

Lacroix’ Self-invented Consensuses

Here is one of Shaikh al-Albani’s fatwas professor

Stéphane Lacroix, deemed to be running counter to the

Islamic consensus:

“Also, he stated that mihrabs—the niche found in

mosques indicating the direction of Mecca—were bid‘a

(an innovation) ...”

Al-Albani’s statement that mihrabs are an innovation129

is far from being revolutionary since numerous scholars

have preceded him in this judgment. Nothing to be

amazed about since the mihrab was adopted from the

curved flexure present in the Christian churches of Egypt

126 Ibid, p.23 127 Ibid, p.23-32 128 Ibid, p.32 129 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-Da’ifa

Wal Madou’a Wa Atharouha Al-Sayyi’ Fil Umma”, Vol.1, p.452.

and Najran130

. Numerous scholars and historians mention

that the mihrab-mosques were only established after the

Prophet Muhammad’s time131

. Al-Albani was therefore

already preceded some fourteen centuries ago by the

companion Ibn Masu’d who said it wasn’t permissible to

pray in a mosque that contained a mihrab132

. He was

followed by numerous scholars throughout the centuries

like Salim Ibn Abd al-Ja’d133

(7th century), Ibrahim al-

Nakha’i134

(7th century), Sufyan al-Thawri

135 (8

th

century), Ibn Hazm136

(11th century), Ibn

Taymiya137

(13th century), al-Zarqashi

138

(14th century), Ali al-Qari

139 (16

th century),

etc. In the 15th century the famous scholar

Abdul-Rahman al-Suyuti even composed a

small booklet he named “Resourceful

Information Concerning the Occurrence of

the Mihrab Innovation”140

. Also in his

own present time, al-Albani had scholars

like Shaikh Muqbil141

and his opponent

Abdullah al-Ghimari142

agreeing with this

judgment on mihrabs. However, according

to Stéphane Lacroix, declaring mihrabs to

be an innovation is a revolutionary

interpretation that runs counter to the

Islamic consensus! Had Mr. Lacroix

conducted a little research, his readers

wouldn’t have to cope with this errant nonsense. Lacroix

is well aware that he belongs to a small group of people

who, as the old Arabic saying goes, ‘are as one-eyed men

amongst the blind’143

. And describing Professor Lacroix

as one-eyed might be an overstatement, especially

considering the fact he stated that al-Albani…:

130 Dr. Ibrahim Ibn Saleh al-Khodeir, “Ahkam Al-Masajid Fil

Sharee’a Al-Islamiya” [Rulings concerning Mosques in Islamic

Legislation], Vol.1, p.339. 131 Dr. Hussein Mou’nis, “Al-Masajid” [Mosques], p.77-79 132 Al-Bazzar, “Kashf Al-Astar”, no. 416 133 Narrated by Ibn Abi Shayba, “Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayba”, Vol.1,

p.408 134 Narrated by Abdul-Razaq al-Sana’ani, “Musannaf Abdul-Razaq”,

Vol.2, p.412 135 Ibid, p.413 136 Ibn Hazm, “al-Muhalla”, Vol.4, p.239-240 137 Shaikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiya, “Iqtida Al-Sirat Al-Moustaqim”,

p.215-225 138 Muhammad Bin Abdillah al-Zarqashi, “I’lam Al-Masajid Bi

Ahkam Al-Masajid”, p.258 139 Ali Ibn Sultan Muhammad al-Qari, “Marqat Al-Mafatih Sharh

Mishkat Al-Masabih”, Vol.2, p.223. 140 Abdul-Rahman Jalal al-Din al-Souyouti, “I’lam Al-Arib Bi Huduth

Bid’a Al-Maharib” 141 Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab al-Wasabi, “Al-Qawl Al-Sawab Fi

Hukm al-Mihrab” [The Correct Opinion in the Ruling on Mihrabs],

p.51-52 142 Abdullah Ibn Muhammad al-Ghimari, see his annotations to “I’lam

Al-Arib Bi Huduth Bid’a Al-Maharib”, p.20 143 This is just one of the numerous well-known Arabic proverbs that

have been absorbed into western languages where it has been altered

to: "In the country of the blind, the one-eyed man is king".


21

Following the Jewish massacres of Palestinians in the occupied territories, al-Albani advised Palestinians to emigrate.

“…declared licit to pray in a mosque with one’s shoes.”

Again, there is nothing exceptional about this. In

declaring it permissible to pray in a mosque with one’s

shoes, al-Albani was preceded by the Prophet of Islam

himself , the Companions and all the Islamic scholars -

as there is an established consensus amongst them on the

permissibility on praying with one’s shoes. If this ruling

of al-Albani coincides with the consensus of Islamic

scholars, then how can it be described as revolutionary?

Praying with shoes is indeed part of the prophetic

tradition144

since the Prophet used to pray with his

shoes on, as has been related by

Bukhari145

who even titled a chapter on

this issue “Praying with shoes”. Does

he consider that Bukhari was also a

revolutionary?!? Praying with shoes is

even an Islamic recommendation since

the Prophet ordered his community

to differ from the Jews who were

known to pray without shoes146

. It

needs to be mentioned that al-Albani

and all the other scholars only declared

it licit to pray in a mosque with one’s

shoes under certain conditions147

.

Claiming that this prophetic tradition which is mentioned

in almost every hadith-collection148

is running counter to

the Islamic consensus is what Shaikh al-Albani used to

describe as impossible:

“It is impossible to have a correct Islamic consensus that

contradicts a correct Hadith, unless the Hadith is

legitimately abrogated”149

In his deceptive or inept approach to the works of al-

Albani, Mr. Lacroix confined himself to picking up a few

fatwas of Shaikh al-Albani and then imagined them to be

revolutionary. He went so far as to make up self-declared

consensuses only to accuse al-Albani of contradicting

them. Isn’t it wonderful to be working as an

‘islamologist’ in present-day France? Just cook up a few

stories, add some Arabic words to them, make it look

academic and get paid handsomely for it! Professor

144 Isma’il Ibn Marshud al-Rumayh, “Ahkam Al-Ni’al” [Rulings

concerning Shoes], p.18 145 Sahih al-Boukhari, “Kitab Al-Salat – Al-Salat Fil-Ni’al” [Chapter

of Prayer – Praying with Shoes], Vol.1, p.102. 146 Sounan Abu Dawud, “Kitab Al-Salat– Al-Salat Fil-Ni’al” [Chapter

of Prayer – Praying with Shoes], Vol.1, p.176, no. 652. 147 One should make sure his shoes are free of impurities before

entering the mosque. Likewise, one shouldn’t pray with his shoes in a

mosque if it would cause a negative reaction from the common folk. 148 Bukhari (1/102), Abu Dawud (1/176), al-Tirmidhi (2/247), Ibn

Majah (1/330), al-Dar al-Qutni (1/313), Musnad al-Imam Ahmed

(11/241)… 149 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Aadab Al-Zifaf” [The

Etiquette of Marriage], p. 42.

Lacroix didn’t perform the slightest bit of research in any

of the books of jurisprudence in order to compare al-

Albani statements with other fatwas of his fellow

Muhaddithin. Consequently, these fatwas became

revolutionary to Lacroix in his own personal view.

In one of his books150

, Shaikh al-Albani sought to address

those who, just like Stéphane Lacroix, write on issues

they don’t comprehend:

“I advise them not to write in any field of science until

they have mastered it and after having gained some

experience in it for a certain time...”

Lacroix continues by saying:

“Another controversial position was

his call for Palestinians to leave the

occupied territories since, he claimed,

they were unable to practice their faith

there as they should—something which

is much more important than a piece of

land.”

What does this fatwa have to do with

Shaikh al-Albani’s so called revolutionary approach to

hadith? This position of the Shaikh becomes much less

controversial if one understands that in this fatwa, Shaikh

al-Albani based his fatwa on the ‘hijra’ (emigration) of

the Prophet who left Mecca, his most beloved city, in

order to freely practice Islam in Medina. This is also the

basic position of many scholars throughout the centuries

in regard to anyone in the same situation. Mr. Lacroix

shouldn’t see this as being controversial since in his own

country thousands of Muslims are trying to flee

oppression to attain religious freedom in the face of a

slowly increasing war against the personal practice of

Islam throughout the country151

.

A little further, the French professor states:

“Finally, al-Albani took a strong stance against

indulging in politics, repeating that “the good policy is to

abandon politics”—a Salafism phrase…”

150 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Difa’ A’n Al-Hadith Al-

Nabawi Wal-Sira” [In Defense of The Prophetic Tradition and

Biography], p. 60 151 See Kareem El Hidjaazi, “The French Suburban House and Field

Negro”


22

Contrary to the notion of some orientalists, the critique of Hadith also includes the matn.

This statement is also questionable since Lacroix wrongly translated the words of al-Albani “min

152 al-

siyasa tark al-siyasa” which is correctly translated as

“abandoning politics is (also) part of politics”. Al-Albani

meant that, in some cases, it is better not to participate in

politics. However, the translation of Lacroix implies that

al-Albani was entirely opposed to politics, which is

incorrect and another attempt of the professor to present

the Salafi scholars as medieval people who are cut off

from society. Al-Albani only opposed political

involvement if it wasn’t based on Islamic principles:

“Despite the fact that politics are needed beyond any

doubt, I believe this isn’t the right time

to take part in politics.”153

Al-Albani stated that, before taking part

in Islamic politics, people should first

acquire knowledge of their religion and

go through the necessary process of

‘Tasfiya wa Tarbiya’ (Purification and

Education):

“We do not say that politics (i.e. Islamic

politics) aren’t compulsory in Islam. On

the contrary, it belongs to the Islamic

collective duties. However, today we

know that by devoting oneself to politics

the people in charge of the da’wa will

turn away from these two central points which are

‘Purification and Education’…Therefore, we would like

for our brothers in the Islamic world who are

participating in the call to the Quran and Sunnah

following the understanding of the pious predecessors, to

first get well-grounded before allocating their time to

politics.”154

This means that people’s understanding of Islam should

first be purified from all alien elements that entered it and

aren’t part of it. Secondly, al-Albani considered that the

Muslims should be educated and brought up according to

the authentic and original creed of Islam155

. Today,

152 The Arabic preposition ‘min’ here is ‘lil tab'eed’ meaning that the

preposition expresses ‘a part of’ or ‘a portion of’ politics. It surely is

amazing that professor Lacroix wasn't able to get the meaning of this

simple preposition, because in his CV, he pretends to be fluent in

Arabic and mentions he used to teach the language. As in the same

way one could question his ability of conducting scientific research,

one could also question his knowledge of the Arabic language. Verily,

someone who doesn't understand basic prepositions cannot be

mastering a language, and even less be teaching it. 153 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Al-Fatawa Al-Manhajihya

Lil-Albany” [al-Albani’s Fatawa on Manhaj issues] p. 20-21 154

Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Durus Lil Shaikh Nasir Al-

Din Al-Albani” (Shabaka al-Islamiya), Lesson 20 155 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Al-Fatawa Al-Manhajihya

Lil-Albany” [Al-Albani’s Fatawa on Manhaj issues] p. 20-21

however, the majority of the political systems in the

Muslim world are not based upon Islam and therefore it

isn’t religiously acceptable for Muslims to participate in

them. The same way non-Muslims would refuse to

participate in Islamic state politics, orthodox Muslims do

not see it religiously allowable to participate in non-

Muslim political systems. But again, what does not

indulging in politics have to do with al-Albani’s

‘revolutionary approach to hadith’?

Al-Albani and Schools of Thought

Professor Lacroix goes on by saying:

“In spite of his undistinguished social

background al-Albani became known as

the greatest hadith scholar of his

generation. His reliance on hadith as the

central pillar of law at the expense of the

schools of jurisprudence caused him to

take up controversial positions.”

In a previous article, Lacroix went

further and mentioned:

“Al-Albani, in return, rejected all the

schools of jurisprudence, calling for

direct and exclusive reliance on the

Quran and the Sunna”156

Another distortion and pure fabrication of our French

amateur is his claim that Shaikh al-Albani’s call was

incompatible with those of the schools of jurisprudence

due to his reliance on hadith. Anyone who gained some

fundamental insight into the works of the four Imams

knows that all schools of jurisprudence initially relied on

hadith. The four Imams would explicitly prohibit others

from giving precedence to their rulings if they

contradicted a hadith. Imam Abu Hanifah stated: “If my

words contradict the book of Allah or a hadith of the

Prophet , then abandon my words”157

. Imam Malik

stated: “Accept everything that corresponds to the Quran

and the prophetic tradition and discard everything that

contradicts the Quran and Sunnah.”158

Likewise, Imam

al-Shafi’ee said: “If the hadith is correct, then that is my

madhab”159

. Lastly, Imam Ahmed also stressed the

importance of relying on hadith by saying: “The one who

rejects the hadiths of the Prophet of Allah finds

himself on the verge of destruction”160

.


Arabia: The Story of Juhayman al-‘Utaybi Revisited”, p.4 157 Al-Fulani, “Al-Iqath”, p.50 158 Ibn Abdul-Bar, “Al-Jami’”, 2/32 159 Al-Nawawi, “Al-Majmou’”, 1/63 160 Ibn al-Djawzi, “Al-Manaqib”, p.182


23

Shaikh al-Albani did not accept criticism against schools of jurisprudence.

Hence, all schools of jurisprudence relied on hadith as

the central pillar of law. It is only in the last centuries that

a large number of people have stopped giving precedence

to hadith by blindly following the rulings of a certain

madhab. And this is what al-Albani disapproved of:

“It has become widespread amongst people in the last

centuries that if a person reaches the age of adulthood,

he is forced to follow one of the four madhabs. He’ll

follow the madhab of his father for example which he will

then entirely accept. He will stick to it without diverging

from it in any aspect. He will blindly follow that madhab

and won’t ask for any proof. He will

not seek any interpretative judgment

(ijtihad) since he considers the doors

of ijtihad to be closed…”161

To uphold his disapproval of

‘Madhabic blind-following’, al-

Albani proved how, in the past, major

scholars of a certain madhab would

abandon the rulings of their Imams162

if they considered them to be in

contradiction with the Sunnah163

.

Other than that, al-Albani always had

a great esteem of the different madhabs and didn’t

tolerate any criticism of them as he himself stated:

“Some people who affiliate themselves to the call of

Salafiya directly or indirectly criticize one of the

madhabs. We say that this is not permissible in our

religion and belief…”164

Mr. Lacroix then claims that al-Albani’s reliance on

hadith —supposedly at the expense of the four

madhabs— caused him to take up controversial positions

which would allegedly have ignited a conflict with the

Saudi scholars:

“This brought him into conflict with the Saudi religious

establishment but also made him popular in Salafi

circles.”

The majority of scholars in the ‘Saudi religious

establishment’ are considered Salafis, even by Shaikh al-

Albani. So how is it conceivable for anyone to gain

161 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Haqiqatu Al-Da’wa Al-

Salafiya” [The Reality of the Call to Salafiya] p.170 162 Muhammad Ibn al-Hassan al-Shaybani and Abu Yusuf were two

Hanafi scholars and students of Imam Abu Hanifa who contradicted

him in one third of his Madhab 163 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Asl Sifat Salat Al-Nabi”,

[The Description of the Prophet’s Prayer, Original Version], p.35 164 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Shubah Hawl Al-Salafiya”


popularity in Salafi circles if he is in conflict with the

Saudi scholars?

Lacroix’ misconception in this part of his article is based

on his notion that the Saudi scholars are blindly

following the Hanbali madhab. If this was true, al-Albani

certainly would’ve had a serious conflict with the Saudi

scholars and would never have been allowed into the

country by them in the first place— not to speak of being

invited by them.

The differences of opinion that occurred between al-

Albani and other scholars weren’t due

to the fact that al-Albani relied on

hadith as the central pillar of law

since the scholars in the Kingdom did

the same. This becomes crystal clear

in the numerous discussions Shaikh

al-Albani had with his Saudi

colleagues; everything was based on

proof taken directly from the Quran

and prophetic Sunnah. In these

debates, the ulema of Saudi Arabia

would never take the madhab-ruling

as a proof.

Indeed, the scholastic differences between al-Albani and

the other scholars shouldn’t be taken out of proportion.

Shaikh al-Albani used to refute his own students and

those of his closest friends without anyone ever

conceiving this as a conflict165

. These are differences of

opinion that have always existed amongst the scholars of

Ahl al-Sunnah. In his writings, al-Albani mentioned that

even the four Imams disagreed in many issues:

“And I know for a fact that the major Imams were those

who considered each other sometimes in error and that

they did refute each other…”166

The laymen or someone with a hidden agenda will likely

interpret these differences of opinion as an internal clash

leading to major conflicts based on fundamental

contradictions. Therefore, the conspiracy-theory where

‘Wahhabis’ on one side are intensely at odds with Salafis

on the other side only exists in Lacroix’ imagination.

If there really had been a conflict between al-Albani and

the Saudi scholars based on fundamental incongruities,

he never would’ve urged his readers to rely on the

understanding of Shaikh Ibn Abdul-Wahhab and the

current Saudi scholars who he called his trustworthy

165 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Al-Rawda al-Dani Fil

Fawa’id al-Hadithiya Lil-Allama al-Albani”, p.9 166 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Asl Sifat Salat al-Nabi”,

[The Description of the Prophet’s Prayer, Original Version], p. 50


24

Al-Albani was a professor at the Islamic University of Medina from 1961 to 1963

Hanbali brothers167

. Moreover, Shaikh al-Albani has been

rewarded for the magnificent achievements he

accomplished in the Kingdom. Many years after his

departure from the Kingdom, the ‘King Faysal

International Board of Rewards for Islamic Studies’

awarded him a prize for his scientific efforts in the field

of hadith. Is this how a recognized body of Saudi

religious knowledge would reward a person with whom

they have fundamental contradictions in the approach of

hadith?

In his will, al-Albani offered his entire personal library to

the University of Medina because he recognized its

position in spreading knowledge, and because this was

the place of which he had very nice memories of his call

to Islam.

The Kingdom: Arrival and Departure of Al-Albani

Professor Lacroix’ fabrications seem

inexhaustible as he addresses al-

Albani’s arrival in the Kingdom:

“The presence of al-Albani in Saudi

Arabia—where he was invited in 1961

by his good friend Shaikh ‘Abd al-

‘Aziz Ibn Baz to teach at the Islamic

University of Medina—prompted

embarrassed reactions from the core

of the Wahhabi establishment...”

In mentioning that al-Albani entered the Kingdom due to

favoritism, Lacroix accuses the previous Mufti of the

Saudi Kingdom of cronyism. This of course is pathetic

because Shaikh al-Albani had already been invited to the

Saudi Kingdom prior to this. In 1957 the Saudi Minister

of education Shaikh Hassan Ibn Abdullah Aal al-Shaikh

asked him to be in charge of the Higher Islamic Studies

Department in the University of Mecca. But owing to

certain circumstances, al-Albani had to turn down this

marvelous offer only to get a new one four years later. If

al-Albani was so sought-after in Saudi Arabia, why

would his arrival have prompted hostility and

embarrassed reactions in the Kingdom? And more

important than this, where are Lacroix’ references of his

claims? He doesn’t mention any since most of his articles

are apparently based on stolen ideas he translated from

the writings of Mansur al-Nuqaidan who is a leading

figure amongst westernized Saudis who see themselves

to be ‘liberals’. It is al-Nuqaidan who mentioned that al-

Albani entered the Kingdom thanks to Shaikh Abdul-

Aziz Ibn Baz’s preferential treatment. However, taking

167 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani’s annotations in “Mukhtasir al-

Uluw Lil-Dhahabi”, p. 64

al-Nuqaidan as a reference poses a problem. First of all

the man does not have an educational background

whatsoever. It is an established fact that he dropped out

of school due to his mental instability. He then tried to

study Islam but again, failed miserably. Mansur al-

Nuqaidan ended up as a wild Takfiri hooligan burning

down shops in the streets of Riyadh and in one of his

articles he even admitted burning down a charitable

institution for widows and orphans. Al-Nuqaidan was

sentenced to prison for two years and eight months where

he finally came to the conclusion he was a total loser at

every endeavor. He didn’t succeed in any kind of studies

and never attained his aspiration of becoming a leader in

the Takfiri movement. Dr. Istifham explains in his

account on al-Nuqaidan168

that he is a very unbalanced

person who takes an opinion at night only to let it go in

the morning169

. Indeed, al-Nuqaidan went from being an

extreme Takfiri to an extreme neo-con secular

fundamentalist- slandering the religious scholars of the

Kingdom. He was sued for libel and

defamation and convicted a second

time by the Saudi government. Mansur

will later exploit this conviction to get

attention in bigoted Western media

alleging he was convicted because he

fights for freedom170

.

Dr. Istifham explains Mansur is

extremely egocentric and in need of

continual attention. It is, of course

people like Mr. Lacroix and other

western islamophobes who are very gladly giving him

the desperate attention he needs. In some of his articles,

Lacroix attempted to promote this convicted felon and

notorious liar by calling him a daring intellectual171

. In

168 “Mansur al-Nuqaidan, Jawla fi Radahat Nafsi wa Damirihi”

http://www.saaid.net/mktarat/almani/46.htm 169 Dr. Istifham pointed out how al-Nuqaidan, time after time, fell

from one extreme to the other. In his Takfiri days, he refused to pray

behind a Sunni Imam who he accused of being a member of the

Murjiya-sect. One year later, Mansur al-Nuqaidan himself openly

started calling to the ideology of the Murjiyas. Likewise, a few

months before his conversion to secularism al-Nuqaidan bashed a

Shaikh who contradicted him in his opinion by saying: “This is

disbelief!” while today he’s accusing all the Saudi scholars of making

the Muslims disbelievers. 170 Mansur al-Nuqaidan "Telling the Truth, Facing the Whip”, New

York Times 171 Stéphane Lacroix is known to defend these kinds of uncultivated

Arabs with obstinacy. During an islamophobic colloquium organized

by ISIM, he gave a lecture called “Saudi Intellectuals and the Islamo-

Liberal Movement”. Indeed, racist anti Muslims only consider the

Arabs to be intellectuals if they call to secularism in their country. On

the other hand, Muslim scholars who studied for decades only

obtained their title due to their adherence to a tribe that succeeded in

monopolizing a part of the Arabian Desert. Moreover, they have so

much knowledge that they abandoned all independent reasoning.

http://www.saaid.net/mktarat/almani/46.htm


25

Al-Albani was born in 1914 in Shkodër, north-west Albania.

Shaikh al-Albani wasn’t born in Syria but near the Montenegrin border.

the following statement of our French researcher, his

scholastic integrity becomes, once more, very apparent:

“The controversy sparked by his book The Veil of the

Muslim Woman, in which he argued that Muslim women

should not cover their face—a position unacceptable by

Saudi standards—, finally gave the Wahhabi

establishment the justification needed to get him out of

the Kingdom in 1963.”

Mr. Lacroix discusses another topic in one

of al-Albani’s works and yet again, he

clearly hasn’t read the book. In “The Veil

of the Muslim Women”, the Shaikh

concludes that Muslim women should

cover their face but concludes that it isn’t

an obligation. Like the majority of Islamic

scholars, he considered it to be part of the

Sunnah and falling under the ‘mustahab’-

category of acts of worship172

. Therefore it

doesn’t come as a surprise to know that the

women in al-Albani’s own family all wore

the niqab. Lacroix’ statement that ‘Muslim

women shouldn’t cover their face’ implies

that al-Albani saw it to be un-proscribed

(mubah), detestable (makruh) or forbidden

(haram).

The four Imams (Ahmed, Malik, al-

Shafi’ee and Abu Hanifa) all saw the niqab

to be a religious recommendation and not

an obligation173

. This shows that the Saudi

scholars do sometimes contradict the

verdict of the majority of the Islamic

scholars and even the four schools of

thought.

Lacroix’ allegation that this book gave the

‘Wahhabi establishment’ the justification needed to kick

al-Albani out of the Kingdom in 1963 is impossible

because the book was written in 1949, twelve years

before the Shaikh’s arrival in Saudi Arabia. On the

contrary, it shows that al-Albani’s stance on the niqab

clearly didn’t prevent the highest representatives of the

‘Wahhabi establishment’ to invite him over to teach in

their most prestigious universities.

Moreover, previous articles of Professor Lacroix show

that he is simply speculating and guessing about things

without being able to bring any references for his foolish

tales. In another hilarious article of his, he mentions the

following:

172 Meaning that it is highly recommended 173 Imam Ahmed has two narrations in this issue. In one narration he

considered is to be an obligation, in another narration he saw it to be

mustahab (religiously recommended).

“In his well-known book “Characteristics of the

Prophet’s Prayer” (sifat salat al-nabi), al-Albani

presented a number of peculiar views on Islamic rituals,

which raised controversy with other scholars. Some say

these controversies led to his expulsion from Medina in

1963…”174

This again is impossible because Shaikh al-Albani wrote

this book in Damascus before he traveled

to Saudi Arabia. So one day al-Albani’s

departure from the Kingdom is due to his

stance on the veil of Muslim women and

another day it is the because of his stances

on the Islamic rituals of the prayer. Is

Lacroix’ astounding incompetence

ascribable to his islamophobic dishonesty

or just to his utter confusion and

ignorance? One thing is sure; he seizes

every pretext for portraying the Saudi

Salafi scholars as evil intolerant

individuals who do not accept other

opinions.

Shaikh al-Albani was never officially

expelled from Saudi Arabia but decided to

leave by himself for reasons unknown to

everybody. He never mentioned why he

left the Kingdom. It is deplorable that

Lacroix is using this event to criticize the

Saudi scholars of Islam, something al-

Albani has never done.

Mr. Lacroix concludes this part of his

article with another gaffe:

“He then re-established himself in his

country of birth, Syria, before leaving for

Jordan in 1979.”

Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani was born in 1914 in

Shkodër near the Montenegrin border in northwestern

Albania, not Syria. While portraying the life of the

greatest hadith scholar in the past century, Stéphane

Lacroix has been unable to even correctly determine his

country of birth! The idea that professor Lacroix is being

paid for his clumsy articles is truly chilling.


Arabia: The Story of Juhayman al-‘Utaybi Revisited”, p.4


26

Ijaza’s have always existed from the time of the first Muhaddithin

Ijaza’s and Other Misconceptions

Lacroix’ article on Shaikh al-Albani turns into a total

mess. There isn’t a single sentence that seems to be free

of errors, fabrications and misconceptions. Here’s

another one:

“Traditional Wahhabi ‘ilm, therefore, was the fruit of a

process of transmission and depended on the number of

ijazas—a certificate by which a scholar acknowledges

the transmission of his knowledge (or part of it) to one of

his pupils, and authorizes him to transmit it further—

given by respected Wahhabi scholars.”

Ijaza’s are nothing typical of what

Lacroix calls ‘Wahhabism’, they

have always existed since the time of

the very first Muhaddithin and

scholars in general. Professor Lacroix

again shows his unfamiliarity with

the field he claims to be able to

inform others about, as there are

several types of ijazas. One form

gives permission to transmit a

specific collection of hadiths through

a specific chain of transmission,

while another type is related to one’s

mastery of a certain work or ability to teach it to others.

The former type of ijazas are authorizations which were

based on the ‘hadith-hearings with a Shaikh’175

which

were very frequent in the time of the first hadith scholars

and contained much larger audiences176

. Today, these

hearings still exist but these kinds of ijaza’s are no longer

considered as crucial due to the prevalence of printed

copies of the source books. The contemporary Saudi

scholars have almost entirely quit attaching the previous

level of importance to this type of ijaza’s although they

are still being used to different degrees by different

scholars, keeping alive this practice of the

predecessors177

. In these days, having a lot of ijazas of

this type is no longer a proof that the person is qualified

to teach178

. On the other hand, the second type of ijaza is

a certificate testifying the mastership of a certain field in

Islamic sciences or of a certain book along with the

authorization to teach it. The simple reason that al-Albani

didn’t possess many of these certificates is because he

175 Meaning that the student would present a body of knowledge to a

Shaikh in one of several ways who would then give him an ‘ijaza’ or

permission to narrate them to others. 176 Sometimes the number of attendants of these sessions would

exceed 200.000 people. 177 Without the presence of the strong conditions imposed by the

Muhaddithin 178 Abdullah Ibn Muhammad al-Shamrani, “Thabt Mu’allafat Al-

Albani”, p. 97-98

grew up in a country with very limited Sunni scholars.

Despite this, no one viewed him to be an unqualified

scholar, not even the ‘Wahhabis’ who invited him to

teach in their land. This also rebuts Lacroix’ initial claim

that “the members of the ‘Wahhabi aristocracy’ would

become the only legitimate transmitters of the Wahhabi

tradition” and that “independent scholars were excluded

because they had not received “proper ‘ilm’ from

‘qualified’ ulama”.

By mentioning al-Albani’s alleged stance to ijazas as

being a new element in his revolutionary approach to

hadith, Lacroix falsely concludes that he has found a new

proof of his farfetched deduction:

“This is the very logic al-Albani—

who, himself, owned very few of these

certificates—would challenge by

promoting his critical approach. As a

matter of fact, according to al-Albani,

transmission has no importance

whatsoever, because, every hadith

being suspect, the fact that it was

narrated by a respected scholar

cannot guarantee its authenticity.”

As Lacroix continues on in his

argument, he mixes the two types of ijazas in the same

context. After firstly describing the certificates of

knowledge transmission, he then mentions the other form

of ijazas which is exclusively restricted to hadith

transmission. Cunningly, the professor gives the

impression that both types of ijaza are one and the same

leading the reader to believe that al-Albani disregards

ijazas. This is impossible since we’re talking about one

of the recognized forms of hadith-transmission that is

universally accepted amongst the Muhaddithin. Al-

Albani’s books contain plenty of examples wherein he

mentions how certain narrators transmit correct hadiths

with an ijaza179

. Likewise, his ‘Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-

Sahiha’ is filled with examples of this kind. Al-Albani

for example states:

“I say that this chain of narrators is good and that the

hadith is correct because it is consolidated by other

hadiths by way of ijaza”180

How can Lacroix then state that al-Albani considered this

established approach of being of no importance? Another

possible interpretation of Lacroix’ incoherent accounts, is

that he believes that the legacy of hadith-transmission

179 See Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani’s comments in “Al-Tankil

Bima Fi Ta’nib Al-Kawthary Min Al-Abatil” 180 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-Sahiha”

[Collection of Correct Hadiths], 1/8


27

Mr. Lacroix seems to believe that the hadith chain of narrators also includes today’s Muhaddithin.

through living narrators still exists today in an unbroken

chain, all the more affirming his allegation of al-Albani’s

revolutionary approach to Hadith. If this truly is his

understanding, then it is well known that the era of

personal narrative transmission ended with the universal

recordings of hadith in the canonical collections in the 9th

and 10th century C.E. But whether understood in the first

manner or the second, his allegation is false in both

cases.

While analyzing Mr. Lacroix’ following statement it

seems more likely he is of the opinion that the

contemporary Muhaddithin are still part of the hadith

sanad:

“On the contrary, the important process is

accumulation—a good scholar of hadith

being someone who has memorized a large

sum of hadith and, more importantly, the

biographies of a large number of

transmitters.”

This is again an attempt to portray the

Muhaddithin as people who do not use

independent reasoning since ‘they only

depend on memorization’. However, it is

common knowledge that one can never

become a true Muhaddith without being

well versed in the other Islamic sciences just

like one cannot be considered as an expert

in Islamic sects if he doesn’t possess a

formal Islamic education or essential knowledge of

Islam, its sciences and history.

Once more, our confused professor is getting things

mixed up. What he attributed to al-Albani is a description

of the reality of the Hadith scholars in the period prior to

the Hadith recordings; whereas Lacroix interpreted that

al-Albani saw it to be a condition for past and present

Muhaddithin. Here is what al-Albani said about the

conditions of a Hadith scholar:

“To sum up we say that the only required condition to

judge hadiths as being strong or weak is that the person

should possess the competence to do so. As for

memorization, then that is something else. If the person

possesses a large sum of memorized hadiths, then that is

better. And if he doesn’t, than it is no condition. And this

has been established by the previous scholars.”181

Al-Albani also stated that there is a consensus amongst

scholars in the issue:

181 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Al-Rad A’la Ta’aqub Al-

Hadith”, p.60

“The great scholars all agreed that the one and only

condition for the one who wished to judge hadiths by

making them weak or strong, is that he has mastered the

science of hadith…”182

But to professor Lacroix, accumulation and

memorization is the condition. Lacroix comes up with all

these fantasies merely to finish off by saying that the

‘Saudi Wahhabis’ only became scholars due to their

family descent, not their knowledge:

“Thus, the science of hadith can be measured according

to objective criteria unrelated to family, tribe, or

regional descent, allowing for a previously absent

measure of meritocracy.”

With this false allegation that serves to

sustain al-Albani’s revolutionary approach

to Hadith, it certainly isn’t the first time

Lacroix has depicted the Saudis as ignorant

people and their society as being non-

meritocratic. This is the typical racist

perception many islamophobes have been

fostering in Western media for many

decades.

The Lacroix-Bin Laden Connection

In his article, Mr. Lacroix has gathered the

criticism of the enemies of Shaikh al-Albani

in his lifetime. After having exploited the

false claims of the secularists, Haddadis, Sufis and

orientalists, Lacroix now takes on the critique of the

Takfiri-sect:

“In the late 1980s, some of al-Albani’s pupils, led by a

Medinan Shaikh called Rabi‘ al-Madkhali, formed an

informal religious network generally referred to as al-

Jamiyya (“the Jamis”, named after one of their key

members, Muhammad Aman al-Jami).”

The term ‘Al-Jamiyya’ was coined by the Takfiris and

members of the neo-Khawarij sect after the Gulf War as

a negative reaction to the fatwas of major scholars like

Shaikh Ibn Baz and Muhammad Aman al-Jami in which

they declared it permissible to make use of American

troops to defend Saudi interests. The scholars of Ahl al-

Sunnah who pronounced this fatwa were severely

condemned by the Takfiris, who called them the

“scholars of America”. Shaikh Muhammad Aman al-

Jami refuted the ambiguities of these hot-headed people,

who then decided to describe all those who didn’t reject

the US military presence in the Saudi Kingdom as

182 Ibid, p.57


28

Despite his origins, Shaikh Muhammad Aman al-Jami had the honor of teaching in the Grand Mosque of the Prophet in Medina.

‘Jamis’. The term is also used by the secularists and other

enemies of the call to Tawheed in order to alienate

people from Islam183

. There is of course no sect or

religious network by the name of al-Jamiyya and no one

has ever declared belonging to this fictitious group184

.

Moreover, Muhammad Aman Al-Jami has always

condemned the formation of groups and sects and he

would never have permitted that people associate

themselves with a group that is derived from his name185

.

But to Lacroix, the Shaikh was a key member in this so-

called organization.

In using the term ‘al-Jamiyya’, Stéphane Lacroix has

joined the ranks of Osama Bin Laden and his followers in

their attacks on Ahl al-Sunna. Let us

just hope this apparent link to al-

Qaida isn’t going to initiate a US

drone attack upon Lacroix’

headquarters at the Sciences-Po

University.

It is regrettable to see that Lacroix

never did any of the necessary

research on the origins of the term

‘al-Jamiyya’ and simply limited

himself to blindly following his

Saudi guru Mansur al-Nuqaidan who

repeatedly used this term when he

was upon the opposite polar of extremism that he is upon

today.

But Lacroix has gone even further than al-Nuqaidan as he

is exploiting this forged terminology as a new argument

in his concocted allegation and misrepresentation of the

Saudi scholars as being a bunch of racists:

“Beyond their focus on hadith, the Jamis became known

for emphasizing al-Albani’s calls not to indulge in

politics and for denouncing those who did. Again, many

of the Jamis were of peripheral origin (al-Madkhali was

from Jazan, on the Yemeni border, while al-Jami was

from Ethiopia) and had therefore been excluded from all

leading positions in the religious field.”

As we already mentioned, the Jami-designation was

based on the rejection of pronounced fatwas during the

Gulf War which the neo-Khawarij didn’t agree with and

not on any tribal or racial criteria since several Saudi

183 Abdul-Aziz Ibn Rayyis, “Al-Jamiyya wa Al-Wahhabiyya wa Al-

Hachwiyya Alqab Tanfiriya”, [Jamis, Wahabis, Hachwiya, terms of

alienation], p.7 184 Bilal Ibn Abdul-Ghani al-Salimi “Abra’a Ila Allah min Al-Jamiyya

wal Madkhaliyya”, [I dissociate myself from al-Jamiyya and al-

Madkhaliyya in front of Allah], p. 81-82 185 Ibid, p.87, 117

scholars of non-peripheral original (as Shaikh Saleh al-

Fawzan) have also been accused of being members of

this so called informal organization. Accordingly,

Muhammad Aman al-Jami and Rabi’ al-Madkhali have

never been excluded from any leading position in the

religious field, despite their foreign or peripheral origins.

To sustain this, it suffices to mention that Shaikh

Muhammad Aman al-Jami was part of the religious elite

that had the honor of teaching in the “Masjid al-Nabawi”,

the Prophet's Mosque in Medina. Shaikh al-Jami was

employed as an aqida-professor in the ‘al-Shari'a’-

faculty of the prestigious Islamic University of Medina

and was also the Head of the Department of Aqida in

Post Graduate Studies.

Moreover, what proves without any

doubt that he had never been

excluded by the ‘religious Wahhabi

establishment’ is that the Ethiopian

Shaikh was a close friend to Shaikh

Abdul-Aziz Ibn Baz, the Saudi mufti

in his time, with whom he undertook

several journeys186

. He also had

many personal meetings with the

previous mufti Shaikh Muhammad

Ibn Ibrahim Aal al-Shaikh187

.

Likewise, Shaikh Rabi' al-Madkhali

has never been excluded because of

the fact he was raised on the Yemeni border. The Shaikh

was the head of the department of ‘al-Sunnah’ at the

Islamic University of Medina and was member of the

teaching faculty. There are, indeed, countless non-Saudi

scholars and ‘scholars of peripheral origin’ who reached

some of the highest religious positions in the Saudi

Kingdom due to their Islamic knowledge, not their

origin, family or tribe.

Lacroix then claims that the Saudi government funded

this imaginary ‘al-Jamiyya’ group:

“They would finally gain prominence in the early 1990s,

when the Saudi government supported them financially

and institutionally, in the hope of creating an apolitical

ideological counterweight to the Islamist opposition led

by the al-Sahwa al-Islamiyya (the Islamic Awakening),

186 Shaikh Muhammad Aman al-Jami kept Shaikh Ibn Baz company

during his journeys to Riyadh after the opening of the ‘Institute of

Science’ (al-Ma'had al-I'lmi). He was also very close to the Mufti

during his classes. 187 Now imagine an Ethiopian student landing in France and becoming

a professor in one of the major universities of the country. Then,

imagine that same African student becoming a close friend to an

important person in the French government (like Sarko or Valls) with

whom he then travels. Indeed, it is not even conceivable. However,

Stéphane Lacroix had the audacity to pretend that Shaikh al-Jami was

excluded by the Saudis due to his Ethiopian origins.


29

In his articles, professor Lacroix deceptively attempts to link Shaikh Ibn Baz, Muqbil and al-Albani to the Juhayman attack of Mecca in 1979

an informal religio-political movement which appeared

in Saudi Arabia in the 1960s as a the result of a

hybridization between Wahhabism, on religious issues,

and the ideas of the Muslim Brotherhood, on political

issues.”

When scholars such as Shaikh al-Jami and Shaikh Rabi’

refuted the astray individuals that adhered to the ‘Sahwa-

movement’, the latter accused them of being bootlickers

of the Saudi government and even went so far to say that

that they were agents working for them. In alleging that

these scholars are being influenced in their fatwas by

government backing, Lacroix has again joined the

Takfiris in their slanderous attacks

against the established Salafi

scholars.

Did it really take the Saudi

government three decades to counter

the Sahwa movement by financing a

few scholars of ‘peripheral origin’,

one of whom (i.e. Shaikh Rabi’) was

strongly opposed to the presence of

US military in the Arabian

Peninsula? Here, Lacroix’

conspiracy theory gets very intricate.

Where does he get his information

from and if these scholars were supported institutionally

then where are their organizations, buildings and

institutions? It is well known that the Saudi government

doesn’t need to favor the country’s scholars money-wise

since they are all well paid anyway.

Depicting al-Albani as a Takfiri

While reading ‘the Lacroix fables’ in this article, one

comes to the question: what is the point in inventing all

this? Al-Albani’s ‘revolutionary’ approach to hadith, his

so-called conflict with the Saudi scholars, his ‘adherence

to Wahhabism’ as well as his ‘critique’ of Ibn Abdul-

Wahhab supposedly all led to independent religious

entrepreneurs who now challenge the ‘Wahhabis’. This is

how Mr. Lacroix rounds up his article:

“As a consequence, al-Albani’s ideas have given

independent Salafi religious entrepreneurs a weapon

with which to fight their way into previously very closed

circles…” and “For all these reasons, al-Albani’s ideas

would rapidly become a means for Salafi religious

entrepreneurs from outside the Wahhabi aristocracy to

challenge the existing hierarchy.”

The point Lacroix is trying to make, is that the legacy of

al-Albani consists of a bunch of youngsters with madcap

ideas opposing the Saudi scholars. Lacroix hasn't realized

that the very same people who in practice challenge the

Saudi scholars all belong to the Takfiri and neo-

Khawarij-sects who are well-known for either

pronouncing takfir on Shaikh al-Albani or calling him a

“Murji”, not for being his supporters.

But this presumed ‘challenge’ of the existing ‘Wahhabi

hierarchy’ was only the initial phase of a movement that

would later result in terrorist attacks:

“In the mid-1960s, a number of al-Albani’s disciples in

Medina founded al-Jamaa al-Salafiyya al-Muhtasiba

(The Salafi Group which Commands Good and Forbids

Evil), a radical faction of which, led

by Juhayman al-‘Utaybi, would

storm the grand mosque of Mecca in

November 1979.”

Professor Lacroix has displayed a

biography of Shaikh Muhammad

Nasir al-Din al-Albani filled with

fabrications and deceptive

arguments with the sole purpose of

linking him to a terrorist movement.

Islamophobic Middle East

specialists are well-aware that by

linking Muslims to terrorism they will always draw

significant attention. In expanding the imaginary al-

Qaida network and demonizing the Muslim community,

their articles will have a greater chance of being

published.

The Juhayman attack on the grand mosque of Mecca had

nothing to do with Shaikh al-Albani and even less with

his creed or ideas. The attack was entirely based on the

alleged dream of a few Juhayman’s supporters in which

they saw Muhammad al-Qahtani to be the mahdi. This

was followed by numerous witnesses of people in the

Arab world who all claimed they had the same dream in

which al-Qahtani was seen as the long awaited mahdi.

The Juhayman group exploited the recurrence of these

so-called dreams in different countries to prove to the

world that the mahdi really had arrived. Al-Albani

explained that, prior to Juhayman, several insane people

had already made this false claim which then led to

nefarious turmoil and seditions. He likewise explained

that Juhaiman went astray due to his tremendous

ignorance and stated his followers were simpleminded or

evil people188

. The Egyptian researcher Dr. Muhammad

al-Muqaddam explains in his book “al-Mahdi” that the

followers of Juhayman had at this stage become

188 Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, “Silsila Al-Ahadith Al-Sahiha”

[Collection of Correct Hadiths], Vol. 8 (Hadiths 1529, 1924 and 2236)


30

According to Stéphane Lacroix, some ‘Salafi scholars’ –in their twenties– where involved in the terrorist attacks of Riyadh in 2003

impregnated by the Sufi ideology in which dreams are as

reliable and accurate as divine revelation189

. It is

important to note that these followers fell into complete

blindly following and were therefore entirely opposing to

the teachings of al-Albani. Likewise, their ideology of

‘khuruj’ and ‘takfir’ was entirely opposed to the salafi

principles of Shaikh al-Albani.

In his article on Juhayman190

, Lacroix himself stated that

the group of Juhayman was political191

while he asserts

that al-Albani wasn’t interested in politics and quoted

him as saying “the good policy is to abandon politics”.

But somehow they are the followers of Shaikh Albani?!?

At the time of the attack, Juhayman and his followers had

nothing left in common with the

creed of Salafiya nor with the Salafi

scholars. Moreover, they weren’t al-

Albani’s disciples but merely a group

of novices who used to attend some

of his classes in the same way they

attended classes of other scholars192

.

They went astray many years before

the 1979 attack and were advised by

several Salafi Shaikhs not to form an

independent group.

Alleging that this cruel attack which

took place 16 years after al-Albani’s departure from the

kingdom has anything to do with his ideas or ideology is

as farfetched as linking Saddam Hussein to al-Qaida. But

how could we expect professor Lacroix to understand

Shaikh al-Albani’s ideas if he isn’t even able to - as

shown previously - accurately determine his place of

birth?

The final conclusion in Lacroix’ article is that a few of

al-Albani’s students who promoted the centrality of

hadith had challenged the ‘Wahhabi religious

aristocracy’ and ended up by committing terror attacks.

The nutty professor states that:

“Again, most of these scholars were peripheral figures,

such as Sulayman al-‘Alwan, a very young—al-‘Alwan

was born in 1970 and started to become known as a

189 Dr. Muhammad Ahmed Isma’il al-Muqaddam, “Al-Mahdi”,

p.557-559 190 Lacroix has cowritten “Rejectionist Islamism in Saudi Arabia: The

Story of Juhayman al-‘Utaybi Revisited” with the notorious

Norwegian islamophobe Thomas Hegghammer. The two made it

seem as if their article on Juhayman was based on their proper

research whereas most of it is plagiarism with ideas taken from the

article “Juhayman Al-Uteybi, Maqati’ min Hayat Astura” written in

Arabic by Mansur al-Nuqaidan who many consider the Saudi version

of Hirshi Ali. 191 S. Lacroix and T. Hegghammer, “Rejectionist Islamism in Saudi

Arabia: The Story of Juhayman al-‘Utaybi Revisited”, p.12 192 See http://www.sahab.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=138172

scholar while he was in his twenties—Shaikh of non-

tribal descent, and ‘Abdallah al-Sa‘d, whose family had

come from the city of Zubayr in Modern Iraq. The two of

them would later become key figures in the Saudi Jihadi

trend, challenging the political order after they had

challenged the religious order. As a consequence, they

would be arrested and jailed after the May 2003

bombings.”193

Et voila! Lacroix began his article by attributing a self-

invented ‘revolutionary approach’ of hadith to Shaikh al-

Albani; he then falsely claimed that this led to frictions

with the scholars of the Saudi Kingdom and concludes by

implying that the May 2003 bombings are part of Shaikh

al-Albani’s legacy. Linking any act

of extremism, terrorism or violence,

directly or indirectly, to al-Albani is

simply outrageous. What is the sense

in mentioning these cruel bombings

committed by people who

excommunicated al-Albani?

Unfortunately, Mr. Lacroix is not

alone in his attempt to link

everything that goes back to the

original Islamic teachings to

terrorism.

Al-Albani’s True Legacy

Albania, Europe’s poorest country is only known in the

Muslim world due to Shaikh Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-

Albani and his magnificent legacy. The Albanian dictator

Ahmed Zogolli would never have been quoted in any

Arabic book if it wasn’t for al-Albani’s biography

mentioning how he and his family had to flee his

oppressive regime.

In Europe, Stéphane Lacroix is being presented as an

Islamic and Saudi Arabia specialist. However, his articles

are blatantly fraudulent compilations of lies, distortions

and misconceptions in which he has taken a

‘revolutionary’ approach194

in slandering Islam and its

major scholars. In addition, he is incapable of conducting

proper scholastic research of the issues he deals with and

his ‘academic’ examination seems to be based on Google

searches, plagiarism and bastardized Orientalist

ambiguities. Lacroix is well aware that he can publish

articles with apparent impunity as long as he deals with

193 According to Lacroix, some youth in their twenties became known

as Salafi scholars. Moreover, these same young Salafi scholars ended

up committing terrorist attacks. Indeed, there is no limit to Lacroix’

desperate tactics of deception. 194 Lacroix’ approach is, of course, not revolutionary since most of the

self-proclaimed ‘Islamic specialists’ slander Islam by any possible

means.

http://www.sahab.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=138172


31

The Albanian secular dictator Ahmed Zogolli collaborated closely with Fascist Italy

In his articles, the French islamophobe, S. Lacroix, leads a crusade to defame Muslims and their faith.

issues people are unacquainted with. And as many other

Sciences-Po professors, he is taking full advantage of the

islamophobia cash cow industry.

One thing, however, should be

acknowledged: Mr. Lacroix has a lot of

imagination when it comes to writing on

Islam. He’s creative in concocting the most

unbelievable stories that contain detailed

plots and his fertile imagination often leads

to unprecedented misconceptions.

One can only conclude that people who are

unable to analyze the foundations of the

Islamic belief, the works of the great

Muhaddithin and the influence and spread

of Islamic sects in a historical context will

come up with the most improbable

suppositions. But in France, you don’t need

to be an expert on the subject matter to get

attention. Khalida Messaoudi is a perfect

illustration of how French media absorb and

accept every form of defamation against

Islam and its Muslim community, no matter

how absurd it may sound. Messaoudi

conceitedly proclaimed that kneeling in the

Islamic prayer is ‘a position of slavery

invented by Bedouin slave traders in Saudi

Arabia’. At the same time, Muslim authors

who have the ability to conduct academic

research are entirely excluded from taking

part in any mainstream media.

Verily, politics and media in France are undeniably

submerged in islamophobia as was, in the previous

century, the anti-Semitic propaganda in Germany. In

1933, German democracy allowed Hitler to popularize

anti-Jewish fascism in the same way French secularism

has today allowed Sarkozy to disseminate a new form of

anti-Islamic fascism. However, the French islamophobes

have learned to avoid the propaganda mistakes of their

German precursors and wage their anti-Muslim hate

campaign under the guise of “a fight for republican and

secular principles” and “freedom of expression”.

Furthermore, they transform designations to attenuate the

xenophobic character of their slanderous attacks. Hence,

in describing orthodox Muslims they no longer use the

terms ‘Muslim faith’ or ‘Muslim citizens’ —

designations that are exclusively reserved for westernized

Arabs—,but rather Islamists, Salafists, Wahhabis,

extremists, fanatics, fundamentalists and other ‘ist-

ending’ words.

Until this day, France doesn’t have a law forbidding

hatred of Islam, or any form of Islam-bashing. This has

allowed the icons of French Islamophobia to present

themselves as Good Samaritans defending the ‘civilized

world’ from the ‘evils of Islam’. Some of

them proudly revealed and justified their

hatred towards Islam on French national

television. Indeed, France is no longer

what it was in the time prior to Sarkozy’s

political career. The passed and enforced

laws against the freedom of Muslim

women to dress according to their beliefs,

the numerous profanities against mosques

and Muslim cemeteries, the despicable

caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad

as well as the increasing slander by

French politicians against practicing

Muslims are only a few elements that

prove that secular France is resembling

Nazi Germany more and more, every

day…

When in 1999, Shaikh al-Albani passed

away, millions of people mourned his

death. However, his works live on and he

will be remembered and loved forever. As

for Stéphane Lacroix, then he is just one

of the numerous bigoted authors of French

secular fundamentalism who has wasted

his life in slandering Islam and Muslims

who stick to their religion. He will be

forgotten, his bigoted articles will

continue to be known as scams and

dissolve in the midst of cheap Islamophobic

propaganda... 195

Kareem El Hidjaazi

REMARK: After this response was posted on “stéphane-lacroix-

science-po.com”, Sciences Po lodged a complaint against this website

that provided a platform for Muslims to respond to the professor’s

scientific deceits. They requested our internet host to take down the

website immediately pretending it contains “identity usurpation”

which of course is untrue, since nowhere on the site has anyone

pretended to be Stéphane Lacroix or Sciences Po.

While many were expecting a complaint to be lodged against

Stéphane Lacroix for anti-Muslim racism, plagiarism and slander,

Sciences Po seems to be defending its islamophobic employees at any

cost.

In their continuous attacks against the Muslim community, French

islamophobes are known to hide behind freedom of speech. However,

when Muslims desire to express and defend themselves against the

slander of Islam and the leading members of their community,

freedom of speech and the right of self-defense no longer seem

applicable…

195 Research for this article has been conducted in the library of ‘Dar

al-Hadith Ma’bar’ (Yemen), I would therefore like to thank Shaikh

Muhammad al-Imam for letting me use the library of his precious

institute.

is stephane lacroix truly an expert on salafism?

Documents

sciences po university

sciences po institution

french mainstream media

islam experts

french muslim community

academic articles

tales of lacroix

routine academic research