It is being circulated by some people that the warning of Ash-S͟hayk͟h Al-ʿAllāmah Ḥasan ʿAbdul-Wahhāb Al-Bannā (raḥimahullāh) regarding Bilāl As-Sālimī is old, and that the S͟hayk͟h later praised him or retracted his criticism.

This claim is invalid for clear reasons:

Firstly: The S͟hayk͟h's criticism is a detailed criticism that does not permit interpretation. The S͟hayk͟h (raḥimahullāh) did not issue a vague criticism; rather, he clearly explained its reasons, attaching it to observable traits in the person. He said; in essence:

• He is unstable and inconsistent. • His speech is mixed. • He speaks on matters beyond his level. • He displays and promotes himself despite lacking the qualifications.

This type of criticism is a detailed criticism based on methodological and knowledge-based reasons. The principle among the scholars of criticism and praise is: A detailed criticism takes precedence and cannot be retracted except by an explicit retraction from the critic. And to this day, there is no authentic, explicit transmission from the S͟hayk͟h (raḥimahullāh) indicating he retracted this criticism.

Secondly: The reasons for the criticism still exist, and are even stronger. Anyone who examines the state of Bilāl As-Sālimī today will find that the causes of the criticism mentioned by the S͟hayk͟h (raḥimahullāh) still exist, and have in fact intensified. These include:

• His involvement and speech in major fitan, such as the fitnah of fighting in Sudan, Yemen, and other Muslim countries; matters for senior scholars, not for those who merely pretend knowledge.
• His audacity towards S͟hayk͟hs and students of knowledge, reaching foolishness and recklessness even to criticizing S͟hayk͟h ʿAbdullāh Al-Buk͟hārī (ḥafiẓahullāh).
• His arrogance and self-exaltation, which can be seen from his behavior, speech, and tracking of his methodology.
• Practically presenting himself as “the Muḥaddith of Egypt,” speaking excessively and neglecting the silence that adorns a seeker of knowledge.
• His visible activity on social media, especially Facebook, where his main occupation appears to be criticizing Salafīs, raising doubts, and reviving fitan under new disguises.

These traits still exist in him, and today they are even clearer and more apparent.

Thirdly: There was no significant opposition to the S͟hayk͟h at the time of the criticism. At that time, no recognized praise countered the S͟hayk͟h's criticism (raḥimahullāh). No well-known scholar of that period opposed S͟hayk͟h Ḥasan Al-Bannā in this ruling or praised Bilāl As-Sālimī. The principle among scholars of criticism and praise is: If a detailed criticism exists, and there is no significant praise from competent scholars, the criticism is accepted without dispute, especially when it comes from an Imām known for knowledge, piety, and recognition of men.

Based on that: the criticism remains valid and unrevoked for two clear reasons:

1- The S͟hayk͟h (raḥimahullāh) did not retract his criticism. Therefore, to those who claim retraction: bring your proof if you are truthful, for claims are not accepted without an established report.

2- The reasons for the criticism still exist. The principle is: if a criticism is justified, and its causes remain, the criticism remains.

And Allāh knows best. May Allāh’s peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muḥammad.

Written by: the one in need of his Lord, Jaʿfar Al-Hāshimī Al-Aḥwāzī Sydney, Australia 28 Rajab 1447 AH

Source: https://t.me/TawhidCentreSyd/1594

Translation: Zubayr ʿAbbāsī