Why I Stopped Following Shaykh Salah Al-Fawzan: Syria and Yemen

I used to follow Shaykh Salah Al-Fawzan in my early 20s.

I used to follow him. I've got his Sharh of Zaid Al-Mustaqna at home.

He's actually got a very good Sharh of Zaid Al-Mustaqna.

It's nice, it's easy to read, and his Fatwas on Hanbali Fiqh were not bad.

However, I started realizing a couple of things.

I used to watch his Fatwa programs every day, every other day.

And there was a point where I just kind of, I'll be honest, became disillusioned, and I'll tell you what happened.

The point was, and it was to do with the politics, unfortunately, right?

What happened was this. I watched one of his Fatwas, and it was at the height of what was going on in Syria at the time.

And people know that, like, at that time, brothers, the Syria thing was as big as the Palestine thing.

We were all so emotionally invested in it, especially in, like, West London.

The Syrian people were getting massacred, we saw it.

I had friends of mine who actually went and joined the Takfiri groups and died in Syria.

So there was a lot of commotion in the area, like in West London, etc.

So I used to follow Shaykh Salah al-Fawzam, and in the height of the Syrian situation, someone asked him a question.

And his answer made me change my whole opinion of him.

Okay, and I remember, Wallahi, I remember exactly this point.

And then the second point I decided that he was being, he's not independent, basically, that was my decision.

And then it was actually, I'll be honest, it was a transformative moment for me.

The first time was, they asked him about Bashar al-Assad.

Now, Bashar al-Assad is Alawi, right? So even the Shiites would make Takfir, they would make excommunication of Alawi, like Bashar al-Assad.

They asked him about Bashar al-Assad, can we make Takfir of him?

And then Salah al-Fawzam, Shaykh Salah, he said, we can't make Takfir of, Takfir is a big matter.

We can't talk about Takfir this easily, etc., etc., blah, blah, blah.

Now, I had a bit of, I swear to God, and I'm not just making this up, Wallahi, as I heard him say that, and I'm seeing people get killed in Syria and stuff, and whatever, I had something in my heart that was like almost a shock.

Do you know when you're told something from someone, is he actually saying this?

Then I said, maybe it's just I'm misinterpreting it, maybe there's some wisdom in what he was saying.

I was making an excuse for him in my mind.

Then he was asked about Yemen, bro, okay?

He was asked about Yemen and the Houthis, and then he says, هؤلاء الذين... I remember actually exactly what he said by word.

He says, هؤلاء الذين يدعون الإسلام. When he started speaking about the Houthis, who are Zaydis, right?

He said, these people who claim to be Muslim.

So wait, the Zaydis who are actually way closer to Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama'ah.

Essentially, you might as well call them disbelievers, all right?

But then, هؤلاء الذين... Sorry. But then Bashar al-Assad, no, the matter has become convoluted.

So the point I'm making is that, to be honest with you, bro, I started to realize that they're not independent, and it was a harsh realization for me.

And then, because if they're not independent, then why do I need to follow that then?

I have to now start looking myself at the evidences, or going to other scholars and seeing other people from all over the world.

And that's when I started to look at Sa'ad al-Kamli, for example, in Morocco, or al-Dada' al-Sharqiti, for example, in Mauritania.

And I started to grow a greater affinity to those scholars, because I found that they were speaking, especially in the case of al-Dada', they were speaking more truth, and they seemed to not care as much.

That was it. They were speaking... They seemed to be more independent.

And their knowledge was as good, if not better.

And I personally believe it is, sorry to say, much better, in terms of certain memorization and stuff like that.

Um, that's it. That's how I transitioned.

I mean, um, in terms of that, but some people will be very upset with this.

And I understand where you're coming from, but the fact is, I'll be honest.

Uh, that's just my, that's my authentic position.

This is something I determined by myself before probably I even became famous.

This is something I, you know, determined by myself and that's what I believe.

And so I agree with the sentiment, bro, that the present day scholars, a lot of them, but I have to also say some of them are very good and some of them I've met their family members.

Uh, and I, and I find that they are sincere.

So for example, she has thought of him when I did.

So she has thought of him when I did, who is the most truth of, uh, of Islam Q and A he, I believe he's in jail.

I believe this man is sincere. I respect this man.

I might not agree with the way he does FIQH and whatever, and all that stuff.

Wallahi, I respect this man. And I, he's because of mawakif, what mawakif, for example, his son, someone killed his son, I don't know if you know about this situation.

Someone killed his son in Saudi Arabia, his own blood son, and guess what he done?

He forgave him. He could have gotten him executed as well, but he, he exercised that forgiveness thing.

This shows you, Wallahi, a man of character.

And when it came to the Syrian situation, he was, he didn't care about anybody.

He was on a TV. Wallahi, I have so much respect for him.

So someone like these people, I'm not trying to brand everybody the same, but if you lose your independence, like A'id al-Qadni, for example, who had to basically come on the TV, groveling and apologizing, I can't respect this brother.

I can't respect these kind of group of scholars.

I'm sorry to say, if you're being controlled by politics, I can't, you want me to follow that?

Why should I? This is the question. Why should we, why should I tell my family members to follow a man who's not independent or men who are not independent, who are basically beholden to state interests?

I have no reason to be beholden to any state interest.

So that's number one. Um,