E kuliev. ) Read the Koran,

25 082

Recently, the following fatwa of Sheikh Gamet Suleymanov (may Allah protect him) regarding Elmir Kuliev appeared on the Internet:

« Translations of Elmir Kuliev have nothing to do with his manhaj, especially if they are translations of Salafi books. It’s another matter if the question concerns his own books, i.e. books of which he is the author.

As for Elmir Kuliev himself, I have already expressed my position regarding him several times. There are various accusations against him, and therefore, it is necessary that he clearly states his manhaj, especially his position regarding the Ikhwan and other issues. Also regarding Muawiyah and some other companions. Therefore, at the moment, we demand from him that he publicly refute the doubts around him and prove that he is in the manhaj of the salaf. And until he clearly states his beliefs, he is closer to innovation, and therefore avoid such people"(http://sunnapress.com/online-qa/5713-qa-qamet-suleymanov-09-13.html).

We would like to draw attention to some issues due to which many brothers have doubts about the manhaj of Elmir Kuliev. Below are examples and facts of Elmir Kuliyev’s deviation from the path (manhaj) of the righteous predecessors (as-salaf as-salih). These facts of deviation from the manhaj of Ahlu-Sunnah wal-Jamaa can be divided into 5 points:

— Attitude towards authoritative scientists of Saudi Arabia and the government of this country
— Criticism of Muslim rulers
— Support for anti-government protests in Egypt
— Attitude towards such innovators as Yusuf Qaradawi, Said Qutbu and Fethullah Gülen
— Use of the anti-Islamic term “Wahhabism”

1. Elmir Kuliev scolds Saudi Arabia

There is a big problem in these words from the point of view of Sharia. Firstly, it is a bad opinion about Muslims. Secondly, this is slander, which is an even greater sin. Thirdly, this statement is unfair, because Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world that practices the laws of Allah more than any other country. We do not claim that everything in Saudi Arabia is ideal, however, everything is learned by comparison and the obvious fact cannot be denied. What this country has done and is doing for Islam is countless. In this regard, we would like to ask Elmira Kuliyev: Which of the authoritative scholars of Ahl-Sunnah had a bad attitude towards Saudi Arabia and said similar offensive words to the government of this country?

From what we know, all scholars of Ahl-Sunnah, regardless of their nationality, citizenship and place of residence, love and treat Saudi Arabia well. After all, today this is the only country that, at the state level, supports and spreads pure monotheism and the correct creed of the Ahlu-Sunna. Saudi Arabia is also the only country that prohibits and fights against all types of polytheism at the state level ( shirk) and innovations ( bida), which are not prohibited, and sometimes even supported, in many Muslim countries!

On the other hand, we know that this country is not loved and hated by all supporters of innovation (Ahlubid) from among the Rafidis, Ikhwans, Kharijites and other sectarians who do not want the spread of true Islam. This gives rise to the question: Who should Elmir Kuliev rely on and who should he rely on when condemning and insulting Saudi Arabia publicly? On the leaders and scholars of the above-mentioned errant sects, or on your own personal judgments and conclusions, thereby contradicting all the authoritative scholars of Ahl-Sunnah?

Here is what the most authoritative Islamic scholars of our time said about Saudi Arabia:

1. Sheikh Ibn Baz (may Allah have mercy on him):

“This country, Saudi Arabia, is an Islamic country, praise be to Allah, it calls for what is acceptable and forbids what is blameworthy, it commands to judge according to Sharia and calls for Sharia to prevail among people.”

Sl. "Ahdafu is hamalat al-i'lamiya"

2. Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him):

“I take the Great Allah and you as witnesses in what I say: I do not know that there is a country on earth today that applies Sharia the way this country, Saudi Arabia, applies it!”

“Ujubu ta’ati sultan”: ‒ 49

3. Sheikh Albani (may Allah have mercy on him):

“And I ask the Most Pure Almighty Allah that He will make permanent the good for the lands of the Arabian Peninsula and other Muslim lands, and that He will preserve the state of Monotheism (Saudi Arabia) under the protection of the Servant of the Two Holy Mosques - King Fahd ibn Abdulaziz, and that He will extend his life in submission (to Allah), sound decisions and continuous success."

Moreover, this accusation by Elmir Kuliev against Saudi Arabia does not correspond to reality and the correct understanding of Islam. We would like Elmir Kuliev to provide evidence for his statement that these three Muslim nations tried to unite, and Saudi Arabia prevented them?

Then the following question arises: how and on what basis can these nations unite today, if the populations of these nations are divided into many sects warring with each other, which understand Islam and Allah Almighty in different ways?

Elmir Kuliev also speaks of unification with the Persians, who mainly profess radical Shiism-Rafidism represented by modern Iran. I wonder how Elmir Kuliev imagines the unification of Sunni Muslims with the Rafidis, who curse and revile the companions and wives of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) day and night? This is more like the lost Ikhwan principle: “let us unite on what binds us and forget what divides us.” At the same time, the Ikhwans believe that incorrect beliefs, which contain many elements of polytheism, innovation and blasphemy, should not prevent people who call themselves Muslims from uniting. Even the famous Ikhwan preacher Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who spent his whole life trying to unite the Sunnis with the Rafidis, recently admitted that he was mistaken and was wrong for not agreeing with the scholars of Saudi Arabia on this issue ().

2. Criticism of Muslim rulers

Elmir Kuliev cites the unreliable words of his associate:

The words attributed to the associate Elmir Kuliev are unreliable, as Sheikh Albani (may Allah have mercy on him) said about this. The full hadith goes like this:

“It is reported that Sa’id ibn Jumkhan said: “Told me Safiyna, who said: “The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “In my community, the caliphate will last thirty years, after which the reign of" Then Safiyna said to me: “Count up: the caliphate of Abu Bakr, the caliphate of ‘Umar, and the caliphate of ‘Uthman.” Then he (again) said to me: “Calculate the caliphate of ‘Ali.”
(Sa'id ibn Jumkhan) said: "And we found that (it lasted for) thirty years." Sa'id said: “I told him: Banu Umayyah believe that they are caliphs, and he said: “Banu Zarqa' are lying! On the contrary, they are kings, the worst of kings."

Ahmad 5/220, at-Tirmidhi 2226, Abu Daoud 4647

At-Tirmidhi cited this hadith with the addition: “Sa’id said: “I told him: Banu Umayyah believe that they are caliphs, and he said: “Banu Zarqaa are lying! On the contrary, they are kings, the worst of kings." I (Sheikh al-Albani - note SunnaPortal.com) I say: “This supplement was transmitted only by Khashraj ibn Nubata from Sa’id ibn Jumkhan and it is weak, since there is weakness in Khashraj. Al-Dahabi reported this in ad-Du'afa and said: “an-Nasai said: “He is not strong.” Al-Hafiz in at-Taqrib said: “Truthful, but he was wrong.” I say: As for the basis of the hadith, it is authentic” (“Silsila al-sahiha” (1/742)).

As we can see, this addition to the hadith is unreliable, therefore it cannot serve as proof of the statement that the companions criticized the rulers. Moreover, we know of dozens of reliable reports that the Companions forbade speaking ill of the rulers. Among them:

1) Anas ibn Malik, who said:

“Adults from among the companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) forbade us to defame the rulers, and they said: “Do not scold your rulers, do not deceive them and do not hate them! Fear Allah and endure, for verily relief is near!””

At-Tabarani in “al-Kabir” 7609, Ibn Abi ‘Asim in “al-Sunnah” 1015, al-Bayhaqi in “al-Shu’ab” 6/96. Sheikh al-Albani, Dr. Basim al-Jawabra and Dr. Ridaullah al-Mubarakfuri confirmed the authenticity of the isnad

2) ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Uqayma:

“I will never help anyone in murder after the death of ‘Uthman.” Asked him: “Did you take part in the murder of ‘Usman?!” He replied: “I believe that talking about his shortcomings was an aid to his murder”.

Ibn Abi Shaiba 12/47, Ibn Sa’d in “at-Tabaqat” 6/115. Isnad is reliable

3) Ibn Qusayb al-‘Adawi:

“Once, when I was with Abu Bakrat near the minbar of Ibn ‘Amir, who was giving the khutbah in thin clothes, Abu Bilal said: “Look at our ruler, who wears the clothes of the wicked!” And Abu Bakrat said to him: “Be silent, for I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) say: “Whoever humiliates the ruler, Allah will humiliate him!””

Ahmad 5/42, at-Tirmidhi 2224. Sheikh al-Albani called the hadith good

4) Abu Hamza ad-Dab'i:

“When it dawned on me that Hajjaj was hit by fire in the Kaaba (during the battle with Ibn az-Zubayir), I went out to Ibn ‘Abbas, and when I began to scold Hajjaj in front of him, Ibn ‘Abbas said: “Do not become a helper for the shaitan!””

Al-Bukhari in “at-Tarikh al-kabir” 8/104

5) Mu'adh ibn Jabal:

“The ruler of Muslims becomes one with the permission of Allah Almighty, and the one who scolds the ruler scolds the command of Allah Almighty!”

Abu ‘Amr ad-Dani in “al-Fitan” 1/404

6) ‘Uqba ibn Wasaj:

“I was told about the Kharijites and how they defame the rulers. And one day when I met ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr, I told him: “You are from among the remaining companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and Allah has given you knowledge. Here people in Iraq are defaming their rulers and publicly proclaiming their errors, what do you say about this? He replied: “These are those on whom the curse of Allah, the angels and all people is!””

Ibn Abi ‘Asim 933, al-Bazzar 207. Sheikh al-Albani said that this hadith is authentic, corresponding to the conditions of al-Bukhari

7) Abu ad-Darda:

“Truly, the first manifestation of a person’s hypocrisy is swearing at the ruler of the Muslims!”

Ibn ‘Abdul-Barr in “at-Tamhid” 21/287

It is obvious that the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not scold the Muslim rulers, much less allow others to do so.

3. Support for anti-government protests

Elmir Kuliev defends anti-government demonstrations:

Elmir Kuliev does not condemn anti-government protests at all; on the contrary, he even defends them. He believes that the victims of the demonstrations are innocent. However, the question arises: Who forced these victims to go to the demonstrations? If they had stayed at home, would they have died? Doesn't Sharia prohibit demonstrations and protests against a Muslim ruler?

1. Imam Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him):

« As for disobedience to the ruler or rebellion against him, this is a prohibited act in accordance with the unanimous opinion of Muslims. And this even if the rulers are wicked and unjust.”.

Sharh Muslim

2. Imam at-Tahawi (may Allah have mercy on him), explaining the beliefs of the Supporters of the Sunnah and a single community (Ahl-Sunnah Wal-Jamaa) in relation to Muslim rulers, wrote:

« And we consider it unacceptable to stand in opposition and go against our rulers, even if they act unfairly. And we do not call upon Allah against them, and we do not abandon submission to them. On the contrary, we believe that submission to rulers is obligatory submission to Allah Almighty. We submit to them in everything that is not sinful. We also call on Allah for them, and ask Him to protect and improve their situation."

"Aqida at-Tahawiya"

However, some may say that it was the military who came out against the legitimate ruler Morsi and the demonstrators, on the contrary, are defending the ruler. Of course, General El-Sisi did not have the right to overthrow Morsi, but having seized power, he becomes a ruler to whom obedience is mandatory.

The famous medieval theologian Hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

« Legal scholars (Ahli Sunnah) are unanimous that if a ruler has taken power by force (i.e. illegally), then it is obligatory (wajib) to obey him and commit jihad under his command. They are also unanimous that submission to such a ruler is better than going against him in order to avoid bloodshed and anarchy.”

"Fath al-Bari"

Also, here are the words of the famous Islamic scholar Sheikh Suleiman Ruhaili (may Allah protect him) about the situation in Egypt:

« I ask Allah Almighty through His beautiful names and His highest attributes to prevent bloodshed among Muslims and protect them from all troubles.

There is no doubt that every sane Muslim who has reliable Sharia knowledge rejoices at any act that prevents the bloodshed of Muslims and protects them from this great evil. In this regard, I say: The people of Egypt are obliged to make every possible effort to prevent bloodshed. It must not resort to measures that lead to the killing and bloodshed of supporters of various groups. For bloodshed is a great sin. After all, “A believer can always be righteous until he sheds forbidden blood. If he sheds forbidden blood, he will destroy himself” (hadith).
A well-known rule in the Ahli Sunnah states that if a person usurps power through armed rebellion and begins to exercise control over the country, then such a ruler becomes a legitimate (Shari'a) ruler.

And therefore, brothers, we say: Ahlyu Sunnah may consider any act to be forbidden, but at the same time considers that it (this forbidden act) may have legal consequences. Ahli Sunnah does not allow and considers usurpation of power prohibited. Ahlyu Sunnah considers armed rebellion against the ruler and violent accession to power to be unlawful (haram). However, if a rebellion suddenly breaks out and the rebel usurps power, then in this case he becomes the legitimate ruler.
We ask Allah to give the opportunity to the wise people of this ummah from among our rulers, scholars and authoritative people who follow the Sunnah, to give them the opportunity to use all the means that stop bloodshed and the spread of evil.".

We do not condone violence. However, we say that these people themselves are to blame for what befell them. Elmir Kuliyev should have addressed Sharia and explained the position of Sharia regarding rebellion against a Muslim ruler, instead of engaging in populism.

4. Kuliyev’s attitude towards the innovators: Yusuf Qaradawi, Said Qutbu, Fethullah Gülen

Elmir Kuliev declares his commitment to the path of his righteous predecessors, but at the same time does not hide his good attitude towards well-known adherents of innovation. Thus, Elmir Kuliev does not hide his stay in the library of the leader of the errant sect of the Muslim Brotherhood, Yusuf Al-Qaradawi.

It is a well-known fact that the righteous predecessors boycotted adherents of innovations. A visit to the library of an innovator itself is not a sufficient argument for accusations, because it may be that the person came there to call for something to be approved or to prohibit something that is disapproved. However, even then, it should not be made public, as people may draw the wrong conclusions. Elmir Kuliev puts this photo on public display and calls Al-Qaradawi a “sheikh” and does not warn against him, which could mislead people.

One day, Yunus ibn ‘Ubayd (may Allah have mercy on him) saw his son leaving the house of an innovationist and said to him: “ Oh son, where are you coming from?!" He replied: " From so-and-so's house" Yunus said:

“I would rather see you leaving the house of an effeminate man than leaving the house of so-and-so. And it is more beloved to me, O son, for you to appear before Allah as an adulterer, a wicked person, a thief and a traitor, than for you to appear before Him with the conviction of adherents of passions!”

Ibn Batta 464, al-Ajurri 2061, authentic isnad

Imam al-Barbahari (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

“Notice how Yunus ibn 'Ubaid pointed out that an effeminate man will not harm his son's religion as much as an innovator who can mislead him in such a way that he may even become an unbeliever!”

“Sharh al-Sunnah” 87

Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him), who was harsh towards the adherents of innovations and passions, said:

“Do not greet the adherents of your passions or sit with them unless you are severe towards them; and do not visit them when they are sick; and do not transmit hadiths from them!”

"Al-Jami'" 125, Ibn Abu Zayd

‘Abdullah ibn ‘Aun (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

“Anyone who is in the company of innovation adherents is worse for us than the innovation adherents themselves!”

“Al-Ibana” 2/273

Imam Abu-l-Fadl al-Hamdani (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

“Those who embrace innovation and invent hadiths are much worse than the atheists (for religion), for the atheists strive to corrupt religion from the outside, and they strive to corrupt it from the inside. They are like those inside the city who set out to ruin the situation in it by opening the gates of the fortress to those atheists who are outside. They are worse for Islam than non-believers”.

Ibn al-Jawzi in “al-Maudu’at” 1/51

And if someone asks for evidence that Yusuf Al-Qaradawi is a supporter of innovation, then we will tell him that there are a lot of words from scientists about Al-Qaradawi. The late Sheikh al-Albani (may Allah have mercy on him) gave an excellent description of Yusuf Qaradawi, saying:

« Yusuf Qaradawi's education is Azharic and it does not follow the methodology of the Qur'an and Sunnah. He gives people fatwas (religious decisions) that are contrary to Sharia. He has many philosophical views, and when something forbidden by the Sharia comes, he relaxes it with the words: “There is no specific text forbidding it!”, and by this method he made music permissible. [However, this approach] contradicts the unanimous opinion (ijma’), because the provisions of Sharia are not necessarily determined by direct texts! Qaradawi also says: “The proof is the Quran, Sunnah, ijma’ and qiyas (analogy).” However, analogy is not proof since it is ijtihad (judgment). On this basis, he permitted many things and relaxed the provisions of Shariah.".

"Sufiya al-Bana wal-Qardawi"

The prominent Yemeni theologian, the late Sheikh Muqbil ibn Hadi (may Allah have mercy on him), said:

« Among the lost preachers in our time is Yusuf ibn Abdullah al-Qaradawi, the Mufti of Qatar. He became a mouthpiece for the enemies of Islam, and began to use his tongue and pen to fight the religion of Islam!”

"Raf' al-lisam an mukhalifa al-Qardawi"

Also, the famous Sheikh Ahmad an-Najmi (may Allah have mercy on him) said about Dr. al-Qaradawi:

« This man’s ignorance and delusions are destroying religion and its foundations and rules!”

“Raf’ al-lisam an mukhalifa al-Qardawi” 78

Moreover, Yusuf Al-Qaradawi is the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood sect, and how much harm this organization has caused can be understood by looking at the fruits of the so-called “Arab Spring”. How much Muslim blood was shed and what damage was done to the economies and military potential of Arab countries!

So, visiting the library of a well-known innovationist and displaying it, without publicly warning against it, is in no way consistent with the path of the righteous predecessors.

Elmir Kuliev also defends Said Qutb, the ideologist of modern Kharijites and the man who accused the entire Muslim community of unbelief and became the ideological inspirer of modern Kharijites.

Defending Muslims from the errors of Said Qutb, according to Elmir Kuliev, is a defamation of the honor of a Muslim, while he allows himself to slander an entire state (Saudi Arabia), whose constitution is the Koran and Sunnah. Of course, the honor of a Muslim is above all, however, pointing out a person’s mistakes and delusions is not slander or gossip if by doing so you warn Muslims against the delusions of this person.

Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

“Scientists made exceptions from the forbidden type of gyib (gossip), some permitted types, some of which were even obligatory. This includes explaining the mistake of those who err in matters of Sharia, since the sanctity of religion is more important than the sanctity of an individual!”

“Al-Umm” 7/90

Shaykhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

“Identifying and reporting someone's innovation and debauchery is not ghibah, as reported by Hasan al-Basri and other imams, if the person does it openly and clearly. Such a person deserves to be punished by Muslims, and the least that is due to him is censure so that people are deterred and distanced from him. And if you do not condemn and do not mention what is inherent in him: debauchery, sins or innovations, then people can be seduced by him and follow him in this”.

“Majmu'ul-Fataua” 15/268

This is what Said Qutb wrote:

« Truly, people who call themselves Muslims are not Muslims. They only live according to the laws of Jahiliya."(See “Maalim fi at-Tariq” 185). Elsewhere he accuses all humanity of unbelief and apostasy, even practicing and praying Muslims: “ Humanity has completely fallen into disbelief. Even those who in different parts of the world on minarets regularly call and repeat the words “there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah,” without realizing the meaning of these words. Indeed, they bear more sin, and their punishment will be more painful on the Day of Judgment. And this is because after they learned the truth and were Muslims, they became apostates and began to worship people.”

”Fi Zilal al-Guran” 1057/2

The above harmful statements of Sayyid Qutb formed the basis of the ideology of the Kharijite extremists and, in the future, became a justification for committing terrorist acts and shedding the blood of innocent people. In this regard, authoritative Muslim scholars warned against reading the books of Sayyid Qutb. The famous Yemeni scholar, the late Sheikh Mughbil ibn Hadi (may Allah have mercy on him) said the following regarding Qutb's interpretation of the Qur'an:

« As for the book of al-Zilal and other works of Sayyid Qutb, may Allah have mercy on him, we do not recommend reading them at all, since these books became the reason that some people among the youth became followers of Jamaat-ut-Takfir. Sayyid Qutb is just a writer, but not an interpreter of the Koran."

“Fadaih va nasaih” 64

The eminent Islamic scholar of the 20th century, the late Muhammad Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said the following about Qutb's books:

« Interpretation of Sayyid Qutb, may Allah have mercy on him, there is a lot of misconception in this book. However, we hope that Allah will forgive him. There are a lot of misconceptions..."

The words are taken from the cassette recording “Agwal-ul-Ulyama fi Ibta-l-Gawaid wa Magalat Adnan Aroor”

Further, Elmir Guliyev cites Fethullah Gülen’s fatwa as an argument, without explaining to readers that Fethullah Gülen is a well-known supporter of Sufism and Nursism. Are there really no words from the scholars of Ahl-Sunnah about the hijab? Against the background of all this, the question arises: How does Elmir Guliyev feel about Fethullah Gülen? Does he consider him an authoritative Islamic scholar or a leader of delusion?

5. Facts of using the anti-Islamic term “Wahhabism”

Elmir Kuliev not only uses this far from Muslim, almost mythological terminology, but moreover, he claims that there is supposedly such a movement as “Wahhabis.” Although none of the scholars of Ahl-Sunnah wal-Jamaa ever used such terms in relation to the followers of Islam, much less spoke about the existence of such a movement! Unfortunately, Elmir Kuliev went further than the scholars of Ahlu-Sunnah wal-Jamaa in this matter, although it is reliably known that this term was actually invented by the enemies of Islam against Islam.

In his interview, Elmir Kuliev says the following:

« First of all, it is necessary to clarify the conceptual apparatus. Many people unenlightened in religious matters, including some journalists, willingly call ordinary Sunnis who are not related to this movement Wahhabis. It seems that even the authors of the recently published explanatory dictionary of the Azerbaijani language, in which the word “Wahhabi” was given a very vague definition, were unable to explain the meaning of the new term.

It's actually not very difficult. Wahhabism, which emerged in Central Arabia in the second half of the 18th century, today has many faces and is heterogeneous. In recent years, this term has been assigned to North Caucasian separatists professing extreme Islamic views, as well as their ideological associates in other countries, including Azerbaijan. Whether it is right to call them Wahhabis or not is another question, but today they are already known by this name, and we will not argue about this.

Another thing is important: it is wrong and even dangerous to equate Wahhabism with Sunnism. Sunnism has existed on the territory of Azerbaijan for many centuries and currently has tens of thousands of followers both in the capital and in the regions. Along with the Jafarite madhhab, Sunni schools made a huge contribution to the development of the moral, ethical and spiritual heritage of the Azerbaijani people and today constitute the traditional religious palette of the country.".

It is surprising that such a seemingly enlightened person in Islam as Elmir Kuliev uses this term. It is known that this term is offensive, because the people themselves, whom Elmir Kuliev attributes to Wahhabis, did not and do not call themselves that. Initially, it should be remembered that Al-Wahhab is the name of Allah Almighty. The founder of the so-called “Wahhabism” movement was named Muhammad. Those who came up with this nickname were afraid to call the followers of the sheikh “Muhammadites”, so as not to offend the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and did even worse, taking the name of the sheikh’s father - Abdul-Wahhab and called the followers of the sheikh - Wahhabis, thereby insulting the name Almighty Allah.

It is also surprising that Elmir Kuliev absurdly using the term “Wahhabis” thereby, in fact, draws a difference between Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab and the rest of the Sunnis. But is this really so?

This is what the Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Abdul Aziz Ali Sheikh, said:

« O my brothers, we are not involved before Allah in the fact that our efforts were for the sake of any particular madhhab or ideology that is not the truth. Our efforts are only in that, in sha Allah, that reveals the truth and elevates it. And the fact that instead we are trying for the sake of some kind of “Wahhabism” is slander! Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdulwahhab, when Allah supported him and opened his chest to the truth, did not call for his madhhab and did not call for any particular madhhab, but called for the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger. And those who were jealous (of the success) of this call, or hated this path, wanted to turn away (people from the sheikh) and said: “This call is Wahhabism.” That is, a call to (follow, honor) a person, a call that is not related to the Koran and Sunnah. All of these (accusations) are misleading and lies! Whoever looks at what the sheikh relied on, reflects, reads his books, will see that truly this call is correct, consistent with the Koran and Sunnah, and that the Great and Mighty Allah has prepared for him Imam Muhammad ibn Suud and his children. They defended this call and engaged in it, and helped it, and supported it. And Allah strengthened this truthful, pure call. Which is not a call to a madhhab or a party, but it is a call to the Koran and Sunnah, and to follow what the righteous predecessors of this community followed.".

The assessment of the “movement” of Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab is also unclear:

So, we ask Elmir Kuliev to answer the following questions:
1. Is it possible to publicly criticize Muslim rulers?
2. Is it possible to support demonstrations against a Muslim ruler who seized power by force?
3. Does Elmir Guliyev consider Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, Said Qutb and Fethullah Gülen as leaders of delusion?
4. Does Elmir Kuliev consider Muhammad ibn Abduluahhab the mujadid of his century, the imam of Ahl-Sunnah Wal-Jamaa? Is it possible to use the term “Wahhabis” in relation to him and his followers?
5. How does Elmir Guliyev relate to authoritative scientists of Saudi Arabia, in particular to the learned members of Lyajna? Does he think that they are “government scholars” and therefore sometimes hide the truth and do not tell the truth in their fatwas?
6. Who does Elmir Kuliyev, from the scholars of Ahl-Sunnah, rely on when calling the government of Saudi Arabia a puppet regime of the United States? Which of the scholars of Ahl-Sunnah said that Saudi Arabia supports the division between Arabs, Turks and Persians?

The above are just a few examples of Elmir Kuliev’s mistakes, but they are enough to seriously doubt that Elmir Kuliev’s beliefs correspond to the beliefs of his associates. Although Elmir Kuliev himself declares that he follows his companions, and if this is so, then we ask Elmir Kuliev to admit his mistakes and repent. For it is not terrible to be ignorant or to make mistakes, but it is terrible to persist in error after the truth has become clear.

Rafidis is one of the common nicknames of Shiites, especially Imamis, which comes from the Arabic verb “rafada” (“to leave”, “to reject”). Muslim doxographers connected the origin of this nickname with various episodes from the history of the Shiite movement. Some argued that the first Rafidis were the followers of Abdullah b. Saba - a Jew who, under the guise of a devout Muslim, called on people to overthrow Caliph Uthman, did not recognize the legitimacy of the rule of Abu Bakr and Umar, called Ali b. Abu Talib was the legitimate successor of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and subsequently proclaimed Ali a divine being, for which he ordered his followers to be burned. Other authors called the Rafidis the Shiites of Kufa, who rejected the claims to the imamate of Zeid b. Ali, since he recognized the legitimacy of the rule of Abu Bakr and Umar. After the separation of the Zaydis, Rafidis began to be called mainly the Twelver Imamis, who recognized only twelve people from the clan of Ali b. as imams. Abu Talib. The Twelver Imami consider anyone who does not accept their views to be an unbeliever. They believe that Ali b. Abu Talib was the best of the companions that the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, appointed him as a Muslim ruler, and after his death Abu Bakr and Umar b. al-Khattab usurped power. They consider most of the Companions to be hypocrites and honor only a few of them, such as Salman al-Farisi, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, al-Miqdad, Ammar b. Yasir, Hudhaifa b. al-Yaman. They believe that after the death of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, the companions distorted the Holy Quran and deleted from it all the revelations that the successors of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, were to be Ali b. Abu Talib and his descendants. They believe that Muhammad b. Ali al-Askari, whom they consider to be the eleventh Imam, had a son who disappeared as a child.
According to them, he is hiding from people to this day and will appear shortly before the onset of Judgment Day. They believe that this “expected” imam will bring the real scroll of the Holy Quran to Muslims, resurrect the companions who were guilty of “usurping” power and hiding the truth, and take revenge on them for their ancestors. They consider the twelve imams to be absolutely sinless people who knew sacred knowledge and died with their own consent. They allow people to turn to them for intercession and consider it permissible to hide their true views from people, which is called “taqiya” (“discretion,” “concealment”). In matters of predestination, the Rafidis share the views of the Qadarites. In addition, they believe that Allah can change His decision. They also allow temporary marriages for a fee. In matters of ideology and Islamic law, the Rafidis also profess other erroneous views. In an authentic hadith reported by Ibn Majah on the authority of Auf b. Malik, it is reported that the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: “The Jews were divided into seventy-one factions, of which one will go to Paradise, and seventy to Hell. Christians were divided into seventy-two movements, of which seventy-one will go to Hell, and one to Heaven. I swear by the One in Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammad! My followers will be divided into seventy-three movements, of which one will go to Heaven, and seventy-two to Hell.” In a similar hadith reported by at-Tirmidhi on the authority of Abdullah b. Umar, it is reported that people asked about the stream that will go to heaven, to which the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: “These are those who follow my path and the path of my companions.” The true followers of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and his companions are adherents of the Sunnah and a single Muslim community (ahl al-sunnah wa al-jamaa). They reject any innovations concerning religion and share the views of the early Muslims. The views of adherents of the Sunnah occupy an intermediate position between the views of various heretical interpretations. They believe that faith consists of conviction, words and deeds. Unlike the Kharijites and Murjiites, adherents of the Sunnah believe that if a Muslim commits grave sins, then he remains a believer, but becomes a sinner, and in the Hereafter his fate will depend on the decision of Allah. Unlike the Qadarites and Jabarites, they believe that man has free will, which depends on the will of Allah, and that human actions are created by Him. Unlike the Mu'tazilites and anthropomorphists, they recognize all the divine qualities mentioned in the Qur'an and Sunnah, without depriving them of their true meaning, without attributing an erroneous interpretation to them, without giving them a form or assimilating them to the qualities of creation. Unlike the Rafidis, the followers of the Sunnah love and honor all the companions of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. It was these views that were defended in his book by Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Ashari, who is rightfully considered one of the most outstanding representatives of the adherents of the Sunnah and supporters of a single Muslim community. The translation of this book is made from the fourth edition of the book “al-Ibana an Usul ad-Diyana” (“Explanation of the Fundamentals of Religion”), prepared by Dr. Bashir Muhammad Uyun. To preserve the exact meaning of the poems quoted in this book, they have been translated into prose. Along with this, the translation omits comparisons of the third Arabic edition with previous editions of this book and various manuscript copies, as well as indications of the interpolations of some copyists. When translating some hadiths and verses, their texts were supplemented in strict accordance with the original sources so that readers received a broader understanding of the context of these texts. However, there are no indications of the translator’s additions, whereas in all other cases the translator’s comments are marked with his initials.

In preparing this article, I used the following literature:
1. “Firak Muasira Tantasib ila al-Islam” (“Modern movements that consider themselves to be Islam”), Ghalib b. Ali al-Awaji.
2. “Sharh al-Aqida at-Tahawiya” (“Commentaries on the beliefs of Imam at-Tahawy”), Ibn Abu al-Izz al-Hanafi.
3. “The Book of Religions and Sects”, Muhammad b. Abd al-Karim al-Shahrastani, translation from Arabic, introduction and comments by S.M. Prozorova.
4. “Usul Mazhab al-Shia al-Imamiyya al-Isnaashariyya” (“Fundamentals of the Imami Shiite sense”), Nasir b. Abdullah al-Kafari.
5. “Islam: encyclopedic dictionary”, G.V. Miloslavsky, Yu.A. Petrosyan, M.B. Piotrovsky and others.
I ask Allah to accept this work and make it useful for Muslims, so that His name may be glorified, so that righteous views will triumph over error. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds! Peace and blessings to the Prophet Muhammad, his family, companions and everyone who follows their path!

The author of the best translation of the meanings of the Koran into Russian is Kuliev Elmir Rafael oglu.
Baku, July 8, 2000

Author of the translation of the Koran into Russian.

Biography

Scientific activity

The first work that brought him fame among CIS Muslims was the book “Prophecies about the approaching end of the world,” dedicated to reflections on the meaning of existence and the study of Muslim eschatological ideas. The work emphasizes that belief in predestination does not mean humility before fate: the future depends on the person himself, and knowledge of the end of history helps to realize responsibility to future generations. [ ]

In 2002-2006, he worked at the State Committee of the Republic of Azerbaijan for Work with Religious Entities, studying the features of state-confessional relations and the mutual influence of religious and political processes. Since March 2006, Elmir Kuliev has been director of the department of geoculture at the Institute for Strategic Studies of the Caucasus (Azerbaijan) and a member of the editorial board of the journal “Caucasus and Globalization” (Sweden).

E. Kuliev’s late work reflects his reformist views. The scientist sees the meaning of reform in Islam in the renewal of the social consciousness of Muslim peoples and a critical rethinking of the accumulated cultural tradition. The scientific and social activities of E. Kuliev are aimed at strengthening the authority of the Koran and the Muslim tradition, and at overcoming the crisis of social and scientific thought in the Islamic world. [ ]

At the end of September 2013, it became known that on September 17, 2013, by the decision of the Oktyabrsky District Court of Novorossiysk ““Semantic translation of the Holy Quran into Russian” / Translation from Arabic by E. R. Kuliev. 1st edition. Complex named after King Fahd for the publication of the Holy Quran. PO Box 6262. Medina Munavvara. Saudi Arabia, 2002. 1088 pp.”, the author of which is Kuliev, was declared extremist and included in the Federal List of Extremist Materials. Kuliev himself connected this event with flaws in Russian legislation. On December 17, 2013, the Krasnodar Regional Court overturned the decision of the Oktyabrsky District Court and issued a new decision, which denied the prosecutor to recognize the “Semantic Translation of the Holy Quran into Russian” as extremist.

As of August 2017, there are two books by the author on the Federal List of Extremist Materials:

• Kuliev E., Badawi D. Zakat. Its place is in Islam. Fasting in Ramadan, its meaning for Muslims. Ed. Abu Ahmad Abdullah ibn Jamil (brochure)
• Kuliev E. R. On the way to the Koran. - Abilov, Zeynalov and sons, 2003.

Awards and prizes:

Biography

Scientific activity

In 2002-2006, he worked at the State Committee of the Republic of Azerbaijan for Work with Religious Entities, studying the features of state-confessional relations and the mutual influence of religious and political processes. Since March 2006, Elmir Kuliev has been director of the department of geoculture at the Institute for Strategic Studies of the Caucasus (Azerbaijan) and a member of the editorial board of the journal “Caucasus and Globalization” ( Sweden).

At the end of September 2013, it became known that on September 17, 2013 decision Oktyabrsky District Court Novorossiysk ““Semantic translation of the Holy Quran into Russian” / Translation from Arabic by E. R. Kuliev. 1st edition. Complex named after King Fahd for the publication of the Holy Quran. PO Box 6262. Medina Munavvara. Saudi Arabia, 2002. 1088 pp.”, the author of which is Kuliev, was recognized extremist, with inclusion in Federal list of extremist materials. Kuliev himself connected this event with flaws in Russian legislation. December 17, 2013 Krasnodar Regional Court overturned the decision of the Oktyabrsky District Court and issued a new decision, which denied the prosecutor to recognize the “Semantic translation of the Holy Quran into Russian” as extremist

Awards

Write a review of the article "Kuliev, Elmir Rafael ogly"

Notes

Links

• - Kuliev’s personal website

Literature

• Dorofeev F. A. The Koran: history of formation and problems of translations. Materials for the course of religious studies, textbook. allowance. - N. Novgorod: Publishing house of UNN, 2008. - 47 p. - 300 copies.

An excerpt characterizing Kuliyev, Elmir Rafael ogly

- Oh, she’s back?
And with the determination and tenderness that happens in moments of awakening, she hugged her friend, but noticing the embarrassment on Sonya’s face, Natasha’s face expressed embarrassment and suspicion.
- Sonya, have you read the letter? - she said.
“Yes,” Sonya said quietly.
Natasha smiled enthusiastically.
- No, Sonya, I can’t do it anymore! - she said. “I can’t hide it from you anymore.” You know, we love each other!... Sonya, my dear, he writes... Sonya...
Sonya, as if not believing her ears, looked at Natasha with all her eyes.
- And Bolkonsky? - she said.
- Oh, Sonya, oh, if only you could know how happy I am! – Natasha said. -You don’t know what love is...
– But, Natasha, is it really all over?
Natasha looked at Sonya with big, open eyes, as if not understanding her question.
- Well, are you refusing Prince Andrei? - said Sonya.
“Oh, you don’t understand anything, don’t talk nonsense, just listen,” Natasha said with instant annoyance.
“No, I can’t believe it,” Sonya repeated. - I don't understand. How did you love one person for a whole year and suddenly... After all, you only saw him three times. Natasha, I don’t believe you, you’re being naughty. In three days, forget everything and so...
“Three days,” Natasha said. “It seems to me that I have loved him for a hundred years.” It seems to me that I have never loved anyone before him. You can't understand this. Sonya, wait, sit here. – Natasha hugged and kissed her.
“They told me that this happens and you heard correctly, but now I have only experienced this love.” It's not what it used to be. As soon as I saw him, I felt that he was my master, and I was his slave, and that I could not help but love him. Yes, slave! Whatever he tells me, I will do. You don't understand this. What should I do? What should I do, Sonya? - Natasha said with a happy and frightened face.
“But think about what you’re doing,” said Sonya, “I can’t leave it like that.” These secret letters... How could you let him do this? - she said with horror and disgust, which she could hardly hide.
“I told you,” Natasha answered, “that I have no will, how can you not understand this: I love him!”
“Then I won’t let this happen, I’ll tell you,” Sonya screamed with tears breaking through.
“What are you doing, for God’s sake... If you tell me, you are my enemy,” Natasha spoke. - You want my misfortune, you want us to be separated...
Seeing this fear of Natasha, Sonya cried tears of shame and pity for her friend.
- But what happened between you? – she asked. -What did he tell you? Why doesn't he go to the house?
Natasha did not answer her question.
“For God’s sake, Sonya, don’t tell anyone, don’t torture me,” Natasha begged. – You remember that you cannot interfere in such matters. I opened it for you...
– But why these secrets! Why doesn't he go to the house? – Sonya asked. - Why doesn’t he directly seek your hand? After all, Prince Andrei gave you complete freedom, if that’s the case; but I don't believe it. Natasha, have you thought about what secret reasons there could be?
Natasha looked at Sonya with surprised eyes. Apparently, this was the first time she had asked this question and she didn’t know how to answer it.
– I don’t know what the reasons are. But there are reasons!
Sonya sighed and shook her head in disbelief.
“If there were reasons...” she began. But Natasha, guessing her doubt, interrupted her in fear.
- Sonya, you can’t doubt him, you can’t, you can’t, do you understand? – she shouted.
– Does he love you?
- Does he love you? – Natasha repeated with a smile of regret about her friend’s lack of understanding. – You read the letter, did you see it?
- But what if he is an ignoble person?
– Is he!... an ignoble person? If only you knew! - Natasha said.
“If he is a noble man, then he must either declare his intention or stop seeing you; and if you don’t want to do this, then I will do it, I will write to him, I will tell dad,” Sonya said decisively.
- Yes, I can’t live without him! - Natasha screamed.
- Natasha, I don’t understand you. And what are you saying! Remember your father, Nicolas.
“I don’t need anyone, I don’t love anyone but him.” How dare you say that he is ignoble? Don't you know that I love him? – Natasha shouted. “Sonya, go away, I don’t want to quarrel with you, go away, for God’s sake go away: you see how I’m suffering,” Natasha shouted angrily in a restrained, irritated and desperate voice. Sonya burst into tears and ran out of the room.
Natasha went to the table and, without thinking for a minute, wrote that answer to Princess Marya, which she could not write the whole morning. In this letter, she briefly wrote to Princess Marya that all their misunderstandings were over, that, taking advantage of the generosity of Prince Andrei, who, when leaving, gave her freedom, she asks her to forget everything and forgive her if she is guilty before her, but that she cannot be his wife . It all seemed so easy, simple and clear to her at that moment.

On Friday the Rostovs were supposed to go to the village, and on Wednesday the count went with the buyer to his village near Moscow.
On the day of the count's departure, Sonya and Natasha were invited to a big dinner with the Karagins, and Marya Dmitrievna took them. At this dinner, Natasha again met with Anatole, and Sonya noticed that Natasha was saying something to him, wanting not to be heard, and throughout the dinner she was even more excited than before. When they returned home, Natasha was the first to begin with Sonya the explanation that her friend was waiting for.
“You, Sonya, said various nonsense about him,” Natasha began in a meek voice, the voice that children use when they want to be praised. - We explained it to him today.
- Well, what, what? Well, what did he say? Natasha, how glad I am that you are not angry with me. Tell me everything, the whole truth. What did he say?
Natasha thought about it.
- Oh Sonya, if only you knew him like I do! He said... He asked me about how I promised Bolkonsky. He was glad that it was up to me to refuse him.
Sonya sighed sadly.
“But you didn’t refuse Bolkonsky,” she said.
– Or maybe I refused! Maybe it's all over with Bolkonsky. Why do you think so badly of me?
- I don’t think anything, I just don’t understand it...
- Wait, Sonya, you will understand everything. You will see what kind of person he is. Don't think bad things about me or him.
– I don’t think anything bad about anyone: I love everyone and feel sorry for everyone. But what should I do?
Sonya did not give in to the gentle tone with which Natasha addressed her. The softer and more searching the expression on Natasha’s face was, the more serious and stern Sonya’s face was.
“Natasha,” she said, “you asked me not to talk to you, I didn’t, now you started it yourself.” Natasha, I don't believe him. Why this secret?
- Again, again! – Natasha interrupted.
– Natasha, I’m afraid for you.
- What to be afraid of?
“I’m afraid that you will destroy yourself,” Sonya said decisively, herself frightened by what she said.
Natasha's face again expressed anger.
“And I will destroy, I will destroy, I will destroy myself as quickly as possible.” None of your business. It will feel bad not for you, but for me. Leave me, leave me. I hate you.
- Natasha! – Sonya cried out in fear.
- I hate it, I hate it! And you are my enemy forever!
Natasha ran out of the room.
Natasha no longer spoke to Sonya and avoided her. With the same expression of excited surprise and criminality, she walked around the rooms, taking up first this or that activity and immediately abandoning them.
No matter how hard it was for Sonya, she kept an eye on her friend.
On the eve of the day on which the count was supposed to return, Sonya noticed that Natasha had been sitting all morning at the living room window, as if expecting something, and that she made some kind of sign to a passing military man, whom Sonya mistook for Anatole.
Sonya began to observe her friend even more carefully and noticed that Natasha was in a strange and unnatural state all the time during lunch and evening (she answered questions asked to her at random, started and did not finish sentences, laughed at everything).
After tea, Sonya saw a timid girl's maid waiting for her at Natasha's door. She let her through and, listening at the door, learned that a letter had been delivered again. And suddenly it became clear to Sonya that Natasha had some terrible plan for this evening. Sonya knocked on her door. Natasha didn't let her in.
“She'll run away with him! thought Sonya. She is capable of anything. Today there was something especially pitiful and determined in her face. She cried, saying goodbye to her uncle, Sonya recalled. Yes, it’s true, she’s running with him, but what should I do?” thought Sonya, now recalling those signs that clearly proved why Natasha had some terrible intention. “There is no count. What should I do, write to Kuragin, demanding an explanation from him? But who tells him to answer? Write to Pierre, as Prince Andrei asked, in case of an accident?... But maybe, in fact, she has already refused Bolkonsky (she sent a letter to Princess Marya yesterday). There’s no uncle!” It seemed terrible to Sonya to tell Marya Dmitrievna, who believed so much in Natasha. “But one way or another,” Sonya thought, standing in the dark corridor: now or never the time has come to prove that I remember the benefits of their family and love Nicolas. No, even if I don’t sleep for three nights, I won’t leave this corridor and forcefully let her in, and I won’t let shame fall on their family,” she thought.

Anatole recently moved in with Dolokhov. The plan to kidnap Rostova had been thought out and prepared by Dolokhov for several days, and on the day when Sonya, having overheard Natasha at the door, decided to protect her, this plan had to be carried out. Natasha promised to go out to Kuragin’s back porch at ten o’clock in the evening. Kuragin had to put her in a prepared troika and take her 60 versts from Moscow to the village of Kamenka, where a disrobed priest was prepared who was supposed to marry them. In Kamenka, a setup was ready that was supposed to take them to the Warsaw road and there they were supposed to ride abroad on postal ones.
Anatole had a passport, and a travel document, and ten thousand money taken from his sister, and ten thousand borrowed through Dolokhov.
Two witnesses - Khvostikov, a former clerk, whom Dolokhov used for games, and Makarin, a retired hussar, a good-natured and weak man who had boundless love for Kuragin - were sitting in the first room having tea.
In Dolokhov’s large office, decorated from walls to ceiling with Persian carpets, bear skins and weapons, Dolokhov sat in a traveling beshmet and boots in front of an open bureau on which lay abacus and stacks of money. Anatole, in an unbuttoned uniform, walked from the room where the witnesses were sitting, through the office into the back room, where his French footman and others were packing the last things. Dolokhov counted the money and wrote it down.
“Well,” he said, “Khvostikov needs to be given two thousand.”
“Well, give it to me,” said Anatole.
– Makarka (that’s what they called Makarina), this one will selflessly go through fire and water for you. Well, the score is over,” said Dolokhov, showing him the note. - So?
“Yes, of course, so,” said Anatole, apparently not listening to Dolokhov and with a smile that never left his face, looking ahead of him.
Dolokhov slammed the bureau and turned to Anatoly with a mocking smile.
– You know what, give it all up: there’s still time! - he said.
- Fool! - said Anatole. - Stop talking nonsense. If only you knew... The devil knows what it is!