Commentary on the Books of the Salaf and the Saying: The Salaf Are Safer, and the Khalaf Are More Knowledgeable

Question:
Honorable Shaykh, as you know, in the present time, there is takfir (declaring someone a disbeliever) through exaggeration, investigation, and addition. There are patterns of books, patterns of books, and abridgments, and critiques of men, and what they claim regarding danger in the creed, even though the creed, if it is better, if it is better in it, is surrounded by his creed. And among them is the saying of the three, which is famous for its excellence, and from it is Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him). What is the greater saying when the later scholars say the earlier ones? Is the required validity? The Salaf are safer, and the Khalaf are higher and better.

Answer:
This is a bad phenomenon, and it is the phenomenon of meddling in knowledge by the ignorant and the beginners of young age, and commenting on books and criticizing the authors, especially if they are from the Salaf and from the famous Imams who are attested to for their excellence and leadership in religion. There is no doubt that this is a great defect and a casting of doubt in the books of the Salaf and a belittling of their status, an exaggeration of the status of these books. This is not permissible. It is not permissible to comment and critique except for a knowledgeable scholar who is well-versed, except for a knowledgeable scholar who is well-mannered, who comments with etiquette and respect, and comments to the extent of necessity. It is not a matter of frivolity and increasing pages and filling books with empty talk. Some of them come to a book and inflate it, inflate it, and make it huge because of all kinds of comments that have no value, either biographies or things or wrong opinions or accusing the author of things he did not understand, he did not understand. Many of the comments, if you read them, you find that he is in one valley and the author is in another valley, because this commentator did not understand. So he rushed in this. The first thing is that the books of the Salaf should be left as they are, not commented on, and that care should be taken only with their verification, only the verification of their printing. As for commenting on them with new opinions or new ideas, this is opening the door to meddling with the books of the Salaf. If you want to author or if you want to meddle in knowledge and scholars, write the book as an independent work, leave it under your name. As for you destroying the books of the Salaf and the books of the scholars, this is a matter that is not permissible. Even if they were alive, they would not have permitted you this and would not have been pleased with your work. Is it for the sake of the goal with the writings and scientific integrity? Disrespect for knowledge and scholars, and you have not reached the stage where you critique the Imams, and praise for the Imams, you have not reached this stage. Yes.
As for the phrase "the Salaf are safer," the methodology of the Salaf is safer and the methodology of the Khalaf is more knowledgeable and more wise, this phrase is invalid and contradictory. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah and others have pointed it out. It is contradictory because their saying "the path of safety is safer" is not "the Salaf are safer." Safety is not achieved except with knowledge. The path of the Khalaf is more knowledgeable. How can there be safety without knowledge? It does not become "the path of the Salaf is safer" unless it is more knowledgeable, or does it not become safer?
It is a known contradiction. This second aspect: how can the Khalaf be more knowledgeable than the Salaf? Does any rational person accept this? That the Khalaf are more knowledgeable than Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthman, 'Ali, Ibn 'Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, Sufyan al-Thawri, Imam al-Awza'i, Imam Malik, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam al-Shafi'i, and Imam Ahmad. And the Imams who came after them. Does someone from the later centuries come and become better than the Salaf?
This is not possible. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) praised the three or four generations. He said: The narrator does not know if he mentioned after his generation two or three generations, then he said: In them will appear a Muslim. This is a condemnation of the Khalaf and praise of the Salaf, describing them with excellence. And excellence includes that they are the best of people in action, the best of people in knowledge, and the best of people in etiquette and dignity in all respects. Yes. How can one from the Mu'tazilah, or from the Jahmiyyah, or from the sects, the scholars of kalam who rely on reason and leave the transmitted texts, how can he be more knowledgeable than the Salaf who rely on the Book and the Sunnah? How can the one who relies on the opinions of men and on the logic of the Greeks and Romans, and presents them over the Book and the Sunnah, be more knowledgeable than the Salaf?
This is a reversal of fitrah (the innate natural disposition) and a reversal of minds. And if you want more of this, refer to the Risalah al-Hamawiyyah of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah. The Risalah al-Hamawiyyah is very great, its introduction specifically spoke about this issue and elaborated on it: the Salaf are more knowledgeable and the Khalaf are more knowledgeable, and the Salaf are safer and the Khalaf are more knowledgeable and more wise. He spoke about this with long words that have no addition in reality.