Addendum for the sake of benefit: Types of permissible backbiting, the second instance: "And the one who identifies."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : So backbiting is forbidden, but it is permissible in six instances. We mentioned the first instance, which is "the complainant".
The second instance is the one who identifies. He said: "And the one who identifies": This identification has a connection to social aspects in many, and very many, occasions. Often a man comes to his friend and asks him: "What do you think of so-and-so? He wants to partner with me in a financial deal, or so-and-so wants to propose to one of our daughters, what do you know about him?" The traditional, well-known answer is: "All people are good and a blessing", and the one being asked knows otherwise. He knows, for example, that the person being asked about is not trustworthy financially, and when asked, he must identify the truth about the person to the questioner. He has to say, "By Allah, I dealt with him and did not find him good in his dealings, and he did such and such." This is backbiting, but this is backbiting that is an exception among the exceptions falling under the category of: "Religion is sincere advice".
Likewise in the other scenario: "So-and-so is proposing to one of our daughters, what do you think of him?" "All people are good and a blessing". He knows that he is a drinker, a loafer, an idler, and so on. So he does not mention what he knows about him from the perspective of "supposition", covering up for him. This is a mistake. This is, as I said at the beginning of the speech, cold scrupulousness. He must mention what is in him so that this questioner is fully informed of the matter.
The second instance is the one who identifies. He said: "And the one who identifies": This identification has a connection to social aspects in many, and very many, occasions. Often a man comes to his friend and asks him: "What do you think of so-and-so? He wants to partner with me in a financial deal, or so-and-so wants to propose to one of our daughters, what do you know about him?" The traditional, well-known answer is: "All people are good and a blessing", and the one being asked knows otherwise. He knows, for example, that the person being asked about is not trustworthy financially, and when asked, he must identify the truth about the person to the questioner. He has to say, "By Allah, I dealt with him and did not find him good in his dealings, and he did such and such." This is backbiting, but this is backbiting that is an exception among the exceptions falling under the category of: "Religion is sincere advice".
Likewise in the other scenario: "So-and-so is proposing to one of our daughters, what do you think of him?" "All people are good and a blessing". He knows that he is a drinker, a loafer, an idler, and so on. So he does not mention what he knows about him from the perspective of "supposition", covering up for him. This is a mistake. This is, as I said at the beginning of the speech, cold scrupulousness. He must mention what is in him so that this questioner is fully informed of the matter.