Is the rule in al-jarh wa al-ta'dil to mention the good and the bad at the same time when mentioning a person?

The questioner : Is the rule in al-jarh wa al-ta'dil to mention the good and the bad at the same time when mentioning a person?

The Shaykh : No.

The questioner : I mean, there is a saying that circulates from time to time that whoever wants to say that so-and-so has such-and-such must present his good qualities before his bad ones. Is this rule correct?

The Shaykh : No, it is not correct, and it is contrary to the position of the scholars of the Salaf. But every occasion has its own discourse; every occasion has its own discourse. If a person wants, for example, to warn someone who is accompanying a person who has a deviation in 'aqidah, but this person is a worshipper, an ascetic, and generous, and so on, and there is no benefit in mentioning his merits, he tells him, "I am warning you about so-and-so because he is deviant in 'aqidah." In such a case, the one who says that he should give a lecture and say, "This man does such-and-such, he stands in night prayer, he fasts by day, he gives charity, and so on, but he is deviant in 'aqidah," is not correct. When the scholars of the Salaf criticize a narrator, they say, for example, that he has poor memory if they want to give him a long biography. He might be one who upholds the Sunnah and fights against bid'ah, but he had poor memory. However, if they want to summarize the speech about him, they suffice with explaining what relates to the science of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil. Therefore, we find among them those who say, "He is truthful but has poor memory," or "He is an imam in the Sunnah, an imam in fiqh, but his memory was poor," or "He was just in judgment, but judgment turned him away from preserving the Sunnah and hadith," and so on. In short, every occasion has its own discourse. As for this generalization, it is not correct.

The questioner : If my shaykh mentions a man known for his bid'ah and cites him for, for example, his good qualities, meaning he has something good, and cites him for that, is it obligatory for the one who mentioned him to warn, for example, about his bid'ah if it is shirk or otherwise?

The Shaykh : Also, this is the opposite of what you mentioned. I say that if the intention in a certain occasion is to vouch for a man, and this vouching leads the listeners to assume that he is relied upon in his knowledge and his 'aqidah, then at that time, it is not permissible to limit oneself to this vouching; rather, it is obligatory to mention what is in him so that people are on clear ground. And therefore, the people of knowledge, when they spoke about the forbidden ghibah by the text of the Book and the Sunnah, clarified that... What are you doing there?
The student : ... Yes, yes.

The Shaykh : May Allah guide you, because I am hearing a rattling sound, and this is being recorded here.
The student: Yes ... .

The Shaykh : And therefore, stay away a little, without blame. Ah, when they speak about the people of ghibah and that it is forbidden by the Book and the Sunnah, they mention that this is not an absolute rule with no conditions, but rather they say that there are exceptions to the forbidden bid'ah. It may be permissible, and it may even be obligatory. Some of the scholars collected this in two lines of poetry, and they said:
"Criticism is not backbiting in six cases: *** The aggrieved, the one seeking knowledge, and the one warning
And one who is open in open sinfulness, and one who seeks a ruling, and one who seeks assistance in removing a wrong.
Here, there are some exceptions, including the definition. When a man is praised from a certain aspect of his knowledge, but this specific aspect of his knowledge, if mentioned alone, leads the listeners to trust him with blind trust, as it is said, then in this case, it is not permissible to mention him with this good quality only; rather, it is also obligatory to mention what criticizes him regarding his 'aqidah.