Is it a condition to mention a man's good deeds when refuting him?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Our Shaykh, also, these brothers or these young men have gathered many things from their saying that it is necessary for anyone who wants to speak about an innovator whose innovation has become apparent and his war against the Sunnah, or even if that is not the case but he has erred in matters connected to the creed of the people of the Sunnah and the community or to the methodology of the people of the Sunnah and the community, that no one speaks about it except by mentioning the rest of his good deeds and what they call the rule of weighing good deeds against bad deeds. Books and papers have been written, our Shaykh, in this chapter by some of those who hold this opinion that it is necessary to follow the methodology of the predecessors in criticism and that one must mention the good deeds and the bad deeds. Is this rule absolute, or are there places where this matter is not applied? We need you, may Allah reward you, to detail this matter.
The Shaykh : Detailing it, and all good is in following those who came before. Did the Salaf do that!
The questioner : They cite, may Allah protect you, our Shaykh, some places, such as the words of the Imams regarding the Shi'ah, for example, "So-and-so is trustworthy in hadith, a Rafidi, a vile person." They cite these places and establish the rule entirely based on them without looking at thousands of texts that contain "liar," "abandoned," "weak."The Shaykh : This is the way of the innovators. When the scholar speaks about a hadith regarding a righteous man, a righteous man and a scholar and a jurist, and he says of him "he has poor memorization," does he say that he is a Muslim and that he is righteous and that he is a jurist and that he is, meaning, one to whom one refers, one to whom one refers in deriving the rulings of the Shari'ah? Allah is the Greatest. The truth is, the previous rule is very important and covers many branches, especially in this time, especially in this time. Where do they get the idea that if an occasion arises to clarify the error of a Muslim, whether he is a caller to Allah or not, he must not give a lecture and mention his merits from beginning to end? Allah is the Greatest. It is a strange thing, and by Allah, it is a strange thing!
The questioner : Yes, and some of the places they cite from al-Dhahabi's *Siyar A'lam al-Nubala* or elsewhere carry, our Shaykh, benefits, meaning, the man has benefits that Muslims need, such as hadith?
The Shaykh : This is incitement, Professor. It is not a matter of forbidding evil or enjoining good. When the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) saysSahih Muslim 49a, do you want to forbid the evil of this evildoer and talk about what his merits are!The questioner : Or when he said, "What a bad preacher you are, but you do this and you do that."The Shaykh : Allah is the Greatest, Allah is the Greatest.
Another questioner : Our Shaykh, among the wonders in this, they said that our Lord, Mighty and Majestic, when He mentioned intoxicants, He mentioned prayer.
The Shaykh : Oh my, Allah is the Greatest. These people follow what is ambiguous in it, seeking fitnah and seeking its ta'wil (figurative interpretation). Glory be to Allah. I see that they have things that we do not have.
The questioner : But, our Shaykh, the young men do not come to you here to speak to you about such things, but those who interact with them.
The Shaykh : No, it is fine, but here we do not have that.
Another questioner : It is not well-known, praise be to Allah.
The Shaykh : No, no, we are saying regarding here, meaning, we do not have it.
Another questioner : By the grace of Allah, our Shaykh, I mention my brother Abu al-Hasan, his manhaj (methodology)The Shaykh : may Allah preserve him, and his da'wah (calling) and its principles in this country are dominant over everyone, although there are people who have these ideas, but they are suppressed up to now. We ask Allah to preserve you as a firm barrier against bid'ah (religious innovation) and its people. O Allah, amen. What Allah willed.
The Shaykh : In the name of Allah.
The questioner : Likewise, our Shaykh, these young men, it is clear from their speech that they hardly find a sect they hate except the students of knowledge or the sons of the Salafi da'wah!
The Shaykh : I seek refuge in Allah.
The questioner : So such previous speech on this issue, in fact, it belittles the matter of the people of innovation. It mentions the man, who is a holder of bid'ah and vile opinions, and mentions his good deeds and that he did this and did that, but he has ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) that is not agreed upon. For example, in matters that are clear, their violations are called ijtihad that is not agreed upon. In contrast, they say, for example, why do the Salafis not deal with this cursed rule? If it were correct, why do they not deal with the Salafis who disagree with them like this? They mention that, praise be to Allah, they defended the creed and Allah benefited through them, and they defended tawhid (the oneness of Allah) and clarified the Sunnah and spread it among the people and fought bid'ah, and so on. They only mention the good regarding the Salafis. Our Shaykh, on the way of mockery, they say these people are sitting in our libraries with a thousand books.
The Shaykh : Between the yellow books.
The questioner : Yes, our Shaykh, we have a thousand books. They say we have a thousand books. They wrote a book, one thousand and one. What is new? And if we come to the speech around the issue of calling to tawhid, it may be called dividing the ranks of Muslims and causing intellectual confusion. So what are the good deeds of the Salafis? They are transferred to the opposite side, the side of faults, and may Allah protect us, and the innovators and their works are ijtihad, meaning they disagree in them, but in positions such and such. So the rule, in fact, they did not even be just to themselves and those who claim it, nor did they deal with others by it!
The Shaykh : Meaning, those who established it did not act by it.
The questioner : And the first to break it, may Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : That is correct.
The questioner : Also, they say, our Shaykh, these groups, these existing Islamic groups, are a healthy phenomenon, using this expression.
The Shaykh : Oh my.
The questioner : A healthy phenomenon, and they complete each other, and we seek complementarity, not erosion.
The Shaykh : Oh my.
The questioner : Like this.
The Shaykh : A hypocrite with a eloquent tongue. Allah is the Greatest, Allah is the Greatest.
The Shaykh : Detailing it, and all good is in following those who came before. Did the Salaf do that!
The questioner : They cite, may Allah protect you, our Shaykh, some places, such as the words of the Imams regarding the Shi'ah, for example, "So-and-so is trustworthy in hadith, a Rafidi, a vile person." They cite these places and establish the rule entirely based on them without looking at thousands of texts that contain "liar," "abandoned," "weak."The Shaykh : This is the way of the innovators. When the scholar speaks about a hadith regarding a righteous man, a righteous man and a scholar and a jurist, and he says of him "he has poor memorization," does he say that he is a Muslim and that he is righteous and that he is a jurist and that he is, meaning, one to whom one refers, one to whom one refers in deriving the rulings of the Shari'ah? Allah is the Greatest. The truth is, the previous rule is very important and covers many branches, especially in this time, especially in this time. Where do they get the idea that if an occasion arises to clarify the error of a Muslim, whether he is a caller to Allah or not, he must not give a lecture and mention his merits from beginning to end? Allah is the Greatest. It is a strange thing, and by Allah, it is a strange thing!
The questioner : Yes, and some of the places they cite from al-Dhahabi's *Siyar A'lam al-Nubala* or elsewhere carry, our Shaykh, benefits, meaning, the man has benefits that Muslims need, such as hadith?
The Shaykh : This is incitement, Professor. It is not a matter of forbidding evil or enjoining good. When the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) says
He who amongst you sees something abominable should modify it
من رأى منكم منكرًا فليغيرهAnother questioner : Our Shaykh, among the wonders in this, they said that our Lord, Mighty and Majestic, when He mentioned intoxicants, He mentioned prayer.
The Shaykh : Oh my, Allah is the Greatest. These people follow what is ambiguous in it, seeking fitnah and seeking its ta'wil (figurative interpretation). Glory be to Allah. I see that they have things that we do not have.
The questioner : But, our Shaykh, the young men do not come to you here to speak to you about such things, but those who interact with them.
The Shaykh : No, it is fine, but here we do not have that.
Another questioner : It is not well-known, praise be to Allah.
The Shaykh : No, no, we are saying regarding here, meaning, we do not have it.
Another questioner : By the grace of Allah, our Shaykh, I mention my brother Abu al-Hasan, his manhaj (methodology)The Shaykh : may Allah preserve him, and his da'wah (calling) and its principles in this country are dominant over everyone, although there are people who have these ideas, but they are suppressed up to now. We ask Allah to preserve you as a firm barrier against bid'ah (religious innovation) and its people. O Allah, amen. What Allah willed.
The Shaykh : In the name of Allah.
The questioner : Likewise, our Shaykh, these young men, it is clear from their speech that they hardly find a sect they hate except the students of knowledge or the sons of the Salafi da'wah!
The Shaykh : I seek refuge in Allah.
The questioner : So such previous speech on this issue, in fact, it belittles the matter of the people of innovation. It mentions the man, who is a holder of bid'ah and vile opinions, and mentions his good deeds and that he did this and did that, but he has ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) that is not agreed upon. For example, in matters that are clear, their violations are called ijtihad that is not agreed upon. In contrast, they say, for example, why do the Salafis not deal with this cursed rule? If it were correct, why do they not deal with the Salafis who disagree with them like this? They mention that, praise be to Allah, they defended the creed and Allah benefited through them, and they defended tawhid (the oneness of Allah) and clarified the Sunnah and spread it among the people and fought bid'ah, and so on. They only mention the good regarding the Salafis. Our Shaykh, on the way of mockery, they say these people are sitting in our libraries with a thousand books.
The Shaykh : Between the yellow books.
The questioner : Yes, our Shaykh, we have a thousand books. They say we have a thousand books. They wrote a book, one thousand and one. What is new? And if we come to the speech around the issue of calling to tawhid, it may be called dividing the ranks of Muslims and causing intellectual confusion. So what are the good deeds of the Salafis? They are transferred to the opposite side, the side of faults, and may Allah protect us, and the innovators and their works are ijtihad, meaning they disagree in them, but in positions such and such. So the rule, in fact, they did not even be just to themselves and those who claim it, nor did they deal with others by it!
The Shaykh : Meaning, those who established it did not act by it.
The questioner : And the first to break it, may Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : That is correct.
The questioner : Also, they say, our Shaykh, these groups, these existing Islamic groups, are a healthy phenomenon, using this expression.
The Shaykh : Oh my.
The questioner : A healthy phenomenon, and they complete each other, and we seek complementarity, not erosion.
The Shaykh : Oh my.
The questioner : Like this.
The Shaykh : A hypocrite with a eloquent tongue. Allah is the Greatest, Allah is the Greatest.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.