How to deal with someone who, when you do good to them, does wrong to you?

The questioner : May Allah bless you. How do you advise a person to deal with a brother he has been afflicted with, especially those who claim to be committed, who do wrong to him when he does good to them? They do wrong to him with their tongues and by speaking ill of his honor. This is one aspect. The other aspect is how a person should deal with brothers who consume the honor of people and spare no effort in doing so. May Allah bless you? And the first aspect is essential to focus on. May Allah bless you.

The Shaykh : Essential, what?

The questioner : To focus on it.

The Shaykh : In my opinion, the answer to this is in an authentic hadith in Sahih Muslim, where a man complained to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) that he had relatives, kin, whom he maintained ties with, but they cut him off. He (peace and blessings be upon him) answered him that if that is the case, . It is known that maintaining ties with those who cut you off, forgiving those who wrong you, and giving to those who deny you are among the noble qualities of character, not among the obligatory rulings. So, if there are people to whom a doer of good does good and maintains ties with them because they all share in commitment to the rulings of the Shari'ah, but they do not commit to the ruling of the Shari'ah regarding doing good to those who do good to them, then there are two cases. The first case, which is the best, is what is included in this hadith and the one before it: that you maintain ties with those who cut you off, and that if they treat you differently than you treat them, it is as if you are throwing hot embers in their faces. But not everyone is able to be patient with such harshness or such bad treatment. So, it is permissible for him not to maintain ties with them and not to visit them if their harm has reached a degree that, at least for him, he cannot bear. So, here, as we say in many answers to some questions, there is taqwa (mindfulness of Allah) and there is a fatwa (scholarly legal ruling). The taqwa is that you continue to maintain ties with them, perhaps Allah (Mighty and Majestic) will guide them and they will return to their senses by rewarding the doer of good with goodness. This is the taqwa. But the fatwa is that it is permissible for you to leave them to their own devices, tolerate their harm, and isolate yourself from them. This ruling, without doubt, applies if it concerns those who share in commitment with them, but here they do not commit to the ruling of Islam. Therefore, a fortiori, regarding dealing with the general public, the same ruling applies. But here, considering the shared commitment of both parties to the Shari'ah, the ruling to maintain ties is stronger than in the other case.

The questioner : The Shaykh, may Allah bless you. Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) says: . This young man we are talking about, why do you speak about so-and-so and say such and such about him? He says, "I hate him for the sake of Allah." They ask him, "What is the reason for your hatred of him for the sake of Allah?" He says, "When we sit in a gathering with..."The Shaykh : Nasser—he turns the scholarly session into a comedic one—and we responded to him, along with some other brothers, saying, "If this statement is true, then..."The Shaykh : Nasser does not allow the scholarly session to be a session of jokes and laughter. So, what, The Shaykh, may Allah bless you, do you add to your first statement? And is there any of your students, The Shaykh, who turns your scholarly session into a comedic one?

The Shaykh : It is possible that there is exaggeration from one of the parties, from the one who claims that he turns the session into a comedic one. And this, of course, reality testifies is not the case. So, there is exaggeration in the speech, meaning that some of that may occur, and this is not something that any session is free from, because first, we are all human, and second, a joke may occur that gives the session a kind of humor. But the exaggeration in the speech may be for the sake of preserving the sanctity of the session and its scientific standing. Therefore, what should not be done is to scrutinize and be precise in such precision, as long as there is a possibility that there is exaggeration from both parties: the party that claims there is a turning of the scholarly session into a comedic one is exaggerating, or the party that reports this report is exaggerating and the matter is not as such.