When is it true to say that a man has reached the level of a scholar?

The questioner: If Allah wills, in my opinion, the question is valid... There are many students of knowledge who say that their shaykhs are the most knowledgeable, right? Of course, there are many shaykhs and many students of knowledge. For example, if we were to ask nowThe Shaykh : onAl-Halabi : Who do you think is the most knowledgeable in hadith? I am sure he would sayThe Shaykh : Al-Albani is the most knowledgeable in hadith
Al-Halabi : Of course.

The questioner : He is doing well.

The Shaykh: And if the question were reversed and asked of you, and he said to you, what do you say, who is it?
Al-Halabi: My shaykh, I asked him and he said, I do not know.

The questioner: I do not know. This is the first time I have seen you, or the second time I have seen you.

The Shaykh: You know others. I am not telling you to testify to his testimony, no, but what do you testify to regarding the one you know?

The questioner: I mean, for example, in hadith, I ask people and they say it is permissibleThe Shaykh : 'Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghuddah, but some of our Salafi brothers, what do they say about him? That he is an innovator and misguided, correct? They said about him that he is among the scholars of hadith. Also, there are shaykhs, meaning othersThe Shaykh : 'Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghuddah, and Allah knows best, meaning in the knowledge of hadith, meaning in fiqh, for exampleThe Shaykh : Ibn Baz, his students sayThe Shaykh : Ibn Baz is the most knowledgeable person on earth. For example, Dr. Muhammad Sulayman al-Ashqar says this is the most knowledgeable person on earth. Likewise, if we ask some of our Salafi brothers, they sayThe Shaykh : Al-Albani. So I want to know from you what is the criterion for a person of knowledge or a scholar, so that he is taken as a scholar, if the question is valid? What is the criterion, meaning, so that we consider this person to be a scholar exactly? Or a scholar by right? What do you say about this question?

The Shaykh: I say, quoting Ibn al-Qayyim:
"Knowledge is: Allah said, His Messenger said *** The Companions said; it is not deception
Knowledge is not setting yourself up for foolish disagreement *** Between the Messenger and the opinion of a jurist
Nor is it affirming or denying the attributes and their negation *** Out of fear of denial of attributes or likening Allah to creation"
Do you think this is the answer to your question? It is not clear.

The questioner: May Allah bless you, but...

The Shaykh: The rest of the matter differs from person to person, to the extent that the person is close to this description - meaning, he is not a scholar - stay with me, just

The questioner: With you, if Allah wills

The Shaykh: With me, but not with me, but in your body, because in Syria they say "the eye is a ladle for speech," I think this is reasonable speech for you.

The questioner: You are right, you are right.

The Shaykh: Well done. So let you know who the jurist is; we have given you the description of the jurist.

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh: He is the scholar of the Book, the Sunnah, and the righteous Salaf. But for you to know that this one or that one is the jurist, you must have a type or a part of this culture and this knowledge in order to distinguish, correct or not?

The questioner : You are correct.

The Shaykh: That a type or part of this answer to this question was previously discussed when we spoke with Abu what is his name? Who was your relative

The questioner: Abu 'Amir

The Shaykh: Abu 'Amir, do you remember when he asked

The questioner: About the madhahib

The Shaykh: About the madhahib, so I gave him several examples. The last example was that the jurist is the one who issues fatwas based on the Book and the Sunnah, and does not issue fatwas based on a specific madhhab. So now, if you take this criterion, you do not have to be an ordinary layman; you must have some general Islamic culture in order to be able to know that this description, please, in order to be able to know that this man is the scholar and not that one. This is the answer to your question, in my belief, and perhaps I have conveyed to you what you wanted.

The questioner: May Allah bless you, meaning you have made the knowledge of the scholar based on the correct Sunnah and the word of Allah first, and then the correct Sunnah and the righteous Salaf. And it is necessary to distinguish with some knowledge, right? Meaning, if we discussed, and may Allah reward you with good, what is this knowledge and what does it consist of?

The Shaykh: The knowledge related to whom?

The questioner: Meaning, what is the knowledge you intended in your question? I am sorry in your answer.

The Shaykh: I said earlier that the one who wants to distinguish whether this is the scholar or not must have a general culture in Islam. I am giving you an example now. If I asked, we have two scholars. If I asked one of them, let us call him Zayd, and the other 'Amr. You observe Zayd, whether orally or in writing, he gives you the answer to your question: halal, haram, fard, sunnah, and so on, and that is it. If you ask him for evidence, he may bring you evidence. If you ask him, is there disagreement in the issue? He tells you there is disagreement. You say to him, what is the stronger position? He will not give you what is the stronger position among all the madhahib, because the stronger position is only his madhhab. Whereas 'Amr, the second one, if you ask him the same question, you see the difference between his answer and Zayd's answer, who is the first one. This is an example by which you can distinguish the scholar of the Book and the Sunnah and on the methodology of the righteous Salaf from the man who is not a scholar. Because Zayd is a scholar of traditional knowledge, meaning madhhab-based knowledge. This is not a scholar, by the consensus of the scholars of the Salaf and the Khalaf, that the one who does not know the evidence of the disputed issues from the Book and the Sunnah is not a scholar. And the opposite is exactly the opposite. This is an example of how a person with some Islamic culture can distinguish the true scholar from the scholar who is a follower of taqlid. And I told you that it is whether orally or in writing. So you just gave some examples. Look at these examples; when they write, they tell you and show you that the issue he adopts, even if it is contrary to his madhhab which he lived by, he adopts it because it agrees with the Book and the Sunnah. And that one is contrary, so he turned away from it, even if it was his old madhhab. And by their opposites, things become clear. As for it being said that so-and-so is a scholar and that is the end of the matter, the matter is not so. Please.