You have spoken about the fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) that occurred, and we praise Allah that it ended with the refutation of the injustice, but this fitnah resulted in much confusion among

The questioner : He says:The questioner : You have spoken about the fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) that occurred, and we praise Allah that it ended with the refutation of the injustice, but this fitnah resulted in much confusion among the youth, to the point that some of them began to disparage the scholarly leadership of the senior scholars, sometimes describing them as negligent, and some went even further than that. What is your advice to these young men?

The Shaykh : My advice to these young men is first that they should know that disagreement in opinion can lead to discord in hearts, and that discord in hearts is the killing of the Ummah (the Muslim community), because Allah the Exalted says: And the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: Then, this dispute or this confusion, in my view, is a mistake, because it is obligatory for every person who is confused by the action of an individual to contact that person and ask him why he issued this ruling and why he did this action, so that he may be clear about the matter. As for taking the action of a person, or a ruling one thinks is wrong, and using it as a tongue to attack that other man, there is no doubt that this is haram (forbidden) and a lack of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) in the religion. In reality, if backbiting one of the people is haram (forbidden) and one of the major sins, then backbiting one of the scholars is greater and more serious, because backbiting a scholar is not just backbiting his person, but it is backbiting him personally, and it is also backbiting the knowledge and the Shari'ah (Islamic sacred law) he carries. You all know that if the status of a scholar is diminished in the hearts of the people, then what he says of the Shari'ah (Islamic sacred law) will be diminished and will not be accepted. Therefore, backbiting scholars is much greater than backbiting the rest of the people. It is obligatory for a person to protect his tongue from backbiting his Muslim brothers, especially backbiting scholars. It is not permissible for a person who is sincere to Allah, His Book, His Messenger, the Muslim imams, and the general public to be a coward. It is not permissible for him to be a coward. Why does he not step forward to the person he thinks is acting wrongly or ruling wrongly? Why does he not step forward to him and ask him? Is there anyone preventing him from that? He should step forward and ask. Often, sayings are attributed to some people that they did not say and did not speak, and based on this false transmission, a person builds a ruling by which he sins. So I say that the brave, sincere person is the one who, when he hears a mistake about a person, whoever that person is, contacts him, asks him, and discusses it with him. Perhaps you think that what is transmitted about the person is true, but it is not true. Or perhaps it is true, but you think it is a mistake, meaning a mistake in the ruling, when it is not a mistake. Often a person comes to another and says, "You said such and such," and he says, "I did not say it." So, is his transmission a lie or the truth? One person came to you and said, "You said such and such," and you said, "I did not say it," so the transmission about you is a lie or the truth? A lie. Well, often someone comes to you and says, "You said such and such," and you say, "Yes, I said such and such," and he says, "This is a mistake." So I say, "Where is the mistake?" and he explains what he has, and I say, "This is what I have," and I explain what I have. Then he is convinced and leaves satisfied with that. Or, for example, what he said was a mistake turns out to be correct, and I retract my statement. The person who wants the truth returns to the truth, whether it agrees with his statement or contradicts it. It is not hidden from us all what happens when the imams of the Muslims retract their statements when they have said them and it becomes clear to them that the truth is in something else. Here is Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him), who often says that he said such and such, but he retracted it. And likewise, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) is reported to have ruled in a case of fara'id (the law of inheritance shares) with a ruling, and then ruled in it with an opposite ruling. We say, let us look at this case and see your opinion: do you agree with 'Umar in his first opinion or his last? A woman died leaving a husband, a mother, two brothers from the mother, and two full brothers. I repeat the example: a husband, a mother, two brothers from the mother, and two full brothers. I repeat it a second time: a woman died leaving a husband, a mother, two brothers from the mother, and two full brothers, and she left six million. What do we say? One said, the husband gets half. How many million? Three million. And the mother gets one-sixth because there is a group of brothers. How much? One million. And the two brothers from the mother get one-third. How much? Two million. And the two full brothers get the crying and the condolence, and they have nothing. Well, this is a ruling. Another ruling said, the husband gets half. How much? Three million. And the mother gets one-sixth, one million. And the two brothers from the mother and the two full brothers get the remainder. How much for each? They are four, and the remainder is two million. Each one? How do you not know the calculation? May Allah guide you. Yes, each one gets half a million, five hundred thousand. Well, which one do we take? 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) ruled with the first, then retracted and ruled with the second. But the correct one is his first ruling, that the two brothers from the mother have one-third, two million, and the two full brothers have nothing. Did you understand? This is the correct one, due to the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): If we assign the fara'id (the law of inheritance shares) to their rightful heirs, nothing remains for the full brothers. We assign the fara'id (the law of inheritance shares) to their rightful heirs. We said, how much for the husband? Half, because the wife has no children.
The student: One-sixth.

The Shaykh : Because we have a group of brothers. The two brothers from the mother get one-third by the explicit text of the Qur'an. Allah the Exalted said: And what remains? What remains of the money? Nothing. So we say to the two full brothers, "You have nothing." Is that clear, everyone? This is the truth and the correct one. And I brought this example to say that the person who wants the truth, when the truth becomes clear to him, returns to it, even if he had said the mistake. He retracts the mistake. So if something is transmitted to you about a person that you disapprove of, the transmitter may be lying, or the transmitter may be truthful, but the truth is with the person, not with you. So it is obligatory for a person to be brave. If something is transmitted to him about a person, let him contact him and say, "I heard such and such about you. Is this true or not?" so that he may be sincere to him. As for making this a reason for backbiting and speaking about him, as the questioner mentioned, this is contrary to sincerity, contrary to justice, and contrary to the truth. Yes.