Is backbiting permissible without mentioning the name or identifying a person who is only known by mentioning his physical characteristics?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Is backbiting permissible without mentioning the name or identifying a person who is only known by mentioning his physical characteristics?
The Shaykh : Backbiting that refers to an unknown person, such as saying, "Some people say such and such" or "Some people do such and such," is permissible on the condition that the listener does not understand it to be so-and-so. If the listener understands it to be so-and-so, then there is no benefit in using a general description.
For this reason, it was the way of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) that when he wanted to rebuke a group of people for something, he would say: So if you say, "Some people say such and such" or "do such and such" or the like, there is nothing wrong with it.
As for if you say, "So-and-so said such and such" and "So-and-so did such and such," which is a fault attributed to him, then this is backbiting.
As for describing a person by his physical characteristics, such as the one-eyed, the lame, the squinting, and the like, if he does not care about it, does not get angry about it, and does not dislike it, then there is nothing wrong with it. This is the common case with titles by which a person is only known, so there is nothing wrong with using the title. For this reason, you will find in the words of scholars: "the squinting one," "the lame one," and the like. If the intention is to identify the person without disparaging him, then there is no blame in this, except if we know specifically that he dislikes being called by this title, in which case we do not call him by it, due to the generality of the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family):Sunan Abi Dawud 4874Sahih (Al-Albani).
In summary: if a person is mentioned in a way that he is not identified by it, but his character traits are mentioned without pointing to him specifically, then there is nothing wrong with it, in order to deter the community from these traits.
As for if it is about physical characteristics, if he is only known by them, then there is nothing wrong with it, as long as we do not know specifically that he dislikes it. And if he does not dislike it and is known without them, then there is nothing wrong with it either, because scholars use this frequently.
The Shaykh : Backbiting that refers to an unknown person, such as saying, "Some people say such and such" or "Some people do such and such," is permissible on the condition that the listener does not understand it to be so-and-so. If the listener understands it to be so-and-so, then there is no benefit in using a general description.
For this reason, it was the way of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) that when he wanted to rebuke a group of people for something, he would say:
What is the matter with a group of people who do such and such?
ما بال أقوام يفعلون كذا وكذاAs for if you say, "So-and-so said such and such" and "So-and-so did such and such," which is a fault attributed to him, then this is backbiting.
As for describing a person by his physical characteristics, such as the one-eyed, the lame, the squinting, and the like, if he does not care about it, does not get angry about it, and does not dislike it, then there is nothing wrong with it. This is the common case with titles by which a person is only known, so there is nothing wrong with using the title. For this reason, you will find in the words of scholars: "the squinting one," "the lame one," and the like. If the intention is to identify the person without disparaging him, then there is no blame in this, except if we know specifically that he dislikes being called by this title, in which case we do not call him by it, due to the generality of the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family):
It is saying something about your brother which he would dislike
الغيبة ذكرك أخاك بما يكرهIn summary: if a person is mentioned in a way that he is not identified by it, but his character traits are mentioned without pointing to him specifically, then there is nothing wrong with it, in order to deter the community from these traits.
As for if it is about physical characteristics, if he is only known by them, then there is nothing wrong with it, as long as we do not know specifically that he dislikes it. And if he does not dislike it and is known without them, then there is nothing wrong with it either, because scholars use this frequently.