‘If You’re Not With us You’re Against Us?’ ‘So and so is Misguided. So and so is an Innovator, So and So is a Sinner’ Are You Claiming Prophethood? Messengership? Are You Infallible? Your Opinion is Not Binding on Anyone
August 3, 2014 § Leave a comment
’Uthaimeen said, “We hold that when permissible disagreement occurs between the Muslims, and that is the type of disagreement in which ijtihaad has a place, then it is not allowed for the one who disagrees to call the person who opposes him misguided, or to declare him to be a faasiq, or to call him an innovator—for as long as it is an issue in which ijtihaad has a place, where the texts may imply this or that, then the opinion of either one of them which is based on his ijtihaad is not binding on the other.
And whoever wants his opinion to be binding on others—then he has assumed for himself the station of Prophethood and Messengership, and claimed infallibility for himself.
And that is why a person should repeatedly say:
اللَّهُمَّ رَبَّ جِبْرَائِيلَ وَمِيكَائِيلَ وَإِسْرَافِيلَ فَاطِرَ السَّمَوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ عَالِمَ الْغَيْبِ وَالشَّهَادَةِ
أَنْتَ تَحْكُمُ بَيْنَ عِبَادِكَ فِيمَا كَانُوا فِيهِ يَخْتَلِفُونَ
اِهْدِنِي لِمَا اخْتُلِفَ فِيهِ مِنَ الْحَقِّ بِإِذْنِكَ
إِنَّكَ تَهْدِي مَنْ تَشَاءُ إِلَى صِرَاطٍ مُسْتَقِيمٍ
‘O Allaah! Lord of Jibraa’eel, Mikaa’il, and Israafil, Originator of the heavens and the earth, Knower of the unseen and the seen! You judge between Your slaves concerning that wherein they differ. Guide me concerning that wherein they differ of the Truth by Your Leave, for You guide whomsoever You will to the Straight Path.’” [Muslim]
Majmoo’ Fataawaa wa Rasaa’il Fadilatish-Shaikh Muhammad ibn Saalih al–’Uthaimeen, vol. 27, p. 238.
Also refer to Shaikh al-Albaani’s answer to, ‘If you’re not with us, you’re against us.’
Al-’Abbaad on, ‘So and so is an Innovator, if You don’t Call Him an Innovator Then We will Call You an Innovator,’ when Both the One Making that Judgement and the one it is Made Against are from Ahlus-Sunnah and Have the Same Manhaj
December 15, 2013 § 1 Comment
Host: The questioner says, ‘Our Shaikh, may Allaah protect you, it is from the success that Allaah has given us that many of the students of knowledge were present for the [lessons on the] Introduction of Sahih Muslim explained by Your Excellency, only that this blessing, i.e., the principles which Imaam Muslim mentioned have become unclear to some of them such that some of them have applied the principles to some of their [own] brothers from Ahlus-Sunnah.
So when a scholar performs ijtihaad and calls someone an innovator but other people oppose him in that, then they oblige other people to call him an innovator [too] and they then go to the people who oppose them and boycott them and warn against them, believing that that is the methodology of the Salaf even though the ’aqeedah of both parties is one and their methodology is one, and the countries of many of these people are full of shirk and magic and Sufism, so do you have any advice to clarify the truth and bring about unity?
Al-’Abbaad: I say: the person to whom Allaah has granted success must clarify the truth and ask for Allaah’s guidance for the person he is clarifying the truth to, but after that what should not occur from him is to pursue that person [such] that if that person does not respond then he is boycotted and not spoken to like that which some of the small students do—because they know nothing of the religion and [they do this boycotting etc.,] while they are present in Europe and the East and the West, ya’ni, they know nothing about the rudimentary matters of the religion but they have been afflicted with calling people innovators and boycotting, ya’ni, ‘So and so called so and so an innovator so whoever does not call him an innovator then he is an innovator and is to be boycotted,’ this is not the way of the Salaf—Shaikh Ibn Baaz would never do this—how numerous his refutations are but he was [always] busy with knowledge and would not pursue the person that was refuted, he would just make the truth clear and then carry on along the path of the people of knowledge. This is the correct way.
As for what some of the small students who are found in different places do and who have nothing in terms of knowledge, but only, ya’ni, they will meet their brothers and so [then will say], ‘So and so is an innovator, if you don’t call him an innovator [too] then we will call you an innovator,’ and he [i.e., the person they are calling an innovator] is from Ahlus-Sunnah and this is about people from Ahlus-Sunnah, it is not about people from Ahlul-Bid’ah but about people from Ahlus-Sunnah, he did something which is attributed to him, it [i.e., this thing attributed to him] may be correct or it may be incorrect, but [then] doing such [aforementioned] things is not allowed—this is not known from the Salaf of this Ummah: that when one of them would make a mistake that he would then be boycotted and called an innovator and that the people would then be asked to call him an innovator [too] and boycott him, this is not from the manhaj of the Salaf.
And the closest example [is that of] our Shaikh, Shaikh ’Abdul-’Aziz ibn Baaz through whom Allaah brought about benefit and that benefit covered the horizons and much, much good came about at his hands and his refutations are numerous but he was busy with knowledge, it wasn’t his mission, when he did call someone an innovator, to then go and say, ‘This is a must, because if not, whoever does not call him an innovator [too] then he will [also] become an innovator and is to be boycotted,’—Shaikh Ibn Baaz never did this—and nor those on the way of the Shaikh, may Allaah have mercy on him.
Asked on 8/12/2013 in the Prophet’s Mosque.
December 13, 2013 § Leave a comment
Questioner: We want a clarification of the danger of rushing to declare someone who is known to have a sound ’aqeedah to be an innovator or open sinner and the enmity and boycotting and conflict that results from that?
Al-’Abbaad: What is obligatory on every Muslim is to take precautions regarding his religion and himself and that he does not thrust himself into issues whose harm will come back to him, in fact, it is sincere advice between the Muslims that is obligatory and especially between Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, advising one another, being good to one another, co-operating amongst each other upon good, warning each other from what they may fall into so that they can turn away from it—and after that the people are not divided into those who support this person against that one or that one against this one.
Rather a person strives to make the truth the missing thing he is looking for, and he [should be someone who] loves good for everyone, such that he loves that a person who has made a mistake returns [to the truth].
As for the differing which takes place and busying one’s time with what happens between Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah in terms of the statements they make about each other and the students of knowledge pursuing that and becoming busy with it such that it becomes their one and only concern—then this does not befit a student of knowledge, in fact, the student of knowledge must desire to become busy with knowledge and not busy himself with, ‘So and so said and so and so said,’ it is not allowed for him to pursue the saying of so and so and so and so which he has become busy with because that results in rancour, enmity, boycotting, hatred and alienation.
So what is obligatory is mutual advice one to another, and what is obligatory is that everyone is good to the other and that he loves good for himself, and thus co-operation upon righteousness and piety will occur.
As for splitting Ahlus-Sunnah into disputants and quarrellers, each of them speaking about the other, calling each other innovators, slandering each other, boycotting each other—then there is no benefit in this, only harm. And it would have been fitting for time to have been spent speaking about the enemies of the Sunnah who spread mischief in the land and do not rectify matters.
As for a person who is from Ahlus-Sunnah but who has mistakes, then he is sincerely advised and debated with in a way that is best, and keenness is to be shown for him to be guided and for him to be brought close and not for him to be alienated and thrown away and discarded.
So it is obligatory to be just[ly balanced] and moderate in all matters and not to go to extremes or fall short.
And the declaring of people [from Ahlus-Sunnah] to be obstinate sinners and innovators and the boycotting [that occurs] and so on, this is all from the handiwork of the Devil and from his plots against man, rather what is obligatory, as I indicated, is to be busy with knowledge and not to preoccupy oneself with the things that some of Ahlus-Sunnah say about each other, because that preoccupies [a person] from knowledge and detestable matters result from it like those that I alluded to earlier such as [people then] boycotting each other, and this is wrong—because if everyone who made a mistake were to be boycotted or if everyone who read his books or listened to him were to be boycotted, no one would be exempt from that, because everyone is liable to make mistakes, and some of the scholars, we don’t say many of the scholars, made mistakes, and the people did not boycott them or abandon them or leave their books, rather they benefitted from them, and the person who makes a mistake is rebutted, but that should not be a cause for people to split into parties and factions, for that is from the Devil’s plot for man.
From the Shaikh’s explanation of Abu Dawud.