...
Shaykh Muhammad Baazmool said,
"The First Step:
Acknowledging
the reality that every child of Aadam makes mistakes and the best of
those who make mistakes are those who repent often. This is the first
step in dealing with the mistake when the Salafi or other than him from
amongst the people have fallen into the mistake.
The Second Step:
We look at the matter which the person has fallen into; is it from the matters of Ijtihaad?
Or is it from the matters where the evidence is apparent which mandates traversing towards it?
This matter is in need of a (well-grounded) student of knowledge or a scholar to whom we raise up the affair of this brother.
We
say to him: "Oh Shaykh, so and so made a mistake (in such and such
matter). How do we deal with him? How should our stance be regarding
him?"
We
do that because it is possible that what this brother has fallen into
is from the matters of Ijtihaad, and not from the matters which mandate
him to traverse towards that which the evidence indicates.
Our
dealing with him, if he opposes (us) in a matter of Ijtihaad, is not
similar to our dealings with him when he opposes us in a matter in which
the evidence is apparent and which mandates one to traverse towards
it.
As
an example, it’s possible that he opposes us regarding placing the
hands on the chest after the Rukoo’. He puts them on the chest and we
don’t put them on the chest. Or we put them on the chest and he doesn’t
put them on the chest. This is a matter of ijtihaad.
It’s
possible that the difference is in the matter of the Izaar of the
believer being to the middle of the two shins. So he made his garment to
be at the middle of the two shins. And we see that the Izaar of the
believer to be as the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said,
“The Izaar of the believer is to be to the middle of the two shins.
There’s no harm for it to be between the shin and the ankles. And
whatever is below the ankles is in the fire.” So he differs with us (in
this matter). We wear (our garments) down to the ankles (right above it)
and he wears (his garment) down to the middle of his shins.
It’s
possible that the matter is concerning the wearing of the turban. We do
not see (for us) the wearing of the turban. We see the wearing of the
head garment which we call the Ghutrah and the Shimaagh. Or the likes of
that from the matters that have a number of points of view (for it) and
there’s no evidence regarding the issue which mandates the person to
traverse towards it (a specific viewpoint) or that which restricts the
statement to be one statement.
It’s
possible that he sees the one who abandons the prayer to be a
disbeliever unrestrictedly and we see that the one who abandons the
prayer out of laziness and negligence is not a disbeliever. But if he
abandons it out of rejection and denial (of its obligation), then he is a
disbeliever. We give details (regarding our stance) similar to the way
of the majority of the scholars. It is not befitting that there be
disputation over these matters in which differences are acknowledged (as
being valid). Some of these matters are justified from the same
evidence. This step is in need of a vast horizon and knowledge of the
differences (of opinion).
It
has been said: The more the knowledge of a person increases about the
differences of opinion, (the more) his chest expands. And the more the
knowledge of a person decreases of the differences of opinion, (the
more) his chest becomes restricted.
The Third Step:
This
mistake which the brother has fallen into, when we know that the
mistake is one in which differences (of opinion) is not justified and
that he is mandated to agree with us—in that case, we reprimand him. We
become stern (with him if he remains upon being in opposition). We
command him with the good and we forbid him from the evil. We command
him to return back to the ‘Ulamaa and to the (well grounded) students of
knowledge in order for them to clarify this matter for him.
If
the matter is one that is justified to differ in, then we are gentle
with him. We advise him and speak to him with calmness and with that
which is better. And we do not become stern with him in an affair with
(allowable) differences (in opinion).
 The Fourth Step:
It is upon us, in all of that (i.e. the issues of allowable differing) to keep away from corruption in disputation.
Indeed, some of the people don’t have the ability to find a person that opposes him in a matter.
As
for the corruption in disputes, it is when he finds one who opposes him
in a matter (of justifiable differing), he becomes corrupt (in his
behavior towards the one who differs with him). This is from the signs
of hypocrisy.
The
Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said: “There are four
matters–whoever has them in him is a pure hypocrite. And whoever has a
trait from them, then he has a trait of hypocrisy until he leaves it
off. When he speaks he lies. When he makes a promise he breaks it. When
he makes a covenant he breaches it. And when he argues he’s corrupt(1).”
Therefore
corruption in disputes merely because (one has) differed (with you in a
matter of justifiable differing) is from the signs of hypocrisy and it
is upon the Muslim to take caution from it.
The Fifth Step:
We
have discussed (the matter) with him, debated him, raised his affair to
the people of knowledge and sought from him to return back to the
people of knowledge. The (well grounded) students of knowledge have
spoken with him, advised him and clarified the matter to him. The proofs
have been established upon him and the doubts have been removed from
him. Thereafter, it becomes clear that his continuation (upon his
opposition) is from following (his) desires. Then we say: Here is where
we go from describing his statement or action as a mistake and a matter
of opposition to describing him as being a possessor of innovation or an
innovator who is astray and is from the people of desires. So, we go
from describing the statement or the action to describing the individual
(himself).
Also
after that, we move to another matter, and it is that we bring about
awareness of the dangers of this person. That’s because he has become
one who carries a misguided understanding which has no justification for
it. He has become one who opposes Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah. Therefore
it is befitting to limit his evil and keep it away from the people.
That is by way of boycotting him, warning against him, warning against
his gatherings, warning against listening to him and warning against
reading his books! Being quiet about this person means giving the
ability to spread his (misguided) views. He may have a (negative) effect
upon the beginner students of knowledge and due to that remove them
from the (realm) of the sunnah. Leaving him (and not warning against
him) puts the doubts (in a position) to lead the people astray from the
path of Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah.
Here,
there is a magnificent foundation which the Salaf have established and
mentioned their consensus upon. It is none other than boycotting the
people of innovation and desires.
The
person (of innovation) is to be boycotted and warned against. He is not
to be sat with, accompanied and listened to. His ranks are not to be
multiplied and we are to keep far away from him. That is due to him
becoming a person of innovation and misguidance.
There
is no difference in that between a major innovation and a lesser
innovation. All innovation is misguidance and its people are the people
of misguidance. This is the Manhaj of Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah
regarding dealing with the one who has fallen into a mistake.
There
has appeared a group and it is a face from the faces of the Khawaarij.
This group has traversed upon the path of the Khawaarij regarding
dealing with the one who has fallen into a mistake. What did they do?
This group makes judgment upon the person who has made the mistakes
right away without the establishment of proof (upon the person). They
don’t distinguish between the mistake of the person of the Sunnah and
the mistake of other than him. They don’t distinguish between the Sunni
scholar who is known for following the Book and the Sunnah, and the
person of innovation and misguidance. They make them to be the same. It
is the group that is called: Al-Haddaadiyyah. Their way is different
from the way of Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah in this matter. They have
gone outside of the path of Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah regarding this
topic. Therefore, it is befitting to be aware of them and not traverse
upon their way"
Footnote:
1)
The scholars have mentioned in their explanation of this hadeeth that
being corrupt when one disputes also entails the following matters:
A. Knowingly rejecting the truth.
B. Arguing with false arguments. C. Bearing false testimony inorder to be viewed as the one who is correct. D. Altering the truth. E. Lying and other than that…
Ref: masjidnurallah.com
|
