quote:

"When the Jarh is Mufassar, it is given precedence. However, it is desireable to look at the criticiser (Jaarih), is he one of those that can be relied upon, such as Yahyaa bin Ma'een, Bukhaaree, Ahmad bin Hanbal, Yahyaa al-Qattaan, Abdur-Rahmaan bin Mahdee, Abu Zur'ah and Abu Haatim, so if he is of this type, then it is accepted and it is a Jarh Mufassar. And al-Jarh al-Mufassar is like when someone says, "He errs", "he has errors", "munkar ul-hadeeth", "kadhdhaab", "matrook" All of this is Jarh Mufassar. Similarly, "Da'eef Jiddan". So the likes of this Jarh Mufassar is given precedence over ta'deel."

quote:

"As for given precedence to the ta'deel of the many, then it is not correct. Because the criticiser has observed what the appraiser (mu'addil) has not observed. So for example, when you find a man always in the first row (in prayer), so you declare him thiqah, but your friend knows that he is not a haafidh (strong memoriser), rather he is weak in memory (da'eef ul-hifdh). So you know that the man is always in the first row, but your friend knows he works in a usurious bank, or that pictures (photos) are made of him (or by him) or he works as one who shaves beards (i.e. a barber), so the Jaarih (criticiser) has observed or come across what the Mu'addil has not come across. If ten people were to declare him thiqah, and then a single person has made criticism of him with a "Jarh Mufassar", then the Jarh Mufassar is accepted..."

quote:

?..Therefore, if he explains it and clarifies it (i.e. the jarh) in the manner that has already been mentioned earlier, then it is given precedence over the one who makes ta?deel. Even if the number of those making the ta?deel are greater in number, ten, or twenty or [even] thirty. So when this mujarrih (the one making the jarh) explains and details his jarh it is not permissible for them to oppose him. And their adaalah (integrity) can be rendered void, and they merely followed jahl and hawaa. So now a scholar makes jarh of this man and explains it and textually states it upon this man, from his speech, from his book, from his cassette, and he mentions the book by edition or print. So all of this is detailed (mufassar), and clear (waadih). And the one who makes ta?deel he says, ?he used to be in prison?, ?he fought in the path of Allaah?, ?he used to call upon Allaah (in worship)?, so it is said, well fine, but this thing (found with him), is this misguidance or not misguidance. So then he opposes it with tribulations and lying and false claims ? may Allaah bless you ? and then he spreads confusion about the affairs of al-jarh wat-ta?deel. The shaahid here (point of evidence) is that the jarh is given precedence over the ta?deel, irrespective of whether it is explained or not explained (i.e. mufassar or not). And when it is made mufassar (explained) then the proof of the one who opposes it falls. And when he opposes this (jarh mufassar) then he is a mubtil (falsifier), and his adaalah (integrity) can also be rendered void. So beware and beware from opposing the truth, that which the people of desires are doing now. Especially al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimeen and those that are derived from them, because they are the most severe of people in recoursing to this particular matter, the likes of Ikhwaan, and the Qutbiyyeen, the likes of Abdur-Razzaq ash-Shayijee and others, they are upon falsehood. And Allaah has indeed manifested the truth and debased their falsehood. If they only repented to Allaah and acknowledge the falsehood that they were upon, and acknowledge the truth that is found with other than them, then the Muslims would be saved from the tribulations, those tribulations whose flag they are carrying in opposition to the truth and its people. Now, this way has become a vile reference point for everyone who wishes to oppose the Salafee Manhaj, it derives from lies, deceptions and adulterations, all of which has made this action of their?s a reference point for everyone who speaks with falsehood and calls to tribulations.