Joined: Sep 2002
It has been said, ?Accepting jarh mufassir (detailed criticism) is not obligatory, for if it was, then the scholars would not have left the criticism against Aboo Haneefah.? |
It has been said, ?Jarh is a kind of ijtihaad, therefore it can be right or wrong, so then it is not binding on us to accept it.?
These two statements are from the many poisons being spread by the defenders of the people of innovation lately. They intend by spreading these shubuhaat to lead the Muslims into misguidance, causing them to turn away from the words of their scholars, turning them to the people of innovation and hizbiyyah after having been made aware of their danger. We ask Allaah for security.
These two statements were posed to Shaykh Rabee? today, may Allaah preserve him. Until I get the tape and post the answers word for word (in shaa? Allaah), I will summarize his answers so these doubts can be crushed before they spread any more.
As for the first question, ?It has been said, ?Jarh is a kind of ijtihaad, therefore it can be right or wrong, so then it is not binding on us to accept it.? What do you say about this statement???
The shaykh replied (summarized):
?This kind of statement is from someone playing games with the Religion, for verily it is binding on the Muslims to accept the report of the trustworthy person. Like when one of the imaams of hadeeth said, ?So and so has a poor memory?, then we must accept that from him! When two reliable witnesses go to the judge to testify, the judge must accept their testimony! When reliable Muslims witness and report a marriage, it has to be accepted from them.
They say these things, tricking the Muslims and laughing at them. These statements only lead to the destruction of the very foundations of Islaam and the Muslims themselves.?
As for the second question, ?It has been said, ?Accepting jarh mufassir (detailed criticism) is not obligatory, for if it was, then the scholars would not have left the criticism against Aboo Haneefah.? What do you say to this??
The shaykh replied (summarized), ?Who said this? Who said that the scholars ?left? the criticism against Aboo Haneefah? Al-Bukhaaree and Muslims said he was dha?eef and did not take his hadeeth! Who said he was reliable? The imaams of hadeeth accepted the criticism against him and did not his hadeeth!?
[Both answers paraphrased]
So think wisely! If you are someone who has been affected by this kind of speech, the kind that only comes from people who play games with the Religion, the kind of speech that leads to the destruction of the very foundations of Islaam and the Muslims themselves, as our shaykh has said, then realize that you have opened yourself up to be lead astray by listening to such a person, so identify them for who they are, refrain from sitting with him/her again, and warn the Muslims from them upon sincerity to Allaah the Exalted.
I hope to post the shaykh?s complete answers once the tape is available, in shaa? Allaah.
I also plan to post some things on this thread from Shaykh Muqbil?s book about the statements of the early imaams against Aboo Haneefah, as a further proof that the scholars did not disregard or leave the criticism against him. I also would like to show some of the other statements of criticism against scholars like Qataadah, and how we are to view them, based on our principles, in shaa? Allaah.
Also, it would benefit us in this thread to know the shuroot and mawaani? of tabdee? and tafseeq, since criticism may have been made against someone but the proof was not established against him, or there was some other excuse to not call him a mubtadi?. I hope to post some statements from the scholars about these things. If anyone wants to contribute any of these things on this thread, then may Allaah reward him/her.
سبحانك اللهم وبحمدك
أشهد أن لا إله إلا أنت
أستغفرك وأتوب إليك