SalafiTalk.Net
SalafiTalk.Net » Affairs of Manhaj
» "Jarh is just ijtihaad, so we can take it or leave it, and the scholars did not accept the jarh against Aboo Haneefah..."
Search ===>




Part 1Part 2Part 3Part 4Part 5Part 6Part 7Part 8Part 9 • Part 10 • Part 11 • Part 12


   Reply to this Discussion Start new discussion << previous || next >> 
Posted By Topic: "Jarh is just ijtihaad, so we can take it or leave it, and the scholars did not accept the jarh against Aboo Haneefah..."

book mark this topic Printer-friendly Version  send this discussion to a friend  new posts last

Moosaa
04-04-2003 @ 12:00 AM    Notify Admin about this post
Member
Posts: 1280
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.

Moosaa Richardson

********************


ilyas.abu.ameenah
03-18-2009 @ 10:45 PM    Notify Admin about this post
Member
Posts: 103
Joined: Oct 2002
          
As salam alaykum,

can someone please post the detail discussion from Shaykh Rabee or other Scholars concerning that issue?

Becuase an Individual in our Area spread Shubuhat concerning the Jarh wa Tadeel.

He is saying that if one side of Scholars rule over a Individual that he is a Deviant or Hizbee or Mubtadi and a other side of Scholars said the oposite than both of the sides get the reward, because this issue is an Ijtihad Issue. And no one is obligated to follow either the one or the other side of the ruling of the scholars.

And as a proof for that he showed the Article from Shaykh Abu Abdul Muiz Muhammad Ali Farkoos al-Jazaairee. And that article is translated on a Website that claims for themselves the Salafi Manhaj.

So could Moosa Richardson or anybody else post more on that Issue so that it will be clearer.

Barakallahu feekum.

As salam alaykum.


abdullah.gambi
03-20-2009 @ 11:31 PM    Notify Admin about this post
Member
Posts: 379
Joined: Nov 2003
          



Assalaamu Alaykum Warahmatullaahi Wabarakaatuhu

Akhi Moosaa (hafidha-kallaah), may Allaah grant you tawfeeq to present the haqq on this topic and reward you with good.  Indeed, this affair is very important.

When I saw your post, I decided to ask a brother called Mahdee Al-Maghribee (hafidha-hullaah) to direct me to a book with a brief discussion on this topic. He directed me to the book of Shaikh Muhammad Bin Umar Saalim Bazmool titled: Ibaaraat Muhimmah in which this topic is discussed in page:62-65]

Perhaps you or anyone else with this book can translate this section for the benefit of the readers if time allows you.

Jazaakumullaahu Khayra  

Abu Muaa-wiyyah Abdullaah Bin AbuBakr Al-Fulaani Al-Gambi




ilyas.abu.ameenah
03-25-2009 @ 3:04 PM    Notify Admin about this post
Member
Posts: 103
Joined: Oct 2002
          
As salam alaykum,

a Brother that I have send this Post from Brother Moosa Richardson said to me that only in Aqeedah and Manhaj there is no Ijtihad but other that this yes.

So what is the correct response to this statemant?

Am I right when I say: Yes this staemant is right, BUT if a Scholar made an Jarh on an Individual WITH Proof, that this is an Ijtihad, yes, BUT we have no other chance to accept that Ijtihad because it is with Proof.

Please correct me if I understand that wrong.

Jazakallahu khairan.

As salam alaykum






SalafiPublications.Com
TawhidFirst | Aqidah | AboveTheThrone | Asharis
Madkhalis | Takfiris | Maturidis | Dajjaal
Islam Against Extremism | Manhaj
Ibn Taymiyyah | Bidah
I Need a Good Arabic Grammar Guide


main page | contact us
Copyright 2001 - SalafiTalk.Net
Madinah Dates Gold Silver Investments