How Muslims Should Deal with One Another When They Differ

 

How
Muslims Should Deal with One Another When They Differ

Questions and Answers with Sheikh Muhammad
Ibn Saleh Ibn 'Uthaymeen (may

Allah have mercy on his soul)

---

Question : When two scholars give differing
judgments on a personal issue, how do we decide upon which opinion to choose?
Do we look at the specialization of the scholar, his age or just the evidence
he brings?

Answer : It is well known and important
that we know what is correct through the means of evidence. Yet it is upon
him (the person seeking the truth) to follow whom he sees is closest to
that which is correct. This is according to the scholar's knowledge and
the level of trust in him. As far as knowledge - there are indeed people
who speak without knowledge. He may have some aspect of knowledge while
having yet missed many aspects. As far as trust - there are some people
who have a lot of knowledge yet he looks to what the people desire therefore
he becomes negligent and rules according to what suits the questioner.
So if scholars disagree, look to who is closest to what is correct. Just
as two doctors may differ in diagnosis or treatment of an illness. You
will follow the one whose diagnosis you see is deeper and more thorough. 

 

Question: If we choose one of the two
scholars opinions about a person, group or issue, how do we treat those
who take an opinion different from us?

Answer : It is necessary that you cooperate
in a manner that shows love and excusing them if they do not abandon or
forsake (the correct) 'aqeedah. Because the companions (radiallahu 'anhum)
differed in matters yet they agreed (in principle) and were in conformity.
They were in agreement (muttafiqoon) that the aim was to reach the truth
and what was correct, and they were in conformity (muwaafiqoon) with the
shari'ah (Islam). Every person will not attain the same understanding as
another. So if there is a difference upon an issue there is no need for
dispute. We all agree to be on one line (i.e. the same 'aqeedah) because
I know that my companion (holding the other opinion) will not differ from
me without following evidence and I likewise would not differ from him
other than upon evidence. Our aim is the same. Then it is not permissible
for one to have any hatred nor anger nor enmity towards the other. We have
many examples of this, among them the matter of Bani Quraidhah. When the
Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) returned from the battle of Ahzaab
and they had put down their preparations for war, Jibreel came to him and
ordered him to go out to Bani Quraidhah in their homeland and fight them
because they had broken the treaty (between them and the Muslims). So the
Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) delegated his companions telling
them not to pray Asr except in Bani Quraidhah, and it was far from Al-Medinah.
They set out from Al-Medinah and the Asr prayer came in so some amongst
them prayed saying that the Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) told
us not to pray except in Bani Quraidhah only to urge us to hurry. Others
said he (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) ordered us not to pray except in
Bani Quraidhah so we won't pray until we reach there even if the sun goes
down. This reached the Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) and he did
not blame or censure any of them nor did any of them find fault in the
other. This is what is obligatory. If I know that my differing companion
is well-intending and he would only differ from me due to evidence with
him, it is necessary to know that it is not permitted for me to feel hatred
toward him. Why (should I)? If was to justify detesting him it means that
I am justifying to myself that I must be obeyed as though I am infallible.
This is not permissible. His argument against me is like mine against him
and he can say why don't you obey me? 

Question: Does this apply as well if
a scholar has criticized a person?

Answer : Yes. I do not like scholars to
criticize one another. Especially at this time. The youth have not reached
this level. It is my opinion that there should be respectfulness from the
side of the scholars and whoever sees his fellow scholar as mistaken should
speak to him privately and if it becomes clear that the truth is with one
or the other it is then obligatory to follow him (i.e. the correct one)
in it. And if the truth is not made clear then each one has his place.
As far as harsh disputation, indeed outright partisanship and hotly taking
sides reaching the level of enmity and hatred over differing over some
person among the scholars, this is an error. A scholar may even die and
Allah will account all and he may have been correct or in error. If I learn
he has made an error in his words it is obligatory to leave that and not
repeat it. And I should find an excuse for him, especially if I know the
man was of good intention and should consider his making ijtihaad (i.e.
attempting to arrive at the truth). 

Question: Who has a right to say someone
has a bid'ah or fallen into it or call someone a deviant or an innovator?
And what is the meaning of the word 'inhiraaf'?

Answer : Inhiraaf means to swerve from
the straight path. It could be a complete inhiraaf that reaches the level
of kufr (disbelief) or it could be an inhiraaf amounting to a shortcoming
that does not lead to disbelief. The truth is we don't just decide the
matter of what is innovation. The scale upon which we weight the matter
is the Kitaab and Sunnah. If this was not the case then every issue in
which there was a difference between scholars in fiqh - and how many they
are - we would say that all those who differ are innovators (mubtadi'een)
[at this the shaykh slapped his hands together as if the matter would be
all over!] and everyone who differs from us are innovators and all the
fuqahaa would be considered as having fallen into innovation! There are
few issues where there is absolutely no difference. 

Question: Then if inhiraaf (meaning
deviation) is applied to a person, what is meant?

Answer : [The shaykh visually illustrated
an example in the room saying…] Here is a straight path from here to the
door, if one goes (away) from here then (what)? (The group responded: Inhiraaf?)
Yes it is inhiraaf. However it may be slight and easy to return from or
it could be major. And this is the example given by the Prophet (sallallahu
'alaihi wa sallam) when he drew a straight line and then lines from both
sides. 

Question: How can someone return if
going off that path?

Answer: By Allah the way to get them back
is to clarify the truth with kindness and compassion without assaulting
a man a saying to him "You mubtadi' (innovator), you are astray!" That
may do nothing except cause him to hold more tightly to his opinion and
at the least he will seek to defend himself or seek to support himself.
However one should come to him with that which is better. Invite him to
your home or go to him for a visit and say 'this matter is causing a problem
for me.' He will say for sure it is a problem however decrease the dispute
with him by approaching him humbly (almost as though you have the problem).
Allah the Mighty and Majestic says: Is Allah better or those who they ascribe
as partners? knowing full well that Allah is indeed better but this was
put for the sake of disputant (for the sake of argument). Go and say to
him "We came to settle this problem. Your words were such and such. Please
clarify to me so we can come to some understanding or agreement." If one
goes to this extent I believe the brother will humble himself and comply
in the face of such leniency and kindness.

Question: What do we do in a situation
where some brothers say "We will not go to such and such a place because
so-and-so will be there?" In other words what are the guidelines with regards
to doing hijraan (boycott) in the matter of inhiraaf (deviation)?

Answer : First, know that it is not permissible
against one who is a believer. Every believer is not permitted to be boycotted
(i.e. absolutely) even if he is an adulterer or a thief a drinker or a
killer because none of that takes him out of having imaan. As Allah stated:
If two parties among the believers fight them make amends between and if
one of them insists on fighting the other then fight the one who continues
until he submits to the order of Allah and if they cease then reconcile
them with justice for verily Allah loves the just. Verily the believers
are brothers so make reconciliation between your brothers. [Al-Hujuraat]
So the believer is not permitted to be boycotted. It is not allowed for
a man to boycott another believer for more than three days. If the two
meet the best one is the one who initiates the salaam. Do you understand?
It is not permissible unless there is an overall benefit to the boycott.
Namely that it causes the person being boycotted to leave the sin he is
being boycotted for. In this case the boycott is a remedy. If such would
be a cure for the illness then let it be so, but if not then stay away
from it. Sometimes boycotting can be a cause for increase in the deviation
and the loss of the person. If however you give the greetings to the person
and smile in his face he will be softer and return to the truth. To boycott
because he cuts his beard or smokes cigarettes or deals with riba is not
correct. He is still a believer. The kaafir is one whom we do not initiate
giving the salaam but what if he greets with salaam? We are obligated to
return the greeting according to the statement of Allah ta'aala, If they
were to greet you then give a better greeting or at least return it (i.e.
an equal greeting). We don't stay away and such a person is a kaafir. These
issues in truth are very specific and ones in which it is not allowable
for us to judge according to emotions. We must always return to the judge,
namely return to the kitaab and the sunnah and the deeds of the righteous
predecessors (as-Salaf as-Saalih).

Question: : Let us be more specific
and ask one of the main issues in question, but without naming names or
personalities. Suppose one of the scholars said a group was very bad or
worse or more dangerous than the Jews and the Christians and someone else
says we can't generalize because there are so many people in them who are
ignorant of this groups problems and it is a greater wrong to make a general
statement that will unduly hurt them. How do we treat that person?

Answer : Why doesn't he (the scholar)
say 'the madhhab of this group is more dangerous to Islam than the Jews
and the Christians.'? This is more correct and safer without committing
excess upon the member of the group. Let's give an example of the Shi'ah.
The extreme Shi'ah are more dangerous than the Jews and the Christians
because they say their imaams control the universe, that their imaams are
better than the Messenger. Then they curse the companions on the minbars
and they curse the Mother of the Believers 'Aaishah (radiallahu 'anhaa).
The one upon whose chest the Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) died
and whose saliva was the last thing he tasted in this world, on her day,
in her house. They would accuse her! Not even the Jews and the Christians
say such a thing! On top of it is the problem that they say this is Islam!
This is a real problem. Look and read in soorah Al-Munaafiqeen. What does
Allah say about them? He says "They are the enemy so be on guard against
them them!" This is a type of restrictive sentence so know its two parts.
They are the enemy - so be on guard against them. Even with this, I don't
see a total rejection or dismissal of them saying such as "You Shi'ah are
a bunch of kaafirs!" I rather say that madhhab and whoever follows its
way is more dangerous to Islam than the Jews and the Christians. This is
more correct. Is that clear?

Question: But how do we deal with a
person who rejects saying that to these groups (not meaning the Shi'ah).
We see him as mistaken or not knowing the truth of these groups. He says
don't make a general statement like that about them because there are pious
and righteous people among them, while we see it as necessary to say so.
Do we make the same blanket judgment about those among these groups who
write on issues such as haakimiyyah and the like without complete knowledge
and the leaders of these groups and the average person who just follows
the leaders, sees them as good and who may have been led to Islam by them?
Do we say to him that such people are more dangerous to Islam than the
Jews and the Christians?

Answer : It is as I mentioned at first.
Concentrate on the madhhab and the method not the person even if the person
is astray not to mention if he has knowledge he may have made ijtihaad.
There is no call for severity and vehemence towards him because some people
gang up on a person just like that. However if we concentrate on the method,
this is more beneficial. In this manner we see that none of heads of the
kuffaar (Al-Quraish) is mentioned by name in the Qur'aan except one (i.e.
Abu Lahab). This is a matter that we should, in shaa Allah follow the sound
way (i.e. to deal with). Even if the innovator comes to us that we say
his bid'ah is greater than the danger of the Yehood and Nasaara I don't
say 'you say or your opinion is such and such', I instead say to him "This
is the way. If you follow it you have chosen for yourself. If you don't
follow it that is what we want."

Question: Suppose I see someone who
has made a mistake in their religion, maybe in 'aqeedah, maybe in an action
or in manhaj. Is it permissible for me with little knowledge to advise
him?

Answer: Has it not reached you that the
Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa 'alaa aalihi was sallam) said, "Convey about
me even if it be a single aayah."? Enough?

Someone states: We love you for the sake
of Allah Shaykh.

Shaykh Ibn Al'Uthaimeen: We love the One
Whom has caused you to love me. Allah has made us beloved to one another
and of those in His cause (awliyaa-ihi). Verily He is in control of all
things. Remain firm and stick together!

Question: Is it correct for a group
of students of knowledge to make a ruling on an individual without going
to him to speak with him or advise him first and instead go to others and
warn them against this person and spread this?

Answer : No. No. Never! First if you hear
something about a person and you see him as mistaken there are stages.
The first stage is confirmation. The transmission about the person may
or may not be correct. How many people transmit some statement about a
person and they either misunderstand it or with the intention of causing
enmity between the Muslims? So first is confirmation. And what could be
better than the statement of Shaykh Al-Islam (Ibn Taymiyyah) in refutation
of the Raafidhah (Shi'ah) in his book The Way of the Sunnah about when
a text is mentioned "the first thing demanded is verification of the transmission."
This is a rule and important. Secondly, if the transmission is verified
let us look. Is there an explanation for it that perhaps the transmitter
did or did not understand? If we see that there is an explanation and the
transmitter misunderstood, we say to the transmitter "Brother fear Allah!
The man isn't such and such!" or "The meaning is so and so." In this case
we would be defending the truth and saving this man from slandering his
brother (buhtaan). Thirdly, if there is no explanation then it is obligatory
that we go to whom the news is being said about and say "We heard such
and such. Is it correct or not?" If he says yes then we should be polite
and mannerly with him and not provoke or upset him and let him know there
is a problem here. Did not Allah say such and such did not the Messenger
say such and such? It is necessary that we return to the truth. He may
have knowledge that is not with me and when I engage him he may point me
to some knowledge and it would obligatory to follow it.

Question: Is it permissible to say to
the person , "We saw you with so and so mubtadi' as though you follow this
innovating group?"

Answer : Never. You engage him as though
you never heard a thing about it.

 

Question: If a brother feels harmed
or hurt by the actions of some other brothers and they have hidden themselves
from that person and as a result he feels this hurt in his heart, how can
he go about healing that or making some type of reconciliation in himself
and how can those brothers perhaps be corrected if their actions indeed
are wrong?

Answer : He should remember the statement
of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam): Allah showed mercy to my
brother Musa who was harmed more than this and he was patient. Be patient
and the end is for the pious. This is of the knowledge of the gha'ib We
have revealed to you. You were not aware of it nor were your people before
you. Be patient for indeed the end is for the pious.

Question: What is obligatory upon a
Muslim, and in particular, those seeking knowledge and making Da'wah, in
regards to befriending scholars capable of performing Ijtihaad - that is
under the assumption that adhering to a group of scholars who are capable
of Ijtihaad is one of the obligatory means of adhering to the Jama'ah?

Answer : I say, the obligation of the
general public of the Muslim community is to follow those scholars who
are known to be abundant in knowledge, correct in the Aqeedah (belief),
and sound in their Manhaj (methodology). This is because Allah says, which
means:

"And ask ahlu-thikr (people of knowledge)
if you do not know"

And the scholars which I have just described
are the "those in authority" - those who have Allah mentioned about in
the Qur'aan, which means: "O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger
and those in authority over you"

Because "those in authority" comprises
two groups of people, the first group being the scholars, and they are
the primary object in this aayah, and the second group are the rulers,
those who implement the Shari'ah of Allah over the slaves of Allah. The
scholars are the people of clarification, knowledge and guidance, and the
rulers are the people of implementation and jurisdiction. So if the public
were to take every person as one to be followed, following him without
investigating his knowledge, trust, manhaj and aqeedah then they would
split apart from one another and go astray. And this, meaning, this division
is what Allah has forbidden in more than one aayah of the Qur'aan. Allah
says, which means:

"It has been legislated for you in the
religion that Nuh (Noah) was ordered with, and that which We revealed to
you, and what We ordered Ibrahim (Abraham) with and Musa (Moses) and 'Eesaa
(Jesus) - (the command) Establish the religion and do not divide therein."

And Allah says, which means: "And do not
divide or you will fail and you will lose your strength"

And Allah says, which means: "And do not
be like those who divided and differed after the clear evidence came to
them, for them is great punishment"

And Allah says, which means: "Those who
split up their religion and became sects, you have nothing to do with them,
their affair is only with Allah, then He will inform them of what they
used to do"

To Allah belongs all Praise, the ways and
means of communication have become many. So now it is possible for a person
living in the East to call one in the West in just one second, and then
ask him for whatever he needs. So the evidence has been established and
the information has become clear. So beware, beware of division - and I
say division not differing, for there is no escape from differing. Because
people have disagreed in understanding, knowledge, imaan and taqwa. So
if the people disagreed in these four subjects then how much more so differing
in opinions. The only thing which requires guard against is differing of
hearts, and the abandoning of each other, until the end result is that
people accuse others of misguidance, and of innovation, so beware and be
warned.

 

 

 

---