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? That’s because it’s possible that, that which 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 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) 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.
__________
1Footnote: The scholars have mentioned in their explanation of this Hadeeth that being corrupt when one disputes also entails the following matters:
1. Knowingly rejecting the truth.
2. Arguing with false arguments.
3. Bearing false testimony to order to be viewed as the one who is correct.
4. Altering the truth.
5. Lying
and other than that…
Source: The page of Shaykh Muhammad Baazmool (may Allaah preserve him).
Translated by Abu Yusuf Khaleefah
20th of Rabee’ al-Awwal, 1436 H (11th of January, 2015)
Masjid Nur Allah, LeFrak City, Corona, NYC, USA
