Worshipping Personalities, Fanaticism Towards or Against a Particular Personality, Turning Away from Knowledge and Memorising the Quraan and Becoming Known for Saying, ‘‘This person is an innovator … this person is misguided … this person has such and such an issue …this one has this and that … and this one praises the people of innovation … and this one says such and such …’ | 2 |
Continuing from the first post …
For this reason, before everything we advise these people who have differed and who were the cause of the youth around them splitting into two factions or more, we advise these people who are at odds with each other in some issues, and I praise Allaah that this difference, in my opinion, is not a difference in aqidah but in some issues which maybe we can call, in the terminology of those who came later, subsidiary issues not fundamentals or the core of the matter–so if the scholars differ then it is not fitting that those people around them split due to the division of the scholars, because the issue is as he عليه الصلاة والسلام said, “If a judge passes judgment and makes Ijtihad and he is right then he will have two rewards. And if he makes a mistake he will have one.”
So we advise these scholars or callers who have differed not to discriminate/be prejudiced against each other and to deal with each based upon his saying عليه الصلاة والسلام, ‘Beware of suspicion, for truly, suspicion is the most false of speech.’
So if some person, [let’s say he’s called] Zaid, makes a mistake then it is upon us to clarify his mistake to him in the best manner and not the worst, and all of those who differ [should] tread this path, because we all claim that we are Salafis, i.e., that we follow the guidance, manhaj and behaviour the Salaf as-Saalih were upon. And we know that they did differ in many issues but this difference [of opinion] was never a cause for them to split or for them to treat each other as enemies.
There are some statements which have been authentically reported from some of the Salaf as-Saalih which if today someone were to mistakenly adopt because it has no angle from which it is correct, a great furore would arise against him, but such a huge furore did not arise against that Companion who, in a certain opinion or ruling, parted with an anomalous stance from the ruling which the other [Companions] had adopted: Umar ibn al-Khattaab, may Allaah the Most High be pleased with him, used to prohibit performing the tamattu type of Hajj and after him Uthmaan ibn Affaan, may Allaah be pleased with him, followed him in this prohibition. When Uthmaan performed Hajj during his caliphate he also prohibited the pilgrims from performing the tamattu type of Hajj.
So Ali ibn Abi Taalib, may Allaah the Most High be pleased with him, stood in his face, an individual from the Ummah, and he would be the Khalifah after him, [he stood in his face and] said to him, ‘Why do you prohibit something which we did in the time of Allaah’s Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم! [And then he announced the talbiyyah for the tamattu type of Hajj] Here I am, O Allaah, performing Umrah with Hajj!’
That person [i.e., Uthmaan] was prohibiting performing the Umrah with Hajj [called Hajj tamattu] and this person [i.e., Ali ibn Abi Taalib] is declaring [his intention to do it] in his face, [saying] that the Sunnah is like this–despite that the people did not split around them, on the contrary they continued to respect each one’s opinion, and they [i.e., the people] may have leaned towards the Khalifah’s opinion [more than the other], because he was the Khalifah of the Muslims etc., [but] why [did the [people not split?]
Because when a dispute breaks out between the scholars it is fitting that it remains confined to them and that the dispute’s infection is not transmitted to the population, because the people do not have the composure, the impregnability and the mind to prevent them from going to extremes in the dispute.
Similarly, Uthmaan ibn Affaan used to hold the opinion that if a man has intercourse with his wife but does not emit any semen then it is enough for him to perform wudoo instead of ghusl, although this contradicts the authentic, clear hadith, ‘When the circumcised part meets the circumcised part ghusl becomes obligatory whether there is ejaculation or not,’ despite this, no fitnah and no discord occurred between him and, for example, Aaishah who is the one who narrated the hadith opposing Uthmaan’s statement, may Allaah be pleased with him.
There are many examples, and even stranger than all of this, and the intent [here] is just to give an example and to bring [what I am trying to convey] closer, is that Umar al-Khattaab used to forbid the traveller who could not find any water from performing tayammum, [saying that] he should carry on as he is without praying until he comes across some water, even though the aayah is clear in its apparent meaning, “… and find no water, then seek clean earth …” [Nisaa 4:43]
And it reached Umar ibn al-Khattab that Abu Musa al-Ash’ari used to give a verdict based upon the apparent meaning of the aayah: that when a traveller does not find water he performs tayammum, so Umar sent for him and said, ‘It has reached me that you say such and such?’ He said, ‘Yes, O Chief of the Believers! Don’t you remember that we were on a journey and we became junub [i.e., entered a state of ritual impurity], and so you and I rolled about in the dust and then when we came to the Prophet عليه السلام and told him the news he said, ‘It would have been enough for you to strike the earth with your palms one time and wipe over your face and hands.’
Okay, [so he said], ‘Don’t you remember that the Prophet عليه السلام said, ‘It would have been enough for you to strike the earth with your palms one time and wipe over your face and hands.’ He replied, ‘I don’t remember.’ So Abu Musa al-Ash’ari said, ‘Shall I cease giving the fatwa?’ Umar said, ‘No, we leave you to that which you have chosen …’ i.e., as they say today, ‘[It’s] under your responsibility, under your guarantee, [since] I don’t remember this story.’ [He i.e., Umar ibn al-Khattaab too was] a man, you are not the only one who forgets, here is the Chief of the Believers who forgot.
Questioner: … what was Umar’s proof … what was Umar’s proof that when [a person is on a journey and doesn’t find water he should wait and not pray until he does so] …
Al-Albaani: His proof was the basis/foundation [al-asl], the basis [in the ruling] is water …
Questioner: … the basis …
Al-Albaani: The basis is water … the important thing is that this dispute and many, many other such disputes were not the cause for the splitting of the Muslim nation, because knowledge takes its course and the ummah stays behind its scholars: whoever is content with this opinion then he is upon guidance and whoever is content with that opinion is upon guidance.
We make a statement regarding this which should be penned down and spread [and which is]: just as when, “… a judge passes judgment and makes Ijtihad and he is right then he will have two rewards. And if he makes a mistake he will have one,” then likewise the one who follows a mujtahid comes under the ruling which applies to the mujtahid, i.e., someone who follows a correct opinion, the Mujtahid Imaam was correct [in a ruling he made] and so he has two rewards–so this person who followed him in this correct [judgement] is also rewarded twice, of course [the extent of] the reward differs, but [still he gets] two rewards. The other person who follows another Imaam who was mistaken, then such an Imaam is rewarded once, and likewise is the one following him.
So when a dispute between the scholars occurs, it is not fitting, firstly, that it should be taken as a cause for splitting amongst them [i.e., amongst the scholars themselves] and secondly, it is not fitting that it should be a cause for a split amongst the people because they are all rewarded, whether he is right or wrong.
This is how our Salaf as-Saalih were–and we think that we are treading upon their manhaj and their way.
Rather I say with profound regret that many of us make this claim and do implement it to a large extent but have deviated in some of its implementation to a very dangerous extent–and here are its effects manifesting themselves now and in a people who we used to think would be an example for others in collecting and bringing them together upon adherence to [the way of] the Salaf as-Saalih, following the Book and the Sunnah upon the methodology of the Salaf as-Saalih.
With regret, some disunity has occurred and thus just as we advise the very people who have differed from amongst the callers or the scholars or the students of knowledge not to be enemies [one to another] but rather to love each other and to make excuses for each other whilst sticking to reminding and advising [each other] with that which is best, then in the same way we advise those of the Ummah–with all their [differing] levels–who are not scholars or students of knowledge but are from the general [mass of] Muslims, also not to be influenced by such differences which they see occurring between the callers.
Because in the Noble Quraan we read that separation in the religion is not from the makeup of the Muslims but rather is a characteristic of the polytheists, “… and be not of the polytheists, of those who split up their religion and became sects, each sect rejoicing in that which is with it.” [Rum 30:31-32]