If one comes across a mistake that a scholar has made,
and he has the ability and the appropriate mannerisms and knowledge to tackle
the issue, then there is no blame on this person for clarifying the mistake.
This person should not be rebuked for clarifying the truth, even if he is wrong
in his interjection (because the person is being judged by his intent to explain
the truth).
It is has been narrated from some of the Salaf that if
they received information but it had no basis to it, they would respond and
refute it immediately. At times they would even issue harsh statements like, “This
person has lied.” We also have the statement of the Prophet [Peace and
Blessings of Allaah be upon him] where he said, “Aboo as-Sanaabil has lied.” He
said this after Aboo as-Saanbil issued a Fatwaa that the pregnant wife of her
deceased husband must expiate her ‘Iddah period (a bereavement period after the
death of her husband) of four months at ten days once she has delivered her
child[1].
It has also been narrated from many of the pious
scholars that they reprimanded weak statements and opinions, despite these
opinions being the opinions of other notable scholars. Some of them even
refuted the other in a harsh and stern manner, as Imaam Ahmad did whilst
extensively rebuking Aboo Thawr and others who issued weak statements during
his time. All of this quite common from the actions and statements of some of
the scholars.
In regards to their intention, then the reason for scholars
rebuking the weak opinion of others is obscure, as the intentions of humans is
hidden from us. Those with the intention to clarify mistakes so that the
general folk will not be deceived, and have the intent to make the truth clear
and apparent, is an action which is undoubtedly praiseworthy and virtuous in
its reward. This type of intent is included in one being sincere to Allaah, His
Messenger, the scholars of al-Islaam and their general folk.
Their virtue is upheld irrespective of the importance
of the mistake, big or small, because by taking this noble action they are
treading the path laid for us by the scholars of old.
Ibn ‘Abbaas [may Allaah be Pleased with him] had
opinions which were odd, but despite his status, there were scholars lesser in
virtues that came after him clarified the correct position in matters that Ibn
‘Abbaas issued strange verdicts upon. Examples of this include the permissible
of Mut’ah (temporary marriages)[2]
and issues connected to inheritance (al-‘Umareeyatayn)[3].
Likewise, there were scholars who rejected the
opinions of Sa’eed bin Musayyab where he stated that a person may re-marry a
woman he has divorced three times with a new marriage contract without her
having to re-marry someone else beforehand[4],
and there are other examples in which his verdicts contradicted what is clear
in the Sunnah.
Hasan al-Basree was of the opinion that there is no
Ihdaad[5]
for the widow, ‘Ataa held the opinion that ‘exposing the private parts[6]’ was
permissible and there are many odd opinions narrated from Taawoos too.
Despite all of these examples, the scholars are in
consensus that the scholars mentioned here and other than them are
rightly-guided and hold expertise, and that there exists great love and praise
for them from our part.
Fault can never be attached to the one who points out
the mistake of another with this noble objective, nor can they be deemed as
being disrespectful to them.
The books authored by the scholars of the Muslims,
from the time of the Salaf and those who came after them are filled with such
examples. There are many examples in the books of Imaam ash-Shafi’ee, Ishaaq
bin Raahooyah, Aboo ‘Ubayd, Aboo Thawr and the scholars of Fiqh and Hadeeth
that came after them. These are just a few examples but further examples are far
more extensive.
[1] Reported by Ahmad in his Musnad (6/136), al-Bayhaqee in
as-Sunnan al-Kubraa (10/210), al-Haythamee in Majma’ az-Zawaa’id (5/6) and
classed as authentic by al-Albaanee in Silsilah as-Saheehah (7/811).
[2] It is reported in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree (5116) that Aboo
Jamrah said that someone asked Ibn ‘Abbaas [may Allaah be Pleased with him] on
the ruling of temporary marriages in times of dire need, such as when one has
strong desire…Ibn ‘Abbaas [may Allaah be Pleased with him] said, “Yes, it is
permissible.”
Imaam al-Baghawee [may Allaah have Mercy on him] said:
The scholars are agreed that temporary marriages are not permitted, and
it is as if there is consensus between the Muslims on this ruling. It is
narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas permitted temporary marriages for those who were in
dire need, such as those who are away from their homes for a long period of
time, however, his final opinion was that it is prohibited, and he changed his
opinion once the Ahaadeeth prohibiting it reached him. End quote. [Sharh
as-Sunnah (9/100)]
[3] This is where a person dies leaving behind a mother, a
father and a spouse. The majority opined that the mother will receive the
remaining sixth if the deceased was a female (half to the husband, a third to
the father and a sixth to the mother) or the remaining third if the deceased
was a male (a quarter to the wife, a third to the mother and the remaining
going to the father). This was the opinion of ‘Umar al-Khattaab and was named
after him after he deduced this ruling. It was
also the opinion of ‘Uthmaan bin ‘Affaan, Zayd bin Thaabit, Ibn Mas’ood and a
view narrated from ‘Alee bin Abee Taalib. It is also narrated to be the opinion
of Hasan al-Basree, ath-Thawree, Maalik, Shafi’ee and the People of Opinion
[the Hanafees] [may Allaah be Pleased with them all]. Ibn ‘Abbaas [may Allaah
be Pleased with them] disagreed with them and dictated that a third of the
wealth is always given to the mother because the Aayaat of inheritance state
that the mother’s share is a third if the deceased dies without leaving behind
any children or siblings. [See: al-Mughnee (6/172) of Ibn Qudaamah]
[4] Allaaah, the Most High, says: “And if he has divorced her (the third time), then she is not lawful
unto him thereafter until she has married another husband. Then, if the other
husband divorces her, it is no sin on both of them that they reunite, provided
they feel that they can keep the limits ordained by Allah. These are the limits
of Allah, which He makes plain for the people who have knowledge.”
[al-Baqarah 2:230]
[5] On the authority of Umm Attiyyah [may Allaah be Pleased
with her] that the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] said,
“It is not permitted to mourn the deceased for more than three days except for
the wife. Her mourning period is four months and ten days in which she is not
allowed to wear dyed (adorned) clothes but wear that which is not beautified.
She is not to apply Kohl (or make-up) nor perfume.” [Reported by al-Bukhaaree
(5342) and Muslim (938)]. Ibn Qudaamah said, “There is no difference of opinion
(except what is narrated by Hasan) that the widow must perform the mourning
period (Ilhaad).”
[6] I asked the Shaykh Saaleh bin Muhammad al-Luhaydaan [may
Allaah Preserve him] for the meaning of this issue to which he replied, “It is
to give out a concubine one possesses to another so that she may be enjoyed and
then returned to the owner once he has finished. This is undoubtedly Haraam and
not the correct opinion.” [12/4/1436 – 1/2/2015]
No comments:
Post a Comment