Login

r/AnsweringHaddaadiyyah

▲ 11 r/AnsweringHaddaadiyyah+1 crossposts

Why the Mubaahalah? A Response to False Takfeer and the Haddaadiyyah's Claims Against the Imams

--( بسم الله والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله )--

For context:

Embracing Islam and the Brotherhood I Found

When I embraced Islam many years ago, alhamdulillah, I was convinced that Islam was the truth. Brothers I met welcomed me, taught me, and cared for me. This brotherhood they showed has had an effect upon me.

Seeking Knowledge and Calling Others to Islam

I sought knowledge and learned from many learned people through lectures, books, and studying under them. I also called others to Islam, alhamdulillah. Allah opened the hearts of some of them to Islam, and He opened the hearts of family members to see the beauty of Islam.

Ignorance, Arrogance, and the Mubaahalah

It is therefore quite disturbing to see misguided Muslims, through their ignorance and arrogance, invoke Allah's punishment upon themselves. However, da'wah has to continue, and lies need to be dispelled. I've put forward the clarifications of scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah regarding imam Abu Haneefah, imam as-Suyooti, imam an-Nawawi, and al-Haafidh ibn Hajar, both in our subreddit and elsewhere. However, abul_miswar_zayd openly admitted:

>"Allaah is my witness that I haven't read this post of cn3m. Not even most of it. Not even a small bit of it."

By accepting the mubaahalah, they knowingly invoked upon themselves the punishment they had stipulated.

Why even a mubaahalah, you might wonder? Then read the following:

This then boils down to the false allegation of me being a kaafir, when I am a Muslim, alhamdulillah.

The guy then added extra names he had been disparaging and, for some reason, did not even ask me to make mubaahalah regarding them. I had no issue at all making du'aa' to Allah concerning something I have no doubt about, especially when scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah have clarified the status of:

  • Imam Abu Haneefah
  • Imam as-Suyooti
  • Imam an-Nawawi
  • Al-Haafidh ibn Hajar

Hence, below are scholarly references:

Ahlus-Sunnah Scholars on the Status of imam Abu Haneefah

Shaykhul-Islam ibn Taymiyyah said:

>Alhamdulillah. The 'aqeedah of ash-Shaafi'ee, may Allah be pleased with him, is the 'aqeedah of the early imams of Islam, such as Maalik, ath-Thawri, al-Awzaa'ee, ibn al-Mubarak, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh. It is also the 'aqeedah of the exemplary mashaayikh, such as al-Fudayl ibn 'Iyaad, Abu Sulayman ad-Daaraani, Sahl ibn 'Abdullah at-Tustari, and others. There was no disagreement among these imams and those like them regarding the foundations of the Deen. The same applies to Abu Haneefah, may Allah be pleased with him, for the 'aqeedah authentically established from him concerning at-Tawheed, al-Qadar, and similar matters agrees with the 'aqeedah of these imams. Their 'aqeedah is that which the Companions and those who followed them in righteousness adhered to, and it is that which the Book and the Sunnah proclaim.

(Source)

I would also reference the scholar and historian, shaykh Dr. Muhammad Musa as-Shareef, who spoke about the biography and legacy of imam Abu Haneefah, may Allah have mercy upon him, which again demonstrates his great status:

Similarly, al-Haafidh Ismaa'eel ibn 'Umar ibn Katheer, another scholar of history, hadith, and fiqh, described imam Abu Haneefah as the jurist of Iraq, one of the imams of Islam, one of the eminent leading scholars, one of the pillars of the scholars, and one of the four followed imams. (Source)

Relevant:

Ahlus-Sunnah Scholars on the Status of imam as-Suyooti

In the madhhab of imam Ahmad, there is one great Hanbali scholar whose work is often referred to and relied upon. He is imam ibn al-'Imaad (d. 1089 H), and his well-known book is Bughyat Uli an-Nahaa fee Sharh Ghaayat al-Muntahaa.

Another great work of his is Shadharaat adh-Dhahab, a biographical encyclopaedia covering ten centuries in the history of some famous hadith scholars and other notable figures. He praised imam Jalaal ad-Deen as-Suyooti (d. 911 H) by stating: "The musnid, the muhaqqiq, the precise investigator, the author of outstanding and beneficial works." Then he said:

>"Ad-Dawoodi thoroughly listed his abundant, numerous, complete, comprehensive, beneficial, precise, carefully edited, authoritative, and recognized works, and they exceeded five hundred compositions. Their fame is sufficient and removes the need to mention them. Most of his writings became well known during his lifetime throughout the lands, east and west."

Ash-Shawkani (d. 1250 H) described as-Suyooti: "The great imam, author of many works." (Source)

That's why scholars do not prevent others from benefiting from his works. One fatwa states:

>There is no harm in reading the works of al-Haafidh Jalaal ad-Deen as-Suyooti and benefiting from them, for he was a scholar well-versed in various sciences, including tafseer, hadith, and others. He has many works that one cannot do without.

>As for his creed, he was Ash'ari. However, the fact that he was Ash'ari does not mean that everything he had was incorrect. Otherwise, if that were applied consistently, the majority of Islamic books would be discarded.

>What should be done is to benefit from the books of such scholars in the areas of fiqh, usool, tafseer, and similar fields. As for matters of creed, one should refer back to the statements of the Salaf concerning issues in which there is disagreement.

(Source)

This also explains why shaykh 'Abdurrahman al-Barraak praised Tafseer al-Jalaalayn. This is the beauty of the efforts of our scholars: giving constructive criticism, clarifying mistakes, and showing why we should turn to contemporary scholars when studying such works by scholars known to have some zallaat. (Source)

Contemporary Ahlus-Sunnah scholars have endorsed and recommended the works of imam as-Suyooti, such as:

If Ahlus-Sunnah scholars have endorsed the works of imam as-Suyooti, then they must contain things that are beneficial for Muslims to learn.

I must also emphasize that we, as Ahlus-Sunnah, do not believe great scholars to be infallible. Elements of human shortcomings will therefore be found among scholars. When studying under scholars, one will notice a methodology in how mistakes are dealt with, whether those mistakes are grave or minor.

The Haddaadiyyah have come with unfounded allegations against imam as-Suyooti, at times even relying upon works that scholars themselves have not established as being authored by him.

When 100% of an allegation rests upon an unproven attribution, the allegation itself rests upon an unproven foundation. Scholars have cited Professor Dr. Sameer ad-Droubi of the Department of Arabic Language at Mu'tah University in Jordan, who summarized the matter as follows:

>"Works that were not as-Suyooti's were attributed to him, and many books were falsely ascribed to him, particularly compilations covering several fields, works of literature and anecdotes, and especially those dealing with sexual matters..."

(Source)

Relevant:

This leads to another point regarding what shaykh 'Abdul-Kareem al-Khudayr said.

Ahlus-Sunnah Scholars on the Status of imam an-Nawawi

See the commentary of shaykh 'Abdul-Kareem al-Khudayr while reading the work of shaykhul-Islam ibn Taymiyyah:

>Shaykhul-Islam (may Allah Most High have mercy on him) says: "People doubt the sincerity of his intention, but what is most likely is that he acts according to what has reached him and what he has understood from the texts."

>This is the statement of shaykhul-Islam. Meaning, if such words are said about ar-Raazi and his conduct, as you have heard, then what about the likes of ibn Hajar, an-Nawawi, and others whose good intentions, sound methodology in following the Sunnah, and care for it are well known?

(Source)

Al-Haafidh ibn Rajab as "the faqeeh, the zaahid, the exemplary model" in his explanation of the Forty Hadith.

So, did al-Haafidh ibn Rajab betray the Ummah by praising imam an-Nawawi, or are those who considered imam an-Nawawi an innovator, and others who have even gone so far as to say that he was a kaafir, the ones who have betrayed the Ummah?

Yes, the Haddaadiyyah have gone so far as to attribute statements and positions to imam an-Nawawi that scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah never attributed to him. So, who is betraying the Ummah: the scholars who knew the imam and his works best, or the Haddaadiyyah who came much later and attributed to him what those scholars never did?

Ahlus-Sunnah Scholars on the Status of al-Haafidh ibn Hajar

Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd said:

>"And with this, you come to know that the accursed initiative of declaring the imams—such as an-Nawawi, ibn Daqeeq al-'Eed, and ibn Hajar al-'Asqalaani—as disbelievers, or belittling their status, or labeling them as misguided innovators, all of this is the work of Shaytan. It is a gateway to misguidance and leading others astray, as well as corruption and spreading corruption. If the witnesses of the Shari'ah are discredited, then what they testify to is also discredited. However, the ignorant and reckless do not comprehend nor do they verify."

(Source)

Relevant:

Refutations and Clarifications Regarding the Haddaadiyyah

I would therefore also like to reference shaykh Abul-Fadl al-Misri, who continuously debunks, dispels, refutes, clarifies, and exposes the lies of the Haddaadiyyah. This includes claims in which the Haddaadiyyah allege that they are directly quoting certain imams, or claim that those imams held particular positions, when the context says otherwise or the content itself is not as they attempt to infer and project it.

The channel is of great value:

The Consequences of the Mubaahalah

Therefore, if we are to witness Muhammad ibn Shams and other Haddaadiyyah being afflicted with great trials, punishments, or sudden death, then know that they themselves asked Allah to inflict upon them what they stipulated in the mubaahalah.

It would be a great reminder not to tread upon such misguidance, and a deterrent for others from mistreating and lying against the imams. This alone is a testament to the soundness of the methodology of Ahlus-Sunnah.

What If They Realize They Were Wrong?

One might then wonder: What if one of them realizes that he was wrong in disparaging the imams and in making false takfeer against Muslims? Then know that Allah is ever Merciful and ever Forgiving.

Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) reported that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) visited a Muslim man who had become extremely weak and emaciated, "like a chick." The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) asked him whether he had been making a particular supplication. The man replied:

>"O Allah, whatever You were going to punish me with in the Hereafter, hasten it for me in this world."

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) responded:

>"SubhanAllah! You cannot bear it, or you are not capable of it."

Then he instructed him to say instead:

>"O Allah, grant us good in this world and good in the Hereafter, and protect us from the punishment of the Fire."

Anas then says that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) supplicated to Allah for the man, and Allah cured him.

(Source)

If they repent, then I can only hope for them to make public tawbah, to clearly recant what they have said, and to instead pray to Allah for mercy before they are afflicted with something they themselves asked for.

reddit.com
u/Extension_Brick6806 — 9 days ago
▲ 12 r/AnsweringHaddaadiyyah+2 crossposts

Claims upon Imam Abu Haneefah

There have been a lot of various claims that have been made against Imam Abu Haneefah (may Allaah have mercy on him). This web page serves as an archive for all the various claims. Any new ones will be added onto this and addressed, in sha Allaah. You may see the "last updated" date to check if a recent update has occurred or not.

I did have a post on this issue before:

However, it has become outdated, and I have instead moved that content to the web page, hence that old post now links the most recent page (and post), but I have left the second part of the post alone, as that will be addressed later.

hanafiyyah.com
u/JabalAnNur — 10 days ago
▲ 14 r/AnsweringHaddaadiyyah+1 crossposts

Minnesotan Abu an-Nouman Bashem al-Misri: The Storyteller

--( بسم الله والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله )--

Who is qualified to speak about the Deen?

When it comes to the Deen of Allah, who is really qualified to speak and teach anything about Islam? Is mere qualification as a Muslim itself a justification for one to simply speak and write about Islam? How, in the first place, did Allah describe what people should do when they do not know?

Allah said:

>فَاسْأَلُوا أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ

>"So ask the people of knowledge if you do not know." (An-Nahl 16:43)

Here, the Ayah means that when we do not know, we ask the people of knowledge.

This is similar to what the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said concerning matters that are clear and those which are doubtful:

>"The lawful is clear and the unlawful is clear, and between them are doubtful matters which many people do not know."

This is the sixth hadith in Forty Hadith of imam an-Nawawi, who, by the way, was described by al-Haafidh ibn Rajab as "the faqeeh, the zaahid, the exemplary model" in his explanation of the Forty Hadith.

So, did al-Haafidh ibn Rajab betray the Ummah by praising imam an-Nawawi, or are those who considered imam an-Nawawi an innovator, and others who have even gone so far as to say that he was a kaafir, the ones who have betrayed the Ummah?

Yes, the Haddaadiyyah have gone so far as to attribute statements and positions to imam an-Nawawi that scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah never attributed to him. So, who is betraying the Ummah: the scholars who knew the imam and his works best, or the Haddaadiyyah who came much later and attributed to him what those scholars never did?

The hadith above is originally reported in al-Bukhaari and Muslim. The point here is that there are matters which many people do not know, and therefore not everyone is qualified to speak independently concerning them.

The warning concerning ar-Ruwaybidah

Moreover, what did the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) say about ar-Ruwaybidah?

He (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) warned that there would come deceptive years in which the liar would be believed, the truthful would be considered a liar, the treacherous would be trusted, the trustworthy would be considered treacherous, and ar-Ruwaybidah would speak. When asked who ar-Ruwaybidah were, he described him as:

>"The insignificant man who speaks concerning the affairs of the general public."

This is reported from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) in ibn Maajah.

Therefore, we always refer back to the scholars. We should not get ahead of ourselves in matters of Islam.

The Salaf's criticism of storytellers

The Salaf strongly criticized storytellers, and at times in the harshest manner. It is one thing for the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) to tell stories concerning the past, because this was based upon revelation from Allah. A storyteller at the time of the Salaf, however, referred to people who would speak and preach to others without possessing the necessary knowledge.

ibn 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said:

>"There was no [public] storytelling in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), nor in the time of Abu Bakr, nor in the time of 'Umar."

(Ibn Maajah, 3754)

'Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) questioned a storyteller:

>"Do you know the abrogating and the abrogated [texts]?"

He said, "No."

'Ali replied:

>"You have ruined yourself and ruined others."

(Source)

Speaking publicly about Islam without knowledge

The problem is that someone is speaking publicly about Islam without knowledge of the sciences of Shari'ah, specifically without knowledge of the principles necessary to understand jurisprudence and the texts correctly.

Hence, such people become misguided, and there is scholarly consideration that those who are actually qualified to speak in detail about Seerah and matters relating to the stories of the Prophets (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them) are scholars, because they possess knowledge of the sciences of Shari'ah and understand how the texts are to be interpreted together.

Muhammad ibn Sireen is reported to have been asked about storytellers, and he said:

>"An innovation. The first people to introduce storytelling were the Harooriyyah [i.e. the Khawaarij]."

(Source)

This is very significant here, as the Haddaadiyyah have the same problems of misguidance seen among the Khawaarij: extremism concerning judgments upon others, alongside this phenomenon of storytelling.

The Haddaadiyyah and those fascinated by them

What have we observed so far concerning the Haddaadiyyah, their subscribers and followers, and those who are fascinated by them, show lenience towards them, and befriend them when these are people who would otherwise require boycott for being known innovators?

Those who have befriended or learned from such Haddaadiyyah innovators have never really learned anything of substance from them. This has become apparent to such an extent that a growing number of youth who contact me can themselves see that the way I relay knowledge is not from myself. I do not put myself forward. Rather, I rely upon what the scholars convey.

How could this not be important when imam Ahmad himself said:

>"Beware of speaking on a matter in which you have no imam."

When storytelling replaces knowledge

The Taabi'ee Abu Qilaabah gives perhaps the clearest early explanation:

>"Nothing has killed knowledge like the storytellers. A man may sit with a storyteller for a year and grasp nothing from him, whereas he sits with knowledge and does not rise until he has grasped something."

(Source)

This precisely highlights the problem: a person can listen to a storyteller repeatedly, perhaps becoming fascinated with him and emotionally attached to what he says, yet after all that time he has not actually learned knowledge.

The issue we are dealing with

The issue here is that we are not merely dealing with people who cite weak or fabricated reports. Rather, we are dealing with an innovator presenting himself as though he is capable and knowledgeable, being pretentious as though he possesses knowledge of the principles of jurisprudence, while incorporating matters relating to 'aqeedah and judgments without referring them back to contemporary scholars.

Rather, I once came across what I regarded as a clear case in which Minnesotan Abu an-Nouman Bashem al-Misri (Wild_Extra_Dip) reproduced material from scholarly works without referencing those who had written them, while presenting this "knowledge" under his own name. This was before we condemned him among the Haddaadiyyah. When I inquired about it in his comments, my comment was removed.

And we have already seen his posts filled with storytelling.

Do not be deceived by pleasing speech

Therefore, do not be fooled when reading from storytellers, however beneficial and benign what they present may appear. Rather, what appears beneficial can be very dangerous and poisonous. They place over themselves a cloak of "knowledge" and attempt to captivate impressionable hearts through speech made to sound pleasing and convincing, as though they genuinely care for you.

They may also speak about themselves in high regard, presenting themselves as though they are people who ought to be respected and looked up to. But such respect is not simply given; it is earned. A pleasing manner of speech, an appearance of concern, and a cloak of "knowledge" should never be mistaken for actual knowledge, sincerity, or qualification.

What did imam ibnul-Qayyim say?

>"The enemy makes it appear good to him that he should meet him with cheerfulness, an open and pleasant face, and good speech, until he becomes attached to him and then seeks to free himself from him but is unable."

The surrounding passage is even more relevant. Ibnul-Qayyim explains that among Shaytan's schemes is that a person may be drawn through good manners, pleasantness, cheerfulness, and agreeable speech, until attachment develops and escaping the harm becomes difficult. This occurs in Ighaathat al-Lahfaan, in the discussion concerning the schemes of Shaytan, immediately after the section entitled, approximately, "Among his schemes is making the objectionable appear good and the good appear objectionable." (Source)

When evil is made to appear beneficial

There is a useful statement from ibnul-Qayyim in Shifaa' al-'Aleel:

>"He adorns evil deeds for the soul and causes it to see them in the form of benefits, pleasures, and good things."

Ibnul-Qayyim explains that the affliction consists of Shaytan's embellishment together with the ignorance of the soul: the harmful thing is made to look beneficial, pleasurable, and wholesome, while its actual harm is concealed. (Source)

In Badaa'i' al-Fawaa'id, ibnul-Qayyim explains that Shaytan can actually direct a person towards numerous doors of apparent good in order either to reach one door of evil or to cause him to miss something much better. A person may therefore feel strongly drawn towards something apparently righteous and assume that it cannot possibly be from Shaytan precisely because it appears to be good. (Source)

This is precisely why appearances are not enough. Something sounding beneficial, compassionate, knowledgeable, or even outwardly righteous does not by itself establish that it is sound.

Abu Haneefah and the treatment of the imams

Related to this, have we not seen the Haddaadiyyah disparaging imam Abu Haneefah? Yet what did ibnul-Qayyim say?

In Ijtimaa' al-Juyoosh al-Islaamiyyah, ibnul-Qayyim has a section entitled:

>ذكر أقوال الأئمة الأربعة رضي الله عنهم

>"Mentioning the statements of the four imams, may Allah be pleased with them."

Then, specifically:

>قول الإمام أبي حنيفة رحمه الله، وما يتعلق به

>"The statement of imam Abu Haneefah, may Allah have mercy upon him, and what relates to it."

(Source)

So ibnul-Qayyim himself places Abu Haneefah among "the four imams", calls him الإمام, and invokes Allah's mercy upon him.

Ibnul-Qayyim also discusses fabricated ahaadeeth invented both for and against Abu Haneefah and ash-Shaafi'ee:

>ومن ذلك: ما وضعه الكذابون في مناقب أبي حنيفة، والشافعي، على التنصيص على اسمهما، وما وضعه الكذابون أيضا في ذمهما عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، وما يروى من ذلك كله كذب

>"Among these are what the liars fabricated concerning the virtues of Abu Haneefah and ash-Shaafi'ee, explicitly mentioning their names, and what the liars also fabricated from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) in disparagement of them. Everything narrated of this kind is false."

(Source)

So ibnul-Qayyim rejects fabricated attacks against Abu Haneefah just as he rejects fabricated virtues falsely attributed to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

Al-Baaqillaani: "The leader of the horsemen"

Have we not seen the Haddaadiyyah disparaging imam al-Baaqillaani and even declaring him a kaafir? Yet what did ibnul-Qayyim say?

In ibnul-Qayyim's al-Kaafiyah ash-Shaafiyah, commonly called the Nooniyyah, he says:

>وكذلك القاضي أبو بكر هو

>ابن الباقلاني قائد الفرسان

A fairly literal translation is:

>"And likewise is al-Qaadi Abu Bakr,

>ibn al-Baaqillaani, the leader of the horsemen."

Or, more idiomatically:

>"The champion of the horsemen."

He then proceeds to cite al-Baaqillaani's at-Tamheed, his treatises, and other writings in support of the point he is discussing.

So how can someone present himself as defending the methodology of the scholars while speaking about al-Baaqillaani in a manner entirely unlike the manner in which ibnul-Qayyim himself spoke about him?

Al-Bayhaqi and books no scholar can do without

Have we not seen the Haddaadiyyah disparaging imam al-Bayhaqi? Yet what did ibnul-Qayyim say?

Ibnul-Qayyim discusses Abu Bakr al-Khallaal's collection of the statements of imam Ahmad, then says:

>وعلى منواله جمع البيهقي في كتابه الذي سماه "جامع النصوص من كلام الشافعي". وهما كتابان جليلان لا يستغني عنهما عالم.

>"And following the same pattern, al-Bayhaqi compiled his book which he called 'Jaami' an-Nusoos min Kalaam ash-Shaafi'ee'. They are two magnificent books which no scholar can do without."

(Source)

Look at the words of ibnul-Qayyim:

>وهما كتابان جليلان لا يستغني عنهما عالم

>"They are two magnificent books which no scholar can do without."

This is not the language of someone attempting to erase al-Bayhaqi from the ranks of the scholars.

An-Nawawi: shaykh Muhyi ad-Deen an-Nawawi

Have we not seen the Haddaadiyyah declare imam an-Nawawi an innovator, with some even going as far as declaring him a kaafir? Yet what did ibnul-Qayyim say?

>منهم الشيخ محيي الدين النووي رحمه الله وغيره

>"Among them is shaykh Muhyi ad-Deen an-Nawawi, may Allah have mercy upon him, and others."

(Source)

Notice that ibnul-Qayyim does not merely say "an-Nawawi". He calls him:

>الشيخ محيي الدين النووي

>"Shaykh Muhyi ad-Deen an-Nawawi"

and invokes Allah's mercy upon him.

He also cites an-Nawawi's al-Adhkaar in connection with the discussion.

So who understood imam an-Nawawi better: ibnul-Qayyim, who called him "shaykh Muhyi ad-Deen an-Nawawi" and said "may Allah have mercy upon him", or people centuries later who attempt to portray the imam in a manner the great scholars themselves did not?

Ibnul-Jawzi and acknowledging excellence

Have we not seen the Haddaadiyyah disparaging imam ibnul-Jawzi? Yet what did ibnul-Qayyim say?

In Badaa'i' al-Fawaa'id, ibnul-Qayyim discusses presence of heart in prayer and then says:

>وما أحسن ما قال أبو الفرج ابن الجوزي في بعض وعظه

>"How excellent is what Abu al-Faraj ibnul-Jawzi said in one of his admonitions."

He then quotes ibnul-Jawzi at length:

>حضور القلب أول منزل من منازل الصلاة...

>"The presence of the heart is the first station among the stations of prayer..."

(Source)

The key words are:

>وما أحسن ما قال

>"How excellent is what he said..."

This itself teaches an important principle. Ibnul-Qayyim was capable of criticizing scholars where he believed they had erred, while at the same time acknowledging their excellence, benefiting from their words, invoking mercy upon them, and giving them the recognition they deserved.

This is very different from a methodology in which one error, disagreement, or allegation becomes an excuse to erase a scholar altogether.

So whose methodology are they really following?

The question therefore becomes unavoidable: when the Haddaadiyyah disparage Abu Haneefah, al-Baaqillaani, al-Bayhaqi, an-Nawawi, ibnul-Jawzi and others in ways that the very scholars they claim to follow did not, whose methodology are they actually following?

Ibnul-Qayyim could disagree, refute, correct, and warn against mistakes, yet he could still say "imam Abu Haneefah", "shaykh Muhyi ad-Deen an-Nawawi", describe al-Baaqillaani as "the leader of the horsemen", praise the work of al-Bayhaqi as something "no scholar can do without", and say concerning ibnul-Jawzi, "How excellent is what he said."

This is scholarship with justice.

It is not the methodology of stripping every scholar of his rank because of an error, nor turning disagreement into an excuse for reckless tabdee' and takfeer.

A warning concerning Abu an-Nouman Bashem

So what does this tell us when we examine the conduct and writings of Abu an-Nouman Bashem?

If someone presents himself as a defender of the Salaf while speaking about these scholars in a manner contrary to how the imams themselves spoke about them, then he is not someone to be taken from or trusted in matters of knowledge.

Do not allow pleasing speech, apparent concern, storytelling, or a cloak of "knowledge" to deceive you. Where falsehood, distortion, unjust disparagement of the scholars, and the misguidance of the Haddaadiyyah have been established, then warn against it clearly, keep away from it, and do not take knowledge from those who call towards it.

Respect is not earned through self-presentation, eloquence, or an appearance of concern. It is earned through knowledge, truthfulness, justice, and adherence to the scholars.

reddit.com
u/Extension_Brick6806 — 13 days ago