Author
6 contributions
Shaykh Abdullah al-Bukhari explains that those who defend innovators are either unaware or knowingly supporting them. The first should be educated, while the second must be warned and avoided. Boycotting is essential, but advising can still occur without companionship or friendship.
Yasir Qadhi suggests setting aside theological differences for practical cooperation. Shaykh Salih al-Luhaydan rejects this approach, stating that failing to distinguish truth from falsehood under the guise of unity is an innovation. He warns that such a stance is misleading and urges adherence to clear religious boundaries.
Shaykh Muḥammad ibn Hādī al-Madkhali explains that followers of ʿAlī al-Halabī fall into two categories: those who are knowingly fanatic and are treated as his companions, and those who were deceived and should be advised. If they persist after clear evidence, they are then treated like the first group.
Shaykh Muqbil al-Wadi’i explains that it is not required for many scholars to criticize an innovator for the criticism to be valid. If a trustworthy scholar presents clear evidence of misguidance, it must be accepted, even if no one else has spoken about the person.
Shaykh Ahmad an-Najmi explains that boycotting must have a clear benefit, especially to guide people back to the truth. If boycotting increases stubbornness, then it is not required. Instead, avoid closeness and kindness, but greet if approached, and maintain moderation without exaggeration.
Shaykh Muqbil explains that a detailed scholarly criticism is sufficient, even if only one scholar has refuted an innovator. Truth depends on evidence, not on consensus, and a trustworthy scholar’s refutation must be accepted.
