Etiquette of Differing

Imām Adh-Dhahabī writes in his Siyar Aʿlām An-Nubalāʾ, in the biographical account of Muḥammad ibn Naṣr, “If each time an Imām made a forgivable mistake in his ijtihād (independent judgement) in derivative secondary issues, we rose against him, labelled him an innovator and shunned him, then neither Ibn Naṣr nor Ibn Mandah, nor anyone greater than them would be safe from us. It is only Allāh who guides His creation to the truth, and He is the Most Merciful of those who show mercy, so we seek refuge with Him from following our desires and from harshness.”

He also writes in the biographical account of ʿAlī ibn Al-Fuḍayl ibn ʿIyāḍ, “In my view, if the likes of the great early Ṣaḥābah were attacked by the Rawāfiḍ and the Khawārij, and the likes of even Al-Fuḍayl have been attacked, who then is safe from the criticisms of people? However, once an individual’s virtue and leadership is established, anything negative said about him should not affect his reputation. Critically speaking about the ʿUlamā requires a great deal of balance and scrupulous piety.”

Saʿīd ibn Al-Musayyib is reported to have said, “There is no nobleman, scholar or ruler except that he has a defect, and there is no hiding from this. However, there are people whose defects should not be mentioned: those whose virtues are greater than their defects; their defect will be overlooked due to their virtue.”

Ibn ʿAbd Al-Barr writes in Jāmiʿ Bayān Al-ʿIlm wa Faḍlih that Saʿīd ibn Al-Musayyib is reported to have said, “Every scholar, nobleman or person of merit has a flaw, but whoever’s virtue outweighs his shortcomings, his shortcomings vanish in his virtue, just as the virtue of one overcome by his shortcomings vanishes.”

Ibn ʿAbd Al-Barr also quotes another as saying, ‘No scholar is safe from erring; whoever errs little and is correct much of the time is a scholar; and whoever is correct little and errs much of the time is ignorant.’

Imām Shihāb ad-Dīn Aḥmad ibn Ḥamdān Al-Adhraʿī said, “Speaking ill of the people of knowledge, especially the seniors among them, is among the major sins.”

Al-Bayhaqī narrates in Shuʿab Al-Īmān that Mālik ibn Dīnār said, “It is enough for a person to be deemed wretched if he is impious and further talks ill of the pious.”

Aḥmad ibn Ziyād As-Simsār said, “A person once came to Aswad ibn Sālim asking him for forgiveness. He said, ‘I backbit you, and saw in my dream an ominous figure reprimanding me, saying, “O enemy of Allāh! Why do you backbite one of the friends of Allāh, one who, if he mounted a wall and told it to walk, it would walk?!”’”

Imām Adh-Dhahabī mentions in Siyar Aʿlām An-Nubalāʾ, under the biography of Qatādah ibn Diʿāmah As-Sadūsī:

He is an authority by consensus, when he explicitly narrates Simāʿ (i.e. ‘So and so has heard [a narration] from so and so…’), because he is a mudallis and well-known for it. He also held some views of the Qadariyyah – we ask Allāh for forgiveness. Despite this, no-one hesitated over his truthfulness, integrity, and memory. It is hoped that Allāh excuses the likes of him: those who fell into innovation while striving to the best of their abilities, intending through it to glorify Allāh and declare Him free of all imperfection. Allāh is indeed a just Judge, gentle with His servants, and He is not questioned for what He does.

Moreover, if a senior leader of knowledge is correct on most occasions, well-known for his striving towards the truth, expansive in knowledge, obviously intelligent, and recognised for his piety, scrupulousness and adherence [to the Sunnah], his errors will be overlooked, and we shall not label him as a deviant, throw him aside and forget his good. Yes, we shall not follow him in his error and innovation; but we hope that he repents of that.

Al-Ḥaṣkafī said, ‘…And the person that knows that differences are from the effects of [divine] mercy; wherever the difference is greater, the mercy is also greater.’

Ibn ʿAsākir said, “My brother! May Allāh grant me and you the ability to please Him, as people who fear Him as He should be feared. Know well that the flesh of the ʿUlamā is poisoned. The custom of Allāh to expose those that look down upon them is well known, because insulting them over matters they are innocent of is a grave affair. Devouring their dignity with lies and slander is grazing a pestilent pasture, and fabricating against those whom Allāh has chosen from them to uphold ʿilm is a blameworthy trait.”

Ibn ʿAsākir also said, “Whoever lets his tongue loose with slandering the ʿUlamā, Allāh will afflict him with the death of his heart before his physical death. [Allāh says in the Qur’ān:] ‘So, those who violate His [messenger’s] order must beware, lest they are visited by a trial or they are visited by a painful punishment.’ (24:63)”

Ibn Kathīr mentions whilst commenting on this āyah, “Meaning: Whoever violates the Sharīʿah of the Messenger both internally and externally should beware and fear that they are visited by a trial in their hearts, in the form of disbelief, hypocrisy or innovation, or that they are afflicted with a painful punishment in this world in the form of execution, a prescribed penalty (ḥadd), imprisonment or the like.”

Al-Fuḍayl [ibn ʿIyāḍ] said, “By Allāh! It is impermissible for you to cause undue harm to a dog or a pig; so how could you harm a Muslim?”

Ibn Kathīr mentions in Al-Bidāyah wan-Nihāyah: From the fine sayings of Iyās ibn Muʿāwiyah is, ‘It is better that an individual’s actions exceed his speech, rather than his speech exceed his actions.’

Sufyān ibn Ḥusayn mentions, “I mentioned a man negatively in the presence of Iyās ibn Muʿāwiyah. He looked into my eyes and asked, ‘Have you been to war with the Romans?’

I replied, ‘No.’

He then asked, ‘How about [the people of] Sindh, the Indians, or the Turks?’

I replied again, ‘No.’

He then remarked, ‘So the Romans, the Sindhis, the Indians and the Turks were saved from you, whilst a single Muslim brother of yours wasn’t?’

I never mentioned anyone negatively again.”

Ibn Al-Qayyim writes, “Differences between people are an inevitability from which there is no hiding, because their wills, understandings and powers of perception differ. However, what is blameworthy is the unjust treatment of one another and hostility. Otherwise, where disagreement does not lead to estrangement and factionalism, and each party seeks to obey Allāh and His Messenger ﷺ, then that difference is harmless, because it is part of how humans have been made…”

Imām Adh-Dhahabī writes, “Yūnus Aṣ-Ṣadafī said, ‘I have never seen anyone more intelligent than [Imām] Ash-Shāfiʿī. I debated with him one day on a certain issue, after which we parted ways. He later met me, and held onto my hand saying, ‘O Abū Mūsā! Can we not remain brothers despite not agreeing on one issue?!’’ (Ibn ʿAsākir)

I say that this points towards the perfection of the Imām’s intellect and the depth of his understanding, because contemporaries have always differed.”

Ibn Al-Musayyib narrates that Ṭalḥah and [ʿAbdur-Raḥmān] ibn ʿAwf once became distant. Ṭalḥah then fell ill, so ʿAbdur-Raḥmān came to visit him. Ṭalḥah said, “By Allāh! O my brother, you are better than me!” ʿAbdur-Raḥmān said, “Don’t say that my brother!” Ṭalḥah said, “Why not! By Allāh, you are! Had you fallen ill, I would not have come to visit you!”

Ibn Al-Qayyim رحمه الله composes a couplet in his Nūniyyah:

It’s deprivation that your haste will earn
When you refute what you have yet to learn.

Ḥudhayfah ibn Qatādah said, “Were I to come across a person who hated me truly for the sake of Allāh, I would make it incumbent upon myself to love him.”