'Alee ibn Khashram said:
((I have never seen Wakee' with a book in his hands, rather, he has everything memorised. So I asked him about the remedy for memorising, and he said:
"If I told you the remedy, will you use it?"
I said: "By Allaah indeed."
He said: "Leaving sins, for I have not experienced anything like it for memorising."))
Siyar A'laam an-Nubalaa. - Volume 9, Page 151
Ref: Fatwa-Online
|
Shaykh Rabee ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee said:
"Lying is worse than innovation my brothers, and a liar according to Ahlus Sunnah is more evil than a Mubtadi` (a person who does Bid`ah)"
Ref: A Liar is more Evil than an Innovator
|
|
|
 |
Reference: www.rabee.net |
O our Shaykh (حفظكم الله), there is a question going around the students of knowledge regarding an individual who has fallen into an innovation. Is it conditional in order to declare him to be an innovator, that the proof be established against him first, or is this not required?
From amongst these affairs:
Firstly, their severe warning against innovation, and their concern for the utilization of the correct terms and meanings affirmed by both the religion and the intellect. So, in as much as they were able to do so, they would never speak except with them. Likewise, they would never apply the correct terms and expressions except upon the correct meanings established in the religion.
Secondly, that they (the ‘Salaf’) were the guardians and protectors of the religion, so whosoever spoke with words that contained truth and falsehood thus opposing the Book and the Sunnah, then they would refute him. And whosoever spoke with an innovated term containing truth and falsehood then they would ascribe him to innovation even if he was refuting ‘Ahlul Baatil’, (the people of falsehood), and they, (the Salaf ), would say:
“Indeed he has only confronted an innovation with another innovation, and has refuted falsehood with that which is false itself.”
And this may have been the case, even if the refuter was from amongst the most virtuous of ‘Ahlus Sunnah.’ And they, (the Salaf), would never say:
“Rather his ‘Mujmal’ ( مجمل- general and ambiguous statements) should be referred back to his ‘Mufassal’ ( مفصل- detailed and explained ones) because we know him to be from ‘Ahlus Sunnah’.
 |
Date Published: Tuesday, 28 December 2004 |
 |
This article has been read 4,119 times |
 |
Print this article |
 |
This article has been published with the permission of the translator, who affirms the accuracy of his translation of this article as well as the authenticity of the original Arabic source. Should you have any comment(s) and/or correction(s) to suggest, please write to us at:
...and your email will be passed on to him, inshaa.-Allaah. |
شيخنا -حفظكم الله- هناك سؤال يدور بين طلاب العلم، وهو: هل يشترط في تبديع من وقع في بدعة أو بدع أن تقام عليه الحجة لكي يبدع أولا يشترط ذلك، أفيدونا جزاكم الله خيراً؟ |
منها:
1- شدة حذرهم من البدع ومراعاتهم للألفاظ والمعاني الصحيحة المعلومة بالشرع والعقل، فلا يعبرون - قدر الإمكان - إلا بالألفاظ الشرعية ولا يطلقونها إلا على المعاني الشرعية الصحيحة الثابتة بالشرع المحمدي.
2- أنهم حراس الدين وحماته، فمن تكلم بكلام فيه معنى باطل يخالف الكتاب و السنة ردوا عليه.
ومن تكلم بلفظ مبتدع يحتمل حقاً وباطلاً نسبوه إلى البدعة ولو كان يرد على اهل الباطل، وقالوا إنما قابل بدعة ببدعة أخرى، ورد باطلا بباطل ، ولو كان هذا الراد من أفاضل أهل السنة والجماعة، ولا يقولون ولن يقولوا يحمل مجمله على مفصله لأنا نعرف أنه من أهل السنة |
|
|
