The Principle of Counterbalancing the Bad AND the Good
Points in the
Understanding of ash-Shaayijee
Ash-Shayijee considers that the greatest principle of this
astray group is
their saying that it is not necessary to mention the good points
of an innovator
when warning against him. He says: “"The Book of Shaikh
Rabee’ bin Haadee ‘The Methodology of Ahl us-Sunnah
wal-Jamaa’ah in Criticising Books and Movements’, it is in this
book
that the fundamental principle of this group has been set down -
and its most
evil one, absolutely. And it is from this principle that all the
other corrupt
principles have been derived. And Shaikh Rabee’ has made the
manhaj of Ahl
us- Sunnah in criticising, that they do not mention except the
evil points of a
righteous Muslim, even if he was not aware of them, or if they
occurred from him
due to an error or due to an oversight.""
Let the noble reader know that ash-Shaayijee did not quote
the words of
Shaikh Rabee’ textually. He mentions them in his own unique style
and in a
way which depends on causing [undue] alarm, provocation and
exaggeration - as
the brother, Mubaarak bin Saif has explained - and Shaikh Rabee’
- may
Allaah preserve him - has not said that everyone who falls into
an innovation
whether due to an error or due to an oversight that he is an
innovator.
Ash-Shaayijee then, intends by this that same principle which
Shaikh
Rabee’ - may Allaah preserve him - has destroyed. And we say
here, that if
this is the fundamental principle of all the principles of this
astray group, in
absolute terms, then what do you say about Shaikh Abdul- Azeez
Bin Baaz - may
Allaah preserve him - since a question was put to him [about
this] and here is
its text:
Q. There are some people who enjoin ‘counterbalancing’
(al-Muwaazanah), meaning that when you criticise an
innovator to warn people
from him, that it is obligatory upon you to mention his good
points/deeds so
that you do not treat him unjustly?
A. No, it is not necessary, it is not necessary. And this
is why when you
read the books of Ahl us-Sunnah you will find the purpose
behind them to
warn. Read in the book of al-Bukhaaree ‘Khalq Af’aal
ul-‘Ibaad’ and ‘Kitaab ul-Adab’ (the Book of
Manners) in the Saheeh and ‘Kitaab us-Sunnah of Abdullaah bin
Ahmad
and ‘Kitaab ut-Tawheed’ of Ibn Khuzaimah and the refutation of
Uthmaan bin Sa’eed ad-Daarimee against the Ahl ul-Bid’ah...
and
other such books. They mention this for the purpose of
warning from their
falsehood and the intent is not to enumerate their good
points/deeds. The
intent is to warn from their falsehood. And their good
points/deeds have no
value in relation to one who disbelieves - when his
innovation makes him a
disbeliever, his good deeds are nullified and when it does
not make him a
disbeliever then he is in a precarious situation. The intent
is to expose
the errors and deviations - which it is necessary to warn
against."
[The Methodology of Ahl us-Sunnah wal- Jamaa’ah in
Criticising Men,
Books and Movements]
And Shaikh Saalih al-Fawzaan was questioned about the same
matter and here is
the text:
Q. It has spread amongst the youth today amongst the
youth that it is
obligatory to counterbalance between to good and bad
points/deeds when
criticising and so they say: ‘When you criticise such and
such person
for an innovation and you expose his mistakes, it is
necessary for you to
mention his good points/deeds - and this is from the
perspective of justice
and fairness. So is this manhaj (methodology) in criticising
correct? And is
it necessary for me to mention the good points/deeds when
criticising?
A. When the one who is being criticised is from Ahl us-
Sunnah
wal-Jamaa’ah and his mistakes are in matters which do not
relate to
‘aqeedah, then yes... his good points/deeds and exceptional
[qualities] are mentioned. His mistakes and slips are
overwhelmed by his aid
for the Sunnah.
But when the one being criticised is from the People of Misguidance and
the People of Deviation and from the People of Destructive and Adulterated
Principles, then it is not permissible for us to mention their good
points/deeds - when he has good points/deeds - because when we mention them,
this deceives the people and makes them hold a good opinion about this
strayer or about this innovator or deviant or parisan (one engrossed with
party-spirit). So then they accept the ideas of this strayer or this
innovator or this biased partisan. And Allaah jalla wa ‘alaa refuted
the Disbelievers, the Criminals and the Hypocrites and did not mention any
of their good points/deeds. And likewise the Scholars of the Salaf refute
the Jahmiyyah and Mu’tazilah and the People of Misguidance and they
never mention any of their good points/deeds. This is because their good
deeds/points are impaired by their misguidance, disbelief, deviation and
hypocrisy. So it is not befitting that you refute a straying wanderer,
innovator, deviant and then mention his good points/deeds and that you say
he is a good man, he has this and that good deed/point, but he made a
mistake! We say to you: Your praise of him is stronger than your his
misguidance, because the people will hold on to you praise of him. So when
you promote this straying innovator and you praise him then you have
deceived the people and this opens up the door for accepting the ideas of
those who lead others astray.
Until he said:
And the foundation for this doubt of counterbalancing between the good
and bad points/deeds in criticising, one of the youth spoke by it and wrote
a book on it. Then others received this with much joy. I came across this
book in which its author argues for the principle of counterbalancing and I
also came across the work of Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee al-Madkhalee and
he refuted that book in which its author justifies the idea of
counterbalancing with a sufficient/complete refutation and explained what
such words contain of error and promotion of falsehood and he explained the
madhhab of the Salaf in refuting and that they used to refute people who
lead others astray and that they did not praise them because if they had
done that, this would have been contradictory. [Kitaab ul- Ajwibah
al-Mufeedah Fee As’ilatil-Manaahij al-Jadeedah]
And Shaikh al-Albaanee was asked about the principle of al-Muwaazanah
(counterbalancing) and he rejected it and exposed its falsehood and in his words
there occurred:
From where [did they derive this] that when the circumstance arises for
explaining the mistakes of a Muslim, whether he is a caller [daai’yah]
or not, that it is necessary for a lecture in which his good points/deeds -
from their beginning to their end are mentioned? Allaahu- Akbar!! A strange
thing!! [Ajwibah ‘Alaamah al-Albaanee alaa Abee Hasan
ad-Da’awiyyah]
And Shaikh Zaid bin Muhammad al-Madkhalee said:
Just as I love that I explain to this writer of this work and to his
associates that Shaikh Rabee bin Haadee al-Madkhalee, whom they consider to
be one of those individuals whom they have named with ‘as-Salafiyyah
al-Jadeedah’, he is not the only one who has destroyed this
aforementioned principle of the obligation of counterbalancing [between the
good and bad points/deeds] and who has fought against it - as the author of
this work has claimed. Rather, those who are more vast than him in knowledge
and more senior in age and who have precedence in being sought - have shared
with him in saying that it is not necessary, rather that one should not be
pleased [in doing it] - such as the Respected Shaikh Abdul-Azeez Bin Baaz
and Shaikh Abdul-Azeez al-Muhammad as-Salmaan and Shaikh Saalih bin
Abdullaah al- Fawzaan. [Kitaab ul-Ajwibah as-Sadeedah alaa As’ilat
ir-Rasheedah]
And after these quotations from the scholars we come with the result and this
is that the principle of ‘al-Muwaazanah’ (counterbalancing) is an
innovatory principle, the purpose behind it is to raise and promote the affair
of the Ahl ul-Bid’ah - and that the first ones who spoke by it are the
people of the new Ikhwaani ideology “al-Qutubiyyah”
and if you wish you can say ‘as-
Surooriyyah”.
Therefore, the principle of ‘al-Muwaazanah’ is the fundamental
principle of the Qutubees, and it has been established that the Senior Scholars
have not acknowledged this and that ash-Shaayijee has agreed with the Qutubees
in their greatest principle!!
Refuting Shayijee : Al-Muwazanah - Mentioning the Good and Bad Points Together