Sheikh Al Albaani... On "What’s your view on the principle “whoever does not make takfeer of a kafir is himself a kafir”, and “whoever does not make tabdi’ of a Mubtadi’ is himself a Mubtadi’; and the principle “whoever is not with us is therefore against us”?” Answer: Where did these (false principles) come from?! Who laid out them out?! This reminds me of an anecdote that is told in our country of origin, Albania, which was mentioned in some gatherings with my father (rahimahulldh), a story which goes: a man who was a scholar visited his friend at his house and then when the scholar left his friend’s house he made takfeer of his friend. It was said to the scholar: “Why did you do that?” We have a custom in our land which I think is widespread throughout the entire world which respects, honours and holds in high esteem the ’Ulama in the form of some customs and traditions which differ in different countries. Such as: A scholar for example will enter a room and stay there the night and when he leaves the room the host has to turn the scholar’s shoes around the other way to prepare his feet in the shoes for departure from the place of rest and the scholar does not take on the responsibility for this. But this scholar, when he visited his friend and left, he found that his shoes had not been prepared for him and found them as they were when he arrived. Meaning: the friend disrespected the Shaykh by leaving the shoes as they were. The scholar said: “this man has disbelieved!” Why though? Because he did not respect the scholar, and whoever does not respect the scholar does not respect knowledge, and whoever does not respect knowledge does not respect the one who comes with knowledge, and the one who came with knowledge is Muhammad (sallalldhu ’alayhi wassallam) and likewise the sequence to Jibreel and to the Lord of the worlds – therefore the man is a kãfir. This question, or this principle, reminds me of this absolute application. It is not at all a condition that whoever makes takfeer of a person and has the proof established on him that all the people with him are included in the takfeer. Because the person could be one who has made an errant interpretation and another scholar could view that takfeer is not applicable, likewise for tafseeq and tabdi’. This reality is of the tribulations of the current era and is from the hastiness of some youth who claim knowledge whether they intend this sequence (of takfeer) or these kinds of absolute obligations. This is a broad arena, because a scholar could view that something is obligatory while another scholar can view that this is not the case, as the ’Ulama differed before and later. As some ijtihad does not necessitate that others have to accept and take on that view. The one who necessitates acceptance of the view of another is the Muqallid who has no knowledge who has to follow someone else uncritically. As for a person who is a scholar like the one who makes takfeer, tafseeq or tabdi’ and a scholar does not share this view then it is not upon him whatsoever to accept the view of that scholar. It is apparent that this is a calamity which, by Allãh’s Will, has later spread from your land to other lands. [From Imãm al-Albãni (rahimahulläh), Silsilah Hudä wa Nir, no.778, fourth question.]
Posted on: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 20:09:41 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015