Erroneous principles that some youth act on

[bamalli]

*Erroneous principles that some youth act on*

Shaykh Muhammad Naasiruddeen
al-Albaanee
*Reference*: Silsilat al Hudaa wal Noor

There are some principles that some youth act on O Shaykh. Amongst them are:
Whoever does not declare a Kafir to be a Kafir is a Kafir himself. Whoever
does not declare an innovator to be an innovator is an innovator himself.
Whoever is not with us is against us. What do you think O Shaykh?

And where did these principles come from and who is it that instituted them?

This reminds me of a joke in my country of origin, Albania, that my father,
may Allaah have mercy upon him, used to tell:

The story is of a scholar who visited a friend of his, when he left at the
end of his visit, he declared his host to be a disbeliever...( story goes on to
the point of the story)...so he (host) didn't respect the Shaykh, so the
Shaykh declared him to be a disbeliever because he does not respect the
scholars. Whoever does not respect scholars does not respect knowledge,
whoever does not respect knowledge does not respect the one who came with
the knowledge, who is Muhammad (Õáì Çááå Úáíå æ Óáã). And likewise he kept
progressing [in his argument until he reached] Gibreel and subsequently to
the Lord of the world, so therefore he (host) is a disbeliever.

This question reminded me of this joke.

It can never be a condition that if a certain individual declares another to
be a disbeliever after establishing the evidences upon him, that everybody
else must agree with him. Because the person may have a misunderstanding,
and another scholar may hold the opinion that due to that misunderstanding
he is not to be declared a disbeliever. Likewise is declaring people as
sinners and innovators.

In reality, this is from the tribulations of this current era and from the
haste of some youth in calling to knowledge. The point is, this chain is
progression is not binding at all.

This is an extensive issue. A scholar may hold the opinion that a certain
act is obligatory while another scholar doesn't. The scholars do not differ
except while knowing that when practicing Ijtihaad, one scholar can not bind
by obligation other scholars with his opinion. The one who is obligated in
taking another person's opinion is the Muqalid, one who doesn't have
knowledge, he is the one who is obligated to blindly follow someone else's
opinion.

As for a scholar however, if another scholar declares an individual to be a
disbeliever, an innovator or a sinner, then it is not binding upon him at
all to follow that scholar.

In reality this is a calamity, insha-Allaah it hasn't spread from your
country to other countries yet.