بسم الله والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله

Estimated Reading Time: 19 minutes

Debating with the People of Innovation

Now, I want to address a topic that is very important, especially considering our recent experiences. This is a situation commonly encountered by laypeople and even students of knowledge. The topic is 'مجادلة أهل البدع', i.e., debating with the people of innovation. This should not be confused with the Ayah in which Allah says:

… وَجَادِلْهُم بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ …
"...and argue with them in a way that is better..." (An-Nahl 16:125)

Some might misunderstand this Ayah, assuming that it falls under the same category as arguing with the innovators, and that it can be done without any restrictions or guidelines.

I will say that arguing or discussion can be categorized into two types: one which Allah has praised, and another which He has forbidden. Generally, engaging in discussion with innovators falls under the category which Allah has forbidden. This has been indicated in the Qur’an, Sunnah, Ijmaa’, and the statements of the Salaf, to the point that many scholars consider it one of the main foundations of the Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah in faith.

As one can clearly see, countless youths, especially those who grew up in the West and have been influenced by a democratic lifestyle, believe in the freedom to speak, discuss, and listen to each other's personal opinions. They think there's nothing wrong with this. Therefore, we need to understand what Islam says about this, and how the Salaf understood all this. As for the evidences, they will be based on a summary of a summary. This is due to the fact that there are around 150 textual evidences from the Salaf. One can refer back to sources like:

All four of these sources have dedicated separate chapters to the topic of argumentation for its own sake. The following is a summarized summary from these, in which Allah says:

… مَا يُجَادِلُ فِي آيَاتِ اللَّهِ إِلَّا الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا
”No one disputes concerning the signs of Allāh except those who disbelieve…” (Ghaafir 40:4)

It will mean that if a Muslim does that, he will resemble the kuffaar.

… ٱلَّذِينَ يُجَـٰدِلُونَ فِىٓ ءَايَـٰتِ ٱللَّهِ بِغَيْرِ سُلْطَـٰنٍ أَتَىٰهُمْ ۖ كَبُرَ مَقْتًا عِندَ ٱللَّهِ وَعِندَ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ ۚ
”Those who dispute concerning the signs of Allāh without an authority having come to them - great is hatred [of them] in the sight of Allāh and in the sight of those who have believed...” (Ghaafir 40:35)

And Allah says, still in the same Surah:

… إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ يُجَـٰدِلُونَ فِىٓ ءَايَـٰتِ ٱللَّهِ بِغَيْرِ سُلْطَـٰنٍ أَتَىٰهُمْ ۙ إِن فِى صُدُورِهِمْ إِلَّا كِبْرٌۭ مَّا هُم بِبَـٰلِغِيهِ
Indeed, those who dispute concerning the signs of Allāh without [any] evidence having come to them - there is not within their breasts except pride, [the extent of] which they cannot reach…” (Ghaafir 40:56)

And Allah described kuffaar Quraysh:

مَا ضَرَبُوهُ لَكَ إِلَّا جَدَلًۢا ۚ بَلْ هُمْ قَوْمٌ خَصِمُونَ ...
”… They did not present it [i.e., the comparison] except for [mere] argument. But, [in fact], they are a people prone to dispute.” (Az-Zukhruf 43:58)

And it was narrated in Sunan at-Tirmidhi where both imam at-Tirmidhi and al-Haakim say it’s Saheeh that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "No people go astray after having been guided, except they developed arguments amongst themselves." Then, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) recited this Ayah:

مَا ضَرَبُوهُ لَكَ إِلَّا جَدَلًۢا ۚ بَلْ هُمْ قَوْمٌ خَصِمُونَ ...
”… They did not present it [i.e., the comparison] except for [mere] argument. But, [in fact], they are a people prone to dispute.” (Az-Zukhruf 43:58)

(Read)

And it was narrated in Saheeh al-Bukhaari and Muslim that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “The most hateful of men to Allah is the one given to fierce violent disputation.” (Read)

The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) came upon his Companions while they were arguing about al-Qadar (Divine Decree), and it was as if pomegranate seeds were bursting in his face out of anger. He said, “Were you commanded to do this, or were you created for this? You apply parts of the Qur’an against other parts. This is what led the nations before you to ruin.” (Source) This comes under the category of arguing for the sake of argument, arguing without knowledge and arguing in order to reject the truth deliberately.

Anas ibn Maalik (may Allah be pleased with him) was asked, “Did the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace be and blessings of Allah upon him) talk about al-Qadar?” He replied, “There was nothing they disliked more than disputes. When such a thing was mentioned to them, they would dust off their garments and disperse [i.e. leave].” (Source)

Remember, there are three types of discussions:

  1. Arguing for the sake of argument
  2. Arguing without knowledge
  3. Arguing to reject the truth deliberately

Every time there is dispute in front of them, they would dust off their garments and leave, this is for them to show that this is not good and this is totally unacceptable.

In regards to Ijmaa’ (consensus), when there is Ijmaa’, it can only be the truth that conforms to the Qur’an and Sunnah. One of the scholars who mentioned Ijmaa’ among the Salaf and Ahlus-Sunnah, is Qutaybah ibn Sa’eed and he is one of the giants in hadith, he studied under the greatest in his time, imam Maalik, Layth ibn Sa’d, ibnul-Mubaarak, Hammaad ibn Salamah and al-Fudayl ibn ‘Iyaad. Among those who studied under him were Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Bukhaari, Muslim and others. Among those who also mentioned Ijmaa’, ibn Battah al-Akbari (author of Ibaanah as-Sughra) and imam al-Baghawi from his book Sharh as-Sunnah.

Among those who also pointed in the foundations of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah from their works, imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Qutaybah ibn Sa’eed, at-Tahhaawi, ibn Battah, al-Burbahari, Abu Bakr Isma’eeli and ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdisi. All those scholars, may Allah have mercy upon them, they have mentioned this matter as a foundation of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah. Imam Ahmad in [Usool as-Sunnah] said : "The foundations of the Sunnah for us are: adhering to what the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) were upon; following their example; abandoning innovations [as] every innovation is a misguidance; abandoning quarrels and sitting with the people of desires; and abandoning disputes, arguments, and quarrel in the Deen."

This means that anyone who does not pay any attention at all to this foundation, he is an innovator [مبتدع] and this shows how serious it is.

In regards to the statements of the Salaf, ‘Umar ibnul-Khattaab (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "What I fear most for you are three things: a hypocrite who recites the Qur’an, making no mistakes in its letters, arguing with people that he is more knowledgeable than them to mislead them from guidance; a scholar's [clear] mistake [زلة], and misguided leaders." Those three points waste people’s time and ruin them eventually.

‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “Beware of argumentation; it destroys the Deen.”

Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “Allah, Mighty and Majestic, has commanded the believers to maintain unity and prohibited them from disagreement and division. He informed them that the destruction of those who came before them was due to their argumentation and disputes in the Deen of Allah, Mighty and Majestic.”

Al-Hasan al-Basri (may Allah have mercy upon him) said: “Don’t sit with the innovators, don’t argue with them and don’t listen to them.” He also said: “These are people who have grown weary of worship, find speech easy, but their piety is lacking, so they [began to] speak.”

Imam al-Awzaa’i (may Allah have mercy upon him) said: “When Allah wants harm for a people, He engrosses them in argumentation and prevents them from good deeds.” This opposite is also true, when Allah wants good for a people, He guides them away from unnecessary arguments and assists them in performing good deeds. This was mentioned from one of the Salaf.

This affirms that one who practices their faith and worships appropriately will never engage in argumentation and disputes about the Deen. These two elements cannot coexist.

Imam Maalik (may Allah have mercy upon him) said: “Do we abandon what Jibreel has revealed to Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) whenever a man comes who is more argumentative than another because of his argumentation?”

It was said to ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him): “Indeed, Najda says such and such,” (Najda was a Khawaarij leader at the time. Now, imagine ibn 'Umar, who grew up with the Prophet – peace and blessings of Allah be upon him – and the Sahaabah; he was one of the scholarly Sahaabah. What was his reaction to this?) he did not hear from him, out of fear that something might settle in his heart.

Ibn Taawoos once sitting with his son, then one of the Mu’tazilah came and began to speak, what did ibn Taawoos did? He put both his index fingers to his ears and ordered his son to do so as well.

Two men who were among the followers of whims and desires entered upon Muhammad ibn Sireen and said: “O Abu Bakr, let us talk with you.” He said: “No.” They said, “Let us recite to you an Ayah from the Book of Allah.” He said: “No; either you get up and leave me or I will get up and leave you. So the two men got up and left.” [Someone who were with him then asked:] “O Abu Bakr, what prevented you from having an Ayah from the Book of Allah the Almighty read to you?" He said: "I feared that he would recite an Ayah and distort it, and that would settle in my heart.”

A man from the people of desires said to Ayyub as-Sakhtiyani: "O Abu Bakr, I ask you about a word." Ayyub said, while gesturing with his fingers: "Not even half a word, not even half a word."

‘Umar ibn ‘Abdul-’Azeez said: "Whoever makes his religion a subject for disputes, moves around a lot (i.e. from one religion to another religion)."

Abdurrazzaq informed us saying, "Ibrahim ibn Abi Yahya said to me, 'I see a lot of Mu'tazilites around you.' I replied, 'Yes, and they claim that you are one of them.' He asked, 'So why don't you come with me into this shop so I can talk to you?' I declined. He asked, 'Why?' I replied, 'Because the heart is weak and the religion is not for those who overpower.'"

Unfortunately, many people, particularly the youth, assume that if someone disputes and appears to win their argument, they must be speaking the truth. However, that's not necessarily the case. There is a sentiment that dates back to the time of the Sahaabah, Taabi’een and those who followed them in righteousness, indicating the shared understanding that the heart is regarded as being weak. The individuals who hold this belief are not random individuals; they are our scholars and the imams of Tafseer, Sunnah, 'Aqeedah, Fiqh, etc. This collective understanding underscores that it's a teaching of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), evidenced by one of the frequent supplications he used to make:

يَا مُقَلِّبَ الْقُلُوبِ ثَبِّتْ قَلْبِي عَلَى دِينِكَ
“O Controller of the hearts, make my heart steadfast in adhering to Your religion.”

I [Anas] said: “O Messenger of Allah, we believe in you and that which you have brought, do you still fear for us?” He said, “Yes, for people’s hearts are between two of the fingers of the Most Merciful and He turns them as He wills.” Narrated by at-Tirmidhi (2140); classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh at-Tirmidhi, 2792.

Some of the Salaf said: “The heart is more fickle than a boiling pot.” Some of them said: “The heart's tendency to fluctuate is like a feather thrown on barren ground, which the wind turns over from its back to its belly.”

Therefore, the righteous predecessors never claimed, for instance, "We are the Sahaabah and we have witnessed the revelation, etc." No, they didn't even trust their own hearts, despite their strong faith. Their faith was so strong that it is impossible for us to reach their status. Nevertheless, they never held themselves in high regard nor took any chances. They chose the safest path.

Abu Umaamah al-Baahili reported: "There was never any shirk except that its appearance involved denying al-Qadar - meaning: the first step in the steps of associating partners with Allah is to deny al-Qadar. And no nation ever fell into shirk without initially denying al-Qadar. You, O nation, will be tested with them. If you encounter them, do not let them ask you anything - meaning: if they confront you, never allow them to question you, and don't ask them anything yourself." Then he said, "This would open the door for doubts to enter your minds."

Discussions can evolve to a point where both parties, in their attempts to win the argument, might end up lying about Allah Himself, such as by misinterpreting Ayat of the Qur'an or rejecting hadiths if possible, etc. May Allah protect us from such misguidance.

From Jaabir (may Allah be pleased with him) he said: Muhammad ibn ‘Ali said to me: "O Jaabir, do not dispute, for disputes deny the Qur’an." Meaning, it leads to the denial of the Qur’an. It was also narrated from Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn al-Hanafiyyah.

Muhammad ibn Waasi’ said: I saw Safwan ibn Mihriz observing a group of people arguing nearby; he stood up, dusted off his clothes, and said: "You are but a disease, you are but a disease." He feared that he might get infected or be affected by their hostility.

The Ayah in question:

… وَإِذَا رَأَيْتَ ٱلَّذِينَ يَخُوضُونَ فِىٓ ءَايَـٰتِنَا فَأَعْرِضْ عَنْهُمْ حَتَّىٰ يَخُوضُوا۟ فِى حَدِيثٍ غَيْرِهِۦ ۚ
”And when you see those who engage in [offensive] discourse concerning Our verses, then turn away from them until they enter into another conversation...” (Al-An’aam 6:68)

Many from the Salaf regard this Ayah to suggest that the disputes and discussions among the innovators fall under this category. Those who have mentioned this include Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn al-Hanafiyyah, al-Fudayl ibn ‘Iyaad, and others.

Ibrahim an-Nakha’i, one who collected the knowledge of ibn Mas’ood and his students, he made tafseer of the Ayah:

… فَنَسُوا۟ حَظًّۭا مِّمَّا ذُكِّرُوا۟ بِهِۦ فَأَغْرَيْنَا بَيْنَهُمُ ٱلْعَدَاوَةَ وَٱلْبَغْضَآءَ …
”… but they forgot a portion of that of which they were reminded. So We caused among them animosity and hatred…” (Al-Maa’idah 5:14)

[He said:] “Some of them were enticed by others into disputes and arguments about religion.” Meaning, it’s a punishment of Allah.

Ayyub as-Sakhtiyani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "I do not know anyone from the people of desires who disputes except with what is ambiguous."

We also know that from this Ayah:

... فَأَمَّا ٱلَّذِينَ فِى قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌۭ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَـٰبَهَ مِنْهُ ٱبْتِغَآءَ ٱلْفِتْنَةِ وَٱبْتِغَآءَ تَأْوِيلِهِۦ ۗ ...
”… As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]…” (Aali ‘Imraan 3:7)

Imam Maalik and imam ash-Shaafi’ee have expressed: “Arguing about knowledge hardens the heart and breeds resentment.” Others have said that when people argue, some end up arguing not to reach the truth but to win the argument, which leads to resentment among individuals. The Salaf also expressed that disputes and arguments nurture hypocrisy in their hearts.

The prohibition of argumentation and disputes has been mentioned in many texts, leaving the door of disputes and argumentation firmly closed until the emergence of innovators and people of strife. These individuals broke that door and preoccupied the Ummah with fruitless disputes and argumentation, opening the door of doubts, wasting time, and hardening hearts. This also allowed the innovators to propagate their misguided views to others.

When the Salaf had the upper hand, the innovators were isolated, to the extent that they couldn't spread deviance among the common folk. However, when ignorant individuals began to hold themselves in high regard, they dared to engage with the innovators, which allowed the innovators to spread their deviance. Discussion attracts listeners, and in this way, innovation and misguidance spread among people, as noted by imam al-Laalikaa’i.

Indeed, al-Hakam ibn ‘Utaybah has made it clear that disputes are a reason for people to indulge in whims and innovations. When one of his companions asked him, "What led people to these whims that they got involved in?" He said, "Disputes."

Loving to listen to disputes and discussions is a sign that a person enjoys the company of people of innovation and is content being with them. This can become an excuse for one's behavior. Despite knowing that it's not right to associate with people of innovation, the excuse becomes that you want to show them the truth, but in reality, you just want to be with them. This paves the way for the revival of innovation among the people.

Ibn Battah narrated in al-Ibaanah with the chain of transmission to Abi Saalih, the scribe of al-Layth, who said: 'Abdul-’Azeez ibn al-Maajushoon dictated to me, saying: ”Beware of argumentation, for it brings you close to every calamity and does not lead you to certainty. It has no limit to which it can end and it gets involved in everything. So, make abstaining from it a path, for it is the intention and the guidance, and know that argumentation and deep diving into matters is the deviation from the right path and the path of error. Do not think that deep diving in religion is firmness [i.e. in order to argue], for those who are firm in knowledge are those who stopped where their knowledge ended [i.e. they sufficed themselves with the knowledge and stayed away from discussions]. Warn them not to argue with you by interpreting the Qur’an and the differing hadiths from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and argue with them, lest you slip as they slipped and be misguided as they were misguided. The path of the [righteous] predecessors has indeed sufficed you in its provisions and set you upright.”

Note that when the Salaf avoided discussions, it was not because they couldn't handle them or because they lacked sufficient knowledge to discuss and refute others' misunderstandings. On the contrary, they chose to abstain because they knew that disputes and discussions led to nothing but harm for Islam, Muslims, and could even be harmful to oneself.

Mahdi ibn Maymun narrated to us, saying: I heard Muhammad [ibn Sireen] and a man disagreed with him about something. So, Muhammad said to him: "Indeed, I know what you mean, and I know more about argumentation than you, but I do not wish to argue with you."

These are the statements of the three best generations. Therefore, you should understand that if you choose to avoid discussions with innovators, it doesn't mean you're conceding to them, nor should it be assumed that you are weak or that you've lost the argument. On the contrary, it can be something that angers them because you're not engaging in discussions. This was noted by imam al-Ajoorri. Ayyub as-Sakhtiyani said: "Nothing is harsher to them than silence." This is consistent with ibn al-Maajushoon's observation that disputes have no definite endpoint. Al-Asma'ee said: I heard Shabeeb ibn Shaybah say: "He who is patient with a word, controls it; he who responds to it, stirs it up." All these observations highlight the wisdom, cleverness, and intellectual strength of the Salaf. Anyone not adhering to their path indicates their ignorance and suggests a flaw in their intellect. Closing the door to disputes is the way to stop the spread of innovation. This is something that is abundantly clear.

In relation to the term used by Safwan ibn Mihriz: [جرب], i.e., disease, the Salaf considered innovation to be a contagious disease. Hence, whenever a person comes close to it, they risk contracting this disease. So, by staying away from it, one remains safe. This is the nature of innovation. This is a fundamental tenet [of Ahlus-Sunnah] that should never be abandoned, avoided, or contravened unless there is clear knowledge applicable to the exceptions to this rule. These exceptions are as follows:

1) The person you are discussing with (not disputing) has a high chance of accepting the truth and returning to Ahlus-Sunnah. This is due to their apparent quest for truth or their recent engagement with innovation. The likelihood of rescuing them from misguidance is high. In such circumstances, it is permitted to have discussions with such individuals. Ibn Sireen prohibited discussions except in this particular instance.

However, is this the case for most people of innovation? The answer is no. The Salaf have suggested that repentance is something difficult for the people of innovation because they believe that their actions are not sinful but are in accordance with Islam. Therefore, Iblees loves innovation more than major sins, as noted by Sufyan ath-Thawri.

2) If a scholar is in the midst of a lecture and an innovator comes and starts discussing their deviation, the scholar should respond appropriately. The scholar should provide a strong refutation, but, as ibn Battah suggested, if the scholar has the chance to change the topic to prevent the common folk from paying attention to the innovator, they should do so.

Hence, one of the Salaf was asked: what if I am in a graveyard and an innovator joins me, then he starts propagating his innovation. Should I respond or not? If you believe that the people around you are familiar with the Sunnah and are not fearful that the innovation will affect them, then you shouldn't respond. However, if you fear that someone will be influenced by this innovation, then you should respond.

3) If the innovator asks a question, not for the sake of debate but to learn something, the answer should be to guide him, not to dispute with him, as suggested by imam al-Ajoorri.

4) If one is forced to discuss with others, wherein there's no option but to respond, as happened with imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal when he was tortured on the orders of the Khalifah at the time. They were ordered to say that the Qur'an is created (خلق القران). This is also noted by imam al-Ajoorri.

5) A scholar going to the place of innovators to guide them, in the hope that some may return to Ahlus-Sunnah, especially in situations where no one had previously spoken to them about the truth. This is similar to what ibn 'Abbaas did with the Khawaarij after 'Ali ibn Taalib sent him there (may Allah be pleased with them).

All of these five exceptions come with a clear condition: one should have knowledge, be able to discuss and highlight their misunderstandings, errors, and deviations, and put them in their place. Otherwise, one would not have fulfilled their duty towards Islam, as noted by Shaykhul-Islam ibn Taymiyyah.

Because if it's not done properly, the following consequences might occur:

1) There's a risk that he himself will become misguided.

This is similar to an incident where a Shaafi’ee went to the Sufis to have discussions with them with the intention of guiding them. He ended up becoming one of them because he didn't have enough knowledge.

2) He will present the truth in a very weak way, to the point that people may not see it as the truth.

3) The misguided people may end up becoming more misguided and will stick more strongly to the innovation they're upon.

It was narrated from ibn Furookh that he wrote to Maalik ibn Anas: "Our town is full of innovations and he (ibn Furookh) has authored a work in refutation of them." Maalik wrote back to him saying: "If you think that of yourself, I fear that you may err and be destroyed. No one refutes them except those who are stable and knowledgeable in what they say to them, who they cannot overcome. There is nothing wrong with this. However, apart from this, I fear that he may engage them in discussion, make a mistake, and they will capitalize on his mistake. Or they may gain something from him, which will make them insolent and increase their persistence in that." (الاعتصام, 1 / 12 )

At the same time, if one is qualified to do so and has knowledge, then he should engage in discussions with them within those five exceptions (mentioned earlier). He should try his best to discuss with the innovators. He should abstain from discussing with the common folk of Ahlus-Sunnah unless there is an innovation spreading among them, in order to put them in their place. Though, one should first consider whether he is suitable and qualified for it. Otherwise, his discussion will do more harm than good. His objective should be to guide others, bring forth the truth and not to dispute with others, nor to intend to win the argument as a personal victory. Most importantly, he must have sincerity in place.

So, as you can see, having discussions with the innovators is a great responsibility and one shouldn't take it lightly.

In regards to discussions between Ahlus-Sunnah on matters of fiqh, both al-Aajurri and ibn Battah have noted that this practice was common among the Salaf. During the era of the Sahaabah and Taabi’een, such debates were routine, provided there was one clear condition: they intend to advise each other and they seek the truth, regardless of whose side the truth is on. To illustrate this point, imam ash-Shaafi’ee once said: "I have never debated with someone who I wished to make a mistake."

In another instance, after a debate on a fiqhi subject between Imam Ahmad and Ishaaq ibn Raahaway (or another imam), both scholars ended up adopting each other's opinion. Such an outcome is unlikely if one raises their voice, remains stubbornly attached to their opinion merely because it was learned from a favored shaykh, or engages in debate solely to win an argument. If these conditions cannot be met, then one should abstain from such discussions, as advised by al-Aajurri and ibn Battah, even if the subject matter is only related to fiqh.

Ibn Battah also mentioned that one of his shuyookh stating: “Sitting together for advice opens the door to benefits, while sitting together for debate closes the door to benefits.”

Hence, imam Maalik and imam ash-Shaafi’ee observed that discussions on knowledge could lead to hardened hearts and create resentment among people. This is when the requirements for beneficial discussion are not met. This could also jeopardize friendships. Therefore, it's essential to differentiate between conveying knowledge for the purpose of learning and conveying something that incites debate. One should be careful not to conflate these two issues. For example, statements such as “I’ve read this and that.” or “I’ve heard from a shaykh this and that.” are merely for knowledge sharing and should not lead to debate.

In regards to discussions on fiqhi matters among Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, the Salaf have praised this practice, particularly when it involves a scholar engaging in discussions with his students for the purpose of teaching. In these situations, 'Umar ibn 'Abdul-'Azeez observed: "I have observed that engaging (in discussion) with people stimulates their minds." Maalik and 'Umar ibn Abdul-'Azeez (may Allah have mercy on them) noted: "I have never seen anyone who interacted (in discussion) with people except that he learned concise in speech." What they referred to is the context of fiqh, where a scholar teaches his students, or when one engages in discussions based on giving advice and seeking the truth, not arguing to win over others. This practice is highly beneficial and positive.

اللهم ارنا الحق حقا وارزقنا اتباعه وارنا الباطل باطلا وارزقنا اجتنابه


Return to the main page