Dealing With Differences

Muhammad Ibn Saleh Ibn 'Uthaymeen (rahimahullah)

Professor at the College of Shari'ah and Usool ud-Deen
Imaam Muhammad ibn Sa'ud Islamic University, Unaizah, Al-Qaseem Saudi Arabia

Alhamdulillah wa salaat wa salaam alaa Rasoolillahi wa bad:

In the year 1999, a group of expatriate, British and American Muslims had the great honor and privilege of
meeting privately with the esteemed scholar Muhammad Ibn Saaleh Ibn Al-Uthaimeen (rahimahullah) after
he graciously granted them exclusive time in his masjid office in Unaizah, Saudi Arabia. What follows is a
transcript of that meeting. After praising Allah and sending salaam upon His Final Messenger and Prophet
Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) the shaykh began with a brief introduction emphasizing the great
need for Muslims to be a unified as much as possible under the banner of pure Islam and that those who seek
to impede the progress of Islam realize that disunity among Muslims and insertion of ideas among their ranks
by their enemies to remove the Muslim's insistence of standing firmly for Islam alone as the correct way for
mankind is a key strategy. He mentioned the strategy of tarnishing the image of Islam and joining ranks with
one another in fighting against Islam that is especially being employed in Asia and Africa and went on to
mention the specific recent visit of Pope John Paul to Egypt. Below is a word for word translation from that
point of the shaykh's introduction with only minor editing for the sake of clarity and flow:
Introduction
...that is why we see the [Catholic] Pope coming to Egypt to meet with Shenouda (the Orthodox Pope). We
must put aside the differences between the Muslims and the Nasaara. This is a dangerous beginning. We, the
Muslims, must fight against this. It is not a matter of fanaticism for the Deen of Islam. Rather, it is to pave the
way for the person (al-abd) to be a slave to Allah truly. Didnt Eesa Ibn Maryam say: O Tribe of Israel, I
am the messenger of Allah to you confirming that which is in the Torah and I bring glad tidings of a
messenger to come after me with the name of Ahmed.? Did those Christians then accept the glad tidings of
Eesa (alaihi salaam)? Never! They rejected it. They rejected the one who came to them with clear evidences.
When the one came to them who Eesa had mentioned, namely Ahmed (i.e. Muhammad), they said, This is
nothing but evident sorcery. It was not possible for them to say that the one they were given glad tidings
about was yet to come because the aayah stated when he came to them with evidences.
It is my opinion that their efforts can be considered only hostility toward Islam because the deen must be for
Allah and there should be no fitnah (trial). We must be on guard and never feel safe from their plots. We must
put our trust and dependence upon Allah Who said: They plan and Allah plans and Allah is the best of planners.
And Allah the Mighty and Majestic says:

46. Mighty indeed were the plots which they made, but their plots were (well) within the sight of Allah, Even
though they were such as to shake the mountains! (Soorah Ibrahim Aayah 46)
It is then our duty to make clear the beauties of Islam through speech and action, by using our tongues and by
writing and applying Islam in our interactions with the people. For example, dealing honestly with people,
fulfilling our contracts, being nice and kind to those who do not fight us - along with the other characteristics
which Islam has come with and that which the Messenger Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) was sent
to perfect of the most noble moral characteristics. Know that the disbelievers1 within this ummah indeed
embraced Islam quickly and with strong exuberance on account of the fact that the previous Muslims followed
Islam completely. They therefore owned the hearts of the people before possessing their lands.
Referring to the Quraish of Makkah at the time of Messenger Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam). Also, Muhammad
referred to all the people of his time as his ummah but divided into two categories. The ummah of dawah those to be called to
Islam non-Muslims; and the ummatul-ijaabah those who answered that invitation namely, Muslims.
1

It is therefore upon us and upon you brothers especially, to stay far away from the controversies and disputes
that rage among the Muslim youth as well as the partisanship which only pleases the enemy and causes the
Muslims to cry. These disputes weaken Islamic strength and are a door of penetration for the enemy. They are
as well a humiliation for the Muslims and a source of power for the enemy. As Allah taaala says:

46. And obey Allah and His Messenger. and fall into no disputes, lest ye lose heart and your power depart;
and be patient and persevering: for Allah is with those who patiently persevere. [Soorah Al-Anfaal Aayah
46]
Nor should we enter into argumentation that we neither benefit from nor benefit others by. The Prophet
(sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) urged leaving off arguing even if a person was in the right. And what was meant
was entering into argumentation that has no benefit. If there is some benefit in it, Allah said (in this case) to
His Prophet:


125. Invite (all) to the way of your Rabb with wisdom and preaching; and argue with them in ways that are
best: for indeed your Rabb knows best, who have strayed from His path, and He knows best who is guided.
[An-Nahl 125]
I ask Allah to facilitate all of us to attain that which He loves and is pleased with and to protect us from the
evil of our enemies. Surely He is in control of all things.

Questions and Answers

Q1: When two scholars give differing judgments on a personal issue, how do we decide upon which opinion
to choose? Do we look at the specialization of the scholar, his age or just the evidence he brings?
Answer: It is well known and important that we know what is correct through the means of evidence. Yet it
is upon him (the person seeking the truth) to follow whom he sees is closest to that which is correct. This is
according to the scholars knowledge and the level of trust in him. As far as knowledge - there are indeed
people who speak without knowledge. He may have some aspect of knowledge while having yet missed many
other aspects. As far as trust - there are some people who have a lot of knowledge yet he looks to what the
people desire and therefore becomes negligent and rules according to what suits the questioner. So if scholars
disagree, look to who is closest to what is correct, just as two doctors may differ in diagnosis or treatment of
an illness. You will follow the one whose diagnosis you see is deeper and more thorough.
Q2: If we choose one of the two scholars opinions about a person, group or issue, how do we treat those who
choose an opinion different from us?
Answer: It is necessary that you cooperate in a manner that shows love and excusing them as long as they do
not abandon or forsake (the correct) aqeedah. Because the companions (radiallahu anhum) differed in
matters yet they agreed (in principle) and were in conformity. They were in agreement (muttafiqoon) that the
aim was to reach the truth and what was correct, and they were in conformity (muwaafiqoon) with the shariah
(Islam). Every person will not attain the same understanding as another. So if there is a difference upon an
issue there is no need for dispute. We all agree to be on one line (i.e. the same aqeedah) because I know that
my companion (holding the other opinion) will not differ from me without following evidence and I likewise
would not differ from him other than upon evidence. Our aim is the same. Then it is not permissible for one
to have any hatred nor anger nor enmity towards the other. We have many examples of this. Among them is

the matter of Bani Quraidhah. When the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) returned from the battle of AlAhzaab and they had put down their preparations for war, Jibreel came to him and ordered him to go out to
Bani Quraidhah in their homeland and fight them because they had broken the treaty (between them and the
Muslims). So the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) delegated his companions telling them not to pray Asr
except in Bani Quraidhah, and it was far from Al-Medinah. They set out from Al-Medinah and the Asr prayer
came in so some amongst them prayed saying that the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) told us not to
pray except in Bani Quraidhah only to urge us to hurry. Others said he (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) ordered
us not to pray except in Bani Quraidhah so we wont pray until we reach there even if the sun goes down. This
reached the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) and he did not blame or censure any of them nor did any of
them find fault in the other. This is what is obligatory. If I know that my differing companion is well-intending
and he would only differ from me due to evidence with him, it is necessary to know that it is not permitted for
me to feel hatred toward him. Why (should I)? If I was to justify detesting him, it means that I am justifying
to myself that I must be obeyed as though I am infallible. This is not permissible. His argument against me is
like mine against him and he can say why dont you obey me?
Q3: Does this apply as well if a scholar has criticized a person?
Answer: Yes. I do not like scholars to criticize one another, especially at this time. The youth have not reached
this level2. It is my opinion that there should be respectfulness from the side of the scholars and whoever sees
his fellow scholar as mistaken should speak to him privately and if it becomes clear that the truth is with one
or the other it is then obligatory to follow him (i.e. the correct one) in it. And if the truth is not made clear then
each one has his place. As far as harsh disputation, indeed outright partisanship and hotly taking sides reaching
the level of enmity and hatred over differing over some person among the scholars, this is an error. A scholar
may even die and Allah will account all and he may have been correct or in error. If I learn he has made an
error in his words it is obligatory to leave that and not repeat it. And I should find an excuse for him, especially
if I know the man was of good intention and should consider his making ijtihaad (i.e. attempting to arrive at
the truth).
Q4: Who has a right to say someone has a bidah (religious innovation) or fallen into it or call someone a
deviant or an innovator? And what is the meaning of the word inhiraaf?
Answer: Inhiraaf means to swerve from the straight path. It could be a complete inhiraaf that reaches the
level of kufr (disbelief) or it could be an inhiraaf amounting to a shortcoming that does not lead to disbelief.
The truth is we dont just decide the matter of what is innovation. The scale upon which we weight the matter
is the Kitaab and Sunnah. If this was not the case then every issue in which there was a difference between
scholars in fiqh - and how many there are we would say that all those who differ are innovators (mubtadieen)
and everyone who differs from us are innovators and all the fuqahaa (scholars of fiqh i.e. jurisprudence) would
be considered as having fallen into innovation! There are few issues where there is absolutely no difference. 3
Q5: Then if inhiraaf (meaning deviation) is applied to a person, what is meant?
Answer: [The shaykh visually illustrated an example in the room saying] Here is a straight path from here
to the door, if one goes (away) from here then (what)? (The group responded: Inhiraaf?) Yes it is inhiraaf.
However, it may be slight and easy to return from or it could be major. And this is the example given by the
Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) when he drew a straight line and then lines from both sides.
Q6: How can someone return if going off that path?
Answer: By Allah the way to get them back is to clarify the truth with kindness and compassion without
assaulting a man a saying to him You mubtadi (innovator), you are astray! That may do nothing except
cause him to hold more tightly to his opinion and at the least he will seek to defend himself or seek to support
himself. However one should come to him with that which is better. Invite him to your home or go to him for
2

i.e. of being able to properly criticize the opinions or positions of one another, much less that of scholars.
Indeed there are many differences in Muslim practices and different rulings regarding them amongst scholars, even those within
the same school of thought. Some differences may be viewed as very serious, nevertheless not every difference can be deemed
sufficient grounds to justify making an Islamic ruling of innovator upon the scholar who holds a particular view that is at odds with
others. You will be hard pressed to find complete unanimity on issues of fiqh in particular but also know that the ummah will never
be in unanimity upon that which is astray or misguided, whereas one will find unanimity upon the truth.
3

a visit and say this matter is causing a problem for me. He will say for sure it is a problem. However, decrease
the dispute with him by approaching him humbly (almost as though you have the problem). Allah the Mighty
and Majestic says: Is Allah better or those who they ascribe as partners?, knowing full well that Allah is
indeed better but this was put for the sake of disputant (for the sake of argument). Go and say to him We
came to settle this problem. Your words were such and such. Please clarify to me so we can come to some
understanding or agreement. If one goes to this extent I believe the brother will humble himself and comply
in the face of such leniency and kindness.
Q7: What do we do in a situation where some brothers say We will not go to such and such a place because
so-and-so will be there? In other words what are the guidelines with regards to doing hijraan (boycott) in the
matter of inhiraaf (deviation)?
Answer: First, know that it is not permissible against one who is a believer. Every believer is not permitted
to be boycotted (i.e. absolutely) even if he is an adulterer or a thief a drinker or a killer because none of that
takes him out of having imaan. As Allah stated:


9. If two parties among the believers fall into a quarrel, make ye peace between them: but if one of them
transgresses beyond bounds against the other then fight you (all) against the one that transgresses until
it complies with the command of Allah; but if they comply then make peace between them with justice
and be fair: for Allah loves those who are fair (and just). [Al-Hujuraat Aayah 9]
So it is not permitted that a believer be boycotted. It is not allowed for a man to boycott another believer for
more than three days. If the two meet the best one is the one who initiates the salaam. Do you understand? It
is not permissible unless there is an overall benefit to the boycott. Namely, that it causes the person being
boycotted to leave the sin he is being boycotted for. In this case the boycott is medicine. If such would be a
cure for the illness then let it be so, but if not then stay away from it. Sometimes boycotting can be a cause for
increase in the deviation and the loss of the person. If however, you give the greetings to the person and smile
in his face, he will be softer and return to the truth. To boycott because he cuts his beard or smokes cigarettes
or deals with riba is not correct. He is still a believer. The kaafir is one whom we do not initiate giving the
salaam, but what if he greets us with salaam? We are obligated to return the greeting according to the statement
of Allah taaala,

86. When a (courteous) greeting is offered you, meet it with a greeting still more courteous, or (at least)
of equal courtesy An-Nisaa 86
We dont stay away and such a person is a kaafir. These issues are in actuality very specific and ones in which
it is not allowable for us to judge according to emotions. We must always return to the judge, namely return
to the kitaab and the sunnah and the deeds of the righteous predecessors (as-Salaf as-Saalih).
Q8: Let us be more specific and ask one of the main issues in question, but without naming names or
personalities. Suppose one of the scholars said a group was very bad or worse or more dangerous than the
Jews and the Christians and someone else says we cant generalize because there are so many people among
them who are ignorant of this groups problems and it is a greater wrong to make a general statement that will
unduly hurt them. How do we treat that person?
Answer: Why doesn't he (the scholar) say 'the madhhab (way) of this group is more dangerous to Islam than
the Jews and the Christians.'? This is more correct and safer without committing excess upon the members of
the group. Let's give an example of the Shi'ah. The extreme Shi'ah are more dangerous than the Jews and the
Christians because they say their imaams control the universe, that their imaams are better than the Messenger.
Then they curse the companions on the minbars and they curse the Mother of the Believers, 'Aaishah

(radiallahu 'anhaa) - the one upon whose chest the Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) died and whose saliva
was the last thing he tasted in this world, on her day, in her house. They would accuse her! Not even the Jews
and the Christians say such a thing! On top of it is the problem that they say this is Islam! This is a problem.
Look and read in Soorah Al-Munaafiqeen.
What does Allah say about them? He says

"They are the enemy so be on guard against them!" Al-Munaafiqoon 3
This is a type of restrictive sentence so know its two parts. They are the enemy - so be on guard against them.
Even with this, I don't see a total rejection or dismissal of them saying such as "You Shi'ah are a bunch of
kaafirs!" I say rather that madhhab and whoever follows its way is more dangerous to Islam than the Jews and
the Christians. This is more correct. Is that clear?
Q9: How do we deal with a person who rejects saying that to these groups? We see him as mistaken or
unaware of the truth of these groups. He says Don't make a general statement like that about them because
there are pious and righteous people among them - not meaning the Shi'ah, while we see it as necessary to
say so. Do we make the same blanket judgment about those among these groups who write on issues such as
haakimiyyah and the like without complete knowledge and the leaders of these groups and the average person
on the street who just follows the leaders sees them as good and who may have even been led to Islam by
them? Do we say to him that such people are more dangerous to Islam than the Jews and the Christians?
Answer: It is as I mentioned at first. My opinion is to concentrate on the madh-hab and the method not the
person even if the person is astray, not to mention if he has knowledge, and may have made ijtihaad. There is
no call for severity and vehemence towards him because some people gang up on a person just like that.
However, if we concentrate on the method, this is beneficial. On this point, none of leaders of disbelief (AlQuraish) is mentioned by name in the Qur'aan except one (i.e. Abu Lahab). We must follow this way and
consider a persons dignity. Even if the innovator comes to us about whom we say his bid'ah is greater than
the danger of the Yehood (Jews) and Nasaara (Christians)how will you convince him of your opinion? He
will ask Why is this not right? [Say] This [i.e. such and such] is the way. If you follow this way, it is up to
you, if you follow it, that is what we want.
Q10: Suppose I see someone who has made a mistake in their religion, maybe in 'aqeedah [beliefs], maybe
in an action or in manhaj [manner of practice]. Is it permissible for me with little knowledge to advise him?
Answer: Has it not reached you that the Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa 'alaa aalihi was sallam) said, "Convey
about me even if it be a single aayah."? Enough?
Someone states: We love you for the sake of Allah Shaykh.
Shaykh Ibn Al-'Uthaimeen: We love the One Who has caused you to love me. Allah has made us beloved to
one another and made us of those who strive in His cause (awliyaa-ihi). Verily He is in control of all things.
Remain firm and stick together!
Q11: Is it correct for a group of students of knowledge to make a ruling on an individual without going to him
to speak with him or advise him first and instead go to others and warn them against this person?
Answer: No. No. Never! First if you hear something about a person and you see him as mistaken there are
stages. The first stage is confirmation. The transmission about the person may or may not be correct. How
many people transmit some statement about a person and they either misunderstand it or with the intention of
causing enmity between the Muslims? So first is confirmation. And what could be better than the statement
of Shaykh Al-Islam (Ibn Taymiyyah) in refutation of the Raafidhah (Shi'ah) in his book The Way of the
Sunnah about when a text is mentioned "the first thing demanded is verification of the transmission." This is
a rule and important.
Secondly, if the transmission is verified let us look. Is there an explanation for it that perhaps the transmitter

did or did not understand? If we see that there is an explanation and the transmitter misunderstood, we say to
the transmitter "Brother fear Allah! The man isn't such and such!" or "The meaning is so and so." Then we
would be defending the truth and saving this man from slandering his brother (buhtaan).
Thirdly, if there is no explanation then it is obligatory that we go to whom the news is being said about and
say "We heard such and such. Is it correct or not?" If he says yes then we should be polite and mannerly with
him and not provoke or upset him and let him know there is a problem here. Did not Allah say such and such
did not the Messenger say such and such? It is necessary that we return to the truth. He may have knowledge
that is not with me and when I engage him he may point me to some knowledge and it would be obligatory to
follow it.
Q12: Is it permissible to say to the person, "We saw you with so and so mubtadi as though you follow this
innovating group?
Answer: Never. You engage him as though you never heard a thing about it.
Q13: If a brother feels harmed or hurt by the actions of some other brothers and they have hidden themselves
from that person and as a result he feels this hurt in his heart, how can he go about healing that or making
some type of reconciliation in himself and how can those brothers perhaps be corrected if their actions indeed
are wrong?
Answer: He should remember the statement of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam): Allah showed
mercy to my brother Musa who was harmed more than this and he was patient. Be patient and the end
is for the pious.

This is of the knowledge of the gha'ib We have revealed to you. You were not aware of it nor were your
people before you. Be patient for indeed the end is for the pious. Hud 49
Translation4 and Editing
Abdul-Qaadir Abdul-Khaaliq

Special thanks to brother Ahmad Ezzat who translated the meeting on the spot.