Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ādam al-Ethiopī (may Allāh have mercy upon him) said in Īdāh al-Sabīl Fi Sharh It-hāf al-Nabīl (pg. 41):
"The Fifth Statement: Accepting the general praise (without detail), and detail in accepting criticism. This is because if someone who has been criticised generally has been deemed trustworthy by one of the leading scholars in this field, then the criticism against him is not accepted from anyone unless it is detailed; because trustworthiness has been established for him, and he is not moved from this position except by a clear affair.
Imām Ahmad said:
"For every man whose trustworthiness has been established, then no criticism against him is accepted from anyone until it becomes clear to him through an affair that does not support except his criticism (i.e., evidenced by detail so that it cannot be rejected)."
This is because the scholars of this affair do not declare someone trustworthy except after they have considered his condition in his religion and then in his narration, and they have critiqued him as it should be, and they are the most cautious among people, so the judgment of one of them is not overturned except by something explicit."
He further said on page 58-9:
"Issue: Clarification that Criticism Against the Well Known Imāms is not Accepted...
I say: Criticism is not accepted against one whose uprightness is well-known and whose imāmate is renowned. Therefore, one should not pay heed to the words of Ibn Abi Dh'ib regarding Imām Malik, nor to the words of al-Nasā’ī regarding Ahmad ibn Sālih al-Misrī; because these are renowned Imāms. Criticising them is like bringing good news from an unknown source; if it were true, there would have been widespread reasons for its transmission.
It has been authentically reported that Ibn Ma'īn spoke about al-Shāfi'ī, and thus, al-Hāfidh al-Dhahabī said: 'Ibn Ma'īn harmed himself with this, and people did not pay attention to his statements about al-Shāfi'ī or his statements about a group of the trustworthy, just as they did not pay attention to his declaring trustworthy some people...'"
Translators note:
Furthermore, we do not pay attention to the criticism of Muhammad ibn Yahya al-Dhuhalī on Imām al-Bukhārī.
Even though all of the above were Imāms themselves who were criticising, they had no detailed evidence of criticism of those who were known for the Sunnah, known to be Imāms, known to be trustworthy and had extensive efforts therein.
Likewise, in today's time, we do not accept criticism against those known for the Sunnah, from the Mashayikh and Asātidha in the West and elsewhere, those known to be trustworthy, those who have been praised by the Ulema, those with extensive efforts in the dawah, without relevant detailed evidence, no matter the status and level of the one criticising. And Allāh knows best.
Σχόλια