Oh, look, I didn't name him. --- A learned brother was discussing a clip with me about a shaykh who said we should have one masjid for all: Sunnis, wahabis, shiah, et al. This is not permitted. The Quran and sunnah are clear in this regard that there must be no such association. This leads to mudāhanah, covering the truth, i.e. sulh kullism. Yes, if a sincere seeker has questions about our aqidah or wants to learn, they are welcome to a Sunni masjid to come and listen. Our doors are open. But not to proselytise. Ahl al-Sunnah are separate from wahabis of all shades and shiah. It is forbidden to have one masjid. They have their buildings and we have our masjids. Our scholars have written entire works on this very matter. How can it be permitted to expose lay Sunnis to wahabis who can endanger their faith? A silly ruling to say the least. Such rulings must be thrown in the trash where they belong.
It makes sense that we don't need to refute people by name. Especially if that person has a low following for example and by you refuting him by name, people become more aware of him. If its a wider issue, such as that of perennialism, it can be refuted as a philosophy in and of itself. And then whenever a lay person hears someone spouting that philosophy, they'll know it's wrong, regardless of who the speaker is. I also agree that, sometimes by naming people, it can put people off. So it's on a case by case basis. On the other hand, if the person has a far reaching and established audience already, it's likely they need to be refuted by name, such as hamza yusuf or yasir qadhi and the like. Because otherwise, by not being refuted by name, legitimacy is established which will just cause more people to fall into the trap.
Agreed, could it also be said that it is better to take advice from the elder scholars if a refutation should be done by name or not.
I think it really is case by case. I don't think there can be hard and fast rules on this apart from saying what I said initially: it isn't wise to name in every scenario. The variables include how serious a mistake it is, who it's by, if he's a repeat offender, if he is approachable, does he tend to retract, how far his mistake has/may reach, do people know it's him who's said these things, etc. Naming him could possibly be counterproductive.
Asalam Alaikum I hope you are all well, Could this be the way to name people in refutation Brother @Aqdas If A Sunni scholar has made a mistake in video, said Sunni scholar should be approached privately and ask to make a public clarification and the said video should then be edited to not include that part in which he made a mistake as the awām would not come under influence of such words (if they havent seen a retraction video) If it is someone who has deviated from the Sunni Path or shows signs of severely deviating even though outwardly is Sunni, should they not be refuted openly? Allāh knows best
Bruh…what prompted him…? what type of question is that? perhaps, an epiphany after deep reflection is what prompted him. what kind of answer are you expecting anyways? what prompted you to ask what prompted him?
Here's an example. Saanp bhi mar jaaye laathi bhi na tuutey. If I go ahead and mention the speaker, his followers will dismiss my point right away. --- I heard one shiah-leaning speaker say whatever wrongs children do is to be blamed on their parents. It is their upbringing that made them wayward. Maybe the speaker forgot about examples such as Adam عليه السلام and his rebellious son. Or Nuh عليه السلام and his son Kinaan. Also, Abd al-Muttalib رضي الله عنه was a believer yet some uncles of RasulAllah ﷺ disbelieved. So the parents aren't blamed in every case. Shiah speakers should soberly cerebrate before shouting their mouths off.
I'm sorry, but when will some Sunnis grow a few brain cells? It isn't wise to always mention names. Yes, sometimes it's necessary but not in every instance. Especially if it's a Sunni scholar involved.
