Truthfulness Only, No Need For Stratagem, Misleading Semantics or Fox Behaviour

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Al-Allamah Salih Al-Fawzan, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

Quotes:

The wise man is the one who possesses wisdom, and wisdom is to place something in its place. Similarly, the wise one means the one with understanding.

He does not debate (with) a fruitless debate that is devoid of benefit. He propagates his knowledge and if accepted he praises Allah. This is what is sought after. If it is not accepted, he is absolved of his responsibility and the proof is conveyed.

“He praises Allah” because he established and conveyed the proof, and fulfilled what is required of him, and the guiding of the hearts is in the hands of Allah. (1)

Imam Muhammad Ibn Salih, may Allah have mercy upon them, said:

O student of knowledge! It is obligated to you to abandon (blameworthy) debate and argumentation because debate and argumentation is a means to cutting off the path to what is correct, makes a person speak to give the upper hand to himself. Even if the truth is made clear to him, you will find him either rejecting it or misconstruing the truth -out of disliking it- to give himself the upper hand and compel his opponent to accept his statement. Therefore, if you notice (blameworthy) debate and argumentation from your brother when the truth is very clear, but he does not follow it, flee from him like you would flee from a lion, and say, “I do not have anything other than the truth I have mentioned to you”. (2) [end of quotes]

We watch and are witnessing that when facts become uncomfortable, honesty become the trial for everyone regardless of their credentials. Honest people do not shift from establishing what happened to deceitfully seeking to twist or trivialise the consequences of what happened.

Honest people do not employ name-dropping or endorse people who divert the topic? This is the opposite of what we have recently witnessed from some people- those who introduce a name that some people identify with prominence or an unrelated issue in order to distract or appeal to authority. Instead of answering: “Is the claim backed by clear, unambiguous knowledge based proof”, the conversation becomes: “But what does X think? X supports him. Look at what X has done. There are bigger issues than this.” They make all these statements to change the subject of the discussion and divert the issue that confronts their preferred ambiguous narrative, their relationships, or their standing within a group.

There is another group that is afflicted with an acute state of status borrowing: associating themselves with someone whom the people respect to make their position appear stronger without addressing the evidence.

Friendship: An honest person who strives to fear Allah does not value relationships more than the factual issue and sincere advice. “Fulan is my buddy does not become more important than “Is he telling the truth?”

Fear of admitting that a person is a transgressor embarrasses only a coward and leads him close ranks around the wrongdoer, while desperately attempting to reinterpret the evidence – openly or discreetly – rather than take a sound stance. We have seen over the years that sometimes shielding another person is not merely about him, rather, the one in defence of him is deceitfully – openly or discreetly – safeguarding himself from whatever would be uncovered if that person is held accountable.

The most pathetic behaviour we have witnessed recently is that some people – who are supposed to be sensible – cling to those whose actions implicate them on a daily basis.

We are witnessing the fact that every one who cannot successfully challenge facts sometimes try to change the social meaning of the facts instead. They don’t necessarily need to prove that the evidence is wrong, instead they try to make the evidence seem irrelevant, make the person raising it seem problematic, involve someone important, change the subject, or persuade everyone that “moving on” is more important than accountability.

The truthful person does get involved in the pathetic games of these people – those who – openly or discreetly – turn facts into competing narratives, personalities, and loyalties. If one cannot defend his calamities or the calamities of his beloved, he should not deceitfully attack the credibility of the people who are capable of exposing them to safeguard others. This treacherous behaviour will always backfire InShaAllah as we have witnessed over the past 30 years.

If you do not want to be stained due to your close association with an open transgressor or those associated with him – a transgressor who seeks to make a big issue out of a round or flat earth in a manner the scholars did not, then openly distance yourself from his other calamities that are as clear as the mid-day sun; otherwise sensible people will examine you for conflicts of interest. There is no stratagem or fox manoeuvres that will distract from this reality.

Many of us are aware of the tactics of the fox in the secondary school playground, whose blameworthy actions were despised by everyone, then how about acting in such a manner in Dawah. This fox was eloquent, sneaky, and knew how to pull the strings without his hands getting dirty, even if those he was manipulating were more street wise and famous than him. He knew precisely what motivated others much wiser and stronger than him. He knew what others cared about, their fears, and desires. He presented his requests in a manner that fitted others existing overall views. He approached others in a manner that made them feel important, wise, protective, or morally responsible. Instead of saying, “Do this for me,” he used to say: “I don’t think anyone can handle this besides yourself”.

He did not give an apparent self-serving instruction, rather, he planned the  circumstances wherein the more dominant ones in the playground believed that the action is their own decision. He knew that experience and dominance did not immediately remove weaknesses. So, he identified that pressure point. He did not say explicitly: “I want you to attack so and so”. Instead, he communicated things in such a way that others who were stronger than him took the initiative. He could even manipulate the biggest bully in the playground. When the bully exercised his immoral authority, the fox in the playground shaped how it was to be implemented.

His biggest opponents were those who kept quiet and watched him until one day the more dominant ones in the playground are granted Tawfiq to say: “You are always around when things happen but your hands are always clean”. When that happened, the fox discreetly moved to another group. May Allah protect us from this bad behaviour Amin.

[1] An Excerpt from It’haf Al-Qari Bitta’liqaat Alaa Sharh As- Sunnah Lil Imam Barbahaaree. 2/265-266
[2] An Excerpt from Sharh Hilyah Talib Al-Ilm page 246