Not accepting Jarh of Shaykh Yahya because other Kibaar Ulama doesnt agree with him

Question :

When Shaykh Yahya ( Al Hajoori hafidhahullah ta ‘ala) puts a jarh on somebody, we have people from the West, who says,”What about the Kibaar ul Ulema? What did they say? Do they agree with the Shaykh or not? So they consider him to be from the Sighaar, from the small Ulema. And whenever he makes a statement concerning something, they don’t accept it because the Ulema that they consider Kibaar from the Ulema from Saudi Arabia, because they didn’t agree or they haven’t said a word about it. So therefore they always use these kind of terminologies to get away with things.

Answer :

Shaykh Abdullah Ibn Lamah Al Khawlaani hafidhahullah mentioned there is no benefit of research about this issue for the person who is empty, not knowing or not acknowledging the virtue of those who deserves those virtues.

But, as long as this question was mentioned and put forth, even though he didn’t like to get into this issue, but as long as the question was made we will mention that Shaykh Yahya, hafidhahullah, he is known for his virtue and his khayr.

Then the Shaykh (hafidhahullaah) goes on to say it’s not from justice, and it’s not fair that we hate some of the statements of the scholars with others. This is not from justice or this is not fair. Rather, among the sahabah, they had difference of opinions. They differed in issues, but they would return to the hujjah, the proofs and evidences. Like Ibn Abbas Radiyallahu ‘anhuma and Hur Ibn Qais they differed and they returned to the hujjah. So among the sahabah, they would differ. But they would return to the hujjah. Also among the taabi’oon, they would differ and would return to the hujjah. So what’s compulsory and necessary here is that we return to the hujjah and not returning to individuals. Like Imam Ash Shafi’i and Imam Ahmad. That we return to Imam Ash Shafi’i and his statement. This is not proper. Rather we return to the hujjah that they put forth.

And in the Usool, it’s known that the Ulema rahimahumullaah, they differed in many issues. And there are principles which are taken in Usool, which are built upon evidences. And it’s not known that among these Usool or the qawaid that they divide the Ulema into akaabir and asaaghir, major scholars or minor scholars. And that we take the opinion of the major scholars and leave off or abandon the minor scholars.

Then the Shaykh (hafidhahullaah) goes on to mention that I admire the position of Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin rahimahullaah, he would make a verdict or a statement. Then if someone would mention to him that such and such scholar he opposes this statement or he has mentioned an opinion which goes against the opinion of Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin, he would be angry for that. So if the person is to return to the treatise of Shaykhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, book of Shaykhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah “Raf ul Malam An Aimmatul a’alam”, which he would find in that book the reasons why the ulema they differ and what make the ulema differ in issues in the deen

Answered by : Shaykh Abdullah Ibn Lamah Al Khawlaani hafidhahullah