Is It Ok to Say: “We Love Him for His Good Deeds but Hate Him for His Innovation”?


Shaikh Rabīʿ ibn Hādī al-Madkhalī, may Allāh protect him from every harm, said:

…[That one] love [a person of innovation] for what he is upon of Islām and hate him for what he has of innovation: this is the [innovated] methodology of muwāzanāt [where it is said that one must also mention the good qualities of a person being warned against]; this saying is attributed to Ibn Taimiyyah, but Shaikh al-Islām does not intend this [thing] that these [people] are intending!!

Shaikh al-Islām, may Allāh have mercy on him, intends [by that] a refutation against the Khawārij because the Khawārij, when a person falls into sin or falls into innovation, they expel him from Islām–they say he becomes a disbeliever–while Shaikh al-Islām says: he doesn’t fall into [major] disbelief.

This is his intent; it’s not his intent that every time you mention a deviant innovator you go listing off his good deeds and that you say, “I love him for his īmān [being upon faith in belief, word, and deed], while I hate him for his evil transgressions.”

This is meaningless speech.

Otherwise, there were several unanimously agreed upon [scholarly views] preceding Ibn Taimiyyah about hating [the people of innovation], boycotting them, belittling them, and cutting off from them.

A large number of famous, major imāms from those who were greater than Ibn Taimiyyah reported unanimity of opinion concerning this.


N.B.: Title mine (Trans.)