ابن رقية

A Scholar's Clarification of Contagion Without Chaos and Discord drive.google.com/file/d/1G4aXFm…

@Taofeeq04 @mmqqaaaa السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته What do you say about the one who says this about their mawqif? And which statement of those Shaykhs are you referring to? Those translations are filled with statements explaining their reasoning for negating contagion

Ustādh @1MMeducation replied:

A Scholar's Clarification of Contagion Without Chaos and Discord drive.google.com/file/d/1G4aXFm…

Ustādh @1MMeducation replied:

[On UNKNOWN @SalafiTanzanian and the Accusation Against Anwar Wright] Let's be clear about what just happened. This account took a video and built a public accusation on it — tying our brother Anwar Wright to a "thug" who attacked a Muslim in a masjid. It was framed with confidence. It was pushed to thousands. The implication was unmistakable and the damage was immediate. Today, the same account writes: "The video and post regarding Anwar Wright contained a serious implication for which there was no proof at the time. Even the points I initially considered as indications are, upon reflection, unsubstantiated." Read that again. No proof. Unsubstantiated. Not my words — his. So the question is not whether he retracted. He did, and that is owed. The question is how a person publishes a serious accusation against a Muslim's honor to thousands of people while himself possessing no proof. Allah ﷻ says: "O believers, if an evildoer brings you any news, verify ˹it˺ so you do not harm people unknowingly, becoming regretful for what you have done" [49:6] Harm out of ignorance, then regret. That is not my description of events. That is the āyah describing this account's own week. And here is what a retraction does not erase: the honor that was dragged through the timeline, the people who shared it in good faith trusting the source, and the face of the dawah in front of every onlooker who now watches Salafis accuse one another on no evidence and walk it back the next day. The bell does not un-ring. This is the disease of the anonymous account. No name. No face. No accountability. No senior people of knowledge over the claim before it is fired at thousands. A student of knowledge weighs his words because his name is attached to them before Allah and before the people. An anonymous account chases the trend, treats speed as a virtue, and discovers "upon reflection" — after the damage — that he had nothing the whole time. By then the lie has travelled and the truth is still tying its shoes. So I will not insult anyone's intelligence by pretending one apology closes the file. If a source can broadcast a grave accusation against a Muslim with zero proof, the burden is now on him to prove he is a trustworthy source — not on us to keep extending trust by default. That does not mean assume the worst of his every word; it means hold him to the exact standard he failed: bring the proof, or be silent. Every serious claim from an account with this track record now deserves the verification he refused to do himself.