The Etiquettes of Discussion

The Etiquettes of Discussion




a) The etiquettes of teaching:



There should be breaks in study so as not to bore the listeners. Ibn 'Abbas (ra) narrated that he used to give admonition to the people every Thursday. A man asked him:



''O Abu 'Abd ar-Rahman, we love your talk and we wish that you preach us every day.'' He said: ''There is nothing to prevent me from doing so, except lest I bore you. I follow the same method in preaching to you that Messenger of Allah (saw), he used to take care of the preaching to us for fear of boredom.'' [Agreed upon].



It is narrted from Ibn Abbas (ra), he said:



''Address the people every Friday once. If you do it more, then it should be only twice or three times (a week). But do not bore the people with this Qur'an. In addition, do not come to the people while they are talking and interrupt them and then address them and bore them. Rather you should remain silent. If they instruct you then address them when they will desire to hear you. Beware of the rhymed prose in the du'a for I was in the time of the Messenger of Allah (saw) and his companions and they did not do this.'' Al-Bukhari.



Select the appropriate time or place to teach in the mosque such that it does not disturb the people who are praying. If the mosque is big then one should choose a place far from where the people are praying and if the mosque is small then one should choose a time when it is makrooh to pray such after Fajr or 'Asr prayer. Abu Sa'eed (ra) narrated that:



''The Messenger of Allah (saw) made I'tikaaf (seclusion) in the masjid. He heard them (his companions) reciting loudly so he moved the cover and said: each one of you is talking to his Lord, do not cause each other harm or raise your voice over the recitation of each other or he might have said in the prayer,''



al-Bayadi narrated that:



''The Messenger of Allah (saw) went out to the people while they were praying. They were raising their voices whilst reciting. The Messenger (saw) told them: ''The one who prays talks to his Lord, so let him concentrate on what he is saying, and do not raise your voices over others when you are reciting the Qur'an.''



To spread hope and not despair in the mercy of Allah, His victory and rescue. Abu Musa al-Ash'ari (ra) narrated:



''The Messenger of Allah (saw) sent me to Yemen and said: Invite people and give them glad tidings and do not drive them away �'' Agreed upon.



Jundub (ra) narrated that:



''Allah's Messenger (saw) stated that a person said: Allah would not forgive such and such (person). Thereupon Allah the Exalted and Glorious, said: Who is he who adjures about Me that I would not grant pardon to so and so; I have granted pardon to so and so and blotted out your deeds (meaning the one who took an oath that I would not grant pardon to him).'' Reported by Muslim.



Abu Hurayrah (ra) narrated that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:



''If a man says the people have perished then he has destroyed them.''



The spreading of hope has to be by that which convinces the person being addressed and has an effect on him. And there is nothing that can achieve this goal except the Kitab and Sunnah. If we can link the text to a specific reality then this will have the biggest and deepest impact on the individual just as Allah (swt) has addressed the Muslims:



He (swt) said:



''And (as for) the believers it was incumbent upon Us to help (them).'' [ 30 ;47 ]



''Verily, We will indeed make victorious Our Messengers and those who believe in this world's life.'' [ al-Ghaafir ;51 ]



''Allah has promised those among you who believe, and do righteous good deeds, that He will certainly grant them succession to (the present rulers) in the earth.'' [ an-Noor24 ; 55]



''Allah never breaks His Promise.'' [ 3 ;9 ]



''And whose words can be truer than those of Allah?'' [ 4 ;122 ]



''A multitude of those (foremost) will be from the first generations (who embraced Islam). And a multitude of those (foremost) will be from the later time (generations).'' [ al-Waaqi'ah: 39-40 ]



As for the Sunnah we have hadiths that prove the goodness in the last (generation) of this Ummah, this is like his (saw) saying:



''The parable of my Ummah is like that of rain, the good of which is not known to exist in its beginning or end.''



''Blessed are the strangers.''



''Allah has servants who are neither Prophets or martyrs�'' Also we have the good news of the Prophet (saw) regarding the return of the Khilafah on the way of the Prophethood, conquest of Rome, the fighting and killing of the Jews and the Khilafah entering into the sacred land.



Here it is worth giving some of the scenes of the history of the Muslims such as their victory in Badr, Khandaq, Qadisiyyah, Nahawand, Yarmuk, Ajnadin, and Tustur and the many other conquests one cannot recount here. We should focus on the battles in which the Muslims were lesser in numbers and preparation than their enemy, even to the point that Allah will give victory to a single person whom the Messenger of Allah (saw) would send him alone as an expedition.




But before we do this we must entrench the 'Aqeedah in the hearts as the basis of the rules and how it moulded the Arabs of Jahiliyyah, whose only preoccupations were tribal conflicts, selfish interests and trivial issues, thus making of them a powerful ummah, mighty by the name of the deen and akhirah,
made of it the best ummah raised for mankind, that led the world to goodness and took them from the darkness to the Light by the permission of their Lord, to the path of the All-Mighty, All-worthy of Praise.



- Choosing good topics of discussion according to the reality in which the people live in order to insure vitality in the discussion.



If he sees the people are in need of a discussion of a certain
belief he should discuss it, if he sees them deceived by a certain circumstance or political situation then he should clarify it. If he sees people are focusing on an erroneous thought, or rule then he should explain it and clarify the correct opinion . It is nothing short of deception and odiousness that a discussion should be about Khul' (divorce at instance of the wife) while America is toppling Baghdad, that the topic should be about the ruling on women driving cars while al-Aqsa is a prisoner in the hands of the enemy, or if whether women can enter parliament while the American army are bathing at the shores of that occupied country, or that we should entertain a discussion on the ruling of attending Ta'ziyyah (gathering to give solace to bereaving family members) while our petrol is being looted, or discuss the rules of hair while the sanctity of al-Masjid al-Haraam is being violated and so on and so forth.



- Avoiding pretending to have knowledge that you do not have.



'Umar (ra) said:



''We have been forbidden from pretence (of knowledge).'' Reported by al-Bukhari.



Masruq said: We came upon 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud (ra) and he said:''O people! If somebody knows something, he can say it, but if he does not know it, he should say, 'Allah knows better,' for it is a sign of having knowledge to say about something, which one does not know, 'Allah knows better.''



Allah said to His Prophet:



''Say (O Muhammad SAW): ''No wage do I ask of you for this (the Qur'an), nor am I one of the Mutakallifun (those who pretend and fabricate things which do not exist).'' [ Saad38:86]



- Avoiding the debate and arguing with the foolish people:



It has been narrated that Jabir (ra) said that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:



''Do not acquire knowledge in order to vie with scholars, and to wrangle with the foolish, and to sit in the best seats: whoever does that his abode will be the Fire, the Fire.'' Reported by Ibn Hibbaan in his Sahih. Al-Haakim has graded as sahih and az-Zahabi agreed.



Avoiding riyaa' (showing off), tasmee' (letting other hear of ones piety), arrogance and pride.



Addressing the people according to their capabilities and capacity.



It has been narrated that 'Ali (ra) said:



''Speak to the people with what they can recognise, do you want them to reject Allah and His Messenger?'' (al-Bukhari).



Ibn Hajar said in his Fath: 'with what they recognise' means 'with what they understand.'



Ibn Mas'ud (ra) said: ''You would not speak any people about things they can not understand except it will be source of fitnah for some.''



Etiquette of debate:



Al-Jadal means to debate or dispute as we can see in the following ayah:



''Indeed Allah has heard the statement of her (Khaulah bint Tha'labah) that disputes with you (O Muhammad SAW) concerning her husband (Aus bin AsSamit), and complains to Allah. And Allah hears the argument between
you both.'' [ Mujadalah:1]



Here Allah (swt) used the word tahaawur to refer to al-jadal. Its
definition is: the presenting of proofs or what is assumed to be a proof by those disputing on a matter. The aim is to support one's view or faction and to disprove the proof of the opponent and to convince him to accept one's view as correct or the truth.



There is a type of debating or disputation, which has been obliged by the Sharee'ah to establish the truth and refute falsehood. The evidence for this is the saying of Allah (swt):



''Invite (mankind, O Muhammad SAW) to the Way of your Lord (i.e. Islam) with wisdom (i.e. with the Divine Inspiration and the Qur'an) and fair preaching, and argue with them in a way that is better.'' [ an-Nahl:125]


Also:



''Say (O Muhammad Peace be upon him), ''Produce your proof if you are truthful.'' [ Al-Baqarah:111]



Furthermore the Messenger of Allah (saw) argued with the Mushriks of Makkah, the Christians of Najraan and the Jews of Madinah. The Da'wah carrier invites to the good, forbids the evil and struggles against the wrong thoughts. Wherever debating is useful as a style to fulfil an obligation then it becomes an obligation due to the principle: that which is necessary to fulfil an obligation is itself an obligation.



There are some types of debating, which are forbidden by the Sharee'ah and thus they are considered kufr (disbelief) such as the disputation regarding Allah or His Signs:



''Yet they (disbelievers) dispute about Allah. And He is Mighty in strength and Severe in punishment.'' [ Ar-Ra'd:13]



''None disputes in the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allah but those who disbelieve.''




''And those who dispute (polytheists, etc. with Our Messenger Muhammad SAW) as regards Our Ayat (proofs, signs,verses, etc. of Islamic Monotheism) may know that there is no place of refuge for them (from Allah's punishment).''[ ash-Shura:35]




One can debate either with a proof or a probable proof (shubhat daleel) but without these it would be a mere row or confusion. The shubha has been defined as: 'what a faction imagines to be true though it is not true.' This is the definition of Ibn 'Uqayl.



Ibn Hazm defines a row or wrangle as: to promote with a false proof a false issue thus leading to falsehood and this is sophistry.' Ibn 'Uqayl said: ''whoever wanted to follow the method of scholars (the people of knowledge) then he has to speak with proof or a probable proof (shubhah), while quarelling is the confusion of the people of disputation.''



One can say quarrelling is the argument, which lacks a proof or probability of a proof. This is the advice of the Muslim 'Ulema regarding the rules and etiquettes of debating, it is the following points, with some adjustment:



He should give precedence to the fear of Allah, intend to draw closer to Him and seek His good pleasure by adhering to His command.



He should intend to establish the truth and refute the falsehood without trying combating, suppression and vanquishing of the opponent. Ash-Shafi'i said: ''I never argued with a man except I wished he is helped and led to the right, asking Allah to give him protection and guarding. I never spoke to a person except that I did not bother whether Allah showed the truth on my tongue or his tongue. Ibn 'Uqayl said: (any debate whose aim is not to support the truth is a curse on the one who engaged in it.)



He should not debate for the sake of status, rank, seeking a benefit, argument, or show off.



He should be truly sincere for Allah, His Deen and his opponent for the Deen is Naseeha (true sincerity).



He should begin by thanking and praising Allah and sending peace and blessings on the Messenger (saw).



He should desire that Allah help him to achieve that which pleases Him.



His style of debating should be good as well as his appearance. Ibn 'Abbas narrated that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:



''Right guidance, graceful manners, deliberation and moderation, are one part of twenty five parts of Prophethood.''



Reported by Ahmad and Abu Dawud. Ibn Hajar said in his Fath al-Baari the hadith has a hasan isnad. It has been reported with a narration, which stops at Ibn Mas'ud that he said:



''Know that good method of guidance in the last age is better than some actions (of devotion).'' Ibn Hajar in his Fath al-Baari said the chain is sound.



Being concise will insure one's speech easy to understand, comprehensive and effective. Using long-winded sentences will lead to boredom, not to mention that it is more prone to mistakes.



He should agree on a basis to which both will refer. With the disbeliever this will be rational but with a Muslim it will be either rational or textual. The mind is the reference in the rational
matters but for the legal matters the basis is the text due to the saying of Allah (swt):



''(And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger (SAW).'' [ an-Nisaa:59] i.e. the Book and the Sunnah.



One should not debate with the Kuffar about the branches (furoo') of the Sharee'ah because he does not believe in their basis. One should not debate with him about marriage to four wives, testimony of women, Jizyah, inheritance, prohibition of alcohol and other such rules. The discussion should be restricted to the fundamentals of the Deen whose proofs are rational. This is because the aim of the debate is to take him from falsehood to the truth, from misguidance to guidance and this will not be possible unless we take him from Kufr to Imaan.



Similarly, one should not debate with a Christian by refuting Buddhism or Judaism. Such discussions cannot be considered a debate. The Christian is not a Buddhist or Jew such that he needs to be taken from these beliefs to the true belief. Rather one should discuss with him his own false creed to make him leave it and bring him to Islam. That is why we do not say:
we debate in that which we agree and leave that which we disagree because we are obligated to debate with them. And debate can never take place unless it is in a matter in which we
disagree. If a Christian or a capitalist agrees with the Muslim that Buddhism, communism or socialism is rationally repugnant and he talks about these issues. Then this is not called debate
or disputation. It does not save the Muslim from the obligation of debating with him until he brings him to Islam. Likewise, we cannot say we will have dialogue with the Kuffar on matters
we agree and leave what we disagree to the Day of Judgement when on that day Allah will judge as he pleases and He will settle the matter between us. We cannot say this because we are commanded to debate in the matters we disagree and if we do not do this then we will have fallen short of our duty. Yes, the judgement is for Allah in this world and the Hereafter but we cannot confuse Allah's action with what He has entrusted us with. Such a proof is untenable. Indeed it is an argument, which has no proof or even a probable proof.



He should not look down or belittle his opponent.



He should be patient, forbearing and forgiving when his opponent argues unless if he is insolent. He should then desist from debating and arguing with him.




If he is debating someone more knowledgeable than him he should not say: you are mistaken or what you have said is wrong. Rather he should say: what would you say if someone said or objected by saying such and such...,or he should oppose using the style of one seeking the correct path such as: is it not correct to say such and such.




He should think about what his opponent is saying and understand him so that he can respond correctly. He should not be quick to speak without allowing his opponent to finish.
Ibn Wahb said: I heard Malik say: ''there is no point in answering without understanding, and it is not good manners to interrupt one's opponent.'' But if he is showing off, playing to the crowds then in origin he should not have been debating him in the first place if he knew this. If such behaviour appears during the discussion then he should advise him. If he doesn't take notice of that then he should discontinue the discussion. He should face his opponent and not look at those present showing contempt for his opponent whether or not they agreed or disagreed with him. If the opponent does this he should be advised. If he does not respond then the debate should be stopped. He should not debate someone obstinate and self-conceited for such a person will not take anything from someone else.



He should not debate someone who hates him whether that hatred is from him or his opponent.



He should not expand matters especially when they are known to his opponent but be brief without impairing the point in question i.e. the subject matter of the debate. He should not debate with someone who belittles knowledge and the people of knowledge or
be in the presence of a fool who belittles the debate or those debating. Malik said: ''the humiliation and disgrace to knowledge is when a man speaks with knowledge to one who does not obey him.''



Out of arrogance he should not refrain from accepting the truth if it appeared on the tongue of his opponent. Returning to the truth is better than continuing with falsehood, and also so
that he becomes from those who hear a saying and follow the best of it.



He should not distort the answer by responding with something inconsistent with the question. For example;



Question: Is Saudi Arabia an Islamic state?
Answer: The judiciary in it is Islamic.



This is deliberate distortion. He should have said: yes or no or I don't know. Any of these answers would have been in line with the question. He should not deny the obvious facts otherwise he will sound presumptuous. Like the one who denies that the Kuffar hate the Muslims or denies that the existing regimes in the Muslim countries are kufr regimes i.e. that they do not rule by Islam.



He should not make a general statement and then contradict it afterwards in the details. For example in the beginning he says America is an enemy to Islam and the Muslims but later he says America is helping the Palestinians to establish their state and decide their future because she loves freedom and justice. Nor should he say America has come to liberate Iraq from oppression and dictatorship.



Source



Click for Further Reading....