Rather, we have good thoughts of them that perhaps he intended something else or perhaps it was a slip of the tongue, but at the same time we must reject that e

Narrated Abu Sa’eed Al-Khudri: the Prophet ﷺ: “It should not prevent a man from speaking the truth when he knows it, the respect and fear that he has for people.” (Narrated by Trimidhi and authenticated by Sheikh Albāni in silsilatu Saheehah) We should continue to give our fellow Muslim excuse until it becomes clear to us either immediately or after a while that such person is a person of desire who persists upon falsehood and refuses to retract from error. It is with this that we can combine between the different narrations from the Salaf of having good thoughts about our brother and also rejecting falsehood. WHERE DID THIS MISAPPLICATION STEM FROM? Sheikh Rabī’ waffaqahullāh said: “The misapplication of this principle first originated from ’Abdullāh ’Azzām's response to Sheikh Albāni's statement that Sayyid Quṭb believes in the unity of existence. Thus ’Abdullāh ’Azzām came to the defence of Sayyid Quṭb and respond to Sheikh Albāni, and during this defense and response, he introduced the obligation of 'ḥamlul Mujmal ’alal Mufaṣṣal'. This was the first appearance of this false principle with this wording.” If we understand this, then we know that this is where the principle of "ḥamlul Mujmal ’alal Mufaṣṣal" stems from. It stems from the false opinion that we must interpret the statement of an individual to give a good meaning even if it is a clear error that opposes what is known in the deen of Allah. It also stems from placing other speech aside from the words of Allah and His messenger and the understanding of the companions as a criterion in the religion. If the words of Allah and His messenger and the understanding of the companions are placed as the criterion then it will be easy to reject anything that is a general [contradictory] statement without seeking to falsely interpret it to give a good meaning. Moreover, the opinion that we should return the ambiguous, misleading statement back to the detailed one is false due to the following: 1. Allāh ﷻ said: {وَالَّذِينَ يَرْمُونَ الْمُحْصَنَاتِ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَأْتُوا بِأَرْبَعَةِ شُهَدَاء فَاجْلِدُوهُمْ ثَمَانِينَ جَلْدَةً وَلَا تَقْبَلُوا لَهُمْ شَهَادَةً أَبَداً وَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ} “Those who accuse chaste women ˹of adultery˺ and fail to produce four witnesses, give them eighty lashes ˹each˺. And do not ever accept any testimony from them—for they are indeed the rebellious.” [Sūrah An-Nūr: 4] So whoever accuses a chaste, believing woman of adultery, regardless of his knowledge, virtue, status, even if he is truthful in his accusation, and then does not bring four witnesses to back his claim, then he will be punished with eighty lashes, his reliability is revoked, he will become one of the sinners, and his testimony will never be accepted, unless he repents and belies himself. So where is the application of "ḥamlul Mujmal ’alal Mufaṣṣal"? 2. Allāh ﷻ said: {وَالَّذِينَ يُؤْذُونَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتِ بِغَيْرِ مَا اكْتَسَبُوا فَقَدِ احْتَمَلُوا بُهْتَاناً وَإِثْماً مُّبِيناً} “and those who undeservedly insult believing men and women will bear the guilt of slander and flagrant sin.” [Sūrah Al-Aḥzāb: 58] If someone says something harmful to a believer (man/woman) undeservedly, then this is the ruling un the sight of Allāh, whether his words were Mujmal or Mufaṣṣal. 3. Narrated Mu’ādh ibn Jabal: the Prophet ﷺ said: 'The head of the matter is Islam, and its pillar is the Salat, and its hump is Jihad.' Then he said: 'Shall I not inform you about what governs all of that?' I said: 'Of course O Messenger of Allah!'" He (ﷺ) said: "So he grabbed his tongue.