Benefit 44: The difference between these three principles and when to apply which; (1) Judging by what's apparent, (2) assuming the best, and (3) ḥamlul Mujmal

Judging by what's apparent and having good assumptions are both from the principles of Ahlus-Sunnah, whereas ḥamlul Mujmal ’alal Mufaṣṣal is one of the principles of the people of innovation and Taḥazzub. To begin with, it's necessary to differentiate between judging by what's apparent and having good assumptions; that is, we continue to assume the best until something concrete comes to prove otherwise. So if you hear something concerning your brother which you disapprove while knowing from him otherwise, then you continue to have good assumptions of him until there is proof to transfer you from this, acting in accordance with the statement of Allāh Almighty: { لَّوۡلَاۤ إِذۡ سَمِعۡتُمُوهُ ظَنَّ ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنُونَ وَٱلۡمُؤۡمِنَـٰتُ بِأَنفُسِهِمۡ خَیۡرࣰا وَقَالُوا۟ هَـٰذَاۤ إِفۡكࣱ مُّبِینࣱ} “If only the believing men and women had thought well of one another, when you heard this ˹rumour˺, and said, “This is clearly ˹an outrageous˺ slander!” [Sūrah An-Nūr: 12] And the origin when it comes to judging by what's apparent, is matters which a person is certain of regarding his brother, due to what he has heard or seen - not uncertainties where there is more than one possibility. And the proof for this origin is the statement of ’Umar raḍhiyallāhu ’anhu, that: “People were judged according to revelation during the era of the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ, but now that revelation has ceased, we take you to account based on what appears to us of your deeds. So whoever shows us good, we will trust him and bring him closer, and nothing of his secret is upto us. Allāh will hold him accountable for his secret. And whoever shows us evil, we neither trust him nor believe him, even if he says his reality is good.” [Narrated by Al-Bukhari] Why is ḥamlul Mujmal ’alal Mufaṣṣal one of the principles of the people of innovation? And what is the difference between it and having good assumptions? The answer is, because it (Ḥamlul Mujmal ’alal Mufaṣṣal) wastes away the disparagment of the people of desires and innovations; the likes of whom the predecessors unanimously agreed on disparaging, and because it contains deception and endorsement of falsehood. And the difference between it and having good assumptions, is that having good assumptions is applied in probable matters, before the appearance of sure knowledge in the matter, unlike ḥamlul Mujmal ’alal Mufaṣṣal, because even with the presence of sure knowledge and the manifestation of evil in words and deeds from the culprit, excuses are sought to cover for these wrongs, especially when it affects the Manhaj and ’Aqīdah. To summarise, there is no similarity or resemblance between husnu dhann for those who are deserving of it as long as there is nothing to remove this, this is not the same as ḥamlul Mujmal ’alal Mufaṣṣal. So whoever implements the principle of ḥamlul Mujmal ’alal Mufaṣṣal in the absolute sense, does not abide by the conditions of husnu dhann, because they have already exceed its limits. As for judging by what's apparent then this is an established principle relating to what is known by certainty, and it is a stage which follows on from husnu dhann. To reiterate, husnu Dhann applies in matters that are unclear and probable, and where the heart is prevented from having bad thoughts due to the prevelance of good and lack of evidence to prove otherwise. But if there's strong evidence to prove otherwise, then we judge by what's apparent. And contrary to judging by what's apparent is the application of ḥamlul Mujmal ’alal Mufaṣṣal; because a person witnesses something that is clearly wrong, but he disregards and counters it by the apparent good shown by this person, or even the good that he assumes of him. And there's a clear difference between the two.