THE WRITER STATES:

"3. Regarding the companionship which was supposedly severed and ended with a warning. What's under question is the position of At-Tahiri towards Ubaid, not the other way round, and brushing this away due to the warning of Ubaid of At-Tahiri; which doesn't nullify this affair, isn't appropriate and Allah knows best, especially as there are still clear signs of deep inclination towards Ubaid, until after his death. Which are evident from his lecture on Ubaid. Which contains a defence for Ubaid from those that spoke ill of him, towards the end of the lecture." [end quote] RESPONSE: Assuming he doesn't consider Ubaid to be an innovator, what exactly are you implying? Are you suggesting that he should also be labelled an innovator? It appears you haven't fully reflected over the speech relayed by Abu Atiyyah, so I will relay it again: Sheikh Yahya ḥafidhahullāh said: "Not declaring an innovator as such may be due to a lack of insight in recognising it, so someone who has insight has been enlightened by Allāh, while the other did not declare the person an innovator because they did not recognise it, or lacked insight, even if it was explained to them. Or, there may be doubts or bad company that prevent them from declaring the innovator as such. Not everyone who refrains from declaring an innovator is themselves an innovator. However, there is a distinction to be made regarding someone who assists in sin and transgression, does not declare the innovator as such due to approval of the innovation, or because they follow the same path and agree with it, even after the matter has been clearly explained to them. In such a case, it can indeed be said that they have not declared the innovator as such. As the saying goes, "A person is upon the religion of their close companion, so let each of you look to whom you befriend." Ahmad said: "They are from among them." These evidences are applied accordingly, based on the situation at hand." (End of quote). https://t.me/almanhajussalafi/870