The text below is reproduced from Abu Iyaad’s article, How the Scholars Dealt With The Fitnah of Ibn Hādī and the Muṣaʿfiqah (opens in a new tab).
Some months later, Shaykh Rabīʿ bin Hādī wrote in his letter addressed to Ibn Hādī, dated 3 Shawwāl 1439, corresponding to 17 June 2018 and it was published on Sahab.Net.
To proceed: Then Shaykh Muḥammad bin Hādī has manifested conduct which has led to revilement of many Salafīs. He labels them ‘Ṣaʿāfiqah’ and says that they are ‘(mulḥaqūn) put alongside Ahl al-Ahwāʾ’. And this is tabdīʿ of them [expelling them from Salafiyyah] without any mention of the evidences for his claim.
So I desired to aid the oppressed, fulfilling the statement of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), “Aid your brother,whether he is the oppressor or the oppressed”, and proceeding from the statement of Allāh (عز وجل), “Say: Bring your proof if indeed you are truthful.” (2:111). For the readers, I present this critique of his claims which are devoid of evidences.
In the rest of this letter, Shaykh Rabīʿ asks many questions of Ibn Hādī asking him to provide evidences for the claims that he made, at the end of which he rebuked him, told him he has zero evidences to justify his tabdīʿ, and asked him to fear Allāh.
This letter was three months after a clear, open stance had already been taken when Shaykh Rabīʿ said it was obligatory to reject falsehood and oppression to those who were saying: “I am silent, I will not enter this tribulation.”
Note: A situation is a confusing “fitnah” when truth is not clear from falsehood. It is necessary to refrain during that period and leave the critiquing scholars to deal with the errors and deviations, in trying to rectify them with advice and patience. However, when the truth becomes clear from falsehood, the errant from the correct, the oppressor from the oppressed by one or more scholars, with evidences, and the era of advice and patience has been expired, which can be a sitting, or a day, or a week, or a month, it is no longer a confusing “fitnah” and a clear position is required from those who know and who have influence and sway over others so that more and more people are not dragged behind the one refuted, and his partisans and fanatics do not spread more confusion and misguidance.
Shaykh Bin Baz (رحمه الله) said in his lecture on the position of a believer regarding tribulations:[8]
Every fitnah that occurs from the hand of any person among the Muslims, the Innovators, or the Disbelievers, it is examined so that the believer stands with the one who is correct, with the oppressed against the oppressor, and the one who is wrong. In this way, the truth is supported and the affairs of the Muslims remain in order, and throught it, the oppressor is deterred from his oppression.
Pay attention to this statement. Any fitnah arising from any Muslim, or innovator is examined by the believer so he can stand with the one who is correct. This way, the truth is supported and the affairs of the Muslims remain in order, and the errant person, the wrongdoer, the oppressor, is repelled from what he fell into .And when this is not done by the believers, what happens? Truth is not supported, affairs of Muslims become disorderly, and the errant and the oppressors, such as Ibn Hādī and his followers in this case, continue on their path, wreaking havoc, and tearing Ahl al-Sunnah apart, more and more.
He (رحمه الله) also said in another place:[9]
The ḥadīths related to fitan (tribulations) and warning against them are interpreted, in the view of the people of knowledge, to mean the fitan in which he who is correct is not known from he who is wrong. These are the fitan in which it is legislated for the believer to be cautious of.
As for the tribulations in which the one who is correct is known from the one who is wrong, and the oppressor from the oppressed, then they are not included in the aforementioned ḥadīths (regarding keeping away from fitan). Rather, the Sharīʿah evidences from the Book and the Sunnah indicate the obligation to support the one who is right and the oppressed against the aggressor and the oppressor.
Thus, the statement of “keeping out of fitnah” when the truth is already clear, without any ambiguity, as to who is correct and who is in error and who is the oppressed and who is the oppressor, and concealing these facts and realities and failing to uphold them so that the affairs of Ahl al-Sunnah remain in order, is out of place, and not in line with the advice based on principles of the scholars in previous tribulations. Rather, it is desertion and dereliction of duty.