Shaykh Usaamah Al-Utaybee said, “…The differentiation between ar-radd ‘alal-mukhaalif (refuting the opponent) and al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel (disparagement/criticism and praise) as a complete and total differentiation, this indicates…ignorance…(as although they are two different fields they are also connected).
When Allah the Mighty and Majestic mentioned Fir’awn with kufr (disbelief) and that he claimed Uloohiyyah (divinity) and he claimed Ruboobiyyah (Lordship) for himself, and He mentioned his disbelief in Allaah the Mighty and Majestic and his striving in that, in the aayah of Allaah,
“And they belied those aayaat wrongfully and arrogantly, though their own selves were convinced thereof. So see what was the end of the mufsidoon (evil-doers).” [Sooratun-Naml 27:14]
Then is this not a Jarh (disparagement) upon Fir’awn?
However is it not also a form of Radd (refutation) upon Fir’awn?
The refutation upon his belief comprises al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel (although it involves a radd (refutation) upon him which puts it under the general field of ar-radd ‘alal-mukhaalif (refuting the opponent) and the more specific field of Al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel also).
So al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel is an aspect of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil and it is an aspect of refuting the statements of the opponent (ar-radd ‘alal-mukhaalif).
Thus…the (one who makes a complete and total) differentiation between that (ar-radd ‘alal-mukhaalif – refuting the opponent) and al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel, then this indicates his ignorance and his misguidance.
Al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel is a part of (ar-radd ‘alal-mukhaalif – refuting the opponent) and cannot be separated from ar-radd ‘alal-mukhaalif (refuting the opponent).
(However) it is true that ar-radd ‘alal-mukhaalif (refuting the opponent) and those who have erred does not necessitate at-tajreeh (disparagement like a jarh which is connected to the field of Al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel).
For example, when a Scholar of the Sunnah slips up and errs, then he is refuted with knowledge, but he is not disparaged (jarraha) due to that (so no jarh from the field of Al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel is placed upon him) especially when he is known for being upon the truth and striving to attain the truth, except that he has slipped up and erred in an issue.
Therefore this involves the occurrence of an error amongst the righteous and the trutfhul and refuting their error (which comes under the field of ar-radd ‘alal-mukhaalif (refuting the opponents) and not Al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel (disparagement and praise))…
However, when the opponent who is being refuted is an innovator or a disbeliever, then the refutation upon him is not excluded from (the field of) al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel (although it comes under the more general field of ar-radd ‘alal-mukhaalif (refuting the opponents)).
(Therefore) the Jarh is upon this disbeliever, and the Jarh is upon this innovator (and not just a simple refutation without at-tajreeh (disparagement) and being disparaged (jarraha)). This is because you are refuting his corrupt principles, which necessitate Jarh (disparagement/criticism) of him and expelling him from the Sunnah if he falsely and slanderously ascribes himself to it. If the opponent reaches the level of a disbeliever or an innovator or a faasiq (open major sinner) who is criminal in his belief and his statement, there is no doubt that the refutation upon him includes tajreeh (disparagement) of him, because these errors that he has committed obligate that he be refuted.
As for when what is intended by mukhaalif (opponent) (from the field of ar-radd ‘alal-mukhaalif (refuting the opponents)) is an opponent in an issue of ijtihaad (independent reasoning), or when the opponent is someone from Ahlu Sunnah who slips up and errs but he is generally upon the truth, then this does not necessitate tajreeh (disparagement) of him (thus it’s a refutation from the general field of ar-radd ‘alal-mukhaalif (refuting the opponents) but it’s not from the more specific field al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel as the refutation is free from jarh (disparagement)).
…The previous information is the detailed explanation of the issue (of ar-radd ‘alal-mukhaalif and al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel). The one who says that al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel has no connection to ar-radd ‘alal-mukhaalif or that there is a complete and total differentiation between the two of them, then such an individual is an ignorant liar. And Allaah knows best.”
Posted by Abdul Kareem Ibn Ozzie