From the principles of the great ḥadīth scholar Muḥammad ibn Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī رحمه الله
Transcript:
Questioner: O Shaykh, is it true that part of the methodology of the Salaf was that they would not judge a man to be from Ahl al-Sunnah unless he possessed the traits of the Sunnah?
And that if he innovated, or praised the people of innovation, he would be counted among them—just as the Salaf would say, for example: whoever says that Allah is not above the heavens, he is a Jahmī?
Shaykh al-Albānī رحمه الله: There is some truth to that, but do not forget what I told you earlier. This does not mean that such a person is no longer a Muslim.
What is the meaning of the Prophet ﷺ refusing to pray over the one who died in debt, or over the one who stole from the spoils, or over the one who committed murder? It does not mean that he was no longer a Muslim.
So this, my brother, is a matter of emphasis, as we mentioned earlier.
Another point: the reports from the Salaf—if they are not numerous and mutually supporting, reaching the level of tawātur—should not be taken from an isolated narration and then built into a methodology that contradicts what is established from the Salaf themselves: namely, that a Muslim does not leave the fold of Islam merely because of a sin, or an innovation, or a wrong he committed.
If we find something apparently in conflict with this principle, we must interpret it in the way I just explained: that it is a form of discipline and warning.
Take the case of Imām al-Bukhārī—what can be said about him? Some ḥadīth scholars actually abandoned him and never retracted their stance. Why?
Because he distinguished between two statements:
Whoever says “The Qur’ān is created”—this is misguidance, innovation, disbelief, depending on the wording used by scholars.
And whoever says: “My recitation (lafẓī) of the Qur’ān is created.”
Imām Aḥmad declared: whoever says, “My recitation of the Qur’ān is created,” is a Jahmī. Based on this, some scholars after him judged that al-Bukhārī should not be taken from, since he once uttered this phrase, which they equated with the statement of the Jahmiyyah.
But the Jahmiyyah did not say “My recitation is created.” They said: “The Qur’ān itself is not the Speech of Allah, but a created thing.”
So what is to be said about al-Bukhārī, who said “My recitation of the Qur’ān is created”? And about Imām Aḥmad, who said: whoever says this is a Jahmī?
Both cannot be correct unless we interpret properly, in line with established principles.
Before moving on—surely you distinguish between one who says “The Qur’ān is created” and one who says “My recitation of the Qur’ān is created,” don’t you?
Questioner: Yes, Shaykh.
Shaykh al-Albānī: Good. Then how do we answer the statement of Imām Aḥmad: whoever says “My recitation of the Qur’ān is created” is a Jahmī?
The answer is what I mentioned to you: this was said as a warning, to prevent Muslims from uttering a statement that could serve as a loophole for the people of innovation—the Jahmiyyah.
Because someone might say “My recitation of the Qur’ān is created,” and by that he really means “the Qur’ān itself is created.” Not every Muslim who used that phrase intended such a corrupt meaning.
Now, Imām al-Bukhārī has no need for anyone’s recommendation—Allah Himself honored him by making his book second only to the Qur’ān in universal acceptance among Muslims, despite their differences.
So, when he said: “My recitation of the Qur’ān is created,” he meant something correct. But Imām Aḥmad feared the consequences of this statement, and therefore said: whoever says it is a Jahmī.
Thus, this was for the purpose of warning, not an actual creed-based judgment that the person is indeed a Jahmī.
Therefore, when we find some statements of the Salaf where they judged a person to be an innovator for committing a certain innovation, it should be understood as a warning—not necessarily as an actual creed-based ruling.
It is worth mentioning here the famous report from Imām Mālik. A man once came to him and asked: “O Mālik, what is al-istiwaʾ (Allah’s rising over the Throne)?” Mālik replied: “Al-istiwaʾ is known, its ‘how’ is unknown, asking about it is an innovation. Expel this man, for he is an innovator.”
Now, was that man truly an innovator just for asking about al-istiwaʾ? No. He only wanted to understand something. But Imām Mālik feared that this question could lead to opposing the ʿaqīdah of the Salaf, so he ordered him expelled, saying: “He is an innovator.”
Notice how the methods differ. If today, one of us—you, me, or anyone—were asked by a layperson or even a student, “What does istiwaʾ mean?” Would we respond exactly as Imām Mālik did, saying: “Expel him, for he is an innovator”? No. Why? Because times have changed. What was suitable and effective then is not suitable now—it may cause more harm than benefit.
Source: Silsilat al-Hudā wa al-Nūr
Tape no: 666
Fatwā no: 03
Time: 00:27:39
