If you have not read Part One of this article please click HERE .
Does Every Misguidance Make One A Kaafir Completely Out of the Deen?
This is an important question, and of course, the nitty-gritty of this work. Does every act of Bid’ah which is misguidance take one out of the Deen? We are not aware of any reputable scholar of the Deen past and present who has said every act of Bid’ah, no matter what level it is, will take whoever is guilty of it out of the Deen.
Said the Rabbaanee Scholar Ash-Shaykh Fauzaan (may Allaah preserve his life) , ‘…but the sin of Bid’ah is of varying levels; according to the type of the Bid’ah itself. There are some innovated practices that are clear-cut acts of unbelief such as making circumambulations around the graves with the intention of seeking closeness to their inmates, so also making slaughters and vows for them, and seeking succor from them… (and there are) some acts of Bid’ah that are means to Shirk such as erecting buildings over the graves as well as making prayers and supplications around them. And there are some acts of Bid’ah that are corruption of the creed such as the innovations of the Khawaarij, Qadariyyah and Murji’ah… and there are some that are just sins such as the idea of celibacy, fasting while standing in the sun, castrating oneself with the intention of removing all sexual drives.’ See al-Bid’ah: Ta’reefu-ha, An’waa’u-ha wa Ahkaamu-ha p.7.
Ash-Shaykh Al-Uthaymen (may Allaah bestow mercy on him) was asked: ‘How can a lover of Sunnah relate with a person of Bid’ah? Is it permissible to forsake him?’ The Shaykh answered: ‘Innovations (in the Deen) can be divided into two: The innovation that makes a person Kaafir, and the one that is less than that; we must however call those who attribute themselves to Islam and that have these forms of Bid’ah whether they are guilty of innovations that take people out of the Deen or the ones that are less than that, to the truth. We should not attack them except when we see that they are arrogant to the truth…so whenever we see obstinacy and arrogance in them we should explain their falsehood (to the people)… ’ [See: Al-Ibdaa Fee Bayaan Kamaal Ash-Shar’ Wa Khatar Al-Ibtidaa, p.37].
Even in the report of hadith, the scholars of hadith differentiate between people of Bid’ah who called to their innovations and those who did not call to it, as far as reporting Ahadith from them is concerned. They do not say everybody guilty of one Bid’ah or another should be thrown out of the Deen. For instance, while discussing the reasons that could make a reporter of hadith to be rejected, ash-Shaykh AbdulMuhsin al-‘Abbaad (may Allaah preserve his life) with the co-author of Min Atyab Al-Man’h Fee Il’m al-Mustalah p.43, an introductory book to the study of hadith, said: ‘Bid’ah is of two types: Mukaffirah; the one that makes his doer a Kaafir and this is in the form of when a person denies what the whole Ummah agree upon as being indisputably part of the Deen; the report of such a person will not be accepted. Mufassiqah; this makes its doer to become a sinner. His reports are acceptable so far he is not a caller to his Bid’ah, or reports what strengthens his Bid’ah. This is the view of the majority of the scholars and that is what is correct.’ That is with respect to accepting his hadith narrations, as for his Islam nobody says he becomes a Kaafir except of course, the Jabtawis of our country, Nigeria, and their ill-guided teachers outside.
Ibn Katheer (may Allaah bestow mercy on him) also alluded to this fact above in Ikhtisaar Uloom al-Hadith when he said: ‘A person of Bid’ah who becomes a Kaafir due to his Bid’ah, there is no doubt as to the rejection of his reports, but if he does not become a Kaafir with it but legalizes lying, his reports will be rejected. But if he does not legalize lying, is it acceptable or not? Should there be a distinction as to if he calls to his Bid’ah or not? There is a great difference of views about that, old and present.’
The difference of view, O reader, is as regard his reports not as regards his person, please pay attention, may Allâh help me and you. Al-Imaam Ibn Katheer (may Allaah bestow mercy on him) continued, ‘But the position of the majority of the scholars is as regard if he invites to his Bid’ah or not. There is a report from [Al-Imaam] Ash-Shaafi’ee about that…’ [See Baaithul-Atheeth p.82]
And that is what Ash-Shaykh Abdul-Muhsin said as earlier quoted.
Commenting on the statement of Ibn Katheer (may Allaah bestow mercy on him) , al-Imaam Ahmad Shaakir (one of the greatest scholars of the hadith of this century, may Allâh be merciful to him) said: ‘The people of innovations and desires, if their innovations are such that will make them Kuffaar, their reports will not be accepted, that is what has been agreed upon…as for those among them whose Bid’ah is not up to kufr level, some scholars do not accept their reports while others accept them. Not accepting their reports is an extremism that is devoid of daleel!’
Al-Imaam Ibn Katheer also said: ‘This is Al-Bukhaaree recording the hadith of Imraan bn Hittaan al-Khaarijee (see Taqreeb At-Tadheeb: 5152) who praised AbdurRahmaan bn Muljam, the killer of ‘Alee; he was one of the greatest caller to his Bid’ah. Allâh knows best.’ ’ [See Baaithul-Atheeth p.84]
‘Al-Haafidh Adh-Dhahabee (may Allaah bestow mercy on him) said in Al-Meezaan (vol.1p.4) while giving the biography of Abaan bn Taghlib (see Taqreeb At-Tadheeb: 136) Al-Koofee, ‘he is a Shi’ite to the skin but he is a sadooq, we shall take his sidq but upon him is his Bid’ah.’ It is also reported that al-Imaam Ahmad and others declared him as trustworthy.’
Al-Imaam Ahmad Shaakir (may Allaah bestow mercy on him) went on quoting Al-Haafidh Adh-Dhahabee: ‘Someone might ask: why is it possible to say a mubtadi is trustworthy while it is within the definition of trustworthiness that the person so declared is upright and certain (in his reports); so how can he be an upright person while he is a person of Bid’ah? Answer: Bid’ah is of two levels: minor Bid’ah such as the tashayyu’u (traits of shi’ism) coupled with some extremism, or tashayyu’u without extremism; the latter was very common in some Taabioon and those who followed them upon religion, wara’ and sidq; if we were to reject their Ahadith them a great number of the Ahadith of the Prophet (salaLlaahu alahyi wa sallam) would go, and that is clearly destructive. Then there is a major Bid’ah like the complete form of rafd (full-blown Shi’ism) and its attendant extremism… ’
Al-Imaam Ash-Shaatibee (may Allaah bestow mercy on him) had said before the scholars of our time, that innovated acts are not upon the same basis, ‘there are some of them that are sins that will not be regarded as Kufr; or some which scholars differ upon whether they are kufr or not such as the thoughts of the Khawaarij, Qadariyyah, al-Mur’ji’ah and the similar misguided sects. Yet there are some of the acts of innovations that are sins and there is an agreement among the scholars as not being Kufr such as the innovated practice of celibacy and fasting in the sun while standing…so what is known is that these innovated practices are not upon the same level thus it is not correct to say they are upon the same level such as saying ‘they are only all frown at’ or ‘they are only prohibited…’ therefore innovated acts are like sins and it is known that sins are of varying degrees so we should view acts of innovations in the same way [See: Al-I’tisaam pp.382-383].
Innovated practices in the Deen once again are of various degrees only that all of them whether small or big are prohibited. Said Ash-Shaykh Al-Albaanee (may Allaah bestow mercy on him) : ‘It should be known that acts of innovation in the Deen are not upon the same level; rather they are of varying degrees; some are acts of shirk and clear-cut kufr while some are less than that but we should know that a little act of Bid’ah a man comes up with in the Deen is prohibited after it might have become clear that it is Bid’ah. There is nothing as such in acts of Bid’ah that are merely reprehensible as some people think. What the Messenger of Allâh (salaLlaahu alahyi wa sallam) said is that ’all acts of Bid’ah is misguidance and every misguidance is in the Hell ,’ that is, whoever comes with it…’ [See Hajjatun-Nabee p.103 as cited in Qaamoos al-Bid’ah pp. 56-57].
Therefore no act of Bid’ah should be seen as being inconsequential because it is the little Bid’ah that leads to the mighty ones. Al-Imaam Al-Bar’bahaaree [d.329AH] said: ‘Be wary of little innovated matters because these are what lead to mighty innovations...’ [Shar’hus-Sunnah with its Commentary, p.37].
Is there anything like Bid’ah Hasanah (Good Innovation in the Deen)?
It is an error to divide innovations in the Deen to Good Innovations and Bad Innovations. What the Messenger of Allâh (salaLlaahu alahyi wa sallam) said was that ‘every act of Bid’ah (in the Deen) is misguidance.’ The statement of ‘Umar bn Al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him) that is often cited to justify the claim to Good Bid’ah has been severally explained by the scholars of the Deen as not applicable. The scholars say what Umar intended when he said ‘What a good innovation!’ with respect to the Taraweeh Prayers that was re-introduced in his tenure, is just of a linguist effect because the act was traceable to the Messenger of Allâh (salaLlaahu alahyi wa sallam).
Also what some people used to say that establishment of Madaaris, authoring books, gathering of the Qur’aan, etc. are acts of innovations in the Deen because the Messenger of Allâh (salaLlaahu alahyi wa sallam) did not do them; that claim is also erroneous because those acts came to place while essentially they had been a part of the Deen right from the time of the Messenger of Allâh (salaLlaahu alahyi wa sallam). For example, Allâh has said the Qur’aan is a Book therefore it is not far-fetched when the Companions eventually gathered it as a Book intended by Allâh and His Messenger (salaLlaahu alahyi wa sallam), above all, the gathering of the Qur’aan was a Consensus od the Companions, and the Consensus is one of the secondary sources of the Islamic law. As for the Madaaris (Islamic schools), right from the time of the Messenger of Allâh (salaLlaahu alahyi wa sallam) there had been teaching and learning of the Deen but in a form of school different from the subsequent forms of schools; what matters, in this case, is what is learnt and how it is learnt. Allâh knows best.
Therefore, whoever exempts any act of innovation in the Deen, or says it is good, will have to cite a proof for it from the Book, Sunnah or the Consensus of reputable scholars of the Deen. Whoever innovates anything in the Deen to seek closeness to Allâh, whether as a statement or an action such has indeed legislated in the Deen of Allâh what is not part thereof. [See Al-Ib’daa Fee Madaar al-Ibtidaa of Ash-Shaykh Alee Mahfoodh, p.43].
Thus with the foregoing, we have been able to destroy, by the mercy of Allâh the claim of the Jabtawis that all innovated practices are on equal footing such that they take one out of the Deen.
Last point: The only defence the Jabtawis will have against the above is that all what we have brought are explanations of the scholars of the Deen; they will never see the Verses of the Qur’aan neither the narrations from the Sunnah. They will say they are not obliged by the comments of the scholars; they will claim they will follow ‘daleel’ and ‘hujjah.’
We will simply reply that this Deen of Islam is a religion that has scholars, everything that is learnt in Islam is through the scholars, and that is how it has been from the very first day of Islam. There is no space here to enumerate the virtues of the people of knowledge in Islam. But the fact remains that almost all the people of base desires always seek to first destroy the authority of the scholars of the Deen so that they will be able to come up with their falsehood.
We like to ask them, who is more worthy of listening to in the matters of the Deen especially the issue we have trashed here, Al-Albaanee, Fauzaan, al-Uthaymeen, AbdulMuhsin Al-‘Abbaad etc or Muhammad Awwal Jabata?
Please let us know your answer before we say how intelligent you are.
O Allâh! Accept this work for Your Face Alone.
Insha Allâh, the refutations will continue after some days. We shall not relent until the truth is vindicated.
