The Ruling on Disagreement in Matters Related to Acts of Worship

The questioner : Three: What is the opinionThe Shaykh : regarding one who disagrees with others in matters related to acts of worship, such as determining the duration for shortening the prayer, the prayer of remembrance (Tasbih), and others? He says that the disagreement is an innovation (bid'ah) because, in his view, it is not established that the duration is determined; thus, determining it is, in his view, a contradiction of the Sunnah, and contradicting the Sunnah in acts of worship is an innovation, and so on. Is it permissible to label the one who disagrees as an innovator?

The Shaykh : There is a verbal error in the question, likely a verbal one. Labeling the one who disagrees as an innovator is one thing, and labeling the issue in which the Sunnah was left as an innovation is another. The difference is that saying "So-and-so is an innovator" is one thing, and saying "This issue that So-and-so speaks of is an innovation" is another. This distinction is very necessary, because we believe, along with the investigating scholars, and at their head Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him), that no scholar is free from some error. This is a matter on which no two people differ, and no two camels butt heads, as they used to say in old times. No scholar is free from falling into an error. We now proceed to the implications of this agreed-upon matter. The error may be in legalizing what Allah has forbidden, or in forbidding what Allah has permitted, or in denying a Sunnah, or in accepting an innovation. This is a reality that has no defense; it cannot be denied. Therefore, if a scholar—any scholar—says, "This issue is lawful," but he knows that a scholar from among the people of knowledge said, "It is forbidden," the one who said it is forbidden will say, "It is an error without doubt." He is, consequently, in error, but he is rewarded; because he did not say it except through independent legal reasoning (ijtihad). And so the chain of the topic extends until it reaches every issue.
If a claimant like me claims that a certain issue—as we mentioned earlier in some examples—is an innovation, I do not mean that the one who said this word—and I saw it as an innovation—is described as an innovator. Because the word "innovator" means that it is his nature and his habit to innovate and innovate, and therefore he takes on this sin... This is a known example in... "Al-Jami' al-Saghir," whether in the authentic or weak, but specifically in the authentic...
... He does not take this description merely because he did it once, but he takes it if justice prevails in him, and it is said that he is just. It does not mean that, on the contrary, he committed injustice in some cases. The criterion is what prevails in a person of good or evil, of correctness or error, and so on. Thus, there is no strangeness in saying that So-and-so erred in saying this is lawful while it is forbidden, or vice versa, or in saying that this statement is an innovation in the religion, because this is our view. But we do not mean by this that the one from whom this innovation came is an innovator, due to what we mentioned earlier, that the word "innovator" means that it is his affair to innovate. Therefore, we must distinguish when we hear, and I feel that the intent of this question is my statement that I made more than twenty years ago, perhaps, and it is still printed to this day, and I am still insistent on it: that placing the hands on the chest after bowing is an innovation. This does not mean that the one who adopted it is an innovator, but I believe that this statement is an innovation. Why? Because the righteous Salaf did not do it, and this is the definition of innovation according to all scholars. Yes, those who say that this placement is a Sunnah have their evidence, and therefore their matter is like my matter and that of others with us in this issue, which revolves between being rewarded or being rewarded two rewards, or one group being rewarded one reward and the other group two rewards. But this expression that it is an innovation means that the Salaf did not do it, and this is an act of worship. So I do not know why this issue is criticized, while, for example, the statements attributed to Abu Hanifa in which he contradicted the Sunnah are not criticized, and perhaps he even contradicted the statements of the Imams of the Salaf and the Companions, and so on. Yet he remains an Imam among the Imams of the Muslims; because the criterion is what prevails in him of correctness, not what is rare in him of error. And so, as Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "There is no one among us but that he was refuted and refuted others, except the one in this grave." Perhaps the matter has become clear in this speech or that question.
Yes.