The Classification of Innovations and Their Application to the Light Legal Rulings

The questioner : The Classification of Innovations.

The Shaykh : Yes?

The questioner : The Classification of Innovations and their application to the light legal rulings, as the scholars of knowledge classified them...?

The Shaykh : If taken in its absolute sense, this is not correct. However, with some detail, it can be correct. This pertains to the reality that the innovation is not purely devotional, but rather in matters of unrestricted public interest. I believe we mentioned here or elsewhere—though I no longer remember due to the repetition of these topics—the permissibility of the adhan for the two Eid prayers. This innovation is misguidance, but that is not the case with the permissibility of taxes if the intention is to cover a deficit in the state system, such as repelling an incident like an enemy attack. This is an unrestricted public interest, and it is obligatory, based on their saying: "What is necessary for the performance of an obligation is itself obligatory." The permissible category, where one can say it is an innovation, includes the things we see now: foods, drinks, clothes, vehicles, and so on. These are things that did not exist in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), but they fall under the general permissibility.
And upon you be peace... And upon you be peace, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.
...That is sufficient... Now, regarding the garlic, the saying of him (peace and blessings be upon him)—pardon me—the saying of some of the Companions that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to say—perhaps it was Aisha, I do not recall it now: , this is how the hadith is in "Sunan al-Nasa'i": , and the hadith became famous with the wording: . The word "three" has no basis in any of the narrations of this hadith; rather, it distorts the meaning. Therefore, this hadith should be read with the wording: . A point. A new sentence: . If it were said: , then prayer would enter into the three things of the worldly life; and that is not the case. The correct, established version in "Sunan al-Nasa'i" and others who narrated this hadith without the word "three" is that the hadith is read as follows: . A point.
And I say: A hadith point, and this has a translation: , then we resume the speech: . As for the hadith point = -- And upon you be peace -- = it was the custom of the old hadith scholars that when one of them copied a hadith = -- And upon you be peace, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings -- = he would draw a circle instead of a point. Whenever he finished a hadith, he would place a circle after it. When he finished copying, he would return to compare the copy with the original. So whenever he read one of those hadiths that he had closed with a circle and compared the hadith with the original, he would place a point in the middle of the circle, indicating that this hadith had been compared with the original and the comparison was verified. It often happens for a person to skip a hadith to another, and after finishing it, place a point in the middle of the circle. So when the time comes to read this section or this book for some of them, and he passes by a hadith with a circle but no point, it means that this specific hadith has not been compared. This hadith point is significant; because it is a circle with a point in its middle. So when we read the previous hadith: , we pause as if there were a large point, then we resume the completion of the hadith and say: , indicating that this sentence is an independent sentence and not one of the worldly matters. Therefore, the addition mentioned in some books that do not pay attention to the precise narration of hadiths, when they mention the hadith with the wording: ; the word "three" is invalid in both chain and text.
This is what should be mentioned now.