What is the criterion for the jurist who has fallen into religious innovation?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Then he exercised independent legal reasoning, and even if he fell into religious innovation, he is still a jurist, and he did not intend to oppose or to know the methodology of the pious predecessors and to contradict it!
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : So he is a jurist.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : So is he called an innovating jurist?! I mean, do you combine these two, jurist and innovator?! And then what is the criterion for us to know whether this is knowledge or he did not know, because this becomes difficult, and it may become very difficult when we start applying the rule in practical application, and we found, for example, in practical application that great and senior scholars in all eras and lands, especially those who were before the Shaykh al-Islam in particular, fell into confusion, and the confusion led some of the people of innovation in this era, or the innovative methodologies in this era, to cling to it, such as, for example, the words of al-Nawawi - I do not want to use Ibn Hajar as an example - the words of al-Nawawi, for example, the statement of the Shaykh al-Islam, al-Nawawi means he fell into dozens of figurative interpretations that contradict the creed, and he followed a path that meant he resembled the people of innovation in speaking about delegating the meaning at times, and speaking about figurative interpretation at other times, and he explicitly stated the methodology of the pious predecessors this and that, yes, so how do we excuse al-Nawawi, for example? I mean, is he excused? And do we call him an innovating jurist?! Do we distinguish between al-Nawawi and the one who repeats his words now? Or do we not repeat? I mean, these are questions if you would be kind?!
The Shaykh : If there are questions in your speech, then I hope you will remind me of the first question, and we will start to answer!
The questioner : What is the criterion for excusing?!
The Shaykh : Do you mean excusing in our view or in the view of our Lord?
The questioner : In our view, so that we do not call him an innovating jurist, so that we take him out of being an innovator?!
The Shaykh : We said earlier: whoever we know from him that he does not care about what the pious predecessors were upon, then he is the innovator, and he is the one who contradicts the Book and the Sunnah.
The questioner : I mean, by signs from his life and his conduct?!
The Shaykh : Yes, and whoever we know from him that he follows the pious predecessors, but in a certain issue, whether it is as we said earlier: meaning a branch issue or a fundamental issue, the Salafi methodology did not become clear to him, and he spoke with his opinion and his independent legal reasoning, then he is rewarded without a doubt.
The questioner : Even if it was in a chapter?
The Shaykh : Even if it was?
The questioner : In a complete chapter, like the chapter of attributes, for example?
The Shaykh : If we imagine this, then it is so, because it may be that this is a theoretical matter that does not happen, for example!
The questioner : I mean, al-Nawawi, for example?
The Shaykh : In a complete chapter?
The questioner : In the chapter of attributes?
The Shaykh : Yes, al-Nawawi in the chapter of attributes, is he not affirming many of the attributes without figurative interpretation?
The questioner : Rarely.
The Shaykh : That is not reasonable, how is this?! What does he say about hearing and seeing, for example?
The questioner : Yes, indeed, in what agrees, meaning.
Another questioner : The Asha'irah, the seven attributes!
The questioner : The Asha'irah, of course, he agrees with them in this.
The Shaykh : I do not care about the Asha'irah now, I was talking about al-Nawawi!
The questioner : Yes, - may Allah have mercy on him -.
The Shaykh : It is not possible, I mean, to say: al-Nawawi does not have faith, even in some of the attributes!!
The questioner : No, he has faith in the attributes.
The Shaykh : But he may interpret attributes, and he may delegate.
The questioner : But he fell into interpretation a lot in his speech.
The Shaykh : That is not your concern!
The questioner : And in delegation at times!
The Shaykh : The research is not in the details now, whether he falls into a little or a lot, but the research, as I said: what is the criterion or the rule for distinguishing? So we say: whoever knows the methodology of the pious predecessors, and then contradicts it, this is without a doubt an innovator.
The questioner : And he knew that this is the methodology of the pious predecessors?
The Shaykh : This is it, this is the condition that we mention.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Whoever knows the methodology of the pious predecessors and then contradicts it, then this is the innovator.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : So he is a jurist.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : So is he called an innovating jurist?! I mean, do you combine these two, jurist and innovator?! And then what is the criterion for us to know whether this is knowledge or he did not know, because this becomes difficult, and it may become very difficult when we start applying the rule in practical application, and we found, for example, in practical application that great and senior scholars in all eras and lands, especially those who were before the Shaykh al-Islam in particular, fell into confusion, and the confusion led some of the people of innovation in this era, or the innovative methodologies in this era, to cling to it, such as, for example, the words of al-Nawawi - I do not want to use Ibn Hajar as an example - the words of al-Nawawi, for example, the statement of the Shaykh al-Islam, al-Nawawi means he fell into dozens of figurative interpretations that contradict the creed, and he followed a path that meant he resembled the people of innovation in speaking about delegating the meaning at times, and speaking about figurative interpretation at other times, and he explicitly stated the methodology of the pious predecessors this and that, yes, so how do we excuse al-Nawawi, for example? I mean, is he excused? And do we call him an innovating jurist?! Do we distinguish between al-Nawawi and the one who repeats his words now? Or do we not repeat? I mean, these are questions if you would be kind?!
The Shaykh : If there are questions in your speech, then I hope you will remind me of the first question, and we will start to answer!
The questioner : What is the criterion for excusing?!
The Shaykh : Do you mean excusing in our view or in the view of our Lord?
The questioner : In our view, so that we do not call him an innovating jurist, so that we take him out of being an innovator?!
The Shaykh : We said earlier: whoever we know from him that he does not care about what the pious predecessors were upon, then he is the innovator, and he is the one who contradicts the Book and the Sunnah.
The questioner : I mean, by signs from his life and his conduct?!
The Shaykh : Yes, and whoever we know from him that he follows the pious predecessors, but in a certain issue, whether it is as we said earlier: meaning a branch issue or a fundamental issue, the Salafi methodology did not become clear to him, and he spoke with his opinion and his independent legal reasoning, then he is rewarded without a doubt.
The questioner : Even if it was in a chapter?
The Shaykh : Even if it was?
The questioner : In a complete chapter, like the chapter of attributes, for example?
The Shaykh : If we imagine this, then it is so, because it may be that this is a theoretical matter that does not happen, for example!
The questioner : I mean, al-Nawawi, for example?
The Shaykh : In a complete chapter?
The questioner : In the chapter of attributes?
The Shaykh : Yes, al-Nawawi in the chapter of attributes, is he not affirming many of the attributes without figurative interpretation?
The questioner : Rarely.
The Shaykh : That is not reasonable, how is this?! What does he say about hearing and seeing, for example?
The questioner : Yes, indeed, in what agrees, meaning.
Another questioner : The Asha'irah, the seven attributes!
The questioner : The Asha'irah, of course, he agrees with them in this.
The Shaykh : I do not care about the Asha'irah now, I was talking about al-Nawawi!
The questioner : Yes, - may Allah have mercy on him -.
The Shaykh : It is not possible, I mean, to say: al-Nawawi does not have faith, even in some of the attributes!!
The questioner : No, he has faith in the attributes.
The Shaykh : But he may interpret attributes, and he may delegate.
The questioner : But he fell into interpretation a lot in his speech.
The Shaykh : That is not your concern!
The questioner : And in delegation at times!
The Shaykh : The research is not in the details now, whether he falls into a little or a lot, but the research, as I said: what is the criterion or the rule for distinguishing? So we say: whoever knows the methodology of the pious predecessors, and then contradicts it, this is without a doubt an innovator.
The questioner : And he knew that this is the methodology of the pious predecessors?
The Shaykh : This is it, this is the condition that we mention.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Whoever knows the methodology of the pious predecessors and then contradicts it, then this is the innovator.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.