Their argument using the hadith (Whoever introduces a good practice in Islam...) and the Shaykh's refutation of them.

The Shaykh : Among the most famous arguments used by the masses today in their approval of religious innovation is the well-known hadith in Sahih Muslim: .
They use this hadith to argue that there is a good innovation and a bad innovation in Islam. Exposing the error in this argument can be based on two things:
The first thing is to recall the reason for the hadith's occurrence, for our knowledge of the reason for the hadith's occurrence will directly reveal to us the error in arguing with the hadith that there is a good innovation in Islam that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did not bring and did not command, but which Muslims merely approve of.
The reason for this hadith, as is also mentioned with the hadith in Sahih Muslim and others, is that Jarir ibn Abdullah al-Bajali said: We were sitting with the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) when a group of Bedouins came to him, wearing patched cloaks and carrying swords, most of them from the tribe of Mudar, or rather all of them from Mudar. When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) saw them, his face became gloomy, meaning the features of sadness and grief appeared on him, because he saw extreme poverty in these people of Mudar. So he (may Allah's prayer and peace be upon him) addressed the people, admonishing and reminding them. Among what he said to them was: . He recited this verse to encourage the Companions to give charity to these people. He added to this by explaining (may Allah's prayer and peace be upon him): "Give charity with a dirham, its value, with a sa' of wheat, its value, or with a sa' of barley." So one of them stood up to go to his house and return with whatever charity he could manage, and he placed it before the Messenger (may Allah's prayers and peace be upon him). When the other Companions saw him, each of them also stood up and brought whatever charity they could manage. So gathered before the Messenger (may Allah's prayers and peace be upon him) was something like a heap of food and dirhams. When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) saw that, his face became like polished silver, his face brightened like polished silver, meaning silver coated with gold, the features of his face (may Allah's prayer be upon him) shining with joy at his Companions' response to his call (may Allah's prayer be upon him). He said: to the end of the hadith.
Now, they interpret "whoever introduces" to mean "whoever innovates a good innovation in Islam." And here in the second part, Now we return to the first part of this hadith, which contains , and they interpret it as a good innovation. Where is the innovation in this story for the interpretation of the hadith as they claim to be correct? We find nothing in this story except charity, and charity is prescribed by the explicit text of the Qur'an. Before this incident, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) reminded them of the previous verse: . So this charity is not an innovation. And the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) affirmed to them and encouraged them that one of them should give charity, even if it is only a dirham. So there is no good innovation in this incident to say that the Messenger said on this occasion, "Whoever innovates a good innovation in Islam." It does not correspond at all if we distort the wording of the hadith to this wording: "Whoever innovates a good innovation in Islam." This wording does not correspond to the incident at all, because there is no innovation in the incident at all. This clarifies the error of this interpretation. And as I say on such an occasion, interpreting this hadith with this later interpretation, "Whoever innovates a good innovation in Islam," is not something a non-Arab man would do if he had some Islamic jurisprudence and some knowledge of the Arabic language, because there is no correspondence or any agreement between the incident and the statement of one who might say, "Whoever innovates a good innovation in Islam" on such an occasion. This indicates the error of this interpretation. And the correct interpretation is very clear from a little reflection on the incident. If we return to the structure of the hadith: , we ask now: Is charity good or bad? There is no doubt that it is good. Okay, was it prescribed by Allah (Mighty and Majestic) by the text of the previous verse and prescribed by the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) in his hadith, or not? The answer is yes.
So this first person who gave charity did not bring a good innovation. He did not bring something new that was not known before. Rather, charity is among the virtues of deeds, and there are many hadiths about it.
So what is the meaning of the statement of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) in this specific hadith: ? It is very clear from the incident that the first man was the first to respond to the admonition of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and the first to go to his house to bring whatever charity he could manage. So the Companions followed him in that. So he, by his going, was the first of every person to have this good practice for these people. So, so that you are not among those who are heedless of a charitable project, Allah inspires one of them to do this project. This project is mentioned in the command in the Book and the Sunnah. So if we suppose collecting money for orphans, for the poor, to build a mosque, for any charitable work, no person with an atom of jurisprudence can say that this charitable work is an innovation in religion, ever. But this person was the first to move for this charitable project, so the people helped him in that. So this first person is called one who introduced a good practice in Islam. But the judgment is not from him. The judgment is from the One who has the judgment and application, which is Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He). But he was the first to move to open the door of this good project by the text of the Shari'ah, by the text of the Book and the Sunnah.
So "whoever introduces" means whoever opened a path to a good practice by the text, not by reason and desire, as the masses of people interpret it today. He has its reward and the reward of whoever works by it until the Day of Resurrection.
Likewise, the completion of the hadith: if a person does it, it applies to him: . What is the bad practice? It is a matter that is religiously reprehensible, its reprehensibility and misguidance being known by the text of the Shari'ah. A person does it and opens the door to this evil, so he bears its sin and the sin of whoever works by it until the Day of Resurrection. For example, tabarruj (a woman's display of her adornment), raising graves and boasting about their construction, building mosques on graves. All these are forbidden in Islam. So the first one who opened this reprehensible practice bears its sin and the sin of whoever works by it until the Day of Resurrection. He did not bring a reprehensible matter that is not known in the Shari'ah, but it is known in the Shari'ah. But the people were in safety from this reprehensible matter, so Zayd from among the people came and opened the door to this reprehensible matter. So it is not that "introducing a bad practice" means innovating and creating something in the Shari'ah that our Lord (Mighty and Majestic) did not point out its status. Rather, it is opening the path of the reprehensible matter before the people, so he bears its sin and the sin of whoever works by it until the Day of Resurrection. This is the first thing by which we can understand the hadith correctly and refute the erroneous interpretation that came later in the matter, because the meaning of the hadith is: , meaning whoever innovates a good innovation in Islam. This interpretation is wrong, and the correct interpretation has become clear to you.
The second thing: We say in this hadith that the good practice is mentioned and the bad practice is mentioned. So what is the criterion for distinguishing between the good practice? Let us be with them now, accommodating them in their terms: What is the criterion and the scale for distinguishing between the good innovation and the bad innovation? Except the Qur'an and the Sunnah, we have nothing else.
So whoever says this is a good innovation or says it is a bad innovation, he must bring evidence that testifies to what he says from the Book and the Sunnah. As for mere saying, as we always and forever hear when the supporters of the Sunnah tell people that this, my brother, is an innovation, the answer is: What is wrong with it, my brother? So the one who approves of this innovation must bring the evidence that approves it. And the one who rejects the innovation and calls it a bad innovation, he also must bring evidence that it is a bad innovation.
Here, it is necessary to remind you of an error that those people make. When it is said, "This is a religious innovation (bid'ah)," their response is, "You are entirely an innovator." They rush to say, "You are entirely an innovator." Why? "This is not from the Sunnah, and this is not from the Sunnah," and so on. All of this was not present in the era of the righteous Salaf. This is their negligence in feeling the favor and grace of Allah upon people compared to previous nations. He said: . He said, "I have completed for you your worldly affairs." Worldly matters have absolutely no relation to religion. Every person has the right to eat, drink, and wear what they wish, but within the limits of the Shari'ah. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) explicitly stated this, saying: . These people mix up religious innovation with worldly innovation. As soon as you deny a religious innovation, they turn around and warn against a worldly innovation. My brother, the Messenger of Allah did not come to teach us trades, inventions, or innovations in worldly matters. Rather, he (peace be upon him) said: . As for worldly means and expanding upon them, these have no relation to religion.
So, whoever interprets the hadith by saying that whoever innovates a good innovation must provide evidence from the Book and the Sunnah that this is a good innovation. At that point, we will concede to them if they bring a hadith supporting the claim that what they call an innovation in religion is actually a good innovation, and if they provide evidence that it is good. In that case, the disagreement between us and them remains, as the jurists say, a verbal disagreement. We do not agree with them in naming what has been proven good by Shari'ah evidence as an innovation, while they call it an innovation. There is no harm in this, provided there is evidence supporting their description of the innovation as good. I will give you an example, and we strongly condemn the division of innovation into five categories, the first of which is an obligatory, mandatory innovation.