Does the hadith (Whoever introduces into our matter something that is not part of it is rejected) indicate the invalidity of worship if it contains a religious innovation, because it aligns with the rule of the invalidity of what is prohibited when it concerns the rights of Allah (discussion)?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : I found this statement, along with its final detail, which is the prohibition for the sake of Allah Himself, meaning the rights of Allah, aligns with the general rule: Sunan al-Bayhaqi 17:1261 meaning it is invalid. But the previous detail, which is its exception when it is for an external matter, such as the prohibition of selling, the prohibition of selling, the issue of the Friday prayer...
The Shaykh : Can we pause here?
The questioner : Yes, you may.
The Shaykh : To what does the hadithSahih Muslim 1718a refer?
The questioner : It refers to all newly introduced commands or those that were not on the covenant.
The Shaykh : I hope this is a grammatical answer, not a general meaning.
The questioner : Ah,Sahih Muslim 1718a, meaning the rejection is of what? Meaning...
The Shaykh : This... so where does this refer to?
The questioner : The introduction, whoever introduces.
The Shaykh : So it returns to the introduced matter.
The questioner : To the introduced matter, yes.
The Shaykh : Okay, okay, what I understood from you is the opposite of this, meaning a man came into the prayer with a religious innovation, so the prayer became invalid?
The questioner : What I know is that it does not become invalid.
The Shaykh : As you said just now.
The questioner : Based on this rule.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : It is supposed to become invalid.
The Shaykh : No, that is not the case. Why? What is the evidence for the invalidity?
The questioner : This hadith.
The Shaykh : This hadith invalidates the addition in the prayer, it does not invalidate the prayer in our current example. It invalidates the addition in the prayer, invalidating it as an act of worship toward Allah because it is newly introduced. But if the prayer has its conditions and pillars that necessitate its validity, that does not harm its validity. Rather, this innovator becomes sinful because he introduced something into the prayer. You know, yes, what is the verse that says Allah does not waste your faith? There is a verse you remember.
The questioner :[Al-Baqarah 2:143] .
The Shaykh[Al-Baqarah 2:143] Perhaps you remember that the intended meaning here is the prayer.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : So here, this introduction does not waste the prayer for the innovator, but he falls into sin. This is what confused me, so I told you: we can pause here so that you do not go far off from this topic.
Whoever introduces into our matter something that is not part of it is rejected
مَن أحدث في أمرنا ما ليس منه فهو ردٌّThe Shaykh : Can we pause here?
The questioner : Yes, you may.
The Shaykh : To what does the hadith
'A'isha reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: He who innovates things in our affairs for which there is no valid (reason) (commits sin) and these are to be rejected.
مَن أحدث في أمرنا هذا ما ليس منه فهو ردٌّThe questioner : It refers to all newly introduced commands or those that were not on the covenant.
The Shaykh : I hope this is a grammatical answer, not a general meaning.
The questioner : Ah,
He who innovates things in our affairs for which there is no valid (reason) (commits sin) and these are to be rejected.
مَن أحدث في أمرنا فهو ردٌّThe Shaykh : This... so where does this refer to?
The questioner : The introduction, whoever introduces.
The Shaykh : So it returns to the introduced matter.
The questioner : To the introduced matter, yes.
The Shaykh : Okay, okay, what I understood from you is the opposite of this, meaning a man came into the prayer with a religious innovation, so the prayer became invalid?
The questioner : What I know is that it does not become invalid.
The Shaykh : As you said just now.
The questioner : Based on this rule.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : It is supposed to become invalid.
The Shaykh : No, that is not the case. Why? What is the evidence for the invalidity?
The questioner : This hadith.
The Shaykh : This hadith invalidates the addition in the prayer, it does not invalidate the prayer in our current example. It invalidates the addition in the prayer, invalidating it as an act of worship toward Allah because it is newly introduced. But if the prayer has its conditions and pillars that necessitate its validity, that does not harm its validity. Rather, this innovator becomes sinful because he introduced something into the prayer. You know, yes, what is the verse that says Allah does not waste your faith? There is a verse you remember.
The questioner :
And never would Allah have caused you to lose your faith
وَمَا كَانَ اللَّهُ لِيُضِيعَ إِيمَانَكُمْThe Shaykh
And never would Allah have caused you to lose your faith
وَمَا كَانَ اللَّهُ لِيُضِيعَ إِيمَانَكُمْThe questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : So here, this introduction does not waste the prayer for the innovator, but he falls into sin. This is what confused me, so I told you: we can pause here so that you do not go far off from this topic.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.