What is the validity of the statement of the usul al-fiqh scholars: "The lack of knowledge of a thing does not necessitate knowledge of its non-existence"? And the Shaykh spoke about the practical Sunnah and the legislative Sunnah.

The questioner : O Shaykh, the statement of the usul al-fiqh scholars, "The absence of transmission does not prove non-existence," explain this principle of usul al-fiqh, and may Allah reward you with good?

The Shaykh : That is not what the usul al-fiqh scholars say. The usul al-fiqh scholars say a word of truth: "The lack of knowledge of a thing does not necessitate knowledge of its non-existence." But the matter regarding transmission is exactly the opposite. The non-transmission of a thing from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), when that thing is apparent, necessitates that it did not occur. Because if it had occurred, the transmission of his (peace and blessings be upon him) guidance and his Sunnah to us would not be possible except in its entirety and with all its details.
In reality, this question encourages and drives me to remind our brothers, the students of knowledge, of a very important principle. It is closely connected to the authentic hadith that was reported in many wordings, all of which converge on the famous wording: Many of the people of the Sunnah who walk with us on the path of the righteous Salaf, which is not worshipping with what occurred after the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in terms of acts of worship, all of them constantly recite this hadith: But in my opinion, few of the scholars, let alone the students of knowledge, let alone the general public, do not at least recall—I do not say they do not know, but they do not at least recall—that judging something to be a religious innovation necessitates looking into the guidance of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and his biography. So when someone says about something, "This is a religious innovation," it means that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not do it. Who judges that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not do it? Is it the general public? Are they the beginning students of knowledge? No, rather they are a specific group of scholars, and they are the people of hadith, not the jurists, nor the exegetes, nor other scholars. Rather, they are the people of hadith who are able to say, "This thing is a religious innovation," necessitating from that that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not do it. This is one thing. The second thing is: how do we know—and I have previously referred to similar speech while we were at lunch—how do we know that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not do such-and-such a thing, so that it is permissible for us to judge it as a religious innovation? Many people, when we tell them, "Do not do this, my brother, this is a religious innovation," the first thing they rush to say is, "Did the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) forbid it?" We say to him, "He forbade it and He did not forbid it," understanding these two contradictory words. The scholars say, "He forbade it and He did not forbid it," "He did not forbid it" as he wishes.The questioner : Did the Messenger, for example, say to the mu'adhdhin, "Do not pray after the adhan?" He did not forbid it. How? This is exactly in the meaning of prohibition. So when the researcher says that this thing is a religious innovation, it means that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not do this thing, and it is an act of worship. If it had been an act of worship, he (peace and blessings be upon him) would have done it, or at least he would have clarified it to the people, either by his saying, or at the very least by seeing it and approving it. So the clarification of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), as you know, is of types: either by his saying, or by his doing, or by his approval. For the sake of this detail, he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: Now, I will give you an example, not a real one, but many of its like are real. I will give you an example: if a group entered the mosque to pray, for example, the Sunnah before the Fajr or the Zuhr or other, and one of them, to whom it was revealed—whether he is a human, a jinn, or a devil, it does not concern us—said, "Why are you praying like this, scattered and separated? Come, let us pray the Sunnah before the Zuhr in congregation," and he supports this with authentic hadiths from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) in his saying. For example, he says, "He (peace and blessings be upon him) said: So come, let us gather and not separate. Rather, he says: And he says: to the end of the hadith. What would be the action of this person if he gathered the people for the Sunnah before the prayer? Without doubt, it would be said that this is a religious innovation. And praise be to Allah, until today such a religious innovation has not occurred, but its like is in the hundreds, indeed in the thousands. How do we deny this religious innovation if it happened? If we denied this religious innovation, the ignorant would say, "Did the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) forbid gathering the Sunnahs?" We cannot say to him, according to his request... Rather, we deny this gathering of his as a matter that occurred after it was not, how do we know that it occurred? It must be that this person who says this has knowledge and comprehensiveness, and coverage of the life of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and his biography, especially what was related to his legislation which Allah revealed to him. This gives us something very important that we should put in our minds as students of knowledge: that if a general hadith contains many parts, and we know by the previous method that a part of the parts of this general hadith was not done by the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), then it is not permissible for us to do this part, even if the general text included it. For example, some of them, years ago, wrote in a respected magazine, which is the Salafi magazine, the comprehensive Salafi magazine that is published in India. He wrote a long article, and I referred to his research just now, before the prayer, regarding raising the hands in supplication after the prayers. He brought general hadiths and argued with them for the legitimacy of raising the hands in supplication. He fell into the same example I gave you just now. He argued with generalities that the practice of them was not established from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). He (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed thousands of prayers with his Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), and he used to supplicate after the prayers with short phrases. But it did not come from him, nor in one hadith, that he raised his hands, let alone that he faced his Companions and he supplicated and his Companions said "Ameen" to his supplication. This is something that did not occur. So those who recommend raising the hands after the prayer and recommend gathering in supplication after the prayer are like those people who gathered in prayer in the Sunnah before the prayer in congregation, arguing with the generalities of the hadiths, which are established from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), but the practice of this part of this general text was not established from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and the righteous Salaf. So the leaving by the Salaf of the practice of this part that is within the general text indicates that it is not intended. And therefore it was said: "Every good is in following those who came before, and every evil is in the innovation of those who came after."
If it had been good, they would have preceded us to it. Therefore, it is obligatory for us, O students of knowledge, to remember this reality so that we do not fall into religious innovation while we are fighting religious innovation. We fall into innovation without realizing it and without being aware of it, due to heedlessness regarding innovation that we do not realize and are not aware of, because of heedlessness regarding this great principle: that what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) left of acts of worship, the act of worship is his leaving it, and what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did of acts of worship, the act of worship is his doing it. For this reason, some of the later scholars, among the most precise, divided the Sunnah into a subtle division, saying: The Sunnah is divided into two parts: a practical Sunnah and a Sunnah of leaving. It is not Turkey, but rather a Sunnah of leaving: a practical Sunnah and a Sunnah of leaving. That is, what we consider to be acts of worship, but we know that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) left that, so the Sunnah is leaving it. The examples before us are many and very many. For example, the adhan is not prescribed for the prayer of the two festivals, the adhan is not prescribed for the prayer for rain, and the adhan is not prescribed for the prayer of the solar and lunar eclipses. Is there a prohibition against the adhan for these prayers? The answer is no, but I say yes: . When the sun was eclipsed in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and he gathered the people on the occasion of the death of his son Ibrahim (peace be upon them both), he delivered a sermon to them and said the famous words: . There was no adhan for this prayer, and it occurred only once in his time (peace and blessings be upon him). So if the adhan had been good, he (peace and blessings be upon him) would have done it and would not have kept it from the people. We praise Allah that the Muslims are still standing by this Sunnah of leaving, but they did not apply this standing consistently. They brought in many acts of worship on the pretext that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) first did not prohibit it, and second, it falls under general texts. So, any act of worship that falls under a general text but was not practiced in the time of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) is not an act of worship, even if it falls under a general text. This is what I wanted to remind you of. We ask Allah to benefit us with what He has taught us and to increase us in knowledge.