If a leader among the leaders of the Sunnah deviates in a matter of creed, is he misguided or is he a jurist who has a reward?

The questioner : In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Our brothers who came from the West a long time ago have a large collection of questions, and each of these questions requires a long time, but we will choose some of them, and perhaps Allah (Mighty and Majestic) will grant us the time to answer them, and we will have answers for these questions that they wrote. We will choose from them not in order, but randomly. The first question: If a leader among the leaders deviates in a matter of religion and creed, such as denying some of the attributes, is he misguided or is he a jurist who has a reward? This is the question.

The Shaykh : Do you mean a leader who is a scholar?

The questioner : Yes, indeed.

The Shaykh : The answer to this question relates to his saying (peace and blessings be upon him) . That is because this hadith, although it is well-known among scholars for its use in legal rulings and the issues they call branch matters, without using this hadith in the fundamental or creedal issues, and although this is well-known among the scholars of legal theory, it is beyond doubt that the hadith includes ijtihad in both of the matters mentioned, whether it is a branch or a root, whether it is creed or a legal ruling. The important thing is that the Muslim scholar does not throw such words around carelessly; rather, he exercises ijtihad in knowing the ruling of his Lord in everything that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) has obligated His servants, whether it is a branch or a root, whether it is jurisprudence or creed. It is known that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) says in the clear text of the Noble Qur'an . And the verse requires us to be alert to its true meaning, because the apparent meaning of the verse is , meaning by his person. And this is without doubt the first step of the Messenger's mission, but the intended meaning is not the person of the Messenger himself, but rather the call of the Messenger (peace be upon him) is more important than the person. We will bring you the issue with two very easy examples. A Messenger was sent to a people, and among these people was a deaf man, so he did not hear the call of the Messenger. A Messenger was sent to his people, but he did not hear the call of this Messenger, so the proof of Allah was not established against him. And measure by that.The Shaykh : The perishing, meaning the old and the like, and the small children. So, although they were in the time when the Messenger was sent to their people, the call did not reach them. This is the first example. Now reverse the call of this Messenger; it reached the second generation, and they did not see the Messenger nor hear his call directly from him, but the call reached them. Does the Noble Verse include them? The answer is yes. . So, either the proof is established by the Messenger directly, or by someone else who conveys his message, as he conveyed it to his people. So, the proof is established by the arrival of the call to the one obligated.
And the call, as we mentioned earlier, may be related to creed, or it may be related to a legal ruling. So, if we assume a person to whom the call of a Prophet was correctly conveyed regarding a legal ruling, and yet he denied this ruling, his denial—and I affirm what I said earlier—that the ruling reached him, as if he had heard the ruling directly from the Prophet or the Messenger, and yet he denied it, then this makes him a disbeliever.
On the contrary, another person to whom the call of the Messenger did not reach regarding a certain creed. Let us give an example. We say: such as the creed of the punishment of the grave, or the questioning by Munkar and Nakir, and the like of the unseen matters that fall under the general meaning of His saying (Glorified and Exalted is He) . This is the second example. The second man, to whom the call of the Messenger did not reach regarding our example, the punishment of the grave, is not obligated, he is not responsible, if he does not believe in the punishment of the grave, because the proof did not reach him and was not established against him, if we know this reality.
At that time, we return to the original question, namely, a leader among the leaders of the Muslims, whether his error is related to creed or his error is related to a legal ruling, he is not held accountable if the proof did not reach him, and the opposite is exactly the opposite. Everyone to whom the proof reached, whether in creed or in jurisprudence, and he denied it, is the one against whom the proof of Allah was established. So, that one is saved and this one is perishing. So, there is no difference between one who falls into the error of denying one of the attributes, for example, the divine attributes, if his denial is not out of stubbornness or denial, but rather out of his ijtihad, even if this ijtihad was an error on his part. Here, the hadith that we began the answer to this question with applies: . Therefore, what is widespread in this time, that one who errs in the fundamentals or in creed is not excused, this generalization is a very clear error, and it is not correct for a Muslim to adopt it.

The questioner : In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Returning to the first question before we move to the second question; since one of the brothers wants to inquire about a detail of the question or the answer, I do not know.