Is it permissible to introduce a view that the Salaf did not hold?

The Shaykh : By preferring one of these views. Here is the direct answer to the question: It is obligatory for him to prefer one of these views, and it is not permissible for him to invent a new view on his own that has not preceded him. It is not permissible for the later scholars to innovate new views in the interpretation of some of the noble verses, which the Salaf have already interpreted, even if with many views. We must only look and examine these views carefully, or scrutinize them, for they will be in one of two states or forms: either they are of the type of conflicting disagreement where it is not possible to reconcile them all, in which case the means to resort to for this preference is the Sunnah. We give an example of this: the saying of Allah the Exalted If we return to the books of tafsir, we will find a real disagreement. Some say that al-quru' is the plural of qur', which is menstruation, and some say it is purity. In this case, preference is necessary because reconciliation is not possible. The preferred view in my mind is that al-quru' is menstruation. We come to another example, which also has many views: This noble verse which we recite in every rak'ah of all the prayers They differed greatly in explaining the straight path. Some say the straight path is Islam, some say the straight path is the Sunnah, and some say—and this is the strangest thing that appears in tafsir—that the straight path is the ghusl from janabah. So here there is a conflict, but this conflict, as it appears obviously, is not a conflict of contradiction and opposition, but rather, as Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) says, it is a difference of variety, not a difference of contradiction. So from these different views in interpreting such a verse, the broadest and most comprehensive meaning that is appropriate to the noble verse , is taken. If it is interpreted as Islam, the Sunnah is included in it, and wudu, purity, ghusl, janabah, and everything that Islam brought are included a fortiori. So this is not an interpretation of contradiction, but an interpretation of variety. Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him, and may He reward him well for Islam and the Muslims) says that the one who interprets, for example, the straight path as the ghusl from janabah, his interpretation is of the type of illustration, like an example he gives, and not of the type of interpretation of the general text in the noble Qur'an meaning that the straight path is only the ghusl from janabah. No. Rather, this came from him on the occasion of an example he presents to those who hear his advice or exhortation, so he comes as if he is interpreting the path literally, and that is not the case. For this reason, we say it is necessary to return to the specialized scholars in tafsir. If they mention views from the Salaf, from the Companions, the Tabi'un, and others, these views appear to be contradictory and conflicting, but their reality is that none of that is the case, because they all meet with the word or with the general, comprehensive interpretation, as we mentioned earlier in the example . And if they differ, as they differed in the interpretation of al-quru', then here it is necessary for the scholar, and not for any other person, to resort to preferring one view over another. And then it is not permissible for him to come with an interpretation that has not preceded him. So the Muslim who wants to be among those who follow the path of the believers and do not deviate from it, as our Lord (Mighty and Majestic) warned in the noble verse against deviation, in His saying like , it is certain and without doubt that any person who comes to any verse in which the specialized scholars in tafsir have said one, two, three, or four views, and then one of the later scholars adds to them a new view, and not only adds to them but surpasses them by declaring them all wrong, and claims that the correct opinion is this view that he invented and innovated, without doubt he has gone out of the path of the believers and is included in the warning of the previous verse . So tafsir must be one in which the Muslim is restricted to the transmitted tafsir, and with this detail that I mentioned earlier. But here is an exception that must be mentioned: without doubt, there are verses whose characteristic is that they may speak as a general principle, not speaking about what relates to 'aqidah, not speaking about what relates to rulings, and not speaking about what relates to morals and behavior, but they may speak about the cosmic verses, about which Allah (Mighty and Majestic) said: Here, the discerning Muslim who knows both languages—the language of the Shari'ah, i.e., the Qur'an and the Sunnah, and the customary language, i.e., the language of the Arabs—such a person can interpret a verse from these verses that does not relate at all to anything we mentioned, starting from 'aqidah and ending with behavior, but only relates to a cosmic verse. Here, he can come with an opinion that may be contrary to an opinion issued by some of them in the past, following the apparent meaning of the verse. This restriction only, we can be lenient in it, and we can say that science can come to discover the reality of a cosmic verse that people were unaware of, because they were passing over it as a verse.