Continuation of the discussion on the division of some callers to Islam of the Sunnah into customary and non-customary, and the benefits and harms that result from this division

The Shaykh : The point from this hadith is that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) encourages in this hadith the revival of a Sunnah that people have abandoned for one reason or another. Negligence is one of these reasons, ignorance is one of these reasons, and people’s preoccupation with worldly life is one of these reasons. So a Muslim stands up and revives a Sunnah, and revives a form of worship from the forms of worship that have become neglected and abandoned, and he revives it and people follow his example in it. He is then recorded the reward of it and the reward of everyone who acts upon it until the Day of Resurrection, without anything being deducted from their rewards. This hadith is explicit in its indication in this area. And there is another hadith that is more explicit in its indication, but our scholarly duty and scholarly integrity require us to mention this hadith because of its greater explicitness in indication than the previous one, with a note on the weakness of its chain of narration. As for its text, it is: to the end of the hadith, exactly like the previous hadith, but it is explicit in its indication as you hear. That one says: This requires some jurisprudence and knowledge, so it is no wonder that this authentic hadith became a cause for a veil to settle over the hearts of many scholars, let alone students of knowledge, let alone the general public, such that they understood from this hadith that there is a good religious innovation in Islam. Meanwhile, it is not in the first authentic hadith, and it is not in this authentic hadith that it is permissible for a Muslim to introduce a religious innovation in the religion of Allah that has no basis in the Book of Allah, nor in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah, nor in what our righteous predecessors (may Allah be pleased with them) were upon. There is nothing of this in it. But some people used it as evidence that there is a good religious innovation. That is because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: So they interpreted to mean “whoever innovates.” Thus, according to the claim of these people who interpret the hadith other than its correct interpretation, there is a good religious innovation in Islam, just as there is a bad religious innovation. And for that reason, they take offense at us, we who are followers of the Salaf, if Allah wills, when we say that every religious innovation is misguidance. And what a wonder it would be if this statement of ours had come from us through independent legal reasoning, citation, and derivation, perhaps they would have had some excuse. But this statement of ours is the statement of our Prophet (may the prayers and peace of Allah be upon him), who repeated it on many different and varied occasions to establish this principle in the minds of the Ummah so that they would not go astray after him (peace be upon him) and suffer. So they interpret this hadith, which established this general principle, contrary to its explicit indication. And unfortunately, this prohibited thing occurred, despite the Messenger (may the prayers and peace be upon him) striving to repeat this blessed phrase on every on many occasions, the most important of which is that it is from the Sermon of Necessity. It is a section of the Sermon of Necessity that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) taught his Companions, and he (peace and blessings be upon him) would repeat this sermon before the Friday sermon. And you hear, unfortunately, I say, few of the preachers who begin the Friday sermon and other sermons with the Sermon of Necessity: In every Friday sermon, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) would repeat it and repeat in it this great and noble principle: Likewise, it was on another occasion and another, such as the hadith of al-‘Arba’ ibn Sari‘ah, who said (may Allah be pleased with him): The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) gave us a sermon that made our hearts tremble and our eyes shed tears. So we said, O Messenger of Allah, give us a bequest. He said: The hadith of al-‘Arba’ ends here, unlike the hadith of the Sermon of Necessity, which has that addition: So the matter is as Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his great book, truly, *Iqtida' al-Sirat al-Mustaqim Mukhalafat Ahl al-Jahim*. He said, refuting those who divide religious innovation into five categories: This is not possible, because if the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) had intended to specify this phrase: he would have specified it on some day. He repeats this phrase to the hearing of the people, and then he utters it thus always and forever, and he does not come even with a gesture or a hint that this is from the general that is specified, as the jurists say in some texts. On the contrary, he left it thus absolute so that it remains thus a continuous principle until the Day of Resurrection.
This principle, that every religious innovation is misguidance, is exactly like another principle that cannot be subject to any specification whatsoever, which is his saying (may the prayers and peace be upon him): No, and no. So when the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) repeated this phrase, it means that he blocked the path for anyone who tries to interpret it or specify it with some interpretations, as you heard in the hadith of Jarir ibn Abdullah, where he (may the prayers and peace be upon him) said: So they interpreted “whoever innovates” as “whoever introduces.” And I said, and I continue to say, that this interpretation, if it were brought by a non-Arab like me, Al-Albani, no matter how much he learns the Arabic language, the matter is as they say: “blood is insidious.” So if a non-Arab like me interpreted his saying (may the prayers and peace be upon him): as some scholars interpreted it, meaning: whoever introduces a good religious innovation in Islam, that would be a grave error on his part, and it would be an act that proves by it that he is a non-Arab who will not become Arabized after that. Why? Because if we say the meaning of his saying (may the prayers and peace be upon him): meaning “whoever introduces,” you have just now known from the context and the occasion of this noble hadith that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said this hadith on the occasion of encouraging charity, and there was no religious innovation whatsoever in that gathering. So if we say the meaning of the hadith, as they claim, is “whoever introduces a good religious innovation in Islam,” we ask them: where is the religious innovation in that gathering? Even the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) mentioned its occasion: “whoever introduces a good religious innovation in Islam.” There is absolutely nothing in the gathering that can be said to be a religious innovation. If there was nothing in the gathering? It was charity. After that, the Messenger (may the prayers and peace be upon him) encouraged them with the verse and with some of his hadiths to give charity to these Bedouins. The first of them stood up and brought what was easy for him, then the others followed him and brought what was easy for them. So he (may the prayers and peace be upon him) said: So it is a very grave error to interpret: here as meaning “whoever introduces,” because this interpretation does not match reality, and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), who is truly the most eloquent of those who spoke the Arabic language.
And I also consider this an opportunity to mention that this phrase: is a fabricated report in terms of narration, but correct in terms of meaning, because he is the pure Arab to whom Allah revealed the Qur'an in a clear Arabic tongue. He is truly the most eloquent of those who spoke with the Arabic tongue. However, it is not correct to say that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) spoke this hadith: But he is truly the most eloquent of those who spoke with the Arabic tongue. How befitting it is for the most eloquent of people to say that there is no occasion for this to have occurred in the gathering? It is an innovation to say that whoever innovates in Islam an innovation... This is a repulsive statement and a completely rejected interpretation. Then we say something else, by way of alerting our brothers, the students of knowledge and all listeners: if we were to argue, hypothetically, that the meaning of the hadith is as they claim—and it is certainly false—we would further clarify its falsity due to this interpretation. We would say: if the meaning of the hadith "Whoever innovates in Islam a good innovation and whoever innovates in Islam a bad innovation," what is the standard, what is the criterion, and what is the rule for knowing the good innovation from the bad innovation? Is it reason or transmission? If their answer is that it is reason, they have departed from being, as they claim, from the people of the Sunnah and the community, and they have associated themselves with the people of deviation and misguidance who say what is known among scholars as "rational beautification and rational disapproval." The Mu'tazilah, among their deviations in which they opposed the majority of Muslim scholars, say what you have heard: rational beautification and rational disapproval. This means they claim that what reason beautifies is good in the sight of Allah, and what reason disapproves of is ugly in the sight of Allah, (Glorified and Exalted is He) from what they associate. What their reason judges to be good should be good, and what their reason judges to be ugly should be ugly. Therefore, all schools of thought agreed, not only the school of the people of the Sunnah, on the falsity of the Mu'tazilah's position regarding rational beautification and rational disapproval. But the reality, unfortunately, is that many of those who claim to belong to the people of the Sunnah and the community, their inner state expresses that in their hearts they are with the Mu'tazilah, meaning that they beautify and disapprove with their minds. This is very clear when you discuss with one of the professors, or one of the doctors, or one of the fanatical, sect-bound shaykhs. You tell them that such and such is an innovation, and he says to you, "My brother, what is wrong with it? It contains the remembrance of Allah and sending blessings upon the Messenger of Allah. Are you forbidding the remembrance of Allah and sending blessings upon the Messenger of Allah?" His reason has not submitted, his mind has not submitted to Allah and His Messenger, as He, (Mighty and Majestic), said: So they referred it back to their minds. This is implicit Mu'tazilah. They disavow Mu'tazilah and declare the Mu'tazilah misguided, and some of them may go so far as to declare them disbelievers. Nevertheless, they meet them in many of the detailed rulings when they judge with their minds.
Now, we are dealing with this hadith, which is from: If we hypothetically accept that the meaning of "whoever initiates" is "whoever innovates," then is the innovation according to our custom or according to our Shari'ah? Who beautifies? Who disapproves? It is the Shari'ah. In that case, we will say, my brother, if you claim that this new matter is a good sunnah, then the good is only known by the explicit text of the Shari'ah. So we say: bring your proof if you are truthful. And they will never find any evidence for the beautification of an innovation that has no basis in the Sunnah. After this comment, to clarify that this hadith cannot be used as evidence for what contradicts the previous rule: The intended meaning of the hadith, as I mentioned earlier, is to encourage Muslims to revive acts of worship and sunnahs, whether they are recommended or emphasized, let alone if they are from the obligatory duties. So in this hadith, there is a strong encouragement to revive what people have neglected and left behind due to the reasons previously mentioned and others. Why? So that he may have the reward of it and the reward of whoever follows him in this revival until the Day of Resurrection.
I mentioned the other hadith, and as I said, I will kill two birds with one stone. First, it is explicit in explaining the intended meaning of this authentic hadith: and so on. And second, to remind you that if you see a hadith like this in some books—and you will certainly see it, because it is in one of the six books, specifically Sunan al-Tirmidhi—this hadith was narrated by al-Tirmidhi, but in its chain there is a man named Kathir ibn 'Abd Allah ibn 'Umar ibn 'Awf al-Muzani, who is accused of lying. He narrated the hadith, perhaps he narrated it according to the meaning that came to his mind based on the authentic hadith, so he said: But this explicit meaning here in this weakly chained hadith has come in the authentic hadith in a way that suffices us for it. And this is one of our arguments against this interpretation, or against this innovated division of the Sunnah: a familiar sunnah and an unfamiliar sunnah. I am hearing this for the first time. Do you have knowledge of this division?

The questioner: A new knowledge.

The Shaykh: Allahu Akbar. The hadith I am referring to now says the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him): So in this hadith, there is an encouragement for Muslims to be among the strangers, and the characteristic of these strangers is that they repair what people have corrupted of the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).

The questioner: I mentioned. This phrase or expression reminded me; it exists and we have heard it from some of them, but with different wording, which is.

The Shaykh: Which is?

The questioner: A known innovation is better than an unknown sunnah.

The Shaykh: Yes, that is correct.

The questioner : Yes, indeed.

The Shaykh: Unfortunately, if they have a predecessor.

The questioner : Yes, indeed.

The Shaykh: But he has successors.

The questioner: Yes, so I remembered now.

The Shaykh: A familiar sunnah and an unfamiliar sunnah. So the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), as he encouraged Muslims in the first authentic hadith to revive the Sunnah so that the reward of it and the reward of whoever acts upon it is written for them, likewise he encouraged here the Muslims in general to be among the strangers, and the characteristic of these strangers is that they repair what people have corrupted of my Sunnah after me. My answer ends here, as far as I can recall now, regarding this division which has no basis. But yes.

The questioner: The answer ends here.

The Shaykh: But does not mean my speech has ended?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh: There is a difference. There is no doubt that if we proceed from this innovated division, the matter will certainly continue to decline and collapse until all the sunnahs die and the innovations come to life and take their place. And there is no scholar in the world, even if he is from the later generations, who can say such a thing: dividing the Sunnah into these two categories. This innovated division contradicts those explicit principles that encourage all Muslims, and encourage the strangers who have felicity and a good return. Felicity, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said in the authentic hadith: This tree is for these strangers. What is the characteristic of these strangers? So this division is not only an innovation that contradicts the generality of his (peace and blessings be upon him) saying: But this is an innovation, or this division is an innovation that contradicts all the statements of the scholars of Muslims when they said that every innovation that contradicts the Sunnah is a misguided innovation, even if they say that there is a good innovation, because they said the good innovation is on the condition that it does not contradict the Sunnah. How is it when they have contradicted many sunnahs here? So if a person devoted himself to tracking the texts, he would find many, many, and very many things. And the speech ends here in answer to that question.

The questioner: There remains a fatwa at the end of the question, Shaykh, that appeared from you.

The Shaykh : Please.

The questioner: And it is considering the public benefit and harm, and what is the criterion for this consideration?

The Shaykh : There is no doubt that this rule, as a scientific principle, is entirely correct in its validity, namely that removing harm takes precedence over seeking benefit. "Removing harm takes precedence over seeking benefit" is a rule in which there is no issue. However, I observe that some of the contemporary scholars today make this rule their crutch and their foundation in advising people not to pay attention to the neglected, abandoned, and forsaken Sunnahs, under the claim of removing harm. How strange it is! Instead of advising the general public and saying to them, "O people, if you hear from some people a Sunnah and they come to you with a hadith from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) to support this Sunnah, whether it is from his saying (peace and blessings be upon him) or his doing, beware that one of you rushes to hastily reject those who bring this Sunnah," because: to the end of the hadith. Instead of advising those who oppose the Sunnah and wage war against it, they turn their advice toward those who revive the Sunnah, under the pretext of removing harm before seeking benefit. Glory to Allah! Why did you not say this to those who corrupt the earth and corrupt the Sunnah and do not reform it? Those are the ones who are more deserving of this advice being directed to them, not to the supporters of the Sunnah, the followers of the Sunnah, and the revivers of the Sunnah.
As for the criterion for this established rule, for example, if acting upon a Sunnah leads to consequences, and we say, in truth, regarding people who have absolutely no knowledge of the Sunnah, they have absolutely no knowledge of the Sunnah, and if reviving this Sunnah suddenly and in one burst, as we say in our region of Sham: "al-'Alawiyah" (a sudden, unprepared action), leads to the shedding of blood, there is no doubt that this harm is not equal to the benefit of acting upon this Sunnah. Because this Sunnah requires preparation and gradual introduction, step by step, so that before anything else, people hear that there is a Sunnah. For example, let us take the example of raising the hands at the bowing and raising them from it. This is in the lands of the non-Arabs, in many of them, such as the lands of the Turks, the Albanians, and the Yugoslavs, who do not know raising the hands except at the opening takbir. So if a man surprises them by raising his hands at the bowing, there is no doubt that harm will occur. But he must prepare for reviving this Sunnah by reviving knowledge of the Sunnah, by reminding them of the hadiths that urge Muslims to adhere to the Sunnah and warn against religious innovation, and the reports from the righteous predecessors, and he continues with this for days until he sees that people are ready to accept one of the abandoned and neglected Sunnahs. This is the criterion, approximately. And the evidence for this is that when the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) entered Mecca as a victor, successful, and rewarded, and he entered and prayed two rak'ahs inside the Ka'bah in gratitude to Allah (Mighty and Majestic) for this great conquest and then exited, his wife A'ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) wanted to do what her Prophet did and pray two rak'ahs inside the Ka'bah. And you know, unfortunately, even now the door of the Ka'bah is in the state it was in during the pre-Islamic age of ignorance, elevated, so one cannot enter the interior of the Ka'bah except by a ladder. And this ladder, unfortunately, is not placed, I do not say for the general people, perhaps it is correct to say for some of the major criminals among them.

The questioner : For some of the major criminals among them.

The Shaykh : For some of the major criminals among them, such was the matter in the time of the Messenger (peace be upon him). So he said to her, to facilitate for her following the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family): All of you know the stone enclosed by this arch of the wall, for it is part of the Ka'bah Here is the point with the ground, not a ladder, like any mosque, you enter from this door and exit from this door. This is what was built upon ease . The Messenger (peace be upon him) did not do that, and to this day, unfortunately, this reform has not been carried out, as if the Muslims have held on to his (peace be upon him) leaving this reform. And here I must make a division, not like that division which is a precise scientific division. The Sunnah is divided into two categories. Did I remind you of this division? It is this hadith. The Sunnah is divided into two categories: a practical Sunnah and a Sunnah of leaving. And beware, if you read this division in some books that are not problematic and well-regulated, you will read it as a practical Sunnah and a Sunnah of being left. No, it is a practical Sunnah and a Sunnah of leaving. That is, what did the Messenger do? So the matter for us is to follow him (peace be upon him). And a Sunnah of leaving means that the Messenger (peace be upon him) left it and did not do it, so the Sunnah for us is to leave it. This division is not like that division; this is for the right, like when you pronounce. And the example? There are many examples. And due to the ignorance of the masses of the later generations of this fair and correct division, they fell into religious innovation in the dozens, hundreds, and thousands of innovations, and unfortunately, they think that they are doing well. We all know that the adhan for the five prayers is from the Sunnah, and I say this is from the obligatory. But there is a disagreement among the jurists: is the adhan a Sunnah or obligatory? Some say one thing and some say another, and among them are those who said it is a distinctive feature of Islam and that it is not permissible to neglect it and it must be performed. And he took a middle position between the people, that it is a confirmed Sunnah, and between it being obligatory. So suppose the adhan for the five prayers is from the Sunnah, but there are other prayers. Is the adhan prescribed for them, for example, the prayer for rain, the prayer of the two festivals, the prayer of the solar and lunar eclipses? The adhan is not prescribed for these prayers. What is the proof? Much of the ignorance of that great rule: every innovation is misguidance. If you say to him, "My brother, this is an innovation, the Messenger did not do it, the Companions did not do it," he says to you, "My brother, do you have a prohibition against it?" He wants a specific prohibition against this newly invented matter. We say, first, it is not necessary that there be a prohibition against every detail and that there be a command for every detail. There are general rules, and our rule is: every innovation is misguidance, and every misguidance is in the Fire. So there is a prohibition, but its understanding is from its understanding, and its knowledge is from its knowledge, and its ignorance is from its ignorance.
The summary is that these prayers we mentioned last, other than the five obligatory prayers, why do we not call the adhan for them? Because the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) did not call the adhan for them. So, what the Messenger left, it is a sunnah for us to leave it; what the Messenger did, it is a sunnah for us to do it. Now, let us return to the story of the Ka'bah. He (peace be upon him) said: and so on. Unfortunately, the Ka'bah remained as the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) left it, or as he left it for them, as if they applied this rule: the Messenger left this, so we leave it. But the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)—look with me now at the fiqh and the precision of fiqh regarding the texts—why did the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) leave it? He left it for a cause that existed at that time. He said: Well, my brother, after a hundred years and two hundred years, praise be to Allah, Islam spread, and there were no longer just one group but many groups who were newly converted from shirk (associating partners with Allah). So, it was obligatory for some of the Muslim rulers and governors to rectify what the polytheists had corrupted, which the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had left for a cause. And this cause has ceased. One of the principles of usul al-fiqh (the principles of jurisprudence) is that the ruling revolves with the cause, in its existence and its absence. So, when the cause ceases, the effect ceases. The polytheists ceased, and Allah (Mighty and Majestic) purified the Arabian Peninsula from shirk and its people. So, it should have been upon some of the Muslim rulers to return the Ka'bah to the foundation of Ibrahim (peace be upon him), as the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said. Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) willed, by His wisdom, that one of the reformers from among the Companions and the sons of the Companions, on the day it was decreed for him to be a ruler in the Hijaz, namely Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr (may Allah be pleased with them both), should do so. You know, unfortunately, the conflict that arose between the Umayyads and Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr, in that Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr was pledged allegiance as caliph in the Hijaz, while the caliphate at that time had passed to Mu'awiyah, then to some of his sons and the Banu Umayyah. Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr, as you all know, his mother was Asma', and Asma' is the sister of Aisha, and both of them are daughters of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq. So, Aisha is the aunt of Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr. Aisha is the one in the story you heard earlier: and so on. So, Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr seized this opportunity and returned the Ka'bah to the foundation of Ibrahim (peace be upon him). But for a wisdom that Allah wills and Allah knows, Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr was killed and crucified, unfortunately, there in Makkah. And the Umayyads secured their rule, and the caliph at that time was, as I recall, Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan. And among the misfortunes of this world, and the allurements of this world, and the allurements of authority and thrones, is that this man, Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan, was among the scholars of the Muslims before he took over the caliphate. When he took over the caliphate, he became another person. And among that was that when he killed Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr and secured his rule, he ordered the rebuilding of the Ka'bah to how it was in the era of jahiliyyah (the pre-Islamic age of ignorance). And one day, while he was on his throne in his kingdom, the story of Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr and his preparation to build the Ka'bah on the foundation of Ibrahim (peace be upon him) came up, as if he was holding a grudge against him. So, one of the people of knowledge, for whom no one takes a blame for the sake of Allah, said: "O Commander of the Faithful, I heard Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr say: Aisha narrated to me from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and he mentioned this hadith." Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan said, regretfully, as they say, "after the destruction of Basra, no destruction of the Ka'bah is more important than the destruction of Basra." He said: "If I had known this hadith, I would have left the Ka'bah on the building of Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr." So, I say, with great regret, after Abd al-Malik returned it to its state in the era of jahiliyyah, no Muslim ruler has arisen to return the Ka'bah to the foundation of Ibrahim (peace be upon him) and abolish this custom by which some people, who do not deserve to enter al-Masjid al-Haram, perhaps let alone enter the interior of the Ka'bah, make two doors for the Ka'bah after they expand its circumference. And people enter from one door and pray in it whoever wishes, and exit from a second door. This is one of the principles of what we can call traffic organization, especially in such crowded places. But unfortunately, most rulers are imitators (taqlid) and do not strive to revive the sunnahs and kill off the bid'ahs (religious innovations). And I believe that the matter in this time is easier; it is the best time in which a Muslim ruler can carry out reform. Why? Because the preparation now, through advertising, radio, television, and other than television, and so on, makes it possible to invade the Muslim world with correct ideas and prepare it for a new reform that does not surprise the world like a sudden shock, causing a revolution. This is very possible and easy if there is someone who cares about reform.
The summary is that the sunnah which the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) left, we must leave it, because we are not more knowledgeable than him, nor more worshipful than him, and neither are his Companions (peace be upon him) and the Salaf (the earliest generations) of good, about whom the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: I have hopefully answered the last part of the question now.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : And you, we want to hear a benefit from you. May Allah reward you with good.
Abu Malik: Whoever rides the sea, he is the master of the waterways.

The Shaykh : May Allah bless you. The sea here, the sea here, and even just the words "May Allah bless you."
Abu Malik: After this knowledge you have attained, may Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : Pour out upon us a word.
Abu Malik: Yes, how?

The Shaykh : Rely on Allah.
Abu Malik: By Allah, O Shaykh, I mean...

The Shaykh : Begin with the Khutbat al-Hajah (the sermon of need) so that knowledge opens up before you.
Abu Malik: The knowledge has disappeared, I mean.

The Shaykh : I don't know if you have time. We do not want to put you in an awkward position with the people, as you see them ready. And if, I mean, we took some of your time and your comfort in the path of Allah: you are but a finger that taps, and in the path of Allah you have not encountered [any obstacle].