Is offering prayers for the innovators considered praise of them? (Asked by Ali Hasan).

Al-Halabi : To complete the issue, my Shaykh, because this issue, as you have noticed, is one of the matters that is frequently discussed today. To complete the research, my professor, I also ask, or I point out, regarding something so that the benefit is complete, if Allah wills. And this is something mentioned by the brothers who adopt these issues. They say: "When we say that offering prayers for them is not obligatory, it is permissible. We do not forbid or prohibit offering prayers for them, but we refrain from it so that it does not become a type of praise, certification, or commendation for the people of innovation. These are people for whom we may not say, for example, that they are innovators, and we rule that they are innovators, meaning from the great ones. But for example, we do not praise them, and we do not say they are imams. For example, if the mention of al-Nawawi comes up, we do not say 'Imam al-Nawawi said.' Rather, they sometimes avoid quoting from them and attributing to them. Even some of our brothers, in a lecture of his, quoted from some of these people—meaning, in reality, Salafi quotes that support the methodology—and they said to him: 'How can you quote from these people?' And by 'these people' I do not mean, my Shaykh, that they are, for example, Ibn Hajar or al-Nawawi, but rather he quoted, for example, from Sayyid Qutb and Muhammad Qutb. So they said: 'How can you quote from these people, and these people are known to be not Salafis? So you, in your capacity as a Salafi, if you quote from them, it is as if you are praising them, and thereby you tell people that these are Salafis. And this is a way of deceiving people with these people, so that perhaps they become like them in innovation, deviation, and distance from the straight path. So, my Shaykh, if you see the comment on this..."

The Shaykh : I do not believe that this is their intention. And secondly, if this were their intention—that it is a method of awareness—I would say: Do the people you referred to read *Fath al-Bari* or not? Which of the two is it? Assume it is an error on their part. If it is said they do not read it, then from where do they understand *Sahih al-Bukhari* in terms of commentary, jurisprudence, disagreement, terminology, and hadith, and so on? They will not find in the commentaries on *al-Bukhari* in the entire world a Salafi. They will not find a Salafi who explains *al-Bukhari* as we want it explained. And even if a commentary is found, it will be found in commentaries that are merely outlines. As for this vast ocean of knowledge, which is open to the author of *Fath al-Bari*—he does not find this in any of the books that have dealt with *Sahih al-Bukhari*. So they will lose a great deal of knowledge. If they intend or imply by this statement a warning to people, among the things they warn about, that they do not benefit from the words of this Imam, and that they have lost knowledge, while they could have combined bringing benefit and repelling harm, as is the case with scholars now. There is no scholar in the world, after al-Iskandari and after al-Nawawi, up to today, who can do without benefiting from their two commentaries: this one for *al-Bukhari* and that one for *Muslim*. And yet, when they benefit from their books or from their two books, they know that in many issues they are Ash'aris and contrary to the methodology of the pious predecessors. So they were able, with their knowledge and not their ignorance, to take from these two books, or from their authors, the knowledge that benefits them, and to turn away from what harms them and does not benefit them. My intention is to say that I fear, and I fear greatly, that behind this sweet-talking is a warning against benefiting from their books. And in that case, there is a loss. And if they say, 'No, we benefit from their two books, and we read them and teach them as well,' then what is the benefit of this method of refraining from offering prayers for them, which is permissible as we said at the beginning of the speech? And what is the benefit or the fruit of their saying, 'We do not say that it is not permissible to offer prayers for them, but we do not offer prayers for them'? Why? Because they fell into innovation? We mentioned earlier that not everyone who falls into innovation has innovation attributed to them, and not everyone who falls into disbelief has disbelief attributed to them. One is clothed in disbelief, and the other is clothed in innovation. We said this. So this reservation has no benefit. And my brother, are the Salafis and the Khalafis the same? Did the scholars from whom we inherited this good call hold the same position toward such imams as these, or as this new generation that claims Salafism? Those earlier scholars were like these? No, the opposite is correct. It should be that these people are like those who preceded us in this good call. Is that not the case? Abu 'Abd al-Rahman, have you finished?

The questioner : By Allah, I do not know. Perhaps it all leads to the same end, my Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : So now the answer is brief, because the methodology... small details related to declaring someone an innovator and declaring someone a disbeliever.