Is it correct to describe the ijtihad of one who errs as a bid'ah (religious innovation)? And what is our ruling regarding those who strive to seek the truth and search for it, but are not successful in knowing the methodology?

Al-Halali: There is something in the question regarding the saying, meaning, do we say that the erroneous ijtihad of the mujtahid (scholar qualified to derive rulings) is a bid'ah (religious innovation)?

The questioner : It may be that his ijtihad is in legalizing the haram (forbidden) or prohibiting the halal (lawful), in which case he is mistaken. He may come up with a form of worship that has no basis in the Shari'ah (Islamic sacred law), such as this worship, while exerting effort in ijtihad. In that case, this is a bid'ah (religious innovation); what he brought forth is a bid'ah (religious innovation) from this mujtahid (scholar qualified to derive rulings). He is rewarded for it because he did not say it except through his ijtihad. There is no difference between his error in the haram (forbidden) and the halal (lawful), for in any case he is rewarded, and his falling into bid'ah (religious innovation) in the sense that he desires the Sunnah (the Prophet's way) through erroneous ijtihad or through ijtihad that is wrong. So we do not say his ijtihad is a bid'ah (religious innovation).
Al-Halali: He may fall into bid'ah (religious innovation).
Mashhur: Shaykh (a scholar or teacher), let us return to the same issue, may Allah bless you.

The Shaykh : And may He reward you.
Mashhur: The issue of saying whether he is a mujtahid (scholar qualified to derive rulings) or a mubtadi' (innovator) is tied to the circumstances. But something has become clear to me, or a distinction, that if this person was not a da'i (caller) for this matter, yes, he says it, but he is not enthusiastic about it, he is not a da'i (caller) for it, and sufficient circumstances have not been established to say about him that he is a mubtadi' (innovator). Is it not the case that labeling him as a mubtadi' (innovator) with these two matters—the first matter has insufficient circumstances, and the second matter is that he does not call for it, he is not enthusiastic, he is not a da'i (caller) for it, even though he holds to it? If a man asked him or challenged him, he would say what we see is a bid'ah (religious innovation). I mean, is not wara' (scrupulousness) and distance...

The Shaykh : And he is from the people of knowledge?
Mashhur: He has an engagement with knowledge, like the state of most shaykhs (scholars or teachers) these days who do not know the methodology.

The Shaykh : The shaykhs (scholars or teachers) of these days, you see them transgressing what the Salaf (the earliest generations) of righteousness were upon.
Mashhur: They do not know the methodology; they are lost from it, ignorant.

The Shaykh : They are mubtadi'un (innovators), either excused or not excused. They are mubtadi'un (innovators), without doubt, and this has been answered previously. And therefore I asked you, meaning, are they excused in our view or in Allah's view? Everyone who contradicts an explicit text of the Shari'ah (Islamic sacred law) is, in our view, a contradictor. Either he is a contradictor through ijtihad, in which case he is excused and rewarded, or he is a contradictor without ijtihad. Here we look: if this one who is not a mujtahid (scholar qualified to derive rulings) followed a scholar who is of the type we mentioned just now, then he is excused. Otherwise, he is not excused; he is blameworthy. And so on.
Mashhur: He is through ijtihad, but he does not have a methodology now. Most shaykhs (scholars or teachers) of these days.

The Shaykh : No problem, he does not have a methodology in what? If you please, do you know that his saying, peace and blessings be upon him: What is the meaning of ijtihad in language? It is expending effort. So these shaykhs (scholars or teachers) about whom you say they do not have this methodology, did they expend effort? Especially when the warning came to them, when the sudden events came to them, telling them that you are in error, you are in misguidance, you are contradicting, and so on. Then they do not turn to anything and remain in their misguidance, deluded. These people, without doubt, are not excused because they are not mujtahids (scholars qualified to derive rulings). And I do not think you, Professor Abu Ubaydah, doubt that these shaykhs (scholars or teachers), first, are not mujtahids (scholars qualified to derive rulings). You do not doubt this at all. Second, perhaps it is not correct to say about them or in them that they are muqallids (those who follow a scholar without knowing his evidence). So from where do we say that they are excused?
Mashhur: Some of them, my Shaykh (a scholar or teacher), have a pursuit of knowledge, they have a love for knowledge, they did not know the methodology, they are ignorant of the methodology, completely unaware of it, and the name of Salafiyyah.

The Shaykh : And no one explained the methodology to him.
Mashhur: And this is the state of most university doctors.

The Shaykh : And he is on the path.
Mashhur: And he is on the path of knowledge and searching. Some of them, some are mujtahids (scholars qualified to derive rulings), meaning they read and search. Some of them, I say, and although they are few in reality, they search and find. And perhaps dawn breaks upon him while he is searching, and perhaps this is his constant guidance most days of the week. This is his state. He does not know the Salafi methodology. He knows some aspects of Salafiyyah, or rather some of the actions performed by some of the enthusiastic youth.

The Shaykh : Meaning, those who disapprove of them.
Mashhur: Those who do evil, the negatives, yes. He has a pursuit and breadth, meaning he expends his breadth. The methodology is not clear. He looks at the evidence (dalil) to the extent he can. Yes, am I speaking about this type of people?

The Shaykh : Yes, this type. Now tie your last words to this type: are they excused or not?
Mashhur: Yes.

The Shaykh : In our view or in Allah's view?

The questioner : In our view.

The Shaykh : How do we know? How can we rule that so-and-so among the people is a mujtahid (scholar qualified to derive rulings) and is on the path and striving earnestly to know the truth? How do we know? And I will tell you finally: if you know this from someone, it is not permissible to blame him, let alone misguide him. It is not permissible. But this is not made easy for the general people. So in that case, we say that this one is mistaken, without doubt and without doubt, a mubtadi' (innovator), without doubt and without doubt, because he contradicts the methodology of the Salaf (the earliest generations). As for whether he remains excused and is on the path and has not yet arrived, that is between him and Allah. We are not able to classify people in our view, saying this one is excused and this one is not excused. I may say, not about the disbelievers, the Jews, the Christians, the Zoroastrians, and the polytheists, that there may be excused ones among them. Rather, I say that the Muslims today who fall into shirk (associating partners with Allah) and misguidance, and many of our brothers, the people of hadith and Sunnah (the Prophet's way), do not notice this meaning at all. They immediately say "disbeliever." And we hear the successive fatwas (scholarly legal rulings) from our shaykhs (scholars or teachers) in Saudi Arabia declaring those who abandon prayer as disbelievers. How do we declare these Muslims disbelievers, when they are saturated with fatwas (scholarly legal rulings) from the people of knowledge that abandoning prayer is not disbelief but open sinfulness and lewdness? And therefore, when questions come to them, such as "I married while I was abandoning prayer, was my contract valid or not?" They say, "This contract is not valid," and so on. These people did not notice the aspect we are circling around, that they may be excused. The ignorant Muslims who fall into shirk (associating partners with Allah), we say they fell into shirk (associating partners with Allah), but we do not rule upon them with the implications of this shirk (associating partners with Allah). A fortiori, the one who took the path of knowledge and has not yet arrived to know this truth that we are circling around, which is: "And all good is in following the Salaf (the earliest generations) *** And all evil is in the innovation of the Khalaf (the later generations)." The summary of the matter in our view is that the one is excused whom we know seeks the truth and strives earnestly for it. The one we do not know, we rule by what appears to us, and his account is with Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He. I think this is sufficient for us, O Abu Jabir, for this first session tonight, and if Allah wills, there will be more to come. Give news, my dear.