If the proponent of religious innovation denies and refutes what contradicts his innovation, how should one deal with him?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : ... ؟
The Shaykh : If he says: "Yes, this is established from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), but I do not accept it," then he is a disbeliever. But if he says: "This is established from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), but his intended meaning is not such and such," then this is considered denial by way of figurative interpretation. The first is denial by way of refutation, and there is a difference between the two. Denial by way of figurative interpretation does not take a person out of Islam, unless there is absolutely no room for it, in which case this interpretation is not accepted from him.
The questioner : What is narrated from Abu 'Ubayd... when the hadith reached him, he said...?
The Shaykh : First, the chain of narration must be authentic.
The questioner : This is narrated in...
The Shaykh : That is, what contradicts a narration, the chain of narration must be authentic. Why? Because in these matters, people may sometimes be biased against a person and narrate from him things that did not happen. Then, if it is authentic and he was in a state of composure, not in a state of debate, because a person in a state of debate may commit grave errors in defending himself, then there is no doubt in his disbelief. And the Mu'tazilah, as you know, their callers are like the callers of the Jahmiyyah.
The Shaykh : If he says: "Yes, this is established from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), but I do not accept it," then he is a disbeliever. But if he says: "This is established from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), but his intended meaning is not such and such," then this is considered denial by way of figurative interpretation. The first is denial by way of refutation, and there is a difference between the two. Denial by way of figurative interpretation does not take a person out of Islam, unless there is absolutely no room for it, in which case this interpretation is not accepted from him.
The questioner : What is narrated from Abu 'Ubayd... when the hadith reached him, he said...?
The Shaykh : First, the chain of narration must be authentic.
The questioner : This is narrated in...
The Shaykh : That is, what contradicts a narration, the chain of narration must be authentic. Why? Because in these matters, people may sometimes be biased against a person and narrate from him things that did not happen. Then, if it is authentic and he was in a state of composure, not in a state of debate, because a person in a state of debate may commit grave errors in defending himself, then there is no doubt in his disbelief. And the Mu'tazilah, as you know, their callers are like the callers of the Jahmiyyah.