Reading from the author's words, with commentary and collation of manuscripts: "And the root of misguidance among the people of the earth originated from these two
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The reader: "And the root of misguidance among the people of the earth originated from these two: either adopting a religion that Allah has not legislated, or prohibiting what Allah has not prohibited. For this reason, the principle upon which Imam Ahmad and other imams"
The Shaykh : The first is in affirmation and the second is in prohibition. Adopting a religion that Allah has not legislated is affirmation, and prohibition is negative. The root of misguidance returns to this, either affirmation or negation.
The reader: "For this reason, the principle upon which Imam Ahmad and other imams based their schools of jurisprudence is that the actions of creation are divided into acts of worship which they adopt as a religion, benefiting from them in the Hereafter, or in this world and the Hereafter, and customs from which they benefit in their livelihoods. The principle regarding acts of worship is that nothing is legislated in them except what Allah has legislated, and the principle regarding customs is that nothing is prohibited from them except what Allah has prohibited. And these"
The Shaykh : These two principles are opposite. The first principle prohibits any act of worship except with evidence, and the second principle, what is permissible? Everything is permissible except with evidence, meaning it is allowed in everything except with evidence. Yes, correct.
The reader: "And these newly established seasons are prohibited because of the religion that has been introduced in them, through which people seek nearness to Allah, as we will mention, if Allah wills. Know that this rule, which is arguing that something is a religious innovation to prove that it is disliked"
The Shaykh : And it is, and it is
The reader: "And it is arguing that something is a religious innovation to prove that it is disliked. It is a great, general rule, and its completion lies in answering what opposes it. This is because some people say: religious innovations are divided into two categories: good and bad. This is evidenced by the statement of 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) regarding the tarawih prayer: "What a good innovation this is," and by evidence of some statements and actions that were introduced after the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) that are not disliked, or are good, due to the evidence indicating that from scholarly consensus or analogical reasoning. Perhaps also added to this, by those who have not mastered the principles of knowledge, are the many customs and similar things that many people are upon, and they make this also one of the proofs for the goodness of some religious innovations. Either by making what he and those he knows have customary into a consensus, even if he does not know the opinion of the rest of the Muslims regarding it, or by disliking its abandonment because of what he has become accustomed to, similar to those who, when it is said to them: "Come to what Allah has revealed and to the Messenger," say: "It is sufficient for us what we found our fathers upon." And how often some of"
The Shaykh : And how, and how
The reader: "And how often some of those who distinguish themselves among those who claim affiliation with knowledge or worship argue with proofs that are not from the principles of knowledge upon which the religion relies. The point is that these texts indicating the condemnation of religious innovations are opposed by what indicates the goodness of some religious innovations, either from correct legal evidence, or from the arguments of some people upon which some ignorant people or those who interpret in general rely. Then these opponents have two positions here
The first is that they say: if it is established that some religious innovations are good and some are bad, then the bad is what the Lawgiver has prohibited, and what the Lawgiver has been silent about regarding religious innovations is not bad, but may be good. This is what some of them say.
And the second position is that it is said about a specific religious innovation: this religious innovation is good because it contains such and such benefit. And these opponents say: not every religious innovation is misguidance.
And the answer: As for the statement that the worst of matters are their newly introduced ones, and that every religious innovation is misguidance, and every misguidance is in the Fire, and the warning against newly introduced matters: this is the text of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), so it is not permissible for anyone to refute its indication of the condemnation of religious innovations, and whoever disputes its indication is one who opposes. And as for the opposing arguments, the answer to them is"
The Shaykh : Correct, this is clear. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is undoubtedly the most eloquent of creation, and he is the most knowledgeable about creation, and he is the most sincere to creation. There is no doubt in this. So if he says "every religious innovation is misguidance, and every misguidance is in the Fire," and all of these are forms of generality, and their status is established by consensus. No one opposes that "every" indicates generality. So whoever claims that something from the newly introduced matters is a recommended practice or permissible, upon him is the evidence.
And it is not possible for us to contradict this decisive generality upon which the scholars have agreed that it is from the forms of generality, merely with analogies, defective analogies. As for the opposing arguments he referred to, the author answered them.
And at that time we say: dividing religious innovation into good and bad is a false statement that opposes the hadith. It is as Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Yes, "so it is not permissible for anyone to refute its indication of the condemnation of religious innovations, and whoever disputes that is one who opposes". Opposing Allah and His Messenger is not a trivial matter. We say: every religious innovation is misguidance, and there is nothing good in religious innovations. But if he says that this is a religious innovation and it is good, then either it is not a religious innovation and he thinks it is, or it is not good and he thinks it is good. It must be one of these. As for establishing that it is a religious innovation and that it is good, that is impossible, and it is never possible. Yes.
The Shaykh : The first is in affirmation and the second is in prohibition. Adopting a religion that Allah has not legislated is affirmation, and prohibition is negative. The root of misguidance returns to this, either affirmation or negation.
The reader: "For this reason, the principle upon which Imam Ahmad and other imams based their schools of jurisprudence is that the actions of creation are divided into acts of worship which they adopt as a religion, benefiting from them in the Hereafter, or in this world and the Hereafter, and customs from which they benefit in their livelihoods. The principle regarding acts of worship is that nothing is legislated in them except what Allah has legislated, and the principle regarding customs is that nothing is prohibited from them except what Allah has prohibited. And these"
The Shaykh : These two principles are opposite. The first principle prohibits any act of worship except with evidence, and the second principle, what is permissible? Everything is permissible except with evidence, meaning it is allowed in everything except with evidence. Yes, correct.
The reader: "And these newly established seasons are prohibited because of the religion that has been introduced in them, through which people seek nearness to Allah, as we will mention, if Allah wills. Know that this rule, which is arguing that something is a religious innovation to prove that it is disliked"
The Shaykh : And it is, and it is
The reader: "And it is arguing that something is a religious innovation to prove that it is disliked. It is a great, general rule, and its completion lies in answering what opposes it. This is because some people say: religious innovations are divided into two categories: good and bad. This is evidenced by the statement of 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) regarding the tarawih prayer: "What a good innovation this is," and by evidence of some statements and actions that were introduced after the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) that are not disliked, or are good, due to the evidence indicating that from scholarly consensus or analogical reasoning. Perhaps also added to this, by those who have not mastered the principles of knowledge, are the many customs and similar things that many people are upon, and they make this also one of the proofs for the goodness of some religious innovations. Either by making what he and those he knows have customary into a consensus, even if he does not know the opinion of the rest of the Muslims regarding it, or by disliking its abandonment because of what he has become accustomed to, similar to those who, when it is said to them: "Come to what Allah has revealed and to the Messenger," say: "It is sufficient for us what we found our fathers upon." And how often some of"
The Shaykh : And how, and how
The reader: "And how often some of those who distinguish themselves among those who claim affiliation with knowledge or worship argue with proofs that are not from the principles of knowledge upon which the religion relies. The point is that these texts indicating the condemnation of religious innovations are opposed by what indicates the goodness of some religious innovations, either from correct legal evidence, or from the arguments of some people upon which some ignorant people or those who interpret in general rely. Then these opponents have two positions here
The first is that they say: if it is established that some religious innovations are good and some are bad, then the bad is what the Lawgiver has prohibited, and what the Lawgiver has been silent about regarding religious innovations is not bad, but may be good. This is what some of them say.
And the second position is that it is said about a specific religious innovation: this religious innovation is good because it contains such and such benefit. And these opponents say: not every religious innovation is misguidance.
And the answer: As for the statement that the worst of matters are their newly introduced ones, and that every religious innovation is misguidance, and every misguidance is in the Fire, and the warning against newly introduced matters: this is the text of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), so it is not permissible for anyone to refute its indication of the condemnation of religious innovations, and whoever disputes its indication is one who opposes. And as for the opposing arguments, the answer to them is"
The Shaykh : Correct, this is clear. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is undoubtedly the most eloquent of creation, and he is the most knowledgeable about creation, and he is the most sincere to creation. There is no doubt in this. So if he says "every religious innovation is misguidance, and every misguidance is in the Fire," and all of these are forms of generality, and their status is established by consensus. No one opposes that "every" indicates generality. So whoever claims that something from the newly introduced matters is a recommended practice or permissible, upon him is the evidence.
And it is not possible for us to contradict this decisive generality upon which the scholars have agreed that it is from the forms of generality, merely with analogies, defective analogies. As for the opposing arguments he referred to, the author answered them.
And at that time we say: dividing religious innovation into good and bad is a false statement that opposes the hadith. It is as Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Yes, "so it is not permissible for anyone to refute its indication of the condemnation of religious innovations, and whoever disputes that is one who opposes". Opposing Allah and His Messenger is not a trivial matter. We say: every religious innovation is misguidance, and there is nothing good in religious innovations. But if he says that this is a religious innovation and it is good, then either it is not a religious innovation and he thinks it is, or it is not good and he thinks it is good. It must be one of these. As for establishing that it is a religious innovation and that it is good, that is impossible, and it is never possible. Yes.