A scholar falling into religious innovation does not mean he is an innovator

The Shaykh : (may Allah be pleased with him) serves as a suitable example for what I mentioned earlier, namely that a scholar falling into religious innovation does not mean he is an innovator, and that a scholar falling into committing a forbidden act—specifically, declaring something forbidden to be permissible, whether by his own independent legal reasoning or otherwise—does not mean he has committed a forbidden act. So I say: The report of Abu Hurayrah, which explicitly states that he would stand on Friday before the prayer to admonish the people and remind them, serves as a suitable example of how religious innovation may occur from a knowledgeable man without him thereby being an innovator. Before delving into the full answer, I say: The innovator is, first, one whose habit is to innovate in the religion, not one who commits a single innovation, even if he did so not through independent legal reasoning but through his own desires. Even so, this does not make him an innovator. The clearest example to clarify this point is that an unjust ruler may be just in some of his rulings, so he is not called just; and a just ruler may be unjust in some of his rulings, so he is not called unjust. This confirms the Islamic jurisprudential principle that a person is characterized by what predominates in him, whether good or evil. Once we understand this reality, we know who the innovator is. Therefore, two conditions are required for one to be an innovator: First, that he is not a scholar qualified to derive rulings, but rather one who follows his desires. Second, that this is his habit and his constant practice. If we observe these two conditions and look at the report of Abu Hurayrah mentioned earlier, we know that neither condition is present in Abu Hurayrah. We say, yes, this is a religious innovation because it contradicts the Sunnah, and the explanation will follow, but we do not say that Abu Hurayrah is an innovator. From this, it has escaped the minds of many of our brothers, the people of the Sunnah in the Saudi lands, when they took offense at my statement that placing the right hand over the left in the second standing is a religious innovation. How can you say it is a religious innovation while so-and-so says it is a recommended practice, and so-and-so...The Shaykh : ...and so-and-so?The Shaykh : Are they innovators? Do you understand the answer now? They are not innovators, but this act, at least in my critique and in my opinion, is a religious innovation.