Explanation of the author's statement: ... and beware of newly invented matters, for every religious innovation is misguidance.

The Shaykh : Then the author mentioned the Prophet's (peace and blessings be upon him) advice, saying: "Beware of you" is a warning, meaning: I warn you. It is as if he said: "I warn you against" the act of newly invented matters.
"Matters" means affairs, and what is intended here are the affairs of religion. As for the affairs of this world, they do not enter into this hadith at all, because the original ruling for the affairs of this world is permissibility. So whatever is newly invented among them is lawful. But the original ruling for the affairs of religion is prohibition, so whatever is newly invented among them is forbidden unless there is evidence. So, regarding newly invented matters, I ask you, what are "matters"? They are affairs, and what is intended by them are the affairs of religion, because the affairs of this world are lawful, and we do not warn against them; rather, their original ruling is permissibility until evidence of prohibition appears.
The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: The emphasis and the "fa" (so/then) indicate derivation, so the sentence is derived from a warning sentence. Therefore, what is intended here is the emphasis of the warning.
Is this statement general or not? It is general. Every religious innovation is surrounded by the strongest word indicating generality, which is the word "every." So this is a decisive generalization issued by whom? By the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). And the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) is the most knowledgeable of creation regarding the Shari'ah of Allah. Do we accept this? Yes. It is obligatory for us to accept this. He is the most sincere of creation toward the servants of Allah. Correct. He is the most eloquent of creation in expression. Correct. Three things converged in his case: knowledge, sincerity, and eloquence. He spoke the words: A general, comprehensive sentence that came after the warning, so it is intended.
And based on this, whoever worships Allah with a belief, statement, or action that is not from the Shari'ah of Allah is an innovator. Whoever worships with the belief of the Jahmiyyah, do they worship with their belief? Yes. They believe that they purify Allah, and that this is the purification and the oneness of Allah. The Mu'tazilah are the same, and the Asha'irah are the same. They worship Allah with the belief they hold.
What about those who invented specific dhikr, one hundred or two hundred, or one thousand or two thousand? Do they worship Allah with that or not? Yes, they worship with that. They believe that they will be rewarded for this.
What about those who invented actions, do they worship Allah with them? One thousand rak'ahs, two thousand rak'ahs, and the like. These people also worship Allah with these actions. All these three categories who innovated in belief, or in statements, or in actions, every religious innovation among their innovations is misguidance. Misguidance. Why did the Messenger describe it as misguidance? Because it is ignorance, compounded ignorance. And because it is a deviation from the truth. Because religious innovation, may Allah bless you, necessitates defective, invalid cautions:
First: It necessitates the falsification of the saying of Allah the Exalted: Because if one comes with a new religious innovation, it means that the religion is not complete and needs this religious innovation. And this necessitates the falsification of this verse. And if we say it necessitates this, does the one who innovated necessarily commit to it? He may not commit to it, but it certainly necessitates it.
Second: It necessitates criticizing the Shari'ah and that it is incomplete. Everyone who came before this religious innovation, all of them, their religion was incomplete. The Companions' religion was incomplete, the Tabi'un's religion was incomplete, until the time of this religious innovation comes and the religion is completed. And this is dangerous, is it not? It is dangerous, because we are now declaring every person who came before this religious innovation to be misguided.
Third: Among the implications of this religious innovation is that the majority of those who engage in a religious innovation are distracted from the Sunnah. This is the majority, as some of the Salaf said: "No people ever innovated a religious innovation except that they demolished the equivalent of it from the Sunnah" Because a person is active; either he occupies himself with the truth or he occupies himself with falsehood. And Satan beautifies these religious innovations, he beautifies these religious innovations...
Fourth: That these religious innovations cause the division of the Ummah. They cause division because these innovators believe that they are the people of the truth and that everyone else is on misguidance. And for this reason, they declare others misguided, and the people of the truth say: "You are the ones on misguidance." So the Ummah divides and tears apart, as is the reality.
So these are great harms, all of which follow from religious innovation in its capacity as religious innovation. And also connected to this religious innovation are things of foolishness in the mind and defects in the religion. They say that in some religious innovations, men and women gather together. Men and women gather together, and there is dancing, shaking of heads, clapping, and songs, and the serving of apple sweets and things. And sometimes, in the midst of this frenzy, they stand up as one man and say: "Peace be upon you, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings. Welcome to the Divine Presence" or "Welcome to the Prophetic Presence." And what do they believe? That the Messenger is present. That the Messenger is present. They stand up to honor him. And what is this? Foolishness in the mind, or is it not? It is foolishness in the mind. No, Satan does not take the form of it, but it is a defect, a confusion of the truth. In any case, what do we have to do with them? Now we return to the saying of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him): And we have explained that it is misguidance from four aspects. But the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) speaks with words whose meaning he knows and whose consequences he knows, and he is the most sincere and most eloquent of creation. And by this, we know that whoever divided religious innovation into five or six or three categories has erred. He has erred, without doubt, and his error is from one of two aspects:
Either the description of religious innovation does not apply legally to what he innovated, or it is not good as he claimed. It does not go beyond this. Whoever innovates a religious innovation and says: "It is good," we say: This does not go beyond one of two things. What are they? Either it is not the religious innovation about which the Messenger said it is misguidance, or it is good in his opinion but in reality it is misguidance. It never goes beyond this. Do you understand this? Every person who innovates a "good" religious innovation, we say: It is absolutely impossible. Either it is not a religious innovation in the Shari'ah, or it is not good. As for it being true that it is a religious innovation and good, this is impossible. Why? Because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) says: Every. And what takes us out of this great wall so that we can divide religious innovations into categories?
If you say: "Welcome to your words, and how good they are, but you are not more knowledgeable than the Commander of the Faithful, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), when he came out to the people while they were praying with their imam in Ramadan and said: So he praised it and called it a religious innovation. He praised it and called it a religious innovation. And who are you compared to the understanding of 'Umar? Can you say: "I understand better than 'Umar"? You cannot. If you said: "I understand better than 'Umar," we would say: "You lied a thousand times. You are not more understanding than 'Umar." But look at what 'Umar said: The "al" (the) is for specification, and the religious innovation that occurred, look, this is a specified religious innovation, specified by "al." And this is a specified indication. We look at what this religious innovation that occurred is. We see that it is established that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed with his Companions in Ramadan for three nights in congregation, then he left it for fear that it would become obligatory. For fear that it would become obligatory. So it is established that the original permissibility, is it not? The original permissibility is established. It is negated that it is a religious innovation in the Shari'ah. It is negated that it is a religious innovation in the Shari'ah. And it is not possible to say it is a religious innovation while the Messenger has prayed it. And it is not possible for 'Umar to describe it as a religious innovation and mean the religious innovation in the Shari'ah while the Messenger has prayed it. This is impossible, is it not? So it is negated that it is a religious innovation. So how did he call it a religious innovation? We say: Because the people left it when the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) left it. They left it and became not praying in congregation with one imam. They became praying in scattered groups. The man alone, and the two men, and the three, and the group, each praying alone. And for this reason, And the Prophet's i'tikaf was in what? In Ramadan. The people remained on this during the time of Abu Bakr and a portion of the caliphate of 'Umar. So he (may Allah be pleased with him) came out one night and said: "If I were to gather the people on one imam, it would be better" And it is true, is it better or not? It is better than them being scattered in groups. So he ordered Abu ibn Ka'b and Tamim al-Dari to stand for the people with eleven rak'ahs. He ordered them, and they stood for the people with eleven rak'ahs. So he came out one night and the people were praying with their imam, and he said: "What a good religious innovation this is" So is it a religious innovation in the Shari'ah? No, it is an additional religious innovation in the sense that it was left, then established, then established again. So this is the aspect of it, the aspect of its being called a religious innovation.
As for the claim that it is a legislative innovation and that 'Umar praised it, that is false and impossible. By this, we know that the words of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) are not contradicted by the words of 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him). His statement (peace and blessings be upon him): It is not possible for us to say of any innovation, "What a good innovation this is." If you ask: How do you reconcile this with the statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him): "Whoever introduces a good practice..."? We say: Praise be to Allah, the words of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) are consistent with one another. He said: and he said: By "good practice," he means the prescribed practice, and the meaning of "introducing" it is hastening to perform it, because people may know that this matter is prescribed but do not proceed to do it. Then one person comes forward and does it, thereby making the path easy for the people. This meaning is indicated by meaning their tunics were hanging down, they had no cloaks, and they were prominent among the Arabs. The face of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) changed and he was distressed. How is it that prominent Arabs would come in such a state? So he called for people to donate to them. The misguided innovation is in his statement: By this, we know that the words of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) do not contradict one another; rather, they are unified and in agreement, because he (peace and blessings be upon him) does not speak from desire. The one who speaks from desire is the one who contradicts himself, because his desire today is in one direction and his desire tomorrow is in another. As for...