The Ruling on Boycotting the Innovator

A message was received by the program from the Yemen Arab Republic, sent by one of the brothers there, named Jamal 'Abd al-Ahmad Salih al-Sha'bi, a Yemeni teacher from al-Fawz Primary School in the al-Zahra district of al-Hudaydah Governorate. Our brother asks a question and says: When is it permissible to boycott the innovator? When is it permissible to hate for the sake of Allah? And does boycotting have an effect in this era?
Answer: The believer looks at these matters with the perspective of faith, the perspective of the Shari'ah, and the perspective of being free from personal desire. If boycotting the innovator and distancing oneself from him does not lead to a greater evil, then boycotting him is the truth, and the least of its states is that it is a recommended practice (sunnah). Likewise, boycotting one who openly declares and displays sins, the least of its states is that it is a recommended practice (sunnah). If not boycotting is better, because he sees that calling these innovators to the Sunnah, guiding them, and teaching them what Allah has made obligatory upon them will have an effect on them and benefit them, then he should not hasten to boycott them. Nevertheless, he should hate them for the sake of Allah, just as he hates the disbeliever for the sake of Allah. He hates the sinners for the sake of Allah according to the magnitude of their sins and according to the magnitude of the innovation.
Hating the disbeliever is more severe. Hating the innovator is according to the magnitude of his innovation, if it is not one that entails disbelief, according to its magnitude. Hating the sinner is according to the magnitude of his sin. And he loves him for the sake of Allah according to the magnitude of his Islam.
As for boycotting, there is a detailed explanation in this. Ibn 'Abd al-Qawi (may Allah have mercy on him) says in his famous poem:
Boycotting one who displays sins is a recommended practice (sunnah), and it has been said that it is to rebuke, and it has been made obligatory and affirmed.
And it has been said, absolutely, as long as he is open about it, and he meets him with a frowning, glaring face.
And it has been said: "Absolutely." Meaning, boycotting is obligatory absolutely.
So the conclusion is: that the stronger and better position is to look at the public benefit (maslahah). The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) boycotted some people and left others whom he did not boycott, considering the Islamic legal public benefit. So he boycotted Ka'b ibn Malik and his two companions (may Allah be pleased with them) when they lagged behind the Battle of Tabuk without an excuse. He boycotted them for fifty nights until they repented, so Allah accepted their repentance. And he did not boycott 'Abd Allah ibn Abi ibn Salul and a group of those accused of hypocrisy for legal reasons that necessitated that.
So the believer looks at what is best. This does not contradict hating the disbeliever for the sake of Allah, hating the innovator for the sake of Allah, and hating the sinner for the sake of Allah. And loving the Muslim for the sake of Allah, loving the sinner according to the magnitude of his Islam, and loving the innovator who has not been declared a disbeliever by his innovation according to the amount of Islam he possesses, does not contradict that.
As for boycotting them, one looks at the public benefit (maslahah). If boycotting them is expected to bring good for them, and it is expected that they will repent to Allah from the innovation and from the sin, then the recommended practice (sunnah) is to boycott them. A group of scholars have made this obligatory, saying: It is obligatory.
And if boycotting them and leaving them is the same, meaning it does not lead to either evil or good, then boycotting them is still better, in order to display the prescribed matter and clarify what is obligatory of displaying the disapproval of what is wrong. So boycotting them in this case is better and safer, so that people know their error and mistake.
The third case is: that boycotting them leads to a greater harm and evil. Then he does not boycott them in this case. If this innovator, when boycotted, increases his evil toward the people and proceeds in calling to the innovation, and his innovations and evils increase, and he exploits the boycotting to call people to falsehood, then he is not boycotted, but rather he is debated, and people are warned against him. And people are not to be distant from him, so that they monitor his actions, and so that they prevent him from expanding in his innovation, and so that they warn people against him, and so that they repeat the call to him, perhaps Allah will guide him, so that people are safe from his evil.
And likewise, the open sinner, if leaving him and boycotting him may lead to the spread of his evil, the expansion of his evil, and his tyranny over the people, then he is not boycotted, but rather he is always debated, and he is always disapproved of, and people are always warned against his evil, so that people are safe from his evil and so that fitnah does not occur because of his sin. We ask Allah for safety. Yes.