What is the ruling on dividing the religion into fundamentals and branches, and declaring the one who disagrees on the fundamentals to be misguided, while not declaring the one who disagrees on the branches to be misguided?

The questioner: Dividing the religion into fundamentals and branches, declaring the one who disagrees on the fundamentals to be misguided, and not declaring the one who disagrees on the branches to be misguided?

The Shaykh: Regarding the division of the religion into fundamentals and branches, and then...

The questioner: Declaring the one who disagrees on the fundamentals to be misguided.

The Shaykh: What is the word, what is it?

The questioner: Misguiding, misguiding.

The Shaykh: Misguiding, misguiding, what?

The questioner: The one who disagrees on the fundamentals, and not misguiding him on the branches?

The Shaykh: Yes, this division, if it leads to the result you mentioned—declaring the one who disagrees on the fundamentals to be misguided, but not declaring the one who disagrees on the branches to be misguided—then that division is misguidance in the Shari'ah or in knowledge. There is no objection to it, provided that this terminology or that does not lead to a contradiction of the Shari'ah in any of its aspects. They mean by fundamentals what relates to creed, and by branches what relates to practical rulings. In the expression of some scholars, they mean by fundamentals the theoretical matters and by branches the practical matters. This division is a reality that must be acknowledged, because the Shari'ah contains creeds and it contains rulings. However, belittling one part of these two categories, by saying that one who denies something of it is not declared a disbeliever, or exaggerating something in the first category, by saying that this one and that one are disbelievers, both are misguidance. One may be declared a disbeliever for denying something from the practical category, and one may not be declared a disbeliever for denying something from the theoretical category. The basis of the ruling and its pivot is only the establishment of the argument against the denier, whether it is of the theoretical type or the practical type. It is not hidden from all those present that the practical matters, meaning the Shari'ah rulings, include what is obligatory, what is a recommended practice, and what is below that. So if one denies the legitimacy of something from these practical rulings, let us say from the recommended practices, and we do not say from the obligations, if one denies something from the regular recommended practices, for example, is he excused and it is said, or is it explained, that he did not deny something from the theoretical matters, meaning the fundamentals, but only denied something from the practical matters, meaning the branches? We say neither this nor that, but rather we look at it. The Fajr recommended practice, for example, may lead to being declared a disbeliever, and may not, even though in one of the previous expressions it is from the practical matters and not from the theoretical matters, or from the branches and not from the fundamentals. Likewise, one who denies something from the theoretical matters may be declared a disbeliever, and may not. And as I said just now, the pivot is the establishment of the argument against the denier. If the argument is established and then he persists in his denial, he has become a disbeliever, whether what he denied is theoretical or practical, and the reverse is the reverse. That is all. From here, the position of the Salaf regarding the scholars of hadith and the Sunnah, concerning some of the misguided sects, in my Salafi belief, and we are their followers, if Allah wills. They denied a factual Shari'ah theoretical matter, yet they did not declare them disbelievers. Like those who deny, for example, seeing Allah on the Day of Resurrection, like the Khawarij—and peace be upon you, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings—like the Khawarij and the Mu'tazilah and their like, and among them are the Shi'ah. The scholars of hadith know the denial of these people of this creed, yet if they narrated a hadith and they were among the trustworthy and truthful ones in their estimation, they accepted their narration and left their innovation, leaving the reckoning for it to Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He). With this detail, the issue should be linked if we want to say whether someone is a disbeliever or not, and not if he denied something from the fundamentals or theoretical matters, we immediately say he is a disbeliever. No, because the practice of the Salaf did not proceed on this basis. And we have evidence from the Book and the Sunnah regarding this matter, and it is one of the very, very important matters that students of knowledge, especially in this time when those who hold fast or are keen to hold fast to the Book and the Sunnah have divided into two groups, the extremists and the moderates, must know. Many of those extremists declare people disbelievers for every one who falls into a theoretical error, without looking at what we mentioned just now about the necessity of establishing the argument against them. And by doing so, they contradicted the righteous Salaf, who did not declare every one who disagreed with them in a creed to be a disbeliever. The evidence for this Salafi methodology is that it is not permissible to declare someone a disbeliever except after the establishment of the argument. The principle is well known: the Noble Qur'an, and His saying (Blessed and Exalted is He): , and also His saying (peace and blessings be upon him): = -- And peace be upon you, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings -- = .