 وإن تعجب فعجب قولهم إذا كنا تراباً إنا لفي خلق جديد أولئك الذين كفرو بربهم وأولئك اللغلال في عنافهم وأولئك أصحاب النارهم في يا خالدون بسم الله والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أما بعد السلام عليكم رحمة الله وبركاته ومبارس and spatial brothers and sisters welcome to another Q&A session on the hot seat podcast where once again I'm joined by أسد برخمن خسن where he's going to answer your questions on misconceptions of bid'a i.e. innovation in a Muslim society Check out the end of this episode to find out how you can ask questions on any of the topics we cover on the hot seat podcast سيدنا ونبينا محمد على آله وأصحابه والتابعين لهم بإحسان إلى يوم الدين أما بعد هل سجل الإسلام يدفع إذا كان هناك أشياء الإسلامية أو لا؟ وإذا كان هناك أشياء الإسلامية، ليس هناك أشياء إسلامية where you do not prohibit evil on matters that are HDHDR, matters that have a difference of opinion لأن إبادة يحتاج إلى إبادة إذا كنت تريد أن تفعل إبادة، يجب أن تأخذ إبادة لكي تفعلها وإذا لم تفعلها، ما تفعله هو إبادة HDHDR means when one party has evidence and the other party has evidence but what is happening here is each party the way that they are interpreting the evidence is probably different to the other person this is now called HDHDR it's a valid difference of opinion but that doesn't mean both parties are right because the Prophet told us إذا اتهد المجتهد if the scholar who has reached a level of independent reasoning he can go to the text himself and extract ruling from it if he goes and he looks at the Qur'an and the Sunnah and he gets it wrong then he gets one reward and if he gets it right he gets two rewards so here what you sense from this حديث is there's a right and a wrong so the scholar is between one reward or two rewards coming back to the question إبادة is not permissible unless there's an evidence for it and the person who's doing this act has to bring an evidence for it so one party has evidence and the other party doesn't have an evidence so it should not be called HDHDR and not every differences there is a difference now yeah say for example we have a حديث that one party declares to be authentic another party declares it to be weak and the party that declares it to be weak say this is an innovation because there is no evidence for it because they obviously believe it to be weak in an issue like this what would we say about this situation this is based upon an HDHDR now we say that it's based on authenticating a حديث or weakening a حديث this is now definitely an HDHDR related issue whether this حديث is صحيح or is it ضعيف that's valid but one party is saying for instance we can celebrate the prophet's birthday and they have no evidence for it there's no evidence for it and the other party is demanding evidence from the ones who are celebrating till now they say wow there are scholars on this side and there are scholars on this side so it's a valid difference of opinion no it's not it doesn't make a valid difference of opinion what makes a valid difference of opinion is that both parties have strong evidences and each party is responding clearly categorically to what the other party has as evidence and now it becomes subjective of what is right and what is wrong and many examples we can give we could say for example is women wearing a قاب for example obligatory that's a valid difference of opinion if it's leaving the prayer out of laziness are you a disbeliever for doing that it's also a valid difference of opinion because each party is pushing their arguments and their evidences and the other party is doing the same and each party is responding to the other person's evidence so it's a valid difference of opinion but again there's one party is right and one party which is wrong but it's subjective which one is right which one is wrong the next question I have for you how does the concept of innovation make someone an innovator not every act that a person does makes them an innovator you see there's a different the scholar is distinguished between the act being an innovation and the doer being an innovator not necessarily does everybody who does innovation become an innovator no not at all great scholars have spoken about this ليس كل ما وقع في البيتعة وقع في البيتعة علي not everybody who fell into innovation does innovation fall on to him great scholars have spoken about this شيخ الباني رحم الله spoke about this شيخ ملوباز and great other scholars have spoken about it and it's a concept that can also be used for the issue of تكفير as well not everybody who does an act of كفر becomes a kafir himself necessarily so no not necessarily no if a person does an act of innovation he doesn't necessarily become an innovator unless of course the proof is established upon him and remember we spoke about this in our podcast on the issue of the first podcast that we did who can you trust in the modern day دعوى سين and we said that it depends on what issue does the person fall in regarding innovation if he goes against أهل سنة in a fundamental issue then yes the proof needs to be established on that person and whatever ambiguity and clarity that is there in their eyes and whatever is keeping them in that opinion is removed from them then it's شاء الله تعالى the person becomes an innovator after the proof is established on them of course but that's dependent on one type of issue of the religion but there's another issue in the religion that if the person does he automatically becomes an innovator for example if the person says I reject the I reject single حديث that just goes into a concept of مصدر تلاقي the source which we take evidence from this person becomes an innovator even before the proof is established on him is this the only condition is ignorance a condition like for example you might have someone who's just a follower of an Imam he doesn't really have any knowledge of Islam and he might for example reject single iterations based on what his Imam is telling him would we then also call him an innovator or how do this thing work see this issue of ignorance and establishing the proof is one of those issues that need تفصيل as well because it really depends on نوعية المسألة what type of issue are we talking about here that this person is ignorant about is it a fundamental issue of the religion that's a different discussion now is it where is this person residing like what type of land are they in that's another thing we need to look at we also have to look at the individual himself what kind of person is he is he new to Islam or is he always a Muslim also what's his type of capability of comprehending all of these when the scholars take into consideration then they say the proof has been established on this person and the proof hasn't been established on this person so this requires a specific circumstance a specific scenario it needs details for that specific case and in terms of the one who is say someone who is claiming to have knowledge and Imam and leader of community and he is calling to his innovation would we still need to do all of these things or will we just say okay in this circumstance and he's an innovator again whoever whether he's calling to the innovation or not again the proof needs to be established on him but we do need to we do need to understand the concept of a person who has innovation but he doesn't talk to anyone about it he keeps his innovation to himself he believes it at home the scholars they deal with him different to the one who comes and propagates his belief okay they call it when you look at books of you realize that the ones that they categorized as to be the ones that need to be stayed away from is the one who calls to his innovation or propagates his innovation not the one who keeps his innovation to himself because remember they were and he never interrogated them and said what do you believe what's in your heart tell us bring out your what have you you know interrogated and looked at them like that what if somebody is associated with an innovator you see this person with a well-known innovator all the time would that make this person an innovator as well so when you say this person is a well-known innovator that's subjective to who is it well-known to for some people they might not see that person to be an innovator for proofs and evidences you find great scholars different on individuals and some scholars would say this person is a well-known innovator and another person would say no he's not individuals were differed upon if you look at him to self they differed on the individuals you find an Imam say this person is this and you find another Imam say this person is this and what we have to understand is that that labeling of the Imam on that person the labeling that he's put in on that person is an HD hat so I really want to explain something okay I for example I'm a reliable person to you you trust me I go out and I tell you أخي you're not brother عمر I'm a brother عبد الله I'm a brother أحمد I saw him drinking والله I saw it in my two eyes I'm a reliable person to you you would have to trust me on what I said because I'm reliable you don't know me to be a liar because Allah said in the ayah يقول لذين أأمنوا إن جاءكم فاسقوا بنبأين فتبينوا and then the Qeela says فتتبتوا if a fast comes to you with news then verify it but if he's not a fast you don't need to verify you take his word for it that's what the ayah says which is the reverse understanding of the verse good but that doesn't mean I now place a label on that person and I say he's a fast for drinking alcohol you go as for you seeing him as an as for you seeing him drinking alcohol I trust you're a reliable person but I'm not going to take your ruling from you the ruling is another thing do you see so there's a خبر and there's a حكم I telling you about what I saw is a خبر it's a news and based on the ayah you'd have to take my word my word for it if you don't if you trust me but my ruling is something else okay okay that you can reject or accept you can accept or you can reject so you find these principles scholars talk about Allah sometimes some scholars they bring قواعد which is الجرح المفسر مقدم على التعديل that the the detailed criticism takes presidents over the ambiguous among the general praise but then again on the other flip side the scholars they say كلام الأقران يطوا ولا يروى the statement of the peers is tossed and it's not narrated so you'd have to there are two principles one should not eliminate the other but it should learn how to reconcile between them and how to deal with it so the point I'm trying to come to is great scholars ابن القييم and others have explained this in great details that the issue of if this person is an innovator or not is an each-the-hadi-related issue and people will differ upon it and so placing a person an innovator because you saw him with someone merely because he's with someone is not correct is incorrect to say that this person is an innovator because he sat with this person is not necessarily and some may then quote some of the aim of the self doing this and saying or so and so but then then take him to it then what we say is that these are specific scenarios that these Imam saw and you can't generalize them and I have the statement of Ibn Tayma to back me up on that شيخ الإسلام Ibn Tayma رحم الله clearly and categorically he said and explicitly he said that sometimes you see statements of the self Ahmed and others and Imam Ahmed and others they would criticize a person and when they criticize that person he said that it's restricted to that particular situation it's restricted to that situation Ahmed saw something in that particular individual that needs to be observed in whatever comes after not just he boycotted him or do you see my point so this is a قضية it's a specific situation that generalization cannot be stipulated from it you can't generalize it for everybody so are you saying all of the statements from the self that have reached us about being careful who you befriend and seeing someone to be with an innovator and therefore declaring this person to be an innovator all of these are for specific scenarios that we can't no, no, no I'm not saying that I'm saying I've clearly said before that sitting with innovators and being with innovators is prohibited and you're not allowed to but when it comes to who's an innovator and who isn't an innovator differences may occur remember I might differ with you on saying for instance you and I both believe that Allah is above His throne okay you and I don't differ Shayed, do you believe Allah is above His throne I believe Allah is above His throne you go and you come to me and you say to me brother Ahmed here believes Allah is not above His throne I then look at you and say I don't agree with you on that he does believe Allah is above His throne so your argument of saying that he's an innovator is based upon something a premise that I don't agree with us right, right, okay you and I here are not differing on whether Allah is above His throne we agree with each other on that but we also even agree that if a person believes Allah is not above His throne it's a deviation in his عقيدة what we're differing here is and our difference here right now is whether this person holds that opinion you see I might say I've sat with him I've spoken to him I've seen him I've traveled with him and I never saw that from him so maybe you must have heard wrong or maybe you must have a person who graduated with him or something else but I see that you want to push something against him do you see my point so then you don't turn at me and you then say you're defending innovators no I'm not I actually don't believe he's an innovator in the first place because for you to say you're defending innovators means I believe he's an innovator and I'm still defending him so the scholars they call this a نتيجة you're coming with a conclusion that we haven't even agreed upon we haven't agreed on the premise that you're picking up from and this is many خلافات that have taken place in the دعوة scene it's because of this this person we looked at him we observed him we realized his دعوة is clear because شمسو في رابعات النهار he calls to the كتاب he calls to the سنة he calls to the understanding of the pious predecessors and then maybe he differs with you on a particular person he say no no no I believe this person is Salafi and then you say he's a مبتدر because he argues and he debates for the criminals and he's arguing for them I'll say he doesn't believe he's a criminal in the first place and he doesn't believe he's an innovator in the first place but what is different is you you don't ever tell us you're مؤتقد we don't know what you believe you hide your belief when you're asked about your belief and what you hold you're always nervous you don't want to talk about it and always you're around a particular type of people then this is a valid reason to criticize this person or this is a right to question this person what does he actually believe what is his stance what is his view do you see my point well yeah yeah of course okay the final question I have for you and this is not just the issue a bit out but also a question that has been reoccurring throughout many of the episodes we've done on the hot seat so far why does it feel like you're always dividing the Muslims declaring everybody to be not necessarily an innovator but always focusing on issues of innovation focusing on being careful who you take your knowledge from why does it feel like you're always dividing the Muslims no I'm not dividing the Ummah that's not true what I'm actually saying is that you see first of what I want to people to understand is when you warn against a particular people and you say don't take knowledge from these type of people these people can harm your religion why is this seen as a division the same wouldn't be used if I was to tell you don't go to this doctor he's corrupt he's known he's a fourth star he's a charlatan don't go to this man you'd say you'd kiss me in the forehead and you'd say you've told me what's beneficial for me but when it comes to the benefit of this dunya and you're here after you look at me and say why are you backbiting people the same with the sister if she wanted to get married or a brother wanted to get married and I said stay away from this person they're known they're evil they're this, they're that he would look at me and you saved me from a problem that's one thing I want us to always keep in mind if a person tells you about a person and says to you stay away from this person look into it look into it because this is your last this is what you're going to you know you've got one chance in this world this is the only chance that you have so make sure that you you verify you look into it number two does every type of division is it blame-worthy and is every type of unity praiseworthy we find that not to be the case our messenger peace be upon him when Quraish came to him in Makkah this is Quraish Ibn Hisham mentions in his Seerah the story of أتوبة من الربيعة أتوبة من الربيعة ست he came to Makkah in the assembly of Quraish he came to Makkah in the assembly of Quraish and the messenger peace be upon him had walked in onto them but he went to the corner to pray peace be upon him and then أتوبة said to Quraish whilst they were sitting in their gathering he said shall I not go to Muhammad and present something to him maybe he might take it from me and this may solve a great calamity harm that we're going through they said of course go to him so he went to him and he said to him يبن أخي my brother's son my nephew you have a big place in our hearts you have a place in the tribe you're a well respected and admired individual what he said he started with that and then he went on to saying if you're looking for kingdom now he then said what you've come with has divided us you have insulted our idols you've declared our forefathers to be in the hellfire and disbelievers so what did he say that فرقت به جماعتنا you've broken our ranks and divided us and he did divide them how did he divide them he took a father and the father became a Muslim and the son didn't or the son became a Muslim and the father didn't in a household there was a Muslim and there was a non-Muslim so division came from the messenger he came to a people who were united upon shirk and what did he do he divided them upon what a group of them took توحيد and a group of them took shirk the battle of bedr a father would be on the side of the disbelievers and the son would probably be on the side of the the Muslims and that was everyone knows that in the syrah so not every type of this unity I'm a division that a person brings is necessarily bad or evil what if somebody says this isn't a very good example to use because you're talking about dividing the Muslims from the kafar whereas what we're talking about now is the division within the group of the Muslims I'm not looking at whether it's kafar and Muslims I'm looking at dividing the Muslims in terms of what is right from what is wrong here there's a wrong path and here's a right path whether that wrong is disbelief or whether that wrong is innovation or whether that wrong is a sin I'll give you an example a mother would say to her child children if she had sons you know don't hang around with your older brother because he drinks and he sells alcohol so she'd divide him from his own brothers that's common everyone does that you see I'll tell you something funny a lot of us already are dividers but it's just how do how far would we go to like every example you go to a brother you say would you work with a rafi didn't she say no no never never no I won't work with him you see my point another one will say I won't even work so the one who wouldn't work with a shiri is a bit he would work with a diobani but he wouldn't work with a shiri this one just said you know what I'm just going to take a step step before you I'm just not going to work with the diobani but you and I both agree that we won't work with innovators you just are not consistent you pick and choose which type of innovators you don't want to work with you see my point so the concept of dividing can sometimes be praise worthy and sometimes it can be what blame worthy and Allah loves us to you and coming to the second point which is is every type of unity praise worthy no it's not no it's not and every type of unity is praise worthy the type of unity that is praise worthy is the one that the people agree with each other on their fundamental beliefs you see we will not necessarily agree on our jurisprudence beliefs I might believe that my wife breaks my will though if I touch her and you may not believe that for instance I might follow the matter but we remember Sheffield in that issue so that and you might follow the for example we might differ on that that division is not going to cause us a problem here right now unless we try unless we use it in an evil way the one that I am trying to say that we need to unite on is the that we need to reunite on our our belief we need to let me make even when I say let me even make it more broader we have to agree on with each other on the the religion because there are some issues which are fundamental so I bring that in as well we need to agree with each other on the foundation the fundamental issues of the religion if we don't then uniting is not a praise worthy issue Allah said about the Jews تحسبهم جميع and you think they are one Allah then says وقلوبهم شتاء but their hearts are different meaning each one believes different to the other one but they pretend to show the people that they are united the prophet he told us you will straighten your lines and you will straighten your lines اوليو خالف الله or Allah will make your faces and your hearts go different directions you will not be united just by going against the prophet if not straightening the lines we will be divided imagine bigger than that do you see my point yeah we disunited because we are going against the messenger and the way that it is and the way that it is so I am just saying and I have looked at it ولهي on all different levels I looked at it through the text the Quran and the sunnah I looked at it rationally I don't believe a false united front is going to benefit the Muslims I say that with sincerity if it would I would be our champion for it I would jump on that opportunity why not but I don't believe that's a solution for the Muslims in the west and in the east that you give them a false impression that we are united we are here with you guys and give them that but when those are closed you guys all say in different things I have sat in some of their circles they discredit one another they put each other down not because of because of statements and beliefs he will tell you that brother is but as soon as the speakers are on and the microphone is on and the lights are switched on and they are on the stage it's a difference شيخ فضل سميك I find that very hypocritical I personally do a lot was this ever the way of the Salaf did the leaders of the Salaf ever have differences between themselves but to the general masses they presented like they were together never why was the great scholars like Ibn Taymiah who we now consider to be one of the the greatest Islamic revivers why was he spending his life in prison why why didn't he just be silent why was he causing division one of the things you know one of the things he got in prison for تعليق الطلاق a concept of issue of divorce he wrote a too thick volume book on it and this was the issue between him and Subki and Ibn Al-Qayyim was present because of that as well by Subki no great scholars were never silent they spoke the truth they said what they believed they criticized they scrutinized that's exactly what our religion is about to purify the ranks so people are you know correct and right in their approach because if we're not united upon our approach each person is going to grab somewhere each person is going to grab somewhere and we're not going to get nowhere just one last thing because I think this is a very important topic especially right now it's very very relevant and I think you mentioned this on the podcast before but I think it's worth clarifying again what if we both agree on certain things we even disagree on fundamental issues of the religion but we both agree that we don't want our kids to be taught homosexuality in schools for example or to be called towards atheism and we have the west who are trying to push these kind of beliefs is it okay for us to unite on this to try and counter the issue of this of the west نعم we are I told you this before I would have been better just to bring my the book out of my library right now let me just get them can I read it from it yeah of course you did this before so okay let me give you the statement of the Kitab I have it's called داد المعاد في هدي خيل العباد it's written by ابن القيّم and this book is about the the prophet's guidance his biography benefits in his life عليه الصلاة والسلام and it's this book that the prophetic medicine was taken out of it's people ask they say ابن القيّم is a prophetic medicine it's actually taken from this book okay it's six volumes sorry it's seven volumes six volumes with the فهرس is seven volumes and this is the best publication it's called دار عالم الفوائد this is the third volume now page page 358 ابن القيّم talks about the benefits that we take from the Treaty of Hudabiyah the Treaty of Hudabiyah was a treaty that took place between the messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and the pagan Arabs the Quraysh there was a treaty that he took with them صلى الله عليه وسلم and ابن القيّم tries to extract thicky benefits that we can take from it one of the things that he mentions is that he says أن المشريكين the pagans وأهل البدا and the people of innovation والفجوري the people of transgression what do the criminals والبغات the rebellious والظالم the oppressors إذا طلبوا if they request أمران اي ماته يو عظيمون في حرومة من حرومات الله they ask to be helped and aided in a sanctuary from the sanctuaries of Allah they say we are going to take care of Allah's religion in a particular issue they ask help for it أعطوه they will be given to them وعين وعليه and they should be aided in this issue وإن منعوا غيره I want this to be underlined even if other things are prevented from them other things we say no, we are not working with you we are not going to socialize and we are not going to be with you guys our stance regarding you is to be clear we consider you guys to be innovators we consider you guys to be corrupt in your belief we consider you guys to be part of the problem of the Muslims but we will help you in this issue not because we want to help you guys we believe that we are aiding Allah's religion in this issue we are giving the upper hand to the Deen of Allah that's what brought us here not because of you guys it just happened that you guys came away from your falsehood and you came to the truth in this issue because that's what you're doing here so we help you in it he said their disbelief and their transgression they're not helped in it they came twice he repeats it and other than that we don't help them in so we have a group of brothers who are extreme they see an issue which the innovators might be doing something right in this issue or they might even see their disbelievers a cathedrals come to you and they say look I want to keep your messages for you I want to keep your messages all I need from you guys is to do this this this this for me and it's known it's محقق it's known that he could do this his power and he has the ability to do it and he can execute this it is obligatory on the Muslims to go and help him in this religious obligation or the messages are going to be closed which falls under حرمة Allah's religion is going to be protected here pay attention straight after that is done and it's finished our stance regarding you is clear again there is a group of brothers you find that they will say no I'm not going to work with you and so they will wait for the messages to be closed and so they go against the prophetic guidance so they're not on the way of the messenger peace be upon him ابن القيم extracted it from the prophet's action peace be upon him what he did in Hudaybiyah we have another group of brothers who are on the other side of the spectrum there are another extreme group which say oh so we will work with every and any person continuously and they ignorantly use the verse و تعاونوا على البر و التقوى و لا تعاونوا على الإثم و العدوان help one another and aid one another in good and do not what and do not help one another in oppression and wrongdoing so they will say I will work with this innovator from today and tomorrow and the day after and continuously and I will continue and guess what I won't say anything about the innovator I have bigger fishes to fry this individual is on one valley and the ayah is on another valley to use that ayah is wrong is incorrect it shows lack of understanding it also shows that you are either trying to fool the people by doing that or you are genuinely ignorant and both of them are as bad as each other as the scholar say احلاهم امر if you didn't know then that's a problem you should try to learn before you use the evidence and if you did know and you deliberately try to deceive the people then that's then that's another bad trait so what we say is that the innovators are not worked with they are not aided they are not supported in any way shape or form but if it happens that a particular issue that honors Allah's religion honors the deen then they will be helped in that particular issue with the condition that the refutation that is made against them among the response that is made against them is all your stance regarding them is well known I just want to mention a brother may Allah guide him to the straight path and myself recently said something like the mufti of Saudi Arabia for instance he said so the mufti in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia he had sat with a group of the innovators he said and he tried to use that as an argument he tried to use that as a proof to say that here it is you guys have to say something about the mufti now what we say is that the mufti starts first of all we don't defend or my methodology isn't to connect my deen with individuals that's not who I am I believe that the Da'wa Salafiya is bigger greater than individuals people can do mistakes scholars can do mistakes short comments come from scholars so that's one thing I want people to really understand if a scholar goes against the Quran and the Sunnah it's not hard for us to say that he's wrong but even in this situation we'll say that the mufti and any other scholars from the Sunnah wherever they are in the world we'll say that specifically the mufti we're talking about here he starts regarding the innovators is known his view regarding the corrupted people of the Muslims it's well known his statements are known and his position is known regarding them and in this issue that he sat with them was because he saw it to be a مصالح عامة a great benefit for the Muslims we don't disagree with that we affirm that so those are the two groups when it comes to this issue a group that don't believe to work with the innovators all in any circumstances a situation and there's a group of them who believe no, we always work with the innovators there's no problem he's my Muslim brother we need to work with the innovators and there's a middle path is always the best path is the middle who say if there's a مصالح there's a benefit for the Muslims and this مصالح it's راجح high with a previous position regarding the innovators a position regarding this group is well known they love us باهورون إن شاء الله you are helping the religion of Allah you are aiding the deen of Allah عز وجله this is not a problem I hope that answers this issue clearly and crystal that's extremely, extremely useful جزاق الله خيرا أذين that's all we have time for today سبحانه وتعالى to ask a question about any of the topics we've covered on the hot seat podcast so far then head over to www.thehotseatpodcast.com and click on the ask a question tab alternatively you can email us at questions at thehotseatpodcast.com that's questions at thehotseatpodcast.com