Shadee Elmasry – Innovation and Bidah – NBF 361
AI: Summary ©
AI: Transcript ©
Yeah. Ready?
Welcome everybody to the safina society. Nothing but
facts livestream on
a rainy Tuesday in the great state of
New Jersey. As always, gotta give you the
weather report.
It's raining today, and it's not even cold
there. It can it's not even hot.
Like, I don't know what's going on with
the weather in New Jersey. It's like Florida
weather now.
It's,
up and down
heat, like insane heat, like 95 degrees, 97
degrees, 98 degrees,
and then
rain
that gets us flood alerts,
and that stops within 2 hours.
So it's so radical, and we're we got,
like, Caribbean weather here because in Florida, that's
the weather.
Super hot, then insane rains.
Like
like, you have to stay in your car
if you're out and you and you get
home.
Gotta wait. Today's a what did I say?
Tuesday? It's a Wednesday. It is, it's I
said Tuesday because it's the 2nd day of
the stream.
It's a Wednesday, which means we're going to
to go until about 1:50. We're gonna stop
for and
then we're gonna be done by 2 o'clock
or maybe a little bit, and let's say
2:15.
Hilarious story here.
Global Eye News
puts out a story breaking. The US government
mistakenly transferred $239,000,000
to the Taliban.
Someone's getting fired.
But listen to this, ex Muslim Inc, which
he's makes fun of it's a parody account.
He's a Muslim guy, but she's it's making
fun of ex Muslims.
I guess his comment is hilarious. He says,
the first installment.
Is that not hilarious or what? That is
a good joke. Another brother said they must
have been writing reciting Surah Alwaka
Surah Alwaka for.
Anyway, let's get going with this.
Today, we are gonna talk about,
and we're gonna talk about the hadith of
Every innovation is a misguidance.
Alright. That's what we're gonna talk about,
today. That's our subject matter today. We're gonna
read from.
There's not a, there's
2 of the Hajjrs here.
And We're
gonna read from 6 books
on when you hear always hear, that's an
innovation.
This is a bidah. So you gotta pay
attention because, well, are all bidah's 1?
So for example, if you go to a
community and every single person after a someone
can assign like 1st of all, immediately they
shake your hand, to
Every single salah.
Well, that's an innovation.
Is that an innovation at the same level
of
believing that Adam evolved?
Or are there a gradation of innovations?
That's the question we're gonna answer.
Alright. First one, first reading. Let's read the
first from Ibn Hajjr al-'Askalani.
Okay.
In this hadith, the worst of affairs are
their new
newly invented
affairs.
K.
So
He's just talking about this hadith has come
previously in other books,
and Bukhari summarized this narration,
in
in his entry.
K.
Let's
get to the content.
That which is new.
First condition.
Does not have
any
basis in the. So the first thing is
let's def define
death.
And
says here,
and we call that thing that has
no origin in the Sharia.
The technical term for that in Sharia is
and that which does have an origin
in the Sharia.
It has a a a root that the
Sharia points to.
Would not be considered
a bidah.
So the word BDA in Sharia is blameworthy.
Unlike
BDA in language, which could be good, right?
A BDA in language. When we say BDA
in language, for example, someone innovated a piece
of technology.
That's fine.
Benefited people with it. So in language, linguistically,
not a problem.
Anything that is totally brand new that there's
no
connection to it in the past,
linguistically,
we call it
a. Alright.
So what can a Mahmoud and Ahmed mama,
whether it's good or bad? So someone invents
a nuclear bomb, he innovated something. Someone,
created these,
supply
the assembly line. That's an also another innovation
or inventing a car or inventing a phone,
whatever. So
linguistic innovation is, that can anything that's new.
Alright? So no issues here so far.
Okay. So he points to another Hadith. He
says, the definition of this bidah is found
in said I just hadith.
Whoever innovate something in this affair of ours,
meaning in religion, not in technology, not in
medicine, not anything else in religion,
that which is not from it.
It's rejected.
Jet.
And he says that he went over this
in other books and in other chapters,
and beware of newly invented matters. What
Every innovation is a misguidance.
K?
He quotes now his imam because Ibn Hajjar
is a he quotes
that which is in line with the sun.
Is
praiseworthy
mood
that which contradicts the sunnah is blameworthy.
So here, the great imam, a chef
is dividing innovations into 2 categories,
that which is blameworthy
and that which is,
praiseworthy. And how do you judge it? You
you compare it against the Sharia.
K?
A very simple example opening up a Quran
school, right, and saying, from 9 to 10,
you guys review. From 10 to 11, you
memorize the new chapters. From 10 to 11,
you maybe learn some language so that you
can memorize the Quran easier.
From 12 to 1, you go and study
the Quran again. Who's telling where did that
come from? Things like that.
So he says now let's re keep reading.
Ibrahim,
Also, imam Al Bayhaqi,
he includes this
in his biography of
a. New matters. New matters. Things you could
say the Sahaba never did it.
The prophet never did it. Otherwise, it wouldn't
be.
Right? Means something new.
Right?
What's going on in the chat? There's a
lot of trolls today. Nobody's saying that I'm
not look there's a is is there an
issue with the picture? Picture's fine. Right?
Yeah. All right. Let's keep going.
Al Mujeta
Barban
New matters are of 2 types. That which
was invented or
someone came up
That which
is a newly invented matter, but it contradicts
the book, the sunnah,
the other, meaning the sayings of the early
salif and the early,
Muslims.
It contradicts it or Ijma of the Muslims.
That is the bidah that leads astray
That which
is invented of good. You came up with
something new. Like, what's his example in lifetime
that he approved of? The addition additional words
to the Takabir
of Eid. We all know the Takbir of
Eid.
Uh-uh.
Sorry.
That's
how it is. Right? 3 takbirs
2 takbirs
However, they he went to Egypt and he
found the Egyptians had added to it.
So imam chef, that is an invention. They
added words to the takbeer that the prophet
SAW Salam gave when chef approved of it.
Alright. So Shafi'i himself is saying
now, that which is invented of good things.
So he says that newly invented matter
that does not contradict
the book, the sun, the other,
and the,
then that is something that is an invention
in the deen that is not blameworthy.
And some of the
have divided up
the bidah in action into 5 categories.
That which is permitted, that which is recommended,
that which is obligatory, could be obligatory.
That like, using a mic for salah. They're
gathering the Quran in the time of the
Sahaba. That bid, that is
discouraged and that bid, that is forbidden.
Right?
Well,
He
says, we're reading.
I said we're gonna read 6
entries, ibn Hajar, in Nawawi, ibn Abdul Bar
who came before them, a hate al hateami,
ibn rajiv and a sayyuti,
all on the hadith of
Alright.
What did he even know? So he said,
Alright. Let me translate first. It's a lot.
Okay.
All right.
Let's translate for it.
Alright. So now he begins and
he gives a narration from Abdullah Masood.
You are upon the fitra,
and new things will occur.
If you see them, then you are up
what,
go with the original guidance.
Alright. Go
back in time to the guidance that the
prophet and his companions were on. So the
first,
bidah is ibn Hajjar is saying here.
The first bidah here is
let me see which
yep. The first innovation was writing the Quran.
K.
Ted the first bid I was Tedween
Al Hadith
from a tafsir of Quran. Get writing down
hadith, writing down the tafsir of the Quran,
and these are and then writing down issues
of and chapterizing them.
And then and then having opinion
in matters in which the text is not
clear. All these are innovations that came, and
you have to, in each time,
assess what is guided from this and what
is not.
And then,
he's saying basically,
the matters of the heart, to write that
down. That was not not something the Sahaba
did. So what is envy? How do we
define envy? What are the states of the
heart, etcetera?
So as for the first one,
Omar and Abu Musa had issues
with much writing down of Hadith because they've
why? In in itself, no. They feared
error,
and they feared Tasahul,
taking it too lightly.
And but most of the companions,
they recognize its values.
So here, in every new matter, there is
an ish there is some debate happening here.
So when Hadith was documented,
even Omar Khattab
began was hesitant
because he saw that this thing could go
astray.
There could be errors here, and there were.
We do see that. So now that we're
documenting hadith, give it some time, and a
whole group of people
began lying about the prophet peace upon him.
And that's why document or or they were
very sloppy about
transmitting from the prophet, peace be upon him.
So
means you have to be extremely cautious about
these new matters.
And what he's gonna say here is take
only what is absolutely necessary.
Of course, you have to write hadith. It's
an absolute necessity as you have to document
the Quran and write that into a book.
Things are absolutely necessary. There's no discussion.
So then we have, for example,
what is
Al Rahi. Masa Al Rahi.
Imam Ahmed.
He Ankarahul Imam Ahmed.
Matters that did not come upon in the
time of the did not come up in
the time of the prophet and the companions.
And now we have to answer them. Imam
Ahmed was extremely,
speculative about this. He's skeptical, sorry, about this.
And he
found it blameworthy.
In
a small group.
So again, now that alright. We got issues
that never came up in the time of
the prophet, peace be upon.
We have to write them down. We gotta
answer them. And this is what he's gonna
bring up, and
So imam Ahmed and he says
and a small group said no to all
of this.
Now,
matters related to that
what is
what are the necessary be beliefs
that a Muslim must have? What would put
a person out of Islam altogether if he
rejected it? What would put him outside of
a sun if he rejected it? What would
simply make him wrong if he rejected it?
And what is not necessary to believe at
all?
It's like a belief that you may have
and may not have. So even in matters
of,
not all errors are the same. And this
is a big issue. When you look at,
online people, may misunderstand
certain things.
Errors in Aqidah are not all the same.
Some errors in will put you outside of
Islam. That's that which is explicit
and widespread.
And there are errors that
would you would not put you out of
Islam, but would put you outside of Al
Sunnah. And examples of those are that which
is
however, not
It's not
widespread. You need to have some kind of,
study to know this. But once you do
know it, it's not up for discussion.
Means something not up for discussion.
It only has one meaning. Then there are
matters that are
its its meaning may
have possible meanings,
and then you interpreted it outside that meaning.
And it's not
So as a result of that,
if you go against it, you'd just be
wrong, but it doesn't remove you from and
definitely doesn't remove you from Islam. What does
it mean to be removed from Ahlus Sunnah?
It means you're an innovator, you're a heretic,
your good deeds don't count.
It means your good deeds don't count. You're
a Muslim, we treat you like a Muslim,
but your good deeds are not counting until
you fix your belief.
These are the sects of Islam.
And And then there are a hadith
that are maybe it could be weak.
Could be a weak hadith, but it pertains
to matters of belief. It's not obligatory
to believe in it at all. You may
believe in it. You may not believe in
it.
So
there there are there's a gradation
in error. Not all errors are the same.
And that's the big
it's so simplistic and simple to say, alright.
If it's in the Quran, let's believe it.
If it's not, it's not yet. That's simplistic.
But in the Quran itself has matters that
are.
Of course,
we know it's a verse of the Quran,
but what it means can mean different things.
Not everything of the Quran has only one
possible meaning.
Let's continue.
And
and their speech in the blame blameworthiness
of theological
disputation
is well known, he
says.
All of and Ahmed ibn Hamba. They all
attacked the initial dialectical
theologians.
Why is that? Because the dialect the initial
people who wanted to respond,
to these new questions that came up were
the.
So what they were blaming were the was
the
departure of the
from
Islamic teachings that are in the Quran and
in the Hadith.
The concept of answering back to atheists, answering
back to philosophers, answering back to
innovators is not what they disagreed upon.
They didn't differ upon that.
K. He says here, West Saba Boo.
Alright. The first the the the origin, the
Saba is that they spoke about matters.
They spoke about matters
that the prophet, peace be upon, didn't speak
about and the companions didn't speak about. And
Malik said in their time, in in the
time of the prophet, this Abba, there were
no innovations at all.
Hence, there was no precedent of how to
go about to do this.
Malik himself says, in the time of the
prophet, peace be upon him, there was no
innovation.
At the time of this Abu Bakr and
Omar, there was no innovation. So now when
Muslims now have heretics
and they need to respond, and they are
responding, the 1st generation to do this, the
first group to do this, the, they went
astray in doing so. How did they go
astray? He says here,
They mixed.
They they confused and mixed
matters of religion
with the philosophy of the Greeks.
And who is this? The
So he says here, they they were.
Alright?
And they mixed the Greek thought with their
thought, and then they made what the philosopher
said to be an which would the assumptions
of the philosophers.
The assumptions of the philosophers
to be an. If a hadith or a
verse contradicted that,
they went with the philosophers and they pushed
away the verse and the hadith.
And they they brought and they held to
much high esteem the Greek logicians
and the Greek philosophers.
And they said, this is the origin of
all knowledge.
K.
Whoever doesn't know this stuff is an and
an ignoramus.
That's why
original originally,
in the time of the 4 imams,
dialectical theology,
was innovation because the because of their
methodology and their results,
not because of the concept that we need
to answer atheists
and we need to answer heretics. That's not
the issue.
Alright. So let's continue here.
So he says here, when it is a
dire need and a necessity
to answer people,
then
suffice yourself
with
the texts. In other words, you cannot contradict
our texts of Quran and Hadith when answering
these people and establishing the principles of how
to answer them, and that's what the theologians
eventually did.
He gives a story about the companions. He
said Abdul Malik ibn Marwan wrote to him
a letter and he said, we're now setting
a schedule.
And after and
after Asr, we're gonna tell people stories about
the religion.
That's what we're we're gonna tell people stories
about the deen, the stories about the Sahaba.
And what did the Sahabi say to him?
This companion said, this is an innovation. I
will not take part in it. K.
So him and Hajjar is saying, at that
time, the companions considered that to be an
innovation. Imagine
what else.
While Malafi. And he said that now, so
what is he pointing saying here? If it
mess owed used to remind the Sahaba every
Thursday, he used to sit for a gathering
every Thursday.
So that they would not get bored with
religion. So he'd give them a reminder.
So,
this hadith here says this narration here says
that the prophet used to have it, but
he would only do it because there was
a need, and he wouldn't make it repetitive
every single,
day as a
schedule.
K.
So he's saying here, Ibn Hajjar is saying
here
that
which every
innovation is a misguidance
that which is new without
evidence from the Sharia,
and it is specific, not general.
Right?
So first of all, he's saying that the
one companion negated. He said, no. I'm not
gonna attend to these routine gatherings because that's
an innovation. Then again, even Masod and even
Mas did have routine gatherings.
So every Tuesday, this. Every Monday, this. So
here we have the Sahaba differed upon the
matter.
And then he said, there's also a difference
upon this saying, is
it
or is
it And there, he's basically discussing also 2
different
interpretations and indicators.
Means anything that begins with all.
K?
So by the language of it,
every single innovation is a misguidance,
unlike what Shafi said. However, he says here,
Now there's the Mantuk and there's the Murad.
So the wording of it would indicate that
every single innovation is an innovation. However, what's
meant by it
is that which is innovated without any evidence.
So it's not.
Right?
And that's the end of
oh, he has some more, he says.
So what's in it? What are examples
of
the categories of innovations? This is a good
clip for our,
for what class where recite here from
Al Azebn Abdus Salam
being cited by in
The categories of innovations. Remember, we're talking about
innovations of actions,
not innovations of.
Innovations
of can render you out of Islam altogether
or an a heretic and a sect and
an an innovator where you're a Muslim, but
your good deeds don't count or simply wrong,
but but you're still within and your good
deeds count for you or even permitted. So
their bidah and that we're not discussing right
now. He's talking about bidah in actions.
And we're citing from.
And he gives an example of
an obligatory innovation, something the prophet and the
Sahaba never did. And he says, getting busy
learning grammar.
Studying grammar because only by studying language, vocabulary,
and grammar, and,
syntax and morphology.
Can you understand the words of Allah and
his prophet
and the Sharia and upholding the Sharia as
an obligation?
Preserving the Sharia is an obligation.
So you can't understand the Sharia without understanding
Arabic. So the study of Arabic is a
on the ummah.
It's a communal obligation.
Every generation,
some people have to preserve the Arabic language
and and study it and teach it. So
that is an example of an obligatory innovation.
You
explaining
words that are in hadith that are unknown
or that are,
unique or that are not well known
and also
documenting the methodology
of deriving rulings.
Okay.
And likewise, it's an obligation,
to separate
sound Hadiths from unsound Hadiths.
Got reading here from Al Azzib, Nabi Salam's
5 categories of innovations
and an example of the forbidden innovation.
Yeah.
Beliefs, and he actually is
now bringing up.
What is forbidden?
And this would even be more than forbidden.
It would be put you out of Alisunah,
completely. The beliefs of the,
the beliefs of the,
the beliefs of the,
anthropomorphous,
or,
other sects in the history of Islam.
And there are some innovations. So he went
to the edges, the obligatory and the forbidden
because those are the important ones. Now let's
go to the recommended innovation. Well,
every good deed that didn't happen in the
time of the prophet peace be upon
him. Gathering for prayer,
building schools,
and having,
citadels
and and citadels the citadels where you you
you used to guard the land and there's
been no no no,
invading army for
years years years, they ended up becoming schools.
Right? They just become schools because the guards
have nothing else to do.
Well,
speaking about the matters of the heart.
What is envy, how to get rid of
envy, how to draw near to Allah with
your heart, etcetera, etcetera.
In and debates
the the gatherings where you debate heretics, debate
the shia, debate the qadari, debate the mushabih,
debate the Christians if this,
reward of Allah
is sought. In other words, not just for
the sake of argumentation.
What about a that which is?
Innovations that are simply permitted?
Shaking
hands.
That's what happens in Tareem, and now you
know where they
how
how far back their usul are in Tareem,
daughter Mustafa,
they have al Musafaha
where everybody shakes everyone's hands after and after
Asr. They do that in an organized fashion.
So he's saying this permitted.
What? Having a big home, having a nice
car, having nice clothes. It's an innovation. The
Sahaba never did this.
They didn't go out buying,
building nice homes for themselves and eating nice
foods. They never went out trying to go,
There's a new restaurant. Let's go check it
out. They never did this
type of thing.
So he says, hello. It's permitted.
Yeah. And what about the discouraged innovations?
Some of this that he's talking about
that is what's considered either recommended or permitted.
Another person may have a perspective that is.
So most of our brothers
who would object to certain things like the
gatherings of the Qur, the Mawalid,
the misbaha,
All of that is within the different upon
matters of discouraged, permitted, or even recommended innovations.
So that's where you
you will start to realize that a lot
of times when we put a stake, you
know,
what's the phrase, put our,
flag down or, you know, draw a line
in the sand, there is some
opinion about that.
Right? There is an opinion about that. And
so it's not all
it it and it and it could be
multiple valid opinions.
Depending on the situation,
it could deem them
to both have different perspectives just like there
are different opinions in fiqh. Alright. So that's
ibn Hajar al Asqarena. That's probably the longest
entry. Alright. So we'll click x on that.
Let's go to ibn Abdul Bar.
Let's see how long his entry is on
this. And this is from his book at
Tim Heed. This is his main book.
And he again quotes the Hadith of air
about that the prophet
gave us a great, piece of advice.
Eloquent advice that has everything in it.
And he says,
Oh, messenger of Allah. This is sounds like
advice of somebody who's,
leaving us. In other words, like, you're parting
from us. It's as if you're going back
to Allah,
giving that advice, the advice if someone is
about to pass away.
So what do you what is the final
word do you have for us?
I advise you to have taqwa of Allah.
Listen and obey.
And even if your ruler
is a Havashi,
why does the prophet
say if your ruler is a Havashi?
Why? Because Habashis are black and we and
we she's putting down black people. Habash is
east Africa. No. Because Habash, remember, they were
the previous colonizers of the Arabs,
and they're the ones who tried to destroy
the Kaaba. So all throughout Arabia, Habeshi is
a bad person in in general. The idea
of being ruled by the Habesh.
Right? It's almost like in 1800,
saying the British in America. Oh, the British,
they just colonize us. We just kicked them
out.
Or today,
are you gonna be it'll be ruled by
Germans, or let's say 1950.
You're gonna be ruled by Germans. The the
specter of Hitler is still there.
So the havesh, when the prophet uses that
example about the East Africans,
has nothing to do with the race of
their skin
because many Arabs were also very dark, like,
say, say, been,
extremely dark. So it has nothing to do
with them being black. It has to do
with them being the most latest colonizer that
tried to destroy the Kaaba, so we don't
like them.
That's why the prophet
says even if a habashi rules over you.
In other words, the people you hate.
And if you come after me, the prophet
said, if you live long after me, you're
gonna see a lot of bad things.
A lot of differences.
Oh, it's upon you to take my sunnah,
take the sunnah of the rightly guided.
Remember the rightly guided
When they make a public
policy
that has upon it,
the
consensus of the companions. Hence, it's an extreme
it is a,
a com completely sound
source of law. There's no discussion about it
because all the heard it. And it's a
policy. Policies can't be vague.
It's explicit,
and it's.
It's Mao Sahaba.
So he then continues, and he says,
bite on it with your molar back of
your molars. Beware
of newly invented matters.
Every one of these
is an innovation.
And every Bidah is a misguidance.
And in Nabi Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallamah,
and nahuqalah,
murukum
bikamsi bikamsi. Bikamsin, amaraniallahu
bihin. I command you to 5 things. Allah
commanded me
to
them.
Where's the 5th one? Oh, at Sam,
follow be with the consensus of the group,
be with the large group.
In our world, it's our physical community, but
in scholarship, it means the consensus opinions.
Listen and obey. Listen to your rulers, your
leaders
and and and obey the meaning. The way
that we we have structure and hierarchy, everything.
The household has structure and hierarchy.
The Masjid has structure and hierarchy. The company
has structure and hierarchy. The charity organization has
structure and hierarchy.
The leaders,
their opinion
should be taken by the they they choose,
one amongst themselves.
Then he should listen to their opinions. He
should hear out their opinions, but he should
make the decision
with which he believes he's gonna face Allah
with that decision. When he makes a decision,
you ought to follow it. Everyone's gotta follow
it. That's the way we operate. That's our
method of we don't do,
situate
we don't have a system where
every single person gets to say, no. Only
the leaders. Those who know.
The people who know how to do things,
only them are asked. But the leader has
to make a decision. He's gonna face god
with that decision.
Once you agreed on him as a leader,
as pious and competent
and trustworthy, now you have to obey him.
You can't leave the board meeting and say,
ah, I totally disagree with this. I'm not
doing it. No. You're a part of one
board now. You're one shura.
You may not like the decision. As long
as
it's valid and permitted, you gotta follow it.
You can't go out there and say, no.
I don't like this decision.
Hijra, leave places that are evil. Remember, the
only
the
only reason you are allowed to live in
non Muslim lands is you take part in
the dawah in some way, shape, or form
in the spread of Islam.
Forget about this. It's been gone for 1000
of years except for the or 100 of
years, except maybe the Afghans
who are now $239,000,000
wealthier than yesterday
because the US accidentally what did you how
do you accidentally send 230,000,000 of this stuff?
Like,
is it like,
Zelle,
Wells Fargo account? Oh, shoot. I clicked the
wrong account. I've done that before.
The Wells Fargo app, when you're transferring money
and you hit
from which account to which account, and you
have to click save.
It's a weird thing. Right?
You have to click save on the account
that you wanna send it to because there's
a default account that you always send to.
If you change it,
the box clicks and a check comes out
on the box. But if you don't hit
save
and you just hit okay, it stays on
the default account. Then you hit send. Right?
I've done it many times. I sent money
to the wrong account.
Right?
How in the world do you send accidentally
send 239
million? I'm telling you, they're reciting Surat al
Waka,
getting risk from where they least expected it.
Goes to show you that the whole operation
in Afghanistan had nothing to do with the
Taliban.
Right? Had everything to do with probably natural
gas and everything else.
You don't have the greatest army in the
world spends a $1,000,000,000,000
or whoever, who knows what, for 20 years,
and you didn't have reached your objective.
The objective what must then have never been
to Taliban.
Must have been something else. Right?
Pipelines or whatever.
Continuing on to the Hadith
and
So we're gonna move on and turn the
page.
We're reading from a here
by
waiting for his discussion on innovation.
And if I'm
he may have covered it elsewhere, but I
don't see it here in the initial.
Now he's moved on to different subjects now.
No. He's moved on to different subjects. So
if we can find his I'm sure we
can find his if there is a discussion
on the definition and nature of innovation, we'll
go there. Otherwise, we'll move on.
Alright. So we're gonna move on from Ebrador
Baru. We'll just put a
question mark there because
the sec section on the team, he didn't
cover anything. So let's go now to
by Ibn Rajab Alhambari.
A lot of people out there, they imagine
because
you have a different view of innovation that
you're part from the book and the sunnah.
It's not.
It's that the definition of innovation is vaster
than what you're saying it is. What you're
saying it is, everything that Sahaba didn't do
is an innovation.
That's not true even in your world because
the companions never studied, for example.
They never put rules of Tajweed. They didn't
put
Shadda on the Quran.
There's a lot of things.
So as much as it's the sentiment is
appreciated,
but you have to do things with knowledge
and realize that the opinion is a far
more vaster than what you're making it out
to be.
Same with.
Is a necessity
to answer back groups who are innovated,
groups who are,
completely outside of Islam, like atheists that try
to poke
doubts into the hearts of Muslims, And what
seems to be contradictions,
which many people who now open the Quran,
open the hadith on their own, who are
secular types
the Islamic world and in the Islamic community
say, hold on. This book is contradictory.
So it's upon the to answer these contradictions
so that it may look to you as
a country, but it's not.
And from the
there are none of the premises of the
Greek philosophers has ever entered into their thought
at all.
Alright. So
in doing so, these are is a
to do so. And a lot of these
are misunderstandings by, I'm telling you, pure people.
And I've seen some of these kids who
went from people who used to say, oh,
doctor said you don't go to his message
ever. It's all innovation.
Within, like, 1 year,
they're, like, very friendly. They're always asking me
questions
and all of a sudden, what happened? What
happened was that he had misunderstood.
Even the hadith of the angels, and I'll
say it again. I don't have to say
it a 1000 times. It is a it
is a hadith
that has many narrations.
If you're lost in the desert then call
you aiba Allah because Allah has oh, slaves
of Allah, help me because
there Allah has angels wandering doing different jobs.
Right? That's the summary of the hadith. Hadith
of the prophet and
we said that calling upon other than Allah
is shirk in 2 conditions.
It's shirk in 2 conditions.
So he can't say it's just shirk because
it could not be shirk. What are the
2 conditions? Number 1, you're calling, you're asking
something only Allah can give you. Like forgiveness
of my deeds. Bring something out from nonexistence.
Or you're asking something that,
believing
that who you're whom you're asking
has absolute power.
Believe it has absolute power. As for if
these two conditions are not there, then now
you're maybe in permissibility
or even maybe discouragement
and you may be even in prohibition
but you would not be in shirk
unless these two conditions are observed.
Let's come back to reading Ibn Hajjar, Ibn
Raja Alhambali.
Everything that
is upon the Sharia,
and the deen is not rejected.
Any action that is outside the boundary of
the Sharia
that,
is not guided by the Sharia is rejected.
The phrase that our affair is not our
command is not upon our command, he says
it's pointing to the fact that the actions,
all of the actions, they must be under
the banner of the Sharia. There must be
some evidence in the Sharia.
And this is where their matters differ.
Okay? And, again, I
don't wanna delay this one actually, but so
I'm actually gonna,
he goes he looks at Hadith at Irbalj.
Let me look that up.
And Irbalj.
Because I don't wanna skip if not.
I wanna have the Hambali perspective here.
You're just gonna have to wait and bear
with me here.
You're just gonna have to wait.
Almost there.
How's the chat going?
Really wanted to get it. I've been on
this.
Here we go. Let's
do a I'll do that.
Okay. I think this is it.
He talks about
for Homer Dut.
In anything that comes that is outside of
the commandment of Allah and his messenger
is rejected.
Do they have partners that they're taking
orders from of what to do in their
religion
that Allah has not permitted.
If you're trying to draw near to Allah
with an action that Allah and his messenger
have not,
legislated
for you, then it is rejected.
For example,
in the
before Islam, their,
rights their tawaf
was by
clapping and whistling and things like that. They
had invented that after
prophet Ibrahim Alaihi Salam, and that's an example
of takar rub,
an act of Ibadah that is,
useless.
That that is rejected
and blameworthy.
And he just says,
someone who listens to a song and says,
I'm gonna draw near to Allah by this
or by dancing.
K.
Things like this.
So if you swear an oath
to do some an act of worship that
turns out to be has no basis
as this companion had done, your oath is
invalid in the first place, and you don't
have to abide by it. A man was
fasting,
and the prophet saw him standing in the
sun at an hour that nobody stands in
the sun. He said, why is this man
standing in the sun? He said,
he swore an oath that his fast, he's
gonna add to his fast. No shade, no
sitting. The prophet
said, sit and sit in the shade.
Alright. Leave this and sit in the shade
and don't bother
with such an oath which is invalid.
And that was during Jummah. That's why the
he stuck out to the prophet who was
in the middle of Jummah.
Okay. Let's see what else has says.
My
Now listen to this.
That which is a Korba
in a specific location,
in a specific setting
is a Korba all the time.
Listen to this principle.
That which is a Korba in one setting
is a Korba all the time.
K?
Sorry. It's not a Korba all the time.
It is not a Korba all the time.
For example, he says here,
So then is that not a way to
draw near to Allah by calling, but you
can't do it all the time.
Right?
Standing at Arafa and making dua even in
the sun and and and,
the sun's hitting your head. It's a Korba
in Arafa,
but not in other places times and places.
Not every act of worship
in one setting is an act of worship
is acceptable elsewhere.
So you have to see what is the
location of an act being acceptable.
A clear example of that, you can't fast
on Eid. You can't
pray in the in the time when that's
forbidden.
Or
you have a matter that is of the
Sharia, but you removed or you add
So now we have to discuss this.
You have a matter that's Mashruah. You remove
something from it or you added something to
it.
We cannot say is accepted nor rejected.
Rather you examine it. And here is where
Ibn Al Rajab is pointing. And this is
what we're talking about of matters that
if they have
things that the Sahaba had not done in
it, he's saying he but it's mixed with
something that is.
K?
You have to examine it. You cannot say
it's fully accepted or fully rejected. You have
to examine it.
So if what you removed from it wasn't
was a precondition
or an obligation of it, and then at
that point,
then we could say the whole the whole
thing is rejected.
So if you remove what you remove from
it
is an obligation
or a precondition,
then the whole thing is invalid.
So for example, someone who makes
and he does everything 4 times, not 3
times,
That 4th
is rejected, but the rest of the wudu
is valid.
Likewise, somebody who, for example,
and by the way, there's there's discussion about
that because the hadith of Abu Huraira says
we'll increase.
So there is discussion
about increasing beyond the number of 3. But
in the majority
view,
there's no need.
Only if there's a need, like there's some
dirt that you can't get off your hands
that caked or something.
Now for example, if you prayed and
you added
a raka, now the whole salah is invalid.
So addition, when you add something,
you have to look at,
you have to it has to be examined.
Is that addition
negating the whole act or is just the
addition negated or is the addition per completely
valid? As we said, Al Shafi'i's,
permitting of the Athkar of the Egypt and
the Tikbirats of the Egyptians,
where they added beyond what the prophet, sallallahu
alaihi wasallam, had said. So therefore it's not
mud at all.
Now there's matters that are different upon.
What is the status of someone's
salah who covered his aura with a stolen
garment? Is the stealing haram
and the prayer valid? Or is the stealing
haram and the prayer is is haram
is invalid, sorry.
The scholars differ on matter, and that's the
whole point of telling
a lot of these,
well intentioned and pure brothers who have learned
one matter without realizing that there's actually discussion
on it.
Okay. Another example, someone he
stole
a water bottle from a gas station, ran,
made with it.
Right?
Is the stealing haram is the wood or
and the woodu valid or the stealing haram
and the wudu invalid
or stolen land. You stole
right? So all of that different.
So what's the rod mud dude here. What
is mud
dude? What's mud dude is the sin. That's
it. That's what the majority
are upon.
Okay.
The sin is you have the sin for
sealing the water, but your will do is
valid.
Abdelrah, so he says here,
Majority say, yes. The stealing is forbidden,
but the would it would be valid.
So what they're do this is what it
means here.
You
have to look into the matter and separate.
It's not just all gonna be 1, stroke
and you have your answer.
K.
In, and so on. Okay. So there he
continues talking
about that issue.
Alright. So the point of that he's making
is that an innovation
that is within the realm of the Sharia
has to be examined.
What are you adding, and does that addition,
is it blameworthy?
And does it negate the entire,
act of worship
or it's blameworthy in itself or it's not
even blameworthy in itself?
K?
If you accidentally add a raka in salah,
the questioner is asking, accidentally is different from
intentionally. We're talking about intentionally. If you accidentally
added a rakah, as soon as you remember
you go down,
you make you salam out and then you
pray 2 ruku of
sahu
for adding to the salah.
K?
So he gives many other
examples, and he goes
into many other examples.
But, ultimately,
here. Can you answer this? Tell them take
a message.
Alright. He goes to other examples.
Let's now move to the next book and
that message? Yeah. Take a message. Answer it
and take a message, please.
Let's go to ibn Hajar Al Haytemi now.
We're now on ibn Hajar Al Haytami.
We read all the all this we're reading
on the nature of every innovation is a
misguidance, which we uphold.
Every innovation is a misguidance.
What is the meaning?
Yes. We we know that the wording would
indicate that
every single one, whereas
that's not the the understanding of the companions
because they held that,
a chef as a chef sorry, of the
of the imams as a noted
that the Sahaba themselves had to do things
that never did such as gather the Quran.
And the set of had to the 1st,
2nd, and 3rd generate the 2nd, 3rd generation.
From
EDP. Oh, I don't wanna talk to him.
He said that,
they had to gather they had to study
grammar. 2nd and third generation had to start
studying grammar. It's a it's a innovation that
was an obligation. They had to set schedules
even though some of the Sahabi didn't like
setting schedules.
We used to give so it shows that
there is room for disagreement on this matter.
You have Abdul Malik ibn Marwan writing to
a Sahabi, please come to this newly established
schedule
of
advising the Muslims after and after us talking
to them, encouraging them. That the prophet never
did that. He never set a schedule. He
advised when he advised.
I'm not coming to this innovation. Then you
have Ibn Abbas setting a schedule and Ibn
Mas'ud setting a schedule.
The difference being they recognize that their schedule
is just for the need of it, not
because there's anything blessed or set for that
day or time.
Alright. Now let's read.
Is there gonna be a discussion or just
the,
the senate he's talking about?
No.
No. No discussion. Let's move on because we're
taking up a lot of time here. Let's
go to
we Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam
Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam
Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam
Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam
Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam
Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam
Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam
Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam
Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam
Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam
Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam
Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam Islam
this Hadith, whoever establishes a good sunnah in
Islam, he has the reward of it
and everyone who does it. So he says,
Imam Abu Nawawi says, this is a
indicator of encouragement
to begin new, to do good things and
to establish good,
precedent. That's what's what it means here, precedent.
And warning from,
inventing something
that is bottled,
that
is a bad, ugly,
And
the reason for this speech or the reason
for this, saying this,
if you had that Hadith and no,
the reason for all this, the setting of
this Hadith, a man came to the prophet
he he came with a big basket that
he couldn't even carry.
K.
And apparently, he gave it in charity. So
the prophet said, if you had that hadithi
Alright. So this man had done a charitable
act and the prophet said this hadith. Now
to the part of
what's innovation, Imam An Nawawi says,
What the prophet intended here is
only the
new things that are bottled. They have no
basis in the sharia.
And innovations that are blameworthy.
We mentioned in the chapter on Jumah
that Bida is a 5 categories.
And he and that's all he's saying about
it.
Yeah.
And I, unfortunately, we'd have to go back
into
the chapter on salah,
Let's look it up here.
Because
in we have to read in we can't
skip in
k.
That's all he says here.
Alright. Let's see here.
Here it is.
In this hadith, there are many benefits,
and he's gonna now discuss the meaning of
the Mujaddath here.
1st, he goes into
the senate. He discusses the senate.
And then
The reason that he says here, it's.
It's general wording that indicates the majority.
Alright.
And the intended meaning here of this hadith
says in no way, the intended meaning of
every single innovation is a misguidance,
is that the majority of innovations are misguidance.
K. In language, an innovation is everything that
has no precedent. Khalil Olama,
the scholars in in Sharia, the definition of
bidah, it's at its end 5 categories depending
on the nature of it. And they said
that it is, as we said, permissible,
obligatory, forbidden, recommended, or discouraged.
And the
said about this,
for example, their response to Malahida,
their response to heretics and atheists.
Like like, that would be, for example, something,
obligatory communal obligation to do and recommended for
an individual to do.
Writing down books of knowledge.
Right? Building schools
and other things. And from the,
having different types of food and a big
menus, etcetera, like that could be permitted.
And
that which is haram and is known is
is is clear. It's
Meaning that which entails something forbidden or something
discouraged.
Yes. The wording is a
all innovations, but what is intended
is the specific, that which is a misguidance.
K?
And he says there are many a hadith
like this.
K? Uayudu Maqulna.
Umr ibn Khattab
is saying about the is an example of
indicating that not every single innovation is a
misguidance.
So it's
The the wording is general, and it's it's
as if it's an all encompassing principle, but
it's specifying certain things such as
saying,
accepting and praising
something that never happened in the time of
the prophet, peace be upon him.
Okay. That would indicate
that it is general but intending a specific
form of innovation And that the reason is
that most innovations are misguidance.
Okay. And that's just another example of every
just because something begins with every doesn't mean
it doesn't have exceptions.
Allah says in the Quran,
Allah sends a
a storm
that destroys all things. Clearly, it didn't destroy
all things.
So clearly, the word all in the does
not mean all things, everything.
Allah sent a storm
that destroys all things.
Right? Well, no. Not all things were destroyed.
The Kaaba wasn't destroyed from that, for example.
Not all things. The ground wasn't destroyed. The
trees may have not been destroyed.
But in general, it appears most things,
vast majority of things.
Okay.
So that's all he has to say about
this.
Alright. So that's a good
summary. Now let's go to
a seal team.
Click click.
Says the exact same thing. He said this
is specific. The language is cool, but as
he said, as a no as a no
we just said, not every mention of the
word every
is actually every, but it's most,
Could be
most.
So he says this hadith, this every new
thing is a blame worthy innovation
is specific to which ones.
That which does not have a basis in
the religion.
That act, which is established on the foundations
of the religion,
but the companions had never done it and
the set up had never done it. But
it's on the basis and the foundations and
the purposes of the religion who is not
blameworthy
and is not sinful.
That's it. That's all he said here. Subhanallah.
That was very brief.
So he bought something from every one of
them.
K?
And that's it.
Khalas, we're done with that. Let's take 2,
3 questions, and then we wrap up.
So the summary here,
is that
The this hadith
should point us all to more to aun
when we study
this, this this the Sharah of this hadith.
It should lead us to more
Neither are those
who
interpret matters
to be based upon the religion and it's
good and the result is good, not their
knowledge is not absolute knowledge
or binding on it. Nor those who in
matters of opinion,
on matters new matters that are deemed
has a basis in religion
and it has a good result and does
not contradict the Sharia,
that all of that is blameworthy and that
doesn't exist. That concept doesn't exist nor is
their their opinion,
God's word that we're all bound by.
So there are
Matt, these are questions of different difference. So
keep in mind, by reading this, I'm not
saying that there's only that one opinion that,
no, there is 5
the the categories of bid out. Yeah. There
are 5, but that doesn't mean we all
agree on what goes where.
Clearly, somebody could could hold,
one act
to be an innovation, and he deems it
harmful, and he deems it has no basis.
And there could be another one who deems
yes. It has a clearly has a basis,
and it's benefiting the people and there's not,
removing anything of the sunnah.
And there could be hilaf on this.
And that's, I think, what's important. So we're
doing, like, for example, on the, gatherings of,
we're we we don't wanna just bring one
evidence that suits what I may personally practice
or not practice. We gotta bring all the
evidences
to show the and the people who are
listening to this that it really is on
both sides. There's room for both opinions to
be completely valid.
And it should never be that a, a
matter of speculation
and seeking out evidence,
should be,
argued upon
and community splits upon, and people don't talk
to people upon.
Why did you say, ma'am, and now he
isn't? He himself is
because that's the truth
about him. So is it been Hajjar Alaskalani?
He is.
No no discussion about that.
No discussion about that.
So now when a brother comes, it's not
okay. I think that this, is a bit
of I don't know, sound and you could
say that. But
with what do you hold it to be
a bita? With absolute certainty or with your
speculation and opinion?
You can say a very it's speculation opinion,
but a very, very strong one. I said,
I don't know, sir. No problem. And what
is your view of the other brothers?
No. They're completely they're innovators.
So that means what? He should divorce his
wife?
Because, you know, that's an obligation once. If
a man is truly an innovator, meaning like
a shiai or a khadari,
that marriage
is haram to stay in that marriage. The
it's valid.
It's not,
but it's haram
to stay in such a relationship.
So prayer behind such a person.
Is it is it sinful? Because the prayer
behind the innovate so don't separate the don't
forget
the levels of innovation.
Innovation that you think it's it's in it's
as an innovation,
or is it put you into the category
of here
that you're an innovator? And that's the big
difference of people what they have to understand
when they say something innovative. I have no
problem somebody says this miss is a bit
fine. But it's a bit of
You you consider it in your opinion too.
Right? So for example, this the the Hanafis
have something far bigger than this. They don't
eat any of the crayfish
that Allah has given us to enjoy like
lobster, crab.
And I think they don't even eat fish
with scales
or or without scales.
And they deem it to be haram.
So he's looking at you and he believes
you're eating, but he believes you on what
basis? On a basis of opinion.
Not a basis that this is God's book
and God's law. Yeah. It is God's book
and God's law to him by speculation and
itched your head.
As a result of that, I could sit
next to him eating the lobster,
eating the lobster tail sandwich or whatever they
sell in Boston.
Right? Lamb, what's it? Lobster bisque? And he's
right in front of me.
And I was not there's nothing offensive about
that. And nor is he a hypocrite for
being my friend because it's a matter of
difference of opinion, and that's the whole point.
Since we're on the topic, how do scholars
differentiate between Dean and Dunya?
Bida and Din versus
so it should be Ibadat and.
There is there are Ibadat
and there are more or not even.
I don't necessarily think the bifurcation of
has no basis.
It clearly has a basis in lived life.
Right? In lived life, it has a basis.
When we,
everyday,
life, there are matters of religion,
like, for example, moral matters.
Woman gets raped. When can she have an
abortion? It's a matter of deen. Right?
Alright. So let's say the said, yeah. Within
40 days, you were raped. Yes. You can
have this abortion.
Okay. The technology of how to do it
is dunya.
Or for example, the
nature of the meat has to be slaughtered.
That's deen. How do I cook it?
Let me go to,
some
website, not a Muslim website, to learn a
recipe. That's dunya.
Didn't Zainal, Dean Al Iraqi, and Tajid Dinasuki
warn against ibn Abdul Bar? May I don't
know. I can't say anything. But maybe in
terms of
his positions in because he does sometimes have
positions that are all over the place.
What if a husband is not paying for
25 years but agrees to pay it now?
How does he account for how much the
money was worth? No. We don't do that.
If he owed you
the 25 years ago and he never paid
it, that's on you and your.
Why did you tolerate this? You had rights.
What is your rights? Don't touch me.
That's your right to say that
if you didn't pay up the Mahar.
Right? When it was due.
But you don't get it in the value
of the dollar back then. You don't get
that. You get 25,000.
If I see an innovator at the gym,
sect person who who uphold sects,
That's not a word do you wanna mispronounce,
but he upholds some heresies in.
You ignore them completely. You don't befriend them.
We're very strict with that. We're very strict
with that. And I'm telling you the shame
of the matter is that we're very strict
with someone who is a heretic in religion.
He he negates
and he goes against that which cannot be
gone against.
Text.
We don't wanna mix up our religion here.
Explicit text. No room for interpretation.
They go against it. We call those innovators.
We have no relationship with them. We don't
befriend them. We don't hang out with them
because there are rights that Allah has.
We all know if someone was to say,
for example,
make fun of my friend's race.
Let's say I have a friend who is
Native American,
and this guy and another guy in the
community, he's always
railing against and making native American jokes.
At some point, he said, Klaus, we're not
dealing with this person anymore. I'm offended
because you offended my friend. I'll in our
society,
we really elevate the rights of people. We
don't elevate the rights of God. Nobody cares
about the rights of God,
but we do.
So if someone is going to
openly go against God's word,
his word that cannot be interpreted is not
up for interpretation. Some is, some isn't.
Some verses are, some verses aren't.
That person is in our religions called the
fassel.
Likewise,
the the the the the the the one
whose beliefs are correct, but he openly sins
against God. No shame opens a liquor store.
We have no relation with him anymore.
Who's the biggest CNN anchor, most established
face in America right now? Anderson Cooper. Anderson
Cooper. Can he Anderson Cooper get caught
hanging out with let's say
a racist for example like a no like
a known racist, right?
A known supporter of, let's say, some, I
don't know, dick a Putin.
Can Anderson Cooper get caught hanging out with
Jackson Hinkle?
He can't get caught having a cup of
coffee with him. Right? It's a scandal. CNN
will be in big trouble.
Jackson Hinkle essentially works for Putin. Right?
Anderson Cooper's mister establishment. CNN, clean-cut.
Right? All that. He can't get caught
hanging out with such people.
You can't get caught hanging out and fraternizing
with someone who offends god every single day,
publicly and openly. That's the idea. That's the
concept.
That doesn't mean you won't have some interaction
here or there. I can have a dentist,
and I don't ask his religion. Then I
discover, oh, this guy is a Shia. Alright.
That's his personal religion. Right? But I'm not
there to be friends with him, but he's
a good dentist. I'll go to him. Right?
No problem. If I had the choice from
the get go,
maybe I wouldn't have,
gone to him if he was
right. Maybe I wouldn't have gone to him
just to keep the money within the community.
But nonetheless, even if I did say, yeah,
here's a Sunni guy. He's a nice beautiful
Hanafi brother, and this is an Iranian Shia,
but his dental reviews are terrible. He doesn't
know how to
treat and do surgery on teeth. This guy's
dental reviews are top notch. I'm taking my
kid to the guy who's top notch.
His she hasn't that's his personal business.
You know, we're not there for friendship. So
the same concept that god has rights, and
I know the social the new new generation
doesn't really care about that.
They care about the rights of slaves,
rights of people,
not the rights of Allah.
So such a person we do ignore them
and we disavow. We disavow from them.
Right? We disavow from them completely.
Is the hadra permissible?
Most say it's it's
a,
it no one disagrees that it's an innovation,
but they disagree on its ruling.
K.
I will talk to Hasid. Some people say
there is no good in there is no
good bida. No. There clearly
is.
Right? There clearly is, but it depends on
how you're defining bida at this point. Right?
If the very definition of it is that
it's blame worthy actions, then clearly there can't
be a good bid. But if the definition
of it is something new,
then we say that it goes into the
5 categories. And we just read them so
you can rewind the video for that.
Brother Cash asked a theological question. He says,
it said that your death is the time
of your death is written. 1 will die
at such a time no matter what. The
suburb of it might differ. You may be
run over. You may be die of death
as a natural death,
etcetera.
Does it mean that that person would have
died anyway?
Allah knows best about these things because
we can't really
we can't really say, but ultimately, all we
can say for sure is that
when and how you die
is written for
you. Now
what may be different is are you gonna
be blameworthy or praiseworthy?
Right?
Are you gonna be blameworthy or praiseworthy? Someone
who dies of cancer, for example, 99%,
we feel terrible about them. Right? What if
he died of cancer And he said, you
know what? No. I'm not gonna go into
the doctors.
I'm just gonna,
try,
to pray and that's it. Not going to
the doctors. Now he dies of cancer just
like the
other one died of cancer, but he may
die blameworthy. Hey. What's what's going on? You
had 3 kids. Why don't you go to
the doctor? Why don't you try to save
your life so he may die
the same time, same place, but he may
be blameworthy.
Right? Personal thoughts on the Hadra and movement
and swaying in. We don't do that. We
do.
Note holding that it is a matter of.
Remember, we don't divide our community up or
allegiances based on matters of HT head. I
hold this a matter of HT head. And
I have very close friends of mine who
say, no. I prefer not to sit there.
I think that it's an innovation.
But what does he think it's an innovation
based on? Based on his too.
Matters of itch he had should never be
the source of breaking a relationship.
And the ignorant person thinks matters of itch
he had, he elevates them to matters that
are explicit. Itch jihad means scholarly,
effort.
If any matter requires scholarly effort to get
to that conclusion,
stop
there. Right?
That's your that's the opinion you chose to
follow. Those are the scholars you chose to
follow. That's not religion.
Explicit definitive matters. That's what
unifies and,
and breaks
relationships.
That's what the our brotherhood should be about.
And the one who
always talks about this is
doctor Hadzaman Hajj, which is why I have
so much respect for him because he brings
that forth and he holds hold on. Matters
of,
let it be matters of It should not
be a sectarian matter.
No one got a notification
when I went live. So are we shadowbanned?
Allah knows best. Allah knows best. Yeah. You
weren't even coming up in my feed.
They're trying to shadow, Ben. There's no doubt
about that. You used to be at the
top. Yep. It's the sponsoring one. How do
you explain f shotism for beginners?
For beginners, it's an attempt
by the scholars to answer matters that had
not come up before in the time of
the prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam.
It
they founded something called.
In the same way, Shafi founded a science
called,
the method of deriving rulings. Shafi'i,
the mutakalamin,
such as Abul Hasan al Ashari,
founded a science
in which you would answer back
to Malahida, atheists.
You would answer back to deviance,
those who deviated away from explicit texts within
the Ummah
in theology.
And you would answer back to those who
ask questions about
seeming apparent contradictions in the religion.
And the Usul
just this is the goal. That's the goal.
What is the methodology?
The methodology
is to abide by the word of Allah
and the word of his messenger and take
guidance from that. And in arguing
these points across,
you argue them upon the basic
assumptions that every word has to have a
set meaning
and no statement can contradict itself. The basic
rules
of discussion. The basic rules of
argumentation
or of establishing any meaningful statement.
So they have to observe these basic rules.
These are the Usur.
The founder,
Abu Hasan al Ashari,
and the
Abu Mansur and Maturidi, the 2 founders.
The followers, the Hanafis followed the Maturidis and
the Madakis and Shafais
followed the Asha'aira.
The ultimately, is it it's it's as it's
it's
it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's
what makes us hadith sahih or not. So
you have to do it.
You have to answer these people. You cannot
leave
the atheist to run free.
Sowing doubts in the hearts of Muslims or
a Shiite to run free.
You also,
it has to establish
because we interact with these people. Right? It
has to establish
what renders
they believe
or
Mistake.
So beliefs. Now people have different beliefs.
So and I have to interact with these
people. So now we need an answer.
Is this person out of Islam or in
Islam?
Or is there a middle category
called innovators?
What makes someone out of Islam or in
Islam? What makes someone an innovator? And what's
my interaction with them?
And what beliefs are not neither of those,
but they're just wrong?
What is the,
what are the
parameters or what are the,
what is the logic behind
why such a belief will put you out
of Islam?
And they brought,
a good answer to that, which is that
which is explicit
in its language
and far widespread every single person knows this.
That means God and his prophet repeated this
so many times. It is the definition of
Islam. It's
It's been when you enter Islam, these are
the assumptions you have
of the word Islam.
That puts you out of Islam if you
don't believe in that.
Then, like, for example, someone says, I'm a
Muslim. I pray
5 times a day. I pray all the
sunnah and I fast every other day, but
I don't believe the 5 prayers are obligatory.
I just believe that they're recommended.
I fast Ramadan every year, but I believe
it's recommended. So at that point, you're going
against whatever Muslim knows. That's obligation.
Repeat it over and over in the Quran
and the Sunnah. So you are now out
of Islam. No matter how much time you
pray, you're saying I'm a Muslim because the
definition of Islam is
that the,
the scholar that these theologians had to also
define what is the sect
and why is that there? Why am I
saying this? Because all over the Internet, people
talk about this. So we have to discuss
it. We're not trying to be divisive. We're
actually trying to be inclusive. And if there's
a rationale for why certain doctrines are
and ideas are innovation.
And the rationale is you wanna get an
against an explicit text.
Has no other interpretation.
So clearly, you're just following your whims. Just
like someone who says, I'm a vegetarian except
I eat steak every day. That's it. One
steak. That's it. No. You went against the
word vegetarian at that point. But what if
someone says I'm a vegetarian, but I eat
fish?
Probably maybe there's some I can't say you're
not a vegetarian
but there may be the the real vegetarians
may think you're like a heretic.
Pescatarian. Pescatarian. Right? So at that point now
there are matters that are
explicit
but they're not widespread. Not a lot of
people would know them. We all laugh when
someone says I am vegetarian that eats steak
because it's well known. But can a vegetarian
eat,
like fake beef? Beef
that was made,
you know, in a lab. It's beef. It's
not vegetable. It's beef but it was made
in a lab. No no animal was harmed.
Like, when Right? Young puppies.
Not plant.
Beef. Okay. So But lab mate. Okay.
So that's a matter if there was a
holy book of vegetarianism,
they'd have they'd need to discuss that. No
one who knows? Right? So in in this
this band here, this category, it's explicit things
that you wouldn't know it unless you studied
it.
So you're forgiven until you're informed about it.
But once you're informed about it, if you
still plan to be stubborn, you're an innovator.
Well, what's the spiritual
result of the innovator? His good deeds don't
count
until he fixes his belief. And everything they
do in Islam with the community is valid,
but sinful to be with them. So to
marry them, it's a valid marriage, but it's
sinful.
Valid but sinful. To pray behind him, your
prayer is valid, but you're sinful for praying
behind him, so on and so forth, and
we should stay away from them.
Right? Is that only if you know? Yeah.
Only if you know. With certainty, not know
with speculation.
He looks like a Wahhabi. No, that's not
how it works, right? He's got a big
beard. A lot of people have big beard.
That's wonderful to have big beard, right?
That's the idea here.
Another, and then there are some beliefs that
are just wrong,
simply wrong. But they don't make you innovators.
Right? They don't let make you,
out of a slump.
Like they're just errors. Just errors. And other
beliefs are
neither is nothing permitted to believe it. Like,
the beliefs related to stories the prophet told
about that are very weak hadiths.
The prophet told this story. It's a very
weak hadith,
but you choose to believe it close. It's
up to you. Believe that or not believe
that
we're trying here to to have inclusivity.
Inclusivity does not mean we include everybody, but
we have a logic behind what we include
and what we not include. And a lot
of the fighting that's happening in the community
and online
is on matters that the brother is trying
to follow the right thing. He's trying to
do the right thing, and he was told
this is the right thing where I'm saying,
no. It's this is actually the right thing.
Right?
There's a an expanse here and a spectrum
of matters of opinion,
valid opinions.
And I gave you the proofs of the
scholars who who said those things.
We gotta go, folks.
Other work to do.
So many
good things.
Differences.
There there I have a book on it,
but it's
very, very minor details, I would say,
in the grand scheme of things.
A
brother says, what if there's an a person
who's on innovation?
Right? He is born into a sect.
Okay? But he's got better character
than anybody else you know. Right?
Well, can I befriend that person? I'll tell
you
the conditions
of that. If there is a potential that
this person is very religious and will try
to invite you to his religion,
then no. If he just happens to be
born that way,
then no problem. Right? And that's how we
deal with our neighbors too. Like, you got
neighbors maybe of course, they're gonna be different
religions. Right?
But the question is, do they try to
invite your kids to become
that
or they're just not?
That's really where you have to draw the
line.
So it depends on their intention. Yeah. It
depends on their intention because let's say this
person he says he's like a great friend
of mine. Fine. That's all fine and good
until he gets religious. You're gonna have problems.
Right?
And we don't deny that a person may
have
great character
and the wrong beliefs.
It's possible.
Right? And you have the right beliefs and
bad character.
And we uphold that in the sight of
Allah, subhanahu wa ta'ala,
the beliefs are more important
than character.
We don't like to hear that,
but why do we believe that? Because if
you have the right belief, you have the
potential
to perfect your character. If you got the
wrong belief, you'll never protect your character. Yes.
He's got honesty right, but he doesn't have
worship right.
Mikaeli asked that we're I'm taking I take
the questions from Instagram, but I also take
them more readily on YouTube, so if you
decide a YouTube channel. So if somebody's got
the wrong beliefs
but great character,
he he's closed the door on ever perfecting
the most important elements of his character, which
is about your position with God.
So that's why it's a big difference.
A guy is a terrible driver.
He falls asleep. He makes wrong turns. He's
not paying attention,
but his GPS is set on the right
address.
Another guy's a wonderful driver, always on the
speed limit,
great stamina,
making great time,
but he's actually got the wrong
address
in the GPS.
Which one are you gonna go with? I
don't wanna go with the guy who's a
bad driver, but if I had to choose,
I gotta go with that guy because he
has the potential to get back on the
right track. Whereas the other one does not
have that potential. It's a guarantee.
He will, with great character, end up at
the wrong destination.
And that's the difference. Right?
And that's and that's the difference without ever,
without ever,
trying to be sectarian about things and break
up relationships, but we just do do have
to know this because we live in a
cosmopolitan area
and cosmopolitan world these days, but we do
have beliefs. So how do we navigate these
2? And that's what we're talking about here.
Let's see what Maddie
Clay
is
saying.
Mohammed Abdul Rahab.
Mohammed Abdul Rahab, his brother is the one
who negated his errors. He has a lot
of errors.
He's got a lot of errors.
I have to say that.
And his brother is the one who answered
him.
Ladies and gentlemen, a kinetic nomad is saying,
are we are you saying we should have
no Shia friends? If they're calling you to
that religion
or that you feel that eventually that he
may,
then clearly not. Right?
Clearly not. Can I have a white friend?
Yes. Until unless he's a white supremacist. Right?
If he's calling you because we know that
people are just born in religions. Right?
So if that's the case, that's not gonna
be the issue. The case is, does he
call you to that?
Or does he have the potential to call
you that to that? And if you're gonna
get very deep and get and marry this
into that religion or that family, yes, the
guy may not care now, but he may
care when he has kids. Or his mother
may care to the point that she eventually
invites your kids,
to go down that route.
So that's what we're talking about. That's why
we have to understand that.
Muneeb Iqbal, why do we not have seclusion
like the prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam? We do
have seclusion,
but,
that a seclusion that doesn't take away from
other sunan that we have to do in
life or obligations.
So, for example, the way that we have
seclusion today is in small amounts
at a time that is good for your
mental health and doesn't take away from your
obligations.
I was with last
year. Yeah. And the whole of his tour
was basically
around seclusion. And then he basically advised that
you ask permission from a spiritual doctor Mhmm.
Of when you can
increase your amount in seclusion Yep. So it
doesn't so you don't end up being a
detriment to yourself.
And you're actually healing yourself and
maximizing your benefit because
seclusion doesn't work unless you're,
Yes.
Exactly. You need a balance. It has to
be balanced out. It can't be
excessively done like that to the point that
it hurts your, mental health, your social well-being.
So it has to be balanced like that.
Alright. We gotta go straight to the end.