Seeking Sacred Sunni Knowledge

Good Bida'ah vs Misguided Bida'ah

 

Compiled by SeekingIlm Staff 

Imām Ash-Shāfi’ī said,

    “Bida’ah is of two kinds: Bida’atun Mahmūda (praiseworthy bida’ah) and Bida’ahtun Madhmūma (blameworthy innovation).”
    Abu Nu’aym also reports with different wording:
    البدعة بدعتان: بدعة محمودة وبدعة مذمومة، فما وافق السنة فهو محمود، وما خالف السنة فهو مذموم
    “Bida’ah is of two types: Bida’ah that is praiseworthy and Bida’ah that is blameworthy. What agrees with the sunnah is praiseworthy and what contradicts the sunnah is blameworthy.”

[Abu Nu'aym's Al-Hilya, Ibn Rajab's Jaami' Al-'Ulum wal Hikam (Arnaa'ut stated "Sahih" in his edition), Ibn Hajr in Fat-h-ul Baari, Shawkaani in Qawl Al Mufid]

To read a defense and proven authentication of these words from Imam Ash-Shafi’i read here.

Imām Al-Jurjānī states in At-Ta’rifāt,

    “Whatever contrivance (fi’latun) contradicts the Sunnah, it is named Bida’ah because whoever supports it innovated it without basis from an Imām. It consists of a novel matter which the Sahābah and their successors did not follow and which is unsupported by a legal proof.” [pg 62]

Ibn Hajr Al-Haytamī said, “Bida’ah in terms of the law is everything innovated in contravention of the Lawgiver’s command and the latter’s specific and general proof.” [At-Tabyīn fī Sharh Arba’īn]

Ibn Al-Jawzī defined misguided bida’ah as,

    “…whatever is blameworthy in contravening the foundations of the law”.

Qadhī Ibn Al-‘Arabī stated,

وإنما يذم من البدعة ما خالف السنة

    “Only the bida’ah that contradicts the Sunnah is blameworthy.” [‘Aridhat Al-Ahwādhī]

Al Hafith Ibn Hajr Al-’Asqalaani stated in his Fat-hul-Baari Sharh Sahih Al Bukhaari when explaining the famous statement of ’Umar ibn Al-Khattab: ‘What an Excellent Bida’ah this is!’;

قال عمر نعم البدعة في بعض الروايات نعمت البدعة بزياة تاء والبدعة أصلها ما أحدث على غير مثال سابق وتطلق في الشرع في مقابل السنة فتكون مذمومة والتحقيق أنها أن كانت مما تندرج تحت مستحسن في الشرع فهي حسنة وأن كانت مما تندرج تحت مستقبح في الشرع فهي مستقبحة وإلا فهي من قسم المباح وقد تنقسم إلى الأحكام الخمسة

    “‘Umar said, “[What a] Fine innovation!” and in some narrations a (letter) ‘taa’ is added. The root meaning of innovation (bida’ah) is what is produced without precedent. It is applied in the law in opposition to the Sunna and is, in that case, blameworthy. Strictly speaking, if it is part of what is classified as commendable by the law then it is an excellent innovation (hasana), while if it is part of what is classified as blameworthy by the law then it is blameworthy (mustaqbaha), otherwise it falls in the category of what is permitted (mubaah). It can be divided into the five legal categories [(or rulings)Ahkaam Al-Khamsah)].

[Fat-hul Baari Sharh Sahih Al Bukhaari]

Notice that most jurists define bida’ah dhalālah (misguided) as an act or dogma that contradicts the Sunnah and has no foundation in Islām. So if an act does not contradict the pure Sunnah and does have a basis in law, it is not an evil bida’ah but a good bida’ah.

All of these definitions are derived from many actions of the Sahābah during and after the life of the Nabī (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam). If one reads through the works of hadīth they will find numerous examples of the Sahābah doing acts of worship without the prior recommendation or consent of the Nabī (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam). Our opponents will argue that due to the fact the Nabī (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam) approved these actions the actions are thus ‘ok’ or even recommended. The problem with this view is that the Sahābah knew the Nabī (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam) had warned against misguided bida’ah, yet they still innovated acts of worship without the blame of our beloved Nabī (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam). Thus it is clear that the Sahābah believed if the act did not contradict the established laws of the shari’ah, the act was a good bida’ah.

Some examples of innovations within the life of the Nabi (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam):

1) Bilāl (Radhiya Allāhu ‘Anhu):

Abu Hurairah reported that Rasūlullah (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam), upon whom be peace, said to Bilal, “O Bilal, tell me what good deed you have done in Islam that I hear the sound of your footsteps in Paradise?” Bilal said, “That after I purify myself during the day or night, I pray with that purification as much as Allah has destined for me.” (Related by al-Bukhari and Muslim. It is also reported by Buraydah Al-Aslamī with minor differences in Tirmithī and Hākim’s Mustadarak)

2) Rifa’a ibn Rāfi’ Az-Zuraqī:

One day we were praying behind the Prophet. When he raised his head from bowing, he said, “Sami’a-l-lahu Liman hamida.” A man behind him said, “Rabbana walaka-l hamd hamdan Kathiran taiyiban mubarakan fihi” (O our Lord! All the praises are for You, many good and blessed praises). When the Prophet completed the prayer, he asked, “Who has said these words?” The man replied, “I.” The Prophet said, “I saw over thirty angels competing to write it first.” Prophet rose (from bowing) and stood straight till all the vertebrae of his spinal column came to a natural position.

[Reported in Sahīh Al-Bukhārī, the Muwatta’, Nasā’ī, Ahmad]

Al-Hāfith Ibn Hajr states after this hadīth, “From this hadīth the permissibility of innovating [jawāz ihdāth] an invocation inside Salāh, other than what was received from the Nabī (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam) can be inferred, as long as it does not contradict what is received from the Nabī (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam).” [Fat-hul Bārī]

3) Innovated Takbirah: Abdullah ibn ‘Umar narrates that a man came late to Salāh. Upon arriving to the line he started his prayer with the following words,

“Allāhu Akbaru Kabīran wal-hamdulillahi kathīran wa subhān Allahi bukratan wa asīlā”

The Nabi (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam), after completing the prayer, asked the people who had said this. The man said, “Oh Rasūlullah! I did not intend by it other than good!” The Nabi (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam) said, “I saw the gates of heaven open because of those words.” Ibn ‘Umar added, “I never ceased saying these words since hearing the Nabi (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam) say that.”

[Muslim, Tirmithī (hasan Sahīh Gharīb), An-Nasā’ī with two chains, and Imām Ahmad with several chains.]

4) The appointed leader reciting Surat-Ikhlās multiple times in Salāh.

There is no need to repeat this story as I would hope every Muslim knows it. This companion (Radhiya Allāhu ‘Anhu) invented reciting Surat Ikhlās multiple times in one prayer. The Sahābah became upset at this and eventually the Nabī (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam) told him, “Tell him that Allāh loves him.”

Shaykh Yūsuf Ar-Rifā’ī stated,

    “In spite of this [The Prophet’s approval (iqrār)], we do not know of any scholar who holds that doing the above is recommended, for the acts the Prophet (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam) used to do regularly are superior, though his confirming the like of this illustrates his Sunnah regarding his acceptance of various forms of obedience and acts of worship, and shows he did not consider the like of this to be reprehensible innovation (bida’ah), as do the bigots who vie with each other to be the first to brand acts as innovation and misguidance.Further, it will be noticed t hat all the preceding hadīths are about Salāh, which is the most important of all bodily acts of worship, and of which the Prophet (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam) said, “Pray as you have seen me pray.” [Mālik, Bukhāri, others]. Yet He (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam) accepted the above examples of personal reasoning because they did not depart from the form defined by the Lawgiver, for every limit must be observed, while there is latitude in everything besides, as long as it is within the general category of being called for by sacred law. This is the Sunnah of the Prophet and his way and it is as clear as it can be. Islamic scholars infer from it that every act for which there is evidence in sacred law that it is called for and which does not oppose an unequivocal primary text or entail harmful consequences is not included in the category of reprehensible innovation, but rather, it is of the Sunnah, even if there should exist something whose performance is superior to it.” [Ar-Radd Al-Muhkam pp119-133]

5) The famous incident of the companion using the verses of Fātihah as Ruqya for the chieftain and receiving payment for that. The Nabi (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam) said regarding this,

    “How did you know it was among the words that heal? You were right! Divide up the herd (of sheep that were given in payment) and give me a share.” [Bukhārī & others]

6) The additional words, “As-Salātu Khayrun Min An-Nawm” [Prayer is better than sleep]. To the fajr adhān.

This was originally added by Bilāl and the Prophet (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam) thus accepted it. This is reported by Ibn Mājah and Imām Ahmad via hasan chains.

There are many more examples. Some will say that this is restricted to the life of the Nabī (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam). Their assumption, in our view, is discarded.

Ibn Al Mubarak narrates in his Az-Zuhd that a man married the widow of Abdullah ibn Rawāha (Radhiya Allāhu ‘Anhu). The man asked her, “Do you know why I married you? I married you so that you would tell me how Abdullah behaved in his house! She said to him, “He used to pray two raka’ahs before going out, and two raka’at before coming in. He never omitted doing this.” [Ibn Hajar narrates it in Isabah and Adh-Dhahabī in his Siyar. The chain is authentic.]

Women innovated, starting with Fātimah (alayhas-salām), placing women in caskets for dislike of their shapes showing. [See Talkhīs Al-Habīr of Ibn Hajr, Abū Nu’aym’s Al-Hilya, Ibn Abdul Barr’s Isti’āb and other works.]

Numerous companions fasted every day, save ‘Eid, after the Nabi (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam)’s death. This is authentically narrated from ‘Umar (ibn Kathir’s Bidāyah), ‘Uthmān (Abū Nu’aym’s Al-Hilya), Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, Abū Talhah, and ‘Ā’ishah (Al-Mughnī of Ibn Qudāmah).

Praying all night without sleep, which is not a sunnah of the Nabi (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam). This was done by Shaddād ibn Aws and many others (Abu Nu’aym’s Al-Hilya and others).

Singing after Salāh. Ibn As-Sim’ānī reports in his Kanz al-‘Ummal (8944) that a the people came to Umar ibn Al Khattab (Radhiya Allāhu ‘Anhu) and told them of a man who sings after Salāh. So Umar went with them and after hearing the lines he sang, Umar himself repeated the last line, “My soul! You and your lusts are nothing! Fear Him! Fear Him! Fear Him!” then said, “Whoever of you must sing, let him sing such things!”

Another example is using the masbahah/Subha, either rocks, or date stones etc. See: http://seekingilm.com/archives/12 for further explanation.

Is Every (kullu) Bida’ah Misguided?

The statement of the Nabi (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam)

    “Every newly fangled thing (kullu muhdathatin) is a bida’ah and every bida’ah is misguidance (dhalāla)…”

Pseudo-Salafism interprets this hadīth to mean “Every bida’ah without exception.” Linguistically, this is not necessarily sound. Many times in the language, especially in Islāmic literature, “kull” is used to mean “most” or “very many”.

Examples:

Allāh ta’alā says,

تُدَمِّرُ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ بِأَمْرِ رَبِّهَا فَأَصْبَحُوا لَا يُرَى إِلَّا مَسَاكِنُهُمْ كَذَلِكَ نَجْزِي الْقَوْمَ الْمُجْرِمِينَ

Everything (kulla) will it destroy by the command of its Lord!” Then by the morning they – nothing was to be seen but (the ruins of) their houses! Thus do We recompense those given to sin!” (46:25)The exceptions to the “everything” being The Mountains, the heavens, the angels etc.Another example is the story of the hoopoe and the Nabi Sulaymān (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam). Read: “But the Hoopoe tarried not far: he (came up and) said: “I have compassed (territory) which thou hast not compassed, and I have come to thee from Saba with tidings true. “I found (there) a woman ruling over them and provided with every requisite (وَأُوتِيَتْ مِن كُلِّ شَيْءٍ); and she has a magnificent throne…”

Yet, Saba (Sheba) was not provided with every shay (thing). Rather, she did not have the throne of Sulaymān.

There are many other examples in the Qur’ān and the Sunnah that state all-inclusiveness yet imply exceptions.

The claim of all-inclusiveness is thus shown, by the evidences we have presented here, to be an incorrect understanding of the hadīth.

Starting a Good Sunnah!

فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏مَنْ سَنَّ فِي الْإِسْلَامِ سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً فَعُمِلَ بِهَا بَعْدَهُ كُتِبَ لَهُ مِثْلُ أَجْرِ مَنْ عَمِلَ بِهَا وَلَا يَنْقُصُ مِنْ أُجُورِهِمْ شَيْءٌ وَمَنْ سَنَّ فِي الْإِسْلَامِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً فَعُمِلَ بِهَا بَعْدَهُ كُتِبَ عَلَيْهِ مِثْلُ وِزْرِ مَنْ عَمِلَ بِهَا وَلَا يَنْقُصُ مِنْ أَوْزَارِهِمْ شَيْءٌ

“Whoever institutes a good practice in Islam has its reward and the reward of all those who practice it until the day of judgement without lessening the rewards of the latter. And whoever institutes a bad practice in Islam beards its onus and the onus of all those who practice it until the Day of Judgment without lessening the onus of the latter.”

The term Sanna (translated here as institutes) means to start an act without precedent. This definition is proven in other authentic narrations. Mainly the hadīth that is ‘agreed upon’ that states the first to commit murder was the son of Ādam (awwalu man sanna al-qatl. Pseudo-Salafism argues that the above hadīth context. The context being spending for Allah’s sake. This is easily refuted by the generality of the words of the Nabi (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam). Amongst the principle foundations of Islām is the maxim, “The import of evidence derived from the generality of the statement, not the context in which it took place.” If this wording were to be understood restrictedly then one must produce specific proof to restrict it. Furthermore, consensus amongst the earliest scholars would be necessitated to fulfill one’s claim. With Allah is supreme success!

48 Responses to “Good Bida'ah vs Misguided Bida'ah”

  1. faqir says:

    nice article sidi

  2. mustafa says:

    mashallah!

    jazakallah khayr what a beautiful read. I remember I would be so afraid to do any act of worship that i didnt know a particular translated hadith on! It makes much more sense that the wrongful bidah is that which contravenes the shariah.

  3. Ibn Umer says:

    Nice.
    Jazakumullahu khayr.

    For more info on this subject, please read the following book (Arabic): http://frzdqi.net/mylib/open.php?cat=3&book=15

    wassalam.

  4. Abu Isma'eel says:

    This article is a joke to be honest and Insah’ Allaah if i can i will refute thi article. iv already seen 1 Hadeeth being quoted out of its correct context.

    bare with me please. i actaully read this with an open mind but no. these people have to take things out of context.

  5. Abul Layth says:

    Lets see what you have then amigo…

  6. Abdurrahman says:

    Salam,

    I found these statements on the internet, and I wanted some feedback regarding it:

    Ibn Umar: “Every innovation is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good.” (Abu Shamah, # 39)

    Abdullah ibn Masúd: “Follow and do not innovate, for you have been given that which is sufficient and every innovation is misguidance.” (Abu Khaithamah, Kitaab Ul-’Ilm #540)

    Thank you for your time,

    Abdurrahman

  7. Abul Layth says:

    Wa’alaykum Salam Abdurrahman:

    1) In order to understand these statements one must understand the concept of bida’ah. As Imam Al-Jurjani stated:

    “Whatever contrivance (fi’latun) contradicts the Sunnah, it is named Bida’ah because whoever supports it innovated it without basis from an Imām. It consists of a novel matter which the Sahābah and their successors did not follow and which is unsupported by a legal proof.”

    So a bida’ah is simply not a newly-fangled matter. Rather, legally, it is an act that has no basis in the law. The law is vast and foundations for actions can be found within the texts.

    Also, the translation of “kullu” as “every”, is – in our view – not necessarily accurate. If you read the above section in the article titled “Is Every (kullu) Bida’ah Misguided?” you will find an explanation for “kullu” that the pseudo-salafis reject.

  8. Abdurrahman says:

    Thank you for your response. However, how have scholars interpreted those statements in particular, which I quoted?

  9. Musa Ali says:

    Salam Abu Layth & brothers
    i hope the author of this article will be kind enough to leave some of the comments below because i believe he does not do justice to the ‘opponent view’ he alludes to above – which is the view of distinguished scholars such as ibn rajab, Shatibi, Ibn kathir, dhahabi etc – the latter 2 who were Shafi’i & very qualified to understand the opening words in this article attributed to the great mujtahid imam.

    The authors’ paragraph which leads on to the examples he gives proposes that the sahahba knew the laws of bid’ah and yet innovated during the lifetime of the Prophet. I would challenge such an assumption on 2 grounds:
    1. the words ‘it is as if it were a farewell admonition’ (hadith 27, arba’in nawawiyyah) is highly indicative that the laws of bid’ah were revealed towards the end of the prophetic mission when the majority of laws were complete.

    2. the prophetic era was unique in that Allah honored the companions by teaching Islam through their mistakes, admonitions, praises etc – e.g. umar & the laws of hijab, Aisha and law of tayammum, dreams & the adhan, tree of dhat anwat, laws of warfare etc. They were in a learning period for 20 years or so and so using examples of their innovation, if they are indeed innovations, would only be valid if they were definitely after the laws of bid’ah were revealed.

    Furthermore, with the examples above – were they shar’i innovations? – i don’t believe they were:
    eg 1. Bilal’s actions were not an innovation. Tabarani in al-awsat relates that the Prophet said, ‘salat is the best matter – whoever can increase (his prayer) should do so’; not to mention the narrations of following up a bad deed with good deeds and performing 2 rakahs for forgiveness etc. Bilal was following revelation
    eg 4 – is not an innovation since the messenger of Allah said about reciting qur’an after fatiha, ‘….then recite whatever you wish..’ [ibn hibban & others]. There is NO innovation. With respect to Shaykh Rifa’i – considering the hadith above and those informing us that ikhlas is equivalent to 1/3 of the Qur’an – is he sure other scholars dont hold this to be recommended?

    eg’s 2&3 – come back to point 2 above, that through the companions we know that there is flexibility in adhkar of the takbir and straightening from ruku’. Through their example we know this. The ruqya has been discussed in detail at another place on this site

    Brother Abu layth refuses to print the many examples of the companions forbidding seemingly harmless acts after the Prophet’s death on account of their being innovations and that following the predecessors is our duty. And this is a shame – because it makes clear his bias.

    Sufis are adamant on allowing innovation into acts of worship because they need this flexibility to justify a lot of the strange/funny/mystical bits and bobs they love to do.
    Regardless….to stick to the established sunnah in word and detail is safest and should never be criticized.
    Bid’ah is the worst sin after shirk – surely it’s best to be safe rather than sorry?

  10. Irfan says:

    can someone post what Imam Shafi Rahimahullah said regarrding bidah in his KITAB AL UMM?

  11. Anonymuslim says:

    Here’s the arabic for what Abdurrahman posted above:

    Ibn Umar’s statement:
    كل بدعة ضلالة وإن رآها الناس حسن

    Ibn Mas’ud’s statement:
    اتبعوا ولا تبتدعوا فقد كفيتم وكل بدعة ضلال

    Also, another interesting anecdote about Ibn Mas’ud – where the condemned action resembles certain acts of Sufis:

    ‘Amr ibn Salamah narrated: We used to sit at the door of ‘Abdullaah ibn Mas’ood before the morning Prayer, so that when he would come out we would walk with him to the mosque. One day Abu Moosaa al-Ash’aree came to us and said: Has Abu ‘Abdur-Rahmaan (i.e. Ibn Mas’ood) come out yet? We replied: No! So he sat down with us until he came out. When he came out we all stood along with him, so Abu Moosaa said to him: O Abu ‘Abdur-Rahmaan! I have just seen something in the mosque which I deemed to be evil, but – and all praise is for Allaah – I did not see anything except good. Ibn Mas’ood inquired: “What did you see?” Abu Moosaa replied: If you live, you too will see it. In the mosque I saw people sitting in circles awaiting the Prayer. In each circle they had pebbles in their hands and a man would say: repeat Allanhu Akhar a hundred times. So they would repeat it a hundred times. Then he would say: repeat Laa ilaaha illallaah a hundred times. So they would repeat it a hundred times. Then he would say: repeat Subhaanallaah a hundred times. So they would say it a hundred times. Ibn Mas’ood then asked: “What did you say to them?” Abu Moosaa said: I did not say anything to them. Instead I waited to hear your view, or what you declared. Then we went along with him, until he came to one of these circles and stood up and said: “What is this I see you doing?” They replied: O Abu ‘Abdur-Rahmaan! These are pebbles upon which we are counting takbeer, tahleel and tasbeeh. He said to them: “Rather, count up your evil deeds. For I assure you that none of your good deeds will be lost. Woe be to you O Ummah of Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam! How quickly you head into destruction! These are the Companions of your Prophet sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and who are widespread. There are his clothes which have not yet decayed, and his bowl which is unbroken. By Him in whose Hand is my soul! Either you are upon a religion better guided than the Religion of Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, or you are opening the doors of misguidance.” They said: O Abu ‘Abdur-Rahmaan! By Allaah! We only intend good. He said to them: “How many there are who intend good, but do not achieve it. Indeed Allaah’s Messenger sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said to us: “A people will recite the Qur’aan, but it will not pass beyond their throats.” By Allaah I do not know, but perhaps most of them are from you.” Then he left. Amr ibn Salamah said: We saw most of those people fighting against us on the day of Nahrawaan, alongside the Khawaarij.
    (Ad-Darimi 1/79, At-Tabarani 9/126, Abu Nu’aym 4/381. Authenticated by Al-Haythami in his Majma’ 1/181)

    And let’s not forget the reply of Imam Malik to the man who wanted to do a ‘good bid’a’ and put on his ihram at the mosque of the Prophet [SAWS]:

    “And what fitnah can be greater than for you to think that you have attained some virtue, which Allaah’s Messenger sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam fell short of. Have you not heard the saying of Allaah:
    “Let those beware who oppose the command of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, lest they are afflicted with fitnah (trial), or lest they are afflicted with a painful punishment.” [Soorah an-Noor 24:63].”

  12. musa ali says:

    salam, bro this link is a bit weird….ibn Mas’ud never forbade dhikr (!!)…we know that, he forbade the MANNER of their making dhikr.

    This is an authentic narration, no one made it up; furthermore, there are many other examples such as the 2 above in Laalikaa’ees’ famous book.

  13. Abul Layth says:

    Bismillah…The readers of my response to the repetitive responses of Musa ‘Ali will have to pardon any mistakes within this response as the time in which I have responded has been a bit hectic for me. To begin:

    I have dealt with many of Musa’s irrelevant disagreements with the Sunnis in other threads. So, since he wishes to repeat the same ol’ claims, without apparently having read the previous refutations of his claims, I will re-entertain some of his views so that later readers of this thread and its comments may benefit insha’allah:

    the words ‘it is as if it were a farewell admonition’ (hadith 27, arba’in nawawiyyah) is highly indicative that the laws of bid’ah were revealed towards the end of the prophetic mission when the majority of laws were complete.

    Time and Time again have we called you out on blatant misuse of ahadith! Such abuse of this hadīth is indeed bātil.

    1) We have already addressed the abuse of the word كل in this hadīth in a linguistic manner within this article and elsewhere. It simply does not mean “every” as you want us to believe, but most!

    2) Holding onto the Sunnah of the Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) is holding onto the principles of the law. The Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) set forth a mighty principle when he opened the doors to actions in worship that did not contradict his Sunnah. In the example of Bilāl that I quoted in the article we see that the Nabī (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) allowed him to innovate. You say that the hadīth you present came prior to his action – yet you cannot prove such a claim. We demand proof for such. Furthermore the issue is not restricted to the issue of Bilāl. You seem to forget that many of the salaf innovated into the dīn of Allāh:

    Example we gave before in another post is the issue the utilization of Fātihah as a ruqya, an act that had not been done by the Nabī (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) prior to this occasion, an act that he expressed astonishment at in fact!

    1. Abu Said al-Khudri said: A group of companions of Allah’s Messenger went on a journey. On their way, they came by a camp of Bedouins and solicited their hospitality. The Arab Bedouins refused to welcome them, so the companions stayed nearby and took a rest. Meanwhile, the chief of the Bedouins became ill of a scorpion bite. His immediate circle tried everything they knew but no avail. Finally, they went and asked the the Sahabah a cure or a ruqya to cure him. The Sahabah said: “You refused us to host us, so we will not treat your chief unless you pay us for it!” So the people agreed to pay them a flock of sheep.
    One of them starteing reciting Umm Al Qur’an (i.e. faatihah) and gathering his saliva and spitting it at the bite. The chief was cured and his people presented the sheep to them, but they said, “We will not take it until we ask Rasulullah (’alayhis salaam). When they asked him, he smiled and said,
    وما أدراك أنها رقية؟
    What made you realize that it [i.e. faatihah] was a ruqya? Take the reward and assign a share for me.
    [Sahih Al Bukhaari 5736 Dar us Salaam english print]
    Firstly the one doing the ruqya, known as a Raaqi, was Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri himself. The proof for this is another narration via Al-’Amash wherein Abu Sa’id is reporting the hadith and when the people asked if there was any amongst them who had a cure he said:
    قُلْت نَعَمْ أَنَا
    “I said: ‘Yes I do’!” This point has been forwarded by Ibn Hajr Al-’Asqalaani in his Fat-hul-Baari in the Sharh of this hadith in the book of Al-Ijaarah.
    Secondly, and the main point to all of this, is that I want you to notice that the Nabi (’alayhis salaam) did not teach the Sahabah of the cure within faatihah, what the Sufis call “sirrul faatiha”. In fact he was amazed that they knew it was a ruqya! Hence his words:
    وما أدراك أنها رقية؟
    and in another report in Sahih Al Bukhaari:
    ‏وَمَا يُدْرِيكَ أَنَّهَا رُقْيَةٌ
    “And what made you realize/know that it was a ruqya?”
    In the Chain of Ma’bad ibn Sireen the Nabi (’alayhi salaam) said:
    وَمَا كَانَ يُدْرِيه
    And as Ibn Hajr said, “This is a phrase used when on is astonished at something (التَّعَجُّب مِنْ الشَّيْء وَتُسْتَعْمَل فِي تَعْظِيم الشَّيْء ).
    And as Al-Hafith Ibn Hajr stated, “And the apparent meaning (thaahir) is that there was no knowledge of the legislated aspect (mashru’iyyah) of performing ruqya with Al-Faatihah!” [Fat-hul-Baari]

    You responded to the example of this hadīth by saying:

    there is nothing to suggest he made it up on the spot. The words of the Prophet ‘how did you know…’ – are too non-specific for such a tenuous deduction. He simply asked ‘how’! What if the practice was already well established.

    To which I said:

    He did not say “how”. He said: وما أدراك أنها رقية؟
    What made you know that it [i.e. faatihah] was a ruqya?
    If it had been done prior such a question would not have been necessary, or even asked, as it would have been futile. The Nabi ‘alayhis salaam had not taught that faatihah was a ruqya, that is why he asked as to “what made him know” it. For it was not the Nabi who made him know it.
    Then the rest of your argument is based in sheer speculation. There is absolutely no proof at all, and we challenge you to bring forth such proof, that the Nabi had taught the Sahabah to use faatihah as ruqya prior to this incident. A single authentic narration please. Not only is it implied, it is the apparent understanding, you have no certain proof for otherwise.

    I ask that you take heed to the words of Al-Hāfith when he said, as pointed out prior:
    “And the apparent meaning (thaahir) is that there was no knowledge of the legislated aspect (mashru’iyyah) of performing ruqya with Al-Fātihah!” [Fat-hul-Baari]
    You also responded by saying:

    It is more plausible & consistent that he had prior knowledge & learnt this from another sahabi such as Anas bin Malik/Aisha [spubs bukhari 5370, 5372 et al;]

    To which I said:

    Has nothing to do with Faatihah being used as a ruqya. The premise being this act was not taught by the Nabi ‘Alayhis salaam, and that Abu Sa’id “made the act up” without prior consent from the Nabi ‘alayhis salaam. You’ve again missed the point.

    So I will repeat: The premise being that Fātihah was never used as a ruqya – an act of worship that was not performed by the Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). Simple question: Was this specific act of worship – that of fātihah being utilized as a ruqya – ever taught prior to this by the Nabī (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) to his companions? If not, then this proves that bida’ah falls beneath the fivefold classification of the Shari’ah as forwarded by Ibn Abdus-Salām!
    You said again:

    The Companions knew to practice ruqya only for scorpion bites, evil eye/magic, ear ailments & they had specific du’as (Bukhari al-fath 5675, 5750;) & Qur’anic verses (Fatihah, al-Mi’wadhatayn, Ayat al-Kursiy & Ikhlaas – without specific number of recitations) in the belief that Allah is the One Who heals if He so Wills

    To which I said: “Again, not faatiha. HE INNOVATED specific recital of FAATIHAH for ruqya.” Fātihah!
    Another example we gave was ‘Uthmān ibn ‘Affān’s innovation of the adhān:
    As-Saa’ib Ibn Yazid stated,
    Narrated As-Saib bin Yazid: In the life-time of the Prophet, Abu Bakr and Umar, the Adhan for the Jumua prayer used to be pronounced when the Imam sat on the pulpit. But during the Caliphate of ‘Uthman when the Muslims increased in number, a third Adhan at Az-Zaura’ was added. Abu ‘Abdullah said, “Az-Zaura’ is a place in the market of Medina.”
    also:
    Narrated As-Saib bin Yazid: The person who increased the number of Adhans for the Jumua prayers to three was Uthman bin Affan and it was when the number of the (Muslim) people of Medina had increased. In the life-time of the Prophet there was only one Muadh-dhin and the Adhan used to be pronounced only after the Imam had taken his seat (i.e. on the pulpit).
    [both in the book of Jumu'ah Salah in Bukhaari]
    Also reported by Az-Zuhri:
    حدثنا ابن علية عن برد الزهري قال كان الاذان عند خروج الامام فأحدث أمير المؤمنين عثمان على الزوراء ليجتمع الناس .
    Notice the word “fa-ahdath” – innovated!
    Ibn Abi Shaybah narrates regarding this that Abdullah ibn Umar called it a “bida’ah”.
    The narrations:
    حدثنا شبابة قال حدثنا هشيم بن الغاز عن نافع عن ابن عمر قال الاذان الاول يوم الجمعة بدعة
    حدثنا وكيع قال حدثنا بن الغاز قال سألت نافعا مولى ابن عمر الاذان الاول يوم الجمعة بدعة فقال ابن عمر بدعة
    Bottom line: It was an innovation in the religion of Allāh (ta’lā), and a sound one at that.
    So we responded to your claims, and I have exhausted this issue. The fact is the Nabī (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) established a principle, well-known by the Sahāba during his life and after his life, that there is a such thing as a good innovated act in worship – as long as it does not contradict the Sunnah. This principle remained, and there is no proof for abrogation. In fact the actions of the companions after the death of the beloved Sayyidul-Anbiyā’ have proven such, as we have shown in multiple places within this site.
    Examples we gave regarding ‘Umar (radhiya Allahu ‘anhu):

    It was Umar who innovated into the deen of Allah!
    He said: نعم البدعة to an act the Nabi ‘alayhis salaam never did: bringing all the Muslims together in ONE SINGLE MASJID to make taraweeh! To this Ibn Hajr stated:
    “‘Umar said, “[What a] Fine innovation!” and in some narrations a (letter) ‘taa’ is added. The root meaning of innovation (bida’ah) is what is produced without precedent. It is applied in the law in opposition to the Sunna and is, in that case, blameworthy. Strictly speaking, if it is part of what is classified as commendable by the law then it is an excellent innovation (hasana), while if it is part of what is classified as blameworthy by the law then it is blameworthy (mustaqbaha), otherwise it falls in the category of what is permitted (mubaah). It can be divided into the five legal categories [(or rulings)Ahkaam Al-Khamsah)].
    Furthermore they did not dispute the act for there was nothing to dispute. There was no proof to forbid ruqya with faatihah.
    There is yet another example of Imam ‘Umar committing a bida’ah as quoted by Ibn Kathir in his Bidaaya,
    “Umar would pray Salatul ‘Ishaa’ with the people then enter his house and never cease praying until dawn, and he did not die except that he aquired the habit of fasting permanently.”
    Imam An-Nawawi affirmed this act as well,
    “Ibn Umar fasted permenatly (i.e. except the days of ‘eid and tashriq). This perpetual fast was his way and the way of his father, Umar ibn Al Khattab, ‘Aa’ishah, Abu Talha and others of the salaf as well as Ash-Shaafi’i and other scholars. Their position is that perpetual fasting is not offensive (makruh).” [Sharh Sahih Muslim]
    This act was not the done by the Nabi (’alayhis salaam) nor was it his sunnah.
    Umar also installed the first Qaass of Islam, Tamim Ad-Daari, as is reported in the Musnad of Imam Ahmad. As’Saaib ibn Yazid stated about this act: “This was unprecendented in the time of the Nabi ‘Alayhis salaam and Abu Bakr.”

    We have already forwarded the very simple responses to your claims in the other post. You are simply beating the dead horse. So, if you still believe your view is correct, and I believe my view is correct, maybe you should leave it at that instead of reviving an issue that has already been debated?
    Again, What is a bida’ah by the Sunni principles? It is what the scholars of Islam have defiined it as:
    “Bida’ah in terms of the law is everything innovated in contravention of the Lawgiver’s command and the latter’s specific and general proof.” [At-Tabyīn fī Sharh Arba’īn]
    Ibn Al-Jawzī defined misguided bida’ah as,
    “…whatever is blameworthy in contravening the foundations of the law”.

    the prophetic era was unique in that Allah honored the companions by teaching Islam through their mistakes, admonitions, praises etc – e.g. umar & the laws of hijab, Aisha and law of tayammum, dreams & the adhan, tree of dhat anwat, laws of warfare etc. They were in a learning period for 20 years or so and so using examples of their innovation, if they are indeed innovations, would only be valid if they were definitely after the laws of bid’ah were revealed.

    The first statement of your sentence is correct. The mistakes of the Sahāba as well as others were corrected by the Qur’an and the statements and actions of our beloved Sayyid (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). The problem is your claim that “using their innovations” as proof for the principle that bida’ah is of two types: praiseworthy and blameworthy is invalid is what we deem bātil.
    1) You claim that the laws of bida’ah were unknown in those early years, and we demand evidence for such a claim.
    2) Secondly, your claim is bātil based upon the examples we have brought on other occasions wherein the Sahāba (radhiya Allahu ‘anhum) innovated after the beloved Messenger’s (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) passing…we have provided many examples elsewhere. Sidi G.f. Haddad has an entire book on the issue, maybe you should read it.
    3) What occurred within the lifetime of the Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) shows that he left the doors open to what did not CONTRADICT his Sunnah. We gave the example of Abu Sa’īd Al-Khudrī (radhiya Allahu ‘anhu) above.

    Furthermore, with the examples above – were they shar’i innovations? – i don’t believe they were:
    eg 1. Bilal’s actions were not an innovation. Tabarani in al-awsat relates that the Prophet said, ’salat is the best matter – whoever can increase (his prayer) should do so’; not to mention the narrations of following up a bad deed with good deeds and performing 2 rakahs for forgiveness etc. Bilal was following revelation

    They were in an innovation. A) This is a specific act not legislated or taught by the Nabī (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). B) The above things you have mentioned were not specific to the time in which Bilāl performed his act.

    eg 4 – is not an innovation since the messenger of Allah said about reciting qur’an after fatiha, ‘….then recite whatever you wish..’ [ibn hibban & others]. There is NO innovation. With respect to Shaykh Rifa’i – considering the hadith above and those informing us that ikhlas is equivalent to 1/3 of the Qur’an – is he sure other scholars dont hold this to be recommended?

    He did not teach reciting it multiple times in the same Salāh. It was also never done by Him (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) – as there Is no proof to indicate such – and the Nabī (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said, “Pray as you have seen me praying” [Bukhārī] hence one is confined to his sunnah in principle. This is a specific innovated act in worship, and the Nabī (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) allowed it.

    eg’s 2&3 – come back to point 2 above, that through the companions we know that there is flexibility in adhkar of the takbir and straightening from ruku’. Through their example we know this. The ruqya has been discussed in detail at another place on this site

    Wrong! It is through the Qur’an and the Sunnah that we know such flexibility in worship exists. Doing an act of worship that does not contradict the Sunnah, is in fact, allowed and hence bida’ah is regulated by the five rulings of the law.

    Brother Abu layth refuses to print the many examples of the companions forbidding seemingly harmless acts after the Prophet’s death on account of their being innovations and that following the predecessors is our duty. And this is a shame – because it makes clear his bias.

    The majority of what you quote is weak in this regards, or specifically contradicts a sunnah. What we have quoted is only the base of the mountain in reality. Many other examples can be provided of the Sahāba innovating actions of worship.

    Sufis are adamant on allowing innovation into acts of worship because they need this flexibility to justify a lot of the strange/funny/mystical bits and bobs they love to do.
    Regardless….to stick to the established sunnah in word and detail is safest and should never be criticized.
    Bid’ah is the worst sin after shirk – surely it’s best to be safe rather than sorry?

    Sad scare tactics. Sūfīs are those who abide by the Sunnah and live by the principle “knowledge before action”. Imām An Nawawī mentions this principle of Tasawwuf in his Maqāsid. Some of the greatest upholders of the Sunnah were Sūfīs, so stop your ridiculous slander. Innovating good actions, as done by the righteous salaf, is the Sunnah of the companions and of the Nabī (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) as he allowed such. Such is clinging to his Sunnah!

    Ibn Umar’s statement:
    كل بدعة ضلالة وإن رآها الناس حسن
    Ibn Mas’ud’s statement:
    اتبعوا ولا تبتدعوا فقد كفيتم وكل بدعة ضلال

    When one reads these statements through the eyes of the law there is nothing that contradicts the principles of the Fuqahā’, primarily Ash-Shāfi’ī who divided Bida’ah into good and blameworthy. “Most bida’ah is misguidance, even if the people see it as good.” Does not mean all as you want us to believe. We have explained this already in the article. ‘Umar (radhiya Allahu ‘anhu) utilized ‘ni’ma al bida’ah’ and the scholars followed him in that.
    “Follow and do not innovate as you have been sufficed, and most bida’ah is misguidance.”
    Following the Sunnah is innovating good actions. What is meant here is misguided and astray bida’ah – or in the words of Imām Ash-Shāfi’ī, “Blameworthy Bida’ah”.
    As the Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

    فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏مَنْ سَنَّ فِي الْإِسْلَامِ سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً فَعُمِلَ بِهَا بَعْدَهُ كُتِبَ لَهُ مِثْلُ أَجْرِ مَنْ عَمِلَ بِهَا وَلَا يَنْقُصُ مِنْ أُجُورِهِمْ شَيْءٌ وَمَنْ سَنَّ فِي الْإِسْلَامِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً فَعُمِلَ بِهَا بَعْدَهُ كُتِبَ عَلَيْهِ مِثْلُ وِزْرِ مَنْ عَمِلَ بِهَا وَلَا يَنْقُصُ مِنْ أَوْزَارِهِمْ شَيْءٌ

    “Whoever institutes a good practice in Islam has its reward and the reward of all those who practice it until the day of judgement without lessening the rewards of the latter. And whoever institutes a bad practice in Islam beards its onus and the onus of all those who practice it until the Day of Judgement without lessening the onus of the latter.”
    The term Sanna (translated here as institutes) means to start an act without precedent. This definition is proven in other authentic narrations. Mainly the hadīth that is ‘agreed upon’ that states the first to commit murder was the son of Ādam (awwalu man sanna al-qatl).

    The narration:

    ‘Amr ibn Salamah narrated: We used to sit at the door of ‘Abdullaah ibn Mas’ood before the morning Prayer, so that when he would come out we would walk with him to the mosque. One day Abu Moosaa al-Ash’aree came to us and said: Has Abu ‘Abdur-Rahmaan (i.e. Ibn Mas’ood) come out yet?

    Shaykh Shaykh Mahmud Mamduh mentions it being weak in his Raf` al-Minara.
    Said by Shaykh G.F. Haddād:

    Al-Darimi in the Muqaddima of his Sunan, narrated from al-Hakam ibn al-Mubarak who narrates from `Amr ibn Salima al-Hamadani. This `Amr ibn Yahya ibn `Amr ibn Salama al- Hamadani is da`if. Ibn Ma`in saw him and said: “his narrations are worth nothing”; Ibn Kharrash: “he is not accepted; al-Dhahabi listed him among those who are weak and whose hadith is not retained in al-Du`afa’ wal-Matrukin (p. 212 #3229), Mizan al-I`tidal (3:293), and al-Mughni fil-Du`afa’ (2:491); and al-Haythami declared him weak (da`if) in Majma` al-Zawa’id, chapter entitled Bab al-`Ummal `ala al-Sadaqa.
    Further, its authenticity was questioned by al-Suyuti in al-Hawi (2:31); al-Hifni in Fadl al-Tasbih wal-Tahlil as cited by al-Lacknawi, Sibahat al-Fikr (p. 25 and 42-43).
    Further, it is belied by Imam Ahmad’s narration in al-Zuhd from Abu Wa’il who said: “Those who claim that `Abd Allah [= Ibn Mas`ud] forbade dhikr [are wrong]: I never sat with him in any gathering except he made dhikr of Allah in it.” Cited by al-Munawi in Fayd al-Qadir (1:457), al-Suyuti in Natijat al-Fikr fil-Jahri bil-Dhikr in al-Hawi, al-Nabulusi in Jam` al-Asrar (p. 66), al-Hifni in Fadl al-Tasbih wal- Tahlil as cited in al-Lacknawi, Sibahat al-Fikr (p. 25).

    Source: http://www.livingislam.org/naw/daa_e.html
    The “good bida’ah of Ihrām” was in contradiction of the Sunnah of the Nabī (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), hence it falls within the 5 ahkām of the law and the jurists judge based upon such.
    Here one can find Abū Hurayrah INNOVATING istighfār 12,000 times a day: http://seekingilm.com/archives/292 . An act not reported to have been done by our beloved Sayyid Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam).

    Also Sidi Ibn Umer quoted the following to which our pseudo-salafi enemies can never properly respond:
    عن معمر عن عاصم بن سليمان عن أبي عثمان النهدي قال : كان سلمان يعلمنا التكبير، يقول : كبروا الله، الله أكبر، الله أكبر مراراً، اللهم أنت أعلى وأجل من أن تكون لك صاحبة، أو يكون لك ولد، أو يكون لك شريك في الملك، أو يكون لك ولي في الذل، وكبره تكبيراً، الله أكبر تكبيراً، اللهم اغفر لنا، اللهم ارحمنا، ثم قال : والله لتكتبن هذه ولا تترك هاتان وليكونن هذا شفعاء صدق لهاتين .
    حدثنا مسكين بن بكير، أنبأنا ثابت بن عجلان، عن القاسم بن عبد الرحمن قال: كان لأبي الدرداء نوى من نوى العجوة حسبت عشرًا أو نحوها في كيس، وكان إذا صلى الغداة أقعى على فراشه فأخذ الكيس فأخرجهن واحدة واحدة يسبح بهن، فإذا نفدن أعادهن واحدة واحدة، كل ذلك يسبح بهن، قال: حتى تأتيه أم الدرداء فتقول: يا أبا الدرداء إن غداءك قد حضر فربما قال ارفعوه فإني صائم
    All three [here are two of them] are authentic accounts, and they show the respective Sahabi innovating in one of the following:

    1) Using invented words
    2) Using an invented mode of doing dhikr
    3) Setting a certain number of times to do a dhikr.

    May Allah bless our beloved Sayyidul-Anbiyā’ Muhammad, his companions, and family, Amīn!

  14. Abul Layth says:

    Nice. Let me guess what the response will be: “Brother the link is a bit weird!” lol.

    Nawawi quoting Ibn Abdus Salaam is the raajih in the madh-hab of the shafi’iyyah!

  15. Malik says:

    Assalaam Alaikum,

    The issue of Bida’ is an age-old debate. I just want to mention that BOTH opinions — possibility of good Bida’ and bida’ only being bad — have existed for centuries. Imam Malik (rahimullah) was against all types of Bidas. Shafi’i (rahimullah) however believed bida could be categorized as good or bad (as the article shows).

    Muhammad b. Waddah al-Qurtubi, (who died about 287 AH) wrote one of the first books dedicated to Bida’, titled “al-Bida’ wal-nahy ‘anha”. Being a Maliki, he was also an opponent of all Bidas. Thereafter, Malikis were generally against all Bidas.

    The exception would probably be the well al-Qarafi (died in 684). He divided Bida into the 5 categories of fiqh. In his book, “Al-Furuq” he even says that the Malikis have a conensus in rejecting all bida’s, a reason why he faced criticism from his fellow Malikis for his division of Bidah. However, substantively, al-Qarafi only allowed bida’ in Muamalat, and not in Ibadaat.

    The great Shafi’i scholar, Ibn ‘Abd AsSalaam (died in 660) was perhaps one of the earliest scholars to explain that there existed different types of bidas.After him, many Shafi’is would argue that Bidah can be categorized as forbidden, discouraged, permissble,etc. Among them Ibn Hajar, Suyuti, etc.

    My point in all of this is to show that that both positions have existed for centuries, and has the backing of different well-known scholars, so nobody should claim that either of these positions are recent phenomenons. Defend and promote your positions, by all means! I think honest discussion and debate is one of the best means to understand the truth. But don’t deny the historical grounding of the opponent’s position.

    I also like Ibn Taymiyya’s stance. Ibn Taymiyyah, as is well known, believed that all Bidahs were bad. But he also said that those who do certain innovations may very well be rewarded for their ijtihad and their sincere intentions. And also he is very critical of people who all they do is forbid innovations, while they themselves are lacking in doing good Ibadaat. “The true religion commands the good and forbids the evil, neither of which can be achieved without the other, so that no evil be prohibited unless there is sufficient exhortation for the good.” So if one criticizes something he/she believes to be a bida’, he/she should also offer some other ibadat or dhikr. Wa Allahu Alim.

  16. Abul Layth says:

    The great Shafi’i scholar, Ibn ‘Abd AsSalaam (died in 660) was perhaps one of the earliest scholars to explain that there existed different types of bidas.

    Imam Ash-Shafi’i himself did so. You should have read the article!

  17. Malik says:

    You are correct. I did read the informative article. I think much of it seems to be taken from a talk of Sh. Nuh, but I might just be imagining things.

    At any rate, my point was Ibn Abd AsSalaam was one of the first to elucidate that Bidah can fit into the 5 categories of fiqh, moreso than Imam Shafi’i

  18. tru_qur'an says:

    Assalaamu ‘alaykum,

    Sidi Abul Layth you quoted GF Haddad quoting this,

    ” Al-Darimi in the Muqaddima of his Sunan, narrated from al-Hakam ibn al-Mubarak who narrates from `Amr ibn Salima al-Hamadani. This `Amr ibn Yahya ibn `Amr ibn Salama al- Hamadani is da`if. Ibn Ma`in saw him and said: “his narrations are worth nothing”; Ibn Kharrash: “he is not accepted; al-Dhahabi listed him among those who are weak and whose hadith is not retained in al-Du`afa’ wal-Matrukin (p. 212 #3229), Mizan al-I`tidal (3:293), and al-Mughni fil-Du`afa’ (2:491); and al-Haythami declared him weak (da`if) in Majma` al-Zawa’id, chapter entitled Bab al-`Ummal `ala al-Sadaqa.

    Further, its authenticity was questioned by al-Suyuti in al-Hawi (2:31); al-Hifni in Fadl al-Tasbih wal-Tahlil as cited by al-Lacknawi, Sibahat al-Fikr (p. 25 and 42-43).”

    Bro faqir asked GF Haddad this,

    ” I would like to request some clarification in relation to the athar
    of Ibn Mas’ud [ra] which comes via the route of `Amr ibn Yahya ibn
    `Amr ibn Salama al- Hamadani….

    Do these reports collectively strengthen the report via `Amr ibn Salama al- Hamadani and if so what would be its status?”

    GF Haddad mentioned,

    ” Yes, its status would become hasan li-ghayrihi, although its meaning
    needs to be understood in light of the reports suporting group dhikr,
    not against them…”

    That and more is taken from here

    http://www.marifah.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=2918

    Does this mean that this hadith is an evidence against certain modalities regarding the method of dhikr since it appears to be hasan li ghayrihi or have I misunderstood?

    Barak’Allah feekum in advance akhi.

  19. tru_quran says:

    … ?

  20. Strang3r says:

    Asalaamua’alaikum bro.

    Thanks for posting this article.

    I’d like to talk about the issue of “Kullu/kulla/Kull”.

    I understand that verse 46:25 has “Kulla” in it, which is translated as everything, which, in linguistical terms, that it doesn’t mean “everything without exceptions”. Rather it means “Most”. For this verse it has exceptions and will agree from there, but I’d also like to ask, does “Kulla/kull” mean the same as “Kullu”?

    I just started searching for a verse and found this verse which says,

    “Everyone shall taste the death. Then unto Us you shall be returned. ”
    “Kullu nafsin tha-iqatu almawti thumma ilayna turjaAAoona”

    (29:57)

    Here, in this verse, does “kullu” also mean “most”? Are there exceptions for a few people that won’t face death?

    Thanks.

  21. Muhammad Jibreel says:

    Salaam to the Seeking Ilm staff
    In regards to the hadith “Whoever introduces a good sunna…whoever introduces a bad sunna…”, it was related to us by our teacher that Imam Nawawi in his Sharh of the Sahih of Imam Muslim explains how this hadith qualifies the hadith in which Sayyidina Rasulullah Salla Allahu Alayhi wa Alihi wa Sallam says: “every newly invented matter is an innovation…,restricting the meaning of bid’a to misguided bid’a.
    Do any of the Seeking Ilm staff have the text of Imam Nawawi’s commentary on the formerly mentioned hadith and it’s citation?
    Your research is greatly appreciated
    Muhammad

  22. “Everyone shall taste the death. Then unto Us you shall be returned. ”
    “Kullu nafsin tha-iqatu almawti thumma ilayna turjaAAoona”
    (29:57)
    Here, in this verse, does “kullu” also mean “most”? Are there exceptions for a few people that won’t face death?

    a reliable person informed me that the word “kullu” in the ayat does not mean “most” rather it means everything, every living being. Allah ta’ala (free Allah ta’ala from any blemish) is not intended from the ayat through the mafhum. It is considered as “al-umum al-mukhassas bidalalat al-’aqli.”

    and Allah ta’ala knows best.

  23. Abul Layth says:

    The point in the argument of kullu was it does not always mean “Every”. The point was proven and the exceptions shown.

  24. Strang3r says:

    JazakAllah khair Abdullah. So why does it mean every in (29:57) and not in the hadeeth?

  25. Muhammad Jibreel says:

    Because for one, Umar ibn al Khataab called Taraweeh behind 1 imam a good bid’a. And this shows, according to the real Salafi Imam al Shafi’ that Rasulullah Sala Allahu Alayhi wa Sallam didn’t mean all bid’a.

  26. Strang3r says:

    About Umar Ibn Khataab calling for a good bid’ah, he did not introduce something that was entirely new to the religion. He only restored the sunnah of the practice which was new at his time.

  27. Hasan says:

    He institutionalized taraweeh, which the Prophet had not done; thus it was a bid’ah. I think Umar knew what he was talking about when he said that it was a bid’ah.

    When Muslims institutionalize other actions that the Prophet did individually, like dhikr, then you Salafis have a problem and call it bid’ah. But when it comes to taraweeh, you cannot criticize it–otherwise you would be calling Umar a mubtadi’ (not that I have not heard some Salafis go so far as to call him that), so you say it is not a bid’ah. But Umar said what he said, and he understood Arabic and what he said better than all the Salafis ever in history.

  28. Strang3r says:

    The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) prayed Taraaweeh in congregation with his companions for many nights, then he stopped doing that lest it be made obligatory upon the Muslims. Then when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died and the revelation came to an end, this concern was no longer an issue, because it could not be made obligatory after the death of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). So ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) gathered the Muslims to pray Taraaweeh in congregation.

    The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) “led his companions in praying for three nights, and on the third or fourth night he did not lead them, and he said: ‘I am afraid that it may be made obligatory upon you.’” This was narrated by al-Bukhaari (872). According to a version narrated by Muslim, “But I was afraid that prayer at night may be made obligatory upon you, and you would not be able to do it.” (1271). So it is proven that Taraaweeh is part of the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

    So there is no basis for saying that Taraaweeh prayer is not part of the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), rather it is part of the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), but he forsook it for fear that it may be made obligatory upon his ummah. When he died, this concern no longer applied. Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him) was distracted by the wars against the apostates and his reign was short, lasting only two years. When the reign of ‘Umar came and the Muslims became secure and victorious, he commanded the people to gather together for Taraaweeh prayers in Ramadaan, as they used to gather with the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). All that ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) did was to go back to that Sunnah and revive it.

  29. Ibrahim AbdulTawwab says:

    Bismillah ir rahman ir raheem,
    As salamu ‘alikum wr wb,

    @ Strang3r Do you have proof that ALL the people would gather under ONE Iman who used only ONE recitation and this is what was sanctioned by Rasul Allah (saw)?

    The other point is why do you believe or what have your teachers told you to believe about Umar(r.a) concerning what Hasan mentioned? That it was a Bid’ah and a good one at that?

  30. Strang3r says:

    Wa’alaikummussalaam warahmatullahi wabarakatuh.

    In the books of Bukhari and Muslim, ‘Aishah (raa) has been reported as saying:

    “The Messenger of Allah (saas) observed Taraweeh prayer in the Masjid one night and people prayed with him. He repeated the following night and the number of participants grew. The companions congregated the third and fourth night, but the Messenger did not show up. In the morning he told them, “I saw what you did last night, but nothing prevented me from joining you except my fear that it might be made mandatory on you in Ramadan.”

    I’ve been taught that what Umar called a good bid’ah was something that was according to shari’ah, that is it has proof and evidence from the Qur’an and Sunnah. Just as Imam As Shafi’ee explained. :)

  31. Muhammad Jibreel says:

    What you need to understand is that the whole Jama’a praying Taraweeh behind 1 imam, for every night of Ramadhan was not instituted by Rasulullah Sala Allahu Alayhi wa Salam. So in this aspect it is a Bida’. What makes it a good bid’a is that it has a basis in the Sunna, i.e. that he did lead some kind of night prayer in jama’a.

  32. Abul Layth says:

    Wa’alaykum Salam,

    Indeed, The Nabi ‘alayhis salam did lead some in prayer for tarawih, however He saaws did not institutionalize the congregational prayer behind ONE Imam – as the brothers Hasan and Muhammad have asserted; such was done by ‘Umar. In fact, if one argues that the Nabi ‘alayhis salam did institutionalize tarawih – which has no proof – one could also argue that it was abandoned by the Prophet Muhammad ‘alayhis salam as well, and in fact his abandonment of an act of worship thus renders it legally his Sunnah. So it was also his Sunnah to abandon the tarawih based upon the same line of rational that the psuedo-salafis argue that he did institutionalize it.

    Further proofs for the idea of a “good bida’ah” and the proof for exceptions claimed are the many acts of the companions, as well as the tabi’in that are stated within the article. Basically the Sahabah and the Salaf understood that if there was a good deed that did not contravene direct commandments, it was permitted to do it.

  33. Abul Layth says:

    Salaam to the Seeking Ilm staff
    In regards to the hadith “Whoever introduces a good sunna…whoever introduces a bad sunna…”, it was related to us by our teacher that Imam Nawawi in his Sharh of the Sahih of Imam Muslim explains how this hadith qualifies the hadith in which Sayyidina Rasulullah Salla Allahu Alayhi wa Alihi wa Sallam says: “every newly invented matter is an innovation…,restricting the meaning of bid’a to misguided bid’a.
    Do any of the Seeking Ilm staff have the text of Imam Nawawi’s commentary on the formerly mentioned hadith and it’s citation?
    Your research is greatly appreciated
    Muhammad

    Sincerest Apologies Sayyidi Muhammad as I did not see your request.

    Yes the following link shows a brief explanation of man sanna fil Islam Sunnatan Hasanatan:

    http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=1&Rec=2216

    His commentary is at the bottom. He mentions that he has clarified this issue of bida’ah in further depth in the Chapter on Jumu’ah:

    وَقَدْ سَبَقَ بَيَان هَذَا فِي كِتَاب صَلَاة الْجُمُعَة , وَذَكَرْنَا هُنَاكَ أَنَّ الْبِدَع خَمْسَة أَقْسَام : وَاجِبَة وَمَنْدُوبَة وَمُحَرَّمَة وَمَكْرُوهَة وَمُبَاحَة .

    “…that bida’ah is divided into 5 branches: obligatory, recommended, forbidden, hated, and permitted.”

    Hope that helps insha’allah!

  34. Strang3r says:

    “What you need to understand is that the whole Jama’a praying Taraweeh behind 1 imam, for every night of Ramadhan was not instituted by Rasulullah (SAWS) Sala Allahu Alayhi wa Salam. So in this aspect it is a Bida’. What makes it a good bid’a is that it has a basis in the Sunna, i.e. that he did lead some kind of night prayer in jama’a.”

    Assalaamua’alaikum.

    I’d like to apologize before hand since I don’t know how to quote messages in this comment box.

    @Muhammad Jibreel.
    You mentioned that “the whole Jama’a praying Taraweeh behind 1 imam was not instituted” by RasulAllah (salAllahu alaihi wassalaam). Didn’t I quote the report of A’isha r.a where he (salAllahu alaihi wassalaam) “observed Taraweeh prayer in the Masjid one night and people prayed with him?”

    Is there proof where people prayed under different imams during RasulAllah’s (salAllahu alaihi wassalaam) time?. JazakAllah khair.

  35. Hasan says:

    Assalamu Alaikum

    Strang3r, I don’t understand why you are arguing this point. Don’t you Wahhabis believe that the Prophet was not praying anything extra in Ramadan anyway? Doesn’t Albani quote the hadith of Aisha that the Prophet never prayed more than eight raka’at inside Ramadan or outside Ramadan to prove that taraweeh is simply the extra night prayerm, and that it should be only eight raka’at? Why are you contradicting yourself by first saying that the Prophet did institutionalize it, then by saying that the Prophet never even prayed extra salah in Ramadan anyway?

  36. Strang3r says:

    Assalaamua’alaikum brothers. It was interesting talking about this subject and learning about your views but I’m afraid that I have to end it here and learn elsewhere. I don’t want to be mean but I do not like the adab here, where people label each other names that only result in dividing the ummah. JazakAllah khair for all your help.

  37. Muhammad Jibreel says:

    Wa Alaykum as-Salaam. It’s unfortunate that Stranger was made to feel that way, I think I was benefiting from the discussion.
    To proceed, I would like to point out that Stranger said to me:

    “You mentioned that “the whole Jama’a praying Taraweeh behind 1 imam was not instituted” by RasulAllah (salAllahu alaihi wassalaam).”

    His quote is disingenous in that he left out the part of “…for every night of Ramadhan…”.

    Furthermore he seems to not understand that Al Habib Al Mustafa Sala Allahu Alayhi wa Alihi wa Sahbihi wa Sallim, did not institute Taraweeh; meaning, he did not command the people to do it AS DID SAYYIDINA UMAR. In fact, as Sayyidi Abul Layth pointed out: “one could also argue that it was abandoned by the Prophet Muhammad” Sala Allahu Alayhi wa Alihi wa Sallim.

  38. Muhammad Jibreel says:

    PS
    I think that after all the above is considered, it becomes clear, Inshallah, why Sayyiduna Abu Hafs Radhi Allahu Anhu called the Tarawih prayer a GOOD BIDA’!
    and I think it becomes clear why al Imam al Shafi’i used this hadith to establish in the Shari’a that Bida is divided into good bida and misguided bida, and why Imams Ibn Hajjar and al Suyuti supported good bidas like the blessed Mawlid!

  39. Abul Layth says:

    So Umar was correct in labeling it a bida’ah because:

    1) The Nabi ‘alayhis salam had abandoned this act of tarawih within his life, and so it became his sunnah to not perform it.

    2) The Nabi ‘alayhis salam did not gather the Muslims behind one Imam for this prayer.

    3) The Nabi ‘alayhis salam did not do this for the entirety of Ramadan, whereas Umar (r) did.

    4) Another bida’ah here is that the Prophet Muhammad did not recite the entirety of the Qur’an in tarawih either, yet the Muslims continue to do it! A Good Bida’ah Indeed!

  40. ibn Ismail says:

    -Amir radhiallahu anhu relates from his father : annahu kaal sallaitu ma’a rasulalllahi
    sallallahu alaihi wasalam as subuha fa lammaa sallamaa inharafaa warafa’ yadaihi wadaa “Allahuma barik lanaa fee madeenatinia
    fee muthinaa fee saainaa” (Ibn Abi Shayba)
    Similar hadith reprted by Imam tabrani from Abdullah ibn Umar and also related from Anas radhiallahu anhu. Imam sumhudi in wafa ul wafa biakhbaaril daril mustafa, vol 1, pg53 said the hadith is saheeh.

    Since the above is proof of Prophet SAW turning around after fajr prayer and doing duaa in congregation, the salafees should not have a problem with sunni mosques conducting duaa in congregation after
    salah.

    Some salafees say that they don’t have problem inconducting it once in a while because yasir qadhi did it, but they have a problem in doing it every time. If 3 nights of taraweeh in congregation is enough proof even though Prophet SAW abandoned it, then so should this be enough proof.

    Moreover their argument that qunoot in fajr was later abandoned would not be proof for them to oppose those who do qunoot in fajr.

    wa salaam

  41. hasan says:

    Brother Ibn Ismail, can you please post the arabic text of the hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayba or can you provide the reference ( chapter name / vol no etc) ?

  42. Zhulfiqar says:

    السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

    Akhî Abu’l Layth, what about those narrations?

    فقد رَوَى البخاريُّ في صحيحِهِ عن أبي هريرةَ رضي الله عنه أنه قالَ: “فكانَ خبيبٌ أوَّلَ من سنَّ الرَّكعتينِ عندَ القَتلِ”

    Abu Hurairah (رضي الله عنه) said: Verily, Khubayb was the first (awwala) who started the two rak’ah (prayer) … (‘inda’l qatl = ? can someone translate this part)

    قد قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: من أحدث في أمرنا هذا ما ليس منه فهو رد. متفق عليه

    Verily, the Prophet (صلى الله تعالى عليه واله وسلم) said: Whosoever invents in our command this which is not from it, then it’s rejected.

    في رواية لمسلم: من عمل عملا ليس عليه أمرنا فهو رد

    In a narration in Muslim: Whosoever practises a practise which is not upon our command, then it’s rejected.

    These two above ahâdîth implies; Thus that which is invented/started but belongs to our command (Dîn) then it’s accepted which is the opposite of the ahâdîth.

    والله أعلم

  43. Abul Layth says:

    Salamu ‘alaykum Bro. Zul FIqar,

    فقد رَوَى البخاريُّ في صحيحِهِ عن أبي هريرةَ رضي الله عنه أنه قالَ: “فكانَ خبيبٌ أوَّلَ من سنَّ الرَّكعتينِ عندَ القَتلِ”

    Abu Hurairah (رضي الله عنه) said: Verily, Khubayb was the first (awwala) who started the two rak’ah (prayer) … (‘inda’l qatl = ? can someone translate this part)

    This story is of enormous benefit indeed! It has been a while since I read the story of Khubayb and I want to thank you brother for bringing it up.

    I could narrate the entire hadith of Abu Hurayrah regarding this issue, but it is rather long so I will link it then summarize the event in my own words so as not to burden the reader.

    You can read the hadith here: http://alim.org/library/hadith/SHB/281/4

    Bascially Khubayb killed Al-Harith in the battle of Badr, was caught and sold as a slave through treachery, and was sold to the son of Al-Harith who imprisoned him and sought to kill him in revenge of his father’s death.

    While imprisoned, many miracles occurred at His hands. He showed bravery and no fear of death. At the time of his death he requested to make two raka’ahs which he was granted to do so.

    In fact he recited some lines of poetry:

    فلست أبالي حين أقتل مسلما ‏
    على أي جنب كان لله مصرعي ‏
    وذلك في ذات الإله وإن يشأ ‏
    يبارك على أوصال شلو ممزع ‏

    “I being martyred as a Muslim, Do not mind how I am killed in Allah’s cause, For my killing is for Allah’s sake, And if Allah wishes, He will bless the amputated parts of a torn body.”

    What you have quoted is the fact that Khubayb is the one who innovated the two raka’ahs before being put to death. The wording that I saw in the Sahih of Al-Bukhari is:

    وكان ‏ ‏ خبيب ‏ ‏هو سن لكل مسلم قتل صبرا الصلاة

    Translated at the above link as: “So, it was Khubaib who set the tradition for any Muslim sentenced to death in captivity, to offer a two-rakat prayer (before being killed).”

    In other words he innovated the action without precedent! Hence it is a bida’ah hasanah, as it contradicts nothing of precedent and it was not done by the Prophet Muhammad prior to the action.

    These two above ahâdîth implies; Thus that which is invented/started but belongs to our command (Dîn) then it’s accepted which is the opposite of the ahâdîth.

    Mafhum Al-Mukhalafa, a principle in the language of ‘understanding the opposite’. The argument would go that the Nabi (‘alayhis salam) said: “Whoever innovates something in this affair of ours (amrina hadha i.e. Islam), that is not of it, will have it rejected”

    So by the principle of opposites in the language one could set forth the principle: “Whoever innovates something in this affair of ours, that IS OF IT, will have it accepted.”

    This is the principle utilized by the Shafi’is in their argument for “good bida’ah”, and this also shows that it was the understanding of the Sahabah as well. So innovating two raka’ahs before one being put to death does not contradict the Sunnah as there is no forbiddance in doing it, and so, Khubayb understood through the principles forwarded in the law by the Prophet Muhammad (saaws) that he could do this action and only good would arise therefrom.

    Jazakum Allahu Khayran bro. Zulfiqar,
    أخوك
    Abu Layth

  44. abdulHAQ says:

    As’salamu alaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barkatuhu,

    Can we cite the example of verse 9:108 revealed about the practise of the people of Quba using water for cleanliness as a good bidah? They used water in imitation of the Yahoo in some narrations. The hadith of Sunan Abu Dawud is said to be weak, Tirmizi said Gharib, Tabrani, & Ahmad narrated it. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir)

  45. Owais says:

    Jazak Allah. It is very helpful and enough to prove Hasaan Bidah.

  46. triniguy says:

    masha Allah nice article ,very benifical jazak Allah khair

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Seeking Ilm » Blog Archive » The Issue of Dancing (ar-Raqs), Swaying (At-Tamaayul), etc. In Islam - [...] contradict the Shari’ah, and hence is not a misguided deviation as many pseudo-salafis claim1 [...]
  2. The Issue of Dancing (ar-Raqs), Swaying (At-Tamaayul), etc. In Islam | SeekingIlm.com - [...] contradict the Shari’ah, and hence is not a misguided deviation as many pseudo-salafis claim1 [...]
  3. Imam Ash-Shafi’i on Evil and Good Bida’ah: A Refutation of the Pseudo-Salafi Weakening of His Narration | SeekingIlm.com - [...] years ago we compiled statements of Imam Ash-Shafi’i (rahmatullah ‘alayh), the forefather of this Ummah that [...]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>