The Concept of Bid’ah in the Shari’ah

[Saad]

The Concept of Bid’ah in the Shari’ah

The upshot is that legal bid'ah is an invented matter which does not have substantiation from the four sources of the religion, while believing it to be from the religion, and something in which one expects to be rewarded from Allah and gain good deeds. According to this, whatever the Lawgiver commanded as an obligation or recommendation of seeking knowledge, memorising it, spreading it, supporting the religion, defending it, purifying the souls and refining them, if its compliance in this age is dependent on acquiring the ways and means which the predecessors (salaf) could do without, due to reasons and states specific to them, like the composition of the sciences and compilation of books, building schools in specific ways etc. taking up these means is not from legal bid'ah. It is established in Usul al-Fiqh that that which an obligation is not completed except by means of it, it is itself obligatory and whatever something prescribed depends on, it too is prescribed, so it is a part of the religion by judgement, and is not from innovation in the religion of that which is not from it. This is similar to a doctor instructing a patient to use a certain ointment which is not found in the market, so the patient took all of its ingredients without excess or shortage and proportioned it into a good standing ointment by himself. Preoccupation with the principles of proportioning and working the mind to [acquire] its methods, although it is not part of what the doctor explicitly instructed, it is nonetheless included in it by judgement, as is clear. Yes, if he increased in the mixture of the medicine or decreased from it, or changed the medicine for another medicine or changed the times of its use or freely chose its measurements, for example, in spite of the instruction of the doctor treating [him], then in this there is opposition to his instruction and interference in his job which is not for others to interfere in. This is the condition of the laws of the Shari'ah: it is not permitted to add to them or decrease from them, or take them out of their times and limits, or restrict something general or generalise something restricted, or specify its modalities and modes by mere opinion and guesswork.

Read the entire article...

[al-Kankohi]

Yet another example of the depth of the scholarship of the ulama of Deoband.

[Ahmad_shakeel]

this hadeeth is often misused:

[The Hadith "Whatever the Muslims deem to be good is good according to Allah"]

[It is mentioned in Majalis al-Abrar:] [In the subject] of innovation, [according] to a learned scholar (fadil): It remains for us to verify [the narration] ‘whatever the Muslims deem to be good…’ to its end, since many people have become accustomed to adducing this narration as proof for the non-detestability of what they have become accustomed to of bid’ahs. This deduction is incorrect. The hadith is against them, not for them, because it is part of a hadith halted at ibn Mas’ud (mawquf ‘ala bni mas’ud), narrated by Ahmad, al-Bazzar, al-Tabrani and others as such: “Indeed Allah (Most High) looked at the hearts of the servants and chose Muhammad and sent him with His message. Then he looked at the hearts of the servants and chose for him companions and made them helpers and supporters of his religion, so whatever the Muslims deem to be good, it is good according to Allah, and whatever the Muslims deem to be bad, it is bad according to Allah.”

There is no doubt that the definite particle (lam) in “the Muslims” is not for the entirety of the genus, so it is not contrary to his (Allah bless him and grant him peace) statement “My nation will divide into 73 groups all of which are in the Fire except one” because every group from the Muslim nation believe its religious character is good, by which it is necessitated that no group of them will be in the Fire, and likewise some Muslims deem something good while others deem it bad, so it results in good being indistinguishable from bad.

Thus, [the definite particle] is either for particularity (‘ahd) and the particularised object (ma’hud) is what he mentioned in his statement “and chose for him companions”, in which case the intended meaning would be the Muslims from the Companions only; or for encompassment (istighraq) of the special features (khasa’is) of that genus so by Muslims is meant the people of sound judgement (ijtihad) who have perfected the attribute of Islam, turning the general (mutlaq) into the perfect (kamil) because the general in the absence of a qualifier turns into the perfect particular (fard kamil) which is the mujtahid [in this case], thus it becomes ‘whatever the Companions or the people of sound judgement deem to be good is good according to Allah and whatever the Companions or the people of sound judgement deem to be bad is bad according to Allah’; and it is possible that [the definite particle] is for actual encompassment so the meaning becomes ‘whatever all the Muslims deem to be good or bad is as such according to Allah’, and whatever is disputed, attention then is given to the three generations whose greatness has been corroborated [in the hadiths]. [End of quote from Majalis al-Abrar]

[Hafiz Al-Lakhnawi wrote after quoting the above:] The most obvious and correct of the three interpretations of the definite particle is the first interpretation as indicated by the fa (so) prefixed to “whatever the Muslims deem to be good.” The latter two interpretations would be considered if the speech was without fa or was with waw (and) as is commonly used on their tongues, and since [this is] not [the case, that is] not [considered].

A group have attributed this hadith to the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) and said Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said “Whatever the Muslims deem to be good is good according to Allah.” From them is Imam al-Razi in al-Tafsir al-Kabir and al-’Ayni in Sharh al-Hidayah and others from its commentators. However, ibn Nujaym said in al-Ashbah wa l-Naza’ir: Al-’Ala’i said, “I did not find a basis for it in marfu’ form in any of the books of hadiths or with a weak chain after lengthy research and much investigation and inquiry, and it is only one of the sayings of ibn Mas’ud halted at him (mawquf ‘alayhi).” [Here] ends a summarised [passage on the discussion of this narration] from Tuhfat al-Akhyar by al-Hafiz al-Lakknawi.[10]

And from what we transmitted to you about this narration you know that the supporters of bid’ahs adhering to it is not justified because it is a narration halted at ibn Mas’ud, and acting on the statement of a Companion and the obligation of practicing it is disputed. Furthermore, the purpose behind it [i.e. the statement] is: whatever they, either all the Muslims or the Companions in particular, agreed upon, is good, as you now from what has preceded. Preserve this for it is beneficial. Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) knows best.

[Antivirus]

Allah Ta'ala blessed Shaykh al-Islam Mawlana Shabbir Ahmad 'Uthmani [R.A] with such a vaste amount of knowledge. This article in itself is more than sufficient to testify this, let alone his amazing piece of work in Fath al-Mulhim. May Allah grants Shaykh al-Islam jannatul firdaus, and bless us with the company of ulemas of his caliber. Ameen!

[al-Kankohi]

Allah Ta'ala blessed Shaykh al-Islam Mawlana Shabbir Ahmad 'Uthmani [R.A] with such a vaste amount of knowledge. This article in itself is more than sufficient to testify this, let alone his amazing piece of work in Ila as Sunnan. May Allah grants Shaykh al-Islam jannatul firdaus, and bless us with the company of ulemas of his caliber. Ameen!

That's the other 'Uthmani, i.e., Mawlana Zafar Ahmad 'Uthmani, the author of 'Ila as-Sunan.

Mawlana Shabbir Ahmad 'Uthmani is the author of Fath al-Mulhim (commentary of Sahih Muslim), the famous tafsir of the Qur'an, Tafsir 'Uthmani, and several other books.

[Mujib]

Did Someone Say “Good Bida`”?

[Antivirus]

That's the other 'Uthmani, i.e., Mawlana Zafar Ahmad 'Uthmani, the author of 'Ila as-Sunan.

Mawlana Shabbir Ahmad 'Uthmani is the author of Fath al-Mulhim (commentary of Sahih Muslim), the famous tafsir of the Qur'an, Tafsir 'Uthmani, and several other books.

Yes obviously. I got that mixed up in my head and only realised my mistake after i logged off.

Jazakallah for pointing it out akhi!

[Saad]

Did Someone Say “Good Bida`”?

You might want to check out this thread.

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...mani-on-Bid-ah

[Mujib]

You might want to check out this thread.

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...mani-on-Bid-ah

Allah reward you. I found Sidi Salman's article more clear than the one you've posted. It is hard to take away a clear definition from the latter.

There must be such a thing as "praiseworthy innovation," otherwise many of the things we all agree on would fall under the definition of "bid`a" and become haram.

Was-Salam

[Shkapar_Dorwaza]

Did Someone Say “Good Bida`”?

Give this a read, . This matter of what constitutes bid`a is probably the most confusing issue for me. I know it's probably because of my weak understanding. Rabbi zidni `ilma.

Imam Ash-Shafi’i on Evil and Good Bida’ah: A Refutation of the Pseudo-Salafi Weakening of His Narration

http://www.seekingilm.com/archives/1003

I'm still learning. Just one question to anyone who has a good grasp of this stuff...so taking this article as the official position of the Shafi`is regarding bid`ah, can there be a valid difference of opinion between the madhahib regarding what constitutes bid`ah which would in turn be treated like any other difference of opinion in fiqh (in other words, respect the difference)?