Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Dispelling The Mist From The View of The Extremist
Dispelling The Mist From The View of The Extremist
Right now, as these words are being penned, Palestine and Al-Aqsa is
under threat! Syria has been set back decades due to civil war! Yemen is
burning! Uyghur Muslims in china are being oppressed! Kashmir is under
occupation! Yet some people have the time, to cast aspersions and to
falsely accuse those who are happy at the remembrance of the great
favour of Allāh Y upon us (3:164) in His sending the Messenger k as
misguided innovators doomed to hell?
This article aims to shed some light on the extremist mentality via an
exposition on the subject of Bid’ah. It is hoped that the essay will act as a
means of clarification to the reader who may be confused or unclear
about the subject of Bid’ah as well as exposing the widespread extremist
mentality which seems to have encompassed the worldview of Islām.
The subject of Bid’ah is only one of many subjects through which the
radical Muslim has created a niche market for the prevalence of strife and
dissension within the Ummah. Let us progress to understand these
differences and the arguments from both camps.
Preliminary Observation:
It is vital for the reader to know that the main differences between the two
viewpoints are based on semantics and interpretation. We shall therefore
endeavour to produce the proofs utilized by the pro-bid’ah-branding
lobbies who deem every new action as an action of misguidance due and
who therefore equate it those actions as bid’ah in the sense that they are
rendered as actions of misguidance. This will be followed by a rebuttal of
such a false notion with evidence from both the linguistic perspective as
well as the textual standpoint from the opposition view.
1. General
2. Specific
1. The general public who are unfamiliar with the concept as derived
from the Qur’ān and Sunnah tend to utilize terminology such as the
word “Bid’ah” in public without understanding it. By this we mean
that they have not studied the subject with a capable teacher. Rather
their understanding is based on hearsay from lectures, and from
browsing the internet. Those who have taught them to translate
‘Bid’ah’ as ‘innovations’ without teaching them the textual and
intellectual application of the word should therefore take
responsibility for the prevalence of this ignorance in society.
2. From a terminological perspective, the understanding of the word
Bid’ah requires immense insight into the various ahādīth which
indicate its definition and implications thereof. Failure to understand
the textual evidences (Naql) as well as the intellectual evidences
(Aql) can prove to be far more detrimental than beneficial in the
study.
The specific problem with the concept of Bid’ah boils down to those
‘scholars’ who are not willing to accept that there is definitely room for
interpretation in the subject. This will become clear as the discussion
progresses. It will also become clear that due to the radical approach of
the pro-bid’ah-branding lobbies -who deem every new action as Bid’ah-,
that their methodological approach is indeed the primary reason for
Muslims calling upon others with slogans of shirk and Kufr! For the benefit
of the reader, we will divide the opinions into just two camps.
“Did the Prophet J do such and such thing? Did his companionsE do such
and such thing? If not, then it is a Bid’ah”
Proof 1: “Allāh Ta Ālā states in the Qur’ān, ‘Today I have perfected for
you your religion and completed my favor upon you and chosen Islām as
your religion’[1]
Their view is that Allāh Ta Ālā has completed the religion, and by
innovating any new action after this, is to opine that the religion is
incomplete, and by your innovation of anything ‘new’, you are
merely‘adding’ to the already ‘completed’ dīn, hence it is a Bid’ah!
The proponents of this view take into consideration the usage of the
terminology according to its definition and socio-historic background as
advocated by the Qur’ān and Sunnah.
Thus the linguistic definition of Bid’ah as per the Qur’ān is, that which
is innovated without prior example, and the Shar’ee (legal) definition of
Bid’ah is that which contravenes the shariah, in other words it has no
basis.
If the proponents of the first view (camp 1) opine that every Bid’ah is
misguidance, then it would bring into question far too many actions of the
scholars from the salfus sālihīn. Thus camp 2 opines that on the basis of
other ahādīth, Bid’ah, can have good and bad. If there are ahādīth which
are indicative of good Bid’ah, then we must find a way to merge the two
instead of leaving them to remain in contradiction. Furthermore, those
narrations which show novel matters implemented by the companions
without prior precedence must be reviewed in order to gain a holistic
understanding of the subject.
The Ulamā from camp 2 argue that there is sufficient textual (naqli) and
intellectual (aqli) proofs in the sunnah to support that the word “Kullu
Bid’atin”(every innovation) may have exceptions:
Example 1:
“Every child is born with the primordial disposition (fitrah) and it is his
parents who cause him to become Jewish, Christian, or Zoroastrian (in
faith)[5]
• The narration is clear and its usage of the word “Kul” (every) is in
evidence. However, if we search the books of Ahādīth, we come
across a narration which will remain in conflict of the
abovementioned narration unless we take on the responsibility of
Ta’wīl (interpretation). That supposedly conflicting narration states:
“On the day he was created, the young boy killed by Moosa’s companion
(Khidhr) was stamped as a disbeliever.”[6]
• When the two narrations are juxtaposed, it proves that whilst the first
stated that ‘every’ child is born upon fitrah, the second narration
‘differs’ inherently. By clarifying that there is an exception here and
that not every person was born with the primordial belief.
Example 2:
“Every son of Ādam, except for Yahyā son of Zakariyyā, will arrive on the
Day of Resurrection with a sin.”[7]
• This example proves quite clearly that when the word “every” is
utilized, there is an exception made in the same statement, hence
“every” is not inclusive of all.
• The Aqīdah of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah is clear that all the
messengers of Allāh Ta Ālā are infallible. If we do not interpret the
above narration to mean, “Every son of Ādam who are not ambiyā”,
then this will go against our belief. Hence, interpretation is required.
Thus, the narration should now read that every son of Prophet Ādam
u who is not amongst the ambiyā will come on the Day of
Resurrection sinful. Hence the ‘exception of the prophets as they are
infallible.
Example 3:
“Rasūlullāh k stated, ‘No one is wrongfully killed except that the first son
of Ādam bears a portion of the guilt, since it was he who sanna
(introduced) the act of murder”[10]
Now that we have clarified that the word ‘every’ according to camp 2 is
not general across the board, but has been utilized by the Prophet k in
the sunnah to also give off a meaning showing exception, let us progress
to understand the shar’ī implications of the word “Bid’ah” in that famously
distorted narration.
A man praying alone or a man praying with a little group behind him. So,
‘Umar said, ‘In my opinion I would better collect these (people) under the
leadership of one Qari (Reciter) (i.e. let them pray in congregation!)’. So,
he made up his mind to congregate them behind Ubay bin Ka’b. Then on
another night I went again in his company and the people were praying
behind their reciter. On that, ‘Umar remarked, ‘What an excellent Bid’ah
(i.e. innovation in religion) this is; but the prayer which they do not
perform, but sleep at its time is better than the one they are offering.’ He
meant the prayer in the last part of the night. (In those days) people used
to pray in the early part of the night.”[11]
Example 2:
Narrated by Zaid bin Thabit: Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the
people! ofYamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet’s
Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him) and found
‘Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me),
“Umar has come to me and said: “Casualties were heavy among the
Qurra’ of the! Qur’ān (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day
of the Battle of Yalmama, and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may
take place among the Qurra’ on other battlefields, whereby a large part of
the Qur’ān may be lost.
“ Then Abu Bakr said (to me). ‘You are a wise young man and we do not
have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine
Inspiration for Allāh’s Apostle. So you should search for (the fragmentary
scripts of) the Qur’ān and collect it in one book).” By Allāh If they had
ordered me to shift one of the mountains, it would not have been heavier
for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur’ān. Then I said to Abu
Bakr, “How will you do something which Allāh’s Apostle did not do?”
Abu Bakr replied, “By Allāh, it is a good project.” Abu Bakr kept on
urging me to accept his idea until Allāh opened my chest for what
He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar. So I started looking
for the Qur’ān and collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks,
thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found
the last Verse of Surat At-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima Al-
Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him.
The Verse is: ‘Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad)
from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any
injury or difficulty… (Till the end of Surah-Baraa’ (At-Tauba) (9.128-129)
Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Qur’ān remained with Abu
Bakr till he died, then with ‘Umar till the end of his life, and then with
Hafsa, the daughter of ‘Umar.[14]
• It is evident that the order to compile the Qur’ān into a unified single
manuscript was not done by the Prophet k, nor was it his
command, yet the giants of the sahabas were willing to go ahead
with it based on the concept of it having “goodness” in it.
• If camp 1 is of the opinion that every action which the Prophet k
didn’t do therefore is a Bid’ah, then surely the same applies for the
unified copies of the Qur’ān which we have in our possession today?
• Camp 1 argues that this is the Sunnah of the sahābas, and this is
established from the hadith, hence their doing so does not advocate
us doing so. If that were true, then what is the entire concept of
Sunnah, if not to do something which someone already did???
Hence the lesson from the Sahābas here, is that even if something
was not done by the Prophet k, yet it is something of benefit for the
Ummah, then the leaders must take this into ‘cognizance’, but
cognitive thought is a problem for anyone who harbours extremist
views.
Astoundingly, here, the author states that a matter of creed which has
become part of the essential teaching in the school of the Salafī ideology
was not done by the Prophet k nor by his companions and then he goes
on to give his ‘interpretation’ and then further states that it is ‘implied’.
The double standards are in evidence.
Word of Caution: We have concluded that Bid’ah has good, and bad. If
an action merits reward or benefit for the Ummah, then it is deemed
permissible according to the scholars. Some examples of actions (known
by South African Muslims in particular), but were never done by the
Prophet k , nor commanded in the Qur’ān and Sunnah, yet are known to
be meritorious by those who partake in it include:
Thus it is imperative for the reader to now understand that these matters
can become divisive if the people objecting continue to focus on
subsidiary matters which are benefiting Muslims, instead of focusing on
matters which are directly harmful to the Ummah from the enmity of the
Kuffār!
May Allāh Y grant the courage to be true to His Dīn and to remove
extremism from our hearts and minds and protect the integrity of the
Prophet k, the Qur’ān and the Sunnah from the enemies of Islām!
[7]Mustadrak of ImāmHaakim
[14] Sahih Bukhari, Book 66, Chapter on the Compilation of the Qur’ān
http://islamiclifestylesolutions.co.za/dispelling-the-mist-from-the-view-of-
the-extremist/