|Wednesday, 04 October 2023|
You are here:
In the cassette, "al-Qawl al-Jalee" Yahya al-Hajuri asks his students:
The saying of some of them, the division of some people of the Innnovators into callers to their innovation and other than the callers to innovation, do the evidences support this division? Is it correct or futile?
Then after some discussion with some of his students al-Hajuri says:
Futile (baatil), by Allaah, futile, and I swear by it too, that it is futile... every innovating person who has an innovation with him is considered to be a caller to his innovation... There is not to be found an innovator on the face of the earth, any innovator, and it be said about him, "It is not possible for him to call to his innovation through speech or action"... Da'wah (calling to Allaah) is both speech and action, it is not restricted to just speech. And this division is futile, futile... it is empty speech, this division is empty speech. And if you refuse (to accept this) we will make an assault through an research piece and an explanation of that, even if the majority speak with it, by Allaah it is a futile division, yes... it is empty speech, empty speech. Is this division correct?! Yes we have seen some of Ahl al-Sunnah affirming this division. I am against this division due to evidences from the Qur'an, the Sunnah and reality... the issue is as clear as the sun, this is a futile division, this division has an observation (against it). It is found with the majority of the Scholars, it is not from just one of them, but it has an observation, it is not correct, it is not correct, it is not correct...
Al-Hajuri has also repeated this in other cassettes of his. Al-Hajuri is very explicit in affirming he is opposing the majority of the Scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah and their leading Imaams in this regard.
Imaam Maalik (rahimahullaah) said (al-Majrooheen of Ibn Hibbaan 1/80):
Four are not to be written from: ... a person of desires, caller to his desire (innovation).
In the Su'aalaat Abee Dawood li Ahmad (p. 198) there occurs:
I said to Ahmad: Shall I write from a Qadari? He said, "If he is not a caller (to his innovation)."
And in al-Kifayah of al-Khateeb al-Baghdaadee (p. 127):
And when it was said to Ahmad: O Abu Abdullah, you narrate from Abu Mu'awiyah but he is a Murji'. He said, "He was not a caller (to his innovation)"
And also from al-Khateeb (p.127):
When Abdullah bin al-Mubaarak was asked: You heard from Amr bin Ubayd (the Mu'tazilee)? He motioned with his hand indicating that he heard a lot (from him). Then he was asked: Then why did you not name him as you name others from the Qadariyyah? He said: Because this one was a head (i.e. a leader, caller to his innovation).
And in Taareekh Ibn Ma'een through the reporting of al-Dawree (2/133):
Imraan bin al-Qattaan used to hold the view of the Kharijites but he was not a caller (to his innovation).
And also in Taareekh Ibn Ma'een (2/111):
I said to Yahyaa (Ibn Ma'een): Is this what you say regarding every caller (to his innovation) that his hadeeth is not to be written, if he is a Qadari, or Raafidee or other than that from the people of desires who is a caller. He said, Do not write from them unless it is one about whom it is only thought to be like that, who does not call to it, such as Hishaam al-Dustuwaa'ee and others, from those who hold the (doctrine regarding) al-Qadar but do not call towards it."
Ibn Taymiyyah said as occurs in Majmu' al-Fataawaa (28/205):
This is the reality of the saying of whoever said from amongst the Salaf that the witness of the callers to innovation is not accepted, they are not to be prayed behind and knowledge is not taken from them, nor are they married into. This is a punishment of them until they end (their innovation). For this reason, they distinguish between a caller (to innovation) and other than a caller (to innovation), because the caller has manifested evils, hence he deserves punishment, as opposed to the concealer.
Ibn Hibbaan says in al-Thiqaat (6/140);
There is not any difference between Ahl al-Hadeeth from our leading Scholars regarding (the matter of) the precise and truthful (narrator) when he has innovation with him but is not a caller to it, that using his reports as proof is permissible. But if he calls to his innovation, then using his reports as proof is invalidated.
The distinction between him being a caller (to innovation) and other than a caller is the most balanced madhhab and many factions from the leading Imaams have tended towards it.
And al-Haafidh said in al-Taqreeb (1/8):
The fourth (rank): The one who falls short of the third rank and this is indicated by the (phrase), (صدوق سيء الحفظ) or (صدوق يهم) or ... and put alongside him is whoever has been accused with a type of innovation such as al-Tashayyu', al-Qadar, al-Nasab, al-Irjaa', al-Tajahhum alongside distinguishing between the caller and other than him.
Al-Mu'allimee says in al-Tankeel (1/42):
And the later ones differed regarding the reason for the rejection (of the reports) of the caller (to innovation) and that which is correct if Allaah wills is what the Imaams of the Sunnah are agreed upon that the innovator, caller (to his innovation), his reports are not accepted. And as for other than the caller (to innovation), then he is treated like the Sunni (whose reports are accepted based upon precision and truthfulness).
And al-Mu'allimee also said in al-Tankeel (1/45):
And as for other than the caller, then citation of the concensus that he is treated like the Sunni, has already passed.
And Shaykh Rabee' bin Haadee said in al-Majmu' al-Waadih (p. 53):
Putting the innovator (to one side) is not done unrestrictedly with the Salaf and their Imaams. Rather they distinguish between the caller (to his innovation) and other than the caller.
Link to this article: Show: HTML Link Full Link Short Link
Add a Comment
You must be registered and logged in to comment.