The public is basically ignorant especially when it comes to religious matters. They may be categorized into two groups: the uneducated or the non-formally educated and the formally educated. Regardless of the groupings, in Islam, all Muslims are advised to consult men of knowledge on matters that they do not understand.
Scholars (ulama), therefore, are obliged to make things clear to people and true scholars will resolve problems besetting the society. While the first group tends to be more receptive and obedient to advice, the second seems to be more analytical before accepting any, or even rejecting some. But at times, both fall victims to overzealousness and confusion.
There are false scholars who misguide people on the ‘strength’ of religious knowledge they acquired. An illustration of this is their explanation concerning a prophetic tradition (hadith) which says: “Beware of matters newly initiated [in religion], for every matter newly initiated is innovation (bid’ah), every innovation is misguidance (dalalah), and every misguidance is in hell”.
Obviously the discussion here concerns the Muslim community. Still, non-Muslims or non-practicing Muslims may take some lessons from this. In the domain of rituals (ibadat), there are certain minor practices that have become disagreements among jurists for centuries. Interestingly, these differences have never been regarded by true scholars as threats disuniting Muslims let alone disintegrating religion.
Those practices include the reciting of qunut in dawn prayers, instructions for dead (talqin) at funerals, invocations (wird/zikr) and supplications after prayers, etc.
Certain scholars claimed that all these rituals have never been practiced by the Prophet (s.a.w.) in the first century of Islam. Therefore, those who practice them after the time of the Prophet are actually initiating new things in religion. i.e. religious innovation, or bid’ah. They insist that all this is against the meaning and spirit of the hadith aforementioned, therefore, must be abandoned, failure of which will deserve people sojourns in hell!
This writing aspires to clarify some possible misunderstandings of the concept of innovation, in the light of the hadith quoted above. It is based on Umdat al-Salik, a work of a Shafi’i jurist, Imam Ahmad Naqib al-Misri (d. 769/1368), translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller as Reliance of the Traveller (1994). This position of Misri is held and affirmed by other reputed Shafi’i jurists like Imam Nawawi and Imam Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani.
The discussion focuses on three points. (1) Scholars argue that the above quoted hadith does not refer to all new things without restriction or qualification. It only refers to those things having nothing in Syariah to attest to their validity.
The use of the word ‘every’ in the hadith does not indicate an absolute generalization, for there are many examples of similar generalization to be found in the Qur’an and Sunnah that cannot be applied without qualification(s). They are rather qualified by restrictions available in other primary textual evidence.
In addition, in Arabic, the term ‘every’ (kullu) may be used under different situations. Two of them are as follows. Firstly, in the sense of ‘jami’ah’; secondly, in the sense of ‘majmu’ah’. The former appears to be more literal as it really means ‘every’ in each and every situation/application. The latter does not refer to every situation, but to certain circumstances only. Meaning, there are exemptions to the word ‘every’ used in this context.
(2) The Sunnah of the Prophet (s.a.w.) was to accept new acts initiated in Islam provided they were for the good interest and wellbeing of Muslims and do not conflict with the established principles of Syariah; and to reject harmful things.
(3) New matters in Islam may not be rejected outright merely because they did not exist during the time of the Prophet (s.a.w.). They must be evaluated and judged according to the comprehensive methodology of Syariah, by virtue of which the Sacred Law is and will remain the relevant and universal legal and moral code for all peoples regardless of place and time to the Day of Judgement.
The following examples, taken from the Holy Qur’an and hadith will illustrate no. (1) above better.
In Surah al-Najm (53): 39, the Almighty God says: “And that a man can have nothing except what he strives for”.
There is an overwhelming amount of evidence from other prophetic traditions qualifying the divine verse pointing to the fact that a Muslim benefits from the spiritual works of others, from his fellow Muslims, the prayers of angels for him, the funeral prayer over him, charity given by others in his name, and the supplications of believers for him.
In Surah al-An’am (6): 44, God says: “But when they forgot the reminders/warning they received, We (God) opened to them the gates of all good things”.
The verse refers to those who go against God but somehow were bestowed with prosperity in life. Though they live comfortably, the doors of mercy were not opened unto them.
A hadith related by Imam Muslim reads: “No one who prays before sunrise and before sunset will enter hell”.
This is a generalized expression that definitely does not mean what its outward generality implies. Someone who performs the dawn and dusk prayers, but neglects all other prayers and obligatory works is certainly not within the scope of the hadith.
Now, there is a considerable number of rigorously authenticated hadiths reported in reliable authoritative works of various scholars showing that many Companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.) initiated new acts, forms of invocations, supplications (du’a), and so on, that the Prophet himself had never previously done, or ordered to be carried out.
Those Companions did so based on their personal opinion, inference and conviction (ijtihad) that such acts were for the good of individual self, society, and ultimately Islam, as long as none of those contradict the Divine Instructions. Even after the demise of the Prophet (s.a.w.), his Companions introduced many new things that were not there during his lifetime.
Therefore, there is no harm for Muslims today and in the future to continue with the tradition provided it is within the parameter and objectives of Syariah.
In fact, there is a hadith encouraging the Muslims to innovate things: “He who inaugurates a good sunnah (act, thing) in Islam earns the reward of it and all who perform it after him without diminishing their own rewards to the slightest”.
It is perhaps clear that Islam is not against innovation or being creative. Muslims are only reminded to be careful in doing so as not to overstep any established limits prescribed by Islam. No initiator will go to hell if this set of requirements is fulfilled.
Obviously there are two categories of innovation – good and evil, or praiseworthy and blameworthy (hasanah and sayyi’ah). We are talking about and promoting the former, not the latter. Another Shafi’i jurist, Izz al-Din ibn al-Salam, indeed categorizes innovations into five: obligatory (wajib), unlawful (haram), recommended (mandub), reprehensible (makruh) and permissible (mubah).
After getting sufficient explanation from scholars, Muslims have to perform the first and abandoned the second. They are at liberty to practice the remaining three categories. If they are not happy with any of the division, the room of discussion is open. At the end, all must abide by the truth, i.e. the most convincing and authoritative position.
And those who claim themselves as religious scholars must be careful not to confuse the public with petty and trivial things. On matters that true scholars agree to disagree, do not cast hell on those who practice them. On the contrary, pseudo-scholars must be wary of a warning from the Prophet that ulama who misuse or misapply their knowledge will go to hell first ahead of idol worshippers!