BENEFIT 234: If a trustworthy scholar declared another to be an innovator, is it obligatory to accept it?
11 August 2024 • 1.78K views
If the judgement was based on evidence, conforms to reality, and the culprit had no valid excuse, then yes it is accepted, OTHERWISE NO.
Consider the following case:
Muhammad ibn Yahya Adh-Dhuhli—a great scholar— declared Imam Al-Bukhari an innovator and criticised him based on his claim that Bukhāri held an innovated belief with relation to the Qur'ān (the issue of Al-Lafdh).
[هدي الساري مقدمة فتح الباري (ص: 490)].
However, Imam Muslim and others opposed Muhammad ibn Yahya, because neither he nor his followers had any proof.
Adh-Dhahabi explained: "The issue (for which Bukhāri was criticised) pertains to whether the utterance (lafdh) is created. When Al-Bukhari was asked about it, he refrained from giving a definitive answer. However, when he refrained and argued that our actions are created, providing evidence for this, Adh-Dhuhli understood from this that he was implying a specific stance on the matter of Al-Lafdh. As a result, Adh-Dhuhli criticised him, assuming the implications of his statement, as did others."
Adh-Dhahabi relates the belief of Al-Bukhari:
«حَرَكَاتُهُم وَأَصْوَاتُهُم وَاكتِسَابُهُم وَكِتَابَتُهُم مَخْلُوْقَةٌ. فَأَمَّا القُرْآنُ المَتْلُوُّ المُبَيَّنُ المُثْبَتُ فِي المَصَاحِفِ، المسطورُ المَكْتُوْبُ المُوعَى فِي القُلُوْبِ، فَهُوَ كَلاَمُ اللهِ لَيْسَ بِمَخْلُوْقٍ، قَالَ اللـه تَعَالَى: {بَلْ هُوَ آيَاتٌ بَيِّنَاتٌ فِي صُدُوْرِ الَّذِيْنَ أُوْتُوا العِلْمَ} [الْعَنْكَبُوت:49]»
"Their movements, voices, actions, and writings are all created. However, that which is recited of the Qur'ān, which is detailed and affirmed in the manuscripts, inscribed and written, and preserved in the hearts, is the word of Allah and is not created. Allah, the Exalted, says: "But it is clear signs [preserved] within the breasts of those who have been given knowledge. [Al-Ankabut: 49]."
[سير أعلام النبلاء 455/12]
Thus, the criterion for acceptance or rejection is the presence or absence of proof, nothing else.
@almanhajussalafi