{ وَمَن یُشَاقِقِ ٱلرَّسُولَ مِنۢ بَعۡدِ مَا تَبَیَّنَ لَهُ ٱلۡهُدَىٰ وَیَتَّبِعۡ غَیۡرَ سَبِیلِ ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنِینَ نُوَلِّهِۦ مَا تَوَلَّىٰ وَنُصۡلِهِۦ جَهَنَّمَۖ

“And whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has been made clear to him and follows a path other than that of the believers, We will leave him to what he has chosen, and We will expose him to Hell, and what an evil destination.” [Sūrah An-Nisāʾ: 115] This—after guidance has been made clear to him—is a necessary condition. And He, Almighty, says: {وَلَئنِ ٱتَّبَعۡتَ أَهۡوَاۤءَهُم مِّنۢ بَعۡدِ مَا جَاۤءَكَ مِنَ ٱلۡعِلۡمِ إِنَّكَ إِذࣰا لَّمِنَ ٱلظَّـٰلِمِینَ} "And if you were to follow their desires after knowledge has come to you, indeed you would then be among the wrongdoers.” [Surah Al-Baqarah: 145] Meaning: before that, the condemnation is not applicable! Allāh states: { وَمَاۤ أَرۡسَلۡنَا مِن رَّسُولٍ إِلَّا بِلِسَانِ قَوۡمِهِۦ لِیُبَیِّنَ لَهُمۡۖ فَیُضِلُّ ٱللهُ مَن یَشَاۤءُ وَیَهۡدِی مَن یَشَاۤءُۚ} “And We have not sent any messenger except in the language of his people to make things clear to them. Then Allāh leads astray whom He wills and guides whom He wills.” [Surah Ibrāhīm: 4] Notice how “leads astray” is joined by the conjunction “fa” in Arabic, implying a sequence—that is, He leads them astray after providing clarification and establishing proof. “And We have not sent any messenger except in the language of his people to make things clear to them. Then Allāh leads astray whom He wills and guides whom He wills,” indicating that this happens after explanation and the establishment of proof; it does not apply to those who have not received clear guidance. Similarly, in an authentic narration from the two Sahih collections, a man instructed his children upon his death, saying, “If I die, crush my body, burn me, and scatter my ashes in the wind. By Allāh, if Allāh has control over me, He will surely punish me severely.” This man doubted Allāh’s power, and doubting Allāh’s power constitutes disbelief without question. Yet this man entered Paradise because his doubt was due to ignorance. As explained by Sheikul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim, and other scholars, this man doubted Allāh’s power out of ignorance and continued in that state until he died, unaware that Allāh could resurrect him. Thus, he was excused due to his ignorance. Numerous pieces of evidence support this understanding; however, this context serves as a brief response to the question posed. In light of this, it is advised that students of knowledge should avoid becoming excessively occupied with this particular debate. Scholars have historically differed on this matter while mutually loving one another. For instance, Sheikh Ibn ’Uthaymīn and Sheikh Al-Albāni held the view that one who commits such acts out of ignorance should not be called a mushrik, but rather an ignorant person deserving of an excuse. Conversely, Sheikh Ibn Baz, may Allāh have mercy on him, and Sheikh Muqbil, in the majority of their fatwas, held that such a person could be labeled a mushrik. Despite this difference, these scholars lived harmoniously, mutually praising one another until their deaths, without aligning themselves with extremist views. This is the approach we encourage our brothers to follow—to adopt the path of scholars. In contrast, those with extremist views have deviated from the scholars. Mustafa Al-Habashi, for instance, differs significantly from the scholars and should not be seen as aligned with them. It is impermissible to adopt a stance of fanatical bias without just cause. We have advised those with such tendencies that bias in the absence of just cause is unjustifiable and should be reassessed. For those who hold one position or another, they are encouraged to conduct themselves in line with scholarly methods, refraining from declaring those who differ with them as innovators or murji'ah.