All perfect praise is for Allaah alone. We beseech His peace and blessings upon Muhammad (sollaLloohu ‘alayhin wa sallam).
In continuation, Rosheed Mustopha al-Khoorijee said, “Also our Shaykh Soolih al-‘Uthaymeen (rohimohuLlaah) said in his Sharh of Iqtidoo as-sirootul mustaqeem; he said you won’t see any innovator except that shirk is with him because if we explain to him and he continues with it, he will contradict tawheed ruboobiyyah or tawheed uloohiyyah.” [Time: 13:19-13:47]
First of all, this is not the exact words of Shaykh Muhammaad Soolih al-‘Uthaymeen. Besides, it is also worth mentioning that he was making comments on some statements of Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rohimohuLlaah). As such, I will start by mentioning the statements of both scholars before clarifying the distortions of Rosheed Mustopha al-Khoorijee even when I have explained it while refuting Sulaimon Abdulateef (the intellectually impotent boy).
Shaykhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said, “IN REALITY ALLAAH THE MOST HIGH TOLD HIS MESSENGER THAT, ‘…VERILY, WE HAVE SENT YOU AS A WITNESS AND A BRINGER OF GOOD TIDINGS AND A WARNER [SOORAH AL-AHZAAB (33):45-46]’. ALLAAH GAVE HIS PROPHET TIDINGS THAT HE (SUBHAANOHU WA TA’ALA) IS THE ONE WHO SENT HIM (THE PROPHET) TO CALL UNTO ALLAAH WITH HIS PERMISSION. ANYONE WHO CALLS TO OTHER THAN ALLAAH HAS COMMITTED SHIRK (WHILE) ANYONE WHO CALLS TO ALLAAH WITH WHAT HE (SUBHAANOHU WA TA’ALA) DOES NOT PERMIT HAS COMMITTED BID’AH. SHIRK IS BID’AH. AN INNOVATOR WILL LATTER MOVE CLOSE TO SHIRK (IF HE IS NOT CAREFUL). YOU WILL NEVER SEE A MUBTADIH EXCEPT THAT THERE IS A FORM OF SHIRK WITH HIM. ALLAAH SAYS, ‘THEY HAVE TAKEN THEIR SCHOLARS AND MONKS AS LORDS BESIDES ALLAAH, AND (ALSO) THE MESSIAH, THE SON OF MARY. AND THEY WERE NOT COMMANDED EXCEPT TO WORSHIP ONE ILAAH (ALLAAH); THERE IS NO DIETY (WORTHY OF WORSHIP) EXCEPT HIM. EXALTED IS HE ABOVE WHAT THEY ASSOCIATE WITH HIM [SOORAH AT-TAWBAH VERSE 31]. FROM THEIR ASSOCIATION OF PARTNERS WITH ALLAAH IS THAT THESE PEOPLE (THE AHBAAR, AND THE RAHBAAN) PROHIBITED THE PERMISSIBLE THINGS AND THEY WERE FOLLOWED, AND MADE PERMISSIBLE, THE PROHIBITED AND THEY WERE FOLLOWED.”
Shaykh Ibn al-‘Uthaymeen says (in explanation of the statements of Shaykhul Islaam), “THE SHIRK WHICH AN INNOVATOR MAY BE INVOLVED IN, ARE IN TWO WAYS. THE FIRST ONE HAS TO DO WITH ULOOHIYYAH (ONENESS IN WORSHIP) AND THE SECOND HAS TO DO WITH AR-RUBOOBIYYAH (ONENESS IN LORDSHIP). AS FOR THE RUBOOBIYYAH, IT IS BECAUSE HE LEGISLATES AND ESTABLISHES HIMSELF AS A JUDGE AND THE ONE WHO LEGISLATES BECAUSE NO ONE DOES A BID’AH EXCEPT THAT HE HAS THE INTENTION OF WORSHIPPING ALLAAH WITH IT. AS FOR THE AREA OF ULOOHIYYAH, HE FOLLOWS HIS DESIRES AND CONTRADICTS HIS CREATOR; THIS HAS TO DO WITH HIM WORSHIPPING HIS DESIRES.
To start with; there is a clear difference between these two statements, “SHIRK IS BID’AH” and “BID’AH IS SHIRK”. As for the former (which Shaykhul Islaam mentioned), it means that shirk itself is an innovation (bid’ah). Shirk was not present from inception. The sharee’ah shows that tawheed was well established but shirk came after a very long time. Allaah says, “Mankind was (of) one religion (before their deviation); then Allaah sent the prophets as bringers of good tidings and warners and sent down with them the Scripture in truth to judge between the people concerning that in which they differed…” [Soorah al-Baqoroh (2):213]. In addition, Ibn ‘Abbass said, “Between Nooh and Aadam were ten generations, all of them were upon Sharee’ah (law) of the truth, then they differed. So Allaah sent prophets as bringers of good news and as warners [Ibn Jarir at-Tobari in his tafseer (4/275) and al-Hakim (2/546)]. These evidences show that Shaykhul Islaam was very correct with his statement, ““SHIRK IS BID’AH”.
To further clarify your misgrounded conceit yaa Rosheed Mustopha al-Khoorijee, Shaykhul Islaam said, “An innovator will latter move close to shirk (if care is not taken)”. If Shaykhul Islaam believes that an innovator is a mushrik (on the basis of your erroneous creed), he wouldn’t have mentioned this statement. This is because the statement will be illogical. It is just like saying, “a thief will later move close to stealing”. How illogical is this? Where is the innovator coming from? Where is he moving to? May Allaah have mercy upon the Shaykh! He clarified this statement beyond doubt. May Allaah grant us a better understanding of His deen. There is no doubt that an innovator is likely to fall into shirk al-akbar since he depends on his intellect, and he may not be able to differentiate between shirk and eeman; a reason why he isn’t safe. We ask Allaah for safety from innovations (in the Deen). Shaykhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (‘alayhi rahmotuLlaah) said, “Sins (may) take one to kufr (disbelief)” [Kitaabul Eeman]. This is so because the eeman of the one who carelessly engage in sins will reduce drastically so much so that (if he is not careful) he starts seeing nothing bad in kufr. May Allaah save us from this! Therefore, one would see that Shaykhul Islaam was very clear with his explanations.
To be continued…
I beseech Allaah to show us the truth as being the truth and to grant us its following, and to show us misguidance as misguidance, and to make it easy for us to abstain from it.
May prayers and peace be upon Muhammad (sollaLloohu ‘alayhi wa sallam), his respected households and companions, and on the generality of the Muslims till the end of time.
Aboo Aaishah Al Odeomeey