So the issue here is that al-Nawawi is absolutely correct that the word (كل) is indeed a generalization that is qualified - from his particular perspective of things (which is to see the word "bidah" purely with its linguistic meaning). The difference is that most of Ahl al-Sunnah believe that that word (بدعة) is already qualified by what is in the hadeeth of Aa'ishah (radiallaahu anhaa), whereas al-Nawawi and the Shafi'ite jurists have brought a classification to enable the qualification of what they see to be a word only having its broad unqualified linguistic meaning which is "anything without any prior example whether praiseworthy or blameworthy" Now because this definition would include (in the modern era) your pizzas, burgers, hoodies, sneakers, brick and marble houses, the internet, mobile devices, types of technology and so on, these Shafi'ite jurists simply made classifications to allow these types of things to be excluded from what is otherwise the blameworthy bidah (innovation). Hence, they said there is an obligatory innovation (so we would say putting the Qur'an in digital format for devices and for the internet is an obligation) and a recommended innovation (setting up online schools for teaching of Qur'an and tajweed is a recommended innovation), and a permitted innovation (enjoy that pizza, wear that hoodie and don those cool sneakers). In other words, food, drink, clothing and residence not present in that way before. So it becomes clear after all this that in reality there is no difference between these two groups of Scholars, they all have the same understanding, but are just simply using two different languages to express it. Having said this, we do consider the classification of bidah into wajib, mandub and mustahab to be an error and the truth is with the Salaf and the likes of al-Shatibi w
1 comments:
So the issue here is that al-Nawawi is absolutely correct that the word (كل) is indeed a generalization that is qualified - from his particular perspective of things (which is to see the word "bidah" purely with its linguistic meaning). The difference is that most of Ahl al-Sunnah believe that that word (بدعة) is already qualified by what is in the hadeeth of Aa'ishah (radiallaahu anhaa), whereas al-Nawawi and the Shafi'ite jurists have brought a classification to enable the qualification of what they see to be a word only having its broad unqualified linguistic meaning which is "anything without any prior example whether praiseworthy or blameworthy" Now because this definition would include (in the modern era) your pizzas, burgers, hoodies, sneakers, brick and marble houses, the internet, mobile devices, types of technology and so on, these Shafi'ite jurists simply made classifications to allow these types of things to be excluded from what is otherwise the blameworthy bidah (innovation). Hence, they said there is an obligatory innovation (so we would say putting the Qur'an in digital format for devices and for the internet is an obligation) and a recommended innovation (setting up online schools for teaching of Qur'an and tajweed is a recommended innovation), and a permitted innovation (enjoy that pizza, wear that hoodie and don those cool sneakers). In other words, food, drink, clothing and residence not present in that way before. So it becomes clear after all this that in reality there is no difference between these two groups of Scholars, they all have the same understanding, but are just simply using two different languages to express it. Having said this, we do consider the classification of bidah into wajib, mandub and mustahab to be an error and the truth is with the Salaf and the likes of al-Shatibi w
Posting Komentar