[2] Still Waiting! Where’s The Clear Unambiguous Knowledge-Based Shariah Proof for the Tabdee?

May 10, 2026 | Abdullah Jallow | Aqeedah, Aqeedah (Creed & Belief), Basics, Bid’ah (Innovation), Brotherhood, Contemporary Issues, Da’wah – Calling To Islam, Fitnah, Methodology – ‘Manhaj’, Morals and Manners – ‘Akhlaaq’, Purification of The Soul, Refutations, Salaf As Saalih (Pious Predecessors), Salafi Masjid Birmingham, Scholars of Islam, Sin, The Salaf – Pious Predecessors, Worship – ‘Ibaadah’

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In The Name of Allāh, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Al-Allamah Salih Al-Fawzan, may Allah preserve him, was asked: We seek (request) from the honorable Shaikh to clarify the stance of the Salaf regarding the Mubtadi’ah, may Allah reward you with good?

Response: Neither did the Salaf declare everyone a Mubtadi nor recklessly apply the term bid‘ah to everyone who opposed or had some opposition to what is correct in the religion. Rather, they described one with bidah who performed an act [of worship, (held a belief or followed a methodology)] for which there is no evidence, seeking nearness to Allah through it – such as a a type of worship that is not legislated by Allāh’s Messenger, peace and blessings of allāh be upon him, due to his statement: “Whoever does an action that is not in accordance with our matter, it will be rejected.” And in another narration: “Whoever introduces into this affair of ours (i.e. practices, beliefs or methodology) that which is not from it, it is rejected”. Therefore, bidah is to initiate something new into the religion (acts of worship, belief, methodology) for which there is no evidence- neither from Allāh’s Book nor the Sunnah of Allāh’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him.

This is bid‘ah when it is established that a person has initiated a bidah into the religion and refuses to recant, in this case, the methodology of the Salaf was to boycott and distance from him, nor did they sit with him. This was their methodology, but as I mentioned, after it is established that he is a Mubtadi- after he has been advised, but does not recant his bidah. Then, he is boycotted so that his harm does not extend to those who sit with him or associate with him, and so that people may be warned against the Mubtadi’ah and bidah.

As for exaggeration (or exceeding the limits) in applying the term bidah against everyone who opposes someone’s view, thus, it is said: This person is a Mubtadi! Everyone calls the other a Mubtadi – while he has not initiated anything (new) into the religion, except (merely) because he is in opposition to another person or a group among the groups, then this (person) is not a Mubtadi. Whoever commits a haram or an act of disobedience (in the Shariah), he is called a sinner (or disobedient) person, however, not every sinner is a Mubtadi and not every person who has committed an error is a Mubtadi. This is because a Mubtadi is one who has initiated into the religion that which is not from it, this is the Mubtadi. As for exaggerating (or exceeding the limits) in the application of the term bidah against everyone who opposes a person, this is not correct, for it may be that the one who opposes him is upon what is correct. This (i.e. exaggerating in applying the term bidah or Mubtadi is not from the methodology of the Salaf. [An Excerpt from Ẓāhirat al-tabdīʿ wa-al-tafsīq wa-al-takfīr wa-ḍawābiṭuhā pages 51-53. paraphrased]

We have repeatedly asked for clear proof for the Tabdee‘ against Shaikh Abu Iyaad, may Allāh protect him and the Salafiyyoon. Yet instead of presenting unambiguous knowledge based Shariah proofs, we continue to see distractions and side arguments. A wrong was committed, thus, we should not complicate the discussion with excessive quotations, technicalities, and side issues, while the central question remains unanswered, otherwise, the focus then becomes the victim’s tone or response. This in no way means that a victim is not held accountable if they have done something wrong, but how can it be expected at the same time that the victim must endure the transgression of false Tabdee, avoid defending himself, and remain calm, while the one who issued the Tabdee remains silent about it. Is this fair?! So we ask again: “Where is the clear proof for the Tabdee‘ against Shaikh Abu Iyaad?” We will not be distracted from this question.

https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2026/03/27/painful-memories-about-some-of-those-who-set-ablaze-the-flames-of-transgression-and-false-tabdi/

https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2025/12/16/an-incident-at-fustat-when-status-meets-truth-humility-as-the-scholars-test-and-shield/