List of common Bid'ah (innovations), with evidences

Also, please read the full explanation by Shaykh Sale7 al Fawzan on what I previously mentioned

Good Innovations



Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan hafidhahullaah


Translation and Footnotes by Maaz Qureshi








Whoever divides innovation [in the religion] into good innovation (bid'ah hasanah), and sinful innovation (bid'ah sayyi'ah), then he has committed wrong, and has opposed his sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam statement, "Every innovation is a misguidance", [1] because the Messenger sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam ruled that innovation - all of it - is misguidance, [2] and this says that not all innovation is misguidance, rather there is good innovation. Al-Haafidh Ibn Rajab said in his commentary to al Arba'een: 'So his sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam statement, "Every innovation is misguidance" is from the all encompassing word, not excluding from it anything. And it is the greatest principle from the principles of the Religion. And it is associated with hissallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam statement, "Whoever invents in this affair of ours, what is not from it, then it is rejected" So whoever invents things and attributes them to the religion, and it does not have an origin in the religion to return to, then it is misguidance, and the Religion is free from those things. And equal to that are matters of beliefs, or actions, or statements whether hidden, or manifest.' [end] [Jaami'ul 'Uloom Wal Hikam, p. 233] [3]

And there is not a proof for them that there is good innovation, except for the statement of 'Umar radiallaahu 'anhu regarding the taraaweeh prayer, "What a good innovation this is!" (ni'imatul bida'atu hadhihi).
And they also say, 'Verily there were things invented, and they were not objected to by the Salaf, like the collection of the Qur`aan into one book, and the writing of the Hadeeth, and recording them.' So the answer to these is that these are matters which have an origin in the law (shar'), so they are not newly invented. And the statement of 'Umar radiallaahu 'anhu "What a good innovation", he desires the linguistic innovation, and not the religious innovation (al bida'atush Shar'iyyah). So whatever has an origin in the law, returns to it. If it is said that it is an innovation, then it is an innovation in language, and not in Islaamic Law. So the religious innovation is what does not have an origin for it to return to. So the collecting of the Qur`an into one book has for it an origin in the law to return to, because the Prophet sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam had commanded the recording of the Qur`aan, but it was written scattered so the Companions collected it into one book for it's protection. Indeed the Prophet prayed taraaweeh with his Companions radiallaahu 'anhum nightly, and they had preferable fear about it in the appointment [of an Imaam], and the continuing of the Companions radiallaahu 'anhum in praying in separate groups in the lifetime of the Prophet and after his sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam passing, up until 'Umar Ibnul Khattaab united them on one Imaam like how they used to be behind the Prophet sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam, and this is not an innovation in the Religion. And the writing of the Hadeeth also has an origin for it in the Law. Indeed the Prophet sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam commanded the writing of some hadeeths for some of his Companions radiallaahu 'anhu, so as to study that from it. [4]
And there was warning against writing it on regular paper according to his sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam advice fearing that there would get mixed with the Qur`aan, that which was not from it. So when the Prophet sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam passed away, this warning was done away with - because the Qur`aan was completed, and vowelized before his sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam passing. So the Muslims recorded the hadeeth after that, preserving it from destruction. And may Allah reward Islaam and the Muslims with good when they preserve the Book of their Lord, and the Sunnah of their Prophet sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam from destruction, and the mockery of the scornful. [5]





Footnotes:


1. Many of the people of innovation say that the word 'kullu' in the hadeeth about innovated matters does not mean everything,
al-Haafidh Ibn Rajab al-Hanbalee says in Jaami'ul Uloom Wal Hikam (2/89) in commentary to the part of the hadeeth, "and beware of the newly invented matter."
"His saying, 'and beware of the newly invented matters, and every bid'ah is a misguidance' contains a warning to the ummah from following the newly invented innovations, and he stresed this by saying, 'and every innovation is a misguidance'. And the meaning of bid'ah is everything that is newly invented that has no basis in the share'ah that would prove it. As for that which has a basis in the share'ah that would prove it then this is not a bid'ah in the sharee'ah even if it be a bid'ah according to the language. And in the saheeh of Muslim from Jabir (radiyallahu 'anhu) from the Prophet that he used to say in his sermons, 'the best speech is the Book of Allaah, and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad, and the worst of matters are the newly invented matters and every bid'ah is a misguidance.'.And Imaam Ahmad reports from the report of Ghadeef Ibnul Haarith ash-Shimaalee, 'Abdul Malk Ibn Marwaan sent (someone) to me and he said: Indeed we gather the people for two matters: raising the hands (for supplication) upon the minbar on the day of Jumu'ah and giving exhortations after the fajr and 'asr prayers. So he said: As for these two matters, then they are examples of your innovations in my opinion and I will not accept anything of them from you because the Prophet sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam said, 'A people do not introduce an innovation except that the likes of it is raised from the sunnah (ie. forgotten and neglected) and sticking to the sunnah is better than innovatig an innovation.' And something similar is reported from Ibn 'Umar. And as for what has occurred from some of the Salaf in their declaring some bid'ahs to be good then this is regards to bid'ah in it's linguistic meaning not it's sharee'ah meaning, and from these is the saying of 'Umar radiallaahu 'anhu when he gathered the people for the standing of Ramadhaan behind one Imaam. He gives reasons as to why this is so, but these have already been mentioned in other articles, and some of them above, so I will not repeat them] And from them: the adhaan for jumu'ah that was increased on by 'Uthmaan due to the need of the people.and it is reported from ibn Umar that he said this was a bid'ah. And maybe he meant what his father meant concerning the standing during the month of Ramadhaan. And from them: collecting the mushaf as one book and the Prophet sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam used to command that the revelation be written and there is no difference in this between writing separately or as one collection, rather one collection has more benefit...[mentioning more examples]... And Abu Nu'aym reports with a chain of narration from Ibraaheem Ibn Junayd who said: I heard ash-Shaafi'ee saying: 'bid'ah is of two types..' And he depended upon the saying of 'Umar radiallaahu 'anhu, 'what a good bid'ah this is' and the meaning of ash-Shaafi'ee (rahimahullaah) is as we have mentioned previously: that the foundation for the blameworthy bid'ah is that which does not have a basis in the sharee'ah that can be referred to - and this is a bid'ah in the convention of the sharee'ah. As for the praiseworthy bid'ah then that is what agrees with the sunnah - meaning that is has a basis in the sunnah that can be referred to, and this is a 'bid'ah' in it's linguistic meaning not in it's sharee'ah meaning due to it's conforming with the sunnah. And another statement has been reported from ash-Shaafi'ee that explains this, and that is: 'newly invented matters are of two types.'" [end] So every innovation is a misguidance, contrary to what some may have you believe.

2. The alleged statement of Imaam ash-Shaafi'ee is another ploy used by the people of bid'ah to try to legislate their innovations into the complete and perfected Religion of Allaah.

3. The shaykh, Saalih al-Fawzaan quoted from al-Haafidh Ibn Rajab, so it would be useful to quote the full discussion: al-Haafidh Ibn Rajab said in commentary of the hadeeth, whosoever introduces something in this affair of ours which is not part of it then it must be rejected.' And the hadeeth, 'whosoever does an action which we have not commanded must be rejected': "This hadeeth contains a great principle from amongst the principles if Islaam, for just as the hadeeth 'indeed actions are by intentions' is the scale (to judge the action in) it's inward form this hadeeth is the scale (to the action in) it's outward form. Just as any action that is not done seeking the Face of Allaah the Exalted does not bestow any reward upon the actor, similarly any action that has not been commanded by Allaah and His Messenger is rejected. And everyone that innovates in the religion that which Allaah and His Messenger have not given permission for, then it is nothing in the religion... And this hadeeth in it's wording indicates that every action that has not been commanded by the Legislator is rejected, and it's understanding indicates that every action that has been commanded is not rejected. And the meaning of 'his command' here is 'his religion and law' as is the meaning of his saying in the other narration, 'whosoever introduces something in this affair of ours which is not part of it must be rejected.' Therefore the meaning is that whosoevers action is outside the sharee'ah and not bound by the sharee'ah, is rejected. And his saying, 'which we have not commanded' indicates it is necessary for th actions of the actors to fall under the rules and regulations of the sharee'ah and that the rules of the Sharee'ah be the judge to command them or forbid them. So whosoevers action falls under the rules and regulations of the sharee'ah, in agreement with them, then his action is accepted, and otherwise it is rejected...and whosoever seeks to draw close to Allaah with an action that Allaah and His Messengersallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam have not appointed as a means of drawing close to Allaah then his action is false and rejected... And the Messenger sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam saw a person standing in the sun, and so he inquired about him and it was said in reply, 'he has taken an oath to stand and not to sit or take shade, and to fast.' So the Prophet sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam ordered him to sit and seek the shade and to complete his fast. [Bukhaaree] So he sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam did not make his standing and exposure to the sun a means of getting close (to Allaah) such that it would require fulfilling the oath. And it is reported that this event occurred on the day of jumu'ah at time of hearing the khutbah of the Prophet sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam while he was on the minbar. So this man made the oath to stand and not sit or seek the shade for as long as the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) gave his sermon, in glorification/respect of listening to the sermon of the Prophet sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam, and yet the Messenger sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam did not make this a means of getting close to Allaah that would require fulfillment of his oath. Despite the fact that standing is worship in other places such as prayer and adhaan and offering du'aa on 'Arafah. And exposure to the sun is a means of getting closer to Allaah for the one in ihraam, so this indicates that everything that is a means of getting close to Allaah on a particular occasion is not a means of getting close on every occasion, rather one follows what occurs in the Sharee'ah in it's correct place for everything." [it is known in the sharee'ah that an oath which involves disobedience to Allaah does not require fulfillment]

4. As for the deception of the people of bid'ah in saying that the collection of the ahaadeeth of the Messenger sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam as an innovation, then this is simply not true. From Abu Qabeel who said: We were with 'Abdullaah Ibn 'Amr Ibnul 'Aas and he was asked which city will be conquered first Constantinople or Rome? So 'Abdullaah called for a sealed trunk and he said: Take out a book from it. Then 'Abdullaah said: Whilst we were with the Messenger of Allaah sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam writing. The Messenger of Allaah sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam was asked: Which city will be conquered first, constantinople or Rome? So Allaah's Messenger (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said: "The city of Heraclius will be conquered first" meaning Constantinople. [Related by Ahmad (2/176), ad-Daarimee (1/126) and al Haakim (3/422)] So this narration shows that some of the Companions did write the hadeeths of the Messenger sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam in his presence.




5. Ibn Hajar on bid'ah as in 'Fath (13/314+) Kitaabul-I'tisaam, Chapter: Following The Sunan of The Prophet sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam. "His saying, 'and the worst of matters are the newly invented matters.', and muhadathaat means the newly invented matters that have no basis in the sharee'ah, and the are called according to the convention of the sharee'ah 'bid'ah', and that which has a basis in the sharee'ah that would prove it then it is not a bid'ah. So bid'ah in the convention of the sharee'ah is blameworthy in contravention to the language, for linguistically every thing that is newly invented, be it blameworthy or praiseworthy, is called bid'ah...and ash-Shaafi'ee said, 'bid'ah is of two types..' Reported by Abu Nu'aym via the route of Ibraaheem Ibn Junayd, and there occurs from ash-Shaafi'ee also what is reported by al-Bayhaqee in his 'Manaaqib', 'the newly invented matters are of two types.' end. And some of the scholars divided bid'ah into the five categories of ahkaam and this is clear. And it is established from Ibn Mas'ood that he said, 'indeed you have matured upon the fitrah, but indeed you shall innovate, and things shall be innovated for you, so when you see the innovations then stick to the original guidance'...And Imaam Ahmad reported with a good sanad from Ghadeef Ibnul-Haarith who said, 'al-Malik Ibn Marwaan sent (someone) to me and he said: indeed we gather the people for two matters: raising the hands (for du'aa) upon the minbar on the day of jumu'ah, and giving exhortations after the fajr and 'asr prayers. So he said: as for these two, then they are examples of your innovations in my opinion and I will not accept anything of them from you because the Prophet sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam said, 'a people do not introduce an innovation except that a sunnah the likes of it is raised (i.e. forgotten and neglected)' and sticking to the sunnah is better then introducing a bid'ah' so if this was the answer of this sahaabee concerning a matter that has a basis in the religion, then what do you think the case would be concerning a matter that has no basis in the religion? And how about when it includes things that contradict the sunnah?..and this matter (of giving exhortations) was present during the time of the Prophet sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam but it was not done constantly like the jumu'ah khutbah rather it was done as the need dictated. And as for his saying in the hadeeth of al-Irbaadh, 'indeed every bid'ah is a misguidance' after saying, 'and beware of the newly invented matters' proves that newly invented matters are called bid'ah. And his saying, 'and indeed every bid'ah is misguidance' is a complete sharee'ah principle both in wording and understanding. As for in wording then it is as if it is said, 'the ruling of such and such is that it is a bid'ah and every bid'ah is a misguidance' and so it would not be from the sharee'ah because the sharee'ah, in it's totality, is guidance...and the meaning of his words 'every bid'ah is a misguidance' is that which has been introduced that has no evidence in either a specific or general way...Ibn 'Abdis Salaam said at the end of 'al-Qawaa'id': bid'ah is of five classifications [mentioning the five and some examples of them]" [End of Ibn Hajar's words] There are some points to be recognized here:

1. Ibn Hajars quoting from Imaam ash-Shaafi'ee after making clear that in the language bid'ah is of two types but in the Sharee'ah it is only one.

2. Indicating that he understands the statement 'praiseworthy bid'ah' in the linguistic sense as did Ibn Rajab.

3. His quoting Ibn 'Abdis Salaam in his classifying bid'ah into 5 categories but he himself saying, 'and the meaning of his words 'every bid'ah is a misguidance' is that which has been introduced that has no evidence in either a specific or general way' and other similar statements.

And Verily Allaah the Exalted Knows Best.


Once again, say NO to bid3ah

another recommendation for our brothers and sisters, "the religion is knowledge, so look to who you take your religion from" - Muhammad ibn Sireen. Please becareful in going to forums that support Sufi tariqas, Shi3a, Secularism, etc. Our deen is Qur'an and Sunnah from the UNDERSTANDING of the SALAF. I'm seeing quotes from Faraz Rabbani and others. Does everyone even know this man and what he stands for? Lets becareful of our deen and guard it with everything we have. May Allah protect us from bid3ah, shirk, and kufr.

format_quote Originally Posted by Sister Unknown

Akhi, I have not read what you've writtten since it's kind of long. If we were all to choose a particular shaykh .... Let me ask you, how do you know what is bid'ah hasana?

I know it from Ulama who understand what is bid'ah hasanah in correct meaning,

Unfortunatelly, I found many Ulama who innovate bid'ah and use statement from Imam Shafi'i rahimahullah as their argument. Of course, they are wrong because they do not understand what was Imam Shafi'i rahimahullah means with bid'ah hasanah. But I do not follow Ulama like them.

Respected imams, every scholar makes mistakes. Who ever says that any scholar doesn't make a mistake, is against my logical and it is impossible. Thus, their work is left to the ulma, and not a bucnh of laypeople.

There is no scholar who free from mistake. So, don't be hesitate to seek knowledge from more than one scholar.

format_quote Originally Posted by squiggle

I don't understand how can there be categories of bid'a when the prophet (saw) said "every innovation is misguidance, and every misguidance is in the hell fire".

It'd make sense if he said "every innovation apart from some are misguidance"

please read my previous post

format_quote Originally Posted by Zafran

Salaam

salaam its impossible to take that literal as we know that the companions did do bida as well which was for the good - for exmaple the collection of the Quran in one book form.

peace

please read my previous post

format_quote Originally Posted by Scents of Jannah

Ibn Taymiyyah deemed it permissable to use a weak hadith 'if it encourages what is known as a good deed in Islamic shari'ah, something of virtue, a praiseworthy action, or idea, then it is fully acceptable to refer to such a hadith as an encouragement for that deed'. The scholars in the list below are in agreement with his view.


'I recapitulate the list of hadith masters who accept the use of hadeeth da`îf at the very least for religious practice related to ethics (fada'il al-a`mal) and in some cases even for legal rulings (Ahmad, Abu Dawud, and the entire Hanafi school), according to the above three sources (Sakhawi, Ibrahim, Keller):

1- Nawawi
2- Ibn al-Salah
3- Sufyan al-Thawri
4- Ahmad Ibn Hanbal
5- Ibn `Uyaynah
6- Ibn al-Mubarak
7- Ibn Mahdi
8- Ibn Ma`een (forgery specialist)
9- al-Khatib al-Baghdadi in 'al-Kifayah', chapter entitled:
"strictness with regard to ahadith pertaining to rulings
and leniency with regard to those pertaining to virtuous actions"
10- Bukhari as proven by his use of them in 'al-Adab al- mufrad'
11- Ali al-Qari (forgery specialist)
12- Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani.
13- Ibn Abd al-Barr in 'al-Isaba'.
14- Ibn al-Qayyim in 'I`lam al-muwaqqi`een'.
15- Sakhawi
16- Abu Sa`eed al-`Ala'i (forgery specialist).
17- Abu Dawud.
18- Hanafi school.


All these scholars cannot be wrong.

GF Haddad ©
[10 Apr 1996]

From Ibn Taymiyyah on the subject

To continue, Ibn Taymiyya says, in para 478:
"and that is the action which is known to be lawful with a shari'ah evidence, and there has been narrated in its virtue a hadith that is not known to be a lie, it is possible that the reward will be true, although none of the Imams have said that it is permissible to consider something required (wâjib) or recommended (mustahabb) by way of a weak hadith, and whoever said so differed from the consensus (ijmâ')."

So here we see that Ibn Taymiyya is explaining that if there is a hadith, even though it has not been judged to be authentic, if it encourages what is known as a good deed in Islamic shari'ah, something of virtue, a praiseworthy action, or idea, then it is fully acceptable to refer to such a hadith as an encouragement for that deed.



read rest here: http://www.livingislam.org/n/vwh_e.htm




Yes the prophet (pbuh) said that, but in what context? Performing voluntary ibadah on a night shown to have merits is not adding to the deen as it is a voluntary act. Voluntary acts are clearly permissible. Innovation is suggesting we sould read two rakahs fardh in Isha rather than four/ or to make something fardh when it is not. The asahaba performed ruqyah without any knowledge or sign that it was recommended. They only came to know about it when they enquired from the prophet regarding it payment. This prooves not every act done with good intentions is bid'ah. And Allah knows best.

My sister in Islam, my Allah preserve you, but this is exactly the problem. I hope you didn't type in google "using weak hadith" and clicked on the first link you saw. That website is from GF Haddad, a known Sufi whose aim and goal is to defeat ahlu'sunnah. He calls us wahabis, kharijis, extremists, etc.

There are many errors in his understanding and the scholars have stated the understanding of Shaykh al Islaam ibn Taymiyya (who btw GF Haddad hates). It does not suffice to say so and so from the tabi3oon or so and so from the salaf used weak hadeeth. Rather its important to know WHY a particular Imam used a weak hadeeth.

Firstly, Haddad's understanding behind Imam Ahmad, Abu Dawud and others is horribly flawed and scholars have mentioned this. Imam Ahmad was known to classify HASAN (good) hadeeth as DA'EEF. Other scholars didn't consider hasan hadeeth to be da3eef but Imam AHmad did. This doesn't mean the hadeeth itself is actually weak.

Secondly, a scholar may collect a weak narration in their texts but this does not mean the scholar accepts this hadeeth or is saying to act upon it. Abu Dawud was one of the many mu7aditheen that did this. He gathered weak ahadeeth in his Sunan but labeled some of them weak himself!

Thirdly, the understanding behind Shaykh al Islaam ibn Taymiyya's statement is greatly misunderstood. He said in his Majmoo3 al Fataawa

"If the weak hadith speaking about the virtues of a good deed introduces any quantitative statement or any specification, then it is impermissible to use it. For example, this would be the case if the hadith specifies a particular time for reciting the Qur'an or a specific chapter or verse, or if it gives a particular way of performing an act." [Majmû` al-Fatâwâ (18/67)]

And ibn Muflih al Hanbali clarified the position of Imam Ahmad in this matter in his Al Adab al-Sharee3'ah, "It is attributed to Imam Ahmad that he would never use a weak hadith for establishing the virtues of good deeds or meritorious acts." [al-Âdâb al-Shar`iyyah (2/304)] .

This topic is not as simple as saying, "oh so and so used a weak hadeeth so therefore its okay". No, it doesn't work that way, we should never feel because there is merit mentioned in a hadeeth and although it is weak we can act upon it.

Imam Muslim was very strict regarding this in his introduction to his Saheeh.

"the weak ahaadeeth are to be discarded and only authentic ahaadeeth are to be narrated", "To proceed, may Allaah have mercy upon you. If it were not from the evil practice that we have seen from many who take upon themselves the position of Muhaddith, in their leaving the obligation to discard the weak ahaadeeth and munkar narrations and to suffice with only the authentic ahaadeeth - well known and transmitted from reliable narrators, well known for their truthfulness and trustworthiness. After knowing and admitting with their tongues that much of what they fling at the ignorant is to be rejected and is transmitted by unsatisfactory narrators whose narrations are censured by the scholars of hadeeth like Maalik, Yahya bin Sa'eed al-Qattaan and others ... And know may Allaah have mercy upon you, that what is obligatory upon everyone who is able to distinguish between authentic and weak narrations and between the suspect and reliable narrators, is that he should narrate therefrom except that known to be authentic and have trustworthy narrators..."

Furthermore in the beginning of Haddad's statement he quotes ibn Taymiyya rahimahullah as saying, 'if it encourages what is known as a good deed in Islamic shari'ah, something of virtue, a praiseworthy action, or idea, then it is fully acceptable to refer to such a hadith as an encouragement for that deed'.

Can we say this abt acts of 3ibaadah that are proven on the 15th of Sha3ban, 27th of Rajab, etc? Of course not, because these are not KNOWN. Do you see the difference ukht?

I will give you an example. In the Sciences of hadeeth, you have hadeeth which are hasan li ghayrihi, these are hadeeth that are weak but due to supporting evidences they are raised to the level of hasan. That is precisely it though, they are raised to that level due to that support. Where as we do not find support for other acts of bid3ah that people do. Its important to differentiate between what is known to what simply isn't especially if the scholars of hadeeth aknowledge that a narration is weak or fabricated.

Lastly, I'd like to leave us with the statement of the Messenger of Allah sallallaahu alayhi'wa'salam and let us ponder on them before we go and act on something that we know has no basis in the sharee3ah.

"Whoever ascribes to me that which I did not say, will surely have to occupy his seat in the fire [of hell]"

May Allah protect us from bid3ah, shirk, and kufr, ameen.

I hope this clarifies inshaAllah,.

format_quote Originally Posted by Muraad

This is exactly the mentality I'm talking about - it's a zombie mentality which does not pay attention to the fact that there have been legitimate historical differences amongst the Fuqaha on issues, one of these issues being the 15th of Sha'ban. This mentality makes the individual quick to blurt out statements like 'this is deviation' without realizing exactly who he's throwing under that statement (in this case you just threw Ibn Taymiyyah under your understanding of "deviation", and he's the least of who you threw in there). It's disrespectful firstly to knowledge and secondly to the scholars that carried that knowledge because it waters down something that was not meant to be watered down to something black and white.

We need to learn to be critically respective of scholarship - not take everything blindly just because a scholar said it but question to understand why something is being said, why other scholars held a different opinion and why the difference of opinion exists in the first place and then learn to accept that difference of opinion when legitimate. Even Ibrahim (as) asked Allaah to show him how He gives life to the dead to satisfy his heart - and that's something regarding the very fundamentals of 'Aqeedah! How then can we dumb ourselves down and just accept something online? That's why these Copy and Paste jobs don't cut it and are more detrimental than anything because it creates a barrier between the masses and learning about the religion, and secondly it turns people into zombies who are incapable of critically thinking for themselves because they're being told this is the end all of everything no matter how simplistic the understanding is. You can't question it otherwise you're falling into "deviation".

I did not throw ibn Taymiyya under any deviation. This is not what I was referring to, furthermore we need to always stop pulling the "differences of opinion" card to suit our desires. This is just as Abdullah ibn Abbas said when the people came to him and said, "But Abu Bakr said..." and he said, "may stones be rained down on you, I say Allah and His Messenger said and you say Abu Bakr and Umar said." Since when do we abandon the ayat and authentic hadeeth for the statement of a scholar? Especially when the scholars themselves have agreed or proved otherwise against the ijtihaad of another scholar?

This goes against basic Islam. Also, we cannot say this issue a "legitimate" difference of opinion, it is not, and no one deems it as such. People are relying on weak claims to suit their desires. Since when was it about what we WANT?

I have no zombie mentality, but the minute we started getting relaxed where the deen is concerned is the minute shaytaan takes that opportunity to split us up.

This is exactly why I didn't want to get into this debate, because people can't handle it, and you're a moderator so obviously its not going to get anywhere.

You said this,

We need to learn to be critically respective of scholarship - not take everything blindly just because a scholar said it but question to understand why something is being said, why other scholars held a different opinion and why the difference of opinion exists in the first place and then learn to accept that difference of opinion when legitimate.

i agree 100%, so what are you doing?