Im going to turn off comments on this post, as I cba to debate and this post is not about debating the evidences of the different poistions, but on the issue of definitions.
As we all know we love debating the concept of bid'ah. Its a good debate as everyone has evidence that supports their views and it is all seemingly contradictory.
The basic argument is over two views on Bid'ah - One group says that bid'ah hasanah exists, the other says it doesnt. One says all Bid'ah is bad while the other says only bid'ah sayyi'ah is bad.
So its all irreconcileable.
Or is it?
In the grand scheme of things, from my understanding there are two popular positions on Bid'ah:
Position 1 as AFAIK supported by Imam Shafi'i:
In this position, it is divided into two - bid'ah hasanah and bid'ah sayyi'ah. Bid'ah that goes against Qur'an and sunnah is called Bid'ah Sayyi'ah, but bid'ah that doesn't can be bid'ah hasanah.
There are various evidences that people can give for this approach that people have been using for over a thousand years.
Position 2 as AFAIK popularised by Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah:
There is only one bid'ah. It is Bad. But if it ONLY bid'ah if it CONTRADICTS Qur'an and sunnah. If it doesn't contradict Qur'an and sunnah, while linguistically it can be called bid'ah on a litteral basis, it actually is not Bid'ah on the religious basis.
Now without these two definitions, it is easy to get lost in debate - but once you consider the different definitions, everythinf heads towards unification:
One group says that bid'ah hasanah exists. The other doesn't consider that bid'ah at all so would not restrict it under the guise of bid'ah.
The other group says all bid'ahs are wrong, but they only define something as bid'ah that the first group calls bid'ah sayyi'ah, which the first group also consider wrong.
While there are still speicifc issues where arguments will continue, on the bigger picture there really isnt much of a difference of views once you take the differing definitions into account.
Suddenly the whole argument is about definition of terms rather than difference in substance.
Next I will go on to solve world peace. Should be a walk in the park.
