Cutting ties with innovators

‏" ‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم هَجَرَ بَعْضَ نِسَائِهِ أَرْبَعِينَ يَوْمًا وَابْنُ عُمَرَ هَجَرَ ابْنًا لَهُ إِلَى أَنْ مَاتَ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ إِذَا كَانَتِ الْهِجْرَةُ لِلَّهِ فَلَيْسَ مِنْ هَذَا بِشَىْءٍ وَإِنَّ عُمَرَ بْنَ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ غَطَّى وَجْهَهُ عَنْ رَجُلٍ ‏.‏
[سنن أبي داود – ٤٩١٦]

Abu Dāwūd said: The Prophet ﷺ boycotted some of his wives for forty days, and Ibn ʿUmar boycotted his son until he died. If the boycott is for the sake of Allah, then it is not part of this prohibition. And ʿUmar ibn Abdul-Aziz covered his face from a man (kept away from him). [Sunan Abu Dawud 4916]

Abu Dawud explains that it is allowed to cut ties for the sake of Allah. This means that you can completely abandon an innovator or an open sinner if that's what is needed to make him return to Allah.

Based on the context, cutting ties can be the fastest option to make a person repent to Allah and return to what is right.

However, it is not permissible to ignore the conditions, because a Muslim would have no right to cut ties with a person who doesn't deserve that treatment.

قَالَ وَنَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم الْمُسْلِمِينَ عَنْ كَلاَمِنَا أَيُّهَا الثَّلاَثَةُ مِنْ بَيْنِ مَنْ تَخَلَّفَ عَنْهُ - قَالَ - فَاجْتَنَبَنَا النَّاسُ - وَقَالَ - تَغَيَّرُوا لَنَا حَتَّى تَنَكَّرَتْ لِي فِي نَفْسِيَ الأَرْضُ فَمَا هِيَ بِالأَرْضِ الَّتِي أَعْرِفُ فَلَبِثْنَا عَلَى ذَلِكَ خَمْسِينَ لَيْلَةً فَأَمَّا صَاحِبَاىَ فَاسْتَكَانَا وَقَعَدَا فِي بُيُوتِهِمَا يَبْكِيَانِ وَأَمَّا أَنَا فَكُنْتُ أَشَبَّ الْقَوْمِ وَأَجْلَدَهُمْ فَكُنْتُ أَخْرُجُ فَأَشْهَدُ الصَّلاَةَ وَأَطُوفُ فِي الأَسْوَاقِ وَلاَ يُكَلِّمُنِي أَحَدٌ

Ka'b ibn Malik narrated: “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ forbade the Muslims from speaking to us—the three of us among those who had stayed behind (who did not partake in the Battle of Tabuk). So the people avoided us, and their attitude toward us changed, until the earth itself seemed strange to me; it was no longer the earth that I knew. We remained in that state for fifty nights. As for my two companions, they remained in their houses, weeping. As for me, I was the youngest and the strongest of them, so I would go out, attend the prayers, and walk through the marketplaces, yet no one would speak to me.” [Sahih Muslim 2769a, b]

وَفِي حَدِيثِ كَعْبٍ هَذَا دَلِيلٌ عَلَى أَنَّهُ جَائِزٌ أَنْ يَهْجُرَ الْمَرْءُ أَخَاهُ إِذَا بَدَتْ (لَهُ) مِنْهُ بِدْعَةٌ أَوْ فَاحِشَةٌ يَرْجُو أَنْ يَكُونَ هِجْرَانُهُ تَأْدِيبًا لَهُ وَزَجْرًا عَنْهَا وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ
[التمهيد - ابن عبد البر - المجلد ٦ - الصفحة ١١٨]

Ibn Abdul-Barr said: “In this hadith of Kaʿb there is evidence that it is permissible for a person to boycott his brother if an innovation (bidʿah) or a grave sin becomes apparent from him—when he hopes that his boycott will serve as discipline for him and deter him from it. And Allah knows best.” [Al-Tamheed - Ibn Abdul-Barr - Volume 6 - Page 118]

وجائز للمريء أَنْ يَهْجُرَ مَنْ خَافَ الضَّلَالَ عَلَيْهِ وَلَمْ يَسْمَعْ مِنْهُ وَلَمْ يُطِعْهُ وَخَافَ أَنْ يُضِلَّ غَيْرَهُ وَلَيْسَ هَذَا مِنَ الْهِجْرَةِ الْمَكْرُوهَةِ
[التمهيد - ابن عبد البر - المجلد ٤ - الصفحة ٨٧]

Ibn Abdul-Barr said: “It is permissible for a person to boycott another who doesn't listen to admonition if he fears misguidance from him. This is not from the kind of boycott that is reprehensible.” [Al-Tamheed - Ibn Abdul-Barr - Volume 4 - Page 87]

وَالَّذِي عِنْدِي أَنَّ مَنْ خُشِيَ مِنْ مُجَالَسَتِهِ وَمُكَالَمَتِهِ الضَّرَرُ فِي الدِّينِ أَوْ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالزِّيَادَةُ فِي الْعَدَاوَةِ وَالْبَغْضَاءِ فَهِجْرَانُهُ وَالْبُعْدُ عَنْهُ خَيْرٌ مِنْ قُرْبِهِ لِأَنَّهُ يَحْفَظُ عَلَيْكَ زَلَّاتِكَ وَيُمَارِيكَ فِي صَوَابِكَ وَلَا تَسْلَمُ مِنْ سُوءِ عَاقِبَةِ خُلْطَتِهِ وَرُبَّ صَرْمٍ جَمِيلٍ خَيْرٌ من مخالطة مؤذية
[الاستذكار - ابن عبد البر - الجزء ٨ - الصفحة ٢٩٠]

Ibn Abdul-Barr said: “And in my view, whoever is feared that sitting with him and speaking to him will cause harm in religion or in worldly affairs, or increase enmity and hatred, then cutting ties with him and keeping away from him is better than being close to him. This is because he will hold against you your slips, argue with you even in what is correct, and you will not be safe from the bad consequences of mixing with him. And sometimes a beautiful severing of ties is better than harmful companionship.” [Al-Istidhkar - Ibn Abdul-Barr - Volume 8 - Page 290]

قال الشيخ: فيه من العلم أن تحريم الهجرة بين المسلمين أكثر من ثلاث إنما هو فيما يكون بينهما من قبل عتب وموجدة أو لتقصير يقع في حقوق العشرة ونحوها دون ما كان من ذلك في حق الدين فإن هجرة أهل الأهواء والبدعة دائمة على مر الأوقات والأزمان ما لم تظهر منهم التوبة والرجوع إلى الحق، وكان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم خاف على كعب وأصحابه النفاق حين تخلفوا عن الخروج معه في غزوة تبوك فأمر بهجرانهم وأمرهم بالقعود في بيوتهم نحو خمسين يوماً على ما جاء في الحديث إلى أن أنزل الله سبحانه توبته وتوبة أصحابه فعرف رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم براءتهم من النفاق.
وفيه دلالة على أنه لا يحرج المرء بترك رد سلام أهل الأهواء والبدع.
وفيه دليل على أن من حلف أن لا يكلم رجلاً فسلم عليه أو رد عليه السلام كان حانثاً.
[معالم السنن - الخطابي - المجلد ٤ - الصفحة ٢٩٦]

Al-Khattabi said: "Among the lessons contained in this is that the prohibition of estrangement between Muslims for more than three days applies only to cases arising from mutual blame, resentment, shortcomings in the rights of companionship, and similar matters. It does not apply to matters concerning the religion. For indeed, boycotting the people of desires and innovation is continuous throughout all times and ages until repentance and a return to the truth become apparent from them. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ feared hypocrisy for Kaʿb and his companions when they stayed behind and did not go out with him on the Expedition of Tabūk. Therefore, he ordered that they be boycotted and commanded them to remain in their homes for about fifty days, as mentioned in the hadith, until Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, revealed His acceptance of their repentance and that of their companions. Then the Messenger of Allah ﷺ came to know that they were free of hypocrisy. It also indicates that a person incurs no sin by refraining from returning the greeting of the people of desires and innovations. It also serves as evidence that whoever swears not to speak to a man, then greets him or returns his greeting, has broken his oath." [Ma'alim al-Sunan - Al-Khattabi - Volume 4 - Page 296]

ولا يهجر أخاه فوق ثلاث ليال والسلام يخرجه من الهجران ولا ينبغي له أن يترك كلامه بعد السلام والهجران الجائز هجران ذي البدعة أو متجاهر بالكبائر لا يصل إلى عقوبته ولا يقدر على موعظته أو لا يقبلها
[ص153 - كتاب الرسالة لابن أبي زيد القيرواني]

Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani said: "And a person should not abandon his brother for more than three nights, and greeting (salām) removes the state of abandonment. It is not appropriate for him to continue refusing to speak to him after giving salām. The permissible form of abandonment (hijrān) is abandoning an innovator (ahl al-bidʿah) or someone who openly commits major sins, in cases where one cannot enforce (legal) punishment on him, is unable to advise him, or when he does not accept admonition." [Al-Risalah - Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani - Page 153]

Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani explains that it is permissible to cut ties with an innovator provided that he does not accept admonition.

قلت: فَأَما هجران أهل الْعِصْيَان، وَأهل الريب فِي الدّين، فشرع إِلَى أَن تَزُول الرِّيبَة عَن حَالهم، وَتظهر تَوْبَتهمْ، قَالَ كَعْب بْن مَالك حِين تخلف عَن غَزْوَة تَبُوك: وَنهى النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَن كلامنا، وَذكر خمسين لَيْلَة.
[شرح السنة – البغوي – الجزء الثالث عشر – الصفحة ١٠١]

Al-Baghawi said: "As for boycotting the people of immorality and those who bring doubt in religion (innovators), it is permissible until the doubt is removed from their condition and their repentance becomes apparent. Kaʿb ibn Mālik said, when he stayed behind from the expedition of Tabūk: “The Prophet ﷺ forbade speaking to us for fifty nights.”" [Sharh al-Sunnah - Al-Baghawi - Volume 13 - Page 101]

Al-Baghawi explains that it is permissible to cut ties with someone to push him towards repentance, from a grave sin or innovation. It is not limited to a specific timeframe, it can go on forever, until the person's repentance becomes apparent.

وَقَالَ عَمْرُو بْنُ عَوْنٍ الْقَيْسِيُّ -وَكَانَ مِنَ الْبَكَّائِينَ حَتَّى ذَهَبَ بَصَرُهُ- سَمِعْتُ سَعِيدَ بْنَ أَبِي عَرُوبَةَ يَقُولُ: مَا فِي الْقُرْآنِ آيَةٌ هِيَ أَشَدُّ عَلَيَّ مِنْ قَوْلِ مُوسَى: {إِنْ هِيَ إِلَّا فِتْنَتُكَ تُضِلُّ بِهَا مَنْ تَشَاءُ وَتَهْدِي مَنْ تَشَاءُ} ٢.
فَقُلْتُ لَهُ: فَالْقُرْآنُ يَشْتَدُّ عَلَيْكَ، وَاللَّهِ لَا أُكَلِّمُكَ كَلِمَةً أَبَدًا، فَمَا كَلَّمْتُهُ٣ حَتَّى مَاتَ.
[تأويل مختلف الحديث – ابن قتيبة – الصفحة ١٤٠]

And ʿAmr ibn ʿAwn al-Qaysī — who was among those who wept much until he lost his eyesight — said: I heard Saʿeed ibn Abī ʿArūbah say: “There is no verse in the Qur’an that is more severe upon me than the saying of Musa: {It is only Your trial by which You misguide whom You will and guide whom You will}.” So I (Amr) said to him (Sa'eed): “So the Qur’an is severe upon you?” By Allah, I will never speak to you a single word again. So I did not speak to him until he died. [Tawil Mukhtalif al-Hadith - Ibn Qutaybah - Page 140]

This is because Sa'eed ibn Abi 'Arubah held the Qadari belief. Sa'eed recited a verse from the Quran which contradicted his doctrine, so it felt uncomfortable for him. Amr upon hearing this from Sa'eed chose to distance himself and promised he will avoid him and never speak to him again.

Amr dealt with the innovation of Sa'eed in a strict and powerful way. He did not tolerate outing of his Qadari innovation.

٤٧ - وَحَدَّثَنِي عَنْ مُوسَى , عَنِ ابْنِ مَهْدِيٍّ , عَنْ سُفْيَانَ , عَنْ هَمَّامِ بْنِ الْحَارِثِ التَّيْمِيِّ , قَالَ: " لَمَّا قَصَّ إِبْرَاهِيمُ التَّيْمِيُّ أَخْرَجَهُ أَبُوهُ مِنْ دَارِهِ وَقَالَ: مَا هَذَا الَّذِي أَحْدَثْتَ؟ "
[البدع والنهي عنها – ابن وضّاح – الصفحة ٥٢]

Al-Ḥārith al-Taymī said: “When Ibrāhīm al-Taymī began speaking publicly (on Irja), his father expelled him from his house and said: ‘What is this thing you have introduced?’” [Al-Bida' wal-Nahy 'anha - Ibn Waddah - Page 52]

The father of Ibrahim al-Taymi did what was expected from him to reprimand his son for his son's Irja. Though that type of Irja did not expel him out of the fold of Islam, he still got kicked out of his father's house and he could not visit him until he repented from his view.

Hujjah was estabilished during that time, as the scholars of Ahl Sunnah spread their belief on Iman being actions, speech, and belief in the heart.

١٣١ - نا إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ سَعْدٍ الْبَصْرِيُّ , عَنْ رَجُلٍ أَخْبَرَهُ قَالَ: «كُنْتُ أَمْشِي مَعَ عَمْرِو بْنِ عُبَيْدٍ , فَرَآنِي ابْنُ عَوْنٍ فَأَعْرَضَ عَنِّي شَهْرَيْنِ»
[البدع والنهي عنها – ابن وضّاح – الصفحة ١٠٣]

Ismāʿīl ibn Saʿd al-Baṣrī narrated to us, from a man who informed him, who said: “I was walking with ʿAmr ibn ʿUbayd, and Ibn ʿAwn saw me, so he turned away from me and did not speak to me for two months.” [Al-Bida' wal-Nahy 'anha - Ibn Waddah - Page 103]

Amr ibn Ubayd was from the Mu'tazilah sect, and this is why Ibn Awn responded by not speaking to the man who walked with Amr ibn Ubayd.

It is important to note that Ibn Awn did not just choose this because he felt like it. He did so because the man knew of Amr ibn Ubayd's innovation but still decided to walk with him.

أَخْبَرَنَا عبدُ الصَّمَدِ الهَاشِمِيُّ (١) -قِرَاءَةً-، قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا الدَّارَقُطْنِيُّ، حدَّثَنَا عُثْمَانُ بنُ إِسْمَاعِيْلَ بنِ بَكْرٍ السُّكَّرِيُّ قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ أَبَا دَاوُدَ السِّجِسْتَانِيُّ يَقولُ: قُلْتُ لأَبِي عبْدِ الله أَحْمَدَ بنِ حَنْبَلٍ: أَرَى رَجُلًا من أَهْلِ السُّنَّة مَعَ رَجُلٍ من أَهْلِ البِدْعَةِ، أَتْرُكَ كَلَامَهُ؟ قَالَ: لَا، أَو تُعْلِمَهُ أَنَّ الرَّجلَ الَّذِي رَأَيْتَهُ مَعَهُ صَاحِبُ بِدْعَةٍ. فإِنْ تَرَكَ كَلَامَهُ فَكَلِّمْهُ، وإلَّا فألْحِقْهُ بِهِ، قالَ ابنُ مَسْعُوْدٍ: "المَرْءُ بِخِدْنِهِ" (٢).
[الطبقات الحنابلة – المجلد ١ – الصفحة ٤٢٩]

Abū Dāwūd said: I said to Abū ʿAbd Allāh Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal: 'If I see a man from the people of the Sunnah with a man from the people of innovation (bidʿah), should I stop speaking to him?' He replied: 'No. Rather, inform him that the man you saw him with is a person of innovation. If he stops associating with him, then speak to him. But if not, then regard him as belonging with him. Ibn Masʿūd said: "A person is with his close companion."' [Tabaqat al-Hanabilah - Volume 1 - Page 429]

٦٧٤ - حَدَّثَنِي أَبِي، نا أَسْوَدُ بْنُ عَامِرٍ، أنا جَعْفَرُ بْنُ زِيَادٍ يَعْنِي الْأَحْمَرَ، عَنْ حَمْزَةَ الزَّيَّاتِ، عَنْ أَبِي الْمُخْتَارِ، قَالَ: شَكَى ذَرٌّ سَعِيدَ بْنَ جُبَيْرٍ إِلَى أَبِي الْبَخْتَرِيِّ الطَّائِيِّ فَقَالَ: مَرَرْتُ فَسَلَّمْتُ عَلَيْهِ فَلَمْ يَرُدَّ عَلَيَّ، فَقَالَ أَبُو الْبَخْتَرِيِّ لِسَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ فَقَالَ سَعِيدٌ: «إِنَّ هَذَا يُجَدِّدُ كُلَّ يَوْمٍ دِينًا لَا وَاللَّهِ لَا أُكَلِّمُهُ أَبَدًا»
[كتاب السنة - عبد الله بن أحمد - المجلد ١ - الصفحة ٣٢٨]

Abū al-Mukhtār narrated: Dharr complained about Saʿeed ibn Jubayr to Abū al-Bakhtarī al-Ṭāʾī, saying: “I passed by him and greeted him, but he did not return my greeting.” So Abū al-Bakhtarī mentioned this to Saʿeed ibn Jubayr. Saʿeed said: “This one introduces a new religion every day. No, by Allah, I will never speak to him.” [Kitab al-Sunnah - Abdullah ibn Ahmad - Volume 1 - Page 328]

Sa'eed ibn Jubayr chose not to return the greeting of Dharr. This is because Dharr was an innovator who changed sect repeatedly, so Sa'eed promised to never speak to him.

١- سمعت١ أبا دَاوُد سُلَيْمَان بْن الأشعث قَالَ: "وأبو خَالِد الأحمر٢ خرج مَعَ إِبْرَاهِيم بْن عَبْد اللَّهِ بْن حسن٣ فلم يكلمه سُفْيَان٤ حَتَّى مَات" (*) .
[سؤالات الآجري - الصفحة ٩٣]

Abu Dawud said: “Abu Khalid al-Ahmar went out with Ibrahim ibn Abdullah ibn Hasan (to rebel against al-Mansur), and Sufyan al-Thawri did not speak to him until he died.” [Sualat Al-Ajurri - Page 93]

٣٢٩ - حَدَّثَنِي مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ أَبِي عُمَرَ الدُّورِيُّ الْمُقْرِئُ، قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ أَبَا عُبَيْدٍ الْقَاسِمَ بْنَ سَلَّامٍ، يَقُولُ: كُنْتُ جَالِسًا وَمَعَنَا أَسْوَدُ بْنُ سَالِمٍ فَذَكَرُوا مَسْأَلَةً فَقُلْتُ: إِنَّ أَبَا حَنِيفَةَ يَقُولُ فِيهَا كَيْتَ وَكَيْتَ، فَالْتَفَتَ إِلَيَّ فَقَالَ: «تَذْكُرُ أَبَا حَنِيفَةَ فِي الْمَسْجِدِ فَلَمْ يُكَلِّمُنِي حَتَّى مَاتَ»
[كتاب السنة – عبد الله بن أحمد – الجزء ١ – الصفحة ٢٠٨]

Abu ʿUbayd al-Qāsim ibn Sallām said: “I was sitting and with us was Aswad ibn Sālim. A Fiqh issue was mentioned, so I said: ‘Abu Ḥanīfah says about it such-and-such.’ He (Aswad ibn Sālim) turned to me and said: ‘You mention Abu Ḥanīfah in the mosque?’ Then he did not speak to me until he died.” [Kitab al-Sunnah - Abdullah ibn Ahmad - Volume 1 - Page 208]

Aswad ibn Salim boycotted Abu Ubayd al-Qasim ibn Sallam for mentioning Abu Hanifa. To him, this was an abhorent act, because Aswad ibn Salim was very much against Abu Hanifa and considered him a big innovator.

Scholars differed regarding the status of Abu Hanifa. At the time, most scholars from Ahl al-Hadith criticized him. This was because they believed that Abu Hanifa gave precedence to his reasoning over authentic narrations.