An Objection and Its Reply:

Suppose someone were to say, “If we grant that Shaykh al-Islām inclined toward the view that the Fire will perish, may a person on the strength of that inclination espouse the same view and defend it?”

The answer is that every Muslim is duty-bound to uphold the position indicated by the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, and embraced by the majority of the early generations. That position is that Hell will never come to an end or disappear. The notion that it will vanish after lasting for long ages is a weak opinion.

If, however, a scholar of acknowledged leadership in the religion performs ijtihād on a matter such as this—doing so with good intentions, sincerity, careful study of the textual proofs, and freedom from whim or partisanship—then errs, he is still rewarded for his ijtihād. Yet that does not permit anyone else to follow him in that error.

The ḥāfiẓ Imām Ibn Rajab has words that fit this situation; he, may Allah have mercy on him, said:

“There is here a subtle point to which one must be alert: Many eminent scholars of the religion may voice a weak opinion while exercising ijtihād, so they are rewarded for their effort and their error is waived. The one who later champions that opinion, however, is not on the same footing, for he may defend it only because his own authority happened to say it. Had another scholar advanced the same view, he would neither have accepted it, nor defended it, nor sided with its supporters, nor opposed its detractors. Yet he imagines that he is standing up for the truth, even though he is mistaken in his ijtihād. As for this follower, his defense of what he believes to be the truth is tainted by a desire to exalt his teacher, to make his teacher’s word prevail, and to shield him from any charge of error. Such a hidden motive undermines the very aim of supporting the truth. Understand this, for it is of great significance. Allah guides whom He wills to a straight path.” (1)