Thus, if you see that an imam has dealt severely with the proponent of a view, or declared him a disbeliever on account of it, this should not be regarded as a general ruling concerning everyone who holds that view, unless the condition warranting such severity and a declaration of disbelief is fulfilled in that person. Someone who denies any of Islam’s manifest prescriptions, but has only recently embraced Islam or grew up in a land of ignorance, is not deemed a disbeliever until the proof conveyed by the Prophet has reached him.

The converse also applies: if you find that an earlier imam expressed an erroneous view and was excused because the proof had not reached him, someone whom the proof has reached is not excused as the former was. Thus, someone who receives the hadiths concerning punishment in the grave and similar matters, yet denies them, is deemed an innovator; whereas ‘Ā’ishah and others like her, who did not know that the dead hear in their graves, are not deemed innovators. This is a fundamental principle of great importance, so reflect upon it, for it is beneficial.

It consists in examining “two considerations concerning a statement.” Is it true, false, or does it admit distinctions, being true in one respect and false in another—as is very frequently the case? The second consideration concerns the ruling on it—whether that ruling is affirmed, denied, or qualified—and how people’s circumstances differ in relation to it.

Whoever follows this approach will arrive at the truth in both word and deed, and will know when a statement should be refuted, upheld, or commended. Such, then, is the matter. May Allah guide us and direct us aright; He is the One who grants this and has power over it.