religious innovation, such as that found among the Kharijites (1), the Shi‘ah, the Murji’ah (2), the Qadariyyah, and others. This was because they (3) did not refrain from transmitting reports from such people on account of their transgression, as some suppose. Rather, anyone who openly displayed his religious innovation had to be censured, unlike one who concealed and kept it secret. Since he had to be censured, this entailed shunning him until he ceased openly displaying his religious innovation. Part of shunning him was that religious knowledge should not be taken from him and that he should not be called upon to testify.

The jurists likewise differed regarding prayer behind adherents of deviant doctrines and flagrant sinners. Some held without qualification (4 that it was permitted, while others held without qualification 4) (4) that it was prohibited. The correct position is that prayer behind them is not prohibited because their prayer is intrinsically invalid, but because, when they openly commit wrongdoing, they deserve to be shunned and not placed in front of the Muslims to lead them in prayer. Refraining from visiting them when sick and attending their funerals falls under the same heading. All of this constitutes the sanctioned shunning used to denounce wrongdoing and forbid it (5).

Once it is understood that this falls under the category of religiously prescribed disciplinary measures, it becomes clear that its application varies—