Dought & clear, - Detailed discussion of bid'ah and shirk

can we call people who do shirk and bid'ah muslims?
This question involves two issues,bid'ah(innovation)
andshirk(polytheism, association of others with Allaah).
A. Bid'ah.
This issue may be divided into three topics:
1. Definition of bid'ah 2. Categories of bid'ah 3.
Rulings on one who commits bid'ah - does that make him a kaafir or
not?
1. Definition of bid'ah.
Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
"According to sharee'ah, the definition is 'Worshipping Allaah in ways
that Allaah has not prescribed.' If you wish you may say, 'Worshipping
Allaah in ways that are not those of the Prophet (peace and blessings
of Allaah be upon him) or his rightly guided successors (al-khulafaa'
al-raashidoon).'"
The first definition is taken from the aayah (interpretation of the meaning):
"Or have they partners with Allaah (false gods) who have instituted
for them a religion which Allaah has not ordained?"[al-Shooraa 42:21]
The second definition is taken from the hadeeth of the Prophet (peace
and blessings of Allaah be upon him), who said:
"I urge you to adhere to my way (Sunnah) and the way of the
rightly-guided successors (al-khulafa' al-raashidoon) who come after
me. Hold fast to it and bite onto it with your eyeteeth [i.e., cling
firmly to it], and beware of newly-invented matters."
So everyone who worships Allaah in a manner that Allaah has not
prescribed or in a manner that is not in accordance with the way of
the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or his
rightly-guided successors (al-khulafa' al-raashidoon), is an
innovator, whether that innovated worship has to do with the names and
attributes of Allaah, or to do with His rulings and laws.
With regard to ordinary matters of habit and custom, these are not
called bid'ah (innovation) in Islam, even though they may be described
as such in linguistic terms. But they are not innovations in the
religious sense, and these are not the things that the Prophet (peace
and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was warning us against.
And there is no such thing in Islam asbid'ah hasanah(good innovation)."
(Majmoo' Fataawa Ibn 'Uthaymeen, vol. 2, p. 291)
2. Categories of bid'ah
Bid'ah may be divided into two categories:
(i) bid'ah which constituteskufr
(ii) bid'ah which does not constitutekufr
If you ask, what is the definition of bid'ah which constitutes kufr
and that which does not constitute kufr?
The answer is:
Shaykh Haafiz al-Hukami (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: "The kind
of bid'ah which constitutes kufr is when one denies a matter on which
there is scholarly consensus, which widely-known, and which no Muslim
can have any excuse for not knowing, such as denying something that is
obligatory, making something obligatory that is not obligatory, or
making something haraam halaal, or making something halaal haraam; or
believing some notion about Allaah, His Messenger and His Book when
they are far above that, whether in terms of denial of affirmation -
because that means disbelieving in the Qur'aan and in the message with
which Allaah sent His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon
him).
Examples include the bid'ah of the Jahamiyyah, who denied the
attributes of Allaah; or the notion that the Qur'aan was created; or
the notion that some of the attributes of Allaah were created; or the
bid'ah of the Qadariyyah who denied the knowledge and actions of
Allaah; or the bid'ah of the Mujassimah who likened Allaah to His
creation... etc.
The second category, bid'ah which does not constitute kufr, is defined
as that which does not imply rejection of the Qur'aan or of anything
with which Allaah sent His Messengers.
Examples include the Marwaani bid'ahs (which were denounced by the
greatest Sahaabah who did not approve of them, although they did not
denounce them as kaafirs or refuse to give them bay'ah because of
that), such as delaying some of the prayers until the end of the due
times, doing the Eid khutbah before the Eid prayer, delivering the
khutbah whilst sitting down on Fridays, etc.
(Ma'aarij al-Qubool, 2/503-504)
3- The ruling on one who commits bid'ah - is he regarded as a kaafir or not?
The answer is that it depends.
If the bid'ah constitutes kufr, then the person is one of the
following two types:
(i) Either it is known that his intention is to destroy
the foundations of Islam and make the Muslims doubt it. Such a person
is definitely a kaafir; indeed, he is a stranger to Islam and is one
of the enemies of the faith.
(ii) Or he is deceived and confused; he cannot be
denounced as a kaafir until proof is established against him, fair and
square.
If the bid'ah does not constitute kufr, then he should not be
denounced as a kaafir. Rather, he remains a Muslim, but he has done a
gravely evil action.
If you ask, how should we deal with those who commit bid'ah?
The answer is:
Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
"In both cases, we have to call these people - who claim to be Muslim
but who commit acts of bid'ah which may constitute kufr or may be less
than that - to the truth, by explaining the truth without being
hostile or condemning what they are doing. But once we know that they
are too arrogant to accept the truth - for Allaah says (interpretation
of the meaning),'And insult not those whom they (disbelievers) worship
besides Allaah, lest they insult Allaah wrongfully without knowledge.'
[al-An'aam 6:108]- if we find out that they are stubborn and arrogant,
then we should point out their falsehood, because then pointing out
their falsehood becomes an obligation upon us.
With regard to boycotting them, that depends upon the bid'ah. If it is
a bid'ah which constitutes kufr, then it is obligatory to boycott the
person who does it. If it is of a lesser degree than that, then it is
essential to examine the situation further. If something may be
achieved by boycotting the person, then we do it; if no purpose will
be served by it, or if it will only make him more disobedient and
arrogant, then we should avoid doing that, because whatever serves no
purpose, it is better not to do it. And also in principle it is haraam
to boycott a believer, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of
Allaah be upon him) said: 'It is not permissible for a man to forsake
[not speak to] his brother for more than three [days].'"
(Adapted fromMajmoo' Fataawa Ibn 'Uthaymeen, vol. 2, p. 293)
B.Shirk, its types and the definition of each
Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Uthaymeen said:
"Shirkis of two types, majorshirkwhich puts a person beyond the pale
of Islam, and lessershirk."
The first type, major shirk, is "Every type ofshirkwhich the Lawgiver
described as such and which puts a person beyond the pale of his
religion" - such as devoting any kind of act of worship which should
be for Allaah to someone other than Allaah, such as praying to anyone
other than Allaah, fasting for anyone other than Allaah or offering a
sacrifice to anyone other than Allaah. It is also a form of
majorshirkto offer supplication (du'aa') to anyone other than Allaah,
such as calling upon the occupant of a grave or calling upon one who
is absent to help one in some way in which no one is able to help
except Allaah.
The second type is minorshirk, which means every kind of speech or
action that Islam describes asshirk, but it does not put a person
beyond the pale of Islam - such as swearing an oath by something other
than Allaah, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be
upon him) said that whoever swears an oath by something other than
Allaah is guilty ofkufrorshirk."
The one who swears an oath by something other than Allaah but does not
believe that anyone other than Allaah has the same greatness as Allah,
is amushrikwho is guilty of lessershirk, regardless of whether the one
by whom he swore is venerated by people or not. It is not permissible
to swear by the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him),
or by the president, or by the Ka'bah, or by Jibreel, because this
isshirk, but it is minorshirkwhich does not put a person beyond the
pale of Islam.
Another type of minorshirkis showing off, which means that a person
does something so that people will see it, not for the sake of Allaah.
The ways in which showing off may cancel out acts of worship are
either of the following:
The first is when it is applies to an act of worship from the outset,
i.e., the person is not doing that action for any reason other than
showing off. In this case, the action is invalid and is rejected,
because of the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah which was attributed to the
Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), which says that
Allaah said, "I am so self-sufficient that I am in no need of having
an associate. Thus he who does an action for someone else's sake as
well as Mine will have that action renounced by Me to him whom he
associated with Me."
(Narrated by Muslim,Kitaab al-Zuhd, no. 2985)
The second is when the showing off happens later on during the act of
worship, i.e., the action is originally for Allaah, then showing off
creeps into it. This may be one of two cases:
The first is when the person resists it - this does not harm him.
For example, a man has prayed a rak'ah, then some people come along
during his second rak'ah and it occurs to him to make the rukoo' or
sujood longer, or makes himself weep, and so on. If he resists that,
it does not harm him, because he is striving against this idea. But if
he goes along with that, then every action which stemmed from showing
off is invalid, such as if he made his standing or prostration long,
or he made himself weep - all of those actions will be cancelled out.
But does this invalidation extend to the entire act of worship or not?
We say that either of the following must apply:
Either the end of his act of worship was connected to the beginning
(with no pause); so if the end of it is invalidated then all of it is
invalidated.
This is the case with the prayer - the last part of it cannot be
invalidated without the first part also being invalidated, so the
whole prayer is invalid.
Or if the beginning of the action is separate from the end of it, then
the first part is valid but the latter part is not. Whatever came
before the showing off is valid, and what came after it is not valid.
An example of that is a man who has a hundred riyals, and gives fifty
of them in charity for the sake of Allaah with a sound intention, then
he gives fifty in charity for the purpose of showing off. The first
fifty are accepted, and the second fifty are not accepted, because the
latter is separate from the former."
Majmoo' Fataawa wa Rasaa'il Ibn 'Uthaymeen, andal-Qawl al-Mufeed Sharh
Kitaab al-Tawheed, vol. 1, p. 114, 1stedition