Hadith, Sunna, & Ambiguity

From the reading, it is clear that Islam has a long and rich tradition upon which it is based. I was particularly struck by the caution put forth against innovations. Muhammad’s earliest followers found keeping the purity of their religion of paramount importance. For example, as mentioned in the Goldziher reading, when the question of wearing gold jewelry arose, the population was unsure. Thus, they questioned those among Muhammad’s earliest followers to ask if he exhibited such behavior or commented on such action. When they received their response, they followed likewise. 

As time went on, those spaces in between became apparent–the gaps for which there is no commentary. Certainly, local cultures, time, and geopolitical situations are all different from those shared with Muhammad. As such, I’d imagine that there would be numerous situations in which the sunna would have no comment. Here I find Al-Shāfi’ī’s distinction of a good and bad bid’a helpful/practical. It would make sense that the would perhaps feel cautious to do something apart from what Muhammad would have done, but they cannot (and I imagine don’t) allow the fear of being an innovator paralyze them from living normal lives.

But I’m still left wondering how there can be unity among those Muslims who accept this distinction and those who reject it. Can individual hadiths be rejected while still holding to the teaching of Muhammad? Also, this position of a good and bad bid’a seems to presuppose a large amount of good faith, especially when considering the severity of the consequences described.