Does the expansion of the principle "original innocence, and that the basic rule for things is permissibility and lawfulness, unless there is evidence to the contrary from the Qur'an and Sunnah" lead to errors, and is this what Al-Shawkani and Al-San'ani fell into, which led them to declare wine pure?

The principle of "original permissibility" (al-bara'ah al-asliyyah) is an accepted postulate among the majority of scholars. It is the last resort for a mufti when no other evidence is found, provided there is no evidence from the Qur'an, Sunnah, consensus (ijma'), or analogical deduction (qiyas) that would shift the matter away from it. The objection of some to the purity of wine is not due to an over-extension of this principle, but rather because of the existence of evidence that the majority considers sufficient to rule on its impurity. The principle of istishab al-asl (presumption of continuity of the original state) is a noble and indispensable principle that must be applied in its correct place. Not every issue requires an explicit text, and sometimes the absence of a text is itself the proof. If we were to insist on finding a text for every ruling, the Sharia would become unworkable.