How do we reconcile the verses denying the warning with the establishment of the proof against the Arabs?

The questioner : What? You mentioned, Your Eminence, regarding the evidence for the fact that the polytheists in the time of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) received the messages and the calls of their people, and Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, clarifies in the Noble Qur'an in many verses that He sent a prophet to a people suddenly before them. So how do we reconcile the meaning of the verses?

The Shaykh : This is a question that undoubtedly arises on this occasion. But as we always know, the verses of Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He, do not contradict one another, and His Sunnah (peace and blessings be upon him) does not differ from the speech of Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He. So regarding such verses: . We must remember that the warning denied in this verse is not an absolute warning. Rather, it is a qualified warning. And to understand this, it is necessary to clarify the following fact. Undoubtedly,
the Muslim community in this fourteenth century has received a warner. But I want to say that a warner did not come. And my saying that a warner came, and my saying that no warner came, both are correct in two different respects. That is, when I said no warner came, I mean directly: we did not receive the Messenger directly. This Messenger came directly to whom? To the Companions. So the Tabi'un, let alone us in the fourteenth century, the Tabi'un did not receive a warner directly, but they received the call of the warner. We received the call of the warner. Do you see whether the proof has been established against us by the arrival of this warner's warning, let alone against the Tabi'un, or not? Without a doubt, the proof has been established, as He, Blessed and Exalted is He, said in the Noble Qur'an: "To warn thereby whoever has been reached." To warn with this Qur'an whoever has been reached by the Qur'an. And the Messenger (peace be upon him) explained this verse with a hadith in Sahih Muslim, also from the hadith of Abu Hurayrah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "There is no man in . So the warning has two forms: direct warning and indirect warning. And by both of them, the proof is established. So when the Exalted said , it does not mean the denial of the warning absolutely, because this is contrary to reality, as we explained to you just now. Ibrahim came to them, and Isma'il came to them, and they built the Ka'bah there, and they legislated for them the laws that Allah revealed to them, and they inherited them, and there were also monotheists among them on the religion of Ibrahim, who were Hanif, and so on. So it is necessary to understand the verses that contain the denial of the warning for the people to whom the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) was sent, meaning they were not warned directly. As for the fact that they were warned by the means of the call reaching them, this is a reality that must be believed in, as it is clear in the Book. Praise be to Allah.

The questioner : Specifically regarding their statements. Is the message of Ibrahim (peace be upon him) to his people an argument for the Arabs in the Arabian Peninsula? Is the argument established by it?

The Shaykh : Okay. I mean, if your prophet reaches his people specifically, to his village or city or country or tribe, and someone from outside hears about him... (peace and blessings be upon him). Okay. Please, please. He does not fear that what came in the hadiths is authentic, and the Prophet was sent to his people specifically, and I was sent to all people. This, may Allah bless you, is to clarify the virtue of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and his distinction from the other prophets and messengers. So he made his call general, while the call of the prophets before him was specific. But this does not mean that if the proof of Allah reaches any individual from the people other than the people of the prophet to whom he was sent, that the proof is not established against him. This does not mean that this prophet was sent only to these people. However, the issue you are asking about is another matter that is not contradicted by the fact that the prophet was sent to a specific people, if the proof of the prophet is established or reaches a group of other people, then the proof of Allah is established and does not change due to the difference between the prophet and the people, and the difference between the people and the nationality of the prophet sent to his people. This is from one aspect. Second, regarding the previous research, Isma'il has his ruling, which is different from the ruling of his father Ibrahim. So Isma'il can be considered that he is Isma'il the Arab, this is him. So if the proof is established against the Arabs first directly from Isma'il and secondarily from Ibrahim, because the proof is with them

The questioner : Thank you. The hadith just now about the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).

The Shaykh : Yes, yes.