The Ruling on Reconciliation Without a Judge and the Compulsion of Reconciliation

The questioner:
I bear witness that there is no god but Allah, I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. Guidance upon the prayer. Guidance upon the prayer. Guidance upon the wilderness. Guidance upon the wilderness. Lord of the worlds, Allah. No.

The Shaykh:
There is no god but Allah. Yes.

The questioner:
And the Shaykh’s case: Allah informed us about authority in two types: people of acknowledgment or denial. Is it necessary to refer it to the judge, or is it permissible to take it without a judge?

The Shaykh:
It is not valid without the judge. It is carried out by the hand of the judge, and it is carried out by the hand of others in what contradicts, but with the condition of mutual consent, as we mentioned. What contains compulsion is what is referred to the judge, which is the one that compels one of the parties. As for that which is through mutual consent, it is permissible with the judge and it is permissible by the hand of other than the judge, but with the condition of justice and fairness. Yes.
Yes, it is witnessed upon. It is witnessed that so-and-so reconciled with so-and-so, and the dispute between them ended, so that no one denies it later. Yes, because it is one of the contracts, right? If they mutually agree between them, yes, it is considered binding thereafter. If they reconcile willingly and then one says, “It was light,” it is said, “No, it has passed now. It is obligatory upon you. You. You agreed to this by your choice and of your own free will, so this thing is obligatory upon you. And still, reconciliation does not proceed among people; everyone makes it light, and disputes return among people.