Is there a contradiction between your statement affirming the gradual implementation of Shari'ah rulings and the principle of "reconciling the evidence"?

The Shaykh : I mean, if the issue is related to the Shari'ah, what is...?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : If the issue is related to the Wise Lawgiver, what is in our hands so that they fear this fear? It is not clear, is it?

The questioner : The question, my Shaykh, was not exactly here.

The Shaykh : Yes?

The questioner : The question is: if we establish a principle of sequence in the rulings in all topics, we will find that this principle ultimately destroys the principle of "reconciling the evidence." I mean, we know that many scholars adopt the reconciliation of evidence and arrive at many matters.

The Shaykh : What do you mean by your first word? We have returned to the same problem now!

The questioner : I was not previously...

The Shaykh : I am telling the brother, what do you mean by the sequence of rulings now?

The questioner : I mean, fundamentally—for example—fundamentally, in the specific matter, fundamentally it is lawful. This act is fundamentally lawful, then matters progressed until we finally arrived at the prohibition of this matter.

The Shaykh : Okay, is this correct or incorrect?

The questioner : Now, personally—for example—through what I have read, I understand that this statement cannot apply to all issues.

The Shaykh : Who says: in all issues?

The questioner : Here the question returns: do you say: in all issues or not? Here is the question?

The Shaykh : Okay, tawhid (the oneness of Allah), is there a sequence in tawhid?

The questioner : There is no god but Allah.

The Shaykh : Is there a sequence?

The questioner : No, there are not.

The Shaykh : I mean, now there is a stage.

The questioner : No, no, there is not. Say: La ilaha illa Allah (There is no deity but Allah).

The Shaykh : So who says there is a sequence, my brother, that you are afraid of?

The questioner : We are not afraid of it.

The Shaykh : You say: if we say this, then that follows.

Another questioner : It was understood from some of the Shaykh's statements in some issues that the Shaykh says in all matters there is a sequence or gradual implementation of rulings in all jurisprudential issues, meaning the jurisprudential matters, that all of them—the Shaykh, meaning through our understanding of some matters—that the Shaykh says there is a gradual implementation of rulings in all jurisprudential issues; consequently, we will arrive at the result that there is no sunnah (recommended practice), but all is obligatory, and there is no mubah (permissible) or they say: general, if there is a prohibition like any issue, or if there is any hadith indicating obligation in this issue, so we want to inquire from you: is this understanding that we understood from afar; did we understand correctly or did we understand incorrectly? This is the question?

The Shaykh : If you limit the topic—as you said lastly—to jurisprudential rulings; yes, it is correct, but not in all rulings of the Shari'ah.

The questioner : In fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence).

Another questioner : You were speaking about the topic of fiqh—yes.

The Shaykh : Okay, you have taken the answer now; what is the concern behind this statement?

The questioner : The concern is that here—for example—we know that there is a principle among other scholars in usul al-fiqh (the principles of jurisprudence) who adopt the process of reconciling the evidence; I mean, if we give an example.

The Shaykh : We do not say by this principle?

Another questioner : You say by this... but if we give an example—for example—the Shaykh in the process of gradual implementation of rulings arrived at the point that the Friday bath is obligatory, and congregational prayer is obligatory.

The Shaykh: All right.

Another questioner : Through the gradual implementation of rulings, other scholars through the principle of reconciling the evidence arrived at the conclusion that congregational prayer is a confirmed sunnah (recommended practice) and not obligatory, they arrived at the conclusion that—for example—the Friday bath is a confirmed sunnah and not obligatory through the reconciliation.

The Shaykh : Your understanding is wrong, your statement about me that I, through the gradual implementation of rulings, arrived at the statement that Friday prayer is obligatory.

Another questioner : Congregational prayer.

The Shaykh : Congregational prayer is obligatory, your statement about me that I say the obligation of congregational prayer is from the perspective of gradual implementation, this is not correct, and we have not said it in our lifetime, nor have we seen it in our dreams; so where did you bring this example from?

Another questioner : I gave...

The Shaykh : You... turn the words, you speak, you... and I have a share to tell you your words are not clear, now the brother clarified some of his words and it turned out it is not correct, I do not say everything I arrived at is from the perspective of gradual implementation of rulings, but from the perspective of adhering to the ruling that the Shari'ah explicitly stated, you now brought the example of congregational prayer, I did not say congregational prayer was such and such and became such and such and became such and such, but I found hadiths that command and encourage congregational prayer, indeed I found our Lord—Mighty and Majestic—saying in the Noble Qur'an: ; from here I said obligation, not from the perspective of sequence and gradual implementation that you are saying I say in it, yes I say in it; because many of the Shari'ah rulings are clear, and now I mentioned to the brother just now the issue of khamr (intoxicants) how the Wise Lawgiver gradually prohibited it completely, likewise—for example: , and this is known to everyone, but this attribution that I understood from you now that I say that all jurisprudential rulings that I take them by the way of gradual implementation and it establishes a disagreement between me and the other scholars who say: we combine the evidence, and I am in the ranks of those who combine the evidence; I say: if a prohibition and a permission conflict, the prohibition is given precedence over the permission, and if the statement and the action conflict, the statement is given precedence over the action, and so on; so where did you understand the generalization that every ruling I say in it is by gradual implementation? And you brought an appropriate example for clarification, which is congregational prayer; I do not say congregational prayer was such and such and became such and such, but I say: He—Exalted is He—said: , and he—peace and blessings be upon him—said: to the end of the hadith; so I say by gradual implementation, but this which you are questioning that...