Is Shaykh al-Ghazali right, or are his opponents right?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : ... the woman and her mahram ...
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.
The questioner : ... a simple clarification if what ... is against or for ... if ... was Shaykh al-Ghazali right or were his opponents right, so a brief overview that clarifies the situation in reality regarding this dispute which, after it was written about and printed up to these days, perhaps twelve editions, and he remained on what he was without conceding a single word, he is mentioning that it was written to him or said to him that he should retract ...
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : And many of the brothers were waiting for the truth to be, for example, the first responses
The Shaykh : This, if we were free to devote ourselves to such things, but I hear that there are writings supporting him
The questioner : ... wrote, meaning he wrote articles in some Egyptian newspapers, and it was said about them that it is the statement of Imam al-Ghazali or the statement of Shaykh al-Ghazali, meaning they were defending, meaning, some of the points and some of the words, trying to force them into some other modifications so that they would depart from their literal, aggressive meaning which was ...
The Shaykh : It is beyond doubt that Shaykh al-Ghazali is certainly not a hadith scholar, he is not from the people of hadith, and he is not from the people of the Sunnah, first in knowledge and second in precision. He is neither a scholar nor one who acts upon the Sunnah, because as it is said, "He who lacks a thing cannot give it". However, some people may think that he is a jurist, but the reality is that he is not a jurist, because the term jurist has two meanings, old and new. The old meaning is one who has specialized in the Book of Allah and the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), because the Ummah has agreed that the principles of the Shari'ah are four: the Book, the Sunnah, consensus, and analogical reasoning. These three matters all relate to transmission. The Qur'an is open, but its interpretation is in the Sunnah. The Sunnah is transmitted through chains of narration, as we all know. Likewise, consensus is transmitted through reports and chains of narration. The remaining source is the fourth, which is analogical reasoning. No one can master and perfect analogical reasoning unless he has knowledge of the first three references: the Qur'an, the Sunnah, and consensus.
The Qur'an, in terms of its preservation, is undoubtedly made easy because it is preserved between the covers of the mushaf. But the important thing in interpreting the Qur'an is that there is no way to it except through the path of the Sunnah. This is explicitly stated in the Noble Qur'an in more than one verse, and the most explicit of them is that He the Exalted says:[An-Nahl 16:44] This verse is explicit in its indication and does not accept figurative interpretation that there is something explained and another that explains. So the Qur'an is the explainer and the Sunnah, which is the speech of the Messenger (peace be upon him), his actions, and his approvals, all of this explains the Noble Qur'an. So the Qur'an is explained by the Sunnah. Whoever has no Sunnah has no interpretation. The interpretation of the Qur'an cannot be understood except through the authentic Sunnah, and the examples of this are many, and very many.
If we take the second pillar of Islam, which is prayer, how does a person pray when there is in the Qur'an only the command to establish prayer? As for the manner of establishing it, the manner of correcting the bowing and prostration, what is recited in these pillars, what is between them, what makes the prayer valid and what does not, all of this, as you know, refers to the explainer, which is the Sunnah.[An-Nahl 16:44] His explanation (peace and blessings be upon him) in the Qur'an is his Sunnah: his sayings, his actions, and his approvals. So when we begin the prayer with the takbir, there is nothing in the mushaf ... that clarifies to you that the prayer, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said in the authentic hadith, Sunan Abi Dawud 61Hasan Sahih (Al-Albani) We do not find in the Qur'an ever such a text, but we took it from his explanation (peace and blessings be upon him). So His saying, Blessed and Exalted is He, So the establishment of prayer is not possible except by what came from him (peace and blessings be upon him) of sayings and actions. For example, the adhan for prayer: there is no mention of the adhan in the Noble Qur'an, let alone the iqamah, let alone the remaining units of prayer. So how can a person be a jurist and know the rulings of the Shari'ah, the clearest and most obligatory of which is prayer? How can he be a jurist when he has no knowledge of the Sunnah?
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.
The questioner : ... a simple clarification if what ... is against or for ... if ... was Shaykh al-Ghazali right or were his opponents right, so a brief overview that clarifies the situation in reality regarding this dispute which, after it was written about and printed up to these days, perhaps twelve editions, and he remained on what he was without conceding a single word, he is mentioning that it was written to him or said to him that he should retract ...
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : And many of the brothers were waiting for the truth to be, for example, the first responses
The Shaykh : This, if we were free to devote ourselves to such things, but I hear that there are writings supporting him
The questioner : ... wrote, meaning he wrote articles in some Egyptian newspapers, and it was said about them that it is the statement of Imam al-Ghazali or the statement of Shaykh al-Ghazali, meaning they were defending, meaning, some of the points and some of the words, trying to force them into some other modifications so that they would depart from their literal, aggressive meaning which was ...
The Shaykh : It is beyond doubt that Shaykh al-Ghazali is certainly not a hadith scholar, he is not from the people of hadith, and he is not from the people of the Sunnah, first in knowledge and second in precision. He is neither a scholar nor one who acts upon the Sunnah, because as it is said, "He who lacks a thing cannot give it". However, some people may think that he is a jurist, but the reality is that he is not a jurist, because the term jurist has two meanings, old and new. The old meaning is one who has specialized in the Book of Allah and the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), because the Ummah has agreed that the principles of the Shari'ah are four: the Book, the Sunnah, consensus, and analogical reasoning. These three matters all relate to transmission. The Qur'an is open, but its interpretation is in the Sunnah. The Sunnah is transmitted through chains of narration, as we all know. Likewise, consensus is transmitted through reports and chains of narration. The remaining source is the fourth, which is analogical reasoning. No one can master and perfect analogical reasoning unless he has knowledge of the first three references: the Qur'an, the Sunnah, and consensus.
The Qur'an, in terms of its preservation, is undoubtedly made easy because it is preserved between the covers of the mushaf. But the important thing in interpreting the Qur'an is that there is no way to it except through the path of the Sunnah. This is explicitly stated in the Noble Qur'an in more than one verse, and the most explicit of them is that He the Exalted says:
And We revealed to you the message that you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them
وأنزلنا إليك الذكر لتبين للناس ما نزل إليهمIf we take the second pillar of Islam, which is prayer, how does a person pray when there is in the Qur'an only the command to establish prayer? As for the manner of establishing it, the manner of correcting the bowing and prostration, what is recited in these pillars, what is between them, what makes the prayer valid and what does not, all of this, as you know, refers to the explainer, which is the Sunnah.