Can it be said that the hadith commanding the dyeing of hair indicates obligation?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The dye, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Dyeing the beard?
The Shaykh : And the hair in general.
The questioner :
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : The command here.
The Shaykh : If no one has stated that it is obligatory, we do not dare to say that it is obligatory.
The questioner : Why?
The Shaykh : Because we fear that we would contradict the path of the Muslims and the way of the Muslims.
The questioner : ... generally regarding obligation, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : No problem, when the command in its indication of obligation is not definitive, we take this stance. But if the text is definitive, we do not care.
The questioner : Is the command in its indication not definitive?
The Shaykh : No, it is not definitive, because it is probable, as evidenced by the fact that there are many commands that were restricted. Nevertheless, Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked, or Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) said regarding dyeing: "I fear that it is an obligation". This is also part of the etiquette we adopt from the Imam. Why did he say "I fear"? Because, as it appears, he did not find a precedent among the Salaf. And for a reason, we are called Salafis, so we do not say something that we have not been preceded to by the Salaf, even if the principles might help us to say it. But when the text is not definitive but rather probable, two things conflict here: the probable indication, such as this command you are asking about, and the absence of any of the Salaf stating that the apparent indication of the command necessitates obligation.
The questioner : The absence of obligation, and it has not reached us that it is obligatory. It might be said that it exists, but it has not reached us.
The Shaykh : It is correct, and everything can be said, meaning it has not reached us. For example, when we rule that a matter is an innovation, and among the innovations that Imam al-Shatibi calls "additional innovation", what is our argument in our denial? We have no argument except that it did not occur among the Salaf or the Salaf did not practice it. But we do not have a text, we do not have a text from the Salaf that this is an innovation and this is disliked or something similar. But the practice of leaving this innovation that some of them introduced suggests to us that it was not in the era of the Salaf. As I gave an example in some occasions, and this is perhaps very close to your question: if a group entered the mosque wanting to pray the time sunnah or the greeting of the mosque, three, four, five, the number is not important. Each of them went to a corner and covered himself with a curtain. Then one of them, who they claimed was the most knowledgeable among them, said: "Come, let us pray in congregation, it is better than praying individually, because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said:Sunan an-Nasa'i 843Hasan (Darussalam) And in the other famous hadith: Sunan an-Nasa'i 4020Sahih (Darussalam). How do we refute the indication or the argument of this person?
The questioner : It is not known from the Salaf despite the presence of the cause.
The Shaykh : Okay, do you have a text that the Salaf did not do this?
The questioner : The Messenger...
The Shaykh : ...O Doctor.
The questioner : The greeting of the mosque ...
The Shaykh : Look, you have now opened a field for him to stray from us.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : If this so-called jurist asked you.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Did you not forbid us from gathering in the pre- or post-obligatory sunnah, or any other sunnah? You answered: the Salaf did not do it. And I agree with you in this. But if he said to you: Do you have a text regarding this? What do you say?
The questioner : It has not reached us.
The Shaykh : This answer is not sufficient!
The questioner : That they perhaps transmitted everything...
The Shaykh : My question, may Allah bless you, and the answer is clear, and it is one of two things, there is no third: Do you have a text? The answer: Yes, no. So the next and final question will be posed to you, perhaps: Since you do not have a text, why do you deny me?
The questioner : Because this practice was not with them.
The Shaykh : This is a role, may Allah bless you, in research: Do you have a text that this was not from the practice of the Salaf?
The questioner : Yes, it was not with them.
The Shaykh : Subhan Allah! This is a claim that you make as a proof! This is a mistake, O Shaykh. You are repeating the same claim, and I agree with you, but I want the proof. What is the proof that the Salaf did not practice this act that this so-called jurist did?
The questioner : It was not transmitted from them, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : This is a teacher, and you are a student among the hadith scholars.
The questioner : I said from the beginning that it was not transmitted from them, O Shaykh, despite the presence of the cause.
The Shaykh : So, it was not transmitted is a proof, meaning when we say this thing was not transmitted, it is a proof.
The questioner : Despite the presence of the cause, meaning the act could have occurred but did not.
The Shaykh : Good, it is so, do we generalize this?
The questioner : How?
The Shaykh : Do we generalize it?
The questioner : Is this the benefit?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : It is generalized, meaning.
Another questioner: By Allah, it might be generalized.
The Shaykh : The word "might" is like "perhaps," meaning like this and like that.
The questioner : It does not need "might."
Another questioner: Yes, if the cause for doing that thing is present and it was not done, that indicates that it is... consistent.
Another questioner: Okay, I have something regarding the topic.
The Shaykh : Please proceed.
The questioner : What we know from Ibn al-Qayyim and some scholars is that if the text is found, it is not a condition for acting upon it that we know it was preceded by practice...
The Shaykh : And we transmitted this in the response to those who permit gold rings for women, we transmitted it from Ibn al-Qayyim. But I said earlier that this is when the text does not allow for multiple meanings, it becomes a text as you said in your speech in your transmission from Ibn al-Qayyim. But when the text is ambiguous for two or more meanings, then we follow what is inherited among the scholars until we find one who took the other opinion that appears to us to be the correct one. But as I said to the Shaykh earlier: We do not dare to say it until we find a precedent among the Salaf, because we are Salafis.
The questioner : But no blame, shall we not say that the Salaf established for us principles for applying the texts, and that is that the command necessitates obligation unless there is a factor that diverts it to recommendation? This principle is from the establishment of the Salaf for us to apply to the texts.
Another questioner: A circumstance confirms the obligation, there is a circumstance in the hadith confirming the obligation.
Another questioner: How, may Allah bless you, what is the circumstance?
Another questioner: It is, opposing the polytheists and the People of the Book is originally obligatory, a fixed legal principle. So the dyeing here is opposing them, meaning there is a command to dye with the command to oppose originally, so this joined with this confirms it, there is confirmation.
The Shaykh : The opposition itself does not necessitate the obligation of opposition in every detail of the opposition.
The questioner : The general principle.
The Shaykh : This is the problem, like the command exactly, meaning the original ruling of the command is obligation but not always, and opposing the disbelievers is also originally obligatory but not always.
The questioner : If this joined with that, does it confirm the obligation?
The Shaykh : I do not think it benefits anything more than what the command benefits.
The questioner : Okay, O Shaykh, if it is not for obligation.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Is it for recommendation? If it is not for obligation.
The Shaykh : It is either for recommendation or for sunnah.
The questioner : Okay, the practice is sufficient for us.
The Shaykh : We did not differ, this is what no one disagrees with.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Dyeing the beard?
The Shaykh : And the hair in general.
The questioner :
Dye yourselves, for they do not dye.
اصبغوا فإنهم لا يصبغونThe Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : The command here.
The Shaykh : If no one has stated that it is obligatory, we do not dare to say that it is obligatory.
The questioner : Why?
The Shaykh : Because we fear that we would contradict the path of the Muslims and the way of the Muslims.
The questioner : ... generally regarding obligation, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : No problem, when the command in its indication of obligation is not definitive, we take this stance. But if the text is definitive, we do not care.
The questioner : Is the command in its indication not definitive?
The Shaykh : No, it is not definitive, because it is probable, as evidenced by the fact that there are many commands that were restricted. Nevertheless, Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked, or Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) said regarding dyeing: "I fear that it is an obligation". This is also part of the etiquette we adopt from the Imam. Why did he say "I fear"? Because, as it appears, he did not find a precedent among the Salaf. And for a reason, we are called Salafis, so we do not say something that we have not been preceded to by the Salaf, even if the principles might help us to say it. But when the text is not definitive but rather probable, two things conflict here: the probable indication, such as this command you are asking about, and the absence of any of the Salaf stating that the apparent indication of the command necessitates obligation.
The questioner : The absence of obligation, and it has not reached us that it is obligatory. It might be said that it exists, but it has not reached us.
The Shaykh : It is correct, and everything can be said, meaning it has not reached us. For example, when we rule that a matter is an innovation, and among the innovations that Imam al-Shatibi calls "additional innovation", what is our argument in our denial? We have no argument except that it did not occur among the Salaf or the Salaf did not practice it. But we do not have a text, we do not have a text from the Salaf that this is an innovation and this is disliked or something similar. But the practice of leaving this innovation that some of them introduced suggests to us that it was not in the era of the Salaf. As I gave an example in some occasions, and this is perhaps very close to your question: if a group entered the mosque wanting to pray the time sunnah or the greeting of the mosque, three, four, five, the number is not important. Each of them went to a corner and covered himself with a curtain. Then one of them, who they claimed was the most knowledgeable among them, said: "Come, let us pray in congregation, it is better than praying individually, because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said:
A man's prayer with another man is greater in reward than his prayer alone
صلاة الرجل مع الرجل أزكى من صلاته وحده، وصلاة الثلاثة أزكى من صلاة الرجلينthe Hand of Allah is with the Jama'ah
يد الله على الجماعةThe questioner : It is not known from the Salaf despite the presence of the cause.
The Shaykh : Okay, do you have a text that the Salaf did not do this?
The questioner : The Messenger...
The Shaykh : ...O Doctor.
The questioner : The greeting of the mosque ...
The Shaykh : Look, you have now opened a field for him to stray from us.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : If this so-called jurist asked you.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Did you not forbid us from gathering in the pre- or post-obligatory sunnah, or any other sunnah? You answered: the Salaf did not do it. And I agree with you in this. But if he said to you: Do you have a text regarding this? What do you say?
The questioner : It has not reached us.
The Shaykh : This answer is not sufficient!
The questioner : That they perhaps transmitted everything...
The Shaykh : My question, may Allah bless you, and the answer is clear, and it is one of two things, there is no third: Do you have a text? The answer: Yes, no. So the next and final question will be posed to you, perhaps: Since you do not have a text, why do you deny me?
The questioner : Because this practice was not with them.
The Shaykh : This is a role, may Allah bless you, in research: Do you have a text that this was not from the practice of the Salaf?
The questioner : Yes, it was not with them.
The Shaykh : Subhan Allah! This is a claim that you make as a proof! This is a mistake, O Shaykh. You are repeating the same claim, and I agree with you, but I want the proof. What is the proof that the Salaf did not practice this act that this so-called jurist did?
The questioner : It was not transmitted from them, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : This is a teacher, and you are a student among the hadith scholars.
The questioner : I said from the beginning that it was not transmitted from them, O Shaykh, despite the presence of the cause.
The Shaykh : So, it was not transmitted is a proof, meaning when we say this thing was not transmitted, it is a proof.
The questioner : Despite the presence of the cause, meaning the act could have occurred but did not.
The Shaykh : Good, it is so, do we generalize this?
The questioner : How?
The Shaykh : Do we generalize it?
The questioner : Is this the benefit?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : It is generalized, meaning.
Another questioner: By Allah, it might be generalized.
The Shaykh : The word "might" is like "perhaps," meaning like this and like that.
The questioner : It does not need "might."
Another questioner: Yes, if the cause for doing that thing is present and it was not done, that indicates that it is... consistent.
Another questioner: Okay, I have something regarding the topic.
The Shaykh : Please proceed.
The questioner : What we know from Ibn al-Qayyim and some scholars is that if the text is found, it is not a condition for acting upon it that we know it was preceded by practice...
The Shaykh : And we transmitted this in the response to those who permit gold rings for women, we transmitted it from Ibn al-Qayyim. But I said earlier that this is when the text does not allow for multiple meanings, it becomes a text as you said in your speech in your transmission from Ibn al-Qayyim. But when the text is ambiguous for two or more meanings, then we follow what is inherited among the scholars until we find one who took the other opinion that appears to us to be the correct one. But as I said to the Shaykh earlier: We do not dare to say it until we find a precedent among the Salaf, because we are Salafis.
The questioner : But no blame, shall we not say that the Salaf established for us principles for applying the texts, and that is that the command necessitates obligation unless there is a factor that diverts it to recommendation? This principle is from the establishment of the Salaf for us to apply to the texts.
Another questioner: A circumstance confirms the obligation, there is a circumstance in the hadith confirming the obligation.
Another questioner: How, may Allah bless you, what is the circumstance?
Another questioner: It is
Oppose them, for they do not dye.
خالفوهم ، فإنهم لا يصبغونThe Shaykh : The opposition itself does not necessitate the obligation of opposition in every detail of the opposition.
The questioner : The general principle.
The Shaykh : This is the problem, like the command exactly, meaning the original ruling of the command is obligation but not always, and opposing the disbelievers is also originally obligatory but not always.
The questioner : If this joined with that, does it confirm the obligation?
The Shaykh : I do not think it benefits anything more than what the command benefits.
The questioner : Okay, O Shaykh, if it is not for obligation.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Is it for recommendation? If it is not for obligation.
The Shaykh : It is either for recommendation or for sunnah.
The questioner : Okay, the practice is sufficient for us.
The Shaykh : We did not differ, this is what no one disagrees with.