A discussion on Ibn Taymiyyah’s statement regarding unconnected public interests.

The Shaykh : We now return to detailing the statement Ibn Taymiyyah made regarding unconnected public interests. He says: If the reason for adopting that means existed in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and then the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) did not adopt it and did not legislate for the people this reason, which is the means, then it is not permissible to adopt it; because if it had been prescribed, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) would have done so.
One example of this is the adhan for the two Eid prayers, or rather the call of "The prayer is assembled" for the two Eid prayers. The reason, which is informing the people of the entry of the time for the Eid prayer, whether Eid al-Fitr or Eid al-Adha, as it exists today, existed in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). So why did the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) not legislate the adhan for the two Eids for the people, given the existence of the reason? The answer is: It is not for the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) to legislate for the people except what is revealed to him. If it is revealed, he does not have the right to legislate; because Allah (Mighty and Majestic) alone is the one for whom legislation is permissible, as He said (the Exalted): . If the reason for legislating the adhan or "The prayer is assembled" existed in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and then he did not adopt this reason, then our brief mention... and it is a means of announcement, is an innovation in the religion and a transgression of the Sunnah of the best of the messengers.
This is his statement if the reason existed and was present in his time (peace be upon him). But the reason may have occurred after it did not exist, and this is part of the precision of his speech (may Allah have mercy on him). He said: At that time, we look; if the reason for the reason is the negligence of the Muslims in applying its rulings to them, then it is not permissible to adopt this reason either; because it is a result of their negligence in applying the Shari'ah of their Lord. Perhaps he mentioned it, or al-Khatib, I no longer remember now. Al-Khatib—excuse me—al-Shatibi, certainly mentioned this in the book "Al-I'tisam"; because he also discussed the issue of unconnected public interests there in an apparent and beneficial manner. But this detail that I am conveying to you is what we benefited from Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him). Al-Shatibi mentioned in "Al-I'tisam" the taxes and levies that some kings imposed on the Muslims. He says: There is no doubt that these taxes are forbidden; because they are from the category of consuming the wealth of people unjustly. But—and here is the point—he said: If the enemy attacks the Muslims in their own land, and there is not in the state treasury and the Bayt al-Mal of the Muslims any wealth that helps in carrying out the repulsion of the enemy's aggression, then the Muslim ruler may impose taxes that correspond to... the wealthy among them to repel the raid of this enemy. If it is repelled, the ruler returns from imposing those taxes; because the sudden public interest that surprised them is what compelled them to impose such taxes. As for taxes becoming a necessary obligation as is the case today in some Islamic countries by the ruling that the state needs money, and it does not have the natural resources and sources that Allah has blessed it with that enable it to achieve these public interests for the Muslim community or the Muslim people, therefore they say it is necessary to impose these taxes. Ibn Taymiyyah and al-Shatibi say: These taxes, if they are for a temporary cause like the previous example when the enemy attacks the land of the Muslims, then there is no harm in it. But if they are adopted as a custom and a system for the Bayt al-Mal of the Muslims, while these rulers neglect bringing in the wealth of zakah according to what is prescribed in the books of hadith and Sunnah; then the poverty that strikes the Bayt al-Mal of the Muslims resulted from the neglect of the rulings of the religion. In this case, it is not permissible to create a new means; because the reason for adopting this means only occurred because of their negligence in carrying out some of the rulings of the religion; among which is that the state carries out the collection of the wealth of zakah in the detail I referred to earlier.
With this, a person can understand that the door of unconnected public interests is a very important door; because it realizes public interests for the Muslims and understands their special circumstances. If we master the understanding of this issue within the limits specified in the speech of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, it will be easy for us at that time to understand matters that occurred in the past and can occur today and in the future, and to distinguish whether they are from unconnected public interests or from misguided innovations.
Recently, we spoke about the topic of Uthman's (may Allah be pleased with him) adhan, and that his innovation of it was not from the category of innovation in the religion, but rather the realization of an unconnected public interest that existed after the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). This is what is explicitly stated in the hadith of al-Sa'ib ibn Yazid, which al-Bukhari narrated in his "Sahih," that when Medina expanded during the period of construction in it, Uthman ibn Affan established the second adhan in al-Zurra. This expansion is something the Muslims do not control, and they are not attributed to negligence because of it. So this reason for creating a new legislation now to achieve their presence at the Prophet's Mosque, Uthman saw that he should make that adhan in al-Zurra. I include in this door completely what is established from 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) of making the divorce with the phrase of three, three, and he knew for certain that it was one divorce in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and in the time of Abu Bakr..., and in part of his own caliphate (may Allah be pleased with him). But when he saw the people... and they continued to collect the divorce with the phrase of three contrary to His saying (Blessed and Exalted is He): , he asked himself or with those around him: If we make it three as a discipline for them? It appeared to him so, and he implemented it. We cannot say that this is an innovation in the religion, but rather this action is temporary. He saw the people contradicting the Sunnah, and without doubt he clarified to them that this is contrary to the Sunnah; just as we do in this time completely. You find the people rushing and divorcing three with one phrase and in one session, or in multiple sessions in one 'iddah. So 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) saw that he should implement it on them as three. This is his ijtihad, not an act of worship, but rather to address a problem that occurred in his time. Whether he was right or wrong, this remains a topic within the generality of his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): . What matters to us now is to be precise in this precision because it is not practical now, and Allah has inspired many of the scholars of the Muslims to return to the authentic Sunnah; which is that the divorce with the phrase of three is only one divorce. But the important thing is that we do not rush and say that 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, the Commander of the Faithful, innovated in the religion. This is not of this kind at all, but rather it is an ijtihad that the time required, in which this public interest was required. The time required this reason, which was not in the time of the Messenger (peace be upon him), and was not in the time of 'Umar because the people were still on the Sunnah. When the people increased in contradicting the Sunnah in the topic of divorcing with the phrase of three, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab exerted ijtihad. And it is more likely to me that he was correct in this ruling and rewarded for it with two rewards completely. But it is not permissible to adopt that as a custom and judge by it against an authentic Sunnah, which is the Sunnah of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), and which Abu Bakr and 'Umar (also) followed in the beginning of his caliphate. This is from the unconnected public interests. If the reason for it goes, the ruling goes with it.
And when this becomes clear to us with complete clarity, we then return to the topic of the speech of Imam al-Musafir, who is a resident of Amm.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Yes, please proceed.

The questioner : The statement... regarding unconnected public interests in the field of transactions is the same... also the consideration in the field of organizing the affairs of people. But do you not see that adopting it in the field of worship opens for the people the door of innovation?

The Shaykh : It is so, and for that reason the Imam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) established these two conditions: that if the underlying cause exists in the time of the Messenger, it is not permissible to act upon an unrestricted public interest; because if it were a genuine public interest, the Messenger (peace be upon him) would have acted upon it. Then, if the underlying cause is found even in transactions—you are now suggesting that it is possible to act upon unrestricted public interests in transactions—no, Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) also says that it is not permissible to act upon them in transactions if the underlying cause for doing so is the Muslims' negligence in carrying out the rulings of their Shari'ah. These are transactions, but you see now that the unrestricted public interest never relates to worship itself, but rather to one of its forms. I am now entering into the specific point to cite what was previously said, which I quoted from Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him), regarding this detail. We did not legislate any speech that we added as an act of worship or a means of drawing near to Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He), but we saw that if we raised our voices with "As-salamu alaykum" (as is the original practice), we would expose people to ruining their prayers.
If—I am saying to you now—if I said.

The questioner : I do not mean this specific detail...

The Shaykh : But I do mean it—may Allah bless you—because the question was directed at this specific detail.