The Chapter on the Talebearer, Explanation of the Hadith of Hudhayfah (may Allah be pleased with him): (No talebearer will enter Paradise).

The Shaykh : The chapter that follows is the Chapter on the Talebearer.
He narrated in it with his authentic chain from Hammam: We were with Hudhayfah when it was said to him: A man is reporting talk to Uthman. Hudhayfah said: I heard the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) say: .
"We were with Hudhayfah": Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman was a man among the prominent Companions of the Messenger (peace be upon him), and he had a special status with him that no one else shared. This was because he was the keeper of the Prophet's (peace and blessings be upon him) secrets. Among those secrets was that he knew the names of the hypocrites, which no human being knew except the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and then Hudhayfah. He was the keeper of the Messenger's (peace be upon him) secrets, so he knew the names of these hypocrites. Therefore, 'Umar, despite his excellence and despite what the Messenger (may Allah's prayer and peace be upon him) said about him: ; even so, 'Umar would come to Hudhayfah and ask him earnestly: Am I mentioned among the names of those hypocrites? He would then reassure him by saying: No. This is Hudhayfah. It was said to him: A man is reporting talk to Uthman. This phrase is an Arabic sentence, but a technical term in the science of hadith has been applied to it. From the Arabic perspective, "reporting talk to Uthman" means he is a talebearer. I think no one is ignorant of the meaning of talebearing (namimah), but the "qattat" mentioned in the hadith is interpreted with a slightly more precise definition than "nammam" (talebearer).
So we say: "reporting talk" means he is a talebearer. And what does "he is a talebearer" mean? He hears talk between people; he is sitting and hears one person insulting another, or criticizing him, whether rightly or wrongly. What this talebearer does is convey this speech to the one who was criticized, with the intention of causing discord between the critic and the criticized. This man was reporting talk to Uthman; meaning, he would sit with people and listen to what people were saying about Uthman. Perhaps many of you know that in the time of Uthman, there were many, and very many, trials. And the outcome of that, with great regret, was that a group of people rebelled against him and killed him in his house while he was reciting the Book of Allah! There is no doubt that whenever a trial becomes great, the preliminaries that preceded it had already occurred, as it is said: "The greatest fire comes from the smallest sparks." In this atmosphere, in the time of Uthman ibn 'Affan, there was a man who would sit in a gathering and hear so-and-so speaking against Uthman. He would hasten to say to Uthman: So-and-so said such and such about you. He wanted to incite Uthman against this person who spoke about him. This is talebearing. When it was said to Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman: There is a man reporting talk—meaning conveying talk—to Uthman in the way of corruption and talebearing. This is the linguistic meaning. But the technical meaning: "reporting talk" is an abbreviation for: "He said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said." This is the difference remaining between the linguistic meaning and the technical meaning. "Reporting talk" means he is a talebearer. "Reporting talk" means he attributes it to the Messenger (peace be upon him). So if such a phrase, "reporting talk," comes without a context or preceding text that makes us feel the speaker intends talebearing; then the meaning of "reporting talk" is: he conveys it to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). But here it is very clear that the intended meaning of his saying: "reporting talk to Uthman"; is: he conveys the speech he heard from the critic of Uthman to Uthman, with the intention of inciting Uthman against him and causing corruption between them. So Hudhayfah's answer was that he said: I heard the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) say: .
It is well known that the "qattat" is interpreted as the talebearer, and this means that no talebearer will enter Paradise. But some scholars mentioned a detail regarding talebearing, and applied that detail to one aspect of the term "qattat":
If a man sits in a gathering among people openly and hears so-and-so saying about so-and-so, then conveys it, this is the "nammam" (talebearer). As for the one who does not sit with people but eavesdrops from behind screens, and people do not know that he is there; like a spy, meaning, they do not know that a person is spying on them. He hears a word containing criticism of a person, and he quickly conveys it to that criticized person with the intention of corruption—also. This is the meaning of "qattat." So the "qattat" is a talebearer without doubt, but not every talebearer is a "qattat." Meaning, from the perspective of the principles of jurisprudence regarding generality and specificity, and also in language: every "qattat" is a talebearer, but not every talebearer is a "qattat." Why? Because the talebearer is the one who steals talk from behind walls and conveys the talk—also—to the criticized person. He intends corruption. So he meets the talebearer who is in a gathering and conveys speech with the intention of corruption at this point. But the difference between the "qattat" and the "nammam" is that the "nammam" is sitting and not spying, whereas the "qattat" spies and conveys the speech.
And we can summarize that the "qattat" combines two misfortunes or two sins: the sin of spying, and He (Glorified and Exalted is He) said: , and many hadiths came regarding that. Then, in addition to that, he conveys the speech he heard from some of the people sitting in the gathering to the criticized person with the intention of causing corruption between them. This is the meaning of the "qattat." So every "qattat" is a talebearer, and not every talebearer is a "qattat." How is that? Every human being is an animal, but not every animal is a human being. This is known in language and in technical usage. Every human being is an animal; because "animal" is a generic name that includes the speaking human and the silent animal. So the human is distinguished from the animal by this. If you say: The human is an animal, you have spoken the truth. But you cannot say: Every animal is a human. Similarly, if you say the "qattat" is a talebearer, it is correct; because he conveys speech with the intention of corruption. But the talebearer is not a "qattat"; because it is the nature of the "qattat" to convey speech from behind screens.
Finally: There remains a point in the hadith that is important, but I think it is sufficient to point to it, given how much we have passed through of commentary on similar matters. , does this mean that the "qattat" or the talebearer or the "duyyuth" (one who does not guard his honor) or any person about whom it was said in the hadiths: ; does that mean that the one who commits talebearing is a disbeliever and it is forbidden for him to enter Paradise? The hadith says so: ! But it is obligatory that we do not understand the hadith alone, but combined with all the texts from the Book and the Sunnah that help us understand the hadith correctly.
If we understood the hadith on its apparent meaning: meaning Paradise is forbidden to him like the disbeliever, at that time this understanding would conflict with texts from the Book and the Sunnah. The most famous and strongest in indication is the saying of Allah (Mighty and Majestic): , so how can it be said: and our Lord says: ? For this verse, there are many texts, as I pointed to, and the scholars interpreted such a text with several interpretations:
First: He considers it permissible in his heart; because considering disobedience permissible in the heart is disbelief and apostasy. And at that time, the hadith remains on its apparent meaning: No one will enter Paradise absolutely; because by his considering this disobedience permissible in his heart, he became a disbeliever. And if not... This is the first meaning.
The second meaning: He will not enter Paradise with the truthful first ones; meaning he will not enter Paradise without reckoning and without punishment. And the implication of this at that time is that he enters Paradise, but after a period of time.
And finally, the third interpretation: one does not enter Paradise until he has received his share of punishment for his sin; whether it was talebearing, or unlawful sexual intercourse, or being a cuckold, or anything else about which the explicit texts have reported. A cuckold does not enter Paradise, as mentioned in some hadiths. So, regarding the one about whom such a statement is made, the final interpretation of the hadith is: he does not enter Paradise until he receives his share of punishment, unless Allah forgives him, based on the previous verse.