Is enjoining good a legal ruling or a matter of belief? And does falling short in it take a person out of Islam?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : No, allow me... I tell you: you did not agree with us on this, or for your time, I mean... Is enjoining good a belief or a legal ruling? ...
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Is enjoining good, whatever good it is, a legal ruling or just a belief, like faith in Allah and so on? Is enjoining good a practical ruling like prayer, fasting, and zakah, or is it a belief in the heart, faith in Allah and His attributes, and the Last Day, and so on?
The questioner : ... A belief.
The Shaykh : This is a deviation; I do not like this...
The questioner : It is a deviation, if Allah wills, but only.
The Shaykh : I do not like this...
The questioner : For what reason? Because until now I cannot decide; I mean, I have a distinction if they call to tawhid (the oneness of Allah).
The Shaykh : If you do not answer my question, we will not get closer as we did before, because of defining the question without an answer.
The questioner: If possible ... .
The Shaykh : ... So ask Professor Awni.
Another questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, do not leave the space, meaning we do not overturn the entire research; the research proceeds in sequence, and now.
Another questioner : Your question that you asked... must I answer it?
The Shaykh : Glory be to Allah! And do I want anything other than that?
The questioner : ... .
Another questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, may Allah reward you with good.
Please proceed.
The questioner : The truth regarding the example.
The Shaykh : ...regarding?
The questioner : For the example.
The Shaykh : For the example.
The questioner : For the example that...
The Shaykh : This is not the research.
The questioner : It is known.
The Shaykh : No, this is not the research, I have no... what you revealed... your nature; and therefore you rushed and said that I hope you repeat the previous research; meaning that you answer the question: Is enjoining good a legal ruling or a belief? And then you go back, you go back to the past.
The questioner : I understood your question and I want to...
The Shaykh : ... .
The questioner : My answer.
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : My answer to your question.
The Shaykh : Do you have a recorder with you?
Another questioner : Yes, yes.
The Shaykh : Yes?
Another questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : The example I gave yesterday regarding dividing disbelief into practical disbelief and creedal disbelief... and we are in... enjoining good and forbidding evil, we follow this... exactly, and we want to apply it in people's reality, so we say: falling short in enjoining good and forbidding evil does not take one out of Islam, and the individual is not considered an apostate, but what we say is that we define the thing that means applying this... meaning we want the person himself to apply this scale in his view of society, and we say that the one who does not apply this... and defines his relationship... this person, this one did not perform tawhid (the oneness of Allah)...
The Shaykh : Do you mean by "did not perform tawhid" that he is a disbeliever and an apostate?
The questioner : An apostate.
The Shaykh : This is contrary to what I agreed with you on.
The questioner: I say ... .
The Shaykh : ... But I am warning you because your words are being recorded and you will see the result that this is a negation of what we agreed upon.
Please proceed.
The questioner : I give an example.
The Shaykh : Continue.
The questioner : I give an example...
The Shaykh : And upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah.
The questioner : You said that we cannot declare someone a disbeliever except one who disbelieves in form and heart.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : This is correct.
The Shaykh : And we agreed on this.
The questioner : And this is what we agreed on; we cannot declare someone a disbeliever except one who... in heart and form. We say that we agreed on declaring certain types disbelievers.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, do not come... connect for me now the root of the disagreement; enjoining good, the professor is linking enjoining good to belief, and you have now ended up with the same words, so you have words... second, no harm in listening to you, but I am warning you that you have not departed from his words, and the meaning of your words and his words is one thing: that you did not agree with us; meaning truly, you have doubts, there is no harm in researching, but this is a negation of the agreement, you must understand this well so that we remain on the path of understanding and closeness.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, complete my example?
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh: No problem ... .
The questioner : ... There is no harm...
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : We said: if a person agreed with us on this example we set in declaring disbelief; that...
The Shaykh : Who is he?
The questioner : We assumed that one established a law other than the law of Allah.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : So we agreed that he is a disbeliever.
The Shaykh : With the previous detail.
The questioner : With the previous detail.
The one who doubts his disbelief means that he did not find it by the scale we agreed upon, so not weighing it by the scale.
The Shaykh : Who is this one who doubts his disbelief?
The questioner : The person who doubts the disbelief of the one who establishes a law from himself.
The Shaykh : Is this statement included in our discussion?
The questioner : It is included that the one who establishes a law contrary to the law of Allah.
The Shaykh : Is it included in our words that such-and-such a person committed disbelief of apostasy, so the one who doubts, while believing that this disbelief is apostasy, doubts the disbelief of this one, is the statement included in our discussion?
The questioner : Meaning it is included...
The Shaykh : Included, meaning during our conversation, even though you are building on it...?
The questioner : This statement is from me regarding...
The Shaykh : ... I tell you: if he believes, I believe that Zayd from among the people came with disbelief of apostasy, so I doubted him; meaning I doubted the ruling that I issued, and this is not conceivable, so the one from whom disbelief of apostasy issued is a disbeliever by apostasy, so where does the doubt come from? The doubt comes, the doubt comes from the atheist, not from the one who is ruling that this is disbelief of apostasy.
The questioner : It is built upon that, and the work that we say, I still say that it makes its owner a disbeliever, if one deals with him on the basis that he is a disbeliever, that he deals with him on this premise in which he weighed, and the truth...
The Shaykh : Okay, do you want to hear your recording that you did not give me an answer regarding the ruling of enjoining good?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Allow me a moment, no.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, sir, you gave a ruling... regarding enjoining good.
The questioner : ... I tell you...
The Shaykh : I am telling you, I am asking you; tell me: yes, tell me: no. Did you give me a ruling?
The questioner : I will give it to you.
The Shaykh : So this is what we are afraid of.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : My brother, we are asking you, and we asked the professor before, and we have been patient with you according to custom, but on the Shami principle; "if it does not come to you, go to it," because I want cooperation on the path of guidance, if you took half an hour more of my time, no harm, because in my opinion I will be a cause of cooperation on good - if Allah wills -; so I am not rushing you, but I have the right to rush you because the written is clear from its title. You took the path head-on, I mean a deviation... the professor frankly... and out of his manners he is silent.
I told you previously that you deviated from the answer, yes, be patient, I have not finished my words, we have been patient and you finished your words, did you answer me that enjoining good is a practical ruling or a creedal ruling? So you also, for the sake of the people of virtue... no; so what did I benefit from the patience? I did not benefit anything, so you... I say in Syria that the Muslims, when they are... the common people, they are able to discipline the shaykhs, they are able to discipline the shaykhs; the shaykhs who are not able to discipline the common people on the Book and the Sunnah, how? Every time a shaykh tells you: this is haram (forbidden); tell him: what is the evidence? He hears from here once, and from here once, and from here once... he is forced in the end to submit to the requests according to the principle of offer and demand, he tells you: the evidence, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, tell him: is this hadith valid or not? The shaykhs never heard it in their lives... finally, we have now verified it in Syria; no preacher comes out on the pulpit except he says: narrated by so-and-so, and the hadith is valid, and so on, and if the validation is by transmission... the important thing.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Is enjoining good, whatever good it is, a legal ruling or just a belief, like faith in Allah and so on? Is enjoining good a practical ruling like prayer, fasting, and zakah, or is it a belief in the heart, faith in Allah and His attributes, and the Last Day, and so on?
The questioner : ... A belief.
The Shaykh : This is a deviation; I do not like this...
The questioner : It is a deviation, if Allah wills, but only.
The Shaykh : I do not like this...
The questioner : For what reason? Because until now I cannot decide; I mean, I have a distinction if they call to tawhid (the oneness of Allah).
The Shaykh : If you do not answer my question, we will not get closer as we did before, because of defining the question without an answer.
The questioner: If possible ... .
The Shaykh : ... So ask Professor Awni.
Another questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, do not leave the space, meaning we do not overturn the entire research; the research proceeds in sequence, and now.
Another questioner : Your question that you asked... must I answer it?
The Shaykh : Glory be to Allah! And do I want anything other than that?
The questioner : ... .
Another questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, may Allah reward you with good.
Please proceed.
The questioner : The truth regarding the example.
The Shaykh : ...regarding?
The questioner : For the example.
The Shaykh : For the example.
The questioner : For the example that...
The Shaykh : This is not the research.
The questioner : It is known.
The Shaykh : No, this is not the research, I have no... what you revealed... your nature; and therefore you rushed and said that I hope you repeat the previous research; meaning that you answer the question: Is enjoining good a legal ruling or a belief? And then you go back, you go back to the past.
The questioner : I understood your question and I want to...
The Shaykh : ... .
The questioner : My answer.
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : My answer to your question.
The Shaykh : Do you have a recorder with you?
Another questioner : Yes, yes.
The Shaykh : Yes?
Another questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : The example I gave yesterday regarding dividing disbelief into practical disbelief and creedal disbelief... and we are in... enjoining good and forbidding evil, we follow this... exactly, and we want to apply it in people's reality, so we say: falling short in enjoining good and forbidding evil does not take one out of Islam, and the individual is not considered an apostate, but what we say is that we define the thing that means applying this... meaning we want the person himself to apply this scale in his view of society, and we say that the one who does not apply this... and defines his relationship... this person, this one did not perform tawhid (the oneness of Allah)...
The Shaykh : Do you mean by "did not perform tawhid" that he is a disbeliever and an apostate?
The questioner : An apostate.
The Shaykh : This is contrary to what I agreed with you on.
The questioner: I say ... .
The Shaykh : ... But I am warning you because your words are being recorded and you will see the result that this is a negation of what we agreed upon.
Please proceed.
The questioner : I give an example.
The Shaykh : Continue.
The questioner : I give an example...
The Shaykh : And upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah.
The questioner : You said that we cannot declare someone a disbeliever except one who disbelieves in form and heart.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : This is correct.
The Shaykh : And we agreed on this.
The questioner : And this is what we agreed on; we cannot declare someone a disbeliever except one who... in heart and form. We say that we agreed on declaring certain types disbelievers.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, do not come... connect for me now the root of the disagreement; enjoining good, the professor is linking enjoining good to belief, and you have now ended up with the same words, so you have words... second, no harm in listening to you, but I am warning you that you have not departed from his words, and the meaning of your words and his words is one thing: that you did not agree with us; meaning truly, you have doubts, there is no harm in researching, but this is a negation of the agreement, you must understand this well so that we remain on the path of understanding and closeness.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, complete my example?
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh: No problem ... .
The questioner : ... There is no harm...
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : We said: if a person agreed with us on this example we set in declaring disbelief; that...
The Shaykh : Who is he?
The questioner : We assumed that one established a law other than the law of Allah.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : So we agreed that he is a disbeliever.
The Shaykh : With the previous detail.
The questioner : With the previous detail.
The one who doubts his disbelief means that he did not find it by the scale we agreed upon, so not weighing it by the scale.
The Shaykh : Who is this one who doubts his disbelief?
The questioner : The person who doubts the disbelief of the one who establishes a law from himself.
The Shaykh : Is this statement included in our discussion?
The questioner : It is included that the one who establishes a law contrary to the law of Allah.
The Shaykh : Is it included in our words that such-and-such a person committed disbelief of apostasy, so the one who doubts, while believing that this disbelief is apostasy, doubts the disbelief of this one, is the statement included in our discussion?
The questioner : Meaning it is included...
The Shaykh : Included, meaning during our conversation, even though you are building on it...?
The questioner : This statement is from me regarding...
The Shaykh : ... I tell you: if he believes, I believe that Zayd from among the people came with disbelief of apostasy, so I doubted him; meaning I doubted the ruling that I issued, and this is not conceivable, so the one from whom disbelief of apostasy issued is a disbeliever by apostasy, so where does the doubt come from? The doubt comes, the doubt comes from the atheist, not from the one who is ruling that this is disbelief of apostasy.
The questioner : It is built upon that, and the work that we say, I still say that it makes its owner a disbeliever, if one deals with him on the basis that he is a disbeliever, that he deals with him on this premise in which he weighed, and the truth...
The Shaykh : Okay, do you want to hear your recording that you did not give me an answer regarding the ruling of enjoining good?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Allow me a moment, no.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, sir, you gave a ruling... regarding enjoining good.
The questioner : ... I tell you...
The Shaykh : I am telling you, I am asking you; tell me: yes, tell me: no. Did you give me a ruling?
The questioner : I will give it to you.
The Shaykh : So this is what we are afraid of.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : My brother, we are asking you, and we asked the professor before, and we have been patient with you according to custom, but on the Shami principle; "if it does not come to you, go to it," because I want cooperation on the path of guidance, if you took half an hour more of my time, no harm, because in my opinion I will be a cause of cooperation on good - if Allah wills -; so I am not rushing you, but I have the right to rush you because the written is clear from its title. You took the path head-on, I mean a deviation... the professor frankly... and out of his manners he is silent.
I told you previously that you deviated from the answer, yes, be patient, I have not finished my words, we have been patient and you finished your words, did you answer me that enjoining good is a practical ruling or a creedal ruling? So you also, for the sake of the people of virtue... no; so what did I benefit from the patience? I did not benefit anything, so you... I say in Syria that the Muslims, when they are... the common people, they are able to discipline the shaykhs, they are able to discipline the shaykhs; the shaykhs who are not able to discipline the common people on the Book and the Sunnah, how? Every time a shaykh tells you: this is haram (forbidden); tell him: what is the evidence? He hears from here once, and from here once, and from here once... he is forced in the end to submit to the requests according to the principle of offer and demand, he tells you: the evidence, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, tell him: is this hadith valid or not? The shaykhs never heard it in their lives... finally, we have now verified it in Syria; no preacher comes out on the pulpit except he says: narrated by so-and-so, and the hadith is valid, and so on, and if the validation is by transmission... the important thing.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.