Discussion of the research on trimming the beard.

The questioner: In the hadith mentioned by our brother there, there is a hadith that is more authentic than it; meaning, this one is good, but the other is more explicit in its indication. They said: "O Messenger of Allah, the People of the Book shave their mustaches and trim their beards." He said: . So, if we know that the 'uthnun is the one that ... with it, especially its tips, as indicated in the books of language; perhaps it will clarify something for us; is that correct or not?

The Shaykh: Does not mean ...?

The questioner: Yes, and only ... we understood that the Messenger - (peace and blessings be upon him) - commanded us to let the beard grow at that time, and perhaps this explanatory hadith ... the hadith of Abu Umamah ... the prayer, a long hadith ... so here the general terms are intended, indicating the entire beard, and it was not restricted to a specific amount.

The Shaykh: Okay; does this question - may Allah bless you - contain something that has not been raised previously by the people of the margins, and for which no answer has been given? In most of the application of the text of the beard in its entirety?

The questioner: No.

The Shaykh : So then?

The questioner: But I tell you ... 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar ... I understand from the general terms of the hadiths.

The Shaykh: I say ... the answer of the text becomes clear from what preceded with complete clarity. We say: The original rule for every general text is that it is obligatory to act according to its generality. The original rule for every general text is that it is obligatory to act according to its generality. This is not a place of research or a place of disagreement, ever. But we add to it an addition and restrict it with a very necessary statement: except for a general text where it has become clear to us that the righteous Salaf, who are more understanding than us and more pious than us, and so on from the conjoined phrases, did not understand that this general text is in its generality and comprehensiveness. I gave you an example just now; and therefore I say - do not hold me to this - : I do not find anything new in your question; because I gave an example to clarify this rule with a Qur'anic text . The thief, linguistically, and I raised my hand; the one who steals this paper is a thief; so do we apply the text within the limits of this linguistic understanding, or do we apply it within the limits of what they understood? I moved from the thief to the stolen item to what? The one being judged . The hand here, the hand here, and the hand here are all a hand, as is known in language. So do we accept the one who takes the indication of the general text in this Qur'anic text? We all agree that the answer is: No. Okay; if we want to elaborate or clarify why the answer is no, and we also all say: The original rule is that it is obligatory to act according to the general text with every part of the general text? Why did we leave this text here in this example? The answer is: Because the righteous Salaf did not act with this concept of this general text; so the answer is repeated whenever the question is repeated. We do not deny the first rule, which is: the obligation to take the general text in its generality and comprehensiveness, except if there is evidence that it is restricted.
Now I am going to mention something new in terms of explanation and clarification, otherwise it is the same idea completely; meaning, I will say: It is obligatory to take the general text in its generality and comprehensiveness, except if there is evidence that specifies or restricts it. This is also agreed upon by the scholars of usul al-fiqh. But look now at what restricts the text or specifies the text? What is in the minds is either a hadith from the Messenger - (peace be upon him) - from his saying or from his action. This is mentioned with complete clarity. But the second thing is not mentioned here, and most people are unaware of it. I restrict the text with the practical life of the Salaf. If the Salaf in their practical life did not take the indication of the general text, then this is added to the text from the Messenger - (peace be upon him) - by saying or by the action of the righteous Salaf. So then, at that time, this general text, which we originally agreed is obligatory to act upon in its generality and comprehensiveness, can be specified - also - by what the righteous Salaf were upon. It is not necessary, and this is also from the explanation I mention on such an occasion; meaning, Abu Jabir just now could have said: And the answer is practiced; so is there a text that the Messenger - (peace be upon him) - took from his beard? I blocked the path beforehand; there is no text like this or like that. So I do not say, in defense of my understanding: No, the Messenger took. And no one else is allowed to say, in defense of his opinion, that he did not take; because there is no explanation in this. But how do I know the life of the Messenger - (peace be upon him) - in things we did not know from his saying or his action? From the environment in which the Messenger - (peace be upon him) - lived; ... Now, many of the innovators, when we deny one of their innovations, say: Do you have, my brother, a text that the Messenger forbade this thing? You want, as I say, or you want a detailed text exactly as you like!! My brother, I say there is a text for those who understand, while the general people who do not understand do not find such a text. I first start from his saying - (peace be upon him) - = -- may Allah have mercy on you -- = : .
Here I have a short pause; who is able to say that this matter is an innovation? It is the one who has the greatest possible comprehensive knowledge of what the Messenger - (peace be upon him) - and the righteous Salaf were upon; meaning - for example - now if we say: This minaret is an innovation, and they say to us from these innovators: Do you have a text that the minaret was not in the time of the Messenger? Do you have a text that the celebration of the Prophet's birthday was not celebrated? We do not have such a text, of course, but when the scholars say: That the celebration is an innovation, and the minaret is an innovation, and count as many as you wish of thousands of innovations, where do they take it from? They take it from their knowledge of the life of the righteous Salaf that it was not mentioned, just as the celebration was not mentioned. The celebration of the day of 'Ashura was not mentioned, nor the wailing and crying on the day of 'Ashura according to the method of the Shi'ah, and so on. They understand from these abandoned matters that they did not exist. And from this wide study, a person can benefit from this hadith: , . We should know , meaning our religion. So the one who does not know our religion will never distinguish between the Sunnah and innovation. And therefore, it is very important in our topic here, when we want to say: This part is not acted upon, we should know the situation of the righteous Salaf, the Companions, the Tabi'un, and their followers, the three famous centuries known for their excellence; was this thing present? So we read these texts, all of them mention taking (trimming) and do not mention the absolute letting grow; so this absolute letting grow is not practiced.
This is what I believe and I testify to Allah with it, and I add to this belief that without this, we cannot revive the Sunnah. Rather, we open the field for the innovations and innovators to spread their innovations in our lands; even we, the people of the Sunnah and the community. And I gave you an example of one of the scholars of hadith in Pakistan when he supported the innovation that Imam al-Shatibi denied; because he is an imam who specialized in studying . And therefore, I believe that it is very, very important to study the science of usul al-hadith as a practical study, and also the science of usul al-fiqh as a practical study, otherwise the person will stumble in a very strange way in his fiqh and in his hadith. And perhaps this amount is sufficient, and praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds.
Yes?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh: Ah, please go ahead.

The questioner: The second question: That letting your beard grow is a matter that affects the Muslims widely. Why ... ...?

The Shaykh: Letting the beard grow affects the people widely; what do you mean?

The questioner: It is known among people that they followed the command of the Messenger - (peace and blessings be upon him) -; it is known to people that they let their beards grow.

The Shaykh : Absolutely?

The questioner: Only the contrary was mentioned.

The Shaykh: A question for clarification; meaning, it is known that they did not take from it at all, do you want to say that?

The questioner: Yes, it was not exaggerated in the action of the Companions.

The Shaykh: Where do we take this ...?

The questioner: From the mention of the contrary to the entire scope of the Companions.

The Shaykh : It is strange; that we erase what was mentioned, and we establish what was concealed and not mentioned at all?

The questioner : Why were they mentioned?

The Shaykh : To clarify the hadith, to clarify and to warn against anyone understanding the hadith in its absolute sense. This is very clear. Then what do you say, Professor? All the Hanafi scholars state and affirm that not taking from the beard is— I don't know, they call it an innovation or they call it forbidden because the era is very distant; they specified that the Sunnah is the fistful. This is their school of thought.
Yes?

The questioner : One who takes less than the fistful is effeminate.

The Shaykh : We are not talking about the less now; we are talking about the excess. Shortening the excess... they would be like the Maghrebis... they used to take it like the Levantines today, meaning there were some from the Muslim Brotherhood; meaning they would trim it like this and round it, and not let it grow to the full extent; because this is the emblem of the people of the Sunnah. The point is that Imam Ahmad, the Imam of the Sunnah— also— says what you heard about Ibn 'Umar and Abu Hurayrah. So they mentioned these things to clarify the Sunnah. I do not think your question is valid at all.
The questioner: ...

The Shaykh : What did he mention?

Another questioner : He mentioned that he sees... what exceeds the fistful.

The Shaykh : That is what I am saying.

Another questioner : The reference?

The Shaykh : Ah, the reference, yes, the reference for you is in the book "Al-Tarjal" by Abu Bakr al-Khallal, yes.

The questioner : The opposite of what he used.

The Shaykh : How?

The questioner : The opposite of what our brother Abdullah used.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : That letting the beard grow is what has become widespread.

The Shaykh : That is what we found strange and disapproved of.

The questioner : It is widespread among people.

The Shaykh : It is widespread among people.
...

The questioner : The general meaning of the hadiths— Shaykh— people understood it perhaps in a way the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) did not say.

Another questioner : ... but the phrase... "it has become widespread," the peak of prevalence.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Is letting the beard grow a Sunnah...?

The questioner : You do not know the meaning of "balwa" (affliction/trial), it means prevalence and spread.

The Shaykh : No, but there is an exaggeration from... here.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Be patient, Abu 'Abdullah.

The questioner : Please, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Do not bring heat into the subject.

The questioner : I do not like this style.

The Shaykh : Be patient.

The questioner : A person should be clear and frank.

The Shaykh : Be patient, it is so.

The questioner : The most important thing is to say: I did not understand this, either explain it to me or do not tell me: your words are wrong. I do not like responding to the Shaykh, respond to me.

The Shaykh : Okay; he responds, my brother— may Allah bless you— with something present in his mind, and he may not be able to express it, so the prevalence of the affliction.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Be patient, be patient a little.
The prevalence of the affliction is said in practical matters, in practical matters contrary to what you say. The prevalence of the affliction now is shaving and shortening, as we said about the Levantines, "the best of beards is the one that is a sign." This is the prevalence of the affliction, not the intellectual prevalence of the affliction; this is not said to have the prevalence of the affliction among the jurists. So you are talking about the intellectual aspect that what is present in the minds of the predecessors is absolute letting of the beard grow. The prevalence of the affliction requires practical occurrence. Practical occurrence: we can say that these extremists for absolute letting of the beard grow wish that all beards were like the beard of Ibn 'Umar and Abu Hurayrah, and so on; because the prevalence of the affliction is completely contrary to this. So indeed, using the phrase "prevalence of the affliction" for what you intended to express is not precise. Then, my brother, from where do we understand this intellectual meaning? From the ignorant people present, or from the jurists? You will agree with me, as I said to our brother many times: No, from the jurists; is that not so?

The questioner : ... I did not discuss because you are answering for him. I wanted the one who said this to be... I wanted him, he corrected me, he is responding to me. I am listening to you out of politeness, and I am ready to listen to you for four hours, but I am not a student and I cannot have you answer for one person. Whoever criticizes me is criticizing me, and they do not refer me to you either. This is a rule of the self-evident for me.

The Shaykh : But this rule is open to discussion.

The questioner : Between you and me, I will try.

The Shaykh : It is open to discussion.

The questioner : But not from the youth.

The Shaykh : Why is it open between you and me?

The questioner : I mean I listen to you, for example, if he referred me to you, I listen out of politeness, but that I accept this, no.

The Shaykh : My brother— may Allah bless you—, leave the word "out of politeness."

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : The truth is widespread, so it must be publicized by every means. The issue of "out of politeness" does not exist among Muslims, meaning "out of politeness" does not carry us to conceal the explanation in a certain gathering. Yes, the young one respects the old one, the scholar respects those below him, and so on. These are other issues. But scientific research does not accept, by Allah, only between you and me, or between you and me and a second person. Why? We are brothers on opposite beds. If I err, you correct my error. If you err, I correct your error. If he errs, you correct his error, without nervousness and without stirring up resentment in the soul.

The questioner : I am not nervous, I am irritable.

The Shaykh : Ah, irritable, okay [The Shaykh : (laughs) ].

Another questioner : Regarding the honorable brother Abdullah asking... if there is a context...

The Shaykh : There is no god but Allah.

Another questioner : So he asks, saying the word "general" and the word "affliction," "it has become widespread"; is it correct? ... he is inquiring.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : ... .

Another questioner : He is inquiring so that he sees the answerThe Shaykh .

The questioner : ... but I want, likeThe Shaykh : He teaches me, I have something I want to teach him, but only, understand me.

Another questioner : Our Shaykh, the question is still standing; regarding the issue, he argued against our brother Abu 'Abdullah that "balwa" (affliction) means... the linguistic meaning. The word "amma" (generalized) has generalization and has legal knowledge, but "balwa" makes me feel— may Allah reward you with good— that it encompassed specific things that are not generalized for anything... the word "amma," but "balwa" is specific things; is this correct or not?

The Shaykh : I said— my brother— this statement is applied to practical matters that spread by the prevalence of the affliction, but intellectual matters have no relation to this statement; meaning if Abu 'Abdullah sees otherwise, we listen to his opinion or he postpones it, and it is up to him; because we do not impose on the person...

The questioner : I have a task, meaning I— praise be to Allah— am one of the regular attendees if I can, and it has reached the point that in a session I do not want to attend, and by the permission of Allah there is no time except I go out... I do not say it in front of you, or I do not attend...

The Shaykh : Welcome.

The questioner : But I feel that some of the youth around you intend to speak— and I do not mean a specific person now— that their only job is forbiddingThe Shaykh : the one who speaks and trying to... the one who speaks, and this is what I do not like. I am certain that there is no person who speaks except seeking knowledge.

The Shaykh : But your saying: I do not like it, is wrong; what do you think?

The questioner : I mean I do not like this action.

The Shaykh : Yes, yes, your saying: I do not like this action, is wrong.

The questioner : Show me this error.

The Shaykh : Because we are all that man, so when you say "I"; it means you are not me.

The questioner : I intended "I" so that I do not oblige others.

The Shaykh : No, you want to oblige him; how not? How do you not oblige him? Is this not from the etiquettes of gatherings?

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : Then?

The questioner : This is what we know of you.

The Shaykh : Then— praise be to Allah— nothing of what you are pointing to occurred in this gathering. It may occur, I do not deny it.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : I did not say that you were, be patient. I say that it did not occur, but I also said— in my complete statement— it may occur, because— my brother— none of us is free from sin; and therefore: .
So now, if someone has a question that is necessary to extend the session by the amount of necessity, otherwise we say: Dismiss yourselves as wise.

The questioner : Those who have questions, our brother, I say postpone them, especially in takfir (declaring someone a disbeliever)... a longer session, so let us not cut the sessions in them, may Allah will it next time by the permission of Allah.

The Shaykh : If Allah wills.

Another questioner : Glory be to You, O Allah, and praise be to You.


The questioner : Excuse me... he reads— for example— in a session of ours: "Haita laka," "Haita laka."

The Shaykh : It is not permissible, my brother, it is not permissible.

The questioner : Did you not say that?

The Shaykh : Once... today he read it "Haita laka," and then a second time he read: "Haita laka."

The questioner : Another session, meaning?

The Shaykh : That is it.

The questioner : Yes, in the prayer he may read in... the first rak'ah with one recitation, and the second rak'ah with another recitation.