Explanation of the Hadith of Abu Bakrah - may Allah be pleased with him - who said: The Messenger of Allah - peace and blessings be upon him - said: (When two Muslims meet with their swords,

The Shaykh: From Abu Bakrah, Nufay' ibn al-Harith al-Thaqafi - may Allah be pleased with him - that the Prophet - peace and blessings be upon him and his family - said: . I said: O Messenger of Allah, this is the killer; what about the killed? He said: Agreed upon by al-Bukhari and Muslim.
In this hadith, there is an explanation of the effect of a bad intention on its owner when it is accompanied by a bad deed. The effect of a bad intention on its owner when it is accompanied by a bad deed. We say with this condition, that it is accompanied by a bad deed in the owner. This condition is necessary; because a mere bad intention, if it settles in the heart of its owner, then by the grace of Allah - Mighty and Majestic - upon the believing servants of this Ummah, they are not held accountable for it. If a Muslim intends a bad intention, his Lord - Blessed and Exalted is He - does not hold him accountable for it unless it is accompanied by a deed. And among the evidence for this is His saying - peace and blessings be upon him - in the hadith agreed upon by the two Shaykhs, from the hadith of Abu Hurayrah, that Allah - Mighty and Majestic - says to His angels: . And in a narration: .
So in this hadith, there is a clear and distinct statement that the bad deed is not written as long as it remains in the realm of intention, and it is only written when it moves to the realm of action. And among the evidence - also - for this is the hadith of Abu Hurayrah - also - in "the two Sahihs." He said: The Messenger of Allah - peace and blessings be upon him and his family - said: .
; so if this condition is realized - meaning: he did not speak and did not act upon what he intended - then Allah - Mighty and Majestic - has pardoned that. And this, as the hadith indicates, is a specific matter and a grace from Allah - Mighty and Majestic - that He has exclusively granted to the Muhammadan Ummah; because He says: .
If we know these hadiths, then at that time, there is no contradiction between them and the hadith of the chapter. I said: O Messenger of Allah, this is the killer; what about the killed? He said: . This killed man, about whom the Messenger - peace be upon him - ruled that he is in the Fire, did not deserve this ruling merely because he intended to kill his companion; rather, it is because he was eager to kill his companion with an eagerness that led him to challenge him and directly engage in killing him. But the decree of Allah overcame him, and he was killed by his companion. If we know this, then at that time, there is no contradiction between the aforementioned hadiths that explicitly stated that Allah - Mighty and Majestic - does not hold accountable for a mere bad intention, and this hadith that explicitly stated that the one who directly engaged in fighting his companion and was killed; there is no contradiction between this and that; because here, the deed was present with the intention; he was eager to kill his companion, as evidenced by the fact that he met his companion and was killed by his companion's sword. So he was in the Fire not merely because he intended to kill the one who killed him, but rather because, along with the intention, he directly engaged in killing him, but he did not prevail over him.
And from here, it becomes clear to you that whoever argues with this hadith - the hadith of the chapter, the hadith of Abu Bakrah al-Thaqafi - that if a Muslim intends a bad deed and resolves upon it, he is held accountable for it; whoever uses this hadith as evidence for this, the hadith does not indicate that; because this hadith did not say: that whoever is eager to kill his companion is in the Fire, but rather it said: . So the killer is clear as stated in the hadith; so what about the killed? He said: . So this killed man had both the bad intention and the bad deed present in him. So it is not permissible - in this case - to use this hadith as evidence that Allah - Mighty and Majestic - holds the Muslim accountable for a bad intention that has not moved to the realm of execution and action; because it is not only that he intended, but rather that he intended and directly engaged in killing; especially since in the previous hadith, it is explicitly stated that He does not hold accountable unless he speaks or acts upon it.
And the scholars differ greatly in this issue; that is because they divide the thoughts that occur to a person into three categories: a fleeting thought (khatir), a resolve (hamm), and a firm determination ('azm). The fleeting thought is the beginning of the bad idea that occurs to a person, then it may settle or it may turn away and go.

The questioner: Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh: And upon you peace.
So this fleeting thought, they agreed that one is not held accountable for it. If it was a fleeting thought, then if this thought settles in the mind of its owner, it takes on some strength and rises from a fleeting thought to a resolve (hamm). And this resolve may be strong such that its owner turns away from it.

Another questioner: Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh : And upon you be peace, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.
So this - also - is something for which one is not held accountable; as evidenced by the previous hadith: . But if the resolve becomes intense such that he plans for it, and nothing remains behind it except the direct execution of the deed; then that is the firm determination ('azm), the third level; where after the firm determination, there is only direct execution and implementation. The scholars differed on whether the owner of this firm determination is held accountable or not? Some said: he is held accountable, and some said: he is not held accountable. And this last opinion is the stronger opinion (rajih) due to the condition mentioned previously: . As for those who opposed that opinion and held that even if it is not accompanied by speech or action; as long as he reached the level of firm determination and did not stop at the level of resolve, let alone the fleeting thought; then he is held accountable. Their argument, or the argument of those who held this view, is this hadith that is before us; he said: . But the answer to this argument has been known from what preceded; it is that this hadith does not explicitly state that he determined and did not act, but it is explicit that he directly engaged in the action; because he met his companion, challenged him, and intended to kill him, and then his companion prevailed over him.
But in any case, this hadith should be taken as a lesson and psychological training that a person is not allowed to surrender to his thoughts and to what he resolves upon, and that he should not allow the space for the fleeting thought to rise to the level of resolve, and that he should keep thinking and thinking until the resolve rises to the level of firm determination; because it is feared that after that, he will reach this level where, if he becomes the killed while he wanted for himself to be the killer, the matter will turn against him and he will become liable for the punishment of the killer while he is the killed. So a person must block the paths of Satan for himself; and that is by occupying his mind and thoughts with what occupies him from continuing to think about disobedience.