The Shaykh : The hadith, which is like the previous hadith, is the statement of the author, al-Hafiz al-Mundhiri (may Allah have mercy on him): And from Abu Sa'id
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : The hadith, which is like the previous hadith, is the statement of the author, al-Hafiz al-Mundhiri (may Allah have mercy on him): And from Abu Sa'id (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: Sahih al-Bukhari 3478; that is, He bestowed and gave him wealth, Sahih al-Bukhari 3478. It was narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim as well. He explains that strange word by saying: Raghasa: with the ra' open and the ghayn with a dot after a sin without a dot, Raghasahu: Abu 'Ubaydah said: Its meaning is that He increased it for him - that is, the wealth - and blessed him in it.
So this hadith is like the previous hadith, and it was from the narration of Abu Hurayrah, as I recall, yes, and this indicates that this hadith, despite the validity of its chain through its primary route, is not a strange, solitary hadith, but rather a group of Companions participated in its narration; the author mentioned two of them: the first is Abu Hurayrah, and the other is Abu Sa'id here.
And we asked ourselves: What is the answer to this hadith, whose apparent meaning is that this man who made the mentioned bequest, which is an unjust bequest, apparently disbelieved in Allah (Mighty and Majestic) and doubted His power to resurrect him ... and to hold him accountable for that reckoning he deserves? So we presented an answer in the previous lesson, but we did not find it satisfactory, of course, and we promised to bring the correct, convincing answer - if Allah wills. This man, when he made this bequest to be burned and his body's ashes scattered in the sea and in the air, there is no doubt that this act indicates disbelief; so how did Allah (Mighty and Majestic) not treat him according to his disbelief but rather forgave him? And we said in the previous lesson: Disbelief is not forgiven; by the evidence of the previous verse:[An-Nisa 4:48] How did He forgive this?
We said: Some might say that the verse denies that Allah forgives shirk, so this is not shirk but rather kufr (disbelief). So we clarified for you that there is no difference in the Shari'ah between kufr and shirk; every kufr is shirk and every shirk is kufr; contrary to what some scholars, both past and present, hold. And on this basis, the verse:[An-Nisa 4:48] means: that he disbelieves in it; whether the type of shirk, from the linguistic perspective, is actually shirk, taking a partner with Allah, or it is kufr by denying something of what Allah legislated or informed about ... We did not find that answer satisfactory; so what is the correct answer? It is what the Imam al-Khattabi and al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani and others of the commentators and memorizers answered, they said: "That this man ...".
Amongst the people preceding your age, there was a man whom Allah had given a lot of money.
إنَّ رجلًا كانَ قبلَكم رَغَسَه الله مالًاWhile he was in his death-bed, he called his sons and said, 'What type of father have I been to you? They replied, 'You have been a good father.' He said, 'I have never done a single good deed; so when I die, burn me, crush my body, and scatter the resulting ashes on a windy day.' His sons did accordingly, but Allah gathered his particles and asked (him), 'What made you do so?' He replied, "Fear of you.' So Allah bestowed His Mercy upon him.
فقال لِبَنيه لمَّا حُضِر : أيُّ أبٍ كنتُ لكُم ؟ قالوا : خيرَ أبٍ . قال: فإنِّني لَم أعمَلْ خيرًا قَطُّ ، فإذا مُتَّ فأحرِقوني ، ثُمَّ اسحَقُوني ، ثُمَّ ذَرُّوني في يومٍ عاصِفٍ ، فَفعَلوا ، فَجمَعهُ الله ؛ فقال : ما حَملَك ؟ قال : مخَافَتُك . فتلَقَّاه برَحمَتِهSo this hadith is like the previous hadith, and it was from the narration of Abu Hurayrah, as I recall, yes, and this indicates that this hadith, despite the validity of its chain through its primary route, is not a strange, solitary hadith, but rather a group of Companions participated in its narration; the author mentioned two of them: the first is Abu Hurayrah, and the other is Abu Sa'id here.
And we asked ourselves: What is the answer to this hadith, whose apparent meaning is that this man who made the mentioned bequest, which is an unjust bequest, apparently disbelieved in Allah (Mighty and Majestic) and doubted His power to resurrect him ... and to hold him accountable for that reckoning he deserves? So we presented an answer in the previous lesson, but we did not find it satisfactory, of course, and we promised to bring the correct, convincing answer - if Allah wills. This man, when he made this bequest to be burned and his body's ashes scattered in the sea and in the air, there is no doubt that this act indicates disbelief; so how did Allah (Mighty and Majestic) not treat him according to his disbelief but rather forgave him? And we said in the previous lesson: Disbelief is not forgiven; by the evidence of the previous verse:
Indeed, Allah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills
إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَغْفِرُ أَنْ يُشْرَكَ بِهِ وَيَغْفِرُ مَا دُونَ ذَلِكَ لِمَنْ يَشَاءُWe said: Some might say that the verse denies that Allah forgives shirk, so this is not shirk but rather kufr (disbelief). So we clarified for you that there is no difference in the Shari'ah between kufr and shirk; every kufr is shirk and every shirk is kufr; contrary to what some scholars, both past and present, hold. And on this basis, the verse:
Indeed, Allah does not forgive association
إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَغْفِرُ أَنْ يُشْرَكَ
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.