In the hadith of intercession, it is stated: (they never did any good at all). Is this expressed in the sense of the general rule, like the hadith of the one who killed a hundred people, where the angels of punishment said:

The questioner : The hadith in question is the hadith of intercession. Some of the brothers mentioned to me that there is a response to the hadith of intercession, which ends with: , meaning the intercession of Allah and the mercy of Allah for a group of people who never did any good at all. He said this specifically refers to the last group, like the wording of the hadith of the one who killed the hundred, where the angels of punishment said that he never did any good at all, even though the man came repentant and had done good. So, this is a difficulty: how can it be said they never did any good at all, when this man believes in Allah and testifies that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah? How is the answer to this difficulty? Who said that this is only expressed in the sense of the general rule, that is, that they never did any good at all?

The Shaykh : ... .

The questioner : The issue is that the response to these details is that the one who abandons prayer is a disbeliever. If we say that this deed does not benefit with... if he abandons prayer.

The Shaykh : First: what is its connection to the hadith that we mentioned, that these are our brothers who used to pray and... and so on... then they intercede for the other group? What is the connection between this hadith and this...?

The questioner : Meaning his statement: i.e., it is not in its meaning.

The Shaykh : There is no... my brother, let him interpret the hadith: however he wishes, because it is not our subject now. Our subject is that this is a valid and explicit hadith that Allah - Mighty and Majestic - permitted the sincere believers from the people of Paradise to intercede for their brothers who were with them, who used to fast and pray, but we do not see them with us. So they seek permission from their Lord to intercede for them, and He permits them. The first group came out, the two groups who used to fast and pray... so they deserved to enter the Fire because of that, so they were brought out by the intercession of the righteous ones. Then they are permitted to bring out another group, this other group... or like those who prayed. So I am asking now, what is the connection of the hadith: to those who were brought out by the intercession of the righteous ones... and were not among the praying ones? What is the point of connection?

The questioner : The point of connection is that the understanding is that the second group does not negate that they are not non-prayers, it does not negate that they... .

The Shaykh : ... those who used to pray were brought out; the first group.

The questioner : Yes, and the others, does it negate...?

The Shaykh : ... of course; because those who said this phrase, "our brothers used to pray with us and fast, and we do not see them with us," interceded for them so they were brought out. When they were permitted to intercede for a second group, these are not among them... and so I am asking, what is the connection of this hadith to this?

The questioner : So here... .

The Shaykh : The classification and arrangement is what led us to use the hadith as evidence that the one who abandons prayer, if he is a believer as we said earlier in distinguishing between creedal disbelief and practical disbelief; if he is a believer in prayer but did not pray out of laziness and negligence, and not out of... denial, then these are the ones for whom intercession is made... .

The questioner : So this difficulty is resolved. The question now is directing this phrase so that it is said they never did any good at all, and no one enters Paradise except a believer.

The Shaykh : What is the meaning of "no one enters Paradise except a believer"? ... So I sometimes say: yes, and sometimes: no, no one enters Paradise except a believer with the first among the first, a complete believer, or at least his good deeds outweigh his bad deeds. But if he is a believer, but has prior sins and bad deeds, and so on; then if the will of Allah and His forgiveness do not encompass him, as Allah - Mighty and Majestic - said: ; if the forgiveness of Allah does not encompass him, he will enter the Fire to be punished as He wills; at that time, as we said in the previous hadith: ; i.e., this testimony is not the testimony with its implications except by its right, as came in the hadith: this is for the believers... but as for the disobedient believers.... The testimony that there is no god but Allah, this is faith and this is the smallest particle of faith; i.e., there was no commitment to the rights of the testimony that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. If a person commits to these rights, he may enter Paradise "in transit" with the first among the first, or he may enter it after the Reckoning and be... a type of punishment, but he does not enter the Fire, and so on. So there are, importantly, degrees. But if we assume the most wretched of people died while testifying that there is no god but Allah; then this testimony benefits him... and does not make him among those who remain in the Fire forever. So when we say: that the one who abandons prayer is a disbeliever; i.e., an apostate from his religion; what is disbelief? What is disbelief?
It is not possible to imagine a true scholar who does not agree with this detail that we derived from Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah; practical disbelief and creedal disbelief. This distinction is necessary, otherwise, whoever does not adopt this distinction must be associated with the Khawarij. Those who declare the one who abandons prayer a disbeliever have no absolutely conclusive argument in the matter except the apparent texts. Well, these apparent texts are opposed by the apparent texts of others, so reconciliation between them is necessary. How do we reconcile? We reconcile the one who abandons prayer while believing in it, acknowledging its legitimacy, and acknowledging in the depths of his heart that he is shortchanging Allah - Blessed and Exalted is He - in neglecting it; this is without doubt... But to equate this with that polytheist who does not acknowledge prayer or zakat, I am very surprised how we equate the one whose disbelief is creedal and practical? The polytheist is a disbeliever by creedal and practical disbelief; i.e., he denies the Islamic Shari'ah in its entirety, including prayer; so he does not pray, so he is a disbeliever by creedal and practical disbelief. That Muslim may pray sometimes, as is the reality with many Muslims who abandon prayer; how do we say this is like that? My brother, this is not like that, this completely contradicts that in creed. This polytheist does not testify that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, nor to its implications, he does not believe in all of that. But this Muslim, the open sinner who goes out from the obedience of Allah and the obedience of the Messenger of Allah, contradicts him fundamentally, for he testifies that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and believes in all its implications, but the desire of the soul overcame him, the love of money overcame him, and so on, from excuses that are not excuses for him to abandon prayer, but they are excuses that intercede for him with Allah on the Day of Resurrection that I believed in Allah and His Messenger, but I was short. So equating this and that is without doubt injustice, and it is a biased and unfair scale.
This, along with the many, many other pieces of evidence we referred to in previous lessons, indicates that merely saying: does not mean he apostatized from his religion; because does not mean he apostatized from his religion. Expressions like this are very common, and very common indeed, in the hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). So what leads us to interpret as meaning: he apostatized from his religion, and as meaning: he did not apostatize from his religion? What is it? I say: these two may coincide, or they may differ and diverge. is apostasy from his religion due to denial, while is denial of this ruling, and he is equated with the first; that is, he is a disbeliever. is one who admits to leaving the prayer and considers it not permissible, which is practical disbelief, and we do not declare him a disbeliever. , so please forgive me, I do not know this one; if you remind me, yes, by Allah, the habit overcame me. This is not disbelief in the doctrinal sense; this is practical disbelief. The hadiths and texts all correspond to one another, and they compel us, intellectually and doctrinally, not to fall into confusion: here is one who apostatized from his religion, and here is one who did not apostatize from his religion. He believes that this... no, here, "disbelieved" means he disobeyed Allah (Mighty and Majestic) and committed practical disbelief, and so on, and there are many, many other things.
Therefore, I was surprised by your statement that this person never performed any good deed, linking it to the topic of the hadith of intercession. No, we observed the detail mentioned in this authentic hadith, which fully indicates that there were people being tormented in the Fire who were praying, and they were taken out. They entered the Fire not because they left the prayer, but perhaps they committed unlawful sexual intercourse, perhaps they stole, perhaps they consumed usury or interest, and so on. They may be taken out of the Fire, as came in some hadiths: , but at the same time, they were with the praying people. So their righteous, praying brothers said: "Our Lord, we do not see our brothers who used to pray with us." So Allah (Mighty and Majestic) was gracious and commanded them to intercede, so they interceded for them. They said: "Our brothers, who did not mention... they used to pray with us and fast, so take out those you know from among them." Take them out... This detail is what led us to argue with this hadith. We did not previously argue with this hadith. We have many, many other things, but this hadith, in reality, brought light upon light, clarifying to those who were unaware that there is exaggeration in this issue by some shaykhs and scholars. It is sufficient for you to know that the majority of the mujtahid scholars, even Imam Ahmad, to whom the view is attributed that one who leaves the prayer out of laziness is declared a disbeliever, has many narrations that I mentioned...

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : They say: if this person apostatized from his religion by leaving the prayer, when will he believe? When will he become a believer if he apostatized from his religion? He must renew his faith. No, he says that he is ordered to make up the prayer, and that is all. I even recall in a narration—and I forget a lot—that if he has a job he needs to earn a living, he is allowed to leave the prayer, meaning: make it up when it becomes easy for him. This is Imam Ahmad, the Imam of the Sunnah. Therefore, I see that the issue was taken with more severity than necessary.