Narrating sensational stories on the pulpits
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
We hear from some preachers or orators that when they address certain topics, such as the topic of satellite dishes and warning against them, they cite, for example, a sensational story: that a man committed zina with his daughter, or a brother committed zina with his sister. Is there any issue with citing such stories, even if they actually happened, when they are presented to people or heard by the community?
I see that these disgraceful stories should not be mentioned, whether regarding satellite dishes or otherwise; because if a person hears them, he will imagine that this matter is widespread, meaning this is a general issue, whereas it is a specific one. However, it is possible in a gathering for a person to mention them to explain their harms, specifically regarding satellite dishes. But generally on the pulpit, this is a matter of concern. Furthermore, the attendees may be from outside the country, and one of them might imagine that this is happening in the country itself, which would result in a bad reputation. So I see that they should not be mentioned, and it is sufficient to rely on the authentic hadith, which is the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): (No servant whom Allah has entrusted with a group of people dies while he is deceiving them, except that Allah will forbid him Paradise) It is said to the head of the family who is able to prevent the satellite dish from entering his home: Has Allah entrusted him with a group of people?Answer: Yes, without a doubt.
And if he is able to prevent this satellite dish and does not prevent it, while witnessing the atrocities in it, is he considered a deceiver to his family or not? He is considered a deceiver to his family.Therefore: The hadith applies to him: (No servant whom Allah has entrusted with a group of people dies while he is deceiving them, except that Allah will forbid him Paradise) He falls under this hadith without a doubt. But do we testify to this specific man? That is what is prohibited; because the texts of warning are not applied to every specific individual, just as the texts of promise are not applied to every specific individual. Do we not know that whoever is killed in the path of Allah is a martyr?! So if a man is killed in a battle between the Muslims and the disbelievers, do we say: So-and-so is a martyr specifically? No, because specifying is not generalizing.
So this man who kept the satellite dish while being able to prevent it, or who brought it into the house himself, if he dies, he is a deceiver to his charge. No one disputes this matter regarding him. He falls under the generality of the hadith. But what is prohibited is that you testify to him specifically, so you say, for example, to your neighbors if their father died and he had brought in the satellite dish: Your father is forbidden from Paradise. This is haram.Because the scholars say: It is the methodology of the people of the Sunnah and the community that we do not testify to a specific person with Paradise or Hellfire, except for those to whom the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) testified.
I see that these disgraceful stories should not be mentioned, whether regarding satellite dishes or otherwise; because if a person hears them, he will imagine that this matter is widespread, meaning this is a general issue, whereas it is a specific one. However, it is possible in a gathering for a person to mention them to explain their harms, specifically regarding satellite dishes. But generally on the pulpit, this is a matter of concern. Furthermore, the attendees may be from outside the country, and one of them might imagine that this is happening in the country itself, which would result in a bad reputation. So I see that they should not be mentioned, and it is sufficient to rely on the authentic hadith, which is the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): (No servant whom Allah has entrusted with a group of people dies while he is deceiving them, except that Allah will forbid him Paradise) It is said to the head of the family who is able to prevent the satellite dish from entering his home: Has Allah entrusted him with a group of people?Answer: Yes, without a doubt.
And if he is able to prevent this satellite dish and does not prevent it, while witnessing the atrocities in it, is he considered a deceiver to his family or not? He is considered a deceiver to his family.Therefore: The hadith applies to him: (No servant whom Allah has entrusted with a group of people dies while he is deceiving them, except that Allah will forbid him Paradise) He falls under this hadith without a doubt. But do we testify to this specific man? That is what is prohibited; because the texts of warning are not applied to every specific individual, just as the texts of promise are not applied to every specific individual. Do we not know that whoever is killed in the path of Allah is a martyr?! So if a man is killed in a battle between the Muslims and the disbelievers, do we say: So-and-so is a martyr specifically? No, because specifying is not generalizing.
So this man who kept the satellite dish while being able to prevent it, or who brought it into the house himself, if he dies, he is a deceiver to his charge. No one disputes this matter regarding him. He falls under the generality of the hadith. But what is prohibited is that you testify to him specifically, so you say, for example, to your neighbors if their father died and he had brought in the satellite dish: Your father is forbidden from Paradise. This is haram.Because the scholars say: It is the methodology of the people of the Sunnah and the community that we do not testify to a specific person with Paradise or Hellfire, except for those to whom the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) testified.