Drawing Attention to the Hadith (Actions are by Intentions) and Giving Examples Thereof

Many people read and repeat the hadith with which Imam al-Bukhari opened his book, Sahih al-Bukhari, namely the hadith of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) Many of us read this hadith, but they do not pay attention to the precise jurisprudential rulings that can be derived from it, including the one we are currently addressing. I will give an example of this, which I read in one of the commentaries on this hadith: A husband traveled away from his wife and was absent for as long as Allah willed, then he returned to her at night. He entered the house, went to the bed, and approached his wife, which is a natural thing for a husband who has missed his wife. When morning came, he found that it was not his wife, but a stranger to him. We are not concerned with the details, because this can happen; it could be the woman's sister, her paternal aunt's daughter, her maternal aunt's daughter, his paternal aunt's daughter, his maternal aunt's daughter, and so on. Did he commit a forbidden act? The answer is no. He satisfied his desire, but his intention was not to commit a forbidden act, but to approach what is lawful, and in his belief, he was approaching his lawful right. But later it became clear that he had approached what is forbidden. Will he be punished? The answer is no. Take the opposite example: A husband has a wife, but as it is said, "Birds fall with their own kind." No sooner had the husband left his house than the wife also left after him. Each of them was seeking the forbidden, then Allah the Exalted decreed that the two met in the house of fornication, and one of them approached the other. When the lights were turned on, the husband was facing his wife. Did he commit a forbidden act or a lawful one? A forbidden act, even though he approached his lawful right. How did the case differ? So, regarding this money that you take, correct your intention in it. If you take it as a wage, just as you take the wage for any physical work, then what you are doing is not material, but it is worship. It is forbidden for you to take a wage for this worship. And here comes the second hadith, which one might thinkThe questioner : contradicts the hadith Here, when you take this money as a wage for religious knowledge, then the hadith of the bow comes in. However, if you take this money in one of the prescribed meanings, as we mentioned at the beginning of the answer, that money may be given in exchange for something or in exchange for nothing. You know that in the early Islamic conquests, some of the Caliphs, when wealth expanded during their caliphate, assigned a fixed salary to every Muslim that was not in exchange for any work. Also, before the circle of wealth coming to the Rightly Guided Caliph expanded, some rulers would assign them a salary. This is called a reward (ju'alah), and it is one of the chapters of jurisprudence and hadith; there is a book or chapter on the reward (ju'alah). The first Caliph after the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), as you know, was Abu Bakr al-Siddiq. They assigned him a reward (ju'alah). Why? Because he had turned away from his work, his buying and selling, and his trade, due to the Muslims' entrusting him with the administration of the Muslim state. So they assigned him a reward (ju'alah). And although Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) was in righteousness, piety, and fear of Allah Blessed and Exalted is He, and came immediately after the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), he did not hesitate to say to those around him from the people of the Shura (council), "What you have assigned to me is not sufficient for me." Is it permissible to call this a wage that Abu Bakr al-Siddiq takes in exchange for performing the duty of managing the affairs of the state? The answer is no. This is a reward (ju'alah). This is now a salary for him. The names are not important; the meanings are important. Therefore, the very clear example is: The reciter teaches people the Qur'an, the hadith scholar teaches people the hadith, and the jurist teaches people jurisprudence. These are acts of worship. If the intention in them is not money—let us set money aside for now—and the intention is another meaning that does not align with sincerity to Allah in this work, his work is nullified, as came in the authentic hadith that its first narrator from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was unable to recite it in order except after fainting time after time due to the horror of this hadith. And it is his saying (peace and blessings be upon him) It is Abu Hurayrah who narrated this hadith, and it is in *Sahih Muslim*. It was said to him, "You narrated to us long ago the hadith of the three, so repeat it for us." So he prepared to narrate it, and he fainted the first time, the second time, and the third time. He was able to gather himself and strengthen himself to narrate this hadith. Why? Because of the severity in it. Three types of people who, in general, are the best of Allah's creation if they were sincere in what Allah the Exalted distinguished them with among His creation: the scholar with his knowledge, the rich man with his wealth, and the fighter with his strength and jihad. So Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said, "I heard the Messenger of Allah, or he said, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said" This is the apparent meaning. And it is said to him, "By Allah, He knows best what is in his heart and what is in his intention" He did not know that he was taking a salary or wage. This is the crux of the hadith: "He only taught so that people would say, 'What Allah willed, so-and-so is a scholar.'" It came in the hadith Meaning, what you sought and aimed for by presiding over gatherings and teaching people is only that people talk about how so-and-so is a scholar. You have obtained it. You took your wage in this world. Take your wage now in the Hereafter. From the scholar? The one about whom it was said in the Noble Qur'an This is a descent into the depths. Why? Because he was not sincere in his knowledge and its explanation to Allah. The fighter is like this, and the rich man is like this. Each of them is brought and it is said to the fighter Also, this one took his wage in this world. Likewise. This was not for the sake of money. He was full of money, satiated with money, and yet he was thrown into the Fire because he spent so that people would say, "So-and-so is generous." And it was said Abu Hurayrah said So, the criterion is what is in the heart. Whoever teaches for the sake of the dirham, the dinar, or fame among people, or similar material meanings, is the one who is forbidden, and it is the wage that is not permissible. And upon this, the hadith of the bow is applied.