Exegesis of the saying of Allah the Exalted: "And who is better in speech than one who calls to Allah and does good and says, 'Indeed, I am among the Muslims.'"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : [Fussilat 41:33].
Is the word a relative pronoun, a conditional particle, an interrogative, or what?
The student: It is a relative pronoun.
The Shaykh : Do you agree with this? He says it is a relative pronoun.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Is it interrogative? Do you agree with that?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, it is interrogative,, but this interrogation means negation, meaning: no one is better in speech than one who calls to Allah.
So if someone asks: What is the benefit of the interrogation being in the position of negation?
We said: When the interrogation is intended to mean negation, it carries a tone of challenge, meaning as if the speaker is challenging the listener, saying: Show me someone better than so-and-so?
Meaning no one is better, and if you claim that, then show me, who is better? Where is the better one?
And this is a rule that a student of knowledge should understand: whenever the interrogation comes with the meaning of negation, it carries the meaning of what? Challenge.
No one is better in speech than one who calls to Allah.
And reflect on His saying:[Fussilat 41:33] meaning: to the religion of Allah (Mighty and Majestic), he is not calling people to his own opinion, and there is a difference between a person who calls people to his own opinion and wants to defend his opinion whether he is wrong or right, and a person who calls people to the path of Allah.
The first one is not calling for guidance but for his own desire, and the second is the one who calls for guidance.
Yes, if a person calls to his opinion because it is the truth, not because it is his opinion, he may not be blamed for that. But if he defends himself and wants people to take his opinion because it is his opinion, that is a great error. And this is the one who wants people to accept his opinion because it is his opinion; he may have placed himself in the position of...
So do not feel that you are calling people to your opinion because it is your opinion, but call them to your opinion because it is the opinion of Allah and His Messenger, meaning: because it is what the opinion of Allah and His Messenger indicated. So no one is better than one who calls to Allah.
And one of the signs that a man is calling to his opinion because it is his opinion is that you find him, when people disagree with him in his independent legal reasoning, he becomes angry and may even become hostile toward them, and may use that disagreement as a means of dominance over that disagreeing person by disparaging him in gatherings and on every occasion. And this indicates that the man does not want the truth, because the person who wants the truth, when he acts upon it, excuses others when they act upon it. So for example, if you disagree with me in an opinion, it is not my right to blame you or be upset with you, just as it is not your right to blame me or be upset with me, because if I blamed you, you would yourself direct this to me and say: I blame you for disagreeing with me.
And the person who wants the truth is the one who understands the truth to the best of his ability and does not blame others when they disagree with him in matters where independent legal reasoning is permissible.
And this has many examples, among them: if you see a person who, when he stands to pray, does not place his right hand over his left hand in prayer, how many people hate this man, despise him, become hostile toward him, and speak about him in gatherings, even though this man may have disagreed with him based on evidence he had? And this is wrong. Rather, it is obligatory for you to excuse him in matters where independent legal reasoning is permissible.
Likewise, if you see a person who, when he goes down to prostration, places his hands before his knees, and you see that the stronger position is to place his knees before his hands, it is not your right to blame him for his independent legal reasoning, and to make that a ladder for speaking about him among people and disparaging him, because if you take this path, he will also take this path with you. And there will be contention, division, and mutual hatred.
And if you see a person who, when he stands for the second or fourth rak'ah in a four-rak'ah prayer, sits for a little while and then stands, and you blame him for this sitting, this is also not your right, because this man sat based on what? Based on independent legal reasoning. This is what his independent legal reasoning led him to. So if you blame him for doing what his independent legal reasoning led him to, he has the right to blame you for leaving the thing that your independent legal reasoning led you to.
So the important thing is that the one who truly calls to Allah is the one who does not call people to his opinion because it is his opinion, but calls people to the truth, even if he is the one who said it. So there is a difference between one who calls people to the truth and is the one who said it, and one who calls people to his opinion in all cases.
And who is better in speech than one who invites to Allah and does righteousness and says, "Indeed, I am of the Muslims."
ومن أحسن قولا ممن دعا إلى الله وعمل صالحا وقال إنني من المسلمينIs the word
Who
منThe student: It is a relative pronoun.
The Shaykh : Do you agree with this? He says it is a relative pronoun.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Is it interrogative? Do you agree with that?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, it is interrogative,
Who is better
من أحسنSo if someone asks: What is the benefit of the interrogation being in the position of negation?
We said: When the interrogation is intended to mean negation, it carries a tone of challenge, meaning as if the speaker is challenging the listener, saying: Show me someone better than so-and-so?
Meaning no one is better, and if you claim that, then show me, who is better? Where is the better one?
And this is a rule that a student of knowledge should understand: whenever the interrogation comes with the meaning of negation, it carries the meaning of what? Challenge.
No one is better in speech than one who calls to Allah.
And reflect on His saying:
than one who invites to Allah
ممن دعا إلى اللهThe first one is not calling for guidance but for his own desire, and the second is the one who calls for guidance.
Yes, if a person calls to his opinion because it is the truth, not because it is his opinion, he may not be blamed for that. But if he defends himself and wants people to take his opinion because it is his opinion, that is a great error. And this is the one who wants people to accept his opinion because it is his opinion; he may have placed himself in the position of...
So do not feel that you are calling people to your opinion because it is your opinion, but call them to your opinion because it is the opinion of Allah and His Messenger, meaning: because it is what the opinion of Allah and His Messenger indicated. So no one is better than one who calls to Allah.
And one of the signs that a man is calling to his opinion because it is his opinion is that you find him, when people disagree with him in his independent legal reasoning, he becomes angry and may even become hostile toward them, and may use that disagreement as a means of dominance over that disagreeing person by disparaging him in gatherings and on every occasion. And this indicates that the man does not want the truth, because the person who wants the truth, when he acts upon it, excuses others when they act upon it. So for example, if you disagree with me in an opinion, it is not my right to blame you or be upset with you, just as it is not your right to blame me or be upset with me, because if I blamed you, you would yourself direct this to me and say: I blame you for disagreeing with me.
And the person who wants the truth is the one who understands the truth to the best of his ability and does not blame others when they disagree with him in matters where independent legal reasoning is permissible.
And this has many examples, among them: if you see a person who, when he stands to pray, does not place his right hand over his left hand in prayer, how many people hate this man, despise him, become hostile toward him, and speak about him in gatherings, even though this man may have disagreed with him based on evidence he had? And this is wrong. Rather, it is obligatory for you to excuse him in matters where independent legal reasoning is permissible.
Likewise, if you see a person who, when he goes down to prostration, places his hands before his knees, and you see that the stronger position is to place his knees before his hands, it is not your right to blame him for his independent legal reasoning, and to make that a ladder for speaking about him among people and disparaging him, because if you take this path, he will also take this path with you. And there will be contention, division, and mutual hatred.
And if you see a person who, when he stands for the second or fourth rak'ah in a four-rak'ah prayer, sits for a little while and then stands, and you blame him for this sitting, this is also not your right, because this man sat based on what? Based on independent legal reasoning. This is what his independent legal reasoning led him to. So if you blame him for doing what his independent legal reasoning led him to, he has the right to blame you for leaving the thing that your independent legal reasoning led you to.
So the important thing is that the one who truly calls to Allah is the one who does not call people to his opinion because it is his opinion, but calls people to the truth, even if he is the one who said it. So there is a difference between one who calls people to the truth and is the one who said it, and one who calls people to his opinion in all cases.