From here the beginning of the tape repeats ! ! ! ! ! ! with the completion of some parts of the tape at the end

The Shaykh : He treated himself and others with material medicine. Turning away from material medicine may cause the one who turns away to be counted among those who cling to [superstitions] or the Sufis, and this is, of course, not permissible in Islam.

The questioner : Reliance upon Allah, is it ... .

The Shaykh : This issue does not give you [a simple answer], but regarding reliance upon Allah, the matter involves detail. In reality, you must know this detail, for it is a matter of great importance. Reliance upon Allah is obligatory; it is one of the foundations of the Shari'ah and is indispensable. However, reliance must be accompanied by taking the means, as we hinted at earlier. Yet there is detail in the discussion of these means. Some of these means are certain in that they are a cure and a medicine; in that case, it is obligatory to take them. Let us give a very clear example: a man has a cut in his artery. It is not fitting for him to say, "I am relying on Allah," and not to bandage the wound or tie the artery, saying, "I am relying on Allah." That is ignorance. Rather, he should be told, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said in a context not relevant here: So tie the artery and bandage the wound. This is a known, certain means that prevents the flow of blood, which, if it continued with its owner, would end in death. There are medicines of a second rank where it is more likely than not that the user benefits from taking them; here, it is fitting to take them. Then there are medicines of a third rank where it is not likely that they are beneficial, and this type is not to be taken. Here, reliance comes in. In reality, by my personal experience and knowledge, people today are in the greatest need of this, because I know that people cling to material medical drugs in the path of treatment, even if they are illusions; the prescription ends the matter. Here, what I mentioned regarding reliance occurs. And here, what I said earlier applies: that a person should use the spiritual Prophetic medicine. So, reliance upon Allah is not absolute; rather, it is according to circumstances. In the first case, it is obligatory to take the means along with reliance. In the second case, the means is taken because its benefit is more likely than not, and reliance is necessary. In the third case, it is not permissible to take that means because it is an illusory means, a means similar to those that the people of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance adopted and imagined good from, such as taking an omen as a bad sign. In fact, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) classified this type as the third type, in that it is not fitting to take it as a means. And the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) returned to pure reliance in this case: that you ask your Muslim brother to make du'a' for you so that Allah the Exalted may heal you, meaning you ask him for ruqyah. Here, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) preferred reliance over asking for ruqyah. This is what came explicitly in his (peace and blessings be upon him) statement in the hadith agreed upon by al-Bukhari and Muslim, when he (peace and blessings be upon him) mentioned: Who are they?" "They are those who do not seek ruqyah, do not use cauterization, do not take an omen as a bad sign, and they rely upon their Lord." So, although taking an omen as a bad sign is one of the customs of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) invalidated, he described these people as not taking an omen as a bad sign, pairing this with seeking ruqyah. Not taking an omen as a bad sign is self-evident for a Muslim, because it is one of the matters of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance. But it does not seem, at first glance, to a Muslim that asking his righteous Muslim brother for ruqyah and du'a' to be healed by Allah from the affliction in him is equivalent to taking an omen as a bad sign. But the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) paired ruqyah, or seeking ruqyah, with the more correct meaning regarding its contradiction with prescribed reliance, with taking an omen as a bad sign. The reason for this, as some of the investigators say, is that when you ask your Muslim brother to make du'a' for you to be healed, you do not know whether this du'a' will be answered or not; this is a matter of doubt. Here, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) tells you: rely on Allah and depend on Allah to heal you and cure you. And he grouped with these three things that contradict reliance, treatment by cauterization with fire, saying: "They are those who do not seek ruqyah and do not use cauterization," even though cauterization is among the best of what you treat yourselves with, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said in some authentic hadiths. The reason here contradicts the reason that negated the legitimacy of seeking ruqyah. The reason for negating the legitimacy of seeking ruqyah is that you depend on a means that is not the stronger position, whereas here the means is the stronger position, but it involves the use of fire, which involves torture. And so, when the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) mentioned in the hadith of al-Bukhari the three things among the best of what you treat yourselves with, he mentioned cauterization with them, saying: "And I forbade my Ummah from cauterization" for this reason. In conclusion, reliance must be accompanied by taking the stronger means, let alone the certain means. That is enough for now, Professor, because the issue will not end.

The Shaykh : A questioner asks here: What are the circumstances in which it is permissible to place money in the bank? He requests detail. The answer is: It is not permissible, and there is no room for detail. It is obligatory for Muslims not to deal with banks as much as they are able to do so, let alone that it is not permissible for them to place their money in banks such that the bank manages this money and the bank's foundation is the money of these depositors in the banks. This is cooperation in evil, and this is not permissible in Islam.

The Shaykh : A person has become convinced that image-making is not permissible. Is he allowed to keep some old pictures for the sake of memory, knowing that he does not display them often? This question is a strange matter. If we have become convinced that image-making is not permissible—neither acquiring it, nor making it, nor the like—then why keep it in our homes? They claim it is for memory. This memory, or this type of memory, is not an Islamic memory; it is a disbeliever's foreign memory. They deal with these models of these memories: they make a trip, they take a picture of one standing on a rock, standing in front of a tree, and so on. That is memory. But the correct Islamic memory is mutual advice and mutual remembrance in knowledge, dealing with good and beautiful morals. This is the true memory, and this is what the Muslim benefits from. Therefore, I believe that every Muslim youth who is afflicted in his time with this disbeliever's foreign memory and keeps pictures of his friends should hasten to tear them up and not keep them, because keeping them gives, at the very least, the impression that he sees image-making as permissible. Even if he says, "I am convinced that image-making is forbidden," this acquisition, as it is said: "Every vessel emits what is in it". If this acquisition is genuine, he will hasten to tear up every picture he has, except for what is necessary. No one should go to some of the listeners and say, "We say: tear up the passports and IDs and the like," because you will be forced to add, meaning another necessity, such as taking a picture a second time. The first time is enough for you. "Necessities permit the prohibited" is true, but "Necessity is estimated by its measure". And we know from the biography of the Salaf, and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) with them, with the great difference between us and them: we lived in an Islamic atmosphere, and yet, unfortunately, we do not live in an Islamic atmosphere. As for them, they lived in a pre-Islamic atmosphere, then Islam came to them and treated many of their evils, including intoxicants. When the prohibition of intoxicants was revealed, what did they do with the intoxicants they had, which they had bought when it was in the category of permissibility or the category of the lawful? They poured it out until the roads in the city flowed with intoxicants. No one among them said, "My brother, you are excused," because it was not under a legal ruling at that time. As for image-making, it has been one thousand and four hundred years since the rulings and hadiths from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) have come one after another that every image-maker is in the Fire, that the angels do not enter a house in which there is a picture or a dog. Then we live in a non-Islamic atmosphere, as I hinted at earlier. Why? Because Muslims do not know their Islam; they do not know their religion. This was the case, then Allah guided whom He willed of the Muslim youth. It is upon them to improve their repentance, to abandon all these pictures, and to tear them up thoroughly, if they are truly convinced of their prohibition.

The Shaykh : The questioner asks here: Is it permissible for a mother to sleep with her grown daughter in the same bed and under the same blanket? May Allah reward you. I say that there is no specific text, of course, answering a question like this, but by quoting from other texts, we can say that it is not permissible for a mother to sleep with her daughter. We derive this ruling from the command of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) to separate children in their beds when they reach the age of ten, whether they are males with males or females with females. This is because Satan may stir up desire between people of the same sex, as is known from some women regarding what is known as lesbianism. It is possible that Satan may intervene between the mother and the daughter and make such a bad act attractive to them. So, in the context of blocking the means to harm, we say it is not permissible for a mother to sleep with a grown daughter who is capable of desire.

The Shaykh : The question here, which is the last one, Allah willing, tonight, is: What is the ruling on a Muslim claiming affiliation with someone other than his father? We mean by this that a wife takes her husband's family name and drops her father's family name. This is not permissible, of course, for two reasons. The first and clearest reason is that this is a European practice. The second and stronger reason is that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said and in another narration and similar to that, which is authentic. Someone might say that this affiliation does not mean disavowing the father. But I say this is like verbal disbelief and disbelief in the heart. Disbelief in the heart is apostasy, while verbal disbelief is a sin. If you, O Muslim, know that it is not permissible in the Shari'ah for a Muslim to claim affiliation with someone other than his father, even if you do not mean to disavow your father, you should not do that. Especially since the first argument I raised is that this method of affiliation is the way of the disbelievers, whom Allah (Mighty and Majestic) described in the Qur'an as those who do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Whoever does not want to see distressing dreams should not sleep between the graves. What is the matter with this state?

The questioner : It is part of it.

The Shaykh : The Jordanian system is like this now. It is strange. This is new.

The questioner : Yes

The questioner : They put it under her father's name, but now it is happening like what started, where So-and-so takes her husband's name.

The questioner : Her husband's family.

The Shaykh : This is the first time I have heard of this. In any case, this is not permissible, and unfortunately, this is not the first violation of the Islamic Shari'ah.

The questioner : ... .

The questioner : In the case where her father...

The Shaykh : Your question, my brother, is well known in its ruling. If one is in dire necessity, then dire necessity permits the forbidden. But we are talking about the Islamic methodology that Muslim rulers should follow.

The Shaykh : He asks: What is the evidence for the prohibition of shaking hands with a non-mahram woman? This research is long, and I have spoken about it repeatedly. I will summarize the answer by saying that the evidence for it is the saying of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him): Do you not understand? "Batsh" means in the colloquial language, hitting. The intended meaning of "batsh" is touching. And this second word, "touching," came in another narration, even though there is weakness in its chain, but this is the meaning. And the hand commits zina, and its zina is touching. So, listening, looking, touching, and walking—yes, all of that is forbidden by the Shari'ah in the context of blocking the means to harm. And there is explicit text, both in words and deeds, regarding shaking hands. As for the words, it is the saying of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him): He said this in response to a woman who wanted to pledge allegiance to the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) by shaking hands, as the men did. He said, "I do not shake hands with women." So you feel with me that the one who said "I do not shake hands with women" is the purest of people and the farthest from Satan being able to whisper evil to him. And this purest of people, in any position, said, "I do not shake hands with women" who pledge allegiance to Islam. So how is it permissible for anyone other than the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) to shake hands with women, not in such an Islamic atmosphere, but in an atmosphere of greeting and affection, and so on, as Shawqi said: "A glance, then a smile, then a greeting, then words, then an appointment, then a meeting" Therefore, in the context of blocking the means to harm, it is not permissible for a Muslim to shake hands with a non-mahram woman. It is not permissible for a Muslim to shake hands with a non-mahram woman. And all that is said about permissibilities is to smooth over the bad reality, unfortunately. And this is enough, and praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds.

The Shaykh : And we seek refuge in Allah from the evils of our souls and from the badness of our deeds. Whom Allah guides, there is no one who can mislead him, and whom He misleads, there is no one who can guide him. I bear witness that there is no god but Allah alone, with no partner, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and His Messenger. As for what follows, the best of speech is the speech of Allah, and the best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad (may Allah the Exalted send blessings and peace upon him and his family). And the worst of matters are their innovations, and every innovation is a religious innovation, and every religious innovation is misguidance, and every misguidance is in the Fire.

The Shaykh : The topic of the lesson tonight is the prohibition of hanging amulets and charms. Charms (huruuz) is the plural of harz, which is anything taken to protect a thing, whether it be a human, an animal, or an inanimate object, and the like. Amulets (tamaamim) is the plural of tamimah, which is anything hung to ward off, for example, the evil eye. These charms and amulets are types among many types of shirk (associating partners with Allah). These are the types by which the Muslim community has been afflicted, particularly in the later centuries. You will hear some authentic hadiths regarding the prohibition, indeed the strong warning, against them, and regarding the fact that this is considered shirk. The first hadith in the book has weakness in it, so we avoid it. As for the one following it, it is authentic. It is the statement: “And from 'Uqbah, meaning ibn 'Amir, that he came in a group of ten to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). So he pledged allegiance to nine of them and held back from one of them. They said, ‘What is the matter with him?’ He said, ‘There is an amulet on his upper arm.’ So the man cut off the amulet, and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) pledged allegiance with him. Then he said: ” It was narrated by Ahmad and al-Hakim, and the wording is his. The narrators of Ahmad are trustworthy. He explains the strange words of the hadith by saying: “The tamimah is said to be a bead that they used to hang, believing that it would ward off calamities from them. And believing this opinion is ignorance and misguidance, for there is no protector except Allah, and no one who wards off harm other than Him.” Al-Khattabi mentioned this. We return to the hadith. 'Uqbah came, or a group of ten came, to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) to pledge allegiance to him. So he (peace and blessings be upon him) pledged allegiance to nine of them and held back from one man among them. They said, “What is the matter with him?” Meaning, they turned to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) with the question: “Why, O Messenger of Allah, did you refrain from pledging allegiance to this man, when he is a Muslim like us?” He (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “There is an amulet on his upper arm.” This man’s Islam is incomplete. Why? Because he had hung an amulet on his upper arm as a charm. So when this man, whom the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had refrained from pledging allegiance to, realized his sin and his error, he cut off the amulet. So he (peace and blessings be upon him) pledged allegiance with him after this Muslim man responded to the ruling of Islam. And he (peace and blessings be upon him) clarified the ruling on this hanging of this amulet by his statement: So hanging amulets and charms is shirk; it is a type of shirk. It may be major shirk, and it may be minor shirk. This varies depending on the one who hangs the amulet. If the one who hangs it believes that this amulet wards off harm and prevents, for example, the harm of the evil eye, that it does so in itself, then there is no doubt that this is major shirk. This is as you heard from the author’s commentary on this hadith, that there is no protector, no benefactor, and no harmer except Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He). So whoever attributes harm or benefit to any of His creations, that is shirk in lordship, let alone shirk in worship. For any thing, even if it were a human, or even if it were an angel, from what Allah (Mighty and Majestic) has created and given many and strong capabilities, the Muslim must not forget that all of that is from Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He). That all of that is from Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He). Therefore, it is among the authentic, established invocations from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) that the Muslim’s saying “La hawla wa la quwwata illa billah” (There is no power and no strength except with Allah) is a treasure from the treasures of Paradise, because it gathers tawhid (the oneness of Allah). This is “La hawla wa la quwwata illa billah.” So whoever attributes any of the power or strength to other than Allah (Mighty and Majestic), then that is shirk in His lordship and His creation (Blessed and Exalted is He). And if he attributed it to a revered creation, such as the angels, the messengers, and the prophets, what do you think if that power was attributed to a mute, deaf stone, and he believes that it wards off harm? I say that hanging amulets is sometimes major shirk and sometimes minor shirk. It is major shirk, as we mentioned earlier, if benefit or harm is attributed to this hung thing. But if he does not believe that, but rather he believes that it is a cause for warding off harm and injury, for example, then in that case his shirk is minor shirk, because he attributed to the Shari'ah what is not in it, and claimed in a matter, and in a hanging, that it wards off harm or injury without there being evidence for that in the Shari'ah. And from this you learn the distance of many Muslims today from tawhid, or at least from the Shari'ah, when we find them taking various types of charms and amulets. So here is a father or mother who places a bead, for example, a blue one or a hand, on the chest of their child to prevent the evil eye. There is a man...