The word "Abu Malik" regarding the issue of sovereignty, and the clarification that the phrase "sovereignty belongs to Allah" is an innovation.

Abu Malik: In one, the British brother who came, the recording when he came from Britain, the brother Shahr al-Din.

The Shaykh : Yes.
Abu Malik: Yes, indeed, so we spoke; he had asked me, he focused on the concept of the Imamate.

The Shaykh : Yes.
Abu Malik: And what some Islamic preachers call "the issue of sovereignty."

The Shaykh: Yes.
Abu Malik: Sovereignty belongs to Allah, and what...

The Shaykh: Okay, where do we stop here now?

Another questioner: Right away, my Shaykh.

The Shaykh: Where is the arena they are talking about?

The questioner: No, no, it is not here, my Shaykh.
Abu Malik: Clearly this one.

Another questioner : This...

The Shaykh: This fortress, yes.

The questioner : ... .

Another questioner : This...

The questioner: These fortresses?

The Shaykh: Okay, is this not Saddam's mosque?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: Okay, what does it look like?

Another questioner: The expansion.
...
Abu Malik: I was speaking about a concept, about the Imamate and from, and the conditions of the Imamate, and among what I said: I said that we, of course, among its conditions is that one must be of Quraysh lineage.

The Shaykh: Yes.
Abu Malik: In the text of the hadith, I said, again I forgot the exact phrase, what I said, I said: If it were permissible for a non-Qurayshi to be an Imam, it would be right for us to say that the Imam in this time is Shaykh Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, yes, indeed, so we said: He is an Imam and not the Imam, he is an Imam and he is greater than that Imam.

The questioner: ... meaning I have heard your viewpoint more than once, so we want - may Allah reward you with good - now the detail in this; for this, this word you do not see it from the linguistic side or the legal side or so, perhaps you now hinted ... .
Abu Malik: First, as this - also - is a benefit we gained from our Shaykh now - may Allah reward him with good - in this journey; that this word is a recent word, and it is not known among the scholars of the Salaf; the word "sovereignty belongs to Allah" is an innovation, and it is among the words that are emphasized in this period of time, and I believe it did not appear except in the last half of the century, so as for before that, the word sovereignty was not known at all, and if you read the books of jurisprudence, the Sunnah, and history, you will not find the word "sovereignty" at all, despite the fact that a time came when the Fatimids ruled and a caliph among their caliphs ruled who is known as "al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah," so he did not say: he said: al-Hakim bi-Amr, even these did not name themselves except with this name, the name attributed with this long attribution "al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah," and he did not name himself "al-Hakim bi-Allah" or "al-Hakim li-Allah" or so, "al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah," and perhaps this - also - is what draws attention to the fact that even though they were deviant in their beliefs, they did not intend by the naming that the naming be taken against them, perhaps it was attached to them in history and harmed them after them, so I say this is one, the first, meaning that this word was not known among the righteous Salaf, then when we say: "sovereignty"; sovereignty is an attribution to what? An attribution to the ruler; is that not so? Okay, when we say attribution to the ruler; who is the ruler? Of course they said: "sovereignty belongs to Allah," I wonder when we say: "sovereignty belongs to Allah," is it a correct attribution that indicates to us the intended meaning, meaning what that originator or founder or speaker of this word intended, the first one who said it? I do not say that the meaning is realized by this word; because the word ruler.

The Shaykh: What is this, Abu 'Abdullah?

Another questioner: This - my Shaykh - is the stadium ... Irbid city, the city of al-Hasan.

The Shaykh: ... the entrance to Irbid?
Abu Malik: ...

The Shaykh: All of this was not in my time, all of this is new.
Abu Malik: Years, my Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Yes?
Abu Malik: Years, this, from three or four years.

The Shaykh: Okay, it has been a while since I came!
Abu Malik: Yes, that is right.
So we say that the word sovereignty does not convey this meaning; because the attribution to it is an incorrect attribution, when you say: "the ruler"; of course who is the ruler? If the intended meaning here is Allah - Mighty and Majestic - .

Another questioner: ... on the right.

The Shaykh : On the right.

Another questioner : At length...
Abu Malik: ... a name among the names of Allah? It is not among the names of Allah, unless we derive al-Hakim from al-hukm, a noun from al-hukm, a noun, it is of course we know that the names of Allah and His attributes are not derived, there is nothing in them of the derived, rather they are based on revelation; so it is not permissible for us to add to them or subtract from them, and since they are based on revelation; how is it permissible for us to attribute to a name we innovate for Allah - Blessed and Exalted is He - and it is al-Hakim? So this is not permissible, then secondly when you say: sovereignty, since the attribution to Allah is negated; from the legal and creedal side that this designation, this name is not designated for Allah, it is not permissible, so what remains is that we correct ... .