Is the hadith of the appointment of a leader during travel used as evidence for the greater appointment?

The questioner : The question of whether the analogy of appointing a leader for groups to the appointment during travel is a valid analogy based on a shared cause. The research now focuses on what the cause is in the appointment during travel. The truth is that the cause is established by the text in the hadith itself, but it is lacking...

The Shaykh : What is the cause specified in the hadith?

The questioner : The cause, which is at the end of the research... that the number is not the travel.

The Shaykh : I ask you, what is the cause specified in the hadith in his claim?

The questioner : In his claim, it is that the number, not the travel.

The Shaykh : Slowly, slowly, where is the cause in the hadith?
Al-Halabi : If you are three on a journey, does it apply now?

The Shaykh : I do not think so.

The questioner : It says that due to the multiplication of descriptions upon which the ruling is based in the hadith, it is necessary to determine which of these descriptions is the effective one in the ruling. It says that the minimum number for which the appointment is obligatory is three, based on the hadith of Abu Dharr and the hadith of Usamah ibn Zayd regarding a man being appointed over two men. It says that this number is the same one mentioned in the hadith of the appointment during travel. Therefore, this appointment is tied to the number, not the travel. This is the refinement of the point of application.

The Shaykh : How is that? What is the text of the hadith?

The questioner : The text of the hadith is

The Shaykh : On a journey. Well, how is it tied to the number? The correct statement is that it is tied to the number and the journey. If one of the two causes is absent, the ruling is absent. In other words, if you are three, is it obligatory? What if they are two?

The questioner : No

The Shaykh : No. Well, if they are three and not on a journey, is it obligatory?

The questioner : No

The Shaykh : So, this statement is false. In this hadith, there are two causes. If they are present, the effect is present, as the jurists say: the ruling revolves with the cause in its existence and absence. The cause here is the number and the journey. If one of the two causes is absent, the effect, which is the ruling, is absent.

The questioner : And despite the fact that he acknowledges that he calls it the hadith of the appointment during travel.

The Shaykh : Yes, that is it. Glory be to Allah. But do not miss my pointing out to you that the hadith I recited at the beginning of the session, in its wording, contains detail, and they relied on it because they found comfort in what they think supports their claim. Now read the text of the second hadith.

The questioner : It says

The Shaykh : It is not permissible for three who are in a desert land except that they appoint one of them as their leader. This hadith, first, as I said at the beginning of the session, is not authentic. Second, even if it were authentic, it would be evidence for what I told you just now: that a group, if they are in the open, do not have a ruler. These people should organize their affairs; they must appoint one of them. As I said regarding Abu al-Hakam, what was he? He was obeyed in his people, so they accepted his judgment. This is the place for this hadith if it were authentic. But this hadith is not authentic. The authentic one is in the first wording: As for the second hadith with the wording "It is not permissible," this actually has a story with me and with the Tawhid Party in particular.
Al-Halabi : What is the hadith, O Shaykh?

The Shaykh :

The questioner : The hadith, but with another wording.

The Shaykh : In the wording that it is not permissible, yes, this has a story that perhaps you know.Those present : Something of the ideas of the Tahrir Party. These people, without doubt, like some other groups, have an emir, and he must be obeyed in everything he says, to the extent that if the emir orders a ruling that contradicts the Shari'ah, he must be obeyed, contrary to the well-known hadith It is a long story, but it is necessary to mention a summary of it because of the lesson and benefit it contains. I was in my shop in Damascus when the phone rang for the first time; one of the heads of the Tahrir Party from Damascus was calling me, asking about this hadith. At that time, I did not have a specific study on this hadith. I answered him, "By Allah, I do not know the status of this hadith. The first one is in Sunan Abu Dawud and others, but I will study it, if Allah wills, in a few days." He called me again, and I studied the hadith. It became clear that there is a man in its chain who is known for weakness among the scholars of hadith. He is one of the distinguished Egyptian scholars and judges, and his name is 'Abd Allah ibn Lahi'ah. This man is the sole transmitter of this text. So I answered him that the hadith with this wording is weak. But I was surprised for the first time by a Tahrir party member asking a person whom they know I was standing up to refute them and clarify that they are deviating from the Book and the Sunnah in much of what they hold. So I began to investigate the reason, and it became clear to me the following: The head of the Tahrir Party, who is Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani (may Allah have mercy on him), passed away to the mercy of Allah, if Allah wills. He held a session with his companions, naturally with his council of consultation. They wanted to publish a bulletin. As you know, it is their custom to work on political matters and openly declare their opinions in opposition to some rulers in some of their decisions. The discussion in the council turned to publishing a bulletin of this kind, and a disagreement arose in the council.The Shaykh : The president saw the publication of this message, despite the harshness in it. The group said, "No, the public benefit does not allow the publication of this message now." A disagreement arose between the president and the subordinates. He argued with them based on what was their custom: that the emir must be obeyed. "This is your opinion, but my opinion is that this bulletin must be published." They discussed it with his logic. They said to him, "You say and cite the hadith 'Let them appoint one of them,' the first hadith, and they say that the command does not imply obligation. The Tawhid Party says so; there must be an indication." They said to him, "The indication is the second hadith, which explicitly states and says 'It is not permissible.' So it is forbidden for you to disobey us." His companions were stunned, and they said, "We do not know this hadith." They said to themselves, "Let us return to the scholar of hadith." Despite their noses, they acknowledge that Al-Albani is the reference. So this person I mentioned just now called. When I gave him the answer that this hadith is not authentic, but the rule, O brothers, is sufficient for you: the original ruling for a command is obligation unless there is an indication. This is the opinion of the majority of scholars of usul al-fiqh. So this hadith, and the establishment of its weakness in their view, was a reason to disobey their emir. A reason to disobey their emir because it contains the explicit statement "It is not permissible." The emir clung to it, and the others said, "Since its chain is not authentic, then it is not obligatory for us to obey you. This is recommended and sunnah, but not obligatory." And from that day, a split occurred among the people of the council. Some remained withThe Shaykh : (may Allah have mercy on him), and some separated from him. The point is that the one who wants to enter a battle and separate himself from the disagreement of the Muslim scholars in all the lands of the world, and says, "We are the group of jihad," and brings such ideas that are not indicated by a sound evidence and a strong fiqh, this is, by Allah, the ultimate danger from the psychological aspect, which can be evidenced by some of the texts of the Shari'ah, such as his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): I advise this group and others not to be alone in interpreting a hadith and explaining it until they ask the people of knowledge whom the scholars testify to as being among the people of knowledge. And at that time, they apply a text in the Qur'an, or else they have contradicted it, whether they wish it or not. I mean by this text the saying of Allah (Mighty and Majestic): I believe that the one who wrote that book, I believe, and I do not know him personally, nor do I know his capability in knowledge, that he does not believe in the depths of his heart that he has become one of the scholars for whom it is valid to exercise independent legal reasoning in understanding the texts of the Book and the Sunnah. And at that time, he must apply the verse mentioned just now: This is what I have regarding this hadith.