The Shaykh’s comment on the usul al-fiqh principle: Omitting the request for details in a case of possibility is treated as a general statement in the text, and it is appropriate to use it as evidence.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : They cite a phrase in use that says omitting the request for details in a case of possibility is treated as a general statement in the text. Do you have this in mind?
The questioner : Omitting the request for details regarding the situation in the context of the question is treated as a general statement in the text.
The Shaykh : The point is that they want to use this phrase, commenting on this hadith, to argue that it is not permissible to cite it as evidence ever, in any other incident. Why? Because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) leaving a matter without seeking further details in a specific incident does not mean opening the door to all the meanings that might arise from that lack of detail. The Prophet (peace be upon him) left it without seeking details because he knew fromThe questioner : that the issue was limited in scope and boundaries, so there was no need for the Prophet to seek further details or clarification. Therefore, applying this principle to other than this hadith should be considered carefully, and it should not be applied absolutely. As for here, it does not apply at all to what we mentioned earlier. After this, something else comes: the person for whom the Hajj is performed can be a father, like the father of the woman from Khath'am. In that case, there is no argument in the hadith. This is the second point. Thirdly: it is possible that it was on behalf of a testator who bequeathed to this pilgrim, who was reciting the talbiyah on behalf of Shubrumah, to perform Hajj on his behalf. Thus, the hadith exits the category of being evidence for the general concept of substitution without restriction or condition, and enters the subject of executing a lawful bequest. I was saying this, and then Allah (Mighty and Majestic), by His grace, stopped me with narrations in al-Tabarani's al-Mu'jam al-Kabir and others. Although I am not yet fully reassured of the authenticity of their chains, they are nonetheless narrations in this story He said: My father. Do you see? In that case, the dots are placed on the letters, as they say today, completely. So it is not permissible to cite the hadith as evidence absolutely.
The questioner : It seems, my professor, I remember once, that the hadith is in the chain of Khalid al-Hizam from Abu Qilabah from Ibn Abbas, but the narrator from them, who is the Shaykh of al-Tabarani’s Shaykh, was not deemed trustworthy by anyone except Ibn Hibban, who said he narrated from the people of Kufa and his narrations are strange, and the rest of the men in the chain are all like mountains.
Al-Halabi : It seems, my professor, I remember once, that the hadith is in the route of Khalid al-Hizam from Abu Qilabah from Ibn Abbas, but the narrator from them, who is the shaykh of al-Tabarani's shaykh, was not authenticated by anyone except Ibn Hibban, who said: The people of Kufa narrated from him, and he is eccentric, and the rest of the men of the chain are all like mountains.
The questioner : Omitting the request for details regarding the situation in the context of the question is treated as a general statement in the text.
The Shaykh : The point is that they want to use this phrase, commenting on this hadith, to argue that it is not permissible to cite it as evidence ever, in any other incident. Why? Because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) leaving a matter without seeking further details in a specific incident does not mean opening the door to all the meanings that might arise from that lack of detail. The Prophet (peace be upon him) left it without seeking details because he knew fromThe questioner : that the issue was limited in scope and boundaries, so there was no need for the Prophet to seek further details or clarification. Therefore, applying this principle to other than this hadith should be considered carefully, and it should not be applied absolutely. As for here, it does not apply at all to what we mentioned earlier. After this, something else comes: the person for whom the Hajj is performed can be a father, like the father of the woman from Khath'am. In that case, there is no argument in the hadith. This is the second point. Thirdly: it is possible that it was on behalf of a testator who bequeathed to this pilgrim, who was reciting the talbiyah on behalf of Shubrumah, to perform Hajj on his behalf. Thus, the hadith exits the category of being evidence for the general concept of substitution without restriction or condition, and enters the subject of executing a lawful bequest. I was saying this, and then Allah (Mighty and Majestic), by His grace, stopped me with narrations in al-Tabarani's al-Mu'jam al-Kabir and others. Although I am not yet fully reassured of the authenticity of their chains, they are nonetheless narrations in this story
Who is Shubrumah?
من شبرمةThe questioner : It seems, my professor, I remember once, that the hadith is in the chain of Khalid al-Hizam from Abu Qilabah from Ibn Abbas, but the narrator from them, who is the Shaykh of al-Tabarani’s Shaykh, was not deemed trustworthy by anyone except Ibn Hibban, who said he narrated from the people of Kufa and his narrations are strange, and the rest of the men in the chain are all like mountains.
Al-Halabi : It seems, my professor, I remember once, that the hadith is in the route of Khalid al-Hizam from Abu Qilabah from Ibn Abbas, but the narrator from them, who is the shaykh of al-Tabarani's shaykh, was not authenticated by anyone except Ibn Hibban, who said: The people of Kufa narrated from him, and he is eccentric, and the rest of the men of the chain are all like mountains.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.