Is the report of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) accepted as the report of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) is accepted?

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : This is a topic in the principles of jurisprudence. The topic of the report of Allah, as some scholars of principles call it. Do you hold the view that it is accepted? That is, that the Companions did something while being far from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), because some people deny it. They say, for example, "We used to say that the Qur'an was being revealed, so this hadith is not accepted." Because if it were accepted on its own, it would be an approval of this principle. They believe it is established by other hadiths. And I think it is clear what is called the report of Allah in this issue.

The Shaykh : Yes, I do not believe that in the science of principles there is a counterpart to the report of the Messenger called the report of Allah. But I believe that I, and the praise belongs to my Lord alone, who has no partner, have now clarified this meaning. And this is not from the science of principles. So, in answer to this question, I say: Is the report of the Messenger used as evidence?

The questioner : There is no doubt.

The Shaykh : Without a doubt. Now, the question comes: Is the report of the Lord of the Messenger used as evidence?

The questioner : Intellectually, without a doubt.

The Shaykh : No, this is a deviation. Why do you consider it? It is fine. It is an intellectual acceptance, not a head-on acceptance...

The questioner : I hold an opinion, and that is why I said "intellectually, without a doubt."

The Shaykh : Good, but you did not say that in the first question. In the first question, you did not say that.

The questioner : I apologize for my deviation.

The Shaykh : Well done. May Allah reward you with good. I return to say: Is the report of the Messenger used as evidence intellectually and religiously?

The questioner : Without a doubt, intellectually and religiously.

The Shaykh : Is the report of the Lord of the Messenger used as evidence intellectually and religiously?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : The topic is finished. And the correct answer, a fortiori, my brother, is that the report of the Lord of the Messenger is used as evidence. Because we did not evaluate or assess the report of the Messenger for anything worthy of assessment except because it is supported by his Lord. So, if we know that the Lord of the Worlds approved that thing, what does it mean that the Lord of the Worlds approved it? It means He did not bring a ruling that abrogates it. Therefore, the objection that "we used to isolate [the Prophet] while the Qur'an was being revealed" does not hold against us. Because we say the report of the Messenger is evidence. But its action, or its indication, in the correct phrase, is as a concept of a text. The explicit wording of a text is evidence by consensus. There is disagreement regarding the concept of a text. The majority use the concept of a text as evidence. The Hanafis say no. The majority themselves say, "We use the concept of a text as evidence, unless it contradicts an explicit wording." Likewise, we say regarding the report, whether it is the Prophetic report or the Divine report, that we use both as evidence, provided they do not contradict a text. Is that clear?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : And for that reason, I am surprised by the Hanafis when they argue about an issue that occurred during the time of the Messenger (peace be upon him), which is closely related to the previous discussion about standing close in the rows, "Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar." You know the disagreement between the Hanafis and the Shafi'is in many issues, such as, for example, the discharge of blood: does it invalidate the ablution or not? Or, for example, the prayer of the one who is obligated to pray behind the one who is traveling. The majority, led by the Shafi'is, bring valid and established evidence. But the Hanafis answered them with arguments that do not include the fact that the Messenger (peace be upon him) knew about it and approved it...

The questioner : The hadith of Mu'adh...

The Shaykh : Ah, do you see what they say? So, I have now innovated in the present age, my brothers, fear Allah. If the Messenger did not know about it, and this is possible, but the Lord of the Messenger knew about it, and the Lord of the Messenger approved it, and did not bring a new ruling. Therefore, the approval of the Lord of the Worlds is, at the very least, like the approval of the Master of the Messengers, and it is stronger without a doubt.

The questioner : One of the university professors discussed this topic with me, so he gave me an example. He said, if it were established that an action was performed in Yemen during the time of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and was transmitted to us like this, suppose the issue... Is this considered a report?

The Shaykh : Yes, it is considered a report, provided it does not contradict a religious text. The issue is settled.
Al-Halabi : Our Shaykh, the condition of contradiction clarifies the issue.

The Shaykh : Certainly. And you know that when the Hanafis suppose their issues, it is not this hypothetical that this person supposed. He went far, far away. And I think this is a Hanfi area. Do I know it or not?

The questioner : What do we know from Akhzam?

The Shaykh : Ah, good. Why? Because I know these people. When they argue, they take the far, far, imaginary example and leave the real example. They are the ones who say in the story of Mu'adh that there is no news that the Messenger looked into what Mu'adh was doing. Likewise, the story of that Companion who stood as a guard for the Companions while they were descending in the valley in that battle. There was a polytheist tracking their footprints. When he saw this Companion standing to pray, he threw the first spear, the second, and the third, and each time he placed it in his leg, and blood flowed from him. They say, with complete coldness of blood, the Hanafis say, "These are our sheikhs and our scholars, but we need to speak the reality." That the Messenger did not look into it. Oh, Glory be to Allah! The Messenger was the commander of the army, regardless of his Prophetic personality. Does the commander of the army not know how one of his men was injured, when he had ordered him to guard? And it is hidden from him? And a soldier, who is Jabir ibn 'Abd Allah al-Ansari, who narrated this incident, knows it! The issue requires fairness and objectivity. Likewise, Mu'adh ibn Jabal, the night he prayed behind the Messenger and returned to his people to lead them in prayer. It was an obligatory prayer for him and a voluntary prayer for them. The Messenger did not have knowledge! Who has knowledge? Also, Jabir ibn 'Abd Allah, who narrated the story to us. And finally, we concede to them, my brothers. Suppose that is the case. But did the Lord of the Messenger not know about this and that? The answer is yes. Did He reveal a specific ruling that contradicts what happened? The answer is no. So, fear Allah (Mighty and Majestic). Your companion went, where? To Yemen. If he had jurisprudence, he would not distinguish between what was in Yemen or in Madinah or in Ta'if or in Makkah, because the entire land is encompassed by our Lord (Mighty and Majestic), and He is the One who legislates rulings, not only for Madinah, but for the whole world. Yes.
Al-Halabi: May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : And beware of your companion reminding us that the time is up, ohAbu Layla
Al-Halabi : Thank you for this good research, and may Allah reward you with good. And this is the first time we have truly heard of it.

The questioner : A rich and abundant session. May Allah bless you, our Shaykh.
Abu Layla : Our Shaykh, if the 'Isha' prayer is delayed, it is from the Sunnah.

The Shaykh : The fatwa has come out.