Your claim that it is obligatory to trim the beard below the handful, citing the actions of Ibn 'Umar, Abu Hurayrah, and 'Ata, and that they did not contradict the absolute text.

The questioner : It is well known that the hadiths regarding the beard are mostly narrated by 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). It is narrated from 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him and his father) that when he performed Hajj and 'Umrah, he trimmed his beard and cut what was below the handful. How can he narrate the hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) that he heard from him, and then do this? May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : I believe your question is incorrect. Even if your question is understood, sometimes the understanding can be correct or incorrect. Is there a difference between what is said and what is heard? Does every statement by a speaker have to be correct? No, it may be correct or it may be incorrect. So, what do you want from this question? I understand it, but your question is wrong. When would your question be correct? If the Messenger (peace be upon him) said, "Do not trim the beard at all," and Ibn 'Umar trimmed it as you mentioned during Hajj and 'Umrah, how would your question arise? How did he trim it when the Messenger said, "Do not trim anything from the beard"? In that case, the question would be valid. But there is no question that says, "Do not trim anything from the beard." Rather, what Ibn 'Umar narrated, as you referred to earlier, is: This is an absolute text. So, if you base your question on the narration, you are asking how Ibn 'Umar contradicted the absolute text, not how he contradicted the text. No, there is a difference. If the hadith were... you leave the job to others...
Abu Layla : I want to clarify, our Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Okay. Here we enter a discussion of extreme precision. In my opinion, if you see a mu'adhdhin calling the adhan and you hear him say the salutation upon the Messenger (peace be upon him) after the adhan, you would rebuke him, right? I think you would. This is, of course, based on good assumption. So, if he says to you, "You have contradicted the Qur'an and the Sunnah. You have contradicted the Qur'an What is your answer?

The questioner : Am I supposed to answer?

The Shaykh : Or what?! I mean, my question is free of charge.

The questioner : Regarding this matter, I say that the saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) in that regard is: Then

The Shaykh : No, that is a deflection. What is your position regarding his argument? It is not your argument. What do you say when he argues with you using the Qur'an and the hadith? I am not asking you about your argument. I said that, based on good assumption, if you heard this addition to the adhan, you would rebuke him, right? I said yes. I am not asking you about your argument. I am telling you there is a difference. I say he is arguing with you using the Qur'an and the hadith. How do you respond to him?

The questioner : If the words he says are authentic as they reached us, then that is fine and good. If they are not, or if they contradict the meaning or are based on a false interpretation, then they are rejected.

The Shaykh : This is called a "double" (hedging). "If and if," and what did you put on it? What did you base it on, if I may express it that way? On which of the two "ifs" did you base it? This is the answer of diplomats, and I think you are a diplomat. A student of knowledge like me, what are you basing it on?

The questioner : I am basing it on the correct statement.

The Shaykh : And what is it?

The questioner : The Book and the Sunnah.

The Shaykh : Okay, my brother, answer me so we can see. I am arguing with you. You are rebuking me for adding the salutation upon the Messenger after the adhan with the noble verse Answer me. I am telling you that you cannot answer me. The reason is that if you could answer me, you would not have raised that question. The answer I told you has precision. The legal texts in the science of jurisprudence and the principles of jurisprudence have the general and the specific, the absolute and the restricted, the abrogating and the abrogated, and so on. Allah said: If someone steals a date, is he called a thief or not?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : His name is a thief, is his hand cut off? The answer is no. I am going to teach you a lesson so we do not waste time. The answer is no. Why? Allah says, "And the thief," and this is called a thief linguistically, but his hand is not cut off. Why? Because the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: . And the thief in the verse, linguistically, is not absolute, do you understand how? Keep this in mind so we can return to the hadith of Ibn 'Umar: . It is not absolute, and from here comes the difficulty for you and others, okay? The verse: . The hand in language includes all of this, including the palm, the forearm, and the upper arm up to here; all of this is the hand. Now, is this what is intended by "so cut off their hands," meaning from here? The answer is no. From here? No. Then from the wrist? Okay, Allah says: . Also, "let the beards grow" is absolute. Keep this in mind. Why do Muslims today cut the hand from here? Because that is what the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) did. If the Messenger of Allah did it, his action qualifies his saying: . It qualifies "the thief," so "the thief" means the one who steals the value of a quarter of a dinar of gold or more; that is the one whose hand is cut off, and it is cut off from the wrist because the Messenger of Allah cut it there by his action. Therefore, we must take all the texts together, some with others. That is why the scholars said that the explanation of the Messenger of Allah, as indicated in His saying: , is divided into three categories: speech, action, and approval. These three categories are between us and the Messenger of Allah fourteen centuries apart. What do we know? The first generation, the Companions who witnessed the Messenger of Allah, are the ones who tell us what the Messenger of Allah said, what he did, and what he approved. We do not approve except through this path. From here, the importance of the science of hadith becomes apparent to you, because through the chain of narration, it appears: "So-and-so narrated to us, he said, so-and-so narrated to me." We have discussed these issues before. How do we know this? Here and there, here and there. We take the hadiths and chains that are authentic, and we leave those that are weak. Therefore, the general text mentioned in the Sunnah, let alone the Qur'an, if it is not acted upon as a general text, it is not acted upon generally; rather, it is acted upon with a restriction. We act upon it with a restriction, and we do not take the general text and argue with it. I think this is understood up to here, but I will add clarification. We return to the argument of the innovator. He argued against us with the verse and the hadith: . We say to him: This verse that was revealed to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), he applied it, and he did not apply it in a way that contradicted it. Of course, he will say he applied it. Okay, did he teach Bilal al-Habashi, Abu Mahdhurah, and 'Amr ibn al-'As the adhan or not? Yes, he taught them. Okay, did these people pray for the Messenger of Allah after the adhan? The answer? No, because all the scholars agree that the adhan ends with "La ilaha illa Allah." But the later scholars, as we told you in the first session, divide innovation into two types: good and bad. They say, yes, this is an innovation, but it is a good innovation. So, in the time of the Messenger of Allah, there was no prayer for the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) after the adhan. And on that basis, judge the rest, okay? Now, let us move to the following result, which is a very important result, and here is the precision: Every general text in the Sunnah or in the Qur'an that has not been acted upon in any of its parts, it is not permissible for us to act upon it, because if it had been intended, those who directly heard this text from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) would have acted upon it first and applied it second. From here, we come to say that your question is wrong. Why? Because Ibn 'Umar, who heard the Messenger of Allah say: . And here we need to say what he understood. "Let the beards grow" means let them grow long and drag them on the ground; this is the meaning of the absolute. Did he clarify that he did not understand it this way? No, because if he had understood it this way, he would not have taken a little from under the fist, one or two centimeters. No, but it appears that he saw the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) taking from his beard, so he did as he did. It is true that we do not have an authentic hadith; we have a weak hadith, and it is appropriate for this context, but we do not argue with weak hadiths. I used to extract it in "Silsilat al-Ahadith al-Da'ifah": "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) used to take from his beard from its width and length." But the hadith has very severe weakness, so we do not take it. But now, entering the core of the subject, the action of the Salaf suffices for us. And here I must pause. Our call is not limited to the Book and the Sunnah, as is the call of every Muslim, and that is necessary, but we add and say: Our call is based on the Book and the Sunnah and the methodology of the righteous Salaf. Why? Because without the righteous Salaf, we would not be able to understand our religion correctly. That is why the Islamic groups divided, in the past and present, into sects and parties: , as Allah said in the noble Qur'an. I say, I told him, why? Because they did not rely on what the righteous Salaf were upon, and they began to interpret the texts according to their desires, so they became most disordered and divided, as we said, into sects and parties. As for us, we say that we are Salafis. We look at how the righteous Salaf understood the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah in its three categories: verbal, practical, and approved, and we follow that. And do we act upon the Shari'ah with this restriction? We say, how not? Allah said: . Therefore, opposing the path of the believers is like opposing the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), because the intended meaning is those who directly witnessed the Messenger of Allah and transmitted his Sunnah to us: his Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), then those who follow them, then those who follow them, as is in the authentic hadith. So, when we say the Book and the Sunnah and the methodology of the righteous Salaf, we are taking the verse and taking the hadith of al-'Arba' ibn Sariyah: , and taking the hadith of Anas ibn Malik and Mu'awiyah and others: . Now we return. We do not have, and there is not a single hadith, even a weak one like that hadith of ours, "He used to take from his beard from its width and length." We said it is weak. There is no weak hadith that the Messenger of Allah did not take from his beard. It is a common belief now among scholars that the Messenger of Allah did not take anything from his beard. There is no basis for this hadith at all. All that can be said is the generality of the hadith "And let the beards grow," but this generality is like those generalities that have not been acted upon. And there is a disagreement that it was not narrated that the Messenger of Allah took from his beard, while his Companions who witnessed him took from theirs. Do you see these people contradicting him while they narrate the hadith of the Messenger of Allah about him, "And let the beards grow"? No, they do not contradict him. And the common belief here has another error, which is a double error. You just narrated from Ibn 'Umar that when he performed Hajj or 'Umrah, he took from his beard. This is an authentic narration, but it is not restricted in the sense that he did not do it except in Hajj and 'Umrah? No. He did it even in other than Hajj and 'Umrah. Then the common second error is that it was only Ibn 'Umar. This is also an error. It is also authentic from Abu Hurayrah that he used to take from his beard as well. And not only that, but it is authentic from Ibrahim ibn Yazid al-Nakha'i, who is from the Tabi'un, that he said: "They used to take from their beards." Who were "they"? The Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). And there is no disagreement about these texts at all. So, the way of the Salaf is not letting the beard grow as we see some of the Salaf who worship with it, and you find their beard reaching down to here. They think that this is the Sunnah. There is no basis for this Sunnah at all. And we have no way of knowing such a thing except through the Companions of the Messenger of Allah. And if the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, among them Ibn 'Umar, the most eager of the Companions to follow the Messenger of Allah, even in matters of custom, and these matters are known to you about him, if from these Companions there is not a single one except that he took from his beard, then we cannot say that the Companions did not take from their beards. And consequently, we cannot say that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) did not take from his beard. What did you agree on, O Abu Anas and O Abu Jabir?
Abu Layla : ... .

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you with good. I see you as you were, meaning happy and joyful. I see you now, a little fog in the air.
Abu Layla : A shaykh is coming with us.

The Shaykh : We do not have much time.

Another questioner : ... One is afraid, I mean.

The Shaykh : Excuse me, may Allah reward you with good, but do not be afraid for...The Shaykh : You.

Another questioner : You are welcome...

The Shaykh : May Allah bless you and expand for you, and replace your home with a better home in Paradise. And I will console you with a type of consolation when we decide to return. We agreed with you by phone, verbally, to make a stop at your place. What do you think... Okay, otherwise.