Discussion of Unrestricted Public Interests.

The Shaykh : We can say now, based on what I will mention regarding the Shaykh al-Islam, that the issue of means relates to what is known among the scholars of usul al-fiqh (principles of jurisprudence) as unrestricted public interests (masalih mursalah). Unrestricted public interests refer to adopting a matter that has occurred which did not exist before. Is it permissible to adopt it? Whether you call it a "means" or an "unrestricted public interest," the result is actually the same, but the old scientific term is unrestricted public interests. The scholars differed on the permissibility of adopting unrestricted public interests; some said it is permissible, and some said it is not. The one who spoke most broadly in this field was, truly, Imam Abu Ishaq al-Shatibi in his great book al-I'tisam. Then, after him, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) spoke on unrestricted public interests in a manner that is very great and indicates what is witnessed of him, that he is truly the one who knows Allah. I use this word because others place it in the wrong place. You know that they sayThe Shaykh : Muhyi al-Din ibn 'Arabi is the one who knows Allah.The Shaykh : So-and-so, for example, al-Jilani, or al-Jili—al-Jilani is much better than him—is the one who knows Allah. The one who truly knows Allah is the one who knows the Book of Allah and the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and is well-versed in them. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah is rare; I do not say there is no one like him, but he is rare in his example. Unrestricted public interests meet with religious innovation (bid'ah) from one side. As you know, the jurists, especially the later ones, differed on religious innovation just as they differed on unrestricted public interests. Some said, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said, , and some said, "No, there is a good innovation and there is a bad innovation." They differed, and we do not doubt that the first opinion is the correct one. This has its answer, and it has its lectures and its tapes. But I wanted to say that Ibn Taymiyyah, who held this correct view that every innovation in Islam is misguidance, also addressed unrestricted public interests on this occasion and explained the ruling on them in the following manner. And from here I arrived at my previous answer. He said that unrestricted public interests have three states: either the cause for adopting them existed in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), or it did not. If it is the first case, it is not permissible to adopt this claimed public interest if the cause for adopting this unrestricted public interest existed in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and he did not adopt it. Then it is not permissible for us to adopt it. This is very clear that it means, in general, with complete clarity, a correction of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). But it becomes clear by example: the adhan (call to prayer), as you know, is a means to announce the entry of the time. Is the adhan prescribed for other than the five prayers? Of course, until now, and praise be to Allah, the Muslims are in agreement, the later generations following the earlier ones, that the adhan is not prescribed except for the five prayers. If an innovator were to innovate an adhan for the eclipse prayer or the lunar eclipse, and the sun were to be eclipsed in broad daylight and the people were in their work, busy and heedless, and one of them saw it and thought it good to climb the minaret and call the adhan—what is this, my brother? This is a reminder of the entry of the time of prayer while the people are heedless. Would his innovation be accepted and his call be accepted? Knowing that his innovation is nothing but the remembrance of Allah and the testimony to Allah and His Messenger? It is not accepted. Why? Because the eclipse prayer occurred in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). If it had been prescribed to adopt this means for this public interest—to inform the people—the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) would have done it. And measure whatever you wish, like the prayer for rain, for example. The Imam of the Muslims or the ruler of the Muslims may gather the Muslims for the prayer for rain. The prayer for rain is prescribed. Is the adhan prescribed? The answer is no. The cause for this legislation existed in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and he did not do it. So this public interest is not adopted. From here came the previous distinction. Ibn Taymiyyah divided the public interest that is found, or the means that is found to achieve a Shari'ah public interest, into two categories. The first: the cause for adopting it existed in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) but he did not adopt it, so it is not prescribed. The second category: the cause for adopting it did not exist, then it was found. This second category is divided into two parts, and this was mentioned earlier. He looks at this public interest that is intended to be adopted: is its cause the Muslims' negligence in performing some of the obligations and rulings of their religion, or not? If the answer is yes, they were negligent, then they correct themselves by adopting such a public interest. Ibn Taymiyyah says it is not adopted. Why? Because it is also a correction of the Wise Lawgiver. This claimant for adopting this public interest says that the Lawgiver did not legislate for us what achieves for us. The reality is that He has legislated it. But if adopting this public interest is not caused by the Muslims' negligence, as we gave an example earlier and clarified, then it is permissible to adopt these means. An example of what is not permissible—I do not know now, and the time is far—whether it is from Ibn Taymiyyah or... from me, regarding the words of Ibn Taymiyyah, but it is a real example. You know that the Wise Lawgiver legislated ways for the Bayt al-Mal (treasury of the Muslims) to be always full to fulfill the interests of the Muslims. You know the zakahs, some of which are collected despite the noses of the rich, like zakat on livestock and zakat on fruits and the like, and bequests and endowments and the like. All of this is what feeds the Bayt al-Mal of the Muslims. The Muslim rulers in the end of times turned away from the system of zakah in Islam, and naturally their treasuries became empty. And they want to fill them with what? With taxes and levies. What do they want with these taxes and levies? They say, "We want to revive the nation and enliven it and fulfill its interests," and so on. This is correct to a large extent. But here it is said, "Sa'd led it, and Sa'd was wrapped up. This is not how, O Sa'd, you lead the camels." Here we return to Abu Ishaq al-Shatibi when he speaks about unrestricted public interests. He gives an example: some of the lands of the Muslims were raided by the enemy. Oh, some of the lands of the Muslims were raided by the enemy, so the Muslim ruler ordered the Muslims to prepare to repel it and return its aggression. But he did not find in the treasury what would enable him to arm the Muslims against their enemy, so he imposed taxes. He says these taxes are permissible because the Muslims were suddenly attacked by this aggression, and this aggression cannot be repelled except by such a means. But he says it is not permissible for these taxes to remain and continue and become a Shari'ah, a law, and a system. No, when the Muslims are done with their enemy, it is not permissible for this ruler to take a single penny from them except through the Shari'ah. So this system that exists today in the name of achieving the public interest of the nation is a means that achieves a public interest indeed, but it is a means whose adoption resulted from the Muslims' negligence in performing the Shari'ah method mentioned in the Book and the Sunnah, which is the system of zakah in Islam. And on this stand many of the systems that exist today, especially what relates to what is called the Shari'ah courts. Ah, the Shari'ah courts regarding marriage and divorce... personal status. Many of these matters were adopted with the intention of reform, but they contradict the Shari'ah texts. If they lead to reform, it is not permissible to adopt them. I am giving you now a precise and sensitive example, and some of the attendees might say, and I hope no one says, "What is this? This is imaginary precision, and the matter of tightening restrictions reaches this level." I say yes. Now there is a group known as the Tabligh Jama'ah. They begin their speech

The questioner : First with the prayer upon our Prophet.

The Shaykh : You know this phrase. Here, he praises the gathering of hearts, stating that their call is established and that it is based on what from the Book and the Sunnah? But they are the furthest people from the Book and the Sunnah, even in this phrase, which is the evidence, followed by a more delicate evidence: the Sunnah of opening speeches and lectures with the "Khutbat al-Hajah" (the Sermon of Need). Perhaps many of you know that I have a specific treatise on the Khutbat al-Hajah, titled exactly that: "The Khutbat al-Hajah that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) taught his Companions." Our Messenger (peace be upon him) used to open his sermons, even on Friday, let alone others, with and so on. These people abandoned this Sunnah and replaced it with "Our success and our prosperity" and so on. As for the precise issue: they use the word "our beloveds." Is that right or not? "Beloveds"? Is this the style of the Messenger (peace be upon him)? The answer is no. Perhaps some of us, the Salafis, followers of the righteous Salaf, have been influenced by this soft style. We do not find this softness in addressing Muslims in the manner these people use. Is this a permissible style? The answer is no. The one who says "no" with us is the one who knows the details I mentioned earlier. And perhaps this is sufficient, and praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds.