A discussion with a Tablighi regarding the ruling on the organized, codified departure of the Tablighi Jamaat, and whether it has a basis in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)

The questioner : First, departing in the path of Allah, based on my experience, is according to the person's condition. If the person is a scholar, he departs to teach; if he is not a scholar, he departs to learn. Learning while departing in the path of Allah is not learning the science of legal issues, hadith, and jurisprudence, but learning the science of virtues so that the heart and chest expand, and the person develops the desire and inclination to obey Allah (Mighty and Majestic), to uphold the commands of Allah, and to uphold the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). The departure in the path of Allah is until the faith-based attributes come to the person, which cannot come to a person through reading alone, until these attributes are in the person. For example, the attribute of patience.

The Shaykh : Yes

The questioner : So, in departing in the path of Allah, the scholar and the ignorant one depart; the scholar teaches, and the ignorant one, the unlettered one, and the student of knowledge learn. The knowledge is the knowledge of virtues so that the heart and chest expand to apply what they hear, because it is not important for a person to gather information and not apply it, so that it becomes an argument against him on the Day of Resurrection. And so that the greatness of the Sunnah and its estimation and its exaltation come to him. I mean, I saw a man in Pakistan who was performing wudu, and he was a man of about seventy or eighty years old. He said this man was from the shepherds, shepherds of sheep. But when he was performing wudu, he started searching in his pockets in a dazed manner, and the iqamah for prayer was near. He was searching as if he had lost something. So he was asked, "What are you looking for? Did you lose money, papers, or something?" He said, "No, the miswak. Where is the miswak?" He was looking for a miswak. So he was told, "O Shaykh, the matter is simple; the prayer is acceptable without a miswak." He said, "True, but what about the virtue of the miswak? How do I pray without a miswak?" He was very concerned to apply the Sunnah. He mentioned some hadiths about the virtue of the miswak, especially with wudu and with prayer. This is not found in many scholars who memorize books and have certificates and doctorates. You find one of them passing weeks and months without holding a miswak. Likewise, the concern for congregational prayer, the concern for enjoining good and forbidding evil. You find many scholars sitting in gatherings full of wrongs and not moving a finger, neither in a good manner nor otherwise. So the greatness of the religion and the importance of the religion come to the heart through departing in the path of Allah. Applying the Sunnah in the home with the family, the person at work in the market, in dealing with relatives, with friends. And likewise the faith-based attributes like patience, forbearance, forgiveness, pardon, responding to the call for reconciliation between people. Many people I know were very arrogant, meaning the right was against them, they were wrong, and the right was against them. The owner of the right would come to ask for their pardon to reconcile between them, but they would refuse, be stubborn, be arrogant, and take it to the highest levels. But when they departed in the path of Allah, they became gentle, soft, and had the faith-based attributes. They would pardon even if the right was theirs, and forgive their right. And I saw a man who was very needy financially, and he had lent ten dinars to a man years ago. And that man, when he took them, promised to return them after a few days or at the end of the month. So this man was needy and remembered that he had ten dinars with that man. He said, "I want to go and take my money." Then he remembered a hadith of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) and said So he prayed two rak'ahs and asked Allah to inspire that man to come to him with the money for this debt. On the same day, and after a short time, he saw nothing but the man entering upon him, greeting him, and saying to him, "My brother, I remembered that on one day I gave you ten dinars. I had forgotten it and forgot to return it to you. Now, praise be to Allah, I remembered it. Please, here are the ten dinars." Whereas, if it had been with any other person who did not know this hadith and did not try to apply it, he would go and file a case against him and make a lawsuit and make problems. And so on, a lot. We found people who had wrongs and forbidden things in their homes. When they departed in the path of Allah, despite their little knowledge, when they returned to the home, they started a movement of change with wisdom, gentleness, and calmness. They removed the wrongs and corrected what was in the home. The wife was corrected and the children were corrected. It became a home that is called an Islamic home, where you smell the scent of Islam. Whereas many, with my respect for knowledge and the people of knowledge, for example, students who graduated from the College of Sharia, you enter their home and it is never like a Jewish or Christian home. Pictures and statues and all things. I even know some people who graduated from the College of Sharia, my classmates, and they do not pray.

The Shaykh : Allah is the Greatest!

The questioner : I know one who graduated from the College of Sharia, and in the period when I was studying, he did not pray. And one was appointed a judge, and he has a master's degree in Sharia, and he does not pray.

The Shaykh : There are many like this.

The questioner : ... And you find many students of knowledge likewise in the Colleges of Sharia dealing with riba, dealing with forbidden things, listening to songs and music. So departing in the path of Allah is for all levels of the ummah: the ignorant one who does not understand anything in the religion, the average student of knowledge, and the scholar. So each one takes according to his condition. Either he is a scholar and he teaches and benefits, so praise be to Allah. We departed with scholars in the path of Allah and benefited from them a lot. Among them is Dr. Numan Abu al-Layl, the professor of tafsir, who was at the Islamic University and is now in Pakistan. And we departed with old people in the da'wah who are not scholars but have practiced the da'wah for a long time, so they have wonderful faith-based attributes. You feel in them sincerity, light, and blessing.

The Shaykh : Do you think that these good deeds you mentioned are not found except in the group that departs as they say in the path of Allah?

The questioner : They are found in many people.

The Shaykh : No problem, no problem. If this thing is found in other than the Tablighi Jamaat, for example, how did they achieve it by the way of departing?

The questioner : Yes, by the way of departing, they achieved these attributes...

The Shaykh : Perhaps I did not understand you. My question, may Allah bless you, is: are there not other groups who are characterized by the morals you mentioned, and perhaps others better than them, and they are not from the Tablighi Jamaat? Or are these good traits confined to the Tablighi Jamaat?

The questioner : No, but they are found in others.

The Shaykh : Okay, that was my first question. The second question: did these who are not from the Tablighi Jamaat achieve these good traits by the same way that the Tablighi Jamaat achieves them, or by another way? If you say it is by the way of the Tablighi Jamaat, I do not think you would say this because you know that they are not from the Tablighi Jamaat and they are not on the methodology of the Tablighi Jamaat. I think you will say this, or do you have a second opinion? I mean, I will say they achieved what they achieved by another way, other than this way of departing?

The questioner : I want to say, with my respect for you and without cutting off your speech, that the actions a person practices while he is departing in the da'wah, he may practice them while he is not departing in the da'wah.

The Shaykh : Good, that is what we want.

The questioner : For example, the circles of knowledge.

The Shaykh : That is what we want, and the matter does not need explanation, because I put two ways: the way of departing as you say in the path of Allah to acquire these good traits, and a way other than departing. So both ways are achieving the traits, by the proof of what? Reality.

The questioner : Existence, yes.

The Shaykh : Okay, so I want to draw your attention, and you, if Allah wills, are a name that fits its meaning, a mind. You will understand what I say. So if there is another way by which one can achieve those attributes you call the faith-based attributes, then it is not befitting for us to mislead people, even unintentionally, that the way to perfect these faith-based attributes is the departure called departing in the path of Allah. Because in that case, we would be understanding people that, as Allah the Exalted said:

The questioner : Far be it from us, we do not say this.

The Shaykh : I know this, and that is why I am telling you this. Otherwise, we would be forced to say, "You are not going to say this, so why are we putting our effort into the call to go out in the path of Allah?" As these people mentioned, and as I also mentioned, people go out without having knowledge, but they learn. This is one point, Professor 'Aqil.

The questioner : Shall I answer it?

The Shaykh : Yes

The questioner : Shall I answer it?

The Shaykh : No, you have no answer for it, because I am saying what you do not agree with. Do you not want to answer it?

The questioner : Clarifying the matter.

The Shaykh : No, no, the matter does not require that. Either you agree or you disagree. If you agree, I will proceed on my way, because it is your way as well. And if you disagree, I will say to you, please, speak...

The questioner : No, I am not in agreement.

The Shaykh : That is it. Then allow me, please.

The questioner : Please go ahead.

The Shaykh : He is going to respond to us with many, many objections regarding this action first, and regarding this naming second, which is going out in the path of Allah. I believe that if what I am about to say is hidden from some people, I do not say in my opinion, but in my belief, that it will not be hidden from you. That is that the best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), and that the matter is as the scholars said: "Every good is in following those who came before, and every evil is in the innovation of those who came after". If this is as I said regarding you, then if there is anyone who disagrees with what I am saying, you are not among them. Rather, you are with us in what we say: that the best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), and that every good is in following those who came before, and every evil is in the innovation of those who came after. Now, we call this going out "going out in the path of Allah." Did the path of Allah exist in the three blessed centuries, or was it absent?

The questioner : It existed.

The Shaykh : You cannot say that you are different; others might say so, but you specifically, the one named 'Aqil, cannot say anything other than that it existed. Do you know of the existence of this going out in that time when going out in the path of Allah was customary and practiced? Do you believe that this going out which the Tabligh group is doing now existed in that time, the time when going out in the path of Allah existed? I do not think you can say yes.

The questioner : I can say yes.

The Shaykh : Please. Now, here we have been walking on a line where we are in complete agreement. But now, what has begun?

The questioner : We have diverged.

The Shaykh : We have diverged on one point, but we will meet again, if Allah wills. Bring it, let us see what your evidence is that this going out existed in that time when going out in the path of Allah was realized. I see the issue as contradictory, meaning it exists and it does not exist, in our understanding. You, on the other hand, want to bring us closer to the thing we perceive as contradictory. Bring it, let us see. Prove to us where this going out was, when it started, and when it stopped?

The questioner : Of course, in the science of hadith, you are our professor in it. There is the story of the man who killed ninety-nine souls. The end of the story is that when he came to the learned man and said, "I want to repent," he said to him, "Yes, you have a repentance..."

The Shaykh : May I interrupt you?

The questioner : Please proceed.

The Shaykh : It appears you did not grasp my question.

The questioner : I grasped it, but this is as an introduction...

The Shaykh : No, you would simply be mistaken. Especially since you are telling me that in the hadith... The hadith you want to mention has no relation to your going out. It has to do with a specific person who lives in a corrupt environment and is ordered by the scholar, not the ignorant monk, to move to another town whose people are righteous. And indeed, he responds and comes, and death overtakes him on the way, and the angels of mercy take over him. What is the relation to what we are asking about?

The questioner : The relation is close, in that we live in a corrupt environment and we need a righteous environment so that we can be rectified in it...

The Shaykh : O Shaykh, you are returning to the corrupt environment, may Allah reward you.

The questioner : We return to the corrupt environment to rectify it, or to live in it while being protected from the corruption present in it.

The Shaykh : No, and no blame on you, but this is a blatant fallacy...

The questioner : How?

The Shaykh : This is a completely blatant fallacy, because if you return to the environment to rectify it, why do you go out of it? So stay in it and rectify it. Because the man in that hadith, what does he say in the hadith?

The questioner :

The Shaykh : "So go out of it, for you are in a land of evil, so go out of it." Well, you go out and return. This hadith did not come for this; this hadith has no relation at all, O Professor. So, may Allah reward you. I hope you will use what you are named.

The questioner : If Allah wills, we will use it.

The Shaykh : Listen to me a little. Use what you are named. Do not be influenced by the teachings you receive from the group, from the party, because this is the problem of the parties existing today on the face of the earth...

The questioner : Praise be to Allah, it is not a party...

The Shaykh : I told you the group first, or the party, so take from the two names whatever suits you. Do not take the name that suits you if you are going to respond to me. No, call it a group, call it a party, call it whatever you want. When I said to you "your party," you tell me, "Praise be to Allah, the group is not a party." The important thing is this teaching that parties teach their members; we feel it with our hands in the Tabligh group. A man like this, who was given as an example, does not know; perhaps he prays like the people. I take... what is the proof? As long as you have heard it from the learned, from the scholar, the learned and the ignorant are all the same in the Tabligh group. They tell you, "The Messenger said ." Where did you learn this? We raise our voices and speak with the hadiths of the Messenger (peace be upon him). Rarely does one come who memorizes a hadith. Why? Because we are not going to teach them except to memorize this hadith. We are narrating to them hadiths by the dozens and by the hundreds. But here there is a specific direction: "Memorize this, they say so, and the answer is so," and so on . Well, this is an authentic hadith, but this is taught to the man. And so when he comes and a learned man speaks with him, he mentions the things he has heard. He simply does not know whether this has a relation to this speech he is hearing or not. So I ask you, and my trust in you is great and very great.

The questioner : May Allah bless you.

The Shaykh : That you use your mind. This story has to do with an evil person . It did not come, O Professor 'Aqil, for this? And I confronted you with complete frankness. I told you, if you left this land and emigrated to a land better than this land, I would say to you, you hit the mark in your citation of the hadith. But you go out from here, you are absent for forty days, more or less, and you return to the same town whose people are corrupt. How do you use this hadith as evidence for this action? Bring it, let us see?

The questioner : Now, when he told him, "Go to the righteous town," did he intend for him to live in it until he dies forever, or did he intend for him to settle his faith and rectify his affairs?

The Shaykh : This is part of the complete education, Professor 'Aqil. This is part of the complete education, and no blame is on you. Logically, answer me: what do you have? What is the intention behind this? That he does not die there, is that not so? This is a mistake. His intention is to go to that land so that his condition improves, and he does not intend to return to the corrupt land from which he fled. As you know, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade those who migrated from Makkah to Madinah from staying in Makkah for more than three days. And from where did they migrate? From Makkah to Madinah. And Makkah is better than Madinah, and prayer in it, as you all know, is worth a hundred thousand prayers. But so that it does not contradict their migration, they left Makkah as migrants in the cause of Allah to Madinah. Do they long for their homeland, their country? No. You are only allowed to stay for three days and then return to the country to which you migrated. So this hadith, truly, I mention it on many occasions. And the brother has hundreds of tapes of lectures and speeches in which he speaks, including this specific hadith. I place it in the topic of the heart’s rectitude is achieved by the rectitude of the limbs, and the rectitude of the limbs is achieved by associating with the righteous and shunning the wicked. And the Messenger (peace be upon him)—and I do not want to prolong this by mentioning many, many hadiths—emphasizes the companionship of the righteous. He says: meaning associate with him. And he says: And he says: And I mention here a long statement to confirm the harm of the companionship of the wicked. Suffice it for you as a reminder his saying (peace be upon him) So this learned man advised the man to leave this land whose people are bad and migrate to the land whose people are good, not in order to pick up some rectitude from there and return. No, but in order to secure his condition in this good place, to be raised, and to live as long as Allah wills for him to live. So where do we take from that he went there in order to visit? And look, Professor 'Aqil, I am truly very sorry that your mind wanders with these illusions. You are now saying, "I wonder if he went in order to die there or in order to return?" Well, I see the hadith has absolutely no relation from any angle. We studied the hadith from it. Finally, you say, as if you are saying—and you do not state it explicitly—that he went to be rectified there and then return to the corrupt land in order to rectify it. Well, what about those groups who go to France, the land of prostitution, corruption, and lewdness, and come back here? Did they go, like that man to the land whose people are good, for what? For what? To secure themselves with good morals there and return here to rectify things, Professor? So the hadith has no relation in any way, shape, or form to this regulated, organized departure. And I do not want to go far. I am still waiting for the clear answer, because you answered with a hadith about a person. My question was: do you know the time when you believe, as we believe, that migration in the cause of Allah existed before this departure? Do not bring me a person; bring me a hadith about this departure...?

The questioner : I have not finished my answer. I brought this as an introduction...

The Shaykh : Very good. This is an introduction, but as you see, this introduction has absolutely no basis in this collective, regulated, organized departure. It is only a departure from a corrupt land to a good land. And we have no disagreement in this at all, right or wrong?

The questioner : Correct.

The Shaykh : So what is the relation of this?

The questioner : I brought this on an individual level, meaning personal.

The Shaykh : That is not my question. That is not my question, may Allah reward you. And you know that I do not need you to come and remind me of the hadith, as I said, because we know in order for a person to leave his homeland in which he was born if its people become bad, to another country whose people are good. This is the indication of the hadith, and this is not our disagreement. Our discussion now is this collective departure. Do you know if it existed in the three centuries attested to as the best, and we agree with you that they are the best of centuries? You said yes. And I think this is far from being verified, but above every one with knowledge is the All-Knowing. Please, bring it so we can see where this departure was?

The questioner : The group that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) sent...?

The Shaykh : Also, I am forced to interrupt you, my brother, because this is also among the indoctrinations we discussed with your sheikhs and your students, and so on. Those who left, may Allah reward you, were an elite, an elite of the Companions of the Messenger, called the Reciters to this day. The Reciters did not leave as ignorant people. They had one leader, and without a doubt, this one leader wanted a leader above him and a leader above him, because there were no scholars among them. But let us assume he was the most learned scholar in the world, but those with him were ignorant. Whereas there, the Messenger sent seventy Reciters, and you know that the Reciter in the time of the Messenger is not the Reciter in our time, right or wrong?

The questioner : Correct.

The Shaykh : So these were callers in the true sense. They call people to what Allah guided them to through our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). So they are Reciters, and they are scholars, and they memorize the Qur'an, and so on. Also, this departure is not our discussion. I am telling you: if two scholars left this house, one went east and one went west, would anyone say this departure is not permissible? No one says this at all, may Allah reward you. So I ask you to reflect on what the question is. This departure that you call in the cause of Allah, when did it start and when did it stop? Glory be to Allah.

The questioner : It started with the beginning of the mission of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).

The Shaykh : How?

The questioner : With the beginning of the mission of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).

The Shaykh : Also, you forgot what I reminded you of just now, my brother. We are not talking about the departure of an individual. I gave you the example just now of two scholars. If two scholars, one east and one west, for the call in the cause of Allah, is this the departure we are talking about? No. This is the departure of scholars. I am going to give you an example from myself. I stayed thirty years in Syria. I left alone, independently. No one denies this, and this is the call of the Messenger (peace be upon him). So you say the Messenger (peace be upon him) started with it.

The questioner : Be patient with me for a moment.

The Shaykh : No, Professor, the discussion is with you entirely. I just do not want to waste your time, and thus waste my time in the discussion...

The questioner : And I want to present the arguments I have, even if they are wrong, so that I may clarify them to myself later?

The Shaykh : No, I just want something I do not hope for from anyone else. Give it your mind. Truly, my opinion of you is different from my opinion of other people...

The questioner : May Allah reward you. I thank you for this.

The Shaykh : Before you throw your arguments at me, think about them and understand what I want from me. I want an argument by which you permit these groups this comprehensive, inclusive departure, which, as I told you, may contain a scholar, if we do not say scholars, if we do not say what we did not say, and so on. But those with him know nothing. Where is the evidence for this type of departure? You brought me the hadith of the man who killed ninety-nine souls, then you followed with seventy Reciters. My brother, the Reciters are scholars. Thirdly, you finally said Muhammad (peace be upon him) alone. Glory be to Allah. I want evidence that you are convinced of. But if you are saying, "By Allah, I am presenting to you what I have of arguments that I heard, what do you think of them?" That is a second discussion. But I saw you completely enthusiastic in the answer to our brother. We do not know if I want good or evil for us when he raised this topic, and we did not meet and gather for this. And as I said at the beginning of the speech, the answer to him is that this time is dedicated to you and to the brother you were with.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good. We benefit.

The Shaykh : As for him, as they say in our land in Sham, "he inserts a wedge" Do you say wedge?

The questioner : Yes, yes.

The Shaykh : Good. This was not on my mind. I bear witness to Allah.

The questioner : May Allah make his speech good. Perhaps I have information that I think is correct but is wrong, so I clarified it.

The Shaykh : This is possible, may Allah reward you. But the method of research may differ. There is a difference between, for example, if I and another person discuss an issue and he says to me, "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said such and such," and he provides me with an introduction stating that you are a specialist in hadith, and so on. Then you say, "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said such and such." Do you not ask me whether this hadith is authentic or not? Do you not let me tell you that the hadith you are citing is fabricated? Do you understand me or not?

The questioner : I understand.

The Shaykh : The point is...

The questioner : I want to ask a question, no harm in it.

The Shaykh : Please go ahead.

The questioner : Now, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)

The Shaykh : (peace and blessings be upon him)

The questioner : When he used to go out to the disbelievers in their markets and their shops to call them, was he accompanied by people like Abu Bakr, Usamah ibn Zayd, and Zayd ibn al-Harithah?

The Shaykh : He might have been accompanied by one or two people, of course.

The questioner : One or two, or more.

The Shaykh : There is no objection to that.

The questioner : The scholar among them was the Messenger (peace be upon him).

The Shaykh : (Peace and blessings be upon him), yes.

The questioner : And those with him were certainly less knowledgeable than he was.

The Shaykh : Certainly.

The questioner : If we do not say that they might have been ignorant at first, in the beginning of the call, that they did not have a reserve of knowledge.

The Shaykh : No, when you reach this point, the answer differs. Was this going out in the beginning of the call or afterwards?

The questioner : This was in the beginning of the call.

The Shaykh : Where?

The questioner : I mean, when the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) used to go out with Abu Bakr, and Abu Bakr knew the tribes, and he was with the Prophet as a guide, showing him the people and introducing them to him, this was in the beginning of the call...?

The Shaykh : Here it becomes clear that his going out was to guide the Messenger to something he needed. So here the issue has gone beyond what we are discussing.

The questioner : Did this going out not have an effect on the heart of Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him)?

The Shaykh : And do I deny this, may Allah reward you? Do I deny this?

The questioner : Do not deny this.

The Shaykh : So why are you asking this question?

The questioner : I want to reach a conclusion that if a group goes out

The Shaykh : Yes

The questioner : In which there is a learned person, a scholar or a student of knowledge, and with him are illiterate, ignorant, disobedient people, but they want to benefit, they benefit from knowledge, they benefit from good character, they benefit from faith, do we say that this thing is not permissible, or what do we say?

The Shaykh : If you stop at the limits of the question and do not address the reality, there is an answer. But if your intention with the question is to address the reality, there is a second answer. So what do you want?

The questioner : Your words are not clear. What do you mean by "address the reality"?

The Shaykh : The reality being researched is this going out. The reality today is that people have gone out from India, from Sindh, I do not know from where, and to other Islamic lands, praise be to Allah, from among them. Is this what you are asking about, or is it a small-scale going out?

The questioner : No, this is what I mean.

The Shaykh : What do you mean by this going out?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : This is what I am asking you about. Do you mean this or that?

The questioner : Yes, this is it.

The Shaykh : I tell you no. The small-scale going out is always present in every era, in every region, in every city.

The questioner : This is authentic.

The Shaykh : Correct. And so there is a difference between the question you are asking, and the answer is, I tell you, yes, this exists, and this is prescribed, and be assured, you will tell me this is correct. But this correct thing does not validate this going out that we are now going around in circles about.

The questioner : Why?

The Shaykh : Because you and I agree that this first going out, which we agreed on its correctness, exists, as I said earlier.

The questioner : It exists, correct.

The Shaykh : It exists in every era and in every region and city. But this going out has no basis at all in all the Islamic centuries that have passed. So this is not that.

The questioner : Do we not say that that going out which we affirmed is the basis for this going out?

The Shaykh : No.

The questioner : And why?

The Shaykh : Absolutely not. Glory be to Allah. This is what I am trying to draw your attention to. This is like the one who approves of every innovation that comes out today and before today. They come to you with general proofs. These general proofs do not cover this specific incident. Let us take an example, which is one of the simplest questions. One of them says, "Why do you deny sending blessings upon the Messenger after the adhan? Does not this sending of blessings upon the Messenger after the adhan include the saying of Allah the Exalted: ? Does not it include his saying (peace be upon him): ? The answer is no, my brother, no. Because this adhan is prescribed, and something was attached to it that was not present before in all these centuries of the past, which are known for their excellence. So now, arguing with some general texts for this incident is incorrect argumentation. Why? Why did I start my speech, may Allah reward you, with you? I told you, we agree that the best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad, and we agree with their saying "Every good is in following the Salaf, and every evil is in the innovation of the Khalaf". So this going out that exists now, certainly no person with a grain of intellect or knowledge can say that it was in the past centuries. We do not say the three centuries, but all these centuries. This is an incident in this time, without doubt.

The questioner : Where did we reach?

The Shaykh : We reached, may Allah reward you, that arguing with specific issues for general issues is incorrect. And the criterion, do not forget the criterion, and every good is in following the Salaf. Perhaps you remember when I told you that going out in the path of Allah was certainly before. But the question is, was this going out in the path of Allah before?

The questioner : In this form that is customary, with the codification and organization that I mentioned, no, it was not.

The Shaykh : Yes, this is it...

The questioner : We analogize to the original basis.

The Shaykh : Yes?

The questioner : Analogizing to the original basis means, I want to ask you a question, for example. Was, for example, Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them), being a compiler and a scholar of interpretation, did he sit like you are sitting now, in a library like this, with a table in front of him, and shelves, and electrical and electronic devices?

The Shaykh : No, by Allah.

The questioner : It was not. So do we say this action...?

The Shaykh : Why now do you have a clock that tires you out, so that we do not say that this going out was not there? Why? Why did you not say like me that Ibn Abbas was not like this? Why do you not say about this going out, "No, by Allah, it was not"? Why? Rather, you try to bring one hadith, two, three, and so on, in order to, as they say in our region in the Levant, without offense, in order to "cover the heavens with the cupolas" — the Shaykh (may Allah have mercy on him) laughs — Why? For this reason I tell you, O intellect, be an intellect. For this reason I tell you, you do not learn, discuss the proofs. The going out of the man fleeing from the land of sin and corruption to the land of the righteous, whose people are pure, we analogize to it the going out of the Muslims from their righteous land, with all its baggage, give me attention, their going out is analogized to their going out from the land of the righteous, with all its baggage, to the land of sin and corruption, to America, to Britain. Is this analogized to that? Glory be to Allah. Ibn Hazm the Zahiri, one of the great scholars of Andalus, and he is called the Zahiri because he relies on the texts in their apparent meaning in a way that has extreme rigidity, and we are not now in this context. From his rigidity, he denies analogy, contrary to the majority of scholars. And analogy, in truth, is the fourth proof, perhaps you remember with me the Qur'an, the Sunnah, consensus, and analogy. So the last of the four proofs is analogy. Why? Because of its precision. Not everyone can analogize. Pay attention. Not everyone can analogize, without offense, I tell you because I, first, have lived all this time openly, especially with my brothers with whom I feel sincerity, and you are among them, if Allah wills. I tell you that you are not able to analogize what the one who wants to analogize...

The questioner : I am not the one who wants to analogize.

The Shaykh : Allow me. At that time, it came out of you that we analogize this to that, and so on. But this did not come out of you; it came out of someone else.

The questioner : Yes, it came out of someone else, and I quoted it word for word.
.
.

The Shaykh : Ibn Hazm al-Zahiri was one of the great scholars of Andalusia. He is called a Zahiri because he relies on the apparent meaning of the texts in a manner that is extremely rigid. We are not discussing this aspect right now, but due to his rigidity, he rejects analogical reasoning (qiyas), contrary to the majority of scholars. Qiyas is, in fact, the fourth proof. Perhaps you can recall with me: the Qur'an, the Sunnah, scholarly consensus (ijma'), and qiyas. The last of the four proofs is qiyas. Why? Because of its precision. Not everyone is capable of performing qiyas. Pay attention; not everyone is capable of qiyas. No blame on you, I am telling you this because, first, I have lived through all this time openly, especially with my brothers with whom I feel sincerity, and you are among them, if Allah wills. I am telling you that it is not in your hands to perform qiyas. The one who wants to perform qiyas...

The questioner : I am not the one who wants to perform qiyas.

The Shaykh : Allow me, at that moment it came out of you that we measure this against that, and so on, but this did not come out of you; it came out of someone else.

The questioner : Yes, it came out of someone else, and I quoted it word for word.

The Shaykh : Therefore, I tell you, think. The point is that qiyas, due to its precision, the scholars of the majority and the scholars of the Sunnah placed it in the fourth position. Ibn Hazm rejected it entirely. But I am impressed by a phrase of his when he discusses those who perform qiyas, specifically those who perform qiyas on reality. He discusses qiyas, using a Syrian expression as well: "Qiyas is not weighed on a scale or a measure". Qiyas is far from the truth, entirely. For example, I have lived with the Hanafi school of jurisprudence. The Hanafi school tells you that if a person speaks during his prayer out of forgetfulness, his prayer is invalid. What is the evidence? They say it is by analogy to the one who does it intentionally. Allahu Akbar! This is analogizing the opposite to its opposite. Is the one who forgets to be analogized to the one who is intentional? Ibn Hazm, and the point here is that when he discusses such statements and such qiyas, what does he say? He has a catchphrase, meaning he repeats it constantly. He says, first, all qiyas is invalid. That is what he says, but my point is in the fullness of his statement: "Even if there were truth in it, this would be the very essence of falsehood". Did you understand his words?

The questioner :-Laughter- No...

The Shaykh : The point is, my brother, qiyas is not easy at all.
.
.

The Shaykh : Now, one thing leads to another. The scholars of Najd are respected scholars, and they are the best of those existing today on the face of the Islamic land, of course, because there is no other, but even so, they have things we do not agree with. The reason is the lack of precision in their examination. For example, you know that they place their hands after rising from bowing (ruku'). What is their argument? Of course, they have an argument; they do not say it is for no reason. But we want to study this argument, we want to reflect on it: is it correct or incorrect? They say: . He stood in prayer, this is standing. This is a correct statement, am I not saying that? I say this is evidence that does not hold, even though I agree with them that this is an authentic hadith: when he stood in prayer, he placed his right hand over his left. The hadith is authentic. But what is the evidence that this second standing is included in this text which, when first established, is established for the first standing? Is my speech clear to you here?

The questioner : That is a general statement and nothing specifies it...

The Shaykh : Well done, that is enough. He says, and here is the point, it is not enough for one of them to say, "My brother, this statement is a general text that includes the first standing and includes the second standing." Because we say that many texts have come that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) used to place his right hand over his left in the first standing. Do you have a single text that the Messenger used to place his hands in the second standing? There is no existence of such a text. Therefore, this general evidence is not suitable for deriving a ruling for this specific action. Is it clear?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : Let me bring this topic closer to you with something that has not happened yet, but I fear it may happen. If a group enters at the time of the midday prayer (Zuhr), for example, one wants to pray the sunnah to the east of the mosque and another to the west, and so on. One calls out and says to them, "My brothers, come, let us pray in congregation." He said, peace be upon him: . This is a hadith. Let us pray the pre-prayer sunnah in congregation. And perhaps this hadith is followed by a second hadith: . And perhaps a third hadith is attached to it: . And so on. Authentic hadiths, but the derivation is incorrect. I wonder, by what means will we respond, Professor, to those who have used these as evidence against us in this phenomenon, this gathering for the sunnah prayer? We do not have a hadith in which the Messenger said, "Do not pray the pre-prayer sunnah in congregation." We do not have such a hadith. But what do we have?

The questioner : The action of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and the Companions.

The Shaykh : Yes, may Allah reward you. Did the Companions do this? The answer is no. I wonder, did they understand these hadiths correctly? The answer is yes. Do you see, was their understanding like your understanding? The answer is no. Because if the answer were yes, would they have left the application of what they understood, and you come to correct them where you joined them in what they understood but contradicted them in application, because they did not apply it? The answer is no. This example, may Allah reward you, clarifies for you that any grouping, any gathering that has no precedent in the pure, bright eras, we are going to find a support for it like this man who did not find three supports, three hadiths, but the derivation from these hadiths is incorrect because the Salaf did not do this... because it is analogizing one image to another. This is a very, very difficult matter, first of all, especially if it conflicts, and here is the crux, with the life of the early Islamic societies, let alone the lower societies, because in some things have changed and transformed after the three centuries, but in other things, praise be to Allah, we are still preserving them. There is no difference between the Salaf and the Khalaf. For example, the preservation of prayers in the mosques, this has been inherited by Muslims, generation after generation. Yes, but there are things the Khalaf do that the Salaf did not do. Therefore, I want you to pay attention to this observation: deriving from texts, I say from texts that the practice of the Salaf did not follow, this is an error that opens up before us many innovations that we agree to deny, and their proponents establish the argument against us with the same evidence that we want to use to justify our current reality. This is with regard to going out in the path of Allah, this going out that is known today. But, Professor, do you not see with me that we return to the agreed-upon matter, that you mentioned and we do not deny this, that the conditions of many people were rectified by this going out? I drew your attention to the fact that there are people from the scholars and others whose conditions were rectified by means other than this going out. Do you not see with me that instead of the individual from these people who are from the common folk, and in the Syrian expression, instead of them packing their bags, meaning distancing themselves from their country and their people, and so on, is it not better for them to sit in their country as a group, form circles in the mosques, study the Qur'an in them, study the Sunnah in them, study fiqh in them? Is this not better than this going out?

The questioner : This is good speech...

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you. Therefore, we advise these people, and I know well that many of those who go out go out for the sake of Allah, they do not want reward or gratitude, but but...
"Sa'd led them, and Sa'd was wrapped up, this is not, O Sa'd, how you lead the camels"
So, these sincere ones, our speech is with them, otherwise every group has those with ill intentions. These sincere ones, let them call out to find a person to teach them the Qur'an, for example, and tajwid in one of the mosques, in one of the houses of Allah, as He said, peace be upon him: .