Continuation of the discussion on the explanation of a hadith in Muslim and al-Busiri’s exaggeration in praising the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).

The Shaykh : We claim, first of all, that we are all Muslims, and praise be to Allah; but there is another thing we claim, which is that we respect our righteous predecessors, the Companions, the Successors, and the jurists who exercised independent legal reasoning, from whom we received the knowledge of the Book, the Sunnah, Islamic jurisprudence, and creed. So, some Muslim scholars say that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) was taught by Allah everything, as stated in the hadith of the Pen based on the hadith in Muslim? I do not know of any knowledgeable Muslim who preceded us in saying something like this. Therefore, it is not permissible for anyone to say something contrary to what our scholars before us said, despite their differences in schools of jurisprudence and inclinations.

The questioner : It is well known to your eminence, our master,The Shaykh : that the Companions were the most truthful people and the most precise in narrating from the Prophet (peace be upon him), to the extent that one of them would not speak out of fear of falling into some forgetfulness...?

The Shaykh : Correct.

The questioner : The narration reached us on the tongue of the Companion with precision: he told us about what was and what is to be.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : The Companion can say, "He told us the keys of things," or "He told us their summary," or "He told us their great matters." However, his saying (may Allah be pleased with him), "what was and what is to be," means the ways. This is one point. The second point is that the Companion says: "There is no expedition about which we did not know, and we knew about its leader." An expedition is known to your eminence as a small group. As for your saying that if Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) revealed His knowledge to him, he would become a partner with Him; this is not said for one reason: as long as we attribute the matter to Allah (Mighty and Majestic) and say He revealed it to him, he became a created being. This is one point. The second point, well known to your eminence, is that Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) split for him from His beautiful names what is present in the Noble Qur'an. He said: , and these are among the beautiful names. We say the following: He said regarding our master Isaac: , and these are among the beautiful names. But if knowledge is attributed to Allah (Mighty and Majestic), it is eternal, and no one shares in it with Him. If it comes from Allah (Mighty and Majestic), it is created with respect to the known for the Prophet (peace be upon him). So, if He revealed to him the unseen, and the Companion’s statement is explicit that He revealed to him what was and what is to be, then it is created knowledge with respect to the Prophet (peace be upon him). Because the Prophet (peace be upon him) is a created being, it does not mean in any way that there is sharing, nor does it mean that the mercy of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is the very mercy of the divine mercy, nor that the prophetic mercy is the very divine mercy. Because the primordial mercy is eternal, and the mercy of the Prophet (peace be upon him) is created and existent in him. Likewise, the knowledge of our master Isaac is created knowledge, while the knowledge of the Truth (Exalted and Majestic is He) is eternal. So, Imam al-Busiri has a point when he said: "And among your knowledge is the knowledge of the Tablet and the Pen." This means that this hadith passed him by, and the man was not ignorant or an associate of partners with Allah, but he was in a century with scholars and people of the oneness of Allah who knew the chaff from the wheat. If he had been an associate of partners with Allah, they would have refuted him. Then, it is well known that if we have ninety-nine gates by which we declare someone a disbeliever, and one gate by which we do not declare them a disbeliever, we take the most cautious path as long as there is a point.

The Shaykh : Excuse me, what are you rambling about now, without blame.

The questioner : If I ramble, I will return to my words...

The Shaykh : No problem, allow me to tell you that you are saying first, second, third, fourth, and fifth. I confess to you that my memory is weak. I am not going to tell you the answer to number one is such and number two is such, and so on. But I felt that you finally deviated from the topic when you said that al-Busiri is an associate of partners with Allah and no one declared him a disbeliever, and so on. We were not in this vein. Allow me now, you said this...?

The questioner : What is prevalent among a group of people...

The Shaykh : Please, please, please.

The questioner : This gathering is pure and clean.

The Shaykh : Yes, you now did not mention the issue of associating partners with Allah, and what associating partners with Allah is, and whether he is an associate of partners with Allah or not?

The questioner : I said because a section of people say that he is an associate of partners with Allah.

The Shaykh : No problem, Professor, did I say that he is not an associate of partners with Allah or not?

The questioner : I said it.

The Shaykh : This is not mentioned in this gathering either, to keep it clean, as long as no one said that he is an associate of partners with Allah, you do not say he is not an associate of partners with Allah, because here the dirtiness of the gathering begins. Without blame, because I am forced to tell you now that in this gathering, on the contrary, we said that this is a poet who exaggerates in speech, and we did not say he is an associate of partners with Allah, so that you say he is not an associate of partners with Allah and no one declared him a disbeliever, and no one declared him an associate of partners with Allah, and so on. This is called deviating from what we were aiming at. We are with you regarding the hadith narrated by Imam Muslim, and I said from the perspective of such and such and such, and so on, and the Companions were such and such, some Muslim and some not Muslim. But despite that, I am a poet that you have deviated, and I tell you as I said regarding al-Busiri and others, without intention, but the deviation exists, and the exaggeration also exists there. But we do not look into what was in the hearts, because only the Knower of the Unseen knows that. You have deviated when you told us we are Muslims and praise be to Allah, then we follow the predecessors and the imams, and so on. And none of them said that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) is equal to Allah in knowledge, as you are saying now. But you distinguish that the knowledge of the Messenger is created, because Allah taught him, and this is also a fact in which two do not differ, and no two camels butt heads in it. But I asked you: which of the scholars to whom we belong, whether in the principles, in the creeds as the school of the people of hadith, the Maturidi school, and the Ash'ari school, which of these scholars equated Allah with His Messenger in knowledge of the unseen, with this difference that the Muslim must state, as you said just now, that this is by the creation of Allah and by the teaching of Allah to the Prophet? Who said that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) shares with Allah in the knowledge of the unseen things that were and will be until the Day of Resurrection? This is what you deviated from, without blame, and I hope for an answer from you frankly: do you know that?

The questioner : The answer frankly is that I do not cite the hadith of the Companions with another...

The Shaykh : This is not an answer.

The questioner : I do not judge the position of the Companions by the position of a Successor.

The Shaykh : This is not an answer, may Allah reward you.

The questioner : The speech of the Companion is definitive, and he is the most just of people after the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family).

The Shaykh : Excuse me, what did Abu Aish tell you?

The questioner : Abu 'Abd al-Rahman.

The Shaykh : I also met Abu 'Abd al-Rahman.

The questioner : May Allah preserve you.

The Shaykh : Ah, Abu 'Abd al-Rahman, if you allow, I raised my hand here. You too, what Allah willed, now we are going to find a treasure... May Allah bless you.

Another questioner : The treasure is present.

The Shaykh : May Allah bless you. And Abu 'Abd al-Rahman, you say I do not prefer anything over the hadith of the Messenger of Allah. Do you see that this 'Abd al-Rahman who is thick and that 'Abd al-Rahman contradict you in this statement? Of course not; is that not so? But I see it weak from you, ha. It must be in a strong tone that there is no disagreement in this, that this is valid, or not?

The questioner : Correct.

The Shaykh : Okay, but where is the disagreement? The disagreement is whether any of the Muslim scholars understood this hadith with this comprehensiveness, so that he became a partner with Allah in this attribute? With the difference you mentioned? You did not answer us about this. You gave the answer of the politicians, without blame.

The questioner : No, no.

The Shaykh : Allow me to complete my answer. I gave the answer of the politicians, I mean, I mean, to clarify to you the speech of politics: if an opportunity comes, he extends it and I extend it with him, and I say I intended this. And if politics requires, he freezes it and shortens it and narrows it, and I say this is what I intended. But the frank answer of the Muslim with his creed says something clear and evident, so that the people of the gathering see one understanding thatThe Shaykh : Abu 'Abd al-Rahman, who is me, says such and such, andThe Shaykh : Abu 'Abd al-Rahman, who is you...

The questioner : The poor Abu 'Abd al-Rahman.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : I am poor.

The Shaykh : What are you?

The questioner : I did not say Shaykh, I am poor.

The Shaykh : I am rich in my faith in Allah... Now, what do we have, Professor, with these titles? May Allah reward you. The important thing is that when the session ends and disperses, the people leave with certainty and insight. They say that Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Albani, Muhammad Nasir al-Din, says that it is not permissible for a Muslim to believe that Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) shares with Allah in any of His attributes, even if that is by creation from his Lord. This is what I say...

The questioner : A created thing cannot become eternal.

The Shaykh : Excuse me for a moment, am I speaking incorrectly?

The questioner : I mean, a created thing cannot be like the Eternal...

The Shaykh : Excuse me, am I speaking incorrectly?

The questioner : It is not possible for a created thing to be like the Eternal,

The Shaykh : You are not answering me.

The questioner : So every created thing, how can it be like Allah (Mighty and Majestic)?

Another questioner : I know that you are al-Albani. Of course, we have al-Nawas in Zarqa, meaning I know that you are al-Albani and he is al-Nawas, meaning by the kunya al-Nawas. Abu Abd al-Rahman, excuse me, his laqab is al-Nawas.

The Shaykh : No problem, what does that have to do with his answer? The important thing, Abu Abd al-Rahman, is what I said about the disagreement. Did I say it? Are you holding my belief? I am speaking about myself. Now, I say that the Lord of the Worlds is the All-Hearing and the All-Seeing, so no one shares with Him in this attribute. Here, some scholars say there may be a sharing; but a sharing in a way that cannot be mentioned, meaning, as I now recall something—Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar, Alhamdulillah who guided us to this, and we would not have been guided had Allah not guided us—do you know the story of Khidr (peace be upon him)? You know it, of course.

The questioner : Yes, we have heard of it.

The Shaykh : Alhamdulillah. Now, the story of Khidr is mentioned in the Noble Qur'an in a brief and concise manner. The authentic hadith came and clarified many things, and very many. I now recall something that has no relation to our discussion, but it confirms my point of view, at least mine. And I do not forget that my request of you is that people understand your opinion on the subject as an answer to a question posed to you...

The questioner : Am I speaking now?

The Shaykh : No problem. So I said that it is not permissible for a Muslim who truly believes in Allah and His Messenger, as it came in the Book and the Sunnah, to believe that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) gave His Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) all of the knowledge of the unseen his knowledge, meaning the knowledge of the Messenger; because Allah taught him that. It is not permissible for a Muslim to say that, meaning there is no difference for me between one who says that Allah is the Knower of the unseen as in the Noble Qur'an, and this is truth, and one who says that Allah taught His Prophet the knowledge of the unseen. This is an acquisition by the Prophet from Allah, that Allah taught him, so the knowledge of the Messenger is created, and the knowledge of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) is eternal and necessary in existence. This distinction is not sufficient. So it is not permissible for us to say that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) "Do not drink while standing, Professor." It is not permissible to say that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) learned everything of what was and what will be until the Day of Resurrection by Allah teaching him. It is not permissible to say this, why? Because this is a sharing, or associating the Messenger with an attribute of Allah. It does not justify or legitimize this association that, what, and Allah, it is so, Allah taught him. This is my opinion. You said it is not permissible because this is by Allah teaching His Messenger. So it occurred to me, before I repeat the previous question to you, the hadith of Khidr (peace be upon him), and what happened between them, the story of the ship, the story of the wall, and the story of the boy. After the story ended, he boarded the ship, so Allah sent a bird that stood on the edge of the ship and pecked with its beak from the water, drop by drops. So Khidr (peace be upon him) said to Musa: "My knowledge and your knowledge in relation to the knowledge of Allah is like this drop that the bird took from the sea." So the divine knowledge in this analogy is the sea, and the knowledge of the prophets and messengers is a drop among drops. So it is not permissible, may Allah reward you, for a Muslim to say that I believe, on the apparent meaning of the hadith of Muslim, that Allah taught the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) everything that exists until the Day of Resurrection, without restriction by the other texts. So I asked you, and I am still asking you, do you know any of the Muslim scholars whom we follow, whether in creed the people of hadith, the Asha'irah, the Maturidiyyah, or the jurists, etc., who said this broad, comprehensive statement with the exception I mentioned, which is that Allah taught him, so the knowledge of the Messenger is created? Do you know who said that among the Muslims?

The questioner : The narrator of the hadith, the Companion who narrated the hadith, and I do not argue with a Tabi'i against a Companion.

The Shaykh : This is not an answer, may Allah reward you.

The questioner : And I do not argue with a Tabi'i against a Companion. By the statement of the Companion: "There is no expedition, and it is a small group, but we were informed about it and its leader. Then the event would pass by me, and if it were a general matter of great things, the mention of the Companion passing by the event, he would say: 'It is as if I saw it in a dream...'"

The Shaykh : If you allow me, Abu Abd al-Rahman, this is speech we have heard from you; but what we want from you and hope to receive is what we have heard. You understand from this hadith this understanding...

The questioner : I understand what the Companion said...

The Shaykh : This is a repetition, my brother, may Allah reward you. This is a repetition for the third or fourth time. This is what you understand from the hadith. I understand from the hadith that the intended meaning is the principles and heads of the unseen matters, and not all the details that the pen has passed through, what is and what will be until the Day of Resurrection. So I am now differing with you in understanding. No problem, I differ with you and you differ with me in understanding. But we need what supports your understanding or my understanding. What is the support? The Companion said, the Tabi'i said, the Imam Mujtahid Abu Hanifa, Malik, the Imam al-Shafi'i, the Imam Ahmad, etc. This is what I demand from you. I do not ask you, nor do I request from you ever, to repeat your opinion to my ears, for I have understood it as I see this light.

The questioner : ... I do not want to answer you. The hadith remains as it is. If you find something that takes it out of what it is, the hadith indicates comprehensiveness and totality. So I demand from you what I demanded from you?

The Shaykh : It is the fourth time.

The questioner : I demand from you what I demanded from you. Bring another Companion or Tabi'i or Imam or Mujtahid who said that the hadith means the general matters and the heads of things?

The Shaykh : I told you just now...

Another questioner : The Shaykh : It is not limited to the answer.

The Shaykh : Excuse me, no problem, if Allah wills. I answered this question.

The questioner : And I answered you about what you asked me.

The Shaykh : No, no, Abu Abd al-Rahman, may Allah be pleased with you, the hadith...

The questioner : I demanded from you, so the hadith is in its comprehensiveness and needs specification, so we demand from you the specification.

The Shaykh : Abu Abd al-Rahman, Abu Abd al-Rahman, the matter is not a duel or a wrestling match.

The questioner : O Allah, if the truth is... or wherever the truth is...

The Shaykh : We do not know what is in your heart, we are only hearing from your words. But when you said to me, I loved you for this, you are meeting me, and I have answered you. No, I want to draw your attention to what preceded in the folds of my speech when I said to you, Allah (Mighty and Majestic) said: I said the unseen here does not mean all the unseen, but some of the unseen...

The questioner : What is the evidence for that?

The Shaykh : The Arabic language that we understand. Excuse me, the Arabic language that we understand. You say here, what is the evidence? It is the interpretation of the Qur'an that we received from generation to generation. Do you believe, and this leads us to the subject of truth, perhaps this is the thing in which we are differing now, is a branch of that subject. And I hope I am mistaken that you and I are now differing in something that is a root of the roots of the Shari'ah. And I hope I am mistaken, because it is in our interest that if I am mistaken in that thing I will state, that we will finally agree that it is not permissible for us to interpret the hadith of Muslim with this comprehensive, broad interpretation. And that is: is it permissible for a Muslim, after fifteen centuries, to come to a text in the Qur'an or the Sunnah and interpret it detached from all these scientific efforts that we inherited from our Salaf and Khalaf, and come with his own opinion and say this is my opinion, and interpret with it a book or a verse or a Prophetic hadith? Or is the matter as we said in the folds of our previous speech:
"And all good is in following the Salaf *** And all evil is in the innovation of the Khalaf." And as some of them said, and we did not mention it just now, and now the opportunity has come:
"Knowledge is what Allah said, what His Messenger said, *** and what the Companions said; it is not deception."
"Knowledge is not for you to set up a foolish dispute *** between the Messenger and the opinion of a jurist. No, nor is it to deny the attributes and their negation *** out of fear of denying the divine attributes or likening Allah to creation."
So now, are you not a believer with us that all good lies in following the Salaf, and all evil lies in the innovation of the Khalaf?

The questioner: Muslims do not differ on this.

The Shaykh: Praise be to Allah. I return to the first question: Do you believe that it is permissible for a Muslim to interpret a text from the Book or the Sunnah with an interpretation of his own?

The questioner : Of course not.

The Shaykh : If?

The questioner: It is necessary to interpret it either by the Book or by the Sunnah...

The Shaykh: No, no, this is a mistake; the answer is wrong. Because you say "interpretation by the Book," I am asking you: is it permissible to interpret the Book with your own understanding, or do you rely, as we said, on the righteous Salaf who interpreted it?

The questioner: One like me is a minor who cannot interpret the Book with his own opinion, because he does not possess the qualifications for independent legal reasoning.

The Shaykh: Very good.

The questioner: And there is no comprehensive Arabic language [knowledge].

The Shaykh : Good, very good. It is not permissible for a person to interpret a verse or a hadith unless he supports his opinion and interpretation with something transmitted from the Salaf; otherwise, we would fall into the deviation we mentioned earlier regarding the beautiful prophetic depiction . Do you not know that in the books of creed, across the different schools of jurisprudence, as we mentioned earlier, you will not find anyone who says that the knowledge of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is equal to the knowledge of Allah, despite the distinction I mentioned?

The questioner: The unseen is part of the knowledge of Allah, not all of the knowledge of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He).

The Shaykh: Please, do not repeat it; we want something new.

The questioner: If you please... The unseen is part of the knowledge of Allah, and the knowledge of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) is not confined to the unseen. This is one point.

The Shaykh : How?

The questioner: I mean, just the knowledge of Allah (Mighty and Majestic)...

The Shaykh: How? How? Does the knowledge of Allah pertain to the non-existent or to the existent?

The questioner: Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) is the Creator of all things.

The Shaykh: Please, my master, answer my question: Does the knowledge of Allah pertain to the existent or to the non-existent?

The questioner: To the existent.

The Shaykh: Okay, what is the meaning of your words then? The existent is that which the Pen has written.

The questioner: I mean, everything we see is just the knowledge of Allah (Mighty and Majestic), but is this the only knowledge of Allah (Mighty and Majestic)?

The Shaykh: Allah is the Greatest. Everything, everything that preceded in the knowledge of Allah that it would be, He knows it. As for that which did not occur in the knowledge of Allah...

The questioner: If His knowledge is what the Pen has written, then He has revealed this to us, the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the Companions...?

The Shaykh : How? How?

The questioner: If His knowledge is only what the Pen has written, then this is what was revealed... The Companions said, "What was and what is to be..."

The Shaykh: We are back to "Hilala returned to her old habit." There is no benefit in this.

The questioner: Okay, the clever line from Imam al-Busiri: "And among Your knowledge is the knowledge of the Tablet and the Pen." The Pen wrote what was and what is to be, and the Companions say, "He told us what was and what is to be." So, does al-Busiri have a chain of narration in any case?

The Shaykh: In any case, no, he does not have a chain of narration. In any case, we are now leaving you to think and leaving us to think. We leave you to think about the opinion you raised, and we think about the opinion we heard, perhaps Allah (Mighty and Majestic) will guide the one of us who is astray. And I do not say, as you said earlier in a veiled manner, that no one has declared him a disbeliever or accused him of associating partners with Allah; but I say with the tongue of the Noble Qur'an: Therefore...

The questioner: This is a statement regarding the disbeliever, so I say, may Allah forgive us all...

The Shaykh: Allow me, for myself, I am asking you, and especially according to your methodology: Is deviation limited or unlimited?

The questioner: We have not reached the knowledge of logic or anything else. We and you, perhaps we are on guidance or in clear deviation. I rise above the position of this statement.

The Shaykh: I say the Qur'an. O Shaykh, may Allah guide you, do you know something among the scholars called "quotation"? Do you know it?
Al-Halabi: The lesson is in the generality of the wording, not the specificity of the cause, O my Shaykh.

The Shaykh: Yes, and that is why I am asking him about deviation in your view.

The questioner: O Shaykh, this verse was revealed regarding the disbelievers...
Al-Halabi: By the consensus of all scholars, the lesson is in the generality of the wording, not the specificity of the cause.

The questioner: You are not going to apply an analogy to a believer and cite a verse against him...

The Shaykh: We are not applying an analogy to you... Allow me, we want to put a point on the path of the hadith scholars: a circle with a point in the center. If Allah wills, the truth is that in reality, and I am a frank man as my brothers know, I heard from the one named Abu 'Abd al-Rahman what I did not hear in a dream, you see, and I say, "There is no power and no strength except with Allah." But alongside this, I say that the session was excellent in terms of the method of what? The back-and-forth; because we gathered with many of my like, and without offense, those who exaggerate regarding the prophets, and even regarding other than the prophets, but unfortunately it was never possible to proceed for a few minutes. So I thank him from this perspective, where he enabled us to understand from him and for him to understand from us, and we left the gathering each with clarity regarding what so-and-so said and what so-and-so said. This is a merit that must not be wasted and must be preserved, because Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) says: And I hope from him that he does not take the first part of the verse, because my intention is the second part, which is: He does not say that I am applying the verse to him: "I hate a group of people," so he says, "You hated me." No, my intention from the verse is: This is one point.

The questioner: You are a scholar, you are a balanced scholar with patience, and this is what we know of you, and it is not possible for us to touch upon anything else.

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you with good.
Al-Halabi: By way of reminder, the hadith of the Prophet (peace be upon him) when he heard the slave girl who was reciting and singing, saying, "And among us is a Messenger who knows what is in tomorrow."

The Shaykh : You have done well.
Al-Halabi: So the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: So, is the Messenger contradictory? It is not possible except with the understanding mentioned by our Shaykh (may Allah preserve him).

The Shaykh: But may Allah bless you, we have not heard his opinion on the hadith of Khidr. That one is explicit that Allah is unique in the knowledge of the unseen. And I hope you remember what the man said: he generalized the knowledge of Allah even to things that have not been created, you see, so that His knowledge is not the knowledge of the Messenger. What He taught him, suppose something known to Allah, what is that thing? It is the thing that the Pen has not written and which will not be until the Day of Resurrection. Yes.

Another questioner: O my Shaykh, I recall on this subject the hadith of the one who came to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) with an angel and two scrolls, one for the people of Paradise and one for the people of Hell. Can this hadith clarify that it is one of the forms of parts of the knowledge of the unseen?

The Shaykh: This is correct, indeed.
Al-Halabi: In the verses "They ask you," the verses "They ask you," say, "They ask you... And Adam was taught all the names..."

The Shaykh: It means the scientific principles.

Another questioner: The hadith, I am just asking, this hadith was about the trials when the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) ascended, and he spoke about the trials, is that not so?

The Shaykh: It is so, of course.

Another questioner: So its meaning is limited, according to my understanding, and if I am wrong, correct me.

The Shaykh: No, complete.

The questioner: That the hadith is limited to what has been and what will be of the trials. He did not tell him about the computer and what will happen in it?

The questioner: ... The hadith was said regarding the morning prayers, and they delayed for the dawn prayer, so they wanted to stand after performing the prayer. The hadith said, "In your rows." The hadith is narrated byThe Shaykh: In his wording, I do not remember it.

The Shaykh: No problem, the meaning is enough for us.

The questioner: The Truth said, regarding what the highest assembly disputes, I said, "My Lord, I do not know." He said, "So He placed His hand between my shoulders — without doubt and without likening — until I felt its coldness between my breasts, and I knew everything. So He asked me, 'And what do the people of the highest assembly dispute about?' I said, 'About expiations, and so on and so on,' in the hadith that he is citing.The Shaykh : So I knew everything, and then I was given the knowledge of the first and the last. So in reality, we are not different; we only differ in our understanding of the hadith. All of us Muslims agree that a Companion would say such and such, and in the full hadith he would say, "So the event would pass by me and I would remember it, just as a sleeper remembers something he saw in a dream or something he had forgotten." This means that whether the events were simple or major, he did not need to be reminded. Then he told us about every secret and who its leader was. So we say: if the wali (close friend of Allah) says that Allah said in the Qudsi hadith , this does not mean that we attribute to the servant something from Allah the Exalted, making him a god and a partner with Allah. It is known that the attribute *Rauf* (Compassionate) is a *fa'ul* form, and *Rahim* (Merciful) is a *fa'il* form, and both are forms of intensification. They mean intensification in the occurrence of the attribute, not intensification in sharing it. So the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is *Rauf*, and he is mercy, and the eye of mercy...?

The Shaykh : No, do not say "the eye of mercy"; say "mercy" and that is enough. Allah did not say "the eye of mercy"; that is a problem.

The questioner : He (peace be upon him) said that he is mercy, so he is the eye of mercy. He says: . This does not take the Prophet (peace be upon him) out of being a created being, whereas *Rauf* (*fa'ul*) means abundant compassion toward many and toward the highest, and then *Rahim* means abundant and toward the highest. And from that is *Rahman* and *Rahim*... but

The Shaykh : There is no god but Allah!

The questioner : From that, we say that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is *Rahim* and the Truth is *Rahim*. Do they share in the meaning? They share in the wording, but each has its own signification, so it does not mean sharing. The sharing is limited to the wording...

The Shaykh : This is a refutation of you. The last sentence, O Abu 'Abd al-Rahman, if you had reflected on it, you would have found it a refutation of you. Sharing in the name, you are right, do you see? But it is not sharing in the attribute. Now, you stop at the attribute of *Rahim* and *Ra'fah* (compassion) with which our Lord described His Prophet. Can you say that the mercy of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in its manner and its comprehensiveness is like the mercy of the Lord of the Worlds, *al-Rahman al-Rahim*? Or do you say...?

The questioner : Of course not.

The questioner : The Unseen is likewise.

The Shaykh : The Unseen is likewise.

The questioner : This mercy is created.

The Shaykh : There is no power and no strength except by Allah,

The questioner : This is a created, occurring mercy.

The Shaykh : My brother, I beg you, since you say we want to know the truth, why do you turn the topic around an issue on which there is no disagreement? We have no disagreement that this is created, but the disagreement is whether this created thing equals that which is not created.

The questioner : Of course not.

The Shaykh : You just said "of course not" regarding mercy. Why do you not say "of course not" regarding knowledge?

The questioner : I say that his knowledge is eternal knowledge, the knowledge of Allah the Exalted. Of course not.

The Shaykh : And do you say that the mercy of Allah is eternal?

The questioner : Of course not, it is occurring.

The Shaykh : But that is not the research, may Allah be pleased with you. That is not the research. The research is: is the attribute of mercy in its generality and comprehensiveness like the attribute of the mercy of *al-Rahman*? You say no.

The questioner : Of course not.

The Shaykh : And we agree with you on this, but you contradict and say that the divine knowledge, which is one of the attributes of Allah, is something in which the Messenger shares with Allah.

The questioner : No, no, shall I rewind the tape for you here?

The Shaykh : My brother, we mentioned your words, I am completing your words. I am repeating your own goods to you. You say that the knowledge of the Messenger regarding the Unseen equals the knowledge of Allah, and the difference is that this is created and that is not created. That is your statement... Allow me a moment, now we need to return to the principle on which we agreed, may Allah bless you, which is that it is not permissible for us to interpret with our opinions and ideas. You are now understanding from the word of the hadith of Mu'adh ibn Jabal that you mentioned recently, when the Lord of the Worlds placed His hand between his hands, and so on, and he knew everything. Is this totality the totality of the knowledge of Allah in terms of totality and comprehensiveness, or is it less than that? I hope the answer will be clear?

The questioner : You must have the hadith that the Companion narrated, regarding what was written by the Pen until the Day of Resurrection.

The Shaykh : He is not answering... Okay, let us stop here, good. You are making this statement that you believe in an interpretation of the words of al-Busiri. This interpretation is valid only if it was as we said, "For whoever taught you the knowledge of the Tablet." He says "from your knowledges," and you just now made the knowledge of Allah two kinds: existing knowledge and knowledge we do not know. So he made this existing knowledge from the knowledge of the Messenger, and there is another knowledge. So you are now defending the words of al-Busiri. Defend al-Busiri as you wish, we have no disagreement, and we have no enmity at all with a Muslim who testifies that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. But do not defend his error. For what purpose? It is an error, and the best of sinners are those who repent. He says "from your knowledges." You are now making his words "from your knowledge is the knowledge of the Tablet and the Pen." The difference between you and al-Busiri is very clear. You make the knowledge of the Messenger the knowledge of the Tablet and the Pen, i.e., his knowledge, and not "from" it, because "from" in knowledge is partitive. Allow me... You are making a big difference between you and al-Busiri, you are making a big difference between you and al-Busiri, whom you are not defending, you are defending his words. You say the inscribed knowledge that was inscribed by the Pen is the knowledge of the Messenger (peace be upon him). As a joke, or we do not bless you in it, of course; because this is contrary to the creed of all Muslims. But you defend al-Busiri who says "from your knowledges is the knowledge of the Tablet and the Pen," and you do not believe in this. Do you believe in the words of al-Busiri on their apparent meaning?

The questioner : I say...

The Shaykh : Allow me, I am asking you, I am asking you, may Allah bless you...

The questioner : I say "from" can be partitive, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : No, knowledges, knowledges, the word "knowledges."

The questioner : "From" can be explanatory...?

The Shaykh : There is no power and no strength except by Allah, my brother, it can be explanatory, and is "knowledges" plural or singular?

The questioner : As long as there is a way, O Shaykh, as long as there is a way not to put the man in a difficult position regarding his words...

The Shaykh : We are putting him in a difficult position. You have returned to what we denied. Do not speak about the man; we are not speaking about the man, we are speaking about his words.

The questioner : O Shaykh, al-Busiri says "Leave what the Christians claimed about their Prophet." This agrees with the hadith of the Prophet (peace be upon him) .

The Shaykh : You did not answer, O Professor. This is a deviation being recorded against you, may Allah bless you. We are asking you. Do not say what we said, do not say the words of al-Busiri. He says "from the knowledges of the Messenger is the knowledge of the Tablet." Do not say the words of al-Busiri. He says "from the knowledges of the Messenger is the knowledge of the Tablet." You say "the knowledge of the Messenger is what is in the Tablet." And the difference between you and him is vast. If you are not speaking with it, and it does not add to what is in your heart, then you must admit that this statement is an error. Do not declare him a disbeliever or an associate of partners with Allah, and this is what concerns us; because his end is with Allah. But this statement which Muslims seek blessing from, and they put water in the cup in the gathering where this statement contrary to the Shari'ah is recited, this you must deny, because it is contrary to your opinion, contrary to your creed. Otherwise, your creed is like his creed, i.e., if you accept the words of al-Busiri, you believe that the knowledge of the Messenger (peace be upon him) of what was and what will be is a part, a small part, not the whole. Or do you say al-Busiri erred in his saying: "From your knowledges is the knowledge of the Tablet and the Pen"? This is if we accept your statement that the Messenger (peace be upon him) encompassed with knowledge everything that was and everything that will be until the Day of Resurrection. But he, al-Busiri, adds to you. So it is one of two things: either you say al-Busiri is wrong, but he is neither with us nor with you. You say so, and by Allah, we will tell you that you have been fair, even once. Or you say I am defending al-Busiri because Allah taught the Messenger what was and what will be. This is not the statement of al-Busiri. The statement of al-Busiri is "from your knowledges." Can you convince us before we leave that you agree with us that this statement is neither Qur'an nor a hadith from the Messenger (peace be upon him), but rather the words of a man who may err and may hit the mark ? Do you have the literary, indeed creedal, courage to say he erred in his saying "from his knowledges," even if he is rewarded for it if he was intending and exerting effort? So I hope to hear this admission?

The questioner : I have not reached the linguistic aspect.

The Shaykh : That is a problem then.

The questioner : Even I am not at the level of his knowledge, and I do not know from it...

The Shaykh : But we see you as more than that; because you say what no one else says.

The questioner : I am a student of knowledge, so I do not establish a ruling.

Another questioner : In the poem by al-Busiri, at its end, he says, "And it was said: Every prophet is with his nation, and O Muhammad, this is the Throne, so touch it." Is there not a doubt in this statement and an exaggeration?
Al-Halabi : Our Shaykh, before we move on, there is a point in the same hadith you mentioned earlier. In Sahih Muslim, which you praised, our brother mentioned the hadith. Yes, my teacher, in the hadith itself, the Companion narrator said, "He who memorized it memorized it, and he who forgot it forgot it." So, some of the Companions memorized this hadith, and we are certain that the Companions, the guardians of the Shari'ah, who preserved Islam for us and what the Master of Mankind (peace and blessings be upon him) narrated, and one of them would pick up the words of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) to narrate them to the people, did they conceal what the Messenger said from here until the Hour, what has been and what will be?

The Shaykh : May Allah protect them from that.
Al-Halabi : So they must have said it, and they did not say, "Here are the books before us, the two Sahihs, the six books, and the Musnad, and so on." They did not say what he mentioned of all these details; rather, they are the essentials of things, as you said.The Shaykh .

The Shaykh : I will add to you: bring the authentic hadiths. The authentic hadiths, the good hadiths, the weak hadiths, and the fabricated hadiths attributed to the Messenger of Allah do not equal a drop of what is in the Preserved Tablet. People, it is a very terrifying matter for a Muslim to deviate in his belief from the transmitted texts and from reason. Reason cannot accept that the Companions of the Messenger, by their nature, would transmit this knowledge that all of humanity cannot encompass. All of humanity, including the prophets, messengers, awliya (close friends of Allah), and the righteous, it is impossible for them to encompass what has been and what will be until the Day of Resurrection. This is an impossible matter.

Another questioner : This was during their lifetimes. How many secret expeditions went out during the lives of the Companions who were after the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)? This was repeated to them.

The Shaykh: There is no power nor strength except with Allah.

The questioner : The Messenger's (peace and blessings be upon him) lecture for half an hour, or an hour, or five hours, what can be said in it?

The Shaykh: It is not possible.

Another questioner : Perhaps just the main points, that in the end times, such and such will happen, and that is all.

The Shaykh : Yes, these are the main points.

Another questioner : Is it permissible that the knowledge of Allah be encompassed by a hadith of one day?

The Shaykh : Impossible, people, impossible.

The questioner : Did he not say he prayed the midday prayer and then went out again on the same day?

The Shaykh : Listen, our brothers.

Another questioner It means that he does not know.

The Shaykh : Very good words, and this...

The questioner : And this hadith must be interpreted figuratively.

The Shaykh : Allah is the Greatest, Allah is the Greatest! O Shaykh, first, may Allah reward you.

The questioner : O Shaykh, you did not hear from me.

The Shaykh : I heard you say the word "interpretation."

The questioner : Do you judge me before I speak?

The Shaykh : No, I heard you say "first." We tell you, why do you not interpret? The texts you rely on, you take them by their general evidence. Now, when I asked you some questions at the end, you said, "I am not that scholar, and I do not establish myself to be a judge." And why do you establish yourself to defend an opinion of yours? As soon as you hear a text and feel you have the capacity to answer it, you stand up and respond to it. Allow me, may Allah reward you.

The questioner : I answer the thing that...

The Shaykh : Allow me, may Allah reward you. And if you are asked a question and you do not have an answer, you say, "I am not a scholar, I am a student of knowledge." And I, and all our brothers, are students of knowledge. Is there anyone among you who says no? No matter how much a person seeks knowledge, he remains a student of knowledge. If he says, "I have known," then he has been ignorant. We are all students of knowledge, but we do not escape the argument with the word "I am a student of knowledge, I do not establish myself as a judge." Allow me, my brother, may Allah be pleased with you. I have told you repeatedly, may Allah be pleased with you, allow me to finish my speech. And as you know, this is also among the etiquettes of the gathering. So, the man mentioned, may Allah reward him with good, the hadith . I said from the start, "We interpret this hadith." So I took this word and it was enough for me. Why do you interpret this text and not accept the interpretation of the texts we told you about? And you say, "The Companions know best"? My brother, we did not disagree that the Companions know best, but what is the meaning of the Companion's statement? Generality and comprehensiveness. Now, when we answer you with a verse from the Qur'an, what do you say about this verse? Can you say, "By Allah, I am not a scholar, I am a student of knowledge..."

The questioner : No, that is a mistake, O Shaykh...

The Shaykh : Allow me to finish my topic. Now there is a verse, and you seem to be memorizing from the Qur'an. What is the whole verse that says: What is the verse? Who memorizes it? Is this general or specific?

The questioner : Generality.

The Shaykh : What do you say, its generality or its specification?

The questioner : I do not know.

The Shaykh : This is what you thought. When you are asked a scientific question, you say, "I do not know." When the issue touches your opinion and your belief, and you are in danger, you say, "We leave the text on its generality." Why do you not leave this text on its generality? and what follows it, a negation followed by restriction. This is a general text, but the scholars of exegesis, may Allah reward you, come and tell you, "You do not leave anything that Allah the Mighty and Majestic intended to erase from the face of the earth, or from these things, the wide earth of Allah." Did He destroy the whole earth and make it scattered dust, as will be the case with this earth and the other planets on the Day of Resurrection? Of course not. So the scholars are the lamps, and we must consider their opinion and their exegesis. We do not rely on our own understanding and say, "This is what the Companion said, we believe the Companion said this." But did he intend generality and comprehensiveness? We believe that Allah said: But is the meaning generality and comprehensiveness? The answer here is no, and the answer there is no. Why? Because the other evidences, if we gather them all, indicate to us that the knowledge of Allah is not equal to the knowledge of a scholar in this world. And it does not save you from contradiction to say, "The knowledge of this scholar, Allah gave it to him, and it is not from his own essence, and the knowledge of Allah is from His own essence." This is absolutely not permissible. And it is enough for you as a conclusion, even if we have bored our brothers with the length of the speech, please think about what I said earlier in answer to our question: The Messenger is merciful, and the Messenger is compassionate, and the Great Truth of Allah; but when we asked you, is the mercy of the Messenger like the mercy of Allah? You said no. Is the knowledge of the Messenger like the knowledge of Allah? You did not say no.

The questioner : I said no.

The Shaykh : Allow me, my brother, may Allah be pleased with you. I am reading the verse No, I seek refuge in Allah. Listen to the complete speech. I said, "The knowledge of the Messenger is like the knowledge of Allah in terms of encompassing and comprehensiveness, but it is created." I said this. And as you say, and your words are recorded, and I am far from you in this speech, so I say your words are recorded. Therefore, I hope you will think about this explicit admission: the mercy of the Prophet does not equal the mercy of Allah, his compassion does not equal the compassion of Allah, the knowledge of the Messenger does not equal the knowledge of Allah. And this means that he does not know everything, as you argue with the hadith of Mu'adh and others, which is the evidence preventing you from saying, "And memorize the hadith of Khadr (peace be upon him) like human knowledge and divine knowledge, as a drop from the sea." And what is the hadith you mentioned?
Al-Halabi : No one knows the unseen except Allah. Leave that and say...

The Shaykh : Yes, no one knows the unseen except Allah.

The questioner : The hadith narrated by the Companion, which is the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him), the Prophet informs about it. He is the one who informs about it. So how does he not know, when he informs about it?

The Shaykh: Allahu Akbar.

The questioner : As long as he informs, he says, "Do not let men be turned away from my pond as the lost camel is turned away." So I say, come, come...

The Shaykh : Listen to me, but allow me, you will be later.

The questioner : For you do not know what they will innovate after you. So I say, woe, woe. Now, is the Prophet (peace be upon him) not informing?

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

The questioner : He informs about something that will be.

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

The questioner : He is informed about it.

The Shaykh: No.

The questioner : He does not inform about it?

The Shaykh : No, he is informed of it in a general way, as we say, and not in detail as you claim. This is a crushing argument in this matter, if you are sincere, you should be fair. He is informed in a general way because Allah (Mighty and Majestic) informed him of what will happen in a general way. This is one of the hadiths that supports our interpretation, along with the hadith of Hudhayfah and others found in Muslim. He knows it in a general way, but not in detail. Therefore, it is said of him: I ask you for a little fairness, Abu Abd al-Rahman. Today is the world, and tomorrow is the Hereafter. I see you like in my story: we have turned white, and only a hand's breadth remains between us and the grave. I see that, so you should review yourself. This is a belief that contradicts the Book, the Sunnah, and the consensus of the Muslims, both the later and the earlier generations. And our Lord (Mighty and Majestic) says in the Noble Qur'an: I seek refuge in Allah (Mighty and Majestic) that anyone in this gathering is one who has strayed from the path of the believers.

The questioner: Amen.
Al-Halabi : Our Shaykh, no problem, one last thing. Our professor, regarding the interpretation (ta'wil) mentioned by al-Hajj, may Allah reward him with good, that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) narrated about this. We benefited from this narration that he knows. So we say: will what the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) narrated happen, or will it not happen? It will happen. So if the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) is asked, and his companions say, "Our companions, our companions," what will be said to him?

The Shaykh : You lied, you lied.
Al-Halabi : You do not know, meaning the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) lied. So if you are correct in one, you are wrong in the other, and if you are correct in the other, you are wrong in the first.

Another questioner : Also, we, as Arabs, if you went to an intelligence officer and he said to you, "I know everything about you."

The Shaykh: . . . May Allah bless you . . .

Another questioner : Five points: your name, which country you are from, and I don't know what else. So the one who is right knows how many pages about you, but there are a million pages. As for him, he says, "I know everything about you." We Arabs, what comes to mind from the context of the Prophet's (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) sermon is that he spoke in brief headings, whereas the leader of the squad...

The Shaykh : The truth is, my brothers, our brother Abu Abd al-Rahman, may Allah guide us and him to the straight path, said a word of truth. He is a student of knowledge, not a scholar. And I admit that he is like me, a student of knowledge, but he must study the Arabic language and its styles. So if I tell him now that in linguistics there is something called "mentioning the whole while intending the part" ("mentioning the whole while intending the part"), do you know this style in the Arabic language?

The questioner: No.

The Shaykh : This is a problem. So when the Messenger (peace be upon him) says, "Hajj is 'Arafah," what does the one who does not know the Arabic language say? If you performed Hajj and that's it, the matter is over. This is a lot. But the Arabic style says: he mentioned the whole, Hajj, and what did he intend? A part of Hajj, which is 'Arafah. Why? Because of its importance.

The questioner : Because of its importance.

The Shaykh : Well done, may Allah reward you. Because of the importance of this thing, it is very important that Allah informs the Messenger (peace be upon him) of some of the signs of the unseen and informs his companions of that. As for every big and small thing, this is enough... This is a matter as we said, and we do not support what we said, and it is sufficient to share with Allah in the attribute, with the difference that he clings to and dwells on. And that is, for example, if Allah (Mighty and Majestic) says: "The Qur'an of the Fajr" means its recitation; but this is not the intended meaning. What is the intended meaning? The Fajr prayer. Subhan Allah, Allah is saying that, and he might argue with me and say to me, why do you interpret the Qur'an? The Qur'an says You do not know the language; unfortunately, many Arabs today have forgotten their Arabic language, and what we are in now is enough. The four prayers were mentioned at the beginning of the verse, and "the Qur'an of the Fajr" was conjoined to them, meaning the Fajr prayer. Meaning the Fajr prayer. This, may Allah reward you, is a style in the Arabic language, as that Companion said, and I quote from him: "He who knew it knew it, and he who did not know it did not know it." He mentions the general and intends the specific; he mentions the whole and intends the part. These are styles in the Arabic language; if we ignore them, we deviate greatly or dangerously.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good, our Shaykh...

The questioner : On the occasion of your mentioning the hadith of I say, when some people are denied something of the innovated actions, such as mentioning the singular name of Allah, "Allah, Allah, Allah," or the loud dhikr, or seclusion, or things related to this, and they say this is an innovation, they say this is a good Sunnah...?

The Shaykh : Yes, the truth is that this hadith is very important; but it is my nature that I do not want to force people to sit, because knowledge, knowledge, the general people say it remains dry. We need something to entertain us, something to lighten our hearts, something to drive drowsiness from our eyes, and so on. So I say, whoever wants to sit, I will sit with him, and whoever wants to leave, he has left, and I am not sure...

The questioner : By Allah, this is contrary to what we were accustomed to before, my professor.

The Shaykh : How? ... How? You must be the first to stand; it appears that if you violate the rule, your juniors will know you...