Continuing the discussion on the issue of cut gold and the like.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : I feel, and I am an honest and sincere advisor to you, that you are now following the path of those who follow what is ambiguous in it.
The questioner : I seek refuge in Allah.
The Shaykh : And I seek refuge in Allah that you be among them!
The questioner : By Allah, indeed.
The Shaykh : But you are walking down this path without knowing or realizing it. Now look, you asked me a question just now and ended it by saying, "Is there any obstacle?" Can you repeat it for me so I can grasp it? And I am warning you in advance that I have objections to it, so be careful of it from all angles!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, I said.
The questioner : That regarding the large and heavy ring, I lean toward it being forbidden, but I do not have certainty. I have not reached certainty because of what the texts are.
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : Because the texts themselves.
The Shaykh : What texts.
The questioner : The ones I looked into.
The Shaykh : And they are, for example.
The questioner : He forbade gold except cut gold, preferring this possibility!
The Shaykh : This possibility.
The questioner : The one we mentioned regarding the ring.
The Shaykh : No, this possibility does not permit cut gold!
The students: May Allah have mercy on you.
The Shaykh : And this ring is cut gold!
The questioner : The ring.
The Shaykh : The ring, yes, not the bracelet.
The questioner : The large, heavy one that is the subject of the discussion, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Yes, put some more details in a bit!
The Shaykh : The ones that have been there from the start, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : I am asking you, whether it is small or large?
The questioner : If it is small, it is not cut. If it is large.
The Shaykh : Large or heavy, is this from the cut gold?
The questioner : If it is large.
The Shaykh : If it is small, the ring, if it is small, this gold is called cut.
The questioner : Cut, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : And what is not cut?
The questioner : The heavy and large.
The Shaykh : Glory be to Allah, and this is taken from the language.
The questioner : From the language, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Is this button cut or attached?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, I do not see a contradiction between cut and attached.
The Shaykh : If so, what is the benefit of your argument with the hadith?
The questioner : The heaviness and its absence.
The Shaykh : No, no, the hadith is only about gold, cut gold?
The questioner : The heaviness and its absence.
The Shaykh : How is the heaviness?
The questioner : When I tell you that there is a possibility that the ring is forbidden or that it was rebuked because it was large.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : And the Messenger of Allah forbade gold except cut gold, and this ring, because it is large, is not cut.
The Shaykh : Well, is this prohibition specific to women or general?
The questioner : It includes men and women.
The Shaykh : So is a gold ring permissible for men?
The questioner : It is not permissible, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Why, because it is cut.
The questioner : How do you mean?
The Shaykh : How is this? This is proof that you do not understand the issue.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, allow me, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : He forbade gold except cut gold.
The Shaykh : It includes it.
The questioner : So the apparent meaning includes men and women.
The Shaykh : The prohibition includes.
The questioner : I forgot now, the intended meaning is women!
The Shaykh : Ha, a mistake...
The questioner : I forgot, but the wording of the phrase includes men and women.
The Shaykh : Allow me, allow me, it was a mistake, no harm, may Allah forgive what has passed. Now, if we repeat the question: He forbade gold except cut gold?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : I said finally, it is specific to women.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : Because originally, gold is permissible for women, so the exception applies to them, and gold is forbidden for men absolutely.
The Shaykh : Did you apply the rule mentioned earlier?
The questioner: What are they?
The Shaykh : The issue of the general and the specific, and the majority and the minority?
The questioner : I applied it, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : You returned to the majority and the minority in your previous detail.
The questioner : How, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : The exception of the minority from the majority, and you refused that the permissible gold be the majority, as we explained?
The questioner : Yes, my Shaykh.
The Shaykh : We return now, in any case.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, does cut contradict the existence of many, for example, the existence of several bracelets, or?
The Shaykh : No, no, my brother, be patient.
The questioner : Where is the contradiction?
The Shaykh : Did he forbid gold except cut gold? Is the prohibition here general? Is the exception here the majority or the minority?
The questioner : The cut.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : No, our Shaykh, repeat the question.
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you, the cut gold, the exception here in the hadith.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Is it the majority or the minority?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, why this question, for example.
The Shaykh : What shall I say to you like this? How did Al-Albani, the non-Arab, have this question in his mind?
The questioner : Allow me, you are bold, our Shaykh. From the beginning, there was a difference between the exception and the specification. You mentioned a little while ago a criticism of my words regarding the specification!
The Shaykh : You are asking me why this question came to me like this. What is your answer? Study the issue well, may Allah reward you. This is a hadith that is an argument against you without you knowing or realizing it!
The questioner : How, my Shaykh?
The Shaykh : And therefore, do not answer that cut gold is excepted from the prohibition, correct.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : He forbade all gold, and the address is specific to women, except the cut. According to your school of thought, the exception here!
The questioner : That is not my school of thought, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, I made a mistake, the school of the scholars.
The questioner : And no one said that, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : What Allah willed.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : This mistake is enough for you.
AThe questioner : Our Shaykh, you, excuse me, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : This mistake is enough for you!
The questioner : By Allah, it is not a mistake. I am telling you, the specification, not the exception. They say it is permissible to say "a hundred except ninety-nine," and the exception of the majority is permissible.
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. My discussion with you is not about the word. Is this an exception? Is it not an exception?
The questioner : An exception.
The Shaykh : Well, I went along with you.
The questioner : I went along.
The students: May Allah have mercy on you.
The Shaykh : May Allah have mercy on you.
The questioner : This is the first one.
The Shaykh : The first one, what Allah willed, we added injustice, because Allah will compensate us, if Allah wills, later!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, may Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : Is this not an exception?
The questioner : An exception.
The Shaykh : Is this exception less than the thing from which it is excepted, or more?
The questioner : This question does not concern us at all. I do not know if it is less or more.
The Shaykh : I am asking you from the perspective of reality. May Allah guide you, from the perspective of reality.
The questioner : I need to think about the question, our Shaykh, while the specification is thought about and I have prepared myself for it.
The Shaykh : And why do you not have your preparation?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, because I do not see it having any relation to the attached gold. This exception.
The Shaykh : You, you are saying "except cut," meaning you entered the attached gold into the cut.
The questioner : I entered it by language, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : But my brother, I am telling you why. May Allah guide you.
The questioner : I reviewed the language and found the cut!
The Shaykh: My brother, may Allah guide you, patience has limits!
The questioner : There is no doubt.
The Shaykh : I am telling you why, so you say I am telling you, this exception is from the general prohibition.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Is it, from the perspective of reality in which you are arguing, less or more? Now, my brothers, how did it happen, it happened.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, I ask them, I want to see who among them will answer us?
The Shaykh : Allow me, no, this is the first time I am saying this to the brothers, and you are a witness!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : It happened without him knowing or realizing. I said before that the attached is the majority.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And now, you, by the very hadith that you misunderstood.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : You proved that the exception from the prohibition is the majority!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, if I prove that the exception is the majority.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : Then this does not concern me, because I said specification. The specification that is the separate exception is not permissible!
The Shaykh : I am with you now in this hadith to show the error in your understanding of it. I do not want to go back. No, you are understanding this hadith incorrectly, while the scholars say the little. You are saying the attached!
The questioner : I am with the scholars.
The Shaykh : The cut is the little.
The questioner : Like the ring and the chain, and others.
The Shaykh : This is an example. This example does not concern us.
The questioner : It concerns you, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Listen, listen, may Allah guide you, listen, may Allah guide you. You are setting yourself up to just refute. I understand from you, I do not say "refuted" if you have a response!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : I am telling you now, the thing I said before is the majority, the attached. Now you have permitted it, although it is the majority. How did the thing from which it is excepted become less and the exception more? You introduced the large ring. Well, we return. Memorize this and review it and study it well. This hadith, if you reflect on it, you will find it an argument against you. But I have established the argument against you regarding the large gold ring!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Well, have you thought about defining this large ring?
The questioner : And have you not thought that this does not concern me at all!
The Shaykh: Why?
The questioner : And I do not see it concerning me.
The Shaykh : What do you want? You want to reconcile the texts. May Allah guide you!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : You are now putting a possibility. Look, you are putting a possibility that the Messenger of Allah rebuked the ring of the daughter of Hubayrah because it was large, and you say I lean toward forbidding the ring, not because it is a ring!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But because it is large!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : What is its weight? Do you know? I am telling you in advance, you do not know?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, the self-evident things, everyone can distinguish between the small and the large of rings.
The Shaykh : Look at this answer. Ah, well.
The questioner : And the station of scrupulousness, precaution, and mindfulness of Allah is applicable!
The Shaykh : Our discussion is not about scrupulousness. May Allah guide you. Our discussion is about what is forbidden and what is lawful. The scope of scrupulousness is very broad. If you want to adhere to scrupulousness, add your voice to ours and say that the forbidden gold ring, the gold ring that is shaved, is forbidden. I have a precautionary view that it is forbidden as a precaution!The Shaykh : It is not obligatory for me.
The questioner : It is disliked. It is not obligatory for you, my brother. It is not obligatory for you, but I am holding you to your words!
The Shaykh : It is disliked, but it does not obligate you, my brother; it does not obligate you, but I am holding you to your words!
The questioner: Our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Scrupulousness, scrupulousness.
The questioner : There is no scrupulousness here.
The Shaykh: Why?
The questioner : I am saying now that the ring is large. In terms of largeness, there is no difference between large and small. The difference is so great that we cannot set a limit, for example, in millimeters. We cannot do that.
The Shaykh : This is obligatory for you.
The questioner : But we say, my brothers, be cautious.
The Shaykh : My brother, this is obligatory for you. May Allah guide you. It is not us who are obligated; we are saying that the gold ring is forbidden. It is not obligatory for us, but it is obligatory for you. When you say, as the Hanafis say, that if the severe impurity is small, it is excused, we say no. And [Allah says], "And purify your garments." We are not obligated to specify the limit, but we are saying: where did you get the limit from? You now must specify it, and now you are leaving the issue vague, meaning that your goal is not to know what Allah has actually forbidden regarding the type of women and the type of gold, but rather to get rid of the indication of the hadith. No, let us be convinced with you. What is this huge ring? What is its weight? Do you know, for example, some jurists, for example the Hanafis, say that a silver ring, if it reaches such-and-such a mithqal, for example, it becomes forbidden. They limited this with a hadith, and the hadith is not authentic. But if it is less than that, it is permissible. No problem if there is a text specifying the limit. But you do not have a text to specify the forbidden ring that you are mostly convinced is forbidden, which is the large ring. It may be the ring!
The questioner : Shaykh, I am saying it is not obligatory for me, just as you do not obligate yourself to specify the section!
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : To specify what, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : I did not say what you said like you. I am saying every ring, every ring, and even if it is a thread thinner than the Jews' thread, I say as long as it is a ring, it is forbidden. But when you philosophize, your philosophy is: if it is huge, and if it is large, it is forbidden. What is large? What is small? You cannot specify it!
The questioner : It is self-evident.
The Shaykh : You say it is not obligatory for you. Why is it not obligatory for you?
The questioner : Self-evident matters, because our Shaykh, no one...
The Shaykh : My brother, understand why it is not obligatory for you. For example, if the ring's band weighs a shell and its stone is a large protrusion the size of a donkey's head, what do you say about this!
The questioner : I say it is large, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Large. Good. And if it is the size of a dog's head?
The questioner : Large too, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : And a cat's head.
The questioner : Elderly.
The Shaykh : If so, what is small? May Allah guide you. What is small?
The questioner : A cricket.
The students: Heh.
The Shaykh : Haha, yes, my brother. May Allah reward you. It is obligatory for you. Everything you say about the issue of the text, if it has not been issued by the Lawgiver, is merely a factual reality. The ring of bint Hubayrah was huge, so you attribute it, as some scholars said, to the fact that it was denounced because it was huge. So what is the limit that is not denounced, and what is the limit that is denounced?
The questioner : I mean, if we are unable to specify, and the Lawgiver did not come with a specification, does the argument fall away?
The Shaykh : It is not the Lawgiver, my brother. May Allah guide you. This is not a statement issued by the Lawgiver. This is a reality. May Allah guide you!
The questioner : The denunciation.
The Shaykh : This is a reality. The reality of the denunciation occurred regarding what the Messenger of Allah saw. So when you want to specify the denunciation, you must bring evidence saying it was denounced because it was large. What is small? Because the meaning of your words is that the small one is not denounced. So you are obligated to clarify the small from the large, and there is no way except that, absolutely, in all cases!
The questioner : I see, our Shaykh, that it is easier than easy for people to know the small ring from the large one!
The Shaykh: How so?
The questioner : Without mentioning to them a mithqal or half a mithqal. I see in my conviction that it is possible to specify the large from the small by the custom of people. All people know this thing.
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. May Allah guide you. Say "Ameen."
The questioner : O Allah, accept it.
The Shaykh : Say "Ameen." I am asking you now: does the custom of people change, or is it fixed?
The questioner : In terms of large and small rings, large and small, it does not change, our Shaykh. That is what I know.
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. The custom of people in a matter like this may not differ.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, I am not answering you with something that will become an argument for you, and I am not convinced!
The Shaykh : Do you see how? How? If you do not want to investigate, and excuse me!
The questioner : How, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : You are declaring with your tongue what you are not paying attention to. What are you saying?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, I know that custom changes, but regarding the small and large ring!
The Shaykh : Why do you not say beforehand that custom changes, because you feel that I am arguing with you on that basis!
The questioner : They do not want it.
The Shaykh : Is this a way?
The questioner : It is not obligatory for me, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : How, my brother?
The questioner : Why do you make custom change regarding the ring, and I say there is no evidence regarding the ring?
The Shaykh: Allahu Akbar.
The questioner : The small and the large.
The Shaykh : My brother, this changes from country to country, like clothes. It changes from country to country, from Amman to Saudi Arabia. What is this talk?
The questioner : The ring.
The Shaykh : From the poor to the rich. What is this talk!
The questioner : The small ring.
The questioner : The other : Shaykh, then largeness and smallness are two relative matters!
The Shaykh : Relative, my brother!
The questioner : The other : Now, this microphone in front of you is small.
The Shaykh: Allahu Akbar.
The questioner : The other : But Abu Ahmad has a microphone like the head of a pen.
The Shaykh : What is this talk?
The questioner : The other : Small, and this is large relative to him.
The Shaykh : What is this talk? This is not taking me. This is stubbornness!
The questioner : The other : Then, the one who wears the ring might be a plump woman. The large one on her hand might be small!
The Shaykh : This is stubbornness. We do not want it from you at all. That you argue in self-evident matters!
The questioner : Glory be to Allah. I see the opposite.
The questioner : The other : For example, on the nisab.
The Shaykh: How.
The questioner : The other : On the nisab of zakah, for example.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : The other : If he said that.
The Shaykh : No, he does not say that.
The questioner : How is the nisab of zakah?
The Shaykh : Do not open a door for him. Your income is enough for us.
The students: Hehe.
The Shaykh : Haha. He wants to extend you with his extensions, and you are not a poet. He wants to reach you that if the ring is of gold below the nisab, it is permissible. May his good be multiplied. Good, we understood your view on the hadith of bint Hubayrah!
The questioner : We have not finished yet, Shaykh!
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : There is a third argument regarding the hadith of bint Hubayrah. We have not finished.
The Shaykh : Glory be to Allah. I did not know this person to be like this. But my brother, what did I say?
The questioner : I said we understood your view. My view is not finished yet.
The Shaykh : I am saying we understood your view on the hadith of bint Hubayrah?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. I wanted to say that this second hadith, we will see your view on the third and fourth hadiths!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, I have not finished the second one for you yet.
The Shaykh : Look at the time.
The questioner : Is it you who prolonged the time?
The Shaykh : I have not finished the second one!
The questioner : I swear by Allah, I have not had ten minutes of all my speaking!
The Shaykh : There is no power and no strength except by Allah. There is no power and no strength except by Allah. Have you not finished the second hadith?
The questioner : I have not finished yet.
The Shaykh : I did not say at the beginning that this is general, then!
The questioner : I did not catch up to say, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Then, I was really forced, because the word "general" here is not clear at all. We specified after the discussion that you mean general in the sense of: did he denounce her because it was a ring, or did he denounce her because it was a huge ring? Did you not say so? No problem.
The questioner : And you said something else with it.
The Shaykh : Please, what is the other thing?
The questioner : I said it is possible that she did not pay its zakah, or out of fear for her of not paying the zakah?
The Shaykh : Good. These evidences, when you bring them, it is possible, it is possible. Is there a text in the Shari'ah that is not possible?
The questioner : Is there a text in the Shari'ah?
The Shaykh : Yes, meaning any ruling now, any decisive ruling.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Does a possible ruling not come back to it, being decisive and abrogated, not possible? Is this the way, meaning it is the way of the people of the Sunnah and the community to refute the myths of the evidences by means of possibilities that do not come to mind!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, false possibilities are refuted!
The Shaykh : Good. How do you know that this is from you? You know that there are hadiths where it was said, "Do you not pay its zakah?" She said, "No." He said, "A coal of fire." Here he did not say that. So when you gather here a possibility that is not mentioned at all, why? Is this not negating the texts!
The questioner : No, our Shaykh, and it has no relation to negating the texts. This is combining the texts.
The Shaykh : What Allah willed.
The questioner : Combining between texts.
The Shaykh : My brother, combining between texts is not by possibilities!
The questioner: Our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : He combined the texts using the method of the specific and the general, the absolute and the qualified, and so on.
The questioner : Yes, the absolute and the qualified.
The Shaykh : Now, is it possible that this woman was not paying zakah, is that not so?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Fine, I am asking you: if that were the case, would the original ruling be to convey this or to conceal it?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, there was a shortcoming on the part of the daughter of Hubayrah; she did not ask the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) what was preventing her?
The Shaykh : But a shortcoming on the part of the Messenger does not occur!
The questioner : It did not occur because he mentioned it in another hadith, may Allah protect him (peace and blessings be upon him)!
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you, the hadith of the actual event, may Allah guide you, say "Ameen."
The questioner: Amen.
The Shaykh : The other hadith has no connection to the daughter of Hubayrah.
The questioner : It has no connection to the daughter of Hubayrah, and it has a connection to the daughter of Hubayrah.
The Shaykh : How do I say this, may Allah guide you, the daughter of Hubayrah, when she heard the striking of the stick on her fingers, and the Messenger did not say to her, "Do you pay your zakah?" In what sense does she leave after eating the date from her finger? It is that he rebuked her because she does not pay zakah. So you are rambling and saying, "In another hadith, a hadith that has a connection to someone else, I am now!"
The questioner : ... general for others.
The Shaykh : I am now, may Allah guide you.
The questioner: Amen.
The Shaykh : If you see a woman and you strike her with a stick in your hand because she is wearing a gold ring, what do you imagine? Does she understand from me that the striking was because she does not pay zakah?
The questioner : And if one entered before her, our Shaykh, yes.
The Shaykh : Answer, may Allah guide you, answer.
The questioner : It is not obligatory for her to understand.
The Shaykh : Answer, my brother, I am asking you a question, may Allah guide you, answer: what does this woman understand?
The questioner : I do not know, by Allah, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : I do not know what she understands. It is possible she understands that you have a debt with her that you want to collect.
The Shaykh : There is no power and no strength except by Allah.
The questioner : Everything is possible.
The Shaykh : If you had a gold ring on your hand and someone struck you with a stick, what would you understand?
The questioner : Before the text of prohibition came, meaning there is no text of prohibition?
The Shaykh : You, you, you are a person, you are a person, there is no before and after, you are a person who does not know the rulings of the Shari'ah, and I am a man, a Shaykh, and respected in your eyes, and I saw you wearing a ring and struck you with a stick on your hand, what do you understand? That you do not pay zakah, so I struck you?
The questioner : It is possible, everything is possible, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : You are a man, now it has become clear to me that you are a sophist.
The questioner : I seek refuge in Allah, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : You are a sophist, you doubt everything in order to reach a specific goal, you resort to possibilities that do not cross the mind, just to doubt any ruling in the Shari'ah. I am now arming myself with your weapon, God forbid, and I will invalidate them with prior possibilities!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, every text.
The Shaykh : This is not permissible.
The questioner : Every text is general, and possibilities are present from other texts, our Shaykh, in the same topic regarding the gold worn, attached, and this is something scholars before me said. If they are sophists, then this is a big problem.
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you.
The questioner : Meaning, the scholars themselves said it is possible because she will not pay zakah, the scholars of Islam!
The Shaykh : I am saying, what is my inquiry, why, when I hear from you, not regarding what I heard!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, may Allah reward you with good, every fixed text of the Shari'ah, the explicit text, there is no ambiguity, there is no absoluteness, it is not impossible to strike them with "possible, possible," because this applies to the five prayers as well, "possible, possible," and to zakah!
The Shaykh : I returned to my argument, I am asking you now: where did you get this possibility from? And I am dealing with the matter in reality: a woman who does not know the ruling of Allah, and he struck her on her finger, where does she get the understanding that this is so that she pays zakah or not?
The questioner : Another text, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : Is it obligatory for every text to mention it?
The Shaykh : This is not the question, may Allah guide you!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Where does she get the understanding from?
The questioner : I do not know where she gets the understanding from!
The Shaykh : Well, that is it.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, do you know where she gets the understanding from?
The Shaykh : Look, he is asking me, am I the one claiming, or are you, may Allah forgive you, for this I say you have fallen into sophistry, not the scholars, because the scholars do not say your words, they do not say, by Allah, if I struck you, for example, I saw a woman, then I came to you, a gold ring on your finger, on your hand, I struck you with a stick, but I ask you, do you not know why I struck you? You would say, "No, for this," they would say this!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, may Allah bless you.
The Shaykh : With the scholars.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : The scholars, my brother, do not say this.
The questioner : Allow me to say what I have, even if...
The Shaykh : That is enough, my brother, you said what you have, you are saying "I do not know"!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, at the beginning of your argument, the possibility is present because the ring is gold, because it is large, because she did not pay its zakah, she did not pay its zakah, by the texts, it is large, there is a prohibition of gold except if cut off.
The Shaykh : What is the benefit of repeating your argument? My words remain!
The questioner : That you say.
The Shaykh : Repeat my words, my objections, the numerous objections to your words, say!
The questioner: Our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Be fair to me, my brother, at least once, be fair to me!
The questioner : May Allah bless you.
The Shaykh : What is the benefit of repeating your words? Am I repeating my objection to you? What is the benefit? Now, my brother, when you say "I do not know," what is the benefit? The discussion remains on an issue that I see!
The questioner : I am not obligated, if I struck a woman on her hand, to know why I struck her!
The Shaykh : You are obligated, if I struck you, to answer me why!
The questioner : By Allah, our Shaykh, the hadith, meaning, and the possibilities were placed by great scholars, so they interpreted the hadith, great scholars, meaning.
The Shaykh : My brother, if we want to return to the scholars, I will critique all your words with one word from the scholars. When you said "kathilah" and "kathil" and "wounded" and "beloved" and so on, I will critique it for you also with words from the scholars. The problem is over. This word is absolute, this is an absolute word among the scholars, and the condition you placed is not present at all!
The questioner: Our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : If we want to return to the words of the scholars!
The questioner : You say about injustice, I believe you have wronged me greatly and severely in this issue. This is a speculative, probabilistic, ijtihadi issue. That I place possibilities around it from other texts makes me a sophist in a hundred thousand or two thousand texts!
The Shaykh : A sophist in the style of your speech, may Allah guide you, ignoring the self-evident matters. I will give you an example.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, if they were self-evident matters.
The Shaykh : If I see a woman with something wrong in her hand, she interprets it, perhaps this, perhaps that, my brother.
The questioner : Honestly, our Shaykh, if a man struck a woman on her hand because she wore a gold ring, it is possible because wearing a gold ring is possible, because he suspected that the ring was stolen from her, here is the night when you dine together!
The Shaykh : O man, fear Allah!
The questioner : It is possible, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Fear Allah.
The questioner : May Allah make us among the righteous.
The Shaykh : Fear Allah, O man. A woman with a clear mind, no one gave her a lecture at all, and a great, dignified Shaykh and scholar saw a gold ring on her hands, so he rebuked her. I am not telling you again, now he struck her, he rebuked her for the gold ring. How do you say you do not know why this woman was rebuked? How do you say this!
The questioner : That you said, our Shaykh, the possibilities are present on the rebuke, no regret, no regret in her wearing, our Shaykh!
The Shaykh : Here it is not permissible to say, my brother, may Allah guide you, possibility.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, we.
The Shaykh : How do you imagine her? You describe her to me, give me a picture in your mind, let me be convinced of your point of view, yes.
Another questioner : Delaying the explanation.
The Shaykh : Describe to me that a woman.
The questioner : Delaying the explanation is not permissible for you, but delaying the address is permissible in this issue.
The Shaykh : There is no power and no strength except by Allah. Describe to me a woman you saw and you rebuked her for something. How should she understand from you? Bring it, let us see. Describe to me a picture?
The questioner : How, our Shaykh? I was occupied with my brother Ali when he said "delaying the explanation," so I said to him, this is delaying the address, and there is no contradiction with the explanation in the text, because she left!
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you, you and him. The important thing is, describe to me a picture of a learned man who rebukes a woman. How do you say that this woman does not understand why he rebuked her?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, if a learned, bold man came.
The Shaykh : My brother, answer the question, may Allah guide you.
The questioner : I will answer you, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : What is this answer? You are repeating the answer.
The questioner : By Allah, I did not catch up, by Allah, I want to answer what is in my heart.
The Shaykh : Until when, my brother? How many times do we need to repeat? Answer this question. I beg you, I beg you, I beg you, to bring an example of a man. Listen, my brother, you do not let a person complete, or if he completes, you deviate from the answer.
The questioner : Please, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : I beg you to give us an example of a learned, virtuous man who rebukes a woman for something, and then this woman does not know why he rebuked her. Is this correct in your mind?
The questioner : Shaykh, I am not saying this question has any relation to the topic?
The Shaykh : All right, I am ending the discussion. I am ending the discussion!
The questioner : Sometimes with his tongue.
The Shaykh : I am ending the discussion. The matter is over. It is a self-evident issue that has suspended enjoining good and forbidding evil, man.
The questioner : Shaykh, one... with his tongue.
The Shaykh : It has suspended enjoining good and forbidding evil!
The questioner : Shaykh, may Allah make you happy.
The Shaykh : A person sees a wrong and forbids it, but he does not know the one he is forbidding it to. Why did he forbid it?
The questioner : Shaykh, may Allah raise your rank in Paradise. Amen.
The Shaykh : All of it.
The questioner : If he had said to her, (peace and blessings be upon him)... there would have been no discussion.
The Shaykh : Leave the hadith alone. We need to address the reality!
The questioner : There would have been no discussion.
The Shaykh : We need to address the reality. May Allah guide you.
The questioner : Shaykh, if you hit a woman on her hand, on her ring, and she rebukes you, if she says to you, "Why are you hitting me?" Would you not say, "You must understand it without me hitting you? Without me hitting you!"
The Shaykh : What?
The questioner : If you came and hit her with a stick like this microphone, Abu Layla.
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you.
The questioner : She was wearing a ring.
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you.
The questioner : Would you not rebuke her if she said, "When you hit me..."
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you.
The questioner : Indeed.
The Shaykh : Rebuking has forms, correct.
The questioner : Varying in their explanation. Yes.
The Shaykh : Rebuking has forms.
The questioner : Varying in their explanation.
The Shaykh : It has forms. All right, but I am telling you, a man hit a woman with a stick on her finger!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Do you imagine that this woman would leave and not know why she was hit and wronged? How does this enter your mind? If you did it, or if I did it, what about the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)!
The questioner : (peace and blessings be upon him).
The Shaykh : He hits a woman, and the woman leaves not knowing why she was hit. What is this talk? Where did this talk come from? From the path of possibilities. It is possible, it is possible, and it is possible. My brother, possibility has aspects, strength, and power. But here, how do you imagine? And my voice is getting hoarse as I tell you, how do you imagine that the daughter of Hubayrah did not know why the Messenger of Allah hit her? This is, by Allah, one of the most astonishing things!
The questioner : The other: A contrary image. If it were possible that our master Muhammad hit her, if there were a possibility... he would have specified it. It is not like that!
The Shaykh : It would have been, and this is what we are saying. There are other stories. He asked, "Do you certify her?" He said, "No." He said, "A brand of fire!"
The questioner : The other: The absence of specification.
The Shaykh : There is nothing like that here. So, my brother, think, and I ask you to think. This woman either knew why the Messenger hit her, or she did not know. Is there a third possibility for you?
The questioner : There is nothing.
The Shaykh : All right, what is the stronger possibility? Did she know or did she not know?
The questioner : The stronger possibility is that she knew.
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : I have a suspicion about her regarding her eagerness for good!
The Shaykh : Very good. So this custom, what is it? Is it because she did not pay the zakah?
The questioner : It is possible, Shaykh. Shaykh.
The Shaykh : You are saying she knew!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : What did she know?
The questioner : These possibilities are possibilities for us, but for her, one is certainty. If we knew what she knew with certainty, we would only be guessing. Generally, we guess about the Companions and their eagerness for good and their seeking. If she had come, the matter would have ended.
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you.
The questioner : I did not discuss with you.
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. When you say, "So-and-so knew this," what will be the stronger possibility? Or is there no possibility that she did not know?
The questioner : Shaykh, we are not differing on that she knew. We are differing on what she knew.
The Shaykh : Why do you not answer? Why do you not answer!
The questioner: Our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Why do you not answer? May Allah guide you.
The questioner : Shaykh, allow me.
The Shaykh : Why do I not allow you? Why do you not answer? I do not know, by Allah, this argumentation!
The questioner : I seek refuge in Allah, Shaykh. We do not have argumentation. Our intention is if it is a matter!
The Shaykh : How would it be argumentation? One asks you three or four times about a question and you evade the answer. How is that argumentation? If this is one of the astonishing things, he said, "This is not argumentation. A woman is hit by the Messenger of Allah and does not know why the Messenger of Allah hit her!"
The questioner : I say she knows, our master.
The Shaykh : Then you say she knew. What did she know!
The questioner : Shaykh, this is our discussion, Shaykh. If it is established with us.
The Shaykh : My brother, I am asking you. You are testifying.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : You knew. What did you know? Say, "I do not know!"
The questioner : I do not say, Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : I do not say "I do not know" until I am convinced.
The Shaykh : If you say "I know," say "I know." Or is this a problem? It is neither one nor the other. If you say "I knew," this is a dialectical statement, because in truth you do not believe that she knew. But I am certain that she knew that the Messenger (peace be upon him) hit her because she adorned herself with gold, and in any case!
The questioner : Shaykh, the same thing you are certain of, I am convinced of from the remaining texts.
The Shaykh : My brother, the disbelievers are like that. May Allah guide you. This is not an argument. But the disbelievers, the innovators, and the misguided sects, all of these are the language of their state. But the explanation drives away Satan. Give me an answer to this question: What did she know? Is it not strange that there is no answer? There is no answer. Oh Allah, oh Abu Layla, the matter is over. Our issue is clear and defined, and everything you are answering, there is nothing new!
The questioner: May Allah reward you with good, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : And you, may Allah reward you with good, and we ask Allah to guide us all to the truth in what people differ over.
The questioner : The other: All right, Shaykh, if you please, your words. We benefited from you regarding the responses you addressed. So if you complete the remaining hadith, we will benefit in our gathering and those who hear the tape!
The Shaykh : I have no objection if he brings the third and fourth hadith.
The questioner : Allow me.
The Shaykh : But he will come back and say, "I did not finish my speech."
The questioner : Shaykh, I am not going to bring the third and fourth, but I will say a word. I do not know, sometimes, for example, I have barriers when I speak with a Shaykh. Even when I dared a little, you commented on saying, "So you say, 'Ah.'" And this, if Allah wills, I do not know if it is a description of good or evil.
The Shaykh : I did not understand this speech.
The questioner : I mean, when a person speaks with a scholar older than him in age and status, and there are barriers in his heart. I mean, I have a lot of speech in my chest that I am not able to speak!
The Shaykh : We clarified the speech for you. We told you, "You presented that I have, what is your opinion about such and such? If I raise it, what was my position with you?" No!
The questioner : I wrote.
The Shaykh : I am asking you a question now.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Halimah returns to her old habit.
The questioner : I am not speaking about you. I am speaking about myself. I say.
The Shaykh : Speak about yourself. You, about yourself. We told you to speak, and what we told you, you did not speak!
The questioner : You told me to speak.
The Shaykh : You brought the first hadith and spoke about Habib.
The questioner: We said here, "It is not correct for it to mean the female, but rather the male," and so on, and we ended and were silent. Then you came to the second hadith. We did not understand your speech when you said here, "The text is general." So we entered into a discussion, and so on. And now.
The questioner: Our brother Abu 'Abdullah is suggesting that you bring the third and fourth hadith. I have no objection. I have no objection. Proceed with your previous request. But if a phrase is difficult for us and we do not understand it, and you say it is general, while for us it is detailed and clear, we must stop at it. Otherwise, what is the benefit of listening to speech we do not understand? So now you want to deliver the third hadith and explain in it whatever you wish!
The questioner : Allow me.
The Shaykh : And the fourth hadith. I ask you, may Allah guide you.
The questioner : I want to speak.
The Shaykh : Do you want to or not? Allahu Akbar.
The questioner : If you want, Shaykh, I want to speak a word before it!
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you.
The questioner : Shaykh, it is a battle. If it is a battle!
The Shaykh : You are making it a battle. I did not break the agreement. You agreed with me: one asks a question, I give a short answer. If we agree, we move on. If we do not agree, you give a lecture!
The questioner: Allow me, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : I will not answer. I will not answer!
The questioner : The other: No harm, Shaykh. It is not intended to have special meanings. Shaykh, no harm!
The questioner : Dear Shaykh, allow me to speak these two sentences, even if it is without the tape, it will be ordinary. I researched the issue until I was tired and wrote a response of eleven pages. A complete response that I read to Shaykh Ahmad al-Salik, and he is known to you!
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : And it is a scientific response. I did not see the second responses. On the contrary, in some responses, I pointed out, for example, the error and the overreach in them, such as the issue of consensus. I clarified that there is presumptive and certain consensus, except for the last one. So when I read it to Shaykh Ahmad al-Salik from the beginning to the end, some modifications occurred. So he treated me, for example, in a way that you are not able to speak. So either, Shaykh, I answer this message and read it from the beginning to the end to you, and you discuss and say, "This is invalid, this is such and such," because I did not enclose it. I did not find it. It was with one of the brothers, and I could not bring it!
The Shaykh : He gave a lecture and answered whatever he answered. This is what came with you, and listen to what I am saying to you: why are you not answering? Do you want to talk about the third and fourth [points] or not? What is this? Cut off the neck, say "no," and we are done. Say "yes," go ahead, and explain.
The questioner : I seek refuge in Allah.
The Shaykh : And I seek refuge in Allah that you be among them!
The questioner : By Allah, indeed.
The Shaykh : But you are walking down this path without knowing or realizing it. Now look, you asked me a question just now and ended it by saying, "Is there any obstacle?" Can you repeat it for me so I can grasp it? And I am warning you in advance that I have objections to it, so be careful of it from all angles!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, I said.
The questioner : That regarding the large and heavy ring, I lean toward it being forbidden, but I do not have certainty. I have not reached certainty because of what the texts are.
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : Because the texts themselves.
The Shaykh : What texts.
The questioner : The ones I looked into.
The Shaykh : And they are, for example.
The questioner : He forbade gold except cut gold, preferring this possibility!
The Shaykh : This possibility.
The questioner : The one we mentioned regarding the ring.
The Shaykh : No, this possibility does not permit cut gold!
The students: May Allah have mercy on you.
The Shaykh : And this ring is cut gold!
The questioner : The ring.
The Shaykh : The ring, yes, not the bracelet.
The questioner : The large, heavy one that is the subject of the discussion, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Yes, put some more details in a bit!
The Shaykh : The ones that have been there from the start, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : I am asking you, whether it is small or large?
The questioner : If it is small, it is not cut. If it is large.
The Shaykh : Large or heavy, is this from the cut gold?
The questioner : If it is large.
The Shaykh : If it is small, the ring, if it is small, this gold is called cut.
The questioner : Cut, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : And what is not cut?
The questioner : The heavy and large.
The Shaykh : Glory be to Allah, and this is taken from the language.
The questioner : From the language, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Is this button cut or attached?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, I do not see a contradiction between cut and attached.
The Shaykh : If so, what is the benefit of your argument with the hadith?
The questioner : The heaviness and its absence.
The Shaykh : No, no, the hadith is only about gold, cut gold?
The questioner : The heaviness and its absence.
The Shaykh : How is the heaviness?
The questioner : When I tell you that there is a possibility that the ring is forbidden or that it was rebuked because it was large.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : And the Messenger of Allah forbade gold except cut gold, and this ring, because it is large, is not cut.
The Shaykh : Well, is this prohibition specific to women or general?
The questioner : It includes men and women.
The Shaykh : So is a gold ring permissible for men?
The questioner : It is not permissible, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Why, because it is cut.
The questioner : How do you mean?
The Shaykh : How is this? This is proof that you do not understand the issue.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, allow me, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : He forbade gold except cut gold.
The Shaykh : It includes it.
The questioner : So the apparent meaning includes men and women.
The Shaykh : The prohibition includes.
The questioner : I forgot now, the intended meaning is women!
The Shaykh : Ha, a mistake...
The questioner : I forgot, but the wording of the phrase includes men and women.
The Shaykh : Allow me, allow me, it was a mistake, no harm, may Allah forgive what has passed. Now, if we repeat the question: He forbade gold except cut gold?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : I said finally, it is specific to women.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : Because originally, gold is permissible for women, so the exception applies to them, and gold is forbidden for men absolutely.
The Shaykh : Did you apply the rule mentioned earlier?
The questioner: What are they?
The Shaykh : The issue of the general and the specific, and the majority and the minority?
The questioner : I applied it, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : You returned to the majority and the minority in your previous detail.
The questioner : How, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : The exception of the minority from the majority, and you refused that the permissible gold be the majority, as we explained?
The questioner : Yes, my Shaykh.
The Shaykh : We return now, in any case.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, does cut contradict the existence of many, for example, the existence of several bracelets, or?
The Shaykh : No, no, my brother, be patient.
The questioner : Where is the contradiction?
The Shaykh : Did he forbid gold except cut gold? Is the prohibition here general? Is the exception here the majority or the minority?
The questioner : The cut.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : No, our Shaykh, repeat the question.
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you, the cut gold, the exception here in the hadith.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Is it the majority or the minority?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, why this question, for example.
The Shaykh : What shall I say to you like this? How did Al-Albani, the non-Arab, have this question in his mind?
The questioner : Allow me, you are bold, our Shaykh. From the beginning, there was a difference between the exception and the specification. You mentioned a little while ago a criticism of my words regarding the specification!
The Shaykh : You are asking me why this question came to me like this. What is your answer? Study the issue well, may Allah reward you. This is a hadith that is an argument against you without you knowing or realizing it!
The questioner : How, my Shaykh?
The Shaykh : And therefore, do not answer that cut gold is excepted from the prohibition, correct.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : He forbade all gold, and the address is specific to women, except the cut. According to your school of thought, the exception here!
The questioner : That is not my school of thought, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, I made a mistake, the school of the scholars.
The questioner : And no one said that, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : What Allah willed.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : This mistake is enough for you.
AThe questioner : Our Shaykh, you, excuse me, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : This mistake is enough for you!
The questioner : By Allah, it is not a mistake. I am telling you, the specification, not the exception. They say it is permissible to say "a hundred except ninety-nine," and the exception of the majority is permissible.
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. My discussion with you is not about the word. Is this an exception? Is it not an exception?
The questioner : An exception.
The Shaykh : Well, I went along with you.
The questioner : I went along.
The students: May Allah have mercy on you.
The Shaykh : May Allah have mercy on you.
The questioner : This is the first one.
The Shaykh : The first one, what Allah willed, we added injustice, because Allah will compensate us, if Allah wills, later!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, may Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : Is this not an exception?
The questioner : An exception.
The Shaykh : Is this exception less than the thing from which it is excepted, or more?
The questioner : This question does not concern us at all. I do not know if it is less or more.
The Shaykh : I am asking you from the perspective of reality. May Allah guide you, from the perspective of reality.
The questioner : I need to think about the question, our Shaykh, while the specification is thought about and I have prepared myself for it.
The Shaykh : And why do you not have your preparation?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, because I do not see it having any relation to the attached gold. This exception.
The Shaykh : You, you are saying "except cut," meaning you entered the attached gold into the cut.
The questioner : I entered it by language, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : But my brother, I am telling you why. May Allah guide you.
The questioner : I reviewed the language and found the cut!
The Shaykh: My brother, may Allah guide you, patience has limits!
The questioner : There is no doubt.
The Shaykh : I am telling you why, so you say I am telling you, this exception is from the general prohibition.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Is it, from the perspective of reality in which you are arguing, less or more? Now, my brothers, how did it happen, it happened.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, I ask them, I want to see who among them will answer us?
The Shaykh : Allow me, no, this is the first time I am saying this to the brothers, and you are a witness!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : It happened without him knowing or realizing. I said before that the attached is the majority.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And now, you, by the very hadith that you misunderstood.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : You proved that the exception from the prohibition is the majority!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, if I prove that the exception is the majority.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : Then this does not concern me, because I said specification. The specification that is the separate exception is not permissible!
The Shaykh : I am with you now in this hadith to show the error in your understanding of it. I do not want to go back. No, you are understanding this hadith incorrectly, while the scholars say the little. You are saying the attached!
The questioner : I am with the scholars.
The Shaykh : The cut is the little.
The questioner : Like the ring and the chain, and others.
The Shaykh : This is an example. This example does not concern us.
The questioner : It concerns you, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Listen, listen, may Allah guide you, listen, may Allah guide you. You are setting yourself up to just refute. I understand from you, I do not say "refuted" if you have a response!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : I am telling you now, the thing I said before is the majority, the attached. Now you have permitted it, although it is the majority. How did the thing from which it is excepted become less and the exception more? You introduced the large ring. Well, we return. Memorize this and review it and study it well. This hadith, if you reflect on it, you will find it an argument against you. But I have established the argument against you regarding the large gold ring!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Well, have you thought about defining this large ring?
The questioner : And have you not thought that this does not concern me at all!
The Shaykh: Why?
The questioner : And I do not see it concerning me.
The Shaykh : What do you want? You want to reconcile the texts. May Allah guide you!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : You are now putting a possibility. Look, you are putting a possibility that the Messenger of Allah rebuked the ring of the daughter of Hubayrah because it was large, and you say I lean toward forbidding the ring, not because it is a ring!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But because it is large!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : What is its weight? Do you know? I am telling you in advance, you do not know?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, the self-evident things, everyone can distinguish between the small and the large of rings.
The Shaykh : Look at this answer. Ah, well.
The questioner : And the station of scrupulousness, precaution, and mindfulness of Allah is applicable!
The Shaykh : Our discussion is not about scrupulousness. May Allah guide you. Our discussion is about what is forbidden and what is lawful. The scope of scrupulousness is very broad. If you want to adhere to scrupulousness, add your voice to ours and say that the forbidden gold ring, the gold ring that is shaved, is forbidden. I have a precautionary view that it is forbidden as a precaution!The Shaykh : It is not obligatory for me.
The questioner : It is disliked. It is not obligatory for you, my brother. It is not obligatory for you, but I am holding you to your words!
The Shaykh : It is disliked, but it does not obligate you, my brother; it does not obligate you, but I am holding you to your words!
The questioner: Our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Scrupulousness, scrupulousness.
The questioner : There is no scrupulousness here.
The Shaykh: Why?
The questioner : I am saying now that the ring is large. In terms of largeness, there is no difference between large and small. The difference is so great that we cannot set a limit, for example, in millimeters. We cannot do that.
The Shaykh : This is obligatory for you.
The questioner : But we say, my brothers, be cautious.
The Shaykh : My brother, this is obligatory for you. May Allah guide you. It is not us who are obligated; we are saying that the gold ring is forbidden. It is not obligatory for us, but it is obligatory for you. When you say, as the Hanafis say, that if the severe impurity is small, it is excused, we say no. And [Allah says], "And purify your garments." We are not obligated to specify the limit, but we are saying: where did you get the limit from? You now must specify it, and now you are leaving the issue vague, meaning that your goal is not to know what Allah has actually forbidden regarding the type of women and the type of gold, but rather to get rid of the indication of the hadith. No, let us be convinced with you. What is this huge ring? What is its weight? Do you know, for example, some jurists, for example the Hanafis, say that a silver ring, if it reaches such-and-such a mithqal, for example, it becomes forbidden. They limited this with a hadith, and the hadith is not authentic. But if it is less than that, it is permissible. No problem if there is a text specifying the limit. But you do not have a text to specify the forbidden ring that you are mostly convinced is forbidden, which is the large ring. It may be the ring!
The questioner : Shaykh, I am saying it is not obligatory for me, just as you do not obligate yourself to specify the section!
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : To specify what, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : I did not say what you said like you. I am saying every ring, every ring, and even if it is a thread thinner than the Jews' thread, I say as long as it is a ring, it is forbidden. But when you philosophize, your philosophy is: if it is huge, and if it is large, it is forbidden. What is large? What is small? You cannot specify it!
The questioner : It is self-evident.
The Shaykh : You say it is not obligatory for you. Why is it not obligatory for you?
The questioner : Self-evident matters, because our Shaykh, no one...
The Shaykh : My brother, understand why it is not obligatory for you. For example, if the ring's band weighs a shell and its stone is a large protrusion the size of a donkey's head, what do you say about this!
The questioner : I say it is large, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Large. Good. And if it is the size of a dog's head?
The questioner : Large too, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : And a cat's head.
The questioner : Elderly.
The Shaykh : If so, what is small? May Allah guide you. What is small?
The questioner : A cricket.
The students: Heh.
The Shaykh : Haha, yes, my brother. May Allah reward you. It is obligatory for you. Everything you say about the issue of the text, if it has not been issued by the Lawgiver, is merely a factual reality. The ring of bint Hubayrah was huge, so you attribute it, as some scholars said, to the fact that it was denounced because it was huge. So what is the limit that is not denounced, and what is the limit that is denounced?
The questioner : I mean, if we are unable to specify, and the Lawgiver did not come with a specification, does the argument fall away?
The Shaykh : It is not the Lawgiver, my brother. May Allah guide you. This is not a statement issued by the Lawgiver. This is a reality. May Allah guide you!
The questioner : The denunciation.
The Shaykh : This is a reality. The reality of the denunciation occurred regarding what the Messenger of Allah saw. So when you want to specify the denunciation, you must bring evidence saying it was denounced because it was large. What is small? Because the meaning of your words is that the small one is not denounced. So you are obligated to clarify the small from the large, and there is no way except that, absolutely, in all cases!
The questioner : I see, our Shaykh, that it is easier than easy for people to know the small ring from the large one!
The Shaykh: How so?
The questioner : Without mentioning to them a mithqal or half a mithqal. I see in my conviction that it is possible to specify the large from the small by the custom of people. All people know this thing.
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. May Allah guide you. Say "Ameen."
The questioner : O Allah, accept it.
The Shaykh : Say "Ameen." I am asking you now: does the custom of people change, or is it fixed?
The questioner : In terms of large and small rings, large and small, it does not change, our Shaykh. That is what I know.
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. The custom of people in a matter like this may not differ.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, I am not answering you with something that will become an argument for you, and I am not convinced!
The Shaykh : Do you see how? How? If you do not want to investigate, and excuse me!
The questioner : How, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : You are declaring with your tongue what you are not paying attention to. What are you saying?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, I know that custom changes, but regarding the small and large ring!
The Shaykh : Why do you not say beforehand that custom changes, because you feel that I am arguing with you on that basis!
The questioner : They do not want it.
The Shaykh : Is this a way?
The questioner : It is not obligatory for me, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : How, my brother?
The questioner : Why do you make custom change regarding the ring, and I say there is no evidence regarding the ring?
The Shaykh: Allahu Akbar.
The questioner : The small and the large.
The Shaykh : My brother, this changes from country to country, like clothes. It changes from country to country, from Amman to Saudi Arabia. What is this talk?
The questioner : The ring.
The Shaykh : From the poor to the rich. What is this talk!
The questioner : The small ring.
The questioner : The other : Shaykh, then largeness and smallness are two relative matters!
The Shaykh : Relative, my brother!
The questioner : The other : Now, this microphone in front of you is small.
The Shaykh: Allahu Akbar.
The questioner : The other : But Abu Ahmad has a microphone like the head of a pen.
The Shaykh : What is this talk?
The questioner : The other : Small, and this is large relative to him.
The Shaykh : What is this talk? This is not taking me. This is stubbornness!
The questioner : The other : Then, the one who wears the ring might be a plump woman. The large one on her hand might be small!
The Shaykh : This is stubbornness. We do not want it from you at all. That you argue in self-evident matters!
The questioner : Glory be to Allah. I see the opposite.
The questioner : The other : For example, on the nisab.
The Shaykh: How.
The questioner : The other : On the nisab of zakah, for example.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : The other : If he said that.
The Shaykh : No, he does not say that.
The questioner : How is the nisab of zakah?
The Shaykh : Do not open a door for him. Your income is enough for us.
The students: Hehe.
The Shaykh : Haha. He wants to extend you with his extensions, and you are not a poet. He wants to reach you that if the ring is of gold below the nisab, it is permissible. May his good be multiplied. Good, we understood your view on the hadith of bint Hubayrah!
The questioner : We have not finished yet, Shaykh!
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : There is a third argument regarding the hadith of bint Hubayrah. We have not finished.
The Shaykh : Glory be to Allah. I did not know this person to be like this. But my brother, what did I say?
The questioner : I said we understood your view. My view is not finished yet.
The Shaykh : I am saying we understood your view on the hadith of bint Hubayrah?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. I wanted to say that this second hadith, we will see your view on the third and fourth hadiths!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, I have not finished the second one for you yet.
The Shaykh : Look at the time.
The questioner : Is it you who prolonged the time?
The Shaykh : I have not finished the second one!
The questioner : I swear by Allah, I have not had ten minutes of all my speaking!
The Shaykh : There is no power and no strength except by Allah. There is no power and no strength except by Allah. Have you not finished the second hadith?
The questioner : I have not finished yet.
The Shaykh : I did not say at the beginning that this is general, then!
The questioner : I did not catch up to say, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Then, I was really forced, because the word "general" here is not clear at all. We specified after the discussion that you mean general in the sense of: did he denounce her because it was a ring, or did he denounce her because it was a huge ring? Did you not say so? No problem.
The questioner : And you said something else with it.
The Shaykh : Please, what is the other thing?
The questioner : I said it is possible that she did not pay its zakah, or out of fear for her of not paying the zakah?
The Shaykh : Good. These evidences, when you bring them, it is possible, it is possible. Is there a text in the Shari'ah that is not possible?
The questioner : Is there a text in the Shari'ah?
The Shaykh : Yes, meaning any ruling now, any decisive ruling.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Does a possible ruling not come back to it, being decisive and abrogated, not possible? Is this the way, meaning it is the way of the people of the Sunnah and the community to refute the myths of the evidences by means of possibilities that do not come to mind!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, false possibilities are refuted!
The Shaykh : Good. How do you know that this is from you? You know that there are hadiths where it was said, "Do you not pay its zakah?" She said, "No." He said, "A coal of fire." Here he did not say that. So when you gather here a possibility that is not mentioned at all, why? Is this not negating the texts!
The questioner : No, our Shaykh, and it has no relation to negating the texts. This is combining the texts.
The Shaykh : What Allah willed.
The questioner : Combining between texts.
The Shaykh : My brother, combining between texts is not by possibilities!
The questioner: Our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : He combined the texts using the method of the specific and the general, the absolute and the qualified, and so on.
The questioner : Yes, the absolute and the qualified.
The Shaykh : Now, is it possible that this woman was not paying zakah, is that not so?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Fine, I am asking you: if that were the case, would the original ruling be to convey this or to conceal it?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, there was a shortcoming on the part of the daughter of Hubayrah; she did not ask the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) what was preventing her?
The Shaykh : But a shortcoming on the part of the Messenger does not occur!
The questioner : It did not occur because he mentioned it in another hadith, may Allah protect him (peace and blessings be upon him)!
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you, the hadith of the actual event, may Allah guide you, say "Ameen."
The questioner: Amen.
The Shaykh : The other hadith has no connection to the daughter of Hubayrah.
The questioner : It has no connection to the daughter of Hubayrah, and it has a connection to the daughter of Hubayrah.
The Shaykh : How do I say this, may Allah guide you, the daughter of Hubayrah, when she heard the striking of the stick on her fingers, and the Messenger did not say to her, "Do you pay your zakah?" In what sense does she leave after eating the date from her finger? It is that he rebuked her because she does not pay zakah. So you are rambling and saying, "In another hadith, a hadith that has a connection to someone else, I am now!"
The questioner : ... general for others.
The Shaykh : I am now, may Allah guide you.
The questioner: Amen.
The Shaykh : If you see a woman and you strike her with a stick in your hand because she is wearing a gold ring, what do you imagine? Does she understand from me that the striking was because she does not pay zakah?
The questioner : And if one entered before her, our Shaykh, yes.
The Shaykh : Answer, may Allah guide you, answer.
The questioner : It is not obligatory for her to understand.
The Shaykh : Answer, my brother, I am asking you a question, may Allah guide you, answer: what does this woman understand?
The questioner : I do not know, by Allah, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : I do not know what she understands. It is possible she understands that you have a debt with her that you want to collect.
The Shaykh : There is no power and no strength except by Allah.
The questioner : Everything is possible.
The Shaykh : If you had a gold ring on your hand and someone struck you with a stick, what would you understand?
The questioner : Before the text of prohibition came, meaning there is no text of prohibition?
The Shaykh : You, you, you are a person, you are a person, there is no before and after, you are a person who does not know the rulings of the Shari'ah, and I am a man, a Shaykh, and respected in your eyes, and I saw you wearing a ring and struck you with a stick on your hand, what do you understand? That you do not pay zakah, so I struck you?
The questioner : It is possible, everything is possible, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : You are a man, now it has become clear to me that you are a sophist.
The questioner : I seek refuge in Allah, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : You are a sophist, you doubt everything in order to reach a specific goal, you resort to possibilities that do not cross the mind, just to doubt any ruling in the Shari'ah. I am now arming myself with your weapon, God forbid, and I will invalidate them with prior possibilities!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, every text.
The Shaykh : This is not permissible.
The questioner : Every text is general, and possibilities are present from other texts, our Shaykh, in the same topic regarding the gold worn, attached, and this is something scholars before me said. If they are sophists, then this is a big problem.
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you.
The questioner : Meaning, the scholars themselves said it is possible because she will not pay zakah, the scholars of Islam!
The Shaykh : I am saying, what is my inquiry, why, when I hear from you, not regarding what I heard!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, may Allah reward you with good, every fixed text of the Shari'ah, the explicit text, there is no ambiguity, there is no absoluteness, it is not impossible to strike them with "possible, possible," because this applies to the five prayers as well, "possible, possible," and to zakah!
The Shaykh : I returned to my argument, I am asking you now: where did you get this possibility from? And I am dealing with the matter in reality: a woman who does not know the ruling of Allah, and he struck her on her finger, where does she get the understanding that this is so that she pays zakah or not?
The questioner : Another text, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : Is it obligatory for every text to mention it?
The Shaykh : This is not the question, may Allah guide you!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Where does she get the understanding from?
The questioner : I do not know where she gets the understanding from!
The Shaykh : Well, that is it.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, do you know where she gets the understanding from?
The Shaykh : Look, he is asking me, am I the one claiming, or are you, may Allah forgive you, for this I say you have fallen into sophistry, not the scholars, because the scholars do not say your words, they do not say, by Allah, if I struck you, for example, I saw a woman, then I came to you, a gold ring on your finger, on your hand, I struck you with a stick, but I ask you, do you not know why I struck you? You would say, "No, for this," they would say this!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, may Allah bless you.
The Shaykh : With the scholars.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : The scholars, my brother, do not say this.
The questioner : Allow me to say what I have, even if...
The Shaykh : That is enough, my brother, you said what you have, you are saying "I do not know"!
The questioner : Our Shaykh, at the beginning of your argument, the possibility is present because the ring is gold, because it is large, because she did not pay its zakah, she did not pay its zakah, by the texts, it is large, there is a prohibition of gold except if cut off.
The Shaykh : What is the benefit of repeating your argument? My words remain!
The questioner : That you say.
The Shaykh : Repeat my words, my objections, the numerous objections to your words, say!
The questioner: Our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Be fair to me, my brother, at least once, be fair to me!
The questioner : May Allah bless you.
The Shaykh : What is the benefit of repeating your words? Am I repeating my objection to you? What is the benefit? Now, my brother, when you say "I do not know," what is the benefit? The discussion remains on an issue that I see!
The questioner : I am not obligated, if I struck a woman on her hand, to know why I struck her!
The Shaykh : You are obligated, if I struck you, to answer me why!
The questioner : By Allah, our Shaykh, the hadith, meaning, and the possibilities were placed by great scholars, so they interpreted the hadith, great scholars, meaning.
The Shaykh : My brother, if we want to return to the scholars, I will critique all your words with one word from the scholars. When you said "kathilah" and "kathil" and "wounded" and "beloved" and so on, I will critique it for you also with words from the scholars. The problem is over. This word is absolute, this is an absolute word among the scholars, and the condition you placed is not present at all!
The questioner: Our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : If we want to return to the words of the scholars!
The questioner : You say about injustice, I believe you have wronged me greatly and severely in this issue. This is a speculative, probabilistic, ijtihadi issue. That I place possibilities around it from other texts makes me a sophist in a hundred thousand or two thousand texts!
The Shaykh : A sophist in the style of your speech, may Allah guide you, ignoring the self-evident matters. I will give you an example.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, if they were self-evident matters.
The Shaykh : If I see a woman with something wrong in her hand, she interprets it, perhaps this, perhaps that, my brother.
The questioner : Honestly, our Shaykh, if a man struck a woman on her hand because she wore a gold ring, it is possible because wearing a gold ring is possible, because he suspected that the ring was stolen from her, here is the night when you dine together!
The Shaykh : O man, fear Allah!
The questioner : It is possible, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Fear Allah.
The questioner : May Allah make us among the righteous.
The Shaykh : Fear Allah, O man. A woman with a clear mind, no one gave her a lecture at all, and a great, dignified Shaykh and scholar saw a gold ring on her hands, so he rebuked her. I am not telling you again, now he struck her, he rebuked her for the gold ring. How do you say you do not know why this woman was rebuked? How do you say this!
The questioner : That you said, our Shaykh, the possibilities are present on the rebuke, no regret, no regret in her wearing, our Shaykh!
The Shaykh : Here it is not permissible to say, my brother, may Allah guide you, possibility.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, we.
The Shaykh : How do you imagine her? You describe her to me, give me a picture in your mind, let me be convinced of your point of view, yes.
Another questioner : Delaying the explanation.
The Shaykh : Describe to me that a woman.
The questioner : Delaying the explanation is not permissible for you, but delaying the address is permissible in this issue.
The Shaykh : There is no power and no strength except by Allah. Describe to me a woman you saw and you rebuked her for something. How should she understand from you? Bring it, let us see. Describe to me a picture?
The questioner : How, our Shaykh? I was occupied with my brother Ali when he said "delaying the explanation," so I said to him, this is delaying the address, and there is no contradiction with the explanation in the text, because she left!
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you, you and him. The important thing is, describe to me a picture of a learned man who rebukes a woman. How do you say that this woman does not understand why he rebuked her?
The questioner : Our Shaykh, if a learned, bold man came.
The Shaykh : My brother, answer the question, may Allah guide you.
The questioner : I will answer you, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : What is this answer? You are repeating the answer.
The questioner : By Allah, I did not catch up, by Allah, I want to answer what is in my heart.
The Shaykh : Until when, my brother? How many times do we need to repeat? Answer this question. I beg you, I beg you, I beg you, to bring an example of a man. Listen, my brother, you do not let a person complete, or if he completes, you deviate from the answer.
The questioner : Please, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : I beg you to give us an example of a learned, virtuous man who rebukes a woman for something, and then this woman does not know why he rebuked her. Is this correct in your mind?
The questioner : Shaykh, I am not saying this question has any relation to the topic?
The Shaykh : All right, I am ending the discussion. I am ending the discussion!
The questioner : Sometimes with his tongue.
The Shaykh : I am ending the discussion. The matter is over. It is a self-evident issue that has suspended enjoining good and forbidding evil, man.
The questioner : Shaykh, one... with his tongue.
The Shaykh : It has suspended enjoining good and forbidding evil!
The questioner : Shaykh, may Allah make you happy.
The Shaykh : A person sees a wrong and forbids it, but he does not know the one he is forbidding it to. Why did he forbid it?
The questioner : Shaykh, may Allah raise your rank in Paradise. Amen.
The Shaykh : All of it.
The questioner : If he had said to her, (peace and blessings be upon him)... there would have been no discussion.
The Shaykh : Leave the hadith alone. We need to address the reality!
The questioner : There would have been no discussion.
The Shaykh : We need to address the reality. May Allah guide you.
The questioner : Shaykh, if you hit a woman on her hand, on her ring, and she rebukes you, if she says to you, "Why are you hitting me?" Would you not say, "You must understand it without me hitting you? Without me hitting you!"
The Shaykh : What?
The questioner : If you came and hit her with a stick like this microphone, Abu Layla.
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you.
The questioner : She was wearing a ring.
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you.
The questioner : Would you not rebuke her if she said, "When you hit me..."
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you.
The questioner : Indeed.
The Shaykh : Rebuking has forms, correct.
The questioner : Varying in their explanation. Yes.
The Shaykh : Rebuking has forms.
The questioner : Varying in their explanation.
The Shaykh : It has forms. All right, but I am telling you, a man hit a woman with a stick on her finger!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Do you imagine that this woman would leave and not know why she was hit and wronged? How does this enter your mind? If you did it, or if I did it, what about the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)!
The questioner : (peace and blessings be upon him).
The Shaykh : He hits a woman, and the woman leaves not knowing why she was hit. What is this talk? Where did this talk come from? From the path of possibilities. It is possible, it is possible, and it is possible. My brother, possibility has aspects, strength, and power. But here, how do you imagine? And my voice is getting hoarse as I tell you, how do you imagine that the daughter of Hubayrah did not know why the Messenger of Allah hit her? This is, by Allah, one of the most astonishing things!
The questioner : The other: A contrary image. If it were possible that our master Muhammad hit her, if there were a possibility... he would have specified it. It is not like that!
The Shaykh : It would have been, and this is what we are saying. There are other stories. He asked, "Do you certify her?" He said, "No." He said, "A brand of fire!"
The questioner : The other: The absence of specification.
The Shaykh : There is nothing like that here. So, my brother, think, and I ask you to think. This woman either knew why the Messenger hit her, or she did not know. Is there a third possibility for you?
The questioner : There is nothing.
The Shaykh : All right, what is the stronger possibility? Did she know or did she not know?
The questioner : The stronger possibility is that she knew.
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : I have a suspicion about her regarding her eagerness for good!
The Shaykh : Very good. So this custom, what is it? Is it because she did not pay the zakah?
The questioner : It is possible, Shaykh. Shaykh.
The Shaykh : You are saying she knew!
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : What did she know?
The questioner : These possibilities are possibilities for us, but for her, one is certainty. If we knew what she knew with certainty, we would only be guessing. Generally, we guess about the Companions and their eagerness for good and their seeking. If she had come, the matter would have ended.
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you.
The questioner : I did not discuss with you.
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. When you say, "So-and-so knew this," what will be the stronger possibility? Or is there no possibility that she did not know?
The questioner : Shaykh, we are not differing on that she knew. We are differing on what she knew.
The Shaykh : Why do you not answer? Why do you not answer!
The questioner: Our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Why do you not answer? May Allah guide you.
The questioner : Shaykh, allow me.
The Shaykh : Why do I not allow you? Why do you not answer? I do not know, by Allah, this argumentation!
The questioner : I seek refuge in Allah, Shaykh. We do not have argumentation. Our intention is if it is a matter!
The Shaykh : How would it be argumentation? One asks you three or four times about a question and you evade the answer. How is that argumentation? If this is one of the astonishing things, he said, "This is not argumentation. A woman is hit by the Messenger of Allah and does not know why the Messenger of Allah hit her!"
The questioner : I say she knows, our master.
The Shaykh : Then you say she knew. What did she know!
The questioner : Shaykh, this is our discussion, Shaykh. If it is established with us.
The Shaykh : My brother, I am asking you. You are testifying.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : You knew. What did you know? Say, "I do not know!"
The questioner : I do not say, Shaykh.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : I do not say "I do not know" until I am convinced.
The Shaykh : If you say "I know," say "I know." Or is this a problem? It is neither one nor the other. If you say "I knew," this is a dialectical statement, because in truth you do not believe that she knew. But I am certain that she knew that the Messenger (peace be upon him) hit her because she adorned herself with gold, and in any case!
The questioner : Shaykh, the same thing you are certain of, I am convinced of from the remaining texts.
The Shaykh : My brother, the disbelievers are like that. May Allah guide you. This is not an argument. But the disbelievers, the innovators, and the misguided sects, all of these are the language of their state. But the explanation drives away Satan. Give me an answer to this question: What did she know? Is it not strange that there is no answer? There is no answer. Oh Allah, oh Abu Layla, the matter is over. Our issue is clear and defined, and everything you are answering, there is nothing new!
The questioner: May Allah reward you with good, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : And you, may Allah reward you with good, and we ask Allah to guide us all to the truth in what people differ over.
The questioner : The other: All right, Shaykh, if you please, your words. We benefited from you regarding the responses you addressed. So if you complete the remaining hadith, we will benefit in our gathering and those who hear the tape!
The Shaykh : I have no objection if he brings the third and fourth hadith.
The questioner : Allow me.
The Shaykh : But he will come back and say, "I did not finish my speech."
The questioner : Shaykh, I am not going to bring the third and fourth, but I will say a word. I do not know, sometimes, for example, I have barriers when I speak with a Shaykh. Even when I dared a little, you commented on saying, "So you say, 'Ah.'" And this, if Allah wills, I do not know if it is a description of good or evil.
The Shaykh : I did not understand this speech.
The questioner : I mean, when a person speaks with a scholar older than him in age and status, and there are barriers in his heart. I mean, I have a lot of speech in my chest that I am not able to speak!
The Shaykh : We clarified the speech for you. We told you, "You presented that I have, what is your opinion about such and such? If I raise it, what was my position with you?" No!
The questioner : I wrote.
The Shaykh : I am asking you a question now.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Halimah returns to her old habit.
The questioner : I am not speaking about you. I am speaking about myself. I say.
The Shaykh : Speak about yourself. You, about yourself. We told you to speak, and what we told you, you did not speak!
The questioner : You told me to speak.
The Shaykh : You brought the first hadith and spoke about Habib.
The questioner: We said here, "It is not correct for it to mean the female, but rather the male," and so on, and we ended and were silent. Then you came to the second hadith. We did not understand your speech when you said here, "The text is general." So we entered into a discussion, and so on. And now.
The questioner: Our brother Abu 'Abdullah is suggesting that you bring the third and fourth hadith. I have no objection. I have no objection. Proceed with your previous request. But if a phrase is difficult for us and we do not understand it, and you say it is general, while for us it is detailed and clear, we must stop at it. Otherwise, what is the benefit of listening to speech we do not understand? So now you want to deliver the third hadith and explain in it whatever you wish!
The questioner : Allow me.
The Shaykh : And the fourth hadith. I ask you, may Allah guide you.
The questioner : I want to speak.
The Shaykh : Do you want to or not? Allahu Akbar.
The questioner : If you want, Shaykh, I want to speak a word before it!
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you.
The questioner : Shaykh, it is a battle. If it is a battle!
The Shaykh : You are making it a battle. I did not break the agreement. You agreed with me: one asks a question, I give a short answer. If we agree, we move on. If we do not agree, you give a lecture!
The questioner: Allow me, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : I will not answer. I will not answer!
The questioner : The other: No harm, Shaykh. It is not intended to have special meanings. Shaykh, no harm!
The questioner : Dear Shaykh, allow me to speak these two sentences, even if it is without the tape, it will be ordinary. I researched the issue until I was tired and wrote a response of eleven pages. A complete response that I read to Shaykh Ahmad al-Salik, and he is known to you!
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : And it is a scientific response. I did not see the second responses. On the contrary, in some responses, I pointed out, for example, the error and the overreach in them, such as the issue of consensus. I clarified that there is presumptive and certain consensus, except for the last one. So when I read it to Shaykh Ahmad al-Salik from the beginning to the end, some modifications occurred. So he treated me, for example, in a way that you are not able to speak. So either, Shaykh, I answer this message and read it from the beginning to the end to you, and you discuss and say, "This is invalid, this is such and such," because I did not enclose it. I did not find it. It was with one of the brothers, and I could not bring it!
The Shaykh : He gave a lecture and answered whatever he answered. This is what came with you, and listen to what I am saying to you: why are you not answering? Do you want to talk about the third and fourth [points] or not? What is this? Cut off the neck, say "no," and we are done. Say "yes," go ahead, and explain.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.