(Examples of the Two Rulings) Rather, that one exists without this one in isolation *** and the reverse is also the case, then they join together; the created being will not be devoid of one of them *** or of both, rather, they do not cease to exist.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"Rather, that one exists without this one in isolation *** and the reverse is also the case"
That is to say, the cosmic ruling exists without the legislative ruling, and the legislative ruling exists without the cosmic ruling. So what do you say about the open sinner? Which ruling issued from him? Was his open sinfulness by the cosmic ruling or the legislative ruling?
The student: The legislative ruling.
The Shaykh : A man committed zina. Was his zina by the cosmic ruling or the legislative ruling?
The student: By the cosmic ruling.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: By the cosmic ruling.
The Shaykh : By the cosmic ruling, and what do you say?
The student: Correct.
The Shaykh : Correct. Good. A man married—Fahd—by the legislative ruling. Good. A prayer that Allah intended from a person, but he did not pray.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, Adam. A prayer that Allah intended from a person, but he did not pray. Allah ruled that this man must pray legislatively, but he did not pray. What is the ruling in this case?
The student: The cosmic ruling.
The Shaykh : He did not pray, O Shaykh.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : He did not pray.
The student: Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh : How...
The student: The cosmic ruling, because...
The Shaykh : If he had wanted, if Allah had ruled cosmically that he should pray, he would have prayed.
The student: Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh : But this one did not pray.
The student: Cosmic ruling.
The Shaykh : That is to say, he left the prayer until the time passed.
The student: Yes, cosmic.
The Shaykh : Glory be to Allah. I am saying that if Allah had ruled cosmically that he should pray, he would have prayed.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : But this one did not pray, yes.
The student: Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh : How can the ruling be cosmic, and what do you say, O...
The student: Legislative, not cosmic.
The Shaykh : This is a legislative ruling, not a cosmic one. Yes, Allah ruled that prayer is obligatory for this man, but he did not pray until the time passed. So...
The student: ...
The Shaykh : The legislative ruling did not occur, did it? The legislative ruling did not occur. If he had prayed within the time, it would have been both cosmic and legislative, like the one who actually married; in that case, there is both the cosmic and the legislative ruling. He said:
"Rather, that one exists without this one in isolation *** and the reverse is also the case, then they join together"
That is to say, they may join together, but do they cease to exist? He says:
"The created being will not be devoid of one of them *** or of both, rather, they do not cease to exist"
So the cosmic and legislative rulings, in terms of joining and separating, may join together, correct? The example is:
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : A man who actually married, or a man who prayed within the time. In this case, there is both the cosmic and the legislative ruling. The cosmic ruling may exist without the legislative ruling.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: ... the sin.
The Shaykh : Like the sin; it is a cosmic ruling and not a legislative one. The legislative ruling may exist without the cosmic ruling.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes, like the ruling that prayer is obligatory, but he did not pray. In this case, the legislative ruling, which is the obligation of prayer, is established for him, without the cosmic ruling. Good. A menstruating woman did not pray.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Her prayer ceased to exist by both the cosmic and the legislative ruling. So they joined together in her case. Good. Is it possible for both the cosmic and legislative rulings to cease to exist?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: No.
The Shaykh : It is not possible. A person must be governed by a cosmic or legislative ruling; it is necessary. For this reason, he said:
"The created being will not be devoid of one of them *** or of both, rather, they do not cease to exist"
That is to say, the cosmic ruling exists without the legislative ruling, and the legislative ruling exists without the cosmic ruling. So what do you say about the open sinner? Which ruling issued from him? Was his open sinfulness by the cosmic ruling or the legislative ruling?
The student: The legislative ruling.
The Shaykh : A man committed zina. Was his zina by the cosmic ruling or the legislative ruling?
The student: By the cosmic ruling.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: By the cosmic ruling.
The Shaykh : By the cosmic ruling, and what do you say?
The student: Correct.
The Shaykh : Correct. Good. A man married—Fahd—by the legislative ruling. Good. A prayer that Allah intended from a person, but he did not pray.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, Adam. A prayer that Allah intended from a person, but he did not pray. Allah ruled that this man must pray legislatively, but he did not pray. What is the ruling in this case?
The student: The cosmic ruling.
The Shaykh : He did not pray, O Shaykh.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : He did not pray.
The student: Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh : How...
The student: The cosmic ruling, because...
The Shaykh : If he had wanted, if Allah had ruled cosmically that he should pray, he would have prayed.
The student: Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh : But this one did not pray.
The student: Cosmic ruling.
The Shaykh : That is to say, he left the prayer until the time passed.
The student: Yes, cosmic.
The Shaykh : Glory be to Allah. I am saying that if Allah had ruled cosmically that he should pray, he would have prayed.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : But this one did not pray, yes.
The student: Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh : How can the ruling be cosmic, and what do you say, O...
The student: Legislative, not cosmic.
The Shaykh : This is a legislative ruling, not a cosmic one. Yes, Allah ruled that prayer is obligatory for this man, but he did not pray until the time passed. So...
The student: ...
The Shaykh : The legislative ruling did not occur, did it? The legislative ruling did not occur. If he had prayed within the time, it would have been both cosmic and legislative, like the one who actually married; in that case, there is both the cosmic and the legislative ruling. He said:
"Rather, that one exists without this one in isolation *** and the reverse is also the case, then they join together"
That is to say, they may join together, but do they cease to exist? He says:
"The created being will not be devoid of one of them *** or of both, rather, they do not cease to exist"
So the cosmic and legislative rulings, in terms of joining and separating, may join together, correct? The example is:
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : A man who actually married, or a man who prayed within the time. In this case, there is both the cosmic and the legislative ruling. The cosmic ruling may exist without the legislative ruling.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: ... the sin.
The Shaykh : Like the sin; it is a cosmic ruling and not a legislative one. The legislative ruling may exist without the cosmic ruling.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes, like the ruling that prayer is obligatory, but he did not pray. In this case, the legislative ruling, which is the obligation of prayer, is established for him, without the cosmic ruling. Good. A menstruating woman did not pray.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Her prayer ceased to exist by both the cosmic and the legislative ruling. So they joined together in her case. Good. Is it possible for both the cosmic and legislative rulings to cease to exist?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: No.
The Shaykh : It is not possible. A person must be governed by a cosmic or legislative ruling; it is necessary. For this reason, he said:
"The created being will not be devoid of one of them *** or of both, rather, they do not cease to exist"