. . . that it is not complete except by a matter known necessarily. What is the qualification for this matter known necessarily? I mean, I want a clear qualification regarding this matter.

The questioner: . . . that it is not complete except by a matter known necessarily. What is the qualification for this matter known necessarily? I mean, I want a clear qualification regarding this matter?

The Shaykh: In my opinion, I have answered this matter, but there is no harm in repeating it first, and then giving some examples to clarify it second. I said it is the matter in which every Muslim shares in its knowledge, with no difference between a scholar and a student, or between an uneducated ignorant person and a cultured scholar. I gave the example of intoxicants and said that they are forbidden by consensus, meaning that their prohibition is known from the religion by necessity. I gave a contrary example, which is tobacco, and said that it cannot be said that there is consensus on its prohibition, or on its permissibility, or on the opinion that it is disliked. Was this not mentioned previously?

The questioner: I mentioned the examples, but they did not mention what was believed.

The questioner: By Allah, he mentioned it.

The Shaykh: Be patient a little, may Allah guide you. What did I not mention?

The questioner: I mentioned the examples, but as I believe, I did not hear you mention that this is the qualification, or that you mentioned the equality of the ignorant and the scholar in this issue.

The Shaykh: I explained that consensus is what is known from the religion by necessity. Is this clear to you?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: Okay, then you explained the clear aspect of what is known from the religion by necessity with this example, which is shared in its knowledge by the scholar and the ignorant. Is that not so?

The questioner: And you mentioned intoxicants as well.

The Shaykh: This is the example. So I explained what it is. Is it clear?

The questioner : Is that clear?

The Shaykh: Okay, I mentioned in this session that there is no harm in clarifying the matter further to explain the benefit of this definition, which is the sharing of the uneducated ignorant person with the scholar in knowing that this thing is known from the religion by necessity, and that is consensus, which can be conceptualized. I said it is necessary to clarify that with an example or some examples. We all know that there are many sects within the circle of the Islamic community that are known as misguided sects, but they do not exit the status of being part of the Islamic community. This is a known matter and is fully present in your mind. Is that right?

The questioner : Okay.

The Shaykh: Okay, by what did these sects, which we described as misguided on one hand and as part of the Islamic community on the other, deviate? Did they deny a text from the Noble Qur'an? The answer is no, because if they had denied a text from the Noble Qur'an, they would not remain within the circle of the Islamic community, correct?

The questioner : Correct.

The Shaykh: Okay, so what is the cause of their misguidance? The answer is that they came to some texts which all Muslims had agreed to interpret in a certain way, and they interpreted them in another way. They did not pay attention to the practice of Muslims in understanding that verse; they did not follow them but deviated from them. So, on one hand, they agreed with Muslims in their faith in the verse, and they differed from them in their interpretation of the verse, interpreting it in a way outside what the community accepted, following the later generations after the earliest generations. For example, you know the denial by the Mu'tazilah, then the Khawarij, then the Ibadis today in Oman and their like, of what is established for us by Book and Sunnah regarding the believers seeing their Lord in the Hereafter. They denied that, but they did not dare, and will not dare, if Allah wills, to deny something like the saying of Allah the Exalted: But they actually dared to affect its interpretation with something other than how it was interpreted by the righteous Salaf and those who came after them from the Muslims, let alone their denial of the hadiths supporting what the apparent meaning of this verse and others in the Qur'an indicate. For example, the saying of Blessed and Exalted is He: The interpretation of the verse in Sahih Muslim is that the best Paradise is the increase of seeing Allah the Mighty and Majestic. All of this was denied by those misguided sects. We will not expand on the old sects and what they deviated from regarding the path of Muslims in understanding the established texts in the Qur'an, let alone the Sunnah. We are now dealing with an example from our reality in our time. You must have heard of the sect known today as the Qadianis or Qadianism, and they call themselves the Ahmadis. This naming of themselves is part of their deception and misguidance of the Muslim community, because they mean by this attribution the Ahmadis, attributed to their claimed prophet whom they named Ahmad Mirza Ghulam Qadiani, while his name is not that; his name is Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani. So they changed the word Ghulam, which in translation means... a servant.

The questioner: A servant, yes.

The Shaykh: So his name is Servant of Ahmad, meaning our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). But from his misguidance, over time, he started to remove the word Ghulam from his books, leaving only Ahmad, why? To attribute to himself the saying of Allah the Exalted: Who is this Ahmad? It is not our Prophet; we are not this Ghulam. This is from the deception of their lying prophet first, and then from the deception of those who followed him second, upon the Islamic world. As for their naming as Qadianis or Qadianism, it is a correct attribution because it is the town in which this Ghulam grew up and first called people to the fact that he is the Mahdi promised in the end times. Then he ascended in misguidance and claimed to be Isa (peace be upon him). Then he comes to the hadiths and distorts them, saying in his statement (peace and blessings be upon him): A likeness of Isa ibn Maryam will descend among you, not Isa himself, a likeness of Isa. And who is the likeness? He means it this way. They used to interpret the texts this way. The point is that this man claimed prophethood and thousands upon thousands followed him in that, if not millions. Is it because he denied a verse in the Qur'an? The answer is no, but in reality, he played with a verse, or rather noble verses, in the Qur'an, and that was through his interpretation of them in a way contrary to the consensus of Muslims, meaning contrary to what is known from the religion by necessity. If you asked any Muslim today, no matter how low in ignorance, or even in misguidance, what is your opinion? Is there a prophet after our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)? He will tell you: No, our Prophet is the last of the prophets, and this is stated in the Noble Qur'an: In addition to the many hadiths that explicitly state that there is no prophet after him (peace and blessings be upon him). How did these people deviate from the Muslims and exit the Islamic circle, unlike the other religions or sects we referred to at the beginning of our speech? It is that they violated the consensus of Muslims from the day their lying prophet made that false claim, which is that he is a prophet to whom Allah the Mighty and Majestic revealed a book called Haqq al-Wahy, and this is a printed book. And from his claimed speech, there is what was revealed to him that has remained in my mind for thirty years and more: "O Ahmad, you are to me in the position of my son. You are to me in the position of my tawhid." Tawhid is this. This is what he claimed was revealed to him from Allah. What did they do with the saying of Allah the Exalted: ? They said in their books that Muslims did not understand this verse in its correct understanding, that it does not mean that there is no prophet after the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), but rather the meaning of the verse is the Seal of the Prophets, meaning the adornment of the prophets, just as the ring is the adornment of the finger. So the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) is the adornment of the prophets and the best of them, but it does not mean that there is no prophet after him. So what did these people do? They believed in the wording of the Qur'an and disbelieved in its meaning, which all Muslims agreed upon, with no difference, as we said earlier, between a scholar or an ignorant person. That is, they contradicted and denied what is known from the religion by necessity.
As for the hadiths, and how numerous they are, which contradict their claim of the prophethood of this Dajjal, they also played their trick with them, just as they did with the noble verse. They said regarding the hadith: meaning there is no prophet with me. As for after the death of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), this text is not denied, because there are prophets who will come after him (peace and blessings be upon him). Therefore, he explicitly stated that many prophets will come after the Messenger, and he is the first of these prophets. From this, the value of scholarly consensus (ijma') becomes apparent to you, which is equal to what is known from the religion by necessity, namely the agreement of the entire Muslim community on this correct concept, which the community has received from generation to generation. This is what I intended to clarify, in addition to what has preceded, and perhaps therein is a clear explanation.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : And beware of it, if Allah wills, and this does not mean authentication, unlike the first one.