The Shaykh’s discussion with one of the students regarding the issue of a body of scholars being under the pressure of a certain government.

The questioner : Repeat the two matters to me, O Shaykh, so that I can understand them better.

The Shaykh : I say, may Allah forbid, that this brother was a flatterer of the ruler, but I did not say that. I said that he was under a specific pressure. He said, “It does not please the ruler.” Do you see the difference between the two matters?

The questioner : I distinguish.

The Shaykh : Fine. Which of the two is less severe?

The questioner : The one who is under pressure.

The Shaykh : Ah, you are now attributing to these people that they said two things: one is severe and a clear disobedience, and the other is mild and soft compared to the first. Is that correct?

The questioner : Authentic

The Shaykh : So.

The questioner : The one who submits to some pressures.

The Shaykh : It is less severe.

The questioner : It is less severe than flattery.

The Shaykh : Do you think that the reality is the same for those whom you accuse of attacking the scholars? Do you think they said that they were flatterers, or that they submitted to specific pressures?

The questioner : I do not think they were under pressure.

The Shaykh : I am not asking for your opinion. I am asking about what is in their hearts. I am not asking for your opinion on whether they were right or wrong.

The questioner : We assume the best of them, is this not the duty of a Muslim toward his Muslim brother?

The Shaykh : Well done, well done. Let us build upon this word.
Shuqara: It has become bright, and you are in the west, because the assumption is about the scholars who are being attacked, not the attackers.

The Shaykh : No, no. I am saying that I gave you an example of myself. May Allah forbid that I attributedThe Shaykh : to flattery, or it was said about me that I attributedThe Shaykh : to flattery, but the truth is, may Allah forbid, that I said about him that he was under specific pressures. Which of the two words did I ask you is less severe? I said this one. I am now using myself as an example regarding what was said about the scholars, and this is from them. So, of those who speak about the scholars and attack them, one of the two words is, for example, “travel.” If he traveled, I think he might say, as a human being, that he accused them of what? Of flattery. And he might have said they were under specific pressures. And we agreed earlier that this word is less severe than that. Fine. Which of the two words did he actually say first? And if he said both, first, do you know what is in his heart? You do not know what is in his heart, as I said earlier, relying on the report of 'Umar. Fine, but since he brought two words, and the responsibility is on the narrator as we say, he brought both words. It is possible that we interpret the flattery as the pressure that came after this word. And all of this is from the perspective of what? Good assumption. Do you understand how? Therefore, the matter, may Allah reward you, is very serious. We come to a person like this, from whom we know nothing but good in the da'wah, but words came from him that might be interpreted. The original rule for a Muslim is to interpret his words. And perhaps you have heard the words of some jurists that if there are a hundred statements from a Muslim, ninety-nine of these hundred all declare this Muslim a disbeliever, and one statement says, “No, this statement, we do not rule with it that he is a disbeliever.” We take the statement of this one and leave the ninety-nine. Why? Because here the place is one of caution and wariness. Perhaps you have heard this saying one day, or perhaps you believe in it, that this precaution is a necessary matter.

The questioner : This is a good thing, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Good. If we are now looking for what is good, is it good to interpret the words of this man, if he said that they were flatterers and submitted to pressures, that the first thing is to interpret this word in a way that lightens and softens the sin? We do not say from error, but what softens the sin of this speaker.

The questioner : That they are under pressures, meaning, for example, they said this.

The Shaykh : There is a difference. This is much less severe than saying about them that they were flatterers, because flattery is for money, for status, for a worldly thing he obtains, or a woman he marries, and so on. So this difference, may Allah reward you, must be noted when we hear this word.

The questioner : There is something, and it is, O Shaykh, his clarification of his intent from this word, which is his saying, “I said, when I was asked about the fatwa of the Senior Scholars Committee, I said it so that nothing is fabricated against Allah and His Messenger.”

The Shaykh : What did he say?

The questioner : Then he said, “It is not permissible to seek assistance,” and so on.

The Shaykh : No, what concerns us is what the attack said.

The questioner : This word is afterwards. That is, he now has the understanding that, according to my limited understanding, I understand that when he says, “I said, when I was asked about the fatwa of the Senior Scholars Committee, I said it so that nothing is fabricated against Allah and His Messenger,” he makes the Senior Scholars Committee an accusation against the Senior Scholars Committee that they fabricated against Allah and His Messenger. Then, after he proceeded in the path of the conversation, and then he commented with his saying, “Ask us, we are in a state of ease of speech,” and so on, I mentioned this to you previously.

The Shaykh : What does “ease” mean? What is its opposite?

The questioner : Narrowness.

The Shaykh : Is that not so?

The questioner : There is no doubt.

The Shaykh : He is not from the Scholars Committee, and I am asking you a question now. Let us be frank. Do you believe, and we will answer for ourselves, do you believe with us that every official Scholars Committee might be under specific pressures, or not?

The questioner : Yes, you may.

The Shaykh : It is possible. If someone says, “There is no committee, there is no land, that has not submitted to specific pressure,” what is wrong with that?

The questioner : If there are scholars in whose religion I trust.

The Shaykh : I say, O my brother, may Allah reward you, there is no need for a lecture. I am saying, a Scholars Committee, there is no need. You say, “If they are like this.”

The questioner : The answer requires detail, O Shaykh. I tell you, no.

The Shaykh : There is no power and no strength except by Allah. O my brother, may Allah reward you, it requires detail. If itThe questioner : requires detail, a question, and here is the crux of the matter as they say, if it is permissible, then what is the very reprehensible matter? If Zayd from among the people says that this or that Scholars Committee is under specific pressures and said such and such, does this become open sinfulness?

The questioner : The answer, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : I am asking you why? So that you do not answer.

The questioner : If this committee is from those in whose religion I trust.

The Shaykh : O my brother, I will say that the Scholars Committee is trusted by Muslims, but Zayd from among the people saw that this committee is under specific pressures and said such and such. This is an error. Is there a need to besiege the scholars and the committee? Tell me, no. If so, what is your opinion? Is this open sinfulness? Did he commit open sinfulness?

The questioner : The one who attacked any committee?

The Shaykh : I do not say attacked, may Allah forgive you. I say Zayd from among the people said about a committee of scholars, the committee that you are pleased with and every Muslim said about it, that it is under specific pressures, submitted, and said such and such. This Zayd, if the expression is correct, what will it mean? What will it be in the sight of Allah, Mighty and Majestic? Disbelief? You will say, no. Open sinfulness? I think you will also say, no. I think you will say, no. I think. And the assumption of the believer is certainty.

The questioner : By Allah, I do not think so, O Shaykh, because accusing a believer that he is a flatterer and that he...

The Shaykh : Look, where did he return to?

The questioner : I, O Shaykh, my understanding is limited. Alert me if I went astray. For example, by Allah, I did not go astray from the question with the intent that I am escaping from the question.

The Shaykh : You are now representing the person whom you are attacking. And if I put myself in your place, I would attack you. Do you know why?

The questioner: Not

The Shaykh : Because I am speaking about the one who said they submitted to specific pressures. You say, “I say, the one who says about the scholars that they are flatterers.” O my brother, I am not researching flattery, and especially we agreed earlier that the word “submitting to specific pressures” is much less severe than flattery. Why are you making a mistake with me and bringing flattery into the topic? Why?

The questioner : Because he said it. I did not bring anything about him from myself.

The Shaykh : O my brother, I am telling you about Zayd from among the people. I am giving you an example.

The questioner : It is possible, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. I am giving you an example that Zayd from among the people, I do not mean the one you mean, I am placing a rule for you in distinguishing between one word and another. Zayd from among the people attacked the Scholars Committee that all Muslims respect, but this attack was only in the wording that they are under specific pressures, submitted, signed, or did, or agreed, or so on. Why are you wandering from me and bringing flattery into the topic, and my research is not about flattery?

The questioner : It is about the pressures.

The Shaykh : Ah, but we say about this person, far from you is my previous question. We say about this person that he is a disbeliever. You will certainly say, “He is not a disbeliever.” Will you say that he is an open sinner? I said about you, “I think.” I think you will say, “He is not an open sinner.”

The questioner : He may not be an open sinner, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : No, I don't think so.

The questioner : I think he may not be an open sinner.

The Shaykh : And he may be an open sinner?

The questioner : And he may be an open sinner if he has...

The Shaykh : Allow me a moment. He may be an open sinner and he may not be an open sinner. Is this the answer?

The questioner : I see it as an answer, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Ask anyone you like, and they will say it is not an answer.

The questioner : Why, Shaykh?

The Shaykh : Because you are wavering between "he may commit open sinfulness" and "he may not commit open sinfulness." So this is not an answer. I mean, if someone asked you, "Is the sun up?" and you said, "It may be up, or it may not be up," did you tell him it is up or not up?

The questioner : I do not see that this can be analogized to that matter.

The Shaykh : That is the analogy itself. Ask anyone present.

The questioner : Perhaps the picture is not clear to me with the example; I mean, it becomes clear.
Shuqara: I am burdened with the example, perhaps it will make the issue clearer. I asked you, "Will so-and-so come?" and you said, "Yes, he may come." I ask you, "When?" You say, "He may come at two o'clock, or he may come at one o'clock, or he may come at three o'clock, or he may not come at all." What do you say about this answer?

The questioner : It is not a correct answer.
Shuqara: Why?

The questioner : Because I see this differs from the same question regarding the issue of whether the pressures...

The Shaykh : Do not deviate; give the answer to the question.

The questioner : I see that this does not apply to this.

The Shaykh : I will ask you why?

The questioner : Because, Shaykh, this is asking me about a person, about Zayd, whether he came or not. He may come at one o'clock, or he may come at two o'clock. I am supposed to answer you that he came or he did not come.
Shuqara: Why do you not answer in this manner?

The questioner : Because I see the question is a question...The Shaykh : It differs.

The Shaykh : It differs, it differs, but why do you not say he committed open sinfulness or he did not commit open sinfulness? There is no middle ground.

The questioner : Let us suppose, for example, that he committed open sinfulness, but I qualify it with conditions. Allow me to give you what I have.

The Shaykh : O Abu Jabir, may Allah guide you and me to the truth in what we say.

The questioner : O Allah, amen.

The Shaykh : Now, you want to conclude. Have we agreed with us that your saying "he may commit open sinfulness and he may not commit open sinfulness" is not an answer? If you agree with us, we will take a second step. But if you do not agree with us, where are we going? You are still in your own ground, staying in your place. Does this constitute open sinfulness or not? He may commit open sinfulness and he may not. This is not an answer.

The questioner : I answered you: he does not commit open sinfulness, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Good, and this is what I wanted. You are giving a lecture now.

The questioner : I have a lecture.

The Shaykh : There is no need, since he agreed. What is the application? Agree with him and embrace him; there is no more need for a lecture.

The questioner : Our Shaykh, he has established before that if a person makes a mistake once in his life and commits a sin, he does not commit open sinfulness, no matter what that sin is. This is our brother Safar; he made a mistake regarding the scholars and committed a sin once or twice; he is not called an open sinner.

The Shaykh : But, may Allah bless you, I also wanted to draw his attention to the difference in the meanings of the words. The word attributing the scholars to compromise is a big thing, but if the scholars are attributed to yielding to pressures, that is not a big thing, whether it was repeated or not. An observation.

The questioner : If these are scholars in whose religion and trustworthiness I have confidence, how, Shaykh, for example, do I say that this constitutes open sinfulness by this word, when I know that these scholars do not compromise?
Shuqara: O Abu Jabir, may Allah console you.