Discussion on the issue of taking from the beard and defining the concept of Salafism

The Shaykh : Excuse me, if it is permissible for me to answer more than one question, is it permissible for me to ask one or more questions? I hope the answer will be given at the time of the question, as this issue has occupied my mind for years. Have you found in the Sunnah that you have come across that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not take from his beard?

The questioner : I have not found that. I only found hadiths that indicate the generality of the matter. As for him not taking from his beard, I have not found that; I only found hadiths regarding the generality of the beard.

The Shaykh : Well done. This necessitates that I direct the second question, which I have prepared for. Did the practice of the Salaf follow this generality?

The questioner : According to my knowledge, except for Ibn 'Umar, who used to take from it.

The Shaykh : I stipulated that the answer be specific.

The questioner : According to my knowledge, the report is from Ibn 'Umar.

The Shaykh : This is not the answer to my question. May Allah reward you. Let me repeat my question. Did you know that the Salaf... my first question was related to the Master of Mankind. Now we have descended to another level, which is: did you know that the Salaf did not take from it?

The questioner : No, some of them used to take from it.

The Shaykh : You are not putting yourself in a difficult position, Professor.

The questioner : According to my knowledge, they did not take from it.

The Shaykh : No, he is putting himself in a difficult position now. And upon you be peace, and Allah's mercy and blessings. Did you know that the Salaf used to take from it?

The questioner : I know.

The Shaykh : May Allah guide you.

The questioner : I know.

The Shaykh : From Ibn 'Umar.

The questioner : From Ibn 'Umar.

The Shaykh : Did you know that they did not take from it?

The questioner : Yes, they did not take from it, meaning generally.

The Shaykh : Did you know or did you not know?

The questioner : I do not have a text or report from any of them.

The Shaykh : That.

The questioner : They used to take from it.

The Shaykh : No, the opposite.

The questioner : Meaning that they did not take from it, yes.

The Shaykh : In that case, who is your Salaf?

The questioner : The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).

The Shaykh : You have contradicted yourself, because you did not know. The answer to the first question was "I did not know." Do you remember? Did you know that the Messenger used to take from it? You said no, correct?

The questioner : The Messenger did not take from his beard; the hadiths indicate the generality.

The Shaykh : Professor, may Allah reward you. There is a verbal Sunnah and there is a practical Sunnah. My question now revolves around the second part of the Sunnah, the practical Sunnah. The verbal one is known to you and to others. The question is: do you know that the Messenger (peace be upon him) did not take from it? Do you know that the Messenger used to pray one hundred rak'ahs every night?

The questioner : I do not know.

The Shaykh : Do you know? Do you know that he used to take from his beard?

The questioner : I do not know.

The Shaykh : Do you know? When you return, you will say, "My role model is the Messenger of Allah." You will return to the Prophetic statement, and even more so to your understanding of the Prophetic statement. That is not the issue here. Is it clear to you now?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : But my last question remains without an answer, which is: who is your Salaf? May Allah reward you.

The questioner : I refer this toThe Shaykh : to teach it to us.

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you.

The questioner : And you.

The Shaykh : What I want to reach, may Allah reward you, and you, and I hope our brothers present also do not let the research be wasted with them, is merely to draw attention to a problem that currently exists in the Islamic world. As you know, there have been many sects in the past, and there are many now. Every one of these sects claims that it gathers the Book and the Sunnah. If I were to debate an Ibadhi, a Rafidi, a Shi'i, or so on, none of them would say, "We are not upon the Book and the Sunnah." In fact, none of them would say, "We do not take from the Sunnah." They all agree with us on the Book and the Sunnah. Of course, the disagreement arises over how to establish the Sunnah, how to understand the Sunnah, and so on. I am not concerned now with the extinct sects, some of which may have followers existing today. But I am concerned with the Islamic parties or Islamic groups. They are all with us on the Book and the Sunnah, and yet we differ greatly from them, and they in turn differ from us even more. The reason is that they neglected attention to a Qur'anic text and Prophetic hadiths. And here, the most dangerous of the sects or groups today on the land of Islam, those who appear with the appearance of enthusiasm for the rulings of Islam, and particularly enthusiasm for the Sunnah, the group known as the Takfir group, they have now come out with the innovation of declaring Muslims disbelievers. They do not limit this to rulers, but also to the ruled. These people, without doubt, are with us and do not deviate from the Book and the Sunnah. But what is the problem? They overlooked, for example, the saying of Allah the Exalted, which is the crux of the matter as they say: If the verse had not been with the phrase it would have been sufficient in the view of the scholars, because opposing the Messenger is disbelief, or at least misguidance, if this misguidance is not accompanied by a belief. But there is a wisdom in that it was conjoined with His saying so He said This phrase, which the Messenger (peace be upon him) supported in more than one authentic hadith, is overlooked by the Islamic groups, except for the Salafis, who say they are upon the Book and the Sunnah and upon the methodology of the righteous Salaf. You mention the hadith of the sects, in which all of them are in the Fire except one. They said, "Who is it, O Messenger of Allah?" He said: And in the other narration: Here we find that if this hadith is not a direct revelation from Allah to His Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), it is a quotation from him of the verse namely the noble companions, where he said: It would also have been sufficient for him to say, "What I am upon," because all guidance emanates from him, peace and blessings be upon him. But the point referred to in the same verse is also that he said: Upon this is the hadith of the Rightly Guided Caliphs: And hold to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the Rightly Guided Caliphs. It would have been sufficient for him to say, "And my Sunnah." The hadith agreed upon by al-Bukhari and Muslim from the narration of Anas: فمن رغب عن سنتي فليس مني And he who turns away from my Sunnah, he has no relation with MeSahih Muslim 1401 This is sufficient. But the verse and the hadith, and the hadith, and to draw the attention of these later people, it is not sufficient for any of you to take the Qur'an and the Sunnah and the Prophetic hadith and interpret each according to what seems to him. He must not at all neglect to know the position of the righteous Salaf regarding these texts that they want to interpret, especially according to the difference of time and place. Therefore, we, may Allah reward you, O Abu Mus'ab, are always concerned to be upon what we claim: we are with the Book and the Sunnah, and upon what our righteous Salaf were upon. This leads me to a rule that I have not found stated as I classify it or as I express it, but without doubt it is scattered in completely different expressions. I am saying this now because the issue has some precision, and I think it is self-evident that you will agree with me on the rule beforehand, and at that time I only hope that you will pay attention to the application. So I say: every text from the Book of Allah or a hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) that is general and the practice has not been carried out with its generality, or that is absolute and the practice has not been carried out with its absoluteness, it is not permissible for us to act upon that generality which was not acted upon, and that absoluteness which was not acted upon. So what is your opinion, may your honor remain?

The questioner : Meaning, when there is an absolute text or a general text, and none of the Salaf said it is absolute or general, then one should pause regarding it. But there is a group of scholars of usul who say that generality is every text is upon its generality, unless a specifier comes for it, or absoluteness.

The Shaykh : It proceeds upon its absoluteness unless something restricts it, correct? We know this well. And for this and that reason.

The questioner : You have established a rule that the Salaf did not act upon it.

The Shaykh : Yes, that is it.

The questioner : Here, at this point, one pauses from acting upon it, and that is the most correct.

The Shaykh : I do not merely want to stop doing it; I want more than that. It is not permissible to do it, and doing it falls under the category of "every innovation is misguidance, and every misguidance is in the Fire." It is not just that one stops doing it, but rather it is not permissible to do it. Now, may Allah reward you. I add to what I mentioned earlier: all the innovations that are disputed between the people of the Sunnah, truly, and the others who claim to be the Sunnah—these innovations they are upon, their basis is their failure to pay attention to this restriction and their adoption of the two well-known principles in the principles of jurisprudence without restriction: the general applies to its generality unless something comes to specify it, and the absolute applies to its absoluteness unless something comes to restrict it. And here, our professor is present, and we need to benefit from his knowledge in this regard. So I say: these two principles must be restricted by what the Salaf were upon; otherwise, we will never have an argument against an innovator in this world, because there is no innovation without a basis. But with the condition, as we benefited from the words of Imam al-Shatibi (may Allah have mercy on him) in his truly great book, *Al-I'tisam*, that innovation, in his view, is divided into two types: a true innovation and an additional innovation. We leave the true innovation for now; most of the innovations that have covered up many of the Sunnahs are of the additional innovations. And he is right to say so. The additional innovation, if you look at it from one angle, you find it prescribed; if you look at it from another angle, you find it not prescribed. From here I say: if we do not take the two principles with the restriction I mentioned earlier, we will not have an argument against the people of innovation regarding the additional innovation, because there is no innovation that does not have a basis. Take, for example, the disagreement that existed among us in Syria between the imams of the mosques, the mu'adhdhins, who either perform a prelude before the adhan or add a prayer upon the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) after the adhan. My brother, what is wrong with it? Do you deny Allah? Do you deny the prayer upon the Messenger of Allah? يا أيها الذين آمنوا صلوا عليه وسلموا تسليما O you who have believed, ask [Allah to confer] blessing upon him and ask [Allah to grant him] peace.[Al-Ahzab 33:56] It is a general text, but the practice did not follow it, my brothers. Fear Allah. Our scholars say so, and from here I pointed to this in my previous speech: "And all good is in following the Salaf *** And all evil is in the innovation of the Khalaf." If this had been good, they would have preceded us to it. Truly, these words are very important, and they are taken from studying the state of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them). Now, we have general texts regarding the beard. It is a general text, there is no dispute, but it concerns us to know those who heard this hadith directly from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and then those who received these hadiths from those who directly heard the hadith from the Messenger (peace be upon him), the Tabi'un, and so on. So I say: although I have not found, even to this day, a text from an individual, not a group, let alone the Salaf—because we say we do not mean one or two people, no, it is permissible for the issue to be disputed—I say I have not found even one person from the imams, from the Companions, from the Tabi'un, from those who transmitted from him, that he left his beard in its natural state and did not take anything from it. This is first. And second, which is important to me because it falls under a principle in which there is something? It falls under a principle disputed between, I think, the Hanafis and others, which is "the narrator is more aware of his narration than others." So I say now: one of the things that benefits us in this topic is that among the narrators of this general or absolute command أعفوا اللحى Let the beards grow. is Ibn Umar, and you are aware that he used to take from it, and Abu Hurayrah, who also used to take what exceeded a handful. So we are now, regardless of what we mentioned earlier, between two things: either we say we understand this general or absolute text better than these two Companions who heard the Messenger (peace be upon him) speak these words, or they understand it better. And I do not think anyone other than us, let alone one of us, would dare to say "we are men and they are men." I do not think this is possible. When can this be? In an issue that is under observation, not under insight, perhaps. But the Companions lived with the Messenger (peace be upon him) and heard him say وأعفوا اللحى And let the beards grow, and then they come and contradict this general or absolute text while believing in its generality and absoluteness? This is something my mind cannot comprehend. If we add to that other narrations in the books of hadith, in the Tafsir of Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, and in the book *Shu'ab al-Iman* by al-Bayhaqi, and other books I may not recall now, which narrate from a group of the Salaf that they used to take from it, then at that time, I do not hesitate, and forgive me for saying, as I said long ago and still say, from this same door: that lengthening the beard beyond a handful is an innovation, just as placing the right hand over the left when raising the head from ruku' is an innovation. Each of these two matters contradicts what was mentioned earlier, because this placement has no practical evidence. We often directed a question to some of the distinguished sheikhs, let alone many students of knowledge: "Have you known that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), when he raised his head from ruku', placed his right hand over his left?" We do not hear an answer other than arguing with the generality. Here, the argument with the generality is weaker than there, for the reason that the generality here did not come from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), whereas there أعفوا اللحى Let the beards grow. it came from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). As for the placement, it came from Wa'il ibn Hujr, whose narration they argue with in Sunan al-Nasa'i: "When he stood in prayer," he stood, he said "placed the right hand," so this is standing. Well, my brothers, show us the practice. There is no answer. And we countered them with something similar, narrated in *Sahih al-Bukhari* and through Imam Malik in his *Muwatta*, where he said from Abu Hazim from Sahl ibn Sa'd al-Sa'idi, who said: "They were ordered to place the right hand over the left in prayer." Not standing. So we said to them: "Then place the right hand over the left between the two prostrations, for example." They could not answer except that this is how the Muslims practiced. And I say: this is how the Muslims practiced after raising the head from ruku', and this was not the practice of the Salaf at all. Because the matter, as Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) says when he discusses the innovators in such issues, says: "If this had occurred, the motivations would have been present to transmit it and it would have been available for transmission. If it was not transmitted, it means that it did not occur." So I hope, professor, that you will reflect on this so that سنشد عضدك بأخيك We will strengthen your arm through your brother[Al-Qasas 28:35] may be true for us, if Allah wills.

The questioner : I will, if Allah wills, verify some matters for myself.

The Shaykh : This is what I want from you.

The questioner : Then, if it is established, I return to...

The Shaykh : This is what I want.

The questioner : Without a single word of doubt.

The Shaykh : So that our back is strengthened by you.

The questioner : The truth is the truth, on my head.

The Shaykh : Let's go, professor?
Al-Halabi : Speaking of the previous issue, my Shaykh, perhaps by way of adding or repeating the statement, in fact, because you have spoken about this repeatedly, that our Shaykh mentions that if there were a man of knowledge, ijtihad, and virtue who saw that the Sunnah, for example, is to clasp the hands after ruku', and then someone followed him, like our Shaykh or his sons or his students, thenThe Shaykh : it is obligatory for him to do what he does. My Shaykh, this issue is important, and this actually removes the difficulty that some might imagine from our Shaykh's words, where he describes this act as an innovation, that he is obligated, or that he is obligated by that description, to describe its doer as an innovator. These are two things that are not necessarily connected at all. What is your opinion, my Shaykh?

The Shaykh : Correct.
Al-Halabi : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : This is what we say, as I said earlier.
Al-Halabi : May Allah preserve you, my Shaykh.
Al-Halali: It is understood from your words, our professor, the correct point that must be pointed out: that the methodology of the Salaf and the understanding of the Salaf (may Allah be pleased with them) is a guide in itself, because we do not follow them by following them, but by following the evidence. However, if it is transmitted from them that they did so, without our knowledge of the evidence, we are obligated to take it.

The Shaykh : The evidence is the path of the believers.
Al-Halali: And therefore, it restricts the absolute and specifies the general.

The questioner : Is the soundness of the chain of the athar not a condition?

The Shaykh : It is necessary, like the hadith; it must be authentic.

The questioner : As for if its chain is weak, it is not taken.

The Shaykh : It is necessary.
Al-Halali: The discussion is about the methodology, the general framework. So if it is established that this is the methodology of the Salaf, then at that time we restrict the absolute with it and specify the general with it. And that is the people of innovation when we say to them, "This is the methodology of the Salaf and the understanding of the Salaf," they say, "How do you restrict the general?"

The Shaykh : This has been answered before, and that is the extent of their knowledge.
Al-Halabi : Also, another point that perhaps strengthens the words of our brother Abu Usamah (may Allah preserve him) is a phrase from our Shaykh that I read in the book *Tarikh Baghdad* by al-Khatib al-Baghdadi. Imam Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak was asked about following (the path), and he said, "Following is Abu Hamzah al-Sakiri."

The Shaykh : What Allah willed.
Al-Halabi : And the hadith يد الله على الجماعة the Hand of Allah is with the Jama'ahSunan an-Nasa'i 4020 that you mentioned at the beginning of the session is narrated by Imam al-Tirmidhi ... After he presented it and spoke about its chain, he said, "And we have narrated with a chain from Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak that he was asked about the group (al-jama'ah), and he said, 'Abu Bakr and Umar.' It was said to him, 'Abu Bakr and Umar have died.' He said, 'So-and-so and so-and-so.' It was said to him, 'So-and-so and so-and-so have died.' He said, 'The group is Abu Hamzah al-Sakiri.' Al-Tirmidhi comments at the end, saying, 'Abu Hamzah al-Sakiri, whose name is Muhammad ibn Maimun, was a righteous Shaykh, and I think that Ibn al-Mubarak said this during his lifetime.'"

The Shaykh : What Allah willed, for he was holding fast to the methodology, what Allah willed. And Glory is to You, O Allah, and praise, I bear witness that there is no deity but You, I seek Your forgiveness and I repent to You.