Is the intended meaning of the hadith (My Ummah will not agree upon misguidance) its scholars?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : There is a question about the prayer for rain, if you permit.
The Shaykh : Before the prayer for rain, you had nothing on your mind.
The questioner : No, I was just remembering, but Brother Abu Yahya mentioned that in "the scholars of my Ummah," there is something omitted. "My Ummah will not agree upon misguidance"—the intended meaning is the scholars of my Ummah. That is what I said, just that.
The Shaykh : That is what you said.
The questioner : I only said that there is something omitted in it. I said that.
The Shaykh : I wished for a moment while he was speaking, so the wish transferred from him to someone else.
The questioner : By Allah, that is my information, that is my understanding... Let's see what the meaning of the hadith is first?
The Shaykh : No, your confusion came from the jurisprudential phrase: is the agreement that constitutes proof the agreement of the Ummah or the agreement of the scholars of the Ummah?
The questioner : Their words are those of the scholars of the Ummah.
The Shaykh : So it got mixed up for you.
The questioner : By Allah, it is possible.
The Shaykh : This is not just possible, it is certain. The jurisprudential and usuli issue in interpreting the hadith got mixed up for you. The hadith does not mean this, but if it happens, welcome, but let us now proceed with your wording so that we do not demolish it entirely. Let us give it some consideration and weight. So, if we assume the scholars of the Ummah...
Another questioner : To preserve the dignity of the face...
The Shaykh : That is between you and him. If we assume the scholars of the Ummah are one hundred people and they differed, and the minority, even if it is one person, is on one side, and the other ninety-nine are on the other side, regardless of whether the truth is with the one or with the others, it is said that the Ummah did not agree upon misguidance, even if it is one person. Now, let us assume the truth is with the one and the error is with the ninety-nine. The Ummah did not agree upon misguidance. Where is this and where is that? Where is the meaning of the hadith? And where is the consensus (ijma') upon which proof is established? It is the consensus of the scholars of the Ummah, not the consensus of the ignorant of the Ummah and the students of the Ummah, especially the students of the last times, where everyone says, "I see it this way," and "My ijtihad led me to this," and so on! No, the intended meaning here is the elite of the Ummah and its scholars. But this is one thing, and the meaning of the hadith is another clear thing. So, what is your question?
The questioner : The scholars say that consensus (ijma') is the consensus of the Companions.
The Shaykh : No, we do not want to enter into that now, or we did not want to enter into the details, because consensus (ijma'), in reality, even the consensus of the scholars of the Ummah, is a name without a body. Because first, its occurrence is impossible. Second, if it did occur, it would be impossible to ascertain. Imagine any community from the day Allah sent Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) until this time. Imagine any large, broad, or small, narrow community. How is it possible for the scholars to agree on an opinion on an issue for which there is no text from the Book or the Sunnah? First? Then, who is able to contact the individuals of this consensus? Second? Therefore, this is an illusion. But the consensus that cannot be denied or rejected is, as Ibn Hazm (may Allah have mercy on him) said, what is known from the religion by necessity. Here, the necessary scientific meaning enters, which no Muslim deviates from. As for deductive and detailed issues, the Ummah must differ in them first. And second, the elite of the Ummah, who are the scholars, must differ in that. Then, even if we assume they agreed or reached consensus, there is no way to obtain that, because now, with the ease of means of transport and the bringing together of the distant, it is not possible to know the opinion of the scholars: did they differ or agree? But consensus (ijma') is what is known from the religion by necessity, and that is all. That is what came in the saying of Allah the Exalted:[An-Nisa 4:115] [An-Nisa 4:115] This person who opposes the path of the believers, which is consensus (ijma'), is the one upon whom this warning falls. As for the theoretical consensus that cannot be ascertained or realized, that is, as I said first, a name without a body, like a loyal friend.
The questioner : What is intended, Professor, by the word "the majority of jurists"?
The Shaykh : The majority, the majority. Yes, that is right.
The Shaykh : Before the prayer for rain, you had nothing on your mind.
The questioner : No, I was just remembering, but Brother Abu Yahya mentioned that in "the scholars of my Ummah," there is something omitted. "My Ummah will not agree upon misguidance"—the intended meaning is the scholars of my Ummah. That is what I said, just that.
The Shaykh : That is what you said.
The questioner : I only said that there is something omitted in it. I said that.
The Shaykh : I wished for a moment while he was speaking, so the wish transferred from him to someone else.
The questioner : By Allah, that is my information, that is my understanding... Let's see what the meaning of the hadith is first?
The Shaykh : No, your confusion came from the jurisprudential phrase: is the agreement that constitutes proof the agreement of the Ummah or the agreement of the scholars of the Ummah?
The questioner : Their words are those of the scholars of the Ummah.
The Shaykh : So it got mixed up for you.
The questioner : By Allah, it is possible.
The Shaykh : This is not just possible, it is certain. The jurisprudential and usuli issue in interpreting the hadith got mixed up for you. The hadith does not mean this, but if it happens, welcome, but let us now proceed with your wording so that we do not demolish it entirely. Let us give it some consideration and weight. So, if we assume the scholars of the Ummah...
Another questioner : To preserve the dignity of the face...
The Shaykh : That is between you and him. If we assume the scholars of the Ummah are one hundred people and they differed, and the minority, even if it is one person, is on one side, and the other ninety-nine are on the other side, regardless of whether the truth is with the one or with the others, it is said that the Ummah did not agree upon misguidance, even if it is one person. Now, let us assume the truth is with the one and the error is with the ninety-nine. The Ummah did not agree upon misguidance. Where is this and where is that? Where is the meaning of the hadith? And where is the consensus (ijma') upon which proof is established? It is the consensus of the scholars of the Ummah, not the consensus of the ignorant of the Ummah and the students of the Ummah, especially the students of the last times, where everyone says, "I see it this way," and "My ijtihad led me to this," and so on! No, the intended meaning here is the elite of the Ummah and its scholars. But this is one thing, and the meaning of the hadith is another clear thing. So, what is your question?
The questioner : The scholars say that consensus (ijma') is the consensus of the Companions.
The Shaykh : No, we do not want to enter into that now, or we did not want to enter into the details, because consensus (ijma'), in reality, even the consensus of the scholars of the Ummah, is a name without a body. Because first, its occurrence is impossible. Second, if it did occur, it would be impossible to ascertain. Imagine any community from the day Allah sent Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) until this time. Imagine any large, broad, or small, narrow community. How is it possible for the scholars to agree on an opinion on an issue for which there is no text from the Book or the Sunnah? First? Then, who is able to contact the individuals of this consensus? Second? Therefore, this is an illusion. But the consensus that cannot be denied or rejected is, as Ibn Hazm (may Allah have mercy on him) said, what is known from the religion by necessity. Here, the necessary scientific meaning enters, which no Muslim deviates from. As for deductive and detailed issues, the Ummah must differ in them first. And second, the elite of the Ummah, who are the scholars, must differ in that. Then, even if we assume they agreed or reached consensus, there is no way to obtain that, because now, with the ease of means of transport and the bringing together of the distant, it is not possible to know the opinion of the scholars: did they differ or agree? But consensus (ijma') is what is known from the religion by necessity, and that is all. That is what came in the saying of Allah the Exalted:
and follows other than the way of the believers
ويتبع غير سبيل المؤمنينAnd whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has become clear to him and follows other than the way of the believers - We will give him what he has taken and drive him into Hell, and evil it is as a destination.
ومن يشاقق الرسول من بعد ما تبين له الهدى ويتبع غير سبيل المؤمنين نوله ما تولى ونصله جهنم وساءت مصيراThe questioner : What is intended, Professor, by the word "the majority of jurists"?
The Shaykh : The majority, the majority. Yes, that is right.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.