The Shaykh’s statement that all scholars, even those from among the people of innovation, agree that it is not required for rulings that their evidence be definitive in establishment and definitive in indication

The Shaykh : Here, I must pause briefly to draw the attention of our brothers present and to have them pay attention with me to this phrase and the subtle, soft insinuation contained within it, which only a few individuals among the scholars or their students notice. It is the questioner’s statement: “There is no definitive text.” The scholars of the Muslims have agreed, all of them, even those from among the people of innovation, that they say: “Creed is not taken from authentic hadiths, but only from authentic, mass-transmitted hadiths.” This has been said by some of the scholars of theology, meaning that creed is not taken from an authentic hadith unless it is a mass-transmitted hadith. As for the rulings of the Shari'ah, they did not impose this condition of mass transmission. Then, those who require mass transmission in hadiths of creed also require something else, which is that the indication of the mass-transmitted text must also be a definitive indication. So, according to those mentioned, the scholars of theology, creed is not established except with two conditions: that the text be definitive in its establishment and that its indication be definitive in its establishment. Two conditions: definitive in establishment and definitive in indication. If one of these two conditions is lacking, there is no argument in the text that obligates the Muslim to adopt what is in it, unless it possesses definitive indication and definitive establishment. If one of these is lacking, the creed is not established. Is the matter the same in the rulings of the Shari'ah? The answer is no. The scholars have agreed on this; that disagreement occurred in creed, but in the rulings of the Shari'ah, no such disagreement occurred. It is sufficient in the rulings of the Shari'ah that the text be established; it is not required that its establishment be definitive, but rather based on preponderant probability. Similarly, it is not required that the indication of this text be a definitive indication; rather, it is sufficient that its indication also be probabilistic. I want to point out, considering that the attendees, if Allah wills, are all, or at least most of them, students of knowledge, that the definitive is opposed by the scholars to the probabilistic. A text definitive in indication is opposed to a text probabilistic in indication; a text definitive in establishment is opposed to a text probabilistic in establishment. This may pass by a student of knowledge, but what I want to remind them of is that they should not think that the “probability” intended in both texts—probabilistic establishment or probabilistic indication—refers to the probability that is condemned in the Noble Qur'an and in the hadith of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). He said regarding the polytheists: This is not the probability mentioned in this verse or in the hadith of al-Bukhari and Muslim: This is not the probability condemned by the Qur'an and the Sunnah. It is the probability that the jurists mean when they say that it is required that the text be definitive in establishment and definitive in indication in matters of creed, whereas that is not required in rulings. In rulings, it is sufficient that the text be probabilistic in establishment and probabilistic in indication. They do not mean this probability. So what do they mean? This is a very important point, because many of those who argue without knowledge, when they research the first topic related to creed, say: “We do not accept ahad hadiths in creed because they only yield probability.” Whether they are right or wrong, they are right because they are quoting from the scholars that ahad hadiths only yield probability, and they are wrong because they mean by “probability” here the weaker probability that is not permissible to act upon. Therefore, they combined a known scientific fact with ignorance coming from them, and they produced a very dangerous result, which is that ahad hadiths are not accepted in creed because, by the agreement of the scholars, they only yield probability, and probability is condemned. They bring the previous verse and the other one, and the hadith. Here, they fall into extreme ignorance. So what do we understand, or what should we understand, when we stand before such a phrase: “This is a text probabilistic in establishment” or “This is a text probabilistic in indication”? It does not mean, first, that this text is not accepted because it is probabilistic in establishment, because they mean the stronger probability. And now I want to bring this issue closer to you. Any Shari'ah judge who rules by what Allah has revealed, even the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) when he judges between two people, has established a rule for the judges after him from which they proceed and upon which they walk. It is that he (may the prayer and peace of Allah be upon him) said in the authentic hadith: What is the meaning of this hadith? The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) says: Two men come to me to dispute, meaning to seek judgment from me. I listen to this one and I listen to that one. One of them may be more eloquent, meaning have a stronger argument, than the other. It is not possible for him (peace and blessings be upon him) except to listen to him, because even if he was extended by revelation from the sky, in judging between people, he judged like a judge. He wanted to teach people what they rely on and by what they judge. So he said: “You come to me to seek judgment and to seek my ruling, so I listen to this one and I listen to that one. It may be that one of them has a stronger argument than the other, and it appears to me that the truth is with him, so I rule in his favor. And the truth may be with the other one who does not have clarity or eloquence to present his argument. I rule in his favor, meaning I rule in his favor with what is not his right.” He said: From here came a principle of usul al-fiqh among the scholars, which they summarized and condensed from this hadith: “We judge by the apparent, and Allah takes care of the hidden.” Now the judges walk on this principle. Now we say that when the judge wants to judge between two people, he does not have revelation; rather, he listens from here and from here and forms an opinion in his mind, and he rules. His ruling may be the execution of so-and-so. Why? Because, for example, two witnesses came and testified, and their testimony may have been false. They say: “Yes, we saw so-and-so, he is the one who killed so-and-so.” So he rules with execution and may be mistaken, but he acted with his ijtihad and ruled by what preponderated in his opinion. This ruling by preponderant probability is what does not burden the Muslim with more than that in every Shari'ah ruling. Therefore, the scholars are content in the rulings of the Shari'ah with a text that is probabilistic in establishment and probabilistic in indication. It is sufficient that it be probabilistic in establishment and probabilistic in indication. If it is definitive in establishment, it is light upon light. And if it is definitive in establishment and definitive in indication, it is light upon light upon light.