(Clarifying that the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence is not among the scholars and should not be asked for a ruling) And when we call you to the proof, your answer is ignorance without proof. We are the followers who have become accustomed to this
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"And when we call you to the proof, your answer is ignorance without proof"
"We are the followers who have become accustomed to this"
"We are the followers who have become accustomed to this, just as their fathers were in former times"
It means: We are followers who follow so-and-so and so-and-so[Az-Zukhruf 43:22]
"We said: How do you declare us disbelievers, when you have no knowledge of declaring someone a disbeliever or of faith"
Since you are followers, you have no knowledge of how to declare us disbelievers, and you do not know declaring someone a disbeliever or faith. This is aggression, not truth. This is aggression. And for this reason he said:
"How do you declare us disbelievers, when you have no knowledge of declaring someone a disbeliever or of faith"
"For the scholars have agreed" This is the explanation for his statement:
"When you have no knowledge of declaring someone a disbeliever or of faith"
"For the scholars have agreed that the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence is like the blind; they are two brothers"
He says that the scholars have agreed that the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence is like the blind who does not find the way. And it is said "they are two brothers" because some poets say:
"There is no difference between the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence and a beast that is led among the broken and the thorns"
There is no difference between the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence and the beast. The beast, until it reaches a certain point, is dragged along with the broken and the thorns, its legs are cut, and it does not know. The one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence is like that. And the scholars have agreed that the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence is not counted among the scholars. Ibn 'Abd al-Barr and others mentioned this. He said: "The scholars have agreed that the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence is not among the scholars, and that it is not permissible to ask him for a ruling, because he is not among the people of knowledge". And Allah the Exalted said: But in case of dire necessity, when no scholar qualified to derive rulings who understands the Book and the Sunnah is found, we ask the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence. Yes.
"For the scholars have agreed that the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence is like the blind; they are two brothers"
"We are the followers who have become accustomed to this"
"We are the followers who have become accustomed to this, just as their fathers were in former times"
It means: We are followers who follow so-and-so and so-and-so
we found our fathers upon a religion, and we are in their footsteps [rightly] guided."
وجدنا آباءنا على أمة وإنا على آثارهم مقتدون"We said: How do you declare us disbelievers, when you have no knowledge of declaring someone a disbeliever or of faith"
Since you are followers, you have no knowledge of how to declare us disbelievers, and you do not know declaring someone a disbeliever or faith. This is aggression, not truth. This is aggression. And for this reason he said:
"How do you declare us disbelievers, when you have no knowledge of declaring someone a disbeliever or of faith"
"For the scholars have agreed" This is the explanation for his statement:
"When you have no knowledge of declaring someone a disbeliever or of faith"
"For the scholars have agreed that the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence is like the blind; they are two brothers"
He says that the scholars have agreed that the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence is like the blind who does not find the way. And it is said "they are two brothers" because some poets say:
"There is no difference between the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence and a beast that is led among the broken and the thorns"
There is no difference between the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence and the beast. The beast, until it reaches a certain point, is dragged along with the broken and the thorns, its legs are cut, and it does not know. The one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence is like that. And the scholars have agreed that the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence is not counted among the scholars. Ibn 'Abd al-Barr and others mentioned this. He said: "The scholars have agreed that the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence is not among the scholars, and that it is not permissible to ask him for a ruling, because he is not among the people of knowledge". And Allah the Exalted said:
So ask the people of knowledge if you do not know.
فاسألوا أهل الذكر"For the scholars have agreed that the one who follows a scholar without knowing his evidence is like the blind; they are two brothers"