Continuation of the benefits of the verse: “And when you said, ‘O Moses, we cannot endure one kind of food, so call upon your Lord to bring out for us from what the earth grows: its herbs, its cucumbers, its garlic, its lentils, and its onions.’ He said, ‘Will you exchange that which is lesser for that which is better? Descend to a city, and you will have what you asked for.’”

In this is evidence for the permissibility of legumes, cucumbers, garlic, lentils, and onions. Where is this taken from? ?
Allah says: “Descend to a city”
If someone were to say, “Is this in the Shari'ah of Moses?”
We say: Our Shari'ah did not come with a contrary ruling, but rather with a ruling in agreement with it. For he and made them permissible for them. Likewise, and clarified that it is lawful, so it is lawful even in our Shari'ah. The Islamic Shari'ah came in agreement with this matter. Even if it had not come in agreement with it and had not come with a contrary ruling, the correct view is that it remains on the original ruling.
In this is evidence for the permissibility of attributing a thing to its place rather than to the First Actor, based on His saying: And who is it that causes it to grow? Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He.
And we take from this the second benefit: which is the permissibility of attributing a thing to its true cause, which has been established as a cause by Shari'ah or by sense, without joining it with Allah. It is not necessary, it is not obligatory. For example, if you say, “This man, for instance, died of hunger,” and you came to him with bread and gave it to him, and you said, “If he had not eaten the bread, he would have perished,” is this permissible or not? It is permissible. Attributing a thing to its cause, which has been established by sense or by Shari'ah as its cause, is not a problem. What is prohibited is that you establish the First Cause, which is the decree of Allah, alongside the second cause, joined with it. What is it joined with? With the conjunction "and." This is what is prohibited, because in that case you are equating Allah with this cause. For example, you say, “If it were not for Allah and the bread, he would have perished.” This is not permissible, because this is associating partners with Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, with something else, using a letter that necessitates what? Association. What does association necessitate? Equating. But association without equating is not a problem, “for Allah, then so-and-so.” The result is that we say in this verse there is evidence that attributing a thing to its true cause, by Shari'ah or by sense, is not a problem. But what is it? But? The prohibited thing is that it be joined with Allah with the conjunction "and" which necessitates equating.
Now, if someone were to say: Did not Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He, rebuke Qarun when he said: ? He attributed the acquisition of this wealth to knowledge, and it is true that knowledge may be the cause?
We say: Because this man denied that this was from Allah. It is well known that if a person attributes a thing to its cause as the first and last cause, it is forbidden; it is not permissible. Even, for example, if you said, “I am the one who made this,” or “If I had not made it, it would not have been right,” or something like that, “If I had not built this building, it would not have been right,” if you intended that you are independent of Allah in this, this is not permissible. But if you attribute it to the true cause indicated by the Shari'ah or by sense, without having the belief that this cause is independent of Allah, then there is no harm. And it is established from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) that he said regarding his uncle Abu Talib: So he attributed the alleviation for Abu Talib to himself, (peace and blessings be upon him), “if not for me.”

The questioner : .........؟

The Shaykh : This report should be looked into, and if it is authentic from Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him), then his intention was to block the means for people whom he feared for.

The questioner : Is it better for us to say, “If not for such-and-such”?

The Shaykh : No, it is better that you say, “If not for the fact that Allah decreed such-and-such.” This is better. Yes.
In it is also evidence for the rebuke of Moses (peace be upon him) of the Children of Israel, and that people like these who exchange that which is lesser for that which is better are deserving of rebuke. Because Moses rebuked them when he said: .
In it is evidence that it is permissible for a person to excuse himself from intermediation if there is no need for it, because he said: What is the need for me to call upon Allah to bring out for you from what the earth grows, and otherwise? Sometimes some people come to you and say, “Intercede for me with so-and-so to complete this task for me,” and then you say, “Go you and try, and if you cannot, then I am ready.” Or is it better that you always take it upon yourself and intercede? It is better to do so for two reasons. The first reason is that you protect the face of this man from humbling himself before you, because if you intercede for him, this will be on his forehead until the Day of Resurrection. That is one thing. The second matter is that if you do this, you may open doors for yourself that you cannot close, and then the door is blocked from above. Do you understand the meaning of this phrase? Yes. It is possible that if everyone who comes to you always gets you to intercede, people will come to you that you cannot get rid of, and then the door is blocked on you from above. How is it blocked? If they see that every day they have three or four intermediaries from you... they say, “We do not need to accept his intercession,” and they take it lightly to reject you, and then they reject you in a matter where it may be important that they accept your intercession. In these matters, a person should be firm, prioritizing reason over emotion. Otherwise, sometimes a person pities the person and says, “Why don't I intercede?” If he has the capacity, and if he sees a correct point of view, and has the capacity that if the doors are closed in front of him, he will intercede, this is better for both parties and for the public interest. And we have seen the effect of this in many matters: that a person not always interceding is better and more dignified for him also with the first authority. Yes. Now, Moses (peace be upon him) refrained from asking Allah, even though supplication is worship; the supplication itself is worship. And he did not ask Allah for them, but rather he said: meaning, “To which city will you descend? Then you will find what you asked for.”