Advice from the Honorable Shaykh on explaining what is obligatory for us to do in response to the news we hear being reported.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful:
Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may Allah send prayers and blessings upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and his Companions, and upon those who follow them with excellence until the Day of Judgment.
As for what follows:
This is the first meeting in the month of Jumada al-Ula, in the year 1404 AH, which takes place every Thursday of every week.
We ask Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) to reward everyone for the research and learning they present, and we inform you all that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said:Sahih Muslim 2699a, so we ask Allah to make that easy for us and for you by His grace and generosity.
On this day, we will speak about a small matter, and then we apologize to you because we have business outside the city. We say: Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) said in His Book:[Al-Jathiyah 45:7]: and the *affak* is the one who engages in *ifk*, and *ifk* is lying. It is narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) that he said: Riyad as-Salihin 1547: meaning that the person who reports everything he hears will burden himself with lies, because not everything that is said and reported is true; rather, much of the news, especially with emotions and feelings, is false and is added to or subtracted from. Therefore, it is obligatory for a person, when he hears something about someone, to first verify the accuracy of the report. The report may be wrong, and this happens often. We often hear things attributed to the shaykhs or to the princes or to other people, and we hear a lot, and then when we verify it, we find that it is a lie and has no basis. Or perhaps it has a basis, but things are added to it. This is a great trial. So first: we must verify the accuracy of the report.
If the report is verified and it is established that so-and-so said such-and-such, whether he is a prince, a scholar, a minister, or an ordinary man, that he said such-and-such, then we reflect before we speak to him. We reflect: does his statement have a point of view?
Is it an *ijtihad* in which he may err or be correct, and perhaps we are the ones who are wrong and he is the one who is correct? We reflect before we rush to speak to him by denying what was attributed to him or the like of that.
And often the thing is reported and the report is correct, and we know that this man said it or did it, but when we reflect, we find that it has a justification and a valid reason. And if it has a justification or a valid reason, even if many people are unaware of it, he is not deserving of blame or deserving of denial, because he said it based on *ijtihad*.
And none of us has revelation descending upon him such that what he said is truth or what he did is truth, for revelation ceased with the death of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).
So if we reflect on what was verified in the report about him and we find that his statement or his action has a valid reason and a justification, then we refrain; we do not speak to him.
If it becomes clear to us that there is no valid reason for his statement and no justification for it, or no valid reason for his action and no justification for it, then at that time we speak.
But how do we speak?
Is speaking to expose this man to the people and say: this is so-and-so, he has this or he does not have that?
No, the obligatory thing is to advise with wisdom, by going to him and saying: you did such-and-such or you said such-and-such, and this is not correct, because it contradicts the saying of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) such-and-such, or the saying of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) such-and-such, or the consensus of the scholars on such-and-such. How can you do this?
And it is absolutely not permissible to expose him, especially if he is among the scholars or among the princes, meaning the ministers, or the greatest ruler in the country. It is not permissible to expose him, because if you expose the error of one of the scholars, you have in reality wronged him personally, just as you wrong other people, but you have added to this wronging a wronging of the knowledge he carries and the Shari'ah he speaks about. If the scholars fall from the eyes of the people, their words will have no measure, and people will not trust their words. And at that time, a part of the Shari'ah will be lost through the hand of this scholar who erred once, and no one is free from error. Many benefits are lost by exposing him, and this is a great crime, not only against the person himself, but against the person and the Shari'ah of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) that he carries, as is well known.
And if this is with the prince and you expose him, you have wronged him personally, just as you wrong other people, the general public, and you have wronged security again. This is because the guardians of security are the princes and those given the authority of punishment and execution. If you expose them, their awe in the hearts of people decreases, and they become like the general public, with no one caring about them, their orders, or their prohibitions. And at that time, security is disrupted, and rebellion occurs.
So now, exposing the scholars necessitates rebellion against the Shari'ah that this scholar carries and speaks about.
And exposing the princes necessitates rebellion against them and the collapse of the structure upon which society is built, which is security, and the loss of control. And this is a great, major crime.
Therefore, Allah the Exalted said:[An-Nisa 4:59] Who are the *awliya al-amr* (those in authority)?
The *awliya al-amr* are two groups of people: the scholars are the *awliya al-amr* in the Shari'ah of Allah and its clarification for creation.
And the princes are the *awliya al-amr* in the execution of the Shari'ah and the preservation of security. Allah made obedience to these people obligatory for the sake of preserving the Shari'ah, preserving security, and the order of people. Because if people rebelled against them and made the order of the prince or the order of the scholar like the order of Zayd and 'Abd, their order would have no authority over hearts or souls, and they would become like the general public. If they speak, the person is at his option: if he wishes, he accepts what they said, and if he wishes, he rejects it. If they order, the person is at his option: if he wishes, he obeys, and if he wishes, he disobeys. And if they prohibit, he has the option: if he wishes, he stops, and if he wishes, he does it. And this is one of the greatest matters. Therefore, He said:[An-Nisa 4:59] He did not say: "And let some of you obey others." He said: [An-Nisa 4:59] So He specified the rulers. Yes, if they order disobedience to Allah, for example, they say to the people: do not pray in congregation, or they say to the people: drink intoxicants, do such-and-such of the forbidden things, or of the obligatory things, and they say: leave them. These people are not to be obeyed, and there is no listening to them or obedience. If they order us to commit disobedience, we say: no, no listening and no obedience. But if they commit disobedience, do they have authority over us?
The answer: Yes, they have authority over us, even if they commit disobedience. If they are disobedient, they have authority over us and obedience is obligatory upon us, because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered obedience to the rulers even if we see from them what we dislike, and ordered obedience to the rulers even if they beat the backs and take the wealth.
And the fact that they disobey Allah, their disobedience is upon them, and we have nothing to do with it.
But if they order us directly, saying: do this disobedience, or leave this obligation, we say: no listening and no obedience.
And what is narrated that 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) ordered something, and Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "No listening and no obedience, because you have a new garment or two garments", I do not think this is correct, because 'Umar has such awe that Bilal could not speak like this in front of the people. Then, Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) has such respect for 'Umar that he could not speak like this in front of the people. Then, even if we assume its correctness is as clear as the sun, perhaps Bilal said that because some people criticized 'Umar for this action, and Bilal wanted to clarify to 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) the reason that made him have a new garment or two garments, so that the issue that occurred in the hearts of some people would be resolved.
As for him publicly denying it in front of everyone, and 'Umar is who? Who is 'Umar and who is Bilal? This is very far-fetched. But if it is correct, its aspect is what I said: that perhaps he heard someone speaking this way, and he wanted to clear his name from what people are saying.
In any case, it is obligatory for us, in response to the news we hear, to do three things in order:
What is the first thing, O brothers? What is the first thing?
The first thing: verification.
And the second thing: reflection.
The first thing: verification. Then reflection: does what was verified about this person have a point of view and a justification?
The third matter is to confront and advise without publicizing or exposing, especially if the person is among those in authority, such as a scholar or a ruler or the like. By doing so, we follow the path of the righteous predecessors (may Allah be pleased with them), and much good is achieved. This does not cause anything to be missed; that is, instead of you forbidding what is wrong today, you forbid it tomorrow or the day after. We do not say: do not act. Act, but with calmness and steady, balanced steps based on what is transmitted and what is rational. By this, matters are completed and conditions are rectified.
We ask Allah the Exalted to unite our hearts upon His obedience and His mindfulness, and to unify our word in truth. Indeed, He is capable of all things. And all praise is due to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may Allah send prayers and blessings upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and his Companions, and those who follow them with excellence until the Day of Judgment, if Allah wills. May He accept from us and from you.
Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may Allah send prayers and blessings upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and his Companions, and upon those who follow them with excellence until the Day of Judgment.
As for what follows:
This is the first meeting in the month of Jumada al-Ula, in the year 1404 AH, which takes place every Thursday of every week.
We ask Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) to reward everyone for the research and learning they present, and we inform you all that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said:
he who treads the path in search of knowledge, Allah would make that path easy, leading to Paradise for him
من سلك طريقًا يلتمس فيه علما سهل الله له به طريقًا إلى الجنةOn this day, we will speak about a small matter, and then we apologize to you because we have business outside the city. We say: Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) said in His Book:
Woe to every sinful liar
وَيْلٌ لِكُلِّ أَفَّاكٍ أَثِيمٍIt is enough for a man to prove himself a liar when he goes on narrating whatever he hears.
كفى بالمرء كذباً أن يحدث بكل ما سمعIf the report is verified and it is established that so-and-so said such-and-such, whether he is a prince, a scholar, a minister, or an ordinary man, that he said such-and-such, then we reflect before we speak to him. We reflect: does his statement have a point of view?
Is it an *ijtihad* in which he may err or be correct, and perhaps we are the ones who are wrong and he is the one who is correct? We reflect before we rush to speak to him by denying what was attributed to him or the like of that.
And often the thing is reported and the report is correct, and we know that this man said it or did it, but when we reflect, we find that it has a justification and a valid reason. And if it has a justification or a valid reason, even if many people are unaware of it, he is not deserving of blame or deserving of denial, because he said it based on *ijtihad*.
And none of us has revelation descending upon him such that what he said is truth or what he did is truth, for revelation ceased with the death of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).
So if we reflect on what was verified in the report about him and we find that his statement or his action has a valid reason and a justification, then we refrain; we do not speak to him.
If it becomes clear to us that there is no valid reason for his statement and no justification for it, or no valid reason for his action and no justification for it, then at that time we speak.
But how do we speak?
Is speaking to expose this man to the people and say: this is so-and-so, he has this or he does not have that?
No, the obligatory thing is to advise with wisdom, by going to him and saying: you did such-and-such or you said such-and-such, and this is not correct, because it contradicts the saying of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) such-and-such, or the saying of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) such-and-such, or the consensus of the scholars on such-and-such. How can you do this?
And it is absolutely not permissible to expose him, especially if he is among the scholars or among the princes, meaning the ministers, or the greatest ruler in the country. It is not permissible to expose him, because if you expose the error of one of the scholars, you have in reality wronged him personally, just as you wrong other people, but you have added to this wronging a wronging of the knowledge he carries and the Shari'ah he speaks about. If the scholars fall from the eyes of the people, their words will have no measure, and people will not trust their words. And at that time, a part of the Shari'ah will be lost through the hand of this scholar who erred once, and no one is free from error. Many benefits are lost by exposing him, and this is a great crime, not only against the person himself, but against the person and the Shari'ah of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) that he carries, as is well known.
And if this is with the prince and you expose him, you have wronged him personally, just as you wrong other people, the general public, and you have wronged security again. This is because the guardians of security are the princes and those given the authority of punishment and execution. If you expose them, their awe in the hearts of people decreases, and they become like the general public, with no one caring about them, their orders, or their prohibitions. And at that time, security is disrupted, and rebellion occurs.
So now, exposing the scholars necessitates rebellion against the Shari'ah that this scholar carries and speaks about.
And exposing the princes necessitates rebellion against them and the collapse of the structure upon which society is built, which is security, and the loss of control. And this is a great, major crime.
Therefore, Allah the Exalted said:
O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْThe *awliya al-amr* are two groups of people: the scholars are the *awliya al-amr* in the Shari'ah of Allah and its clarification for creation.
And the princes are the *awliya al-amr* in the execution of the Shari'ah and the preservation of security. Allah made obedience to these people obligatory for the sake of preserving the Shari'ah, preserving security, and the order of people. Because if people rebelled against them and made the order of the prince or the order of the scholar like the order of Zayd and 'Abd, their order would have no authority over hearts or souls, and they would become like the general public. If they speak, the person is at his option: if he wishes, he accepts what they said, and if he wishes, he rejects it. If they order, the person is at his option: if he wishes, he obeys, and if he wishes, he disobeys. And if they prohibit, he has the option: if he wishes, he stops, and if he wishes, he does it. And this is one of the greatest matters. Therefore, He said:
obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you
أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْand those in authority among you
وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْThe answer: Yes, they have authority over us, even if they commit disobedience. If they are disobedient, they have authority over us and obedience is obligatory upon us, because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered obedience to the rulers even if we see from them what we dislike, and ordered obedience to the rulers even if they beat the backs and take the wealth.
And the fact that they disobey Allah, their disobedience is upon them, and we have nothing to do with it.
But if they order us directly, saying: do this disobedience, or leave this obligation, we say: no listening and no obedience.
And what is narrated that 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) ordered something, and Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "No listening and no obedience, because you have a new garment or two garments", I do not think this is correct, because 'Umar has such awe that Bilal could not speak like this in front of the people. Then, Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) has such respect for 'Umar that he could not speak like this in front of the people. Then, even if we assume its correctness is as clear as the sun, perhaps Bilal said that because some people criticized 'Umar for this action, and Bilal wanted to clarify to 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) the reason that made him have a new garment or two garments, so that the issue that occurred in the hearts of some people would be resolved.
As for him publicly denying it in front of everyone, and 'Umar is who? Who is 'Umar and who is Bilal? This is very far-fetched. But if it is correct, its aspect is what I said: that perhaps he heard someone speaking this way, and he wanted to clear his name from what people are saying.
In any case, it is obligatory for us, in response to the news we hear, to do three things in order:
What is the first thing, O brothers? What is the first thing?
The first thing: verification.
And the second thing: reflection.
The first thing: verification. Then reflection: does what was verified about this person have a point of view and a justification?
The third matter is to confront and advise without publicizing or exposing, especially if the person is among those in authority, such as a scholar or a ruler or the like. By doing so, we follow the path of the righteous predecessors (may Allah be pleased with them), and much good is achieved. This does not cause anything to be missed; that is, instead of you forbidding what is wrong today, you forbid it tomorrow or the day after. We do not say: do not act. Act, but with calmness and steady, balanced steps based on what is transmitted and what is rational. By this, matters are completed and conditions are rectified.
We ask Allah the Exalted to unite our hearts upon His obedience and His mindfulness, and to unify our word in truth. Indeed, He is capable of all things. And all praise is due to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may Allah send prayers and blessings upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and his Companions, and those who follow them with excellence until the Day of Judgment, if Allah wills. May He accept from us and from you.