The Book of Faith-08a
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The reciter: And Zuhayr ibn Harb narrated to me, he said: Abd al-Samad ibn Abd al-Warith narrated to us, he said: My father narrated to us, he said: Husayn al-Mu'allim narrated to us, from Ibn Buraydah, from Yahya ibn Ya'mar, that Abu al-Aswad narrated to him from Abu Dharr, that he heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) say: Sahih Muslim 61.
The Shaykh : These two hadiths, from Ibn Umar and from Abu Hurayrah, indicate a serious issue, which is describing another person as a disbeliever. If one of the people calls a man a disbeliever and says to him:, or: , then either the person addressed is a disbeliever, an enemy of Allah, in which case he has earned this description, or he is not, in which case it returns upon the one who said it.
In this is an explicit text that it is obligatory for us to be cautious in judging another person as a disbeliever, and not to make disbelief one of the rulings that we issue without referring to the speech of Allah and the speech of His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him).
There is no doubt that the matter is serious, and that there are now people who rush in this matter, judging a person as a disbeliever if he says a word that may or may not be disbelief, let alone looking into his condition, whether he is knowledgeable or ignorant.
And disbelief is not ruled upon except when we know that this word is disbelief, or this action is disbelief, and that the doer or the speaker is not excused by what he said or did, whether his excuse is ignorance, or his excuse is haste, or his excuse is heedlessness, or his excuse is compulsion. The important thing is that we know that the speaker or the doer is not excused.
So it is necessary to have two things: verifying that this is disbelief. And from where do we take this verification?
The student: From the Book and the Sunnah.
The Shaykh : From the Book and the Sunnah.
Second: verifying that the one from whom this issue, which the evidence indicates is disbelief, is not excused by ignorance, or by heedlessness, or by extreme joy, or by extreme anger, or otherwise. The important thing is the excuse.
And among the excuses: that he is interpreting it with a permissible interpretation, or an impermissible interpretation but he did not find anyone to point it out to him. And if we do not dare to say that this is forbidden or that this is obligatory except with evidence from the Shari'ah, then our not daring to say that this is disbelief is all the more so, because the doer of the forbidden, at most, is a disobedient open sinner, but if we say he is a disbeliever, we have taken him out of the religion. And this, if Allah wills, has an extensive discussion in another lesson.
No person who claimed knowingly anyone else as his father besides (his own) committed nothing but infidelity, and he who made a claim of anything, which (in fact) did not belong to him, is not amongst us; he should make his abode in Fire, and he who labeled anyone with unbelief or called him the enemy of Allah, and he was in fact not so, it rebounded on him.
ليس من رجلٍ ادّعى لغير أبيه وهو يعلمه إلّا كفر ، ومن ادّعى ما ليس له فليس منّا ، وليتبوّأ مقعده من النّار ، ومن دعا رجلًا بالكفر ، أو قال: عدوّ الله وليس كذلك إلّا حار عليهThe Shaykh : These two hadiths, from Ibn Umar and from Abu Hurayrah, indicate a serious issue, which is describing another person as a disbeliever. If one of the people calls a man a disbeliever and says to him:
O disbeliever
يا كافرO enemy of Allah
يا عدو اللهIn this is an explicit text that it is obligatory for us to be cautious in judging another person as a disbeliever, and not to make disbelief one of the rulings that we issue without referring to the speech of Allah and the speech of His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him).
There is no doubt that the matter is serious, and that there are now people who rush in this matter, judging a person as a disbeliever if he says a word that may or may not be disbelief, let alone looking into his condition, whether he is knowledgeable or ignorant.
And disbelief is not ruled upon except when we know that this word is disbelief, or this action is disbelief, and that the doer or the speaker is not excused by what he said or did, whether his excuse is ignorance, or his excuse is haste, or his excuse is heedlessness, or his excuse is compulsion. The important thing is that we know that the speaker or the doer is not excused.
So it is necessary to have two things: verifying that this is disbelief. And from where do we take this verification?
The student: From the Book and the Sunnah.
The Shaykh : From the Book and the Sunnah.
Second: verifying that the one from whom this issue, which the evidence indicates is disbelief, is not excused by ignorance, or by heedlessness, or by extreme joy, or by extreme anger, or otherwise. The important thing is the excuse.
And among the excuses: that he is interpreting it with a permissible interpretation, or an impermissible interpretation but he did not find anyone to point it out to him. And if we do not dare to say that this is forbidden or that this is obligatory except with evidence from the Shari'ah, then our not daring to say that this is disbelief is all the more so, because the doer of the forbidden, at most, is a disobedient open sinner, but if we say he is a disbeliever, we have taken him out of the religion. And this, if Allah wills, has an extensive discussion in another lesson.