Review and discussion under the hadith (Begin with what Allah began with) and the hadith (There is no wudu for one who did not mention the name of Allah upon it).
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 peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and his Companions, and those who follow them with excellence until the Day of Judgment:
Previously, the author (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned the hadith of Jabir, and began with the narration of al-Nasa'i:Sunan an-Nasa'i 2962Sahih (Darussalam) Why did he prioritize beginning with this before the narration of Muslim?
The student: It contains an explicit command.
The Shaykh : Because it contains an explicit command.
Now, what is problematic about this is that the hadith has one source and one narrator, so how is it narrated in both ways?
The student: Shaykh, it is said that it was narrated by meaning.
The Shaykh : Yes, the narrators understood that the report here is by way of command, so they transmitted it with the wording of command. Now, we mentioned when he said:Sunan Abi Dawud 102Sahih Maqtu' (Al-Albani) that the negation comes in valid forms, is that correct?
The student: In three forms:
First: Negation of existence.
The Shaykh : First: It must be interpreted as negation of existence, because this is the default for negation. If that is not possible?
The student: Negation of validity.
The Shaykh : Then it is negation of validity.
The student: If that is not possible, then negation of perfection.
The Shaykh : If that is not possible, then it is negation of perfection.
If it is said—"No, Ali"—if it is said: How is it valid to negate when the intended meaning is negation of validity?
Yes, the default is negation of existence, so how is it permissible for us to interpret it as negation of validity?
The student: If negation of existence is impossible.
The Shaykh : Yes, no one is clearer, okay?
The student: The wudu exists.
The Shaykh : Yes, because the wudu exists, but why did we say that in negation of validity, it is valid to negate the absolute negation, i.e., negation of existence?
The student: Because what is not valid is not considered in the Shari'ah, so its existence is like its non-existence.
The Shaykh : Well done, because what is not valid is not considered in the Shari'ah, so its existence is like its non-existence. Yes, now, does mentioning the name of Allah upon wudu have a parallel in that it is not valid if the name of Allah is not mentioned upon it, Yahya?
The student: Ritual slaughter, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Ritual slaughter. Now, but the texts regarding ritual slaughter are clear, are they not?
Now, bring the evidence?
The student: Other than ritual slaughter, I mean.
The Shaykh : Evidence that is explicit and authentic regarding ritual slaughter?
The student:[Al-An'am 6:121].
The Shaykh : Yes, this is from the Qur'an[Al-An'am 6:121], and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: Sunan Ibn Majah 3178Sahih (Darussalam), and he said: Sahih Muslim 1929a Now, the evidence is clear.
Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and his Companions, and those who follow them with excellence until the Day of Judgment:
Previously, the author (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned the hadith of Jabir, and began with the narration of al-Nasa'i:
We will start with that with which Allah started.
ابدؤوا بما بدأ الله بهThe student: It contains an explicit command.
The Shaykh : Because it contains an explicit command.
Now, what is problematic about this is that the hadith has one source and one narrator, so how is it narrated in both ways?
The student: Shaykh, it is said that it was narrated by meaning.
The Shaykh : Yes, the narrators understood that the report here is by way of command, so they transmitted it with the wording of command. Now, we mentioned when he said:
the ablution of a person who does not mention the name of Allah is valid
لا وضوء لمن لم يذكر اسم الله عليهThe student: In three forms:
First: Negation of existence.
The Shaykh : First: It must be interpreted as negation of existence, because this is the default for negation. If that is not possible?
The student: Negation of validity.
The Shaykh : Then it is negation of validity.
The student: If that is not possible, then negation of perfection.
The Shaykh : If that is not possible, then it is negation of perfection.
If it is said—"No, Ali"—if it is said: How is it valid to negate when the intended meaning is negation of validity?
Yes, the default is negation of existence, so how is it permissible for us to interpret it as negation of validity?
The student: If negation of existence is impossible.
The Shaykh : Yes, no one is clearer, okay?
The student: The wudu exists.
The Shaykh : Yes, because the wudu exists, but why did we say that in negation of validity, it is valid to negate the absolute negation, i.e., negation of existence?
The student: Because what is not valid is not considered in the Shari'ah, so its existence is like its non-existence.
The Shaykh : Well done, because what is not valid is not considered in the Shari'ah, so its existence is like its non-existence. Yes, now, does mentioning the name of Allah upon wudu have a parallel in that it is not valid if the name of Allah is not mentioned upon it, Yahya?
The student: Ritual slaughter, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Ritual slaughter. Now, but the texts regarding ritual slaughter are clear, are they not?
Now, bring the evidence?
The student: Other than ritual slaughter, I mean.
The Shaykh : Evidence that is explicit and authentic regarding ritual slaughter?
The student:
And do not eat of that upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned
ولا تأكلوا مما لم يذكر اسم الله عليهThe Shaykh : Yes, this is from the Qur'an