The benefits of the saying of Allah the Exalted: ((The One who forgives sins and accepts repentance...)).

Among the benefits of this noble verse, the second one, is that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) forgives all sins, based on His saying: . The word "sin" here is singular and accompanied by the definite article "al," which makes it general, because a singular noun with the definite article is general, like: , meaning that every human being.
Among the benefits of this noble verse is the encouragement to do what leads to forgiveness. The reason for this is that Allah did not inform us that He is the One who forgives sins merely so that we would know that He is the One who forgives, but rather so that we would seek His forgiveness. What are the causes that lead to forgiveness? The causes are many. Among them is seeking forgiveness, saying "O Allah, forgive me." Among them are righteous deeds by which Allah expiates sins. Among them is doing good to creation, to the extent that Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) forgave a prostitute for giving water to a thirsty dog. So the causes of forgiveness are many. He also forgave a man who found a tree on the road that was harming people, so he removed it, and Allah forgave him. The important thing is that we seek the causes of forgiveness, because that is the implication of His saying: .
Among the benefits of this noble verse is that He accepts repentance from His servants, but He does not accept anything unless it is in accordance with the requirements of the Shari'ah, based on the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): .
So what is the repentance that is in accordance with the requirements of the Shari'ah? The repentance that is in accordance with the requirements of the Shari'ah is that which gathers five matters, which are known as the conditions of repentance:
The first is sincerity for Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He), such that what motivates the person to repent is his sincerity to Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He), the love of drawing near to Him and fleeing from His punishment. So he is not motivated to repent by considering the people or by gaining fame and authority, but rather he is motivated by sincerity to Allah.
The second is: regret for committing the sin. The person must feel a sense of regret and remorse for what he did. Regret is necessary, because the regret that reveals the truth of the person's return to Allah and that this sin affected his soul, so he regretted what he did. It is not said that regret is an emotion, and that emotion comes without choice, like anger, for example, or sadness over what happened. It is said that what is meant by regret here is the heart's remorse; it is an emotion that occurs in the person, not like an emotion whose cause comes from outside, in which case the person may not be able to change what happened.
The third condition is: abandoning the sin and separating from it. If he repents while still persisting in it, his repentance is most like mockery. How can the one who eats pork say, "I seek forgiveness from Allah the Exalted and I ask Allah to make my food good"? Is this appropriate or not? He is eating, he is chewing the meat well, and he says, "I seek forgiveness from Allah for eating pork and I ask Allah to make my food good." This is most like a mocker. If a man forbade you from something and found you doing that thing while you are saying, "I hope you will excuse me" and the like, and he is eating, and he said to him, "Do not eat," and he eats, the one he is addressing will say that you are mocking him and making fun of him. So there is no repentance with persistence. One must abandon the sin.
Now, if the sin is against Allah, abandoning it is easy. But if the sin is against other than Allah, meaning he sinned against the rights of other than Allah, how does he abandon it? We say: If it is money, abandoning it is by delivering it to its owner by any means. If the owner has died, then to his heirs. If they are unknown, then to the public treasury. Or, if the public treasury is not organized or there is a fear that it will be lost, then he should give it in charity on behalf of its owner. How many stages are there now? Four: to its owner, to his heirs, to the public treasury if they are unknown, or giving it in charity. Which is more preferable, the public treasury or charity? The general rule is that charity is more preferable, especially in our time, where the public treasury may not be managed by the one in authority in a way that is satisfying.
Now, if it is an aggression against the self, not money, then repentance from it is to enable the owner of the right to take retaliation from him. For example, if he had assaulted a person by hitting him, let him go to him and say, "I assaulted you by hitting you, hit me as I hit you," as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did with the man whom the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) hit when he saw him advancing in the row. The man said, "Take your right from me, O Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)." So the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) uncovered his belly to let him take his right. What did the man do? He kissed it. So this is the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), the most noble of creation and the most beloved of people to his followers, enabling retaliation from himself. Now, this is two: money and the body.
If it is regarding honor, and you assaulted a person regarding his honor, meaning by backbiting him or insulting him. The difference between backbiting and insulting is that insulting is in the face, and backbiting is behind the back. So mentioning your brother with what he dislikes, if he is absent, it is backbiting, and if he is present, it is insulting. Repentance from this is to seek his forgiveness. So, if I said, "Insult me as I insulted you," is that valid or not? It is not valid, because this is a crime against yourself. But seek his forgiveness. This is if it was insulting, because he became aware of it. If it was backbiting, do you seek his forgiveness? Do you go to him and say, "I backbit you, so excuse me, forgive me"? The answer is: Some scholars said, yes, it is obligatory that you go to him and say, "I backbit you, so excuse me, forgive me." And some scholars said, it is not obligatory to seek his forgiveness, but it is sufficient to seek forgiveness for him, as came in the hadith, even if it is weak: . Seek forgiveness for him and praise him with what he deserves in the places where you backbit him, so that good deeds will erase bad deeds. And this opinion is more correct, because this contains disavowal and avoiding disturbance. Because if you go to him and say, "I backbit you, so forgive me," no matter what form of backbiting you bring up, he may not be convinced by it. If you say, "I said about you that you are stingy," he may say, "You said I was stingy and cowardly," is that not so? Perhaps Satan will say this to him and he will refuse to forgive you. So if he did not know, praise Allah for that, seek forgiveness for him, and praise him with what he deserves in the places where you used to backbite him, and by that you will be safe from sin. This is the description of abandoning the sin if it is in the right of other than Allah.
Now, here is a question: Some people have a financial right owed to a person, either they stole it or denied it or the like. Then this perpetrator repents and goes to the owner of the right and says, "Take your right," but the owner of the right refuses. He refuses to take it. What does he do? And this happens often; the owner of the right may have held a grudge in his heart against this oppressor who oppressed him and refuses to accept. What does he do? Do we say that in that case his right is dropped and the repentance of the aggressor is valid, and if he asks for his right again, he is given it, and if he does not ask, then the aggressor is free? We say we apply this situation to the legal principles. The legal principles require that this one who has the right is free, because Allah says: . And this is what suffices him; he presented the right to its owner and said, "Take it," and he said, "No, I will not take it. You assaulted me first and I do not accept from you." This one who refused to accept it is the one who erred and committed a crime, because it is befitting for a person, if his brother apologizes to him, to accept his apology. But this one is the one who committed a crime now. So we say to this man, "You are now free of your obligation. Keep the money with you. If he comes one day, give it to him. And if he dies, is it obligatory for him to give it to the heirs? The answer is: There is consideration in this, and that is that the man who was assaulted did not accept this money and it did not enter his ownership. So if he did not accept it and it did not enter his ownership, how does it transfer to the heirs? And one of the conditions of inheritance is the transfer of the money from the deceased, and this deceased did not accept this money. And it may be said that the original rule is that it is his property, so it is obligatory to return it to his heirs. And this latter is more cautious, but there is consideration in its obligation, because the one who assaulted and wanted to return it says: "I gave the man and he refused to own it, so how does it transfer to the heirs?" But we say the most cautious and preferable is to return it to the heirs to be safe from it. But if it is assumed that he has no heirs or that his heirs are unknown, then this repentant person has fulfilled what is upon him. These are three conditions.
The fourth condition: that one resolves not to return to the sin, or that one does not return to the sin. Is it the first or the second? The first is that one resolves not to return to the sin, or is the condition that one does not return to the sin? The first. What is the difference between them? The difference is that if we say the condition is not returning, and then one returns, the first repentance is invalidated. But if we say the condition is the resolution not to return, and one has resolved not to return but then returns, the first repentance remains valid, and he must repent a second time for the new sin. In any case, the condition is the resolution not to return in the future. If he returns, he must repent again. So he repents and returns, he repents; he returns, he repents; he returns, he repents.
If someone were to ask: Has it not been established in the authentic narrations that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) informed us of ? Does this mean that if a person repeatedly commits a sin while seeking forgiveness, he is forgiven? The answer is: Yes, whatever sin he commits, if he then seeks forgiveness, he is forgiven. But if someone were to say that the apparent meaning of the hadith is "let him disobey Allah," we say this is not sound because it contradicts the many pieces of evidence indicating that every sin requires repentance, except for one group from this Ummah who do not need repentance from sin, and they are the people of Badr. For Allah looked upon them and said: .
The fifth condition: that the repentance be in the time in which repentance is accepted, which is that the repentance be before the sun rises from the west and before the arrival of the term of death. The first is general for everyone; there is no repentance for anyone once the sun rises from the west, based on the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): . This is supported by the saying of Allah the Exalted: . The meaning of "some of the signs of your Lord" is the rising of the sun from the west.
The second: that it be before the arrival of the term of death. If the term of death arrives, repentance does not benefit, based on the saying of Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He: [Al-Nisa: 18]. There is no repentance for them. The practical application of this is that when Pharaoh was overtaken by drowning, he said: . It was said to him: . You believe ? There is no mercy for you, but . As for your soul, there is no salvation for it. Allah saved him with his body because he had terrified the Children of Israel, and they hardly believed that he had perished until they saw him, so they would be reassured. Therefore, Allah saved him with his body so that they could see him.
Now, is it a condition that one not be persisting in another sin? For example, suppose he repented from drinking intoxicants but remains in zina, may Allah protect us from it. Is his repentance from drinking intoxicants valid? There is scholarly disagreement on this. Some scholars say that repentance from a sin is not valid while persisting in another sin. Some said, rather, it is valid because every sin has its own crime. Some said if the sin he is persisting in is of the same type as the one he repented from, then the repentance is not valid. For example, a man repents from zina but he casts his gaze in forbidden looking, then his repentance from zina is not valid. Or a man repents from forbidden looking but he has not repented from forbidden touching; this also, his repentance is not accepted. Some scholars said it is accepted absolutely if he repents from a sin, Allah forgives him for that sin, because Allah, Mighty and Majestic, is a just Judge and His mercy precedes His wrath. This man has multiple crimes; he repented from one of them, so let him be a repentant person. This is the most correct opinion, but the description of absolute repentance is not applied to this repentant person because his repentance is restricted. That is, he does not deserve the description of "the repentant" in an absolute sense, so he does not fall under the saying of Allah the Exalted: . Because this man is not truly a repentant person in an absolute sense, but he is repentant from a sin while falling into another sin. This is the opinion in which the evidences converge. It is said that deserving the absolute description for one who repents from a sin while persisting in another does not occur, but describing him with restricted repentance is correct.