The Exegesis of the Saying of Allah the Exalted: “O you who believe! Do not follow the footsteps of Satan. And whoever follows the footsteps of Satan, indeed he commands obscenity and what is wrong.”

Then Allah the Exalted said: meaning His paths and His adornment of them. “Do not follow the footsteps of Satan.” *Khutwat* is the plural of *khatwah*, which refers to the distance between the two feet in walking; this is a step. The intended meaning of “the footsteps of Satan” is His paths. The author used the word “step” to refer to the path because a path is the trace of steps. The author’s statement, “His paths and His adornment of them,” yes, it is so. All of Satan’s paths are disliked for the human being, but he adorns them for the human being so that he enters them. The paths of Satan, in their general meaning, are denial and arrogance. These are the general paths of Satan. So Satan is a denier and an arrogant one. For example, evidence of his arrogance is that he refused to prostrate to Adam. Yes. And his denial is that he claimed he was better than Adam. So this necessitates that he lied about Adam being better than him. So these are the paths of Satan in a general sense: denial and arrogance. Now, denial is the opposite of what? It is the opposite of the reports (akhbar). And arrogance is the opposite of the obligation of commands and prohibitions. Stay with us. And if you reflect on all sins, you will find that they do not go beyond these two matters: either denial or arrogance. So the paths of Satan, or His path, are based on these two matters: denial and arrogance. Denial pertains to the reports, and arrogance pertains to the obligation of commands and prohibitions. Now, when we come to details, for example, is stinginess from the footsteps of Satan or not? Yes, because he commands it.

Satan threatens you with poverty and orders you to immorality

الشيطان يعدكم الفقر ويأمركم بالفحشاء

[Al-Baqarah 2:268]

Many scholars said that the intended meaning of *fahsha* (obscenity) here is stinginess, meaning the verse is in the context of condemnation, although the original meaning is broader.
Now, eating with the left hand and drinking with the left hand are also from his footsteps, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) informed

for indeed Ash-Shaitan eats with his left hand and drinks with his left hand

بأن الشيطان يأكل بشماله ويشرب بشماله

Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1799Sahih (Darussalam)

And on this basis, eating with the left hand and drinking with the left hand become forbidden, because Allah prohibited following the footsteps of Satan, and the Prophet also prohibited a person from eating with his left hand and drinking with his left hand. And from this we take the danger of people’s negligence today with this matter, because many people—may Allah guide them—now eat with the left hand and drink with the left hand and claim that this is progress and civilization. The reason is the feeling of inferiority, because when a person feels his own deficiency, he must imitate those he sees as more complete than him. These humiliated people thought that these disbelieving nations are more refined and more advanced than them. And it is true that they are more refined than us in industry and stronger than us in worldly matters, but in the morals and etiquettes to which Islam guided us, they are not more refined than us. However, looking at the state of Muslims today, there is no doubt that they have some of the Islamic etiquettes that they practice, not out of intention, but merely because they are noble morals that do not constitute worship of Allah, and they are better than us in this. And unfortunately, the Muslim who was commanded to practice these etiquettes and morals is the one who neglected them, even though if the Muslim practices them, he will be characterized by these noble morals. And this is undoubtedly nobility and honor. In addition to that, he will be rewarded because he does them in obedience to the command of Allah and His Messenger. If they do them, are they rewarded or not? They are not rewarded; rather, they do them because they are noble morals. For example, they have truthfulness in transactions, and they have avoiding deception, and they have keeping promises. All of these are among the qualities that Islam commanded. Many Muslims today have abandoned these qualities, but if the Muslim is characterized by them, he will be praised for them and will also be rewarded for them because he does them in obedience. I say that the footsteps of Satan, therefore, are His paths upon which he is and which are in his behavior, and they revolve around two matters: denial and arrogance. And the footsteps of Satan may be specified, as we said in the matter of eating with the left hand and drinking with the left hand. Allah the Exalted said:

And whoever follows the footsteps of Satan

ومن يتبع خطوات الشيطان فإنه

[An-Nur 24:21]

meaning the one who follows.

commands to do what is shameful

يأمر بالفحشاء

meaning the ugly and the wrong according to the Shari'ah, by following them. “ And whoever follows the footsteps of Satan.” From what do we parse it? It is conditional, from a conditional noun. And the conditional requires a condition and a consequence, meaning a verb of condition and a response to the condition. Where is the verb of condition? *Yatabi'* (follows). And the response to the condition is Now, we have “whoever follows” and we have “the footsteps of Satan.” So, to which one does the pronoun in *fa-inna* (so indeed) refer? If we look at the original sentence and the subject, we say it refers to *man* (whoever), because the speech now means the response to the condition refers to what the verb of condition refers to. And if we look at the context and the nearest mentioned, we say it refers to Satan. So the meaning is: “And whoever follows the footsteps of Satan, he falls into obscenity and what is wrong.” And the sentence becomes as if it indicates the response to the condition, but it is not the response to the condition itself. As for what the author took, *fa-inna* becomes here the response to the condition; it is itself the response to the condition. Is it clear or not? And *fa-inna* here, the pronoun refers to the one who follows, so *fa-inna* means the one who follows, as the author said. So the sentence is the response to the condition. And this estimation is more likely, that the original is that the mentioned is the response to the condition, and the pronoun in the response refers to what the verb of condition refers to. This is the original. And as for the second opinion, it says: *fa-inna huwa ya'muru bi al-fahsha wa al-munkar* (so indeed he commands obscenity and what is wrong). It says: So indeed Satan commands obscenity and what is wrong. And this indicates the response. And what supports this opinion is that the context is in the prohibition of following what? The footsteps of Satan. So it is as if he says: Whoever follows the footsteps of Satan, he falls into obscenity and what is wrong, because Satan commands obscenity and what is wrong. And this is clearer from two aspects:
Because the context indicates it; this is one aspect. And because the one who follows the footsteps of Satan may not command obscenity and what is wrong; he may commit obscenity and what is wrong, but he does not command it. So it is not necessary that whoever follows the footsteps of Satan commands obscenity and what is wrong. Yes, whoever follows in an absolute sense, meaning absolute following, it is necessary that he commands obscenity and what is wrong, because Satan commands obscenity and what is wrong. So in any case, the most likely is that the pronoun in his saying *fa-inna huwa* (so indeed he) is... Yes, the most likely is that it refers to Satan, not to the follower. Two things make it more likely. First, the indication of the context, because Allah prohibits following the footsteps of Satan, then He mentioned what supports this prohibition from the warning, where He clarified that Satan commands obscenity and what is wrong. And every rational person, if he knows that Satan commands obscenity and what is wrong, is it permissible for him to follow his footsteps? The answer is no. The second aspect, or the third aspect, is that the one who follows the footsteps of Satan may not command obscenity and what is wrong; he may commit it in himself but not command it. And many of the people of misguidance, you find them misguided in themselves, but they do not have a call to what they are upon. Yes, and although we also find that many of the people of misguidance have a call, they command obscenity and what is wrong according to what they are upon. So the correct is that the pronoun in his saying *fa-inna* refers to Satan. And if we say it refers to Satan, the consideration remains: where is the response to the condition...?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Let him say that *fa-inna* means Satan, which is omitted, and this sentence indicates it. What is its estimation?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : And whoever follows the footsteps of Satan, he falls into obscenity and what is wrong, because Satan commands obscenity and what is wrong. So whoever follows him, he falls into it. And Allah knows best. The verse...