The Fifth: That every actor who feels that he does a thing or leaves it off without any feeling of compulsion
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Okay, he says: "The Fifth: That every actor who feels that he does a thing or leaves it off without any feeling of compulsion, he stands and sits, enters and exits, travels and stays by his pure will, and he does not feel that anyone is compelling him to do so. Rather, he makes a real distinction between doing a thing by his choice and being compelled to do it by a compeller. Likewise, the Shari'ah made a legal distinction between them, so the actor is not held accountable for what he did under compulsion in matters pertaining to the right of Allah the Exalted".
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh? How?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : No, legally, legally this is the correct one. Correct it.
"So the actor is not held accountable for what he did under compulsion in matters pertaining to the right of Allah the Exalted".
This is also a tangible, apparent aspect. Every person feels that he does a thing with what? With his choice. Who brought you to this place after you broke your fast in the morning? No compulsion? Never. A person comes and does not feel that anyone is compelling him, right? Likewise, he leaves a thing off and does not feel that anyone is compelling him, ever. If a person did not have a will, he would be compelled to this thing. Rather, a person distinguishes between what he did by his choice and what he did under compulsion. Right? If I said to someone, for example: "Stand up," and he said, "By Allah, I have no will to stand up." Then I said: "Stand up, or I will whip your back," and he stood up out of fear of the whip. Is he compelled or not compelled? He knows the difference between when I say: "Stand up," and he says: "Welcome and easy," and he stands up. He stood up with what? With his choice. I said to him: "Stand up," he said: "I have no will to stand up and I am not standing," so I said: "Either you stand up or I will whip your back." Does he stand up or not? But it is by force.
We all feel the difference between what we do reluctantly and what we do willingly. Clear?
The Jabriyyah say they are all the same. He says: One person threw you from the roof to the ground, this is a forced descent, and a person descended from the roof to the ground by the stairs, a descent?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, no, the reality, the reality.
The student: Voluntary.
The Shaykh : Voluntary, without doubt. Everyone knows the difference between this and that. They are the same to the Jabriyyah, they are the same. Look how the minds are!
And for this reason, we say: The Mu'tazilah are closer to reason than the Jabriyyah, because the Jabriyyah's position is one that no one can imagine accepting. It is not imaginable that anyone would accept it, completely? I say, is this aspect clear? Yes.
And therefore he says: "Rather, he distinguishes - meaning the human being - with a real distinction between doing a thing by his choice and being compelled to do it by a compeller. Likewise, the Shari'ah - may Allah have mercy on you - the Shari'ah made a legal distinction between them, so the actor is not held accountable for what he did under compulsion in matters pertaining to the right of Allah".
Is the one compelled to do a thing held accountable by Allah? No, even to the point that Allah the Exalted said regarding the greatest of sins:[An-Nahl 16:106].
The greatest of sins is disbelief, and even if a person is compelled to it, and his heart is at rest with faith, he does not become a disbeliever, and the rest is even more so.
And our statement here: "in matters pertaining to the right of Allah" is to exclude what pertains to the right of a human being. For if a person is compelled to destroy a man's wealth and he destroys it, he is liable for compensation. He is liable for compensation, so he is held accountable for the human being's wealth. And if he is compelled to kill a person, is he liable? A tyrannical, oppressive man said to another: "Kill this one, or I will kill you." Does he kill him?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : But my brothers, pay attention. If he did not kill him, he would be killed. Does he kill? He does not kill him, even if he is killed? Complete. And even if he is killed, meaning: even if the tyrant says to him: "Kill this man, or I will kill you," he does not kill him and he is patient in bearing the killing, because it is not permissible to preserve one's own life by destroying another's. It is not permissible.
Okay. A woman has a fetus in her womb, and the fetus is alive, and it is said to her: Either we kill the fetus and you are safe, or we keep the fetus and you perish.
The student: He looks.
The Shaykh : Hm?
The student: The fetus remains.
The Shaykh : The fetus remains even if she dies?
The student: Even if she dies.
The Shaykh : Even if she dies.
Okay. If the rationalists say: If the fetus remains and she dies, it must die, so in that case we would have killed two souls. And if we kill the fetus and take it out, we kill one soul, and reason sees that killing one soul is less severe than killing two souls, so what is the answer? The answer?
The student: Me, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Yes, it appears you are wandering, and by Allah you do not know, whether in the mosque or in the market. Allah knows best. What?
The student: Reason conforms to the Shari'ah.
The Shaykh : How?
The student: The indication of reason conforms to the Shari'ah.
The Shaykh : What did we say just now?
The student: We said if we kill.
The Shaykh : What is the scenario of the issue?
The student: A woman.
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.
The student: Has a fetus in her womb.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: We said she has a choice, either we kill her child in her womb or ... or we take out her son and she dies.
The Shaykh : Is this the scenario, my brothers? I see you are wandering in your imagination.
This is a pregnant woman and her child is alive, and the doctors said: Either we kill the child and the mother is safe, meaning we kill him, we perform an operation, and the mother is safe, or he remains in her womb and the mother dies, and it is known that if the mother dies, the fetus dies. So they say: We kill the fetus, we take it out, and the mother is safe, and in that case we would have killed only one soul. But if we kept him and the mother died and then he died, we killed two souls. What do we say?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : The mother dies.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Huh? No, if we take out the fetus, the fetus dies and the mother remains alive.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Hm?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : And if he remains in her womb, the mother dies and then the fetus dies, it must be so. Which is better, that two die or one? One. So we kill the fetus and take it out and let the mother remain, this is the ruling. The question is for you, my son.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes. The important thing, my brothers, is that you see this is a doubt. I am not saying it as a hypothetical, it is a reality. Meaning, there are some people among the scholars who are literati and not scholars of Shari'ah in reality, who mislead the people. He says: Kill the fetus and let the mother remain, because if you keep the fetus, the mother dies and the fetus dies. Did you understand? And it is known that killing one soul is less severe than killing two souls, huh?
The student: We say that killing the fetus is aggression.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: The death of the mother ... .
The Shaykh : Not realized?
The student: It is in doubt, it is doubtful.
The Shaykh : No, no, even if it were one hundred percent. The doctor says: This is one hundred percent, she will die.
The student: This is up to Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He.
The Shaykh : It is up to Allah, but there are signs.
The student: We say we do not commit aggression because of doubt.
The Shaykh : Okay, is there an answer other than this? In any case, your answer is not bad, but it walks on one leg. Yes.
The student: If we kill the fetus, we kill it by our action, but as for the mother, if she dies, it is by the action of Allah, Mighty and Majestic.
The Shaykh : You have done well, this is the correct one.
We say: Yes, if the fetus remains in the womb and the mother dies, and then the fetus dies, the death of the fetus here is by the action of Allah, is it not? The death of the fetus is by the action of whom? By the action of Allah. It is not by our action. But if we kill him, his death is by our action, so it is not permissible. Clear?
Okay. So we say: Our statement "in the right of Allah the Exalted" is to exclude what? Compulsion in the right of a human being.
Okay. If someone said to you: Either you slaughter this animal, and it is an animal belonging to someone other than the speaker, or I will imprison you, and you slaughtered it under compulsion, is the right of the human being dropped? No, it is not dropped, you are liable for it to its owner.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh? How?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : No, legally, legally this is the correct one. Correct it.
"So the actor is not held accountable for what he did under compulsion in matters pertaining to the right of Allah the Exalted".
This is also a tangible, apparent aspect. Every person feels that he does a thing with what? With his choice. Who brought you to this place after you broke your fast in the morning? No compulsion? Never. A person comes and does not feel that anyone is compelling him, right? Likewise, he leaves a thing off and does not feel that anyone is compelling him, ever. If a person did not have a will, he would be compelled to this thing. Rather, a person distinguishes between what he did by his choice and what he did under compulsion. Right? If I said to someone, for example: "Stand up," and he said, "By Allah, I have no will to stand up." Then I said: "Stand up, or I will whip your back," and he stood up out of fear of the whip. Is he compelled or not compelled? He knows the difference between when I say: "Stand up," and he says: "Welcome and easy," and he stands up. He stood up with what? With his choice. I said to him: "Stand up," he said: "I have no will to stand up and I am not standing," so I said: "Either you stand up or I will whip your back." Does he stand up or not? But it is by force.
We all feel the difference between what we do reluctantly and what we do willingly. Clear?
The Jabriyyah say they are all the same. He says: One person threw you from the roof to the ground, this is a forced descent, and a person descended from the roof to the ground by the stairs, a descent?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, no, the reality, the reality.
The student: Voluntary.
The Shaykh : Voluntary, without doubt. Everyone knows the difference between this and that. They are the same to the Jabriyyah, they are the same. Look how the minds are!
And for this reason, we say: The Mu'tazilah are closer to reason than the Jabriyyah, because the Jabriyyah's position is one that no one can imagine accepting. It is not imaginable that anyone would accept it, completely? I say, is this aspect clear? Yes.
And therefore he says: "Rather, he distinguishes - meaning the human being - with a real distinction between doing a thing by his choice and being compelled to do it by a compeller. Likewise, the Shari'ah - may Allah have mercy on you - the Shari'ah made a legal distinction between them, so the actor is not held accountable for what he did under compulsion in matters pertaining to the right of Allah".
Is the one compelled to do a thing held accountable by Allah? No, even to the point that Allah the Exalted said regarding the greatest of sins:
Whoever disbelieves in Allah after his belief... except for one who is forced [to renounce his religion] while his heart is secure in faith. But those who [willingly] open their breasts to disbelief, upon them is wrath from Allah, and for them is a great punishment;
من كفر بالله من بعد إيمانه إلا من أكره وقلبه مطمئن بالإيمان ولكن من شرح بالكفر صدرا فعليهم غضب من الله ولهم عذاب عظيمThe greatest of sins is disbelief, and even if a person is compelled to it, and his heart is at rest with faith, he does not become a disbeliever, and the rest is even more so.
And our statement here: "in matters pertaining to the right of Allah" is to exclude what pertains to the right of a human being. For if a person is compelled to destroy a man's wealth and he destroys it, he is liable for compensation. He is liable for compensation, so he is held accountable for the human being's wealth. And if he is compelled to kill a person, is he liable? A tyrannical, oppressive man said to another: "Kill this one, or I will kill you." Does he kill him?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : But my brothers, pay attention. If he did not kill him, he would be killed. Does he kill? He does not kill him, even if he is killed? Complete. And even if he is killed, meaning: even if the tyrant says to him: "Kill this man, or I will kill you," he does not kill him and he is patient in bearing the killing, because it is not permissible to preserve one's own life by destroying another's. It is not permissible.
Okay. A woman has a fetus in her womb, and the fetus is alive, and it is said to her: Either we kill the fetus and you are safe, or we keep the fetus and you perish.
The student: He looks.
The Shaykh : Hm?
The student: The fetus remains.
The Shaykh : The fetus remains even if she dies?
The student: Even if she dies.
The Shaykh : Even if she dies.
Okay. If the rationalists say: If the fetus remains and she dies, it must die, so in that case we would have killed two souls. And if we kill the fetus and take it out, we kill one soul, and reason sees that killing one soul is less severe than killing two souls, so what is the answer? The answer?
The student: Me, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Yes, it appears you are wandering, and by Allah you do not know, whether in the mosque or in the market. Allah knows best. What?
The student: Reason conforms to the Shari'ah.
The Shaykh : How?
The student: The indication of reason conforms to the Shari'ah.
The Shaykh : What did we say just now?
The student: We said if we kill.
The Shaykh : What is the scenario of the issue?
The student: A woman.
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.
The student: Has a fetus in her womb.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: We said she has a choice, either we kill her child in her womb or ... or we take out her son and she dies.
The Shaykh : Is this the scenario, my brothers? I see you are wandering in your imagination.
This is a pregnant woman and her child is alive, and the doctors said: Either we kill the child and the mother is safe, meaning we kill him, we perform an operation, and the mother is safe, or he remains in her womb and the mother dies, and it is known that if the mother dies, the fetus dies. So they say: We kill the fetus, we take it out, and the mother is safe, and in that case we would have killed only one soul. But if we kept him and the mother died and then he died, we killed two souls. What do we say?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : The mother dies.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Huh? No, if we take out the fetus, the fetus dies and the mother remains alive.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Hm?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : And if he remains in her womb, the mother dies and then the fetus dies, it must be so. Which is better, that two die or one? One. So we kill the fetus and take it out and let the mother remain, this is the ruling. The question is for you, my son.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes. The important thing, my brothers, is that you see this is a doubt. I am not saying it as a hypothetical, it is a reality. Meaning, there are some people among the scholars who are literati and not scholars of Shari'ah in reality, who mislead the people. He says: Kill the fetus and let the mother remain, because if you keep the fetus, the mother dies and the fetus dies. Did you understand? And it is known that killing one soul is less severe than killing two souls, huh?
The student: We say that killing the fetus is aggression.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: The death of the mother ... .
The Shaykh : Not realized?
The student: It is in doubt, it is doubtful.
The Shaykh : No, no, even if it were one hundred percent. The doctor says: This is one hundred percent, she will die.
The student: This is up to Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He.
The Shaykh : It is up to Allah, but there are signs.
The student: We say we do not commit aggression because of doubt.
The Shaykh : Okay, is there an answer other than this? In any case, your answer is not bad, but it walks on one leg. Yes.
The student: If we kill the fetus, we kill it by our action, but as for the mother, if she dies, it is by the action of Allah, Mighty and Majestic.
The Shaykh : You have done well, this is the correct one.
We say: Yes, if the fetus remains in the womb and the mother dies, and then the fetus dies, the death of the fetus here is by the action of Allah, is it not? The death of the fetus is by the action of whom? By the action of Allah. It is not by our action. But if we kill him, his death is by our action, so it is not permissible. Clear?
Okay. So we say: Our statement "in the right of Allah the Exalted" is to exclude what? Compulsion in the right of a human being.
Okay. If someone said to you: Either you slaughter this animal, and it is an animal belonging to someone other than the speaker, or I will imprison you, and you slaughtered it under compulsion, is the right of the human being dropped? No, it is not dropped, you are liable for it to its owner.