Now, in this hadith there are several benefits: First, the permissibility of mentioning one’s father by his proper name.

The Shaykh : Now, in this hadith there are several benefits:
First, the permissibility of mentioning one’s father by his proper name.
The student: 'Umar.

The Shaykh : Huh? Because Ibn 'Umar said: " 'Umar prohibited " and Ibn 'Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, was among the most scrupulous of people. What he said, may Allah be pleased with him, regarding naming his father by his name is correct, for it is permissible and there is no impediment to it. However, some scholars disliked a person calling his father by his name. That is, you do not say to your father, for example, if his name is 'Abd al-'Aziz, "O 'Abd al-'Aziz." What do you say? You say "O my father," or in our Qasimi dialect, "O Baba." Yes, yes, in any case, you do not call him by his name. Now, is there a basis for this? They said yes. Ibrahim, peace and blessings be upon him, said to his father even though his father was a disbeliever, saying "O my father." He attached it to himself; he attached it to himself. And Allah, Mighty and Majestic, says to the community meaning, do not call Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, by saying "O Muhammad," but say "O Messenger of Allah" by description. Therefore, calling by title is more eloquent in honor than calling by proper name. For this reason, you inform about your father that he said such and such, but you do not call him by what? By his proper name. You inform about him by his proper name, but you do not call him by his proper name, because this is the way of the prophets. Ibrahim said "O my father," and because this is more eloquent in honor, as the Exalted said: .
Now, among the benefits of the hadith is that the Sunnah of 'Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, was to prohibit the sale of mothers of children, or the transfer of their ownership by gift or inheritance. Yes, and that is the case. However, he, may Allah be pleased with him, prohibited this by virtue of authority and the caliphate, not by virtue of the Shari'ah, for it is not legislated to contradict what was the case during the time of the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him. The sale of mothers of children was permissible during the time of the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, and the time of Abu Bakr, and the early part of 'Umar's caliphate. But when he saw the people transgressing, when he saw the people violating the sanctity of these mothers, so they would sell them, and their children would run after them crying for them, because the children of mothers of children are free and cannot be sold. If the mother was sold, the children would remain poor with no mother to have mercy on them. When 'Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, saw that, he saw from the perspective of policy that it was necessary to prohibit the sale of them, to prohibit the sale of them. Did you understand now?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : Therefore, the prohibition of selling mothers of children is not for a meaning related to the mother, but for what follows from it, which is the separation of the mother from her child, and the breaking of the mother's heart and the loss of the children that Islamic policy requires to be prevented. And it is known that a person may be prevented from disposing of his wealth due to the right of another. Has it not been narrated from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, that he restricted Mu'adh in his wealth ... Yes, it has passed us that the Messenger restricted him, preventing him from disposing of it. So what 'Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, did was a type of restriction, not a general legislation. And based on that, if her child died, is it permissible to sell her or not?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : Yes, it is permissible to sell her. Based on that, we say if her child died, it is permissible to sell her, because the prohibition of sale is not for a meaning related to the mother, but for a meaning related to the children, yes, with the mother. And this meaning, if the children die, ceases, so it becomes permissible to sell them.
And among the benefits of the hadith is also the clarification of the jurisprudence of the Commander of the Faithful, 'Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, because preventing a person from disposing of his wealth is a matter that the Shari'ah brought, and this is part of the completeness of his jurisprudence and the precision of his understanding. And similar to that, from some aspects, is his prevention of a woman who has been divorced three times from returning to her husband, in order to restrict people from this type of divorce. Because if a person knows that if he divorces three times, the wife is separated from him, he will hold back, he will hold back. But if he knows that if he divorces, he will be told it is one and he can take her back, he will divorce three times and not care, because he knows that he will take her back. But if he is prevented, he will refrain from divorcing three times.
Now, among the benefits of the hadith is also the good policy of the Commander of the Faithful, 'Umar, because he prohibited the sale of mothers of children.
And among the benefits of the hadith is also that the mother of a child is permissible for her master to enjoy her as long as he wishes, because she is his property, because she is his property.
And among its benefits is also that the mother of a child is not freed merely by the birth, due to his saying: " But if he dies, she is free " so she is not freed merely by the birth.
And among the benefits of the hadith is that the mother of a child is freed by the death of the master, even if he leaves no one else, so her freedom is from the principal, not from the third, due to the generality of his saying: " But if he dies, she is free ".
Yes, and among the benefits of the hadith is the permissibility of gifting slaves and selling them, because he prohibited the sale of the mother of a child and her gift, so that indicates that the original state of slaves is what? That they are sold and gifted, and that is the case, that they are sold and gifted.
If someone says, is this not injustice to the person and a violation of his rights? Because the person is a human being. How do you put the collar around his neck and say "who will bid?" What is the answer? The answer is that we say this person is the one who humiliated himself and his family by what? By disbelief. Because the cause of slavery is what? Disbelief. So when he disbelieved, he became lowly. That is, he went to free himself from the slavery of worshipping Allah, so he fell into the slavery of worshipping the people of Allah. Yes, because he freed himself from the slavery of worship, so he fell into the slavery of the created, just as the origin of his freedom was that he freed himself from the worship of the Most Merciful to the slavery of worshipping Satan. The disbelievers who do not worship Allah, whom did they worship?
The student: Satan.

The Shaykh : They worshipped the devils, without doubt. So they are poor. They went from the worship of the Creator to the worship of the created. They went from the worship of the close friend of those who believe to the worship of the enemy of those who believe, which is Satan. But ...
Now, and among the benefits of the hadith, it is not a benefit of the hadith, but among the benefits in what the author mentioned is that some of the narrators may make a mistake, right? Yes, yes. For this reason, it has passed us in the terminology of hadith that one of the reasons for rejecting a hadith is the criticism of the narrator, is that not so?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : Now, the narrator may make a mistake, because the person is a human being. The hadith may be reversed for him, he may advance or delay in it, he may add to it, he may subtract from it, he may make it marfu' when it is mawquf, or mawquf when it is what?
The student: Marfu'.

The Shaykh : It is marfu' (traced to the Prophet), but what is the standard by which we weigh the errors of the narrators and the absence of errors in the narrators? This is a problem. We say that the Shari'ah, praise be to Allah, has fixed rules and strong, clear texts. So, whatever comes in contradiction to these fixed rules or these strong, clear texts, we rule that it is an error (wahm) and an anomaly (shadhdh), just as the scholars said: a condition for the validity of a hadith is that it not be illa (defective) and not be shadhdh (anomalous). If a narrator is trustworthy (thiqah) but contradicts someone who is stronger than him, whether in number, in memorization, or in integrity, we say that the hadith of the man is shadhdh; it is shadhdh. If a hadith comes from a man whose beginning and end are contradictory, we know that the narrator did not have it under control. Among what Ibn al-Qayyim chose, and I also choose it, even though there is no comparison between me and him, is the hadith: This hadith is contradictory in its beginning and end in this form, because its beginning is: , and when a camel kneels, it puts its hands forward without a doubt. So, if it says "and let him put his hands before his knees," it becomes contradictory to the first part, so we know that it is an error. Now, why do we not make the first part the error and say "and let him put his hands before his knees" is the preserved version? We say: because the Lawgiver's custom is to prohibit imitating animals. He said: So, we know that the first part is the established one and the second is inverted, and the correct ruling is that he puts his knees before his hands. But a man comes to us and says, "How ignorant you are in your language! How ignorant you are in your language!" Please, we do not claim infallibility for ourselves. He says, "The camel's knees are in its hands." If he says "do not kneel as the camel kneels," it means do not kneel on your knees, because the camel kneels on its knees. He says, "You are now ignorant in your language." Then, if we interpret the hadith with this meaning, there is no contradiction; its beginning and end agree, so let this be the truth. We say, "By Allah, this is correct. We agree with you that the camel's knees are in its hands, and no one denies this. But the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) was given the essence of words, eloquence of tongue, and clarity of expression. He said and did not say "do not kneel on what it kneels on." If he had said "do not kneel on what the camel kneels on," we would have said this is correct: do not kneel on the knees. But he said "as the camel kneels," and the letter kaf is for comparison, so the intended meaning is that his posture during prostration should be like the posture of the camel when it kneels. As for the issue of the limb on which one kneels, this is what the hadith did not address. I say this so that when a person encounters such hadiths, he measures them against other established hadiths that are considered mountains in the Sunnah. If a hadith narrated by Abu Dawud contradicts what al-Bukhari and Muslim narrated in a way that cannot be reconciled, which do we take?
The student: Al-Bukhari and Muslim.

The Shaykh : We take what al-Bukhari and Muslim narrated. Now, this man, all his narrators are just men. Are the men of al-Bukhari and Muslim not just in our view?
The student : More just

The Shaykh : More just. Therefore, al-Bayhaqi (may Allah have mercy on him) says, "Its elevation (to the Prophet) is an error." So, error (wahm) occurs in narrators without a doubt, just as we see in ourselves; we always make errors. We make errors in what we perceive by hearing, by sight, and by the heart. Error is comprehensive for the son of Adam in all the senses, is it not?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : ... and my hand, for example, has ... you know ...
The student: No.

The Shaykh : cracks from the cold. Touch this; I find it smooth, meaning my hand ... I say this is smooth, praise be to Allah, it comes ... he says the microphone is smooth, it comes, one person's hand is soft ... from its roughness, yes, he considers it all thorns. So, the important thing is that a person makes errors. He makes errors in all the senses: in sight, in hearing, in understanding in the heart, and in smell as well, in all the senses, and in food as well. Yes.