Chapter: Knowledge before speech and action, based on the saying of Allah the Exalted: “So know that there is no deity except Allah.”

The reader: “Chapter: Knowledge before speech and action”
Based on the saying of Allah the Exalted: . He began with knowledge. . And He, Glorious is His mention, said: . And He said: And He said: . And the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said:

The Shaykh : In our version, it is “understands it,” not what you have.
The reader: “understands it”

The Shaykh : This is the preserved version.
The student: In the narration...

The Shaykh : “understands it”?
The student: “understands it”

The Shaykh : Yes
The reader: And Abu Dharr said: . And Ibn Abbas said: And it is said...

The Shaykh : In our version, it is “hulama” (wise men), with the lam.
The reader: “Hulama,” O Shaykh?

The Shaykh : Yes, it might be a variation in the narration.
The student: “Hulama fuqaha” (wise jurists).

The Shaykh : Very well.
The reader: No, O Shaykh, no, O Shaykh, it is “hukama” (wise men).

The Shaykh : In the explanation?
The reader: No, in the main text it is “hukama.”

The Shaykh : Yes, in our main text it is “hulama.”
The reader: And it is said: “the *rabbani* is the one who nurtures people with the small matters of knowledge before the great ones”.

The Shaykh : In this chapter, the author did not mention a hadith with a full chain, but he mentioned an *athar* (report from a Companion or successor) and provided evidence. The verses he cited to support his point—that knowledge comes before speech and action—have both a textual proof and a rational proof. As for the textual proof, it is the saying of Allah the Exalted: He began with knowledge before action. As for the rational proof, it is known that a person cannot act without knowledge. Action is built upon knowledge, and speech is built upon knowledge. Can a person do something without prior knowledge of it? This is impossible. So, know first, then act second. However, the paths of knowledge are those that require consideration. The paths of knowledge are multiple: either from a Shaykh, which is the closest path; or from a book, which requires effort; or from well-known practice, which is the path of the common people. The path of the common people is well-known practice. The common person lives in this Ummah and walks with it. If asked, “How many prayers are there?” he says, “Five.” “What is your evidence?” he says, “Everyone prays five.” “How many rak'ahs in the Zuhr prayer? How many in the Maghrib prayer?” He says, “Four and three.” The evidence is: “The practice of the people.” We say the common person’s path is knowledge of what? Practice. The well-known practice in the environment in which he lives.
As for the first two paths we mentioned: first, receiving knowledge from a Shaykh. Receiving from a Shaykh is more effective in establishing the foundations of scientific issues and rooting them, and is closer to grasp, because the Shaykh has what the student does not. You find that he has gathered the ends of the known from every angle and then presents them to the student in a mature form. There is no doubt that this makes things easy for the student; it makes things very easy for the student. Have you seen, if you want to know the ruling on an issue where there is disagreement, if you do not take it from the mouth of the Shaykh, you need to consult several books, and perhaps you will understand what you read or perhaps you will not. But with the Shaykh, it is made easy; he makes the matter easy for you, clarifies the path for you, opens the door of discussion, the door of ijtihad (independent legal reasoning). But in this path, there may be thorns. There may be thorns. I say, strong or weak? Weak. If a strong thorn hits you and gets embedded in the body, it is easy to remove it, or not? Yes, exactly. For example, a pin. If a pin gets embedded, it is easy to pull it out. But if it is a weak thorn that has split, if you take one of them, it breaks, and then it tires you out. It tires you out removing the rest, and it remains in your skin. In any case, receiving from Shaykhs has thorns. And with this, we must know the Shaykh first in his creed, because he may have a defective creed, contrary to the creed of the Salaf (the earliest generations), and be a clever man who does not speak plainly, but speaks in a veiled manner. Whoever understands him while being naive thinks it is the truth, but it contains calamity. Second: we must know the extent of his religion, because some people have knowledge, but they do not have religion; they are not trustworthy in terms of religion because they follow their desires. This is also dangerous. And this is known—knowing the integrity of a person from bad creed and weak religion is known by his conduct and his speech. No person keeps a secret in his heart without Allah revealing it on his face, on the tips of his tongue, and on the pages of his face.
As for books, the second path, which is receiving from books, this requires great effort and long perseverance until a person grasps what he grasps. It has been said that whoever’s evidence is his book, his errors are more than his correct statements. This does not mean that he does not hit the mark, but he errs a lot. If we start first with what? With receiving [from a Shaykh]. Then, if we do not find [a Shaykh], necessities permit the prohibited. It becomes consulting books and persevering until we reach knowledge, and then we build our action upon knowledge. Yes.
Then he says, “And the scholars are the heirs of the prophets; they inherited knowledge. Whoever takes it takes a great share.” The scholars inherited, and this apparent expression is correct: they inherited knowledge. The scholars inherited knowledge; they did not inherit a dirham or a dinar.
The student: The prophets.

The Shaykh : My intention, yes, the prophets inherited knowledge; they did not inherit a dirham or a dinar. And this is from the wisdom of Allah, Mighty and Majestic. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: O assembly of prophets. And this is from the wisdom of Allah that their relatives have no share in their inheritance. Because if it were so, the prophets would be suspected of being seekers of kingship and wealth, and that they want to acquire the wealth of people so that it would be for their heirs. And the wording of the hadith is: And the Rafidah (the Twelver Shi'ah) said, “No, the Prophet inherits.” The hadith is: They said this wording is correct. As for “charity” with the nominative case, that is an error. For this reason, they said that Abu Bakr, Umar, and the Companions were oppressors and open sinners, because they prevented an obligation from the obligations of Allah, which is the inheritance of the daughter and the relatives. They prevented Fatima from her right from her father, and they prevented her uncle and her uncles’ sons. If the uncles’ sons have an inheritance, we say to them, “May Allah disfigure you.” If the wording of the hadith is as you claim, what is the difference between the prophets and others? Even non-prophets, if they endow something and it is inherited, yes, and if they leave it, it is charity and not inherited. What distinction do the prophets have? While there are other explicit proofs in this matter. In any case, the prophets inherited knowledge. But did they inherit only knowledge? Or knowledge, action, and calling? All three, together. Therefore, whoever inherits from the prophets and takes hold of knowledge, it is obligatory for him to perform the rest of the inheritance, which is action, and second, calling. Otherwise, he would be like one who inherited wealth and did not benefit from it.
He also said: "Whoever takes the path in hadith This refers to the knowledge of the Shari'ah. And his saying 'path' includes both the physical path and the spiritual path. The physical path is coming from your home to the place of the lesson, and the spiritual path is reading the books and sitting to take in what the scholars said, and the like of that. And He, Glorious is His mention, said: 'Khushu' means fear, but khushu is more complete than fear, because it is accompanied by knowledge, as He, the Exalted, said: As for fear, it can be accompanied by knowledge or without knowledge. The scholars are scholars by what? By Allah and His verses and His rulings. And if you wish, say 'by Allah and His verses,' which includes the rulings, because the rulings of Allah, the Exalted, are among His verses, whether they are cosmic rulings or Shari'ah rulings. Now, are the scholars of physics, medicine, the layers of the earth, and the celestial bodies included in this? No, but perhaps Allah grants favor to whom He wills among them; if they know what wisdom Allah, the Exalted, has in these things, they will be guided. Now, what is the aspect of the virtue of knowledge in His saying: That the scholars are the people of khushu for Allah. He said, and He said: These return to the parables. Meaning, no one understands them, understands what is intended by them, and understands the connection between the parable and what it was made a parable for, except the 'alimun (the knowing ones). Because the ignorant ones may read the parables mentioned in the Qur'an, but they do not know their purpose, nor the connection between them and what they were made a parable for. But the 'alimun (with the kasrah) are those who comprehend that. And he also said: They say this as an answer, or rather, they say it when they are asked: Meaning, if we had heard with understanding and submission. Otherwise, they hear the hearing of mere perception. Messengers came to them and conveyed the message to them. Meaning, or if we had intellect, meaning even if we had not heard, because 'aw' (or) implies... We say, yes, because the person of intellect must seek the truth. This is why it is said that Waraqah ibn Nawfal, the maternal uncle of Khadijah, to whom Khadijah brought the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) when she informed him of the first revelation of the revelation to him, it is said that he disliked what the people of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance were upon, namely the worship of idols, and he saw that this was not the truth. So he went to Sham, he went to Sham, seeking the religion of the Christians. He became a Christian and returned to Makkah, and he was walking upon what was in the religion of the Christians of truth. So the person of intellect, even if he has not heard, must seek the truth, and the sound fitrah (innate natural disposition) points to the truth. As for hearing, if a person hears the Qur'an while his heart is present, he benefits from it, as He, the Exalted, said: This is the intellect.
You did not bring al-Bukhari.