Explanation of the author's statement: It contains issues; the first is the prohibition of swearing by fathers.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said, "It contains issues; the first is the prohibition of swearing by fathers". Where is this taken from? And the prohibition indicates prohibition.
"The second is the command for the one sworn to by Allah to be satisfied", based on His saying:Sunan Ibn Majah 2101Da'if (Darussalam).
"The third is the warning for the one who is not satisfied". Where is this taken from?.
The fourth remains, which the author omitted, and it is? The command for the one who swears to be truthful. This is important, because truthfulness is obligatory even without an oath, so how much more so with an oath? It has been established for us that one who swears a false oath is sinful. Some scholars said that this is the *ghamus* oath, while others said that the *ghamus* oath is the one by which a Muslim's wealth is cut off.
The questioner : The untrustworthy person might be truthful now in this matter.
The Shaykh : Yes, perhaps.
The student: Why don't we believe him and...?
The Shaykh : It is not obligatory for us.
The student: Because there is a warning.
The Shaykh : That is, a warning for the one who is not satisfied. Because if I judge that he is not trustworthy, it is not obligatory for me to be satisfied. So the matter does not lack cases. The first is: that I know he is lying, so no one says it is obligatory for me to believe him, clear?
The second is: that I judge he is lying, so likewise it is not obligatory for me to believe him. The third is: that the two are equal in my view, so in this case I must believe him. The fourth is: that I judge he is truthful, so I must believe him, or not? The fifth is: that I know he is truthful, not just judging, I know he is truthful because I have indications supporting his words, so this is even more of a reason for me to believe him if he swears.
The student: Shaykh, regarding the third, you said if the two are equal, do I not look at the man's condition if the two are equal?
The Shaykh : If the two are equal, if you look at his condition and one becomes more probable in your view, it becomes the stronger position, either this one or that one. But if I am unable to judge his condition, or I cannot look at it now because the matter requires immediacy, then I must be satisfied. This is said regarding sensory matters. As for religious matters in the chapter of litigation, I must be satisfied and be bound, and the defendant is absolved. Yes.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : It is Isa (peace be upon him). It appears that when he swore to him, he became doubtful of himself, doubtful of himself, and said: this man did not swear except truthfully. So when he became doubtful, he denied it, cutting off his own lie.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : That is, perhaps he thought he made a mistake.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : By Allah, I do not think this... exalting Allah. If this man did not exalt Allah, I know that, it is my strong opinion that he did not exalt Allah. How would it be if we opened this door? It is a problem.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : It is obligatory for you out of respect for the oath, and no stronger position was found that contradicts this respect, so that we could say there is a stronger position that makes it not obligatory to believe, because this man has desecrated the greatness of Allah the Exalted, so his oath has no sanctity.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Sensory matters, because the religious ruling is obligatory for you to accept, whether it agrees with your desire or not. Even if my opponent swears that he is innocent of what I claim, and I know he is lying, I must be satisfied. I do not say this is an unjust ruling, or this is an oppressive ruling, or I repeat the request...
Do not swear by your fathers
لا تحلفوا بآبائكم"The second is the command for the one sworn to by Allah to be satisfied", based on His saying:
and if an oath is sworn for a person by Allah, let him accept it
ومن حلف له بالله فليرض"The third is the warning for the one who is not satisfied". Where is this taken from?
So he is not from Allah
فليس من اللهThe fourth remains, which the author omitted, and it is? The command for the one who swears to be truthful. This is important, because truthfulness is obligatory even without an oath, so how much more so with an oath? It has been established for us that one who swears a false oath is sinful. Some scholars said that this is the *ghamus* oath, while others said that the *ghamus* oath is the one by which a Muslim's wealth is cut off.
The questioner : The untrustworthy person might be truthful now in this matter.
The Shaykh : Yes, perhaps.
The student: Why don't we believe him and...?
The Shaykh : It is not obligatory for us.
The student: Because there is a warning.
The Shaykh : That is, a warning for the one who is not satisfied. Because if I judge that he is not trustworthy, it is not obligatory for me to be satisfied. So the matter does not lack cases. The first is: that I know he is lying, so no one says it is obligatory for me to believe him, clear?
The second is: that I judge he is lying, so likewise it is not obligatory for me to believe him. The third is: that the two are equal in my view, so in this case I must believe him. The fourth is: that I judge he is truthful, so I must believe him, or not? The fifth is: that I know he is truthful, not just judging, I know he is truthful because I have indications supporting his words, so this is even more of a reason for me to believe him if he swears.
The student: Shaykh, regarding the third, you said if the two are equal, do I not look at the man's condition if the two are equal?
The Shaykh : If the two are equal, if you look at his condition and one becomes more probable in your view, it becomes the stronger position, either this one or that one. But if I am unable to judge his condition, or I cannot look at it now because the matter requires immediacy, then I must be satisfied. This is said regarding sensory matters. As for religious matters in the chapter of litigation, I must be satisfied and be bound, and the defendant is absolved. Yes.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : It is Isa (peace be upon him). It appears that when he swore to him, he became doubtful of himself, doubtful of himself, and said: this man did not swear except truthfully. So when he became doubtful, he denied it, cutting off his own lie.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : That is, perhaps he thought he made a mistake.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : By Allah, I do not think this... exalting Allah. If this man did not exalt Allah, I know that, it is my strong opinion that he did not exalt Allah. How would it be if we opened this door? It is a problem.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : It is obligatory for you out of respect for the oath, and no stronger position was found that contradicts this respect, so that we could say there is a stronger position that makes it not obligatory to believe, because this man has desecrated the greatness of Allah the Exalted, so his oath has no sanctity.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Sensory matters, because the religious ruling is obligatory for you to accept, whether it agrees with your desire or not. Even if my opponent swears that he is innocent of what I claim, and I know he is lying, I must be satisfied. I do not say this is an unjust ruling, or this is an oppressive ruling, or I repeat the request...