"If they do not take a life or property reaching the threshold for theft, they are to be exiled so that they are not left to take refuge in any land."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : The fourth: "If they do not take a life or property reaching the threshold for theft, they are to be exiled". Is this a conditional sentence, and the answer to the condition is? Yes? They are to be exiled. The author used the word "exiled" following the text [Al-Ma'idah 5:33] and did not mention the one who exiles. It is known that the one who exiles is the one in authority who has the power, so the exile is carried out by the one in authority. If he does not do it, the Muslims exile them. This is the secret behind its being built for the object. "They are to be exiled". How do we exile them? He said: "By making them wander, so that they are not left to take refuge in any land". They are made to wander in the wilderness and it is not possible for them to return to the lands, neither their own lands nor the lands of others. For this reason, Allah the Exalted said: [Al-Ma'idah 5:33]. Do not say the verse says they are to be exiled from the earth, so we must put them in the sky. This is not possible. But from the land where they cut the roads. The meaning is that we exile them from the towns and the places that people frequent, because the purpose of exile is to remove their harm and their frightening people. This is the meaning of His saying: [Al-Ma'idah 5:33]. Some scholars said that exile is imprisonment. They are exiled from the earth, meaning they are imprisoned, because imprisonment is called a prison, the prison of this world. And that is the case. The one in prison is not in this world with people, nor in the Hereafter with the dead. So he is exiled from the earth. And because imprisoning them is closer to safety from their harm. If we exiled them from the towns and the roads, perhaps they would raid one day when people are unaware and cut the roads. But if they are imprisoned, their harm is completely safe. This is the school of Abu Hanifah. And as we all know, the school of Abu Hanifah is always based on reason, but the apparent meaning of the verse does not support it [Al-Ma'idah 5:33]. Otherwise, Allah would have said "or they are imprisoned." Since He said: [Al-Ma'idah 5:33] If someone said that if it is not possible to guard against their harm except by imprisoning them, they are imprisoned, and if it is possible to guard against their harm by making them wander, they are made to wander. If someone said this, it would have a valid aspect. It would be a middle ground between those who say they are imprisoned absolutely and those who say they are made to wander absolutely. That is, we make the issue detailed based on two different situations. We apply these two opinions to two different situations and say: if it is possible to guard against their harm by making them wander, we do so following the apparent text. And if it is not possible, yes, then we imprison them because this is closer to repelling their harm.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : ... they will die.
The Shaykh : We have prevented questions until after, for the sake of the recording. Okay, now we have understood from the author's words and his statement, may Allah have mercy on him, how many aspects does the punishment for highway robbers have?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Four types, and for each type: killing and crucifixion, killing without crucifixion, cutting off the hand and foot from opposite sides, and making them wander in the land. If they killed and took the money, they are killed and crucified. The method of crucifixion and when it occurs has been mentioned previously. And if they killed and did not take the money.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : They are killed without crucifixion. And if they took the money without killing, their hands and feet are cut off from opposite sides. And if they did not take the money and did not kill, they are made to wander. So we have the combination of the two, the isolation of one, and the absence of both. Their combination and their absence, yes, and the absence of one.[Al-An'am 6:132] Where did this division come from, while the apparent meaning of the noble verse [Al-Ma'idah 5:33]? The apparent meaning of the noble verse is choice, because "or" when it comes in the Qur'an is for choice. So where did this thing come from? Where did it come from? They said it came from the report of Ibn 'Abbas. He, may Allah be pleased with him, said exactly this statement. This is the famous report from him.
He said: "If they killed and took the money, they are killed and crucified. And if they killed and did not take the money, they are killed and not crucified. And if they took the money and did not kill, their hands and feet are cut off from opposite sides. And if they frightened the road, they are exiled". This is how it was reported from him. And they said that Ibn 'Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him and his father, is the interpreter of the Qur'an. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said about him:Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah 29:588. And they also said that the custom in the Qur'an is that if something is by way of choice, it begins with the lightest, and if it is by way of order, it begins with the heaviest. Consider the ranks of the expiation for zihar. Is it order or choice? Yes? The ranks of the expiation for zihar, brothers?
The questioner : Choice.
The Shaykh : The ranks of the expiation for zihar.
The questioner : Order.
The Shaykh : Order?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Or choice?
The questioner : A sequence.
The Shaykh : Yes, order. Did it begin with the heaviest or the lightest?
The questioner : The heaviest.
The Shaykh : The heaviest. Freeing a slave, fasting two consecutive months, feeding sixty poor people. Likewise, in the expiation for killing, is it order or choice?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : The expiation for killing?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : Order.
The Shaykh : Order, choice. No, neither order nor choice.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : What... this, then, O Muhammad.
The questioner : Order.
The Shaykh : Order?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Order. And look at the expiation for an oath. Is the expiation for an oath choice or order?
The questioner : A sequence.
Another questioner: ...
The Shaykh : Okay, the one who said choice: the things in which there is choice began with the lightest: feeding ten poor people, or clothing them, or freeing a slave. And look at the ransom for harm. If a person is in the state of ihram and needs to shave his head, he shaves it.
The questioner : Fasting.
The Shaykh :[Al-Baqarah 2:196] Which is more severe?
The questioner : The sacrifice.
The Shaykh : The sacrifice, then what? Charity, then fasting. And this was in the time of the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, and those in their condition. So those who said that the verse is not order but for variation, that "or" in it is for variation and that it is according to the crime, said: We know from the Qur'an that if something is in order, it begins with the heaviest, and if it is in choice, it begins with the?
The questioner : Lightest.
The Shaykh : The lightest. Okay, so the evidence for them is a report and reasoning. And Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy on him, held that "or" in the verse is for choice, and that the imam is given the choice: if he wishes, he kills and crucifies; if he wishes, he kills and does not crucify; if he wishes, he cuts off limbs; and if he wishes, he exiles. He is given the choice. But according to the school of Malik, it is obligatory for the imam to look at what is most beneficial. If the most beneficial is killing and crucifying, yes, what? Killing and crucifying. And if it is in killing only, killing only. And if it is in cutting off, cutting off. For example, if people violate the sanctity of rights and become indifferent to the highway robber, what is the benefit?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Killing and crucifying. And if crucifying this man leads to fitnah, because he is the master of his tribe and we fear that if we crucify him, this tribe will revolt and blood and harms will occur, what is the most beneficial? Hmm?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Killing only. We kill him and bury him, and what else?
May Allah have mercy on him, that "or" is for choice and not for variation.
The imam is given the choice. And if he is given the choice, it is obligatory for him to follow what is most beneficial. But the second opinion, which is the first in our report, is more correct, especially in our time. Because if we opened the door of choice for the rulers, they would manipulate it. So this one is killed and crucified in their view, and the other is exiled from the land and let go. The correct view in this issue is the first opinion, that these hudud are fixed and the imam has no choice in them. And we make "or" for what? For variation, not for choice. Yes, okay. Yes?
or that they be exiled from the land
أو يُنفوا من الأرضor that they be exiled from the land
أو ينفوا من الأرضor that they be exiled from the land
أو ينفوا من الأرضor that they be exiled from the land
أو ينفوا من الأرضthat they be exiled from the land
ينفوا من الأرضThe questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : ... they will die.
The Shaykh : We have prevented questions until after, for the sake of the recording. Okay, now we have understood from the author's words and his statement, may Allah have mercy on him, how many aspects does the punishment for highway robbers have?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Four types, and for each type: killing and crucifixion, killing without crucifixion, cutting off the hand and foot from opposite sides, and making them wander in the land. If they killed and took the money, they are killed and crucified. The method of crucifixion and when it occurs has been mentioned previously. And if they killed and did not take the money.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : They are killed without crucifixion. And if they took the money without killing, their hands and feet are cut off from opposite sides. And if they did not take the money and did not kill, they are made to wander. So we have the combination of the two, the isolation of one, and the absence of both. Their combination and their absence, yes, and the absence of one.
And for all are degrees from what they have done
ولكل درجات مما عملواIndeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides
إنما جزاء الذين يحاربون الله ورسوله ويسعون في الأرض فسادا أن يقتلوا أو يصلبوا أو تقطع أيديهم وأرجلهم من خلافHe said: "If they killed and took the money, they are killed and crucified. And if they killed and did not take the money, they are killed and not crucified. And if they took the money and did not kill, their hands and feet are cut off from opposite sides. And if they frightened the road, they are exiled". This is how it was reported from him. And they said that Ibn 'Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him and his father, is the interpreter of the Qur'an. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said about him:
O Allah, give him understanding in the religion and teach him interpretation
اللهم فقهه في الدين وعلمه التأويلThe questioner : Choice.
The Shaykh : The ranks of the expiation for zihar.
The questioner : Order.
The Shaykh : Order?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Or choice?
The questioner : A sequence.
The Shaykh : Yes, order. Did it begin with the heaviest or the lightest?
The questioner : The heaviest.
The Shaykh : The heaviest. Freeing a slave, fasting two consecutive months, feeding sixty poor people. Likewise, in the expiation for killing, is it order or choice?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : The expiation for killing?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : Order.
The Shaykh : Order, choice. No, neither order nor choice.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : What... this, then, O Muhammad.
The questioner : Order.
The Shaykh : Order?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Order. And look at the expiation for an oath. Is the expiation for an oath choice or order?
The questioner : A sequence.
Another questioner: ...
The Shaykh : Okay, the one who said choice: the things in which there is choice began with the lightest: feeding ten poor people, or clothing them, or freeing a slave. And look at the ransom for harm. If a person is in the state of ihram and needs to shave his head, he shaves it
and a ransom from
ففدية منThe questioner : Fasting.
The Shaykh :
fasting [three days] or charity or sacrifice
صيام أو صدقة أو نسكThe questioner : The sacrifice.
The Shaykh : The sacrifice, then what? Charity, then fasting. And this was in the time of the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, and those in their condition. So those who said that the verse is not order but for variation, that "or" in it is for variation and that it is according to the crime, said: We know from the Qur'an that if something is in order, it begins with the heaviest, and if it is in choice, it begins with the?
The questioner : Lightest.
The Shaykh : The lightest. Okay, so the evidence for them is a report and reasoning. And Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy on him, held that "or" in the verse is for choice, and that the imam is given the choice: if he wishes, he kills and crucifies; if he wishes, he kills and does not crucify; if he wishes, he cuts off limbs; and if he wishes, he exiles. He is given the choice. But according to the school of Malik, it is obligatory for the imam to look at what is most beneficial. If the most beneficial is killing and crucifying, yes, what? Killing and crucifying. And if it is in killing only, killing only. And if it is in cutting off, cutting off. For example, if people violate the sanctity of rights and become indifferent to the highway robber, what is the benefit?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Killing and crucifying. And if crucifying this man leads to fitnah, because he is the master of his tribe and we fear that if we crucify him, this tribe will revolt and blood and harms will occur, what is the most beneficial? Hmm?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Killing only. We kill him and bury him, and what else?
May Allah have mercy on him, that "or" is for choice and not for variation.
The imam is given the choice. And if he is given the choice, it is obligatory for him to follow what is most beneficial. But the second opinion, which is the first in our report, is more correct, especially in our time. Because if we opened the door of choice for the rulers, they would manipulate it. So this one is killed and crucified in their view, and the other is exiled from the land and let go. The correct view in this issue is the first opinion, that these hudud are fixed and the imam has no choice in them. And we make "or" for what? For variation, not for choice. Yes, okay. Yes?