Explanation of the author's statement: "Chapter: If that is absent, one reverts to what the name encompasses, and it is three"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : The fourth rank. He said "Chapter: If that is absent, one reverts to what the name encompasses" This is the fourth rank, meaning if there is no intention, no cause, and no specification, we revert to what the name encompasses. The meaning of "what the name encompasses" is what the name indicates. We revert to what this name indicates. The intended meaning of "name" here is not the counterpart of the particle, but rather the thing upon which the oath was made, the phrase, meaning the phrase upon which the oath was made. So we revert to what the name encompasses regarding that thing upon which the oath was made.
The name, in reality, is divided into three categories: legal, linguistic, and customary. This name, meaning the meanings of names, either has, yes, meaning that names either have a legal meaning, a linguistic meaning, or a customary meaning. Sometimes the meanings agree in a single word, meaning this word has one meaning in language, Shari'ah, and custom. And sometimes it has a meaning in language different from its meaning in Shari'ah, a meaning in custom different from its meaning in Shari'ah and language. The intended meaning of "language" here is the Arabic language, and the intended meaning of "custom" is the customary language.
He said, may Allah have mercy on him, "and it is three: legal, literal, and customary." If these three agree in the meaning of the word, there is no problem. But the problem is if they differ; which one is prioritized? The author clarifies this. The sky has a meaning.
The questioner : Linguistic.
The Shaykh : And legal.
The questioner : And customary.
The Shaykh : And customary, the meaning is one. The egg has one meaning: legal, customary, and linguistic. The earth has one meaning, and there are many examples of this. Meaning, there are words in which the Shari'ah, custom, and language do not differ. This matter is clear in them; if one swears, the word is taken according to its meaning, which does not differ. Now, if they differ, do we prioritize the legal, the customary, or the linguistic? We look. The author said "So the legal is that which has a designation in the Shari'ah and a designation in the language" Meaning, that which has a meaning in the Shari'ah and a meaning in the language. This is the legal. It is as if the author is saying that the legal is that in which the language and the Shari'ah differ, such as sale, such as purity, prayer, zakah, fasting, Hajj, sale, endowment, and many other things. The Shari'ah and language differ in these, and for this reason we say purity is such-and-such in language and such-and-such in Shari'ah, prayer is such-and-such in language and such-and-such in Shari'ah, zakah is such-and-such in language and such-and-such in Shari'ah, Hajj is such-and-such in language and such-and-such in Shari'ah, sale is such-and-such in language and such-and-such in Shari'ah. These are the things in which there is a difference; the Shari'ah and custom differ in them. Since we are believers, our speech is taken according to the legal meaning when it is used generally, meaning if there is no cause and no intention, it is taken according to the legal meaning. So if someone says, "By Allah, I will pray before the 'Isha' adhan," and then he stretches his hands to the sky and supplicates until the 'Isha' adhan is called, we say to him, "Man, why did you not pray?" He says, "I prayed." Does he break his oath or not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : I say there is no intention, my brothers. No intention and no cause.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Does he break his oath?
The questioner : He breaks his oath.
The Shaykh : Why? Because his speech is taken according to the legal meaning. It is true that prayer in language means supplication, but we, as Muslims, yes, our speech is taken according to the legal matter. Now.
He said, "By Allah, I will perform Hajj today," and then, by Allah, "I will perform Hajj today," and then he went to a friend of his, and the sun set. Does he break his oath or not?
The questioner : He breaks his oath.
The Shaykh : No, pay attention, yes, no, he does not break his oath. Why? Because Hajj here cannot be taken according to the legal meaning. The cause says "today." Today, we are now on the night of the fourteenth of Jumada al-Ula. How can he perform Hajj? Jumada al-Ula, my brother, where is Hajj after that?
The questioner : ... and he went.
The Shaykh : In any case, we say he does not break his oath because in his speech there is something that prevents it from being taken according to the legal meaning.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : A subtle point, a subtle point. Because in his speech there is something that prevents his speech from being taken according to the legal meaning, which is his saying "today." But if he said, "By Allah, I will perform Hajj," and he just said "I will perform Hajj" and left it general, and then went to a friend of his and said, "This is Hajj," Hajj in language means intention, and I intended, we say it is not possible, because Hajj, when used generally, since you have no intention and no cause, is taken according to what?
The questioner : The legal.
The Shaykh : The legal meaning.
The questioner : He does not break his oath ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : He does not break his oath because the time for Hajj has not come.
The Shaykh : No, intention is not Hajj.
The questioner : If it passes, meaning ...
The Shaykh : Yes, if the time for Hajj passes and he did not perform Hajj, yes, and otherwise, it is known that he did not perform Hajj at this time. Now, then.
The questioner : In language, Shaykh, does the restriction of Hajj ... ?
The Shaykh : No, no, it is not a condition.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, no, it has a meaning.
The questioner : "Today," this?
The Shaykh : Yes, "I will intend today," meaning anything I intend, "I will intend today," anything. So if he says, "I intended so-and-so," and this is intention.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Because in his manner, and in any case, he is as he wishes. Now, the important thing is, if the word has a legal meaning and a linguistic meaning, do we take it according to what?
The questioner : The legal meaning.
The Shaykh : The legal meaning, and for this reason he said.
The name, in reality, is divided into three categories: legal, linguistic, and customary. This name, meaning the meanings of names, either has, yes, meaning that names either have a legal meaning, a linguistic meaning, or a customary meaning. Sometimes the meanings agree in a single word, meaning this word has one meaning in language, Shari'ah, and custom. And sometimes it has a meaning in language different from its meaning in Shari'ah, a meaning in custom different from its meaning in Shari'ah and language. The intended meaning of "language" here is the Arabic language, and the intended meaning of "custom" is the customary language.
He said, may Allah have mercy on him, "and it is three: legal, literal, and customary." If these three agree in the meaning of the word, there is no problem. But the problem is if they differ; which one is prioritized? The author clarifies this. The sky has a meaning.
The questioner : Linguistic.
The Shaykh : And legal.
The questioner : And customary.
The Shaykh : And customary, the meaning is one. The egg has one meaning: legal, customary, and linguistic. The earth has one meaning, and there are many examples of this. Meaning, there are words in which the Shari'ah, custom, and language do not differ. This matter is clear in them; if one swears, the word is taken according to its meaning, which does not differ. Now, if they differ, do we prioritize the legal, the customary, or the linguistic? We look. The author said "So the legal is that which has a designation in the Shari'ah and a designation in the language" Meaning, that which has a meaning in the Shari'ah and a meaning in the language. This is the legal. It is as if the author is saying that the legal is that in which the language and the Shari'ah differ, such as sale, such as purity, prayer, zakah, fasting, Hajj, sale, endowment, and many other things. The Shari'ah and language differ in these, and for this reason we say purity is such-and-such in language and such-and-such in Shari'ah, prayer is such-and-such in language and such-and-such in Shari'ah, zakah is such-and-such in language and such-and-such in Shari'ah, Hajj is such-and-such in language and such-and-such in Shari'ah, sale is such-and-such in language and such-and-such in Shari'ah. These are the things in which there is a difference; the Shari'ah and custom differ in them. Since we are believers, our speech is taken according to the legal meaning when it is used generally, meaning if there is no cause and no intention, it is taken according to the legal meaning. So if someone says, "By Allah, I will pray before the 'Isha' adhan," and then he stretches his hands to the sky and supplicates until the 'Isha' adhan is called, we say to him, "Man, why did you not pray?" He says, "I prayed." Does he break his oath or not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : I say there is no intention, my brothers. No intention and no cause.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Does he break his oath?
The questioner : He breaks his oath.
The Shaykh : Why? Because his speech is taken according to the legal meaning. It is true that prayer in language means supplication, but we, as Muslims, yes, our speech is taken according to the legal matter. Now.
He said, "By Allah, I will perform Hajj today," and then, by Allah, "I will perform Hajj today," and then he went to a friend of his, and the sun set. Does he break his oath or not?
The questioner : He breaks his oath.
The Shaykh : No, pay attention, yes, no, he does not break his oath. Why? Because Hajj here cannot be taken according to the legal meaning. The cause says "today." Today, we are now on the night of the fourteenth of Jumada al-Ula. How can he perform Hajj? Jumada al-Ula, my brother, where is Hajj after that?
The questioner : ... and he went.
The Shaykh : In any case, we say he does not break his oath because in his speech there is something that prevents it from being taken according to the legal meaning.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : A subtle point, a subtle point. Because in his speech there is something that prevents his speech from being taken according to the legal meaning, which is his saying "today." But if he said, "By Allah, I will perform Hajj," and he just said "I will perform Hajj" and left it general, and then went to a friend of his and said, "This is Hajj," Hajj in language means intention, and I intended, we say it is not possible, because Hajj, when used generally, since you have no intention and no cause, is taken according to what?
The questioner : The legal.
The Shaykh : The legal meaning.
The questioner : He does not break his oath ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : He does not break his oath because the time for Hajj has not come.
The Shaykh : No, intention is not Hajj.
The questioner : If it passes, meaning ...
The Shaykh : Yes, if the time for Hajj passes and he did not perform Hajj, yes, and otherwise, it is known that he did not perform Hajj at this time. Now, then.
The questioner : In language, Shaykh, does the restriction of Hajj ... ?
The Shaykh : No, no, it is not a condition.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, no, it has a meaning.
The questioner : "Today," this?
The Shaykh : Yes, "I will intend today," meaning anything I intend, "I will intend today," anything. So if he says, "I intended so-and-so," and this is intention.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Because in his manner, and in any case, he is as he wishes. Now, the important thing is, if the word has a legal meaning and a linguistic meaning, do we take it according to what?
The questioner : The legal meaning.
The Shaykh : The legal meaning, and for this reason he said.