The ruling on standing up for someone entering a gathering.

The Shaykh : Because, is it conceivable, Professor, that the scholars would recommend what their Master disliked? So what is the meaning of the scholars’ exception from the ruling, when the dislike came from the Master of the scholars regarding his right? It is said: “No one was dearer to them than the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and they did not stand up for him because they knew of his dislike of that.” There is no doubt that you are aware of the life of the Companions with the Messenger (peace be upon him), and first, the life of the Salaf in general with scholars like them. You do not find in this conduct what the scholars, or some of the later scholars, recommend, namely standing up for a scholar, a righteous person, or a just king. How is this possible with this continuous life that is contrary to this ruling which is claimed to be recommended? How can this ruling be recommended? Allah (Mighty and Majestic) says: . Then there is the problem resulting from the recommendation mentioned for a group of Muslims rather than the majority of Muslims. Can this be adhered to and realized? Or does opening the door of recommendation for a group without the others lead to its being opened by others as well, as is exactly the case? If it is, as you know, one of the principles of Islamic law, blocking the means to harm, and if we know that a matter recommended in claim leads to an impermissible matter, then it is said to close this door, as the jurists have done. The matter has reached the point where some of them saw that leaving a Sunnah established from the Messenger (peace be upon him) is required if it becomes a symbol for some of the people of innovation. This is a very great thing, although I do not see it so in such a detail. It is established that a Sunnah is from the Messenger (peace be upon him), and then some of the people of innovation adopted it, so we leave it? I do not see... for those who want to apply this principle and expanded it to include the Sunnah, that it be left because it became a symbol for the people of innovation. Today, the matter is the exact opposite. Today, if the one sitting does not stand up for the one entering, even if he is from the people of knowledge, let alone if he is a minister, a dignitary, or a prince, if he does not stand, the Day of Resurrection will rise against him. This is the ruling. May we ask Allah for guidance.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Whether he is or is not.

The questioner : Meaning, there is no blame, even if, meaning, it occurs to the one entering that he is not from the people of knowledge, and if he is, for example, old in age or something like that, it is not befitting for us to apply this Sunnah, and I do not look...

The Shaykh : No, it is not applied, or on the contrary, meaning, we dislike what the Messenger (peace be upon him) disliked, except in the other principle of choosing the lesser of two evils.

The questioner : In this case.

The Shaykh : But, meaning, if it is.
The student: Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh : Welcome, and upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah and His blessings. If people are sitting, or some of them, and a man enters whom one fears for his injustice and tyranny, and one stands to ward off the harm, there is no objection. But we say, how do we stand intentionally? How do we stand as a recommendation when the Messenger (peace be upon him) disliked it? In fact, the matter reached with him what is more important than the dislike, which may appear to us to be a disliked act of lesser severity, in the hadith narrated by Imam Muslim and others from the hadith of Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari, that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed one day with his companions the midday prayer sitting, and the people prayed behind him standing, so he gestured to them to sit, and they did. When he finished the prayer, he said: .
The student: Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh : And upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah and His blessings. And from here, the stronger opinion among the jurists’ disagreement is that if the imam prays sitting, those behind him also pray sitting. Why? To remove the resemblance. Glory be to Allah! So removing the formal resemblance between these praying people behind their sitting imam, who is compelled, and the King of Persia and his followers, who sits by choice and even arrogance, and they stand behind him in reverence and magnification. How far the compared thing is from the thing it is compared to, despite that.
The student : In the approach of the night now.

The Shaykh : Did you see the sun set?
The student : I looked at the sun, yes.

The Shaykh : That’s it, it’s not clear with you, do you want to see the disk of the sun?

The questioner : I want to look at it from below, I look from below, it is clear...

The Shaykh : Okay. I want to say: ... the resemblance regarding the Master of mankind who prays to Allah sitting, and the tyrant of Persia who sits... and the Companions who pray behind him, how far they are from imitating the people of Persia, standing on the heads of their kings, despite that... behind the wise Lawgiver except to the appearance, the important thing in the subject is that... the prayer of the praying people behind the imam by invalidating only this image, how... the one entering, let him be a scholar, let him be a righteous person... I cannot say that this image is disliked and that’s it.