Suhaib Webb – Usul alFiqh ThirtyNine Imam alHarmain’s Waraqat The Actions of the Prophet (Approvals)
AI: Summary ©
The speaker discusses the actions of the messenger of Allah, which includes affirming statements and affirming actions. The actions are related to the actions of the messenger of Allah, and the speaker explains that these actions are not part of the discussion. The speaker also discusses the importance of the actions of the messenger of Allah, including affirming actions and clarifying actions, and mentions the importance of the actions of the messenger of Allah in modern times.
AI: Summary ©
Welcome back to our explanation of Al Warakat.
We're still on the section of the actions
of the Messenger of Allah. So
we talked about
earlier all the things we talked about related
to am, has, mutlakum, all
that falls under his statements.
So now he's like transitioned into his actions
and we said
That takes us now to
the second,
sort of,
component of these actions and that
is means to affirm something.
But here it means for him to affirm
it without saying anything. So
Sayedna Imam Al Al Haramain says,
this actually is
a
So when the Prophet
affirms
the statement of a person is like it's
his statement when he affirms the action of
a person Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam it's like his
action
that the, you know, affirming
the action or statement of a person.
And it's like his statement.
And his affirming the action of a person
is like his action.
So therefore it's going to have a designation,
it's going to have a ruling. That's why
it's here.
Because the prophet is protected.
Means Allah has protected him from doing anything
that will compromise
his role as a prophet. Sallallahu alaihi wa
sallam. We know the ulama differ on this
opinion,
in like 3 different ways. Sheikh Al Marzuk
says,
right there, Ishmael the prophets are like angels.
Angels didn't disobey Allah, so the prophet didn't
disobey Allah.
That's a minority opinion, by the way. Others
say that they fell into small mistakes
that were not sinful. Some some scholars say
they fell into minor sins, which don't fall
under like alhurma.
This is not part of our discussion here,
but just to put it in your mind,
you can take the class with me.
I talk about it there.
But he says,
the word 'asam means to protect. Ma'asam is
like a fortress.
Allah says, will protect
you from the people. So Ma'asum,
pay attention here is is a mafrool mean
Osama whom Allahu Azwajal.
Allah has protected them. They are the object
of protection, meaning Allah has protected them.
Like Allah has protected him from ever approving
someone in a state of sin or evil.
An example of this is in here you
see, Iqra'ahu
Mustar
with a Mudaf
And then Mustar
yudaf ilafailihi.
So he says here ikura ruhu. Then say,
ikura
ruhu.
He
says, and if you pay attention to
because that can
act like a verb.
So when the prophet says an example, he
he affirmed what Abu Bakr did.
When when he when he,
when when when say the Kharabin Walid or
Adiallahu wanted to eat a bulb which is
like a lizard. The prophet, he didn't eat
it, but he he allowed him to eat
it. So it means it's permissible.
Here we take a an important axiom,
just because he didn't do it doesn't mean
that it's a proof. It's forbidden. Sometimes people
say, well, the prophet didn't do it. The
prophet didn't do it. The prophet didn't do
it. And we see 2 extremes in this.
One would be in the the middle, and
he everything that the prophet
didn't do is not is not bidah. Everything
that the prophet didn't do also not something
we should do. So you find sometimes the,
you know, the our Sufi brothers and sisters,
and sometimes salafiyah, they they this is a
hot topic. In the future, we'll have a
section on this. We plan to sort of
what's the balance here? But said, Khaled, he
ate a bub,
and we know that the sahaba, they said,
has it been made Haram, You Rasulullah. I
said, no. She's not from where I'm from.
I'm not I'm not familiar with this kind
of food. Also,
evidence for orphan fatwa, for those of you
interested for custom and fatwa. But the point
is, even though he didn't eat it, he
approved aided by his silence.
So
sometimes him not doing something itself
is is not a proof that the thing
is forbidden.
And what was done during his time, although
it wasn't in in his presence,
didn't happen in front of him, sallallahu alaihi
wa sallam. And then he knew about it.
It's another axiom, so we took now 2
axioms.
And what he affirms that was done
outside of his presence,
right, in his absence, but he later on
knew about it is like his own action.
Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam. Those three axioms are important.
Keep them here. So
it
says, what happened during his time?
His lifetime
that was not done in front of him.
He knows about it. What I'm doing Kiru.
Kahook me here.
Fahuk mu huka, hope moo mafu ilafimaj is
like what someone did in front of him.
Better way to phrase the axiom. Let me
rephrase it is
So what was done in his absence and
later on he knew about it and he
he didn't refute it is that what was
done in front of him. That's a better
way to say it.
So, sayin Abu Bakr, he took an oath
that he's not gonna eat while he's angry,
then later on he saw that that was
better, and he ate while he was angry
in the process of
He approved of that. It didn't happen in
front of the Messenger of Allah Sallallahu Alaihi
Wasallam. It happened in his absence.
As is taken from the hadith of imam
Muslim in the section on food. But, Alhamdulillah,
now we finished the actions of the messenger
of Allah, at least a brief discussion.
The chapter coming next is one that, unfortunately,
especially in these modern times, we see,
some sloppiness and some,
hostilities,
but it's a very important component of our
Sharia.
Very important point of our usul. And we
wanna present that, you know,
the the position of of the majority of
our jurors to on
abrogation.