Nasīhatu Ahli Az-Zamān authored by Shaykh Mujaddid `Uthmān Dan Fodio rahimahullāh 31

🕌 *HALQAH SESSION*
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
الحمد لله رب العالمين
والصلاة والسلام على من بعث رحمة للعالمين
وعلى آله وصحبه ومن تبعهم بإحسان إلى يوم الدين
Assalāmu Alaykum Warahmatullāh Wabarakātuh
Honored brothers and sisters in the platform, you are welcome to this morning’s session of the Halqah
We took a break through Ramadān from the illustrious book _Nasīhatu Ahli Az-Zamān_ written by the Shaykh and Imām Uthmān Dan Fodio – rahimahullāh
We shall continue that this morning Allāh willing
We stopped at where the Shaykh said:
قلت: وعلى هذا فلا ننكر إنكار الحرام على من استرقهم وأولادهم وعيالهم وإن كان المشهور عدم جواز ذلك لأنه من المسائل التي اختلف العلماء في حكمها وإن كان ترك ذلك أفضل لكونه من باب الورع

_”I say: and based on this, we do not rebuke by way of impermissibility the one who takes them, their children and their wives as slaves even though what is official is the impermissibility of that. This is because it is of the matters about whose Ruling the ‘Ulamā differed. Even though its leaving is better for the fact that it is among the matters of scrupulousness.”_
Where he was explaining the difference of opinion of the Ulamā on matters that have occurred in his time. And we explained this, Alhamdulillāh
Then he said:
ومن أمثلة ما وقع في هذا الزمان من الأمور التي اختلف العلماء في حكمها أخذ أموال المسلمين المقيمين ببلد الحرب
The scenerio he means here is if a Muslim were to reside in a land of the Kuffār, and that is a land that is not ruled by the Laws of Islām, and majority of its inhabitants were not Muslims, and the Muslim Armies under its Amir waged war against them and won a victory over them and subdued them, and took the wealth of the people of that land as spoils of war, is the property of that Muslim, if it falls among the spoils considered a must return to the Muslim if he claims his property back?
He said:
وفي الزهرات الوردية: سئل الأجهوري عن جماعة المسلمين عند ملك كافر، ثم إن سلطان المسلمين غزاهم وأخذ منهم غنائم، ثم جاءوا فعرفوا أموالهم فهل لهم أخذها أم لا؟ فأجاب بقوله: مال المسلمين ببلد الحرب فيء فيكون من جملة مال بيت المال، ثم قال: وعليه فليس لمن وجد منهم من ماله أخذه بحال. انتهى
_”And it was mentioned in Az-Zaharāt Al-Wirdiyyah: Al-Ujhūrī was asked concerning a congregation of Muslims who reside under the suzerainty of a Kāfir king, who were waged war upon by a Muslim leader and spoils were taken from them. Then they came to claim their wealth, are they entitled to take it? He then responded by saying: the wealth if the Muslims that reside in the Abode of War (Bilādu Al-Harb) is a _Fay’_ (Spoil) and is therefore a part of the wealth in the Baytu Al-Māl._
_Then he said: and based on that, it is not sanctioned for any of such Muslims to lay claim to recovering his wealth by any means”_
وفي المعيار، قال الأشهب وسحنون: إن هذا المال لا يجوز لعموم قوله عليه السلام
((لا يحل مال امرئ مسلم إلا عن طيب نفس منه))
وفيه أيضا في محل آخر: وللمتأخرين خلاف في استباحة أموالهم على أن حكمها حكم الدار أو احترامها بحرمة الإسلام، والأول هو الصحيح. انتهى
_And it was mentioned in the Mi’iyār: Al-Ash’hab and Suhnūn said:_
_”Indeed, it is not permissible to take this wealth due to the general implication of the one upon whom is Peace:_
_”It is not permissible to take the wealth of a Muslim except with a free mind from him”_
_And in it also (the Mi’iyār) in another page: and the later people differed on the permissibility of their wealth, they said that its ruling is the ruling of the land, or that its ruling follows the ruling of the sanctity of Islām. And the earlier position (we have stated) is the Sound one.”_
Then he said:
قلت: وعلى هذا فلا ننكر إنكار الحرام على من أخذ أموالهم وأكلها وإن كان الورع ترك ذلك لأنه من المسائل التي اختلف العلماء في حكمها
_”I say: and based on this, we do not rebuke, the rebuke of Harām, the one that seizes their wealth and consumes it even though what scrupulousness calls for is to abandon that because this is a matter about whose ruling the Ulamā have differed”_
As for Al-Ujhūrī and his Fatwah Masterpiece, the _Zaharātu Al-Wirdiyyah_, then we have referred to them earlier. Same goes to the Mi’iyār, Imām Suhnūn and Al-Ash’hab, Rahimahumullāh
The matter being discussed here is whether such wealth is attributed to the owner, who is a Muslim, or it is attributed to the state, which is a kufr state that warred with the Muslims until it was subdued by the Muslims
The Ulamā that attributed the wealth to the state by virtue of the fact that it fell as a spoil during the course of the war referred to it as a part of the spoil without recourse to the person who owned it. It is therefore of the generality of the wealth found in the land of the Kuffār
Whereas those that attributed it to the respective owners held that since it was found to be owned by a Muslim, it must be returned accordingly
I say, and Allāh knows best, the later opinion is what is supported by proof and sound in accordance with the goals of the Sharī’a of Islām
It is authentic in the Hadīth recorded by Imām Ahmad and others from ‘Amr Ibn Yarthī – radiyallāhu ‘anhu – that the Rasūl – salallāhu alayhi wasallam – said:
لا يحل مال امرئ مسلم إلا بطيب نفس منه
_”It is not permissible to take the wealth of a Muslim except with a free mind from him”_
And the Hadīth from Abū Hurayrah that the Rasūl – salallāhu alayhi wasallam – said:
كل المسلم على المسلم حرام، دمه , وماله , وعرضه
_”All of a Muslim to another Muslim is Harām: his blood, his wealth and his honour”_
Likewise, the Ulamā have agreed that whenever Harām and Halāl meet in one matter, precedence is given to the Harām
Imām Al-Asyūtī – rahimahullāh – mentioned in _Al-Ashbāh Wa An-Nadhā’ir_
_”Whenever Halāl and Harām come together in a matter, Harām is preponderant”_
It is mentioned in _Al-Manthūr Fī Al-Qawā’id_ from Az-Zarkashī, he said:
إذا اختلط الحلال بالحرام، وجب اجتناب الحلال، موضعه في الحلال المباح، أما إذا اختلط الواجب بالمحرم، روعيت مصلحة الواجب
_”Whenever Halāl mixes with Harām, it becomes obligatory to avoid that which is Halāl because its position as Halāl is permissibility but when an Obligation (Wājib) intersects with Harām, preponderance is accorded to the interest of the Wājib”_
This is known to the Students of Fiqh, Alhamdulillāh
That said, there is no strength to the position espoused by Al-Ujhūrī as quoted in the _Zaharāt_ referred by the Shaykh, and Allāh knows best
We shall stop here for the week inshā Allāh to continue next week
Bārakallāhu fīkum
اللهم اجعلنا من الذين جازوا ديار الظالمين، واستوحشوا من مؤانسة الجاهلين، وشابوا ثمرة العمل بنور الإخلاص، واستقوا من عين الحكمة، وركبوا سفينة الفطنة، وأقلعوا بريح اليقين، ولججوا في بحر النجاة، ورسوا بشط الإخلاص.
اللهم اجعلنا من الذين سرحت أرواحهم في العلا، وحطت همم قلوبهم في عاريات التقى، حتى أناخوا في رياض النعيم، وجنوا من رياض ثمار التسنيم، وخاضوا لجة السرور، وشربوا بكأس العيش، واستظلوا تحت العرش في الكرام
سبحانك اللهم وبحمد نستغفرك ونتوب إليك
Āmīn
Assalāmu Alaykum Warahmatullāh Wabarakātuh

10th Shawwal 1439H
(24/06/2018)
📮 *IslamNode*
🌿🌿🌿🌿🌿🌿🌿🌿🌿