Recordings › Monday Nights with Mufti #199 | Q&A Unscripted & Unrestricted! 😉 | Mufti Abu Layth · 26 Jan 2021 › Segment 10 of 36
If the Prophet couldn't forbid what Allah allowed, how can scholars issue fatwas?
fiqh fiqah fikh hadeeth ahadith ahaadeeth hadis hadees ahaadith fatwah fatawa fatwaa fataawa legal opinion muftis hukm ahkam hukum hukam ahkaam halaal permitted haraam forbidden mubah mubaah jahannam jahanam jahannum koran quraan al-quran sura soorah surat suwar soora chapter ayah aya ayat ayaat aayah aayat ulema ulamaaQuran 66:1, forbidding what Allah made lawful, and the law of defaults
Play from 41:12
The video loads from YouTube only when you press play. Click a time in the transcript to seek.
Watch the answer
Open on YouTube at 41:12The player starts at 41:12, where the answer begins.
This segment41:12 to 45:11 · 3 min 59 sGeneral teaching
The answer in brief
machinesummary, machine-writtenThe verse rebukes the Prophet for forbidding himself something permissible to please others, not for legislating; things are permissible by default, so declaring something haram is a weighty step.
In more detail
A questioner asks, setting aside the hadith about it, how the ulama justify jurisprudence and fatwas if 66:1 shows that even the Messenger may not declare things impermissible. Mufti Abu Layth says the verse does not say the ruling changed, since the Prophet is a legislator: it addresses him for forbidding himself something permissible in order to console and please others, not for changing a ruling. He adds that halal becoming haram is not the same as haram becoming halal, because things are permissible by a powerful law of defaults, called istishab [?] especially among the Malikis, akin to innocent until proven guilty: everything is halal until proven haram, so making something haram is a big call. By contrast, he says, prohibitions are made for a reason, and if the reason disappears the ruling disappears.
Question as read aloud · questioner not identifiedRegarding Quran 66:1, 'why do you prohibit what Allah has made lawful for you', setting the hadith about it aside: if the Messenger himself is not allowed to declare things haram, how did the ulama justify jurisprudence and fatwas?
- Some terms in this segment are uncertain
Position stated
Mufti Abu Layth says 66:1 addresses the Prophet for forbidding himself something permissible to console others, not for legislating, and that because everything is permissible by default, declaring something haram is a weighty matter, while a prohibition lapses when its reason disappears.
“you see things are permissible by default making them haram is is a big call okay”
Category: method
Kind: general teachingTranscript
machine41:12 to 45:11 · click a time to seek · dotted terms open the glossary
ah go on then what the hell do it man just do it man just do it not like your salah's gonna be accepted anyway uh i'm messing or am i [Laughter] ah don't worry about it do you see a mom if you need to do them you can do it look it's in the quran tiemoue is there as well okay so if you have an excuse it's your excuse to judge nobody else to judge you it's your call um somebody said
can you explain [Music] we'll come back to that regarding quran surah 66 verse 1 why'd you prohibit yourself from allah is made lawful
still got it let's take the hadith about this aside if the messenger himself is not allowed to declare things haram or impermissible then how did the ulimus justify jewish prudence and fatwa you see the verse doesn't say because the prophet himself we believe is a legislator the verse doesn't say that you felt the ruling changed it says
that what you turn what's permissible into impermissible tabtari mardata that you it's not because of the ruling that you're saying this to make them to kind of console them and it's telling the prophet about that that you know this otherwise if it comes to if it's about the actual ruling changing then the ruling would have changed if the prophet feels but here the whole point is that the prophet isn't changing the ruling and it's not about the actual
thing the question at hand it's more about just trying to console someone and that's what it is and you see the other thing as well there's a difference and i'd like to layer that with this statement there's a difference in when haram becomes halal and halal becoming haram because you see things being halal are by the law of defaults
and that is an incredibly powerful law so that's saying things like innocent till proven guilty and all of these things are an attachment of that things are always pure until they become impure or things are this law of defaults known as iste in the usual especially going to the malikia and others this is this you see things are permissible by default making them haram is is a big call okay whereas it's not the same the other way are certain things that are haram
you see things when they made haram they made haram for a reason that reason if it disappears the ruling disappears whereas things being halal are not halal foreign and everything on earth by default is always halal until proven haram so you see when it says about why do you prohibit something which is so securely based in in the law of defaults as halal that too not that you believe in it but just
in an attempt to console so that's the kind of lesson in that verse but i think that's a good a very good question multi you missed my super chat i meant large uh i'm trying to get to it let me see is is prophet shaib jethro now i'm not sure if
Paragraphs overlapping 41:12 to 45:11. Full text on the recording page.
Cite this segment
Stable id, transcript version and tier are part of the citation. Every change to a transcript is logged.Mufti Abu Layth Archive, segment 2021-01-26b-S10, auto-transcribed, may contain errors. https://muftiabulayth.org/r/eokcnwggiba/s/10/ (accessed 1 November 2026)
- APA 7
Mufti Abu Layth. (2021, January 26). If the Prophet couldn't forbid what Allah allowed, how can scholars issue fatwas? [Video, segment 2021-01-26b-S10, auto-transcribed, may contain errors]. Mufti Abu Layth Archive. Retrieved November 1, 2026, from https://muftiabulayth.org/r/eokcnwggiba/s/10/
- Chicago author-date
Mufti Abu Layth. 2021. "If the Prophet couldn't forbid what Allah allowed, how can scholars issue fatwas?" Video, segment 2021-01-26b-S10, auto-transcribed, may contain errors. Mufti Abu Layth Archive. Recorded January 26, 2021. Accessed November 1, 2026. https://muftiabulayth.org/r/eokcnwggiba/s/10/
- BibTeX
@misc{abulayth-2021-01-26b-S10, author = {Mufti Abu Layth}, title = {{If the Prophet couldn't forbid what Allah allowed, how can scholars issue fatwas?}}, year = {2021}, month = {1}, date = {2021-01-26}, howpublished = {\url{https://muftiabulayth.org/r/eokcnwggiba/s/10/}}, url = {https://muftiabulayth.org/r/eokcnwggiba/s/10/}, organization = {Mufti Abu Layth Archive}, urldate = {2026-11-01}, note = {Segment 2021-01-26b-S10, auto-transcribed, may contain errors} }
Something wrong here?
Tell us what is wrong and it will be checked against the recording. Nothing changes until a person has reviewed it.
Sending a note needs JavaScript, which is off or unavailable in this browser. Nothing has been sent.
No name, email address or account is asked for or stored, and the inbox does not store your IP address. For rate limiting it keeps an unreadable fingerprint of your connection for 48 hours, and our database provider's own logs record connections as every website's do. Only your note, its kind, the page and the moment in the recording are kept, for review.