Toggle above to switch between keyword search and direct hadith lookup
سنن نسائي
Nasai
كتاب الأشربةThe Book of Drinks
بَابُ : مَا يَجُوزُ شُرْبُهُ مِنَ الْعَصِيرِ وَمَا لاَ يَجُوزُChapter: What Kind of Juices are Permissible to Drink and What Kinds are Not
Hadith 5733
اُردوEn
أَخْبَرَنَا سُوَيْدُ , قَالَ : أَنْبَأَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ , عَنْ ابْنِ جُرَيْجٍ قِرَاءَةً , أَخْبَرَنِي عَطَاءٌ , قَالَ : سَمِعْتُ ابْنَ عَبَّاسٍ , يَقُولُ : " وَاللَّهِ , مَا تُحِلُّ النَّارُ شَيْئًا وَلَا تُحَرِّمُهُ " , قَالَ : ثُمَّ فَسَّرَ لِي قَوْلَهُ : لَا تُحِلُّ شَيْئًا لِقَوْلِهِمْ فِي الطِّلَاءِ وَلَا تُحَرِّمُهُ .
´'Ata' said:` "I heard Ibn 'Abbas say: 'By Allah, fire does not make anything permissible or forbidden.'" He said: "Then he explained what he meant by 'it does not make permissible' as referring to what they said about At-Tila' (thickened grape juice), and he explained what he said about 'it does not make forbidden' as referring to performing Wudu' after eating something that has been touched by fire."
Brief Explanation
1؎: That statement is: “Fire makes talā’ (ointment) lawful,” meaning: when two-thirds of the talā’ is burnt and one-third remains, then this final third is lawful.
2؎: This objection is as follows: if it is said that something was lawful before being cooked by fire and became unlawful after being cooked, then it would have to be accepted that fire itself makes something lawful or unlawful, whereas this is not the case. This explanation makes it clear that the phrase of «الوضوء مما مست النار» is a commentary on hadith number 5733 of «تتمہ», and not an independent chapter heading, as some people have assumed (this has been pointed out in the commentaries of Sindhi and Hashiyah Nizamiya; furthermore, if this phrase is considered an independent chapter, then the narrations mentioned therein (numbers 5734 to 5737) do not appear to have any connection with this chapter).
2؎: This objection is as follows: if it is said that something was lawful before being cooked by fire and became unlawful after being cooked, then it would have to be accepted that fire itself makes something lawful or unlawful, whereas this is not the case. This explanation makes it clear that the phrase of «الوضوء مما مست النار» is a commentary on hadith number 5733 of «تتمہ», and not an independent chapter heading, as some people have assumed (this has been pointed out in the commentaries of Sindhi and Hashiyah Nizamiya; furthermore, if this phrase is considered an independent chapter, then the narrations mentioned therein (numbers 5734 to 5737) do not appear to have any connection with this chapter).
Explanation & Benefits
Hafiz Muhammad Ameen
Urdu marginal note:
"It also cannot make it unlawful"—that is, merely being cooked on fire does not render something unlawful, except if it contains an intoxicant or was already unlawful beforehand. For example, if a lawful (halal) thing is cooked on fire, eating it will not break ablution (wudu); rather, the lawful thing will remain lawful, and the ablution will also remain valid.
"It also cannot make it unlawful"—that is, merely being cooked on fire does not render something unlawful, except if it contains an intoxicant or was already unlawful beforehand. For example, if a lawful (halal) thing is cooked on fire, eating it will not break ablution (wudu); rather, the lawful thing will remain lawful, and the ablution will also remain valid.
Source: Sunan Nasa'i: Translation and Benefits by Shaykh Hafiz Muhammad Amin Hafizullah, Page: 5733
