General Dought & clear, - * Reasons for the difference of opinion among the fuqaha’ about reciting behind the imam

Share ::-

*AS'SALAMU ALAIKUM (WR, WB)*
-
Friday - Feb- - 24 -2017
-
Jamathul Avval - - 26- -1438
-
* JUMMA MUBARAK! *
-:-

♣
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
♣
I have read your answer to the question "reciting surah fatiha behind the imam" but i have a confusion in it.
What Ive heard is that imam Maalik lived his life in madinah and learnt religion from there, then why does he suggest that surah fatiha should not be recited when imam recites out loud?
He was born in 93 AH and was the closest in all the imam such as imam Shafi and imam Hunbal to the time of Prophet (peace and mercy be upon him). Then why is there a difference in his teachings and the teachings of the others?
A similar difference is on keeping the hands by ones sides while qiyaam.
Please explain and if possible please give references from mauta imam malik as well.
I understand that imam abu hanifa was the closest to the time of Prophet (peace and mercy be upon him) but since he was in iraq his teachings are different in many matters. But is this true that his students corrected many hhadees when they came to madinah? Like I've heard that one of his students Abu Abdullah corrected nearly 3000 ahadees he learnt from imam abu hanifa when he came to Madinah.
-
Praise be to Allah
Firstly:
Reciting al-Faatihah behind the imam in a prayer in which recitation is done out loud is a matter that is subject to ijtihad. What each imam said concerning it is the conclusion to which his ijtihad led him. We mentioned the evidence supporting the view that it is obligatory to recite it, and the evidence quoted by those scholars who disallowed that. Please see the answers to questions no. 66742and 10995.
You may also refer to the books of the Maalikis for more information concerning that.
Secondly:
The matter has nothing to do with Imam Maalik (may Allah have mercy on him) having lived in Madinah or having lived close to the time of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). This could be relevant with regard to the issue of whether the hadith reached him or not, but the deciding factor in this issue mostly has to do with the scholars examining and understanding the relevant text. Inal-Muwatta’(193), Imam Maalik quoted as evidence the hadith of Abu Hurayrah, according to which the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) completed a prayer in which he recited out loud, then he said: “Was one of you reciting with me just now?” A man said: Yes, O Messenger of Allah. He said: “I was saying to myself, what is wrong with me that someone is fighting to wrest the Qur’an from me?” So the people stopped reciting with the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in prayers in which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) recited out loud, when they heard that from the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him).
This indicates that he thought that reciting (behind the imam in a prayer in which recitation is done out loud) was initially allowed, then it was prohibited.
Among contemporary scholars, a similar view was held by Shaykh al-Albaani (may Allah have mercy on him), who thought that reciting behind the imam in a prayer in which recitation is done out loud was abrogated. We responded to the claims that it was abrogated and explained that the words “So the people stopped reciting…” were not the words of Abu Hurayrah; rather they are the words of Ibn Shihaab az-Zuhri, so they cannot be quoted as evidence. Please see the answer to question no. 231217.
Maalik (may Allah have mercy on him) quoted as evidence the command (in the Qur’an) to listen attentively when the Quran is recited, this hadith, and the practice of the people of Medina.
Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) said: How could anyone suggest anything that is different from the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), the clear meaning of the Book of Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, and the practice of the people of Medina? Do you not see what Ibn Shihaab said: So the people stopped reciting with the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in prayers in which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) recited out loud, when they heard him say, “what is wrong with me that someone is fighting to wrest the Qur’an from me”?
Maalik said: In our view, no one should recite with the imam in a prayer in which recitation is done out loud. So this indicates that this was an inherited practice in Medina.
End quote fromat-Tamheed, 11/34
Al-Baaji said: The words “So the people stopped reciting with the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in prayers in which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) recited out loud, when they heard that” mean: They responded to his objection to their reciting the Quran in prayers in which the imam recites out loud by giving up what he told them not to do and by refraining from what he objected to them doing. This hadith is the foundation of the view of Maalik (may Allah have mercy on him), that the one who is praying behind an imam should not recite behind him in a prayer in which recitation is done out loud, because of the reason explained in the hadith for which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) told people behind him not to recite when he was reciting out loud. So it seems that reciting out loud was the reason for that ruling.
The evidence for the soundness of Maalik’s view is the verse in which Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
“So, when the Quran is recited, listen to it, and be silent”
[al-A‘raaf 7:204].
This implies that all types of recitation and all types of talk are disallowed (when Quran is recited), and everyone should listen attentively when any reciter is reciting, unless there is any evidence for some exception.
Our evidence from the Sunnah is the report narrated by Abu Saalih from Abu Hurayrah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “The imam is only appointed to be followed. So when he says takbeer, then say takbeer, and when he recites then listen attentively.” This is a command, and a command implies that something is obligatory.
Our evidence on the basis of analogy is that this is a case where others are following the imam, therefore the recitation is waived in the case of one who is following the imam.
End quote fromal-Muntaqa Sharh al-Muwatta’(1/161)
Our aim here is not to discuss all the views on this issue; rather our aim is to explain that Maalik and other leading scholars reached their conclusions after examining the religious texts; thus it became clear to them that a specific view was the correct view, while other scholars thought that another view was the correct view.
Ash-Shaafa‘i was of the view that it is obligatory for the one who is praying behind an imam to recite in all cases. Think about it. The hadith of Abu Hurayrah tells us that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “what is wrong with me that someone is fighting to wrest the Qur’an from me?” And in the hadith of ‘Ubaadah ibn as-Saamit, it says: We were behind the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in Fajr prayer, and the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) recited Qur’an and stumbled in his recitation. When he finished he said, “Perhaps you recite behind your imam?” We said, Yes. He said, “Do not do that, except for the Opening of the Book (al-Faaithah), for there is no prayer for the one who does not recite it.” Narrated by Abu Dawood (823).
This clearly indicates that it is not allowed to recite behind the imam in a prayer in which recitation is done out loud, except for al-Faatihah; it is excluded from the general instruction to listen attentively, because of the general meaning of the Prophet’s words: ““Whoever offers a prayer in which he does not recite the Essence of the Qur’an (al-Faatihah), it is deficient,” three times, “not complete.” Narrated by Muslim (395).
As for the practice of the people of Medina, that is subject to further discussion. Many of the Sahaabah in Madinah narrated that they recited behind the imam. An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The practice of the majority of the Muslims is to recite behind the imam in prayers in which recitation is done silently and those in which recitation is done out loud. Al-Bayhaqi said: This is the most sound and prudent view. Then he narrated the hadiths about that, then he narrated that with numerous isnaads from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab, ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib, ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ood, Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, Mu‘aadh ibn Jabal, Ibn ‘Umar, Ibn ‘Abbaas, Abu’d-Darda’, Anas ibn Maalik, Jaabir ibn ‘Abdillah, Abu Sa‘eed al-Khudri, ‘Ubaadah ibn as-Saamit, Abu Hurayrah, Hishaam ibn ‘Aamir, ‘Imraan, ‘Abdullah ibn Mughaffil, and ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with them all). He said: We narrated it from a number of the Taabi‘een. And he narrated it from ‘Urwah ibn az-Zubayr, Mak-hool, ash-Shu‘bi, Sa‘eed ibn Jubayr and al-Hasan al-Basri (may Allah have mercy on them).
End quote fromal-Majmoo‘(3/365)
Thirdly:
What was said about this issue may be said about other controversial issues, such as holding the hands (on the chest) when standing in prayer. Indeed there is a report from Maalik which suggests that his view is the same as that of the majority.
Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar said: Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said: There is no report from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) contrary to that, and it is the view of the majority of the Sahaabah and Taabi‘een. This is what Maalik narrated inal- Muwatta’, and Ibn al-Mundhir and others never narrated anything other than that from Maalik.
Ibn al-Qaasim narrated from Maalik that he used to hold his arms by his sides (when praying), and most of his followers adopted that view.
And it was narrated from Maalik that he differentiated between obligatory and naafil prayers (regarding the position of the hands when praying).
Some of them regarded it as disliked to hold the hands on the chest (when praying). Ibn al-Haajib narrated that this refers to when the worshipper holds his hands and leans on them in order to rest.
End quote fromFath al-Baari, 2/224
Fourthly:
Imam Abu Haneefah (may Allah have mercy on him) was one of the foremost scholars, and in terms of fiqh the scholars depend on his knowledge, as ash-Shaafa‘i (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
He had the utmost respect for the Qur’an and Sunnah, and did not say anything except on the basis of the conclusion he reached after examining the religious texts. So he will receive either a double or single reward (depending on whether his ijtihad was correct or not – the scholar is rewarded for his effort even if his conclusion is mistaken), in sha Allah. Perhaps he missed out on some reports of the Sunnah because he lived far away from Madinah; hence his two companions and his students may have differed from him regarding some issues, if they found out about some report of the Sunnah that did not reach him, and they may have differed from him when their examining of the religious texts led them to a conclusion different to his. We have not come across what you mentioned about one of his students regarding as saheeh the number of hadiths mentioned, etc.
Our advice to you is to seek knowledge, and do not be distracted by differences of opinion among the leading scholars, for all of them are mujtahids who will be rewarded. Examining differences of opinion and the evidence on which views are based can only come after one has become well-versed in knowledge and attained a great deal of knowledge and prominence in many fields, such as Arabic language and usool al-fiqh.
We ask Allah to bless and guide us and you.
And Allah knows best.

PUBLISHERM.NajimudeeN. MD,IRI

Belief, Dought & clear,- * The difference between mu‘jizah, karaamah (two types of miracles) and witchcraft

Share ::-

What is mu‘jizah, and what is the difference between it and karaamah on the one hand, and between it and witchcraft on the other?.
-
Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly:
The mu‘jizah (miracle) is the extraordinary sign with which Allah supports His Prophets and Messengers, and challenges people. The karaamah is something extraordinary that Allah causes to happen at the hand of one of His close friends. There are many differences between the mu‘jizah and the karaamah, including the following:
1. The mu‘jizah is meant to be done openly and be seen and known by many people, and the one for whom it is done (the Prophet) is enjoined to show it openly, whereas the karaamah is based on concealment and the one for whom it is done (the wali or close friend of Allah) is enjoined to conceal it.
2. The mu‘jizah may be accompanied by a challenge and claim of Prophethood, whereas the karaamah is not accompanied by any challenge or any claim of virtue or high status before Allah.
3. The fruits of the mu‘jizah bring benefits to others, whereas the karaamah usually only benefits the one to whom it is given.
4. The mu‘jizah may be any extraordinary event; the karaamah can only be of a few types.
5. The mu‘jizah is only for the Prophets, whereas the karaamah is for the close friends of Allah.
6. The Prophets use their miracles (mu‘jizah) to establish proof against the mushrikeen, because their hearts are hard; the close friends of Allah (awliya’) use the karaamah to establish proof for themselves so that they will have peace of mind and certainty of faith, and will not be worried or anxious.
Quoted from a Master’s thesis entitledal-Wilaayah wa’l-Karaamah fi’l-‘Aqeedah al-Islamiyyahby Muhammad Khayr al-‘Umari.
There are also a number of other differences between the mu‘jizah and witchcraft, including the following:
1. The mu‘jizah is something extraordinary, i.e., it occurs contrary to the laws of nature and comes from Allah, may He be exalted. As for witchcraft, it occurs according to laws that the practitioner of witchcraft may learn.
2. The mu‘jizah results in nothing but good, whereas no good can come from witchcraft.
3. The mu‘jizah cannot be cancelled out, whereas witchcraft can be cancelled out or undone. It is well known that witchcraft can only be done by seeking the help of the devils and drawing close to them.
End quote from Dr. Ahmad al-‘Awaayishah,Muhaadaraat bi’th-Thaqaafah al-Islamiyyah, p. 174
4. The mu‘jizah occurs at the hand of the Prophet, who is the best of people in knowledge, deeds and attitude, whereas witchcraft occurs at the hands of the practitioner of witchcraft, who is the worst of people in knowledge, deeds and attitude – people are put off by him and those who keep company with him.
5. There is no cause for the mu‘jizah, hence no one other than the Prophet can do anything like it. As for witchcraft, it has causes that are well-known, which are incantations that are spoken or written, and he makes use of the jinn in doing it. Anyone who learns that and does it will get what he wants from witchcraft. In the case of the mu‘jizah, it cannot be obtained by learning and experience.
See:al-Furooqby al-Quraafi, 8/116
There follow some of the comments of the scholars on the differences between mu‘jizah, karaamah and witchcraft.
Al-‘Allaamah as-Sa‘di (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
The difference between the mu‘jizah and karaamah, and devilish extraordinary things that happen at the hands of magicians and charlatans is as follows:
The mu‘jizah is that which Allah causes to happen at the hands of the Messengers and Prophets of extraordinary events with which they challenge the people, so that they will believe in the message with which Allah sent them and by means of which He supported them, such as the splitting of the moon and the sending down of the Qur’aan, which is the greatest mu‘jizah ever bestowed upon a Messenger, as well as the grieving of the palm tree stump (which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) used as a minbar until a minbar was built for him), the springing up of water from between his fingers, and many other miracles.
The karaamah is an extraordinary event that Allah causes to occur at the hands of His believing close friends (awliya’), such as knowledge, power, and so on, and such as the shade that used to come upon Usayd ibn al-Hudayr when he recited Qur’aan, and the shining of light for ‘Abbaas ibn Bishr and Usayd ibn Hudayr when they left the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and when they separated there was light for each of them at the end of his whip.
In order for it to be regarded as a karaamah, it is stipulated that the one at whose hand this miracle occurs should be adhering strictly to Islam and following sharee‘ah. If that is not the case, then these extraordinary things happen are the result of devilish work. Moreover, it should be noted that the fact that karaamah does not happen for some Muslims does not mean that they are lacking in faith, because karaamah only happens for certain reasons, such as the following:
- To strengthen the person’s faith and make him steadfast. Hence many of the Sahaabah did not see any karaamah, because of the strength and absolute certainty of their faith.
- To establish proof against the enemy, as happened to Khaalid when he ate poison. He was besieging a fortress and they refused to yield until he ate the poison, so he ate it and then he conquered the fortress. A similar thing happened to Abu Idrees al-Khawlaani when he was met by al-Aswad al-‘Ansi in the fire and Allah saved him from that, because he needed that karaamah. We see something similar in the story of Umm Ayman when she set out to migrate to Madinah (Hijrah) and became extremely thirsty. She heard a sound above her and lifted her head, and she saw a bucket of water; she drank from it then it was taken away again.
The karaamah may be a test or trial; some people may be blessed by it and others may be doomed as a result. The one at whose hands it happens may be blessed if he gives thanks for it, or he may be doomed if he is filled with self-admiration and does not adhere to righteousness.
End quote fromat-Tanbeehaat al-Lateefah fima Ahtawiyat ‘alayhi al-Waasitiyyah min al-Mabaahith al-Muneefah, p. 107
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked:
How can we differentiate between mu‘jizah, karaamah and kahaanah (sorcery)?
He replied:
The mu‘jizah is for the Prophets, the karaamah is for the close friends of Allah, the awliya’ of ar-Rahmaan, and kahaanah is for the close friends of the Shaytaan (awliya’ ash-shaytaan).
Nowadays it is impossible for a mu‘jizah to occur, because the Messenger (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was the last of the Prophets. Karaamah happened at the time of the Messenger and may occur after his time, until the Day of Resurrection; it may occur at the hands of a righteous close friend of Allah (wali). If we know that the man at whose hand a karaamah occurred is a righteous man who fulfils his duties towards Allah and towards His slaves, then we know that it is indeed a karaamah.
We should look at the man -- if this “miracle” comes from a kaahin (soothsayer) -- i.e., a man who is not righteous -- then we know that it comes from the devils; the devils sometimes help the sons of Adam to achieve what they want.
End quote fromLiqaa’aat al-Baab al-Maftooh(no. 84; question no. 8)
And Allah knows best.

PUBLISHERM.NajimudeeN. MD,IRI

Belief, Dought & clear,- * If the angels do not approach the dead body of a kaafir, then how can he be questioned in the grave?

Share ::-

In one of your Fatwas, you stated the following hadith:
“The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “There are three things which the angels do not approach: the dead body of a kaafir, a man who has perfumed himself with saffron (because this is frivolous and foolish behaviour, and is an imitation of women – Qayd al-Qadeer, 3/325), and a person who is junub, until he does ghusl.” (Narrated by Abu Dawood, 4180; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood, 3522” I shared your fatwas with others to depict the importance of Ghusl, but someone asked me back that “if the angels do not approach the dead body of a kaafir, then how will he/she be questioned in graves by the angels??? And if a man/woman is in junub and its time for him/her to die, wont the angel of death approach him/her???” Can you please clarify the issue. I am sure there is a context in which this hadith is to be taken and there is an explanation for it.
-
Praise be to Allaah.
Abu Dawood (4180) narrated from ‘Ammaar ibn Yaasir (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “There are three whom the angels do not come near: the dead body of a kaafir, a man who smears himself with khalooq and a person who is junub, unless he does wudoo’.”
Classed as hasan by al-Albaani inSaheeh Abi Dawood
What is meant in the hadeeth is that the angels of mercy do not approach these people to bring down a blessing or mercy to them, because they are not deserving of this bounty. What is intended is to put people off their actions and the state they are in, which is a state that deserves the angels of mercy to keep away from them. This is supported by al-Bayhaqi’s version of this hadeeth in hisSunan(9241), in which it says: “There are three whom the angels do not approach with anything good…”
It was also narrated by at-Tabaraani; in his version it says, “The angels do not approach the bier of the kaafir with anything good, or one who is junub until he does ghusl or does wudoo’ as for prayer, or one who has smeared himself with sufrah (a kind of perfume).”
Fath al-Baariby Ibn Rajab, 1/360
It may be understood from the phrase “with anything good” in these two reports that what is meant is the angels of mercy whose coming signals good.
As for the angels of death and the recording angels, they are not included in this hadeeth; neither are the angels of punishment and the angels who question the person in his grave, and so on. They are not included in this hadeeth.
Al-Mannaawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“There are three whom the angels do not come near” – this refers to the angels who bring down blessing and mercy, and those who go around among the people to visit and listen to dhikr, and the like, not the recording angels who do not leave those who are accountable for even an instant in all their situations, good and bad.“Not a word does he (or she) utter, but there is a watcher by him ready (to record it)” [Qaaf 50:18].
End quote fromFayd al-Qadeer, 3/428. see alsoMirqaat al-Mafaateeh, 2/384
Al-Khattaabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his commentary on the hadeeth, “The angels do not enter a house in which there is an image or a dog or a person who is junub” – which is a da‘eef hadeeth:
The words “The angels do not enter a house…” refers to the angels who bring down blessing and mercy, not the angels who record people’s deeds, for they do not leave a person whether he is junub or otherwise.
End quote fromMa‘aalim as-Sunan, 1/75. al-Baghawi stated something similar inSharh as-Sunnah, 2/37
Al-Bukhaari (3322) and Muslim (2106) narrated from Abu Talhah that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “The angels do not enter a house in which there is a dog or an image.”
An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
The scholars said: The reason why they refuse to enter a house in which there is an image is the fact that it is a grievous sin and is competing with the creation of Allah, may He be exalted. And some images represent that which is worshipped instead of Allah, may He be exalted. The reason why they refuse to enter a house in which there is a dog is that dogs frequently eat impure things. And the one who keeps a dog is punished by being deprived of the angels entering his house, praying in it, asking Allah for forgiveness for him, bringing blessing to him and his household, and warding off the harm of the Shaytaan from him. As for those angels who do not enter a house in which there is a dog or an image, they are the angels who go around bringing mercy, blessing and prayers for forgiveness. As for the recording angels, they enter every house and they do not leave the sons of Adam under any circumstances, because they have been commanded to count and record their deeds.
End quote fromSharh Muslim, 7/207
Thus it becomes clear that there is no confusion in the hadeeth, if we understand it in accordance with what the scholars have stated in their commentaries on it, that the hadeeth speaks of a kind of punishment for the one who does that, in that the angels of mercy and blessing avoid the places where he is.
All of this is based on the assumption that the hadeeth is proven and saheeh. This is the view favoured by Shaykh al-Albaani (may Allah have mercy on him) and it is on this that the answer mentioned on the site previously is based.
But given that more than one of the scholars have ruled that the hadeeth is da‘eef (weak) in its chain of narration, because there is an interruption between the Sahaabi, ‘Ammaar ibn Yaasir (may Allah be pleased with him), and the one who narrated it from him, Yahya ibn Ya‘mar, because he did not hear directly from him, then in that case there is no reason for this confusion.
See:Musnad al-Imam Ahmad, ar-Risaalah edition, 31/182;an-Naafilahby Shaykh Abu Ishaaq al-Huwayni, no. 149
And Allah knows best.

PUBLISHERM.NajimudeeN. MD,IRI