Friday Prayers - There is no regular Sunnah prayer before Jumu’ah

Is there any Sunnah prayer before or after Jumu’ah? Praise be to Allaah. There is no regular Sunnah prayer before Jumu’ah according to the more correct of the two scholarly opinions, but it prescribed for the Muslim, when he comes to the mosque, to pray whatever Allaah enables him to pray, saying salaam after each two rak’ahs, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The prayers of the night and the day [i.e., other than the obligatory prayers] are two by two.” (Narrated by Imaam Ahmad and the authors of Sunan with a hasan isnaad; the original is to be found in al-Saheeh without any mention of the day.)  And many saheeh reports indicate that what is prescribed for the Muslim when he comes to the mosque on Friday is to pray whatever Allaah wills he should pray before the imaam comes out. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not specify whether it should be two or four or more. All of that is good, but the minimum is two rak’ahs to “greet the mosque.”   With regard to after Jumu’ah, there is a regular Sunnah prayer, the minimum of which is two rak’ahs and the maximum is four, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “Whoever among you prays after Jumu’ah, let him pray four (rak’ahs)” (narrated by Muslim, al-Jumu’ah, 8881). And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to pray two rak’ahs after Jumu’ah in his house. May Allaah help us all to do that which pleases Him. 

Frid to perform the twelve rak‘ahs (regular Sunnah prayers) on Friday?

How is the hadeeth, “Whoever prays to Allah twelve rak‘ahs in a day and night, a house will be built for him in Paradise”, to be implemented on Friday, as there is no Sunnah prayer before Jumu‘ah prayer? Praise be to Allah In the answer to question no. 14075 and 181043 we stated that there is no regular Sunnah prayer before Jumu‘ah prayer, but there is a regular Sunnah prayer after it.  Secondly:  Concerning the virtue of the one who prays twelve rak‘ahs every day, there is a report narrated by Muslim from Umm Habeebah (may Allah be pleased with her), the wife of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), that she said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) say: “There is no Muslim slave who prays twelve rak‘ahs to Allah each day, voluntarily, apart from the obligatory prayers, but Allah will build for him a house in Paradise.”  The rak‘ahs are mentioned in detail in another hadeeth, in which there is no mention of Jumu‘ah, as in the hadeeth of at-Tirmidhi (415) from Umm Habeebah (may Allah be pleased with her), who said: The Messenger of Allah (sa) said: “Whoever prays twelve rak‘ahs in a day and night, a house will be built for him in Paradise: four before Zuhr and two after it, two rak‘ahs after Maghrib, two rak‘ahs after ‘Isha’, and two rak‘ahs before Fajr prayer.” It was classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh Sunan at-Tirmidhi.  Based on that, Friday is an exception from the general meaning of the hadeeth, “… whoever prays twelve rak‘ahs to Allah each day…”  This does not mean that the Muslim should not be keen to offer naafil prayers before Jumu‘ah prayer or to do a great deal of that. Concerning the virtue of offering naafil prayers before Jumu‘ah, there is the hadeeth reported by al-Bukhaari (910) from Salmaan al-Faarisi (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever does ghusl on Friday, and purifies himself with whatever means of purification he can, then puts on perfume, then goes and does not push between any two people, then prays whatever is decreed for him, then when the imam comes out he listens attentively, (his sins) between that and the next Friday will be forgiven.”  Shaykh Dr. Bandar ibn Naafi‘ al-‘Abdali, a member of faculty at the University of Qaseem, was asked:  What is the number of confirmed Sunnah rak‘ahs (Sunnah mu’akkadah) that we should pray on Friday? It is well known that the hadeeth mentions twelve rak‘ahs; how should that be done on Friday? He (may Allah preserve him) replied: There is no regular Sunnah prayer before Jumu‘ah prayer, but there is a regular Sunnah prayer after it, which is four rak‘ahs, because it is proven in Saheeh Muslim (881) that Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “When one of you prays Jumu‘ah, let him pray four (rak‘ahs) after it.” In as-Saheehayn it is narrated that Ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) used not to pray after Jumu‘ah until he left, then he would pray two rak‘ahs in his house. Al-Bukhaari, 937; Muslim, 882  Some of the scholars reconcile between the two hadeeths by stating that if he prays in the mosque, he should pray four, and if he prays at home, he should pray two. This is the view of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him). Others said: rather he should pray six rak‘ahs, so as to reconcile between the two hadeeths. This was narrated from Imam Ahmad, and was also the view of some of the early generations, such as Sufyaan ath-Thawri, ‘Ata’ and Mujaahid. Yet others said: rather he should pray four rak‘ahs after Jumu‘ah in all cases, whether he prays in the mosque or at home, because this was clearly stated by the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). His praying two rak‘ahs was his practice, and his practice does not contradict his words, because this may be understood in several ways. In my view, this opinion is more sound, that the regular Sunnah prayer after Jumu‘ah in all cas

Darwinism, - Responses to the claim that peptide bonds can be established in thelaboratory

Share

Darwinists have been going through troubled times in the face of the fact that protein cannot form spontaneously. They claim that one peptide bond, one of the hundreds of essential preconditions for protein, can be formed in the laboratory. The fact is, however, that even if such research has been carried out, the existence of one chemical bond produced in a conscious and controlled environment in existing living systems obviously comes nowhere near accounting for the existence of protein. Darwinists still have no explanation for how a completely functional protein could have emerged BY CHANCE and fully formed in the manner they claim.
The fact that a single peptide bond has been established, after decades of research, under specific conditions in the laboratory and under the supervision of conscious scientists, indicates that this mechanism cannot form by chance.
This fact shows the enormous complexity in even one single detail regarding protein.
In any case, the establishment of a single peptide bond does not produce even one of the hundreds of preconditions necessary for protein to come into being. By itself, it is completely meaningless.
The whole of the amino acid chain, in specific numbers, sequences and shapes, that will make protein functional has to be bound with peptide bonds. For that reason, that bond has to form individually hundreds or even thousands of time in amino acid for a single protein.
Darwinists who speculate over a single peptide bond have to account for the same complex process for each and every bond.
Darwinists have to be able to account for the formation of a single protein. Chemical reactions are not life. Even if there are hundreds of amino acids all bound by peptide bonds, they will never combine together to make protein. A great many conditions, all of which are individually impossible, would have to be met for protein to form. But the really critical thing, is that proteins have to be present in order for protein to form.

Share

Darwinism, - The invalidity of he claim that ''theprobability calculations regarding protein formation are wrong''

Share

Since the greatest and most fundamental dilemma facing Darwinism is that of the initial beginning of life, that is the subject that is most troubling to Darwinists. Darwinists are unable to account for the formation of a single protein even in the laboratory, let alone by chance, and as always they resort to demagoguery as the easiest way out.
Darwinists hide behind the idea that the probability calculations for the formation of a single protein are “wrong.” Even this just goes to show how terrified Darwinists are at their inability to account for a single protein .
It is true that the probability of an average, functional protein in the human body forming spontaneously has been calculated as 1 in 10 950 . But even if there is an error in that calculations, as Darwinists hypothesize, if the true probability were 1 in 10600or 10400or even just 10100or 1060instead of 10950it would still pose an insoluble dilemma for Darwinists. Because the probability in all cases would still be ZERO.
But the point that really needs to be emphasized is this: in terms of protein, it is impossible to speak of any mathematical probability at all. Because IN ORDER FOR PROTEIN TO FORM, OTHER PROTEINS MUST ALREADY BE PRESENT. In other words, it is incorrect to employ the logic of “it can only form with such and such a probability.” Because protein itself has to exist beforehand in order for protein to come into existence. And this is a huge vicious circle for Darwinists.
Even if all the materials needed for protein, and all the amino acids that represent the building blocks of protein, were all brought together, no protein would still form in any way. THE PRESENCE OF DNA AND PROTEINS TO PERFORM THE MANUFACTURE OF PROTEIN AND FULLY EQUIPPED CELLS to organize the process IS STILL ESSENTIAL.
In addition, 60 proteins are needed for a single protein to form, not just one or two. Since these all have different functions, they are all highly specialized.
It is unclear why Darwinists keep insisting on bringing up the fact that protein and DNA are essential for protein to exist “has been known to scientists for a very long time.” It is of course something that every scientist investigating the cell in the 21st century must know. The important thing is not who discovered it, but that it represents an insoluble dilemma for evolution.
It is therefore deceptive for Darwinists to try to gain time by saying “that calculation is wrong, but this one is right.” No matter what Darwinists claim, it is impossible for them to account for the emergence of a protein, in other words, for the origin of life.
The fact that Darwinists are unable to account for a single protein totally eliminates the theory of evolution. All false accounts regarding evolution will all be invalid right from the outset.

Share