I have stumbled across the some errors of our Maulana. Can you please confirm that these indeed are errors or is there a reasonable explanation.

Answered according to Hanafi Fiqh by Askimam.org

I have stumbled across the some errors of our Maulana. Can you please confirm that these indeed are errors or is there a reasonable explanation.
________________
Indeed All praise and thanks are due to Allaah only, We praise Him, We seek His Assistance, And We seek His Forgiveness. And We seek refuge in Allaah from the evils of our selves and from the evil consequences of our actions. Whoever Allaah guides, then there is none that can lead him astray. And whoever Allaah leaves to go astray, then none can guide him. And I bear witness that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah, He is alone, having no partners. And I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and messenger. And for what follows:

Then we say: It is upon the Muslim who is able to address an opposition to the Sunnah to do so, if it is done by way of authentic evidences and sound speech from the Scholars (may Allaah have mercy on them all).

Thus, upon this premise, We intend to uncover an issue that hasn’t been addressed (as far as we know) up until this day of ours. We sat through many of the Khutbas of the Khateebs of the Daarul ‘Uloom (and other than them) in the past, and presently, and we have observed the method in which every one of them (Daarul ‘Uloom trained Khateebs in specific, or most of them at least) initiate their Khutbas.

The Khutbatul Haajah (the Sermon of Necessities) has been legislated in the Sunnah of the Prophet through the ahaadeeth of at least 7 Companions . And it has been practised by the Salafus Saalih and the Imaams that came after them, initiating their speeches and writings etc. However, the majority of the Khateebs these days either abandon it completely, or partially and Allaah’s Aid is sought. In any case, We noticed four (4) grave errors that that many of the Khateebs of the Daarul ‘Uloom (and other than them who mention these particular words) make in the initiation of their Khutbas (whether this be for Salaatul Jumu’ah, Marriage ceremonies or elsehwere):

(1)The Mistake:

We have heard them saying: “Innal Hamda Lillaah, Nahmaduhu, Wa Nasta’eenuhu…until Wa Nash-Hadu An Laa Ilaaha Illallaah…”

Meaning: “Verily All praise and thanks are due to Allaah, We praise Him, We seek His Assistance, We seek His Forgiveness and We seek refuge in Allaah….”
Until “And We (?) testify that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah (He is alone having no
partners) and that Muhammad is His slave and messenger….”

i.e. Declaring the testimony of faith (Laa Ilaaha Illallaah Muhammadur Rasoolullah) in plural form.

The Response: The declaration of the testimony of faith occurs in the singular form, never in the plural

Shaykhul Islaam ibn Taymiyyah mentioned, by way of his student, Ibnul Qayyim Al Jawziyyah in his Tah-dheebus
Sunan:

“All of the ahaadeeth are in agreement that the verbs ‘seeking assistance’, ‘Asking for forgiveness’ and ‘Seeking refuge in Allaah’ occur in the plural form whereas the testification of faith occurs in the singular form i.e. ‘I testify that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah (He is alone having no
partners) and that Muhammad is His slave and messenger.’

He continued : “…Since no one can take the testimony of faith on behalf of someone else and since a proxy for it cannot be accepted under any condition, the declaration of the testimony of faith occurs here in the single form. And because seeking assistance, seeking forgiveness and seeking refuge is accepted on behalf of others, it occurs here in the plural form…”

He proceeded to give an alternative reason: “…the acts of seeking forgiveness, seeking refuge and asking for assistance are all requests and wishes. So it is recommended for the supplicant to ask for himself and for his believing brothers (and sisters). And as for the testimony of faith, then it is a notification in which one informs others that he testifies to the Oneness of Allaah and to the Messengership of His Prophet. It is a notification that corresponds to the belief and the affirmation of one’s heart. A person can only inform about this with respect to himself since he is aware of his own condition, contrary to him informing such on behalf of others. So he may inform of someone else’s sayings but not what is found in his heart. And Allaah knows best.”

(2) The Mistake:

They mention these words in their Khutbas: “Arsalahu bil Haqqi Basheeraa Wa Nadeeraa..” Until “Wa Laa Yudhurullaaha Shay aa.”

Entire translation: “He sent him with the truth as a giver of glad tidings and a warner in the midst of the Final Hour. Whoever obeys Allaah and His Messenger, then verily he is guided, and whoever disobeys them both (ya’sihimaa-dual pronoun), he does not harm anyone but himself, and he does not harm Allaah in the least.”

The Response: This hadeeth is not authentic.

Al ‘Allaamah, Al Muhaddithul Kabeer, Shaykh Muhamamd Naasirud Deen Al Albaanee mentioned in his treatise Khutbatul Haajah:

Chain of narration: ‘Imraan ibn Qattaan reported from Qataadah from Abdu Rabbihi from Abu ‘Iyyaad that Ibn Mas’ood said…

“… Reported by Abu Dawud (1/172 and 331), Al Bayhaqee (3/215 and 7/146) and At Tabaraanee in Al Kabeer…”

“…the chain of narration is weak. Its defect lies in this ‘Abu ‘Iyyaad who is Al Madanee (i.e. from Madeenah). Al Haafidh (ibn Hajar) said about him in At
Taqreeb: ‘He is unknown (majhool)…

…A group of scholars have overlooked this defect, the first of whom, from what I came across, is Al Mundhiree, as occurs in the abridgement of the Sunan, who deemed it defective due to ‘Imraan (in the chain).
He said: “In its chain is ‘Imraan bin Daawur Al Qattaan and there are statements made against him.”

Shaykh Al Albaanee proceeded to mention that Ibnul Qayyim and Ash Shawkaanee (in Nayul Awtaar) took the same position (as Al Mundhiree) and that Imaam Al Bukhaaree used him (only as) support, and Yayhaa ibn Ma’een and An Nasaa’ee said: “He is weak in hadeeth.”

(he also mentioned that Imaam An Nawawi mistakenly graded it authentic saying (i.e. Shaykh Al Albaanee):
“I believe that this is genuine defect I mentioned
(above) must have skipped his mind…”)

(3) The Mistake: This follows on from the previous point, in the text of the weak hadeeth discussed above. It occurs in the usage of the term “…and whoever disobeys them both (ya’sihimaa-dual pronoun).”

The Response: The usage of this term is only permissible for the Prophet

Imaam Muslim in his Saheeh and others report from ‘Adee ibn Haatim :

“A man once delivered a Khutbah in the presence of the Prophet saying: ‘Whoever obeys Allaah and His Messenger then he is guided, and whoever disobeys them both (ya’sihimaah-dual pronoun), then he is misguided.’ So the Messenger of Allaah said: “What a bad speaker you are! (Instead) say: ‘And whoever disobeys Allaah and His Messenger(i.e.separately)…'”

Imaam An Nawawee in his explanation of Saheeh Muslim
said:

“Al Qaadhee and a group of scholars hold that rebuked the man because he combined him in the same pronoun (with Allaah) – an action that denotes equality (between the both of them). He ordered him, when mentioning both names together, to instead mention Allaah’s Name separately, out of glorification for Him…”

Imaam An Nawawee declared this to be a weak position however, due to the fact that “the usage of the pronoun in this manner is found repeatedly in the authentic ahaadeeth containing the statements of Allaah’s Messenger…”

Shaykh Al Albaanee comments in his book Khutbatul Haajah, that this is not evidence for the position held by Imaam An Nawawee. He says “…Rather, the most can that can be derived from this claim is that these statements (i.e. using Allaah and His Messenger in the same pronoun) occurred from him alone, and it was not something he taught to his Ummah (to do). So based on this, the occurence of such usage of the (dual) pronoun from the Prophet does not contradict the afore-mentioned hadeeth of the ‘Adee ibn Haatim due to the principles that have been agreed upon….”

He continues: “…so the usage of this pronoun would then be permissible for him alone in exclusion of his Ummah. The differentiation is clear . And it is because the Prophet is not in a position in which it could be understood from his words that he intended something unbefitting to Allaah’s Lordship and Worship. This is contrary to others, since that may be understood from their speech (whereas it is impossible in the case of his speech)…”

He proceeded to quote Shaykh As Sindee’s footnotes to the Sunan An Nasaa’ee (pg 80):

“Shaykh ‘Izzud Deen said: “From his unique characteristics is that it was permissible for him to combine himself and his Lord in the same pronoun , while this was prohibited for everyone else. The reason why this was not allowed for those apart from him was because if someone besides him were to combine in this manner, it would generally be perceived as an attempt to make equality (between Allaah and His Messenger). But this was not the case with the Prophet since his position did not allow for such thoughts to be conceived about him…”

He also mentioned that Imaam Al Qurtubee and Abul Hasan As Sindee adopted this view, quoting a similar statement from him (i.e. Abul Hasan).

Answer

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatuh

1.      The words of testimony in the Khutba are in the singular form (i.e Ash hadu,’ I testify’). Therefore for the Khateeb to use the singular verb (i.e Ash hadu) is more preferred as this was the way Nabiصلى الله عليه و سلم delivered the khutba, however if the  khateeb used the plural verb(i.e Nash hadu) in the khutba, the khutba will be correct as the plural verb is also used for one person. We learn that from the hadith hereunder:

 أنَّ رسولَ الله -صلى الله عليه وسلم- قال : «مَنْ قَالَ حينَ يُصبحُ : اللهمَّ أصبَحنا نُشْهِدُكَ ، ونُشهِدُ حَمَلَةَ عَرشِكَ ، وملائِكَتَكَ وجميعَ خَلْقِكَ بأنكَ أنتَ اللهُ ، لا إلهَ إلا أنتَ وحدكَ لا شريكَ لكَ ، وأنَّ مُحمدا عَبدُكَ ورسولُكَ ، إلا غَفَرَ اللهُ لهُ ما أصابَ في يومِهِ ذلك ، وإن قَالَهَا حينَ يُمسي ، غَفرَ اللهُ لَهُ ما أصابَ في تلكَ اللَّيلةِ من ذَنْبٍ».أخرجه الترمذي، وأبو داود

Indeed Rasulullahصلى الله عليه و سلم said “Whoever says in the morning, OH Allah we pass the morning (in this state that) we make you witness and we make those who carry your throne witness and the Angels and all your creation that indeed you, you are Allah.”

 

In the hadith above we are taught to use the plural noun for testification.Yet the person waking up can only testify his Iman not the Iman of anyone else, but we also notice that using the plural noun is not used here for testifying on some else’s Iman but it is used in general keeping the Muslimeen in mind. Similarly in the khutba, the khateeb uses the plural noun not to testify the Iman on those present rather uses it keeping in mind the crowd of muslimeen being addressed. However to use the singular verb is still more preferred as this was used by Nabiصلى الله عليه و سلم himself.

2.      Regarding “”  و من يعصهماthere are various opinions among the Muhaditheen.

According to Imam Suyooti and Imam Qurtubi  رحمة الله عليهمas stated hereunder, among the reasons for Nabi Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم saying” بئس الخطيب انت” Is that there was a fear of incorrect belief of the speaker or someone in the gathering  being addressed. Therefore Nabi صلى الله عليه و سلم reprimanded the speaker to rectify any incorrect belief that could possibly be understood by equating Allah ta ‘ala with Nabiصلى الله عليه و سلم from his statement.

وَيُمْكِن أَنْ يُقَال إِنَّ النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَآله وَسَلَّمَ إِنَّمَا أَنْكَرَ عَلَى ذَلِكَ الْخَطِيب التَّشْرِيك لِأَنَّهُ فَهِمَ مِنْهُ اِعْتِقَاد التَّسْوِيَة فَنَبَّهَهُ عَلَى خِلَاف مُعْتَقَده وَأَمَرَهُ بِتَقْدِيمِ اِسْم اللَّه تَعَالَى عَلَى اِسْم رَسُوله لِيُعْلَم بِذَلِكَ فَسَاد مَا اِعْتَقَدَهُ –   ]شرح سنن النسائ لسيوطى و عون المعبود[

It is also stated in Hashiyatus sindi that those speaking and those listening should be taken into consideration. This means that if a speaker’s Aqeeda[beliefs] are not correct and it’s possible for him to assume equality of Nabi صلى الله عليه و سلم to Allah, then in this case the speaker should mention Allah Ta ‘ala and Nabi صلى الله عليه و سلم separately and not in a singular pronoun. For example a Christian newly embraced Islam and being exposed to the false belief of trinity in early days could possibly equate Nabi صلى الله عليه و سلم to Allah Ta ‘ala as was his beliefs as a Christian, in this case he should mention the name of Allah and Nabi صلى الله عليه و سلم separately and not in one pronoun. Similarly this would also apply to the listeners; if the speaker is aware of someone in the gathering whose belief is not correct or someone who newly embraced Islam then he should mention the name of Allah separately from the name of Nabi صلى الله عليه و سلم to avoid a misunderstanding of incorrect belief.

According to some commentators of hadith another possible reason for Nabi صلى الله عليه و سلمreprimanding the speaker was because he paused on the word”و من يعصهما“, again this could cause an incorrect meaning because in context of the Khutba it would be understood as follows:

من يطع الله و رسوله فقد رشد و من يعصهما”

“Whoever obeys Allah and his Messenger then he has been guided and whoever disobeys them.”

This is the explanation of Imam Tahaawiرحمة الله عليه for Nabi صلى الله عليه و سلم saying بئس الخطيب انت to the speaker. [Fathul Mulhim]

Besides the Hadith in question which Nabi صلى الله عليه و سلم himself says و من يعصهما [Sunan Abu Dawud] there’s another hadith narrated in Bukhari shareef where Nabi صلى الله عليه و سلم uses the dual pronoun for Allah Ta ‘ala and himself .

Nabiصلى الله عليه و سلم said

عن النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم قال ( ثلاث من كن فيه وجد حلاوة الإيمان أن يكون الله ورسوله أحب إليه مما سواهما

“Whoever has these three qualities in him will experience the sweetness of Iman, That Allah and his messenger is more beloved to him than that which is besides them (i.e Allah and Nabiصلى الله عليه و سلم).

In the above hadith one could say that this was a speciality of Nabiصلى الله عليه و سلم to mention Allah and himselfصلى الله عليه و سلم in one pronoun, however the following narration from Bukhari shareef dispels that perception in which a companion of Nabi صلى الله عليه و سلم uses Allah and his messenger صلى الله عليه و سلم in one pronoun.

3962 – أخبرنا صدقة بن الفضل أخبرنا ابن عيينة حدثنا أيوب عن محمد بن سيرين عن أنس بن مالك رضي الله عنه قال : صبحنا خيبر بكرة فخرج أهلها بالمساحي فلما بصروا بالنبي صلى الله عليه و سلم قالوا محمد والله محمد والخميس . فقال النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم ( الله أكبر خربت خيبر إنا إذا نزلنا بساحة قوم فساء صباح المنذرين ) . فأصبنا من لحوم الحمر فنادى منادي النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم ( إن الله ورسوله ينهيانكم عن لحوم الحمر فإنها رجس ) [بخاري ر 364 ]

An announcer of Nabiصلى الله عليه و سلم called out “They (Allah and his messengerصلى الله عليه و سلم) prohibit you from the meat of donkeys for indeed it is filth!”

Regarding the word ينهيانكم”“, Ibni Hajr رحمة الله عليه has said it is permissible to join the name Allah with other than it in one pronoun. Then the claim of whoever said Nabiصلى الله عليه و سلم reprimanded the speaker for saying “و من يعصهما فقد غوي” has been rejected. As seen below:

قوله ينهيانكم في رواية سفيان الآتية ينهاكم بالإفراد وفي رواية عبد الوهاب بالتثنية وهو دال على جواز جمع اسم الله مع غيره في ضمير واحد فيرد به على من زعم أن قوله للخطيب بئس خطيب القوم أنت لكونه قال ومن يعصمها فقد غوى وقد تقدمت الإشارة إلى مباحث ذلك في كتاب الصلاة-فتح الباري

. ومما بقي مما يتعلق بلفظ هذا الحديث : أن قوله ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) : ” أن يكون الله ورسوله أحب إليه مما سواهما ” يدل على أنه يجوز الجمع بين اسم الله واسم غيره من المخلوقين في كلمة واحدة . فتح اباري

The above is also the view of Ibni Rajab that it is permissible to join the name of Allah with the name of the creation of Allah in one pronoun.

From all the views of the Muhaditheen above, we see that it is permissible to mention the name of Allah with the name of Nabiصلى الله عليه و سلم in one pronoun. Therefore to say و من يعصهما in the Khutba will not be incorrect.

And Allah knows best

Wassalam

Ml. Zakariyya Madatt,
Student Darul Iftaa

Checked and Approved by:

Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In’aamiyyah

Source

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestmail
Sidebar