Home » Hanafi Fiqh » Mahmoodiyah » Averting of Person while in Salaah

Averting of Person while in Salaah

Answered as per Hanafi Fiqh by Mahmoodiyah


Q1-What will the answer be to the practise of the Sahabi mentioned in the Kitaab way of the Sahaba that he beat the person who walked in front of him when praying Salaat?



It has been unanimously agreed upon that whatever is mentioned in the Ahaadith pertaining to averting the person passing in front of the Musalli is not Waajib; rather it is Mandoob (preferable) and the ruling with regards to fighting with him/her has been abrogated.  This ruling was only applicable when ‘Amal-e-Katheer (excessive actions) was allowed in Salaah.  When the command of adopting tranquillity in Salaah came into effect then such actions which negated the original form of Salaah became abrogated.  Some of these prohibitions are recorded in the Ahaadith while others were deduced from the actual prohibitions.  Initially Rasoolullah (S.A.W.) said that the passing of a dog, donkey or female in front of the Musalli invalidates the Salaah but actions contrary to this transpired, therefore if anyone of these three pass before the Musalli, the Musalli’s Salaah will still be valid.  

The A’immah-e-Mujtahideen deduced Masaail after scrutinising the lifestyle of Rasoolullah (S.A.W.), the objective of the Shari’ah on a whole and the special motive behind every act of worship.  It is for this reason that whenever they came across any contradictions they either interpreted it or negated it.  Relying on their research we thread in their footsteps.  The Jurists concluded that to attack with a weapon or to kill the one who passes in front of the Musalli is totally not permissible and the word Muqaatalah was either used in the meaning of Dafa’ (aversion) or was abrogated and was only confined to the initial years.  (Sharah Saheeh Muslim lin Nawawi, Vol. 1, Page 196, Ad-Durrul Mukhtaar, Vol. 1, Page 294)

Whatever action of Abu Sa’eed Al-Khudri (R.A.) is mentioned in the Hadith does not prove fighting rather forceful aversion by means of Ishaarah (indications) is proven.  From this it is understood that this was not the action of any of the Sahabah (R.A.), which is why Marwaan prevented this action.  Thereafter Abu Sa’eed Al-Khudri (R.A.) mentioned this Hadith in affirming in action.

The crux of this is that it possible that an action was either abrogated or omitted but some Sahabah continued to practice upon it due to the possibility that the Hadith with regards to its abrogation did not reach them or according to their deductions it was not abrogated.  The announcement of the prohibition of the sale of an Umme Walad slave and Mudabbar slave and the prohibition of Mut’ah (temporary marriages) in the time of Umar (R.A.), similarly the permissibility of Tatbeeq in Ruku’ of Ibni Mas’ood is the proof of some Sahabah continuing with their actions. 

And Allah Ta’ala knows best

Mufti Muhammad Ashraf

Darul Iftaa

Jameah Mahmoodiyah


20 May 2004

29 Rabee’ul Awwal 1425

Read answers with similar topics: