Friday, 13 March 2020

Ṣalāt at-Tarāwīḥ: 8 or 20 Rakʿah?

A translation of this fatwa from Naseem al-Sham



Question: 

Is Ṣalāt at-Tarāwīḥ 8 or 20 rakʿah? What is the evidence?

Answer (Imam Muḥammad Tawfīq Ramaḍān):

Ṣalāt at-Tarāwīḥ is twenty rakʿah by consensus of all the imams, without any difference of opinion. As for the ḥadīth in which ʿĀʾishah, may Allah be pleased with her, was asked about how the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, prayed in Ramaḍān and she replied, ‘In Ramaḍān and outside of it, he would not do more than eleven rakʿah. He would pray four, and do not ask me about their excellence or their length, and then he would pray another four, and do not ask me about their excellence or their length, and then he would pray three’, it has to do with ṣalāt al-Witr, and ṣalāt al-Witr remains the same, whether in Ramaḍān or not.

Ramaḍān is distinguished by alāt at-Tarāwīḥ and the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, prayed it in the masjid for three or four days and then did not pray it in the masjid, for fear that it would be made obligatory upon the people.[1]

Ibn Ḥajar, and he is the Commander of the Believers in ḥadīth, says the following in Fatḥ al-Bārī, ‘It is on the authority of Ibn ʿAbbās, who said, “I was with ʿUmar in the masjid and he heard the tumult of the people, so he said, ‘What is this?’ It was then said that the people had left the masjid, and this was in Ramaḍān. He said, ‘Whatever remains of the night is more beloved to me than what has passed.’” A similar narration is from the path of ʿIkrimah on the authority of Ibn ʿAbbās. ʿUmar said, “What a good innovation [niʿma al-bidʿah hādhihi] this is!” In some narrations, it is niʿmat al-bidʿah, with a tāʾ at the end. The original meaning of bidʿah is something that is invented and has no precedent, and in the Revealed Law it is that which is opposite to the Sunnah, and thus it is blameworthy. It is a matter of fact that if it falls under that which is approved of in the Revealed Law then it is good, and if it falls under that which is disapproved of in the Revealed Law then it is disapproved of. If it is neither, it comes under the category of that which is permissible, and it could take any one of the five rulings.[2] As for his statement that to sleep through it is better, this is a clear statement from him that prayer in the latter part of the night is better than in the first part, but it does not contain anything to suggest that performing the night prayer by oneself is better than performing it in congregation. In conclusion, in this narration, there is no mention of the number of rakʿah that Ubay ibn Kaʿb prayed,[3] and there are different narrations. In al-Muwaṭṭaʾ, it is on the authority of Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf, on the authority of as-Sāʾīb ibn Yazīd that it was twenty-one. Saʿīd ibn Manṣūr has related it from another path and added that they would recite 200 āyāt, and they would stand with sticks because of how long they were standing. Muḥammad ibn Naṣr al-Marwazī has related from the path of Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq on the authority of Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf, who said, “thirteen”. ʿAbdur Razzāq has narrated it from another path on the authority of Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf, who said, “twenty-one”. Mālik has related from the path of Yazīd ibn Khuṣayfah on the authority of as-Sāʾib ibn Yazīd that it is twenty, and this is understood to be exclusive of witr. It is on the authority of Yazīd ibn Rūmān, who said, “In the time of ʿUmar, the people would perform twenty-three.” Muḥammad ibn Naṣr has related from the path of ʿAṭāʾ, who said, “I came upon them in Ramaḍān and they were praying twenty rakʿah and three rakʿah for witr.” Combining between these narrations is possible based on differing circumstances and it is conceivable that these differences are due to the length of the recitation, such that when the recitation was long, the number of rakʿah was less, and vice versa, and ad-Dāwūdī and others were resolved upon this position. The first number agrees with the ḥadīth of ʿĀʾishah that is mentioned after this ḥadīth in the chapter. The second is close to it, and the difference therein regarding anything more than twenty goes back to the difference over witr, such that sometimes witr would be prayed as one and other times it would be prayed as three. Muḥammad ibn Naṣr has related from the path of Dāwūd ibn Qays, who said, “I came upon the people under the rule of Abāna ibn ʿUthmān and ʿUmar ibn ʿAbdul ʿAzīz., i.e. in al-Madīnah, and they were praying thirty-six rakʿah and then three for witr, and Mālik said, ‘This is an old matter for us.’” It is on the authority of az-Zaʿfarānī from ash-Shāfiʿī, “I saw the people praying thirty-nine in al-Madīnah and twenty-three in Makkah, and there is no limitation in this whatsoever.” It is also narrated from him that he said, “If they stand for longer and do fewer prostrations then good, and if they do more prostrations and recite less then good. The former is more beloved to me.” At-Tirmidhī said, “The most that has been said in this regard is that it is prayed as forty-one rakʿah, i.e. with witr.” This is what he said, and Ibn ʿAbdul Barr has transmitted on the authority of al-Aswad ibn Yazīd that it is prayed as forty rakʿah followed by seven for witr. It has also been said that it is thirty-eight, as mentioned by Muḥammad ibn Naṣr from Ibn Ayman, from Mālik. It is possible to place this with the first by joining it with three for witr, but he made it clear in his narration that he would do witr as one, and thus it is forty with the exception of one. Mālik said, “This is what is acted upon.”’

In ʿUmdat al-Qārī Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, he[4] said, ‘At-Tarāwīḥ is an emphasised sunnah and it is obligatory to perform it in congregation. In the Rawḍaḥ of our companions, ‘In congregation it is virtuous.’ In the Dhakhīrah of our companions, from the majority of the scholars, establishing it in congregation is a communal sunnah, and whoever prays it at home has relinquished the virtue of the masjid. In al-Mabsūṭ, “If someone were to pray at home, if would not be sinful, as this was done by ʿUmar, Sālim, al-Qāsim, Nāfiʿ and Ibrāhīm. Furthermore, it is twenty rakʿah, and it is the position of ash-Shāfiʿī and Aḥmad, and al-Qāḍī has narrated it from the majority of scholars. It has been narrated that al-Aswad ibn Yazīd would pray forty rakʿah followed by seven for witr. According to Mālik, it is nine tarwīḥāt[5] and thirty-six rakʿah exclusive of witr, and his proof is that it is what the people of al-Madīnah did.[6] The proof for the Shāfiʿīs and the Ḥanbalīs is what has been related by al-Bayhaqī with an authentic chain of transmission on the authority of the Companion as-Sāʾib ibn Yazīd, who said, ‘In the time of ʿUmar, may Allah be pleased with him, they would pray twenty rakʿah, and the same in the time of ʿUthmān and ʿAlī, may Allah be pleased with both of them.’ If you were to say, ‘He says in al-Muwaṭṭaʾ, “It is on the authority of Yazīd ibn Rūmān, who said, ‘In the time of ʿUmar, the people would perform twenty-three in Ramaḍān’”, I would reply, ‘Al-Bayhaqī says that the three is witr, and Yazīd never met ʿUmar, so there is an interruption in the chain of transmission.’”’



[1] (tn): This ḥadīth is related by Imams al-Bukhārī and Muslim; please see al-Muʿtamad fī al-Fiqh ash-Shāfiʿī (Damascus: Dar al-Qalam: 1434/2013) by Imam Muḥammad az-Zuḥaylī, v. 1, p. 397-398
[2] (tn): i.e. unlawful (ḥarām, maḥẓūr), disliked (makrūh), permissible (mubāḥ), recommended (mandūb, mustaḥabb, sunnah), or obligatory (wājib, farḍ)
[3] (tn): ‘…and al-Fārūq [i.e. ʿUmar], may Allah be pleased with him, saw the people praying individually in the masjid, or in pairs or congregations of three, so he gathered them behind Ubay ibn Kaʿb and had them pray twenty rakʿah, and the Companions made consensus with him on this.’ Kifāyat al-Akhyār fī Ḥallī Ghāyat al-Ikhtiṣār by Imam Taqī ad-Dīn ad-Dimashqī (Beirut, Dār al-Khayr, 1425/2004), p.112
[4] (tn) i.e. Imam Badr ad-Dīn al-ʿAynī (d. 855 AH), Ḥanafī scholar and contemporary of Imam Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī
[5] (tn): a tarwīhah is a break between sets of two rakʿah
[6] (tn): Please refer to Aqrab al-Masālik li Madhhab al-Imām Mālik by Imam Aḥmad ad-Dardīr (Kano: Maktabah Ayūb, 1420/2000), p.20, in which the author lists the supererogatory prayers and says, ‘…and at-Tarāwīḥ, which is twenty rakʿah...’

Related:

Friday, 6 March 2020

When is hardship an excuse that permits breaking one’s fast in Ramaḍān?

A selection of fatawa from Naseem al-Sham




Question:

There are people who work in quarries, under the hot sun. Their jobs are difficult and they need to drink a lot of water while they are working. Is there a solution for them in the month of Ramaḍān, as they have no alternative work? Either they stop working or they work and do not fast, so what is the solution? May Allah reward you.

Answer (Imam Rushdī Salīm al-Qalam):

If someone is able to stop working during the daytime in Ramaḍān then he should do so. If he has to provide for a wife, children, mother, father, then he should work and make the intention to fast. If it becomes hard for him then he should break his fast. It should also be noted that many harvesters work from dawn to just after sunrise and then stop in order to complete their fast. If one can do this, it is better.

Question:

I work in the oil and gas sector in a foreign country and the nature of my work is to be in the desert. My working hours are from 6:30 am until 8 pm. These days, the temperature is very high, almost 50° Celsius, and the company is not Muslim. Is it permissible for me not to fast and to make up the days afterwards, with the knowledge that I have to be at my workstation for eight hours every day and this could lead to a loss of consciousness if I become extremely thirsty (and with the knowledge that the fast is from 4 am until 9 pm, i.e. almost seventeen hours)? Please give me a fatwā and may Allah reward you.

Answer (Imam Rushdī Salīm al-Qalam):

You must begin every day by fasting, with a correct intention, and if you are not able to complete your fast because of the difficulties your work places upon you, you break it. This is the ruling for anyone who has a hard job and it has nothing to do with one’s working hours, for people are different in terms of ability and what they can bear and be patient with.

Question:

Are there any facilitations for someone who has to fast more than nineteen hours a day? I live and work in a European country (Belarus) and my working day lasts between 10 and 12 hours. If there are no facilitations then may Allah help me. May Allah allow you to remain as pillars for Islam and the Muslims.

Answer (Imam Rushdī Salīm al-Qalam):

Our Lord has said, “Any of you who are resident for the month must fast it.” [al-Baqarah 2:185] You are obligated to fast, and Allah has not placed any hardship upon you in the Religion,[1] and if, on some days, the difficulty is such that you are not able to complete your fast, break it and make it up afterwards, before the following Ramaḍān. I ask Allah to assist you and to strengthen your obedience to Him. Peace.

Question:

A man is over seventy-five years of age! Is he allowed not to fast in Ramaḍān? Please direct my question to either Sheikh Muḥammad Shuqayr or Sheikh Dr Muḥammad Tawfīq al-Būṭī, may Allah preserve them.

Answer (Imam Muḥammad Tawfīq Ramaḍān):

The issue has nothing to do with someone’s age. Rather, it has to do with the extent of one’s ability to fast. If one can bear the fast and is able to do it, he is obligated to fast. If his body cannot bear the fast and would be harmed by it, it is permissible for him not to fast and to pay the fidyah, and Allah knows best.
_______________
[1] (tn): Please see Sūrat al-Ḥajj 22:78

More Fatawa on Ramadan and Fasting

Friday, 28 February 2020

When is it obligatory to stop eating and drinking?

A selection of fatawa from Naseem al-Sham




Question:

I heard one of those people who come on television to answer questions (iftāʾ) say that if you have a cup of water in your hand and you are drinking it and you hear the adhān for fajr, there is no objection to you finishing your drink, and he mentioned the ḥadīth of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, the meaning of which is {If one of you has a vessel in his hand, let him not put it down until he has fulfilled his need}, or however he said it, peace and blessings be upon him. What is the validity of this ruling?

Answer (Imam Muḥammad Tawfīq Ramaḍān):

Those who give this fatwā are giving a fatwā that ruins a Muslim’s fast from the very beginning of the day, and they are relying on the realities of situations that are not used as evidence. The text of Allah the Exalted’s Book and the Sunnah of His Prophet obligate that one refrain from food and drink[1] when fajr has entered, not afterwards. This behaviour nullifies the fast.[2]
 

Question:

When we want to fast, we eat after the adhān has started until about half of it has been completed, based on the fact that the minarets[3] follow one another in close succession and that the Prophet commanded that suḥūr be delayed. Is this permissible?

Answer (Imam Muḥammad Tawfīq Ramaḍān):

The person fasting must refrain from food and drink from the moment fajr enters until the sun has completely set. The adhān is connected to the entrance of fajr. Therefore, eating and drinking after the adhān of fajr (i.e. not the first adhān or the adhān that indicates that one should stop eating and drinking [4]) is impermissible. The one who is eager to have a valid fast does not put himself right on the edge of committing disobedience. 


Question:

When does one refrain from eating and drinking, upon hearing the first adhān or the second adhān? Thank you.

Answer (Imam Muḥammad Tawfīq Ramaḍān):

The first adhān is called adhān al-imsāk, and its purpose is to notify that fajr is approaching. The second adhān informs that fajr has entered, and that anything that breaks the fast must be abstained from. It is presumed that the person fasting, upon hearing the first adhān, has finished his suḥūr and is hastening to drink water or something similar in preparation for the entrance of fajr.



[1] Ar. al-imsāk
[2] In the book at-Taqrīrāt as-Sadīdah, Sheikh Ḥasan al-Kāf adds, ‘A gross error that many people fall into is that when they hear the adhān for fajr, they hasten to drink something, because they think that it is permissible to do so as long as the muʾadhdhin is calling the adhān. This is not permissible, and if someone does this, his fast is invalid, and he has to make it up if it is an obligatory fast. This is because the muʾadhdhin does not start calling the adhān until after fajr has entered. If someone drinks during the adhān, he is drinking after fajr has entered. All of this is because of ignorance. This position has not been stated by any esteemed imam'. (Tarīm: Dār al-Mīrāth an-Nabawī, p.458)
[3] Ar. mādhin, i.e. the places from which the adhān is given
[4] Ar. adhān al-imsāk, please see the next fatwā

More Fatawa on Ramadan and Fasting


Friday, 21 February 2020

The Person Fasting is His Own Master

A translation of this fatwa from Naseem al-Sham




Question:

Assalām ʿalaykum,

If I intend to fast some days (a supererogatory fast, like the six days of Shawwāl, for example) and then on the second day I don’t fast, do I owe an expiation (kaffārah)?

Answer (Imam Muḥammad Tawfīq Ramaḍān):

Kaffārah (which is to fast for two months straight) is only obligatory upon the one who breaks his fast in Ramaḍān deliberately by having sexual intercourse.

And one is not obligated to pay a fidyah[1] (which is one mudd[2] of the staple crop of one’s country) except for specific reasons that are also connected to the fast of Ramaḍān.

The one who fasts voluntarily – i.e. performs a supererogatory fast – is his own master; he may break his fast or he may complete it, even though it is disliked (makrūh) for him to break it according to us,[3] and Allah knows best.


_______________
[1] (tn): i.e. redemption, a person in this situation has not sinned and is thus merely looking to compensate for missing out on worship as opposed to expiating a sin they have committed
[2] (tn): i.e. half a litre of food, which should be the staple crop of the country. Please see Reliance, section i1.33, p.290. According to Muʿjam Lughat al-Fuqahāʾ (Beirut: Dār Al-Nafāʾis, 1431/2010), s.v. Mudd, one mudd is equivalent to 0.543 kg, to be precise.
[3] (tn): i.e. the Shāfiʿīs

More Fatawa on Ramadan and Fasting

Friday, 31 January 2020

Jurisdiction and Borders

What makes a country?



This interview with the late Sir Roger Scruton sheds a lot of light on why Brexit is happening, and how the Anglosphere is different from European countries, but the point he makes at 34:45 is what stands out.

He defines his country as the land "where our jurisdiction operates". He then explains that the national idea is that "territorial jurisdiction" is what must be defended against religious or quasi-religious jurisdictions, such as the Universal Doctrine of Human Rights or indeed the Revealed Law. He says the law is defined by the land in which it operates. There's nothing "blood and soil" about the matter. 

Imam Muhammad Saeed Ramadan al-Bouti, may Allah have mercy on him, when explaining how al-Madinah was different to Makkah when the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, settled there, boiled it down to three things:
  • Al-Madinah was the first territory that Muslims ruled over, i.e. they had "territorial jurisdiction"
  • There was a a system of governance in place, with the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, as the ruler
  • There were people residing in that territory
As the Imam explains,  this is why martial combat (i.e. jihad) was legislated in al-Madinah; once in al-Madinah, the Muslims had something to defend and fight for. This is the first Dar al-Islam. 

The Muslims in Makkah had none of these, and thus Allah did not legislate martial combat during that period.

I do not know how much Sir Roger Scruton knew about Islam or the Revealed Law, but he does seem to understand that what unites people, at the most fundamental level, is shared beliefs and ideas. An ummah consists of people who share the same beliefs and ideas, e.g. Muslims, Jews, Christians, Americans, Pakistanis etc. It is not blood and lineage (e.g. a qawm, such the Arabs, the English, the Punjabis etc.) or soil and birthplace. The Muslims gathered under one territorial jurisdiction in al-Madinah because they believed in Allah in His Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, not because they had all been born in al-Madinah (rather, some were born there and other were migrants) or because they had familial links to the city. At the same time, there were hypocrites and disbelievers that were very much native to the city and were vehemently hostile to new Muslim governance. It is not blood and soil that unites people.

And Allah the Exalted knows best.