What is the ruling on the adhan of one who shaves his beard and smokes?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The questioner says: We have people at the university who smoke and shave their beards, and they call the adhan. We prevented some of them, even though the mu'adhdhin's voice among them is good, and we chose another from those who do not shave their beards or smoke. Is this action correct?
The Shaykh : When a question like this comes, you do not know if it is from university students, school students, or institute students; they do not know. The question asks: Is it permissible, meaning its content is: Is the adhan of one who shaves his beard permissible if he has a good voice, or is it not permissible?
The questioner : And the smoker.
The Shaykh : We say in this that the adhan of one who shaves his beard is valid, because he performed it in the manner that came in the Shari'ah. So if he performs the adhan correctly and soundly, there is no harm. But if a person comes to call the adhan and says "Allahu Akbar," is his adhan valid or not? Valid? "Allahu" — why is it not valid? Because he is asking a question. Allah the Exalted said:[Yunus 10:59] This adhan is not valid from any person. And if a person comes as a mu'adhdhin and says "Allahu Akbar"
The questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : Why? "Akbar" does not mean the drum. "Akbar" is the plural of "kibr," and "kibr" is the drum. This is the correct derivation of the phrase. "Akbar" is the plural of "kibr," just as "asbab" is the plural of "sabab." And "kibr" is the drum, and it is known that this does not hold up. Okay, and if he says "I bear witness that there is no god but Allah," is it valid or not? Not valid. Rather, it is said "I bear witness that there is no god but Allah," because "an" here is a lightened form of the heavy "inna," and the heaviness cannot be restored to it. So if "an" here is a lightened form of the heavy "inna," it must be lightened. And if it is lightened and it is sakin (unvoweled), and the lam caused it to be sakin, it is assimilated into the lam, so it is said "I bear witness that there is no god but Allah." And if he says in his adhan "I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah," is it valid? "I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah" — is it valid? Why is "that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah" not valid?
Because if he says "I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah," he has not brought the news. Okay, and what do you bear witness to? That Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, a truthful prophet? We are still waiting for the news. You understand? And on this basis, this error distorts the meaning and corrupts the performance. But if we listen to the adhan of many people, we find them saying "I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah." Many mu'adhdhins say it this way. Do you find an exit for us by which we can derive a ruling? So that we do not invalidate the adhan of many mu'adhdhins?
We say yes, the Arabic language, and praise be to Allah, is vast. There is correct Arabic that makes both parts accusative, meaning that "inna" makes the subject and the predicate accusative. So you say "Inna Zaydan qayman" (Indeed Zayd is standing), and from this is the saying of the poet: "Inna harasana asdan" (Indeed our guards are lions). If the common language had been used, he would have said "Inna harasana asad," but he said "Inna harasana asdan." So we say, praise be to Allah, as long as we have found, as long as we find an exit in the Arabic language to correct the adhan of the mu'adhdhins, let us correct it. Provided that if the mu'adhdhin were asked what he means by saying "I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah," he would say, "I mean that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah." So did he intend the meaning or not? He intended the meaning. Okay. And if we hear a mu'adhdhin saying "Allahu Akbar" making the hamza a vowel, what do we say? We say this is permissible in the Arabic language. If the hamza occurs after a dammah, it is permissible to turn it into a waw.
And on this basis, those who say "Allahu Akbar" have a valid adhan, provided that it is better for them to say "Allahu Akbar" with the realization of the hamza. The important thing is that the adhan of one who shaves his beard and smokes, and those similar to them who persist in sins, is valid as long as they perform it in the sound manner that does not change the meaning.
The questioner : If he found other.
The Shaykh : When a question like this comes, you do not know if it is from university students, school students, or institute students; they do not know. The question asks: Is it permissible, meaning its content is: Is the adhan of one who shaves his beard permissible if he has a good voice, or is it not permissible?
The questioner : And the smoker.
The Shaykh : We say in this that the adhan of one who shaves his beard is valid, because he performed it in the manner that came in the Shari'ah. So if he performs the adhan correctly and soundly, there is no harm. But if a person comes to call the adhan and says "Allahu Akbar," is his adhan valid or not? Valid? "Allahu" — why is it not valid? Because he is asking a question. Allah the Exalted said:
Say, "Has Allah permitted you [to do so], or do you invent [something] about Allah?"
قُلْ آللَّهُ أَذِنَ لَكُمْ أَمْ عَلَى اللَّهِ تَفْتَرُونَThe questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : Why? "Akbar" does not mean the drum. "Akbar" is the plural of "kibr," and "kibr" is the drum. This is the correct derivation of the phrase. "Akbar" is the plural of "kibr," just as "asbab" is the plural of "sabab." And "kibr" is the drum, and it is known that this does not hold up. Okay, and if he says "I bear witness that there is no god but Allah," is it valid or not? Not valid. Rather, it is said "I bear witness that there is no god but Allah," because "an" here is a lightened form of the heavy "inna," and the heaviness cannot be restored to it. So if "an" here is a lightened form of the heavy "inna," it must be lightened. And if it is lightened and it is sakin (unvoweled), and the lam caused it to be sakin, it is assimilated into the lam, so it is said "I bear witness that there is no god but Allah." And if he says in his adhan "I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah," is it valid? "I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah" — is it valid? Why is "that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah" not valid?
Because if he says "I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah," he has not brought the news. Okay, and what do you bear witness to? That Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, a truthful prophet? We are still waiting for the news. You understand? And on this basis, this error distorts the meaning and corrupts the performance. But if we listen to the adhan of many people, we find them saying "I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah." Many mu'adhdhins say it this way. Do you find an exit for us by which we can derive a ruling? So that we do not invalidate the adhan of many mu'adhdhins?
We say yes, the Arabic language, and praise be to Allah, is vast. There is correct Arabic that makes both parts accusative, meaning that "inna" makes the subject and the predicate accusative. So you say "Inna Zaydan qayman" (Indeed Zayd is standing), and from this is the saying of the poet: "Inna harasana asdan" (Indeed our guards are lions). If the common language had been used, he would have said "Inna harasana asad," but he said "Inna harasana asdan." So we say, praise be to Allah, as long as we have found, as long as we find an exit in the Arabic language to correct the adhan of the mu'adhdhins, let us correct it. Provided that if the mu'adhdhin were asked what he means by saying "I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah," he would say, "I mean that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah." So did he intend the meaning or not? He intended the meaning. Okay. And if we hear a mu'adhdhin saying "Allahu Akbar" making the hamza a vowel, what do we say? We say this is permissible in the Arabic language. If the hamza occurs after a dammah, it is permissible to turn it into a waw.
And on this basis, those who say "Allahu Akbar" have a valid adhan, provided that it is better for them to say "Allahu Akbar" with the realization of the hamza. The important thing is that the adhan of one who shaves his beard and smokes, and those similar to them who persist in sins, is valid as long as they perform it in the sound manner that does not change the meaning.
The questioner : If he found other.
Source
دروس وفتاوى المسجد الحرام لعام 1407هـ - 12 — binothaimeen.net (1:17:09)
The Arabic text is a machine transcription of the audio recording.