Explanation of the Hadith: (Five prayers have been made obligatory by Allah, Mighty and Majestic. Whoever perfects their ablution and prays them at their times...)

The student: In the manner I described, does he have no prayer?

The Shaykh : Of course, is it not said that he did not perfect his ablution?
The student: But ihsan (excellence) does not vary, O Shaykh? I mean, is it not possible to have a valid ablution that is not perfected?

The Shaykh : You have not answered me, may Allah bless you, because I am the one who will answer you. Ihsan varies, but I asked you a question.
The student: Repeat.

The Shaykh : Is it not said that he does not perfect his ablution?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : Well, your question, without offense, is not applicable, because I do not contradict you on it. So why, when I ask you, "Is it not said that he did not perfect his ablution," is the answer yes?
As for asking me, "Is there not a difference?" the answer is yes, but it has no relation to our topic.
And you know, on this occasion, the saying of the Messenger (peace be upon him) when he saw a shine on a man, he said to him, "Go back and perfect your ablution and repeat your prayer." Is that correct or not?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : So why do we remove this omission of perfecting the ablution from our minds and take the second possibility, which is what you asked about, and there is no disagreement on that? But the first thing that comes to mind from the absolute wording is the absolute meaning or the specific meaning?
This is the problem that those who study the matn (texts) and want to judge them as anomalous or denounced, or that they are strengthened by other narrations or not, should address. The one who should study the hadith must combine knowledge of the terminology of hadith and the men of hadith, that is, the critique and vindication of narrators, with the Arabic language and the subtleties of its expressions, noting the differences between some of them, and so on.
You said just now, as you made explicit, that the first wording contains no proof, while the second wording contains proof. I do not see a difference between the first wording and the other except from one side, which is that the other wording is explicit in its indication. As for the one who abandons prayer, his case is left to Allah; if He wills, He forgives him, and if He wills, He punishes him. As for the first wording, this is the fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) I referred to just now, citing the answer of Ali to Abu Juhayfah al-Sawai: "except for a fiqh or understanding that Allah grants a servant in His Book".
So now, the one who did not perfect his ablution, the wording, may Allah bless you, is absolute, and it includes the one who did not perfect his ablution with absolute perfection, like the one to whom it was said, "Go back and perfect your ablution and repeat your prayer." This is the one who prays, and it is said of him that he prayed and did not pray. Here comes the hadith of Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman (may Allah be pleased with him): because he prayed and did not pray, as came in the hadith of the one who performed his prayer poorly, which you know: three times, as is known. Finally, it became clear to the man that he truly did not know how to pray and so on. This is one point here.
So perfecting the ablution is what necessitates the validity of the prayer, and imperfection in omitting the perfection of the ablution may sometimes necessitate that his prayer is invalid, and it may not necessitate that. For example, now I am saying, give me a case in which you can say, as the Messenger (peace be upon him) said in the first part, "Go back and perfect your ablution and repeat your prayer." Give me a case where you tell a person who has performed ablution, "Go back and perfect your ablution," but you do not tell him, "and repeat your prayer." What do you imagine? That he left a mustahabb (recommended act), or left a confirmed sunnah (recommended practice), for example, or what? Can you imagine this case?
The student: Of course not. I would order him to repeat his ablution, but I might say that this man, or I might tell him, "You did not perfect your ablution," for example, but I would not tell him, "Repeat your ablution," if he completed what is required of him in the ablution.

The Shaykh : You have not answered me, may Allah bless you. My question is very specific, standing by the wording of the Messenger, because he is our model. If you see a man who has imperfection in his ablution, do you tell him, "Go back and perfect your ablution," or do you order him to repeat the prayer?
The student: No, it is necessary to repeat the prayer.

The Shaykh : So, so?
The student: I ordered him to go back and perfect his ablution, so it necessarily entails repeating the prayer.

The Shaykh : Very good, but the question has a follow-up: if you see that he neglected something from the sunnah (recommended practices) of the ablution, do you say, "Go back and perfect your ablution," and thereby you do not tell him, "and repeat your prayer," or do you say it in another phrase?
The point of all this is...
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : And I do not want to narrow a matter that Allah has made broad; it is only a reminder, and the reminder benefits the believers. We must heed the words of the Messenger (peace be upon him) and place them in their proper positions. So his saying there: This hadith is explained by that one. So ihsan (excellence) means completing the ablution. If he did not complete it, it is as if he did not perform ablution, and consequently, if he prayed, it is as if he did not pray. And therefore he said to him: "Go back and perfect your ablution and repeat your prayer." So this is the first observation in this first narration. If we look carefully at the fiqh in it, we will not find a difference between it and the other narration except what I referred to just now regarding the explicitness of the second narration compared to the first. Then, and he did not complete his khushu' (humility) as he says, or before that, his ruku' (bowing).
The student: And he completed his ruku'.

The Shaykh : No, regarding the one who did not complete it, regarding the second part of the hadith.
The student: And whoever did not do it, the first hadith or the other?

The Shaykh : The first. We are still in the first.
The student: The first .

The Shaykh : The meaning of this is...
The student: And whoever did not do it.

The Shaykh : Did not do what?
The student: We said these four, yes.

The Shaykh : This is it. So I took the first one, which is...
The student: He perfected their ablution.

The Shaykh : He did not perfect his ablution. And whoever did not do that, what does it mean? He did not perfect his ablution, correct?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : And he did not complete their ruku'.
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : Nor their khushu'.
The student: And he did not pray at its time.

The Shaykh : Well, now we take the second phrase, which is "he did not complete the ruku'."
The student: The second, and he prayed them at their times...
Another student: And he did not pray.
Another student: The hadith is "whoever perfected their ablution," this is first, second, "and he prayed them at their times."

The Shaykh : Good. "He prayed them at their times." We come to this second one, "and he prayed them at their times." The second man did not pray it at its time. Is it an accepted prayer?
The student: Of course not.

The Shaykh : So what is the benefit of this prayer? Is there a difference for you between one who prays the prayer before its time or prays it after its time? This is a case for the one who prays the prayer before its time or prays it after its time. This is one person, and another person does not pray it, not at its time, not before its time, and not after its time. Is there, I mean, a disagreement between the two men that this one who prayed before the time has no prayer, and the one who prayed after the time has no prayer, but the one who has a prayer is the one who preserved, like the saying of Allah the Exalted: We are now dealing with a man who does not pray the prayer at its time, so he has no prayer. So what is the difference between this meaning in the wording in the first narration, which you did not find except through that unknown narrator, and in the other narration? There is no difference except in the wording; there is clarity there and obscurity here. And this obscurity, when explained, becomes clear and meets the second narration.