We were told that you divide the rulings of tajwid from a legal perspective into obligatory and non-obligatory, so we ask you to clarify the criterion?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Your Eminence, the Shaykh (may Allah preserve you), we were told that you divide the rulings of tajwid from a legal perspective into obligatory and non-obligatory, so we ask you to clarify the criterion, and may Allah reward you with good?
The Shaykh : Yes, I mentioned this and gave a well-known example. I now acknowledge that I am not a specialist in the science of tajwid, though by the grace of Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He), I have received the Qur'an and read it from one of my scholarly teachers, my father (may Allah have mercy on him). He holds, according to the method followed by reciters to this day, a license (ijazah) stating that he received the Qur'an from the recitation of Hafs, following his rules and style of reciting the Qur'an.
I completed the recitation of the Qur'an with him (may Allah have mercy on him), and I have perfected its recitation to a great extent and know many of its rulings, but I am not a specialist. I often mention that when matters become confused for some of the general public who have no knowledge, and a specific issue becomes difficult for them, some scholars may say, for example, that it is forbidden, while others say it is permissible, or one may say that something is obligatory while the other says it is recommended. When such contradictory statements are presented, one should consider the qualities present in each of the two differing scholars to prefer the statement of one over the other. Among the things I have mentioned and still mention is to look at which of them is the specialist in the science where their statement differs from that of the other. Now, if I tell you that I am not a specialist, I do not mean that I am ignorant of the rulings and rules of tajwid, but rather that if you hear from a scholar a statement that contradicts what I have mentioned and the example you will hear from me, if you hear from him something that contradicts me, there is no surprise in that, because disagreement is a reality that will inevitably occur. If there had been a way to escape disagreement in some opinions and understandings, the people most deserving of that would have been the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), yet they disagreed on many issues, and I do not need to mention any of them now.
It is sufficient for me to return to the issue, which is: for example, the scholars of tajwid say:
That elongation (madd) is divided into three categories: a category they call natural elongation (madd tabi'i), and they say it is moved for two counts; a category they call disjointed elongation (madd munfasil), and they say it is permissible to elongate it for two, four, or six counts; and the disjointed elongation and connected elongation (madd muttasil) are elongated for five counts. I gave this as an example and said: It is not permissible for them for the reciter to elongate the natural elongation for more than two counts; if he elongates it for three or four counts, he has contradicted the transmitted recitation passed down from the predecessors. But as you heard from me just now, they say regarding disjointed elongation: It is permissible for you to elongate it for two, four, or six counts. This is an expansion in elongation, so it is permissible for you to elongate this disjointed elongation like the natural elongation, and it is permissible for you to elongate it for six counts, which is more than the connected elongation, where they do not permit elongating it for less than five or more than that. And I said—and with this I conclude the answer to this question: Just as in the rulings of jurisprudence there is what is permissible, what is recommended, and what is not permissible, so it is said in the rulings of tajwid: some of it is permissible and some of it is not permissible.
The Shaykh : Yes, I mentioned this and gave a well-known example. I now acknowledge that I am not a specialist in the science of tajwid, though by the grace of Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He), I have received the Qur'an and read it from one of my scholarly teachers, my father (may Allah have mercy on him). He holds, according to the method followed by reciters to this day, a license (ijazah) stating that he received the Qur'an from the recitation of Hafs, following his rules and style of reciting the Qur'an.
I completed the recitation of the Qur'an with him (may Allah have mercy on him), and I have perfected its recitation to a great extent and know many of its rulings, but I am not a specialist. I often mention that when matters become confused for some of the general public who have no knowledge, and a specific issue becomes difficult for them, some scholars may say, for example, that it is forbidden, while others say it is permissible, or one may say that something is obligatory while the other says it is recommended. When such contradictory statements are presented, one should consider the qualities present in each of the two differing scholars to prefer the statement of one over the other. Among the things I have mentioned and still mention is to look at which of them is the specialist in the science where their statement differs from that of the other. Now, if I tell you that I am not a specialist, I do not mean that I am ignorant of the rulings and rules of tajwid, but rather that if you hear from a scholar a statement that contradicts what I have mentioned and the example you will hear from me, if you hear from him something that contradicts me, there is no surprise in that, because disagreement is a reality that will inevitably occur. If there had been a way to escape disagreement in some opinions and understandings, the people most deserving of that would have been the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), yet they disagreed on many issues, and I do not need to mention any of them now.
It is sufficient for me to return to the issue, which is: for example, the scholars of tajwid say:
That elongation (madd) is divided into three categories: a category they call natural elongation (madd tabi'i), and they say it is moved for two counts; a category they call disjointed elongation (madd munfasil), and they say it is permissible to elongate it for two, four, or six counts; and the disjointed elongation and connected elongation (madd muttasil) are elongated for five counts. I gave this as an example and said: It is not permissible for them for the reciter to elongate the natural elongation for more than two counts; if he elongates it for three or four counts, he has contradicted the transmitted recitation passed down from the predecessors. But as you heard from me just now, they say regarding disjointed elongation: It is permissible for you to elongate it for two, four, or six counts. This is an expansion in elongation, so it is permissible for you to elongate this disjointed elongation like the natural elongation, and it is permissible for you to elongate it for six counts, which is more than the connected elongation, where they do not permit elongating it for less than five or more than that. And I said—and with this I conclude the answer to this question: Just as in the rulings of jurisprudence there is what is permissible, what is recommended, and what is not permissible, so it is said in the rulings of tajwid: some of it is permissible and some of it is not permissible.