The Shaykh’s comments on the mistakes made by the mu'adhdhins and imams.

The mu'adhdhin: Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar...
...

The Shaykh: Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar. This is the first sin, where the ra' is raised, so the correct takbir is "Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar."
First of all, I want to correct a mistake I made, where I said: "This is the first sin." The correct thing is to say: "The first mistake." Because a sin (khati'ah) is a deed committed by a person intentionally, whereas a mistake is . So, from the common mistakes on the tongues of the masses of mu'adhdhins in all Islamic lands—except what Allah wills from them, and what Allah wills in them, and they are few—who call the adhan in accordance with the Sunnah. I do not want to speak now about the melodic singing, embellishment, and elongation that is not permissible in any of the various forms of recitation. Rather, I want to speak about this mistake to which I drew attention just now, which is raising the ra' in the phrase "Allahu Akbar." Many people, when they connect the second phrase to the first, or the first to the second, move the ra' with a fathah, saying "Allahu Akbara, Allahu Akbar." This is a linguistic error with no basis in language or in narration.
As for the language—you are the people of language, and from you we learned the language—"Akbar" is the predicate of "Allah," so it is in the nominative case. So what put it in the accusative case? There is no marker for the accusative case except that there is a hadith. This hadith is famous on the tongues of some people as a hadith. The problem with such a hadith is twofold: first, it is not a hadith, and second, it is an Arabic phrase that was misunderstood. What is this hadith? . It is said in some books: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: ." And this has no basis whatsoever from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) in any book of the Sunnah. If you mean the six famous books, or the sixty remaining obscure books, or the six hundred and more books of hadith! This phrase is not mentioned in any of the books of hadith at all, let alone the details of the Sunan, Musnads, dictionaries, benefits, and parts. Rather, this phrase came as a statement from Ibrahim ibn Yazid al-Nakha'i. This is a young Tabi'i, famous for his narration from some of the Companions of Ibn Mas'ud, such as 'Uqbah and Yazid ibn al-Aswad, and others. Ibrahim ibn Yazid al-Nakha'i is the one who said: "The takbir is jasm."
So what does "the takbir is jasm" mean?
They interpreted it with the grammatical term. Jasm is sukun (stillness), and based on this—after this mistaken understanding—they built upon it that the word in the jasm case, if moved, is moved with the lightest of the vowel marks, which is the fathah. A mistake built upon a mistake. The first mistake is that it is not a hadith, and the second mistake is that it does not mean the customary grammatical meaning. Jasm means sukun. And if the narration of the adhan is as we hear in some lands, "Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar," and some people wanted to connect them, they moved the ra' in the jasm case based on that hadith which has no basis, and said: "Allahu Akbara, Allahu Akbar." A mistake upon a mistake. What is the correct meaning of this phrase after we know that it is not valid to attribute it to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)? Its meaning is: "The takbir is jasm," meaning: khatf (quickening), meaning: it is not elongated, as we also see some mu'adhdhins and callers behind some imams saying: "Allahu Akbar." This is a mistake. Rather, he should say: "Allahu Akbar." This is the intent of Ibrahim ibn Yazid al-Nakha'i in his saying: "The takbir is jasm," meaning: khatf. And a hadith on the same pattern came in "Sunan al-Tirmidhi" from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: . It means jasm. And this is something that many imams of mosques also neglect, causing some of the followers to deviate from their imams. Because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) established a rule for the followers and said (peace and blessings be upon him): to the end of the hadith. So the point is that some imams, when they say the taslim to the right and to the left, say: "As-salamu alaykum wa rahmatu Allahu," elongating the salam. This is a mistake, because before he finishes his elongation of his salam, the masses of followers behind him have already finished their salam. And this is not permissible, of course, because the implication of the previous hadith is: . There are two opinions of the scholars:
- Either you say the takbir immediately after the imam begins the takbir.
- Or you say the takbir after the imam finishes the takbir.
As for finishing the takbir, or finishing the salam before the imam finishes the salam; this is a type of racing ahead of the imam, which is prohibited. And the reason for causing the followers to fall into such deviation is the neglect by the imams of some of the Sunnahs, if not the obligatory duties. Among that is omitting the salam. So it is not permissible for the imam to prolong himself with the salam, but rather he should omit it and say: "As-salamu alaykum wa rahmatu Allah, as-salamu alaykum wa rahmatu Allah," thus with omission, jasm, and khatf. And attach to this whatever synonymous phrases you wish, whose words differ but whose meanings and intents are the same.
So in summary: the legal adhan, after we spoke about the Arabic aspect, that the takbir is jasm, we say: "Allahu Akbar." So when we connect, we move the ra' with the dammah, which is the indication that the word "Akbar" is the predicate. So what is the Sunnah?
Is the Sunnah to separate each takbir individually, as we hear in some lands, "Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar"? Or do we connect the first takbir to the next?
The answer—and this is a benefit from the Sunnah and hadith—is what Imam Muslim narrated in his "Sahih" from the hadith of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), that when he would ascend the minbar on Friday, and the mu'adhdhin would call the adhan before him, he said—so the hadith goes—he said the mu'adhdhin: "Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar," and 'Umar responded: "Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar," and so on. So the separation between the first and the next takbir was first based on a hadith with no basis: "The takbir is jasm," and second, it was based on contradicting this authentic hadith that Imam Muslim narrated in his "Sahih" from 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him).