The Ruling on Tajwid, with a Discussion of Some of Its Rulings

The questioner : In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate
The question, which is frequently raised nowadays in the arena regarding the ruling on tajwid.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : And the application of the known tajwid rules, such as idgham, ikhfa, and madd in its various types, and other known and popular rules. Discussion of these has increased; some say that these rules are obligatory, and they consider those who do not learn them to be sinful, deeming them sinners, and they assert the obligation of these rules. Others, however, are lenient and negligent regarding them. So the question here is:
First: What is your opinion of those who say that these rules are obligatory and consider it a sin to leave off learning them?
Second: I also want your opinion on the legitimacy of these rules, and the evidence for them from the Book, the Sunnah, and the Salafi reports. It occurs to me that some of the Salaf or some of the Imams have statements regarding some of the rules—for example, some disliked imalah.

The Shaykh : The recitation of Hamzah, do you mean?

The questioner : Yes, and some disliked heavy idgham, and they have texts regarding some aspects, and so on with some of the later Imams, such as al-Dhahabi and others.

The questioner: Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh: And upon you peace.

The questioner : We find their statements regarding those whom we are truly afflicted with, who are those who exaggerate in reciting the Qur'an and strain themselves severely in articulating the letters with severe strain. This also needs clarification of its ruling. So we would like you to give us a comprehensive answer in this question, by which Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) may benefit us, if Allah wills.

The Shaykh : I say—and success is from Allah—that the rules of recitation and tajwid are, in my view, in the same position as the rules found in the schools of jurisprudence. Some of these rules, in terms of their establishment, have evidence from the Book and the Sunnah, and sometimes the consensus of the Ummah. Some are based on analogical reasoning and independent legal reasoning, and independent legal reasoning and analogical reasoning are subject to error and correctness. This is in terms of their establishment. In terms of the ruling, some of these rules—as is not hidden from you—are obligatory or a fard, and their violator or leaver is sinful. Some are from the Sunnah, and their doer is rewarded, while their leaver is not punished. And some of these rules, specifically those that came from the later scholars who were dominated by rigid adherence to following a scholar without knowing his evidence, involve juristic preference for some rules, which are religious innovations contrary to the Sunnah. This detail found in the jurisprudential rules is fully present in the tajwid rules, if the expression is correct.
It is regrettable that we do not find a chapter—in excusation, a book—in the books of hadith, let alone a section, let alone a specific chapter related to this topic you are asking about. Therefore, for a person to be on clear ground in this matter, he needs what the jurist scholar needs regarding the rulings of the Shari'ah: knowledge of tafsir and hadith, both text and chain of narration, so that he can distinguish what has evidence first, and what does not have evidence. Second, to know the rulings of the issues addressed by the Book and the Sunnah, he must be knowledgeable of the Book and the Sunnah and the Salafi reports. This path is facilitated and smoothed, as you know, such that the striving, independent legal reasoning scholar or student of knowledge can reach knowledge of the rulings of the Shari'ah he is seeking. As for what concerns the rules related to the science of tajwid, that is very difficult. Therefore, my answer is that we must have scholars of tajwid, and they exist, praise be to Allah. But in my knowledge, we do not have scholars of the science of tajwid who are Salafi, as we have in the rulings of the Shari'ah. Because with these scholars, we can answer your two-part question: Do all these rules have evidence from the Book and the Sunnah? And are they all of the same status, so that they are all obligatory and their leaver is sinful? Or are there rules where some are obligatory and some are recommended? If one neglects this recommended part, he is not punished or held accountable, unlike if he neglects the first part. The one who can answer such a question is the Salafi scholar of tajwid; because I believe that recitation or reading according to the rules of tajwid is taken by transmission, and its source is not like the jurisprudential rules, which are taken directly from the books unless the student of knowledge has a shaykh who is proficient in the knowledge of the Book and the Sunnah.
I, for example, am not a specialist in the science of tajwid, so I cannot claim what is not mine. I would say, for example... natural madd is obligatory. I say this to myself, but I cannot issue a fatwa on it, fearing that there may be evidence among the specialists in the science of tajwid that obligates the reader to extend the disconnected madd for four or six movements, and the connected madd for five movements. It is possible that the specialist in this science has evidence that obligates me to say what we used to read when we completed the Qur'an with some of the scholars there. As for saying this is obligatory and this is recommended and not obligatory; this should be undertaken by the specialists in this science. Therefore, I hope that some of the students of knowledge whom we see now, who are bent over the science of hadith with a wonderful enthusiasm, and neglect the other sciences, such as the science of tafsir and the science of tajwid; because the specialization of these people in this science will be a new opening in the field of the science of tajwid. Because the scholars existing today do not have a Salafi culture that requires returning to the Book of Allah and the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah in every issue. Therefore, they do not strive to distinguish whether this recitation is valid or not valid? Is this rule obligatory or recommended? It does not concern them. But if a generation of Salafi youth grows up and specializes in studying the science of tajwid, it will be a cause—as I said before—of a new opening for this science in which scholars differ, as I mentioned, especially in this country.
And more specifically in the Najdi lands, because the Najdi lands—in reality—before Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab were nothing worth mentioning. Therefore, specialized scholars in every science are not known among them. Consequently, scholars like the existing scholars in Egypt, in Syria, in Jordan, or in Pakistan and others, who recite the Qur'an well according to the tajwid rules, are not known among them, regardless of what their ruling is or what their evidence is. Therefore, we hear, when we traveled, especially in the previous two months—you must have heard, as I came for 'Umrah—we would pray in some mosques and see a great difference between some Imams and others. Some recite a good recitation, and I understand that they received this recitation from some scholars of tajwid. And some are like the common people and do not recite the Qur'an well.
So the point is that people must specialize, based on the Salafi call, to provide an answer to such a question. But I am fully confident that it is obligatory for one who has no knowledge to follow one who has knowledge in a certain issue. Regarding the rulings of the Shari'ah, it is not for the common people to say, "No, this is not correct," or "This is not reasonable." No, . These scholars of tajwid in this science are the people of remembrance. If they say, for example, "All the rules of tajwid are for obligation, and we received them all from our shaykhs by transmission, generation after generation," then it is obligatory for others like us to follow them in what they say. The matter in that is like the rulings of the Shari'ah: it is obligatory for every Muslim to understand the ruling of the Shari'ah by way of his Shari'ah study if he is a student, or if he is unlettered, to ask the scholar, who will issue a fatwa for him, and he should act upon it. If he violates it, he will be a sinner; because Allah says: . So he is not a scholar to ask himself, nor is heThe questioner : Even if he is ignorant, or if he acts arrogantly and issues rulings to her based on his own ignorance, just as this is not permissible in legal rulings, and he must ask the scholars of knowledge, so too is it not permissible in tajwid, and he must ask the scholars of knowledge. And just as in matters of legal rulings, if he asks a scholar and acts on his fatwa, and it later becomes clear to him that this fatwa contradicts evidence from the Book and the Sunnah, he must return from it to what the evidence from the Book and the Sunnah establishes, so too must the scholars of tajwid be asked and issue rulings based on what they know, whether they are correct or incorrect. First, this is between them and their Lord. Second, as for us, we follow them, because we have no choice but to leave the opinion of the specialized scholars in favor of our own ignorance of this science. We must follow them. If it becomes clear to us that this following involves some contradiction with the legal evidence, we contradict them and follow the legal evidence. I will give you an example: today, the reciters differ in practice. For example, some stop at the beginnings of verses, so they recite al-Fatihah verse by verse, and this is from the Sunnah as you know. Others do not do that; they may connect one verse to the next, especially if the next verse completes the meaning of the first. In that case, they connect them as if they consider it obligatory. The evidence for this is that we find in printed mushafs, even today, and especially those printed in Istanbul, indicators saying "No," do not stop, such as His saying (Exalted is He): No, meaning: do not stop. Therefore, in fact, the majority of them do not stop, because they take the issue by intellect and meaning. So what is the position of the scholars of tajwid and recitation regarding this example?
The early scholars, and the stronger opinion according to the majority, is that one does not connect a verse to another, because this is contrary to the Sunnah. But the later scholars, who do not care about studying the rulings of tajwid in light of what is established in the Sunnah, say, "No, the stronger opinion for us is to connect a verse to another as long as stopping distorts the meaning." Here, we were able to contradict the majority of reciters today and say that connecting is contrary to the Sunnah, and stopping is the Sunnah. But what is the ruling on one who connects? Did he sin, or did he leave a Sunnah for which its leaver is not punished and its doer is rewarded? Here, you need a knowledgeable teacher who knows the rulings of tajwid and the evidence for these rulings, so he is the one who can give you the answer to the second question. We say the Sunnah is to separate, but what is the ruling on connecting? We do not know, because we did not find an answer to this question in what we have reviewed from the Sunnah, but it is possible that a specialist will find an answer to a question like this.
Similarly, for example, some of them, as you know, in the short surahs, when they finish reciting, for example, al-Duha, they say takbir, saying: Allahu Akbar. And this, too, has no basis in the Sunnah.

The questioner : But they say that it is mutawatir in the chain of narration.

The Shaykh : This is one of the things that falls under my previous statement; it must be studied. And upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah and His blessings. We say, who is able to say that this is mutawatir? It is the one who has a knowledge of the science of recitation and tajwid similar to the knowledge a scholar has of the evidence for disputed issues from the Book and the Sunnah.

The questioner : And how do you prove this mutawatir, O Shaykh?

The Shaykh : By transmission.

The questioner : By transmission.

The Shaykh : Yes, by transmission. Therefore, I say that the matter requires a specialist rooted in the principle of seeking the difference, seeking the truth from what the scholars have differed on, and so on. There are many, and very many, rulings. You gave, for example, the example of idgham and the like. Was this idgham actually done by the Messenger (peace be upon him)? It requires study. If it is established that he did it, it requires a second study: what is its ruling? I can say: the ruling of this ghunnah, for example, is like the ruling of the rituals of Hajj. The original ruling is that it is obligatory, except for what evidence establishes as not obligatory in some of the rituals of Hajj. So I say: the original ruling in what he (peace be upon him) recited, or in the way the Messenger (peace be upon him) recited, is that it is obligatory, because the Qur'an was revealed this way, and this is how Jibril taught it to the Messenger (peace be upon him). So the original ruling is obligation, unless evidence establishes otherwise; then it is not obligatory.
We prayed 'Asr today in that mosque, and I was unable to recite al-Fatihah, or even half of it, in either of the last two rak'ahs. So I was astonished in myself that this imam, what is he reciting of the Qur'an? This is like the chanting of poetry, and you did not recite it properly. Well, this is a problem. So it is necessary for these imams to receive the recitation of the Qur'an from the people of recitation, and then, if they are able, to research the ruling of these rulings: are they obligatory or are they Sunnah?
This actually requires, as I told you, a specialist, and I am not that specialist. But I present this information in a general way. And if the ignorant person must follow a scholar, he must recite as he is taught and as he is heard. If it becomes clear to him that there is an error in what he heard, made clear to him by argument and proof, he returns from it, just as is the case with legal rulings. This is what I can say regarding this question.

The questioner : Also, O Shaykh, regarding the same question, which is an issue that is common now in the arena. Now, many, especially from this youth who were successful in mastering these rulings by transmission, when they mastered these rulings and excelled in them, they saw scholars and dignitaries and nobles who did not recite the Qur'an, or did not apply these rulings in their recitation of the Qur'an, because they did not receive them like these youth. This led the youth to something: disparaging these scholars. For example, if a scholar neglects idgham or ikhfa or something else, they disparage the scholar and diminish his status, perhaps in his knowledge, and not just in his application of these rulings. So this is a real problem and it is common. We want guidance from you on this point as well?

The Shaykh : I see what I hinted at earlier, that the sheikhs in Najd actually did not have reciters who received knowledge from the people of the Qur'an, like Ibn al-Jazari, for example. Ibn al-Jazari was a hadith scholar like Ibn Kathir, and a jurist like some of the famous imams like al-Nawawi, specialized in Shafi'i jurisprudence. In addition to that, he had a specialization in the recitation of the Qur'an, indeed in the ten recitations, and he has a book on this subject.

The questioner : "Al-Nashr."

The Shaykh : Yes, this man, our scholars, those mentioned earlier, must read his books related to the science of tajwid. He has, for example, a poem. When I was young and I read the Qur'an with my father (may Allah have mercy on him), because he also received the Qur'an from some of his sheikhs, and he mentioned to me that he had an ijazah, this ijazah is connected to Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, the author of the famous tafsir known as "Al-Tafsir al-Kabir," and he called it "Mafatih al-Ghayb." The Turkish scholars and others received recitation in a way that differs in some letters from the reciters of the Arabs themselves, and especially regarding the letter dhad.
Personally, based on receiving the recitation from my father and then based on what I read of treatises discussing the pronunciation of the letter *dhaad*, it became clear to me that the Arabs themselves differ in the pronunciation of *dhaad*. The *dhaad* of the Levant and the *dhaad* of Egypt differ completely from the *dhaad* of Iraq and the *dhaad* of Najd. The pronunciation of this letter is closer to correctness in the manner in which the people of Najd and the people of Iraq speak and read it than the pronunciation used by the Egyptians and the Levantines.

The questioner : Can you describe the two pronunciations, O Shaykh?

The Shaykh : Yes, Ibn al-Jazari, this one, says in his poem:
"And the ḍād is by elongation and point of articulation *** Distinguished from the ḍāʾ, and all of them come out"
And in the early stages of my academic life, especially after I had read to my father and completed the Qur'an, I received the ḍād according to the guidance mentioned in al-Jazari's poem.

The questioner : By elongation?

The Shaykh : So I used to sit in the shop after my father went home for his nap, and I would remain there alone. I composed a small treatise on the point of articulation of *dhaad*. I remember clearly that one day, after the midday prayer, while I was sitting in the shop, there was a work table in front of us for repairing watches. To the right of the person sitting to repair them was a small window for receiving customers and their calls. I sat for several days composing a small treatise on this subject, facing the window and leaving the work, while my father had gone for his nap. We had no urgent work that required haste. One day, a man known in the Levant or in Damascus as one of the reciters passed by me. His name was 'Abd al-Wahhab Dubb wa Zayt, and "Dubb wa Zayt" was his nickname. 'Abd al-Wahhab Dubb wa Zayt stopped at the shop, greeted me, and saw that I was not attending to the work but facing the window, because I had spread out books in front of me to study them and transcribe from them. He greeted me and found that I was not working in the shop but working on something written in front of me. He asked me why. I told him I was researching the topic of *dhaad*. I had reached examples where Ibn al-Jazari or others—I do not remember exactly now—point out the necessity of distinguishing *dhaad* from *taa*, such as in the saying of Allah the Exalted: Today, the Egyptians and others say "fa min atar," as if they have merged *dhaad* with *taa*. But *dhaad* is a soft letter and *taa* is a high letter, so they merged the soft *dhaad* with *taa*. This is a grave error. I was amazed that when I heard him recite this example, he stoppedThe Shaykh : Dubb wa Zayt, who was one of the famous reciters there, began to recite and make errors, because he merges *dhaad* with *taa*. I said to him, "O Professor, Ibn al-Jazari says:
"And the ḍād is by elongation and point of articulation *** Distinguished from the ḍāʾ, and all of them come out"
First, he mentioned elongation. *Taa* does not have elongation. When you pronounce a static *taa*, you say "at," but when you speak with the soft *dhah*, not *dhaad*—the soft *dhah*—you say "adh," and the sound comes out from between the incisors. As for *dhaad*, it shares this elongation with *dhah* but is distinguished from it by its point of articulation, because the correct point of articulation for *dhaad* is by attaching the edge of the tongue to the molars, whereas *dhah* is from the incisors. As for the Levantine and Egyptian *dhaad*, it is by attaching the tip of the tongue to the roof of the throat. This is an error. So he began to recite the verse "fa min atar," his chest constricted, and he could not articulate it except by merging, and this is an error. Since there is a similarity between the soft *dhah* and the soft *dhaad* such that the pronunciation of *dhaad* sometimes becomes confused and is pronounced like *dhah*, this good reciter was instructed to distinguish *dhaad* from *dhah* because of this similarity. But there is no similarity between *dhaad* and *taa*, so on the contrary, you merge *dhaad* into *taa*, and this is an error. I remember this discussion well, and I remember clearly that I composed the treatise at that time, and I was naturally under twenty years old. The treatise is still in my possession in my handwriting, and I have drawn the molars and the tongue in the correct pronunciation of *dhaad*, with the edge of the tongue attached to the molars, not the tip of the tongue to the roof of the throat as the Levantines and others pronounce it. When we hear *dhaad* from the Iraqis, whether reciters or from the Najdis, even in their speech, it is completely different from the Egyptian and Levantine *dhaad*, and it is the correct *dhaad*. This is supported by the Arabic style in that some poems have a rhyme of *dhah*, and since *dhaad* is similar to *dhah*, the poet does not disdain making the rhyme sometimes with *dhaad* and sometimes with *dhah*. I find now in some treatises sent to me from Najd that they write *dhah* in place of *dhaad* because it is completely similar in pronunciation, and this is correct. Therefore, this confirms for us that it is necessary to receive the knowledge of recitation and *tajwid* from the scholars. For example, the Egyptians and the Damascenes err in the pronunciation of *dhaad*. For instance, the *Fatiha* that is recited in every unit of the five prayers in Syria and elsewhere, they say This *dhaad* is nothing but a heavy *dal* as the scholars of *tajwid* say. As for the correct Arabic *dhaad* about which Ibn al-Jazari and those who explained his words revolve, it is a soft *dhaad* accompanied by elongation, such that if a person wanted to extend himself with *dhaad* he would be able to, unlike the Levantine *dhaad* where it breaks off and collides. So there is a difference between one who says "wa la al-dalīn" and one who says . Its point of articulation is from the edge of the tongue attached to the molars, and between one who places the tip of the tongue in the roof of the throat. This example alone confirms that it is necessary to receive this recitation from specialists, and not leave it to instinct and nature, because it differs from country to country. The Turks, for example, due to their inability to pronounce the eloquent Arabic *dhaad*, you hear from them a pure *dhah*, "wa la al-dhālin," its point of articulation between the incisors, between the molars and the edge of the tongue. And the scholars of *tajwid* say that among the characteristics and specific traits of 'Umar was that he used to pronounce *dhaad* from the two sides of the tongue, the edges of the tongue, as if our Lord had given him an extension in the width of the tongue, so he would extend it to the right and left, and pronounce *dhaad* very soft and in accordance with the description mentioned by al-Jazari and others. So the truth is that the knowledge of *tajwid* is not perfected except by transmission, but we are in need of scholars who are not imitators in the knowledge of *tajwid* and who know where these rulings came from. Most of it is transmission, but is this transmission connected or disconnected? It may be like this and it may be like that, but the definitive answer to the matter requires specialists. I had meetings with some scholars of *tajwid* there in Damascus in the way of obtaining this truth, but unfortunately I did not find what I was looking for. They know, like most reciters today, how they received it, but as for where these rulings came from, they do not know anything of it. Therefore, I advise the scholars of Najd that it is obligatory for them to concern themselves with receiving... the recitation of the Qur'an from specialists, but they must choose from among them those who are closer to the Sunnah and are not those who recite the Qur'an on musical scales, raising some verses and lowering others, and perhaps extending what does not deserve extension and shortening what deserves extension, and so on. The reason is that they observe musical laws, and this is naturally not permissible, and this is what the Imams of the Sunnah, such as Imam Ahmad and others, forbade. They forbade reciting the Qur'an with melodic tunes and dragging out the sounds, and similar violations.