On the excellence of ablution and prayer.

The questioner : I mentioned this... prayer.

The Shaykh : Of course; is it not true that he did not perform his ablution with excellence?

The questioner : But does not excellence vary, O Shaykh? I mean, is it not possible to have a valid ablution that is not performed with difficulty?

The Shaykh : You have not answered me—may Allah bless you—because I am the one who will answer you: excellence varies. But I asked you a question: is it not said that he did not perform his ablution with excellence?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : Fine; your question—without holding you to it—is not applicable; because I do not disagree with you on that. So why, when I ask you: is it not said that he did not perform his ablution with excellence? The answer is: 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 that man on Friday; he said to him: , right? So why do we distance this concept of excellence in ablution from our minds, and take the second possibility, which is what you asked about? There is no disagreement on that. But the first thing that comes to mind from the absolute wording: is it the absolute meaning or the specific meaning? This is the problem that those who study the 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, and observing the differences between them, and so on. So you said just now, without explicitly stating it, that the first wording does not contain proof, while the second wording contains proof. I do not see a difference between the first and the second wording except from one side; which is that the second wording is explicit in its indication. As for the one who abandons prayer, his case is left to Allah; if He wills, He will forgive him, and if He wills, He will pardon him. As for the first wording, this is the ruling I referred to just now, arguing with the answer of Ali to Abu Juhayfah al-Sawai, except for the jurisprudence or understanding that Allah grants a servant in His Book.
So now, the one who did not perform his ablution with excellence, the wording—may Allah bless you—is absolute, so it includes the one who did not perform his ablution with absolute excellence, like the one to whom it was said: ; so this is the one who prays, and it is said of him: he prayed, but he did not pray. And here comes the hadith of Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: "If this man dies while praying this prayer, he will die upon a religion other than the religion of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him)"; because he prayed, but he did not pray, as came in the hadith of the one who performed his prayer poorly, which you know; where he prayed, then came to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and he said to him: three times, as is known. Finally: the man realized that he indeed did not perform the prayer with excellence, and said: "By Allah, O Messenger of Allah, I do not know anything else; so teach me." He said to him: and so on. This is one point here. So the excellence of ablution is what necessitates the validity of the prayer, and the poor performance in leaving the excellence in ablution may sometimes necessitate that his prayer is invalid, and may not necessitate it if, for example; now I say: give me a picture in which you can say, as the Messenger (peace be upon him) said in the first part: , give me a picture of a person who has performed ablution to whom you say: go back and perform your ablution with excellence, and you do not say to him: and repeat your prayer. What do you imagine? That he left something while considering it permissible? That he left a confirmed sunnah, for example? And what is this? Is it possible for you to imagine this picture?

The questioner : Of course, I do not order him to repeat his ablution, but I can say that this man, or I can say to him: you did not perform your ablution with excellence, for example, but I do not say to him: repeat your ablution, if he completed what was 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 (peace be upon him); because he is the model for us. If you see a man who performed his ablution poorly; do you say to him: go back and perform your ablution with excellence, and do you not order him to repeat the prayer?

The questioner : No, he must repeat the prayer.

The Shaykh : So.

The questioner : This is what I ordered him to do: to go back and perform his ablution with excellence, so it necessarily entails repeating the prayer.

The Shaykh : Very good, but the question has a follow-up, which is: if you see that he neglected something from the sunnahs of ablution; do you say: go back and perform your ablution with excellence, and consequently you do not say to him: and repeat your prayer, or do you say it in another phrase?!
The point of all this, and I do not want to narrow a matter in which Allah has been broad, is only a reminder, and the reminder benefits the believers. We must consider the words of the Messenger (peace be upon him) and place them in their proper places. So his saying there: "Go back and perform your ablution with excellence," this hadith is explained by that; so 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; so he said to him: . This is the first observation in this first narration, which, if we look carefully into understanding it, we will not find a quotation between it and the other narration except what I referred to just now regarding the explicitness of the second narration over the first. Then: "and he did not complete his humility"—he says—or before that: "his bowing."

The questioner : And they completed their bowing and their humility.

The Shaykh : No, regarding the one who did not complete it, regarding the second part of the hadith.

The questioner : And the one who did not complete the first hadith or the second?

The Shaykh : The first; we are still in the first.

The questioner : The first: "Whoever performed their ablution with excellence and prayed them at their times, and completed their bowing and their humility; he has a covenant with Allah that He will forgive him."

The Shaykh : This is understood.

The questioner : And the one who did not do so.

The Shaykh : And the one who did not do so, what?

The questioner : We said these four.

The Shaykh : This is it, so I took the first one; which is.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : He did not perform his ablution with excellence, and the one who did not do so, what does it mean? He did not perform his ablution with excellence; right?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : And he did not complete his bowing or his humility.

The questioner : And he did not pray...

The Shaykh : Good; so now we take the second phrase, which is: he did not complete the bowing.

The questioner : This... the hadith is: whoever performed their ablution with excellence, this is first, second: and prayed them at their times.

The Shaykh : Good, and they prayed them at their times, we come to this second one: and they prayed them at their times. The second man did not pray it at its time; is it an acceptable prayer?

The questioner : No.

The Shaykh : So what is the benefit of this prayer? Is there a difference for you between the one who prays the prayer before its time or prays it after its time? This is a picture for the one who prays; he 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 His saying (Glorified and Exalted is He): ?
We are now 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 person, and in the other narration? There is no difference except in the wording; there is clarity there and error here, and this error, when explained, becomes clear and meets the second narration. Then comes the third attribute: and he did not complete the humility, regarding the second man.

The questioner : The bowing and the humility.

The Shaykh : The bowing and the humility, so now we have finished observing the excellence of ablution, and observing not praying at its time, where he did not pray it at its time. The first performed the ablution with excellence and prayed at the time, the second did not perform the ablution with excellence and did not pray it at its time. We come to the other attribute that he did not complete the bowing; does this one who did not complete the bowing have a valid prayer?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : So then - may Allah bless you - the matter does not require that one speak of remaining in khushu' (humility); for there is disagreement among the scholars regarding khushu': is it a pillar of the prayer, or an obligatory part of the prayer, or one of its recommended practices? We have no evidence that khushu' ... "Everyone laughs" = We have no evidence that khushu' in the prayer is a pillar of the pillars of the prayer; this is one opinion. Rather, we have evidence that this khushu' is from the mercy of Allah - Mighty and Majestic - toward His servants, in that He did not make it obligatory upon them; it is an obligatory condition, not an obligation without a condition, out of mercy for them. And I mean by this His saying - peace and blessings be upon him - : . So the khushu' which is the fourth complete attribute for the one who maintains the prayer: if we say - as I believe - that it is not a pillar, then in that case, if he prays his prayer after perfecting his wudu', and prays it in its time and completes the ruku', his prayer is valid even if he does not have khushu'; because we have no evidence for the conditionality or pillarhood of khushu' in the prayer.
And if it is said that it is a pillar - and I do not think any of you says this - then in that case, the fourth attribute applies to this second man who has turned to Allah: if He wills, He forgives him, and if He wills, He punishes him. As for this one, he did not pray; because he did not have khushu' in his prayer. I am not going to dwell on this; because I do not believe that khushu' is a pillar of the pillars of the prayer, so that every one who does not have khushu' has an invalid prayer. But there is no doubt that the first three attributes are from the pillars of the prayer. So it is said regarding this one who did not perfect his wudu', and did not pray it in its time, and did not complete the ruku': he has no prayer. This aligns with the second wording.
And after that, I say something: this unknown man is a Tabi'i (successor), and the unknownness of a Tabi'i is not in the same position as the unknownness of one below him. Many of the scholars of hadith - and perhaps Malik is among them - used to treat the hadith of an unknown Tabi'i as we previously discussed with the noble brother here: that one should hold a good opinion of him; for two reasons:
The first reason: that lying did not become famous among the Tabi'un, rather, there is not among them the weakness that appeared in those after them in terms of poor memorization. And perhaps there is a material explanation for this due to the contentment of soul that they lived in, and the tranquility that they inhabited.
So the point is: that this unknownness here may be excused regarding some of them, according to the view of some hadith scholars, among them Ibn Kathir and among them Ibn Rajab. They treat the hadiths of unknown Tabi'un as a means of argumentation with his hadith. So if we suppose - and this is a hypothesis that must be noted - that this second wording does not have a corroborating narration with its clarity and explicitness; then if we combine it with the first observation - which is strong as you see - and the second observation which I attributed to Ibn Kathir and Ibn Rajab; then in that case, the person arrives at a result that is almost certain: that the one who abandons the prayer, or the one who performs it while neglecting some of its pillars and conditions, has no prayer.