When does the one who abandons prayer become a disbeliever, people? Is it with one prayer, or with five, or how does this work?

The Shaykh : And I hope—also on this occasion—that you address: When does the one who abandons prayer become a disbeliever, people? Is it with one prayer, or with five, or how does this work? We know the severe warning from the Messenger (peace be upon him) when he says, for example: Is he a disbeliever? If it is said: Yes; we ask: What is the evidence? And if conditions are set—and there is no way to these conditions, because they do not exist—then what are the conditions? And with how many prayers, if the lazy person abandons prayer, not the one who denies it? What are the prayers such that if the one who abandons them agrees to abandon them, he becomes an apostate from his religion, exiting his faith, while he believes in their legitimacy... and he admits his shortcoming due to abandoning them? No one can set a limit for this, and therefore it is not permissible—in this state—to utter the word of declaring someone a disbeliever. And the one who utters this... cannot set a limit for its implementation; so have you found an answer to this question? When does he become a disbeliever?
Please proceed.

The questioner : Some scholars say that the one who abandons one prayer until its time passes intentionally is a disbeliever...

The Shaykh : No problem.

The questioner : Excuse me, some of them say: The one who abandons it entirely, meaning he does not pray at all, not the Friday prayer, not the two festival prayers, not the obligatory prayer; this is the one who is declared a disbeliever.

The Shaykh : Good; so what is the evidence for this or that?

The questioner : Abandonment, some say the one who abandons it.

The Shaykh : No problem; there is a disagreement now, some declare him a disbeliever with one prayer, and some do not declare him a disbeliever unless he abandons it entirely; meaning if he is of the type we call in the Levant "patching up his prayer"; meaning sometimes he prays and sometimes he does not; like those who do not know prayer except in Ramadan, for example, this is very common among us, are these people disbelievers? According to the first group, they are disbelievers, according to the second group, they are not disbelievers, this disagreement alone came to you from those who say he does not become a disbeliever at all except by denial, this is known in the books of jurisprudence, but now this detail; some say: he becomes a disbeliever by abandoning one prayer, and some say: by turning away from prayer for his whole life, so the matter has disagreement, how do we resolve this disagreement? What is the evidence that makes us feel secure after we say: the one who abandons prayer is a disbeliever? The one who abandons prayer is a disbeliever; who is he? The one who abandoned one prayer as said in the hadith: , this is a very severe warning, but is there agreement on its indication of disbelief? It is very clear that those who utter the statement of the disbelief of the one who abandons prayer did not agree on this, so the matter requires caution; because we know the many hadiths that warn the Muslim from uttering the word of disbelief against his Muslim brother, and the Muslim who testifies that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, it is not permissible to take him out of the circle of Islam merely because he neglected a pillar of it.
Please proceed.

The questioner : Well, Shaykh, if someone says: ... the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: , and the Companion who narrated the famous hadith of Abdullah ibn Shuqayq: What the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) did... the hadith, so if he says: abandoning prayer this is the generic name; so if it is true that it can be applied to him that he abandoned the generic type of prayer; then he becomes a disbeliever, so this is the answer that resolves the disagreement, and the hadith that says: that some people from the Ummah of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) will be taken out of the Fire, and they will be known by the marks of prostration, so some people cross the Sirat entirely and enter Paradise, and there they are punished then they are taken out by intercession with the marks of prostration, so where do you see the ones who abandon prayer entirely, who have no marks of prostration at all; where do you see them being taken out of the Fire? I mean I hope for an answer to these two points?

The Shaykh : I see that they are taken out by the intercession of the Lord of the Worlds who said: ; so is the one who abandons prayer a polytheist? And is the intercession of the Lord of the Worlds like the intercession of the Master of the Prophets and Messengers, let alone the other Prophets and Messengers, or is it broader and more comprehensive?

The questioner : No, it is broader and more comprehensive.

The Shaykh : Well; does it include as came in some hadiths: , so can we say that the one who abandons prayer not by denial, and there is not a grain of faith in his heart? I do not think anyone says this except the Khawarij, even the Khawarij I do not think say this.

The questioner : Well; and the first statement?

The Shaykh : And what is it?

The questioner : If it is true that it can be applied to him that he abandoned the generic type of prayer, then he becomes a disbeliever.

The Shaykh : The answer to the first statement is: , if the hadith of Abu Ya'la is authentic, in which it says: , is there anyone among you who has the text in mind, or is this part of it enough? If this wording is authentic, the matter is ended, and it is sealed with the stamp of disbelief.

The questioner : Major, meaning?

The Shaykh: Huh?

The questioner : ... major disbelief ... the one who abandons prayer, if the hadith is authentic.

The Shaykh : Yes, if the hadith is authentic, but there is no saying that the one who abandons prayer is a disbeliever by authentic hadiths, rather good ones, but that it is disbelief, there is no doubt in that, but here enters the precise research that we understood from the Imams of the Sunnah like Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah that disbelief is two types: creedal disbelief and practical disbelief, or another division and it has precision too: verbal disbelief and heart-based disbelief, and verbal disbelief and practical disbelief do not take their owner out of the religion; because it is disbelief in the sense of an action that the disbelievers do, so if he believes the belief of the disbelievers, then at that time the case is ended, as for the research in the one who abandons prayer while admitting its obligation and admitting his shortcoming in abandoning its performance; here we cannot say that his disbelief is creedal disbelief; because it contradicts the reality of what is settled in his heart of faith in the legitimacy of this prayer, so his disbelief is practical disbelief; so it is not permissible to assert that the hadith you mentioned: ; meaning: he apostatized from his religion; because such a wording came in many sinners.

The questioner : ... the disbelief that keeps its owner in the Fire forever is only creedal disbelief.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : And that all types of practical disbelief, its owner cannot be kept in the Fire forever.

The Shaykh: Yes, that is so.

The questioner : Well; did they specify this, meaning the same ones who divided disbelief into two types specified that this is the outcome of this and this is the outcome of that?

The Shaykh : No, no, no, it is not necessary that they specified it, this is a matter in which two people do not differ, meaning if the disbelief is practical disbelief, otherwise what is the benefit of the division? When they detail that disbelief—as we said—is practical disbelief and creedal disbelief, or heart-based disbelief and verbal disbelief, what is the benefit of this division if we want to say: the end is one and it is eternal abode in the Fire of Hell? No, they are in a place of clarity that they intended by it that it is not permissible to treat the one who disbelieved with practical disbelief as the one who disbelieved with creedal disbelief, it is not permissible to treat the one who disbelieved with verbal disbelief as the one who disbelieved with heart-based disbelief, and you are recalling with me what Imam Ahmad narrated in his Musnad from the hadith of Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him), he said: The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) gave a sermon to his Companions, so a man stood up and said to him: "What Allah wills and what you will, O Messenger of Allah." He said: ; so was this his disbelief practical disbelief or creedal disbelief? I do not think anyone says that the disbelief of this man was creedal disbelief taking him out of the religion, despite that the Messenger (peace be upon him) rebuked him with severe interrogative rebuke: ; as if a reporter reported that this one who addressed the Messenger with the saying: What Allah wills and what you will, made the Prophet a peer for Allah, so whoever makes a servant of Allah a peer for Allah, no doubt that in that he has exited the religion, and he will be kept in the Fire forever except that he repents to Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He).
So now, regarding this Companion: the one who associated his Prophet with Allah by saying, "What Allah wills and what you will"—was his shirk (associating partners with Allah) verbal or in the heart? No one with insight and understanding doubts that his shirk was verbal. This is because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), despite his strong disapproval of him using this severe phrasing, did not count him among the disbelievers who had apostatized from their religion. He did not order him to renew his faith or renew his marriage contract with his wife, nor did he impose upon him the consequences that apply to one who has apostatized from his religion, such as... This is because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) knew—and we learn from him—that this man had erred with his tongue. It is like the man whose hadith you know in Sahih Muslim, who set out traveling on his camel with his provisions of food and drink on it. When it was time for the midday nap, he put his head down and slept under a tree. When he woke up, he did not find the camel, and he lost his food and drink with it. He searched for it in vain, then resigned himself to death from hunger and thirst. Then, when he woke up, he found the camel at his head, just as he recognized it, with his food and drink on it. He said: . This is kufr (disbelief), but it is verbal kufr; because of the shock of joy and the intensity of his happiness, he made this grave verbal error. Similarly, that Companion, when he said, "What Allah wills and what you will," he only meant—here is the ta'wil (figurative interpretation) that is necessary—he meant, "O Messenger of Allah, it is obligatory to obey you just as it is obligatory to obey Allah," because Allah says: . But his expression was problematic. So the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) corrected his expression after disapproving of it and making him understand that this expression was verbal shirk, and that he must say, "What Allah wills alone." Therefore, this distinction between practical kufr, doctrinal kufr, verbal kufr, and heart-based kufr—merely for a scholar to make this distinction—means that the outcome differs. The one who committed practical or verbal kufr will not remain in the Fire forever, whereas the one who committed heart-based or doctrinal kufr is the one who will remain in the Fire forever.