Discussion of some of the evidence of those who hold that the one who abandons prayer is a disbeliever.

The questioner: All right, our Shaykh, you know that some scholars declare the one who abandons prayer a disbeliever. We have discussed this a great deal, but they also say—based on the Book, the Sunnah, the statements of the Companions, and sound reasoning—that the listener assumes the matter is indeed so. We ask you, (may Allah preserve you), to clarify and detail the answer. First, they cite the Qur'an, referring to the verse in Surat al-Tawbah: : . They say: The implication of the verse indicates that if they do not do that, they are not your brothers. And brotherhood is not negated by sins, however great they are, but it is negated by leaving Islam. How valid is this argument using this verse? It is not hidden from you that the context is discussing the polytheists.

The Shaykh: My answer is from two angles: That brotherhood may be general or specific. If the brotherhood negated here due to abandoning what Allah has made obligatory is general brotherhood, then their statement is correct. But there is no evidence for this that compels those who disagree with this view to accept their claim; because it is possible that the negated brotherhood is specific brotherhood, and they must adopt this; this is the strong argument; because they distinguish between the one who abandons prayer and the one who abandons zakah in that they do not conclude that the one who abandons zakah is a disbeliever or an apostate, as they do with the one who abandons prayer. And [the verse] mentioned abandoning zakah along with abandoning prayer; so what was their answer regarding the one who abandons zakah is our answer regarding the one who abandons prayer.

The questioner: Is this a refutation of them?

The Shaykh: But the answer has already been given.

The questioner: ... regarding the verse.

The Shaykh: As for the verse, I have nothing.

The questioner: Our Shaykh, is it not said that he arranged those actions following the repentance, which is the repentance of Islam; and consequently, if this repentance is absent, the performance of those other actions has no fruit? This is regarding the repentance; meaning those [actions] follow the repentance, and the context is about the polytheists.

The Shaykh: Your speech is not clear.

The questioner: I mean now the speech is about the polytheists.

The Shaykh: Perfect.

The questioner: So he began the discussion with the repentance, which is the repentance of Islam, entering into Islam, and consequently arranged those matters meaning it does not necessitate that it is due to establishing prayer and giving zakah, but rather due to the repentance they entered into, and establishing prayer and giving zakah follow the repentance; consequently, we do not negate his brotherhood in religion due to his abandoning prayer alone; because before prayer he repented, otherwise it is the original state.

The Shaykh: All right; but the answer remains the implication of the opposite;

The questioner: And this is correct due to the repentance, not due to the prayer.

The Shaykh : How?

Another questioner : ... .

The Shaykh: Be patient; because he is not yet clarifying his intent. The implication of the opposite—and here is the argument—if they do not establish prayer and give zakah, they are not your brothers.

The questioner: There is before his saying establishing prayer and giving zakah the repentance, if they do not repent, and those actions follow.

The Shaykh: Fine, so we say: If they do not repent, they are not your brothers?

The questioner: Of course.

The Shaykh: All right; if they do not repent and do not pray.

The questioner: This becomes the other discussion that you favored, our professor.

The Shaykh: I am deviating from this, my brother.

The questioner: According to your opinion, we will say: If they do not repent and establish prayer and give zakah, they are not our brothers.

The Shaykh: Yes, meaning we cannot say that the intended meaning is only the first phrase, which is the repentance, but rather the repentance and establishing prayer and giving zakah; this group, if it is negated, equals the negation of brotherhood. But is this negated brotherhood absolute brotherhood? That is: are they polytheists as they were before, or to the extent that they are deficient, the brotherhood is deficient, so the negated one is the brotherhood of perfection, like: negation of perfection and not negation of validity.

The questioner: So with this last paragraph, I have answered their argument from the Sunnah, which is their saying that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: , and that , these hadiths are not according to their apparent meaning.

The Shaykh: Of course, disbelief less than disbelief, Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) explained it.

The questioner: All right; if there is further clarification in this.

The Shaykh: This is enough for you now.

The questioner: And they also say: The statements of the Companions, the saying of the Commander of the Faithful 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him). =
-- The Shaykh: ... and what else?

The questioner: It exists ... . --
= The questioner: The statements of the Companions, the saying of the Commander of the Faithful 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him): "There is no share in Islam for the one who abandons prayer," and the share is the portion, and here it is an indefinite noun in the context of negation, so it is general, no small or large portion. This is the saying of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab; so what is the answer to it? And is this argument valid?

The Shaykh: By Allah, I do not know now, the answer to this is in "al-Targhib," but I do not know if it is correct, I do not have it in mind now.

The questioner: "Sahih al-Targhib"?

The Shaykh: I say: No, it is in "al-Targhib," but I do not know if it is correct or not -- ... -- I do not remember who narrated it? "There is no share in Islam."

The questioner: A saying of a Companion.

The Shaykh: A saying of a Companion, yes.

Another questioner: Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh: And upon you peace.
: But this does not go beyond the previous discussion, now it occurs to me like: what is the difference? and and "no share."
-- Another questioner: Do you want to rest here, our Shaykh?

The Shaykh: Yes, I rest. --
: What I want to add is that what preceded is that this is an indefinite noun indicating comprehensiveness, this is correct Arabic speech, but this is when there are no proofs that compel us to restrict this indication, otherwise if we take the hadith: and and similar expressions, we would exit with the exit of the Khawarij school, but when it is added to such a text, especially since it is mawquf and not marfu'; if we add to it the hadiths in which faith is affirmed for the one who testifies that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and that he will be saved from eternal abode in the Fire; at that time we are compelled to say that this scientific jurisprudential term, in that this is a negated indefinite noun which indicates comprehensiveness; this is if we look at this text with a specific look, but if we look at the other proofs, at that time we say: "No share" is like our saying in: and similar; that is: no complete share, as we also said in brotherhood.

Another questioner: No complete brotherhood.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: Our Shaykh.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: In "al-Muwatta," the Muwatta of Yahya ibn al-Laythi, from Malik, Malik narrated to us, from Hisham ibn 'Urwah, from his father, that al-Miswar ibn Makhramah informed him that he entered upon 'Umar ibn al-Khattab on the night in which he was stabbed, so he woke 'Umar for the Fajr prayer, and 'Umar said: "Yes, and there is no share in Islam for the one who abandons prayer."

The Shaykh: I am trying to remember, it seems like this is in al-Bukhari?

The questioner: Yes, I did not like to say: in al-Bukhari, by Allah it fell in my heart that it is in al-Bukhari, but I did not like to say ... he did not point; because it is his habit to point, Fu'ad 'Abd al-Baqi.

The Shaykh: Yes, yes, this is correct.

The questioner: Yes, may Allah reward you with good, and the answer is also to the saying of 'Abdullah ibn Shuqayq: The Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) were the answer to the ...

The Shaykh: It is all of this same tone.

The questioner: The precise or sound looking remained, but from the side of sound looking it is said: Is it conceivable that a man in whose heart is a mustard seed of faith knows the greatness of prayer and Allah's care for it, and then he persists in abandoning it? This is something impossible. And I have considered the proofs cited by those who say that he does not become a disbeliever, and I found that they do not go beyond four statements; either there is no proof in them at all, or they were restricted by a description with which abandoning prayer is impossible, or they were restricted by a state in which the one who abandons this prayer is excused, or they are general and are specified by the hadiths of the disbelief of the one who abandons prayer.

The Shaykh: All right; what is this?

The questioner: This is Ibn Uthaymeen.

The Shaykh: Oh? Ibn Uthaymeen.
: This is the first one who disagrees with this statement.

The questioner: The first one who disagrees with this statement.

The Shaykh : The author is the first to contradict what he wrote and said in this paragraph; because the issue in their view is not about one who has never prayed in his life, but rather about one who left off two prayers, and so on. This ruling applies to him; that is, the Hanbalis, who differ from the majority, are not... In fact, my brothers, these Hanbalis have not properly documented their school of thought regarding the one who abandons prayer. I have often heard them speak on the radio, but they do not clarify the issue in a way that every listener can understand through their words. Do they declare someone a disbeliever for abandoning one prayer, or for abandoning five prayers in a day and night, or...? You cannot understand this issue from them at all. And if they want to cling to the apparent meanings of the evidence, they say, "Whoever abandons a prayer intentionally, Allah and His Messenger have disclaimed responsibility for him." One prayer, according to their understanding of these texts, without regard for the other texts, expels him from the religion. And if we assume or suppose that they set a limit, for example, saying: "If he abandons one prayer, he does not become a disbeliever, but if he abandons five prayers, he does," we would say to them: What is the evidence? And they would be unable to find a way to that. Therefore, the issue is not resolved except by the school of Ibn 'Abbas: practical disbelief and creedal disbelief. Whoever abandons one prayer while considering it permissible is an apostate from his religion. But whoever abandons one prayer while believing in it and acknowledging his shortcoming with Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) is a sinner and a criminal, and his case is left to Allah (Mighty and Majestic); if He wills, He will punish him, and if He wills, He will forgive him; because this is an action, and Allah (Mighty and Majestic) says: .
And I do not know why the scholars there keep repeating this issue in the Islamic year without— as it is said today— putting the dots on the letters; that is, saying: One prayer makes one a disbeliever, no, one prayer does not make one a disbeliever, five prayers do. And when they enter into this detail and this specification, the weakness of their school of thought becomes apparent; because there is no way to set a limit, and consequently, if they set a limit, the theoretical argument I read to you earlier falls away.

The questioner : I remember that I said to him: What do you say about the hadith that says: ? He said: This is from the specific generalization.

The Shaykh : Strange!

The questioner : And I do not know where the generality in the hadith is in the first place?

The Shaykh : Yes, no, they counter it by saying that the hadiths that say "whoever does such and such has disbelieved" are many. Do these hadiths also specify ? No one says this. The one who was saved was saved by faith, not by abandoning the action.

The questioner : In the hadith about the person, in the sense that if... the prayer is five times... then if He wills, He will admit him to Paradise, and if He wills...; meaning this is another hadith I do not remember.

The Shaykh : Yes, this hadith is well known; .