A man prayed the Fajr prayer and two rak'ahs of the Dhuhr prayer while in a state of major ritual impurity; what should he do?

The Shaykh : All right, here is a question that says: A man prayed the Fajr prayer and two rak'ahs of the Dhuhr prayer.
How did that happen?
A man prayed the Fajr prayer and two rak'ahs of the Dhuhr prayer while in a state of major ritual impurity; all right, what should he do?
It is well known that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed part of his prayer while in a state of major ritual impurity, then he remembered, so he gestured to those behind him to stay in their places, and he went and performed the full ritual bath, then he continued from where he had left off.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : ... .
Answer: We have a hadith and we have a report from 'Umar. The hadith states that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) entered the Fajr prayer, led the people in prayer, and said the takbir, then he gestured to them to stay in their places, and he returned to his house and performed the full ritual bath, and he came back with his head dripping water, so he prayed with them, and after the prayer he said to them: . In this hadith, it is clarified that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) built upon his first takbir, the takbir of entering prayer; that is because he did not speak on the one hand, and on the other hand, he kept his companions standing, and he said to them by gesture; he gestured to them to stay in their places, and when he returned, he prayed; meaning: he completed the prayer with them, and after the prayer he said: . So... from this hadith, whoever remembers his ritual impurity during his prayer builds upon what has passed after he purifies himself. The other incident I referred to is from 'Umar, that he prayed Fajr one day with his companions in Madinah, and after the prayer he looked at his clothes and found a trace of semen in them, so he went back, performed the full ritual bath, and repeated the prayer, and he did not order the people to repeat the prayer. So we said: Since 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) repeated the prayer and announced that regarding himself, as he was one of the Companions whose statement is authoritative, and he did not order those who prayed behind him to repeat it, we derived two rulings from this here; the first ruling is that whoever remembers his state of ritual impurity after the prayer, he must purify himself and repeat the prayer, and as for if he remembers it during the prayer, he purifies himself and completes and builds upon it. If not for the report of 'Umar, we would have said: there is no difference between whoever remembers during the prayer or after the prayer. The report of 'Umar is what makes us distinguish between the two incidents.
And when we adopt the report of 'Umar, we link that to a principle we have; which is that it is obligatory for us to understand the texts of the Book and the Sunnah according to the methodology and understanding of the righteous Salaf; and therefore, when Allah (Mighty and Majestic) said in the Noble Qur'an: He said: . Allah (Mighty and Majestic) did not limit Himself to saying: "And whoever opposes the Messenger after the guidance has become clear to him, We will turn him to what he has turned to," but rather He added to that and said: ; because opposing the path of the believers means opposing their methodology in understanding the Book and the Sunnah; because it is not sufficient for a Muslim to be saved by Allah (Mighty and Majestic) on the Day of Resurrection to say: My proof is the Book and the Sunnah; because all the Islamic sects, despite the severity of the disagreement between them, every sect claims that it is upon the Book and the Sunnah, but the decisive judge is returning to the path of the believers; especially the first of them, who are the Companions, and pointing to this reality, we find the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) saying: . They said: Who are they, O Messenger of Allah? He said: . And in a narration that is strong with its corroborating evidence, he said: . Why did he mention: and not limit himself to saying: ; but rather added to that and said: ?!
Among the corroborating evidence for the hadith is the hadith of al-'Arba' ibn Sari'ah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) gave us a sermon that made our hearts tremble and our eyes shed tears; so we said: Give us a bequest, O Messenger of Allah. He said: . Why did he not say: ? That would be sufficient, without a doubt; because we have nothing other than the Qur'an and the Sunnah... but there is a profound wisdom; which is the Sunnah of the Rightly Guided Caliphs, on the basis that they are the first bearers who... (peace and blessings be upon him) and they understood it with a correct understanding, and they applied it with a correct application as well; and therefore, it is not befitting to limit oneself to... this is the solution and the savior from the much and long disagreement in which the Muslims have fallen throughout these many long centuries. It is necessary to return to the Book and the Sunnah first, and then to understand the Book and the Sunnah according to the understanding of the righteous Salaf secondly, and this methodology, in reality, its importance branches out to the fact that we must correct many of our concepts of some of the texts of the Book and the Sunnah and our argumentation with them. For example, I will explain to you:
The scholars have differed since before al-Bukhari regarding a man who enters the mosque and finds the imam bowing, so he bows and joins him in the bowing; is it considered a rak'ah for him or not? The majority went to the view that it is considered a rak'ah, while Imam al-Bukhari and Ibn Hazm and others said: No... and its indication, as you see, is explicit, , but this is an argumentation by generality. When Imam al-Bukhari and Ibn Hazm argued that the criterion for catching the bowing... is the recitation of al-Fatihah in every rak'ah, and since he did not recite al-Fatihah in this rak'ah, then it is not considered a rak'ah, they argued with the generality of the text. But I say, deriving from the previous rule: "Any general text upon which the practice of the Salaf did not proceed, it is not permissible to argue with it and take its generality; in matters upon which the practice of the Salaf did not proceed"; because they were purer in intellect and purer in heart, and they participated with the Messenger (peace be upon him) in his worship in his prayer. So if we find them, for example, considering catching the bowing as catching the rak'ah; that means our argumentation by generality is not correct; because if it were correct, they would have been more knowledgeable about the indication of this generality to this specific detail. We find, for example, that it is authentic from the first Caliph, Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, contrary to what al-Bukhari went to, that catching the bowing is catching the rak'ah, and the same was established also from Zayd ibn Thabit, by whose effort the Qur'an was compiled between two covers.

The questioner : By command or by action, professor?

The Shaykh : Yes?

The questioner : From the statement of Abu Bakr or from his action?

The Shaykh : Right now, it does not come to my mind regarding Abu Bakr specifically and Zayd, but the third report comes to you now. We mentioned Abu Bakr and Zayd ibn Thabit, mostly by action, and the third is Abdullah ibn Mas'ud. So, it was established from Abdullah ibn Mas'ud what was established from the two previous companions, but it was also established from him an explicit statement on the subject. Ibn Abi Shaybah in his Musannaf and Imam al-Tabarani in al-Mu'jam al-Kabir and others reported that Ibn Mas'ud entered the mosque with a companion of his—perhaps his name was Zayd ibn Wahb, or Wahb ibn Zayd, the doubt is from me now—entered the mosque, and found the imam bowing, so he bowed, and when the imam said the taslim, Ibn Mas'ud said the taslim with him, while his companion stood up to come for a rak'ah, so he held him by his garment and said to him: You have caught it. So when we find such reports and their chains are all authentic, and such was also reported from Abdullah ibn 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, and if a person specialized in tracking reports, perhaps Allah would bless him in them, so when we find these authentic reports from the great Companions considering catching the bowing as catching the rak'ah; we do not give weight to the argumentation with the general text as long as there is no specific text; because this general text is possible to be specified, and this specification, we did not know it, but those who heard the text directly from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) knew it.
I am giving you an example of how it is not permissible to act upon these general texts in matters where the knowledge of the Salaf did not proceed upon them. In reality, our failure to observe this rule has been a cause for opening the door to religious innovation in the Shari'ah, an innovation that has destroyed the Sunnah in many cases. For example, those who add to the adhan or the iqamah the prayer upon the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), and what they describe him with, both what is correct and what is not; if you say to them, "My brother, how did Bilal call the adhan?" he will tell you, "At 'La ilaha illa Allah' and it ended." Fine, why don't you do what he did? He will tell you, "What's in it? Allah said: ." So the first thing he does is rush to argue with the general text. The text is correct, a verse in the Noble Qur'an, but did the Salaf understand this argument from the general text? No, not the Companions, not the Tabi'un, not their followers, and not any of the mujtahid imams whom these people claim to follow. So this acting upon the general text did not proceed upon it from the beginning of Islam; therefore, this is among the newly invented matters. And every bid'ah (religious innovation) that exists among the Muslims must have a basis; that is, a general text, but acting upon it was never done at all. So their acting upon general evidence that the righteous Salaf did not act upon is an innovation and a bid'ah in the religion.
Finally, I will give an example so that we do not stray far from the previous discussion. A final example: The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said: to the end of the hadith in "al-Sahih." If there were a private gathering of relatives with women and men in it, and they looked and found a woman who was the most reciting and the most knowledgeable among them; so an idea occurred to one of the attendees, and he recalled this hadith, and said: "The Messenger of Allah (may Allah pray upon him and grant him peace) said: ; so Lady So-and-so, or the lady So-and-so, or the like, must lead us." But this is an argument from a general text that the practice of the Salaf did not proceed upon in all this time. So the argument is wrong. From this and many other examples, you know the importance of adding the practice of the righteous Salaf to the Book and the Sunnah; because this practice is what clarifies the Book and the Sunnah for us. For this truth, Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) — and well does he say — says:
"Knowledge is: Allah said, His Messenger said, *** The Companions said, that is not deception."
He added the Companions, and this is part of his fiqh. He took from the way of the believers in the Qur'an, he took from the Sunnah of the Rightly Guided Caliphs in the hadith of al-'Abbas, he took from the hadith of Abu Hurayrah and others, and he said:
"Knowledge is: Allah said, His Messenger said, *** The Companions said, it is not deception.
What knowledge has placed you in foolishness *** Between the Messenger and the opinion of a jurist
"No, and denying the attributes and negating them *** Out of fear of ta'til (denial of the divine attributes) and tashbih (likening Allah to creation)."
We have now returned to the original issue. We distinguished between the one who remembers his ritual purity during the prayer, who must purify himself and complete the prayer without restarting it, and the one who remembers his ritual purity after the prayer, who must restart it; because he prayed the whole thing without purity, following the action of 'Umar and his public declaration of it in the presence of many of the Companions.

The questioner: And where is the athar (report) of our master 'Umar, professor?

The Shaykh: In "al-Muwatta."
Yes.

Another questioner: If the one who performed wudu' or ghusl faces the qiblah, is this permissible?

The Shaykh: No.

Another questioner: He should be facing the qiblah...

The Shaykh: Yes, he must adhere to facing the qiblah.

Another questioner: Regarding the incident, he repeats Fajr and repeats Zuhr, is that not so?

The Shaykh: No.

Another questioner: Regarding the question?

The Shaykh: No.

Another questioner: ... Zuhr.

Another questioner: ... is that not so?

The Shaykh: He completes the two rak'ahs of Zuhr.

Another questioner: He completes it, he must do Zuhr and repeat Fajr.

The Shaykh: Yes.

Another questioner : ... .

The Shaykh: Yes.

Another questioner: ... They went and came back, they did not turn away from the qiblah?

The Shaykh: They went and came back?

Another questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh: Where did you get "came back" from?

Another questioner: They went, they left.

The Shaykh: Where did you get "came back" from?

Another questioner: Where did they go? ...

The Shaykh: Are you asking me? Are you saying: they went and came back, where did you get "came back" from?

Another questioner: The Messenger rebuilt upon it after...

The Shaykh: Are you talking about the Messenger or...?

Another questioner : ... .

The Shaykh: No, Shaykh, you need to be precise with your words. The Messenger and his Companions were with him, two groups. One group, as came in the hadith, when the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said the taslim at the end of the two rak'ahs, said: "The people quickly left the mosque." These ones left, and a group remained in the mosque. So when you say: "they went and came back," where did you get "came back" from?!

Another questioner : ... .

The Shaykh: ... So those who were in the mosque naturally did what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did.

Another questioner: They did not turn away from the qiblah.

The Shaykh : Yes?

Another questioner: They did not turn away from the qiblah.

The Shaykh: No, I am not saying: did they turn away or not. Before anything else, I want to correct the narration. When you say: "they went and came back," what if there was an explicit text that they went out with their backs to the Ka'bah, then they entered... or if these ones did not turn their backs, we have no specification for that. But we have a specification that is greater, concerning the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) himself; because he went to a side of the mosque, and lay down and placed one of his hands on the other... so it proceeded.

Another questioner : ... .

The Shaykh: So the known discussion in the hadith remains. The important thing is, what does this need? As the Shafi'is say: "Repairing the prayer"; because the Messenger was forgetful. This is a second matter. But here, he was the one who remembered, so he must try not to deviate from the Ka'bah.