A Note on the Statement of Some: "Allah the Exalted said after 'I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Shaytan.'"

The Shaykh : Before answering this question, I feel it is obligatory for me to point out a common error made by many students of knowledge and others. That is, when they are in a gathering of knowledge and one of them wants to cite a verse and use it as evidence, or wants to ask about its meaning or about how to reconcile it with a certain hadith, the questioner says, "Allah the Mighty and Majestic said, I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Shaytan ," for example, or he says, "Allah the Exalted said," after "I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Shaytan," or similar phrases. This is a pure error in which something is attributed to Allah that the speaker does not intend, but he is held accountable for the wording, and thus he falls into contradicting the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) . So when we correct some people and say to them, "Where did Allah say, 'I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Shaytan' ?" There is absolutely nothing of the sort. But I know, as every one of you knows, that this reciter, or this one citing evidence, or this questioner, only says this phrase and mentions this seeking of refuge before the verse in order to implement or apply the saying of the Exalted . That is what they say when we object to them, reminding them that this should not be done, because your saying "Allah said after such-and-such" means that Allah said "I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Shaytan" . Especially if it is said "Allah said after I seek refuge in Allah," this "after" pertains to the phrase and does not pertain to Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He. Therefore, everyone who cites a verse intending to use it as evidence or to ask about it should recite it directly and not say "Allah the Exalted said, I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Shaytan" , nor say "Allah said after I seek refuge in Allah," but rather mention it directly, saying, "How do you reconcile the saying of the Exalted with the hadith of such-and-such?" This is how you must be careful so that you do not fall into being held accountable for contradicting the saying of the Messenger, peace be upon him . People always say, "By Allah, I intended such-and-such, my brother." Your intention in your heart is known only to your Lord, but is it not better to express your intention with your wording? Have you not heard the severe disapproval of the Messenger, peace be upon him, of that Companion who heard a sermon from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and stood up to show his submission, following, and obedience to the Prophet by saying, "What Allah wills and what you will, O Messenger of Allah"? What was his position, peace be upon him? He said, "Have you made me a rival to Allah? Say, 'What Allah wills alone.'" Do you think that this Companion, addressing his Prophet, intended by saying "What Allah wills and what you will" to make him a partner with Allah? No one who believes in the Messenger of Allah, certainly, does so except to escape from shirk (associating partners with Allah). So why did the Messenger, peace be upon him, exaggerate in his disapproval of him with this severe phrase ? Therefore, you should not justify your verbal errors with the correctness of your hearts. This does not justify that. So when we speak, our speech must match the goodness of our intention, and our speech should not be bad while our intention is good. Rather, the wording must match what is in the heart. This is a reminder, and it benefits the believers, if Allah wills. The research the questioner asked about is long and has many branches, so there is no room now to elaborate on such a question in answer to it. But I say, his saying, peace be upon him, is general and includes every prayer and every person praying, whether he is an imam, a ma'mum (one praying behind the imam), or praying alone, whether he caught the bowing or did not catch the bowing and did not recite al-Fatihah (Surat al-Fatihah), in which case he has no prayer. Is this generality still remaining in its generality, like the generality of the verse the questioner asked about ? There is no doubt and no ambiguity that the verse remains in its generality. So there is no prayer for a Muslim in any state he is in except that he listens, remains silent, and listens to the recitation of the Noble Qur'an. As for the hadith, a specification has entered it that is necessary according to the majority of scholars, with the authentic hadith, because the majority of scholars from the Companions, the Tabi'un (the generation after the Companions), the mujtahid (a scholar qualified to derive rulings) imams, and those after them said: If a Muslim enters the mosque and finds the imam bowing, and he joins him in the bowing, then he has caught this rak'ah (a unit of prayer), even though he did not recite al-Fatihah. This has its proofs, and I am not now in the position to mention them, as I indicated that I mentioned them in another gathering. So what is the ruling of this hadith regarding its generality? Is its generality still standing, or has specification entered it? The answer is affirmative. The meaning of the hadith became: There is no prayer for one who does not recite al-Fatihah, except for one who caught the imam bowing and was unable to recite al-Fatihah, so the obligation of reciting al-Fatihah dropped from him, and he caught the rak'ah by catching the bowing behind the imam. This generality of "no prayer" became restricted to one who caught the bowing, so this generality no longer remains comprehensive if we note this point only. At that time, we establish the disagreement between the verse and the hadith on the following images. There is no disagreement between the verse and the hadith because they flow from one source. Rather, the disagreement is between the two generalities: the generality of the verse and the generality of the hadith. So, if two generalities conflict, how do you reconcile them? Al-Hafiz al-'Iraqi mentioned in his commentary on the Introduction to the Terminology of Hadith that the scholars have mentioned more than one hundred aspects of reconciling different hadiths. From those aspects, if two generalities conflict, one being a general absolute and the other a general restricted, the general absolute is referred to the general restricted, because the general absolute is stronger in its indication by its generality than the generality of the restricted. Noting this rule opens a door of knowledge for students of knowledge that is very wonderful. From that is what the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah applied, and I have not seen that from anyone else, even though al-Hafiz al-'Iraqi pointed to it, and perhaps he quoted it from Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him). Now we present to you two generalities from the hadith of the Messenger that conflict, and the matter is often difficult for some people of knowledge, let alone students of knowledge. He said, peace and blessings be upon him, . This is a general text. He said, peace be upon him, . Two generalities conflicted. That one says "do not pray," and this one says "do not sit until you pray." How do you reconcile them? Ibn Taymiyyah said: The hadith "There is no prayer after Fajr and no prayer after 'Asr" is a general one specified by many proofs. And I say that there is a very important book by one of the scholars of hadith in India, namely Shams al-Din al-'Azhim al-Abadi, in the book he authored titled *I'lam al-'Asr bi Ahkam Rak'atay Sunnat al-Fajr* (Informing the People of the Era of the Rulings of the Two Rak'ahs of the Fajr Sunnah). He mentioned in this book the many specifications of the first hadith, "There is no prayer after Fajr and no prayer after 'Asr." From that, for example, is his saying, peace be upon him, . A person remembers a prayer after he has prayed Fajr, so he must pray it at the time of remembering. What did we do with his saying "There is no prayer after 'Asr"? We specified it with this hadith. A man enters the mosque and finds the imam entering the prayer, and he had not yet prayed the Fajr sunnah. So when he says the taslim (the closing salam of prayer) with the imam, he stands and performs the two rak'ahs of the Fajr sunnah after Fajr. This is contrary to the generality of his saying, peace be upon him, . A man who had prayed the Fajr obligatory prayer in a mosque then came to another mosque and found them praying, so he must pray in it, repeating the obligatory prayer, and this is his saying, peace be upon him, . This is general and was specified. And so the application of the general with the specific proceeds. So when the generality of something is specified, its indication is weakened in terms of its generality, and at that time the general that has not been specified takes control of it by specification. As for the greeting of the mosque, with this reconciliation, Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) answered and said: His saying, peace be upon him, "There is no prayer after 'Asr or after Fajr" is a general one that has been specified by many specifications, and I pointed to some of them just now. So when another general hadith comes that contradicts this general absolute, namely his saying, peace be upon him, , and in the other narration , Ibn Taymiyyah says: This hadith specifies the hadith "There is no prayer after Fajr and after 'Asr," because this one has not been specified but remains in its generality and comprehensiveness from two aspects. The first aspect is that no specification has been applied to it by imposing a general hadith on it. The second aspect, which is very important, is that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) drew the attention of the Muslims to the remaining generality of this generality when the khatib (the one who leads the prayer) is delivering the khutbah (the sermon) on Friday, when it is not permissible while the khatib is delivering the sermon to command the one sitting to listen to the sermon to do what is right or forbid what is wrong. Yet it came from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) his saying . He, peace be upon him, commanded these two rak'ahs of the greeting of the mosque while the khatib is delivering the sermon at the time when it is not permissible to command what is right and forbid what is wrong, which is obligatory, and when the khatib is delivering the sermon, it is not permissible. So when he commanded the greeting of the mosque while the khatib is delivering the sermon, and forbade saying to the one who is speaking while the khatib is delivering the sermon, and said, "Then you have spoken in vain," this confirms that his saying, peace be upon him, , or in the other narration , is evidence that this generality remains in its comprehensiveness and absoluteness. At that time, this generality is imposed on the specified generality, which is "There is no prayer after Fajr" and "There is no prayer after 'Asr." This is a very important rule that removes obstacles and difficulties in reconciling some hadiths that appear to conflict. On this method, reconciliation is made between his saying, the Exalted, , which is a general absolute text that has not been specified, and his saying, peace be upon him, , which has been specified by the consensus of the majority of scholars. I do not say all the scholars of the Muslims, but with the majority, there are proofs from the Sunnah. If the majority were contrary to these proofs, we would not pay attention to their contradiction, because the hadith is explicit and authentic, contrary to those who think it is weak. That one who comes to the mosque and finds the imam bowing, and finds him bowing, has caught the rak'ah, unlike if he did not catch the bowing but only caught the imam prostrating, in which case he did not catch the rak'ah. This specifies, along with authentic reports from the Salaf (the earliest generations), starting from Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) and ending with Ibn 'Umar, that they said: One who catches the bowing with the imam has caught the rak'ah. So at that time, we specify the generality of his saying, peace be upon him, , with the generality of his saying, the Exalted, . And the result and the outcome is as follows: There is no prayer for one who does not recite al-Fatihah, except for one who caught the imam bowing, so he has a prayer. Why? Because we saw the proofs establishing the validity of this prayer. Also, there is no prayer for one who does not recite al-Fatihah, except for one who heard it from the imam. Why? Because the Exalted says , and because the Messenger, peace be upon him, says . Some scholars say: We reverse the issue and say: We specify the verse with the hadith, and the result in their view is as follows. But this is an error. They say: The Exalted said , except in the recitation of al-Fatihah, so it must be recited even if one does not listen or hear it. That is, they specify the verse with the hadith, contrary to what we mentioned just now. But this is a reversal of what we mentioned just now, which has become clear to scholars of hadith and fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) that if a general text is specified, it is not permissible to specify with it a general text that has not been specified. Therefore, the correct view is what we mentioned just now: specifying the hadith with the verse, and not specifying the verse with the hadith. And with this amount, it is sufficient regarding this issue. Please proceed.