(There is no i'tikaf except in the three mosques) If the Salaf did not act upon it, does that weaken its evidence, even though they knew it?

The Shaykh : Please go ahead.
Al-Huwaini: Regarding the hadith:

The Shaykh : How?
Al-Huwaini: , so most of the shaykhs among us strongly rejected this fatwa

The Shaykh : Yes.
Al-Huwaini: And they said that if the matter were as such, it would have been transmitted to us by necessity and through numerous chains, the migration of the Companions who dispersed among the Ansar to one of the three mosques, and since that does not exist, this ruling is not valid, and not every authentic hadith is one upon which we act.

The Shaykh : Allahu Akbar.
Al-Huwaini: And truly, Your Eminence has not written anything that has been published up to now regarding this issue, so we want to answer the arguments of these people.

The Shaykh: ... I wrote something, did you see the treatise on standing in prayer in Ramadan?
Al-Huwaini: I saw it, but it is very brief

The Shaykh: Brief

The questioner: Very much, meaning we want to satisfy them, if Allah wills.

The Shaykh: Well, first, it is regrettable that we say, this is a habit we know from Akhzam, which is rejecting authentic hadiths due to ignorance of those who acted upon them, rejecting the practice of an authentic hadith due to ignorance of who acted upon it, and here I said recently, near and far, that Allah the Exalted promised the Muslims that He would preserve their religion for them by preserving the Book and the authentic Sunnah, and He did not promise them that He would preserve for them in every hadith who among the Muslims acted upon it, and this is what Imam al-Hashimi al-Qurashi al-Mutalibi, Imam al-Shafi'i, explicitly stated in his treatise named "The Treatise" (al-Risalah), he said: "The hadith is a foundation in itself," so if the hadith is established from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and its meaning is clear, it is obligatory to act upon it because it is a foundation in itself, and we do not refrain from acting upon it until we find someone who preceded us in acting upon it. Yes, I am fully convinced that if the hadith allows for more than one aspect in its meaning, then here it is necessary for a student of knowledge like us to find someone who preceded him in interpreting the hadith with the understanding he leans toward, so that that serves as a basis for him that he did not misunderstand the hadith, but if the hadith is clear in meaning and manifest like a building, then at that time there is no need for the Muslim or the student of knowledge to refrain from acting upon the hadith because it is a foundation in itself. So our hadith -and perhaps some of you have heard it- is his saying (peace be upon him): , so it is on the scale of the well-known hadith, and well-known to many Muslims, and unknown to others among them, either unknown in narration and understanding, or unknown in understanding but known in narration, which is the hadith: , on the scale of this hadith came the hadith we are discussing: , and mentioning the statement that it is not permissible to act upon this hadith because no one from the Salaf acted upon it, this is nullifying knowledge with ignorance, the knowledge here as Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah (may Allah have mercy on him)
"Knowledge is what Allah said, what His Messenger said, what the Companions said, it is not deception"
... to the end, knowledge is what Allah said, what His Messenger said, so we are not saying an opinion from ourselves, but rather we are saying our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) said: , this is knowledge, by what was this knowledge refuted? By the saying of those you heard referred to: We do not know, their saying: We do not know, is ignorance, we do not know who acted upon this hadith, this if we concede to them this ignorance and we do not have other knowledge, which is that some of the Salaf acted upon this hadith, namely Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman, who is the narrator of the hadith, where he refuted -and upon a noble Companion- and his followers from the Tabi'un, namely Abdullah ibn Mas'ud, who were performing i'tikaf in some mosques, I think in Basra, so Hudhayfah argued against these people performing i'tikaf that he heard from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) this authentic hadith: , so we have established the knowledge from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) with this hadith, and we have established that some of the Salaf also acted upon this hadith and refuted completely, just as we refute today, i'tikaf in other than the three mosques, and before I finish speaking or commenting on this hadith, it was among the consequences of opening the door of i'tikaf in every mosque that a widespread innovation appeared in many lands, where it is written on pieces of paper in large letters to instruct those entering the mosque: I intend to perform i'tikaf in this mosque as long as I am in it, where did this innovation come from? From opening the door of i'tikaf in every mosque. Then I want to draw the attention of these people of doubt and skepticism in this hadith and in those who acted upon it from the Salaf, is the prescribed i'tikaf prescribed in every mosque, whether it is a congregational mosque or a non-congregational mosque, or a prayer place, or a house? So their answer to this question is our answer, and we have a precaution we rely on in the hadith , so if one of them says, for example, many will say -and perhaps some of you are present- and upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah and His blessings, they will say: It is not permissible to perform i'tikaf in the house, we will say to him what is the evidence? Do you have a prohibition from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) regarding i'tikaf in the house? There is nothing of that at all, then we ascend a degree and say what do you think of i'tikaf in .. -even if I contradict some of the etiquettes that some mention- what do you say about i'tikaf in a musayjid? Because they say it is not permissible to diminutive a masjid to a musayjid, but instead of saying: What do you say about i'tikaf in a small masjid, I say -because there is no prohibition in that-: What do you say about i'tikaf in a musayjid, some will also say not all of it: It is not permissible, and so I continue to ascend until I reach the masjid that is not a musayjid, but is not a congregational masjid, meaning Friday prayer is not performed in it, is it permissible to perform i'tikaf in such a masjid where Friday prayer is not performed, if he says it is permissible, we say bring your proof, and if he says it is not permissible, we say bring your basis. And so on until we do not find a negation except this hadith: . This is what I have as an answer to this question as well. If anyone has a statement, I will hear it, if Allah wills.

The questioner: They also say that this hadith was present before the eyes of the mujtahid imams, and yet it did not affect any one of them, -and upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah and His blessings- whether from the schools of the well-known followed imams or from others, that he issued a fatwa in accordance with this hadith, and this is what weakens its evidence.

The Shaykh : No, this is not a matter that weakens its meaning; it is a matter that weakens its chain of narration. This is a criticism. In any case, as we have learned from some of the living and deceased shaykhs—they have passed away but left behind their works—we learned from them to say on such an occasion: "Establish the Throne, then inscribe." I mean, we say to them: What is your evidence that this hadith was before the eyes of the mujtahid imams and yet they did not act upon it? This is merely a claim, and claims, unless you establish clear proofs for them, are the claims of claimants. Second, or rather third: What is expected of an imam among the imams of the Muslims when a hadith comes to him that is authentic in its chain and explicit in its meaning, coming to him in this form from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family)? Is what is expected of him to turn away from acting upon it, or to hasten to it, submit to it, and surrender to it, as the Lord of the Worlds said in the Noble Qur'an: There is no doubt that the answer to such a question is that, in our good opinion of them, if a hadith from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) comes to them that is authentic and explicit, they should submit to it and act upon it. How is it that they reverse the matter and claim that this hadith was before the eyes of the imams and yet they did not act upon it? This is one thing, and another thing: Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him) rebuked a man who said to him: "You say such and such, according to what came in the hadith, and so-and-so, a well-known scholar of that time, says the opposite of your view." He said to him, with a very strong expression of disapproval: "Do you think I have left the church?! Do you think I am the most stubborn of people, so that I would leave acting upon the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) for the saying of so-and-so and so-and-so?!" This is one thing, and another, and another. The saying of Imam al-Shafi'i is also: "There is no Muslim but that a sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) is hidden from him, whether in understanding, in the root of a matter, or in a statement. And the statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family)—so take his saying (peace and blessings be upon him) and leave my saying." Or he said: "So cast my saying to the winds." This is the position of the scholars. And those who say that this hadith was before the eyes of the scholars and yet they did not take it upon themselves are accusing them in their religion, whether they realize it or not. I do not know; perhaps they want to save themselves from the contradiction by throwing the imams into contradiction, so that, in their claim, their conscience is cleared from acting upon this authentic hadith. In summary: Suppose that this hadith, or any other hadith, was before the eyes of an imam or imams among the imams of the Muslims. Is it permissible for one to whom this hadith has reached, who is certain that some Muslim scholars knew of it but did not act upon it due to their opinion or ijtihad, is it permissible for one for whom it is established and for whom the obligation to act upon it is established to leave the hadith because so-and-so and so-and-so among the scholars did not take this hadith? The answer is also known from the words of the four imams, among which is what they agreed upon: "If the hadith is authentic, then it is my madhhab." And it is known in detail from the treatise of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him, Blessed and Exalted is He), which has been printed repeatedly and repeatedly under the title: *Raf' al-Malam 'an al-A'immah al-A'lam* (Lifting the Blame from the Famous Imams). Indeed, the researcher in the Sunnah, and the researcher in the sayings of the four imams, let alone others, will find that each of them left acting upon a certain hadith. We borrow the phrase quoted earlier to place it in its proper context. We know that some hadiths were before their eyes and yet they did not act upon those hadiths, but they have reached us without what contradicts them reaching us. So do we leave acting upon them because they left acting upon them, even though they were truly before their eyes?