The argument of those who see the permissibility of demonstrations by the story of the Islam of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him): The Muslims went out in Mecca, he was in one row and Hamza in another row, and they were saying this is
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : These people who hold demonstrations cite from the biography that when 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) embraced Islam, the Muslims went out in Mecca, 'Umar in one row and Hamza in another row, and they were saying this is a demonstration to show strength and to express disapproval of what the tyrants of Quraysh and their disbelievers are doing. What is your answer to this citation?
The Shaykh : My answer to this is: how many times did this phenomenon occur in the Muslim society?
The questioner : Once.
The Shaykh : Well, does one occurrence become a Sunnah to be followed? The scholars of jurisprudence say that if a prescribed act of worship is established from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) for which its doer is rewarded, then one should not persist in it constantly and forever, lest it become a followed tradition such that, with time, that matter which was originally recommended becomes an obligatory matter in the minds and customs of people, so that if any Muslim leaves this recommended act, there is severe censure against him. They say this and that is part of their jurisprudence. So what about when emotion surges on an occasion and such a group goes out as mentioned in the biography, and it is taken as a followed Sunnah, and even as an argument for what the disbelievers do constantly and forever against the Muslims who have not done that since this modernity at all, despite the severity of what necessitates it? We know, with great regret, that many of the previous rulers issued rulings contrary to Islam, and many people were imprisoned unjustly and oppressively, and perhaps killed. What would be the position of the Muslims? The Messenger (peace be upon him) commanded in some authentic hadiths the obligation of obeying the ruler, even if he takes your wealth and beats your back. I mean by this that things occurred in the past centuries that should have been censured publicly, but none of that happened. And from here, we fear from this so-called awakening. We truly fear from it, just as we are pleased with it, because it is an emotional awakening and not a scholarly awakening to the extent that this awakening occurs, so that it leans to the right and to the left. There is no doubt that in Algeria and in all lands of Islam, there is such an awakening that manifests in the emergence of the Muslim youth after they were sleeping and not awake. But you see them, before they walked a path that indicates that they did not understand the religion of Allah (Mighty and Majestic), and the examples of that are very many. So let us not go beyond what we are dealing with. This citation is sufficient for us now.
This citation indicates ignorance of Islamic jurisprudence. That is what I referred to earlier: this incident occurred, and I say, correcting myself, that I remember that this incident was mentioned in the biography, but I do not recall now if it is authentic in its chain of narration. If any of you knows that it was mentioned in a reliable book from the books of the Sunnah, let him remind me. Otherwise, the matter for me requires review. So, assuming the establishment of this demonstration when 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) embraced Islam, this occurred once. If it occurred once, it does not become a Sunnah such that we support what the disbelievers do, and then we make the Muslims in violation of this Sunnah because it was not repeated. And even if it was repeated, over all the eras and these long years, it is a drop in the ocean. It is not valid to be taken as evidence for such a reality as the disbelievers do, and then we follow them in that.
This citation means smoothing out, justifying, and legitimizing this reality, whatever its nature. I remember well that the Hanafi scholars explicitly stated in a jurisprudential issue, while acknowledging that it is a Prophetic Sunnah, that it should be left sometimes. That is the Sunnah of reciting Surat al-Sajdah on Friday. This is established in the two Sahihs. Nevertheless, the Hanafi scholars stated that the imam of the mosque should leave this Sunnah sometimes, lest the persistence of the imams in this Sunnah lead to the establishment of a belief in the minds of the common people that contradicts this Sunnah and raises its ruling above its level. And I have witnesses to this that confirms for us this precision in jurisprudence and understanding of the Sunnah.
I remember well that the imam of the Great Mosque in Damascus, the Umayyad Mosque, led the Fajr prayer on a Friday and did not recite Surat al-Sajdah. As soon as the imam finished the taslim, a great commotion arose from the worshippers. They rose up against the imam: why did you not recite Surat al-Sajdah? So the imam tried to convince them, saying: O brothers, I know that this is a Sunnah, and I always recite it in the Fajr of every Friday. But it is necessary to leave this Sunnah in reality. But as the poet said:
"And if you called, you would hear a living person, *** But there is no life for the one you call.
And even if a fire were blown into it, it would light up *** but you are blowing into ashes
The shouting continued for a very long time because this imam left the recitation of Surat al-Sajdah on that morning. And stranger than that is what happened to me personally. I was vacationing in a village about sixty kilometers from Damascus called Mada'a, and it is in a mountain. I went down to the mosque on Friday morning to pray with the congregation of Muslims there. It happened that the imam did not come. They looked and found no one there but me. I was a young man that day, but my beard had started to grow, so they thought well of me and put me forward. In truth, I did not memorize Surat al-Sajdah well, so I did not want to take the risk. I started with Surat Maryam and read the first two pages in the first rak'ah. When I wanted to bow and said the takbir for bowing, I felt that all the people went down into prostration. I was bowing and they prostrated. What does this indicate to you?
The present ones: According to custom.
The Shaykh : According to custom, yes. And unfortunately, as there are in some old and even new mosques a long minbar that cuts through the row, not just the first row, but some of these minbars cut through at least two rows. This minbar, despite the smallness of the mosque there in the village, cut through the first and second rows. So those who were directly behind me felt their mistake, so they made up for it and joined me in bowing. But those who were behind the minbar remained bowing until they heard my "Istaghfirullah" (excuse me), so they remained prostrating until they heard my "Allahu akbar" (Allah is the Greatest). Then they shouted, meaning they ruined their prayer with noise and commotion. And I, of course, was patient until I completed the prayer in its entirety. Then I turned to them and said to them: O people, do you not feel shame? Do you not feel shame? You are Arabs, or are you non-Arabs? Do you not distinguish between the reciter's saying "Qaf" (excuse me, "Alif") in the first rak'ah and "Kah-Ha-Ya-Ain-Sad"? Do you not distinguish between this and that? If this happened in the lands of the non-Arabs, it would be a disgrace for them. So what about you, and you are Arabs? But it seems that your minds are occupied with crops and milk and such matters. So in this modernity, I was confirmed in the truth of the saying of the scholars I referred to earlier that the imam should consider the state of the society he lives in, so that they do not exaggerate in some rulings. This story and the one before it show you that matters in the Shari'ah must be taken without exaggeration, without raising what was a Sunnah to the level of obligation, and to the level of strong obligation, and what was an obligation is lowered to the level of a Sunnah. All of this is excess or negligence, which is not permissible. This is the answer to this citation which indicates the ignorance of those who cite it. Please.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : This story was mentioned in ... the Islam of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) and in Siyar A'lam al-Nubala.
The Shaykh : It's fine, but this does not benefit us with authenticity.
The questioner : No, with a weak chain of narration.
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : The story of the Islam of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab is weak.
The Shaykh : I am with you regarding the story of the Islam of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, in which it is said that he entered upon his sister, and so on. This story is indeed weak. It is cited by those who say that it is not permissible for a Muslim to touch the Qur'an except in a state of ritual purity. If this story was not reported except through this chain, then it is a weak story. As for me, I said earlier, with caution, fearing that this story might have been reported alone in some of the books of the Sunnah with another chain, in which case that chain would be either good in itself or good due to external support. As for the well-known story, which Imam al-Daraqutni included in his Sunan, I... I say that Imam al-Daraqutni narrated this story in his Sunan with a weak chain. If this story, which contains that display, was reported with another chain that can be cited or used as evidence, then that is fine. Otherwise, the story to which the brother referred is weak, and it is not permissible to cite it as evidence.
Please go ahead.
The Shaykh : My answer to this is: how many times did this phenomenon occur in the Muslim society?
The questioner : Once.
The Shaykh : Well, does one occurrence become a Sunnah to be followed? The scholars of jurisprudence say that if a prescribed act of worship is established from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) for which its doer is rewarded, then one should not persist in it constantly and forever, lest it become a followed tradition such that, with time, that matter which was originally recommended becomes an obligatory matter in the minds and customs of people, so that if any Muslim leaves this recommended act, there is severe censure against him. They say this and that is part of their jurisprudence. So what about when emotion surges on an occasion and such a group goes out as mentioned in the biography, and it is taken as a followed Sunnah, and even as an argument for what the disbelievers do constantly and forever against the Muslims who have not done that since this modernity at all, despite the severity of what necessitates it? We know, with great regret, that many of the previous rulers issued rulings contrary to Islam, and many people were imprisoned unjustly and oppressively, and perhaps killed. What would be the position of the Muslims? The Messenger (peace be upon him) commanded in some authentic hadiths the obligation of obeying the ruler, even if he takes your wealth and beats your back. I mean by this that things occurred in the past centuries that should have been censured publicly, but none of that happened. And from here, we fear from this so-called awakening. We truly fear from it, just as we are pleased with it, because it is an emotional awakening and not a scholarly awakening to the extent that this awakening occurs, so that it leans to the right and to the left. There is no doubt that in Algeria and in all lands of Islam, there is such an awakening that manifests in the emergence of the Muslim youth after they were sleeping and not awake. But you see them, before they walked a path that indicates that they did not understand the religion of Allah (Mighty and Majestic), and the examples of that are very many. So let us not go beyond what we are dealing with. This citation is sufficient for us now.
This citation indicates ignorance of Islamic jurisprudence. That is what I referred to earlier: this incident occurred, and I say, correcting myself, that I remember that this incident was mentioned in the biography, but I do not recall now if it is authentic in its chain of narration. If any of you knows that it was mentioned in a reliable book from the books of the Sunnah, let him remind me. Otherwise, the matter for me requires review. So, assuming the establishment of this demonstration when 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) embraced Islam, this occurred once. If it occurred once, it does not become a Sunnah such that we support what the disbelievers do, and then we make the Muslims in violation of this Sunnah because it was not repeated. And even if it was repeated, over all the eras and these long years, it is a drop in the ocean. It is not valid to be taken as evidence for such a reality as the disbelievers do, and then we follow them in that.
This citation means smoothing out, justifying, and legitimizing this reality, whatever its nature. I remember well that the Hanafi scholars explicitly stated in a jurisprudential issue, while acknowledging that it is a Prophetic Sunnah, that it should be left sometimes. That is the Sunnah of reciting Surat al-Sajdah on Friday. This is established in the two Sahihs. Nevertheless, the Hanafi scholars stated that the imam of the mosque should leave this Sunnah sometimes, lest the persistence of the imams in this Sunnah lead to the establishment of a belief in the minds of the common people that contradicts this Sunnah and raises its ruling above its level. And I have witnesses to this that confirms for us this precision in jurisprudence and understanding of the Sunnah.
I remember well that the imam of the Great Mosque in Damascus, the Umayyad Mosque, led the Fajr prayer on a Friday and did not recite Surat al-Sajdah. As soon as the imam finished the taslim, a great commotion arose from the worshippers. They rose up against the imam: why did you not recite Surat al-Sajdah? So the imam tried to convince them, saying: O brothers, I know that this is a Sunnah, and I always recite it in the Fajr of every Friday. But it is necessary to leave this Sunnah in reality. But as the poet said:
"And if you called, you would hear a living person, *** But there is no life for the one you call.
And even if a fire were blown into it, it would light up *** but you are blowing into ashes
The shouting continued for a very long time because this imam left the recitation of Surat al-Sajdah on that morning. And stranger than that is what happened to me personally. I was vacationing in a village about sixty kilometers from Damascus called Mada'a, and it is in a mountain. I went down to the mosque on Friday morning to pray with the congregation of Muslims there. It happened that the imam did not come. They looked and found no one there but me. I was a young man that day, but my beard had started to grow, so they thought well of me and put me forward. In truth, I did not memorize Surat al-Sajdah well, so I did not want to take the risk. I started with Surat Maryam and read the first two pages in the first rak'ah. When I wanted to bow and said the takbir for bowing, I felt that all the people went down into prostration. I was bowing and they prostrated. What does this indicate to you?
The present ones: According to custom.
The Shaykh : According to custom, yes. And unfortunately, as there are in some old and even new mosques a long minbar that cuts through the row, not just the first row, but some of these minbars cut through at least two rows. This minbar, despite the smallness of the mosque there in the village, cut through the first and second rows. So those who were directly behind me felt their mistake, so they made up for it and joined me in bowing. But those who were behind the minbar remained bowing until they heard my "Istaghfirullah" (excuse me), so they remained prostrating until they heard my "Allahu akbar" (Allah is the Greatest). Then they shouted, meaning they ruined their prayer with noise and commotion. And I, of course, was patient until I completed the prayer in its entirety. Then I turned to them and said to them: O people, do you not feel shame? Do you not feel shame? You are Arabs, or are you non-Arabs? Do you not distinguish between the reciter's saying "Qaf" (excuse me, "Alif") in the first rak'ah and "Kah-Ha-Ya-Ain-Sad"? Do you not distinguish between this and that? If this happened in the lands of the non-Arabs, it would be a disgrace for them. So what about you, and you are Arabs? But it seems that your minds are occupied with crops and milk and such matters. So in this modernity, I was confirmed in the truth of the saying of the scholars I referred to earlier that the imam should consider the state of the society he lives in, so that they do not exaggerate in some rulings. This story and the one before it show you that matters in the Shari'ah must be taken without exaggeration, without raising what was a Sunnah to the level of obligation, and to the level of strong obligation, and what was an obligation is lowered to the level of a Sunnah. All of this is excess or negligence, which is not permissible. This is the answer to this citation which indicates the ignorance of those who cite it. Please.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : This story was mentioned in ... the Islam of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) and in Siyar A'lam al-Nubala.
The Shaykh : It's fine, but this does not benefit us with authenticity.
The questioner : No, with a weak chain of narration.
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : The story of the Islam of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab is weak.
The Shaykh : I am with you regarding the story of the Islam of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, in which it is said that he entered upon his sister, and so on. This story is indeed weak. It is cited by those who say that it is not permissible for a Muslim to touch the Qur'an except in a state of ritual purity. If this story was not reported except through this chain, then it is a weak story. As for me, I said earlier, with caution, fearing that this story might have been reported alone in some of the books of the Sunnah with another chain, in which case that chain would be either good in itself or good due to external support. As for the well-known story, which Imam al-Daraqutni included in his Sunan, I... I say that Imam al-Daraqutni narrated this story in his Sunan with a weak chain. If this story, which contains that display, was reported with another chain that can be cited or used as evidence, then that is fine. Otherwise, the story to which the brother referred is weak, and it is not permissible to cite it as evidence.
Please go ahead.