In some Islamic countries, when the imam finishes the Friday prayer, one of the callers to Allah (Mighty and Majestic) stands up and reminds the people of the days of Allah.

The questioner : In some Islamic countries, after the imam finishes the Friday prayer, one of the callers to Allah (Mighty and Majestic) stands up and reminds the people of the days of Allah. Does this conflict with the verse ? Also, this issue occurs in the tarawih prayer when, after every four rak'ahs, the imam stands up and reminds the people of the days of Allah (Mighty and Majestic). Is this permissible?

The Shaykh : The first issue differs from the second, and the second differs from the first. The first issue does not conflict with or contradict a man standing up after the Friday prayer to remind, preach, and perhaps teach, nor with the saying of Allah the Exalted . This is because, although the verse is explicit in its command, this command is not for obligation by the consensus of the scholars; it is a command of permissibility and the lifting of a previous prohibition in the same verse, in the same surah, where He (Glorified and Exalted is He) said . So when Allah (Mighty and Majestic) intended to restore the previous ruling before commanding them to say , He said regarding trade and buying and the like. This verse is among the evidence of the scholars of usul al-fiqh (the principles of jurisprudence) that a command does not necessarily imply obligation always, even though they differed on the original ruling: is the original ruling of a command obligation? This is the stronger position (rajih) according to the majority of scholars of usul al-fiqh that the original ruling of a command is neither for obligation nor for recommendation, and that this requires other external evidence apart from the command itself. As you see, or as you feel with me, this is a weaker position (marjuh) because it requires research and individual analysis for every command, which those addressed by all these commands cannot do. Therefore, the statement of the majority that the original ruling is obligation—that the original ruling of a command is obligation—is the correct one, one hundred percent, because the style of speech in the Arabic language requires this first, and second, because making the command ambiguous does not yield obligation or recommendation except in light of the evidence that every listener of the command must directly know. This means suspending the Shari'ah commands and suspending the implementation of what the Muslims were commanded to do. This reminds me of a story, and it seems the time has ended, so let us make it the last part of this session, because it has, first, a benefit, and it has a point and a wit. Once, one of our Salafi brothers in Damascus came to me while I was in the Zahiriyyah Library and complained to me about his boss in the office where he works, saying that he had disagreed with his boss on this usul al-fiqh issue: is the command for obligation or not? His boss adopted the second view, that it is not for obligation, and our brother adopted that it is for obligation, as we explain in all our gatherings. Our brother was not as strong as his boss in Islamic culture and knowledge of usul and furu' (branches), so due to this disparity, the boss overcame the subordinate, first, and second, because he is the boss. I told him, because I could not teach this Salafi brother the evidence in one session, especially since he comes to me while I am bent over research and verification in the Zahiriyyah Library, and the library is not a place for preaching and teaching, and so on, that I would give him words by which he could silence his companion and his boss. I told him: "As long as it is so, whenever your boss orders you to do something, you do not obey him. For example, if he says, 'Give me that book,' 'Give me the pen,' 'Give me the paper,' 'Give me this' (in the Syrian expression), you say 'Tunash tunash,' meaning 'do your own thing, I didn't hear you,' until the one giving the order gets annoyed. Then he will say to you, 'My brother, what is wrong with you? Why don't you listen? Why don't you execute the order?' You say to him, 'Professor, you taught us that a command does not imply obligation, so I am not responsible.' And so he did, and he got rid of him. In fact, if it is said that a command does not imply obligation, this is a suspension. When can the one commanded be able to do so? If the master says to the servant, 'Go get water,' he stays in his place and does not respond to his order. Why? Because the command does not imply obligation until there is a sign (qarinah). And where does the sign come from for such a commanded person or that command to imply obligation? So when the verse came, it means the lifting of the previous command . Leave the trade now; the command to seek livelihood came, so it lifted that prohibition. Thus, the command for something after its prohibition implies permissibility and does not imply obligation. Since that is the case, the preacher who preaches to the people on Friday after the prayer is not contradicting this hadith, because the hadith does not obligate immediate departure as it obligates departure from the prayer with the taslim. There is a great difference between this and that. This is regarding the preacher on Friday. As for the preacher after four rak'ahs of tarawih, the matter differs completely in my view. And although there is no command here that implies permissibility as the command in the previous verse, I see that the prayer of standing (qiyam) is a special setting. The intended purpose is not knowledge and teaching, but rather the purification of souls by turning to Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) through prayer, standing, bowing, prostrating, and the remembrance of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) after the prayer. So this atmosphere is not permissible to be occupied with anything else, even if that other thing is worship, or even if it is better than worship, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said So seeking knowledge and proceeding in it is better than the voluntary prayer. But the lesser thing may sometimes be better than the greater thing in other times. For example, you know his (peace and blessings be upon him) saying or his prohibition (peace and blessings be upon him) regarding reciting the Qur'an in ruku' and sujud. We say "Subhan Rabbi al-'Azim" (Glory be to my Lord the Great) and "Subhan Rabbi al-A'la" (Glory be to my Lord the Most High) in ruku' and sujud, and other known supplications. Is that better than the Qur'an? The answer is no. But we say yes, here, in this place, this recitation is better than the Qur'an, not as a principle, but as a branch related to this place. When we sit for the tashahhud in prayer, we do not recite al-Fatihah, but we recite "At-tahiyyat" (The greetings). Is "At-tahiyyat" better than the Qur'an, better than al-Fatihah, the opening of the Book? The answer is no. But if we recite al-Fatihah in the tashahhud, we have disobeyed, and if we recite the tashahhud, we have followed. So the wisdom is to place each thing in its proper place. Why did the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prescribe or establish, from his Lord, the prayer of standing in Ramadan? Was he reminding? Was he teaching? The answer is no; it is pure worship. Therefore, the matter differs in my view regarding reminding during tarawih. So this is not prescribed, except in one case: if an occasion arises, for example, if the imam sees a man who does not know how to perform the prayer of standing, he teaches him. But to make reminding a regular part of the recitations in the prayer of standing in Ramadan, this is religious innovation (bid'ah). And praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds. And perhaps you have learned, if Allah wills, in some of what you have learned, contentment, so there is no question after this; then depart as guided ones.