On what does the negation operate: on perfection or on validity, in the case of his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): “There is no prayer without a head covering”?

The questioner : May Allah reward you, Your Eminence.The Shaykh : What is meant by the texts in which certain things are negated, such as his saying (peace be upon him) , or , or ? Is the negation of validity or of perfection? May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : The original rule for such negating hadiths is that the negation is understood as negating validity, not perfection. This is the original rule, and it is not permissible to depart from a principle of the Shari'ah or one of its rules except with a Shari'ah proof that also obliges the Muslim to depart from this original rule and follow the compelling proof. This is the case here, as is said regarding the Shari'ah commands in the Book and the Sunnah: do they indicate obligation, or recommendation, or do they indicate nothing? The scholars differed, and the correct view is that the command indicates obligation, except for a proof. Similarly here, , , and so on. The original rule is that these acts of worship are not valid unless a proof comes that compels the one who examines this proof to interpret the negation of validity as a negation of perfection, in order to reconcile the texts. In the three examples you mentioned, there is nothing in the Shari'ah that supports interpreting the negation as a negation of perfection. All the negation mentioned in these three hadiths is a negation of validity. The one who does not recite the opening of the Book has an invalid prayer, and the one who does not mention the name of Allah over his ablution has a defective ablution, and consequently no prayer for him. And the woman who does not pray with a head covering on her head, her prayer is also not valid. However, this rule—that the "la" is for negating validity—may, from the Arabic perspective, sometimes be a negation of the genus. This is not the rule we stated, which is that it is for negating validity. It is not consistent; a text may come with a negation of something, but the intended meaning is a negation of perfection, not a negation of validity. For example, his saying (peace be upon him): . The decisive proofs from the Book and the Sunnah indicate that the Muslim who testifies that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, whatever sins he commits, this good word saves him on the Day of Resurrection from eternal abode in the Fire, as he (peace be upon him) said: . So when this hadith comes and contradicts those pillars and those strong proofs indicating that the faith of the Muslim benefits him even if it is the weight of an atom, the scholar is then compelled to interpret his saying (peace be upon him): , meaning there is no complete faith, because if we understand it on its apparent meaning, we would declare them disbelievers. This is the position of the Khawarij. In fact, this is the position of those who rebelled against the Khawarij and others, because the Khawarij declare a Muslim a disbeliever for committing a major sin. We do not hold that failing to fulfill a trust is a major sin; it is certainly a sin. If we take the apparent meaning of the hadith, it means we declare Muslims disbelievers merely for committing a sin, whereas the proofs we referred to indicate to us decisively that a Muslim does not become a disbeliever merely by committing a sin, but the word "La ilaha illa Allah" will save him from eternal abode in the Fire. Therefore, "there is no faith for one who has no trustworthiness" means no complete faith, and "there is no religion for one who has no covenant" means no complete religion. But we resorted to this interpretation because of those proofs. As for the three examples raised in the question, there is no proof that compels us to interpret them as we did in the last hadith, except following a school of thought, and this is not a proof. This is sufficient, and praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh: And you as well, if Allah wills.

The questioner : In the book of dreams, it is mentioned that Abu al-Darda' said: "Deeds are presented to the dead. If they see good, they praise Allah, and if they see otherwise, they seek forgiveness for us."

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : The commentator says that he did not find a biography of the shaykh of Ibn Abi al-Dunya, but the rest of the chain is good, and that Ibn al-Mubarak narrated it in his book of asceticism with a good chain, stopping at Abu al-Darda'. Is this correct?

The Shaykh : The hadith is not valid as marfu' (traced to the Prophet). As for whether it is valid as mawquf (stopping at a Companion), I do not know.

The questioner : If it is valid as mawquf, does it have the ruling of marfu'?

The Shaykh : No

The questioner : Because it is a matter of the unseen, or something like that?

The Shaykh: No.