Did it become established that 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) gathered the people for tarawih in twenty rak'ahs?

The questioner : Did it become established from 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) that he gathered the people for twenty rak'ahs?

The Shaykh: No.

The questioner : What is established? I mentioned it to some of the brothers, and he said: This is the argument of a bankrupt man. Yes, indeed!

The Shaykh : What is the argument of the bankrupt man?

The questioner : The argument of the bankrupt man is that it is weak.
Abu Malik: Meaning, he did not like it to be weak!

The questioner : That is his statement, just as he said, meaning.

The Shaykh : Now, this wealthy man, if Allah wills, has it established with him that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) did not increase in Ramadan or in any other time beyond eleven rak'ahs?

The questioner : He says that this is specific to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and he argues that the Messenger did not go out except for three days only, so this statement of his cannot be built upon!

The Shaykh : What did the Messenger do?

The questioner : He did not go out to prayer except for three days only!

Another questioner : In congregation, meaning.

The questioner : In congregation in Ramadan in the night prayer.

The Shaykh : Now, does he not know the rest of the hadith?

The questioner : No, it was not mentioned.

The Shaykh His going out was only for the sake of his Ummah!

The questioner : So he is saying it based on a rejected narration.
Abu Malik: Our Shaykh, excuse me, I want to clarify what is in his heart. He wants to say that that man who said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) did not go out except for three days means that the increase happened before, yes, this is what he is saying. Meaning, imagine that the increase beyond eight came, and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) was still alive, and that the people approved of it. This is what he is saying!

The Shaykh : This companion of yours to whom you are referring says, as Abu Malik assumed about the Messenger, that in his home for the remaining nights of Ramadan he was praying twenty-three rak'ahs?

The questioner : No, he did not say this.

The Shaykh : Because that is how he understands it.

The questioner : The people after him, after the death of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), 'Umar gathered the people for twenty as he said.

The Shaykh : My brother, we understood this.
Abu Malik: ... among themselves.

The Shaykh : We asked you, did the hadith of A'ishah reach him? You answered on his behalf: that it was only three nights. I understood this statement to mean that he did not pray except in those three nights, while others might understand that he prayed the remaining nights but did not limit himself to eleven rak'ahs, but rather twenty-three. Does your companion say this?

The questioner : It is not this.

The Shaykh : Now, what does he say then?

The questioner : He says that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not go out to the people and gather them for the night prayer except for three nights only!

The Shaykh : I understood, my brother, but the Messenger clarified the reason. What does he say?

The questioner : He means that it cannot be built upon, meaning you are increasing beyond the norm, such that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not go out except for three days only, meaning you did it, meaning you are now doing a full thirty in the mosques!

The Shaykh : I understood this, it has become a repetition of words. May Allah reward you. We say as the Lady A'ishah said in her hadith, or others Why did he leave it? Fear that it would be thought to be obligatory.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : So the leaving was for a cause, and therefore when 'Umar ibn al-Khattab returned, he did not innovate as some ignorant people regarding the Sunnah claim, but rather he revived the Sunnah, because many of the rulings of the Shari'ah that are attributed to a Shari'ah cause, the scholars and jurists say that the ruling follows the cause in its existence and absence. Why did the Messenger (peace be upon him) leave the night prayer after three nights? Fear that it would be written as obligatory upon them. Now, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) passed away and the Shari'ah was completed, there was no longer a fear that a person would think a new obligation had been imposed that had not been imposed before. Why? Therefore, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab did not bring something new, but rather he revived the old thing that the Messenger (peace be upon him) left for the cause that was present during his life. But with his death, the cause disappeared, so the effect disappeared, meaning the leaving disappeared and the virtue of reviving it took its place. Therefore, our brothers present know that the Messenger (peace be upon him) encouraged the Muslims to pray the night prayer of Ramadan with the imam, and that if they prayed 'Isha with the imam, it was written for them as standing for half the night, and if they stood, it was written for them as standing for a full night. So here we have two matters, each of which stands on establishing the legitimacy of continuing the night prayer in congregation in Ramadan, even if the Messenger only prayed for three nights only. The first matter is that he attributed the leaving to the fear that it would be made obligatory upon them. The second matter is that he encouraged the Muslims to pray the night prayer in congregation. So 'Umar ibn al-Khattab responded to these two texts and revived this Sunnah. Here comes another thing. We ask this man: 'Umar ibn al-Khattab ordered Ubayy to lead the people in prayer. How many rak'ahs did he pray with them?

The questioner : They say twenty.

The Shaykh : He is either ignorant or from ... .

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Listen, my brother, may Allah guide you. He is either ignorant or deliberately ignorant, because the hadith with the most authentic chain in the Muwatta of Imam Malik, with the highest chain, is that he ordered Ubayy ibn Ka'b to lead the people in prayer for eleven rak'ahs. And when we say this, we do not deny that there is another narration that says that they were praying in the time of 'Umar, in the era of 'Umar, twenty-three rak'ahs. We do not deny this. But we have here two positions: one is hadith-based and the other is fiqh-based. As for the hadith-based position, it is that the first chain for the eleven rak'ahs is more authentic than the other chain. This is the hadith-based position, meaning we say that that increase is denounced, or at least anomalous, because it contradicts the authentic narration that I mentioned quoting from the Muwatta of Imam Malik. This is from the hadith perspective. Of course, not everyone, even if he is from the people of knowledge, can agree with another who is like him or lower in knowledge. He may see that the second narration is not authentic. Here we enter the fiqh aspect. We enter the fiqh aspect and say: let us assume that the second narration is authentic and that the people were praying twenty-three rak'ahs in the era of 'Umar. 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) is established with the opposite, as I mentioned earlier. So now, from the fiqh perspective and from the perspective of applying following the Messenger (peace be upon him) as a general principle, is it better to limit ourselves to what the Messenger (peace be upon him) did in quantity and quality, or is it better to do the permissible thing? At the very least, it is permissible for him. At the very least, it is permissible. But can someone say that what came in the second narration from 'Umar is better than what came in the first narration that matches what the Messenger was upon? I do not think a jurist can claim such a claim. So we follow him and say that all that is the case here is that it is permissible to pray twenty-three rak'ahs. And I say I was the first to say, if that was established, in my opinion, from the first aspect, the hadith aspect, I was the first to say it is permissible. But I still hold that the better is what? The better is what the Messenger (peace be upon him) was upon.