What is your opinion on making up the witr prayer if it is forgotten? And is the makeup performed as an even number or not?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : A question I forgot among the questions, and many of the brothers urged me to answer it. It is: O Shaykh, what is your esteemed opinion on making up the witr prayer if it is forgotten, and is it made up as an even number or not? A hadith of Aisha has been reported, but it is not an explicit text on that matter. Has a sound chain been reported from the Companions and the Successors that it is made up as an even number, even though the majority in al-Bukhari’s al-Fath said that it is not made up?
The Shaykh : First, you or the ones who tasked you with this question...
The questioner : And I am occupied on the side of the brothers.
The Shaykh : Ah, meaning you are afraid you might be the second Abdullah... If it is permissible for me to ask, what do you mean by "making up"? Do you mean the pure linguistic Arabic meaning? Or do you mean the technical jurisprudential meaning?
The questioner : The jurisprudential meaning, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : The jurisprudential meaning, which is? No, I do not think you mean this.
And you will see when the dust settles *** whether you are a horse or a donkey...
The Shaykh: There is a difference between one who forgot the witr or slept through it, and this one must make it up; and one who turned away from this prayer, and this one does not make it up. So do you mean this or that?
The questioner : No, I mean one who forgot or slept.
The Shaykh : Then it is not the jurisprudential makeup.
The questioner : The linguistic one?
The Shaykh : Of course, because the jurisprudential makeup is performing the act of worship after its time, in a time not prescribed for it. For example, a man wakes up for the Fajr prayer but is distracted from it until its time passes with the rising of the sun. Here comes the traditional question: does he make it up or not? The jurists say he makes it up; we say he does not make it up; because the Messenger of Allah saidSahih Muslim 684c. This may be a surprise to you, of course, because you are a Hanbali, even if you are a Salafi in creed.
The questioner : I follow the evidence, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Good, and praise be to Allah, and that is what we want. But I do not accuse you of not following the evidence; I am speaking based on the fact that you are a Hanbali. Can you deny this?
The questioner : No, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : That is it; so you were hasty with me when I said that you follow the evidence. I did not accuse you, but you are now combining two things. It is obligatory for every student of knowledge to be a Hanbali while seeking the evidence, to be a Hanafi while seeking the evidence, to be a Maliki while seeking the evidence, and to be a Shafi'i while seeking the evidence. It is not as many of our Salafi brothers, the impetuous ones, the impetuous ones, imagine: "What is it, brother? Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, Hanbali, and so on." They say: Allah said, the Messenger of Allah said; Allah said, the Messenger of Allah said. This requires preparation for that. If there is a place where this is my madhhab, if there is an atmosphere resembling the atmosphere of the Salaf, there is no madhhabism there, but rather: Allah said, the Messenger of Allah said. It is not permissible for one to be a Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, and Hanbali at all. But the reality is that this society is missing, it does not exist, correct or not?
The questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : So I understand from you and others that you are a Hanbali in madhhab, and there is no dispute about that. If I tell you that you are a Hanbali, why did you insult yourself with this attribution? This is your duty. But if you are a Hanbali who follows blindly in contradiction to the evidence, here the criticism comes. And I did not criticize you.The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : And that is my opinion of you: if the evidence is established for you, you follow it. So now, the Hanbali madhhab says that whoever misses a prayer makes it up, is that not so?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Look, Professor Ali, take this benefit.
Al-Halabi : Yes, my teacher, may Allah bless you, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : First, you or the ones who tasked you with this question...
The questioner : And I am occupied on the side of the brothers.
The Shaykh : Ah, meaning you are afraid you might be the second Abdullah... If it is permissible for me to ask, what do you mean by "making up"? Do you mean the pure linguistic Arabic meaning? Or do you mean the technical jurisprudential meaning?
The questioner : The jurisprudential meaning, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : The jurisprudential meaning, which is? No, I do not think you mean this.
And you will see when the dust settles *** whether you are a horse or a donkey...
The Shaykh: There is a difference between one who forgot the witr or slept through it, and this one must make it up; and one who turned away from this prayer, and this one does not make it up. So do you mean this or that?
The questioner : No, I mean one who forgot or slept.
The Shaykh : Then it is not the jurisprudential makeup.
The questioner : The linguistic one?
The Shaykh : Of course, because the jurisprudential makeup is performing the act of worship after its time, in a time not prescribed for it. For example, a man wakes up for the Fajr prayer but is distracted from it until its time passes with the rising of the sun. Here comes the traditional question: does he make it up or not? The jurists say he makes it up; we say he does not make it up; because the Messenger of Allah said
He who forgets the prayer, or he slept (and it was omitted)
من نسي صلاة أو نام عنهاThe questioner : I follow the evidence, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Good, and praise be to Allah, and that is what we want. But I do not accuse you of not following the evidence; I am speaking based on the fact that you are a Hanbali. Can you deny this?
The questioner : No, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : That is it; so you were hasty with me when I said that you follow the evidence. I did not accuse you, but you are now combining two things. It is obligatory for every student of knowledge to be a Hanbali while seeking the evidence, to be a Hanafi while seeking the evidence, to be a Maliki while seeking the evidence, and to be a Shafi'i while seeking the evidence. It is not as many of our Salafi brothers, the impetuous ones, the impetuous ones, imagine: "What is it, brother? Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, Hanbali, and so on." They say: Allah said, the Messenger of Allah said; Allah said, the Messenger of Allah said. This requires preparation for that. If there is a place where this is my madhhab, if there is an atmosphere resembling the atmosphere of the Salaf, there is no madhhabism there, but rather: Allah said, the Messenger of Allah said. It is not permissible for one to be a Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, and Hanbali at all. But the reality is that this society is missing, it does not exist, correct or not?
The questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : So I understand from you and others that you are a Hanbali in madhhab, and there is no dispute about that. If I tell you that you are a Hanbali, why did you insult yourself with this attribution? This is your duty. But if you are a Hanbali who follows blindly in contradiction to the evidence, here the criticism comes. And I did not criticize you.The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : And that is my opinion of you: if the evidence is established for you, you follow it. So now, the Hanbali madhhab says that whoever misses a prayer makes it up, is that not so?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Look, Professor Ali, take this benefit.
Al-Halabi : Yes, my teacher, may Allah bless you, our Shaykh.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.
