Benefits of the Hadith: (When one of you prays facing something that shields him from people . . . )

The Shaykh : In this hadith there are benefits:
One of its benefits is that the apparent meaning of his statement: indicates that placing a sutrah is not obligatory, because his statement: implies that one may pray facing something that shields him, or one may not pray facing it. The disagreement on this issue has been mentioned previously, and the stronger position is that adopting a sutrah is not obligatory.
Another benefit of this hadith is pointing out the benefit of the sutrah, which is that it shields a person from people. We have previously mentioned that it shields from people in the sense that one who passes behind it does not harm the worshipper in any way, whether that person is one who breaks the prayer or not. Also, it protects the person, because if someone passes by him and there is a sutrah in front of him, what happens? He respects him and avoids passing in front of him. So it shields from people in these two ways.
Another benefit of this hadith is the obligation to repel one who intends to pass through, based on his statement: This indicates that repelling is necessary. This is clear in the case of the obligatory prayer or the voluntary prayer, specifically when the passerby breaks the prayer. If it is the obligatory prayer and the passerby is one who breaks the prayer, it is clear that he must be repelled. Why? So that he does not invalidate an obligatory act of worship, and the obligatory act of worship must be completed by the person. So in the obligatory prayer, if the passerby is one who breaks the prayer, he must be repelled. Why? So that he does not invalidate for him an obligatory act of worship that he is able to prevent. As for the voluntary prayer, or if the passerby is one who does not break the prayer, the apparent view is that the matter is not obligatory but rather recommended. One might say that it is obligatory, not because of invalidating the prayer, but because it is a disciplinary punishment (ta'zir) and correction for the passerby so that he becomes aware. I mean, some people, and we see them in the Sacred Mosque in Makkah, some people walk with their eyes in the sky and do not care. So when he feels that the worshipper will repel him, if he refuses, he will fight him, and at that point he becomes aware. So the important point is that the obligation of repelling is apparent when the prayer is obligatory and the passerby breaks the prayer. In cases other than that, it is possible that it is obligatory and it is possible that it is recommended. This is because if a person intentionally breaks a voluntary prayer without an excuse, he has the right to do so. But we say that it may be obligatory from another aspect, which is the disciplinary punishment and correction for this, and that it is obligatory for a person to be mindful of his brothers. This strengthens the view that he said:
Another benefit of this hadith is that if someone intends to pass through what is beyond what is in front of him, he has no right to repel him. But what is in front of him? Some scholars said that this is referred to custom (urf). This is referred to custom. So whatever is considered in front of the worshipper is in front of him, and whatever is not, is not. It was said that this is estimated as three cubits from the worshipper's foot. The stronger view is that what is in front of him, if it is a defined area like a prayer mat, for example, or the tiles in the vicinity of the Sacred Mosque, then whatever is within that defined area is in front of him, and whatever exceeds it is not in front of him. And if there is no defined area, then what is in front of him is the limit of his prostration, meaning the position of the forehead during prostration. This is because this worshipper has a respected place. What is his respected place? His respected place is what he needs for his prayer. The man did not define a specific thing, did not place a sutrah, and did not have a defined prayer place. So we say that he does not own of the land except the amount he needs for his prayer, which is the limit of his prostration.
Another benefit of this hadith is that if he prays without a sutrah, he has no right to prevent [the passerby], because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) qualified the matter with the condition of praying facing a sutrah. This issue, were it not for other hadiths, would be the implication of the text. But there are other hadiths that indicate that he repels him absolutely if he intends to pass in front of him. And this is the correct view: that if someone intends to pass in front of you, even if you do not have a sutrah, you have the right to repel him. But the sutrah and other things differ in that everything between him and the sutrah is respected, even if it is far from the place of prostration, unless it is an excessive distance. But if he does not have a sutrah, it is up to the limit of his prostration. This is the difference.
Another benefit of this hadith is that if someone intends to hand something to a person from in front of the worshipper, there is no harm. The evidence is his statement: And if he extends his hand to the person behind the worshipper to hand him something or to greet him, there is no harm. But if this causes disturbance to the worshipper, such as leading to the worshipper looking or following the gaze of the one who extended his hand, then at that time we say: do not do it. Why? Because it leads to disturbing the worshipper and introducing a deficiency in his prayer. But if the worshipper does not care about it, like a man known for his humility in prayer, or a blind man who does not look at it, then there is no harm.
Another benefit of this hadith is the permissibility of fighting one who refuses to be repelled and attempts to pass through, based on his statement: And our meaning by permissibility is that fighting is not prohibited, but it is commanded. Now, if someone says: I am afraid that if I fight him, he will fight me, we say to him: Yes, this is the apparent meaning of the word: Because the reciprocal form implies action from both sides. So he says: I am afraid he will fight me. Then the matter prolongs: he hits me, I hit him; he hits me, I hit him; the matter prolongs. We say: if he fears that his prayer will be invalidated by excessive movement, he should not do it, because the basis of fighting is for the protection of the prayer. If that leads to its invalidation, he should not do it. And if he exceeds the limits while performing the commanded repelling and then fighting, on whom is the sin?
The student: The passerby.

The Shaykh : On the passerby. The sin is on the passerby.
And another benefit of this hadith is the excellence of the teaching of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family), and that is by linking rulings to their causes, based on his statement: This is a required matter for the mufti to link rulings to their causes or to their evidence, especially if he feels that the questioner has not been very reassured, to the extent that he has been surprised by the fatwa. So here, if he does not find [a way], he should link the fatwa to the evidence, or to the clear cause, so that the questioner is reassured. I prefer that the fatwa be linked to the evidence in every fatwa if he is able to do so, because if the ruling is linked to the evidence, the questioner acts in following what? The evidence. And this is an important issue, because acting in following the evidence is the realization of following the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). And if you say to the questioner: this is forbidden, and this is obligatory, for example, he is convinced as long as he knows that you are from the people of fatwa. But if you say: it is obligatory because of the statement of Allah the Exalted, it is obligatory because of the statement of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), it is forbidden because of the statement of Allah the Exalted, it is forbidden because of the statement of the Messenger, then he undoubtedly increases in reassurance from one aspect, and he feels that if he acts on what you have issued a fatwa for, he is following the evidence. And this is an important issue that the mufti should link the ruling to the evidence as much as he is able, so that he is a guide from two aspects: from the aspect of clarifying the ruling, and from the aspect of leading people to what? To following and emulation. To following and emulation. As for giving the ruling dryly without evidence, this undoubtedly suffices, but it is better with the evidence. And if you see from the questioner and you feel, yes, that he has been surprised by the ruling, and this is known by the features of his face, then here you must mention the evidence. You must mention the evidence. Why?
The student: So that he is reassured.

The Shaykh : Yes, so that he is reassured. So that he is reassured from one aspect, and so that he does not go to others to ask them for a fatwa, and they issue a fatwa for him without knowledge.
And another benefit of this hadith is that the passerby in front of the worshipper, with repelling, or even without repelling, is a devil. And that is due to the similarity of the devil in attempting to diminish the act of worship, or what? Or to invalidate it.
And another benefit of the other wording is that the companion of the devils commands aggression and oppression, and he is like that. For this reason, Allah Mighty and Majestic said: So Allah the Exalted guided to responding to the wrongdoer from among humans and the wrongdoer from among the jinn.