Continuation of the explanation of the author's statement: "And it is obligatory to mention the name of Allah during the ablution along with the remembrance."

The Shaykh : They deviated from the view that it is a condition because there is doubt regarding the authenticity of the hadith in this matter. For this reason, al-Muqaffa (may Allah have mercy on him) held the view that mentioning the name is not obligatory, but rather a recommended practice (sunnah), because the Imam Ahmad said regarding this hadith that nothing is established in this chapter. If nothing is established in it, it cannot serve as a proof. There are two opinions in this issue: the first is that mentioning the name is obligatory, but it is excused if forgotten, and this is the well-known view in the school of thought. The second opinion is that it is a recommended practice (sunnah) and not obligatory, because the hadith in this matter is not strong enough to make it obligatory upon the Muslims or to invalidate their ablution. Also, many of those who described the ablution of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not mention the naming in it, and these are numerous hadiths. If this had been among the obligatory matters without which the ablution is not valid, it would have been mentioned.

The questioner : If it is in the bathroom, O Shaykh?

The Shaykh : If it is in the bathroom, Imam Ahmad mentioned that if a man sneezes, he praises Allah with his heart. From this narration, it is derived that he mentions the name with his heart. The author stated "It is obligatory to mention the name during the ablution along with the remembrance". His phrase "along with the remembrance" indicates to us that it is excused if forgotten. If he forgot it at the beginning and remembered it in the middle, what does he do? He mentions the name and continues, and does not start over. There is a difference of opinion in this issue. Al-Muntaha and Al-Iqna' differ in this, and both are books of Hanbali jurisprudence. The author of Al-Muntaha said he should start over, while the author of Al-Iqna' said he should continue. As for the argument of the author of Al-Muntaha, he says: because this man mentioned the name before finishing, he is obligated to perform the ablution in a valid manner. As for the argument of the author of Al-Iqna', he said: it is excused if forgotten when one finishes the entire ablution. If he finishes part of it, then that part in which he forgot is considered valid. Which one is the school of thought according to the later scholars? The one in Al-Muntaha. They hold that what is in Al-Muntaha is the school of thought when Al-Iqna' and Al-Muntaha differ. It is obligatory to mention the name during the ablution along with the remembrance. Now, is it obligatory in the full ritual bath (ghusl)? The jurists say yes, it is obligatory in the full ritual bath (ghusl), because the full ritual bath is one of the two purifications, so mentioning the name in it is obligatory, just as in the ablution. And because if it is obligatory in the ablution, which is the minor state of impurity and more frequently encountered by the person obligated, then its obligation in the major state of impurity is even more so. Is it obligatory in the dry ablution (tayammum)? They said yes, it is obligatory in the dry ablution (tayammum), because the dry ablution is a substitute for water purification, and the substitute has the ruling of the thing it substitutes. However, there may be a counter-argument saying that the dry ablution does not have the ruling of the thing it substitutes regarding the obligation to purify the limbs, because in the dry ablution, only two limbs are purified in the minor state of impurity, and in the major state, it is not possible to say that what is obligatory in water purification is obligatory in dry ablution purification. But in any case, caution is better. Moreover, one who reflects on the hadith of 'Amir ibn Yasir, which is the saying of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) to him , and he did not mention the naming, can derive from it that it is not obligatory in the dry ablution. On this occasion, let us look at the rulings of mentioning the name in the Shari'ah. Mentioning the name in the Shari'ah may be a condition, may be obligatory, may be a recommended practice (sunnah), or may be an unlegislated innovation (bid'ah). When is it a condition? In slaughter, in lawful slaughter, and in hunting, it is a condition. It is not excused, according to the correct view, whether intentionally, out of ignorance, or by forgetfulness. If a person slaughters an animal and forgets to mention the name, it becomes forbidden (haram). And if he shoots at game and forgets to mention the name, it becomes forbidden (haram). Some scholars said, and this is the school of thought, that if he shoots at game and forgets to mention the name, it is forbidden, but if he slaughters and forgets to mention the name, it is lawful (halal). Which is more deserving of excuse? The game is more deserving of excuse. It is said: how do you excuse him in the slaughtered animal and not in the game, even though it is common for a person, when he sees the game, to rush and forget and be distracted? And yet they say that the game or the hunted animal is not lawful, while the slaughtered animal is lawful. The evidence, they said, is because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said . So they said: "and mentioned the name of Allah," meaning that if you do not mention the name of Allah upon it, you do not eat it. We say: he also said or he said . What is the difference between this and that? There is no difference between them. So he made the lawfulness of the slaughtered animal conditional upon mentioning the name and letting the blood flow. Just as if a man forgot and slaughtered the animal with an electric shock, and you say about the slaughtered animal: it is carrion, it is not lawful. Similarly, if he forgot and did not mention the name, it is carrion, not lawful. But someone might say: does not Allah say ? Yes, He said that, and we say it too. So this man who forgot to mention the name of Allah upon the slaughtered animal, there is no sin or error upon him. But I, who intentionally eat from this slaughtered animal, have a sin upon me, because Allah says , so He prohibited us. For this reason, if I eat it while forgetting or out of ignorance, there is no sin upon me, which applies to the saying of our Lord . If someone says: if you say this, you will cause a loss to the Muslims. How will you cause a loss to the Muslims? A camel is slaughtered for three or four thousand, and he forgets to say "Bismillah." You say: take it to the dogs. This is a loss, a loss for the Muslims. It means that the wealth of the Muslims is to be wasted. The answer is: if I say that forgetfulness is excused, it means you want to allow many slaughtered animals to be eaten without mentioning the name, because a person often falls into this. But if we say to these people: take this camel to the dogs, then the next day, when they slaughter a camel, will they forget or not forget? They will not forget. They may mention the name ten times. So there is nothing wrong with that. And this is the only reason, except as some people reasoned when they said: if you cut off the hand of the thief, half the people will be cut off. Why? Because half the people are thieves! They say: if you cut off their hands, half the people will be cut off. We say: no, that is not correct. If you cut off one person, how many will repent? Hundreds of people will repent. And this is what we established in the issue of lawful slaughter, that mentioning the name is not excused by forgetfulness, which is what Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) chose. Now, we said that it may be obligatory, not a condition, like the ablution with us, which is obligatory and not a condition. And it may be recommended (mustahabb), like eating. Mentioning the name over eating is recommended according to the majority of scholars. Some scholars said it is obligatory, and the correct view is that mentioning the name over eating is obligatory. And it may be an innovation (bid'ah) in the call to prayer (adhan) before the adhan is called, saying "Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim." In prayer, before entering the prayer, saying "Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim" before the takbir of intention. In reciting the Qur'an, it is recommended.

The questioner : It is a recommended practice (sunnah).

The Shaykh : It is a recommended practice (sunnah).

The questioner : There is a difference of opinion regarding the beginning of the surah.

The Shaykh : At the beginning of the surah, there is no doubt that it is recited. But in the middle of the surah, some scholars claimed that it is recommended to say "Bismillah." However, some scholars, and this is the correct view, rejected this and said that Allah did not command us when reciting the Qur'an except to say "I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Shaytan." So if you are going to recite from the middle of the surah, do not say "Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim." Say "I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Shaytan" , and do not say "Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim," because we were not commanded to do anything other than that.

The questioner : This is obligatory when reciting. Is seeking refuge obligatory when reciting?

The Shaykh : Yes, and the apparent meaning of the Qur'an is that it is obligatory. It says: "It is obligatory to mention the name during the ablution along with the remembrance."

The questioner : Is it disliked (makruh)?

The Shaykh : This is it. If we say it is not a recommended practice (sunnah), it means it is disliked (makruh).