Thursday, July 31, 2014

Manner of performing Zikir after Solah (5)

Continuation of: Manner of performing zikir after solah (4)

“And all that he (Syaikh ash-Shuyukh[1]) said are problematic, do not comply to the principles of knowledge, especially in matters of worship (‘Ibadat) – which is the very issue we are dealing with/discussing – since it is not permissible for anyone among the creations of Allah, to innovate in Sharie‘ah, from his own opinion, something which no daleel/proof stands to support (or indicate) it, because that is the very thing known as bid‘ah, and in this matter, it is the very same thing, since there is no daleel/proof in it, to take it that the du‘a’ is to be offered aloud for the congregation after the obligatory prayers all the time, as how the sunnahs (matters based on the Prophet’s teachings) are performed, such that the one who is not performing it (i.e not performing du‘a’ in congregation) is to be regarded as one who opposses the entire Muslim Community, estranged, ostracized, and till the end of what he mentioned and every single thing that has no daleel/proof supporting it is a bid‘ah (an innovation).

As a matter of fact, those words (of Shakh ash-Shuyuukh) imply that following the later generations of blindfollowers is better than following the pious predecessors (as-Salaf)! Even if it is from one of the permissible matters (it is not allowed to be followed), so how can it be permitted if it is two different matters, one is for certain correct and the other doubtful? Such that the doubtful is followed while the one which is undoubtedly correct is being neglected and yet the one following it (the doubtful) is to be praised.?!” [2]

Then he (ash-Shaatibi rahimahullaah) cited a few examples, then continued:

“The author of al-‘Utbiyyah – together with it’s Sharh: “al-Bayan w at-Tahsiel”: 1/392 –  said: (al-Imam) Malik was asked with regard to a man, delighted by a matter, performs prostration to Allah ('azza wa jalla)? So he (Malik) replied: This is not to be done, this (was not) from what practised by the people (Companions and at-Tabi‘ien). It was said to him: Indeed Abu Bakr as-Siddieq (radhiyalLaahu 'anhu) as they mentioned, made prostration of gratitude to Allah on the Day of Yamamah. Have you not heard of that? He (Malik) responded saying: I have never heard of that and to me, they have lied using the name of Abu Bakr. This is from misguidance, that is when someone heard one thing, then he claims: This matter, I have never heard of any dispute pertaining to it. It was then said to him (Malik): We have asked you, to know, what is your opinion so that we can refute that with it (your view). He (Malik) then said: We bring forth to you with another thing (point), what you have not heard from me. The Prophet was victorious and those came after him too were successful in opening new territories (for the Muslims), have you ever heard anyone among them who performed like this (i.e the Sujood of Gratitude - Sujood ash-Shukr - translator)? (If at any other time, someone comes to you with this kind of thing), and it is happening among them (doing that act – translator) and practised in their hands (commonly practised by them - translator) what never been heard (not narrated) from them, then you should just use this (proof), because if it has been practised by them (the Prophet and Companions), it would have been mentioned (in narrations from them – translator), as this is something that happened during their time, but have you ever heard any of them prostrated (for such occasion - translator)?This is a matter they unanimously agreed, (i.e.) when a matter which you never knew it, you are to leave it (neglect it)…(end quote from Imam Malik - translator) this is the complete narration”

The question and answer from him (al-Imam Malik 93-179H), if we take it, provided the proof of what previously mentioned.

The main point of the question is that, Bid‘ah is to be understood as – for example (from the narration from Malik – translator) – It is an act which the Shari‘ (The Legislator of Sharie‘ah – Allah) left untold of it’s ruling, in doing or neglecting it, thus it has not been given a ruling specifically, hence the original ruling would be; it is permissible to do it and likewise it is permissible to neglect it. [3] (from the question)

Then he (ash-Shaatibi rahimahullaah) said:

And the main point of the meaning of Malik’s answer is that; an untold ruling of to act or to neglect here – when there is a reason for it – is the consensus from everyone who is not speaking (their silence), is that, there is not to be any addition to what is (known) before/previously/in the pass, since if it is appropriate in Sharie‘ah or widely being practised, they (the Salaf - pious predecessors) would have act upon it or performed it, because they (the Salaf) were the better lot to have acquired/discerned it and the earliest to do and perform it.

(asy-Syatibi rahimahullaah quoted): Ibn Rushd (d: 595H – trans.) said in “Sharh Mas-alah al-Utbiyyah”:The point in that (quote from Malik – trans.) is that to him it is a matter not legalized in the Deen (Religion/Islam) – that is: Sujud ash-Shukri (Prostration of Gratitude to Allah) – not obligatory nor supererogatory, since the Prophet never instructed that, and never did it [4] and the Muslims never came to a consensus to perform it and the Sharie‘ah Rulings are not legislated except by one of these sources.

He said (Ibn Rushd): And his (Malik) basis that the Messenger of Allah (sallalLaah 'alaihi wa sallam) never did that and not even the Muslims after him, such that if it had ever been performed it would have been narrated: is correct, because it is not appropriate for the Muslims to neglect the narration of a matter of this Sharie‘ah, when they had been commanded to convey (the Message).

He said (Ibn Rushd): This is a fundamental principle from the many principles, and based on it, Zakat is not imposed on vegetables and herbs (of spices) although it is obligatory upon them (these items) due to the general (meaning) of the Prophet’s saying: {For vegetation watered naturally by rain or springs (the Zakat) is one tenth (10% of it’s produce) and which is watered by (manual) irrigation it is half of one tenth (5%)}, because if we take it that they neglected conveying that the Prophet (sallalLaah 'alaihi wa sallam) actually took Zakat from these items as a Standing Sunnah, then we are to take (conclude the same) that they did not narrate the Prostration (Sujud) from the Prophet (sallalLaah 'alaihi wa sallam) on occassions of expressing gratitude as a Standing Sunnah that there is no Sujud for such occassions.” Then he (Ibn Rushd) mentioned the opinion of Imam ash-Shafi‘ie and his commentary on it.

The motive from this question and answer (session of al-Imam Malik mentioned here), is that al-Imam Malik asserted it to be a bid‘ah (i.e. it is to be taken as a principle), not the assertion that it is bid‘ah at random (not specifically pertaining to this issue; i.e. Sujud ash-Shukr). [5]              

Then he (asy-Syatibrahimahullaah) continued:

(he argued the points that Shaikh ash-Shuyuukh brought up and among the things he mentioned; if doing du‘a’ after the obligatory prayers is meant as a way to educate the congregation, all the time, although it is a matter outside the Prayer, then to educate them of what is more important of matters in the Solat itself, should also be done too after the Prayers and many other points)…Then this Qa‘idah/principle is uprooted from it’s very roots, because the as-Salaf as-Salih were the foremost people to compete to get the virtues of it, for all the benefits that had been mentioned, for that reason Malik (bin Anas) said with regard to it: {Do you think that people of today are more inclined towards good deeds, as compared to those people of the past (the Companions and their disciples)?!} Which indicates the aforementioned principle  that  is, the very reason or factor to the innovation/introduction (of the newly invented) – is the inclination or drive to perform what is good – and the as-Salaf as-Salih were the most perfect people in that, and yet they did not do/perform it and thus it is a proof that it is not to be done (and it is to be neglected - trans)[6]

What has been mentioned by al-Imam asy-Syatibi (rahimahullaah) would suffice. We should have understood from him and as he quoted al-Imam Malik, as well as what we brought forth of quotes from al-Imam ash-Shafi‘ie before it, that “What has been neglected by the Prophet and the Salaf of acts of worship, is considered prohibited to be performed by the ummah” and this original ruling stands i.e. it is not permissible to innovate in matters of this Deen. This does not apply to worldly matters. This is contrary to the conclusion made by al-Ghumari and al-‘Alawi al-Maliki. Either both of them were oblivious of this principle, well known to scholars or that they merely brought up a conjecture. Both of them should have read this masterpiece of al-Imam asy-Syatibi (rahimahullaah) and it is rather astonishing if they were regarded as scholars of such high status, as thought by many of their followers, but they had never read or came across this masterwork of al-Imam asy-Syatibi (rahimahullaah) or at least made a passing remark that scholars held on to the principle: “What has been neglected by the Prophet and the Salaf of acts of worship, is considered prohibited to be performed by the ummah” as we will cite later. For a scholar to discuss or make an analysis on an issue, then make a new conclusion, he should bring forth all the opinions of his predecessors, citing their evidences, their arguments and conclusions. Both al-Ghumari and al-‘Alawi did not do that. For example, when al-‘Alawi concluded that “Maulid Celebration is just a tradition o customary” he should have mentioned what the predecessors said with regard to it. Likewise for al-Ghumari to conclude: “what the Prophet neglected of acts of worship only provided a proof that it is permissible”, he should have quoted from his predecessors, analyse their statements, evidences and arguments, before projecting his conclusion. They would have known or discovered this and at least read al-I‘tisam due to it’s popularity in this issue. Yet, we will mention here, this very principle, mentioned by other renowned scholars:

[1] See footnote no: 31 – it is at this point, in this chapter, al-Imam asy-Syatibi started to refute his teacher’s arguments. Since it is rather difficult for any lay man who has not been exposed to the technicalities of the terms of Usul al-Fiqh, we try to simplify here on Bid‘ah Idafiyah, as he explained.

Bid‘ah Haqiqiyah (Actual/Real Bid‘ah) is not supported with any daleel, for example, offering Solat everytime one enters his office, fasting at night, paying obligatory Zakat by giving away furniture, going round a masjid as Tawaf or Haj to Baitul Maqdis. This type of Bid‘ah, is clear to any muslim with a sound mind knowing the basic teachings of Islam and is able to know this type of Bid‘ah.

As for Bid‘ah Idafiyah, a lay man not knowing the basis of the rulings in Islam might fall prey to misleading conclusions and misguided people or “scholars”. This type of Bid‘ah, simply means, it is a Bid‘ah, but it is supported by a daleel or a few daleels which apparently seem to support that Bid‘ah, but in reality, these daleels are misinterpreted and wrongly understood and thus the misleading conclusions and misguided rulings are derived from them.

The Quranic texts and the Sunnah (Authentic Ahadeets) must be accumulated and understood as one entity, if there be any apparent contradiction between them, they are to be reconciled and resolved by means of al-Jam‘u (such that with the reconciliation, all the texts are put to practice and applicable in every aspect), and if there is no way for doing al-Jam‘u, then scholars resort to an-Naskh, some of the daleels had been abrogated and others are implemented (as long as there are supportive evidences to conclude so). This is still a way of reconciliation. Or else, as a last resort, they make at-Tarjieh, to take the strongest daleels which provide certainty and neglect those which are weak. The above was outlined by the Great Imam asy-Syafi‘ie in ar-Risalah.

Apart from that, there are daleels which are al-‘Umum/al-‘Am (general) – eg. When Allah made Haj obligatory, He Precsribed it to all of mankind (3: 97) and there are those which are al-Khas/at-Takhsies (specific) – eg. “The records of deeds are lifted from 3 types of people…” such that not everyone, eg an insane person, is obliged to perform it, and others al-Mutlaq (not restricted to any aspect; description/manner/number) – eg. “It is made unlawful for you to eat carcass” (5:3), to be understood with al-Muqayyad (restricted to certain aspects; description/manner/number) – eg. “and dead sea creatures are lawful” hence carcass of creatures living on land are the ones made unlawful, and other daleels al-Mujmal (overall indication/implication) – eg, “the Prayers are made obligatory in the Qur’an but not described in detail”, to be co-related to al-Mubayyan or al-Mufassal (detailed) – eg “the Description of the Prophet’s Prayer in as-Sunnah”. We give some more egs; The hadeets: “The prayer in congregation is more superior than the prayer done alone…” is not applicable to Tahiyyat al-masjid or Rawatib (such that an-Nawawi categorized the Sunnah Prayers, to be done in Congregation or otherwise - al-Majmu': 4/60). Doing them in jama‘ah is a Bid‘ah (manner). According to asy-Syafi‘ie: “There is no Azan nor Iqamah except for the 5 (obligatory) Prayers” (al-Majmu‘:3/83) Calling it out for funeral procession is a Bid‘ah (time/occasion). Therefore, these are to be performed as how the Prophet did. So if people do Dzikir and Salawat in Congregation citing verses of the Qur’an like “Do make remembrance of Allah (plural form)…” or “O you (plural) who believed, send prayers of Salawat upon him” and assuming that it is permissible, then they have not followed the ways of the predecessors in understanding and deriving rulings from the Sacred texts, not applying them as how the Prophet had taught and set as example.

So when daleels are not accumulated and reconciled, hence not understood correctly, that is how and when Bid‘ah Idafiyah occurs.  Wallahu a‘lam. It is clear to us now that an-Nawawi categorized the voluntary Solat, how to perform it, in congregation or not, all based on as-Sunnah and asy-Syafi‘ie disallowed Azan and Iqamah except for 5 Obligatory Prayers, based on the Sunnah and all these are proofs; matters of ‘Ibadah/worship is not permissible unless there is a daleel for it.   

[2] al-I‘tisam : 2/262-263 (pdf page: 258 – for personal reference) 

[3] Ibid: 2/265-266 (pdf page: 261 – for personal reference)

[4] Sujud ash-Shukri is a Sunnah of the Prophet, unfortunately all the narrations did not reached al-Imam Malik. Yet the point al-Imam asy-Syatibi cited this narration from al-Imam Malik is that; the principle which al-Imam Malik held on to i.e. if there is no narration from the Prophet in matters of this Religion, it is not legitimised or not permissible for us to do and performing what has never been narrated is a Bid‘ah. He quoted from al-Imam Malik because Andalusia/Spain, or Granada to be precise, was predominantly occupied by Scholars of the Malikiyah Madzhab. Even Syeikh as-Syuyukh and asy-Syatibi were known as scholars of al-Malikiyah.   

[5] al-I‘tisam: 2/269-271 (pdf page: 264-266 – for personal reference)

[6] Ibid: 2/276 (pdf page: 272 – for personal reference) 

Copyright 2011
Template by freethemelayouts