Hadeeth Qudsee: “Neither My Earth nor My Heavens Could Contain Me…” [?]

In the Name of Allaah, the Most Merciful, the Ever-Merciful…

A hadeeth qudsee is a narration which is attributed to the Prophet (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace), that he narrated words from Allaah which are not part of the Quran. Unlike the Quran, these narrations have to be studied and authenticated before they can be accepted and acted upon.

One such narration commonly quoted and attributed to Allaah as His Words is as follows:

ما وسعني أرضي ولا سمائي، ووسعني قلب عبدي المؤمن…
“Neither My Earth nor My Heavens could contain Me, whilst the heart of My believing servant does contain Me…”

I found this hadeeth once while I was searching the manuscript archives at Umm al-Qura University. I came accross a title listed in one of the indexes on the topic of criticism of some unauthentic hadeeths in al-Bukhaaree and Muslim attributed to Ibn Taymiyyah. So I rushed to get the microfilm and print out a copy, thinking to have found some amazing treasure not known to even the scholars previously. When I began to read it, I found that it was actually a previously known work called “Ahaadeeth al-Qussaas (Hadeeths Used by Storytellers) by Ibn Taymiyyah, which has been printed already, and in fact it was even (for the most part) included in Ibn Taymiyyah’s large Fataawee Collection (18/122-128, 375-385).

What’s the connection? Well, the hadeeth qudsee in question is actually the first hadeeth mentioned in that book. About it, Ibn Taymiyyah said:

This is something they (storytellers) narrate from the Israa’eeliyyaat (narrations of the Jews and Christians). It has no known chain to the Prophet (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace). Its meaning would be (if it were authentic): His heart contains belief in Me, love of Me, and knowledge of Me.

Otherwise, anyone who would claim that Allaah Himself is present inside of the people’s hearts is more of a disbeliever than the Christians, who restricted that (Allaah’s actual presence within the creation) to the Messiah alone.

Other scholars of hadeeth, like al-‘Iraaqee, as-Sakhaawee, and Al-Albaanee Continue reading

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen on Attending Classes While in I’tikaaf (Seclusion in the Masjid)

In the Name of Allaah, the Most Gracious, the Ever Merciful…

Some people may feel it is inappropriate to attend a class about Islaam while performing i’tikaaf (seclusion in the masjid), which is commonly done in the last ten nights of Ramadhaan.

Our shaykh, the great scholar, Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have Mercy on him) posed and answered the following question:

*ﻭﻫﻞ ﻳﻨﺎﻓﻲ ﺭﻭﺡ ﺍﻻ‌ﻋﺘﻜﺎﻑ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺸﺘﻐﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻜﻒ ﻓﻲ ﻃﻠﺐ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ؟*

 Does it go against the spirit of i’tikaaf to occupy oneself with seeking knowledge?

*ﺍﻟﺠﻮﺍﺏ: ﻻ‌ ﺷﻚ ﺃﻥ ﻃﻠﺐ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ﻣﻦ ﻃﺎﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ، ﻟﻜﻦ ﺍﻻ‌ﻋﺘﻜﺎﻑ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ، ﻛﺎﻟﺼﻼ‌ﺓ، ﻭﺍﻟﺬﻛﺮ، ﻭﻗﺮﺍﺀﺓ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ، ﻭﻣﺎ ﺃﺷﺒﻪ ﺫﻟﻚ، ﻭﻻ‌ ﺑﺄﺱ ﺃﻥ ﻳَﺤﻀﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻜﻒ ﺩﺭﺳﺎً ﺃﻭ ﺩﺭﺳﻴﻦ ﻓﻲ ﻳﻮﻡ ﺃﻭ ﻟﻴﻠﺔ؛ ﻷ‌ﻥ ﻫﺬﺍ ﻻ‌ ﻳﺆﺛﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻ‌ﻋﺘﻜﺎﻑ، ﻟﻜﻦ ﻣﺠﺎﻟﺲ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ﺇﻥ ﺩﺍﻣﺖ، ﻭﺻﺎﺭ ﻳﻄﺎﻟﻊ ﺩﺭﻭﺳﻪ، ﻭﻳﺤﻀﺮ ﺍﻟﺠﻠﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺜﻴﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﺸﻐﻠﻪ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﺒﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ، ﻓﻬﺬﺍ ﻻ‌ ﺷﻚ ﺃﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻋﺘﻜﺎﻓﻪ ﻧﻘﺼﺎً، ﻭﻻ‌ ﺃﻗﻮﻝ ﺇﻥ ﻫﺬﺍ ﻳﻨﺎﻓﻲ ﺍﻻ‌ﻋﺘﻜﺎﻑ.* 

The answer: No doubt that seeking knowledge is an act of obedience to Allaah. However, i’tikaaf has more to do with specific acts of obdedience, such as prayer, remembrance, recitation of Quran, etc. There is no problem if the one performing i’tikaaf attends a lesson or two during the day or night, as this does not affect the (validity of) i’tikaaf.

However Continue reading

Ibn al-Qayyim Explains the Disbelief of Ibn Sina (Avicenna)

In the Name of Allaah, the Most Gracious, the Ever Merciful…

Since the publication of our article, The Reality of Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Famous Scientist and Philosopher, many people have been asking for more detailed proofs that Ibn Sina was not actually a Muslim, specifically from his own beliefs.

This article provides more detailed proof about his specific beliefs from the writings of one of the most amazing scholars in Islamic history, Ibn Qayyim al-Jowziyyah (d.751), may Allaah have Mercy on him.

After Ibn al-Qayyim mentioned that Aboo Nasr al-Faaraabee (or Al-Farabi), like Ibn Sina, was upon an extreme deviation of the concepts promoted by Aristotle, including disbelief in Allaah, His Angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Last Day, he went on to say:

Perhaps an ignorant person might say that we have dealt too harshly with them, ascribing them to disbelief in Allaah, His Angels, His Books, and His Messengers. This is not far-fetched for someone who is ignorant of both their writings and the reality of true Islaamic teachings.

[Disbelief in Allaah]

You should know: According to the teachings of the best of the modern philosophers, their voice, and their role model whom they prefer over the Messengers themselves, Aboo ‘Alee Ibn Sina, Allaah – Glorified and Exonorated above their claims – is merely one who exists in a general way, without having a single attribute, nor any chosen actions at all. He does not know anything about the universe at all. He does not know how many planets there are, nor does he know anything of the unseen. He does not speak, nor does He have any attribute at all (in their beliefs).

It should be clearly known that this concept is (that Allaah is) just an imaginary idea in one’s mind, having no reality. Its most apparent manifestation of this is when a person thinks of it and defines it in his mind, as he would imagine other theoretical concepts. This is certainly not the Lord to whose Way the Messengers called, the One whom the previous nations knew of.

The real Lord of the universe, the God of the Messengers, is clearly not this “lord” whom the heretics call to, stripping him of any real presence and any attribute or action, claiming he is neither part of the universe, nor beyond it, nor having any connection at all to it, nor being seperate from it, nor being in front of it or above it, nor on the left or right, etc. The difference between the two is like the difference between existence and non-existence, like the difference between affirming something and negating it (i.e. complete opposites)!

In fact, anything that could possibly exist would be more complete than this “god” who the heretics call to, the one their intellects have carved, while real carved idols have a real existence and this “lord” does not. He can only exist within the imagination!

All of this is the case, while these heretics are more correct Continue reading

Shaykh Saalih Aal ash-Shaykh on Asking the Dead to Intercede

In the Name of Allaah, the Most Gracious, the Ever Merciful…

This is an answer given by Shaykh Saalih Aal ash-Shaykh to the issue of requesting the supplication of the deceased. The shaykh was asked (during his explanation of al-‘Aqeedah at-Tahaawiyyah, in the printed version: 2/1029, Dar al-Mawaddah, Egypt):

من سأل النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أن يدعو له وأن يطلب له المغفرة من الله بعد موته، هل هذا شرك؟

The one who asks the Prophet (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace) to supplicate for him and to ask for his forgiveness from Allaah after his (the Prophet’s) death, is this shirk (an act of polytheism)?

The shaykh’s answer:

نعم، هو شرك أكبر لأن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لا يُدعى بعد موته، فطلب الدعاء من الميت، وطلب الدعاء بالإغاثة أو الاستسقاء؛ يعني أن يدعو الله أن يغيث، أو أن يدعو الله أن يغفر، أن يدعو الله أن يعطي ونحو ذلك، هذا كله داخل في لفظ الدعاء والله – عز وجل – قال {وَأَنَّ الْمَسَاجِدَ لِلَّهِ فَلَا تَدْعُوا مَعَ اللَّهِ أَحَدًا} [الجن:18].

Yes, it is major shirk because the Prophet (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace) is not to be called upon after his death. Requesting supplication from the dead  (for them to) request rescue and sending of rain, meaning, that he (the deceased) supplicates to Allaah that He grants relief or he supplicates to Allaah to forgive (the person making the request), that he supplicates to Allaah to give (to that person) and what is like this, all of it is included in the meaning of the word “du’aa” (supplication), and Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic said, “And the mosques are for Allaah, so do not invoke anyone alongside Allaah” [72:18].

 والذي يقول إنّ هذه الصورة وهي طلب الدعاء تخرج عن الطلب الذي به يكون الشرك شركًا فإنه ينقض أصل التوحيد كله في هذا الباب، فكل أنواع الطلب؛ طلب الدعاء يعني طلب الدعاء من الميت، طلب المغفرة من الميت، أو طلب الدعاء من الميت أن يدعو الله أن يغفر، أو طلب الإغاثة من الميت أو طلب الإعانة أو نحو ذلك كلها باب واحد هي طلب، والطلب دعاء فداخلة في قوله تعالى {وَمَنْ يَدْعُ مَعَ اللَّهِ إِلَهًا آخَرَ لَا بُرْهَانَ لَهُ بِهِ فَإِنَّمَا حِسَابُهُ عِنْدَ رَبِّهِ إِنَّهُ لَا يُفْلِحُ الْكَافِرُونَ} [المؤمنون:117] ، وفي قوله {وَأَنَّ الْمَسَاجِدَ لِلَّهِ فَلَا تَدْعُوا مَعَ اللَّهِ أَحَدًا} ، وفي قوله {وَالَّذِينَ تَدْعُونَ مِنْ دُونِهِ مَا يَمْلِكُونَ مِنْ قِطْمِيرٍ} [فاطر:13] ، ونحو ذلك من الآيات.

And the one who says that this form, which is to Continue reading

The Reality of Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Famous Scientist and Philosopher

In the Name of Allaah, the Most Gracious, the Ever Merciful…

The famous fifth-century medical expert and philosopher, Ibn Sina, known to the West as “Avicenna”, is often credited as being one of the greatest Muslim scientists in history. His name is a celebrated one in many Muslim circles, and even hospitals and institutions of learning are named after him out of respect and admiration for his achievements.

While many Muslim scientists throughout history truly did pioneer many important medical and scientific breakthroughs, Muslims need to step back and re-examine what they have been led to believe about Ibn Sina specifically – Is it factually correct? Was he even a Muslim?

Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah on Ibn Sina

Aboo ‘Alee Al-Husayn ibn ‘Abdillaah ibn al-Hasan ibn ‘Alee ibn Sina (d.428) was born to a severely deviant Ismaa’eelee (Shiite) family, known for their severe blasphemy and hypocrisy, as mentioned by Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah.[1] In fact, as Ibn Taymiyyah said:

وأحسن ما يُظهرون دين الرفض وهم في الباطن يُبطنون الكفر المحض

“The best thing they showed openly was ar-Rafdh (being Raafhidah Shiites), while they concealed pure, absolute disbelief inwardly.” [1]

Ibn Taymiyyah confirmed this by mentioning that Ibn Sina himself identified his own family, his father, and his brother to all be from this severely deviant group that was exposed and declared outside of Islam by many scholars.

Ibn Taymiyyah further detailed how Ibn Sina attempted to blend what he learned from the deviant claimants to Islam, the Mu’tazliah and Raafidhah, with the polytheistic philosophy of Aristotle, and when he did so he deviated even further, Continue reading

Shaykh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez ar-Raajihee on Those Who Consider Ibn Sina to be a Muslim

In the Name of Allaah, the Most Gracious, the Ever Merciful…

Shaykh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez ar-Raajihee (may Allaah preserve him) was asked:

Question: With respect to the proper understanding of the issue of people who do not hold the polytheists to be disbelievers, such as Ibn Sina (Avicenna), if a person comes along and says, “I do not hold Ibn Sina to be a disbeliever. He is a Muslim to me.” Has this person committed disbelief?

Answer: If he is confused about him and is not aware of his condition, he does not commit disbelief until his (Ibn Sina’s) affair is first made clear to him. However, someone who knows he was a disbeliever and a heretic, yet does not declare him to be a disbeliever, falls under this nullifier of Islaam (i.e. he is no longer a Muslim). This may not be clear to some people, however, so the one who is not aware of his condition should be made aware of it.

Question: [Continuing…] But if he rejects this and says, “I am not required to do this”?

Answer: He IS required to do this. This means that he has fallen into one of these nullifiers of Islaam: “Whoever does not consider the polytheists to be disbelievers, or has doubts about their disbelief or considers their ways and beliefs to be correct, then he has committed disbelief.”

You are required to hold the polytheists as disbelievers and have enmity and hatred for them for the sake of Allaah. Allaah has required this Continue reading

Shaykh Saalih al-Fowzaan on Loving and Hating for the Sake of Allaah

In the Name of Allaah…

Recently, the great scholar, Shaykh Saalih ibn Fowzaan al-Fowzaan (may Allaah preserve him) was asked:

What is the ruling on rejecting the idea of hatred for the sake of Allaah and claiming that it is not from Islam? Is a person’s Islaam valid if he does not hate the Jews and Christians?

The shaykh responded:

Walaa’ and baraa’ (the islamic system of loyalty) is a must. (It is) disallegiance with the enemies of Allaah and loyalty to the allies of Allaah. Walaa’ and baraa’ means to have hatred, declaring oneself free of them (the disbelievers) and their religion, this is baraa’.

Walaa’ means to love Allaah, to love His Messenger, and to love His believing servants, take them as allies and come to their defense.

“Indeed you have a good example in Ibraaheem (Abraham) and those with him, when they said to their people: We are free of you and all that you worship beside Allaah…” [Meaning of Quran 60:4]

They declared themselves free of them and their idols, their objects of worship.

“…We are free of you and all that you worship beside Allaah. We have disbelieved in you (i.e. your religion), and there shall be enmity and hatred between us forever, unless you believe in Allaah alone.” [Meaning of Quran 60:4]

Thus it is not permissible to love the disbelievers. Whoever takes them as allies, Allaah, the Mighty and Most High, has said [what means]:

“O you who believe! Do not take the Jews and Christians as allies! They are allies of one another. Whoever takes them as allies is indeed from them. Verily Allaah does not guide people who are oppressive.” [Meaning of Quran 5:51]

The issue is very serious. Walaa’ (loyalty) and baraa’ (disallegiance) are Continue reading

Referring to the Quran as a Form of “Music” or Describing it as “Musical”

In the Name of Allaah, the Most Gracious, the Ever Merciful…

From the unique writings of the late scholar, Shaykh Bakr Aboo Zayd (may Allaah have Mercy on him), is a beneficial 700-page dictionary of “bad language” called “Mu’jam al-Manaahee al-Lafthiyyah” in which he identified and refuted incorrect, inappropriate, and/or impermissible words and phrases that some people use.

In this book (p.117), he included how some people refer to the Quran as “music” or “musical”, or having musical tones or rhythms, and commented:

These are unacceptable descriptions because of three issues:

[1] This is claiming a likeness between Quranic Verses and impermissible musical instruments.

[2] Music is an art form that draws people into disobedience and wickedness, so how could it resemble the Magnificent Quran, the Speech of the Lord of all the worlds, that which guides to eemaan (statements, actions, and beliefs of faith) and the Straight Path?!

[3] Allaah the Exalted has refuted the idea of the Quran being poetry and exonerated it above that (claim), so how could it (the Quran) then resemble the voices and instruments of musicians?! (something far worse)

As the Arabs who have picked up these kinds of repugnant phrases from books that the scholars have been warning against (like Sayyid Qutb’s “Thilaal” for example), it is also hoped that Continue reading

Do not Disregard the Moonsighting to Rely on Calendars for the Beginning and End of Ramadhaan

In the Name of Allaah, the Ever Merciful, the Most Merciful…

All Muslims concerned with following the Quran and Sunnah properly should be advised that it is not permissible to plan the first day of Ramadhaan based solely on calendars and the scientific predictions behind them.

This is because Allaah has legislated fasting to begin with the sighting of the crescent of Ramadhaan or the completion of 30 days of Sha’baan when the crescent is not visible.  His Messenger (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace) said, quite clearly:

لا تصوموا حتى تروا الهلال ولا تفطروا حتى تروه

“Do not begin fasting until you sight the moon, and do not break your fast (for ‘Eed) until you have sighted it.” (Bukhari & Muslim)

Since Monday will be the 29th of Sha’baan, Ramadhaan 1434 will begin on either Tuesday (July 9, 2013) or Wednesday (July 10, 2013), depending on whether or not the moon is sighted.

Please be advised that any people claiming at this time that Ramadhaan will begin on a pre-specified day are people who are inviting you to leave the clear practice of fasting according to the Book and the Sunnah.

Please take the time to read the following official verdict of the Permanent Committee of Scholars on the topic if you are not entirely clear on the Islaamic rulings related to this matter:

http://www.alifta.net/Fatawa/FatawaChapters.aspx?languagename=en&View=Page&PageID=30&PageNo=1&BookID=10

May Allaah bless the Muslims and unite them upon the Book of their Lord, the Sunnah of His Messenger (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace), and the way of the Companions and early Muslims who practiced it purely.

NOTE: Do not allow the legitimate scholarly differing over the issue of “local” vs. “global” moonsighting to be grounds for anyone to introduce any concept they choose – like rejecting the entire concept of moonsighting altogether!

And Allaah knows best.

Written by: Moosaa Richardson

Shaykh al-Fowzaan Exposes the Plots to Defame Scholars by Calling Them “Madkhalees” and “Jaamees”

In the Name of Allaah, the Most Merciful, the Ever Merciful…

Shaykh Saalih ibn Fowzaan al-Fowzaan, one of today’s most widely respected scholars of Islaam – may Allaah preserve and protect him – , was asked about people who resort to name-calling with labels like “Madkhalees” and “Jaamees”, and he replied:

Stop these kinds of affairs and this name-calling. Do not insult each other with name-calling. Allaah, the Mighty and Most High, has commanded you:

ولا تنابزوا بالألقاب

Do not insult each other with name-calling! [49:11]

You are all brothers [addressing students al-Madeenah University], all of you are upon the same religion. You are all peers, and to Allaah is the praise. Drop these affairs, and show respect for the scholars. Respect the scholars! Whoever does not respect the scholars shall remain deprived of their knowledge. He will be deprived of being able to benefit from them.

Abandon this thing – the name-calling and speaking ill of the scholars – those who have virtue and status over the rest of the people which Allaah bestowed upon them:

يرفع الله الذين آمنوا منكم والذين أوتوا العلم درجات

“Allaah raises the believers among you and the people given knowledge many degrees.” [58:11]

The scholars have their status, they have their ranks that are to be respected. If the scholars are Continue reading

Regarding the Claimed Contradictions of Shaykh Rabee’ in Jarh and Ta’deel

In the Name of Allaah, the All Compassionate, the Ever Merciful…

[Read the complete PDF version of this article]

We’ve seen for years people criticizing the likes of Shaykh Rabee’ ibn Haadee al-Madkhalee (may Allaah preserve him), regarding the claim that he is not upon the way of the early critics of the Salaf – the likes of Imaams Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Yahyaa ibn Ma’een. And what they say: “His ‘foolishness’ of lavishly praising people and then abandoning them has excluded him from resembling the critics of old, and it shows that he is ‘unstable’ and his statements in criticism of people are ‘not reliable’.”

Let us begin with understanding something in this issue so that we don’t pass on and parrot things without understanding them.

True Academic Criticism in Islaam

In academic criticism in Islaam – as understood by the scholars of Jarh wa Ta’deel throughout history (النقد العلمي) [Academic criticism] – No one is beyond criticism, no one is immune from criticism, other than those who have gained immunity from Allah, i.e. they have been praised in the Qur’aan and they have been sanctified by the Book of Allah or by the revelation given to Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم), i.e. his Sunnah. Aside from that, the narrators, the teachers, the callers, the scholars themselves – all of them are subject to criticism. As one of the greatest of the scholars, al-Imaam Maalik, is so commonly quoted as saying:

مَا مِنَّا إِلاَّ رَادٌّ وَمَرْدُودٌ عَلَيْهِ

Meaning: Every single one of us (every scholar) is either criticizing / refuting, or being criticized / refuted.

That is the case of the scholars, and, of course, every writer and every caller is subject to criticism. The criticism of the scholars of Islaam is ongoing, it is mutajaddid [continuously updated], it is renewed, and it is revisited, at every possible occasion. No one from the critics of Islaam had ever Continue reading

Regarding Those Who Say Hatred is Not From Islam (Shaykh ‘Abdur-Rahmaan Muhyiud-Deen)

In the Name of Allaah, the Most Merciful, the Ever Merciful…

Question: A well-known preacher in the West says: Islaam does not require anyone to hate any of the people. He also says: I do not want a religion that requires me to hate some people. This understanding has spread, and some of the Muslims have adopted it. What is your advice to the one who said this and to those Muslims who have followed him?

Answer by Shaykh ‘Abdur-Rahmaan Muhyiud-Deen, Former Professor at the Islamic University of al-Madeenah and Mufti at the Prophet’s Masjid (may Allaah preserve him):

This poor, misguided person does not know about Islaam. Someone who says that Islam does not include any hatred, and (this includes) that it does not include love either, since love and hatred [are inseparable]… This is Liberalist philosophy. The Shaytaan (Devil) has spoken upon this person’s tongue when he said there is no hatred, since there would be no love either, as a logical result. Impossible. You must hate disbelief and its people. You detest disbelief and its people. Could you watch the cross being worshipped and say: Be happy, there’s nothing (wrong) with that, or it’s nothing?! He would either be happy, or say there is nothing wrong. There is absolutely something wrong here, why is that? Because everything that is worshipped besides Allah is an enemy to Allaah! All of mankind are required to worship Allaah, ( O Mankind! ) What? [Students reply, ( Worship your Lord ).] [2:21]

It is a must to love Allaah: ( You do not find any people who Continue reading

The (So-Called) “Nation of Islam” are Not Muslims (Shaykh Saalih al-Luhaydaan)

In the Name of Allaah, the Most Merciful, the Ever-Merciful…

Recently, the renowned senior scholar, Shaykh Saalih al-Luhaydaan (may Allaah preserve him) was asked the following question about the group called “the Nation of Islam” headed by Louis Farrakhan:

Shaykh, in America there is a religious sect who call themselves “The Nation of Islam” and they claim to be upon Islaam. Their beliefs are as follows:

That generally, every black person is an incarnate of Allaah, specifically that He is in the form of a man named Fard Muhammad, and that all whites are devils.

That Muhammad (sallallaahu ’alayhe wa sallam) was not the seal of all Prophets and Messengers, and that Elijah Muhammad was in fact Continue reading

Q&A: Hadeeth about not Sleeping Alone?

In the Name of Allaah…

QUESTION: Is there a hadeeth in which sleeping alone has been prohibited and, if so, what is the proper understanding of this hadeeth? Someone read that on a website providing tips on how not to miss Fajr, and one of those tips was not to sleep alone. It said al-Albaanee authenticated the hadeeth in as-Silsilatus-Saheehah.

ANSWER: There does exist a hadeeth in the Musnad of Ahmad (2/91) which alledgedly states that the Messenger of Allaah (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace) prohibited people from sleeping alone:

نهى عن الوحدة أن يبيت الرجل وحده أو يسافر وحده

He forbade (us) from seclusion: that a man sleeps alone or travels alone.

The chain appears to be authentic at first glance, since all of the narrators are from the narrators used in the two Saheeh collections of al-Bukhaaree and Muslim, except for one who was not used in Saheeh Muslim, Aboo ‘Ubayd ‘Abdul-Waahid ibn Waasil al-Haddaad.  At face value, scholars have graded its chain to be saheeh (authentic), one of them being the great scholar of Hadeeth and its sciences, Muhammad Naasir ad-Deen al-Albaanee in his Silsilah Saheehah (#60), as mentioned in the question.

Al-Haythamee said about this hadeeth in Majma’ az-Zawaa’id (8/104), “Its narrators are from the narrators of the Saheeh (collections of al-Bukhaaree and/or Muslim).”  I learned a very important thing about this kind of statement from al-Haythamee, when he refrains from calling the chain or the hadeeth saheeh, and suffices with profiling the narrators as reliable – that this is not sufficient as authentication, as other factors are involved in declaring a hadeeth authentic beyond the reliability of its narrators, like the connectivity of the chain and the absence of any hidden defects. In fact, when al-Haythamee refrains from calling the hadeeth or its chain saheeh, there is often a hidden defect somewhere in the chain, a very fine point of hadeeth criticism I learned from al-Albaanee himself, from his highly beneficial hadeeth commentary in his two massive works – as-Saheehah and adh-Dha’eefah.

Furthermore, referring to the narrators as being from those used in the Saheeh collections of al-Bukhaaree and Muslim is insufficient by itself to establish their reliability in a general sense for a number of reasons, the easiest of which to explain in English would be that sometimes al-Bukhaaree and Muslim only relied on a narrator when he was maqroon, or paired with someone else relaying the same narration – meaning they would not rely on his narration independently.  This connects us directly to this hadeeth…

The narrator, Aboo ‘Ubayd al-Haddaad, was from those used by al-Bukhaaree, when paired with another narrator, not independently, as mentioned by ath-Thahabee in al-Meezaan.  This helps us understand the criticism levelled against him regarding his precision as a narrator, while he was from those used in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree, the most authentic source book of Hadeeth available.

Furthermore, Aboo ‘Ubayd al-Haddaad has narrated this hadeeth from his shaykh, ‘Aasim ibn Muhammad, as eight or nine other reliable students did, except that none of them mentioned sleeping alone, their narrations only mention travelling!

From this, we can understand clearly that the mention of sleeping alone in this narration was a mistake added by Aboo ‘Ubayd, and thus is not authentic as a hadeeth of the Messenger (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace).

This very fine of point of criticism of this hadeeth can only be detected when gathering the chains together and inspecting them very closely, as done by a number of scholars and hadeeth researchers who have come to this same conclusion.  The one most worthy of mention was the great scholar of Hadeeth criticism of Yemen, Muqbil ibn Haadee al-Waadi’ee (may Allaah have mercy on him), in his book, Ahaadeeth Mu’allah Thaahiruhas-Sihhah (#269).

In conclusion, the part of the hadeeth mentioning the prohibition of sleeping alone is not authentic.

Even without this hadeeth, however, it is still an acceptable point to say that one way to wake up for Fajr prayer on time is to sleep with or around others who can help each other to wake up together at the right time.  And Allaah knows best.

Written by: Moosaa Richardson

Retraction: Saying “Yaa Allaah” is not Correct

In previous lectures, perhaps more than once, I erred in mentioning a point of Arabic language regarding the phrase “Yaa Allaah” – that the Arabs used the phrase “Allaahumma” to replace it.

On the Salafitalk Forum (the older, currently uneditable version of Salafitalk.com), I wrote:

As a note for proper pronunciation: Yaa Allaah would be pronounced together as: Yallaah (saying the yaa’ and going right to the laam), since the hamza in Allaah’s name is hamzat al-wasl, however saying “Allaahumma” instead is the usage found in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. And Allaah knows best.

Today I was sent an authentic hadeeth which proves that at least one Companion supplicated saying, “Yaa Allaah,” and it was approved by the Messenger of Allaah (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace), disproving my mistaken claim.  A Companion Continue reading

Important Advice About the Number of Rak’ahs of Night Prayers

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Ever Merciful…

After mentioning the Sunnah of praying 11 and 13 rak’ahs at night, and that it is best, Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih Al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have Mercy upon him) then said:

However, if the people of the masjid prefer that he (the imaam) shortens the length of the recitation and the length of the bowings and prostrations, and increases the number of rak’ahs, saying, “This is easier on us,” then there is no harm if he accommodates them, due to the generality of the statement of the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace):

“Make things easy and do not make things difficult.” [1]

And also due to the generality of his statement (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace):

“When one of you leads, then let him shorten (the length of the prayer).” [2]

So long as we do not fall into anything prohibited, then bringing ease to those under our authority is better and takes precedence. The imaam is the one responsible for the masjid, having been put in authority over the praying people, thus he is called the “imaam.” The imaam is the one who has authority over them in affairs related to the prayer, for example he orders them to establish their rows and straighten them. So if the imaam is requested to be easy on them by increasing the number (of rak’ahs) while shortening the bowings, prostrations, and recitations, then there is no harm in that.

With this we must say that it is not befitting for us that we be excessive or neglectful, as some of the people commit ghuluw (excessiveness) when they stick to the Sunnah of the number (of rak’ahs), saying, “It is not permissible to increase upon the number that comes in the Sunnah,” and they speak in the sternest way against someone who increases upon that (by praying more than 11 or 13 rak’ahs), saying that he is sinful and disobedient. And there is no doubt that this is a mistake. How could he be sinful or disobedient when the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) was asked about the night prayer, and he said:

“(It is) two (rak’ahs) by two (rak’ahs).” [3]

And he did not limit it to any set number. And it is well known that a person who asks about the night prayer does not know the number (of its rak’ahs), since the one who does not know how to pray the night prayer would more rightfully not know the number (of its rak’ahs). Furthermore, he (the questioner) was not from the servants of the Messenger (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace), so we can not say that he knew about the affairs within his house.

So since the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) told him about the manner that the night prayer is to be prayed, and he did not limit it to any set number, then it is known that there is leeway in the affair, and that a man may even pray 100 rak’ahs and then perform Witr with one rak’ah.

As for his statement (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace):

“Pray as you have seen me praying.” [4]

Then this hadeeth is not unrestricted, even with those people (who say that 11 or 13 is the limit). They themselves do not say that it is obligatory on the people to perform Witr by praying five rak’ahs sometimes, seven rak’ahs other times, and sometimes nine. So if we understood this hadeeth in a general, unrestricted way, then we would have to say that it is obligatory to perform Witr by praying exactly five rak’ahs sometimes, seven other times, and sometimes nine. Rather, the meaning is, “Pray in the manner as you have seen me praying.” As for the number of rak’ahs, then no (this is not understood from the hadeeth), except that which is limited by a text.

Anyway, it is binding that a man not be harsh on the people in an affair that has some leeway. We have even seen some of the brothers who are harsh about this declaring imaams to be innovators, those who increase upon 11 (rak’ahs), and leaving the masjid, thus losing the reward that the Messenger (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) spoke of:

“Whoever stands (in prayer) with the imaam until he leaves, then it will be written for him that he stood a (complete) night (in prayer).” [5]

And perhaps they may sit out after having prayed ten rak’ahs, thus causing a gap in the row by sitting there. And perhaps they may even speak (while sitting out) sometimes, thus disturbing those who are praying. All of these (scenarios) are wrong. We have no doubt that they intend good, and that they were mujtahids (seeking to arrive at what is correct), however not every mujtahid is correct.

Another group of people take the opposite stance. They speak very harshly and sternly against those who restrict themselves to 11 rak’ahs, saying, “You have gone against ijmaa’ (scholarly consensus), and verily Allaah has said:

“And whoever contradicts the Messenger after the guidance has been made clear to him, and he follows a way other than the way of the believers, then We will turn him to that which he has turned himself to, and cause him to enter Jahannam, what an evil abode!” [6]

“All of those before you did not know anything other than 23 rak’ahs!” And they speak very harshly against them. This is also wrong…” [7]

…So then what if someone says, “You have established 11 rak’ahs (as the Sunnah), so then what do you say if we pray behind an imaam who prays 23 or more, should we remain seated and not pray with him when he stands for the sixth tasleem (after 10 rak’ahs), or is it better to finish with him?”

The answer: It is best to complete (the prayer) with him; the evidence for that is from two angles:

The first one is the statement of the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) about the night prayers of Ramadhaan:

“Verily whoever stands (in prayer) with the imaam until he leaves, then it will be written for him that he stood a (complete) night (in prayer).” [5]

So whoever remained seated and waited for the imaam to reach the Witr Prayer, then he has not prayed with the imaam until he has left, since he has left off a portion of his prayer.

The second angle of proof is the generality of the statement of the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace):

“Verily the imaam has only been appointed to be followed.” [8]

This includes every action the imaam does, so long as it is not a forbidden one, and praying more than 11 (rak’ahs) is not forbidden, so then we follow the imaam. However, if the increase is forbidden, like if the imaam prays five rak’ahs for Thuhr Prayer, then we do not follow him.

Furthermore, we must know that the unity of the Ummah is something sought after with the highest priority from the Islaamic Sharee’ah, since Allaah has said:

“And this is your Ummah, a single Ummah.” [9]

And differing between members of the Ummah is something to be rejected, as Allaah the Most High has said:

“And do not be like those who split up and differed after the clear proofs came to them.” [10]

And Allaah the Most High has said:

“Allaah has legislated as part of the Religion that which he enjoined upon Nooh, that which We sent down to you, and what he enjoined upon Ibraaheem, Moosaa, and ‘Eesaa: That you establish the Religion and do not be divided over it.” [11]

And He, the Most High, has said:

“Verily those who split up their Religion and became sects, then you have absolutely nothing to do with them. Rather your affair is solely with Allaah, and He will inform them of what they used to do.” [12]

And the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) used to say when lining the people up for prayer:

“Do not differ, or your hearts will differ.” [13]

And when ‘Uthmaan (may Allaah be pleased with him) prayed the prayers that have four rak’ahs during Hajj in Minaa, he did not shorten them after the eight years of his khilaafah had passed. The people detested this, saying, “The Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace) shortened (his prayer), and so did Aboo Bakr and ‘Umar, as you did in the beginning of your khilaafah.” However, he (may Allaah be pleased with him) changed his position, and those Companions that spoke against this action of his still prayed four rak’ahs behind him, while detesting it. This was while this increase was inseparable from the prayer, and it was an evil thing to them, however they still followed the imaam, preferring unity.

So what do you think about when the increase is separate, not directly connected to the prayer, when a person does it intentionally it does not nullify the prayer? And he (the one who does not pray more than 11 or 13 rak’ahs with the imaam) says, “We are people who stick to the Sunnah and follow the narrations from the Companions,” with this contradiction of his in this issue.

So I say: Surely any person that says he follows the Sunnah and the guidance of the Salaf, it is not for him to abandon the imaam when he prays 23 (rak’ahs) and say, “I will follow the Sunnah and pray 11 rak’ahs,” since you have been ordered to follow your imaam, and you have been prohibited from contradicting (him). Furthermore, you have not been prohibited from praying more than 11 rak’ahs.

So then it is binding upon the students of knowledge specifically, and upon all people in general, to be vigilant in preserving unity whenever it is possible, since the only hope for the people of disobedience and the criminals is that the people of goodness differ. This is because they have no weapon more effective than differing, and verily Moosaa said to the magicians:

“Woe to you, do not invent lies against Allaah, lest he wipe you out with a (single) punishment, for those who lie will suffer loss. Then they differed over their affair between themselves.” [14]

Once they differed, they failed and lost their strength.

So this differing that we find with some of our brothers who are (overly) stern in following the Sunnah in this issue and others, I view it as a contradiction to the Sunnah and to the goals of the Sharee’ah, like the unifying of the positions and the unity of the people, since this, and to Allaah is the praise, is not something that is haraam nor is it a munkar, rather it is something that is based upon ijtihaad. So as for us bringing about division and causing the hearts to have animosity, hatred, and mockery for the one who opposes our position, while it is permissible and not in opposition to the Sunnah, then it is obligatory on every man to protect and guard over the unity of the ranks whenever possible. [15]

Translated by: Moosaa Richardson (1423/09/04)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Al-Bukhaaree (69) and Muslim (4503)

[2] Al-Bukhaaree (703) and Muslim (1046)

[3] Al-Bukhaaree (473) and Muslim (1746)

[4] Al-Bukhaaree (631)

[5] Sunan An-Nasaa’ee (1605) and Sunan At-Tirmithee (806); Al-Albaanee called it saheeh.

[6] the meaning of Soorah An-Nisaa’ (4):115

[7] As-Sharh Al-Mumti’, 4/52-54

[8] Al-Bukhaaree (732) and Muslim (920)

[9] the meaning of Soorah Al-Ambiyaa (21):92

[10] the meaning of Soorah Aali ‘Imraan (3):105

[11] the meaning of Soorah Ash-Shooraa (42):13

[12] the meaning of Soorah Al-An’aam (6):159

[13] Muslim (971)

[14] the meaning of Soorah Taa-Haa (20):61-62

[15] Ash-Sharh Al-Mumti’, 4/61-63