You are here:
Defending the Honour of Uthmaan Bin Affaan From Al-Hajuri and His Extremist Followers: Part 9 - the Tafseel of Imaam Al-Albaanee
Posted by Abu.Iyaad, Editor in Articles
The View of Imaam al-Albani Does Not Support the Haddadi Hajurites
Imaam al-Albani (rahimahullaah) has tafseel (detailed clarification) on the issue of the adhaan of Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu). He wrote a small treatise (الأجوبة النافعة عن أسئلة لجنة مسجد الجامعة) in response to a written question (consisting of numerous parts) sent to him about issues connected to the adhaan of Jumu'ah.
We have provided below the relevant section (first 35 pages) from the book. The treatise is over 40 years old.
For our purpose in this article we will provide a summarization of the points which are relevant to our discussion:
- On page 13, in the question put to the Shaykh, "Do you hold that what Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu) did on the day of Jumu'ah of (ordering) the second (new) adhaan is to be followed unrestrictedly, or only when the (underlying) reason which led our chief, Uthmaan, to do that, when he say the people had increased and they became occupied in the means of subsistence? Or to put it another way: When there is a masjid that does not have a market nearby or residential area and it does not have a regular imaam, nor mu'addhins (callers to prayer), such as the masjid which is within the Humaydiyyah barracks, do you consider that the Sunnah of our chief, Uthmaan, should be carried out, or should it be sufficed with a single adhaan as was the situation in the era of the the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and his two companions?" It is clear from the questioner's understanding that the action of Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu) is treated as a Sunnah, and that it was legislated due to a need, and with this understanding the questioner posed it to Shaykh al-Albaani (rahimahullaah).
- In beginning his answer, the Shaykh mentions that it is worthy to mention the hadeeth regarding the adhaan of Uthmaan in full, inclusive of all of its additions (ziyaadaat) which many of the past scholars may have neglected to mention: So he brings the hadeeth in this way (with additions indicated by square brackets):
Imaam al-Zuhree (rahimahullaah ta'aalaa) said: al-Saa'ib bin Yazeed said: The first adhaan [that Allaah mentioned in the Qur'an] was (performed) when the Imaam sat on the pulpit [and when the prayer was established (meaning, the iqaamah)] on the day of Jumu'ah [from the doorway of the masjid] during the era of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and Abu Bakr and Umar. Then when it was the khilaafah of Uthmaan and the people increased, and the homes became distant (from the masjid), Uthmaan ordered a third adhaan (i.e. in addition to the original adhaan and its iqaamah) on the day of Jumu'ah (and in a narration it says: "(he ordered) the first adhaan", and in another narration, "(he ordered) with a second adhaan") [from a place belonging to him] in the market that was called al-Zooraa]. So then (this adhaan) was given from al-Zooraa [before he would come out so that the people would know that the time for Jumu'ah had approached]. So then the affair remained established upon this [and the people did not find fault with him for this, though they had found fault with him when he completed the prayer (to four rakahs) at Minaa (during Hajj)].
The Shaykh brings this complete narration through the following sources: Al-Bukhari, Abu Da'wud, al-Nasa'i, al-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, al-Shafi'i (in al-Umm), Ibn al-Jarood (in al-Muntaqaa), al-Bayhaqi, Imaam Ahmad, Ishaq bin Raahuyah, Ibn Khuzaymah (in his Saheeh), al-Tabarani, Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Marduyah.
- After this the Shaykh states that we can proceed to the answer and then writes:
Answer to the first portion (of the question): 1. We do not hold that the Uthmaan's action (radiyallaahu anhu) should be followed absolutely without restriction. For we know from what has preceded that he added the first adhaan due to an intelligible reason, which is the increase in the people and their homes being distant from the Prophet's Mosque. So whoever turned away from considering this underlying reason and held to the adhaan of Uthmaan unrestrictedly, he is not a follower of him (radiyallaahu anhu). Rather, he is an opposer to him (Uthmaan) in that he did not look through the same consideration to that reason without which Uthmaan would not have added to his Sunnah (alayhis salaatu wassalaam) and the Sunnah of the two khalifas after him (Abu Bakr and Umar). When is the Uthmani Adhaan Legislated? Hence, true following of (Uthmaan) (radiyallaahu anhu) is when the reason is found for which Uthmaan added the first adhaan which is "the increase of people and their homes being distant from the masjid" as has preceded.
- On page 21 onwards, Shaykh al-Albani elaborates upon his view that the additional adhaan of Uthmaan should not be performed because it is very rare or difficult for the reason behind it to be found. He explains that in large cities (like Damascus for example) you will find thousands of speakers (in the various mosques) through which the adhaan is amplified and its not possible for a person not to hear it.
- On the bottom of page 22, Shaykh al-Albani says, "And in summary: We hold that the (original) adhaan of Muhammad [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] should be sufficed with and that it should be when the imaam comes out and ascends the pulpit, due to the reason which permitted Uthmaan to add (the adhaan) having ended, and in following the Sunnah of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and he is the one who said, "Whoever turns away from my Sunnah is not from me" (Agreed upon). Note here that this does not support the Hajurites in any form or fashion as is clear. This clarification does not render the institution of the adhaan by Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu) for the intelligible reason that it was instituted to be a blameworthy innovation in the religion. Rather the action of Uthmaan is a Sunnah. However, when that Sunnah is performed without consideration of its underlying reason, then this is what Shaykh al-Albani is speaking about, and he does not hold that this is to be done unrestrictedly, because then a person would not be following Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu) in his Sunnah.
- On page 25, Shaykh al-Albani says (addressing the part of the question related to the barracks), "Yes, we do not see anything to prevent this (additional) adhaan of Uthmaan (being performed) when it is from the external entrance of the barracks because it causes the passers-by on the path to hear and informs them that in the barracks there is a masjid in which prayer is established, so they go to it and pray within it in the same way that those who are resident in the nearby houses on the path, however it is desirable that only a short time should separate between the two adhaans, because the Sunnah is to begin the khutbah straight after the zawaal (noon) after the adhaan...." This is a clear indication of the tafseel that is with Shaykh al-Albaanee (rahimahullaah).
- On page 27, Shaykh al-Albaanee addresses another part of the question which relates to whether the use of loudspeakers affects the previous clarification in relation to the adhaan of Uthmaan. He said, "Announcing the adhaan from the aforementioned mosque with loudbspeakers does not change the ruling in this matter in any way on account of that whose explanation has just preceded and we add here and we say: It has already passed that Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu) added the first adhaan "in order to inform the people that Jum'ah had approached" so when the adhaan (legislated by) Muhammad [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] is announced through loudspeakers, then the objective sought by Uthmaan with his adhaan has been achieved. And I believe that had this loudspeaker been present in the time of Uthmaan, and he considered the permissibility of its use as we believe (to be so), he (radiyallaahu anhu) would have sufficed with the announcing of the adhaan (legislated by) Muhammad [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam], and it would have made him free of need of his addition (of another adhaan)."
- From page 28, Shaykh al-Albani then discusses the correct places from which the original adhaan and the adhaan of Uthmaan (radiyallahu anhu) ought to be performed. He states (p. 28), "Verification of the place of the Prophetic and Uthmani adhaans: What has preceded in the hadeeth, "The adhaan in the era of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), Abu Bakr and Umar was at the door of the masjid, and the adhaan of Uthmaan used to be at al-Zooraa" makes us understand the answer to this portion (of the question). So when the reason demanding (us) to resort to his (Uthmaan's) adhaan is found, upon the detail that has preceded, then it is done from the place of need and benefit (for the purpose), not at the door of the mosque, because that is the place of the Prophetic adhaan, and nor is it to be done in the mosque by the pulpit, for this is an Amawi bid'ah, as will be (shown) in what follows, and it does not achieve the intended meaning behind the adhaan, which is notification..." Then Shaykh al-Albani brings some narrations in this regard showing that moving the adhaan's performance to right beside the pulpit is something that was not done previously and is considered an innovation. Note: The Hajurites have attempted to use some of these narrations that speak of the adhaan being performed in this manner (right near the pulpit) and make them appear to be in reference to the institution of the first adhaan by Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu) and this the subject of a separate article that would look at the various deceptions used by the Hajurites to make it appear that there is more evidence for their (futile) view than there actually is (which is in fact zero in reality to begin with).
Notes and Comments
From what has preceded it is sufficiently and abundantly clear that Imaam al-Albani's position is not the position of the Haddadi Hajurites, even though they have tried to use the Shaykh's position to justify their own taqleed of al-Hajuri, and then in turn of Shaykh Muqbil (rahimahullaah), and this is while they accuse Ahl al-Sunnah of making taqleed. The truth in this matter is not with Shaykh Muqbil (rahimahullaah). The narration of Ibn Umar is not in their favour, even if we accept it is authentic, because the Scholars of Islaam have explained it to mean the use of the word bid'ah linguistically, similar to the re-enactment of the Tarawih prayer by Umar bin al-Khattab (see this article). The end result of all of this is that the Haddadi Hajurites, whilst accusing everyone else of taqleed appear to be worse (in this matter) than the Muqallidah of the madhaahib. Because those Muqallidah say openly "We are Muqallidah (blind-followers)." The one who knows he is a blind-follower is superior to the blind-follower who denies he is a blind-follower, which is the case with the Hajurites in this particular issue.
Link to this article: Show:
Add a Comment
You must be registered and logged in to comment.