Documentation of Al-Hajuri's Misguided and Erroneous View on the First Adhaan Posted by Abu.Iyaad on Tuesday, August, 19 2014 and
filed under Articles
It has come to our attention that some of those who have returned from Dammaaj are confused about the affair of al-Hajuri and sincerely wish to know the truth. It is clear that they are unaware or misinformed about al-Hajuri's writings. In this article, we will document - for the record - the position of al-Hajuri on the first adhaan from his own writings.
Ibn al-Mundhir said, "When the people increased (in number) ʿUthmān bin ʿAffān (radiyallaahu anhu) ordered a third call (to prayer) in number, and it is the first (of them) which he began after sun reaching the zenith (doing this) in the presence of the Muhājirīn and the Anṣār and not a single one of them rejected it that we know of, and then the Ummah remained upon this until this day of ours." Al-Awsat min al-Sunan wal-Ijmāʿ (Dār al-Falāh, 1431H, 4/63).
Ibn Rajab al-Ḥanbalī (rahimahullaan) said, "And Ḥarb quotes from Isḥāq bin Rāhūyah that the first adhān for Jumuʿah is introduced, it was introduced by ʿUthmān. He saw that (the adhān) will not be heard unless he increases the callers to pray so that those furthest away will be informed (of time of Jumuʿah) and hence it became a Sunnah, because it is upon the khulafāʾ to look into such matters for the (benefit of) the people." Fatḥ al-Bārī (8/220-221.) And Ibn Rajab said a little later (p. 231), "And his statement in this narration which was related by al-Bukhārī here, 'And so the affair became established upon that', indicates that this was when ʿUthmān ordered it, it continued and it was not abandoned after that. And this shows that ʿAlī remained upon it and did not invalidate it, for two of the rightly-guided Caliphs agreed upon its performance, may Allāh be pleased with them all."
Al-Hajuri's Book Ahkām al-Jumu'ah
Aḥkām al-Jumuʿah wa Bidaʿihā by Yaḥyā al-Ḥajūrī. Published by Dār al-Imām Aḥmad (has a previous 1st edition with Dār Sharqayn). This is the 2nd edition 1428H/2006CE. This is the inside cover.
On page 249 al-Hajuri claims that whoever says the adhaan of Uthmaan is from the guidance of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is an evil liar and will not find any scholars of the Muslims agreeing with him upon this disgraceful lie. He is incorrect since many Scholars cite consensus of the Companions in their acceptance of this adhaan, and its being treated as the Sunnah referred to in the hadeeth of Irbaad bin Saariyah which itself is considered to be the Sunnah of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).
On the top of page 250 al-Hajuri judges the adhaan of Uthmaan as "misguidance" (dalaalah) and after he says, "And some of the stubborn deniers may say..." and he addresses the issue of whether Uthmaan became an innovator or not by this action. Al-Hajuri denies it, but this shows his contradiction in some of his other vile principles he is vehemently arguing for, such as his claim of the futility of distinguishing between the one who merely harbours an innovation and the one who calls to it. When you look at this matter holistically, along with some of his other speech, al-Hajuri is left with no choice but to make tabdee' of Uthmaan, and also the majority of the Companions and this is why Scholars such as Shaykh Fawzaan state explicitly that such people "desire to make tabdee' of Uthmaan" (see here) and why Shaykh Ibn al-Uthaymin consider this view a revilement of not only Uthmaan, but the Companions and even the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) (see here, here, and here).
On page 253 al-Hajuri describes some of those who cite the hadeeth "Whoever instituted in Islaam a good Sunnah..." to say Uthmaan's adhaan was an acceptable Sunnah as "blind in vision (insight)..."
On page 257 al-Hajuri says that Uthmaan opposed an explicit text relating to the action of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). He claims other Companions opposed this action of Uthmaan, but that is not established and al-Hajuri's evidences in that regard have been evaluated and invalidated. Discussing that is outside the scope of this article.
On page 415 he describes the adhaan of Uthmaan as "that mother (of innovation), the innovtion of the first aadhaan" stating other innovations were born as a result of that innovation.
And on page he refers to another innovation, saying it is from the daughters of that mother of innovation, the adhaan of Uthmaan.
On page 450 he addresses the issue of whether Uthmaan's action makes him an innovator. Al-Hajuri denies this, but in reality, his overall position and some of his other false principles do not allow him to escape like that.
On page 451 he states, "The one who followed him (Uthtmaan) in that error after the explanation of the proof, then he is an innovator, he has no excuse in opposing the Sunnah of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and his two companions." These types of judgements indicate that al-Hajuri cannot really give the other Companions present during Uthman's reign any excuse. How can it be when the knew the Sunnah of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and observed it every week of their lives, and then when the alleged bid'ah of Uthmaan was introduced, they did not come out openly with rejection?
Al-Hajuri brought 30 citations which he used to establish the adhaan of Uthmaan is bid'ah and dalaalah and mukhaalafah. Upon closer inspection, a large number of these quotes are very general and cannot be used by al-Hajuri. Those narrations which state that the adhaan of Uthmaan is "muhdath" - then that is not synonymous with it being misguidance and innovation. This is because these statements are from a linguistic point of view, it is an adhaan that was not present before. That is agreed upon by everybody. As for the judgement that it is bid'ah and mukhaalafah and dalaalah, that is something else. So after discounting a fair share of these statements, another set of these statements that use the word "bid'ah" could be relating to another adhaan, either that of Hishaam bin Abd al-Malik or al-Hajjaaj bin Yusuf, and it is not clear in those narrations. So they too can be discounted because of their lack of clarity and specificity. Alternatively, some of these narrations using the word bid'ah can be understood to mean linguistically an "innovation" meaning something not found before, not legislatively an innovation. Likewise, his quote from al-Albani, that does not support al-Hajuri, since al-Albani considers the adhaan of Uthmaan to be a legitimate Sunnah which can be implemented where the need for it arises. This is different to al-Hajuri's view which is that it is outright bid'ah. When we analyze each of these statements we find that they are struck out one by one. Then we are left with a few statements that require more detailed analysis, which has already been done by Shaykh Rabee' and others. And it comes down to either narrations which are not authentic (are shaadh, munkar) or the erroneous opinion of a scholar (that has no evidence for it). And it is clear after all of this, that al-Hajuri and his followers do not have any evidence to stand upon. Also within some of these citations, al-Hajuri has deliberately clipped certain quotes because they refute his falsehood (an example is here).
After the debate is exhausted and all the evidences are invalidated, the followers of al-Hajuri continue to ascribe bid'ah to the action of Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu) and they have been refuted by a number of the Major Scholars.
Shaykh al-Fawzan Does Not Accept the Excuses of the Hajurites (Uthmaan Made Ijtihaad, We Do Not Say Uthmaan Was a Mubtadi')
Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan was asked (mp3) (source):
Question: "Esteemed Shaykh, one of the du'aat (callers) says, "We do not declare Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu) an innovator - but we say that the first adhaan on the day of Jumu'ah is an innovation." He (the questioner) says, what is the ruling of this statement of his?"
Shaykh al-Fawzaan: "This itself is bid'ah (innovation), the man, this itself is bid'ah [to hold this position], he is an innovator. It is obligatory to withhold his tongue from the likes of this speech. Uthmaan is a rightly-guided caliph, and the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, "You must follow my sunnah and the sunnah of the rightly-guided caliphs after me..." Is this [speech of his against Uthmaan] from his eagerness for the Sunnah?? He declares the Companions innovators, declares the Caliphs innovators!! Is the Sunnah like this?! We ask Allaah for pardon! This is from ignorance (jahl) and not knowing the bid'ah from Sunnah. Yes."
In his lesson on the day of Sunday, 14/05/1435H Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan was asked (mp3) (source):
Question: May Allaah be benevolent to you, this questioner says: Is the first adhaan of the day of Jumu'ah considered an innovation?
Shaykh al-Fawzaan: Our (previous) speech (see here, here, and here) has become of no value.
Question: May Allaah be benevolent to you esteemed Shaykh, the questioner says: Some people say that the reason for which Uthmaan ordered the first adhaan is no longer present...
Shaykh al-Fawzaan: It has not ended, your desire is to make tabdee' of Uthmaan. This is not a permissible affair. Is this from your eagerness for the Sunnah? The action of Uthmaan is from the Sunnah by testimony of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)! "You must follow my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly-guided Caliphs after me." Respect the Companions! Especially the rightly-guided Caliphs, respect them! For they are the most superior of the Ummah, do not speak about them!
When we put all the statements of al-Hajuri together (and his absence of differentiation between one who holds or practices a bid'ah and one who calls to bid'ah) - then end result of all of that in reality is to say or imply Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu) was an innovator, a caller to his innovation. This is the direction that one is headed towards and ends up in when setting on this disastrous path and this is why Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan has said what he has said. This in turn leads to understand the severity with which Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen spoke in this matter:
Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen's Harsh Speech Against Those Accusing Uthmaan of Bid'ah
Shaykh Ibn al-Uthaymeen: The One Who Says Adhaan of Uthmaan Is Bid'ah Reviles the Messenger, the Caliphs and the Companions - (see here)
Shaykh Ibn al-Uthaymeen: Foolish-Minded Astray Innovator Who Says Uthmaan's Adhaan of Jumu'ah Is Bid'ah - (see here)
Shaykh Ibn al-Uthaymeen: He Is an Astray Innovator Who Says Uthmaan's Action Was Misguided - (see here)
Here are some quotes from the above articles from the Shaykh:
And the Jumu'ah (prayer) has a first adhaan which is from the Sunnah of Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu), and he is one of the rightly-guided Caliphs whose Sunnah we have been commanded to follow. Some of those pretending to be clever who claim that they are Salafis, Sunnis say: We do not accept the first adhaan of Jumu'ah, it is a bid'ah, it was not present in the time of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). This statement of theirs is a revilement upon the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), a revilement upon the rightly-guided Caliphs and a revilement upon the Companions. And these paupers reached this limit without knowing.
And he has strayed who said that it is a bid'ah, and he has declared the Companions (radiyallaahu anhum) as fools and has declared the rightly-guided Caliph (Uthmaan) as a fool. And we say: You are the innovator (mubtadi') in this saying which you have claimed that it is a bid'ah. How can it be bid'ah when the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) has called it a Sunnah, "... the Sunnah of the rightly-guided Caliphs after me." However, those people (who say this) are foolish-minded, even if they are senior in age. How can you declare the Companions to be astray with their leader Uthmaan bin Affaan. And yet you claim that you are a person of the Sunnah? Rather, you are a person of bid'ah in this saying
As for the one who rejects it from the newly-arisen ones and says, "It is a bid'ah" and declares Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu) to have been misguided (in his action), then he is the astray innovator.