Announcement: New Resources Site

By
al-Sidrah
-

The Sidrah team has launched a new Resources website, dedicated to the study and dissemination of the numerous sciences studied in the Islamic seminary. It is directed both to a general audience, as well as seminarians and specialists. God-willing, the website will include general and specialized glossaries, biographies of noteworthy Islamic personalities, and encyclopedia articles on varying subjects like Arabic, Islamic Law, and Qur’anic studies. It is intended to provide some insight into the work of the seminary, and more importantly, preserve and share the knowledge produced therein.

Currently, we are working on completing a glossary of terms, particularly for the fields of Arabic morphology (ṣarf) and Arabic grammar (naḥw). If you have any suggestions, concerns, corrections, or would like to contribute, please email us. Thank you!

Tadwīn al-Ḥadīth: Introduction and Preliminary Discussions

By
Haziq Sheikh
-

The Circulation and Recording of Hadith: Section 1

The following is a lightly-edited selection from baḥth al-khārij (advanced jurisprudence) lectures of Sayyid Aḥmad Madadī, a respected jurist and student of Sayyid Abū l-Qāsim al-Khūʾī and SayyidʿAlī al-Sīstānī. He resides and teaches in the holy city of Qom.

This series of lectures deals with the history of the writing and circulation of hadith (tadwīn al-ḥadīth) in the Muslim world, as a precursor to his main discussion on taʿāruḍ al-adillah (dealing with the resolution of conflicting religious evidence). Sayyid Madadī did not intend this section of the lessons to be a detailed historical lecture. Rather, he intended to convey his own conclusions on tadwīn al-ḥadīth, and to prepare his students to understand his chosen method(s) for resolving taʿāruḍ al-adillah. As such, they can serve as a good starting place for further research into the history of Shiʿi hadith studies and as a survey of the discussions therein.

Introduction: TheʿUlamāʾ and their Transmitted Legacy

Shia and Sunniʿulamāʾ approach the sources of Islamic teachings in different ways, albeit with some overlap. Hadith discussions and research in the Sunni world, even from the very earliest of stages in their intellectual development, have revolved around a baḥth rijālī (narrator analysis). For example, Abū Ḥanīfah would accept mursal reports, while al-Shāfiʿī would not. It is even said that theʿulamāʾ used to act upon mursal reports until the time of al-Shāfiʿī, who rejected these reports as non-authoritative.[1]The acceptance of marāsīl (“detached”), traditions in which the contiguity of the narrators is not maintained, is a matter of dispute among Sunni jurists. The marasīl of tābiʿūn (“Successors,” i.e. the generation following the Companions) were accepted by Abū Ḥanīfah, Mālik b. Anas, Ibrāhīm al-Nakhaʿī, and others. They were rejected by al-Shāfiʿī, Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal, and the rest of Ahl al-Ḥadīth as a general rule. See: Majd al-Dīn Abū Sa‛ādāt al-Mubārak b. Muhammad Ibn al-Athīr, Jāmiʿ al-Uṣūl Fī Aḥādīth al-Rasūl, Vol. 1 (Irbid: Maktabah Dār al-Bayān, 1969), 117-119.

This is in contrast to the qudamāʾ (earlier scholars) of the Imami Shiʿa, who in their hadith-analysis originally focused on books and sources, engaging in what can be called baḥth fihristī (catalogue analysis). This does not mean they were not engaged in other forms of research. The Shia are indeed distinguished in having engaged both in baḥth fihristī, baḥth rijālī, and baḥth riwāʾī. However, the primary concern of the Shiʿi jurists and scholars of hadith was not the individual narrators. There is a clear distinction here between analyzing a text with regard to the individual narrators in the isnād (chain of narrators), as opposed to analyzing it through its written source and origin.

There are two tiers of discussions with regard to our riwāyāt. The first pertains to fahāris (catalogs of authors, singl. fihrist), where we examine the books of the companions and jurists and the ṭuruq (chains of authorities, singl. ṭarīqah) of their respective works. The second regards the narrations in our hadith compilations, such as al-Kutub al-Arbaʿah. For example, often Shaykh al-Kulaynī will present us with the following chain of narrators:

ʿAlī b. Ibrāhīm, from his father, from al-Nawfalī, from al-Sakūnī

With the repetition of this chain and with reference to the fihrist-texts, it becomes clear that the original source of this narration is the book of al-Sakūnī, a companion of Imam Ṣādiq (ʿa).[2]Al-Sakūni is the narrator’s nisbah (tribal affiliation). His name is Ismāʿīl b. Abū Ziyād; his father’s name was Muslim. Shaykh al-Ṭūsī mentions that al-Sakūnī was anʿāmmī (non-Shiʿi) but that the jurists of the sect (ṭāʾifah) acted on his reports. All of the chains of authorities (ṭuruq, singl. ṭarīqah) mentioned in the catalog of authors (fihrist, pl. fahāris) for the book(s) and riwāyāt of al-Sakūnī coalesce back to the same Ibrāhīm b. Hāshim mentioned in al-Kulaynī’s isnād. See: al-Sayyid Abū al-Qāsim al-Khūʾī, Muʿjam Rijāl al-Ḥadīth, vol. 4, 1st ed. (Najaf: Maktabah al-Tawzīʿ), 21-25 and 98-99.

The Akhbārīʿulamāʾ–mostly for polemical purposes–were among the most adamant in distinguishing between the meaning of the term “ṣaḥīḥ” (sound) per the ancient scholars (qudamāʾ) and its meaning according to the later scholars (mutaʾakhkhirīn)[3]At the forefront of this polemic, arguing in favor of this distinction was Mullā Muḥammad Amīn al-Astarʾābādī in his famous al-Fawāʾid al-Madaniyyah, where he contrasts the isnād-rijāl analysis of the later scholars for the sound hadith with any report of certain provenance from the maʿṣūm, regardless of its isnād, as the intent of the term among the qudamāʾ. See: Muḥammad Amīn al-Astarʾābādī and al-Sayyid Nūr al-Dīn al-ʿĀmilī, al-Fawāʾid al-Madaniyyah wa bi dhaylih al-Shawāhid al-Makkiyyah, 2nd ed. (Qom: Muʾassasah al-Nashr al-Islāmī, 1426/2005), 109-113. . Among the Shiʿa, the main agent of this switch from a baḥth fihristī to a complete and total baḥth rijālī isʿAllāmah Ḥillī.

For example, Shaykh al-Ṭūsī (r) mentions a narration fromʿAlī b. Jaʿfar, the youngest son of al-Ṣādiq (ʿa) famous for his collection of masāʾil from his brother Imam al-Kāẓim (ʿa), about how to purify a vessel a pig has drunk from:

Shaykh Mufīd reported to us from Abū al-Qāsim Jaʿfar b. Muḥammad, from Muḥammad b. Yaʿqūb, from Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā, from al-ʿAmrakī b.ʿAlī, fromʿAlī b. Jaʿfar, from his brother, Mūsā b. Jaʿfar (ʿa). He (ʿAlī b. Jaʿfar) said: I asked him (al-Kāẓim) about a pig that has drunk from a vessel. What is done with it? He said, “It is washed seven times.”[4]Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Ṭūsī, Tahdhīb al-Aḥkām, (Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyyah, 1390/1970), 261, hadith 47-760

Both al-Kulaynī and al-Ḥimyarī–the author of Qurb al-Isnād–before him possessed the Masāʾil ofʿAlī b. Jaʿfar. Later, a different manuscript also reached al-Majlisī. However, this narration does not appear in any of these texts or manuscripts. In addition to this, Shaykh al-Ṭūsī himself does not produce a fatwa corresponding to this narration in any of his legal texts, nor does anyone after him give a fatwa according to it. The first jurist to rule based on this narration is Muḥaqqiq al-Ḥillī, who lived about two centuries after al-Ṭūsī, and his fatwa is only based on recommendation (istiḥbāb). The first to rule that it is obligatory to do so isʿAllāmah al-Ḥillī, because he understood this report to be sound per its chain of transmission. The fact that no extant manuscript ofʿAlī b. Jaʿfar’s work today contains this narration could mean one of two things:

1. Shaykh al-Ṭūsī made a mistake. For example, this report was a gloss in the margins of a manuscript of the Masāʾil, and he ascribed it to the text itself mistakenly.
2. This report was in al-Ṭūsī’s manuscript–meaning it is a mistake in the reporting of the text–and, therefore, has since been added to the original text.

If our primary focus for this report was rijālī, then our attention would be given to the individual narrators in the isnād. Thus, because we see that this report, as it appears in Shaykh al-Ṭūsī’s Tahdhīb al-Aḥkām, has reached us through a reliable isnād–that is, it is contiguous and from trustworthy narrators–it will be considered valid evidence in the derivation of law. However, if we pay attention to the original source of this narration–in other words, the hadith text it was originally sourced in–then our focus will be on the various manuscripts of that text, the text’s status/reception among the jurists and scholars of hadith, the different chains of authority mentioned in the fahāris, and so on.

Although the above hadith reported by al-Ṭūsī does not have any problems in its isnād, issues do surface when it is compared to the content utilized by other, earlier jurists from the various copies ofʿAlī b. Jaʿfar’s Masāʾil that were in circulation. Additionally, there is no fatwa in accordance with this particular report prior to the second half of the seventh century A.H. Thus, the sound isnād is insufficient evidence to establish the Imam as the source of the report. Conversely, if we have an isnād that may contain an unknown (majhūl) or even weak narrator, this apparent defect may be considered irrelevant due to the fame/renown of the original source for the hadith and the uniformity of source manuscripts that the jurists had access to.

In any case[5]For more insight into Sayyid Madadī’s ideas on baḥth fihristī see: Kāẓim Khalaf, “Manāhij al-Ijtihād wa Ṭarāʾiq al-Muhaddithīn ḥiwār maʿa al-Sayyid Aḥmad al-Madadī,” Markaz al-Buḥūth al-Muʿāṣirah fī Bayrūt, November 19, 2016, nosos.net/مناهج-الاجتهاد-وطرائق-المحدّثين. , it is necessary to fully grasp these discussions when learning how to deal with conflicting evidence, which is necessary to become a jurist. To do that, one must understand the intellectual legacy of the ancient scholars, which, in turn, requires us to understand the history of tadwīn (circulation) and writing of hadith. This discussion begins with looking at the history of Sunni hadith.

The Hadith and the Sunnah

As an introduction to this discussion, it is important to understand the distinction between sunna, hadith, and taḥdīth, terms often conflated by researchers. Taḥdīth is, very simply, the oral transmission of hadith. The sunnah (pl. sunan) of the Prophet (ṣ) is his legislation (tashrīʿ). For example, Allah mandated the five daily prayers, each originally two rakʿahs. Then the Prophet (ṣ) added two more rakʿahs to each, except Maghrib, to which he added just one rakʿah. The original two rakʿahs are from God’s legislation–the farḍ–while the obligatory additional rakʿahs are prophetic legislation through the legislative authority (wilāyah tashrīʿiyyah) delegated to him–that is, sunnah.[6]Muhammad b. Yaʿqūb al-Kulaynī, al-Kāfī, vol. 1 (Qom: Dār al-Ḥadīth, 1429/2008), 662-665, hadith 4-697

Another example is God’s forbidding the consumption of wine specifically and the Prophet (ṣ) then expanding that to the prohibition of all intoxicants.[7]Ibid. The phrasing for this in the hadith is the following: ḥarrama Allāhu –ʿazza wa jalla– al-khamra bi-ʿaynihā wa ḥarrama rasūlullāhi–ṣallallāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālihi–al-muskira min kulli sharābin. There is also the famous tradition instructing when the prayer is not to be repeated, referred to as the hadith of Lā Tuʿād (lit. “will not be repeated”) by theʿulamāʾ, narrated by Zurārah where Imam Bāqir (ʿa) mentions that the qirāʾah and tashahhud in ṣalāh are sunan and the sunnah does not overrule the farīḍah.[8]Muḥammad b.ʿAlī b. al-Ḥusayn ibn Bābuwayh al-Qummī, al-Khiṣāl (Qom: Markaz al-Manshurāt al-Islāmiyyah, 1403/1982), 284-285, hadith 35 Related is the following narration from al-Ṭūsī’s abridgment of al-Kashshī’s Maʿrifah al-Rijāl:

[Narrated] from Ḥamdwayh, from Muḥammad b.ʿĪsā, from Muḥammad b. AbūʿUmayr, fromʿUmar b. Udhaynah, from Zurārah.

He said: Ḥumrān and I were sitting with Imam al-Ṣādiq (ʿa), and Ḥumrān said to him, “What do you think about the view of Zurārah that I disagree with?” The Imam said, “What issue is that?” Ḥumrān said, “He claims that [establishing] the times of prayer was delegated to the Prophet (ṣ) and he was the one who established them.” The Imam replied, “And what do you think?” “I believe Jabrāʾīl (ʿa) came to him on the first day with the first prayer time, and on the second day with the latter prayer time. Then Jabrāʾīl said, ‘O Muḥammad, whatever is between them is a time.’” Then the Imam said, “O Ḥumrān, Zurārah is saying Jabrāʾīl only came in an advisory capacity to the Prophet (ṣ). Zurārah is correct. Allah delegated that to the Prophet (ṣ). He established it and Jabrāʾīl indicated [approval].”[9]Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Ṭūsī, Ikhtiyār Maʿrifah al-Rijāl al-maʿrūf bi-Rijāl al-Kashshī, 1st ed. (Qom: Muʾassasah al-Nashr al-Islāmī, 1427/2006), 132, hadith 20-227.

Aḥadīth are more general than the sunan. They encompass characteristics and attributes of the Prophet (ṣ), his mannerisms and appearance, how he would conduct himself in battle, historical information about him, sīrah, how he would eat and drink, and so on. On the other hand, sunan speak particularly about his legislations. This distinction between sunan and aḥādīth seems to have been present among the Ṣahābāh. It can also be inferred from the report of IbnʿAbbās, when the Khawārij seceded from Amīr al-Muʾminīn (ʿa) and he said, “Do not debate them with the Qurʾan as it has many possible meanings. Rather dispute with them using the sunnah.”[10]Jalāl al-DīnʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. al-Kamāl al-Suyūṭī, Mafātīh al-Jannah fī al-Iḥtijāj bi al-Sunnah, vol. 1, 3rd ed. (Medina: Dār al-Nashr al-Jāmiʿah al-Islāmiyyah, 1399/1979), 59.

Arabic as Written Text

The prevailing opinion among the Sunniʿulamāʾ is that the Prophet (ṣ) forbade the writing of his hadith. Some said it is permissible to write down the hadith for memorization. But after one has memorized it, he must efface it. However, prior to diving into the discussion of the circulation and writing of hadith, it would be beneficial to understand some of the background behind writing and script in the Muslim world.

Prior to the advent of Islam, there was no standard script among the people of Mecca. Some writing may have existed in the Musnad script, a Yemeni script that resembles cuneiform (mismārī). An Iraqi named Bishr, the brother of a famous Arab king, Ukayd, learned the Ḥīrī script that would later be called the Kufan script. Ḥīrah was an ancient city that functioned as the capital city of the Lakhmid Empire. It was also close to the city of Madāʾin, which was at that point a major Persian city.

At the time, there were two main scripts extant in Iraq, the Suryānī (Syriac) script–an entirely clerical language–(the Bible was written in this script) and the Nabaṭī (Nabatean) script, which was used by the general population. The Ḥīrī script that Bishr learned was the Suryānī script that he taught to several Meccans after he migrated, marrying the sister of Abū Sufyān. Among those he taught were Abū Sufyān himself, Muʿāwiyah,ʿUmar, and Ṭalḥah.[11]It is apparent that Sayyid Madadī bases his narrative of the development and movement of Arabic script on historical sources. Other researchers, through paleographic study, believe that Arabic script was developed from Nabṭī rather than Suryānī. See: Dr. Ṣalāh al-Dīn al-Munjid, Tārīkh al-Khaṭṭ al-ʿArabī, 2nd ed. (Beirut: Dār al-Kitāb al-Jadīd, 1982), 12-19. This script, along with some development of the Nabaṭī script, survived until about the 4th-century after the Hijra–around 310 to 315 AH. It was the Abbasid vizier, Ibn Muqlah, a man renowned for his calligraphy, who then took elements from both the Kufan and Nabaṭī script and created the Naskh script used today.

After the Naskh script became the new standard, there was a long process of rewriting texts that were previously written in the Kufan script. The Kufan script had unique characteristics, such as the lack of diacritical markings and niqāt (dots), as well as the lack of an alif in the middle of words, which is why certain words in the Qurʾan such as Ismāʿīl are written: إسمـعيل, without the alif in the middle. Indeed, many scribal errors (taṣḥīf) in texts can be attributed to this confusion of the script and the conversion to the new script.

We can say with certainty that the Qurʾan was written during the Meccan period of the prophetic mission in the Kufan script. The evidence also suggests that nothing called the sunna or the hadith of the Prophet (ṣ) was circulated during this time. In fact, very few sunan were revealed then. For example, as we mentioned previously, the obligatory ṣalawāt were each originally two rak‛ahs. However, they were devoid of any particular order or organization. The Muslims would pray in the morning, at noon, etc. without any set and obligatory boundaries of time, until the fifth year after the start of the prophetic mission. Then the following verse was revealed:

أَقِمِ الصَّلَاةَ لِدُلُوكِ الشَّمْسِ إِلَىٰ غَسَقِ اللَّيْلِ وَقُرْآنَ الْفَجْرِ ۖ إِنَّ قُرْآنَ الْفَجْرِ كَانَ مَشْهُودًا

Establish ṣalāh at the sun’s decline until the darkness of the night and [establish] the recitation of dawn. Verily the dawn recital is witnessed.[12]Qurʾan, al-Isrāʾ:78

These are two preliminary discussions useful in understanding the history of writing and circulating hadith. Next, we will discuss the origins of the permissibility of writing hadith, along with the views of Sunniʿulamāʾ regarding it.

Notes   [ + ]

1. ⇧ The acceptance of marāsīl (“detached”), traditions in which the contiguity of the narrators is not maintained, is a matter of dispute among Sunni jurists. The marasīl of tābiʿūn (“Successors,” i.e. the generation following the Companions) were accepted by Abū Ḥanīfah, Mālik b. Anas, Ibrāhīm al-Nakhaʿī, and others. They were rejected by al-Shāfiʿī, Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal, and the rest of Ahl al-Ḥadīth as a general rule. See: Majd al-Dīn Abū Sa‛ādāt al-Mubārak b. Muhammad Ibn al-Athīr, Jāmiʿ al-Uṣūl Fī Aḥādīth al-Rasūl, Vol. 1 (Irbid: Maktabah Dār al-Bayān, 1969), 117-119.
2. ⇧ Al-Sakūni is the narrator’s nisbah (tribal affiliation). His name is Ismāʿīl b. Abū Ziyād; his father’s name was Muslim. Shaykh al-Ṭūsī mentions that al-Sakūnī was anʿāmmī (non-Shiʿi) but that the jurists of the sect (ṭāʾifah) acted on his reports. All of the chains of authorities (ṭuruq, singl. ṭarīqah) mentioned in the catalog of authors (fihrist, pl. fahāris) for the book(s) and riwāyāt of al-Sakūnī coalesce back to the same Ibrāhīm b. Hāshim mentioned in al-Kulaynī’s isnād. See: al-Sayyid Abū al-Qāsim al-Khūʾī, Muʿjam Rijāl al-Ḥadīth, vol. 4, 1st ed. (Najaf: Maktabah al-Tawzīʿ), 21-25 and 98-99.
3. ⇧ At the forefront of this polemic, arguing in favor of this distinction was Mullā Muḥammad Amīn al-Astarʾābādī in his famous al-Fawāʾid al-Madaniyyah, where he contrasts the isnād-rijāl analysis of the later scholars for the sound hadith with any report of certain provenance from the maʿṣūm, regardless of its isnād, as the intent of the term among the qudamāʾ. See: Muḥammad Amīn al-Astarʾābādī and al-Sayyid Nūr al-Dīn al-ʿĀmilī, al-Fawāʾid al-Madaniyyah wa bi dhaylih al-Shawāhid al-Makkiyyah, 2nd ed. (Qom: Muʾassasah al-Nashr al-Islāmī, 1426/2005), 109-113.
4. ⇧ Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Ṭūsī, Tahdhīb al-Aḥkām, (Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyyah, 1390/1970), 261, hadith 47-760
5. ⇧ For more insight into Sayyid Madadī’s ideas on baḥth fihristī see: Kāẓim Khalaf, “Manāhij al-Ijtihād wa Ṭarāʾiq al-Muhaddithīn ḥiwār maʿa al-Sayyid Aḥmad al-Madadī,” Markaz al-Buḥūth al-Muʿāṣirah fī Bayrūt, November 19, 2016, nosos.net/مناهج-الاجتهاد-وطرائق-المحدّثين.
6. ⇧ Muhammad b. Yaʿqūb al-Kulaynī, al-Kāfī, vol. 1 (Qom: Dār al-Ḥadīth, 1429/2008), 662-665, hadith 4-697
7. ⇧ Ibid. The phrasing for this in the hadith is the following: ḥarrama Allāhu –ʿazza wa jalla– al-khamra bi-ʿaynihā wa ḥarrama rasūlullāhi–ṣallallāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālihi–al-muskira min kulli sharābin.
8. ⇧ Muḥammad b.ʿAlī b. al-Ḥusayn ibn Bābuwayh al-Qummī, al-Khiṣāl (Qom: Markaz al-Manshurāt al-Islāmiyyah, 1403/1982), 284-285, hadith 35
9. ⇧ Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Ṭūsī, Ikhtiyār Maʿrifah al-Rijāl al-maʿrūf bi-Rijāl al-Kashshī, 1st ed. (Qom: Muʾassasah al-Nashr al-Islāmī, 1427/2006), 132, hadith 20-227.
10. ⇧ Jalāl al-DīnʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. al-Kamāl al-Suyūṭī, Mafātīh al-Jannah fī al-Iḥtijāj bi al-Sunnah, vol. 1, 3rd ed. (Medina: Dār al-Nashr al-Jāmiʿah al-Islāmiyyah, 1399/1979), 59.
11. ⇧ It is apparent that Sayyid Madadī bases his narrative of the development and movement of Arabic script on historical sources. Other researchers, through paleographic study, believe that Arabic script was developed from Nabṭī rather than Suryānī. See: Dr. Ṣalāh al-Dīn al-Munjid, Tārīkh al-Khaṭṭ al-ʿArabī, 2nd ed. (Beirut: Dār al-Kitāb al-Jadīd, 1982), 12-19.
12. ⇧ Qurʾan, al-Isrāʾ:78

Who was Imam ʿAli? – Sunni Islam, Theological Boundaries, and Imam ʿAlī: An Interview with Professor Nebil Husayn

By
al-Sidrah
-
www.salamstock.com

Early Islam was rife with a vast spectrum of beliefs, many of which were coupled with vehement, even violent disputes. Indeed, when we read about its early history, Islam seems to have been very different from how we think about it today. And Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib was a focal point for many of these various disputes. How did early Muslims view Imam Ali? What are the various factors that led to or were affected by the views of these early Muslims? And how are the views of early Muslims relevant to us today?

We sat down with Professor Nebil Husayn at the 2015 Muslim Group Conference in Chicago, Il, to gain insights into some of these questions, and to ponder how to approach Islamic history. His dissertation at Princeton University, entitled, “The Memory of Ali ibn Abi Talib in the Early Sunni Community,” was on the issue of Pro-ʿAlid perspectives, Anti-ʿAlid sentiment, and the imprints of early Muslim thought on Sunni Islam. Professor Husayn now teaches Islamic Studies at the University of Miami.

Click here to listen to the interview.

ʿIyādat al-Marīḍ, or “The Etiquette of Visiting the Sick” in Hadith-Narrations

By
Sayyid Sameer Ali
-

ʿIyādat al-marīḍ, or “visiting the sick,” is an important Islamic moral commandment. It is the right of a Muslim, who is ill and bedridden, for other Muslims to make an effort to visit him and provide comfort. This right exists because the Muslim community consists of members bound by faith, devotion, and commitment to each other’s well-being. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ urges the Muslims to fulfill this commandment, stating:

A Muslim has five rights upon his fellow Muslim: that he should greet him when they meet, answer him when called, visit him when he is sick, accompany his bier when he dies, and love for him what he loves for himself.[1]

This narration highlights the mutual devotion that exists between members of the Muslim community, including visiting each other when one member of the community falls ill. It is reported that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ used to inquire about his companions if one of them was absent from the congregation for more than three days, and the Messenger would visit him if he was sick.[2]

Often, our conception of illness or sickness is related to being bedridden or even terminally ill. This is, of course, false. The hadith literature does not indicate that the commandment to visit a sick Muslim applies only when he or she is terminally ill. Rather it encourages Muslims to visit each other when a person might be bedridden or absent from the physical congregation of the Muslim community. For our purposes, these illnesses may include the common cold, the flu, or any other condition which prevents a Muslim from being physically present in the masjid or the community center.

The social and spiritual rewards for visiting the sick are tremendous. It strengthens the mutual bonds between community members, provides space for displaying devotion and commitment to the faith, and offers Muslims an opportunity to remember God. Visiting the sick is compared to visiting Allah Himself. A narration from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ states that on the Day of Judgment, Allah will address his servant and say:

“O my servant! I was sick and you did not visit me!” The servant will reply: “O Allah! How could I have visited you in your sickness? You are the Lord of the realms!” God will reply: “Did you not realize that my servant, so-and-so, was ill, and you did not visit him? Did you not know that if you had visited him you would have found Me with him?”[3]

This tradition is indeed exceptional. It places the sick person in the direct company of God, and compares the company of the sick person to the presence of God. It also provides the Muslim an opportunity to directly visit Allah by visiting the sick person. The paradigm is unique and differs from the common perception of a visit: the visitor becomes the one seeking God and benefiting from His company, while the sick person as the host is the one near whose bedside Allah is found for all those who choose to visit Him. Like a masjid, the sick person is temporarily turned into a Divine space, a sacred presence, and one who provides others with the opportunity to visit God.

The sick person also has the opportunity to gain rewards from God. He or she is to act in a dignified manner, avoid complaining about his or her medical condition, and be content with what Allah has decreed for him. A narration in al-Kāfī states:

Whoever is sick for three days and does not complain to his visitors, his flesh and blood will be replaced with something better.[4]  

Avoiding complaining about a sickness with which Allah has decided to test a believer is an opportunity to show strength, fortitude, and patience. The sick person’s physical state will be improved, and his or her body will be bettered, if he or she can remain patient in the face of sickness, which may include pain, discomfort, and disability.

The hadith–narrations also mention a particular etiquette for visiting the sick, a propriety that should exist between the visitor and the sick person. Here, we will examine a few of these prescribed behaviors: First, the visit should be kept short (takhfīf al-julūs). A short visit ensures that the sick person has sufficient time for rest, and the visitor is not intruding on the path toward recovery. It also creates an opportunity for a short, but meaningful, conversation between the visitor and the sick person; a visit of limited duration must create and find meaning during the social exchange. A hadith attributed to Imam ʿAlī ibn abī Ṭālib (ʿa) specifically stipulates a brief visit.[5]

The second etiquette is for the visitor to abandon any expectation of being hosted and treated as a guest in the house of the sick believer. A visitor cannot expect the usual exchange of food, snacks, or even a meal that usually accompanies a social visit. The visitor should bear in mind the physical, and possibly financial, constraints the illness has placed upon the person being visited. This also creates an opportunity for members of the Muslim community to exchange something that is intangible, immaterial, and beyond the usual constraints of social interaction. They exchange comfort and presence; the sick person offers his or her own presence as a gift to the visitor.[6] The third etiquette is for the visitor to bring gifts to the sick person. A narration states that a sick person should not be visited empty-handed; small gifts such as apples, quinces, pears, or perfumes should be taken by the visitor to the sick person.[7] These gifts fulfill the expectations of the sick person that God is providing for them through the visitor, increasing the sick person’s sense of comfort and relief.

The fourth etiquette is showing empathy for the condition of the patient. This behavior qualifies any discussions of death, sickness, and suffering, and tempers it with kindness, gentleness, and emotional and spiritual presence. It assures the visitors that they are present and care for their fellow believers at times of illness, creating an expectation of reciprocity and general awareness. It also provides the sick person with comfort and relief. A report from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ states:

When you visit a sick person, remove his or her anxiety about dying, as this might provide relief to the Soul.[8]

Such behavior certainly acts to reduce anxiety, decrease discomfort, and improve some of the feelings the sick person may be experiencing.

The fifth, and perhaps final display of akhlāq, is performing a prayer for the sick person. This provides the visitor with the opportunity to pray and seek the fulfillment of their desires in close proximity to God’s presence. The visitor is invited to supplicate to God for the healing of the sick person as well as for his or her own personal needs. A narration in Biḥār al-Anwār mentions a particular duʿāʾ for the sick from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ:

O Allah! Heal him (the sick person) with your healing, cure him with your medicine, and save him from your affliction!

This supplication reveals that the entirety of the sick person’s experience originates in God’s will and is aimed—as far as we can determine—at bringing the sick person and his visitor in closer proximity to Allah. The illness and its cure, the malady and its medicine, and the affliction and its abatement emerge from God and return back to Him. Illness presents a cumulative and total experience in the Muslim community which reveals one of the manifestations of the verse:

Say, All is from Allah. What is the matter with these people that they hardly understand any tiding?[9]

At the moment of supplication, the sick believer’s prayers are also answered, and he or she is invited to pray for the visitors, their families, and the community in general.

As is apparent from a brief examination of these verses, visiting the sick members of the Muslim community is a duty for all believers, contains great opportunities for spiritual connection and growth, and is a moment of supplication and devotion to the Divine Presence. The encounter between the sick person and his or her visitor calls for a particular etiquette, which eschews superficial manners of behavior and social expectation; it provides a spiritual space and enriches certain metaphysical realities which the Muslim community should be aware of.

 

[1] Abul-Qāsim Pāyanda, Nahj al-Fasaha (Tehran: Sāziman-i Intishārāt-i Jāwidān, 1992), 634.

[2] Sayyid Muḥammad Ḥusayn al-Ṭabātabāʾī, Sunan al-Nabi: A Collection of Narrations on the Conduct and Customs of the Noble Prophet Muhammad (Kitchener, Ont: Islamic Publishing House, 2007), 27.

[3] Pāyanda, Abul-Qāsim, Nahj al-Faṣāhah, 311.

[4] Usūl al-Kāfī, vol.3, p.115, h1.

[5] Ibid, vol. 3, p.118, h6.

[6] Al-Muḥaddith al-Nūrī, Mustadrak al-Wasāʾil, vol. 2 (Qum: Muʾassasah Āl al-Bayt l-Ihya al-Turāth), 154.

[7] Uṣūl al-Kāfī, vol.3, p.118, h3.

[8] Al-Karājikī, Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī, Kanz al-Fawāʾid, vol. 1 (Qum: Intishārāt Dār al-Dhakāʾir), 379.

[9] Quran, 4:78 (Arberry translation).

Ahl al-Bayt Islamic Seminary Reading-List

By
al-Sidrah
-

Over the past fifteen years, members of the Shīʿī community have embarked on a large project of digitizing English-language articles and books on Islamic topics from Shīʿī authors. Various websites and Dropbox links provide web-based reading opportunities, PDF downloads, and e-Book offerings. In addition, academia has taken a stronger interest in Islamic Studies in general, and Shīʿī studies in particular; this has led to new publications by academic presses, as well an increase in works published for the general reader. But with this progress has also come the consternation of many seekers and readers as they fail to effectively wade through the mire of hundreds of texts whose topics range from refutations of Orientalist history to detailed discussions on Shīʿī philosophy of law.

This small project will organize a list of texts into useable categories as a basic reference for individuals who would like to find a text in a given field. The list will not be exhaustive; rather, we hope to provide the reader with specifically insightful or important texts—though this does not amount to an endorsement, as some of the foundational texts in a given field may have gaps or disagreeable content. This should eliminate some of the confusion and frustration that occurs when searching for a work on a particular topic.  We hope that this will offer a rough curriculum for interested readers and give them a sense of the breadth of the available works in English.

At the outset, our list will remain small and dedicated primarily to introductory books to Islamic doctrine and practice in general. The list will be composed, primarily, of texts written by Muslim scholars in general and Shīʿī scholars in particular, but will also include relevant texts and articles written by others. We hope that this resource will build over time—both in terms of the number of texts represented and the categories into which they fit.

Our list will be organized by the last name of the author or editor, with the title thereafter. Occasionally, for translated works, authors names are transliterated differently due to different standards. For consistency’s sake, we have used the transliteration we have found to be most common; the reader ought to bear in mind that searching for a work in translation by a particular author may require searching various spellings of the author’s name; for example, “Murtaza Mutahhari” may sometimes be seen as “Murtada” or “Murtaẓa” or “Murtadha.” Translator names will be omitted unless it is relevant due to multiplicity of translations. Occasionally a text may fall into multiple categories and will be listed as such.

 

Introduction to Islam and/or Shīʿī Islam

  • Bahonar, Jawad and Beheshti, Muhammad Husayni – Philosophy of Islam
  • Chirri, Mohamad Jawad – Inquiries about Islam
  • Chittick, William and Murata, Sachiko – The Vision of Islam
  • Haider, Najam – Shīʿī Islam: An Introduction
  • Kashif al-Ghita, Muhammad Husayn – The Shi’ah: Origin and Faith
  • Lari, Sayyid Mujtaba Musavi – Lessons in Islamic Doctrine (4 Volumes – 1 – God and His Attributes 2 – The Seal of the Prophets and his Message 3 – Resurrection, Judgement, and the Hereafter 4 – Imamate and Leadership)
  • Mudhaffar, Muhammad Ridha – The Faith of the Imamiyyah Shi’ah
  • Mutahhari, Murtaza – Fundamentals of Islamic Thought: God, Man, and the Universe
  • Mutahhari, Murtaza – Goal of Life
  • Nasr, Seyyed Hossein – The Heart of Islam: Enduring Values for Humanity
  • Rahman, Fazlur – Islam
  • Rizvi, Sayyid Muhammad – An Introduction to Islam
  • Rizvi, Sayyid Muhammad – Islam: Faith, Practice, and History
  • Rizvi, Sayyid Muhammad – Shīʿism: Imāmate and Wilāyat
  • al-Sadr, Muhammad Baqir – Shi’ism: The Natural Product of Islam
  • Shomali, Mohammad Ali – Discovering Shi’i Islam
  • Tabatabaʾi, ʿAllamah Muhammad Husayn – Islamic Teachings: An Overview
  • Tabatabaʾi, ʿAllamah Muhammad Husayn – Shi’ite Islam

Legal Prohibitions Relating to God, Self, and Society

By
Azhar Sheraze
-
www.salamstock.com

There are a number of obligations and prohibitions that a Muslim should take heed of. Many such obligations are expressed in the form of rulings (aḥkam) that carry moral and legal weight in the Islamic conception of law (fiqh). While law is only one aspect of a broader Islamic conception of life, one should understand the law as boundaries defining the possibilities of action and a starting point for traversing a much larger path towards moral perfection – a path that includes ethics, theology, and practice.

Below are a selection of legal prohibitions that relate to a person’s relationships with Allah ﷻ and others, in accordance with the rulings of Sayyid Ali al-Husayni al-Sistani.[1]Sayyid Ali al-Husayni al-Sistani, al-Masāʾil al-Muntakhabah (Beirut: Dār al-Muʾarrikh al-ʿArabī, 2012), 10-4. Although this selection of rulings includes actions that are all equally forbidden, the tool and methods for avoiding and resolving them may widely differ.  Seeking inspiration and assistance from various disciplines outside of law may be required.

One should not:

  • Lose hope in the mercy of Allah and His salvation
  • Feel a guarantee of safety from Allah’s retribution for evil. Allah may seize an evildoer at anytime in a way they would never have imagined.
  • “Revert to Ignorance” after migration. This is defined as moving or living in a place where one’s religion becomes deficient. Therefore, it is not permissible to go somewhere that would result in a person’s faith (imān) becoming weaker in terms of correct doctrine, performance of obligations, or avoidance of what is religiously prohibited.
  • Assist or incline towards a tyrant (zālim) is forbidden, as is accepting an official position from him. The exception to this rule is when the action or role is (a) permissible in itself and (b) is performed in order to counteract the tyrant for the sake of the best interests of the Muslims.
  • Kill a Muslim or any innocent or protected soul.  It is also not permitted to harm, hit, or do any harmful action against such a person. Related to this issue is the impermissibility of the killing of a fetus before the soul enters its body, even if it merely be a blood clot or embryo.
  • Gossip (ghībah) about a believer. Gossip is to publicly mention a deficiency or shortcoming of a believer which is hidden from people while that believer is not present. Such “public mention” is gossip regardless of whether one does so intending to demean or not.
  • Curse, damn, demean, humiliate, mock, and cause fear to a believer. Likewise, it is not permissible to spread his or her secrets, keep track of his or her mistakes and shortcomings, and to look down upon him or her.  This is especially the case if he or she is poor or destitute.
  • Slander a believer, which is defined as mentioning something in his or her absence which is not true. (The difference here, between “gossip” and “slander”, is that the former is a true statement whereas the latter is false.)
  • Stir up calumny between believers, which results in dividing them.
  • Forsake a Muslim for more than three days (forbidden as an obligatory precaution).
  • Accuse a chaste man or woman of indecency, such as adultery (zinā), without a religiously mandated form of proof.
  • Cheat a Muslim in commerce or anything similar, whether by hiding a fault or the undesirability of a product, or offering a desirable description of a product that does not accurately describe it, or showing a product that is actually not the same type as what is being sold. Generally speaking, any form of deception in commerce is forbidden.
  • Use vulgar speech, defined as obscene words whose mention is considered shameful.
  • Be treacherous and betray a Muslim or a non-Muslim.
  • Express jealousy (ḥasad) in word or deed. As for jealousy in the heart that is not expressed in word or deed, such is not forbidden per se, although it is a reprehensible trait. There is no harm in envy (ghibṭah), defined as wishing for something that someone else has been bestowed with, without wishing for it to be taken away or removed from that person.
  • Have sexual activity outside of a valid marriage, including looking, touching, and listening with desire.  Likewise, bringing two people together for illicit sexual relations is also forbidden.  Furthermore, it is not permitted to see one’s spouse commit adultery while being silent or not stopping it.
  • Resemble the opposite gender (For men to resemble women or women to resemble men), according to obligatory precaution. Such resemblance is defined by a person taking on the form or dress of the opposite gender.
  • Give an opinion without knowledge or legitimate evidence.
  • Lie, even regarding something which does not harm another person. The worst types of lies are the giving of false testimony in legal cases and issuing a religious edict (fatwa) without a valid basis in that which Allah ﷻ has revealed.
  • Break a promise, as per obligatory precaution. Also, making a promise which one does not intend to fulfill.
  • Receive usury in transactions and lending. Consuming usury, carrying it, and gifting it are all forbidden. It is also not permitted to give compensation for a usurious transaction. Recording and testifying to such a transaction is also not permitted.
  • Be arrogant (kibr) and conceited (ikhtiyāl). This is when a person presents himself, without merit, as better than or above others.
  • Cut ties (qaṭīʿat al-raḥim) with relatives.  “Cutting ties” is defined as neglecting goodness to them in a situation where goodness would be expected.
  • Be extravagant, which is spending in excess of what is proper, or wasteful, which is spending on that which is not proper.
  • Pay less than what is due in a transaction, in terms of money, weight, measure, or the like, in such a way that what is rightfully due to another is not fulfilled.
  • Spend the wealth of a Muslim (or one ruled as a Muslim, such as the minor child of Muslim parents) without their consent or willingness.
  • Harm a Muslim (or one ruled as such) regarding his person, his wealth, or his reputation.
  • Accept bribes for legal judgments, whether one gives or receives, even if for getting a ruling which is correct.  As for bribes for seeking one’s right from an oppressor, it is permissible, although forbidden for the oppressor to take it.
  • Show off, either by being seen or heard, in matters of religious obedience and worship.
  • Kill oneself or intend to bring about substantial harm to oneself.  Also a believer should not debase himself or herself, for example, by wearing clothes which make him look disgraceful or heinous in the eyes of the public.

A believer should make preparations for the sake of obedience to Allah by following His commands and prohibitions, purifying and refining the soul from contemptible attributes and objectionable traits, and adorning the soul with the perfections of morality and praiseworthy traits.This is accomplished by following the Sacred Book and the Noble Practice of the Prophet ﷺ, such as remembering death, the transience of the life of this world, and the final outcome of the afterlife, such as Purgatory (Barzakh), Resurrection (Nushūr), the Gathering of all people on that Day (Ḥashr), the Accounting of all actions (Ḥisāb), and the Judgement from Allah ﷻ. Also, the remembrance of the descriptions and blessings of paradise, along with the terror of the Hellfire. Likewise, one would do well to remember the results of one’s actions in this life and their final result in the Hereafter. This advice is what is meant by the religious instruction of having mindfulness of Allah, His obedience, and being wary of falling into sin.

 

Notes   [ + ]

1. ⇧ Sayyid Ali al-Husayni al-Sistani, al-Masāʾil al-Muntakhabah (Beirut: Dār al-Muʾarrikh al-ʿArabī, 2012), 10-4.

The Best Time for Prayers

By
Haziq Sheikh
-
A piece discussing the legalities of ideal prayer times

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

صلّى الله على محمد وآله الأطهار

 

The ritual prayer (ṣalāh, pl. ṣalawāt) is perhaps the most integral practice of a Muslim’s daily life. It is well known to Muslims and non-Muslims alike that throughout the day a Muslim will stop whatever they are doing, turn towards Mecca, and commune with their Lord. The ṣalāh is prescribed to be performed with certain preliminaries and in a particular method. Among these preliminaries is performance of the prayers in their specified times, as Allah alludes to in the Qur’an: “Verily the ṣalāh is a timed prescription upon the faithful.”[1][2]

The Prophet (ṣ) and Imams (ʿa) stressed the obligation of dutifully observing our prayers and making sure we pray them within their prescribed times. al-Kulaynī reports the following hadith from Abān ibn Taghlib, a notable jurist from the companions of Ahl al-Bayt (ʿa):

I was praying in congregation behind Imam Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq (ʿa) in Muzdalifah; when he finished, he turned to me and said, “Abān, whoever establishes the five obligatory prayers with their requirements and takes care to pray them in their allotted times shall meet Allah on the Day of Reckoning with a covenant that will bring him into paradise. However, whoever fails to establish them with their requirements and neglects their prescribed times shall meet Allah with no covenant. If He wishes, He can punish him, and if He wishes, He can pardon him.”[3]

Naturally, one would then wonder what are these prescribed times for each of the daily prayers. Of the Qur’anic verses that speak about the times of prayer, one encompasses all five daily ṣalawāt: “Establish ṣalāh from the sun’s decline until the darkness of the night and [establish] the recitation of dawn. Verily the dawn recital is witnessed.”[4] This verse mentions three times: the sun’s decline (dulūk al-shams), the darkness of the night (ghasaq al-layl), and dawn (fajr). Some Shīʿī Muslims, often in the context of polemics, try to argue that this verse has only defined three timings for the ṣalawāt—namely to argue that the five obligatory prayers have only three times that are established by Allah. This is, however, not what is understood from the verse, linguistically. The verse calls for us to establish prayer within a particular stretch of time—from dulūk al-shams until ghasaq al-layl—and at one particular time, fajr. It does not say to pray at noon, pray at night, and pray at dawn.

The main source for establishing the specific timings for each prayer within that stretch of time is the reported traditions from the Ahl al-Bayt (ʿa). In the issue of the timings of the daily prayers, the fuqahāʾ (jurists) of the school of Ahl al-Bayt (ʿa) have a near consensus on the prayer times. They are as follows:

The time of ẓuhr and ʿaṣr is from noon until sunset. However, the very beginning of this time, for the duration of time it would take to pray ẓuhr, is specific to ẓuhr. The end of the time, just before sunset, is similarly specific to ʿaṣr. Whatever is between these two times is shared. The time of maghrib and ʿishāʾ is from sunset until midnight (literally, when half the night has passed). However, the beginning of this time, for the length of time it would take to pray maghrib, is specific to maghrib. The ending time—just prior to midnight—is similarly specific to ʿishāʾ. Whatever is between these two times is shared.[5]

These given times are the basic boundaries for the prayers to be considered “on time,” termed waqt al-ijzā’. It is these times that are most well-known among the Shiʿa today. Many people perform the prayers in “sets”; that is, they perform ʿaṣr immediately after ẓuhr, and ʿishāʾ immediately after maghrib. This practice of consistently combining prayers is foreign to Sunni Muslims. Generally, Sunnis believe that these prayers cannot be prayed back-to-back without cause, such as traveling or illness. The issue of combining prayers in this manner—without special circumstance—has become a sectarian issue and emblematic of differences between the Shiʿa and the Sunnis.

As members of the two communities constantly interact, ideas and views passively transfer between them. As Sunnis make up a majority of the Muslim community, they tend to set the tone and ethos behind many issues, and their culture defines which views are seen as normative. The dint of this hegemony enforces a culture of stringency on separating the prayers—in a particular way—as ideal, while combining is seen as lax and even deviant. Sometimes this passive absorption of values or a sudden urge to follow the prophetic sunnah in full capacity drives practicing Imāmī Shiʿa to separate their prayers and feel as though their community’s general practice is in opposition to the sunnah of the Prophet (ṣ), even if they affirm the permissibility of combining prayers.

Is Combining Prayers Less Preferable?

To answer this question, one must take a step back and look into the conclusions of experts. Sayyid ʿAlī al-Sīstānī and the late Sayyid al-Khūʾī (d. 1992) say that the recommendation of separating (tafrīq) two prayers with overlapping timings is unestablished and problematic, respectively.[6] Sayyid Khūʾī states that the discouragement (karāhah)[7] for combining prayers in and of itself—meaning for two prayers of a shared time to follow one after another successively—is not supported by any evidence and that the recommendation of tafrīq itself is baseless. Rather, what is established is the karāhah of performing a prayer in the waqt al-faḍīlah (pl. awqāt al-faḍīlah)[8] of another prayer.[9] So there is no established merit in, say, praying ẓuhr at noon and then delaying ʿaṣr until slightly before sunset. The standard is not separating the prayers; it is praying them in their recommended times.

After establishing that, naturally we need to know when are these awqāt al-faḍīlah. The fuqahāʾ differ due to the variety of reports regarding the issue. The general consensus of the jurists is that the waqt al-faḍīla for maghrib is from sunset until the disappearance of the redness in the western sky (shafaq). This disappearance of the shafaq is the beginning of ʿishāʾ’s recommended time that continues until the first third of the night ends. Below is a chart outlining the three predominant views regarding the timings for ẓuhr and ʿaṣr. These times are measured by the length of an object’s shadow in relation to the actual object’s height. As the day moves forward from sunrise towards noon, an object’s shadow will shorten. Once that shadow stops shortening and starts to grow again, the time of ẓuhr has begun. As the day goes along and the sun nears dusk, the length of the object’s shadow will grow. This is what is intended by “shadow length.” So if a 7-foot pole were placed under the sun, it would reach a shadow length of 1/1 when the shadow is 7 feet longer than what it was at the very start of ẓuhr.

 

Faḍīla of Ẓuhr Faḍīla of ʿAṣr
Beginning End Beginning End
Opinion 1[10] Noon Shadow Length 1/1 Shadow Length 1/1 Shadow Length 2/1
Opinion 2[11] Noon Shadow Length 4/7 Shadow Length 2/7 Shadow Length 6/7
Opinion 3[12] Noon Shadow Length 1/1 Noon Shadow Length 2/1

 

For those familiar with the supererogatory prayers that accompany each of the daily prayers–termed nawāfil, nāfilah, or rawātib–note that there seems to be an intimate relationship between these preferred prayer times and the supererogatory prayers. For example, some opinions leave a gap between the beginning of ẓuhr and the waqt al-faḍīlah of ʿaṣr, which would leave appropriate time for the nawāfil of ʿaṣr to be prayed. There is an internal logic to this issue; this time allotment encourages the performance of each ṣalāh with its nawāfil and tries not to create any competition between rituals. So for one who is going to pray these nawāfil—a total of sixteen cycles (rakaʿāt, sing. rakʿah) of prayer—naturally the two prayers will be separated.

At first glance, it may seem surprising that there would be variant timings for the prayers, and that the jurists would put forward differing views.  However, these timings and their variances offer a more holistic picture of the rules and recommendations, and allow for flexibility when people are working, tired, ill, praying in congregation, alone, pregnant, etc.

al-Shaykh Muḥammad al-Sanad, a jurist and teacher in the Najaf seminary, pulls together the various narrations as follows:

It is not unlikely (lā yabʿud) that there are three times for the faḍīlah. For the person praying individually, who anticipates an unexpected task or impediment to the prayer, or that his enthusiasm will fade, the best time for ẓuhr is one-seventh shadow length and two-sevenths for ʿaṣr. However, for others, especially those who will pray in congregation, the best for the two prayers is two-sevenths and then four-sevenths, respectively. That is the regularly-practiced sunna of the Prophet (ṣ) where he would pray the nawāfil, then pray ẓuhr in congregation when the shadow length reached two-sevenths. Then he would pray the nawāfil for ʿaṣr, followed by praying ʿaṣr in congregation when the shadow length reached four-sevenths. Four-sevenths and six-sevenths are the least excellent of the awqāt al-faḍīlah for ẓuhr and ʿaṣr, respectively.

This is for whoever wishes to pray the nawāfil before each of the prayers. If one is not going to do so, then it is best to hasten in praying [both successively] in the very beginning time, regardless of the situation.[13]

Again we see the intimate connection between the performing of prayers in their awqāt al-faḍīlah and the nawāfil prayers. So much so that one who is not going to pray the nawāfil should, in fact, pray ʿaṣr immediately after ẓuhr. Why might this be the case? The virtue of performing righteous deeds earlier rather than later is a known Islamic principle. In a report from Imam Muḥammad al-Bāqir (a), the esteemed jurist and companion of Ahl al-Bayt (ʿa), Zurārah b. Aʿyan, reports:

I said to Imam Bāqir (ʿa): …Is the beginning, middle, or ending time for the ṣalāh the best? He said, “The beginning. The Prophet (ṣ) said: Verily Allah loves the good that you hasten to.”[14]

Some jurists, such as al-Shaykh Fayyāḍ, declare this to be the case not only for ẓuhr and ʿaṣr, but also for maghrib and ʿishāʾ. In a question-answer regarding whether it is recommended to separate or combine ẓuhr and ʿaṣr, and likewise maghrib and ʿishāʾ, he replied that successive praying of the two obligatory prayers in the beginning of their time is superior for anyone who is not going to pray the nawāfil.[15]

This may seem to be very confusing. How does one even figure out two-sevenths of a shadow length? Why does that matter if my marjiʿ say this rather than that? It does not seem that the Imams (ʿa) stressed precision in any of these matters with their followers. Rather, they made things easier for them and expected from each person according to their own ability and knowledge. A group of jurists and narrators from the companions of Ahl al-Bayt (ʿa) were once in the presence of Imam Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq (ʿa) trying to measure out what would be two-sevenths shadow length in Medina. The Imam says to them:

Shall I not inform you of something clearer than this? When the sun begins its descent, then it is time to pray ẓuhr. However, you have in front of you nawāfil and that is up to you. If you would like, lengthen them. If you would like, shorten them.[16]

The companions of the Imams (ʿa) themselves had difficulty with these issues and were confused regarding the timings. There were, apparently, such discussions going on among the jurists that they would specifically ask about this issue, often times in the form of letters. Imam ʿAlī al-Hādī (ʿa) was written to about prayer times; it was mentioned to him that all of these different lengths and times have been reported from the late Imams (ʿa) and that they were unsure of what to do. The Imam (ʿa) replied that it’s neither this measurement nor that measurement–as if to move them away from complicating the issue –and states:

When the sun begins its descent, then it is time to pray ẓuhr. However, you have in front of you nawāfil that is eight cycles. If you would like, lengthen them. If you would like, shorten them. Then pray ẓuhr. When you’re done, between ẓuhr and ʿaṣr are nawāfil that are eight cycles. If you would like, lengthen them. If you would like, shorten them. Then pray ʿaṣr.[17]

A strong emphasis on upholding these specifics between prayer times at all costs neither appears in the traditions from Ahl al-Bayt (ʿa) nor the sīrah (way or lifestyle) of the fuqahā’, especially for the general public. However, the emphasis of praying ṣalawāt in their beginning time and avoiding unnecessary delay is clear and established without doubt. In a report narrated in al-Kāfī, one of Imam Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq’s (a) close students said that he heard the Imam say:

For each ṣalāh there are two times and the best of those times is the first of them. It is not for anyone to take the second time for himself without reason, unless he has an excuse.[18]

In fact, several early Shīʿī scholars limited the prayers to their earlier times—based on narrations like the above—and believed it was not admissible to delay them unnecessarily, especially with the first of two prayers in each set. For example, Taqī al-Dīn b. Najm al-Dīn Abū Ṣalāh al-Ḥalabī (d. 447 AH), one of our preeminent jurists from among al-Shaykh al-Ṭusī’s students, believed that the time of ẓuhr ended at four-sevenths shadow length for a person without a pressing need, and the time of ʿaṣr ended when the shadow length equaled the length of the standard.[19] Therefore, according to Abū al-Ṣalāḥ, if you were to delay ẓuhr and ʿaṣr after these times without good reason, you would have committed a sin.

The open nature of the prayer timings is a mercy and blessing for Muslims. There may be a more preferred way in certain situations and contexts, but our world and schedules are constantly changing, and the lifestyle of one society is different from another. Combining the prayers need not be a cop-out, nor should it be seen as choosing what is easier; rather it is a principled decision derived from the sources of knowledge. It is this openness that allows us to dutifully fulfill the most integral pillar of our faith after walāyah. All of this is part of the tradition and practice that the Prophet (ṣ) himself established.

Imam Ja`far al-Ṣādiq (ʿa) said: “The Prophet (ṣ) prayed ẓuhr and ʿaṣr together successively with the people in congregation when the sun began its descent, without any reason; and he prayed Maghrib and ʿIshāʾ together successively with them in congregation before the disappearance of the shafaq, for no reason. The Prophet (ṣ) only did this so that time would not be a burden [upon his nation].”[20]

 

[1] Qur’an, al-Nisā’ 3:103. إِنَّ الصَّلاةَ كانَت عَلَى المُؤمِنينَ كِتابًا مَوقوتًا

[2] According to several narrations from the Imams (ʿa), “time” (مَوقوتًا) means a lasting obligation, not that the prayer can only be performed at its onset. See: Mashhadī, Tafsīr Kanz al-Daqā’iq wa Baḥr al-Gharā’ib, vol. 3 (Tehran: Shams al-Ḍuḥā) 553-4.

[3] al-Kulaynī, “Kitāb al-Ṣalāh” (“Bāb man Ḥāfaẓa ʿalā Ṣalātih aw Ḍayyaʿahā“) in al-Kāfī fī ʿilm al-Dīn, vol. 3, Hadith 1.

[4] Qurʾan, al-Isrāʾ 17:78. “أَقِمِ الصَّلاةَ لِدُلوكِ الشَّمسِ إِلىٰ غَسَقِ اللَّيلِ وَقُرآنَ الفَجرِ ۖ إِنَّ قُرآنَ الفَجرِ كانَ مَشهودًا”

[5] Sīstānī, Kitāb al-Ṣalāh (“Aʿdād al-Farāʾiḍ wa-Nawāfilihā wa-Mawāqītihā: al-Faṣl al-Thānī“), Minhāj al-Ṣāliḥīn, vol. 1 (Beirut: Dār al-Muʾarrikh al-ʿArabī, 2013) 154.

[6] Sayyid Muḥammad Kāẓim Yazdī, al-`Urwah al-Wuthqā bi-Hāmishihā, vol. 2. (Qum: Muʾassasah Fiqh al-Thaqalayn al-Thiqāfiyyah) 24.

[7] Literally hatred, abhorrence. It is a technical legal term to referring to permissibility, but avoidance being better. An act with this status is deemed makrūh.

[8] Literally time of virtue or excellence. This terms refers to the recommended time to perform a particular prayer.

[9] al-Khū’ī, al-Mustanad fī Sharḥ al-`Urwah al-Wuthqā, vol. 1, 225.

[10] This is the view of Shaykh Makārim Shīrāzī and is usually deemed as the popular (mashhūr) view.

[11] This is the view of Sayyid ʿAlī Sīstānī and of the late Sayyid Muḥammad Ḥusayn Faḍlallāh. However, Sayyid Sīstāni adds that it is even better if ẓuhr is completed before 2/7th and ʿaṣr completed before 4/7th.

[12] This is the view of the late Sayyid Abū al-Qāsim al-Khūʾī, Sayyid Rūhallāh Khumaynī, and of Shaykh Waḥīd Khurasānī.

[13] Sanad, Kitāb al-Ṣalāh (“Awqātuhā“), Minhāj al-Ṣāliḥīn, vol. 1, masʾalah 504.

[14] al-Kulaynī, Kitāb al-Ṣalāh (“Bāb al-Mawāqīt Awwalihā wa Ākhirihā wa Afḍalihā“) in al-Kāfī, vol. 3, hadith 5.

[15] Ishāq al-Fayyadh, “Question and Answer”, accessed: September 20, 2016, http://alfayadh.org/ar/#post?type=post&id=5698.

[16] al-Kulaynī, Kitāb al-Ṣalāh (“Bāb Waqt al-Ẓuhr wa-l-ʿAṣr“) in al-Kāfī, vol. 3, hadith 4.

[17] Ḥurr al-ʿĀmilī, Kitāb al-Ṣalāh (“Abwāb al-Mawāqīt: Bāb istiḥbāb taʾkhīr al-mutanaffil al-Ẓuhr wa-l-ʿAṣr“) in Wasāʾil al-Shī`ah, vol. 4, hadith 13.

[18] al-Kulaynī, Kitāb al-Ṣalāh (“Bāb al-Mawāqīt Awwalihā wa-Ākhirihā wa Afḍalihā“) in al-Kāfī, vol. 3, hadith 3.

[19] al-Ḥalabī, al-Kāfī fī al-Fiqh (Najaf: Maktabh Imām Amīr al-Muʾminīn) 137.

[20] al-Ḥurr al-ʿĀmilī, Kitāb al-Ṣalāh (“Abwāb al-Mawāqīt: Bāb Jawāz al-Jamʿ bayn al-Ṣalātayn li-ghayr al-ʿudhr ayḍan) in Wasāʾil al-Shīʿah, vol. 4, hadith 8.

Announcement: Audio Files Now Available

By
al-Sidrah
-
al-Sidrah Audio Files on Hipcast

Here at al-Sidrah, we attempt to fulfill our goal of disseminating the fruits of the Seminary through various means and media. Insha’allah we will be providing access to various audio files including jum’ah khutbahs, interviews, and occasional lectures, each of which contains unique information and insights. These recordings will be available through both iTunes and Hipcast, which you can access using the “Audio” link in the menu above. Jumu’ah khutbahs will be available on a weekly basis, whereas interviews and the occasional lectures will be more posted intermittently. These programs, we hope, will be of spiritual and intellectual benefit to a wide audience.

If you have any requests or suggestions, say a particular topic you would like us to explore through an interview, or a past lecture you would like to be made available once again, please let us know. Thank you.

L.I.F.E. 2016: Experiencing the Spiritual Influence of the Ahl al-Bayt

By
David Coolidge
-
David Coolidge on his experience at LIFE 2016
Photo Credit Emaun Kashfipour

One of the central questions in my mind when I attended the 2016 L.I.F.E. program at the Ahl al-Bayt Seminary was, “How can I ensure my worship is accepted?” Prior to attending, I had read the section at the end of Shahid Mutahhari’s book, Divine Justice, entitled, “The Deeds of Non-Muslims.” Interestingly enough, this book was translated from Persian by one of the Ahl al-Bayt Seminary founders, Sayyid Sulayman Hasan, along with two other scholars. At this point in my studies, the argument of Mutahhari is the most cogent theological treatise I have read describing the conditions for the acceptability of our actions in the next world. But logic and scriptural proofs alone do not address our needs—the heart (qalb) too has needs that the mind (ʿaql) is not designed to fulfill.

The teachers at the L.I.F.E. program presented a balanced perspective that integrated the needs of both the mind and the heart. Our class on Contemporary Theology by Shaykh Mahdi Mohammadpour was by far the most rigorous exploration I have experienced of a traditional Muslim scholar seriously grappling with the the epistemological challenges of contemporary religious pluralism. Alongside such highly engaging intellectual classes were deeply fulfilling spiritual classes as well. In 4 sessions regarding good character (akhlāq), Shaykh Ammar Haider gave us so much practical wisdom to improve our selves that it will take many years to implement all the lessons we learned! May Allah help us to do so. Āmīn.

But throughout the first half of the program, I kept returning to my initial concern, and yearning for something to explicitly address it. How might I know that the prayers I am making every day are acceptable to God? It was in this moment that we had a special session on duʿāʾ led by Shaykh Hamza Sodagar. He gave us an explanation of a portion of a duʿāʾ recommended to recite after ṣalāt al-ʿaṣr, attributed to Imam al-Sadiq (upon him be peace):

اَللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أعُوذُ بِكَ مِنْ نَفْسٍ لاَ تَشْبَعُ

وَمِنْ قَلْبٍ لاَ يَخْشَعُ

وَمِنْ عِلْمٍ لاَ يَنْفَعُ

وَمِنْ صَلاَةٍ لاَ تُرْفَعُ

وَمِنْ دُعَاءٍ لاَ يُسْمَعُ

O Allah, I seek Your protection against a Self that never has enough,

A heart that does not feel apprehension,

Knowledge that does not avail,

A prayer that is not accepted,

And a supplication that is not heard.[1]

He explained how this comprehensive prayer for protection addresses our whole selves (body, heart, and mind), and how the need for our prayers (both ṣalāt and duʿāʾ) to be accepted is representative of our deepest spiritual needs. For our purpose in life is to worship and serve our Creator, and so we deepen our worship and service by seeking refuge in our Creator from the imperfections of our worship and service. We are always in need, and only the One can truly fulfill our needs, both material and spiritual.

Saying this prayer has brought solace to my heart every day. It is as if Imam al-Sadiq knew of my spiritual need before I was even born, and in that moment at L.I.F.E., according to the plan of God, Shaykh Hamza became the conduit for me to experience the spiritual guidance of the Ahl al-Bayt. As many can attest, the duʿāʾs of the Prophet and his family, blessings and peace be upon all of them, often help us express ourselves to God better than we can with our own words. Yes, I had asked my Lord to accept my worship before learning this particular duʿāʾ, but never so beautifully, concisely, and comprehensively. And throughout L.I.F.E. 2016, we were taught about the spiritual treasures waiting for those who turn to the Ahl al-Bayt for guidance: Duʿāʾ Kumayl, Duʿāʾ Abū Ḥamzah al-Thumālī, “The Letter of Imam Hasan al-ʿAskarī (upon him be peace) to ʿAlī ibn Bābawayh al-Qummī”, and many more.

These are the moments we cherish, when our deepest needs are met in a palpable way. I still wonder about the acceptability of my worship from time to time—perhaps it is a lifelong manifestation of living between fear and hope—but this prayer of the Ahl al-Bayt has become my daily companion on the journey to experience the ultimate answer. Every day after ṣalāt al-ʿaṣr, it reminds me to turn back to the One to whom I have already prayed, and dive deeper into the oceans of hope.

Our hope is in the Most Merciful of those who show mercy (Arḥam al-rāḥimīn), and I thank the instructors of L.I.F.E. 2016 for deepening that hope in so many ways.

 

[1] Available on http://www.duas.org.

“Treatise Clarifying the Creed of the Faithful” By al-Karājikī

By
Haziq Sheikh
-
A Beautiful Mosque in Paris, France

Abū al-Fatḥ Muḥammad b. `Alī al-Karājikī (d. 449 AH) lived from the end of the fourth century into the fifth century hijrī, a time of great political divisions. The Abbasid caliphate’s control was limited to Baghdad and the areas surrounding it, while the rest of the Muslim world was split between the Fatimids, the Umayyads, the Buwayhids, and others. This was also a time when the differing schools of thought debated and discussed varying juristic and theological issues. Al-Karājikī was among the foremost scholars of the Imāmī theologians, after his teachers Shaykh al-Mufīd and Sharīf al-Murtaḍā, and would engage in dialogue and debate with scholars from the various sects.

Al-Karājikī wrote this treatise in response to a believer requesting a gloss of the beliefs of the Imāmī Shīʿa, to which he obliged. The following translation is the beginning section regarding theology proper, or Ilāhiyyāt, which summarizes correct doctrine regarding God and His attributes according to the Imāmī Shīʿa. Given al-Karājikī’s historical context, the points mentioned here are in contrast to the views of other theological groups, such as the Muʿtazilah or Ashāʿirah, and should not be understood to be exhaustive.

Treatise Clarifying the Creed of the Faithful

From the book Kanz al-Fawāʾid by Abū al-Fatḥ Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Karājikī (d. 449 AH)

Divine Unicity:

You must know that it is obligatory to believe in the created nature of the entire universe and that nothing existed prior, that God is the creator of the entire cosmos, its material bodies and their attributes, except for the deeds originating from His servants. They perform their own actions, not God[1]. One must believe that God alone is pre-eternal and that there is no other pre-eternal entity. He exists and always was. He shall remain and never cease to be. He is a thing unlike all other things, bearing no resemblance to created things. The attributes of created things cannot be attributed to Him. He knew the creation before it existed and no thing is hidden from His knowledge. God possesses certain qualities that are essential to Him and independent of His creation (literally, without the aid of another). These are His characteristics of being all-Living, all-Knowing, pre-Eternal, and Everlasting. It is impossible for Him to be bereft of these qualities, taking on anything contrary.

It is necessary to understand that He has attributes that are derived from His actions. These types of traits are only attributable to Him after the action. These are the types of characteristics He has described for Himself, such as being the Creator, Sustainer, Giver, Merciful, Sovereign, Speaker, etc. He, also, has characteristics that are metaphorically attributed to Him such as wanting, hating, pleasure, and anger. God desiring (irādah) to do an action is, in fact, the execution of that action. God desiring an action by someone else consists of His command to that action. Labeling God’s irādah as His “desire” is not literal; it is figurative language. In that light, His anger is the threat of punishment and His pleasure is the promise of reward.

The believer must affirm that God does not occupy a physical place. He cannot be perceived by the five senses. The Lord is free of all defects. He does not do any injustice to the people because He knows of its evils and is not compelled to injustice for any reason, even if He is capable of doing so. His word is true and His promise real.

The Lord does not burden creation with the impossible, nor does He forbid them any good that is beneficial to them. He commands us to what He wishes and forbids us from what He wishes not.

He established creation for their own good and commissioned them for the sake of their divine benefit. He eliminated their weaknesses in carrying out their duties and did for creation what is best. He enabled them before giving them responsibilities and graced them with intellect and discernment.

They are given agency, they are able to do or—instead—not do a particular action. The truth that must be recognized is found through reason and revelation. The rational imperative is not separate from the revealed imperative.

God has sent to the people prophets and authorities acting as conduits between Him and them to communicate revealed knowledge. These prophets and authorities alert the people through rational argumentation and convey understanding of matters they cannot know about except through revelation. The knowledge of these decisive authorities encompasses all things that the people need from them. They are protected from errors and mistakes, an infallibility (stemming from) choice. The Lord has graced them above the rest of creation and made them His vicegerents who establish the truth. They have performed miracles by the permission of God as confirmation and evidence for the veracity of their prophecies and claims.

Despite all this, they are created servants of God, human beings burdened with responsibilities. They eat; they drink; they have children. They live and die. They feel pain and become ill. Some of them were killed while others died natural deaths. They do not decree creation or sustenance. They do not know of the unseen (al-ghayb) except for what the Lord of creation has informed them of. Their words are true, and all that they brought is real.

[1] Shaykh Muhammad Rida Muzaffar summarizes this issue as follows: “Our actions are in one respect really our own; we are their natural cause. They are under our control and choice. However, from another perspective, they are decreed by God and under His dominion, for He gives existence and is its source. He does not compel us to our actions, thereby oppressing us in punishing us for evil deeds. This is because we have control and choice in what we do. God did not delegate to us the creating of our actions, thereby removing them from His dominion. Rather, creation, rule, and command belong to Him. He is capable of any possibility and thoroughly acquainted with His servants.” This is to say that for our actions to be the result of our free will is itself ordained by God. This removes the quandary of unjust punishment and attributing evil to God.

(رسالة البيان عن جمل اعتقاد أهل الإيمان)

من كتاب كنز الفوائد لفقيه الأصحاب أبي الفتح محمد بن علي الكراجكي المتوفى 449 هـ

 

 (اعلم) ان الواجب على المكلف ان يعتقد حدوث العالم باسره وانه لم يكن شيئا قبل وجوده ويعتقد ان الله هو محدث جميعه من اجسامه واعراضه إلا افعال العباد الواقعة منهم فانهم محدثوها دونه سبحانه ويعتقد ان الله تعالى قديم وحده لا قديم سواه وانه موجود لم يزل وباق لا يزال وانه شئ لا كالاشياء لا يشبه الموجودات ولا يجوز عليه ما يجوز على المحدثات وان له صفات يستحقها لنفسه لا لمعان غيره وهي كونه حيا عالما قادرا قديما باقيا لا يجوز خروجه عن هذه الصفات الى ضدها يعلم الكائنات قبل كونها ولا يخفى عليه شئ منها.

وان له صفات افعال لا يصح اضافتها إليه في الحقيقة إلا بعد فعله وهي ما وصف به نفسه من انه خالق ورازق ومعط وراحم ومالك ومتكلم ونحو ذلك وان له صفات مجازات وهي ما وصف به نفسه من انه يريد ويكره ويرضى ويغضب فارادته لفعل هي الفعل المراد بعينه وارادته لفعل غيره هي امره بذلك الفعل وليس تسميتها بالارادة حقيقة وانما هو على مجاز اللغة وغضبه هو وجود عقابه ورضاه هو وجود ثوابه.

وانه لا يفتقر الى مكان ولا يدرك بشئ من الحواس وانه منزه من القبائح لا يظلم العباد وان كان قادرا على الظلم لانه عالم بقبحه غني عن فعله قوله صدق ووعده حق لا يكلف خلقه ما لا يستطاع ولا يحرمهم صلاحا لهم فيه الانتفاع ولا يامر بما لا يريد ولا ينهى عما يريد.

وانه خلق الخلق لمصلحتهم وكلفهم لاجل منازل منفعتهم و ازاح في التكليف عللهم وفعل اصلح الاشياء بهم وانه اقدرهم قبل التكليف واوجدهم العقل والتمييز وان القدرة تصلح ان يفعل بها الشئ وضده بدلا منه وان الحق الذي تجب معرفته تدرك بشيئين وهما العقل والسمع وان التكليف العقلي لا ينفك من التكليف السمعي.

وان الله تعالى قد اوجد للناس في كل زمان مسمعا من انبيائه وحججه بينه وبين الخلق ينبههم على طريق الاستدلال في العقليات ويفقههم على ما لا يعلمون الا به من السمعيات وان جميع حجج الله تعالى محيطون علما بجميع ما يفتقر إليهم فيه العباد وانهم معصومون من الخطا والزلل عصمة اختيار وان الله فضلهم على خلقه وجعلهم خلفاء القائمين بحقه وانه اظهر على ايديهم المعجزات تصديقا لهم فيما ادعوه من الانباء والاخبار.

وانهم مع ذلك باجمعهم عباد مخلوقون وبشر مكلفون ياكلون ويشربون ويتناسلون ويحيون باحيائه ويموتون باماتته تجوز عليهم الالام المعترضات فمنهم من قتل ومنهم من مات لا يقدرون على خلق ولا رزق ولا يعلمون الغيب الا ما اعلمهم اله الخلق وان اقوالهم صدق وجميع ما اتوا به حق.

1...345...7Page 4 of 7
© Ahl al-Bayt Islamic Seminary - All Rights Reserved