[swwatch]

Assalamu alaikum,

According to the Hanafi ulema there are no mistakes in Hanafi madhab - and according to the scholars of each madhab there are no mistakes in their madhabs. But in reality there could be and only Allah knows.

For example are crabs halaal or haraam. Hanafis say haraam but everyone else says halaal. One of the groups is correct and the other incorrect. According to each they are correct but according to Allah there is only one correct answer.

As long as we followed knowledgeable scholars Allah will not take us to task for following mujtahids and nor will the mujtahids be taken to task if they were sincere. There are hadith regarding this - for example it says more or less if a mujtahid makes correct ijtihad he gets two rewards (for ijtihad and being correct) and if a mujtahid makes wrong ijtihad he gets one reward (for making ijtihad) (but no sin for being wrong).

What you are explaining can not be termed as mistakes, as mistake is something that is 'known' and 'can be corrected'.

In the above scenario you have given, we can not know who is correct. The madhhaahib are following proper guidelines to reach a conclusion. Thus there isn't anything further to make correction of.

Allaahu A'lam.

[Frdsdx26]

What you are explaining can not be termed as mistakes, as mistake is something that is 'known' and 'can be corrected'.

In the above scenario you have given, we can not know who is correct. The madhhaahib are following proper guidelines to reach a conclusion. Thus there isn't anything further to make correction of.

Allaahu A'lam.

Assalamu alaikum brother, the way you put it makes sense. JazakAllah.

[85IbLcwQ]

If the Imam does something that breaks his wudhuu and lets say he still carries on, why will my Salah and Wudhuu become invalid?

[Ikhqgvas]

If the Imam does something that breaks his wudhuu and lets say he still carries on, why will my Salah and Wudhuu become invalid?

The salaah will be broken, but the wudhu remains intact.

[85IbLcwQ]

The problem here arises when we say that they are all valid ways, and we then go on to say that prayed behind such and such a person is void. Do you seriously think that Imam Shafi'i while holding the opinion that Basmala is Fard in Fatiha wouldn't pray behind Imam Malik who beleived it is Makruh. As long as it's opinions based on sound understanding and knowledge, and not whims and desires.

Yes we may find such fatwas in some books, but that doesn't mean they are necessarily correct. Just as major Imams have said that one can't marry outside the school etc. Such extremism wasn't uncommon at certain times in Islamic history. Let us not repeat their mistakes.

They said that?

[RogerButton33]

Such claims require proof.

We have the great Shafi'i Imam, Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni :rah:, who was the teacher of Imam Ghazali. He said that the issue of marriage to Hanafis is like that to Ahlul Kitab. A Shafi'i man can marry a Hanafi woman, but Shafi'i woman is not allowed to marry a Hanafi man. This is obviously a ridiculous fatwa. And it's rejected.

My point is extremism can always be found. Just like i as a Shafi'i would let my daughter marry a pious Hanafi, so would many Hanafi ulama pray behind Imam Shafi'i, Nawawi, Al-Hafeth etc even if he only did masah on small part of the hair, or didn't take water into mouth and nose while doing ghusl or something similar which can be done according to the Shafi'is.

[85IbLcwQ]

The salaah will be broken, but the wudhu remains intact.

let's say the Imam leads the prayer and all along his wudhuu was broken but he still leads the Muslim jamaa3ah, and then they disperse ..he realises he wasnt taahir or whatever and repeats his Salaah, in this case what about the Salaah of the now dispersed Jamaa3ah.


FiamaanAllah

[85IbLcwQ]

Brother Rifai,

I know you weren't addressing me but you call that scholar 'great' and then call his fatwa 'ridiculous'..can Great Scholars make ridiculous fatwas?

[slowlexrese]

Brother Rifai,

I know you weren't addressing me but you call that scholar 'great' and then call his fatwa 'ridiculous'..can Great Scholars make ridiculous fatwas?

he refer "major Imams " as the scholars of madhab, and not the 4 imam.

[RogerButton33]

Brother Rifai,

I know you weren't addressing me but you call that scholar 'great' and then call his fatwa 'ridiculous'..can Great Scholars make ridiculous fatwas?

Well, we would all agree that a fatwa like this is rejected, am i right?
This doesn't take away from Imam al-Haramayns greatness, as he was indeed a great scholar of Ahlus Sunnah. But he was a human being and like so many other ulama seem to have fell victim of math'hab extremism.

Now let's not focus on this as we are going off-topic.

wassalam

[85IbLcwQ]

ok brother.

[Frdsdx26]

My point is extremism can always be found. Just like i as a Shafi'i would let my daughter marry a pious Hanafi, so would many Hanafi ulama pray behind Imam Shafi'i, Nawawi, Al-Hafeth etc even if he only did masah on small part of the hair, or didn't take water into mouth and nose while doing ghusl or something similar which can be done according to the Shafi'is.

Asslamu alaikum brother,

I understand wiping 3 hairs is enough in Shafi fiqh. But this is the minimum. The sunnah is to wipe the whole head and there is general agreement regarding this. So tell me brother why would someone intentionally leave out the sunnah? If you read Bustan al-Arifeen you will see how strongly Imam Nawawi himself talks about following the sunnah. So unless we see someone wiping only 3 hairs we will assume they followed the sunnah and did the whole wudu and whole ghusl. Sunnah of ghusl is to do wudu and sunnah of wudu is to put water in the nose and gargle and rinse the mouth.

[Frdsdx26]

let's say the Imam leads the prayer and all along his wudhuu was broken but he still leads the Muslim jamaa3ah, and then they disperse ..he realises he wasnt taahir or whatever and repeats his Salaah, in this case what about the Salaah of the now dispersed Jamaa3ah.


FiamaanAllah

Assalamu alaikum,

Mufti Abdur Rahman stated that the imam must make all endeavours and attempts to reach the dispersed gathering and ensure that those who prayed behind him are informed that they must repeat the prayer.

[Chooriwrocaxz]

I believe the issue is not about following the imam of another madhhab. The issue is when the imam does something that invalidate salah of the ma'mum of another madhhab but not the imam's, as given in the example above (i.e. bleeding while praying or when you see a Hanbali imam wipe wudhu' on socks).

Exactly, that's what I mean, and sorry for not having been enough clear.

The problem here arises when we say that they are all valid ways, and we then go on to say that prayed behind such and such a person is void. Do you seriously think that Imam Shafi'i while holding the opinion that Basmala is Fard in Fatiha wouldn't pray behind Imam Malik who beleived it is Makruh. As long as it's opinions based on sound understanding and knowledge, and not whims and desires.

Yes we may find such fatwas in some books, but that doesn't mean they are necessarily correct. Just as major Imams have said that one can't marry outside the school etc. Such extremism wasn't uncommon at certain times in Islamic history. Let us not repeat their mistakes.

Sidi Rifai, my thinking goes with you, and I'd theorically agree with you; the point is that I've heard that to be the stronger opinion in the Hanafi madhhab, and more than one time.

Even Shaykh Faraz Rabbani mentioned that as the strongest position in the Hanafi madhhab:

Shaykh Abdul-Hayy Lucknowi said that when a hanafi pray behind an imam of another madhab, his prayer is legally valid if his prayer was valid according to his school of thought, even if the imam did something that could annul the muqtadi's hanafi prayer. The shaykh then quotes Abu Bakr ar-Raazi (another hanafi 'ulama), who said that if an imam from another school of thought bleeded and didn't make his ablutions again (as per his madhab's rulings), and then led prayer for a hanafi then the latter's prayer is legally valid (Al-Hidaya, 1/126 end of page). That is why Abu Yusuf prayed behind Hârûn ar-Rashîd when he just had done a bleeding done on him as per Maalik's fatwa given to him. (Sharh ul-’aqîda at-tahâwiyya, Ibn Abi-l-’izz al-hanafî, 2/535).

Shah Waliyyullah wrote: “Among the sahabah, the tabi'un and their followers, some used to recite the basmala (during the prayer), others would not; Some would recite basmala loudly (during prayer), some others not ; others making qunût in salât ul-fajr, others would not; some would consider ablutions cancelled by a bleeding, nose-bleeding or vomiting and others would not consider ablutions cancelled by one of these reasons; (similarly with touching the genital parts or his wife with pleasure, , or by eating what was touched by fire or with eating camel food). In spite of this, they would pray behind one another. Thus, Abu Hanifa or his 2 pupils, and ash Shafi'i and others would pray behind imaams of Madina etc., although they would not recite basmala loudly nor silently. Ar-Rashîd led prayer after having done a bleeding and Abu Yusuf prayed behind him and din't repeat his prayer. Ahmad ibn Hanbal thought ablutions were cancelled by nose-bleding or bleeding and when questioned he said" Would I not have prayed behind Mâlik or Sa’ïd ibn ul-Mussayyib ?”" (Hujjat ullah il baligha,Volume 1 pp. 455-456).

Warning: Errors of translation likely!

..

Asslamu alaikum brother,

I understand wiping 3 hairs is enough in Shafi fiqh. But this is the minimum. The sunnah is to wipe the whole head and there is general agreement regarding this. So tell me brother why would someone intentionally leave out the sunnah? If you read Bustan al-Arifeen you will see how strongly Imam Nawawi himself talks about following the sunnah. So unless we see someone wiping only 3 hairs we will assume they followed the sunnah and did the whole wudu and whole ghusl. Sunnah of ghusl is to do wudu and sunnah of wudu is to put water in the nose and gargle and rinse the mouth.

Yeah, but let's assume he only did the fard, would my prayer as Hanafi behind such an Imam (or an Imam bleeding, and so on) be valid or not?

It looks like there are two different opinions in the Hanafi madhhab:
a. If the Imam's Salah is valid according to his own madhhab (but not according the Hanafi madhhab), it's fine for the Hanafi follower too.
b. If the Salah of a non-Hanafi Imam is invalid according to Hanafi madhhab, it's invalid for an Hanafi follower.

I honestly can see where the first come from, also considering the lives of the Sahaba and some episodes from the lives of great Hanafi scholars; but nonetheless, the second one looks like the strongest and the relied upon one (according to what I've so far read and gathered).

Believe me, I don't have any "extremism" nor "sectarianism" in my Taqlid; I simply want to understand what's the relied opinion in the Hanafi madhhab about this issue, and how this could affect the validity of my prayers behind other Imams in real life scenarios (if the Imam bleeds and guide the prayer without having new wudu', if he makes masah on "Hanbali-valid" socks, and so on..).

Any knowleadgable brother could shed some more light on this issue?

[erepsysoulptnw]

Assalamualaykum,
From what little I know, once I'm aware the imam breaks wudu'/solah, I should break away from him. Doesn't matter same mazhab or not.

But playing husn zhonn is advisable. If we don't hear a Hanafi imam say "bismillah.." before the Fatihah, then we should "assume" he'd said it silently since it is sunnah for them to recite silently.

As precaution, I wouldn't look at how he prepares himself before the solah. And would stand out of sight so I don't accidentally see him doing something that would break a solah rukun (missing toma'ninah during i'tidal etc).

Anyway the imam should be knowledgable enough to satisfy everybody.

And Allah knows best.

[Frdsdx26]

Even Shaykh Faraz Rabbani mentioned that as the strongest position in the Hanafi madhhab:




Yeah, but let's assume he only did the fard, would my prayer as Hanafi behind such an Imam (or an Imam bleeding, and so on) be valid or not?

Assalamu alaikum brother,

We should follow the stronger opinion as Mufti Husain pointed out previously. Disregard the SunniPath fatwa. Shaykh Faraz mentions that a number of reliable ulema give fatwa on this weaker opinion without mentioning who these "reliable" people are so that we judge for ourselves if they are reliable or not. We have from our authorities both past and present (like Mufti Husain and Mufti Abdur Rahman Mangera) that the follower's prayer would not be valid if the imam's is not valid according to the follower.

We cannot assume what the imam did. If we don't know we have to assume the imam's wudu and ghusl is valid according to our madhab, even if in his madhab he is not obligated to wudu and ghusl as in the Hanafi madhab (but I am assuming it will still have to be considered sunnah in his madhab). This is what I understood from what our imam related from Mufti Mas'ud who is a very brilliant mufti from Azaadville madressah. Unless we see or know for certain the imam's wudu/ghusl/salah is invalid according to us we should pray behind them.

[Chooriwrocaxz]

Assalamu alaikum brother,

We should follow the stronger opinion as Mufti Husain pointed out previously. Disregard the SunniPath fatwa. Shaykh Faraz mentions that a number of reliable ulema give fatwa on this weaker opinion without mentioning who these "reliable" people are so that we judge for ourselves if they are reliable or not. We have from our authorities both past and present (like Mufti Husain and Mufti Abdur Rahman Mangera) that the follower's prayer would not be valid if the imam's is not valid according to the follower.

We cannot assume what the imam did. If we don't know we have to assume the imam's wudu and ghusl is valid according to our madhab, even if in his madhab he is not obligated to wudu and ghusl as in the Hanafi madhab (but I am assuming it will still have to be considered sunnah in his madhab). This is what I understood from what our imam related from Mufti Mas'ud who is a very brilliant mufti from Azaadville madressah. Unless we see or know for certain the imam's wudu/ghusl/salah is invalid according to us we should pray behind them.

Yes Sidi, I wanted to have a confirmation about it being the strongest opionion.
My doubt is, Imam Muhammad (ra) and Imam Abu Yusuf (ra) agreeing on an issue with a view different from that of Imam Abu Hanifa (ra), doesn't make their (Imam Muhammad's and Imam Abu Yusuf's) view the stronger?
Also keeping in view the post I've copy-pasted from brother bugmenot.

Do you by any chance have the link of Mufti Husain's post? I didn't manage to find it!
And the article of Mufti Abdur Rahman?

!

[Frdsdx26]

Yes Sidi, I wanted to have a confirmation about it being the strongest opionion.
My doubt is, Imam Muhammad (ra) and Imam Abu Yusuf (ra) agreeing on an issue with a view different from that of Imam Abu Hanifa (ra), doesn't make their (Imam Muhammad's and Imam Abu Yusuf's) view the stronger?
Also keeping in view the post I've copy-pasted from brother bugmenot.

Do you by any chance have the link of Mufti Husain's post? I didn't manage to find it!
And the article of Mufti Abdur Rahman?

!

Assalamu alaikum brother,

As SunniPath themselves confirmed the stronger opinion is of invalidity. Also Imam Muhammad and Imam Abu Yusuf agreed on many issues but the fatwa is with Imam Abu Hanifa. There are many examples such as: Asr time, Isha time, looking and reading from the Quran while in salaat, etc. So the stronger opinion can still be Imam Abu Hanifa's even though they may differ and be united in their difference.

I don't have the link to Mufti Husain's post but I distinctly remember reading it - someone can correct me if I am wrong but I believe Mufti Rafi Usmani was mentioned in that post too.

Mufti Abdur Rahman addressed a similar issue, I heard him live. He also addressed such issues in his recordings on www.zamzamacademy.com. You can check out especially the lecture series on salaat and check out the lecture of witr where he talks about the invalidity of praying 2+1 rakat behind the imams of the Haramain.

About Imam Shah WaliAllah, he is known to have differed from the mufta bihi opinion of the Hanafi madhab on many occasions. He had knowledge to do so. The Salafis in accusing the Hanafis and other people who take from various madhabs, to justify their position quote him in their defense. The funny thing is that Shah WaliAllah, rahimahuAllah, himself wrote in his book with his own hands that he considered switching to the Shafi' madhab but he saw the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, in his dreams telling him to remain in the Hanafi madhab. So as for his final position on various issues - I am uncertain whether he stuck to his views or reverted to the mufta bihi position of the Hanafi madhab.

[tofRobbroolve]

brother umar i sent an email...did u receive it......

[RogerButton33]

Let's not forget that there may be difference of opinion as to what is the stronger and more relied upon opinion. Like Indo-Pak ulama tend to side with Abu Hanifa over Sahibayn. Others may side with Sahibayn over Abu Hanifa when the two are in agreement etc.

And what does this mean for the laymen, who's word is final?