We often hear people saying, that which Nabi had done is called, Sunnat. To practice on it will earn us rewards, even if he only did it a few times.
This is an incorrect definition of Sunnat. That which Nabi had done once or twice, or that which Nabi had discontinued, will not be termed as Sunnat.
Then what is a Sunnat? That which Nabi (S.A.W) had perpetually done is called Sunnat, while that which he had stopped doing, or had at some point done but never again done, will not be Sunnat.
We consider even that which Nabi had done once to be Sunnat. Then you probably consider it to be Sunnat to stand and pass urine, because it is mentioned in the Hadith that Nabi stood and passed urine on one occasion. (Bukhari pg 35, 36, 336 vol. 1) And, nowhere in Bukhari Shareef is there any Hadith regarding sitting and passing urine. Not a single place. To make things even better, there is no Hadith regarding sitting and passing urine in Muslim shareef either, but the Hadith of standing and urinating is found there even! (Muslim pg.133 vol.1). Nabi had also lifted up a little girl whilst performing salah, (Bukhari pg 74 vol.1 Muslim pg 205 vol.1 ) He had also exposed his shoulder in salah (Abu-Dawud), do you then consider all these to be Sunnat? How many times have you practiced on these Sunnan?
These actions are not Sunnat. But these acts were carried out by Nabi , but they are not Sunnat.
This is what we are saying; every act of Nabi is not a Sunnat, eg. He had gargled his mouth while making wudhu, which we consider Sunnat, after wudhu he had kissed his wife; we do not consider this as Sunnat. Both are the actions of Nabi ; one is a Sunnat, while the other is not. Similarly, to read the thanaa is Sunnat, but to lift a little girl (in salah) is not Sunnat, whereas he had done both these acts. Every one accepts this, and if both these are Sunnat, according to the first explanation (of Sunnat) earlier, then all those Ghair MuqalliDeen coming into the masjid not carrying a little girl, are guilty of discarding the Sunnat, and in your words, are being deprived of great rewards. You should kindly turn their attention towards this great reward.
I am able to show you a Hadith wherein Nabi had worn one cloth and read salah, whilst he placed another on the ground. The words, one cloth are undoubtedly mentioned, but this doesn't prove reading bare headed.
When one cloth is mentioned, bare headed is already proven by the way. How can the whole body be covered in one cloth? To prove reading bare headed from this Hadith is now forcing the issue.
Show me the words, bare headed. Wearing one cloth doesn't mean the head is bare headed. A person can comfortably cover his entire body including the head in one big cloth.
Reading namaaz in one cloth has been proven, you have even accepted it. When there are no other clothes available, it is permissible to wear only one piece of cloth, this was done by Nabi to show permissibility.
Look I have proven that reading Namaaz in one cloth is Sunnat.
Previously it was shown and accepted that something done once or twice is not a Sunnat, a Sunnat perpetual, not temporary. If namaaz, read in one cloth, is Sunnat, then this Sunnat is being butchered in your Masaajid. Today you should make the announcement, 'all those reading namaaz wearing six pairs of clothes are innovators, because Nabi had worn just one cloth.
When did we ever wear six pairs of clothes? You should count trousers, shirt, vest, hat, jacket, socks. You should bring alive a dead Sunnat by asking all those reading namaaz in these clothes, that everyone should remove all their clothes, some leaving just the sock, some the hat, some the shirt, so that all could practice on the words 'one cloth', and firstly, you and your entire family should practice on this. This rare philosophy of taking one cloth to imply bare headed doesn't make sense to me. Tomorrow someone will say this implies only to the cloth worn around the waist, are you going to reject this? He will present the same Hadith to you. He may just take it to mean the turban only, what answer are you going to give him?
There is a narration in Abu-Dawud that a person by the name of Shuraik placed his topi in front of him and read his namaaz Hold on! Ahle Hadith only take proofs from the Quraan and Sunnat (Hadith), now this Shuraik person, is he some prophet? Never. Is he a Sahabi? Never, He is a tab'i or tab'e tab'i, and check up the chapter Abu-Dawud has formulated. Abu-Dawud says that he had nothing to place as a shield in front of him, so he placed his topi as a shield. Therefore, you can neither prove Nabi or any Sahabi to have read namaaz without a topi. What sort of an Ahle Hadith are you, that when it comes to accepting something, you would reject even an authentic, marfoo' Hadith, because its against your ruling, and when it is conforming to your ruling, you would go around with the word of a tab'i or even tab'e tab'i forcing (people) into acceptance. Nabi was not prepared to reply to the greeting of a person who was bare headed (Mishkat). When he would make masah, he would lift the turban slightly with one hand and make masah with one hand. He did not like to be bare headed for even that amount of time, where he could remove his turban placing it on the side and make masah, and here the ummati (his follower) reads namaaz all the time bare headed. Majority roam in the market place bare headed and thereafter call themselves Ahle Hadith. Everyone besides them are murtads (renegades) and open sinners. How then would Nabi like such a person?
The namaaz of a person, who intentionally reads namaaz without a topi, is it not done? Or is there something wrong with this? Definitely there is something wrong with it, because you would be imitating the Christians. You may have seen the Christians praying, all of them pray bare headed. When there is no clear proof in any authentic Hadith to read namaaz bare headed, then too there is still something definitely wrong with this. This can be found in Fatawa Ulama-e-Hadith (Ahle Hadith Book) , where it said to be makrooh.
If a person reads namaaz bare headed due to being compelled to do so, for example he does not have sufficient clothing, or he has some illness, then his namaaz will be done, and if he is reading bare-headed due to laziness, then he would imitating the Jews. It is mentioned of the Jews in the Quraan, 'when they stand for salah, they stand lazily'.
We spend hundreds of hours ensuring you receive a quality service from this site. We do not fall into the advertisement schemes as all the ads contain elements of Haraam including Haraam Islamic links. Please consider setting up a £1 monthly donation. May Allah (swt) reward you.
From the Muwatta of Imam Muhammad. Hadith number 153, page 96.
Malik informed us: "Abd ar-Rahman ibn-Qasim narrated to us from Abdullah ibn Abdullah ibn Umar, that he used to see his father sit (with his buttoks) on the ground in the prayer. He said, 'So I did it, and I was then still in my youth. My father reproached me and said, "It is NOT THE SUNNAH of the prayer. The Sunnah of the prayer is that you keep your right foot upright and put your left foot on its side"'"
Imam Muhammad said "We Adhere to this and this is the verdict of Abu Hanifa.
For the Sahabi / Tabi'een to say that it is Not Sunnah after the Prophet has passed is enough proof to shame the ghair muqallideen who strongly suggest that they are on the Sunnah. Maybe they are practicing something that may have been done, which gives them a basis, but it clearly states that it's NOT a Sunnah!
Narrated Hudhaifa' rz.a: The Prophet and I walked till we reached the dumps of some people. He stood, as any one of you stands, behind a wall and urinated. I went away, but he beckoned me to come. So I approached him and stood near his back till he finished. (Bukhari, Book #4, Hadith #225)
but the sunnah is that one must urinate in sitting posture.
This is why it's said that every sunnah is hadis but every hadis isn't sunnah.
Narrated Abu Maslama: Said bin Yazid Al-Azdi: I asked Anas bin Malik rz.a whether the Prophet had ever, prayed with his shoes on. He replied "Yes."(Bukhari, Book #8, Hadith #383)
(translation of this hadis isn't correct as the words are ''yusalli bi na'lihi'' which indicates to 'madhi istmrari'' (would pray salah wearing shoes and Hz Anas rz.a replied- yes)
this hadis have been narrated by almost 52 Hazrat Sahaba ikram rz.a whereas only 2 Hazrat sahaba ikram rz.a said that RasulAllah would pray salah without wearing shoes or sandal.
Logically we must follow the ahadis of 52 sahaba ikram rz.a but we've the amal on the ahadis of 2 Hazrat sahaba ikram rz.a.
It proves that we've to scale every hadis on the 'usool of darayat' instead of 'riwayat'.
If GM don't accept it then they must-
urinate in standing posture
pray salah- wearing the shoes
There are many examples of such ahadis as are not sunnah.
This cannot be undone and I am sure it will be greatly appreciated.
We apologise but you have been denied access to report posts in this thread. This could be due to excessively reporting posts and not understanding our forum rules. For assistance or information, please use the forum help thread to request more information. Jazakallah