Taraweeh
prayer: Number of Rakah during Umar Ibn Khattab R.A.
.... Islam Q&A
Firstly:
The report that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab ordered that Taraweeh prayer
should be twenty rak’ahs came from four of the Taabi’een. These are
their reports:
1 – It was narrated that Saa’ib ibn Yazeed said: ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab
(may Allaah be pleased with him) gathered the people together in
Ramadaan to be led by Ubayy ibn Ka’b and Tameem al-Daari in praying
twenty-one rak’ahs, and they used to recite hundreds of verses, and
they dispersed before dawn broke.
A number of narrators narrated it from al-Saa’ib, some of whom
mentioned twenty rak’ahs or twenty-one or twenty-three. They were:
Muhammad ibn Yoosuf, the son of the sister of al-Saa’ib, from
al-Saa’ib, as was narrated by ‘Abd al-Razzaaq in al-Musannaf (4/260)
from the report of Dawood ibn Qays and others.
Yazeed ibn Khusayfah. This was narrated by Ibn al-Majd in al-Musnad
(1/413), and via him by al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan (2/496).
Al-Haarith ibn ‘Abd al-Rahmaan ibn Abi Dhubaab. This was narrated by
‘Abd al-Razzaaq in al-Musannaf (4/261).
These reports are saheeh reports narrated by trustworthy narrators from
al-Saa’ib ibn Yazeed. They mention twenty rak’ahs at the time of ‘Umar
ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him). The extra amount
mentioned – twenty-one or twenty-three, refers to Taraweeh plus Witr.
2 – It was narrated that Yazeed ibn Rumaan said: At the time of ‘Umar
ibn al-Khattaab the people used to pray twenty-three rak’ahs of qiyaam
in Ramadaan.
This was narrated from him by Maalik in al-Muwatta’ (1/115). Al-Nawawi
said in al-Majmoo’ (4/33: It is mursal, because Yazeed ibn Rumaan did
not live at the same time as ‘Umar. End quote.
3 – It was narrated from Yahya ibn Sa’eed al-Qattaan that ‘Umar ibn
al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him) ordered a man to lead them
in twenty rak’ahs of prayer. This was narrated by Ibn Abi Shaybah in
al-Musannaaf (2/163) from Wakee’ from Maalik. But Yahya ibn Sa’eed did
not live at the same time as ‘Umar.
4 – It was narrated that ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Rafee’ said: Ubayy ibn Ka’b
used to lead the people in praying twenty rak’ahs during Ramadaan in
Madeenah, and he would pray Witr with three rak’ahs.
This was narrated by Ibn Abi Shaybah in al-Musannaf (2/163).
From all these reports it is clear that twenty rak’ahs was the way that
Taraweeh was usually done at the time of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may
Allaah be pleased with him). A matter such as Taraweeh prayer is
something that is well known among all people, and is transmitted from
one generation to another. The report of Yazeed ibn Rumaan and Yahya
al-Qattaan is to be taken into account even if they did not live at the
same time as ‘Umar, because undoubtedly they learned it from a number
of people who had been alive at the time of ‘Umar, and this is
something that does not need and isnaad, rather all the people of
Madeenah are its isnaad.
Imam al-Tirmidhi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in his Sunan
(3/169):
Most of the scholars are of the view that what is narrated from ‘Umar,
‘Ali and other companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah
be upon him) is twenty rak’ahs. This is the view of al-Thawri, Ibn
al-Mubaarak and al-Shaafa’i.
Al-Shaafa’i said: This is what I learned in our land, in Makkah they
pray twenty rak’ahs.
Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said in al-Istidhkaar (2/69):
Twenty rak’ahs was narrated from ‘Ali, Shateer ibn Shakl, Ibn Abi
Mulaykah, al-Haarith al-Hamadaani and Abu’l-Bakhtari. It is the view of
the majority of scholars and it is the view of the Kufis, the Shaafa’is
and most of the fuqaha’. It was narrated in saheeh reports from Ubayy
ibn Ka’b, and there was no difference of opinion among the Sahaabah.
‘Ata’ said: I grew up at a time when the people prayed twenty-three
rak’ahs including Witr.
See that in Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (2/163).
Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa
(23/112):
It is proven that Ubayy ibn Ka’b used to lead the people in praying
twenty rak’ahs in qiyaam in Ramadaan, and he used to pray Witr with
three rak’ahs. Many scholars think that this is the Sunnah, because he
established that among the Muhaajireen and Ansaar and no one objected
to that. Others regarded it as mustahabb to pray thirty-nine rak’ahs,
based on the fact that this was the practice of the people of Madeenah
in the past. End quote.
With regard to what it says in the report of Imam Maalik, Yahya
al-Qattaan and others from Muhammad ibn Yoosuf from al-Saa’ib ibn
Yazeed in al-Muwatta’ (1/115) and in Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (2/162)
“eleven rak’ahs” – this is to be understood as referring to what was
done at first, then it was reduced after that, then ‘Umar increased the
number to twenty to make the recitation in qiyaam easier for the
people.
Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said in al-Istidhkaar (2/68):
It may be understood as meaning that at first qiyaam at the time of
‘Umar was eleven rak’ahs, then he reduced the length of qiyaam for them
and made it twenty-one rak’ahs, to make the recitation lighter for them
and so that they would bow and prostrate more. But it seems most likely
to me that the report about eleven rak’ahs is a mistake. And Allaah
knows best. End quote.
Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa
(23/113):
When Ubayy ibn Ka’b led them in praying qiyaam in a single
congregation, he could not make them stand for too long, so he
increased the number of rak’ahs to make up for the long standing. So
they doubled the number of rak’ahs. He used to pray eleven or thirteen
rak’ahs of qiyaam al-layl, then it seems that after that the people of
Madeenah found it difficult to stand for so long during the recitation,
so they increased the number of rak’ahs until it reached thirty-nine.
End quote.
Secondly:
Night prayers are broad in scope, and there is no set number. Whoever
wants to pray eleven rak’ahs may do so, and whoever wants to pray more
or less than that may do so. The same applies to Taraweeh prayers in
Ramadaan.
Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa
(23/113):
One group said that it is proven in al-Saheeh from ‘Aa’ishah that the
Prophet did not pray more than thirteen rak’ahs in Ramadaan or at any
other time, and some people were uncertain about this report, because
they thought that it contradicted the saheeh hadeeth and because of the
practice of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs and the actions of the Muslims.
But the correct view is that all of that is good, as was stated by Imam
Ahmad (may Allaah have mercy on him). There is no set number of rak’ahs
for qiyaam during Ramadaan, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of
Allaah be upon him) did not set a number. End quote.
Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Majmoo’
al-Fataawa (11/322):
It is proven that ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) told the one
whom he appointed among the Sahaabah to pray eleven rak’ahs, and it is
proven that they prayed twenty-three rak’ahs based on his command. This
indicates that the matter is broad in scope and that the matter was
flexible according to the Sahaabah. That is also indicated by the words
of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “The night
prayers are two by two.” End quote.
See also the answer to question no. 9036 and 38021.
And Allaah knows best.
|
Zakah
on Debt
--- from Islam Q&A
When a Muslim is owed a debt
by someone else, one of two scenarios must apply:
(i) That
it is owed by someone who admits it and knows the amount and is willing
to pay it.
(ii) It
is owed by someone who admits it, but he is in difficulty or is
delaying payment, or it is with someone who denies it.
In the first
case, he should pay zakaah on the debt in addition to the wealth he has
with him, so he should pay zakaah on all his wealth, and do that every
year, even if he has not received it from the debtor, because it is
like trust. And it is permissible for him to delay paying zakaah on the
debt until the time he receives it, and then pay zakaah for all the
past years.
In the second
case, he does not have to pay zakaah, but when he does receive it, in
order to be on the safe side he should pay zakaah on it for one year,
even if it was kept with one who was hard up or delayed payment, or
denied it, for several years.
This is a
summary of the correct scholarly view concerning this issue. There are
differences among them concerning the issues that we have mentioned.
This is a brief look at their opinions concerning that:
It says in
al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (23/238, 239):
The debt is the
property of the lender, but because it is not in its owner’s
possession, the fuqaha’ differed concerning it. Ibn ‘Umar, ‘Aa’ishah
and ‘Ikrimah the freed slave of Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with
them) were of the view that there is no zakaah on a debt, and the
reason for that is that it cannot grow (through investment), so its
zakaah is not due on it, like items that are kept for personal use.
The majority of
scholars are of the view that debt which is due is of two types: that
which it is hoped will be paid off, and that concerning which there is
no hope that it will be paid off.
A debt which it
is hoped will be paid off is that which is owed by one who admits it
and is willing to repay it, and there are several views concerning
this. The view of the Hanafis and Hanbalis, which is also the view of
al-Thawri, is that zakaah must be paid on it by its owner every year,
because it is wealth that belongs to him; he does not have to pay
zakaah on it whilst it is not in his possession, but when he does take
possession of it, he must pay zakaah on it for all years past.
The basis for
this opinion is that it is a debt that is confirmed to be owed, so he
does not have to pay zakaah on it before he takes possession of it, and
because he is not making use of it at present, so he does not have to
pay zakaah on wealth that he is not making use of. But the entrusted
item whose owner can take it at any time does not come under this
category, rather he must pay zakaah on it when one year has
passed.
The more correct
view of al-Shaafa’i, and of Hammaad ibn Abi Sulaymaan, Ishaaq and Abu
‘Ubayd is that he must pay zakaah at the end of every year on the debt
that he hopes will be repaid , as in the case of wealth that is in his
possession, because he is able to take it and dispose of it.
The Malikis
regarded debts as being of different types: the zakaah of some debts is
to be paid every year, namely the debt of the merchant who buys and
sells for trade; zakaah is to be paid on the price that he is owed for
the trade goods.
In other cases,
zakaah is to be paid when one year has passed since [the lender] first
acquired it, and it is to be paid for only one year, even if it stays
with the borrower for many years.
There is no
zakaah on some kinds of debt, which is that which he did not take
possession of, such as a gift, mahr, or compensation for an injury and
the like.
In the case of a
debt for which there is no hope of repayment, which is what is owed by
one who is hard up, or who denies it, or is delaying repayment, there
are several opinions. The opinion of the Hanafis in this case, which is
the view of Qataadah, Ishaaq and Abu Thawr, and is mentioned in one
report from Ahmad, and is the view of al-Shaafa’i, is that there is no
zakaah on it, because it is not fully in his possession, because he is
not able to make use of it.
The second view,
which is the view of al-Thawri and Abu ‘Ubayd, and is narrated in
another report from Ahmad, and is the more correct view of al-Shaafa’i,
is that he should pay zakaah on it when he takes possession of it, for
all years past, because of the report narrated from ‘Ali (may Allaah be
pleased with him) concerning the uncertain debt: “If he is sincere then
let him pay zakaah when he takes possession of it for what is past.”
Maalik was of
the view that he should pay zakaah when he takes possession of it for
one year, even if it stayed with the debtor for several years. This is
the view of ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Azeez, al-Hasan, al-Layth and
al-Awzaa’i. End quote.
What we think is
most correct in this case is that which was mentioned in a fatwa issued
by the scholars of the Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas and by
Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen. See the answer to question
no. 1117.
Shaykh Muhammad
ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said, after
discussing the scholarly views on this matter:
The correct view
is that zakaah must be paid on it each year, if it is owed by one who
is rich and willing to pay, because it comes under the same ruling as
wealth that you have with you; but he should pay it when he takes
possession of the debt, and if he wishes he may pay zakaah on it with
the zakaah of the rest of his wealth. The former is a concession
(rukhsah) and the latter is a virtue, and is more expedient in
discharging one’s duty.
But if it is
owed by one who is delaying payment or one who is hard up, then no
zakaah is due on it, even if it remains for ten years, because he is
unable to dispose of it, but if he takes possession of it, he should
pay zakaah once, for the year in which he took possession of it, and he
does not have to pay zakaah for the time that has passed.
This opinion was
mentioned by Shaykh al-‘Anqari in his commentary on Shaykh al-Islam
Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab, and his grandsons (may Allaah have mercy
on them). It is also the view of Imam Maalik (may Allaah have mercy on
him) and this is the correct view, for the following reasons:
1.
It is akin to crops on which zakaah must be paid when they are
acquired, and rent, concerning which Shaykh al-Islam favoured the view
that zakaah must be paid on them when taking possession of them, even
if a full year has not yet passed.
2.
One of the conditions of zakaah being obligatory is that one must be
able to pay it; when one is able to pay it, then zakaah must be paid.
3.
A few months of the year may have passed before he gave it as a loan.
4.
Waiving zakaah for what has passed and making it obligatory to pay
zakaah for the year in which one takes possession of it only makes
things easier for the owner, because how can we oblige him to pay
zakaah when he is obliged to give the one who is hard up more time? It
is also making things easier for the one who is hard up, by giving him
more time.
An example of
that is wealth that is buried and forgotten. If a person buried his
wealth for fear that it might be stolen, then he forgets its
whereabouts, he should pay zakaah only for the year in which he found
it.
Another example
is stolen wealth, if it remains with the thief for several years, then
its owner manages to find it; he should pay zakaah for one year only,
like the debt that is owed by one who is hard up. End quote.
Al-Sharh
al-Mumti’ ‘ala Zaad al-Mustaqni’ (6/27, 28).
To sum up:
You have to pay
zakaah on this money for the three years during which you were a
partner with your friend.
After that –
from the beginning of your agreement with him to repay the money – this
money changes from the money held by a partnership to money that is
owed by your friend. It seems from your friend’s situation that he is
hard up, so you do not have to pay zakaah on this money until you take
possession of it, then you have to pay zakaah on it for one year only,
even if it remained in your friend’s possession for several years.
And Allaah knows
best.
|
Download
pdf