عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(220): "Ruling on the Permissibility of the two Athans for the Friday Prayer"

Date Added : 21-12-2015

Resolution No.(220)(10/2015) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"Ruling on the Permissibility of the two Athans for the Friday Prayer"

Date: 24/Thulhijjah/1436 AH, corresponding to 8/10/2015 AD.

 

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds; and may His blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.
On the above given date, the Board reviewed the question sent by some citizens, and it reads as follows:

Nowadays, some students of Islamic Sharia argue that the Sunnah is to have one Athan (Call for prayer) for Friday prayer and it should be pronounced  after the Imam sits on the pulpit (Mimbar),  and not two Athans as the Sunnah which used to be practiced by the Caliphate Othman Bin Affaan (May Allah be pleased with him). As a result, this matter has led to dispute in some mosques. Would you kindly clarify the ruling of Islamic Sharia on this issue and issue a Fatwa in this regard in order to settle the dispute and  to ward off the trial?

After researching and deliberating, the Board decided what follows:
 In the lifetime of the Prophet (PBUH), the Athan for Friday prayer used to be pronounced after the Imam sat on the pulpit , and there is no dispute about its permissibility, as stated by Ibn Qodamah: "There is no dispute about the permissibility of the Athan for Friday prayer which is pronounced after the Imam sat on the pulpit, as it used to be in the lifetime of the Prophet (PBUH)." As-Saa`b Ibn Yazeed said: "In the lifetime of the Prophet, Abu Bakr and `Umar, the Adhan for the Jumua prayer used to be pronounced when the Imam sat on the pulpit." (Bukhari).
As regards pronouncing the Athan before the Imam sat on the pulpit, it is the Sunnah of Uthman Bin Affaan and it was approved by the Prophet`s companions, so this proves that it is permissible. The wisdom behind this Athan is to remind the people to get ready for the Friday prayer, one hour before its due time. As a result, this Athan remained until present, following the Sunnah of the rightly guided Caliphs (May Allah be pleased with them). The Messenger (PBUH) said: "So you must keep to my Sunnah and to the Sunnah of the Caliphs Ar-Rashideen (the rightly guided caliphs), those who guide to the right way. Cling to it stubbornly [literally: with your molar teeth]. " {Mosnad ahmad}.

Nowadays, although the time between the two Athans for Friday prayer is short, it fulfills the essential purpose observed in the Sunnah of the Caliph Uthman Bin Affan (May Allah Be Pleased with him), giving prayer performers extra minutes to reach the mosque before the Imam sits on the Pulpit.

There is no sound reason for denying this Athan (the one pronounced before the Imam sits on the pulpit), nowadays, as it fulfills the aim of the Sunnah which used to be practiced by Uthman, 
and since its permissibility is based on the fact that the Prophet`s companions approved it. This is despite the fact that some traditions describe this Athan as one of the newly invented matters (in religion), as reported by Ibn Rajab in his book [Fateh Al-Bari, vol.8/pp.218-220]. It is considered newly invented (Mohdath) in the sense that it wasn`t pronounced in the lifetime of the Prophet (PBUH), and it isn`t intended for banning and forbidding. In fact, the companions invented as well as sanctioned it, and since there is no Sharia-approved evidence that it is forbidden, the four juristic schools have agreed that it is lawful as follows:

[Hashyat Ibn Adeen], a Hanafte book, stated: "The second Athan for Friday prayer is pronounced after the Imam sits on the pulpit, as a Sunnah."

[Manh Al-Jaleel], a Malikite book, stated: "The first Athan for the Friday prayer is a Sunnah."

[E`anat At-Talibeen], a Shafite book, stated: "The two Athans for the Friday prayer are permissible."

[Kash-shaaf Al-khina]," a Hanbalite book, stated: "The first Athan for the Friday prayer is recommended because Uthman has kept it as Sunnah and was observed by the Muslim Nation."

Pronouncing the Athan for the Friday prayer twice is effective in Jordan as determined by the Ministry of Awqaf, Islamic Affairs and the Holy Sites. It is also adopted in the rest of  the Muslim World. Therefore, those who have a different opinion in this regard based on their Ijtihad (independent reasoning) aren`t allowed to create dispute and conflict in mosques to impose their view. In addition, they aren`t allowed to criticize others for not following suit. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, The Grand Mufti of Jordan: Sheikh AbdulKareem al-Khasawneh
Vice-Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Dr. Ahmad Hilayel
Prof. Abdulnasser Abulbasal / Member
Dr. Yahia al-Botoosh / Member
Sheikh Sae`id Hijjawi / Member
Prof. Mohammad al-Qhodat / Member
Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh / Member
Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Esa / Member
Dr. Mohammad  al-Z`obi / Member

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Is a woman sinful if she fasts out of shyness from her family while menstruating or in postnatal bleeding?

It is forbidden for a woman who is menstruating or in postnatal bleeding to abstain from food and drink with the intention of fasting. If she fasts out of shyness, she is sinful, as her fast is not valid.
However, if she refrains from eating and drinking without intending to fast, it is not forbidden, but she unnecessarily burdens herself without need.

Is a person who is in a state of Janabah (major ritual impurity due to having a marital intercourse, ejaculation, menstruation, and post-delivery impurities) sinful if he/she goes about his/her daily life activities in that state i.e. without making Ghusl (ritual bath)?

It goes without saying that a Muslim should always be in a state of ritual purity so as to be able to perform prayers and recite Quran. It is from Sunnah (Prophetic tradition) that a Muslim hastens to make Ghusl from Janabah, but he/she is not sinful in case he/she delayed that provided that he/she doesn`t miss prayers. However, it is permissible for him/her to go about their daily activities while in a state of Janabah, but had better bathe in order not to miss any prayer.

Does nosebleed during the day in Ramadan affect the validity of fasting?

A nosebleed does not affect the validity of fasting unless some of the blood reaches the body cavity or the person intentionally swallows it. In such a case, their fast is invalid, and they must refrain from eating and drinking for the rest of the day and make up for that day later.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

See More