sujood of forgetfullness??

[thariq2005]

Wa `alaykum salaam wa rahmatullaah

Yes sister Samiha, I completely agree with all your post jazaakillaah khairaa.

Although I would like to add that a layman shouldn't be going around and enforcing people to accept his taqleed. What I intended to say is when people spread their 'thoughts' about acts of worship- many of which are cultural and have nothing to do with Islaam... at this point we need to challenge them by asking for proof and stuff.

In terms of Fiqhi rulings, I completely agree with you and I really appreciate you clearing this up.

 

[samiha]

:salam2:

BaarakAllaahu feek, I agree about the not pushing ones' own Taqleed. This needs a thread of its own though.

And the second is an interesting point, and I've been thinking about it as well...

When these 'cultural acts of worship' (yes many which are thoughts and superstitions even), are spread like Fiqh rulings, what's the best way to address it?

Because in their view, some treat these 'cultural understandings' as if they are an aspect of fiqh, and any disagreement on it, is a disagreement on fiqh itself to them, due largely to the lack of understanding, misinformation, and word of mouth.

And trust me I've heard my fair share of oddities, especially in regards to women and I've always asked them where the proof is for the action they are doing before. But honestly, I think I'm going to change it to - who said this is part of the religion? If it's from the Hanbali madhab, then khayr - which of the scholars from the Ahnaf said it?

Because I doubt many can get past that point. There's no reliable scholar they can reference these ideas to, and that's where the issue is, the lack of scholarly reference or backing. And if there is a valid answer, then the issue of proofs can be looked into.

Since I think what this does, is prevent a lot of people from going overboard, as when you start asking for proofs or create that mentality that the things you 'feel is wrong' needs to be given proof for or is invalid - sometimes there may be a point where what you feel is wrong culturally, is actually something which has a valid ikhtilaaf - even if it's not strong or even invalid according to the scholars/opinion you follow.

For instance it reminds me of Witr, and how some of the scholars we prominently follow say that it is not permissible to perform witr with three rak'aat together whilst sitting in the second raka'a for tashahud based off their understanding, whereas this is valid according to the Hanafis.

So what some people do, based on the 'lack of proof' they feel is from that opinion, not only speak against it, but go further and denounce those who follow this opinion entirely, as if by following it their salaah is completely invalid, thereby passing their own fatwas almost as well as what you said first about pushing taqleed.

Hmm, just throwing thoughts out there, it's a bit more complex really isnt it?

 

[thariq2005]

:salam2:

When these 'cultural acts of worship' (yes many which are thoughts and superstitions even), are spread like Fiqh rulings, what's the best way to address it?

Wa `alaykum salaam wa rahmatullaah

Actually, thinking about what you wrote now... it may well be a better idea to just ask such people about the scholars who held such a view. 'Cos back home, when you say "what is the evidence?", they automatically deem you to be 'Salafi/Wahhabi' and thus your da`wah is not accepted.

If they are hanafis, it might be a good idea to ask them to clarify if Abu Haneefah rahimahullaah was upon what you all are upon (whether this is `Aqeedah related or Fiqh related, because quite sadly they mix a lot of rubbish into `Aqeedah and Fiqh back home). This might sink in better with such people.

The so-called 'Ahl al-Hadeeth' back home have the most worthless agruments with deobandis. They try to refute them in their 20- rak`ah taraweeh, placing the hands below the navel and other petty issues and most of these are valid differences of opinion amongst scholars.

 

[Seeking Allah's Mercy]

Sorry for not explaining myself properly... basically it goes in this manner

Recite Tashahud> Salawaat> Seeking refuge> Supplications you want to recite> Tasleem to the right and left> two prostrations> Tasleem to the right and left againt

The correct view is to NOT recite tashahud after the prostration of forgetfullness [Below is part of a fatwa from IslamQA regarding Tashahhud after Sajdah as Sahw]

Shaykh Ibn Qudaamah said:

“Ibn Seereen and Ibn al-Mundhir said (concerning sujood al-sahw): there is tasleem [saying salaam] in them but there is no tashahhud.

Ibn al-Mundhir said: the tasleem [in sujood al-sahw] is proven from more than one isnaad, but there is some dispute concerning the tashahhud.”

(al-Mughni, 2/431, 432)

According to al-Nawawi, among the things we learn from the hadeeth of Dhoo’l-Yadayn are:

That sujood al-Sahw was done at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

That it consists of two prostrations, and that one should say Takbeer (“Allaahu akbar”) for each prostration. They are like the prostrations of prayer, because they are called sujood, and if they had been different, he would have explained that. One should say salaam after doing sujood al-sahw, but there is no tashahhud, and if one has to do sujood al-sahw because of doing something extra in the prayer, this should be done after the salaam.

(Sharh Muslim, 5/71).

wAllaahu a`lam

Wassalaamu `alaykkum

Asalamoalaikom wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuh,

I was going to this thread and this fatwa caught my attention. That bold bit, does it mean that the way people perform sajdah sahw here is valid too. i.e addition of another tashahhud?

Jazakallah khair.

 

[Aisya al-Humaira]

:salam2:

BaarakAllaahu feek, I agree about the not pushing ones' own Taqleed. This needs a thread of its own though.

And trust me I've heard my fair share of oddities, especially in regards to women and I've always asked them where the proof is for the action they are doing before. But honestly, I think I'm going to change it to - who said this is part of the religion? If it's from the Hanbali madhab, then khayr - which of the scholars from the Ahnaf said it?

Because I doubt many can get past that point. There's no reliable scholar they can reference these ideas to, and that's where the issue is, the lack of scholarly reference or backing. And if there is a valid answer, then the issue of proofs can be looked into.

Since I think what this does, is prevent a lot of people from going overboard, as when you start asking for proofs or create that mentality that the things you 'feel is wrong' needs to be given proof for or is invalid - sometimes there may be a point where what you feel is wrong culturally, is actually something which has a valid ikhtilaaf - even if it's not strong or even invalid according to the scholars/opinion you follow.

For instance it reminds me of Witr, and how some of the scholars we prominently follow say that it is not permissible to perform witr with three rak'aat together whilst sitting in the second raka'a for tashahud based off their understanding, whereas this is valid according to the Hanafis.

So what some people do, based on the 'lack of proof' they feel is from that opinion, not only speak against it, but go further and denounce those who follow this opinion entirely, as if by following it their salaah is completely invalid, thereby passing their own fatwas almost as well as what you said first about pushing taqleed.

Hmm, just throwing thoughts out there, it's a bit more complex really isnt it?

Interesting issue you've brought up. Something I've been observing for quite some time. The issues of ikhtilaaf, it really saddens me that when a brother/sister hold another slightly different view from the others just because scholars from her/his madhaab explain it a bit differently, then the brother/sister are quickly refuted for it due to it is not within the views of the popular scholars around. I second with both of you that at some point, we are making taqleed to the scholars whom we trust his methodology is upon that of the ASWJ. And its true that we may not always know everything. Even until the end of our days, we do not know everything.

Perhaps from now on, whenever someone brings proofs/evidence/daleel from his/her side, we should ask 1. from which scholar does the view holds, 2. which madhaab are the views in line with.

And once we've bring our proofs from various trustworthy source [from all madhaab; only if one has knowledge and is able to share it], it is upon the people asking or in doubts on which views they want to choose that is best for themselves. So at this time, that person is making taqleed to the scholar he trust since all of us here are in the level of layman people. Good taqleed, I suppose.