The Distinguished Jurists Primer by Ibn Rushd

The comprehensive discussion of the principles of this chapter is covered in four sections. The first section is about the obligation of jumtfia prayer and about the person on whom it is obligatory. The second is about the conditions for jumtfia. the third is about the elements (arban) of jumu'a. The fourth is about the ahkam of jumu^a.

The majority of the jurists uphold the universal obligation of the jumifyi (Friday) prayer, as a substitute for another obligation, which is the zuhr prayer and also because of the apparent meaning of the words of the Exalted, “0 ye who believe! When the call is heard for the prayer of the day of the congregation, haste unto remembrance of Allah and leave your trading. That is better for you if ye did but know”.129 The command here necessitates an obligation. Further, because of the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “Let people desist from neglecting the Friday prayers, or Allah will stamp their hearts”. A group of jurists maintained that it is a communal obligation (fard kifayd), and from Malik there is an isolated opinion that it is a sunna.

The reason for this disagreement stems from its similarity to the <Jd prayer, because of the words of the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “This day has been determined to be an by Allah”.

The person on whom it is obligatory is one who fulfils the conditions for the obligation of prayer, the discussion of which has preceded, and who meets four additional conditions, two of them are agreed upon and two are disputed. The two that are agreed upon are being a male, and being in sound health. Thus, it is not binding upon a woman, nor upon a sick person, but if they attend, their jumu'a prayer would be valid. The disputed conditions are (not) being a traveller and (not) being a slave. The majority maintain that jumufa is not obligatory on them, while Dawud and his disciples maintained that it is obligatory.

The reason for disagreement arises from their dispute over the authenticity of the tradition related to this issue, which is the saying of the the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “JumuSa is a duty that is obligatory upon each Muslim living among a group, except for four persons: an owned slave, a woman, a minor, and one who is sick”. In another version the words f are “except for five”, and the words “a traveller” are added. The tradition has not been deemed authentic by most of the (hadith) scholars.

They agreed that the conditions of the Friday prayer are the very conditions | jetennined for obligatory prayers, that is, the eight preceding conditions, except for the time and the call for prayer, for they disagreed about these, t Similarly* they disagreed about the conditions specific to the Friday prayer.

With respect to the time (of the jumufa prayer), the majority of the jurists I maintained that it is the time for zuhr itself, that is, the time of the declining of 1 the sun, and that it is not permitted before the declining of the sun. A group of jurists, including Ahmad ibn Hanbal, maintained that it is permitted to observe it before the declining of the sun.

The reason for this disagreement stems from the dispute over the meaning of the traditions urging the early observance of the Friday prayer, like the one recorded by al-Bukhari from Sahl ibn SaM, who said, “We did not take lunch or a midday nap, during the time of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), until after the Friday prayer”; likewise another report says, “that they used to pray and return before the walls had cast their shade”. Those who understood from these traditions that the prayer was observed before the declining of the sun permitted it, while those who only interpreted them to mean (just starting with the) takbir did not permit it, so that the sources may not conflict with each other on this topic. The reason (for upholding this interpretation) is that it is established through the tradition of Anas ibn Malik “that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to pray when the sun had declined”. Further, as the Friday prayer is a substitute for the (regular) zuhr prayer, it is necessary that its time be the time for zuhr. It therefore becomes necessary by way of reconciliation to construe those traditions so that they apply to takbir, for they do not indicate explicitly that the time (for the Friday prayer) starts before the declining of the sun, and that is what the majority uphold.

The majority of the jurists agree that the time of adhan (for the Friday prayer) starts when the imam seats himself at the pulpit. They disagreed, however, on whether a single mu*adhdhin or more should make the call for prayer in front of the imam. Some of them maintained that only one mtfadhdhin is to make the call while facing the imam, and this is the call with which buying and selling are declared prohibited. Some other jurists said that there should be two mu*adhdhins, and not more, who are to make the call, while others have said that in fact three of them should make the call. The reason for the disagreement derives from the conflict of traditions about this. It is recorded by al-BukharT from al-S^ib ibn Yazid that he said, “The call on Friday, during the time of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) and also during the time of Abu Bakr and °Umar, was made when the imam had seated himself at the pulpit. When at the time of TJthman the population had increased, a third call was instituted to be delivered from ah Zawra”. It is also related from al-Sa’ib ibn YazTd that he said, “In the time of the Messenger , of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) there was only one mi^adhdhin for the Friday prayer”. It is related from SacTd ibn al- Musayyab that he said, “The call for the Friday prayer during the periods of the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) and Abu Bakr and HJmar used to be a single call when the imam came out, but when it was the time of TJthman and the population increased he added’ to the one initial call in order to induce the people to get ready for the Friday prayer”. Ibn Habib has related “that the mtfadhdhins during the time of the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to be three”.

A group of jurists followed the apparent meaning of the report by al-Bukhari and maintained that on Friday two mu>adhdhins are to make the call. Some other jurists maintained that there should be a single mi^adhdhin. They said that the meaning of the words “When it was the time of TJthman and the population increased, a third call was instituted”, is that the second call was the Others adopted what is reported by Ibn Habib, although the traditions of Ibn Habib are weak according to the traditionists, especially those that only he has related.

It is agreed upon by all, in the conditions of obligation and validity of the Friday prayer, that a condition for it is the congregation (jamfra), but they differed a6out the (minimum) number in the congregation. Some of them said that one person with the imam is sufficient. This is the opinion of al-Tabari. Some said that there should be two persons besides the imam. Some said that there should be three persons besides the imam-, this is the opinion of Abu HanTfa. Some of them stipulated the presence of forty persons, which is the opinion of al-Shafi<i and Ahmad, while some said there should be thirty. Some did not fix a number, but said that it should be a number sufficient to establish a settlement. Thus, according to this opinion, which was held by Malik, it (Friday prayer) is not permissible with three or four persons.

The reason for their disagreement stems from their dispute over the minimum number that can be referred to in the plural whether this is three or four or two, and whether the imam is included in-this number. Further, whether the plural for purposes of this prayer is the minimum that is applied in most cases, which is more than four or three. Those who maintained that the condition here is designation with the minimum to which the plural is applied—and for them the minimum for the plural was two—said that the jumu'a is valid with two persons, the imam and another; this was the view of those who included the imam in the count, but if they were among those who did not include the imam in the count, they held that it is valid with two ersons besides the imam. Those for whom the minimum for plurality was three, and they were not including the imam in the count, said that jumu^a is valid with three persons besides the imam, but if they were among those who included the imam in the count, their opinion conformed with the opinion of those who said that the minimum for plurality was two while not counting the imam in the congregation. Those who took into account what is usually applied to a congregation by custom, said that it is not valid with two or with four, and they did not fix a minimum limit for this. As the condition for the (validity of) Friday congregation was that it be held in a permanent settlement, they fixed for this a number of people who are able to establish a permanent settlement by themselves. This is Malik’s opinion (God bless him). Those who fixed the number at forty did so relying on the report that this was the number of the group who held the Friday prayers for the first time (in Medina, just before the Hijra of the Prophet). This, then, is one of the conditions of the Friday prayer, that is, conditions of obligation and conditions of validity, as in the conditions for the Friday prayer, some are the conditions of obligation alone, while there are others that combine the two factors, I mean, they are the conditions of obligation as well as those of validity.

The second condition (of obligation and validity) is that it should be held in a (permanent) settlement (and the believer must be a resident there, not a traveller). The jurists agreed about this because of their agreement that the Friday prayer is not obligatory for a traveller. This is opposed by the Zahirites who hold that the jumu'a is obligatory for a traveller as well. Abu HanTfa stipulated that there should be a permanent settlement and a (governing) authority along with it, but he did not stipulate a number.

The reason for disagreement in this matter arises from whether or not the circumstances prevailing at the time the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) held this prayer are to be considered as conditions for the validity or for the obligation of this prayer. It happened that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) always observed this prayer in a congregation in a permanent settlement (village or town) and in a central mosque. Those who maintained that the linking of these surroundings with his prayer renders them conditions for the Friday prayer stipulated their existence as a condition. Those who linked (only) some of these (elements) with his Friday prayer stipulated (only) these as conditions to the exclusion of others. This is like the stipulation by Malik of observing it in a mosque, and dropping the condition that it should take place in a permanent settlement and that there should be (a ruling) authority. In relation to this topic, we may add that the jurists disputed other points, like their disagreement over whether two or more Friday congregations could take place in one town.The reason for their disagreement in stipulating some of these related circumstances and acts is that some of these circumstances are more suited to the acts of prayer than others. It is for this reason that they agreed upon the stipulation of performing it in a congregation as congregating is a legal feature of the Muslim prayer. For this reason also Malik did not stipulate that the observance of the Friday prayer in a congregation should be conditional on the existence of a settlement and a supervising authority, because he did not consider these as either representative features of prayer or circumstances closely related to prayer. Yet he stipulated that the Friday congregation be held in a mosque as the mosque is closely related to prayer. His disciples however, differed to the extent of whether the mosque should have a roof, and whether it is a condition that Friday prayers are regularly held in this mosque. Perhaps this amounts to too much probing, and the Din of Allah requires ease. Someone may raise the objection that if all these were the conditions for the validity of prayer, the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) would not have remained silent about them and he would not have failed to give the explanation because of the words of the Exalted, “We have revealed unto thee the Remembrance that thou mayst explain to mankind that which hath been revealed for them”,130 and His words, “And We have revealed the Scripture unto thee only that thou mayst explain unto them that wherein they differ”.131 Allah guides to what is right.

The Muslim jurists agreed that the elements (major parts of the Friday prayer) are the khutba (sermon) and the two rak^as after the khutba. Within this they agreed about five issues that are the principles of this topic.

Whether the khutba is a condition for the validity of this prayer and whether it is one of its elements (arkan). The majority maintained that it is a condition as well as an element. A group of jurists said that it is not obligatory, while the majority of the disciples of Malik maintained that it is obligatory, except for Ibn al-Majishun.

The reason for their disagreement stems from the principle that has already been discussed, whether all things and circumstances existing at the time the Prophet used to hold the Friday prayer should necessarily constitute the conditions for its validity. Those who maintained that the khutba is one of the | circumstances specific to this prayer, especially when it is taken into account ■’ that it is * substitute for the two rak'as that have been reduced from the {zuhr) E- prayer, said that it is an element of this prayer and one of the conditions of its I validity. Those who maintained that its purpose is the usual exhortation that is i the aim of all sermons, held that it is not a condition for this prayer. One | group of jurists argued on the basis of the words of the Exalted, “haste unto i reniembrance of Allah”,132 saying that this means the sermon.

Those who upheld that the sermon is an obligation differed about the minimum length of the sermon. Ibn al-Qasim said that it is the minimum length that can be called a sermon in the usage of the Arabs, including a word of praise for Allah {al-Hamd) at the beginning. Al-Shafi(T said that the permitted minimum requirement of a sermon is that it should be in two parts during which the speaker {imam) should >be standing and that they should be separated by a short interval for sitting, and that at the beginning of each part he should pronounce words praising Allah {al-Hamd), pray for the Prophet and preach piety. He should also recite a passage from the Qur’an in the first part of the sermon and pray for the believers in the second part.

The reason for their disagreement over this issue is their dispute over the meaning of the minimum permissible length whether it is the literal or the technical meaning? Those who maintained that the permitted length is the literal minimum did not stipulate in it anything of the words that have been traced to the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) in his sermons. Those who maintained that the permitted length is the minimum to which the technical meaning applies stipulated that it should include words that were regularly included in the sermons of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), that is, not just occasional words.

The reason for this disagreement is that the sermons that have been transmitted from him contained words regularly used and also occasional remarks. Those who took into account the occasional remarks and preferred the hukm emanating from them said that a sufficient length is the minimum to which the literal term applies, that is, the meaning of the term khutba in the usage of the Arabs. Those who took into account the regularly delivered speeches and gave predominance to their hukm said that the permitted length is the minimum to which the term khutba is applied in legal usage and practice. Sitting down (between the two parts of the sermon) is not a condition; for the khutba in Malik’s view, and it is a condition, as we have said, in al-ShafiTs view. The reason is that those who attributed to it the ordinary meaning of being a rest for the khatib (speaker) did not consider it to be a condition, while those who considered it to be a ritual deemed it a condition.

There are three different opinions about maintaining silence while the imam is delivering the sermon. Some of the jurists held that silence is obligatory under all circumstances and then it is a binding hukm of the sermon. These were the majority: Malik, al-ShafiT, Abu Hamfa, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and all the jurists of the provinces. They are, however, divided into three groups. Some permitted the utterance of a blessing for a person who has sneezed, and also permitted responding to salutations; others distinguished between exclamation of a blessing and salutations, saying that one may respond to salutations, but not bless. The second view is the opposite of the first, that is, speech during any stage of the sermon is permitted, except when the Qur’an is being recited during it. This is related from al-Sha^T, Sacid ibn Jubayr, and Ibrahim ak Nakha T. The c third opinion makes a distinction between the worshippers who can hear the sermon and those who cannot. The worshippers who can hear the sermon should maintain silence, but those who cannot hear it are permitted to occupy themselves in the remembrance of Allah or to discuss religious issues. This was the opinion of Ahmad, Ata’, and a group of jurists.

c The majority maintain that if a person talks (during the sermon) his prayer is not invalidated, but it is related from Ibn Wahb that if a person indulges in idle talk he is obliged to pray the four rak'as of zuhr (i.e. his Friday prayer is invalidated).

The majority upheld the obligation <of maintaining silence because of the tradition of Abu Hurayra that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, “If you say to your companion ‘Be silent’, during Friday prayer while the imam is delivering the sermon, then, you have indulged in idle talk’”. Those who did not deem this obligatory, for them I do not recall an analogy, unless they were of the view that this matter is in conflict with the implication of the text in the words of the Exalted, “And when the Qur’an is recited, give ear to it and pay heed, that ye may obtain mercy”,133 that is, there is no obligation to maintain silence for what is besides the Qur’an, but this is weak, Allah knows best. It is more probable that this tradition did not reach them.

IIn the case of their disagreement about responding to the salutation and about blessing the person sneezing, the reason for disagreement stems from the conflict between the general command to do so and the general command to maintain silence; the likelihood is that each is an exemption from the other. Thus, those who exempted from the general command to maintain silence during the jumu^a sermon the command to respond to the salutation and to bless the person sneezing permitted them, while those who exempted from the general command to respond to the salutation, and to bless the person sneezing, the proscription of speaking during the Friday sermon, did not permit either. Among those who made a distinction between the two utterances, some exempted the response to a salutation from the proscription of speaking during the Friday sermon, and some exempted the expression of blessings for one who has sneezed. Each one of these two groups adopted one of these exemptions, about which it was convinced because of the strength in one general application and a weakness in the other. The reason is that the command for maintaining silence is general with respect to speech and particular with respect to time, while the command to respond to salutation and to utter blessings is general with respect to time and -particular with respect to speech. Those who exempted the particular time from general speech did not permit, during the sermon, the response to salutation or blessing one who has sneezed, while those who exempted particular speech from the proscription of general speech permitted it.

The correct method is not to adopt an exemption of one of the general implications from one of the particular implications, except on the basis of an evidence. If this becomes difficult then a preference among the general and particular implications is to be investigated, and preference is to emphasize the commands. The discussion of all this is lengthy, but it should be known in brief that if the commands have equal strength and the general and particular implications are also equal in strength, and there is no evidence as to which is to be exempted from the other a dead end is inevitably reached, though this rarely happens. If this is not the case, then, the preference between general and particular meanings occurring in such cases involves an investigation of all kinds of relationships that exist between the particular and general meanings. These are four. Two general meanings possessing the same strength and two particular meanings having the same strength, are not to be exempted, one from the other, except on the basis of another evidence. The second case is the opposite of this, and this may be a particular meaning of extreme strength or a general meaning of extreme weakness. In such a case it is to be adopted, in fact it is necessary, that is, exempting the particular from the general. The third is the case of two particular meanings of the same category and a general meaning that is weaker than the other (general meaning). In this case it is necessary to restrict the weaker general meaning. The fourth case is that of two general meanings of the same category along with one particular meaning that s stronger than the other. In such a case it is necessary that the hukm be assigned to the stronger particular meaning. All this takes place when the commands are equal in emphasis. If that is different, the orders are all changed and the measures are applied equally to the implications of the words as well as to the commands. Because of the difficulty of ordering such matters, it is said that each mujtahid is correct or, at least, he is not at fault.134

They disagreed about whether a person who arrives in the mosque for Friday prayers when the imam is already at the pulpit, is to begin offering the (two required) rakfas. Some of the jurists maintain that he is not to pray, and this is Malik’s opinion, while others maintained that he is to offer the rak'as.

The reason for their disagreement arises from the conflict of analogy with the general implication of the tradition. The general implication of the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “When one of you arrives in a mosque, he is to offer two conveys that anyone entering a mosque on a Friday is to offer two rakfa even if the imam is delivering the sermon. The evidence of the command of paying attention to the speaker in silence requires that the entrant is not to occupy himself with anything that distracts him from silent attention, even if such an activity is worship. The general meaning of this tradition is supported by the authentic tradition of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “When one of you enters the mosque when the imam is delivering the sermon, he should offer two short nwhw”. It is recorded by Muslim in some of its versions. Most versions of this tradition say, “The Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) ordered a man who had entered the mosque that he should pray”. He did not say, “When one of you enters the mosque .. This leads to a disagreement on whether an addition by a single narrator, when he is opposed by the other narrators narrating through a common shaykh, is to be accepted. If the addition is proved authentic, it is necessary to act according to it, for it is explicit on a appears that what Malik has taken into account on this issue is ‘amal (practice of the jurists of Medina).

The majority of the jurists maintain that the recitation of the sura of i n the first raffia of the Friday prayer is an established practice (sunna)> for its repetition is observed in the acts of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him). Muslim has recorded from Abu Hurayra “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to recite it in the first raffia during Friday prayers, and in the second (raffia) he used to 1

recite surat al-Munafiqiin. Malik has related that aLDahhak 11A • — • ibn Qays asked al-NuSman ibn Bashir what the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) usually recited on a Friday after the surat al~Jumu‘a. He said, “He used to recite (the sura beginning with the words), ‘Hath there come unto thee the tidings of the Overwhelming?’”135 136 137 Malik preferred that the practice conform with this tradition, though it would be good, in his view, if (the sura beginning with the words), “Praise the name of thy Lord the Most High”138 was recited, for it is related from TJmar ibn cAbd al-cAziz. Abu HanTfa, on the other hand, did not specify anything in this respect.

The reason for their disagreement arises from the conflict between the reported practice and analogy. Analogy dictates that there should not be any sura appointed for this purpose as is the case with the rest of the prayers, while the indication of practice requires that there an appointed suras.

The QadT said that Muslim has recorded from al-Nucman ibn Bashir “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to recite on the occasion of the two ‘Ids and Jumu‘a (the sura beginning with the words), ‘Praise the name of thy Lord the Most High’^139^ and also (the sura beginning with the words), ‘Hath there come unto thee the tidings of the Overwhelming?’”140 He said that if the ‘Id and Jumu‘a fell on the same day, they were recited in both prayers. This indicates that there is no appointed sura for this and they were not always recited in the Jumu‘a.

This topic covers four issues. First, the hukm of purification for Friday prayers. Second, on whom it is obligatory from among those living outside the town. Third, the desired time for moving toward the Friday congregation Fourth, the permissibility of trading on Friday after the call has been made

They disagreed about purification (bathing)-for Friday prayers. The majority maintained that it is a sunna, while the Zahirites held that it is an obligation There is no dispute, as far as I know, that it is not a condition for the validity of this prayer.

The reason for their disagreement stems from the conflict of traditions. On this.subject, there is the tradition of Abu SacTd al-KhudrT, being the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “Bathing for the jumuta is obligatory on each adult, like bathing after sexual defilement”. There is also the tradition from cA*isha, who said, “The people, who were mostly workers, used to come for Friday prayers in the condition that they were, and it was said to them, ‘If only you had washed yourselves’”. The first tradition is authentic by agreement, while the second has been recorded by Abu Dawud and Muslim. The apparent meaning of the tradition of Abu Sa Td c implies the obligation of bathing, while the apparent meaning of € A*isha’s tradition conveys that it is only for purposes of cleanliness and is not a required ritual. It has been reported that “It is sufficient to perform ablution on a Friday, but if one takes a bath it is better”. This is explicit in eliminating the obligation. It is, however, a weak tradition.

About the obligation of Friday prayers on one living outside a permanent settlement, a group of jurists have said that it is not obligatory on such a person, while another group has said that it is obligatory. These Jurists differed extensively. Some said that if the distance between his place and the place of the congregation involves a journey of one day, it is obligatory on him to come to it. This is a deviant opinion. Some said that it is obligatory on him to come if the distance is within three miles. Others were of the view that it is obligatory on him to come to it from a distance up to which the call can normally be heard, and this is determined to be three miles from the place of ' the issuance of the call. The latter two opinions are related from Malik. This issue is related to the conditions of obligation.

The reason for their disagreement on this topic arises from the conflict of traditions. It is reported that the people used to come for Friday prayers from suburbs during the time of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be r on him), which were up to three miles from Medina. Abu Dawud has Reported that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, “The | Friday prayer is obligatory on one who hears the call”. It is also reported that b‘Friday prayer is obligatory on one who can return to his family by nightfall”, |but this is a weak tradition.

Their disagreement about the preferred timings for setting off for the Friday ’prayer is based on the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “If one sets off in the first hour, it is as if he has made an offering :

o f a camel. If one sets off in the second hour, it is as if he has made an offering o f a cow. If one sets off in the third hour, it is as if he has made an offering of a horned ram. If one sets off in the fourth hour, it is as if he has made an offering of a chicken. If one sets off in the fifth hour, it is as if he has made an offering of an egg”. Al-Shafi T and a group of jurists believed that c these hours are the hours of the day, and they recommended moving in the first hour of the day. Malik maintained that these are the parts of the single hour prior to the declining of the sun and after it. A group of jurists said that these are the parts of the hour before the declining of the sun. This appears to be the prominent opinion, because there is an obligation of making haste after the declining of the sun, except for those who maintain that greater merit can also be attached to obligatory acts.

In their disagreement over buying and selling at the time of the call (and thereafter before the prayer), a group of jurists have said that the sale is rescinded if the call has been made, while another group said that it is not rescinded. The reason for their disagreement stems from their dispute on whether the proscription of a thing, which is essentially permissible, when associated with another attribute, renders void the thing proscribed?

The etiquette of Friday prayer covers three things: perfume, brushing the teeth (was done with a tooth-stick), and decent attire. There is no dispute about this because of the traditions related to the topic.