بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
16 Jumād al-Awwal, 1445 AH (Thursday, 30 November, 2023)
We discussed the chain of ḥadīth number 175. Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī quotes:
أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ
That the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ.[1]
This is the chain in the Muwaṭṭaʾ. Imām Mālik quoted from Ibn Shihāb, who quoted from ʿAṭāʾ ibn Yazīd al-Laythī, who quoted from Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī, who reported from the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ. All the transmitters of the Muwaṭṭaʾ narrated it as such besides one student who also narrated it from Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyab via Zuhrī. ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr comments:
هكذا رواه جماعة الرواة عن مالك، إلا المغيرة بن سقلاب، فإنه رواه عن مالك، عن الزهري، عن سعيد بن المسيب وعطاء بن يزيد الليثي. جميعا عن أبي سعيد الخدري. ولم يذكر سعيدا في إسناد هذا الحديث غيره، والله أعلم.
This is how the majority of transmitters of the Muwaṭṭaʾ reported it from Mālik besides Mughirah ibn Saqlāb. He reported it from Mālik from Zuhrī from Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyab and ʿAṭāʾ ibn Yazīd al-Laythī. All of them reported from Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī. No one else mentioned Saʿīd in the chain of this ḥadīth. And Allāh knows best.[2]
This narration has also been reported from Mālik from Zuhrī from Sāʾib ibn Yazīd from the Prophet ﷺ via Musaddad, but this is incorrect, as ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr mentions:
وقد روي هذا الحديث عن مسدد، عن يحيى القطان، عن مالك، عن الزهري، عن السائب بن يزيد، عن النبي -صلى الله عليه وسلم-. وذلك خطأ من كل من رواه بهذا الإسناد، عن مسدد أو غيره، ولا يعرف فيه ويحفظ إلا حديث الزهري، عن عطاء بن يزيد، عن أبي سعيد الخدري، وهو الصحيح فيه، والله أعلم.
This narration has been reported by Musaddad, citing Yaḥyā al-Qaṭṭān, who reported it from Mālik from Zuhrī from Sāʾib ibn Yazīd, who narrated from the Prophet ﷺ. However, this is an error from all those who narrated it with this chain, whether through Musaddad or others. The only known and well-retained narration in this context is the one transmitted by Zuhrī through ʿAtāʾ bin Yazīd from Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī. This is the correct one. And Allāh knows best.[3]
However, we do not have to consider the weaker chains. This chain of the Muwaṭṭaʾ is strong enough. ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī comments on these weak versions:
واختلف على الزهري في إسناد هذا الحديث، وعلى مالك أيضا، لكنه اختلاف لا يقدح في صحته.
The chain of this ḥadīth have been quoted in different ways from Zuhrī as well as from Mālik. However, this is not detrimental to its authenticity.[4]
Since this narration features in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim and some of the six canonical books of ḥadīth as well, its authenticity is indisputable. ʿAllāmah Baghawī says:
هذا حديث متفق على صحته.
This is a ḥadīth whose authenticity is agreed upon.[5]
قَال: “إِذَا سَمِعْتُمُ النِّدَاء”
Said, ‘When you hear the call,’
Explanation of the Word: ‘Nidāʾ’
In the footnotes, it is written concerning the word ‘nidāʾ’:
في الأصل و(ب) دون همز، وفي (ج)، وفي طبعة بشار بالهمز.
The main and second main manuscript has it without a hamzah whereas the manuscript of ʿAllāmah Jurjānī and Bashshār’s print has it with a hamzah.[6]
ʿAllāmah Ibn al-Jawzī explains the meaning of ‘nidāʾ’:
النداء ها هنا الأذان.
‘Nidāʾ’ here refers to the adhān.[7]
ʿAllāmah Zurqānī elaborates:
أي: الأذان سمي به لأنه نداء إلى الصلاة ودعاء إليها.
I.e. the adhān; it was given this name because it is a call and invitation for prayer.[8]
ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī outlines the difference between ‘nidāʾ’ and ‘adhān’:
والفرق بينهما: أن لفظ الأذان أو التأذين أخص من لفظ النداء لغة وشرعا.
The difference between them is that the word ‘adhān’ or ‘taʾdhīn’ is more specific than the word ‘nidāʾ’ linguistically and legally.[9]
Since the Prophet ﷺ is saying ‘samiʿtum’, Imām Nawawī deduces the following ruling:
من رأى المؤذن وعلم أنه يؤذن ولم يسمعه لبعد أو صمم، الظاهر أنه لا تشرع له المتابعة، لأن المتابعة معلقة بالسماع والحديث مصرح باشتراطه.
If someone sees the muʾadhdhin and knows that he is calling the adhān but does not hear it due to distance or being deaf, it is apparent that repeating it is not prescribed for him because the act of repeating is contingent upon hearing, and the ḥadīth explicitly affirms this condition.[10]
ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿĀbidīn ash-Shāmī also asserts the same:
يفهم منه أنه لو لم يسمع لصمم أو لبعد أنه لا يجيب، وهو ظاهر الحديث الآتي: “إذا سمعتم الأذان”، حيث علق على السماع، وقد صرح بعض الشافعية بأنه الظاهر.
It can be understood from this that one should not respond if one does not hear due to deafness or being at a distance. This aligns with the explicit meaning of the forthcoming ḥadīth: ‘When you hear the adhān,’ emphasising the association with hearing. Some Shafiʿīs have clearly stated that this is the correct understanding.[11]
“فَقُولُوا”
‘Then utter’
The word ‘fa-qūlū’ is a command from the Prophet ﷺ to the Muslims. Scholars differed on the nature of this command, whether it stands as an obligation or recommendation. Amīr Ṣanʿānī states:
ظاهر الأمر الإيجاب، وبه قالت الحنفية، ووافقهم ابن وهب من المالكية. وقالت الشافعية: الإجابة مندوبة والقرينة على ذلك الإجماع على عدم وجوب الأصل. قلت: الإجماع غير صحيح، ولو صح ففي الاستدلال به نظر
The apparent indication of the commands leans towards the obligation, and the Ḥanafīs held this view and Ibn Wahb from the Malikīs aligns with them. The Shāfiʿīs, on the other hand, contend that the response is recommended, and the indication for this lies in the consensus on the non-obligation of the default. I would argue that the alleged consensus is incorrect, and even if it were valid, the reliance on it as a basis for argumentation is arguable.[12]
We will delve into this with elaborate details after this narration if Allāh wills.
“مِثْلَ”
‘The same’
Explanation of the Word: ‘Mithl’
The lām on the word ‘mithl’ will be pronounced with a fatḥah in the accusative case. ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī addresses this and says:
مثل منصوب على أنه صفة لمصدر محذوف، أي: قولوا قولا مثل ما يقول المؤذن.
‘Mithl’ is in the accusative case as an attribute to an omitted verbal noun, i.e. qūlū qawlan mithl mā yaqūlu ’l-muʾadhdhin (say something similar to what the muʾadhdhin says).[13]
He also expounds concerning the word ‘mithl’:
والمثل هو النظير، يقال: مِثل ومَثَل ومثيل مثل: شبه وشبه وشبيه، والمماثلة بين الشيئين اتحادهما في النوع: كزيد وعمرو في الإنسانية.
‘Mithl’ signifies an equivalent, expressed as: ‘mithl’, ‘mathal’ and ‘mathīl’ akin to the words ‘shibh’, ‘shabah’ and ‘shabīh’. Similarity between two entities is defined by their belonging to the same category, such as comparing Zayd and ʿAmr in their humanity.[14]
According to Ibn ʿAbd as-Salām, the word ‘mithl’ does not convey the meaning of complete similarity in every aspect. In that case, the listener is not required to utter the exact words of the adhān in the absolute exact way as the muʾadhdhin. Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar first quotes this view:
وفي الحديث دليل على أن لفظ المثل لا يقتضي المساواة من كل جهة، لأن قوله مثل ما يقول لا يقصد به رفع الصوت المطلوب من المؤذن .
In the ḥadīth, there is evidence that the word ‘mithl’ does not imply equality from every aspect, as when he says, ‘Similar to what the muʾadhdhin says,’ it does not intend to raise the voice to the level required for the muʾadhdhin.[15]
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar responds to this:
كذا قيل وفيه بحث، لأن المماثلة وقعت في القول لا في صفته، والفرق بين المؤذن والمجيب في ذلك أن المؤذن مقصوده الإعلام فاحتاج إلى رفع الصوت، والسامع مقصوده ذكر الله فيكتفي بالسر أو الجهر لا مع الرفع. نعم لا يكفيه أن يجريه على خاطره من غير تلفظ لظاهر الأمر بالقول. وأغرب ابن المنير فقال: حقيقة الأذان جميع ما يصدر عن المؤذن من قول وفعل وهيئة.
وتعقب بأن الأذان معناه الإعلام لغة، وخصه الشرع بألفاظ مخصوصة في أوقات مخصوصة فإذا وجدت الأذان، وما زاد على ذلك من قول أو فعل أو هيئة يكون من مكملاته ويوجد الأذان من دونها. ولو كان على ما أطلق لكان ما أحدث من التسبيح قبل الصبح وقبل الجمعة ومن الصلاة على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم من جملة الأذان، وليس كذلك لا لغة ولا شرعا. واستدل به على جواز إجابة المؤذن في الصلاة عملا بظاهر الأمر، ولأن المجيب لا يقصد المخاطبة.
This argument has been presented, and it involves scrutiny. The similarity pertained to the act of uttering, not in its method. The difference between the muʾadhdhin and the one responding lies in the muʾadhdhin’s intention to inform, necessitating the raising of the voice, whilst the listener’s intent is the remembrance of Allāh, which is sufficient with silent or audible recitation without the need for elevation [of the voice]. However, it is insufficient for him to merely contemplate it internally without vocalising, given the apparent indication of the command to verbally recite.
Ibn al-Munīr presented an isolated perspective, stating that the literal meaning of the adhān encompasses all that emanates from the muʾadhdhin, including speech, actions and form. (Therefore, one should follow him completely in the words of the adhān and the manner of calling it out audibly.) An objection is raised against this because the adhān, linguistically, means information, which the Sharīʿah has specified with particular expressions at designated times. Therefore, if the adhān is present, anything beyond that, whether in speech, action or form, would be considered supplementary to its perfection (and not integral to the adhān). Adhān can be found without these.
Had it been as he (Ibn al-Munīr) stated, tasbīḥ before the morning prayer and the Friday prayer and sending blessings on the Prophet ﷺ would form part of adhān. However, this is not the case either linguistically or legally. This argument was used to support the permissibility of responding to the muʾadhdhin during prayer, acting upon the apparent command, and because the responder does not seek communication (with people).[16]
“مَا”
‘Words’
ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī explains regarding this word:
وكلمة: ما، مصدرية أي: مثل قول المؤذن.
The word ‘mā’ conveys the meaning of a verbal noun, i.e. mithl qawl al-muʾadhdhin (similar to the statement of the muʾadhdhin).[17]
“يَقُولُ المؤَذِّنُ.”
‘As the muʾadhdhin’
ʿAllāmah Ibn Waḍḍāḥ claimed that the word ‘al-muʾadhdhin’ is not part of the narration. In the footnotes, it is written:
كتب فوق المؤذن “صح” “ع”. وفي الهامش: “قال ابن وضاح: “المؤذن” ليس من كلام النبي -صلى الله عليه وسلم-“.
‘Ṣaḥḥa’ and an ʿayn was written over ‘al-muʾadhdhin’. Written in the margin is: “Ibn Waḍḍāḥ said, ‘‘Al-muʾadhdhin’ does not form part of the Prophet ﷺ’s statement.’”[18]
ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī addresses this in ʿUmdat al-Qārī and refutes it:
وقال ابن وضاح: قوله المؤذن، مدرج والحديث: (فقولوا مثل ما يقول) ، وليس فيه المؤذن، وفيه نظر لأن الإدراج لا يثبت بمجرد الدعوى، والروايات في الصحيحين: (مثل ما يقول المؤذن).
Ibn Waḍḍāḥ claimed, “His saying ‘al-muʾadhdhin’ has been inserted by a narrator, and the ḥadīth is: ‘Utter the same words as him,’ without the inclusion of ‘al-muʾadhdhin’.” There is a contention in this view because insertion by a narrator is not proven by mere assertion. The narrations in the Ṣaḥīḥayn state: ‘Then utter the same words as the muʾadhdhin.’[19]
ʿAllāmah Suyūṭī affirms:
وقد اتفقت الروايات في الصحيحين والموطأ على إثباتها.
The narrations in the Ṣaḥīḥayn and the Muwatṭaʾ concur on its presence.[20]
Reason for Using the Word ‘Muʾadhdhin’ after ‘Nidāʾ’
The Prophet ﷺ used the word ‘nidāʾ’, not ‘adhān’, and instead of ‘munādī’, he used ‘al-muʾadhdhin’. Majd ad-Dīn Ibn al-Athīr explains the reason for this:
ولم يقل المنادي، لأنه لما قال النداء -وهو لفظ مشترك بين نداء الصلاة وغيره- عدل إلى لفظ المؤذن عن المنادي، لئلا يتكرر لفظ النداء أولا وآخرا، فيقوى في النفس أحد القسمين على الآخر، فأما حيث قال “المؤذن” فإن ذلك الوهم زال، ويمحض النداء للصلاة خاصة دون غيرها.
He did not say ‘munādī’ because when he used ‘nidāʾ’, which is a common term for the call to prayer and other matters, he specifically chose ‘muʾadhdhin’ over ‘munādī’ to avoid redundancy of the word ‘nidāʾ’ at the beginning and end. This strengthens one of the two categories (i.e. the category of the call towards prayer) in the mind over the other (like the call for other matters). When he said ‘al-muʾadhdhin,’ the assumption disappeared, and the term ‘nidāʾ’ became exclusive to the call to prayer, distinguishing it from other calls.[21]
Majd ad-Dīn Ibn al-Athīr defines it:
يريد التلفظ بألفاظ الأذان.
It refers to the articulation of the words of the adhān.[22]
ʿAllāmah Ibn al-Jawzī outlines the reason for responding by repeating the same words as the muʾadhdhin:
وإنما تسن إجابة المؤذن بمثل قوله ليعلم المجيب أني مقر بما تدعوني إليه، مستجيب له.
It is Sunnah to respond to the muʾadhdhin by uttering the same words as him to let the responder announce: ‘I am agreeing to what you are inviting me to and I am responsive to it.’[23]
Many laws apply to this narration, which we will upcomingly discuss. (Please note that the order of these points has been changed, to place the points into a better sequence. The first point, for example, has been quoted in Ḥadīth 149, whereas some points will be typed out under the next narration.)
The Status of Replying to the Muʾadhdhin
Those who deemed it non-obligatory
Most scholars believed that it is not compulsory to respond to the adhān. After agreeing over its non-compulsion, some claimed that responding is Sunnah whereas others mentioned that it is recommended. For instance, ʿAllāmah Ibn al-Jawzī mentioned that responding to the adhān is Sunnah. He states:
وإنما تسن إجابة المؤذن.
Responding to the muʾadhdhin is Sunnah.[24]
Al-Mawsūʿah al-Fiqhiyyah al-Kuwaytiyyah also affirms it as Sunnah. It is written:
يسن لمن سمع الأذان متابعته بمثله.
It is Sunnah for one who hears the adhān to repeat the same.[25]
Other scholars wrote that it is recommended. Consider the following statement of Imām Nawawī in his commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim:
يستحب إجابة المؤذن بالقول مثل قوله لكل من سمعه.
It is recommended for everyone who hears the muʾadhdhin to respond to him by verbally uttering the same words as him.[26]
ʿAllāmah Ibn Qudāmah al-Maqdisī went to the extent of asserting the absence of any divergent view on its recommendation. He writes:
مسألة؛ قال: (ويستحب لمن سمع المؤذن أن يقول كما يقول)
لا أعلم خلافا بين أهل العلم في استحباب ذلك، والأصل فيه ما روى أبو سعيد، أن رسول الله -صلى الله عليه وسلم- قال: “فإذا سمعتم النداء، فقولوا مثل ما يقول المؤذن”. متفق عليه.
Issue: He said: – ‘It is recommended for one who hears the muʾadhdhin to utter the same words as him’ – I do not know of any differences of opinion amongst the scholars regarding its recommendation. Its basis is the narration of Abū Saʿīd that the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said, ‘When you hear the call, utter the same words as the muʾadhdhin.’[27]
Those who deemed it obligatory & the views within the Ḥanafī school of thought
On the other hand, we have scholars who maintained its obligation. For instance, ʿAllāmah Ibn Daqīq al-ʿĪd writes:
إجابة المؤذن مطلوبة بالاتفاق.
Responding to the muʾadhdhin is required by the agreement of everyone.[28]
He affirmed a consensus on this whereas this is merely one of two views, as ʿAllāmah Ibn al-ʿArabī states:
القول الأول – قال قوم: هو على الوجوب.
والقول الثاني – قال قوم: إنه على الاستحباب والندب.
The first view: Certain people say it is obligatory.
The second view: Certain people say it is recommended and preferable.[29]
It is actually many Ḥanafī scholars who claimed that it is obligatory to respond to the adhān. This is also one view in the Mālikī and the Shāfiʿī schools of thought.
Ḥanafī scholars who regarded a verbal response as obligatory
Many Ḥanafī scholars and few scholars from the Mālikī and the Shāfiʿī schools of thought deemed it compulsory to repeat the same words as the muʾadhdhin. ʿAllāmah Zayn ad-Dīn ar-Rāzī, for example, says:
إجابة المؤذن
ويجب على سامع الأذان والإقامة متابعة المؤذن.
Responding to the Muʾadhdhin
It is obligatory for one who hears the adhān and the iqāmah to follow the muʾadhdhin (by repeating the same words as him).[30]
Mawlānā ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq ad-Dihlawī writes:
ثم إجابة المؤذن واجبة، ويُكره التكلم عند الأذان.
Responding to the muʾadhdhin is obligatory, and it is disliked to speak during adhān.[31]
ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Din ʿAynī says:
احتج بقوله: (فقولوا) أصحابنا أن إجابة المؤذن واجبة على السامعين لدلالة الأمر على الوجوب. وبه قال ابن وهب من أصحاب مالك، والظاهرية، ألا ترى أنه يجب عليهم قطع القراءة وترك الكلام والسلام ورده وكل عمل غير الإجابة؟ فهذا كله أمارة الوجوب.
Our scholars used the statement: ‘utter’ to prove that responding to the muʾadhdhin is obligatory upon the listeners since the command (in the word ‘fa-qūlū’) indicates obligation. Ibn Wahb amongst the Mālikī scholars and the Ẓāhirīs argued: ‘Do you not see that it is obligatory for them to stop the recitation [of the Qurʾān], speaking, greeting and replying to greetings as well as all other actions besides responding to it? All of these are signs of obligation.’[32]
Furthermore, ʿAllāmah Ibn al-Humām elaborates on how certain scholars considered it to be obligatory to respond:
ظاهر الأمر في قوله -صلى الله عليه وسلم-: “فقولوا مثل ما يقول” الوجوب، إذ لا تظهر قرينة تصرفه عنه، بل ربما يظهر استنكار تركه لأنه يشبه عدم الالتفات إليه والتشاغل عنه. وفي التحفة: ينبغي أن لا يتكلم ولا يشتغل بشيء حال الأذان أو الإقامة. وفي النهاية: تجب عليهم الإجابة لقوله -صلى الله عليه وسلم-: “أربع من الجفاء، ومن جملتها: ومن سمع الأذان والإقامة ولم يجب” اهـ.
The apparent command in the Prophet ﷺ’s statement: ‘utter the same words as him’ denotes obligation given there are no external factors to avert the obligation. In fact, sometimes disapprovals appear for not responding to it since it is akin to not paying attention to it and being distracted by other matters. At-Tuḥfah mentions: ‘One should not speak nor get distracted by any affair during adhān and iqāmah.’ An-Nihāyah mentions: “They must respond because the Prophet ﷺ said, ‘Four things form part of crudity,’ amongst them, he included: ‘whoever hears the adhān and the iqāmah but does not respond.’”[33]
Ḥanafī scholars who offered a different interpretation
He then presents a different interpretation to this command:
وهو غير صريح في إجابة اللسان، إذ يجوز كون المراد الإجابة بالإتيان إلى الصلاة، وإلا لكان جواب الإقامة واجبا، ولم نعلم فيه عنهم إلا أنه مستحب، والله أعلم.
Having said that, it does not explicitly indicate a verbal response since it is possible for the meaning to be responding by coming to the prayer. Otherwise, repeating the iqāmah would have been obligatory, but we only know their view on it as its recommendation. And Allāh knows best.[34]
ʿAllāmah Ibn Nujaym supported this intrepretation. He quotes from Ḥanafī scholars who did not regard a verbal response as compulsory:
إجابة المؤذن ليست بأذان. وفي فتاوى قاضيخان: إجابة المؤذن فضيلة وإن تركها لا يأثم، وأما قوله -عليه الصلاة والسلام-: “من لم يجب الأذان فلا صلاة له”، فمعناه الإجابة بالقدم لا باللسان فقط، وفي المحيط: يجب على السامع للأذان الإجابة […]
لا يقرأ السامع، ولا يسلم، ولا يرد السلام، ولا يشتغل بشيء سوى الإجابة. ولو كان السامع يقرأ يقطع القراءة ويجيب.
وقال الحلواني: الإجابة بالقدم لا باللسان، حتى لو أجاب باللسان ولم يمش إلى المسجد، لا يكون مجيبا، ولو كان في المسجد حين سمع الأذان، ليس عليه الإجابة.
وفي الظهيرية: ولو كان الرجل في المسجد يقرأ القرآن فسمع الأذان لا يترك القراءة؛ لأنه أجابه بالحضور ولو كان في منزله يترك القراءة ويجيب، لعله متفرع على قول الحلواني، والظاهر أن الإجابة باللسان واجبة لظاهر الأمر في قوله -صلى الله عليه وسلم-: “إذا سمعتم المؤذن فقولوا مثل ما يقول” إذا لا تظهر قرينة تصرف عنه، بل ربما يظهر استنكار تركه؛ لأنه يشبه عدم الالتفات إليه والتشاغل عنه. وفي شرح النقاية: ومن سمع الإقامة لا يجيب ولا بأس بأن يشتغل بالدعاء عندهما.
Responding to the muʾadhdhin does not equal to adhān. It is written in the Fatāwā of Qāḍī Khān: “Responding to the muʾadhdhin is meritorious, and if one leaves it, he will not be sinful. As for the statement of the Prophet – blessings and peace be upon him –: ‘There is no prayer for he who does not respond to the adhān,’ it refers to the physical response, not merely verbal.” Al-Muḥīṭ states, ‘It is obligatory upon one who hears the adhān to respond.’ […]
The listener should not read, greet, reply to greetings or occupy himself in any other affair besides responding. If the listener was reciting [the Qurʾān], he must stop his recitation and respond.
Ḥalwānī said, ‘The response is physical, not verbal such that if he responds verbally but does not walk to the mosque, he is not regarded as having responded. However, if he is in the mosque when he heard the adhān, it will not be obligatory on him to respond [verbally].’
It is mentioned in Aẓ-Ẓahīriyyah: ‘If the man is at the mosque, reciting the Qurʾān, and then he hears the adhān, he should not stop his recitation since he responded to the adhān by being present. If he is at home, he must stop his recitation and respond.’ Probably, this was deduced based on Ḥalwānī’s statement.
It is most evident that the verbal response is obligatory due to the apparent command in the statement of the Prophet ﷺ: ‘When you hear the muʾadhdhin, then utter the same words as him.’ This is because there are no external factors to avert the obligation. In fact, sometimes disapprovals appear for not responding to it since it is akin to not paying attention to it and being distracted by other matters.’
It is written in Sharḥ an-Nuqāyah: ‘Whoever hears the iqāmah should not respond. Additionally, it is alright if he occupies himself with supplication during both of them (i.e. the adhān and the iqāmah).’[35]
ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn al-ʿAynī quotes the same view from Ḥalwānī, as follows:
وعن الحلواني: لو أجاب اللسان ولم يمش إلى المسجد لا يكون مجيبا. ولو كان في المسجد ولم يجب لا يكون اثما، ولا تجب الإجابة على من لا تجب عليه الصلاة.
It was reported from Ḥalwānī that if one responds verbally but does not walk to the mosque, he will not be considered as having responded. If he was in the mosque and did not respond, he would not be sinful. Responding is not obligatory for those who are not obligated to pray.[36]
ʿAllāmah Ḥaṣkafī also presented his view. He writes:
(ويجيب) وجوبا، وقال الحلواني: ندبا، والواجب الإجابة بالقدم. (من سمع الأذان) ولو جنبا لا حائضا ونفساء وسامع خطبة وفي صلاة جنازة وجماع، ومستراح وأكل وتعليم علم وتعلمه.
‘One should respond’ – as an obligation; Ḥalwānī stated it is recommended, and the obligatory act is to respond physically – ‘if he hears the adhān’ – even one in the state of sexual defilement, not those in menstruation or lochia, and even one listening to a sermon, performing a funeral prayer, engaging in intercourse, resting, eating as well as seeking knowledge and teaching it.[37]
ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿĀbidīn ash-Shāmī comments on this view of Imām Ḥalwānī and presents refutations against it:
(وقال الحلواني ندبا إلخ) أي: قال الحلواني: إن الإجابة باللسان مندوبة والواجبة هي الإجابة بالقدم. قال في النهر: وقوله بوجوب الإجابة بالقدم مشكل؛ لأنه يلزم عليه وجوب الأداء في أول الوقت وفي المسجد إذ لا معنى لإيجاب الذهاب دون الصلاة وما في شهادات المجتبى: سمع الأذان وانتظر الإقامة في بيته لا تقبل شهادته مخرج على قوله كما لا يخفى. وقد سألت شيخنا الأخ عن هذا فلم يبد جوابا اهـ.
مطلب في كراهة تكرار الجماعة في المسجد
أقول وبالله التوفيق: ما قاله الإمام الحلواني مبني على ما كان في زمن السلف من صلاة الجماعة مرة واحدة وعدم تكرارها كما هو في زمنه صلى الله عليه وسلم وزمن الخلفاء بعده، وقد علمت أن تكرارها مكروه في ظاهر الرواية إلا في رواية عن الإمام ورواية عن أبي يوسف كما قدمناه قريبا، وسيأتي أن الراجح عند أهل المذهب وجوب الجماعة وأنه يأثم بتفويتها اتفاقا. وحينئذ يجب السعي بالقدم لا لأجل الأداء في أول الوقت أو في المسجد، بل لأجل إقامة الجماعة وإلا لزم فوتها أصلا أو تكرارها في مسجد إن وجد جماعة أخرى وكل منهما مكروه فلذا قال بوجوب الإجابة بالقدم.
لا يقال: يمكنه أن يجمع بأهله في بيته: فلا يلزم شيء من المحذورين؛ لأنا نقول: إن مذهب الإمام الحلواني أنه بذلك لا ينال ثواب الجماعة وأنه يكون بدعة ومكروها بلا عذر، نعم قد علمت أن الصحيح أنه لا يكره تكرار الجماعة إذا لم تكن على الهيئة الأولى وسيأتي في الإمامة أن الأصح أنه لو جمع بأهله لا يكره وينال فضيلة الجماعة لكن جماعة المسجد أفضل، فاغتنم هذا التحرير الفريد، ويأتي له قريبا بعض مزيد.
‘Ḥalwānī stated it is recommended…’ – i.e. Ḥalwānī said that responding verbally is recommended, and the obligatory act is to respond physically. It is stated in An-Nahr: ‘His claim that the obligation is for the physical response is problematic. The reason for this is this necessitates the obligation of fulfilling [the prayer] in the beginning time and the mosque because there is no purpose of obligating going [to the mosque] and not prayer. Concerning what was mentioned in Shahādāt al-Mujtabā, that whoever hears the adhān and waits for the iqāmah in his house, his testimony will not be accepted, it is clearly based on this claim. I have certainly asked our scholar and brother concerning this, but he could not find any answer.’
The Dislike of Repeating Congregations in the Mosque
I say, and the ability for success is from Allāh alone, the claim of Imām Ḥalwānī is based on the single performance of the congregational prayer and its non-repetition in the time of the predecessors, as it was during the time of the Prophet ﷺ and the time of the caliphs after him. You are well aware that repeating it is disliked, according to the ẓāhir ar-riwāyah, except in one report from Imām [Abū Ḥanīfah] and one report from Abū Yūsuf, as we recently discussed. It will soon come that the preponderant view according to the scholars within our school of thought is the obligation of the congregation, and it is sinful to miss it according to all. In that case, it is obligatory to come physically, not for the purpose of fulfilling [the prayer] in the beginning time or inside the mosque, but for the purpose of establishing the congregation. Otherwise, it will necessarily either be missed entirely, or it will be repeated in one mosque if another congregation is found. Both of these are disliked. Hence why, he said that it is obligatory to physically respond. It cannot be said that it is possible for the person to form a congregation with his household, thereby none of the two restricted matters will be necessary. This is because we say that according to Imām Ḥalwānī’s stance, by doing this, he will not receive the reward of [praying in] congregation, it is an innovation, and it is disliked without any valid excuse. Yes, you know that the correct view is that repeating the congregation is not disliked if it is performed in the same manner as the first one. It will soon come under the chapter of leading prayer that the most correct view is if one forms a congregation with his family, it is not disliked, and he will receive the reward of [praying in] congregation. Nevertheless, the congregation in the mosque is better. Therefore, seize this unique deed, and soon, some extra good shall come to you.[38]
After acknowledging that certain scholars regarded it compulsory to respond, Imām Ṭahāwī preferred that it is not. He says:
وقد قال قوم: قول رسول الله -صلى الله عليه وسلم- “إذا سمعتم المؤذن فقولوا مثل ما يقول” على الوجوب. وخالفهم في ذلك آخرون فقالوا ذلك على الاستحباب لا على الوجوب.
Certain people said that the statement of the Prophet ﷺ: ‘When you hear the muʾadhdhin, then utter the same words as him,’ denotes obligation. However, others differed with them by maintaining that it denotes recommendation, not obligation.[39]
Proof of its non-obligation
He then presents the following proof for the non-obligation:
فكان من الحجة لهم في ذلك ما حدثنا ابن أبي داود، قال: ثنا عبيد الله بن معاذ بن معاذ، قال: ثنا أبي، قال: ثنا سعيد بن أبي عروبة، عن قتادة، عن أبي الأحوص، عن علقمة، عن عبد الله، قال: “كنا مع النبي -صلى الله عليه وسلم- في بعض أسفاره، فسمع مناديا وهو يقول: الله أكبر الله أكبر، فقال رسول الله -صلى الله عليه وسلم-: “على الفطرة”، فقال: أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله، فقال رسول الله -صلى الله عليه وسلم-: “خرج من النار”، قال: فابتدرناه فإذا هو صاحب ماشية أدركته الصلاة، فنادى بها.
فهذا رسول الله -صلى الله عليه وسلم- قد سمع المنادي ينادي، فقال غير ما قال، فدل ذلك على أن قوله: “إذا سمعتم المنادي فقولوا مثل الذي يقول” أن ذلك ليس على الإيجاب، وأنه على الاستحباب والندبة إلى الخير وإصابة الفضل، كما علم الناس من الدعاء الذي أمرهم أن يقولوه في دبر الصلاة وما أشبه ذلك.
The evidence supporting their view is what Ibn Abī Dāwūd narrated to us, saying: ʿUbayd Allāh ibn Muʿādh ibn Muʿādh narrated to us, saying: My father narrated to us, saying: Saʿīd ibn Abī ʿArūbah narrated to us from Qatādah from Abū ’l-Aḥwaṣ from ʿAlqamah from ʿAbdullāh, who said, “We were with the Prophet ﷺ on one of his journeys when he heard someone calling, ‘Allāhu Akbar! Allāhu Akbar!’ Thereupon, the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said, ‘He is upon the religion of Islam’. Then, the person said, ‘Ashhadu a ’llā ilāha illā ’Llāh’, and the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said, ‘He has been set free from the free.’ We hastened to him and found out that he was a person who tends to cattle, and it was time for him to pray. Thus, he gave the call for it.”
Here, the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ heard the person giving the call. Yet, he uttered other words instead of what he said. This proves that the Prophet ﷺ’s statement: ‘When you hear the person giving the call, then utter the same words as him,’ does not denote obligation. It denotes recommendation and encouragement to perform good and acquire the virtue, similar to the supplications well-known by people which the Prophet ﷺ commanded them to say after each prayer and the like.[40]
However, ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī refutes this argument, saying:
قلت: الأمر المطلق المجرد عن القرائن يدل على الوجوب، ولا سيما قد تأيد ذلك بما روي من الأخبار والآثار في الحث على الإجابة، وقد روى ابن أبي شيبة في (مصنفه) : عن وكيع عن سفيان عن عاصم عن المسيب بن رافع عن عبد الله قال: من الجفاء أن تسمع المؤذن ثم لا تقول مثل ما يقول. انتهى. ولا يكون من الجفاء إلا ترك الواجب، وترك المستحب ليس من الجفاء، ولا تاركه جاف، والجواب عن الحديثين: أنهما لا ينافي إجابة الرسول لذلك المنادي بمثل ما قال، ويكون الراوي ترك ذكره أو يكون الأمر بالإجابة بعد هذه القضية.
I say: a general command devoid of any external factors denotes obligation, especially when it is supported by the reports and traditions narrated concerning the encouragement of responding. Ibn Abī Shaybah reported in his Muṣannaf from Wakīʿ from Sufyān from ʿĀṣim from Musayyab ibn Rāfiʿ from ʿAbdullāh, who said, ‘Crudity is that you hear the muʾadhdhin, and then you do not utter the same words as him.’ Crudity is only for abandoning an obligatory act. Forsaking a recommended act does not form part of crudity, and the person who forsakes it is not coarse.
The answer to both ḥadīths is that they both do not negate that the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ responded to that person who called by uttering the same words as him. The narrator did not mention it. Alternatively, the command to respond may have come after this incident.[41]
In short, there are many Ḥanafīs who considered it compulsory to respond, whilst there are others who considered it recommended.
Shāfiʿī view
Some Shāfiʿī scholars also claimed that it is compulsory. ʿAllāmah Munāwī states:
ندبا وقيل وجوبا.
It is recommended. Some said it is obligatory.[42]
The preferred view within the Shāfiʿī school of thought, though, is that it is preferable. Imām Nawawī says:
واعلم أنه يستحب إجابة المؤذن بالقول مثل قوله لكل من سمعه من متطهر ومحدث وجنب وحائض وغيرهم ممن لا مانع له من الإجابة.
Know that it is recommended to respond to the muʾadhdhin verbally by uttering the same words as him for everyone who hears him, including one in the state of purity, one in the state of minor impurity, one in sexual defilement, a menstruating woman and all others who have no hindrance to respond.[43]
Imām al-Ḥaramayn mentions:
إجابة المؤذن مستحبة إذا سمع السامعُ الأذانَ، ولم يكن في الصلاة.
Responding to the muʾadhdhin is recommended when the listener hears the adhān and is not in prayer.[44]
The Conditions for Replying to the Adhān
There are two conditions for the above rulings to apply. Firstly, the adhān should be called in Arabic. Secondly, the words should be pronounced correctly. ʿAllāmah Ḥaskafī mentions this:
(بأن يقول) بلسانه (كمقالته) إن سمع المسنون منه، وهو ما كان عربيا لا لحن فيه، ولو تكرر أجاب الأول (إلا في الحيعلتين) فيحوقل.
‘By uttering’ – verbally – ‘the same words as him’ – if he hears the muʾadhdhin calling it according to the prescribed way, which is in Arabic without any mistakes. If the adhān recurs, he should respond to the first one. ‘However, this excludes the two ḥayya’ – for then he should say: ‘Lā ḥawla wa-lā quwwata illā bi’Llāh.’[45]
This is essential as it is impermissible to listen to a muʾadhdhin who is erring. ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿĀbidīn ash-Shāmī says:
وقد ذكر في البحر أنهم صرحوا بأنه لا يحل سماع المؤذن إذا لحن كالقارئ.
Quoting from Al-Baḥr, they explicitly stated that listening to a muʾadhdhin is impermissible when he is making mistakes, just like [listening to] the person reciting [the Qurʾān with mistakes].[46]
The Recipients of the Command to Respond to the Adhān
The aforementioned rulings of responding to the adhān apply to every person who hears the adhān. Therefore, the ḥadīth is general. ʿAllāmah Abū ’l-Walīd al-Bājī mentions:
وهو الذي يقتضي العموم، وأنه متى سمع النداء فعلى السامع أن يقول مثله.
This implies generality, and whenever one hears the call, the listener must utter the same words.[47]
Āmīr Ṣanʿānī mentions:
ظاهره سواء قد صلى السامع تلك الصلاة التي ينادي لها أم لا وسواء قد أجاب نداء مناد آخر أو لا.
Per the apparent indication, it is equal (i.e. he must respond) whether or not the listener is performing this prayer for which the call is being given and whether or not he responded to the call of another person.[48]
ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī explains:
وينبغي أن لا يتكلم السامع في خلال الأذان والإقامة، ولا يقرأ القران، ولا يسلم ولا يرد السلام، ولا يشتغل بشيء من الأعمال سوى الإجابة، ولو كان في قراءة القران يقطع ويسمع الأذان ويجيب.
The listener should not speak during adhān and iqāmah, he should not recite the Qurʾān, he should not greet nor reply to greetings, and he should not occupy himself with any work besides responding. If he is reciting the Qurʾān, he must pause, listen to the adhān and respond.[49]
In Subul as-Salām, Amīr Ṣan ʿānī deduces this generality from the ḥadīth:
فيه شرعية القول لمن سمع المؤذن أن يقول كما يقول على أي حال كان من طهارة وغيرها، ولو جنبا أو حائضا، إلا حال الجماع، وحال التخلي لكراهة الذكر فيهما.
Therein lies the legislation that whoever hears the muʾadhdhin should utter the same words as him whatever condition he may be, whether in purity or any other. This applies even if he is in sexual defilement or menstruating unless during intercourse and whilst relieving oneself as remembrance is disliked in these two conditions.[50]
Cases where one should not respond to the adhān
Having said that, there are exceptions where one should not respond to the adhān. Imām Nawawī points out the factors that prevent replying to the adhān:
فمن أسباب المنع أن يكون في الخلاء أو جماع أهله أو نحوهما.
The cause of hindrance is being in the toilet, engaging in intercourse etc.[51]
This is not a matter of unanimity. To illustrate, according to the Ḥanafīs, a menstruating female does not have to respond, whereas according to the Mālikīs, it is meritorious for her to repeat the same words as the muʾadhdhin.
In Radd al-Muḥtār, ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿĀbidīn ash-Shāmī comments on the words of ʿAllāmah Ḥaskafī and explains:
قوله: (ولو جنبا) لأن إجابة المؤذن ليست بأذان. بحر عن الخلاصة.
قوله: (لا حائضا ونفساء) لأنهما ليسا من أهل الإجابة بالفعل فكذا بالقول. إمداد: أي بخلاف الجنب فإنه مخاطب بالصلاة؛ ولأن حدثه أخف من الحيض والنفاس لإمكان إزالته سريعا.
قوله: (وسامع خطبة) أيّ خطبة كانت ط، وهذا وما بعده معطوف على قوله “حائضا”.
قوله: (وفي صلاة جنازة) سقط من بعض النسخ لفظ “صلاة” موافقا لما في البحر عن المجتبى، وعبارة الإمداد: وصلاة ولو جنازة.
قوله: (ومستراح) أي بيت الخلاء.
قوله: (وتعليم علم) أي شرعي فيما يظهر، ولذا عبر في الجوهرة بقراءة الفقه.
قوله: (بخلاف قرآن) لأنه لا يفوت، جوهرة، ولعله لأن تكرار القراءة إنما هو للأجر فلا يفوت بالإجابة، بخلاف التعلم، فعلى هذا لو يقرأ تعليما أو تعلما لا يقطع. سائحاني.
‘Even one in the state of sexual defilement’ – because responding to the muʾadhdhin is not equal to adhān. Extracted from Al-Baḥr ar-Rāʾiq, which is an extraction from Al-Khulāsah.
‘Not those in menstruation or lochia’ – because they are not entitled to respond physically, thus the same applies verbally. It is written in Imdād: ‘I.e. contrary to the one in the state of sexual defilement because he is addressed with the command of praying. Moreover, his state of impurity is lighter than menstruation and lochia given the possibility of its fast removal.’
‘And even one listening to sermon’ – whichever sermon it may be. This and the following are attached to the word ‘in menstruation’.
‘Performing a funeral prayer’ – in certain manuscripts, the word ‘ṣalāh’ is missing, in conformity with the quotation in Al-Baḥr from Al-Mujtabā. The wording in Al-Imdād is: ‘wa-ṣalāh wa-law janāzah’ (performing prayer, even a funeral one).
‘Relieving himself’ – i.e. in the toilet.
‘As well as seeking knowledge’ – i.e. of the Sharīʿah, as it appears. That is why in Al-Jawharah, it was worded as ‘qirāʾat al-fiqh’ (the recitation of fiqh).
‘Contrary to the Qurʾān’ – because he will not miss it. Extracted from Al-Jawharah. Perhaps this is because repeating the recitation [of the Qurʾān] is for rewards, and this is not missed by responding [to the adhān], as opposed to seeking knowledge. Based on this, if one recites [the Qurʾān]] for the purpose of learning or teaching, he should not stop. Extracted from Sāʾiḥānī.[52]
ʿAllāmah Ibn Sayyid an-Nās presents the Mālikī view concerning the ruling for a female in her menstruation:
ويستحب متابعته لكل سامع من طاهر، ومحدث، وجنب، وحائض، وكبير، وصغير. .
It is recommended for everyone who listens to the muʾadhdhin to follow him, whether he is in a state of purity, impurity, sexual defilement, menstruation, major or minor.[53]
Replying to the adhān during prayer
Mālikī view
There are also differences of opinion regarding a person who is praying. ʿAllāmah Ibn Sayyid an-Nās then continues by saying:
ويستثنى من هذا المصلي ومن هو على الخلاء والجماع على اختلاف في المصلي بين السلف، وتفصيل لمتقدمي العلماء ومتأخريهم سنذكره.
This excludes those in prayer, in the toilet and engaged in intercourse, with divergent views concerning the person in prayer amongst the predecessors. We shall mention the details of the past and later scholars.[54]
In contrast to this view within the Mālikī school of thought, ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr presents one view that a person may respond to half of the adhān:
وذكر أبو عبد الله محمد بن إسحاق بن خويزمنداد البصري المالكي، عن مالك، أنه قال: يجوز أن يقول المصلي في صلاة النافلة مثل ما يقول المؤذن، من التكبير، والشهادتين، فإن قال: حي على الصلاة، حي على الفلاح، الأذان كله كان مسيئا، وصلاته تامة. وكره أن يقول في الفريضة مثل ما يقول المؤذن، فإن قال الأذان كله في الفريضة أيضا، لم تبطل صلاته، ولكن الكراهية في الفريضة أشد.
Abū ʿAbdillāh Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq ibn Khuwayzmandād al-Baṣrī al-Mālikī reported that Mālik said, ‘It is permissible for a person in a voluntary prayer to utter the same words as the muʾadhdhin, such as the takbīr and the two shahādah. However, he will be sinful if he says, ‘Ḥayya ʿalā’ṣ-ṣalāh. Ḥayya ʿalā’l-Falāḥ.’ Nevertheless, his prayer will be complete. In compulsory prayers, it is disliked to utter the same words as the muʾadhdhin. Still, if one recites the entire adhān in a compulsory prayer, his prayer will not become invalid, but the dislike is more severe for compulsory prayers.[55]
In Al-Istidhkār, he states:
فقال مالك: إذا أذن وأنت في صلاة مكتوبة، فلا تقل مثل ما يقول وإذا كنت في نافلة فقل -مثل ما يقول- التكبير والتشهد، فإنه الذي يقع في نفسي أنه أريد بالحديث. هذه رواية ابن القاسم ومذهبه.
Mālik said, ‘If the adhān is given whilst you are in a compulsory prayer, then do not utter the same words as the muʾadhdhin. If you are in voluntary prayer, then utter – the same words as him – the takbīr and the shahādah. This is what I believe to be the intent of the ḥadīth.’ This is the report of Ibn al-Qāsim and his stance.[56]
There are three views within the Mālikī schools of thought:
- A person should not respond whilst he is in a voluntary prayer, and he should not respond in a compulsory prayer.
- A person should respond whilst in prayer, irrespective whether it is a compulsory or a voluntary prayer.
- A person should not respond whilst in prayer, irrespective whether it is compulsory or a voluntary prayer.
ʿAllāmah Abū ’l-Walīd al-Bājī quotes these views hereunder:
وقد يكون الأذان في وقت يكون السامع في صلاة نافلة، أو فرض، أو قراءة قرآن، فدل عليه أن يقول مثل ما يقول المؤذن، روى ابن القاسم، عن مالك أنه يقول ذلك في النافلة، ولا يقوله في الفريضة. وروى أبو مصعب عن مالك: يقول ذلك في الفرض والنفل، وهو قول ابن وهب. وقال سحنون: لا يقوله في فرض ولا نفل.
وجه رواية ابن القاسم أن الفريضة آكد من النافلة، فلا يجوز تركها والاشتغال عنها بالنافلة، وليس كذلك إذا كان في نافلة، فهذه زيادة من هذا الجنس، وهو يعود إلى ما كان فيه من نافلة، ولذلك جاز الاشتغال في النافلة بالتعوذ، والبسملة، والإتيان بها، ومنع ذلك في الفريضة.
ووجه رواية أبي مصعب أن هذا ذكر لله تعالى غير مناف للصلاة، فلا يمنع في صلاة فرض ولا نفل، كالتشهد والدعاء.
ووجه قول سحنون أن الصلاة وقراءة القرآن أفضل الأذكار، فلا يجوز قطعه لغيره من الأذكار لأنه لا يقطعه لما هو مثله.
The adhān can be at a time when the listener is performing a voluntary prayer or reciting the Qurʾān. He is thus directed to utter the same words as the muʾadhdhin.
Ibn al-Qāsim reported from Mālik that he should say it in voluntary prayers but not compulsory prayers. Abū Muṣʿab reported from Mālik that he should say it in compulsory and voluntary prayers, and this was the view of Ibn Wahb. Saḥnūn said, ‘He should not say it in compulsory prayers nor voluntary prayers.’
The rationale for Ibn al-Qāsim’s report is that compulsory actions are more emphasised than voluntary actions. Hence, it is impermissible to forsake it and occupy oneself with voluntary acts. That is not the case when one is performing a voluntary prayer. It is merely an addition from the same category, and he can return to the voluntary prayer he was in. For this reason, it is permissible to occupy oneself with taʿawwudh and basmalah in voluntary prayers whilst it is prevented in compulsory prayers.
The rationale for Abū Muṣʿab’s report is that this is the remembrance of Allāh Taʿālā, the latter of which does not negate prayer. Hence, it is not prohibited in compulsory or voluntary prayers, like reciting the shahādah and supplications.
The rationale for Saḥnūn’s view is that prayer and the recitation of the Qurʾān are the best of remembrances. It is thus impermissible to interrupt it for other types of remembrances because one cannot interrupt it for something similar.[57]
ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr proceeds to assert that Imām Layth held the same view as that which Ibn al-Qāsim reported from Imām Mālik:
وقال الليث مثل قول مالك، إلا أنه قال: ويقول في موضع حي على الصلاة، حي على الفلاح: لا حول ولا قوة إلا بالله.
Layth held the same view as Mālik except that he said, “During ‘ḥayya ʿalā ’ṣ-ṣalāh’ and ‘ḥayya ʿalā ’l-falāḥ’, he should say, ‘Lā hawla wa-lā quwwata illā bi ’Llāh.’[58]
Shāfiʿī view
According to the Shāfiʿīs, this is not prescribed. Imām Nawawī writes:
ومنها أن يكون في صلاة، فمن كان في صلاة فريضة أو نافلة فسمع المؤذن لم يوافقه وهو في الصلاة فإذا سلم، أتى بمثله، فلو فعله في الصلاة، فهل يكره فيه؟ قولان للشافعي- رضي الله عنه-، أظهرهما أنه يكره لأنه اعراض عن الصلاة لكن لاتبطل صلاته ان قال ماذكرناه لأنها أذكار.
Amongst it is being in prayer. Whoever hears the muʾadhdhin whilst he is performing a compulsory or voluntary prayer should not utter the words in harmony with him whilst he is in prayer. After making salām, he will utter the same words. If one does it in prayer, will it be disliked? There are two views for Shāfiʿī – may Allāh be pleased with him –, the most reliable of which is that it is disliked because it is turning away from prayer. Nonetheless, his prayer will not become invalid if he recites what we mentioned because they are remembrances.[59]
ʿAlāʾ ad-Dīn Ibn al-ʿAṭṭār mentions this preferred view with absolute certainty:
ولا شك أنه لا تشرع إجابة المؤذن؛ لمن هو في صلاة فريضة، أو نافلة.
Without a doubt, responding to the muʾadhdhin is not legislated for one who is performing compulsory or voluntary prayers.[60]
Ḥanbalī view
The Ḥanbalīs also advise against it, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Rajab al-Ḥanbalī states:
انه لا يستحب اجابته في الصلاة بحال؛ لقول النبي -صلى الله عليه وسلم-: “إن في الصلاة لشغلا”.
وهذا ظاهر مذهب الشافعي.
وهو قول أصحابنا، قالوا: وقد نص أحمد على ان من دخل المسجد فأذن المؤذن، فانه لا يصلي تحية المسجد حتى يجيب المؤذن. وهذا يدل على انه لا يجيبه في الصلاة.
It is not recommended to respond to him in prayer under any condition because the Prophet ﷺ said, ‘Indeed, prayer is an occupation.’ This is the reliable view of Shāfiʿī and the view of our scholars. They said that Aḥmad explicitly stated that whoever enters the mosque, and the muʾadhdhin gives the adhān should not perform the taḥiyyat al-masjid until he responds to the muʾadhdhin. This indicates that he should not respond to him whilst in prayer.[61]
Ḥanafī view
Concerning the Ḥanafi school of thought, Imām Ṭaḥāwī mentions:
في المصلي يسمع الأذان
قال أبو جعفر: لم نجد عن أحد من أصحابنا فيه منصوصا، وقد حدث ابن أبي عمران، عن ابن سماعة، عن أبي يوسف، فيمن أذن في صلاته الى قوله: أشهد أن رسول الله، ولم يقل: حي على الصلاة، أن صلاته لا تفسد إن أراد الأذان.
قال أبو جعفر: وقول محمد كقول أبي حنيفة، لأنه يقول فيمن يجيب إنسانا وهو يصلي بلا إله إلا الله، أن صلاته فاسدة.
قال أبو جعفر: فهذا يدل على أن من قولهم ان من سمع الأذان في الصلاة لا يقول فيها.
Concerning the Person in Prayer Who Hears the Adhān
We did not find any explicit declaration from any of our scholars on this. Ibn Abī ʿImrān narrated from Ibn Simāʿah from Abū Yūsuf regarding one who recites the adhān in his prayer until ‘ashhadu anna rasūlu ’Llāh’ without saying, ‘ḥayya ʿalā’ṣ-ṣalāh’, that his prayer will not be invalid if he intends the adhān.
The view of Muḥammad is similar to the view of Abū Ḥanīfah because he says regarding one who responds to a person by saying, ‘Lā ilāha illā ’Llāh,’ whilst he is praying, that his prayer is invalid.
This proves that their view is whoever listens to the adhān whilst in prayer should not repeat it therein.[62]
Responding to the adhān after the hindrances are gone
ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿĀbidīn ash-Shāmī then brings up a point: must one respond to the adhān after he is done with the aforementioned acts which prevent responding? He writes:
[تنبيه] هل يجيب بعد الفراغ من هذه المذكورات أم لا؟ ينبغي أنه إن لم يطل الفصل فنعم، وإن طال فلا، أخذا مما يأتي، لكن صرح في الفيض يأنه لو سلم على المؤذن أو المصلي أو القارئ أو الخطيب، فعن أبي حنيفة لا يلزمه الرد بعد الفراغ، بل يرد في نفسه. وعن محمد: يرد بعده: وعن أبي يوسف: لا يرد مطلقا، هو الصحيح، وأجمعوا أن المتغوط لا يلزمه مطلقا اهـ تأمل.
Note: Should one respond after the termination of these mentioned [hindrances] or not?
If the separation is not lengthy, then yes. Otherwise, if it is lengthy, then no, based on what shall soon be mentioned. However, it was explicitly stated in Al-Fayḍ that if one greets a muʾadhdhin, a person praying, one reciting [the Qurʾān] or lecturer, according to Abū Ḥanīfah, it is not necessary to reply after the termination. Rather, he should reply within himself. According to Muḥammad, he should reply afterwards. According to Abū Yūsuf, he should not reply at all. This is the correct view.
Moreover, they agreed unanimously that it is not necessary at all for the person who relieved himself. Reflect on this![63]
ʿAllāmah Ibn Sayyid an-Nās says:
فإذا فرغ ذو الخلاء والجماع مما كانا فيه تابع كل منهما، صرح به الماوردي، وكذا إذا كان السامع في قراءة أو ذكر أو درس علم أو نحو ذلك فإنه يقطع ما هو فيه ويتابع المؤذن ثم إن شاء رجع إلى ما كان عليه.
If the person in the toilet or the one engaged in intercourse completes what they were doing, each one of them should follow [the muʾadhdhin]. Māwardī explicitly stated this.
Likewise, if the listener was reciting [the Qurʾān], engaged in remembrance, studying knowledge and the like, he should stop what he was doing and follow the muʾadhdhin, Thereafter, if he wishes, he can return to what he was doing.[64]
Method of the Verbal Response
It is important to note that the verbal response of the adhān should be after each sentence.
Imām Nawawī explains:
وفيه أنه يستحب أن يقول السامع كل كلمة بعد فراغ المؤذن منها ولا ينتظر فراغه من كل الأذان.
This demonstrates the recommendation for the listener to utter each sentence after the muʾadhdhin completes it, and he should not wait for him to complete the entire adhān.[65]
ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī illustrates how this deducation is made from this narration:
وإنما قال: مثل ما يقول المؤذن، بلفظ المضارع، ولم يقل: مثل ما قال المؤذن، بلفظ الماضي، ليكون قول السامع بعد كل كلمة مثل كلمتها، والصريح في ذلك ما رواه النسائي من حديث أم حبيبة: (أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إذا كان عندها فسمع المؤذن قال مثل ما يقول حين يسكت.
The Prophet said: ‘similar to what the muʾadhdhin says’ by using the present tense instead of saying, ‘similar to what the muʾadhdhin said’ by using the past tense. This is so as the listener utters each sentence afterwards in the same way. An explicit narration on this is the narration of Nasāʾī via the ḥadīth of Umm Ḥabībah that when the Prophet ﷺ was by her, and he would hear the adhān, he would utter the same words as him, and then he would remain silent.[66]
ʿAllāmah Ibn Sayyid an-Nās raises an objection on this:
فإن قيل: النداء حقيقة يطلق على مجموع الأذان فليكن الشروع في الإجابة عند تمام الأذان ولم يقولوا به، فيقال في الجواب عنه: قَدْ بُيّن لنا إن هذه الحقيقة غير مرادة، والأحاديث التي تضمنت الإجابة كلمة كلمة قولًا وفعلًا كما في حديث عمر وابن مسعود وغيرهما.
Objection: The literal meaning of ‘nidāʾ’ is used for the collective words of the adhān. Hence, the prescribed method of responding should be upon the completion of the entire adhān, but scholars do not hold this view.
Answer: It was clarified to us that this literal meaning is not intended. The ḥadīths containing the response are sentence by sentence, verbally and physically, as in the ḥadīth of ʿUmar, Ibn Masʿūd and others.[67]
May Allāh Taʿālā have mercy on them all.
سبحانك اللهم وبحمدك، أشهد أن لا إله إلا أنت، أستغفرك وأتوب إليك
[1] Imām Abū ʿAbdillāh Mālik ibn Anas al-Aṣbaḥī, Al-Muwaṭṭaʾ bi-Riwāyat Yaḥyā ibn Yaḥyā al-Laythī (Morocco: al-Majlis al-ʿIlmī al-Aʿlā, 2019), 219.
[2] ʿAllāmah Abū ʿUmar Yūsuf ibn ʿAbdillāh al-Qurṭubī, better known as Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr, At-Tamhīd li-mā fī ’l-Muwaṭṭaʾ min al-Maʿānī wa ’l-Asānīd (London, Muʾassasat al-Furqān li ’t-Turāth al-Islāmī, 2017), 7:8-9.
[3] Ibid, 7:9.
[4] ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn Abū Muḥammad Maḥmūd ibn Aḥmad al-ʿAynī, ʿUmdat al-Qārī Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī (Beirut: Dār al-Fikr / Idārat aṭ-Ṭabāʿah al-Munīriyyah), 5:117.
[5] ʿAllāmah Abū ’l-Qāsim ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad al-Baghawī, Sharḥ as-Sunnah (Beirut: Al-Maktab al-Islāmī, 1983), 2:283.
[6] Imām Mālik, Al-Muwaṭṭaʾ bi-Riwāyat Yaḥyā Ibn Yaḥyā al-Laythī – Moroccan print (n 1) 219.
[7] Jamāl ad-Dīn Abū ’l-Faraj ʿAbd Raḥmān ibn ʿAlī, better known as Ibn al-Jawzī, Kashf al-Mushkil min Ḥadīth aṣ-Ṣaḥīḥayn (Riyadh: Dār al-Waṭan, 1997), 3:127.
[8] ʿAllāmah Abū ʿAbdillāh Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Bāqī az-Zurqānī, Sharḥ az-Zurqānī ʿalā ’l-Muwaṭṭaʾ (Cairo: Dār al-Ḥadīth, 2015), 1:194.
[9] ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn Abū Muḥammad Maḥmūd ibn Aḥmad al-ʿAynī, Sharḥ Sunan Abi Dāwūd (Riyadh: Maktabat ar-Rushd, 1999), 2:478.
[10] Imām Abū Zakariyyā Yaḥyā ibn Sharf an-Nawawī, Al-Majmūʿ Sharḥ Muhadhdhab (Cairo: Idārat aṭ-Ṭabāʿah al-Munīriyyah), 3:120.
[11] ʿAllāmah Muḥammad Amīn ibn ʿĀbidīn ash-Shāmī, Radd al-Muḥtār ʿalā ’d-Durr al-Mukhtār Sharḥ Tanwīr al-Abṣār (Riyadh: Dār ʿĀlam al-Kutub, 2003), 2:65.
[12] ʿAllāmah Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl, Amīr Ṣanʿānī, At-Tanwīr Sharḥ al-Jāmiʿ aṣ-Ṣaghīr (Riyadh: Dār as-Salām, 2011), 2:100-101.
[13] ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī, ʿUmdat al-Qārī (n 4) 5:117.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Ḥāfiẓ Abū ’l-Faḍl Aḥmad ibn ʿAlī ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī, Fatḥ al-Bārī bi Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī (Beirut: Dār ar-Risālah al-ʿĀlamiyyah, 2013), 3:35.
[16] Ibid.
[17] ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī, ʿUmdat al-Qārī (n 4) 5:117.
[18] Imām Mālik, Al-Muwaṭṭaʾ bi-Riwāyat Yaḥyā Ibn Yaḥyā al-Laythī – Moroccan print (n 1) 219.
[19] ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī, ʿUmdat al-Qārī (n 4) 5:117.
[20] Jalāl ad-Dīn Abū ’l-Faḍl ʿAbd ar-Raḥmān ibn Abī Bakr as-Suyūṭī, Tanwīr al-Ḥawālik Sharḥ Muwaṭṭaʾ Mālik (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah, 2002), 1:86.
[21] ʿAllāmah Abū ’s-Saʿādāt Mubārak ibn Muḥammad ash-Shaybānī, better known as Majd ad-Dīn Ibn al-Athīr al-Jazarī, Ash-Shāfī fī Sharḥ Musnad ash-Shāfiʿī (Riyadh: Maktabat ar-Rushd, 2005), 1:444.
[22] Ibid, 1:443.
[23] ʿAllāmah Ibn al-Jawzī (n 7) 3:127.
[24] Jamāl ad-Dīn Abū ’l-Faraj ʿAbd Raḥmān ibn ʿAlī, better known as Ibn al-Jawzī , Kashf al-Mushkil min Ḥadīth aṣ-Ṣaḥīḥayn (Riyadh: Dār al-Waṭan), 3:127.
[25] Al-Mawsūʿah al-Fiqhiyyah al-Kuwaytiyyah (Kuwait: Wazārat al-Awqāf wa ’sh-Shuʾūn al-Islāmiyyah, 1983), 2:372.
[26] Imām Abū Zakariyyā Yaḥyā ibn Sharf an-Nawawī, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim bi-Sharḥ an-Nawawī / Al-Minhāj Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim Ibn al-Ḥajjāj (Cairo: al-Maṭbaʿah al-Miṣriyyah bi ’l-Azhar, 1929), 4:88.
[27] ʿAllāmah Abū Muḥammad ʿAbdullāh ibn Aḥmad, better known as Ibn Qudāmah al-Maqdisī, Al-Mughnī (Riyadh: Dār ʿĀlam al-Kutub, 1997), 2:85.
[28] ʿAllāmah Abū ’l-Fatḥ Muḥammad ʿAlī, better known as Ibn Daqīq al-ʿĪd, Iḥkām al-Aḥkām (Beirut: ʿĀlam al-Kutub, 1987), 1:208.
[29] ʿAllāmah Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdillāh, better known as Ibn al-ʿArabī al-Mālikī, Al-Masālik fi Sharḥ Muwaṭṭaʿ Mālik (Beirut: Dār al-Gharb al-Islāmī, 2007), 2:316.
[30] Zayn ad-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Abī Bakr ibn ʿAbd al-Qādir ar-Rāzī, Tuḥfat al-Mulūk fī Fiqh Madhhab al-Imām Abī Ḥanīfah an-Nuʿmān (Beirut: Dār al-Bashāʾir al-Islāmiyyah, 1997), 50.
[31] Mawlānā ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq ibn Sayf ad-Dīn ad-Dihlawī, Lamʿāt at-Tanqīḥ fī Sharḥ Mishkāt al-Maṣābīḥ (Lebanon/Kuwait/Tunisia: Dār an-Nawādir, 2014), 2:412.
[32] ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī, ʿUmdat al-Qārī (n 4) 5:117.
[33] Kamāl ad-Dīn Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Wāḥid as-Sīwāsī, better known as Ibn al-Humām, Sharḥ Fatḥ al-Qadīr ʿalā ’l-Hidāyah Sharḥ Bidāyat al-Mubtadī (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah, 2003), 1:254.
[34] Ibid.
[35] Zayn ad-Dīn ibn Ibrāhīm ibn Muḥammad, better known as Ibn Nujaym al-Miṣrī, Al-Baḥr ar-Rāʾiq Sharḥ Kanz ad-Daqāʾiq (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah, 1997), 1:450-451.
[36] ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī, ʿUmdat al-Qārī (n 4) 5:118.
[37] ʿAlāʾ ad-Dīn Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Ḥaṣkafī, Ad-Durr al-Mukhtār Sharḥ Tanwīr al-Abṣār wa-Jāmiʿ al-Biḥār (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah, 2002), 1:57.
[38] ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿĀbidīn ash-Shāmī (n 11) 2:65.
[39] Imām Abū Jaʿfar Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad at-Ṭaḥāwī, Sharḥ Maʿānī ’l-Āthār (Beirut: ʿĀlam al-Kutub, 1994), 1:146.
[40] Imām Ṭaḥāwī, Sharḥ Maʿānī ’l-Āthār (n 38) 1:146.
[41] ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī, ʿUmdat al-Qārī (n 4) 5:118.
[42] ʿAllāmah Muḥammad ʿAbd ar-Raʾūf al-Munāwī, At-Taysīr bi-Sharḥ al-Jāmiʿ aṣ-Ṣaḥīḥ (Beirut: Al-Maktab al-Islāmī), 1:107.
[43] Imām Nawawī, Al-Minhāj (n 26) 4:88.
[44] Imām al-Ḥaramayn ʿAbd al-Malik ibn ʿAbdillāh al-Juwaynī, Nihāyat al-Maṭlab fī Dirāyah al-Madhhab (Jeddah: Dār al-Minhāj, 2007), 2:55.
[45] ʿAllāmah Ḥaṣkafī (n 36) 1:57.
[46] ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿĀbidīn ash-Shāmī (n 11) 2:66.
[47] ʿAllāmah Abū ’l-Walīd Sulaymān ibn Khalaf al-Bājī, Al-Muntaqā Sharḥ al-Muwaṭṭaʾ (Egypt: Maṭbaʿat as-Saʿādah, 1st ed. 1332 AH / Cairo: Dār al-Kitāb al-Islāmī, 2nd ed.), 1:131.
[48] Amīr Ṣanʿānī, At-Tanwīr Sharḥ al-Jāmiʿ aṣ-Ṣaghīr (n 12) 2:101.
[49] ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī, ʿUmdat al-Qārī (n 4) 5:118.
[50] ʿAllāmah Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl, Amīr Ṣanʿānī, Subul as-Salām al-Mūṣilah ilā Bulūgh al-Marām (Saudi Arabia: Dār Ibn al-Jawzī, 1421), 2:62.
[51] Imām Nawawī, Al-Minhāj (n 26) 4:88.
[52] ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿĀbidīn ash-Shāmī (n 11) 2:65-66.
[53] ʿAllāmah Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad al-Yaʿmurī, better known as Ibn Sayyid an-Nās, An-Nafḥ ash-Shadhiyy Sharḥ Jāmiʿ at-Tirmidhī (Saudi Arabia: Dār aṣ-Ṣamīʿī, 2007), 4:132.
[54] Ibid.
[55] ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr, At-Tamhīd (n 2) 7:18-19.
[56] ʿAllāmah Abū ʿUmar Yūsuf ibn ʿAbdillāh al-Qurṭubī, better known as Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr, Al-Istidhkār al-Jāmiʿ li-Madhāhib Fuqahāʾ al-Amṣār wa ʿUlamāʾ al-Aqṭār fī-mā Taḍammana-Hu ’l-Muwaṭṭaʾ mi’ Maʿānī ’r-Raʾy wa ’l-Āthār wa Sharḥ dhālika Kulli-Hī bi ’l-Ījāz wa ’l-Ikhtiṣār (Cairo: Dār al-Waʿy, 1993), 4:21-22.
[57] ʿAllāmah Bājī (n 46) 1:131.
[58] ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr, Al-Istidhkār (n 55) 4:22.
[59] Imām Nawawī, Al-Minhāj (n 26) 4:88.
[60] ʿAlāʾ ad-Dīn ʿAlī ibn Dāwūd ibn al-ʿAṭṭār ash-Shāfiʿī, Al-ʿUddah fī Sharḥ al-ʿUmdah fī Aḥādīth al-Aḥkām (Beirut: Dār al-Bashāʾir al-Islāmiyyah, 2006), 1:387.
[61] Ḥāfiẓ Abū ’l-Faraj ʿAbd ar-Raḥmān ibn Aḥmad ibn Rajab al-Ḥanbalī, Fatḥ al-Bārī Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī (Madīnah Munawwarah: Maktabat al-Ghurabāʾ al-Athariyyah, 1996), 5:259-260.
[62] Imām Abū Jaʿfar Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad at-Ṭaḥāwī, Mukhtaṣar Ikhtilāf al-ʿUlamāʾ (Beirut: Dār al-Bashāʾir al-Islāmiyyah, 1995), 1:193.
[63] ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿĀbidīn ash-Shāmī (n 11) 2:66.
[64] ʿAllāmah Ibn Sayyid an-Nās (n 52) 4:132.
[65] Imām Nawawī, Al-Minhāj (n 26) 4:87.
[66] ʿAllāmah Badr ad-Dīn ʿAynī, ʿUmdat al-Qārī (n 4) 5:117.
[67] ʿAllāmah Ibn Sayyid an-Nās (n 52) 4:132.