Seeking Sacred Sunni Knowledge
Currently Browsing: Shafi’i Fiqh

Imam Ash-Shafi’i on Evil and Good Bida’ah: A Refutation of the Pseudo-Salafi Weakening of His Narration

Compiled by Abu Layth

Alhamdulillah for the ability given to us to research the claims of the pseudo-salafis for ourselves, and having the chains of serfdom to pseudo-salafi “Shaykhs” removed from our necks! For our brethren shackled in pseudo-salafi Saudi Arabia do not have the ability to freely search out the truth! May Allah free them from the oppression of the Wahhabi propaganda machine funded by oil dollars, Amin! All of us reading this article should thank Allah ta’ala for this ability!

Several years ago we compiled statements of Imam Ash-Shafi’i (rahmatullah ‘alayh), the forefather of this Ummah that standardized Usul Al-Fiqh with his Risalah, in which he held that there existed good bida’ah and evil bida’ah. We recently came upon some quotes from some pseudo-salafi “Shaykhs”, particularly Salim Al-Hilali and ‘Ali Al-Halabi – students of al-Albani who claimed these reports were weak. In this article we will refute the baseless accusation and expose such ignorance in this science.


Some Possible Rukhsah Opinions in the Shafi'i School Regarding the issue of Touching a Woman Nullifying Wudu'

Compiled by Abu Layth

Disclaimer: This article is intended for Shafi’is. If individuals from other schools read this, take note that we are not attacking your school, or saying that your madhhab’s views are invalid. We respect all 4 Sunni schools and respect the differences of them as the Sunni scholars of our glorious past did as well!

There is no doubt that the official view of the Madhhab of Imam Ash-Shafi’i is that a man or a woman touching the opposite gender- skin to skin – nullifies wudu’. Imam An-Nawawi solidifies this as the “Jadid” or new school opinion of Imam Ash-Shafi’i himself throughout many of works, Kitab At-Tahqiq, Majmu’ etc. To see solid proof based legal arguments from the Qur’an and the Sunnah regarding this issue, as well as refutations of the Hanafis and others, click here. I would like, however, to mention some possible dispensations from within the school for those who may face some need or reason to utilize these views.


Safinat un Naja' – A Shafi'i Primer Translated

Newly Released

Matn Safīnat al-najāʾ: Arabic and English.
by: Shaykh Sālim ibn ʿAbdullah ibn Saʿd ibn Samīr al-Haḍramī al-Shāfiʿī.

The Ship of Salvation:
A classic manual of Islāmic Doctrine and Jurisprudence
In Arabic with English text, commentary and appendices,

Edited and translated by:
ʿAbdullah Muḥammad al-Marbūqī al-Shāfiʿī.
Cover designed by: Mawlānā Yusūf ibn Yaʿqūb
Ṣafar 1430 H


I have read through most of the manual now and have come to the conclusion that this is an excellent primer to begin learning Shafi’i fiqh. It begins with Taharah and ends with Hajj & ‘Umrah. Make du’aa for Sayyidi Abdullah Al-Marbuqi for his efforts!

Download the PDF Here

Part 2: The Beard in the Shafi'i School


The topic of the “Beard” in the Shafi’i school has been dealt with in another article: اللحية The Beard : A Collection of Shafi’i Verdicts.

Some brethren posted some objections, specifically from Sayyidi Taha Karan, to the points made within above article. I also needed further clarification on linguistic usages so I asked the Shafi’i, Shaykh Gibril Haddad to explain further two quotes I thought were pertinent to this issue.

The first quote I asked him about was from the the explanation of the Minhaj of Imam An-Nawawi by Imam Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi (Mughni Al-Muhtaj):

واللحية من الرجل، وهي
بكسر اللام، وحكي فتحها:
الشعر النابت على الذقن
خاصة، وهي مجمع اللحيين

“And the beard for men is with a kasrah beneath the “lam”…it is the hair that grows specifically upon the chin, and it is where the two jaws meet (وهي مجمع اللحيين).”

I needed clarification as to what was intended in the arabic by “where the two jaws meet (وهي مجمع اللحيين)”. It seemed to me that it could mean the inclusion of the two jaws and by extension what is upon them. To this, Shaykh Gibril explained:

    “`ala al-dhaqani khaassatan” means “specifically on the chin,” which implies: “and generally on the rest of the face as well.”  

    “wa hiya majma`u al-lahyayn” is a gloss for dhaqan (fem.) to which the pronoun hiya refers, i.e. the chin is where the two lateral halves of the jawbone/mandible meet.

    Note: The human jaw has two bones: the upper bone or maxilla and the lower or mandible, also called jawbone. In the fiqh texts, the latter is imagined to be two halves (“the two bones out of which grows the lower row of teeth” in al-Ghazzi on Abu Shuja`), hence the dual.

Then I asked the Shaykh to clarify for me nearly the same words by Ibn Hajr Al-Haytami in his Tuhfah:
> واللحية بكسر اللام أفصح
> من فتحها، وهي الشعر
> النابت على الذقن التي
> هيمجتمع اللحيين ومثلها
> العارض وأطلقها ابن سيده
> على ذلك وشعر الخدين

To which he said:

Again a progression from the specific to the less specific:

1. specific = dhaqan
2. less specific, though “identical” (wa-mithluha) = `aaridayn

while Ibnu Siyadah, al-Haytami said, “indifferently referred it” (atlaqaha), i.e. the term lihya, “to that (i.e. al-dhaqan) and the hair of the two cheeks.”

Imam al-Shafi`i has some precise words on what constitutes a specific definition of the beard in al-Umm (`Abd al-Muttalib ed. 2:55). He says:

“The beard consists in two things (wal-lihyatu fa-hiya shay’aan):

“[First,] the cheek-beard connected to the two temples (`idhar al-lihya al-muttasil bil-sudghayn) , under and next to which is part of the face, and which has thin hair: it has the same status as the hair of the two eyebrows and [ablution] is incomplete unless it is washed, because the face borders it as I have described and because its hair is not so abundant as to prevent water from reaching it the way it reaches the eyebrows and moustache;

“[Second,] lower-lip hair (al-`anfaqa) – and that is on the chin (al-dhaqan) – and all of the two jaw bones [hair] that reach to the chin (wa-ma ila al-dhaqani min al-lahyayni) : *the latter is the gathering place of the beard and the beard in the restrictive sense* (fa-hadha mujtama`u al-lihyati bi-munqati`i al-lihya).”

So, stricto sensu, the lihya is the hair on the dhaqan and lahyayn, excluding the `aridayn and khaddayn and Allah knows best.

[end quote]


He also commented upon parts of the article of Shaykh Taha Karan saying:

> The word lihyah, similarly, has a wider, general meaning that
> includesthe hair on the chin as well as the sideburns and even the hair
> on thecheeks; and then it has a narrower meaning that is restricted to
> thehair on the chin. When discussing the washing of the face in wudu,
> ourfuqaha used the word lihyah in its narrower sense. 

So then there is agreement on the above on all sides. The disagreement is on the following:

When discussing
> theregulations pertaining to the hair, the manner in which
> theyunambiguously attach the ruling of karahah to the sideburns as
> wellleaves one with little option but to conclude that in this respect
> theyuse the word lihyah in a wider sense than in the case of wudu.

> One is reminded here also of the hadith that states that
> RasuluLlahsallaLlah u `alayhi wasallam shortened his beard by grasping it
> with hishand and removing the excess. The hadith states that this was
> done forboth the length and breadth of the beard. The authenticity of
> thehadith is a matter of dispute. Among our fuqaha Ibn Hajar
> al-Haytamiaffirms that it is authentically documented by Ibn Hibban
> (though Imust confess I have not yet located it in his Sahih). The
> question tobe considered here is this: How does one trim the excess from
> thebreadth of the beard to a fist-length when the beard is only that
> whichgrows on the chin?

The hadith al-Haytami adduced only states that “the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace, would trim his beard, from its length and breadth” narrated by al-Tirmidhi. There is no mention of his “grasping it with his hand and removing the excess.” The latter modality is related only from Ibn `Umar and Abu Hurayra.

It is based on the above hadith that al-Haytami and others determined that shaving the sideburns was permissible. His interpretation was that “breadth” (`ard) referred to the sides of the face (`awarid). The contemporary shaykh `Abd al-Rahman Ibn Shumayla al-Ahdal wrote: “What Ibn Hajar determined regarding the permissibility of shaving the sideburns: divergence over it pertains to the sideburns of beards, provided its report is sound.”

Al-Tirmidhi said “gharib.” It was imprudently included among the forgeries by al-Albani and Ibn Baz who said one of its narrators, “a man called `Umar ibn Harun al-Balkhi,” was a liar. True, this hafiz had been accused of lying by Ibn Ma`in in one of two verdicts he gave, the other being “He is nothing.” However, al-Bukhari and al-Tirmidhi, al-Dhahabi and Ibn Kathir did not accept that charge. Ibn Harun belongs in al-Tirmidhi’ s fifth layer of ta`dil and he and al-Bukhari said this is the only munkar report he is known to narrate, so it is between weak and very weak.

Second, there are three other independent Prophetic narrations commanding trimming of the beard:

[1] from Abu Quhafa in Abu Yusuf’s Aathaar (no. 1038);
[2] from Jabir in Abu Nu`aym, Tarikh Asbahan 2:244 and al-Bayhaqi, Shu`ab al-Iman (5:221 no. 6440); and
[3] from Mujahid mursal in Abu Dawud’s Marasil (p. 316 no. 448).

The above reports, although weak in themselves, convey on the whole that al-Tirmidhi’ s narration does have a basis. What further corroborates his instinct in the matter is the fact that light trimming (al-akhdhu min) of the `aridayn – sideburns, cheek hair and upper beard – and the bottom of the beard was the recommendation and/or practice of our liegelords `Ali ibn Abi Talib, `Abd Allah ibn `Umar and Abu Hurayra followed by many a great Imam of the Successors and mujtahid jurists of the Salaf (emphatically in pilgrimage per verse 29 of Surat al-Hajj: {Then let them make an end of their unkemptness} ); and this is the position of the massive majority.

And Allah Most High knows best.

GF Haddad

[end quote]

The Conditions of Combining Salah for Rain in the Shafi'i School

BasmalaCompiled by Abul Layth


The Shafi’i school states that combining the prayers (jama‘), whether Thuhr or ‘Asr or Maghrib and ‘Isha’, when it is raining is permissible (ja’iz) in the law, and a divine dispensation (rukhsah). See the proofs here. However, they are not unanimous regarding the shuroot (conditions) that are needed for it to be valid. This article will discuss the disagreements.


Ibn Naqib Al-Masri stipulates the following conditions for the validity of Jama‘ (combining prayers) at the time of rain:

  1. The rain is strong enough to wet one’s garment.
  2. With the condition that he INTENDS to make jama’ah in the Masjid.
  3. The Masjid is far.
  4. It is raining when the first prayer begins and it ends, and when the 2nd prayer begins. Then he mentions that the conditions mentioned for travelling (i.e. those not specifically for travel such as distance etc, are also conditions)
  • That the first prayer be prayed first (e.x.: thuhr before ‘asr )
  • the intent exists for joining before the end of the first prayer.
  • That one not seperate the two prayers by waiting between them, however if the seperation is short then it is forgiven. 

[See Reliance of the Traveller 15.10, 15.14 (pages 194-196)]


  • Qadi Husayn and Mutawalli ((in his التتمة )) stipulate the condition that the shoes become wet (not the garment – thobe).
  • Taqiyud-din Al-Hisni stipulates that the rain be present at the time of the end of the Salams for the first prayer “as stated by the ‘Iraqi jurists” and this is the “correct opinion” in his view. However he does state that there is a minor opinion of this not being conditional. ((Kifayatul Akhyar pg 189 pub Darul-Minhaj ))
  • Imam Abi Shuja’ in his “Matn” (Ghayatul-Ikhtisar) stipulates that it be at the first Salah time they be combined, not at the second. and Taqiy-ud-din calls this the Ath-har (lit. most manifest) opinion. The other view is that is permitted and this is do to the qiyas (the analogy) that it is the same as travelling. Those who disagree state that analogy can not be made between the two issues, as rain is not in the ‘hand’ of the one praying, whereas it is in the hand of the one travelling.

Imam An-Nawawi stipulates the following in his Minhaj:

“And it is permitted to combine the prayers in rain praying them at an early time (i.e. praying the second prayer early), and in the ‘new school’ it is forbidden to pray it in its later time (i.e. for jama’), and the condition for praying it at an early time is that [the rain is] present at the time of the first prayer. The most correct view is that its conditional that it be present at the time at the end of the salams. Snow and hail are just like [the ruling of] rain if it is pouring. And the Ath-har (and he states Asa-hh – most correct view in Rawdat at talibin) is that this dispensation is for those who are going for prayer  in jama’ah at the masjid that is far off and the rain creates difficulty for him in his path [to the masjid].”

Imam Al-Khatib Ash-Shirbini mentions a second opinion in his Mughni al-Muhtaj after mentioning the words of An-Nawawi regarding it be specific to the one going to the masjid: “And the second view is that it is an absolute dispensation.” ((Mugni Vol 1 470 ))

May Allah shower His blessing on the Prophet Muhammad, his family, his followers. Amin!

Download: [download id="2"]

« Previous Entries