Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

JURISTIC QUESTIONS

By:SAYYID ABDUL HUSAYN SHARAFUDDEEN

Translated by

Abdullah Al-Shahin

Publisher: Ansariyan Publications - Qum

First Edition 1381 - 1423

ISBN: 964-438-394-X

In The Name of Allah, The Beneficent, The Merciful

TABLE OF CONTENTS

THE PUBLISHER’S FOREWORD 4

PREFACE 5

OFFERING TWO PRAYERS AT ONE TIME 6

IS BASSMALA A QURANIC VERSE? IS IT TO BE RECITED IN PRAYERS? 12

The excuse of our opponents 15

RECITING QURAN IN THE PRAYER 18

TAKBEERATUL IHRAM 23

TRAVELER’S TAQSEER AND FAST BREAKING 24

Legislating taqseer 24

Legislating fast breaking 24

The conditions of taqseer 25

Our evidence 25

The excuse of ash-Shafi’iy and those who consider taqseer as not wajib 27

The conditions of fast breaking 27

The distance that determines taqseer and fast breaking 30

TEMPORARY MARRIAGE 32

1. The way of this marriage 32

2. The consensus of the umma on the legality of the temporary marriage 33

3. The evidences of the Quran 33

4. Temporary marriage in the Sunna 34

5. Those who said it was annulled and their excuses about that 34

6. True traditions betraying the caliph 36

7. The deniers of Omar’s decision 37

8. The Shia’s thought about temporary marriage 38

WIPING THE FEET OR WASHING THEM IN WUDU’ 40

The evidence of the Shia 40

A look at the traditions of washing 41

A look at their excuse of approval 43

Note 43

To the ankles 44

WIPING OVER SLIPPERS AND SOCKS 46

Wiping over the turban 49

Does wiping the head have a limit? 50

SIX DISPUTABLE QUESTIONS 52

1. Wiping the ears 52

2. Does washing the head instead of wiping it suffice for wudu’ 52

3. Order in performing wudu’ 52

4. Succession of acts of wudu’ 53

5. The intention 54

6. Performing wudu’ with juice 55

Notes 58

THE PUBLISHER’S FOREWORD

Sayyid Sharafuddeen (may Allah have mercy upon him) was a great figure of jurisprudence, jihad and Islamic unity. He spent his blessed age in the way of that. He produced a great scientific heritage and strove in his jihad for the sake of the solidarity of the umma. Neither his scientific works nor his jihad could ever be forgotten and they would serve the Islamic matter for ever.

His style in writing was distinguished with clearness, accuracy, utmost objectivity and respecting the others’ opinions; therefore the hearts of his friends and enemies together were attracted to him.

He played a great role in achieving wide juristical cordiality among the different Islamic sects through his wonderful writings, from among which we chose this valuable booklet although it was small but we hoped to achieve the same high aims the author had achieved.

May Allah have mercy upon the great honored jurisprudent Sharafuddeen and may the all make use of his abundant knowledge!

Ansariyan Publications - Qum

PREFACE

These are juristic questions discussed in a clear and firm way. They depend upon the true evidences and follow the straight way. It is enough for them to be a result of a high learned mind and a wonderful pen depending upon the accurate scientific theories so that they are directed easily towards the bright way of rightness and assisted by those accurate theories.

This is a book among tens of books written by our honored great uncle Imam Sharafuddeen, who has supplied the Arabic library with what makes the seekers of the truth ladle from this pure knowledge and makes them appreciate his apposite thinking, truthfulness of evidences, impartiality and defending the rightness.

In this valuable research you will find a correct knowledge depending upon the Book of Allah and the Sunna of His messenger for the author hasn’t depended upon other than them. Although the jurisprudential points discussed in this research are few, you will get a great benefit out of them.

Imam Sharafuddeen discussed these certain questions especially and made them the subject of his short thesis because these secondary questions were the source of much argument and disagreement. Much ado and fierce attacks often and often aroused about these points, hence Imam Sharafuddeen tried to ease the fierceness of the attackers and to lead the fair prudent ones towards the truth. On the other hand, he wanted to clear that the Shia wouldn’t adopt any religious matter, unless they were certain and sure that it was derived from the holy Quran and the true Sunna.

These questions are true examples giving you a clear image about the successful conclusion and fair jurisprudential investigation. You notice in them the high justification for they don’t care for other than clear evidences and true excuses derived from the holy Book of Allah and the sacred Sunna of the Prophet (s).

Nooruddeen Sharafuddeen

OFFERING TWO PRAYERS AT ONE TIME

There was no disagreement among all the Islamic sects about the permissibility of offering Dhuhr prayer and Assr prayer at one time in Arafa.[1]It was called antecedence.[2]The same was said about offering Maghrib and Isha’ prayers at one time in Muzdalifa.[3]This was called delaying.[4]In fact there was no any disagreement about preferring offering each two prayers together and considering that as a part of the Prophet’s Sunna but the Muslims disagreed upon offering two prayers together in other than these two cases.

The point of the dispute was about the permissibility of offering two prayers (whether Dhuhr and Assr or Maghrib and Isha’) in the time of one of them like anteceding one of them as had been done in Arafa or delaying one as had been done in Muzdalifa.

The infallible imams of the Prophet’s progeny had declared clearly that it was permissible (to offer two prayers together) at all but offering each one in its certain time would be better. The Shia followed their imams in this concern in every age and in every side of the earth. They often offered Dhuhr prayer and Assr prayer at one time and Maghrib and Isha’ at one time whether they were in travel or not and whether there was an excuse for that or not. It was not different for them whether anteceding one of the first two prayers or delaying one of the other two prayers.

The Hanafites[5]prohibited offering two prayers at one time at all except in Arafa and Muzdalifa in spite of that their Sihah[6]had true traditions confirming the permissibility of that but they interpreted them according to their own thoughts. We will show you the invalidity of their thoughts later on inshallah.

As for the Shafi’is, the Malikites and the Hanbalites,[7]they permitted that in travel with some disagreements among them in case when there were no excuses like raining, mud, illness or fear. Also they were in dispute about the conditions of travel that might permit to offer two prayers together.[8]

Our evidence, according which we worshipped Allah in this matter, was the true traditions of our infallible imams (s). But we might argue with the Sunni sects according to their own Sihah, in which many traditions were mentioned talking about the permissibility of offering two prayers at one time.

Muslim[9]said in hisSahih :

a. Yahya bin Yahya told us from Malik from Abuz Zubayr from Sa’eed bin Jubayr that ibn Abbas had said: “The Prophet (s) offered Dhuhr and Assr prayers together (at one time)[10]and offered Maghrib and Isha’ prayers together where there was no fear nor was he on travel.”

b.   Abu Bakr bin Abu Shayba narrated from Sufyan bin Oyayna from Amr bin Dinar from Abush Sha’tha’ Jabir bin Zayd that ibn Abbas had said: “I offered prayers with the Prophet (s) eight times, in which he offered each two prayers at one time. I think he delayed Dhuhr prayer and preceded Assr prayer and delayed Maghrib prayer and preceded Isha’ prayer.” Muslim said: “I think so too.”[11]

c. Abur Rabee’ az-Zahrani narrated from Hammad bin Zayd from Amr bin Dinar from Jabir bin Zayd that ibn Abbas had said: “The Prophet (s) offered Dhuhr and Assr prayers together and Maghrib and Isha’ together seven or eight times in Medina.”

d. Abur Rabee’ az-Zahrani narrated from Hammad from az-Zubayr from bin al-Khareet that Abdullah bin Shaqeeq had said: “One day Abdullah bin Abbas made a speech after the Assr prayer until the sun set and the stars appeared in the sky. People began to cry: The prayer! The prayer! Then a man of Tameem,[12]who was so bold and who wouldn’t abate nor would he give up, came to ibn Abbas saying: “The prayer! The prayer!” Ibn Abbas said to him: “Do you teach me the Sunna?!” Then he added: “I have seen the Prophet (s) offering Dhuhr and Assr prayers at one time and offering Maghrib and Isha’ prayers at one time.” Abdullah bin Shaqeeq said: “I doubted about that. I went to Abu Hurayra and asked him. He confirmed the saying of ibn Abbas.”[13]

e. Ibn Abu Omayr narrated from Wakee’ from Imran bin Hadeer that Abdullah bin Shaqeeq al-Aqeeli had said: “A man said to ibn Abbas: The prayer! Ibn Abbas kept silent. Then the man said: The prayer! He kept silent. Then he said: The prayer! Ibn Abbas said: “Do you teach us the prayer?! We often offered the prayers together at the time of the Prophet (s).”

An-Nassa’iy mentioned a tradition narrated by Amr bin Harm from Abush Sha’tha’ that ibn Abbas offered Dhuhr and Assr prayers with no period of time separating between them because of business. He justified that by referring to the Prophet (s).[14]

f. Ahmed bin Younus and Oun bin Salam narrated from Zuhayr from Abuz-Zubayr from Sa’eed bin Jubayr that ibn Abbas had said: “The Prophet (s) offered Dhuhr and Assr prayers at one time in Medina without fear or travel.”[15]Abuz Zubayr said: “I asked Sa’eed why the Prophet (s) did so. He said: I asked ibn Abbas the same question and he said: the Prophet (s) did so in order not to embarrass any one of his umma.”[16]

g. Abu Bakr bin Abu Shayba and Abu Kurayb narrated from Abu Mo’awiya and Abu Kurayb and Abu Sa’eed al-Ashajj narrated from Wakee’ and Abu Mo’awiya from al-A’mash from Habeeb bin Abu Thabit from Sa’eed bin Jubayr that ibn Abbas had said: “The Prophet (s) offered Dhuhr and Assr prayers at one time and offered Maghrib and Isha’ prayers at one time in Medina where there was no fear or rain.” …Wakee’ asked Ibn Abbas why did the Prophet (s) do so and ibn Abbas said: “…in order not to embarrass his umma.” In the tradition of Abu Mo’awiya also it was said to ibn Abbas: What did the Prophet (s) want by doing so? Ibn Abbas said: He (the Prophet (s)) wanted not to embarrass his umma.”

h. Yahya bin Habeeb al-Harithi narrated from Khalid bin al-Harth from Qurra bin Khalid from Abuz Zubayr from Sa’eed bin Jubayr that ibn Abbas had said: “The Prophet (s) offered Dhuhr and Assr prayers at the same time and offered Maghrib and Isha’ at the same time on his travel during the battle of Tabook.” Sa’eed said: “I asked ibn Abbas that what led the Prophet (s) to do that. He said: he wanted not to embarrass his umma.”

i. Yahya bin Habeeb narrated from Khalid bin al-Harth from Qurra bin Khalid from Abuz Zubayr from Aamir bin Wa’ila Abut Tufayl that Mu’ath bin Jabal had said: “During the battle of Tabook the Prophet (s) offered Dhuhr and Assr prayers together and offered Maghrib and Isha’ prayers together. I asked what led him to do that. It was said that he didn’t want to embarrass his umma.”

These true traditions mentioned in the Sihah were clear in showing the reason behind the legislation of offering two prayers at one time. It was to let people have some ease in offering the prayers and not to be burdened with them because separation between the prayers-offering each one in its certain time-might be somehow difficult for the most of people, who would be busy with their works and affairs of living. The last two traditions were not restricted to travel or other excuses like illness, raining, fear or others as they were by themselves but they referred to generality that the permissibility of offering two prayers at one time was absolute and not limited to special cases. Therefore you found that Imam Muslim didn’t mention these traditions under the chapter of “offering the prayers together where there was no travel” to be as evidences for the absolute permissibility of that and this showed his prudence, knowledge and fairness.

The traditions mentioned by Muslim were according to the conditions depended by al-Bukhari in deciding the truthfulness of traditions and the narrators also were depended upon by al-Bukhari so what made him (al-Bukhari) not mention all the traditions talking about the subject? What led him to be satisfied with a few of them? And why didn’t he assign a certain chapter about the true traditions talking about offering prayers at one time whether in travel or not although that most imams of the different sects had acknowledged the permissibility of offering two prayers at one time? And why did he choose the weakest traditions in proving the subject? I don’t think that al-Bukhari was one of those, who changed the words from their (right) places and concealed the truth which they themselves knew well!

Here is what he has chosen of traditions in hisSahih talking about this subject:

a. Abun Nu’man narrated from Hammad bin Zayd from Amr bin Dinar from Jabir bin Zayd that ibn Abbas had said: “The Prophet (s) offered Dhuhr and Assr prayers in the same time and offered Maghrib and Isha’ prayers in the same time in Medina seven or eight times.” Ayyoub said: “Perhaps it was in a rainy night.” He said: “Perhaps!”  
(They follow but conjecture) as Allah says!

b. Adam narrated from Shu’ba from Amr bin Dinar from Jabir bin Zayd that ibn Abbas had said: “The Prophet (s) offered prayers together seven or eight time.”

c. From ibn Omar, Abu Ayyoub and ibn Abbas that the Prophet (s) offered Maghrib and Isha’ prayers (together) in the time of one of them rather than the other.

Mentioning this very few traditions from among much many true traditions evidencing the subject was enough to confirm what we said about al-Bukhari.

Also it was confirmed by the saying of ibn Mass’ood: “The Prophet (s) offered-in Medina-Dhuhr and Assr prayers together and offered Maghrib and Isha’ prayers together. He was asked about that and he said: I did so lest my umma would be embarrassed.” It was mentioned by at-Tabarani.[17]

It was mentioned that Abdullah bin Omar was asked: “Why did the Prophet (s) offer Dhuhr and Assr prayers together and Maghrib and Isha’ prayers together in Medina where he was not on travel?” He said: “He did so in order that his umma not to be embarrassed.”[18]

Anyhow all the Sunni jurisprudents acknowledged the permissibility of offering the prayers in one time and they were certain that these traditions were true in evidencing this matter.

You can refer to whatever you like of their comments on these traditions talking about the permissibility of offering two prayers in one time.[19]

Yes! They interpreted the tradition according to the doctrines of their sects; therefore they became in a dark confusion.

The comment of an-Nawawi on these traditions mentioned in his bookSharh Sahih Muslim was enough to show you the truth. He said, after considering the traditions as clear evidence confirming the permissibility of offering the prayers together in residence: “The ulema had different interpretations and thoughts. Some of them justified that by saying that the Prophet (s) had offered the prayers together because of the rain. This was the thought of some of the first great personalities.[20]But this was a weak justification according to the second tradition of ibn Abbas when saying (…without fear or rain). Some of them pretended that the sky was cloudy so the Prophet (s) offered the Dhuhr prayer but when the clouds dispelled, it appeared that it was the time of Assr prayer then the Prophet (s) offered the Assr prayer.[21]This was also vain because if it was possible for Dhuhr and Assr prayers, it wouldn’t be possible for Maghrib ans Isha’ prayers.

Some of them pretended that the Prophet (s) had delayed the first prayer (Dhuhr) until the end of its time and so when he had finished offering it, the time of the Assr prayer came and then he offered it; therefore his gathering the two prayers was just formal.[22]This was weak and vain too because it contradicted the meaning of the tradition so clearly. The doing of ibn Abbas when he made his speech and the people cried: the prayer, the prayer, but he didn’t pay any attention to them and he justified his delaying the Maghrib prayer until the time of the Isha’ prayer and then Abu Hurayra confirmed that and didn’t deny it when he was asked; all that refuted the above interpretation.”

Ibn Abdul Birr, al-Khitabi and others denied this interpretation too. They said that offering prayers together was a kind of authorization and if it was formal, it would be so difficult to offer each prayer in its time because the beginnings and the ends of prayers’ times couldn’t be perceived by most of the scholars so how about the ordinary people! They said that ibn Abbas’ saying (…he wanted not to embarrass his umma) was clear evidence proving the authorization of offering prayers together. Offering prayers together, which was cleared by the true traditions, was either by preceding the second prayer to be offered with the first one or by delaying the first prayer to be offered with the second one. They said that it was this meaning, which was understood from the wording of these traditions. This was the very point of the dispute.

An-Nawawi said: “… and some of them interpreted the traditions as if offering prayers together was because of illness or something like that. This was the thought of Ahmed bin Hanbal and the judge Husayn and it was adopted by our companions; al-Khitabi, al-Mutawalli and ar-Rawyani. This was the apparent meaning according to the wording of the traditions.”

No evidence in the traditions showing what they said. Saying so was but fabrication as al-Qastalani had said in his bookSharh Sahih al-Bukhari.[23]

Some of the scholars criticized him (an-Nawawi) too by saying: “It was said that offering prayers together was because of illness. An-Nawawi confirmed this saying. But this justification was not correct because if the Prophet (s) had offered the prayers together because of illness, then no one would have offered prayers with him except those who were ill, whereas the Prophet (s) had offered the prayers with a group of his companions as it had been narrated by ibn Abbas in a true tradition.”[24]

Since there was no interpretation accepted by the ulema about the traditions talking about offering the prayers together, so some of the Sunnis adopted the thought of the Shia about the matter unknowingly. An-Nawawi mentioned them after he had refuted their false interpretations. He said: “Some of the scholars permitted offering prayers together in residence (in one’s place of living-not being in travel) if it was necessary for those, who would not take it as a habit. This was the thought of ibn Seereen and Ashhab, who were Malik’s companions. So was the thought of al-Qaffaal ash-Shashial-Kabeer , who was one of ash-Shafi’iy’s companions as it was said by al-Khitabi. The same was thought by Abu Iss~haq al-Mirwizi and some of the scholars of Hadith. Ibnul Munthir acknowledged this thought when he said: “The saying of ibn Abbas confirmed this thought when he said that the Prophet (s) didn’t want to embarrass his umma where he didn’t justify it by illness or anything else. Allah is the most aware!” This was his own saying.[25]Some others of the Sunni scholars[26]had said the same.”

Some of the Sunni researchers in our time might adopt our thought, as I was told by more than one of them, but they didn’t dare to inform the public of that or ihtiyat (precaution) might prevent them from that because separating the prayers (offering each one in its certain time) would be better than offering them together but an important thing escaped them that separating prayers led many people, who would be busy with their jobs during the time of prayers, to give up offering the prayers whereas offering prayers together would be more possible to make them keep to their prayers. Hence the jurisprudents would better give a fatwa to permit the public to offer the prayers together in order to make it easy for them and not difficult.(Allah desires ease for you, and He does not desire for you difficulty 2:185) ,(…and He has not laid upon you any hardship in religion 22:78) .

The evidence of offering the prayer together absolutely is clear according to the holy Quran and the Sunna. The Quran has declared that the times of obligatory prayers are three only; a common time for Dhuhr and Assr prayers, a common time for Maghrib and Isha’ prayers and a third time for the Fajr (dawn) prayer. Allah says:(Keep up prayer from the declining of the sun till the darkness of the night and the morning recitation; surely the morning recitation is witnessed. 17:78)

Imam ar-Razi said when interpreting this verse in hisTafseer :[27]“If we interpret ghasaq[28](dusk) as the beginning of darkness in the sunset, so according to this account mentioned in the verse, the times of prayers are three; the time when the sun declines, the beginning of the sunset and the time of the dawn. This requires that the time when the sun declines, is to be a common time between Dhuhr and Assr prayers, the beginning of the sunset is to be a common time between Maghrib and Isha’ prayers. This determines the permissibility of offering the prayers together absolutely.[29]But the evidence shows that offering prayers together in residence without an excuse is not permissible so it becomes obligatory for offering prayers together that there must be an excuse like travel, raining or other things.”

We strove in researching for what he had said that offering prayers together in residence without an excuse wouldn’t be permissible but we, by Allah, couldn’t find anything leading to it. Yes, the Prophet (s) offered prayers together when there was an excuse but he also offered prayers together when there was no any excuse for that lest he would embarrass his umma. We had no any objection that offering each prayer in its certain time would be better; therefore the Prophet (s) had preferred it except when there was an excuse as he used to do with mustahabs.[30]

IS BASSMALA A QURANIC VERSE? IS IT TO BE RECITED IN PRAYERS?

The Muslim scholars disagreed on this matter.[31]Malik and al-Awza’iy thought that it was not a part of the Quran and they prohibited their followers from reciting it in the prayers whether it was in the beginning of sura of Hamd[32]or in the beginning of the second sura and whether it was recited loudly or softly but they permitted to be recited in nafila.[33]

Abu Haneefa, ath-Thawri and their followers recited bassmala with sura of Hamd but they said that it must be recited softly even in the loud-recited prayers.[34]This showed that they agreed with Malik and al-Awza’iy. We didn’t find any evidence justifying that except that they didn’t consider it as part of the Quran.

Ash-Shafi’iy recited bassmala loudly in loud-recited prayers and softly in soft-recited prayers and considered it as a verse of sura of Hamd. So was the thought of Ahmed bin Hanbal, Abu Thour and Abu Obayd.

Different sayings were mentioned about the thought of ash-Shafi’iy concerning bassmala; whether he believed that it was a part of every sura except Bara’a[35](9) or it was not a verse except in sura of Hamd. But his companions agreed upon that bassmala was a verse of all the suras[36]and justified the two different sayings mentioned about their Imam’s thought.[37]

As for us-the Shia-we agreed, according to our infallible imams, upon that bassmala was a complete Quranic verse of every sura except Bara’a and whoever left reciting it in the prayer intendedly, his prayer would be vain whether the prayer was wajib (obligatory) or mustahab. It must be recited loudly in loud-recited prayers and it was desirable (mustahab) to be recited loudly in soft-recited prayers.[38]It was a piece of a verse in sura of an-Naml. The traditions of our infallible imams were clear in denying the sayings of their opponents. Imam Sadiq (s) said: “What?! They attacked the greatest verse of the Book of Allah the Almighty and they pretended that it was a heresy and then they spread their heresy about the verse(In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful). [39]

Our evidence from the Sunni side is the traditions mentioned in their Sihah and how many they are!

1. Ibn Jurayj narrated from his father from Sa’eed bin Jubayr that ibn Abbas when talking about the Quranic verse(And certainly We have given you seven of the oft-repeated (verses) and the grand Quran 15:87) had said: “It is the Fatiha[40]of the Book;In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.  All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds…etc.). Ibn Jurayj said: “I asked my father: Did Sa’eed tell you that ibn Abbas had said that(in the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful) was a Quranic verse? He said: Yes!”[41]

2. Ibn Abbas said: “The Prophet (s), whenever Gabriel came to him and recitedin the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful , knew that it was a sura.”[42]

3. Ibn Abbas said: “The Prophet (s) didn’t know that a sura was completed until a newin the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful was revealed to him.”[43]

4. Ibn Abbas said: “The Muslims didn’t know that a sura was completed untilin the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful was revealed. When it was revealed, they became certain that the previous sura was completed.”[44]

5. Umm Salama said: “The Prophet (s) used to recite(in the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.  All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds…etc.) and scanned it verse by verse.”[45]

Umm Salama said in another way: “The Prophet (s) recited in the prayer(in the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful) and counted it as the first verse and then recited(All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds) and counted it as the second, then (The Beneficent, the Merciful) as the third, (Master of the Day of Judgment) as the fourth, then(Thee do we serve and Thee do we beseech for help) and gathered his five fingers.”[46]

6. Na’eem al-Mujammir said: “I was behind Abu Hurayra (in offering the prayer) when he recited(in the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful) then he recited al-Fatiha until he finished it and said amen and the people said amen! When he finished the prayer, he said: “I swear by Him, in Whose hand my soul is, that I am the most similar to the Prophet (s) in offering the prayer.”[47]

Abu Hurayra said: “The Prophet (s) used to recite(in the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful) loudly in the prayers.”[48]

7. Anass bin Malik said: “Once Mo’awiya offered a prayer in Medina and he recited(in the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful) loudly for al-Fatiha but he didn’t recite it for the second sura. When he finished the prayer, some of the Muhajireen and the Ansar,[49]who heard him, shouted at him: “O Mo’awiya! Did you steal the prayer or forget?” When he offered the prayer after that, he recited bassmala for the second sura.” Al-Hakim mentioned this tradition in his Mustadrak and considered it true according to (Imam) Muslim’s conditions.[50]The tradition was mentioned by others like Imam ash-Shafi’iy,[51]who commented on it. It would be better to quote his comment. He said: “Mo’awiya was a very powerful ruler, so unless reciting bassmala loudly was a certain verdict among all the companions of the Muhajireen and the Ansar, they wouldn’t dare to object to him when he didn’t recite bassmala.”[52]

I would like to comment on this tradition to draw the attention of every researcher to the evidence this tradition had that confirmed our thought (the Shia’s thought) about bassmala in the prayer and that it was not permissible to recite bassmala with al-Fatiha only and not to recite it with the second sura, otherwise the companions wouldn’t have objected to Mo’awiya unless the matter of bassmala had been like the Shia’s thought.

8. It was narrated from another way that Anass had said: “I heard the Prophet (s) reciting(in the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful) loudly in the prayer.”[53]

9. Muhammad bin as-Sariy al-Asqalani said: “I offered Fajr and Maghrib prayers behind al-Mu’tamir bin Sulayman innumerable times. He recited(in the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful) loudly before al-Fatiha and before the second sura. I heard al-Mu’tamir saying: I haven’t failed to imitate my father’s prayer and my father said: I haven’t failed to imitate Anass’ prayer and Anass said: I haven’t failed to imitate the Prophet’s prayer.”[54]

This tradition and other traditions showed that they (the Sunnis) used to recite bassmala with the second sura after al-Fatiha in the prayers like the Shia. Many other traditions confirmed this matter.[55]

Qatada said: “Anass bin Malik was asked that how the Prophet (s) recited in his prayers. He said: “He used to stress his reciting.” Then he recited (bismillahir-rahmanir-raheem)[56]and he stressed ar-rahman (the Beneficent) and ar-raheem (the Merciful).”

Hameed at-Taweel narrated that Anass bin Malik had said: “I offered prayers behind the Prophet (s), Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman and Ali. All of them recited bassmala loudly.”

All the previous traditions were mentioned by Abu Abdullah Muhammad bin Abdullah al-Hakim an-Nayssaboori in his Mustadrak. He said after the last tradition: “I mentioned this tradition to be evidence for the previous traditions. These traditions showed clear objection to the tradition narrated by Qatada that Anass had said: “I offered prayers behind the Prophet (s), Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman and I didn’t hear any of them reciting(in the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful). ”

Then al-Hakim said: “Many other traditions narrated by Othman, Ali, Talha bin Obaydillah, Jabir bin Abdullah, Abdullah bin Omar, al-Hakam bin Omayr ath-Thimali, an-Nu’man bin Basheer, Samra bin Jundub, Burayda al-Aslami and Aa’isha bint Abu Bakr concerning this subject. I didn’t mention them in order not to overburden the reader with them. I chose from among what might fit this chapter. Also I mentioned in this chapter those, who recited bassmala loudly in their prayers, of the companions, the successors and the successors’ successors.”[57]

Ar-Razi mentioned in his at-Tafseer al-Kabeer [58]that al-Bayhaqi had mentioned in hisSunan some traditions about reciting bassmala loudly in the prayer narrated by Omar bin al-Khattab, ibn Abbas, ibn Omar and ibn az-Zubayr. Then ar-Razi said: “As for Ali bin Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him), it was proved recurrently that he recited bassmala loudly in his prayers and whoever imitated Ali bin Abu Talib in his religion, would be guided. The evidence for that was the saying of the Prophet (s): “O Allah! Turn the rightness with Ali wherever he turns.”

It would be a sufficient evidence for bassmala to be a Quranic verse in the beginning of every sura except Bara’a, that all the companions, their successors and the successors’ successors of every generation of the umma had agreed unanimously, since the Quran had been written down until nowadays, upon writing down bassmala at the beginning of every sura except Bara’a.

They wrote it down as they wrote every other Quranic verse without any difference between them whereas they had agreed unanimously upon not writing anything that was not of the holy Quran unless they would put a distinguishing mark in order not to be mixed up with the Quranic words. Didn’t you see how they distinguished the names of the suras, the symbols of the sections, the parts…etc. and put them out of the text of the Quran in order to be known that they were not of the Quran so that the Quran would be protected as it had been revealed? You knew well that the umma had never agreed unanimously upon any matter as it had agreed upon this matter and this was enough evidence proving that bassmala was independent Quranic verse coming at the beginning of every sura written by the ancestors and the successors.

It was mentioned that the Prophet (s) had said: “Every important task that doesn’t begin with (in the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful) will be amputated.”[59]  and: “Every important task that doesn’t begin with (in the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful) will be amputated or mutilated.”[60]

It is certain that the holy Quran is the best of what Allah, the Almighty has revealed to His apostles and prophets and that every sura in it is important and great that Allah has challenged all the people, who failed to produce a sura like the Quranic suras. So would it be possible for the Quran to be amputated? Allah, His Quran and its suras be exalted highly above any raving!

The prayer is the success and the best of doings as it is announced from above the minbars and the minarets. It is known by everyone. Nothing is to be compared with it after believing in Allah, His prophets and the Day of Resurrection. Then is it possible for Allah to legislate the prayer so amputated and mutilated? Neither a pious nor a dissolute one dares to say so but the pious imams Malik, al-Awza’iy and Abu Haneefa (may Allah be pleased with them) were distracted from these necessities; and every mujtahid would be rewarded and not to be blamed whether being right or wrong when trying his best to deduce his conclusion from the legal evidences.

The excuse of our opponents

They justified the matter with some excuses:

First: if bassmala was a verse of al-Fatiha and was a part of every sura of the Quran, then repeating(the Beneficent, the Merciful) [61]would be necessary to be repeated one hundred and thirteen times throughout the Quran.

The answer: the situation might require repeating if it was to pay much attention to some great affairs in order to be taken in consideration with much carefulness. The holy Quran had many examples of this thing; for example in sura of ar-Rahman (55), al-Mursalat (77) and al-Kafiroon (109). Was there anything of the affairs of this life and the afterlife deserving utmost attention and greatest carefulness like the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful? Were the prophets delegated, the angels sent down and the Books revealed without in the name of Allah, the beneficent, the merciful or His guidance? Were the heavens and the earths constructed but with in the name of Allah, the beneficent, the merciful?[62]

(O men! call to mind the favor of Allah on you; is there any creator besides Allah who gives you sustenance from the heaven and the earth? There is no god but He; whence are you then turned away) 35:3.

Second: the tradition narrated by Abu Hurayra that the Prophet (s) had said: “Allah the Almighty says: I have divided the prayer between Me and My servant into two halves. If the servant says:All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds. Allah says: My servant praises Me. If he says:The Beneficent, the Merciful. Allah says: My servant thanks Me. If he says:Master of the Day of Judgment. Allah says: My servant glorifies Me. If he says:Thee do we serve and Thee do we beseech for help. Allah says: this is between Me and My servant…etc.”

Their evidence in this tradition was that he didn’t mention(in the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful) with the verses of al-Fatiha. They said that if it was a verse of al-Fatiha, he would mention it.

The answer: this tradition was contradicted by a tradition narrated by ibn Abbas when saying: “Allah says: I have divided the prayer between Me and My servant. If the servant says:in the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful . Allah says: My servant calls me…etc.”[63]The tradition was too long but our evidence was that it included bassmala and so it contradicted Abu Hurayra’s tradition. In fact Abu Hurayra himself narrated a tradition that the Prophet (s) used to recite bassmala loudly in the prayer and that he himself used to recite it loudly in his prayer. He said: “I am the most of you in imitating the Prophet’s prayer.” This tradition was mentioned previously.

Third: the tradition narrated by Aa’isha that the Prophet (s) began his prayer with takbeer[64]and reciting (al hamdu lillahi rabbil aalameen).[65]

The answer: this couldn’t be an evidence for them because Aa’isha made (al hamdu lillahi rabbil aalameen) as a name for this sura exactly as when one said: “I recited (qul huwal-lahu ahad)”[66]to mean that he recited sura of al-Ikhlass or when saying that someone recited (inna fatahna laka fathan mubeena)[67]to mean that someone recited sura of al-Fat~h and so on. So the meaning of the tradition was that the Prophet (s) began his prayer with takbeer and reciting this sura, whose beginning wasin the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. [68]

Fourth: the tradition narrated by ibn Mughaffal when saying: “My father heard me recitingin the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. He said to me: “O my son! Beware of changing the Sunna! I offered prayers with the Prophet (s), Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman. I didn’t hear any of them reciting it (bassmala).”[69]

The answer: the scholars of jarh and ta’deel[70]didn’t know who ibn Mugaffal was. They didn’t mention any of his traditions. Ibn Rushd mentioned him when talking about bassmala in his book Bidayatul Mujtahid[71]and brushed him away when quoting the saying of Abu Omar bin Abdul Birr that ibn Mughaffal was unknown man.

Fifth: Shu’ba narrated from Qatada that Anass bin Malik had said: “I offered prayers with the Prophet (s), Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman. I didn’t hear any of them recitingin the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful .”[72]Another one narrated by Hameed at-Taweel that Anass said: “I offered prayers behind Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman. All of them didn’t recitein the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful .”[73]

The answer: you found in our evidence mentioned previously true traditions narrated by Anass contradicting these two traditions. You might refer to them.

Imam ar-Razi mentioned this tradition of Anass in hisTafseer and said: “The answer to this tradition is in many ways;

First: Sheikh Abu Hamid al-Isfarayeeni said: “Six traditions were narrated from Anass in this concern. The Hanafites narrated from him three traditions. One of them was his saying: I offered prayers behind the Prophet (s), Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman. They began the prayer with(All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds).

The other was his saying: …they didn’t mentionin the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.

The third saying: …I didn’t hear any of them recitingin the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.

These three traditions agreed with the thought of the Hanafites and there were three other traditions contradicting this thought;

one of them was his tradition about Mo’awiya, who didn’t recite bassmala in the prayer and then the Muhajireen and the Ansar objected to him and this showed that reciting bassmala loudly in the prayer was a certain matter, which was agreed upon unanimously among them.

The other one: Abu Qulaba narrated from Anass that the Prophet (s), Abu Bakr and Omar used to recite bassmala loudly in the prayers.[74]

The third one: that Anass was asked about reciting bassmala loudly or softly and he answered: “I don’t know about this matter.” Ar-Razi said: “It was clear that Anass’ traditions about this matter became so confused and contradictory and hence we had to depend upon other evidences…and also there was another suspicion in his traditions that Ali (s) exaggerated in reciting bassmala loudly but when the Umayyads seized the rule, they exaggerated in forbidding from reciting bassmala loudly in order to remove everything referring to Ali (s).[75]Anass might be afraid of the Umayyads; therefore his sayings became confused.

Whatever we doubted about something, we would never doubt about that if there was a contradiction between the sayings of persons like Anass and ibn al-Mughaffal and the sayings of Ali bin Abu Talib (s), who kept on that until the end of his life, certainly depending upon the sayings of Ali would be better. This was a final answer…and whoever took Ali as the imam of his religion, would certainly lay hold on the firmest handle of religion and life…etc.”[76]

All praise is due to Allah Who guided us to this, and we would not have found the way had it not been that Allah had guided us.

RECITING QURAN IN THE PRAYER

The jurisprudents disagreed upon reciting Quranic suras in the prayer. Abu Bakr al-Assamm, Isma’eel bin Olya, Sufyan bin Oyayna and al-Hasan bin Salih thought that reciting Quran in the prayer was not wajib but it was mustahab.

This was irregularity in thinking, contradicting the evidences and violating the consensus of the umma.

They depended upon a tradition narrated by Abu Salama and Muhammad bin Ali that once Omar bin al-Khattab had offered the maghrib prayer and he didn’t recite the suras in it. He was asked about that. He said: “How about the ruku’ and sujood?”[77]They said: “Alright.” He said: “Never mind then!”

This was Omar’s own thought and he didn’t ascribe it to the Prophet (s). He might think that leaving reciting the suras inattentively wouldn’t invalidate the prayer. Allah is the most aware.

Al-Hasan al-Basri and others thought that reciting suras was obligatory (wajib) in one rak’a.[78]This was like the previous thought in its irregularity and violating the consensus.

They justified their thought by interpreting the Prophet’s saying: “No prayer (will be correct) except with (reciting) al-Fatiha.” They thought that if al-Fatiha was recited in the prayer even one time, the prayer would be correct.

The answer: this tradition didn’t regard the prayer when it was offered with al-Fatiha and didn’t decide whether it was valid or not but it regarded it when it was without al-Fatiha and decided that it was not a prayer like the Prophet’s saying: “No prayer (is accepted) without wudu’ (or tayammum).” The tradition “No prayer (will be correct) except with (reciting) al-Fatiha” showed the obligation of reciting al-Fatiha in the prayer. Al-Fatiha was a necessary part of the prayer whereas wudu’ was a condition determining the validity of the prayer.

Imam Abu Haneefa and his companions though that reciting al-Fatiha was not wajib in the prayer. They thought that reciting anything of the Quran would be enough. Abu Haneefa was satisfied with reciting one verse of the Quran even if it was one word like (“Mudhammatan 55:64”: both inclining to blackness) but his companions Abu Yousuf and Muhammad bin al-Hasan ash-Shaybani were satisfied with three short verses like(Then he looked. Then he frowned and scowled.  Then he turned back and was big with pride. 74:21-23) or with one verse that was as equal as three short verses or a little more. The Hanafites kept to this in their prayers.[79]

Abu Haneefa permitted translating the Quran that was to be recited in the prayer into any foreign language for those, who couldn’t speak Arabic well,[80]but his two companions permitted translating just for those, who were unable to speak Arabic, not for those, who could speak bad Arabic.

Reciting the Quran in the prayer was wajib according to their doctrine in the two rak’as-prayers like Fajr prayer, Friday prayer and the traveler’s prayers (Qasr)[81]but as for three or four-rak’as prayers, reciting the Quran was wajib in any two rak’as of the prayer. The prayer had the option to choose between the first two rak’as, the last two rak’as, the first and the third, the first and the fourth, the second and the third or the second and the fourth. If a prayer recited the Quran in the first two rak’as, he would be free in the last two rak’as whether to recite the Quran, recite tasbeeh[82]or to be silent as long as the time of one tasbeeh.

They depended upon a tradition narrated by Abu Hurayra when saying: “One day the Prophet (s) entered the mosque. A man came in, offered the prayer and then came to greet the Prophet (s). The Prophet (s) replied his greeting and said to him: “Go back and offer your prayer because you didn’t offer it (correctly).” The man came back and offered his prayer as same as the first one. Then he came to the Prophet (s) and greeted him. The Prophet (s) replied his greeting and said to him: “Go back and offer your prayer because you didn’t offer it.” He did that for three times. The man said to the Prophet (s): “I swear by Him, Who has sent you with rightness! I don’t know more than this. Please teach me!” The Prophet (s) said: “When you stand up to offer the prayer, say Takbeer then recite what is easy of the Quran as possible as you can, then bow then stand erect then prostrate yourself then sit. Do this throughout your prayer.”

They depended upon the Prophet’s saying (recite what is easy of the Quran as possible as you can) as their evidence in this matter.

Neither Abu Hurayra nor his traditions had any value near us. He was not trusted or reliable. We detailed all the facts about him in a book called (Abu Hurayra). Whoever liked to know the shiny truth, let refer to it.

This tradition might be not true because it was confused and not clear. We examined the tradition and didn’t find any clear explanation that might fit the prophets (s). The tradition lacked many necessary things that the umma had agreed upon unanimously. It didn’t mention anything about the intention of the prayer, sitting during the last tashahhud[83], saying (blessing and peace be upon Muhammad and his progeny), tasleem[84]and other things. It didn’t fit the Prophet (s) with his high morals to let that man offer invalid prayer for three times and that might not be permissible for him (s).

Abu Dawood mentioned this story narrated by Rifa’a bin Rafi’ al-Ansari[85]that the Prophet (s) had said to the man, who didn’t offer his prayer correctly: “When you stand up towards the Qibla, say takbeer and then recite al-Fatiha and whatever you like to recite.”

Ahmad bin Hanbal and ibn Habban mentioned this story narrated by Rifa’a that the Prophet (s) had said to the man, who didn’t offer his prayer correctly: “…then recite al-Fatiha and then recite whatever you like.”[86]

It was certain that Abu Hurayra would never equal Rifa’a whether in his doings or sayings. When there was any contradiction, the traditions of Rifa’a would certainly be preferred to the traditions narrated by Abu Hurayra. Therefore we found that al-Qastlani when explaining the tradition of Abu Hurayra in his book Fat~hul Bari tried his best to interpret the tradition to be in accordance with the tradition of Rifa’a.

Whoever looked for the sayings of the ancestors and the successors when talking about Abu Hurayra’s tradition, would find them all, except the Hanafites, either refuting[87]or interpreting[88]the tradition to be in accordance with their thoughts. Refer toSharh Sahih al-Bukhari andSharh Sahih Muslim to see their sayings about Abu Hurayra’s tradition in details.[89]

Abu Hurayra himself contradicted his tradition when he narrated other traditions saying: “I heard the Prophet (s) saying: The prayer won’t be correct unless al-Fatiha is recited in it.”[90]Abu Hurayra also said: “The Prophet (s) ordered me to announce in Medina that no prayer (would be correct) without (reciting some of the) Quran, even if it was al-Fatiha and something more.”[91]He also said: “I heard the Prophet (s) saying: Whoever offers a prayer without reciting al-Fatiha, his prayer is aborted, his prayer is aborted, his prayer is aborted, his prayer is aborted.”[92]

Then why did the Hanafites depend upon the outward meaning of the saying (recite what is easy of the Quran as possible as you can) mentioned in Abu Hurayra’s tradition and give up the clear and true prophetic traditions talking about the prayer? In fact they depended upon what contradicted the many true traditions and objected to all the other sects of the Muslims and what they gave up was confirmed by the true prophetic traditions and by all the other sects of the Muslims.

The Hanafites might depend upon the Quranic verse(therefore read what is easy of the Quran 73:20) as their evidence for this matter.

The answer: this verse had nothing to do with the subject of reciting Quranic suras in the prayer at all. The interpreters had explained this verse clearly. Let him, who wants to see its real meaning, refer the interpretations of the Quran.

The Hanafites justified the permissibility of reciting the translation of the Quran in the prayer according to some sayings;

First: Ibn Mass’ood recited to some foreigners:(Surely the tree of the Zaqqum is (ta’am al-atheem)the food of the sinful 44:43-4). One of the foreigners recited (ta’am al-atheem) as (ta’am al-yateem; the orphan). Ibn Mas’ood said to him: “Say: Ta’am al-fajir).[93]Then ibn Mass’ood said: “It is no mistake to recite (al-hakeem; wise) instead of (al-aleem; aware). The mistake is to put a verse of mercy instead of a verse of torment.”

The answer: this was too far from our subject and if the saying was true, it would just show ibn Mass’ood’s own thought and it would never be taken as evidence.

Second: the Quranic verses(And most surely the same is in the scriptures of the ancients 26:196) and(Most surely this is in the earlier scriptures; the scriptures of Ibrahim and Musa 87:18-9).

Their evidence out of these verses was that the umma agreed upon that the Quran had not been in its Arabic wordings whether in the scriptures of the ancients or the scriptures of Abraham and Moses but it was its meanings that had been mentioned in those scriptures in Hebrew and Syriac.

The answer: this was like the previous justification in not having anything to do with the subject. In fact it was much farther than that one.

Third: the Quranic verse(…and this Quran has been revealed to me that with it I may warn you. 6:19) and the foreigners didn’t understand Arabic unless the meaning would be translated to them into their language; therefore the warning was to be in their language.

The answer: this would be possible as evidence for the permissibility of translating the holy Quran into the foreigners’ languages so that they could make use of its maxims, morals, orders and prohibitions. This was something and jargoning in the prayer would be something else. Would any Arab or foreigner not understand that reciting al-Fatiha did mean to recite the sura as it had been revealed with its original wording written down in the holy Quran? Would any one of good tact not feel that the spirit of the Quran would be deprived of if it was recited in a foreign language whether eastern or western?

I didn’t think that Imam Abu Haneefa would fail in his justifications to a degree that he might fall down to the bottom! It was because he relied upon analogy and approval in deducing the legal verdicts. Hence he found that it would be nice for the foreigners if the Quran was translated into their languages in order to be recited in their prayers. He found that it would be easier for them to understand the meanings and to be more submissive in their prayers. He compared the foreigner’s reciting the Quran in his language with his listening to the sermons and learning the lessons in his language. This was the theory of Atatürk in offering the prayer. He didn’t take it from Abu Haneefa but it was just telepathy! What helped Atatürk with this theory that he didn’t appreciate the legal evidences; in fact he didn’t know them and didn’t want to know them. He determined what he approved. If the Sharia had something leading to the permissibility of acting according to the approval, they would justify their thought but how far!

Ash-Shafi’iy, Malik, Ahmed and others thought that reciting al-Fatiha in all wajib and mustahab prayers in Arabic was obligatory. Their evidence for that was Abu Hurayra’s tradition talking about the story of the nomad, who couldn’t offer his prayer correctly and then the Prophet (s) taught him how to offer the prayer, ordered him to recite some of the Quran in his prayer and then said to him: “Do this in all of your prayers.”[94]

You already knew our thought about this tradition when we said that we had brushed it aside and that it had no value near us.

The Shia believed, according to their infallible imams, that reciting al-Fatiha in correct Arabic was obligatory in the first two rak’as of every wajib and mustahab prayer[95]for the single prayer (one, who offers a prayer alone) and for the imam (one who leads the others in offering the prayer).

As for the ma’moom,[96]he didn’t have to recite al-Fatiha because the imam[97]would undertake that instead of him. As for the last two rak’as, it would be obligatory for the ma’moom either to recite the sura or to recite tassbeeh.[98]The imam was not to undertake reciting the sura or tassbeeh instead of the ma’moom in the last two rak’as.

Our evidence (the Shia’s evidence) in all of that was the sayings of our infallible imams, who were the equal of the Quran.

Reciting al-Fatiha by the Prophet (s) in the first two rak’as of the prayer was confirmed by all the Sihah and Musnads (the books of Hadith) according to the tradition narrated by Abu Qatada al-Harth bin Rib’iy and others.

What the Prophet (s) used to do in his prayer would be obligatory[99]for the all because he had said: “Offer the prayer as you saw me offering it.” As it was proved that the Prophet (s) had recited al-Fatiha in the last two rak’as, it was also proved that he had recited tassbeeh in them. The wording of tassbeeh was as the following (subhanal-lah wel hamdu lillah wela ilaha illallah wel-lahu akbar) according to the imams of the Prophet’s progeny (s). The tradition, narrated by Sa’d bin Abu Waqqass and mentioned in al-Bukhari’sSahih and other Sihah and Musnads, confirmed this.

The people of Kufa complained to Omar against Sa’d until they said to him that Sa’d hadn’t offered the prayer correctly. Sa’d said: “By Allah, I offered the prayer in a way like the prayer of the Prophet (s) without a bit of difference. I expatiated (on reciting al-Fatiha and the other sura) in the first two rak’as and I lightened in the last two rak’as (hastening in them by only reciting tassbeeh or al-Fatiha alone without the second sura).” Allah is the most aware!

TAKBEERATUL IHRAM

The Shia agreed, according to their pure imams, unanimously upon thattakbeeratul ihram [100]was a necessary pillar of every wajib and mustahab prayer. Withouttakbeeratul ihram the prayer would be invalid. The only form oftakbeeratul ihram was (Allahu akbar). If the prayer began his prayer with anything else than Allahu akbar even if it had the same meaning, his prayer would be invalid. Also saying it in any language other than Arabic would invalidate the prayer. It was enough for us thattakbeeratul ihram was obligatory that the Prophet (s) had never begun any of his prayers except with it. You already knew that the Prophet (s) had said: “Offer the prayer as you saw me offering it.”

The obligation oftakbeeratul ihram was confirmed by the Quran, the Sunna and the consensus of the umma. Allah said:(And your Lord do magnify 74:3). [101]The consensus of the umma agreed upon that the verse referred totakbeeratul ihram and the orders of Allah were to be obeyed obligatorily. According to the consensus of the umma too that other than saying (Allahu akbar) at the beginning of the prayer was not obligatory. The Prophet (s) said: “The key of the prayer is the tahoor,[102]its tahreem[103]is saying Allahu akbar and its tahleel[104]is by saying tasleem.”[105]This tradition was mentioned by Abu Dawood in hisSunan .

The Hanafites said that tahreem was not a pillar of the prayer but it was related to standing up towards the qibla. They said that it was not necessary to saytakbeeratul ihram in Arabic and they permitted translating it into any language the prayer liked whether he was able or unable to speak Arabic. They said thattakbeeratul ihram would be valid if the prayer said instead of (Allahu akbar) (subhanallah) or (la ilaha illallah) or any of the attributes of Allah the Almighty on condition that it was not to be said more than the attribute of Allah. The prayer could say (Allah), (ar-Rahman; the Beneficent) or any one of the other attributes of Allah to begin his prayer. This was their belief and their evidence for that was only approval!