Shia objection #1
‘But, but … Tarawaya (Tarawih) is the innovation of Omaar, he himself called it (i.e. Tarawih) an excellent bid’ah in your own Sunni books!’ Here the hadith:
It was narrated that ‘Abd al-Rahmaan ibn ‘Abd Al-Qaari’ said: I went out with ‘Omar ibn Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) one night in Ramadan to the mosque, and the people were scattered, with one man praying by himself and another with a group of men following his prayer. ‘Omar said: “I think that if I gather them behind one reader, it will be better.” Then he decided to unite them behind Ubayy ibn Ka’b. Then I went out with him on another night, and the people were praying behind their reader. ‘Omar said: “What a good innovation this is. But the prayer that they forget about and sleep is better than the one they are offering.” [Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1906.]
Answer
Let’s say – for the sake of argument – that ‘Omar indeed meant to have introduced an evil bid’ah into the religion of Allah: So what! Muslims are not blind followers of ‘Omar nor are Shias (last time we checked …). Besides, if ‘Omar thinks something is an innovation, since when does that make it an innovation? The reality is that it was not an innovation, because there was a precedent for it during the life of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), also ‘Omar did not mean what Shias (due to their ignorance of the Arabic language) accuse him of.
In reality there was nothing so “new” and “innovative” about what ‘Omar had done, since the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had already led such a congregation before during his lifetime.
If Shias say that they use ‘Omar’s statement as a prove against us, then we say that thier (i.e. Shias) statement is actually prove of their ignorance, specifically regarding the Arabic language and terminologies who have to be understand in context not according to ones whims (ironically in this case here Shias suddenly become literalists …).
Scholars have correctly explained ‘Omar’s words, the Shia argument is not new, just recycled:
With regard to what was said by some of the earlier generations about regarding some innovations as good, that refers to innovation in the linguistic sense, not in the technical shar‘i sense. An example of that is what ‘Omar (may Allah be pleased with him) said, when he united the people in praying Qiyam in Ramadan behind a single Imam in the mosque; when he came out and saw the people praying in that manner, he said: What a good innovation this is. And it was narrated from him that he said: If this is an innovation, then what a good innovation. What he meant was that this deed had not been done in this manner before this time, but it had a basis in Islamic teaching that may be referred to, such as the fact that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) used to encourage and urge people to pray Qiyam in Ramadan. At his time, the people used to pray Qiyam in the mosque, in scattered groups and individually, and he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) led his companions in praying Qiyam in Ramadan for several nights. Then he stopped doing that, on the basis that he feared that it might be made obligatory for them, then they would be unable to do it, but there was no fear of that after he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) died. [Ibn Rajab in his Jaami‘ al-‘Uloom wa’l-Hikam (2/783)]
The Saying of Ibn Kathir
In support of the above, we find Ibn Kathir said in explanation of the verse (2:117):
والبدعة على قسمين تارة تكون بدعة شرعية كقوله فإن كل محدثة بدعة وكل بدعة ضلالة وتارة تكون بدعة لغوية كقول أمير المؤمنين عمر بن الخطاب عن جمعه إياهم على صلاة التراويح واستمرارهم نعمت البدعة هذه
And bid’ah is of
two types. Sometimes it is a
bid’ah shar’iyyah (with its
Shariah meaning), such as his saying, ‘For every newly-invented matter is an innovation and every innovation is misguidance …’ and sometimes it is a
bid’ah lughawiyyah (with its linguistic meaning), such as the saying of Amir Al-Mu’minin ‘Omar bin Al-Khattab regarding his uniting them together for the Tarawih
prayer and making them maintain this practice, ‘
What an excellent innovation this is …’
This indicates that there is no such thing as “good bidah” in the Shariah, and where bidah is spoken of in a praiseworthy sense, it is only being spoken of with its linguistic meaning. To distinguish between these two makes it much easier for us to grasp the nature of the perception of some of the Shafi’ite jurists in their classifiation of bidah. This we will investigate in the following articles in this series.
A staunch Shia of ‘Ali, the first person to lead people in Tarawih in Islamic history!
The first Imam to lead Tarawih in the Prophet’s Mosque after ‘Omar combined all the small groups into one large group was Ubayy ibn Ka’b, who was one of the closest and staunchest supporters of the Commander of the Faitfhul, ‘Ali, and one of the best memorisers and reciters of the Qur’an. Surprise Surprise, one of the closest Shias of ‘Ali led the first unified Tarawih congregation after the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) in Islamic history and Shias (who have innovated numerous innovated prayers) call it bid’ah!
The question now is: Who was Ubayy ibn Ka’b to Shias? And don’t Shias make takfir on most of the Sahabah?
Indeed, they do, however some Sahabah (especially those who sided with ‘Ali in his battles) are spared from their takfir, amongst them is Ubay about whom ‘Ayatullah’ Al-Khoie says that he (‘Ubay) is amongst the best companions of ‘Ali and a reliable and trustworthy individual:
مستقاة من الكتاب القيم لآية الله العظى الشيخ : المامقاني (ر) وهو كتاب : تنقيح المقال : ، وغيرها من المصادر الكثيرة
– أبي بن كعب بن قيس النجاري ( أبو المنذر ) ، حسن بل ثقة
The first person to lead what Shias believe to be a Sunni ‘bid’ah’ was actually one of the staunchest Shia (‘supporters’) of ‘Ali! Surely ‘Ali must have made an attempt to stop him? If ‘Ali was against Tarawih, then why did he not stop his closest Shia from leading it in the first place? And besides, if Ubayy was such a close and strong Shia (‘supporter’) of the Imam, why did he even agree to lead Tarawih if he knew ‘Ali was against it? Are Shias really going to pull out the Taqiyyah card again? Perhaps, Ubayy being scared of ‘Omar’s whip? Taqiyyah is only permissible for saving ones life. Do Shias seriously expect us to believe that if Ubayy refused to lead, his life would be in danger. Let’s be realistic here, Bilal (out of sadness) refused to give Adhan after the Prophet’s (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) demise even though Abu Bakr asked him to continue giving it, but he refused, and no one could harm him or kill him for that. So somehow Bilal had no need for Taqiyyah but Ubayy had?
Asad ibn ‘Amr ibn Abi Yusuf said: I asked Abu Hanifah about Taraweeh and what ‘Omar did. He said: Tarawih is a confirmed Sunnah, and ‘Omar did not base his decision on speculation and he was not introducing bid’ah (an innovation). He did not enjoin it except because of what he knew from the Messenger of Allah ((peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). ‘Omar introduced this and gathered the people behind Ubayy ibn Ka’b and he offered this prayer in congregation, at the time when the Sahaabah – the Muhaajireen and Ansaar – were still alive, and no one among them objected to that, rather they helped him and agreed with him, and also enjoined it
What Shias don’t know about the Sunni stance with regard to the Tarawih prayer
Sunni scholars in general maintain (and it is similarly one view among the Zaydis) that it is recommended to hold congregational Tarawih prayers regularly in Ramadan, with its basis in Prophetic practice. This has played an important role in the public preservation of the Qur’an, as it has been customary to complete its recitation from memory at least once per Ramadan during these congregational Tarawih prayers.
After agreeing on the meritoriousness of a congregation being established for Tarawih, the same scholars nevertheless differed (amongst themselves) as to how much it is stressed for every individual to participate in the congregational Tarawih. According to the dominant view in the Hanafi school, the congregation for Tarawih is Sunnah ‘ala Al-kifayah, i.e. it is enough (i.e. the Sunnah is considered to be fulfilled) if a congregation for Tarawih is established in the community [Ibn ;Abidin, Radd Al-Muhtar], but if a person prays it on his own (at home or elsewhere) he is not considered to be sinful or remiss.
Badruddin al-A’ini said in his commentary of Sahih al-Bukhari called ‘Umdat al-Qari:
Malik, Al-Shafi’, and Rabi’a held to the view that the prayer in the house is better than the prayer with an Imam [i.e. in the mosques]. This is the view of Ibrahim [Al-Nikha’i], Al-Hasan Al-Basri, Al-Alqama and Al-Aswad.
In the chief book of Maliki jurisprudence, the Mudawwana, when Imam Malik was asked about praying during Ramadan, he said:
If one has the strength, it is preferred to me that one prays in his house. Not everyone has the strength to do that.
There has been disagreement, since the early generations, about whether it is better for an individual to join the congregation for tarawih, or to pray on his own. While there were a number of prominent Sahabah and Tabi’in who are reported to have prayed Tarawih in congregation, there were others who did not. In Madinah, `Abdullah ibn ‘Omar, the Sahabi, would pray Tarawih on his own, and would advise/give fatwa similarly (Shias love to quote a harsh statement of him, where he compares people who know Qur’an yet pray the whole night behind an Imam in Tarawih with donkeys. This harsh opinion of Ibn ‘Omar was directed to those who know the Qur’an i.e. according to Ibn ‘Omar it is better for the one who knows the Qur’an to pray the night prayer in Ramadan alone. This narration is not in favour of the Shia, it only proves the freedom the Sahabah and the community had in ‘Omar’s time, to the point that his own son expressed such opinions).
Salim (Ibn ‘Omar’s son) as well as Al-Qasim ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr and ‘Urwah ibn Al-Zubayr (two of the Seven Great Jurists of Madinah) similarly would pray Tarawih alone. In fact it is even reported that ‘Omar ibn Al-Khattab himself prefered to pray Tarawih alone at home or later at night (‘But the prayer which they do not perform but sleep at its time, is better than the one they are offering now.’)
In Kufah, Ibrahim Al-Nakha’i, ‘Alqamah and Al-Aswad would each lead their congregations in ‘Isha but then leave and do Tarawih on their own. Ishaq ibn Suwayd relates that there would be a row of people (called Saff Al-Qurra – the Reciters’ Row) praying Tarawih individually in the mosque while the congregation was in progress [See: Ibn Abi Shaybah, Musannaf; Tahawi, Sharh Ma`ani Al-Athar].
The Sunni position, as one can clearly see is very open-minded and moderate, from the early times the Sahabah themselves preferred different methods of praying the night prayer, some in congregation, some alone, however, nobody has ever went to the extremes of the Rafidah (extremist Shias such as the Twelvers) who due to their grudge and hatred for ‘Omar dismiss the practice of Tarawih altogether. A man, who was able to recite Qur’an for himself, asked Al-Hassan Al-Basri whether to pray Tarawih alone or to join the Jama’ah. Al-Hassan told him to choose whichever option is better for him, in terms of being more conducive to awareness and a fearful heart [Narrated by Muhammad ibn Nasr al-Marwazi]. This astute reply brings out the fact that for different people, in different circumstances, one or the other option might be better.
Shia objection #2
‘What about Shia narrations that speak of the prohibition of Tarawih?’
Response:
Yes, Shia books do include such narrations, but the absolute irony is that those narrations (that speak of the PROHIBITION of Tarawih) are in reality weak according to Shia hadith standards themselves. The only reason they are championed and parroted is due to their ‘Anti-‘Omar’ and ‘Anti-Tarawih’ nature, when scrutinised, they hold no water when compared to the previous Shia narrations we provided that clearly prove that Tarawih has its roots in the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) not ‘Omar or anyone else. The most famous Anti-Tarawih narrations Shia propagandists, websites and their scholars (in their bias) love to quote are the following:
Anti-Tarawih hadith #1
The Khutba of Ameerul Mumineen (as) in Al-Kaafi:
Imam Ali (AS): “The rulers before me did many acts that went against the teachings of the Prophet (SAWW), which they intentionally went against, contradicting their covenant to him, changing his Sunnah. And if I used force to drive people away from this (innovation) then people will divide. I swear by Allah I have commanded people to not pray any optional prayers (Taraweeh) in Jama’a other than the obligatory prayers, and I told them that their gatherings in Nawafil (Taraweeh) is a Bid’ah (innovation).” (Al Kaafi by Sheikh al-Kulayni, vol. 8/ p 51)
Response:
- The above narration – as mentioned earlier – conflicts with the authentic narration in Al-Kafi that proves that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was the first to pray Ramadan in congregation not ‘Omar or any ‘ruler’ before ‘Ali.
- Besides, this alleged sermon of ‘Ali is in the Raudah Al-Kafi (smallest part of Al-Kafi, with the Usul then Furu’ being the largest), there is difference of opinion amongst Shia themselves whether Al-Kulayni even authored Raudah Al-Kafi or not. Some believe some other unknown person compiled it, and as such, they tend to be very suspicious of the narrations in the Raudah Al-Kafi because the identity of the compiler is not confirmed.
- Shias can’t just dismiss the importance of the chain of transmission (many do in their desperation), for the chain of this so called sermon is manifestly weak (da’if), if not an outright fabrication according to Shia hadith standards itself!
- The chain contains numerous problems for Shias, we shall point out one to save us and yourselves time: Ibrahim b. ‘Omar Al-Yamani = Da’if Jiddan”, “extremely weak according to Ibn Al-Ghada’iri, one of the earliest Shia rijal and hadith scholars.
Anti-Tarawih hadith #2
Imam al-Sadiq (as) and al-Baqir (as) were asked about the Nafil (recommended) prayers in congregation on the nights during the month of Ramadan. So they would reply: “Verily when the Messenger of Allah (saw) prayed the final al-`Isha, he would return home, then leave in the final hours of the night to the mosque so he stands and prays. So he left the first night of the month of Ramadan to pray as he prays, so the people made rows behind him, so he (the Prophet) fled from them to his home and left them. This was repeated for three nights. So the Prophet (saw) stood during the third day on the pulpit, praised Allah (SWT) and then said: “Oh People, verily the congregational prayers during the nights of the month of Ramadan is an innovation (bid‟a), and the Duha prayers is an innovation. Therefore do not gather at night during the month of Ramadan for the night prayers. And do not pray the Duha prayers since it is a sin. Verily every innovation is a misguidance and every misguidance is on a path to the hellfire.
He then came down (from the pulpit) while saying: “Little of the sunnah is better than much of the innovations.”
Sanad: Muhammad b. `Ali b. al-Husayn by his isnads from Zurara and Muhammad b. Muslim and al-Fudayl who said the above hadith
Source: Wasa’il Al-Shia, Volume 8, Page 45, Hadith #1
Response:
- The above narration also conflicts with the authentic narration in Al-Kafi that proves that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was the first to pray Ramadan in congregation and he did not rebuke people for doing so (i.e. praying with him).
- Most importantly, the hadith is ‘da’if’ (weak) according to Shia rijal standards (even lenient ones). One of the narrators in the chain of the narration is Muhammad bin Isa bin ‘Ubaid who was declared ‘da’if; (weak) and a Ghaali (exaggerator/extremist) by Al-Tusi in his book of Rijal.
- There are more issues in the chain, such the narrator Muhammad bin Muslim Al-Thaqafi who is also not reliable, because of the presence of Ali bin Ahmed and his father Ahmad bin Abi Abdillah and his grandfather Muhammad bin Khalid all of whom are ‘majhool’ (Unknown, or no clear grading for them). In fact, ‘Ahmad bin Abi Abdillah’ was expelled from the city of Qom by Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Isa (because of his deviant beliefs). So there are people in the chain who are even extremists and weak narrators according to the extreme Twelver Shias themselves!
Anti-Tarawih hadith #3
Abi Abdillah (as) was asked about the prayers at the mosque during the month of Ramadan, he said: When Ameer al-Mu‟mineen (as) went forth to Kufa, he ordered al-Hassan (as) to call to the people: “There are no congregational prayers in the month of Ramadan. So al-Hassan bin Ali (as) called to the people by what Ameer al-Mu‟mineen (as) ordered him, so when the people heard these words they chanted: “Oh Umar! Oh Umar!”. So when al-Hassan bin Ali (as) returned to Ameer al-Mu‟mineen (as), he (Ali) asked: “What is this noise? So (al-Hassan) replied: “Oh Ameer al-Mu‟mineen, the people are chanting: “Oh Umar! Oh Umar!”. Ameer al-Mu‟mineen (as) said: “tell them „pray.‟”
Sanad: `Ali b. al-Hasan b. Faddal from Ahmad b. al-Hasan from `Amr b. Sa`d alMada‟ini from Musaddaq b. Sadaqa from `Ammar who said the above hadith
Source: Wasaa’il al-Shia, Volume 8, Page 46, Hadith #2
Response:
- The Sanad (chain of narration) of this narration is also ‘dai’f’ (weak) because of the presence of Ali bin Hasan bin Faddal who was a Fath’hite (a deviant Shia sects according to Twelvers), and was ‘da’if’ according to Al-Hilli, fact Al-Hilli declared him to be a Kafir and accursed because he and his family were prominent proponents of the Fathite belief, he even wrote a book proving the Imamah of Abdullah bin Ja’far.
- The Matn (text) is a clear-fabrication (besides portraying ‘Ali as a weak authority who bows down to the demand of the people which is – allegedly – in violation to the religion!), not supported by any historical account whatsoever. If ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) vocally opposed Tarawih, how come all the other classical Muslim historians failed to register his opposition in their books, even though they registered his other stances in which he opposed the previous caliphs in their books. For example, ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) differed with the previous Caliphs on the issue of ‘Umra and Hajj Tamattu, and Sunni scholars clearly recorded his opposition to the stance of the Caliphs, even though he was not even a Caliph at that time. The fact is that Sunni scholars, historians and narrators of Hadith never shied away from documenting, recording and registering in their books the points on which ‘Ali opposed the previous Caliphs or differed with them. Rather, they carefully recorded all such noteworthy instances in their books. How come, they assiduously and meticulously record ‘Ali’s stances of opposition against the previous Caliphs when he is simply a regular citizen of the state, but fail to record the attempts he allegedly made to ‘ban’ or ‘oppose’ Tarawih when he became Caliph? Does this make sense?
- In view of this, we say: if ‘Ali had done something as major as placing a ban on Taraweeh or even if he had voiced his opposition to it, how many scholars would be able to suppress that? Even if ten or twenty Sunni scholars suppressed it, another ten or twenty Sunni scholars would end up quoting it, perhaps absentmindedly, and the truth would have emerged, as is always the case.
Anti-Tarawih hadith #4
Abi Abdillah (as) and Abi Ja‟far (as) said: “When Ameer al-Mu‟mineen (as) was in Kufa, the people came to him and said: “Appoint for us an Imam (of prayer) to lead us in Ramadan. So he replied to them: “No” and he forbade them from congregating in it. So when the evening came (the people) would say: “Cry (for) Ramadan, Oh Ramadan” So Haarith al-ahwar came from among people (to Ali) and said: “Oh Ameer al-Mu‟mineen, the people are causing a fuss and dislike your words. He replied: “Leave them to do what they want and let them pray with whom they want” then he said (the following ayah) “And whoever [..] follows other than the way of the believers – We will give him what he has taken and drive him into Hell, and evil it is as a destination.” (4:115)
Sanad: Muhammad b. Idris in the end of as-Sara‟ir transmitting from the book of Abu „l-Qasim Ja`far b. Muhammad b. Qulawayh who said the above hadith
Source: Wasaa’il al-Shia (Aale Bayt), Volume 8, Page 47, Hadith #5
Response:
- This hadith is not ‘Musnad’, i.e the Sanad is broken, and it is not consecutively connected to any of the Shia ‘infallibles’.
