Tag Archives: Sunnat

Khatam Khawajagan in the light of Shari’ah

[Mufti Afzal Hoosen Elias]

Shariat is easy, complete and approved by Allaah, To make zikr is praiseworthy, good, laudable, rewardable, gains proximity onto Allaah, provided it is done in accordance with the Shariah.

In Shariat, acts are classified Fardh, Wajib, Sunnat, Masnoon, Nafl, Mustahab, Mubah, Bid’at etc.

For every occasion, set-up, problem, difficulty, joyous occasion, sad occurrence, the Shariah is detailed with what to read, what measures to take, what not to do, what to avoid, how to behave etc.

Now to take a case, in a situation/set up of difficulties, we will find a set of proceedings to be followed as stated in the Qur’aan and Sunnat; then we also find a set of proceedings by the pious predecessors who formulated then and after trying then found these good and beneficially. These formulations were chosen from the Qur’aan and Ahadith and at times, duaa combinations of the pious. No pious one said that you have to do this or this method is Fardh, Waajib, Sunnat. This formulations such as “Khatam Khwajaghan” are neither Fardh, Waajib, Sunnat or Nafl  but “mubah”. If a person does it,
Knowing that this is neither Fardh, Waajib or Sunnat but it is a
tried and beneficially formulations that worked for/ by the pious ones, so lets also do it, Insha – Allaah, it will work for me in my state of difficulty etc.

Now understand another important aspect, one is “Dawaam” (constantly, regularity) and the other “Iltizaam” (to make necessary, essential, compulsory).

At times one decides that one is going read one para everyday, this the person decided to do regularly and constantly. This is an ‘mubah’ act which the person will be rewarded for tremendously. Now this person tells others, that you’ll also have to read one para daily constantly and regularly, making it essential, necessary on others (iltizaam). This is now turning into ‘Dawaam’ into Bid’at.

“Khatam Khwajagan” and other formulations, provided that the wardings do not contain un- Islaamic meanings, or erroneous beliefs then it will be permissible to read as long as one fully understands the jurisprudic status of that recitations and also does not oblige others to join and does not feel at the least hurt when no one joins or develops a sense of pride and show when many join.

Moreover the Sufi orders generally encourage such recitations, thus it is most highly advisable that such recitations be done under the strict guidance of a pious, righteous, reliable, authentic, spiritual mentor who will see that no un-Islaamic practices intrude these sessions, like inter mingling of sexes, photography, turning into social gatherings, adopting tea- gossip, party set up, sessions leading to holding hands whilst making zikr, then standing, then turning, then jumping, then dancing, then doing all the above together.

It is very quick for those activities that barely become permissible, to reach the stage of Bid’at.

A permissible act becomes Bid’at, due to time, place, condition, method specification which are not proven and are attached to

It is far better to use a formulation as specified in the Sunnat of Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) than to practise and promote any other permissible formulation.

We make duaa Allaah blesses all the understandings of Deen and grant us the ability to practise upon the pure, blessed, sanctions, approved, easy Sunnat of Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallan).

The Position of the Feet in Sajdah

QUESTION: Some  Ulama  are  propagating  that   it  is  Sunnat  for the  ankles  to touch  in  Sajdah. They  support  this  claim  with a  Hadith  attributed  to  Hadhrat  Aa’ishah  (radhiyallahu anha). It  has  always  been understood  that  the  feet should  be  kept  apart  in  Sajdah.  The  same  space  between the  feet  in  Qiyaam  should  be  also retained  in  Sajdah. What  is  the  correct  view?


[By Maulana Ahmad Sadiq Desai]

While  there  is  a  view  that the  ankles  should  touch  in  Sajdah,  it  is  an  extremely  weak view  which  has  not  been  entertained  by  all  the  Fuqaha  from the  earliest  era  of  Islam.  In  fact it  is  a  discarded  view.  The Maulana Sahib  who  is  propagating  the  view  of  ankles touching  in  Sajdah  has  unnecessarily  assumed  a  burden  on himself.

None  of  the  early  Fuqaha has  enumerated  this  practice  to be  among  the  Sunan  of  Salaat. In  fact,  they  don’t  even  make reference  to  it.  Hadhrat  Maulana  Zafar  Ahmad  Uthmaani (rahmatullah  alayh)  states  in Imdaadul Ahkaam:

None  of  our  Fuqaha  has mentioned  it  except  the  author of  Ad-Durr  and  the  Commentator  of  Al-Muniyah  and  the few  of  who  follow  them.  Al-Qudoori, Al-Kanz, Al-Wiqaayah  and  others  (i.e.other senior  Fuqaha)  of  the  authoritative    texts  who  narrate  Zaahirur  Riwaayat  have  not  entertained  it………    In  As-Siaayah, Allaamah  Abdul  Haq  Lucknowi  states: 

  “The  leader among  the  Hanafis  of  those who    contend  the  Sunniyat  of Ilsaaq  (i.e.  joining  the  ankles in Sujood) is  Zaahidi.  Despite  him  being  a great  Imaam  in  Fiqh,  he  is  well known  for  narrating   Dhaeef (Weak) narrations Ibn Aabideen  has  categorically mentioned  this  fact  in  Tanqeehul  Fatawal  Haamidiyyah.  It  is stated  in  Fawaaidul  Bahiyyah that  despite  him  being  a Hanafi  in  Furoo’  (i.e.  the  rules of  Fiqh),  he  was  a  Mu’tazili  by beliefs.”  (Mu’tazilis  hold  some very repugnant beliefs of kufr).

“According  to  the  discussion  of  Imaam  Tahaawi (rahmatullah alayh) in  Ma-aanil  AathaarIlsaaq    is  not  a Shar’i  injunction  in  anything pertaining  to  the  limbs,  neither in  Ruku’  nor  in  Sujood  for men. In  fact,  the  opposite,  i.e. separation  between  the  two ankles, is taught Mashroo’  (i.e.  by  the  Shariah). ……….Imaam  Tahaawi  added:    “We  have  seen  that  the Sunnah  which  came  from  Nabi (sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam)  is At-Tajaafi  (spreading  the  feet) in  Ruku’  and  Sujood.  The  Muslimoon  (i.e.  the  Ummahhave enacted Ijma’ on this. …..”

Now  since  the  weakness  of  its  narration  in  the  Madhab has  been  established,  and  since Tahaawi  has  unequivocally stated  the  Sunniyyat  of  At-Tajaafi  (i.e.  spreading  the  feet is  Sunnah)  in  Ruku’  and Sujood,  then  there  is  no  need whatsoever  to  establish  a daleel  for  the  Sunniyyat  of  this Ilsaaq (joining the ankles).”  (Imdaadul Ahkaam, Vol. 1, Page 478)       

The  Maulana  Sahib  has  embarked on an unnecessary  exercise  regarding  an  issue  which the  illustrious  Fuqaha  had  settled  more  than  13  centuries ago.  Tajaafi    (keeping  the  feet apart  whether  in  Ruku’  or  Sajdah,  has  been  the  amal  of    our Akaabireen  as  well  as  the Fuqaha.  It  is  a  practice  which has  come  down to us  from  generation  to  generation.  This  continuity  of  practice  (the  Tawaaruth  of  the  seniors  and  the Ummah)  may  not  be  altered with a weak view.

The  fact  that  according  to the  Shafi’i  Madhab  too Tajaafi  is  Sunnat,  further strengthens  the  view  of    keeping  the  feet  apart.  The  Shafi’i Madhab’s  view  is  stated  as follows:  “Spreading  the  feet, etc.  in  this  (i.e.  in  Sajdah)  is  on account  of  following  the  Sunnah.” 

There  is  really  no  need  for us  to  publish  a  detailed  response  to  the  arguments  of  the Maulana  Sahib.  We  do  not deem  it  prudent  to  publish  a booklet  in  refutation  of  the  arguments  presented  by  the  Maulana  Sahib  in  favour  of  his view.  It  suffices  to  say  that Tajaafi  is  the  official  teaching of    our  Madhab  and  that  the practice  of  our  Akaabireen  has been  on  this  act,  and  all  the senior Fuqaha  are of this view.

A  practice  which  the Fuqaha  had  not  proclaimed  a Sunnat  from  the  earliest  time, cannot  in  this  belated  century be  elevated  to  the  status  of Sunnah.  The  view  which  the Maulana  propagates  implies that  the  Ummah  was  not  aware of  this  Sunnat  for  all  the  past centuries  from  the  era  of  the Aimmah  Mujtahideen,  and  that this ‘Sunnat’  has  become known  only  recently.  But  this is  absurd,  especially  when Imaam  Tahaawee  had  categorically  stated  many  centuries  ago that  there  is  no  Shar’i  basis  for Ilsaaq.

The  solitary  Hadith  on which the  Maulana  Sahib  relies was  known  to  the  Fuqaha many  many  centuries  ago.  Despite  their  awareness,  they  set it  aside.  They  did  not   adopt  it as  a  basis  for  establishing  Ilsaaq to  be  Sunnat  has  the Maulana  Sahib  has  erroneously  contended.

The  contention  of  the  Maulana  that  the  silence  of  the Fuqaha  on  this  issue  is  not  a daleel,  is  audacious  to  say  the least.  It  was  the  sacred  obligation  of  the  Fuqaha  of  the Khairul  Quroon  to  codify  and systematize  the  whole  Shariah. In  Kitaabus  Salaat  the  Fuqaha had   enumerated  all  the  Sunan of  Salaat,  even  the  Mustahabbaat  and  the  Aaadaab.  If Ilsaaq  was  Sunnat,  then  it  is inconceivable  that  all  the Fuqaha  –  100%    of  them  –  had opted  for  silence.  The  obligation  of  the  Fuqaha  of  the Khairul  Quroon  era  was  to  prepare,  compile  and  hand  over  to posterity  the  entire  Shariah. Nothing  of  the  Shariah  was lost  after  Rasulullah  (sallallahu alayhi  wasallam),  hence  nothing  can  be  discovered  of  it  fourteen  centuries  down  the line.

The  contention  that  all  the Fuqaha,  including  such  illustrious  Aimmah  as  Imaam  Abu Hanifah,  Imaam  Abu  Yusuf, Imaam  Muhammad  and  innumerable  other  great  and  illustrious  Fuqaha  of  our  Madhab were  unaware  of  a  Sunnat practice,  hence   their  silence, and  that  the  Maulana  Sahib  has managed  to  unearth  the  ‘lost’  Sunnat,  simply  boggles  the mind.
No  one  in  this  age  has  the right  to  hoist  as  Sunnat  a  practice had  not  enumerated among  the  sunan  nor  had  our Akaabireen  regardless  of  what narration he  produces.


Necessary Technical Terms of Fiqh

There are eight kinds of Divine laws regarding the deeds and action of man:

(1)Fardh (2)waajib (3)sunnat (4)musstahab (5)haraam (6)makrooh tahrimi (7)makrooh tanzihi (8)mubah


Fardh is a Divine Command Which is established by such proof kbown as Daleel Qat’i (Absolute proof), one who neglects a fardh injunction without any valid islamic excuse is termed by the Shari’ah as Faasiq.

One who rejects a Fardh injunction is termed a kaafir and is beyond tbe pale of Islam

Fardh is divided into two classes 1) Fardh Ayn and 2) Fardh Kifaayah

Fardh Ayn is a duty which is compulsory upon every muslim. Neglect of fardh ayn without a valid (Islamic) reason validates a punishment, and such a person is described as a Faasiq.

Fardh Kifaayah is a compulsory duty, which, if discharged by a few members in a community. However, if not a single person in a community executes it then the entire community will be liable and sinful.


Waajib is a Divine command established by proof known as Daleel Zanni (or such proof which is almost very strong, but of a lower category than Daleel Qat’i), one who neglects or rejects a waajib injunction is termed a Faasiq


Sunnat refers to such deeds as practiced by Rasulullah (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) or his Sahaaba (alaihim ur ridhwan). Sunnat is divided into two classes.

1. Sunnatul Muak-kadah
2. Sunnatul Ghair Muak-kadah

Sumnatul Muak-kadah is an action which was steadfastly upheld by Rasulullah or his Sahaaba (The Companions) and was not left off without valid reason. One who constantly rejects it is also termed as a Faasiq

Sunnatul Ghair Muak-kadah is an act which was practiced by Rasulullah or his Sahaaba, but which they left off without any excuse.

Execution of Sunnatul Ghair
Muak-kadah warrants a great sawaab (reward), and failure to carry it out does not warrant punishment.

It os also known as Sunnatul Zaa-idah and Sunnatul ‘Aadiyah


Mustahab is an act which Rasulullah (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) and his Sahaabah did occasionally. One who fulfills a Mustahab act deserves Sawaab. There is no sin in not doing it.


Haraam refers to a prohibition which is established by proof known as Daleel Qat’i (Absolute Proof). The perpetor of Haraam is termed a Faasiq and one who rejects a haraam becomes a Kaafir.


Makrooh-Tahrimi is a prohibition established by proof known as Daleel Zanni (or such a proof which although very strong, is of a lower category than Daleel Qat’i). One who commits Makrooh-Tahrimi is a Faasiq, and the one who rejects it is also a Faasiq.


Makrooh-Tanzihi refers to such an act which if not done will warrant Sawaab, and if done then it will not be a punishable offence.

It should be remembered that commission of Makrooh-Tanzihi onlu OCCASIONALLY will not be a punishable offence. However, committing Makrooh-Tanzihi contantly becomes a punishable offence.


Mubaah is an act which if not done does not warrant Sawaab amd if not done then it will not be a punishable offence. In other words it is an act which it merely permissible.