The Validity of Giving a Khutbah In non-Arabic
In the Name of Allah 
, Most Merciful, Most Compassionate
The preferred opinion of the later fuqaha of the Shafi’i madhhab, is that it is valid to give a khutbah in another language beside Arabic, with the conditions that people understood the language and all the integrals of the khutbah should be delivered in Arabic.
The Integrals of the Two Khuṭbahs are Five:
1. Praising Allah in both the khuṭbahs.
2. Ṣalāh upon Nabi sallaLlahu alayhi wa alihi sallam in both the khuṭbahs.
3. Enjoining taqwa in both the khuṭbahs.
4. Recitation of one verse of the Qurʾān in one of the khuṭbahs.
5. To make duʿā for the believers, males and females in the second khuṭbah.
[see Safinat al-naja: The ship of salvation]
The Opinion of the Mutaakhkhirin Aṣhāb
There is no clear “naṣ,” from the mutaqaddimin ashab, rendering the permissibility of the khutbah in other languages beside Arabic. However, the details of this mas’alah1 has been clarified by many mutaakhkhirin (later jurists) in their commentaries and meta-commentaries.
The integrals of a khutbah should been rendered in Arabic, besides that a khutbah may be rendered in other language besides Arabic. This has been mentioned clearly by Imam Ibn Hajar (al-Tuhfah), Imam Shams al-din al-Ramli (al-Nihayah), Shaykh al-Islam Zakariyya (Fath al-Wahhab), Khaṭīb al-Shirbīnī (al-Iqnaʿ), and al-Bujayrimī (Hashiyah ‘ala al-Manhaj).
It is stated in al-Tuḥfah when mentioning the conditions of the khutbah:
( ويشترط كونها ) أي الأركان دون ما عداها ( عربية )
“It is a condition that (the integrals of khutbah; not that which is beside them,) are in Arabic.”
نهاية المحتاج – (ج 7 / ص 82)
( ويشترط كونها ) أي الخطبة والمراد بها الجنس الشامل للخطبتين كما أن المراد بهما أركانهما ( عربية )
(قوله كما أن المراد بهما أركانهما) يفيد أنه لو كان ما بين أركانهما بغير العربية لم يضر، ويجب وفاقا لم ر أن محله إذا لم يطل الفصل بغير العربي وإلا ضر لإخلاله بالموالاة كالسكوت بين الأركان إذا طال بجامع أن غير العربي لغو لا يحسب، لأن غير العربي لا يجزي مع القدرة على العربي فهو لغو أنتهى سم على منهج والقياس عدم الضرر مطلقا ويفرق بينه وبين السكوت بأن في السكوت إعراضا عن الخطبة بالكلية بخلاف غير العربي فإن فيه وعظا في الجملة فلا يخرج بذلك عن كونه من الخطبة. – الشبراملسي (2: 317)
Imam al-Shabramallisi commented on the statement of al-Nihayah, “The intended meaning of “them two” is the integrals of two khutbahs,” this informed us, if in between the integrals of the khutbah, speech is given in other languages beside Arabic, it will not cause harm to the khutbah.
In accordance with Imam Ramli’s view, this (permissibility to use non-Arabic in the khutbah) is as a matter of necessity (“yajibu“) only applicable in the case where the interruption through non-Arabic is not long. Otherwise it will harm the khutbah, because in that instance, the continuity of the integrals is not found. Like the case of long pause between the integrals. In general, non-Arabic will be ineffective, because non-Arabic will not be considered in spite of having an ability to perform it in Arabic. This opinion is according to Imam Ibn Qasim on the commentary of al-Manhaj.
(The response of imam al-Shabramallisi to the view of Ibn Qasim rahimahuma Allah ta’ala) However, according to analogy, it will not harm (the khutbah). There is a difference between non-Arabic and silence, the silence is turning away from the khutbah in total, contrary to the case of non-Arabic. Altogether, warning is conveyed; therefore, long separation of the integrals will not bring non-Arabic speech out of being part of a khutbah.
The Khutbah Should Be Given In the Language That People Understand
(قوله وإن لم يعرفها القوم) تضيته إن الخطيب لو أحسن لغتين غير عربتين كرومية وفارسية مثلا وباقي القوم يحسن إحدهما فقط أن الخطيب أن يخطب باللغة التي لا يحسنونها ويؤيده قوله: وأجاب القاضي عن سؤال ما فائدة الخطبة بالعربية الخ ونقل عن الزيادي ما يوافقه وفيه نظر، بل الظاهر أن الخطبة لا تجزي إلا باللغة التي يحسنها القوم ولا يعارضه صحة الخطبة بالعربية بل وجوبها بها حيث أحسنها دونهم لأنها الاصل فوجبت مراعته بخلاف غيرها من اللغات فحيث وجد لبعضها مرجح كفهم القوم لها قدم على غيره ويؤيد ذلك ما قاله الأذرعي على ما نقله عنه عميرة بناء على عدم اشتراط كونها بالعربية من قوله لعله إذا علم القوم ذلك اللسان. – الشبراملسي (2: 317)
Apparently, the khutbah is only valid if it is conveyed in the language that the people understand. However, this will not go against the ruling of the validity of khutbah in Arabic. Moreover, it is wajib to give the khutbah in Arabic if people only understand the Arabic well, not other languages. Because of the Arabic is the original, to consider its essential is imperative, unlike other languages. Whenever there are some factors to give preference one over the other, then it should be put forward. This is been supported by the statement of imam al-Ażraʿī, “Perhaps when people understood that language,” this has been narrated by shaykh ʿAmīrah, base on the opinion that Arabic is not a condition in a khutbah,
Considering Other Factors in the Khutbah:
The khutbah is for the sake of exhortation and advice
The object of khutbah is to advice and admonishes people. This should be done in the language that people understood it well. Allah says in the holy Qur’an:
و َمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن رَّسُولٍ إِلاَّ بِلِسَانِ قَوْمِهِ لِيُبَيِّنَ لَهُمْ
We have not sent any Messenger except with the language of his people so he can make things clear to them. [surah Ibrahim: 4]
المجموع شرح المهذب – (ج 4 / ص 521)
ومقصود الخطبة الوعظ وهذا نصه في الاملاء وممن نقله عن الاملاء الرافعي وغيره
The object of the khutbah is an admonition. This is the nass of Imam al-Shafi’i in the Al-Imla’, among those who narrates it from the al-Imla’ is Imam al-Rāfiʿī and others, (al-Majmu).
صحيح البخاري – البغا – (ج 1 / ص 301(
فإذا خرج الإمام حضرت الملائكة يستمعون الذكر
In the hadith of Bukhari, it is mentioned:
“When the imam came out (for the khutbah) the Angels present and listen to the dhikr.”
Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani explained the word dhikr refers to the khutbah i.e. the admonition and others. (see al-Fath: 2: 427)
The khutbah is not a substitute of the two rakʿats of Zuhr.
It is established, the Jumu’ah salah is not a substitute for the Zuhr salah.
Speech is not prohibited in the khutbah
وهل يحرم الكلام على الخطيب فيه طريقان المذهب لا يحرم قطعا والثاني على القولين ثم جميع هذا الخلاف في الكلام الذي لا يتعلق به غرض مهم ناجز
Is it prohibited for the khatib to speak? There are two opinions regarding this. The madhab is that it is absolutely permissible, and the second opinion has two verdicts. All the differences of the opinions regarding the speeches that does not pertaining to the important matter. (see al-Rawḍah: 1: 420)
(see the previous article on the issue of talking during Jumu’ah )
المجموع شرح المهذب – (ج 4 / ص 525)
ذكرنا أن الصحيح عند أصحابنا أنه لا يحرم الكلام وبه قال عروة بن الزبير وسعيد بن جبير والشعبى والنخعي والثوري
وداود وقال مالك والاوزاعي وأبو حنيفة واحمد يحرم
“The correct view according to our [Shafi'i] colleagues is that speech is not prohibited (during the khutbah) and this is the opinion of ʿUrwah ibn al-Zubayr, Saʿīd ibn Jubayr, al-Shaʿbī, al-Nakhaʿī, al-Thawrī and Dāwud. According to Malik, al-Awzāʿī, Abū Hanīfah, Ahmad rahimahumuLLah ta’ala it is haram.” [Majmu' Sharh Al-Muhadhdhab 4/525]
However, There Are Some Problems With The Application of the Usul in this Mas’alah
It is clear, from the opinion of the mutaakhkhirin that they held it to be permitted to speak in non-arabic within the Khutbah, as long as the conditions were met.
(1) However, despite this permissibility, the fuqaha stated that the arkan (pillars) of the khutbah should be in Arabic. How have the fuqaha come to this conclusion and what is the principle behind this?
(2) With the limited source I have, I have not come across the qawl (legal saying) of the mutaqaddimin that conforms to the fatwa of the mutaakhkhirin as mentioned above.
Maulana Taha’s Clarification Regarding the Issue:
Restricting the stipulation of being in Arabic to the arkan of the khutbah alone is a sort of compromise between the idealism of those of the As’hab al-Wujuh who insist upon Arabic, and the realism of those in whose opinion Arabic is not a requirement.
The second group (whose view is recorded by al-Mutawalli in Tatimmah) approach the matter from a realistic angle: the khutbah is for the sake of exhortation and advice; delivering it in a language which the congregation does not understand defeats the purpose. Reasoning that the purpose of the khutbah is more important than its language and form, they came to the conclusion that Arabic per se is not a requirement for the validity of the khutbah.
The first group, on the other hand, took note of a number of other features of the khutbah:
(1) it is a fard dhikr
(2) it consists of indispensable integrals
(3) it has to be delivered from a standing position
(4) the two khutbahs must be separated by a mandatory sitting in between
(5) it can only be delievered in a state of taharah
(6) the ‘awrah has to be covered during its delivery
All of these considerations led them to the conclusion that while the khutbah might perhaps not quite be a replacement for two rak’ahs, it certainly has a much more formal character than common speech. By looking wider afield into fiqh they found that all forms of fard dhikr carry the stipulation of being in Arabic, hence they concluded analogically that the khutbah, too, has to be in Arabic.
The dalil (proof) used above is qiyas (analogical deduction). It is this dalil which Imam Nawawi uses in Sharh al-Muhadhdhab. As for the argument of iittiba’ of a transmitted practice which is commonly cited, it stands challenged by the usuli dimensions which had been raised, to which one may respond by citing the special nature of the khutbah as outlined above. This response, however, will only be effective within the bounds of the madhhab since the other madhahib generally do not regard satr al-’awrah, taharah, qiyam etc. as shurut (pre-conditions) for the validity of the khutbah.
That much pertains to the Mutaqaddimin up to the Shaykhayn.
The realism that underlies the marjuh view (of Arabic not being a requirement) did not quite die out, as can be seen from the compromise position of having the non-integrals in the local language. In my opinion this view came about precisely on account of the persistence of the idea of the purpose being equally important (if not more important than) the form of the khutbah. What may also have contributed to it from a socio-historical perspective is that unlike in its early centuries, the spread of Islam no longer went hand in hand with the spread of the Arabic language. Regions to which Islam spread during the last millennium or so did adopt Islam, but unlike the lands of the early conquests (Egypt, Syria, North Africa), Arabic did not replace local languages. The phenomenon of substantial Muslim populations whose use of Arabic was restricted to devotional aspects of life.
I would believe that there would be a certain credence to the claim that these two factors (the persistence of the importance of purpose, and the proliferation of non-Arabic speaking communities) combined to impress upon the Muta’akhkhirin the need for introducing some realism. In doing so they had two options:
(1) Abandon the rajih position and go back to the marjuh.
(2) Stick to the rajih position but adapt it somewhat.
The option they chose was the second. The manner in which they reasoned their adaptation of the rajih position was as follows:
• The rajih position dictates that the khutbah must be in Arabic
• The khutbah, essentially, is really only the arkan; in a certain sense, the rest is superfluous
• So if the arkan are kept in Arabic, the requirement of the rajih position has been satisfied at the most basic level
• The rest may therefore be in a language other than Arabic
With the likes of Shaykh al-Islam Zakariyya and his pupils Khatib, Ibn Hajar and al-Ramli having jointly reached this conclusion, the question that arose was whether the inclusion of a non-Arabic insertion would invalidate the khutbah. All agreed that if the non-Arabic insertion is short the khutbah would remain valid since the requirement of muwalat stands unaffected. In the case of a lengthy non-Arabic insertion, however, opinions differed. Ibn Qasim in his (unpublished) Hashiyah on Sharh al-Manhaj takes his cue from al-Ramli when he states that where the non-Arabic insertion creates a lengthy interruption, the khutbah should be invalid, as in the case of a lengthy silence. To this Shabramallisi responds by differentiating between a non-Arabic insertion on the one hand and silence on the other.
[end with slight amendment]
And Allah ta’ala knows best.
[re-edited by Abul Layth on Sept. 4-2009]
- i.e. fiqh issue [↩]
In My Masjid our Imaam gives a Speech in Urdu.
Then the Khutba Azaan is done ,
Then the English Translation of the Speech is given.
Then the Imaam stands on the Mimbar and basically gives the Arabic Khutba
Which is in fact a translation of the Urdu and English with all the integrals of The Khutba.
What does anyone think of the method?
The method prescribed above is the way of the Ahnaaf and others who hold their opinion. As stated in this article from the A’immah of our school, this method is not obligatory and is unnecessary.
What is the Fatwa bihee Qawl ? or which opinion is in the majority
Assalamu Alaykum.
I live in Sweden, and I understand Swedish better than I understand Arabic or Serbo-Kroatian (I am ethnic Kurd). In fact, they´re never giving Khutbahs in Swedish, only in Arabic and in the Serbo-croat-language (Since the Jam´ah is mostly a mix of Arabs and people from Balkans) in our Mosque. At best, I could understand a few words of the Arabic Khutbah and almost nothing of the Serbo-Croat translation. Thus, I don´t benefit too much from a Khutbah, unless a brother translates for me.
What is the ruling of people going to Jumu´ah and don´t listen/ or don´t understand the Khatib?
Wassalam.
Wa’alaykum Salam Brother Abdul Hakim,
There is a deeper issue here. Imam Taqiy Al-Hisni in his Kifayat Al-Akhyar is of the opinion that the Sahih (correct) view of the madh-hab, and this is HIS view, is that it is necessary to perform the khutbah in arabic. Though he asks the question – what if no one is good in arabic? Then it is permitted to do the khutbah in other than arabic! But then he says,
“And it is waajib upon every one of them to learn it in arabic – i.e. the Khutbah, just as it is wajib for learning to say the takbir in the Salah…”
My advice to you brother, is that you strive to the utmost of your ability to learn the arabic of the khutbah and that you make a concerted effort to learn as much as you can. By Allah
brother, I was once in the same condition as you when I first accepted Islam. I too became disheartened with jumu’ah because of it. If you are patient, and make your intention sincere, Allah 
will bless you in your endeavor. Make du’aa that Allah 
open the doors of this language to you, and He will! That is just my advice to you beloved brother!
was-Salam,
Abul Layth
Al-salam `alaykum,
This is an excellent piece. I have a few comments for your consideration, and a question:
1) Your historical argument is somewhat weekend by the facts that:
* The battle of Qadisiyya and most of the conquest of Persia preceded the conquests of Syria and Egypt, and the battle of Nahawand preceded the conquest of the rest of the now Arabic-speaking lands. The conquests of Ma wara’ an-nahr and of Multan and Sindh proceeded at the same time as the conquest of North Africa.
* It was several centuries before Arabic became the spoken language of the common people in even Egypt and Syria. Even if they did understand it better than the Persians, it still would not have been the ideal medium for delivering advice and warning.
And yet the khutba was given in Arabic in Syria and Egypt as well as Fars, Khurasan, Sindh, and so on. Perhaps in the first centuries one might argue that this was due to the majority of Muslims in these areas still being Arabs in the garrisons. But the khutba remained in Arabic long after this ceased to be the case,even in those places which did not adopt the language for other purposes.
2) In your comment you refer to the modern South Asian form of a local language talk followed by an Arabic khutba as “the way of the Ahnaaf and others who hold their opinion.” This is not quite accurate. The Hanafi fuqaha allowed that a khutba in other than Arabic was technically valid, and yet this was never implemented – at least not in India, and not anywhere in Islamic history that I am aware of – until the arrival of the modern reform movements.
When, in the last century, reformers began to demand khutbas in the local language, the traditional ulama considered it but held it to be against the “inherited sunna” of the umma, even if valid. Some proposed the current solution, while others opposed it – seeing it as a third khutba, and as distracting people from reading Sura al-Kahf, praying nawafil, and performing individual dhikr, as well as being a burden on their time and patience in general.
In the end, the former group won out, and this is the practice now across the Subcontinent and in neighboring regions and in the diaspora – though with a number of prominent masajid as exceptions. It really has nothing to do with Hanafi fiqh specifically, even if those who instituted it were Hanafi.
3) In one of our local masjids, the Shafi`i imam delivers two Arabic khutbas, and one of the followers translates the first khutba for 15-20 minutes in between the two. Would this be seen to interrupt the continuity, and therefore affect the validity?
assalaamu alaikum
The main article is not the correct view of shafi madhab. Its because of the misunderstanding that 5 integrals being arabic means the rest in arabic is permissible. While the correct view is that it sinful similar to what imam taqiudeen said. The khutbah is a fard dhikr. And fard dhikr have to be in arabic. Ill provide references later. The issue is discussed very indepth in my place in a manner not found in other places. It is infact a issue between the salafiyya/mawdudiya groups & traditional sunni. If there was a proof of the permissibility not only in shafi madhab but even the other madhabs; they would be jumping around with this. But instead we have the salafiyya themselves accepting that they have not found proof for this from the books of scholars.
The only article I found that discusses the issue in detail is by mufti taqi usmani.
http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=3840&CATE=112
His conclusion is similar to what my scholars say.
To add to the historical inaccuracy, sahabah were sent to different parts of the world to preach islam, including my south indian state. And there is no proof of them giving non arabic khutbah. The issue is related to tarbiyya.
Among the two main sunni groups one permit a talk before khutbah. While the other prevent it because of replacing sunnah.
And by the way, In safinat al naja – The conditions for delivering the two khutbahs, it says: “The khutbah should be in the arabic language.”
I made a error above when I said that it is a matter of “tarbiyya”. It is actually a matter of “ithibah”.
———-
Here is a couple of references I picked up long back & posted elsewhere:
Busharal Kareem – (2/7) it says something like: even if all the people present are non arabs it is sharth that the khutbah is in arabic . Similar opinion in Sharkawi – (1/273) of Shk Abdullah Bin Hajjaj bin Ibrahim Bin Atabi Al Azhari. Also check Sharh Afdal – (2/71), Mahalli – (1/278,279,287), Imam Bagavi in Tahdeeb-( 2/342), Ibn Muqree in Rawdhu Talib-(1/257) ,Sheikhul Islam Zakariyal Ansari- Tuhfatul Tullaab(1/268), Abdullah ba Hadramy in Al Mukadimatul Hadramiah(332), Zainuddeen Makhdoom in Fath ul Mueen – (141).
While Imam Ibnu Daqeekil Eidi in Ihkaamul Ahkaam(2/40) and Imam Subki in Jam ul Jawaami(1/396) consider it haraam.
Also Imam Nawawi says something like :{ It is necessary that the Khutbah is in arabic because it is a fardh dhikr. Therefore like the takbiratul Ihram and tashhadu, the khutbah should be in Arabic.}
Regarding the replacing of sunnah, check (tafir razi (4/15)); which should be taken into account before validating the talk before khutbah.
Ibn Isma’il, review the introduction to the article.
Jazakum Allahu Khayran
he Late Sheikh Jad Al-Haqq `Ali Jad Al-Haqq, the former grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar, states:
“The Hanafi school of fiqh (jurisprudence) state that it is permissible to deliver the khutbah in a language other than Arabic whether the audience are Arabs or not.
However, the majority of Muslim jurists hold the opinion that one of the conditions of Friday khutbah is that it should be given in Arabic.
The Maliki school of fiqh affirms that the khutbah is to be given in Arabic, and it is not permissible to be delivered in a language other than Arabic, even if the audience are non-Arabs.
The Hanbali school of fiqh, however, holds that if the preacher knows Arabic, then it is a must that the khutbah is in Arabic. If the preacher does not know Arabic, then he is allowed to give it in any other language which he masters whether the audience are Arabs or not. The Qur’anic verses in both cases, however, have to be recited in Arabic.
The Shafi`i school of fiqh bases is of the opinion that one of the conditions of the Friday sermon is that it should be delivered in Arabic. This would be the case if the audience are Arabs. If they are not, then it is not a condition to say it in Arabic. The imam can speak in his language, but the Qur’anic verses have to be recited in Arabic.
I see that since the aim of the Friday sermon is to admonish people, then the opinion of Abu Hanifah should take priority. It goes more with the nature and aim of the congregation.”
Quote from qa.sunnipath.com
***************************
Question:
Asalaamu alaikum Could you please outline the requirements needed for juma? (i.e. what must be said during the khutba, number of attendees. etc) My questions is more from the perspective of the attendee than from the perpsective of the khateeb.
Answer:
The requirements of the Jumu`ah prayer are in Reliance, f18.1-10. Please refer to it, but note the following:
1. f18.9(a) “saying “al-Hamdu lillah”…”: meaning, praising “Allah
” with any form of hamd, though not any other form of glorification (Mufid al-`Awamm, 120)
2. f18.9(b) “the Blessings…”: meaning, any form of salah, using any of the names or titles of the Prophet (Allah
favor and salute him), a pronoun referring to him not sufficing, even if he was just mentioned (Mufid al-`Awamm, 120): so merely saying “salla Llahu `alayhi wa sallam” after mentioning him does not suffice as the blessings upon the Prophet (Allah 
favor and salute him).
3. f18.9(last para.)(n:) “This sermon fulfills conditions (a), (b), (c), and (d) above”: Rather, it fulfills only (a), (c), and (d), but it fails to fulfill (b) because of point 2. above. (Note that Sheikh Nuh has adjusted this in the upcoming edition of Maqasid, and it will, if Allah
wills, be changed in future editions of Reliance.)
4. Two important conditions are missing from the text of Reliance, though they are mentioned in most Shafi`I texts (e.g. Mufid al-`Awamm, 122): (1) continuity and (2) Arabic:
(1) Continuity means that neither lengthy (meaning a little over a minute) silence nor lengthy unrelated material intervene between the integrals of the sermon, or between the two sermons, or between the second sermon and the prayer. But things related do not harm; so even if the khutbah is composed of very lengthy admonition, it is valid, since admonition is related (Fath al-`Allam, 3:52). On a practical level, this condition does not seem violated by many khatibs: I do not know of many khatibs who stand on the minbar and talk about marketing, their favorite novels, or the like; they usually talk about obeying Allah
and avoiding disobeying Him, which is exactly what is demanded in the khutbah, and thus does not negate the continuity.
(2) Arabic means that the integrals must be in Arabic, even if the rest of the khutbah is in another language (Fath al-`Allam, 3:52), as is in Sheikh Abd al-Wakil al-Durubi’s comment (Allah
show him mercy): “and the rest of the sermon may be in any language” (Reliance, f18.9). Note also that using another language does not negate the continuity (Fath al-`Allam, 3:52).
And Allah
knows best.
Mustafa Azzam
Amman, Jordan.
@bro Abu Layth
Could u name any latter fuqaha who has the authority to issue fatwa on shafi madhab who explicitly permitted non arabic khutbah.
It is a sharth That khutbah should be in Arabic.
And doing a ibaadah w/o sharth is faasiq & haraam in the madhab.
“wal ibaadatu bidooni shartiha faasidatun haraamun” (from Ibn Daqeeq’s Ihkaam ul Ahkaam)
-Regarding the condition that khutbah should be mafhoomath; it is refering to using ghareeb and wahshi lafh while the language is arabic itself.
wa salaam
“and the rest of the sermon may be in any language” (Reliance, f18.9).
The above is not found in the arabic text of reliance.
Ibn Isma’il, read the article again and your questions are answered. I am not going to waste my time repeating what was already written by Bro Abdullah.
As for the claim that it is not found in the arabic, then you are correct, however in the text it says “A: and the rest of the sermon may be in any language”…
“A:” is in reference to the late Shafi’i master of Syria, Shaykh Abdul Wakil Ad-Durubi. It is his commentary of the words and was explicitly stated in the Reliance.
was-Salam,
Abul Layth
Imam Ramli’s opinion as quoted by Mufti Taqi:
“And it is a condition (for the validity of Khutbah) that it is delivered in Arabic. This is to follow the way of the Sahabah and their descendants. And to learn Arabic (for the purpose of delivering Khutbah) is Fard al-Kifayah, therefore, it is sufficient that at least one man learns it… But if no one learns it, all of them will be sinful and their Jumu’ah prayer will not be acceptable. Instead, they will have to perform zuhr prayer. However, if it is not at all possible (due t o short time) that the Arabic is learnt, then it is permissible that the Imam delivers Khutbah in his own language, even though the people do not understand it… If somebody raises the question as to what purpose can be served by the Khutbah when it is not understood by the people, our answer would be that the purpose is served when the people merely know that the Khutbah is being delivered, because it is expressedly mentioned that if the audience listen to the Khutbah and do not understand its meaning, it is still a valid Khutbah.”
- The nature of ibaadaat is as Ibn Daqeeq said in ihkaam ul ahkaam:
“in al ibaadaati mahallu ta’boodat wa yakhturu fihaa zaalik fal ihtiyaatu fihaa al ithibaa”
- On the Proof of khutbah being in arabic , some shafi’s said
“ithibaa’an lissalafiul khalafi”
and other shafi’s said :
“li maa jaraa’a alaihin naas”
And from the above we understand it was ijma of salaf and khalaf on khutba being Arabic.
Hence the ma’ana of above is “….. LI JAMEE’ lissalafiul khalafi” and “…..
JAMEEUN naas”.
———
Regarding the issue of Arkaan And Tawaabi
- The tafseel of khutbah as arkaan and tawaabi was not done before
Sykh ul Islam Zakariya al Ansari.
Rather it was “Wa yushtartu kaunuha ay al khutubati KHULLIHA bil arbia”
- The ilath for both arkaan and tawaabi as mentioned is “ithibaa’an lissalafiul khalafi” or “li maa jaraa’a alaihin naas”.
- The reason for tafseel was because it is enough for arkaan to be in arabic for khutbah to be sihath.
Having other language in between will not effect the sihath if not long, and if it is long the khutubah will be fasaad since the muwaalaat between arkaan will be broken.
But, what is the hukm for using the non arabic language?
Reading “lam yadurra” only, it should not be interpreted that there is no problem with it. It should be understood individually & based on the context.
As mentioned the sihath of khutbah is not effected if non arabic was used between arkaan such that muwalaat is not broken, but what is done is wrong. Why ? Because for tawaabi to be mu’thadbi it is sharth that it should be in arabi.
If it is not in arabi then “fa huwa la’awul la yuhssabbu” and in another ibaarat ” fa inna ghair al arabi’i la’awul la yujajiu ma’al arabi’i” i.e it is not mujzi. Mujzi is said when something is fardh or sunnah. Hence the thalab will not be
done if it is non arabic. It will be mujzi and Thalab only if it is done in arabic.
So if someone does the arkaan only and not tawaabi, theres no problem at all. But if the tawaabi is being done, then it should be done in arabic.
Otherwise the ibaadat will be faasid. Because even though tawaabi is sunnah, the sunnah should be done with sharth.
If a person does’nt pray sunnah prayer, its ok. But if a person prays sunnah prayer w/o wudu, then inaddition to prayer not being valid, what is done would be haraam.
To conclude:
All that is meant by that ibaarat is that, only arkaan is necessary for khutbah to be valid. Hence it is necessary for arkaan to be in arabi for khutbah to be valid.
And if non arabi is used such that the muwaalaat is broken, it will effect the sihath of khutbah. But If the non arabi is such that it does not effect muwaalaat, it will not effect the sihath of khutbah. But it is not mu’thadbih and mujzi. The thawaabi is faasid.
And to be thalabus with faasid is haraam. Hence what is done is haraam no doubt.
————————
Regarding the hanafi’s:
- THe hanafi Shah waliullahi dhelvi in his hashia of muwatta said regarding language of khutbah :
“wa ammaa kaunuha bil arabiyya”
Regarding the ibaarat used by some on the position of hanafi’s i.e, “fa lau khataba bil faarsiyatil jaazzaa”
In umdatu ri’aaya the the meaning of jaazza is explained:
“wa laisal jawaazu bi ma’anal hill’il muthlaqi bal bi ma’ana ssihhati fi haqqi ssalaati” and the
reason why this is said is “li annahu laa shakka annahu khilaafu sunnati al mutawaarisati minan
nabeeu sallallahu alaihi wassallam wa mam ba’aduhu min assahaabati wa tabi’i radhiallahu anhu fa yakoonu MAKROOHAN TAHREEMAN”
Hence the jaazza was with the ma’ana of sahhaa. Hence the prayer of jumuaah will be valid if khutbah is done in farsi or other language,
but what was done still is near haraam.
——————-
- And in a direct opposite way than us, Ahmed ibn Hanbal rahimanullah’s proof for Azaan being in Arabic is the khutbah being in Arabic.
————-
@Editor
- Which is the book from which the opinion of “Sheikh Jad Al-Haqq `Ali Jad Al-Haqq” was taken ? Has he provided any basis for the opinion he put forward in the name of shafi’s ?
—————
- Imam Shabramallisi opinion was taken from his hashiya of nihayah right?
Does the Imam only comment that the khutbah is valid even for long non arabic between arkaan or does he even mention that there is no sin in what was done ?
wa salaam
Ibn Isma’il, this website is not a comparative fiqh website. It is a Shafi’i website! With all due respect, to quote other madha-hab opinions on this site is irrelevant.
was-Salam,
Abul Layth
Sorry brother. Someone commented that it is technically valid in Hanafi madhab and someone quoted Sheikh Jad Al-Haqq as favouring Abu Hanifa’s position.
From what I’ve known the ibarat on farsi language is used to base this opinion. Hence provided its tafsir.
As for comment on Ahmed ibn Hanbal (r); it helps in understanding the mindset of the people during those periods. Imam Ahmed’s way of using the necessity of khutbah in arabic as proof for necessity of Azan in arabic is as if the former is well established and agreed upon.
And brother, could you provide details on how Shaykh Abdul Wakil Ad-Durubi derived his opinion when he said : “and the rest of the sermon may be in any language”. Did he give an unconditional permissibility ?
wa salaam
samaleikum
Imam Qasim said:
” In general, non-Arabic will be ineffective,”.
While Imam Shabramallisi said:
“therefore, long separation of the integrals will not bring non-Arabic speech out of being part of a khutbah.”
Imam Qasim did not restrict the non effectiveness
of non arabic to long seperation. But instead said it was in general non effective. While Imam Shabramallisi does qiyas with the assumption that short seperation will not make non arabic ineffective.
anyone know why?
An ‘aalim provided me this link:
http://www.hakikatkitabevi.com/display.asp?DID=1&KID=18
do check pg 9-10.
wa salaam
Assalamu Alaikum.
My brothers this discussion just now came to my notice as my friend mr Ibn Ismail gave the link.the author says “There is no clear “naṣ,” from the mutaqaddimin ashab, rendering the permissibility of the khutbah in other languages beside Arabic” This is not true,he may not see the following Ibara.Becuase,the great scholar from Muthaakreen Imam Nawavi(R) says in his Kithab Roudathuthalibeen that is it sharth to have quthuba in arabic fully;there are two views and shaheeh is it is sharth.و هل يشترط كون الخطبة كلهابالعربيةوجهان الصحيح اشتراطه like that Imam Rafiee says in his book Sharahu Kabeer named Fathul Azeez with its Mathn(متن )by Imam Ghazzali,there are two views regarding the quthuba should be in arabic fully and Asahh from it is,it is sharth becuase following the doing of poeple.
(وأركانها خمسة الحمد لله ويتعين هذاالفظ والصلاة علي رسولله ويتعين لفظ الصلاة والوصية بالتقوي ولايتعين لفظها اذ غرضه الوعظ وأقلها أطيعوالله والدعاء للمؤمنين و أقله رحمكم الله وقرائة آية) وله ان تبحث في شيئين من قوله ويتعين هذاللفظ وقوله ويتعين لفظ الصلاة أحدهماأن الحكم بتعيين اللفظين يقتضي عدم اجزائهما بغير العربية فهل هو كذلك والجواب ان في اشتراط كون الخطبة كلها بالعربية وجهان اصحهما انه شرط اتباعا لماجري عليه الناس 4:579
If anyone need more plese go through the following link.Allah bless us all.Aameen
http://www.hakikatkitabevi.com/display.asp?DID=1&KID=18
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم الحمد لله رب العالمين والصلاة والسلام على النبي الفخيم والرسول الأمين الذي أرسله الله تعالى بالهدى والدين القويم وعلى آله الطيبين الطاهرين وأصحابه وأمته المختارين.
أما بعد
وأنا اشكر أصحابي وأصدقائي الزائرين لاشتراككم في هذا الموقع حيث نجتمع هنا في حديقة العلم والمذاكرة والمباحثة للافادة والاستفادة خصوصا لأخوي ذوَى الحرص والاطلاع ابن إسماعيل وقاسم أحساني للتنبيه في اختلاف فقهائنا حول هذه المسئلة
ولا نزاع أن الأصل والخير أن يخطب الخطيب على منبر الجمعة بلغة الوحي وصاحبه النبي الأمي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم.
وهل يجوز الخطبة باللغة غير العربية هذا ما نبه صاحباي بمنعه كما أفتى به علماء الهند رحمهم الله تعالى ونفعونا بعلومهم ذهب بعضهم من أصحابنا منهم الشيخ الأجل الأستاذ الشيخ طه كران والشيخ عبد الوكيل الدروبي والشيخ محمود سعيد ممدوح وكذا علماء بلاد الملايويين مالزيا وإندونسيا وهي أكثر بلدان المسلمين سكانا وشافعيا مذهبا من زمن طويل بجواز الخطبة بغير اللغة العربية ما عدى أركانها أخذوا بظاهر كلام شيخي المتأخرين ابن حجر والرملي رحمهما الله تعالى.
والاختلاف في الفروع وسعة ورحمة وللمفتي إن كان من أهل النظر أفتى بما أدى إليه نظره.
والله نسئل التوفيق والصواب وإليه المرجع والمئاب.
والسلام عليكم
assalaamu alaikum
Brother Abdullah, Should we bother about Indonesians and Malaysian shafi’s conducting non-arabic khutbah, when we have explicit texts of shafi authorities against it?
What would you say regarding the absence of women covering the face in those regions?
And as far as I am aware, Turkeys Ataturk regime first started this practise by force. This I believe is mentioned in Rashid Rida’s Tafseer.
And brother, have you provided the book linked above to Shaikh Mamduh and other scholars you mentioned ? I would like to know how they defend their position or comment on this ?
May Allah
reward you for your efforts!
wa salaam
مےں اپ لوگوں سے مناظره كاناچاهتاهوں همت هوتو مناظره مجه سے كریں مدیراعلی ماهنامه پیغام شافعی كوكن
As-Salamu’alaikum all,
With all due respect to the purported [personal] opinions of Sheikhul-Islam Zakariyya Al-Ansari, Khatib Shirbini, Ibn Hajar & Sheikh Ramli, could Sheikh Taha Karan or any scholar here state the Mu’tamad position (of the Sheikhayn) in this regard of which the Fatwa is pronounced upon (Mufta Bihi) and not the personal views of Shafiee Scholars?
Thank You
Ramlah,
Kuala Lumpur
Asalamu ‘alaykum,
Can you please post evidence for the requirement of 40 worshippers for jumu’ah prayer, please?
I follow the opinion, but it would beneficial to have the evidence of how the scholars got to that ruling so I can defend it.
JazakAllahu Kheir
Ramlah, the article expresses the views, and then states the opinion of the Shaykhs accordingly. With all due respect, take it or leave it.
was-Salam,
Abu Layth
Can anyone assist re 40 worshippers question, please?
JazakumAllah Kheir
وأقرب ما يحتج به ما احتج البيهقي والأصحاب عن عبد الرحمن بن كعب بن
مالك عن أبيه قال : أول من جمع بنا في المدينة أسعد بن زرارة قبل مقدم النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم المدينة في نقيع الخضمات قلت : كم كنتم قال : أربعون رجلا حديث حسن رواه أبو داود والبيهقي وغيرهما بأسانيد صحيحة قال البيهقي وغيره : وهو صحيح ، النقيع هنا بالنون ذكره الخطابي والحازمي وغيرهما ، والخضمات بفتح الخاء وكسر الضاد المعجمتين قال الشيخ أبو حامد في تعليقه : قال أحمد بن حنبل : نقيع الخضمات قرية لبني بياضة بقرب المدينة على ميل من منازل بني سلمة وقال أصحابنا : وجه الدلالة منه أن يقال أجمعت الأمة على اشتراط العدد ، والأصل الظهر فلا تصح الجمعة إلا بعدد ثبت فيه التوقيف ، وقد ثبت جوازها بأربعين ، فلا يجوز بأقل منه إلا بدليل صريح ، وثبت أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال صلوا كما رأيتموني أصلي ولم تثبت صلاته لها بأقل من أربعين .
شرح المهذب (4/423
Bismillah
Salamu ‘alaykum brethren,
Jazakum Allahu Khayran Brother Qasim. I did not want to delve into this discussion but I feel it is necessary to shed some light on this issue, with the help of the works of our forefathers.
Quoting brother Qasim:
This hadith in authentic form can be found in the Sunan of Abi Dawud reported thus:
حدثنا قتيبة بن سعيد حدثنا ابن إدريس عن محمد بن إسحق عن محمد بن أبي أمامة بن سهل عن أبيه عن عبد الرحمن بن كعب بن مالك وكان قائد أبيه بعد ما ذهب بصره عن أبيه كعب بن مالك
أنه كان إذا سمع النداء يوم الجمعة ترحم لأسعد بن زرارة فقلت له إذا سمعت النداء ترحمت لأسعد بن زرارة قال لأنه أول من جمع بنا في هزم النبيت من حرة بني بياضة في نقيع يقال له نقيع الخضمات قلت كم أنتم يومئذ قال أربعون
My translation:
“When K’ab ibn Malik heard the call to Salah on Jumu’ah, he would ask Allah
to have mercy for As’ad ibn Zurarah [in the hadith of Ibn Majah it says: كُلَّمَا سَمِعَ أَذَان الْجُمُعَة يَسْتَغْفِرُ لِأَبِي أُمَامَةَ وَيُصَلِّي عَلَيْهِ "Everytime he would hear the adhaan for Jumu'ah he would seek forgiveness for Abu Umamah and send blessings upon him]. I asked him: Why is that when you hear the adhan for Jumu’ah you make du’a for As’ad ibn Zurarah? He responded that it was because he held the Jumu’ah prayer for the first time for us at Hazm Al Nabit of Harrah belonging to Banu Bayaadah in Naqi’, called Naqi’ Al-Khadumat. I asked him, ‘How many were you at the time?’ he said, “Fourty!”
Imam Al-Bayhaqi argued that these men could only have done this act by the permission of the Nabi ‘alayhis salam, and that the actual count of the people would also be from his order. This hadith is also used to refute the Hanafis who say that Jumu’ah can only be held in a large city (masr) and not a village. This is proof that it can be held in a village!
[Hafith Ibn Hajr stated this was a hasan report in his Talkhis Al-Habir. Al-Bayhaqi stated in his Khilafiyyat that the reporters were "all impeccably trustworthy".]
There exists a response to this proof regarding utilizing it for the 40 as a condition, and that is this is not proof for making 40 an actual Shart شرط – condition. It does show that it was the way of the early Muslims to have 40 people. But within the tradition there is no hadith where the Prophet Muhammad
(‘alayhis salam) actually stipulated the number of people necessary. The hadith is simply stating that there were 40 people at the Jumu’ah and not instituting an actual condition – as no such command is reported from the Nabi in authentic form.
There is another hadith utilized as support by those who forward the view of 40, i.e. the Shafi’i mu’tamad view, and a report from Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, which states,
مضت السنة أن في كل ثلاثة إماما وفي كل أربعين فما فوق ذلك جمعة وفطر و أضحى
That the sunnah is that for every three individuals they appoint an Imam, and for every fourty individuals and above that there is jumu’ah, fitr, and slaughter.
This is narrated from Jabir and in its chain is عبد العزيز بن عبد الرحمن
Imam Ahmad accused him of lying and fabricating. Ad-Daraqutni labeled him “munkar al hadith”. Imam Al-Bayhaqi upon narrating this hadith said, “There is no support in it.”
There is yet another tradition reported from Abdullah ibn ‘Ubaydullah ibn ‘Utbah Ibn Mas’ud, who was from the major Tabi’in that he said,
“Every village wherein is 40 men, Jumu’ah is [obligatory] upon them.”
This is not a hadith, however it is an athar from a tabi’i.
The Mujtahid Shafi’i Imam, Imam As-Suyuti stated,
لَمْ يَثْبُت فِي شَيْء مِنْ الْأَحَادِيث تَعْيِين عَدَد مَخْصُوص
“There is nothing from the ahadith that establish obligating a specific number.” [Nayl Al-Awtar Vol. 2 page 546] Al-Hafith Ibn Hajr Al-’Asqalani is reported to agree as well to his statement. This is the proof used by those who posit 40 as a condition. One can definitely ascertain that 40 was a standard amongst the early Muslims, but as Imam As-Suyuti said, there is nothing authentic from the Nabi ‘alayhis salam to actually stipulate 40.
The relied upon verdict of our school is that 40 men who are residents, and free, – without any other valid excuses – must perform jumu’ah in their locale. As is found in ‘Umdat As-Salik,
“…and there be a minimum of forty participants who are male, have reached puberty, are sane, and are local residents, meaning they live there and do not leave except when they need to.”
[Page 204 of Reliance of the Traveller]
And Allah
knows Best!