INTRODUCTION
A unique topic that has been expounded is Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her)’s istidrakāt (corrections) of some of the Companions’ stances. The first person to compile a book on this subject was Abu Mansur al-Baghdadi (d. 489 AH), who put together 25 reports and titled it “Radd al-ʿUqūl at-Tāʾishah bi Dhikr ma Istadrakathu ʿĀʾishah“ (lit. Refuting Reckless Thoughts by the Mention of What Aisha Corrected). Subsequently, Imam Badr ad-Din az-Zarkashi (d. 794 AH) compiled another book in which he included Abu Mansur’s reports and added his own insights.
This subject is significant as it conveys how the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) engaged in academic discourse ensuring the accuracy of both the transmission and interpretation of the prophetic teachings. This testifies against the allegation that the Companions were lax in this regard. Moreover, it signifies the pivotal role that Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) had in transmitting the prophetic traditions alongside their juristic nuances. She held an impressive position among the Companions due to the vastness of her knowledge on a multitude of sciences. She was from among the most prolific narrators who transmitted 2210 traditions and interpreted them correctly given her many proximal years in the company of the Prophet (ﷺ). She not only transmitted reports, but also was at the forefront of explaining juridical matters and issuing legal verdicts. Hence, we understand what Imam Hakim (may Allah have mercy on him) meant when he stated, ‘A quarter of the laws of the Shariah has been narrated on the authority of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her)’ (al-Ijabah 39). This was a major contributing factor in preserving the teachings of the Prophet (ﷺ).
This article will examine one of the corrections that Aisha made, specifically regarding Umar’s stance on abstaining from performing additional prayer after ‘Asr until the end of sunset. Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) held a strict position on this issue based on the Prophet’s instruction not to pray after ‘Asr until the sun had fully set. Some narrators have indicated that Umar would even “strike the hands” (yaḍribu) or repel people (yaṣrifu) when he saw them praying after ‘Asr. However, Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), when questioned about this matter, disagreed with Umar’s stance and indicated that he had made an oversight in the matter. She added that the prohibition only applied to the time of sunset and not before it. Additionally, this study will analyse a passage from a PhD dissertation by Sofia Rehman, an admirer of the feminist writer Fatema Mernissi. Rehman translates various reports from Imam Zarkashi’s collection but interprets them through a feminist and liberalist lens. Her work contains errors related to the basics of the science of hadith which we will take a look at.
UMAR’S PRACTICE (MAY ALLAH BE PLEASED WITH HIM)
Imam Zarkashi (may Allah have mercy on him) commenced the seventh example listed under the Chapter of Umar by mentioning the highlighted portion of the following hadith narrated in Sahih Muslim:
وَحَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ، وَأَبُو كُرَيْبٍ جَمِيعًا عَنِ ابْنِ فُضَيْلٍ، – قَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، – عَنْ مُخْتَارِ بْنِ فُلْفُلٍ، قَالَ سَأَلْتُ أَنَسَ بْنَ مَالِكٍ عَنِ التَّطَوُّعِ، بَعْدَ الْعَصْرِ فَقَالَ كَانَ عُمَرُ يَضْرِبُ الأَيْدِي عَلَى صَلاَةٍ بَعْدَ الْعَصْرِ وَكُنَّا نُصَلِّي عَلَى عَهْدِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم رَكْعَتَيْنِ بَعْدَ غُرُوبِ الشَّمْسِ قَبْلَ صَلاَةِ الْمَغْرِبِ . فَقُلْتُ لَهُ أَكَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم صَلاَّهُمَا قَالَ كَانَ يَرَانَا نُصَلِّيهِمَا. فَلَمْ يَأْمُرْنَا وَلَمْ يَنْهَنَا.
(صحيح مسلم: كتاب صلاة المسافرين وقصرها: باب اسْتِحْبَابِ رَكْعَتَيْنِ قَبْلَ صَلاَةِ الْمَغْرِبِ)
[Imam] Muslim reports from Abubakr b. Abi Shayba and Abu Kurayb, both narrate from Ibn Fudayl who said, Abubakr said, Muhammad b. Fudayl narrated to us from Mukhtar b. Fulful who said: ‘I asked Anas b. Malik (Allah be pleased with him) regarding voluntary [prayer] after ‘Asr. He replied: “Umar would strike hands for performing [additional] prayer after ‘Asr.” In the Prophet’s time, we would perform two units [of prayer] after the setting of the sun, before the Maghrib prayer.”’
Sahih Muslim: Chapter of the Prayer of the Travellers and Its Shortening
According to Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) used to physically strike the hands of those who prayed after ‘Asr. This is not contradicted by what Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) said next, which is that they would pray two units of prayer after sunset during the time of the Prophet (ﷺ), between the adhān of the Maghrib prayer and its iqāma. Umar, being the Leader at that time and entrusted with ensuring that his subjects do not fall into errors or innovation, took his religious duty seriously. Therefore, he instituted a physical consequence for those who prayed after ‘Asr, hoping to deter people from even considering praying during the prohibited time of sunset.
AISHA’S CORRECTION (MAY ALLAH BE PLEASED WITH HER)
Moving forward, Imam Zarkashi then brings Imam Muslim’s second report which contains Aisha’s statement. The full hadith is as follows:
حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ حَاتِمٍ، حَدَّثَنَا بَهْزٌ، حَدَّثَنَا وُهَيْبٌ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ طَاوُسٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ عَائِشَةَ، أَنَّهَا قَالَتْ وَهِمَ عُمَرُ إِنَّمَا نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم أَنْ يُتَحَرَّى طُلُوعُ الشَّمْسِ وَغُرُوبُهَا.
(باب لاَ تَتَحَرَّوْا بِصَلاَتِكُمْ طُلُوعَ الشَّمْسِ وَلاَ غُرُوبَهَا)
Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) said: Umar had an oversight; indeed the Prophet (ﷺ) prohibited from observing prayer at the sun’s rising and its setting.’
Sahih Muslim: Do Not Aim to Pray When the Sun is Rising or Setting
Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) corrected Umar not because he was careless or inattentive in his transmission, but rather because she believed that he had overlooked something that she knew since the Prophet (ﷺ) prohibited praying at sunset specifically, she corrected Umar since praying after ‘Asr but before sunset would not fall under the prophetic prohibition.
Imam Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) comments on Umar’s oversight saying:
By saying “Umar had an oversight”, she is referring to Umar b. al-Khattab who narrated the prohibition of praying after ‘Asr without any qualifications. [Rather she clarifies that] he (ﷺ) prohibited from stipulating it [as a time of prayer]. Qadi Iyad said, “Indeed Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) said this (i.e. wahima Umar) due to what she had reported that the Prophet (ﷺ) prayed two units of prayer after ‘Asr. Furthermore, what Umar narrated is also corroborated by Abu Sa’id, Abu Hurayra, and Ibn ‘Abbas who said that many people informed him of the same. I (Imam Nawawi) say: Both traditions can be reconciled: the tradition about the prohibition of stipulating it (the time of sunset) [as a time to pray] is when one delays the obligatory prayer to this time (sunset), and the tradition of complete prohibition refers to the voluntary prayers that are free of cause.
Nawawi, Al-Minhaj fi Sharh Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj, 11:119.
We do not take issue with Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) correcting Umar; we hold both of them in high regard and ultimately, the objective of our study is not to determine whether Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) truly made an oversight or not, or to determine whether Imam Zarkashi’s (may Allah be pleased with him) account qualifies as an instance of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) correcting Umar (may Allah be pleased with him). Rather, our focus is primarily on appreciating Aisha’s extensive knowledge and her commitment to ensuring that the Prophetic traditions were accurately transmitted and interpreted. We also seek to contextualise the reports and study them to filter out misconstrued and distorted feminist interpretations, which, under the guise of true Islamic scholarship, aim to promote false insinuations of misogyny among the Companions. This includes the marginalisation and suppression of female Companions, specifically Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her). Individuals such as Sofia Rehman do this to problematise the roles that female scholars have had since the time of the Companions in order to promote their supposed “enlightened” liberal and feminist solutions.
SOFIA REHMAN’S ERRORS
Mistranslation
The PhD author, Sofia Rehman, has mistranslated the portion referenced by Imam Zarkashi without acknowledging varying reports related to the subject. In fact, according to her mistranslation, Umar was acting in accordance with Aisha’s tradition, since ‘he would bind his hands in prayer after Asr’. So, what was Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) even correcting? Was it that the optional prayer after ‘Asr should be done with qabḍ (grasping the hands)? Pictured below is her translation:
Marginalisation of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her)
Rehman’s one-sided approach is perhaps unsurprising given that her thesis appears to be based on the assumption that Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), despite being marginalised, was in reality a sort of “boss lady” who corrected the errors of numerous Companions, especially in areas related to women that were allegedly tainted by misogyny. However, having recognised her status, the Companions and the scholars after them preserved and transmitted her teachings, as well as her corrections. This fact makes it clear that she was not marginalised by the Companions nor the scholars after them. Had this not been the case, scholars like Imam Zarkashi (may Allah have mercy on him) would have been unable to compile a book like al-Ijabah; which is a secondary text based on larger and earlier hadith compilations.
Furthermore, whilst we acknowledge that Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) possessed an exceptional level of knowledge and an intimate understanding of the teachings of the Prophet (ﷺ) that may have eluded other Companions, we refuse to allow individuals like Sofia Rehman to exploit her example for their own corrupt ideologies. It should be noted, that it is unprofessional to engage with the science of hadith without providing a comprehensive overview of the subject and instead cherry-pick portions gathered by Imam Zarkashi to present a distorted version of events.
Take a look at how she introduces the hadith in discussion (#7) along with another one:
Claiming the presence of ghaflah
The author, Sofia Rehman, has made two additional fundamental errors that pertain to the principles of hadith. Her first claim is that both traditions can be invalidated on the basis of ghaflah (carelessness), which is a patently absurd assertion. It is shocking to see her discarding Prophetic traditions so easily, for both of these reports are rigorously authentic and do not contain ghaflah from any narrator. Furthermore, whilst the burden of proof is on the one who makes a claim, she fails to bring evidence to support her claim that the reports allegedly contain ghaflah, and therefore, must be invalidated.
Overall, her whole statement is convoluted; ghaflah is not even mentioned in the text of the hadith referring to Umar (may Allah be pleased with him). If Rehman deems ‘wahima’ to confer the meaning of ghaflah (carelessness), it would only be fair for her to also call Aisha’s oversights ‘ghaflah’ on issues like urinating whilst standing or raḍa’at al-kabīr (adult suckling), etc. Moreover, had Umar’s (may Allah be pleased with him) oversight truly been an error, it is not an invalidating factor according to the principles of hadith. Rather, when Companions impugn one another, it is treated as their difference of opinion and does not affect the validity of their reports nor does it decrease their credibility. A number of texts in the Qur’an and Sunnah attest to the rank and general credibility of the Companions. As such, many masters of hadith like an-Nawawi, Ibn Kathir, Ibn Abd al-Barr, al-Munawi, Ibn Abi Hatim, al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, et al., who have understood these texts and concluded that ‘as-ṣaḥabatu kulluhum ʿudūl’ (the Companions are all upright). Since it is difficult to elaborate on the evidence here, it will suffice to quote the statement of Imam Ibn as-Salah (d. 642 AH), another leading scholar of hadith well-versed in its principles.
He states:
The Companions, all of them, possess the special trait that none of them may be questioned. Rather, it is a settled matter, for they were declared upright without qualification in the texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah and by the consensus of those who are taken into consideration in the consensus of the Community…The Community agrees unanimously on declaring all of the Companions to be upright. On the basis of the consensus of those scholars who are taken into account in determining a consensus, the same is held to be true of those who were involved in discords on account of their high esteem and glorious deeds which were set out for them. It would seem that Allah ordained the consensus on that because they were the conveyers of the Sacred Law. Allah knows best. (Muqaddimah 213)
Equating wahm to ghaflah
As for her second error, Rehman appears to conflate Aisha’s (may Allah be pleased with her) literal use of the word ‘wa-hi-ma’ with the technical usage of the term in hadith terminology (i.e., wahm), which she assumes confers the same meaning as ghaflah. The word ‘wahima yahimu’ literally means to err, to slip up, to have an oversight. Imam Ibn al-Manzur (d. 711 AH) quotes Imam Asma’i as saying, ‘and wahima [means]: when he errs (ghalita)’ (Lisān al-ʿArab 12:643). This is in contrast to the literal meaning of the word ‘ghafala yaghfulu’ which means to be inattentive, careless, or negligent (ibid 11:497). Even if we concede that the literal definitions of both slightly overlap, it is still incorrect to use them synonymously in reference to narrators. In the science of hadith, both ‘wahm’ and ‘ghaflah’ have a technical usage in the subject of al-jarḥ wa at-taʿdīl (criticism and praise). Imam Ibn al-Athir even explains the distinction between wahm and waham by mentioning that wahm is ‘when one’s thoughts goes somewhere (i.e. one assumes something)’ and waham is when one errs [unintentionally] (an-Nihayah 5:234). Technically, scholars define ghaflah as a narrator lacking in wit and acuteness of thought, which is brought about by negligence and little preoccupation with the science, whilst wahm refers to simply having an oversight, which every human being is bound to experience. Wahm is generally not a weakening factor unless a narrator experiences it repeatedly and is not corroborated by other narrators. On the other hand, ghaflah is generally a weakening factor and the traditions of someone known as ‘mughaffal’ are generally rejected.
To conclude this point, it is erroneous for Rehman to claim that both traditions must be invalidated due to carelessness when there was none to begin with. It demonstrates that relying on incomplete or erroneous research can result in significant losses, as important prophetic reports could be dismissed or misconstrued. It is crucial to approach research in a comprehensive and accurate manner to ensure that we retain the integrity of the prophetic traditions and that they are not misinterpreted or distorted in any way. This requires a deep understanding of the principles of hadith and a thorough analysis of the reports, taking into account varying perspectives and contexts. It is imperative that we strive for accuracy in our work to preserve the teachings and practices of the Prophet (ﷺ) for future generations. These fundamental mistakes suffice to demonstrate Rehman’s incompetence in the noble science of hadith.
Not acknowledging Umar’s clarification
Moving forward, Imam Zarkashi states:
Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr stated: ‘Ibn Umar and others held the same opinion as Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her). This is also the opinion of Zayd b. Khalid al-Juhani, because [on one occasion] Umar saw him performing two units [of prayer] after ‘Asr. So he went to him and hit him with a whip upon which Zayd said, “O Amir al-Muminin, hit [as you please], for by Allah, I will not leave them after seeing the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) praying them.” Thus, Umar said to him, “O Zayd, had I not feared that people would take it as a reason to pray until the night (i.e. entrance of Maghrib), I would not have hit for their sake.”’
It is peculiar that Sofia Rehman did not offer any commentary on Umar’s clarification of his actions toward Zayd. Her lack of response suggests a willingness to portray Umar as an agitated, angry individual once again being admonished by the supposedly marginalised Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her). However, Umar’s statement “had I not feared that people would take it as a reason to pray until the night” clarifies his intentions and even suggests that he may have recognised the validity of the practice but feared that people would exceed the boundaries set by the Prophet (ﷺ). Imam Tahawi’s reconciliatory report below indicates how Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) understood Umar (may Allah be pleased with him)’s motives and approved of them.
AISHA’S SUPPORT FOR UMAR
٥٢٨٣ – حدثنا إبراهيم بن مرزوق قال: حدثنا عثمان بن عمر بن فارس قال: حدثنا إسرائيل بن يونس، عن المقدام بن شريح، عن أبيه قال: “قلت لعائشة: كيف كان يصنع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم؟ كأنه يعني بعقب صلاته الظهر، وبعقب صلاته العصر قالت: “كان يصلي الهجير، ثم يصلي بعدها ركعتين، ثم كان يصلي العصر، ثم يصلي بعدها ركعتين”، قال: قلت: فأنا رأيت عمر رضي الله عنه يضرب رجلا رآه يصلي بعد العصر ركعتين، فقالت: لقد صلاهما عمر، ولقد علم أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم صلاهما، ولكن قومك أهل اليمن قوم طغام، وكانوا إذا صلوا الظهر صلوا بعدها إلى العصر، وإذا صلوا العصر صلوا بعدها إلى المغرب، فقد أحسن.” (٢٩٦)
Al-Miqdad ibn Shurayh reports from his father who said, ‘I said to Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her): What would the Prophet (ﷺ) do?’ as if he were inquiring about his habit after Zuhr and ‘Asr. She replied, “He used to pray the Zuhr prayer, and then two units of prayer after it, and he used to pray the ‘Asr prayer, and two additional units after it.” He said, “I said, ‘[But] I have seen Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) hitting a man whom he saw offering prayer after ‘Asr.’” She replied, “Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) himself would pray them (the two units after ‘Asr), and he was aware that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) would pray them. However, your people —the people of Yemen— are uncivilised; when they would pray Zuhr, they would offer prayer after it until ‘Asr, and when they would pray ‘Asr, they would offer prayer after it until Maghrib. So, he (i.e. Umar) did well.”’
Mushkil al-Āthar (13:295), Muʾassasah ar-Risālah.
Shaykh Shu‘ayb al-Arna’ut (d. 2016) —a renowned hadith scholar and manuscript editor— comments under this hadith that the chain of this hadith is sahih (authentic) based on the criteria of Imam Muslim (may Allah have mercy on him). Additionally, he lists a few similar reports that corroborate the one Imam Tahawi has brought. Imam Tahawi (d. 321 AH) then comments on the hadith saying:
ففي هذا الحديث ما قد يحتمل أن يكون ما كان عند عائشة في النهي عن الصلاة بعد العصر مثل ما كان منه عند علي عليه السلام، مما قد ذكرناه عن وهب بن الأجدع عنه، عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في الباب الذي قبل هذا الباب، ولم يكن عندها ما كان عند عمر عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم من نهيه عن الصلاة بعد العصر، حتى تغرب الشمس، وكان الذي كان عند عمر في ذلك أولى من الذي كان عند علي وعندها فيه؛ لأن الذي كان عند عمر، قد دخل فيه ما قد كان عندها منه، وزاد عليه ما لم يكن عندهما منه، فكان أولى من الذي كان عندهما منه، وكان حديث عائشة هذا الذي ذكرناه قد دلنا على أن صلاة رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بعد العصر الركعتين اللتين كان صلاهما، كان ذلك قبل نهيه عن الصلاة بعد العصر، حتى تغرب الشمس، وإن نهيه عن الصلاة بعد العصر، حتى تغرب الشمس قد قطع ذلك، والله عز وجل نسأله التوفيق. (شرح مشكل الآثار 13:295)
In this hadith, there is an indication that what Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) knew regarding the prohibition of praying after ‘Asr was similar to what Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) knew, which we mentioned from Wahb ibn al-Ajda’ from him (‘Ali), from the Prophet (ﷺ), in the chapter before this. It appears that she did not have [the additional information] that ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) had from the Prophet (ﷺ) regarding him prohibiting prayer after ‘Asr until the sun fully set. In this case, what ‘Umar had regarding the matter is more preferable than what ‘Ali and Aisha had; because what Umar knew included what they both knew, as well as what they did not know. Moreover, this hadith of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) indicates to us that the two units that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) offered after ‘Asr was before his prohibition of praying after ‘Asr, until the sun set fully. The prohibition [narrated] from him solidifies this. And we ask Allah for assistance.
ibid.
SUPPORTING REPORTS
Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) was not alone in his stance. There were other Companions who held the same opinion as him, including:
- Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with him), as narrated in Sahih Muslim:
حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ يَحْيَى، قَالَ قَرَأْتُ عَلَى مَالِكٍ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ يَحْيَى بْنِ حَبَّانَ، عَنِ الأَعْرَجِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم نَهَى عَنِ الصَّلاَةِ بَعْدَ الْعَصْرِ حَتَّى تَغْرُبَ الشَّمْسُ وَعَنِ الصَّلاَةِ بَعْدَ الصُّبْحِ حَتَّى تَطْلُعَ الشَّمْسُ . (صحيح مسلم: باب الأَوْقَاتِ الَّتِي نُهِيَ عَنِ الصَّلاَةِ، فِيهَا)
Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with him) is reported to have said that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) prohibited from observing prayer after the ‘Asr prayer until the sun set, and after the dawn until the sun rose.
- Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him), as narrated in Sunan an-Nasa’i:
أَخْبَرَنَا مُجَاهِدُ بْنُ مُوسَى، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ، عَنْ ضَمْرَةَ بْنِ سَعِيدٍ، سَمِعَ أَبَا سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيَّ، يَقُولُ نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم عَنِ الصَّلاَةِ بَعْدَ الصُّبْحِ حَتَّى الطُّلُوعِ وَعَنِ الصَّلاَةِ بَعْدَ الْعَصْرِ حَتَّى الْغُرُوبِ . (سنن النسائي: باب النَّهْىِ عَنِ الصَّلاَةِ بَعْدَ الْعَصْرِ )
Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (may Allah be pleased with him) reported that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) prohibited from observing prayer after the morning [prayer] until the sun rose and from observing prayer after ‘Asr until the sun set.
- Ibn ‘Abbas (Allah be pleased with him), as narrated in Sunan an-Nasa’i:
أَخْبَرَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ حَرْبٍ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، عَنْ هِشَامِ بْنِ حُجَيْرٍ، عَنْ طَاوُسٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم نَهَى عَنِ الصَّلاَةِ بَعْدَ الْعَصْرِ . (سنن النسائي: باب النَّهْىِ عَنِ الصَّلاَةِ بَعْدَ الْعَصْرِ)
Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) reports that the Prophet of Allah (ﷺ) prohibited from observing prayer after the ‘Asr prayer.
- Moreover, we find that Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) explains why the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) himself was seen performing prayer after ‘Asr. Imam Tirmidhi reports:
حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ، حَدَّثَنَا جَرِيرٌ، عَنْ عَطَاءِ بْنِ السَّائِبِ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، قَالَ إِنَّمَا صَلَّى النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم الرَّكْعَتَيْنِ بَعْدَ الْعَصْرِ لأَنَّهُ أَتَاهُ مَالٌ فَشَغَلَهُ عَنِ الرَّكْعَتَيْنِ بَعْدَ الظُّهْرِ فَصَلاَّهُمَا بَعْدَ الْعَصْرِ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَعُدْ لَهُمَا (جامع الترمذي: باب مَا جَاءَ فِي الصَّلاَةِ بَعْدَ الْعَصْرِ)
Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (ﷺ) only performed the two units after ‘Asr because some wealth came to him which preoccupied him from the two units after Zuhr, so he prayed them after ‘Asr, then he did not repeat that.
After quoting the aforementioned hadith of Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him), Imam Tirmidhi explains that multiple Companions have reported that the Prophet (ﷺ) prayed two units after ‘Asr. However, this practice appears to contradict other reports that indicate that the Prophet (ﷺ) verbally prohibited praying after ‘Asr until the sun had fully set. The hadith of Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) [reported from ‘Umar] is more reliable, for it affirms that the Prophet (ﷺ) did not return to praying these two extra units of prayer after ‘Asr. This view is also supported by the report of Zayd b. Thabit (may Allah be pleased with him). He adds:
As for Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), many reports indicate that the Prophet (ﷺ) would visit her after ‘Asr and pray two units. However, other reports from Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), as transmitted from Umm Salamah (may Allah be pleased with her), assert that the Prophet (ﷺ) prohibited praying after ‘Asr until the sun had completely set and after the morning prayer until the sun had fully risen.
A VERBAL COMMAND’S PRECEDENCE
Imam Tirmidhi highlights the importance of giving precedence to the verbal prohibition of the Prophet (ﷺ) over his physical actions when the two appear to contradict one another. While the physical actions of the Prophet (ﷺ) demonstrate certain practices that he engaged in, they do not necessarily carry the same evidentiary weight as his verbal commands or prohibitions, which stand as evidence in and of themselves. Therefore, in the case of the dispute over whether or not the Prophet (ﷺ) prayed two units after ‘Asr, the verbal prohibition from the Prophet (ﷺ) prohibiting prayer after ‘Asr holds more weight than the instances in which he was observed praying. This is especially true considering the clarification offered by Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him).
AN OVERVIEW OF THE JURIDICAL STANCE
It is difficult to discuss the juridical stance of the four scholars of thought here in detail, therefore, the following short passage from al-Mawsu’ah al-Fiqhiyyah al-Kuwaitiyyah is sufficient in highlighting the view of the four schools regarding offering prayer after ‘Asr.
الْوَقْتُ الثَّالِثُ: بَعْدَ صَلاَةِ الْعَصْرِ:
ذَهَبَتِ الْحَنَفِيَّةُ وَالْمَالِكِيَّةُ وَالشَّافِعِيَّةُ إِلَى كَرَاهَةِ التَّنَفُّل الْمُطْلَقِ بَعْدَ صَلاَةِ الْعَصْرِ، لِحَدِيثِ الشَّيْخَيْنِ الَّذِي تَقَدَّمَ: لاَ صَلاَةَ بَعْدَ صَلاَةِ الْعَصْرِ. وَذَهَبَ الْحَنَابِلَةُ إِلَى جَوَازِ قَضَاءِ سُنَّةِ الظُّهْرِ بَعْدَ صَلاَةِ الْعَصْرِ؛ لأَِنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ صَلَّى نَافِلَةَ الظُّهْرِ بَعْدَ صَلاَةِ الْعَصْرِ. (الموسوعة الفقهية الكويتية 7:183)
The Hanafi, Maliki, and Shafi’i scholars have opined that it is disliked to offer voluntary prayer after the ‘Asr prayer, due to the tradition of the Shaykhain (Abubakr and ‘Umar) that has preceded: ‘[There is] no prayer after the ‘Asr prayer’. The Hanbali scholars have opined that [only] the sunnah of Zuhr can be offered after the ‘Asr prayer; as the Prophet (ﷺ) had done so.
Al-Mawsu’ah al-Fiqhiyyah al-Kuwaitiyyah (7:183)
CONCLUSION
We can conclude with three possible explanations to harmonise between the traditions. The first is naskh (abrogation); the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) would offer prayer after ‘Asr in the beginning of Islam and had not issued a prohibition in this regard. It was then later abrogated by the narrations in which he (ﷺ) prohibited prayer after ‘Asr until the sun fully set. The traditions denoting initial permissibility could be understood in this light. Moreover, the tradition in which the Prophet (ﷺ) clarified that the two units that he offered after ‘Asr were the ones he missed after Zuhr could also be understood within this context. Imam Tahawi’s explanation (may Allah have mercy on him) also supports this.
The second is khususiyyah (specificity); praying after ‘Asr was specific to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and was prohibited for everyone else. The explanation offered by Imam Tirmidhi (may Allah have mercy on him) regarding giving preference to a verbal command over an action fits well under this explanation, as it is indicative that what the Prophet (ﷺ) did could have been specific to him.
Lastly, praying after ‘Asr is permissible as long as the sun is high and bright, and not close to decline. However, since ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) understood the tendencies of the people of his time, he prohibited them from engaging in something voluntary in order to deter them from falling into a prohibition. This is an example of sadd adh-dhara’i‘ (blocking the means). Since the aim of this article was neither to delve into the nuances of jurisprudence, nor to engage in a full scale study of all the available reports on the matter, it is best to suffice with the above given summary.
The Mother of the Believers, Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) was the epitome of piety, knowledge, and excellence. She was eloquent, confident, modest, and graceful. Her sharp acumen, high status, and relevance was greatly appreciated and particularly recognised among the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them). Anytime they felt stuck on any given matter, they would forward the questions to the mothers of the believers, specifically to Aisha on several occasions. The Companions and scholars of hadith are free from all allegations of misogyny and iniquity in her regard; they transmitted the important teachings and opinions of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) to the Successors, who passed it on to those scholars who eventually compiled her traditions and teachings in the form of books. Had the situation been the opposite, we would not have had even a whiff of her corrections today, let alone her transmissions. We refuse to allow individuals like Sofia Rehman to exploit her example for their own corrupt ideologies.
May Allah accept this humble effort, and keep our ink flowing, āmīn.
The Hadith Disciple 