Full Lecture Transcript (Cleaned)
The Question — 0:00
Sister Sumera from India emails—masha'Allah, we have a large viewership in India. Sister Sumera says she has seen a clip posted by an anti-Muslim website or Facebook page in which a Muslim preacher in English says that the one who abandons salah—even one salah—is a worse crime than one who murders, rapes, steals, or sells drugs. She says they are using this clip to show that Muslims are fanatical and that a murderer is considered better than the one who misses even one salah. She says this clip has flustered her and she wants to know: is this what Islam says?
The Problem of Clips Taken Out of Context — 1:25
Dear Sister Sumera, this is actually a very multi-layered question. I want to begin by stating that you shouldn't be surprised that anti-Muslim websites and Facebook pages take such clips and make them viral. These types of entities commonly do this—they go to clerics or preachers, even I myself have been the target of a number of such campaigns where they take a clip out of context and portray something that perhaps the speaker did not intend.
Sometimes a preacher might encourage something to his private audience, saying it in a forceful manner that he thinks will work for that audience. But with cell phones and video, it's so easy to take that clip out of context, broadcast it to the entire globe, and make it sound just plain wrong and awkward. This is a problem of social media.
I'm very conscious of this: sometimes I'm teaching a class to advanced students and I might say something to get a point across that I would never say in the khutbah. Not that it contradicts, but there's a time and a place and a manner for such teaching.
I say this because, frankly, even though I don't agree with the sentiment expressed by this speaker, I can understand where he's coming from. He probably wanted to encourage the people in that audience to pray—not that he was trivializing murder, but rather encouraging prayer using terminology he thought would be effective.
Where This Claim Comes From — 5:14
Let us get to the crux of the matter: is it true that leaving the salah is worse than murder, rape, stealing, and drugs?
We need to understand where this notion comes from. This phrase—"the one who does not pray is worse than the murderer"—does not occur in the Quran. It does not occur in the Sunnah. It does not occur upon the tongues of any of the Sahaba or Tabi'in or the early scholars of this Ummah. It is not a phrase that is divinely revealed or divinely sanctioned. It is a derived phrase based upon an opinion—a minority opinion in some legal and theological schools.
The Hanbali Position on Abandoning Salah — 6:21
That opinion is: there is a minority opinion that the one who abandons the salah has committed a sin worse than any sin against a human being, because the claim of this opinion is that the one who abandons the salah is not a Muslim—has committed kufr.
Who said this? The opinion was stated by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and it is generally predominant in the Hanbali school. The Shafi'is, the Hanafis, and the Malikis do not agree with this opinion.
His later followers—in particular Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim—were very clear in this position: the one who abandons the prayer (called tarik al-salah) has committed kufr. And since kufr is the biggest sin in Islam—since kufr and shirk are the worst sins—if the one who abandoned salah has committed kufr, then one can state that abandoning the salah is worse than murder.
The Debate Between Imam al-Shafi'i and Imam Ahmad — 7:56
There is a legitimate opinion that the one who abandons the salah has committed kufr. This is not the Q&A to get into the full controversy—perhaps another time. They have evidences which from their perspective are crystal clear. There's a hadith in Sahih Muslim: "The treaty or the covenant between me and my followers is the salah. Whoever abandons it has committed kufr." Imam Ahmad understood from this that the one who leaves salah is a kafir.
There is an interesting conversation reported in al-Subki's work. It is said that Imam al-Shafi'i asked Imam Ahmad: "Do you say that the one who leaves the salah is a kafir?" Imam Ahmad said, "Yes."
Imam al-Shafi'i said, "If he has left the salah, how does he re-enter Islam?" Imam Ahmad said, "He must say La ilaha illallah, Muhammad Rasulullah to re-enter."
Imam al-Shafi'i said, "But the man never abandoned the shahada. He's believing—he just hasn't prayed. Why should he repeat what he hasn't abandoned?"
Imam Ahmad was silent, then responded, "He must re-enter Islam by praying the salah—that's how he re-enters, because he left Islam by abandoning it."
Imam al-Shafi'i said, "But you are telling him to pray, and you just called him a kafir—and the kafir's prayer is not accepted. So how then do you expect him to re-embrace the faith?"
According to this anecdote, there was no response. We have to take this with a grain of salt—it comes from al-Subki, who has his biases—but it's an interesting anecdote that demonstrates the philosophical tension.
The Majority Position — 10:34
The point is: Imam al-Shafi'i and Imam Malik said the one who abandons the prayer out of laziness has committed a sin but he is not a kafir—he is a Muslim. Imam Ahmad said the one who abandons the prayer has left Islam.
Three Key Nuances — 11:30
Even if one follows the Hanbali school, there are several critical points that need to be mentioned:
1. What Does "Abandon the Salah" Mean? — 11:30
Does it mean you never pray at all? Or that you don't pray the majority? Or that you miss just one salah (which is apparently what the speaker said)?
If you read Ibn Taymiyyah and others, it seems very clear that their opinion is not what this preacher said. By "abandoning the salah," they mean the one who has left the salah in totality—the one who never prays at all in his life, the one who never does sajdah ever. That is what they meant by "tarik al-salah."
Very few voices—even in modern times—follow what I would call a very extreme position: that the one who abandons one salah has committed kufr. This is a minority opinion within the minority opinion of the Hanbali school.
2. Gravity of Sin vs. Potential for Forgiveness — 13:58
This is a key point that perhaps the speaker did not know or did not express. The gravity of the sin is different than the potential of forgiveness of the sin, and we need to differentiate between them.
Sins between man and Allah—no matter how grave—also have the potential to be forgiven with ultimate ease. Allah forgives the biggest sins against Him for the one who repents. How does a mushrik repent? By simply saying the shahada—and all of that shirk is forgiven.
In contrast, sins between mankind—even if small—might be extremely difficult to forgive if the other person does not forgive. The murderer can ask a thousand times, but if the family of the murdered and the murdered person himself does not forgive him on the Day of Judgment—of what use is that? Even backbiting, which is infinitely smaller than murder: if the one you backbit does not forgive you, how will you be forgiven? You must give him some good deeds as penalty.
So one needs to differentiate between the enormity of the sin and the potential for forgiveness. When you understand this, the phrase becomes incorrect according to the potential for forgiveness (even if it might be correct according to the Hanbali school regarding the enormity of the sin).
3. The "Disgust Factor" and Societal Reality — 16:28
I'd also like to point out: would you rather live next to a practicing Christian or a mass murderer? Even though we know that shirk is worse than killing people in terms of sin—still, in terms of psychology, society, and civil duty, which would you choose?
Allah explicitly allows non-Muslims to live in a Muslim land and practice their faith, yet we are not allowed to give shelter to murderers and criminals. Think about that. So we have to be careful in how we understand and phrase these things.
Advice to Preachers — 17:44
Those who are preaching and teaching Islam—including myself—we need to be extra careful about evil people taking our 10-second clips and distorting them. I have no doubt that this preacher is following the Hanbali school, has read it in some books, and thinks this is the correct opinion. I have no doubt he intended good—he intended his audience to pray.
But given the world we live in and the reality of the internet—where everything is online and so easy to misunderstand—I advise myself first and foremost: be extra careful and don't give ammunition, with no intention to do so, to Islamophobes.
Even if you follow this sentiment and the Hanbali school, preach it in a manner that is wise. Preach it in a manner that contextualizes and develops it, like I have just explained: you can say the gravity of the sin is worse, but the potential for forgiveness is much easier.
Conclusion — 19:52
To conclude:
And Allah knows best.