A scholarly and comparative analysis of the jurisprudential opinions regarding the deliberate abandonment of Salah (prayer) as mentioned in Imam Qurtubi’s Tafsir al-Jami' li Ahkam al-Qur'an

Abstract

The issue of Tark-e-Salat Muta'ammidan (deliberate abandonment of obligatory prayer) has been a subject of significant debate in Islamic jurisprudence, particularly concerning the perspectives of the four major schools of thought: Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, and Hanbali. This research aims to explore the varying jurisprudential views of the four Imams regarding the deliberate neglect of obligatory Salah (prayer) in light of Tafsir al-Qurtubi.

Each Imam developed their stance based on the Quran, Hadith, and principles of analogy (Qiyas). According to Imam Abu Hanifa (r.a) of the Hanafi school, deliberately abandoning obligatory Salah is a grave sin but does not amount to disbelief (kufr). Therefore, such an individual should not be executed but rather imprisoned until they resume offering prayers.

In contrast, Imams Malik (r.a), Shafi'i (r.a), and Ahmad ibn Hanbal (r.a) hold the view that a person who neglects prayer deliberately should be executed. However, there are nuanced differences in their reasoning. Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (r.a) asserts that deliberate abandonment of obligatory prayer renders a person an apostate (murtad), and the punishment for apostasy is execution. On the other hand, Imams Malik and Shafi'i do not consider the individual an apostate but argue that execution is the appropriate punishment for intentionally abandoning Salah.