so-and-so. This deliberate vagueness may have come from the Prophet himself—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—because he preferred not to mention the man’s name. It could also be that ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr withheld the name so that later narrators would not identify the person, or that a transmitter after ʿAbdullāh hid it for the same reason.

In any case, the point is clear: what truly matters in such issues is the deed itself, not the identity of the doer. For that reason, it was the Prophet’s practice—peace and blessings be upon him—that when he wished to forbid something, he would not single out individuals. Instead he would say, “What is the matter with certain people who do such-and-such?” and the like.

Omitting the person’s name yields two major benefits:

1. It preserves the individual’s privacy.
2. The person’s condition may later change, so he would no longer deserve the judgment passed on him at the time—for hearts are in Allah’s hand. Suppose, for example, I see a man committing open sin. If I name him and say to someone, “Do not be like So-and-so; he steals, fornicates, or drinks wine,” that man might later repent, straighten his affairs, and worship Allah properly. In that case he no longer merits the censure I once mentioned. Anonymity, therefore, is better: it both conceals the person and safeguards against misjudgment should his condition improve.

The Prophet’s words, “He used to stand in prayer at night and then abandoned the night prayer,” warn us against beginning a righteous deed and then giving it up. Doing so may indicate a distaste for goodness, which is a grave danger. A person might, of course, leave an act of worship for a valid excuse; when that happens—and if the deed can be made up—then he should make it up, and if