salam aleykum Taraweeh, Tahajjud or Qiyaam in Ramadhaan Author: Shaykh ul-Hadeeth Ubaidullah Rehmaanee Mubaarakpooree Translator: Abu Hibbaan

and Abu Khuzaimah al-Ansaari Source: The Clear Path Published: Monday 15th December 2003 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In reality Taraweeh, Tahajjud and Qiyaam of Ramadhaan, are all one and the same thing. The long hadeeth of Abu Dharr (radi-Allaahu anhu) in Ibn Maajah is clear evidence of this statement. The summary of the hadeeth is that Abu Dharr (radi-Allaahu anhu) said,

We kept the fasts of Ramadhaan with the Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam), then he led us in Qiyaam (Taraweeh prayer) on the 23rd night (when seven nights were left) till about one third of it passed. He did not observe it on the 24th, then on the 25th night he led us till about half the night passed. We requested to offer supererogatory prayer during the whole night. The Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) said, He who observes Qiyaam along with the Imaam till he finishes it, then it is as if he offered prayer the whole night. Then he did not observe the Qiyaam with us on the 26th night, then finally on the 27th night he gathered his wives, members of his household and the people and he led everyone in the Qiyaam (Taraweeh prayer) till we feared of missing the dawn meal. [Ibn Maajah (no. 1327) (2/287) (Arabic/English)] [1] It is clear from this narration that the Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) led the taraweeh prayer in three parts of the night and by praying it after Eesha until the end of the night he informed us of its time. It is likely that no time would have remained for tahajjud, (as taraweeh on the 27th night was prayed so late in the night to the extent that there were fears of missing the dawn meal) therefore no doubt remains about taraweeh and tahajjud being one prayer. Maulana Muhammad Anwar Shah Kashmiree Deobandee said,

There is no way out or alternative in accepting that the taraweeh of the Messenger of Allaah (salAllaahu alayhe wa sallam) was eight (8) rakahs (units), and it is not established by any narration he prayed taraweeh and tahajjud separately. [Urf ash-Shadhee (1/166)] [2] Praying taraweeh or tahajjud with congregation, or alone in the mosque or in the house in the latter part of the night is more virtuous. Umar (radi-Allaahu anhu) said,

Praying it late at night when you go to sleep is more virtuous than praying in the first part of the night. During this era of laziness and excuses; the taraweeh should be prayed with the congregation otherwise many people will leave and abandon it. Never mind listening to the whole Quraan they will not even hear the Quraan at all! During the Khaliphate of Umar (radi-Allaahu anhu) taraweeh was prayed at the earlier time with congregation and the Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) also prayed in the first part of the night during the first night (on the 23rd night). THE NUMBER OF RAKAH OF TARAWEEH Different statements from the Salaf have come concerning taraweeh, 40, 38, 36, 34, 28, 24 and 20. Ainee (Hanafee) and others have discussed them in detail. From these statements the one that is most correct is the one of the 8 rakahs with 3 Witr; totalling 11 rakahs and this is the Sunnah. Any other statement is not in accordance with the Sunnah. If someone wishes to pray more than 8 e.g. 20 or more, then he may do so. 20 rakahs should not be made specific, neither is this that which was practiced by Umar (radi-Allaahu anhu) as he also commanded the people to pray 11 rakahs during his khaliphate. PROOFS FOR 11 RAKAHS WITH WITR On the authority of Abee Salamah bin Abdur Rahmaan who said, The Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) did not exceed praying 11 rakahs in Ramadhaan of taraweeh (tahajjud). [Bukhaaree and Muslim] [3] On the authority of Jaabir (radi-Allaahu anhu), The Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) led us in prayer in Ramadhaan of 8 rakahs then we prayed the Witr. [Tabaraanee, Muhammad ibn Nasr, Ibn Khuzaimah, Ibn Hibbaan] [4] On the authority of Jaabir (radi-Allaahu anhu), Ubayy Ibn Kaab (radi-Allaahu anhu) came to the Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) and said, I did something yesterday night. The Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) said, What did you do? He said, Some women came to my house and said they did not know much Quraan so we shall pray behind you and will listen to the Quraan. So I led them in 8 rakahs of prayer and offered the witr

prayer. The Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) remained silent and thus it became the Sunnah. [Abu Yaala, Haithamee said in Majmaa az-Zawaaid the chain is Hasan] [5] Umar (radi-Allaahu anhu) ordered Ubayy ibn Kaab and Tameem ad-Daaree to lead the people in 11 rakahs. (on the authority of Saaib ibn Yazeed, Maalik in his Muwatta, Saeed in Mansoor and Abu Bakr ibn Abee Shaybah and Nimawee Hanafee said the chain is authentic in Aathaar as-Sunan) [6] And none of the narrations of 20 rakahs is authentic. Furthermore Allaamah Ibn Humaam Hanafee [7], Maulana Abdul Haqq Hanafee [8] and Maulana Abdul-Haiy Lucknowee [9] Hanafee and other Hanafee scholars have all said the narrations of 20 rakahs is weak and they established 11 rakahs to be the Sunnah. [10] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Footnotes [1] Saheeh Ibn Maajah no.1344 and no.1100 according to the numbering of Shaykh al-Albaanee (rahima-hullaah) (1/395) 1417 edn, Abee Dawood (1/217 Saheeh no.1245), Tirmidhee (1/72-73), Saheeh Nasaaee (1/338), Musannaf Ibn Abee Shaybah (2/90/21), Sharh Maanee al-Aathaar (1/206) of Tahaawee, Qiyaam al-Layl (p.89) of Muhammad ibn Nasr Marwazee, al-Faryaabee (2/71-72), Baihaaqee (2/294), Irwaa (no.447) of Imaam Al-Albaanee, Mishkaat (no.1298), Salatul Taraweeh (p.16-17) of Shaykh al-Albaanee. Muhaddith Al-Albaanee said Saheeh, Athaar as-Sunan (p.347) of Maulana Abdul Haiy Lucknowee Hanafee, Elaa as-Sunan (7/38) of Dhafar Ahmad Thanwee Hanafee. [2] He further said, 8 rakahs taraweeh is authentically proven from the Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) and the narration of 20 rakahs is narrated with a weak chain and there is agreement of its weakness. He also said, According to my preference taraweeh and tahajjud are one prayer, although there are differences in their attributes. [Faidh al-Baaree (2/420)] [3] Bukhaaree (3/25, 4/205), Muslim (2/66), Abu Awaanah (2/327), Abu Dawood (1/210), Tirmidhee (2/302-303) Shaakir edn, Nasaaee (1/248), Ibn Khuzaimah (2/192) Muwatta Imaam Maalik (1/134), Muwatta of Imaam Muhammad (p.138) Baihaaqee (2/495-496), Ahmad (6/36, 73, 104), UmdatulQaaree (11/128) of Mullah Alee Qaaree Hanafee. [4] Tabaraanee in Muajam as-Sagheer (p.108), Qiyaam al-Layl (p.90) of Muhammad ibn Nasr Marwazee, Saheeh Ibn Khuzaimah (2/138), Saheeh Ibn Hibbaan (4/62, 64), the chain is hasan as

indicated by Haafidh Ibn Hajr Asqaalanee in Fath ul-Baaree (3/10) and in Talkhees al-Habeer (p.119), Aathaar as-Sunan (p.248) of Nimawee Hanafee. Also authenticated by Maulana Abdul Haiy Lucknowee Hanafee Umdatur Raayah (1/207) and Taleequl Mumajjid (p.138) who said it was extremely authentic. Imaam Bukhaaree has bought this hadeeth in both the chapters of tahajjud and taraweeh, indicating he made no distinction between them. [Salaatul Taraweeh of Imaam Naasir ud Deen] [5] Musnad Abu Yaala (3/336), Majmaa az-Zawaaid (2/74) of Noor ud deen Haithamee (d.807H) [6] Muwatta (p.98), Musannaf ibn Abee Shaybah (2/391-392), Sunan Saeed ibn Mansoor as quoted from al-Haawee lil-Fatawaa (1/349), Aathaar as-Sunan (p.250) of Nimawee Hanafee (d.1322H). Imaam Suyootee said about its chain it is a strong authentic chain. Al-Masaabeeh Fee Salaatul Taraweeh (p.15) of Imaam Suyootee and al-Haawee lil-Fatawaa (1/350) Muwatta Imaam Maalik (1/114), As-Sunan Al-Kubraa Of Baihaaqee (2/496), Sharh Maani Al-Athaar (1/193), Al-Mukhtarah of Hafiz Dhiya Al-Maqdisee from Kunzul al-Aamaal (8/407), Maarifah As-Sunan of Baihaaqee (2/367-368), Qiyaam ul-Layl of Marwazee (p.200), Musanaff Abdur Razzaaq from Kunzul Aamaal, Mishkaat Al-Masaabeeh (p.115), Sharh As-Sunnah of Baghawee (4/120), Al-Muhazzab Fee Ikhtisaar As-Sunan Al-Kabeer of Dhahabee (2/461), Kunzul Aamaal (8/407), As-Sunan Al-Kubraa of Nasaaee from Tuhfatul Ashraaf of Muzee (8/22) [7] See Fath ul-Qadeer (1/205, 334) [8] Yanaabeea Risaalah Taraweeh (p.44) [9] See Umdatur Raayah (1/207) and Taleequl Mumajjid (p.138) [10] Muhammad Qaasim Nanautwee the founder of Deoband writes, it is written from the people of knowledge that Taraweeh (Qiyaam ul-Ramadhaan) and Tahajjud (Qiyaam ul-Layl) are in reality both One. [Fuyoodh Qaasamiyyah (p.13)] salam aleykum Dear Brother Azim Tariq, as far as I know Ahle Hadith always have the fatwa of a sahabi, a Tab'i or an Imam. For tarawih, Maliki pray eleven, and in france I prayed with Maliki from Algeria, Marroco and Tunisia and they always prayed 11. As for the Ijma, there is no Ijma, as you can see Ayni Hanafi mentions more than 10 sayings among salaf Some people who do not do Tahqid like to mention Ijma, or like to barogate sahih hadith without dalil.

But even the people of Tahqiq among Hanafi mention Ikhtilaf. As for making a difference between Taraweeh and Tahajud, see at Allamah Kashmiri's saying and Imam Luknawi mentionned the same on Ta'liq Muamajad, thet for muhaqqiqun it is one prayer. As for this hadith "Ibn Abbas (ra) narrated that the Prophet (saw) used to pray 20 raka'at by himself followed by 3 raka'at Witr (every night) in the month of Ramadan. (Sunan Al-Baihaqi, Hadith 12,102) " It is declared weak even by Ahnaf. And Imam Shafi'i mention 20 as nawafil, and he does not say 20 is sunnah Muakadah So there is no ijma on 20 being sunnah Muakadah. Insha Allah I shall mention even Hanafi book of fiqh saying the SUnnah of the Prophet saw is 11 and that of Umar is 20. While all hadith mentioning 20 is weak, as explined by Mubarakpuri in Tuhafatul Ahwadhi and shaykh Albani in his salah Tarawih. But Tariq Azim it is good you make tahqiq Insha Allah I will mention you Ibn Humam, Bahr Raiq and others aying the Sunnah is 11 and 20 is amal Sahabah. May Allah guide us all Salam aleykum Tariq Azim Look at that, Bahr Raiq Sharh Kanz daqaiq online in arabic You can asl Ryadul Haqq or any other to translate. You can also ask an arab brothet who is neither salafi nor deobandi, so he can tell you what Ibn Humam says, as quoted from Bahr Raiq. http://feqh.al-islam.com/Display.asp?Mo ... iacratic=0 We have in the matn : But the Muhaqiq Ibn Humam said in his Fath Qadeer that what is obtained is that the dalil leads tothe Sunnah being from the 20 what the Prophet saw prayed from it and he left fearing it be obligatory upon us, and the rest being Mustahab, and it is proven that it was 11 Raka'at with the witr( What he prayed and left) as established in the two sahih from the hadith of Aishah. Then what is the Sunnah according to he Usul of our Mashaykh is 8 and the 12 from it (20) are mustahab, End of Ibn Humam words And in the Sharh it is said " And it is said in Fath ( Qadeer) " What is reported from Ibn Abi Shaybah in his musanaf and Tabarani and Bayhaqi from the ahdith of Ibn Abbas that the prophet was praying in Ramadan 20 rak'at

except witr, then it is weak with Abi Shaybah Ibrahim ibn Uthman, the grand father of the Imam Abu Bakr, his weakness is agreed upon with the oppsition to the sahih" End of Ibn Humam's words And then the sharih tries to make tawil of the sahih hadith, and tries to prove that Umar's order of praying 20 is based on something. But All narration with 20 are weak, and the sahih is what is established in Muwatta, Umar ordered to pray 11. So you can see there is no Ijma', Ibn Humam says 8 is the SUnnah and the rest 12 are mustahab. Insha Allah more to come salam aleykum Here are shaykhul Islam Ibn Taymiya's words http://arabic.islamicweb.com/Books/taim ... 1&id=11778 Ibn Taymiyah says the Prophet saw prayed 11, and then Ubay ibn Ka'b during the time of Umar prayed 20 and then Witr because people were tired of long Qyam, and the longer number in Qyam is the replacement of the longer Qyam. So Ibn Taymiyah aslo holds the SUnnah is 11, and what sahabah did was their Ijtihad, because people were tired But other scholar have shown that these narrations of 20 are all weak, and in Muwatta Malik there is the narration that Umar ordered to pray 11 So Darul Ulum deoband that issue every year fatwa that praying eleven is forbidden, there is no asl to it, and even try to quote salfee scholars, These people should make tawbah to forbid the Sunnah And Ibn Taymiyah mentions also here that some salaf made Taraweeh with 40 rak'at, 36 Rak'a, So Ibn Taymiyah holds the SUnnah is eleven, and the salaf increased this number because of other reasons. What about Ijma, this is ridiculous. Insha Allah I will show words of Ibn hajar, maliki fiqh of book that are online like Mukhtasar Khalil which quotes 11 to 36m also mentions that Umar fisrt led to 11, then changed to 20. So people saying that 11 hadith is mudtarib and forbiding what some maliki fuqahas holds following hadith of eleven Insha Allah I will see what Zaraqni says in his sharh of Muwatta that is online. Azim Tariq, have you seen your deobadni using weak hadith and msi interpreating Ibn Taymiyah That is what we are against, weak hadith and Sutborness and ghulu to defend the opinion of one's

Imam salam aleykum Tamam Minah p 255 Imam Ibn Khuzaymah sais in his sahih vol 2 p 194 after quoting the sahih hadith about the number of raka in night from nine to 13 : This khilaf is among the permitted one, it is permissible for the person to pray which number he wants from the number that is reported the Prophet saw prayed, and according to the way the Prophet is reported to have prayed. There is no forbiddance for anyone for these These words according to shaykh Albani show that praying more according to ibn Khuzaymah is forbidden, since this is the permissible khilaf, more than 13 is not permitted. And Ibn Khuzaymah sees no difference between Qyam Tahjjud and Qyam Ramadan also called Tarawih, as as said by Albani, he called one of his chapter related to Qyam on Ramadan : Chapter Zikr of the number of Salah of the Prophet in the night in Ramadan, and the dalil that he did not add in Ramadan to the number he saw used to pray ghayr Ramadan And he quotes in this chapter the hadith from Aishah His prayer was 13 with the two raka of Fajr salam aleykum Mukhtasar Khalil http://feqh.al-islam.com/Display.asp?Mo ... 3%23%23%23 There is report from Nafi' that he saw people praying 39 with three witr, and Malik said the people never cessed this. LAkhmi says what he takes is what Umar gathered people and it is 11 Rak'ah. Ibn Habib said Umar turned then to 23. Mudawanah http://feqh.al-islam.com/Display.asp?Mo ... 3%23%23%23 In it there is the report of Nafi' that he did not see people except praying 39, and it is said that Umar ibn Abdel Aziz alos ordered 39. So we can see some maliki fuqahas give tarjih of eleven, and they Umar gathered people on it, while other say that after he turned to 23. And there is no Ijma since some prayed 39. So hanafi claiming an Ijma is ridiculous. Insha Allah more to come salam aleykum Look at that Tariq Azim, another alteration of deobandi

http://feqh.al-islam.com/Display.asp?Mo ... iacratic=0 This is Talkis al Habir sharh fi Takhrij Ahadith Rifaa' Al Kabir And ibn Hajar says " The Prophet saw prayed for people 20 Rak'a two nights, and one the third night people gathered, and he did not leave for them, and he said the day after, I feared it became obligatory upon you until end of hadith, and it is agreed upon its authenticity WITHOUT THE MENTION OF THE NUMBER,and it their riwayah ( Bukhari and Muslim) " I feared it became wajib upon you and you could not be able to do it" and Bukhari added " The Prophet saw died and the situation remained like that". As for the number, then Ibn Hibban reports in his sahih the hadith of Jabir that the Prophet saw prayed 8 rak'atin and did witr, and it is clear in what the Musanaf reports, yes the reports of 20 is in another hadith. Bayhaqi reports from Ibn Abbas that the Prophet saw prayed in Ramadan without Jam'at 20 Rak'at and witr, and sulaym Razi added in kitab Targhib that he saw prayed 3 witr. And Bayhqai said : And Abu SHaybah Ibrahim ibn Uthman is alone in reporting that and he is weak." And after that Ibn hajar mentions a narration of Muawatta that Umar ordered Ubay to pray 20. And it is known that many other muhadith declare 20 to be weak and eleven to be sahih in Muwatta. So Ibn Hajar did not consider the hadith of Aishah mentionning 20 to be sahih. For the number he mentionned the hadith of Jabir and his sukut on it means he considers it sahih, as for the hadith of ibn Abbas, ibn hajar quoted words showing it is weak. As for the hadith in which Aishah tells Prophet prayed 20, there is no mention of isnad or book where it is taken from. So this hadith is a mistake of Rifa'i. It does not come in Bukhari or muslim with these words. For the number Ibn Hajar also leans towards the hadith of Jabir that the Prophet saw prayed 11. See what your deobandi teach you. What they want to say to Ibn Hajar, while for the number he tends to the hadith of Jabir and shows weakness of that of ibn Abbas Allahul Musta'anu Insha Allah I will look also at Fath Al bari, and Muntaqa sharh Muwatta of Zarqani salam aleykum Here is Fath Al Bari http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 0&Rec=3158 Under the hadith of Aishah thet the Prophet did not increase over 11 in Ramadan or ghayr Ramadan. Ibn Hajar says " As for what is reported by Ibn Abi SHaybah from the hadith Ibn Abbas, that the Prophet saw prayed 20 rak'at and witr, its isnad is weak, and it opposes this hadith of Aishah that is in two sahih whit also the fact that she is more knoledgable of the Prayer of night of the Prophet saw. End of his words

So Ibn Hajar says the hadith of 20 opposes this hadith of Aishah. So he understands these words to mean the Prophet saw prayed 11. So Ibn Hajar also agrees the SUnnah is to pray 11. Allahu Akbar salam aleykum here ar words from sharh Zarqani of Muwatta http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... =7&Rec=347 So the author under the hadith that Umar ordered Ubay ibn Ka'b and Tamim Dari to lead people with 11 Rak'at, says : " And maybe Umar followed in this ( order) the salah of the Prophet saw at night as what is reported from Aishah that the Prophet saw prayed at night 11 rak'at, and the narrators disagree on what was prayed in Ramadan during Umar's time, Saib ibn Yazid emntions 11, and Yazid ibn Rawman narrates 23 rak'a and Nafi' mawla ibn Umar says he reached people praying 39 from which three witr. And it is possible that Umar ordered them to pray 11 and he ordered the Qari to read lond surah with Miin in every Rak'a, because long prayer in Qira'at are best, and when people got tired he ordered to pray 23 to make takhfif of longer Qyam, ...and the situation remined this until day of Hurrah, Qyam became hard on them and they reduced qira'ah and imcreased mumber of Rak'a until 36 and 3 witr, and the situation remained like that until Umar ibn Abdel Aziz." And Zarqani mentions that Malik takes 36 and shafi'i 20, and he mentions the saying of Abul Waleed sayoing the one who can pray 11 Rak'at with miin in very rak'at, this is the best So we have ikhtilaf on number of Tarawih, and AHle Hadith are taking the best, that is 11 Rak'a. So dar Al Ulum Deoband should make tawbah to issue fatwa every year forbiding people to pray eleven. On this topic, Habib Rahman A'athami authored a book, and shaykh Rehmani answered him, showing all Hanafi scholars saying that 11 is the SUnnah, from more than 10 Hanafi muhadith saying the same as Ibn Humam. A'thami tried to make tad'if of hadith of Jabir that the Prophet saw prayed 11 the three days, he also tries to make tad'if of Ubay ibn Ka'b saying he led the people with 11 Rak'a, but who listens to him while Haythami Hanafi says contrary. After aknowledging that Ibn Abbas' hadith is weak, he tries to raise it by what Umar ordered, and these narrations have all been weakened by shaykh Rehmani. Shaykh Rehmani also answered his calim of idtirab on the hadith of MAlik Umar ordering to pray 11. And A'thami also tries to bring Ibn taymiyah and Shawkani's words, but fully quoted, they say different to what he wants to prove

So we see the like of Habibu Rahman A'thami who opposes hanafi Muhadith, even his madhab's book say the sunnah is eleven and 20 is mustahab. May Allah guide us all Salam aleykum I looked to the book of shaykh Abdel Munir Qamar on tarawih on Quransunnah and it is said that Imam Luknawi says the hadith of Jabir that the Prophet saw prayed 8 is sahih in ta'liq Mumajad p 93, and he also in his book Tuhfatul Akhyar, p 38, Imam Luknawi is asked how much did the Prophet saw prayed the two nights in jam'ah, and he answers 8 as said by the hadith of Jabir. And in Umdah rayah Hashiyah sharh Wiqayah p 207, he also mentions the hadith of JAbir from shaih Ibn hibban. And he also mentions that in his Hashyah Hidayah, p 151 Mulla Ali Qari in his Mirqat, says that there is no doubt the prophet saw prayed 8 rak'at from the sahabah in tarawih without witr. Also in Hashyah Dur Mukhtar of TAhtawi, he mentions that the Prophet saw did not pray 20 but 8, p 295 Allamah shami says in Rad Al Mukhtar known as fatawa SHami ( vol 1 p 285) : " According to the dalil, only 8 is the sunnah and the rest is mustahab" Abul Hassan SHurunbulali says in Maraqi Falah sharh Nur Al Idhah p 347, that it is established that the Prophet saw prayed taarawih in jam'at with 11 rak'at with witr" Also Zelai in Nasb ruyah makes tad'if of the hadith of Ibn Abbas and quotes the hadith of Jabir , vol 2 p 153 And there are more hanafis cholars mentionned So why did Habibur Rahman A'thami did not bring all these hanafis scholar saying. Why does he make hadith Jabir tad'if while the like of Zelai and Luknawi do not do it. These people are ready to anything, even to oppose their muhadith and fuqahas, to give victory to their madhab. May Allah guide us to fairness and protect us from Ta'asub salam aleykum Here is a link to nasb Ruyah of Imam Zela'i Hannafi http://www.al-eman.com/Islamlib/viewchp ... CID=169#s1

Zela'i mentions hadith of Jabir that the Prophet saw prayed 11 in Tarawih. Also Zela'i says the hadith of ibn Abbas about the Prophet is ma'lul ( having defect), as Abu Shaybah Ibrahim ibn Uthamn's weaknees is agreed upon and this hadith opposes the sahih, and then he tells the hadith of Aishah that the Prophet saw would not increase in Ramadan and ghayr Ramadan to 11. Then he further mentions the two narrations from Muwatta the one of Yazeed ibn Ruman that people were praying 23 during Umar's time, and the other of Saib that Umar ordered Ubay ibn Ka'b and TAmim Dari to lead people with 11 rak'a, and Zela'i mentions Bayhaqi's saying that the jam' between these narrations is that first Umar ordered them to pray 11 then 20, and Yazid ibn Ruman did not reach Umar, end of Bayhqai's words. So we see Zela'i's clear words, for him the Prophet saw prayed 11 as the hadith of 20 is weak and oppsing Sahih hadith of Aishah. He also mentions hadith of Jabir without weakening it, contrary to Habiburahman A'thami He does not mention idtirab for hadith in Muwata about hadith of 11, contrary to A'thami. So the Sunnah of the Prophet is to pray 11, how can A'thami contradict the likes of Zela'i and accuse Ahle hadith of innovation. This person who has been accused of making tahreef in Musnad Humaydi, opposes the like of Ibn Humam, Zela'i, Luknawi, Haythami for hadith of Jabir. All these hanafi quotes are hujjah against A'thami and his followers who accuse Ahle hadith of bid'a. Deobandi should make tawbah to take from the like of him, as many other people who are not sincere, but only write to give victory to their madhab, like Safdar Khan deobandi who weakens Ibn Ishaq in his book Ahsan Kalam, while all hanafi muhadith like ibn Humam, Zela'i, Luknawi, Ayni, Haythami, Ibn Turkmani, Kashmiri, even Kawthari and Abu Ghuddah consider him to be thiqah or saduq, meaning his hadith are at least hassan. And at same time, Safdar deobandi in his book Taskeen Sudur mentions a narration from Ibn Ishaq, who is also a Mudallis, telling the Prophet saw in his grave listen from near and salam are transmited from far, while IbN Ishaq trasnmit the hadith with An'anah, and does not mention tahdith. So the hadith is weak, but he grades it sahih, while calling ibn Ishaq in Ahsan kalam a liar. So we see their madhab, the same narrator becomes a liar when he narrates against ahanafi fiqh, and thiqah when he narrates for HAyati deobandi belief May Allah protect us from Ta'asub Question #9036: Numbers of rakahs in Taraaweeh prayer

Click here to get a printable version Question :

have asked this earlier but did not get a satisfactory answer. My question is about Taraweeh Prayer in Ramadan. You have answered to me in a question before that Taraweeh should not be more that 11 rakat. It has been authentically reported that Muhammad SAAW prayed Taraweeh 3 times in Ramadan and it consisted 11 Rakah. Also the book by Shaykh Naasir-ud-Din Al-Albani (May Allah have mercy on him) Qiyam and Taraweeh states that Taraweeh should be 11 Rakah. The sunnah is 11 Rakat. Now the question which is confusing and often becomes a discussion among brothers is whether the number of Rakat in Taraweeh should be 11 Rakat or 20 Rakat. Some people during Ramadan go to masjids where the Imam does 11 Rakats and other go to Masjids where the Imam does 20 Rakats. In most of the Hanafi Masjids around the US the Imam does 20 Rakat. The point to note is whether 20 Rakat or 11 Rakat the Imam completes the entire Qurran during Ramadan. The people are very sentitive about this issue and this issue becomes a topic in gathering in the United States. The people who pray 20 Rakat blame the other groug praying 11 as being wrong and the group praying 11 Rakat blames the group praying 20 as wrong. This is a big fitnah in the US. This leads to disunity. People always quote that in Prophets Mosque the Imam prays 20 Rakats and also in Masjid-ulHaraam in Mecca the Imam prays 20 Rakat. Also those who during Ramadan go to Saudi Arabia for Umrah say that the Imam prays 20 Rakat. This is a confusion. Please answer and explain to me the following issues: 1. The sunnah is to pray 11 Rakat then why is Prophets mosque in Medina and also in Masdid-ulHaram the imam leads the people to pray 20 Rakat? Why? Why is this different from the sunnah? 2. Why are the number of Rakat of Taraweeh in Prophets mosque and Masjid-ul-Haraam 20 Rakat? Please explain to us so. Answer : Praise be to Allaah. We do not think that the Muslims should be so sensitive with regard to issues that are the matter of scholarly differences or make them the cause of division and fitnah among the Muslims. Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said, when speaking about the matter of one who prays ten rakahs with the imam, then sits down and waits for Witr and does not complete the Taraaweeh prayers with the imam: It grieves us deeply that we find in the Muslim ummah a group which differs concerning matters in which differences of opinion are acceptable, and they take these differences as a means to cause division. Differences within the ummah existed at the time of the Sahaabah, yet they remained united. The youth in particular and to all those who are committed to Islam must remain united, because they have enemies who are laying in wait. Al-Sharh al-Mumti, 4/225 Two groups have gone to extremes with regard to this matter. The first group denounced everyone who prays more than eleven rakahs and said that doing so was bidah. The second group denounced those who do only eleven rakahs and said that they are going against scholarly consensus (ijmaa). Let us listen to what Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Here we say that we should not go to extremes or be negligent. Some people go to extremes in adhering to the number mentioned in the Sunnah, and say that it is not permissible to do more than the number mentioned in the Sunnah, and they aggressively denounce those who do more than that,

saying that they are sinners. This is undoubtedly wrong. How can they be sinners, when the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), upon being asked about night prayers, said that they are to be done two by two, and he did not specify any particular number? Of course the one who asked him about the night prayer did not know the number, because if he did not know how to do it, it is even more likely that he did not know the number. And he was not one of those who served the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) so that we might say that he knew what happened inside his house. Since the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) told him how to do it but did not say how many times, it may be understood that the matter is broad in scope, and that a person may pray one hundred rakahs then pray Witr with one rakah. With regard to the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), Pray as you have seen me praying, this does not apply in absolute terms even for these people. Hence they do not say that a person should pray Witr with five rakahs sometimes and with seven rakahs sometimes and with nine rakahs sometimes. If we understand it in absolute terms, then we would have to pray Witr with five rakahs sometimes and with seven rakahs sometimes and with nine rakahs sometimes. But what is meant by the hadeeth is pray as you have seen me praying with regard to how to pray not how many rakahs, unless there is a text to state what the number is. Whatever the case, a person should not be strict with people with regard to a matter that is broad in scope. We have even seen some brothers who are strict on this matter accusing the imams who pray more than eleven rakahs of following bidah, and they leave the mosque, thus missing out on the reward of which the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: Whoever stands with the imam until he finishes (the prayer), the reward of qiyaam al-layl will be recorded for him. (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 806; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh alTirmidhi, 646). Some of them even sit down after completing ten rakahs, thus breaking up the rows of worshippers by sitting there, and sometimes they start talking and disturb the people who are praying. We have no doubt that their intentions are good and they are doing their best to come to the right conclusion, but that does not mean that they are correct. The other group does the opposite. They sternly denounce those who pray only eleven rakahs and say that they have gone against scholarly consensus. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): And whoever contradicts and opposes the Messenger (Muhammad) after the right path has been shown clearly to him, and follows other than the believers way, We shall keep him in the path he has chosen, and burn him in Hell what an evil destination! [al-Nisa 4:115] All the generations who came before you only knew the number as twenty-three rakahs, and they denounce anyone who says anything different. Al-Sharh al-Mumti, 4/73-75 With regard to the evidence quoted by those who say that it is not permissible to do more than eight rakahs in Taraaweeh, they quote the hadeeth of Abu Salamah ibn Abd al-Rahmaan, who asked Aaishah (may Allaah be pleased with her), How did the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) pray during Ramadaan? She said: He did not pray more than eleven rakahs in Ramadaan or at other times. He would pray four, and do not ask how beautiful and long they were,

then he would pray four, and do not ask how beautiful and long they were, then he would pray three. I said, O Messenger of Allaah, will you sleep before you pray Witr? He said, O Aaishah, my eyes sleep but my heart does not. Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1909; Muslim, 738 They said: This hadeeth indicates that the Messenger of Allaah was consistent in his prayers at night in Ramadaan and at other times. The scholars refuted this use of the hadeeth as evidence by saying that this is what the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did, but the fact that he did something does not imply that it is obligatory. The evidence that there is no set number for prayers at night which include Taraaweeh is the hadeeth of Ibn Umar according to which a man asked the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) about prayer at night. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: Prayers at night are to be offered two by two (two rakahs at a time). If any of you fears that the time of dawn is approaching then let him pray one rakah as Witr. (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 846; Muslim, 749) If we look at what the scholars of the prominent schools of thought said, you will clearly see that this matter is broad in scope and that there is nothing wrong with doing more than eleven rakahs. Al-Sarkhasi, who is one of the imams of the Hanafi school, said: It is twenty rakahs, apart from Witr, in our view. Al-Mabsoot, 2/145 Ibn Qudaamah said: The favoured view according to Abu Abd-Allaah (i.e., Imam Ahmad, may Allaah have mercy on him), is that it is twenty rakahs. This was the view of al-Thawri, Abu Hanfeefah and al-Shaafai. Maalik said it is thirty-six. Al-Mughni, 1/457 Al-Nawawi said: Taraaweeh prayer is Sunnah according to scholarly consensus. Our view is that it is twenty rakahs with ten tasleems, and it is permissible to pray it individually or in congregation. Al-Majmoo, 4/31 These are the views of the four imams concerning the number of rakahs of Taraaweeh prayer. All of them said something more than eleven rakahs. Perhaps the reasons why they said something more than eleven rakahs include the following: 1- They thought that the hadeeth of Aaishah did not mean that this was the specific number. 2- A greater number was narrated from many of the salaf.

See al-Mughni, 2/604; al-Majmoo, 4/32 3- The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to pray eleven rakahs and make them very lengthy, so much so that it used to take him most of the night. Indeed, one night in which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) led his companions in praying Taraaweeh, he did not end his prayer until just before dawn, and the Sahaabah feared that they would miss suhoor. The Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) loved to pray behind the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and they did not feel that it was too long. The scholars thought that if the imam made the prayer so long, this would be too difficult for the members of the congregation and that might put them off. So they thought that the imam should make the recitation shorter and increase the number of rakahs. The point is that the one who prays eleven rakahs in the manner narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is doing well and is following the Sunnah. Whoever makes the recitation shorter and increases the number of rakahs is also doing well. A person who does either of these two things is not to be denounced. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: If a person prays Taraaweeh according to the madhhabs of Abu Haneefah, al-Shaafai and Ahmad, with twenty rakahs, or according to the madhhab of Maalik, with thirty-six rakahs, or with thirteen or eleven rakahs, he has done well, as Imam Ahmad said, because there is nothing to specify the number. So the greater or lesser number of rakahs depends on how long or short the qiyaam (standing in the prayer) is. Al-Ikhtiyaaraat, p. 64 Al-Suyooti said: What is narrated in the saheeh and hasan ahaadeeth is the command to observe night prayers during Ramadaan, which is encouraged without specifying a particular number. It is not proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) prayed twenty rakahs of Taraaweeh, rather that he prayed at night, with an unspecified number of rakahs. Then he delayed it on the fourth night lest it become obligatory for them and they might not be able to do it. Ibn Hajar al-Haythami said: There is no saheeh report that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) prayed twenty rakahs of Taraaweeh. The narration which suggests that he used to pray twenty rakahs is extremely weak (daeef). Al-Mawsooah al-Fiqhiyyah, 27/142-145 So you should not be surprised that people pray Taraaweeh as twenty rakahs. There have been generation after generation of those imams (who used to pray twenty rakahs), and all of them are good. And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A (www.islam-qa.com) As for the narrations brought by Ahnaf here is a detail answer of them, from two noble brothers alQaul as--Saheeh Fee Masalatut--Taraaweeh

By Abu Hibbaan Malak & Abu Khuzaimah Ansaari Maktabah Ashaabul Hadeeth We present the introduction in the words of the Shaikh, the Imaam al-Allaamah Muhammad Ismaaeel (d.1246H) the author of Taqwiyyatul-Eemaan. The hanafees claim he was a hanafee so we have mentioned some of his statements in rebuking of them and at the same time elucidating the problem why the muqallideen especially the hanafees have so much rigid bigotry and partisanship and the problems associated with it. he says, Chapter Exaggeration in Taqleed and Taassub (bigotry). People have exaggerated a lot in the taqleed of one particular individual and have made rigid bigotry obligatory upon themselves to the extent that they have prohibited an individual from performing ijtihaad and from doing taqleed of other Imaams. And this is that non-curable illness which destroyed the sheeahs and these people (ie the muqallideen) have also reached the realms of destruction but the only difference is that the sheeahs have reached a greater level of destruction. They (the sheeahs) started to find texts to back up the statements of their Imaams and these people (ie the muqallideen) have also adopted this way and begun to figurative explain well known narrations that opposed the statements of their Imaams. However they should have weighed and presented the statements of their Imaams to these narrations and texts and if they (the statements) coincided with the text they should have accepted them or otherwise rejected them. (Tanweer ul-Aynain Fee Ithbaat Raful-Yadain (pg.44-45) He further said, And I am amazed when I see a person has the ability to return to a clear and conclusive hadeeth of the Messenger of Allaah (Saalalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) which opposes the statement of his Imaam and yet they still hold doing taqleed permissible and I wonder how is this permissible. So if he does not leave the statement of his Imaam in such a situation then he has with him Shirk Fir-Risaalah (Association partners in the Messengership of the Prophet.). then the Shaikh goes onto mention the hadeeth of Adiyy bin Haatim in Jaami at-Tirmidhee in regards to the verse of Allaah, They have taken their monks and rabbis Lords besides Allaah. (Soorah at-Taubah). He goes onto say further, So we find from this hadeeth that if a person comes to know the evidences from the Book and the Sunnah and he still adheres to the statement of a specific Imaam and begins to figurative explain these evidences, then such a person has traits of Christianity in him and there is the danger that he may have taken some aspects of Shirk in him. And there is extreme amazement on such a nation, who instead of fearing such taqleed they declare those who abandon this taqleed to be great oppressors. Then how well does the following verse fit such people, How shall I fear those whom you associate and yet you do not fear that you have associated partners with Allaah for which Allaah has not revealed any evidence, so which of the two are upon the truth, if only but you knew. So think and be just and do not be from those people who have doubts and we seek refuge in Allaah from being amongst those who have bigotry. (Tanweer ul-Aynain Fee Ithbaat Raful-Yadain (pg.49-51). Shaikh Abdul Hayy Lucknowee Hanafee said, "A group of the Hanafee's are engrossed in extreme partisanship and bigotry adhering strongly to the books of fataawa (verdicts) and when these people come across an authentic hadeeth or a clear athar which is contrary to their madhab then they say, "If this hadeeth was authentic then the Imaam would have definitely issued verdicts according to it and not contrary to this, then it is the ignorance of these people." (al-Naaf'e al-Kabeer (pg.145) Throughout their books the hanafees use ahadeeth from the Musannaf of Imaam Abee Shaybah when they feel obliged to do so but look at some of bigotry of these people against this very same book of Musannaf. So Asbaq bin Khaleel said, It is more beloved to me that a head of a Pig is put in my books then I have (to read) Musannaf Ibn Abee Shaybah. (refer to Siyar Alam an-Nabula (13/288.290), Leesaan ul-Meezaan (1/458), Nafh at-Tayyib (3/273), Tarteeb al-Madarak (3/143-144), Tadhkirratul-Huffaadh

(2/630) Similarly Imaam Shaatibee said from the fourth harm of taqleed is that the muqallid holds the statement and opinion of his Imaam to be the Shareeah and he does not even consider listening to the opinion of another mujtahid but rather he hurls abuse, disparaging statements and criticisms at the other. (al-Eitisaam (2/348). And lastly Shaikh Anwar Shah Kashmiree Hanafee Deobandee mentioned a statement which puts the hanafees and the other muqallideen and their traits in pure perspective, he says, I have witnessed these people and they formulate defective and erroneous principles, so what else can be wished for after this. So when one of them finds a weak hadeeth according to his madhab he formulates the rule or principle that due to numerous routes (of this weak hadeeth) the blame of weakness is lifted or removed. Similarly when they find an authentic hadeeth contradicting their madhab they immediately formulate the rule and principle that the hadeeth is Shaadh (ie weak due to opposing something more authentic that it. (Faidh al-Baaree (2/348) So this is the first treatise in regards to this issue of Taraaweeh, Inshallaah there is another treatise that is to be released shortly also which is a research paper on how the hanafee deobandees changed and altered a hadeeth in Sunan Abee Dawood, attempting to deceptively prove taraaweeh to be 20 rakahs. May Allaah save us from altering the words of Allaah and his Messenger. Evidences Utilized By The Hanafees For Claiming Taraaweeh is 20 Rakahs Our Claim The Imaam the Muhaddith, al-Allaamah Abu Muhammad Badee ud deen Sindhee said, The AhlulHadeeth claim it is not authentically established from any companion that they prayed 20 rakahs of taraaweeh and the narrations that are mentioned in this regard are all principally weak. (Tanqeed asSadeed Bir-Risaalah Ijtihaad Wat-Taqleed (pg.264). The First Evidence The Narration of Ibn Abbaas Ibn Abbaas (Radhiallaahu Anhuma) said, The Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) would pray 20 rakah (taraaweeh) and Witr in Ramadhaan. (Musannaf Ibn Abee Shaybah (2/393). Baihaqee also references it in Sunan al-Kubraa (2/496), Khateeb Baghdaadee in Taareekh Baghdaad (6/113), (2/45) and others. The wording mentioned by Imaam Baihaqee is as follows, The Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) would pray 20 rakah (taraaweeh) and Witr without the jamaah The Answer : First and foremost, when this hadeeth mentions, without the jamaah it does not constitute evidence for hanafees as they claim the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee WasSallam) prayed 20 rakahs in jamaah. So this cannot be utilized by the hanafees in deducing Taraaweeh is 20 rakahs. The chain of this narration is as follows, Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan from Hakam from Miqsam from Ibn Abbaas. The Statement of Allaamah al-Imaam Muhammad Abdur-Rahmaan Mubaarakpooree Imaam Allaamah Abdur-Rahmaan Mubaarakpooree said, This hadeeth is very weak and the deduction is incorrect and deducing from this hadeeth is not correct. Haafidh Zailaaee said in Nasb

ur-Raayah, It is defective due to Abee Shaybah Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan, the grandfather of al-Imaam Abee Bakr ibn Abee Shaybah, and they are agreed upon him being weak. Ibn Adiyy said he was weak in al-Kaamil, then it also opposes the authentic hadeeth from Abee Salamah bin Abdur-Rahmaan when questioned Aaishah (Radhiallaahu Anha), What was the prayer of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) in Ramadhaan? She replied, Whether Ramadhaan or other than Ramadhaan he would not exceed 11 rakahs. (al-Hadeeth) End of the words of Zailaaee. Nimawee said in Taleeq Aathaar as-Sunan, Transmitted by Abd bin Humaid al-Kashee in his Musnad and Baghawee in his Muajam, Tabaraanee in Muajam al-Kabeer and Baihaqee in his Sunan, all of them via the route of Abee Shaybah Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan, the grandfather of Imaam Abee Bakr ibn Abee Shaybah, and he is weak. Baihaqee said after transmitting it said Abu Shaybah Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan al-Absee al-Koofee is alone in reporting it and he is weak. Mizzee said in Tahdheeb ul-Kamaal, Ahmad, Yahyaa and Abu Dawood said he is weak, Yahyaa also said he is not trustworthy, Nasaaee and Daulaabee said Matrook al-Hadeeth (rejected in hadeeth), Abu Haatim said weak in hadeeth and Sakatu Anhu (remained silent on him) he said also Saaleh (Good), weak and do not write his hadeeth. Thereafter al-Mizzee said from his rejected narrations are, his narration that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) prayed 20 rakah in Ramadhaan. End (See Tahdheeb al-Kamaal (2/147-151) for this) This is also what is mentioned in Meezaan (ul-Eitidaal). Haafidh (Ibn Hajr) said in Taqreeb, Matrook al-Hadeeth. End of the words of Nimawee. Shaikh Ibn Humaam said in Fath ul-Qadeer after mentioning this hadeeth, Weak due to Abee Shaybah Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan the grandfather of Imaam Abee Bakr ibn Abee Shaybah, they are agreed upon his weakness and he also opposes the authentic hadeeth. End of his words. Ainee said in Umdatul-Qaaree after mentioning this hadeeth said, And Abu Shaybah and he is Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan al-Absee al-Koofee the Qaadhee of Waasit and the grandfather of Abee Bakr ibn Abee Shaybah. Shubah said he was a liar and Ahmad, Ibn Maeen, Bukhaari and Nasaaee and others said he was weak. Ibn Adiyy mentioned this hadeeth to be from (ie Ibraaheems) his rejected hadeeth in al-Kaamil. End of his words. (Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee Sharh Jaame at-Tirmidhee (3/445446). The Details Concerning Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan Then he is Abu Shaybah Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan al-Absee al-Koofee. Imaam Baihaqee after mentioning this narration directly after it says, Abu Shaybah Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan is alone in reporting it and he is weak. (Sunan al-Kubraa (2/496), (Nayl al-Awthaar (3/58) of Imaam Shawkaanee. Imaam Uthmaan ad-Daarimee mentions from Imaam Ibn Maeen who said, He is not trustworthy. (Meezaan ul-Eitidaal (1/170 no.145), Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (1/130), al-Jarh Wat-Tadeel (2/115 no.347), Kitaab adh-Dhuafaa Wal-Matrookeen (1/41 no.86) Imaams Ahmad, Yahyaa, Abu Dawood and Abu Zurah said, Weak. (Meezaan ul-Eitidaal (1/170), Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (1/130 no.229), al-Jarh Wat-Tadeel (2/115), Kitaab adh-Dhuafaa WalMatrookeen (1/41), Kitaab al-Majrooheen Minal Muhadditheen (1/100 no.14) of Imaam Ibn Hibbaan Imaam Bukhaari remained silent concerning him. (Meezaan ul-Eitidaal (1/170), Tahdheeb utTahdheeb (1/130), Dhuafaa as-Sagheer (no.5 pg.1), Taareekh as-Sagheer (pg.190) and Taareekh alKabeer (1/310 no.982) of Imaam Bukhaari.

Imaam Tirmidhee said, Munkar al-Hadeeth. (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (1/130) Imaam Nasaaee and Daulaabee said, Matrook al-Hadeeth. (he would narrate rejected ahadeeth) (Meezaan ul-Eitidaal (1/170), Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (1/130), Kitaab adh-Dhuafaa Wal-Matrookeen (1/41), Kitaab adh-Dhuafaa Wal-Matrookeen (no.11 pg.1) of Imaam Nasaaee Imaam Abu Haatim said, Weak in Hadeeth, remained silent and rejected his hadeeth. (al-Jarh WatTadeel (2/115), Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (1/130), Kitaab adh-Dhuafaa Wal-Matrookeen (1/41). Juzjaanee said, Dropped. Saaleh Jazrah said, Weak, do not write his hadeeth. He narrates abandoned ahadeeth from Hakam. Abu Alee Neesaabooree said, He is not strong. (Tahdheeb utTahdheeb (1/130) Imaam Shubah said he was a liar. (Meezaan ul-Eitidaal (1/170), (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (1/130) Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, I say, Ibn Saad said, He is weak in hadeeth. Daarqutnee said, Weak. Ibn al-Mubaarak said, Throw him away. Abu Taalib said, From Ahmad who said he was Munkar al-Hadeeth, similar to al-Hasan bin Aamaarah. Ibn Adiyy mentioned about Abee Shaybah, He did not hear from al-Hakam except one hadeeth. (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (1/131), al-Jarh Wat-Tadeel (2/115 no.347), Kitaab adh-Dhuafaa Wal-Matrookeen (1/41 no.86) of Ibn al-Jawzee. Haafidh Ibn Hajr also said in Taqreeb, Matrook al-Hadeeth. (Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.217 pg.112) Imaam Dhahabee after bringing the statement of the Imaams of Hadeeth says, From the abandoned (Manaakeer) narrations of Abee Shaybah (Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan) is what is narrated by alBaghawee from Mansoor bin Abee Mazaahim from Abu Shaybah from al-Hakam from Miqsam from Ibn Abbaas, The Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) would pray 20 rakah (taraaweeh) and Witr in the month of Ramadhaan without a jamaah. (Meezaan ul-Eitidaal Fee Naqd ar-Rijaal (1/169-170 no.145). Imaam Dhahabee also said, They are agreed upon him being weak. (Deewaan adh-Dhuafaa WalMatrookeen (1/52 no.211) of Imaam Dhahabee. Haafidh al-Haithamee said, In it (this narration) is Abu Shaybah Ibraaheem and he is weak. (Majmaa az-Zawaaid (3/172). 8al-Qaul as-Saheeh Fee Masalatut-Taraaweeh Maktabah Ashaabul-Hadeeth See also al-Mughnee Fidh-Dhuafaa (1/20), adh-Dhuafaa (1/59-60), al-Kaamil (1/239-241), adhDhuafaa Wal-Matrookeen (no.7) of Imaam Daarqutnee, Taareekh Baghdaad (6/113), Ibn Saad (6/384). Imaam Suyootee severely criticized the narrator of this hadeeth and said, This hadeeth is VERY weak and it cannot be used as proof. (al-Haawee Lil-Fataawa (1/347), al-Masaabeeh (p.3) The Words Sakatu Anhu (I) Remain Silent About him) of Ameer al-Mumineen Fil-Hadeeth Muhammad bin Ismaaeel al-Bukhaari. lbn Katheer explains: If aI-Bukhaari says about a man (I) remain silent about him or Look into his hadeeth then he is in the lowest and worst of the levels with him. (Ikhtisaar Uloom al-Hadeeth

(p.73) and al-Baaith al-Hatheeth (1/320). The above also has been mentioned by many scholars of hadeeth including Haafdih Sakahwee, Haafidh al-Araaqee, Imaam Suyootee etc. See the discussion on FeeHee Nazar of the words of Imaam Bukhaari and his meaning in using them. Refer to the general books of mastalah al-Hadeeth and also to the work of the hanafee deobandee Zafar Ahmad Thanawee Uthmaanees Qawaaid Uloom al-Hadeeth (pg.254-258), he also says these two statements ie FeeHee Nazar and Sakatu Anhu are from the (most highest grades) first or second grades of criticism (pg.258) Imaam Dhahabee said, The statement of Imaam al-Bukhaari (I) remain silent on him on its apparent is neither praise or criticism but we know his usage is that his hadeeth are to be abandoned. (al-Muqaddimah al-Muwwaqizah Fee Ilmal-Mastalah al-Hadeeth (pg.320) of Imaam Dhahabee Maa Sharh Kifaayatul-Hifzah of Shaikh Saleem al-Hilaalee as-Salafee. The Statement of Imaam Muhammad bin Ismaaeel al-Ameer as-Sanaanee. The Shaikh said, As for the narration concerning 20 rakahs then it is not Marfoo except that which has been narrated by Abd bin Humaid and Tabaraanee via Abu Shaybah Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan from Hakam from Maqsam from Ibn Abbaas that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) prayed 20 rakahs of Taraaweeh and witr. The author of Subl a-Rashaad said Ahmad, Ibn Maeen, Imaam Bukhaari, Imaam Muslim, Abu Dawood, Tirmidhee and Nasaaee all opined this individual (Abu Shaybah Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan) was weak and Shubah said he was a liar and Ibn Maeen said he is not trustworthy and counted this hadeeth to be from the rejected narrations he narrated. Azraaee said in al-Mutwasat that which is narrated from the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) that in the two nights that he led the prayer was in 20 rakahs is rejected. Zarkashee said in al-Khaadim the claim that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) led the people in 20 rakahs is not correct and that which is established from the authentic narrations is that no number of rakahs are specified. The narration in Jaabir mentions the Messenger of Allaah led the people in 8 rakahs and Witr and then we waited for him the next day but he did not come. Transmitted by Ibn Hibbaan and Ibn Khuzaimah in their Saheehs. Transmitted Baihaqee the narration of Ibn Abbaas by the way of Abee Shaybah and then said it is weak and then narrates other narrations. But none of them are Marfoo (raised) and we are to mention the narration of Aaishah which is agreed upon that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) did not exceed 11 rakahs and witr in the month of Ramadhaan or in any other than it End of his Words. (Subl as-Salaam Sharh Buloogh al-Maraam (3/27-29) The Statement of Imaam Muhaddith al-Albaanee From Irwaa ul-Ghaleel The Muhaddith mentions in his book, Imaam Tabaraanee said, This is not narrated from Ibn Abbaas except with this chain. Baihaqee said, When Abu Shaybah is alone in reporting, then he is weak. I say, Haithamee has mentioned in al-Majmaa (3/172) and this Abaa Shaybah is weak. Haafidh said in al-Fath, The chain is weak. Al-Haafidh Zailaaee also said it is weak in Nasb ur-Raayah (2/153) before (discussing the) chain and he rejected it due to its text, he said, And it opposes the authentic hadeeth from Aaishah when she said the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) would not exceed 11 rakahs in the

month of Ramadhaan or other than it, transmitted by the Shaikhain. Similarly Haafidh Ibn Hajr increased upon this and said, Aaishah was more knowledge about the affairs of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) in the night. Haafidh Dhahabee also mentions in Meezaan this narration to be from the abandoned narrations of Abee Shaybah. The Faqeeh Ahmad bin Hajr said in al-Fataawa al-Kubraa this hadeeth has severe weakness. I hold the opinion it is Mawdoo (fabricated) due to 3 affairs, which I have mentioned in Ahadeeth adDaeefah Wal-Mawdooah (no.546) so refer to it whoever wishes to. (Irwaa al-Ghaleel Fee Takhreej Ahadeeth Manaar as-Sabeel (2/191-192 no.445) The Statement of Imaam Muhaddith al-Albaanee From Salaatul-Taraweeh Allaamah al-Albaanee established the following chapter heading, The Hadeeth for 20 Rakahs Is Very Weak and Not Permissible To Act Upon. and said, and Said (Haafidh Ibn Hajr) in al-Fath (4/205-206) under the explanation of the first hadeeth, And that which has been narrated by Ibn Abee Shaybah from the hadeeth of Ibn Abbaas in which the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) prayed 20 rakahs and witr in Ramadhaan, then the chain of this hadeeth is weak and it contradicts the hadeeth of Aaishah (Radhiallaahu Anha) which is narrated in the Saheehain, and she was more knowledgeable about the Prophets (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) affairs in the night. Haafidh Zailaaee preceded him in this meaning in Nasb ur-Raayah (2/153). I say: This hadeeth of Ibn Abbaas is extremely weak as Suyootee said in al-Haawee lil-Fataawa (2/73) and the defect in this is Abaa Shaybah Ibraaheem ibn Uthmaan. Haafidh Ibn said in Taqreeb, Matrook al-Hadeeth. This hadeeth has not been narrated by any other narrator in any other route except this one, and he Ibraaheem is in all of them. Tabaraanee said, This has not been narrated from Ibn Abbaas except with this chain. Baihaqee said, This is the single report of Abu Shaybah and he is weak. Similarly Haithamee said he was weak in al-Majmaa (3/172). The reality is that he is very weak as mentioned by the statement of Haafidh Ibn Hajr who said he was abandoned in hadeeth, and this is what is correct. Ibn Maeen said he is not trustworthy, Juzjaanee said, dropped. Shubah said he was a liar. Bukhaari remained silent on him. So Haafidh Ibn Katheer mentioned in Ikhtisaar Uloom al-Hadeeth (pg.118), When al-Bukhaari says about a man They remain silent about him then he is in the lowest and in the worst of the levels with him. Hence in this regard I have opined and ruled this hadeeth is Mawdoo (fabricated) as it contradicts the hadeeth of Aaishah and Jaabir as mentioned before from words of the two Haafidhs ie Zailaaee and Asqalaanee and Haafidh Dhahabee has mentioned this (hadeeth) to be from the rejected narrations. The Jurist Ibn Hajr al-Haithamee said in al-Fataawa al-Kubraa (1/195) after mentioning this hadeeth, It has an extreme weakness. The scholars of hadeeth whilst criticizing him said his narrations are criticized and from them is the abandoned narration which he narrated, All the nations were destroyed in such a month and Qiyaamah will also occur in this month of such and such as-Subkee said, The condition for acting upon a weak hadeeth is that its weakness is not severe. Dhahabee said, The narrator which Shubah says is a liar then one should not even differ with him I say: So the mentioning of Subkees statement by Haithamee indicates he did not hold the opinion to act upon 20 rakahs. (Salaatul-Taraaweeh (ps.19-20). The Statement of Shaikh Safee ur-Rehmaan Mubaarakpooree. The Shaikh said, There is not a single authentic hadeeth for praying 20 rakah Taraaweeh. The

narration which Abd bin Humaid and Tabaraanee have narrated via Abu Shaybah Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan from Hakam from Miqsam from Ibn Abbaas that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) prayed 20 rakahs of Taraaweeh, is extremely weak because Imaam Ahmad, Ibn Maeen, Imaam Bukhaari, Imaam Muslim, Abu Dawood, Tirmidhee and Nasaaee all opined this individual was weak and Shubah said he was a liar. On the contrary there are authentic and raised (Marfoo) ahadeeth that mention that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) prayed 8 rakah for taraaweehs. That is why the Sunnah is 8 rakah Taraaweeh. Allaamah Ibn Humaam also said this, he said in the explanation of Hidaayah, Fath ul-Qadeer Taraaweeh is but 8 rakahs and any addition to this is recommended and will be counted as optional prayers. Similarly Allaamah Muhammad Anwar Kaashmiree, the former Shaikh ul-Hadeeth of Daar al-Uloom Deoband said in Urf ash-Shadhee there is no alternative but to accept that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) prayed 8 rakahs Taraaweeh and it is not proven in any narration that he (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) prayed Taraaweeh and Tahajjud separately. (Ittihaaf al-Kiraam Sharh Buloogh al-Maraam (1/260). End of his words. Allaamah Muhammad Taahir Hanafee said, That which has been narrated from Ibn Abbaas aswell as being weak also opposes the hadeeth of Aaishah in the Saheehain. And Aaishah knew more than Ibn Abbaas concerning the Prophets night prayers. (Majmaa al-Bahaar (2/77) Allaamah Abu Tayyib Sindhee said, The chain of this hadeeth is weak and it also opposes the hadeeth of Aaishah which is in the Saheehain. Therefore this (hadeeth) is not proof. (Sharh Tirmidhee (1/423). The Hanafee Scholars on Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan Imaam Zailaaee Hanafee Then concerning the narrator Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan and this narration of Ibn Abbaas Imaam Zailaaee Hanafee (d.762H) said, It is defective due to Abee Shaybah Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan, the grandfather of al-Imaam Abee Bakr ibn Abee Shaybah, and they are agreed upon him being weak. Ibn Adiyy said he was weak in al-Kaamil, then it also opposes the authentic hadeeth from Abee Salamah bin Abdur-Rahmaan when questioned Aaishah (Radhiallaahu Anha), What was the prayer of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) in Ramadhaan? She replied, Whether Ramadhaan or other than Ramadhaan he would not exceed 11 rakahs. (Nasb ur-Raayah (1/293). He also said Imaam Ahmad said he was Munkar al-Hadeeth (he would narrated abandoned hadeeth). (Nasb ur-Raayah (1/53). Imaam Zailaaee Hanafee in another place in Nasb ur-Raayah (2/66) concerning another of his hadeeth said it is weak and on (2/67) he mentions the statement of Imaam Baihaqee who said he was, Weak. Further Imaam Zailaaee brings the statement of Abul-Fath Saleem bin Ayoob ar-Raazee who said, They are agreed upon him (ie Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan) being weak. (Nasb ur-Raayah (2/153). Shaikh Ibn Humaam Shaikh Ibn Humaam said in Fath ul-Qadeer after mentioning this hadeeth, Weak due to Abee Shaybah Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan the grandfather of Imaam Abee Bakr ibn Abee Shaybah, they are agreed upon his weakness and he also opposes the authentic hadeeth.

Shaikh Ainee Hanafee Shaikh Ainee said in Umdatul-Qaaree after mentioning this hadeeth said, And Abu Shaybah and he is Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan al-Absee al-Koofee the Qaadhee of Waasit and the grandfather of Abee Bakr ibn Abee Shaybah. Shubah said he was a liar and Ahmad, Ibn Maeen, Bukhaari and Nasaaee and others said he was weak. Ibn Adiyy mentioned this hadeeth to be from (ie Ibraaheems) his rejected hadeeth in al-Kaamil. (Umdatul-Qaaree (1/128). For the above three statements also refer to Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee of Imaam Abdur-Rahmaan alMubaarakpooree and Salaatul-Taraaweeh of Imaam al-Albaanee, above. Shaikh Abdul-Hayy Lucknowee Abdul-Hayy Lucknowee have criticized this hadeeth in their works. (see Fataawa of Abdul-Hayy (1/354). Shaikh Anwar Shah Kashmiri Hanafee Deobandee Anwar Shah Kashmiri said about this hadeeth, As for the 20 rakah from the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam), then it is with a weak chain and it being weak is agreed upon. (alUrf ash-Shadhee (1/166). Maulana Muhammad Zakariyyah Khandhelwi Hanafee Tableeghee Maulana Zakariyyah Khandhelwi said, There is no doubt the specificity of 20 rakah taraaweeh has not been established marfooan from the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) with an authentic route according to the principles of the scholars of hadeeth. As for that which has been narrated in the narration of Ibn Abbaas, then it has been spoken about (criticized) according to their (muhadditheens) principles. (Awjaz al-Masaalik Sharh Muwatta Imaam Maalik (1/397). Maulana Habeeb ur-Rahmaan Adhamee Deobandee Hanafee After writing his book on this issue, even he was forced to say, Nonetheless we accept that Ibraaheem is a weak narrator and due to him this hadeeth is also weak. (Rakaaat at-Taraaweeh (pg.59). The Second Evidence The Narrations of Umar The First Narration- Of Yazeed bin Rumaan Yazeed bin Rumaan said, The people in the time of Umar used to pray 23 rakahs. (Muwatta Imam Maalik (1/38), Sunan al-Kubraa (2/496) of Imaam Baihaqee. The Answer Concerning Yazeed bin Rumaan, Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, Trustworthy, a narrator of the fifth level and he died in 130H. (Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.7763 pg.1074) and Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (11/282 no.8033) And the Haafidh said in the introduction to Taqreeb, The fifth level is of the smaller (successors) ones, they saw either one or two companions and some of them hearing from the companions is not established, like Aamash. (Muqaddimah Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (pg.82)

Imaam Badee ud deen said, This narration is not authentic because Yazeed bin Rumaan did not encounter the time of Umar, rather he was of a later time and we do not know who he heard this from and whether that individual was truthful or a liar. So relying upon an unknown narrator is issues pertaining to the religion, is wrong. The narration is not clear and it also opposes a clear and authentic narration that mentions 11 rakahs. The hanafees themselves have admitted Yazeed bin Rumaan did not meet Umar, see Allaamah Zailaaees Nasb ur-Raayah (2/154), Ainee Hanafees Banaayah Sharh Hidaayah (1/867) and Nimawee in Aathaar as-Sunan (2/158). (Tanqeed as-Sadeed (pg.265) Allaamah al-Albaanee said, Imaam Baihaqee mentioned this narration in his book al-Maarifah and it has a weakness and he said, Yazeed ibn Rumaan did not encounter Umar. Haafidh Zailaaee also supported this in Nasb ur-Raayah (2/154). Imaam Nawawee also said this athar is weak (al-Majmooa (4/33), he said Imaam Baihaqee narrated this but it is mursal because Yazeed ibn Rumaan did not encounter Umar. Similarly Ainee also weakened it and said, The chain is disconnected. (UmdatulQaaree Sharh Saheeh al-Bukhaari (5/357). Therefore this narration is not worthy that it be used as proof when this narration is weak due to being disconnected between Ibn Rumaan and Umar. Similarly it opposes the authentic narration from Umar which mentions 11 rakahs. (SalaatulTaraaweeh (pg.53-54). Imaam Baihaqee also said, The chain is disconnected, Yazeed bin Rumaan who was trustworthy, did not meet Umar. (al-Jaami Shubal-Eemaan (6/444 no.3000) The hanafee author of Kabeeree said, Yazeed bin Rumaan did not meet Umar, hence this athar is disconnected. (Kabeeree (pg.351). Shaikh Nimawee Hanafee said, Yazeed bin Rumaan did not encounter Umar bin Khattaab. (Taleeq al-Hasan Ala Aathaar as-Sunan (pg.253 no.284). The Second Narration Of Saaib bin Yazeed The hanafees cause much confusion regarding this narration by not mentioning clearly the text of the narration or its references with their chains so that a clear understanding can be achieved. So note the narrations and their variations alongside their specific chains and their answers thereafter, inshallaah. The Text Saaib bin Yazeed said the people would pray 20 rakahs during the time of Umar and in the era of Uthmaan they would stand for such long periods that the people would become tired and would lean on their sticks. (Sunan al-Kubraa (2/496) of Imaam Baihaqee.) The Chain Informed me Abu Abdullaah al-Hussain ibn Muhammad ibn al-Hussain Finjuwayah ad-Dinawaree from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Ishaaq as-Sunnee from Abdullaah ibn Muhammad ibn Abdul Azeez al-Baghawee from Ali ibn al-Jaad from Ibn Abee Dhib - Yazeed ibn Khaseefah from Saaib ibn Yazeed, Answer. Firstly: - Abu Abdullaah al-Hussain ibn Muhammad ibn al-Hussain Finjuwayah al-Dinawaree The narrator Abu Abdullaah al-Hussain ibn Muhammad ibn al-Hussain Finjuwayah al-Dinawaree, is unknown Majhool and no biography of him can be found to establish his trustworthiness. So this narration is weak. Imaam Abdur-Rahmaan Mubaarakpooree said, The chain includes Abu Abdullaah bin Finjuwayah

al-Dinawaree and I do not know of his condition and so it is upon the people who claim its authenticity to prove (Abu Abdullaah al-Dinawaree) to be trustworthy. (Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee (3/447). Shaikh Taaj ud deen as-Subkee mentioned the biography of Ahmad bin Muhammad ibn Ishaaq asSunnee (the one who Finjuwayah al-Dinawaree is supposed to have narrated from) in great detail and with this he mentioned a list of his teachers and students and he fails to mention Finjuwayah al-Dinawaree to be from his students. (se Tabaqaat ash-Shaafiyyah (2/96). However we find the statement of Imaam Dhahabee where he states, Sherwiyyah said in his Taareekh that (Finjuwayh al-Dinawaree) is trustworthy, truthful but he would narrate many abandoned narrations readily and he authored many works. (Siyar Alaam an-Nabula (17/383). Secondly: - Alee ibn al-Ja'ad The narrator Alee ibn al-Ja'ad, is criticised for being a sheeah, he would curse and criticise Muawiyyah and other companions. (See Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (7/248-250 no.4763). Thirdly: The chain also contains Yazeed bin Khaseefah. Imaam al-Muhaddith al-Albaanee said, This chain with the words 20 is good from the angle of the people of hold 20 rakahs permissible for the Taraaweeh prayer and on its apparent the chain seems authentic and some have even said it is authentic however it contains defects which if looked at will render the narration weak and make it from the realms of weak rejected narrations due to the following reasons, Number One. Even though Yazeed ibn Khaseefah is trustworthy, Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said he is Munkar alHadeeth (rejected in hadeeth), and him being mentioned in Dhahabees Meezaan ul-Eitidaal is sufficient to say he is not clear. So from the statement of Imaam Ahmad we find that ibn Khaseefah would sometimes narrate narrations in which he would be alone and other trustworthy narrators would not narrate. This is mentioned by the hanafee scholar Abdul Haiy Lucknowee (Ar-Rafa WatTakmeel (p.14-15). Hence this narration (of Ibn Khaseefah) opposes narrators who were more preserving then him and therefore this narration is shaadh (is A narration that opposes more authentic narrations) according to the principles of hadeeth. We know two sets or reports stem from Saaib ibn Yazeed one from Muhammad bin Yoosuf and the other Yazeed bin Khaseefah 1) Muhammad ibn Yusuf the narration that mentions 11 rakahs in Muwatta Imaam Maalik 2) Yazeed ibn Khaseefah the narration that mentions 20 rakahs Now both these narrations oppose each other and so precedence will be given to the narration of Muhammad ibn Yoosuf mentioning 11 rakahs. As there are unknown narrators in the 20 rakah (the Shaikh here is mostly likely referring to Abu Abdullaah al-Hussain ibn Muhammad ibn al-Hussain Finjuwayh al-Dinawaree,) chain and because Muhammad ibn Yoosuf is more trustworthy then Yazeed ibn Khaseefah. Haafidh Ibn Hajr said concerning Muhammad ibn Yoosuf, Thiqatun Thabt ie trustworthy, firm and established whereas for Yazeed ibn Khaseefah he only says, Thiqah trustworthy only.

Number Two There is Idhtiraab in the narration of Ibn Khaseefah in regard to the numbering, ie different number for the rakahs are mentioned from Yazeed Ibn Khaseefah. Sometimes he mentions 11 and at other times he mentions 20 and 21. Further more this narrator is opposing a more trustworthy narrator then himself. Number Three Muhammad ibn Yoosuf was the nephew of Saaib ibn Yazeed and due to this closeness Muhammad ibn Yoosuf was more aware and knew the narration of his uncle better than anyone else and its preservation. (Salaatul-Taraaweeh (pg.49-51) (Summarised) Fourthy: This opposes the more authentic narration of Saaib ibn Yazeed. See further ahead. Another Narration There is another narration from Saaib bin Yazeed reported by Ibn Abdul Barr which states the people would stand for 23 rakahs during the time of Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) (cited from Umdatul-Qaaree (5/357) via al-Haarith bin Abdur-Rahmaan bin Abee Dhubaab Ibn Abee Dhubaab Imaam al-Albaanee said the narrator Ibn Abee Dhubaabs memory deteriorated. Ibn Abee Haatim said, my father said (Abee Haatim) Darwardee would narrate rejected narrations from him, he is not strong. Abu Zurah said, There is no harm in him. Ibn Hazm said, Weak. He was not trusted by Imaam Maalik nor was he narrated on by him, as mentioned by Imaam Ibn Hajr. (Refer to Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (2/135-136 no.1090), Meezaan ul-Eitidaal (2/172-172 no.1631), al-Jarh Wat-Tadeel (3/79-82 no.365) (see Salaatul-Taraaweeh (pg.52) The Third Narration Of Yahyaa bin Saeed Ibn Abee Shaybah in his Musannaf narrates from Wakee from Maalik from Yahyaa bin Saeed that Umar bin al-Khattaab ordered a man to lead them in prayer for 20 rakaahs. (Musannaf Ibn Abee Shaybah (2/89/2). The Answer. Allaamah al-Albaanee said, Then this is also disconnected. Allaamah al-Mubaarakpooree said in atTuhfah (2/85), Nimawee said in Aathaar as-Sunan, The narrators are trustworthy but Yahyaa bin Saeed did not encounter (meet) Umar. So Nimawee is correct in saying that there is disconnection in the chain and therefore it is not correct to deduce from it. It also opposes the authentically established chain of Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) in which he ordered Ubayy bin Kaab and Tameem ad-Daaree to lead the people in 11 rakahs, transmitted by Maalik in Muwatta as cited previously. It also opposes that which is established from the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) in an authentic hadeeth. (Salaatul-Taraaweeh (pg.54-55), Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee (3/445) Imaam Ibn Hazm said Yahyaa ibn Saeed was born approximately 25 years after the death of Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu). (al-Muhallaa (10/60) Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, Yahyaa bin Saeed bin Qais al-Ansaari al-Madanee (Abu Saeed al-Qaadhee,

Thiqatun-Thabt), from the Fifth level. He died in 144H or after it. (Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.7609 pg.1056) And the Haafidh said in the introduction to Taqreeb, The fifth level is of the smaller (successors) ones, they saw either one or two companions and some of them hearing from the companions is not established, like Aamash. (Muqaddimah Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (pg.82) As cited above, Shaikh Nimawee Hanafee said, I say the narrators are trustworthy but, Yahyaa bin Saeed did not meet Umar. (Taleeq Aathaar as-Sunan (pg.253 no.285). The Third Evidence The Narrations of Alee The First Narration From Hammaad bin Shuayb from Ataa bin Saaib from Abu Abdur-Rahmaan as-Silmee, and he narrates from Alee that Alee summoned reciters and ordered one of them to lead the people in 20 rakahs and Alee would lead them in the Witr. (Baihaqee (2/496). The Answer. Muhaddith Abdur-Rahmaan Mubaarakpooree said, Nimawee after mentioning this athar said, Hammaad bin Shuayb is weak, Dhahabee said in Meezaan, Ibn Maeen and others said he was weak, Yahyaa (ibn Maeen) said another time, do not write his hadeeth, Bukhaari said Feehee Nazar (look into him), Nasaaee said weak, Ibn Adiyy said most of his hadeeth are not supported. End of the words of Nimawee. I say The affair is as Nimawee said. (Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee (3/444). Allaamah al-Albaanee said, The chain of this athar is weak. The memory of Ataa bin Saaib deteriorated and Hammaad bin Shuayb is also an extremely weak narrator. Imaam Bukhaari said about him, Feehee Nazar (look into him). And another time Munkar al-Hadeeth. And when Imaam Bukhaari says these words about a narrator then the narrator is not trustworthy and nor are his narrations used as support. (see Tadreeb of Suyootee, Mukhtasar Uloom al-Hadeeth of Ibn Katheer, at-Tahreer of Ibn al-Humaam, ar-Rafaa Wat-Takmeel (pg.15) of Abul-Hasanaat and TuhfatulAhwadhee (2/75), all of them agree that when Imaam Bukhaari uses this statement concerning a narrator then he does so with this meaning) I say: Muhammad bin Fudhail opposes Hammaad bin Shuayb as the wording of his narration in Ibn Abee Shaybah from Ataa bin Saaib with the brief words of, From Alee when they stood (to prayer) in Ramadhaan. does not mention the number of rakah absolutely and Muhammad bin Fhudail is a trustworthy narrator . So we find when a trustworthy narrator opposes Shuayb bin Hammaad then Shuayb bin Hammaad will be declared weak. Therefore according to this principle this narration is rendered to be rejected. (Salaatul-Taraaweeh (pg.66-67) Concerning Hammaad bin Shuayb Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, Ibn Maeen declared him to be weak and another time he said, Do not write his ahadeeth. Bukhaari said, Feehee Nazar (look into him). Nasaaee said, Weak. Ibn Adiyy said, Most of his hadeeth are not supported and they are abandoned narrations that are narrated from him by a group. Uqailee said, He is not supported except by another, that is like him. Abu Haatim said, He is not strong. Abu Zurah said, Weak. Ibn al-Jarood mentioned from Bukhaari he said about him, Munkar al-Hadeeth. Abu Dawood said, Weak. And another time he said, His hadeeth are rejected. Saajee said, His hadeeth have weakness. (Leesaan ul-Meezaan (2/395 no.2962) of Ibn Hajr, see also adh-Dhuafaa (1/312) of

Imaam Uqailee.) As mention Imaam Bukhaari said, Feehee Nazar (Look into him.) (Kitaab Taareekh Kabeer (3/25 no.101) of Imaam Bukhaari Imaam Ibn Abee Haatim said, Abbaas Dooree said I heard Yahyaa ibn Maeen say, Hammaad bin Shuayb Abu Shuayb, Weak. He said, I asked my father about him and he said, He is not strong. He said, I asked Abu Zurah and he replied, Koofee Weak in hadeeth. (al-Jarh WatTadeel (3/142 no.625). Imaam Dhahabee said, Ibn Maeen and other declared him to be weak. Yahyaa (ibn Maeen) said another time, Do not write his hadeeth. Bukhaari said, Look into him. Nasaaee said, weak. Ibn Adiyy said, Most of his hadeeth are not supported. Uqailee said, He is not supported except by another, that is like him. Abu Haatim said, He is not strong. (Meezaan ul-Eitidaal (2/366 no.2257) The Words FeeHee Nazar (Look Into His Hadeeth) of Ameer al-Mumineen Fil-Hadeeth Muhammad bin Ismaaeel al-Bukhaari. Imaam Abdur-Rahmaan Mubaarakpooree said, BENEFIT: Shaikh Ibn al-Humaam said in at-Tahreer, when al-Bukhaari says about a man FeeHee Nazar, then his hadeeth is not proof, nor can it be used as a support or correct in reliability. End of the words of Ibn al-Humaam. I say: The athar of Alee is not to be used as proof or as a support or correct in its reliability as in the chain is Hammaad bin Shuayb and Bukhaari said about him FeeHee Nazar. (Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee (3/444). lbn Katheer explains: If aI-Bukhaari says about a man (I) remain silent about him or Look into his hadeeth then he is in the lowest and worst of the levels with him. (Ikhtisaar Uloom aI-Hadeeth (p.73) This is what Haafidh as-Sakhawee also explained in his Fath ul-Mugeeth (pg.161) and that Bukhaari means by this that his hadeeth are to be rejected. Imaam Dhahabee said, Also his habit of saying Feehee Nazar means they are accused (of being liars) or they are not trustworthy and they according to him are with the example and condition of being weak. (al-Muqaddimah al-Muwwaqizah (pg.321). 20al-Qaul as-Saheeh Fee Masalatut-Taraaweeh Maktabah Ashaabul-Hadeeth Shaikh Abdul-Hayy Lucknowee said, When Bukhaari says about a narrator Feehee Nazar, then it indicates (he the narrator) is accused (of being a liar) according to him (ie Imaam Bukhaari.) (arRafa Wat-Takmeel (pgs.388, 399) al-Kawtharee said, Bukhaari said (about a narrator) Fee Hadeethee Nazar (look into this hadeeth) and this is statement is extreme criticism with him (ie according to Imaam al-Bukhaari. (See his Taneeb (pg.105), However there is a difference between FeeHee Nazar and Fee Hadeethee Nazar, as the second just refers to the fact that this particular hadeeth of his in question needs to be looked into and the narrator maybe good, yet al-Kawtharee fails to make a distinction between the two statements (See at-Tankeel Bimaa Fee Taneeb al-Kawtharee Minal-Abaateel (1/204-205) of Imaam Muallimee al-Yamaanee, so according to his (Kawtharees) understanding Hammaad bin Shuayb is to be abandoned. The Shaikh of the hanafee deobandees Shaikh Zafar Ahmad Uthmaanee al-Hanafee deobandee, whom the mutassub and muqallid Abdul-Fattah Abu Guddah said about, the Allaamah, the Muhaqqiq, al-Muhaddith, the Faqeeh and the list of his praise for him was endless, said, Tanbeeyyah, In Mentioning The Meaning of Bukhaari Regarding his statements FeeHee Nazar and Sakatau Anhu. Bukhaari means by these two statements that the hadeeth of the narrator be rejected.

(Qawaaid Uloom al-Hadeeth (pg.254). Then Abdul-Fattah Abu Guddah in his notes to this book mentions the meaning of this terminology of Bukhaari from other Shaikhs like Imaam Suyootee in Tabreeb, al-Fiyyah of Araaqee (2/11) and from Abdul-Hayy Lucknowee from Rafa Wat-Takmeel) The Words Munkar al-Hadeeth (His Ahadeeth are Rejected) of Ameer al-Mumineen Fil-Hadeeth Muhammad bin Ismaaeel al-Bukhaari. As Imaam al-Albaanee mentioned when Imaam Bukhaari says about a narrator Munkar al-hadeeth, then it is not lawful to narrate from such a narrator. Imaam Bukhaari said, All those narrators about who I say, Munkar al-Hadeeth, then it is not lawful to narrates from them. (Meezaan ul-Eitidaal (1/5), (2/202), Tabaqaat ash-Shaafiyyah al-Kubraa (2/9), Tadreeb ar-Raawee (pg.235) of Suyootee, Fath ul-Mugeeth (pg.163) (2/42-43 Edn.) of Araaqee and (pgs.344-346) of Sakhaweee, ar-Rafa Wat-Takmeel (pg.129, 149) of Lucknowee, al-Baaith alHatheeth (1/320) of Allaamah Muhammad Ahmad Shaakir and Kifaayatul-Hifzah (pg.321) Sharh Muqaddimah al-Muwwaqizah, See also Seeratul-Bukhaari (pg.67) of Imaam Abdus-Salaam Mubaarakpooree. The Shaikh of the hanafees and deobandees, Zafar Ahmad Thanawee Uthmaanee said, and his terminology of Munkar al-Hadeeth on one denotes it is not lawful to narrate from him, and this is how it is mentioned in Tadreeb ur-Raawee. (See Qawaaid Uloom al-Hadeeth (pg.258), Then he goes onto say with others Munkar al-Hadeeth is from the third grade of criticism ie weak in hadeeth.) 21al-Qaul as-Saheeh Fee Masalatut-Taraaweeh Maktabah Ashaabul-Hadeeth Concerning Ataa bin Saaib Another narrator in this chain Ataa bin Saaib was forgetful. Imaam Dhahabee said, He became forgetful in the end and his memory deteriorated. Ahmad said, Those who heard from him in the beginning (then their ahadeeth) are authentic and those who heard from him after, then their (hadeeth) are nothing. Yahyaa said, Not worthy as being used as proof. Ahmad bin Abee Khaithamah said from Yahyaa who said, (Ataas) hadeeth are weak except those (narrated) from Shubah and Sufyaan. And Imaam Nasaaee, Imaam Bukhaari, Imaam Ejlee, Abu Haatim and others said the same. (Meezaan ul-Eitidaal (5/90-92 no.5647), Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (7/177-180 no.4754), al-Jarh Wat-Tadeel (6/332-334 no.1848), Taareekh al-Kabeer (6/465 no.3000) Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, Truthful but became forgetful. (Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.4625 pg.678) Zailaaee Hanafee said, But he became forgetful at the end and all those who narrated from him, did so after he started to forget except Shubah and Sufyaan. (Nasb ur-Raayah (3/58) Ibn Akyaal mentioned him in his book of forgetful narrators, al-Kawaakib an-Neeraat Fee Maarifah Min Ikhtilaat Min Rawaah ath-Thiqaat (no.327) Nimawee Hanafee also criticized this hadeeth therefore resort to his Taleeq al-Hasan Ala Aathaar asSunan (pg.254 no.291). The Second Narration Abul-Hasnaa said Alee ordered a man to lead the people in 20 rakaahs in Ramadhaan. (Musannaf Ibn Abee Shaybah (3/393), Baihaqee in al-Kubraa (2/497) The Answer. Imaam Abdur-Rahmaan Mubaarakpooree said (after citing the above narration), Nimawee said in

Taleeq Aathaar as-Sunan, This athar is revolves around Abil-Hasnaa and he is not known. (Imaam Mubaarakpooree continued and said I say it is as Nimawee said, Haafidh said in Taqreeb in the tarajamh of Abil-Hasnaa he is majhool (unknown), Dhahabee said in Meezaan he is not known. (Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee (3/444) Allaamah al-Albaanee said, Imaam Baihaqee (2/497) after mentioning this athar declares the chain to be weak. I say the defect is Abul-Hasnaa and about him Imaam Dhahabee said, He is not known. Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, Majhool (unknown). I say, there is another defects and that two narrators between Alee and Abul-Hasnaa are omitted, therefore this athar is Muadhal. Haafidh Ibn Hajr whilst mentioning the Abul-Hasnaas biography narrates a hadeeth concerning Slaughtering and mentions the chain as (Abul-Hasnaa) from al-Hakam bin Utaibah from Hansh and he from Alee. Therefore in this chain, between Abul-Hasnaa and Alee two narrators (ie two ways) are present. (Salaatul-Taraweeh (pg.66) For the narration above mentioning the narration of slaughtering then refer to (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (12/66 no.8386), and this Abul-Hasnaa has also been called Hussain as mentioned by al-Haafidh. Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, Abul-Hasnaa is Majhool (unknown.) (Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.8112 pg.1134) Haafidh Dhahabee said, He is not known (Meezaan ul-Eitidaal (7/356 no.10114) (al-Hakam bin Utaibah narrates from him.) Shaikh Nimawee Hanafee said, He is not known. (Haashiyyah Aathaar as-Sunan (pg.255). Allaamah Abdur-Rahmaan Mubaarapooree concluded, NOTE: The deduction from these two athaar of Alee in which he ordered the praying of 20 rakahs, then we have come to know these two athars are weak and it is not correct to use them as evidence and they also oppose that which is established from the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) in the authentic hadeeth. (TuhfatulAhwadhee (3/444) What Is A Muadhal Narration and The Ruling Upon it. In Summary it is as Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, (a muadhal narration is) If two or more narrators one after the other consecutively are missed or dropped. (Nazhatun-Nazhar (pg.80). Haafidh Ibn as-Salaah and in his support and agreement Imaam Nawawee and Badr bin Jamaah said the following, Muadhal is the chain of narration in which two or more narrators are missing or dropped. (Muqaddimah (pg.59), al-Irshaad (pg.68) and al-Minhal (pg.47). Taahaa bin Muhammad al-Bayqoonee said, Wal-Muadhalu as-Saaqitu Minhu Ithnaan. (and alMuadhal, from it dropped are two.) (al-Manzoomah al-Bayqooniyyah (18th couplet), Taleeqaat alAthariyyah Ala Manzoomah al-Bayqooniyyah (pg.48) of Shaikh Alee Hasan al-Halabee al-Atharee See also Maarifatul-Uloomal-Hadeeth (pg.36) of Imaam Haakim, al-Iqtiraah (pg.192) of Ibn Daqeeq al-Eed, al-Muqnaa 1/145-148) of Ibn al-Mulqin, at-Taqayyid Wal-Aydah (pg.81) of Araaqee, Ikhtisaar Uloom al-Hadeeth (pgs. 43-46), an-Nukt Ala Kitaab Ibn as-Salaah (2/575-582), NukhbatulFikr (pg.3), Qasb as-Sukar Nazam Nukbatul-Fikr (50th Couplet) of Imaam Sanaanee, Fath ulMugeeth (1/158-159) of Sakhawee, Tadreeb ar-Raawee (1/174), Qafu al-Athar (p.69), of Ibn alHanablee, Tawdheeh al-Afkaar (1/324) of Sanaanee and others and as Haafidh ibn as-Salaah explained, al-Muadhal is a special of specific type of manqaata (disconnected) narration, so every muadhal narration is manqaata and not every manqaata narration is muadhal, and a group have

called (muadhal) a mursal narration as mentioned previously. (Muqaddimah (pg.59). Hence such narrations are weak with agreement The Fourth Evidence The Narrations of Ubayy bin Kaab The First Narration This is the chain which includes Abdul-Azeez bin Rufae and he narrates, that Ubayy bin Kaab would lead in 20 rakahs and 3 witr in Ramadhaan in the Prophets city. (Musannaf Ibn Abee Shaybah (2/90/1) The Answer It is very strange how the hanafees use this narration especially when they themselves claim they do not know the authenticity of its chain. It is as if they have just thrown all these narrations together to make their false claim stronger. Shaikh Habeeb ur-Rehmaan Aadhamee Deobandee Hanafee said about this narration, The condition of the chain of this narration is not known but because it supports the narration of Yazeed bin Rumaan, then even if it is of a weak chain there is no harm in it. (Rakaaat Taraaweeh (pg.65) The Shaikh, the Allaamah Nazeer Ahmad Rehmaanee al-Aadhamee said upon this point of Habeeb ur-Rehmaan, Never mind your saying even if it is of a weak chain, because you would even say what is the harm if it was a fabricated (Mawdoo) chain because in either case another evidence can be used by the hanafee madhab as the number of evidences increases by one for you? So when you do not even know the condition of the chain why have you assumed it is of the level of being weak? Why cannot it be fabricated. (Anwaar al-Masaabeeh Ba-Jawaab Rakaaat Taraaweeh (pg.273). Imaam al-Albaanee said there is a disconnection in the chain between Ubayy ibn Kaab and AbdulAzeez bin Rufae and according to Tahdheeb utTahdheeb there is a gap of more than 100 years between them and so Nimawee Hanafee said, AbdulAzeez did not meet Ubayy. Mentioned by al-Mubaarakpooree (in Tuhfah (2/75) and in agreeing with this he (al-Mubaarakpooree said) The affair is as Nimawee said that his athar of Ubayy ibn Kaab is disconnected and alongside this it opposes that which is established from Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) in which he instructed Ubayy ibn Kaab and Tameem ad-Daaree to lead the people in 11 rakahs. It also opposes that which is established from Ubayy ibn Kaab that he led the women in 8 rakahs and Witr in Ramadhaan in his house, this has been mentioned previously. (Salaatul-Taraaweeh (pg.6768), Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee (3/445). Ubayy bin Kaab died in 23H (although there are differences see Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.285 pg.120) The Second Narration This has a different wording and at the end of the narration it mentions, And Ubayy ibn Kaab led them in 20 rakahs (cited by adh-Dhiyaa al-Maqdisee in al-Mukhtarah (1/384) with the following chain, from Abee Jaafar ar-Raazee from Rabeea bin Anas from Abee Aaaliyyah from Ubayy bin Kaab. The Answer Imaam al-Albaanee said this chain is weak. Abu Jaafar who is Eesaa bin Abee Eesaa bin Mahhaan.

Imaam Dhahabee mentioned him in adh-Dhuafaa and said, Abu Zurah said, Would err excessively. Ahmad said, Not strong. Another time he said, Good in hadeeth. Falaas said, Bad memory. And others have said he was trustworthy. Imaam Dhahabee also said in al-Kunna, All of (the scholars) have criticised him. Haafidh Ibn Hajr said in Taqreeb, Bad memory. Ibn Qayyim said in Zaad al-Maaad (1/99), One of abandoned narrations and he is not proof when alone in reporting even with one of the Ahlul-Hadeeth. The Shaikh went on to say his narrations oppose more trustworthy narrators and then the Shaikh mentioned some example of such narrations. (Salaatul-Taraaweeh (pg.69-70) The Fifth Evidence The Narration of Abdullaah ibn Masood That Abdullaah bin Masood after finishing Eeshaa prayer would pray 20 rakahs and 3 Witr as narrated by Aamash from Abdullaah ibn Masood. (Qiyaam al-Layl (pg.91) The Answer Muhaddith Mubaarakpooree and Shaikh al-Albaanee said, This is also disconnected as Aamash did not meet Abdullaah ibn Masood. (Tuhfah (2/75). (Tuhfah (3/445) latest edn.) The details of this are that Abdullaah bin Masood (Radhiallaahu Anhu) died in 22H as mentioned by Imaam Dhahabee (see his al-Kaashif (2/116) and he also says Aamash was born in 60H. (al-Kaashif (1/320). Shaikh al-Albaanee goes onto say the defect is that the narration is muadhil as there seems to be two narrators omitted between Aamash and Ibn Masood. (Salaatul-Taraweeh (pg.71), see above for the ruling of a muadhal narration And the Haafidh said in the introduction to Taqreeb, The fifth level is of the smaller (successors) ones, they saw either one or two companions and some of them hearing from the companions is not established, like Aamash. (Muqaddimah Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (pg.82). Hanafee Objection On The Acceptance of Mursal Narrations. The hanafees claim after admitting the narrations above are (Mursal) (ie companions have been omitted from the chains) that each narration supports each other and thereby strengthening each other and therefore these weak ahadeeth support each and hence the weakness from them is removed. (As mentioned by Shaikh Habeeb ur-Rehmaan al-Aadhamee in Rakaaat Taraaweeh) The Answer Shaikh Anwar Shah Kashmiree Hanafee Deobandee mentioned a statement which puts the hanafees and the other muqallideen and their traits in pure perspective, he says, I have witnessed these people and they formulate defective and erroneous principles, so what else can be wished for after this. So when one of them finds a weak hadeeth according to his madhab he formulates the rule or principle that due to numerous routes (of this weak hadeeth) the blame of weakness is lifted or removed. Similarly when they find an authentic hadeeth contradicting their madhab they immediately formulate the rule and principle that the hadeeth is Shaadh (ie weak due to opposing something more authentic that it. (Faidh al-Baaree (2/348) Shaikh al-Allaamah al-Albaanee answered this and said, This is incorrect for two reasons, The First Reason

It may seem these narrations have been narrated via many routes but in reality this is not the case. As there are only 3 athars and they are, Saaib bin Yazeeds which is continuous (in its chain), and Yazeed bin Rumaans and Yahyaa bin Saeed al-Ansaaris are disconnected. So it is possible the narrators of one athar affect the narrators of another athar and vice versa therefore by this possibility the deduction maybe dropped. The Second Reason. We have established 11 rakahs previously from the narration of Maalik from Muhammad bin Yoosuf from Saaib and this is authentic. So that which opposes the narration of Maalik is wrong, similarly that which opposes Muhammad bin Yoosuf by Ibn Khaseefah and Ibn Abee Dhubaab is Shaadh. So from the knowledge of hadeeth we find Shaadh(s) (narrations) are abandoned, rejected and errors and erroneous (narrations) do not strengthen. Ibn as-Salaah said in al-Muqaddimah (pg.86), When a narrator is alone in reporting something then we look into it ie that which he is alone in reporting is he opposing (people) who are more preserving than and have better integrity, if he is then his narration will be Shaadh and rejected. And if does not oppose and he narrates something which the others have not done so, and he is trustworthy, preserving and reliable then his narration will be accepted. And there is no doubt we are taking about the first type, hence his narration will be declared to be rejected, hence Shaadh narrations are not reliable nor are they worthy to be used as supports. As for the narration of Yazeed bin Rumaan and Yahyaa bin Saeed, they are disconnected and it is not permissible to say one supports the other. The Shaikh then goes onto mention the statement of Shaikh ul-Islaam Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah who said, The people differ in accepting the mursal narrations. The correct saying is that (mursal narrations) are of three types, Maqbool (accepted), Mardood (Rejected) and Mauqoof (stopped). The mursal narration that opposes trustworthy narrators will be rejected, however if there are two chains of a mursal narration and the Suyookh of the narrators are different then the narration will be considered to be authentic and truthful. Therefore mentioning from two different narrators as a habit is not to be understood to be incorrect. (From a manuscript of Haafidh Ibn Abdul-Haadee which is preserved I al-Maktabah az-Zaahiryyah in Damascus. (Hadeeth no.405 Q 225-276) (Salaatul-Taraaweeh (pg.56-59) The Statement of Other Scholars from the Scholars of Hadeeth and Jurists Imaam Ibn Hazm said, A mursal hadeeth is one in which a narrator or more is missing between the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) and one narrator, this is also know as manqataa (disconnected), and it is not accepted and it cannot constitute evidence because its basis is of majhool (unknown). (al-Ahkaam Fee Usool al-Ahkaam (2/2) Imaam Muslim said, The Mursal narrations according to me and the saying of the people of knowledge is that it is not evidence. (Muqaddimah Saheeh Muslim (1/24), Imaam Nawawee agreed with this statement of Imaam Muslim, see his Irshaad (pg.81) Imaam Tirmidhee said, The hadeeth that is mursal is not authentic according to the majority of the People of Hadeeth and more than one person from amongst them said they are weak. (al-Ellal (pg.245) of Imaam Tirmidhee.) Imaam Ibn Abee Haatim said, I heard my father (Abu Haatim) and Abu Zurah saying the mursal narrations are not evidence and evidence is only that which has an authentic and continuous/linked chain. (Kitaab al-Maraaseel (p.7).

Imaam Ibn as-Salaah said, Know the ruling concerning a mursal narration is the same as the ruling concerning a weak hadeeth, except if it is established via another route. (Muqaddimah (pg.53), alIrshaad (pg.80) and Taqreeb (pg.7) both of Imaam Nawawee, Imaam Khateeb al-Baghdaadee said, Said Muhammad ibn Idrees ash-Shaafiee and others amongst Ahlul-Ilm (People of Knowledge) it is not allowed to act upon them (ie Mursal narrations.) and said also this the Imaams and Scholar from amongst the preservers of hadeeth (Huffaadh al-Hadeeth) and the scrutinizers of narrations. (al-Kifaayah Fee Ilm ar-Riwaayah (pg.384). Haafidh Araaqee said, Most of the Ahlul-Hadeeth (People of Hadeeth) have said Mursal narrations are weak and one cannot use them for evidence. (Fath ul-Mugeeth (pg.69) Imaams Nawawee and Suyootee said, And the Mursal hadeeth is weak and not evidence according to the Majority of the Scholars of Hadeeth (Muhadditheen) and (Imaam) Shaafiee and with many of the jurists and people of principle (Usool). (Tadreeb ar-Raawee Sharh Taqreeb Lil-Nawawee (pg.77) In summary Imaam Khateeb Baghdaadee said, After this detail the position we have adopted is that it is not obligatory to act upon mursal narrations and mursal narrations are not accepted. (al-Kifaayah (pg.387). Haafidh Ibn as-Salaah said, And what we have mentioned that mursal narrations cannot be deduced from and grading them to be weak then this is the position of the majority of the Preservers of Hadeeth (Huffaadh) and the scrutinizers of narrations and this is the opinion they have repeated in their works. (Muqaddimah (pg.55). Imaam Nawawee said, Mursal narrations are not evidence according to me and according to the majority of the scholars of hadeeth, a group of jurists and the majority of the people of principles. (Sharh Muhazzab (1/103). And lastly Haafidh Elaaee said, Most of the Maailkees and the Muhaqqiq (researching/truth following) hanafees like Tahaawee and Abu Bakr ar-Raazee(Jassaas) have said that in the situation of conflict or contradiction the mutasil (continuous) narration will be given precedence over the mursal narration. (Jaame Tahseel (pg.34). Hence it is narrated from Imaam Tahaawee that he said, Without doubt the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) did not pray 20 rakahs but rather he prayed 8 rakahs and this is also the position of Ibn Humaam Hanafee and others. (See Radd ul-Mukhtaar Sharh Durr al-Mukhtaar (1/295). Shaikh Habeeb ur-Rehmaan al-Aadhamee Hanafee Deobandee and His Distortion Of the Words of al-Imaam ash-Shaafiee, Who Was One of the Lamps of This Ummah. Shaikh Habeeb ur-Rahmaan Hanafee said, Although the mursal narration is not accepted by Imaam Shaafiee, he clarifies this and says it is only accepted when a mursal narration is supported by either another mursal or a Musnad narration (See his Rakaaat Taraaweeh (pg.62). The Answer This is a distortion of the words of Imaam ash-Shaafiee and missing out his exact opinion concerning mursal narrations aswell as his explanation of this issue. The distortion here, and a very very cunning one indeed, by Shaikh Habeeb ur-Rehmaan Aadhamee is that he mentions Imaams Shaafiees position as, he clarifies this and says it is only accepted when a mursal narration is supported by either another mursal or a Musnad narration However Imaam Shaafiee only said this about the mursal narrations from the MAJOR SUCCESSORS (Kibaar Taabieen) and not from the Minor

Successors (Sighaar Taabieen). So Habeeb ur-Rehmaan attempted to deceive the people by showing any mursal narration from any of the successors is accepted, as long as it is supported in some way. Imaam Shaafiees position was as Imaam Ibn Katheer mentioned, He (Shaafiee) said in his book arRisaalah the mursal narrations of the Major Successors are evidence, on the condition they are also narrated via another route, even if the other route is mursal or if they are supported by a statement of a companion and the majority of the Scholars or the narrator names his man (ie narrator) he is except but trustworthy. So with these conditions the mursal narration will constitute proof but it will still not reach the level of Mutasil (ie a continuous chain to the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee WasSallam). Imaam Shaafiee also said, Mursal narrations from other than the major successors (ie those successors who were from the middle or minor level), then I do not know anyone who accepted them. (Ikhtisaar Uloom al-Hadeeth (pg.15) Haafidh Ibn Hajr has also something similar to this in Fath ul-Baaree.). So these mursal narrations are the narrations of Yazeed ibn Rumaans, Yahyaa bin Saeeds, AbdulAzeez bin Rufaes and Aamash from Abdullaah ibn Masood. Abdul-Azeez bin Rufae Hafidh Ibn Hajr said, Trustworthy from the fourth level (Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.4123 pg.612) The Fourth Level Haafidh explained the fourth level of people to be those who narrate from the Major Successors. (See Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (pg.81) Yazeed bin Rumaan 30al-Qaul as-Saheeh Fee Masalatut-Taraaweeh Maktabah Ashaabul-Hadeeth Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, a narrator of the Fifth level. (Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.7763 pg.1074) and Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (11/282 no.8033) Yahyaa bin Saeed Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, Thiqatun-Thabt, from the Fifth level (Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.7609 pg.1056) Aamash Haafidh Ibn Hajr said he was also from the Fifth level (see Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb) The Fifth Level And the Haafidh said in the introduction to Taqreeb, The fifth level is of the smaller (successors) ones, they saw either one or two companions and some of them hearing from the companions is not established, like Aamash. (Muqaddimah Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (pg.82). So all four narrator are from the fourth or fifth level and are therefore from the middle or minor successors, none of them are from the major successors. Hence the condition of Imaam ash-Shaafiee is also not fulfilled. The Sunnah of Taraaweeh is 8 Rakahs and the Evidences for This. The Recommended Method For Taraaweeh is 8+3 with Witr. The First Evidence - The Hadeeth of Aaishah Ummul Mumineen Aaishah (Radhiallaahu Anha) narrates The Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee-Wasallam) after finishing the Eesha prayer he would pray 11 rakahs till the morning and after every 2 rakaah he would make the salutation and he would pray one witr (Saheeh Muslim (1/254). Abu Salamah bin Abdur-Rahmaan asked Aaishah, How was the prayer of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee-Wasallam) in Ramadhaan. She replied, Whether Ramadhaan or other than the month of Ramadhaan, he would not exceed 11 rakahs. (Saheeh al-Bukhaari (3/25, 4/205), Saheeh Muslim (2/66), Saheeh Abu Awaanah (2/327), Abu Dawood (1/210), Tirmidhee (2/302-303) Shaakir edn, Nasaaee (1/248), Saheeh Ibn Khuzaimah (2/192) Imaam Maaliks Muwatta (1/134), Muwatta of Imaam Muhammad (pg.138) Baihaqee Sunan al-Kubraa (2/495-496), Musnad Ahmad (6/36, 73, 104), Buloogh al-Maraam Maa Subl as-Salaam (3/35-36), Nayl al-Awthaar (3/58), Umdatul-Qaaree (11/128) of Mulla Alee Qaaree Hanafee.

Hanafee Objection. The hanafees object here and say this hadeeth is concerning Tahajjud and not Taraweeh. The First Answer. Tahajjud, Taraaweeh, Qiyaam al-Layl, Qiyaam Ramadhaan are all different names for the same prayer. (see Fath ul-Qadeer (1/319) of Ibn Humaam and Bahr ur-Raaiq (2/52), see also Fath ulMulhim (2/322) of Shaikh Shabbeer Ahmad Uthmaanee Hanafee If this is the case as the hanafees claim that the hadeeth of Aaishah is pertaining to the Tahajjud prayer then we say it is not established at all that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu AlayheeWasallam) prayed Tahajjud and Taraaweeh separately (in the month of Ramadhaan). Therefore it is upon the hanafees to prove he prayed these two prayers separately. So Imaam Abdul-Jabbaar Khandayaalwee said, Some hanafees have limited this hadeeth of Aaishah in Bukhaari to tahajjud, then firstly this is a fallacy which is given to the general folk because it is not established from any narration the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee-Wasallam) prayed taraaweeh and tahajjud separately in the month of Ramadhaan. The three (3) nights the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee-Wasallam) prayed with the companions is referred to as taraaweeh, whereas in these 3 nights, in one night he prayed from the beginning of the night right to its end. So we also find from this the time of taraaweeh prayer is from after Eeshaa up until sunrise (al-Insaaf Rafa Ikhtilaaf Musama bih Khaatimah Ikhtilaaf (pg.63-64). Shaikh al-Allaamah al-Muhaddith Ubaidullaah Mubaarakpooree said, Taraaweeh, tahajjud and Qiyaam of Ramadhaan, all are really the one and same, the long hadeeth of Abu Dharr (Radhiallaahu Anhu) in Ibn Maajah is a clear evidence of this claim. The summary of it is that Abu Dharr (Radhiallaahu Anhu) said, We kept the fasts of Ramadhaan with the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam), then he led us in Qiyaam (Taraweeh prayer) on the 23rd night (when seven nights were left) till about one third of it passed. He did not observe it on the 24th, then on the 25th night he led us till about half the night passed. We requested to offer superarogatory prayer during the whole night. The Messenger of Allaah said, He who observes Qiyaam along with the Imaam till he finishes it, then it is as if he offered prayer the whole night. Then he did not observe the Qiyaam with us on the 26th night, then finally on the 27th night he gathered his wives, members of his household and the people and he led everyone in the Qiyaam (Taraaweeh prayer) till we feared of missing the dawn meal. (Ibn Maajah (no.1327) (2/287) (Arabic/English), (Saheeh Ibn Maajah no.1344 and no.1100) according to the numbering of Shaikh al-Albaanee (1/395) 1417edn, Abee Dawood (1/217 Saheeh no.1245), Aun al-Mabood (4/174 no.1372) Tirmidhee (1/72-73), Saheeh Nasaaee (1/338) Musannaf Ibn Abee Shaybah (2/90/21), Sharh Maanee al-Aathaar (1/206) of Tahaawee, Qiyaam al-Layl (p.89) of Muhammad ibn Nasr Marwazee, al-Faryaabee (2/71-72), Baihaqee (2/294) Irwaa (no.447) of Imaam Al-Albaanee, Mishkaat (no.1298), Salaatul Taraaweeh (p.16-17) of Shaikh al-Albaanee. Muhaddith Al-Albaanee who said Saheeh Nayl al-Awthaar (3/54 no.944) of Imaam Shawkaanee who said, All The narrators of this chain according to Ahlus-Sunan are the narrators of the Saheehs. Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee (3/437-438 no.803), Athaar as-Sunan (p.347) of Shaikh Nimawee Hanafee, Elaa as-Sunan (7/38) of Dhafar Ahmad Thanawee Hanafee) Imaam Tirmidhee after transmitting the hadeeth said, Hasan-Saheeh, Allaamah Mubaarakpooree said, Transmitted by Abu Dawood, Nasaaee, Ibn Maajah. Abu Dawood remained silent. Mundhiree mentioned it with the authentication of Tirmidhee. Haafidh Ibn Hajr al-Makkee said about the above hadeeth, This hadeeth was authenticated by Tirmidhee and Haakim. (Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee (3/438).

Allaamah Muhaddith Ubaidullaah Mubaarakpooree Rehmaanee went onto say, It is clear from this narration that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) led the taraaweeh prayer in three parts of the night and by praying it after Eeshaa until the end of the night he informed us of its time. It is likely that no time would have remained for tahajjud, (as taraaweeh on the 27th night was prayed so late in the night to the extent that there were fears of missing the dawn meal) therefore no doubt remains about taraaweeh and tahajjud being one prayer. It is in Urf ash-Shadhee (lessons on Tirmidhee by Maulana Muhammad Anwar Shah Kashmiree Deobandee) that, There is no way out or alternative in accepting that the taraaweeh of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) was eight (8) rakahs, and it is not established by any narration he prayed taraaweeh and tahajjud separately.(Urf ash-Shadhee (1/166). End of the Shaikhs Words. Muhammad Qaasim Nanautwee the founder of Deoband writes, it is written from the people of knowledge that Taraaweeh (Qiyaam ul-Ramadhaan) and Tahajjud (Qiyaam ul-Layl) are in reality both One prayer. (Fuyoodh al-Qaasimiyyah (pg.13) The Second Answer The scholars of hadeeth of hadeeth also placed this hadeeth under chapter headings of Qiyaam arRamadhaan (The Standing in Ramadhaan) and Taraaweeh. 1. Saheeh al-Bukhaari; The book of Fasting; The Book Of the Taraaweeh Prayer; Chapter The Virtue in Standing Ramadhaan. 2. Muwatta Muhammad bin al-Hasan ash-Shaybaanee (pg.141); Chapter standing In The Month of Ramadhaan And What is From Its Virtue. Shaikh Abdul-Hayy Lucknowee said in the notes to this, Qiyaam ar-Ramadhaan and Taraaweeh is the one and the same thing. Likewise Abdul-Hayy mentioned this in his book Tuhfatul-Akhyaar Fee Ahya Sunnatil-Abraar and in his notes to Waqaayah. 3. Imaam Baihaqee, Chapter. What is Narrated In Regards to the Number of Rakahs of Standing In The Month Of Ramadhaan. (Sunan al-Kubraa (2/495-496). 4. Imaam Suyootee mentioned this hadeeth of Aaishah in his book titled, al-Masaabeeh Fee Salaatul-Taraaweeh (pg.9). 5. Haafidh Zailaaee has mentioned it in his; The Book of Prayer; Chapter Standing In the Month of Ramadhaan (Nasb ur-Raayah (2/153). 6. Shaikh Ibn Humaam in Fath ul-Qadeer; The Book of Prayer; The Chapter In Standing In the Month of Ramadhaan (Fath ul-Qadeer (1/407) 7. Shaikh Nimawee Hanafee mentioned this hadeeth in; The Chapter of Taraaweeh 8 Rakahs. (Taleeq al-Hasan Maa Aathaar as-Sunan (pg.248). 8. Shaikh Abdul-Hayy Lucknowee Hanafee mentioned this hadeeth in Taleeq al-Mumajjid Ala Muwatta Muhammad; Standing in Ramadhaan (pg.141). 9. Shaikh Anwar Shah Kashmiree Hanafee mentioned in, Chapter What is Said Concerning Qiyaam In the Month of Ramadhaan (al-Urf ash-Shadhee (1/166). The compiler of al-Albani Unveiled (pg.57-58) mentions a self-refutation point that his blind following, Taassub and tahazzub have led him to do so without him realizing what he has actually wrote. He writes, The Imam al-Muhadithin al-Bukhari (Rahamihaullah) has placed the hadith from Aisha under at least two sections of his Sahih, first Bukhari, vol 2, chapter 15 no.246 English Ed) and then under the section of 32: The Book of Taraweeh Prayers. (see Sahih al-Bukhari 3/230 pg.128). This means that Imam Bukhari believed that the prayer mentioned by Aisha was that of Tahajjud only, and since the tahajjud prayer is performed also in Ramadan, then Imam Bukhari also quoted the same hadith under the Book Of Taraweeh Prayers, but Allaah knows best. (End of his words.)

Then this individual with little comprehension failed to realize aswell as the other hanafees that Imaam Bukhaari held the Tahajjud prayer to also be the prayer we know as Taraaweeh in the Month of Ramadhaan. Furthermore Imaam Bukhaari by bringing the very same hadeeth in the following two chapters elucidates he held both the prayers with the different names to be the same prayer, as opposed to bringing two different hadeeth in the two different chapters. The Third Answer No Scholar of the earlier times has said this hadeeth is not concerning the Taraaweeh prayer. The Fourth Answer A number of Scholars have presented this hadeeth when refuting the weak ahadeeth for 20 rakahs for Taraaweeh. 1. Haafidh Zailaaee Hanafee (Nasb ur-Raayah (2/153). 2. Imaam Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaanee (ad-Diraayah (1/203). 3. Shaikh Ibn Humaam Hanafee (Fath ul-Qadeer (1/467). 4. Shaikh Ainee Hanafee (Umdatul-Qaaree (11/128). 5. Imaam Suyootee (al-Haawee Lil-Fataawa (1/348). The Fifth Answer The questioner asked concerning Ramadhaan and hence the Qiyaam in Ramadhaan, which is known as Taraaweeh, the questioner did not even ask concerning Tahajjud prayer. Hence Imaam Abdul-Jabbaar Khandayaalwee said, Thirdly:- The questioner only questioned regarding Qiyaam Ramadhaan which we refer to as taraaweeh and the questioner did not even ask concerning the tahajjud prayer. Rather the Mother of the Believers Aaishah answered in addition to what the questioner asked and explained the Qiyaam in Ramadhaan and outside of Ramadhaan so the questioner would know the prayer of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) other than the Qiyaam of Ramadhaan ie the tahajjud prayer. Hence the hadeeth narrated by Aaishah in Saheeh al-Bukhaari is a clear evidence for 8 rakah taraaweeh and 3 Witrs and this is also supported and explained by the hadeeth in Ibn Khuzaimah and Ibn Hibbaan. (al-Insaaf Rafa Ikhtilaaf Musama bih Khaatimah Ikhtilaaf (pg.64). The Sixth Answer According to the hanafee position Taraaweeh prayer and the Tahajjud prayer are two different prayers. So according to the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee-Wasallam) prayed 23 (20+3) rakahs first (as Taraaweeh) and then 11 rakahs (8+3) (as Tahajjud) just as they deduce from the Hadeeth of Aaishah. However the problem here is that this will necessitate the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu AlayheeWasallam) prayed the witr prayer twice in one night, when the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee-Wasallam) said, There are no two Witr prayers in one night. (Tirmidhee (1/107), Abu Dawood, Nasaaee, Saheeh Ibn Khuzaimah and Saheeh Ibn Hibbaan) The Seventh Answer Shaikh Anwar Shah Kashmiree Hanafee Deobandee accepted and admitted Tahajjud and Taraaweeh are the one and the same prayer and there is no difference between the two. (See his Faidh al-Baaree (2/420) and al-Urf ash-Shadhee (1/166). He said, According to my preference taraaweeh and tahajjud are one prayer, although there are differences in their attributes. The Imaam and Shaikh of the Deobandee Hanafees Rasheed Ahmad Gangohee also held the position

that Tahajjud and Taraaweeh were both the same prayer. (see his al-Lama ad-Duraaree (2/285) The Eighth Answer Umar bin al-Khattaab also understood Tahajjud and Taraaweeh to be the same prayer. (see Faidh alBaaree (2/420) of Anwar Shah). The Ninth Answer. Numerous scholar prohibited the people from praying the Tahajjud prayer who had already prayed the Taraaweeh prayer. (see Qiyaam al-Layl of Muhammad Nasr al-Marwazee from Faidh al-Baaree (2/420). The Tenth Answer The Other Ahadeeth like Jaabirs mention the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee-Wasallam) prayed 8 rakahs and Witr in the month of Ramadhaan. The Second Evidence - The Hadeeth Of Umar From Imaam Maalik from Saaib bin Yazeed Imaam Maalik from Muhammad bin Yoosuf from Saaib bin Yazeed that Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) ordered Ubayy ibn Kaab and Tameem ad-Daaree to lead the people in 11 rakahs. Muwatta Imaam Maalik (1/114), Musannaf ibn Abee Shaybah (2/391-392), Sunan Saeed ibn Mansoor as quoted from al-Haawee lil-Fataawa (1/349), Saheeh Ibn Khuzaimah (1/184), as-Sunan alKubraa of Baihaaqee (2/496), al-Faryaabee (1/76, 2/75), Sharh Maanee al-Athaar (1/193), Aun alMabood (4/175), al-Mukhtarah of Haafidh Dhiyaa al-Maqdisee from Kunzul al-Aamaal (8/407), Maarifah as-Sunan of Baihaaqee (2/367-368), Qiyaam al-Layl (pg.200), Abu Bakr Neesabooree in al-Fawaaid (1/135), Musannaf Abdur Razzaaq from Kunzul Aamaal, Mishkaat al-Masaabeeh (1/115), Sharh As-Sunnah of Baghawee (4/120), al-Muhazzab Fee Ikhtisaar as-Sunan al-Kabeer of Dhahabee (2/461), Kunzul Aamaal (8/407), as-Sunan al-Kubraa of Nasaaee from Tuhfatul Ashraaf of Mizzee (8/22), Nayl al-Awthaar (3/57), Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee (3/442), of Allaamah Mubaarakpooree, Aathaar as-Sunan (p.250) of Nimawee Hanafee, Also transmitted by Imaam Umar bin Shaybah (d.262H) in Taareekh al-Madeenah (2/713). Muhaddith Mubaarakpooree aid, Narrated also by Saeed bin Mansoor, Abu Bakr bin Abee Shaybah. Nimawee said in Aathaar as-Sunan, The chain is authentic. (Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee (3/442) Haafidh Ibn Abdul-Barr said, Maalik mentioned 11 rakahs and others have mentioned 21 rakahs. (Tamheed (8/114). Imaam Bukhaari has brought a hadeeth in his Saheeh in the Book of Hajj with the exact same Chain, therefore the narrators are trustworthy according to the conditions of Imaam al-Bukhaari. Similarly Imaam Tirmidhee said about a chain like this Hasan-Saheeh. Imaam Suyootee said about its chain This athar is at the highest level of authenticity. (al-Masaabeeh Fee Salaatul Taraaweeh (pg.15) of Imaam Suyootee and in his al-Haawee lil-Fataawa (1/350), Qiyaam ul-Layl of Marwazee (pg.200) Dhiyaa al-Maqdisee authenticated this athar. (See Ikhtisaar Uloom al-Hadeeth (p.77) of Ibn Katheer). As did Imaam Baaji (Zurqaanees Sharh of Muwatta (1/238) Imaam Badee ud deen after mentioning the narration above said, The chain of this hadeeth is absolutely authentic. Saaib bin Yazeed is a famous companion and Muhammad bin Yoosuf is from the famous trustworthy narrators and his biography is mentioned in Taqreeb and in Tahdheeb ((9/534) and there is no defect in this chain, it is continuous and authentic and its wording is also clear that Ameer Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) ordered 11 rakahs. (Tanqeed as-Sadeed (pg.264). The Hanafee Scholar, Nimawee said The chain is authentic Aathaar as-Sunan (pg.250)

Note- The Claim of Idhtiraab The compiler of Al-Albani Unveiled (pg.59-61) cites the research of a pamphlet from Madrasah Arabia Islamia, Azadville, South Africa) where both hanafee parties eventually conclude this hadeeth of Imaam Maalik is Mudhtarib (ie interchanged) and hence weak and unacceptable. The Answer Imaam Abdur-Rahmaan Mubaarakpooree after bringing a narration of Saaib bin Yazeed via a different chain including Abu Uthmaan Basree and Abu Taahir Faqeeh which mentions in the time of Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) the people would observe 20 rakahs and witr, he cites Nimawee as saying he could find out about these two narrators and then agrees with him. Thereafter he says, It also opposes that which has been transmitted by Saeed bin Mansoor in his Sunan, he said, Hadathana (narrated to us) Abdul-Azeez bin Muhammad Hadathanee (narrated to me) Muhammad bin Yoosuf Samitu (I heard) as-Saaib bin Yazeed Yaqool (say), In the time of Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) we used to observe 11 rakahs. Haafidh Jalaal ud deen Suyootee said in Risaalah al-Masaabeeh Fee Salaatul-Taraaweeh after mentioning this athar, This athar is at the highest level of authenticity. Allaamah Mubaarakpooree went onto say, It also opposes what has been narrated by Muhammad bin Nasr in Qiyaam al-Layl via the route of Muhammad bin Ishaaq from Muhammad bin Yoosuf from his grandfather as-Saaib bin Yazeed who said, In the time of Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) we would pray 13 rakahs in Ramadhaan. It also opposes that which has been narrated by Maalik in his Muwatta from Muhammad bin Yoosuf from Saaib bin Yazeed who said, Umar bin al-Khattaab ordered Ubayy bin Kaab and Tameem ad-Daaree to lead the people in 11 rakahs. So the athar of Saaib bin Yazeed narrated by Baihaqee (mentioning 20 rakahs) then it is not correct to use it as evidence. (TuhfatulAhwadhee (3/447) Shaikh al-Imaam al-Albaanee after mentioning the hadeeth says, I say This chain (of this hadeeth of Muhammad bin Yoosuf from Saaib bin Yazeed) is very authentic and Muhammad bin Yoosuf the teacher of Imaam Maalik is trustworthy with agreement. And the Shaikhain (Ie Imaams Bukhaari and Muslim) have used his as poof. Saaib bin Yazeed is a minor Companion and he performed Hajj with the Prophet (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam). This narration is by the way of Maalik, transmitted by Abu Bakr Neesaabooree in al-Fawaaid (1/135), Faryaabee (1/76 2/75) and Baihaqee in as-Sunan alKubraa (1/496). Maalik is supported in his narration of 11 rakahs by Yahyaa bin Saeed al-Qattan in Musannaf Ibn Abee Shaybah (2/89/2) (2/391-392), Ismaaeel bin Umayyah, Usaamah bin Zaid, Muhammad bin Ishaaq with al-Neesaabooree and Ismaaeel bin Jaafar al-Madanee with Ibn Khuzaimah in the hadeeth of Alee bin Hujr (1/1864), and all of they mention from Muhammad bin Yoosuf (11 rakahs). Except Ibn Ishaaq as he says, 13 rakahs. As narrated by Ibn Nasr in Qaiyaam al-Layl (pg.91). The Shaikh goes onto say, I say: The number 13 as mentioned by Ibn Ishaaq then he is alone in reporting it. However this narration coincides with the narration of Aaishah in the standing in Ramadhaan and It has been mentioned previously that the Sunnahs for Fajr have been included in this, in the footnotes (pg.16-17) in this manner the narration of Ibn Ishaaq is coincided with the narrations from the group. As for the saying of Ibn Abdul-Barr that, I do not know a single person say 11 rakahs except Maalik. So this is a clear error, al-Mubaarakpooree said in Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee (2/74), An false

error. Zurqaanee also refutes this in Sharh al-Muwatta (1/25) and says, It is not as he (Ibn AbdulBarr) has said. This narration has been narrated by Saeed bin Mansoor from Muhammad bin Yoosuf by mentioning 11 rakahs as Maalik said. I say: The chain is very authentic as Suyootee said in al-Masaabeeh and this report alone is sufficient to refute the statement of Ibn Abdul-Barr (Salaatul-Taraaweeh (pg.45-47) Further Elucidation The Hadeeth is not Mudhtarib And The lack of Understanding of the Hanafees The above claim of mudhtarib cited by the compiler of Al-Albani Unveiled (pg.59-61) who cites it from Madrasah Arabia Islamia, Azadville, South Africa and they took it from Habeeb ur-Rehmaan A;dhamees book on Taraaweeh. They claim the narration of Muhammad bin Yoosuf who narrates 11 rakahs, contradicts that what has been narrated by Abdur-Razzaaq who narrates 21 rakahs, and therefore it is mudhtarib. The Answer So the definition of Mudhtarib hadeeth is one which is reported more than once from a single narrator, or from two or more narrators, which disagree and all of similar strength such that one cannot be preferred to the others. (See Imaam Suyootees Tadreeb ur-Raawee (1/262). The narration of Imaam Maalik is preferred over the narration of Abdur-Razzaaq because the strength of the memory of Imaam Maalik was preferred over Abdur-Razzaaqs therefore it is not mudhtarib. The narrator who narrates Abdur-Razzaaqs book of Fasting is Ishaaq bin Ibraaheem ad-Dabaree. (see Musannaf Abdur-Razzaaq (4/153). So Dabaree heard the works of Abdur-Razzaaq from him when he was seven (7) years old and he was not a companion of hadeeth. He would also report rejected ahadeeth from Abdur-Razzaaq, which contradict what is authentic. Some scholars have even authored whole books containing the mistakes and errors in transmission of ad-Dabaree with regards to the Musannaf. (See Meezaan ul-Eitidaal 1/331-332 no.732). Imaam Muhaddith al-Albaanee said this narration (of Abdur-Razzaaq that mentions 21 rakahs) cannot be presented and firstly trustworthy narrators mention 11 rakahs. Secondly Abdur-Razzaaq is alone in reporting and although Abdur-Razzaaq is trustworthy the Haafidh and the famous author his memory deteriorated as he became blind. Haafidh Ibn Hajr has mentioned this in Taqreeb and Haafidh Ibn as-Salaah counted him from those people whose memories deteriorated at the end. Hence he said in his Muqaddimah Uloom al-Hadeeth (pg.407), Ahmad bin Hanbal mentioned he (Abdur-Razzaaq) became blind at the end so whoever would inform him he would accept it, and those who heard after he became blind are nothing. Nasaaee said look into those who wrote from him in the end. And he (ibn as-Salaah said in the introduction of the aforementioned chapter (pg.391), The ruling concerning such narrators is that the ahadeeth narrated by them before they started to forget are accepted and the ahadeeth they narrated after they started to forget are not accepted. Also concerning the narrators there are doubts about (is which ahadeeth of theirs) was narrated before or after they became forgetful are not accepted. I say: This athar is of the third type (of the ones mentioned by Haafidh Ibn as-Salaah) ie we do not know when this hadeeth was narrated from him after or before he started to forget. So there are contraindications and contradictions in this narration so how can it be accepted. (Salaatul-Taraaweeh (pg.47-49) Summarized).

The Third Evidence - The First Hadeeth of Jaabir al-Ansaari Jaabir (Radhiallaahu Anhu) narrates that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) led us in prayer in Ramadhaan and he prayed 8 rakahs and witr. (Saheeh Ibn Khuzaimah (2/138 no.1070), Saheeh Ibn Hibbaan (4/62,64 no.2401, 2406), Aun al-Mabood (4/175), Muajam asSagheer (1/190) of Tabaraanee, Mukhtasar Qiyaam al-Layl (pg.197), Subl as-Salaam (3/28), Nayl alAwthaar (3/58) The chain is hasan as indicated by Haafidh Ibn Hajr Asqaalanee in Fath ul-Baaree (3/10) and in Talkhees al-Habeer (1/119). The authors of the books of Saheeh by bringing a narrator of a saheeh hadeeth in their books indicates their authenticity according to them (ie Imaams Ibn Khuzaimah and Ibn Hibbaan). (See al-Iqtaraah (pg.55) of Ibn Daqeeq al-Eed and Nasb ur-Raayah (1/149) and (3/264). Haafidh Ibn as-Salaah mentioned the same in is Uloom al-Hadeeth. Nimawee Hanafee also authenticated it in Aathaar as-Sunan (p.248) Also authenticated by Maulana Abdul Hayy Lucknowee Hanafee in Umdatur Raayah (1/207) and Taleequl Mumajjid (p.138) who said it was extremely authentic. The Second Hadeeth of Jaabir Of Ubayy ibn Kaab On the authority of Jaabir (Radhiallaahu Anhu) that Ubayy Ibn Kaab (Radhiallaahu Anhu) came to the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) and said, I did something yesterday night the Messenger of Allaah said, What did you do? he said, Some women came to my house and said they did not know much Quraan so we shall pray behind you and will listen to the Quraan. So I led them in 8 rakahs of prayer and offered the Witr prayer. The Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) remained silent and thus it became the Sunnah. (Musnad Abee Yaala (3/336-337 no.1801), Qiyaam al-Layl (no.155) Majmaa az-Zawaaid (2/74) Haafidh al-Haithamee said, Narrated by Abu Yaala, Tabaraanee in al-Awsth and its chain is Hasan. (Majmaa az-Zawaaid (2/74). The Objections (Hanafee) The likes of Abdur-Raheem Laajpooree Hanafee in his fataawa and the other hanafee scholars like Habeeb ur-Rehmaan al-Adhamee have raised the following objections and highly ignorant individuals in the west based upon their blind following have re-iterated some of these objections and authored ridiculous books like, Al-Albani Unveiled namely one Sayf ad-Din Ahmad ibn Muhammad (see (pg.62-63) of this book The First Hanafee Objection. They say the hadeeth is weak and in attempting to answer this hadeeth they say a narrator in the chain, Muhammad bin Humaid ar-Raazee was weak and a liar and they by mentioning this declare this narration of Jaabir to be weak. Then this is extreme ignorance and indicates their lack of research in the field of hadeeth. The Answer To the First Objection. Muhammad bin Humaid is only a narrator of the narration in Qiyaam al-Layl (pg.197) and there are other narrator who have also narrated this hadeeth from the central narrator Yaqoob bin Abdullaah al-

Qummee, they are, 1. Jaafar bin Humaid al-Koofee (see al-Kaamil (5/889), Muajam as-Sagheer (1/190) of Tabaraanee and Meezaan ul-Eitidaal (5/385 no.6561) 2. Abu Rabeea (Musnad Abee Yaala al-Mausalee (3/336), Saheeh Ibn Hibbaan (1/23 no.920) 3. Abdul-Ala bin Hammaad (Musnad Abee Yaala and al-Kaamil of Ibn Adiyy) 4. Maalik bin Ismaaeel (Saheeh Ibn Khuzaimah (2/138) 5. Ubaidullaah Ibn Moosaa (Saheeh Ibn Khuzaimah (2/138 no.1070). Imaam Shams ul-Haqq Aadheemabaadee has also mentioned some of the chains above in his explanation of Sunan Abee Dawood (see his Aun al-Mabood (4/175). All the above narrators are trustworthy, therefore the objection is invalid. The Second Objection. They the hanafees say Yaqoob bin Abdulllaah al-Qummee is weak because Imaam Daarqutnee said he was weak. The Answer To the Second Objection. Yaqoob al-Qummee is trustworthy according to the majority of the scholars of hadeeth. Imaam Tabaraanee after narrating this hadeeth of Yaqoob al-Qummee said, This is not narrated from Jaabir bin Abdullah except with this chain, and he (Yaqoob) is alone in reporting it, and he is Thiqah (Trustworthy). (Muajam as-Sagheer (1/190) this is further supported by what Haafidh Ibn Hajr mentions from Imaam Tabaraanee concerning Yaqoob al-Qummee in Tahdheeb.) Imaam Dhahabee said, The (Aalim) Scholar of the people of Qum..Nasaaee and others said, There is no harm in him. Daarqutnee said, He is not strong. I say (ie Imaam Dhahabee) Bukhaari transmitted from him (in his Saheeh) in note form (Meezaan ul-Eitidaal (7/278 no.9823), athThiqaat (7/645) of Ibn Hibbaan. Imaam Dhahabee also mentioned Yaqoob al-Qummee in his monumental work Siyar al-Alaam anNabula (8/299-300) and said about him, al-Imaam al-Muhaddith al-Mufassir. (The Imaam, The Scholar of Hadeeth and the Explainer) Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, Nasaaee said, There is no harm in him. Abul-Qaasim Tabaraanee said, He is Trustworthy. Daarqutnee said, He is not strong. Ibn Hibbaan mentioned him in ath-Thiqaat. Jareer bin Abdul-Hameed would say about him, A believer from the house of Firaun. Muhammad bin Humaid ar-Raazee said when I entered Baghdaad I was welcomed by Imaams Ahmad and Ibn Maeen and they asked me about the Ahadeeth of Yaqoob al-Qummee. (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (11/340 no.8143), Tabaqaat al-Muhadditheen BaAsbahaan (2/177 no.86) of Abush-Shaikh, Ibn Hibbaan mentions him in his ath-Thiqaat (7/645) and also mentions the above. And Abdur-Rahmaan ibn Mahdee narrated from him (Yaqoob al-Qummee). (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (11/340) and Tabaqaat al-Muhadditheen BaAsbahaan (2/177 no.86). Imaam Dhahabee said, Imaam Ahmad said, The men who Abdur-Rahmaan ibn Mahdee narrates from are trustworthy. (Siyar al-Alaam an-Nabula (9/203), Taareekh Baghdaad (10/243), Sharh Ellal (1/80), Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (6/281). And Abdur-Rahmaan ibn Mahdee would only narrate from trustworthy narrators. (Tadreeb ur-Raawee (1/317). Haafidh Dhahabee also said, Truthful. (al-Kaashif (3/255). Imaam Ibn Khuzaimah graded his hadeeth to be authentic and

Shaikh Noor ud deen Haithamee said his hadeeth were Hasan. As mentioned by Imaam Dhahabee, Imaam Bukhaari has narrated from him in his Saheeh al-Jaami in taleeq form and he does not criticize him in his Taareekh al-Kabeer (8/391 no.3443), therefore he (Yaqoob) is trustworthy with Imaam Bukhaari according to Dhafar Ahmad Thanawee Deobandee Hanafee. (See Qawaaid Uloom al-Hadeeth (pg.136). Haafidh Ibn Hajr remained silent on the hadeeth reported by him alone in Fath ul-Baaree (3/10) and this keeping silent by him is an evidence for the authenticity of this hadeeth. (see Qawaaid Uloom alHadeeth (pg.55) of Dhafar Ahmad Thanawee Deobandee Hanafee). The Third Objection The Hanafees say Eesaa bin Jaariyyah in this chain is weak and Imaams Ibn Maeen, Nasaaee, asSaajee, Uqailee, Ibn Adiyy and Abu Dawood criticized him and some said he was Munkar al-Hadeeth ie rejected in hadeeth. (Refer to Meezaan and Tahdheeb n the tarjamah of Eesaa) The Answer To the Third Objection. The criticisms of Eesaa bin Jaariyyah are vague, unclear and non-detailed becase none of the criticisms are backed up by evidence or reason. Shaikh Abdul-Hayy Lucknowee said, The condition for vague and unclear criticism to be accepted is that there is no praise (for the same narrator) and that is the narrator who has been criticized has not been praised by any scholar of hadeeth. Therefore if any scholar of hadeeth has praised him and spoken of his trustworthiness then the vague criticism will be rejected. (ar-Rafa Wat-Takmeel (pg.6) The Scholars of hadeeth who criticized Eesaa bin Jaariyyah from the ones mentioned above, are considered to be Mutashaddideen Fil-Jarh (Severe and Harsh in Criticism) according to the HANAFEES themselves and the evidence for this is what the Hanafee Scholar Abdul-Hayy Lucknowee said about these Scholars of hadeeth when they criticized Abu Haneefah. (See his Zafar al-Amaanee (pg.282). Similarly Shaikh Abdul-Hayy Lucknowee said (concerning the Mutashaddideen Scholars), From them is Abu Haatim and Nasaaee and Ibn Maeen and Ibn Qattaan and Yahyaa al-Qattaan and Ibn Hibbaan and other than them who are known to be severe and harsh in criticism. (Rafa WatTakmeel (pg.18) _____________________________NOTE WELL____________________________ With what face do the hanafees deobandees quote the Muhadditheen when on one hand they curse and revile them by mentioning highly degrading words concerning them and using words to describe them which are nothing but venomous disparagements. So The Shaikh of the deobandee hanafees and tableeghees Zakariyyah Khandhelvi said, Look and listen to the Dhulm (oppression and tyranny) of these scholars of hadeeth. (See his Taqreer Bukhaari (3/104). Similarly these Hanafee Deobandee muqallideen and others like them, and they number many have notoriously and continuously referred to the People of the Sunnah, the Ahlul-Hadeeth, Ahlul-Athar and the Salafis as Ghair Muqallids (ie non-blind followers) as a derogatory term. However they fail to realize this very same word they coin and concoct for the Sunnis in a disparaging manner was also used for Abu Haneefah by themselves. So Shaikh Ashraf Alee Thanawee said, And it is YAQEENEE (Certain/conclusive) that Imaam Adham Abu Haneefah was a GHAIR MUQALLD. (Majaalis Hakeem al-Ummat (pg.345) compiled

by Muftee Muhammad Shafee Deobandee the father of Taqee Uthmaanee Hanafee Deobandee.) And They would blame others, But they would be the culprits themselves. Another renowned Hanafee Deobandee scholar Muhammad Hasan Sanbhalee has sworn and abused the Sunnis and Ahlul-Hadeeth so much so that whilst expressing his utmost enmity for the Sunnis says, Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Qayyim, Shawkaanee, Ibn Hazm and Dawood Dhahiree were all DOGS. (See his Nazam al-Faraaid (pg.102) printed in Lucknow). And there are many statements like this from them just refer to the works of the Affaak Zaahid alKawtharee. From one of his despicable statements is that he said Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal the Great Imaam of the Sunnis was not a Jurist he was only a scholar of hadeeth. (Refer to Tankeel (1/167) We say the Hanafees should take care as we see them continuous upon this otherwise we will have to mention what we feel is not necessary like Musailamah Kadhaab the one who claimed Prophethood for himself was a hanafee. (See Seerah Ibn Hishaam (4/246) and it is known Mirzaa Ghulaam Ahmad Qaadiyaanee was a hanafee. And have you also forgotten Bishr ibn Gayth al-Mareesee was also a Hanafee so refer to (your) the Hanafee books of Tabaqaat. So check yourselves The Criticisms of Imaams Nasaaee and Uqailee are not Accepted According To the Principles of the Hanafee Deobandees. Its quite ironic and amazing how the hanafee deobandees forget their own words, yet they are quick to mention things without thinking. So Shaikh Habeeb ur-Rehmaan Hanafee Deobandee, the one who brought the above criticism of the Scholars of hadeeth on Eesaa bin Jaariyyah in his book Rakaaat Taraaweeh, also said, To take from Uqailee (referring to his discussion on Ataa Khurasaanee) is incorrect, this is because the scholars of hadeeth do not trust Uqailees weakening (of narrators). (see Alaam al-Marfooa (pg.6) of Habeeb ur-Rehmaan.) Then Habeeb ur-Rehmaan writes about Imaam Nasaaee, Nasaaee has made him (ie Zubair bin Saeed) weak. However firstly his criticism is vague and unclear and secondly he is quick (hasty) and harsh, therefore his declaring him to be weak is not taken. (Alaam al-Marfooa (pg. The criticisms by the other scholars are also vague. Eesaa bin Jaariyyah according to the majority of the scholars is trustworthy and truthful or Hasan al-Hadeeth. Imaam Bukhaari mentioned him in at-Taareekh al-Kabeer (6/385 no.2721) and he did not mention any criticism on him. Imaam Abu Zurah said there is no harm in him. (al-Jarh Wat-Tadeel (6/273 no.1513), Meezaan ulEitidaal(5/385 no.6561), Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (8/179 no.5508) Imaam Abu Haatim ar-Raazee mentioned him and did not mention any criticism concerning him. (alJarh Wat-Tadeel (6/273) and Abu Haatim remaining silent about a narrator, is his authentication of that narrator according to the hanafee scholar Dhafar Ahmad Thanawee Uthmaanee (See Qawaaid Uloom al-Hadeeth (pg.248) checked by Abu Guddah Abdul-Fattah al-Hanafee). Imaam Ibn Hibbaan mentioned him in ath-Thiqaat. (ath-Thiqaat (5/214), Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (8/179) Imaam Ibn Khuzaimah authenticated his hadeeth as well as Imaam Ibn Hibbaan. Shaikh Haafidh Ibn

as-Salaah said, It is sufficient for a hadeeth to be authentic, that it is present in the book in which their authors declared they would mention such ahadeeth, like the book of Saheeh compiled by Ibn Khuzaimah. (al-Muqaddimah (pg.9). al-Haithamee has declared his hadeeth to be good (Majmaa az-Zawaaid (2/72) and he also declared him (ie Eesaa) to be trustworthy (Majmaa az-Zawaaid (2/185). Haafidh Ibn Hajr remained silent on his hadeeth. (See Fath ul-Baaree (3/10) Haafidh Dhahabee mentioned this hadeeth in Meezaan ul-Eitidaal (5/385) and said, The chain is of a middle level. Shaikh al-Bausaree said his hadeeth are good in Misbah uz-Zajaajah az-Zawaaid Sunan Ibn Maajah (no.4241). Haafidh Mundhiree said concerning one of his hadeeth, The chain of this is good. (Targheeb WatTarheeb (1/507). Imaam Suyootee after mentioning the statement of Ibn Abdul-Barr said, Transmitted by Ibn Hibbaan in his Saheeh from the hadeeth of Jaabir from the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee WasSallam) that he prayed 8 rakahs and witr and this is what is authentic. (Tanweer al-Hawaalik (1/103). The Hanafee Scholars On the Hadeeth of Jaabir Haafidh Zailaaee Haafidh Zailaaee also cited this hadeeth and did not mention any criticism regarding it in two places in his book, therefore this proves this hadeeth was authentic according to him. (See Nasb ur-Raayah (1/276) and (1/293). Shaikh Ibn Humaam He also cited this hadeeth and did not mention any criticism on it. (see Fath ul-Qadeer (1/181). Shaikh Mulla Alee Qaaree Mulla Alee Qaaree mentioned the statement of his teacher, Ibn Hajr without any criticism at all, he says, And in the Saheeh of Ibn Khuzaimah and Ibn Hibbaan that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) prayed 8 rakahs and witr. (Mirqaat Sharh Mishkaat (2/175). In another place he categorically writes, It is authentically established from the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) that he prayed 8 Rakahs and Witr. (Mirqaat (2/174). Shaikh Anwar Shah Kashmiree Anwar Shah said, The prayer which the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) led the companions in prayer in Ramadhaan was a total of 11 rakahs as reported from Jaabir by Ibn Khuzaimah, Muhammad bin Nasr and Ibn Hibbaan and it was 8 rakahs and witr, and the witr were 3 rakahs. (Kashf as-Satr (pgs. 27, 33). Therefore, the criticisms of Eesaa bin Jaariyyah by the scholars of hadeeth are not detailed and as he has been also praised, then the praise is taken over the non-detailed criticism. So this hadeeth of Jaabir is at the level of being Hasan.

We ask why in this instance are the criticisms of the Imaams like Imaam Nasaaee, Uqailee and Ibn Adiyy taken regarding Eesaa bin Jaariyyah and rejected when the exact same statements are mentioned from them regarding Abu Haneefah. The Position of Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah Shaikh ul-Islaam Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah said, If the one praying the taraaweeh prayer can cope with a lengthy standing then whilst acting upon the norm of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) whose taraaweeh prayer was 13 rakah with witr, is more virtuous. (Majmoo Fataawa (23/113) he also accepts the taraaweeh prayer of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee WasSallam) in Ramadhaan and in the other months to be 13 rakahs (Majmoo Fataawa (23/120), see also Mulla Alee Qaarees Mirqaat Sharh Mishkaat (2/175). (note Shaikh ul-Islaam counts the Sunnah of the Fajr prayer in this number of 13) The False Claim of There Being Consensus on 20 Rakahs Allaamah Muhaddith al-Asr Imaam al-Albaanee said the claim of some of people claiming that there has been Ijmaa on 20 rakahs is not acceptable and Allaamah Mubaarakpooree said this claim is (baatil) False (See Tuhfah (2/76). Imaam al-Albaanee argues that if the claim of Ijmaa was correct then the jurists of the later times would not have opposed it, whereas we find statements mentioning more and less than 8 rakahs so an Ijmaa is not established just by the fact of mentioning it in a book and when we further check them we find most of the claims of Ijmaa are incorrect. The Shaikh goes onto mention the statement of Imaam Nawaab Siddeeque Hasan Khaan, who said the people have fallen careless in quoting and mentioning Ijmaas and the one who is aware even of a little of these madhabs knows that the people of these madhab are indulges in such great corruption. And the Shaikh continues his beautiful explanation (See as-Siraaj al-Wahhaaj Min Kashf Mataalib Saheeh Muslim bin al-Hajjaaj (1/3) from Salaatul-Taraaweeh (pg.72-74) of Imaam alAlbaanee Imaam Ibn al-Mundhir who died in the year 318H authored a book called al-Ijmaa in which he mentions all the issues upon which there has been Ijmaa and according to him there were approximately 765 issues and yet he does not mention any such claim on this Ijmaa on taraaweeh being 20 rakahs. Imaam Nawawee said, An established Sunnah cannot be denied or rejected on the basis of the practice of a majority or a minority. (Sharh Saheeh Muslim (1/369). Shaikh Shaah Waleeullaah Muhaddith Dhelawee said, There is no room for Ijmaa or Qiyaas contrary to the (established) Sunnah. (Tafheemaat Aalhiyyah (1/41) The Criterion of the Hanafees The Practice in Makkah and Madeenah The hanafees say the people pray 20 rakahs in Makkah and Madeenah and since they are the places, the Wahabiyyah control, why do we pray 8 rakahs. The Answer Then the position of the major scholars of Saudia Arabia is clear like the brightness of the Sun and they have said,

Salaatul-Taraaweeh is the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) and the evidence for this is that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) did not exceed 11 rakahs in the month of Ramadhaan or in any other month. (Signed Shaikhs Abdullaah bin Qaood, Abdullah bin al-Ghudayaan, Abdur-Razzaaq al-Afeefee, Abdul-Azeez bin Baaz, Fataawa Lajnatud-Daaimah (7/194). They also said, And superior is that which the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) practiced regularly, that one should pray 8 rakahs and make salutation after every 2 rakahs and then pray 3 Witr with humility and tranquility and recite the Quraan with tarteel. This is established in the Saheehain from Aaishah (Radhiallaahu Anha) who said, The Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) did not exceed 11 rakahs in the month of Ramadhaan or in any other month. (Fataawa Lajnatud-Daaimah (7/212). al-Allaamah ash-Shaikh Ibn al-Uthaymeen said, The Salaf differed in regards to the number of rakahs for the Taraaweeh prayer and witr, some have said 41, some have said 39 some have said 23, some have said 19 and some have said 13, some have mentioned 11 and some have mentioned a number other than these but from these statements the one that is given precedence is the 11 rakahs or 13 rakahs. As in the Saheehain (Bukhaari and Muslim) from Aaishah mention 11 rakahs and from Ibn Abbaas (Radhiallaahu Anhuma) he mentions 13 rakahs from Bukhaari. It is in al-Muwatta from Saaib bin Yazeed who said Umar bin al-Khattaab ordered Ubayy bin Kaab and Tameem adDaaree to lead the people in 11 rakahs. (Majaalis Shahar Ramadhaan (pg.19). The Understanding of the Earlier Hanafee Scholars Please refer to the treatise of Shaikh Allaamah Abdul-Jaleel Saamroodee in this regard, also;Abu Yoosuf mentions in his book from Abu Haneefah narrates from Abee Jaafar Muhammad bin Alee al-Baaqir that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) would pray 8 rakahs and 3 witr between the prayers of Eeshaa and Fajr and then he would pray the Sunnahs of the Fajr prayer. (Kitaab al-Aathaar no.170 pg.34). Imaam Tahaawee has also mentioned similar narration in his Sharh Maanee al-Aathaar (1/69-174). (note the generality of this narration ie the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) would always pray 8 rakahs) Similarly the Masaaneed Of Abu Haneefah mentions, The prayer of the Prophet of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) would be 13 rakahs, which included the 3 for Witr and 2 for the Sunnahs of Fajr. (Masaaneed Imaam Adham (1/388) Chapter 5) The Position of the Other Scholars. After the position of the scholars mentioned above including those from the Ahnaaf some others who held the same opinion as 11 rakahs are as follows, Imaam al-Hadeeth wal-Maghaazee, Muhammad bin Ishaaq born 80H and died in 150-151H and we was from the time of the companions and successor, he said, I have not heard any narration more affirmed and established than the hadeeth of Saaib that mentions the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) prayed 13 rakahs in the night. (Qiyaam al-Layl (pg.157). As for the narration of 39 from Imaam Maalik from Ibn al-Qaasim (in Mudawwanah) Then firstly clearly contradicts the more authentic narration from Imaam Maalik mentioning 1 rakahs. Secondly

although Ibn al-Qaasim was trustworthy, the issues he narrates from Imaam Maalik need to be looked into because Imaam Abu Zurah said, The People talk about (negatively) the issues Ibn al-Qaasim mentions from Maalik. (Kitaab adh-Dhuafaa (pg.534) Imaam Shaafiee narrates the hadeeth, which is in Imaam Maaliks Muwatta from Imaam Maalik himself and says, (Akhbarana) informed me Maalik from Muhammad bin Yoosuf from Saaib bin Yazeed who said Umar bin al-Khattaab commanded Ubayy bin Kaab and Tameem ad-Daaree to lead the people in 11 rakahs. (See Sunan al-Kubraa (2/496), Sharh Maanee al-Athaar, Kunzul Amaal (8/263), Aathaar as-Sunan (pg.255) of Nimawee. Imaam Ibn al-Arabee (the author of Ahkaam al-Quraan and not the Kaafir soofee Ibn Arabee) said after bringing the various reports of the number of rakahs for Taraaweeh says, The correct position is that Taraaweeh is 11 rakahs. The Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) prayed 11 rakahs and the origin of more rakahs is not established. Then why should not this be adhered to, the limit to which was adhered to in the time of the Prophet when the Messenger of Allaahs prayer as 11 rakahs in the month of Ramadhaan or in any other month, hence following him is obligatory. (Aaridhal Ahwadhee Sharh Jaami at-Tirmidhee (4/19). Shaikh Ainee Hanafee mentioned the position of Imaam Maalik himself was that he prayed 11 rakahs. (see Umdatul-Qaaree (11/127). Imaam Suyootee mentions the position of Imaam Maalik and says, Allaamah Jauree informed us concerning Imaam Maalik that his statement was 11 rakahs of Taraaweeh was beloved to him because Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) also gathered the people to pray 11 rakahs and the prayer of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) was also 11 rakahs. Another narration mentions 13 rakahs with witr, now I do not know where these additional rakahs have come from. (al-Masaabeeh Fee Salaatul-Taraaweeh (2/77). Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah also mentions 11 rakahs to be position of Imaam Maalik (see his Ikhtiyaaraat ilmiyyah (pg.38) Imaam Badee ud deen says after mentioning the above statement of Imaam Suyootee, We find the following things from the words of Imaam Maalik, (1) The Imaam (Maalik) held the position of 11 rakahs and not 20. (2) This amount was beloved and favoured with him (3) This number (of 11) was also acted upon by Umar. (4) This is the number which Umar gathered the companions upon and this is what the Ijmaa is upon. (5) This is also the number prayed by the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee-Was-Sallam) (6) There is no evidence as regards to an increase to 11 rakahs. (7) According to Imaam Maalik this increase (ie more than 11) is something new and created in the religions. Therefore the claim of Ijmaa is incorrect and the attribution of 20 rakahs to Umar is also incorrect. (Tanqeed as-Sadeed (pg.267-268) Shaikh Allaamah Muhammad Ameer as-Sanaanee said, That which the majority of the people have agreed upon (that taraaweeh is 20 rakahs) in an innovation (Subl as-Salaam (3/29). The hanafee scholar Shaikh Abdul-Haqq mentions during the time of Umar bin Abdul-Azeez the people used to pray 8 rakahs according to the Prophets Sunnah. (Maa Thabt Ba-As-Sunnah (pg.122). Imaam Nawaab Siddeeque Hasan Khaan has also mentioned the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) to be 1 rakahs. (See his Hidaayatus-Saail (pg.138), see his Aun alBaaree Hal Mushkilaat al-Bukhaari (4/375-376).

Imaam al-Allaamah Abu Tayyib Muhammad Shams ul-Haqq Aadheemabaadee mentioned the statement of the author of Tuhfatul-Akhyaar who was Shaikh Abdul-Hayy Lucknowee who said the Rightly guided Khulafa prayed 20 rakahs for Taraaweeh and then said this is incorrect and it is not established from Abu Bakr and Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhuma) that they prayed 20 rakahs even once. (Aun al-Mabood Sharh Sunan Abee Dawood (4/175) Shaikh Ahmad Alee Saharanpooree Hanafee said, The summary of all this discussion is that the standing in Ramadhaan is 11 rakahs and Witr which is the Sunnah. The Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) prayed this in congregation..And this is what Ibn Humaam said. (Haashiyyah Saheeh al-Bukhaari (1/154). Shaikh Abdur-Rahmaan Banna established the following chapter heading in Musnad Ahmad, The permissibility For Praying 8 Rakahs for Salaatul-Taraaweeh other than the Witr. and then he mentioned two ahadeeth of Aaishah (Radhiallaahu Anha) that Taraaweeh is only 8 rakahs. (See Fath ur-Rabbaanee Maa Musnad Ahmad (3/13) and according to Imaam Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal held an opinion of 11 rakahs. (See his Ikhtiyaaraat ilmiyyah (pg.38), alMusfaa Sharh Muwatta (1/771) of Shah Waleeullaah Dhelawee. salam aleykum in this treatise the two brothers mentionned the weakness of 20 rak'a and establish the authenticity of 11. I will look insha Allah ib detail to the deobadni work, to see if there is something the two brothers did not mention. Brother Salafist, do you not see clearly these deobandi opposing the biggest Hanafi muhadith like Zela'i, Ayni, Ibn Humam, Luknawi and others. How biased they are. Why are these people forbiding 11 while according to these hanafi the Prophet prayed 11. These people want to forbid the SUnnah salam aleykum The deobandi author writes : " (9) Ibn Abbas reports that Rasulullah (Allah bless him & give him peace) used to perform twenty rakat in Ramadn individually and he also performed witr. (Abubakr Ibn Shaibah in his Musannaf and Baihaqi) This hadith has been accepted by the Ummah and is unanimously practised worldwide. End of deobandi Now this deobandi is even taking his hanafi scholars who made tad'if of this hadith out of the Ummah. Ibn Humam said there is ittifaq on his weakness. What a mockery to the science of hadith. The deobandi instead of talking about hadith should open a circus

salam aleykum Deobandi said : "Just as the two different qirat of the Qurn are accepted, so too should the two differing narrations of a hadith" What is this, is there any scholar saying this ? Qira'at are all wahy, Jibril tauight the Prophet sevens Qira'ah, and the Prophet saw did not teach different ways of hadith. So one is sahih and the other shadh or weak, it is impossible to different meaning being sahih. What is this knoledge ? the deobandi said : "We can challenge anyone to prove that any jurist or muhaddith has rejected twenty rakat of tarwh from the era of Umar till the era of the British Empire in India. We also challenge anyone to prove from authentic Islamic literature that there was a protest against adopting this practice" Look at all scholars who say the sunnah is 11 even among Hanafi, this is why the author mentionned only from time of Umar, as many scholars rejected the Prophet saw prayed 20. And there are alos many scholars who said Umar ordered Tamim Dari and Ubay to pray 11. Just look above. as for the list of scholars quoted by shaykh Atiyah Salim and others, we have already seen these people like Shaf'i and AHmad do not say the SUnnah of the Prophet is 20, rather they say 11 is alo permissible While deobandi call it a bid'a So many early scholars praying more than 20 is not a dalil there beliveing it is the SUnnah. And we have seen the words of Ibn Taymiyah and he also said the Prophet saw prayed 11 the two nights. And rak'a were made longer because people were tired, not because it is the Sunnah As for this deobandi stuff "In fact, for more than 150 years, the standard practice in Madinah was of thirty six rakat. The reason for this number (36) is that some saints used to perform four rakat individually at every interval (tarwhah), thus adding an additional number of sixteen to the total of twenty. However, only twenty rakat were performed with congregation. Eventually the additional four rakat of every interval were omitted and twenty rakat became the standard practice of every city. Although the names of all the Ulama are not explicitly mentioned in the books of Fiqh, nonetheless this much is certain that after the Khairul Quroon (the era of the Prophet Allah bless him & give him peace and the Sahba), all the Ulama of the Ahle Sunnat wal Jamat gave a verdict of twenty rakat. " What is this, we have claims with no dalil.

Mudawanah talked about 36 rak'a done by Umar ibn Abdel Aziz, and he did not mention saints praying alone. What is this except Cat's urine ? And Ayni mentionned many sayings on tarawih, without mentionning some prayed alone Is this knowledge or Dhann ? As for this "Whenever any person becomes a salafi, his first task is to discredit the mutawtir prayer (the unanimously accepted salaah performed throughout the ages) which has been performed by the Ummah for fourteen centuries and he introduces a new prayer which clashes with the mutawtir prayer. This is done in order that the Muslims should dispute and clash at least five times daily and every musjid should be made a battlefield. Even if he does not know Arabic, by studying translations, he compiles books and sometimes calls it Prayerur Rasool or Prayerun Nabi. Thus, he objects to the prayer of the Hanafis, Shfis, Mlikis and Hambalis and presents a new prayer for the general masses. " What prayer agreed upon ? What about alls cholars saying the SUnnah is 11 ? First these people lie, and then inuslts Ahle Sunnah. And shaykh ALbani quoted Ibn Khuzayma also showing that it is not permissible to pray more than 11. As for their expnation of Aisha's hadith that the Prophet did not pray more than 11 in ramdan or ghayr Ramadan. I don't ven think there is need of refutation Just look at the words of Liknawi and Kashmiri that Tarawih and Tahajud are same prayer. Just look at ibn Humam and Zela'i saying the hadith of ibn Abbas the Prophet praying 20 oppose that of Aisha in Bukhari What does it mean ? They understood from this hadith that the Prophet saw prayed 8 in Tarawih, that's why rejecting the weak report of ibn Abbas Who is more knloedgable, all these Hanafi muhadith or these ignorant deobandi ? And what is shoking they do not even have courage to quote words of Kashmiri saying Tahajud and Tarawih are one prayer. What is this except a deciet ?

salam aleykum The deobandi rejected the hadith of Jabir that the Prophet saw prayed 11. Now who is more knoledgeable, Ibn Humam, Zela'i, Luknawi and all other Ahnaf who said this hadith is sahih or this deobandi ? As for this saying "This narration of his goes against the Ijm of the Sahba (Allah be pleased with them). " First establish the throne, then sit on it. There is no Ijma', what is the dalil for Ijma ? As for their saying "It is a principle of hadth that jarh (declaring invalid) precedes tadl (declaring reliable). Hence Is will be regarded as majrh (unreliable), especially when one considers the words used by Imm Nisai and Abu Dawd for him." Do you follow this for Abu Hanifa ? How many jarh of imam Nassai and other have been rejected by Ahnaf ? salam aleykum As for their calim of idtirab, scholars like Zela'i and others mentionned the narration that Umar ordered Ubay and Tamim to pray 11 and did not mention idtirab, as many other Hanafi scholars. Now who is more knoledgable, Zela'i or this deobandi ? Zela'i tried to make jam's that fisrt Umar ordered to pray 11 then 20. Ibn Humam has permitted eight raka'at -Fathul Qadir vol.1 pg.334 - Moulana Zafar Ahmad Uthmani has rejected this view with complete proofs - See I'laus Sunan vol.7 pg.68-72) And we have shown that not only Ibn Humam but many others said the SUnnah is to pray 11. We have more than 15 big hanafi quoted to say that the Prophet saw prayed 11. So what Zafar Ahmad Uthmani says is shadh, and who listen to him when we have the like of Ibn Humam, Zela'i, Luknawi, Shah Waliullah, and all other hanafi muhadith. So we see that this deobandi scholar has written a paper that is cat's urine ( except for Allah's words or Prophets words) All his own words are cat's urine, opposing even his own Hanafi scholars in accepting weak hadith and rejecting sahih. Also false accusations on Ahle hadith and false ijma'

May Allah protect us from Taqleed salam aleykum What an answer can they give to all Hanafi muhadith saying Prophet saw prayed 11 and made weakness of 20. What about their muhadith saying Tarawih and Thajud are one prayer. These people might know before this but there only aim is giving victory to their madhab at any costs, distorting, latering, interpreating. What are these people, they want to Forbid sunnah of 11 despite knowing so many muhadith even from them agreed Prophet prayed 11. Do they not know the hadith about worshiping monks and priests who make halal haram and Haram halal. These deobandi make wive haram if one touches his mother in law or daughter with desire while Allah did not make it Haram These people make Sunnah of 11 Haram. And all people doing this, whith knoledge of all Muhadith saying Prophet saw prayed 11, then they are upon shirk. I even saw the like of Dr Israr on ary difital saying the SUnnah is 11 and Umar prayed 20, which is a mistake, then he talked about Ijma but what Ijma ? So people forbding 11 are attacking the Sunnah and they should be fought until they repent One who spit on the Sun, the spit cames back to his face and does not touch the sun. So we have seen these deobandi not having courage to quoted their own muhadith on these hadith, like Zela'i, Luknawi, ibn Humam and others. May Allah protect us from the shirk of taqleed salam aleykum As for this deobandi accusation that ahle hadith are against four imams and other rubbish Then who has a hadith saying Shaf'i is more harmful than Iblis. Is this not Hnafi books like Durul Mukhtar ? Who said imam Shafi'i is a jahil ?

Who forbade salah behing Shafi'i, and I can show extracs from Bahr Raiq that is online if asked. So in fact muqallid are biggest ennemies of their Imam, while they do not pray one behind the other. What is ahle hadith's crime except they like all Imams and take what is rajih from their fatwa by studying their proves. And all Imams forbade their taqleed and asked to take hadith when it opposes their saying. MAy Allah protect the Ummah from the harm of taqleed salam aleykum Brother salafist can you ask these deobandi where they found this hadith in Sunan Abu Dawud (4) Hadrat Ubayy Ibn Ka'b (Allah be pleased with him) used to lead the prayers by performing twenty rakat tarwh and three rakat witr. (Abu Dawood pg.202) Because I looked in chapter Qyam Ramadan and I did not find this report. What is the chapter of this hadith or is this the same as number 18. As for hadith 18 deobandi said " It is reported by Hasan that Umar Ibnul Khattb (Allah be pleased with him) gathered the people with Ubayy Ibn Kab (Allah be pleased with him) and he used to perform twenty rakat with them. (Abu Dawood, pg.1429 -Arabian print) There are two prints of Sunan Abi Dwd. Some prints have twenty rakat while others have twenty nights. Just as the two different qirat of the Qurn are accepted, so too should the two differing narrations of a hadith. Shaikh Muhammad Ali As-Sbooni of Makkah has also narrated this hadith in his book, Al-Hadyun Nabawi As-Sahh f Prayerit-Tarwh. Thus, to accuse the Ulama of Deoband of interpolation is highly irresponsible. Furthermore, Allmah Dhahabi has reported this hadith with the words twenty rakat in his Siyar lmin Nubal. This was centuries before Deoband could even be established. " Why did he not quote the full text of the hadith that are " Umar ibn Khattab gathered Ubay ibn Ka'b and he prayed 20 nights and did not do Qunut except in the second half, and when last 10 days came, he prayed at home, and people asked where Ubay fled " While deobandi print says rak'a isntead of nights And the prove if tahreef are 1) Abu Dawud narrated this hadith on bab Qunut and not Tarawih, and he did not quote this hadith in the chapter of tarawih

2) Ubay ibn Kab did not pray 10 last days, showing he did for 20 first nights, so the meaining is about nights. 3) Imam Bayhaqi quoted this hadith in Sunan Kubra vol 2 p 498, with the words " Nights" and not Rak'a 4) Hanafis Muhadith also quoted 20 nights, Zelai Nasb ruyah vol 2 126, ibn humam, fath Qadir vol 1 p 375, and Ibn Turkmani after quoting 20 nights declares tha hadith weak and munqati', Johir an naqi vol 2 p 498 So the context shows it is not rak'a, this is why this deobandi did not bring the matn of the text. And what About Zela'i and others aying in Nasb Ruyah that this hadith is munqati', So even with your wrong words, the hadith is weak. So this is deobandi, bringing weak distorted narrations. salam aleykum Brother salafist,narrations 1, 2, 9, 11, 13, 16 are clearly answered by Brothers Abu Khuzayma and ibn Hibban 18 is a tahreef and for 4 then show the chapter and matn of the text Barakallah Fik For number 10 if Shaytar Ibn Shakl is Abul Hasna then it is done For 17 there is no mention of narrators, so ask deobandis who the narrators are. If it is narration of Abu Jafar Razee it is done So there is still these athars to answer (5) The eminent Tbi, At said, "I found the people performing twenty rakat tarwh and three raka t witr." (Abubakr Ibn Shaibah in his Musannaf, vol.1 pg.483) (6) Abul Khusaib says that Suwaid Ibn Ghaflah used to make five sittings, i.e. he used to perform twenty rakat (and sit after every four). (Baihaqi vol.2 pg. 496) (7) Nfi Ibn Umar reports that Ibn Abi Mulaykah used to perform twenty rakat for them in Ramadn. (Abubakr Ibn Shaibah in his Musannaf) (8) It is reported by Sab Ibn Ubaid that Ali Ibn Rabah used to make five tarwhas (i.e. read twenty rakat and rest after every four) with the people and he used to perform three rakat of witr. (Abubakr Ibn Shaibah in his Musannaf) (12) It is reported in Qiymul Layl by Muhammad Ibn Ka'b Al- Qurazi that all the people used to perform twenty rakat tarwh in the month of Ramadn. They used to lengthen the qirt and perform three rakat of witr. (Qiyamul Layl by Muhammad b. Nasr Marwazi pg.91 (14) Nfi, who was the freed slave of Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with them) and the student of

Hadrat !isha, Abu Hurairah and Abu Rafi' (Allah be pleased with them), reports that he saw the people performing 36 rakat of tarwh and witr. (Tuhfatul Ahwazi vol.2 pg.73) (The reason for the difference in the number of raka'at will be discussed in chapter three) (15) Dawd Ibn Qays reports that during the era of Umar Ibn Abdil Aziz (101 A.H) and Abn Ibn Uthmn (105 A.H.), he saw the people of Madinah performing thirty six rakat. Hadrat Umar Ibn Abdil Aziz had ordered the Qurr to perform thirty six rakat. (Qiyamul Layl by Muhammad b. Nasr Marwazi pg.91-92) But we can see none of these athars mention what the Prophet saw prayed or what Umar ordered to pray 20. Some even oppose Hanafi fiqh of 20 and their ijma' Amd Umar Ibn Abdil Aziz had ordered the Qurr to perform thirty six rakat. There is clear mention of ordering Qurra to pray 36, not Jam'at of 20 and 16 were prayed alone by imajinary saints So your dalil is they are sahih oppose hanafi fiqh or show as said by Ibn Taymiyah that people prayed more after because of tirdeness, and it is not a dalil of their considering it the Sunnah. And none of them considered 11 to be forbidenne as these deobandi do. Did Imam Shafi'i said pray 20 because it is the SUnnah ? Did Umar ibn Abdel Aziz said 20 is the Sunnah ?

salam aleykum here are ABu Khuzayma's answers (5) The eminent Tbi, At said, "I found the people performing twenty rakat tarwh and three rakat witr." (Abubakr Ibn Shaibah in his Musannaf, vol.1 pg.483) Answer This statement is neither Quraan or hadeeth, nor ijmaa or the action of the rightly guided khulafa nor the action of the companions, its merely the action of the people of Madeenah. The narration describes PEOPLE and this entity is unknown and hence the action of unknown people is not evidence. Ie which people, where were they from and of what era. This narration no doubt from its wording is highly ambiguous In addition to this the action of the people of Madeenah was to pray 41 rakahs (see Sunan atTirmidhee1/166). And even so do their actions constitute evidence for us. (6) Abul Khusaib says that Suwaid Ibn Ghaflah used to make five sittings, i.e. he used to perform twenty rakat (and sit after every four). (Baihaqi vol.2 pg. 496). Answer. Abu Khusaib is Ziyaad bin Abdur-Rahmaan is a tabiee, Basree and according to Imaam Dhahabee he is unknown, although Imaam Ibn Hibbaan has mentioned him in ath-Thiqaat, but this alone is not

sufficient. (See Meezaan (3/134 no.2953). Yet according to Haafidh Ibn Hajr he is maqbool ie accepted as he mentions in Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb, BUT according to the understanding of al-Haafidh maqbool with him means the narrator has to be supported and without being supported he does not constitute evidence, we have also mentioned this in al-Qaul as-Saheeh Fee Masalatut-Taraaweeh. so refer to it. However there are numerous authentic evidences that oppose this report of Abu Khusaib from the companions also, hence this report is rejected. It is also to be noted that Suwaid bin Ghaflah is a tabiee and his action contradicts the norm of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee WasSallam) and the companions therefore it is rejected. (7) Nfi Ibn Umar reports that Ibn Abi Mulaykah used to perform twenty rakat for them in Ramadn. (Abubakr Ibn Shaibah in his Musannaf). Answer. Again this report is not Hujjah and it also contradicts the authentic Sunnah. (8) It is reported by Sab Ibn Ubaid that Ali Ibn Rabah used to make five tarwhas (i.e. read twenty rakat and rest after every four) with the people and he used to perform three rakat of witr. (Abubakr Ibn Shaibah in his Musannaf) Answer. Then there is also no confusion in this narration nor does it in any way prove 20 rakahs. The wording in the brackets that he used to rest after every 4 is not part of the wording of the narration, it Is a false interpretation of the compiler. This narration coincides with having 5 sets of rest, this is possible with praying 5 units of 2 rakahs and then the 1 unit for witr. (12) It is reported in Qiymul Layl by Muhammad Ibn Ka'b Al- Qurazi that all the people used to perform twenty rakat tarwh in the month of Ramadn. They used to lengthen the qirt and perform three rakat of witr. (Qiyamul Layl by Muhammad b. Nasr Marwazi pg.91 Answer. This narration with its chain reports this action during the time of Umar (Raadhiallahu Anhu) (During the time of Umar has not been mentioned in this report which the compiler has left out which is indeed very strange). and we know Muhammad bin Kaab was born in 40H and Umar (Raadhiallaahu Anhu) died in 23H so there is a gap of 17 years and hence a disconnection between the chain. The narration is weak. Refer to Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb. Also Muhammad bin Nasr al-Marwazee has not mentioned any chain for this report in his Qiyaam alLayl, so how can its authenticity be ascertained. (14) Nfi, who was the freed slave of Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with them) and the student of Hadrat !isha, Abu Hurairah and Abu Rafi' (Allah be pleased with them), reports that he saw the people performing 36 rakat of tarwh and witr. (Tuhfatul Ahwazi vol.2 pg.73) (The reason for the difference in the number of raka'at will be discussed in chapter three). Answer. Yet again this narration mentions people which is an unknown entity. Secondly this narration is not evidence it is a mere athar which clearly contradicts the authentic established Sunnah, so what is binding upon the Muslims are the statements and actions of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallaahu Alayhee Was-Sallam). It is also possible as explained earlier the general people of the time prayed 36 units due to the general hadeeth in Bukhaari. Lastly the ahnaaf also admit this is just a report as if it

was an established action, then would also pray 36, therefore it is not sufficient to quote this report to us when they themselves do not act upon it. (15) Dawd Ibn Qays reports that during the era of Umar Ibn Abdil Aziz (101 A.H) and Abn Ibn Uthmn (105 A.H.), he saw the people of Madinah performing thirty six rakat. Hadrat Umar Ibn Abdil Aziz had ordered the Qurr to perform thirty six rakat. (Qiyamul Layl by Muhammad b. Nasr Marwazi pg.91-92) Answer. What is the point of deduction from this narration. This neither negates our position nor does it strengthen yours ie of 20 rakahs. It fits exactly according to the opinion of Ahlul Hadeeth of praying as many units in 2 rakah prayer until the Adhaan for fajr is heard according to the hadeeth in Bukhaari. So this does not negate the fact they held the opinion of 11 or 13 rakahs. All this narration indicates they exceeded 8 rakahs, therefore this narration does not state they did not hold 8 rakahs to be their position. It should also be noted these are actions of people other than the Messenger of Allaah and his ashaab, therefore according to the position and usool of Ahlus-Sunnah this is not evidence rather on the contrary it opposes the established Sunnah that is reported from the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Wasallam). (10) Shaytar Ibn Shakl who was a student of Al (Allah be pleased with him) reports that he (Al) used to make Immat of twenty rakat in Ramadn and he used to make three rakat of witr. (Baihaqi vol.2 pg.496) So if Shaytar Ibn Shakl and if he is Abul Hasna then you have answered it Answer. Imaam Baihaqee does not mention a chain for this narration in his Sunan, hence it is weak, or it is upon them to bring the chain for this narration if they have it. also for this one 17) Ubay bin Kaab (Allah be pleased with him) reports that Umar (Allah be pleased with him) instructed him saying that if he lead the prayer it will be better. Thereafter he said, "Perform twenty rakat for the people." Atharus Sunan pg.255) If it is narration of Abu Jafar Razee it is done I asked the deobandi to give name of narrators So if you know about these athars then let me know

salam aleykum About the so called hadith of Abu dawud, Abu Khuzayma said Answer. This narration from Sunan Abee Dawood is one of the grave distortions of the hanafi deobandis, May

Allaah Jalo Wa Ala save us from such horrific distortions. One of the major Ahlul-Hadeeth Scholar of Pakistan authored a treatise exposing this distortion which has been Alhamdulillah translated by ourselves. The treatise is called, Naam ash-Shahood Ala Tahreef al-Ghalain Fee Sunan Abee Dawood. Yes, We Do Have Witnesses Regarding the False Distortion of the Extremists In Sunan Abee Dawood. By al-Allaamah ash-Shaikh Sultaan Mahmood Jalaalpooree Rahimahullah. May Allah guide us all salam aleykum Azim Tariq have you got no shame to bring a paper that has already been refuted and which contains lies on Ibn Hajar Your paper say "Hafiz Ibn Hajr the great muhaddith and well known for his commentary on Sahih Bukhari has reported in his book Al-Talkhees Al-Habeer, on the authority of Aisha (ra) that the Prophet (saw) performed 20 raka'at on those 3 nights. (Al-Talkhees Al-Habeer, Hadith 540). He reemphaisies this opinion in Fath Al-Bari, vol 4, p 219). By the way these 2 books of this great Muhaddith are quoted by salafis quite a lot except these pages obviously" And I have given the link to Talkhees kabeer shwoing this was a lie Have you got no shame to gather deobandi lies on scholars and put them here Insha Allah all these liars will pay their crimes on judgement day salam aleykum I have given the link to ibn taymiyah's words showing the Sunnah is 11, also Ibn Humam, Zela'i saying the sunnah is 11, the Prophet saw prayed 11 the first days Also ibn Hajar says the Prophet says 11. Azim Tariq fear Allah, and stop bringing weak narrations whose weakness is agreed upon by scholars The Prophet said " Whoever lied on me, let him get ready for his place in fire" Read theses posts thatw ere posted at the beginning In reality Taraweeh, Tahajjud and Qiyaam of Ramadhaan, are all one and the same thing. The long hadeeth of Abu Dharr (radi-Allaahu anhu) in Ibn Maajah is clear evidence of this statement. The summary of the hadeeth is that Abu Dharr (radi-Allaahu anhu) said,

We kept the fasts of Ramadhaan with the Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam), then he led us in Qiyaam (Taraweeh prayer) on the 23rd night (when seven nights were left) till about one third of it passed. He did not observe it on the 24th, then on the 25th night he led us till about half the night passed. We requested to offer supererogatory prayer during the whole night. The Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) said, He who observes Qiyaam along with the Imaam till he finishes it, then it is as if he offered prayer the whole night. Then he did not observe the Qiyaam with

us on the 26th night, then finally on the 27th night he gathered his wives, members of his household and the people and he led everyone in the Qiyaam (Taraweeh prayer) till we feared of missing the dawn meal. [Ibn Maajah (no. 1327) (2/287) (Arabic/English)] [1] It is clear from this narration that the Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) led the taraweeh prayer in three parts of the night and by praying it after Eesha until the end of the night he informed us of its time. It is likely that no time would have remained for tahajjud, (as taraweeh on the 27th night was prayed so late in the night to the extent that there were fears of missing the dawn meal) therefore no doubt remains about taraweeh and tahajjud being one prayer. Maulana Muhammad Anwar Shah Kashmiree Deobandee said, There is no way out or alternative in accepting that the taraweeh of the Messenger of Allaah (salAllaahu alayhe wa sallam) was eight ( rakahs (units), and it is not established by any narration he prayed taraweeh and tahajjud separately. [Urf ash-Shadhee (1/166)] [2] On the authority of Jaabir (radi-Allaahu anhu), The Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) led us in prayer in Ramadhaan of 8 rakahs then we prayed the Witr. [Tabaraanee, Muhammad ibn Nasr, Ibn Khuzaimah, Ibn Hibbaan] Ibn Humam and Zela'i also brought this narration to justify that the Prophet saw prayed 11, so do you deny these hanafi muhadith ? On the authority of Jaabir (radi-Allaahu anhu), Ubayy Ibn Kaab (radi-Allaahu anhu) came to the Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) and said, I did something yesterday night. The Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) said, What did you do? He said, Some women came to my house and said they did not know much Quraan so we shall pray behind you and will listen to the Quraan. So I led them in 8 rakahs of prayer and offered the witr prayer. The Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu alayhe wa sallam) remained silent and thus it became the Sunnah. [Abu Yaala, Haithamee said in Majmaa az-Zawaaid the chain is Hasan] [5] So you deny the judjement of Haythami Hanafi ? Answer this now, are Zela'i, ibn Humam, Haythami and Anwar Shah Kashmiri non reliable for you Imaam Zailaaee Hanafee Then concerning the narrator Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan and this narration ( of 20) of Ibn Abbaas Imaam Zailaaee Hanafee (d.762H) said, It is defective due to Abee Shaybah Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan, the grandfather of al-Imaam Abee Bakr ibn Abee Shaybah, and they are agreed upon him being weak. Ibn Adiyy said he was weak in alKaamil, then it also opposes the authentic hadeeth from Abee Salamah bin Abdur-Rahmaan when

questioned Aaishah (Radhiallaahu Anha), What was the prayer of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) in Ramadhaan? She replied, Whether Ramadhaan or other than Ramadhaan he would not exceed 11 rakahs. (Nasb ur-Raayah (1/293). Shaikh Ibn Humaam Shaikh Ibn Humaam said in Fath ul-Qadeer after mentioning this hadeeth, Weak due to Abee Shaybah Ibraaheem bin Uthmaan the grandfather of Imaam Abee Bakr ibn Abee Shaybah, they are agreed upon his weakness and he also opposes the authentic hadeeth. The extact of Zela'i was given beofre from the book online if you want to check So why did ibn Humam and Zela'i said the hadith of ibn Abbas of 20 with being weak oppose the sahih ? Because for these Hanafi scholars the hadith of Bukhari shows the Prophet saw prayed 11 in qyam Ramdan, and they undertsodd that Tahajud and Tarawih is one prayer Answer this now. Ahle hadith undertsand this hadith that the Prophet saw prayed 11 in qyam in ramdan and ghayr ramdan and this qyam is the same tarawih and tahajjud And Ibn Humam and Zela'i also say the hadith the Prophet saw prayed 20 oppose the hadith of Aishah So you have no way to make any interpolation, except to say Answar shah, Zela'i, Ibn Humam and all other hanafi scholars are mistaken but your deobandi papers have no shame to show their words and try to say onlt ahle hadith mis undertsood this hadith What is this game with the religion, do they not fear Allah ? And this is the sickness of taqleed As for Tahajjud then it is also witr, witr is from 1 to 11, and it is also called tahajjud, Qyam layl look at sahih Bukhari Volume 2, Book 16, Number 105: Narrated Ibn Umar: Once a person asked Allah's Apostle about the night prayer. Allah's Apostle replied, "The night prayer is offered as two Rakat followed by two Rakat and so on and if anyone is afraid of the approaching dawn (Fajr prayer) he should pray one Raka and this will be a Witr for all the Rakat which he has prayed before." Nafi' told that 'Abdullah bin 'Umar used to say Taslim between (the first) two Rakat and (the third) odd one in the Witr prayer, when he wanted to attend to a certain matter (during that interval between the Rakat). http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamental ... 6.sbt.html

aslo check from this in sahih bulhari chapter Tahajjud http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamental ... 1.sbt.html Volume 2, Book 21, Number 238: Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar : A man said, "O Allah's Apostle! How is the prayer of the night?" He said, "Two Rakat followed by two Rakat and so on, and when you apprehend the approaching dawn, offer one Raka as Witr." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Volume 2, Book 21, Number 239: Narrated Ibn Abbas: The prayer of the Prophet used to be of thirteen Rakat, i.e. of the night prayer. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Volume 2, Book 21, Number 240: Narrated Masruq: I asked Aisha about the night prayer of Allah's Apostle and she said, "It was seven, nine or eleven Rakat besides the two Rakat of the Fajr prayer (i.e. Sunna). " -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Volume 2, Book 21, Number 241: Narrated 'Aisha, The Prophet (p.b.u.h) used to offer thirteen Rakat of the night prayer and that included the Witr and two Rakat (Sunna) of the Fajr prayer. for sahih muslim Book 004, Number 1604: 'A'isha reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used to observe thirteen rak'ahs of the night prayer. Five out of them consisted of Witr, and he did not sit, but at the end (for salutation). So we see the Prophet saw praying witr of 5 and sitting in last rak'a -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Book 004, Number 1605: This hadith has been narrated by Hisham with the same chain of transmitters. And there are many other hadith in other books showing the Prophet saw prayed 11 in different ways

asslaamu alaikum xlx_paki_xlx wrote: salam i think and plz correct me the it's saying that the 20 Rakats is the Jamhur opinion. right salam xlx-paki there is no ijmaa regarding 20 ra'kat taraweeh it is a lie by these blind followers of hanafi madhab read this topic from the begining without the taqleedy mind try to understand it with open mind and heart then you will understand Insha'Allaah, i told you before all the hadeeth regarding twenty rak'at are not authentic and like brother abu dujaanaah has explained the isnaad of the narration you quoted that its munqati by well known scholars why is that it does not sink into you and in the barelwi section of this forum i told you the hadeeth is munqati. and i also told you in the book muwwata imam muhammad written by the student of imam abu hanifa which say imam abu hanifa was on the opinion of 8 rak'at. now it is up to you to decide who is telling the truth, the student of imam abu hanifa or those people who came after 5th century AH who wrote the hanafi fiqh books which you cant trace back to imam abu hanifa. and you think you are following imam abu hanifa 1 Qudoory was written in 5th century AH 2 Hidayah 6th century AH yes the famous hidayah was written in 6 centyry AH when imam abu hanifa died in 150 AH (may Allaah have mercy on his soul), 450 years after imam abu hanifa died and books like Alamghiry and shami were written 12th century AH. Look you are not even doing taqleed of imam Abu Hanifa and the hanafi dont even follow imam abu hanifa in his aqeedah so how can you say that you are hanafi when in aqeedah and fiqh you do taqleed of (ashari, matureedi) and ( shami, qudoori, hidayah) so that actually makes you muqallad of others not imam abu hanifa. i hope that Allaah Subhaan wa Ta'ala will guide you through our naseehah Insha'Allaah, till next time Insha'Allaah Asslaamu Alaikum Akhi it just surprises me why is it that the hanafi's want to debate and argue with you on issue's of fiqh but not on the aqeedah. if you talk to them about wahada tal wajood they will be questioning about rafal yaddain. khair regarding the opinion of imam abu hanifa about 8 raka'at taraweeh just check the answer the hanafi's have given in what you quoted from them. [quote="salafist"] Let me quote a Hanafee: [quote] Recently, a salafi forwarded this to me, can you please comment...apparently he's trying to imply that Imam Abu Hanifa rahmatullah alaihe was of the opinion that tarawih is only 8 rak'at. Here's his comment:

<"This is what has been stated in the Hanafi books of fiqh (jurisprudence), for we do not find any book that can be authentically ascribed to Abu Hanifa (d.150H) (rahimahullaah). Rather, what is apparent from looking into al-Muwatta of Imam Muhammad (one of the main students of the Abu Hanifa) is that Abu Hanifa's madhhab (school of thought) was to pray eleven rakats. Imam Muhammad includes a chapter in al Muwatta (p.110), stating: "Chapter: Establishing the Night Prayer in the month of Ramadhan, and the virtues contained in it." Under this chapter he relates four ahadith. The first, third and fourth narrations do not make mention of any specified number of rakats for the Tarawih Prayer, rather they just mention the excellence of establishing Prayer in congregation and the excellence of the night Prayer in Ramadhan. However, in the second narration eleven rakts is mentioned. Then Imam Muhammad said (p.111): "And we take all of this." ... Thus, he has shown that his madhhab is eleven rakts, and this can only be the madhhab of Imam Abu Hanifa< Akhi This is the position of imam abu hanifa and this is what i was refereing to. now lets take a look at the games the hanafis are playing. Answer: Al-Salam alaykum All the relied upon books of Fiqh in the Hanafi school - like Al-Mabsut of Sarakhsi, Mukhtasar al-Quduri, Al-Wiqaya, Kanz al-Daqa'iq, Al-Durr al-Mukhtar etc. state that Tarawih is 20 raka`at.none of these books can be traced back to imam abu hanifa authentically This is the clearly transmitted opinion of Imam Abu Hanifa r.a. how can this be clear opinion of imam abu hanifa when these above books have no authentic isnaad reaching imam abu hanifa. The quotation from the Muwatta of Imam Muhammad regarding the 11 raka`at refers to the Tahajjud Salah of Rasululullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). see now the real game they are playing is of words that taraweeh and tahajjud are two different prayers and akhi salafist our scholars have made it clear that it is the same prayer and the hadeeth of A'isha (RA) in bhukari proves it. Furthermore Imam Muhammad's narrating this hadith does not indicate that this was the position of Imam Abu Hanifa (i.e. Tarawih being 8 raka`at) it does indicate that imam abu hanifa was on the opinion of 8 rak'at, check it out. Imam Muhammad includes a chapter in al Muwatta (p.110), stating: "Chapter: Establishing the Night Prayer in the month of Ramadhan, and the virtues contained in it." Under this chapter he relates four ahadith. The first, third and fourth narrations do not make mention of any specified number of rakats for the Tarawih Prayer, rather they just mention the excellence of establishing Prayer in congregation and the excellence of the night Prayer in Ramadhan. However, in the second narration eleven rakts is mentioned. Then Imam Muhammad said (p.111): "And we take all of this." ... Thus, he has shown that his madhhab is eleven rakts, and this can only be the madhhab of Imam Abu Hanifa< In fact in the fourth hadith of the same chapter Imam Muhammad narrates the incident of Hadrat Umar's gathering the people together for the tarawih salah. Yes Umar (RA) did gather people behind 1 imam but for 20 nights not raka'at all the hadeeth with 20 rak'at are weak. abu alaqama has given the daleel in this very same link.

He thereafter states that: We accept all of this because the Muslims have agreed on this. He then quotes the hadith: "What the Muslims approve of is approved of by Allah" indicating clearly that the practice of Hadrat Umar r.a. is the accepted position in the Hanafi school. It is ludicrous to claim that the Hanafi view is that of 8 raka`at. It is reported in many Ahadith that the practice of the Muslims in the time of Hadrat Umar r.a and subsequent to him was to offer 20 raka`at of tarawih. And Allaah knows best. I want hanafi deobandis and barelwis to come and talk to us about aqeedah first, fiqh issues are secondary, if your aqeedah is currupt then all your deeds are in vain regardless wether you pray 20 rak'at or 11, if you do rafal yadain or you dont all this will be lost it will be in vain if you believe in your pirs to be muskil kasha and believe in wahadatal wajood ( that Allaah and the creation are one) Astaghfirullah.