Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu Part 1: Proof of doing Rafa Yadain

The Prophet ( ) used to raise his hands for takbeerat alihram (the takbeer at the beginning of the prayer), sometimes whilst saying the takbeer, sometimes after it and sometimes before. (al-Bukhari and al-Nisaai) When he had finished reciting Quran, he would pause for a moment then raise his hands, say takbeer and do rukoo. (Sifat Salaat al-Nabi () , p. 128). He used to raise his hands when he stood up from rukoo (reported by alBukhari and Muslim), and this raising of the hands is mutawaatir (reported by so many to so many that it is inconceivable that they could all have agreed on a lie). It is the opinion of the majority of scholars and of some of the Hanafis. (Sifat Salaat al-Nabi ( ) by al-Albani, p. 136). Narrated by al-Bukhari (no.735) and Muslim (no.390) from Abdullah ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), who said that the Messenger of Allah ( ) used to raise his hands to shoulder level when he started to pray, when he said Allahu akbar before bowing in rukoo, and when he raised his head from rukoo. What The Scholars Have Said: The majority of scholars followed this hadeeth and said that it is mustahabb for the worshipper to raise his hands at the points mentioned in the hadeeth. Imaam al-Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him) wrote a separate book on this issue which he called Juz fi Raf al-Yadayn (Section on Raising the Hands) which can be read from here in English.

(http://www.docstoc.com/docs/75313100/Juz-Rafa-Yadain-in-English)

in which he proved that the hands should be raised at these two points on the prayer, and hestrongly denounced those who go against that.

He narrated that al-Hasan al-Basri said: The Companions of the Messenger of Allah ( ) used to raise their hands during prayer when they bowed and when they stood up (from bowing).

Al-Bukhari said, Al-Hasan did not exclude any of the Sahaba from that, and it was not proven that any one among the Sahaba did not raise his hands.

Imaam al-Bukhari said: Al-Hasan and Humayd ibn Hilaal said: The Companions of the Messenger of Allah ( ) all used to raise their hands, without exception. (Juz raf al-yadayn, p. 26, maa jila al-aynayn).

Ibn al-Qayyim said: Look at the practice at the time of the Prophet ( ), and the Sahaba after him. They used to raise their hands in prayer when doing rukoo, and when standing up again. And in the time of the Sahaba, if Abdullah ibn Umar saw someone not raising his hands in prayer, he would throw a stone at him. (Ilaam al-Muwaqqieen, 2/376).

Az-ZaylaI (who was a Hanafi Scholar) said: in Nasb ar-Rayah, quoting from Juz Rafi-l-Yadayn of al-Bukhari, ibn al-Mubarak used to raise his hands and he is the most knowledgeable of the people of his time as far as is known.

Ibn al-Mubarak said, I prayed beside Numan (Abu Haneefahs real name) and I raised my hands so he said to me, I fear that you are trying to fly. I replied to him saying, if I did not try to fly at the first [raising] then I was not trying to fly at the second. (Imam Abu Hanifah got speechless) al -Waki said, may Allah have mercy upon ibn al-Mubarak, he used to have his answers ready.

Abu Eesa [at-Tirmidhi] said; al-Fadl bin as-Sabbah al-Baghdadi narrated to us; Sufyan bin Uyaynah narrated to us; az-Zuhr narrated to us; the likes of the hadeeth of ibn Umar (Bukhari no.735) with this isnad

Abu Eesa said: the hadeeth of ibn Umar (Sahih Bukhari #735 #736 #737 #738 #739 ) is hasan sahih and some of the People of Knowledge from the Companions of the Prophet ( ) held this view [stated in the hadth]. From amongst them were:

Abdullah bin Umar Jabir bin Abdullah Abu Hurayrah Anas bin Maalik

Abdullah ibn Abbas Abdullah bin Zubair Maalik bin al-Huwairath Wail bin Hujr Abu Humaid as-Saaidi Abu Qatadah Sahl bin Sa'd Abu Aseed as-Saaidi Muhammad bin Muslimah Abu Bakr Siddique Umar bin Khattab Ali bin Abi Taalib Abu Moosa al-Asha'ri, and others. (May Allah be pleased with them all)

From amongst the Tabieen were:

Hasan al-Basri Ata (the teacher of Imam Abu Hanifah) Tawus Mujahid Nafi Salim bin Abdullah

Said bin Jubair Qaasim bin Muhammad Umar bin Abdul Azeez Nu'man bin Abi Ayyash Ibn Sireen Makhool Abdullah bin Dinaar Ubaidullah bin Umar Al-Hasan bin Muslim Qais bin Sa'd and others (May Allah have Mercy on them all) And of this opinion from the Imams, and Mujtahideen were:

Maalik bin Anas Mamar Awzaai Sufyan ibn Uyaynah Abdullah Ibn Mubarak ash-Shafiee Ahmad bin Hanbal Ali bin al-Hasan Abdullah bin Uthman

Yahya bin Yahya Esa bin Moosa Ka'b bin Sa'eed Muhammad bin Salaam Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Musnadi Abdullah bin al-Zubair Ali bin Abdullah al-Madini Yahya bin Ma'een Ishaaq bin Raahwaih Ibn Hibban Ibn Khuzaymah Bukhari Muslim Abu Dawud and countless others. (May Allah have mercy on all of them)

Ibn Taymiyyah Said: If a man is following Abu Haneefah or Maalik or alShafiee or Ahmad (Ibn Hanbal), and he sees that the view of another madhhab concerning a given matter is stronger, and he follows that, then he has done well, and that does not detract from his religious commitment or good character. There is no scholarly dispute on this point. Rather this is more in accordance with the truth and is more beloved by Allah and His Messenger.

(Said by Shaykh al-Islam may Allah have mercy on him in al-Fataawa, 22/247).

Concearning The Hanafis of The Indian Sub Continent (note: There is a story which is widespread among the Hanafis in the Indian sub-continent that the Prophet ( ) only raised his hand because the people praying behind him ( ) were munafiqs who had idols under their arms, as strange as it sounds majority of the Hanafis of India, Pakistan & Bangladesh still believe this story, obviously this story is fabricated and scholars have debated with Deobandi Maulanas who admitted they dont have any evidence as to where this story came from)

We do not know whether the ahaadeeth about raising the hands reached Abu Haneefah (may Allah have mercy on him) or not, but they did reach his followers. But they did not follow them because they had other ahaadeeth and reports which said that the hands should not be raised except when saying Allahu akbar at the beginning of the prayer.

These ahaadeeth include the following:

1) The hadeeth narrated by Abu Dawood (749) from al-Baraa ibn Aazib, which says that the Messenger of Allah ( ) used to raise his hands almost to his ears when he started to pray, then he did not repeat (this action).

2) The hadeeth narrated by Abu Dawood (748) from Abdullah ibn Masud (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: Shall I not lead you in pra yer as the Messenger of Allah ( ) did? Then he prayed and he only raised his hands once. See Nasb al-Raayah by al-Zaylai, 1/393-407.

But these ahaadeeth were classed as daeef (weak) by overwhelming majority of the Imams of hadeeth. The hadeeth of al-Baraa (Abu Dawud no.749) was classed as daeef by Sufyaan ibn Uyaynah, al-Shaafiee, al-Humaydi the shaykh of al-Bukhari, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Yahya ibn Maeen, al-Daarimi, alBukhari, and others. The hadeeth of Ibn Masud (Abu Dawud no.748) was classed as daeef by Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Yahya bin Adham, Abu Dawood, al-Bukhari, al-Bayhaqi, Ibn Hibban, al-Daaraqutni and others. Similarly, the reports which were narrated from some of the Sahaba about not raising the hands are all daeef. Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak said: the hadeeth of the one who raises his hands is established, and he mentioned the hadeeth of Salim (Ibn Abdullah) from his father (Ibn Umar), and the hadeeth of ibn Masud is not established

We have quoted above the words of al-Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him): it was not proven that any one among the Sahaba did not raise his hands. See Talkhees al-Habeer by al-Haafiz ibn Hajar, 1/221-223.

Once it is proven that these ahaadeeth and reports which say that the hands should not be raised are weak, then the ahaadeeth which say that the hands should be raised remain strong with no opposing reports.

Hence the believer should not fail to raise his hands at the points in prayer described in the Sunnah. He should strive to make his prayer like the prayer of the Prophet () who said, Pray as you have seen me praying. (Narrated by al-Bukhari, 631). Hence Ali ibn al-Madeeni, the Shaykh of al-Bukhari, said: It is the duty of the Muslims to raise their hands when they bow in rukoo and when they stand up from rukoo. Al-Bukhari said: Ali was the most knowledgeable of the people of his time. So what is proven in the Sunnah with regard to raising the hands in prayer is that they should be raised at four points in the prayer: 1.when pronouncing takbeerat al-ihraam, 2.when going for rukoo, 3.when standing up from rukoo, 4.after standing up from the first tashahhud. And Allah knows best.

(Article compiled from the works of Shaykh Muhammad al-Munajjid & Abu alAla Muhammad al-Mubarakpuri)

Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 2---Hadith of Abdullah bin Masood on rafa yadain

" :

: "

From Sufyn; from Asim bin Kulayb; from Abur-Rahmn ibn al-Aswad; from Alqama who said, ibn Masd said, Shall I not pray with you the prayer of the Messenger of Allh (SAW) so he prayed and he did not raise his hands except the first time. [Sunan Tirmidhi 59/1, H. 257 and said it is Hasan, also by Ibn Hazam in alMuhalla 87, 88/4, and said it is Sahih] Tahqeeq: This hadith, due to a very grave defect, is Malool. And its Sanad and Matan both areDaeef. The followng Imams have declared it to be Daeef and Malool: First Answer: The majority of Muhadditheen have declared this hadith to be Daeef and Malool: 1. Shaikhul Islam, the Mujahid, and the trsutworthy, Abdullah bin al-

Mubarak said:

The Hadith of Ibn Masood is not established. [Sunan Tirmidhi 59/1] Some people from the modern era, have tried to remove this Jarh of Imam Ibn alMubarak from this Hadith, but the following Imams, and Muhadditheen have attributed this jarah on this hadith to Imam Ibn al-Mubarak:

Tirmidhi [Sunan 59/1] Ibn al-Jawzi. [Al-Tahqeeq 278/1] Ibn Abdul Hadi. [Al-Tanqeeh 278/1] Nawawi. [Al-Majmoo Sharh al-Madhab 403/3] Ibn Qudamah. [Al-Mughni Vol 1, Pg 295] Ibn Hajr. [Al-Talkhis al-Khabir 222/1] Al-Shawkani. [Nail al-Awtaar 80/2] Al-Baghwi. [Sharh as-Sunnah 25/3] Baihaqi. [Al-Sunan al-Kubra 79/2] No Imam of Hadith has ever said that this Jarh is not related to the Hadith of Ibn Masood.

2.

Al-Imam al-Shafaee has refuted all the ahadeeth of not doing rafa yadain by

saying that they are not established. [See: Kitab al-Umm Vol 7, Pg 201] 3. 32] 4. Imam Abu Haatim ar-Raazi said: "this is a mistake, and it is said the Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal has criticized this Hadith. [See: Juz Rafa Yadain:

mistake is from ath-Thawri for a group of people have narrated from 'Asim and all of them have said, "that the Prophet (SAW) stood in prayer and he

raised his hands, then he performed the ruku' and placed his hands together between his knees." Not one of them narrates what ath-Thawri reports." [Illal al-Hadith 96/1] 5. Imam Ad-Daruqutni said, 'it is not established'. [See: al-Illal by Daraqutni

Vol 5, Pg 73] 6. Imam Ibn Hibban, in his Kitaab al-Salaah, said: 'this is the best narration

that the people of Kufah narrate with regards to negating raising the hands in prayer at the ruku' and at rising from it. In reality it is the weakest of things to depend on because it has defects that invalidate it' [Al-Talkhis al-Khabir 222/1] 7. Imam Abu Dawud said: This Hadith is a summary of a long hadith, and it is not sahih with these words. [Sunan Abu Dawud, Vol 1, Pg 478] Imam Abu Dawud and the Hadith of Ibn Masood Some people in the 14th century have refused from the Jarah of Imam Abu Dawud on this Hadith, and by collecting some mistakes of the author of Mishkat, they have decided that this Jarah from Imam Abu Dawud is his Wahem. Though, the following Scholars have attributed this saying to Imam Abu Dawud:

Ibn al-Jawzi. [Al-Tahqeeq fi Ikhtilaaf al-Hadith 278/1] Ibn Abdul Bar al-Andalusi. [Al-Tanqeeh 278/1] Ibn al-Mulqan. [Al-Badar al-Muneer, Vol3, Pg 493] Ibn al-Qattan al-Faasi. [Bayaan al-Wahem wal aihaam fi kitaab al-ahkaam 365/3] Shams ul-Haqq Azeem Abadi. [Awn al-Mabood Vol 3, Pg 449]

So we came to know that this saying is of Imam Abu Dawud, and is related to this Hadith. 8. Yahya bin Aadam (The teacher of Imam Ahmed) [Juz rafa yadain 32] And 9. Abu Bakr Ahmed bin Umer al-Bazzar have criticized this Hadith. [Al-

Baher al-Zarkhar Vol 5, Pg 47] 10. Muhammad bin Wadaah has declared all the ahadith of not doing rafa yadain to be Daeef.[Al-Tamheed 220/9] 11. Imam Bukhari has declared this Hadith to be Daeef. [See: Juz Rafa Yadain 32, and Talkhis al-Kahbir] 12. Zailaee (Hanafi) narrated from Ibn al-Qattan al-Faasi that, he declared this addition (of not doing rafa yadain again) to be a Mistake. [Nasb ur-Rayaa 395/1] 13. Abdul Haqq al-Ashbaili said: It is not sahih. [Al-Ahkaam al-Wasta Vol 1, Pg 367] 14. Ibn al-Mulqan has declared it Daeef. [Al-Badar al-Muneer 492/3] 15. Al-Haakim declared it Daeef. [Al-Khalafiyat by Baihaqi with reference to Badar al-Muneer 493/3] 16. Imam al-Nawawi said: All the scholars are agreed upon its weakness [AlKhulasa al-Ahkaam 354/1] 17. Imam Al-Daarimi has declared it Daeef. [Tahdheeb al-Sunan 449/2] (I didnt find this reference with Sahih Sanad!) 18. Al-Baihaqi declared it Daeef. [Tahdheeb al-Sunan 449/2] (This reference was also not found with Sahih Isnad)

19. Muhammad bin Nasr al-Marwazi has declared this Hadith to be Daeef. [Nasb ur-Rayaa 395/1] 20. Ibn Qudamah said: It is Daeef. [Al-Mughni Vol 1, Pg 295] They all were the great and famous scholars of the Muslim nation. Their unification on declaring this hadith to be Daeef and malool is far more superior to the authentication of Tirmidhi and Ibn Hazam. Therefore, this Hadith, without any doubt, is Daeef. If the expert scholars of the defects of Hadith, were to declare the hadith of a trustworthy narrator to be Daeef, even then their tahqeeq will be accepted, because they are the experts in finding out the defects of Hadith, and their research on ahadith is evidence for us. Second Answer: This (Hadith) is depended upon Sufyaan ath-Thawri as it is proven from its Takhreej. Sufyan Ath-Thawri besides being a Trustworthy, Memorizer of Hadith, and Pious, He was also a Mudallis. [See: Taqreeb at-Tahdheeb 2445] The following Scholars have declared him to be Mudallis: 1. Imam Yahya bin Saeed al-Qattan. [Kitaab al-Illal wa marifat al-rijal

207/1] 2. Imam Bukhari. [Al-Illal al-Kabeer by Tirmidhi 966/2] 3. Yahya bin Maeen. [Al-Jarah wal Tadeel 225/4] 4. Abu Mahmood al-Maqdasi. [Qasidah fil Mudalliseen Pg 47] 5. Ibn al-Tarkamani Hanafi. [Al-Jawahir al-Naqi Vol 8, Pg 262]

6. Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani. [Tabaqaat al-Mudalliseen Pg 32] 7. Al-Dhahabi. [Seer Alam al-Nabula 242/7]

Hafidh Dhahabi said in Mizaan al-Itidaal (169/2) that: And said: [Seer Alam al-Nabula 242/7] And said: [Same: 274/7] From this witness of Hafidh Dhahabi, we came to know that Sufyan used to do Tadlees from Daeef narrators. Those who do Tadlees from Dufa, their narrations narrated by AN are Daeef. Abu Bakr al-Seerfi said in Kitaab Al-Dalaail that: Every narrator whose Tadlees gets proven from Daeef narrators, then his narrations will not be accepted until he says: Haddathani, or Samitu. Meaning when he affirms his hearing only then his narration will be accepted. [See: Al-Nakt by al-Zarkashi Pg 184] 8. Salaah ud-Deen al-Alaai said in Jaami al-Tahseel fi Ahkaam al-Maraseel (Pg 99) that: Sufyan ath-Thawri used to do Tadlees with those Majhul people who were not known 9. Hafidh Ibn Rajab (Sharh Illal al-Tirmidhi 358/1) said: Sufyaan ath-Thawri

and others used to do tadlees even with those whom they never heard.

10. Abu Naeem al-Fadal bin Dukain al-Kufi. [Tarikh abu Zurah al-Dimashqi 1193] 11. Abu Aasim al-Dahaak bin Makhlad al-Nabeel. [Sunan ad-Daraqutni 201/3] 12. Ali bin Abdullah al-Madini. [Al-Kifayaa by al-Khateeb Pg 362] 13. Abu Zura ibn al-Iraaqi, [Kitaab al-Mudalliseen: 21] 14. Haakim. [Marifat Uloom al-Hadith 106] 15. Al-Aini Hanafi. [Umdatul Qari Vol3, Pg 112] 16. Al-Karmani. [Sharh Sahih Bukhari 62/3] 17. Ibn Hibaan. [Al-Ihsaan 61/1] 18. Al-Suyooti. [Asmaa min arfa bil-Tadlees: 24] 19. Al-Halabi. [Al-Tabiyeen fi asma al-Mudalliseen: 27] 20. Qastalani said: Sufyan ath-Thawri is a Mudallis, and the An-ana of Mudallis is not acceptable, unless if its affirmation gets proven. [Irshad al-Saari Sharh Sahih Bukhari Vol1, Pg 286]

Sarfaraz Safdar Deobandi writes in his book Ahsan ul-Kalaam that: Abu Qilaba was Siqqah but was a Mudallis.Abu Qilbah also used to do Tadlees with those who he met and those who he didnt meet. [Vol2, Pg 111]

If, from the saying of Hafidh Dhahabi: Abu Qilaba can be called a Mudallis, then why cant Sufyan be called a Mudallis from the saying of Ibn Rajab?

Though Abu Qilaaba was not a Mudallis. Abu Haatim al-Raazi has refuted the accusation of Tadlees on him. (See: Al-Jarah wal Tadeel 8/5)

The authentication of the ahadith of Abu Qilabah which are narrated by AN has been done by many scholars including: Bukhari, Mislim, and Dhahabi etc.

How can a saying of later (Mutakhir) scholar be accepted in front of the saying of Former (Mutaqaddim) scholars? Did any Muhaddith ever even say that Abu Qilabah used to do tadlees with weak narrators?

Rejecting the An-ana of Abu Qilabah who was not a Mudallis, and accepting the AN-ana of Sufyan, who used to do tadlees with Dufa, is similar to the murder of Justice. Allah will definitely ask the Zaalimoon. No one will be able to help them on that day.

Note: Allamah Muhammad Naasir ud-Deen Albani has declared a sanad, Daeef due to the AN-ana of Abu Qilabah. [Haashiya Sahih Ibn Khuzaimah Vol 3, Pg 268]

Though Abu Qilabah being a Mudallis is not correct, those who declared him to be Mudallis after many hundred years, have added him in the First Tabqa (those Mudalliseen whose Tadlees is not harmful). His tadlees with Dufa is also not proven. Allamah Albani has declared his ahadith to be daeef, but he has declared

the ahadith of Sufyan, who used to do tadlees with Dufa, to be Sahih in Taliqaat of Mishkat.

We have explained with proofs that this authentication of Allamah Albani is wrong, and is against the principles of Muhadditheen, therefore it is rejectable.

The Dhahabi of this era, Shaikh Abdur-Rehmaan Al-Muallami Al-Yamani, has also declared this hadith to be daeef due to the AN-ana of Sufyaan. [AlTankeel bima fi Taneeb al-Kawthari mn al-abateel 2, Pg: 20]

The summary is that, Sufyan was a Mudallis, and according to the tahqeeq of Sarfaraz Khan Safdar, He was a very extreme Mudallis. Therefore, his MuAN-an ahadith are Daeef in the absence of Mutabiat.

The AN-ana of a Mudallis:

Imam Ibn al-Salah said: The ruling concerning such narrators is that, the only hadith that will be accepted from them is where they affirm their hearing. Imam Shafaee has said this thing for every person, who commits Tadlees even once. [Muqaddimah Ibn al-Salah, Pg 99]

Imam Yahya bin Maeen said: The Mudallis is not a proof in his Tadlees. (al-Kifaayah (p.362) and Sharh Ellal at-Tirmidhee (1/353) and (1/357358)

Therefore, this mu-AN-an narration of Sufyan ath-Thawri (Rahimahullah) (who used to do tadlees from Dufa and Majaheel) is Daeef. In presence of the Sahih ahadith, the existance or non-existance of Daeef hadith is equal.

Discussion on the Third Tabqa (Tabqa Thania):

From the above mentioned details, it is proven that Sufyan ath-Thawri was a very strong Mudallis. Therefore, mentioning him in the second level of Mudalliseen is wrong, but Hafidh Ibn Hajr has added him in the second level. [Tabqaat alMudalliseen Pg 32]

Before Hafidh Ibn Hajr, Imam Haakim al-Nisaburi, has added Sufyaan in the third level of Mudalliseen. [Marifat Uloom al-Hadith, Pg 106]

Imam Haakim was more expert and superior than Hafidh Ibn Hajr. In light of the following proofs, Imam Haakims saying is correct, and Hafidh Ibn Hajrs saying is wrong.

Benefit # 1: Sufyan ath-Thawri did not used to do tadlees from the following Shuyookh:

Habeeb bin Abi Thabit, Salamah bin Kuhail, and Mansoor etc. [Al-Illal al-Kabeer by al-Tirmidhi 966/2]

Benefit # 2: The narration of Yahya bin Saeed al-Qattan from Sufyan ath-Thawri is with the affirmation of hearing. [See: Kitab al-Illal wa Marifat ur-Rijaal 207/1]

Benefit # 3: If a reliable Mutabiat of a Mudallis is found then his narration becomes strong. In this narration, Sufyan Ath-Thawri is alone in narrating from Aasim bin Kulaib, and it has no reliable Mutabiat. Therefoe, its sanad is Daeef.

Third Answer:

There is no mention of the rafa yadain of ruku in this narration of Sufyan ath Thawri, therefore, this narration is general. If it is considered general then even the opposers of rafa yadain do not follow this Hadith.

They raise their hands in Witr after the first Takbeer (while this hadith only says to raise the hands in the first takbeer)

They raise their hands after the first takbeer in the prayers of Eidain. If the exception of Witr and Eidain is proven from other ahadith, then the exception of rafa yadain before and after ruku is also proven from other ahadith.

It is essential for those who take evidence from this hadith, that first they try to save the rafa yadain of witr and eidain from the generality of this hadith.

Note: The opposition of the rafa yadain of before and after ruku is not proven from any Sahih hadith. The ahadith of the opposers are Baatil, Daeef, and Mardood. [For more details see the book of Hafidh Ibn al-Qayyim, Manar al-Maneef pg 137]

Forth Answer:

As it is stated above, that this hadith doesnt mention about the rafa yadain of before and after ruku, Imam Abu Dawud has brought this hadith under the chapter heading:

(Chapter of those who did not mention about the rafa yadain in ruku)

And it is known even to common students that, (after mentioning the proof of a thing) mentioning of anything afterwards, is not a proof of the prohibition of what is mentioned before.

Ibn al-Tarkamani Hanafi said: The one who does not mention about a thing is not a Hujjah on one who mentions it. [Al-Johar al-Naqi Vol 4, Pg 317]

The famous Muhaddith Hafidh Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani said:

[Al-Darayah Vol 1, Pg 225]

Therefore, even with this aformementioned Daeef hadith of Sufyan ath-Thawri, the opposition of rafa yadain does not get proven.

Fifth Answer:

There is negation in the Hadith of Sufyan, while in the Mutawaatir ahadith of Sahihain, there is confirmation, and it is known even to ordinary students that confirmation is precedent over negation.

Imam Nawawi said: Acting upon the (sahih) ahadith of rafa yadain is superior, because they contain the confirmation, while this (the hadith of Sufyan) is negation. Thus confirmation will take precedence over negation due to it being excessive in knowledge. [Al-Majmoo Sharh Madhab 403/3]

Hanafis say that even Karkhi Hanafi (d. 317) has declared the confirmation (of something) to be superior to the negation, to act upon. [See: Noor ul-Anwaar: Pg 197] For more details see: Nasb ur-Rayaa (359/1), and Fathul Bari (333/1)

Sixth Answer:

Some scholars have said that this hadith means that Ibn Masood raised his hands only once with the First Takbeer, not again and again. (Meaning the rafa yadain of first takbeer was done only once by him). [See: Mishkaat alMasaabih Pg 77, H. 809]

Imam Nawawi said: Our companions have said that if this hadith was authentic, then its meaning would be that, he did not used to do rafa yadain again and again, in thebeginning of the prayer and in the beginning of other rakahs. (It does not have to do anything with the rafa yadain of ruku), from this Taweel, all the ahadeeth will be followed. [Al-Majmoo 403/3]

Seventh Answer:

Even if this Hadith, for the sake of argument, were to be authentic, then still it would be consideredabrogated (Mansookh).

Imam Ahmed bin Al-Husain al-Baihaqi said: Its possible that in the beginning, Tark-e-Rafa Yadain was present when the permissiblity of rafa yadain was not there, and after that it got abrogated, and the rafa yadain of before and after ruku became the sunnah, and these two things remained the same with Ibn Masood. [Marifat al-Sunan wal Athaar Vol 1, Pg 220]

Note: This is a retaliatory (Ilzaami) answer; otherwise the reality is that this hadith is not proven from Ibn Masood.

Lastly:

Hafidh Ibn Hazam writes about this Hadith of Ibn Masood that: If this hadith was not there, then the rafa yadain would have been obligatory with every bending, rising, Takbeer, and Tamheed. [Al-Muhalla Vol 4, 88]

In the light of the above details, the hadith of Ibn Masood presented by Ibn Hazam, due to several defects, is proven to be Daeef.

Therefore, let the people decide (who use his saying against this hadith) , what is the position of rafa yadain according to Ibn Hazam? Doesnt it become obligatory according to him?

Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 3---Hadith of Baraa bin Aazib "

Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad, narrated from Ibn Abi Laila, from Al-Baraa that, "I saw the Messenger of Allah (SAW) when he started the prayer, raised his hands to near his ears, then he did not repeat that." [Maani al-Athaar by Al-Tahawi, and Sunan abu Dawud 749]

First Answer:

This Hadith is depended upon the narrator, Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad Al-Qarshi AlHaashmi, who was a Daeef and Shiaa narrator.

Introduction of Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad:

Criticizers:

1: Shubah said: [Ref: Al-Jarah wal Tadeel 265/9]

2: Abu Hatim al-Razi said: He is not the memorizer, He is not strong [Ref: Same as above]

3: Yahya bin Maeen said: : : His ahadith are not evidence, He is not strong, Daeef in Hadith. [Ref: Same, Al-Kamil la Ibn Adi (2729/7)]

4: Abu Zurah said: Lenient, Write his ahadith, and he is not Hujja [ref: Al-Jarah wal Tadeel]

5: Ibn al-Mubarak said: He is discarded [Al-Dufa al-Kabeer lil Ukaili 380/]

6: Wakee said: He is nothing [Same Ref]

7: Abu Usamah said: [Same Ref]

8: Al-Ukaili: Mentioned him in Al-Dufa [Same Ref]

9: Al-Nisai said: He is nothing [Al-Dufa wal Matrokeen 651]

10: Al-Juzjani said: [Ahwaal ar-Rijaal 135]

11: Ahmed bin Hanbal said: [Kitaab al-Illal wa marifat ar-rijaal 33/2]

12: Ibn Adi said: [Al-Kaamil la Ibn Adi (2730/7)]

13: Ibn Hazam said: Daeef [Al-Muhalla (484/7)]

14: Al-Baihaqi said: Not strong [Al-Kubra (26/2)]

15: Al-Haithami said: Daeef [Al-Majma al-Zawaid (71/5)]

16: Ibn Kathir said:

Daeef [Tafsir Ibn Kathir (112/4, 98/2)]

17: Ibn al-Tarkamani (Hanafi) said: Weakened [Al-Johar al-Naqi 208/2]

18: Abu Dawud said: [Tahdheeb al-Kamal lil Mizzi (1534/3)]

19: Ibn Qaai said: Daeef [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb (288/11)]

20: Al-Haakim abu Ahmed said: He is not strong [Same: Pg 289]

21: Al-Barwaiji said: He is not strong [Same]

22: Ibn Khuzaymah said: [Same]

23: Al-Daraqutni said: [Same]

24: Ibn al-Fudail said: He is the big Imam of Shiaas [Same]

25: Ibn Hajr said:

[Taqreeb at-Tahdheeb]

26: Al-Dhahabi said: Famous Weak memorizor [Al-Mughni fi Al-Dufa 7101]

27: Ibn al-Madini said: He weakened him [Al-Dufa lil Ukaili 380/4]

28: Sufyan bin Uyainah said: ( ) [Al-Imam al-Shafaee Vol1, Pg 104]

29: Ibn Hibban said: Mentioned him in al-Dufa [Al-Majroheen, Vol 3, Pg 99]

30: Al-Hakim Abu Abdullah said:

[Nasb ur-Rayaa, Vol 1, Pg 402]

Admirers:

1. Ibn Shaheen: Mentioned him in Al-Thiqaat [Al-Thiqaat 1561]

2. Ahmed Saalih said: [Thiqaat Ibn Shaheen] (This saying is without any sanad so it is not acceptable)

3. Al-Ijli said: [Marifat al-Thiqaat 2019]

4. Yaqoob bin Sufyan said: [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb]

5. Ibn Sad said: [Tabqaat al-Kubra 340/6]

We came to know that according to the Majority of Scholars, Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad al-Haashmi is Daeef. The reason of his weakness is his weak memorization, and excessive mistakes. The scholars who declared him to be Siqqah or Suduq, their saying, due to going against the Majority, is rejected.

Imam Busairi said about Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad: The Jumhoor has declared him to be Daeef. [Zawaid Ibn Maja 2116]

Hafidh Ibn Hajr said: And Jumhoor has declared his Hadith to be Daeef. [Hadi al-Sari Pg 459]

Ashraf Ali Thanwi Deobandi said about the Hadith of Sunan Abu Dawud that: It is Daeef due to the weakness of Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad. [Nashar alTayyib fi Zikr al-Nabi Al-Habeeb Pg 244]

Note: All the Imams of Hadith have affirmed that: Yazeed has narrated this hadith after his deterioration, as it is coming ahead.

Second Answer:

Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad has narrated this Hadith after his Deterioration.

Sufyaan bin Uyainah said: Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad narrated a Hadith to us in Makkah:

" [Kitaab al-Majroheen 100/3]

There is no mentioning of not doing rafa yadain in this ancient hadith. Sufyan Bin Uyainah said: Then I came to Kufa and met Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad. I heard him narrating this Hadith, and he added the phrase of (did not repeat it) in it. I think Kufis had suggested him, meaning they inculcated these words on his tongue.[Kitab al-Umm Vol 1, Pg 104]

Imam Daraqutni also said that at the end of his age, Yazeed added these words by accpeting the suggestions. [Sunan Al-Daraqutni 294/1]

Hafidh Ibn Hibban said: Kufis have presented this Hadith for the negation of the rafa yadain of before and after ruku, and the addition of ( did not repeat it) was not present in this Hadith. Kufis inculcated these words on Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad, at the end of his age, as a suggestion. Thus Yazeed accepted this suggestion, as Sufyaan bin Uyainah has described that: he had seen him narrating this hadith without these words in Makkah, and the one whose ploy is knowledge; they never present such ahadith as evidence. [AlMajroheen Vol 3, Pg 100]

From these affirmations of Muhadditheen, we came to know that Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad Al-Kufi Al-Shiai used to narrate this hadith without the words did not repeat it in the beginning era of his age, later when his Hafdha got deteriorated due to his oldness, he added these words of not doing it, by accepting the suggestion of his friends and people. Therefore, taking evidence from this hadith is not permissible.

Third Answer:

Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad is a Mudallis.

See: [Jaami al-Tahseel fi ahkaam al-Maraseel Pg 112, Uloom al-Hadith by AlHaakim Pg 105, Qaseeda fil Mudalliseen By Mahmood al-Maqdasi # 4, Risala al-

Suooti fil Midalliseen 67, Abu Zura Ibn al-Iraqi 71, Dhahabi in Arjozat, and Tabqat al-Mudalliseen by Ibn Hajr (Third Tbaqa 3/112)]

Imam Daraqutni and Haakim etc have declared him Mudallis.

All the ahadith narrated by Yazeed on not doing rafa yadain (meaning his those ahadith which mention the phrase, did not repeat it do not contain his affirmation of hearing.

Therefore, we came to know that, this narration is Daeef due to the AN-ana of Yazeed Mudallis and the AN-ana of a Mudallis is contrariant to the strongness of a Hadith.

Forth Answer:

There is a consesus of Muhadditheen that this hadith is Daeef. And the phrase he did not repeat it are the addition of Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad.

Ibn al-Mulqan said: This hadith is Daeef, with the consesus of the Huffaz of Hadith. [Al-Badar al-Muneer 487/3]

The following Muhadditheen have confirmed the weakness of this hadih:

Sufyan bin Uyainah Al-Shafaee Al-Humaidi Ahmed bin Hanbal Yahya bin Maeen Ad-Daarimi Al-Bukhari Ibn Abdul Barr Al-Baihaqi Ibn al-Jawzi Not a single Imam or Muhaddith has ever authenticated this hadith.

Fifth Answer:

There is the ijma of Imams and Muhadditheen on the saying that: the phrase did not repeat it in this hadith is Mudraj. [Mudraj (def): an addition to the hadith interpolated by one of its narrators, in this case Yazid, and therefore not from the words or actions of the Prophet (SAW).]

Hafidh Ibn Hajr said: There is the ijma of Huffaz of Hadith that the phrase did not repeat it in this hadith is the Mudraj of Yazeed. Shubah, Thawri,

Khalid and Zuhair have narrated it from him without this phrase. [Al-Talkhis al-Khabir 221/2]

Also see: Al-Mudraj ilal Mudraj [By Al-Suyooti, Pg 19, H 4]

Sixth Answer:

See the 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th answer to the hadith of Ibn Masood again. Those arguments are also valid on this hadith.

The summary is that this hadith is Daeef, and is not authentic with this wording.

Note: Muhammad bin Abi Laila has narrated this hadith with the sanad of:

[Sunan Abu Dawud 479/1, H. 752]

Imam Abu Dawud said: This Hadith is not Sahih.

The grave deffect in this hadith is that, Muhammad bin Abi Laila had heard this hadith from Yazeed bin Abi Laila.

Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal has narrated from Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Numair that, I saw in the book of Ibn Abi Laila, he was narrating from Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad. [Kitaab al-Illal by Ahmed Vol 1, Pg 43]

Moreover, Muhammad bin Abi Laila, himself is Daeef. In fact Tahawi Hanafi has also declared him to be Mudtarib ul-Hifdh. [Mushkil al-Athaar 226/3]

Zailaee said: Daeef [Nas ur-Rayaa 318/1]

Anwar Shah Kashmiri said: He is Daeef according to me, as is said by the Jumhoor of Muhadditheen. [Faidh ul-Bari 168/3]

Therefore, this Mutabiat is Mardood. Its real dependency is on the teacher of Muhammad bin Abi Laila, Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad al-Kufi who is Daeef, and Shiaa.

Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 4----Hadith of Jaabir bin Samurah

Hadith of Jaabir bin Samurah on Rafa Yadain

Some people have presented the hadith of Jaabir bin Samurah against rafa yadain:

" : "

The Messneger of Allah (peace be upon him) came towards us and said: How is it that I see you lifting your hands like the tails of headstrong horses? Be calm in the prayer. [Sahih Muslim, Vol 1, Pg 181, H. 430]

First Answer:

Just like Quran explains itself, A Hadith explains another Hadith.

Jabir bin Samurah said:

When we said prayer with the Messenger of Allah (SAW) we said the taslim and gestured with our hands on both sides. Upon this the Messenger (SAW) said, why do I see you moving your hands as if they were tails of headstrong horses. When one of you says the taslim then he should only turn his face towards his companion and not gesture with his hands. (Sahih Muslim, Vol1, Pg 181)

It is said in another narration of Jaabir bin Samurah that:

When we said prayer with the Messenger of Allah (SAW) we said the taslim and gestured with our hands on both sides. Upon this the Messenger (SAW) said, why do I see you moving your hands as if they were tails of headstrong horses. It is enough for you that one should place ones hand on ones thigh and then pronounce taslim to the brother on ones right and left. [Sahih Muslim H. 430]

( Tails of headstrong horses), is present in all three The phrase, narrations, which is a clear evidence that all these three ahadith are talking about only one incidence, therefore; taking evidence from it, is absolutely rejected.

Second Answer:

There is a consesus of all the Muhadditheen that this hadith is related to Tashahhud. It is not in the prohibition of the rafa yadain of before and after ruku. No one amongst the Khair ul-Quroon has ever taken evidence from this Hadith against the rafa yadain.

For example: The following Muhadditheen have brought this hadith under the chapter of Salaam (at the end of prayer).

Imam Nawawi. [Sahih Muslim with the Sharh of Imam Nawawi Vol 4, Pg 152] Imam Abu Dawud. [Sunan Abu Dawud: 998, 999] Imam al-Nasai. [H. 1185] Imam Tahawi. [Sharh Maani al-Athaar, Vol1, Pg 268, 269] Baihaqi. [Al-Sunan al-Kubra Vol2, pg 181]

No Muhaddith ever brought this hadith under the chapter of prohibition of doing rafa yadain before and after ruku. From the Ijmaa of Scholars, we came to know that this hadith is related to Tashahhud, and it has nothing to do with the rafa yadain of before and after ruku.

Hafidh Ibn Hajr said: It is not right to take evidence from this Hadith (of Jaabir bin Samurah), because the first hadith is a shortened version of the second Hadtih. [Al-Talkhis al-Khabir, Vol1, Pg 221]

Imam Al-Bukhari said, the one who depends upon the hadith of Jabir bin Samurah for forbidding the raising of hands at ruku, then there is not for him a portion of knowledge, for this is well-known, having no difference of opinion over it that it was in the state of tashahhud. [At -Talkhis al-Khabir Vol1, Pg 221, Juz Rafa Yadain: 37]

Similar thing is also said by Imam Ibn Hibban that: mentioning the [full] narration is necessary to explain the previously mentioned summarised narration because the people were commanded with tranquillity in prayer at the point of indicating at the taslim, not the raising which is established at ruku.Then he narrates th e like of what Muslim narrates. [Sahih Ibn Hibban 178/3, H. 1877]

Imam Nawawi said: The one, who takes evidence from this Hadith for not doing rafa yadain before and after ruku, has done an act of major ignorance. Doing rafa yadain before and after ruku is Sahih and proven which can not be refuted.. [AlMajmoo Sharh al-Madhab Vol 3, Pg 403]

Hafidh Ibn al-Mulqan said: Taking evidence from this Hadith is a very serious and bad Jahalat, which has been added to the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), because this hadith is not narrated regarding the rafa yadain of before and after ruku, Instead they (the sahaba) used to point with their hands in Salam. There is no difference of opinion among the Ahl -e-Hadith (Scholars) regarding it. The one who has a very little relation with hadith, even he accepts this. [Al-Badar al-Muneer Vol3, Pg 485]

Third Answer:

If this hadith is on the prohibition of doing rafa yadain, then why do the opposers of rafa yadain do rafa yadain in the following places?

First Takbeer Witr Eidain

If the rafa yadain of ruku is prohibited with this hadith, then the above mentioned rafa yadain should also be prohibited.

There answer is also our answer. If the excpetions of these above rafa yadain are proven from other ahadith, then the exception of rafa yadain before and after ruku is also proven from other ahadith.

Fourth Answer:

The hadith presented by the opposers doesnt mention about the rafa yadain of ruku, while the ahadith presented by the supporters, do mention about the rafa yadain of ruku. Therefore; Mufassar will take precedence over the Mubham.

Hafidh Ibn Hajr wirtes: And Mufassar is superior over the the Mubham. [Fathul Bari 283/10].

Fifth Answer:

If the rafa yadain of this hadith is taken to be the rafa yadain of before and after ruku, then that means doing rafa yadain is a very scurrilous act; and since the rafa yadain is proven from the prophet (peace be upon him) throug mutawaatir narrations, then it would mean that Prophet (peace be upon him) acted upon a scurrilous action, which can not be expected from the prophet, so we came to know that this is not the rafa yadain of before and after ruku. Otherwise, we would have to consider the act of prophet to be scurrilous, about which we cant even think.

Note: Some people have tried to answer the first answer that this hadith is consisted of multiple incidences, this claim of theirs is wrong.

Hafidh Abdul Manan Nurpuri wrote in his letter to Abdul-Rasheed Kashmiri that:

In the narration of Jabir bin Samurah, there is not even a hint on the prohibition of the rafa yadain of ruku, even when the incidences are considered to be multiple, because in one narration, the rafa yadain of Salam not being mentioned in it, does

not necessitate that it means the rafa yadain of ruku. Therefore; making it an evidence of the prohibition of rafa yadain in ruku is nothing but ignorance.

Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 5---Hadith of Ali bin Abi Taalib Narration of Ali (radiallah anhu) on Rafa Yadain

Rafa yadain has been authentically proven from Ali (ra), before and after ruku. See the following Hadith.

. . .

It was narrated from Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allaah be pleased with him) that when the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) stood up to offer an obligatory prayer, he would say takbeer and raise his hands up to his shoulders, and he would do that when he had finished his recitation and wanted to bow, and he would do it when he rose from bowing, but he did not raise his hands at any point during his prayer when he was sitting, but when he stood up after Sajdatain (two prostrations/two Rakah) he would raise his hands likewise and say takbeer. [Ibne Majah hadeeth no: 864 chapter raising hands in rukoo and after rukoo]

Despite the above Hadith, there are some Mutassub people who try to prove that Ali (ra) did not used to do rafa yadain, by quoting some weak narrations. To do so, they have taken the help of the following Hadith.

: .

Asim narrates from his father who narrates from Ali (ra) that he used to raise his hands only in the initial takbir and did not (raise) afterwards [Nasb ur-Rayaa 406/1, Maani al-Athaar by Tahawi 225/1]

Taking this hadith as evidence is Mardood (rejected) due to two reasons. 1. Jarah Mufassar (Explained Criticism) has especially been done on this hadith.

(It is narrated that) Sufyan ath-Thawri has rejected this narration. [Juz rafa yadain Pg 47, H. 11]

Imam Uthman bin Saeed al-Daarimi has declared it Weak. (Al-Sunan alKubra 80, 81/2)

Imam Ahmed rejected this hadith. (Al-Masail al-Ahmad 243/1) Imam Bukhari declared it Daeef [Sharh Tirmidhi with reference to Jala alAinain Pg 48]

Ibn al-Mulqan said: This narration of Ali is Daeef. It is not proven authentically from him, and Imam Bukhari has (also) declared it Daeef. [AlBadar al-Muneer 499/3]

(It is narrated from Zafarani that) Imam Shafaee said: And it is not proven from Ali. [Al-Sunan al-Kubra by Baihaqi 81/2]

Therefore, this narration is Malool (Daeef). No one amongst the trustworthy scholars has authenticated it. Therefore, presenting the trustworthiness (Saqahat) of its narrators is rejected, in front of this Jarah Mufassar

1. There is no clarity of ruku in this athar (narration), meaning it is general (Aam), while the ahadith of rafa yadain are Specific (Khaas), and according to the principle, Specific (Khaas) takes precedence over General (Aam). Otherwise, then why do the opposers of rafa yadain, do it in Qunoot, and Eidain?

Even if we accept this narration from Ameerul-Mumineen then due to its general meaning, the rafa yadain of Qunoot and Eidain also gets waived. If that rafa yadain (of Qunoot and Eidain) is an exception to this hadith, then why isnt the rafa yadain of before and after ruku is an exception, due to the Marfoo and Mufassar ahadith of Sahihain?

Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 6---Hadith of Ibn Abi Layla from Ibn Umar

The narration of leaving the Hands (in prayer)

: : (Nasb ur-Rayaa 391/1)

Rafa Yadain should be done in seven places when commencing Salaat, when entering Musjidul Haraam and seeing the Baitullah, when standing on Safa and Marwah, when making Wuqoof with the people in Arafaat, at Muzdalifah, at Maqaamain, when pelting the Jamrah.

Answer:

This narration is Weak, because its narrator Muhammad bin Abdur-Rehman bin Abi Laila, according to the Jumhoor of Muhadditheen, is Weak.

Introduction to Muhammad bin Abdur-Rehman bin Abi Laila:

Criticizers:

1: Shubah bin Al-Hajjaj said: (I never saw any person weak in memorization more than him) And said: : [Al-Jarah wal-Tadeel 322/7]

2: Zaidah said: (Leave his narrations) [Ref: Same as above]

3: Yahya bin Saeed al-Qattan said: (Very weak in memorization) [Ref: Same as above]

4: Ahmed bin Hanbal said: Weak in memorization, Mudtarib ul-Hadith [ref:Same book, Pg 323]

5: Yahya bin Maeen said: ,/ (He is nohing/ Weak in Hadith [Al-Majroheen 245/2]

6: Abu Haatim ar-Raazi said: (Muhalla al-Sidq, He is weak in Hifz, He is abandoned due to making a lot mistakes) [Al-Jarah wal Tadeel]

7: Abu Zurah said: [Saalih (Pious), (but) not the strongest] [Same book]

8: Al-Juzjani said: Weak from the memory [Ahwaal-Al-rijaal: 86]

9: Al-Nisai said: [He is not strong in Hadith] [Al-Dufa by Al-Nisai: 525]

10: Ibn Adi said: With his poor memory, write his narrations [Al-Kaamil 2195/6]

11: Salma bin Kuhail said: (Lied upon) [Al-Dufa by Al-Ukaili]

12: Al-Daraqutni said: : : Thiqqah, fi Hifza Shai, And said: He is not a Haafidh, also said: He is Weak in Hadith, Weak in memorization. Poor in memorization, Has many illusions

[Al-Sunan 124/1, 241/1, 263/2]

13: Ibn HIbban said: Poor in memorization, Has many illusions, Grossly mistaken, Deserves to be abandoned [Al-Majroheen 244/2]

14: Al-Baihaqi said: Has a lot of illusions, Weak in narrating, Weak in memorization, Makes many Mistakes [Al-Sunan al-Kubra 24/1, 334/5]

15: Zailai Hanafi said: (Weak) [Nasb ur-Rayaa 318/1]

16: Muhammad bin Tahir al-Maqdasi said:

There is consensus on his weakness [Tadhkiratul-Mawdoat: 90, 24]

17: Al-Dhahabi said: Truthful, Weak in memorization [Diwaan al-Dufa 279]

18: Ibn Hajr said: (Weak) [Fathul-Bari 214/4]

19: Tahawi said: Very Confused in memorization [Mushkil al-Athaar: 226/3]

20: Al-Haithami said: (Weak)

[Majma al-Zawaid 78/1]

21: Muhammad bin Ishaaq al-Sadi said: His ahadith deserve to be abandoned [Al-Majroheen 246/2]

* 22: Al-Saji said: Weak in Memorization [Tahdheeb (without any sanad)]

* 23: Ibn Jareer al-Tabari said: He is not a Hujja [Same]

* 24: Ibn Khuzaimah said: He is not a Hafidh [Same]

* 25: Abu Ahmed al-Hakim said: [Same]

* 26: Ibn al-Madini said: [Same]

* 27: Ibn al-Qatan said: Weak in memorization [Nasb ur-Rayaa 182/2]

28: Al-Nadwi said: (Weak) [Nasb ur-Rayaa 84/4]

29: Ibn Al-Jawzi said:

They all weakned him [Nasb ur-Rayaa 107/4]

30: Al-Mundhiri said: [Al-Targheeb 525/5]

31: Ibn Hazam said: Weak in Memorization [Al-Muhalla 123/7]

32: Al-Sakhawi said: Weak in Memorization [Al-Qaul al-Badee 167,168]

Admirers:

1. Al-Ijli said: Truthful, Siqqah [Marifat al-Thiqqat 244,243/2]

2. Yaqoob bin Sufyan said: Siqqah, Just [Tahdheeb] (without any sanad) 3. Zaidah said: He is the jurist of the people of earth [Al-Jarah 322/7]

4. Tirmidhi: Authenticated him [Derwi 165]

5. Al-Dhahabi said:

[Tadhkirat al-Huffaz 171/1]

6. Ibn al-Qayyim, and al-Haithami said: [Derwi, Pg 165, 166]

From the above sayings of Imams and Muhadditheen, we came to know that a huge amount of scolars have declared Muhammad bin Abi Laila to be Daeef, Sai ul-Hifz, and Kathir ul-Wahem. According to Baihaqi, he was Kathirul-Khata (one who makes a lot of mistakes); therefore the authentication of just a few scholars is rejected. Some scholars declaring him to be a Faqeeh (Jurist), is not an evidence of his authentication.

Zaidah declared him to be Faqeeh, but still he rejected his ahadith.

The sayings of Dhahabi and Haithami are contradictory, therefore they are neutral.

The scholars who have praised him, they have done so, only on his personality, he was a truthful person, but was weak in Hadith due to his weak memory, and making a lot of mistakes.

Muhammad bin Abi Laila and Ahnaaf:

Hanafi and non-Ahe-Hadith people have also declared Ibn abi Laila to be Daeef

1. Tahawi

Hanafi

said:

He

is

confused

(Mudtarib)

in

memorizarion. [Mushkil al-Athaar 226/3] 2. Zaylai said: Daeef [Nasb ur-Rayaa 318/1] 3. Ibn al-Turkamani Hanafi said: Ibn Abi Laila is criticized. [Al-Jawahir al-Naqi 347/7] 4. Al-Naimwi said: He is not strong. [Athaar al-Sunan: H 32] 5. Khalil Ahmed Sahanpuri Deobandi said: Kathirul-Wahem (Making a lot of Illusions). [Bazl al-Majhood Vol 3, Pg 37] 6. Anwar Shah Kashmiri deobandi said: ..he is weak according to me, and this is also the saying of Jumhoor. [Faiz ul-Bari 168/3] 7. Muhammad Yunuf Binnori Deobandi has also declared Ibn Abi Laila to be weak in accordance to the Jumhoor. [Maariful Sunan 290/5].

Second Sanad of the narration of Muhammad bin Abdur-Rehman bin Abi Laila:

Ibn Abbas | Maqsim | Al-Hakam (Mudallis) | (Muhammad bin Abdur-Rehman) Ibn Abi Laila [Daeef] | Imraan (binMuhammad bin Abdur-Rehman) bin Abi Laila | Muhammad bin Imran bin Abi Laila | Muhammad bin Uthman bin Abi Shaibah | Al-Tabarani in Al-Kabeer (385/11)

Muhammad bin Fudail bin Gharwan has narrated it from Muhammad bin AbdurRehman bin Abi Laila(Daeef) as a Mawqoof narration. [Musannaf ibn Abi Shaibah, Vol 4, Pg 96, H. 15747]

Some narrators have narrated the words of Tarfa al-Aidi (Leaving the hands).

The summary is that whether this hadith is narrated as a Marfoo or Mawqoof, with rafa yadain or without rafa yadain, all words are Daeef.

Discussion on the Text of this Hadith:

If rafa yadain should only be done in these seven places, then why do the opposers of rafa yadain do it in the Qunoot, in the prayers of Eidain, and in Duaa? If the exception of these places is proven from the other ahadith, then the exception of doing rafa yadain before and after ruku is also proven in Sahihain etc with Mutawaatir narrations. Rafa yadain is proven from Abdullah bin Umar himself from Mutawaatir narrations, therefore some peoples taking evidence from this Baatil hadith is also Baatil.

Note: The prohibition, Abrogation, or abadoning of rafa yadain of before and after ruku is not proven from a single Sahih Hadith. And the ahadith of the opposers of rafa yadain are all Daeef.

Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 7---Hadith of Muhammad bin Jaabir al-Sahimee Hadith of Muhammad bin Jaabir al-Saheemi

: Muhammad Bin Jaabir (through his fabricated chain) that: I prayed with the prophet (peace be upon him), Abu Bakr, and Umar (radiallah anhum), they did not raise their hands except in the initial takbeer when starting the prayer. has narrated from Ibn Mas'ood

Imam Daraqutni said: Only Muhammad bin Jaabir has narrated it, and he is Da'eef

First Answer:

This Hadith is fabricated. No Imam has ever authenticated this hadith; rather many Imams have clearly declared it Daeef and Mawdoo: The following Muhadditheen have rejected this hadith: 1.Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal said: This Hadith is Munkar. And he strictly rejected it. 2.Imam Haakim. [Marifat al-Sunan wal athaar by Bahaqi 220/1] said: This Isnad is Da'eef 3.Ad-Daraqutni. [Sunan 295/1] 4.Al-Baihqi. [Al-Sunan al-Kubra 80/2]

5.Ibn al-Jawzi said its Fabricated. [Al-Mawdooaat 96/2] 6.Ibn al-Qaisaraani. [Tadhkiratul Mawdooaat Pg 78] 7.Al-Shawkani. [Al-Fawaid al-Majmoaah fil ahadith al-Mawdooah, Pg 29]\ 8.Ibn al-Qayyim. [Al-Manar al-Maneef Pg 138] 9.Ibn Iraq. [Tanziyat al-Shariyyah 101/2]

Second Answer:

is Daeef.Its Narrator Muhammad bin Jaabir

Muhammad bin Jabir in the light of Jarah and Tadeel

: :

: : : :

: : :

In compared to these criticisms, only two scholars have praised him: 1.Al-Zahli: He said: There is nothing in him 2.Ishaaq bin Abi Israeel [Nasb ur-Rayaa]

From this detail we came to know the great majority of Imams of Muslim Ummah have declared him Daeef and Matrook, due to his bad memory, Ikhtilaat, and some other reasons. [Al-Jarah wal Tadeel 220/7]said: According to the scholars, Muhamad bin Jaabir is Saaqit ul-Hadith. The much praised Imam, Abu Zur'ah Ar-Raazi

Hafidh Noor ud-Deen Al-Haithami said: Muhammad bin Jaabir is present in this sanad, who is Da'eef according to the Jumhoor of scholars. but he has also been praised.

Third Answer:

Muhammad bin Jaabirs memory got deteriorated at the end of his age. [See: Al Kwakib al-Nirat fi Marifat min Ikhtilaat mn al-riwayah by Ibn Kiyaal, Pg 495] This narration is not narrated by his old students, rather by his later student Ishaaq bin Abi Isra'eel, who was born in 151 H. [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb Vol1, Pg 196]

Muhammad bin Jaabir died approximately a few years after 170 H. [Al-Nabula 238/8]

Muhammad bin Jaabirr after his Ikhtilaat.Meaning at the time of his death,

Forth Answer:

Hammad bin Abi Sulemaans memory got deteriorated at the end of his age. Ibn Sad said: He had Ikhtilaat at the end of his age. [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb15/3]

Hafidh Noor-ud-Deen al-Haithami said: Only those narrations of Hammad are acceptable which are narrated from him by his old students, such as: Shu'bah, Sufyan, and Dastawai. Besides them, everyone has narrated after his ikhtilaat [Majma al-Zawaid Vol1, Pg 119, 120]

after his Ikhtilaat.Therefore, we came to know that

Due to these grave defects this hadith is Daeef and Baatil, and taking evidence from this is Mardood.

Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 8---Hadith of Umar bin Khattab

A narration attributed to Umar (radiallah anhu)

It is narrated with the sanad of Ibraheem AN Aswad that I saw Umar bin Khattaab (May Allah be pleased with him), doing rafa yadain in the first takbeer, then he did not repeat it. [Maani al-Athaar by Al-Tahawi 227/1]

Imam Abu Abdullah al-Hakim al-Nisaburi objects to this hadith as being shadh (irregular), and therefore proof cannot be established using it and that it cannot be used to oppose the authentic narration from Tawus bin Kaysan; from ibn Umar; that Umar used to raise his hands at ruku and when rising from it. [Nasb ur-Rayaa Vol 1, Pg 405]

Imam Abu Zurah ar-Raazi has declared the Hadith of Sufyaan ath-Thawri, which mentions of doing rafa yadain, to be more authentic than the hadith of Al-Hasan bin Ayyash. [Illal-al-Hadith by Ibn Abi Haatim Vol 1, Pg 95]

[Note: Ibn Hajr said in ad-Dirayah, al-Bayhaqi said, quoting from al-Hakim, it is reported by al-Hasan bin Ayyash; from Abdu-l-Malik bin Abjar; from az-Zubair bin Adi with the wording, he used to raise his hands with the first takbir and then he did not repeat that. Ath-Thawri reports it from az-Zubair bin Adi with the

wording, he used to raise his hands with the takbir without [the addition] then he did not repeat that and according to Imam Abu Zurah as said above, the hadith of Thawri is more authentic than the hadith of Hasan bin Ayyash.]

Ibn al-Jawzi said: This narration is not Sahih. [Al-Badar al-Muneer 501/3]

The Tahqeeq of Imam Abu Zurah, Imam Haakim, and the Jumhoor, is superior than the Tahqeeq of Imam Tahawi.

Secondly: In this narration, the narrator Ibraheem Nakhaee is a Mudallis.

[Refs: Tabqat al-Mudalliseen by Ibn Hajr 28, Jaami al-Tahseel fi ahkaam alMaraseel by Hafidh Salah ud-deen Pg 104, Marifat Uloom al-Hadith by Haakim Pg 108, Al-Mudalliseen by Abu Zurah ibn al-Iraqi Pg 2, Mudalliseen by Suyooti 1, and Al-Tabeyeen by al-Halabi 14]

And this narration is mu-AN-an (narrated from AN).

Under the Hadith of Ibn Masood, it is explained above that the hadith of a Mudallis narrated by AN is Daeef. Imam Nawawi said: If a Mudallis narrates with AN then that narration, without any doubt, does not become an evidence. [Nab-ur-Rayaa Vol 2, Pg 34]

One defect is also that, If Umar was the one who did not used to do rafa yadain, then even his pious and Faqeeh Son, Abdullah, also wouldnt have done it, w hile the matter is opposite. Ibn Umar did not only used to do rafa yadain, but he also used to hit those who did do rafa yadain, therefore, this narration is not sahih.

One answer is also this that, the opposers of rafa yadain taking evidence from this hadith is not correct, because they do rafa yadain in Qunoot, and Eidain. If this narration from Umar was Sahih, then this reasoning can be suggested, that Umar did not do rafa yadain after the first takbeer, even in the witr and qunoot. Then why do these people do it. If the exception of the rafa yadain of Qunoot and Eidain is proven from other ahadith, then the exception of doing rafa yadain before and ruku is also proven from other ahadith. The opposers need to present a hadith in which it is clearly mentioned that Fulan Sahabi did do rafa yadain before and after ruku. The real difference is on the rafa yadain of ruku. If the claim is specific (Khaas), then the evidence should also be specific (Khaas ) Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 9---Another Hadith Attributed to Ibn Masood

Another narration attributed to Ibn Masood

About one narration of Ibn Masood, we have already proved that it is Daeef and Mardood, the second narration is as follows:

 : [Nasb ur-Rayaa 406/1]

Ibraheem Nakhaee said: Ibn Masood did not used to do rafa yadain in prayer, except in the beginning.

First Answer:

Ibn Masood died in 32, or 33 Hijri. [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb 25/6]

And Ibraheem bin Yazeed al-Nakhaee was born after 37 Hijri. [Tahdheeb atTahdheeb Vol 1, Pg 155]

Therefore, this narration is Munqata.

If it be said that Ibraheem Nakhaee has heard this Hadith from multiple people [Nasb ur-Rayaa Vol 1, Pg 406, 407] Then the answer is that, these multiple people, or a Jamaat is unknown, therefore, taking evidence from it is rejected. Shaikh Muhammad Gondalwi said: But it does not get established from this that this narration is Hujjah, because being a Hujja or not, is dependant on the correlation-disconnetion, and Weakness-strongness of a Hadith. This narration is not able to become evidence.

Firstly: because, it is possible that two or three Kufis narrate to him together, and all three of them are Weak in memorization.

Secondly: We dont know, through how many routes, does this silsilah of Isnad reaches up to Ibn Masood. Sometimes, between a Tabaee and a Sahabi, there can be a route of two or four or even seven narrators. Tahqeeq is necessary regarding them.

Thirdly: It is possible that a narrator, according to Ibraheem, may be Siqqah, but according to other Imams he may be Daeef.

In the light of all these possibilities, the great Imams of Jarah and Tadeel have decided that, the narrations of Ibraheem from Ibn Masood are Daeef. Imam Dhahabi said in Mizaan al-Itidaal Vol 1, Pg 35: Imam Shafaee said: If Ibraheem Nakhaee narrates from Ali or Abdullah, then it wont be accepted, because Ibraheem did not meet with any of them. The summary of this saying is that, Imam Shafaee and Hafidh Dhahabi has declared the ahadith of Ibraheem from Ibn Masood to be Daeef.

Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 10----Hadith of Abdullah bin Awn al-Kharraz The narration of Abdullah bin Awn al-Kharraz

Some people have presented the following narration (in the opposition of rafa yadain):

: " "

Abdullah bin Umar said that: The Prophet (peace be upon him) used to raise his hands when starting the prayer, then he did not repeat it. [Ref: Al Khalafiyat by Imam Baihaqi]

Firstly:

1. Imam Abu Abdullah al-Haakim said (about this narration) that:

This riwaayat is Baatil Mawdoo. Mentioning this hadeeth, except with criticizism is not Jaaiz (permissible). According to the Tahqeeq, it has been narrated to us, opposite to this Hadith from Imam Malik with a Sahih Isnaad. (Nasb ar-Raayah 404/1)

About Imam Haakim, Hafidh Dhahabi said:

(Seer Alam al-Nabula 163/17)

And said:

(Same book: Ph 65)

Khateeb Baghdadi said:

(Tarikh Baghdad 473/5)

Imam Haakim is Truthful, but in Mustadrak he authenticates the weak and fabricated ahadith. [Mizaan al-Itidaal 608/3]

Imam Haakim was Mutasahil. [Al-Mutaqallimoon fi al-rijaal by Sakhawi, Pg 137]

When a Mutasahil declares a Hadith to be Baatil or Fabricated then, that narration (usually) is anextremely low level of Baatil and Mawdoo Hadith.

Hafidh Dhahabi has said and to Imam al-Haakim. [Ref: Tadhkiratul Huffaz 227/3].

2.

Hafidh Abu Abdullah Muhammad bin Abu Bakr Al-Dimashqi, famous as, Ibn

al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah said:

One who has even smelled a Hadith from far away; He giv es the witness, swearing by Allah, that this Hadith is fabricated. [Ref: Al-Manar al-Maneef fi al-Sahih wa al-Daeef, Pg 138]

Now see, the opinions of some scholars, regarding Hafidh Ibn al-Qayyim.

i)

Ibn Rajab al-Dimashqi said:

(Kitab al-Zail ala Tabqaat al-Hanabilah 448/2)

ii)

Ibn Kathir al-Dimashqi said:

(Al-Bidayah wal Nihaya 246/14)

iii)

Ibn Naasir ud-Deen al-Dimashqi said:

(Al radd al-Wafir 119)

iv)

Ibn al-Amaad al-Hanbali said:

(Shazrat al-Zahab 168/6)

Also see: Al-Durrur al-Kaminah by Al-Asqalani (400/3), and Al-Badar al-Taali by Al-Shawkani (143/2)

Sarfaraz Khan Safdar Deobandi wrote that:

Many people of Innovation disrespect Hafidh Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al -Qayyim, but Mulla Ali Qari al-Hanafi praises them with the following words:

(Jama al-Wasail Vol 1, Pg 208)

And Hafidh al-Suyooti very happily used to praise Hafidh Ibn al-Qayyim. [AlMinhaaj al-Wazih Pg 187]

3. Hafidh Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani said about this Hadith:

(Al-Talkhis al-Khabir 222/1)

About Hafidh Ibn Hajr, Abdul Hai Lakhnawi Hanafi said:

(Ghaith ul-Ghamam Pg 28)

Sarfaraz Safdar said about him that:

(Rah Raast Pg 39)

Ibn al-Amad al-Hanabali said:

(Shazrat al-Zahab 270/7)

It is said that Al-Iraqi, Al-Taqi, Al-Fasi, Al-Burhan al-Halbi and alSakhawi etc have praised him.

Al-Haakim, Ibn al-Qayyim, and Ibn Hajr have declared this Hadith to be fabricated with agreement.

From Imam Haakim to Hafidh Ibn Hajr, no Muhaddith or Imam ever authenticated this hadith.

In the authentication and the weakness of Ahadith, only the sayings of Muhadditheen are evidence.

Imam Abdur-Rehmaan bin Mahdi said: The Marifat (knowledge) of Hadith is an Ilhaam.

Ibn Numair said: Ibn Mahdi has said the truth, If I wouldve asked him that, where did you get this thing from, he would not have any reply [Illal al -Hadith by Ibn Abi Haatim Vol1, Pg 9, Sanad Sahih]

What is meant by Ilhaam here is, a special professional experience, through which a goldsmith can tell with his experience, that whether the ornaments and jewels are real or fake. It doesnt mean the Ilhaam and the Kashf that Sufis believe in, through which they bring the news of unseen and the fabricated stories.

Abu Haatim said:

The example of recognition of Hadith is like if there is an ornament whose price is 100 dinars, and there is another ornament of the same color whose price is 10 Darham. (Illal al-Hadith 9/1).

Imam Abu Haatim declared some ahadith to be fabricated and Baatil and some as Sahih but couldnt give the evidence. When Imam Abu Zurah declared the same ahadith to be Fabricated, Baatil, and Sahih the questioner became surprised.

This recognition is the same as an ornamentalist recognizes the real and fake pearl.

For the detailed story see: Taqaddimah al-Jarah wal Tadeel, Pg: 349, 351.

Therefore, for the recogniton of Hadith, only the sayings of its ornamentalists (Muhadditheen) is evidence

Secondly:

From Imam Baihaqi, the author of Al-Khalafiyat, to Abdullah bin Awn alKharraz, the sanad (chain) is not known.

Abdullah bin Awn died in 232 H. [Ref: Tarikh Baghdad 36/10, and Taqreeb atTahdheeb: (3520)]

And Imam Baihaqi was born in 382 H. [Ref: Al-Ansaab by Samaani 439/1, Seer al-Alam al-Nabula 164/18]

If it be said that Imam Baihaqi narrated this hadith in al-Khalafiyat, from the sanad of , as stated by Mughaltai then the answer is:

1.

The adalat of Mughaltai bin Kulaij al-Bakjari is unknown. Some scholars

have pointed towards his Mistakenness and his Weak intellect. He has claimed to have heard from some Shyookh, but the major scholars have refuted it. [See: Lisaan al-Mizaan 72-74/6]

Ibn Fahd al-Makki said in the page number 13 of Lahz al-Alhaaz bazail tabaqaat al-Huffaz that:

And on Page number 136, he said:

In short, the narrations of this Criticized, Mistakes making, weak in Fahem, and untrustworthy person, are rejected due to it being against the mutawaatir ahadith.

2. If Muhammad bin Ghalib is Tamtaam (his full name) then, he died in 283 H. [Tarikh Baghdad 146/3]

Meaning, he died 101 years before the birth of Imam Baihaqi. Therefore, this Munqata narration is Mardood (Rejected).

Thirdly:

Shaikhul Islam Imam Daraqutni wrote a book called Gharaib Hadith Maalik. In this book, he has collected every type of (Baatil and Mawdoo) ahadith, but he didnt bring the hadith of Mughaltai al-Bakjari in it. [See: Nasb ur-Rayaa by ZalaI 404/1]

From this we came to know that this narration was fabricated after Imam Daraqutni and was attributed to Muhammad bin Ghalib

Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 11---Some Fabricated ahadith Some Fabricated Ahadith

Some liars have presented such fabricated ahadith against the practice of rafa yadain that are, with agreement, Daeef and Fabricated.

1.

A narration is attributed to Anas bin Maalik. [Al-Laai Al-Masnooah fil

ahadith al-Mawdooah Vol 2, Pg 19]

This narration is fabricated, and it is fabricated by Muhammad bin Akashah, who was a famous Liar. [See: Lisan al-Mizaan Vol 5, Pg 324]

Mamoon bin Ahmed (Liar) had stolen this Hadith from him. [Al -Darayah Vol 1, Pg 152]

2.

Similarly, a narration is attributed to a man named, Abbaad bin al-

Zubair that:

When Rasulullah (Sall Allahu alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallim) would open the Salaat, he would raise his hands in the beginning of Salaat. Thereafter he would not at all raise his hands until he completed (the Salaat). (Baihaqi)

First of all: There is Inqitaa in this narration

Secondly: Abbaad bin al-Zubair is not known. (Note: He is not Abbad bin Abdullah bin al-Zubair)

Thirdly: Some of its narrators have been criticized. [Al-Darayah Vol1, Pg 152]

Forthly: It contains Hafs bin Ghyath in its sanad who is a Mudallis, and he is narrating with AN.

Hafidh Ibn al-Qayyim said about this narration: And it is fabricated. [Al-Manar al-Maneef Pg 139, no 315]

Only those people take evidence from these fabricated narrations, who themselves are liars.

Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 12---Hadith of Abu Bakr bin Ayyash from Ibn Umar A narration attributed to Ibn Umar (radiallah anhu)

, : ,

It is narrated (with the sanad) from Abu Bakr bin Ayyash, from Husain, from Mujahid that: they did not see Ibn Umar doing rafa yadain except in the first Takbeer. [Maani al-Athaar Vol 1, Pg 225]

First Answer:

Imam Yahya bin Maeen said: The narration of Abu Bakr from Husain is his Mistake; it does not have any reality. [Juz Rafa Yadain: 16]

The criticizm of Imam Ibn Maeen on this narration is Specific and Mufassar (Explained). In compared to it, even if the opposers of rafa yadain may do thousands of praise, this narration will still remain Baatil and Mardood. The position that Imam Ibn Maeen has, in the field of Hadith, is not hidden even to the beginner Students.

Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal said about this narration: Abu Bakr has narrated it from Husain, from Ibn Umar, and it is Baatil. [Masail Ahmed Vol 1, Pg 50]

Imams of Hadith have also called this narration of Abu Bakr bin Ayyash to be his Illusion and Mistake. Therefore, this narration of his, is Baatil and nonproven.

Second Answer:

Abu Bakr bin Ayyash had his memory deteriorated at the end of his age. [AlKwakib al-Niraat fi marifat min Ikhtilaat min al-riwayat al-Siqqaat by Ibn alKiyaal Pg 439-444, Nasb-ur-Rayaa]

Hafidh Ibn Hibban has also affimred in his Kitaab al-Siqaat that: when Ibn Ayyash got old, his memory got deteriorated. When he used to narrate, he would make mistakes. The correct ruling is that, those ahadith in which he made mistakes should be left, and only those ahadith should be accepted in which he did not make mistake. [Al-Tahdheeb Vol 12, Pg 39]

Imam Bukhari has explained with detail that, in the old times, Abu Bakr used to narrate it from Husain, from Ibraheem, from Ibn Masood as a Mursal Mawqoof Hadith, and it is preserved. The first thing is his grave mistake, because he has opposed the companions of Ibn Umar. [Nasb ur-Rayaa Vol 1, Pg 409]

This saying of Imam Bukhari is Jarah Mufassar which cannot be rejected. Now see the takhreej of Husain on this Hadith:

Abdullah bin Umar | Mujahid | Husain ------------| Mashar | | | | Thawri | | | bin Ayyash | | Abul-Ahwal | | Hammad |

Abdullah bin Masood | Ibraheem Nakhaee ----------------------------------| | | Husain---------------------------------

Abu | |

| Abu Bakr Uyainah

Sufyan

bin-

Hammad bin

|-------------

Abu Bakr | Masar (Old) bin Ayyash med bin (Last age) Hasan | | Yunus | | bin | | | Muhammad | Ah Salamah | | |

Wakee Razzaq |

Hajjaj bin

Abdur-Razzaq

al-Shaibani Abdur-

| 71/2 | | | Muhammad bin Musannaf Ibn bin Abdullah Abi Azeez (236/1) | | | Tabarani Tabarani in Al-Kabeer Kabir in al-Kabir 301/9 301/9 | Ali bin Abd | Musannaf 71/2 | |

Manhal

Musannaf

Ishaaq

Shaibah Ibraheem al-Hadrami |

-ul

Tabarani

in al-

300/9

From this detail we came to know that Abu Bakr has narrated this Hadith after the deterioration of his memory. In this, he has opposed many siqqah narrators. Therefore, his narration is Shaadh (irregular), and Shaadh is a kind of Mardood hadith. Due to this, Imam Yahya bin Maeen and Imam Ahmed and others have declared his hadith to be Daeef. Even after this detail, if someone persists on the health of this Hadith, then his treatment needs to be done in some mental hospital.

Another Chain

Muhammad bin al-Hasan al-Shaibani said:

" : "

Muhammad bin Abaan bin Saalih has narrated from Abdul Azeez bin Hakeem, he said: I saw Ibn Umar, he used to raise his hands up to his ears in the first Takbeer while starting the prayer, and he did not used to do it afterwards. [Muwatta Muhammad bin Hasan al-Shaibani, Pg 96]

Answer:

This Sanad is very weak.

1. Muhammad bin al-Hasan al-Shaibai, the student of Imam Abu Hanifah, is very weak.

The Jumhoor of Muhadditheen has criticized him.

Imam Yahya bin Maeen said: He is Jahmi (and) Kazzab (Liar). [Kitab al-Dufa lil Ukaili 52/4]

Imam Nasai said: Daeef. [Juz fi akhir kitab al-Dufa wal matrokeen, Pg 266]

Imam Ibn Adi said: The people of Hadith are free from his narrated ahadith. [Al-Kaamil 2184/6]

Imam Abu Zurah said: Muhammad bin al-Hasan was a Jahmi. [Kitaab al-Dufa by Abu Zurah Pg 570]

Umro bin Ali al-Falas said: Daeef. [Tarikh Baghdad 181/2]

For the detailed criticism on Muhammad bin al-Hasan al-Shaibani, see the book Al-Nasar Al-Rabbani fi Tarjumah Muhammad bin Hasan al-Shaibani

2. Muhammad bin Abaan bin Saalih al-Jafi is also a Daeef narrator. The Jumhoor of Muhadditheen has criticized him. [See: Lisaan al-Mizaan 122/5]

Imam Nasai said: He is Daeef Kufi. [Kitaab al-Dufa wal matrokeen: 512]

Imam Bukhari said: He is not strong. [Kitaab al-Dufa: 321]

Therefore, this sanad is also Fabricated, Baatil, and rajected. Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 13----Hadith of Mudawwanah al-Kubra A narration from Mudawwanah Al-Kubra

Rafa Yadain of before and after ruku, is proven from Imam Malik through Mutawaatir ways.

Some people have presented the hadith of Mudawwanah al-Kubra against it.

Sayyidinah Abdullah bin Umar said that: Prophet (peace be upon him) used to raise his hands up to his shoulders while saying Takbeer. [Ref: AlMudawwanah al-Kubra, Vol 1, Pg 71]

No one amongst the trustworthy scholars has ever presented this Hadith against rafa yadain, and neither can any person with a little brain can do so. Taking evidence from this Hadith is rejected due to a number of reasons:

1. This is a brief Hadith. It does not mention the rafa yadain of before and after ruku and aforementoning is not Mustalzam for Nafi Zikr.

2. The narrations of rafa yadain from Imam Malik are Mutawaatir.

3. The narration from Ibn Wahb, from Maalik, from Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri is present in Sunan al-Kubra (69/2), and it contains the affirmation of rafa yadain of before and after ruku The sanad from Baihqi to Ibn Wahb is absolutely Sahih.

4. In the narration of Ibn al-Qaasim also, the affirmation of rafa yadain of before and after ruku is present. (Al-Tamheed 210/9,211). The narration of Ibn al-Qaasim is also present in Muwatta Imam Malik. (Pg 113, H 59)

5. The affirmation of rafa yadain from Imam Ibn Shihab is also proven from Mutawaatir reports, therefore; taking evidence from this hadith which contains aforementioning is Baatil.

6. The sanad and the trustworthiness of the book Mudawwanah itself is not known.

Mudawwanah al-Kubra is not the book of Imam Malik. Its Sanad (chain) up to Sahnoon is not known; therefore this whole book is without any sanad. A very famous scholar, Abu Uthman Saeed bin Muhammad bin Sabeeh bin al-Hadad al-Maghribi, who was amongst the Mujtahideen (Seer al-Alam al-Nabula 205/14) has wrtten a book in refutation of Mudawwanah. (Same reference pg 206). He used to call Mudawwana, the book of Mudawwadah (book of Insects). (Al-Aber fi Khabar min Ghabar: 122/2).

Al-Shaikh Abu Uthman was one of the Imams of Ahle-Sunnah. He died in 302 Hijri. May Allah have mercy on him. Deobandi Brothers also dont follow the other masaail of this Bay-Sanad book. (Without chain) for example it is written in Vol1 and pg 68 of this book that:

In the prayer Bismillah should not be recited even in silence. According to this book: It is considered Makrooh by Imam Malik to tie the hands in the prayer. (Vol 1. Pg 76)

So what do the deobandi brothers say, about these matters? Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 14----Hadith in the Tafsir of Ibn Abbas A Tafseer Attributed to Ibn Abbas and the opposition of rafa yadain

Allah (swt) has said in the Quran:

Those who humble themselves in their prayers. [Muminoon: 2]

Some people said that, Ibn Abbas, while explaning this Hadith, said:

And they dont raise their hands in prayer.

[See: The Tafseer attributed Ibn Abbas Pg 212]

The answer is that, this whole book of Tafseer is fabricated, and it is not proven from Ibn Abbas.

In the beginning of this Tafseer, the following chain is written:

Abdullah al-Siqqah ibn al-Mamoor Al-Harwi informed us, he said, my father said: Abu Abdullahinformed us, he said: Abu Ubaidullah Mmahmood bin Muhammad al-Raazi informed us, he said: Ammar bin Abdul-Hameed AlHarwi informed us, He said: Ali bin Ishaaq al-Samarqandi informed us, fromMuhammad bin Marwan, from Al-Kalbi, from Abu Saalih, from Ibn Abbas [Tanvir al Maqbas, Tafsir Ibn Abbas, Pg 2]

The two centeral narrators of this sanad:

1. Muhammad bin Marwan al-Sadi. 2. Muhammad bin al-Saaib al-Kalbi.

Both are liars.

Introduction to Muhammad bin Marwan al-Sadi:

Here are sayings of some scholars regarding Muhammad bin Marwan al-Sadi:

Imam Bukhari said: He is Matrook. [Al-Tarikh al-Kabir 232/1]

And also said: His ahadith are not able to be written. [Al-Dufa al-Sagheer: 350]

Yahya bin Maeen said: He is not siqqah. [Al-Jarah wal Tadeel Vol 8, Pg 86]

Abu Haatim al-Raazi said: He is too bad in Hadith, He is Matrook, His ahadith are not written. [Al-Jarah wal Tadeel 86/8]

Nasai said: He narrates from Al-Kalbi, He is Matrook in Hadith. [Al-Dufa wal Matrokeen: 538]

Yaqoob bin Sufyan al-Farsi said: He is Daeef and not Siqqah. [Al-Marifat wal Tarikh 186/3]

Ibn Hibban said: He used to narrate fabricated ahadith from Siqqah narrators. It is not pemissible to write his ahadith except by investigating. It is not permissible to take evidence from him in any cost. [Al-Majroheen 286/2]

Ibn Numair said: He is a Liar. [Al-Dufa al-Kabir lil Ukaili 136/4]

Hafidh Haithami said: He is Matrook. [Majma al-Zawaid 99/8]

And said: There is a consesus on his weakness. [Majma al-Zawaid 214/1]

Hafidh Dhahabi said: He is Kufi, Matrook Mutham. [Diwan al-Dufa: 3969]

Hafidh Ibn Hajr said: He is accused of Lying. [Taqreeb al-Tahdheeb: 6284]

The Imam of Ahle-Sunnat, According to the Deobandis, Sarfaraz Khan Safdar has also declared him to be weak by quoting Imam Bukharis saying above. [Dufa Sagheer Imam Bukhari 29]

Imam Nasai said that he is Matrook in Hadith. [Dufa Imam Nasai pg 52]

Hafidh Dhahabi said: The Muhadditheen have left him, and some have also accused him of lying, Imam Ibn Maeen said: he is not siqqah, Imam Ahmed said:

I left him. Ibn Adi said: Lie is clearly seen in his narration. [Mizaan al-Itidaal, Vol 3, Pg 132]

Imam Baihaqi said: He is Matrook. [Kitaab Asma wal Sifaat, Pg 394]

Hafidh Ibn Kathir said: He is extremely Matrook. [Tafsir Ibn Kathir Vol 3, Pg 515]

Allamah Subki writes that: He is Daeef. [Shifa al-Siqaam Pg 37]

Allamah Muhammad Tahir wrote: He is Liar. [Tadhkiratul Mawdoat Pg 90]

Jareer bin Abdul Hameed said: He is a Liar, Yaqoob bin Sufya n said: He is Daeef, Saalih bin Muhammad said: He is Daeef, and he used to make (Fabricate) ahadith, Abu Haatim said: He is Matrook in Hadith, his hadith can not be written. [Azalat al-Raib Pg 316]

Sarfaraz Khan Safdar in his other books has also very strictly criticized him by saying him to be Liar, Fabricator, Weak, Matrook, etc and dont forget, Sarfaraz Khan Safdar is an Imam of Deobandi brothers.

Introduction to Muhammad bin Al-Saaib al-Kalbi

The following are some of the sayings of scholars regarding Muhammad bin AlSaaib al-Kalbi:

Suleman al-Taimi said: There were two Liars in Kufa, and Kalbi is one of them. [Al-Jarah wal Tadeel 270/7]

Qurrah bin Khalid said: People used to think that Kalbi lies. [Al-Jarah wal Tadeel 270/7]

Sufyan Ath-Thawri said: Kalbi said to us, whatever is narrated to you, from my sanad, from Abu Saalih, from Ibn Abbas, that is all lie, dont narrate that. [Al -Jarah wal Tadeel 271/7]

Yazeed bin Zaree said: Kalbi was Sabaai. [Al-Kaamil la Ibn Adi 2128/5]

Muhammad bin Mahran said: The Tafsir of Kalbi is Baatil. [Al-Jarah wal Tadeel 271/7]

Juzjani said: He is a Liar Saaqit. [Ahwaal al-Rijaal: 37]

Yahya bin Maeen said: Kalbi is nothing. [Tarikh Ibn Maeen: 1344]

Abu Haatim ar-Raazi said: There is a consesus of scholars on his ahadith being Matrook, the time should not be wasted in his ahadith, he is bad in hadith. [AlJarah wal Tadeel 271/7]

Hafidh Ibn Hajr said: The Mufassar, he is accused of lying, and with Raafid. [Taqreeb at-Tahdheeb: 5901]

Hafidh Dhahabi said: He is abandoned. [Al-Mughni fi al-Dufa: 5545]

Sarfaraz Khan Safdar wrote about Kalbi: Now listen to the condition of KalbiKalbis name is Muhammad bin Al-Saaib bin Basher Abu al-Nazar AlKalbi. Imam Matamar bin Suleman narrated from his father that there are two big liars in Kufa, and Kalbi is one of them, and Layth bin Abi Saleem said: There were two big liars in Kufa, one is Kalbi and the other is Asdi. Imam Ibn Maeen said: He is nothing. Imam Bukhari said that Imam Yahya and Imam ibn Mahdi have completely abandoned his narrations. Imam Ibn Mahdi said: Abu Juz said: I give witness that Kalbi is a Kaafir, and when I mentioned this sayinng to Yazeed bin Zaree, he also started saying that I have also heard him saying that (he is Kaafir), so I asked him the reason of his Kufr so he said that: Kalbi used to say that Jibraeel used to bring the wahi to the prophet (peace be upon him), One day he went out for Haajat (bathroom), and Ali (ra) sat on his place, so Jibraeel sent wahi to Ali (ra)and it goes on..[ Tadhkiratul Mawdooaat, Pg 82]

Allamah Muhammad Tahir al-Hanafi wrote that the weakest narration in the field of Tafseer is the narration of Kalbi AN Abi Saalih, AN Ibn Abbas [Tadhkiratu l Mawdooaat Pg 83]

The third narrator of its Sanad is Abu Saalih Bazaam, who is also Daeef.

Introduction to Abu Saalih Bazaam

Imam Abu Hatim ar-Razi said: His ahadith are written, but evidence is not taken from him. [Al-Jarah wal Tadeel 432/2]

Imam Nasai said: Daeef Kufi. [Al-Dufa wal Matrokeen: 72]

Imam Bukhari has mentioned him in Kitaab ad-Dufa [Tuhfa al-Aqwia Pg 21] Hafidh Dhahabi said: Daeef in Hadith. [Diwan al-Dufa: 544]

Hafidh Ibn Hajr said: Daeef. [Taqreeb at-Tahdheeb: 634]

Some scholars have also praised him, but in compared to the criticizm of Jumhoor, this praise his rejected.

About this Sanad of Tanvir al-Miqbaas, Hafidh Suyooti said: Among all the routes (of sanad), the weakest of all is the sanad of Al -Kalbi, An, Abi Saalih, An, Ibn Abbas. And if, in this narration, Muhammad bin Marwan al-Sadi gets added, then this sanad becomes Silsilah al-Kizb [Al-Itqaan fi Uloom al-Quran Vol 2, Pg 416]

It should be clear in minds that this sanad is called Silsilah al -Kizb only up to Abu Saalih, not up to the sahabi, and sahabas are all Aadil and this is the ultimate principle. Only the narrators coming after them need to be Siqqah and Suduq, and this is also an ultimate principle.

From this detail, we came to know that this Tafseer is not proven from Ibn Abbas (ra), rather it is the fabricated tafseer of Muhammad bin Marwan al-Sadi, which he has attributed to Ibn Abbas, by lying.

Note: From Ibn Abbas himself, the rafa yadain before and after ruku is proven with Sahih Narrations.

Abu Hamzah (Tabaee) said: I saw Ibn Abbas; he used to do rafa yadain in the beginning of prayer, before ruku and after raising his head from ruku. [Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaibah Vol 1, Pg 235 H. 2431]

This narration is also present in Masaail al-Imam Ahmed, Musannaf AbdurRazzaq (69/2, H. 2523), and Juz Rafa Yadain (H. 21).

Tawoos (Tabaee) said: I have seen Ibn Abbas doing rafa yadain in the prayer. [Juz Rafa Yadain: 27]

Ibn Abbas doing rafa yadain in the prayer is the evidence that doing rafa yadain is not against the Khushoo of prayer.

Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 15----Hadith of Musnad Humaidi Musnad Al-Humaidi and the Hadith of Rafa Yadain (Raising the Hands)

Habeeb ur-Rehmaan Azami Indian Deobandi has published Musnad al-Humaidi from his Nuskha Deobandiyyah, and has taken the help of Nuskha Saeedia, and Nuskha Uthmaniyyah in its affirmity. [See: Muqaddimah Musnad al-Humaidi, Pg 2, 3]

The date at which the Nuskha Saeedia was written is: 1311 Hijri

The date at which the Nuskha Deobandiyyah was written is: 1324 Hijri

And the date of Nukha Uthmaniyyah is: Before 1159 Hijri. [Same reference]

Azami, the Indian Deobandi, has made the Nuskha Deobandiyyah to be real. [Same book, pg 3]

There is another Nuskha of Musnad al-Humaidi, which is called Nuskha Zahiria. [Muqaddimah pg, 4, 25]

This Nuskha is in Shaam (Syria), and its photographs are present in Makkah and other places.

The date at which the Nuskha Zaahiriya was written is: 689 Hijri. [Muqaddimah Musnad al-Humaidi Pg 19]

The real Nuskha Deobandiyyah has many mistakes, For example: See, Musnad alHumaidi, Vol 1, Pg 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15.. etc

In many places interpolations have also been done. For example: See, Vol 1, Pg 15, Haashia 7, or 1/71 In many places he (the deobandi) has made corrections of Nuskha Deobandiyya by giving superiority to the Nuskha Zaahiriya, See for example: 275/2, 285, 287, 302, etc

In many places Azami Deobandi himself has ag reed that there is an interpolation in it. [See: Musnad al-Humaidi with the Tahqeeq of Azami Vol 1, Pg 15 etc]

Image of Nuskha Deobandiyyahs Musnad Humaidi

(See: Figure 1a)

Musnad Humaidi/ Image of Makhtootah Zaahiriya

(See: Figure 2b)

The Image of another Ancient Nuskha of Musnad Humaidi

(See: Figure 3c)

The Image of the Published Nuskha of Musnad Humaidi in Arab

(See: Figure 4d)

The Image of Al-Mustakhraj by Abu Naeem al-Asbahani

(See: Figure 5e)

In both the ancient Qalmi Nuskhas of Musnad Humaidi, it is written that:

It becomes clear from this statement that, the addition of in Nuskha Deobandiyyah is an interpolation by the writer or the Naasikh himself, as it was also done recently by a Mutassub Deobandi publisher, when Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaibah was published in Karachi, having a reflection from the published nuskha of Mumbai. And that Mutassub Deobandi publisher added his own words of at the end of the Hadith of Wail bin Hujr.

In the chain of this Hadith of Musnad Humaidi, the phrase of was also left; Azami realized this mistake after a long time, because the chart of Mistakes

which is present at the end of the book also doesnt contain the mentioning of this mistake.

The Zaahiria Nuskha is the most authentic and trustable Nuskha among all the other Nuskhas. And in one other Nuskha also, this narration is present as it is, in Nuskha Zaahiria. Imam Humaidi has narrated the narration of Abdullah bin Umar (of doing rafa yadain) from another chain also, which proves that Abdullah bin Umar used to consider it essential to do rafa yadain.

After the same narration, Imam Humaidis mentioning of the action of Abdullah bin Umar that-----he used to hit the opposers of rafa yadain with stones, until they would agree to do rafa yadain------ is the proof that Imam Humaidi wants to prove this issue by first mentioning the Hadith of Abdullah bin Umar and then his action. And thats why Imam Humaidi himself used to act upon rafa yadain.

Imam Abu Awanah, after narrating the same hadith from the other students of Sufyan, also narrated the starting words of the hadith from the sanad of Imam Humaidi, and then by saying he pointed that the words of Imam Humaidis hadith are also the same. Thus this also proves that the phrase of is wrong and rejected.

From this detail we came to know that:

1.

The disputed phrase in the printed Nuskha of Musnad Humaidi is an

interpolation.

2.

Other Trustworthy (Siqqah) narrators have narrated this hadith from Sufyan

bin Uyainah right next with the proofs of doing rafa yadain before and after ruku, therefore; even if this disputed phrase was present in all the Qalmi Nuskhas of Musnad Humaidi, then it would still be considered a Mistake without any doubt.

3.

Since this interpolated narration did not have any footprints in the early

centuries, thats why no one ever presented this hadith against rafa yadain.

4.

The scholars who have written books on Zawaaid, for example: Al -

Mataalib al-Aliah fi Zawaaid al-Masaneed al-Thamaniya by Ibn Hajr (and Musnad al-Humaidi is also one amongst those Masaneed), and Athaaf al-Sadat AlMahrah al-Khairah by Imam Busairi. No one amongst any of them mentioned this interpolated Hadith. If it was there then surely they would have mentioned it!

5.

In the Maktabah Zaahiryahs ancient nuskha of Musnad al -Humaidi, this

narration is present with the affirmation of doing rafa yadain before and after ruku

6.

In his Musnad (Vol 2, Pg 91), Imam Abu Awanah Yaqoob bin Ishaaq has

declared this narration (of Musnad Humaidi) to be similar as the narration of Imam ShafiI and Imam Abu Dawud.

The narration of Imam ShafiI is present with the affirmation of rafa yadain before and after ruku in Kitaab al-Umm Vol1, Pg 103. The narration of Imam Abu Dawud from Ali (bin al-Madini) was not found, but his narraton in Sunan Abu Dawud is present with the affirmation of rafa yadain before and after ruku from Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal. [Sunan Abu Dawud Vol1, Pg 111] And the narration of Ali (bin Abdullah al-Madini) is present with the affirmation of rafa yadain before and after ruku in Juz Rafa Yadain of Imam Bukhari Pg 17, Hadith # 2

7.

The rafa yadain of before and after ruku is proven with sahih Isnad, from the

centeral narrator of this Hadith, ie; Imam Sufyan bin Uyainah. [See: Sunan Tirmidhi Vol2, Pg 39, Hadith 256, with the tahqeeq of Ahmed Shakir]

8.

Imam Humaidi also used to act upon the rafa yadain of before and after ruku.

[Juz Rafa Yadain Pg 35]

The summary is that, the narration narrated from Zuhri, from Saalim, from his father, in Musnad al-Humaidi is with the affirmation of rafa yadain, not with the opposition. Therefore, the interpolated phrase of Nuskha Deobandiyyah is fabricated and Baatil. And presenting it as evidence is a remorseful, dishonest and a shamelful act.

9.

After this reasearch, I got the oppurtunity to look at Al-Mustakhraj by Abu

Naeem al-Asbahani (Vol 2, Pg 12), even there, this narration is present with the

same sanad as that of Musnad al-Humaidi, which contains the affirmation of rafa yadain not the opposition. Walhamdulillah.

10. Musnad al-Humaidi that is published from Shaam (Syria) also contains the hadith of doing rafa yadain, and there is no mentioning of not doing it. [See: Vol 1, pg 515, H 626]

Fig: 1a

Fig: 2b

Fig: 4d

Fig: 5e

Fig: 3c Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 16----Hadith of Musnad Abu Awanah Munsad Abu Awanah and the Hadith of Rafa Yadain

On this issue, Mawlana Irshaul Haqq Athari, a long time ago, wrote a book called, Masla Rafa Yadain per aik nai Kaawish ka Taheeqi Jaiza, in which he has given very satisfactory answers to the assumptions and the mistakes of Derwi.

Since Imam Abu Awanah has narrated this (hadith) from three narrators, therefore it comes under the ruling of three narrations. Thats why Imam Abu Awan ah, very honestly, has also mentioned about the dispute of (each of) the narrators (regarding the wording of this hadith). Some said: ( ( , and some said: , and similarly, some said: ( ( , and some said: ( (, but the meaning of all of them is the same. Imam Abu Awanah said: meaning of all of them is the same. In Sahih Muslim, six narrators have narrated the words of ( ( from Sufyan ibn Uyainah (who is the centeral narrator of the hadith of Musnad Abu Awanah). Imam Ahmed and others have narrated the words of ( (

The Image of Muharraf Published Nuskha of Musnad Abu Awanah

See: Fig 1a

Musnad Abu Awanah/ The Image of the Qalmi Nuskha from Madinah

See: Fig 2b

The Image of Sindhi Makhtootah of Musnad Abu Awanah

See: Fig 3c

A narration of Sadan bin Nasr, who is the narrator of this Hadith of Musnad abu Awanah, is also present in Al-Sunan Al-Kubra by Baihaqi. (The sanad up to Sadan is aboslutely Sahih).

It says that:

[Sunan al-Kubra Vol 2, Pg 69]

Therefore, we came to know that this Hadith is an excellent proof of the affirmation of rafa yadain, thats why The Hafidh, the Siqqah, The great, Imam Abu Awanah brought this Hadith under the Chapter Heading of:

Some foolish people have attached the wording of with the previous phrase, while the evidences refute this stance very clearly:

1.

Even if the Waow (Arabic Letter) in the printed Nuskha of Musnad Abu

Awanah was dropped intentionally or unintentionally, this Waow is present in Sahih Muslim, and the Qalmi Nuskhas of Musnad Abu Awanah etc. (In the Nuskha of Allama Sayyid Ahsan Allah Shah Raashdi also, this waow is present, In Fact, even in the Nuskha of Madinah, this Waow is present. Walahamdulillah).

2. The narration of Sadaan also affirms the doing of rafa yadain

3. The Tabwiyyat of Abu Awanah is also a witness on this.

4.

The narrations of Imam ShafiI, Imam Abu Dawud, and Imam Humaidi also

are in the affirmation of doing rafa yadain before and after ruku, about whom Abu Awanah has said: ---- , and .

5.

The previous Hanafi Scholars like ZaylaI etc did not present this hadith in

favor of not doing rafa yadain. At that time this narration was not interpolated, so how could they mention it!?

We came to know that, taking evidence from this Hadith for not doing rafa yadain is wrong, Baatil, and an innovation of 14th Century.

Musnad Abu Awanah has always been very famous in the past times also, but not a single Imam has ever mentioned this Hadith as an opposition to rafa yadain. Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part 17 (Last)----Ahadith on raising hands in prostrations Ahadith on doing Rafa Yadain in the prostrations

1. Hadith of Maalik bin Huwairath

Imam Nasai said:

" ": (Sunan Nisai Vol 2, Pg 205, 206, H. 1086)

Malik bin al Huwayrith reports that he saw the Prophet (saw) raise his hands in his salah until he brought them in line with the top of his ears, when he

bowed into ruku, when he raised his head from ruku, when he went down into sujud, and when raised his head from sujud.

The point that needs to be noted is that, in the normal Nuskhas of Imam Nasais Sunan al-Kubra, the phrase An Saeed has been hidden and replaced by the word An Shubah, which is not correct.

Proof # 1: Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal has naarated the same Hadith from Ibn Abi Adi, with the sanad of Saeed bin Abi Aroobah. [Musnad Ahmed 436/3, H. 15685]

Proof # 2: This narration of Muhammad bin al-Muthna from Ibn abi Adi, is narrated by Imam Muslim with the sanad of Saeed bin Abi Aroobah. [Sahih Muslim, H. 391/26]

Proof # 3: This same narration with the same sanad and Matan is narrated by Imam Nasai in al-Sunan, with the sanad of Saeed--- (AN)Qatadah. [Vol 1, Pg 228, H. 672, Second Nuskha: Vol 1, Pg 343, H. 676]. This is very big evidence. Due to a mistake of Naasikh or the copyist in al -Mujtaba, the phrase Shubah (AN)---Qatadah has been added instead of Saeed---(AN)---Qatadah.

Proof # 4: Ibn Hazam, in al-Muhalla, has narrated the same hadith with his sanad from Imam Nasai, and it also contains the name of Saeed bin Abi Arooba

Proof # 5: Hafidh Ibn Hajr, in Fathul-Bari (177/2), has narrated the same narration from Imam Nasai with the clarity of Saeed bin Abi Aroobas name.

Proof # 6: Hafiz Ibne Hibban said that, sometimes by mistake, Saeed becomes Shubah and Shubah becomes Saeed (in the chains of ahadith). (Al Majrooheen vol 1 page 59).

Proof # 7: Tahawi Hanafi has narrated the same Hadith from Imam Nasai with the sanad of Saeed. [Mushkil al-Athaar, Vol 15, Pg 57]

Proof # 8: Imam Baihaqi has narrated the narration of Muhammad bin al-Muthna from the sanad of Saeed. [Al-Sunan al-Kubra 25, 71/2]

Therefore, this narration is from the sanad of Saeed bin Abi Arooba and this hadeeth is weak due to the Tadlees of Qatadah, tadlees of Saeed, Ikhilaat of Saeed and Oddnesses present in it.

2. Hadith of Waail bin Hujr

(Sunan Abu Dawud, H 723)

In this Hadith, Sujood is written, which can be used for both Singular and Plural. Therefore, In the light of other evidences, it means that when he used to stand up after four sujud, or in other words when he used to stand up after two rakahs, he used to do the rafa yadain. Therefore, making it the rafa yadain of the prostrations is not Sahih.

Through other narrations of Waail bin Hujr, the words of, Iza rakaa, wa iza sajadah have also been narrated. [Sunan Daraqutni 291/1, H. 1108]

The meaning of this Hadith is that, when he used to (intend) do the ruku, and when he used to intend to do the Sajdah, he would do the rafa yadain.

Both these rafa yadain are that of before ruku and after ruku, not that of prostration, and sitting position. And the hadith of Abu Hurairah has the same meaning which is narrated by Abu Dawud, Ibn Khuzaimah, and others.

1. Hadith of Anas bin Malik

(Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaibah, Pg 235)

In this narration, Humaid al-Taweel is a Mudallis, therefore this sanad is Daeef. And even if it is Sahih, then the meaning of Fi al-Ruku is before ruku, and the meaning of fi al-Sujud is before Sujud, meaning both these rafa yadain are that of Qiyaam, not of Qaud.

Abu Yala Al-Mosli said:

: [Vol 6, Pg 424, 425, H. 1038]

This narration has explained the above mentioned hadith, and it is known even to a common Student that, a Hadith explains another Hadith

4. Hadith of Abdullah bin Zubair

[Abu Dawud with Awn al-Mabood, Vol 1, Pg 269, H. 739]

Its sanad is Daeef, due to the Tadlees of Ibn Lahiah, and due to the unknowingness ofMaimoon. Ibn Lahiah is a famous Mudallis. (See: the books of Mudalliseen), and is narratung with AN. It narrator Maimoon al-Makki is Majhul. [Al-Taqreeb: 7054]

Only Ibn Habirah has narrated from Maimoon al-Makki [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb]. A narrator who has only one student and no one has also authenticated him, then that narrator is Majhul ul-Ain. The narration of Majhul ul-Ain is Daeef according to the Muhadditheen. Its text also doesnt mean what the opposers have considered, but rather its correct meaning is that, he used to do rafa yadain in the Qiyaam and also used to do that in ruku, then after ruku and before doing sajdah, he used to do it, and when he used to stand up after two rakahs, he used to do it again.

So proving the rafa yadain of prostrations from this is not Sahih, otherwise then tell us! Where is the rafa yadain of after ruku in it?

5) Hadith of Abdullah bin Abbas

(Abu Dawud witth Awn al-Mabood, Vol 1, Pg 269, H. 740)

Its sanad is Daeef due to the weakness of Nadhar bin Katheer. (See: Taqreeb attahdheeb (7147)

6) With every Takbeer

In some Weak narrations, doing rafa yadain with every takbeer is mentioned, for example:

*. From Umair bin Qatadah. [Sunan ibn Maja, H. 861]

Imam Bosairi said in al-Zawaid that: Rafda bin Qadaah is Daeef in its Sanad, and Abdullah did not hear anything from his father.

To know the criticism on Rafdah, see: Tahdheeb and Taqreeb etc

* From Jaabir bin Abdullah. [Musnad Ahmed, Vol 3, Pg 310]

In its sanad, Hajjaj bin Artaat is a Mudallis, and is narrating with AN. AlZiyaal bin Harmala is Majhul ul-Haal, and Nasr bin Baab is Daeef according to the Jumhoor of Muhadditheen. Therefore this sanad is Daeef. The meaning of all these narrations is also not to do rafa yadain in between the prostrations, but the meaning of With every takbeer is, as explained in here:

[Abu Dawud, Vol1, Pg 263]

The summary is that, doing rafa yadain in between the prostrations is not proven from the prophet (peace be upon him) with any Sahih hadith. One who claims the affirmity of this rafa yadain, Its our demand to him, that he only show us one Sahih or Hasan hadith, in which after the rafa yadain of before sujud, doing rafa yadain in between sujud is also present.