rafayadyn

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

Yadain

The Prophet ( وسلم عليه الله -used to raise his hands for takbeerat al (صلى

ihram (the takbeer at the beginning of the prayer), sometimes whilst saying the

takbeer, sometimes after it and sometimes before. (al-Bukhari and al-Nisaa’i)

When he had finished reciting Qur’an, he would pause for a moment then raise his

hands, say takbeer and do rukoo’. (Sifat Salaat al-Nabi ( وسلم عليه الله .p ,(صلى

128).

He used to raise his hands when he stood up from rukoo’ (reported by al-

Bukhari 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 ( وسلم عليه الله .(by al-Albani, p. 136 (صلى

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 (

وسلم عليه الله used to raise his hands to shoulder level when he started (صلى

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 ( وسلم عليه الله used to raise their hands during prayer when they (صلى

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 ( وسلم عليه الله all used to raise (صلى

their hands, without exception.” (Juz’ raf’ al-yadayn, p. 26, ma’a jila’ al-‘aynayn).

Ibn al-Qayyim said: “Look at the practice at the time of the Prophet ( الله صلى

وسلم and the Sahaba after him. They used to raise their hands in prayer ,(عليه

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. (I’laam al-Muwaqqi’een, 2/376).

Az-Zayla’I (who was a Hanafi Scholar) said: in Nasb ar-Rayah, quoting from

Juz’ Raf‘i-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 Nu‘man (Abu Haneefah’s 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-Zuhrî 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 ( وسلم عليه الله held this view [stated in (صلى

the hadîth].

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 Tabi‘een were:

Hasan al-Basri

Ata (the teacher of Imam Abu Hanifah)

Tawus

Mujahid

Nafi‘

Salim bin ‘Abdullah

Sa‘id 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

Ma‘mar

Awzaa’i

Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah

Abdullah Ibn Mubarak

ash-Shafi’ee

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 al-

Shafi’ee 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 ( وسلم عليه الله only raised his hand because the people praying (صلى

behind him ( وسلم عليه الله ,were munafiqs who had idols under their arms (صلى

as strange as it sounds majority of the Hanafi’s of India, Pakistan & Bangladesh

still believe this story, obviously this story is fabricated and scholars have debated

with Deobandi Maulana’s who admitted they don’t 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 ( وسلم عليه الله used to raise his hands (صلى

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 Mas’ud (may

Allah be pleased with him) who said: “Shall I not lead you in prayer as the

Messenger of Allah ( وسلم عليه الله (صلى did?” Then he prayed and he only

raised his hands once.

See Nasb al-Raayah by al-Zayla’i, 1/393-407.

But these ahaadeeth were classed as da’eef (weak) by overwhelming majority of

the Imams of hadeeth. The hadeeth of al-Baraa’ (Abu Dawud no.749) was

classed as da’eef by Sufyaan ibn ‘Uyaynah, al-Shaafi’ee, al-Humaydi the

shaykh of al-Bukhari, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Yahya ibn Ma’een, al-Daarimi, al-

Bukhari, and others. The hadeeth of Ibn Mas’ud (Abu Dawud no.748) was

classed as da’eef by ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Yahya bin

A’dham, 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 da’eef. 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 Mas’ud 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 ( وسلم عليه الله (صلى

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 al-

Ala Muhammad al-Mubarakpuri)

Mas'la Rafa' al-Yadain 'Ind ar-Ruku' wa ba'dahu (Refutation Series): Part

2----Hadith of Abdullah bin Mas’ood on rafa yadain

، د� و� �س� األ� ب�ن� م�ن� ح� الر� ع�ب�د� ع�ن� ، ك�ل�ي�ب� اب�ن� ي�ع�ن�ي م� ع�اص� ع�ن� ، ي�ان� ف� س� ع�ن�

أ�ال� : " ع�ود� م�س� ب�ن� الل�ه� ع�ب�د� ال� ق� ، ة� م� ع�ل�ق� ع�ن�

: ل�م� ف� ، ل�ى ف�ص� ال� ق� ؟ ل�م� و�س� ع�ل�ي�ه� الل�ه� ل�ى ص� الل�ه� ول� س� ر� ة� ال� ص� ب�ك�م� ل5ي ص� أ�

ة6 ر� م� إ�ال� ي�د�ي�ه� ع� ف� " ي�ر�

From Sufyân; from ‘Asim bin Kulayb; from ‘Abur-Rahmân ibn al-Aswad; from

‘Alqama who said, ‘ibn Mas‘ûd said,

“Shall I not pray with you the prayer of the Messenger of Allâh (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 al-

Muhalla 87, 88/4, and said it is Sahih]

Tahqeeq: This hadith, due to a very grave defect, is Ma’lool. And its Sanad and

Matan both areDa’eef.

The followng Imams have declared it to be Da’eef and Ma’lool:

First Answer:

The majority of Muhadditheen have declared this hadith to be Da’eef and

Ma’lool:

1. Shaikhul Islam, the Mujahid, and the trsutworthy, Abdullah bin al-

Mubarak said:

“ حدیثابنمسعود ”لمیثبت

The Hadith of Ibn Mas’ood is not established. [Sunan Tirmidhi 59/1]

Some people from the modern era, have tried to remove this Jarh of Imam Ibn al-

Mubarak 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

Mas’ood.

2. Al-Imam al-Shafa’ee 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. Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal has criticized this Hadith. [See: Juz Rafa Yadain:

32]

4. Imam Abu Haatim ar-Raazi said: "this is a mistake, and it is said the

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:

ظ� الل�ف� ذ�ا ه� ع�ل�ى يح� ح� ب�ص� و� ه� ل�ي�س� و� ط�و�يل� د�يث� ح� م�ن� Bر ت�ص� م�خ� Bد�يث ح� ذ�ا ه�

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 Mas’ood

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-Ma’bood 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 Da’eef.[Al-Tamheed 220/9]

11. Imam Bukhari has declared this Hadith to be Da’eef. [See: Juz Rafa Yadain

32, and Talkhis al-Kahbir]

12. Zaila’ee (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 Da’eef. [Al-Badar al-Muneer 492/3]

15. Al-Haakim declared it Da’eef. [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 [Al-

Khulasa al-Ahkaam 354/1]

17. Imam Al-Daarimi has declared it Da’eef. [Tahdheeb al-Sunan 449/2] (I

didn’t find this reference with Sahih Sanad!)

18. Al-Baihaqi declared it Da’eef. [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 Da’eef.

[Nasb ur-Rayaa 395/1]

20. Ibn Qudamah said: It is Da’eef. [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 Da’eef and ma’lool is far more superior

to the authentication of Tirmidhi and Ibn Hazam. Therefore, this Hadith,

without any doubt, is Da’eef.

If the expert scholars of the defects of Hadith, were to declare the hadith of a

trustworthy narrator to be Da’eef, 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 Sa’eed al-Qattan. [Kitaab al-Illal wa ma’rifat al-rijal

207/1]

2. Imam Bukhari. [Al-Illal al-Kabeer by Tirmidhi 966/2]

3. Yahya bin Ma’een. [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel 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 A’lam al-Nabula 242/7]

Hafidh Dhahabi said in Mizaan al-I’tidaal (169/2) that:

“ قال من لقول عبر وال ذوق نقد ل ولکن الضعفاء عن یدلس کان ۃان ہ

الکذابین عن ویکتب ”یدلس

And said:

[Seer A’lam al-Nabula 242/7] “ الضعفاء عن دلس ”وربما

And said:

[Same: 274/7] “ الضعفاء عن یحدث کان ”لانہ

From this witness of Hafidh Dhahabi, we came to know that Sufyan used to

do Tadlees from Da’eef narrators. Those who do Tadlees from Du’fa, their

narrations narrated by “AN” are Da’eef.

Abu Bakr al-Seerfi said in Kitaab Al-Dalaail that:

Every narrator whose Tadlees gets proven from Da’eef narrators, then his

narrations will not be accepted until he says: “Haddathani, or Sami’tu.

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 Na’eem al-Fadal bin Dukain al-Kufi. [Tarikh abu Zur’ah 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 Zur’a ibn al-Iraaqi, [Kitaab al-Mudalliseen: 21]

14. Haakim. [Ma’rifat 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 didn’t meet. [Vol2, Pg 111]

If, from the saying of Hafidh Dhahabi: Abu Qilaba can be called a Mudallis, then

why can’t 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 Ta’deel 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 Du’fa, 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,

Da’eef 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 Du’fa is also not

proven. Allamah Albani has declared his ahadith to be da’eef, but he has declared

the ahadith of Sufyan, who used to do tadlees with Du’fa, to be Sahih in Ta’liqaat

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-Mu’allami Al-Yamani,

has also declared this hadith to be da’eef due to the “AN-ana” of Sufyaan. [Al-

Tankeel 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

“Mu’AN-an” ahadith are Da’eef in the absence of Mutabi’at.

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 Shaf’aee has said this thing for every person, who commits

Tadlees even once. [Muqaddimah Ibn al-Salah, Pg 99]

Imam Yahya bin Ma’een said: “The Mudallis is not a proof in his

Tadlees.” (al-Kifaayah (p.362) and Sharh Ellal at-Tirmidhee (1/353) and (1/357-

358)

Therefore, this “mu-AN-an” narration of Sufyan ath-Thawri (Rahimahullah) (who

used to do tadlees from Du’fa and Majaheel) is Da’eef. In presence of the Sahih

ahadith, the existance or non-existance of Da’eef 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 al-

Mudalliseen Pg 32]

Before Hafidh Ibn Hajr, Imam Haakim al-Nisaburi, has added Sufyaan in

the third level of Mudalliseen. [Ma’rifat Uloom al-Hadith, Pg 106]

Imam Haakim was more expert and superior than Hafidh Ibn Hajr. In light of the

following proofs, Imam Haakim’s saying is correct, and Hafidh Ibn Hajr’s 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 Sa’eed al-Qattan from Sufyan ath-Thawri

is with the affirmation of hearing. [See: Kitab al-Illal wa Ma’rifat ur-Rijaal 207/1]

Benefit # 3: If a reliable Mutabi’at 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 Mutabi’at. Therefoe, its sanad is Da’eef.

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, Da’eef, 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 doesn’t 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) “ب�اب

ك�وع� Pالر ن�د� ع� ع� ف� الر� ي�ذ�ك�ر� ل�م� ”م�ن�

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] “ وقوعہ عدم الشئ ذکر عدم من یلزم ”ولا

Therefore, even with this aformementioned Da’eef 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 Mas’ood 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 al-

Masaabih 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 Ta’weel, 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: It’s 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 Mas’ood. [Ma’rifat 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 Mas’ood.

Lastly:

Hafidh Ibn Hazam writes about this Hadith of Ibn Mas’ood 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 Mas’ood presented by Ibn

Hazam, due to several defects, is proven to be Da’eef.

Therefore, let the people decide (who use his saying against this hadith) , what

is the position of rafa yadain according to Ibn Hazam? Doesn’t it become

obligatory according to him?


3----Hadith of Baraa bin Aazib

ول� " س� ر� Qأ�ن ، اء� ال�ب�ر� ع�ن� ، ل�ي�ل�ى ب�ي� أ ب�ن� م�ن� ح� الر� ع�ب�د� ع�ن� ، ي�اد� ز� ب�ي

� أ ب�ن� ي�ز�يد�

م�ن� ر�يب� ق� إ�ل�ى ي�د�ي�ه� ع� ف� ر� ة� ال� الص� ت�ت�ح� اف� �ذ�ا إ ك�ان� ل�م� و�س� ع�ل�ي�ه� الل�ه� ل�ى ص� الل�ه�

ي�ع�ود� ال� ث�م� �ذ�ن�ي�ه� أ

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." [Ma’ani 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 Al-

Haashmi, who was a Da’eef and Shi’aa narrator.

Introduction of Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad:

Criticizers:

1: Shu’bah said:

“ رفاعا ”كان

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

2: Abu Hatim al-Razi said:

“ بالقوی لیس بالحافظ، یکن ”لم

He is not the memorizer, He is not strong

[Ref: Same as above]

3: Yahya bin Ma’een said:

: : الحديث ضعيف ومرة بالقوي، ليس ومرة بحديثه، يحتج ال

His ahadith are not evidence, He is not strong, Da’eef in Hadith.

[Ref: Same, Al-Kamil la Ibn Adi (2729/7)]

4: Abu Zur’ah said:

به يحتج وال حديثه يكتب لين،

Lenient, Write his ahadith, and he is not Hujja

[ref: Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel]

5: Ibn al-Mubarak said:

“ بہ ”ارم

He is discarded

[Al-Du’fa al-Kabeer lil Ukaili 380/]

6: Wakee said:

“ بشيء ”ليس

He is nothing

[Same Ref]

7: Abu Usamah said:

صدقته ما قسامة يمينا خمسين لي حلف لو

[Same Ref]

8: Al-Ukaili:

Mentioned him in Al-Du’fa

[Same Ref]

9: Al-Nisai said:

“ بشيء ”ليس

He is nothing

[Al-Du’fa wal Matrokeen 651]

10: Al-Juzjani said:

حديثه يضعفون سمعتهم

[Ahwaal ar-Rijaal 135]

11: Ahmed bin Hanbal said:

بذاك ليس حديثه

[Kitaab al-Illal wa ma’rifat ar-rijaal 33/2]

12: Ibn Adi said:

شیعۃ من الکوفہ ویزید ضعفہ اھل حدیثہ مع یکتب

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

13: Ibn Hazam said:

”ضعيف“

Da’eef

[Al-Muhalla (484/7)]

14: Al-Baihaqi said:

“ قوي ”غير

Not strong

[Al-Kubra (26/2)]

15: Al-Haithami said:

”ضعيف“

Da’eef

[Al-Majma al-Zawaid (71/5)]

16: Ibn Kathir said:

”ضعيف“

Da’eef

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

17: Ibn al-Tarkamani (Hanafi) said:

”مضعف“

Weakened

[Al-Johar al-Naqi 208/2]

18: Abu Dawud said:

منه إلي أحب وغيره حديثه، ترك أحدا أعلم ال

[Tahdheeb al-Kamal lil Mizzi (1534/3)]

19: Ibn Qaai’ said:

”ضعيف“

Da’eef

[Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb (288/11)]

20: Al-Haakim abu Ahmed said:

“ بالقوي ”ليس

He is not strong

[Same: Pg 289]

21: Al-Barwaiji said:

بالقوي هو ليس

He is not strong

[Same]

22: Ibn Khuzaymah said:

“ منہ القلب ”فی

[Same]

23: Al-Daraqutni said:

اختلط قد وكان لقن، إاذا ويلقن كثيرا، يخطئ ضعيف

[Same]

24: Ibn al-Fudail said:

“ ائمۃ من الکبار الشیعۃ کان ”

He is the big Imam of Shi’aas

[Same]

25: Ibn Hajr said:

يتلقن وصار فتغير كبر ضعيف

[Taqreeb at-Tahdheeb]

26: Al-Dhahabi said:

مشھرسئالحفظ

Famous Weak memorizor

[Al-Mughni fi Al-Du’fa 7101]

27: Ibn al-Madini said:

He weakened him

[Al-Du’fa lil Ukaili 380/4]

28: Sufyan bin Uyainah said:

( بالحفظ یزید یصف سفیان یکن (لم

[Al-Imam al-Shafa’ee Vol1, Pg 104]

29: Ibn Hibban said:

Mentioned him in al-Du’fa

[Al-Majroheen, Vol 3, Pg 99]

30: Al-Hakim Abu Abdullah said:

حفظہ ساء کبر فلما بالحفظ یذکر یمیز کان وال المتون فی ویزید االسانید یقلب فکان

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

Admirers:

1. Ibn Shaheen:

Mentioned him in Al-Thiqaat

[Al-Thiqaat 1561]

2. Ahmed Saalih said:

فيه تكلم من قول يعجبني وال ثقة

[Thiqaat Ibn Shaheen]

(This saying is without any sanad so it is not acceptable)

3. Al-Ijli said:

يلقن بأخرة وكان الحديث، جائز

[Ma’rifat al-Thiqaat 2019]

4. Ya’qoob bin Sufyan said:

والثقة العدالة علي فهو

[Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb]

5. Ibn Sa’d said:

بالعجائب فجاء عمره آخر في اختلط أنه إال نفسه، في ثقة

[Tabqaat al-Kubra 340/6]

We came to know that according to the Majority of Scholars, Yazeed bin Abi

Ziyaad al-Haashmi is Da’eef. 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 Da’eef”. [Zawaid Ibn Maja 2116]

Hafidh Ibn Hajr said: “And Jumhoor has declared his Hadith to be

Da’eef. [Hadi al-Sari Pg 459]

Ashraf Ali Thanwi Deobandi said about the Hadith of Sunan Abu Dawud

that: “It is Da’eef due to the weakness of Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad. [Nashar al-

Tayyib 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:

“ الل�ه� " ل�ى ص� الل�ه� ول� س� ر� Qأ�ن ، اء� ال�ب�ر� ع�ن� ، ل�ي�ل�ى ب�ي� أ ب�ن� م�ن� ح� الر� ع�ب�د� ع�ن�

ي�د�ي�ه� ع� ف� ر� ة� ال� الص� ت�ت�ح� اف� �ذ�ا إ ك�ان� ل�م� و�س� ”ع�ل�ي�ه�

[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 “ ال� ث�م�

in it. I think Kufis had suggested him, meaning they (did not repeat it) ”ي�ع�ود�

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 “ ي�ع�ود� ال� ”ث�م�

(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. [Al-

Majroheen Vol 3, Pg 100]

From these affirmations of Muhadditheen, we came to know that Yazeed bin Abi

Ziyaad Al-Kufi Al-Shi’ai 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 Al-

Haakim Pg 105, Qaseeda fil Mudalliseen By Mahmood al-Maqdasi # 4, Risala al-

Suooti fil Midalliseen 67, Abu Zur’a 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 Da’eef 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 Da’eef. And the

phrase “he did not repeat it” are the addition of Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad.

Ibn al-Mulqan said: This hadith is Da’eef, 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-Shafa’ee

Al-Humaidi

Ahmed bin Hanbal

Yahya bin Ma’een

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. Shu’bah, 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 Mas’ood again. Those

arguments are also valid on this hadith.

The summary is that this hadith is Da’eef, 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] “ ع�يس�ى ع�ن� يه� ع�ب�د� أ�خ� ع�ن� ، ك�م� ال�ح� ع�ن� ،

ع�از�ب� ب�ن� اء� ال�ب�ر� ع�ن� ، ل�ي�ل�ى ب�ي� أ ب�ن� م�ن� ح� ”الر�

Imam Abu Dawud said:

“ يح� ح� ب�ص� ل�ي�س� د�يث� ال�ح� ذ�ا ” ه�

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 Da’eef. In fact Tahawi Hanafi has

also declared him to be “Mudtarib ul-Hifdh”. [Mushkil al-Athaar 226/3]

Zaila’ee said: “Da’eef” [Nas ur-Rayaa 318/1]

Anwar Shah Kashmiri said: He is Da’eef according to me, as is said by the

Jumhoor of Muhadditheen. [Faidh ul-Bari 168/3]

Therefore, this Mutabi’at is Mardood. Its real dependency is on the teacher of

Muhammad bin Abi Laila, “Yazeed bin Abi Ziyaad al-Kufi” who is Da’eef, and

Shi’aa.


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:

WWWWWWWW WWWWWWW WWWWWW WWWW WWWW WWWWW WWW،م�� ه�و�س�ل �ي �ه�ع�ل خرجعلینارسولاللص�ل�ىالل

" " : ��واف�يالص�الة �ن ؟اس�ك �ل/ش�م�س/ خ�ي �اب� ذ�ن� �ه�اأ ن� �أ ك ��م �ك �د�ي ي

� ر�اف�ع�يأ ��م ر�اك� �يأ ل م�ا ف�ق�ال�

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]

The phrase, “ س� م� م� س� ي� خ م� ا خ ي� خ�� ” (Tails of headstrong horses), is present in all three

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 Ma’ani 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 the 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….. [Al-

Majmoo’ 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 doesn’t 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 can’t 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.”


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.

أبي بن الرحمن عبد حدثنا الهاشمي أيوب أبو داود بن سليمان حدثنا

الرحمن عبد عن الفضل بن الله عبد عن عقبة بن موسى عن الزناد

قال طالب أبي بن علي عن رافع أبي بن الله عبيد عن النبي األعرج كان

حتى يديه ورفع كبر المكتوبة الصالة إلى قام إذا سلم و عليه الله صلى

. . من رأسه رفع وإذا ذلك مثل فعل يركع أن أراد وإذا منكبيه حذو يكونا

ذلك . مثل فعل السجدتين من قام وإذا ذلك مثل فعل الركوع

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.

: الله رضي عليQا6 أن أبيه عن كليب، بن عاصم ثنا قال النهشلي، بكر أبو

ب�ع�د� يرفع ال ثم الصالة، من تكبيرة أول في يديه يرفع كان .عنه

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, Ma’ani 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 Sa’eed al-Daarimi has declared it Weak. (Al-Sunan al-

Kubra 80, 81/2)

Imam Ahmed rejected this hadith. (Al-Masail al-Ahmad 243/1)

Imam Bukhari declared it Da’eef [Sharh Tirmidhi with reference to Jala al-

Ainain Pg 48]

Ibn al-Mulqan said: This narration of Ali is Da’eef. It is not proven

authentically from him, and Imam Bukhari has (also) declared it Da’eef. [Al-

Badar al-Muneer 499/3]

(It is narrated from Za’farani that) Imam Shafa’ee said: “And it is not proven

from Ali”. [Al-Sunan al-Kubra by Baihaqi 81/2]

Therefore, this narration is Ma’lool (Da’eef). 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-Mu’mineen 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 isn’t the rafa

yadain of before and after ruku is an exception, due to the Marfoo’ and Mufassar

ahadith of Sahihain?


6----Hadith of Ibn Abi Layla from Ibn Umar

The narration of leaving the Hands (in prayer)

“: : مواطن سبع فی االیدی ترفع عمر ابن عن نافع عن pلیلی ابی ابن ۃعن

والوقفین والمرو والصفا البیت واستقبال ، الصال افتتاح ۃعند ۃ

”والجمرتین

(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: Shu’bah bin Al-Hajjaj said:

منه حفظا أسوأ أحدا رأيت ،ما

(I never saw any person weak in memorization more than him)

And said:

مقلوبة: هي فإذا أحاديث أفادني ومرة

[Al-Jarah wal-Ta’deel 322/7]

2: Zaidah said:

“ حديثه ”ترك

(Leave his narrations)


3: Yahya bin Sa’eed al-Qattan said:

“ جدا الحفظ ”سيئ

(Very weak in memorization)


4: Ahmed bin Hanbal said:

“ الحديث مضطرب الحفظ سيئ

Weak in memorization, Mudtarib ul-Hadith

[ref:Same book, Pg 323]

5: Yahya bin Ma’een said:

/, بذاك ليس الحديث ضعيف

(He is nohing/ Weak in Hadith

[Al-Majroheen 245/2]

6: Abu Haatim ar-Raazi said:

ق د ص ل ا ه ل ح م

الحفظ، سيئ الخطأ كان كثرة عليه ينكر إنما

(Muhalla al-Sidq, He is weak in Hifz, He is abandoned due to making a lot

mistakes)

[Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel]

7: Abu Zu’rah said:

“ يكون ما بأقوي ليس ”صالح

[Saalih (Pious), (but) not the strongest]

[Same book]

8: Al-Juzjani said:

“ الحفظ ”سيئ

Weak from the memory

[Ahwaal-Al-rijaal: 86]

9: Al-Nisai said:

“ الحديث في بالقوي ”يس

[He is not strong in Hadith]

[Al-Du’fa by Al-Nisai: 525]

10: Ibn Adi said:

“ حديثه يكتب حفظه سوء ”مع

With his poor memory, write his narrations

[Al-Kaamil 2195/6]

11: Salma bin Kuhail said:

علی یکذب

(Lied upon)

[Al-Du’fa by Al-Ukaili]

12: Al-Daraqutni said:

: : الحفظ سيئ الحديث ضعيف ومرة بحافظ، ليس ومرة شيء، حفظه في ثقة،

الوهم كثير الحفظ رديء

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:

الوهم كثير الحفظ رديء

الترک فاستحق أا الخط فاحش

Poor in memorization, Has many illusions, Grossly mistaken, Deserves to be

abandoned


14: Al-Baihaqi said:

الوهم خطأه كثير وكثرة حفظه لسوء ، الروای فی ہضعیف

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:

”ضعیف“

(Weak)


16: Muhammad bin Tahir al-Maqdasi said:

“ ضعفہ یی عل ”اجمعوا

There is consensus on his weakness

[Tadhkiratul-Mawdo’at: 90, 24]

17: Al-Dhahabi said:

“ الحفظ سيئ ”صدوق

Truthful, Weak in memorization

[Diwaan al-Du’fa 279]

18: Ibn Hajr said:

”ضعیف“

(Weak)

[Fathul-Bari 214/4]

19: Tahawi said:

“ 6 جدا الحفظ ”مضطرب

Very Confused in memorization

[Mushkil al-Athaar: 226/3]

20: Al-Haithami said:

”ضعیف“

(Weak)

[Majma al-Zawaid 78/1]

21: Muhammad bin Ishaaq al-Sa’di said:

حدیثہ یترک ان یستحق

His ahadith deserve to be abandoned


* 22: Al-Saji said:


Weak in Memorization

[Tahdheeb (without any sanad)]

* 23: Ibn Jareer al-Tabari said:

بہ یھتج لا

He is not a Hujja

[Same]

* 24: Ibn Khuzaimah said:

“ بحافظ ”ليس

He is not a Hafidh

[Same]

* 25: Abu Ahmed al-Hakim said:

“ مقلوبۃ احادیثہ ”عامۃ

[Same]

* 26: Ibn al-Madini said:

الحفظ الحدیث سيئ واھی

[Same]

* 27: Ibn al-Qatan said:

الحفظ سيئ

Weak in memorization


28: Al-Nadwi said:

”ضعیف“

(Weak)


29: Ibn Al-Jawzi said:

“ ضعا ف کلھم ”

They all weakned him


30: Al-Mundhiri said:

فیہ الجمھور قال کذا یا کثیر الحفظ ردئ ثقہ

[Al-Targheeb 525/5]

31: Ibn Hazam said:



[Al-Muhalla 123/7]

32: Al-Sakhawi said:



[Al-Qaul al-Badee’ 167,168]

Admirers:

1. Al-Ijli said:

“ ثقہ ”صدوق

Truthful, Siqqah

[Ma’rifat al-Thiqqat 244,243/2]

2. Ya’qoob bin Sufyan said:

“ عدل ”ثقة

Siqqah, Just

[Tahdheeb] (without any sanad)

3. Zaidah said:

“ الدنيا أهل أفقه ”كان

He is the jurist of the people of earth

[Al-Jarah 322/7]

4. Tirmidhi:

“ لہ ”صحح

Authenticated him

[Derwi 165]

5. Al-Dhahabi said:

“ الحسن وزن فی ہھدیث ”

[Tadhkirat al-Huffaz 171/1]

6. Ibn al-Qayyim, and al-Haithami said:

اللہ شاء ان حسن ھدیثہ

[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 Da’eef, 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 Da’eef

1. Tahawi Hanafi said: He is confused (Mudtarib) in

memorizarion. [Mushkil al-Athaar 226/3]

2. Zaylai said: Da’eef [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. [Ma’ariful Sunan 290/5].

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

Laila:

Muhammad bin Fudail bin Gharwan has narrated it from Muhammad bin Abdur-

Rehman bin Abi Laila(Da’eef) 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 Da’eef.

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 people’s 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 Da’eef.


7----Hadith of Muhammad bin Jaabir al-Sahimee

Hadith of Muhammad bin Jaabir al-Saheemi

جابر بن عن: محمد عن عن عن قال

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 Da’eef 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. [Ma’rifat 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-Mawdoo’aat 96/2]

6.Ibn al-Qaisaraani. [Tadhkiratul Mawdoo’aat Pg 78]

7.Al-Shawkani. [Al-Fawaid al-Majmo’aah fil ahadith al-Mawdoo’ah, Pg 29]\

8.Ibn al-Qayyim. [Al-Manar al-Maneef Pg 138]

9.Ibn Iraq. [Tanziyat al-Shariyyah 101/2]

Second Answer:

is Da’eef.Its Narrator Muhammad bin Jaabir

Muhammad bin Jabir in the light of Jarah and Ta’deel

العالم

القول

الجرجاني عدي بن أحمد أبو

حديثه يكتب تكلم من فيه تكلم ما ومع أحاديث، في خالف قد

البيهقي بكر أبو

: ضعيف ومرة متروك،

العقيلي جعفر أبو

حديثه عامة على يتابع ال

الرازي حاتم أبو

أحاديث ويروي يلقن وكان حفظه وساء عمره، آخر في كتبه ذهبت

عن وحديثه لحقا كتبه في رأوا اللقاء، جيد بالسماع معروف وهو مناكير،

: الصدق، محله ومرة الثقات، من عشرة عنه روى اضطراب، فيه حماد

صحاح: فهي أصوله وأما تخاليط حديثه في أن إال صدوق ومرة

البستي حبان بن حاتم أبو

به فيحدث به ذوكر ما ويسرق حديثه، من ليس ما كتبه في يلحق أعمى

السجستاني دواد أبو

: ضعفه ومرة بشيء، ليس

الرازي زرعة أبو

: تخاليط حديثه في أن إال صدوق ومرة العلم، أهل عند الحديث ساقط

صحاح فهي أصوله وأما

حنبل بن أحمد

: كتابه في يلحق أو كتابه في ألحق ربما ومرة منه، شر إال عنه يحدث ال

: يقولون بالسماع معروف وهو مناكير أحاديث يروي ومرة الحديث، يعنى

: جدا، أنكره منكر ومرة اضطراب، فيه حماد عن حديثه نحو كتبه في رأوا

بأس: به ليس ومرة

النسائي شعيب بن أحمد

ضعيف

الجيلي صالح بن أحمد

ضعيف

الجوزجاني يعقوب بن إبراهيم

: مقنع غير ومرة ضعفه،

الرازي حاتم أبي ابن

صحاح فهي أصوله وأما تخاليط حديثه في أن إال صدوق

العسقالني حجر ابن

ضعيف يلقن، فصار وعمى كثيرا وخلط حفظه فساء كتبه ذهبت صدوق

الدارقطني

: ضعيف وقال ومرة به يعتبر بل يترك وال الضعف، من قريب

الذهبي

الحفظ سيئ

مهدي بن الرحمن عبد

: بعد تركه ثم عنه يحدث كان ومرة ضعفه،

الفالس علي بن عمرو

الحديث متروك كثيرالوهم، صدوق

البخاري إسماعيل بن محمد

مناكير روى فيه، يتكلمون بالقوي، ليس

الذهلي يحيى بن محمد

به بأس ال

التهذيب تقريب تحرير مصنفوا

ضعيف

الطيالسي الملك عبد بن هشام

عنه التحديث من بامتناعنا جابر ابن نظلم نحن

معين بن يحيى

: : : ليس ومرة كوفيا، وكان واختلط عمي ومرة منه، أشر هو من إال عنه يحدث ال ومرة ضعيف، وهو حديثه عليه اختلط

بشيء

الفسوي سفيان بن يعقوب

ضعيف

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 Da’eef and Matrook, due to his bad memory, Ikhtilaat, and

some other reasons.

[Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel 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 Jaabir’s memory got deteriorated at the end of his age. [See: Al-

Kwakib al-Nirat fi Ma’rifat 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 Sulemaan’s memory got deteriorated at the end of his age.

Ibn Sa’d 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 Da’eef and Baatil, and taking evidence

from this is Mardood.


8----Hadith of Umar bin Khattab

A narration attributed to Umar (radiallah anhu)

“ رایت: االسود عن ابراھیم عن الخطاب قال بن اول عمر فی یدی ہیرفع

یعود ال ثم ۃالتکبیر ”

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. [Ma’ani 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 Zu’rah 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 Zur’ah 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 Zur’ah, Imam Haakim, and the Jumhoor,

is superior than the Tahqeeq of Imam Tahawi.

Secondly: In this narration, the narrator Ibraheem Nakha’ee is a Mudallis.

[Refs: Tabqat al-Mudalliseen by Ibn Hajr 28, Jaami al-Tahseel fi ahkaam al-

Maraseel by Hafidh Salah ud-deen Pg 104, Ma’rifat Uloom al-Hadith by Haakim

Pg 108, Al-Mudalliseen by Abu Zu’rah 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 Mas’ood, it is explained above that the hadith of a

Mudallis narrated by “AN” is Da’eef.

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 wouldn’t have done it, while

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

)


9----Another Hadith Attributed to Ibn Masood

Another narration attributed to Ibn Mas’ood

About one narration of Ibn Mas’ood, we have already proved that it is Da’eef and

Mardood, the second narration is as follows:

“ : شئ فی یدی یرفع ال مسعود بن الل عبد کان قال النخعی ابراھیم ہعن ہ

االفتتاح فی اال الصال ۃمن ”


Ibraheem Nakha’ee said: Ibn Mas’ood did not used to do rafa yadain in

prayer, except in the beginning.

First Answer:

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

And Ibraheem bin Yazeed al-Nakha’ee was born after 37 Hijri. [Tahdheeb at-

Tahdheeb Vol 1, Pg 155]

Therefore, this narration is Munqata’.

If it be said that Ibraheem Nakha’ee 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 Jam’aat 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 don’t know, through how many routes, does this silsilah of Isnad

reaches up to Ibn Mas’ood. Sometimes, between a Taba’ee 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 Da’eef.

In the light of all these possibilities, the great Imams of Jarah and Ta’deel have

decided that, the narrations of Ibraheem from Ibn Ma’sood are Da’eef. Imam

Dhahabi said in Mizaan al-I’tidaal Vol 1, Pg 35:

“Imam Shafa’ee said: If Ibraheem Nakha’ee narrates from Ali or Abdullah, then it

won’t be accepted, because Ibraheem did not meet with any of them”. The

summary of this saying is that, Imam Shafa’ee and Hafidh Dhahabi has declared

the ahadith of Ibraheem from Ibn Mas’ood to be Da’eef.


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):

ع�ن� ، ال�م� س� ع�ن� ، ه�ر�ي5 Pالز ع�ن� ، Bال�ك م� د�ث�ن�ا ح� ، از� ر� ال�خ� ع�و�ن� ب�ن� الل�ه� ع�ب�د� ع�ن�

" : ت�ت�ح� اف� �ذ�ا إ ي�د�ي�ه� ع� ف� ي�ر� ك�ان� ل�م� و�س� ع�ل�ي�ه� الل�ه� ل�ى ص� الن�ب�ي� Qأ�ن ر� ع�م� اب�ن�

ي�ع�ود� ال ث�م� ، الة� " الص�

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:

“ روینا فقد القدح سبیل pعلی اال یذکر ان یجوز وال موضوع باطل ھذا

ھذا بخالف مالک عن الصحیح ہباالسانید ”

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 A’lam al-Nabula 163/17) “ شیخ العالم الناقد الحافظ ہاالمام

”المحدثین

And said:

(Same book: Ph 65) “ فیہ قلیل تشیع علی العلم بحور من وکان للل وع لدل وع وجرح لرج وخ لنف ”وص

Khateeb Baghdadi said:

(Tarikh Baghdad 473/5) “ ثقہ ”وکان

Imam Haakim is Truthful, but in Mustadrak he authenticates the weak and

fabricated ahadith. [Mizaan al-I’tidaal 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 “ الکبیر “ and ”الحافظ المحدثین .to Imam al-Haakim ”امام

[Ref: Tadhkiratul Huffaz 227/3].

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

al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah said:

“ : موضوع ان بالل شھد بعد� pعلی الحدیث روائح شم ہومن ہ ”

“One who has even smelled a Hadith from far away; He gives the witness,

swearing by Allah, that this Hadith is fabricated. [Ref: Al-Manar al-Maneef fi

al-Sahih wa al-Da’eef, Pg 138]

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

i) Ibn Rajab al-Dimashqi said:

منہ الاستنباظ ودقائق وفقھہ ومعانیہ والحدیث المنتھی فیھما والیہ الدین، وباصول فیہ، یجاری بالتفسیرلا اا عارف ،وکان

۔۔۔۔ ال ذالک فی یلحق

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

ii) Ibn Kathir al-Dimashqi said:

“ علم سیما ال ، متعدد علوم فی وبرع العالم االمام الشیخ ہصاحبنا ۔۔۔ ہ

واالصلین والحدیث ”التفسیر

(Al-Bidayah wal Nihaya 246/14)

iii) Ibn Naasir ud-Deen al-Dimashqi said:

(Al radd al-Wafir 119) “ ۔ ۔ المحققین۔ احد الدین شمس العلامہ الامام ”الشیخ

iv) Ibn al-‘Amaad al-Hanbali said:

“ المتکلم االصولی النحوی المفسر المظلق المجتھد بل الحنبلی ہالفقی ”

(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) “ الائمہ ھذا اولیاء ومن والجماعۃ السنہ اکابراھل من ”وکان

And Hafidh al-Suyooti very happily used to praise Hafidh Ibn al-Qayyim. [Al-

Minhaaj al-Wazih Pg 187]”

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

(Al-Talkhis al-Khabir 222/1) “ موضوع مقلوب ”وھو

About Hafidh Ibn Hajr, Abdul Hai Lakhnawi Hanafi said:

(Ghaith ul-Ghamam Pg 28) “ الحفاظ امام ”ھو

Sarfaraz Safdar said about him that:

(Rah Raast Pg 39) “ الدنیاء ”حافظ

Ibn al-‘Amad al-Hanabali said:

(Shazrat al-Zahab 270/7) “ فی المؤمنین امیر الاعلام علم الاسلام شیخ

العسر حافظ ”الحدیث

It is said that Al-Iraqi, Al-Taqi, Al-Fasi, Al-Burhan al-Halbi and al-

Sakhawi 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 Ma’rifat (knowledge) of Hadith

is an Ilhaam.”

Ibn Numair said: “Ibn Mahdi has said the truth, If I would’ve 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 doesn’t 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:

“ ثمنہ نہ لو علی مثلہ آاخر و دینار مائتہ ثمنہ فصل کمثل الحدیث معرفۃ مثلہدراھم ہعشر ”

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 couldn’t give the evidence. When Imam Abu Zur’ah 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 Ta’deel, 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 al-

Kharraz, the sanad (chain) is not known.

Abdullah bin Awn died in 232 H. [Ref: Tarikh Baghdad 36/10, and Taqreeb at-

Tahdheeb: (3520)]

And Imam Baihaqi was born in 382 H. [Ref: Al-Ansaab by Sama’ani 439/1,

Seer al-A’lam al-Nabula 164/18]

If it be said that Imam Baihaqi narrated this hadith in al-Khalafiyat, from the sanad

of “ عون بن عبدالل عن البرقی محمد بن احمد عن غالب بن ہمحمد

:as stated by Mughaltai then the answer is ,”الخراز

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:

“ الحنفی البکجری عبداللہ بن قلیج بن ”مغلظایئ

And on Page number 136, he said:

“ واضحۃ ببراھین ذالک لاجل الحفاظ من وجھابذۃ فیہ ”وتکلم

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

didn’t bring the hadith of Mughaltai al-Bakjari in it. [See: Nasb ur-Rayaa by Zala’I

404/1]

From this we came to know that this narration was fabricated after Imam

Daraqutni and was attributed to Muhammad bin Ghalib


11---Some Fabricated ahadith

Some Fabricated Ahadith

Some liars have presented such fabricated ahadith against the practice of rafa

yadain that are, with agreement, Da’eef and Fabricated.

1. A narration is attributed to Anas bin Maalik. [Al-Laai Al-Masnoo’ah fil

ahadith al-Mawdoo’ah 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]

Ma’moon 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.


12---Hadith of Abu Bakr bin Ayyash from Ibn Umar

A narration attributed to Ibn Umar (radiallah anhu)

“ “ : , , ع� ف� ر� ر� ع�م� اب�ن� ي�ر� ل�م� �ن�ه� أ د� اه� م�ج� ع�ن� ي�ن� ص� ح� ع�ن� ع�ي�اش� ب�ن� ب�ك�ر� ب�ي� أ ع�ن�

األ�ول�ى ة� الت�ك�ب�ير� ف�ي إ�ال ”ي�د�ي�ه�

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”. [Ma’ani al-Athaar Vol 1, Pg 225]

First Answer:

Imam Yahya bin Ma’een 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 Ma’een 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 Ma’een 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.” [Masa’il 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 non-

proven.

Second Answer:

Abu Bakr bin Ayyash had his memory deteriorated at the end of his age. [Al-

Kwakib al-Niraat fi ma’rifat min Ikhtilaat min al-riwayat al-Siqqaat by Ibn al-

Kiyaal 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 Mas’ood 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 Abdullah bin Mas’ood

| |

Mujahid Ibraheem Nakh’aee

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

Husain | |

Husain----------------------------------------------

| Abu Ma’shar Hammad |

| | |

| | | |

| | |

| | | Sufyan bin- Thawri

Abul-Ahwal Abu Bakr

| | Hammad bin Uyainah |-------------

| bin Ayyash

Abu Bakr Mas’ar Salamah | | |

| (Old)

bin Ayyash | | | Muhammad |

Ahmed bin

(Last age) | | | bin Hasan |

Yunus

Wakee’ Hajjaj bin Abdur-Razzaq al-Shaibani Abdur-

Razzaq |

| Manhal Musannaf 71/2

Musannaf 71/2 |

| |

| |

| |

| Muhammad bin

Musannaf Ibn Ali bin Abd Ishaaq

bin Abdullah

Abi Shaibah -ul Azeez

Ibraheem al-Hadrami

(236/1) |

| |

|

| |

Tabarani Tabarani

Tabarani

in Al-Kabeer in al-Kabir

in al-Kabir

301/9 300/9

301/9

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 Ma’een and Imam Ahmed and others have

declared his hadith to be Da’eef. 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:

" : التکبیر اول فی اذنی حذاء یدی یرفع عمر ابن رایت قال حکیم بن عبدالعزیز عن صالح بن ابان بن محمد ہاخبرنا ہ

ذالک سوی فیما یرفعھما ولم الصلاۃ " افتتاح

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 Ma’een said: He is Jahmi (and) Kazzab (Liar). [Kitab al-Du’fa

lil Ukaili 52/4]

Imam Nasai said: Da’eef. [Juz fi akhir kitab al-Du’fa wal matrokeen, Pg 266]

Imam Ibn Adi said: The people of Hadith are free from his narrated ahadith.

[Al-Kaamil 2184/6]

Imam Abu Zur’ah said: Muhammad bin al-Hasan was a Jahmi. [Kitaab al-Du’fa

by Abu Zur’ah Pg 570]

Umro bin Ali al-Falas said: Da’eef. [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-Ja’fi is also a Da’eef narrator. The

Jumhoor of Muhadditheen has criticized him. [See: Lisaan al-Mizaan 122/5]

Imam Nasai said: He is Da’eef Kufi. [Kitaab al-Du’fa wal matrokeen: 512]

Imam Bukhari said: He is not strong. [Kitaab al-Du’fa: 321]

Therefore, this sanad is also Fabricated, Baatil, and rajected.


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.

ابیہ عن سالم عن شھاب ابن عن مالک عن القاسم ابن و وھب ابن عنیرفع کان ل�م� و�س� ع�ل�ي�ه� الل�ه� ل�ى ص� الل رسول ہان

الصلاۃ افتتاح اذا منکبیہ حذو یدیہ

Sayyidinah Abdullah bin Umar said that: Prophet (peace be upon him) used to

raise his hands up to his shoulders while saying Takbeer. [Ref: Al-

Mudawwanah 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 Sa’eed bin Muhammad bin Sabeeh’ bin al-Hadad

al-Maghribi, who was amongst the Mujtahideen (Seer al-A’lam 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 don’t 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?


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:

“ ع�ون� اش� خ� م� ت�ه� ال� ص� ف�ي ه�م� ”ال�ذ�ين�

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

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

الصلاۃ فی ایدیھم یرفعون ولا

And they don’t 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-Ma’moor 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 Al-

Harwi 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-Du’fa al-Sagheer: 350]

Yahya bin Ma’een said: He is not siqqah. [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel 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 Ta’deel 86/8]

Nasai said: He narrates from Al-Kalbi, He is Matrook in Hadith. [Al-Du’fa wal

Matrokeen: 538]

Ya’qoob bin Sufyan al-Farsi said: He is Da’eef and not Siqqah. [Al-Ma’rifat 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-Du’fa 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-Du’fa: 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 Bukhari’s saying above. [Du’fa

Sagheer Imam Bukhari 29]

Imam Nasai said that he is Matrook in Hadith. [Du’fa Imam Nasai pg 52]

Hafidh Dhahabi said: The Muhadditheen have left him, and some have also

accused him of lying, Imam Ibn Ma’een said: he is not siqqah, Imam Ahmed said:

I left him. Ibn Adi said: Lie is clearly seen in his narration. [Mizaan al-I’tidaal, 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 Da’eef. [Shifa al-Siqaam Pg 37]

Allamah Muhammad Tahir wrote: He is Liar. [Tadhkiratul Mawdo’at Pg 90]

Jareer bin Abdul Hameed said: He is a Liar, Ya’qoob bin Sufyan said: He is

Da’eef, Saalih bin Muhammad said: He is Da’eef, 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 don’t 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 Al-

Saaib al-Kalbi:

Suleman al-Taimi said: There were two Liars in Kufa, and Kalbi is one of them.

[Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel 270/7]

Qurrah bin Khalid said: People used to think that Kalbi lies. [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel

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, don’t narrate that. [Al-Jarah

wal Ta’deel 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 Ta’deel

271/7]

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

Yahya bin Ma’een said: Kalbi is nothing. [Tarikh Ibn Ma’een: 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. [Al-

Jarah wal Ta’deel 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-Du’fa: 5545]

Sarfaraz Khan Safdar wrote about Kalbi: “Now listen to the condition of Kalbi…

Kalbi’s name is Muhammad bin Al-Saaib bin Basher Abu al-Nazar Al-Kalbi.

Imam Ma’tamar 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 Ma’een 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

Jibra’eel 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 Jibra’eel sent wahi

to Ali (ra)……and it goes on…..[ Tadhkiratul Mawdoo’aat, 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… [Tadhkiratul

Mawdoo’aat Pg 83]

The third narrator of its Sanad is Abu Saalih Bazaam, who is also Da’eef.

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 Ta’deel 432/2]

Imam Nasai said: Da’eef Kufi. [Al-Du’fa wal Matrokeen: 72]

Imam Bukhari has mentioned him in Kitaab ad-Du’fa [Tuhfa al-Aqwia Pg 21]

Hafidh Dhahabi said: Da’eef in Hadith. [Diwan al-Du’fa: 544]

Hafidh Ibn Hajr said: Da’eef. [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 (Taba’ee) 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 Masaa’il al-Imam Ahmed, Musannaf Abdur-

Razzaq (69/2, H. 2523), and Juz Rafa Yadain (H. 21).

Tawoos (Taba’ee) 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.


15----Hadith of Musnad Humaidi

Musnad Al-Humaidi and the Hadith of Rafa Yadain (Raising the Hands)

Habeeb ur-Rehmaan A’zami Indian Deobandi has published Musnad al-Humaidi

from his Nuskha Deobandiyyah, and has taken the help of Nuskha Sa’eedia, and

Nuskha Uthmaniyyah in its affirmity.

[See: Muqaddimah Musnad al-Humaidi, Pg 2, 3]

The date at which the Nuskha Sa’eedia 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]

A’zami, 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 al-

Humaidi, 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 A’zami Deobandi himself has agreed that there is an interpolation

in it. [See: Musnad al-Humaidi with the Tahqeeq of A’zami Vol 1, Pg 15 etc]

Image of Nuskha Deobandiyyah’s 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 Na’eem al-Asbahani

(See: Figure 5e)

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

یرکع ان اراد واذا منکبی حذو یدی یرفع الصال افتتاح اذا الل رسول ہرایت ہ ہ ۃ ہ

السجدتین بین یرفع وال الرکوع من راس یرفع ما بعد ہو ہ

It becomes clear from this statement that, the addition of “ یرفع in Nuskha ”فال

Deobandiyyah is an interpolation by the writer or the Naasikh himself, as it was

also done recently by a Muta’ssub Deobandi publisher, when Musannaf Ibn Abi

Shaibah was published in Karachi, having a reflection from the published nuskha

of Mumbai. And that Muta’ssub Deobandi publisher added his own words of “

ہتختسر ” at the end of the Hadith of Wa’il bin Hujr.

In the chain of this Hadith of Musnad Humaidi, the phrase of “ سفیان ”حدثنا

was also left; A’zami realized this mistake after a long time, because the chart of

Mistakes which is present at the end of the book also doesn’t 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 Humaidi’s 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 that’s 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 “مثلہ” he pointed that the words of Imam Humaidi’s

hadith are also the same. Thus this also proves that the phrase of “ یرفع is ”فال

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, that’s 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 Al-

Mahrah 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 Zaahiryah’s 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 Ya’qoob bin Ishaaq has

declared this narration (of Musnad Humaidi) to be similar as the narration of Imam

Shafi’I and Imam Abu Dawud.

The narration of Imam Shafi’I 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

Na’eem 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


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. That’s why Imam Abu Awanah, very

honestly, has also mentioned about the dispute of (each of) the narrators (regarding

the wording of this hadith). Some said: “( ) منکبیہ بھما حذو“ :and some said ,” یحاذی

,”منکبیہ and similarly, some said: “( ) السجدتین بین یرفعھما ,”ال and some

said: “( ) السجدتین بین یرفع .but the meaning of all of them is the same ,”ال

Imam Abu Awanah said: “ واحد pوالمعنی” meaning of all of them is the same. In

Sahih Muslim, six narrators have narrated the words of “( ) بین یرفعھما ال

from Sufyan ibn Uyainah (who is the centeral narrator of the hadith of“السجدتین

Musnad Abu Awanah). Imam Ahmed and others have narrated the words of “(ال

السجدتین ( بین ”یرفع

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 Sa’dan 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

Sa’dan is aboslutely Sahih).

It says that:

pیدیحتی رفع الصال افتتاح اذا و�س�ل�م�، ع�ل�ي�ه� ص�ل�ىالل�ه� الل رایترسول

بین یرفع وال الرکوع من یرفع ما وبعد یرکع ان اراد واذا منکبی ہیحاذی ہ

السجدتین

[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, that’s why The Hafidh, the Siqqah, The great, Imam

Abu Awanah brought this Hadith under the Chapter Heading of:

“ ولرفع وللرکوع منکبی بحذاء التکبیر قبل الصال افتتاح فی الیدین ہرفع ۃ

السجدتین بین یرفع ال Qوان الرکوع من ہراس ہ ”

Some foolish people have attached the wording of “ یرفعھما with ”ال 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 Sa’daan also affirms the doing of rafa yadain

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

4. The narrations of Imam Shafi’I, 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: “ بمثلہ ---- .”مثلہ“ and ,”نحوہ

5. The previous Hanafi Scholars like Zayla’I 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:

" " : انہ الحویرث بن مالک عن عاصم بن ناصر عن قتادہ عن سعید عن عدی ابی ابن حدثنا یی المثن بن محمد اخبرنابھما یحاذی pحتی السجود من راس رفع واذا سجد واذا الرکوع من راس رفع واذا رکع واذا صال فی یدی رفع النبی ہرای ہ ۃ ہ

اذنیہ فروع

(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 Nasai’s

Sunan al-Kubra, the phrase “An Sa’eed” has been hidden and replaced by the

word “An Shu’bah”, which is not correct.

Proof # 1: Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal has naarated the same Hadith from Ibn Abi

Adi, with the sanad of Sa’eed 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 Sa’eed 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 “Sa’eed--- (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 “Shu’bah –

(AN)---Qatadah” has been added instead of “Sa’eed---(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 “Sa’eed 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 Sa’eed bin Abi Arooba’s name.

Proof # 6: Hafiz Ibne Hibban said that, sometimes by mistake, Saeed becomes

Shu’bah 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 Sa’eed. [Mushkil al-Athaar, Vol 15, Pg 57]

Proof # 8: Imam Baihaqi has narrated the narration of Muhammad bin al-Muthna

from the sanad of Sa’eed. [Al-Sunan al-Kubra 25, 71/2]

Therefore, this narration is from the sanad of “Sa’eed 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 Waa’il bin Hujr

(Sunan Abu Dawud, H 723) “ الصلاۃ۔۔ من فرغ یی حت یدیہ رفع اا ایض السجود، من راسہ رفع ”واذا

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 Waa’il bin Hujr, the words of, “Iza raka’a, 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

“ الرکوع فی یدیھ رفع کان النبی ان انس عن حمید عن الثقفی ےحدثنا

”والسجود

(Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaibah, Pg 235)

In this narration, Humaid al-Taweel is a Mudallis, therefore this sanad is Da’eef.

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 Qa’ud.

Abu Ya’la Al-Mosli said:

“ : رایت قال انس عن حمید عن الثقفی عبدالوھاب حدثنا بکر ابو حدثنا

من راس رفع واذا رکع واذا الصال افتتاح اذا یدیھ یرفع الل ہرسول ۃ ہ

”الرکوع

[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

“ بیدیہ ویشیر فیقوم للقیام ینھض وحین سجد وحین یرکع وحین یقوم حین کفیہ یشیر بھم یی ”وصل

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

Its sanad is Da’eef, due to the Tadlees of Ibn Lahi’ah, and due to the

unknowingness ofMaimoon. Ibn Lahi’ah 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 Da’eef according

to the Muhadditheen. Its text also doesn’t 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

“ وجھہ۔۔۔ تلقاء یدیہ رفع منھا راسہ فرفع یی الاول السجدۃ سجد اذا ”فکان

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

Its sanad is Da’eef due to the weakness of Nadhar bin Katheer. (See: Taqreeb at-

tahdheeb (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 Qada’ah is Da’eef 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”. Al-

Ziyaal bin Harmala is Majhul ul-Haal, and Nasr bin Baab is Da’eef according to

the Jumhoor of Muhadditheen. Therefore this sanad is Da’eef. 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] “ صلاتہ ینقضی یی حت الرکوع قبل یکبرھا تکبیرۃ کل فی ”ویرفعھما

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.

rafayadyn

Documents

Transcript of rafayadyn