Taken From The Works of-:
- Shaikh ul Allaamah Al-Haafidh Abu Taahir Zubayr Alee Za’ee (May Allah Preserve him)
- Shaikh ul Allaamah Al-Haafidh Thanaullaah Zayaa (May Allah Prserve Him)
- Shaikh ul Allaamah Al-Haafidh Badee ‘ud-Deen Shaah Raashidi as-Sindhee (May Allah have Mercy upon him)
- Translated and Compiled by: Raza Hassan
Before we continue, It is important to know the meaning of Chest i.e ‘Sadr’ in arabic. In the arabic dictionary of deoband, Qamoos Al Waheed pg 915, the word ‘Sadr’ means “the chest of a Human (From beneath the throat upto the tummy)”.
We begin with the name of Allaah who is the Most Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy. To proceed:
Sahl ibn Sa’d, may Allaah be pleased with him, reported, “The people were ordered to place their right hand upon their left forearm.” (Saheeh al-Bukhaaree, 1/102)
We can understand from this hadeeth that one should fold ones hands whilst in Salaah. One of the way this hadeeth can be understood is that if the right hand were to be placed upon the left forearm as stated above then naturally, the hands would rest on the chest.
The forearm here means from the finger region of the hand right up to the elbow. In another hadeeth it is reported that, “He (sallelaho alaihi wa alaihi wasalam ) placed his right hand upon his left hand, wrist and forearm.” (Sunan Nasaa’i with the footnotes of Allaamah Sindhee(1/141), AbuDawood(1/112), lbnKhuzairnah(1/243,480) and Ibn Hibbaan (p.485) have all authenticated this narration).
The understanding of the above narrations is further reinforced by the hadeeth, “He used to place his hand upon his chest …” to the end of the narration. (Musnad Ahmad (5/226) with this wording also At-Tahqeeq of Ibn Hibbaan al-Jawzee (1/283) and( 1/338) in manuscript form).
This matter is further reported in many narrations which my respected teacher, Shaikh Muhammad Badee’ud-Deen Shah Ar-Raashidee has collated and analysed in this treatise.
Generally, according to the scholars of hadeeth, the narrations which are put forth by the Deobandi’s, Bareilwi’s and other branches of the Hanafi’s, according to the scholars of Hadeeth are all weak and rejected. One such narration possibly the one which is most frequently used, is of a report in Sunan Abee Dawood (p. 756). This narration includes ‘Abdur-Rahmaan ibn Ishaaq al-Koofee, who is unanimously known amongst the scholars to be weak.
One may refer to classical Hanafi texts such as Nasbur-Rayah of Zailee (1/314), Al-Banaaya Fee Sharh Hidaayah (2/208) and others. In actual fact, it is mentioned in the notes to the book Hidaayah al-Awlayn, (no. 17, 1/103) that this narration is, “… weak by consensus.”
Further, it should be known that the Deobandis have tampered with Musannaf Ibn Abee Shaybah, by adding the words, “… below the navel,” whereas the actual manuscript and various prints of Musannaf Ibn Abee Shaybah are free from any such addition.
Then a strange twist to this matter is the saying of the Hanafees that, “Men should place their hands below the navel and that women should place theirs upon there chest.” Subhaanallaah! There is no proof for this statement from any hadeeth – either authentic or weak – and nor is there any consensus upon such a distinction. In spite of this, all Hanafees are agreed upon this matter and practice it in their prayers.
May Allaah make this treatise a means of guidance and Sadaqah Jaariyyah.
Haafidh Zubair Alee 22/9/1999
We say the prayer is the principal way to worship Allaah, the Almighty, and when a person stands in prayer, then, “He secretly converses with his Lord. ” (Muslim (1/208).
This is why no act should be performed within the Prayer which may conflict with good and suitable mannerisms. Rather, the Prayer should be offered with such humility that the fear of Allaah and taqwaa become apparent. Then it should be known that from man’s body, the heart is perceived as being of the greatest importance. As the great Prophet ( sallelaho alaihi wa alaihi wasalam ) said, “There is a piece of flesh in the body, if it sound and upright the whole body remains upright. If this part becomes corrupt then the whole body becomes corrupt. Verily this is the Heart.”(Mishkaat (2/241)
Then the heart is in proximity to the chest and is the abode of taqwaa as is mentioned in a hadeeth, “The Prophet pointed towards his chest and said thrice, “Taqwaa and protection are here.”” (Muslim (2/317) with Nawawee)
This is why he ( sallelaho alaihi wa alaihi wasalam ) would place his hands upon the chest. It is the way to show absolute humility. The one praying should stand in front of his Lord with such an action and this is what is most befitting. Allaamah Shaikh Sa’dee Sheyraazee has also mentioned similar reasoning in very eloquent poetry prose.
There is no basis in hadeeth for the action of those people who are accustomed to placing their hands below the navel. In actual fact, such an action displays disrespect and, if one were to place ones hands upon the navel to welcome a respected person today, then he would be looked upon in a bad light. How then can one stand in such a position in front of the King of all kings? Rather a person should place his hands upon his chest with all humilty offering his heart to his Lord. This was also the practice and method of the Prophet of Allaah.
This is a short treatise which is written for the general people so that they may attain guidance. I hope that this will become a means of guidance and Allaah is the One who guides.
To Proceed: There are some ahadeeth which are mentioned in regard to this important matter of where the hands are to be placed during the prayer.
Hadeeth No. 1
Abu Haazim Sahl ibn Sa’d Saadee narrates that: All those people praying (Companions) were ordered to place their right hand upon the left forearm and elbow. Salmah ibn Deenaar mentioned that I understood this narration to be marfoo in reaching the Prophet.
Authenticity of the Hadeeth
It is sufficient that this hadeeth is recorded in Saheeh al-Bukhaari because the ahadeeth in Bukhaari have a special grade of authenticity compared to all other ahadeeth and this is also the decision of the Scholars of this Ummah. [Sharh Nukhbah p.224 and Tadreeb ar-Raawee of Suyootee p.25 and others).
Further Imaam Ibn Hazm in Al-Muhalla (4/114) and Ibn Qayyim in A’laam al-Muwaqqi’een (2/6, Indian print) have declared this narration authentic.
This hadeeth is marfoo as is stated by the narrator Abu Haazim and who other than the Prophet could have given such an order? This is why Haafidh Ibn Hajr has said in his Fathul-Baari (2/124, Salafia Print) and Allaamah Ainee in his Umdatul Qaari (5/278, Al-Muneeriyyah Print) that this narration is marfoo and that this hadeeth is proof to place the hands upon the chest because when the right hand is placed upon the left arm and elbow then the hands will not be able to drift below the chest.
This method should be tried by the reader to see what happens and then the matter will become clear, if Allaah wills.
Hadeeth # 2:
Waail ibn Hujr narrates that, “I prayed with the Prophet and he placed his right hand upon his left on his chest.” (Saheeh ibn Khuzaimah, 1/243).
Authenticity of the Hadeeth
Imaam Ibn Khuzaimah, in relation to his Saheeh Ibn Khuzaimah, states at the very beginning the condition that, “This is a compilation of authentic ahadeeth which go right back to the Prophet with authentic and complete chains of narration. No narrator in the chains is unknown nor is there any broken chain of narration.” (Ibn Khuzaimah, 1/2).
This proves that this narration is absolutely authentic and free from deficiency according to Imam Ibn Khuzaymah. Further it is mentioned by Imaam Nawawee in his explanation of Saheeh Muslim, (4/115, Egyptian print), in Sharhul-Muhazzab (3/315), Haafidh ibn Sayyid in An-Naas in An-Nafkhush Shuzaa (2/211), Haafidh Shamsud-Deen ibn Abdul Haadee al-Maqdisee in Al-Muharar fil-Hadeeth, (p. 44), Haafidh Zailee in Nasbur-Raayah (1/314), Ibn Hajr in Fathul-Baari (2/224), Talkhees al-Habeer (1/224, Egyptian), Ad-Darayah Fee Takhreej Ahadeeth al-Hidaayah (1/128, Egyptian), and in Buloogh al-Maraam (p. 55), Aliaamah Ainee Hanafee in Umdatal-Qaaree (5/379, Al-Muneeriyyah Print), Imaam Shawkaanee in Naylal-Awtaar(Zn 15), Aliaamah Mujadiddud-Deen Fairozabaadee in Safaras-Sa’dah, Aliaamah al-Murtada az-Zubaidee Hanafee in Aqoodul-Jawaahir al-Muneefah (1/59) – (these) and others have all reported this hadeeth.
Further, Imaam Ibn Sayyid an-Naas, Haafidh Ibn Hajr, Aliaamah Ainee and Aliaamah Shawkaanee have all declared this narration authentic. Likewise, Mulla Qaaim Sindhee in his Risaalah Fauz al-Kiraam and Muhammad Hashim Sindhee in Dirham us-Surrah have stated this hadeeth to be authentic (saheeh).
Also, Ibn Nujaym Hanafee in Al-Bahr ar-Raqaa’iq, Allaamah Abul Hasan al-Kabeer as-Sindhee in Fathul-Wadeed Sharh Abee Dawood, Aliaamah Muhammad Hayaat Sindhee in his Fathul-Ghafoor and Shaikh Abu Turaab Raashidullaah Shah Raashidee in his Darjud-Duroor have all stated this hadeeth to be authentic (saheeh).
It can be seen then that this hadeeth in its chain of narration and meaning, is clear as it informs us that the Sunnah of the Prophet is to place the hands upon the chest in the prayer.
Analysis of its Isnaad (Chain)
Its chain is like this:
Abu Moosa Muhammad bin Muthna informed us, Mu’ammal bin Isma’eel narrated to us, Sufyaan ath-Thawree narrated to us, From Aasim ibn Kulayb, From His Father Kulayb bin Shihaab, From Waail ibn Hujr [radiallah anhu]
Waa’il bin Hujr
The first narrator of its chain is the Companion of the Mesenger of Allah [peace be upon him], Waa’il bin Hujr [radiallah anhu]. The Ahlu-Sunnah Wal Jama’ah are agreed upon that all the Companions are incomparable in Adal and Thaqahat.
Kulayb bin Shihaab
Imam Ibn Sa’d said: “Kulayb is Siqah and is the narrator of many narrations. I have seen the experts of the fields praising his narrations, and they used to consider him Hujja” [Al-Tabaqaat Al-Kubra: Vol 6 Pg 123, Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb Vol 8 Pg 400]
Imam Abdur Rahmaan bin Abi Haatim said that Imam Abu Zur’ah was asked about Kulayb bin Shihaab, so he said: “He is Siqah.” [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel: Vol 7 Pg 167]
Abdullah bin Ahmed narrates that My Father (Ahmed bin Hanbal) said: “Aasim narrates from his Father Kulayb, and he is the same from whom Ibraheem bin Muhaajir narrates.” [Al-Illal: 1886]
The Third in this chain is Aasim bin Kulayb.
Aasim bin Kulayb
Imam Yahya ibn Ma’een and others have declared him Siqah. [Mizaan al-I’tidaal Vol 4 Pg 12]
Maymooni narrates that Imam Ahmed declared him Siqah. [Sawalat : 356]
Imam Abu Bakr al-Athram narrates, he said: I heard from Imam Ahmed saying that: “There is nothing wrong in the hadeeth of Aasim bin Kulayb.” [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel: Vol 6 Pg 350]
Imam Abu Haatim said that: Aasim bin Kulayb is Saalih al-Hadeeth. [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel: Vol 6 Pg 350]
Imam Abu Dawood said that: Aasim bin Kulayb is better than the people of Koofah. And Imam Ibn Hibban has added him in Kitaab ath-Thiqaat. [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: Vol 5 Pg 49]
Imam Ibn Sa’d said: Aasim is Siqah and Hujja. [Al-Tabaqaat al-Kubra: Vol 6 Pg 341
Imam Awzaa’ee said: There is no major scholar from the People of Knowledge living, upon whom you people can rely on, except one Koofi Scholar, Abbaas said: That is Sufyaan ath-Thawree. [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel: Vol 4 Pg 222]
Imam Sufyaan ibn Uyainah said: I did not see a person more well verse with Halal and Haraam than Sufyaan ath-Thawree. Ibn al-Muarak said, I did not see a great person like Sufyaan ath-Thawree. Imam Yahya bin Sa’eed al-Qattaan said, I did not see a Haafiz like Sufyaan. [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel: Vol 4 Pg 223]
Yahya ibn Ma’een said: Sufyaan is the leader of the Believers in Hadeeth. [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel: Vol 4 Pg 225]
Imam Dhahabi said: The Experts of the Field are agreed upon Sufyaan being Siqah and Hujjat, even though he used to do tadlees from Du’afa. [Mizaan al-I’tidaal: Vol 3 Pg 244]
The Hanafi Objection on Sufyaan ath-Thawree
The ahnaaf claim that Sufyaan ath-Thawree is narrating this narration with “AN”, and Sufyaan is famous in making tadlees from Du’afa. Therefore the narration of such a narrator is unacceptable.
Answer to this Objection
This narration of Sufyaan ath-Thawree is narrated in Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah with “AN”, but this narration will not become Da’eef due to this defect, because such narrations of Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah are affirmed of having heard, as Imam Nawawi writes:
“The Mu’an’an narrations of the Mudallis narrators from Saheeh Bukhaari, Muslim and the similar books like them, will be held affirmed of having heard.” [Taqreeb an-Nawawi with the Sharh of Tadreeb ar-Raawi]
Since there is a doubt of Inqita’ in the Mu’a’an narration of a Mudallis, that’s why the narration of that narrator is not accepted until the affirmation of having that hadeeth heard directly is done from that narrator.
Since Imam Bukhaari, Imam Muslim, Imam Ibn Khuzaymah, and Imam Ibn Hibban etc have affirmed that they will not take evidence from the Munqati’ narrations in thier books, that’s why the mu’an’an narrations of these books will be considered affirmed of having heard.
Imam Ibn Khuzaymah has narrated many mu’an’an narrations of Mudalliseen in his Al-Musnad as-Saheeh (Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah). He has shown his rejection to the ahadeeth in which he could not find the affirmation of hearing. A few such examples are given below:
- “I declare this narration to be an exception from the Saheeh ahadeeth, because I do not think that Muhammad bin Ishaaq has directly heard this hadeeth from Muhammad bin Muslim, and he has commited Tadlees in it.” [Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah: Vol 1 Pg 71]
- “Abu Ishaaq has narrated this narration with “AN” that’s why there is some problem in this narration, because I do not know about his Samaa in this narration.” [Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah: Vol 1 Pg 212]
- “I do not know whether Abu Ishaaq has heard this hadeeth from Burayd or has committed tadlees.” [Vol 2 Pg 152]
From the above mentioned examples, it becomes clear that those mu’an’an narrations of Mudalliseen which were affirmed of hearing, upon them Haafidh Ibn Khuzaymah gave the verdict of authenticity in the beginning. And the narrations in which he was not aware of the affirmation, he showed his rejection to those ahadeeth. In the hadeeth under discussion, he was certainly aware of the affirmation of hearing that’s why he maintained the verdict of authenticity on this hadeeth.
Secondly, If a reliable Shaahid or Mutaabi’at is found for a Mudallis narrator, then the accusation of tadlees gets removed. A strong Shahid of the above narration is present in Musnad Ahmed (5/226 H. 22313), Al-Tahqeeq fi Ikhtilaaf ul-Hadeeth by Ibn al-Jawzi (1/28 H. 477), so the tadlees in this narration is no longer harmful.
Mu’ammal bin Ismaa’eel
His full name is Abu Abdullah Mu’ammal bin Isma’eel Al-Qarshi Al-Udwi Al-Basri. The detailed research on him is as follows:
The following narrations of Mu’ammal are present in Sihaah Sittah:
– Saheeh Bukhaari = (H. 2700, and according to a raajih qaul H. 7083 in Ta’leeq Form)
– Sunan Tirmidhi = (H. 415, 672, 1822, 1948, 2145, 3266, 3525, 3906, 3949)
– Sunan Nasaa’ee = Al-Sughra = (H. 4097, 4589)
– Sunan Ibn Maja = (H. 2013, 2919, 3017)
Criticizm on Mu’ammal bin Ismaa’eel
The following are the criticizms narrated regarding Mu’ammal:
- Abu Haatim ar-Raazi: “Sadooq, Strictly Follows the Sunnah, Makes Abundant Mistakes, Write his narrations” [Kitaab al-Jarah wal Ta’deel: 8/374]
- Zikriyah bin Yahya As-Saaji: “He is sadooq, but makes many mistakes. He has errors that would take too long to be mentioned.”[Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 10/381]
* From the author of Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb (Hafidh Ibn Hajar) to Imam As-Saaji, the chain is not present. Therefore this narration is Mardood.
- Muhammad bin Nasar al-Marwazi: “If Muammal alone relates a certain narration then it becomes obligatory to pause and research the hadeeth as he had a bad memory and erred excessively” [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 10/381]
* This saying is also chain-less, and is rejected due to going against the Jumhoor.
- Ya’qoob bin Sufyaan al-Faarsi: “Muammal is a great sunni shaikh. I heard Sulaiman bin Harb praise him. Our shaikhs would advise us to take his hadeeth, only that his hadeeth are not like the hadeeth of his companions. At times it is obligatory upon the people of knowledge to distance themselves from his narrations as he narrates munkar ahadeeth from even his authentic teachers. This is worse for had he narrated these munkar ahadeeth from weak authorities we would have excused him.” [Kitaab al-Ma’rifat wal Taareekh: 3/52]
* If this Jarah is from Sulemaan bin Harb then Ya’qoob al-Faarsi is among the Admirers (Mothaqeen) of Mu’ammal; and if this Jarah is from Ya’qoob then Sulemaan bin Harb is among the Admirers (mothaqeen) of Mu’ammal.
- Abu Zur’ah: “There are a lot of Mistakes in his hadeeth” [Mizaan ul-I’tidaal: 4/228 T. 8949]
* This saying is also chain-less.
- Ibn Sa’d: “He is Thiqah, makes many mistakes.” [Al-Tabaqaat al-Kubra by Ibn Sa’d: 5/501]
- Daraqutni: “Thiqah, makes many mistakes.” [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 10/381]
* This saying is contradictory to the praise of Imam Daraqutni as is coming ahead, and it is also not proven from The author of Tahdeeb to Daraqutni. Mu’ammal is not mentioned in the book of Imam Daraqutni “Kitaab ad-Du’afa wal Matrokeen”.
- Abd ul-Baaqi bin Qaani’: “Saalih makes Mistakes” [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 10/381]
* This saying is chain-less. Abdul Baaqi bin Qaani himself is criticized of being Mukhtalat. Some have praied him and some have criticized him. [See: Mizaan ul-I’tidaal: 2/532, 533]
- Hafidh Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaani: “He is truthful, weak in memory.” [Taqreeb at-Tahdheeb]
- Imam Bukhaari: “Munkir ul-Hadeeth” [Tahdheeb al-Kamaal: 18/526, Mizaan ul-I’tidaal: 4/228, Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 10/381]
* In all the three books, this saying is mentioned without any chain and without any reference. Whereas on the contrary to it, Imam Bukhaari has mentioned Mu’ammal in Al-Taareekh al-Kabeer (Vol 8 Pg 49 T. 2107) and did not criticize him. Mu’ammal is also not mentioned in Kitaab ad-Du’afa of Imam Bukhaari, and the narrations of Mu’ammal are present in Saheeh Bukhaari, See: H. 2700, 2083 with Fath ul-Bari. Imam Mizzi said: “Imam Bukhaari has narrated from him as Istish-haad” [Tahdheeb al-Kamaal: 18/527]
Haafidh Muhammad Taahir al-Maqdasi has written regarding a narrator that: “In fact He (Bukhari) has taken narrations from him in many places as Istish-haad to indicate that he is Siqah”
This proves that Mu’ammal is Siqah according to Imam Bukhari, not Munkir ul-Hadeeth.
- Ahmed bin Hanbal: “Mu’ammal is mistaken.” [Sawalaat al-Marwaazi: 53, Mawsoo’ah Aqwaal al-Imam Ahmed: 3/419]
It is an established saying that, even the Siqah narrators get mistaken (sometimes), therefore if such a narrator is Siqah according to the Jumhoor, then his proven Mistakes are to be left, and in his remaining narrations, he will be Hasan ul-Hadeeth. Moreover see: Qawaid fi Uloom ul-Hadeeth: Pg 275 and others.
- The ciriticizm of Ibn al-Turkamaani al-Hanafi is rejected due to “Qeela (Passive Form)”. [See: Johar al-Naqi 2/30]
The Praise of Mu’ammal bin Ismaa’eel
On the contrary, Mu’ammal is proven to be Siqah by the following Muhadditheen:
- Yahya ibn Ma’een: “Thiqah” [Taareekh Ibn Ma’een by Ad-Dauri: 235 Pg 591, Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel by Ibn Abi Haatim: 8/374]
In Kitaab al-Jarah wal Ta’deel, Imam Ibn Abi Haatim wrote that: “Ya’qoob bin Ishaaq narrated to us from what was written in the book from him, he said, Uthmaan bin Sa’eed (Imam Ad-Daarimi) narrated to us, he said: I said to Yahya ibn Ma’een: ‘What is the Condition of Mu’ammal when he narrates from Sufyaan? He replied: ‘He is Siqah’, I said to him: ‘Who is more beloved to you Mu’ammal or Ubaydullah?’ He declared both of them to be Equal” [Same Reference]
Ya’qoob bin Ishaaq al-Harwi is Siqah. He is mentioned in Taareekh al-Islaam of Haafidh Dhahabi [25/54]
Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali, in Sharh Illal al-Tirmidhi, has narrated this saying from the book of Imam Uthmaan bin Sa’eed ad-Daarimi. [See: 541/2]
- Ibn Hibban has mentioned him in Kitaab ath-Thiqaat (9/187) and said: “Make Mistakes”. Such a narrator is not Da’eef accrding to Imam Ibn Hibbaan. Imam Ibn Hibbaan has brought the narrations of Mu’ammal in his Saheeh. [See: Al-Ihsaan bitarteeb Saheeh Ibn Hibbaan Vol 8 Pg 253 H. 6681]
This proves that Mu’ammal is Saheeh ul-Hadeeth or Hasan ul-Hadeeth according to Ibn Hibbaan. The criticizm of “Make Mistakes” does not affect the narrator.
- Imam Bukhaari: He narrated from Mu’ammal as Istishhaad in his Saheeh. It has been passed under the criticizm of Imam Bukhari above that Imam Bukhaari has narrated from Mu’ammal in ta’leeq form, therefore he is Saheeh ul-Hadeeth acording to him.
- Sulemaan bin Harb: He praised him [The reference has been passed under the criticizm of Sufyaan al-Faarsi]
- Ishaaq bin Rahwayh: “Thiqah” [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 10/381]
* This saying is chain-less, therefore it is not proven.
- Tirmidhi: Declared his narration, Saheeh [415, 672, 1948], Declared his narration, Hasan [6146, (3266)]
Note: The narrations without the brackets around, are narrated from the chain of Mu’ammal from Sufyaan.
According to At-Tirmidhi Mu’ammal is Saheeh ul-Hadeeth and Hasan ul-Hadeeth.
- Ibn Khuzaymah: Authenticated him. [1/243 H. 479 etc]
The chain of Mu’ammal – AN – Sufyaan is authentic according to Imam Ibn Khuzaymah.
- Ad-Daraqutni: Authenticated him in his Sunan. [2/186, H. 2261]
* Daraqutni wrote about the chain of Mu’ammal from Sufyaan that, it is Saheeh. Meaning he is Saheeh ul-Hadeeth according to him from Sufyaan.
- Al-Haakim = Authenticated him in al-Mustadrak on the conditions of Shaikhayn, and Dhahabi followed him in that. [1/384 H. 1418]
* This narration is narrated from the chain of Mu’ammal from Sufyaan thawree, therefore Mu’ammal is Siqah according to Imam Haakim and Dhahabi.
- Dhahabi = “He is among the Siqaat” [Al-Abar fi Khabar min Ghabar: 1/274]
This proves that according to Imam Dhahabi, Mu’ammal is Siqah and the criticizm on him is rejected.
- Ahmed bin Hanbal = He Narrated from him. Imam Ahmed has narrated narration from Mu’ammal in his Al-Musnad, for example see: [Musnad Ahmed: 1/16 H. 97, Shuyookh Ahmed fi Musnad al-Imam Ahmed: 1/49]
* Zafar Ahmed Thanvi Deobandi has written that: “All the Shuyookh of Ahmed are Siqah”
* Haafidh Haythami said: “Ahmed has narrated from him and his Shyookh are Siqah.” [Majma az-Zawaid: 1/80]
Meaning generally, with the exception of some narrators, all the teachers of Imam Ahmed are Siqah (according to Jumhoor).
- Ali ibn al-Madeeni = He narrated from him as mentioned in Tahdheeb al-Kamaal (1/526) and Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb (10/380) and others. See Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel (8/374)
* It is narrated from Abu al-Arab al-Qairawaani that: “Certainly Ahmed and Ali ibn al-Madeeni (usually) only narrate from Siqah narrators” [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 9/114 T. 155]
- Ibn Katheer ad-Dimashqi: In a hadeeth of Mu’ammal from Sufyaan, he said: “Its chain is Jayyid” [Tafseer ibn Katheer 4/423, Surah al-Ma’arij]
* Mu’ammal is Jayyid ul-Hadeeth, meaning Siqah and Sudooq according to Imam Ibn Katheer.
- Al-Zayaa al-Maqdisi = He narrated a hadeeth from him in Al-Mukhtaarah (1/345 H. 237)
* Mu’ammal is Saheeh ul-Hadeeth according to Haafidh Zaya.
- Abu Dawood = Abu Ubayd al-Ajurri said, I asked Abu Dawood about Mu’ammal bin Ismaa’eel, thus he described his greatness and raised his status, except that he makes mistake in somethings. [Tahdheeb al-Kamaal: 18/527]
* This proves that according to the saying narrated from Imam Abu Dawood, Mu’ammal is Hasan ul-Hadeeth according to him, but the tawtheeq of Abu Ubayd al-Aajuri is not known, this saying is defective.
- Haafidh al-Haythami = “Siqah and he has weakness in him.” [Majma az-Zawaid: 8/183]
* Meaning Mu’ammal is Hasan ul-Hadeeth according to Haafidh Haythami.
- Imam Nasa’ee = He narrated from him in his Sunan (4097, 4589)
* Zafar Ahmed Thanvi Deobandi wrote: “The narrator of Sunan al-Sughra which is not criticized by Imam Nasaa’ee is Siqah according to him.” [Qawaaid Uloom ul-Hadeeth Pg 222]
- Ibn Shaheen = He mentioned him in Kitaab ath-Thiqaat [Pg 232 T. 1416]
- Al-Ismaa’eeli = He narrated from him in his Mustakhraj (upon Saheeh Bukhaari). [See: Fath ul-Bari 13/33 Under H. 7083]
- Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaani = He mentioned the hadeeth of Ibn Khyzaymah in Fath ul-Baari (which contains Mu’ammal) and did not criticize it. [2/224 Under H. 740]
* Zafar Ahmed Thanvi said: “Whatever hadeeth Haafidh narrates in Fath ul-Baari without criticizing it, then it is Saheeh or Hasan according to him, as is affrmed in the Muqaddimah…….” [Qawaaid fi Uloom ul-Hadeeth Pg 89]
This proves that according to Thanvi, Mu’ammal is Saheeh ul-Hadeeth or Hasan ul-Hadeeth according to Haafidh Ibn Hajar. Meaning he recanted from his Jarah in Taqreeb at-Tahdheeb.
- Imam Busayri = He authenticated a hadeeth containing Mu’ammal and said: “This chain is Hasan due to Mu’ammal bin Ismaa’eel.” [Misbaah al-Zajajah VOl 2 Pg 130]
- Ibn Sayyid an-Naas = He authenticated a hadeeth containing Mu’ammal [Sharh Tirmidhi Vol 2 Pg 211]
From this detail we come to know that Mu’ammal bin Ismaa’eel is Siqah and Sudooq, or Saheeh ul-Hadeeth and Hasan ul-Hadeeth according to the Jumhoor of Muhadditheen, therefore the criticizm of some Muhadditheen upon him is Mardood. Among the criticizers, the criticizm of Imam Bukhari is not even proven. According to Imam Tirmidhi and the Jumhoor of Muhadditheen, if Mu’ammal narrates from Sufyaan then he is Siqah and Saheeh ul-Hadeeth. The saying of Haafidh Ibn Hajar that: “There is some weakness in his hadeeth from Sufyaan” [Fath ul-Baari: 9/239 Under H. 5172] is rejected due to it being against the Jumhoor.
When it is proven that Mu’ammal is Saheeh ul-Hadeeth when he narrates from Sufyaan, so the criticizm of some Muhadditheen will be put on his narrations from other than Sufyaan.
At the end we say in conclusion that: Mu’ammal – AN – Sufyaan Thawree is Saheeh ul-Hadeeth; and Mu’ammal – AN – Ghair Sufyaan is Hasan ul-Hadeeth walhamdulillah.
Zafar Ahmed Thanvi Deobandi, after narrating a hadeeth of Mu’ammal – AN – Sufyaan, said that: “Its narrators are Siqah” [A’laa as-Sunan Vol 3 Pg 133 Under 865]
Moreover, Thanvi wrote about another narration of Mu’ammal that: “its chain is Hasan.” [A’laa as-Sunan: 3/118, Under H. 85]
Meaning even according to the Deobandis, Mu’ammal is Siqah.
Total Number of Criticizers = 10. Criticizm is not proven from some of them such as Bukhaari etc.
Total Number of Admirers = 22. Praise is not proven from some of them such as Ishaaq bin Rahwayh.
[Taken from: Ithbaat at-Ta’deel fi Tawtheeq Mu’ammal bin Ismaa’eel]
Abu Moosa Muhammad bin Muthana
Abu Moosa Muhammad bin Muthana is the narator of Sihah Sittah. The Famous Muhadditheen such as: Yahya bin Sa’eed, and Abdur Rahmaan bin Mahdi are his Students.
Imam Yahya ibn Ma’een said: He is Siqah….. Abdur Abdur Rahmaan said: I asked my Father about Muhammad bin al-Muthana, he said: He is Saalih ul-Hadeeth. [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel: Vol 8 Pg 95]
Khateeb Baghdaadi said: “He is Thiqah Thabat, the Ummah has relied upon his narrations.” [Mizaan ul-I’tidaal: Vol 6 Pg 318]
Hanafi Objection on the Hadeeth
After narrating this hadeeth, Imam Shawkaani has written that, Imam Ibn Khuzaymah has authenticated it.
Molvi Abdul Azeez Deobandi Punjabi, while showing his anger for Imam Shawkaani, writes:
“Qaadhi Shawkaani is the one who didn’t even see this (Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah) book, because this book is counted among those books which were extinct before and were rediscovered later on. Therefore, no eye has seen this book and neither is there any remnants left of it. Yes, however, two volumes of this book are said to have been present in the library of Liyadan.” [Haashiah Nasb ur-Rayaa: Vol 1 Pg 314]
Furthermore he writes:
“Certinly Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah is not like Bukhaari, Muslim, Abu Dawood, and Nasaa’ee, rather he gives his verdict on a hadeeth after narrating it, like Imam Tirmidhi and Imam Haakim. If he renders a hadeeth to be Saheeh then he declares it to be Saheeh.” [Haashiah Nasb ur-Rayaa: Vol 1 Pg 315]
To stregnthen his congectural and ideological position, he writes, while trying to educt from the writing style of Haafidh Ibn Hajar that:
“The narration narrated by Waail bin Hujr is narrated with different wordings. In some of the wordings, there is no doubt of their authenticity. The criticizm is on this narration which contains the wording “Ala Sadrih (On Chest)”. Haafidh Ibn Hajr has written in Fath ul-Baari that the narration narrated by Waail ibn Hujr [radiallah anhu], which is narrated by Imam Abu Dawood and Imam Nasaa’ee with this wording that The Apostle of Allah [peace be upon him] placed his right hand upon the left hand in a way that it was on the joint of the hand and wrist.” Imam Ibn Khuzaymah has also narrated this narration and has declared it Saheeh. The narration of Waail which contains the wording of ‘Ala Sadrih’, Haafidh Ibn Hajr said about this narration in Fath ul-Baari that the narration of Waail ibn Hujr is also narrated by Imam Ibn Khuzaymah that the Prophet [peace be upon him] placed his hands on the chest, and in Musnad Bazzar it says, close to the chest, he did not narrate the tasheeh (authentication) of Imam Ibn Khuzaymah about this additional wording neither in Fath ul-Baari nor in Talkhees ul-Habeer and nor in Al-Dirayah” [Haashiah Nasb ur-Rayaa: Vol 1 Pg 316]
And Molvi Muhammad Haneef Gangohi has also raised the same arguement in Ghayat us-Sa’ayah Vo 3 Pg 42
Answer to this Objection
Haafidh Ibn Hajar has narrated several ahadeeth in his books with reference to Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah. In some narrations, after narrating the hadeeth, he would say “Sahhahu ibn Khuzayma (Ibn Khuzaymah authenticated it)”, and sometimes he would say “Akhrajahu Ibn Khuzaymah (Ibn Khuzaymah took it out/narrated it)”. Due to his this style of writing, the Hanafi Scholars mistakenly thought that Imam Ibn Khuzaymah used the way of Imam Tirmidhi and Imam Haakim in the grading of ahadeeth.
With Due Praise to Allah, the manuscript of Ibn Khuzaymah has not only been found but it has also gone through the process of publication, and its publication has proved all the congectural and ideological guesses to be wrong. And this manuscript is not taken from the library of Liyadan, rather it is taken from Maktabah Ahmed al-Thalith Istanbul Turkey.
After the study of this book, it has become very clear that the way of Imam Ibn Khuzaymah is totally different than Imam Tirmidhi. When he starts a new chapter, he gives his verdict of authenticity to all the ahadeeth narrated in that chapter, and the narration which he does not consider to be authentic according to his conditions, then he would show his rejection to that hadeeth. The chapter under which Imam Ibn Khuzaymah has narrated those two narrations which are mentioned by Molvi Abdul Azeez Deobandi Punjabi in the Haashiah of Nasb ur-Rayaa, Imam Ibn Khuzaymah has started that chapter with the following words:
“This is the most abridged Musnad as-Saheeh based on the sayings of the Prophet, according to the conditions that we have mentioned in the beginning of Kitaab at-Tahaarah” [Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah: Vol 1 Pg 153]
In the beginning of Kitaab at-Tahaarah, he has written that:
“This is the most abridged Musnad Saheeh based on the sayings of the Prophet. Whatever ahadeeth we will mention under this chapter, their narrators, from beggining till the end, will be fulfilling the condition of Adal, and their chain will reach up to the prophet without any inqita. All its narators, Allah willing, are free from the defect of Jarah.” [Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah: Vol 1 Pg 3]
Under this chapter, Imam Ibn Khuzaymah has brought 708 Abwaab and 1469 ahadeeth, and in some of them he has shown his rejection, about whose authenticity he was not very sure, or his mentioned condition was not fulfilled by them. It should be kept in mind that Imam Ibn Khuzaymah has completely followed his conditions, therefore Allamah Jalal ud-Deen Suyuti writes;
“The status of Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah is high in authenticity than Saheeh Ibn Hibbaan, because Imam Ibn Khuzaymah is very cautious about this matter. He would reject a hadeeth as being unauthentic on a mere minute criticism and say that ‘If this narration is authentic or if it is proven’ (with the expression of doubt: “If”) etc.”
From the publication of Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah and the explanation of Allamah Jalal ud-Deen Suyuti, the position of Molvi Abdul Azeez Deoband Punjabi and Molvi Haneef Gangohi gets proven to be wrong.
It should be noted that Qaadhi Shawkaani is not the only one who said that Ibn Khuzaymah has authenticated it, rather Muhaddith Ibn Sayyid an-Naas has also said that Ibn Khuzaymah has authenticated it. [Sharh Tirmidhi: Vol 3 Pg 211]
The Hanafi Objection on the Text of this Hadeeth
Molvi Muhamad Haneef Gangohi, while discussing this hadeeth, wrote:
“Furthermore, its text also has idtiraab in it. Ibn Khuzaymah has narrated the words ‘Ala Sadrih (On Chest)’ Haafidh Al-Bazzar narrated ‘Inda Sadrih (Close to Chest)’, while Ibn Abi Shaybah narrated ‘Tahta Surrah (Below the Navel)’” [Ghayat us-Sa’ayah: Vol 3 Pg 41]
Answer to this Objection
Does this hadeeth really contains Idtiraab in it? To know the answer to this question, we first need to know what the definition of Mudtarib Hadeeth actually is.
“Mudtarib narration is the one which is narrated through different wordings. One narrator narrates contradictory words two or more than two times. Two or more narrators contradict each other, on the condition that he is Mutaqaarib in the words of Nawawi, Mutasawi in the words of Ibn as-Salaah, and Mutaqawim in the words of Ibn Jama’ah with a ‘waw’ and ‘meem’, and none of them can be preferred over the others. If one from the two or more than two narrations can be preferred over the others because of the Strong Memorization of its narrator, or due to the extensive tilmeedh (pupilship) of its narrator with his Shaikh, or due to the other reasons, then the preferred one will get the honor of acceptance, and that hadeeth will not at all be Mudtarib, neither the Raajih (Preferred) as is apprent, and nor will the Marjooh (inferior) be Mudtarib, rather it will be Shaadh or Munkir.” [Taqreeb an-Nawawi Ma’ Sharh Tadreeb ar-Raawi: Pg 93]
Meaning a narrator sometimes narrate different words and in other times he narrates different words than before; or several students of one Shaikh narrate contradictory words, then such a narration will be declared Mudtarib on the condition when none of them can be preferred over the others. The following are the situations of preference:
- One student among all the students is the possessor of strongest memory.
- Any of the students among the students, stayed with his Shaikh for a long time.
- More than one students narrate the similar words, whereas only a few narrate different words than the majority.
Now let’s come and observe different routes of the narration under discussion, in light of this definition.
The hadeeth of Waail [radiallah anhu] present in the authentic Nuskha of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, is narrated without any determination of where to place the hands. The addition of ‘Tahta Sirra (Under the Navel)’ at the end of this narration was first done by Qaasim bin Qatlubagha and he said that its chain is Jayyid. Before him, many Hanafi scholars (Ibn Hummam Hanafi, Aynee Hanafi, Ibn Ameer al-Haaj Hanafi, Ibraheem Halbi Hanafi, and Saahib ul-Baher Hanafi) had presented several Da’eef ahadeeth and athaar to stregnthen their Madhab on this issue, but none of them presented this hadeeth as their evidence, even though they had a deep eye on Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah. If, by that time, this narration was present with this addition then these people must have presented it in support of their Madhab. The inconsideration of this hadeeth by these guys is an open proof that, by that time, Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah had not been targeted by the negligence of any Copyist, or the Maslaki Ta’assub of any person. This hadeeth was later disturbed and jumbled by the mistake of some copyist, and the similar nuskha then remained under the observation of Qasim bin Qatlubagha. It is not difficult for the copyist to make such a mistake because right after this marfoo hadeeth, the athar of Ibraaheem Nakha’ee is present which contains the words ‘Tahta Sirrah’ at its end. Allamah Hayaat Sindhi Hanafi announces the acceptance of this fact with the following words:
“Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah has narrated this narration, and after that he has narrated the athar of Ibraaheem Nakha’ee. The starting words of both of them are almost the same, but the words of ‘tahta sirrah’ are present at the end of the athar (only). There are many Nuskhas (Manuscripts) of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, and the exact mention of where to place the hands is found in none of them, and the athar of Ibaraaheem is present in it with the words of ‘Tahta Sirrah’ and in some nukha the words of Tahta SIrrah are present at the end of the Marfoo hadeeth but the athar of Ibraaheem is not there.” [Darat fi Izhar Ghash naqad as-Sirat]
This detail makes it clear that the words of ‘tahta sirrah’ at the end of the Marfoo hadeeth are Ghair Mahfoodh (unpreserved), therefore it is not correct to present these words as a contradiction.
As far as the difference of ‘Ala Sadrih’ and ‘Inda Sadrih’ in Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah and Musand al-Bazzar is concerned, then this is not a kind of difference due to which we can reject the hadeeth, under discussion, by declaring it to be Mudtarib; because such a semantic difference is also found in the books of ahnaaf. Here is one example to prove this point:
Allamah Ibn Abideen said:
“Women and the homosexual should place their palm over the palm under their breasts, and in some Nuskhas of Munyah, it says to place them over the breast, in Hilyah it says that it is better to say that they should place them on chest as said by Jam al-Ghafeer, because when the hands are on chest then some part of the wrist must also be on the breast.” [Radd al-Mukhtaar Ala ad-Durrul Mukhtar: Vol 2 Pg 188]
Just like Ibn Abideen solved the word differences of the Nuskhas of Munyah, similarly, the word difference of ‘Ala Sadrih’ and ‘Inda Sadrih’ can also be solved. Meaning, we can say that the hands should be placed on the part of chest which is attached to the mouth of stomach, like this, some part of the wrist will certainly be close to the chest and some part must also be on the chest.
and Also Read the Below Narrations. Click & Read The Below Links