بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Hadīth 1)
وَعَنْ وَائِلِ بْنِ حُجْرٍ - رضى الله عنه - قَالَ : صَلَّيْتُ مَعَ اَلنَّبِيِّ - صلى الله عليه وسلم -فَوَضَعَ يَدَهُ اَلْيُمْنَى عَلَى يَدِهِ اَلْيُسْرَى عَلَى صَدْرِهِ
Wā’il ibn Hujr narrated:
“I prayed with the Prophet and he placed his right hand upon his left on his chest.”
(Sahīh ibn Khuzaymah, 1/272, #479, authenticated Ibn Khuzaymah. Authenticated by Ibn Hajr in al-Fath 2/224 and Bulugh al-Marām #217. Declared Sahīh by Al-Mubārakfūrī in Tuhfah 1/540. Al-Albānī also declared it Sahīh in the checking of Sahīh Ibn Khuzaymah and Sifat al-Salāh pg. 88)
Hadīth 2)
رَأَيتُ النَّبيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلَّمَ يَنصرِفُ عن يَمينِه وعن يَسارِه، ورَأَيتُه -قال:- يَضَعُ هذه على صَدرِه، وَصَفَ يَحيى: اليُمنى على اليُسرى فوقَ المَفصِلِ
Qabīsah ibn Hulb the Tābi’ī narrates from his father Hulb:
“I saw the Prophet and he was turning to his right and left in the prayer and I saw that, in the prayer, he would place his right hand upon his left on his chest. Yahyā al-Yamanī depicted this by placing the right hand upon the left (on the chest) above the level of the elbows.”
(Musnad Imām Ahmad #21864 – checking by Ahmad Shākir who declared the isnād as Sahīh. Authenticated by al’Adhīm al-Abādī in ‘Awn al-Ma’būd 2/203 who said: ‘the narrators of this hadīth are all trustworthy’. Al-Mubārakfūrī also authenticated it in Al-Tuhfah 3/400 and Al-Albānī in Sifat al-Salāh pg. 88)
[T.N: ‘Adhīm al-Ābādī says in summary (after saying all the men of the isnād are reliable – 2/203-205):
1. Yahyā ibn Sa’īd al-Qattān:
A hāfidh, hujjah (authority), and imam of jarh wa-l-ta’dīl
Highly praised by Ahmad (“my eyes have not seen his like”) and Ibn Ma’īn (“more reliable than Ibn Mahdī”)
2. Sufyān al-Thawrī:
Trustworthy, hāfidh, jurist, authority. Though he sometimes practiced tadlīs (concealment), noting here that he explicitly stated transmission here, eliminating any tadlīs concerns.
3. Simāk ibn Harb:
Sadūq (i.e. truthful – Hasan in hadīth) [see Taqrīb #2901].
[Abū Hātim said about him: “Truthful, Thiqah”. Al-Nasā’ī said: “There is nothing wrong with him”. Ibn Hibbān mentioned him in al-Thiqāt. Al-Thawrī said: “No hadīth of Simāk fell (to level of weakness/not suitable for consideration).” Yahyā ibn Ma’īn said: “Thiqah.” al-‘Ijlī said: “Acceptable in hadīth”. Ya’qūb said: “And his narration from ‘Ikrimah specifically (is) mudtaribah (inconsistent), and he (is) Sālih (acceptable) in other than ‘Ikrimah…”. Al-Bazzār said in his “Musnad”: He was a well-known man, I do not know anyone (who) abandoned him, and he had changed before his death.”. Ibn ‘Adī said: And Simāk has much hadīth (that is) straight (mustaqīm), if Allāh wills, and he is from the senior tābi’īn (successors) of the people of Kūfah, and his ahādīth (are) good (hisān), and he (is) sadūq (truthful), no harm (ba’s) in him – see Tahdhīb of Ibn Hajr]
Criticised for: Inconsistent narration from ‘Ikrimah specifically, changed/weakened at the end of his life.
Response to potential criticisms here: His inconsistency was only with ‘Ikrimah, not with Qabīsah (who he narrates from here). His late-life deterioration doesn’t affect this hadīth because Sufyān heard from him early in his life. Early transmissions from Simāk (like those of Shu’bah and Sufyān) are “straight/correct (mustaqīm)”
4. Qabīsah ibn Hulb:
Ibn Hajr said in al-Taqrīb: “maqbūl (acceptable)” – #6197.
[Ibn al-Madīnī and al-Nasā’ī called him majhūl (unknown)]
[al-‘Ijlī said: “(He was) thiqah – a Tābi’ī (successor).” Ibn Hibbān included him in al-Thiqāt.]
When Simāk was alone in narrating from Qabīsah, Qabīsah became majhūl al-‘ayn (unknown in person). And the hadīth of one who is majhūl al-‘ayn (is) acceptable if someone other than the one alone (in narrating) from him declares him trustworthy. Ibn Hajr said in “Sharh al-Nukhbah”: If the narrator is named and only one narrator is alone in narrating from him, then he is majhūl al-‘ayn like the unidentified (mubham), except if someone other than the one alone (in narrating) from him declares him trustworthy, according to the most correct (view).“
And you have known that Ahmad al-‘Ijlī and Ibn Hibbān, from the imams of al-jarh wa-l-ta’dīl, declared him trustworthy, so how can he be majhūl (unknown)?]
Hadīth 3)
عَنْ طَاوُسٍ، قَالَ كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَضَعُ يَدَهُ الْيُمْنَى عَلَى يَدِهِ الْيُسْرَى ثُمَّ يَشُدُّ بَيْنَهُمَا عَلَى صَدْرِهِ وَهُوَ فِي الصَّلاَةِ
Tawūs narrated:
“The Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) used to place his right hand on his left hand, then he folded them firmly on his chest in prayer.”
(Abū Dawūd 759. Declared Sahīh by Al-Albānī, who said even though this narration is mursal, it is used as evidence according to all the scholars – see Irwā 2/71. Mubārakfūrī declared it Hasan in Al-Tuhfah 401.
Shu’ayb al-Arnāūt declared it Hasan in his checking 2/71 – saying its men (narrators) (are) trustworthy (thiqāt) except Sulaymān ibn Mūsā – and he is al-Dimashqī – for (he is) sadūq (truthful) hasan al-hadīth (good in hadīth).
Al-Mubārakfūrī graded the isnād as Hasan and then followed it up by saying, the mursal narration is proof according to Imām Ahmad, Imām Mālik, Abū Hanifah unrestricted, and with Imām Shāfiʿī it’s proof when supported via another chain, whether musnad or mursal – Summarised from Tuhfah 3/401)
[T.N: on Sulaymān ibn Mūsā:
Yahyā ibn Ma’īn said to Yahyā ibn Aktham: Sulaymān ibn Mūsā (is) thiqah (trustworthy and reliable) and his hadīth (is) Sahīh (authentic) in our view.
Al-Zuhrī said: Sulaymān ibn Mūsā (is) more retentive (in memory) than Makhūl.
‘Uthmān al-Dārimī said, from Duhaym: Thiqah (trustworthy). And from Ibn Ma’īn: Thiqah in (narrations from) al-Zuhrī.
Ibn Sa’d said: He was thiqah (trustworthy), Ibn Jurayj praised him.
Ibn Hibbān said in al-Thiqāt (The Trustworthy): He died in the year 115H from a drink (that was) given to him, and he was a jurist (faqīh) (and) pious (wari’).
And al-Dāraqutnī said in al-‘Ilal: (He is) From the trustworthy (narrators), ‘Atā’ and al-Zuhrī praised him.
Abū Hātim said: His status (is) truthfulness (sidq), and in his hadīth (there is) some idtirāb (inconsistency), and I do not know anyone from the companions of Makhūl more versed in fiqh than him nor more reliable than him.
Ibn ‘Adī said: And Sulaymān ibn Mūsā (is) a jurist (faqīh) (and) narrator (rāwī). The trustworthy (narrators) narrated from him, and he is one of the scholars of the people of al-Shām, and he narrated ahādīth which he is alone in narrating, no one else narrates them, and he is in my view thabt (reliable/precise) sadūq (truthful) (See al-Tahdhīb of Ibn Hajr)
‘Adhīm al-Ābādī said: “And the statement of al-Nasā’ī (regarding Sulaymān): “(He is) not strong” (is) an unexplained criticism (jarh) and it does not impugn one whose uprightness (‘adālah) has been established, as has been established in its place.
As for the statement of Abū Hātim: “His status (is) truthfulness, in his hadīth (there is) some inconsistency,” it does not indicate except that he (is) light in preservation/precision (dabt), so the utmost extent and end of the matter is that his hadīth would be hasan (good) in itself, and it shares with the Sahīh (authentic) in (being used as) proof, so there is no defect in it…” (Awn al-Ma’būd 2/203)]
Points of benefit from the scholars:
- Al-San’ānī commenting on the hadīth of Wā’il in Bulūgh al-Marām said: The hadīth is evidence of the legitimacy of the aforementioned placement (of the hands) in prayer, and its position is on the chest, as stated in this hadīth. (Sharh Bulūgh al-Marām 1/284)
- Al-‘Adhīm al-Abādī said: The mursal narration of Tawūs, and the ahadīth of Halb and Wā’il bin Hujr are evidence of the desirability of placing the hands on the chest, and this is the truth. As for placing the hands below the navel or above the navel then there is no hadīth that has been proven from the Prophet (ﷺ).(‘Awn al-Ma’būd 2/205)
- Al-Albānī said: To place them on the chest is what is proven in the Sunnah, and all that is contrary to that is either weak or totally baseless. (Sifat al-Salāh pg. 88)
- Al-Marwazī said in al-Masā’il pg. 222: Ishāq (ibn Rahawayh) used to pray witr with us… he would raise his hands in qunūt, and make qunūt before rukū’ and he would place his hands on his breast or just under his breast. (Al-Irwā of Al-Albānī 2/71)
- Muhammad al-Bazmūl said: The location of the hands is on the chest, above the breasts. This is what is Sahīh from the narrations of the Prophet (ﷺ). (Sharh Sifat al-Salāh pg. 162)
- Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said: Shāfi’ī said: (place them) at the chest. And it was narrated from ‘Alī that he would place them on the chest. [He then mentioned the narration of Tawūs]. (The placing of the hands below the navel) was narrated from Alī, Abū Hurayrah and al-Nakhāī – (however) this was not (authentically) proven from them. (Al-Tamhīd 12/420)
- Ibn Hajr said: Ibn Khuzaymah narrated from the hadīth that he (ﷺ) “placed them on his chest”, and Al -Bazzārs (wording) – “near his chest”, and Ahmad reports a similar hadīth. And in Zawāid al-Musnad is the hadīth of ‘Alī that he placed them below the navel and its chain of transmission is weak. (Al-Fath 2/224)
- Al-Mubārakfūrī said: Section 2: In mentioning what is adhered to by those who believe in placing the hands above the navel: I have not come across a hadīth which is marfū [elevated to the Prophet (ﷺ)] that supports this position. Yes, there is the narration of ʿAlī which indicates this, as reported by Abū Dāwūd in his ‘Sunan’ from Jarīr ad-Dabbi who said, ‘I saw ʿAlī grasping his left wrist with his right hand above the navel.’
I say: this isnād is sahīh or hasan, but this is the action of ʿAlī and is not marfu’ [i.e. attributed to the Prophet (ﷺ)]. Also the clear meaning of his saying, ‘above the navel’ is a place raised from the navel, meaning, upon the chest or near the chest, as occurs in the hadīth of Wā’il ibn Hujr and the hadīth of Halb al-Tāi’ī and the mursal narration of Tawūs, and this three ahadīth will follow [these are hadīth 1,2,3 mentioned above]. And this interpretation is supported by his (i.e. ‘Alīs) tafsīr of His saying, “wanhar” (Sūrah al-Kawthar:2) by placing the hands upon the chest in the prayer as has preceded [This narration of’ Alī can be found in the tafsīr of Ibn Jarīr al-Tabarī 18/632, sunān al-Kubrā of al-Bayhaqī #2332, al-Awsat of Ibn al-Mundhir 3/238]. (Al-Tuhfah 3/398) - Al-Mubārakfūrī said: ‘Section 3: In mentioning what is adhered to by those who believe in placing the hands on the chest: These people used ahadīth as evidence… ‘
Including: The narration of Wā’il… is Sahīh as authenticated by Ibn Khuzaymah, as was made clear by ibn Sayyīd al-Nās in Sharh al-Tirmidhī…. Al-Shawkānī (also) said in Al-Nayl (al-Awtār) “Ibn Khuzaymah reported it and authenticated it”.
And from the ahādīth that these scholars depend upon is the hadīth of Halb… [hadīth 2]… And the narrators of this hadīth are all trustworthy, and the isnād is linked…
And the narration of Tawūs is considered mursal as Tawūs was a Tābi’ī, and its isnād is hasan. A mursal narration is considered proof with Abū Hanīfah, Mālik and Ahmad absolutely. And according to Shāfi’ī, it is a proof when supported by something that occurs via another route that builds upon the first route be it musnad or mursal. And this mursal narration is supported by the aforementioned hadīth of Wā’il and Halb. So deriving evidence from this to place the hands upon the chest in prayer is correct. (Al-Tuhfah 3/397-401, abridged and summarised). - Al-Mubārakfūrī said (in refuting those who reject these narrations due to slight differences in the wordings):
And as for the wording of ibn Khuzaymah, ‘upon the chest’, and the wording of al-Bazzār, ‘near the chest’, then the first (narration) is stronger and takes precedence over the second for the reason that the first has support with the hadīth of Halb and the mursal narration of Tawūs, contrary to the second for it has no witnesses.
Reconciling these narrations is also possible; scholars have reconciled them by stating that these narrations were reported regarding two different prayers, similar to the difference of the wording of the ahadīth that mention regarding the raising of the hands to the level of the shoulders or to the level of the ears [meaning that doing either one is permitted as the narrations were reported regarding different prayers].
So the claim of some of the hanafīs that the narration of Wā’il is mudtarib (confused) is not to be paid any attention. (Slightly abridged, and paraphrased Al-Tuhfah 3/401-402)
fawaaids.com 