(no title)

Weak hadīth: saying Bismillah wa barakatillah before eating

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Abū al-‘Abbās Qāsim ibn al-Qāsim al-Sayyārī informed us in Marw, Abū al-Muwajjih [informed] us, ‘Abdān [informed] us, al-Fadl ibn Mūsā [informed] us, ‘Abd Allāh ibn Kaysān narrated to us, ‘Ikrimah narrated to us, from Ibn ‘Abbās (may Allāh be pleased with them both) that:

أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ ﷺ وَأَبَا بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا أَتَوْا بَيْتَ أَبِي أَيُّوبَ، فَلَمَّا أَكَلُوا وَشَبِعُوا قَالَ النَّبِيُّ ﷺ : خُبْرُ وَلَحْمٌ وَتَمْرٌ وَكِسَرٌ وَرُطَبٌ، إِذَا أَصَبْتُمْ مِثْلَ هَذَا فَضَرَبْتُمْ بِأَيْدِيكُمْ فَكُلُوا بِاسْمِ اللَّهِ وَبَرَكَةِ اللَّهِ

The Prophet (ﷺ) and Abū Bakr and ‘Umar (may Allāh be pleased with them both) came to the house of Abū Ayyūb. When they ate and were satisfied, the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Bread and meat and dates and pieces [of food/bread] and fresh dates. When you obtain the like of this and you strike with your hands [to partake], then eat in the name of Allāh (bismillah) and with the blessing of Allāh (wa-barakatillah).” (al-Mustadrak of al-Hākim #7261 and a different version in #7357. Mu’jam al-Saghīr of al-Tabarānī #185)

Declared weak by Al-Albānī in Da’īf al-Targhīb #1303, and Ta’liqāt al-Hisān #5193.

Abd Allāh ibn Kaysān: Al-Bukhārī said about him in al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr 5/178 (561): “Rejected/objectionable (munkar), not from the people of hadīth.”

Abū Hātim said about him in al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dīl 5/143: “Weak in hadīth.”

Al-Nasā’ī said about him in al-Du’afā 329: “He is not strong.”

Ibn ‘Adīy said about him in al-Kāmil 5/385: “And ‘Abd Allāh ibn Kaysān has from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbās – hadīths other than what I have dictated that are not preserved…”.

In al-Iktifā 2/187 it’s mentioned: “Al-‘Uqaylī said: “In his hadīth there are many errors.” Ibn al-Jārūd mentioned him among the weak [narrators].”

In Qānūn al-Du’afā pg. 273, it’s mentioned: “(‘Abd Allāh ibn Kaysān is) matrūk (abandoned).”

Acting upon and using the weak hadith as evidence – Part 3: al-Shawkānī, al-Dawānī, al-Qanūjī, al-Hilālī

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Imām al-Shawkānī said: “What has been explicitly declared authentic (Sahīh) or good (Hasan) is permissible to be acted upon, and what has been explicitly declared weak is not permitted to be acted upon.” (Nayl al-Awtār 1/15)

Imām Al-Shawkānī also said: “The legal (Sharī’ah) rulings are equal in footing, there is no difference between them, so it is not lawful to establish anything from them (i.e. legal rulings) except by what establishes evidence, otherwise it would be speaking about Allāh regarding what He did not say, and in it is the punishment that is well-known” (al-Fawā’id al-Majmū’ah fī al-Ahādīth al-Mawdū’ah p. 283)

Shaykh Siddīq Hasan Khān al-Qanūjī said: “The correct [position] that there is no escape from – is that legal rulings are equal in footing, so one should not act upon a hadīth until it is [established to be] authentic (Sahīh) or good (hasan) in itself (li-dhātihī) or due to external factors (li-ghayrihī), or its weakness is remedied so it rises to the level of good (hasan) in itself (li-dhātihī) or due to external factors (li-ghayrihī).” (Nuzul al-Abrār pp. 7-8)

Shaykh Salīm Al-Hilālī said: “Using weak hadīth as evidence – whether in beliefs (‘aqā’id), or [legal] rulings (ahkām), or encouragement and warning (targhīb wa tarhīb) – after the principles of the sciences of hadīth have been established – is not permitted absolutely, because in using it as evidence is establishing worship (‘ibādah) with what Allāh did not legislate.” (al-Mutqin Sharh Tadhkirah of Ibn Mulaqqin pg. 61)

Jalāl al-Dīn al-Dawānī said: “They agreed that weak hadīth do not establish legal rulings (al-ahkām ash-shar’iyyah).

Then they mentioned that it is permissible, rather recommended, to act upon weak hadīth in virtues of actions. Among those who explicitly stated this is al-Nawawī in his books, especially the book ‘al-Adhkār’.

There is a problem in this, because the permissibility of action and its recommendation are both among the five legal rulings [i.e. obligation, recommendation, permission, dislike, prohibition].

So when action according to weak hadīth becomes recommended, its establishment is by weak hadīth, and that contradicts what has been established regarding the non-establishment of rulings by weak hadīth.” (Unmūdhaj al-‘Ulūm pg. 2)

Acting upon weak hadīth – part 2: what did Imām Ahmad and others intend by allowing acting upon weak hadīth – Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, Ibn ‘Allān, Ahmad Shākir

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Part 1: the opinions of Yahyā ibn Ma’īn, Bukhārī, Muslim, Ibn al-‘Arabī’, Al-Albānī on acting upon weak hadīth

https://fawaaids.com/2025/05/11/can-we-act-upon-weak-hadith/

Ibn Taymiyyahs and Ahmad Shākirs position on acting upon weak hadith

Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah said: “It is not permissible to rely in the Sharī’ah on weak hadīth that are neither authentic (sahīh) nor good (hasan)” (Qā’idah Jalīlah fī at-Tawassul wa al-Wasīlah p. 84)

Shaykh Ahmad Shākir said: “What I hold is…that there is no difference between rulings (ahkām) and virtues of actions (fadā’il al-a’māl) and such, in not taking to the weak narration. Rather, there is no proof/evidence for anyone except with what is authentic from the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) from authentic (Sahīh) or good (Hasan) hadīth.” (al-Bā’ith al-Hathīth p. 76)

Clarifying what the Imāms meant by allowing acting upon weak hadīth

Shaykh al-Islām ibn Taymiyyah said: “This is the meaning of (Imām) Ahmad’s use of weak hadīth as evidence, and his saying: “Sometimes we take the weak hadīth” and other such statements of his – he means by it the hasan (hadīth).” (Sharh al-‘Umdah 1/143)

Shaykh al-Islām also said: “The weak [hadith] according to them [is of] two types: weak that is not used as evidence, which is the weak according to al-Tirmidhī’s terminology, and the second: weak that is used as evidence, which is the hasan in al-Tirmidhī’s terminology.” (Mabtū’ Ma’a al-Majmū’ 20)

He also said: “The first person known to have divided hadīth into Sahīh, hasan, and da’īf was Abū ʿĪsā al-Tirmidhī.” (al-Majmū al-Fatāwā 18/23)

Imām ibn al-Qayyim said: “So the weak hadīth according to him [i.e. Imām Ahmad] is a counterpart to the authentic, and a division among the divisions of the hasan, and he did not used to divide hadīth into Sahīh, hasan, and da’īf, but rather (only) into authentic (Sahīh) and (Da’īf) weak.” (I’lām Muwaqi’īn 1/31-32)

Ibn ‘Allān: “Then what is transmitted from Imām Ahmad ibn Hanbal regarding acting upon weak hadīth absolutely when nothing else is found, and that it is better than opinion (raʾī) – the weak in it is interpreted as the opposite of authentic (Sahīh) according to his custom and the custom of the predecessors, since reports according to them [were either] authentic (Sahīh) or weak (Daʿīf), because it [the latter] is weak from the rank of Sahīh, so it includes Hasan [the good hadīth].

As for the weak according to the famous/well-known terminology – meaning what does not gather the conditions of acceptance [and is rejected] – this is not what is intended. Ibn al-ʿArabī transmitted this from his teacher, and it is good – by it what was mentioned of criticism regarding this imām is repelled.

Al-Zarkashī said: “Close to this is the statement of Ibn Hazm: ‘The Hanafīs are agreed that the school of Abū Hanīfah [holds that] weak hadīth according to him takes precedence over opinion.’ The apparent [meaning] is that their intention by ‘weak’ is what preceded.”” (al-Futuhāt al-Rabbāniyyah 1/86)

Shaykh Ahmad Shākir said: “As for what Ahmad ibn Hanbal, ‘Abd ar-Rahmān ibn Mahdī, and ‘Abd Allāh ibn al-Mubārak said: “When we narrate concerning al-halāl wa al-harām (the lawful and unlawful), we are strict, and when we narrate concerning al-fadā’il (virtues) and similar matters, we are lenient” – what they mean by this – in what I consider most likely, and Allāh knows best – is that the leniency is only (a reference to) taking the hadīth (which is) hasan – that has not reached the level of sihhah (Sahīh – highest level of authenticity).

For indeed the terminology in the distinction between al-Sahīh and al-Hasan (the authentic and the good) was not established and clear in their era. Rather, most of the early scholars would not describe the hadīth except as having authenticity (i.e. Sahīh) or weakness (i.e. Da’īf) only.” (al-Bā’ith al-Hathīth pg. 138)

Imām al-Shawkānīs speech on the mawlid (celebrating the Prophet’s birthday)

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

“I have not found until now any evidence indicating its establishment from [the] Book [of Allāh], nor Sunnah, nor consensus (ijmāʿ), nor analogy (qiyās), nor any legal reasoning/inference (istidlāl).

Rather, all Muslims are in agreement that it did not exist in the era of the best generations, nor those who followed them, nor those who followed them.

They agreed that the one who invented it was the Sultān al-Mudhaffar Abū Saʿīd Kawkabūrī ibn Zayn ad-Dīn ʿAlī ibn Sabaktīn, the ruler of Irbil and [he was the] builder of al-Jāmiʿ al-Mudhaffarī at the foot of Qāsiyūn.

[Ibn Kathīr mentioned in “al-Bidāyah wa al-Nihāyah,” quoting Sibt Ibn al-Jawzī, that he said regarding what he mentioned about the Sultān of Irbil: that he would organise for the Sūfīs during the Mawlid a samāʿ (musical/mystical gathering) from noon until dawn and would dance with them himself].

So take note that the Mawlid was introduced in the seventh century [Hijrī]…and no one among the Muslims denied that it was an innovation (bidʿah).

When this is established, it becomes clear to the one who contemplates that whoever says it is permissible – after accepting that it is an innovation and that every innovation (bidʿah) is misguidance according to the explicit text of the Chosen One (ﷺ) – has said only what is contrary to the purified Sharīʿa. He has not held onto anything except his blind following (taqlīd) of those who divided innovation (al-bidʿah) into categories that have no traces from knowledge.

The conclusion is that we do not accept any statement from the one who says it is permissible except after he establishes evidence that specifically exempts this innovation [i.e. the Mawlid] from that generality which cannot be denied [i.e. every innovation is misguidance].

As for merely saying ‘so-and-so said’ and ‘so-and-so wrote,’ this is of no value. The truth is greater than any individual. Moreover, if we were to rely only on the sayings of men and cling to the tails of hearsay, then the claim of permissibility would be nothing more than a rare oddity among Muslims.

As for the Purified Household (ʿItra al-Mutahharah – the Prophet’s family) and their followers, we have not found a single word from them indicating its permissibility.

The spread of innovations is swifter than the spread of fire, especially the innovation of Mawlid, for the souls of the common people long for it with utmost yearning, particularly after the attendance of a group of people of knowledge, nobility, and leadership with them. For it will seem to them after that that this innovation is among the most confirmed of the Sunnah practices.”(Exerpts taken from Fath al-Rabbānī 2/1087-1089)

Division of bid’ah into good and bad – Imām al-Shawkānī

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

وَعَنْ عَائِشَةَ : أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ ﷺ قَالَ: مَنْ عَمِلَ عَمَلًا لَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ أَمْرُنَا فَهُوَ رَدُّ»

وَلأَحْمَدَ: مَنْ صَنَعَ أَمْرًا عَلَى غَيْرِ أَمْرِنَا فَهُوَ مَرْدُودٌ»

From ‘Ā’ishah: that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Whoever does a deed that is not according to our affair, it is rejected.”

In Ahmads version: “Whoever does a matter according to other than our matter, it is rejected.” (al-Bukhārī 3187, Muslim 178, and Ahmad 1389)

Imām al-Shawkānī said: “what is meant by affair here is one of the affairs, which is what the Prophet (ﷺ) and his companions were upon.

This hadīth is among the foundations of the religion, because under it fall rulings that cannot be enumerated. Nothing is clearer or more explicit in invalidating what the jurists have done in dividing innovations (bid’ah) into categories, and restricting the rejection to some of them without any specifier from reason or transmitted (evidence).

So when you hear someone say: “This is a good innovation (bidʿah hasanah),” you should take a stance of prohibition, supporting [your position] with this universal (principle) and similar (statements) such as his (ﷺ) saying:

كل بدعة ضلالة

“Every innovation is misguidance,”

seeking evidence for the specification of that particular innovation which has become a matter of dispute after agreement that it is [originally] an innovation. If he brings you [such evidence], accept it, but if he fails, you will have silenced him with a stone and found rest from argumentation.” (Nayl al-Awtār 1/641)

Imām al-‘Uthaymīn on good and bad bid’ah: https://fawaaids.com/2025/07/26/holding-a-celebration-after-completing-the-quran-refuting-the-doubt-of-good-innovation-sh-uthaymin/

The meaning of taqlīd (blind-following) and its prohibition from the Qur’ān – al-Qurtubī, al-Shawkānī, al-Uthaymīn, Abū Hayyān

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

The meaning of taqlīd

Imām al-Qurtubī said: “Al-Taqlīd (blind following), according to the scholars, its reality is accepting a statement without evidence.

And it is linguistically derived from qilādat al-ba’īr (the camel’s collar/halter), for the Arabs say: “I put a qilādah on the camel” when they put a rope around its neck by which it is led. So it is as if the muqallid (blind follower) places his entire affair (subject) to whoever leads him wherever he wishes.

Al-Taqlīd is not a path to knowledge nor does it lead to it, neither in usūl (fundamental matters) nor in furūʿ (subsidiary matters).” (Tafsīr al-Qurtubī 1/553)

The prohibition of taqlīd

Allāh says:

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمُ اتَّبِعُوا مَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ قَالُوا بَلْ نَتَّبِعُ مَا أَلْفَيْنَا عَلَيْهِ وَآبَاءَنَا أَوَلَوْ كَانَ ءَابَاؤُهُمْ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ شَيْئًا وَلَا يَهْتَدُونَ

“And when it is said to them: “Follow what Allāh has sent down.” They say: “Nay! Rather we shall follow what we found our fathers upon.” (Would they do that!) even though their fathers did not understand anything nor were they guided?” [2:170]

Imām al-Shawkānī said: “And in this verse is censure of the muqallidīn (blind followers), and a denunciation of their excessive ignorance and their corrupt belief – in a manner that cannot be measured.

And similar to this verse is His saying, the Exalted:

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمْ تَعَالَوْا إِلَى مَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ وَإِلَى الرَّسُولِ قَالُوا حَسْبُنَا مَا وَجَدْنَا عَلَيْهِ ءَابَاءَنَا

“And when it is said to them, ‘Come to what Allāh has revealed and to the Messenger,’ they say, ‘Sufficient for us is what we found our fathers upon‘” [5:104].

And in that is evidence for the ugliness of taqlīd (blind following) and the prohibition from it.” (Fath al-Qadīr 1/508)

Imām ibn al-‘Uthaymīn said: “(From the benefits of this verse is) that whoever shows fanaticism for a madhhab (school of thought) while contradicting the evidence has in him a resemblance to these [people]. The obligation is that when a person is told “Follow what Allāh has revealed,” he should say: “We hear and we obey.” (Tafsīr al-Thamin 1/385)

Imām Abū Hayyān said: “And in this (verse) is evidence that the dīn (religion) of Allāh is following what Allāh has revealed, because they were not commanded [to do] anything except that.” (al-Bahr Muhīt 1/683)

Imām al-Qurtubī said: “Ibn Dirbās said: “And the people of innovation have frequently spoken against those who hold fast to the Book and the Sunnah that they are muqallidūn (blind followers), and this is an error from them.

Rather, it is more fitting for them and more appropriate to their schools of thought, since they accepted the statements of their leaders and elders in what they opposed of the Book of Allāh and the Sunnah of His Messenger and the consensus of the Companions (may Allāh be pleased with them), so they became included among those whom Allāh censured by His saying:

وَقَالُوا۟ رَبَّنَآ إِنَّآ أَطَعْنَا سَادَتَنَا وَكُبَرَآءَنَا فَأَضَلُّونَا ٱلسَّبِيلَا۠, رَبَّنَآ ءَاتِهِمْ ضِعْفَيْنِ مِنَ ٱلْعَذَابِ وَٱلْعَنْهُمْ لَعْنًۭا كَبِيرًۭا

And they will say: “Our Lord! Verily, we obeyed our leaders and our elders, and they misled us from the (Right) Way. Our Lord! Give them double torment and curse them with a mighty curse!” [33:67-68].” (Tafsīr al-Qurtubī 1/553)

When does a weak hadeeth become hasan & the authenticity of calling adhaan/iqaamah in newborns ear

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Intro: When does a weak hadīth become Hasan

Meaning of hasan li-ghayrihi: “…it is the hadīth that contains weakness that is not severe, such as its narrator being weak (but) not descending below the rank of one who is considered (for supporting evidence), or a mudallis [one who practices tadlīs] who did not explicitly state hearing, or its chain being interrupted (munqatiʿ). And all of this is conditional upon two matters: that the hadīth not be irregular (shādhdh), and that it be narrated from another route like it or stronger than it with its wording or meaning.” (Mu’jam Mustalahāt Hadithiyyah pg. 319)

Al-Nawawī said: “When a hadīth is narrated from weak routes, it doesn’t necessitate that hasan (good grade) results from their combination.

Rather, what was weak due to the poor memory of its truthful and trustworthy narrator – (this weakness) disappears by its coming from another route and becomes hasan.

And likewise if its weakness was due to being mursal [having a missing link in the chain], (this weakness) disappears by its coming from another route.

But as for weakness due to the transgression/sin/disobedience (fisq) of the narrator, the agreement of others does not affect it. And Allāh knows best.” (al-Taqrīb pg. 58)

Hāfidh Ibn Kathīr said: “…because [weakness] varies – from it is what does not disappear with supporting narrations, meaning: it does not matter whether it is a follower or followed – such as the narration of liars and the abandoned (matrūkīn) and their like [verifier commented saying: “meaning from the weak ones with severe weakness, such as one who is described with the statement “very weak (daʿīf jiddan)”].

And from (the weak hadīth) is weakness that disappears with supporting narration, as when its narrator has poor memory, or narrated the hadīth as mursal. For indeed the supporting narration benefits in that case, and it raises the hadīth from the depths of weakness to the pinnacle of hasan or Sahīh.”

Shaykh Ahmad Shākir commented on Ibn Kathīrs statement saying: “And by this becomes clear the error of many of the later scholars in their unrestricted statement that when a weak hadīth comes from multiple weak routes, it rises to the level of hasan or sahīh.

For if the weakness of the hadīth is due to the transgression/sin/disobedience (fisq) of the narrator or his (condition) being attributed with lying, then it comes from other routes of this type, (it) increases weakness upon weakness. Because the isolation of those attributed with lying or those criticised in their integrity, such that none other than them narrates it, removes confidence in their hadīth and supports the weakness of their narration. And this is clear.” (al-Bā’ith al-Hathīth pg. 66)

The weak narrations of calling the adhān/iqāmah for the newborn

Hadīth 1:

Abū Dawūd 5105:

حَدَّثَنَا مُسَدَّدٌ، حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى، عَنْ سُفْيَانَ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي عَاصِمُ بْنُ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ، عن عُبَيْدِ اللهِ بنِ أَبِي رَافِع ، عن أَبِيهِ قال : رَأَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللهِ ﷺ أَذَّنَ فِي أُذُنِ الْحَسَنِ بنِ عَلِيٍّ ، حِينَ وَلَدَتْهُ فَاطِمَةُ ، بالصَّلَاةِ

Musaddad narrated to us, Yahyā narrated to us, from Sufyān, he said: ‘Āsim ibn ‘Ubayd Allāh narrated to me from ‘Ubayd Allāh ibn Abī Rāfi’ that his father said: “I saw the Messenger of Allāh recite the Adhān in the ears of Al-Hasan ibn ‘Alī, when Fātimah gave birth to him.”

Hāfidh Zubayr ‘Alī Za’ī said: “Its chain of transmission is weak. It was [also] recorded by al-Tirmidhī…under the chapter: The Adhān in the ear of the newborn, hadīth: 1514, from the narration of Yahyā al-Qattān with it. And he [i.e. Tirmidhī] said: “Hasan Sahīh”, [even though] ʿĀsim ibn ʿUbayd Allāh is weak. And for the hadīth there are supporting witnesses (shawāhid) that are extremely weak and not suitable to be used as supporting evidence.” (Takhrīj Abū Dawūd 5/414)

Imām al-Mubārakfūrī said: “Al-Mundhirī said in Talkhīs al-Sunan after transmitting al-Tirmidhī’s statement: “In its chain is ‘Āsim ibn ‘Ubayd Allāh ibn ‘Āsim ibn ‘Umar ibn al-Khattāb. Imām Mālik criticised/found fault with him, Ibn Ma’īn said: ‘Weak, his hadīth is not used as evidence,’ and others spoke about him. Abū Hātim Muhammad ibn Hibbān al-Bustī criticised his narration of this hadīth and others.” End of al-Mundhirī’s statement.

I say (i.e. Al-Mubārakfūrī): Al-‘Ijlī said: “There is no problem with him.” Ibn ‘Adī said: “Despite his weakness, his hadīth is written down.” Ibn Khuzaymah said: “I do not use him as evidence due to his poor memory.” Thus in Mīzān al-I’tidāl.” (al-Tuhfah 9/276)

Shaykh Al-Arnāūt said: “Its chain is weak due to the weakness of ‘Asim ibn ‘Ubayd Allāh.” (Takhrīj Musnad Imām Ahmad 39/297)

In the version collected by al-Tabarānī 926:

– حدثنا محمد بن عبد الله الحضرمي، ثنا عون بن سلام، ح وحدثنا الحسين بن إسحاق التستري، ثنا يحيى الحماني، قالا ثنا حماد بن شعيب، عن عاصم بن عبيد الله، عن علي بن الحسين، عن أبي رافع :أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أذن في أذن الحسن والحسين رضي الله عنهما حين ولدا، وأمر به

Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allāh al-Hadramī narrated to us, ‘Awn ibn Salām narrated to us, – and al-Husayn ibn Ishāq at-Tustarī narrated to us, Yahyā al-Hamānī narrated to us. They both said: Hammād ibn Shu’ayb narrated to us, from ‘Āsim ibn ‘Ubayd Allāh, from ‘Alī ibn al-Husayn, from Abū Rāfi’: “That the Prophet (ﷺ) called the adhān in the ears of al-Hasan and al-Husayn, may Allāh be pleased with them both, when they were born, and commanded (with) it.”

Shaykh al-Arnāūt said: “This is a very weak chain, containing – besides ‘Asim ibn ‘Ubayd Allāh – Hammād ibn Shu’ayb, whom there is agreement on him being weak.” (Takhrīj Musnad Imām Ahmad 39/297)

Imām al-Haythamī said: “…in it is Hammād ibn Shu’ayb, who is very weak.” (Majma al-Zawāid 8/643)

Imām Al-Albānī declared the hadīth weak and said: “…so I graded the hadīth of Abū Rāfiʿ (initially) as hasan (good) [due to supporting narrations] as in “al-Irwāʾ” (1173/400/4).

And now that al-Bayhaqī’s book “al-Shuʿab” has been published – and praise be to Allāh – and I have examined its chain in it, and the severity of its weakness became clear to me, I have retracted from the mentioned grading as hasan, and the hadīth of Abū Rāfiʿ has returned to the weakness that its chain necessitates [i.e. weak and not suitable for elevation to authenticity].” (Slightly paraphrased, al-Da’īfah 6121)

Hadīth 2/3:

Shu’ab al-Īmān of al-Bayhaqī, 8619:

أخبرنا أبو محمد بن فراس بمكة أنا أبو حفص الجمحي نا علي بن عبد العزيز نا عمرو بن عون أنا يحيى بن العلاء الرازي عن مروان بن سالم عن طلحة (بن) عبد الله العقيلي عن (الحسين) بن علي قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: من ولد له مولود فأذن في أذنه اليمنى وأقام في أذنه اليسرى رفعت عنه أم الصبيات

Abū Muhammad ibn Firās informed us in Makkah [that] Abū Hafs al-Jumahī informed us [that] ‘Alī ibn ‘Abd al-‘Azīz narrated to us [that] ‘Amr ibn ‘Awn informed us [that] Yahyā ibn al-‘Alā’ ar-Rāzī [narrated] from Marwān ibn Sālim from Talhah (ibn) ‘Abd Allāh al-‘Uqaylī from (al-Husayn) ibn ‘Alī, who said: The Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) said: “Whoever has a child born to him and calls the adhān in his right ear and establishes the iqāmah in his left ear, Umm as-Sabiyyāt will be lifted from him.“

Musnad Abū Ya’lā 6780:

حدثنا جبارة، حدثنا يحيى بن العلاء، عن مروان بن سالم، عن طلحة بن عبيد الله، عن حسين، قال: قال رسول الله – صلى الله عليه وسلم :من ولد له فأذن في أذنه اليمنى وأقام في أذنه اليسرى، لم تضره أم الصبيان

Jabbārah narrated to us, Yahyā ibn al-ʿAlāʾ narrated to us, from Marwān ibn Sālim, from Talhah ibn ʿUbayd Allāh, from Husayn (ibn ʿAlī), (who) said: The Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) said: “Whoever has (a child) born to him and calls the adhān in his right ear and establishes the iqāmah in his left ear, umm al-sibyān will not harm him.“

Imām Al-Albānī declared the isnād as Mawdū’ (fabricated) saying: “Yahyā ibn al-ʿAlāʾ and Marwān ibn Sālim fabricate hadīth.” (al-Da’īfah 321)

Al-Sinārī said: “I say: This is an extremely invalid/false (bātil jiddan) chain (isnād), as if it were fabricated (mawdūʿ)…

1 – Jabbārah ibn al-Mughallas: (He is) closer to being abandoned (al-tark) than to anything else, and it has been transmitted from Ibn Maʿīn that he declared him a liar…

2 – And his teacher: Yahyā ibn al-ʿAlāʾ: His hadīth died the day that Imam Ahmad said about him: “A liar who fabricates hadīth”…

3 – And Marwān ibn Sālim: He is al-Shāmī about whom al-Sājī and Abū ʿUrūbah al-Harrānī said: “He fabricates hadīth.” The first added: “A liar.” And the critics abandoned him (completely). How similar he is to (Yahyā ibn al-ʿAlāʾ)!

4 – And Talhah ibn ʿUbayd Allāh al-ʿUqaylī: (He is) an absent shaykh – unknown who he even is?!…” (Abridged and slightly paraphrased, Takhrīj Musnad Abū Ya’lā 9/173-174)

Shaykh Al-Arnāūt said in Takhrīj Musnad Imām Ahmad, saying: “In its chain are Yahyā ibn al-‘Alā’ and Marwān ibn Sālim, both of whom are attributed with fabrication. Abū Ya’lā’s shaykh contains Jabbārah ibn Mughallas, who is weak.

Regarding Umm al-Sibyān, al-Manāwī said in “al-Fayd” 6/238: “A wind that affects them, sometimes causing them to faint from it, as it is said. More appropriate than this is al-Hāfidh Ibn Hajr’s statement: ‘Umm as-Sibyān is a follower from among the jinn.'” (39/298)

Hadīth 4.

Shu’ab al-Īmān of al-Bayhaqī 8620:

وأخبرنا علي بن أحمد بن عبدان أنا أحمد بن عبيد الصفار نا محمد بن يونس نا الحسن بن عمر (بن سيف) (٥) السدوسي نا القاسم بن مطيب عن منصور بن صفيه عن أبي معبد عن ابن عباس: أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أذن في أذن الحسن بن علي يوم ولد فأذن في أذنه اليمنى وأقام في أذنه اليسرى

‘Alī ibn Aḥmad ibn ‘Abdān informed us [that] Ahmad ibn ‘Ubayd as-Saffār informed us [that] Muhammad ibn Yūnus narrated to us [that] al-Hasan ibn ‘Amr (ibn Sayf) as-Sadūsī narrated to us [that] al-Qāsim ibn Mutīb [narrated] from Mansūr ibn Safiyyah from Abī Ma’bad from Ibn ‘Abbās: “the Prophet (ﷺ) called the adhān in al-Hasan ibn ‘Alī’s ear the day he was born, calling the adhān in his right ear and establishing the iqāmah in his left ear.“

Al-Bayhaqī said: “In these two chains (i.e. hadīth 8619, 8620) there is weakness.”

Imām Al-Albānī declared the hadīth Mawdū (fabricated) saying: “And in this statement (of al-Bayhaqī) (there is) great leniency, which I would not have wished to issue from him, due to the severe weakness of the two chains. For indeed the hadīth referred to contains two men who fabricate hadīth.

And some of the later scholars have been deceived by such leniency, so they strengthened with it the hadīth of Abū Rāfiʿ whose chain is weak – as I clarified there – and had they known the severity of its weakness, they would not have strengthened it… because the severely weak (hadīth) is not suitable (to be used) in supporting evidence (shawāhid) by consensus of the scholars (of Hadīth)…

…for indeed al-Hasan ibn ʿAmr (originally: ʿUmar) al-Sadūsī is abandoned (matrūk) – as in al-Taqrīb – and Ibn al-Madīnī and al-Bukhārī called him a liar.

And Muhammad ibn Yūnus – who is: al-Kadīmī – is a liar and fabricator…” (al-Da’īfah 6121)

Evidence that face and hands of the woman are not awrah – part 2; Tafsīr of al-Ahzāb:59 & clarification of what’s authentic from Ibn ‘Abbās

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

For part 1 – containing ahādīth which show the women uncovering their face and hands during the time of the Prophet (ﷺ), responses to some of the doubts/objections, and the tafsīr of Sūrah al-Nūr verse 31 – click here: https://fawaaids.com/2025/07/12/evidence-that-the-face-hands-of-the-woman-is-not-awrah-part-1/

Tafsīr of Sūrah al-Ahzāb:59

Allāh says:

يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّبِيُّ قُل لِّأَزۡوَٰجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَآءِ ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنِينَ يُدۡنِينَ عَلَيۡهِنَّ مِن جَلَٰبِيبِهِنَّۚ ذَٰلِكَ أَدۡنَىٰٓ أَن يُعۡرَفۡنَ فَلَا يُؤۡذَيۡنَۗ وَكَانَ ٱللَّهُ غَفُورٗا رَّحِيمٗا

Oh Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw close (yudnīna) upon themselves of their outer garments (jalabīb). That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And Allāh is Forgiving and Merciful.

The meaning of yudnīna (يدنين) – basic verb adnā (أدنى)/danā (دنا) – verbal noun idnā (إدناء) – root word dunū (الدُّنُو)

Al-Rāghib al-Asfahānī said: “Al-Dunū (الدُّنُو): Closeness by essence or by ruling, and it is used regarding place, time, and status…And it is said: I brought together between the two matters (dānayty bayna al-amrayn), and I brought one of them closer (adnayt ahadahumā) to the other, (as) Allāh The Most-High said: “to draw close upon themselves of their outer garments” [Al-Ahzāb:59].” (Mufradāt pg. 263)

Ibn Mandhūr said: “…And in the hadīth: “When you eat, (mention the) name (of) Allāh and danū (دنوا) and sammitū.” The meaning of his (ﷺ) saying danū (دنوا) is: eat from what is adjacent to you and what is near you and close to you.

And al-dunyā was named for its nearness, and because it came near while the Hereafter was delayed.” (Lisān al-Arab 3/426)

Abu Hayyān said: “Al-Kisā’ī said: They cover themselves with their garments drawn close upon them – he intended by “drawing close” the meaning of al-idnā’ (drawing close).” (al-Bahr Muhīt 7/333)

Al-Alūsī said: “Al-idnā’ means drawing close; it is said “adnānī” meaning “he brought me close,” and it carries the implied meaning of loosening or letting down, which is why it is used with the preposition “alā” (over/upon) as it appears to me.” (Rūh al-Ma’ānī 11/736)

Meaning of jilbāb

Al-Wahīdī said: “(jilbāb) – meaning the woman’s garment with which she wraps herself with.” (Tafsīr Basīt 18/274)

Al-Karmānī said: “(jalābīb) – Their outer garments and its singular is jilbāb.” (Gharīb al-Qur’ān pg. 500)

Al-Baghawī said: “the plural of jilbāb, which is the cloak/outer garment that a woman wraps herself with over the dress and head covering.” (Tafsīr al-Baghawī 3/600)

Al-Sam’ānī said: “The jilbāb is the outer garment/cloak, which is the sheet that a woman wraps herself with over the dress and head covering.” (Tafsīr al-Sam’ānī 3/362)

Ibn ‘Attiyah said: “The “jilbāb”: is a garment larger than the khimār (head covering). It is narrated from Ibn ‘Abbās and Ibn Mas’ūd that it is the outer cloak/garment.” (Muharrar al-Wajīz 8/55)

Al-Albānī said: “The jilbāb is the outer garment that a woman wraps herself with above her clothes, according to the most correct opinion.

It is mostly used when she leaves her home, as narrated by the Two Shaykhs (Bukhārī 324, Muslim 890, and the wording is his) and others from Umm ‘Atiyyah (may Allāh be pleased with her), who said: “The Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) commanded us to bring them out for Fitr and Adhā: the mature women, those menstruating, and those in seclusion. As for those menstruating: they should avoid the prayer but witness the good and the supplication (du’ā’) of the Muslims. I said: ‘Oh Messenger of Allāh, what about one of us who does not have a jilbāb?’ He said: ‘Let her sister clothe her from her jilbāb.'” (Hijāb Mar’ah Muslimah pg. 46-47)

Al-Albānī also said: “…the jilbāb is the outer garment that a woman wraps herself with over her clothes – and not over her face… upon this [understanding] all the language books [agree] – there is nothing in any of them mentioning the face at all.” (Radd al-Mufhim pg. 10)

Tafsīr of the salaf and some of the scholars

Ibn ‘Attiyah said: “The people (of knowledge) differed regarding the manner of bringing (the jilbāb) close.” (Muharrar al-Wajīz 8/55)

Al-Tabarī said [after explaining the first opinion of those who say the jilbāb is brought close by covering the entire body except the one eye – weak narration of Ibn ‘Abbās and Ibn Sirīn to follow insha Allāh]:

“Others said: Rather, they were commanded to tighten their jalābīb over their foreheads. A mention of those who said this:

Muhammad ibn Sa’d who said my father narrated to me, he said: My uncle narrated to me, he said: My father narrated to me, from his father, from Ibn ʿAbbās: “… And the drawing close of the jilbāb is to cover oneself and tighten it upon one’s forehead. (Tafsīr al-Tabarī 15/83, Dar Ibn al-Jawzī – chain declared very weak by the verifier. T.N: although weak, this statement is supported by the authentic narration of Ibn Abbās to follow, and his tafsīr of Sūrah al-Nūr verse 31 – Narrated by ‘Abdullāh ibn ‘Abbās – via the route of Sa’īd ibn Jubayr – regarding His saying: “except what appears thereof,” he said: her face, her hands, and the ring.” (Mawsū Tafsīr Mathūr 15/561))

Qatādah (said) regarding (the verse)… “Allāh took upon them when they go out that they should cover above their eyebrows.” (Tafsīr al-Tabarī 15/83-84, Dar Ibn al-Jawzī – verifier declared the chain as Sahīh. Also declared as Sahīh by Al-Albānī in Radd al-Mufhim pg. 52)

Mujāhid (said) regarding (the verse)… “They should wear outer garments, so it will be known that they are free women, so no transgressor will approach them with harm through words or suspicion.“” (Tafsīr al-Tabarī 15/84, Dar Ibn al-Jawzī – chain declared Sahīh by the verifier)

End quote of Imām Tabarī [complete chains of transmission omitted].

Ibn Jurayj said: The last thing that ʿAtā’ said to me was: Abū ash-Shaʿthā’ informed me that Ibn ʿAbbās said: “She brings the jilbāb close to her face, and does not pull it upon it.” (Masāil Imām Ahmad of Abū Dawūd pg. 154-155. Authenticated by Al-Albānī in Radd al-Mufhim pg. 50 saying: “This isnād is very authentic (Sahīh Jiddan)” He also said in Radd al-Mufhim pg. 10: “What contradicts it is either anomalous (shādh) or weak (da’īf).”)

Abū Bakr al-Jassās said: “Ibn ʿAbbās and Mujāhid said: The free woman covers, when she goes out, her forehead and her head, contrary to the condition of the slave women.” (Ahkām al-Qur’ān 5/245)

ʿIkrimah, mawlā of Ibn ʿAbbās, said regarding His words: “draw close upon themselves from their jalābīb,” he said: She draws close the jilbāb until the opening of her throat is not seen.” (Mawsū Tafsīr Mathūr 18/130-131)

Saʿīd ibn Jubayr [the great student of Ibn ‘Abbās] said regarding His words: “draw close upon themselves,” he said: “They let down upon themselves from their jalābīb” – and it is the qinā’ (large head covering) over the khimār (head covering). It is not permissible for a Muslim woman to be seen by a stranger except that she has the qinā’ (large head covering) over the khimār, and has tied with it her head and throat.” (Mawsū Tafsīr Mathūr 18/130)

[T.N: al-miqna’ah: what a woman covers her head with. In as-Sihāh: what a woman covers her head with. The qinā’ is broader than the miqna’ah. Al-Azharī said: There is no difference according to the reliable linguists between qinā’ and miqna’ah

According to Dūzī: The words qinā’, miqna’, and miqna’ah in Arabic refer to a type of fabric (shawl) that both genders place on the head. (Mu’jam Arabī Li-Asmā Mulābis pg. 408)

Al-Nawawī said: “Al-miqna’ and al-miqna’ah are what a woman covers her head with. Al-qinā’ is broader than al-miqna’ah.” (Tahdhīb Asmā wa Lughāt 4/105]

Muqātil ibn Sulaymān said: “…to draw close upon themselves from their jalābīb,” meaning: the qinā’ (large head covering) that is over the khimār (head covering).” (Tafsīr Muqātil ibn Sulaymān 3/507-508)

Ibn Qutaybah said: “draw close upon themselves from their jalābīb” – meaning: they wear upon themselves the cloaks/outer garments.” (Gharīb al-Qur’ān pg. 278)

Hāfidh ibn al-Qattān said (after explaining and providing evidence that the covering of the hands and face is not obligatory): “If it is said: This that you have adopted – that a woman is excused for the appearance of her face and hands, even though she is commanded to cover as much as possible – its opposite appears from His saying, the Most High:

“Oh Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw close (yudnīna) upon themselves of their outer garments (jalabīb). That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And Allāh is Forgiving and Merciful.”

The answer is that we say: It is possible to interpret this “drawing close” in an interpretation that does not contradict what we said – that its meaning is: they should draw close upon themselves from their outer garments what does not cause earrings and necklaces to appear, like His saying:

وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَى جُيُوبِهِنَّ

“And let them draw their khimār (head covering) over their bosoms” [al-Nūr: 31]

The commanded “drawing close” (idnā) is general/unrestricted (mutlaq) in respect to everything that can be called idnā (“drawing close”). When we apply it to a single (act) of what is called/referred to as “drawing close,” it fulfills the requirement of the command, since not every (possible form of) drawing close was required – for it is a (positive) obligation, unlike prohibition and negation [which are absolute].

Moreover, it has been said [by the scholars of Tafsīr] about the verse that it only came to distinguish between free women and slaves, and we will mention (the discussion) about that in (a separate) issue…” (Slightly paraphrased, Ihkām al-Nadhar pg. 213-214)

Al-Albānī said: “…there is no evidence in the verse that a woman’s face is ‘awrah requiring her to cover it. Rather, the utmost that is in it is the command to bring down the jilbāb upon her, and this, as you see, is an absolute/unrestricted command. It is possible that the idnā’ (bringing close) is upon the zīnah (adornment) and its places which she is not permitted to display, as the first verse explicitly stated [i.e. Sūrah al-Nūr:31], and in that case the mentioned indication (i.e. the face must be covered) would be negated…

We hold that the first opinion (i.e. that covering the face and hands is not included in this verse) is more suitable to be correct for [several] matters:

First: That the Qur’ān explains parts of itself with other parts. It has been clarified from the preceding verse of al-Nūr that the face does not have to be covered [click here to read the tafsīr of Sūrah al-Nūr:31], so it is necessary to restrict the idnā’ (bringing close) here to what is other than the face, harmonising between the two verses.

The other: That the Sunnah clarifies the Qur’ān, specifying its generalities and restricting its unqualified statements. Many texts from (the sunnah) have shown that the face does not have to be covered [click here to see some of these texts], so it is necessary to interpret this verse in light of those (texts) and restrict its (application) by them.

Thus it is established that the face is not ‘awrah requiring covering, and this is the madhhab (school of thought) of most scholars…

…in conclusion, it is obligatory upon all women to cover themselves when they leave their homes with jalābīb (outer garments), with no difference in this between the free women and the slave woman. It is permissible for them to uncover only the face and hands due to the practice being established in the time of the Prophet (ﷺ) with his approval of them doing so.” (Abridged, Jilbāb Mar’ah Muslimah pg. 87-96)

Weak narration attributed to Ibn ‘Abbās

Alī > Abū Sālih > Mu’āwiyah > Alī > Ibn ‘Abbās: “… Allāh commanded the women of the believers, when they go out from their houses for a need, to cover their faces from above their heads with the outer garments and to show one eye.”

(Tafsīr al-Tabarī 15/82 Dar Ibn al-Jawzī – the isnād declared da’īf (weak) by the verifier. And declared weak by Al-Albānī in Hijāb al-Mar’ah al-Muslimah pg. 50 saying: “This ʿAlī is Ibn Abī Talhah as Ibn Kathīr noted from him, and along with some scholars criticising him, he did not hear from Ibn ʿAbbās, indeed he never (even) saw him. It has been said that Mujāhid is between them, so if this is authentic regarding this report, then it is connected, but in the chain to him is Abū Sālih whose name is ʿAbdullāh ibn Sālih, who has weakness. Ibn Jarīr narrated from Ibn ʿAbbās what contradicts this, but it is also weak in the chain of transmission. However, we found another chain for it that is authentic.”)

[T.N: On Alī ibn Abī Talhah:

Al-Dhahabī says: “(he narrated) from Mujāhid, and Abū al-Waddāk, and Rāshid ibn Saʿd. He took Ibn ʿAbbās’s commentary from Mujāhid, but did not mention Mujāhid, rather he transmitted it directly from Ibn ʿAbbās.

Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: “He has (narrated) objectionable things (munkarāt).” And Abū Dāwūd said: “He used to hold (permissible) the sword (i.e. rebelling against the ruler).”

And Duhaym said: “Alī ibn Abī Talhah did not hear tafsīr (commentary of the Qur’ān) directly from Ibn ʿAbbās.” (Mizān al-I’tidāl 3/146. See also Jāmi’ Likutub al-Du’afā wal-Matrukīn wal-Kādhābīn 10/591-592)

Ibn Hajr said: “He transmitted from Ibn ʿAbbās with a broken chain and did not see him, from the sixth [class of narrators]. Truthful but errs.” (Taqrīb #5336)]

[T.N: on Abū Sālih ‘Abdullāh ibn Sālih:

Al-Nasā’ī said: “(he is) not thiqah (trustworthy and reliable)”.

Ibn Hibbān said: “(he is) Very objectionable in hadīth” (munkar al-hadīth jiddan).”

Ziyād ibn Ayyūb said: “Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allāh have mercy on him, forbade me from narrating the hadīth of ʿAbdullāh ibn Sālih.”

Ahmad said: “He was coherent at first, then became corrupt later (in life), and he is nothing.”

Ibn al-Madīnī said: “I struck through (i.e. crossed out) his hadīth and I do not narrate anything from him.”

Abū ʿAlī Sālih ibn Muhammad al-Hāfidh said: “The scribe of al-Layth (i.e. Abū Sālih) used to lie.” (Jāmi’ Likutub al-Du’afā wal-Matrukīn wal-Kādhibīn 9/222-234)

Ibn Hajr said: “(he is) Truthful but makes many errors, reliable [when narrating from] his book but there was heedlessness in him. From the tenth (class of narrators).” (Taqrīb #3752)

Weak narration attributed to Muhammad ibn Sirīn from ʿUbaydah

From Muhammad ibn Sīrīn, he said: “I asked ʿUbaydah [al-Salmānī] about this verse: “draw close upon themselves from their jalābīb,” so he raised a wrap that was upon him, covered himself with it, and covered his entire head until it reached the eyebrows, and covered his face, and brought out his left eye from the left side of his face on the side of the eye.” (Mawsū Tafsīr Mathūr 18/130)

In a wording: “the right eye.” (Tafsīr al-Tabarī 15/83)

In a wording: “one of the eyes.” (Tafsīr al-Baghawī 3/444 and others)

Al-Albānī said: “The explanation of its weakness from [several] aspects:

That it is severed and stopped (maqtūʿ mawqūf), so there is no proof in it, because ʿUbaydah al-Salmānī is a Follower (tābiʿī) by consensus. So if he had elevated a hadīth to the Prophet (ﷺ), it would be (considered) mursal (disconnected) with no proof in it – so how about when it is stopped (mawqūf) at him like this? And how [is it acceptable] when it contradicts the interpretation of the interpreter of the Qur’ān: Ibn ʿAbbās and those with him from the Companions?
That they (i.e. narrators) were inconsistent in determining the uncovered eye in it, so it was said: “the left [eye]” and it was said: “the right [eye]” and it was said: “one of his eyes”…When you know this, then know that inconsistency (idtirāb) – according to the scholars of hadīth – is a defect in the transmission that removes it from the rank of using it as evidence…because it indicates that the narrator did not preserve it (accurately) and did not memorise it.
Its contradiction to the [authentic] interpretation of Ibn ʿAbbās of the verse as previously explained, so what contradicts him is rejected without doubt.

(Abridged, Radd al-Mufhim pg. 54-58)

Weak narration attributed to Muhammad ibn Sa’d al-Quradhī

From Muhammad ibn ʿUmar (al-Wāqidī) > Ibn Abī Sabrah from Abū Sakhr > Muhammad ibn Kaʿb al-Quradhī who said: “draw close upon themselves from their jalābīb,” he said: “She covers her face except one of her eyes.“

(Tabaqāt of Ibn Sa’d 8/176-177. Declared Mawdū (fabricated) by Al-Albānī in Radd al-Mufhim pg. 57 saying:

“Ibn Abī Sabrah – Imām Ahmad said in “al-ʿIlal” (1/204):”He used to lie and fabricate hadīth.”

The narrator from him, Muhammad ibn ʿUmar – who is al-Wāqidī – is close to him [in weakness]. Al-Hāfidh said in “al-Taqrīb”: “(He is) abandoned (matrūk).”And Ahmad said: “A liar (kadhāb).” Moreover, (the narration) is mursal (disconnected).”)

Rulings related to saying “Ameen” in prayer; is it obligatory? Is it said loud or quiet? What if the imām doesn’t say it?

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

The Imām and the followers saying Āmīn aloud (in the loud prayers)

Narration 1: of Abū Hurayrah

Imām al-Bukhārī said: “Chapter: The Imam’s Audible Recitation of “Āmīn“

Ibn al-Zubayr and those behind him would say “Āmīn” until the mosque would resound with noise. [authenticated by Al-Albānī in al-Da’īfah 2/369]

Abū Hurayrah narrared that the Prophet (ﷺ) said:

إِذَا أمَّنَ الإِمَامُ فَآمِنُوا؛ فَإِنَّهُ مَنْ وَافَقَ تَأْمِيتُهُ تَأمِينَ الْمَلائِكَةِ غُفِرَ لَهُ مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ ذَنْبِهِ». وَقَالَ ابْنُ شِهَابٍ: وَكَانَ رَسُولُ الله ﷺ يَقُولُ: «آمِينَ

“When the imam says ‘Āmīn,’ then you say ‘Āmīn,’ for whoever’s Āmīn coincides with the Āmīn of the angels will have his previous sins forgiven.”

And [Imām] Ibn Shihāb [al-Zuhrī] said: “The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) used to say “Āmīn.” [in a variant: used to say Āmīn audibly]. Ibn Hajr said: “Even though it is mursal (disconnected), it is supported by the practice of Abū Hurayrah.”

(Sahīh al-Bukhārī 780. Fath al-Bārī of Ibn Hajr 2/637-642)

In a variant from Abū Hurayrah:

قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم إِذَا ‏”‏ قَالَ الإِمَامُ ‏{‏ غَيْرِ الْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلاَ الضَّالِّينَ ‏}‏ فَقُولُوا آمِينَ فَإِنَّ الْمَلاَئِكَةَ تَقُولُ آمِينَ وَإِنَّ الإِمَامَ يَقُولُ آمِينَ فَمَنْ وَافَقَ تَأْمِينُهُ تَأْمِينَ الْمَلاَئِكَةِ غُفِرَ لَهُ مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ ذَنْبِهِ ‏”‏

The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: ‘When the Imām says: ‘ghayri al-maghdūbi ʿalayhim wa lā al-dāllīn’ say: ‘Āmīn’ for the angels say Āmīn and the Imām says Āmīn, and if a person’s Āmīn coincides with the Āmīn of the angels, his previous sins will be forgiven.‘” (al-Nasā’ī 927. Declared Sahīh by Al-Arnāūt in his checking)

[the practice of Abū Hurayrah: Nuʿaym al-Mujmir who said: Abū Hurayrah led us in prayer and said: “Bismi-llāhi ar-Rahmāni ar-Rahīm).” Then he recited Umm al-Qurʾān [i.e., al-Fātihah] until he reached “ghayri al-maghdūbi ʿalayhim wa lā al-dāllīn),” [then] he said “Āmīn.” [in the variant of Ibn Hibbān 1797: “and the people (likewise) said Āmīn”] Then he said: “By the One in Whose hand is my soul, I am the one among you whose prayer most closely resembles the prayer of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ)”. (Sunan al-Kubrā of al-Bayhaqī 2/153, Dar al-Hadīth – declared Sahīh by the verifier. Sahīh Ibn Hibbān 1797 – declared Sahīh by al-Arnāūt. Ibn Khuzaymah 499 who declared it Sahīh]

Imām Ibn al-Mundhir said: “In his (ﷺ) statement “When the imām says āmīn, then you say āmīn” is clear evidence that the imām says the ta’mīn aloud, and it is not permissible for it to be otherwise, because if the imām said the ta’mīn quietly, the follower (ma’mūm) would not know so that he could say āmīn when the imām says āmīn. This is clear and apparent to one whom Allāh grants understanding from the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ), since it is impossible for the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) to command the follower to say āmīn when his imām says āmīn while he has no way to know his imām’s āmīn.” (al-Awsat 3/291-292)

Narration 2: of Wāʾil ibn Hujr

Imām Al-Bayhaqī said: “Chapter: The Imam’s Audible Recitation of “Āmīn”

Wāʾil ibn Hujr narrated:

كَانَ النَّبِي ﷺ إِذَا قال : «آمِينَ . رَفَعَ بِهَا صَوْتَهُ

“The Prophet (ﷺ), when he said “Āmīn,” would raise his voice with it.” [Declared Sahīh by Ibn Hajr in Talkhīs 2/672]

(al-Bayhaqī said) “This is the wording of al-Faqīh’s hadīth. In al-Sulamī’s narration he said:

سَمِعْتُ النَّبِيَّ الله إذا قال (وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ) قال : «آمين». رَفَعَ بِهَا صَوْتَهُ فِي الصَّلَاةِ

“I heard the Prophet ﷺ when he said “nor those who have gone astray (wa lā al-dāllīn),” he would say “Āmīn” and raise his voice with it in prayer.” (Sunan al-Kubrā of al-Bayhaqī 2/151, Dar al-Hadīth – it’s verifier declaring the hadīth as Sahīh saying: “Al-Dāraqutnī extracted it in his Sunan (1/333) and authenticated it. Al-Baghawī [mentioned it] in Sharh al-Sunnah and classified it as hasan (good). Ibn Hajr authenticated it as [mentioned] in al-Nayl (2/247). Ibn al-Qattān criticised/weakened it because of Hujr ibn ʿAnbas, saying “he is not known.” Ibn Hajr corrected him and said: “He is trustworthy and known, and it was said he had Companionship [with the Prophet], and Yahyā ibn Maʿīn and others considered him thiqah (trustworthy and reliable). “Al-Tirmidhī classified the hadith as hasan. Ibn Sayyid al-Nās said: “It should be (considered as) Sahīh.”)

[in the narration of Sufyān]…Wakīʿ ibn al-Jarrāh narrated it from Sufyān:

يَمُدُّ بِهَا صَوْتَهُ

“he would extend his voice with it.”

Al-Firyābī said from Sufyān in this hadith:

رَفَعَ صَوْتَهُ بِآمِينَ وَطَوَّلَ بِهَا

“he raised his voice with Āmīn and lengthened it.” (Sunan al-Kubrā of al-Bayhaqī 2/151, Sahīh as previously stated)

Narration 3: of Abū Rāfi’

Abū Rāfiʿ narrated:

أَنَّ أَبَا هُرَيْرَةَ كَانَ يُؤَذِّنُ لِمَرَوَانَ بْنِ الْحَكَمِ، فَاشْتَرَطَ أَنْ لَا يَسْبِقَهُ بِالضَّالِّينَ حَتَّى يَعْلَمَ أَنَّهُ قَدْ دَخَلَ الصَّفَ ، فَكَانَ إِذَا قال مَرْوَانُ وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ قَالَ أَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ : آمِينَ . يَمُدُّ بِهَا صَوْتَهُ وَقَالَ : إِذَا وَافَقَ تَأْمِينُ أَهْلِ الْأَرْضِ تَأْمِينَ أَهْلِ السَّمَاءِ غُفِرَ لَهُمْ

“Abū Hurayrah used to call the adhān for Marwān ibn al-Hakam, and he stipulated that he [Marwān] not precede him with “al-dāllīn” until he knew that he [Abū Hurayrah] had entered the row. So when Marwān said “wa lā al-dāllīn,” Abū Hurayrah would say “Āmīn,” extending his voice with it. And he said: “When the taʾmīn of the people of earth coincides with the taʾmīn of the people of heaven, they are forgiven.” (Sunan al-Kubrā of al-Bayhaqī 2/153-154, Dar al-Hadīth – declared Sahīh by its verifier. Also declared as Sahīh by Al-Albānī in al-Da’īfah 2/369)

Narrations 4 and 5: of ‘Atā

ʿAtāʾ narrared:

كُنْتُ أَسْمَعُ الأَئِمَّةَ ابن الزُّبَيْرِ وَمَنْ بَعْدَهُ يَقُولُونَ : آمِينَ، وَمَنْ خَلْفَهُمْ : آمِينَ حَتَّى إِنَّ لِلْمَسْجِدِ لَلَجَّةٌ

“I would hear the imams – Ibn al-Zubayr and those after him – saying “Āmīn,” and those behind them [saying] “Āmīn” until the mosque would resound with voices.” (Sunan al-Kubrā of al-Bayhaqī 2/154, Dar al-Hadīth – declared Sahīh by the verifier)

ʿAtāʾ narrated:

أَدْرَكْتُ مِائَتَيْنِ مِنْ أَصْحَابِ النَّبِيِّ ﷺ فِي هَذَا الْمَسْجِدِ إِذَا قَالَ الإِمَامُ : غَيْرِ الْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ سَمِعْتُ لَهُمْ رَجَّةً بِآمِينَ

“I witnessed two hundred Companions of the Prophet (ﷺ) in this mosque [i.e. masjid al-Harām – see I’lām of Ibn Mulaqqin 2/586]. When the imām said “ghayri al-maghdūbi ʿalayhim wa lā al-dāllīn),” I heard them make a reverberating sound with “Āmīn.” (Sunan al-Kubrā of al-Bayhaqī 2/154, Dar al-Hadīth – it’s verifier declaring it Hasan)

(al-Bayhaqī said) Ishāq al-Handhalī narrated it from ʿAlī ibn al-Hasan and said: “They raised their voices with Āmīn.” (Sunan al-Kubrā of al-Bayhaqī 2/154)

Al-Bayhaqī said: “And it was narrated to us regarding Ibn ʿUmar that he would raise his voice with it, whether he was an imām or a follower.” (Sunan al-Kubrā of al-Bayhaqī 1/154)

Imām Al-Albānī said on the legitimacy of the followers saying Āmīn loudly: “…nothing contrary to saying it aloud has been established from Companions other than Abū Hurayrah and Ibn al-Zubayr – which has been authenticated from them both…” (al-Da’īfah 2/369)

Shaykh ul-Islām ibn Taymiyyah said: “These are all texts that (show) the Prophet (ﷺ) used to say the ta’mīn aloud, and he commanded the followers to say āmīn with the imām’s āmīn.

Its apparent meaning is that they say āmīn like his āmīn, because āmīn is more emphasised for them since they were commanded with it. If he says it aloud, then the follower has greater priority. The explicit statement of this has preceded.

Therefore, the Companions of the Prophet (ﷺ) understood this command to say it aloud and were unanimous upon it.” (Sharh al-Umdah 2/757)

Summary of saying Āmīn in the silent and loud prayers

Al-Afqahsī said: “The ummah has unanimously agreed that the one praying alone says āmīn, and likewise the follower and imām in the silent prayer, and likewise the majority (of scholars) said regarding the loud prayer.” (Sharh Umdatul Ahkām 1/347)

Shaykh ul-Islām ibn Taymiyyah said: “The imām, follower, and one praying alone say (the ta’mīn). The imām and follower say it aloud in what he says aloud in his recitation, following al-Fātihah. Likewise the one praying alone if he recites aloud.” (Sharh al-‘Umdah 2/755)

The ruling on saying Āmīn

Imām Al-Saffārīnī said: “This command according to the majority (of the scholars) is for recommendation.

Ibn Buzayzah related from some scholars its obligation upon the follower, acting upon the apparent meaning of the command. He said: The Dhāhiriyyah made it obligatory upon every worshipper.” (Sharh Umdatul Ahkām 2/294)

Imām Al-Ithyūbī said: “Then what appears (correct) to me is its obligation upon the follower, because the command is for obligation according to the majority’s statement, except when a diverter [from a text] diverts it. The majority who say recommendation here did not mention a diverter. And Allāh, The Most-High knows best.” (Sharh al-Nasā’ī 12/20)

Imām al-San’ānī said: “The majority carried the command to (mean) recommendation, and I do not know what [evidence] diverted it from obligation, while the principle [of a command] is obligation.” (al-Tahbīr 5/285)

What if the imām doesn’t say Āmīn aloud

Shaykh ul-Islām ibn Taymiyyah said: “If the imām leaves out the ta’mīn or (leaves out) saying it aloud, the follower says āmīn and says it aloud, whether he is close to the imām and hears his recitation, or hears his murmuring, or cannot hear his voice – he says āmīn.” (Sharh al-Umdah 2/758)

Imām Al-Saffārīnī said: “If the imām leaves it out, the follower comes with it (i.e. says it)”. (Sharh Umdatul Ahkām 2/294)

Imām Al-Ithyūbī said: “Ash-Shāfi’ī’s saying in “al-Umm” is that the follower says āmīn even if the imām leaves it out intentionally or forgetfully.

What ash-Shāfi’ī – may Allāh have mercy upon him – said in “al-Umm” is what I consider most correct, due to the apparent meaning of his statement: “When the imām says: ‘wa lā al-dāllīn’ then say: Āmīn.” And Allāh, The Most-High, knows best.” (Sharh al-Nasā’ī 12/25)

Imām al-San’ānī said: “His statement (ﷺ): “Pray as you have seen me pray” (Sahīh al-Bukhārī 6008, Sahīh Muslim 674) – it has been established that he said āmīn, so every worshipper should say āmīn, whether individual, imām, or follower, because his statement “pray” is a general address and command to every believer with that. If the imām errs by abandoning it, the follower does not err by following him in the abandonment.” (al-Tahbīr 5/285)

Those who held to say Āmīn quietly and a refutation of their evidence

Imām Ibn al-Mundhir said: “The people of opinion (ashāb al-ra’ī, i.e. the hanafīs) saw that the imām should say āmīn quietly. Sufyān al-Thawrī said: “When you finish reciting the opening of the Book, say āmīn quietly.” (al-Awsat 3/295)

Imām Al-Ithyūbī said: “It has become clear from what preceded of verification from the speech of these memorising imāms that the most correct of the madhabs is what the majority hold – the legitimacy of āmīn aloud in audible prayer for the imām, follower, and one praying alone, due to the authenticity of the hadīths (that came) with that.

As for those who say not to say it aloud, they have no evidence except what preceded from Shu’bah’s narration: “and he lowered his voice with it.” [1] The memorisers have agreed that this narration is not authentic; rather, the authentic is (Sufyān) al-Thawrī’s narration with the wording: “He said āmīn, extending his voice with it.” (Sharh al-Nasā’ī 12/31)

Imām al-Mubārakfūrī said: “The Hanafīs said to say the ta’mīn quietly and conceal it, and they used as evidence the hadīth of Wā’il that at-Tirmidhī mentioned [1]… This is a hadīth (which is) not suitable to be used as proof as you will come to know…” (al-Tuhfah 3/375)

[1] Imām Al-Tirmidhī said: “Shu’bah reported this Hadīth, from Salamah ibn Kuhail, from Hujr Abū Al-‘Anbas, from ‘Alqamah ibn Wāʾil, from his father:

أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ ﷺ قرأ غَيْرِ الْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ فَقَالَ : «آمین»، وَخَفَضَ بها صَوْتَهُ .

“That the Prophet recited: (ghayri al-maghdūbi ʿalayhim wa lā al-dāllīn) then he said: ‘Amin,’ and he lowered his voice with it.”

(Al-Tirmidhī 248. Declared Shādh (i.e. isolated/anomalous – a weak hadīth due to narrator contradicting narrator(s) stronger in reliability/authenticity) by Al-Albānī in his checking of Al-Tirmidhī)

Shaykh al-Arnāūt said: “Sufyān and Shu’bah differed regarding this hadīth….When Shu’bah and Sufyān differ, the statement (which is given precedence) is Sufyān’s statement, and this is what the imāms chose. Al-Bukhārī noted this error of Shu’bah’s in his “Tārīkh” 3/73, and in what at-Tirmidhī quoted from him in his “Jāmi'” 2/28, and in “al-‘Ilal al-Kabīr” 1/217-218.” (Takhrīj Musnad Imām Ahmad 31/138)

Ibn al-Mulaqqin said: “Al-Bayhaqī said in his “Khilāfiyyāt”: “I do not know of any disagreement among the scholars of Hadīth that when Sufyān and Shu’bah differ, the statement (which is given preference) is Sufyān’s statement.” (Badr al-Munīr 3/582)

Imām al-Mubārakfūrī said: “…The fourth reason [why the statement of Sufyān is given preference over Shu’bah’s]: Shu’bah was alone in what he said in his narration in these two places, and no one followed him in that. As for Sufyān, he was not alone in what he said in his narration regarding them, but rather al-‘Alā’ ibn Sālih, ‘Alī ibn Sālih, and Muhammad ibn Salamah followed him in that. For these reasons, the error was attributed to Shu’bah and not attributed to Sufyān…” (Abridged, al-Tuhfah 3/378)

Imām al-Mubārakfūrī continues: “Some of them (i.e. the hanafīs) used as evidence the hadīth of Samurah ibn Jundub that he memorised from the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) two pauses: a pause when he said takbīr, and a pause when he finished reciting (ghayri al-maghdūbi ʿalayhim wa lā al-dāllīn)”. [T.N: Abū Dawūd 779 and others. Declared weak by Al-Albānī in his checking saying: “Its chain is weak because al-Hasan – who is al-Basrī – despite his great status, is a mudallis (concealer), and he did not explicitly state his hearing of this hadīth from Samurah.” Da’īf Abī Dawūd 9/299]. It was said: “The most apparent is that the second pause was for saying āmīn quietly.”

The response: The second pause was not for saying āmīn quietly, because he used to say the ta’mīn aloud, and saying āmīn quietly has not been established from him. How can it be said that it was for saying āmīn quietly? Rather, the second pause was for his breath to return to him, as Qatādah explicitly stated in some of his narrations (Al-Tirmidhī 247, Ibn Mājah 844).

They also used as evidence the report from ‘Umar and ‘Alī: Al-Tahāwī (Sharh Ma’ānī Āthār 1208) narrated from Abū Wā’il who said: “‘Umar and ‘Alī did not say aloud ‘Bismi-llāhi ar-Rahmān ar-Rahīm,’ nor the seeking refuge, nor āmīn.”

The response: This report is very weak (da’īf jiddan), for in its chain is Sa’īd ibn al-Mirzbān al-Baqqāl. Al-Dhahabī said in “al-Mīzān”: “Al-Fallās abandoned him, Ibn Ma’īn said: ‘His hadīth should not be written,’ and al-Bukhārī said: ‘Rejected in hadīth (munkar al-hadīth).'” End quote. Al-Dhahabī said in the biography of Abān ibn Jablah al-Kūfī: “Ibn al-Qattān related that al-Bukhārī said: ‘Everyone I said about “rejected in hadīth,” it is not permissible to narrate from him.'” End quote.

They also used as evidence the statement of Ibrāhīm al-Nakha’ī: “Five things the imām conceals: ‘Subhānak Allāhumma wa-bihamdik,’ seeking refuge, ‘Bismi-llāhi ar-Rahmān ar-Rahīm,’ āmīn, and ‘Allāhumma Rabbana laka al-hamd.'” ‘Abd al-Razzāq narrated it (2597).

The response: This statement of Ibrāhīm al-Nakha’ī contradicts the authentic marfū (elevated to the Prophet (ﷺ)) hadīths, so it should not be given attention. The distinguished al-Laknawī said in “as-Sa’āyah”: “As for al-Nakha’ī’s report and similar ones, they do not equal the elevated narrations.” End quote.” (Al-Tuhfah of al-Mubārakfūrī 3/375-376)

Is the hadith of the 73 sects authentic & who is the saved sect? – Ibn ‘Uthaymīn

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

The questioner says: I found in the commentary of Ibn Kathīr a hadīth in which the Messenger says something to the effect: “This nation will split into seventy-three sects, all of them in the Fire except one,” so is this hadīth authentic? And what are the misguided sects compared to this saved sect?

So he answered – may Allāh the Most High have mercy upon him: “This hadīth is authentic (Sahīh), due to the abundance of its chains of transmission, and the nation’s reception of it with acceptance. For indeed the scholars accepted it and established it even in some of the books of creeds. And the Prophet (ﷺ) clarified that the saved sect (al-firqah al-nājiyah) is the group (al-jamāʿah) who gathered upon what the Prophet and his Companions were upon in creed, speech, and action. So whoever adheres to what the Messenger of Allāh was upon from the correct, sound beliefs, and the legislated statements and actions – then that is the saved sect.

And this is not specific to a time nor a place, but rather everyone who adheres to the guidance of the Messenger (ﷺ) outwardly and inwardly, then he is from this saved group. And it is saved in this world from innovations and violations, and saved in the Hereafter from the Fire.”

(Fatāwā Nūr Alā Darb 1/34-35)

The questioner asks: Who is the victorious group (al-tāʾifah al-mansūrah)? And how is (this group) identified?

So he answered – may Allāh the Most High have mercy upon him: “The victorious group is Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jamāʿah and they are the saved sect (al-firqah al-nājiyah), and they are those who are upon the same as what the Prophet (ﷺ) and his Companions were upon in creed, speech, and action.

So in creed, they believe in Allāh and His angels and His books and His messengers, and the Last Day, and Divine Decree – its good and its evil. They believe that Allāh – the Most High – is the Lord of everything and its Sovereign. They believe that Allāh – the Most High – is the Truth, and that whatever is called upon besides Him is falsehood. They believe in everything that Allāh named Himself with, or what His Messenger (ﷺ) named Him with. They believe in everything that Allāh described Himself with, or His Messenger (ﷺ) described Him with, without distortion (tahrīf) nor negation (taʿtīl) nor asking how (takyīf) nor likening (tamthīl). They likewise believe in the angels of Allāh – the Most High – according to what came in the Book and the Sunnah.

They worship Allāh – the Most High – with what He has legislated. They do not innovate in the religion of Allāh – the Most High – what He did not legislate, neither in creed nor in verbal or practical actions. Rather, they are sincere to Allāh – the Most High – in their worship, because they were commanded with that:

“And they were not commanded except to worship Allāh, being sincere to Him in religion, inclining to truth (i.e. monotheism)” [al-Bayyinah: 5].

They are followers of the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ). They believe that every innovation (bidʿah) in the religion of Allāh – the Most High – is misguidance. These are the saved group, and they are the victorious sect, and they are Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jamāʿah.”

(Slightly Abridged, Fatāwā Nūr Alā Darb 1/32)

The narrations of the 73 sects and their authenticity – with added benefits from various scholars of past and present

Who is the victorious group/saved sect – Imām Ahmad and Shaykh Al-Albānī