Acting upon weak hadith – part 1: Yahyā ibn Ma’īn, Bukhārī, Muslim, Ibn al-‘Arabī’, Al-Albānī

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

The Prophet (ﷺ) said:

“مَنْ حَدَّثَ عَنِّي حَدِيثًا وَهُوَ يَرَى أَنَّهُ كَذِبٌ فَهُوَ أَحَدُ الْكَاذِبِينَ“

“Whoever narrates a Hadīth from me which he knows is a lie, then he is one of the liars.”. (Tirmidhī 2662)

In another narration:

“مَنْ حَدَّثَ عَنِّي بِحَدِيثٍ وَهُوَ يَرَى أَنَّهُ كَذِبٌ فَهُوَ أَحَدُ الْكَاذِبَيْنِ“

Whoever narrates a Hadīth from me thinking it to be false, then he is one of the two liars [meaning the one who initiated it and the one who spread it]. ” (Ibn Mājah 41)

Lying upon the messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) is a major sin. Lying upon the prophet (ﷺ) includes the one who relate what is false, whether done intentionally or unintentionally. (Benefits from the introduction to Sahīh Muslim pg. 41 of Ibn Ādam)

Al-Qādī Ibn al-‘Arabī al-Mālikī said:

Verily the weak hadīth is never acted upon. (Sahīh Targhīb 1/48)

Shaykh al-Khudayr said: “(from the scholars who held that it’s not permitted to act upon weak hadīth absolutely)

1 – Yahyā ibn Ma’īn – Ibn Sayyid an-Nās said when discussing the authentication of Muhammad ibn Ishāq “Among those from whom equalization between rulings and other [matters] has been reported is Yahyā ibn Ma’īn”.

2 – Imām Muhammad ibn Ismā’īl al-Bukhārī – It is apparent from al-Bukhārī’s practice in his Sahīh, his strict conditions regarding narrators, and his not including any weak hadīth, that his methodology is not to act upon weak hadīth, which is what Shaykh Jamāl ad-Dīn al-Qāsimī concluded.

3 – Imām Muslim ibn al-Hajjāj al-Qushayrī – It appears from his strong criticism in the introduction of his Sahīh of the narrators of weak [hadīth] that his methodology is not to use weak hadīth as evidence absolutely.

Ibn Rajab said: “Whats apparent is that what Muslim mentioned in the introduction of his book necessitates that he not narrate hadīth of encouragement (targhīb) except from those from whom rulings are narrated from.”” (al-Hadīth Da’īf pg. 260-261)

Imām Al-Albānī said: “…for indeed among the scholars (are those who) do not act upon weak hadīths absolutely, neither in ahkām (rulings) nor in fadā’il (virtues), and Ibn Sayyid al-Nās related that in “ʿUyūn al-Athā” from Yahyā ibn Maʿīn, and it is attributed in “Fath al-Mughīth” to Abū Bakr ibn al-ʿArabī.

The great scholar, Jamāl al-Dīn al-Qāsimī said in “Qawāʿid al-Tahdīth fī Mustalah al-Hadīth”:

“And (what’s) apparent is that this is also the position of Bukhārī and Muslim. Bukhārī’s condition in his Sahīh indicates this, (as does) Imam Muslim’s tashnī’ (strong criticism) of those who narrate weak hadīths agreed upon as weak. This is also the position of Ibn Hazm, may Allāh have mercy on him, as he stated in ‘al-Milal wa al-Nihal.’ Refer to his words there. And also in ‘al-Muhallā.’

… the truth in this issue is with the scholars who held the position of abandoning acting on weak hadīths regarding virtuous deeds, and that (is for) several reasons:

First: The weak hadīth only yields dhann (conjecture) by agreement (of the scholars), and acting upon conjecture is not permissible, due to the saying of Allāh:

“إِنْ يَتَّبِعُونَ إِلا الظَّنَّ وَإِنَّ الظَّنَّ لا يُغْنِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ شَيْئًا“

“They follow nothing but conjecture, and conjecture avails nothing against the truth” [53:28]

and his (i.e. the Prophet’s) statement (ﷺ):

“إياكم والظن فإنه أكذب الحديث“

“Beware of conjecture, for it is the most false of speech.” (Musnad Imām Ahmad 7337. Isnād declared Sahīh upon the conditions of Sahīh Bukhārī and Muslim by al-Arnāūt in his checking)

Second: The Prophet (ﷺ) commanded us to avoid narrating from him except what we know is authentic from him, saying:

“اتقوا الحديث عني إلا ما علمتم“

“Fear/avoid narrating from me except what you know/are certain of.” (Musnad Imām Ahmad 2974. Declared Sahīh by Al-Arnāūt in his checking)

and from the known (is) that narrating a hadīth is only a means to act upon what is established in it. So if he (ﷺ) prohibits us from narrating what is not established from him, then prohibiting acting upon it is even more appropriate. This is clear and evident.

Third: In what is established from him (ﷺ), there is sufficiency from what is not established… [i.e. authentic hadīth already provide complete guidance, thus, weak hadīth are not necessary].” (Jāmi al-Turāth 2/428-429)

The name of Allāh: 3) Al-Wāsi’ (The All-Encompassing/Vast)

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Allāh said:

﴿ إِنَّ اللَّهَ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ ﴾

“Indeed, Allāh is All-Encompassing/Vast (Wāsiʿ), All-Knowing” [Al-Baqarah: 115].

And Allāh said:

﴿ وَاللَّهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ ﴾

“And Allāh is All-Encompassing/Vast (Wāsiʿ), All-Knowing” [Al-Baqarah: 247].

And Allāh said:

﴿ رَبَّنَا وَسِعْتَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ رَحْمَةً وَعِلْمًا ﴾

“Our Lord, You have encompassed all things in mercy and knowledge” [Ghāfir: 7].

Shaykh al-Sa’dī said: He is The One who is vast with respect to His Attributes and qualities and those things linked to them this from the point of view that none can enumerate His praise as He deserves, rather He is as He has praised Himself. Vast in grandeur, authority and dominion, vast in bestowing grace and good, great in majesty and nobility. (Explanation to the Beautiful and Perfect Names of Allāh pg. 95, Dar as Sunnah print, Taysīr al-Karīm al-Rahmān 5/305)

Shaykh al-‘Uthaymīn said: Al-Wāsiʿ means vast in encompassment, and vast in attributes, so He is vast in His knowledge, and in His power, and His Hearing and His Seeing, and other attributes of His. (Tafsīr Thamanīn 1/195)

Al-Tabarī said: “Wāsiʿ”: He encompasses all His creation with sufficiency, bounty, generosity and management. (Tafsīr Al-Tabarī 3/984)

Ibn Qutaybah said: “Among His attributes is ‘Al-Wāsiʿ,'” and it means The-Rich/Self-Sufficient (i.e. in need of none, whilst all else is needy), and “al-sa’ah” (السعة) means wealth. (Tafsīr Gharīb al-Qurān pg. 46)

Al-Azharī said: Al-Wāsi’ – among the attributes of Allāh The Most-High: He whose provision encompasses all His creation, and whose mercy encompasses everything. (Mu’jam al-Tahdhīb al-Lughā 4/3889)

Al-Kalbī said: “Indeed, Allāh is All-Encompassing/Vast (Wāsiʿ), All-Knowing” (2:115) means “vast in Forgiveness.” (Tafsīr al-Baghawī 1/140)

Ibn al-Anbārī said: “Al-Wāsiʿ” among Allāhs names means: “The One abundant in giving, who has capacity for what is asked of Him.” (Mu’jam al-Tahdhīb al-Lughā 4/3890)

Al-Wāhidī said: He is All-Encompassing/Vast in His bounty upon His creation, and in His tolerance of His servants’ requests, and the persistence of their asking does not trouble Him (Tafsīr al-Basīt 3/235)

Al-Rāghib Al-Asfahānī: “And His saying: ‘My Lord has encompassed all things in knowledge’ is a description of Him, like: ‘He has encompassed all things in knowledge,’ and His saying: ‘And Allāh is All-Encompassing/Vast, All-Knowing,’ and ‘Allāh is All-Encompassing/Vast, All-Wise,’ expresses the vastness of His Power, Knowledge, Mercy, and Bounty” (al-Mufradāt 211)

‘Abdul-‘Azīz al-Humaydī said: Allāh is Al-Wāsiʿ, who multiplies reward and recompense for His servants many times over, as He said:

﴿ مَثَلُ الَّذِينَ يُنفِقُونَ أَمْوَالَهُمْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ كَمَثَلِ حَبَّةٍ أَنبَتَتْ سَبْعَ سَنَابِلَ فِي كُلِّ سُنبُلَةٍ مِّائَةُ حَبَّةٍ وَاللَّهُ يُضَاعِفُ لِمَن يَشَاءُ وَاللَّهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ ﴾

Allāh is Al-Wāsiʿ whose bounty and generosity are in His Hand; He gives His bounty to whom He wills among His servants, as He said:

“The example of those who spend their wealth in the way of Allāh is like a seed [of grain] which grows seven spikes; in each spike is a hundred grains. And Allāh multiplies [His reward] for whom He wills. And Allāh is All-Encompassing/Vast, All-Knowing” [Al-Baqarah: 261].

﴿ قُلْ إِنَّ الْفَضْلَ بِيَدِ اللَّهِ يُؤْتِيهِ مَن يَشَاءُ وَاللَّهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ ﴾

“Say, ‘Indeed, [all] bounty is in the hand of Allāh – He grants it to whom He wills. And Allāh is All-Encompassing/Vast, All-Knowing'” [Āl ‘Imrān: 73]. (Rawāih al-Husnā pg. 248-249)

Praying 4 Rak’ah after ‘Ishaa

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Ibn ‘Abbās narrated:

فَصَلَّى النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم الْعِشَاءَ، ثُمَّ جَاءَ إِلَى مَنْزِلِهِ، فَصَلَّى أَرْبَعَ رَكَعَاتٍ، ثُمَّ نَامَ،

… so the Prophet (ﷺ) prayed the ‘Ishā’ prayer, then came to his home, prayed four rak’ahs, then went to sleep… (Sahīh al-Bukhārī 117, 137, , Abū Dawūd 1357,

Adhīm al-Ābadī said: “prayed four (rak’ah)” These are the regular Sunnah of ‘Ishā’. (‘Awn al-Ma’būd 3/198)

Ibn Hajr said: Muhammad ibn Nasr interpreted these four (rak’ah) as the sunnah of ‘Ishā’ because they occurred before sleep. (Fath al-Bārī 3/322)

Musannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah 3/138-139: Chapter ‘On Four Rak’ah after ‘Ishā:

– ‘Abdullāh ibn ‘Amr said:

مَنْ صَلَّى أَرْبَعًا بَعْدَ العِشَاءِ كُنَّ كَقَدرِهِنَّ مِنْ لَيْلَةِ القدرِ

“Whoever prays four [rak’ahs] after ‘Ishā’, they are equivalent to their worth from Laylat al-Qadr.”



– ‘Ā’ishah said:

أَرْبَعَةٌ بَعْدَ العِشَاءِ يَعْدِلْنَ بِمِثْلِهِنَّ مِنْ لَيْلَةِ القدرِ

“Four [rak’ahs] after ‘Ishā’ are like their equivalent from Laylat al-Qadr.”



– ‘Abdullāh [ibn Mas’ūd] said:

مَنْ صَلَّى أَرْبَعًا بَعْدَ العِشاء لا يَفْصِلُ بَيْنَهُنَّ بِتَسْلِيمٍ، عُدِلْنَ بِمِثْلِهِنَّ مِنْ لَيْلَةِ القدر

“Whoever prays four [rak’ahs] after ‘Ishā’ without separating them with taslīm, they are like their equivalent from Laylat al-Qadr.”



– Ka’b ibn Māti’ said:

مَنْ صَلَّى أَرْبَعًا بَعْدَ العِشَاءِ يُحْسِنُ فِيهِنَّ الرُّكُوعَ وَالسُّجُودَ، عُدِلْنَ مِثْلَهُنَّ مِنْ لَيْلَةِ القدر

“Whoever prays four [rak’ahs] after ‘Ishā’, perfecting their bowing and prostration, they are like their equivalent from Laylat al-Qadr.”



– Mujāhid said:

أَرْبَعُ رَكَعَاتٍ بَعْدَ العِشَاءِ الآخِرَةِ يَكُنَّ بِمَنْزِلَتِهِنَّ مِنْ لَيْلَةِ القدرِ

“Four rak’ahs after the latter ‘Ishā’ are of the same status as their equivalent from Laylat al-Qadr.”



– ‘Abd al-Rahmān ibn al-Aswad said:

مَنْ صَلَّى أَرْبَعَ رَكَعَاتٍ بَعْدَ العِشاء الآخِرَةِ، عُدِلْنَ بِمِثْلِهِنَّ مِنْ لَيْلَةِ القدرِ

“Whoever prays four rak’ahs after the latter ‘Ishā’, they are like their equivalent from Laylat al-Qadr.”

Al-Albānī declared all the above narrations – except that of Ka’b – to be authentic and said: “and although they are mawqūf (stopping at the Companions), they have the ruling of marfū’ (traced back to the Prophet); because they are not said based on opinion, as is apparent.”. (al-Da’īfah #5060)

Additional narrations from Ka’b:

مَنْ تَوَضَّأَ فَأَحْسَنَ وُضُوءَهُ، ثُمَّ شَهِدَ صَلَاةَ الْعَتَمَةِ فِي جَمَاعَةٍ، ثُمَّ صَلَّى إِلَيْهَا أَرْبَعًا مِثْلَهَا ، يَقْرَأُ فِيهَا وَيُتِمُّ رُكُوعَهَا وَسُجُودَهَا ، كَانَ لَهُ مِنَ الْأَجْرِ مِثْلُ لَيْلَةِ الْقَدْرِ

Whoever performs Wudū and performs Wudū well, then attends ‘Ishā’ prayer in congregation, then prays four similar Rak’ahs after that, reciting therein and bowing and prostrating perfectly, that will bring him a reward like that of (praying) Laylat Al-Qadr.”

(al-Nasāī 4957, 4958, Risālah print – the verifiers said: Its chain is Hasan to Ka’b if this Ayman is al-Habashī al-Makkī, and we have detailed the discussion about him at narration (4943)

Also collected by al-Bayhaqī in al-Kubrā #4510 – Dar al-Hadīth print, the verifier saying: (the narration is) Hasan, Ka’b is Ka’b al-Ahbār, and Tubay’ is Ibn ‘Āmir al-Himyarī, the son of Ka’b’s wife, [he is] truthful (sadūq), and the rest of its narrators are trustworthy)

Authenticity of fasting the six days of shawwaal

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Hadīth 1.

Narrated by Yahyā ibn Ayyūb and Qutaybah ibn Sa’īd and ‘Alī ibn Hujr, all from Ismā’īl – Ibn Ayyūb who said: Ismā’īl ibn Ja’far narrated to us: Sa’d ibn Sa’īd ibn Qays informed me from ‘Umar ibn Thābit ibn al-Hārith al-Khazrajī,

Abū Ayyūb al-Ansārī, may Allāh be pleased with him, that he narrated that the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) said:

مَنْ صَامَ رَمَضَانَ ثُمَّ أَتْبَعَهُ سِنَّا مِنْ شَوَّالٍ ، كَانَ كَصِيَامِ الدَّهْرِ

“Whoever fasts Ramadān and then follows it with six (days) from Shawwāl, it is like fasting for all time.”

(Sahīh Muslim 1164. Ibn Mājah 1716. Abū Dawūd 2433. Al-Tirmidhī 759 and others.

Declared Sahīh by Ibn Mulaqqin in Badr al-Munīr 5/751. Declared Sahīh by Ibn al-Qayyim in Tahdhīb Sunan 4/680. Declared Sahīh by Al-Albānī in Sahīh Abū Dawūd 7/191 and Irwā 950. Declared Sahīh by Al-Mundhirī in Targhīb 2/215. Declared Hasan Sahīh by Al-Tirmidhī in his Jāmi’ #759.)

Hadīth 2.

Narrated by al-Husayn ibn Idrīs al-Ansārī, narrated by Hishām ibn ‘Ammār, narrated by al-Walīd ibn Muslim, narrated by Yahyā ibn al-Hārith al-Dhimārī, from Abū Asmā’ al-Rahabī

Thawbān, the freed slave (mawlā) of the Messenger of Allāh, may Allāh be pleased with him, from the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) who said:

مَنْ صَامَ رَمضانَ وسِتّاً من شوال ، فَقَدْ صامَ السَّنةَ

“Whoever fasts Ramadān and six (days) from Shawwāl, has indeed fasted the year.”

(Ibn Hibbān 3635, isnād (chain of transmission) declared Sahīh by Al-Arnāūt in his checking)

Additional narrations to the above

Al-Tirmidhī said: There are narrations on this topic from Jābir [al-Awsat of al-Tabarānī 3192, Ahmad 14302, al-Bazzār 1062, al-Bayhaqī 4/292], Abū Hurayrah [al-Bazzār 8334, al-Awsat of al-Tabarānī 7607], and Thawbān [Ibn Mājah 1715, Nasā’ī in al-Kubrā 2874, Ibn Khuzaymah 2115, Ibn Hibbān 3635].

Al-Mubārakfūrī said: and on this topic (there are) also (narrations) on the authority of al-Barā’ ibn ‘Āzib [al-Dāraqutnī in al-‘Ilal 3/74], and Ibn ‘Abbās [al-Awsat 4642] and ‘Ā’ishah. (al-Tuhfah al-Ahwadhī 6/331)

Criticism of Sa’d ibn Sa’īd

Al-Tirmidhī said: Sa’d ibn Sa’īd has been criticised by some of the people of hadīth due to his memory. (Jāmi’ al-Tirmidhī #759)

Ibn Hajr said: (Sa’d ibn Sa’īd ibn Qays ibn ‘Amr al-Ansārī) is truthful but has a poor memory. (al-Taqrīb #2466)

Imām Ahmad said: Sa’d ibn Sa’īd, the brother of Yahyā ibn Sa’īd is weak in hadīth. (Mawsū Aqwāl Imām Ahmad #923, Jarh wa Ta’dīl 4/84)

Elsewhere Imām Ahmad said: Sa’d is not precise in hadīth. (Mawsū Aqwāl Imām Ahmad #923)

Yahyā ibn Ma’īn said: (he is) weak. (Mawsū Aqwāl Yahyā Ibn Ma’īn #1324)

Elsewhere Yahyā ibn Ma’īn said: Sa’d ibn Sa’īd is sālih (i.e. suitable for acceptance/consideration – someone who is righteous but contains some weakness). (Jarh wa Ta’dīl of Ibn Abī Hātim 4/84)

Abū Hātim said: Sa’d ibn Sa’īd is muaddī. Abū Muhammad (Ibn Abī Hātim) said: This means that he did not memorise [well but] he conveyed what he heard. (Jarh wa Ta’dīl 4/84)

Al-Nasā’ī said: He is not strong (al-Tahdhīb of Ibn Hajr 1/692)

Ibn Hibbān mentioned him in “Al-Thiqāt” (The Reliable Narrators) and said: He used to make mistakes. (al-Tahdhīb of Ibn Hajr 1/692)

Al-‘Ijlī and Ibn ‘Ammār said: (He is) trustworthy and reliable (thiqah). (al-Tahdhīb of Ibn Hajr 1/692)

Ibn Sa’d said: He is trustworthy and reliable (thiqah), with few hadīth. (al-Tahdhīb of Ibn Hajr 1 /692)

Ibn al-Qayyim said: Someone like this is only rejected (in his narrations) when he narrates alone, or contradicts trustworthy/reliable narrators. But when he doesn’t narrate alone and narrates what (other) people have narrated, his hadīth is not rejected…

(Imām) Muslim only used his hadīth as evidence because it was clear to him that he (i.e. Sa’d) didn’t err in it, due to indications, corroborations, and supporting evidence that showed him this, even if his errors were known in other matters…(al-Tahdhīb al-Sunan 4/682)

Al-Albānī said: Sa’d has some weakness in terms of his memorisation. Therefore, some scholars deemed the hadīth weak because of him, but the corroboration from Safwān ibn Sulaym and others strengthens it. (Sahīh Abū Dawūd 7/192)

In Irwā (4-106-107), Al-Albānī said:

al-Tahāwī said:

“This hadīth was not strong in our hearts [due to its reliance] on Sa’d ibn Sa’īd, and the reluctance of hadīth scholars [to accept narrations] from him, until we found that it had been taken from him by those we mentioned who are distinguished in narration and verification, and we found that it was narrated from ‘Amr ibn Thābit, Safwān ibn Sulaym, Zayd ibn Aslam, Yahyā ibn Sa’īd al-Ansārī, and ‘Abd Rabbih ibn Sa’īd al-Ansārī.”

I say (i.e. Al-Albānī): Then he presented his chains of transmission to them for this, so the hadīth is authentic, praise be to Allāh, and the doubt concerning Sa’d ibn Sa’īd’s poor memory has been removed.

Ibn al-Qayyim said: In summary: Sa’d did not narrate (this hadīth) alone. Let’s say he did narrate it alone; he is thiqah and truthful. Muslim narrated from him, and Shu’bah, Sufyān al-Thawrī, Ibn ‘Uyaynah, Ibn Jurayj, and Sulaymān ibn Bilāl all narrated from him. These are the imāms of this field. Ahmad said: ‘Shu’bah was a nation unto himself in this field.’ (al-Tahdhīb al-Sunan 4/682)

Hadīth explanation

Ibn Taymiyyah said: It is the same whether one fasts these days immediately after (Eid) al-Fitr or separates them, and whether one fasts them consecutively or separately. This is because the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “and follows it with six (days) from Shawwāl,” and in another narration: “six (days) from Shawwāl,” making all of Shawwāl a time for fasting them, without specifying one part over another. (Sharh al-‘Umdah 3/463)

Al-Mubārakfūrī said: (That is like fasting for all time); because a good deed is multiplied by ten times, so Ramadān counts as ten months and the six days count as two months.”

Al-Nawawī said: “This has been mentioned in a hadīth traced back to the Prophet in the book of Al-Nasā’ī.

[In Al-Sunan Al-Kubrā: 2874, from the hadīth of Thawbān, traced back to the Prophet: “Allāh has made a good deed equal to ten, so a month is equal to ten months, and six days after breaking the fast (Eid) completes the year.”

The wording in Ibn Mājah is: “Whoever fasts six days after (Eid) al-Fitr, it is like fasting for a year.

مَن جَاءَ بِالْحَسَنَةِ فَلَهُ عَشْرُ أَمْثَالِهَا

‘Whoever comes with a good deed will have ten times the like of it‘” [Sūrah Al-An’ām: 160].] (Al-Tuhfah al-Ahwadhī 6/331-332)

The recommendation to fast the six days

Al-Tirmidhī said: There are those people who consider fasting six days of Shawwāl recommended due to this hadīth. (Jāmi’ al-Tirmidhī #759)

Al-Mubārakfūrī said (commenting on Al-Tirmidhīs statement): and this is the truth.

Al-Nawawī said: In it is clear evidence for the school of al-Shāfi’ī, Ahmad, Dāwūd, and those who agree with them regarding the recommendation of fasting these six days.

And Mālik and Abū Hanīfah said: It is disliked. Mālik said in al-Muwatta’: I have not seen anyone from the people of knowledge fast them. They said: It is disliked lest it be thought to be obligatory.

And the evidence of al-Shāfi’ī and those who agree with him is this clear, authentic hadīth, and when the Sunnah is established, it should not be abandoned because some people, most of them, or all of them abandon it. And their saying: “lest it be thought to be obligatory” is contradicted by the fasting of the day of ‘Arafah, ‘Āshūrā’, and other recommended fasts. End of al-Nawawī’s words.

I say (i.e. Al-Mubārakfūrī): The statement of those who say that fasting these six days is disliked is invalid and contradicts the hadīths of this topic. (al-Tuhfah al-Ahwadhī 6/332-333)

Ibn ‘Uthaymīn said: Some scholars disliked fasting the six days every year, fearing that common people might think fasting them is obligatory. This principle is weak and incorrect because if accepted, it would necessitate disliking the regular Sunnah prayers that follow the obligatory prayers being performed daily, which is clearly false…(Sharh al-Mumti’ 3/573)

Ibn al-Qayyim said: The fact that the people of Madīnah in (Imām) Mālik’s time did not act upon it does not necessitate that the entire Ummah abandon it. Ahmad, Al-Shāfi’ī, Ibn al-Mubārak, and others acted upon it. (al-Tahdhīb al-Sunan 4 /684)

Ibn Taymiyyah said: The summary of this issue is: Following Ramadān with six (days) from Shawwāl is recommended. (Sharh al-‘Umdah 3/460)

Witr series part 1: Raising the hands in Qunūt

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Those who held that it is recommended to raise the hands in Qunūt:

“This is the position in the Shāfi’ī madhab and the saying of Ahmad which is the established position in his madhab, and some Hanafīs also held this view.

This is (also) the saying of Ibn Mas’ūd, Abū Hurayrah, Ibn ‘Abbās, al-Nakha’ī, Makhūl, al-Thawrī, and Ishāq.” (Qunūt fī al-Witr pg. 129)

This was also the position of Imām Abū Yūsuf, the student of Abū Hanīfah – as reported by our scholars. In the biography of Abū Yūsuf, Ahmad ibn Abī Imrān, the jurist said: “Faraj, the freed slave of Abū Yūsuf, told me: ‘I saw my master Abū Yūsuf raise his hands in supplication when he entered into the Qunūt of the Witr prayer.'” (Asl Sifāt al-Salāh of Al-Albānī 3/958)

Evidence:

The Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) whenever he prayed the morning prayer; he raised his hands (in Qunūt) supplicating against them. (Jāmi al-Saghīr of al-Tabarānī 1/324 and others)

Abū ʿUthmān narrated: ‘Umar would perform Qunūt with us after bowing, and he would raise his hands until his armpits/upper arms became visible and his voice could be heard from behind the mosque. (al-Awsat 5/216, Musannaf of Ibn Abī Shaybah 7114, 7115)

From Khilās ibn ‘Amr al-Hajarī who narrated from Ibn Abbās that he prayed and performed Qunūt with them in the Fajr prayer in Basrah, and raised his hands until he extended his upper arms. (al-Awsat 5/216, Musannaf of Ibn Abī Shaybah 7116)

Abd al-Rahmān ibn al-Aswad narrated from his father that Abdullāh (ibn Mas’ūd) would raise his hands in Qunūt to his chest. (al-Awsat 5/216, Sunan al-Kubrā of al-Bayhaqī 3/270)

Statements from some of the scholars:

Imām ibn Qudāmah said:

“So one raises his hands during the Qunūt.

Al-Athram said: Abū Abdullāh [i.e. Imām Ahmad] used to raise his hands in Qunūt to his chest, and he argued that Ibn Mas’ūd raised his hands in Qunūt to his chest. This was also narrated from ‘Umar and Ibn Abbās, and this was the opinion of Ishāq and the people of ra’ī (opinion) [i.e. the hanafīs).” (al-Mughnī 2/101)

Shaykh ibn al-‘Uthaymīn:

Q. 277. Is it part of the Sunnah to raise the hands when making the supplication of Qunūt, and what is the evidence for that?

A. Yes, it is part of the Sunnah for a person to raise his hands when he makes the supplication of Qunūt. This has been reported from the Messenger of Allāh in his Qunūt, when he used to perform Qunūt in the obligatory prayers at times of calamity. Likewise, it has been authentically reported from the Commander of the Faithful, ‘Umar bin Al-Khattāb, may Allāh be pleased with him, that he raised his hands in the Qunūt of Witr and he was one of the righteous caliphs whom we were ordered to follow.

So, raising the hands when making the Qunūt of Witr is a Sunnah whether it be for an Imām or one who is led in prayer, or a single worshipper. Therefore, whenever you make Qunūt, raise your hands. (Fatāwā Arkān al-Islām 2/508, Darussalām)

Shaykh Bin Bāz:

Question:
What is the ruling on raising the hands in the Witr prayer?

Answer:
“It is legislated to raise the hands during the Qunūt of Witr prayer; because it is of the same category as the Qunūt for calamities (al-nawāzil), and it has been authentically reported that the Prophet (ﷺ) raised his hands when supplicating in the Qunūt of calamities (al-nawāzil). This was narrated by Al-Bayhaqī, may Allāh have mercy on him, with a Sahīh (authentic) isnād (chain).” (al-Majmū Fatāwā 30/51)

Elsewhere the Shaykh, may Allāh have mercy upon him, said:

“It is mustahab (recommended), raising the hands in Qunūt is mustahab (recommended)…” (Fatāwās of Ibn Bāz #15795, Link)

Shaykh ‘Abd al-Muhsin:

“… As for raising hands in the Qunūt of Witr prayer, it has been reported from some companions such as Abū Hurayrah, and as for the Qunūt during calamities, it has been reported that the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) would raise his hands. So hands are raised in the Qunūt of calamities and in Witr…” (Sharh Sunan Abū Dawūd 173)

Shaykh Al-Albānī:

“… raising the hands in Qunūt is an established Sunnah from the Prophet (ﷺ) in the Qunūt of calamities (al-nawāzil), and it is established from some of the Companions in the Qunūt of Witr, such as ‘Umar and Ibn Mas’ūd.” (Rihlat al-Khayr, 18)

Elsewhere the Shaykh said:

“Raising the hands during Qunūt, whether it is Qunūt of Witr, or Qunūt of Fajr and other five daily prayers during calamities, it is legislated to raise the hands in it.

And when the Imām performs Qunūt, he raises his hands and raises his voice in supplication, and those behind him say “Āmīn” while also raising their hands.”

Questioner: Sometimes we pray behind people like these who regularly perform Qunūt, and you see some brothers not raising their hands and not saying “Āmīn” behind them, so what is the ruling on that?

The Shaykh: “This, of course, is not permissible, because it goes against his (ﷺ) statement, as we always recall: “The Imām is appointed to be followed, so do not differ from him.”

One should follow the Imām in such matters of past scholarly disagreements, not to mention recent. So (the likes of) this Imām should be followed, even if the follower does not see the legitimacy of that practice when praying by himself. This is the answer.” (Jāmi al-Turāth 7/266)

Shaykh Muhammad al-Bazmūl:

Muhammad ibn Nasr al-Marwazī (d. 294 AH) said:

“(Imām) Ahmad was asked about Qunūt in Witr, is it before bowing or after it, and are the hands raised in supplication in Witr? He said: “Qunūt is after bowing and one raises his hands, and that is by analogy with the action of the Prophet (ﷺ) in the Qunūt in the morning prayer…” And Ishāq preferred Qunūt after bowing in Witr. Muhammad ibn Nasr said: And this is the opinion I prefer.” [Mukhtasar Qiyām al-Layl p. 134.]

I say (i.e. Shaykh Bazmūl): And making an analogy in the rulings of Qunūt with the morning prayer is supported by the (principle) that what is permissible to do in an obligatory prayer is permissible in a voluntary prayer.

And when we remember that the evidence is established for the legitimacy of Qunūt in the five prayers – including Maghrib, which is the Witr of the day – it most resembles the Witr of the night, and the Messenger (ﷺ) performed Qunūt in the Maghrib prayer, so the rulings of Qunūt in the Witr of the day most resemble the rulings of Qunūt in the Witr of the night, and vice versa.

And it should be noted that this is not (solely) a mere analogy, but is accompanied by the action of the Companions which has the ruling of being raised to the Prophet (ﷺ). (Sharh Sifat al-Salāh pg. 310)

Can the junub and menstruating woman touch the Qur’an – al-Shawkānī, Al-Albānī

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

A summary

Imām Al-Albānī was asked:

**Questioner:** Is it correct that a menstruating woman and a person in a state of major ritual impurity (janābah) can touch the Qur’ān or to read (from) it for worship or memorisation?

**Sheikh:** No, we do not find in the Book (Qur’ān) nor in the Sunnah anything that supports the prohibition for menstruating women and the one in a state of major ritual impurity from touching the Quran or reciting it.

Rather, we may find in the established principles and fundamentals what supports the opposite, which is that it is permissible. This is because one of the principles upon which many branches are built is their saying: “The default ruling for things is permissibility.” So here we have touching the Qur’ān and here we have reading from the Qur’ān, and the default ruling for both matters is permissibility. Therefore, we should not depart from this principle except with evidence… from the Book or from the authentic Sunnah.

There is absolutely nothing in the Book nor in the Sunnah that prohibits a person in a state of ritual impurity from touching the Qur’ān or reciting it, and the same applies to menstruating women.

(Exerpt from Shaykh Al-Albānī’s fatāwā:https://alathar.net/home/esound/index.php?op=codevi&coid=158339)

Discussion of the evidence used by those who prohibit the junub/menstruating woman from touching the Qur’ān

The Prophet (ﷺ) wrote a letter to the people of Yemen which contained:

أَلَا يَمَسَّ الْقُرْآنَ إِلَّا طَاهِرُ

“None should touch the Qur’ān except one who is Tāhir (pure)” (Muwattā 680, Al-Dāraqutnī 5, authenticated by Al-Albānī in Irwā 221)

Imām al-Shawkānī said:

The hadīth indicates that it is not permissible to touch the Mushaf except for one who is pure (tāhir).

However, the term tāhir (pure) is used in multiple senses: for a believer, for one who is free from major and minor ritual impurity, and for one who has no physical impurity on their body.

For the first meaning, there is Allāh’s statement:

إِنَّمَا الْمُشْرِكُونَ نَجَسٌ

“Indeed, the polytheists are najas (impure)” [Al-Tawbah: 28]

and his (ﷺ) saying to Abū Hurayrah:

المؤمن لا ينجس

“The believer does not become impure.”

For the second meaning:

وَإِن كُنتُمْ جُنُبًا فَأَطَهَرُوا

“And if you are in a state of janābah (major ritual impurity), then purify yourselves” [Al-Ma’idah: 6].

For the third meaning: his (ﷺ) statement regarding wiping over khuffs (leather socks):

دعهما فإني أدخلتهما طاهرتين

“Leave them, for I put them on while I was in a state of purity.”

And for the fourth meaning: the consensus that something without physical or ritual impurity is called pure.

This term [i.e. pure] has been used in many contexts… What seems most correct is that such a term is ambiguous and cannot be acted upon until (it’s meaning) clarified. (Abridged, Nayl al-Awtār 1/332-333)

Imām al-Shawkānī said:

Those who prohibit the one in (a state of) janābah from touching the Mushaf cite Allāh’s words:

لَا يَمَسُّهُ إِلَّا الْمُطَهَّرُونَ

“None touch it except the purified ones” [Al-Waqi’ah: 79].

This is valid only if the pronoun [i.e. “it] refers to the Qur’ān, but what’s apparent is that it refers to “the Book” meaning the Preserved Tablet, as it is closer (in context), and “the purified ones” are the angels…

Even if we accepted that it refers specifically to the Qur’ān, its indication of the intended ruling/meaning —prohibiting one with janābah from touching it—is not conclusive, because “the purified” refers to one who is not impure, and a believer is never impure according to the hadīth: “The believer does not become impure,” which is agreed upon. So it’s not valid to interpret “the purified” as someone who is not in a state of janābah, menstruation, minor impurity, or physical impurity. Rather, it must be interpreted as one who is not a polytheist, as in Allāh’s statement: “Indeed, the polytheists are impure.”

[further clarification omitted]… When you understand this, you will know that there is no strong evidence to prevent anyone other than polytheists from touching the Qur’ān.

(Abridged, Nayl al-Awtār 1/333-334)

Imām, Shaykh al-Islām ibn Taymiyyah said in explanation of the above verse:

… The correct view is that the Preserved Tablet (al-lawh al-mahfūdh) in heaven is intended by this verse, and likewise the angels are intended by His saying “the purified ones” (al-mutahharūn) for several reasons:

  • This is the interpretation of the majority of the predecessors (salaf) from among the Companions and those after them.
  • He informed that the entire Qur’ān is in a Book, but when this verse was revealed, only some of the Meccan portions had been revealed, and the entire Qur’ān was not compiled into a Mushaf until after the Prophet’s death (ﷺ).
  • He said: “In a Book well-protected” [Al-Waqi’ah: 78]. “Well-protected” (maknūn) means safeguarded and secured, which cannot be reached by the hands of the misguiding ones. This is a description of the Preserved Tablet.
  • His saying: “None touch it except the purified ones” is a description of the Book and not a command.
  • If the meaning of the statement were a command, it would have said “So let none touch it” to connect the command with what preceded it.
  • He said “the purified ones” (al-mutahharūn), which implies that their purification comes from someone else. If the purity of Banī Ādam (i.e. humans) was intended, it would have said “those who purify themselves” (al-mutatahhirūn), as in Allāh’s saying: “Within it are men who love to purify themselves; and Allāh loves those who purify themselves [al-muttahhirīn]” [Al-Tawbah: 108], and His saying: “Indeed, Allāh loves those who are constantly repentant and loves those who purify themselves [al-mutatahhirīn” [Al-Baqarah: 222].

(Slightly summarised, Sharh al-‘Umdah 1/418-420)

Can the menstruating woman recite the Qur’an – Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Hazm, Al-Albānī

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Those who held the permissibility of the menstruating woman reciting Qur’ān:

This is narrated from Sa’īd ibn al-Musayyib, and it was held by: Mālik—in the well-known, relied-upon position in his madhhab and Al-Shāfi’ī in the earlier of his two statements, and the Dhāhirīs, and it was narrated as a report from Ahmad, chosen by Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim, and it is the position given in fatwas by our verifying scholars [i.e. Permanent Committee in Saudi, Ibn Bāz, Ibn ‘Uthaymīn]. (al-Ikhtiyārāt of Ibn Taymiyyah 2/95-96)

Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah said:

“It is permissible for the menstruating woman to recite the Qur’ān…” (al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā 5/314)

And he said in another place:

“…the more apparent of the two scholarly opinions is that (the menstruating woman) is not prevented from reciting the Qur’ān when she needs it…” (al-Majmū’ 26/179)

And he said in another place:

“There is absolutely nothing (from the) Sunnah prohibiting her from [reciting] the Qur’ān…” (al-Majmū’ 26/191)

And he said in another place:

“… regarding the Qur’ān, The Lawgiver (i.e. Allāh) did not forbid her from that.” (al-Majmū’ 21/461)

Ibn Hazm said:

Reciting the Qur’ān, prostrating during (it’s recitation), touching the mushaf, and remembering Allāh The Most-High, are all permissible, whether with ablution or without ablution, and for the person in a state of major ritual impurity and the menstruating woman.

The proof for this is that reciting the Qur’ān, prostrating during it, touching the mushaf, and remembering Allāh The Most-High, are good deeds that are recommended and for which the doer is rewarded. Whoever claims prohibition of these in certain circumstances is required to bring evidence. (al-Muhallā 1/163)

Shaykh Al-Albānī said:

When the Prophet (ﷺ) performed the Farewell Pilgrimage, his nine wives were accompanying him. By Allāh’s intended wisdom, it was decreed that Lady ‘Ā’ishah, before entering Makkah by one marhala [distance of travel], while they were camping at a place called Sarif, she began menstruating while in the state of ihrām for ‘Umrah, as she intended to perform Tamattu’ – combining ‘Umrah with Hajj – and as did all the Messenger’s wives.

The Messenger (ﷺ) entered upon her and found her crying. He said to her: “What’s wrong with you? Have you begun menstruating?” She said: “Yes, O Messenger of Allāh.” He said: “This is something Allāh has decreed for the daughters of Ādam, so do—here is the point, so pay attention—do what the pilgrim does except do not circumambulate (the Ka’bah) and do not pray.” This mosque is great, and within it is this blessed structure – which is the Ka’bah. He didn’t say to her, “Don’t enter the mosque.” He said to her: “Do not circumambulate and do not pray.”

So this means he permitted her to recite the Qur’ān, because what does a pilgrim do? They recite the Qur’ān, send blessings upon the Messenger, and remember Allāh, etc.

(Slightly paraphrased, Jāmi’ al-Turāth 1/539-540)

Whoever dies whilst fasting will enter Paradise

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

The Prophet (ﷺ) said:

مَنْ خُتِمَ لَهُ بِصِيَام يَوْمٍ دَخَلَ الجنَّة

“Whoever has his life sealed with a day of fasting will enter Paradise.” (Declared Sahīh by Al-Albānī in Sahīh al-Jāmi 6224 and al-Sahīhah 1645)

Al-Manāwī said: “Whoever has his life sealed with a day of fasting” meaning: whoever concluded his life with a day of fasting by dying while fasting, or after breaking his fast from fasting. “will enter Paradise” meaning: among the Sābiqīn al-Awwalīn (the foremost early believers) or without preceding punishment. (Fayd al-Qadīr 2 / 1441)

Intention to fast ramadan is required every night

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

The Prophet (ﷺ) said:

مَنْ لَمْ يُبَيِّتِ الصِّيَامَ قَبْلَ طُلُوعِ الفَجْرِ فَلَا صِيَامَ له

“Whoever does not commit himself (i.e. establish the intention) for fasting before the break of dawn has no fast“

(Sahīh al-Jāmi of Al-Albānī who declared it Sahīh #6534)

Al-Manāwī said:

… and in Ibn Mājah’s narration: “Whoever does not make it obligatory [yafridhu] from the night,” meaning to decide firmly upon fasting from the night, and “fard” means “to cut/decide.” In Al-Dāraqutnī’s version: “Whoever does not expose himself to fasting,” meaning to approach fasting and intend it. And in a narration mentioned by Ibn Al-ʿArabī: “Whoever does not decide firmly [yabut] on fasting,” and “al-batt” means decisive determination, “before the break of dawn” meaning to intend it from the night.

The apparent meaning applies to both obligatory and voluntary fasts. This view is held by a group including Ibn ʿUmar, Mālik, Dāwūd Al-Dhāhirī, and Al-Muzanī. Most scholars, however, restricted it to obligatory fasting based on Al-Dāraqutnī’s narration from ʿĀishah that al-Mustafā (the chosen one) (ﷺ)  said: “Do you have any breakfast/morning meal?” She said: “No.” He said: “Then I am fasting…” The hadīth uses “idhan” (then) which indicates future action and starting anew.

Scholars agreed on requiring nighttime intention for every obligatory fast that is not tied to a specific time, but they differed regarding fasts that have a specific time.

Most scholars required nighttime intention for these as well, based on the general meaning of the hadīth.

However, Mālik and Ahmad, in one of his two narrations, said: If one intends on the first night of Ramadān to fast the entire month, it is sufficient, because fasting the whole month is like fasting a single day. Al-Qādī [Al-Baydāwī] said: “This is a rejected analogy that contradicts the explicit text.” (Fayd Al-Qadīr 2/1411-1412)

Al-Kittānī said (quoting Ibn Hazm):

From Ibn ʿUmar: “One does not fast except by resolving/intending to fast before dawn.”

From ʿĀishah: “There is no fast for one who does not resolve/intend [to fast] before dawn.”

From Hafsah: “There is no fast for one who does not resolve/intend [to fast] before dawn.”

No disagreement with them is known from among the companions whatsoever.

Dāwūd and Al-Shāfiʿī said: “Neither Ramadān fasting nor any other fasting is valid except with a renewed intention each night for the coming day’s fast. Whoever deliberately abandons the intention, his fast is invalid.” (Mu’jam Fiqh al-Salaf 1/314 – see al-Muhallā 2/738-739)

Ibn Hazm said:

We do not know of any evidence for Mālik at all, except that they said: “Ramadān is like a single prayer.”

This is a blatant false argument, because in a single prayer, there is no deliberate interruption by something that is not part of it, whereas in the fasting of Ramadān, between each two days there is a night in which fasting is completely invalid and eating, drinking, and sexual intercourse are permitted. Thus, each day has its own ruling, different from the day before it and the day after it. One might fall ill, travel, or a woman might menstruate, and the fast becomes invalid, whereas yesterday one was fasting and tomorrow one will be fasting.

Rather, the month of Ramadān is like the prayers of the day and night, with intervals between each two prayers that are not prayer, so each prayer requires its own intention, and likewise each day of fasting requires its own intention.

They are the first to invalidate this analogy, for they hold that whoever deliberately breaks his fast on a day of Ramadān must make it up, but the rest of his fasting for the remaining days of the month is valid. So they have acknowledged that the ruling of the month is not like a single prayer over a single night and day. (Slightly paraphrased, al-Muhallā 2/741-742)

Al-Albānī was asked:

Questioner: Is it necessary to establish the intention for fasting each night in Ramadān?

Shaykh: Yes, by Allāh.

(Jāmi’ al-Turāth 10/113)

Weak ahadith pertaining to Ramadan Part 1.

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

سيد الشهور شهر رمضان

“The master of all months is the month of Ramadān.”

Collected in Kashf Al-Astār 1/339, and Al-Bayhaqī in Shu’ab Al-Īmān (3/355, 3/314, 3755, 3736) and Ibn ‘Asākir in Tārīkh Dimashq (26/392-393) through the chain of Yazīd ibn ‘Abd al-Malik.

This chain is very weak. Yazīd ibn ‘Abd al-Malik Al-Nawfalī is unanimously considered weak (i.e. by the likes of Imām Ahmad, Abū Zur’ah, Abū Hātim, Al-Bukhārī, Al-Nasā’ī – see checking of Jāmi al-Ahkām al-Siyām 1/86-87)

إِنَّمَا سُمِّيَ رَمَضَانُ، لِأَنَّهُ يَرْمِضُ الذُّنُوبَ

“Ramadān was only named as such because it burns up the sins.”

Collected by ar-Rāfiʿī in “al-Tadwīn” (2/242), and al-Daylamī (2339), and Muhammad ibn Nasr in “Taʿdhīm Qadr al-Salāh” (2/41), and Abū ash-Shaykh in “al-ʿAdhamah” (256).

Declared mawdū (fabricated) by Al-Albānī in Da’īf al-Jāmi’ 2060 and al-Da’īfah 3223 saying:

Ziyād ibn Maymūn – who is ath-Thaqafī al-Fākihī – is a liar, as Yazīd ibn Hārūn said, and similar to this is al-Bukhārī’s statement: “They abandoned him.”

And al-Hārith ibn Muslim is unknown (majhūl).

(from other routes also, collected by) Abū al-Hasan al-Azdī in “Hadīth Mālik” 2/205, (in it is) ʿUmar ibn Mudrik who is a liar, as Ibn Maʿīn said.

And ʿUthmān ibn ʿAbdullāh al-ʿUthmānī is unknown.

أوَّلُ شَهْرُ رَمَضَانَ رَحْمَةٌ، وَوَسَطُهُ مَغْفِرَةٌ، وَآخِرُهُ عِلْقٌ مِنَ النار

“The first part of Ramadān is mercy, its middle is forgiveness, and its end is emancipation from the Fire.”

Collected by al-ʿUqaylī in “al-Duʿafā'” (172), Ibn ʿAdī (165/1), al-Khatīb in “al-Muwaddih” (2/77), al-Daylamī (1/1/10-11), and Ibn ʿAsākir (8/506/1).

Declared very weak by Al-Albānī in Da’īf al-Jāmi 2135, and munkar (rejected) in al-Da’īfah 1569 saying:

al-ʿUqaylī said:

“It has no authentic basis from the hadīth of al-Zuhrī.”

Ibn ʿAdī said:

“Salām ibn Sulaymān ibn Sawwār, in my opinion, narrates rejected hadīth, and Maslamah is not well-known.”

And al-Dhahabī said likewise.

And regarding Maslamah, Abū Hātim said about him:

“Abandoned in hadīth,” as mentioned in his biography in “al-Mīzān”.

ذَاكِرُ اللَّهِ فِي رَمَضَانَ مَعْفُورٌ لَهُ، وَسَائِلُ اللَّهِ فِيهِ لَا يَخِيبُ

“The one who remembers Allāh in Ramadān is forgiven, and the one who asks Allāh during it will not be disappointed.“

Collected by al-Tabarānī in “al-Awsat” (2/97/1 from “al-Jamʿ bayn al-Muʿjamain”), and al-Asbahānī in “al-Targhīb” (1/182), Ibn Lāl in his “Hadīth” (2/114-115), and Ibn ʿAdī (1/232). See also Majma Zawāid 4853 Dār al-Minhāj print – the verifier said: “And this chain contains two weak narrators and one abandoned narrator.”

Declared fabricated by Al-Albānī in Da’īf al-Jāmi 3038 and al-Da’īfah 3621 saying:

‘Abd al-Rahmān ibn Qays is abandoned in hadīth. Abū Zurʿah and others declared him a liar, as in “al-Taqrīb.”

Hilāl ibn ʿAbd al-Rahmān – who is al-Hanafī – is close to him [in weakness]; for al-ʿUqaylī said in his biography:

“He is rejected in hadīth.” Then he cited three hadīths for him, and said:

“All of these are rejected, with no basis, and are not corroborated.”

رَمَضَانُ بِمَكَّةَ أَفْضَلُ مِنْ أَلْفِ رَمَضَانَ بِغَيْرِ مَكَّةَ

“Ramadān in Makkah is better than a thousand Ramadāns elsewhere.“

Collected in Jāmi al-Saghīr of al-Suyūtī 4478. Majma’ of al-Haythamī 3/145. Al-Bazzār 102 and others.

Al-Manāwī said: “al-Haythamī said: In (the chain) is ‘Āsim Ibn ‘Umar, who was declared weak by the leaders (in hadīth), such as (Imām) Ahmad and others…” (Fayd al-Qadīr 2/1379)

Declared weak by Al-Albānī in Da’īf al-Jāmi 3139 and al-Da’īfah 831 saying:

ʿĀsim ibn ʿUmar al-ʿUmarī is weak. In fact, Ibn Hibbān said (8/881):

“Very rejected in hadīth, he narrates from reliable narrators what does not resemble the hadīth of established narrators.”

رَمَضَانُ بِالمَدِينَةِ خَيْرٌ مِنْ أَلْفِ رَمَضَانَ فِيمَا سِوَاهَا مِنَ البُلْدَانِ، وَجُمُعَةٌ بِالْمَدِينَةِ خَيْرٌ مِنْ أَلْفِ جُمُعَةٍ فِيمَا سِوَاهَا مِنَ الْبُلْدَانِ

“Ramadān in Madīnah is better than a thousand Ramadāns in other cities, and a Friday in Madīnah is better than a thousand Fridays in other cities.”

Collected by al-Tabarānī (2/111/1) and Ibn ʿAsākir (2/510/8) and others.

Al-Manāwī said: al-Haythamī said: “In (the chain) is ‘Abdullāh ibn Kathīr, and he is weak.” (Fayd Al-Qadīr 2/1379)

Declared fabricated by Al-Albānī in Da’īf al-Jāmi 3138 and false/invalid in al-Da’īfah 831:

al-Dhahabī said in “al-Mīzān,” who cited this hadīth for him and said:

“It is not known who this is. And this (hadīth) is false/invalid, and the chain is obscure…. See al-Da’īfah of Al-Albānī.

فَضْلُ الْجُمُعَةِ في رمضان على سائرِ أَيَّامِهِ ؛ كَفَضْلِ رمضان على سائر الشهور

“The excellence of Friday in Ramadān over other days is like the excellence of Ramadān over other months.”

Collected by al-Asbahānī in “al-Targhīb” (2/215), and al-Diyā’ in “al-Ahādīth wa al-Hikāyāt” (2/147/12) through one route. And the other route collected by al-Daylamī (5/329).

Declared fabricated by Al-Albānī in Da’īf al-Jāmi 3962 and Al-Da’īfah 4003 saying:

(First route), Abū Dāwūd al-Dārimī who is Nufayʿ ibn al-Hārith – as in “Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb” – and he is a liar.

(Second route), ʿUmar ibn Mūsā – who is al-Wajīhī; Ibn ʿAdī and others said:

“He fabricates/invents hadīth.”

صَمْتُ الصَّائِمِ تَسْبِيحُ، وَنَوْمُهُ عِبَادَةٌ…

“The silence of the fasting person is glorification [of Allāh], his sleep is worship…”

Collected by Abū Tāhir al-Anbārī in his “Mashyakhah” (1/152), and al-Daylamī (2/253).

Declared weak by Al-Albānī in Da’īf al-Jāmi 3493 and very weak in al-Da’īfah 3784 saying:

al-Rabīʿ ibn Badr, and he is abandoned [in hadīth].

Al-Manāwī said: And in it is Shaybān ibn Farrūkh; Abū Hātim said: He held the view of Qadar [predestination], people were compelled to (rely on) him in later times. And [it contains] al-Rabīʿ ibn Badr who is discarded/abandoned. Al-Dhahabī said: Al-Dāraqutnī and others said: (He is) abandoned. And Ibn Hajr said in “al-Fath”: In its chain is al-Rabīʿ ibn Badr, and he is discarded/abandoned. (Fayd al-Qadīr 2/1383)

لَيْسَ فِي الصَّوْمِ رِيَاءٌ

“There is no showing off in fasting.”

Collected by Abū ʿUbayd in “al-Gharīb” (2/57)

Declared weak by Al-Albānī in Da’īf al-Jāmi 4907 and al-Da’īfah 4385 saying:

And this is a chain whose narrators are all reliable, narrators of the two Shaykhs [al-Bukhārī and Muslim]; except that Ibn Shihāb is a younger successor [tābiʿī], so it is mursal or muʿdal [types of disconnected narrations].