Narrations which obligate wudū after touching the privates
Hadīth 1.
Narrated from Busrah: The prophet (ﷺ) said:
إذا مسَّ أحدُكُم ذكره، فلا يُصلّي حتى يتوضأ
If one of you touches his penis, he should not pray until he performs ablution.
(Al-Tamhīd of Ibn ‘Abdul-Barr 11/36)
Hadīth 2.
Narrated from Umm Habībah: The prophet (ﷺ) said:
من مس فرجه فليتوضأ
Whoever touches his private part should perform ablution.
(Al-Tamhīd of Ibn ‘Abdul-Barr 11/37)
Hadīth 3.
Narrated from Abū Hurayrah: The prophet (ﷺ) said:
إذا أفضى أحدُكم بيدِه إلى فرجِه و ليس بينه و بينها حجابٌ و لا سِترٌ ، فقد وجب عليه الوضوءُ
If one of you brings his hand to his private part and there is no veil or covering between him and it, then performing ablution is obligatory upon him.
(Sahīh al-Jāmi’ 362 of Al-Albānī. Al-Tamhīd of Ibn ‘Abdul-Barr 11/40)
Hadīth 4.
Narrated by Amr ibn Shu’aib, from his father, from his grandfather that the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) said:
أيما رجل مس فرجه فليتوضأ، وأيما امرأة مست فرجها فلتتوضأ
Any man who touches his private part should perform ablution, and any woman who touches her private part should also perform ablution.
(al-Dāraqutnī 1/148, Ahmad, Bayhaqī. Authenticated by al-Bukhārī in Ilal, Ahmad Shākir in his checking of Musnad)
Some points of benefit mentioned by Imām Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhīd (11/34-49) and al-Istidhkār (2/211-212):
As for those from the Companions who narrated on the authority of the Prophet (ﷺ) on the obligation of wudū after touching the penis; include the narrations of Busrah and Umm Habībah. (Likewise) Abū Hurayrah [which the Imām declares Hasan], ‘Āishah, Jābir, and Zayd ibn Khālid, but the chains of transmission from them are ma’lūlah (contain defects).
As for the companions (of the Prophet ﷺ)who held the view that ablution is obligatory after touching the private parts, they include: ʿUmar ibn al-Khattāb, ‘Abdullāh ibn ʿUmar, Abū Hurayrah (with a differing opinion attributed to him), al-Baraʾ ibn ʿĀzib, Zayd ibn Khālid al-Juhaniy, Jābir ibn ʿAbdullāh, and Saʿd ibn Abī Waqqās, according to the narration of the people of Medina about him.
As for the tabi’īn whom it was narrated that (one must) perform wudū from touching the penis, from the books of narrations, the book of Ibn Abī Shaybah, and ‘Abd al-Razzāq: Sa’īd ibn Al-Musayyab, ‘Atā ibn Abī Rabāh, Tawūs, ‘Urwa, Sulaymān ibn Yasār, Abān ibn ‘Uthmān, Ibn Shihāb, Mujāhid, and Makhūl, Al-Sha’bi, Jābir ibn Zaid, Al-Hasan, and Ikrimah.
Likewise, this was the position of Al-Awzā’i, Al-Shāfi’i, Al-Layth ibn Sa’ad, Ahmad, Ishāq, Dawūd, and Al-Tabarī.
Ahmad ibn Hanbal was of the opinion that it was obligatory to perform ablution after touching the penis, based on the hadīth of Busrah and the hadīth of Umm Habībah. Likewise, it’s what Yahyā ibn Ma’īn held, and both hadīths are authentic according to them – and they are from the leading scholars of hadīth.
The condition for touching the penis is that there be no barrier or cover between it, and that it is touched intentionally and willingly; Because the Arabs do not call the subject fa’il (doer), except with the intention of acting. This is the truth in that regard, and what is known regarding the intention to touch is that in most cases it is done with the palm (of the hand). A hasan hadīth with a similar meaning was narrated… on the authority of Abū Hurayrah: If one of you brings his hand to his private parts and there is no veil or covering between him and it, then performing ablution is obligatory upon him [hadīth 3].
Al-Albānī on the view of the Hanafīs that touching the private parts doesn’t invalidate wudū
Sayyīd Sābiq said: The Hanifiyyah are of the opinion – based on the following hadīth – that touching the private parts does not nullify the ablution:
A man said: “I touched my penis” or he said, “Does a man who touch his penis during the prayer should perform Wudū (ablution)?” The Prophet (ﷺ) replied, “No, it is only a part of your body”
(Abū Dawūd 182 and others – authenticated by Al-Albānī and Al-Arnāūt in their checking of Abū Dawūd. Declared weak by al-Shāfi’ī, Abū Hātim, Abu Zur’ah, al-Bayhaqī, al-Dāraqutnī, Ibn Al-Jawzī – see Minatul-‘Alām of Abdullāh al-Fawzān 1/309)
Al-Albānī comments on this (i.e. the statement of Sayyid Sābiq):
I say: his saying (ﷺ): “It is only a part of you” contains an indication that the touch that does not require ablution is that which is not accompanied by lust, because in this case touching of the penis can be likened to touching another part of the body.
Unlike if one touches it with lust, then the touching (of it) is not similar to touching another part of the body because (the touching of the other parts of the body) is not associated with lust. And this is clear and apparent.
Accordingly, the hadīth is not evidence for the Hanafīs who say that touching in general (i.e. unrestricted) does not invalidate ablution. Rather, it is evidence for those who say that touching without lust does not invalidate ablution, but as for touching lust, it is invalidated in light of the evidence of the hadīth of Busrah. (Tamām al-Minnah 1/103)
Another method of reconciliation between the different narrations
Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said: A group of scholars have argued that the hadīth which obligates ablution after touching the private parts has abrogated the hadīth that exempts one from performing ablution.
They reason that the obligation for ablution is derived from the Sharī’ah (i.e. textual evidence), without any role for rational thinking in it, that the private part is considered like any other body part. It would be impossible to say: that it is merely a part of oneself, (yet) the Sharī’ah has obligated ablution after touching it. Therefore, it is possible that the obligation for ablution was legislated later on. (al-Tamhīd 11/43)
‘Abdullāh al-Fawzān said: Some scholars have taken the approach of abrogation (naskh), arguing that the hadīth of Talq ibn ‘Ali has been abrogated by the hadīth of Busrah because Talq’s hadīth was earlier and Busrah’s hadīth came later. The evidence for the earlier timing of Talq’s hadīth is that he came to Madīnah when the Prophet (ﷺ) and his companions were building the mosque at the beginning of the migration (Hijrah).
Among those who have supported the abrogation are Ibn Hibbān, al-Tabarānī, Ibn al-Arabī, al-Hāzimī, al-Bayhaqī, and Ibn Hazm.
Ibn Hazm reinforced the argument for abrogation by noting that the statement, “It is only a part of you” indicates that this occurred before the command to perform ablution for touching the private part. Had this statement been made after the command, the Prophet (ﷺ) would not have said this but rather clarified that the previous ruling had been abrogated. His statement suggests that there was no prior ruling on the matter and that (touching) it was regarded like (touching) any other body part. (Minhatul-‘Alām 1/313)
Another method of reconciliation
Al-San’ānī said: The view that favors preference over abrogation is better, as the hadīth of Busrah is stronger. This is due to the many scholars who have authenticated it and the numerous corroborating evidences for it. Furthermore, Busrah narrated her hadīth in the presence of the Muhājirīn and the Ansār, where many people were present, and no one objected to it. (Subul as-Salām 1/106)
Abdullāh al-Fawzān said regarding the ways the hadīth of Busrah is considered stronger:
1. The hadith of Busrah is more authentic than the hadith of Talq ibn Ali, as it has a sound chain of narration, while the hadīth of Talq has been deemed weak by several scholars, as previously mentioned [Shāfi’ī, Abū Hātim, Abu Zur’ah, al-Bayhaqī, al-Dāraqutnī, Ibn Al-Jawzī] . Al-Bukhārī stated about the hadīth of Busrah: “It is the most authentic narration in this topic.”…
2. The hadīth of Busrah has many supporting witnesses, narrated by seventeen companions, while the hadith of Talq does not have any supporting evidence.
3. The hadīth of Busrah conveys the original principle of ‘not needing to perform ablution after touching the private parts’ ; the one who transmits from the original principle is given precedence because he brings additional knowledge.
4 – The hadīth of Busrah is safer.
(Abridged, Minhatul-‘Alām 1/314-315)
The statement of Shāfī that wudū is only invalidated if touched with the inside of thepalm
Al-San’āni said: The Shāfi’īs claimed that invalidation (of ablution) only occurs when (the touching) is done with the inside of the palm, and that it is not invalidated if the penis is touched with the outside of the palm.
The muhaqiqūn responded to them by saying that al-ifdā (i.e. contact/touch): linguistically, is more general than being (limited) to the inside or outside of the palm.
Ibn Hazm said: There is no evidence for what they said, neither from the book, nor from the Sunnah, nor from consensus, nor from the saying of a companion, nor from analogy, nor from correct opinion… (Subul as-Salām 1/97)
‘Abdullāh al-Fawzān said: The well-known opinion of Imām Ahmad is that there is no difference between (the touching of) the palm or outside of the hand. (Minhatul-‘Alām 2/312)
(Allāhumma innī a’ūdhu bika minal-baras wal-junūn wal-judhām wa min sayyi-il-asqām)
“Oh Allāh, I seek refuge in You from leprosy, insanity, vitiligo, and the worst of diseases.”
(Abū Dawūd 1554. Declared Sahīh by Al-Albānī)
Ibn ‘Uthaymīn said: And the worst of al-asqām (diseases) is the plural of disease, which is illness, and this includes all bad diseases, including what is now known as cancer. We ask Allāh for wellness, as it is one of the worst diseases. (Sharh Riyād al-Sālihīn 6/40)
“Oh Allāh, distance me from from reprehensible morals, deeds, desires and diseases.”
(al-Tirmidhī 3591. Ibn Hibbān 3/240. Al-Hākim 1/532. Kitāb al-Sunnah of Ibn Abī ‘Āsim pg. 13. Mishkāt 2471. Declared Sahīh by Al-Albānī)
‘Abdullāh Al-Fawzān said: reprehensible morals and (reprehensible) deeds are those that are condemned by the Sharī’ah and custom. Reprehensible morals refers to mistreatment of people and reprehensible deeds refers to sins.
It has been said that reprehensible morals are the inner (i.e hidden) actions, such as conceit, pride, envy, haughtiness, malice, and the like. (Reprehensible) deeds are the visible deeds, such as adultery and drinking alcohol.
(Reprehensible) Desires, is what the soul is inclined to without regard to a purpose that is praiseworthy inthe Sharī’ah.
(Reprehensible) diseases, the intent is chronic, incurable or repulsive diseases, such as cancer, vitiligo and leprosy. (Abridged, Minhatul A’lām 10/249-250)
Say (Oh Muhammad): "If you (really) love Allāh then follow me (i.e. the Sunnah), Allāh will love you and forgive you of your sins. And Allāh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." (3:31)
The Prophet (ﷺ) said: فَإِنَّ خَيْرَ الْحَدِيثِ كِتَابُ اللَّهِ وَخَيْرَ الْهَدْيِ هَدْيُ مُحَمَّدٍ وَشَرَّ الْأُمُورِ مُحْدَثَاتُهَا وَكُلَّ بِدْعَةٍ ضَلَالَةٌ, وكلَّ ضلالةٍ في النَّارِ "The best speech is the Book of Allāh, the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad, and the worst matters are the newly-invented matters. And every innovation is misguidance. And all misguidance is in the Fire." (Sahīh Muslim 867, Sahīh al-Jāmi' 1353)
The Prophet (ﷺ) said: فَمَنْ رَغِبَ عَنْ سُنَّتِي فَلَيْسَ مِنِّي "Whomsoever turns away from my sunnah then he is not from me." (Sahīh Muslim 1401, Sahīh al-Bukhārī 5063)
Hold fast to At-Tasbīh, At-Tahlīl, and At-Taqdīs, and count them upon the fingertips, for indeed they shall be questioned, and they will be made to speak. (al-Tirmidhī 3583. Declared Hasan by Al-Albānī his checking)
Al-Albānī said regarding the statement: “count them upon the fingertips” – that it is a command from the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ). (Al-Daīfah 1/186)
Hadīth 2. ‘Abdullāh ibn ‘Amr narrated:
رَأَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم – يَعْقِدُ التَّسْبِيحَ قَالَ ابْنُ قُدَامَةَ – بِيَمِينِهِ
I saw the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) counting al-Tasbīh of Allāh on his fingers.
Ibn Qudāmah said (in his version: “With his right hand.” (Abū Dawūd 1502. Declared Sahīh by Al-Albānī)
Bakr Abū Zayd said: It is proven from the guidance of the Prophet (ﷺ) in word, action, and approval, that the dhikr is counted with the fingers of the [right] hand and nothing else. (Kitāb al-Subhah pg. 9)
Chapter 2. History of prayer/rosary beads
Bakr Abū Zayd said: Know that the Arabs did not have knowledge of the word subhah (rosary/prayer beads) in their language, nor in their worship during the pre-Islamic period, nor in their customs of play and amusement, and for this reason you will not find a mention of it in their speech, prose or poetry. Therefore Arab linguists have said that this word subhah is a newly-coined word. (Al-Subhah pg. 52)
Bakr Abū Zayd said: The rosary entered the Arab lands through two ways: The Sūfīs and the Rāfidah. al-Shihābi said: The spread of the rosary in some Islamic lands can be traced back to their use by the Sūfīs, who consider it (i.e. the rosary) an essential part of their practices and traditions. They use them in dhikr circles and keep them in a special container/box. There are people dedicated to using them in their supplications and remembrance, known as the “Shaykhs of the Subhah”. Some Sūfī sects see it as necessary to wear the rosary around the neck, as they believe this is more secure and rewarding.(Al-Subhah pg. 72)
Yāsir al-Fathī said: The rosary was introduced into the people of Islām. It was not known at all; neither in the era of the Prophet, nor in the era of the companions after the Prophet (ﷺ). Rather, it is an ancient Hindu Buddhist innovation that the Sūfīs introduced to the people of Islām. (Sharh Abū Dawūd 18/342)
Al-Albānī said: it (i.e. the rosary) is a symbol of the Christians. (Kitāb Radd ‘alā Abdullāh al-Habashī 1/64)
Chapter 3. Weak hadīths used to support the allowance of the rosary
Bakr Abū Zayd said: There is no authentic hadīth on the permissibility of counting dhikr on pebbles or date pits.
The most that has been narrated on this matter with chains of transmission traceable to the Prophet is three narrations, one of which is mawdū’ (fabricated), which is the hadith of Abū Hurayrah [to follow].
The narrations of Safiyyah and Sa’d ibn Abī Waqqās [to follow] do not establish for its legitimacy, and the authenticity of the chain of transmission of each of them is questionable. (Al-Subhah pg. 16)
Al-Albānī said: There are no narrations mentioning the rosary. There are narrations of tasbīh with pebbles, and whatever of them was traced back to the Messenger (ﷺ) is not authentic, and whatever was attributed to some of the Companions, then we have deemed weak all of them. (Kitāb Jāmi’ al-Turāth 17/271)
Yāsir al-Fathī also said: There is no proven hadīth or narration on counting (dhikr) with date pits or pebbles, and its action is not proven from a single companion. Rather, (the only narration) which is proven (is) that of Ibn Mas’ūd of rebuttal, and he is one of the scholars and jurists among the companions of the prophet (ﷺ). (Sharh Abū Dawūd of al-Fathī 18/342)
Abdūs ibn ‘Abdullāh > Abū Abdullāh al-Hussain ibn Funjūwayah al-Thaqafī > ‘Alī ibn Muhammad ibn Nassrūwīyah > Muhammad ibn Harūn ibn ‘Isā ibn Mansūr al-Hāshimī > Muhammad ibn ‘Alī ibn Hamzah al-‘Alawī > ‘Abdul-Samad ibn Mūsā > Zainab ibn Sulaymān ibn ‘Alī > Umm al-Hasan ibn Ja’far ibn al-Hasan > her father > her grandfather > ‘Alī marfū (raised to the prophet (ﷺ)) :
نِعْمَ المُذَكِّرُ السبحةَ ، َوإِنَّ أفضل ما يُسْجَدُ عليه الأرض، وما أنبتته الأرض
What a wonderful reminder is the rosary, and the best thing to prostrate on is the ground and on what the earth produces.
(Musnad al-Firdaws 4/98. Declared mawdū’ (fabricated) by Al-Albānī in al-Daīfah 1/184, #83)
Isnād:
Al-Albānī said: this isnād contains darkness upon darkness. Majority of them are majhūl (unknown) and some have been blamed;
Umm al-Hasan ibn Ja’far ibn al-Hasan – i did not find a written biography of her.
Abdul-Samad ibn Mūsā – al-Hāshimī [Abū Ibrāhīm]. Al-Dhahabī said in al-Mīzān [3/543] on the authority of al-Khatīb: they held him to be weak. Then Al-Dhahabī said: He narrates fabricated/strange narrations on the authority of his grandfather Muhammad ibn Ibrāhīm al-Imām.
[Al-Albānī then mentions that only Muhammad al-‘Alawī, Muhammad ibn Hārūn al-Hāshimī, Abū ‘Abdūllah al-Thaqafī and ‘Abdūs ibn ‘Abdullāh are known and are truthful/trustworthy.]
Thus, due to the above it is clear that the hadīth is weak and cannot be used as proof. (Al-Daīfah 1/184-185)
Meaning of the hadīth
Al-Albānī continues: the meaning of the hadīth is bātil (false) due to the following reasons:
The rosary is a bid’ah (newly invented) that was not present at the time of the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ). Thus, how is it conceivable that the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) informed his companions about something that they had no knowledge of.
The rosary opposes the guidance and the command of the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) [see ahadīth in chapter 1 above].
(Summarised from al-Daīfah of Al-Albānī 1/184-186)
Hadīth 2.
Sālih ibn ‘Alī al-Nawfalī > ‘Abdullāh ibn Muhammad ibn Rabī’ah al-Qudāmī > Ibn al-Mubarāk > Sufyān al-Thawrī > Sumayya > Abū Sālih > Abū Hurayrah marfū:
كان – صلى الله عليه وسلم – يسبح بالحصى
The prophet (ﷺ) would make tasbīh with pebbles.
(Tārīkh Jurjān of Abū al-Qāsim al-Jurjānī 68. Declared Mawdū (fabricated) by Al-Albānī in al-Daīfah 3/47, #1002.
Isnād:
‘Abdullāh ibn Muhammad ibn Rabī’ah Al-Qudāmī:
al-Dhahabī said in al-Mīzān: one of the weak ones, who narrated calamities (i.e. fabrications) on Mālik. (2/436)
Al-Albānī said: He was declared weak by Ibn ‘Adīy and al-Darāqutnī in al-Lisān. Ibn Hibbān said: He turns the narrations upside down (i.e. alters them). He may have altered more than one hundred and fifty narrations upon Mālik… Al-Hākim Al-Naqqāsh said: He narrated fabricated hadīths on the authority of Mālik. Abū Nu’aym (said): he narrated odd/strange narrations. (slightly abridged, Al-Daīfah of Al-Albānī 3/48)
Al-Albānī said: (regarding) Sālih ibn ‘Alī al-Nawfalī, I could not find a biography on him. (Al-Daīfah 3/48)
Hadīth 3.
Muhammad ibn Bashār > ‘Abd al-Samad ibn ‘Abd al-Wārith > Hāshim, who is Ibn Sa’īd al-Kūfī > Kinānah, the freed slave of Safiyyah > Safiyyah:
“The Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) entered upon me and before me were four thousand date pits, I was making Tasbīh with them. He (ﷺ) said: ‘You have made Tasbīh with these? Should I not teach you that which is more than what you have made Tasbīh with?’ So I said: ‘Indeed, teach me.’ So he said: ‘Say: May Allāh be removed from all imperfections as much as the number of His creation (Subḥān Allāhi ‘adada khalqihī).’”
(al-Tirmidhī 3554, who declared it weak.
Declared Munkar (rejected) by Al-Albānī in Da’īf al-Tirmidhī pg. 464 and by Yāsir al-Fathī in Sharh Sunan Abū Dawūd 18/338.)
Isnād:
Kinānah:
Yāsir al-Fathī said: He is not strong – Al-Tahdhīb (3/476) , Ma’rifat Al-Thiqāt (1560) , Al-Jarh wa Al-Ta’dīl (7/169) , Al-Thiqāt (5/339). (Sharh Sunan Abū Dawūd 18/338)
Al-Azdī said: The isnād of his hadīth is not established (i.e. is weak). (Al-Tahdhīb 3/476)
Al-Tirmidhī said: His isnād is not that strong/reliable. Elsewhere he said: His isnād is not well-known. (Al-Tahdhīb 3/476)
Ibn Hajr said: (He is) acceptable. (al-Taqrīb pg. 145)
Hāshim ibn Sa’īd al-Kūfī:
Al-Tirmidhī declared the hadīth weak saying: This hadīth is gharīb (i.e. unique), we do not know it except from this route of the hadīth of Hāshim ibn Sa’īd al-Kūfī and his isnād is not well-known. Also, there is a hadīth on this issue on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbās.’ (Sunan al-Tirmidhī 3554)
Al-Dhahabī said: (Yahyā) ibn Ma’īn said: He is nothing. Ibn ‘Adīy said: Whatever he narrates is not followed up. (Al-Mīzān 5/48)
Abū Hātim said: He is weak in hadīth. (Jarh wa Ta’dīl 9/104)
Ibn Hajr said: (he is) da’īf (weak). (al-Taqrīb #8166)
Text of the hadīth:
Bakr Abū Zayd said: Al-Tirmidhī’s statement ‘also, there is a hadīth on this issue on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbās’ means what Muslim and others narrated on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbās, from Jawayriyah [to follow]. (Al-Subhah pg. 18)
Al-Albānī said: what indicates the weakness of these two hadīths [hadīth 3, and hadīth 4 to follow insha Allāh] is that this incident was narrated by Ibn ‘Abbās without the mention of pebbles:
عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْرِيَةَ، أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم خَرَجَ مِنْ عِنْدِهَا بُكْرَةً حِينَ صَلَّى الصُّبْحَ وَهِيَ فِي مَسْجِدِهَا ثُمَّ رَجَعَ بَعْدَ أَنْ أَضْحَى وَهِيَ جَالِسَةٌ فَقَالَ ” مَا زِلْتِ عَلَى الْحَالِ الَّتِي فَارَقْتُكِ عَلَيْهَا ” . قَالَتْ نَعَمْ . قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ” لَقَدْ قُلْتُ بَعْدَكِ أَرْبَعَ كَلِمَاتٍ ثَلاَثَ مَرَّاتٍ لَوْ وُزِنَتْ بِمَا قُلْتِ مُنْذُ الْيَوْمِ لَوَزَنَتْهُنَّ سُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ وَبِحَمْدِهِ عَدَدَ خَلْقِهِ وَرِضَا نَفْسِهِ وَزِنَةَ عَرْشِهِ وَمِدَادَ كَلِمَاتِهِ ”
On the authority of Ibn Abbās, On the authority of Juwayriyah that the Prophet (ﷺ) left her early when he went to pray the morning prayer, while she was in her place of prayer, then he returned after Duhā (forenoon) and she was still sitting there. So he said to her: Are you still in the same state that I left you in? She answered: Yes.
The Prophet (ﷺ) said: I have already said four statements after you, three times, and if they were weighed against what you have said today then they would outweigh what you have said. They are: SubhanAllāhi wa bihamdihī, ‘adada Khalqihī, wa ridā nafsihī, wazīnata ‘arshihī, wa Midāda kalimātihi. (Allāh is free from imperfection and praise is for him; to the number of his creation, the pleasure of His own Self, the beautification of His ‘Arsh and the extent of His words).
(Sahīh Muslim 2726 and others)
So this authentic hadīth indicates two things:
1. The person in the story is Juwayriyah and not Safiyyah as was mentioned previously… [hadīth 3 here].
2. The mention of pebbles [or date pits] in the story is rejected.
(Al-Daīfah of Al-Albānī 3/189-191)
Other isnāds of the above narration:
Al-Tabarānī (Kitāb al-Du’ā 1740, al-Awsat 5472): Muhammad ibn ‘Uthmān ibn Abī Shaybah > his father who said: I found in my father’s book in his handwriting > Mustalim ibn Sa’īd > Mansūr ibn Zādhān > Yazīd ibn Mu’attib – the freed slave of Safiyyah > Safiyyah…
Al-Tabarānī said: We do not know this narration from Mansūr ibn Zādhān except by way of Mustalim ibn Sa’īd… (al-Awsat 5/334)
Yazīd ibn Mu’attib
Yāsir al-Fathī said: This is a gharīb jiddan (i.e. very unique) narration from Mansūr ibn Zādhān, and Yazīd ibn Mu’tab is majhūl (unknown). (Sharh Sunan Abū Dawūd 18/340)
Bakr Abū Zayd said: No biography was found for Yazīd. (Al-Subhah pg. 18)
2. (Natāij Al-Afkār of Ibn Hajr pg. 83) : […] Shu’ayb ibn ‘Abdullāh > Ahmad ibn Ishāq ibn ‘Utbah > Rūh ibn al-Faraj > ‘Amr ibn Khālid > Hadīj ibn Mu’awiyah > Kinānah, the freed slave of Safiyyah > Safiyyah…
Yāsir al-Fathī said: Ibn Hajr claimed in Natāij al-Afkār that Hāshim ibn Sa’īd al-Kūfī was followed up in this narration [thus declaring it Hasan], citing this path. I say: Hadīj ibn Mu’awiyah is not strong.
[Ibn Hajr said: He is truthful but makes mistakes ; Yahyā ibn Ma’īn said: He is nothing. Al-Nasā’ī said: He is weak. Al-Bukhārī said: They spoke about some of his hadīth. Ibn Sa’d said: He is weak in hadīth. Al-Bazzār said: He has a poor memory. (Al-Taqrīb pg. 158, Dār al-Ma’rifah print)]
Hadīj is much more famous than Hāshim ibn Sa’īd, having more companions/students, and a large group narrated from him. Likewise ‘Amr ibn Khālid who had many companions/students. Yet the narration of Hāshim – whom only three people narrated from – is more well-known and collected by authors of hadīth (i.e. books of Sunan, Musnad, Sahīh, Jāmi’), yet they didn’t collect the hadīth of Hadīj and ‘Amr. This narration has not come except from a very odd/unique source. And it is not unlikely that one inserted one hadīth into another hadīth. And no one collected/narrated this hadīth except [‘Alī ibn al-Hassan] al-Khula’ī despite his later period. How did these Imāms such as al-Tirmidhī, Abu Ya’lā, Al-Tabarānī, Ibn ‘Adīy, al-Hākim miss this hadīth (i.e. of Hadīj/’Amr)?
Rather, it can be asserted that this is a hadīth which is bātil (false); it was not narrated by Hadīj or ‘Amr ibn Khālid, as a number of critics have agreed that Hāshim ibn Sa’īd is the only one to narrate this hadīth of Safiyyah, and that it is only known from his hadīth:
Al-Tabarānī said: these ahadīth on the authority of Kinānah on the authority of Safiyyah are only known via Hāshim ibn Sa’īd al-Kūfī… [al-Awsat #8502]
Al-Tirmidhī said: This hadīth is gharīb (i.e. unique), we do not know it except from this route of the hadīth of Hāshim ibn Sa’īd al-Kūfī and his isnād is not well-known… [Sunan al-Tirmidhī #3554]
The approach of Ibn ‘Adīy also indicates that this hadīth is only known from Hāshim… (Summarised, Sharh Sunan Abū Dawūd 18/339 of Al-Fathī)
Hadīth 4.
Ahmad ibn al-Hasan > Asbagh ibn al-Faraj > ‘Abdullāh ibn Wahb > ‘Amr ibn al-Hārith > Sa’īd ibn Abī Hilāl > Khuzaymah > ‘Āisha bint Sa’d ibn Abī Waqqās > her father (Sā’d ibn Abī Waqqās):
That he entered with the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) upon a women, before her was a date pit – or he said – pebble – that she would make Tasbīh with. So he (ﷺ) said: “Should I not inform you of what is easier for you then this, and better?… (to the end of the hadīth)
(al-Tirmidhī 3568. Abū Dawūd 1500. Al-Baghawī in Sharh as-Sunnah 1279. And others.
Declared da’īfby Al-Albānī in his checking of Tirmidhī and Abū Dawūd.
Included by Muqbil ibn Hādī’ in ahadīth mu’allah dhāhiruha sihha (hadīth that appear to be authentic but contain defects/weakness) pg. 148)
(This narration was also collected by al-Hākim 1/547, Ibn Hibbān 837 al-Bazzār 4/40 – without ‘Khuzaymah’ in the isnād. Declared Munqati’ (disconnected/broken) by Al-Albānī in his checking of Mawārid al-Dhamān #2330)
Isnād:
Muqbil ibn Hādī said: if you go back to Al-Tahdhīb Al-Tahdhīb, you will not find a narration by Sa’īd ibn Abī Hilāl on the authority of Āisha bint Sa’d ibn Abī Waqqās… [i.e. the chain is broken/disconnected]. (ahadīth mu’allah dhāhiruha sihha pg. 148)
Khuzaymah:
Abdul-Muhsin al-‘Abbād said: this hadīth is weak and not established due to the presence of an unknown narrator in the isnād – and that is Khuzaymah. (Sharh Abū Dawūd 3/180)
Al-Dhahabī said: Khuzaymah, he is not known. (al-Mīzān 1/601)
Ibn Hajr said: He is not known – his lineage nor his condition. And no one narrated from him except Sa’īd ibn Abī Hilāl. (al-Taqrīb #1877, Natāij Al-Afkār pg. 81)
Sa’īd ibn Abī Hilāl:
Al-Sājī said: Ahmad said (about Sa’īd): he became confused. (al-Tahdhīb 2/48)
Ibn Hazm said: He is not strong (al-Tahdhīb 2/48)
Yahyā [ibn Ma’īn] also described him as confused in al-Fasl of Ibn Hazm 2/95. (Al-Da’īfah 1/189)
Al-Albānī said: Perhaps what supports this argument (i.e. of Sa’īd becoming confused and mixing up the narrations) is his narration of this hadīth, because some of the trustworthy narrators who narrated from Sa’īd do not mention Khuzaymah in their chain, so the chain becomes disconnected/broken.
This is why Hāfidh al-Mizzī did not mention ‘Āishah bint Sa’ad amongst the shaykhs (those who were narrated from) of (Sa’īd) Ibn Abī Hilāl, so this isnād is not without the defects of Jahālah (a narrator being unknown) or Inqitā’ (a break in the chain), so how can this hadīth be Sahīh or Hasan?! (Al-Daīfah 1/189)
Chapter 4: narrations attributed to the companions
[A separate page will be written focusing on the narrations attributed to the companions in this matter insha Allāh. But in summary as stated above:
Yāsir al-Fathī said: There is no proven hadīth or narration on counting (dhikr) with date pits or pebbles, and its action is not proven from a single companion. Rather, (the only narration) which is proven (is) that of Ibn Mas’ūd of rebuttal, and he is one of the scholars and jurists among the companions of the prophet (ﷺ). (Sharh Abū Dawūd of al-Fathī 18/342)]
Chapter 5. Using the rosary “to count accurately”
Bakr Abū Zayd said: The extremists have said about the (use of the) rosary:
“Counting with the fingers is only practical for a few remembrances, like those under a hundred. However, for those with many supplications and continuous remembrances, counting with their fingers can lead to mistakes and distraction when counting. Thus, this is the wisdom behind using the rosary.”
I say: In the pure Sharī’ah, there is no fixed number for dhikr that is restricted by condition, time, or place beyond a hundred. Anything else is considered unrestricted dhikr. Allāh, The Most-High says: “Oh you who have believed, remember Allāh with much remembrance” (33:41), among other verses, such as in Ali-Imrān (3:41), Al-Anfāl (8:45), and Al-Ahzāb (33:35).
Thus, imposing a restricted dhikr on oneself with a number that neither Allāh nor His Messenger (ﷺ) commanded is an addition to what is prescribed. (Al-Subhah pg. 101-102)
Chapter 6. Closing remarks
Bakr Abū Zayd said: It is undeniable that using the rosary for counting dhikr is imitation of the practices of the disbelievers and constitutes an innovation in the worship of dhikr and supplications. It’s a deviation from the legislate method of counting with the fingers, as demonstrated by the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) through his words and actions. This practice has been passed down by those who follow his guidance and continue to do so to this day. Matters of disagreement should be referred back to his teachings, which clarify the correct approach in times of disagreement.
Anyone who examines the history of using the rosary will know that it is associated with the rituals of disbelievers such as Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, and others, and that this practice entered the Muslim community from their places of worship, will understand that it is a (particular) characteristic of the places of worship of the disbelievers. Therefore, for a Muslim to adopt it as a means of worship is a misguided innovation, and this is clearly evident, and all praise is to Allāh.
Every servant who is sincere to themselves should free themselves of innovations in the religion and limit their practices to following the example of the Seal of the Prophets and Messengers and his companions (may Allah be pleased with them).
So, leave the rosary, Oh servant of Allāh, and emulate your Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) in the restricted dhikr and the method of counting with your fingers. Continuously engage in the remembrance of Allāh abundantly, without restricting yourself to a number not prescribed by Sharī’ah.
Narrated by al-Hakam ibn al-Mubārak > ‘Amr ibn Yahyā > from his father (Yahyā ibn ‘Amr) > from his father (‘Amr ibn Salimah ibn al-Hārith) who reported:
We used to sit by the door of Abdullāh ibn Mas’ūd, may Allāh be pleased with him, before dawn prayer. When he came out, we would walk with him to the mosque. Then Abū Mūsā al-Ash’arī came to us and he said: “has Abū Abd al-Rahmān come out to you yet?” We said: “No.” So he sat with us until he came out. When he came out, we all stood and went to him.
So Abū Mūsā said to him:, “O Abū Abd al-Rahmān, I recently saw something in the mosque that I detested and yet, praise be to Allāh, I saw nothing but good.” Ibn Mas’ūd said, “What was it?” Abū Mūsā said, “If you live long enough, you will see it. I saw people sitting in the mosque in circles waiting for prayer. A man in each circle had pebbles and he would tell them to say Allāhu Akbar one hundred times and they would do so, then declare lā ilahā illAllāh one hundred times and they would do so, then Subhan-Allāh one hundred times and they would do so.”
Ibn Mas’ūd said, “What did you say to them?” Abū Mūsā said, “I did not say anything to them. I was waiting for your opinion or order.” Ibn Mas’ūd said, “Would you not order them to count their sins and guarantee for them that their good deeds would not be wasted?”
We went along with him until he reached one of these circles and he stood over it, saying, “What is this I see you doing?” They said, “O Abū Abd al-Rahmān, they are pebbles by which we count Takbīr, Tahlīl, and Tasbīh.” Ibn Mas’ūd said, “Count your sins, for I guarantee that none of your good deeds will be wasted. Woe to you, nation of Muhammad! How quickly do you run to your destruction! Here are his companions, these are his clothes yet to be worn out, these are his utensils yet to break. By the One in whose hand is my soul, perhaps you are upon a religion better guided than the religion of Muhammad? Or have you opened the door of misguidance?”
They said, “By Allāh, O Abū Abd al-Rahmān, we intended nothing but good.” Ibn Mas’ūd said, “How many intend good but do not achieve it! The Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) informed us that people would recite the Qur’ān and it would not reach beyond their throats. By Allāh, I do not know that perhaps many of them are among you!” Then he turned away from them.
‘Amr ibn Salimah said, “We saw most of them in these circles fighting us on the day of Nahrawān along with the Khawārij.”
(Sunan al-Dārimī #212, pg. 136. Kitāb al-Tarīkh of al-Wāsitī pg. 198 – from two paths via ‘Amr ibn Yahyā ibn ‘Amr ibn Salimah.
Declared Sahīh by the editors of Risālah Publishers – authentication based on Shu’ayb Al-Arnāūts methods pg. 213.
Declared as Sahīh by Al-Albānī in Al-Sahīhah #2005.
Declared Sahīh by Yāsir al-Fathī in Sharh Abū Dawūd 18/342.
A shortened version of the narration can be found in al-Tirmidhī 2188, Musnad of Imām Ahmad 3831, Ibn Majāh 168 via different chains)
Research of the isnādof al-Dārimī
al-Hakam ibn al-Mubārak – al-Bāhilī. The Imām, Hāfidh, Abū Sālih al-Khāshitiyy al-Balkhī (Fath al-Manān Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī 3/359)
He is one of the shaykhs of al-Bukhārī in al-Adab al-Mufrad (Fath al-Manān Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī 3/691)
He narrated from: (Imām) Mālik, Abū Awānah and others.
Those who narrated from him: Zakariyyā ibn Yahyā, ‘Abdullāh al-Dārimī and others. (Tahdhīb 1/469. Al-Mīzān 1/531)
He was declared thiqah (trustworthy, i.e. upright and accurate in what he narrates) by Ibn Hibbān, Imām Ahmad, Ibn Mandah, ibn Sam’ānī, al-Dhahabī and others. (Fath al-Manān Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī 3/359. Sharh al-Dārimī of al-Zahrānī 1/181. Al-Mīzān 1/531, al-Tahdhīb 1/469. Thiqāt 8/195)
Al-Bukhārī said: He died in the year 213 or thereabouts. (al-Tahdhīb 1/469)
‘Amr ibn Yahyā – ibn ‘Amr ibn Salimah ibn al-Hārith al-Hamdānī (Fath al-Manān Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī 3/691. Al-Sahīhah of Al-Albānī 5/12. Jarh wa Ta’dīl of Ibn Abī Hātim 1487)
He narrated from: his father (Yahyā ibn ‘Amr).
Those who narrated from him: Ibn Abī Shaybah, Ibn Numayr, ‘Abdullāh Ibn Umar, Ibrāhīm Ibn Mūsā, and Abdullāh Ibn Sa’īd Al-Ashja. Sa’īd ibn Sulaymān al-Wāsitī. (Jarh wa Ta’dīl of Ibn Abī Hātim 1487. Thiqāt 8/480. Tarīkh al-Kabīr of al-Bukhārī 7/475-476)
Ishāq ibn Mansūr narrated from Yahyā ibn Ma’īn that he declared ‘Amr ibn Yahyā thiqah. (Jarh wa Ta’dīl of Ibn Abī Hātim 1487)
Ibn Hibbān also mentioned him in al-Thiqāt (The Trustworthy) (8/480).
Yahyā ibn ‘Amr – ibn Salimah al-Hamdānī/Al-Kindī (Fath al-Manān Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī 3/691. Al-Sahīhah of Al-Albānī 5/12)
He narrated from: his father (‘Amr ibn Salimah).
Those who narrated from him: Shu’bah and al-Thawrī and others. (Tahmīl ‘alā Kitāb Jarh wa Ta’dīl of Ibn Abī Hātim 1/348 by al-Nājī. Kitāb al-Īthār of Ibn Hajr pg. 190)
Ya’qūb ibn Sufyān said: There is nothing wrong with him. (Tahmīl ‘alā Kitāb Jarh wa Ta’dīl of Ibn Abī Hātim 1/348 by al-Nājī).
Al-Ujaylī said: (He is) thiqah, (from) kūfa. (Thiqāt of Al-Ujaylī #1819. Tahmīl ‘alā Kitāb Jarh wa Ta’dīl of Ibn Abī Hātim 1/348 of al-Nājī. Al-Sahīhah of Al-Albānī 5/12-13)
Al-Zahrānī said: They (i.e. Shu’bah and al-Thawrī) only narrate from thiqah. (Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī 1/363)
Al-Albānī said: It suffices us to praise/validate him by the (mere fact) Shu’bah narrated from him, as he (i.e. Shu’bah) was selective in whom he narrated from… (Al-Sahīhah 5/12)
Imām Ahmad said that the overall shaykhs of Shu’bah are jayyid (i.e. good, reliable, strong). (Fath al-manān Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī 3/691)
‘Amr ibn Salimah ibn al-Hārith – al-Hamdānī al-Kindī al-Kūfī. A tābi’ī from the first generation, from the people of Kūfah. (Fath al-Manān Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī 3/692)
He narrated from: ‘Alī, Abū Mūsā al-Ash’arī.
Those who narrated from him: his son Yahyā and others. (al-Tahdhīb 3/274)
Ibn Hajr said: Thiqah (al-Taqrīb pg. 77)
Ibn Hibbān mentioned him in al-Thiqāt (5/172).
Ibn Sa’īd said: He is thiqah. (al-Tahdhīb 3/274)
Al-Ujaylī said: (He is a) thiqah kūfan tābi’ī (al-Thiqāt of Al-Ujaylī #1263)
Research of the isnād of al-Wāsitī in kitāb al-Tarīkh
‘Alī ibn Hassan ibn Sulaymān – al-Hadramī, originally from al-Wāsit – Kūfah. (al-Taqrīb pg. 39)
Ibn Hajr said: thiqah. (al-Taqrīb pg. 39)
Abū Dawūd said: thiqah. (Tadhīb Kamāl 20/370)
Hākim said: thiqah. (Jarh wa Ta’dīl 6/180)
He died in the year 236/237. (al-Tahdhīb 3/151)
The rest of isnād is the same as above – via ‘Amr ibn Yahyā.
Benefits derived from this narration
They did this (i.e. sit at the door of Ibn Mas’ūd and walk with him to the Masjid) because of the status of ‘Abdullāh ibn Mas’ūd (may Allāh be pleased with him), a great companion, one of the early ones (to embrace), whose virtues are recorded in the collections of the Sunnah. (Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī of al-Zahrānī 1/363)
The sahābī Abū Mūsā al-Ash’arī (may Allāh be pleased with him) coming and asking for Ibn Mas’ūd, and then sitting waiting for him to come out – again shows the status of Ibn Mas’ūd – may Allāh be pleased with him. (Summarised, Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī of al-Zahrānī 1/363)
Aside from this narration, there is no proven hadīth or narration on counting (dhikr) with date stones or pebbles, and its action is not proven from a single companion. Rather, it is proven that Ibn Mas’ūd rebuked it, and he is one of the scholars and jurists among the companions of the prophet (ﷺ). (Sharh Abū Dawūd of al-Fathī 18/342)
Abū Mūsā saying: “.. I detested…” meaning within himself, but did not make it apparent due to his dislike possibly being out of place as what was apparent to him was that which he had seen was (apparently) good. (Fath al-Manān Sharh Musnad Al-Dārimī 3/692)
There is no doubt that what they (i.e. people of the circles) did was not a usual practise and that it was (based on) a new opinion on the method of making dhikr, which had no basis in the Book or the Sunnah. (Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī of al-Zahrānī 1/365)
Ibn Mas’ūd rebuked the people that were counting tasbīh upon the pebbles. If the use of pebbles for counting Tasbīh was that which the Messenger (ﷺ) relayed then it would not have been hidden from Ibn Mas’ūd, insha Allāh. (Al-Da’īfah of Al-Albānī 1/191-192)
This rebuke of Ibn Mas’ūd was adopted by those who took knowledge from him such as Ibrāhim ibn Yazīd al-Nakha’ī – who used to prohibit his daughter from helping women braid thread together for rosary beads which they would use for tasbīh. (Al-Da’īfah of Al-Albānī 1/191-192)
Ibn Mas’ūd understood that the action of these people was an innovation that must be denounced and its illegitimacy in the Shari’ah be pointed out. (Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī of al-Zahrānī 1/364)
Ibn Mas’ūd explained to them that they were quick to innovate, and were quick to perish by contradicting the prophetic guidance in what they did. They deviated quickly from the straight path despite the death of the messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) occurring not far off, and the presence of his companions whom they did not seek guidance for that which they did. (Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī of al-Zahrānī 1/364)
Ibn Mas’ūd rebuked them by saying either they were on a better guidance than that of the prophet (ﷺ) – never could this be the case, or that they opened the door of misguidance – which is the truth. (Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī of al-Zahrānī 1/365)
The sunnah that has been established by action and speech of the messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) in regards to making tasbīh is that it’s (only) done with the fingers. (Al-Sahīhah of Al-Albānī 5/13)
The lesson (in what matters) is not in the amount of worship (i.e. quantity) but what’s done in accordance to the sunnah, as Ibn Mas’ūd said: (اقتصاد في سنة، خير من اجتهاد في بدعة ) ‘Moderation in following the sunnah is better than striving in innovation’ [al-Hākim 289]. (Al-Sahīhah of Al-Albānī 5/14)
The small innovation leads to a greater innovation, do you not see that the people of these circles later became Kharijites who fought and were killed by the caliph ‘Alī ibn Abī Tālib. (Al-Sahīhah of Al-Albānī 5/14)
The battle of Nahrawān took place in the year 38 after the Hijrah; the Khawārij – 4,000 in number – rebelled against ‘Alī so the Muslims went out and fought and killed them. Only 9 men were killed from the Muslims. (Sharh Musnad al-Dārimī of al-Zahrānī 1/366)
Al-Albānī said: “He (ﷺ) would sometimes practice iq’ā [to rest on both his heels and feet].
Al-Iq’ā has come from the hadīth of Ibn ‘Abbās in Sahīh Muslim and Abū Dawūd and Al-Tirmidhī, who declared it Sahīh and others authenticated it; see (Al-Sahīhah 383), and from the hadith of Ibn ‘Umar with a good chain of transmission according to Al-Bayhaqī and authenticated by Ibn Hajr. Abū Ishāq Al-Harbi narrated in (Gharīb Al-Hadīth, 1/12/5) on the authority of Tawūs that he saw Ibn’ Umar and Ibn ‘Abbās practising Iq’ā, and its chain of transmission is Sahīh.
(Sifat al-Salāh pg. 132)
Narrations of Ibn ‘Abbās and Ibn ‘Umar
Tawūs reported:
قُلْنَا لاِبْنِ عَبَّاسٍ فِي الإِقْعَاءِ عَلَى الْقَدَمَيْنِ فَقَالَ هِيَ السُّنَّةُ . فَقُلْنَا لَهُ إِنَّا لَنَرَاهُ جَفَاءً بِالرَّجُلِ . فَقَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ بَلْ هِيَ سُنَّةُ نَبِيِّكَ صلى الله عليه وسلم
We asked Ibn ‘Abbās about sitting Al-Iq’ā (in prayer) upon the heels. He said: It is sunnah. We said to him: We find it hard on the person. Ibn ‘Abbas said: Rather it is the sunnah of your prophet (ﷺ). (Sahīh Muslim 536, Abū Dawūd 845, al-Tirmidhī 283)
Nāfi’ narrated upon Ibn ‘Umar:
كان يُقْعِي بَيْنَ السَّجْدَتَيْنِ
He would sit Yaqī’ between the two prostrations. (Musannaf of Ibn Abī Shaybah #2959)
he saw ‘Abdullāh ibn ‘Umar, when he raised his head from the first prostration, he would sit iq’ā upon the tips of his toes. And he said: This is from the Sunnah. (Sunan al-Kubrā of Al-Bayhaqī #2735, Sahīh)
I saw Ibn ‘Umar and Ibn ‘Abbās and they were sitting iq’ā on the tips of their toes between the two prostrations (Sunan al-Kubrā #2738 of Al-Bayhaqī, Sahīh)
Ibn al-Mundhir said:
Ibn ‘Abbās said: “From the Sunnah is for your heels to touch your buttocks.”
Tawūs said: I saw the ‘Abādilāh doing it; Ibn Umar, Ibn Abbās, and Ibn al-Zubayr [declared Sahīh by Al-Albānī in Irwā 2/22].
Sālim, Nāfi’, Tawūs, Atā’, and Mujāhid also acted upon that. (Al-Awsat of Ibn al-Mundhir 3/358)
Explanation of the above:
Al-Bayhaqī said:
This is the legislated or recommended position of iq’ā, according to what we narrated on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbās and Ibn ‘Umar; which is to place the tips of ones toes on the ground. And one places his buttocks on his heels and rests his knees on the ground. (Sunan al-Kubrā 2/258)
Muhammad Bazmūl [explaining the authors – Al-Albānīs – text: “sometimes he would practise iq’ā”] said:
… And the author, may Allāh have mercy upon him, when he says: (Sometimes) this means that the Messenger (ﷺ) used to do this at times and leave it at (other) times. What is the evidence that the Messenger (ﷺ) used to do this sometimes?
We say: The evidence for this is that those who described the Messenger’s prayer (ﷺ) did not all agree on that (same) description. This indicates that the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) sometimes did it and left it (at other times). And thus, whoever mentioned (this description) would have seen the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) at the time he did it, and whoever did not mention it would not have seen the Messenger doing it.
There are two ways of sitting between the two prostrations;
The first manner: is the manner of iftirāsh [i.e. spreading out the left foot horizontally whilst sitting on it and propping up the right foot, with the toes facing the Qiblah].
This manner of sitting iftirāsh is legislated in three places:
When sitting between the two prostrations
When sitting for the middle tashahhud of a prayer containing two tashahhuds
When sitting for the tashahhud of a prayer containing a single tashahhud, like that of the Fajr prayer
The second manner of sitting between the two prostrations is the manner of iq’ā.
There are three ways of sitting iq’ā;
To place ones feet upright [and rest on ones toes] and to place the buttocks on the heels – this manner of sitting is proven between the two prostrations.
To place ones shins upright and place ones buttocks on the ground, like a dog.
To place one’s shins, knees and feet on the ground, and place one’s buttocks between one’s feet and one’s shins on the ground, like a dog’s iq’ā (squatting).
Iq’ā in the second and third manner is not prescribed at all in the prayer. As for the first manner of iq’ā then this is only prescribed in the sitting between prostrations.
(Abridged, Sharh Sifat al-Salāh pg. 274-275)
Some weak hadīth which are used to prohibit iq’ā between the two prostrations and their explanation/reconciliation
O ‘Alī! I love for you what I love for myself, and I dislike for you what I dislike for myself. Do not sit iq’ā between the two prostrations. (al-Tirmidhī 282, Ibn Mājah 294, 295. Declared da’īf by Al-Albānī in his checking of al-Tirmidhī. Also declared da’īf by Ibn al-‘Arabī in ‘Āridatul-Ahwadhī 2/103.
Al-Nawawī said in Sharh Sahīh Muslim 1/163, regarding Hārith ibn ‘Abdullāh al-A’war al-Hamdānī [one of the narrators in this isnād]: “It is agreed upon that he is weak”.
When you raise your head from prostration, do not squat like a dog. Place your buttocks between your feet and let the tops of your feet touch the ground. (Ibn Mājah 896. Declared Mawdū’ by Al-Albānī in his checking of Ibn Mājah and in al-Da’īfah #2615)
Al-Mubārakfūrī said: “In the isnād is ‘Alā Abū Muhammad, and some of the Imāms have weakened him”. (Tuhfah al-Ahwadhī 4/37)
al-Hararī said: Al-Bukhārī, Al-Uqailī and Ibn ‘Adī said: “He is a fabricator of hadīth.” Abū Hātim said: “He is a fabricator of hadith and his hadīth is abandoned.” ‘Alī ibn Al-Madīnī said: “He used to fabricate hadīth.” Abū Dawūd said: “He is abandoned in hadīth.” Its said in “Al-Taqrīb”: “He is abandoned.” (Sharh ibn Mājah of al-Hararī 6/83)
3). Narrated by Abū Hurayrah:
نَهى عن ثلاثٍ عن نقرةٍ كنقرةِ الدِّيكِ وإقعاءٍ كإقعاءِ الْكلبِ والتفاتٍ كالتفاتِ الثَّعلبِ
The prophet (ﷺ) forbade me from three things: pecking like a rooster, squatting like a dog, and looking around like a fox. (Musnad of Imām Ahmad 8106. Declared da’īf by Al-Arnāūt in his checking (13/468), who said: Its chain of transmission is weak due to the weakness of Sharīk – who is Ibn Abdullāh Al-Nakha’ī – and Yazīd ibn Abū Ziyād – who is the Hāshimī Qurayshī)
Al-Mubārakfūrī said: This hadīth was also collected by al-Bayhaqī [Sunan al-Kubrā #2713] and it is from the narration of Layth ibn Abī Sulaym, and it was also collected by Abū Ya’lā [#6226] and Al-Tabārānī in Al-Awsat [#2575]. (Tuhfah al-Ahwadhī 4/38)
Regarding Layth ibn Abī Sulaym:
Imām Ahmad said: ” (he is) unstable in hadīth.” Abū Hātim said: “weak in hadīth.” Ibn Ma’īn said: “munkar in hadīth, although he was a person of the sunnah.” Al-Hākim Abū Abdullāh said: “there is agreement on his poor memory.” (See al-Taqrīb pg. 147-148, dār muayyid print. Al-Tahdhīb Al-Tahdhīb 3/484-485)
4). Abī Jawzā narrated from Ā’ishah:
وَكَانَ يَنْهَى عَنْ عُقْبَةِ الشَّيْطَانِ
The prophet (ﷺ) prohibited the devil’s way of squatting. (Sahīh Muslim 498)
Ibn Hajr said in Bulūgh al-Marām #215: and in it there is a defect.
Ibn Mulaqqin said: In this isnād there is a defect. (al-I’lām 3/19)
Al-Albānī said: This isnād appears to be authentic, hence why Muslim and Abū Awānah collected it in their Sahīh, however, (in reality) it is defective. (Irwā 2/21)
Ibn ‘Abdul-Barr said: Abū Jawzā is Aws Ibn ‘Abdullāh al-Rabi’ī, he did not hear from Ā’ishah, and his hadīth from her are Mursal [i.e. interrupted/broken and ends at the Tabi’ī level]. (Al-Tamhīd 13/35)
Al-Bukhari said in the biography of Abū Jawzā: Fī isnādihi nadhar. (Tarīkh al-Kābīr 2/16-17,#1540)
Ibn Hajr said: Al-Bukhārīs saying fī isnādihi nadhar [here] means that he did not hear from the likes of Ibn Masūd, Ā’ishah and others, not that he held him to be weak. (Al-Tahdhīb 1/194)
Al-Albānī said: Al-Hāfidh (Ibn Hajr) explained this isnād as broken in another hadīth that follows (334) and what supports this break (in the chain); in Kitāb al-Salāh of Ja’far al-Faryābī […] Badīl Al-‘Uqailī told us, on the authority of Abū Jawzā, who said: “I sent a messenger to Ā’ishah to ask her… then he mentioned the hadīth.” I say: So the hadīth was attributed to being on the authority of an unknown man who was the intermediary between Abū Jawzā and Ā’ishah, so the weakness of (this) chain of transmission is established. (Abridged, Irwā 2/21)
Al-Nawawī said: {The devil’s way of squatting}, Abū ‘Ubayd and others interpreted as the forbidden iq’ā; which is to place ones buttocks on the ground, place ones shins upright, and to place the hands on the ground, just as dogs and other wild beasts do so. (Sharh Sahīh Muslim 2/532)
Al-Nawawī said: The correct interpretation of the hadīth of Ibn ‘Abbās [“It is the sunnah of your prophet (ﷺ)”] is that one places his buttocks on his heels between the two prostrations. And this is different from the iq’ā that’s been prohibited. (Summarised, sharh Sahīh Muslim 2/579-580)
Al-Albānī said: As for the narrations that prohibit iq’ā’, it is not permissible to adhere to them in order to oppose this Sunnah (for the following) reasons:
First: They are all weak and defective.
Second: If they were authentic, or if what was agreed upon was correct, (then) it refers to the prohibition of iq’ā like the iq’ā of a dog, which is something other than the iq’ā that’s proven.
Thirdly: That they are a possible reference to performing iq’ā in other than it’s legislated place, such as (performing it in) the first and second tashahhud. This is what some ignorant people do, and this is forbidden because it is contrary to the Sunnah. (Summarised, Irwā 2/22)
Ibn Qūdamah said: It is recommend to recite Sūrah al-Kahf on Friday. (al-Mughnī 2/313)
Al-Nawawī said: “It is recommended to recite Sūrah al-Kahf on the day (of Friday). Al-Shāfī’i said in the book al-Umm: I recommend reciting it on Friday night [i.e. Thursday night according to the Gregorian calendar]. ” (Kitāb al-Adhkār pg. 226)
Q) What is the ruling on reciting Sūrah Al-Kahf on Friday during the day and night?
A) The recitation of Sūrah Al-Kahf on Friday is a recommended act and there is reward in it and there is no difference between a person reciting it from the Book, or by heart. (Fatāwā Nūr ‘alā Darb 2/5, Ibn ‘Uthaymīn)
Evidence:
Hadīth 1. The prophet (ﷺ) said:
من قرأ سورةَ ( الكهفِ ) في يومِ الجمعةِ أضاء له من النورِ ما بين الجمُعَتَين
Whoever recites Sūrah Al-Kahf on the day of Friday will be illuminated with a light between the two Fridays (From one Friday to the next).
(Al-Hākim #3432 – who declared it Sahīh. Also declared Sahīh by Al-Albānī in Sahīh Targhīb wa Tarhīb #736 and Sahīh al-Jāmi’ #6470 and Irwā 3/93)
Whoever recites Sūrah Al-Kahf on the night [other narrations mention the day] of Friday, he will be illuminated with a light between him and the Ancient House (Makkah).
(Al-Dārimī #3434 – declared Sahīh by Al-Arnāūt. Targhīb wa Tarhīb #736, Sahīh al-Jāmi’ #6471 of Al-Albānī)
Irwā 3/94 – declared Sahīh by Al-Albānī and said that this narration takes the ruling of Marfū’ ;raised to the prophet (ﷺ) as it is something that cannot be said by (ones own) opinion.
Al-San’ānī said: “Al-Hāfidh Ibn Hajr said: It comes in a narration: “Day of Friday”, and in other narrations: “Night of Friday”, and the gathering between them means: the day with its night and night with its day.” (Tanwīr Sharh Jāmi’ al-Saghīr 10/351)
Then the Shaitān (Satan) made them slip therefrom (the Paradise), and got them out from that in which they were. We said: “Get you down, all, with enmity between yourselves. On earth will be a dwelling place for you and an enjoyment for a time.” (al-Baqarah:36)
The saying of The Most High: {On earth will be a dwelling place for you and an enjoyment for a time} meaning: that you will settle on the earth, and you will enjoy it with the blessings that Allāh has given you, but not forever; rather for a time. And that is (until) the establishment of the Hour.
Benefits [from the verse] :
7. It is not possible for Banī Ādam to live anywhere else except on Earth, as Allāh The Most-High says:
{On earth will be a dwelling place for you and an enjoyment for a time}, and this is (further) supported by the saying of Allāh The Most-High:
{فيها تحيون وفيها تموتون ومنها تخرجون} [الأعراف: ٢٥]
{Therein you shall live, and therein you shall die, and from it you shall be brought out (i.e. resurrected)} (al-A’rāf:25)
Based on that, we know that the attempt of the disbelievers to live on other than Earth, either on some planets, or in some (space) ships, is a desperate attempt because their dwelling must [inevitably] be on the Earth.
“O Allāh! I seek refuge with You from sadness and grief, from incapacity and laziness, from cowardice and miserliness, from the heavy burden of debt and from being overpowered by (other) men.” (Sahīh Bukhārī 6369)
Allāhu Rabbī, lā sharīka lahu
The prophet (ﷺ) said:
من أصابه هم أو غم ، أو سقم ، أو شدَّة ، فقال : الله ربي, لا شريك له ، كُشِفَ ذلك عنه
“Whoever is afflicted with sadness, grief, sickness, or adversity, and says: Allāh is my Lord, He has no partner. Then it will be removed from him.” (Sahīh al-Jāmī’ of Al-Albānī #6040, who declared it Hasan)
Allāhumma innī ‘abduka ibnu ‘abdikaibnu amatik, nāsiyatī biyadik, mādin fī hukmūk, ‘adlun fī qadāuk, asaluka bikulli-smin huwa lak, sammayta-bihi nafsak, aw anzaltahu fī kitābik, aw ‘allamtahu ahadan min khalqik, aw-statharta-bihi fī ‘ilmi-lghayb ‘indik, an taj’ala al-qurān rabī’a qalbī, wa nūra basarī, wa jilā-a huznī, wa dhahāba hammī
“No servant ever says, when afflicted with sadness or grief:
‘Oh Allāh, I am your servant, the son of your servant, the son of your maidservant. My forelock is in Your hand, Your judgment over me is passed, Your decree upon me is in justice, I ask You by every name that that is Yours, which you have given Yourself, or which You have revealed in Your Book, or which You have taught to any of Your creation, or which You have kept in the knowledge of the unseen with You, that You make the Qur’ān the spring of my heart, the light of my sight, the remover of my grief, and the remover of my sadness.’
except that Allāh removes his sadness and replaces his grief with joy.”
They said: “Oh Messenger of Allāh, should we learn these words?” He (ﷺ) said: “Yes, whoever hears them should learn them.” (Ibn Hibbān #972, 3/253, declared Sahīh by Shu’ayb al-Arnāūt)
“The duā at the time of distress is: ‘Oh Allāh, Your mercy is what I hope for, so do not entrust me to myself even for the blink of an eye, and rectify for me my condition, all of it. There is none worthy of worship except You.'” (Abū Dawūd 5090. Declared Hasan by Al-Albānī)
Yā Hayyu yā Qayyūm, bi-rahmatika astaghīth
Anas narrated that whenever something would distress the prophet (ﷺ), he would say:
يَا حَىُّ يَا قَيُّومُ بِرَحْمَتِكَ أَسْتَغِيثُ
“Oh Ever-Living, Oh Self-Sustainer! In Your Mercy do I seek relief.” (al-Tirmidhī 3524. Declared Hasan by Al-Albānī)
Lā ilāha ill-Allāhul-Halīmul-Karīm, subhānahu wa tabārakallāhu Rabbul-‘arshil-adhīm, wal-hamdulillāhi Rabbil-‘ālamīn
‘Alī narrated:
“The Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ) gave me these words and commanded me to say them at the time of distress or adversity:
‘There is none worthy of worship except Allāh, The Forbearing, The Generous; He is free from (all types of) imperfection. Blessed is Allāh, The Lord of the great throne, and all praises belong to Allāh, the Lord of all that exists.'” (Sahīh al-Mawārid of Al-Albānī #2371, 2/38, who declared it Hasan Sahīh)
And it has already been revealed to you in the Book (this Qur’ān) that when you hear the Verses of Allāh being denied and mocked at, then sit not with them, until they engage in a talk other than that; (but if you stayed with them) certainly in that case you would be like them. Surely, Allāh will gather the hypocrites and disbelievers all together in Hell. (Al-Nisā:140)
The tafsīr of Ibn ‘Abbās
Ibn ‘Abbās said: (Those that) are included in this āyah are every innovator in the religion, and every person of innovation until the Day of Judgement (Mawsū al-Tafsīr Al-Ma’thūr 7/187)
The tafsīr of Hasan al-Basrī
Al-Hasan said: It is not permissible to sit with them even if they engage in a different conversation, according to what Allāh said [Al-An’ām:68]:
And if Shaitān (Satan) causes you to forget, then after the remembrance sit not you in the company of those people who are the Dhālimūn (polytheists and wrong-doers, etc.). (Mawsū al-Tafsīr Al-Ma’thūr 7/186)
The tafsīr of Ibrāhīm al-Nakha’ī
Abū Wā’il said: Indeed, a man speaks in a gathering with a lying word, he makes those sitting laugh, and Allāh is displeased with them all.
This was mentioned to Ibrāhīm Al-Nakha’ī and he said: Abū Wā’il spoke the truth, isn’t this found in the Book of Allāh:
then sit not with them, until they engage in a talk other than that (Mawsū al-Tafsīr Al-Ma’thūr 7/187)
The tafsīr of al-Makkī
Al-Makkī said, regarding the verse in al-Nisā:140:
This verse is a proof for avoiding the people of sin if they make apparent their evil, and avoiding the people of falsehood of every kind; from the innovators, the Qadariyyah, and others who engage in fisq (i.e. sin, immorality, disobedience). (Hidāyah Ilā al-Bulūgh al-Nihāyah 2/985)
The tafsīr of al-Tabarī
Commenting on Al-Nisā:140, al-Tabarī says:
This verse clearly shows the prohibition of sitting with people of falsehood of all kinds, including the innovators and immoral/sinful people, when they engage in their falsehood. (Jāmi’ al-Bayān 7/660)
The tafsīr of Ibn ‘Atiyyah
Ibn ‘Atiyyah said:
This verse contains strong evidence on the obligation to avoid the people of innovation and people of sin, and to not sit with them.
It was narrated on the authority of ‘Umar ibn’ Abdul-‘Azīz that he took some people who were drinking khamr (intoxicants), and it was said to him about one of those present: verily he is fasting, so he carried out the punishment upon him and then recited this verse: {In that case you would be like them}. (Muharar al-Wajīz 3/344)
The tafsīr of al-Qurtubī
… In that case you would be like them, this shows the obligation to avoid the people of sin who make apparent their evil, because whoever does not avoid them is pleased with their actions, and being pleased with disbelief is disbelief.
Allāh The Mighty and Majestic said: In that case you would be like them. So whoever sits in a gathering of sin and does not rebuke them will be equal to them in sin, and it is necessary to rebuke them if they speak of (what contains) sin or commit sin. If he is not able to rebuke them, then he should get up and leave them so that he will not be among the people (included in) this verse. (Jāmi’ al-Ahkām 3/635)
The tafsīr of Ibn Kathīr
Ibn Kathīr says:
What has already been revealed in the Book — as the Āyah says — is the Āyah in Sūrah al-An’ām:68 which was revealed in Makkah;
And when you see those who engage in false conversation about Our verses (of the Qur’ān) by mocking at them, stay away from them.
The Āyah means, if you still commit this prohibition after it reaches you, and you are satisfied to sit with them in the place where the verses of Allāh are rejected, mocked and disparaged, and you approve of them in that, then you have participated with them in what they are doing.
That is why Allāh said, But if you stayed with themcertainly in that case you would be like them, in sin. As comes in the hadīth:
من كان يؤمن بالله واليوم الآخر فلا يجلس على مائدة يدار عليها الخمر
Whoever believes in Allāh and the Last Day should not sit at a table where khamr (intoxicant) is served. (Slightly adapted, ‘Umdatul-Tafsīr 1/588)
The tafsīr of al-Sa’dī
Al Sa’dī says:
Allāh says, when you hear the verses of Allāh being denied and mockedat, meaning, the noble and sacred verses of Allāh are being disparaged.
It is obligatory on every accountable person to believe in Allāh’s noble verses, and respect and revere them. It is for this purpose that Allāh sent them down and for which He has created this entire creation.
The opposite of belief in them is kufr, i.e. to reject them.
The opposite of respecting and revering them is degrading and mocking them.
This mockery and rejection also includes the argumentation by the disbelievers and the hypocrites against the verses of Allāh and their support of disbelief.
Equally, included in this are all types of innovators in the religion. Their argumentation for their falsehood implies mocking/disrespecting the noble verses of Allāh; Allāh’s noble verses attest to nothing but the truth and are a confirmation of the truth and nothing else.
Allāh says, do not sit with them until they engage in a talk other than that, that is, until they stop uttering insulting words and degrading remarks toward Allāh’s verses, certainly in that case, if you continue to sit with them in the state described in this noble verse, you would be like them. This is because you expressed your approval of their mocking and disbelief. Being content with an evil or sin is similar to committing that evil or sin. (Slightly abridged, Tafsīr al-Sa’dī 1/447)
Related:
Sh. Fawzān and Sh. Rabī’ on sitting with the people of sin and innovation:
And the Day when We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imām. (Sūrah Isrā:71)
Ibn Kathīr said: Some of the Salaf said this is the greatest honor for the people of Hadīth, because their Imām is the Prophet (ﷺ). (Mawsū al-Tafsīr Al-Ma’thūr 13/263)
fawaaids.com 