I’la al-Sunan on Raf’ al-Yadayn Part Five

[Hadith Seventeen]

17. Narrated from Sharikh from Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad from „Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Layla from al-Bara‟ that Allah‟s Messenger (Allah bless him and grant him peace) would when he started the Salah raise his hands close to his ears and then would not repeat [this]. Abu Dawud transmitted it (Badhl al-Majhud, 2:22), and he said: „Abd Allah ibn Muhammad al-Zuhri narrated to us: Sufyan narrated to us from Yazid the equivalent of the hadith of Sharikh, and he did not say, “Then he would not repeat.” Sufyan said: He said, “Then he would not repeat” to us afterwards in Kufa. Abu Dawud said: “This hadith was narrated by Hushaym, Khalid and Ibn Idris and they did not mention, „Then he would not repeat.‟” Then he transmitted from Waki„ from Ibn Abi Layla from his brother „Isa and from al-Hakam from „Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Layla from al-Bara‟ ibn „Azib: He said: “I saw the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace) raise his hands when he began the Salah, and then he did not raise them until he finished.” Abu Dawud said: “This hadith is not sahih.” I say: Yes, but it is hasan as we will explain in the commentary.

I say: Abu Dawud criticised this hadith from two perspectives:

Firstly, based on what Sufyan said, that Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad did not narrate this wording initally, and he narrated it in Kufa afterwards, so it is as though he added it from his surroundings.

Secondly, Hushaym and Khalid and Ibn Idris did not narrate “then he would not repeat” from Yazid as Sharik narrated from him, so the narration of Sharik is anomalous and conflicts with trustworthy narrators.

He [i.e. Abu Dawud] criticised the hadith of Waki‘ due to Ibn Abi Layla who is Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman as is apparent.

The answer to the first [criticism] is that Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad is from the narrators of Muslim and the Four [i.e. al-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, al-Nasa’i and Ibn Majah], and al-Bukahari narrated from him without chain.

Ya‘qub ibn Sufyan said: “Although they criticised Yazid due to his change, he is reliable and trustworthy, even if he is not like al-Hakam and Mansur.” Ibn Shahin said in al-Thiqat: “Ahmad ibn Salih al-Misri said: ‘Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad is trustworthy, and the speech of those who criticised him does not appeal to me.’” (Abbreviated from Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, 11:331)

This is an explained accreditation rejecting his weakness due to his change, as Ahmad ibn Salih and Ya‘qub ibn Sufyan declared him trustworthy despite their knowledge of what others said about him, and that is inconsequential according to them. Furthermore, when a confused or changed [narrator] is followed-up or a corroborant is found for what he narrated, his hadith is accepted and used as proof, as we mentioned in the introduction, and Yazid is so, because al-Hakam and ‘Isa ibn Abi Layla narrating from ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Layla followed him up in his statement “then he would not repeat” as Abu Dawud, al-Tahawi and al-Bayhaqi transmitted from Waki‘, and both of them are trustworthy; rather ‘Isa is trustworthy and firm, which is stronger than Yazid without doubt, as mentioned in al-Jawhar al-Naqi (1:137). Abu Dawud’s statement regarding it, “This hadith is not sahih” does not harm us, for although Muhammad ibn Abi Layla was criticised, he is not less than Yazid, rather he is equal to him, since al-‘Ijli praised him and he said: “He was a jurist, a champion of the Sunnah, reliable, passable in hadith,” and Ya‘qub ibn Sufyan said: “Trustworthy, righteous, there is some criticism of his hadith,” as mentioned in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib (9:302). Al-Tirmidhi has declared a hadith of his to be hasan. Hence, the hadith is hasan.

As for the statement of Abu Dawud that Hushaym, Khalid and Ibn Idris did not narrate “then he would not repeat” from Yazid as Sharik narrated from him, this is opposed by the statement of Ibn ‘Adi in al-Kamil: “Hushaym and Sharik and a group with them narrated it from Yazid with his chain, and they said in it, ‘Then he would not repeat.’” Al-Daraqutni transmitted it also from the narration of Isma‘il ibn Zakariyya from Yazid, and al-Bayhaqi transmitted it in al-Khilafiyyat through the route of al-Nadr ibn Shumayl from Isra’il ibn Yunus ibn Abi Ishaq from Yazid. This is mentioned in al-Jawhar al-Naqi (1:136). Therefore, it is apparent from this that Yazid is not alone in his narration from ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Layla and Sharik is not alone in his narration of the phrase “then he would not repeat” from Yazid. Rather, there are follow-ups for each of them. Hence, the truth is that the hadith is hasan, and can be used as proof. And Allah Almighty knows best.

 

[Hadith Eighteen]

18. Abu Bakrah narrated to us: Mu‟ammal narrated to us: Sufyan narrated to us from al-Mughirah: He said: I narrated to Ibrahim the hadith of Wa‟il that he saw the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) raising his hands when he opened the Salah and when he bowed and when he raised his head from bowing, so he said: “If Wa‟il saw him doing that once, then indeed „Abd Allah saw him fifty times not doing that.” Al-Tahawi narrated it (1:132). I say: The chain is hasan. Its narrators are all trustworthy besides Mu‟ammal ibn Isma„il who is differed upon, some of them having declared him trustworthy while others having criticised him, and it is mentioned in al-Taqrib: “[He is] reliable with bad memory,” and [it is hasan] due to the corroborative report from the narration of Abu Yusuf al-Qadi from Husayn ibn „Abd al-Rahman and „Amr ibn Murrah from al-Nakha„i, which we mentioned earlier [see hadith no. 14].

I say: The meaning of Ibrahim’s statement is that Wa’il infrequently accompanied the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) while Ibn Mas‘ud frequently accompanied him, and Wa’il did not pray with him except a number of Salahs as distinguished from Ibn Mas‘ud, since he prayed with him many Salahs and witnessed from his states what Wa’il and his likes did not witness. So the preference goes to the narration of Ibn Mas‘ud.

Faqih Abu Bakr ibn Ishaq objected to this that this reasoning equates to nothing because:

Raising the hands is authentic from the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace), and then from the rightly guided caliphs, and then from the Sahabah and Tabi‘in, and in ‘Abd Allah ibn Mas‘ud’s forgetfulness of raising the hands is nothing that necessitates that these Sahabah did not see the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) raise his hands.

Ibn Mas‘ud forgot from the Qur’an that which the Muslims did not differ on since [then], which is the mu‘awwidhatayn (i.e. the last two chapters of the Qur’an); and he forgot what all the scholars agreed is abrogated, that is tatbiq; and he forgot the manner of two people standing behind the imam; and he forgot that in which there is no disagreement between the scholars, that the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) prayed Fajr on the Day of Sacrifice in its [correct] time; and he forgot the manner in which the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) combined [the prayers] in ‘Arafah; and he forgot that in which there is no disagreement, of placing the elbow and wrist on the earth in prostration; and he forgot how the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) would recite wa ma khalaqa al-dhakara wa al-untha (Qur’an 92:3). Since it is possible for Ibn Mas‘ud to forget such things with respect to Salah, why is the same not possible in raising the hands? Al-Bayhaqi narrated it from him as [mentioned] in al-Jawhar al-Naqi (1:139)

I say: The outcome of your statement is that none of Ibn Mas‘ud’s (Allah be pleased with him) hadiths can be used as proof at all due to the possibility of forgetfulness in them, so it is necessary for you to remove all his hadiths in their entirety from the books of hadith, particularly the two Sahihs, and remove his name from the group of the huffaz of hadith, and criticise the hadith-scholars who counted him amongst the huffaz of the Sahabah like al-Dhahabi, since he mentioned him in his Tadhkirat al-Huffaz, and he counted him amongst the huffaz, and he praised him [saying]:

The companion of Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and grant him peace) and his attendant; one of the foremost and first [Muslims], and from the senior veterans of Badr, and from the noble jurists and Qur’an teachers. He was from those who would be careful in transmitting and strict in narrating. He deterred his students from being carefree in the precision of words, and he would narrate hadiths little and be cautious in the words. It was narrated from Abu ‘Amr al-Shaybani: “I sat with Ibn Mas‘ud for a year, and he would not [normally] say, ‘Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said,’ and when he did say, ‘Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said,’ he would be overcome with tremors, and he would say [after narrating], ‘like this’ or ‘close to this.’”

‘Umar wrote to the inhabitants of Kufa: “I have preferred you over myself with ‘Abd Allah ibn Mas‘ud.” And ‘Umar once looked at him and said: “A small vessel filled with knowledge.” And Hudhayfah was asked about the nearest of people to the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace) in conduct and characteristic, and he said: “That is Ibn Mas‘ud. The protected companions of Muhammad (Allah bless him and grant him peace) knew that Ibn Umm ‘Abd [i.e. Ibn Mas‘ud] is from the nearest of them to Allah.” End [quote], selected from 1:13, 14, 15.

If you say: We distinguish between the remainder of his hadiths and his hadith on not raising the hands, so we accept them and do not accept this, I say: Allah have mercy on you! Explain to us the reason for distinguishing between them – why do you leave his hadith on this due to the possibility of forgetfulness, and not leave the remainder of his hadiths due to this very possibility? If you say the reason for distinguishing [between them] is his isolatedness from other than him in narrating [the practice of] not raising the hands, I say: This is no doubt a lie and a claim without proof, since it is authentic from ‘Ali and ‘Umar (Allah be pleased with them) that which supports the statement of Ibn Mas‘ud, and we have not found anyone mentioning ‘Uthman (Allah be pleased with him) amongst the group of those who would raise [their hands] when bowing and rising from it, so your statement, “Raising the hands is authentic from the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace), and then from the rightly guided caliphs” is inaccurate. Ibn al-Turkumani said:

That which was narrated from ‘Umar on raising [the hands] upon bowing and rising from it, al-Bayhaqi cited its chain in which are those who were weakened, which is why al-Bahayqi said in the previous chapter: “We narrated it from Abu Bakr and ‘Umar,” and he mentioned [with them] a group [of Sahabah], and he did not say this using the wording of authentication as Ibn Ishaq did.

His statement, “And then from the Sahabah and Tabi‘in,” is negligence, since some of the Sahabah limited the raising [of the hands] to the opening takbir as has preceded, and likewise a group of the Tabi‘in, from whom are al-Aswad, ‘Alqamah, Ibrahim, Khaythamah, Qays ibn Abi Hazim, al-Sha‘bi, Abu Ishaq and others, and Ibn Abi Shaybah narrated all of this in his Musannaf with good chains. He also narrated this with an authentic chain from the companions of ‘Ali and Ibn Mas‘ud, and they are sufficient for you, and in them is a great number as is not hidden, and we have mentioned most of these [narrations] in what has preceded [in the text].

His statement, “In ‘Abd Allah ibn Mas‘ud’s forgetfulness of raising the hands is nothing that necessitates that these Sahabah did not see the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) raise his hands,” is a claim without proof, as there is no means to know that Ibn Mas‘ud [initially] knew this and then forgot it. The correct etiquette in this sitiuation – in which he attributed forgetfulness to him – is to say: “It did not reach him”¹ as other scholars did.

His statement, “He forgot the manner of two people standing behind the imam,” by this he intends the narration that he prayed with al-Aswad and ‘Alqamah and he made them [stand] to his right and left. However, Ibn Sirin justified this by [explaining] that the mosque was narrow, as mentioned by al-Bayhaqi afterwards in Bab al-Ma’mum yukhalif al-Sunnata fi al-Mawqif.

His statement, “He forgot that in which there is no disagreement between the scholars, that the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) prayed Fajr on the Day of Sacrifice in its [correct] time” is incorrect since it is has been narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari and other [collections] from Ibn Mas‘ud that he (upon him peace) prayed Fajr on that day at the dark of the night (ghalas). Therefore, he did not forget that he prayed it in its time, rather he meant that he prayed it outside its habitual time which is when there is some brightness (isfar), and this is clear from what is narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari from his hadtih: “When dawn came, he said: ‘Indeed the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) would not pray at this hour except this prayer in this place on this day.’”

His statement, “He forgot that in which there is no disagreement, of placing the elbow and wrist on the earth in prostration,” by this he intends the narration from Ibn Mas‘ud that he said, “The bones of the sons of Adam were facilitated for prostration, so prostrate even on the elbows.” However the wording of Ibn Ishaq is weak, and it would have been better to say “of the detestability of placing the elbow and the wrist [on the earth].” Ibn al-Turkumani did not reply to this question. I believe that the narration of prostration on the elbows is inauthentic from him, since al-Tabrani narrated in al-Kabir from Ibn Mas‘ud: “We were commanded to prostrate on seven bones,” and its chain is hasan and although Isma‘il ibn ‘Amr al-Bajali who was criticised is in it, Ibn Hibban declared him trustworthy. He [i.e. al-Tabrani] also narrated from him: “When one of you prostrates, he should not prostrate lying down, and nor with the legs to the side.” Its chain is sahih. It is not hidden that prostration on elbows is precisely lying down [and prostrating] which he forbade. Al-Tabrani narrated in al-Kabir also from ‘Abd Allah ibn Ziyad that he said: One who saw Ibn Mas‘ud narrated to me, he said: “It is as though I am seeing him prostrating: he moved his elbows apart until I could almost see the whiteness of his armpits.” Al-Haythami mentioned all of these narrations in Majma‘ al-Zawa’id (1:191-2).

His statement, “He forgot how the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) would recite wa ma khalaqa al-dhakara wa al-untha (Qur’an 92:3),”

It is mentioned in al-Muhtasab by Ibn al-Jinni: “The Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace), ‘Ali, Ibn Mas‘ud and Ibn ‘Abbas recited wa al-dhakari wa al-untha without ma.” [It is narrated] in the two Sahihs that Abu al-Darda said: “By Allah, verily Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and grant him peace) taught it to me [in this way].” So it is established that Ibn Mas‘ud was not alone in this, and we do not concede that he forgot how the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) would recite it. Rather, he heard it in another form, so he transmitted it as he heard [it]. (Al-Jawhar al-Naqi, 1:139-40)

As for his statement, “Ibn Mas‘ud forgot from the Qur’an that which the Muslims did not differ on since [then], which is the mu‘awwidhatayn (i.e. the last two chapters of the Qur’an),” [the error] in this is that Ibn Mas‘ud did not forget them and did not deny them being [part of] the Qur’an, sent down from Allah, and how is that possible for him or for any of the Arabs, when the inimitability (i‘jaz) is obvious in them just as it is in other chapters [of the Qur’an]? Rather, he only rejected their inclusion in the mushaf due to his belief that they were sent down for seeking protection only, not for recitation.

By this [analysis], al-Bayhaqi’s bias against the Hanafis is manifest to you, since he criticises their proofs by quoting such statements in which is bad behaviour with respect to the Sahabah, and he remained silent about it, and did not refute its speaker. By Allah! I recognise the greatness of al-Bayhaqi, his trustworthiness, his scrupulousness and his memory, and his great favour to the Muslims, and likewise the greatness of the jurist Abu Bakr ibn Ishaq, but the greatness of the Sahabah and their magnitude and their respect are greater in [my] heart than the greatness of all people after them, so silence is not permitted for me in this place. I felt that refutation of these statements and clarification of the errors of their speakers is more deserving and more worthy. [Having said] this, all praise belongs to Allah in the latter and the former [worlds].

Addendum

Al-Shawkani said in Nayl al-Awtar:

It is established from the hadith of Ibn ‘Umar according to al-Bayhaqi that he said after mentioning the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace) would raise his hands upon the opening takbir and upon bowing and when straightening: “And this remained his Salah until he met Allah (Exalted is He).” (Nayl al-Awtar, 2:67)

And he said after transmitting the hadith with the wording of al-Bukhari and Muslim without the addition of “and this remained his Salah until he met Allah (Exalted is He)”:

The hadith was transmitted by al-Bayhaqi with the addition, “And this remained his Salah until he met Allah (Exalted is He).” Ibn al-Madini said: “This hadith, according to me, is a proof to all creation. All who hear it must act upon it, because there is nothing [problematic] in its chain.” (Nayl al-Awtar, 2:68)

This gives the impression apparently that Ibn al-Madini strengthened it with this addition which al-Bayhaqi narrated, and that it is established from Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and grant him peace) as such, and there is nothing problematic in this chain. This is an error. Rather, the speech of Ibn al-Madini refers to the hadith with the wording transmitted by the two shaykhs and there is no doubt in the authenticity of its chain and its being free from any defect. Yes, we have criticism of it from the perspective of [its] comprehension due to the narrations from Ibn ‘Umar being contradictory on this [matter] as we discussed earlier.

As for the one with the addition which al-Bayhaqi narrated, it is not sahih at all. Rather, it appears to be fabricated, since al-Zayla‘i mentioned its chain and said:

Shaykh [Ibn Daqiq al-‘Id] said in al-Imam: “This doubt, i.e. the claim of abrogation, is removed by what al-Bayhaqi narrated in his Sunan through the route of al-Hasan ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Hamdan al-Raqqi: ‘Ismah ibn Muhammad al-Ansari narrated to us: Musa ibn ‘Uqbah narrated to us from Nafi‘ from Ibn ‘Umar that Allah’s Messenger would when beginning Salah raise his hands and when bowing and when raising his head from bowing and he would not do this during prostration, and this remained his Salah until he met Allah (Exalted is He). He narrated it from Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Hafiz [i.e. Imam al-Hakim] from Ja‘far ibn Muhammad ibn Nasr from ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Quraysh ibn Khuzaymah al-Harawi from ‘Abd Allah ibn Ahmad al-Dajmahi from al-Hasan with it.” (Nasb al-Rayah, 1:213)

‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Quraysh was accused by al-Sulaymani of fabricating hadith as mentioned in Lisan al-Mizan (3:425), and no one declared him trustworthy. As for ‘Ismah ibn Muhammad al-Ansari, Abu Hatim said, “He is not strong,” and Yahya ibn Ma‘in said, “An excessive liar, fabricating hadith,” and al-‘Uqayli said, “He narrates falsehoods from trustworthy narrators,” and al-Daraqutni and others said, “Abandoned,” and Ibn ‘Adi said, “‘Ismah ibn Muhammad ibn Fudalah ibn ‘Ubayd al-Ansari, the Medinan, none of his hadiths are preserved.” (Lisan al-Mizan, 3:170)

Hence, there is no proof therein, and the claim of abrogation is not repelled thereby at all, so be wary of this, for indeed many people were misled by this addition. And Allah knows best.

I‘la al-Sunan, Idarat al-Qur’an wa al-‘Ulum al-Islamiyyah, Karachi: Pakistan, 1427 H, 3:56-91²

[Footnotes to Part Five]

1. And this is not a deficiency, as some rulings were hidden to [Abu Bakr] al-Siddiq, ‘Ali and ‘Umar (Allah be pleased with them), until those junior to them informed them, as is not hidden to one who has knowledge of hadith (Mawlana Zafar Ahmad al-‘Uthmani)

2. According to what is written at the end of the third volume of I‘la al-Sunan, this section of the book was completed on Dhu al-Qa‘dah 1340 H/July 1922 CE