Jump to content


- - - -


Photo
- - - - -

Placing hands at sides during Salat


28 replies to this topic

#1 zainabia

zainabia

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,828 posts
  • Location:Pakistan

Posted 07 March 2005 - 04:18 PM

Bismillah
Salam Alaikum

I found the following traditon of Hadhrat Aisha in Sahih Bukhari:


Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 56, Number 664:

    Narrated 'Aisha:

    That she used to hate that one should keep his hands on his flanks while praying. She said that the Jew used to do so.



This tradition shows the following:

1) There were indeed people (who were either Sahaba or Tabaeen) in times of Aisha, who used to pray while putting their hands at sides (may be on flanks, or may be straight).

So question is why these Sahaba or Tabaeen did this???????

Doesnt it show that there were indeed very basic differences between Companions themselves???? (i.e., after staying 23 years with Rasool (saw), they were unable to be 100% sure where Rasool (saw) used to put his hands during Salah.

When they were unable to remember where Rasool (saw) put his hands during Salat, then no wonder these same people also forgot the appointment of Mawla Ali (as) at Ghadir-e-Khum.


I need your opinions.

Jazak Allah.

Was Salam.

Edited by zainabia, 07 March 2005 - 04:29 PM.


#2 Matami-Shah

Matami-Shah

    wanna play?

  • Banned
  • 2,359 posts
  • Location:Slough - United Kingdom

Posted 07 March 2005 - 05:39 PM

brilliant

#3 Murtada

Murtada

    (يا لثارات محمد (ص

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,756 posts
  • Religion:Islam

Posted 09 March 2005 - 06:33 PM

(bismillah)
(salam)
Actullay before all muslims during the time of Rasoul (pbuh) prayed with thier hands band or close. They closed them by the chest. Some munafiqain
took advantage of this idea and weard baggy sleeves clothes and kept thier idols inside thier sleevs secretly performing their prayer probably. Later, when the Rasoul found out about this he ordered that everybody should pray with their hands open. Eversince namez was read with hands down by sides. But sunnis do not follow this tradition and still read with their hands closed.

#4 GHULAAM E ABBAS

GHULAAM E ABBAS

    Ali Da Malang

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,734 posts
  • Location:Washington DC USA

Posted 09 March 2005 - 06:49 PM

yaar she was Ayesha........
however i agree with Shabir

#5 tahasyed

tahasyed

    slave of Allah

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,444 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Eating, sleeping, thinking, reading, religion, surfing the net, calligraphy, drawing, painting.. <br /><br /><br />..did I mention sleeping?

Posted 07 June 2005 - 10:43 AM

Some more interesting narrations from sunni sources:

Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr narrated in his book, al-Tamheed that:
Mujahid said, "If the right hand is to be placed over the left, then it should be on the palm or the wrist on the chest." The narrator added from Mujahid, "and he hated that."
Mujahid is one of the MOST prominent figures of the salaf.

Also, in the same book:
‘Abd Allah ibn al-Izar said, "I used to make tawaf around the Kaba with Said ibn al-Jubayr. Once, he saw a man placing one hand over the other, so he went to him, separated his hands, and then returned to me.
Said ibn Al-Jubayr is also one of the MOST prominent figures of the salaf.

Same book again:
‘Abd Allah ibn Yazid said, "I never saw Said ibn al-Musayyib holding his left hand with his right hand in the prayer, he used to lay them straight.
Said ibn al-Musayyib is one of the MOST prominent figures of the salaf.

Al-Hasan al-Basri, Ibrahim al-Nakh’ai, Ibn al-Musayyib, Ibn Sirin, and Sa’id ibn Jubayr are some of the prominent figures who did not fold their arms.

ws.

#6 beeru

beeru

    Member

  • Banned
  • 475 posts

Posted 07 June 2005 - 12:19 PM

This tradition shows the following:

1) There were indeed people (who were either Sahaba or Tabaeen) in times of Aisha, who used to pray while putting their hands at sides (may be on flanks, or may be straight).

So question is why these Sahaba or Tabaeen did this???????

Doesnt it show that there were indeed very basic differences between Companions themselves????  (i.e., after staying 23 years with Rasool (saw), they were unable to be 100% sure where Rasool (saw) used to put his hands during Salah.

When they were unable to remember where Rasool (saw) put his hands during Salat, then no wonder these same people also forgot the appointment of Mawla Ali (as) at Ghadir-e-Khum.


1. Ummul Momineen Saiyidiah Siddiqah radhiyAllahu 'anha witnessed the life of Rasoolullah sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam so closely, as they were the Life Companion of the Prophet. They knew better how Rasoolullah sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam prayed.

2. As for my information, some people still pray keeping their arms straight along with their sides, as seen in Makkah by some friend etc, this must be a question of jurisprudence.

3. Still majority of Muslims fold their hands while praying.

4. If there were really BIG differences amongs Companions regarding folding hands or keeping them along the sides, then zainabia should find narrations which should support her guess-work.

5. Ummul Momineen lived a long life after the demise of their Husband, Rasoolullah sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam, and if during the period of Caliphs, someone prayed holding his/her hands on flanks, it doesn't mean the same was the tradition of Rasoolullah sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam, as in this narration it is not shown who exactly were those people (no proof that they were sahabah, at least zainabia didn't provide with that).

6. As for Ghadir Khum, it was the matter of secrecy (Taqiyyah) so the Imamat of Imam 'Ali was proclaimed after the grand gathering of Hajjat-al-Wida', so that all those 100,000 people (or so) wouldn't know about the Imamat of Imam Ali.
If everyone knew at the event of Prophet's sermon that 'Ali is an Imam, then the 9/10 th of the religion couldn't be accomplished.
So it is likely that the Imamat of Imam 'Ali was announced at Ghadir Khum so that only a few people should know about this most important appointment and so they should forget about it easily.
If they remembered about this appointment of Imam 'Ali, how could the Ummah be divided and 100,000 people be killed during the period of Imam 'Ali?

7. What brother taha has pointed out, I would like to comment that Sa'id ibn Jubayr is the Rebel of Khalifah who fought against him along with rebels and he was caught by the waali of Makkah and so Hajjaj killed him because of his rebellion.
He belonged to Kufah and was a shia.
No matter how reliable he is regarded as a muhaddith.
Mujahid is also objected by the 'Ulama and both of them were mawaali (freed slaves).
As for others, I don't have much knowledge, will find out later inshaAllah.

Edited by beeru, 07 June 2005 - 12:23 PM.


#7 beeru

beeru

    Member

  • Banned
  • 475 posts

Posted 07 June 2005 - 12:25 PM

Actullay before all muslims during the time of Rasoul (pbuh) prayed with thier hands band or close. They closed them by the chest. Some munafiqain
took advantage of this idea and weard baggy sleeves clothes and kept thier idols inside thier sleevs secretly performing their prayer probably. Later, when the Rasoul found out about this he ordered that everybody should pray with their hands open. Eversince namez was read with hands down by sides. But sunnis do not follow this tradition and still read with their hands closed.


I have also heard of such things, but without any sound evidence they can't be accepted.

#8 Zafaryab

Zafaryab

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 798 posts
  • Location:Eh?!

Posted 07 June 2005 - 06:06 PM

(salam)

1. Ummul Momineen Saiyidiah Siddiqah radhiyAllahu 'anha witnessed the life of Rasoolullah sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam so closely, as they were the Life Companion of the Prophet. They knew better how Rasoolullah sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam prayed.

...

5. Ummul Momineen lived a long life after the demise of their Husband, Rasoolullah sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam, and if during the period of Caliphs, someone prayed holding his/her hands on flanks, it doesn't mean the same was the tradition of Rasoolullah sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam, as in this narration it is not shown who exactly were those people (no proof that they were sahabah, at least zainabia didn't provide with that).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


A single woman's narration of an event holds no substance according to the Quran as in the case of Ayesha (No offence to the sisters)... I still have trouble believing that people neglected this point when writing their sahih books.

Wassalaam (Peace be upon you)

#9 ghulamhusain

ghulamhusain

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPip
  • 470 posts

Posted 07 June 2005 - 06:19 PM

aisha doesnt refer her fatwa to the sunnah, her reason is that SHE doesnt like it
not that the prophet (pbuh) doesnt like it.

the prophet prayed in front of the sahaba every day, five times a day. didnt they notice where he put his hands? if he closed his hands together, the sahabah cant even say where exactly he put them.

this is what happens, when certain leading sahaba forbid the writing of hadith and say "the quran is enough" - in the end its up to the tabieen to figure things out, and most of it is qiyas and most of it is what they see muslmis doing at that time, which is what the umayyads had already instituted.

#10 delight

delight

    Member

  • Banned
  • 934 posts

Posted 08 June 2005 - 04:56 AM

Hazrat Ali (radhiallahu anhu) relates that the sunnah of Rasulullah (Sall Allahu alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallim) is to place one hand over the other below the navel. [Abu Daud, ch. on Wad’ul Yumna, Hadith 756]
The above-mentioned method of tying the hands is also related by Hazrat Anas (radhiallahu anhu).

#11 syed_shia

syed_shia

    Muslim

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,399 posts

Posted 08 June 2005 - 07:42 AM

which one is mre authentic to u sahiih bukhari or abu daud?

#12 delight

delight

    Member

  • Banned
  • 934 posts

Posted 08 June 2005 - 09:26 AM

which one is mre authentic to u sahiih bukhari or abu daud?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

none.But I think abu daud is included in sahih.

#13 Shia chauvinist

Shia chauvinist

    Abu Bakr & Umar of our Time

  • Banned
  • 384 posts

Posted 08 June 2005 - 10:08 AM

none.But I think abu daud is included in sahih.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



Whatever hadith that helps you in a debate becomes sahih, other "sahih" hadiths shia use against nasibis, becomes a "shia forgery".

Lanat on Sunnism.

#14 Aliya

Aliya

    shiachat resident

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,793 posts
  • Location:USA
  • Interests:Discussing and learning about Islam and other religions; learning about other cultures; discussing current affairs. Please don't pm me asking for my messenger, etc. I don't chat with ppl I don't know.

Posted 08 June 2005 - 11:33 AM

^ I've said before, you can find "sahih" hadith to support ANY position you hold on most subjects, even if the positions are in direct opposition to each other. :!!!:

#15 tahasyed

tahasyed

    slave of Allah

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,444 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Eating, sleeping, thinking, reading, religion, surfing the net, calligraphy, drawing, painting.. <br /><br /><br />..did I mention sleeping?

Posted 08 June 2005 - 02:22 PM

7. What brother taha has pointed out, I would like to comment that Sa'id ibn Jubayr is the Rebel of Khalifah who fought against him along with rebels and he was caught by the waali of Makkah and so Hajjaj killed him because of his rebellion.
He belonged to Kufah and was a shia.
No matter how reliable he is regarded as a muhaddith.
Mujahid is also objected by the 'Ulama and both of them were mawaali (freed slaves).
As for others, I don't have much knowledge, will find out later inshaAllah.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

:lol:
I was expecting something like this.
Anyway, if you discard of people like Said bin Jubair and Said ibn Musayyib, then I don't know what the sunni hadith system stands on. :) You have just denounced 2 out of 'The Four Seas of Knowledge' in sunnism.
Why don't you add al-Zuhri to the list too, as there are 'evidences' of him being shia too? :rolleyes: And then just discard Sahih Bukhari TOTALLY because it relies HEAVILY on ALL the afore-mentioned narrators.

*sigh*
Wassalamu 3ala man ittaba3al-huda...

#16 beeru

beeru

    Member

  • Banned
  • 475 posts

Posted 08 June 2005 - 05:19 PM

I was expecting something like this.
Anyway, if you discard of people like Said bin Jubair and Said ibn Musayyib, then I don't know what the sunni hadith system stands on. :) You have just denounced 2 out of 'The Four Seas of Knowledge' in sunnism.
Why don't you add al-Zuhri to the list too, as there are 'evidences' of him being shia too? :rolleyes: And then just discard Sahih Bukhari TOTALLY because it relies HEAVILY on ALL the afore-mentioned narrators.


You have a problem of reading and understanding both:

First read what you said:

Some more interesting narrations from sunni sources:

Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr narrated in his book, al-Tamheed that:
Mujahid said, "If the right hand is to be placed over the left, then it should be on the palm or the wrist on the chest." The narrator added from Mujahid, "and he hated that."
Mujahid is one of the MOST prominent figures of the salaf.

Also, in the same book:
‘Abd Allah ibn al-Izar said, "I used to make tawaf around the Kaba with Said ibn al-Jubayr. Once, he saw a man placing one hand over the other, so he went to him, separated his hands, and then returned to me.
Said ibn Al-Jubayr is also one of the MOST prominent figures of the salaf.


Now read your reply again and delete your post, in any case I would reply to you.

Did I criticise a narration of Sa'id bin Jubayr?

I only said, that he was a Reble of Khalifah of his time and was killed by Hajjaj and he was the maula (freed slave of Bani Asad who were shias) and inhabitant of Kufah Shareef.

And to surprise you, there is nothing written that if a narrator of Bukhari is a Shia then Sunnis will accept this Shia-Narrator's religion the same way they accept his narration.
This is foolish.
So if Sa'id bin Jubayr performs mut'ah then we sunnis also follow him?
Is he an Infallible Imam of Sunnis?

Therefore whatever Sa'id bin Jubayr or Mujahid or anyone did, is not an authority for us.
The best source to follow religion is Tawatur, and if you understand what tawatur means then you should know that our four Imams of Fiqh explain all the ways Rasoolullah sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam prayed Salaat.

#17 beeru

beeru

    Member

  • Banned
  • 475 posts

Posted 08 June 2005 - 05:23 PM

And I understand why this thread has been started:

Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 56, Number 664:

Narrated 'Aisha radhiyAllahu 'anha:

That she used to hate that one should keep his hands on his flanks while praying. She said that the Jew used to do so.

If I am not wrong, shias pray like that which by Ummul Momineen is the way Jews used to pray.

#18 Aliya

Aliya

    shiachat resident

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,793 posts
  • Location:USA
  • Interests:Discussing and learning about Islam and other religions; learning about other cultures; discussing current affairs. Please don't pm me asking for my messenger, etc. I don't chat with ppl I don't know.

Posted 08 June 2005 - 05:44 PM

flank ( P ) Pronunciation Key (flngk)
n.
The section of flesh on the body of a person or an animal between the last rib and the hip;

last time I checked, it was the sunnis doing this, not the shias. because if your arms are hanging to your sides they are by your legs, are they not? unless you've got REALLY short arms.

Also, the hadith says Aisha used to hate to see people pray that way, not that it wasn't allowed. more her personal preference. so the hadith doesn't prove, or disprove, anything.

Edited by Aliya, 08 June 2005 - 05:45 PM.


#19 tahasyed

tahasyed

    slave of Allah

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,444 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Eating, sleeping, thinking, reading, religion, surfing the net, calligraphy, drawing, painting.. <br /><br /><br />..did I mention sleeping?

Posted 09 June 2005 - 07:54 AM

You have a problem of reading and understanding both:

First read what you said:
Now read your reply again and delete your post, in any case I would reply to you.

Did I criticise a narration of Sa'id bin Jubayr?

I only said, that he was a Reble of Khalifah of his time and was killed by Hajjaj and he was the maula (freed slave of Bani Asad who were shias) and inhabitant of Kufah Shareef.

And to surprise you, there is nothing written that if a narrator of Bukhari is a Shia then Sunnis will accept this Shia-Narrator's religion the same way they accept his narration.
This is foolish.
So if Sa'id bin Jubayr performs mut'ah then we sunnis also follow him?
Is he an Infallible Imam of Sunnis?

Therefore whatever Sa'id bin Jubayr or Mujahid or anyone did, is not an authority for us.
The best source to follow religion is Tawatur, and if you understand what tawatur means then you should know that our four Imams of Fiqh explain all the ways Rasoolullah sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam prayed Salaat.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Although I usually don't criticize people on their usage of language or semantics, I truly could not understand what you mentioned in your previous post. I read it again, and I *think* I see what you are trying to say, which is 'sure we accept what Ibn Jubayr SAYS, but he is not infallible so we do not follow his a3maal'. Am I correct in my understanding? If not, then please try to clarify.
And in reply to (my assumption of) what you said; then sadl should be as permissible in salaat as the takteef of the hanafis, as their takteed is nothing more that ra'ee combined with the singular isolated hadith passed down to Abu Hanifah. SO if HIS takteed is OK with you, then the sadl of the prominent people I mentioned above should be even MORE ok. They are THE TOP tabi'is, many of them being students of the sahabah. Again, this does not imply infallibility, but it does make you wonder.... what were the sahaba doing, that made these significant tabi3is not fold their arms?
In any case, don't forget that no hadith is mutawatir when it comes to folding the arms except the one that states the placement on the chest. So Abu Hanifah WAS actually wrong. And it's funny that you criticize sadl (letting the arms hang) but not Abu Hanifa's ra'ee. Don't forget, Malik did not fold his arms either, and he learned this from the afore-mentioned tabi3is who saw the companions doing it. And please do not state that Malik did this because his hands were beaten with a cane (as is the argument of Bilal Phillips, read 'The Evolution of Fiqh'). There is sufficient authentic evidence that shows Malik always did sadl, said taktif was makrooh, but that it was acceptable in long nawafil prayers for support.

#20 bkkkb

bkkkb
  • Advanced Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 09 June 2005 - 11:57 AM

Salamun Ala Manittaba alHuda

Recently, Ive been very disappointed hearing about some of the posts of Br. Tahasyed, who in my opinion is a very open minded brother who looks for *facts* and derives conclusions based on what he feels is the strongest evidence. Although I do not agree with this approach at all, since I consider such a capability to be found within a Mujtahid only, I respect his endeavour.

One of the issues he discussed was concerning Sadl and Qadhb. The Madhab of Imam Malik is well known for not clasping the hands, but letting them hang to the sides. It should be noted though that a large majority of Maliki Ulema permitted clasping the hands together such as Ibn Abd Al Barr himself whom Br. Taha quoted enthusiastically - and he (Ibn Abd Al Barr) would not have allowed it if he did not see any evidence for it. Ibn Rushd, the great Maliki faqih said in his Bidayat Al Mujtahid:

- ( المسألة الخامسة ) اختلف العلماء في وضع اليدين إحداهما على الأخرى في الصلاة، فكره ذلك مالك في الفرض، وأجازه في النفل. ورأى قوم أن هذا الفعل من سنن الصلاة وهم الجمهور. والسبب في اختلافهم أنه قد جاءت آثار ثابتة نقلت فيها صفة صلاته عليه الصلاة والسلام، ولم ينقل فيها أنه كان يضع يده اليمنى على اليسرى، وثبت أيضا أن الناس كانوا يؤمرون بذلك. وورد ذلك أيضا من صفة صلاته عليه الصلاة والسلام في حديث أبي حميد فرأى قوم أن الآثار التي أثبتت ذلك اقتضت زيادة على الآثار التي لم تنقل فيها هذه الزيادة وأن الزيادة يجب أن يصار إليها. ورأى قوم أن الأوجب المصير إلى الآثار التي ليس فيها هذه الزيادة، لأنها أكثر، ولكون هذه ليست مناسبة لأفعال الصلاة، وإنما هي من باب الاستعانة، ولذلك أجازها مالك في النفل ولم يجزها في الفرض، وقد يظهر من أمرها أنها هيئة تقتضي الخضوع، وهو الأولى بها.

- Scholars have differed regarding placing the hands, one of them on the other during Salah. Malik considered that makruh (disliked) during the obligatory prayer, and permitted it during the voluntary prayers. And some people considered this action to be from the Sunnah of Salah. They are the majority. The reason for their difference is that some established traditions (of the companions and successors) have come (in which) the description of the Prophet’s prayer – may Allah grant him peace – has been related in them and nowhere in them was it related that he placed his right over his left. It also has been confirmed that the people were commanded to do that (i.e. fold their hands). The former has also been mentioned as part of the description of his prayer – may Allah bless and grant him peace – in the hadith of Abu Hamid.

Br Taha said:

And in reply to (my assumption of) what you said; then sadl should be as permissible in salaat as the takteef of the hanafis, as their takteed is nothing more that ra'ee combined with the singular isolated hadith passed down to Abu Hanifah.

A blatantly wrong conclusion. There are a number of hadith, weak and sound, that state that the hands should be clasped during the prayer. Imam Al Kattani, the Muhaddith of his age, in his Nazm states the narrations on folding hands as Tawatur i.e. mass transmitted.
Here are the number of people saying placing one hand on the other was what the Prophet did.

‏(‏ وضع اليدين أحداهما على الأخرى في الصلاة‏ )‏‏.‏

- Putting the hands one over the other in prayers: (narrated) by:

عن ‏(‏1‏)‏ سهل بن سعد

1. Sahl Ibn Sa'd

(‏2‏)‏ ووائل بن حجر الحضرمي

2. Wa'il Ibn Hujr

‏3‏)‏ وعبد اللّه بن مسعود)

3. Ibn Mas'ud

‏(‏4‏)‏ وهلب الطاءي

4. Wahb al Ta'i

‏(‏5‏)‏ وعلي بن أبي طالب

5. Ali bin Abi talib

وابن الزبير ‏(‏7‏)‏ وأبي هريرة (6)
6. Ibn Zubair and 7. Abu Hurayrah

‏(‏8‏)‏ وجابر ابن عبد اللّه ‏(‏9‏)‏ والحارث
8. Jabir bin Abdullah and 9. Harith

(Ive stopped posting the Arabic)

10. Amr bin Harith

11. Ya'la bin Marah

12. Ibn Umar

13. Abu Al Darda

14. Hudhayfa

15. Ayesha

16. Ibn Abbas

17. Anas

18. Shadad bin Sharjil

19. Muadh bin Jabal

20. Sufyan Thawri (Mursal- he was a Tabi' , one who met the Sahaba)

21. Abi Umayyah

22. Ta'wus

23. Hasan Al Basri

24. Ata

25. Ibrahim Nakha'i

(end)

Thus it is absolutely clear that placing the hands on the other is *not* a singular, gharib hadith with no basis. Rather, it is mass transmitted from the Prophet through the Companions and Tabi'in.

Br. Taha then said:

In any case, don't forget that no hadith is mutawatir when it comes to folding the arms except the one that states the placement on the chest. So Abu Hanifah WAS actually wrong.


This statement is actually once again incorrect. Most of the narrations merely mention placing the hands on the other without *position*.

As for the hands on the chest then it is the position of *none* of the prominent scholars save some of the Salafiyyah and Imam Shafi' who has two opinions on the matter, the placement on the chest is less soundly attributed to him. Imam Tirmidhi also provides proof of this when he states in his Sunan that *both* placing the hands below the navel and above (below the chest) are sound, without mentioning the placement on the chest as a position.

Also, according to the Hanbalis the most sound position is the same as the Hanafis and Imam Ahmad was certainly not a person who used Ra'i as much as Imam Al Azam. This can easily be seen by looking at the major Hanbali works such as Al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah and others.

قال‏:‏ ‏[‏ويجعلهما تحت سرته‏]‏ اختلفت الرواية في موضع وضعهما‏,‏ فروى عن أحمد أنه يضعهما تحت سرته روى ذلك عن على وأبي هريرة وأبي مجلز‏,‏ والنخعي والثوري وإسحاق لما روي عن على رضي الله عنه قال‏:‏ من السنة وضع اليمين على الشمال تحت السرة رواه الإمام أحمد‏,‏ وأبو داود وهذا ينصرف إلى سنة النبي - صلى الله عليه وسلم- ولأنه قول من ذكرنا من الصحابة وعن أحمد أنه يضعهما فوق السرة وهو قول سعيد بن جبير والشافعي لما روى وائل بن حجر قال‏:‏ ‏(‏رأيت النبي - صلى الله عليه وسلم- يصلي فوضع يديه على صدره إحداهما على الأخرى ‏وعنه أنه مخير في ذلك لأن الجميع مروي‏,‏ والأمر في ذلك واس

Ibn Qayyim Al JAwziyya, a Salafi favorite states:

واختلف في موضع الوضع، فعنه‏:‏ فوق السرة، وعنه‏:‏ تحتها، وعنه‏:‏ أبو طالب سألت أحمد بن حنبل أين يضع يده إذا كان يصلي‏؟‏ قال‏:‏ على السرة أو أسفل، وكل ذلك واسع عنده إن وضع فوق السرة أو عليها أو تحتها، قال علي رضي اللّه عنه‏:‏ من السنة وضع الكف على الكف في الصلاة تحت السرة، عمرو بن مالك عن أبي الجوزاء عن ابن عباس مثل تفسير علي، إلا أنه غير صحيح، والصحيح صهيب، وعلي، قال في رواية المزني‏:‏ أسفل السرة بقليل، ويكره أن يجعلها على الصدر، وذلك لما روي عن النبي ـ صلى اللّه عليه وسلم ـ أنه نهى عن التكفير، وهو وضع اليد على الصدر، مؤمل بن إسماعيل عن عاصم بن كليب عن أبيه عن وائل أن النبي ـ صلى اللّه عليه وسلم ـ وضع يده على صدره، فقد روى هذا الحديث عبد اللّه بن الوليد عن سفيان لم يذكر ذلك، ورواه شعبة، وعبد الواحد لم يذكرا خالفًا، كذا سفيان، اه

The reason the Hanafis state that one should place his hands beneath his Navel, since this is the Sunna, as do the Hanbalis as stated in Kashaf Al Qina by Al Buhuti. There are also many Hadith that support this (also see the quotes of Ibn Qudama and Ibn Qayyim which mention some of these hadith):

حدثنا أبو معاوية عن عبد الرحمن بن إسحاق عن زياد بن زيد السوائي عن أبي جحيفة عن علي قال : من سنة الصلاة وضع الايدي على الايدي تحت السرر

Sayyidina Ali states:

- To place one palm over the other beneath the navel, is from the sunna of prayer (Bayhaqi, Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayba 1:391).

Also there is another hadith by Sayyidina Ali from Uqba ibn Suhban (a Thiqa narrator) regarding placing the hands below the navel. The narration has a Qawi sanad (strong chain) and was first reported with his Isnad by al Hafiz Abu Bakr al Athram (a famous student of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal). This narration is strong enough to raise the level of the narration via the dha'if narrator Abdur Rahman ibn Ishaq al Kufi - who reports from his uncle: Nu'man ibn Sa'd from Imam Ali and others like Abu Juhaifa from Ali - these narrations are found in some editions of Sunan Abu Dawud, then also in Sunan al Daraqutni, Sunan al Bayhaqi, Zawa'id al Musnad ibn Hanbal by Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ibn Shahin in al Sunna, Razin ibn Mu'awiya in his Tajreed al Sihah, Diya al Maqdisi in al Mukhtara etc. This latter narration is thus Hasan li Ghayrihi.

حدثنا يزيد بن هارون قال : أخبرنا حجاج بن حسان قال : سمعت أبا مجلز أو سألته قال : قلت كيف يصنع قال : يضع باطن كف يمينه على ظاهر كف شماله ويجعلها أسفل من السرة

Hajjaj ibn Hassan relates:

- Either I heard Abu Mijlaz saying or I inquired from him, ‘How should one position his hands [during prayer]?’ He replied, ‘He should place the inner portion of his right hand upon the back of the left one beneath the navel.” (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayba 1:390)

The transmission of this hadith is Hasan.

حدثنا جرير عن مغيرة عن أبي معشر إبراهيم قال : لا بأس بأن يضع اليمنى على اليسرى في الصلاة

Ibrahim Nakhai states:

- One should place his right hand upon the left one beneath the navel whilst in salat. (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayba 1:390)

And there are more hadiths in regards to this.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following is an analysis of the ahadith often quoted for placing the hands upon the chest.

This is a short article based on Shaykh Abu Yusuf Riyadh al Haq's book: The Salah of the Believer, in reply to the claim that it is from the Sunna to place the hands upon the chest in Salah. To place the hands on the chest is not the position of any of the 4 Madhhabs or their major students.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

قال في رواية المزني أسفل السرة بقليل ويكره أن يجعلهما على الصدر ، وذلك لما روي عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه نهى عن التكفير وهو وضع اليد على الصدر

Ibn al Qayyim al Jawziyyah writes in his Badai' al Fawaid:

- It is makruh (undesirable) to place the hands on the chest in view of the narration that the Prophet forbade takfeer, which is to place the hands on the chest. (3:73)

Further, in the same book it says:

وعنه أبو طالب : سألت أحمد أين يضع يده إذا كان يصلي . قال : على السرة أو أسفل

- And Abu talib narrated: I asked Ahmad (ibn Hanbal) where to place the hands.... He said: On the navel or lower.


As for the hadith on placing the hands on the chest following is an analysis of most of them:

1. Sayyidina Wail bin Hujr says, 'I prayed with the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) and he placed his right hand over his left on his chest.(Ibn Khuzaimah: 479)

Imam Nimawi says:

- It's isnad is questionable and the additional wording 'on his chest' is inauthentic and not established.

This hadith has been reported by Muammal bin Ismail from Sufyan al Thawri from Aasim bin Kulaib from Wail bin Hujr (ra) - However it is only Muammal who reports these additional words from Sufyan al Thawri. Sufyan's other student, Abdullah bin al Waleed who also narrates this hadith from him does not include these words in his narration as recorded in Imam Ahmad's Musnad. (Ahmad 18392)

The other narrators who report the hadith together with Sufyan al Thawri from Aasim bin Kulaib have also not included these words in their narrations. Observe the following list of narrators who have all reported the same hadith from Aasim bin Kulaib but none of then have included the additional words reported by Muammal bin Ismail

• Sh'ubah, Abdul Wahid, and Zubair bin Muawiyah as in Imam Ahmad's Musnad. (Ahmad 18398, 18371 & 18397)

• Zaidah as in Imam Ahmad's Musnad, Darimi, Abu Dawood. Nasai and Baihaqi (Ahmad 18391, Darimi 1357, Abu Dawood 726, Nasai 889 and Baihaqi 2325)

• Bishr bin al Mufaddhal as in Ibn Majah, Abu Dawood and Nasai (Ibn Majah 810, Abu Dawood 726 & 957, and Nasai 1265)

• Abdullah bin Idrees as in Ibn Majah (Ibn Majah 810)

• Salam bin Saleem as in Abu Dawood Tayalisi's Musnad (Abu Dawood Tayalisi 1020)

There are many other chains for this hadith, however, none contain this extra wording. Thus, it is clear that this is Muammal bin Ismail's own erroneous addition to the hadith. Ibn al Qayyim al Jawziyyah also says in I'laam al Muwaqqieen, 'No one has said upon the chest apart from Muammal bin Ismail.’ (2:361) Therefore, as Imam Nimawi has concluded in his al Ta'leeq al Hasan, this hadeeth with the additional wording of' upon his chest' is extremely weak.

It is an accepted principle of hadith that if a certain authentic and reliable narrator contradicts other equally authentic or more reliable narrators in his wording of a hadeeth then his narration will be declared shaadh and will not be accepted. If this is the case with authentic narrators, then an irregular addition of the words 'upon the chest' cannot be accepted from a narrator who, although declared acceptable by some, errs excessively and is weak of memory like Muammal bin Ismail. Study the following observations of the scholars of Jarh and T'adil about Muammal bin Ismail:

Abu Hatim says, 'He is saduq, firm in sunnah, but one of many mistakes."
Imam Bukhari says, 'Muammal is munkar al hadeeth (People who view Imam Bukhari as the ultimate authority in matters of Hadeeth should note his following statement: 'It is not permissible to narrate from anyone whom I have labelled munkar al hadeeth [Mizan al I'itidal 1:119]

Dhahabi says in al Kashif, 'He is saduq, firm in sunnah, but one of many mistakes. It was also said that he buried his books and narrated by heart and thus erred. '

Ibn Sa'd says, 'He is thiqah, though one of many mistakes.'

Ya'qub bin Sufyan says:

- Muammal Abu Abdul Rahman is a great sunni shaikh. I heard Sulaiman bin Harb praise him. Our shaikhs would advise us to take his hadeeth, only that his hadith are not like the hadith of his companions. At times it is obligatory upon the people of knowledge to distance themselves from his narrations as he narrates munkar ahadith from even his authentic teachers. This is worse for had he narrated these munkar ahadith from weak authorities we would have excused him.

Saji says, 'He errs excessively. He is saduq, but one of many mistakes. He has errors that would take too long to be mentioned.'

Muhammad bin Nasr al Marwazi says, 'If Muammal alone relates a certain narration then it becomes obligatory to pause and research the hadeeth as he had a bad memory and erred excessively (See Tahdheeb al Tahdheeb)

Hafidh Ibn Hajr has made it clear in his Fath al Bari that there is dh'af (weakness) in Muammal bin Ismail's narrations from Sufyan (Fath al Bari, 9/297).

The above hadeeth has this very chain of narration.

We must also bear in mind that Sayyidina Wail Ibn Hujr, the very companion who narrates this hadith, was a resident of Kufa, and the practice of the people of Kufa was to fasten their hands below the navel. There is nothing to suggest that he contravened this practice. Sufyan al Thawri, from whom Muammal narrates this hadith, is himself of the view that the hands should be placed below the navel (Ibn Qudamah in al Mughni 2:23, and others as quoted by the author of Bughyah al Almai 1:316)

Furthermore, there is another hadeeth narrated by Sayyiduna Wail (ra) himself (quoted above) which says that he saw the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) fasten his hands below the navel.

2. Sayyidina Hulb relates, 'I saw the Prophet turn from both his right and left and I also saw him place this upon his chest.' Yahya (one of the narrators) described this as being the right hand upon the left above the wrist joint. (292)

The above hadith contains the words 'upon his chest'. This extra wording is not firmly established or confirmed, because of all the narrators who report this hadeeth from Simak, only one reports this extra wording.

Observe the following narrations of the same hadeeth without the extra wording of 'upon his chest'.

• Abu al Ahwas reports from Simak bin Harb from Qabeesah bin Hulb from his father that the Prophet would lead us in prayer and would clasp his left hand with his right. (293)

• Shareek reports from Simak from Qabeesah bin Hulb from his father who says (towards the end of a longer hadeeth), 'I saw him place one of his hands on the other and I also saw him turn once towards his right and once towards his left.' (294)

Waki reports from Sufyan from Simak bin Harb from Qabeesah bin Hulb from his father who says, 'I saw the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) place his right hand upon his left in prayer and I also saw him turn away from both his right and left.' (295)

• Daruqutni narrates from Abdul Rahman bin Mahdi and Waki', from Sufyan from Simak bin Harb from Qabeesah bin Hulb from his father who says, 'I saw the Prophet place his right hand upon his left in prayer.' (Daruqutni #1087)

The above narrations all clearly show that the wording 'upon his chest' is an unreliable addition on the part of one of the reporters and therefore this particular narration is shaadh.

Imam Nimawi adds in his al T'aleeq al Hasan (1:145):

- I have a suspicion that the wording of this hadith has mistakenly been changed by a writer. The correct words would appear to be "Yadhau hadhihi ala hadhihi", i.e., "he would place this hand upon this hand", and not "hadhihi ala sadrihi", i.e., "this hand upon his chest". Only this wording would be in agreement with the narrators own interpretation of the hadeeth as is stated in the narration "Yahya described this as being the right hand upon the left above the wrist joint". This would also tally with all the other narrations of this hadith that do not contain the wording "upon the chest", and would also explain why the following authors have not included this narration in their comprehensive books: Haythami in his Majm'a al Zawaid, Suyuti in his Jam' al Jawami, and Ali al Muttaqi in his Kanz alUmmal. And Allah knows best.

The author of Awn al M'abud also admits that Yahya's commentary does not fit the wording of the hadeeth.

NOTES:

footnote (fn) no. 292 says: Ahmad 21460. Allamah Hashim Sindhi says in Dirham al Surrah p. 113 that both Simak bin Harb and Qabeesah (two of the narrators of this hadith) have been disparaged by some of the ulama of jarh and t'adeel.

fn. 293 Ibn Abi Shaybah 3934, Ahmad 21467, Ibn Majah 809 and Tirmidhi 252. Imam Tirmidhi adds that it is a hasan hadeeth.

fn. 294: Ahmad 21464.

fn. 295: Ahmad 2146I & 21475. Daruqutni 1087. al T'aleeq al Hasan 1:145

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A more detailed reply can be found in arabic works like:

i) Dirham Al Surra by Imam Muhammad Hashim al Sindi (d. 1174 AH) - which contains a thorough reply to Shaykh Muhammad Hayat al-Sindi and those who imitated him in later times (like Abdur Rahman al Mubarakpuri in his Tuhfatul Ahwadhi)

ii) Athar al-Sunan ma'a Ta'liq al Hasan by Imam al-Nimawi

iii) I'la al Sunan by Shaykh Zafar Ahmad al-Uthmani (d. 1974)

iv) Badhlul Majhud fi Halli Sunan Abu Dawud by Shaykh Khalil al-Sahranpuri

v) Ma'arif al-Sunan by Shaykh Muhammad Yusuf al Binuri (d. 1977)


And Allah alone gives Success.

Salman

Edited by bkkkb, 09 June 2005 - 12:07 PM.


#21 tahasyed

tahasyed

    slave of Allah

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,444 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Eating, sleeping, thinking, reading, religion, surfing the net, calligraphy, drawing, painting.. <br /><br /><br />..did I mention sleeping?

Posted 11 June 2005 - 07:36 PM

Salamun Ala Manittaba alHuda

Salamun 3alay indeed.

Recently, Ive been very disappointed hearing about some of the posts of Br. Tahasyed, who in my opinion is a very open minded brother who looks for *facts* and derives conclusions based on what he feels is the strongest evidence. Although I do not agree with this approach at all, since I consider such a capability to be found within a Mujtahid only, I respect his endeavour.

Agreed. I too agree 100% that lay people like myself have no right to decide what to believe and what not to believe. However, I am in the process of finding the truth, and I have full faith in Al-Rahman Al-Rahim and He knows I'm sincere in my quest and for now, I DO choose not to stick to the statements of 3ulema. For everyone else, I always emphasize following the scholars; for myself I need to get to that stage first.

One of the issues he discussed was concerning Sadl and Qadhb...
.........
v) Ma'arif al-Sunan by Shaykh Muhammad Yusuf al Binuri (d. 1977)
And Allah alone gives Success.

Salman

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Perhaps you misunderstood me. Recently I have noticed that both shias and sunnis misunderstand what I say, perhaps I should be more careful about being as accurate as possible in what I type. :unsure:
Anyway, my point was to show that the issue of taktif/sadl had not crystallized in the era of the early salaf. That's why we have people like al-Hasan al-Basri practicing sadl. Also, Malik too was quite unaware of the practice of takteef, hence his expression of amazement when a man frmo 3iraq (Kufa if I'm not mistaken) came to Madinah and he saw the latter crossing his hands. Upon asking, Malik got in reply a sahih al-isnad hadith that supported the 3iraqi's practice. But Malik remarked that he was quite unaware of this practice, as were his teachers of the jumhur. I think this is a strong indication of what 3amal al-Madinah was in the early salaf, and I strongly believe that sadl was indeed the 3amal of Madinah. And as you know, 3amal Madinah has a place in shari3ah in the Maliki madhhab, as Malik held it to be an authentic display of the Prophetic sunnah.
Regarding what you posted with regards to the tawatur of folding the hands, I am not arguing with that, nor DID I in the first place. I DO know that it is mutawatir (just as takteef was mutawatir fil-3amal in Madinah ;) according to Malik) and I never objected to that. I just stated that the ahadith that mentioned the specific placement of the hands were not mutawatir.
And I did state that only the hadith about placing it on the chest was sahih. Perhaps I am mistaken. But I was only echoing what Al-Albani stated in his book, as well as what my (once upon a time) teacher Bilal Phillips had stated. Yes, they are salafis, so their words might not hold any meaning for you. But since I am strongly convinced that salafiism is real sunnism, I tended to accept what these two people had said.
Anyways... I hope you understand the point of my statement and my objection above. It was only to show that practice of sadl in the salaf (particularly Madinah). We are not arguing about the specifics of taktif, or the very authenticity of the practice itself, as I am not stupid enough to state that it is not well-established in sunni ahadith. :)
Wassalamu 3alaika ya akhi fil-Islam.

#22 transistor

transistor

    Member

  • Banned
  • 266 posts

Posted 11 June 2005 - 08:02 PM

tahasyed, amazingly but I need to make sure about this . My Sunni friend who was Zaidi (he is trustworthy and I know him very well) told me that there is hadith in Zaidi book that indicates "وضع اليدين إحداهما على الأخرى في الصلاة، " is done by the prophet (as) .

I was reading Mauta Malik to look for anything regarding وضع اليدين إحداهما على الأخرى في الصلاة، but i didn't find any hadith about that. Do you have any idea?



I think that this issue is not a big deal and we should not focus in. It is just figh issue.

#23 zameel

zameel

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 795 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 11 June 2005 - 11:58 PM

Assalamu alaikum

I just wanted to say that placing hands at the sides is also a valid Sunni view. It was the most well known view of Imam Malik who took his judgements from the people of Madinah. So the view is a valid Ijtihadi view and should not be critisiced by us non-Mujtahids. The other views are to place them below, on or above the navel.

Assalamu alaikum

#24 muslim_believer

muslim_believer
  • Advanced Members
  • 8 posts

Posted 12 June 2005 - 12:55 AM

which one is mre authentic to u sahiih bukhari or abu daud?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Bukhari

#25 zameel

zameel

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 795 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 12 June 2005 - 05:23 AM

Assalamu alaikum

For the Sunnis, there are many books of Hadith. The Ahadith in Bukhari AND Muslim are the most Sahih and then those only in Bukhari and then those only in Muslim. They are Sahih by consensus.

The other books of Hadith have both Sahih and non-Sahih Ahadith, but if they are verified as Sahih, then that does not make them any less valuable.

Assalamu alaikum



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users