Category Archives: Uncategorized

The Qur’an Only and Uzair

“The Jews say, “Uzair is the son of Allah,” while the Christians say, ‘The Messiah is the son of Allah.” Such are their baseless assertions, only parroting the words of earlier disbelievers. May Allah condemn them! How can they be deluded ‘from the truth’?’ (Qur’an 9:30)

Imagine for a moment that you are a follower of the Qur’an only religion.  Your understanding of the Qur’an as a follower of this religion is that:

  1. It is the only source of guidance, not the primary source.
  2. That it is highly detailed, and your understanding is that it and it alone contains absolutely everything you need.

Have you ever seen a meaningful discussion between a follower of the Qur’an only religion and a follower of Judaism on the question of Uzair being the son of Allah where the Quranist uses the Qur’an alone?

Let’s look at what the Qur’an does tell us.

  1. It mentions an individual named Uzair (mentioned once in the entire Qur’an) whom the Jews would call the son of Allah.

Now let us look at the situation with the Christians. This is an easier claim to engage with. The Christians will openly admit they believe that Jesus is the Messiah and that he is the son of God.  Even if they are Unitarians or Jehovah’s Witness. I have yet to come across any Christian who does not make this baseline claim about Christ Jesus. Secondly we can look to their sacred text and see these claims being made about Jesus there.

This article will go under the section:

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Sunni and Shia narrators state that Ali bin Abi Talib drank alcohol and offer prayers while intoxicated?

“O you who believe! Approach not As-Salât (the prayer) when you are in a drunken state until you know (the meaning) of what you utter,…” (Qur’an 4:43)

Ibn Taymiyyah Al Harrani states:

إطهخٔ اشقف ٗهص اًن ٌٕنٕقذ اي إًهؼذ ٗرح ٖساكس ىرَأٔ جلصنا إتشقذ ل إُيآ ٍٚزنا آٚأ اٚ ٗهػ ٙف ٗناؼذ ا لضَأ ذقٔ

Translation: “Allah has revealed for Ali {O you who have believed, do not approach prayer
while you are intoxicated until you know what you are saying – 4:43} when he prayed and recited and then got mixed up.” [Manhaj as-Sunnah (7/172)]

Putting aside the fact the possibility that Ali bin Abi Talib drank alcohol before the actual prohibition, it is still rather bizarre to assume that the sanctity of the prayer was not ingrained in him enough to the point where he would approach the prayers in such a way.  Making Ali the asbab al-nuzul for this verse does seem like an incredible insult. Even worse is the idea that Ali bin Abi Talib was sloshing his words about in prayer and butchering the recitation of the Qur’an.

An-Nisa 4:43

Tafsir of the verse:

“O you who believe! Approach not As-Salât (the prayer) when you are in a drunken state until you know (the meaning) of what you utter,…” [The Noble Qur’an, Surah An-Nisa 4:43]

It was narrated from ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) that an Ansari man invited him and ‘Abdur – Rahman ibn ‘Awf, and offered them wine before the prohibition of Khamr was revealed. ‘Ali lead them in Maghrib prayer, and recited: Say ‘O you disbelievers!… (Al – Kafirun 109), but he was confused in it. Then the verse, ‘O you who believe! Approach not Salaat when you are intoxicated until you know (the meaning) of what you utter (An-Nisa’ 4:43)’ was revealed.”

Sources: (Sunan Abu Dawud, Volume 4, Book 25, Hadith Number 3,671, p. 222; Classed as Hasan by Hafiz Abu Tahir Zubair Ali Zai, Darussalam Publishers, [English Translation], 2008] )

Abu ‘Abdur – Rahman As – Sulami narrated that ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib  (may Allah be pleased with him) said, “‘Abdur – Rahman ibn ‘Awf prepared some food for which he invited us, and he gave us some wine to drink. The wine began (to) affect us when it was time for Salaat. So they encouraged me (to lead) and I recited: ‘Say: O you disbelievers! I do not worship what you worship, and we worship what you worship’ – and Allah, the Most High, revealed, ‘O you who believe! Do not approach Salaat when you are in a drunken state until you know what you are saying (An – Nisa’ 4:43)’.”

Sources: (Jami` at-Tirmidhi, Volume 5, Book 44, Hadith number 3,026; Imam Tirmidhi said, “This hadeeth is Hasan Ghareeb Saheeh.” Classed as Hasan by Hafiz Abu Tahir Zubair Ali Zai, Darussalam Publishers, [English Translation], 2008] )

Hafiz Abu Tahir Zubair Ali Zai commented on the hadeeth as follows:

“A drunkard loses sense and consciousness in the state of being drunk; in this state he does not know what he is saying, and he is unaware of the positive or negative promise with Allah. As ‘Ali was drunk, he said some words in favour of the disbelievers unknowingly; and this Ayah of Surah An – Nisa’ was revealed concerning this.

It is also known from this Hadith that if one is overwhelmed by sleep and they are unaware of what is coming out of their mouth, one should then delay the prayer until the senses and consciousness have returned to their normal state.”

Habib Ibn Abi Thabit Asadi Kahili Kufi narrates reports in which ‘Ali accidently prays in a state of major ritual impurity and another in which he leads prayer while in a state of intoxication.  Sources: (Al Tirmidhi, Sunan Iv pg. Abd al-Razzaq Al Sanani, Al Musannaf (ed) Habib Al Rahman Al Azamai (Beritut), ii. p Sources: (AL Tirmidhi, Sunan, iv, p.305; ‘Abd al-Razzaq al-Sanani, al-Musannaf, (ed) Habib Al Rahman Al Aazami (Beirut,1970), ii, p 350.)

This is some very buggy stuff concerning Ali bin Abi Talib. These things about Ali bin Abi Talib have not been transmitted by the Muslims, the People of the Truth and Steadfastness (Ahl Al Haqq Wal Istiqamah).  

You be fair and you judge! We, whose predecessor fought on the side of Ali at the battle of the Camel, and at Siffin, whose seniors warned Ali against the arbitration with Muaviyah and subsequently broke camp, are we deemed so low in the eyes of others over this? Yet, Sunni and Shi’i narrators can narrate about Ali that he lead the prayers drunk, while in major ritual impurity, uttered, “and we worship what you worship” and is the occasion of the revelation “do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated until you know what you are saying” for all posterity?

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Ibadi Stance on Ali bin Abi Talib

“Wherever you are ˹O Prophet˺, turn your face towards the Sacred Mosque. And wherever you ˹believers˺ are, face towards it, so that people will have no argument against you, except the wrongdoers among them. Do not fear them; fear Me, so that I may ˹continue to˺ perfect My favour upon you and so you may be ˹rightly˺ guided.” (Qur’an 2:150)

In his book ‘Opposing the Imam: The Legacy of the Nawasib in Islamic Literature’ by Nebil Husayn he says of the Muhakkimah: Those who opposed Ali’s decision for arbitration.

“From this survey of Ibadi literature, it is apparent that condemnation of Ali was not at all tied to his identity or political aspirations as a Hashimid. Ibadi’s criticized Ali’s conduct as a rule and, in particular, his handling of arbitration and the Muhakkima without regard for his status as a close relative or Companion of the Prophet. It is clear that the Khariji-Ibadi tradition considered all Muslims equal before God. Those who piously represented their strict sense of justice included notable Companions and kinsmen of the Prophet from the tribe of Qurasysh. They also included non-Arabs and late converts who had not been among the Muhajirun and the Ansar. To best understand the animus between Uthmanis’ Umayyads and pro-Alids one must tie claims to religious and political authority to the powerful clans that made them. Abu Bakr, Ali, and Muawiya were not simply charismatic leaders. They were the heads of families and political factions that continued to make claims to authority long after their deaths. Members of these factions transmitted narratives about the past that sought to exalt their own leaders and deprecate their rivals. While the Ibadi’s certainly did the same in their tales, there was less of a tendency to exalt characters by means of long hagiographical backstories. What would be the point of dwelling on the many years that a person served as the Prophet’s Companion if it was possible for such a person to die as an enemy of God and the community? The Khariji-Ibadi tradition was chillingly pragmatic. Individuals were lauded only for their deeds and their commitment to justice. Nothing else guaranteed a person’s righteousness.” (pg. 287-288)

Shaykh Massoud bin Muhammed Al Miqbali (hafidullah) gives the range of the Ibadi view regarding Ali bin Abi Talib. May Allah (swt) continue to bless our brother Assad for the sub titles!

There are two things in the video a person should take away.

“Firstly, the difference in the types of kufr according to the Ibadi classification, which has Quranic support through the evidences presented. And kufr ni’ma doesn’t put the person out of the fold of Islam.” -Leondro Peres

“Secondly, that those which have the knowledge about something may have a particular opinion on it but those who do not may refrain from having any opinion on it. Hence the meaning of the word ‘stop’ used in the video.” -Leondro Peres.

So basically to sum it up the Muslims, The People of the Truth and Steadfastness, are of three views regarding Ali Ibn Abi Talib.

The fact that he went against the Qur’an based ruling at Siffin and killed the Muslims at Nahrawan put him in the state of kufr ni’ma (which doesn’t take the person out of Islam). However, that person would still need to repent of their kufr before they died.

  1. One view is that Ali Ibn Abi Talib did not repent of this and therefore his ending was doom.
  2. The other view is that Ali Ibn Abi Talib, possibly after seeing that Muaviya indeed was not sincere in arbitration, and seeing the world crumble around him and possibly at the prompting of Ibn Abbas he repented to Allah (swt) and therefore his ending was a good ending.
  3. Those like myself (the one writing this post) who are ambivalent as we just do not have enough data to give a conclusive answer. We hold our tongues regarding companions like Ali Ibn Abi Talib.

Thus, in the Ibadi community you will find the following:

Scholars who when they mention the name of Ali they will say, “karamallahu wajhah” meaning May Allah exalt his face. Or they will say when mentioning his name radhiallahu anhu” meaning may Allah be pleased with him.

Scholars who do not mention anything after the name of Ali because they are in category a 3, meaning they are ambivalent or those few scholars in our books who put Ali in category 1.

Ali Ibn Abi Talib is used as a transmitter of hadith in the Musnad Al- Imam Ar-Rabee’

What amazes me are those among the Muslims who think that the blood of the sahabah that Ali shed at Nahrawan is cheap where as the blood of Ali is expensive. This is a most repulsive proposition.

“We take the truth even from a man of hatred and we reject falsehood even from a chosen friend. We have no respect for a man, however exalted, If from the truth he has deflected.”-Shaykh Abdullah bin Humeid Al Salmy

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Sociological Experiment: Ali, Umar and Fatima

“Indeed, Allah commands you to render trusts to whom they are due and when you judge between people to judge with justice. Excellent is that which Allah instructs you. Indeed, Allah is ever Hearing and Seeing.” (Qur’an 4:58) 

This is a sociological experiment I conducted on my social media regarding the tale that some from among our Shi’a brothers relate in regards to Umar, Ali and Fatima.

Narrated `Aisha:

Once Fatima came walking and her gait resembled the gait of the Prophet (saw). The Prophet (saw) said, “Welcome, O my daughter!” Then he made her sit on his right or on his left side, and then he told her a secret and she started weeping. I asked her, “Why are you weeping?” He again told her a secret and she started laughing. I said, “I never saw happiness so near to sadness as I saw today.” I asked her what the Prophet (saw) had told her. She said, “I would never disclose the secret of Allah’s Messenger (saw).” When the Prophet (saw) died, I asked her about it. She replied. “The Prophet (saw) said: ‘Every year Gabriel used to revise the Qur’an with me once only, but this year he has done so twice. I think this portends my death, and you will be the first of my family to follow me.’ So I started weeping. Then he said. ‘Don’t you like to be the chief of all the ladies of Paradise or the chief of the believing women? So I laughed for that.” 

Sources: (Sahih al-Bukhari 3623, 3624 Book 61, Hadith 129, Vol 4, Book 56, Hadith 819 & Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 5, Book 57, Hadith 62)

If indeed our brothers from among the Shi’a believe that this narration is true and that Fatima would be the first from among the family of the Beloved Messenger (saw) to die it cannot also be true that the “unborn” son of Fatima would die as he would technically be the ‘first of my family‘ to follow. 

Ali bin Abi Talib said:

“When al Hassan was born the Prophet (saw) came and said: Show me, my boy, what have you named him? I said: I called him Harb, he said: Nay He is Hassan When al Hussein was born the Prophet (saw)said: show me my boy, what have you named him? I said: Harb, he said: Nay he is Hussein, and when the third was born the Prophet (saw) came then said: Show me, my boy, what have you named him? I said: Harb, He said: Nay he is Muhassin, then He said: I have named them after the names of the children of Haroun(Aaron) they are Shibr, Shubeir, Mushabbar.” 

Source: (Musnad Ahmad 1/98, Isnad is SAHIH)

It’s not believable to say that Muhassin was aborted as a fetus and yet the above narration says that he was born.

Here is a video of Ayatollah Sayyid Fadhlallaha, a Shi’i Imam who thinks this whole tale about Ali, Umar and Fatima is a big fat juicy fabrication. For those who can’t click on English subtitles in the post, I have put the YouTube link where you can click on English subtitles.

Also, remember the presence of a statement in a book does not necessarily make it authentic. I do not know of anyone who holds this position. The chains of narrators the isnaad needs to be scrutinized. Do the reports contradict other pieces of evidence? This is what needs to be understood when engaging in dialogue with anyone from among the Muslims.

Now let us assume for the sake of argument that this incident took place as suggested by some of our Shi’a brothers. Obviously learned people like the Ayatollah above don’t buy it for a hot minute. 


So knowing that Muslims have vested interest in this tale and there are emotional attachments to it I decided to ask people who were absolutely clueless about this incident.

I decided that I would ask my non-Muslim friends about their thoughts concerning the characters of the two major individuals in this incident. So this is the data that I gave to them:

I want my non-Muslim friends to answer this question. Any Muslim who comments I’ll delete it. This is a sociological experiment.

What would you say about a man (person A) who punched another man’s wife(person B) in the stomach and caused her to miscarry? Person B (a man) does absolutely nothing in response to person A (a man).

Latter person, B marries one of his daughters to person A.

Person B names his son after person A. 

What follows are their responses. Some of them are quite interesting. I have covered up their names to protect/respect their personal privacy. 

“I hope person a is not you.” Yikes looks like I need to work on my public perception! lol.  Well, so there you have it. 20 different responses to this scenario.

Now we have the lady of heaven film that has created quite a controversy. Unfortunately, some from the Ahl Sunnah instead of using clips like the above to dismiss the claims of those who wish to fan the flames of sectarianism, they themselves have decided to add gas to the fire.

May Allah (swt) guide our tongues to speak the truth and our hearts to have the courage to say it. May Allah (swt) guide us from speaking falsely about any person incident or matter. Amin! 


Filed under Uncategorized

The Friday Sermon attended by Imam Malik ibn Anas. The Khatib, an Ibadi.

“Rise up and deliver the warning.” (Qur’an 74:2)

After the Muslims, the People of the Truth and Steadfastness had captured Mecca and Medina the following Khutbah was given.

Abu Hamza al-Mukhtar bin Awf al-Uzdy al-Umany. Also known as Abu Hamza al-Shari. One of the prominent Ibadhi’s of Basra. The sermon was delivered in Medina in the presence of Imam Malik ibn Anas:

I counsel you in fear of Allah and the Sunnah of His Prophet (Blessings and peace be upon him) and to observe the ties of blood, and magnify the truth of Allah which tyrants have diminished, and to diminish the falsehood they have magnified, to put to death the injustice they have brought to life, and to revivify laws they have let die; to obey Allah and to those who obey Him, disobey others in obedience to Him, for there is no obeying a creature which disobeys its Creator. We call you to the Book of Allah and the Sunna of His Prophet, and to equal sharing, and to justice for the subject peoples and to putting the fifth of the booty in the place Allah ordained for them. As for us, we have not taken arms lightly or frivolously, for play or amusement, or for a change of government on which we hope to immerse ourselves, or for the revenge that was taken from us; but we did it when we saw the earth had grown wicked, and proofs of tyranny had appeared, and religious propagandist increased, but men did as the pleased, and laws were neglected, and the just were put to death, and speakers of truth treated violently, and we heard a herald calling us to Truth and the straight Path, so we answered the summoner of Allah…And by His grace we became brethren.

“O people of Medina! Children of the Muhajirin and the Ansar! How sound are your roots, and how rotten are your branches! Your fathers were men of certainty and religious knowledge and you are a people of error and ignorance. For Allah opened the door of religion for you, and you (let it grow choked with rubbish); He locked the door of this world for you and you forced it open; hasty to temptation and laggards in the way of the Prophet; blind to the demonstration of Truth and deaf to knowledge; slaves of greed and allies of affliction! How excellent was the legacy your fathers left, had you preserved it, and how miserable will be that of your children if you hold on to it! Them He aided to the Truth you He deserts in error. Your ancestors were few and pious, and you are many and malicious. The preachers of the Qur’an cry out to you, and you are not chidden’ they warn you, and you do not ponder!

(Islam by John A. Williams (London & New York 1961 pp 215-217)

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Who killed the companion Ammar ibn Yasir?

“But whoever kills a believer intentionally – his recompense is Hell, wherein he will abide eternally, and Allah has become angry with him and has cursed him and has prepared for him a great punishment.” (Qur’an 4:93)

Narrated `Ikrima:

“That Ibn `Abbas told him and `Ali bin `Abdullah to go to Abu Sa`id and listen to some of his narrations; So they both went (and saw) Abu Sa`id and his brother irrigating a garden belonging to them. When he saw them, he came up to them and sat down with his legs drawn up and wrapped in his garment and said, “(During the construction of the mosque of the Prophet) we carried the adobe of the mosque, one brick at a time while `Ammar used to carry two at a time. The Prophet (saw) passed by `Ammar and removed the dust off his head and said, “May Allah be merciful to `Ammar. He will be killed by a rebellious aggressive group. `Ammar will invite them to (obey) Allah and they will invite him to the (Hell) fire.”

Source: (al-Bukhari 2812 Book 56, Hadith 28)

Such a problem is the above sahih hadith that the Hanbali Ibn Taymiyyah al Harrani tried to come up with all kinds of crafty ways of dealing with the impact of the statement from the Blessed Messenger (saw).

“Some have said that it is not authentic, and others have interpreted it. People have had different statements on the tradition of ‘Ammaar; of them are those who have criticized it.” He goes on: “But the people who have knowledge of this tradition have had three different statements. One group of them regards it to be inauthentic because to them, it has been narrated through a weak chain of transmitters!”

Source: (Ibn Taymiyyah Minhaju Al-Sunna Vol. 2, p. 204, 208-209 & 212)

So Ibn Tamiyyah has two claims.

  1. The tradition itself despite being in Bukhari is actually daif.
  2. It has a suitable interpretation.

The Imam of the Muslims, the People of The Truth and Steadfastness, Al-Imamu Al-Qannubi says: “We do not know whom Ibn Taymiyyah means by his claim “Some (have said that it is not authentic)….” There will come explanation that many have classified this tradition as authentic….”

Source: (Al-Qannubi Al-Tufan Al-Jarif Vol. 3, section two, p. 625)

But this interpretation has been objected to by even Ibn Taymiyyah himself!

Source: (Ibn Taymiyyah Minhaju Al-Sunna Vol. 2, p. 210-211)

But – all of a sudden – we, finally, find Ibn Taymiyyah himself turns around to clearly state that the said tradition is authentic. “The tradition is proved and it is authentic, being from the Prophet (saw)”.

Source: (Ibn Taymiyyah Minhaju Al-Sunna Vol. 2, p. 211)

Yet, surprisingly, he has misinterpreted it saying: “His killers were those who held weapons and killed him” Which he means to say not Mu’awiya!!! He says again: “The word “killer” if loosely or absolutely used, means the one that has killed: not the one that has issued the order (of killing)”.

This bizarre philosophy of Ibn Taymiyyah indicates that if he were to live in the present age, he would – of course – agree with the claim that presidents are not responsible for the crime of the illegal, haphazard bloodshed committed by their armies in different Muslim and non-Muslim countries, but rather their troops are the ones responsible for that! Indeed, while Ibn Taymiyyah defends Mu’awiya in that way, we find that Mu’awiya himself proves him wrong as he says: “Ali had two right hands (two strong assistants and supporters), one of which I cut on the day of Siffin, meaning ‘Ammaar bin Yasir; and the other I cut today, meaning Al-ashtar”

Source: (Al-Tabari Al-Taarikh Vol. 3, p. 133. Ibn Al-Athir Al-Kamil Vol. 2, p. 705.)

Check mate!

Not only this but here is a tradition that contradicts Ibn Taymiyyah’s bizarre idea. The tradition says: “He who assists with a half-uttered word in the killing of a Muslim, he will come on the day of judgment between his two eyes there has been written “He has despaired of the Mercy of Allah.” Al-Rabi’u bin Habib Al-Jami’u Al-Sahih p. 368, tradition no. 960. Ibn Majah Al-Sunan p. 444, tradition no. 2620. How does it come, then, that Ibn Taymiyyah excludes the one from whose order the killing is carried out from being responsible for it?!

Typically many from the Sunni have used these tactics to get around this hadith. Even some of the early proto-Sunni saying that the one’s who slew Ammar ibn Yasir were the one’s who brought him to the battlefield, meaning Ali ibn Abu Talib himself!

May Allah (swt) open the eyes and the hearts of this ummah! May Allah (swt) unite us upon the truth!

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Dust Becomes Marvel’s First Muslim Superhero

“And cover not Truth with falsehood, nor conceal the Truth when ye know what it is.” (Qur’an 2:42)

And Marvel’s first Muslim superhero is…Kamala….

Dust (real name Sooraya Qadir) is a superheroine appearing in American comic books published by Marvel Comics. The character usually appears in X-Men-related comic books. Sooraya is a mutant with the ability to transform her body into a pliable cloud of dust. The X-Men travel to Afghanistan to rescue Sooraya, whose abilities have made her the target of antagonists.

Born in Kandahar, Sooraya is attacked by a slave trader attempting to remove her traditional niqab; almost instinctively, she lashes out with her powers and flays him alive with her sand-like dust. The X-Men, hearing of the situation, travel to Afghanistan and rescue her, where she is brought to the United States and becomes a student of theXavier Institute for Higher Learning. After the actions of the Scarlet Witch(in which millions of mutants lost their powers), Sooraya remains one of the few mutants to keep their powers. She is currently a member of the Champions team.

Sooraya Qadir First appearance as ‘Dust’ in December 2002. Where as Kamal Khan’s first appearance in August 2013.

Instead of getting a Muslim girl, who deals with life in an ultra liberal society where religion is seen little more than a cumbersome relic of the past, where she must balance between keeping her faith (as Dust did) and regulating her emotions (as Dust did), Learning how to drive, dealing with racial microaggressions, especially when it concerns how she dresses. A lesson in multi cultural diversity instead what we are going to get. Seeing her turn to Allah (swt) in times of diversity and she struggles against her desires. Dust whos is an obviously observant Muslim, is also friends with another religious character, a Christian named Rahne Sinclair who has already been featured in films as Wolfsbane. Instead of showing the amazing dynamic of friendship that can exist between a practicing Muslim and a practicing Christian Hollywood took a pass. That Muslim is completely unrelatable. So instead of Hollywood taking on the challenge to humanize such a person and make her relatable instead we are going to get the desired face of Muslims.

Instead we are going to get a ‘Muslim’ (whatever that means), that deals with racial microaggressions, crushing on classmates, has super powers, doesn’t really need or depend upon Allah (swt), arguing with her overly strict parents, because you know those ‘stupid rules’, and learning how to drive.

What a real wasted opportunity by Hollywood. Especially considering that this Ms. Marvel is now the Third rendition of Ms. Marvel in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The first Ms. Marvel which helped the Avengers against Thanos, and is part of the Kree Empire. Than we have Monica Rambeau, a major African American super heroine, who gets upstaged by Kamala Khan by being regulated to the Disney plus programs.

Victory for the Muslim community or victory for the liberal agenda.

Sorry Sooraya, your just not relatable enough for Hollywood.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The school of the Muslims, Ahl Al Haqq Wal Istiqamah (World Wide)

“Today those who disbelieve have lost all hope of (damaging) your faith. So, do not fear them, and fear Me. Today, I have perfected your religion for you, and have completed My blessing upon you, and chosen Islam as Dīn (religion and a way of life) for you.” (Qur’an 5:3)

“It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance the true world view to manifest over all other world views, although the those who associate others with Allah detest it.” (Qur’an 9:33)

All praise be to Allah (swt) more and more people in the Muslim community are having their eyes opened by Allah (swt).

The Muslims, are the people of truth and righteousness in Russia and Kazakhstan, and I choose among them the preachers, the first of whom is the political analyst Kirill, and the second is our companion Vladimir, and with him is Murad who is the owner of a school in Kazakhstan, and the preacher is Ashir, and they are Ibadhis for a long time and are promising new followers of the truth there.
Ibadism Ahul Alistiqamh in Russia and Khazakhstan. More and more people following Istiqamah in Russia, Khazakhstan, and other parts of central Asia.

The Muslims, are the people of truth and integrity in Ghana and Mali. There is a video of them on their YouTube channel and You can find a link on the account page. The Istiqamah community is growing rapidly there. They are under the leadership of the noble Shaykh Umar.


The Ibadites are the people of truth and righteousness in Algeria. We would like to mention that the Berbers (the people of North Africa) were the first to accept the Ibadi sect in North Africa, and they formed a sprawling Ibadi state called the Rustumiya State. They are Ibadis in the Maghreb, men and scholars. There is growth and revival among the school in Algeria. The Algerian people respect them in general as people who are upright in religion and steadfast upon the deen.

Zanzibar & Tanzania. Ibadis are the people of truth and integrity in Tanzania Zanzibar, we are limited to mentioning the most famous institute in Tanzania, which is the Institute of Integrity in Tango, and as you know Ibadites spread in all parts of Zanzibar and various regions of Tanzania. The school is growing once again. Those who are entering the school from other schools are those from the Shafi’i madhab and those who proclaimed Salafi Manhaj. Not to mention those who are from the Non Muslims who come to Islam upon this way.

We would be remiss if we did not mention the honorable and noble teacher, Caller to the Truth, Shaykh Khamis Kwaheri. He was beloved by the people and tireless in the effort of dawah. Allah (swt) called him home. A beautiful Nasheed in his honour!

Ibadis are the people of truth and righteousness in Bangladesh, (and they are guided by Shaykh Saif al-Islam) In the picture below, there is a video attached to his school in a next tweet…

Sudan. The Ibadis are the people of truth and integrity from Sudan, I will only mention the shaykhs, including Shaykh Al-Balqiah, who is a preacher and influenced by Shaykh Ja’id Al-Kharousi, may Allah have mercy on him. . May Allah protect them and bless them both!


The Ibadites are the people of truth and righteousness in France, and Shaykh Kahlan Al-Kharusi has visits to France. You can find them on YouTube. We mention the deceased preacher Shaykh Muhammad Qaras (raheemullah) sitting next to the left Shaykh Kahlan. The Istiqamah community is growing in France. Interestingly communities that may have not interacted in Algeria, Libya, Tunisia and Morocco interact more freely in France. This has generated lots of interest in the school. There is an abundance of literature in French and Arabic.


Nafusa and Zuwara region is where you find most of the Muslims, the People of the The Truth and Steadfastness. They have a long history in Libya. You should also know that the Ibadi school is working with the Amazigh people to thwart the attempts by outsiders to foment ethnic strife and tension between Arabs, Amazigh and others. The French tried their colonization methods and now they are trying a different more subversive approach. We will be there to stop them.


The Ibadis, the people of truth and righteousness in Kenya. Islam spread throughout the countries of East Africa with the people of truth and righteousness, until the call withered with the arrival of foreign sectarian currents backed by money and men, to lead them where they desired and forget the truth, and only a few Omani and African tribes remained that cling to the truth. That is changing today. As the call has been revived and more material and information is available in Swahili and Arabic the Istiqamah school is once again growing. Al hamdulillah!

Thailand. A very touching audio clip explaining the story behind the first Istiqamah school in Thailand. Interesting that the former Mufti suggested to the young Shaykh how to navigate the chaos currently going in the Muslim world.


Ibadis are the people of truth and righteousness in Uganda, the mother of the great Nile River, including Dr. Ashraf, who is the director of the Abu Ubaidah Muslim bin Abi Karima School (the second imam), and dozens of seasoned preachers and memorizers of the Noble Qur’an graduate annually on his hands, then spread in villages and neighboring countries in order to invite the people to the truth. Dr. Ashraf is a very beautiful soul who gives of himself tirelessly, both as a medical professional and in the director of his school. He has personally suffered under the hands of militant Christians and those who have tried to shut down the school.


The Ibadis are the people of truth and integrity in Tunisia. Djerba is one of the authentic lands that embraced and stuck to the Ibadi school over time, and among them is mentioned Shaykh Farhat Al-Jaberi, may Allah protect him and keep him, and he has many books, and this is a brief photo of them. Farhat al-Jaberi appears to the left of Shaykh Ahmed al-Siyabi.


The Ibadites are the people of truth and righteousness in Nigeria, and one of their elders was Shaykh Al-Bruni – may Allah have mercy on him – who learned in Zanzibar, and the virtuous professor Othman Al-Qoni has an active hand in the call, and our companion, the translator of the shaykhs’ lectures from Arabic into English Ahmed was studying in Saudi Arabia, and Shaykh Dr. Takoh informed us of what was happening. Al hamduillah.

United States and the United Kingdom, where our brothers are coming to the path of Ahl Al Haqq Wal Istiqamah. In the United Kingdom there is an Masjid established there. May Allah (swt) continue to open the eyes and the hearts to the truth!

There are many hundreds more every day that Allah (swt) is opening their eyes and their hearts to the truth. Brothers and sisters from Germany, Burkina Faso, Palestine, South Korea, Canada, Trinidad, Brazil, Croatia, Bosnia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Holland and not to mention the revival that is happening among the Freemen (Amazigh)

The Muslims, The People of the Truth and Steadfastness you will not find us among the conflicts among the Muslims today. You will not find us among the sectarian strife today. We are not invested in what happened among the companions 1400 years ago. Nor are we beholden to them. We are not an apocalyptical school hanging on the future musings of salvific figures who may never come. We are people of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Islam is not found in the books it is found in communities.






Filed under Uncategorized

Clarity from Obfuscation: Where to place the hands in the prayer?

“The Messenger of Allah is certainly a good example for those of you who have hope in Allah and in the Day of Judgment and who remember Allah very often.”  (Qur’an 33:21)

And perform the prayer, and pay the alms, and bow with those that bow.”  (Qur’an 2:43)

And obey Allah and obey the Messenger. But if you turn away, then Our Messenger is responsible only for conveying the message clearly. (Quran 64:12)

It has been attributed to the Blessed Messenger (saw) in the following hadith:

Malik ibn Al-Huwayrith reported: We came to the Prophet, (saw), while we were young men and we stayed with him twenty nights. Then the Prophet considered that we were anxious to see our families, so he asked us who we had left behind to take care of them and we told him. The Prophet was kindhearted and merciful, and he said, “Return to your families, teach them, and enjoin good upon them. Pray as you have seen me praying. When the time of prayer arrives, then one of you should announce the call to prayer and the eldest of you should lead the prayer.” Source: (al-Bukhari 5662, Muslim 674)

The hadith above have been used by many people to advocate that Muslims should try and pray the way that the Blessed Messenger (saw) prayed.    Often what they really mean is to pray the way THEY THINK he prayed.  In reality, we don’t have any video footage recorded of the Blessed Messenger (saw).

What we have are two ways of obtaining evidence about the way the Blessed Messenger (saw) performed his prayer 1. The mass transmitted sunnah as practice.   2. Lone narrator reports that latter become committed to text.

Before we get into that it is important to understand exactly what the prayer means to us as Muslims.

I would encourage you to read the following:

Clarity from Obfuscation: Where to place the hands in the prayer?

We have a situation in the Muslim Ummah in which there are certain groups who go around and police other people’s prayers.   They are like the ‘prayer police’.  I honestly think that many of them are coming from a place of sincerity in that they only want you to follow what they believe the Blessed Messenger (saw) was doing.

However they give the false impression that the correct way of doing the prayer is to place the right hand over the left hand (SOMEWHERE.…)  -we will come to this latter.  Thus, they will give the impression that anyone who does anything different than this is not doing the prayer of the Blessed Messenger (saw) or worse yet they are doing innovation! Interestingly enough the ‘evidence for placing the hands on the chest’ is not contained in either of the two most authentic collections of the hadith  al- Bukhari or ‘Muslim’ 

First things first.

It should be noted that according to the Majority group , ‘al-Bukhari’ and ‘Muslim’ are the two most authentic hadith collections. (most authentic according to the Sunni)

However, you will be quite surprised to know that NEITHER of these collections will you find the following information:

  1. It doesn’t tell you to place your right hand over your left hand behind your back.
  2. It doesn’t tell you to place your right hand over your left below your navel.
  3. It doesn’t tell you to place your right hand over your left hand in the mid-section.
  4. It doesn’t tell you to place your right hand over your left wrist and grip it.
  5. It doesn’t tell you to place your right hand over your left forearm.
  6. It doesn’t tell you to place your right hand on your left shoulder.
  7. It doesn’t tell you to place your right hand under the chin at the top of the sternum.

Neither of these two hadith collections will inform you to do any such thing at all!

That being said we do have a hadith in ‘al-Bukhari’ that should have many of you scratching your heads:

Narrated Sahl bin Sa’d:

“The PEOPLE WERE ORDERED to place the right hand on the left in the prayer. Abu Hazim said, “I only know that it is attributed tot he Prophet .” (Source: (Volume 1, Book 12, Number 707)

Like why would people need to be ordered to do something that the Blessed Prophet (saw) did? Any Muslim would rush to imitate a sunnah of the prophet!

I would encourage you to reflect upon all the oral traditions you have heard attributed to the Blessed Messenger (saw).  How often do you hear this terminology “THE PEOPLE WERE ORDERED” ??

The people were ordered to sleep on their right side?

The people were ordered to wash their right hands?

The people were ordered to do two rakats upon entering the Masjid?

The Hadith of Sahl closer look:

“Abdullah ibn Maslama related to us from Malik from Abu Hazim from Sahl ibn Sa’d He said: “The people were ordered that a person is to place their right hand over their left hand during Salat.” Abu Hazim said, “I know only that he attributes that (yanmi dhalika) to the Prophet.” Isma’il said,” (I only know that) That is attributed (yunma dhalika).” And he didn’t say: “He attributes” (yanmi).

This hadith -in spite of being in the Muwatta of Imam Malik and the Sahih of Imam Bukhari is not definite proof that the Prophet’s sunnah was to pray while holding his left with his right hand. What weakens such an assumption made from this hadith are the following:

#1) It is not an explicit report or statement or action of the Prophet (saw).

#2) The statement, “That the people were ordered that a person is to place their right hand over their left forearm during Salat” is the statement of the Companion, Sahl. And he doesn’t say that the Prophet (saw) gave this order. So there is a possibility that another could have given this order.

#3) The statement, “I know only that he attributes that (yanmi dhalika) to the Prophet” is not the statement of Sahl. Rather it is the statement of the Tab’i Abu Hazim. So there is no certainty that Sahl actually attributed this to the Prophet since Abu Hazim is merely conjecturing about what he remembers.

#4) The statement of Isma’il that (I only know that) That is attributed (yunma dhalika).” And he didn’t say, “He attributes (yanmi)”. further emphasizes the belief that Abu Hazim didn’t actually hear Sahl attribute the order to the Prophet.

#5) Notice that many Muslims pray with their arms below their navel or up midway above the navel or high up on the chest. So obviously that hadith above (which has been shown not to be firmly established from the Prophet) doesn’t help us to know where to place the hands. You could even do takbir and than put your hands behind your back taking the left forearm with the right as in the picture below!

#6) A very important point. Many among the Salafis think that just quoting the above hadith is enough to negate sadl-laying the arms at the side. However, that is simply not the case at all! Because that hadith does not indicate if this was to be done before the first ruku or the returning position after ruku. We will return to this point later insh’Allah. 

(The above illustration is ‘taking the left hand with the right hand’)


Example being: Ibn Tumart who forced theological positions at sword point!

“It is nothing but bigotry and small-mindedness, if not political, Indeed, in Morocco, when Al-Mahdi b.Toumart returned from his travels seeking knowledge in the East, meeting many great Ash’ari scholars like Al-Kiya Al-Harrasi, he proceeded to disseminate the school throughout Morocco, When he claimed to disseminate the school throughout Morocco. When he claimed to be the Mahdi, and established the Almohad state, he obliged the population to adhere to the school, and fought against the school of the early Muslims, dismissing the previous Almoravid state as “anthropomorphists”,  when they actually were upon the way of the early Muslims in their beliefs. He called his own dynasty  Muwahhidun (“Monotheist”). He also opposed the Maliki school and the scholars of Morocco and Andalusia who adhered to it. In this way, enmity developed between the two groups; and the inherent cause was political.”   -The Hadith Scholar, Professor ‘Abdullah Guenon Al-Hasani, President of the Morrocan League of Scholars and Member of the Islamic World League, Mecca’  taken from page 326 (Notions that Must Be Corrected by Shaykh Muhammad b ‘Alawi Al-Maliki Al Hasani)

Example being: The Shirazi Shi’a dynasty that forced people to adopt their prayer as well as adopt their version of Shiasm in general!

“It was, however, nothing less than a reign of terror that inaugurated the new dispensation. On capturing Tabriz in 907/1501, a city two-thirds Sunnite in population, Shah Esmāʿil threatened with death all who might resist the adoption of Shiʿite prayer ritual in the main congregational mosque, and he had Qezelbāš soldiers patrol the congregation to ensure that none raise his voice against the cursing of the first three caliphs, viewed as enemies of the Prophet’s family. In Tabriz and elsewhere, gangs of professional executors known as the tabarrāʾiān would accost the townsfolk at random, forcing them to curse the objectionable personages on pain of death. Selective killings of prominent Sunnites occurred in a large number of places, notably Qazvin and Isfahan, and in Shiraz and Yazd, outright massacres took place. Sunnite mosques were desecrated, and the tombs of eminent Sunnite scholars destroyed (Aubin, 1970, pp. 237-38; idem, 1988, pp. 94-101).”  Source: Hamid Algar

So yeah these people were not really impressed by the verse: “Let there be no compulsion in religion.” (Qur’an 2:256)

Often when a Muslim politic conquered a rival Muslim politic they would have the muezzin add to the prayer: “So and so is now the commander of the faithful” -because this was their way of mass communication in those times.

In fact, Shaykh Hamza Yusuf had quoted something very interesting from the great Hanafi master of fiqh and hadith: Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari.

Quoting from Mulla ‘Ali Qari Shaykh Hamza Yusuf says,

“Mulla ‘Ali Qari says It could have been the Prophet, It could have been the Khulafa, or it could have been the rulers that were telling people to do that.”

Shaykh Hamza Yusuf continues:

“So even the Hanafi, one of the great Hanafi scholars of hadith it’s not clear who was telling who to do what.”

Shaykh Hamza Yusuf continues:  “My conclusion is I actually think its a political thing. Because the two people who were leaving their hands at their side were the people who were most resistant to the Ummayad rule. And that was the Kwarij and the Shi’a. So it’s very interesting that the thing that immediately distinguishes your political allegiance is in the prayer. ”  Source is:  @ 07:20 seconds into the video

In fact further proof of what Shaykh Hamza Yusuf says comes to us in the following report:

bn ‘Abd Al-Barr in his book al-Tamheed narrates that (20:76)

‘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.

Placing the hand over the other was considered to be munkar by Said ibn Al-Jubayr because you can only change an act that is known to be munkar. It is also interesting that he (Said ibn Al-Jubayr) observed a person doing this meaning that it ‘stood out to him’.  So the majority practice during the time of the companions and their successors was to place the arms at the side.

Keep in mind that Said ibn Al-Jubayr took part in the Battle of Dayr al-Jamājim against the Ummayds!

Also, keep in mind that not everyone who  prayed sadl (hands to the side) opposed the Ummayads.

An example of this is  Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib.   Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib refused to give allegiance to Abdullah ibn Al-Zubayr who was opposed to the Ummayads.

Also narrated in al-Tamheed: ‘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.”

Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib was one of the biggest Tabi’een in Madina, and this was thus the practice of the people of Madina that Imam Malik witnessed. (Source: al-Tamheed Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr 20:76)

Another example of the prayer being an issue of politics is the history of the rivalry in West Africa between the two Sufi Tariqah: The Tijani and The Qadiri.

“Beginning with the 1949 demolition of the Tijani mosque in Sokoto Province at the order of the sultan of Sokoto, tensions between Tijaniyya and Qadiriyya periodically erupted into violence throughout the 1950s and 1960s. A 1956 riot in two districts of Sokoto resulted in four deaths, including that of a Qadiri imam. In 1965, again in Sokoto Province, clashes attributed to Tijaniyya-Qadiriyya disputes resulted in the deaths of eleven policemen. As in Mali , a potent symbol of and perhaps pretext for inter-brotherhood antagonism remains the posture of arms during prayer: Tijanis cross their arms over the chest (kabalu), whereas Qadaris keep their arms straight at their sides. The Qadiris regard kabalu as heretical.(Source: The History of Islam in Africa  page 219)

The exact ritual of prayer has long been an expression of difference-especially whether the arms are folded (kablu) or at one’s side(sadlu) when standing in the course of prayer. After Friday prayer, there is also the issue of what dhikr is said and for how long-and whether, as a novelty, bandiri drums are used. There were thus very visible and audible differences between Qadiri and Tijani Muslims, and these could become a source of much controversy. In some emirates, the Tijaniyya clearly represented opposition to the ruling establishment when that establishment was Qadiri. Given that ‘Uthman dan Fodio was a Shaikh of the Qadiriyya and his son was a successor Muhammad Bello refused to abandon his father’s tariqa in favour of the new, radical Tijaniyya (which a visitor to Sokoto, ‘Umar al-Futi, was then strongly promoting), then joining the Tijaniyya was in effect an act of dissidence or at least dissent.” (Source:  Sects & Social Disorder: Muslim Identities & Conflict in Northern Nigeria page 43)

The issue of the kabalu (folding the hands) or the sadlu (leaving them)  was ordered in the Tijani Tariqa an outward display of political dissonance and a means of separating them and making them distinct.

“For example, Shaykh al-Tijani (RA) strongly recommended us to recite the Basmalah loudly before the Fatihah. This is against the Maliki and Hanafi Madh-habs, but we have to follow it. Shaykh Ibrahim (RA) ordered his (mostly Maliki) followers to pray with folded hands, so Maliki Tijanis have to do it, even if it goes against the Maliki Madh-hab. Indeed, when he was ordered by Allah, Rasul (SAW), and Shaykh al-Tijani (RA) to order the people to pray with folded hands, many people in West Africa fought him. They said to him: “But your father (RA) prayed with open arms???” He replied: “Al-Humduli’Llah! Allah has not ordered us to follow anyone absolutely but the Prophet (SAW)”. Also, when someone said: “But Shaykh al-Tijani (RA) is related to have prayed with open arms too?” Baye (RA) replied: “We take the Tariqah from Shaykh al-Tijani (RA) and we don’t go an inch against him. But, we take the Shari’ah from Rasul-Allah (SAW).” As Shaykh Mahy Cisse told me, Shaykh al-Tijani (RA) also wished to pray Qabd but was not given the permission than as he had other affairs to see to, as well as the fact that his following in Fes and Morocco was not big enough to bring about such a major change. Everything has a time, and the Shaykh al-Tijani (RA) ordered Shaykh Ibrahim (RA) to revive this Sunnah among the Malikis.”


We should be careful to not take our fiqh and our ijtihad from dreams as anyone can say anything.

With a Shaykh, especially a Sufi Shaykh does such a thing they put you in a difficult position. They are either lying or telling the truth

All that you have read was tell you the political history in regards to the Muslims and in particular the politics surrounding the prayer of the Blessed Messenger (saw).


Now we will be looking at the only three pieces of evidence to support the majority practice (all three of them hotly disputed).

1) The Hadeeth of Wa’il Ibn Hujr in Ibn Khuzaimah
2) The Hadeeth of Halb At-Taa’ee in Tirmidhi
3) The Mursal report of Tawus in Sunan Abu Dawud

A very important note.   When I said the pieces of evidence about where the hands are placed as the ‘majority practice’  there is a caveat here. Allow me to remind you of point 6.

#6) A very important point. Many among the Salafis think that just quoting the above hadith is enough to negate sadl-laying the arms at the side. However, that is simply not the case at all! Because that hadith does not indicate if this was to be done before the first ruku or the returning position after ruku. We will return to this point later insh’Allah. 

This is the majority practice (before the first ruku -bowing).

After the first ruku-bowing leaving the hands at the side (becomes the majority practice) and those putting the hands back on the chest or navel become the minority!!

Now, this is a ‘Salaah Guide’ a guide on doing the prayer according to one of the Sunni Muslim views.

Now notice that in figure 3 the hands are folded above the navel.   In figure 4 the person is bowing.  However, in figure 4a after coming up from bowing the hands are placed at the sides!

Placing the hands at the side in the prayer after ruku (is the majority practice) among all Muslims worldwide!


As you can observe in the following video there are those Muslims who when they come back up from the ruku they will fold their hands back. In doing this it becomes the (minority practice).

You can see that here: (SORRY IT WAS REMOVED)

For some strange reason someone didn’t want you to see the above video. As if it was a national intelligence secret. Thankfully, for you dear reader your guy has some skills. Voila!

It is a point of dispute among those Muslims who claim to be following ‘The way of the Salaaf‘.   Among the big Salafi Shaykhs who practice this are:

Shaykh Badeeu deen As-Sanadi and Shaykh Bin Baaz whereas Shaykh al-Albaani declared that those who did that are innovators.

The proof text that Bin Baaz uses for his position is the very hadith under discussion above!  So this hadith does not tell us if the hand is placed one over the other (where are they to be placed) and if they are to be folded (before or after the ruku)!

So opposed to the diagram above those people who take the position such as Bin Baaz

they believe the hands go like this before and after the ruku!

Now we will be looking at the only three pieces of evidence to support the majority practice  (all three of them hotly disputed).

Before I begin this section I want to say that the proofs and evidence are largely taken from the Sunni Maliki scholar: Mukhtar ibn Muhaydimat ad-Daudi ash-Shinqiti.

He wrote a treatise called: “The Legality of Draping the Arms in Salah“.  His works are often used but rarely is the source credited.  May Allah (swt) bless all who have contributed towards learning and truth!

1) The Hadeeth of Wa’il Ibn Hujr in Ibn Khuzaimah
2) The Hadeeth of Halb At-Taa’ee in Tirmidhi
3) The Mursal report of Tawus in Sunan Abu Dawud


Sayyiduna Wail bin Hujr says, ‘I prayed with the Prophet (saw) and he placed his right hand over his left on his chest’. ( Source: Ibn Khuzaimah, 479)

This hadith has been reported by Muammal bin Ismaeel from Sufyan al Thawri from Aasim bin Kulaib from Wail bin Hujr  -However, it is only Muammal who reports these additional words from Sufyan al Thawri.

Sufyan’ al Thawri’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. (Source: Ahmad 18392)

Ibn al Qayyim al Jawziyyah also says in I’laam al Muwaqqieen, ‘No one has said upon the chest apart from Muammal bin Ismaeel.’ (Source: I’ilaam al Muwaqqieen 2/361)

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.

Study the following observations of the scholars of Jarh and T’adeel about Muammal bin Ismaeel:

Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani has made it clear in his Fath al-Bari that there is daif (weakness) in Muammal bin Ismaeel’s narrations from Sufyan (Source: Fath al Bari, 9/297). The above hadith has this very chain of narration.


Imam Bukhari mentions that Muammal ibn Ismaeel is among the munkarul Hadith (denounced in hadith). ( Source: Aathar Us-Sunan Pg. 65, Chapter: Placing the hand on the chest).

(People who view Imam Bukhari as the ultimate authority in matters of hadith should note his following statement: ‘It is not permissible to narrate from anyone whom I have labeled munkar al hadith‘  [Source: Mizan al I’itidal. 1/119]

Shaikh ibn al-Hammaam said in ‘at-Tahreer’, ‘when al-Bukhari says about someone, “there is a problem in him” then his hadith are not depended upon or used for support, or given any consideration.’

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 ‘upon the chest’ reported by Muammal bin Ismaeel

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

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

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

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

• Salam bin Saleem as in Abu Dawood Tayalisi’s Musnad (Source: Abu Dawood Tayalisi 1020)

In Layman’s understanding, it is like this.

A -B-C-D-E-F than G says…
A -B-C-D-E-F
A -B-C-D-E-F
A -B-C-D-E-F

So what happens is we go and double-check what G says.  Which should be a huge eye-opener to anyone reading this.  If the prayer of the Blessed Messenger (saw) was folding the right hand over the left upon the chest it would be a mass transmitted practice. 

This is something as frequent as praying five times a day, every day until He (saw) died!  The very fact that they need to do and double-check these statements should open some eyes!   So after double-checking what G says, we go back and see transmissions from F through other chains and NONE OF THEM say what G is saying. G stands alone in his statement!


So before I would be inclined to accept such a description of the prayer just our hearts and curiosity:

1) Is it possible to have the quote from Sufyan Al Thawri or Aasim bin Kulaib where he said the prophet prayed with his hands upon his chest? I just want to make sure that I am following the Salaaf and not someone’s simple mistake by making an added addition.

2) Why did Imam Bukhari denounce Muhammal ibn Ismaeel and why does he not use him in his narrations?

3) Why did Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani declare Muhammal’s narrations from Sufyan At Thawri as weak?

4) Why accept Wail Ibn Hujr’s narration above on placing hands but not the following narration. Narrated Wa’il ibn Hujr: ‘I saw that the Prophet (saw) placed his knees (on the ground) before placing his hands when he prostrated himself. And when he stood up, he raised his hands before his knees.’?    (Source: Kitab Al-Salat): Details of Commencing Prayer’ of Sunan Abu-Dawud. 0837)


The hadith of Halb at-Taa’ee/Hulb Al-Ta’i reported by Imaam Ahmad in his ‘Musnad’/Tirmidhi/Ibn Majah, and Daraqutni,

“That Yahya bin Sa’eed narrated to us from Sufyaan At Thawri , from Samaak bin Harb from Qabeesa bin Halb from his father that, ‘I saw the Messenger of Allah (saw) turn from his left to right, and place these on his chest, and Yahya al-Yamanee depicted this by placing the right hand upon the left (on the chest) above the level of the elbows.’

The above hadeeth contains the words ‘upon his chest‘. This extra wording is not firmly established or confirmed, because of all the narrators who report this hadith 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 (saw) would lead us in prayer and would clasp his left hand with his right.

• 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.’

• Wakee reports from Sufyan from Simak bin Harb from Qabeesah bin Hulb from his father who says, ‘I saw the Prophet (saw) place his right hand upon his left in prayer and I also saw him turn away from both his right and left.’

• Daruqutni narrates from Abdul Rahman bin Mahdi and Wakee’, from Sufyan from Simak bin Harb from Qabeesah bin Hulb from his father who says, ‘I saw the Prophet (saw) place his right hand upon his left in prayer.’ ( Source: 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.

The weakness of this Hadith.

Weakness #1: Qabisa ibn Hulb has been classified as weak and unknown.

Shawkani said in Nayl Al-Awtar [2/200]: “In the chain of this hadith is Qabisa ibn Hulb. Sammak is the only one to narrate from him. Al-‘Ijli considered him to be reliable. And Ibn Al-Madini and Nasa’i said: “(He is) Unknown.”

Weakness #2: Sammak ibn Harb has been classified as weak.

Dhahabi said about him in Al-Mizan [2/422 &423]: “Sufyan At Thawri, Shu’ba, and others declared him to be weak. And Imam Ahmad said: “He is) Unstable (mudtarib) in hadith.” And Nasa’i said: “He used to be dictated to. And he would learn (from those dictated notes.).”

So there is a weak transmitter who transmits from another who is unknown. So no attention is to be shown to it!

As for what Tirmidhi relates from Samaak ibn Harb from Qabeesah ibn Hulb from his father who said: “The Messenger of Allah used to lead us, and take his left with his right.” and declared it to be Hasan (of fair grading), then said, “Action is in accordance with this among the companions of the Prophet (saw) “; There is no doubt that he (Tirmidhi) depending upon the hadith of Hulb in attributing this action, since there is a distance (in time) between him, and between the Sahaabah and Taabioon. Also because he didn’t mention any support for that (placing hands on the chest) other than the Hadith of Hulb.

If it (the hadith) had been Sahih (sound), it would have passed as evidence. However, it is one of the narrations of Samaak and Qabeesah. And it has already preceded that Samaak is weak… and Qabeesah is unknown (majhool). And only Samaak narrates on his authority. And Tirmidhi’s choosing of this chain from (all) the different chains going back to the Prophet in this chapter is proof that all chains of transmission fall in the center of ignominy!!!

In Layman’s understanding, it is like this.
A -B-C-D-E-F than G says…H…says
A -B-C-D-E-F
A -B-C-D-E-F
A -B-C-D-E-F

So what happens is we go and double-check what G says.   So after double-checking what G says, we go back and see transmissions from F through other chains and NONE OF THEM say what G is saying.  Not only that but it is known that G is unstable as a transmitter.  Not only this but G is relying upon H and no one seems to know who H is!


1) Again why isn’t such a Hadith in Bukhari or Muslim?

2) Why did Tirmidhi choose this chain from all the different ones going back to the prophet?

3) Why did Imam Ahmad declare him (Sammak ibn Harb) to be unstable in hadith?

4) Why did Imam Nasa’i declare Qabisa ibn Hulb as unknown?


And from the hadith these people depend upon is the hadeeth of Tawus

Reported by Abu Dawood in ‘al-Maraaseel’ who said, ‘Abu Tawba narrated to us from al-Haytham (ibn Humaid) from Thawr bin Yazeed from Sulaiman bin Musa from Tawoos who said, ‘The Messenger of Allaah (saw) placed his right hand upon his left and then hold them tight on his chest while in prayer.’’ (Source: Abu Dawood 759)

Weakness #1:

This report is incompletely transmitted since there are undisclosed companion and/ or even-non-Companion intermediaries between these Tabi’in.

So the Hadith of Tawus is Musral, because Tawus is a Taabi’ee . So he could not have seen the Blessed Messenger (saw).

However, the mursal hadith is considered a proof with Imam Abu Hanifa, and the Hanafi’s have their response to this.

Status of Mursal Hadith.  

 How did the Sunni Imams deal with mursal hadith?

It is a proof with Imam Malik when it confirms the Amal of Madinah. This does not confirm the Amal of Madinah from a Maliki point of view because the view with Imam Malik is that the hands are laid to the sides.

Unless the report describes the nawaafil or sunnah prayers.

It’s a proof with Imam Ahmad in general, and we all know the best position of Imam Ahmad (r) is the hands are below the navel.

And according to Imam Shaafi’ee the mursal hadith are not acceptable unless there is another chain with a complete isnaad that backs it up.

Weakness #2: The first narrator of this tradition is Abu Tawba, whose full name is Ahmed bin Salem. Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani; said of him, “he is famous for tailoring fake traditions.”

(Source: Meizan ul E’tidaal, volume 1, page 100) 

Ibn Hajar writes in Taqreeb al-Tehzeeb that, he was unreliable and an extreme liar“. “He used to make changes in the traditions and steal traditions, he could never find a person more of a liar than him.” (Source: Taqreeb al-Tehzeeb, volume 2, page 69.)

Weakness #3: The second narrator is Haytham, whose full name is Haytham bin Hameed al-Damishqi; Abu Dawood himself has called Haytham a follower of Qadri religion, Abu Mus-har Ghasani has called him a Qadri and unreliable.

(Source: Al Mizan ul E’tidaal volume 4, page 319, series 9289)

Weakness #4:

This hadith is mursal and its isnad contains Sulaiman bin Musa who has been classified as weak by some scholars.

Bukhari claims that he has munkar narrations. (Source: Aathar Us-Sunan Pg. 65, Chapter: Placing the hand on the chest)

Dhahabi said about him in Al-Mizan volume 2, page 225, Nasa’i says that he is a weak narrator of hadith.

Weakness #5:

The third narrator is Thawr bin Yazeed; he too followed Qadri faith.  (Source: Mizan ul E’tidaal, volume 1, page 373)

In Layman’s understanding, it is like this.
A -B-C-D-E-F than G says…
A -B-C-D-E-F
A -B-C-D-E-F
A -B-C-D-E-F

So in this case we have a report from G who has been declared to be an outright liar and someone who is known for making up traditions.  Than G takes from F who apparently has issues with his creed. F takes from E who apparently is classified as weak by some scholars and Bukhari outright claims he has denounced traditions!  E takes from D who again has issues with his creed.  D claims to get information from C who relates information from an undisclosed source.

I would say that if a person has a creed (aqidah) whom the hadith scholars are being critical of for me that is not cause for rejection, that is simply sectarian bias.  However, as we know from history taking information from a Tabiee or even a Companion doesn’t make that person innocent of possible treachery.


1) Why isn’t such a report in Bukhari, or Muslim?

2) Why is such a description of the prayer such as ‘pressing one hands to the chest tightlyonly a Musral Hadith?

3) Is it possible that since there is a break in this chain (in the sanaad) the Blessed Messenger (saw)  may not have even done it at all?

4)  Since Abu Dawud mentions many ahadith about the positions of the hands in prayer.

He transmitted the following:

with one’s hands below the navel
on the chest
and even hands to the sides

Just like Imam Malik related the hadith about Sahl ibn Sa’d,  in his Muwatta as mentioned above.   Malik related this hadith to show his awareness of this hadith being in circulation.

Similarly, Abdu Dawud has transmitted three hadith that he was aware of in regards to the placement of the hands.

Proof that Imam Malik related the same hadith above:

“Yahya related to me from Malik from  Abu Hazim ibn Dinar that Sahl ibn S’ad said, “People used to be ordered to place their right hands on their left forearms in the prayer.” Abu Hazim added: “I know for sure that Sahl traces that back to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.” (Source: page 59 Al Muwatta of Imam Malik ibn Anas translated by Aisha Abduurrahman Bewley)

Yet, Imam Malik who was the city of Madinah was of the view that the hands are to be placed at the sides during the prayer.

This is the opinion narrated by Ibn al-Qasim in  [ al-Mudawanna (1:74) ]

Yet there are some untruths and some huge lies being circulated concerning why Imam Malik prayed with his hands to the side.  One of these lies is being circulated by  Salafi preacher Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips.

“He was severely beaten in the year 764 CE by the order of the Ameer of Madeenah, because he made a legal ruling that forced divorce was invalid. This ruling opposed the ‘Abbaasid rulers’ practice of adding in the oath of allegiance given to them by the masses the clause that whoever broke the oath was automatically divorced. Malik was tied and beaten until his arms became severely damaged to such a degree that he became unable to clasp them on his chest in Salaah and thus he began the practice of praying with his hands at his sides according to some reports.” ( Source: pg 78. The Evolution of Fiqh Islamic Law & The Madh-habs) By Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips International Islamic Publishing House.)

“Some reports” such as? Doesn’t Abu Ammenah Bilal Philips have to give his evidence or are we just suppose to accept what he said?

Can such a claim be verified by and in any of the traditionally relied upon books of Islamic history?  No!  One will be hard-pressed to find any evidence substantiating this argument.

Remember what Allah said:

“Verily, those who conceal the clear proofs, evidence, and the guidance, which We have sent down after We have made it clear for the people in the Book, they are the ones cursed by Allah and cursed by those who curse.” (Qur’an: 2:159)

So where is the proof? Secondly, how could Imam Malik not have enough strength to clasp his hands on his chest but still be able to do the tabkir-, go into ruku, and go into sajdah and to push his hands up from sujuud since Imam Malik’s view is that the knees go up than the hands after sajdah? What about all the other Tabieen who prayed the way Imam Malik did? Did each and every one of them have their arms broken as well? Also don’t you think Imam Malik would have said as plain as day, “Hey everyone as you know I’m only praying this way because my arm was pulled out of my socket, don’t follow me follow the Blessed Messenger!”

Likewise, where did the Shi’a get the idea to pray with the arms to the side?

Where did the so-called Khawarij get the idea to pray with the arms to the side?

Where did the Ibadi get the idea to pray with the arms to the side?

Are they all following someone who got their arms pulled out of their shoulder joint?   We need to use some common sense!


So what was  Abu Dawud’s position on the matter? Did he pray with hands below the navel, at the sides, just above the navel or pressed tight to the chest? Abu Dawud transmits three hadith on the position of the hands in prayer.

Inquiring minds want to know!

For example:

Abu Dawud also narrates the following:

Hadith no: 757

Narrated / Authority Of Abu Huraira
(The established way of folding hands is) to hold the hands by the hands in prayer below the navel.

Hadith no: 755

Narrated / Authority Of Ali ibn Abu Talib
Abu Juhayfah said: Ali said that it is a sunnah to place one hand on the other in prayer below the navel.

Source: (Chapter 3 Prayer Kitab Al-Salat)

Reported by Abu Dawood in ‘al-Maraaseel’ who said, ‘Abu Tawba narrated to us from al-Haytham (ibn Humaid) from Thawr bin Yazeed from Sulaiman bin Musa from Tawoos who said, ‘The Messenger of Allaah (saw) placed his right hand upon his left and then hold them tight on his chest while in prayer.’’ Source: (Abu Dawood 759)

So Imam Abu Dawud narrated ahadith about placing the hands below the navel. Does this mean he found this to be the strongest evidence or acted upon it? Why even narrate such a hadith at all?

Similarly, Imam Malik narrated the hadith that people were ordered to place ‘the right over the left’ (unspecified place). Does this mean he found this to be the strongest evidence or acted upon it? Why even narrate such a hadith at all?

*Note*   It should be understood that placing the hands below the navel is the view of the Sunni Hanafi school of jurisprudence. It is also one of many views that are ascribed to Imam Ahmed and the Hanbali school of jurisprudence.  

The Hanafi school brings us an anomaly.  This anomaly consists of instructing men to place the hands below the navel but instructing women to place their hands. The placing of the hands-on the chest is considered ‘makrooh’ extremely disliked in the Hanafi school.  In the school it is next to haraam.  One then wonders why one standard for the men and another for the women?

Certainly, this issue has perturbed many in the Hanafi school.

So far, we quoted the hadith from Abu Dawud about pressing the hands on the chest and two hadith about placing the hands under the navel.  Anyone who studies these hadith knows they are fraught with issues and intra-madhab rivalry and intra-Sunni conflict on where the hands are to be placed and how they are to be placed. 

So then what about the hadith about praying with arms on the side (which is not disputed or controversial) and actually IS IN Bukhari and is simply brushed aside?

It is related from Abu Hurayra,
“The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, entered the mosque and a man entered and prayed. He greeted the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who returned the greeting and said, ‘Go and back and pray. You have not prayed.’ He went back and prayed as he had prayed before. Then he came and greeted the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who said three times, ‘Go back and pray for you have not prayed.’ He said, ‘By the One who sent you with the truth, I cannot do any better than that, so teach me.’ He said, ‘When you stand for the prayer, say the takbir and then recite something you know well from the Qur’an and then do ruku’ until you are at rest in your ruku’ . Then stand back up until you are completely upright. Then go into sajda until you are at rest in your sajda. Then sit back until you are at rest in the sitting position. Do that throughout all of your prayers.’  Sources: (Related by al-Bukhari hadith(s) 715,751, 5782, 6174. Muslim hadith 602.)

So where is all the Sunni critique of this hadith?  Where is the critique of its chains of transmissions, its matn, its narrators?


It has been related by Abu Dawud on the authority of `Amr ibn `Ataa al-Qurashi al-`Aamiri who said:

He said: “I heard Abu Humayd as-Sa`adi, who was present among ten of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, among whom was Abu Qatada, say the following. ‘ I am the most learned of you regarding the prayer of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.’ They said to him: ‘How is this? By Allah! You did not follow him more than us nor did you proceed us in companionship to him.’ He replied: ‘Indeed, this is true.’ They then said: ‘Then show us.’ He said: ‘The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace when he stood for the prayer he would raise his hands equal with his shoulders.

يَقِرَّ كُلُّ عَظْمٍ فِي مَوْضِعِهِ مُعْتَدِلًا

He would then make the takbir letting all of his limbs settle in their proper places…

قَالُوا صَدَقْتَ هَكَذَا كَانَ ‏ ‏يُصَلِّي ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ
They all said: “You have told the truth. Likewise did he, may Allah ta`ala bless him and grant him peace perform his prayer.”

This hadith can be found in the Sunan of Abu Dawud, Ibn Maajah, and others and is sound!

Now my dear brothers and sisters and respected readers after reading all of this we have to do some reflection.

How is that the Ibadi, Kwarij, Shi’a, and even people like Said ibn Al Musayyib who were all opposed to each other historically and would jump at the opportunity to site the other for innovation and infraction can all agree that the method of the prayer of the Blessed Messenger (saw) is to let the hands be at the side?

How is that the ‘Ahl Sunnah Wal Jammah‘  who seem to have more continuity and unity than any of the groups mentioned above, and yet have such conflicting views on where the hands are to be placed in the prayer!

We have in the Hanafi school men placing the hands below the navel and women placing them on the chest.  We have disputes among the Salafi who do not know if they place the hands on the chest after the ruku or not.

In fact, the Salafi have disputes on actually where to place the hands on the chest. The Arabic word yad could refer to any part of the human arm up to and including the shoulder joint.

This is why you see them placing the hands:

Pressed on the chest……

Clasped over the left hand.

On the forearm

On the shoulder

Just below the chin…

After examination and close consideration you will find that (the majority practice)  have as their evidence basically only two ahadith and one mursal hadith.

We can see that our brothers are relying upon lone narrator reports that chalked full of problems.  However, a very clear report about the Blessed Messenger (saw) praying without placing one hand over the other is reported in Abu Dawud, Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Majah, and the only ones seem to be following it are a few Sunni Muslims of the Maliki school.

“If you stand up for prayer say ‘Allāhū Akbar’ then read that which is easy for you from the Qurʾān. Then bow (make rukūʿ) until you are at ease and tranquil in your rukūʿ. Then stand up fully until you are standing up straight. Then prostrate until you are at ease and tranquil in your sujūd. Then sit until you are tranquil in you sitting – and do this in your entire prayer. Source (Bukhārī (757), Muslim (397) from Abū Hurayrah)

Now, what is going on here?

May Allah (swt) open the hearts and the eyes of this Ummah!

With Allah (swt) is success!


Filed under Uncategorized

The Ibadhi’s follow the blessed Sunnah of opening the hands in the prayer.

“The Messenger of Allah is certainly a good example for those of you who have hope in Allah and in the Day of Judgment and who remember Allah very often.” (Qur’an 33:21)

And perform the prayer, and pay the alms, and bow with those that bow.”  (Qur’an 2:43)

Most of the worlds Muslims have it right when it comes to making du’a (supplication).

We open our hands and we do not tie or fold our hands when making du’a (supplication).

The picture on your left is the Sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw) to make du’a or supplication with the hands open. We do not tie the hands or fold our hands in the prayer. That is the method of other traditions.

We do not fold or tie the hands in the prayer.

Like what you see in the picture below this is not the Sunnah.

This is the correct way. This is the Sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw). No tying or folding of the hands. You should be tranquil in your prayer.


As you can see in the begging in the fitra period and early period the Sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw) was to not tie the hands or fold the hands in the prayer…AT ALL!

Listen to this interesting clip in an exchange I had with a brother from our school on this subject.


Now, they may say it is preferred to tie or fold the hands. However, none of them say it’s prohibited or bid’ah or anything even close to that to keep the hands open in the prayer.

School of Ahmed Ibn Hanbal

Imam Ala’ al-Din al-Mardawi, the Munaqqih & Musahhih of the Madhhab who authored an explanation on the Muqni’ in 12-volume work he named “al-Insaf”. It is reported that Imam Ahmad would open his hands and leave them to his sides always.

In the Ṭabaqāt al-Ḥanābilah

Abdullah Asked his father Ahmad bin Hanbal about the hadeeth of Abi Ma’sher “it’s not allowed to do takfeer in salat” So Ahmad said, “It means putting his right on his chest.”

Ibn ul-Qayyim, in his Badaaī’ al-Fawaaid cites al-Muzani, the student of Imam Ahmad, as follows:

ونقل المزني عنه…ويكره أن يجعلهما على الصدر، وذلك لما روي عن النبي -صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم- أنه نهى عن التكفير، وهو وضع اليد على الصدر

بدائع الفوائد

Imam Ahmad said:

“It is reprehensible for him to place both of them (hands) upon the chest. And that is because of what is related from the Prophet ﷺ that he prohibited al-Takfeer – and that is placing the hand upon the chest.”

School of Imam Shafi’i

In the book of “Al Um” by Shafi’i you’ll not find mention of tying or folding the hands in the prayer, he didn’t ever mention it.

Also the book of Nawawi “Al Minhaj” didn’t mention Qabd (tying or folding the hands in the prayer)

And all who have explained it from Shafi’ees didn’t mention it as obligatory in the prayer.

We also know that Imam Shafi’i was a student of Imam Malik and we will come to that insh’Allah.

School of Imam Abu Hanifa.

Imam Abu Hanifa we have nothing written from him on this subject. We just do not.

School of Imam Malik

Narrated by Ibn al-Qasim in al-Mudawanna (1:74) and in al-Tamheed (20:75) al-Layth as-Sa’d is reported to have said:

Not tying or folding the hands in prayer is preferred, unless he is standing for an extended period and becomes tired, then there is no problem (la ba’as) in putting the right hand over the left.


And the only narration that they really have is: 

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu Hazim ibn Dinar that Sahl ibn Sad said, “People used to be ordered to place their right hands on their left forearms in the prayer.” 

Abu Hazim added, “I know for sure that Sahl traces that back to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.” 

This exact hadith came by way of Imam Malik and Imam Malik himself doesn’t do it!

And when a narrator narrates something about the Blessed Messenger (saw) and doesn’t follow it he’s either: 

  1. A fasiq 
  2. He knows that isn’t Authentic about the Blessed Messenger (saw) 
  3. He may Have forgotten 

And Since Malik is a respectable Scholar then the first option is removed. The last option is also removed because Imam Malik mentioned the hadith in his Muwatta. Which means only option 2 is left, because he saw another thing than what was reported.

Just two other points about the hadith that s used.  

Also, he didn’t say “We were Ordered” but said “People were ordered” 

And only Abu Hazm the Tabi’e have claimed that it’s from the Prophet (saw).  


وحدثني عبد الرحمن بن إبراهيم عن عبدالله بن يحيى المعافري عن حيوة عن بكر بن عمرو أنه لم ير أبا أمامة -يعني ابن سهل- واضعا إحدى يديه على الأخرى قط ولا أحدا من أهل المدينة حتى قدم الشام فرأى الأوزاعي وناسا يضعونه

Look what Imam Abu Zur’ah the Shaykh of Imam Al Bukhari had to say:

Abd al-Rahman ibn Ibrahim told me on the authority of Abdullah ibn Yahya al-Ma`fari on the authority of Haywa on the authority of Bakr ibn Amr that he had never seen Abu Umamah - meaning Ibn Sahl - ever put one of his hands on the other, and no one from the people of Medina did that either,  until he came to Syria, so he saw al-Awza`i and people putting him on.

Better archive/save the following before it suddenly disappears from the internet.

Abu Umama bin Sahl is one of the Sahaba His full name is Asad bin Sahal bin Hunaif Al Ansari and The Blessed Messenger (saw) used to call him Abu Umama.

So the pedigree, the start of this practice of tying and folding the hands in prayer started in Sham where the Ummayads country was.

All Scholars from the great Scholars of Tabi’een that opposed Umayyads, it’s authentic about them that they didn’t do tying or folding the hands in Salat!

May Allah (swt) open your eyes WIDE dear Muslim ummah! May Allah (swt) put in your hearts a love for the Sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw).

If you would like to read more:



Filed under Uncategorized