Tag Archives: Ibadi

Why do Ibadis not have Qunut in prayer?

“Indeed, in the Messenger of Allah you have an excellent example for whoever has hope in Allah and the Last Day, and remembers Allah often.” (Qur’an 33:21)

﷽ 

Why do Ibadis not have Qunut in the prayer?

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: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:6008)

We acknowledge that the Blessed Prophet (saw) used to do Qunut for the companions in time of crisis.  However, this was something abrogated. That is our position.

Imam Malik and Imam Al Shafi’i considered Qunut in Fajr a confirmed Sunnah. Imam Ahmad considers it recommended during times of crisis. They do it during the witr prayers. Although they are not doing it currently for Palestine. Even if they think Hamas is a calamity, then still let them pray for their brothers! The Hanafi school believes that the Qunut is not done in any of the five daily prayers. However, they believe it is for the witr prayer. Zahiris do not do Qunut unless in times of crisis.

It was narrated from Abu Malik Al-Ashja’i that his father said:

“I prayed behind the Messenger of Allah (saw) and he did not say the Qunut, and I prayed behind Abu Bakr and he did not say the Qunut, and I prayed behind Umar and he did not say the Qunut, and I prayed behind Uthman and he did not say the Qunut, and I prayed behind Ali and he did not say the Qunut.” Then he said: “O my son, this is an innovation.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/nasai:1080)

It was narrated from Anas:

“The Messenger of Allah (saw) said the Qunut for a month.”- (One of the narrators) Shu’bah said: “He cursed some men.” Hisham said: “He supplicated against some of the tribes of Arabs.”-“Then he stopped doing that after bowing.” This is what Hisham said. Shu’bah said, narrating from Qatadah, from Anas that the Prophet (saw) said the Qunut for a month, cursing Ri’l, Dhawkan and Lihyan.

Source: (https://sunnah.com/nasai:1077)

Please know, dear reader, that all the schools of Islamic jurisprudence have their proofs and justifications for why they do as they do. We follow what we believe is the correct sunnah of the Blessed Prophet (saw).

We also believe that the Blessed Prophet (saw) abolished raising the hands altogether. 

Please see the link below.

Click to access 10-reasons-that-prohibits-raising-the-hand-and-folding-them-in-prayer.pdf

May Allah Guide the Ummah

May Allah Forgive the Ummah

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Reviving the way the Blessed Messenger Prayed. -Arabic

“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: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:6008)

Listen carefully to what our brother is saying here.

You may also be interested in the following:

May Allah (swt) open the hearts and may Allah (swt) open the eyes.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Manipulation of Hadith To Advocate Prayer Positions.

“Take what the Messenger gives you, and do without what he forbids you from.” (Qur’an 59:7)

﷽ 

This entry will show the manipulation and changing of the ‘matn’ text in the chains of transmission to advocate various positions for the prayer.

Hopefully, in writing this in the process we will be able to defend the prayer of the Blessed Messenger (saw) as was the practice of the people of Madinah in his time, namely the practice of laying hands at the side. This practice is continued among those who follow the Jafari and Zaydi School of jurisprudence as well as the oldest living school of jurisprudence which the people of Oman are upon, the Ibadi school.

This blog entry will also show that Imam Malik only prayed that way (sadl) because it is what he saw as the practice of the people of Madinah, and it’s not because he was beaten, which is a lie that has been circulated by a certain group whom have invented their own methodology of doing the prayer.

MISUNDERSTANDING NO. 1 Imam Malik only prayed like that (arms to the side) because he was beaten so badly that he couldn’t pray with one hand over the other.

“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 supposed to accept what he said?

Can such a claim be verified by and in any of the traditionally relied upon books of Islamic history? 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 one of them have their arms broken as well?

MISUNDERSTANDING NO. 2 The Malikis get their prayer from the Shi’a in Iran!

Now let us ask you, dear reader, something why would Sunni Muslims go and ask the Shi’a about how to pray? That’s just absurd! The second point is this: Why don’t the Malikis follow the Shi’a in everything in prayer, like raising the hands in ruku and when going into sujud? Or making sujud on a stone? Or placing the knees before the hands? Or saying the whole prayer out loud? Or include the basmallah before Al Fatiha like the Shi’a do. Also, a very good question would be where did the Shi’a get their prayer from? Do the Shi’a follow some guy who got his arms broken too?!?

The Shi’a don’t follow Imam Malik because they don’t accept him as one of their Imams in jurisprudence. This whole point, again, is another flat lie. If such a claim were true, then you should give the evidence. You have to have tangible evidence of it.

“And of mankind is he who purchases idle talk (lahwal hadeeth) to mislead from the path of Allah without knowledge (ilm), and takes it by way of mockery. For such there will be a humiliating torment.” (Qur’an 31:6)

We see this ayat as applying directly to those people who will take the Hadith (reports) over the Sunnah (practice). Those who have no ilm (no fiqh). In this instance, those who will take the Hadith over the mass transmitted Sunnah of the blessed Messenger (saw). We have to understand and this cannot be stressed enough. The Sunnah is a ‘living tradition’ that is organically passed down from one generation to the next. The hadith WERE fragments and snippets of the sunnah, which at times became a mechanism to convince people of controversial issues.

“Pray as you see me pray”.

Qur’an and Sunnah not Qur’an and Hadith.

We would like to remind our readers that the Prophet (saw) is reported to have said,” I leave you two things. “The Qur’an and my Sunnah.” He (saw) did not say “I leave you the Qur’an and Hadith.” And with all due respect, We ask anyone reading this to find a single statement where The Blessed Messenger (saw) said I leave you “Qur’an and Hadith”.

People who say that the prophet (saw) said “Qur’an and Hadith” are trying to use Hanbali and Shaf’i usuli methods and impose these methodological principles on the rest of the Muslim ummah.

The so-called ‘Salafiyyah’ today cherry-pick their usuli methods.

The Blessed Messenger (saw) never handed to his followers a Mushaf of the Qur’an or a Sahih Bukhari volumes 1–4 etc. What he gave was a living, breathing revelation from Allah preserved foremost as an oral tradition, and then his living, breathing organic practice, deeds, and ways of living that collectively we call the Sunnah; again, which was orally transmitted.

The living breathing practice is witnessed and transmitted as a living breathing, organic practice. The hadith is transmitted on the basis of one from one and can be corrupted, added to, mistakenly transmitted, leave out important details, have hidden defects, and so on.

The problem today is that people who graduate from Madinah University are using Shaf’i and Hanbali Usuli principles to judge the rest of the Muslim ummah on the Qur’an and Sunnah, and it doesn’t work like that.

The point being Imam Malik saw the living sunnah around him every day. For the Malikis, the ‘Amal’ or practice of the people of Madinah is a mass-established sunnah. They did not need to split hairs trying to find documented sunnah evidence in the form of hadith for everything they do.

In fact, a principle of the Maliki madhab is that even if there is a Sahih hadith, if it clashes with the Sunnah of Madinah, Imam Malik drops it.

Why?

Because, again, you need to understand that Muhammed (saw) said, “I leave you the Qur’an and Sunnah.” If we are talking in terms of what has more weight, Rabia, one of Imam Malik’s teachers said to him, “I would rather take 1000 from 1000 because that 1 from 1 can strip the sunnah right out from your hands!”

The vast majority of Hadith are, which means narrations one from one. Imam Malik is basically saying, “Look people, I live in the city where the 10,000 sahabah are buried and where the Blessed Himself (saw) is buried. If there ever was a sunnah established or practiced, we know about it because we live it every day.

The following examples show corruption in the Hadith traditions that try and promote grasping of the hands in prayer.

Now we will give what we believe to be the original accounts of Sadl, and the transformation of it into Qabd, and for whatever reason, someone found it important to try and undermine the way we understand the Blessed Prophet’s prayer, which Al hamdulillah is being followed by the people of Oman today.

Remember Islam began as a stranger, and it will return to the world as a stranger. Reflect upon that!

An original orally transmitted report.

In the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaibah, the following can be found:

Yahyaa Ibn Sa’eed declared to us: On the authority of ‘Abdullah ibn Al- ‘Eezaar. He said: “I used to accompany Sa’eed ibn Jubair: So, he saw a man praying while placing one of his hands on the other. This one on this one, and this one on this one. So, he went, separated them, and then returned (to me).” The Musannaf is one of the earliest hadith canons in Islamic history.

Ibn ‘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.

The corrupted oral transmission of the story and the attempt to change it.

The Hadith of Ibn Masud

Actually reported in Abu Dawud and Sunan of Nasai

“The Prophet saw me placing my left hand on my right hand in Salat. So he took my right hand, and then placed it over my left hand.”

Abu Dawud’s chain is: Muhammed ibn Bakkar from Hushaym ibn Bashir from

Al-Hajjaj ibn Abu Zaynab from Abu Abi-Uthman from Ibn Mas’ud.

Nasa’is chain is: Hushaym ibn Bashir from Al Hajjaj ibn Abu Zaynab from Abu Abi

‘Uthman from Ibn Mas’ud.

In the chain is Hushaym ibn Bashir

Dhahabi states in Al Mizan [5/431], and Ibn Hajar states in

Taqrib al-Tahdhib [2/269] that he: “Often used trickery in his reports to convince others to accept unacceptable chains of narration in addition to being guilty of conveying subtly distinguishable incomplete chains of narration.” (kathir at-tadlis wa al-irsal al-khafi).

The Hadith of Jabir ibn ‘Abd Allah Reported by Ahmad and Daraqutni

“The Messenger of Allah passed by a man who was praying while placing

his left hand on the right hand. So he snatched it and placed the right on the left.”

But this is reported by way of Al Hajjaj ibn Abu Zaynab -from Abu Sufyan-from Jabir ibn ‘Abd Allah.

Al Hajjaj ibn Abu Zaynab has been declared to be weak by ‘Ali ibn Al-Madini, Nasa’i, Ahmad, and Daraqutni as stated by Dhahabi in Al Mizan [1/462].

Our comments after using reasoning logic and deduction:

Now in the original report, we see that someone was praying with hands folded (qabd) to which offense was taken and so their hands were separated during the prayer. Now what happens is that, in order to support the practice of folding one hand over the other (qabd), the highest authority in the land, the Blessed Prophet (saw) himself is invoked in the story. To make the argument more insiduous,  the issue is not even the releasing of the hands but ‘how the hands were folded‘. So the person who hears the narration would assume that folding hands leaving at the sides is not an issue at all, but would learn that the person in the narration simply folded it the wrong way! Then Ibn Hajar gives sweeping condemnation of Hushaym ibn Bashir in his commentary. It’s interesting to see that Hushaym Ibn Bashir, in all three reports, gets his information from Al Hajjaj ibn Abu Zaynab, who does not fare any better when he is critically examined.

What was added: The prophet was seen doing it to make it more authoritative.

What was changed: The issue was with how to fold the hands properly (sadl: laying of the hands at the side) was taken out completely!

An original orally transmitted report.

Muwatta of Imam Malik 9.15 Placing One Hand on the Other in the Prayer

Yahya related to me from Malik that ‘Abd al-karim ibn Abi-LMukhariq Al Basri said, “Among the things, the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said and did are: ‘As long as you do not feel ashamed, do whatever you wish’, the placing of one hand on the other in prayer (one places the right hand on the left), being quick to break the fast, and delaying the meal before dawn.”

The corrupted oral transmission of the story and the attempt to change it.

The Hadith of ‘Aisha bint Abu Bakr Reported by Daraqutni and Bayhaqi

Aisha said: “Three things are from prophecy: making haste for breakfast, delaying the predawn meal, and placing the right over the left during Salat.”

Point 1) Ibn Hazm related it in Al-Muhalla [4/113] as a statement of ‘Aisha but without a chain.

Point 2) There is a break in the chain. So it can even be ascribed to ‘Aisha.

Hafiz ibn Hajar said in Talkhis al-Habir [1/223]: “Daraqutni and Bayaqi related it as a statement of ‘Aisha.” And it has a break in its chain.

Prima Qur’an Comments:

Now we do not even apparently have the complete chain of this. Now we do not expect devilry at work at every corner. But if you compare the statement in the Muwatta to that of Imam Malik, then look at the following: It is word for word with two very huge changes.

The change is now some unknown comes along and either intentionally or maliciously invokes Aisha (ra) to make it authoritative. After all, she’s the prophet’s wife and spent so much time with him, so she would be an authority, right?

Or the reporter, relying upon memory, makes a mistake. We believe the former that the change is intentional due to what was actually changed.

So this is a very obvious question.

What is from the prophecy (or from the prophet)?

Did He (saw) say to place the right hand over the left? Or did He (saw) say that doing such indicates that a person really has no shame?

Two original orally transmitted reports

In the following, we will give you two original reports of the hadith in the Muwatta of Imam Malik and then the attempt to combine the two hadiths into one due to oral corruption in the transmission.

Muwatta of Imam Malik 9.15 Placing One Hand on the Other in the Prayer

Yahya related to me from Malik that ‘Abd al-karim ibn Abi-LMukhariq Al Basri said, “Among the things, the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said and did are: ‘As long as you do not feel ashamed, do whatever you wish’, the placing of one hand on the other in prayer (one places the right hand on the left), being quick to break the fast, and delaying the meal before dawn.”

Muwatta of Imam Malik 9.15 Placing One Hand on the Other in the Prayer

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu Hazim ibn Dinar that Sahl ibn Sa’d 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.”

The corrupted oral transmission of the story and the attempt to change it.

Hadith of Abd Allah ibn ‘Abbas, reported by Daraqutni.

“Verily we — the assembly of Prophets—have been ordered to hold our right hands over our left hands.

Weakness #1 One of the transmitters, Talha ibn ‘Amr, has been classified as being an unreliable narrator. The author of Awjaz al-Masalik says, “And in its chain is Talha ibn ‘Amr, who has been relinquished (matruk).

Likewise, it is mentioned in Al-‘Ayni (Sharh of) Al-Bukhari.

Dhahabi said in Al-Mizan (3/54): “Ahmad and Nasai’i said (about Talha)” “(He is) relinquished in hadith. And Bukhari and Ibn Al-Madini said: “He is insignificant” (Laysa bi shayin).”

Prima Qur’an comments:

It can be seen that the original hadith statement in the Muwatta of Imam Malik slowly evolved into a statement that supposedly the Prophets were ‘ordered’ to place one hand over the other.

Finally, the two hadiths were joined together to get the following ‘Sahih’ narration.

(Ibn Hibban relates it in his sahih, (13-14/3 #1767)

“The prophets were ordered to delay the suhoor and expedite the breaking of the fast and hold with our right hands our left hands in our prayer.”

Prima Qur’an comments:

So here you have the finished product. What were two distinct hadiths in the Muwatta of Imam Malik that were transformed into one hadith that combined elements of both?

In this new hadith, we find that it wasn’t the people who were ordered, it was the Prophets who were ordered and, of course, the only one to give orders to the prophets is Allah (swt) himself!

So if we can’t ascribe it to Aisha (ra), let’s ascribe it to the Prophet (saw), and if that doesn’t work, let’s ascribe it as an order to all the Prophets — which only comes from Allah!

So what this Hadith effectively does is eliminate any doubt about where such an order would come from. Also, as in the “Aisha Hadith” quoted above, the original hadith in the Muwatta of Imam Malik was changed so that instead of folding the hands in the fard prayer being an act of shame, it becomes meritorious, and not only that, but something directed by the divine himself!

And this is also supported by the fact that ibn Turkamaanee, the Shaykh of al-Haafidh az-Zayla’i mentioned in his ‘al-Jawhar’ two weak hadith to support his madhab where he said, ‘Ibn Hazm said, “it is reported to us from Abu Hurayra who said, ‘place the hand upon the hand below the navel.’ And from Anas who said, ‘three are from the manners of the Prophethood: hastening the iftaar, delaying the suhoor, and placing the right hand upon the left below the navel in the prayer.’”’

The hadith that ibn Hazm mentions in ‘al-Muhalla’ in ta’leeq form from Anas with the wording, ‘three are from the manners of the Prophet-hood: hastening the iftaar, delaying the suhoor, and placing the right hand upon the left below the navel in the prayer.’

Ash-Shaikh Haashim as-Sindee said in his letter, ‘Diraahim as-Surra’, ‘and from them is what az-Zaahidee mentioned in his ‘Sharh al-Qudooree’, and ibn Ameer al-Haaj and ibn Najeem mentioned in ‘al-Bahr ar-Raa’iq’, that it is reported from the Prophet (saw), “three are from the habit of the Messengers: hastening the iftaar, delaying the suhoor, and placing the right hand upon the left below the navel in prayer.”

He said: “I have not come across the sanad to this hadeeth except that az-Zaahidee added that it is reported by Ali bin Abu Taalib {3} from the Prophet (saw). But ibn Ameer al-Haaj and ibn Najeem said, “that the reporters of hadeeth do not know the wording, ‘below the navel’ from a marfoo or mawqoof narration.”’

Anas reports that there are three aspects from the character of Nubuwwa [Prophethood]: to open fast early, to delay the suhur [pre-dawn meal], and to position the right hand over the left one beneath the navel while in salat. [al-Jawharal-naqiyy 2:31]

Since the graduates of Madinah University cherry-pick Shafi’i and Hanbali usuli principles to establish daleel (namely that a person has to have documented sunnah in the form of hadith), then let us entertain them.

The hadith of Sahl ibn Sa’ad — PEOPLE WERE ORDERED TO PLACE THE RIGHT OVER THE LEFT IN PRAYER

“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 the right hand over his left forearm during Salat.” Abu Hazim said: “I know only that he attributes that (yanmi dhalika) to the Prophet.” Isma’il said: “(I know only that) That is attributed (yunma dhalika). And he didn’t say: “He attributes” (yanmi).

Source: (Bukhari, 224/2)

The weakness of this hadith

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

  • This is not an explicit statement, report, or action of the Prophet.
  • Sahl does not say that the prophet gave the order, so it’s possible someone else gave the order.
  • The saying, “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.
  • The statement of Ismail that, “(I know only 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 that order to the Prophet.
  • The above-mentioned Hadith further corroborates with what is in the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaiba.

In fact do you want to see how the Salafis and Wahabbis deceive the masses?

Go look at how the render the English over here: https://sunnah.com/bukhari:740

Narrated Sahl bin Sa`d:

The people were ordered to place the right hand on the left forearm in the prayer. Abu Hazim said, “I knew that the order was from the Prophet (saw) .”

What a juciy dishonest lie! In plain sight!

The whole of the Arabic text actually says:

Abdullah ibn Maslamah narrated to us, from Malik, from Abu Hazim, from Sahl ibn Sa’d, who said: “People were commanded that a man should place his right hand on his left forearm during prayer.” Abu Hazim said: “I know of it only as being attributed to the Prophet (peace be upon him).” Isma’il (a narrator in the chain) said: “It is attributed” — and he did not say “he attributes it.”

“Ibn ‘Ulayyah declared to us: On the authority of Ibn ‘Aun about Ibn Seereen that he was asked about the man who holds his right hand with his left. He said: “That was merely done because of the Romans’ (influence).”

Also, people who claim that Imam Malik only prayed sadl because his arms were broken need to look at the above hadith if the people were indeed ‘ordered‘ to pray one hand over the other means that they didn’t always do that!

The proof is out there for anyone to see we know who fabricated the hadith chains. We know claims are inconsistent and who wish to attack the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) and bring in place of it lahwal hadeeth (Qur’an 31:6)

For further reading you maybe interested in:

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

The Ibadi 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)

﷽ 

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 prayer. That is the method of other traditions.

Opening of the hands is the way of the supplicant getting ready to receive some mercy or guidance from above. Leaving the hands at the side leaves the heart open and uncovered. It signifies stillness, tranquility and humbleness before a Sovereign and Mighty God.

Most of the world’s 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).

We do not fold or tie hands in prayer.




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

FROM SUNNAH TO INNOVATION: AN EVOLUTION OF CHANGE IN THE SUNNI SCHOOLS.

How does one come to such radically different approaches to one of the most witnessed and beloved acts of the Blessed Messenger (saw)? Insh’Allah, we have another article at the end of this that you may wish to read and ponder over.

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 prayer…AT ALL!

Listen to this interesting clip from brother Hamed Rashid Malik

NONE OF THE FOUR SURVIVING SUNNI SCHOOLS OF JURISPRUDENCE SAY ITS OBLIGATRY TO PRAY WITH THE HANDS FOLDED.

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 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 a 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 hadith 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 (saw) 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) with putting the right hand over the left.

LOOKING AT THE NARRATIONS USED BY THOSE WHO ADVANCE TYING/FOLDING THE HANDS

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 it 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 has claimed that it’s from the Prophet (saw).

THE PEOPLE WERE ORDERED? INNOVATION BY BANI UMMAYAD

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 Umayyads country was.

All the scholars of the great Scholars of Tabi’een that opposed the Umayyads, it’s authentic about them that they didn’t tie or fold 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 are interested or keen to pray the way the Blessed Prophet (saw) prayed, we would encourage you to read the following. May Allah (swt) bless those responsible for its compilation.

HOW TO DO THE PRAYER ACCORDING TO THE BLESSED SUNNAH?

If you would like to read more:

https://primaquran.com/2023/04/01/the-value-of-the-prayer-in-islam/

https://primaquran.com/2022/06/08/clarity-from-obfuscation-where-to-place-the-hands-in-the-prayer/

https://primaquran.com/2020/09/05/textual-manipulation-of-hadith-to-advocate-prayer-positions/

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

The Value of the Prayer in Islam

“Glory to Him who journeyed His servant by night, from the Sacred Mosque to the Farthest Mosque, whose precincts We have blessed, in order to show him of Our wonders. He is the Listener, the Beholder.” (Qur’an 17:1)

“Perform the prayer at the decline of the sun, until the darkness of the night; and the Qur’an at dawn. The Qur’an at dawn is witnessed. And keep vigil with it during parts of the night, as an extra prayer. Perhaps your Lord will raise you to a laudable position. And say, “My Lord, lead me in through an entry of truth, and lead me out through an exit of truth, and grant me from You a supporting power.”. And say, “The truth has come, and falsehood has withered away; for falsehood is bound to wither away.”. We send down in the Qur’an healing and mercy for the believers, but it increases the wrongdoers only in loss.” (Qur’an 17:79-82)

Muslim-woman-praying-1

﷽ 

Many believe that Muslims only pray five times a day. However, Muslims have many invocations of divine remembrance throughout the day. There are invocations that are said by Muslims when we eat, embark on a journey, or even sleep.

Embark on a voyage of great spiritual discovery.

go-makkah-hajj-oumra-owf6ji-al-masjid-al-nabawi-madinajpg

The ‘sublime oral tradition’, or hadith, reports that the Blessed Prophet Muhammed, (saw), received the five times daily prayer of Islam during his mystical ascension through the heavens into the glorious (Garden of Spiritual Essence). During this journey, the Noble Prophet was able to contemplate angels performing each of the various movements of prayer.

Prayer is a gift from the Creator, A spiritual technology,  displayed first through angelic beings, rather than springing from human intellect, will or initiative. It is reported that The Prophet of Islam proclaimed, “Prayer is the ascension of the faithful.”

Prayer is more of a way of intimate discussion with the Creator than an offering to the Creator. The Creator does not ask for or need any offering. Prayer exists beyond the kingdom of personal will. Rather, it is the key to the kingdom of Divine Will.

The Blessed Prophet Muhammed, (saw), could have brought back from his ascension any gift from the infinite Divine Treasury. Since he returned with the technology of prayer, we can infer that it is most precious.

Fotolia_19819098_XL.jpg

For Muslims, prayer is ordained by the Creator as the most effective way to unfold the fullness of our humanity. The Creator does not need our prayers but offers the technology of prayer to us as His supreme gift.

We as Muslims pray not only from a sense of obligation but as an act of tender responsiveness, just as a lover desires to fulfill every wish of the Most Beloved, the Most Covetous.

istockphoto-856212278-612x612

The unified lines of prayer, with the intention of the hearts in perfect alignment as well, produces such an experience of spiritual power and communion, it is as though all humanity was standing together in prayer.

salaad

To humble oneself and prostrate during prayer is to plunge directly into the ocean of Divine Mercy. How sublime for the one who discovers it and how unfortunate to miss even a single occasion of it.

May Allah (swt) Guide the Ummah.

May Allah (swt) forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

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)

﷽ 

What you are about to see cannot be unseen.

You are about to learn information concerning the prayer of the Blessed Prophet (saw). Whoever adopts it adopts and is blessed and whoever leaves it is accountable.

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: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:6008)

The hadith above has 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.

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 from this is not doing the prayer of the Blessed Messenger (saw) or worse, ye,t they are doing innovation!

Interestingly enough, the statement “placing the hands on the chest” is not contained in either of the two most authentic collections of the Sunni hadith corpus, namely, al-Bukhari or Muslim!

What we have are two ways of obtaining evidence about the way the Blessed Messenger (saw) performed his prayer.

Since we do not have a video recording of how the Blessed Prophet (saw) prayed how is the sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw) preserved and transmitted?

1. Diagram A: Sunnah preserved via mass living connected chains via the mass transmitted living sunnah as actual practice. This means that masses of people pray who observe their seniors, scholars and learned people pray who observe their seniors and scholars, and learned people pray who observe their seniors, scholars and learned people pray who observed the Prophet (saw) prayed.

2. Diagram B: Sunnah preserved in the form of an oral report as theoretical practice. Theoretical practice because these are scholar’s interpretations of what the lone narrator reports entail. Often they contain many conflicting suggestions about how the Prophet (saw) prayed. Often the scholar who employs this method does his/her best to deduce how the Prophet (saw) might have prayed. These become documented in writings.

3. Diagram C: Now, obviously, the hadith (report) or sunnah (practice) — which we have in our hands in the form of writings, started off as khabar al-wahid or lone narrator oral reports. However, without context, (mass living and mass transmitted practice) it is difficult to determine with certainty and clarity the authority they convey. This is why these reports are often called dhaani, which means they imply certainty about a matter but do not necessarily convey it.

Diagram B & Diagram C, for all practical purposes, are the same methodologies.

An example of context in regard to the sunnah is knowing if a prophetic practice was enforced or abrogated.

An example of abrogated sunnah

“Narrated Al-Bara:

The Prophet (saw) prayed facing Bait-ul-Maqdis (i.e. Jerusalem) for sixteen or seventeen months but he wished that his Qibla would be the Ka`ba (at Mecca). (So Allah Revealed (2.144) and he offered `Asr prayers(in his Mosque facing Ka`ba at Mecca) and some people prayed with him. A man from among those who had prayed with him, went out and passed by some people offering prayer in another mosque, and they were in the state of bowing. He said, “I, (swearing by Allah,) testify that I have prayed with the Prophet (saw) facing Mecca.” Hearing that, they turned their faces to the Ka`ba while they were still bowing. Some men had died before the Qibla was changed towards the Ka`ba. They had been killed and we did not know what to say about them (i.e. whether their prayers towards Jerusalem were accepted or not). So Allah revealed:– “And Allah would never make your faith (i.e. prayer) to be lost (i.e. your prayers offered (towards Jerusalem). Truly Allah is Full of Pity, Most Merciful towards mankind.” (2.143)

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4486)

What this means is that it was the sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw) to pray facing towards Jerusalem and then the sunnah was to pray facing towards the Ka’ba and there were companions who died, and this information did not reach them.

An example of the sunnah in theoretical practice as interpreted by scholars.

“Abdullah ibn Maslama related to us, on the authority of Malik from Abi Hazim from Sahl ibn Sa’d He said:

The people were ordered that a person is to place their right hand over their left forearm during prayer” 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).”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:740)

Problems with the above hadith:

#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 prayer” 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 (saw), since Abu Hazim is merely conjecturing about what he remembers.

#4) The statement of Isma’il is that (I only know that) That is attributed to (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 (saw).

TAKING THE SUNNAH BY THE METHOD OF DIAGRAM B or DIAGRAM C

The problem with scholars’ interpretations of lone narrator’s reports will be shown.

Notice that many Muslims pray with their right hand over their left hand 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 by the Prophet) doesn’t help us to know where to place the hands.

You could even do takbir and then put your hands behind your back taking the left forearm with the right hand as in the picture above! Of course, no one among Muslims is doing this. However, this clearly demonstrates why relying upon the methodology relied upon in diagrams B & C above can be problematic.

The group(s) that proclaim the ‘Salafi Manhaj’ are in major dispute in regard to the Prophets prayer based upon the principles of interpretation in diagrams B & C

Sticking with the already previously mentioned Hadith: “The people were ordered that a person is to place their right hand over their left forearm during prayer” and showing the challenges of interpretation rather than going by mass-living mass-transmitted practice.

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 ruku (see fig 3. and fig 4. below)or the returning position after ruku.

Salafi Interpretation number 1.

The Salafi will place the right hand over the left hand before bowing and after bowing, they leave the hands at the side (sadl).

In figure 4, the majority of Muslims, Ibadi, Shi’i, Shafi’i, Maliki, Hanafi leave their hands at the side after bowing.

Salafi Interpretation number 2.

The Salafi will place right hand over the left hand before bowing and after bowing, they again place the right hand over the left!

In figure 4, the majority of Muslims, Ibadi, Shi’i, Shafi’i, Maliki, Hanafi do not grasp their hands after bowing.

You can see that here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYyPSjWAIi8 (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, we saved it. Voilà!

So you can see those Salafis who follow interpretation number 2 in the video below. They place the right hand over the left hand after bowing.

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 they are to be placed) and if they are to be folded (before or after the bowing- ruku)!

You can read more about that here:

So who was the correct way of praying? Who was upon innovation? If people say this is just a matter of ijtihad (interpretation), what they are saying is that one can still be rewarded for guessing how the Prophet (saw) prayed. One of them, either Bin Baz or Albaani, went their entire life without praying one prayer correctly? Yikes!

Possible Salafi Interpretation number 3.

A possible interpretation of the above hadith is to leave the hands at the side before bowing and, after bowing, they place the right hand over the left.

In figure 4, now no one is currently doing this, but it does show the problem of simply relying upon interpretation of the hadith.

In the above hadith you will not find any of the following information:

  1. It doesn’t tell you to place your right hand over your left forearm behind your back.
  2. It doesn’t tell you to place your right hand over your left forearm below your navel.
  3. It doesn’t tell you to place your right hand over your left forearm in the mid-section.
  4. It doesn’t tell you to place your right hand over your left forearm before ruku.
  5. It doesn’t tell you to place your right hand over your left forearm after ruku.
  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.

THE PEOPLE WERE ORDERED THAT A PERSON IS TO PLACE THEIR RIGHT HAND OVER THEIR LEFT FOREARM DURING PRAYER.

Various Muslim polities and empires would often force their viewpoints and positions on the masses. They would also force people to change their acts of worship.

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 http://www.cultureofiran.com/islam_safavid_era.html

Another example of 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 as 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 Madhhabs, 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 Madhhab. 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.”

Source:(https://www.facebook.com/181790208517422/posts/the-salah-of-ibrahim-niass-may-allah-be-pleased-with-himwritten-and-published-by/640450455984726/)

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

If 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.

Shaykh Hamza Yusuf on the politics of prayer.

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 it’s a political thing. Because the two people who were leaving their hands at their side were the people who were most resistant to the Umayyad rule. And that was the Khawarij and the Shi’a. So it’s very interesting that the thing that immediately distinguishes your political allegiance is 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 hadith:

Ibn ‘Abd Al-Barr in his book al-Tamheed narrates that:

‘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.

Source: (al-Tamheed Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr 20:76)

Placing one 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 man doing this, meaning that this novel practice ‘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 Umayyds!

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

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 Umayyads.

Also, the hadith 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)

These pieces of information are important and anyone who takes this religion seriously needs to pause and reflect.

  1. Where did these men get the practice of laying their hands straight in prayer from?
  2. Where these people innovators? If they were, how can we trust information from them?
  3. Is there anyone from among the Salafi, or any other group of Muslims who claims that Sadl (laying hand straight) was a sunnah of the Prophet (saw) that was abrogated?
  4. If yes to question 3, what is the proof?

HOW DID ABU UMAMA BIN SAHL PRAY?

How did Abu Umama Bin Sahl Ibn pray?

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.

Look at the hadith of Imam Abu Zur’ah, the Shaykh of Imam Al Bukhari!

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

Source: (Tarikh Abu Zur’ah pg. 319. Hadith 1785)

“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 [in prayer], and no one from the people of Madinah did that either. When he came to Syria he saw al-Awza`i and other people placing one hand on the other.”

In other words, Bakr ibn Amr observed that this was a practice of the Syrians.

Recall the hadith:

“Abdullah ibn Maslama related to us, on the authority of Malik from Abi Hazim from Sahl ibn Sa’d He said:

The people were ordered that a person is to place their right hand over their left forearm during prayer” 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).”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:740)

Sahl ibn Sa’d — the same one who has informed us that people were ordered by an undisclosed source to initiate a practice in prayer (namely, put the right hand over the left arm in the prayer), is the same one who informed us that some vile undisclosed individual ordered him (Sahl ibn Sa’d) to curse Ali.

Sahl b. Sa`d reported that a person from the offspring of Marwan was appointed as the governor of Medina. He called Sahl b. Sa`d and ordered him to abuse `Ali. Sahl refused to do that. He (the governor) said to him:

If you do not agree to it (at least), say: May Allah curse Abu Turab. Sahl said: There was no name dearer to `Ali than Abu Turab (for it was given to him by the Prophet himself) and he felt delighted when he was called by this name. He (the governor) said to him: Narrate to us the story of his being named as Abu Turab. He said: Allah’s Messenger (saw) came to the house of Fatima, and he did not find `Ali in the house; whereupon he said: Where is your uncle’s son? She said:”There was something that cropped up between me and him which had annoyed him. He went out and did not rest there. Allah’s Messenger (saw) asked a person to find out where he was. He came and said: Allah’s Messenger, he is sleeping in the mosque. Allah’s Messenger (saw) came to him and found him lying in the mosque and saw that his mantle had slipped from his back and his back was covered with dust and Allah’s Messenger (saw) began to wipe it away from him (from the body of Hadrat `Ali) saying: Get up, covered with dust (Abu Turab); get up, covered with dust.

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:2409)

THE THREE PIECES OF EVIDENCE THAT ARE USED BY SOME MUSLIMS TO ADVOCATE CLASPING THE HANDS ABOVE THE NAVEL.

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 Tirmidhi3)
  • The Mursal report of Tawus in Sunan Abu Dawud

Now we will be looking at the only three pieces of evidence to support the idea of placing the hands on the chest in prayer (all three of them hotly disputed).

Before we begin this section,we 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. Allah (swt) has certainly rewarded all who have contributed towards learning and truth!

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

HADITH NO. 1 THE HADITH OF WA’IL IBN HUJR

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)

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 hadith, then his narration will be declared shaadh (irregular) and will not be accepted.

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)

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 narration from Sufyan. The above hadith has this very chain of narration

Source: (Fath al Bari, 9/297).

WHY IS SUCH A HADITH NOT INCLUDED IN BUKHARI OR MUSLIM?

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 hadithSource: (Mizan al I’itidal. 1/119)

Shaykh ibn al-Hammaam said in ‘at-Tahreer’, ‘when al-Bukhari says about someone, “there is a problem in him” then his hadith is 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 them 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 Layperson 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 if 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. G stands alone in his statement!

Those who claim the Salafi approach have some bizarre logic.

We have 7 people in the example above who narrate this hadith from Aasim bin Kulaib. 6 out of 7 confirm they do not have the extra wording. One of these students, Sufyan Al Thawri, now has two people narrating from him. One of the two students, Abdullah bin al Waleed, also narrated the same as the other 6 students of Aasim bin Kulaib. However, one of Sufyan’s students, Muammal bin Ismail, has the extra wording.

This is what passes as daleel for the Salafi!

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 go and double-check these statements should open some eyes!

Questions:

So, before we 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 Blessed Prophet (saw) prayed with his hands upon his chest?

We would ike to ensure thjat we are 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?

HADITH NO. 2 THE HADITH OF HULB AT-TA’I

The hadith of Hulb Al-Ta’i reported by Imam Ahmad in his ‘Musnad’. Also reported in Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, and Daraqutni,

“That Yahya bin Sa’eed narrated to us from Sufyan At Thawri , from Simak bin Harb from Qabisa bin Hulb 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 hadith 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 narration of the same hadeeth without the extra wording of ‘upon his chest’.

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

Source: (Ibn Abi Shaibah 3934, Ahmad 21467, Ibn Majah 809 and Tirmidhi 252. Imam Tirmidhi adds that it is a hasan-fair hadith)

Shareek reports from Simak from Qabisa bin Hulb from his father, who says (towards the end of a longer hadith), ‘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.’

Source: (Ahmad 21464)

Wakee reports from Sufyan from Simak bin Harb from Qabisa 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.’

Source: (Ahmad2146I & 21475. Daruqutni 1087. al T’aleeq al Hasan 1/145)

Daraqutni narrates from Abdul Rahman bin Mahdi and Wakee’, from Sufyan from Simak bin Harb from Qabisa 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 the chain of this hadith is Qabisa ibn Hulb. Simak bin Harb 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.”

Source: (Nayl Al-Awtar [2/200])

Weakness #2: Simak bin Harb has been classified as weak.

Dhahabi said about him: “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.).”

Source: (Al-Mizan [2/422 &423])

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

As for what Tirmidhi relates from Simak bin Harb from Qabisa 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) depended upon the hadith of Hulb in attributing this action, since there is a distance (in time) between him, and between the Sahaba and Tabieen. 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) in chain and text, it could have possibly passed as evidence. However, it is one of the narrations of Simak and Qabisa. And it has already preceded that Simak is weak… and Qabisa is unknown (majhool). And only Simak 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 embarrassment.

In the layperson’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 from F. 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!

Those who claim the Salafi approach have some bizarre logic.

Three transmitters transmit from Simak without the extra wording, and out of those three transmitters, one of them, Sufyan, has three transmitters and only one of them, Yahya bin Sa’eed, has the extra wording. It is highly likely that this is a text corruption by a scribe.

Questions:

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 (saw)?

3) Why did Imam Ahmad declare him (Simak bin Harb) to be unstable in Hadith?

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

HADITH NO. 3 THE HADITH OF TAWUS

And from the Hadith these people depend upon is the hadeeth of Tawus.

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

Source: (Abu Dawud 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 by 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 of 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 is that the hands are below the navel.

And according to Imam Shafi’i, 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. IIbn Hajar Al-Asqalani, said of him, “He is famous for tailoring fake traditions.”

Source: (Mizan 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 Dawud himself has called Haytham a follower of Qadri religion, Abu Mushar 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 that Nasa’i says that he is a weak narrator of hadith.

Source: (Al-Mizan volume 2, page 225)

Weakness #5:

The third narrator is Thawr bin Yazeed; he too followed the Qadri faith.

Source: (Mizan ul E’tidaal, volume 1, page 373)

In the Layperson’s understanding, it is like thisA -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. Then G takes from F, who apparently has issues with his creed. F takes from E, who is apparently 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.

Which hadith are these popular da’i following?

In the picture below I see most gripping the left forearm with the right hand. I see placement just above the navel, on the stomach and on the sternum.

Placed his right hand upon his left and then hold them tight on his chest while in prayer.” -Hadith of Tawus

By placing the right hand upon the left (on the chest) above the level of the elbows.” -Hadith of Hulb At-Tai

“‘I prayed with the Prophet (saw) and he placed his right hand over his left on his chest’. ” -Hadith of Wail ibn Hujr

The above picture is not to defame or discredit any of the teachers above. The picture is for illustration purposes to show that they themselves do not have uniformity in the approach to prayer.

Questions:

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 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, can we know for certain the hadith that he followed?

Abu Dawud transmits hadith with different placements for the hands.

Abu Dawud transmitted the following hadith:

  • hands below the navel
  • on the chest
  • and even hands to the sides

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

Similarly, Abu Dawud has transmitted three hadith that he was aware of in regard 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,

The people were ordered that a person is to place their right hand over their left forearm during prayer” 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).”

Source: (pg. 59 Al Muwatta of Imam Malik ibn Anas translated by Aisha Abduurrahman Bewley)

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

This is the opinion narrated by his student Ibn al-Qasim.

Source: (al-Mudawanna (1:74) )

Salafis claim to be people of evidence, and yet they spread rumors about Sunni Mujtahid Imams.

The false claim regarding Imam Malik.

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 supposed 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 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 of praying with the arms to the side?

Where did the so-called Khawarij get the idea of praying with their arms to the side?

Where did the Ibadi get the idea of praying with their 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!

AAnd 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 it 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.

THE THREE POSITIONS OF IMAM ABU DAWUD ON WHERE THE HANDS GO DURING THE PRAYER:

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 concerning the position of the hands in prayer.

Inquiring minds want to know!

For example:

Abu Dawud also narrates the following:

Place them below the navel.

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

Source: (Hadith no: 757)

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: (Hadith no: 755)

Hold them tight on the chest.

Source: (Chapter 3 Prayer Kitab Al-Salat)

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

Source: (Abu Dawud 759)

No indication that the hands were to be lifted or placed anywhere.

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, (saw), among whom was Abu Qatada, say the following. ‘ I am the most learned of you regarding the prayer of the Messenger of Allah, (saw).’ 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.”

Source: (Abu Dawud Book 2 hadith 729 Chapter: The Beginning Of The Prayer https://sunnah.com/abudawud:730 )

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

So far, we quoted the ahadith from Abu Dawud about pressing the hands on the chest and two hadith about placing the hands under the navel, and leaving the arms and hands to the side.

Anyone who studies these Hadiths knows they are fraught with issues and intra-madhab rivalry and intra-Sunni conflict about where the hands are to be placed and how they are to be placed.

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? Malik related such hadith just as Abu Dawud did to let people know he was aware of such a narration. So, just because Malik narrates a hadith doesn’t mean he acts upon it. Just as Abu Dawud narrates a hadith does not mean he acts upon it.

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

The Hanafi school brings us an anomaly.  This anomaly consists of instructing men to place their hands below the navel and instructing women to place their hands on their chest.

The placing of the hands on the chest is considered ‘makrooh’ and extremely disliked in the Hanafi school.In the school it is next to haram. One then wonders why one standard for the men and another for the women?

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

THE IBADI SCHOOL FOLLOWS THE PRAYER OF THE BLESSED PROPHET AS SHOW CASED IN BUKHARI

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: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:757) & (https://sunnah.com/abudawud:856) & (https://sunnah.com/nasai:1314)

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

By the way, we do not even need these lone narrator reports. Everyone knows that our school has lived in relative isolation from the rest of the ummah. Anyone who has met and lived and studied with our scholars knows they have the utmost circumspect adherence to the Blessed Sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw).

We follow the Sunnah preserved via mass living connected chains via the mass transmitted living sunnah as actual practice. This means that masses of people pray, who observe their scholars and elders and learned people pray, who observe their scholars and elders, and learned people pray, who observe their scholars and elders and learned people pray who observed the Prophet (saw) pray.

Whereas the confusion of the rest of the ummah began with a hadith that says that the people were ordered to place their hands somewhere. It doesn’t even tell you where to place your hands and this has led to confusion and debate about where to place one’s hands in the prayer. Leading to some bizarre displays in the prayer that do not resemble anything remotely close to tranquility and serenity.

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

How is that the Ibadi, Shi’a, Maliki and even people like Said ibn Al Musayyib who were all opposed to each other historically and would jump at the opportunity to cite 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 it the ‘Ahl Sunnah Wal Jammah’ who seem to have a clearer majority 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 their hands below the navel and women placing them on the chest. We have disputes among the Salafi, who do not know if they place their hands on the chest after the ruku or not.

In fact, the Salafi have disputes about actually where to place their hands. 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 their 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 practice of placing one hand over the other above the navel has as their evidence basically only two ahadith and one mursal hadith.

We can see that our brothers are relying upon lone narrator’s reports that are 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 who 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)

So, when it comes to anyone who wants to separate us from the Blessed Sunnah of the prayer of the Blessed Messenger (saw), we will say to them:

“Produce your proof, if you should be truthful” (Qur’an 2:111)

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

With Allah (swt) is success!

If you would like to learn the prayer of the Blessed Prophet (saw), you are encouraged to use the following as a guide.

You may also be interested in reading the following:

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

6 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Ibadi view of Yazid and the Umayyad Imperium.

And DO NOT OBEY the order of the transgressors, Who cause corruption in the land and do not amend their ways” (Qur’an 26:151-152)

﷽ 

What Did Imam Malik Say About Abu Hamzas Khutbah? – His Eminence Shaykh Nasir al MarMuri رحمة الله تعالى.

English subtitles:

Abu Hamza al-Mukhtar bin ‘Awf, one of the prominent Ibadi’s of Basrah had this to say about the Umayyad rulers in general and Yazid in particular during a Friday sermon in Medina in the presence of Imam Malik ibn Anas:

“There came Yazid, a libertine in religion and unmanly in behavior, in whom was never perceived right guidance. He would eat forbidden food, and drink wine, and wear a robe worth a thousand dinars, through which you could see his flesh so that the veil of modesty was rent, an unpardonable disrobe. And Haraba the singing girl on his right, and Salama the singing girl on his left, both singing if you had taken drink away from him, he would rent his garments!

And he would turn to one of them and say, Shall I fly? Aye, he flew. To God’s damnation, and the burning Fire, and a painful torment!

He then turns to the Umayyads:

“The sons of Umayyads are a party of error, and their strength is the strength of tyrants. They take conjecture for their guide, and judge as they please, and put men to death in anger, and govern by mediation and take the law out of context and distribute the public money to those not entitled to them. For God has revealed those who are entitled, and they are eight classes of men, for He says:

“The freewill offerings are for the poor and the needy, those who work to collect them, those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and slaves and debtors, and those in the way of Allah and the travelers.”

They, the Umayyads make themselves the ninth category and take it all! Such are those who rule by what Allah has not sent down.” (The World of Islam John A Williams p 218)

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Conditions of Takfeer/Excommunicating in the Ibadi School

“That is Allah—your True Lord. So what is beyond the truth except falsehood? How can you then be turned away?” (Qur’an 10:32)

﷽ 

The Conditions of Takfeer/Excommunication in the Ibadi School by Shaykh, Dr Scholar Abdullah bin Saeed bin Abdullah Al Ma’mari May Allah protect him and continue to benefit us from him.

One of the principles established by Ahl al-Istiqama.

The evidence with clear-cut authenticity and clear meaning in theology is taken as definitive, absolute, certain and must be believed.

Whoever opposes this meaning in theology and rejects it is a Mushrik. We seek refuge in Allah from such people. 


That is for those who reject it outright without interpretation.

The one who rejects it by means of interpretation is a fasiq.

In both cases, such people are misguided. Because this evidence can only have one meaning. Rejecting it is unacceptable. This rejection only comes from desire.

Allah (swt) says: “So what is beyond the truth except falsehood?” (Qur’an 10:32)

Whoever opposes clear-cut evidence in terms of authenticity and meaning should not receive sweet words from us.

Again, this is only if it has a clear-cut meaning, is authentic, and it comes from the Qur’an and Sunnah.

Our beloved teacher and respected Shaykh Al-Qanoobi (h) has said:
“Evidence does not become clear-cut unless it goes through certain conditions.”

There are four conditions in our school which must be fulfilled.

1) The first is that it must be authentically transmitted from the Qur’an or Sunnah.

2) The second is that it has a clear-cut authenticity.

3) The third is that the meaning has to be clear.

4) It has to be agreed as being tawatur.

Point 4 has a caveat.

By Tawatur/Mutawattir. That is to say, mass transmitted in practice without additions, accretions or innovations. Alternatively, mass transmitted by disassociated chains of transmission such that it is not possible for them to have conspired upon a falsehood.

For the person who says it is mutawatir. They should take it as part of their creed.

The one who takes a matter disputed as mutawatir by right cannot call another who disagrees as a fasiq. That is because the one who does so takes those hadith as ahad only.

For instance, the belief in Al-Siraat and some say the punishment of the grave.

Shaykh Imam Al-Salimi (r) says:

The evidence regarding the punishment of the grave is mutawatir.

That was his position and he did not call other scholars from the school as fasiqs.

Example: Our luminous scholar Shaykh Imam Nasir bin Abi Nabhan (r) didn’t believe in the punishment of the grave. That is because he didn’t believe the narrations were mutawatir (clear-cut and mass transmitted).

Rather, Shaykh Nabhan (r) saw them as ahad.

Going back to the general principle of the school. No evidence should be accepted in theology unless it is clear-cut with a clear meaning.

However, Shaykh Imam Al-Salimi (r) and other scholars said it is clear-cut with a clear meaning and so they and their followers have to believe it. It is a point of creed.

This is done without calling Fasiq either side due to this difference of opinion.

This is an important principle mentioned by Shaykh Al Qanubi (h) in some of his books.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Adoptionist Theology: How did Jesus Become The Son of God?

“And they say: The Beneficent has adopted a son. Glory be to Him! Nay, they are honored, slaves.”(Qur’an 21:26)

“But the Jews and the Christians say, “We are the children of Allah and His beloved.” Say, “Then why does He punish you for your sins?” Rather, you are human beings from among those He has created. He forgives whom He wills, and He punishes whom He wills. And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them, and to Him is the [final] destination.” (Qur’an 5:18)

﷽ 

“They say: “(Allah) Most Gracious has begotten a son!” Indeed you have put forth a thing most monstrous! At it the skies are ready to burst, the earth to split asunder, and the mountains to fall down in utter ruin, That they should invoke a son (like-kind) for (Allah) Most Gracious. For it is not consonant with the majesty of (Allah) Most Gracious that He should beget a (like-kind) son.” (Qur’an 19:88-92)

“Say: “Allah Is Absolutely One.” Who is independent of all and whom all depend on. He does not bring forth like-kind nor was he brought forth from like-kind; And there is none comparable to Him.” (Qur’an 112:1-4)

THE BIBLE’S POSITION

For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever shall believe in him will not perish but have everlasting life.(John 3:16 King James Version)

What does begotten mean? (According to the English language)

Answer: Begotten is a past participle of beget.

Beget begot, begotten: To become the father of: sire

Sire 1: Father 2: The male parent of an animal (as a horse or dog) sired, siring, PRO-CREATE

Source: (The Merriam Webster’s Dictionary For Large Print Users)

Beget – give birth to

Source: (Webster’s Dictionary)

It is indeed blasphemous to ascribe offspring to the Almighty Allah. It is also insulting to the human intellect of any rational person. All Christians of every sect believe Jesus is the ‘Son of God’.

Allah declares that ascribing a son or any offspring to him is a thing most blasphemous.

We as human beings have children to pro-create our species, and to ensure that humanity survives. We will all die; therefore it is a necessity that sons and daughters take our place.

However, Allah is Ever-Living and needs no such means for survival.

Christians will object and say this is a misrepresentation of their beliefs. Yet, they will claim we know it means ‘Sired by God’, but that is not what we believe!

What does begotten mean? (According to the Greek language)

The references for both are as follows:

Source: (https://biblehub.com/greek/3439.htm)

Source: (https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/3-16.htm)

Their own dictionaries describe Christ Jesus as God’s ‘offspring’ and ‘stock’.

We will now walk through the development of this all-important Christian concept. We will show conclusively how an innocuous expression ‘Son of God‘ became Jesus ‘The Son of God’ in the very theologically loaded sense that it is today.

This very belief latter transforms into ‘God the Son’ the second member of the ever infamous Tri-theistic Trinity of the Athanasian Creed.

SONS BY THE TONS

As Sheikh Ahmed Deedat used to say:

The terms ‘Son of God’ and ‘children of God’ are often used throughout the Bible.

EXAMPLES:

You are children of the Lord your God(Deuteronomy 14:1)

He shall build a house for my name, and he shall be my son, and I will be his father.(I Chronicles 22:10)

Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.” (Job 1:6)

I have said, you are gods; and all of you are children of the Most High(Psalms 82:6-7)

“...For I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.” (Jeremiah 31:9)

Have we not one father?” “Has not one God created us?” (Malachi 2:10)

Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the sons of God(Matthew 5:9)

For unto which of the angels, said he at any time, You are my Son, this day have I begotten you? And again, I will be to him A FATHER, and he shall be tome A SON?” (Hebrews 1:5)

Prima Qur’an Comments:

In none of the above quotations are the terms ‘children of God’ or ‘Son of God’ understood to be non-allegorical. So why in the case of Jesus is he understood to be the non-allegorical ‘Son of God’.

If you will pay special attention to the last quotation of Hebrews 1:5 you will see that Jesus is ‘A’ Son and God is ‘A’ Father unto him. It does not say Jesus is ‘THE’ Son and God is ‘THE’ father of Jesus.

The reason why Jesus is ‘a’ son and God is ‘a’ father has to do with adoptionist theology.

Jesus a righteous man or ‘son of God’?

When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matthew 27:54)

“The centurion, seeing what had happened, praised God and said, “Surely this was a righteous man.”(Luke 23:47)

So we can see that Matthew and Luke report the centurion saying two different things? So is this a contradiction or an acceptable allegory? We would say that this is not a contradiction it is an acceptable allegory. That ‘son of God’ simply meant a righteous servant, one near to God.

Son of God or Slave of God?

“And they say: The Beneficent has adopted a son. Glory be to Him! Nay, they are honored, slaves.(Qur’an 21:26)

“Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.” (Acts 3:26 King James Version)

“To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.” (Acts 3:26 New King James Version)

Notice that the King James Version calls Jesus “his Son”,Whereas the New King James Version calls Jesus “His Servant” and whenever you see that word “servant” in the New Testament, it means slave.

WHAT IS ADOPTIONIST THEOLOGY?

Adoptinonist theology:

Adoptionist refers to a person who believes that Jesus became the Son of God at his baptism, while adoptionism is the theological doctrine that Jesus was born a mere mortal and was later adopted as the Son of God.

What are the text used in the Bible to support this view held by early Christians?

“I will be to him a father, and he shall be to Me a son; so that when he goes astray I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the sons of Adam.” (2 Samuel 7:14)

Prima Qur’an comments:

  1. I am not currently his father but I will be.
  2. He is not currently my son but he will be.
  3. I will be to him ‘a’ father. Not ‘the’ father.
  4. He will be to me ‘a’ son. Not ‘the’ son.
  5. If he goes astray he will be chastened.

Here we have a concept of God appointing someone to be his son, or we may say a righteous servant.

This is also stated in Psalms 2:2 and Psalms 2:7 in a reference to King David.

“The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed.” (Psalms 2:2)

“I will declare the decree: the Lord has said unto me, You are my Son; This day have I begotten you.” (Psalms 2:7)

Note: It has this day I have begotten you. It is being said to King David while he is alive and a grown adult. David was appointed by adoption to be the ‘son of God’.

A THEOLOGY TAKES SHAPE

We will now show how ‘Son of God’ in New Testament theology takes a total and complete departure from how ‘Son of God’ was used in the Old Testament.

Now I will give you the proof text which shows how Jesus went from being the adopted ‘Son of God’ to the non-allegorical ‘Son of God’.

ADOPTIONIST THEOLOGY BEHIND THE BAPTISM OF JESUS

And there came a voice from heaven, saying, YOU ARE my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” (Mark 1:11)

Note: The voice from heaven addressed Jesus. The Greek for YOU is su (SU).

And there came a voice from heaven, saying, “THIS IS my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” (Mathew 3:17)

Note: The voice from heaven talks about Jesus. The Greek for THIS IS outos (HOUTOS).

Question: Why the change in voice?

Why would one writer deliberately alter the wording of the text?

Answer: The theology!

Mark’s theology held that Jesus became the ‘Son of God’ at baptism, much like David’s coronation in 2 Samuel 7:14

Matthew’s theology held that Jesus was already the ‘Son of God’ based on the virgin birth.

So Jesus does not need to know who he is. Thus, the voice is changed from “You are my son” to an announcement to the ignorant crowd: “This is my son.”

The Qur’an and the Gospel of Luke reject Matthew’s claim.

Note: Look at the Gospel of Luke and Qur’an say in response to Matthew’s claim about Jesus being the ‘son of God’ based upon the virgin birth.

“And they had no child because Elizabeth was barren, and they were now well stricken in years.” (Luke 1:7)

“And Zacharias said unto the angel, how shall I know this? I am an old man, and wife is well stricken in years. And the angel answered said to him, “I am Gabriel who stands in the presence of God; I am sent to speak unto you and to show you glad tidings.” (Luke 1:18-19)

(His prayer was answered): “O Zakariya!” We give you good news of a son: His name shall be Yahya: on none by that name have We conferred distinction before.” He said: “O my Lord”! How shall I have a son, when my wife is barren, and I have grown quite decrepit from old age?” He said: “So (it will be) your Lord says, ‘that is easy for Me: I did indeed create you before when you had been nothing!‘” (Qur’an 19:7-9)

Prima Qur’an Comment: Allah asks Zechariah to reflect upon the fact that he was created indeed before he was nothing

“Relate in the Book (the story of) Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place in the East. She placed a screen (to screen herself) from them; then We sent her our angel, and he appeared before her as a man in all respects. She said: “I seek refuge from thee to (Allah) Most Gracious: (come not near) if thou dost fear Allah.” He said: ” I am only a messenger from your Lord, (to announce) to you the gift of a holy son. She said: “How shall I have a son, seeing that no man has touched me, and I am not unchaste?” He said: “So (it will be): Your Lord says, ‘that is easy for Me: and (We wish) to appoint him as a Sign unto men and a Mercy from Us’: It is a matter (so) decreed.” (Qur’an 19:16-21)

The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: “Be”. And he was.(Qur’an 3:59)

Prima Qur’an Comment: All glory to be to Allah! Allah explains things in a very simple manner for Christians. Allah says that Adam was made from dust(nothingness) and he was simply willed into being. Thus, as Allah (swt) made Adam from nothingness, likewise Christ Jesus, as the word of Allah, is the created word of Allah. Just as all of Allah’s words are created. Jesus, as the kalim of Allah, was created from nothingness.

THE CREATION OF 5 TYPES OF HUMAN BEINGS:


1) Adam was made without a man or a woman and not divine!

2) Eve made without a woman and not divine!

3) Jesus made without a man and not divine!

4) Isaac and John made while their parents were old, infertile, and not divine!

5) The rest of humanity is made of man and woman and not divine!

THE LUKE FACTOR

Luke’s version of the baptism of Jesus:

And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, YOU ARE my beloved Son; in you, I am well pleased.(Luke 3:22)

Note:

1) Luke has the story of the virgin birth

2) Luke has Jesus addressed ‘you are’.

“A few MSS [“D”, “o”, “b”] and Patristic citations representing the “Western” text, have, instead of (You are my beloved Son, in you, I am well pleased), the words of Psalms 2:7, You are my son this day have I begotten you.

“Numerous expositors (e.g. W. Mason, Zahn, Klostermann, Harnack, Moffat, Streeter) accept this variant reading as the original. The majority then explain the alteration of the text from the fact that copyists regarded these words as a contradiction to the reality of the virgin birth.”

Source: [The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel of Luke by Norval Geldenhuys p. 148]

Prima Qur’an Comment: If we take the above evidence, then the baptism of Jesus (according to Luke) would look like this:

“And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, “You are my son, this day have I begotten you”. (Luke 3:22)

This would mean that Jesus became the ‘son of God’ at his baptism as an adult in the same way David became the ‘son of God’ as an adult.

Let’s continue…

“More important still is the fact that the heavenly voice which greeted Jesus at his baptism hailed him in the opening words of the decree of Psalms 2:7You are my SonMark 1:11

“Indeed, the “Western” text of Luke 3:22 represents the fuller wording from Psalms 2:7 which is quoted here by the author of Hebrews 1:5

“For unto which of the angels said he at any time, You are my Son. “This day have I begotten you?” (Hebrews 1:5)

“The words were evidently in widespread use as a testimonial in the apostolic age, as Acts 13:33 bears witness, and not only these words but the other parts of psalms were given a messianic interpretation, as may be seen from the quotation and explanation of its first two verses in Acts 4:25.

Source: [The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Epistle to the Hebrews FF. Bruce]

“God has fulfilled the same unto us, their children, in that he has raised Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalms, You are my Son, this day have I begotten you.” (Acts 13:33)

“Why does the heathen rage, and people imagine a vain thing? “The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his ANOINTED.” (Psalms 2:1-2)

“Who, by the mouth of your SERVANT David, has said, Why DID the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? “The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his CHRIST.” (Acts 4:25-26)

Note: Some important points need to be made.

David was called ANOINTED (Christ). Also, Luke says David was a SERVANT (Slave) of God. This also means Jesus is like David: He is Anointed, meaning appointed by God. Jesus is also the Servant (slave) of God!

Let’s continue…

“Likewise, certain early manuscripts of Luke quote all of Psalms 2:7: Luke 3:22 in Codex Bezae, and certain old Latin Manuscripts used by Justin, Clement, Origen, and Augustine read, “You are my Son this day have I begotten you.”

But interestingly, Luke also used Psalms 2:7, in a speech composed for Paul.

In Paul’s theology, Jesus was “DECLARED to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead” (Romans 1:4)

“Luke apparently knew of this Pauline teaching for he has Paul quoting Psalms 2:7 as a speech uttered to Jesus at his resurrection, and not his baptism! Acts 13:32-33

“For Luke and Paul Psalms 2:7 is a RESURRECTION prophecy and not a BAPTISM prophecy.”

Source: (Gospel Fictions: Randel Helms pg. 32, 38)

LUKE: He sees the water Jesus is baptized in as ‘the grave’. When Jesus comes out of the water, it is his ‘resurrection.’ The water is symbolic: of ‘being washed by the blood’ of Jesus.

MARK: believed Jesus to be the adopted ‘Son of God’. In the same way, David was the adopted ‘Son of God’, Thus Jesus became the ‘Son of God’ at his baptism.

MATTHEW: believed Jesus was the non-allegorical ‘Son of God’ based on the virgin birth.

LUKE AND PAUL: believe Jesus was the non-allegorical ‘Son of God’ based on his resurrection from the dead.

Note: Paul said Jesus was ‘Declared’ to be the ‘Son of God’ not that HE WAS the ‘Son of God’

Source: Romans 1:3

What do Christians mean: Jesus is the ‘Son of God’?

Examination time!

We have already seen what begotten means. Not only this but every modern translation of the Bible does away with the term ‘begotten‘?

Why?

Answer:

1) Because David was called, ‘the begotten Son of God’: in Psalms (2:7). You cannot have Jesus be the ‘only-begotten’ when David is already begotten.

2) Hebrews 11:17

By faith, Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac; and he that had received the promise offered up his only-begotten son.”

  1. a) This is a flat contradiction because Ishmael was begotten before Isaac was.
  2. b) Or this is not to be understood as allegorical.

We know this is not understood literally. Isaac is not the only-begotten son; just as Jesus is not the non-allegorical ‘son of God’.

Question: Is Jesus ‘eternally begotten’ by the father?

Answer: No!

Hebrews 1:5

For unto which of the angels said he at any time, You are my Son?” This day have I begotten you?”

Prima Qur’an Comment: Jesus cannot be ‘eternally begotten’ by the father when this passage clearly states ‘This day’ have I begotten you. Indeed, one would wonder what day that is.

Tertullian did not believe in the eternality of the son.

For example, to me, it is very clear that Tertullian did not believe in the eternality of the son based upon the following:

“Because God is in like manner a Father, and He is also a Judge; but He has not always been Father and Judge, merely on the ground of His having always been God. For He could not have been the Father previous to the Son, nor a Judge previous to sin. There was, however, a time when neither sin existed with Him, nor the Son; the former of which was to constitute the Lord a Judge, and the latter a Father.”

Source: (https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0313.htm)

When the Church decided upon the doctrine of Tri-theism they had to make Jesus co-equal and co-eternal with the father in so doing the doctrine of adoption created huge problems for them. Not only this but if Jesus was indeed begotten ‘this day’ he would not be co-eternal. This is why the Church called Jesus ‘eternally begotten’.

There is no Greek text to support the idea that Jesus is ‘eternally begotten‘ That is why to meet the strong arguments of Bishop Arius his fellow Christians could only respond with two things:

1. Violence.

2. Use an oxymoron ‘eternally begotten‘.

The Greek text is monogenes

How do other Bibles translate John 3:16

“For God so loved the world that he gave his only son (or the unique son of God), that whosoever believes in him shall not perish but have life eternal.” [The Living Bible] John 3:16

“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son, that whosoever shall believe in him shall not perish but have everlasting life.” [New International Version] John 3:16

“For God so loved the world that he gave his only son, that whosoever shall believe in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” [Revised Standard Version] John 3:16

“For God so loved the world that he gave his only son that whosoever shall believe in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” [The New American Bible] John 3:16

Note: All of the above translations say something like ‘Only Son’ or ‘Unique Son’.

  1. a) Either this is a flat contradiction because, as shown from Hebrews 1:5 Jesus is ‘A’ Son not ‘Thee’ Son of God.
  2. b) Or this is to be understood as allegorical!

We know this is not to be taken nonallegorically. Jesus is not the only son because, as already proven, God has many ‘sons’.

As far as the ‘Unique Son’ is concerned, every ‘Son of God’ is unique! So, once again, Christians are at a loss to explain how Jesus is the non-allegorical ‘Son of God’.

Remember that Jesus never once claimed to be the ‘only son’ of God!

Christians started to see the problem with John 3:16 translations. In a classic debate between Christian televangelist Jimmy Swaggart and Muslim debater Ahmed Deedat, Swaggart anticipated a possible question of Deedat by saying the following:

@ 8:53 minutes “Now I want to start this off tonight by quoting a passage of scripture that Mr. Deedat and myself disagree somewhat over. But which is one of if not the dearest passage in the word of God to the world of Christendom. Found in St. John 3:16

“For God so loved the world that he gave his only unique Son (Fooled you there Mr. Deedat), his only unique son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.”

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlA22NNFlDw

CONCLUSION:

The Christians should repent to Allah for every ascribing a non-allegorical son to him. Glory be to Allah who has not adopted a son or daughter! It can be seen how Jesus was called the ‘Son of God’ in the same way that previous people were called ‘Sons of God’.

However, this concept slowly evolved from being the adopted son of God into Jesus being the non-allegorical ‘Son of God’ and eventually led to him being ‘eternally begotten God’

May Allah bring the people out of the great darkness into the light. May Allah guide us to the truth!

“And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized of the truth. They say, “Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses.”(Qur’an 5:83)

Back to main section: https://primaquran.com/christianity/

You may also be interested in reading:

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/the-evidence-to-reject-the-virgin-birth-of-jesus/

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/the-case-for-the-virgin-birth-from-the-quran/

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

6 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

A Jewish Argument against the Qur’an.

“Also, mention when the angels said, “O Mary, indeed Allah gives you good news of a word from Him, whose name will be the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary – distinguished in this world and the Hereafter and among those brought near to Allah. He will speak to the people in the cradle and in maturity and will be of the righteous. “She said, “My Lord, how will I have a child when no man has touched me?” The angel said, “Such is Allah; He creates what He wills. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, ‘Be,’ and it is. (Qur’an 3:45-47)

﷽ 

“Also, mention, in the book the story of Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place toward the east and she took, in seclusion from them, a screen. Then We sent to her Our Angel, and he represented himself to her as a well-proportioned man. She said, “Indeed, I seek refuge in the Most Merciful from you, so leave me, if you should be fearing of Allah. He said, “I am only the messenger of your Lord to give you news of a pure boy. “She said, “How can I have a boy while no man has touched me and I have not been unchaste? “He said, “Thus it will be; your Lord says, ‘it is easy for Me, and We will make him a sign to the people and a mercy from Us. And it is a matter already decreed.” (Qur’an 19:16-21)

As Shaykh Ahmed Deedat (r) has mentioned in his Pamphlet “Is the Bible God’s Word?” page 11:

We do not have the time and space to go into the tens of thousands of — grave or minor —defects that the authors of the Revised Standard Version (RSV) have attempted to revise. We leave that privilege to the Christian scholars of the Bible. Here I will endeavor to cast just a cursory glance at a “half-a-dozen” or so of those “minor” changes.


1. “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a VIRGIN shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14 – AV)
The indispensable “VIRGIN” in the above verse has now been replaced in the RSV with the phrase “a young woman,” which is the correct translation of the Hebrew word almah. Almah is the word that has occurred all along in the Hebrew text and NOT bethulah, which means VIRGIN. This correction is only to be found in the English language translation, as the RSV is only published in this tongue. For the African and the Afrikaner, the Arab and the Zulu, in fact, in the 1500 other languages of the world, Christians are made to continue to swallow the misnomer “VIRGIN.”

The argument goes (from the Jews) and the atheists, for that matter, that if the Gospel writer ‘Matthew’ had been inspired and directed by the Holy Spirit, then he (Matthew) would not have relied upon the Jewish Septuagint for the source of his quote.

Technically, the word almah more than not was used for a young woman that could be married. Being a young, unmarried woman, it was often understood that she was not married and thus, a virgin.

However, those who argue against this state that the word ‘bethulah’, which actually does mean virgin, should have been used in place of ‘almah’, which has the possibility of being a virgin.

The website: Jews for Jesus has the following to say:

https://jewsforjesus.org/publications/issues/issues-v09-n01/almah-virgin-or-young-maiden/

Whereas the web site Jews for Judaism as this short entry:

https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/almah-virgin-and-parthenos

We as Muslims could agree with our Christian apologist and say look, ‘almah’likely means ‘virgin’ and that is good enough.

The reason that it is not good enough is that the author of the ‘Gospel According to Matthew’ had made some huge blunders when being reliant upon the Greek Septuagint.

We will give a clear example: Believe us, there are many!

“When they drew near Jerusalem and came to Bethphage on the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two disciples, saying to them, “Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find an ass tethered, and a colt with her. Untie them and bring them here to me. And if anyone should say anything to you, reply, ‘The master has need of them.’ Then he will send them at once. “This happened so that what had been spoken through the prophet might be fulfilled: Say to daughter Zion, ‘Behold, your king comes to you, meek and riding on an ass, and on a colt, the foal of a beast of burden.’ “The disciples went and did as Jesus had ordered them. They brought the ass and the colt and laid their cloaks over them, and he sat upon them. The huge crowd spread their cloaks on the road, while others cut branches from the trees and strewed them on the road. The crowds preceding him and those following kept crying out and saying: “Hosanna to the Son of David; blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord; hosanna in the highest.” And when he entered Jerusalem the whole city was shaken and asked, “Who is this? “And the crowds replied, “This is Jesus the prophet, from Nazareth in Galilee.” (Matthew 21:1-11)

This is disastrous. It is disastrous on several accounts. Whoever wrote the Gospel according to Matthew couldn’t have known the original Hebrew text. Instead, the Greek Septuagint was relied upon resulting in the mistaken belief that the so-called “prophecy” was about Jesus riding upon two donkeys!

Again, look at what Christian scholars have had to say about the matter.

4-5] The prophet: this fulfillment citation is actually composed of two distinct Old Testament texts, Isaiah 62:11 (Say to daughter Zion) and Zechariah 9:9. The ass and the colt are the same animal in the prophecy, mentioned twice in different ways, the common Hebrew literary device of poetic parallelism. Matthew takes them as two is one of the reasons why some scholars think that he was a Gentile rather than a Jewish Christian who would presumably not make that mistake (see Introduction).

7] Upon them: upon the two animals; an awkward picture resulting from Matthew’s misunderstanding of the prophecy.

The source is from: (http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew28.htm)

So why could this be a Jewish contention against the Qur’an?

The Core of the Critique.

The criticism, as we’ve laid out, follows this logic:

The Christian Doctrine is Based on a Mistranslation: The Christian belief in a virgin birth prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 relies on the Greek Septuagint’s translation of the Hebrew word almah (young woman) as parthenos (virgin), rather than the more precise Hebrew word for virgin, bethulah.

Matthew’s Error Demonstrates Human Authorship: The author of the Gospel of Matthew (who used the Septuagint) further demonstrates his human fallibility by misreading Zechariah 9:9, thinking it describes two animals (an ass and a colt) instead of one animal described with poetic parallelism.

The Qur’an is Therefore Derivative and Human: Since the Qur’an also affirms the virgin birth, the critic argues that its author simply borrowed this “mistaken” Christian doctrine, which itself is based on a Greek mistranslation of a Hebrew text. This, they claim, proves the Qur’an is a human document from the 7th century, not a divine revelation.

The assumption that the Jew could make is that because Muslims believe in the virgin birth of Mary (May Allah honour her) that the “author of the Qur’an” simply copied the Christian doctrine — which in turn is based upon the Greek Septuagint and has no knowledge of the Hebrew text. Presumably, this makes the Qur’an all too human and not of divine authorship.

The Qur’an is Independent and Authoritative, Not Derivative.
This is the most critical point. The Qur’an does not seek to prove the virgin birth by referencing the Hebrew Bible. It does not say, “And this happened to fulfill what was said by the prophet Isaiah…” as Matthew does.

Instead, the Qur’an narrates the event as a direct, fact revealed by Allah.

We as Muslims have a straightforward response to this. That is that whoever wrote the ‘Gospel according to Matthew’ was quote-mining the Jewish sacred text to get legitimacy for Jesus as the Messiah. Whereas, for us as Muslims, the Qur’an stands independent of any justification for the miraculous birth of Christ Jesus.

Muslims could agree with Christian apologists that almah can imply virginity. However, the Islamic position is stronger: We have no theological need to enter that debate. Our belief is not contingent on the interpretation of a single word in a text that could have been altered. Our belief is based solely on the clear, unambiguous words of the Qur’an:

“She said, ‘How can I have a boy while no man has touched me and I have not been unchaste?’ He said, ‘Thus [it will be]; your Lord says, ‘It is easy for Me…”” (Qur’an 19:20-21)

The Qur’an uses the phrase “while no man has touched me” (وَلَمْ يَمْسَسْنِي بَشَرٌ), which is an explicit, clear statement of virginity that avoids the ambiguity of the Hebrew almah altogether

In other words, Christ Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary. This is our belief as Muslims who believe in the words of the Qur’an.

This was a real event that took place. Where we part with the Christians is this:

The Christians in particular whoever wrote the ‘Gospel according to Matthew’ felt a need to justify this event by reference to the Hebrew scriptures albeit reliance upon the Greek Septuagint.

Conclusion:

The mistakes of Matthew highlight the human process of trying to fit Jesus into Old Testament prophecies, sometimes through forced interpretations and errors from using a translation.

The Qur’an, by contrast, displays none of this. It is entirely self-contained and authoritative. It does not make interpretive errors about Zechariah or Isaiah because it does not reference them in the first place. It simply states the truth of the event as revealed by Allah.

Therefore, the argument that the Qur’an “copied” a mistake actually proves the opposite: its independence from the textual corruptions and human errors that affected the previous scriptures. The Qur’an’s account of the virgin birth is not evidence of its human origin but rather of its divine origin, as it provides a pristine, uncorrupted narrative free from the dilemmas of biblical scholarship.

As Muslims, our belief in this stands apart from needing any proof text or citation from previous scriptures. With Allah is the success!

May Allah (swt) guide the sincere among them so that they do not perish in ever lasting hellfire!

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized