✦ Is Both Performing and Abandoning Rafʿ al-Yadayn in Prayer Established from Ḥadīth?
Source: Fatāwā ʿIlmiyyah, Volume 1, Kitāb al-Ṣalāh, Page 351
Question:
Is it correct to say that both performing Rafʿ al-Yadayn (raising the hands in prayer) and abandoning it are proven from ḥadīths? What is the ruling on one who sometimes performs it and sometimes doesn’t?
(Question by: Ṭāriq ʿAlī Brohī, Karachi)
❖ Scholarly Answer
Al-ḥamdu lillāh, waṣ-ṣalātu was-salāmu ʿalā Rasūlillāh, Ammā Baʿd:
✦ Authenticity of Rafʿ al-Yadayn in Prayer
✅ Rafʿ al-Yadayn at the following three instances is proven from authentic and mutawātir (mass-transmitted) aḥādīth:
① At the beginning of the prayer
② Before going into Rukūʿ
③ After rising from Rukūʿ
Sources:
- Qaṭf al-Azhār al-Mutanāthirah – al-Suyūṭī
- Laqṭ al-Laʾālī al-Mutanāthirah – al-Kattānī
- Nūr al-ʿAyn fī Ithbāt Masʾalat Rafʿ al-Yadayn (pp. 82, 87; new edition: pp. 122–123)
📌 Even the Deobandī scholar Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī admitted the mutawātir nature of Rafʿ al-Yadayn:
“Mutawātir aḥādīth have absolute certainty according to all Islamic sciences.”
(Nayl al-Farqadayn, p. 22)
Thus, by the standards of both uṣūl al-fiqh and uṣūl al-ḥadīth, a mutawātir narration is definitive and indisputable.
❖ Review of Opposing Arguments
➊ Narrations in which Rafʿ al-Yadayn is not mentioned
For example, the ḥadīth of Jābir ibn Samurah رضي الله عنه in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, which mentions the flapping of hands like horse tails:
📝 Maulānā Maḥmūd Ḥasan Deobandī writes:
“Using this narration as a response is unjustified, because it pertains to salām (the ending of prayer).”
(Taqārīr Shaykh al-Hind, p. 65)
📝 Muḥammad Taqī ʿUthmānī writes:
“In reality, using this narration for the Ḥanafī stance is weak, because it clearly refers to the act of salām, not Rafʿ al-Yadayn.”
(Dars Tirmidhī, Vol. 2, p. 36)
✅ Hence, these narrations do not negate Rafʿ al-Yadayn.
➋ Narrations that hint at the abandonment of Rafʿ al-Yadayn
Such as the narration attributed to ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd رضي الله عنه.
📝 However, in light of the principles of ḥadīth criticism, all such narrations are weak and rejected.
Example:
In Nūr al-ʿAynayn (pp. 92–106; new ed. pp. 125–158), the author has shown with multiple evidences that the narration via Sufyān al-Thawrī attributed to Ibn Masʿūd is:
“Defective due to critical ʿillah and weak both in chain and content.”
(p. 96; new ed. p. 130)
✦ Refutation of False Attribution
An unknown individual “Abū Bilāl Jhangvī” authored a booklet Tuhfat Ahl al-Ḥadīth (No. 2), published by al-ʿAzīz, Sialkot Road, Gujranwala.
📌 On page 159, he falsely claimed:
“Zubair ʿAlī Zai… declared the narration in Nūr al-ʿAynayn to be ṣaḥīḥ.”
🛑 In reality, the author declared the narration weak and rejected, not ṣaḥīḥ or ḥasan.
📌 The writer in question, Abū Bilāl Muḥammad Ismāʿīl Jhangvī, became known for his dishonesty and distortion.
📖 For further details, refer to:
Māhnāmah al-Ḥadīth, Issue 35, pp. 51–60:
“Fifteen Lies of Ismāʿīl Jhangvī”
✦ Personal Experience
Recently, someone brought the book Ikhtilāf-e-Ummat aur Ṣirāṭ-e-Mustaqīm by Muḥammad Yūsuf Ludhiyānwī Deobandī.
Upon researching the manuscripts of Musnad al-Ḥumaydī and Musnad Abī ʿAwanah, the author concluded:
“I left the Deobandī madhhab and chose the path of Qurʾān and Sunnah.”
Al-ḥamdu lillāh
❖ Summary and Final Warning
✅ The abandonment of Rafʿ al-Yadayn before and after Rukūʿ is:
- ❌ Not mansūkh (abrogated)
- ❌ Not proven by any ṣaḥīḥ ḥadīth
- ❌ Not preferred over the mutawātir practice of Rafʿ al-Yadayn
📖 For further study, refer to:
- Juzʾ Rafʿ al-Yadayn by Imām al-Bukhārī
✅ Final Conclusion
🔺 Rafʿ al-Yadayn should always be done before and after Rukūʿ.
🔻 A person who alternates—sometimes doing it and sometimes not—is acting contrary to authentic, mutawātir ḥadīths.
Such inconsistency is incorrect and unjustifiable in light of authentic prophetic practice.
(Shahādat — February 2000)
ھٰذَا مَا عِندِي، وَاللّٰهُ أَعْلَمُ بِالصَّوَاب
