Fath al-Rabbani

Benefits: … Since the abandonment of raising the hands (raf‘ al-yadayn) relies mostly on this narration, its reality will be clarified in detail.

(a) First, consider the translation of this hadith and see that this narration is actually evidence for the affirmation of raising the hands (raf‘ al-yadayn). Nowhere in the entire hadith will you find any word that prohibits raising the hands when going into or rising from bowing (ruku‘).

(b) All Hanafis are opposed to this hadith. If, according to the Hanafi argument, there is only one raising of the hands, then why do they perform raf‘ al-yadayn in the witr prayer? If they say it is due to another evidence, then according to the established narrations of Sahih Bukhari and Muslim, raising the hands should also be done when going into and rising from ruku‘—so why do they deny this? And why this double standard?

Abandon double standards, become of one color,
Either become wholly wax or wholly stone.

This hadith is weak.

(Alif): … Imam Sufyan al-Thawri is a mudallis (one who practices tadlis), and in every chain he narrates with ‘an (from).

(1) … Imam Yahya ibn Ma‘in rahimahullah says: “Wa kana yadallis,” meaning: Sufyan al-Thawri used to practice tadlis. (al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dil: 4/225, and its chain is authentic; al-Kifayah by al-Khatib: p. 361)

(2) … Imam al-Daraqutni rahimahullah says: “Yadallis,” meaning: Sufyan al-Thawri is a mudallis. (al-‘Ilal by al-Daraqutni: 2/169)

(3) … Imam Shu‘bah rahimahullah says: “Yadallis,” meaning: Sufyan al-Thawri practices tadlis. (al-Kamil by Ibn ‘Adi: 1/69)

(4) … Imam ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak rahimahullah says: “Yadallis,” meaning: Sufyan al-Thawri practices tadlis. (al-Kamil: 1/104)

(5) … Imam Hushaym ibn Bashir said to Imam ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak: “Qad kana kabirak yadallisan,” then he mentioned Sufyan al-Thawri and al-A‘mash, meaning: Your two elders, Sufyan al-Thawri and al-A‘mash, used to practice tadlis. (al-Kamil: 1/95, 224; 7/135, and its chain is authentic)

(6) … Imam Sufyan al-Thawri’s student, Imam Abu ‘Asim Dihak ibn Makhlad Nabil, says: “Nara anna Sufyan al-Thawri innama dallasahu ‘an Abi Hanifah,” meaning: We think that Sufyan al-Thawri practiced tadlis from Abu Hanifah rahimahullah. (Sunan al-Daraqutni: 3/201, hadith: 3423)

(7) … Imam al-Bukhari rahimahullah says: “A‘lam al-nas bi al-Thawri Yahya ibn Sa‘id li-annahu ‘arafa hadith sahihihi min tadlisihi,” meaning: The one who knows Sufyan al-Thawri best is Yahya ibn Sa‘id al-Qattan, because he could distinguish the authentic hadith from his tadlis. (al-Kamil by Ibn ‘Adi: 1/111, and its chain is authentic)

It is thus clear that there is consensus on Imam Sufyan al-Thawri being a mudallis. Imam ‘Ayni al-Hanafi writes: “Sufyan min al-mudallisin, wa al-mudallis la yuhtaj bi-‘an‘anatihi illa an yuthbat sama‘uhu min tariq akhar,” meaning: Sufyan (al-Thawri) is among the mudallis narrators, and the narration of a mudallis with ‘an is not a proof unless his hearing (sama‘) is established by another route. (‘Umdat al-Qari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari: 3/112) Qastallani in Irshad al-Sari: 1/286 and Karmani al-Hanafi in Sharh al-Karmani li al-Bukhari: 3/62 have made the same claim. Imam Turkamani al-Hanafi writes: “al-Thawri mudallis,” meaning: Sufyan al-Thawri is a mudallis. (al-Jawhar al-Naqi: 8/262) Imam ‘Ayni al-Hanafi (‘Umdat al-Qari: 1/214), Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri Deobandi (Badh al-Majhud: 5/230), Husayn Ahmad Madani Deobandi (Taqrir Tirmidhi: p. 391), Sarfaraz Safdar Deobandi (Khazain al-Sunan: 2/77), ‘Abd al-Qayyum Haqqani Deobandi (Tawdih al-Sunan: p. 615), Shir Muhammad Mamati Deobandi (A’inah Taskeen al-Sudur: p. 92), Muhammad Amin Okaraawi Deobandi (Majmu‘ah Rasail: 3/331), Abu Yusuf Muhammad Sharif Kotlawi Barelwi (Fiqh al-Faqih: p. 134), Muhammad Abbas Rizwi Barelwi (Wallah Aap Zinda Hain: p. 321), and others have called Imam Sufyan al-Thawri a mudallis. The narration of a trustworthy mudallis with ‘an is weak and unreliable until explicit hearing (sama‘) or corroboration (mutaba‘ah) is established. See: (al-Jawhar al-Naqi: 7/377, ‘Umdat al-Qari by ‘Ayni al-Hanafi: 1/261, al-Binayah by ‘Ayni al-Hanafi: 2/297, 6/539, Fath al-Qadir by Ibn Humam al-Hanafi: 1/52, al-Sa‘ayah by ‘Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawi al-Hanafi: 1/247, al-Ta‘liq al-Hasan by Naimawi al-Hanafi: pp. 98, 99, 198, Idah al-Adillah by Mahmud al-Hasan Deobandi: p. 44, Taqrirat Shaykh al-Hind: p. 35, Haqa’iq al-Sunan by ‘Abd al-Haqq Deobandi, founder of Dar al-‘Ulum Haqqaniyyah: 1/156, 161, Tawdih al-Sunan: p. 586, Fiqh al-Faqih by Muhammad Sharif Barelwi: p. 130)

Janab Amin Okaraawi Deobandi writes: “‘An‘anah by consensus is a sign of weakness.” (Tajalliyat Safdar: 3/93) The Imam of Barelwis, Ahmad Raza Khan, writes: “‘An‘anah of a mudallis, according to the preferred and relied-upon view of the majority of hadith scholars, is rejected and unreliable.” (Fatawa Ridawiyyah: 2/290) He also writes: “‘An‘anah of a mudallis is unacceptable according to the principles of the hadith scholars.” (Fatawa Ridawiyyah: 2/307) In this hadith, Imam Sufyan al-Thawri has not explicitly stated hearing (sama‘), therefore, according to the principles of the hadith scholars, this hadith is weak and not a valid proof.

(Ba) … The following great Imams have declared this hadith weak: Imam al-Bukhari rahimahullah, Imam al-Shafi‘i rahimahullah, Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal rahimahullah, Imam ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak rahimahullah, Imam Abu Hatim al-Razi rahimahullah, Imam Yahya ibn Adam rahimahullah, Imam al-Daraqutni rahimahullah, Imam Ibn Hibban rahimahullah, Imam Abu Dawud rahimahullah, Imam al-Darimi rahimahullah, Imam Muhammad ibn Waddah rahimahullah, Imam al-Bazzar rahimahullah, Imam Muhammad ibn Nasr al-Marwazi rahimahullah, Imam al-Bayhaqi rahimahullah, Imam al-Hakim rahimahullah, Imam Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr rahimahullah, Imam al-Nawawi rahimahullah, Imam Ibn al-Qattan al-Fasi rahimahullah, Imam Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdisi rahimahullah, and others.

Here are the detailed statements of a few Imams: Imam ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak said: “Lam yathbut ‘indi hadith Ibn Mas‘ud,” … meaning: The hadith of Sayyiduna ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud radi Allahu anhu is not established according to me. (Sunan al-Tirmidhi: under hadith 256) Imam Abu Dawud said: “Hatha hadith mukhtasar min hadith tawil, wa laysa huwa b-sahih ‘ala hadha al-lafz,” meaning: This hadith is an abridgment of a long hadith, and it is not authentic in these words. (Abu Dawud: under hadith 748) Imam Abu Hatim al-Razi said: “Hatha khata’,” meaning: This hadith is a mistake. (al-‘Ilal: 1/96) Imam Ibn Hibban rahimahullah said: “Huwa fi al-haqiqah ad‘af shay’ yu‘awwal ‘alayh, li-anna lahu ‘ilalan tubtiluhu,” meaning: In reality, this narration is the weakest thing to rely upon, because it has defects that invalidate it. (al-Talkhis al-Habir: 1/222)

(Jim) … Imam al-Bukhari rahimahullah said in Juz’ Raf‘ al-Yadayn: Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal narrated from Yahya ibn Adam, who said: I saw the book of ‘Abdullah ibn Idris, which he wrote from (the narrator of this hadith) ‘Asim ibn Kulayb, and in it the words “lam ya‘ud” were not present. This is more correct, because according to the scholars, what is written in the book is considered more preserved.

(Dal) … The ahadith affirming raising the hands (raf‘ al-yadayn) are extremely clear, decisive, and numerous, therefore, due to the opposition to authentic ahadith, the weakness of this weak narration is further increased. From the above facts, it is clear that to claim abrogation of raising the hands based on this weak hadith is nothing but a deception of the common people.