Toggle above to switch between keyword search and direct hadith lookup
مصنف ابن ابي شيبه
Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah
كتاب الصلواتBook of Prayers
وضع اليمين على الشمالPlacing the Right Hand Over the Left in Salah
Hadith 3981
اُردوEn
٣٩٨١ - حدثنا وكيع عن موسى بن عمير عن علقمة (بن) (١) وائل بن حجر عن أبيه قال: رأيت النبي ﷺ وضع يمينه على شماله في الصلاة (٢) (٣).
It is narrated from Hazrat Wa'il bin Hujr that I saw the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) placing his right hand over his left hand during prayer.
Explanation & Benefits
Hafiz Zubair Ali Zai
Where should the hands be placed in prayer?
A narration from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah is presented regarding this matter. What is its status in terms of its chain of transmission?
«عن وائل بن حجر قال; رايت النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم يضع يمينه على شماله فى الصلاة تحت السرة» [مصنف ابن ابي شيبه1/390]
Answer:
The narration of Wa’il bin Hujr rahimahullah, as found in Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah (vol. 1, p. 390, Al-Aziz edition, Hyderabad, India, 1386 AH / 1966 CE), is present without the addition of «تحت السرة».
Similarly, in the handwritten manuscript of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah that is present in the library of my respected teacher, Shaykh Abu al-Qasim Muhibbullah Shah al-Rashidi al-Sindi rahimahullah, the words «تحت السرة» are also not present.
Anwar Shah Kashmiri Deobandi said that he has seen three manuscripts of Musannaf (Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah), and in none of them are the words «تحت السرة» present. [فيض الباري ج2 ص267]
The edition of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah that was published from Beirut—
In that as well, the words «تحت السرة» are not present. [ج1 ص342 حديث 3938]
The narration of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah is from Imam Waki’. Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal rahimahullah has also transmitted this narration from Imam Waki’ without «تحت السرة». [مسند احمد ج4ص316حديث: 19051]
Recently, the Deobandi publishers of Idarah al-Qur’an wal-‘Ulum al-Islamiyyah from Karachi have published a copy of Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah, in which, without any reference, the words «تحت السرة» have been added.
A Hanafi Mawlawi, Qasim bin Qutlubugha (born 802 AH, died 979 AH), has transmitted this narration from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah with the addition of «تحت السرة», and regarding him, Burhan al-Din Abu al-Hasan Ibrahim bin ‘Umar al-Biqa’i (d. 885 AH), the author of “Nazm al-Durr fi Tanasub al-Ayat wal-Suwar,” which has been published in eight volumes, has stated: «قاسم بن قطلوبغاكان كذاباً» Qasim bin Qutlubugha was a liar (i.e., a fabricator). [الضوء اللا مع للسخاوي ج6ص186]
See the original article . . . .
Fatawa ‘Ilmiyyah, vol. 1, Kitab al-Salat, page 313
A narration from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah is presented regarding this matter. What is its status in terms of its chain of transmission?
«عن وائل بن حجر قال; رايت النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم يضع يمينه على شماله فى الصلاة تحت السرة» [مصنف ابن ابي شيبه1/390]
Answer:
The narration of Wa’il bin Hujr rahimahullah, as found in Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah (vol. 1, p. 390, Al-Aziz edition, Hyderabad, India, 1386 AH / 1966 CE), is present without the addition of «تحت السرة».
Similarly, in the handwritten manuscript of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah that is present in the library of my respected teacher, Shaykh Abu al-Qasim Muhibbullah Shah al-Rashidi al-Sindi rahimahullah, the words «تحت السرة» are also not present.
Anwar Shah Kashmiri Deobandi said that he has seen three manuscripts of Musannaf (Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah), and in none of them are the words «تحت السرة» present. [فيض الباري ج2 ص267]
The edition of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah that was published from Beirut—
In that as well, the words «تحت السرة» are not present. [ج1 ص342 حديث 3938]
The narration of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah is from Imam Waki’. Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal rahimahullah has also transmitted this narration from Imam Waki’ without «تحت السرة». [مسند احمد ج4ص316حديث: 19051]
Recently, the Deobandi publishers of Idarah al-Qur’an wal-‘Ulum al-Islamiyyah from Karachi have published a copy of Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah, in which, without any reference, the words «تحت السرة» have been added.
A Hanafi Mawlawi, Qasim bin Qutlubugha (born 802 AH, died 979 AH), has transmitted this narration from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah rahimahullah with the addition of «تحت السرة», and regarding him, Burhan al-Din Abu al-Hasan Ibrahim bin ‘Umar al-Biqa’i (d. 885 AH), the author of “Nazm al-Durr fi Tanasub al-Ayat wal-Suwar,” which has been published in eight volumes, has stated: «قاسم بن قطلوبغاكان كذاباً» Qasim bin Qutlubugha was a liar (i.e., a fabricator). [الضوء اللا مع للسخاوي ج6ص186]
See the original article . . . .
Fatawa ‘Ilmiyyah, vol. 1, Kitab al-Salat, page 313
Source: Fatawa Ilmiyyah (Tawdih al-Ahkam), Page: 313
Al-Sheikh Ghulam Mustafa Zaheer Amanpuri
Research on the Ibn Abi Shaybah Narration Regarding Placing the Hands Below the Navel
Question:
What do you say regarding the following statement?
• Allamah Abdul Shakoor Farooqi Luckhnawi Deobandi writes:
“In this issue as well, Imam Shafi’i rahimahullah is in opposition; according to him, men should also fold their hands on the chest. Some short-sighted people think that the Hanafis have no textual evidence in this matter, whereas in the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah, there is a hadith transmitted via Alqamah from Wa’il bin Hujr that he saw the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam folding his hands below the navel. All the narrators of this hadith are reliable.”
[حاشیہ علم الفقہ، حصہ دوم، ص 212]
Answer:
The mentioned narration is not suitable as evidence; details are as follows:
• Sayyiduna Wa’il bin Hujr radi Allahu anhu narrates:
«رَأَيْتُ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَضَعَ يَمِينَهُ عَلَىٰ شِمَالِهِ فِي الصَّلَاةِ [تَحْتَ السُّرَّةِ]»
“I saw the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam placing his right hand over his left hand below the navel in prayer.”
[مصنف ابن أبى شيبة: 390/1]
In this hadith, the words “tahta as-surrati” (below the navel) are found in an extremely deficient, unreliable, and non-circulated manuscript of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah. Its scribe is unknown and unidentified. This manuscript is present in Maktabah Mahmoodiyyah, Madinah. Its owner was Muhammad Abid Sindhi Hanafi [1257ھ], and later it came into the possession of his descendants, who dedicated it to Maktabah Mahmoodiyyah.
• Two researchers of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Hamad bin Abdullah and Muhammad bin Ibrahim Haydan, have written about this manuscript:
«هِيَ نُسْخَةٌ كَامِلَةٌ، لَا بَأْسَ بِهَا لَوْلَا مَا فِيهَا مِنَ التَّصْحِيفَاتِ والسَّقْطِ الْكَثِيرِ .»
“This is a complete manuscript; there would be no harm in copying from it, if it were not for the many corrections and excessive omissions found in it.”
[مصنف ابن أبي شيبة، مقدمة، ص 368، ط مكتبة الرشد]
The words “tahta as-surrati” in this narration were first mentioned by Allamah Qasim bin Qutlubugha Hanafi [879ھ].
• Allamah Biqa’i rahimahullah (885H) says:
«كَانَ كَذَّابًا، يَضَعُ الْحَدِيثَ.»
“Qasim bin Qutlubugha was a severe liar and a fabricator of hadith.”
[الضوء اللامع للسخاوي: 188/6]
• Allamah Nīmwi Hanafi [1322ھ] says:
«أَلْإِنْصَافُ أَنَّ هَذِهِ الزِّيَادَةَ، وَإِنْ كَانَتْ صَحِيحَةً لِوُجُودِهَا فِي أَكْثَرِ النُّسُخِ مِنَ الْمُصَنَّفِ، لَكِنَّهَا مُخَالِفَةٌ لِرِوَايَاتِ الثَّقَاتِ، فَكَانَتْ غَيْرَ مَحْفُوظَةٍ فَالْحَدِيثُ، وَإِنْ كَانَ صَحِيحًا مِّنْ حَيْثُ السَّنَدِ، لَكِنَّهُ ضَعِيفٌ مِّنْ جِهَةِ الْمَتْنِ.»
“The just statement is that this addition, although present in most manuscripts of the Musannaf, is contrary to the narrations of trustworthy narrators, therefore it is not preserved. Thus, this hadith, although authentic in terms of chain, is weak in terms of text.”
[التعليق الحسن، ص 91]
It should be noted that Allamah Nīmwi’s claim that this addition is established in multiple manuscripts is not based on reality. This addition of the words “tahta as-surrati” is not present in any reliable manuscript of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah. When these words do not exist at all, how can it be said that they are contrary to the narration of the trustworthy?
*Note*
If someone says that Allamah Nīmwi retracted this statement and wrote in Ta’liq al-Ta’liq:
«تُقْبَلُ هٰذِهِ الزِّيَادَةُ وَيَقَعُ التَّرْجِيحُ بَيْنَهَا وَبَيْنَ مُعَارِضِهَا، لِأَنَّ هٰذِهِ الزِّيَادَةَ أَرْفَعُ سَنَدًا مِنْ رِوَايَةِ عَلَى الصَّدْرِ الَّتِي أَخْرَجَهَا ابْنُ خُزَيْمَةَ.»
“This addition is acceptable. This hadith will be given preference over the opposing hadith, because the chain of this narration is better than the chain of the chest narration in Ibn Khuzaymah.”
[تعليق التعليق، ص91]
When the addition of “tahta as-surrati” is not present in any reliable manuscript of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, and it was first introduced to the world by Allamah Qasim bin Qutlubugha Hanafi, then what is the meaning of giving it preference over the words “on the chest”?
• Allamah Anwar Shah Kashmiri Deobandi (1353H) says:
«فِي الْمُصَنَّفِ لِابْنِ أَبِي شَيْبَةِ: تَحْتَ السُّرَّةِ، فَاضْطَرَبَتِ الرِّوَايَةُ جِدًّا، وَأَوَّلُ مَنْ نَبَّهَ عَلَى تِلْكَ الزِّيَادَةُ الْأَخِيرَةُ الْعَلَّامَةُ الْقَاسِمُ بْنُ قُطْلُوبُغَا، ثُمَّ إِنَّ لَفْظَ: تَحْتَ السُّرَّةِ، لَمْ يُوجَدْ فِي بَعْضِ نُسَخِهِ، فَظَنَّ الْمُلَّا حَيَاةُ السِّنْدِهِيُّ أَنَّهُ وَقَعَ فِيهِ سَقْطٌ وَحَذْفٌ، ثُمَّ صَارَ مَتْنُ الْأَثَرِ مَرْفُوعًا .
قُلْتُ: وَلَا عَجَبَ أَنْ يَكُونَ كَذَلِكَ، فَإِنِّي رَاجَعْتُ ثَلَاثَ نُسَخِ لِلْمُصَنَّفِ، فَمَا وَجَدْتُهُ فِي وَاحِدَةٍ مِّنْهَا .»
“In Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, the words «تحت السرة» are found; this narration is severely disturbed. Allamah Qasim bin Qutlubugha Hanafi (879H) was the first to mention this addition, then the words ‘tahta as-surrati’ were not found in some manuscripts of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah. Mulla Hayat Sindhi is of the opinion that there has been omission and deletion in this hadith, then these (words of the Tabi’i) became the text of the marfu’ hadith. I (Anwar Shah) say: Such a thing is not surprising, because I have reviewed three manuscripts of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, but I did not find these words in any of them.”
[فيض الباري: 267/2]
• Mufti Taqi Usmani Deobandi says:
“But in my (Mufti Taqi Usmani’s) view, reasoning from this narration is weak, firstly because the words ‘tahta as-surrati’ are not found in the printed copies of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah. Although Allamah Nīmwi has referenced multiple manuscripts in Aathar al-Sunan in which this addition is mentioned, even then, the presence of this addition in some manuscripts and its absence in others certainly makes it doubtful.”
[درس ترمذي: 23/2]
When this addition is not present in any reliable manuscript, and according to Mufti Taqi, it is not found in any printed copy either, on which basis he has declared this hadith doubtful and reasoning from it weak, yet some people, through distortion, have inserted the words “tahta as-surrati” into some printed copies of the Musannaf. Why is this so?
[فتاوىٰ امن پوری، قسط: 540، صفحه: 15-20]
See the original article . . . .
Fatawa Amnpoori, Part: 540, Pages: 15-20
Question:
What do you say regarding the following statement?
• Allamah Abdul Shakoor Farooqi Luckhnawi Deobandi writes:
“In this issue as well, Imam Shafi’i rahimahullah is in opposition; according to him, men should also fold their hands on the chest. Some short-sighted people think that the Hanafis have no textual evidence in this matter, whereas in the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah, there is a hadith transmitted via Alqamah from Wa’il bin Hujr that he saw the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam folding his hands below the navel. All the narrators of this hadith are reliable.”
[حاشیہ علم الفقہ، حصہ دوم، ص 212]
Answer:
The mentioned narration is not suitable as evidence; details are as follows:
• Sayyiduna Wa’il bin Hujr radi Allahu anhu narrates:
«رَأَيْتُ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَضَعَ يَمِينَهُ عَلَىٰ شِمَالِهِ فِي الصَّلَاةِ [تَحْتَ السُّرَّةِ]»
“I saw the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam placing his right hand over his left hand below the navel in prayer.”
[مصنف ابن أبى شيبة: 390/1]
In this hadith, the words “tahta as-surrati” (below the navel) are found in an extremely deficient, unreliable, and non-circulated manuscript of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah. Its scribe is unknown and unidentified. This manuscript is present in Maktabah Mahmoodiyyah, Madinah. Its owner was Muhammad Abid Sindhi Hanafi [1257ھ], and later it came into the possession of his descendants, who dedicated it to Maktabah Mahmoodiyyah.
• Two researchers of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Hamad bin Abdullah and Muhammad bin Ibrahim Haydan, have written about this manuscript:
«هِيَ نُسْخَةٌ كَامِلَةٌ، لَا بَأْسَ بِهَا لَوْلَا مَا فِيهَا مِنَ التَّصْحِيفَاتِ والسَّقْطِ الْكَثِيرِ .»
“This is a complete manuscript; there would be no harm in copying from it, if it were not for the many corrections and excessive omissions found in it.”
[مصنف ابن أبي شيبة، مقدمة، ص 368، ط مكتبة الرشد]
The words “tahta as-surrati” in this narration were first mentioned by Allamah Qasim bin Qutlubugha Hanafi [879ھ].
• Allamah Biqa’i rahimahullah (885H) says:
«كَانَ كَذَّابًا، يَضَعُ الْحَدِيثَ.»
“Qasim bin Qutlubugha was a severe liar and a fabricator of hadith.”
[الضوء اللامع للسخاوي: 188/6]
• Allamah Nīmwi Hanafi [1322ھ] says:
«أَلْإِنْصَافُ أَنَّ هَذِهِ الزِّيَادَةَ، وَإِنْ كَانَتْ صَحِيحَةً لِوُجُودِهَا فِي أَكْثَرِ النُّسُخِ مِنَ الْمُصَنَّفِ، لَكِنَّهَا مُخَالِفَةٌ لِرِوَايَاتِ الثَّقَاتِ، فَكَانَتْ غَيْرَ مَحْفُوظَةٍ فَالْحَدِيثُ، وَإِنْ كَانَ صَحِيحًا مِّنْ حَيْثُ السَّنَدِ، لَكِنَّهُ ضَعِيفٌ مِّنْ جِهَةِ الْمَتْنِ.»
“The just statement is that this addition, although present in most manuscripts of the Musannaf, is contrary to the narrations of trustworthy narrators, therefore it is not preserved. Thus, this hadith, although authentic in terms of chain, is weak in terms of text.”
[التعليق الحسن، ص 91]
It should be noted that Allamah Nīmwi’s claim that this addition is established in multiple manuscripts is not based on reality. This addition of the words “tahta as-surrati” is not present in any reliable manuscript of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah. When these words do not exist at all, how can it be said that they are contrary to the narration of the trustworthy?
*Note*
If someone says that Allamah Nīmwi retracted this statement and wrote in Ta’liq al-Ta’liq:
«تُقْبَلُ هٰذِهِ الزِّيَادَةُ وَيَقَعُ التَّرْجِيحُ بَيْنَهَا وَبَيْنَ مُعَارِضِهَا، لِأَنَّ هٰذِهِ الزِّيَادَةَ أَرْفَعُ سَنَدًا مِنْ رِوَايَةِ عَلَى الصَّدْرِ الَّتِي أَخْرَجَهَا ابْنُ خُزَيْمَةَ.»
“This addition is acceptable. This hadith will be given preference over the opposing hadith, because the chain of this narration is better than the chain of the chest narration in Ibn Khuzaymah.”
[تعليق التعليق، ص91]
When the addition of “tahta as-surrati” is not present in any reliable manuscript of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, and it was first introduced to the world by Allamah Qasim bin Qutlubugha Hanafi, then what is the meaning of giving it preference over the words “on the chest”?
• Allamah Anwar Shah Kashmiri Deobandi (1353H) says:
«فِي الْمُصَنَّفِ لِابْنِ أَبِي شَيْبَةِ: تَحْتَ السُّرَّةِ، فَاضْطَرَبَتِ الرِّوَايَةُ جِدًّا، وَأَوَّلُ مَنْ نَبَّهَ عَلَى تِلْكَ الزِّيَادَةُ الْأَخِيرَةُ الْعَلَّامَةُ الْقَاسِمُ بْنُ قُطْلُوبُغَا، ثُمَّ إِنَّ لَفْظَ: تَحْتَ السُّرَّةِ، لَمْ يُوجَدْ فِي بَعْضِ نُسَخِهِ، فَظَنَّ الْمُلَّا حَيَاةُ السِّنْدِهِيُّ أَنَّهُ وَقَعَ فِيهِ سَقْطٌ وَحَذْفٌ، ثُمَّ صَارَ مَتْنُ الْأَثَرِ مَرْفُوعًا .
قُلْتُ: وَلَا عَجَبَ أَنْ يَكُونَ كَذَلِكَ، فَإِنِّي رَاجَعْتُ ثَلَاثَ نُسَخِ لِلْمُصَنَّفِ، فَمَا وَجَدْتُهُ فِي وَاحِدَةٍ مِّنْهَا .»
“In Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, the words «تحت السرة» are found; this narration is severely disturbed. Allamah Qasim bin Qutlubugha Hanafi (879H) was the first to mention this addition, then the words ‘tahta as-surrati’ were not found in some manuscripts of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah. Mulla Hayat Sindhi is of the opinion that there has been omission and deletion in this hadith, then these (words of the Tabi’i) became the text of the marfu’ hadith. I (Anwar Shah) say: Such a thing is not surprising, because I have reviewed three manuscripts of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, but I did not find these words in any of them.”
[فيض الباري: 267/2]
• Mufti Taqi Usmani Deobandi says:
“But in my (Mufti Taqi Usmani’s) view, reasoning from this narration is weak, firstly because the words ‘tahta as-surrati’ are not found in the printed copies of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah. Although Allamah Nīmwi has referenced multiple manuscripts in Aathar al-Sunan in which this addition is mentioned, even then, the presence of this addition in some manuscripts and its absence in others certainly makes it doubtful.”
[درس ترمذي: 23/2]
When this addition is not present in any reliable manuscript, and according to Mufti Taqi, it is not found in any printed copy either, on which basis he has declared this hadith doubtful and reasoning from it weak, yet some people, through distortion, have inserted the words “tahta as-surrati” into some printed copies of the Musannaf. Why is this so?
[فتاوىٰ امن پوری، قسط: 540، صفحه: 15-20]
See the original article . . . .
Fatawa Amnpoori, Part: 540, Pages: 15-20
Source: Monthly Magazine al-Sunnah Jhelum, Page: 999
