Proof of Rafʿ al-Yadayn from Abu Bakr al-Siddiq ﷺ

الحمد لله رب العالمين والصلوة والسلام على رسوله الأمين و رضي الله عن أصحابه أجمعين و رحمة الله على التابعين و من تبعهم بإحسان إلى يوم الدين . أما بعد:

The claim of Ahl al-Sunnah, that is Ahl al-Hadith, regarding raising the hands in prayer is as follows:
Our master Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, used to raise his hands at the beginning of the prayer, before bowing, and after bowing, and there is no authentic and accepted hadith proving that this raising of hands was abrogated, forbidden, or abandoned in his later life.
There are many evidences supporting this claim, some of which can be studied in my book “Noor al-Aynayn fi Ithbat Mas’alah Raf’ al-Yadayn.” For now, keeping in view فـعـلـيـكـم بسنتي و سنة الخلفاء الراشدين المهديين ., the translation, research, and meaning of a magnificent hadith narrated by our master Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, is presented, which proves the continuous and uninterrupted practice of raising the hands:
The famous scholar Imam Bayhaqi, may Allah have mercy on him (died 458 AH), said: أخبرنا أبو عبد الله الحافظ : ثنا أبو عبد الله محمد بن عبد الله الصفار الزاهد إملاء من أصل كتابه . قال قال أبو إسماعيل محمد بن إسماعيل السلمي : صليت خلف أبى النعمان محمد بن الفضل فرفع يديه حين افتتح الصلوة و حين ركع و حين رفع رأسه من الركوع . فسألته عن ذلك فقال: صليت خلف حماد بن زيد فرفع يديه حين افتتح الصلوة و حين ركع و حين رفع رأسه من الركوع . فسألته عن ذلك فقال: صليت خلف أيوب السختياني فكان يرفع يديه إذا افتتح الصلوة وإذا ركع و إذا رفع رأسه من الركوع . فسألته فقال : رأيت عطاء بن أبى رباح يرفع يديه إذا افتتح الصلوة وإذا ركع و إذا رفع رأسه من الركوع. فسألته فقال : صليت خلف عبد الله بن الزبير فكان يرفع يديه إذا افتتح الصلوة و إذا ركع و إذا رفع رأسه من الركوع. فسألته فقال عبد الله بن الزبير : صليت خلف أبى بكر الصديق رضى الله عنه فكان يرفع يديه إذا افتتح الصلوة وإذا ركع و إذا رفع رأسه من الركوع . وقال أبو بكر : صليت خلف رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فكان يرفع يديه إذا افتتح الصلوة و إذا ركع و إذا رفع رأسه من الركوع رواته ثقات
Abu Abdullah al-Hafiz narrated to us. (He said:) Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Abdullah al-Saffar al-Zahid narrated a hadith from his original book by dictation, he said: Abu Ismail Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Sulami said: I prayed behind Abu al-Nu’man Muhammad ibn al-Fadl, and he raised his hands when starting the prayer, when bowing, and when rising from bowing. Then I asked him about it, and he said: I prayed behind Hammad ibn Zayd, and he raised his hands when starting the prayer, when bowing, and when rising from bowing. Then I asked him about it, and he said: I prayed behind Ayyub al-Sakhtiyani, and he used to raise his hands when starting the prayer, when bowing, and when rising from bowing. Then I asked him about it, and he said: I saw Ata ibn Abi Rabah, he used to raise his hands when starting the prayer, when bowing, and when rising from bowing. Then I asked him about it, and he said: I prayed behind Abdullah ibn Zubair, may Allah be pleased with both of them, and he used to raise his hands when starting the prayer, when bowing, and when rising from bowing. I asked him about it, and Abdullah ibn Zubair, may Allah be pleased with both of them, said: I prayed behind Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, and he used to raise his hands when starting the prayer, when bowing, and when rising from bowing.
And Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, said: I prayed behind the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and he used to raise his hands when starting the prayer, when bowing, and when rising from bowing. Its narrators are trustworthy.

Hafiz Zahabi said: رواته ثقات Its narrators are trustworthy.

Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani said: و رجاله ثقات and its narrators are trustworthy.

It is submitted that the chain of this hadith is absolutely authentic from the principles of hadith and the science of narrators. The brief and comprehensive conditions of all the narrators of this hadith are as follows:

① Imam Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Al-Husayn Al-Bayhaqi, may Allah have mercy on him:

(Deceased 458 AH)
There is consensus on his trustworthiness and truthfulness, and here are ten testimonies from the great hadith scholars about him:
➊ Hafiz Abu al-Hasan Abdul Ghaffar bin Ismail al-Farsi (deceased 529 AH) said:
الإمام الحافظ الفقيه الأصولي الدين الورع ، واحد زمانه فى الحفظ و فرد أقرانه فى الإتقان والضبط . Imam, Hafiz, jurist, usuli, pious, abstinent, unparalleled in memorization and precision in his time (trustworthy).

➋ Ibn al-Jawzi (deceased 597 AH) said: و كان واحد زمانه فى الحفظ والإتقان ، حسن التصنيف He was unmatched in his time in memorization and precision (trustworthy and meticulous), and was a writer of good books.

➌ Abu al-Qasim Zahir bin Tahir bin Muhammad al-Shihami (deceased 533 AH) said:

الشيخ الإمام الحافظ أبو بكر أحمد بن الحسين بن على البيهقي رحمه الله

➍ Abu Saad Abdul Karim bin Muhammad bin Mansur al-Sam’ani (deceased 562 AH) said:

كان إماما فقيها حافظا جمع بين معرفة الحديث و فقهه و كان تتبع نصوص الشافعي و جمع كتابا فيها

He was an imam, jurist, and Hafiz; he combined knowledge of hadith and jurisprudence of hadith and compiled the sayings of Shafi’i into one book…

➎ Ibn Nuqta al-Baghdadi (deceased 629 AH) said: ”الحافظ الإمام “ Hafiz Imam.

➏ Yaqut al-Hamawi (deceased 626 AH) said: و هو الإمام الحافظ الفقيه فى أصول الدين ، الورع ، أوحد الدهر فى الحفظ و الإتقان مع الدين المتين And he was an imam, Hafiz, jurist in the fundamentals of religion, pious, with strong religiosity, unmatched in memorization and trustworthiness in his time.

➐ Historian Ibn Khalkan (deceased 681 AH) said: الفقيه الشافعي الحافظ الكبير المشهور ، واحد زمانه و فرد أقرانه فى الفنون A great Shafi’i jurist and Hafiz, famous, unmatched in his time and superior to his peers in the sciences.

Note: Shafi’i does not mean being a follower (muqallid), as will be explained later, InshaAllah.
➑ Hafiz al-Dhahabi said: هو الحافظ العلامة الثبت الفقيه ، شيخ الإسلام He is a Hafiz, scholar, trustworthy, jurist, Sheikh al-Islam.

➒ Hafiz Ibn Kathir (deceased 774 AH) said: وكان واحد زمانه فى الإتقان والحفظ و التصنيف ، فقيها محدثا أصوليا He was unmatched in his time in trustworthiness, memorization, and authorship; he was a jurist, hadith scholar, and usuli.

➓ Hafiz Ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi, may Allah have mercy on him, said: كان واحد زمانه و فرد أقرانه حفظا و اتقانا وثقة و عمدة وهو شيخ خراسان … He was unmatched in his time and alone among his peers in memorization, precision, trustworthiness, and reliability; he is the Sheikh of Khorasan.

There is no criticism of Imam Bayhaqi in hadith narration, therefore there is consensus on his trustworthiness.
If someone says that Imam Bayhaqi was a follower (muqallid) of Imam Shafi’i, the answer is that Imam Bayhaqi was not a follower of Imam Shafi’i, and here are ten (10) proofs presented:
➊ Imam Bayhaqi wrote about Al-Qadi: فإنه غير جائز له أن يقلد أحدا من أهل دهره So surely it is not permissible for him to follow any one of his contemporaries…

If it is impermissible for Al-Qadi to follow scholars of his own time, then it is even more impermissible to follow scholars of earlier times, and it is known that Imam Bayhaqi was superior to Al-Qadi.
➋ Imam Bayhaqi transmitted with authentic chain the fatwa of Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Mas’ud, may Allah be pleased with him, that لا تقلدوا دينكم الرجال … and do not imitate men in your religion…

There is no evidence in any of Imam Bayhaqi’s books that he opposed this fatwa, so it is impossible that he would imitate in opposition to this authoritative hadith.
➌ Imam Bayhaqi transmitted with an excellent chain the ruling of Sayyiduna Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, that one should not turn to people over the Book of Allah.

There is no evidence that Bayhaqi opposed this Farouqi ruling.
➍ Imam Bayhaqi was a great scholar, and it is impossible for a scholar to be a follower (muqallid), because a follower is ignorant. Sarfaraz Khan Deobandi wrote:
“And imitation is only for the ignorant.”

➎ It is absolutely not proven that Imam Bayhaqi ever said: “I am a follower.”
➏ It is not proven from any of Imam Bayhaqi’s students that their teacher was a follower.
➐ Calling a scholar Shafi’i is not proof of his being a follower; for example, Abu Bakr al-Qaffal al-Shafi’i, Abu Ali al-Shafi’i, and Qadi Husayn al-Shafi’i narrated that they said: لسنا مقلدين للشافعي، بل وافق رأينا رأيه We are not followers of Shafi’i, rather our opinion coincided with his opinion.

➑ Imam Bayhaqi said that he presented the sayings of everyone on the basis of the Book, Sunnah, and Athar, and then found Imam Shafi’i to be the most followed (in following the Book and Sunnah)…

It is clear that Bayhaqi preferred the sayings of Shafi’i with his own ijtihad.
➒ Imam Bayhaqi quoted from Imam Ibn Abi Hatim’s book Adab al-Shafi’i wa Manaqibihi the saying of Imam Shafi’i: و لا تقلدوني And do not imitate me.

How could it be that despite this saying, Imam Bayhaqi would imitate?
➓ The innovation of imitation began in the fourth century AH. See A’lam al-Muwaqqi’in by Ibn al-Qayyim

Al-Radd ‘ala man Akhlada ila al-Ard

and The Issue of Imitation in Religion

It is not proven that Imam Bayhaqi was involved in the innovation of imitation; rather, in his book, he wrote a chapter on raising the hands when standing from two or three rak’ahs (if the prayer is four or three rak’ahs), thereby refuting the imitation of Imam Shafi’i: “Chapter on raising the hands when standing from two rak’ahs”

② Abu Abdullah Al-Hafiz (Al-Hakim Al-Nisaburi Sahib Al-Mustadrak)

The following hadith scholars and ulema have authenticated and praised you:
✿ Khateeb Baghdadi
✿ Ibn al-Jawzi
✿ Al-Dhahabi
✿ Ibn Kathir
✿ Abu Saad al-Sam’ani
✿ Hafiz Ibn Hajar
✿ Abdul Ghaffar bin Ismail al-Farsi
✿ Abdul Wahhab bin Ali al-Subki
✿ Abu al-Khair Muhammad bin Muhammad al-Jazari
✿ Bayhaqi
In comparison, the criticism of Hafiz Muhammad bin Tahir al-Maqdisi is rejected.
Note: The criticism attributed to Imam Hakim by Ibn al-Falaki يميل إلى التشيع and the criticism attributed to Sheikh al-Islam Abu Ismail al-Harawi calling him “an imam in hadith and a filthy Rafidhi” are not proven with authentic chains from these two scholars, therefore this criticism is rejected for three reasons:
◈ It is not proven with an authentic chain.
◈ It contradicts the authentication of the majority.
◈ From Hakim’s books such as Al-Mustadrak, it is clear that he was not Shia but Sunni.
For detailed references, see my book: Tawzeeh al-Ahkam

and Al-Mustadrak (

and from the virtues of Amir al-Mu’minin Umar bin al-Khattab رضي الله عنه)
Master Amin Okara Deobandi wrote about Imam Hakim that “he is written as a filthy Rafidhi in Tadhkirat al-Huffaz.”

It is submitted that Okara’s criticism is rejected and invalid for four reasons:
● In Tadhkirat al-Huffaz by al-Dhahabi, it is narrated from Muhammad bin Tahir al-Maqdisi that he asked Abu Ismail al-Ansari about Hakim and he said: ثقة فــي الــحـديـث، رافضي خبيث He was trustworthy in hadith, he was a filthy Rafidhi.

This criticism is not proven with an authentic chain from Muhammad bin Tahir.
● This criticism is rejected because it contradicts the authentication of the majority.
● Hakim wrote about the virtues and merits of Sayyiduna Umar رضي الله عنه, Sayyiduna Mughirah bin Shu’bah رضي الله عنه, and Sayyiduna Abu Sufyan رضي الله عنه, and it is impossible for a Shia to believe in the virtue of these companions; rather, Shias speak ill of these companions. (May Allah protect us)
● Okara’s teacher and the “imam” of the Hayati Deobandis, Sarfaraz Khan Safdar Deobandi, wrote about Imam Hakim that he is the same Imam called Al-Hakim, whose book Al-Mustadrak has been published. Allama Dhahabi رحمه الله writes that he was the great Hafiz and Imam of the Muhadditheen.

To the Okara party, it is submitted that if you do not accept the research of the majority of Muhadditheen, then at least accept the research of your self-made Imam of Ahl al-Sunnah!

③ Authentication and Praise of Imam Abu Abdullah Hamid bin Abdullah bin Ahmad Al-Zahid Al-Saffar Al-Isfahani, may Allah have mercy on him:

Presented from ten hadith scholars and ulema:
➊ Al-Bayhaqi called him trustworthy in the mentioned narration.
➋ Al-Hakim authenticated one hadith narrated by him by saying صحيح على شرط الشيخين.

Al-Hakim described him in the history of Nishapur as the hadith scholar of Khorasan in his time and one whose prayers were accepted.

➌ Al-Dhahabi called him trustworthy and said: الشيخ الإمام المحدث القدوة

➍ Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani called him trustworthy.
➎ Abu Nu’aym al-Isfahani said: أحد العباد He was among the worshippers.

➏ Abu Sa’d al-Sam’ani said: و كان زاهدا حسن السيرة ورعا كثير الخير and he was ascetic, of good character, pious, and very virtuous.

➐ Ibn al-Jawzi described him as the hadith scholar of Khorasan and one whose prayers were accepted.

➑ Hafiz Ibn Kathir described him as the hadith scholar of Khorasan of his era and one whose prayers were answered (i.e., mustajab al-du’awat).

➒ Ibn al-Athir al-Jazari (d. 630 AH) said: كان زاهدا حسن السيرة ورعا He was ascetic, of good character, and pious.

➓ Salah al-Din Khalil ibn Aybak al-Safadi (d. 764 AH) described him as the hadith scholar of Khorasan of his era.

He heard hadith from his teacher Abu Isma’il al-Sulami. See Al-Mustadrak

And it is not proven that he was a mudallis (one who conceals the source), therefore this hadith is connected and authentic.
For details see the respected teacher Maulana Faizur Rahman al-Thawri, may Allah have mercy on him, in his footnote on: Jala’ al-‘Aynayn bi Takhrij Riwayat Juz’ Raf’ al-Yadayn

Benefit: Although Muhammad ibn Abdullah al-Saffar does not need following, it is stated that Abdullah ibn Yahya ibn Mihran ibn Khalid ibn Uthman ibn Abdullah al-Harshi: Ibn Abi Dhikr or al-Qadi, may Allah have mercy on him, has fully followed him by saying exactly the hadith: ثنا أبو إسماعيل محمد بن إسماعيل الترمذي. See the hadith compiler Abu al-Hasan Ahmad ibn Ibrahim ibn ‘Abdu al-‘Abdawi al-Nisaburi, i.e., Juz’ al-‘Abdawi

Majmu’at Ajza’ al-Hadithiyyah, researched by Mashhoor bin Hasan

④ Abu Ismail Muhammad bin Ismail bin Yusuf Al-Salmi Al-Tirmidhi, may Allah have mercy on him:

The authentication of Abu Ismail Muhammad bin Ismail bin Yusuf Al-Sulami Al-Tirmidhi, may Allah have mercy on him, is established by the consensus of the majority of hadith scholars, among which ten references are as follows:
➊ Imam Al-Daraqutni said about him: ثقة صدوق

➋ Hafiz Ibn Hibban mentioned him in Kitab Al-Thiqat.

➌ Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi said: و كان فهما متقنا مشهورا بمذهب السنة and he was intelligent, trustworthy, and well-known for adhering to the creed of Ahl al-Sunnah.

➍ Al-Hakim Al-Nishapuri said that the hadith narrated by Muhammad bin Ismail Al-Sulami is صحيح الإسناد.

➎ Hafiz Abu Awana narrated many hadiths from him in his Sahih Abi Awana. For example, see Sahih Abi Awana

➏ Abu Saad Al-Sam’ani said: فقيه عالم ثقه صدوق .. فقيه عالم ثقة صدوق

➐ Hafiz Al-Dhahabi said: الإمام الحافظ الثقة

And after quoting the criticism of Ibn Abi Hatim, he said: انبوم الحال على توثيقه و إمامته His authentication and leadership have been firmly established (i.e., a definitive ruling).

➑ Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani said: ثقة حافظ لم يتضح قول أبى حاتم فيه He is trustworthy; Abu Hatim’s (i.e., Ibn Abi Hatim’s) statement about him is not clear.

➒ Ibn Nasir Al-Din Al-Dimashqi said: ثقه منتقن

➓ Muhammad bin Ali bin Ahmad Al-Dawoodi (d. 945 AH) said: ثقه حافظ إلخ

In contrast to this great authentication, Imam Abdur Rahman bin Abi Hatim Al-Razi said:
سمعت منه بمكة و تكلموا فيه I heard this from him in Makkah and he spoke about it.

This criticism is rejected and invalid for four reasons:
◈ Those who criticized (the attackers) are unknown, i.e., anonymous, and the criticism of an unknown person is not accepted.
◈ It is not known what was criticized; that is, the criticism is unknown.
◈ This criticism contradicts the authentication of the majority of hadith scholars.
◈ Esteemed scholars such as Hafiz Ibn Hajar and others have rejected this criticism, and Al-Hakim Al-Nishapuri said: لم يتكلم فيه أبو حاتم Abu Hatim (Al-Razi) did not criticize them.

When Imam Abu Hatim, the father of Imam Ibn Abi Hatim, did not criticize Imam Muhammad bin Ismail Al-Sulami, then what value is there in the unknown criticism of unknown attackers?
Benefit: Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi said about Muhammad bin Ismail Al-Sulami Al-Tirmidhi:
و روى عنه أيضا أبو عيسى الترمذي و أبو عبدالرحمن النسائي فى صحيحيهما And both Abu Isa Al-Tirmidhi and Abu Abdur Rahman Al-Nasa’i also narrated from him in their respective Sahih books.

It is understood that he was trustworthy and authentic in hadith according to both Imam Tirmidhi and Imam Nasa’i.

⑤ Imam Abu al-Numan Muhammad ibn al-Fadl al-Sadawi al-Basri:

Many hadith scholars have declared Aram, may Allah have mercy on him, as trustworthy and truthful. Ten references are as follows:
➊ Abu Hatim al-Razi said: ثقة and said: When Aram narrates a hadith to you, then accept it.
➋ Muhammad ibn Muslim ibn Warah said: الصدوق المأمون

➌ Imam Ajli said: بـصـري ثقة رجـل صـالـح … و كان ثقة يـعـد مـن أصحاب الحديث A trustworthy, pious man from Basra… and he was trustworthy, counted among the companions of hadith.

➍ Imam Muhammad ibn Yahya al-Dhuhli, may Allah have mercy on him, said: و كان بعيدا من العرامة ثقة صدوقا مسلما He was free from bad manners, trustworthy, truthful, and a Muslim.

➎ Imam Nasai said: و كان أحد الثقات قبل أن يختلط and he was one of the trustworthy narrators before the mixing (ikhtilath).

➏ Hakim Nishapuri said: حافظ ثقة

➐ Muhaddith Khalili Qazwini said: ثم من بعدهم من المتقنين أبو النعمان عارم، معتمد فى حديثه After him, among the trustworthy narrators is Abu al-Numan Aram, his hadith is relied upon.

➑ Aqili said: فمن سمع من عارم قبل الإختلاط فهو أحد ثقات المسلمين و إنما الكلام فيه بعد الإختلاط . So whoever heard from Aram before the mixing (ikhtilath), he is among the trustworthy narrators of the Muslims, and the criticism is only after the mixing.

➒ Imam Bukhari narrated many hadiths from Abu al-Numan in Sahih Bukhari, which is evidence that he was trustworthy, truthful, and authentic according to Imam Bukhari.
➓ Imam Muslim narrated hadiths from Abu al-Numan al-Sadusi in Sahih Muslim, which is his endorsement of Abu al-Numan.
If someone says, “Abu al-Numan suffered from mixing (ikhtilath) in his later life, so this hadith is weak,” then this objection is rejected for five reasons:
◈ Hafiz Dhahabi said about Abu al-Numan: ثقة شهير ، يقال : اختلط بآخره It is commonly said that he suffered from mixing in the end.

And he said: تغير قبل موته فما حدث He suffered from alteration (mixing) before his death but did not narrate any hadith.

When Imam Abu al-Numan did not narrate any hadith after the mixing, then what is the objection?
◈ How did Abu al-Numan suffer from mixing? In explanation, Abu Hatim al-Razi’s statement is presented: و زال عقله and his intellect was lost.

Whoever loses his intellect becomes insane, so if a trustworthy narrator became insane in his later life, then he is excused; in the sight of Allah, he is not a criminal.
A person who becomes insane does not narrate hadith, nor does any sane person listen to hadith from an insane person, so the objection of mixing on the mentioned hadith is incorrect.
◈ Trustworthy Hafiz Imam Abu Ismail Aslami said that he prayed behind Abu al-Numan, and this is proof that Abu al-Numan was neither affected by mixing nor insane at that time but was leading people in prayer. Only an insane person prays behind another insane person.
◈ Imam Bayhaqi said رواته ثقات and by reasoning from this hadith, he testified that the narrators of this hadith are trustworthy in narrating from each other, so the objection of mixing here is rejected.
◈ Imam Abdul Razzaq said: The people of Mecca took the raising of hands in the beginning of prayer, at bowing, and when rising from bowing from Ibn Jurayj; he took it from Ata’ ibn Abi Rabah; Ata’ took it from Ibn al-Zubair, may Allah be pleased with them; and Ibn al-Zubair took it from Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him; and he took it from the Prophet, peace be upon him.

Aqili’s grandfather Abu Khalid Yazid ibn Muhammad ibn Hammad al-Aqili al-Makki, may Allah have mercy on him, said: I have not seen anyone in Basra who prays better than Abu al-Numan Aram, and people said: He learned prayer from Hammad ibn Zaid, and Hammad learned from Ayyub, etc.

Benefit: Tahir al-Qadri Sahib has also given a strong response to the allegation of mixing against Abu al-Numan. See the book: Aqeedah al-Tawassul

⑥ Hammad bin Zaid:

A primary narrator of the Sahihain, a great Imam, jurist, and highly trustworthy. Ibn Sa’d, Mujalli, Ibn Hibban, and others have called him trustworthy, and Imam Yahya bin Ma’in said: ليس أحد فى أيوب أثبت من حماد بن زيد “There is no one more trustworthy than Hammad bin Zaid in narrations from Ayub.”

This narration is also from Ayub al-Sakhtiyani.

⑦ Ayub bin Abi Tamimah al-Sakhtiyani, may Allah have mercy on him:

A primary narrator of the Sahihain, a great Imam, jurist, and highly trustworthy. Imam Yahya bin Ma’in, Ibn Sa’d, Abu Hatim al-Razi, Ibn Hibban, and others have declared him trustworthy.

⑧ Imam Ata bin Abi Rabah al-Makki, a venerable Tabi’i:

A primary narrator of the Sahihain, a great Imam, jurist, and highly trustworthy. Ibn Sa’d, Bajali, Abu Zur’ah al-Razi, Ibn Hibban, and others have declared him trustworthy.
Benefit: It is also established from another narration that Ata bin Abi Rabah, may Allah have mercy on him, used to raise his hands before and after bowing (ruku’).

⑨ Our Master Abdullah bin al-Zubair, may Allah be pleased with them both:

Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn al-Zubair رضي الله عنهما was a famous companion and a venerable Imam.
Benefit: Abu al-Zubair رحمه الله narrates that I saw both Ibn Umar and Abdullah ibn al-Zubair رضي الله عنهما raising their hands before and after bowing (ruku).

There is no narration from Sayyiduna Ibn Zubair رضي الله عنهما that indicates abandoning the raising of hands.

⑩ Sayyiduna Abu Bakr al-Siddiq رضي الله عنه:

Sayyiduna Abu Bakr As-Siddiq رضي الله عنه, the first Caliph, Amir al-Mu’minin, and certainly one of the people of Paradise.
Warning: There is no authentic or accepted narration proving the abandonment of raising the hands (raf’ al-yadain) from Sayyiduna Abu Bakr As-Siddiq رضي الله عنه. The narration attributed to Muhammad bin Jabir Al-Yamami is weak, rejected, and invalid.
Muhammad bin Jabir has been declared weak by the majority of hadith scholars. See Majma’ az-Zawa’id

.
Summary of the research: This research proves that the continuous raising of hands narrated from Sayyiduna Abu Bakr As-Siddiq رضي الله عنه is completely authentic in terms of hadith principles, the names of narrators, as well as the chain and text.
Explanation of the hadith: From this hadith and its explanation, the following points are established:
◈ The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم used to raise his hands at the beginning of the prayer, before bowing (ruku’), and after bowing.
◈ After the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, Sayyiduna Abu Bakr As-Siddiq رضي الله عنه used to raise his hands before and after bowing.
◈ After Sayyiduna Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه, Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn al-Zubair رضي الله عنهما used to raise his hands before and after bowing.
◈ After Sayyiduna Ibn al-Zubair رضي الله عنهما, Imam Ata ibn Abi Rabah رحمه الله used to raise his hands before and after bowing.
◈ After Imam Ata, Imam Ayyub as-Sakhtiyani used to raise his hands before and after bowing.
◈ After Imam Ayyub as-Sakhtiyani, Imam Hammad ibn Zayd used to raise his hands before and after bowing.
After Imam Hammad ibn Zayd, the famous teacher of Imam Bukhari, Imam Abu al-Numan as-Sudusi (d. 224 AH) used to raise his hands before and after bowing.
It is clear that during the best era of the best generations (Khair al-Qurun), from the time of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم until the third century AH, the great Imams of Ahl al-Sunnah and trustworthy narrators of hadith continuously and uninterruptedly practiced raising the hands before and after bowing. Therefore, considering raising the hands as abrogated, forbidden, or abandoned is incorrect and false. If raising the hands had been abrogated, Sayyiduna Abu Bakr As-Siddiq رضي الله عنه would never have raised his hands after the death of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم or during the last period of his life. He led the last prayers behind the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and even led the last prayer on his prayer mat. Could he not have known that raising the hands was abrogated or abandoned? If raising the hands had been abrogated or abandoned, neither Sayyiduna Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه nor his grandson Sayyiduna Ibn al-Zubair رضي الله عنهما would have ever raised their hands. They learned prayer from their grandfather, who was the most excellent after the Noble Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.
◈ None of the respected hadith scholars have declared this hadith weak.
◈ Those who claim that raising the hands was abrogated or abandoned cannot present any continuous hadith until the Day of Judgment proving that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم abandoned raising the hands at the end, then his companion abandoned it, then the companion’s student (Tabi’i) abandoned it, then the student of that Tabi’i (Tabi’ al-Tabi’i) abandoned it, and so on.
◈ This hadith is decisive in proving that raising the hands was neither abandoned nor abrogated in the end.

① A person wrote about Imam Bayhaqi that he was a follower of Imam Shafi’i, may Allah have mercy on him, and was strongly biased against the Hanafi school, and so strict in following Imam Shafi’i that when the great hadith scholar Abu Muhammad al-Juwayni intended to leave the following of Imam Shafi’i and perform ijtihad himself, Imam Bayhaqi wrote him a letter forbidding him, saying that it is absolutely not permissible for you to leave the following of Imam Shafi’i (Tabaqat al-Shafi’iyyah).

The answers to these false objections are as follows:
◈ Imam Bayhaqi was not a mere follower but a great scholar. See the same topic (after the translation of the hadith (Phrase:1))
◈ Imam Bayhaqi had no bias against the Hanafis.
◈ Imam Bayhaqi did not forbid Abu Muhammad al-Juwayni from leaving taqlid but rather refuted some Shafi’is who took the books of the early scholars as mere “taqlid.”
See Tabaqat al-Shafi’iyyah by al-Subki

And he said: و اجتهادي فى طلبه “And I strive hard in seeking hadith.”

Bayhaqi did not say that “leaving the taqlid of Imam Shafi’i is absolutely not permissible,” therefore the one from Tajalliyat Safdar has told a blatant lie.
Bayhaqi only refuted some weak narrations mentioned by Abu Muhammad al-Juwayni and encouraged him to investigate.
② Some people have written that Imam Hakim was a filthy Rafidhi and an extremist Shia.

Both these accusations are false, as has already been explained under the investigation of hadith narrations, phrase number 2.
③ Some people wrote: You could not prove the transmission (sama’) of the second narrator As-Saffar from his teacher As-Sulami. If you have the courage, then prove it.

It is stated that Abu Abdullah Muhammad bin Abdullah As-Saffar said:

ثنا أبو إسماعيل محمد بن إسماعيل

The transmission (sama’) has been established, so the objection is false.
④ Some people wrote: Then this Sulami himself is a narrator who is subject to criticism.

It is stated that more than ten hadith scholars have declared Sulami, may Allah have mercy on him, trustworthy and truthful, so the unknown criticism of unknown attackers against him is rejected. See the same topic in the section on trustworthy hadith narrators, phrase number 4.
⑤ Abu Nu’aym al-Fadl bin Dukain al-Kufi, may Allah have mercy on him, died in 218 AH or 219 AH. See Tahdhib al-Kamal

Imam Abu Ismail As-Sulami said: ثنا الفضل بن دكين “Fadl bin Dukain narrated hadith to us.”

It is understood that in 218 AH Abu Ismail was a sensible young man.
Muhammad bin al-Fadl al-Sadwi died in 223 AH or 224 AH.

Imam Abu Hatim al-Razi said:
فمن كتب عنه قبل سنة عشرين و مأتين فسماعه جيد . “Whoever wrote from them (Abu Nu’man) before 220 AH, his transmission (sama’) is good.”

A student who was studying hadith in 218 AH, could he not have attended Abu Nu’man’s gathering before 220 AH? It is understood that Sulami’s transmission from Abu Nu’man is from before their association.
Also see the authentication of hadith narrators, phrase: 5
⑥ Some people said: It seems that throughout his life he found only one person who raised his hands in prayer.

It is stated that this claim is baseless and the absence of mention is not proof of negation.
Secondly, if Hammad bin Zayd, may Allah have mercy on him, had received any authentic hadith from any narrator about abandoning the raising of hands, he would certainly have narrated it and never concealed the truth. His not narrating any hadith about abandoning raising hands is proof that until 79 AH there was no trace of abandoning raising hands in Basra.
⑦ Some people wrote: And I asked him what is this? From this it is understood that in the first half of the second century, throughout the world only one person in Basra raised his hands in prayer.

They did not ask “what is this?” rather فسألته عن ذلك means: I asked him about it.
This means that Hammad bin Zayd asked his teacher for evidence regarding his practice to satisfy himself and preserve the hadith narration. Asking for evidence is neither a crime nor proof that all other people were acting completely oppositely.
A student’s question to his teacher is absolutely not proof that all Muslims at that time were acting against this issue or that this issue was strange and unusual.
Currently, three proofs are presented:
◈ Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Umar, may Allah be pleased with them both, asked his father Sayyiduna Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, about wiping over socks.

Does this mean that in their time all the Companions, Tabi’in, or general scholars did not accept wiping over socks? Absolutely not, so the objection of the “Tajalliyati” denier of hadith is false.
◈ Allah’s prayer of four rak’ahs contains twenty-two takbirs; when Sayyiduna Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him, said twenty-two takbirs in prayer, Ikramah the Tabi’i went to Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them both, to object to Abu Hurairah.

◈ Abu Jamrah al-Dab’i, may Allah have mercy on him, performed Hajj Tamattu’, then asked Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them both, about the issue. See Sahih Muslim

Does asking about an issue make Hajj Tamattu’ forbidden, abandoned, or annulled?
It is understood that the principle that asking or seeking evidence means people were not acting on the issue is false!!
Some people have tried to respond to the authentic hadith of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, by presenting weak and rejected narrations of Maimun Makki (unknown) etc., which is fundamentally false and rejected. وما علينا إلا البلاغ (29/May/2010)