❖ Ruling on the Chain of the Hadith Regarding Invalidating Wudū in the Final Tashahhud
Source: Fatawa Ameenpuri by Shaykh Ghulam Mustafa Zaheer Ameenpuri
❖ Question:
What is the status of the chain of the following hadith?
❀ Narrated from ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿUmar رضي الله عنهما:
“If a man becomes invalidated (i.e., loses his wudū) while sitting in the last tashahhud before giving salām, his prayer is valid.”
(Sunan Abī Dāwūd: 617; Sunan al-Tirmidhī: 408; Sunan al-Dāraquṭnī: 1/379; al-Sunan al-Kubrā by al-Bayhaqī: 2/176; Sharḥ Maʿānī al-Āthār by al-Ṭaḥāwī: 1/274)
❖ Answer:
This hadith is weak, disconnected, and severely inconsistent (muḍṭarib wa munqaṭiʿ).
It cannot be relied upon for deriving legal rulings.
Below are the detailed reasons and scholarly criticisms:
❖ Issues in the Chain of Narration:
① ʿAbdur-Raḥmān ibn Ziyād ibn Anʿum al-Ifriqī — Weak narrator.
② ʿAbdur-Raḥmān ibn Rāfiʿ al-Tanūkhī — Also weak.
③ Though Bakr ibn Sawādah is thiqah (reliable), there is no known evidence of his hearing from ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ, making the sanad disconnected (munqaṭiʿ).
❀ Imām Nawawī رحمه الله:
“بكر بن سوادة لم يسمع من عبد الله بن عمرو.”
“Bakr ibn Sawādah did not hear from ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr.”
(Al-Majmūʿ: 3/463)
❖ Scholarly Verdicts on This Hadith:
✅ Imām Nawawī رحمه الله:
“اتفق الحفاظ على ضعفه لأنه مضطرب ومنقطع.”
“The hadith is unanimously declared weak by the ḥuffāẓ due to its inconsistencies and broken chain.”
(Khilāṣat al-Aḥkām: 1/449)
“Weak by consensus… its weakness is well-known in hadith literature.”
(Al-Majmūʿ: 3/481, 3/425)
—
✅ Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar رحمه الله:
“قد ضعفه الحفاظ.”
“The hadith has been graded weak by the hadith masters.”
(Fatḥ al-Bārī: 2/323)
—
✅ Imām Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī رحمه الله:
Declared it “munkar” (unacceptable).
(Al-Jarḥ wa al-Taʿdīl: 5/232)
—
✅ Imām al-Tirmidhī رحمه الله:
“إسناده ليس بذاك القوي، وقد اضطربوا فى إسناده.”
“Its chain is not strong, and there is confusion in the isnād.”
(Sunan al-Tirmidhī under 408)
—
✅ Imām al-Ḥākim رحمه الله:
“يقال للمحتج بهذا الخبر: إنه خبر مضطرب المتن والإسناد.”
“Anyone who tries to use this hadith as evidence should be told: this report is inconsistent in both wording and chain.”
(Al-Khilāfiyāt by al-Bayhaqī: 3/225)
—
✅ Ḥāfiẓ al-Bayhaqī رحمه الله:
“لا يصح.”
“This hadith is not authentic.”
(Al-Sunan al-Kubrā: 2/176)
—
✅ Ḥāfiẓ Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr رحمه الله:
“لا يصح لضعف إسناده واختلافهم فى لفظه.”
“It is not authentic due to the weakness of its chain and variations in its wording.”
(Al-Tamhīd: 10/214)
“لا يصح أصلا.”
“It is absolutely not proven.”
(Al-Istidhkār: 1/524)
—
✅ Ḥāfiẓ al-Khaṭṭābī رحمه الله:
“حديث ضعيف… وعارضته الأحاديث التى فيها إيجاب التشهد والتسليم.”
“The hadith is weak, and it contradicts authentic reports which emphasize the obligation of tashahhud and salām.”
(Maʿālim al-Sunan: 1/140)
—
✅ Imām Ibn al-ʿArabī رحمه الله:
“لم يصح.”
“It is not authentic.”
(Al-Qabas fī Sharḥ Muwaṭṭaʾ Mālik: 224)
—
✅ Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī رحمه الله:
Classified the hadith as “munkar” (rejected).
(Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl: 2/560)
—
✅ Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Rajab al-Ḥanbalī رحمه الله:
“رفعه منكر جدا.”
“Narrating it as a marfūʿ hadith (directly from the Prophet ﷺ) is severely rejected.”
(Fatḥ al-Bārī: 5/218)
✔ Summary:
❌ The hadith is weak (ḍaʿīf), disconnected (munqaṭiʿ), and inconsistent (muḍṭarib).
❌ Not acceptable for use in deriving Islamic rulings.
❌ Contradicts stronger authentic narrations which establish the obligation of complete tashahhud and salām in ṣalāh.
✅ Unanimous agreement among hadith masters on its weakness.
