Critical Review of the Weak Hadith on Four Sunnah Before Jumuʿah

❖ A Critical Analysis of the Weak Ḥadīth Cited for Four Sunnah Before Jumuʿah
Source: Fatāwā ʿIlmiyyah – Volume 1, Kitāb al-Ṣalāh, Page 448

❀ Question​

The Ḥanafīs refer to a narration to establish the practice of offering four specific Sunnah rakʿāt before Jumuʿah. Is the chain of this narration reliable? The reference is found in Iʿlāʾ al-Sunan, Vol. 7, p. 13, Ḥadīth 1762.

❖ Answer​

Al-ḥamdu lillāh, waṣ-ṣalātu was-salāmu ʿalā Rasūlillāh, ammā baʿd!


This narration is recorded in al-Muʿjam al-Awsaṭ (Vol. 2, p. 368, Ḥadīth 1640), where Imām al-Ṭabarānī mentions:


From ʿAlī رضي الله عنه: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ used to perform four rakʿāt before Jumuʿah and four after, making the salām at the end (i.e., after four continuous units).

✔ Textual and Transmission Errors in Other Sources​

In Naṣb al-Rāyah (Vol. 2, p. 202), al-Zaylaʿī al-Ḥanafī quotes this narration but with several textual and transcriptional errors:


◈ The intermediary Abū Isḥāq is omitted.
◈ Shabāb al-ʿAṣfarī is miswritten as Sufyān al-ʿAṣfarī.
◈ Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sahmī is incorrectly recorded as al-Taymī.

❖ Reasons for the Weakness of the Chain​

➊ Abū Isḥāq al-Sabīʿī’s Tadlīs (Obfuscation)​

He is a well-known mudallis, often narrating without explicit mention of hearing (samāʿ).


Imām Shuʿbah said:
“I have spared you the tadlīs of three: al-Aʿmash, Abū Isḥāq, and Qatādah.”
References:

• Masāʾilat al-Tasmiyah by Ibn Ṭāhir al-Maqdisī, p. 47
• Maʿrifat al-Sunan wal-Āthār (1/82)
• Ṭabaqāt al-Mudallissīn by Ibn Ḥajar, p. 151
• al-Fatḥ al-Mubīn, p. 83

This narration is not through Shuʿbah but through “ʿan” transmission, making it weak.

➋ Abū Isḥāq’s Memory Issues​

In his old age, Abū Isḥāq’s memory deteriorated, resulting in confusion and mixing in his narrations (ikhtilāṭ).

➌ Weakness of Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sahmī​

• Declared weak by al-Bukhārī and Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn.
• Ibn ʿAdī said: “ʿIndī lā baʾs bihī” — though often used for weak narrators.
  Example: al-Kāmil by Ibn ʿAdī (2/562), also found in Lisān al-Mīzān (Vol. 5, p. 277)
• Abū Ḥātim: “Not well-known”
• Although Ibn Ḥibbān mentioned him in al-Thiqāt, the majority criticism overrides his grading.

❖ Critique of Ẓafar Aḥmad al-Thānawī’s Defense​

Ẓafar Aḥmad al-Thānawī attempted to declare the narration ḥasan based on:


◈ Ibn Ḥibbān’s positive grading
◈ Ibn Ḥajar’s silence


However:

• Ibn Ḥajar, in Fatḥ al-Bārī (2/426 under Ḥadīth 937), cites criticism against the narration.
• He quotes Imām Aḥmad’s student, al-Athram, who declared this ḥadīth as weak.

❖ The Attempted Supporting Narration from​

Ẓafar Aḥmad also cites a second narration from al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr (Vol. 12, p. 129, Ḥadīth 12674), referenced in Iʿlāʾ al-Sunan (Vol. 7, p. 14, Ḥadīth 1763).


But:


◈ The chain includes Mubashshir ibn ʿUbayd, whose reliability is debated.
◈ Though some acknowledge his presence, his status does not support the claim of authenticity.


Even Ḥanafī scholars like al-ʿAynī admit his existence, but not his strength.

❖ Final Assessment​

This entire effort reflects an attempt to uphold a weak narration as reliable through insufficient or flawed reasoning.


Such efforts to declare weak aḥādīth as ṣaḥīḥ, and authentic ones as weak, are not acceptable under the principles of ḥadīth science.

Conclusion​

◈ The narration supporting four Sunnah before Jumuʿah in one salām is weak (ḍaʿīf) due to:
— Tadlīs and ikhtilāṭ of Abū Isḥāq
— Weakness of Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sahmī
— Disagreement among experts


◈ Efforts to validate it are unsound, and no ṣaḥīḥ ḥadīth exists in this specific wording.


هٰذَا مَا عِندِي، وَاللّٰهُ أَعْلَمُ بِالصَّوَابِ