❖ A Critical Analysis of a Weak Narration About Rising for the Second Rakʿah ❖
Source: Fatāwā ʿIlmiyyah, Volume 1, Kitāb al-Ṣalāh, Page 380
In the Shahādat magazine (November 2002 issue), under “Āp ke Masāʾil,” Khalid Saif ḥafiẓahullāh mentioned that:
“One may rise to the next rakʿah like kneading dough.”
Upon inquiry, Shaykh Abū Jābir ḥafiẓahullāh stated:
“This method of rising is not proven.”
Similarly, Shaykh Khwājah Muḥammad Qāsim رحمه الله, in his book Qad Qāmat al-Ṣalāh, referenced Ibn Ḥajar’s Talkhīṣ al-Ḥabīr, where the narration is declared weak (ḍaʿīf).
On the other hand, Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Nāṣir al-Raḥmānī ḥafiẓahullāh deems the narration ḥasan, claiming Imām al-Albānī graded it as such.
So, whose view is correct? Kindly provide a detailed analysis and reference.
الحمد لله، والصلاة والسلام علىٰ رسول الله، أما بعد!
The narration concerning rising for the second rakʿah in a manner described as “like kneading dough” (يَعْجِنُ) comes through a single chain, and a key narrator in this chain is:
✦ Haytham ibn ʿImrān al-Dimashqī
Hence, based on uṣūl al-ḥadīth, such a narrator is classified as:
"Majhūl al-ḥāl" (unknown state of reliability)
❖ "The solitary narration of a majhūl narrator—without corroboration—is considered weak (ḍaʿīf)."
Therefore, any narration solely reported through Haytham ibn ʿImrān, and especially if unconfirmed by more reliable transmitters, is not acceptable for establishing sunan or fiqh rulings.
Example of al-Albānī’s inconsistency:
Hence, applying that same principle here, grading the Haytham ibn ʿImrān narration as ḥasan is methodologically flawed and not reliable.
✔ The narration describing “rising like kneading dough” when getting up for the second rakʿah
is weak due to the presence of a majhūl al-ḥāl narrator.
✔ Declaring it ḥasan is incorrect and contradicts the established principles of hadith science.
✔ Therefore, this action should not be practiced as a Sunnah or prescribed method in ṣalāh.
ھذا ما عندي، واللہ أعلم بالصواب
Source: Fatāwā ʿIlmiyyah, Volume 1, Kitāb al-Ṣalāh, Page 380
✦ Question:
In the Shahādat magazine (November 2002 issue), under “Āp ke Masāʾil,” Khalid Saif ḥafiẓahullāh mentioned that:
“One may rise to the next rakʿah like kneading dough.”
Upon inquiry, Shaykh Abū Jābir ḥafiẓahullāh stated:
“This method of rising is not proven.”
Similarly, Shaykh Khwājah Muḥammad Qāsim رحمه الله, in his book Qad Qāmat al-Ṣalāh, referenced Ibn Ḥajar’s Talkhīṣ al-Ḥabīr, where the narration is declared weak (ḍaʿīf).
On the other hand, Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Nāṣir al-Raḥmānī ḥafiẓahullāh deems the narration ḥasan, claiming Imām al-Albānī graded it as such.
So, whose view is correct? Kindly provide a detailed analysis and reference.
✔ Answer:
الحمد لله، والصلاة والسلام علىٰ رسول الله، أما بعد!
◈ Examination of the Narration: "Rising Like Kneading Dough"
The narration concerning rising for the second rakʿah in a manner described as “like kneading dough” (يَعْجِنُ) comes through a single chain, and a key narrator in this chain is:
✦ Haytham ibn ʿImrān al-Dimashqī
◉ Source of the Narration:
- al-Muʿjam al-Awsaṭ by al-Ṭabarānī
Ḥadīth No. 4019
◉ Status of the Narrator Haytham ibn ʿImrān:
- Only Ibn Ḥibbān declared him thiqah.
- No other ḥadīth critic authenticated him.
Hence, based on uṣūl al-ḥadīth, such a narrator is classified as:
"Majhūl al-ḥāl" (unknown state of reliability)
◈ Hadith Principle Applied:
❖ "The solitary narration of a majhūl narrator—without corroboration—is considered weak (ḍaʿīf)."
Therefore, any narration solely reported through Haytham ibn ʿImrān, and especially if unconfirmed by more reliable transmitters, is not acceptable for establishing sunan or fiqh rulings.
◉ Grading of the Narration:
- Imām al-Albānī graded it ḥasan
(al-Ṣaḥīḥah, and Tamām al-Minnah) - However, this grading has been contested due to inconsistency in methodology.
Example of al-Albānī’s inconsistency:
- In al-Ḍaʿīfah (10/70–71, Ḥadīth 4566), al-Albānī declares a narration weak, despite the narrator being declared thiqah by Ibn Ḥibbān, arguing majhūl status.
Hence, applying that same principle here, grading the Haytham ibn ʿImrān narration as ḥasan is methodologically flawed and not reliable.◉ Position of Other Scholars:
- Shaykh Abū Jābir and Shaykh Khwājah Muḥammad Qāsim have rightly rejected the narration.
- Referenced support from Ibn Ḥajar’s Talkhīṣ al-Ḥabīr, where the narration is treated as weak.
❖ Conclusion:
✔ The narration describing “rising like kneading dough” when getting up for the second rakʿah
is weak due to the presence of a majhūl al-ḥāl narrator.
✔ Declaring it ḥasan is incorrect and contradicts the established principles of hadith science.
✔ Therefore, this action should not be practiced as a Sunnah or prescribed method in ṣalāh.
ھذا ما عندي، واللہ أعلم بالصواب
