Question re. "feet to feet" in the saff

[Abu_Abdillah2000]

Assalamu 'alaykum,

This question is for brother Abuz Zubayr or any other students of knowledge.

It is about the issue of brothers standing literally feet to feet in the salah, to the point that they pess the whole sides of their feet up next to the other, until their ankles are touching, resulting in them sometimes standing in an awkward position with their toes pointing inwards.

They take as their evidence the athar of an-Nu'man ibn Bashir and Anas ibn Malik in Sahih al-Bukhari, and they understand it to be taken literally. And they will quote the verdict of Shaykh al-Albani which says this.

Many of the brothers seem to assume that this is the correct opinion of all of the scholars of the Salaf.

However, I have heard that several other great 'ulama', such as Shaykh Muhammad ibn Salih al-'Uthaymin and Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd are opposed to this practice of pressing the feet together, and that Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymin even once punched a brother in the chest when he tried to press his foot next to the shaykh's.

So my question is: What exactly is the general view of the 'ulama' regarding the athar of an-Nu'man and Anas, radhiyallahu 'anhuma, and how do they understand the issue of where and how the feet are to be placed in the saff? And does anyone have any detailed quotes by Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymin and Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd in regard to this matter? Because in everything that I have been able to find, they don't seem to deal with this matter clearly. And most of what I have been able to find (apart from Shaykh al-Albani's verdict) seems to be very ambiguous.

Jazakumullahu khayran...

[Abuz Zubair]

So my question is: What exactly is the general view of the 'ulama' regarding the athar of an-Nu'man and Anas, radhiyallahu 'anhuma, and how do they understand the issue of where and how the feet are to be placed in the saff?
The dhahir of the texts of both, nu'man and anas is the emphasis on straightening the rows and closing the gaps, and not that ankles be touching ankles, or knees be touching knees, or necks be touching necks.

This is how the scholars understood the apparent meanings of these texts, Allah knows best.

I think I did come across Sh Bakr Abu Zayd's writing on this issue in English somewhere on the internet. May be you can ask Shaykh Google.

[Abu_Abdillah2000]

Jazakallahu khayran brother Abuz Zubayr. Actually, not long after writing the above post, I did come across Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymin's fatwa, in which he said more or less what you said. When I get time, I might translate it for the benefit of the brothers and sisters in sha' Allah.

I really wish that the salafi brothers would take note of this, because just about every one that I know is following what they understand to be Shaykh al-Albani's view on this (i.e. literally pressing the ankles together from the beginning of the salah to the end, with the result that their feet are bent inwards in a very strange and awkward-looking posture), yet it seems apparent from what the other mashayikh have pointed out that if this is indeed the view of al-Albani, it is one of his shadhdh opinions in fiqh which should not be followed, wallahu a'lam...

[Shaghuri]

There is a good blog post by Abu Eesa for saturday June 18th:
http://islamiblog.blogspot.com/2005_06_01_islamiblog_archive.html

[abubakr]

is this the same abu eesa niamatullah?

[Abdullah al-Shishani]

I had read somewhere that it is the shoulders, not the feet that should be touching.

[AbuNaim]

[QUOTE=Abu_Abdillah2000;14522]Jazakallahu khayran brother Abuz Zubayr. Actually, not long after writing the above post, I did come across Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymin's fatwa, in which he said more or less what you said. When I get time, I might translate it for the benefit of the brothers and sisters in sha' Allah.

QUOTE]


Here you are;

س234: ما المعتمد في إقامة الصفوف؟ وهل يشرع للمصلي أن يلصق كعبه بكعب من بجانبه؟ أفتونا مأجورين؟
الجواب: الصحيح أن المعتمد في تسوية الصف محاذاة الكعبين بعضهما بعضاً، لا رؤوس الأصابع، وذلك لأن البدن مركب على الكعب، والأصابع تختلف الأقدام فيها، فهناك القدم الطويل، وهناك القدم القصير، فلا يمكن ضبط التساوي إلا بالكعب .
وأما إلصاق الكعبين بعضهما ببعض فلا شك أنه وارد عن الصحابة –رضي الله عنهم- فإنهم كانا يسوون الصفوف بإلصاق الكعبين بعضهما ببعض ، أي أن كل واحد منهم يلصق كعبه بكعب جاره لتحقق المحاذاة وتسوية الصف، فهو ليس مقصوداً لذاته لكنه مقصود لغيره كما ذكر بعض أهل العلم، ولهذا إذا تمت الصفوف وقام الناس ينبغي لكل واحد أن يلصق كعبه بكعب صاحبه لتحقق المساواة، وليس معنى ذلك أن يلازم هذا الإلصاق ويبقى ملازماً له في جميع الصلاة .
ومن الغلو في هذه المسألة ما يفعله بعض الناس من كونه يلصق كعبه بكعب صاحبه ويفتح قدميه فيما بينهما حتى يكون بينه وبين جاره في المناكب فرجة فيخالف السنة في ذلك، والمقصود أن المناكب والأكعب تتساوى

Question: What is the relied-upon position regarding the straightening of the rows (sufuf)? Is it prescribed for the praying person to join his ankle (ka'b) to the ankle of the person next to him? Please give us the fatwa, may you be rewarded.

Answer: That which is correct is that the relied-upon position regarding the straightening of the row is that the ankles should be in line with each other, not the ends of the toes, and that is because the body is supported upon the ankle, and the feet differ in regard to the toes, because some feet are long, and some feet are short. So it is impossible to ensure straightness except by the ankles (i.e. by the ankles being in line with each other).

As for joining the ankles to the ankles of the others, then no doubt this is reported from the Sahabah, radhiyallahu 'anhum, for they would straighten the rows by joining ankles, that is, every one of them would join his ankle with the ankle of his neighbour to ensure being line, and the straightness of the row. So it is not meant as an aim in itself, but rather as a means of achieving another aim, as some of the people of knowledge have mentioned. Therefore, when the rows are completed and the people are standing, it is befitting for every one of them to join his ankle to the ankle of his companion to ensure straightness. It does not mean that he should continue this joining and remain so for the whole salah.

From the extremism that has occurred with regard to this issue is what is done by some people in that one of them will join his ankle to the ankle of his companion, and he will spread his feet so far apart until there is a gap between his shoulder and the shoulder of his companion, so he will oppose the Sunnah by doing that. But the aim is that the shoulders and ankles should be in line with each other.

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Salih al-'Uthaymin, rahimahullah

[abootalha]

AssalamuAlikum,
Somebody wants to put that fatawa in their community newsletter so could you please give the source of the Arabic Fatawa and Insha'Allah can they put their name as the translator?

[AbuNaim]

AssalamuAlikum,
Somebody wants to put that fatawa in their community newsletter so could you please give the source of the Arabic Fatawa and Insha'Allah can they put their name as the translator?


see this link:

http://www.altawhed.com/Detail.asp?InSectionID=1335&InNewsItemID=147570

[Abu_Abdillah2000]

AssalamuAlikum,
Somebody wants to put that fatawa in their community newsletter so could you please give the source of the Arabic Fatawa and Insha'Allah can they put their name as the translator?

The fatwa is from this website:

http://www.ibnothaimeen.com/index.shtml

I translated it, you can put my name down as Abu 'Abdillah.

[AbuNaim]

The fatwa is from this website:

http://www.ibnothaimeen.com/index.shtml

I translated it, you can put my name down as Abu 'Abdillah.

are you the one from sunniforum?

[Abu_Abdillah2000]

are you the one from sunniforum?

Let's just say that I was the one from sunniforum... alhamdulillah for guidance and tawfiq... PM me if you need more info...

[izzi]

assalamaleikoem

can someone please tell me more about this subject...and also more names of oulama who are supporting this opinion

and more fatawa, books and stuff...

like ...which of the oulama nowadays are of this opinion?

and what's the hanbali position in this and did sheikh al islaam ibn taymiyyah supported this or not?

djazakALLAH khairan...


wassalaam

[nobody]

http://www.sunnahonline.com/ilm/sunnah/0017.htm



There are many authentic Ahadeeth from the sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam concerned with the command to straighten the rows (for congregational prayer), and so this is rarely hidden from any of the students of (Islaamic) knowledge let alone their teachers. However it remains unknown to many that straightening the rows requires straightening it with the feet, not just the shoulders. Indeed we have often heard some of the Imaams of the Masaajid (Mosques) pointing out - when ordering the people to straighten the rows - that the Sunnah is to do so with the shoulders to the exclusion of the feet! Since this is contrary to what is established in the authentic Sunnah, I thought it necessary to mention some Ahadeeth that exist on this topic, as a reminder for whoever wishes to act in accordance with the authentic Sunnah, not being deceived by the widespread customs and habits present in the Ummah............

The Fiqh of these Ahadeeth
In these two Ahadeeth there are a number of important points of benefit and fiqh. 1. The obligation to straighten the rows for salaah and to stand close together in them, due to the command mentioned in the Ahadeeth. The rule concerning such commands is that they constitute an obligation (wujoob) except if accompanying evidence (qareenah) proves otherwise as is well established in the science of fiqh principles. The qareenah here in fact emphasizes the obligation, and that is in the saying of the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam, "...or Allaah will cause conflict between your hearts", since such a warning is never given for leaving that which is not obligatory as is quite clear.

2. The forming and straightening of the rows mentioned in the Hadith is only achieved by joining the shoulder and the side of ones foot with the shoulder and foot of the adjacent person. This is because that is what the Companions, Radiallaahu 'anhum, did when ordered to straighten the rows and stand close together in them. Hence al-Haafidh (ibn Hajar) said in al-Fath after mentioning the additional saying of Anas in the first Hadith that I have quoted above:
"This (wording) is an explicit explanation that the mentioned action (of the Companions) was done in the time of the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam. With this in mind the usage of this action as a pretext for explaining what straightening the row means becomes complete."
It is regrettable that many Muslims have neglected this Sunnah of straightening the row, or rather they have lost it altogether, except for a few of them. For I have not seen this practiced by any group amongst them except Ahlul-Hadith (the People of the Hadith). I saw them in Makkah in the year 1368AH enthusiastic and concerned with adhering to the Sunnah as with other Sunan of al-Mustafaa (Muhammad the Messenger of Allaah) sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam. This contrary to others from the followers of the Madhaahib - and I do not exclude the Hanaabilah (Hanbalees), for this Sunnah has become utterly forgotten amongst the. In fact they have consecutively abandoned and turned away from it. This is because most of their Madhaahib state that the Sunnah in this regard is that a space of four fingers width should be kept between ones feet, and more than this is disliked, as is detailed in al-Fiqh 'alal-Madhaahib al-Arba'ah [1/207].
This spacing has no foundation in the Sunnah; rather it is based on mere opinion. If it were correct then it would be necessary to restrict this practice to the Imaam and the one praying on his own so that the authentic Sunnah (of standing close in the row) would not be opposed with this practice, as the fundamental principles of fiqh (al-Qawaa'id al-Usooleeyah) necessitates.
In short I appeal to the Muslims - especially the Imaams of the Masaajid, those who are concerned to follow the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam, and to acquire the virtue of reviving his Sunnah, I appeal to them to act by this Sunnah, have concern for it, and call the people to it until they unify upon it, and by what they will be saved from that warning "…or Allaah will cause conflict between your hearts."
I add in this addition [4] (of my book): It has reached from one of the callers to Islaam (du'aat) that he belittles the status of the Sunnah that the Companions practiced, and which they did so with approval of the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam. He insinuates that the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam did not teach them this practice. So he has not realized - and Allaah knows best - that (1) this was their understanding and that (2) the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam approved of their understanding and their practice. This is sufficient amongst Ahlus-Sunnah to affirm the legitimacy of this practice, because the witness sees what the absent does not, and the Companions are people whose followers will never be wretched (unsuccessful).

3. In the first Hadith there is an affirmation of a clear miracle (mu'jizah) given to the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam, and that was his ability to see behind him without turning his head. However it should be known that this was exclusively for the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam when he was in Salaah since nothing exists in the Sunnah that states that he used to see behind him without turning his head outside the Salaah. And Allaah knows best.

4. In the two Ahadeeth there is a clear proof for something that many people do not know about, although it has become recognized in the field of psychology, and that is the fact that outer (apparent) evil and corruption affects inner evil and corruption and vice versa. There are many Ahadeeth about this, perhaps we will undertake the task of gathering and referencing them at some later opportunity if Allaah, The Most High wishes.

5. The entering of the Imaam into the opening takbeer for prayer when the mu'ahddhin says 'The Prayer is about to start.' (qad qaamati-salaah) is an innovation in the religion (bid'ah) due to its contradicting the authentic Sunnah, as these Ahadeeth prove - especially the first one. The Ahadeeth show us that after the Iqaamah has been called there is a duty upon the Imaam which he must fulfill, and that is commanding the people to straighten the rows, reminding them of that, for he is responsible for them and will be asked.
"...And all of you are shepherds and all of you will be asked about your flock."


Translated from Silsilatul-Ahadeethis-Saheehah of Shaykh Muhammad Naasirud-Deen Al-Albaanee. Vol.1 pp70-74, Hadith no.31 and 32.

[izzi]

"Fiqh of Straightening the Rows"
Compiled by Yusuf Estes (but the following is a piece transelated from a book written by sheikh Bakr abu Zeid hafidhahullah)



All praises is due to Allah Lord of all the worlds, I bear witness that Muhammad is His servant and messenger, may Allahs' peace and blessings be upon him, his family, his companions and those who follow his guidance until the day of judgment, and as to what follows:


_______________________________________________


Regarding the straightening of the rows there are three sunnahs:

1 - Establishing the row and consolidating it, where no ones' chest or anything from them protrudes out {compared to} to those who are on his side, Hence there will be no crookedness in the line.

From amongst the expressions for straightening the rows are: "Istawoo" i.e. straighten your lines, "istaqeemoo" i.e. be straight, upright, "i'tadiloo" i.e. align yourselves, and "aqeemoo saf" i.e. establish the rows. And this establishing of the row, can be accurately implemented by commanding alignment between the necks, shoulders, knees and ankles. It is clear from the guidance of the Prophet {salallahu alahi wa salam} that these expressions were all used interchangeably.

2 - Filling the gaps, to the point where there is no space in it.

From amongst the ways of expressing this {is by saying}: "sudu'l khalal" i.e. fill the gaps, and "do no not leave a space for the shaytan." This sunnah can be precisely implemented by consolidating the lines, i.e. by saying "taraasoo"

3 - Connecting the first rows and the completion of it.

This is expressed in the following ways: "atimoo'saf al awal fal awal" i.e. complete the rows, the first one, then the one behind it, and "whoever connects a row, Allah will connect him {by His mercy} and whoever breaks {from} a row {by not filling the gap}, Allah will cut him off " {by cutting him off from His overall mercy} (see: "Awn Al Ma'bood Fee Sharh Sunan Abu Dawud").

And within these sunan {plural of sunnah} there are many other abandoned sunan; like making dua and asking forgiveness for the first row three times, then those behind twice, the imam coming to the end of the row to straighten it, sending someone to check upon the lines {see: sunan At-Tirmidhee}, and so forth, all from the guidance of the Prophet {salallahu alahi wa salam} way in achieving these three sunan for the lines by: straightening it, filling the gaps and consecutively completing the ranks, beginning with the first one, then the second, then the third and so forth.

All this is indicates that straightening the rows has a very important role in establishing the salah, beautifying it, and perfecting it. In this, there is great merit and reward, in addition to binding the hearts and bringing them together as the ahadeeth bears witness to. And this blessed ummah distinguishes itself, and it is unique, in that its' rows for the salah are like that of the angels, wa alhamdulillah rabil a'lameen.

Amongst the things which have been added, is the new stance for the salah which has no source, is what we see from some musaleen {those who line up for the salah}: adjoining to the one to his right, if he is on the right side of the line, and the one to his left, if he is on the left side of the line, is such a manner that he adjusts his heels to joins his ankles to the ankles of the one beside him. This type of stance is something extra from what has been narrated, and also in it {this stance} is extremity in practicing the sunnah. This stance is contradictory for two reasons: Firstly: Joining the feet and adjusting until they are stuck to each other is a clear mistake, apparent burden, new understanding in which there is extremity in practicing the sunnah, severe tightness, bothering oneself with what has not been legislated, preoccupying oneself by trying to fill the spaces when raising up from sujood, and losing the ability to direct the toes towards the qiblah {see: "Fath Al-Bari, vol 2, pg. 344, chapter: directing the toes towards the qiblah" i.e. in sujood"}. And also {in this stance} is the taking of the spot from the one who preceded him to it, in addition to seizing the place of the feet of other without any right. And all of this is making a sunnah out of what has not been legislated. Secondly: whenever the Prophet {salallahu alahi wa salam} ordered the alignment between the shoulders and the ankles, he would also order the alignment between the "necks" as in the hadeeth of Anas {radiallahu anhu} as narrated in the sunan of An Nasa'i {pg 813}. All this meaning: straightening the row, making it parallel and the even, and filling the gaps, does not mean to literally "join or stick {ilzaaq}", for indeed joining neck to neck is impossible, joining shoulders to shoulders in every standing is clearly burdensome, joining knee to knee is also impossible, and joining ankle to ankle is to a certain extent unattainable in addition to it being burdensome, difficult, and busying oneself in every rakat, which is clear and apparent.

Therefore, it is clear that aligning is in four cases: the neck, the shoulders, the knees and the ankles - all from one door. The intention behind it being to encourage the establishing of the rows, consolidating it, making it straight and even without any crookedness or spaces, and by this the goal of the legislator {Allah} is achieved.

Al Hafidh ibn Hajar says "what is meant by straightening the rows is to be aligned upright in a common manner, or what is meant by it is to fill the gaps..... " { "Fath ul-Bari" the explanation of saheeh Al Bukhari, vol. 2, pg. 242}. And this is the fiqh of the ahadeeth for straightening the rows, as in the hadeeth of ibn Nu'man ibn Bashir {radiallahu anhu} who said "the Messenger of Allah (may peace-be upon him) used to straighten our rows as one would set an arrow upright, until we thought that we had understood. One day he turned with his face whereby he saw a man whose chest was bulging out from the row, so he said: straighten your rows or Allah would create dissension amongst you," {sunan Abu Dawud}. This is the sahabahs {may Allah be pleased with them} understanding of straightening the rows: Standing straight and filling the gaps, not sticking the ankles together. This is why when imam Al Bukhari said in his naming the chapter: Chapter joining the
shoulder to shoulder and foot to foot in the line, and Nu'man ibn Bashir said: "saw that a man would join his ankle to the ankle of his companion". Al Hafidh ibn Hajar said "what is intended by this is to greatly emphasize the straightening of the rows and filling the gaps." { "Fath ul-Bari" the explanation of saheeh Al Bukhari, vol. 2, pg. 242}

The proof of Al Hafidh ibn Hajar untainted understanding of the hadeeth from Bukharis' title of the chapter, is Nu'man ibn Bashir statement, as also recorded in the Saheeh of ibn Khuzaymah (nos.160), the Sunan of Ad Darqutanee (vol. 1, pg. 282), and in the Sunan of Abu Dawud where Nu'man ibn Bashir said "I saw {that} a man would join his shoulder to the shoulder of his companion, his knees to his knees, and ankle to ankle" {this is the wording of the hadeeth as it came in the Sunan of Abu Dawud}.

Thus, joining knees to knees is impossible, hence, it becomes clear that the meaning of the hadeeth is encourage and emphasize filling of the gaps and straightening of the rows, and not the actual joining and sticking. This is why Al Khataabee said about the hadeeth that has been narrated by Ibn Abbas {radiallahu anhu} from the Prophet {salallahu alahi wa salam} that he said "the best of you are those of you who have the most gentle shoulder in salah" {Abu Dawud and others. It is hasan according to al- Albaanee, Saheeh ul-Jaami no. 3264) }, "the meaning of it is to have tranquility throughout the salah, and to be comfortable within it, and not to push nor rub against the shoulders of the one next to him" {Mu'aalim As Sunan, and Awn Al Ma'bood Fee Sharh Sunan Abu Dawud: vol.2 pg. 369}

This concept can be further explained by using the example of the narrations of the different wordings for "at tawaruk" in salah, {i.e. to sit with the left upper thigh on the ground and the right foot being upright, in the last at tashahud}, as in the hadeeth of Abi Hameed As Sa'dee {radiallahu anhu} who said about the Prophet {salallahu alahi wa salam} "and he would sit on his bottom". This manner of expression is a type where a general word or phrase is used, however, only part of that word or phrase is intended; "itlaq al kul wa iradtul ba'd". For it is impossible for the one who does the "tawarruk" to place his whole bottom on the ground, this is why in other wordings of the hadeeth it says: "he sat on his left side", "he put his left leg on the ground", "he sat on his left side mutawarrikan". Thus, it is not possible that a person of intelligence to derive from the wording "and he would sit on his bottom," the ability to sit his whole bottom on the ground, for this is impossible naturally and conceptually, just as the case for the wordings for being straight as has been mentioned before. Look at the hadeeth about the merits of salah in its time, for it is as ibn Daqeeq said in "Al Ahkam" {vol. 2, pg. 38}, "it has never been narrated from any of them (the salaf) that they used to be extreme (yushadid) in this, to the extent that {they say that} the first takbeer should take place exactly at the beginning of the time of the salah {to get the blessings of praying the salah in its time}"

And Allah is most knowledgeable about His rulings.

Taken from the first chapter of Bakr Abu Zayds' book "La Jadeed Fee Ahkaam As Salah"
- There is nothing new in the rulings for Salah, first printing: 1413 hijri corresponding to 1992}

[Abu Maryam PK]

The dhahir of the texts of both, nu'man and anas is the emphasis on straightening the rows and closing the gaps, and not that ankles be touching ankles, or knees be touching knees, or necks be touching necks.

Bismillah
Asalamoalaikum
Dear brother Abuz Zubayr,
To my knowledge there is no hadith which mentions
الزاق الرقبة بالرقبة
i.e. necks touching each other.
Secondly, why should the dhahir be straightening, when Anas radhiallahuanhu said they "saw" (رايت) people sticking their feet to the foot of their neighbor.

I am not trying to get into a lengthy debate. U r much more knowledgeable than me. I m just trying to understand. I will insha'Allah change my stance if i am convinced by the other salafi opinion.
الحق أحق أن يتبع

[Abuz Zubair]

Have you read Sh Bakr's work on the topic? search saaid.net, I think I saw it there....

[Abu Maryam PK]

Have you read Sh Bakr's work on the topic? search saaid.net, I think I saw it there....
One of 'feet to feet' or 'manuscripts'? I asked 2 questions today.

[Abuz Zubair]

Sorry, on feet to feet... Sh Bakr's work is called لا جديد في أحكام الصلاة

I am sure you can download it somewhere on the net.

[Abu Maryam PK]

Sorry, on feet to feet... Sh Bakr's work is called لا جديد في أحكام الصلاة

I am sure you can download it somewhere on the net.
Jazakallahu Khair
http://saaid.net/book/open.php?cat=87&book=3868

[Abu Maryam PK]

He said: الثاني أَن النَّبِيَّ صلي الله عليه وسلم لَمَّا أَمر بالمحاذاة بين المناكب والأَكعب, قد أَمر أَيضاً بالمحاذاة بين ((الأَعناق)) كما في حديث أَنس – رضي الله عنه – عند النسائي (814). <o>></o>>
وكل هذا يعني: المصافة, والموازاة, والمسامتة, وسد الخلل, ولا يعني العمل على ((الإِلزاق)) فإِن إِلزاق العنق بالعنق مستحيل, وإِلزاق الكتف بالكتف في كل قيام, تكلف ظاهر. وإِلزاق الركبة بالركبة مستحيل, وإِلزاق الكعب بالكعب, فيه من التعذر, والتكلف, والمعاناة, والتحفز, والاشتغال به في كل ركعة, ما هو بيِّن ظاهر. فتنبين أَن المحاذاة في الأَربعة: العنق. الكتف. الركبة. الكعب: من بابة واحدة, يُراد بها الحث على إِقامة الصف والموازاة, والمسامتة, والتراص على سمت واحد, بلا عوج, ولا فُرج, وبهذا يحصل مقصود الشارع. <o>></o>>

He did not mention that any hadith commands sticking necks to necks. So how come the in the conclusion the command of alignment was taken to mean the command of sticking.
Moreover, Bukhari when he narrated Al-Nu'maan's mu'allaq narration did not mention knees. Is that because he took ankles to mean feet (like Allah says quraan al-fajr to mean salaah al-fajr, as ankles touching is not as impossible as knees or necks. I have seen some people's ankles so large that they prevent you from touching any part of the foot other than the ankles and the little toe), particularly since the hadith of abu Dawood has some weakness (quoting from memory)? Is this a valid analysis [i mean my words not Sheikh Bakr's]?

[nobody]

قال عليه الصلاة والسلام : رصُّوا صفوفكم ، وقاربوا بينها ، وحاذوا بالأعناق ، فو الذي نفسي بيده إني لأرى الشيطان يدخل من خلل الصف كأنها الْحَذَف . رواه الإمام أحمد وأبو داود والنسائي .

translation is not my depart. from sharh ahadeeth 'umdatul ahkam.

[izzi]

قال عليه الصلاة والسلام : رصُّوا صفوفكم ، وقاربوا بينها ، وحاذوا بالأعناق ، فو الذي نفسي بيده إني لأرى الشيطان يدخل من خلل الصف كأنها الْحَذَف . رواه الإمام أحمد وأبو داود والنسائي .

translation is not my depart. from sharh ahadeeth 'umdatul ahkam.




sheikh al albaani has said that this hadith is sahih as well...in his checking of sunan abi dawud

حدثنا مسلم بن إبراهيم ثنا أبان عن قتادة عن أنس بن مالك عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : رصوا صفوفكم وقاربوا بينها وحاذوا بالأعناق فو الذي نفسي بيده إني لأرى الشيطان يدخل من خلل الصف كأنها الحذف
قال الشيخ الألباني : صحيح

[Abu Maryam PK]

sheikh al albaani has said that this hadith is sahih as well...in his checking of sunan abi dawud

حدثنا مسلم بن إبراهيم ثنا أبان عن قتادة عن أنس بن مالك عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : رصوا صفوفكم وقاربوا بينها وحاذوا بالأعناق فو الذي نفسي بيده إني لأرى الشيطان يدخل من خلل الصف كأنها الحذف
قال الشيخ الألباني : صحيح
But it does not say 'stick your necks to the neighbours's neck'. It says 'align the necks in one direction.' Morever in the hadith of Anas in Bukhari, he said 'i saw one of us sticking his foot to the foot of his companion and his shoulder to his shoulder' (approximate words from memory)

In all honesty it either means literally sticking both foot and shoulder or not sticking any of them (as shiekh bakar said), just aligning them. But if it means just aligning, the gap should not be too large to let a small kid of a goat pass, as in the hadith, which would mean that even if the two worshippers are not touching, they would be very close to each other.

It is apparently wrong to insist on just sticking the shoulder with the exclusion of the foot, whereas the hadith which mentions sticking contains mention of both shoulder and foot. This is what happens in all deobandi & barelvi mosques in pakistan. They insist on touching shoulder only.

[JayshAllah]

It is apparently wrong to insist on just sticking the shoulder with the exclusion of the foot, whereas the hadith which mentions sticking contains mention of both shoulder and foot. This is what happens in all deobandi & barelvi mosques in pakistan. They insist on touching shoulder only.

But isn't that what Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen also said?

Except that he said that at the start of the salah we touch ankles to line up, but that doesn't mean the whole salah...

[Abuz Zubair]

Well, Sh Bakr's argument is that the understanding of the hadeet, that ankles should literally touch ankles is an innovated understanding.

This is because Ibn Hajar says in the Sharh of al-Bukhari's chapter heading, words to the effect that the wording of ilzaq as meant only as exaggeration in straightening the rows and closing the gaps. Not that one should literally stick one's ankle's with the person next to him.

What confirms Ibn Hajar's understanding, according to Sh bakr is that the narration al-Bukhari is referring to, as collected by others such as al-Darutuqni, also mentions sticking knees with knees, and that is impossible, which shows that sticking the shoulders, knees and ankles, is in fact said in an exaggerating way to emphasise the importance of straightening the rows and closing the gaps, and not that one should literally stick one's ankles to the next person's ankles, or his knees with the next person's knees, etc.

He gave another example of that, that in a narration it states that the musalli sits on his buttocks during tawarruk, which is impossible. However, the other narrations clarify the intended meaning of the first hadeeth.

What's important to me here is who from the Salaf and the madhahib understood the hadeeth in this light, that one should literally stick one's ankle to the next person's ankle? This is Sh Bakr's main point.

[Milk Shaykh]

So, what is the more correct understanding of the ahadeeth according to the majority of scholars, past and present, or what is the 'Raajih'?

[hearandobey]

So, what is the more correct understanding of the ahadeeth according to the majority of scholars, past and present, or what is the 'Raajih'?

i'd like to know this too inshallah

[Abu Maryam PK]

This is because Ibn Hajar says in the Sharh of al-Bukhari's chapter heading, words to the effect that the wording of ilzaq as meant only as exaggeration in straightening the rows and closing the gaps. Not that one should literally stick one's ankle's with the person next to him.


The underlined are not Ibn Hajar's words.
In fact he said:
قَوْلُهُ : ( بَاب إِلْزَاق الْمَنْكِب بِالْمَنْكِبِ وَالْقَدَمِ بِالْقَدَمِ فِي الصَّفِّ ) ‏
‏الْمُرَاد بِذَلِكَ الْمُبَالَغَة فِي تَعْدِيلِ الصَّفّ وَسَدِّ خَلَلِهِ , وَقَدْ وَرَدَ الْأَمْرُ بِسَدِّ خَلَل اَلصَّفّ وَالتَّرْغِيب فِيهِ فِي أَحَادِيثَ كَثِيرَةٍ أَجْمَعُهَا حَدِيث اِبْن عُمَر عِنْدَ أَبِي دَاوُد وَصَحَّحَهُ اِبْن خُزَيْمَةَ وَالْحَاكِمُ وَلَفْظُهُ " أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - قَالَ : أَقِيمُوا الصُّفُوف وَحَاذُوا بَيْنَ الْمَنَاكِبِ وَسُدُّوا الْخَلَل وَلَا تَذَرُوا فُرُجَات لِلشَّيْطَانِ , وَمَنْ وَصَلَ صَفًا وَصَلَهُ اَللَّهُ , وَمَنْ قَطَعَ صَفًّا قَطَعَهُ اللَّهُ " . ‏

‏قَوْلُهُ : ( وَقَالَ النُّعْمَان بْن بَشِير ) ‏

‏هَذَا طَرَفٌ مِنْ حَدِيثٍ أَخْرَجَهُ أَبُو دَاوُدَ وَصَحَّحَهُ اِبْن خُزَيْمَةَ مِنْ رِوَايَةِ أَبِي الْقَاسِم الْجَدَلِيِّ وَاسْمُهُ حُسَيْن بْن الْحَارِث قَالَ " اَلنُّعْمَان بْن بَشِير يَقُولُ : أَقْبَلَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - عَلَى النَّاسِ بِوَجْهِهِ فَقَالَ : أَقِيمُوا صُفُوفكُمْ ثَلَاثًا , وَاَللَّهِ لَتُقِيمُنَّ صُفُوفكُمْ أَوْ لَيُخَالِفَنَّ اَللَّهُ بَيْنَ قُلُوبِكُمْ . ‏ ‏قَالَ : فَلَقَدْ رَأَيْت الرَّجُلَ مِنَّا يَلْزَقُ مَنْكِبه بِمَنْكِبِ صَاحِبِهِ وَكَعْبَهُ بِكَعْبِهِ " وَاسْتَدَلَّ بِحَدِيثِ النُّعْمَان هَذَا عَلَى أَنَّ الْمُرَادَ بِالْكَعْبِ فِي آيَةِ الْوُضُوءِ الْعَظْم النَّاتِئ فِي جَانِبَيْ الرِّجْلِ - وَهُوَ عِنْدَ مُلْتَقَى السَّاقِ وَالْقَدَمِ - وَهُوَ الَّذِي يُمْكِنُ أَنْ يَلْزَقَ بِاَلَّذِي بِجَنْبِهِ , خِلَافًا لِمَنْ ذَهَبَ أَنَّ الْمُرَادَ بِالْكَعْبِ مُؤَخَّر الْقَدَم , وَهُوَ قَوْلٌ شَاذٌّ يُنْسَبُ إِلَى بَعْضِ الْحَنَفِيَّةِ وَلَمْ يُثْبِتْهُ مُحَقِّقُوهُمْ وَأَثْبَتَهُ بَعْضهمْ فِي مَسْأَلَةِ الْحَجِّ لَا الْوُضُوء , وَأَنْكَرَ الْأَصْمَعِيّ قَوْل مَنْ زَعَمَ أَنَّ الْكَعْبَ فِي ظَهْر الْقَدَم
قَوْلُهُ : ( عَنْ أَنَس ‏
‏رَوَاهُ سَعِيد بْن مَنْصُور عَنْ هُشَيْمٍ فَصَرَّحَ فِيهِ بِتَحْدِيث أَنَس لِحُمَيْدٍ وَفِيهِ الزِّيَادَةُ الَّتِي فِي آخِرِهِ وَهِيَ قَوْلُهُ " وَكَانَ أَحَدنَا إِلَخْ " وَصَرَّحَ بِأَنَّهَا مِنْ قَوْلِ أَنَس . وَأَخْرَجَهُ الْإِسْمَاعِيلِيّ مِنْ رِوَايَةِ مَعْمَرٍ عَنْ حُمَيْدٍ بِلَفْظ " قَالَ أَنَس : فَلَقَدْ رَأَيْت أَحَدنَا إِلَخْ " وَأَفَادَ هَذَا التَّصْرِيحُ أَنَّ الْفِعْلَ الْمَذْكُورَ كَانَ فِي زَمَنِ اَلنَّبِيِّ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - , وَبِهَذَا يَتِمُّ الِاحْتِجَاجُ بِهِ عَلَى بَيَان الْمُرَاد بِإِقَامَةِ الصَّفِّ وَتَسْوِيَتِهِ , وَزَادَ مَعْمَرٌ فِي رِوَايَتِهِ " وَلَوْ فَعَلْت ذَلِكَ بِأَحَدِهِمْ الْيَوْمَ لَنَفَرَ كَأَنَّهُ بَغْل شُمُوس

The meaning of this is to exaggerate [mubalagha here does not mean 'lying/stretching the truth' as used in urdu language] in balancing the row and plugging its gaps.....
And this hadith is used as an evidence that "ka'b" (ankle) in the verse on ablution (in the Quraan) is the bone on the side of a man and it is on the joint of the shin and foot and it is the one which can be stuck (ilzaq) to the (same bone i.e. ankle of the companion) one on its side. This is against those who think that the "ka'b" is the back of the foot....or the ones who think it is on top of the foot.

end of ibn hajr's words.

He gave another example of that, that in a narration it states that the musalli sits on his buttocks during tawarruk, which is impossible. However, the other narrations clarify the intended meaning of the first hadeeth.

In tawarruk we sit on our left buttock at least, right? In my case both are on the ground perhaps because of being a bit plump.

[Abuz Zubair]

The meaning of this is to exaggerate [mubalagha here does not mean 'lying/stretching the truth' as used in urdu language] in balancing the row and plugging its gaps.....
And this hadith is used as an evidence that "ka'b" (ankle) in the verse on ablution (in the Quraan) is the bone on the side of a man and it is on the joint of the shin and foot and it is the one which can be stuck (ilzaq) to the (same bone i.e. ankle of the companion) one on its side. This is against those who think that the "ka'b" is the back of the foot....or the ones who think it is on top of the foot.

end of ibn hajr's words.

exaggeration is not always lying. Exaggeration means to emphasise a point by saying that which isn't true, while the person knows that what is being said isn't literally true, but the intent is only to emphasise.

For instance, if a person says: 'I called you a hundred times but you didn't respond', this wouldn't be lying if he called him lots of times. But it would be lying if he only called him once.

The Prophet SallAllahu 'alaihi wa-sallam said he would make istighfar 100 times a day. He didn't mean it as an exact number, but only to show that he does it a lot.

Similarly, when Ibn Hajar says that it is an exaggeration, he means that not that they literally stuck ankles with ankles, but this was only said as exaggeration.

In order to support your understanding of this hadeeth, you need to:

a) quote who from the Salaf understood it as you do, and;

b) tell us how is it possible for you to stick knees with knees for that is also mentioned.

[nobody]

i dont get it. who says ankles should be joined 'literally'.

[Abu Maryam PK]

exaggeration is not always lying. Exaggeration means to emphasise a point by saying that which isn't true, while the person knows that what is being said isn't literally true, but the intent is only to emphasise.
Actually Imam Al-Bukhari was accused of 'Funn e Mubalgha-arai ki hadd' (i.e. at the farthest end of the art of making mubalaghas) by Yusuf Ludhyanvi (ikhtilaaf e ummat vol 2 pp 398, quoting from memory). If u read the passage he is accusing him of stretching the truth aka lying
I was affraid ibn hajar's words could be misunderstood for the same.

As for sayings of salaf, i have to search for that.
i dont get it. who says ankles should be joined 'literally'.
Apparently, Shaikh Asghar at Al-Ma'had Alsalafi, khi. Sh Adbur Rahmaan 'Aabid, Jam'iah Al-Darasaat says it depends upon the structure of the feet, hence it means literally for him too. Some ahlul-hadith brothers stand with feet curled inside in ian uncomfy fashion to make the ankles touch. I used to that too, but then thought of the the ta'weel that ankles meen feet, as imam bukhari reproduced that part only, and not the knees, because if i remember correctly there is a mudallis narrator in the knees narration. Sorry no time to research, i am supposed to be busy with my thesis. I hope i motivate myself to concentrate there.

[Abuz Zubair]

Actually Imam Al-Bukhari was accused of 'Funn e Mubalgha-arai ki hadd' (i.e. at the farthest end of the art of making mubalaghas) by Yusuf Ludhyanvi (ikhtilaaf e ummat vol 2 pp 398, quoting from memory). If u read the passage he is accusing him of stretching the truth aka lying

And I guess you read that in an Anti-Hanafi work by an Ahl-e-Hadis?

I doubt anyone would accuse al-Bukhari of lying. The exaggeration bit refers to the feud between Ahl al-Hadeeth and Ahl al-Ra'i, and as I said, not every exaggeration is a lie. Whether or not al-Bukhari exaggerated, it remains a fact, as Ibn 'Abd al-Barr said, that many Ahl al-Hadeeth exaggerated things against Imam Abu Hanifa, such as that he was forced to repent from kufr twice and other such baseless stories.

kalam al-aqran yutwa wala yurwa

As for sayings of salaf, i have to search for that.

This would be very important, as Imam Ahmad said:

إياك أن تتكلم في مسألة ليس لك فيها إمام

as imam bukhari reproduced that part only, and not the knees, because if i remember correctly there is a mudallis narrator in the knees narration
Can you check? because Sh Bakr mentions several narrations from several collections that also mention knees to knees, and I am assuming here that they are all from different turuq.

[Abu Maryam PK]

And I guess you read that in an Anti-Hanafi work by an Ahl-e-Hadis?

I doubt anyone would accuse al-Bukhari of lying.
Erm...no. I actually i read it in the said work myself and i have two copies of the same (one i believe was gifted to me ibn imam (one with green cover) and the other i got from the treasure trove of a student who left for pak, leaving his books behind.) If u wish i can put the scan here.
The exaggeration bit refers to the feud between Ahl al-Hadeeth and Ahl al-Ra'i, and as I said, not every exaggeration is a lie.
No. It refers to Imam Al-Bukhari's claim that not doing raf'ul yadein is not proven by any sahabi and his saying that is what al-hasan al-basari said because he did not leave out any of them.

Can you check? because Sh Bakr mentions several narrations from several collections that also mention knees to knees, and I am assuming here that they are all from different turuq.Maybe over the weekend, Insha'Allah.

[nobody]

i was reading the urdu translation of Abu Zahra's work on ibn Hazm rahimahullah. the translator said that the author said that he cannot tell what was the reason of the bitter opposition of fuqaha against ibn Hazm. whether it was ibn Hazm's harshness or in arguments he didnt left the malikis anything to say.

but in this case the followers of both school of thoughts are present and widespread. one can know who is 'principally wrong' in this rivalry. we must not do the mistake ibn Hazm did according to abu zahra. i.e to attack the person or intention of the person. but to show lineancy in the name of fiqh is also a big mistake.

[nobody]

Actually Imam Al-Bukhari was accused of 'Funn e Mubalgha-arai ki hadd' (i.e. at the farthest end of the art of making mubalaghas) by Yusuf Ludhyanvi (ikhtilaaf e ummat vol 2 pp 398, quoting from memory). If u read the passage he is accusing him of stretching the truth aka lying
I was affraid ibn hajar's words could be misunderstood for the same.

he also said that the authors of sehah satta were either mujtahideen or followers of a madhhab. so their works naturally have the 'colour of their madhhab'. and " imam bukhari do not include the hadeeth in support of the other madhhab even it is sahih according to his own criteria ". implicit but serious ta'n against these muhadditheen in general and on bukhari in particular.


Apparently, Shaikh Asghar at Al-Ma'had Alsalafi, khi. Sh Adbur Rahmaan 'Aabid, Jam'iah Al-Darasaat says it depends upon the structure of the feet, hence it means literally for him too. Some ahlul-hadith brothers stand with feet curled inside in ian uncomfy fashion to make the ankles touch. I used to that too.

well this is strange. imams order to join shoulder to shoulder and feet to feet (urdu: paun, pair,qadm). and i never saw you this way too. but since you are saying it must be true. as for sh 'abdur Rehman hafizahullah every sunnah is possible. smile.

[Abu Maryam PK]

kalam al-aqran yutwa wala yurwa

I checked Al-Dhahabi's Siyar for that. This is generally true, but comes with conditions. See the ehd of Imam Al-Shaafi's biografy in the same work. I think to paint all jarah as kallam aqraan is not correct, particularly since it is mufassar, like him having a weak memory, mdhtarab al hadith etc. Isn't there a reason why in tarikh, imam bukhari rejected jarah on muhammad b ishhaaq but not on imam abu hanifah? Albani also refuted this claim that all jarah (vis a vis his memory) on his memory should be 'folded up and not narrated' on imam abu hanifah, as this would not place the blame on the aimma who blamed him for his memory. I also plan to study al-tankil by al-mu'allami with a student of knowledge. Do u advise that, or should i read the other camp before this? JK.

This would be very important, as Imam Ahmad said:

إياك أن تتكلم في مسألة ليس لك فيها إمام

I would bring this in the next post. After researching the topic, i am convinced that the slaf took 'ilzaq' to mean literal 'touching'. I will do a detailed post soon, insha'Allah.

Can you check? because Sh Bakr mentions several narrations from several collections that also mention knees to knees, and I am assuming here that they are all from different turuq.
I did. In the tareeq of abu dawod, zakariyyah is mudallis, as mentioned by ibn hajar and dhahabi and others. However he does tasreeh bil tahdeeth in ibn khuzayma's version. So that matter is clear, that the narration cannot be weakened on that basis.
Ibn Hajar says it is hasan (i think in al-talkees al-habeer or taghleeq al-ta'leeq), as opposed to Albani, who says it is saheeh. But since all narrations are from the routew of Hussain al-jadali, who i remember is saduuq, it is probably hasan. As for my saying that Bukhari narrated part of it which matched his narration from Anas, that is something i will discuss with scholars before saying anything further, as that would be speech without knowledge. For now, the statement stands retracted.

[Abuz Zubair]

True, not all jarh between aqran is to be ignored, but the point is, when you know there is enmity between people, one still has to stop. In case of Imam Abu Hanifa as well as his students we have an issue of a feud between ahl al-hadeeth and ahl al-ra'i, and this is where one should stop, especially when we are speaking about an Imam.

Also, the accusations of dha'f aren't the only accusations, but also of zandaqa and kufr, etc, etc... al-Bukhari said that Ahl al-Hadeeth not only rejected his hadeeth but also his ra'i. Plus, the latter scholars of jarh and ta'dil, such as al-Mizzi, al-Dhahabi and Ibn Hajar have all agreed on a stance on Abu Hanifa, and it does not look good for a person to oppose them on this in the name of reviving the same old feud amongst the Salaf.
And if one really wants to do that, then he should go all the way, as Sh Muqbil did, and not only attacked Abu Hanifa's dhabt, but also his 'adala. But at least he was consistent.

[Abu_Abdallah]

You got that book of Muqbil, rahimahullah? Is it somewhere to be found on the net?

[Abuz Zubair]

Yes... I found it somewhere on the net and downloaded it. Let me look for it in my computer.

[Abuz Zubair]

here you go....

[nobody]

what about albani's typr of jarh. its like nasai rahimahullah. only about zabt.

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Assalamoalaikum
Plus, the latter scholars of jarh and ta'dil, such as al-Mizzi, al-Dhahabi and Ibn Hajar have all agreed on a stance on Abu Hanifa, and it does not look good for a person to oppose them on this in the name of reviving the same old feud amongst the Salaf.

I think Dhahabi mentioned him in his tadhkirah dua'afa, as well [i know shu'ayb arnaoot and abdul hai luckhnawi's take on that].
Also did ibn hajar, dhahabi authenticate any of his narrations?
what about albani's typr of jarh. its like nasai rahimahullah. only about zabt.
If i have time, i will post exactly what dhahabi said about jarah aqraan, insha'Allah.


PS: as far as i can remember nasai and muslim challenged his dhabt only, which is not a big 'fault' anyway. Shareek bin 'Abdullah was criticised for that too, despite his imamate. Can u give me other examples where the jarah on a person's memory was rejected just because of mutual (or one sided) jealousy? I can't find any.

[Abuz Zubair]

al-Dhahabi also mentions Imam Abu Hanifa in tadhkirat al-huffadh. The work is introduced by al-dhahabi as:
هذه تذكرة بأسماء معدلي حملة العلم النبوي ومن يرجع إلى اجتهادهم في التوثيق والتضعيف والتصحيح والتزييف وبالله اعتصم وعليه اعتمد وإليه أنيب

He mentions no jarh, and in fact quotes Yahya b. Ma'in, a mutashaddid, saying la ba'sa bihi, which in his mustalah means thiqa. What do we do when a mutashaddid makes ta'dil of someone?

Also did ibn hajar, dhahabi authenticate any of his narrations?

I remember coming across statements of scholars such as Ibn Taymiyya and others making ihtijaj with the tashih of Abu Hanifa.

Interestingly, Ibn Ma'in also said that Abu Hanifa is thiqa and does not narrate except from what he has memorised. Some say that this is the reason his ahadeeth were very few, whereas others often used to narrate from books.

[nobody]

If i have time, i will post exactly what dhahabi said about jarah aqraan, insha'Allah.


PS: as far as i can remember nasai and muslim challenged his dhabt only, which is not a big 'fault' anyway. Shareek bin 'Abdullah was criticised for that too, despite his imamate. Can u give me other examples where the jarah on a person's memory was rejected just because of mutual (or one sided) jealousy? I can't find any..

this is so confusing. when i read the ta'deel of ibn ishaq and his jarah from imam malik rahimahullah that he is a liar (probably he said Dajjal) was due to personal issue, it made sense but many muhadditheen weakening a man of a such a stature just because of feud is confusing because these people are most relied upon who are supposed to be just and muttaqi (God fearing). i read in raf' almalam that some muhadditheen of hijaz did not accept the narrations from iraqi or shami muhadditheen or kind of that. but it had reason that is they thought they (iraqis and shamis) didnt have the zabt required, so there is so much idhtirab in the ahadeeth iraqis and shamis narrate. but again the 'adalah issue comes. which is equivalent to spraying gasoline from a fire engine. though the jarh regarding 'adalah are shaaz or weak. the best is what hafiz saleem said keep quite until a hadeeth is quoted in which he is a rawi. and Allah knows best.

i read somewhere that ibn muin had opposing opiions about him. so his jarh and ta'deel is saqit. dont remember where.

[nobody]

and imam bukhari was a mu'tadil muhaddith, right ?

[Abuz Zubair]

yes, he was

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Assalamoalaikum
al-Dhahabi also mentions Imam Abu Hanifa in tadhkirat al-huffadh. The work is introduced by al-dhahabi as:
هذه تذكرة بأسماء معدلي حملة العلم النبوي ومن يرجع إلى اجتهادهم في التوثيق والتضعيف والتصحيح والتزييف وبالله اعتصم وعليه اعتمد وإليه أنيب

He mentions no jarh, and in fact quotes Yahya b. Ma'in, a mutashaddid, saying la ba'sa bihi, which in his mustalah means thiqa.
In Du'afaa he quotes Nasa'ii's jarah.
What does التزييف mean?
What do we do when a mutashaddid makes ta'dil of someone?It makes his ta'deel much stronger, because he is much stricter than others.
I remember coming across statements of scholars such as Ibn Taymiyya and others making ihtijaj with the tashih of Abu Hanifa.U mean Imam AH making tashih of a hadith or Ibn Taymiyyah making tashih of a hadith in which he is munfrid?

Interestingly, Ibn Ma'in also said that Abu Hanifa is thiqa and does not narrate except from what he has memorised. Some say that this is the reason his ahadeeth were very few, whereas others often used to narrate from books.Which means that others who narrated many ahadeeth had a stronger memory? I think the statement narrated from Imam AH himself is that i donot narrate anything except that which i memorized as it is since the time i heard it [can't remember whether it can correctly attributed to him]. But, Al-Nasa'i said [or was it muslim in al asmaa wal kinaa?] that he made errors in the few narrations that he narrated. The huffadh like bukhari/muslim/al-nasa'i knew of the i'lal of the hadith. If his riwayaat were correct, wouldn't these scions in that case be rejecting words of the Prophet sallallahoalaihiwasallam just because it was coming from an illustrious luminary whom they were at odds with? As i promised i would reproduce from dhahabi where he made a distinction between what is to accepted and rejected from aqwaal of aqraan. Insha'Allah [but i am a bit busy these days. صدّقني]
i read somewhere that ibn muin had opposing opiions about him. so his jarh and ta'deel is saqit. dont remember where.
there was a book i read about a year ago in our uni library. It was i believe from one of the islamic uni's in ksa, maybe jam'ia al-imam. Probably a thesis, but the size was really tiny. Title was 'aqwaal ibn ma'een fi jarah wa ta'deel' or something like that. Under Imam Abu Hanifa's name, rahimahullah, he only mentioned,
قال مرّة لا بأس به
و قال مرّة يكتب حديثه
The latter i remember the author took to be a jarah. However i am quoting from memory.
the best is what hafiz saleem said keep quite until a hadeeth is quoted in which he is a rawi. and Allah knows best.May Allah Preserve him. The same was advised by Sh Yaya Bhatti, in a private chat.
و حديث رسول الله أولي
صلي الله عليه وسلّم

[Abuz Zubair]

U mean Imam AH making tashih of a hadith or Ibn Taymiyyah making tashih of a hadith in which he is munfrid?

I think its the former.

Which means that others who narrated many ahadeeth had a stronger memory?

Not necessarily. Most of others used to narrate from books, despite of vast memorisation, in order to retain accuracy. Imam Abu Hanifa would only narrate from his memory.

The huffadh like bukhari/muslim/al-nasa'i knew of the i'lal of the hadith. If his riwayaat were correct, wouldn't these scions in that case be rejecting words of the Prophet sallallahoalaihiwasallam just because it was coming from an illustrious luminary whom they were at odds with?

This argument casts doubts on the entire principle of not accepting the jarh due to the differences in madhahib, beliefs and personal feuds. The fact is that they were all human beings and they all unjustly criticised each other, knowingly or not knowingly. It was Ibn 'Abbas, I think, who pointed out that the jurists are as competitive amongst each other as cattle in a barn. And if it wasn't for this principle, we wouldn't have anyone left of the Imams, such as al-Shafi'i, al-Bukhari (died in exile) and others.

You have to ask yourself, why did Ibn Ma'in, despite of being a mutashaddid, and despite of knowing the verdicts by other scholars, such as al-thawri, still made tawtheeq of Imam Abu Hanifa. You also have to ask yourself, why Ibn 'Abd al-Barr blamed Ahl al-hadeeth for making jarh of Imam Abu Hanifa; and why did al-Dhahabi praise al-Mizzi for purging all the Jarh against Imam Abu Hanifa; and the statement of Ibn Hajar regarding Abu Hanifa that he has jawaza al-qantara, i.e. he has gone beyond the measuring scale, and that people like that are not subject to the rules of Jarh and Ta'dil any more. This is where the people stopped, and this is where we should also stop.

And if one disagrees, I would like him to go all the way, and declare Imam Abu Hanifa to be a Zindiq as he was declared as such by some. Most of the criticism against him is of that nature, and very little with respect to his memory.

[Abu_Abdallah]

I think we should find a balance in this.

Abu Hanifah, the Imam, is certainly not a liar. We all agree on this. He is a trustworthy scholar, to dignified to lie as stated by an eminent scholar. He is not the most profound narrator from among his generation. On the contrary, he is not known as a authoritative narrator because of several reasons: the less abundance of narrations, his less involvement in narrating, etc.

We can not ignore the criticism forwarded against him, that is: what has been said against and about him by the Rijal-critics. Particularly, the early critics. It is true that many later scholars knew of the criticism against him as a narrator, yet for some reasons they ignored part of it knowingly and a few rejected them. Instead, absolute and fair final verdicts are positive.

Today, there is a trend among students and scholars of Hadith - particularly in KSA - that revives the 'school of Hadith' of old. That is: academics who studied the sources of Jarh wa'l-Ta'dil-texts and the Manâhij of 'Ulama of Jarh wa'l-Ta'dil make Ijtihad and writes theses about Hadith wherein some of their conclusions may differ with classical late scholars.

For example: al-Albani tried to be as consequently as possible in his judgements, so he weakened many narrations of Abu Zubayr Muhammad b. Tadrus mentioned in the Sahih Muslim. He based his reasoning on the 'Ilal-texts and the Rijal-books, irrespective of Hafidh Abu Mas'ud al-Dimashqi's Ta'aqqubat or Hafidh Ibn Hajar's Muqaddimah.

Another example: certain writers have written critically of the Majhul/Mastur narrator, thereby reaching conclusions wherein they have criticized narrations others - particularly Ibn Hajar - accepted for granted. So certain Tabi'in or Tabi'al-Tabi'in who are actually 'not [very] known' but relate narrations now found in the Sahihayn, are consequently not really Sahih.

Again, there are many other examples: such as the debate concerning the status of the Da'if tradition, or the support/authentication of a tradition based upon several weak narrations, etc.

This is good. I mean: we should never stop performing Ijtihad, in whatever subject.

I believe, and this is why Abu Hanifah's status as a transmitter is debated in this era more than many centuries before, that only this would revive and make better the sacred sciences of Islam.

And whatever Abu Hanifah's status is, in detail, there is no doubt that he had some weakness. One can not ignore the obvious, even in the wake of what later scholarship may tell us.

I mean:

Brother Abuz Zubair. Didn't you say that the Kibar scholars of today were silence in certain subjects - whether out Hikmah or not - while they should speak or express their opinion publically? And that they did not, and then some said: Well, we can not imagine that they act as such..?

I believe THIS happens with Abu Hanifah, as a transmitter. Why don't they speak, at least reject clearly, what has been related of Jarh against him? And then argue for his reliability in clear terms? Maybe the same reason?

Take the Tadhkirah al-Huffadh.

I've read two booklets on Abu Hanifah's status as a transmitter, one by a Hanafite who argued passionately in defence of the Imam, rejecting one by one the 'proofs' of the other party. The Tadhkirah al-Huffadh, that was one of their arguments.

Yet, sometimes people forget to see things in perspective. I mean, Abu Hanifah's inclusion in it does speak something about the calibre of the Imam as a narrator. But why not be consequent? And say: Well, Muhammad b. 'Umar al-Waqidi has also a lemma in the Tadhkirah al-Huffadh.

Or take Ibn Ma'in's verdicts.

We know that this is a popular and [possible] strong evidence. The author of one of those booklets - I forgot the title - repeated what Ibn Ma'in said in more than one place.

Yet, we know that Ibn Ma'in with his Tashaddud has been mislead by certain narrators. That is: narrators that were AWARE of Ibn Ma'in's criticism skils, so they would narrate in his presence only sound or secure narrations.

Also, another point: Ibn Ma'in's Tashaddud is usually confined to people he knew, i.e. his teachers and contemporaries. For he studied under people a lot, and he would transmit very little (or not at all, as Ibn Sa'd said), yet focus only on determining the capability of the narrator as a narrator. And his Tashaddud is mostly explained by this, i.e. his strict tests and listening of scholars and then passing judgement. Scholars of a previous generation, which he scrutinized too of course, were less 'victim' of his (sometimes: sweeping) verdicts. Ahmad Nur Sayf has some good comments on Ibn Ma'in as a critic.

Also, there are several Mutashaddidun who make ta'dil of weak and sometimes very weak transmitters. So one have to be careful and investigate everything.

[I could also mention: the Ta'dil of Ibn Ma'in has been weakened by some scholars, while the Jarh has been authenticated - but I don't believe the argument forwarded is convincing enough to argue this]

Anyway.

Albeit Imam Abu Hanifah is a trust, righteous, learning and examplary Imam, who had some expertise in Hadith, he is not the best of narrators. He had his mistakes in narrating, less accuracy. This is stated verbatim by Huffadh whom al-Dhahabi, Ibn Taymiyyah, al-Mizzi nor Ibn Hajar can compete with. So if these Imams state otherwise, which has to be seen clearly for some, this does not reduce the criticism of old.

However, neither should we ignore the latter verdicts. Especially, the definitive verdicts like found in Abu Nu'aym's, Ibn al-Jawzi's, al-Dhahabi's, al-Khazraji's, and Ibn Hajar's works. Such as in: the K. al-Du'afa, or the K. al-Thiqat who were unfairly criticized, or the Tadkhirah al-Huffadh, or the Taqrib, or the Khulasah etc.

wa-Allahu A'lam

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Assalamoalaikum
JK Abu Abdallah for the enlightening post. I have not read Sh Muqbil's wprk, nor can I since i hear it is banned in KSA (can u confirms it?) as it would be ma'siat wali al amr. But i believe to be fair, the only thing correct of his criticism is the criticism of memory, WHICH DOES NOT DEMENT HIS IMAMATE.

Abu Abdallah's comment that some scholars kept quite on him due to hikmah is reasonable. I will try to examplify:

Ibn Hajar when mentioning him in tahzeed etc. Says "Imam Mashhoor", "Faqih Mashhoor" (famous faqih/imam). These in and of themselve are not words that means that his memory is good, but yes his 'adala is affirmed by these words.
But in al-talkhees al-habeer (there is 'al' before the first word too, as discussed in the arabic multaqa), you see that almost every narration where Imam AH is the narrator he weakens the narration, without explicitly pointing about the dhabt of the Imam rahimahullah. Look at the narration:
من كان له الامام فقرأة لامام له قرأة
He just says,
روي مرفوعاً من طرق و كلها معلولة
or as he said (quoting from memory). Why, because the weak narrator in one tareeq is Imam Abu Hanifa and in the other Hasan bin Al-Ammarah (who is weaker of the two).
In other cases he would point to other defects.

This brings us to what i earlier asked:
If his riwayaat were correct, wouldn't these scions in that case be rejecting words of the Prophet sallallahoalaihiwasallam just because it was coming from an illustrious luminary whom they were at odds with?
Imam Al-Daraqutni after narrating the above Qira'at narration said: It is weak because of Imam AH (in one tareeq) and Hasan Al-Ammarah (in another tareeq) and they are both Da'eef (See Silsillah Dha'eefa).

Now what do u say of Al-Daraqutni and the majority of Ahl Al-Hadeeth for that matter. They rejected a correct narration , just due to the cattle-in-barn-mentality?
Quote Abu Maryam:
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td class="alt2" style="border: 1px inset ;"> U mean Imam AH making tashih of a hadith or Ibn Taymiyyah making tashih of a hadith in which he is munfrid? </td> </tr> </tbody></table>
I think its the former.
This is outside the topic then. Generally ahlul hadith accept his criticism of rijaal and isnaad, that is why Al-Tirmidhi narrated his opinion about jabir al-ju'fi/ibn rabah in his sunan. That is if does not oppose the opinions of specialists in this field.
و قال مرّة يكتب حديث
My bad:
و قال مرّة لا يكتب حديثه

PS: Even Imam Al-Zalai'ee Al-Hanafi in Nasbur rayah narrated Imam Daraqutni's same jarah right after the said narration. Can u please say this hadith is sahih/hasan lithaatihi , marfu'an? If not, then why not?

[waziri]

Asalamualaykum,


Its difficult for a layman like me to follow the discussion of the students of knowledge like yourselves, so can someone tell me the point of this discussion.

I hope your not trying to slate Imam Abu Hanifa in any way!

Also whats the point in discussing the position of the great Imam and what others said about him etc etc.

[Abu_Abdallah]

Asalamualaykum,


Its difficult for a layman like me to follow the discussion of the students of knowledge like yourselves, so can someone tell me the point of this discussion.

I hope your not trying to slate Imam Abu Hanifa in any way!

Also whats the point in discussing the position of the great Imam and what others said about him etc etc.

Allah forbid that we speak ill of the Salaf!

There is a practical benefit, some might say.

I discuss it only as an academic exercise. I see no practical benefit, since many narrations the Imam narrated and which are authentic are reported by others too; and those that are not declared authentic, such as several in the K. al-Athar of al-Shaybani, then they are already inauthentic because of other considerations.

[nobody]

jazakAllah khair abu abdullah. your posts were really great. it was surprising to know that waqdi was mentioned in tadhkiratul huffaz.

[Abu_Abdallah]

jazakAllah khair abu abdullah. your posts were really great. it was surprising to know that waqdi was mentioned in tadhkiratul huffaz.

You know. I had some doubts concerning my assertion, since a brother whom I know well doubted this and I know HE knows a lot of the Tadhkirah al-Huffadh.

So after a digital search and browsing thru the index, I have to correct it:

Muhammad b. 'Umar al-Waqidi is NOT mentioned in the Tadhkirah al-Huffadh

My mistake. So please forgive me.

Then, I was thinking.. how could I make such a blunder? Well, I use for knowledge of the Huffadh/Thiqat the books of al-Kalabadhi on the Rijal al-Sahihayn, the Tadhkirah and the Tabaqat al-Huffadh.

And it is the latter, Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti's Tabaqat al-Huffadh, which mentions Muhammad b. Umar al-Waqidi among the scholars in that book, i.e. the supplement/revinement of al-Suyuti's book of al-Dhahabi's.

So I guess that's how I am mistaken. Again, sorry

[Abu_Abdallah]

Here are fine words spoken, just words:

http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?p=699686

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Assalamoalaikum

But in al-talkhees al-habeer (there is 'al' before the first word too, as discussed in the arabic multaqa), you see that almost every narration where Imam AH is the narrator he weakens the narration, without explicitly pointing about the dhabt of the Imam rahimahullah. Look at the narration:
من كان له الامام فقرأة لامام له قرأة
He just says,
روي مرفوعاً من طرق و كلها معلولة
or as he said (quoting from memory). Why, because the weak narrator in one tareeq is Imam Abu Hanifa and in the other Hasan bin Al-Ammarah (who is weaker of the two).
In other cases he would point to other defects.


Imam Al-Daraqutni after narrating the above Qira'at narration said: It is weak because of Imam AH (in one tareeq) and Hasan Al-Ammarah (in another tareeq) and they are both Da'eef (See Silsillah Dha'eefa).

Now what do u say of Al-Daraqutni and the majority of Ahl Al-Hadeeth for that matter. They rejected a correct narration , just due to the cattle-in-barn-mentality?


Soryy the narration is slightly different. U can find the exact words in sunan al-daraqutni, in the chapter "man kan lahu al-imam"
The point of dispute is not it being marfuu' , but it being muttasil and and mursal. Only Imam AH and Al-Hassan b Ummarah narrate it through jaabir, rest mursal-ly through abdullah b shaddad. That is what ibn hajar said implicitly and ad-daraqutni explicitly. So the Question is:
Can u please say this hadith is sahih/hasan lithaatihi , mutasillan or mursalan? And Why?

[Abuz Zubair]

Well, this is my contention that even if we agree on his 'adala, why do we? On what basis do we reject the criticisms on his 'adala but accept the criticisms on his dabt? Even though, most of the jarh is related to his 'adala by people who actually met him, as all those narrations are mentioned by Sh Muqabil in the work I attached above. Remember, al-Bukhari not only criticises his hadeeth but also his fiqh. He was only reflecting the attitude towards him amongst Ahl al-hadeeth.

It is possible that some scholars remained silent over the issue due to circumstances, but then, this does not explain Ibn Ma'in's ta'dil, nor Ibn 'Abd al-Barr's comments against AH's critics. Ibn 'Abd al-barr's comments in his Jami' Bayan al-'Ilm are very important to me since the whole book is really about Manhaj Talab al-'ilm and bringing balance into the thinking of a talib al-'ilm, etc... Also, remaining silent about AH due to circumstances is one thing, but al-Dhahabi praising al-Mizzi for purging all the criticisms against him is something else. If he were to remain silent, then that would have supported your assumption, but that as we know isn't the case.

Also, what do we do about the principle in jarh and ta'dil that once a person's Imamah is established, then he has gone beyond the measuring scale and no jarh is applicable to him. This is the principle Ibn Hajar enacts with respect to Abu Hanifa.

Yes, there is a trend nowadays to revive the manhaj of the mutaqaddimin, and it is not all good, just as it's not all bad. Most of the senior hadeeth scholars and teachers in KSA are not fond of verifying the ahadeeth of al-bukhari and muslim, and it is still largely disliked. Students doing their masters are specifically given instructions in their takhreej to suffice by simply attributing a hadeeth to bukhari and/or Muslim instead of declaring 'sahih, as declared by so and so scholar...' Imam Abu Hanifa's jarh and ta'dil is also another controversial issue where many of the scholars do not like to speak simple because, as they say, he has gone beyond the measuring scale, so no matter what we say of him, it does not affect him at all.

You are right about the ta'dil of Ibn Ma'in, as well... many times a mutashaddid makes ta'dil whilst the vast majority of the people have made jarh mufassar, as it happens to be the case with Imam Abu Hanifa. But again, most of that jarh mufassar is attacking his 'adala and not dabt, and we come back to square one, why spare his 'adala and not his dabt?

And I think if you glance through Sh Muqbil's work, you would see what I mean... And looking at the amount of jarh, and the type of jarh gathered against him, it seems that Ibn 'Abd al-Barr was right, that perhaps he really was a victim of Ahl al-hadeeth and ahl al-ra'i feud. Allahu Alam.

besides, as you said, there isn't even a pressing need to speak about the jarh or ta'dil of the Imam, since most of what he narrated is also narrated by others. So there isn't much benefit in the discussion.

[nobody]

i cannot differentiate between the academic debate and a dangerous debate about his Jarh. the need of jarh is the preservation of sunnah if that is not an issue with abu haneefa rahimahullah, whats the point ?

but i want to ask a pure academic question. after the imamate is established jarh is gone. there are exceptions to this rule like tadlis ? or tadlis is not jarh ?

[Abuz Zubair]

tadlis is and is not jarh.

i.e. it has nothing to do with 'adala or dabt. One only has to be careful if a narrator is known for tadlis, and even with tadlis there are degrees.

[nobody]

jk. so this means that the usool has some exceptions. but if the imamte is established then the imam is out of the scope of jarh regarding his zabt and 'adalah.

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Assalamoalaikum
Well, this is my contention that even if we agree on his 'adala, why do we? On what basis do we reject the criticisms on his 'adala but accept the criticisms on his dabt? Even though, most of the jarh is related to his 'adala by people who actually met him, as all those narrations are mentioned by Sh Muqabil in the work I attached above.
Because people who praise worthy of him otherwise, i mean especially his fiqh, were critical of his hadith. E.g. Ibn Mubarak said hadn't it been for Imam AH and Sufyan Al-Thawri, he would have been like other people and in another narration called him most faqih of people. But in the book of jarah ta'deel by Al-Nasa'ii, ibn Mubarak is reported to have said that he was an orphan in hadith.

Similarly with a sound chain (i didn't check it myself;, thats what a brother on arabic multaqa said) Imam Abu Hanifa himself is reported to have told his listeners that the majority of ahadith i have narrated are you are in error! So, he being full of 'adala and insaaf, actually warned others against his own memory, as a naseehah for Allah and His deen.

Remember, al-Bukhari not only criticises his hadeeth but also his fiqh. He was only reflecting the attitude towards him amongst Ahl al-hadeeth.
No doubt, so was the case with Al-Tirmidhi too, as shaiekh haytham hamadan pointed here:
http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?t=7276
But, despite this, he still narrated his opinion on jaabir/ibn rabah. Why? Because it is a matter of preserving the sunnah, where cattle-in-the-barn mentality is to be set aside. And remember we are talking about the vast majority of the ahlal hadeeth.

It is possible that some scholars remained silent over the issue due to circumstances, but then, this does not explain Ibn Ma'in's ta'dil, nor Ibn 'Abd al-Barr's comments against AH's critics. Ibn 'Abd al-barr's comments in his Jami' Bayan al-'Ilm are very important to me since the whole book is really about Manhaj Talab al-'ilm and bringing balance into the thinking of a talib al-'ilm, etc...
As pointed out ibn ma'een also said the contrary. What do we do in case of opposing views from the same imam?

Also, as i asked the question earlier, did abu 'umar did tasheeh of a hadith in which he is munfarid. Or Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Hajar, Al-Mizzi or Al-Dhahabi for that matter?

Also, remaining silent about AH due to circumstances is one thing, but al-Dhahabi praising al-Mizzi for purging all the criticisms against him is something else. If he were to remain silent, then that would have supported your assumption, but that as we know isn't the case.
Actually Mizzi quoted a very damning (and probably fabricated) story about how AH started seeking knowledge in his tarjumah. When Al-Dhahabi narrated the same in Siyar he cursed the fabricator of the story. So Al-Mizzi did not 'purge' out everything.

Also, what do we do about the principle in jarh and ta'dil that once a person's Imamah is established, then he has gone beyond the measuring scale and no jarh is applicable to him.
You, with all due respect and more, have misunderstood the principle. It has exceptions, as Al-Dhahabi said himself in atleast two places, which i will insha'Allah produce in a week's time. Also, Al-Dhahabi himself went against this rule in some places, as noted by Sh Bashaar of Baghdad Uni in his research on Tahzeeb Al-Kamal of mizzi. I will try to produce that too, insha'Allah.

This is the principle Ibn Hajar enacts with respect to Abu Hanifa.
Not at all. Infact he faulted a narration in which AH is the weak link, as pointed out in my previous two posts. And I asked you the same: Is the hadith of qir'at through the route of jaabir correct or is it correct mursalan? If the latter then why? If the latter, as said by Al-Daraqutni, due to Imam AH, then if Al-Daraqutni is doing so out of pure jealousy, isn't it a horrendous crime. In that case we are directly accusing Hafidh Al-Daraqutni of misleading the ummah regarding the authenticity of the Prophet sallallahoalaihiwasallam's words.

besides, as you said, there isn't even a pressing need to speak about the jarh or ta'dil of the Imam, since most of what he narrated is also narrated by others. So there isn't much benefit in the discussion.

At least I did not start it in this thread. I think this is an academic discussion. If it can be discussed in the arabic multaqa 10 times over, why not here? We all here to learn; at least me.

[nobody]

one cannot ignore the strong coupling of the academic side of this debate and its consequences which no one better than you is aware of. llok at the waziris post.

its the 4th time that you 2 are discussing this issue. bury this to the pms if you want. looks to be the old feud between you and the shaykh. wink.

[izzi]

assalam alikum

back to the subject of straighting the rows

does anyone have more fatawa which supports the opinion of not pressing the feet toeach other, like sheikh bakr abu zeyd rahimahullah said

or fiqh books, arab english...doesnt matter what language

djazakumALLAH

wassalaam

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
I have compiled enuff evidence to show that many salaf considered touching actually to be the meaning of the hadith. havent got time to translate it yet. U can get it in pm if u want

[izzi]

Bismillah
I have compiled enuff evidence to show that many salaf considered touching actually to be the meaning of the hadith. havent got time to translate it yet. U can get it in pm if u want

send it in pm inshALLAH...wa barakALLAH feek

and if people have evidence which supports the opinion of sheikh bakr abu zayd rahimahullah send it to me as well

and i'm out

wassalaam

[Madarijas-Salikeen]

I have some evience that shows the feet do not need to be touched.

[mosa]

I have some evience that shows the feet do not need to be touched.

Salaam, i think there is evidence in fath al bari

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
wait a couple of days i have to dig it out of the old computer.

[al-Athari]

Bismillah
wait a couple of days i have to dig it out of the old computer.

Please do akhee, may Allah reward you.

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
I dont have the time to translate every thing. But here is what i have:
[I also presented my understanding of fathul bari to Sh Abudullah Naasir Rahmani and he agreed.] I am ataching the original too.

Foot to Foot (Physically) from the salaf.

Alhamdolillah wa al-salaat wa al-salaam 'ala al-mustafa

I would like to present some of the material i collected [open to debate] showing that some of the scholars did in fact hold the opinion that feet should be stuck to feet physically in the congregational prayers.

1) Al-Imam Ibn Khuzaymah:

صحيح ابن خزيمة<o>></o>>
كتاب الوضوء <o>></o>>
<o>> </o>>
باب ذكر الدليل على أن الكعبين اللذين أمر المتوضئ بغسل الرجلين إليهما العظمان الناتئان في جانبي القدم « لا العظم الصغير الناتئ على ظهر القدم ، على ما يتوهمه من يتحذلق ممن لا يفهم العلم ، ولا لغة العرب »<o>></o>>
<o>> </o>>
161 - نا سلم بن جنادة ، نا وكيع ، عن زكريا بن أبي زائدة ، حدثنا أبو القاسم الجدلي قال : سمعت النعمان بن بشير ، وحدثنا هارون بن إسحاق ، حدثنا ابن أبي غنية ، عن زكريا ، عن أبي القاسم الجدلي قال : سمعت النعمان بن بشير يقول : أقبل علينا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بوجهه فقال : « أقيموا صفوفكم ثلاثا ، والله لتقيمن صفوفكم أو ليخالفن (1) الله بين قلوبكم » قال : « فرأيت الرجل يكون كعبه بكعب صاحبه ، وركبته بركبة صاحبه ، ومنكبه بمنكب صاحبه » « هذا لفظ حديث وكيع » قال أبو بكر : « أبو القاسم الجدلي هذا هو حسين بن الحارث من جديلة قيس ، روى عنه زكريا بن أبي زائدة ، وأبو مالك الأشجعي ، وحجاج بن أرطاة ، وعطاء بن السائب عداده في الكوفيين ، وفي هذا الخبر ما نفى الشك والارتياب أن الكعب هو العظم الناتئ الذي في جانب القدم الذي يمكن القائم في الصلاة أن يلزقه بكعب من هو قائم إلى جنبه في الصلاة ، والعلم محيط عند من ركب فيه العقل أن المصلين إذا قاموا في الصف لم يمكن أحد منهم إلصاق ظهر قدمه بظهر قدم غيره ، وهذا غير ممكن وما كونه غير ممكن لم يتوهم عاقل كونه »<o>></o>>

فتح العزيز شرح الوجيز وهو الشرح الكبير للامام ابي القاسم عبد الكريم بن محمد الرافعي المتوفى سنة 623 ه<o>></o>>
<o>> </o>>
قال الفرض الخامس غسل الرجلين مع الكعبين قال الله تعالى (وأرجلكم الي الكعبين) وحكم الرجل على انقسامها الي الكاملة والناقصة كما سبق في اليد.<o>></o>>
والكعبان هما العظمان الناتئان من الجانبين عند مفصل الساق والقدم وروي القاضي ابن كج وغيره عن بعض الاصحاب ان الكعب هو الذى فوق مشط القدم: وجه الاول ما روى النعمان بن بشير رضى الله عنه قال أمسنا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم باقامة الصفوف فرأيت الرجل يلزق منكبه بمنكب أخيه وكعبه بكعبه (1) والذى يتصور فيه التزاق القائمين في الصف ما ذكرنا دون ظهر القدم وقد يمتحن<o>></o>>

طرح التثريب- زَيْنُ الدِّينِ عَبْدُ الرَّحِيمِ الْعِرَاقِيّ<o>></o>>
3\67<o>></o>>
( بَابُ الْإِمَامَةِ ) ( الْحَدِيثُ الْأَوَّلُ ) عَنْ هَمَّامٍ عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ { أَقِيمُوا الصَّفَّ فِي الصَّلَاةِ فَإِنَّ إقَامَةَ الصَّفِّ مِنْ حُسْنِ الصَّلَاةِ } .<o>></o>>
( فِيهِ ) فَوَائِدُ : ( الْأُولَى ) فِيهِ الْأَمْرُ بِإِقَامَةِ الصُّفُوفِ فِي الصَّلَاةِ وَالْمُرَادُ بِالصَّفِّ الْجِنْسُ وَيَدْخُلُ فِي إقَامَةِ الصَّفِّ اسْتِوَاءُ الْقَائِمِينَ عَلَى سَمْتٍ وَاحِدٍ وَالْتِصَاقُ بَعْضِهِمْ لِبَعْضٍ بِحَيْثُ لَا يَكُونُ بَيْنَهُمْ خَلَلٌ وَتَتْمِيمُ الصُّفُوفِ الْمُقَدَّمَةِ أَوَّلًا فَأَوَّلًا وَفِي صَحِيحِ مُسْلِمٍ وَغَيْرِهِ عَنْ النُّعْمَانِ بْنِ بَشِيرٍ قَالَ { كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يُسَوِّي صُفُوفَنَا حَتَّى كَأَنَّمَا يُسَوِّي بِهَا الْقِدَاحَ حَتَّى رَأَى أَنْ قَدْ عَقَلْنَا عَنْهُ ثُمَّ خَرَجَ يَوْمًا فَقَامَ حَتَّى كَادَ أَنْ يُكَبِّرَ فَرَأَى رَجُلًا بَادِيًا صَدْرُهُ مِنْ الصَّفِّ فَقَالَ : عِبَادَ اللَّهِ لَتُسَوُّنَّ صُفُوفَكُمْ أَوْ لَيُخَالِفَنَّ اللَّهُ بَيْنَ وُجُوهِكُمْ } وَفِي سُنَنِ أَبِي دَاوُد وَغَيْرِهِ عَنْ النُّعْمَانِ { أَقْبَلَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَلَى النَّاسِ بِوَجْهِهِ فَقَالَ أَقِيمُوا صُفُوفَكُمْ ثَلَاثًا وَاَللَّهِ لَتُقِيمُنَّ صُفُوفَكُمْ أَوْ لَيُخَالِفَنَّ اللَّهُ بَيْنَ قُلُوبِكُمْ قَالَ فَرَأَيْت الرَّجُلَ يُلْزِقُ مَنْكِبَهُ بِمَنْكِبِ صَاحِبِهِ وَرُكْبَتَهُ بِرُكْبَةِ صَاحِبِهِ وَكَعْبَهُ بِكَعْبِهِ } .<o>></o>>
فَهَاتَانِ الرِّوَايَتَانِ دَالَّتَانِ بِمَجْمُوعِهِمَا عَلَى أَنَّهُ يَدْخُلُ فِي إقَامَةِ الصَّفِّ اسْتِوَاءُ الْقَائِمِينَ بِهِ وَانْضِمَامُ بَعْضِهِمْ لِبَعْضٍ وَفِي صَحِيحِ الْبُخَارِيِّ عَنْ أَنَسٍ عَنْ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ { أَقِيمُوا صُفُوفَكُمْ فَإِنِّي أَرَاكُمْ مِنْ وَرَاءِ ظَهْرِي وَكَانَ أَحَدُنَا يُلْزِقُ مَنْكِبَهُ بِمَنْكِبِ صَاحِبِهِ وَقَدَمَهُ بِقَدَمِهِ }<o>></o>>

شرح البخاري لابن بطال 3/426<o>:p></o>:p>
<o>:p> </o>:p>
(1)/101 - فيه: أَنَسِ قَال النَّبِيِّ - صلى الله عليه وسلم - : « أَقِيمُوا صُفُوفَكُمْ، فَإِنِّي أَرَاكُمْ مِنْ وَرَاءِ ظَهْرِي، وَكَانَ أَحَدُنَا يُلْزِقُ مَنْكِبَهُ بِمَنْكِبِ صَاحِبِهِ وَقَدَمَهُ بِقَدَمِهِ » .<o>:p></o>:p>
هذه الأحاديث تفسر قوله عليه السلام: « تراصُّوا فى الصف » ، وهذه هيئة التراص، وفيه: أن الكعب هو العظم الناتئ فى أثر الساق ومؤخر القدم، كما قال أهل المدينة؛ لأنه لو كان الكعب فى مقدم القدم كما قال أهل الكوفة لما تمكن أن يلزق أحدهم كعبه بكعب صاحبه، وهذا يدل على أن الكعبين اللذين جعلهما الله غاية فى غسل القدمين هما المذكوران فى حديث النعمان بن بشير، وقد تقدم هذا فى كتاب الطهارة بزيادة.<o>:p></o>:p>

عمدة القاري 8/4<o>:p></o>:p>
قوله يلزق بضم الياء من الإلزاق أي يلصق قوله كعبه بكعب صاحبه أي يلزق كعبه بكعب صاحبه الذي بحذائهوفيه دليل على أن الكعبهو العظم الناتىء في مفصل الساق والقدم وهو الذي يمكن إلزاقه وقال بعضهم خلافا لمن ذهب إلى أن المراد بالكعب مؤخر القدم وهو قول شاذ ينسب إلى بعض الحنفية قلت هشام روى عن محمد بن الحسن هذا التفسير ولكنه ما أراد بهذا الذي في باب الوضوء وإنما مراده الذي في باب الحج فنسبة هذا إلى بعض الحنفية على هذا غير صحيحة<o>:p></o>:p>

فتح الباري 3/75<o>:p></o>:p>
وَنَازَعَ مَنْ اِدَّعَى الْإِجْمَاع عَلَى عَدَمِ الْوُجُوبِ بِمَا صَحَّ عَنْ عُمَر أَنَّهُ ضَرَبَ قَدَمَ أَبِي عُثْمَان النَّهْدِيّ لِإِقَامَةِ الصَّفِّ ، وَبِمَا صَحَّ عَنْ سُوَيْدِ بْن غَفَلَةَ قَالَ " كَانَ بِلَال يُسَوِّي مَنَاكِبنَا وَيَضْرِبُ أَقْدَامَنَا فِي الصَّلَاةِ " فَقَالَ : مَا كَانَ عُمَر وَبِلَال يَضْرِبَانِ أَحَدًا عَلَى تَرْكِ غَيْر الْوَاجِبِ وَفِيهِ نَظَرٌ ، <o>:p></o>:p>
لِجَوَازِ أَنَّهُمَا كَانَا يَرَيَانِ اَلتَّعْزِيرَ عَلَى تَرْكِ السُّنَّةِ .<o>:p></o>:p>

[AbuNaim]

Well, Sh Bakr's argument is that the understanding of the hadeet, that ankles should literally touch ankles is an innovated understanding.

This is because Ibn Hajar says in the Sharh of al-Bukhari's chapter heading, words to the effect that the wording of ilzaq as meant only as exaggeration in straightening the rows and closing the gaps. Not that one should literally stick one's ankle's with the person next to him.

What confirms Ibn Hajar's understanding, according to Sh bakr is that the narration al-Bukhari is referring to, as collected by others such as al-Darutuqni, also mentions sticking knees with knees, and that is impossible, which shows that sticking the shoulders, knees and ankles, is in fact said in an exaggerating way to emphasise the importance of straightening the rows and closing the gaps, and not that one should literally stick one's ankles to the next person's ankles, or his knees with the next person's knees, etc.

He gave another example of that, that in a narration it states that the musalli sits on his buttocks during tawarruk, which is impossible. However, the other narrations clarify the intended meaning of the first hadeeth.

What's important to me here is who from the Salaf and the madhahib understood the hadeeth in this light, that one should literally stick one's ankle to the next person's ankle? This is Sh Bakr's main point.

What about this:

This addition also occurs in the report of al-Mukhallis and Ibn Abee Shaybah [1/351] with the following wording: Anas said, "...So I saw each of us adjoining our shoulder with those of our companions and also (adjoining) our feet with those of our companions, but if you were to practice this today, a person would flee (from you) like a restless mule."

So the meaning would be then that if Anas was about to stand close as much as possible exaggerating it to one another...the person would run away ?

And not that when he would try to join his schoulder and feet (i.e. what is ment with it the ankle as can be seen from the narration Numan bin Bashir) literally to one another ?

I have tried to clarify one and another here:

http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?t=16270


Was salaam

[Abdullah ibn Adam]

This addition also occurs in the report of al-Mukhallis and Ibn Abee Shaybah [1/351] with the following wording: Anas said, "...So I saw each of us adjoining our shoulder with those of our companions and also (adjoining) our feet with those of our companions, but if you were to practice this today, a person would flee (from you) like a restless mule."



The point that Anas ibn Malik seems to have been making was that when lining up to form the rows, the Sahabah used to join their feet to make sure the line was straight (they didn't have lines marked on the ground like many masajid today!), and that he was criticising the people in the succeeding generation for being somewhat averse to this. You find similar examples of other narrations in the books of the Sunnah of the sahabah objecting to certain things done or not done by the next generation of Muslims that they considered deficiencies.

Also, note that the mention by Anas in this narration of joining feet when lining up the rows before the prayer doesn't imply that the Sahabah used to literally stand with their heels connected in an exaggerated manner throughout the entire prayer from the takbir to the taslim.

[junaid123]

Also, note that the mention by Anas in this narration of joining feet when lining up the rows before the prayer doesn't imply that the Sahabah used to literally stand with their heels connected in an exaggerated manner throughout the entire prayer from the takbir to the taslim.

that means only at first rakah they maintained it and not after 2nd rakah bis taslem? but some brothers start to again stick their foot with other ones after 2nd rakah throughout the whole salah.

[AbuNaim]

that means only at first rakah they maintained it and not after 2nd rakah bis taslem? but some brothers start to again stick their foot with other ones after 2nd rakah throughout the whole salah.

The following is taken from Shaykh Abu Yusuf Riyadh ul Haq's book, The salah of a believer in the Quran and Sunnah:

The distance of the feet in salâh while praying in congregation.

Many ahadeeth have been narrated about the straightening of the rows and they include a number of different expressions to emphasise this point, such as the following narrations:

1. Sayyiduna Anas radiallahu anhu narrates that Rasulullah sallallahhu alaihi wa sallam said, ‘Pull your rows together, keep them close and keep your necks in line, for by He in Whose hands rests the soul of Muhammad, indeed I see the shayateen entering the gaps in the row as though they are small sheep.’

(Ahmad 13324,Abu Dawood 667 and Nasai 815)

2. Sayyiduna Nu’maan bin Basheer radiallahu anhu says, ‘Rasulullah sallallahhu alaihi wa sallam turned his face to the people and said thrice, “Straighten your rows.” (He then said,) “By Allâh, you will straighten your rows or Allâh will make your hearts differ.” (Sayyiduna Nu’maan bin Basheer continues,) I saw each man join his shoulder with the shoulder of the person next to him, his knee with his knee, and his ankle with his ankle.’

(Ahmad 17962, Abu Dawood 662, Ibn Khuzaimah 160, Ibn Hibban 2173 and Daraqutni 1080.)

3. Sayyiduna Anas bin Malik radiallahu anhu reports that Rasulullah sallallahhu alaihi wa sallam said, ‘Straighten your rows, for indeed I see you from behind my back.’ Sayyiduna Anas radiallahu anhu says, ‘We would join our shoulders and feet with the shoulders and feet of the person next to us.’

(Bukhari 692.)

Certain people, however, take some aspects of the above ahadeeth literally and insist on joining their ankles and feet with the person next to them throughout salâh. Their understanding of the ahadeeth is at odds with that of the scholars of hadeeth and fiqh.

Imam Bukhari has narrated the above hadeeth of Sayyiduna Anas radiallahu anhu in a chapter which he has titled ‘Chapter on joining the shoulders and feet in the row.’ Hafidh Ibn Hajar says in his commentary of Bukhari, Fath al Bari,

‘The meaning of this is to emphasise the straightening of the row and the filling of the gaps in between.’

(Fath al Bari, 2/268.)

The muhaddithun and fuqaha have never taken these individual expressions literally but, as explained above by Hafidh Ibn Hajar, only as a general indication of the measures to be adopted in order to straighten and complete the rows before salâh.

They explain the actions of the Sahâbah radiallahu anhum as being before salâh. It is extremely difficult if not impossible to maintain this posture in ruku’, sajdah, and tashahhud, and there is no evidence to suggest that, if practiced, it should be restricted only to the qiyâm. In fact, even in qiyâm it is extremely awkward and difficult to keep one’s knee joined to that of the next person. It is precisely for the above reasons that the mujtahid Imams, the muhaddithun and the fuqaha of the ummah have never mentioned the joining of the knees and ankles as part of the posture or procedure of salâh. They regard them as only a presalâh measure to ensure the completion and straightening of the rows.

So once the gaps have been filled, the row is straight and where necessary complete, one should adopt a natural posture and keep both feet apart at a comfortable distance.

End of quote.

According to the madhabs the following measures are mustahab between the musallis own feets when praying:

1. According to the Hanbali Math-hab there should be a ‘small’ gap between the feet of the musalli.

2. According to the Maaliki Math-hab, the distance should be moderate, neither together nor so wide apart which is considered repugnant.

3. According to the Shaafi Math-hab, the gap between the feet should be one hand. It is Makrooh to spread the feet wider than this.

4. According to the Hanafi Math-hab, the distance between the feet should be four fingers.

[Abu Abdallah al-Bulghari]

Jizakum Allahu khairan, br. AbuNaim.

Practical observation. Most of the "stick-your-feet" brothers I know spread it wider than shoulders.If you have Salafi on your left side and Deobandi on your right side, you are touch Deobandi with your shoulder (they are shy of "touching feet") and Salafi w/ your foot.

As a result sometimes there is serious physical momentum towards knocking you down towards Salafi brother.

I think I saw evidence in this thread for sticking both shoulders and feet together and for sticking only shoulders together, but I did not see any evidence for sticking only feet together (may be I missed something - the thread is quite long).

We can put feet apart as far as we want, but we cannot spread our shoulders to the same extent. Which means that shoulders are natural limit to staying close to each other.

It is obvious that when forming rows, one should first try to touch with shoulders and then adjust feet accordingly, not vice versa.

[AbuNaim]

I think I saw evidence in this thread for sticking both shoulders and feet together and for sticking only shoulders together, but I did not see any evidence for sticking only feet together (may be I missed something - the thread is quite long).

You missed a lot, for example this hadith:

Sayyiduna Nu’maan bin Basheer radiallahu anhu says, ‘Rasulullah sallallahhu alaihi wa sallam turned his face to the people and said thrice, “Straighten your rows.” (He then said,) “By Allâh, you will straighten your rows or Allâh will make your hearts differ.” (Sayyiduna Nu’maan bin Basheer continues,) I saw each man join his shoulder with the shoulder of the person next to him, his knee with his knee, and his ankle with his ankle.’

(Ahmad 17962, Abu Dawood 662, Ibn Khuzaimah 160, Ibn Hibban 2173 and Daraqutni 1080.)


Since the knees can't be joined, the meaning of this as well as the shoulders and ankles is maximum closeness when lining up BEFORE the start of salaat, not that they touch eachother literally. When once lined up and enshured the closeness of the row one should take a comfortable stance in the row. And further concentrate on the salaat and not anymore on ankles, knees, or shoulders, or feets (as the Salafis do at beginning of every new rakaat in prayer)

[Abu Abdallah al-Bulghari]

You missed a lot, for example this hadith:

Sayyiduna Nu’maan bin Basheer radiallahu anhu says, ‘Rasulullah sallallahhu alaihi wa sallam turned his face to the people and said thrice, “Straighten your rows.” (He then said,) “By Allâh, you will straighten your rows or Allâh will make your hearts differ.” (Sayyiduna Nu’maan bin Basheer continues,) I saw each man join his shoulder with the shoulder of the person next to him, his knee with his knee, and his ankle with his ankle.’

(Ahmad 17962, Abu Dawood 662, Ibn Khuzaimah 160, Ibn Hibban 2173 and Daraqutni 1080.)


Since the knees can't be joined, the meaning of this as well as the shoulders and ankles is maximum closeness when lining up BEFORE the start of salaat, not that they touch eachother literally. When once lined up and enshured the closeness of the row one should take a comfortable stance in the row. And further concentrate on the salaat and not anymore on ankles, knees, or shoulders, or feets (as the Salafis do at beginning of every new rakaat in prayer)

Akhi, that is not relevant to my remark, because this does not address the case of touching with only feet, but not shoulders.

[AbuNaim]

Akhi, that is not relevant to my remark, because this does not address the case of touching with only feet, but not shoulders.


Touching only with feet and standing with very wide feets in a disrespectfull manner is a awkard practice of some salafis which now has become a landmark amongst them!, read the following article:

The Feet In Salaat - The Salafi Error

Introduction


In this fourteenth century of the Islamic era, a recently mushroomed sect known as the Salafis, has invented some new rules which they believe are the Sunnat teachings of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Inspite of their views being in conflict with the teachings of the Salf-e-Saaliheen belonging to the Noblest Ages of Islam (Khairul Quroon), they obstinately cling to their misguided opinions. Their method is to subject the Ahadith to their personal understanding. Inspite of the divergence which this self-opinion produces from the Way of the Ummah inherited from the Sahaabah, the Salafis intransigently cling to their deviation.

A little reflection would convince them that it is not possible that the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen who were the Students of the Sahaabah would propagate acts which are in conflict with the Sunnah. Any act which has been accepted and practised by the entire Ummah from the earliest era of Islam cannot be deviation. Deviation will be the act which is in conflict with this sacred Unanimity.

One of the erroneous practices of the Salafis is their act of spreading their legs wide apart during Salaat. In the bid to touch the toes of the musalli standing adjacent to them, they disfigure their stance and ruin their composure with the mental preoccupation of touching the toes of the musallis standing on both sides in the Saff during Jamaat Salaat. Even when performing Salaat alone, they stretch the legs hideously apart. But for this innovation they have absolutely no Shar’i evidence. A solitary Hadith which makes reference to ‘foot with foot’ has been grievously misunderstood and misinterpreted by them. Besides their misinterpretation, they have intentionally ignored all the other Shar’i proofs which refute their interpretation.

A perusal of the relevant Ahadith on this subject will convince every unbiased Muslim that the Salafi interpretation of the Hadith is a concoction of the nafs. It is a concoction designed and prepared by shaitaan to create rifts and discord in the Ummah. When people opt to abandon the practices which the Aimmah Mujtahideen have reported on the basis of the authority of the Sahaabah, then shaitaani manipulation is evident.

All four Math-habs of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah unanimously refute the Salafi contention on the position to be adopted when standing for Salaat. None of the Math-habs teaches that the legs should be spread out widely when standing for Salaat nor that the toes of the Musalli alongside should be touched. Some of the Salafis go to great lengths in spreading their legs in the bid to touch the next man’s toes causing annoyance and much irritation.


The Emphasis on Straghtening the Sufoof

(Sufoof is the plural of saff which refers to the row of musallis in a Jamaat)

The Ahadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) emphasise the straightening of the sufoof. The emphasis in all the Hadith narrations dealing with this subject is directed to proper saff*-formation, not on the feet of the musallis touching the toes of the musalli standing alongside as the Salafis inordinately and inconsiderately practice.

In the endeavour to sustain the practice of stretching the legs wide open while performing Salaat, the Salafis have gone to the extreme of adopting this ugly stance even when performing Salaat alone. While a man who is uneducated in the laws of the Shariah may misunderstand the solitary Hadith in which reference has been made to “foot with foot”, the same mistake cannot and should not be made in so far as Salaat performed alone because the question of “foot with foot” is not remotely related to infiraadi Salaat, i.e. performing Salaat alone.

The Salafis may abortively argue that the aim of spreading the legs wide apart is to ensure straightness of the sufoof, but what argument do they have for justifying this unbecoming practice when a man is performing Salaat infiraadan(individually)? Furthermore, there is no Hadith narration in this regard which could even be misinterpreted to support the case of a munfarid stretching his legs to the extremities of east and west or north and south, depending on the location of the Qiblah from where he happens to be.

The Salafis claim that it is Sunnah to stretch the legs wide apart and for a musalli’s toes to touch the toes of the musalli standing alongside him in the saff. This ludicrous position is imposed by the Salafis on even women who are obliged to stand with their legs wide open. What an ugly, miserable and immodest stance for a woman to adopt? A woman is an object of concealment according to the statement of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). When she has to stretch her legs wide open, she adopts the stance of lewd and shameless women. Throughout Salaat, a woman’s postures are to be constricted -- made small and drawn in, not asserted like a man asserts and expresses his actions during Salaat.

As far as their stance is concerned for the munfarid, there is not a single Hadith which they can cite in substantiation for their view which anyhow is utterly baseless. All the relevant Ahadith on this topic teach the contrary, namely, that the feet should be held slightly apart -- about four to five inches (10 cm). There also exists consensus of the Four Math-habs on this issue.

As far as the feet position for the saff is concerned, the Salafis conveniently overlook all the Ahadith which negate their corrupt view and intransigently cling to a view which they have understood to be the method. In taking to this view, they deliberately cast aside what exactly the Hadith in question says. They took a single word (namely ‘foot with foot’) out of the context of the Hadith and formulated the practice of stretching the legs wide apart and touching the toes of the musallis standing alongside on either side in the saff. For understanding this issue, it is best that we cite all the relevant Ahadith.

The Ahadith

1. Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Straighten the sufoof, line up the shoulders, close the gaps and become tender in the hands of your brothers. Do not leave any gaps for shaitaan. Whoever joins the saff, Allah will join him. And whoever cuts the saff Allah will cut him.” (Bukhari & Abu Dawood)



2. Hadhrat Baraa’ Bin Aazib (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) used to enter the saff from end to end, touching our chests and our shoulders. He would say:

“Do not be irregular (in your rows), for then your hearts will become irregular (i.e. discord will overtake you).” He would (also) say:

“ Verily, Allah Azza Wa Jal and His Malaaikah dispatch Salaam on the first sufoof”

[When the word ‘Salaat’ is related to Allah Ta ‘ala, it denotes Rahmat, i.e. He sends down mercy. When it is related to the Malaaikah, it means that they supplicate to Allah Ta`ala to send His mercy upon His servants.]

3. Hadhrat Anas Bin Maalik (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates that the Iqaamah for Salaat was given. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) turned towards us and said: “Straighten your sufoof and stand close together, for verily I see you from behind.” In a narration of Hadhrat Anas (radhiyallahu anhu) it is mentioned: “Everyone among us would put his shoulder with the shoulder of his companion (alongside) and his foot with his foot.”

4. Hadhrat Anas (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Join your sufoof and stand close together, and stand in line with (your) necks. I take oath by The Being in Whose power is my life that most certainly I see shaitaan entering the gaps in the saff as if he is a lamb.” (Abu Dawood)

5. Abul Qaasim Jadli (rahmatullah alayh) said :“I heard Nu’maan Bin Basheer (radhiyallahu anhu) say: ‘Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) turned towards the people (the musallis) and say three times: ‘By Allah! Most certainly, you should straighten your sufoof otherwise Allah will create discord in your hearts.’ Thereafter I saw that a man would attach his shoulder to the shoulder of his companion (the one standing alongside), his knee to the knee of his companion and his ankle to the ankle of his companion.” (Bukhari & Abu Dawood)

6. Nu’maan Bin Basheer (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: “Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) would arrange (set in order) our sufoof. One day he came out (from his home) and saw a man (in the saff) whose chest was protruding in front of the (chests of) the community (i.e. the musallis). He then commented: ‘Straighten your sufoof otherwise Allah will cast discord in your faces (i.e. in the words coming from your mouths).” (Tirmizi)

7. Maalik Ibn Abi Aamir Ansaari (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: “Uthmaan Bin Affaan (radhiyallahu anhu) would recite in his Khutbah: ‘When the Salaat is ready, arrange the sufoof properly and line up with the shoulders’ (i.e. the shoulders of the musallis should all be in line and touching).” (Muatta Imaam Muhammad)

8. Hadhrat Anas (radhiyallahu anhu) narrated that Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Join your sufoof and draw close among yourselves and line up with the necks.” Reported by Abu Dawood and Nisai. Authenticated by Ibn Hibbaan. (Bulooghul Maraam)--*I’laaus Sunnan

These are about all the narrations pertaining to the manner and style of standing in Jamaat Salaat. Explaining these Ahadith, Imaam Bukhaari (rahmatullah alayh) states in the section captioned:

“JOINING SHOULDER TO SHOULDER”:

“This is what the Jamhoor have said: ‘Verily, the meaning (of joining in this context) is complete nearness and lining up, not actual joining (or touching).’” Al-Haafiz said: “The meaning of this is to emphasise in straightening the saff and closing the gaps.” And Aini too has said so. With this, the indication is towards emphasis in straightening the sufoof and closing the gaps. Qustulaani and others have also said this.”

(Laamiud Duraari—commentary of Bukhari)

In Faidhul Baari it is reported as follows:

“It is stated in Sharhul Wiqaayah: ‘The musalli should stand apart (with his feet) so that there is a distance of four fingers in between them, and that is also the view of Imaam Shaafi (rahmatullah alayh), In another view it is said that the distance (between the feet) should be one hand (i.e. about 10 cm).’ (The author says): I did not find any difference of opinion among the Salf (i.e. Salf-e-Saaliheen) between the stance (of the musalli) in Jama’ah and in infiraad (i.e. performing alone). There is no difference regarding the gap (between the feet). It is not that the spreading of the feet should be more in Jama’ah than when performing Salaat alone.”

The summary of this is: When we do not find the Sahaabah and the Taabi-een differentiating in their standing position between Jama’ah and individual Salaat, then we understand that the only meaning of Rasulullah’s statement of ‘joining the shoulders’ is to line up closely and to abstain from leaving gaps (between the musallis).

The following appears in Laamiud Duraari, Commentary of Saheeh Bukhaari:

“The Authorities (the Fuqaha) stated that it is best for the musalli to keep his feet about four fingers apart. They did not say that the feet should be united in ruku’ or sajdah. Aini says in Binaayah: ‘It is appropriate that there be the distance of four fingers between the feet of the musalli, for verily, this is nearest to khushoo.’”

Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhuma) would not spread (widely) his feet nor would the one foot touch the other, but between this there would be neither much closeness nor much distance.

In Raddul Mihtaar it is reported as follows:

“The meaning of joining ankles to ankles is that everyone in the Jama’ah should stand alongside the other (i.e. in a straight line). So is it said in Fataawa Samarqand).” (I’laaus Sunan)

From all the narrations and views of the Muhadditheen and Fuqaha of the Khairul Quroon era it is abundantly clear that the Hadith which mentions joining foot with foot does not have a literal meaning. It simply means that the feet should be all in line, and this is achieved by the heels of the musallis all being in the same line. This will ensure a straight saff on which the emphasis of all the Ahadith is.

[B]The Salafis

The Salafis of this age, while grabbing the words ‘foot with foot’, ignore ‘neck with neck’, ‘shoulder with shoulder’, ‘knee with knee’ and ‘ankle with ankle’. The narrations command joining of the necks just as it instructs joining of the feet. And, in the same way it commands joining of the knees and ankles. How is it possible for the neck of one musalli to touch the neck of the musalli alongside? At most, shoulders can touch. But to achieve the phenomenal act of joining necks, the musallis will have to ruin their Salaat and stand on their toes balancing at a precarious angle to achieve the goal of touching each other’s neck. But no one has ever advocated this ludicrous stance. Similarly, if the literal sense of the ‘ankle with ankle’ has to be accepted, it will place the musallis under great stress to achieve what is not simple because the protruding heels are barriers for this achievement. Also, if ‘knee against knee’ had to be literally considered, the musallis would have to stand with ugly bandied legs, stretching even their thighs hideously in order to join their knees with the knees of their companions? But, not even the Salafis have ventured such ludicrousness.

Why do the Salafis choose only ‘foot with foot’ out of the several instructions pertaining to the joining of various bodily parts? For this choice they have only their intransigent nafsaani desire --no daleel whatsoever. What is the determining factor to choose only feet and to ignore necks, knees, shoulders and ankles? On the other hand, the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah -- the followers of the Four Math-habs -- *have a mass of evidence to support ‘joining of the shoulders’. Furthermore, joining or lining up of the shoulders is simple, rational and fulfills in the best way the instruction of straightening the saff.

It should be noted that the emphasis is on closing the gaps. There should be no gap between two musallis standing in the saff. But, the wider the legs are spread apart, the more the distance between the shoulders will increase. Thus, spreading the legs wide apart defeats the very command issued in the Hadith to close the gaps and straighten the sufoof.

In order to achieve ‘foot with foot’ literally, the Salafis are constrained to turn their feet at angles away from the Qiblah. In this hideous exercise they manage only to touch the toes of the adjacent musalli with much difficulty and irritation to those whose peace of mind is disturbed with the unruly encroachment of his companion’s toes. When the toes are made to touch with the feet in diagonal posit