Al-Albani Unveiled Al-Albani's Weakening of Someof Imam Bukhari's and Muslim's Ahadith.

Al-Albani has said in "Sharh al-Aqeedah at-Tahaweeah, pg. 2728" (8th edition, Maktab al-Islami) by Shaykh Ibn Abi al-Izz alHanafi (Rahimahullah), that any Hadith coming from the Sahih collections of al-Bukhari and Muslim is Sahih, not because they were narrated by Bukhari and Muslim, but because the Ahadith are in fact correct. But he clearly contradicts himself, since he has weakened Ahadith from Bukhari and Muslim himself! Now let us consider this information in the light of elaboration :-

SELECTED TRANSLATIONS FROM VOLUME 1 No. 1: (*Pg. 10 No.1) Hadith: The Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him) said: "Allah says I will be an opponent to 3 persons on the day of resurrection: (a) One who makes a covenant in my Name but he proves treacherous, (b) One who sells a free person (as a slave) and eats the price (c) And one who employs a laborer and gets the full work done by him, but doesn't pay him his wages." [Bukhari no 2114-Arabic version, or see the English version 3/430 pg 236]. Al-Albani said that this Hadith was DAEEF in "Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 4/111 No.4054". Little does he know that this Hadith has been narrated by Ahmad and Bukhari from Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with him)!! No. 2: (*Pg. 10 No.2) Hadith: "Sacrifice only a grown up cow unless it is difficult for you, in which case sacrifice a ram." [Muslim No.1963-Arabic edition, or see the English version 3/4836 pg. 1086]. Al-Albani said that this Hadith was DAEEF in "Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 6/64 No.6222." Although this Hadith has been

narrated by Imam's Ahmad, Muslim, Abu Dawood, Nisai and Ibn Majah from Jaabir (Allah be pleased with him)!! No. 3: (*Pg. 10 No.3) Hadith: "Amongst the worst people in Allah's sight on the Day of Judgement will be the man who makes love to his wife and she to him, and he divulges her secret." [Muslim No.1437- Arabic edition]. Al-Albani claims that this Hadith is DAEEF in "Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 2/197 No.2005." Although it has been narrated by Muslim from Abi Sayyed (Allah be pleased with him)!! No. 4: (*Pg. 10 No.4) Hadith: "If someone woke up at night (for prayers) let him begin his prayers with 2 light rak'ats." [Muslim No.768]. Al-Albani stated that this Hadith was DAEEF in "Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 1/213 No.718." Although it is narrated by Muslim and Ahmad from Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with him)!! No. 5: (*Pg. 11 No.5) Hadith: "You will rise with shining foreheads and shining hands and feet on the Day of Judgement by completing Wudhu properly. . . . . . . ." [Muslim No.246]. Al-Albani claims it is DAEEF in "Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 2/14 No.1425." Although it has been narrated by Muslim from Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with him)!! No. 6: (*Pg. 11 No.6) Hadith: "The greatest trust in the sight of Allah on the Day of Judgement is the man who doesn't divulge the secrets between him and his wife." [Muslim no's 124 and 1437] Al-Albani claims it is DAEEF in "Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 2/192 No.1986." Although it has been narrated by Muslim, Ahmad and Abu Dawood from Abi Sayyed (Allah be pleased with

him)!! No. 7: (*Pg. 11 No.7) Hadith: "If anyone READS the last ten verses of Surah al-Kahf he will be saved from the mischief of the Dajjal." [Muslim No.809]. Al-Albani said that this Hadith was DAEEF in "Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 5/233 No.5772." NB- The word used by Muslim is MEMORIZED and not READ as al-Albani claimed; what an awful mistake! This Hadith has been narrated by Muslim, Ahmad and Nisai from Abi Darda (Allah be pleased with him)!! (Also recorded by Imam Nawawi in "Riyadh us-Saliheen, 2/1021" of the English ed'n). No. 8: (*Pg. 11 No.8) Hadith: "The Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him) had a horse called al-Laheef." [Bukhari, see Fath al-Bari of Hafiz Ibn Hajar 6/58 No.2855]. But Al-Albani said that this Hadith was DAEEF in "Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 4/208 No.4489." Although it has been narrated by Bukhari from Sahl ibn Sa'ad (Allah be pleased with him)!!! Shaykh Saqqaf said: "This is only anger from anguish, little from a lot and if it wasn't for the fear of lengthening and boring the reader, I would have mentioned many other examples from al-Albani's books whilst reading them. Imagine what I would have found if I had traced everything he wrote?"

AL-ALBANI'S INADEQUACY IN RESEARCH (*Vol. 1 pg. 20) Saqqaf said: "The strange and amazing thing is that Shaykh alAlbani misquoted many great Hadith scholars and disregards them by his lack of knowledge, either directly or indirectly! He crowns himself as an unbeatable source and even tries to imitate the great scholars by using such terms like "Lam aqif ala

sanadih", which means "I could not find the chain of narration", or using similar phrases! He also accuses some of the best memorizers of Hadith for lack of attention, even though he is the one best described by that!" Now for some examples to prove our point: No. 9 : (* Pg. 20 No. 1) Al-Albani said in "Irwa al-Ghalil, 6/251 No.1847" (in connection to a narration from Ali): "I could not find the sanad." Saqqaf said: "Ridiculous! If this al-Albani was any scholar of Islam, then he would have known that this Hadith can be found in "Sunan al-Bayhaqi, 7/121" :- Narrated by Abu Sayyed ibn Abi Amarah, who said that Abu al-Abbas Muhammad ibn Yaqoob who said to us that Ahmad ibn Abdal Hamid said that Abu Usama from Sufyan from Salma ibn Kahil from Mu'awiya ibn Soayd who said, 'I found this in my fathers book from Ali (Allah be pleased with him).'" No. 10 : (* Pg. 21 No.2) Al-Albani said in 'Irwa al-Ghalil, 3/283': Hadith of Ibn Umar 'Kisses are usury,' I could not find the sanad." Saqqaf said: "This is outrageously wrong for surely this is mentioned in 'Fatawa al-Shaykh ibn Taymiyya al-Misriyah (3/295)': 'Harb said Obaidullah ibn Mu'az said to us, my father said to me that Soayd from Jiballa who heard Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) as saying: Kisses are usury.' And these narrators are all authentic according to Ibn Taymiyya!" No 11 : (* Pg. 21 No.3) Hadith of Ibn Mas'ud (Allah be pleased with him): "The Qur'an was sent down in 7 dialects. Everyone of its verses has an explicit and implicit meaning and every interdiction is clearly defined." AlAlbani stated in his checking of "Mishkat ul-Masabih, 1/80 No.238" that the author of Mishkat concluded many Ahadith with the words "Narrated in Sharh us-Sunnah," but when he examined

the chapter on Ilm and in Fadail al-Qur'an he could not find it! Saqqaf said: "The great scholar has spoken! Wrongly as usual. I wish to say to this fraud that if he is seriously interested in finding this Hadith we suggest he looks in the chapter entitled 'AlKhusama fi al-Qur'an' from Sharh-us-Sunnah (1/262), and narrated by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih (No.74), Abu Ya'ala in his Musnad (No.5403), Tahawi in Sharh al-Mushkil al-Athar (4/172), Bazzar (3/90 Kashf al-Asrar) and Haythami has mentioned it in Majmoo'a al-Zawaid (7/152) and he has ascribed it to Bazzar, Abu Ya'ala and Tabarani in al-Awsat who said that the narrators are trustworthy." No 12 : (* Pg. 22 No.4) Al-Albani stated in his "Sahihah, 1/230" while he was commenting on Hadith No.149: "The believer is the one who does not fill his stomach. . . . The Hadith from Aisha as mentioned by Al-Mundhiri (3/237) and by Al-Hakim from Ibn Abbas, I (Albani) could not find it in Mustadrak al-Hakim after checking it in his 'Thoughts' section." Saqqaf said: "Please don't encourage the public to fall into the void of ignorance which you have tumbled into! If you check Mustadrak al-Hakim (2/12) you will find it! This proves that you are unskilled at using book indexes and the memorization of Hadith!" No 13 : (* Pg. 23) Another ridiculous assumption is made by al-Albani in his "Sahihah, 2/476" where he claims that the Hadith: "Abu Bakr is from me, holding the position of (my) hearing" is not in the book 'Hilya'. We suggest you look in the book "Hilya , 4/73!" No 14 : (*Pg. 23 No.5) Al-Albani said in his "Sahihah, 1/638 No.365, 4th edition": "Yahya ibn Malik has been ignored by the 6 main scholars of

Hadith, for he was not mentioned in the books of Tahdhib, Taqreeb or Tadhhib." Shaykh Saqqaf: "That is what you say! It is not like that, for surely he is mentioned in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib of Hafiz ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (12/19 Dar al-Fikr edition) by the nickname Abu Ayoob al-Maraagi!! So beware!

FURTHER EXAMPLES OF AL-ALBANI'S CONTRADICTIONS No 15 : (* Pg. 7) Al-Albani has criticized the Imam al-Muhaddith Abu'l Fadl Abdullah ibn al-Siddiq al-Ghimari (Rahimahullah) for mentioning in his book "al-Kanz al-Thameen" a Hadith from Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with him) with reference to the narrator Abu Maymoona: "Spread salaam, feed the poor. . . ." Al-Albani said in "Silsilah al-Daeefa, 3/492", after referring this Hadith to Imam Ahmad (2/295) and others: "I say this is a weak sanad, Daraqutni has said 'Qatada from Abu Maymoona from Abu Hurayra: Unknown, and it is to be discarded.'" Al-Albani then said on the same page: "Notice, a slapdash has happened with Suyuti and Munawi when they came across this Hadith, and I have also shown in a previous reference, No.571, that al-Ghimari was also wrong for mentioning it in al-Kanz." But in reality it is al-Albani who has become slapdashed, because he has made a big contradiction by using this same sanad in "Irwa al-Ghalil, 3/238" where he says, "Classified by Ahmad (2/295), al-Hakim . . . from Qatada from Abu Maymoona, and he is trusted as in the book 'al-Taqreeb', and Hakim said: 'A Sahih sanad', and al-Dhahabi agreed with Hakim!

So, by Allah glance at this mistake! Who do you think is wrong, the Muhaddith al-Ghimari (also Suyuti and Munawi) or al-Albani? No 16 : (* Pg. 27 No.3) Al-Albani wanted to weaken a Hadith which allowed women to wear golden jewellery, and in the sanad for that Hadith there is Muhammad ibn Imara. Al-Albani claimed that Abu Haatim said that this narrator was: "Not that strong," see the book "Hayat alAlbani wa-Atharu. . . part 1, pg. 207." The truth is that Abu Haatim al-Razi said in the book 'al-Jarh waTaadeel, 8/45': "A good narrator but not that strong. . ." So note that al-Albani has removed the phrase "A good narrator !" NB-(al-Albani has made many of the Hadith which forbid Gold to women to be Sahih, in fact other scholars have declared these Hadith to be daeef and abrogated by other Sahih Hadith which allow the wearing of gold by women. One of the well known Shaykh's of the "Salafiyya" - Yusuf al-Qardawi said in his book: 'Islamic awakening between rejection and extremism, pg. 85: "In our own times, Shaykh Nasir al-Din al-Albani has come out with an opinion, different from the consensus on permitting women to adorn themselves with gold, which has been accepted by all madhahib for the last fourteen centuries. He not only believes that the isnad of these Ahadith is authentic, but that they have not been revoked. So, he believes, the Ahadith prohibit gold rings and earrings." So who is the one who violates the ijma of the Ummah with his extreme opinions?!) No 17 : (* Pg. 37 No.1) Hadith: Mahmood ibn Lubayd said, "Allah's Messenger (Peace and blessings be upon him) was informed about a man who had divorced his wife 3 times (in one sitting), so he stood up angrily and said: 'Is he playing with Allah's book whilst I am still amongst you?' Which made a man stand up and say, 'O Allah's Messenger,

shall I not kill him?'" (al-Nisai). Al-Albani declared this Hadith to be Daeef in his checking of "Mishkat al-Masabih, 2/981, 3rd edition, Beirut, 1405 A.H; Maktab al-Islami", where he says: "This man (the narrator) is reliable, but the isnad is broken or incomplete for he did not hear it directly from his father." Al-Albani then contradicts himself in the book "Ghayatul Maram Takhreej Ahadith al-Halal wal Haram, No.261, pg. 164, 3rd Edn, Maktab al-Islami, 1405 A.H"; by saying it is SAHIH!!! No 18 : (* Pg. 37 No.2) Hadith: "If one of you was sleeping under the sun, and the shadow covering him shrank, and part of him was in the shadow and the other part of him was in the sun, he should rise up." AlAlbani declared this Hadith to be SAHIH in "Sahih al-Jami alSagheer wa Ziyadatuh (1/266/761)", but then contradicts himself by saying it is DAEEF in his checking of "Mishkat ul-Masabih, 3/1337 No.4725, 3rd Ed" and he has referred it to the Sunan of Abu Dawood!" No 19 : (* Pg. 38 No.3) Hadith: "The Friday prayer is obligatory on every Muslim." AlAlbani rated this Hadith to be DAEEF in his checking of "Mishkat al-Masabih, 1/434", and said: "Its narrators are reliable but it is discontinuous as is indicated by Abu Dawood". He then contradicts himself in "Irwa al-Ghalil, 3/54 No. 592", and says it is SAHIH!!! So beware o wise men! No 20 : (* Pg. 38 No.4) Al-Albani has made another contradiction. He has trusted AlMuharrar ibn Abu Hurayra in one place and then weakened him in another. Al-Albani certifies in "Irwa al-Ghalil, 4/301" that Muharrar is a trustee with Allah's help, and Hafiz (Ibn Hajar) saying about him "accepted", is not accepted, and therefore the

sanad is Sahih. He then contradicts himself in "Sahihah 4/156" where he makes the sanad DAEEF by saying: "The narrators in the sanad are all Bukhari's (i.e.; used by Imam al-Bukhari) men, except for al-Muharrar who is one of the men of Nisai and Ibn Majah only. He was not trusted accept by Ibn Hibban, and that's why al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar did not trust him, Instead he only said 'accepted!'" So beware of this fraud! No 21 : (* Pg. 39 No.5) Hadith: Abdallah ibn Amr (Allah be pleased with him): "The Friday prayer is incumbent on whoever heard the call" (Abu Dawood). Al-Albani stated that this Hadith was HASAN in "Irwa al-Ghalil 3/58", he then contradicts himself by saying it is DAEEF in "Mishkatul Masabih 1/434 no 1375"!!! No 22 : (* Pg. 39 No.6) Hadith: Anas ibn Malik (Allah be pleased with him) said that the Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him) used to say : "Do not be hard on yourself, otherwise Allah will be hard on you. When a people were hard on themselves, then Allah was hard on them." (Abu Dawood) Al-Albani stated that this Hadith was DAEEF in his checking of "Mishkat, 1/64", but he then contradicts himself by saying that this Hadith is HASAN in "Ghayatul Maram, pg. 141"!! No 23: (* Pg. 40 No.7) Hadith of Sayyida Aisha (Allah be pleased with her): "Whoever tells you that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) used to urinate while standing, do not believe him. He never urinated unless he was sitting." (Ahmad, Nisai and Tirmidhi) Al-Albani said that this sanad was DAEEF in "Mishkat 1/117." He then contradicts himself by saying it is SAHIH in "Silsilat alAhadith al-Sahihah 1/345 No.201"!!!

So take a glance dear reader! No 24 : (* Pg. 40 No.8) Hadith: "There are three which the angels will never approach: The corpse of a disbeliever, a man who wears ladies perfume, and one who has had sex until he performs ablution" (Abu Dawood). Al-Albani corrected this Hadith in "Sahih al-Jami al-Sagheer wa Ziyadatuh, 3/71 No.3056" by saying it was HASAN in the checking of "Al-Targhib 1/91" [Also said to be hasan in the English translation of 'The Etiquettes of Marriage and Wedding, pg. 11]. He then makes an obvious contradiction by saying that the same Hadith was DAEEF in his checking of "MishkatulMasabih, 1/144 No.464" and says that the narrators are trustworthy but the chain is broken between al-hasan al-Basri and Ammar (Allah be pleased with him) as al-Mundhiri had said in al-Targhib (1/91)!! No 25 : (* Pg. 42 No.10) It reached Malik (Rahimahullah) that Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him) used to shorten his prayer, in distances such as between Makkah and Ta'if or between Makkah and Usfan or between Makkah and Jeddah. . . . Al-Albani has weakened it in "Mishkat, 1/426 No.1351", and then contradicts himself by saying it is SAHIH in "Irwa al-Ghalil, 3/14"!! No 26 : (* Pg. 43 No.12) Hadith: "Leave the Ethiopians as long as they leave you, because no one takes out the treasure of the Ka'ba except the one with the two weak legs from Ethiopia." Al-Albani has weakened this Hadith in his checking of "Mishkat 3/1495 No.5429" by saying: "The sanad is DAEEF." But then he contradicts himself as is his habit, by correcting it in "Sahihah, 2/415 No.772."

An example of al-Albani praising someone in one place and then disparaging him in another place in his books No 27 : (* Pg. 32) He praises Shaykh Habib al-Rahman al-Azami in the book 'Sahih al Targhib wa Tarhib, page 63', where he says: "I want you to know one of the things that encouraged me to. . . . which has been commented by the famous and respected scholar Shaykh Habib al-Rahman al-Azami" . . . . And he also said on the same page, "And what made me more anxious for it, is that its checker, the respected Shaykh Habib al-Rahman al-Azami has announced. . . ." Al-Albani thus praises Shaykh al-Azami in the above mentioned book; but then makes a contradiction in the introduction to 'Adaab uz Zufaaf (The Etiquettes of Marriage and Wedding), new edition page 8', where he said: "Al-Ansari has used in the end of his letter, one of the enemies of the Sunnah, Hadith and Tawhid, who is famous for that, is Shaykh Habib alRahman al-Azami. . . . . For his cowardliness and lack of scholarly deduction. . . . ." NB - (The above quotation from Adaab uz Zufaaf is not found in the English translation by his supporters, which shows that they deliberately avoided translating certain parts of the whole work). So have a glance at this!

SELECTED TRANSLATIONS FROM VOLUME 2 No 28 : (* Pg. 143 No.1) Hadith of Abi Barza (Allah be pleased with him): "By Allah, you will not find a man more just than me" (Sunan al-Nisai, 7/120 No.4103).

Al-Albani said that this Hadith was SAHIH in "Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 6/105 No.6978", and then he astonishingly contradicts himself by saying it is DAEEF in "Daeef Sunan al-Nisai, pg. 164 No.287." So beware of this mess! No 29 : (* Pg. 144 No.2) Hadith of Harmala ibn Amru al-Aslami from his Uncle: "Throw pebbles at the Jimar by putting the extremity of the thumb on the fore-finger." (Sahih Ibn Khuzaima, 4/276-277 No.2874) Al-Albani acknowledged its weakness in "Sahih Ibn Khuzaima" by saying that the sanad was DAEEF, but then contradicts himself by saying it is SAHIH in "Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 1/312 No.923!" No 30 : (* Pg. 144 No.3) Hadith of Sayyidina Jabir ibn Abdullah (Allah be pleased with him): "The Prophet (Peace be upon him) was asked about the sexually defiled [junubi]. . . can he eat, or sleep. . . He said :'Yes, when this person makes wudhu.'" (Ibn Khuzaima No.217 and Ibn Majah No.592). Al-Albani has admitted its weakness in his comments on "Ibn Khuzaima, 1/108 No.217", but then contradicts himself by correcting the above Hadith in "Sahih Ibn Majah, 1/96 No.482 "!! No 31 : (* Pg. 145 No.4) Hadith of Aisha (Allah be pleased with her): "A vessel as a vessel and food as food" (Nisai, 7/71 No.3957). Al-Albani said that it was SAHIH in "Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 2/13 No.1462", but then contradicts himself in "Daeef Sunan al-Nisai, No.263 pg. 157", by saying it is DAEEF!!! No 32 : (* Pg. 145 No.5) Hadith of Anas (Allah be pleased with him): "Let each one of you ask Allah for all his needs, even for his sandal thong if it gets

cut." Al-Albani said that the above Hadith was HASAN in his checking of "Mishkat, 2/696 No.2251 and 2252", but then contradicts himself in "Daeef al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 5/69 No.4947 and 4948"!!! No 33 : (* Pg. 146 No.6) Hadith of Abu Dharr (Allah be pleased with him): "If you want to fast, then fast in the white shining nights of the 13th, 14th and 15th." Al-Albani declared it to be DAEEF in "Daeef al-Nisai, pg. 84" and in his comments on "Ibn Khuzaima, 3/302 No.2127", but then contradicts himself by calling it SAHIH in "Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 2/10 No.1448" and also corrected it in "Sahih al-Nisai, 3/902 No.4021"!! So what a big contradiction! NB- (Al-Albani mentioned this Hadith in 'Sahih al-Nisai' and in 'Daeef al-Nisai', which proves that he is unaware of what he has and is classifying, how inept!) No 34 : (* Pg. 147 No.7) Hadith of Sayyida Maymoonah (Allah be pleased with her): "There is nobody who has taken a loan and it is in the knowledge of Allah. . . ." (Nisai, 7/315 and others). Al-Albani said in "Daeef al-Nisai, pg 190": "Sahih, except for the part al-Dunya." Then he contradicts himself in "Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 5/156", by saying that the whole Hadith is SAHIH, including the al-Dunya part. So what an amazing contradiction! No 35 : (* Pg. 147 No.8) Hadith of Burayda (Allah be pleased with him): "Why do I see you wearing the jewellery of the people of hell" (Meaning the Iron ring), [Nisai, 8/172 and others. . .]. Al-Albani has said that it was SAHIH in "Sahih al-Jami wa

Ziyadatuh, 5/153 No.5540", but then contradicts himself by saying it is DAEEF in "Daeef al-Nisai, pg. 230"!!! No 36 : (* Pg. 148 No.9) Hadith of Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with him): "Whoever buys a carpet to sit on, he has 3 days to keep it or return it with a cup of dates that are not brownish in colour" (Nisai 7/254 and others). Al-Albani has weakened it with reference to the '3 days' part in "Daeef Sunan al-Nisai, pg. 186", by saying: "Correct, except for 3 days." But the 'genius' contradicts himself by correcting the Hadith and approving the '3 days' part in "Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 5/220 No.5804". So wake up (al-Albani)!! No 37 : (* Pg. 148 No.10) Hadith of Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with him): "Whoever catches a single rak'ah of the Friday prayer has caught (the whole prayer)." (Nisai 3/112, Ibn Majah 1/356 and others). Al-Albani has weakened it in "Daeef Sunan al-Nisai, No.78 pg. 49", where he said: "Abnormal (shadh), where Friday is mentioned." He then contradicts himself by saying SAHIH, including the Friday part in "Irwa, 3/84 No.622 ." May Allah heal you!

AL-ALBANI AND HIS DEFAMATION AND AUTHENTICATION OF NARRATORS AT WILL! No 38 : (* Pg 157 no 1) KANAAN IBN ABDULLAH AN-NAHMY :- Al-Albani said in his "Sahihah, 3/481" : "Kanaan is considered hasan, for he is attested by Ibn Ma'een." Al-Albani then contradicts himself by

saying, "There is weakness in Kanaan" (see "Daeefah, 4/282")!! No 39 : (* Pg. 158 No.2) MAJA'A IBN AL-ZUBAIR :- Al-Albani has weakened Maja'a in "Irwa al-Ghalil, 3/242", by saying, "This is a weak sanad because Ahmad has said: 'There is nothing wrong with Maja'a', and Daraqutni has weakened him. . ." Al-Albani then made a contradiction in his "Sahihah, 1/613" by saying: "His men (the narrators) are trusted except for Maja'a who is a good narrator of Hadith." An amazing contradiction! No 40 : (* Pg. 158 No.3) UTBA IBN HAMID AL-DHABI :- Al-Albani has weakened him in "Irwa al-Ghalil, 5/237" by saying: "And this is a weak (Daeef) sanad which has three defects. . . . the second defect is the weakness of al-Dhabi, the Hafiz said: 'A truthful narrator with hallucinations'". Al-Albani then makes an obvious contradiction in "Sahihah, 2/432", where he said about a sanad which mentions Utba: "And this is a good (hasan) sanad, Utba ibn Hamid al-Dhabi is trustworthy but has hallucinations, and the rest of the narrators in the sanad are trusted." !! No 41 : (* Pg. 159 No.4) HISHAM IBN SA'AD :- Al-Albani said in his "Sahihah, 1/325": "Hisham ibn Sa'ad is a good narrator of Hadith." He then contradicts himself in "Irwa al-Ghalil, 1/283" by saying: "But this Hisham has a weakness in memorizing" So what an amazement!! No 42 : (* Pg. 160 No.5) UMAR IBN ALI AL-MUQADDAMI :- Al-Albani has weakened him in "Sahihah, 1/371", where he said: "He in himself is trusted but he used to be a very bad forger, which makes him

undependable. . . ." Al-Albani then contradicts himself again in "Sahihah, 2/259" by accepting him and describing him as being trustworthy from a sanad which mentions Umar ibn Ali. Al-Albani says: "Classified by Hakim, who said: 'A Sahih Isnad (chain of transmission)', and al-Dhahabi went along with it, and it is as they have said." So what an amazement !!! No 43 : (* Pg. 160 No.6) ALI IBN SA'EED AL-RAZI :- Al-Albani has weakened him in "Irwa, 7/13", by saying: "They have said nothing good about alRazi." He then contradicts himself in another 'fantastic' book of his, "Sahihah, 4/25", by saying: "This is a good (hasan) sanad and the narrators are all trustworthy." So beware !!! No 44 : (* Pg. 165 No.13) RISHDIN IBN SA'AD :- Al-Albani said in his "Sahihah, 3/79" : "In it (the sanad) is Rishdin ibn Sa'ad, and he has been declared trustworthy." But then he contradicts himself by declaring him to be DAEEF in "Daeefah, 4/53"; where he said: "And Rishdin ibn Sa'ad is also daeef." So beware!! No 45 : (* Pg. 161 No.8) ASHAATH IBN ISHAQ IBN SA'AD :- What an amazing fellow this Shaykh!! Al-Albani!! Proves to be. He said in "Irwa al-Ghalil, 2/228": "His status is unknown, and only Ibn Hibban trusted him." But then he contradicts himself by his usual habit! Because he only transfers from books and nothing else, and he copies without knowledge; this is proven in "Sahihah, 1/450", where he said about Ashaath: "Trustworthy". So what an amazement!!! No 46 : (* Pg. 162 No.9) IBRAHIM IBN HAANI :- The honourable!! The genius!! The copier!! Has made Ibrahim ibn Haani trustworthy in one place and has then made him unknown in another. Al-Albani said in

'Sahihah, 3/426': "Ibrahim ibn Haani is trustworthy", but then he contradicts himself in "Daeefah, 2/225", by saying that he is unknown and his Ahadith are refused!! No 47 : (* Pg. 163 No.10) AL-IJLAA IBN ABDULLAH AL-KUFI :- Al-Albani has corrected a sanad by saying it is good in "Irwa, 8/7", with the words: "And its sanad is good, the narrators are trustworthy, except for Ibn Abdullah al-Kufi who is truthful." He then contradicts himself by weakening the sanad of a Hadith where al-Ijlaa is found and has made him the reason for declaring it DAEEF (see 'Daeefah, 4/71'); where he said: "Ijlaa ibn Abdullah has a weakness." AlAlbani then quoted Ibn al-Jawzi's (Rahimahullah) words by saying: "Al-Ijlaa did not know what he was saying ."!!! No 48 : (* Pg. 67-69) ABDULLAH IBN SALIH : KAATIB AL-LAYTH :- Al-Albani has criticised Al-Hafiz al-Haythami, Al-Hafiz al-Suyuti, Imam Munawi and the Muhaddith Abu'l-Fadl al-Ghimari (Allah's mercy be upon them) in his book "Silsilah al-Daeefah, 4/302", when checking a Hadith containing the narrator Abdullah ibn Salih. He says on page 300: "How could Ibn Salih be all right and his Hadith be good, even though he has got many mistakes and is of little awareness, which also made some fraudulent Hadiths enter his books, and he narrates them without knowing about them!" He has not mentioned that Abdullah ibn Salih is one of Imam alBukhari's men (i.e. used by al-Bukhari), because it does not suit his mode, and he does not state that Ibn Ma'een and some of the leading critics of Hadith have trusted him. Al-Albani has contradicted himself in other places in his books by making Hadiths containing Abdullah ibn Salih to be good, and here they are :Al-Albani said in "Silsilah al-Sahihah, 3/229" : "And so the sanad is good, because Rashid ibn Sa'ad is trustworthy by agreement, and who is less than him in the men of Sahih, and there is also Abdullah ibn Salih who has said things that are unharmful with Allah's help!!" Al-Albani also said in "Sahihah,

2/406" about a sanad which contained Ibn Salih: "a good sanad in continuity." And again in "Sahihah, 4/647": "He's a proof with continuity." NB- (Hasan al-Saqqaf then continued with some important advice, this has been left untranslated for brevity but one may refer to the Arabic for further elaboration). By the grace of Allah, this is enough from the books of Shaykh Saqqaf to convince any seeker of the truth, let alone the common folk who have little knowledge of the science of Hadith. If anyone is interested for hundreds of other similar quotes from Shaykh Saqqaf, then I suggest you write to the following address to obtain his book Tanaqadat al-Albani al-Wadihat (The Clear Contradictions of al-Albani). THE IMAM AL-NAWAWI HOUSE PO BOX 925393 AMMAN JORDAN [The cost for volume 1 is $4.00 US plus shipping and the cost for volume 2 is $7.00 plus shipping]. Allah knows best. HERE ENDS THE QUOTATIONS FROM AL-SAQQAF

This has been just 48 selected contradictions from the works of al-Albani, as derived by Shaykh Saqqaf. During the course of my own research into al-Albani's works which have been translated into English by his followers in England, I myself came across some startling errors. I was given some publications coming from his supporters in England [Jami'at Ihyaa Minhaaj alSunnah]; one by the title: "Daeef Ahadith of Abu Dawud's Sunan (according to Shaikh al-Albaanee, No's according to the English

Translation of Professor Ahmad Hasan, published in 1411/1991 C.E.)", and the other by the title: "Daeef Ahadith of an-Nawawi's Riyaad-us-Saaliheen (according to the checking of Naasir udDeen Al-Albani, No's according to the English Translation of S. M. Madni Abbasi)". I found some serious contradictions when I cross-referenced the above named publications; but I content myself by quoting just two of the contradictions, so that a round figure of fifty errors is achieved! Besides these errors there are others which will be displayed in the following pages, from the one who claims to be giving us the most 'authentic' Sunnah through his 'classifications of Ahadith'! The main aim in carrying out the latter exercise is for the benefit of those believers who do not and can not read the Arabic works of al-Albani for one, and secondly to give the opportunity to any doubting "Thomas"; who may or may not be one of al-Albani's supporters at the time of reading this short exposition, to actually go along and check the references I have quoted from (mainly in English). By doing this, Insha'Allah, all doubts about the authenticity of this exposition will be alleviated and the hearts of those who doubt may become content! Allah knows best. No 49 :Hadith: Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported the Apostle of Allah (Peace and blessings be upon him) as saying: "Allah and His Angels bless those who are on the right flanks of the rows (in prayer)." [See Sunan Abu Dawood, 1/676 pg. 175, English ed'n and Riyadh-us-Saliheen, 2/1094 pg. 548]. When I checked the authenticity of the above Hadith by using the list "Daeef Ahadith of Abu Dawud's Sunan", it was not counted amongst the daeef ones, which means to the user of this list that the above Hadith is SAHIH (or at least HASAN) according to the checking of al-Albani! But, when I found the same Hadith in Riyadh-us-Saliheen, it was declared to be DAEEF by al-Albani. The actual words used by the

author of "Daeef Ahaadith of an-Nawawi's Riyadh-us-Saliheen", was:- "Al-Albaanee brings a long note. . . . . . The wording ('upon those on the right rows') is Shaadh or Munkar - the correct narration being : ('upon those who join the rows') - see Mishkaat, No.1096, 'Daeef Abi Daud', No.153. . ."!!! NB- al-Imam Nawawi (Allah's mercy be upon him) said that the above Hadith has been cited on the terms of Imam Muslim by Imam Abu Dawood (see the above reference in 'Riyadh'). No 50 :Hadith: Abu Umamah (Allah be pleased with him) says that the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) said: "A person who did not take part in jihad or failed to equip a fighter, or did not look well after the family of a fighter, would be severely punished by Allah before the day of judgement." ( Abu Dawood, 2/2497, pg. 693 and Riyadh-us-Saliheen, 2/1348, pg. 643) When I checked the authenticity of the above Hadith by using the list 'Daeef Ahadith of Abu Dawud's Sunan', it was not listed as being DAEEF, hence it has been declared to be SAHIH (or at least HASAN) in al-Albani's checking of Abu Dawood! But when I found the above Hadith in Riyadh-us-Saliheen, al-Albani declared it to be DAEEF. The actual words used by the author of 'Da'eef Ahaadith of An-Nawawi's Riyaad-us-Saaliheen' was: "Its isnad contains al-Waleed ibn Muslim-a-mudallis - and he has used 'an'anah here('from. . .'). See 'at-Ta'leeq-ur-Ragheeb', 2/200." NB- Imam an-Nawawi said that the above Hadith has been related with a Sahih isnad, besides that, according to Shaykh Shu'ayb al-Arnaoot's checking of the above Hadith in his edition of Riyadh-us-Saliheen, the above Hadith is not daeef (this information has been derived from another publication of 'Jami'at Ihyaa Minhaaj al- Sunnah, by the title "List of daeef ahadiths in Riyaad-as-Saliheen according to Shuaib Arnaoutt," but as for the lists authenticity, I say: it needs to be checked). I leave you to decide whose checking you will adopt.

Now that I have quoted you 50 mistakes of al-Albani in Hadith, I wish to delve into some rather important issues of fiqh, especially by comparing al-Albani's declarations with the views of other authors! For the record let me say at the outset, that most of the opinions that I will be quoting from al-Albani are sound and acceptable to one school of fiqh or another. But if the reader may sometimes get the feeling that I have inclined too much towards one particular school, then I have only done so to defend other sound and acceptable views which have been and are still being practised by large sections of the Ummah, indifference to the views of al-Albani and others. To all of us, more than one view should be acceptable if a Mujtahid has used his personal reasoning to extract a ruling from the sources of the Shari'ah; since this was the attitude of the glorious Salaf as-Salihin (pious predecessors of the first three generations of Islam), may Allah be pleased with them all. But as for al-Albani and the generality of his supporters they have adopted the tactless way of ejecting/criticising all other ways 'unacceptable' to their deductions from the Qur'an and Sunnah as you shall see below. Allah knows best. Al-Albani Unveiled Important Issues of Fiqh [Jurisprudence] Moving the Finger in Tashahhud With reference to al-Albani's recently translated book "The Prophet's Prayer described from the beginning to the end as though you see it (Sifah Salah-alNabee)", al-Albani claimed (pg. 66): "Further, the Hadith that he would not move his finger does not have an authentic Isnad, as I have explained in Daeef Abi Daawood (175)." But when I looked this Hadith up in the English Translation of the Sunan of Imam Abu Dawood (1/984, pg. 252) I found that Abdallah ibn al-Zubair (Allah be pleased with him ) said : "The Prophet (Peace be upon him) used to point with his finger (at the end of tashahhud) and he would not move it."

But lo and behold, this very Hadith has not been listed In "Daeef Ahadith of Abu Dawud's Sunan", by his followers; which means to the user of this list that this Hadith is acceptable to them, and is either of the rank of SAHIH or HASAN to the user of this list! Imam Muslim (Rahimahullah) also reported Ibn al-Zubair (Allah be pleased with him) narrating from his father: "That when the Messenger of Allah (Peace be upon him) sat for supplication, i.e. Tashahhud, he placed his right hand on his right thigh and his left hand on his left thigh, and pointed with his forefinger, and placed his thumb on his (middle) finger, and covered his knee with the palm of his left hand." (Sahih Muslim, 1/1202, English ed'n) According to the Hanafi, Hanbali and Shafi'i Madhhabs, one should not continuously make supplications with the fore-finger. It is written in the English translation of Fiqh-us-Sunnah, by As-Sayyid Sabiq, (vol. 1, pg. 157): "Wa'il ibn Hajr (Allah be pleased with him) reported that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) would place his left palm on his left thigh and knee. He would place the end of his right elbow upon his right thigh and would then close his right hand, forming a circle. In another narration it states, he would make a circle with his middle finger and thumb and point with his index finger, and (wa'il) saw him moving it to make supplications (related by Ahmad)." Explaining the Hadith, al-Bayhaqi (Rahimahullah) says, "The implication of 'he would move it' is that he would point with it, not that he would continue to move it." This would be in agreement with the narration of Ibn az-Zubair (Allah be pleased with him), who reported, "The Prophet (Peace be upon him) would point with his finger while supplicating, and he would not move it." This is related by Abu Dawud with a Sahih chain. AnNawawi also mentioned it. (NB - Both Imams al-Bayhaqi and Nawawi were great Shafi'i scholars of Hadith who followed this Hadith of Ibn al-Zubair, besides so many other scholars of Hadith). Now, there is also a footnote (no 11) by the translator Jamal Zarabozo who said, "In his notes to Mishkat al-Masabih, al-Albani has discussed the Hadith of Wa'il ibn Hajr and of Ibn az-Zubair. He said that the first Hadith has a Sahih chain. The narrators of the latter Hadith (i.e of Ibn al-Zubair) are all trustworthy. Muhammad ibn Ijlan (a narrator in the chain going back to Ibn az-Zubair) has some weakness due to his memory, but his memory was not so poor as to drop to the rank of hasan (a good Hadith). Therefore, the statement recorded by Sabiq that the chain is Sahih is incorrect (i.e only if you accept al-Albani's classification of Hadith); The important words in the latter Hadith are, 'and he would not move it.' According to al-Albani this addition is irregular and rejected (shadh and munkar)."

And I Say: "al-Albani's followers have not said that it is shadh and munkar in their Daeef Ahadith of Abu Dawud's Sunan !" Again referring to Fiqh-us-Sunnah (vol. 1, pg. 158), Sabiq says: "According to the Shafiyyah, one points with the finger only once, when saying 'except Allah' in the statement bearing witness. The Hanafiyyah raise the finger in the denial part of the Statement (there is no God) and put it back down during the confirmation part (except Allah). The Malikiyyah (see below for the Maliki view) move the finger to the left and to the right until they finish the prayer. The Hanbaliyyah point with the finger every time they mention Allah, as a reflection to the oneness of Allah, and they do not move it." Another two Hadith on this issue have been related by Imam Muslim (Rahimahullah) in his Sahih: "Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) reported that when the Messenger of Allah (Peace be upon him) sat for the tashahhud he placed his left hand on his left knee, and his right hand on his right knee, and he raised his right finger, which is next to the thumb, making supplication in this way, and he stretched his left hand on his left knee. Another version on the authority of Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) says: When the Messenger of Allah (Peace be upon him) sat for the tashahhud, he placed his left hand on his left knee and placed his right hand on his right knee, and he formed a ring like (Arabic number 53) and pointed with his finger of attestation. (Also) Ali ibn Abd al-Rahman al-Mu'awi reported: Abdullah ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) saw me playing with pebbles during prayer. After finishing the prayer he forbade me (to do it) and said: Do as the Messenger of Allah (Peace be upon him) used to do. I said: How did Allah's Messenger (Peace be upon him) do? He said that he (the Messenger of Allah) sat at tashahhud, placed his right palm on the right thigh and closed all his fingers and pointed with the help of the finger next to the thumb, and placed his palm on his right thigh." (Sahih Muslim, 1/1203-4, English ed'n) Imam Ibn Abi Zaid al-Qairawani (d. 389 AH; Rahimahullah) who is famed with the title 'little Malik', gave the view of the Maliki Madhhab in his al-Risala (pg. 31) in the following words: "At the time a worshipper reads the tashahhud, that is the tahiyyah, he places his hands on his thighs. He then folds the fingers of his right hand, but he leaves his index finger unfolded and pointing forward with its side pointing towards his face. There are differences of opinion about the interpretation of the state of the finger. Some believe that, keeping the finger still signifies that Allah is one God. Those who shake it consider it a club with which to ward off the Satan. I consider that the interpretation of that is that it reminds the worshipper that he is in the state of prayer, and that moving the finger shall prevent him from

forgetting himself. The worshipper then places his left hand on his left thigh with the palm downwards, he must not move it nor point with it." Finally, it is written in the English translation of Umdat al-Salik wa Uddat al-Nasik - {This book gives the Shafi'i Madhhab's views} (The Reliance of the Traveller, by Shaykh Ahmad Ibn Naqib al-Misri, d. 769AH/1368 CE; Rahimahullah, trans. Nuh Ha Mim Keller, pg. 142, f8.44): "One does not move it while it is thus raised (Shaykh Umar Barakat said in his commentary to Umdat al-Salik: following the Sunnah from a Hadith related by Abu Dawud. It is offensive to move it here, though some hold that it is recommended, the evidence for which is also from the Sunnah, in a Hadith related by Bayhaqi, who states both Hadiths are rigorously authenticated (Sahih). Precedence is given to the former Hadith (i.e of Ibn AzZubair), which negates moving the finger, over the latter Hadith, which affirms it, because scholars hold that what is sought in prayer is lack of motion, and moving it diminishes one's humility). (I say: al-Albani's comment on the Hadith of Ibn alZubair: 'Even if it were authentic, it is negatory, while the Hadith above is affirmatory: the affirmatory takes precedence over the negatory, as is well known among the scholars' [see pg. 66 of Sifah Salah an-Nabee] is of no consequence to what most of the Fuqaha (Jurisprudents) have said from amongst the Hanafi, Shafi'i and Hanbali scholars, but his opinion is only supported by the Malikiyyah, so do not be confused). The Prophet's moving it was merely to teach people that it was permissible (and Shaykh Abdal-Wakil Durubi said: 'As it was the Prophet's (Peace be upon him) duty to distinguish for his Community the acts that were offensive from those that were unlawful, and he was given the reward of the obligatory for doing such offensive acts'). Moreover, Bayhaqi says that the meaning of 'moving it' in the latter Hadith is simply raising it, so there is no actual contradiction)." From the above discussion we may briefly say in summary that al-Albani labelled the Hadith of Abdallah ibn al-Zubair as being DAEEF according to what he said in 'Sifah-Salah an-Nabee, (pg. 66), but his followers have not labelled it as being DAEEF in 'Daeef Ahadith of Abu Dawud's Sunan'!! Also according to Jamal Zarabozo's quotation from al-Albani's checking of Mishkat ul-Masabih, this same Hadith was of the rank of HASAN, and not DAEEF as he had said in 'Daeef Abi Dawood (no 175)'; is this not a grave contradiction? We should rather accept the checking of such great memorizers of Hadith like the Imam's Bayhaqi and Nawawi (Allah's mercy be upon them). Allah knows best.

The Placing of Hands in Prayer With regard to the placing of the hands below the navel in Salah (see Sifah Salah an-Nabee, appendix 4, pg. 102-103, English ed'n), al-Albani has declared all the Hadith that reached him on this issue to be Daeef, due to the presence of the narrator Abdar-Rahman ibn Ishaq al-Wasiti al-Koofi. This may be true due to what the scholars of Hadith have said, but he has either overlooked the fact that there are many other Ahadith which order the placing of the hands below the navel, or has deliberately not bothered to mention them to his readers who are usually unaware of this fact! Al-Albani claims on page 12 of the same book : "To place them on the chest is what is proved in the Sunnah, and all that is contrary to it is either Daeef or totally baseless." But he contradicts himself on page 102-103 of the same book by saying: "What further points to its weakness (i.e. the Hadith of Abdar-Rahman ibn Ishaq) is that contrary to it has been narrated on the authority of Ali (Allah be pleased with him) with a better Isnad: the Hadith of Ibn Jareer al-Dabbi an (from) his father, who said, 'I saw Ali holding his left arm with his right on the wrist, above the navel (I say: The statement above the navel, does not mean on the chest, but literally above the navel and below the chest, since this is the opinion of the Shafiyyah scholars like Bayhaqi, Nawawi, Muslim and so on) - this Isnad is a candidate for the rank of HASAN; Baihaqi (1/301) firmly designated it to be Hasan, and Bukhari (1/301) designated it with certainty while giving it an abridged, ta'leeq form." Is this not a clear contradiction from within the same book? And this is not all my dear reader... Al-Albani claimed that it was found in Bukhari (1/301), but when I examined the Sahih al-Bukhari (Vol. 1, Chapter. 6, no. 707, pg. 396, English ed'n), I did not find this narration of Ibn Jarir al-Dabbi (Allah be pleased with him), but instead a Hadith from Sahl ibn Sa'ad (Allah be pleased with him) who said: "The people were ordered to place the right hand on the left forearm in the prayer." Abu Hazim said, " I knew that the order was from the Prophet (Peace be upon him)." [see also Muwatta of Imam Malik, section 9.15, no 50, pg 70, English trans'n by A. Abdarahman and Y. Johnson for a very similar narration]. According to the author of Ja'al Haqq, Shaykh Ahmad Khan, there is not even one Hadith in the Sahih collections of al-Bukhari and Muslim which specify where the hands should be placed!

Now you have just read above that al-Albani classified the Hadith of Ibn Jarir alDabbi to be HASAN, but when I found this very Hadith in the Sunan of Abu Dawood (1/756, pg. 194, English ed'n) and cross referenced it to the list, "Daeef Ahadith of Abu Dawud's Sunan." I found that his followers listed it as being DAEEF!! Imam Abu Dawood (Rahimahullah) said after relating the Hadith from Ibn Jarir al-Dabbi: "Sa'id ibn Jubair narrated the words: 'above the navel'. Abu Mijlaz reported the words: 'below the navel'. This has also been narrated by Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with him). But that is not strong." The latter quote is one which al-Albani failed to mention in "Sifah Salah an-Nabee!" Note also that al-Albani said with regard to the placing of the hands on the chest (see Sifah Salah an-Nabee, pg. 12, in the footnote): "In fact, Imam Ishaq ibn Rahwaih acted on this Sunnah, as Marwazi said in 'Masaa'il (pg 222): 'Ishaq used to pray witr with us.... he would raise his hands in qunoot, and make the qunoot before bowing, and place his hands on his breast or just under his breast.'" But when Iread the footnote to Abu Dawood's Sunan (vol. 1, pg. 194, fn. 345, English ed'n), I noticed that the author of Awn al- Mabood (1,275), Shams al-Haqq Azimabadi, claimed that both Abu Ishaq al-Marwazi and al-Hafiz Ishaq ibn Rahwaih (one of Imam al-Bukhari's teachers) held the position that the hands should be folded below the navel! In his Sahih Muslim sharif-Mukhtasar Sharh Nawawi (vol. 2, pg. 28, fn. 23), Wahid az-Zaman (a late scholar of the 'Salafiyya' in Pakistan) also affirmed that the Imam's Sufyan al-Thawri, Abu Hanifah, Ishaq ibn Rahwaih and Abu Ishaq al-Marwazi (Allah's mercy be upon them) all used to place their hands below the navel! So who do you think is quoting correctly, alAlbani or al-Azimabadi and az-Zaman? Here is the full quote from Abu Dawood's Sunan: "The question of folding hands in prayer below the navel is disputed amongst the jurists. According to Abu Hanifah, Sufyan al-Thawri, Ishaq ibn Rahwaih, Abu Ishaq al-Marwazi (I say: others who held the same view include the Mujtahid's like Ibrahim al-Nakhai, Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman, Abu Yusuf, Muhammad alShaybani, Zufar ibn Hudayl and many other scholars, Allah's mercy be upon them), the hands should be folded below the navel. This tradition is followed by them (I say: it is not just this tradition which lends support to placing the hands below the navel, but others as well). According to al-Shafi'i, the hands should be placed below the chest (I say: this is also the opinion of Imam Muslim, according to the chapter heading used by him: 'The placing of the right hand over the left

hand after the first takbir in prayer below the chest and above the navel and then placing them opposite the shoulders in prostration' -see Sahih Muslim, vol. 1, pg. 220, English ed'n). Al-Nawawi says that this is the view of the majority of the jurists (this may have been in Imam Nawawi's day, but it is well known that through out the centuries of Islam in aggregate, most of the Ulama as well as the common folk have been placing their hands below the navel, by Allah's decree and will). Two statements have been attributed to Ahmad ibn Hanbal (see al-Albani's Sifah Salah an-Nabee, footnote on pg. 51). According to the third view ascribed to him he does not give any preference to any of these two views. One has the choice of placing the hands. Malik is also reported to have held two different views. According to the second, he held that one should leave the hands in their natural position without folding them. One should not fold them placing one on the other." NB- The most authoritative position of Imam Malik (Rahimahullah) has been recorded in al-Mudawwana al-Kubra, by Qadi Sahnoon (d. 240 AH). This book contains the most authentic positions of al-Imam Malik and his illustrious disciples, namely Imam ibn al-Qasim and Imam ibn Wahb. Qadi Sahnoon recorded the declarations of Imam Malik directly from Imam ibn al-Qasim, hence there is no real doubt in my mind that whatever has been recorded in this book is the Madhhab of al-Imam Malik, and usually the amal (practise) of the people of Madinah in his day. In al-Mudawwana (vol. 1, pg. 75-76), Imam Malik has been recorded to have said, "Putting the right hand on the left in salah, I have no knowledge of it in the compulsory (fard) prayer, it is thus disliked (makrooh). But in the supererogatory (nafl) prayer there is no harm (in folding the hands), it is left to the individual to decide." This statement from Imam Malik is a strong proof against those who claim that Imam Malik only prayed with his hands at his sides, after he received a severe beating (see The Evolution of Fiqh, pg. 70, by A.A. Bilal Philips)! Al-Albani has only 'checked' six Hadith which allow the placing of the hands below the navel (see his 'Sifah', pg. 102, Appx. 4). But there are more than 6 other Hadith (which allow the placing of the hands below the navel) which he has not bothered to mention/check; may be he has not come across them! One of such Hadith is very similar to what al-Albani mentioned in "Sifah Salah an-Nabee," pg. 11: "We, the company of Prophets, have been commanded to hasten the breaking of the fast, to delay the meal before the fast, and to place our right arms on our left arms during prayer [from Ibn Hibban and Diyaa', with a Sahih Isnad according to al-Albani]. The version I have is related by Sayyidina Ali (Allah be pleased with him): "Three things are from the habits of Prophethood: To hasten the breaking of the fast, to delay the Sehri (pre-fast meal) as late as possible, and to place one's right hand on top of the left hand below the navel (transmitted by Hafiz Ibn Shaheen)."

To finish, As-Sayyid Sabiq quoted Imam Tirmidhi (Rahimahullah) as saying in Fiqh-us-Sunnah (vol. 1, pg 132): "Knowledgeable Companions (Allah be pleased with them all), their followers and those that came after them believed that one should put his right hand over the left during prayer, while some say above the navel and others say below the navel."

Raful-Yadain : The Raising of Hands in Prayer Another point I wish to raise concerns the long disputed issue of raising the hands in prayer (salah). It is a well known fact that al-Albani and the generality of people amongst the 'Salafiyya' have made a mountain out of a molehill, and have brewed a storm in a tea cup with regards to this issue, such that many of them are bold enough to accuse those who do not raise their hands in Salah (i.e. after the initial raising called Takbir-Tahrimah) of not following the Sunnah, as well as going to the disgusting length of openly detesting and despising those who do not raise their hands after the first Takbir! I must also admit that among those who do not raise their hands in the subsequent stages of Salah, usually the ignorant people have accused those who raise the hands in the other stages of Salah to be 'Wahabbi's!' This is due to ignorance and pride of both sides, which usually stems from the lack of knowledge of the opinion of our great Mujtahid Imam's, and the Ahadith based evidences used by the research scholars in their respective defence of either raising or not raising the hands in the other stages of Salah. Our brothers and sisters who accuse those of raising the hands in the other stages of prayer should ask themselves: "Were the great Imam's like al-Shafi'i and Ahmad ibn Hanbal (Allah's mercy be upon them) Wahhabi's?" I pose this question because it is well known that both of the latter named Imam's used to practise Raful-Yadayn after the initial Takbir, besides many other Companions and successors (Tabi'een), may Allah be pleased with them all! It is a well known fact from the Mutawateer Ahadith (a report of a large number of narrators whose agreement upon a lie is inconceivable) available to us, that the Holy Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him) used to raise his hands when pronouncing the initial Takbir in Salah. Sayyid Sabiq stated in his Fiqh-us-Sunnah (vol. 1, pg 129): "Says Ibn al-Mundhir, 'All scholars agree that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) raised his hands at the beginning of his prayer.' Commenting upon this report, Ibn Hajar (al-Asqalani) says, 'The Prophet's raising his hands at the beginning of his prayer has been narrated by fifty companions, including the ten who were given the tidings of Paradise.' Al-Bayhaqi related that al-Hakim said, 'I

do not know of any Sunnah other than this one which is accepted by the four rightly guided Khalifahs, the ten companions who were given the tidings of Paradise, and other Companions scattered across many lands." (NB-In my own experience, the only people I have met who do not raise their hands in any stage of the Salah have been the remnants of a Kharijite sect called the Ibaadiyah, nor do they fold their hands in Salah). Now, the difference in opinion stems on the question of whether the raising of the hands is necessary in the other stages of Salah, like when going into Rukoo, standing up from Rukoo, in between the prostrations (sajdah) and when standing up for the third rakah in Salah... Al-Albani said in "Sifah Salah an-Nabee, pg. 42, fn. 4": "The raising of the hands is reported as Mutawateer from him (Peace be upon him), as is the raising of the hands on straightening up after Rukoo. It is the Madhhab of the three Imams Malik, Shafi'i and Ahmad, and of the majority of scholars of Hadith and Fiqh. Imam Malik practised it right up to his death, as reported by Ibn Asakir (15/78/2). Some of the Hanafi's chose to do it, among them Isam ibn Yusuf Abu Asamah alBalkhi (died. 210 A.H.), a student of Imam Abu Yusuf, as has been explained in the introduction." I wish to say to the bias of al-Albani, "You have quoted a portion of the truth correctly, but have also blundered in one of your opinions!" It is absolutely true that the great Mujtahid Imams like al-Shafi'i and Ahmad ibn Hanbal (Allah's mercy be upon them) recommended the raising of the hands in the other subsequent stages of Salah, but it is a mistake to say that the great Imam of Madinah, Malik ibn Anas (Rahimahullah) "practised it right up to his death" as al-Albani claims, by quoting from Imam Ibn Asakir (a Shafi'i scholar of Hadith, and a staunch defender of Imam Abu'l Hasan al-Ashari, he wrote a work entitled 'The Exposure by alImam Abu'l Hasan al-Ashari of Mischievous untruths, d. 571 AH; Rahimahullah). For the real and authoritative view of Imam Malik and his followers, one must study the books written by the Maliki Madhhab, and then quote their opinions! I say this due to the sensible advice given to me by one of my friends in a written communication. He said: "One lesson you should learn from all this is not to, for example, take Hadith from someone who is mainly specialized in Fiqh or some other subject, or take Hanafi dalils (evidences used to give legal verdicts) from someone who is not a specialist in the Hanafi madhhab's methodological bases and evidences, or take a Hanbali

scholar's word about some ruling in a different madhhab, or take Hadith knowledge from scholars who make large numbers of mistakes, and so on. In general, one does not take an accounting problem to a shoe salesman." For the most authentic view and stance of Imam Malik (Rahimahullah) and his disciples please refer to the appropriate title and discussion later, but as for what alAlbani quoted from Imam Ibn Asakir (Rahimahullah), then I say the authenticity of this report needs to be checked, since al-Albani has failed to classify it himself in his "Sifah Salah an-Nabee," (does this not mean that he wants his readers to 'blindly' accept his verdicts?), and even if Hafiz Ibn Asakir's reference proves to be Sahih, then there is no doubt in my mind that this statement coming from Imam Malik must be rejected in favour of the real position of Imam Malik himself. The statements that I shall be quoting in favour of Imam Malik's authoritative opinion, comes directly from his most famous disciples, where as the reference coming from Ibn Asakir as given by al-Albani, was recorded well over 300 years after the death of Imam Malik (NB- Imam Malik passed away in the year 179 AH; while Imam Ibn Asakir was born in the year 499 AH)! As you have read above al-Albani stated that the Imam's Shafi'i and Ibn Hanbal (Allah's mercy be upon them) performed Raful-Yadayn, but one should also know that on the other hand, the great Mujtahid's amongst our Pious-Predecessors, like Abu Hanifah, Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman, Ibrahim al-Nakhai, Alqama, Aswad (two famous disciples of the great Companion Abdallah ibn Masood), Abu Yusuf, Muhammad al-Shaybani, Sufyan al-Thawri and many other Ulama (Allah's mercy be upon them all) did not perform Raful-Yadayn, except in the initial Takbir, based on many sound chains of narration! So you may now ask: "Why the difference of opinion?" The answer to this small problem is simple; it is only due to preference given to the derived Ijtihad of the available Ahadith on this subject, by individual Mujtahid's of the highest scholarly rank, and not that of the laity amongst the general masses of this Ummah. Since many a scholar has said that it is impermissible to derive legal verdicts from the Qur'an and Sunnah, if one is not qualified to do Ijtihad (see the section on Taqleed), but conversely, what do we see today (see later)? The Imams who held the view that Raful-Yadayn is unnecessary, besides the initial Takbir, have based their views from many authentic Ahadith coming from the Holy Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him), as well as directly from the great Companions (May Allah be pleased with them all). The fact of the matter is, that in their view the practise of performing RafulYadayn in the other stages of prayer have been abrogated, and hence unnecessary

in performance. Contrary to this, Imam's like al-Shafi'i, Ibn Hanbal.... believe it to be desirable to perform Raful-Yadayn, and in their view the practise has not been abrogated. Consequently, many of the well known and wise research scholars have said that one's Salah is correct and acceptable by the practise of either mode! So please do not fall into the abyss of ignorance, by accusing and abusing each other of performing Salah incorrectly, since it was not generally the way of our foremost Mujtahid's of the pious generations (see the discussion between Imam al-Azam Abu Hanifah and Imam al-Awzai later)! Al-Albani has said that some of the Hanafi's like Shaykh Isam ibn Yusuf al-Balkhi (Rahimahullah) chose to perform Raful-Yadayn because he did not know the evidence of his Imams who held the view that Raful-Yadayn was unnecessary after the initial Takbir (See "Sifah Salah an-Nabee, pg xvii," and also "The Evolution of Fiqh, pg. 126", by A.A. Bilal Philips). I find it strange that Shaykh Isam ibn Yusuf did not know the evidence for not performing Raful-Yadayn, since by simple logic one can deduce the fact that he must have seen his two main Imams (Muhammad al-Shaybani and Abu Yusuf) not performing Raful- Yadayn, and hence he must have been curious enough to ask his Imams for the evidence they used for not performing Raful-Yadayn! What seems more apt in a situation like this, is to say that probably Shaykh Isam ibn Yusuf felt that the evidence for performing RafulYadayn was more convincing to him, than the converse evidence for not performing Raful- Yadayn, and Allah knows best. One lesson which can be learnt from this incident, is that if Shaykh Isam ibn Yusuf was a Mujtahid within the Hanafi school, then like all other Mujtahid scholars it is incumbent on him to follow his own Ijtihad, even if it has at times contradicted the founder of the Madhhab he belonged to. Thus, Shaykh Isam had to follow his own Ijtihad. The proof for what I have just said has been agreed upon by most of the scholars who were specialized in the fundamentals (Usool) of Islam. For example, it is written in the book "Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence", by Mohammad Hashim Kamali (pg. 370): "The Ulema of Usul are in agreement that the Mujtahid is bound by the result of his own Ijtihad. Once he has deduced the ruling on a particular issue which is founded in his true conviction and belief, he may not imitate (Taqleed) other Mujtahids on that matter regardless as to whether they agree with him or otherwise. For the Mujtahid, the conclusion that he reaches is tantamount to a divine command which he must observe. It is therefore unlawful for him to abandon it or to follow anyone else in respect of it. But if he had not rendered his own Ijtihad on an issue which is not urgent, and he has time to investigate, then according to some ulema he may imitate other Mujtahid's. However, the preferred view is that he must avoid taqleed, even of one who might

be more learned than him. Only the ammi (layman/non-Mujtahid's) who is incapable of Ijtihad is allowed to follow the opinion of others." (The above author has quoted from Imam Ghazzali's Mustasfa, vol.2 pg. 121; Imam Amidi's Ihkam, vol.4 pg. 204 and from al-Kassab's Adwa, pg. 119). The above quote clears some of the misconceptions held by some people on the role of Mujtahid's in Islam. For example, some people who try to refute the Taqleed of the Mujtahid's, bring forward examples in which the disciples of the four main Imams contradicted the Ijtihad of their Master's on certain points. These people should always remember that if a disciple contradicts the opinion of his master, then this is the result of the natural prerogative bestowed upon him, when he attained the high and honourable grade of Ijtihad. There is a well known story related from the great Imam Abu Hanifah (d. 150 AH; Rahimahullah), who said: "I follow the book of Allah, and if I find no solution there, I follow the Sunnah of The Prophet (peace be upon him). If I find no solution in either the Qur'an or the Sunnah, I follow whichever of the pronouncements of the Sahabah I prefer, and leave whichever I wish. If there is a pronouncement on a particular matter by any of the Sahabah, I would not adopt any other made by any other scholar. But, if I found a solution only in the opinions of Ibrahim (al-Nakhai), al-Shabi, Ibn Sirin, Hasan al-Basri, Ata (ibn Abi Rabah) or Sa'eed ibn al-Musayyib (they were all Mujtahid's), I would make Ijtihad just as they did." (vide: "Usul al-Fiqh al-Islami," pg. 64, by Taha Jabir al-Alwani, who reported this account from Tarikh Baghdad, vol. xxxi, pg. 368, al-Intiqa of Ibn Abdal Barr, pg. 142, and Mashayikh Balkh alHanafiyah, pg. 190). This report exemplifies the prerogative of a Mujtahid, as well as why Shaykh Isam ibn Yusuf may have held different opinions from his Masters. I must stress, the above discussion only refers to those who can perform Ijtihad, and not to those who are unable to fulfil the conditions recognized by the scholars of Usool for carrying out the duties of a Mujtahid. Those who are not Mujtahid's are bound to the opinions of qualified Mujtahid's, and this is Taqleed. Al-Albani said in 'Sifah Salah an-Nabee', (pg. 105-6): "About raising the hands on going into Ruku and rising from it, many Ahadith have been narrated from the Prophet (Peace be upon him): they are actually mutawateer in the eyes of the scholars; in fact, raising the hands with every takbir is proven on his authority in many Ahadith; whereas not raising the hands is not authentically related from him except once via Abdallah ibn Masood (Allah be pleased with him), but this is not suitable for putting into practise, for it is naaf (negatory). It is firmly established, in the eyes of the Hanafi's and others, that the muthbit (affirmatory) takes precedence

over the naaf (negatory); this is even when the affirmatory is on its own, let alone the case when it is a multitude of narrations, as in this issue! On the basis of this principle, and in the absence of anything contrary, this renders it binding on them to adopt the raising of the hands, and not to stick zealously to the Madhhab after the establishment of proof. However, it is a pity that only a handful of the earlier or later ones have adopted it, so much so that not raising the hands has become a land mark for them!" The above quote shows the limited and superficial knowledge of al-Albani, in the evidences used by the Hanafi scholars for not performing Raful-Yadayn! It is true that the Ahadith confirming Raful-Yadayn are Mutawateer, but what the reader should also know, is that not performing it has also come down to us in a Mutawateer way! In fact there are more than 50 Ahadith proving the converse of what the "great scholar," al-Albani holds, as well as those who bolster his claims! Al-Albani claims that not raising the hands has come to us authentically only, "once through Abdallah ibn Masood, but this is not suitable for putting into practise." To which I reply, why should it not be possible to put into practise the Hadith related by the great Companion Ibn Masood (Allah be pleased with him)? Did he (Allah forbid) lie or fabricate from the Prophet (Peace be upon him)? Please do not forget that there are many other authentic Ahadith to back up the opinion of the Hanafi's (and Maliki's)! Al-Albani only explains this Hadith of Ibn Masood away by bringing in the jurisprudential principle of, "the affirmative takes precedence over the negatory", but his argument is fallacious in this case, since I have already said that the Hanafi's believe that the performance of Raful-Yadayn has been abrogated by many other Ahadith, hence the above principle is inapplicable in this case! He claims the Hadith from Ibn Masood (Allah be pleased with him) has been only related authentically once. I say this is incorrect, and only due to his ignorance of all the available routes (Asanid) coming from Ibn Masood. As far as I know he has not listed the Hadith of Ibn Masood to be Daeef, in his checking of Imam Abu Dawood's Sunan, since his followers have not recorded it in their, "Daeef Ahadith of Abu Dawud's Sunan". The Hadith in question is from Alqamah (Rahimahullah), who said: "Abdallah ibn Masood (Allah be pleased with him) said :'Should I pray in the way the Apostle of Allah (Peace be upon him) had performed it?' He said: 'He prayed, raising his hands only once.'" [Abu Dawood, 1/747, pg. 193, English ed'n]. Since it has not been listed in the above mentioned publication, this means that the above narration is either Sahih, or at least Hasan to the user of the list.

Note also, according to Shams al-Haqq Azimabadi, in his book Awn al-Mabood (1,272-73), the above Hadith was regarded to be Hasan by Hafiz Ibn Ma'een (Rahimahullah), and it is well known that Imam Tirmidhi (Rahimahullah) rated it to be Hasan (see Sunan al-Tirmidhi, 2/257, pg. 40-41, edited by Ahmad Muhammad Shakir). The above Hadith has been related from Imam al-Azam Abu Hanifah (Rahimahullah), through an absolutely SAHIH chain (all the narrators given below were well known Mujtahid's and absolutely truthful), and here it is: Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahimahullah) has related to us from his teacher, Imam Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman (Rahimahullah), who related from his teacher, Imam Ibrahim al-Nakhai (Rahimahullah), who related from his two teachers Imam Alqamah and Imam Aswad (Allah's mercy be upon them), the two distinguished pupils of Ibn Masood (Allah be pleased with him), who related from Ibn Masood (Allah be pleased with him), who related from the Holy Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him). The reference for this is given after the discussion between Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam al-Awzai (Allah's mercy be upon them), please see below. So my dear reader, I have just proven to you that the Hadith from Ibn Masood has come to us authentically, through at least two authentic routes, as given above. Can you now believe in al-Albani's assertion that it has only come through one authentic narration? As for al-Albani saying, "However, it is a pity that only a handful of the earlier or later ones (i.e. Hanafi's) have adopted it, so much so that not raising the hands has become a landmark for them!" I say this statement is due to his ignorance, lack of scholarly deduction and knowledge of the principles and proofs held by the Hanafi's! He claims that it has become a "landmark", for the Hanafi's only! I say, "O 'Shaykh', have you not contradicted yourself by admitting that others besides the Hanafi's do not raise their hands in Salah in the same book?" Here is alAlbani's admission that it is not just the Hanafi's who have made it a "landmark"; he said in "Sifah Salah an-Nabee," (footnote to pg 91): "The Ibaadiyyah have distorted this hadeeth: their scholar Rabee' has related it in his unreliable Musnad with a different wording to justify their view that raising the hands with takbeer invalidates the Prayer! That wording is false, as I have explained in ad-Da'eefah (6044)."!!! This by Allah, is a grave contradiction from within the same book, and tantamount to his admission that besides the Hanafi's, the Ibaadiyyah sect do not also raise their hands! In fact we have on record some scholars who initially used to perform Raful-Yadayn, but later on in their lives they stopped performing it altogether, except for the initial Takbeer; when they had taken into account all the arguments and evidence. Two of such great scholars are as follows:-

(A) Imam Abu Ja'far al-Tahawi (d. 321 AH; Rahimahullah): He was a Mujtahid in specific issues (Mujtahid fi al-Masa'il) and also the famous author of the work 'Al-Aqeeda al-Tahawiyya' (The Muslim Belief According to alTahawi), which has been translated into English by two different organisations, and many other works on Hadith. He was originally a Shafi'i scholar who gained mastery in Shafi'i Fiqh from his famous uncle Imam al-Muzani (Rahimahullah) [mentioned in Sifah Salah an-Nabee, pg. xvi], who was the famous disciple of Imam al-Shafi'i (Rahimahullah). But later in his life he joined the Hanafi school and hence stopped performing Raful-Yadayn indifference to the Shafi'i view of performing it. Imam Tahawi lived in a time when most of the Hadith had been collected (after Bukhari, Muslim etc), hence he had an ideal opportunity to sift through the Hadith on Raful-Yadayn and he came to the conclusion that Imam Abu Hanifah's (Rahimahullah) view point was more convincing to him, and in this regard he quoted some Hadiths negating the practise of Raful-Yadayn in some of his works. (B) Imam Muhammad Amin ibn Abidin (d.1252/1836; Rahimahullah): He was also originally a Shafi'i scholar who changed his school and became the foremost Hanafi Imam of his time. Hence he also changed his original opinion of performing Raful-yadayn, to not performing it. His most famous work is 'Hashiya Radd al-Mukhtar'. Al-Albani has quoted from him in 'Sifah Salah an-Nabee' (pg's viii, xvii). The View of Imam Malik and his Madhhab on Raf-ul-Yadayn I have already quoted the opinion of al-Albani with regard to his quotation from Imam ibn Asakir. Al-Albani has claimed that Imam Malik used to perform RafulYadayn right upto his death. But this is in direct contradiction to what has been related from Imam Malik (Rahimahullah) by his famous disciple, Imam ibn alQasim. The foremost book of the Maliki Madhhab in terms of Fiqh is a book called 'Al-Mudawwanah' (A Book of Legal Cases). It is a recension of Qadi Sahnoon (Rahimahullah), containing his questions, answered by Imam Ibn al-Qasim (Rahimahullah). These answers repeat the literal words of Imam Malik (Rahimahullah) by occasional personal interpretation of Ibn al-Qasim himself. It is written in "al-Mudawwanah", (vol. 1, pg. 71): "Imam Malik has said that he does not know of Raful-Yadayn being done in any Takbeer, even when going into (Rukoo) or rising from it, except in the Takbeer Tahrimah (the initial Takbeer), then ibn al-Qasim said that in the opinion of Imam Malik the performance of Raful-Yadayn was Daeef (a weak practice)."

The diligent reader may have noticed that Imam Malik has quoted two Hadith which seems to support the practice of performing Raful- Yadayn, in his celebrated al-Muwatta! The Hadith quoted is as follows, "Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Salim ibn Abdullah from Abdullah ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with them) that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, used to raise his hands to the level of his shoulders when he began the prayer and when he raised his head from ruku he raised them in the same way, saying, 'Allah hears whoever praises him, our Lord and praise belongs to You.' He did not raise them in sujud (prostration)." Also, "Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar used to raise his hands to the level of his shoulders when he began the prayer and when he raised from the ruku he would raise them less than that." (see Muwatta section 3.4, no. 17 and 21, pg. 27, trans. by A. Abdarahman and Y. Johnson). The above Hadith has also been related by Imam's Bukhari and Muslim in their respective collections, besides many other books of Hadith with slight variations in wording and description. The above Hadith has been one of the main proofs used to prove the performance of Raful-Yadayn by some great scholars. But, the Hanafi and Maliki schools put forward some of the following arguments to explain their contention. The Imam Abu Dawood (Rahimahullah) reported a Hadith very similar to the one above, he said that Imam Nafi said on the authority of Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) that when he began his prayer, he uttered the Takbeer (Allah is most great) and raised his hands; and when he bowed (he raised his hands); and when he said: "Allah listens to him who praises Him," (he raised his hands); and when he stood up at the end of two rak'ahs, he raised his hands. He (Ibn Umar) traced that back to the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him). Abu Dawood then said: "What is correct is that the tradition reported by Ibn Umar does not go back to the Prophet (may peace be upon him)." Abu Dawood then said: "The narrator Baqiyyah (found in the Isnad) reported the first part of this tradition from Ubaid Allah and traced it back to the Prophet (may peace be upon him); and the narrator al-Thaqafi reported it from Ubaid Allah as a statement of Ibn Umar himself (not from the Prophet). In this version he said: 'When he stood at the end of two rak'ahs he raised them up to his breasts. And this is the correct version." Abu Dawood then said: "This tradition has been transmitted as a statement of Ibn Umar (and not of the Prophet) by al-Layth ibn Sa'ad, Malik,Ayyub, and Ibn Juraij; and this has been narrated as a statement of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) by Hammad ibn Salamah alone on the authority of Ayyub. Ayyub and Malik did not mention his raising of hands when he stood after two prostrations, but al-Layth mentioned it in his version. Ibn Juraij said in his version: I asked Nafi, "Did Ibn Umar raise (his

hands) higher for the first time?' He said, 'No.' I said, 'Point out to me. He then pointed to the breasts or lower than that.'" (see Sunan Abu Dawood, 1/740, pg. 191, English ed'n). Now, the Hadith related by Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) stated that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) "used to" perform Raful-Yadayn; although Imam Malik (Rahimahullah) quoted this particular Hadith it does not necessarily mean that he himself, as well as Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) performed RafulYadayn! In fact we have to remember that Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) said that the Prophet (Peace be upon him), "used to" perform Raful- Yadayn. I say this because we have many other Ahadith which have been related from Abdullah Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) himself which prove that he did not always perform Raful-Yadayn, as well as indicating that the Holy Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him) himself stopped performing Raful-Yadayn; but Allah knows best! Here follows a few of these Ahadith from Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him):- (A) The Imam of Hadith, Abu Awaanah (Rahimahullah) related in his "Sahih" (vol. 2, pg. 90) from Sufyan ibn Uyayna, who related from Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri, who related from Salim ibn Abdullah, who related from his father Abdullah ibn Umar, who said: "I saw the Prophet (Peace be upon him) raise both his hands up to the shoulders when starting Salah, but he did not raise his hands when going into rukoo, or when rising from it; not even between the prostrations (sujud)." (B) The Imam of Hadith and teacher of Imam al-Bukhari, Abdullah Ibn Zubair alHumaidi (Rahimahullah) related in his "Musnad" (2/614, pg. 277) from Sufyan ibn Uyayna, who related from Ibn Shihab al- Zuhri, who related from Salim ibn Abdullah, and he from his father Ibn Umar: "I saw the Prophet (Peace be upon him) raise both his hands at the beginning of Salah up to his shoulders, but when going into Rukoo and when raising his head from rukoo he did not raise his hands, not even between the prostrations." (C) The Hanafi scholar of Hadith, Imam Yusuf al-Zaylai (d. 762 AH; Rahimahullah) quoted in his book "Nasb ar-Rayah" (vol. 1, pg. 404), a narration from Abdallah ibn al-Kharraz, who related from Imam Malik, who related from Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri, and he from Salim ibn Abdallah, who related from Ibn Umar, who said: "The Prophet (Peace be upon him) raised his hands when beginning Salah, and he never repeated again." (D) The two well known scholars of Hadith, Imam Tahawi and Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah (Allah's mercy be upon them), related that Imam Mujahid (the disciple of

Ibn Abbas; Allah be pleased with them) said: "I prayed many times behind Ibn Umar, but he raised his hands only once at the beginning." (see Ja'al Haqq, pg. 55, by Mufti Ahmad Y. Khan) These four narrations give strong evidence in favour of the Hanafi and Maliki views that Raful-Yadayn has been abrogated. So now ask yourselves, "Can the opinions of al-Albani be relied upon, if he does not base his opinions from the books of the Hanafi and Maliki Schools, plus the proofs used by them for not performing Raful-Yadayn?" Now, I leave it to you to decipher for yourself, why certain Imams decided to perform Raful-Yadayn and others not to; but before I finish on this issue let me relate to you a famous incident that took place between the Imam's Abu Hanifah and al-Awzai (Allah's mercy be upon them) of Syria, when they met in Makkah. The purpose of the following debate is to show that even though the two great Imams had different narrations to prove their particular opinions, they did not abuse or despise each other in the derogatory way that some of us have become accustomed to! Insha'Allah, we should respect each others opinions, if it has a sound basis from the sources of the Shari'ah. Imam al-Awzai said, "Why do you not raise your hands just before rukoo and after?" Imam Abu Hanifah replied, "There is no recorded word or action of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), to authenticate this (any longer)." "How so", replied al-Awzai, "When al-Zuhri has reported this to me on the authority of Salim and that of his father (ibn Umar) who said that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) used to raise his hands at the beginning of the Salah and before and after rukoo?" Abu Hanifah also reported, "Hammad related to me through Ibrahim, through Alqamah, through al-Aswad, and through ibn Masood, that the Messenger of Allah (Peace be upon him), only raised his hands at the beginning of the Salah and did not repeat this action again." Al-Awzai then suggested that his authorities were more reliable than those of Abu Hanifah, who countered, "Hammad was more knowledgeable than al-Zuhri, and Ibrahim was more knowledgeable than Salim. And if Ibn Umar is to be credited as a Companion of the Prophet, then alAswad has many merits. And the merits of Abdullah ibn Masood speak for themselves." At this, al- Awzai remained silent. (Vide: 'The Ethics of Disagreement in Islam', pg. 59-60, by Taha Jabir al-Alwani; also see 'Imam Abu Hanifah: Life and Work' pg. 66-67, by Shibli Numani). This incident has also been recorded with slight variations by Hafiz Ibn al-Humam in his 'Fath al-Qadir', and Shah Waliullah Dehlawi's 'Hujjat Allah al-Baligha'. Allah knows best.

The Abrogation of Performing Prayer Sitting: Behind a Sitting Imam Al-Albani stated in 'Sifah Salah an-Nabee' (pg. 4): "He (Peace be upon him) prayed sitting during the illness of which he died. He also prayed sitting on another occasion before that, when he was injured, and the people behind him prayed standing; so he indicated to them to sit, so they sat (and prayed). When he finished, he said, You were going to do as the Persians and the Romans do : stand for their kings who sit. So do not do so, for the Imam is there to be followed : When he makes ruku, make ruku, when he rises, rise, and when he prays sitting, pray sitting (all of you)." (See Sahih Muslim, 1/824, pg. 227, English ed'n). The above statement made by al-Albani seems to indicate his lack of knowledge about the Hadiths on this rare issue; or to be safe we may say that again he has given us half of the 'story'. According to Shah Waliullah Dehlawi (Rahimahullah), the above command is concerned with the earlier period when the present mode of prayer was made obligatory. The Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) stressed this point with a view to effacing out of the minds of his people the undue respect and reverence which the neighbouring people of Persia and Rome showed to their kings. They kept standing before them in all humility and dared not sit down before them. The Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) did not approve of this type of respect which is against the dignity of man. He, therefore, in contravention of the practises amongst the Romans and the Greeks, ordered them to sit down when the Imam was sitting and not to observe this type of ceremonious respect. But when the sense of human dignity and equality took hold of the minds of the Muslims, then this practise was abrogated and the Muslims were permitted to say their prayer standing behind a sitting Imam, when there is no valid reason for it, as standing in prayer is part of prayer and it should not be abandoned in normal circumstances (Hujjatullah-al-Baligha, vol. 2, pg. 27, quoted in the English translation of Sahih Muslim, vol. 1, fn. 633, pg. 227). The proof against al-Albani's opinion is found in the Sahih collections of alBukhari and Muslim; and it is of greater authority as evidence than the Hadith quoted by al-Albani. I say: so much for al-Albani giving his followers the most authentic Sunnah, when he himself has contradicted the authentic Sunnah by not realising that his opinion has been clearly abrogated by a later practise of the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him)! Imam Muslim has a chapter heading titled: 'The Imam is authorised to appoint one as his deputy when there is a valid reason for it (for example, illness or journey or any other), and if an Imam leads the prayer sitting as he cannot do so standing, his followers should say prayer standing

provided they are able to do it and there is an abrogation of saying prayer sitting behind a sitting Imam.' (see Sahih Muslim, vol. 1, pg. 228, English ed'n). The actual Hadith that proves our point is found in a long narration reported from Ubaidullah ibn Abdullah ibn Utba (Rahimahullah) from Aisha (Allah be pleased with her); the most important part of the Hadith is as follows: "Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) was leading the people in prayer. When Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) saw him (the Prophet, peace be upon him), he began to withdraw, but the Apostle of Allah (Peace be upon him) told him not to withdraw. He told his two (companions) to seat him down beside him (Abu Bakr). They seated him by the side of Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) said the prayer standing while following the prayer of the Apostle (Peace be upon him) and the people said prayer (standing) while following the prayer of Abu Bakr. The Apostle (Peace be upon him) was seated." (for full Hadith see Muslim, 1/832, pg. 228-229 and Bukhari, 1/655, pg. 371-372) NB - Imam Bukhari (Rahimahullah) said, "The Imam is appointed to be followed. The Prophet (Peace be upon him) in his fatal illness led the people in prayer while he was sitting (and the people were standing)...." (see Bukhari vol. 1, chapter 51, pg. 370, English ed'n). Imam al-Bukhari (Rahimahullah) also quoted Imam al-Humaidi (Rahimahullah) as saying: "The saying of the Prophet (Peace be upon him): 'Pray sitting, if he (Imam) prays sitting' was said in his former illness (during his early life) but the Prophet (Peace be upon him) did not order them to sit. We should follow the latest actions of the Prophet (Peace be upon him)" (see Bukhari, 1/657, pg. 373). Finally, Abdul Hamid Siddiqi said in his footnotes to Sahih Muslim (vol. 1, footnote 632, pg. 226): "According to Imam Awzai and Imam Malik, this mode is essential in offering (i.e according to al-Albani's opinion). Imam Shafi'i and Imam Abu Hanifah (as well as al-Bukhari, Muslim and many others) are of the opinion that it is not advisable to say prayer sitting behind an Imam who has not been obliged to say prayer in a sitting posture due to illness or some other reason..." But according to Shams al-Haqq Azimabadi in Awn al-Ma'bood (1,233-234), Imam Malik does not allow anyone to lead the prayer sitting! (see Abu Dawood, vol. 1, fn. 266, pg. 159 English ed'n).

Going into Prostration (Sajud): Hands or Knees First? Al-Albani is of the firm opinion that when one goes into Sajdah, he or she should

place his hands onto the ground before his knees. He stated in 'Sifah Salah anNabee' (pg. 52): "He (the Prophet, peace be upon him) used to place his hands on the ground before his knees." Then al-Albani said in the footnote of the same page (pg. 52, fn. 2): "Ibn Khuzaimah (1/76/1), Daraqutni and Hakim, who declared it Sahih and Dhahabi agreed. All the Ahadith which contradict this are inauthentic. This way has been endorsed by Malik, and similar is reported from Ahmad in Ibn al-Jawzi's al-Tahqeeq (108/2). Also, al-Marwazi quoted with a Sahih isnad, Imam al-Awzai in his Masaa'il (1/147/1) as saying: 'I found the people placing their hands before their knees.' Then al-Albani continued on the same page: "He used to instruct likewise, saying: When one performs Sajdah, he should not kneel like a camel, but should place his hands before his knees" (related by Abu Hurayra, see Abu Dawood, 1/839, pg. 215 English ed'n). Al-Albani has quite categorically claimed that the Ahadith which prove that one should place one's knees down before one's hands are all 'Inauthentic' according to his 'classification' standards. But as usual when there seems to be 'contradictory' Ahadith, al-Albani fails to tell his readers that many other scholars of Hadith and even the Mujtahid Imams like Abu Hanifah and al-Shafi'i (Allah's mercy be upon them) are indifference to his view of placing the hands on the ground before the knees! In fact Sayyid Sabiq said in Fiqh-us-Sunnah (vol. 1, pg. 151): "Most scholars prefer that one place his knees on the floor before his hands. Ibn al-Mundhir related this from Umar (ibn al-Khatab), an-Nakhai, Muslim ibn Yasar, Sufyan alThauri, Ahmad (ibn Hanbal, according to one of two views reported from him), Ishaq (ibn Rahwaih) and other jurists including Ibn al-Mundhir himself. Abu atTayyeb said that most jurists agree with this. Ibn al Qayyim (al-Jawziyya, the disciple of Ibn Taymiyyah) said: 'When the Prophet, upon whom be peace, prayed, he would place his knees (on the floor) before his hands, then his hands, his forehead and nose. This is what is authentic and has been related by Shuraik from Asim ibn Kaleeb on the authority of his father from Wa'il ibn Hajr (Allah be pleased with him) who said: I saw the Messenger of Allah, upon whom be peace, while prostrating, place his knees (on the floor) before his hands. Upon getting up, he would raise his hands before his knees. I never saw him do otherwise.'" (see Abu Dawood, 1/837-838, pg. 215). Sayyid Sabiq then gave the opinion of Malik, al-Awzai, Ibn Hazm and Ahmad (according to his other opinion) whose opinions coincide with al-Albani's.

The Hadith from Wa'il ibn Hajr and Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with them) can also be found in the English translation of Mishkat- ul-Masabih (see vol. 2, no's 898-899, pg. 172) where it says: "Abu Sulayman al-Khattabi (d. 388/998; Rahimahullah) said that the tradition of Wa'il ibn Hajr is more sound than this (i.e the Hadith of Abu Hurayra) and it is also said that it is an abrogated one (i.e the Hadith of Abu Hurayra). Also the author of Awnal-Ma'bood (vol 1, 311-312), Shams al-Haqq Azimabadi said in his commentary to Abu Dawood; after quoting the opinions held by some scholars that the hands should be placed before the knees: "But al-Khattabi is of the opinion that the tradition of Wa'il ibn Hajr is better established because it is supported by several other sound traditions (which have not been quoted by al-Albani). Ibn Khuzaimah (a Shafi'i scholar of Hadith, d. 311/924; Rahimahullah) observes that the tradition of Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased with him) has been abrogated. He reports a tradition on the authority of Sa'ad ibn Abi Waqqas (Allah be pleased with him): We used to place our hands (on the ground) before our knees, but later on we were commanded to place our knees before our hands!" The Hadith of Wa'il ibn Hajr is also found in Imam Tirmidhi's Sunan, where Imam Tirmidhi said that the Hadith was Hasan Gharib (see Sunan alTirmidhi, 2/268, edited by Ahmad Shakir). The author of Awn al-Ma'bood also said: "Abu Hanifah, al-Shafi'i and Ahmad (according to his second view) maintain that one should place his knees before his hands. And this seems to more convenient (see Sunan of Abu Dawood, vol. 2, fn. 383-384, pg. 215 English ed'n)." Al-Albani Unveiled TARAWEEH PRAYER 8 OR 20 RAK'AHS? Ahmed ibn Muhammad

In a handout by al-Albani's followers in England, by the title "Some common questions answered" (dated October 1990), there appeared the following question and answer (No. 22): (a) Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reports that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) never prayed more than 8 rak'aats in taraweeh, so how come nobody disapproves of 20?(b) Is it true that Umar (Allah be pleased with him) introduced it? Ans. 22 (a) As regards the taraweeh prayer - people agree that the Sunnah of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) and the best way is 11 rak'aats. As regards any addition - then

this is DISAPPROVED of and DECLARED AS A BID'AH (A bad innovation) by Shaykh al-Albani and by a few earlier scholars - that being reported from Imam Malik, Ibn ul-Arabee and as-San'aanee (see Salat-ut-taraweeh of Shaykh alAlbani). (b) It is not true that Umar (Allah be pleased with him) either prayed or ordered 20 rak'aats. Rather he ordered Ubayy ibn Ka'b to lead the people with 11 rak'aats (alMuwatta 1/137, with a Sahih Isnad). I do not wish to go into much detail on this issue, but Insha'Allah a separate publication is what is really required, to show which opinion is the most correct. But any way it should be said that the vast MAJORITY of the scholars of hadith, Fiqh, and even the four Mujtahid Imams are in agreement that 20 rak'ahs are the most appropriate, followed by 3 rak'ahs of witr, and this is also the opinion of the Imam of the "Salafiyya", Ahmad ibn Taymiyya! First, it should be said that the hadith reported from Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) about 11 rak'ahs is not at all to do with tarawee, according to the majority of scholars, but in fact concerns the number of rak'ahs of TAHAJJUD prayer! The hadith in question is as follows:Narrated Abu Salama ibn Abdur Rahman that he asked Aisha (Allah be pleased with her), "How was the prayer of Allah's Apostle (Peace be upon him) in Ramadan?" She replied, "He did not pray more than eleven raka'at in Ramadan or in any other month. He used to pray four raka'at - let alone their beauty and length - and then he would pray four - let alone their beauty and length - and then he would pray three rak'aat (witr)." She added, "I asked, 'O Allah's Apostle! Do you sleep before praying the witr?' He replied, 'O Aisha, My eyes sleep but my heart does not sleep.'" (Bukhari, 3/230, English edn) According to the author of "Fatawa Rahimiyyah", Mufti Abdur Rahim Lajpuri (vol. 1, pg. 275); in his defence of 20 rak'ahs of taraweeh: "The commentator of al-Sahih al-Bukhari and the erudite traditionist, Shaykh Shamsud-Din al-Kermani (d. 786 AH; Rahimahullah) said: 'In the hadith (above), the tahajjud prayer is meant. Abu Salama's question and Hadrat Aisha's answer concerned the tahajjud.' He adds further: 'If the tahajjud prayer is not meant, then this tradition will be at variance with the tradition that states that the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) led twenty rak'ahs each for two nights, and in the case of such clash the tradition of twenty rak'ahs which is affirmative (muthbit) shall have precedence because according to the principles of hadith, the affirmative takes

precedence over the negative (naaf)" (vide: Al-Kawakib ud-Durari Sharh Sahih alBukhari, vol. 9, pg 155-156). I say, does this not mean that people who perform 8 rak'ahs of taraweeh, should pray 20 rak'ahs instead? Since according to the principles of hhadith (as affirmed by al-Albani), "The affirmative takes precedence over the negative in certain cases." A great fact that should also be noted by the reader is that the Imams of hadith have placed the hadith from Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) under the section of tahajjud prayers, which indicates their belief that the hadith applies to tahajjud only. The Imam al-Muhaddithin al-Bukhari (Rahimahullah) has placed the hadith from Aisha under at least two sections of his Sahih, first under the section of '21: The tahajjud Prayer at Night' (see Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 2, chapter 15, no. 248, English ed'n) and then under the section of '32: The Book of taraweeh Prayers' (see Sahih al-Bukhari, 3/230, pg. 128 English ed'n). This means that Imam Bukhari believed that the prayer mentioned by Aisha was that of tahajjud only, and since the tahajjud prayer is performed also in Ramadan, then Imam Bukhari also quoted the same hadith under 'The book of taraweeh prayers', but Allah knows best. Imam Muslim (Rahimahullah) has also placed the hadith from Aisha under the tahajjud prayer section (see Sahih Muslim 1/1607, pg. 356, English ed'n). Also Imam Malik (Rahimahullah) has placed Aisha's hadith under the Book of tahajjud (see AlMuwatta, Book 7, section 7.2, no. 9, pg. 5, English ed'n). The Imam Abu Dawood (Rahimahullah) has also placed the same hadith under the chapter 'On the number of rak'ahs of the prayer at night (tahajjud)' (see Abu Dawood 1/1336, pg. 351, English version). Even Imam's Tirmidhi and Nisai (Allah's mercy be upon them) placed Aisha's hadith under the tahajjud section (see Tirmidhi, vol. 1, pg. 58 and Nisai, vol. 1, pg. 154). Even one of the most prominent Imams of the 'Salafiyya', Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya placed the aforementioned hadith in the section of tahajjud prayers in his book Zaad al Ma'ad (vol. 1, pg. 86)! Mufti Abdur Rahim said about Aisha's hadith: "And if this tradition may have been quoted in some book under the devotions of Ramadan along with the taraweeh. Like the taraweeh, the tahajjud, too, is a prayer of Ramadan, and because of this affinity, it can be mentioned along with the taraweeh (as Imam Bukhari did). Hence, supposing it may have been mentioned in some book, it cannot be made thereby a categorical argument. 'When uncertainty creeps in, the argument is falsified.' Moreover, Hafiz al-hadith Imam Qurtubi's (d. 671/1273; Rahimahullah) statement regarding this hadith (of Aisha) should not be overlooked that, 'many a man of knowledge considers the aforesaid hadith mudtarib (i.e. confounded).'" (vide: Imam Ayni in his Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 2, pg. 187).

In short, the aforesaid report is in no way a proof for eight rak'ahs of taraweeh. In contradistinction to this, as regards the twenty rak'ahs the Companions Consensus (Ijma-as-Sahaba) has taken place over the approval of Ibn Abbas' hadith (about 20 rak'ahs being performed by the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him) and practically the majority of Ulama have accepted it." (Fatawa Rahimmiyah, vol. 1, pg 276277). Although Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) had said: "He did not pray more than 11 Raka'at," we also have reports from her that the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) also prayed more than 11 Raka'ats! The proof for this was given by her in another narration involving Abu Salama ibn Abdal Rahman (Rahimahullah). Abu Salama asked Aisha about the prayer of the Messenger of Allah (Peace be upon him), she said, "He observed 13 Raka'ahs (in the night prayer). He observed 8 raka'ahs and would then observe (three rak'ahs of) witr and then observe two raka'ahs sitting (nafl prayer), and when he wanted to bow he stood up and then bowed down, and then he observed two raka'ahs in between the Azan and Iqama of the dawn prayer (i.e. fajr)." (See Sahih Muslim 1/1603, pg. 357 and also alAlbani's Sifah Salah an-Nabee, appendix 7, pg. 110). So does this not mean that the 'Salafiyya' should perform 13 Raka'ats of taraweeh in Ramadan? Now, the statement 'the best way is 11 rak'aats' is only the opinion of a small group of the ulama, in fact there are more than 50 opinions to say that the best way is 20 rak'ahs according to the Prophet (Peace be upon him) and his Companions (Allah be pleased with them all) practise! What is more interesting to note is that the four great Mujtahids, Abu Hanifah, Malik, Shafi'i and Ahmad ibn Hanbal (Allah's mercy be upon them) are in agreement that the taraweeh consists of twenty rak'ahs. The statement that Imam Malik approved of eight rak'ahs needs to be proved, most likely this ascription was made to him because he quoted the hadith which is used to prove eight rak'ahs of taraweeh in his al-Muwatta (see Muwatta, 6.2, no. 4, pg. 48) by a small group of scholars. Although Imam Malik (Rahimahullah) quoted this hadith in his book, it has no bearing on what his actual opinion and practise was, on the contrary Imam Malik believes in thirty-six rak'ahs of taraweeh (i.e. 20 rak'ahs and 16 rak'ahs of extra nafl prayers, see later for the official verdict of the Maliki Madhhab)! Also the hadith which seems to prove 11 rak'ahs of taraweeh (including three rak'ahs of witr) in Imam Malik's Muwatta has been explained away by many other convincing arguments. Recently I came across a booklet by the title, "Is taraweeh 20 Rakaats?" (Published by Madrasah Arabia Islamia, Azaadville, South Africa, author unknown). In this

booklet the hadith quoted from the Muwatta of Imam Malik (Rahimahullah), about 11 rak'ahs of taraweeh (including three witr) was quite eloquently analysed. The actual hadith in question was related by Yahya ibn Yahya al-Laythi, who related from his teacher Imam Malik, who related from Muhammad ibn Yusuf, who said that as-Saaib ibn Yazid said, "Umar ibn Khattab (Allah be pleased with him) ordered Ubayy ibn Ka'b and Tamim ad-Dari (Allah be pleased with them) to watch the night in prayer with the people for eleven rak'ahs. The reciter of the Qur'an would recite the Mi'in (a group of medium sized surah's) until we would be leaning on our staffs from having stood so long in prayer. And we would not leave until the approach of dawn." (see above reference in al-Muwatta). It was stated in the aforementioned booklet (chapter 7, pg. 20), after quoting the above narration, "If we analyse the chain (Isnad) of this hadith, we notice that Muhammad ibn Yusuf narrates from Saaib ibn Yazid. Muhammad (ibn Yusuf) has 5 students and the narration of each student differs from the next (i.e. the text of the hadith is different from each student). The five students are: (1) Imam Malik (2) Yahya ibn Qattan (3) Abdul Aziz ibn Muhammad (4) Ibn Ishaq and (5) Abdur Razzaq Their narrations are as follows : (1) Imam Malik says that Umar ordered Ubayy ibn Ka'b and Tamim Dari to perform 11 rakaats. (What practise occurred thereafter is not mentioned, nor is Ramadaan mentioned). (2) Yahya ibn Qattan says that Umar made the people gather with Ubayy ibn Ka'b and Tamim Dari and both of them began performing 11 rakaats. (Hadrat Umar's command is not mentioned, nor is any mention of Ramadaan made). (3) Abdul Aziz (ibn Muhammad) says that we used to perform 11 rakaats in the era of Umar. (Neither is the command mentioned, nor is Ubayy ibn Ka'b or Ramadaan mentioned). (4) Ibn Ishaq says that we used to perform 13 rakaats in Ramadaan during the era of Umar. (Neither is the command of Umar mentioned. Instead of 11 rakaats, 13 are mentioned).

(5) Abdur Razzaq says that Umar gave the commaarifatus Sunan of al-Bayhaqi. Allamah Subki and Mullah Ali al-Qari have stated in Sharh Minhaaj and Sharh Muwatta respectively that the chain of narrators of this hadith are correct. (Tuhfatul Ahwazee, vol.2, pg 75). From the above narration we can clearly see that both the students of Yazid (ibn Khaseefah), unanimously narrate the fact that during Umar's (Allah be pleased with him) era 20 rakaats was the standard practise. On the contrary, the 5 students of Muhammad ibn Yusuf quote Saaib (ibn Yazid) differently. In such a situation the correct approach would be to rely on the narration of Yazid ibn Khaseefah. However the Ahl al-hadith (another name for the "Salafiyya") have unjustly discarded this narration and adopted the doubtful one of Muhammad ibn Yusuf, which has differing versions. This goes against the principles of hadith." Here ends the quote . Another hadith that is used by the protagonists of eight rak'ahs of taraweeh has been related by Jabir ibn Abdullah (Allah be pleased with him): "The Prophet (Peace be upon him) led the people in prayer during Ramadan with 8 rak'ahs and the witr. We gathered in the Mosque the following night hoping that he would come again. We remained waiting till the next morning (until he came out). The Prophet (Peace be upon him) said, 'I feared that the witr may become incumbent on you.'" (related by Ibn Nasr al-Marwazi in Qiyamul-Layl, pg. 90, al-Tabarani and Ibn Hibban - see below for the actual hadith) The above hadith has been analysed by Shaykh Abdur Rahim in his "Fatawa" (vol. 1, pg. 278-9) with the conclusion that the hadith is Daeef. The Shaykh said: "The strange thing about this hadith is that its chain of authorities (Isnad) is not trustworthy. Please examine the statements of the Imams of this science concerning the narrators of this chain. In this chain one narrator is Ibn Hameed Razi, about whom the opinions of the great and august critics of hadith are as under: (1) 'He is weak.' - Hafiz al-Dhahabi (see his Mizanul I'tidal, vol.3, pp. 49-50) (2) 'He narrates many disowned (munkar ) hadiths.' - Ya'qub ibn Shaybah (3) 'He is objectionable.' - Imam Bukhari (4) 'He is a liar.' - Abu Zur'ah (5) 'I testify that he is a liar.' - Ishaq Kausaj

(6) 'He narrates hadiths about everything; I have not seen a man bolder than him vis-a-vis God.' - Sauleh Jazrah (7) 'By God! He is a liar.' - Ibn Kharash (8) 'He is not reliable.' - Imam Nisai Now, about the second narrator, Ya'qub ibn Abdullah Ash'ari al-Qummi:(1) 'He is not strong.' - Daraqutni (see Mizanul I'tidal, vol. 3, pg. 324). About the third narrator, Isa ibn Jariyah:(1) 'He has had disowned (munkar) hadiths.' - Ibn Ma'een (2) 'His hadiths are disavowed.' - Nisai (3) 'His hadiths are rejected (matruk ).' - Nisai (4) 'His hadiths are disavowed.' - Abu Dawood - synopsis (5) 'He is counted among the weak.' - (see Mizanul-I'tidal, vol. 2, pg. 311, by Hafiz al-Dhahabi)." Here ends the quote. Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (Rahimahullah) has reported a similar narration to the above hadith in his Bulugh al-Maram min Adillat al-Ahkam (no. 396, pg. 159), on the authority of Hafiz Ibn Hibban (Rahimahullah): "Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah (Allah be pleaed with him): Allah's Apostle (Peace be upon him) prayed during the night in Ramadan; the people waited for him on the next day, but he did not come out; and he said, 'I feared that the witr might be enjoined on you.'" Note the above narration does not even state how many rak'ahs were performed by the Prophet (Peace be upon him)!! The above two hadiths can not be used as justifiable proof in favour of 8 rak'ahs of taraweeh on their own. Al-Imam Malik (Rahimahullah) has in fact quoted a hadith which proves the performance of 20 rak'ahs of taraweeh in Ramadan; and that is as follows:Yahya related to me from Malik that Yazid ibn Ruman said,"The people used to watch the night in prayer during Ramadaan for 23 rak'ahs (i.e 20 rak'ahs of taraweeh, followed by 3 rak'ahs of witr) in the time of Umar ibn al-Khattab." (vide: al-Muwatta, 6.2, No. 5, pg. 48, English ed'n) Although the above hadith is Munqati (a link is missing in the chain) and has thus been declared to be Daeef by some scholars (including al-Albani), it never the less has been used as proof. Besides, the hadith has been given a full Isnad (chain) by either Imam Ibn Abdal Barr al-Maliki (d. 463/1071; Rahimahullah) or Shaykh Muhammad Habibullah ibn Mayabi ash-Shanqiti (Rahimahullah), in their thorough research to complete all the chains of transmission (Isnad) which have an incomplete chain; as found in the Muwatta of Imam Malik!

In fact the latest edition of the English version of al-Muwatta (translated by A. A. at-Tarjumana and Yaqub Johnson) says (pg. xxxiv): "Ibn Hajar (al-Asqalani) said, 'The book of Malik is sound by all the criteria that are demanded as proofs in the mursal, munqati (two types of hadith which have a missing link) and other types of transmission.' Then as-Suyuti followed what Ibn Hajar said here; and said, 'The mursal hadith in it are a proof with him (i.e. ash-Shafi'i) as well because the mursal is a proof with us when it is properly supported. Every mursal in the Muwatta has one or more supports as will be made clear in this commentary (i.e. Suyuti's commentary on al-Muwatta called Tanwir al-Hawalik). It is absolutely correct to say that the Muwatta is sound without exception.' Ibn Abdal-Barr collected together all the mursal, munqati and mu'addil hadiths in the Muwatta and said that the total number of hadiths in the Muwatta which do not have an Isnad are sixty one. He stated that he found the isnads of all of them in other sources with the exception of four hadiths. The erudite scholar of hadith, Shaykh Muhammad Habibullah ibn Mayabi ash-Shanqiti says in Ida'a al-Halik that he had found witnesses for these four hadith and he then mentioned these witnesses. He said, 'Some of the people of knowledge made these Isnads complete.' He mentioned from Ibn Abdal-Barr that there was no munkar(rejected) hadith in the Muwatta, nor anything fundamentally refuted." In the light of what the erudite scholars of hadith have said above, we may emphatically state that the apparently 'munqati' hadith from Yazid ibn Ruman has a complete Isnad; hence it may be used as a proof, since Imam Ibn Abdal-Barr has said that there is, "No munkar hadith in the Muwatta nor anything fundamentally rejected." Hence, many scholars of hadith and Fiqh have used the above hadith as a proof in favour of 20 rak'ahs of taraweeh. The quote from "Some common questions answered," also claimed that, "Rather he (Umar) ordered Ubayy ibn Ka'b to lead the people with 11 rakaats." I say, this is half of the truth, since it is clearly stated in al-Muwatta :"Umar ibn Khattab ordered Ubayy ibn Ka'b AND Tamim ad-Dari ....(see Muwatta, 6.2, no. 4, pg. 48)!! Al-Albani has said that if anyone performs more than 11 rak'ahs of taraweeh, then he or she is basically committing a Bid'ah (a very bad innovation)! We seek refuge in Allah from such a disgusting statement! Since this tantamountally means that the foremost Imams of the saved sect (al-Firqat an-Najiyyah) of Ahl-al-Sunnah wa'l Jama'ah have been committing a gross innovation (Allah forbid). Al-Albani seems to be implying that the venerable Companions (may Allah be pleased with them and increase their rank), the four great Mujtahid Imams (Allah's mercy be

upon them), as well as the foremost scholars of hadith and Fiqh of the last 1400 years have 'innovated' the practise of 20 rak'ahs of taraweeh, if considered in the light of penetrative elaboration, implicitly and covertly! What alternative conclusion can one derive, if the "Albani Madhhab" says, "As regards any addition (to 11 rak'ahs) - then this is disapproved of and declared as a bid'ah by 'Shaykh' alAlbani?" I ask you, are the so called "Salafiyya" in the true path of the original and true Salaf-as-Salihin (the pious predecessors of the first three generations of Islam), when they have declared the practise of 20 rak'ahs to be a bid'ah, even though the Salaf have been reported to have practised 20 rak'ahs? The actual hadith which states that the Holy Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him) performed 20 rak'ahs of taraweeh has been reported by Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him). He said, "Verily, the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) in the month of Ramadaan, used to perform 20 rak'ahs and the witr prayer (afterwards) without congregation." (Reported in al-Sunan al-Bayhaqi, vol.2, pg. 496, Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Kabiri of Imam al-Tabarani, Ibn Aadi in his Musnad, and by Imam Baghawi in his Majmua-as-Sahabah ) Although some scholars have declared this hadith to be Daeef on its own, it does not mean that it should be whole heartedly rejected; since Daeef does not mean Maudu (fabricated). Please refer to the next section on Daeef hadiths, and when they are acceptable to scholars for further elaboration. The hadith related from Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him) is supported by many other narrations coming from great Companions like Uthman, Ali, Ibn Masood...(Allah be pleased with them all), as well as their successors (Tabi'in). Besides, some of the scholars of hadith have even declared some weak Ahadith to be Sahih, if it has a firm basis. It was stated in the book "Criticism of hadith among Muslims with reference to Sunan Ibn Maja," (pg. 131, by one of the leading "Salafi" Shaykhs in Britain, Suhaib Hasan): "Shafi'i also recognises a weak hadith as authentic (sahih) if it is found to be accepted by the whole Ummah (see al-Sakhawi: Fath al-Mugith). But he does not accept Malik's view of restricting the practise to the people of Madinah. According to the later scholars of the Hanafi school like Ibn al-Humam, a hadith will be declared Sahih, if it is supported by the practise of the Ummah (see Abdal Rashid Nu'mani: Ma tamusu ilaihe al-Haja, pg. 18). Among traditionalists, Tirmidhi often remarks, after quoting a less authentic hadith: 'It is being practised by the people of learning (Ahl al-Ilm).' Suyuti deduces: 'It indicates that the hadith is supported by the sayings of the people of learning. More than one scholar has

said that a hadith is declared Sahih if supported by the sayings of the people of learning, even if it lacks a proper Isnad (see Suyuti: al-Ta'aqubat, folio 20)." As stated above, the great research scholar (Muhaqqiq) Hafiz Kamal ibn alHumam (d. 861/1457; Rahimahullah) had actually said: "One of the factors from which the authenticity of a hadith is known is that the learned (Ulama) may conform to it, which is a proof of its being sound (vide: Fath al-Qadir, vol. 3, pg. 349). There are many quotes from scholars which prove a near universal juridical acceptance of 20 rak'ahs of taraweeh, but I content myself by quoting a select few from some of the foremost scholars of the Ahl-as-Sunnah, as well as the Imam of the "Salafiyya" (when it suits their whims and desires), Ahmad ibn Taymiyya. (1) Shaykh al-Islam Ahmad ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852/1449; R.A.) The Hafiz of hadith, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani has reproduced from Imam Rafi'i (Allah's mercy be on him): "For two nights the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) led twenty rak'ahs of prayer each night; on the third night the people gathered but the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) did not come out. Then the next morning, he told the people, 'It so occurred to me that it would be made obligatory for you, and you would not be able to discharge this obligation.'" After reproducing this tradition, Hafiz Ibn Hajar said: "All the traditionalists (Muhaddithin) are unanimous about the soundness of this report." (see Talkhis al-habir fi takhrij ahadith al-Rafi'i al-Kabir, vol. 1, pg. 119, by Hafiz ibn Hajar). (2) Imam al-Azam Abu Hanifah (d. 150 AH; Rahimahullah) It was stated in Fayd ul-Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari (by Shaykh Anwar Shah Kashmiri): "Imam Abu Yusuf (Rahimahullah) asked Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahimahullah), 'Did Hadrat Umar (Allah be pleased with him) have any compact from the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) for 20 rak'ahs of taraweeh?' The Imam replied, 'Hadrat Umar was not one to invent on his own; certainly he had some proof with him for this!'" (also found in Maraqi ul-Falah, pg. 81, by Imam al-Shurunbulali and Bahr ur Ra'iq, vol.2, pg. 66, by Imam ibn Nujaim al-Misri). (3) Imam al-Tirmidhi (d. 279/892; Rahimahullah)

Imam Tirmidhi said: "Umar, Ali as well as other Companions (Allah be pleased with them all) and Sufyan al-Thauri, Ibn al-Mubarak and Imam al-Shafi'i (Allah's mercy be upon them), all believed in 20 rak'ahs of taraweeh, and Imam Shafi'i has stated that he had seen the people of Makkah saying 20 rak'ahs (see Sunan al-Tirmidhi, vol.1, pg. 99). (4) Imam Malik ibn Anas (d. 179 AH; Rahimahullah) It was written in the most authentic book on Maliki Fiqh, al-Mudawwanah (vol.1, pg. 193-94), by Qadi Sahnoon (Rahimahullah): "Ibn al-Qasim said, 'The rak'ahs (of taraweeh) with witr are 39.' Imam Malik said, 'This is what the people have agreed upon from amongst the predecessors, and the people have not stopped doing it.'" (For an explanation of why it was 36 rak'ahs see the quote below from Allamah Anwar Shah Kashmiri). (5) Hafiz Ibn Humam (d. 861/1457; Rahimahullah) Allamah Ibn Humam asserts that it has been established from genuine authority that the Companions and their Successors (tabi'in) used to say twenty rak'ahs of taraweeh during the auspicious time of Umar (Allah be pleased with him); this authority of Yazid ibn Ruman has been reported from Sa'ib ibn Yazid that, 'during Umar's auspicious time we used to say twenty rak'ahs.' The genuineness of this authority has been verified by Imam Nawawi in the synopsis (see Fath al-Qadir, vol.1, pg. 407 and Nasb-ur-Rayah, vol.1, pg. 294, by Hafiz al-Zaylai). Hafiz Ibn Humam also said in Fath al-Qadir (vol.1, pg. 470): "At last unanimity was formed on 20 rak'ahs of prayer and this alone is in succession." This last statement has also been said in similar words by Ibn Taymiyya in his Minhaj us-Sunnah (vol.2, pg. 224). (6) Imam Ata ibn Abi Rabah (Rahimahullah) The august successor (Tabi'in) and Mufti of Makkah in his time said: "I have seen the Companions, and other people in Makkah saying 23 rak'ahs, including the witr." This report is Hasan (good). (see Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, pg. 406, Fath alBari, vol.4, pg. 219, of Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Qiyam ul-Layl, pg. 91, by Imam Ibn Nasr al-Marwazi).

(7) Imam Muwaffaq al-Din Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620/1223; R.A) The Imam of the Hanbali's in his time, Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi, said in his book alMughni (vol.1, pg 803): "There has been the Companion's consensus (Ijma-as-Sahaba) on 20 rak'ahs of taraweeh." (8) Allamah Anwar Shah Kashmiri (d. 1352 AH; Rahimahullah) It was stated in his published lecture, Tirmidhi al-ma'ruf ba-Arfa'sh-Shazzi (vol.1 pg. 329) : "Not even one of the the four Imams believes in less than 20 rak'ahs of taraweeh; the practise and belief of the majority of the Companions was also this. Imam Malik (Allah's mercy be upon him) believes in more than 20 rak'ahs; he is positive that they are 36. According to Imam Malik's practise only 20 rak'ahs of taraweeh will be said in congregation, but the general practise and method of the citizens of Madinah was that during the brief rest interval (after every 4 rak'ahs), when the Imam sat down after 4 rak'ahs, they used to perform 4 more rak'ahs. The men who said the taraweeh in the sacred mosque at Makkah, used to circumambulate (Tawaf) the Ka'ba during this brief recess. The people of Madinah, naturally, could not circumambulate the Ka'ba and hence, instead, they used to perform 16 rak'ahs more (in total) during these brief recesses." (9) Imam al-Ayni (d. 855/1451; Rahimahullah) Allamah Ayni wrote in his Sharh al-Bukhari: "The number of rak'ahs in the taraweeh is twenty. Imam Shafi'i and Imam Ahmed (Allah's mercy be upon them) assert the same thing. Their proof is the report which Bayhaqi has, with genuine authority, narrated from Sa'ib ibn Yazid. The great Companions, including Umar, Uthman and Ali (may Allah be pleased with them), as also the revered Successors (Tabi'in), used to perform twenty rak'ahs." Then he said: "The most excellent and the most advisable course to conform to is that of the Holy Prophet's and his (Peace and blessings be upon him) Companions (practise)." (Umdat ul-Qari Sharh-al-Bukhari, vol. 7, pg. 178). (10) Hafiz Taqi-ad-Din Ahmad Ibn Taymiyya al-Hanbali (d. 728/1328) He has said in his Fatawa Ibn Taymiyya (vol.1, pg. 191):

"It has been proven without doubt that Ubayy ibn Ka'b (Allah be pleased with him) used to lead the Companions, during Ramadan, for 20 rak'ahs and 3 rak'ahs of witr. Hence it is the principle (maslak) of most of the Ulama that this is the Sunnah, because Ubayy ibn Ka'b led 20 rak'ahs of prayer in the presence of the Muhajirin (the emigrants) and the Ansars (the helpers) and not a single Companion repudiated it!" So please ask yourselves: "Who are the 'Salafiyya'; are they the people who conform to the way of the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him), his Companions (may Allah be pleased with them all), and their successors (this includes the four Mujtahid Imams, Allah's mercy be upon them) consensus on 20 rak'ahs, or is it the likes of al-Albani and his followers?" May Allah guide them. Many of us who are practising Muslims or otherwise, are familiar with the epithet 'Wahhabi'. The founder of this sect was Muhammad ibn Abdal Wahhab (d. 1206 AH), from the Najd area of 'Saudi' Arabia. He is also known as Shaykh an-Najdi by his opponents and his followers have been labelled as either 'Najdi's' or 'Wahhabi's' by the Ahl al-Sunnah. He claimed to be a Hanbali in Fiqh. It is well known that he fully digested the aqeedah and ideas of Ibn Taymiyya. The scholars of his time warned the Muslims to be on their guard from accepting his 'reformatory' ideas; and this work is still existent among the scholars of the Ahl al-Sunnah even today. The neo- 'Salafi's' of today respect Ibn Abdal Wahhab quite highly by bestowing upon him such great titles like 'Shaykh alIslam'. I do not want to say much about his movement and activities, but a few quotes from three well known scholars should suffice for now. (1) The foremost Hanafi scholar of his time, Imam Muhammad Amin ibn Abidin (d. 1252/1836 Rahimahullah) said in his celebrated work Hashiyya radd alMukhtar (vol. 3, pg. 309): "In our time Ibn Abdal Wahhab (Najdi) appeared, and attacked the two noble sanctuaries (Makkah and Madinah). He claimed to be a Hanbali, but his thinking was such that only he alone was a Muslim, and everyone else was a polytheist! Under this guise, he said that killing the Ahl asSunnah was permissible, until Allah destroyed them (Wahhabi's) in the year 1233 AH by way of the Muslim army." (2) Shaykh Zayni Dahlan (Rahimahullah) said in his book Futuhat al-Islamiyya (vol. 2, pg. 268): "The sign of the Khawarij (the first deviant sect that appeared in the time of the Companions) concerning the shaving of the head, was not found in the Khawarij of the past, but only in the Najdi's of our time!"

(3) Shaykh al-Islam Hussain Ahmad al-Madani (Rahimahullah) said in his book ash-Shihab as-saqib (pg. 42): "Ibn Abdal Wahhab arose in the beginning of the thirteenth Islamic century in the Najd. His thinking was false, and his beliefs were corruptional; on these grounds he opened the way for killing the Ahl asSunnah." (4) A more contemporary view on the Wahhabite sect has been expressed by Abdal-Hakim Murad in the journal Islamica (pg. 9): "Ibn Abdal Wahhab, however, went far beyond this (i.e; of Ibn Taymiyya). Raised in the wastelands of Najd in Central Arabia, he had little access to mainstream Muslim scholarship (I say: This may be disputed by his supporters). In fact, when his da'wah appeared and became notorious, the scholars and muftis of the day applied to it the famous hadith of Najd: Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) reported the Prophet (Peace be upon him) as saying: "Oh God, bless us in our Syria; O God, bless us in our Yemen." Those present said: "And in our Najd, O Messenger of God!" But he said, "O God, bless us in our Syria; O God, bless us in our Yemen." Those present said, "And in our Najd, O Messenger of God!" Ibn Umar said that he thought that he said on the third occasion: "Earthquakes and dissensions (fitnah) are there, and there shall arise the horn of the devil." (Sahih al-Bukhari). And it is significant that almost uniquely among the lands of Islam, Najd has never produced scholars of any repute. The Najd-based da'wah of the Wahhabi's, however, began to be heard more loudly following the explosion of Saudi oil wealth. Many, even most, Islamic publishing houses in Cairo and Beirut are now subsidised by Wahhabi organisations, which prevent them from publishing traditional works on Sufism, and remove passages in other works considered unnacceptable to Wahhabist doctrine. The neo-Kharijite nature of Wahhabism makes it intolerant of all other forms of Islamic expression. However, because it has no coherent fiqh of its own - it rejects the orthodox madhhabs - and has only the most basic and primitively anthropomorphic 'aqidah, it has a fluid, amoebalike tendency to produce divisions and subdivisions among those who profess it. No longer are the Islamic groups essentially united by a consistent madhhab and the Ash'ari 'aqidah (see later). Instead, they are all trying to derive the Shari'ah and the 'aqidah from the Qur'an and the Sunnah by themselves. The result is the appaling state of division and conflict which disfigures the modern salafi condition."

Another person who is a reference for today's neo-"Salafi's", is Muhammad ibn Ali al-Shawkani (d. 1250/1834). He was a leading scholar of the Zaydi (Shi'ah) sect found mainly in the Yemen. He claimed to have departed from his old Shi'ite ways and joined the Ahl al-Sunnah. He was attacked by the scholars of his day for saying Taqleed was completely haram, as well as other important issues. Some scholars had accused him of still holding on to his deviant Zaydiyyah-Mu'tazilite (rationalistic thinking that was propounded by one of the first deviant sects of Islam) thinking, while pretending to be within the fold of orthodox Sunni Islam; but Allah knows best! It is a well known fact that he denied the consensus of the Companions (Ijma as-Sahaba), as well as rejecting the validity of the Fatwa of a Companion! One may refer to Anwar Ahmad Qadri's book Islamic Jurisprudence in the Modern World (pg. 142) for a lenghthier discussion. Many scholars have noticed the extreme tendencies within the "Salafiyya" sect around the world, for its lack of respect for the scholars of the four Madhhabs, its Aqeedah and some untenable juristic positions it has produced over a short period of Islam's history. The scholars have not been afraid of declaring the neo- "Salafi's" to be neo-Kharijites in their behaviour and attitude to other Muslims. Note, the scholars are not saying that the neo-"Salafi's" are Kharijites, but rather they seem to have certain traits which were only found amongst the Kharijites of the past. One of the most striking things I have noticed amongst these 'neo-Kharijites', is their direction of Qur'anic verses that were revealed specifically for the unbelievers, as referring to the believers who do not seem to have their way of thinking! This was a well known practise of the Kharijites of old; as we shall see below. A well known scholar of the "Salafiyya", Dr. Yusuf al-Qardawi (who has himself been attacked by other members of the "Salafiyya", especially for holding some untenable positions in his book al-Halal wal Haram fil Islam) said in his book Islamic awakening between Rejection and Extremism (pg. 41-3): "Imam al-Shatibi (Rahimahullah) wrote (in his book al-I'tisam, 2. 182-4): 'Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him) was right. When a person knows the reason behind a certain verse or surah, he knows how to interpret it and what its objectives are. However, ignorance of that leads people to misinterpret it and to have different opinions, without an insight and knowledge which could lead them to the truth, and prevent them from indulging ignorantly in such matters with no support or evidence from al Shari'ah, and therefore go astray and lead people astray. This can be demonstrated by what is reported by Ibn Wahab from Bakir who asked Nafi': What does Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) think of

al-Haruriyyah (i.e; al-Khawarij who were also called al-Haruriyyah after the place -Harawra- where they gathered and were found by Ali ibn Abu Talib and the Companions of the Prophet [may Allah be pleased with them all] who supported him)? Nafi' answered: He thinks they are the most evil of people. They applied the verses which pertain to the kuffar on the believers.' (NB- Imam al-Bukhari has recorded Ibn Umar as saying in his Sahih [vol.9, pg.50; English edn]: These people (the Khawarij and heretics ) took some verses that had been revealed concerning the disbelievers and interpreted them as describing the believers ). Al-Qardawi also said (pg. 42): One of the causes of such shallowness is that extremists never listen to people who hold different views (and I can personally testify to that), never accept any dialogue with them or imagine that their own views could be tested in the light of others, and may thereby be either accepted or rejected. Most of them have not been taught by reliable Muslim ulama who are specialised in the field. Rather, they have received semi-knowledge directly from books and newspapers without any opportunity for revision or discussion which could test the learner's understanding and analyze the depth of his knowledge. They simply read, 'understand', then deduce what they wish. However, their reading, understanding, and deduction may well be wrong or deficient. There might be someone somewhere who opposes their opinions on stronger and more valid bases, but they are not aware of that because nobody has drawn their attention to such a possibility. These devout young people have ignored the facts that if they want to study al Shari'ah, they must seek the help of reliable Muslim scholars. They cannot venture into this extensive and entangled discipline without the guidance of reliable Muslim scholars who can interpret and explain obscurities, define terms, and point out the relationships between the parts and the whole and also equate similarities. Those who venture into it alone will meet with the same catastrophic results which could certainly befall the unskilled swimmer who ventures into dangerous waters. Proper knowledge of al Shari'ah cannot be perfected without practice and close contact with the experts, especially in those areas where opinions diverge, evidences seem to contradict each other, and certain matters seem to be under suspicion. This is why our venerable 'ulama' have warned us not to seek to study and understand al Qur'an al Karim through a person who has only memorized it without any knowledge of its contents, nor to seek knowledge through a person who has acquired his own "knowledge" from reading newspapers and journals only, without being properly instructed by reputable and qualified scholars." This topic began with a brief discussion on Taqleed and I would like to finish with the following two questions for you to ponder over. (A) Would it not be

classified as being Taqleed if one were to accept the classifications of Hadiths, exegesis of the Qur'an etc; by a renowned Islamic scholar, if one was not to go back to the original sources which are used to authenticate the Hadith and so on? (For example, if a scholar claimed that a Hadith found in the Sunan of Imam Abu Dawood was Sahih and you accepted it as being Sahih - since you trust him, then are you not practising Taqleed; if you, yourself do not go back to the original sources used to classify the Hadith in question, since sometimes a Hadith classified to be Sahih by one scholar can be classified as being Da'eef by another!). (B) Is it not true that those who are calling for the abandonment of Taqleed, are calling for the Taqleed of their own books and speeches; hence creating their own little 'Madhhabs'?Many of us who are practising Muslims or otherwise, are familiar with the epithet 'Wahhabi'. The founder of this sect was Muhammad ibn Abdal Wahhab (d. 1206 AH), from the Najd area of 'Saudi' Arabia. He is also known as Shaykh an-Najdi by his opponents and his followers have been labelled as either 'Najdi's' or 'Wahhabi's' by the Ahl al-Sunnah. He claimed to be a Hanbali in Fiqh. It is well known that he fully digested the aqeedah and ideas of Ibn Taymiyya. The scholars of his time warned the Muslims to be on their guard from accepting his 'reformatory' ideas; and this work is still existent among the scholars of the Ahl al-Sunnah even today. The neo- 'Salafi's' of today respect Ibn Abdal Wahhab quite highly by bestowing upon him such great titles like 'Shaykh al-Islam'. I do not want to say much about his movement and activities, but a few quotes from three well known scholars should suffice for now. (1) The foremost Hanafi scholar of his time, Imam Muhammad Amin ibn Abidin (d. 1252/1836 Rahimahullah) said in his celebrated work Hashiyya radd alMukhtar (vol. 3, pg. 309): "In our time Ibn Abdal Wahhab (Najdi) appeared, and attacked the two noble sanctuaries (Makkah and Madinah). He claimed to be a Hanbali, but his thinking was such that only he alone was a Muslim, and everyone else was a polytheist! Under this guise, he said that killing the Ahl asSunnah was permissible, until Allah destroyed them (Wahhabi's) in the year 1233 AH by way of the Muslim army." (2) Shaykh Zayni Dahlan (Rahimahullah) said in his book Futuhat al-Islamiyya (vol. 2, pg. 268): "The sign of the Khawarij (the first deviant sect that appeared in the time of the Companions) concerning the shaving of the head, was not found in the Khawarij of the past, but only in the Najdi's of our time!" (3) Shaykh al-Islam Hussain Ahmad al-Madani (Rahimahullah) said in his book ash-Shihab as-saqib (pg. 42): "Ibn Abdal Wahhab arose in the beginning of the

thirteenth Islamic century in the Najd. His thinking was false, and his beliefs were corruptional; on these grounds he opened the way for killing the Ahl asSunnah." (4) A more contemporary view on the Wahhabite sect has been expressed by Abdal-Hakim Murad in the journal Islamica (pg. 9): "Ibn Abdal Wahhab, however, went far beyond this (i.e; of Ibn Taymiyya). Raised in the wastelands of Najd in Central Arabia, he had little access to mainstream Muslim scholarship (I say: This may be disputed by his supporters). In fact, when his da'wah appeared and became notorious, the scholars and muftis of the day applied to it the famous hadith of Najd: Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) reported the Prophet (Peace be upon him) as saying: "Oh God, bless us in our Syria; O God, bless us in our Yemen." Those present said: "And in our Najd, O Messenger of God!" But he said, "O God, bless us in our Syria; O God, bless us in our Yemen." Those present said, "And in our Najd, O Messenger of God!" Ibn Umar said that he thought that he said on the third occasion: "Earthquakes and dissensions (fitnah) are there, and there shall arise the horn of the devil." (Sahih al-Bukhari). And it is significant that almost uniquely among the lands of Islam, Najd has never produced scholars of any repute. The Najd-based da'wah of the Wahhabi's, however, began to be heard more loudly following the explosion of Saudi oil wealth. Many, even most, Islamic publishing houses in Cairo and Beirut are now subsidised by Wahhabi organisations, which prevent them from publishing traditional works on Sufism, and remove passages in other works considered unnacceptable to Wahhabist doctrine. The neo-Kharijite nature of Wahhabism makes it intolerant of all other forms of Islamic expression. However, because it has no coherent fiqh of its own - it rejects the orthodox madhhabs - and has only the most basic and primitively anthropomorphic 'aqidah, it has a fluid, amoebalike tendency to produce divisions and subdivisions among those who profess it. No longer are the Islamic groups essentially united by a consistent madhhab and the Ash'ari 'aqidah (see later). Instead, they are all trying to derive the Shari'ah and the 'aqidah from the Qur'an and the Sunnah by themselves. The result is the appaling state of division and conflict which disfigures the modern salafi condition." Another person who is a reference for today's neo-"Salafi's", is Muhammad ibn Ali al-Shawkani (d. 1250/1834). He was a leading scholar of the Zaydi (Shi'ah) sect found mainly in the Yemen. He claimed to have departed from his

old Shi'ite ways and joined the Ahl al-Sunnah. He was attacked by the scholars of his day for saying Taqleed was completely haram, as well as other important issues. Some scholars had accused him of still holding on to his deviant Zaydiyyah-Mu'tazilite (rationalistic thinking that was propounded by one of the first deviant sects of Islam) thinking, while pretending to be within the fold of orthodox Sunni Islam; but Allah knows best! It is a well known fact that he denied the consensus of the Companions (Ijma as-Sahaba), as well as rejecting the validity of the Fatwa of a Companion! One may refer to Anwar Ahmad Qadri's book Islamic Jurisprudence in the Modern World (pg. 142) for a lenghthier discussion. Many scholars have noticed the extreme tendencies within the "Salafiyya" sect around the world, for its lack of respect for the scholars of the four Madhhabs, its Aqeedah and some untenable juristic positions it has produced over a short period of Islam's history. The scholars have not been afraid of declaring the neo- "Salafi's" to be neo-Kharijites in their behaviour and attitude to other Muslims. Note, the scholars are not saying that the neo-"Salafi's" are Kharijites, but rather they seem to have certain traits which were only found amongst the Kharijites of the past. One of the most striking things I have noticed amongst these 'neo-Kharijites', is their direction of Qur'anic verses that were revealed specifically for the unbelievers, as referring to the believers who do not seem to have their way of thinking! This was a well known practise of the Kharijites of old; as we shall see below. Al-Albani A Concise Guide to the Chief Innovator of Our Time al-Albani is a self-taught claimant to hadith scholarship who has no known teacher in any of the Islamic sciences and has admitted not to have memorized the Book of Allah nor any book of hadith, fiqh, aqida, usul, or grammar. Al-Albani A Concise Guide to the Chief Innovator of Our Time Nasir al-Albani is the arch-innovator of the Wahhabis and Salafis in our time. A watch repairman by trade, al-Albani is a self-taught claimant to hadith scholarship who has no known teacher in any of the Islamic sciences and has admitted not to have memorized the Book of Allah nor any book of hadith, fiqh, `aqida, usul, or grammar. He achieved fame by attacking the great scholars of Ahl al-Sunna and reviling the science of fiqh with especial malice towards the school of his father who was a Hanafi jurist.

A rabid reviler of the Friends of Allah and the Sufis, he was expelled from Syria then Saudi Arabia and lived in Amman, Jordan under house arrest until his death in 1999. He remains the qibla of the people of Innovation, self-styled re-formers of Islam, and other Salafi and Wahhabi sympathizers, and the preferred author of book merchants and many uneducated Muslims. Most of the contemporary Sunni scholars warned of his heresy and many of them wrote articles or full-length works against him such as: - The Indian hadith scholar Habib al-Rahman al-A`zami who wrote alAlbani Shudhudhuh wa Akhtauh (Al-Albanis Aberrations and Errors) in four volumes. - The Syrian scholar Muhammad Sa`id Ramadan al-Buti who wrote the two classics al-Lamadhhabiyya Akhtaru Bid`atin Tuhaddidu al-Shari`a alIslamiyya (Not Following A School of Jurisprudence is the Most Dangerous Innovation Threatening Islamic Sacred Law) and al-Salafiyya Marhalatun Zamaniyyatun Mubaraka La Madhhabun Islami (The `Way of the Early Muslims Was A Blessed Historical Epoch, Not An Islamic School of Thought) - The Moroccan hadith scholar `Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn al-Siddiq alGhumari who wrote Irgham al-Mubtadi` al-Ghabi bi Jawaz al-Tawassul bi al-Nabi fi al-Radd `ala al-Albani al-Wabi (The Coercion of the Unintelligent Innovator with the Licitness of Using the Prophet - Allah bless and greet him as an Intermediary in Refutation of al-Albani the Baneful), al-Qawl al-Muqni` fi al-Radd `ala al-Albani al-Mubtadi` (The Persuasive Discourse in Refutation of al-Albani the Innovator), and Itqan al-Sun`a fi Tahqiq Ma`na al-Bid`a (Precise Handiwork in Ascertaining the Meaning of Innovation). - The Moroccan hadith scholar `Abd al-`Aziz ibn Muhammad ibn al-Siddiq al-Ghumari who wrote Bayan Nakth al-Nakith al-Mu`tadi (The Exposition of the Treachery of the Rebel). - The Syrian hadith scholar `Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda who wrote Radd `ala Abatil wa Iftiraat Nasir al-Albani wa Sahibihi Sabiqan Zuhayr alShawish wa Muazirihima (Refutation of the Falsehoods and Fabrications

of Nasir al-Albani and his Former Friend Zuhayr al-Shawish and their Supporters). - The Egyptian Hadith scholar Muhammad `Awwama who wrote Adab alIkhtilaf (The Proper Manners of Expressing Difference of Opinion). - The Egyptian hadith scholar Mahmud Sa`id Mamduh who wrote Wusul al-Tahani bi Ithbat Sunniyyat al-Subha wa al-Radd `ala al-Albani (The Alighting of Mutual Benefit and Confirmation that the Dhikr-Beads are a Sunna in Refutation of al-Albani) and Tanbih al-Muslim ila Ta`addi alAlbani `ala Sahih Muslim (Warning to the Muslim Concerning al-Albanis Attack on Sahih Muslim). - The Saudi hadith scholar Isma`il ibn Muhammad al-Ansar who wrote Ta`aqqubat `ala Silsilat al-Ahadith al-Da`ifa wa al-Mawdu`a li al-Albani (Critique of al-Albanis Book on Weak and Forged Hadiths), Tashih Salat al-Tarawih `Ishrina Rak`atan wa al-Radd `ala al-Albani fi Tad`ifih (Establishing as Correct the Tarawih Salat in Twenty Rak`as and the Refutation of Its Weakening by al-Albani), and Ibahat al-Tahalli bi alDhahab al-Muhallaq li al-Nisa wa al-Radd `ala al-Albani fi Tahrimih (The Licitness of Wearing Gold Jewelry for Women Contrary to al-Albanis Prohibition of it). - The Syrian scholar Badr al-Din Hasan Diab who wrote Anwar al-Masabih `ala Zulumat al-Albani fi Salat al-Tarawih (Illuminating the Darkness of al-Albani over the Tarawih Prayer). - The Director of Religious Endowments in Dubai, `Isa ibn `Abd Allah ibn Mani` al-Himyari who wrote al-I`lam bi Istihbab Shadd al-Rihal li Ziyarati Qabri Khayr al-Anam Allah bless and greet him (The Notification Concerning the Recommendation of Travelling to Visit the Grave of the Best of Creation Allah bless and greet him -) and al-Bid`a al-Hasana Aslun Min Usul al-Tashri` (The Excellent Innovation Is One of the Sources of Islamic Legislation). - The Minister of Islamic Affairs and Religious Endowments in the United Arab Emirates Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Khazraji who wrote the article al-Albani: Tatarrufatuh (Al-Albanis Extremist Positions).

- The Syrian scholar Firas Muhammad Walid Ways in his edition of Ibn alMulaqqins Sunniyyat al-Jumu`a al-Qabliyya (The Sunna Prayers That Must Precede Salat al-Jumu`a). - The Syrian scholar Samer Islambuli who wrote al-Ahad, al-Ijma`, alNaskh. - The Jordanian scholar As`ad Salim Tayyim who wrote Bayan Awham alAlbani fi Tahqiqihi li Kitab Fadl al-Salat `ala al-Nabi Allah bless and greet him -. - The Jordanian scholar Hasan `Ali al-Saqqaf who wrote the two-volume Tanaqudat al-Albani al-Wadiha fi ma Waqa`a fi Tashih al-Ahadith wa Tad`ifiha min Akhta wa Ghaltat (Albanis Patent Self-Contradictions in the Mistakes and Blunders He Committed While Declaring Hadiths to be Sound or Weak), Ihtijaj al-Khaib bi `Ibarat man Idda`a al-Ijma` fa Huwa Kadhib (The Losers Recourse to the Phrase: `Whoever Claims Consensus Is a Liar!), al-Qawl al-Thabtu fi Siyami Yawm al-Sabt (The Firm Discourse Concerning Fasting on Saturdays), al-Lajif al-Dhu`af li alMutala`ib bi Ahkam al-I`tikaf (The Lethal Strike Against Him Who Toys with the Rulings of I`tikaf), Sahih Sifat Salat al-Nabi Sallallahu `alayhi wa Sallam (The Correct Description of the Prophets Prayer Allah bless and greet him -), I`lam al-Khaid bi Tahrim al-Quran `ala al-Junub wa alHaid (The Appraisal of the Meddler in the Interdiction of the Quran to those in a State of Major Defilement and Menstruating Women), Talqih alFuhum al-`Aliya (The Inculcation of Lofty Discernment), and Sahih Sharh al-`Aqida al-Tahawiyya (The Correct Explanation of al-Tahawis Statement of Islamic Doctrine). Among Albanis innovations in the Religion: 1- In his book Adab al-Zafaf he prohibits women from wearing gold jewelry rings, bracelets, and chains despite the Consensus of the Ulema permitting it. 2- He claims that 2.5% zakt is not due on money obtained from commerce, i.e. the main activity whereby money circulates among Muslims. 3- He absolutely prohibits fasting on Saturdays.

4- He prohibits retreat (i`tikaf) in any but the Three Mosques. 5- He claims that it is lawful to eat in Ramadan before Maghrib as defined by the Law, and similarly after the true dawn. 6- He compares Hanafi fiqh to the Gospel. 1 7- He calls people to imitate him rather than the Imams of the Salaf such as the founders of the Four Schools, and his followers invalidate the hadiths that contradict his views. 8- He prohibits the make-up performance of prayers missed intentionally. 9- He claims that it is permissible for menstruating women and those in a state of major defilement (junub) to recite, touch, and carry the Quran. 10- He claims over and over that among the innovations in religion existent in Madina is the persistence of the Prophets Allah bless and greet him grave in the mosque. 11- He claims that whoever travels intending to visit the Prophet Allah bless and greet him or to ask him for his intercession is a misguided innovator. 12- He claims that whoever carries dhikr-beads in his hand to remember Allah Most High is misguided and innovating. 13- He invented a location to Allah Most High above the Throne which he named al-makn al-`adam the non-existent place. 14- He claims in Tamam al-Minna that masturbation does not annul ones fast. 15- He published corrected editions of the two Sahihs of al-Bukhari and Muslim, which he deceitfully called Abridgments (mukhtasar) in violation of the integrity of these motherbooks. 16- He published newly-styled editions of the Four Sunan, al-Bukharis alAdab al-Mufrad, al-Mundhiris al-Targhib wa al-Tarhib, and al-Suyutis al-

Jami` al-Saghir, each of which he split into two works, respectively prefixed Sahih and Da`if in violation of the integrity of these motherbooks. 17- He said: Many of those who interpret figuratively [the Divine Attributes] are not heretics (zandiqa), but they say what heretics say, and figurative interpretation is the very same as nullification (al-tawl `ayn alta`tl). 2 18- He suggests that al-Bukhari is a disbeliever for interpreting the Divine Face as dominion or sovereignty (mulk) in the verse Everything will perish save His countenance (28:88) in the book of Tafsir in his Sahih: Except His wajh means except His mulk, and it is also said: Except whatever was for the sake of His countenance. Albani blurts out: No true believer would say such a thing and We should consider al-Bukhari innocent of that statement. 3 19- In imitation of the Mu`tazila, tawassul (seeking means), istightha (asking for help), and tashaffu` (seeking intercession) through the Prophet Allah bless and greet him or one of the Awliy he declared prohibited acts in Islam (harm) tantamount to idolatry (shirk) in his booklet alTawassul as did his friends Bin Baz and those who obey them such as alQahtani in al-Wala wa al-Bara and others, in flat rejection of the numerous sound and explicit narrations to that effect, such as al-Bukharis narration of the Prophet Allah bless and greet him from Ibn `Umar Allah be well-pleased with him -: Truly the sun shall draw so near on the Day of Resurrection that sweat shall reach to the mid-ear, whereupon they shall ask (istaghth) help from Adam upon him peace -, then from Musa upon him peace , then from Muhammad Allah bless and greet him who will intercede (fa yashfa`u) and that day Allah shall raise him to an Exalted Station, so that all those who are standing [including the unbelievers] shall glorify him (yahmaduhu ahlu al-jam`i kulluhum). 20- He denies that the name of the Angel of death is `Azrl and claims such a name has no basis other than Israelite reports, although `Iyad reports the Consensus on the Umma on it in al-Shifa. 21- Like the rest of Wahhabi and Salafi innovators he declares Ash`aris, Maturidis, and Sufis to be outside the fold of Ahl al-Sunna and even outside the fold of Islam, although Allah Most High and His Prophet Allah bless and greet him praised them! Upon revelation of the verse Allah shall

bring a people whom He loves and who love Him (5:54), the Prophet Allah bless and greet him pointed to Abu Musa al-Ash`ari Allah be well-pleased with him and said: They are that mans People. 4 AlQushayri, Ibn `Asakir, al-Bayhaqi, Ibn al-Subki, and others said that the followers of Abu al-Hasan al-Ash`ari i.e. Ash`aris who were mostly Sufis are included among Abu Musas People for in every place that a people are affiliated to a Prophet, what is meant is the followers of that Prophet. As for Maturidis, they are referred to in the narration of the Prophet Allah bless and greet him from Bishr al-Khath`ami or al-Ghanawi with a sound (sahh) chain according to al-Hakim, al-Dhahabi, al-Suyuti, and alHaythami: Truly you shall conquer Constantinople and truly what a wonderful leader will her leader be [Mehmet Fatih Sultan - Allah be wellpleased with him -], and truly what a wonderful army will that army be! Both the leader and his army were classic Hanafi Maturidis and it is known that Mehmet Fatih loved and respected Sufis, practiced tawassul, and followed a Shaykh. Moreover, enmity against Ash`aris, Maturidis, and Sufis, is nifq and enmity against the Umma of Islam as most of the Ulema of Islam are thus described. 22- In at least five of his books 5 he calls for the demolition of the Green Dome of the Prophets Mosque in al-Madina al-Munawwara and for taking the Prophets grave outside the Mosque. 23- He states: I have found no evidence for the Prophets Allah bless and greet him hearing of the salaam of those who greet him at his grave and I do not know from where Ibn Taymiyya took his claim 6 that he Allah bless and greet him hears the salaam from someone near. This and the previous item are among his greater enormities and bear the unmistakable signature of innovation and deviation. 7 24- He considers it an innovation to visit relatives, neighbors, or friends on the day of `Eid and prohibits it. 8 25- He gave the fatwa that Muslims should exit Palestine en masse and leave it to the Jews as it is part the Abode of War (dr al-harb). 9 26- He advocates in his Salat al-Nabi Allah bless and greet him -, the formula Peace and blessings upon the Prophet instead of upon you, O Prophet in the tashahhud in contradiction of the Four Sunni Schools, on the basis of a hadith of Ibn Mas`ud whereby the Companions used the

indirect-speech formula after the passing of the Prophet Allah bless and greet him -. But the Prophet Allah bless and greet him himself instructed them to pray exactly as he prayed saying: Peace and blessings upon you, O Prophet without telling them to change it after his death, nor did the major Companions (whose Sunna we were ordered to imitate together with that of the Prophet Allah bless and greet him -), such as Abu Bakr and `Umar, teach the Companions and Successors otherwise! 27- He prohibits praying more than 11 rak`as in Tarawih prayers on the grounds that the Prophet Allah bless and greet him never did and in blatant rejection of his explicit command to follow the Sunna of the wellguided Caliphs after him. 28- He declares that adding more to 11 supererogatory rak`as in the late night prayer (tahajjud) is an innovation rather than an act of obedience on the grounds that the Prophet Allah bless and greet him never ever prayed one hundred rak`as in his whole lifetime 10 although the Ulema agree that there is no prescribed limit to something which the Prophet Allah bless and greet him commanded without specifically quantifying it, and he Allah bless and greet him said in three authentic narrations: Know that the best of your good deeds is prayer, 11 Prayer is a light, 12 and The night prayer is in cycles of two [rak`as] and when one of you fears the rising of the dawn, let him pray a single one. 13 It is also established in many authentic narrations collected by Imam `Abd al-Hayy al-Lacknawi in the second part of his Iqamat al-Hujja `ala anna al-Ikthar min alTa`abbudi Laysa bi Bid`a that the Companions and Salaf prayed hundreds if not thousands of rak`as in every twenty-four hours! 29- He considers it an innovation to pray four rak`as between the two adhns of Jumu`a and before Salat, although it is authentically narrated that the Prophet Allah bless and greet him prayed four rak`as before Jumu`a and four rak`as after it. 14 30- He declares it prohibited (harm) and an innovation to lengthen the beard over a fistfuls length although there is no proof for such a claim in the whole Law and none of the Ulema ever said it before him. 15 31- He gives free rein to his propensity to insult and vilify the Ulema of the past as well as his contemporaries. As a result it is difficult to wade through his writings without being affected by the nefarious spirit that permeates

them. For example, he considers previous editors and commentators of alBukharis al-Adab al-Mufrad (Book of Manners!) sinful, unbearably ignorant, and even liars and thieves. Of one he says: There are so many weak hadiths [in his choice] that it is an unislamic practice; of another: It is ignorance which must not be tolerated; of another: Forgery and open lie His edition is stolen [from a previous one]. 16 Such examples actually fill a book compiled by Shaykh Hasan `Ali al-Saqqaf and titled Qamus Shataim al-Albani wa Alfazihi al-Munkara al-Lati Yatluquha `ala `Ulama al-Umma (Dictionary of al-Albanis Insults and the Heinous Words He Uses Against the Scholars of the Muslim Community). 32- He revived Ibn Hazms anti-madhhab claim that differences can never be a mercy in any case but are always a curse on the basis of the verse (If it had been from other than Allah they would have found therein much discrepancy( (4:82). 17 Imam al-Nawawi long since refuted this view in his commentary on Sahih Muslim where he said: If something is a mercy, it is not necessary for its opposite to be the opposite of mercy. No-one makes this binding and no-one even says this, except an ignoramus or one who affects ignorance. Similarly, al-Munawi said in Fayd al-Qadir: This is a contrivance that showed up on the part of some of those who have sickness in their heart. 33- He expresses hatred for those who read Imam al-Busiris masterpiece, Qasidat al-Burda, and calls them cretins (mahbl) 18, i.e. millions of Muslims past and present including the likes of Imams Ibn Hajar al`Asqalani, al-Sakhawi, and al-Suyuti who all included it as required reading in the Islamic curriculum. 19 34- He perpetuates lies if they detract from Ash`aris, such as his remark that Imam Sayf al-Din al-Amidi did not pray, 20 although Dr. Hasan alShafi`i in his massive biography entitled al-Amidi wa Arauhu al-Kalamiyya showed that the story that al-Amidi did not pray was a forgery put into circulation during the campaign waged by Imam Ibn al-Salah against him for teaching logic and philosophy in Damascus. 35- He perpetuates the false claim first made by Munir Agha the founder of the Egyptian Salafiyya Press, that Imam Abu Muhammad al-Juwayni the father of Imam al-Haramayn repented from Ash`ari doctrine and supposedly authored a tract titled Risala fi Ithbat al-Istiw wa al-Fawqiyya (Epistle on the Assertion of Establishment and Aboveness). 21 This

spurious attribution continues to be promoted without verification for obvious reasons by modern-day Salafis who adduce it to forward the claim that al-Juwayni embraced anthropomorphist concepts. The Risala in question is not mentioned in any of the bibliographical and biographical sources nor does al-Dhahabi cite it in his encyclopedia of anthropomorphist views entitled al-`Uluw. More conclusively, it is written in modern argumentative style and reflects typically contemporary anthropomorphist obsessions. 36- He derides the fuqah of the Umma for accepting in their massive majority the hadith of Mu`adh ibn Jabal on ijtihd as authentic then rejects the definition of knowledge (`ilm) in Islam as pertaining to fiqh but claims that it pertains only to hadith, 22 although the Ulema of the Salaf explicitly said that a hadith master without fiqh is a misguided innovator! And he defines the `lim as meaning, of course, the `Salafi `lim, not the `Khalafi [late Egyptian Shaykh] Ghazali! 23 Al-Qurtubi said: One of the knowers of Allah said: A certain group that has not yet come up in our time but shall show up at the end of time, will curse the scholars and insult the jurists. 24

by Abul Layth Muhammad Al-Albani, may Allah have mercy upon him, is considered a flagbearer and Imam in the sciences of hadith to the pseudo-salafis of our era. What the majority of these psuedo-salafis do not know is that Al-Albaani contradicted himself numerous times throughout his published works on hadith, lending to the Sunni claim that he is not a scholar of hadith and is in fact not authorized, or even qualified, to grade chains. When one begins to compare some of his editing/commentaries that he authored, one consistently finds Al-Albani repenting or changing his opinion after the truth was made known to him. For his followers, or anyone seeking to benefit from his works, they may come to realize that they have to buy all of AlAlbanis many works in order to truly find the stance that he died upon. Some scholars, such as Abul Hasan Ash-Shaykh who love Al-Albani, have collected his many contradictions in works they have presented such as the Taraju wherein Abul Hasan mentions some 220 narrations wherein Al-Albani contradicted himself. In this article I will give eleven examples of contradictory views of Al-Albaani, most have been caught by him and brought to his attention by some of his students etc.

Example 1: In his editing of Mishkat Al-Masabih he writes regarding the hadith from Aishah:

Whoever narrates to you that the Nabi used to urinate while standing, do not believe him, for certainly the Nabi would not urinate save while sitting. (Ahmad, Tirmidhi, and An-Nasai) Its chain is daif, in it is Sharik ibn Abdullah Al-Qadhi, and he makes mistakes in memorization. (Entry 365) He changes his verdict in his Silsilat As-Sahihah wherein he states after quoting the above, As of now I have determined that this hadith is Sahih due to following up narrations (mutabaaat) that have been mentioned Thought: Yes, there is a follow up report in the Sunan of Imam Al-Bayhaqi that replaces Sharik with Israil. Why was this unknown to Al-Albani in his editing of the Mishkat?

Example 2:

[Reported by Ahmad in his Musnad] Al-Albani includes this hadith in his Daif al-Jami number 801 citing Abdul-Malik ibn Ar-Rabi ibn Sabrah as daif, yet declares it authentic in his Silsilat As-Sahihah 2783.

Example 3:


That the Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said, If any of you passes wind while praying, let him take a hold of his nose [as though his nose is bleeding] then leave [the prayer]. It is reported by Abu Dawud thus:

Al-Albani declares it daif in his Daif Al-Jami 566. He declares it authentic in his silsilat assahihah 2976, see also his Sahih Abi Dawud 1020.

Example 4:

Declared Dhaif in Daif al-Jami 1871. Later he declares it Sahih in Silsilat As-Sahihah 3405.

Example 5:


The Nabi (s) said, If as little as what can be placed on a fingernail of what is in jannah were to become apparent, it would have beautified all the far corners of the heavens and the earth. And if a man among the people of jannah were to appear and his bracelets were exposed, it would have blotted out the light of the sun, as the sun blots out the light of the stars. Tirmidhi said, This hadith is gharib, and we do not know save with this chain except through the narration of Ibn Lahiah. Yahya ibn Ayyub reported this hadith from Yazid ibn Abi Habib and he said From Umar ibn Sad ibn Abi Waqqas from the Prophet. This hadith was declared daif by Al-Albani in his edition of the Mishkat 5638. He admits to his heedlessness in grading this chain and in his Silsilat As-Sahihah declares it Sahih 3396.

Example 6:

Travel and you will become healthy (or will stay healthy), fight and you will receive ghanimah. [Reported from Ahmad.] Al Albani declared it weak in his Daif Al-Jami 3210 and also in Silsilat Daifah 254. However in his Silsilat Sahihah 3352 he mentions that the hadith comes from Abu Hurayrah and Ibn Umar. As for what is reported from Abu Hurayrah it comes via two ways:

1) From Darraj from ibn Hujayrah from Abi Hurayrah. He says, This chain is Hasan its men are all thiqat as what is known about the established reports from Darraj from Ibn Hujayrah. Though Ibn Lahiah is mistaken in memorization except when the Abaadilah report from him, Imam Ahmad deemed the reports of Qutaybah ibn Said from Ibn Lahiah Sahih. 2) The other is weak.

Also he declared the hadith of Ibn Umar weak apparently before it became clear to him that this hadith was hasan. [See the Dha'ifah 2551]

Example 7:

The swords are the keys to Jannah! [Ibn Abi Shaybah in his Musannaf] He declared the hadith daif in his Daif Al-Jami 3376. However in his Silsilat As-Sahihah he declared it Sahih saying, I say: This chain is Jayyid and its men are all thiqaat, men of the two Shaykhs [i.e. bukhari and muslim] except for Zayd ibn al Hubab and his Shaykh Ad-Dabii. The two of them are from the men of Sahih Muslim and regarding them is statements [of criticism] that are of no harm. And for it are witnessing reports from Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad [2672]

Example 8:

Imam Al-Bukhari narrates in his Sahih, And it is reported from Ibn Abbas and Jarhad and Muhammad ibn Jahsh from the Nabi (s) that the thigh is awrah. Al-Albani states in his Ath-Thamr Al-MustaTab, As for the hadith that the thigh is awrah, then it is weak as Al-Bukhari alluded to by mentioning that it was reported from them. He goes on to support his claim via a number of arguments he deems established and correct! Al-Albani, however, contradicts himself in a number of places. In his Irwa Al-Ghalil 1/297 he states that all of the chains strengthen one another and thus it is an authentic hadith. In fact in his argument in Al-Irwa he actually uses as support the fact that Imam al-Bukhari mentioned these narrations in muallaq form. In his Tamam Al-Minnah 160 he also supports the usage of this hadith as proof by many of the Ulama. In his Sahih al-Jami (4280, 4157, 4158) and in the Mishkat 3112, 3113, 3114, the Shaykh says, These three narrations with its chains are weak, however they strengthen each other. Example 9:

From Abu Hurayrah that Rasulullah said, There are three types of people whose supplication will not be rejected, The fasting person until he breaks his fast, the Just Imam, the dua of the oppressed. Allah raises it up above the clouds and opens the gates of heaven to it and The Lord says, By My Might, I will aid you, even if it be after a while.

Imam At-Tirmidhi said, This hadith is Hasanand Abu Mudillah, he is the freed-servant of Umm Al Muminin Aishah, and we do not know of him except through this hadith. This hadith has been reported from him in longer form. Al Albani states in his comments on Al-Kalam At-Tayyib: And this was also said by Al-Hafith, and there is defect in this claim according to me. The defect in it is Abu Mudillah and Adh-Dhahabi said of him, He is unknown. In his Silsilah As-Sahihah (596 Maktabah Al Maarif) he says, I disagreed with Al-Hafith on this hadith in my taliq of al kalim at tayyib number 163 [Maktabah Al Ma'arif] and as of now I agree with him do to witnessing reports. Thought: Maybe Al Albaani should have known his place and remained silent instead of misleading the common folk away from Al-Hafith! Example 10:

The Prophets are alive in their graves, praying. In Al-Albanis Silsilat As-Sahihah number 621 the Shaykh confesses that he used to believe this hadith was weak thinking that Ibn Qutaybah was alone in reporting this narration. He then states that chain is strong and that if you read any of his books wherein he has weakened this hadith, abandon it and hold onto this view [of mine] with your molars!

Example 11:


The ghanimah (booty) for the gatherings of dhikr are Jannah! Al Albaani declared this hadith daif in Daif Al-Jami 3919. In his Silsilat As-Sahihah (3335) he admits that at the time of writing the grading he did not see the chain found in At-Tabaranis Mujam Al-Kabir in volume 13 via an authentic chain. He then declares the hadith Sahih.

and May peace and blessings be upon our beloved Prophet Muhammad, his family, companions, and followers Amin! The Question: It is said that Al-Shaikh Nasir Al-Den Al-Bani, may Allah have mercy upon him, used to declare hadith weak that were in fact strong and vice versa? Is this truly the case or not? The Answer: Indeed, Sheikh Albani (ra) was from those who revived the art of examining and criticizing hadith during these times. Indeed, due to him, many people became interested in the study of the Sunna (way of the Prophet (sa) and the science of examining reports, investigating reporters of hadith and the extraction of sound narrations. In fact, we can safely say that he was the most famous person in this age regarding this important science and it is well known the he exercised a great amount of effort towards this field. However, like any other human being who exerts great effort, some of his conclusions were correct and others were not. Thus, some of the hadith, which he declared sound, others in his field failed to agree with. Thus, these errors were made manifest to him and he corrected them. In addition, some of the narrations which he declared as weak were not agreed upon by those in his field. Then, once he was shown his errors, he went back and corrected them. Thus, if you look at many of the books written by the Sheikh, may Allah have mercy on him, there reprints would indicate where the sheikh went back, upon the advice of the Ulema, and changed his opinions. This is one of the great qualities of the scholars: that, when shown their mistakes, they would try to correct them with great haste and concern out of the sincerity towards the faith and truthfulness toward it. For that reason Umar Al-Khatab (ra) wrote to Abu Musa Al-Ashari (ra), Returning back to the truth is better than stubbornness on falsehood. Therefore, the Sheikh, on a number of occasions, would return to his work and correct it accordingly. However, as with any person, there are sure to be mistakes after the demise of the Sheikh (ra) because there is none amongst us who are protected by Allah from making mistakes and having shortcomings (except the Prophets). Thus, it behooves us not to accept everything the Sheikh declared as sound without investigation. And at the same time, we should examine what he declared to by weak prior to accepting it as well.

The reason for this is that the scholars differed on the ability, of those who would come in the latter years of the Muslim nation, to declare hadith sound or weak. Ibn Salah (ra) felt that it was impossible since the later scholar would not have met those who preceded him. Imam Nawawi (ra) differed and felt thus such an action was indeed possible. There is an important point that should be noted: namely, declaring something sound is much easier than declaring something weak. The reason being that in order to declare something sound, one only needs one sound narration, however, when declaring something weak, one could have amassed a large number of narrations, but still there could be one sound one that they failed to locate. Thus, they might declare something weak that, due to one other narration, would make it sound. Thus declaring something weak is much harder than the opposite. One of the areas that Sheikh Albani (ra) was mistaken in was that he relied, in some cases, on manuscripts that suffered from printing errors. Many times these manuscripts were not narrated to the Sheikh, or he did not read them to the people of knowledge. Thus, at times, because of the printing errors, he fell into error; sometime declaring a hadith weak due to the printing error in the book. An example of this is the hadith found in the collection of Al-Bayhaqi which, in a misprinted copy states, from Ubaydullah the son of Abdullah bin Abbas (ra). Sheikh Albani (ra) declared this hadith to be weak saying: Ubaydullah bin Abdullah bin Abbas is an unknown person.However, the correct print of Al-Bayhaqis texts states: From Ubadullah from Abdullah bin Abbas (ra). This Ubaydullah is actually Ubaydullah the son of Abdullah the son of Utbah the son of the son of Masod one of the great seven jurists of Medina. He is considered the most trust worthy narrator when it comes to Ibn Abbas (ra) as agreed upon by the scholars. This error was due to a printing error and a cause for the Sheikh to declare the narration weak. However, this type of mistake was not due to the Sheikh himself, but was due to the print or a mistake of a scribe. It is important to note that such an error takes nothing away from the Sheikh nor his efforts, sincerity, knowledge or stature. For, indeed, it was a mistake, and none of us are free from error. And Allah knows best Sh. Muhammad Hassan Walid Didou Al-Shinqiti