How did the Prayer of Tasbih remain studied in the past centuries without anyone paying attention to it, while all of them weaken it despite its authenticity? Does this not contradict the preservation of Allah?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : There is a matter... Many scholars say that the spirit of the Shari'ah is facilitation, and that the Shari'ah is preserved until the Day of Resurrection. And Allah (Mighty and Majestic) has guaranteed its preservation. For that reason, regarding the Prayer of Tasbih, which you mentioned is authentic due to its chains of narration, they say: How can it remain studied over these centuries without anyone paying attention to it, and all of them... weaken it? Then we come in this century and say it is authentic. Does this not contradict what Allah (Mighty and Majestic) inspired to His Prophet that He would preserve this Shari'ah?
The Shaykh : We say: "Prove the Throne, then inscribe it." How can the claim that it was studied be valid, when it is only known in this era? How do you prove such a claim, when among the first to mention it and describe its form is 'Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak, the Imam of the Sunnah? How can such words be said! These words are from one who has not first studied the hadith in terms of its chains of narration, nor studied the hadith in terms of acting upon it. All that can be said is that the hadith is subject to the strongest disagreement regarding its authenticity, with some saying it is authentic and others saying it is fabricated. This is not the first hadith to which such disagreement applies. The reference in that case is to the people of knowledge and specialization. After that, one looks at the hadith from the jurisprudential perspective: Did any of the Imams, whose jurisprudence and understanding are trusted, act upon it or not? If, after research, it is established that the hadith is first not authentic, and second, that none of the Salaf spoke of it, then this statement comes. But without that, it is spinning the spindle.
The Shaykh : We say: "Prove the Throne, then inscribe it." How can the claim that it was studied be valid, when it is only known in this era? How do you prove such a claim, when among the first to mention it and describe its form is 'Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak, the Imam of the Sunnah? How can such words be said! These words are from one who has not first studied the hadith in terms of its chains of narration, nor studied the hadith in terms of acting upon it. All that can be said is that the hadith is subject to the strongest disagreement regarding its authenticity, with some saying it is authentic and others saying it is fabricated. This is not the first hadith to which such disagreement applies. The reference in that case is to the people of knowledge and specialization. After that, one looks at the hadith from the jurisprudential perspective: Did any of the Imams, whose jurisprudence and understanding are trusted, act upon it or not? If, after research, it is established that the hadith is first not authentic, and second, that none of the Salaf spoke of it, then this statement comes. But without that, it is spinning the spindle.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.
