Continuation of the previous question regarding the issue of placing the hands on the chest when rising from bowing.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : In order to be safe from deviating from the Sunnah to religious innovation, we must look: did the righteous Salaf do that or not? Otherwise, we would fall into what the innovators fell into.
Our previous topic is exactly of this type. There are hadiths that some scholars use as evidence based on their generality, and you recently came to use as evidence the generality of Ibn Hazm's statement. But that generality and that other one have never been acted upon by the Salaf. There is no one among the Companions or the followed imams, meaning the four, who says that placing the hands is recommended and a recommended practice after raising the head from bowing, just as all the people of the Sunnah say that placing the hands is a recommended practice before bowing.
The questioner : In al-‘Iyni’s book "Sharh al-Bukhari," al-‘Iyni says: "Chapter on the time of raising the hands."
The Shaykh : Meaning, are you now going to use as evidence something more than the general?
The questioner : No, I am mentioning a narration from Imam al-Bukhari that al-‘Iyni mentioned.
The Shaykh : Did you understand my question?
The questioner : Yes, I understood your question...
The Shaykh : Are you now using as evidence something more than the general, or do you have a specific text from one of the Salaf?
The questioner : Al-‘Iyni says... "Chapter on the time of placing the hands." He says: "The principle is that in every standing in which there is a recommended dhikr that is relied upon, the principle in relying is to place the right hand on the left, and what is not; then no. Based on this, there is no reliance in the standing after bowing, and upon this... contrary to what Abu Ali al-Nasafi and Imam Abu Abdullah see regarding standing in every standing, whether there is a recommended dhikr in it or not."
The Shaykh : From whom did he narrate it? From whom?
The questioner : Abu Ali al-Nasafi and Imam Abu Abdullah.
The Shaykh : From whom? From whom?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Is my question not clear? You are saying he narrated it from so-and-so, from whom did he narrate it? You are saying you are quoting a text from the Salaf, who is it?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Who is he?
The questioner: Al-Bukhari.
The Shaykh : What did al-Bukhari say?
The questioner : Al-Bukhari that he relies in every standing.
The Shaykh : My dear, you are using as evidence the general text!
The questioner : He said at the beginning that after bowing there is no reliance, contrary to what he sees... that Imam Abu Abdullah sees placing the hands after bowing, because he said contrary to what Imam Abu Abdullah sees.
The Shaykh : Abu Abdullah, who is Imam al-Bukhari, did he explicitly state placing the hands in the second standing?
The questioner : It is understood from his words.
The Shaykh : My dear, answer, say "text" or say "no text."
The questioner : He did not explicitly state it.
The Shaykh : Yes, this is what you said before. You want to use as evidence general words, not specific words.
The questioner : The context is clear.
The Shaykh : My research now is not whether the words are clear or not. Do you think the general text is clear or ambiguous? The general text?
The questioner : Is that clear?
The Shaykh : So its being clear is one thing, and its being specific or general is another thing. The important thing is, the best of speech is what is little and effective. Do you have a text from one of the Salaf that he said about the legitimacy of placing the hands in the second standing or did it? Do you have a specific text in it?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : So you are striking cold iron. I am telling you, using as evidence the generalities of the hadiths, let alone the hadiths of others who are not an authority in the first place, is not permissible, unless the practice of the Salaf was done on that. You are going around this point. First, I am telling you something: either you are convinced with me by the previous statement, that "any part of a general text that the practice of the Salaf has not been done on; then it is not permissible to act on it," either you are convinced or you are not convinced? And I do not impose my opinion on you, but I assume either this or that. Either you are convinced by this, then praise be to Allah, in that case, you should, in order to apply what you are convinced of, come with an explicit text, either a statement or an action, that one of the previous imams from the righteous Salaf said this placement, and there is no way to that at all. Search in the books as much as you want. But to come with general words, that is available, and you do not need to come with general evidence from some scholars; because the general evidence is in the hadith:, this is a general text, so what matters to you after this text of the action of the Messenger - peace be upon him - to resort to the statements of those after him?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : And I will do with others what I did with it. Which is more important, the hadith or the words of others?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Are the words of others Shari'ah?
The questioner : How?
The Shaykh : Are the words of others Shari'ah? Shari'ah, Shari'ah?
The questioner : ... the four imams explicitly stating that placing the right hand on the left after...
The Shaykh : I do not mean by the four imams, I say all the Salaf, it is included, so that you do not understand from me a restriction. My speech is broader, the Salaf, and in them are the four imams, ... it has not come from any of these, neither by statement nor by action, the placement in the second standing.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, and what do you benefit from this? Nothing was transmitted, neither this nor that. What do you benefit? You are the one who brings a positive, actual matter, so you are the one who must prove it. As for me, my position is negative. I say it did not come from the imams, neither negatively nor positively. In that case, is it valid for either party to use as evidence their actions? I say it did not come, and you say it came. When I say it did not come, it is because this is the reality, but when you say it came, is it a reality?
The questioner : A reality from the Salaf...
The Shaykh : No, no, from the intended imams.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : You are now meaning you forgot everything we agreed on... it went down the drain. I told you, are you convinced with me by this rule? And it is: every general text that contains a part, this part the practice of the Salaf has not been done on; do we act on it? You said: No. Now I am putting the dots on the letters: did the practice of the Salaf happen in this? When you say it happened, the proof is on you. I do not have to prove; because my position is negation and denial. As it was said in the principles: "If you are a transmitter; then the truth, or a claimant; then the evidence." We are now at this rule that we agreed on, which is: "that the part of the general text that the practice of the Salaf has not been done on, we do not act on it," correct? So what must the one who wants to act on it do? He must prove that it is from the action of the Salaf; did you do this? The answer: No. On the contrary, you went back to say, since I admit that it did not come from them, neither this nor that, then we return to the generality! What do you have now? A circle!
My brother, the generality that you want to return to, you are supposed not to forget what we agreed on, which is: that it should have been acted upon by the practice of the Salaf, and now you admit with me that we do not have what indicates that the practice of the Salaf was done on it. This is a point with precision and great precision, and I hope from Allah - Mighty and Majestic - that He will inspire us to understand it in the correct way.
Our previous topic is exactly of this type. There are hadiths that some scholars use as evidence based on their generality, and you recently came to use as evidence the generality of Ibn Hazm's statement. But that generality and that other one have never been acted upon by the Salaf. There is no one among the Companions or the followed imams, meaning the four, who says that placing the hands is recommended and a recommended practice after raising the head from bowing, just as all the people of the Sunnah say that placing the hands is a recommended practice before bowing.
The questioner : In al-‘Iyni’s book "Sharh al-Bukhari," al-‘Iyni says: "Chapter on the time of raising the hands."
The Shaykh : Meaning, are you now going to use as evidence something more than the general?
The questioner : No, I am mentioning a narration from Imam al-Bukhari that al-‘Iyni mentioned.
The Shaykh : Did you understand my question?
The questioner : Yes, I understood your question...
The Shaykh : Are you now using as evidence something more than the general, or do you have a specific text from one of the Salaf?
The questioner : Al-‘Iyni says... "Chapter on the time of placing the hands." He says: "The principle is that in every standing in which there is a recommended dhikr that is relied upon, the principle in relying is to place the right hand on the left, and what is not; then no. Based on this, there is no reliance in the standing after bowing, and upon this... contrary to what Abu Ali al-Nasafi and Imam Abu Abdullah see regarding standing in every standing, whether there is a recommended dhikr in it or not."
The Shaykh : From whom did he narrate it? From whom?
The questioner : Abu Ali al-Nasafi and Imam Abu Abdullah.
The Shaykh : From whom? From whom?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Is my question not clear? You are saying he narrated it from so-and-so, from whom did he narrate it? You are saying you are quoting a text from the Salaf, who is it?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Who is he?
The questioner: Al-Bukhari.
The Shaykh : What did al-Bukhari say?
The questioner : Al-Bukhari that he relies in every standing.
The Shaykh : My dear, you are using as evidence the general text!
The questioner : He said at the beginning that after bowing there is no reliance, contrary to what he sees... that Imam Abu Abdullah sees placing the hands after bowing, because he said contrary to what Imam Abu Abdullah sees.
The Shaykh : Abu Abdullah, who is Imam al-Bukhari, did he explicitly state placing the hands in the second standing?
The questioner : It is understood from his words.
The Shaykh : My dear, answer, say "text" or say "no text."
The questioner : He did not explicitly state it.
The Shaykh : Yes, this is what you said before. You want to use as evidence general words, not specific words.
The questioner : The context is clear.
The Shaykh : My research now is not whether the words are clear or not. Do you think the general text is clear or ambiguous? The general text?
The questioner : Is that clear?
The Shaykh : So its being clear is one thing, and its being specific or general is another thing. The important thing is, the best of speech is what is little and effective. Do you have a text from one of the Salaf that he said about the legitimacy of placing the hands in the second standing or did it? Do you have a specific text in it?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : So you are striking cold iron. I am telling you, using as evidence the generalities of the hadiths, let alone the hadiths of others who are not an authority in the first place, is not permissible, unless the practice of the Salaf was done on that. You are going around this point. First, I am telling you something: either you are convinced with me by the previous statement, that "any part of a general text that the practice of the Salaf has not been done on; then it is not permissible to act on it," either you are convinced or you are not convinced? And I do not impose my opinion on you, but I assume either this or that. Either you are convinced by this, then praise be to Allah, in that case, you should, in order to apply what you are convinced of, come with an explicit text, either a statement or an action, that one of the previous imams from the righteous Salaf said this placement, and there is no way to that at all. Search in the books as much as you want. But to come with general words, that is available, and you do not need to come with general evidence from some scholars; because the general evidence is in the hadith:
When he stood up in prayer, he would place his right hand over his left.
كان إذا قام في الصلاة وضع اليمنى على اليسرىThe questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : And I will do with others what I did with it. Which is more important, the hadith or the words of others?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Are the words of others Shari'ah?
The questioner : How?
The Shaykh : Are the words of others Shari'ah? Shari'ah, Shari'ah?
The questioner : ... the four imams explicitly stating that placing the right hand on the left after...
The Shaykh : I do not mean by the four imams, I say all the Salaf, it is included, so that you do not understand from me a restriction. My speech is broader, the Salaf, and in them are the four imams, ... it has not come from any of these, neither by statement nor by action, the placement in the second standing.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, and what do you benefit from this? Nothing was transmitted, neither this nor that. What do you benefit? You are the one who brings a positive, actual matter, so you are the one who must prove it. As for me, my position is negative. I say it did not come from the imams, neither negatively nor positively. In that case, is it valid for either party to use as evidence their actions? I say it did not come, and you say it came. When I say it did not come, it is because this is the reality, but when you say it came, is it a reality?
The questioner : A reality from the Salaf...
The Shaykh : No, no, from the intended imams.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : You are now meaning you forgot everything we agreed on... it went down the drain. I told you, are you convinced with me by this rule? And it is: every general text that contains a part, this part the practice of the Salaf has not been done on; do we act on it? You said: No. Now I am putting the dots on the letters: did the practice of the Salaf happen in this? When you say it happened, the proof is on you. I do not have to prove; because my position is negation and denial. As it was said in the principles: "If you are a transmitter; then the truth, or a claimant; then the evidence." We are now at this rule that we agreed on, which is: "that the part of the general text that the practice of the Salaf has not been done on, we do not act on it," correct? So what must the one who wants to act on it do? He must prove that it is from the action of the Salaf; did you do this? The answer: No. On the contrary, you went back to say, since I admit that it did not come from them, neither this nor that, then we return to the generality! What do you have now? A circle!
My brother, the generality that you want to return to, you are supposed not to forget what we agreed on, which is: that it should have been acted upon by the practice of the Salaf, and now you admit with me that we do not have what indicates that the practice of the Salaf was done on it. This is a point with precision and great precision, and I hope from Allah - Mighty and Majestic - that He will inspire us to understand it in the correct way.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.