"I saw the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) counting the tasbih with his right hand."

The questioner : They count with their fingers, but the right hand was not specified to the exclusion of the others.

The Shaykh : Yes, and the hadith of Ibn 'Umar.

The questioner : The hadith of Ibn 'Umar: "He used to count the tasbih," and Muhammad ibn Qudamah added in Abu Dawud: "with his right hand."

The Shaykh : Without the addition, what is the narration of the others?

The questioner : "He used to count the tasbih with his hand."

The Shaykh : This is it, did he say with his two hands?

The questioner : It appears that in the language of the Arabs, when you say "hand" or "eye" in the singular, the plural is intended.

The Shaykh : It is possible, but here, first: what is the immediate impression from the narration that is the original, is it his right hand, his left hand, or both his hands? What is the linguistic implication? As it is said that the generic is used to mean the species, this is correct, but what is derived if we look away from the narration: "his two hands"?

The questioner : O Shaykh, but regarding this, like the eye and the hand and the leg, it is not possible, they used to say: "He walked with his leg" and "He saw me with his eye," and they meant his two eyes, and in the same matter, this hadith: "He counts the tasbih with his hand"; meaning: with his two hands.

The Shaykh : Is this the immediate impression for you?

The questioner : And if it is not the immediate impression, it is a known thing.

The Shaykh : No, it is not known, then he called... meaning - for example - : ; how do you understand it? Is this the topic you are hovering around or the topic I am hovering around?

The questioner : If the foot is mentioned in the singular, I do not know here, it is a foot; meaning if other narrations do not come to specify it, the original is the two feet; if a narration does not come to restrict it to such and such.

The Shaykh : So you understand this hadith as meaning his two feet?

The questioner : Other narrations clarified it.

The Shaykh : What did they clarify?

The questioner : That his foot is one of his two feet.

The Shaykh : Where are the other narrations?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Until this hour I have not heard of this, meaning I do not know except the narration of al-Bukhari: , as for "one of his two feet," this is an addition; if it is established, it is taken, otherwise we stop at what is transmitted and that is enough without addition.

The questioner : The original is the absence of addition; because I...

The Shaykh : This is the original; so at that time, as I say, we hold to the original, which is the narration: "He used to count the tasbih with his hand"; we look away from the narration: "his right hand"; likewise here, you look away from what you assume of the existence of another narration: one of his two legs; so what do you understand from his - Blessed and Exalted is He - placing his foot, is it more than one foot or is the immediate impression the single foot?

The questioner : No, in this hadith... one foot.

The Shaykh : So what is the difference between this and that? Then another aspect; do we not know that the original is the right hand for sacred matters - if the expression is correct - or respected ones, and the left for other than that; is this not the safer rule...?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : So if the matter is such, and even if we concede for the sake of argument that "his hand" means...; would this not be from the rule that the hand with which it is not permissible to blow out the nose, let alone clean oneself, is such a hand that it must be sanctified and the remembrance of Allah must be elevated from being counted with it, taking the general texts into account? This reality, if our Prophet (peace be upon him) says: Eat with your right hand, give with your right hand, take with the right, and drink with the right, and similar matters that do not equal the value of the remembrance of Allah, tasbih, takbir, and tahlil in sanctity, dignity, and exaltation, and something that is mentioned at all...

The questioner : The things that are done with one hand are specific to the right hand, like eating, as you mentioned - May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : But I did not understand what is behind... with one hand? They are two hands; so what made us use one hand for food and drink and taking and giving except that he loved to use the right hand in everything.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Okay; why.

The questioner : And also here, O Shaykh, the beginning is with the right hand, so now the supplication - also - we do not supplicate with one hand, and we do not carry the mushaf with one hand; we carry it with two hands.

The Shaykh: No, no.

The questioner : Because we work with two hands.

The Shaykh : No, that is not it.

The questioner : And there are texts in this matter.

The Shaykh : It is not for this, but rather because the Sunnah clarified to us that we supplicate with both hands, this is an analogy with a difference; so the Messenger (peace be upon him) - as you know - says: , for such a clear and explicit hadith, we build on it what we said that he does not supplicate with one hand, but if a hadith came that does not clarify to us this clear clarification, we could not say that he supplicates with both hands, then there is something that must be mentioned on this occasion; do you believe that acting on the general texts where no part of the general texts has been acted upon is not permissible by the Shari'ah, and that it is the origin of the innovations in which many innovators have expanded in the past and present, or is the general acted upon; meaning: with a part of its parts, even if we do not know that the practice of the Salaf was upon it, I do not know if this speech is understood by you, if Allah wills, or does it need clarification?

The questioner : I understood its general meaning.

The Shaykh : Good, and what is your answer?

The questioner : No, the second methodology is the safer or it is obligatory.

The Shaykh : What took us out of this rule in our matter, and we do not know that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) counted the tasbih with both hands, we do not know this, not from him or from any other of the Salaf, so holding to his saying (peace be upon him) to the women: is from this topic that you said and you hit the mark that the general texts are not acted upon as long as the practice of the Salaf has not been upon it, add to that that it contradicts the remembrance of Allah and the etiquette with the remembrance of Allah.
I say on this occasion: that a hand with which one blows out the nose and cleans oneself and urinates is more sacred and higher than to count the tasbih with this hand, so it is placed for things that are not respected, so if we leave this rational reasoning and return to the previous rule, it is enough for us to say that acting on the hadith of Ibn 'Umar and on the narration of Abu Dawud is the immediate impression from his saying (may Allah be pleased with him): "He counts the tasbih with his right hand," so if we return to the addition - excuse me, with his hand - , so if we return to the addition, we are assured that this is the original and this is the Sunnah, then this addition is not contradictory to the original, so it is not considered anomalous, if the narrator looks at this addition with the same lens that I looked at the hadith of Wa'il ibn Hujr and I explained my opinion in that in some of my books that the additional narration - Ibn Qudamah - : "I saw him moving it" does not contradict the narration of the others from the trustworthy ones that he pointed with his finger; because pointing does not contradict moving, so everyone who moved has pointed, so if you say to your companion far from you: Come, and some of those who saw you said: He pointed with his hand to his companion; this does not mean that he did not move his hand, on this there is no contradiction between the narration: he moves it or he points with it as some students think, likewise here, there is no difference between the narration of the one who narrated: "I saw him counting the tasbih with his right hand," and the narration of the one who narrated: "with his hand," the hand is singular and was interpreted by this narration: "with his right hand," all this if we look away from what we mentioned of the etiquette of using the right hand for respected things and the left hand the opposite of that, and it is amazing - without blame - that I see our brothers... they refrain from eating with their left hand with the right hand, so we see them sometimes one takes the meat from one end and the other from another end until it is... little, and they do not use this hand; do you not notice this with me?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : And why? While sanctifying this hand from tasbih is more appropriate than sanctifying it from food and drink.