Rebuttal of Ibn al-Qayyim's claim that applying the term "knees" to the joints in the front is a matter of predominance, as it contradicts the texts.

The Shaykh : This is where Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) falls into a problem that we have always learned from him to reject. What is the motivation for such an interpretation? He says: If the knee is applied to the joint in the front of the camel, what is this? Predominance. What does "from the perspective of predominance" mean? It means that since people in usage apply the term "knee" to the leg, it was said that the knee in the animal in the front is from the perspective of predominance. There is no predominance here. This claim is refuted against him linguistically and in Arabic usage. Otherwise, predominance is said, for example, of "the two suns" and "the two moons" and "the two 'Umar"s and the like. That is predominance. As for the language, it explicitly states that the camel's knees are in its front, and the usages and Arabic texts are the same. So this claim is refuted; because first, it has no evidence, and second, it contradicts the Arabic texts that we mentioned.
He says in the third point: "If it were as they said, he would have said: 'So let him prostrate as the camel prostrates.'" This is, of course, according to his previous understanding, he raises this statement or this possibility that should have been the case. The Messenger forbade prostrating like the prostration of the camel; so how would he say: "So let him prostrate as the camel prostrates"? We say to Ibn al-Qayyim: We agree with you that the Messenger forbade prostrating like the prostration of the camel; so how do you say: "So let him say: 'And let him prostrate as the camel prostrates'"? No, but we differ on how the camel prostrates. He says: It prostrates with this falling; meaning it places its head before what? Its middle. No, rather it prostrates, meaning it places its knees before any other part of its body. So the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) commanded to contradict that. If the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) had said: "And let him prostrate as the camel prostrates," note that the intention is that the person should not prostrate with the prostration of the camel; because he mentioned hadiths in which the one praying is forbidden from imitating animals in turning around, pecking like a crow, and likewise in the prostration of the camel. But the question is what is the reality of the camel's prostration, and this reality has become clear, by the permission of Allah. He said: "And if it were as they said, he would have said: 'So let him prostrate as the camel prostrates, and the first thing of the camel to touch the ground are its hands.'" Do you see "the first thing of the camel to touch the ground are its hands"? That is wrong. What is always touching the ground are its hands, but rather the knees.
"And the secret of the matter is that whoever reflects on the prostration of the camel, and knows that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade prostrating like the prostration of the camel; he knows that the hadith of Wa'il ibn Hujr is the correct one, and Allah knows best."
So in summary: Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) never imagined the correctness or reality of the camel's prostration; as evidenced by the fact that the first thing to fall is its hands, and its hands, like its legs, are always and forever fallen. Rather, the correct thing is that the first thing to fall from its body are the knees in its front. This is his answer to the conflicting hadith regarding the hadith of Wa'il ibn Hujr, and you have known its weakness.