The fact that the heart settles on certain hadiths does not mean that Ibn al-Qayyim’s claim regarding the hadith of the brook is sound

The Shaykh : However, the fact that the heart settles on this in these hadiths does not mean that Ibn al-Qayyim’s claim is sound either. The reversal in the hadith: , he says: This is reversed, and perhaps it is: . This is not accepted from him; because the hadith—as will be explained—is established from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) with this wording, and the argument is negated from the author in his claim of reversal, as will be explained. Where he said in *Tammam al-Kalam bi-Yaqul*: "Until I saw Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaybah." This is connected to his previous statement that it was suggested to him that perhaps the hadith is reversed, but he wanted to say: "I was just keeping it to myself because I had no evidence." "Until I saw Ibn Abi Shaybah narrate it likewise," meaning: he narrated it with the wording: . At that point, Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) was reassured regarding what had been circulating in his mind previously, that the hadith is reversed, and that the correct version is: . Why? He said he saw in Ibn Abi Shaybah that he narrated it likewise. "So Ibn Abi Shaybah said: Muhammad ibn Fudayl narrated to us from ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa‘id from his grandfather from Abu Hurayrah from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family): ." Ibn al-Qayyim’s claim is valid up to this point. , and al-Athram also narrated it in his *Sunan* from Abu Bakr likewise, and it has been narrated from Abu Hurayrah from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) what confirms this and agrees with the hadith of Wa’il ibn Hujr.
Before studying this matter, we will understand the answer to what he claimed regarding the narration from Abu Hurayrah that agrees with the hadith of Ibn Abi Shaybah. Here, one remains wondering. Ibn al-Qayyim says he was hesitating in his mind, perhaps the hadith is reversed, and he did not dare to be certain of this claim until he found Ibn Abi Shaybah narrating the hadith with the wording that was in his mind: . He presents its chain, saying Ibn Abi Shaybah said: "Muhammad ibn Fudayl narrated to me from ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa‘id from his grandfather from Abu Hurayrah." We need to see who this ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa‘id is. This ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa‘id has been accused of lying. And now, in the previous manner of abbreviation, we can see what Ibn Hajar said? This ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa‘id is: "‘Abd Allah ibn Sa‘id ibn Abi Sa‘id al-Maqburi, and he is from Madinah. ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa‘id ibn Abi Sa‘id al-Maqburi, Abu ‘Abbad al-Laythi, the client of Madinah, is abandoned." This is what Ibn Hajar says about him: "Abandoned." Let us see, for example, what al-Dhahabi says? He is approximately a contemporary of Ibn al-Qayyim and his peer. ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa‘id [The Shaykh : searching in the book ] is not coming here, do you know? "‘Abd Allah ibn Sa‘id ibn Abi Sa‘id al-Maqburi, from his father, they abandoned him." Likewise, al-Dhahabi says this.
So, this hadith that he relied on previously, thinking that perhaps the hadith is reversed, it is more appropriate to say that this is the reversed one; because the one who narrated it is abandoned; meaning extremely weak. If he narrated a hadith with no defect whatsoever, his hadith is not used as evidence and is thrown aside; because he is accused. And it is perhaps also advisable that you verify the seriousness of this man, such that it is no longer valid to rely on him in a claim of reversal. Details of some of the words the Imams said about this man:
Abu Qudamah said about Yahya ibn Sa‘id: "I sat with him in a session and I knew in it—meaning lying—'I sat with him in a session'; meaning he attended his session for listening to hadith, and lying became apparent to him from his hadiths. Abu Talib said about Ahmad—Imam Ahmad—he said: "His hadith is denounced, his hadith is abandoned." And likewise, ‘Amr ibn ‘Ali said about Ibn Ma‘in: "Weak." The two narrations are of no value. He also says: "His hadith is not written." And Abu Zur‘ah said: "Weak in hadith, nothing is established from him." And al-Bukhari said: "They abandoned him." And al-Nasa‘i said: "He is not trustworthy, Yahya and ‘Abd al-Rahman abandoned him." And al-Hakim Abu Ahmad said: "His hadith is gone." And Ibn ‘Adi said: "And most of what he narrates, the weakness upon him is clear." Al-Barqi, Ya‘qub, and Dawud al-Sajji weakened him. And al-Daraqutni said: "Abandoned, his hadith is gone." And Ibn Hibban said: "He used to reverse the reports." Look, this is a core argument, meaning, Ibn Hibban says: "He used to reverse the reports until it precedes to the heart that he is intentional in doing so." So how is it permissible to claim the reversal of a hadith from trustworthy narrators because of the narration of this abandoned man who is accused of lying?!
He said: "And it has been narrated from Abu Hurayrah what confirms this and agrees with the hadith of Wa’il ibn Hujr. Ibn Abi Dawud said: Yusuf ibn ‘Adi narrated to us, Fudayl narrated to us—perhaps there is an error here, Muhammad ibn Fudayl—from ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa‘id—the same man your companion just mentioned—from ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa‘id from his grandfather from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to, when he prostrated, begin with his knees before his hands." What is your opinion now? He is using as evidence the same weak man who narrated the first hadith reversed, contrary to the narration of the trustworthy one. He also narrated it reversed from another aspect. The hadith is from his saying (peace be upon him), so he reversed it and made it from his action.
Then he said: "And Ibn Khuzaymah narrated in his *Sahih* from the hadith of Mus‘ab ibn Sa‘ad from his father, he said: We used to place our hands before our knees, and we were commanded to place our knees before our hands. And on this basis, if the hadith of Abu Hurayrah is preserved"—meaning the verbal hadith: —he said: "If the hadith of Abu Hurayrah is preserved, then it is abrogated, and this is the method of the author of *al-Mughni* and others. But the hadith has two defects, one of which is: What hadith? The hadith of Ibn Khuzaymah that he relied on in claiming the abrogation of the correct hadith of Abu Hurayrah. He is adding to its condition, saying: It has two defects; meaning the hadith with its wording: We used to place our hands before our knees; then we were commanded to place our knees before our hands; he says: "It has two defects, one of which is that it is from the narration of Yahya ibn Salama ibn Kuhayl, and he is not one whose hadith is used as evidence. And al-Nasa‘i said: 'Abandoned.' And Ibn Hibban said: 'His hadith is extremely denounced, it is not used as evidence.' And Ibn Ma‘in said: 'He is of no value.'"
So, if we want to summarize these words, this hadith is extremely weak. The hadith that they used to place their hands before their knees and then were commanded to do the opposite, this hadith is extremely weak by the testimony of the words of the Imams that the same author transmitted. This is the first defect.
The second defect—and it is much more important—is that the preserved version of the narration of Mus‘ab ibn Sa‘ad from his father is only the story of the application, and the saying of Sa‘ad: "We used to place this, so we were commanded to place our hands on the knees." This is the preserved, correct hadith, and it is narrated in *Sahih Muslim*. Ibn Mas‘ud (may Allah be pleased with him) used to hold that the one who bows does not place his hands on his knees, but rather he applies his palms together like this and then inserts them between his thighs. This is the application, and he was strict in adhering to this application.
With Mus‘ab, who is the son of Sa‘ad, he was praying one day next to ‘Abd Allah ibn Mas‘ud. So when Ibn Mas‘ud bowed, he applied his hands, and his companion Mus‘ab next to him took hold of the knees. So Ibn Mas‘ud did nothing but untie his hands from his knees, and applied them for him, and "pushed" them for him—using the Shami expression—between his thighs.
The man knew the standing of Ibn Mas'ud; so it became his firm conviction that this was the year in which the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) left his Companions, and he responded to him. This took place in Kufa, in the town where Ibn Mas'ud was, and then he returned to Madinah, where his father Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas was, one of the ten promised Paradise. He related to him what Ibn Mas'ud had done to him, and Sa'd (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "My brother Ibn Mas'ud spoke the truth. We used to do that, and then we were commanded to place the knees [on the ground]." Ibn al-Qayyim says—and this is a sign of his fairness, of course—that the preserved hadith from al-Tabi'i Mus'ab ibn Sa'd, from his father the Companion, has no connection to the issue of abrogating the placement of the hands in prostration by placing the knees [instead]; rather, this hadith is related to the application [of the ruling]. That narrator, who is abandoned and extremely weak, either deliberately inverted this hadith as well, or due to his severe poor memory, the matter became confused for him. Instead of narrating the story of the application, he narrated something that does not exist: that they used to place their hands in prostration, and then they were commanded to place the knees before the hands.
So Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him), in this... the people in it, and he clarified that it is not permissible to rely on it due to the extreme weakness of its narrator first, and because the preserved, authentic hadith is only in the story of the application, not in the story of descending into prostration.
He said: "As for the statement of the author of al-Mughni: 'From Abu Sa'id, he said: We used to place the hands before the knees, and then we were commanded to place the knees before the hands'; this is, Allah knows best, a mistake in the name, and it is actually from Sa'd. And it is also a mistake in the text, as mentioned before, and it is only in the story of the application."
...
I see that we should suffice for now, as more than an hour has passed since we began, and we will complete the research, if Allah wills, in the next session. It will likely not take much time so that we can devote ourselves to answering the remaining questions or some of them, if Allah wills. Therefore, we conclude this session with this amount, and praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds.