Discussion of Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah's research on the issue of lowering oneself to prostration

The questioner : ... Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah regarding the matter of descending into prostration; where he stated in *Zad al-Ma'ad* that the correct view is placing the knees on the ground before the hands. I hope you will discuss ..., and peace be upon you?

The Shaykh : If not for the fact that this question has actually been repeated dozens of times, and if not for the abundance of trials with contradicting the correct Sunnah, we would not have devoted ourselves to answering the requestThe questioner : which is to discuss the evidence of Ibn al-Qayyim.
Ibn al-Qayyim wrote about four pages on this issue, and he elaborated greatly in it, as is his habit in many issues, but unfortunately, in this issue, he was far from the truth. I found an excuse for him in that; where he mentioned in the introduction of the book, and this is what he actually mentioned, and it alone is sufficient to indicate that this man is a scholar. But if he erred in some issues, and he composed the book while traveling, there is no surprise in him falling into such illusions which we will point out now, if Allah wills.
He says at the beginning of this issue: "And he (peace and blessings be upon him) used to place his knees before his hands, then his hands after them, then his forehead and nose." He said: "This is the correct report narrated by Shurayk from Asim ibn Kulayb from his father from Wa'il ibn Hujr: 'I saw the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) when he prostrated, he placed his knees before his hands, and when he rose, he raised his hands before his knees, and nothing was reported in his practice that contradicts this.'"
Here, in these few words, we observe two very strange matters:
The first point: He says: This is the correct view narrated by Shurayk with the chain he mentioned. This Shurayk is Shurayk ibn 'Abd Allah al-Qadi, and he is known among the scholars of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil (the critique and vindication of narrators) to be weak due to his poor memory. Of course, the time does not allow us to read to you the words of the imams regarding the criticism of this narrator, Shurayk, but we will suffice with two citations:
The first citation: It is that among those who extracted this hadith is the Hafiz Imam al-Daraqutni in his "Sunan." When he finished narrating its chain and text, he said: "And Shurayk is not strong." So the extractor of the hadith, or one of the extractors of the hadith, weakens this hadith and attributes its defect to the fact that this Shurayk is not strong in hadith.
Then another citation we quote directly from a book by one of the authors in whom a beginner in hadith has no doubt about his knowledge, let alone others, that he has a standing of truth in this science; namely, the science of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil (the critique and vindication of narrators). I mean by that the Hafiz Ahmad ibn Hajar al-Asqalani. So listen to his statement about him; he says: "He is truthful but makes many mistakes. His memory changed since he took up the judgeship in Kufa. He was a just, excellent, worshipper, and severe against the people of innovation." This is the biography of the Hafiz Ibn Hajar of Shurayk ibn Abdullah al-Qadi, the narrator of this hadith. So he gives him what he deserves of virtue in worship, righteousness, and the like—and the most important of that regarding hadith science is truthfulness; meaning: he does not lie. But he was overcome by his condition; so he made many mistakes, and his memory changed, meaning: it worsened when he took up the judgeship in Kufa. This is a natural, known matter; that every scholar who turned to a side in which he was strong, and conversely, weakened in the other sides from which he turned away.
So we are surprised by the statement of Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah that this is the correct view narrated by Shurayk, and Shurayk does not narrate authentic hadiths; because he has a weak memory. Therefore, al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi himself mentioned in the conclusion of the biography of this Shurayk in his book *Mizan al-I'tidal fi Naqd al-Rijal* (*The Scale of Moderation in the Critique of Men*), he said: "And Muslim narrated a supporting chain (mutaba'ah) for him"; meaning that Muslim did not rely on Shurayk as a proof due to his poor memory, but rather narrated from him only with a supporting chain or a corroborating narration from another. The word "mutaba'ah" alone is sufficient for one engaged in this science to know that the narrator is not relied upon for his hadith until someone comes who supports him or compares him in narrating the same hadith. And the reality here is that Shurayk was unique in narrating this hadith. This is the first point taken against Imam Ibn al-Qayyim in the previous statement.
And the second thing—and the last: his statement: "And nothing was reported in his practice that contradicts this." This is a slip of the pen due to the man's preoccupation, the issue of writing while traveling. Why? Because there is a hadith, I think he himself mentioned it, which is the hadith of Ibn Umar: "That the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to place his hands before his knees." He himself cited this hadith, and the discussion will come in its place, if Allah wills. So it is surprising that he said that it was not narrated, or "nothing was reported in his practice that contradicts this." Then Ibn al-Qayyim says, answering a question that arises in the mind of the student of his book: "As for the hadith of Abu Hurayrah, he raised it: ; he answers this hadith which is explicit in contradicting the hadith of Wa'il which Ibn al-Qayyim claimed was the correct one. It is opposed by the hadith of Abu Hurayrah raised to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and from his saying: ; meaning: he does not place his knees before his hands; because he (peace be upon him) said in the completion of the hadith: .
Listen to the answer of Ibn al-Qayyim; for in its beginning you feel its weakness. He says: "So the hadith—and Allah knows best—has an error from some of the narrators, for its beginning contradicts its end. For if he placed his hands before his knees, he has prostrated as a camel prostrates; for the camel only places its hands first." This is the doubt of all people, and it seems as if this doubt is not only inspired by the words of Ibn al-Qayyim; but it is a doubt that prevails over the majority of people who do not observe the camel when it lowers itself constantly and forever.
So let us discuss Ibn al-Qayyim in this claim; he says: "That the camel when it prostrates, when it kneels, only places its hands before its knees." I hope he means he places his knees.

The questioner : He says: "his hands."

The Shaykh : He says: "his hands." Yes, he said: "For its beginning contradicts its end, for if he places his hands before his knees - that is, the one praying - then he has prostrated like a camel prostrates, for the camel only places its hands first." He says: the camel places its hands first. So we remember the observed reality always and forever that the camel, like all four-legged animals, walks on four legs; so it is not conceivable that it be compared to a human, or that it be compared by a human. The human walks on two legs, whereas the camel walks on four. Therefore, his statement that the camel, when it prostrates, first places its hands, is here a leap, or an oversight; because we say: is the camel, when it walks, not placing its legs? Of course, no one says it is not placing its legs; it is placing its legs.
Is it walking while not having its hands placed? The answer is the same; it is walking with its hands and legs placed; so it walks on four.
So, to be aware of this error and the strange, wonderful thing, we must prepare to answer a very simple question, and yet most people are heedless of the correct answer to it. What is the first thing that touches the ground from its body when the camel kneels?
It is not correct to say "his hands," because his forelegs are positioned like his hind legs. So, what is the first part of the camel to touch the ground when it prostrates, when it kneels? The knees. It is not correct to say "the hands" as Ibn al-Qayyim said, that the first thing the camel does when it kneels is to place its hands. This is an error, because he has them placed permanently; from the day it falls from its mother's womb, it falls on four legs, it does not lean to the right or the left, then it walks like this, so it walks on four legs. How can it be said that the first thing it does when it kneels is to place its hands, when they are already placed? So the correct answer is: when the camel kneels, the first thing it places is... and we do not say "its knees" now, because here we are discussing a point from the author himself, and we will discuss it with him. Rather, we say: the first thing it places on the ground when it kneels is the joint in its forelegs, the joint in its forelegs. What is the name of this joint? The scholars of language, hadith, and the Prophetic biography are all in agreement that these two joints in the camel's forelegs are called knees. But the author does not accept this. So listen to his words, the entirety of his previous statement. He said: "And when the proponents of this view—meaning those who say regarding the second hadith that there is an error in it, which is the hadith of Abu Hurayrah: —what does Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) say? 'And when the proponents of this view knew that, they said: The camel's knees are in its forelegs, not in its hind legs, so when it kneels, it places its knees first; this is what is prohibited.'"
Indeed, Ibn al-Qayyim relates the opinion of the scholars of hadith and scholars of language and others from those we mentioned who say: the knees of the camel are in its hands; so when it prostrates, it places its knees first. This is what is prohibited. He refutes this claim from several angles, saying: And it is defective for several reasons:
One of them: That when the camel prostrates, it places its hands first, and its legs remain standing. So when it rises, it rises with its legs first, and its hands remain on the ground. And this is what the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited and did the opposite of. Here, the author Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) took another side to address the refutation of those who say placing the palms before the knees. Did he leave the topic of placing the palms before or after the knees? And he took another phenomenon which in reality needs illustration, so I will make room for Professor Ali ... let him show you the image that Ibn al-Qayyim means, and it is not applicable to those who say placing the hands before the knees; meaning Ibn al-Qayyim imagines that the indication of the hadith only means the prostration of a person who is completely incapacitated. How does the incapacitated person prostrate?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : So what happened to his rear? It became above his head, like that Ibn al-Qayyim imagines. Yes, this phenomenon resembles the prostration of the camel exactly, did you notice how? But this is a matter different from what we are discussing. So we can repel the doubt, the doubt of Ibn al-Qayyim; we say: it is not necessary that the rear of the prostrator be higher than his head. This is the thing that Ibn al-Qayyim denies, and with which he refutes the hadith, whereas we can combine the apparent meaning of the hadith: and reject this image that he is refuting, and we are rejecting it with him. Now he intends the prostration that we are applying.

The questioner : What is the reason...?

The Shaykh : I mean, the difference between us and those who prostrate on their knees is that there is no difference between us and them in that our rear ends up above our heads. Rather, the first thing we touch the ground with is our hands, instead of their touching it with their knees.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : And also Abu Muhammad, the prostration of the others... what do they do with the ground?

The questioner : The prostration of the others is like this...

The Shaykh : So this objection, I think, has become clear to you all; the objection of Ibn al-Qayyim is not applicable to the hadith, because he is imagining that it is necessary from placing the hands before the knees that he prostrate like this, his rear above his head. This is not necessary. All that is the case is that the prostrator, instead of receiving the ground with his knees and his health being affected by his prostration with a tremor like the tremor of a camel, especially if it is loaded with weights; instead of this phenomenon which is not befitting the calm and tranquility in prayer, this prostrator receives the ground with his palms, so that tremor and that shock with the ground are repelled at that time. So we do not differ with Ibn al-Qayyim and everyone who contradicts this authentic hadith, the hadith of Abu Hurayrah: We do not differ with him that it is not prescribed to prostrate such that his head is in the ground ... without his rear being above it. This is what we agree with him that it is not prescribed; because from another angle, there is a resemblance to the camel. But we say to him: what do you say about this posture that you saw; his rear did not rise above his head? And this is what Ibn al-Qayyim denies, he only received the ground with his palms. This is the explicit meaning of the hadith: ; because the camel receives the ground with its knees and it cannot do otherwise, whereas the human is as He (Glorified and Exalted is He) said, He created him in the best of forms; so he is able to act more than the animal. So he is able to prostrate on his knees, and he is able to prostrate on his hands. So the Messenger (may the prayers and peace of Allah be upon him) prohibited the one praying to resemble the camel by receiving the ground on or with his knees. So this is the answer to the difficulty or objection of Ibn al-Qayyim to those who said with the hadith of Abu Hurayrah: .
Then he says: "This is what the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited." We say: No, if the hadith was only and nothing else, it would have been possible to say with the demonstrative pronoun and the restriction, "This is what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited." He is saying: No, he clarified what he prohibited, so he said: . So what is prohibited? Placing the knees before the hands; because what is commanded is the opposite; placing the hands before the knees. So his statement "This is what is prohibited" is a refutation of the second part of the hadith; which is: . But the excuse of Ibn al-Qayyim in reality is that he says: there is a mistake in the hadith. In the completion of his speech, he says: the narrator intended to say: but he made a mistake and said: . This is the viewpoint of Ibn al-Qayyim when he says: "This is what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited," which is that he prostrates with his head lower than his waist. We say: the hadith is clear where it said: .
The Shaykh: Then he says: And the first thing to fall from him (meaning the Messenger, peace be upon him) to the ground was the closest, then the closest. And here, this exact wording is not correct, rather it is a summary of the hadith of Wa'il ibn Hujr which he mentioned earlier through Shurayk, and you have known its weakness. Then he added to that and said: And the first thing to rise from the ground was the highest, then the highest. This means he is rejecting another authentic hadith; which is: "The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to, when he rose from an odd number of his prayer, rise upright on his hands." Demonstrate the rising in the correct way, and the rising in the incorrect way...

The questioner : ... the last thing we lift from the ground are the hands ...

The Shaykh : This is based on the hadith of Wa'il ibn Hujr; this is the second image based on the hadith of Hujr in the weak one in which Shurayk was unique in narrating it. And here you see how the weak hadith contradicts the authentic hadiths, and not just one hadith. So the hadith of Shurayk has two ends:
The first end: relates to the manner of descending into prostration, and the other end relates to the manner of rising from prostration. So the hadith of Shurayk in its first end contradicted two hadiths, one of which Ibn al-Qayyim has mentioned so far; which is: .
The other end: from the hadith of Wa'il, it contradicts a hadith in *Sahih al-Bukhari*, which is the hadith of Malik ibn al-Huwayris that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to, when he rose in an odd number of his prayer, stand relying on his hands, whereas the hadith of Wa'il says: he stood relying on his knees and the tops of his feet ... his feet. So the hadith of Wa'il ibn Hujr in both of its ends contradicts authentic hadiths. Therefore, Ibn al-Qayyim says that he used to rise from the lower to the higher, which is contrary to the hadith of al-Bukhari. Then he said, to confirm and detail the hadith of Wa'il ibn Hujr: And he used to place his knees first, then his hands, then his forehead. And when he raised his head, first, then his hands, then his knees. And this is the opposite of the action of the camel.
Now we return to the opposite of the opposite. It becomes clear that the hadith of Malik ibn al-Huwayrith is what saves us from the similarity to the camel in its rising, and it is not as Ibn al-Qayyim and others think. Now we say: When the camel rises from the ground to a standing position, what part of its body does it rely on?

The questioner: On its knees.

The Shaykh: On its knees. So, you who are prostrating, if you rise relying on your knees, you are the one imitating the camel. But if you rise relying on your palms and hands, and then make your knees follow your hands, you have differed from the camel in a clear and obvious way.
And thus it becomes clear that the correct practical Sunnah never differs from the correct verbal Sunnah. So the hadith of Abu Hurayrah: The second part of the hadith of Wa'il differs from the hadith of Malik ibn al-Huwayrith. In fact, the second part of the hadith of Wa'il contains a similarity to the camel, just as the first part contains a similarity to the camel, because when the camel kneels down, it kneels on its knees, and when it rises, it rises on its knees. So, you who are praying, if you want to pray as the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) commanded you, your differing from the camel in both kneeling down and rising is achieved by relying on the hands, not the knees. This is the first aspect on which the author relied in refuting those who said that the camel's knees are in its front legs. Accordingly, one should prostrate on the hands, and you have known the answer in detail.
Then he said: "This is the opposite of the camel's action, and he (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) forbade imitating animals in the prayers. So he forbade kneeling like the camel, turning like the fox, spreading the legs like the cat, and squatting like the dog..." This is undoubtedly an accepted statement. But we still need to discuss Ibn al-Qayyim regarding whether the imitation of the camel that the Lawgiver forbade in more than one hadith is done by placing the hands before the knees, or the opposite? It has become clear that the opposite is the imitation. Placing the knees before the hands is the imitation. Placing the hands before the knees is a deviation from the Sunnah regarding the camel's kneeling, and rising on the hands is a deviation from the camel's rising, because it rises relying on its knees. This is the first aspect on which the author relied in refuting those who said that the camel's knees are in its front legs. Accordingly, one should prostrate on the hands, and you have known the answer in detail.
He says in the second aspect: "Their saying: 'The camel's knees are its hands' is a statement that makes no sense. This is from the words of the authors. Ibn al-Qayyim said: 'Their saying' (meaning those who adopted the hadith: , 'The camel's knees are in its hands' is a statement that makes no sense and is not known by the people of language.' This is a refuted statement. There is no need for anything more. Every one of you can consult the books of language under the root 'R-K-B' (knee). You will find the derivatives of the knee, and you will find there the explicit statement that the camel's knee is in its front legs, and likewise all four-legged animals have their knees in their front legs. This is the text of the books of language.
What Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him, and may Allah forgive us and him) says—that this meaning, i.e., that the camel's knees are in its front legs, is not known by the Arabic language—is one of his illusions. Then we have Arabic usages in the books of the authentic Sunnah that also refute Ibn al-Qayyim, not only from the perspective of relying on books of language, but also books of hadith and biography. For example, in the story of the Prophet's (may Allah's blessings and peace be upon him) migration from Medina to Mecca, and the pursuit of Suraqah ibn Malik of him (peace be upon him) on his horse, when Suraqah got close to them, it is said in "Sahih al-Bukhari": "The front legs of the horse sank to its knees." This is a hadith in "Sahih al-Bukhari," and a hadith in "Sahih al-Bukhari" is sufficient as proof, not only in the Shari'ah, but also in the Arabic language. So this is a text from the usages of the narrators of hadith, meaning from the Companions, the Tabi'un, and those after them, that they understood by their natural Arabic instinct that the horse's knees are in its front legs. Therefore, he said: "The front legs of the horse sank to its knees."
This is a usage, but it may be said that Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) did not recall this hadith when he said what he said, that the language does not know that the camel's knees are in its front legs. But we find in what he himself wrote a proof against him, and perhaps I can recall it quickly now...