Is there evidence for placing the hands on the chest after rising from bowing?

The student : Regarding placing the hands on the chest, we say: We say Allahu Akbar and place the hands on the chest. Is this established from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)?

The Shaykh : There is nothing established, absolutely not.
The student : There is nothing established.

The Shaykh : Yes, the matter is actually precise, my brother. Its precision lies in the fact that the Shari'ah texts are divided into a general text and a specific text. This is understood by students of knowledge, like the abrogating and the abrogated, and the absolute and the restricted. This is part of the science of fiqh and usul al-fiqh... - Oh Allah - after this short introduction... There is no hadith from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) stating that when he raised his head from bowing, he placed his right hand over his left, like this hadith. It does not exist at all in the world. But our scholars who say that this placement is done, where did they take it from? Of course, it is not as they say in some countries that they took it from their father's house. No, they found a hadith, which is well-known in Sunan al-Nasa'i and others. But this hadith is not a specific text, meaning specific to this position. Because the text of the hadith says . "When he stood in prayer." Standing in prayer could be the first standing before bowing, or it could be the second standing after bowing. And from here comes the precision in the subject. Do you think this narrator, who is at the top, Wail ibn Hujr al-Yamani, or the one who narrated from him, who is Kalib, the father of 'Asim, or his son 'Asim? Because this is the only path; it has no other path. You see, when this narrator or that one or that one said, "The Messenger of Allah, when he stood in prayer," is this in general, meaning in the first standing and the second standing? This is the point of dispute. Clear? This is the point of dispute. Our scholars who say that the placement is done say it is a general text. A general text means it includes both standings. And I agree with them in this, as an Arabic style, . But the Companions who saw him and transmitted the description of his prayer to us, none of them mentioned that he (peace and blessings be upon him) placed his hands after bowing. Meanwhile, the placement before bowing is mentioned explicitly. And in Sahih Muslim and Musnad Imam Ahmad, indeed in Musnad Imam Ahmad and others, a researcher and thinker cannot say that this generality, which we said they use as evidence, is not intended. The narrator of the hadith, who is Wail or someone below him, does not intend this generality. Why? Because in Sahih Muslim, Wail ibn Hujr described the prayer of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him): "He said the takbir and folded his arms, placing his right hand over his left, then he recited, then he bowed and raised his hands as he did in the first time, meaning the takbir of intention. Then he bowed, then he raised his head and said, 'Allahu ma' min hamidah,' and raised his hands likewise, then he prostrated." And he continues describing the prayer. Here, he mentioned raising the hands three times: the first time at the takbir of intention, the second time at bowing, and the third time at raising the head from bowing. And in each of the second and third times, he says "likewise," meaning as he raised them in the takbir of intention, the first raising. So why does he not say "then he placed them likewise"? He does not mention it. That is, when he brings the detailed hadith, when he described the prayer of the Messenger, he repeated raising the hands but did not repeat the placement twice: the first time before bowing and the second time after bowing. From here, we say that that hadith which gave us the general meaning and included the second placement, we say this hadith was excerpted from the full context, which is in Musnad Imam Ahmad and similar to it in Sahih Muslim. When it was detailed regarding what came before and after it, it gave the most meaning: the meaning is the second placement. But when we see this phrase in the long, detailed hadith, there is only one placement, which is the first standing. This is one thing. The second thing is a very precise and important rule from the fiqh perspective, which is: "Every general text upon which the practice of the Salaf has not been carried out," or in other words, "Every general text, and the general text includes parts; if one of these parts that falls under the general text has not been acted upon by the Salaf, this general text is not used as evidence to establish the practice of this part." Because the Salaf did not act upon it. What does this mean? There are many examples to clarify this example. We say now . A general text that includes the placement in the second standing. But in light of the second rule I mentioned, that it is a part of the parts of the general text that has not been acted upon and is not acted upon. Now we say this text is general. Our previous answer was excerpted from the long, detailed text. Now we must return to this detail. We say this is a general text, but a general text that contains a part that has not been acted upon is not permissible to act upon unless the Salaf acted upon it. Do you have a text from the righteous Salaf, from the Companions, the Tabi'un, and the generation after the Tabi'un, which includes an Imam from the four followed Imams of the Muslims, that one of them said the second placement or performed the second placement? There is absolutely no existence of such a thing. So how can an Imam from the Imams of the Muslims not say it, and then someone comes at the end of time and says that this text is general? Give an example now, which is as they say, putting the dots on the letters. Sometimes you find in manuscripts a word without dotting, they say without i'jam, and it is "Yazid," for example. Yazid has two dots below and one dot above the ra. You read Yazid, but sometimes we see it undotted, meaning it has no two dots below and no dot above. It is possible then that you read "Bayrid" instead of "Yazid." It is possible you read "Bayrid." When is the problem resolved? When we put the dots, then we put two dots below and one dot above, and we read Yazid. And when we put a dot on the lower one, it becomes Bayrid. So I am now saying, like putting the dots on the letters, as an example, he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: . This hadith is agreed upon as authentic. You see with me now that this hadith, in terms of its wording, is general: congregational prayer. Now we will give an example. We entered the mosque at the time of Zuhr, for example. Each person went to a corner wanting to pray the rawatib. One of the group had an idea and said, "Why are you scattering like sheep without a shepherd? Come, let us pray in congregation. Why are you praying individually when the Messenger said . And then in a hadith . If some of us used this hadith as evidence against us, and for an action like this, which is that we pray the rawatib sunnahs on the basis of an authentic hadith, what is our response to them? The previous rule: every general text that includes a part, attribute, or image upon which the practice of the Salaf has not been carried out, the ruling of this part is not taken from this general text. Because if this ruling was understood from the hadith, they would have applied it. This is what I wanted to clarify, and the example I expressed as putting the dots on the letters. So congregational prayer, like "when he stood in prayer," congregational prayer includes every congregation, including the congregation of sunnahs. Why are we now agreed - and praise be to Allah - that this congregation is not prescribed? We do not have a text "Do not pray in congregation," and we do not have a text "Do not place your hands in the second standing." But we have a text like this, and we know for certain that the Salaf did not pray this congregation that I described just now. From here, we say this authentic hadith does not obligate this branch, this part. Because if it had been good, they would have preceded us to it. Likewise, this second placement falls under the generality of this hadith. But it has not been acted upon, as we mentioned just now, not by the Companions, not by the Tabi'un, and not by an Imam from the Imams of the Muslims. And the practice of the Muslims has been like this in all centuries: they do not place their hands except in the first standing. So now, I do not see it correct to come to this general text and say that it indicates the second placement as well, the second standing. While we say this is like that. That is, if someone said, "Come, let us pray in congregation, it is better than praying individually," we would say we need from you what supports you from the practice of the Salaf in this understanding that you understood, otherwise we are in no need of it. This is the summary of what I have on this matter.