What is the authenticity of the narration: "and he did not move it"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : No, the phrase "and he did not move it" regarding the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is not authentic.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Yes, the matter of this addition is strange.
The questioner : Shu'ayb al-Arna'ut says it is not authentic.
The Shaykh : This narration is reported in Sunan Abu Dawud. By the grace of Allah, I am among the people who know Sunan Abu Dawud best in this time, if I do not say: I am the one who knows it best, because I have been occupied with it for approximately years. This hadith is narrated by Abu Dawud through the route of Muhammad ibn 'Ujlan. Muhammad ibn 'Ujlan narrated from a man from the lineage of al-Zubayr ibn al-'Awwam named 'Amir ibn 'Abd Allah, with a report that he "saw the Messenger (peace be upon him) when he sat in the tashahhud raise his finger, and I saw him not moving it".
First: It appears to everyone who has practice in the science of hadith and the biographies of its narrators that Muhammad ibn 'Ujlan is spoken of regarding his memory, but the criticism is light such that his hadith does not descend to the level of weakness, but it does not rise to the level of authenticity; so it is hasan. Every hasan hadith is susceptible to fluctuation for the slightest reason, because it is hasan, not sahih, meaning there is something in his memory. What I observed and clarified in the Sahih of Abu Dawud is as follows:
First: Muhammad ibn 'Ujlan was contradicted by a group of trustworthy narrators in the narration of a hadith in Sahih Muslim and others. They all say: "The Messenger pointed" and they do not say: I saw him not moving it. The narration of "not moving it" reported in Sunan Abu Dawud becomes shadh or munkar, because the trustworthy narrator, let alone one who is below the level of trustworthiness, if he contradicts the trustworthy narrators, his hadith is shadh or munkar. This is the first point.
Second: Muhammad ibn 'Ujlan did not stand firm on the narration of the explicit negation. The hadith came through routes from a group of trustworthy narrators from him, in which he agrees with the other trustworthy narrators who followed him in narrating a hadith containing the negation of moving it. A hadith like this can never be hasan, let alone sahih, because if Muhammad ibn 'Ujlan were trustworthy and the trustworthy narrators contradicted him and did not mention the addition "not moving it," the phrase would be shadh. What is the case when he is not trustworthy, but rather below the level of trustworthiness? What is the case when he did not stand firm on this addition? The evidence is that he was inconsistent. One of the trustworthy narrators narrated from him with the addition "not moving it", and you find another narrated the hadith from him restricting it to the pointing without explicitly negating the moving. And there is no such thing as this except in this hadith absolutely.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : It supports it, yes. Therefore, the hadith is weak and is not cited as evidence absolutely.
He points with it and does not move it
يشير بها ولا يحركهاThe Shaykh : No, the phrase "and he did not move it" regarding the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is not authentic.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Yes, the matter of this addition is strange.
The questioner : Shu'ayb al-Arna'ut says it is not authentic.
The Shaykh : This narration is reported in Sunan Abu Dawud. By the grace of Allah, I am among the people who know Sunan Abu Dawud best in this time, if I do not say: I am the one who knows it best, because I have been occupied with it for approximately years. This hadith is narrated by Abu Dawud through the route of Muhammad ibn 'Ujlan. Muhammad ibn 'Ujlan narrated from a man from the lineage of al-Zubayr ibn al-'Awwam named 'Amir ibn 'Abd Allah, with a report that he "saw the Messenger (peace be upon him) when he sat in the tashahhud raise his finger, and I saw him not moving it".
First: It appears to everyone who has practice in the science of hadith and the biographies of its narrators that Muhammad ibn 'Ujlan is spoken of regarding his memory, but the criticism is light such that his hadith does not descend to the level of weakness, but it does not rise to the level of authenticity; so it is hasan. Every hasan hadith is susceptible to fluctuation for the slightest reason, because it is hasan, not sahih, meaning there is something in his memory. What I observed and clarified in the Sahih of Abu Dawud is as follows:
First: Muhammad ibn 'Ujlan was contradicted by a group of trustworthy narrators in the narration of a hadith in Sahih Muslim and others. They all say: "The Messenger pointed" and they do not say: I saw him not moving it. The narration of "not moving it" reported in Sunan Abu Dawud becomes shadh or munkar, because the trustworthy narrator, let alone one who is below the level of trustworthiness, if he contradicts the trustworthy narrators, his hadith is shadh or munkar. This is the first point.
Second: Muhammad ibn 'Ujlan did not stand firm on the narration of the explicit negation. The hadith came through routes from a group of trustworthy narrators from him, in which he agrees with the other trustworthy narrators who followed him in narrating a hadith containing the negation of moving it. A hadith like this can never be hasan, let alone sahih, because if Muhammad ibn 'Ujlan were trustworthy and the trustworthy narrators contradicted him and did not mention the addition "not moving it," the phrase would be shadh. What is the case when he is not trustworthy, but rather below the level of trustworthiness? What is the case when he did not stand firm on this addition? The evidence is that he was inconsistent. One of the trustworthy narrators narrated from him with the addition "not moving it", and you find another narrated the hadith from him restricting it to the pointing without explicitly negating the moving. And there is no such thing as this except in this hadith absolutely.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : It supports it, yes. Therefore, the hadith is weak and is not cited as evidence absolutely.