The Response to Those Who Deny the Prescribed Nature of Two Rak'ahs in the Mosque upon Entering the Town One Is Traveling To, and Likewise upon Returning to One's Own Town

The questioner : ... in his town, is it prescribed for him to go to the mosque and pray two rak'ahs?

The Shaykh : How could it not be? That is a recommended practice (sunnah).

The questioner : But some of them, O Shaykh, speak about this matter.

The Shaykh : Speak about it?

The questioner : They speak about this matter.

The Shaykh : I know, I know this matter. There is a difference between speaking about it and speaking to it.

The questioner : And from him.

The Shaykh : No, if we clarify, speaking about it and to it and concerning it, versus speaking about it. So you mean about it?

The questioner : Yes, that is what I mean.

The Shaykh : Okay ... what do they say?

The questioner : The implication of their words is that this matter is not prescribed, but a hadith, O Shaykh, has been reported about it.

The Shaykh : My brother, may Allah bless you.

The questioner: And in you, if Allah wills.

The Shaykh : You must have heard the poet's saying. Of course, this is said to an absent person, not to a present one, because it is heavy: "If every dog that barks I were to throw a stone at it," I have forgotten the second line, but the meaning is that the value of every stone became a dinar.

The questioner : May Allah forgive you, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Why should Allah forgive me? That is said in the case of a mistake.

The questioner : Yes, it is said in the case of a mistake.

The Shaykh : Ah, I did not make a mistake.

The questioner : Do you not want forgiveness from Allah, O Shaykh?

The Shaykh : No, I want forgiveness and pardon, but do you not feel with me that every occasion has its appropriate speech? For example, if a man says a wrong word and his opponent says to him, "May Allah guide you," and he does not believe he made a mistake, he says to him, "Why do you say to me, 'May Allah guide you'?" Is it correct for him to say, "Do you not want Allah to guide you?"

The questioner : No, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : This is like that, ...

The questioner : On this basis, O Shaykh, are the two rak'ahs prescribed?

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.
Abu Layla : And leaving as well, O our Shaykh?

The questioner : Does he not pray them in his house?

The Shaykh : No, he does not pray them in the house. As for the one arriving, he prays them in the mosque.

The Shaykh : Ah, what did you find?
Al-Halabi : O our Shaykh, there is a narration here, but it seems the Imam refers to the chain of narration that preceded it, which is the chain of the hadith of Abu Hurayrah via 'Abd al-'Aziz al-Darawardi from Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah from Abu al-Zinad from al-A'raj. Is it the hadith of the prostration ...?

The Shaykh : How did you say al-Darawardi? How did you say 'Abd al-'Aziz? What?
Al-Halabi : Ibn Muhammad, is he not al-Darawardi?

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.
Al-Halabi : Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah ibn al-Hasan narrated to us from Abu al-Zinad from al-A'raj from Abu Hurayrah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: And then he brought two chains of narration from "Muhammad said": When the Imam says, "May Allah hear from those who praise Him," the one behind him says, "May Allah hear from those who praise Him. O Allah, our Lord, to You belongs all praise."

The Shaykh : Who is Muhammad?
Al-Halabi : Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah ibn al-Hasan, the narrator from Abu al-Zinad from al-A'raj.

The Shaykh : This could be al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah, is that not so?
Al-Halabi : He is the well-known one, and Allah knows best.

The questioner : From Abu al-Zinad from Abu Hurayrah, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Give me the book now.

The questioner : Al-Mubarakfuri mentioned it like this. We were with this wording, and he referred me to al-Daraqutni, saying it is from the hadith of Abu Hurayrah. So I went back and found this, but I do not know ... No, I went back to al-Daraqutni and found this, and al-Mubarakfuri says ...

The Shaykh : What did you say, O 'Abd Allah, you?

The questioner : Yes, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : What did you say regarding al-Mubarakfuri?

The questioner : Al-Mubarakfuri says that the Companions used to say, and he is quoting from Abu Hurayrah in his hadith, and their evidence is the hadith of Abu Hurayrah that he used to say: "We used to say when the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: We would say: 'May Allah hear from those who praise Him. Our Lord, to You belongs all praise.'" And he referred me to al-Daraqutni. When I went back to al-Daraqutni, I found this hadith of Abu Hurayrah.

The Shaykh : Did al-Mubarakfuri refer to al-Daraqutni in this text?

The questioner : Yes, exactly.

The Shaykh : Al-Daraqutni is not here. Did you search in other places?

The questioner : Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi.

The Shaykh : In other places in the Sunan of al-Daraqutni?

The questioner : I searched in al-Daraqutni, meaning I turned through more than one place and did not find anything other than this.

The Shaykh : This is not the hadith from Abu Hurayrah. This is from Muhammad ...

The questioner : But the chain of narration itself, perhaps al-Daraqutni says with his chain in the hadith.

The Shaykh : Yes, al-Daraqutni says with his chain in the hadith.

The Shaykh : Yes, al-Daraqutni. You read with 'Ali, what does he say? After he narrates the hadith from Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah ibn al-Hasan from Abu al-Zinad from al-A'raj from Abu Hurayrah, marfu': Then from the same path with the same hadith, then from another path from Ibn 'Awn, he said: "Muhammad said." Here, Muhammad is not named, but it appears from the first two chains of narration that he is Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah ibn al-Hasan, who is described as al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah. However, to be sure, we should return to the biography of Ibn 'Awn and the biography of the Muhammad from whom Ibn 'Awn narrated, to confirm whether Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah ibn al-Hasan narrated to Ibn 'Awn? In that case ...
Al-Halabi : O our Shaykh, 'Abd Allah ibn 'Awn ibn Artaban.

The Shaykh : Yes, in that case we confirm that the Muhammad in the third chain of narration is the Muhammad mentioned in the chain before it and the one before that. In that case, the hadith is munqati' (disconnected), disconnected, not mursal (missing the Companion link), meaning it is mawquf (stopping at a Companion) not on the Companion, but on someone below him, either a Tabi'i or a Tabi' al-Tabi'in. And that is the apparent case here, because I do not think Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah ibn al-Hasan was a Tabi'i.
Al-Halabi : Here, in the biography of 'Abd Allah ibn 'Awn, his narration from Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Aswad al-Zuhri and from Muhammad ibn Sirin is mentioned ... and from Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Aswad al-Zuhri.

The Shaykh : Ah, al-Zuhri, yes. It appears this must be Muhammad ibn Sirin; because when he is mentioned without a name, he is meant. So initially, we say, and not finally; because research and verification require expanding on the subject. Initially, we say here two things. The first thing is that the Muhammad mentioned in the chain of narration here, number five, is not Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah ibn al-Hasan. It is not him.

The questioner : Because he did not hear from him?

The Shaykh : No, it is not the issue of not hearing. No, yes, do you mean 'Abd Allah ibn 'Awn?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Ah, but we do not say he did not hear, because negation, my brother, negation is the hardest thing for a person to resort to, because the scholars say: "The absence of knowledge of a thing does not necessitate knowledge of its absence." So the scholars and the people of induction and thorough investigation did not say that 'Abd Allah ibn 'Awn did not hear from Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah ibn al-Hasan. Yes, they did not negate this so that we would follow them. But they said he heard from Muhammad ibn Sirin and Muhammad ibn al-Aswad al-Zuhri. They said he heard from this one and this one, so they did not negate that he heard from Muhammad. Is that clear?

The questioner : Is that clear?

The Shaykh : But we do not say without knowledge, neither affirming nor negating. We speak within the limits of what is before us. What is before us is that this Muhammad is not named. So look, who is this unnamed Muhammad? If we look at al-Daraqutni's method of context for the first hadith from the path of Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, it suggests to the mind that he is the one mentioned in the two chains of narration here. But not everything that suggests itself to the mind is correct. Ah, so to verify what was suggested to the mind, or whether it is closer to the truth or to error? We saw that we should return to this 'Abd Allah ibn 'Awn who narrated from the Muhammad who was not named. So al-Mustaw'ib for men, teachers and students, which is al-Hafiz al-Mizzi (may Allah have mercy on him), mentioned that he narrated from so-and-so and so-and-so. The Muhammads are not among them, the one who is al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah. So after looking here, there is hesitation between this being Ibn al-Aswad al-Zuhri and this being Ibn Sirin the Tabi'i. In that case, this is the closest; because the fame of Ibn Sirin means he is much more famous than the other al-Zuhri. So in conclusion, it appears that al-Mubarakfuri's attribution to al-Daraqutni that they used to do such-and-such is an error, if we finish exhausting al-Daraqutni from all the places where that hadith is supposed to be mentioned.
Al-Halabi : We saw something new, O our teacher.

The Shaykh : Bring it, let's see.
Al-Halabi : Here, the Imam al-Daraqutni, in the chapter mentioning the abrogation of the application and the command to take the reins, says: Abu Talib al-Hafiz Ahmad ibn Nasr narrated to us, Ahmad ibn 'Amir al-Dimashqi narrated to us, Abu Zur'ah 'Abd al-Rahman ibn 'Amr, and he is al-Razi. O our Shaykh, ah, is this not al-Dimashqi? Al-Razi, of course.

The Shaykh : No, I think you have now reached the Tabi'un. What is after that?
Al-Halabi : Then he narrated to us Yahya ibn 'Amr ibn 'Umarah ibn Rashi, other than Ibn Jarir there, who said: I heard 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Thabit, or Thabit ibn Thuban, say: 'Abd Allah ibn al-Fadl narrated to me from al-A'raj from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: . After that, he traced another chain; why did our Shaykh mention Abu Zur'ah? Because it is the point where the two chains meet later on. What did he say? Abu Talib al-Hafiz also narrated to us, and Yazid ibn Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Samad narrated to us; here the two chains differ, now the two chains meet each other. Yahya ibn 'Amr ibn 'Umarah narrated to us, I heard Ibn Thabit ibn Thuban say: 'Abd Allah ibn al-Fadl narrated to me from al-A'raj from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: . This is the preserved version with this chain, and Allah knows best.

The Shaykh : What was the first wording, then?
Al-Halabi : .

The Shaykh : Here it is the opposite, the second narration.
Al-Halabi : Here it says: O Allah, our Lord, to You belongs all praise.

The Shaykh : Yes, and you, this is the hadith you mentioned.

The questioner : The one al-Mubarakpuri intends?

The Shaykh : Yes,

The questioner : By Allah, O Shaykh...

The Shaykh : Is this what he intends?
Al-Halabi : If you look at the Musnads, limiting yourself to the narrations of Abu Hurayrah, this chapter cannot be found except in these. So I looked at all of them, and there is nothing other than these two narrations, my teacher.

Another questioner : Volume five of al-Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi.

The Shaykh : Al-Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Al-Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi is in the room there; I have the Indian edition of volume five; where exactly?

The questioner : In what he says after bowing.

The Shaykh : No, because it is difficult to search here; in any case, we are now reaching something.

The questioner : The text is before us.

The Shaykh : Allah has given us the book.

The questioner : This is the hadith of Abu Hurayrah, O Shaykh.
Al-Halabi : I, O my Shaykh, want to see al-Tuhfat al-Ashraf with the same chain, what do you think?

The Shaykh : Yes, please go ahead.
Abu Layla : If possible, we can re-record, because the recorder was off. May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : We will redo it, meaning it is in the same state as the leader...
Al-Halabi : Our Shaykh, Abu Ahmad is present.

The Shaykh : Yes, he has the right to that.
Abu Layla : May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : Something has become clear to you now, and I hope that neither you nor your companion will forget it, if Allah wills, which is precision in scientific research, which most writers of the present age lack. And when they lack that, speed in deciding sensitive and precise scientific issues takes its place, and they fall into many errors. When we saw the narration of Ibn 'Unayn from Muhammad and the previous discussion took place, and we do not repeat it, we only circled around it, we should have been certain: who is this Muhammad? Is he the one in the two chains before him? Or is he another person? After referring to the biography of Ibn 'Unayn, who is named 'Abd Allah, it appeared to us that he narrates from Muhammad ibn Sirin and from Ibn al-Aswad al-Zuhri, and does not narrate from al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah. But finally, and here is the point, and here is the crux of the matter as they say, I said: we say this before we continue the research in Sunan al-Daraqutni, for perhaps the hadith exists in another place. So it is not permissible for us to err regarding al-Mubarakpuri when he attributed the text you started asking about to al-Daraqutni, and with this quick review we found only the athar from Muhammad. So it is not permissible for us to rush and say al-Mubarakpuri erred, al-Albani erred, and so on.
Al-Halabi: Allahu Akbar.

The Shaykh : Slow down, what is required? Comprehending the subject from all its aspects. This is the observation I wanted to draw attention to, to be a cause for focusing on scientific research with every student who seeks knowledge.

The questioner : As Imam Ahmad said: "And what does he know? Perhaps the people have differed."

The Shaykh: Yes.
Al-Halabi : On an occasion other than this.

The Shaykh : We return to this hadith that is before us. Al-Daraqutni mentioned for it two contradictory narrations. The first narration says: , meaning as the Imam says; and the second narration says: , and he says this is the preserved one. What should we understand by such a phrase as "this is the preserved one," or in what way should we understand it? It appears at first glance that he means that the two narrations hinge on 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Thabit ibn Thuban, and that the one who narrated the first narration from him differs from the one who narrated the other. The one who narrated the first narration from Ibn Thuban is here Abu al-Khattab, named Yahya ibn 'Amr ibn 'Umarah ibn Rashi, etc., who narrated the second narration here. He is the same in the second narration, but the narrators from him differed. The narrator from Abu al-Khattab in the first narration is Abu Zur'ah, 'Abd al-Rahman ibn 'Amr. He is a trustworthy Imam who does not need research, unlike the second narration, whose narrator is Yazid ibn Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Samad. I do not recall in my mind, as I recall the biography of Abu Zur'ah, that we are in need of a review. What is the value of Yazid ibn Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Samad in the narration generally, and then what is the value of this narration of Yazid specifically in case of contradiction? Does he deserve that his narration be preferred over the narration of Abu Zur'ah, or is the opposite the correct one?

The questioner : And it is the preserved one.

The Shaykh : And he said about the narration of Yazid, whose biography we are not currently recalling, do you recall anything? Look at al-Taqrib, even if only approximately?

The questioner : Excuse me, O Shaykh, al-Daraqutni, Abu 'Umar, says about the narration of Abu Zur'ah, and not...?

The Shaykh : No, Yazid.

The questioner : He says it is more preserved than the narration of Abu Zur'ah.

The Shaykh : He says it is the preserved one.
Al-Halabi : Yazid ibn?

The Shaykh : Yazid ibn 'Abd al-Samad, Yazid ibn Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Samad.
Al-Halabi : Trustworthy, from the eleventh generation.

The Shaykh : Look at the difference now between the two narrators.
Al-Halabi : Abu Zur'ah al-Dimashqi, and not al-Razi, 'Abd al-Rahman ibn 'Amr ibn 'Abd Allah, trustworthy, memorizer, author. Abu Zur'ah al-Dimashqi, our Shaykh, both are from the same generation, the eleventh.

The Shaykh : Both of them narrated from one person, that is not the point. The point is which one is more trustworthy?
Al-Halabi : There is no doubt.

The Shaykh : Is it clear to you now which one is more trustworthy?

The questioner : Al-Dimashqi, Abu Zur'ah.

The Shaykh : And not Yazid ibn Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Samad.

The questioner : Trustworthy.

The Shaykh : Trustworthy. How does al-Daraqutni then say about his narration that this is the preserved one?
Al-Halabi : O my Shaykh, something came to my mind, which is why I researched in al-Tuhfat al-Ashraf that this hadith might be narrated in the Six Books, and therefore he said "the preserved one" not just for the sake of this narrator, but because the original narration is in the Six Books. So these narrators agreed with the narrators of the hadith, and I found that the chain of 'Abd Allah ibn al-Fadl from al-A'raj from Abu Hurayrah does not exist at all in them from this path. Perhaps the research also confirms this, our teacher?

The Shaykh : But let us understand exactly what came to your mind? What did you think was possible, and then you did not find it?
Al-Halabi : What came to my mind as a possibility is that there might be supporting narrators above Yazid, meaning above al-A'raj, 'Abd Allah ibn al-Fadl. So I researched the chain of 'Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Fadl from al-A'raj from Abu Hurayrah, and I did not find it at all...

The Shaykh : This is certainly not present in these details; but the saying of the Messenger: , this is present in the Sahih.
Al-Halabi : Regarding the chain, O Shaykh, I mean I researched the chain, not the text.

The Shaykh : Ah, the chain.

The questioner : Ah, my research was on the chain, not the text. When I returned to al-Tuhfa, I did not find it at all, so this is another chain that differs from the other chains you mentioned, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Well, if your intention is the chain, what is the benefit?
Al-Halabi : Supporting the text.

The Shaykh : You are saying your research was on the chain?
Al-Halabi : The chain itself, O Shaykh, I mean, the chain itself and the text itself.

The Shaykh : Now the correctness of the phrase, this is it.
Al-Halabi : Yes, this is what is intended, even if the expression...

The Shaykh : Well, my master, now the soul is not at peace with this preference that Imam al-Daraqutni leaned toward; rather, the opposite is the correct one; but this is said only if the chain of the hadith from above these two who differed, Abu Zur'ah and Yazid, are all trustworthy. In that case, the difference remains between the trustworthy memorizer and the trustworthy one. Obviously, we say the narration of the trustworthy memorizer is preferred over the trustworthy one. But what is the question about 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Thabit ibn Thuban?
Al-Halabi : You always speak well of the hadith, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : How do I know? But so that the brothers hear, there is weakness in it for me.
Al-Halabi : 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Thabit ibn Thuban is trustworthy but makes mistakes.

The Shaykh : The error here, which led Imam al-Daraqutni to prefer one narration over another, is his view that this narrator makes mistakes. In reality, this point concerns the science of hadith. Often, what drives a scholar to prefer one narration over another is something external to the subject of the chain and text, such as jurisprudence and knowledge, which is fixed in the memory of the one making the preference. So, in the mind of Imam al-Daraqutni, saturated as he was with hadith, the hadith I mentioned earlier, , appears to support those who say the follower’s duty is to say, “Our Lord, to You belongs all praise.” Now, if he has a narration from a person in his memory, he sometimes narrates that the follower should say what the imam said, and sometimes he narrates that the follower should say something different from what the imam said, namely: “Our Lord, to You belongs all praise.” If this is the correct and preserved version, he ruled that this text is more memorized than the first. This ruling did not stem from looking at the narrator from Ibn Thawban, but from his look at other hadiths, including . In that case, the issue remains open to criticism. Why? Because the jurisprudential basis we are relying on in this hypothetical scenario—we are discussing hypotheticals, not judging al-Daraqutni—is all possibilities and theories that are subject to refutation. It is not necessary that his saying, peace and blessings be upon him, , means that you do not say, “Allah hears the one who praises Him.” It is not necessary that this is the intended meaning.

The questioner : Do we have the generality of ?

The Shaykh : No, I want to mention something new, different from that. So I say: why is it not necessary that this is the intended meaning? Because this hadith, which we imagined earlier that Imam al-Daraqutni was driven by his jurisprudence in it to this preference, can be criticized. It can be said: No, the hadith does not mean that the follower does not say, “Allah hears the one who praises Him.” The proof is that there is a hadith similar to the authentic hadith we mentioned earlier, , which resembles it, . Just as that hadith does not negate that the follower says, “Excuse me, I made a mistake, perhaps,” if the imam says, “Not those upon whom is Your anger,” and you say, “Ameen,” it does not negate that the imam says, “Ameen.” Do you understand?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : The apparent meaning of the hadith is a division between the imam and the follower. The imam says what? “Not the lost ones,” meaning he recites al-Fatihah. What does the follower say? “Ameen.” Well, does the imam not also say “Ameen”? We know that he does. But this division, on its apparent face, suggests that the imam does not say “Ameen.” And with this hadith, the Maliki school said, do you see why? Because they stopped at the apparent meaning of this division. But the reality is that when the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, , he intended, of course, to legislate from Allah, Mighty and Majestic, for the followers to say “Ameen.” He did not intend to legislate that the imam does not say “Ameen” and that the follower says “Ameen.” Rather, when the imam finishes saying, “Not the lost ones,” you say what? “Ameen.” And this came explicitly in the hadith of . In that case, we say: just as his saying, peace and blessings be upon him, , did not indicate that the imam does not say “Ameen,” so his saying, , does not mean that the follower does not say what the imam said, “Allah hears the one who praises Him.” So saying, “Say, ‘Our Lord, to You belongs all praise,’” does not mean that the follower does not say what the imam said. So the fair answer allows for this and allows for that. We return finally to the hadith of . In that case, we say: this hadith is not a text negating that the follower says, as the imam says, “Allah hears the one who praises Him.” I emphasized in this explanation that the correct view is to apply the generality of his saying, peace and blessings be upon him, . But what is the relation of this speech to the hadith we have in hand now, if Ibn Thawban has weakness in his memory, and every narrator from him is a proof, with a difference in the value of the proof for each? One is a trustworthy memorizer and the other is truthful, and the truthful one’s narration is a proof. So if we combine the two narrations and derive the jurisprudential result we derived earlier, and we say that Ibn Thawban intended to say: “So you say, ‘Allah hears the one who praises Him, Our Lord, to You belongs all praise,’” is that clear?

The questioner : Yes, meaning we establish both narrations?

The Shaykh : The two narrations, and we combine them.

The questioner : And we do not need to prefer one over the other.

Another questioner : Meaning we do this sometimes and that sometimes?

The Shaykh : You have done well.

The questioner : May Allah bless you and reward you.

Another questioner : We do this sometimes, O Shaykh, and that sometimes?

The Shaykh : No, we do not combine them.