Al-Halabi: The answer to the objection was mentioned in the speech, but we need a stronger answer to their objection if we discuss with them some of the issues.

Al-Halabi : The answer to the objection was mentioned in the speech, but we need a stronger answer to their objection if we discuss with them some of the issues. That is, the people of Tajwid, or so on, while acknowledging the basis of the science according to your detail, say: "This science was received by the later generations from the earlier ones, and generation from generation, so the basis is this reception; therefore, this reception is mass transmission (tawatur), and consequently, we are not required to provide evidence for every detail of this science?"

The Shaykh : Yes, in answer to this objection, we say: Establish the Throne, then erase, or...
Claims are not accepted unless they establish proofs; otherwise, their claimants are mere claimants.
This man al-Za'bi made this claim exactly in the aforementioned issue. When I researched the topic in the book of Ibn al-Jazari, I found that the reciters themselves differ. One of them, Abdullah ibn Kathir al-Makki, is one of the famous reciters upon whom one of the recitations revolves. He alone, among the other reciters, distinguished himself by saying the takbir (Allahu Akbar) after the surahs. This is explicitly stated in Ibn al-Jazari. So our friend al-Za'bi created a halo of words saying that this is a matter of mass transmission (tawatur) from later to earlier generations, and so on. And this mass transmission (tawatur) has two conditions: First, it is relative mass transmission (tawatur). Second, it does not meet the definition of a mass-transmitted report (khabar mutawatir) among the hadith scholars, because they require that the mass transmission (tawatur) not be broken in every link, in every century or era. If the mass transmission (tawatur) is broken, the report becomes a report with a limited chain (khabar ahad). And what we found in this recitation with the takbir, as I learned from the book *Akhabar Makkah* by al-Fakihani, and I studied the biography of Ibn Abi Umar at that time, who was the teacher of al-Fakihani, is that they sometimes did it and sometimes left it off. The leaving off continued until his era, and he was from whom? From the Makkan people. As for the other reciters, they had nothing in this regard. I found that Ibn Taymiyyah has a good fatwa in this regard. Subhan Allah, I found him cautious. It appears that he thought that explicitly weakening this hadith might cause a problem in his time. Because the question was: People gathered to complete the recitation of the Qur'an and were reading with the recitation of Ibn Kathir. Is it permissible for them to say the takbir after every surah, from *Al-Dhuha* and *An-Nazilat*? And is the hadith reported in that regard authentic and mass-transmitted (mutawatir)? So he fled...The Shaykh : Subhan Allah, from the explicit answer, first by saying it is authentic, let alone denying that it is mass-transmitted (mutawatir). But when you read the answer, you understand completely that he does not approve of the authenticity of the hadith, let alone its mass transmission (tawatur). But his answer was such that the general reciters did not understand it. Because what did he say? He said: "If they recite with the recitation of Ibn Kathir, then they have that." So al-Za'bi exploited this and said, in response to al-Akhdar, that this means Ibn Taymiyyah affirms the sunnah of the takbir. Do you see? Why? Because he did not explicitly deny it here; he said to them "they have that." But first, look at the precise answer of the scholar: he qualified it with the recitation of Ibn Kathir. If they are reciting the Qur'an with the recitation of Ibn Kathir, and they are at the short surahs, then they may say the takbir, because this imam from whom they received the recitation used to do so. But if they are not reciting with his recitation, it is better that they do not say the takbir; rather, it is the sunnah. Do you see? Here, understand explicitly: if the hadith were authentic for him, he would say "it is the sunnah" the other way around. Then what would he say? He would say: "Even if this hadith was narrated by Ibn Kathir with his chain from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), this would be in the time of... why? Because the other reciters could not have been unaware of such a sunnah and continue to leave it off, and the hadith is supposed to be authentic." This is the word of Ibn Taymiyyah. He gave the answer to the question in a way that truly contains precision and policy, without confrontation. And in reality, I do not find that strange; Ibn Taymiyyah was in a very intense atmosphere. Therefore, we appreciate his scholarly courage, which has these good effects in the present era. Otherwise, if he had been like others, his inner state would have said: "If it had not been for the tongue, he would have said: O people, follow the people."