The Prophet’s Prayer Footnotes1

The Prophet’s Prayer (SAWS) Chapter 1 Footnotes

[1]Soorah an-Nahl, 16:44

[2]Bukhaari & Muslim - it will later follow in full.

[3]Bukhaari & Ahmad.

[4]Maalik, Abu Daawood, Nasaa’i, & Ibn Hibbaan. A saheeh hadeeth, declared saheeh by several Imaams. I have given its takhreej in Saheeh Abi Daawood (451, 1276).

[5]Saheeh - collected by Ibn al-Mubaarak in az-Zuhd (10/21/1- 2), Abu Daawood & Nasaa’i with a good sanad; I have given its takhreej in Saheeh Abi Daawood (761).

[6]Abul-Hasanaat Al-Lucknowi says in An-Naafi’ al-Kabeer liman yutaali’ al-Jaami’ as-Sagheer (p. 122-3), after ranking the books of Hanafi fiqh and saying which of them are dependable and which are not: “All that we have said about the relative grades of these compilations is related to their content of fiqh issues; however, as for their content with regards to ahaadeeth of the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), then it does not apply, for many books on which the cream of the fuqahaa’ rely are full of fabricated ahaadeeth, let alone rulings of the scholars. It is clear to us from a broad analysis that although their authors were otherwise competent, they were careless in their quotation of narrations.”

One of these false, fabricated ahaadeeth which are found in some of the best books is: “He who offers the compulsory prayers on the last Friday of Ramadaan, that will make up for every prayer he missed during his life up to the age of seventy years” ! Lucknowi (rahimahullaah) says in Al-Aathaar al-Marfoo’ah fil-Akhbaar al-Mawdoo’ah (p. 315), after giving this hadeeth, “‘Ali al-Qaari says in his al-Mawdoo’aat as- Sughraa and al-Kubraa: this is totally false, for it contradicts the ijmaa’ (consensus of opinion) that one act of worship cannot make up for those missed over years. Hence, there is no point in quoting the author of an-Nihaayah nor the rest of the commentators on al-Hidaayah, for they are not scholars of Hadeeth, nor did they reference this hadeeth to any of the collectors of Hadeeth.”

Shawkaani also mentioned this hadeeth in Al-Fawaa’id al- Majmoo’ah fil-Ahaadeeth al-Mawdoo’ah with a similar wording and then said (p. 54), “This is fabricated beyond doubt - I do not even find it in any of the compilations of fabricated ahaadeeth! However, it has become popular among some students of fiqh in the city of San’aa’ in this age of ours, and many of them have started acting according to it. I do not know who has fabricated it for them - May Allaah disgrace the liars.”

Lucknowi further says, “To establish that this hadeeth, which is found in books of rituals and formulas, is fabricated, I have composed a brief essay, with intellectual and narrated evidence, called Repelling the Brethren from the Inventions of the Last Friday of Ramadaan, in which I have filed points which will enlighten minds and to which ears will hearken, so consult it, for it is valuable in this topic and of high quality.”

The occurrence of similar false ahaadeeth in the books of fiqh destroys the reliability of other ahaadeeth which they do not quote from dependable books of Hadeeth. The words of ‘Ali al- Qaari contain an indication towards this: a Muslim must take Hadeeth from the people who are experts in that field, as the old Arabic sayings go, “The people of Makkah know its mountain- paths best” and “The owner of the house knows best what is in it.”

[7]Imaam Nawawi(rahimahullaah)’s words in Al-Majmoo’ Sharh al- Muhadhdhab (1/60) can be summed up as follows: “The researching scholars of the People of Hadeeth and others say that if the hadeeth is weak, it will not be said regarding it, ‘The Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said/did/commanded/forbade …’ or any other phrase designating certainty, but instead it will be said, ‘It is reported/quoted/narrated from him …’ or other phrases suggesting uncertainty. They say that phrases of certainty are for saheeh and hasan ahaadeeth, and phrases of uncertainty are for anything else. This is because phrases designating certainty mean that what follows is authentic, so they can only be used in the case of what is authentic, otherwise one would effectively be lying about him (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam).

This convention is one ignored by most of the fuqahaa’ of our age, in fact, by most scholars of any discipline, except for the skilled muhadditheen. This is disgusting carelessness, for they often say about a saheeh hadeeth, ‘It is reported from him that …’, and about a da’eef one, ‘he said’ and ’so- and-so reported …’, and this is far from correct.”

[8]Publisher’s note: Also in this category are the works of our teacher, author of e.g. Irwaa’ al-Ghaleel fi takhreej Manaar as-Sabeel in 8 volumes, & Ghaayah al-Maraam fi takhreej ahaadeeth al-Halaal wal-Haraam, a takhreej of the ahaadeeth found in Dr. Yoosuf al-Qaradaawi’s The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam, (which contains many da’eef ahaadeeth).

[9]The term, “authentic hadeeth” includes saheeh and hasan in the eyes of the muhadditheen, whether the hadeeth is saheeh li dhaatihi or saheeh li ghairihi, or hasan li dhaatihi or hasan li ghairihi.

[10]an-Najm, 53:28

[11]Bukhaari & Muslim.

[12]Saheeh - collected by Tirmidhi, Ahmad & Ibn Abi Shaibah.

Later, I discovered that this hadeeth is actually da’eef: I had relied on Manaawi in declaring saheeh the isnaad of Ibn Abi Shaibah, but then I happened to come across it myself, and found that it was clearly weak, being the same isnaad as Tirmidhi and others - see my book Silsilah al-Ahaadeeth ad- Da’eefah (1783). However, its place is taken by the Prophet’s saying (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), “He who relates from me a saying which he knows is a lie is indeed one of the liars”, collected by Muslim and others.

[13]Abdul Hayy Al-Lucknowi says in Imaam al-Kalaam fimaa yata’allaq bil-Qiraa’ah Khalf al-Imaam (p. 156), as follows: “Whoever dives into the oceans of fiqh and the fundamentals of jurisprudence with an open mind, and does not allow himself to be prejudiced, will know with certainty that in most of the principal and subsidiary issues in which the scholars have differed, the madhhab of the scholars of Hadeeth is firmer than other madhhabs. Every time I go into the branches of difference of opinion, I find the view of the muhadditheen nearest to justice - their reward is with Allaah, and He will thank them. How could it be otherwise, when they are the true inheritors of the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), and the sincere agents of his Law; may Allaah include us in their company and make us die loving them.”

[14]Subki says in al-Fataawaa (1/148):

“The most important affair of the Muslims is the Prayer, which every Muslim must care about and ensure its performance and the establishment of its essentials. Related to Prayer are issues on which there is consensus and there is no escaping the truth, and other issues in which the scholars have differed. The correct approach is either to keep clear of dispute if possible, or to look for what is authentically- proven from the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) and adhere to that. When one does this, his Prayer will be correct and righteous, and included in the words of the Exalted, “So whoever expects to meet his Lord, let him work correct, righteous deeds.” (Al-Kahf, 18:110)

I say: The latter approach is superior, nay, obligatory; this is because the former appeoach, as well as being impossible many issues, does not fulfil his command (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), Pray as you have seen me praying, but instead leads to one’s prayer being decidedly different to that of the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam).

[15]From the poetry of Hasan ibn Muhammad an-Nasawi, as narrated by Haafiz Diyaa’ ad-Deen al-Maqdisi in his article on the excellence of the Hadeeth and its People.

[16]Baqarah, 2:213

[17]Tirmidhi, Qudaa’i, Ibn Bushraan & others.

[18]This is the sort of taqleed (blind following ) which Imaam Tahaawi was referring to when he said, “Only someone with party-spirit or a fool blindly follows opinion” - quoted by Ibn ‘Aabideen in Rasm al-Mufti (vol. 1, p. 32 from the Compilation of his Essays).

[19]al-A’raaf, 7:3

[20]Ibn ‘Aabideen in al-Haashiyah (1/63), and in his essay Rasm al-Mufti (1/4 from the Compilation of the Essays of Ibn ‘Aabideen), Shaikh Saalih al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p. 62) & others. Ibn ‘Aabideen quoted from Sharh al-Hidaayah by Ibn al-Shahnah al-Kabeer, the teacher of Ibn al-Humaam, as follows:

“When a hadeeth contrary to the Madhhab is found to be saheeh, one should act on the hadeeth, and make that his madhhab. Acting on the hadeeth will not invalidate the follower’s being a Hanafi, for it is authentically reported that Abu Haneefah said, ‘When a hadeeth is found to be saheeh, then that is my madhhab’, and this has been related by Imaam Ibn ‘Abdul Barr from Abu Haneefah and from other imaams.”

This is part of the completeness of the knowledge and piety of the Imaams, for they indicated by saying this that they were not versed in the whole of the Sunnah, and Imaam Shaafi’i has elucidated this thoroughly (see later). It would happen that they would contradict a sunnah because they were unaware of it, so they commanded us to stick to the Sunnah and regard it as part of their Madhhab. May Allaah shower His mercy on them all.

[21]Ar.: halaal

[22]Ibn ‘Abdul Barr in Al-Intiqaa’ fi Fadaa’il ath-Thalaathah al- A’immah al-Fuqahaa’ (p. 145), Ibn al-Qayyim in I’laam al- Mooqi’een (2/309), Ibn ‘Aabideen in his Footnotes on Al-Bahr ar-Raa’iq (6/293) and in Rasm al-Mufti (pp. 29,32) & Sha’raani in Al-Meezaan (1/55) with the second narration. The last narration was collected by ‘Abbaas ad-Dawri in At- Taareekh by Ibn Ma’een (6/77/1) with a saheeh sanad on the authority of Zafar, the student of Imaam Abu Haneefah. Similar narrations exist on the authority of Abu Haneefah’s companions Zafar, Abu Yoosuf and ‘Aafiyah ibn Yazeed; cf. Eeqaaz (p. 52). Ibn al-Qayyim firmly certified its authenticity on the authority of Abu Yoosuf in I’laam al-Mooqi’een (2/344). The addition to the second narration is referenced by the editor of Eeqaaz (p. 65) to Ibn ‘Abdul Barr, Ibn al-Qayyim and others.

If this is what they say of someone who does not know their evidence, what would be their response to one who knows that the evidence contradicts their saying, but still gives verdicts opposed to the evidence?! Therefore, reflect on this saying, for it alone is enough to smash blind following of opinion; that is why one of the muqallid shaikhs, when I criticised his giving a verdict using Abu Haneefah’s words without knowing the evidence, refused to believe that it was a saying of Abu Haneefah!

[23]Ar.: haraam

[24]Ar.: fatwaa

[25]i.e. Imaam Abu Haneefah’s illustrious student, Abu Yoosuf (rahimahullaah).

[26]This was because the Imaam would often base his view on Qiyaas (Analogy), after which a more potent analogy would occur to him, or a hadeeth of the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) would reach him, so he would accept that and ignore his previous view. Sha’raani’s words in Al-Meezaan (1/62) are summarised as:

“Our belief, as well as that of every researcher into Imaam Abu Haneefah (radi Allaahu ‘anhu), is that, had he
lived until the recording of the Sharee’ah, and the journeys of the Preservers of Hadeeth to the various cities and frontiers in order to collect and acquire it, he would have accepted it and ignored all the analogies he had employed. The amount of qiyaas in his Madhhab would have been just as little as that in other Madhhabs, but since the evidences of the Sharee’ah had been scattered with the Successors and their successors, and had not been collected in his lifetime, it was necessary that there be a lot of qiyaas in his Madhhab compared to that of other imaams. The later scholars then made their journeys to find and collect ahaadeeth from the various cities and towns and wrote them down; hence, some ahaadeeth of the Sharee’ah explained others. This is the reason behind the large amount of qiyaas in his Madhhab, whereas there was little of it in other Madhhabs.”

Abul-Hasanaat Al-Lucknowi quoted his words in full in An- Naafi’ al-Kabeer (p. 135), endorsing and expanding on it in his footnotes, so whoever wishes to consult it should do so there.

Since this is the justification for why Abu Haneefah has sometimes unintentionally contradicted the authentic ahaadeeth - and it is a perfectly acceptable reason, for Allaah does not burden a soul with more than it can bear - it is not permissible to insult him for it, as some ignorant people have done. In fact, it is obligatory to respect him, for he is one of the imaams of the Muslims through whom this Deen has been preserved and handed down to us, in all its branches; also, for he is rewarded under any circumstance: whether he is correct or wrong. Nor is it permissible for his devotees to continue sticking to those of his statements which contradict the authentic ahaadeeth, for those statements are effectively not part of his Madhhab, as the above sayings show. Hence, these are two extremes, and the truth lies in between. “Our Lord! Forgive us, and our brethren who came before us into the Faith; and leave not, in our hearts, any rancour against those who have believed. Our Lord! You are indeed Full of Kindness, Most Merciful.” (Al-Hashr 59:10)

[27]Al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p. 50), tracing it to Imaam Muhammad and then saying, “This does not apply to the mujtahid, for he is not bound to their views anyway, but it applies to the muqallid.”

Sha’raani expanded on that in Al-Meezaan (1/26):

“If it is said: ‘What should I do with the ahaadeeth which my Imaam did not use, and which were found to be authentic after his death?’ The answer which is fitting for you is: ‘That you act on them, for had your Imaam come across them and found them to be authentic, he would have instructed you to act on them, because all the Imaams were captives in the hand of the Sharee’ah.’ He who does so will have gathered all the good with both his hands, but he who says, ‘I will not act according to a hadeeth unless my Imaam did so’, he will miss a great amount of benefit, as is the case with many followers of the Imaams of the Madhhabs. It would be better for them to act on every hadeeth found to be authentic after the Imaam’s time, hence implementing the will of the Imaams; for it is our firm belief about the Imaams that had they lived longer and come to know of those ahaadeeth which were found authentic after their time, they would have definitely accepted and acted according to them, ignoring any analogies they may have previously made, and any views they may have previously held.”

[28]Ibn ‘Abdul Barr in Jaami’ Bayaan al-’Ilm (2/32), Ibn Hazm, quoting from the former in Usool al-Ahkaam (6/149), & similarly Al-Fulaani (p. 72)

[29]This is well known among the later scholars to be a saying of Maalik. Ibn ‘Abdul Haadi declared it saheeh in Irshaad as- Saalik (227/1); Ibn ‘Abdul Barr in Jaami’ Bayaan al-’Ilm (2/91) & Ibn Hazm in Usool al-Ahkaam (6/145, 179) had narrated it as a saying of Al-Hakam ibn ‘Utaibah and Mujaahid; Taqi ad- Deen as-Subki gave it, delighted with its beauty, in al- Fataawaa (1/148) as a saying of Ibn ‘Abbaas, and then said: “These words were originally those of Ibn ‘Abbaas and Mujaahid, from whom Maalik (radi Allaahu ‘anhu) took them, and he became famous for them.” It seems that Imaam Ahmad then took this saying from them, as Abu Daawood has said in Masaa’il of Imaam Ahmad (p. 276): “I heard Ahmad say, ‘Everyone is accepted and rejected in his opinions, with the exception of the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam)’.”

[30]From the Introduction to Al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel of Ibn Abi Haatim, pp. 31-2.

[31]Ibn Hazm says in Usool al-Ahkaam (6/118):

“Indeed, all the fuqahaa’ whose opinions are followed were opposed to taqleed, and they forbade their

companions from following their opinion blindly. The sternest among them in this regard was Shaafi’i (rahimahullaah), for he repeatedly emphasised, more than anyone else, following the authentic narrations and accepting whatever the proof dictated; he also made himself innocent of being followed totally, and announced this to those around him. May this benefit him in front of Allaah, and may his reward be of the highest, for he was the cause of great good.”

[32]Related by Haakim with a continuous sanad up to Shaafi’i, as in Taareekh Dimashq of Ibn ‘Asaakir (15/1/3), I’laam al- Mooqi’een (2/363, 364) & Eeqaaz (p. 100).

[33]Ar.: halaal

[34]Ibn al-Qayyim (2/361) & Fulaani (p. 68)

[35]Harawi in Dhamm al-Kalaam (3/47/1), Khateeb in Al-Ihtijaaj bi ash-Shaafi’i (8/2), Ibn ‘Asaakir (15/9/10), Nawawi in Al- Majmoo’ (1/63), Ibn al-Qayyim (2/361) & Fulaani (p. 100); the second narration is from Hilyah al-Awliyaa’ of Abu Nu’aim.

[36]Nawawi in Al-Majmoo’ (1/63), Sha’raani (1/57), giving its sources as Haakim and Baihaqi, & Fulaani (p. 107). Sha’raani said, “Ibn Hazm said, ‘That is, … found to be saheeh by him or by any other Imaam’.” His saying given next confirms this understanding.

Nawawi says: “Our companions acted according to this in the matter of tathweeb (calling to prayer in addition to the adhaan), the conditions on coming out of ihraam due to illness, and other issues well-known in the books of the Madhhab. Among those of our companions who are reported to have passed judgment on the basis of the hadeeth (i.e. rather than the saying of Shaafi’i) are Abu Ya’qoob al-Buweeti and Abu l-Qaasim ad-Daariki. Of our companions from the muhadditheen, Imaam Abu Bakr Al-Baihaqi and others employed this approach. Many of our earliest companions, if they faced an issue for which there was a hadeeth, and the madhhab of Shaafi’i was contrary to it, would act according to the hadeeth and give verdicts based on it, saying, ‘The madhhab of Shaafi’i is whatever agrees with the hadeeth.’ Shaikh Abu ‘Amr (Ibn as-Salaah) says, ‘Whoever among the Shaafi’is found a hadeeth contradicting his Madhhab, he would consider whether he fulfilled the conditions of ijtihaad generally, or in that particular topic or issue, in which case he would be free to act on the hadeeth; if not, but nevertheless he found it hard to contradict the hadeeth after further analysis, he would not be able to find a convincing justification for opposing the hadeeth. Hence, it would be left for him to act according to the hadeeth if an independent imaam other than Shaafi’i had acted on it, and this would be justification for his leaving the Madhhab of his Imaam in that issue.’ What he (Abu ‘Amr) has said is correct and established. Allaah knows best.”

There is another possibility which Ibn as-Salaah forgot to mention: what would one do if he did not find anyone else who acted according to the hadeeth? This has been answered by Taqi ad-Deen as-Subki in his article, The Meaning of Shaafi’i’s saying, “When a hadeeth is found to be saheeh, then that is my madhhab” (p. 102, vol. 3): “For me, the best thing is to follow the hadeeth. A person should imagine himself in front of the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), just having heard it from him: would there be leeway for him to delay acting on it? No, by Allaah … and everyone bears a responsibility according to his understanding.”

The rest of this discussion is given and analysed in I’laam al- Muwaqqi’een (2/302, 370) and in the book of al-Fulaane, (full title:) Eeqaaz Himam ulu l-Absaar, lil-Iqtidaa’ bi Sayyid al- Muhaajireen wal-Ansaar, wa Tahdheeruhum ‘an al-Ibtidaa’ ash- Shaa’i’ fi l-Quraa wal-Amsaar, min Taqleed al-Madhaahib ma’a l- Hamiyyah wal-’Asabiyyah bain al-Fuqahaa’ al-A’saar (Awakening the Minds of those who have Perception, towards following the Leader of the Emigrants and Helpers, and Warning them against the Innovation Widespread among Contemporary Jurists in the Towns and Cities, of following Madhhabs with Zeal and Party- Spirit). The latter is a unique book in its field, which every desirer of truth should study with understanding and reflection.

[37]addressing Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (rahimahullaah).

[38]Related by Ibn Abi Haatim in Aadaab ash-Shaafi’i (pp. 94-5), Abu Nu’aim in Hulyah al-Awliyaa’ (9/106), al-Khateeb in Al- Ihtijaaj bish-Shaafi’i (8/1), and from him Ibn ‘Asaakir (15/9/1), Ibn ‘Abdul Barr in al-Intiqaa’ (p. 75), Ibn al-Jawzi in Manaaqib al-Imaam Ahmad (p. 499) & Harawi (2/47/2) with three routes from ‘Abdullaah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal from his father that Shaafi’i said to him: …etc; thus, it is authentic on the authority of Shaafi’i. This is why Ibn al- Qayyim attributed it definitely to him in I’laam (2/325), as did Fulaani in Eeqaaz (p. 152) and then said: “Baihaqi said, ‘This is why he - i.e. Shaafi’i - used hadeeth so much, because he gathered knowledge from the people of Hijaaz, Syria, Yemen and ‘Iraq, and so accepted all that he found to be authentic, without leaning towards or looking at what he had considered out of the Madhhab of the people of his land when the truth was clear to him elsewhere. Some of those before him would limit themselves to what they found in the Madhhab of the people of their land, without attempting to ascertain the authenticity of what opposed it. May Allaah forgive all of us’.”

[39]Abu Nu’aim (9/107), Harawi (47/1), Ibn al-Qayyim in I’laam al-Muwaqqi’een (2/363) & Fulaani (p. 104).

[40]Ibn Abi Haatim in al-Aadaab (p. 93), Abul Qaasim Samarqandi in al-Amaali, as in the selection from it by Abu Hafs al- Mu’addab (234/1), Abu Nu’aim (9/106) & Ibn ‘Asaakir (15/10/1) with a saheeh sanad.

[41]Ibn Abi Haatim, Abu Nu’aim & Ibn ‘Asaakir (15/9/2).

[42]Ibn Abi Haatim (pp. 93-4).

[43]Ibn al-Jawzi in al-Manaaqib (p. 192)

[44]Fulaani (p. 113) & Ibn al-Qayyim in I’laam (2/302).

[45]Ar.: ittibaa’

[46]Abu Daawood in Masaa’il of Imaam Ahmad (pp. 276-7)

[47]Ibn ‘Abdul Barr in Jaami’ Bayaan al-’Ilm (2/149).

[48]Ibn al-Jawzi (p. 182).

[49]an-Nisaa’, 4:65

[50]an-Noor, 24:63

[51]Even against their fathers and learned men, as Tahaawi in Sharh Ma’aani al-Aathaar (1/372) & Abu Ya’laa in his Musnad (3/1317) have related, with an isnaad of trustworthy men, from Saalim ibn ‘Abdullaah ibn ‘Umar, who said:

“I was sitting with Ibn ‘Umar (radi Allaahu ‘anhu) in the mosque once, when a man from the people of Syria came to him and asked him about continuing the ‘Umrah onto the Hajj (known as Hajj Tamattu’). Ibn ‘Umar replied, ‘It is a good and beautiful thing.’ The man said, ‘But your father (i.e. ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab) used to forbid it!’ So he said, ‘Woe to you! If my father used to forbid something which the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) practised and commanded, would you accept my father’s view, or the order of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) ?’ He replied, ‘The order of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam).’ He said, ‘So go away from me.’ Ahmad (no. 5700) related similarly, as did Tirmidhi (2/82) and declared it saheeh.

Also, Ibn ‘Asaakir (7/51/1) related from Ibn Abi Dhi’b, who said:

“Sa’d ibn Ibraaheem (i.e. the son of ‘Abdur Rahmaan ibn ‘Awf) passed judgment on a man on the basis of the opinion of Rabee’ah ibn Abu ‘Abdur Rahmaan, so I informed him of the saying of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) which was contradictory to the judgment. Sa’d said to Rabee’ah, ‘We have Ibn Abi Dhi’b, whom I regard to be reliable, narrating from the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) contrary to what I ruled.’ Rabee’ah said to him, ‘You have made your effort, and your judgment has been passed.’ Sa’d said, ‘Most amazing! I enforce the decree of Sa’d, and not the decree of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam)! No, I shall withdraw the decree of Sa’d, son of the mother of Sa’d, and enforce the decree of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam).’ So Sa’d called for the written decree, tore it up and gave a new verdict.”

[52]In fact, he would be rewarded, because of the Prophet’s saying (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam): “When a judge passes judgment, if he makes his effort (ijtihaad) and rules correctly, he will have two rewards; if he makes his effort (ijtihaad) and rules wrongly, he will have one reward.” (Related by Bukhaari, Muslim & others.)

[53]Quoted in the notes on Eeqaaz al-Himam (p. 93)

[54]Fulaani (p. 99)

[55]cf. al-Waaqi’ah 56:13-14

[56]Ibn ‘Aabideen in Haashiyah (1/62), & Lucknowi gave its source in an-Naafi’ al-Kabeer (p. 93) as Ghazaali .

[57]He himself says at the beginning of his Concise Shaafi’i Fiqh (printed in the margin of Imaam Shaafi’i’s Al-Umm):

“This book is a selection from the knowledge of Muhammad ibn Idrees al-Shaafi’i (rahimahullaah) and from the meanings of his sayings, to aid the understanding of whoever wants it, knowing of his forbidding the following of his, or anyone else’s, opinion, so that such a person may carefully look for his Deen in it.”

[58]In which he has explained his opposing his Imaam in about twenty masaa’il (nos. 42, 44, 103, 120, 158, 169, 172, 173, 228, 230, 240, 244, 274, 275, 284, 314, 331, 338, 355, 356 - from Ta’leeq al-Mumajjid ‘alaa Muwatta’ Muhammad (Important Notes on Muhammad’s Muwatta’))

[59]Ibn ‘Aabideen mentioned him among them in Haashiyah (1/74) & in Rasm al-Mufti (1/17). Qurashi mentioned him in Al- Jawaahir al-Madiyyah fi Tabaqaat al-Hanafiyyah (p. 347) and said, “He was a reliable transmitter of Hadeeth. He and his brother Ibraaheem were the two shaikhs of Balakh of their time.”

[60]Al-Fawaa’id al-Bahiyyah fi Taraajum al-Hanafiyyah (p. 116)

[61]Al-Bahr ar-Raa’iq (6/93) & Rasm al-Mufti (1/28).

[62]Al-Fawaa’id … (p. 116); the author then added a useful note:

“From this can be deduced the falsity of Makhool’s narration from Abu Haneefah: ‘that he who raises his hands during Prayer, his Prayer is ruined’, by which Ameer, the scribe of Itqaani, was deceived, as has been mentioned under his biography. ‘Isaam ibn Yoosuf, a companion of Abu Yoosuf, used to raise his hands, so if the above-mentioned narration had any foundation, Abu Yoosuf and ‘Isaam would have known about it … It can also be deduced that if a Hanafi ignored the madhhab of his Imaam in an issue due to the strength of the evidence against it, this would not take him outside the ranks of the Imaam’s followers, but this would in fact be proper taqleed in the guise of leaving taqleed; do you not see that ‘Isaam ibn Yoosuf left Abu Haneefah’s madhhab of not raising the hands, but he is stil counted as a Hanafi?… To Allaah I complain of the ignorance of our time, when they insult anyone who does not follow his Imaam in an issue because of the strength of evidence against it, and expel him from the fold of that Imaam’s followers! This is not surprising when those who do this are from the ordinary masses, but it is amazing when it comes from those who imitate men of learning but plod along that path like cattle!”

[63]an-Noor 24:51-52