Thread by @TasiuAl

ACCEPTANCE OF A WEAK HADITH AMIDST (WIPING OF THE FACE AFTER DUA A SUNNAH)
اعوذ بالله من الشيطان الرجيم
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
وصلى الله على النبي الفاتح الخاتم وعلى آله وصحبه ومن حذا حذوه إلى يوم زلزلت الأرض زلزالها...
Thread

Throughout yesterday, tweets about rubbing the face were flying over my TL and even though I never wanted to say anything about it as it originates from an ignorant source.

What triggers me to this thread today is the say around the Hadith of Ibn Umar that whenever the

prophet SAW raises his hands for prayers he usually don't drop them u til he wipes off his face with it.
The antagonist to wiping of the face after dua have no proof to their claim unless that some certain mallams (Ibn taymiyyah and Ibn Uthaymeen) said there are hadith's narrated

to the wiping of the face but cannot be used as proves here because they are somehow faulty.
We should be very careful of how we condemn things simply because we don't like the people known with it.
In Islām is either you profer a proof of prohibition or that thing remains halāl.

الأصل فى الأشياء الإباحة حتى يأتى دليل صريح صحيح يصرفه عن إباحته ويسوقه إما إلى الوجوب وإما إلى التحريم

Scholars of Usulul Fiqh will say: The origin of everything is Permissibility, until a proof come to state it exact stand, whether obligatory or forbidden.

A good example is Alcohol (Al-khamr). Before the prohibition of Alcohol on 3 good stages, people were taking it without been prohibited, some certain dignitaries deemed it not be good for one's personality but was still permissible.
When it was finally prohibited at the third

stage with Allah saying:
يا ايها الذين آمنوا إنما الخمر والميسر والأنساب والأزلام رجس من عمل الشيطان فاجتنبوه لعلكم ترحمون

All the believers who stored Alcohol at home and those who sells it threw away the remains from their homes
But before the prohibition were they taking it ?

Yes they were.

So whoever wish to prohibit something should be able to come with a clear and sound proof (Sareehan Wa saheehan) before giving a verdict on something.
Those same set of people believes that the prophet SAW use to recite a dua (الموعوذتان) and rub off his whole

body while going to bed every night.
Perhaps they want to teach us something we don't know that (the face is not part of the body).
Since an hadith was narrated by Ibn Umar that the prophet use to wipe his face every after dua it's then a sunnah.
Because, we cannot throw away the

words of Ibn umar (sahabiyy) for Ibn taymiyyah (500 years + after hijrah) and Ibn uthaimeen (1000+ years A.H) and their likes.

Hold your Ibn taymiyyah and I will hold on to Ibn Umar, Ibn Abbas, and Hassan Al-basari (Tabi'es Sahābah).
And the hadith mentioned was even a weak

(ضعيف) hadith and classed as Fair/good by conjoining with similar narrations (الحسن بغيره).

Let it be noted that when scholars of hadith say:

Saheeh : They are only trying to say that the hadith meets requirements of truth. But not 100% sure it was said or done by the

prophet SAW.

Daef : The hadith doesn't meets requirements of sound narration. But they are totally claiming the prophet never said it or do it.

On this basis, until they are able to proffer a hadith or verse of the Qur'an or Ijma or qiyas that outrightly prohibits the act

(صريحا وصحيحا) wiping of the face after dua remains a sunnah of the prophet. Ibn taymiyyah and co should seat this one out

Let's shake the ta me a little bit.

I would like those same condemners to come and condemn this hadith also at the end.

The famous hadith stating the

prophet SAW left us with Al-kitāb Was-Sunnah is weaker hadith to this very hadith of ibn Umar.

Please be patient while we have a check of 3 narrations out of it.

1. Al-muwattah of Imam Malik came before the Sihāhu Sitt, hence we start from it.

Imam Malik mentioned the hadith

as an information getting to him from the prophet SAW(بلغنا عن رسول الله) but his student Ibn Abdil Barr made it easier for us by proffering Chains of narrations to all the hadiths in Al-muwattah he named the book (التمهيد لما فى الموطء من المعانى والأسانيد)

Ibn Abdil Barr said:
وحدثنا عبد الرحمن بن يحيى قال : حدثنا أحمد بن سعيد قال : حدثنا محمد بن إبراهيم الديبلي قال : حدثنا علي بن زيد الفرائضي قال : حدثنا الحنيني ، عن كثير بن عبد الله بن عمرو بن عوف ، عن أبيه ، عن جده ، قال : قال رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم : تركت فيكم أمرين

لن تضلوا ما تمسكتم بهما كتاب الله ، وسنة نبيه - صلى الله عليه وسلم - .

ج ٢٤ ص٣٣١

From this hadith, we have (كثير بن عبد الله) who was brutally faulted by scholars of hadith's.

A. Imam Shafi'i and Abu Dawud said about him:
ركن من اركان الكذب
He is a pillar amongst the pillars

of lies.

See (تهذيب التهذيب) Ibn hajar Al-asqalāni

B. Imam Ahmad bn hambal fling away any hadith narrated from him

C. Ad-daru qutniy said:
متروك حديثه
His hadiths should be abandoned.

D. Yahya Ibn Maeen said:

كثير بن عبد الله ضعيف الحديث
He is a weak man in hadith.

E. Abu Zur'a said:
واه الحديث ليس بقوي
He narrates confusion in hadith, he is not reliable.

F. Imam An-nasai said:
متروك الحديث
His hadiths are best neglected.

See (كتاب الضعفاء والمجروحين ...ابن حبان ) ( تهذيب التهذيب...ابن حجر العسقلانى) ( الجرح والتعديل....ابن الصلاح)

G. Mudtarib Bn Abdullah Al-madaniy said: I have met him (katheer bn Abdullah) and he argues too much, non of our companions narrates a hadith from him.

H. Ibn Hibbān said: He (katheer bn Abdullah) narrated a copy of hadith collection from his father from his grand father full of

lies, you only get to mention about them as a surprise to how one would lie against the prophet SAW.

See (ميزان الإعتدال ....الذهبي)

I. Ibn hajjar said:
مجمع على ضعفه
Its agreed upon his weakness (lack of truth)

J. Ibn Hazm said:
متفق على طرحه، ساقط لا تقبل روايته

Agreed upon throwing away his hadith, he falls short that his narrations are not accepted.

Secondly, in the same chain of narration, we have (الحنيني) his full name is إسحاق ابن إبراهيم الحنيني

A. Bukhari and Abu hātim said about him:
فى حديثه نظر
There is doubt in his hadith

B. An-nasa'i said:
,ليس بثقة
He is not trustworthy.

C. Abu zur'a said :
صالح فى دينه لا فى حديثه
He is a pious worshiper but not truthful in his hadith

D. Al-hākim said:
فى حديثه بعض مناكير
In his hadith there are detestable info. (I.e there are falsifications)

E. Al-bazzār said:
كف بصره فاطرب حديثه
His lost his eyesight and his hadith became shaky

---------------------
See: ( تهذيب التهذيب .... ابن حجر ) and (كتاب الضعفاء..... العقيلي).

Thirdly, in the same chain we have ( عبد الرحمن بن يحيى) one of the scholars of Ibn Abdul Barr.

A. Scholars said about him:

لا يعتمد عليه
He is not reliable

B. Al-uqayliyy said:
مجهول لا يستقين الحديث من جهته
He is Unknown and hadith from him are not reliable.

---------------------------
See: مغنى الضعفاء، ميزان الإعتدال ، الضعفاء والمجروحين

Now, you see how 3 among the narrators were brutally faulted, and left the hadith no value ?

The only hadith that can bring up this hadith is the narration from Abu hurairah :
حدثنا عبد الرحمن بن مروان قال : حدثنا أحمد بن سليمان البغدادي قال : حدثنا البغوي قال : حدثنا داود بن

عمرو الضبي قال : حدثنا صالح بن موسى الطلحي قال : حدثنا عبد العزيز بن رفيع ، عن أبي صالح ، عن أبي هريرة قال : قال رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم : إني قد خلفت فيكم اثنتين لن تضلوا بعدهما أبدا: كتاب الله وسنتى

This is a better narration even though its still not totally fault free

The hadith is lone (Ahād) hadith.

2. Al-hākim narrated it in his Al-mustadrak saying:

حدثنا أبو بكر بن إسحاق الفقيه انبأنا محمد بن عيسى بن سكن الواسلي ثنا داود بن عمر الضبي ثنا صالح بن موسى الطلعي عن عبد العزيز بن رفيع عن ابى صالح عن ابى هريرة رضي الله عنه عن النبي ص....

In the chain of narration there is (صالح بن موسى الطلعي)

Scholars of hadith like Al-bukhari and Ibn Maeen agreed upon that his hadith are best neglected.

See. (سير اعلام النبلاء.....الذهبي) and (تهذيب التهذيب)

We also have (عبد العزيز بن رفيع).

He is weak and not trustworthy.

See: المجروحين .....النساء v2 page 338 ترجمة ( موسى ابن طريف الاسدى)..

3. In the Narration of Al-bayhaqiyy from Abdullahi bn Hākim from Ismail bn Muhammad As-sha'rāniyy ......

In the chain we have:

عكرمة البربرى

He is a liar according to scholars of hadith

And also (ابن عويس) he is عبد الله بن عبد الله بن عويس

Yahya bn Maeen said about him:
ليس بثقة هو وابنه ضعيفان
He is not trustworthy, he and his son are both weak narrators.

An-nasai said:
ليس بقوي
He is not reliable

Al-madeeniy said:
كان عند اصحابنا ضعيف

He is regarded as weak within our clique.

Ibn Abi Khaisam said:

ابن عويس وابوه يسرقان الحديث
Ibn uwais and his father steals hadith

Imam Ahmad said:
ضعيف
He is weak

Its even enough to know that when Bukhari was able to proffer a sound narration for it, he stated categorically

that the mention of (وسنتى او سنة نبيه ) is strange (غريب)

Now, this is the state of a hadith we rate highly and I wonder why start to have problems now simply because of the interference of Ibn taimiyyah and Ibn uthaimeen and some few scholars.

Wiping of the face remains a sunnah until they proffer a proof prohibiting it.

Did you read it to this end ??

😁😁..

Drop a word if you gained anything here.. If you didn't feel free to disagree but make sure to confirm what we have here before saying confusing yourself here.

*not totally