Wiping face with hands after dua [Archive] - AussieMuslims.com

View Full Version : Wiping face with hands after dua

Majestic_Islam

05-Sep-2007, 11:48 PM

Wiping face with hands after dua

Question: Some people, when they finish making the dua after the prayer wipe their face after they have made the dua. Is that a bid'ah; is there any contextual evidence from the sunna for its permissibility.

Answer:

No, this is not a bid'ah; rather, it is an established sunna and recommended to wipe one’s face after supplicating. It is reported in authentic hadiths, such as the one Imam Tirmidhi reports, that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) use to wipe his hands over his face after completing the du`a.

This is mentioned as being recommended by:

Imam Nawawi (Adhkar, Majmu` 4.451), and others
(Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya 3.19)
Imam Shurunbulali (Shurunbulaliyya)
Imam Haskafi (Durr al-Mukhtar)
Imam Ibn Abidin (Radd al-Muhtar)

Answered by Shaykh Abu Usamah and Sheikh Faraz Rabbani

black_blood

06-Sep-2007, 12:01 AM

Al Baitel 'ateeq

06-Sep-2007, 12:18 AM

Assalaamu Alaykum

I am not going to give and take over this issue, just a fatwa below and to each his own.

======================================

Question:
What is the ruling on wiping the face and body with the hands after making du’aa’, and kissing the eyes?.

Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.

It is not prescribed to wipe the face after making du’aa’. There are many ahaadeeth which describe how the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) called upon his Lord in du’aa’, and there is no proven report that he used to wipe his face after making du’aa’.

Those who say that the face should be wiped quoted some ahaadeeth as evidence, but upon further examination they are not saheeh, and do not support one another.

As for the views of the scholars who say that it is not allowed to wipe the face, they include the following:

1 – Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: It is not known that anyone used to wipe his face after making du’aa’ except al-Hasan.

Al-‘Ilal al-Mutanaahiyah, 2/840, 841

2 – Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: With regard to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) raising his hands when saying du’aa’, there are many saheeh ahaadeeth concerning this, but as for his wiping his face with his hands, there are only one or two hadeeths concerning that, and they cannot be taken as evidence.

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 22/519

3 – al-‘Izz ibn ‘Abd al-Salaam said: No one wipes his face with his hands after saying du’aa’ except one who is ignorant.

Fataawa al-‘Izz ibn ‘Abd al-Salaam, p. 47

If it is not permitted to wipe the face after making du’aa’, it is more likely that the person who says du’aa’ should not be allowed to wipe his body either, or to kiss his eyes.

Rather the scholars stated that kissing the thumbs and placing them on the eyes is a bid’ah that was introduced by some of the Sufi tareeqahs, and there is a hadeeth concerning that which is falsely attributed to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked about the ruling on wiping the face with the hands after making du’aa’. He replied:

Wiping the face with the hands after making du’aa’ is more likely to be not prescribed in Islam, because the ahaadeeth that have been narrated concerning that are da’eef (weak). Shaykh al-Islam (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: They cannot be used as evidence. If we are not certain or we think it most likely that this is not prescribed, then it is better not to do it, because Islamic rulings cannot be proven on the basis of mere conjecture, unless we believe it to be mostly likely to be the case.

What I think about wiping the face with the hands after du’aa’ is that it is not Sunnah. As is well known, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) prayed for rain during his Friday khutbah and raised his hands, but it is not narrated that he wiped his face with them. Similarly in a number of ahaadeeth it says that the Prophet raised his hands, but there is no proof that he wiped his face. End quote.

Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 14/question no. 781

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A (http://www.islamqa.com/index.php?ref=39174&ln=eng)

Al Baitel 'ateeq

06-Sep-2007, 12:19 AM

thats good. and also, when u cry tears of fear from ALLAH, you shud rub those tears over your body, the fire of hell doesnt touch the part of the body that is tuched with tears of fear of ALLAH.

SALAMZ
Assalaamu Alaykum

If you're going to say such things ukhti, please support it with evidence so that we can further increase our knowledge and be sure to keep away from bid'ah.

Baarak Allah feeki.

Khaled

06-Sep-2007, 12:29 AM

black_blood

06-Sep-2007, 12:31 AM

sure, i read it in faizal-a'maal. sahabah section. ill have to find it.
kissing the eyes? :confused:

Majestic_Islam

06-Sep-2007, 02:12 AM

Assalaamu 'alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,

Just regarding Ibn Taymiyyah's saying:
Wiping the face with the hands after making du’aa’ is more likely to be not prescribed in Islam, because the ahaadeeth that have been narrated concerning that are da’eef (weak). Shaykh al-Islam (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: They cannot be used as evidence. If we are not certain or we think it most likely that this is not prescribed, then it is better not to do it, because Islamic rulings cannot be proven on the basis of mere conjecture, unless we believe it to be mostly likely to be the case.

The term Sheikh ul Islam, does not mean the Sheikh of 'All' of Islam, as that would apply to our Beloved Messenger Muhammed sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam. Rather, people who follow Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah classify him as the sheikh of Islam in the Hanbali Madhhab - not all of the Madhhabs.

Just like Muhammed Zahid al Kawthari (the Sheikh of Abdul Fattah Abul Ghuddah (who also taught Al Albani)) was the final Sheikhul Islam of the 'Uthmani Khilaafah, or Sheikhul Islam Zakariyya Ansari in the 16th century etc.

In terms of raising of the hands - if you can read Adabul Mufrad - there should be a section on Imam Bukhari's work on raising of the hands and wiping etc (it should be in the bibliography). This work was destroyed - most likely by the Tartar's.

Akhi Umar Ibn Khattab, as regards to your inquiry regarding the hadith - I'll see what I can do inshaAllah.

One thing to note hear regarding the fatwa which Islamqa has posted - how does the concept of just before sleeping, one recites du'as and supplications, and then blows them on their hands and then wipes them on their whole body fit in with the statement in this fatawa:
If it is not permitted to wipe the face after making du’aa’, it is more likely that the person who says du’aa’ should not be allowed to wipe his body either, or to kiss his eyes.

The only 'Ulama that I know of that do not allow wiping the face after du'aa is from Saudi Arabia. Hence as the sister mentioned 'eac to his own', however it definately does not seem to be the dominant position.

Even regarding Salatul Hajah(t) - Imam Tahawi (A great faqih) mentions it in his Maraqqiul Falah - a sharh on Imam Shurunbul'ali's Nur al Idhah - the Hanafi fiqh text(Imam ShurunbulAli was a Hanafi faqih who lived in the 16th century - and Imam Tahawi lived in the 18th-19th centuries - died around early 1800's). There are others who also have it in their works - such as Mehmed Zihni Efendi (one of the late Ottoman Scholars). This is just scratching the surface of the matter. I am sure that many other fuqaha -alog with the sunnipath scholars have allowed this dua & Salat due to other factors - as they wouldn't base it on mawdu ahadith.

Even Sheikh Albani in terms of Salatul Tasbeeh allows it - and says that it was a sunnah - so what does our brothers who follow islamqa do there? Who's correct - Ibn Uthaymeen (he claims that it is mawdu - fabricated!)? Bin Baz, Albani, Munajjid? there's so many topics where they themselves differ on certain practises - so what happens then? That's why I prefer to views of the madhhab Imams & the fuqaha who follow them on such issues.

More to come inshaAllah

Fi Amanillah

Abu Khadijah

Majestic_Islam

06-Sep-2007, 02:46 AM

Assalaamu 'alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,

Here's more on the topic of wiping over the face after du'aa. It may be a little bit technical for those who haven't studied Mustalah al Hadith - however, as can be seen, there is a basis for wiping the face etc after du'aa as the Sahabah did it, and the weak narrations are raised to the level of Hasan - and this can be acted upon by the Ahnaf (Hanafi) & Malikiyya madhhabs - hence I will continue to make du'a and wipe inshaAllah.

Also a point to note is Imam Hasan al Basri's doing this action also. Who was Imam Hasan al Basri? And who's house was he raised in? Do some reading and you'll find out inshaAllah.

Note - I am not giving my 'own' opinions or wanting you to follow 'my' line of worshiping. I only want to be following Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama'ah - and that means taking from the bulk of the 'ulama that have come and gone throughout the centuries.

Differences of opinion amongst the scholars will exist, and at times they are a mercy for us - as we have leeway in certain matters - so Alhamdulillahi Rabbil 'Alameen for that.

Fi Amanillah

Wiping the Hands on the face after du'a, Irshadul Haqq Al-Athari

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Salam aleykum

Bis Millahi Ir Rahman nir Raheem

This is adapted from article of Shaykh Irshadul Haqq Al-Athari written about the permissibility of wiping hands on the face and a refutation of those who think it is an innovation or only done by ignorant. This article was published in Al-I’tisam and is present in the Shaykh’s “Maqalat”. Shaykh Abdel Mannan Noorpuri also mentioned it in his “Ahkam wa Masail”.

Hafiz ibn Hajar wrote in Bulugh Al-Maram concerning hadith of Umar narrated in At-Tirmidhi about wiping hands on the face after invocation : “Narrated by At-Tirmidhi, and this has Shawahid (witnesses), among them Abu Dawood from Hadith of ibn ‘Abbas and others, and the total requires that it is a Hassan hadith”

First Hadith :

The narration of At-Tirmidhi has Hammad ibn ‘Issa Al-Juhani who is weak, not Matrook or liar ( Tahzib v 6 p 419)

Second Hadith :

The narration of Ibn ‘Abbas in Abu Dawood has Salih ibn Hassaan who is Matrook as said in Taqreeb by Ibn Hajar, but it has a Mutabi with ‘Issa ibn Maymoon, as mentioned by Imam Muhammad ibn Nasr Al-Marwazi in Qyam Al-Layl p 236, but he is also weak as said by Ibn Hajar in Taqreeb p 411.

The narration of ibn ‘Abbas is also narrated by another chain by Abu Dawood from Abdullah ibn Ya’qoob from the one who narrated him from Muhammad ibn Ka’b, but this chain has AbdulMalik ibn Muhammad ibn Yaman who is Majhool (unknown) and the identity of the Shaykh of Abdullah ibn Ya’qoob is not known.

Shaykh Albani says about this Hadith in Silsila As-Sahihah v 2 p 146 : “The defect is the narrator who is not named, and ibn Majah and others named him Salih ibn Hassaan as I have shown in Mishkat 2243 and he is very weak (da’if Jiddan)”

In Irwa Al Ghalil v 2 p 178 and after, Shaykh Albani said on this hadith : “The chain is weak, this Abdul Malik has been weakened by Abu Dawood and there is in it the Shaykh of Abdullah ibn Ya’qoob who is not named, he is then Majhool, and it is possible that he might be ibn Hassaan …or ibn Maymoon”

So this is less accurate than in Sisilah where the narrator is told to be Salih ibn Hassan, here two possibilities are mentioned.

Allamah Mizzi mentioned in his Tahzib Al Kamal v 22 p 257-258 that this non-named narrator can also be Abu Miqdam.

In all cases, this narrator Mubham (non-identified) is weak, and Abu Miqdam is even Matrook.

But the words of Shaykh Albani that Abu Dawood declared Abdul Malik to be weak is absolutely incorrect. Imam Abu Dawood said : “This way is the most Amthal and it is weak”. Imam ibn Qattan declared Abdul Malik to be Majhool, and ibn Hajar as well declared him Majhool in Tahzib v 4 p 1419 and Taqrib.

Another chain is narrated by Al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, but it has Muhammad ibn Mu’awiyah who is matrook, Imam Daraqutni and others declared him to be a liar.

In conclusion, the narration of ibn ‘Abbas is narrated from many ways, that are all weak, but two are very weak as their narrators are matrook, and two have weak and Majhool narrators.

( 1 chain in Abu Dawood : Salih ibn Hassan is Matrook
2 chain in Marwazi with ‘Issa ibn Maymoon who is weak
3 chain in Abu Dawood, Abdul Malik is Majhool and the shaykh of Abdullah ibn Ya’qoob is Mubham (non identified)
4 chain in Al-Hakim with Muhammad ibn Mu’awiyah who is Matrook)

Third Hadith :

Narrated by Yazid ibn Sa’id in Abu Dawood and also Imam Muhammad ibn Khalf Al Wakee’ in Akhbar Al-Qadha v 1 p 107, but this chain is weak because of ibn La’ihah who is weak and his Shaykh Hafs ibn Hisham is Majhool.

These are all Shawahid and Mutabi’at on which Ibn Hajar based himself to declare this hadith Hassan.

The narration of ‘Umar has a weak narrator.
The narration of Yazid ibn Sa’ib has a weak and a Majhool.
The narration of ibn ‘Abbas has two chains, one with a weak and the other with a majhool and a Mubham.

So if the total is not Hassan then what is it ?

Mawqoof Hadith

Imam Bukhari narrates in his Adab Al-Mufrad : Ibrahim ibn Munzir narrated us, he said Muhammad ibn Falih narrated us, he said : my father informed me from Abu Nua’ym and he is Wahb, he said : "I saw ibn ‘Umar and ibn Zubayr making invocation and they wiped their hands on their faces."

This Athar is Hassan, and Ibn Hajar even declared it Sahih in Al-Amali, and its narrators are all from Bukhari.

The action of Hassan Al-basri

Imam Muhammad ibn Nasr Al-Marwazi narrates from Mu’tamar that he saw Abu Ka’b Abd Rabihi ibn Ubayd Al-Azdi, the author of Tahrir, invoking raising his hands and then he was wiping them on his face after finishing. I asked him why he was doing and he answered that Hassan Al-Basri was doing this. (Qyam Al-Layl p 236)

Imam Ahmad was asked about wiping hands on face in Witr and he answered : “It is narrated from Al-Hassan that he was wiping them on his face in his invocation” (Masail Imam Ahmad from narration of ibn Abdillah v 2 p 300)

Hafiz ibn Hajar said in Al-Amali : “But this Hadith has Mawsool, Mursal witnesses and the total shows that the Hadith has a basis, and this is also supported by what comes from Al-Hassan Basri with a Hassan chain, and there is in it a refutation for those who consider that as an innovation, and Al-Bukhari narrated in his Adab Al-Mufrad from Wahb ibn Kaysan, he said : he said : “I saw ibn ‘Umar and ibn Zubayr making invocation and they wipped their hands on their faces.” And this is Mawqoof Sahih and this strengthens the refutation of those who disapprove of that”

Hadith Mursal

The mursal narration to which ibn Hajar was making a sign in Al-Amali is probably that of Zuhri mentioned in AbdurRazaq saying : “The Prophet (saw) was raising his hands to the level of his chest when he was invoking and then was wiping them on his face”

The great Muhadith Faqeeh Ishaq ibn Rahawayah was approving action on these Ahadith as said by Muhammad ibn Nasr Al-Marwazi : “I saw Ishaq liking action on these Ahadith” (Qyam Al-Layl p 232)

There are two narrations from Ahmad on this topic, one is that after invocation of Witr this should not be done as narrated from Imam Abu Dawood, and the second is that it is recommended as mentioned by ibn Qudamah on Al-Maghni v 1 p 786 and Shamsudin ibn Qudamah in Sharh Al Kabeer v 1 p 724, see Al-Qil’ v 1 p 185. Al-Marwazi said that hands should be wiped on the face and : “This is the Madhab of Imam Ahmad, he was doing that”. The author of Majma’ Al-Bahrayn said this narration is stronger, and in Al-Kafi, it is said that it is better. (Al-Insaf v 3 p 173)

Hafiz ibnul Qayim mentioned that Imam Ahmad was asked about wiping hands on the face, and he answered : “ I hope there is no harm, and when Al-Hassan was invoking, he was wiping then on his face, and he said : my father was asked about raising hands in Qunut and wiping them on the face, he said : There is no harm in doing this, wiping them on the face. Abdullah said that he did not see his father wiping them on the face” ( Bada’I al-Fawaid v 4 p 113)

Imam Ibnul-Qayim commented this : “Abu Abdillah (Imam Ahmad) made the matter easy, and he considered this similar to the fact of wiping the face outside the prayer, and this is a small action of obedience and Abu Abdillah decided to leave it”

So according to Zahir saying of ibnul Qayim, Imam Ahmad did not leave that outside prayer, but only in prayer, he was not acting according to that in the prayer, yet he did not see any harm.

‘Allamah Manawi in Faydh Al-Qadir v 1 p 369 rejected the saying of ‘Izz ibn AbdiSalam that only ignorant person does this, saying it is a bid mistake.

The strange matter is that Shaykh Albani in his Al-Irwa v 2 p 182 said that An-Nawawi in his majmoo agreed with Izz ibn AbdisSalam and he declared that non recommended, while An-Nawawi said in his Sharh Al-Muhazzab v 3 p 501-505 that doing this in Witr is not recommended, and he said that Al-Bayhaqi and Ar-Rafi’I also said that, but he did not say that it was not recommended outside the prayer, rather in the end of his book Al-Azkar, he mentioned among Adab of invocation : “facing the Qiblah, and raising the hands and wiping them on the face…”

And also Al-Bayhaqi only disapproved of that in prayer, not outside the prayer. He said in his Sunan Al-Kubra v 2 p 212 : “As for wiping hands on the face after invocation, I do not know this from any Salaf in the invocation of the Qunut, although it is narrated by some about invocation outside the prayer”

Among Shawafi Qadhi Abu Tayib, Imam Al-Haramayn, ibn Sabagh, Al-Mutawali, Shaykh nasr, Imam Ghazali and Abul Khayr all agreed on weeping hands in Qunut basing on general narrations. Imam Al-Bayhaqi said at the end : “The best is not to do it (in the prayer)”

And Shaykh Irshadul Haqq Al-Athari concluded that best is not to do that in Qunut of Witr as there are no Hadith about that, this is why Imam Ahmad left that yet he did not declare that doing it in prayer was an innovation, he said there is no Harm.

Personal Notes : For doing that outside the prayer, Ibn Hajar declared totality of ahadith ti be Hassan, Imam Ishaq was liking action on these Ahadith, there come this from Ibn ‘umar and Ibn Zubayr as narrated by Al-Bukhari, and action of Sahabi is a Hujjah for 4 schools when there is no ikhtilaf, and it comes from Mursal of Zuhri, and Mursal is a Hujjah for Ahnaf and Malikiyah, and for Shafii it is accepted with some conditions : The Tabii should be big and it should also come in musnad way, and it is the case here.

Allah knows best

Wa Salatu was Salam 'ala Nabi (saw)

Majestic_Islam

06-Sep-2007, 03:18 AM

Assalaamu 'alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,

Here's even more proof and analysis of the topic. I don't agree with the author attacking the salafi brethren and sheikh Albani rahimahullah as such, however, the points raised are very valid in terms of how the madhhab's have allowed this practice - which has a base. InshaAllah it will be beneficial to you.

Wiping One’s Face With the Hands After Du’aa: A Case Study

Sidi Abul Layth ibn ‘Ataa’

Years ago I was told by some pseudo-Salafis that it was a bida’ah to wipe one’s face with hands after du’aa. For years I wondered, looked over, and pondered this issue. On Islam-qa’s website, they state regarding this act:

لا يشرع وضع اليدين على الوجه لا بعد الانتهاء من الصلاة ، ولا بعد الانتهاء من الدعاء ، وخير الهدي هدي نبينا محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم ، وكان إذا سلَّم استغفر ثلاثاً ، ولم يمسح وجهه بيديه لا بعد السلام ولا بعد الدعاء .

Their translation: “It is not prescribed to place the hands over the face after finishing prayer or after finishing du’aa’. The best of guidance is the guidance of our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). When he said the salaam (at the end of prayer) he would pray for forgiveness three times, but he did not wipe his face with his hands after saying the salaam or after saying du’aa’.”

There are many fatawaa from the pseudo-salafis/Wahhaabis of our times condemning this act. Muhammad Al-Albaani in his Irwaa Al-Ghaleel declares the ahadeeth mentioning this act “dha’if…This hadeeth cannot be strengthened by the two routes of narration together due to the severity in weakness of the first one, which you have seen.” Ibn Taymiyyah said, “Wiping the face has only one or two hadith which are weak and cannot be used as proof for this matter.”((Fatawa 22/519 ))

The Deobandis disagree with this conclusion. See their fatwaa by clicking here. Al-Haafith Ibn Hajr (rahimahullah), as you will come to see, also disagrees with this conclusion, as well as many of the Hanafi Jurists of the past as mentioned by Sidi Faraz Rabbani here. There are many other ‘Ulamaa’ that disagree as well.

There are a few narrations used as proof for this act. They are:

First: The narration of ‘Umar ibn Al Khattab in Sunan At-Tirmidhi

حَدَّثَنَا ‏ ‏أَبُو مُوسَى مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى ‏ ‏وَإِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ يَعْقُوبَ ‏ ‏وَغَيْرُ وَاحِدٍ ‏ ‏قَالُوا حَدَّثَنَا ‏ ‏حَمَّادُ بْنُ عِيسَى الْجُهَنِيُّ ‏ ‏عَنْ ‏ ‏حَنْظَلَةَ بْنِ أَبِي سُفْيَانَ الْجُمَحِيِّ ‏ ‏عَنْ ‏ ‏سَالِمِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏عَنْ ‏ ‏أَبِيهِ ‏ ‏عَنْ ‏ ‏عُمَرَ بْنِ الْخَطَّابِ ‏ ‏رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ ‏ ‏قَالَ ‏كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏إِذَا رَفَعَ يَدَيْهِ فِي الدُّعَاءِ لَمْ يَحُطَّهُمَا حَتَّى يَمْسَحَ بِهِمَا وَجْهَهُ ‏
قَالَ ‏ ‏مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى ‏ ‏فِي حَدِيثِهِ ‏ ‏لَمْ يَرُدَّهُمَا حَتَّى يَمْسَحَ بِهِمَا وَجْهَهُ ‏ ‏قَالَ ‏ ‏أَبُو عِيسَى ‏ ‏هَذَا ‏ ‏حَدِيثٌ صَحِيحٌ غَرِيبٌ ‏ ‏لَا نَعْرِفُهُ إِلَّا مِنْ حَدِيثِ ‏ ‏حَمَّادِ بْنِ عِيسَى ‏ ‏وَقَدْ تَفَرَّدَ بِهِ وَهُوَ قَلِيلُ الْحَدِيثِ وَقَدْ حَدَّثَ عَنْهُ النَّاسُ ‏ ‏وَحَنْظَلَةُ بْنُ أَبِي سُفْيَانَ الْجُمَحِيُّ ‏ ‏ثِقَةٌ وَثَّقَهُ ‏ ‏يَحْيَى بْنُ سَعِيدٍ الْقَطَّانُ

Musaa Muhammad ibn Al-Muthannaa and Ibraahim ibn Ya’qub and more than one stating that Hammaad ibn ‘Eesaa Al-Juhani narrated to us from Hanthalah ibn Abi Sufyaan Al-Jumahiy from Saalim ibn Abdullah from his father (Abdullah ibn Umar) from Umar ibn Al-Khattab (radhiya Allahu ‘Anhu) who said that Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) when raising his hands in du’aa, would not put them down until he had wiped his face with them.

At-Tirmithi continues, “This hadith is Sahih ghareeb1, we do not know it save from the hadith of Hammad ibn ‘Eesaa, and he alone narrates this [from Hanthala]. He has few hadith and the people reported from him. And Hanthalah ibn Abi Sufyaan al-Jumahiy is thiqah (highly trustworthy), and he was declared thiqah by Yahyaa ibn Sa’id Al-Qattaan.”

The attack on this chain, according to Al-Albaani in his Irwaa’, is that Hammad ibn ‘Eesaa Al-Juhani is dha’if (weak). He writes,

“However, this reporter is weak, as in Taqreeb of Ibn Hajr, who says about him in Tahdheeb:

Ibn Ma`een said, “A good shaikh” Abu Haatim said, “Weak in Hadeeth”; Abu Daawood said, “Weak, he reports munkar ahaadeeth”; Haakim and Naqqaash said, “He reports fabricated ahaadeeth from Ibn Juraij and Ja`far as-Saadiq.” He is declared to be weak by Daaraqutni. Ibn Hibbaan said, “He reports things which are the wrong way round on the authority of Ibn Juraij and `Abdul `Azeez ibn `Umar ibn `Abdul `Azeez, such that it seems to those whose field this is that it is deliberate; it is not permissible to use him as proof.” Ibn Maakoolaa said, “They declare his ahaadeeth to be weak.”

Hence, the like of this reporter is very weak, so his ahaadeeth cannot be raised to the level of hasan, let alone saheeh!” 2

The exact words of Al Albaani are:

قلت : فمثله ضعيف جدا ، فلا يحسن حديثه فضلا عنه أن يصحح !

The obvious question is: How is this reporter ” Dha’if Jiddan - Very weak”? The Imaam of Ahlus Sunnah, Yahyaa ibn Ma’een labeled this man, “A Saalih Shaykh!”3. Furthermore, Imaam At-Tirmidhi clearly states, “And the people reported from him”. An-Naas or the people is in reference to the scholars of hadeeth. That means that this narrator was NOT abandoned by the scholars. Not only does he say the scholars did not abandon him, but he grades the hadith Authentic (sahih)! Adh-Dhahabi mentions in Al-Meezaan,

ضَعَّفَهُ أَبُو دَاوُدَ وَأَبُو حَاتِمٍ والدَّارَقُطْنِيُّ وَلَمْ يَتْرُكْهُ

“He was weakened by Abu Daawud, Abu Haatim, and Ad-Daaraqutni, but he was not Abandoned [by them].”

This proves that the scholars did not consider him “very weak” as claimed by some. Rather, they were cautious and sought supporting narrations. For if he were VERY weak, the scholars would have abandoned his narrations altogether. This is further attested too by the verdict of Ibn Hajr in his Taqrib declaring him “Dha’if”, while not declaring him “very weak” or “abandoned” etc. Thus, the claim that he is “very weak” is an exaggeration. If the pseudo-salafis argue that Haakim and Naqqaash declared that he reported fabrications, we say either of two things:

1) The scholars obviously did not accept this standard or else you would have seen them labeling him Kath-thaab (liar) or matrook (abandoned). Rather, there is nearly a unanimous decision that he is only “dha’if” and not a fabricator!

2) He is not reporting from these men and they were specific in their criticism. Rather he is reporting from Hanthalah ibn Abi Sufyaan.

It is interesting that Al-Albaani and the pseudo-salafis use Al-Haafith Ibn Hajr Al-’Asqalaani’s grading of “Dha’if” against Hammad ibn ‘Eesaa. Al-Haafith (rahimahullah) states in Bulugh Al-Maraam after mentioning this specific narration,

“Reported by Tirmithi. It has shawaahid (supporting narrations) such as the hadith Ibn ‘Abbaas that is reported by Abu Daawud and elsewhere. These narrations, collectively, warrant the hadith to be considered Hasan!”

Even though he declared him weak, he did not abandon his reports, rather he used them as support with other narrations.

The editor, Shaykh Haazim Al-Qaadhi, declares this hadith to be “Hasan li-ghayrih” in his gloss of Subul-As-Salaam of Imaam As-Sana’ani. Imaam As-Sana’ani himself states after this hadith, “In this narration is daleel (proof) that it is legislated to wipe the face after finishing one’s du’aa”.4

Second Hadith: The Narration of As-Saa’ib Ibn Yazeed from His Father Yazeed ibn Sa’id

The second report comes from Abu Daawud in his Sunan and Imaam Ahmad in his Musnad;

‏حَدَّثَنَا ‏ ‏قُتَيْبَةُ بْنُ سَعِيدٍ ‏ ‏حَدَّثَنَا ‏ ‏ابْنُ لَهِيعَةَ ‏ ‏عَنْ ‏ ‏حَفْصِ بْنِ هَاشِمِ بْنِ عُتْبَةَ بْنِ أَبِي وَقَّاصٍ ‏ ‏عَنْ ‏ ‏السَّائِبِ بْنِ يَزِيدَ ‏ ‏عَنْ ‏ ‏أَبِيهِ ‏ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏كَانَ ‏ ‏إِذَا دَعَا فَرَفَعَ يَدَيْهِ مَسَحَ وَجْهَهُ بِيَدَيْهِ

Qutaybah ibn Sa’id narrated to us from Ibn Lahee’ah from Hafs ibn Haashim ibn ‘Utbah ibn Abi Waqqaas from As-Saa’ib ibn Yazeed from his father that the Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) when making du’aa would raise his hands and then would wipe his face with his hands.

There are two defects in this chain: Abdullah ibn Lahee’ah. There is severe disagreement regarding him. The majority say that he wa mistaken after his books were burnt. There is praise from major scholars, such as Ibn Wahb who called him the Saadiq (truthful) righteous man. Ibn Hajr labeled him, “Saduq, he mingled [hadith] after his books burnt…”.5 Haafith Shu’ayb Al-Arnaa’ut disagrees and states, “Dha’if (weak), his reports must be followed up, and his hadith are Sahih if reporting from him are the ‘Abaadilah: i.e. Ibn al Mubaarak, Ibn Wahb, Ibn Yazeed Al-Muqri’, Ibn Maslamah Al-Qa’Nabi , for they followed his principles and transcribed what he said…”

Regarding this hadith, an important point must be made. Qutaybah ibn Sa’id is reporting from him. Qutaybah reported from Ibn Lahee’ah prior to his books being burnt as stated by Shaykh Shu’ayb Al-Arnaa’ut in his Tahreer. This lends strength to a stronger period in Ibn Lahee’ah’s career as a Muhaddith. However, he is weak, as Ibn Ma’in stated he was weak prior to his burning of his books. He is not severely weak however, as even Al-Albaani attested too in his Radd Al-Mufhim and elsewhere.

The second weakness is that the one Ibn Lahee’ah is reporting from, Hafs ibn Haashim, is majhul (unknown) as stated by Ibn Hajr and the rest of the Muhadditheen. However, Ibn Lahee’ah follows up this chain, as mentioned by Imaam Ibn Hajr in his Tahtheeb at-Tahtheeb with another reporter in his place, Yahyaa ibn Is-haaq As-Seelaheeni. Ibn Sa’ad said about him, “thiqah and a master of hadeeth.” He was declared thiqah by Ahmad and others as well. Due to this thiqah follow-up narrator, it is not severely weak, and clearly can be used as a supportive narration.

Third Hadith: The narration of Ibn ‘Abbaas (radhiya Allahu ‘anhu)

This is the narration alluded to by Al-Haafith Ibn Hajr in his Bulugh Al-Maraam. Abu Daawud records it in his sunan thus:

حَدَّثَنَا ‏ ‏عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مَسْلَمَةَ ‏ ‏حَدَّثَنَا ‏ ‏عَبْدُ الْمَلِكِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ أَيْمَنَ ‏ ‏عَنْ ‏ ‏عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ يَعْقُوبَ بْنِ إِسْحَقَ ‏ ‏عَمَّنْ ‏ ‏حَدَّثَهُ عَنْ ‏ ‏مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ كَعْبٍ الْقُرَظِيِّ ‏ ‏حَدَّثَنِي ‏ ‏عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ عَبَّاسٍ ‏
أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏قَالَ ‏ ‏لَا تَسْتُرُوا الْجُدُرَ مَنْ نَظَرَ فِي كِتَابِ أَخِيهِ بِغَيْرِ إِذْنِهِ فَإِنَّمَا يَنْظُرُ فِي النَّارِ سَلُوا اللَّهَ بِبُطُونِ أَكُفِّكُمْ وَلَا تَسْأَلُوهُ بِظُهُورِهَا فَإِذَا فَرَغْتُمْ فَامْسَحُوا بِهَا وُجُوهَكُمْ ‏
قَالَ ‏ ‏أَبُو دَاوُد ‏ ‏رُوِيَ هَذَا الْحَدِيثُ مِنْ غَيْرِ وَجْهٍ عَنْ ‏ ‏مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ كَعْبٍ ‏ ‏كُلُّهَا وَاهِيَةٌ وَهَذَا الطَّرِيقُ أَمْثَلُهَا ‏ ‏وَهُوَ ضَعِيفٌ ‏ ‏أَيْضًا

Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas:

The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: “Do not cover the walls. He who sees the letter of his brother without his permission, sees Hell-fire. Supplicate Allah with the palms of your hands; do not supplicate Him with their backs upwards. When you finish supplication, wipe your faces with them.”

Abu Daawud says, “This hadith is is reported from other directions (of narration) from Muhammad ibn Ka’ab, all of them containing weakness (waahiyah), and this path (tareeq) is an example of that. It is Dha’if (weak) as well.”

The weakness in this hadith, as mentioned by Al-Albaani in hsi Irwaa are two things:

A) Abdul Malik ibn Muhammad ibn Ahmad - who is Majhul according to Ibn Hajr in his Taqreeb. Haafith Shu’ayb Al-Arnaa’ut disagrees and states, “Majhul-Al-Haal” because two trustworthy reporters report from him. However, his hadeeth are acceptable according to the conditions of An-Nawawi and Ibn As-Salaah because his status is “Majhul-Al-Haal” as two or more trustworthy narrators narrate from him and there is no criticism against his status.

B) ‘Abdullah ibn Ya’qub ibn Is-haaq - who is also Majhul Al-Haal.

To be Majhul-Al-Haal/Mastur is not an extreme weakness, and according to some, is not a weakness at all. Please read the following article so as to clarify the valid acceptance of the Mastur’s reports: http://seekingilm.com/archives/99

There are other weak chains that support this narration. They are as follows;

Support 1:

حدثنا ‏ ‏محمد بن الصباح ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏عائذ بن حبيب ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏صالح بن حسان ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏محمد بن كعب القرظي ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏ابن عباس ‏ ‏قال ‏
قال رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏إذا دعوت الله فادع ببطون كفيك ولا تدع بظهورهما فإذا فرغت فامسح بهما وجهك

This is the same hadeeth regarding the wiping of the face. It is the chain of Ibn Maajah in his Sunan. It is weak due to Saalih ibn Hassaan being within it. He is abandoned by most of the Muhadditheen. In fact Al-Bukhaari states regarding him, “Munkar Al-Hadeeth”. Adh-Dhahabi reports that Al-Bukhaari stated that when he deemed someon “munkar al hadeeth”, he is to be abandoned.

Support 2:

As Al-Albaani mentions in his Irwaa’, Ibn Nasr reports this hadeeth without Saalih ibn Hassaan. Instead in his place is another weak narrator by the name of ‘Eesaa ibn Maymoon Al-Madani. There is disagreement as to how severe his weakness is. Ibn Hajr concludes that he is “Dha’eef”, while Haafith Shu’ayb Arnaa’ut deems him abandoned (matrook) in his tahreer.6 Imaam Adh-Dhahabi states in his Kaashif, “He is weakened (dha’afahu).”7 Meaning Adh-Dhahabi agreed to his status being dha’eef, but not abandoned.

If it is as Haafith Ibn Hajr and Imaam Adh-Dhahabi stated, then this second narration is a valid follow up and supportive chain for the first.

After all of this, one can see the validity in Al-Haafith Ibn Hajr’s declaration of “Hasan” upon these narrations. His ruling is justifiable in the shari’ah and, in the view of many of the Muhadditheen, is the correct ruling.

Lastly, Al-Albaani states in his Irwaa’ the following about the Madh-hab of Imaamunaa Ahmad ibn Hanbal (rahimahullah) regarding wiping the face with the hands after du’aa:

قال ابن نصر عقب الحديث : ورأيت إسحاق يستحسن العمل بهذه الأحاديث ، وأما أحمد بن حنبل : فحدثني أبو داود قال : سمعت أحمد ، وسئل عن الرجل يمسح وجهه بيديه إذا فرغ في الوتر ؟ فقال : لم أسمع فيه بشئ

He quotes ibn Nasr as saying, “And I saw Is-haaq declaring good the action of these narrations. Regarding Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal then Abu Daawud narrated to me saying, ‘I heard Ahmad and he was being asked regarding the man who wiped his face with his hands after beseeching Allah in Salatul-Witr. He said, “I have not heard anything at all regarding it.”

The response to this quote:

Firstly: This is specific to Salatul-Witr, not du’aa outside of the Salaah. There is nothing reported regarding wiping one’s face in the Salaah itself.

Secondly: The Hanaabilah have infact established wiping the face after du’aa. Some of them considered it Makrooh in Salaatul-Witr. Others deemed it jaa’iz to recommended outside of it.

Ibn Qudaamah in his Al-Kaafi fi fiqh Al-Imaam Ahmad states regarding Qunut in Witr,

“And when the Imam performs Qunut, the one behind him says Aameen. If he does not hear the Qunut of the Imaam, then he is to make du’aa, and there is textual proof (nass) for that. And [one] raises his hands in the Qunut to the level of his chest, due to Ibn Mas’ood doing so. When he has completed his du’aa he wipes his face with his hands. It is also reported from it [i.e. the madh-hab] that it is not done. And the first [opinion] is better due to what is reported from As-Saa’ib ibn Yazeed (from his father) that Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) would raise his hands when making du’aa, and wipe his face thereafter with his hands. Reported by Abu Daawud.”
Imaam Al-Hajjaawi, a master of the Hanbali madh-hab, writes in his Zaad Al-Mustaqni’ in his section on Salatul-Witr after the Qunut,

“And he wipes his face with his hands…”
Imaam Al-Bahuti, the Imaam of the Hanaabilah in his time, writes in explanation withi his Rawdh Al-Murabbi’,

“That is when he is finished with his du’aa. And when he leaves the Salaah due to the statement of Umar ibn Al Khattab that Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) when raising his hands in du’aa, would not put them down until he had wiped his face with them. Reported by Imaam At-Tirmithi.”
Imaam Mar’i ibn Yusuf Al-Karmi in his Daleel At-Taalib states,

“…he then says Aameen then wipes his face with his hands here…”
Imaam ‘Abdul Qaadir ibn ‘Umar Ash-Shaybaani Al-Hanbali states in his gloss of Daleel At-Taalib, Nayl Al-Maa’rib Sharh Daleel At-Taalib,

“meaning, within the Qunut.”8
So according to these five masters of the Hanbali Madh-hab, this is an established, recommended act, encouraged for every Hanbali in his Salaah. Compare this to the statement of Al-Albaani who said,

فهو بدعة بلا شك

“It is a bida’ah, without a doubt!”

Compare the statements of Ibn Qudaamah, Al-Hajjaawi, Imaam ‘Abdul Qaadir ibn ‘Umar Ash-Shaybaani Al-Hanbali, Imaam Mar’i ibn Yusuf Al-Karmi, Imaam Al-Bahuti and many others of the Hanaabilah to this irresponsible statement of Al-Albaani. Let us not forget this is the official stance of the Hanafis and many Shaafi’is as well, including Ibn Hajr, Imaam As-Suyuti (who deemed the narrations Hasan), and Hujjatul-Islaam Al-Ghazzaali, Imaam Ash-Shawkaani in his Tuhfat-Adh-Dhaakireen, Imaam Al-Jazari in his al-Hisn9. So see with your own eyes the exaggerations of Al-Albaani and the Albaanite hizb.

**Edited on July 11 ‘07**

The following I decided to translate and include in this article for the benefit of the Tullaab:

Imaam Ibn Muflih states in his Al-Mubda’ Sharh Al-Muqni’, the gloss of the simple treatise “Al-Muqni’” of Ibn Qudaamah Al-Maqdisi after the following words of Ibn Qudaamah,

“And does one wipe his face (i.e. when one finishes the du’aa) with his hands? There are Two reports.”The well known (mash-hoor) of the two opinions is that one is to wipe his face. There is a text for it from Ahmad, and it was the chosen opinion (ikhtaaruh) of many. This is due to what is reported from As-Saa’ib ibn Yazeed from his father that the Nabi (alayhis Salaam) would rise his hands in du’aa, and when finished he would wipe his face.It is recorded by Abu Daawud from Ibn Lahee’ah. The second report from the madh-hab is that it is not done. This is recorded by a group and was the chosen of Al-Aajuree due to the weakness of the narration. And also from the madh-hab is that it is Makruh (disliked), and this was declared authentic in the book “Al-Waseelah”.10
I ask Allah to guide us, make our feet firm upon his deen, draw us near to his infinite mercy. Oh Allah bless our beloved Sayyidunaa Muhammad, his family, companions, and those following him until the end.

Footnotes (Click ↩ at the end of the note to Go Back to Original Place in the article) :
meaning narrated by one person - as is the nomenclature of the scholars of hadith [↩]
Note that this is the translation of the salafis themselves here: http://abdurrahman.org/innovation/wipingFace.html [↩]
Tahtheeb at-Tahtheeb [↩]
Vol. 4 page 1543 Dar Al-Fikr Edition [↩]
Taqrib #3563 [↩]
#5335 of the Tahreer [↩]
entry 4403 of Al-Kaashif [↩]
Page 53 in the chapter “Salatu-Tatawwu’” Jaam’iat Al-Azhar’s publication edited by Shaykh Rashdy As-Sayyid Sulaymaan [↩]
page 65 beneath the chapter “Wiping the face with the hands in Du’aa” published by Daar Al-Arqam 1998 CE [↩]
2/238 [↩]

Abu Layla

12-Oct-2007, 11:21 AM

What I read about the Shaykh who mentioned that only the ignorant do it was based on the narrations that he had received on the issue. Shaykh Abu Ammar Yasir Qadhi talks about the issue of wiping over the face in his book, Du'a: Weapon of the Believer. He mentions that there is a difference of opinion on the issue and neither side should attack the other as both have evidence. One hadith being sahih gharib, the others being weak but according to some supporting each other and according to others not so. So if people accept that they support each other, then they can follow that opinion but if people don't accept that they support each other then they can avoid wiping over the face and he states that what appears to be the stronger opinion is that one shouldn't wipe over the face although one can do either and shouldn't be condemned for it.

cheesegirl

12-Oct-2007, 11:45 AM

:salam:

Abu Saifur-Rahman got it right...

The scholars have different opinions as to whether the hadiths about it are weak or not. Some, like Ibn Hajar said the hadith is hasan, so he acted upon it. Others said it is weak so they do not act upon it.

Because there is a basis for it in the hadith we can't say it is bid'ah (even though the hadiths might be weak). (From the notes from the Drops of Dew course).

*F@ttY*

12-Oct-2007, 12:00 PM

Abu Layla

12-Oct-2007, 12:19 PM

Wa Iyaaki, I feel it is a very balanced view and an approach needed in the ummah. And Allaah knows best.

Dragons

12-Oct-2007, 07:24 PM

Shaykh Abu Ammar Yasir Qadhi talks about the issue of wiping over the face in his book, Du'a: Weapon of the Believer. He mentions that there is a difference of opinion on the issue and neither side should attack the other as both have evidence.

Maashallah...we need more scholars like this in this Ummah.

I don't agree with the author attacking the salafi brethren and sheikh Albani rahimahullah
Agreed.

We should not take from people or should I say psuedo- scholars like Sidi Abul Layth ibn ‘Ataa’ who methodology and reasoning is based on insulting and attacking other ulema. May Allah guide him and us all. Ameen.

cheesegirl

12-Oct-2007, 08:44 PM

Here's even more proof and analysis of the topic. I don't agree with the author attacking the salafi brethren and sheikh Albani rahimahullah as such, however, the points raised are very valid in terms of how the madhhab's have allowed this practice - which has a base. InshaAllah it will be beneficial to you.

:salam:

Who is the author? (I know his name, but what else can you tell us about him?)

Even Sheikh Albani in terms of Salatul Tasbeeh allows it - and says that it was a sunnah - so what does our brothers who follow islamqa do there? Who's correct - Ibn Uthaymeen (he claims that it is mawdu - fabricated!)? Bin Baz, Albani, Munajjid? there's so many topics where they themselves differ on certain practises - so what happens then? That's why I prefer to views of the madhhab Imams & the fuqaha who follow them on such issues.

So what do you do when there is a difference of opinion within your madh-hab?