Qabd Vs Sadl: An Argument that the True Maliki Opinion is Right Hand Over The Left

54 Comment(s)

1. On May 23, 2008, Rafael said:

   Jazakum Allah khairn.

   Fair enough, but when discussing qadb, how is it established they are not referring it in the context of the nafila salat rather than the fard? Wasalam.

2. On May 23, 2008, Abul Layth said:

   Because they mentioned it in general, without being specific.

3. On May 23, 2008, Abdurrahman R. Squires said:

   As-salamu ‘alaykum,

   Interesting, but if I put my Maliki hat back on, far from being sufficiently convincing to get me to abandon the mashur position of the school, which is indeed sadl. The main reasons for this are that: 1) Imam Malik, although he made it clear that he was aware of authentic ahad hadiths to the contrary, clearly and unambiguously said that qabd was unknown in al-Madina and thus sadl in the fard prayers was what was manifestly passed down to the overwhelming majority of his students; and 2) sadl remains the mashur position of the madhhab, although I do recognize that there’s not absolute ‘ijma’ on it (since some Egyptian and Andalusian Malikis preferred qabd as well).

   So the first point essentially does away with every hadith that was quoted. Additionally, the Malikis produced voluminous rebuttals to those who, in an attempt to undermine the efficacy of ‘amal, have claimed that in al-Madinah there really wasn’t ‘ijma’ on such-and-such a practice. Due to that, before reaching a conclusion on this…or even thinking we’ve reached one…the only methodologically sound thing to do would read how Maliki scholars have dealt with the opinion of Qadi ‘Abd al-Wahhab al-Baghdadi and other proponents of qabd. Until that’s accomplished, it’s kind of like we’re considering him to be an army of one.

   Which brings me to the second point, which is that one scholar believing that something is the “stronger view” doesn’t make it so. Rather, to determine what the stronger view is, we’d have to look at the views of a whole host of other Maliki scholars. Until that somewhat daunting task has been accomplished in detail, the evidence above is enough to convince me that one relatively early Maliki scholar, Qadi ‘Abd al-Wahhab al-Baghdadi, viewed qabd as the stronger opinion…but not much more than that. From a personal perspective, the fact that the half-dozen or so Maliki teachers that I’ve personally dealt with and learned from all felt that sadl is the dominant opinion of the school counts for a lot…especially knowing that they were all well aware of the controversies surrounding it from both inside and outside the madhhab.

   I’m sure that you’re aware that Ustadh Abdullah bin Hamid Ali has written two ([1][2])treatise on the position of sadl in the Maliki school, but I’ll reference them here for the benefit of those who are not aware of them. Both of these articles try to defend sadl by refuting various ahadith that seem to contradict this practice. As beneficial as this may be to those who have more of Shafi’i (or even “Salafi”) approach to fiqh, I feel that the lack of a detailed explanation in these articles of ‘amal and its weighty role in Maliki fiqh seriously detracts from them.

   Ibn Rushd, interestingly enough, said that the reason Imam Malik disliked qabd was that (if it was indeed the preferred practice) it would be included among the fundamentals of prayer (but it was not).

   In regards to using qabd to support oneself, well I’ve heard that people would gather their loose garment in their hands and then hold it tight with their hands folded in order to support their lower back, which is where fatigue usually starts to set in during long prayers. So it would seem qabd in this manner is what’s makruh…wa Allahu ‘alim.

   Even if me accept, simply for the sake of argument, that the stronger position is qabd because Imam Malik’s statement has been misunderstood by legions of Maliki scholars for generations (sorry, but I couldn’t resist putting it that way!) and thus the great Imam of al-Madinah never really claimed that qabd was contrary to the ‘amal , I still feel that the real point of this discussion should focus on the fact that in the Maliki madhhab ‘amal is considered a much stronger proof than ahad narrations. In saying all that you’ve said above, are you trying to dispute that point or not? I wish you would be more clear on that, which is why I was disappointed that this interesting discussion got side-tracked. Indeed, once one starts dealing with the nitty-gritty minutiae of fiqh issues, sometimes it’s hard to see the forest because of all the trees…wa Allahu ‘alim.

4. On May 23, 2008, Abul Layth said:

   This narration of Sahl, in my view, refutes the claim that such was not the way of the people of Medinah. It shows that not only was it strong amongst the Sahaba - as they were ordered to do it, but it was strong amongst the tabi’in such as Abu Hazim, the qadhi of medinah.

   I am not disputing that ‘Amal of Ahlul Medinah is established in the madh-hab. In fact, I am utilizing this principle for the basis of my argument - showing that the ‘Amal is in fact narrated via sound transmissions - whether ahad or not.

5. On May 23, 2008, Abdurrahman R. Squires said:

   That’s fair enough and, to be honest, I think you’ve made your case rather well. I think it would be wrong to conclude, in spite of the weighty proof that ‘amal represents, that it represents “the way of the Sahabah” in some sort of absolute way. Insha’llah, no one who reads this discussion will come to that faulty conclusion. That’s because there were plenty of Sahabah and Tabi’een in locations other than al-Madinah that obviously did not teach or carry on some of the practices supported by ‘amal, thus it doesn’t amount to some sort of undeniable and monolithic proof. Thus the overtly sectarian view of some Malikis, who thankfully represent a very small minority, that consider Muslims who don’t follow the ‘amal as somehow deficient, is clearly wrong.

   Just for the sake of interest, however, I’ll mention that I find it quite enchanting that sadl has survived amongst the Twelver Shi’a, the Zaydis, the Ismailis and the ‘Ibadis. This is even more of an eyebrow raiser when one realizes that these heretical sects actually split away from the Ahl al-Sunnah prior to the time of Imam Malik. So although we don’t take the practices of heretics as proofs, it does raise the interesting question of where the practice of sadl came from in all these diverse sects if it wasn’t something that was widely practiced in the early days of Islam.

   On that note, I’ll say that one of the primary benefits of praying like a Shafi’i instead of a Maliki in the largely Hanafi masjid where I pray is that now I only get accused of being a “Salafi” instead of a Shi’a…and that’s in spite of the fact that I don’t wiggle my finger or stand on top of other people’s feet!

6. On May 23, 2008, Rafael said:

   As salam ‘aleykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.

   I would also like to add in addition to the words of my vanguard, Sidi Squires, that if I remember correctly the mashur of the Maliki madhab of Iraq was still to pray sadl in the fard and use qadb in other salat; if this is the context in which the statements are understood, then our final understanding in much different than what the title may imply.

   I would also like to add that this manner of grappling with the possible opinions of one or two scholars seems rather falllacious when on considers that the issue is much larger than either Imam Malik or Qadi Al-Baghdadi; if one were to refer to Ustadh ‘Abdullah’s treatise on sadl, one would the evidence that supports sadl as the practice of several of the scholars among the early generations, notably the Imam of the Tabi’een, Hasan al-Basri.

   And I think a third arguement that is important and useful to consider is that brought up by our brothers of Norwich who have taken up the name of the Murabitun, is that because the deviation of the Ibadi-Khawarij and the Shia preserved some of the practices of the early community by being removed from the influence of later Sunni scholars, we have two other examples of ‘amal that support what has been regard as the ‘amal of Medina by the overwhelming majority of Maliki scholars from the across the Moslem world.

   And personally among the Maliki scholars I have met many of them practiced sadl, a practice I have seen even among scholars of the Shafi’i madhab. Wasalam.

7. On May 23, 2008, Rafael said:

   Hmm.. Considering the arguement of sadl being the practice of Medina, and the Shia, and the Ibadi, has lead me to devise a new slogan: Three ‘amals are better than none!

8. On May 23, 2008, Abul Layth said:

   As-Sana’ni in his subul as-salaam says that Zayd ibn ‘Ali believed qabd was correct, though the Haadawiyyah believe it is not and that if one does it to much it will nullify ones Salah.

   Just for the sake of interest, however, I’ll mention that I find it quite enchanting that sadl has survived amongst the Twelver Shi’a, the Zaydis, the Ismailis and the ‘Ibadis. This is even more of an eyebrow raiser when one realizes that these heretical sects actually split away from the Ahl al-Sunnah prior to the time of Imam Malik. So although we don’t take the practices of heretics as proofs, it does raise the interesting question of where the practice of sadl came from in all these diverse sects if it wasn’t something that was widely practiced in the early days of Islam.

   Could it have in fact stemmed from deviation. As we have many authentic narrations directly from the Nabi , as well as many Sahaabah throughout the globe - ex: Wa’il ibn Hujr who was in Yemen, Ibn Mas’ud who was in ‘Iraq etc, Abu Hurayrah who was in Medinah as well as the east.

   However, I should mention that An-Nawawi claims Imam Layth ibn Sa’ad as performing sadl and Imam Al-Awza’i of Lebanon believing one has the freedom to choose between both views. Both Imams contemporaries or slightly prior to Imam Malik.

9. On May 23, 2008, Abdurrahman R. Squires said:

   Well actually I think it might have very well originated simply in deviance, since all of these groups seem to have a knack for wanting to differ from the majority Sunnis. Also, instead of breaking them down as three sects in this instance, it’s probably more accurate to consider the Zaydis, Ismailis and Twelvers all as simply Shi’a since they all are just offshoots of each other anyway. Which leaves us with the fact that the Khawarij (’Ibadis) and the Shi’a (of all flavors) largely practice sadl. Sounds like a nice PhD dissertation for someone…

10. On May 23, 2008, Abul Layth said:

    I was going over the Tuhfat Al-Ahwadhi Sharh Sunan At-Tirmidhi, obviously laced with Hanafi quotes, and I came across the Shaykh saying regarding the view of some Malikis that the right hand should be over the left below the chest and above the navel,

    “And in ‘iqd Al-Jawaahir’ (written by Abu Muhammad Abdullah Ash-Shaashi Al-Maliki) this is reported from Imam Malik by Mutarrif and Al-Maajishun.”

    Every Maliki knows their incredible status with the earliest Malikis.

11. On May 23, 2008, Rafael said:

    Nope; I remain unconvinced.

12. On May 23, 2008, Abdurrahman R. Squires said:

    This reminds me of something that my first teacher of Maliki fiqh said during a lesson when one of the students asked what to say if harassed about not folding his arms in the prayer. The Shaykh said, “Say to the arm-folder: ‘So how do I fold my arms? The Hanafis say below the navel, the Shafi’is above the navel and others say to fold them even higher up on the chest. Once you arm-folders get this figured out, give us Malikis a call.’” Needless to say, this was received with wild enthusiasm in the Maliki dars…Ha!

13. On May 23, 2008, Ibn Ahmad said:

    شرح زروق على متن الرسالة

    باب صفة العمل في الصلوات المفروضة وما يتصل بها من النوافل والسنن

    في حكم الإرسال بعد تمام الرفع اختلاف ولا يضع يمناه على يسراه في الفريضة وذلك خائز في النافلة لطول القيام ليعين نفسه الطرطوشي إنما منعه في الفريضة لأجل الاعتماد وفي العتبية لا أرى به بأسا في الفريضة والنافلة ابن رشد ظاهره اختلاف قول وروى الإخوان يستحب والعراقيون يمنع عبد الوهاب التفرقة بين الفريضة والنافلة غير صحيح والتأويل بالاعتماد غير صحيح وإنما اختلف الناس هل ذلك من هيئات الصلاة أم لا في البيان يتحصل في ثلاثة أقوال الإباحة مطلقا والكراهة إلا في طول النافلة والاستحباب وهو بقبض اليمن على كوع اليسرى وتحت صدره

    Sharh Zarruq ‘Ala Matn Al-Risala

    Chapter: The Various Actions Pertaining to the Obligatory Prayers & The Sunna & Meritorious Acts Related Therein

    There is disagreement in the ruling of placing the hands to the sides after raising them in the opening takbir. (One opinion holds) that the right is not placed over the left in the obligatory prayers though it is permitted to do so in the supergatory prayers throughout the standing phase of the prayer. This is done in order that one may support himself. Al-Tartoushie prohibited this in the obligatory prayers (if done for the) PURPOSE OF SUPPORT. With respect to being censured on account of qabd, then I (Ahmad Al-Zarruq) do not see a problem therein either in the obligatory prayers nor the supergatory. Ibn Rushd has supported this opinion. In further relation to this difference, our Iraqi brothers have deemed this practice (qabd) to be the preferred. Abd Al-Wahab has prohibited the differentiation of this action between the obligatory and supergatory prayers and deemed such a distinction invalid, in addition to regarding its interpretation as a form of support also invalid; for the question is whether the people have differed on the issue of qabd as constituting a part of the prayer or not. In the exposition of this issue, one will find three absolutely strong opinions of this act (qabd) being strongly disliked (in the madh-hab) except if it is performed in the long supergatory prayers and the preferred method of qabd in such a case is to place the right hand over the left elbow below the chest.

    *Please Correct Any Defects in Translation*

14. On May 23, 2008, Rafael said:

    Does anyone else get the impression that this really doesn’t matter all that much?

15. On May 23, 2008, Abdurrahman R. Squires said:

    Well I think this horse has been beaten quite enough. I told you that we’d get sidetracked…Ha! Not that I’m complaining, since it was a valuable discussion…but I think it’s about time to bring it to an end. However, I still have a couple of lengthy quotes from renowned Maliki scholars where they state the importance of ‘amal in their madhhab, which I intend to scan, OCR and then post…insha’llah.

    And before I forget…a big “Jazaka Allah khayr” to Ibn Ahmad for posting the excellent translation.

16. On May 23, 2008, Abul Layth said:

    Jazaakum Allahu Khairan Sidi Ibn Ahmad.

17. On May 23, 2008, Abul Layth said:

    This reminds me of something that my first teacher of Maliki fiqh said during a lesson when one of the students asked what to say if harassed about not folding his arms in the prayer. The Shaykh said, “Say to the arm-folder: ‘So how do I fold my arms? The Hanafis say below the navel, the Shafi’is above the navel and others say to fold them even higher up on the chest. Once you arm-folders get this figured out, give us Malikis a call.’” Needless to say, this was received with wild enthusiasm in the Maliki dars…Ha!

    If he would like a real debate on the issue, no offense to the speaker, he should debate a Shafi’i!

18. On May 24, 2008, Sufisticated said:

    As-salamu alaikum,

    The ibadiyya school which was orginally formed by a fraction of the khawarij (who was the bulk of imam Alis army) have always held this view too. As do the Zaydiyya of Yemen, as the ithna ashariyyah. I am not basing my fiqh on twelwers shia at all, but one seem to see a pattern here, that is to say, the inner circle of Imam Ali seemed to have prayed with sadl, and they held on to it even when they made takfir on him and succeeded. The zaydiyya and ibadiyya have been a bit isolated in their fiqh understanding, not having to deal with the bid´ah from Iraq and the northerns borders.
    Again, this is no solid argument in fiqh, but still, in an academic enviroment we can at least discuss it, and admit that the sadl position is very early and very “salafi” to say the least.

    Wa salaam!

19. On May 24, 2008, Sufisticated said:

    So we have to possible stories, either that qabd was added, or that sadl was added. One version has it, that all of a sudden three schools departed from the
    main body of muslims and formed ibadiyyah, zaydiyyah, ithna ashatiyyah ( and the ismailis prayed with sadl too before their school totally went overboard and nullified salat). These innovated schools populated the lower areas of the arabian peninsula and the whole of North Africa, while in the northern territories (facing the Byzantines and the Persians) the muslims hanged on to the sunnah of clasping the hands. When I read history I see that most bid´ah has its roots in these central areas. Abu Hanifa was very strict in hadith because of the area he was in.
    Imam Malik didnt even accept what was rapported in these areas. The schools which are extinct today also held the sadl position as allowed or preferable, Tabaris school (Jariri) and al-Awzais school. It seem at an early stage that all of the arabian peninsula accepted sadl as their position. What later happened, I cant answer. But at least, the sadl position must at least be seen as coming from the sunan, at one point or another, maybe mansukh, but still, it must have been there at one time.

20. On May 24, 2008, tilmeedh said:

    As far as the practice of sadl itself is concerned, there’s no doubt that it did exist in the time of the early salaf - but so did qabd.
    The only difference of opinion can be regarding whether they considered folding a sunnah or not.

    Here’s a neat section from the Musannaf of Imam Abd Al-Razzaq: http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/archive/showHadiths2.php?BkNo=17&KNo=3&BNo=376

    And from the Musannaf of Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah: http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/library/BooksCategory.php?idfrom=404&idto=404&bk_no=10&ID=390

21. On May 24, 2008, Sufisticated said:

    As-salamu alaikum,

    Again using crypto-proofs here but just thinking freely. Doesnt the ithna ashariyya sect have these 11 imams (we exclude the 12th since he is just too much, in my view).
    But all these 11 imams were kibar al-ulama according to us, and we must admit that the proofs for sadl gets even stronger since we have this position coming from them all (from books we dont take fiqh from, but still). Its quite a good isnad if we only could trust the chain after them (the ahl ul-bayt) until written down in the 10th century or whenever.

22. On May 24, 2008, Abul Layth said:

    Wa’alaykum Salaam,

    Although I see where the brothers are coming from, I think their argument is weak, especially from a Sunni view. I think the real issue is to see what the proper view of Imam ‘Ali ‘Alayhis salaam was. It is authentically narrated via multiple chains that he promoted qabd, primarily through the aathaar in reference to the tafsir of Surat Al-Kawthar.

    The schools which are extinct today also held the sadl position as allowed or preferable, Tabaris school (Jariri) and al-Awzais school.

    Imam Al-Awza’i believed in freedom of choice in this issue. Neither was preferrable.

    Another issue I would like to address here is that the narrations relied upon regarding sadl, as posted by Sidi tilmeedh, are not from Medinites. ‘Ataa ibn Abi Rabaah was the Mufti of Makkah, Ibrahim An-Nakha’i was an Imam of ‘Iraq.

    Several of the narrations from the Musannaf of ibn Abi Shaybah are not authentic:

    ex: حدثنا عمر بن هارون عن عبد الله بن يزيد قال : ما رأيت ابن المسيب قابضا يمينه في الصلاة كان يرسلها .

    ‘Amr ibn Haarun was abandoned by many of the Huffaath.

    The point that I am making is that I have seen some Maalikis using these statements of ‘Ataa and Ibrahim as proof for their stance, yet these men are not even of the people of Medinah or from their fiqh. Whereas, we have Abu Hazim, the Qadhi of Medinah raising the hadith of qabd to the Nabi (’alayhis salaam) and narrating it to his students, such as Malik who intern narrated it.

    I am not seeing the validity in the utilization of some of the views reported from the ‘Iraqiyyun. What is even more interesting is that the Hanafis cling to the school of An-Nakha’i, yet we know their view is qabd.

23. On May 24, 2008, Abdurrahman R. Squires said:

    In regards to: “If he would like a real debate on the issue, no offense to the speaker, he should debate a Shafi’i!”

    Well it seems to me that misses the entire point. Since if a Shafi’i were brought in, he’d no doubt rigorously defend, based on Shafi’i principles, where the best place to place the hands is. Then if a Hanafi were brought in, he’d do the same based on Hanafi ‘usul…and ditto for a Hanbali. Then a even a “Salafi” could be brought in and he might argue that the Sunnah espouses an entirely different from the aforementioned three, all of which differ from each other.

    Thus the point isn’t that each of the other madhaahib doesn’t have rigorous proofs for their position (no pun intended), but that they all come to a different conclusion. Hence the statement, “Once you arm-folders get this figured out, give us Malikis a call.”

24. On May 24, 2008, Sufisticated said:

    And also, when I check my Muwatta, in the Muhammad ash-Shaybani-rahimahu Llah-version, I see that Ibn Umar-radiya Allahu ´anhu- used Hayy ´alaa´l-khayri´l-´amal in his adhan. So maybe maybe all that the ahl ul-bid´ah does are not wrong per se, rather their wrongs are wrong simply because they are wrong, not because of who they are. “La tandhur ilaa man qala wa undhur ilaa maa qaala”.

    Anyways, I am no internet debater, all I want to do is to be left alone in the mosque when I pray according to the mashhur of the Umm al-madhaahib.

    Often we malikis tend to be extra sensible
    in this sadl or qabd discussion because
    of bad experiences and low tolerance level in our mosques.

25. On May 24, 2008, Abul Layth said:

    Btw…is there an authentic narration from the Messenger of Allah in the books of hadith that he practiced sadl?

    There are many in the view of the Malikis. Primarily the hadith of “The mistaken man” wherein the Nabi (’alayhis salaam) taught him how to pray and he did not teach him qabd.

    As well as all the other narrations wherein it was not specifically mentioned.

26. On May 25, 2008, Salman said:

    salamu `alaykum

    I think it would be very difficult to claim something as the “true Maliki opinion” when the mashhur, most undoubtedly, is not in agreement with such a view - regardless of whether certain scholars of the Maliki school, early or late, disagreed with this position.

    Also, I found the analysis, despite the authors mention of there being more details to come, to be generally lacking an usuli perspective. Such an analytical perspective is quite necessary if we are to establish anything. Otherwise, even in the Hanafi school, there are numerous statements of Imam Abu Hanifa that are contradictory regarding the same issue. However, this does not mean that one can simply quote a statement of the Imam and certain early day scholars who supported that view and claim it to be the “true” opinion when the mu`atamad is known to be otherwise.

    Wasalam
    Salman

27. On May 25, 2008, Abul Layth said:

    Wa’alaykum Salam,

    Your critique has validity. However, I believe that the claim the mu’tamad is sadl is a later assertion by the later majority western scholars of Africa & Egypt.

    I believe that the authentic way of Ahlul Medinah was qabd - as I presented above. I also believe that the older school, especially the ‘Iraqi Maaliki school, argued that Qabd was the relied upon view of the madh-hab as stated by the Qadhi.

    Now, if you think that I am claiming that the mu’tamad of our era amongst the Malikis is qabd, then you have misunderstood my claim. What I meant by “True Maliki Opinion” was that this was the view of the early Malikis, including Malik himseld, and it is substantiated by the proof presented. I did not at all argue that the scholars of later - especially the early African school - did not believe sadl was the mu’tamad. That is not my claim, and it is not the objective of this article.

    Jazakum Allahu Khairan

28. On May 25, 2008, Abul Layth said:

    In regards to: “If he would like a real debate on the issue, no offense to the speaker, he should debate a Shafi’i!”

    Well it seems to me that misses the entire point. Since if a Shafi’i were brought in, he’d no doubt rigorously defend, based on Shafi’i principles, where the best place to place the hands is. Then if a Hanafi were brought in, he’d do the same based on Hanafi ‘usul…and ditto for a Hanbali. Then a even a “Salafi” could be brought in and he might argue that the Sunnah espouses an entirely different from the aforementioned three, all of which differ from each other.

    Thus the point isn’t that each of the other madhaahib doesn’t have rigorous proofs for their position (no pun intended), but that they all come to a different conclusion. Hence the statement, “Once you arm-folders get this figured out, give us Malikis a call.”

    When the school, within itself, has open disagreement regarding the issue based upon their own principles - as we have noted in the original article - then the true faqih is able to defend his view not just based upon his school’s principles but the principles of the others school as well.

    As my Shaykh once told me, the true faqih is not the one who can defend his own view, but defend his view based upon the argumentation of the opponents view.

29. On May 25, 2008, al-Kakazai said:

    Salam

    A few of points regarding this discussion:

    I have come across a number of staunch Malikis from the Arab lands who hold the view of the position of Qabd. I met a solid Maliki Sheikh from Bahrain who mentioned that the Malikis of Bahrain have traditionally practised Qabd. You will also find a number of Mauritanian scholars in the Emirates who practise Qabd and are firm in their following of the Maliki school and belong to Tariqahs.

    On the other hand Sh. Mukhtar al-Dawudi (whose book was the basis for the article on sadl) mentions riwayat from Imam Malik, Imam al-Shafi and Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal for sadl being permissible (I dont have the book at hand here im afraid)

    Interestingly, from what I recall, it is mentioned in some works that Imam Muhammad bin Hasan al-Shaybani, the great student of Imam Abu Hanifah who also studied with Imam Malik mentions that one practised sadl for the beginning part of the prayer (when the reciting the opening dua) after which one makes qabd for the recitation.

    Finally, on a forum discussion it was mentioned that there exists another narration to Imam Malik from other than Ibn al-Qasim where Imam Malik mentions that sadl should be practised and that his Sheikh in Madinah (from the Ahl al-Bayt) disliked qabd and preferred sadl, therefore we have two narrations going back to Malik affirming his preference for sadl.

    This is important because the Malikis who prefer Qabd mention that sadl was only reported by Ibn al-Qasim and no other student of Imam Malik

    ws

30. On May 25, 2008, Sufisticated said:

    Quote: “Interestingly, from what I recall, it is mentioned in some works that Imam Muhammad bin Hasan al-Shaybani, the great student of Imam Abu Hanifah who also studied with Imam Malik mentions “THAT ONE” practised sadl for the beginning part of the prayer (when the reciting the opening dua) after which one makes qabd for the recitation”.

    Who is “the one” mentioned above referring to? (I filled it in above)
    Is this to say there exists a report from shaykh Muhammad ash-Shaybani that says that when he himself studied under imam Malik in Medina saw the students of Malik as well as the ahl ul-Medina do this practice; to stand in sadl position in the beginning and later change position of the arms, while in salah? This seems rather strange, since there is no opening dua after takbirat ul-ihram in the maliki school.

31. On May 25, 2008, al-Kakazai said:

    Salam

    Sorry, was a typo, should read “that one practises”

    Imam Muhammad was mentioning his position about folding the arms, whether Malikis recite the istiftah or not is of no consequence.

    I believe I read the above quote referenced to Imam Muhammad in Imam al-Tahawi’s brief work on the Ikhtilaf of the Scholars.

    Ws

32. On May 25, 2008, Rafael said:

    As salam ‘aleykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.

    You know I find the only last impact of such discussion is the potential to fill my heart with doubt and to become distracted and disatisfied with my salat on account of where my arms are rather than where my heart is. The reality is that sadl is part of sunnah and qadb is part of the sunnah. Personally not only am I inclined towards the opinions that sadl represents the practice of the majority of the early community, but I am more convinced that because of the threat to sadl becoming a “dead sunnah”, that itself should be an impetus to adopt in my daily practice. I guess I can save qadb for tarawih inshaAllah. Wasalam.

33. On May 25, 2008, Abul Layth said:

    In the transmission of Muhammad Ash-Shaybani from Imam Malik beneath the hadith of Abu Hazim he says,

    “The one praying should, once standing in his prayer, place the palm of his right hand on his left wrist, under the navel, and cast his eyes to the place where he prostrates. And this is the saying of Abu Hanifah.”

    [Turath's print pg 137]

    Regarding the Bahraini Maliks performing Qabd, then this is mash-hur, as you stated from them. It is also mash-hur from the Emirati Malikis. In fact, the latest prints of Qadhi Abdul Wahhab Al-Baghdadi’s works are printed by the Emirati government and promoted by the Maliki scholars of the Emirates. It seems the ‘arab Malikis tend to rely upon the ‘Iraqi school, a branch of the school that is not as numerous as the African one.

    I have read several works on Hanbali fiqh, and three opinions are reported from him: qabd above the navel, below the navel, and choice between the two. This is the three riwayat from him [you can see these views expressed in Al-Kafi fi fiqh Al Imam Ahmad by Ibn Qudaamah Al-Maqdisi]. Never have I seen in the works of the Hanbalis a report suggesting his view was sadl. However, being “permitted” is of no shock because it is simply “recommended” and thus abstaining from such bares no blame.

34. On May 25, 2008, al-Kakazai said:

    Salam

    If someone has Imam al-Tahawis work perhaps they can check Imam Muhammads position in there, im pretty sure i read it somewhere

    I was referring to the Mauritanian Malikis in the Emirates, not the emiratis themselves, anyhows you do get a number of the emiratis praying with sadl aswell, also the main emirati origin shuyukh who are Maliki pray with sadl as I was informed.

    If i recall correctly, the al-Ahsa Malikis also pray with sadl (I would need to check, but from what I recall this is is their position)

    Therefore this division between gulf and african malikis on this issue is not correct

    Ws

    ws

35. On May 25, 2008, al-Kakazai said:

    Salam, Sh. Musa Furber mentioning Sadl as a position transmitted from Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal:

    “Several transmitted opinions are listed in al-Insaf: [1] below the navel (the madhhab, supported by the vast majority of Hanbali scholars), [2] below the chest (without naming a single Hanbali who preferred it), [3] choosing between the above (preferred by Majd al-Din in al-Muharrar), [4] letting them dangle in all prayers, and [5] letting them dangle in voluntary but not obligatory prayers – with some including the Funeral Prayer among the voluntary prayers. Here is the text from al-Insaf (2:46):

    So, five opinions were transmitted from Imam Ahmad, with one being supported by the vast majority of Hanbalis and another being supported by a few”

    full answer at:
    http://hanbali.org/blog/2008/01/24/placement-of-hands-during-prayer/#more-43

36. On May 25, 2008, Abul Layth said:

    http://seekingilm.com/archives/25

    It is strange such was not reported by Ibn Qudaamah in any of his works, or Al-Bahuti etc. I wonder if the stated report is not referring to after ruku’ at the time of ‘itidaal.

37. On May 26, 2008, Ibn Ahmad said:

    Amir Muhammad of Dubai adheres to sadl.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0saWXXHvyQ

    *Watch the very end of the video.

    I have seen other videos of him performing sadl among the qabd-performing Saudi dignitaries.

38. On May 26, 2008, faqir said:

    as-salamu `alaikum

    To determine ‘the true Maliki opinion’ I presume one must go to the ‘relied upon’ books in the madhhab.

    I am not a Maliki so I would be interested in knowing what are the ‘relied upon’ books in the school with which one can say ‘this is the madhhab’.

    Is the text quoted by brother Abul Layth a major text of the Maliki school from which fatawa positions in the madhhab are derived?

    jazakumAllahu khayran

39. On May 26, 2008, Abul Layth said:

    wasalam,

    Faqir I clarified what I meant by “true” Maliki opinion. I am not arguing that it is the view of the majority of scholars of our era or even of past generations. I am arguing that the Iraqi school, and their Imam Qadhi Abdul-Wahhab Al-Baghdadi is the correct view. As for his works being relied upon, then they are amongst the old Iraqi school. You will certainly not see his works promoted amongst certain ethnic groups.

40. On Jul 8, 2008, Musa Abu Bakr Tikari said:

    Assalaamu ‘Alaikum wa RahmatuAllahi wa Barakatu,

    The relied upon books of the school is well known, namely Aqrab al-Masalik and of course more importantly, Mukhtasar Khalil where the dominant positions of the school have been established.

    On a side note, I have heard that the African schools of the madhab of the three schools is considered to be the closest to the original positions coming out of Madina. Is this true?

41. On Jul 9, 2008, Ibrahim Al Amreeki said:

    bismillah ir rahman ir raheem, As salamu ‘alikum wr wb…

    One of the reasons why Qabd became predominate in North Africa ( places that traditionally practiced Sadl) was due to the Fatimah Shi’a influence over North Africa. Just as you see Maliki scholars today advise to place one arm over the other not to cause fitnah, they too were advised before in the past. We also have to keep in mind that in our society though we believe we are attuned to such detailed matters of fiqh, those of yesterday were more adept than we can imagine. Hair styles, mustache, beard all could be used by the keen eye to understand the fiqh of the person. It’s also good to note that madhabs and traditional empires also shared allegiance with one another.

    I believe a strong point for the issue of Sadl comes from the hadeeths in relation to it being disliked for a person to place their hands on their hips. Now we all get the picture of the Sahabah as being some supreme infallible holier than thou types (thou saintly) read the Muwatta carefully. At the end of the day you are dealing with God fearing human beings. Simple human beings. We get reports of people playing with pebbles in their salaah, how many Muslims do that today in the Masjid? Any how we got reports of people placing their hands on their hips imagine! To me this is an indirect proof of Sadl as one could be more inclined to do that than say if they were pressed on the chest. Though the Hanafi/Humbali still has room to counter.

    Also about the hands being used as support, I have found many Malikis simply just drop or lower their arms slowly and let them hang ‘anyhow’ in the Salaah but from what our teachers have given us they are to remain stiff and firm as if at military attention and that my friends is no easy task even for a few minutes to keep them tense.

    After practicing as such for a few years there have been times where I have placed one hand over the other simply cause I just didn’t want to do Sadl.

    That’s my few beans.
    All praise be to Allah , the mistakes (especially those in grammar and syntax) are mine.

42. On Aug 12, 2008, Asad Habib said:

    “as-salamu `alaikum

    To determine ‘the true Maliki opinion’ I presume one must go to the ‘relied upon’ books in the madhhab.

    I am not a Maliki so I would be interested in knowing what are the ‘relied upon’ books in the school with which one can say ‘this is the madhhab’.

    Is the text quoted by brother Abul Layth a major text of the Maliki school from which fatawa positions in the madhhab are derived?

    jazakumAllahu khayran”

    Asalaam Alaykum,

    Mudawanna of Sahnun formed the basis of the fiqh of West Africa and Andalusia. This is because he explained the Muwatta so well. Merged with the Marriage of the Risala al Qayrawani, the issue of Sadl is sealed.

    Imam Abdul Wahab al Baghdadi rahimahu Allah was born in 422 AH. This is the key thing to remember in all the peice. He was born around 300 years after the main men of Madinah recorded Amal and Hadith, following on from this in this instance, Sadl.

    Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahu Allah stated in the first 3 generations of Madinah their is no bidah and wrote a treatise on it, interestingly he says after 3 generations things got mixed up.

    So to me it is illogical to accept an Imam authority 300 years after, claim it is the correct opinion (indirectly) then show a profound mis-understanding of Amal ahl al Madinah by stating that is the Amal!! (imam baghdadis opinion).

    For your interest I pray Sadl for Fardh btw and sometimes do Qabd on Sunnah or Nafl.

    Finally brother Layth, literalist opinions in line with ones views and then “pumping up” the authors of those views truthfullness (what the peice was based on) shows a profound misunderstanding of the Amal of Madinah. One kindly requests you to sit with Malikis for 6months and then observe how Amal in person (how it is transmitted) can never be accurately recorded in text (where you got your judgement from if i am not mistaken).

    Masalaam & Allah knows best.

43. On Aug 12, 2008, Asad Habib said:

    For more detailed info on the majority opinion, its fiqh and ruling over and above hadith please refer to:

    ʿAmal v Ḥadīth in Islamic Law the Case of Sadl al-Yadayn (Holding One’s Hands by One’s Sides) When Doing the Prayer
    Yasin Dutton

    http://www.jstor.org/pss/3399180

44. On Aug 13, 2008, Abul Layth said:

    Salamu ‘Alaykum,

    I do not deny that the majority view is sadl - in fact that is not the claim of the article at all. In a prior comment you saw me state:

    Faqir I clarified what I meant by “true” Maliki opinion. I am not arguing that it is the view of the majority of scholars of our era or even of past generations. I am arguing that the Iraqi school, and their Imam Qadhi Abdul-Wahhab Al-Baghdadi is the correct view. As for his works being relied upon, then they are amongst the old Iraqi school. You will certainly not see his works promoted amongst certain ethnic groups.

    Rather, I am stating that the medinites established qabd - not sadl - and I gave reference to that. The Qadhi of the Malikis of Baghdad, Abdul Wahhab saw such and ignored the contradictory reports. Furthermore, Ibn Abdul Hakam reported qabd from Imam Malik as well, leaving room for ikhtilaaf as to what the ‘amal of ahlul medina was.

    The response given does not even respond to the “smoking-gun” regarding the medinite chain of qabd.

45. On Aug 13, 2008, Asad Habib said:

    Walaykum Asalam,

    Then of course you are entitled to your opinion and if you deem it correct so be it. However note, from a fine print of your site and reading it seems you take Sunnah directly from texts and then implement it. Since this is Alien to “Amal” in its purest form i can see why you arrive at your conclusion.

    Assuming you adopt the Shafi opinion of hands on the chest, and this view of Imam Baghdadi(ra) tallies in with hands on the chest I can see why you chose it.

    However, this doesnt change the fact that the Madinah Amal in the time of the Prophet salalahu alayhi wasalaam prior to 300 years before Imam Baghdadi(ra) came was Sadl, for the simple fact Imam Layth(ra) famously said didnt he?

    “I would rather than 1,000 from 1,000 than 1 from 1, for the latter would rip the Sunnah right out of your hands”.

    Seeing as Sadl is the Mashoor and thus, correct opinion (Amal being based on practise and not text), then you can cast iron guarantee 1,000 saw from 1,000 then the following 1,000 took from 1,000 and so it spread, to all of Africa, Andalusia and Persia (with the Shi’ites).

    As to why Qabd crept back in a few hundred years later, this is easily explained if one thinks carefully. Sultans, Caliphs, Amirs and the political order imposed change on Madinah didnt they? As so knew Imams came in, Imams who saw text, lost some Amal, didnt want to upset the status quo.

    Even today some Malikis know the position is Majority for Sadl but say “fold your hands, dont create fitnah”. Now if people came and saw Malikis do this and say this was the correct view, doesnt make it right does it?

    in the same vein we look at Madinah 300 years after the Sahaba and the time of the Imam you quote.

    So, unless you can prove the Amal was different, and i dont think you can, then i see this case as closed brother. However, i would invite you to learn more of Amal, if you viewed this as it was meant to be you would never have arrived at the conclusion you gave.

    I would like to close the matter on Imam Maliks (ra) famous letter to Imam Layth(ra),

    “So when there is a clear practice in Madina and people follow it, I do not see room for anyone to go against it. This is because the people of Madina have in their hands the inherited tradition that no one else can claim or falsely attribute to themselves.

    If the people of various cities were to begin saying, ‘This is the practice in our area’ and, ‘This is what people amongst us have been doing’ their claim would not be reliable. Their claim would not have the support that the claim of the people of Madina would have when they say this same thing”.

    To use this claim of Amal referred to above for Madinah 300 years after when Heresies, fitnah, tribulations and a whole manner of other political things happened and affected the people of Madinah is quite clearly wrong.

    Masalaam
    Hajj Asad Habib

46. On Aug 13, 2008, Rafael said:

    As salam ‘alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.

    What I love about this, Sidi Abu Layth, is that you claim that you are not trying to argue that sadl is not the mashur of the madhab, despite the title of the thread — you just want to prove that the mashur is wrong.

    I think there is another dangerous game being played here, and that is confining the issue to being hadith versus ‘amal when sadl has as much support from hadith as does qadb — if not more. I think the only thing I would be interested in to add to this discussion would if someone were to translate Shaykh al-’Alawi ad-Darqawi’s treatise in favour of qadb. (Nudge, nudge.)

    Wasalam.

47. On Oct 10, 2008, Maliki said:

    The practice of the successors in Madina was Sadl.Read Tareekh Abi Zar’ah Al-Dimashqi and you will find this narration:

    حدثني عبد الرحمن بن إبراهيم عن عبد الله بن يحي المعافري عن حيوة عن بكر بن عمرو أنه لم ير أبا أمامة يعني ابن سهل واضعا إحدى يديه على الأخرى قط ولا أحدا من أهل المدينة حتى قدم الشام فرأى الأوزاعي وناسا يضعونه

    This narration is authentic according to the conditions of Imam Bukhari and it proves that the practice of the successors of Madina was Sadl.

48. On Dec 19, 2008, Abdul said:

    I know i’m way late on this one but I just want to make sure that you know that this is a bogus article. You have no right to make such a statement. No right whatsoever. Sidi Abdur Rahman posted the articles by Ustadh Abdullah Ali please read those and correct yourself before you wreck yourself.

    Wa salaam,

    Abdul

49. On Dec 20, 2008, Abul Layth said:

    The practice of the successors in Madina was Sadl.Read Tareekh Abi Zar’ah Al-Dimashqi and you will find this narration:

    حدثني عبد الرحمن بن إبراهيم عن عبد الله بن يحي المعافري عن حيوة عن بكر بن عمرو أنه لم ير أبا أمامة يعني ابن سهل واضعا إحدى يديه على الأخرى قط ولا أحدا من أهل المدينة حتى قدم الشام فرأى الأوزاعي وناسا يضعونه

    This narration is authentic according to the conditions of Imam Bukhari and it proves that the practice of the successors of Madina was Sadl.

    The hadith of Sahl disproves such.

50. On Dec 27, 2008, Sadiq said:

    The Shia hadiths seem to attribute qabd to Zoroastrians, in Chapter 15:

    http://www.rafed.net/books/hadith/wasael-7/wasail11.html#267

    As for the Ibadhis, their fiqh coalesced in Basra, which was a melting pot in every way. They say that Prophet Isa is dead, deny his return, and claim that the dajjal is not an individual, but rather abstractly and non-literally a country, group, etc. Along with this Basran Mutazilite thought are sloppy mistakes in fiqh and tafsir, such as them saying that 24:3 bars two adulterers from marrying and that even small sins legally break ones fast, based on qiyas from one of their hadiths saying that the Prophet said that one who slanders a chaste woman breaks their fast. Among many other strange views such as “kufr nima” and along with their strange history prior and after the formal development of their fiqh, their practices cannot be taken as even tertiary proof as to the validity of holding the arms at the sides in prayers.

51. On Jan 5, 2009, Ibn Malik said:

    Asalamu alaykum,

    A truly comendable dicussion. However, there is a major point missing: For the M’utamid opinion in the school there are two books that are given the most weight:

    1. The Mukhtasar of Imam al-Khalil
    2. al-Sharh al-Saghir of Sidi Dardir

    Both mention that the Mashur opinion is to allow one’s hand’s to the side. However, as noted above, it is recommended to place one’s hands on his chest in two situations:

    1. If one intends the sunna
    2. If one seeks to guard differences [if one prayed in a masjid were the majority placed their hands on their chests or bellow the belly for example]

    Finally, it could actually be an obligation for one to do so if he is a muqalid and the Imam he follows holds it as an obligation.

    The ‘ila for kiraha, as noted by Ibn Rushd, surrounding this prohibition and mentioned in the Mudawanna, is not the actual placement of the hands, but the istinad of the hands on the persons body. The axiom states, “If the ‘Ila is removed, so is the ruling.” With that in mind, most of the major scholars of the school place their hands on their chest.

    Thank you for this wonderful dicussion, however, conclusions regarding the school’s opinions rest upon the texts mentioned above as the are both for fatwa within the school.

    Allah knows best

52. On Jan 5, 2009, Ibn Ruben said:

    Check your opinions against the Mashur of the school, it is sheer folly to suggest otherwise. If you are simply stating your opinions make that known. For the record you are wrong, and should not continue unless you have idhn to make such statements.

    wa Allah hu Alim

53. On Jan 5, 2009, Ibn Ruben said:

    I stand corrected ,After reading, I see your point more clearly. However I still think such a topics should be off limits to those without proper qalification. Furthermore when one does a google search of qabd and sadl this page comes up one the first or second page of results. With that being said it is important to realize that there are many uneducated Muslims with access to the internet and they are looking into topics such as this. And without the proper understanding, may accidentally take such statements as sahih. Especially considering the slickness and authoritative feel of this page.

    Wa Salaam

54. On Jan 6, 2009, Abul Layth said:

    Jazakum Allahu Khairan brothers for your comments and concerns.

    I agree with most of what Ibn Malik said. I certainly agree that the mash-hur is sadl amongst the Malikis and I alluded to this point prior. My argument stems as to what the actions of the medinites was, and to show than many Mujtahid Malikis maintained that Qabd was Sunnah.

    Ibn Ruben :

    Advice to you and myself - read before commenting. We have produced sufficient authority for our stance.

    Was-Salam
    Abul Layth