Seeking Sacred Sunni Knowledge

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

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), the Shafi’i mujtahid, 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 ghareeb ((meaning narrated by one person – as is the nomenclature of the scholars of hadith )), 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!”  ((Note that this is the translation of the salafis themselves here: http://abdurrahman.org/innovation/wipingFace.html ))

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!” ((Tahtheeb at-Tahtheeb )). 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. 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”. ((Vol. 4 page 1543 Dar Al-Fikr Edition ))

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 a Saadiq (truthful) righteous man. Ibn Hajr labeled him, “Saduq, he mingled [hadith] after his books burnt…”. ((Taqrib #3563 )) 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 Lahi’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 Lahi’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 Lahi’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 Tahthib at-Tahthib 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 Dawud 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 his 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. ((#5335 of the Tahreer )) Imaam Adh-Dhahabi states in his Kaashif, “He is weakened (dha’afahu).” ((entry 4403 of Al-Kaashif )) 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.” ((Page 53 in the chapter “Salatu-Tatawwu’” Jaam’iat Al-Azhar’s publication edited by Shaykh Rashdy As-Sayyid Sulaymaan ))

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-Hisn ((page 65 beneath the chapter “Wiping the face with the hands in Du’aa” published by Daar Al-Arqam 1998 CE )). 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”. ((2/238 ))

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.

10 Responses to “Wiping One's Face With the Hands After Du'aa: A Case Study”

  1. Abul Layth says:

    Editing on July 11th ’07 with an addition:

    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”.

  2. Mustafa says:

    Shaykh muhammad ibn salih al uthaymeen also is of the view that the reports can be strengthen. Thus making it a valid practice. Is he a ‘Pseudo salafi’? Please give us an answer Abul Layth ash Shadhilikhi

  3. Abul Layth says:

    He is indeed a pseudo-salafi, May Allah have mercy upon him. A proponent of Allah literally sitting on a throne, giving him station and place, confining Him ta’alaa as the christians do.

    Secondly, I do not think you are correct in ascribing to your Imaam Ibn Uthaymeen what he said. In his Majmu’ Fatawaa Ibn Uthaymeen we find the following fatwaa:

    ” مسح الوجه باليدين بعد الدعاء الأقرب أنه غير مشروع ؛ لأن الأحاديث الواردة في ذلك ضعيفة حتى قال شيخ الإسلام رحمه الله : إنها لا تقوم بها الحجة ، وإذا لم نتأكد أو يغلب على ظننا أن هذا الشيء مشروع فإن الأولى تركه ؛ لأن الشرع لا يثبت بمجرد الظن إلا إذا كان الظن غالباً .

    فالذي أرى في مسح الوجه باليدين بعد الدعاء أنه ليس بسنة ، والنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم كما هو معروف دعا في خطبة الجمعة بالاستسقاء ورفع يديه ، ولم يرد أنه مسح بهما وجهه ، وكذلك في عدة أحاديث جاءت عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه دعا ورفع يديه ولم يثبت أنه مسح وجهه ”

    Wiping the face with the hands after making du’aa’ is not prescribed, 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.

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

    So, yes he was a pseudo-salafi wahhaabi muqaatili, may Allah have mercy upon him Aameen!

    What we have shown in this treatise is that many of the Hanaabila maintained it being Sunnah. It is an official act of many of the madhaa-hab in fact. I do not deny that some A’immah disagreed on this issue. The only reason I wrote this article was to share this knowledge with the layman, so when a spiritually bankrupt stupid pseudo salafi starts bickering with him that he is doing a “bida’ah”, he can fight back with Knowledge and leave him crushed evermore.

    May Allah free this world of their fitnah and replace it with the beautiful eras of the noble Sufis of Al-Junayd, Salaahud-deen Al-Ayyubi, Muhammad Fat-h, Nithaamul-Mulk and those that followed them in righteousness. Aameen!

  4. abushamweel says:

    It is normal for disagreements to arise in the ummah but I think we should all remember the flesh of the ulama is poison, whether it be sufi or salafi ulama. Bin Uthaymin was known not only for his ilm but intense devotion to zuhud and worship.

  5. Abul Layth says:

    In response to your statements I have compiled this: http://seekingilm.com/archives/105

    Fact: the established scholars stood against men like Ibn Uthaymeen and warned against them.

    Fact: Ibn Uthaymeen was upon a deviant creed, rejected by Ahlus Sunnah.

    We ask Allah ta’alaa to send his mercy and forgiveness upon Ibn Uthaymeen, and remove his bida’ah that he helped to spread by the oil revenue of the wahhabi kingdom that massacred thousands of hujjaaj and illegally made khurooj against the Khalifah of the Ottomans in the 1700s. Aameen!

  6. Abul Layth says:

    This and the following report suggests that Ibn `Umar, like his father, – Allah be well-pleased with both of them – supplicated together with others: From Wahb: “I saw Ibn `Umar and Ibn al-Zubayr supplicating [i.e. together] and rubbing their hands against their faces.”

    Narrated by al-Bukhari in al-Adab al-Mufrad (2:68) with a sound chain according to Shaykh `Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda in his Thalath Rasa’il (p. 93). This event may have taken place at the highly dramatic time following the death of al-Husayn ibn `Ali – upon them peace – at the hands of Yazid ibn Mu`awiya, after which Ibn `Umar told `Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr – Allah be well-pleased with them: “Al-Husayn has beaten us” i.e. with martyrdom, and they wept.

    11. Ibn `Abd al-Razzaq narrated with his chain in his Musannaf (2:252-253) from Yahya ibn Sa`id al-Ansari the qadi of al-Madina that “Ibn `Umar used to supplicate together with al-Qass” (kâna yabsutu yadayhi ma`a al-Qass) and that “they [i.e. the senior Successors] mentioned that those that came before them [i.e. the Companions] would supplicate and then place back their hands on their faces so as to place back the du`â’ and its baraka. Al-Qass is the Tâbi`î `Ubayd ibn `Umayr ibn Qatada al-Laythi al-Makki the admonisher and Qur’anic commentator.

    Shaykh Abu Ghudda said (p. 94): “This is frank evidence to the effect that wiping the face with the two hands after raising them in supplication was practiced in the first generations.”

    http://www.livingislam.org/fiqhi/fiqha_e56.html

  7. abs says:

    I have Adab Al mufrad in English. It says cupping not rubbing. Is this a dodgy translation? I don’t have the Arabic!

    276. Raising the hands in supplication
    609. Abu Nu’aym, who is Wahb, said, “I saw Ibn ‘Umar and Ibn az-Zubayr making supplication,
    cupping their palms in front of their faces.”

  8. Abu Ahmad says:

    Assalamo Alykom warhamatullahi wabarakatuhu.

    I don’t find any problem in raisng my two hands either I pray alone or I pray with my mahmoom or Jama’ah. What I can say: it is allowed, and recommended, no matter what other people say that is bidaa or haram. One night I had a dream in which someone whispered to me from my right ear and said,” look !there your Rab.” Then I look up I saw undescribable light. Unintentionally and quickly, when I look up toward that Holy Light, my two hands had extended forward and upward and toward that Holy Light with my two opened palms facing above. Then, I suddenly said:” Iyyaka nahbudu wa iyyaka nastaeyn.” Suddenly, light struck me from above the Holy Undescribable Light . From Above,The light like lightning first entered into my two open hands until it covered all myself.It was so pleasant to experience it and I missed it really. Then, I was awakened. And i said,” Alhamdulillah!”

    I love to pray or make dua with my two hands raised with my palms are both facing above the sky. As for wiping my face, sometimes I wipe my hands after dua and sometimes I don’t. If I made dua and recited the Surah Alfalaq and Surah Annas after prayers, I don’t believe it is bidaa to wipe my hands. Even though, I did not recite the Muaddhatain, as long as there is dua which I recited from the Holy qur’an like ” Rabbanaa Aatinaa Fiddunya hasanatan wa fil aakhirati hasanatan waqinaa adhaaban Naar” I would wipe my face..Because I believe The words of Allah are full of blessedness(barakah). Did not you read about our Prophet S.A.W. he used to wipe his face and body, etc with the Jayton oil in the Prophetic Medicine? He told about the jayton to the Sahabah(R.A.)? He sad:” fiyhaa barakah.” If jayton has barakah, what do you think of The Word or words of ALLAH in the Holy qur’an, are not they more blessed than the Jayton?So why not wipe your face, your body, after reciting it and making duaa?Is it bida’a to have barakah?

    May Allah guide you all to the truth path.Amen.

  9. admin says:

    Salamu ‘alaykum,

    To see the Shafi’i's mu’tamad (relied upon) opinion regarding this issue, go here:

    http://www.shafiifiqh.com/?p=450

    was-salam

  10. Mohammed says:

    Jazakullah khair brother Abu Layth,

    I am very excited that you put this beneficial website back up. I saw that you mentioned the Deobandis in this article. Just had a question, insha’Allah you can clear it up. I personally follow those of Deobandi manhaj but am not restricted to them. I am always hearing opponents comparing the Deobandis to the Wahabis because they have similarities in certain issues. Issues such as dancing, asking help directly from the dead, and other issues lead to this wahabi label. Is this fair? Deobandis are known to be ash`ari in `aqeedah and hanafi in fiqh and have had scholars such as Maulana Shah Waliullah, Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi, etc. who represented mainstream Sunni Islam. Please shed some light on this issue as I find it very offensive when deobandis am termed as wahabi. As Shaykh Hamza Yusuf once said (paraphrasing):
    “If you are called Sufi on the one hand and Wahabi on the other, know that you are on the Haq.” A very interesting way of looking at it.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. SeekingIlm.com Brought back Online: The Story- SeekingIlm.com - [...] http://www.seekingilm.com/archives/95 [...]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>