I tried to seperate the thread into different topics based on the different ideas introduced into it that were off the topic... and the whole discussion has been deleted. I'm not a very skilled moderator, sorry. Maybe if someone has saved the discussion they could re-post it here. May Allaah bless you.
as-salāmu 'alaikum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuh akhee,
Allaahul-Musta'aan. Here's the little I was able to milk from Google Cache:
From: Aalia Ehsanullah
Mūsá said he would look up this narration inshaa Allaah. If it helps, I found a reference for it in a book for Aḥmad and al Haakim.
Perhaps that might help.
From Brother Mūsá Richardson hafiẓahullāh:
wa 'alaykumus-salāmu wa rahmatullaah...
I don't believe this supplication can be attributed to the Messenger (ṣallallāhu 'alayhe wa sallam). And that is because the supplication, "O Allaah Give me an easy reckoning!" is an additional phrase, added to a ḥadīth that is authentic and narrated from a number of different chains (in al-Bukhārī and Muslim and elsewhere), that a person who is made to discuss what is in his book shall be destroyed, without any mention of this supplication. The only narrator who added this supplication was Muhammad ibn Is-haaq who was an acceptable narrator in general, but scholars have always been extremely critical of things he narrates without any support, especially in a ḥadīth like this, with many chains.
The ḥadīth, with the supplication was actually authenticated by al-Haakim in alMustadrak, and ath-Thahabee did not reject this. Furthermore, it was collected by Ibn Khuzaymah in his Ṣaḥīh (#849), which means he also authenticated it. However, both al-Haakim and Ibn Khuzaymah have been considered by scholars of ḥadīth to be lenient in their rulings on ḥadīth.
Al-Waadi'ee said in Tatab-bu' al-Owhaam (1/114): Ibn Is-haaq was not one of the narrators relied upon by Muslim, and furthermore he is mudallis and has not clearly stated that he heard the ḥadīth from his shaykh. The different routes must also be gathered and studied to see who opposed Ibn Is-haaq and narrated as it is found in the two ṣaḥīḥs.
However, the issue of Ibn Is-haaq being mudallis is not relevant here, as he says explicitly in another narration of the same ḥadīth also in the Mustadrak (#939, 1/374 of Haramyan printing) that his shaykh told him the ḥadīth directly.
But what remains is sufficient to consider this supplication SHAATH (contradictory, and unauthentic), as a mistake made by Ibn Is-haaq, that no one narrated it with the supplication other than him. and Allaah knows best.
In short, the supplication is not authentically preserved from the speech of the Messenger ṣallallāhu alayhe wa sallam upon investigation.
From "Karima Yousufi"
Assalamu alaykum wa rahmatullah,
This supplication is found in 'The prophets prayer described' by Shaykh al-Albaani, and it says that it was declared ṣaḥīḥ by Aḥmad and Haakim, and Dhahabi agreed.
From Brother Mūsá:
wa 'alaykumus-salāmu wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuh.
It was collected by Aḥmad and authenticated by al-Haakim, not that they both authenticated it. The grounds for this position have already been mentioned, and more (Ibn Khuzaymah's authentication of it as well).
As mentioned, their verdicts are too lenient in many cases, and this is an example of that. This du'aa' is a tafar-rud (lone report) of Muhammd Ibn Is-haaq, within a ḥadīth reported by other thiqaat without his addition, and I remember al-Albānī judging reports of this kind exactly to be unauthentic, meaning with the tafar-rud of Ibn Is-haaq. So, according to his own principles, Al-Albaanee would not accept this ḥadīth.
Simply put, it seems that this was a mistake from that great scholar, may Allaah have Mercy on him and continue to benefit the Muslims from his outstanding work.
And Allaah knows best.
From "Saadiq Owodunni":
assalāmu 'alaikum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuh,
JazaakAllaahu khayraa for this benefit. Is the "Muhammad ibn Is-haaq" you mentioned the same one that wrote one of the other Kitaab-ut-Tawḥīd's i.e. "Abū 'Abdillaah Muhammad ibn Ishaaq ibn Mandah (d. 395 or 396)." If he is, I would have thought that he would be more popularly known as "Ibn Mandah."
jazaakAllaahu khayraa again for your efforts. Much appreciated.
From "Nadeem Nazeer":
Brother I have a Question regarding reckoning....
Narrated 'Aisha(radiallaha'anha): Allah's Apostle(صلى الله عليه وسلم), said, "None will be called to account on the Day of Resurrection, but will be ruined." I said "O Allah's Apostle! Hasn't Allah said: 'Then as for him who will be given his record in his right hand, he surely will receive an easy reckoning? (84.7-8) -- Allah's Apostle said, "That (Verse) means only the presentation of the accounts, but anybody whose account (record) is questioned on the Day of Resurrection, will surely be punished."
-Sahih Bukhari, Ar-Riqaq.
Is the category of those who will not be involved in ruqya etc. mentioned in previous hadith of kitau-Tawḥīd included in Category mentioned in above hadith(i.e : whose records will be presented but not questioned), or is it Different category without any presentation of records and questioning.
From Adnaan Ali:
I just wished to make a slight correction to what was quoted by Karima Yousufi from Shaikh al-Albānī above. He raḥimahullāh said regarding this ḥadīth:
“And this chain (or narration) is ‘jayyid’. And the statement of Al-Haakim:
<ṣaḥīḥ to the standard of Muslim>. And Adh-Dhahabee agreed. – this is not correct”
ie: he held that the chain of narration for the ḥadīth is ‘jayyid’ – meaning ṣaḥīḥ or hasan. However, he disagreed with al-Haakim in his ruling of it being authentic to the standard of Muslim.
I have attached the relevant passage from Sifat-us-Ṣalāt-in-Nabee (the detailed version) which is available online:
This is Mūsá's final post on this, jazaahullaahukhairan:
wa 'alaykumus-salāmu wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuh
May Allaah bless you all as well.
Sadiq: Muhammd ibn Is-haaq was the famous second century historian who collected accounts about the battles.
"Muhammad ibn Is-haaq" was a common name, it was the name of many imāms, like Ibn Khuzaymah, as-Sarraaj, Ibn Mandah, and many others.
Nadeem: An easy account is that it is looked at and then excused instantly, while anyone who has to discuss anything in it will be destroyed. No account at all is better than an easy account, and Allaah knows best.
Adnaan : Shaykh Al-Albaanee authenticated the ḥadīth, as you mentioned, but he did not discuss the hidden defect that others picked up on, like Shaykh Muqbil. Shaykh Muqbil advised in his notes to the Mustadrak of al-Haakim that the routes of the ḥadīth should be gathered for a very specific purpose, to check for someone who matched Ibn Is-haaq's narration by adding the supplication. This is a very fine detailed point of criticism that is only discovered when someone is actually looking very closely for a defect, and this was the case with Shaykh Muqbil when he was doing work on a book about hidden defects. Not picking up on this point is completely understandable, even for the best of the ḥadīth scholars.
The advice of Shaykh Muqbil has been taken and made the focus of a detailed study of this ḥadīth and its different chains and wordings here (in Arabic):