Azami 1543

Nasai (78) and Ahmad (12694) both narrated it from the hadith of Abdul-Razzaq, and it is in his Musannaf (20535), saying, Mamar told us, from Thabit and Qatada, from Anas, and he mentioned the same. Ibn Khuzayma graded it sahih (144), narrating it through the path of Abdul-Razzaq with the same wording, and Nasai and Ibn Khuzayma used it as evidence for the legitimacy of saying the basmalah at wudu, and they titled their chapters accordingly. The original story is in the Sahihayn without mention of the basmalah, and it will come later in the chapter on the miracles of the Prophet ﷺ. Bayhaqi said, after narrating the hadith, "It is the most sahih thing regarding the basmalah," Kubra (1/43).As for what has been narrated from Abu Hurairah, Ayesha, Abu Saeed, Sahl bin Saad, and Asma bint Saeed bin Zayd from her father, of the saying of the Prophet ﷺ, "There is no wudu for one who does not mention the name of Allah over it," all of these are defective. That is why Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal said, "I do not know of any hadith in this chapter with a good chain." Ahmad bin Hafs Saadi said, "Ahmad was asked about the basmalah in wudu, and he said, I do not know of any hadith in it that is established. The strongest thing in it is the hadith of Kathir bin Zayd, from Rabih (he is the son of Abdul-Rahman bin Abu Saeed Khudri)." Then he mentioned Rabih, that is, who is he, and who is his father, meaning that the one who narrated the hadith of Saeed bin Zayd, they are unknown, and he weakened its chain. Mughni (1/146).Ibn Mulaqqin said, "This hadith is well known, and it has various paths, all of which are subject to criticism." See Badr Munir (2/69).Imam Bukhari said, "The best thing in this chapter is the hadith of Rabah bin Abdul-Rahman." I say, this is the hadith of Rabah bin Abdul-Rahman bin Abu Sufyan bin Huwaytib, from his grandmother, from her father, who said, I heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ say, "There is no wudu for one who does not mention the name of Allah over it." Tirmidhi narrated it (25) through the path of Bishr bin Mufaddal, from Abdul-Rahman bin Harmala, from Abu Thiqal Murri, from Rabah. Then he also narrated it (26) through another route, from Yazid bin Ayyad, from Abu Thiqal Murri with the same wording, but he did not mention the wording of the hadith, and instead referred back to the previous hadith. Ibn Majah also narrated it (398) through the path of Yazid bin Ayyad with the same wording, adding at the beginning of the hadith, "There is no prayer for one who has no wudu."Its axis rests on Abu Thiqal, who is Thumama bin Waail bin Husayn Murri, with the meem vowelled with damma then a ra. He is well known by his kunya. Bukhari said of him, "There is something questionable in his hadith." Ibn Hibban mentioned him in Thiqat (8/157–158), and after mentioning the hadith he said, "But there is something in my heart regarding this hadith, because there has been disagreement about Abu Thiqal in it."In the chain of Ibn Majah there is also Yazid bin Ayyad Laythi, Abu Hakam Madani, who resided in Basra. Malik and others called him a liar, and Ibn Madini and Daraqutni weakened him. Bukhari and Muslim said, "His hadith is denounced (munkar)." However, Tirmidhi narrated it through the path of Abdul-Rahman bin Harmala.As for Rabah bin Abdul-Rahman bin Abu Sufyan himself, no one has deemed him trustworthy. Ibn Hibban mentioned him in Thiqat according to his usual practice, and that is why the Hafiz said of him, "Acceptable," meaning if corroborated, otherwise his hadith is lenient (weak in a mild sense). So if this is the state of the hadith of Rabah bin Abdul-Rahman, of which Imam Bukhari said, "It is the best thing in this chapter," then what of the hadiths of others? However, some scholars hold that the sum of the corroborating narrations makes the hadith hasan li-ghayrihi. See the sourcing of these hadiths in Nasb Raya (2/64–66).Munziri said in Targhib wal-Tarhib, "There is no doubt that the hadiths which came regarding this, even though none of them is free from criticism, corroborate one another through the multiplicity of their paths, and gain strength thereby." That is why Imam Ahmad said, in one report, that it is obligatory. Tirmidhi related from Ishaq bin Rahawayh, "If one leaves it deliberately, he must repeat the wudu, but if he was forgetful or acting on an interpretation, it suffices him." See for more, Minna Kubra (1/134–135).