The people differ about how many raka’ahs are to be prayed, and the saying which agrees with the guidance of Muhammad is that it comprised of eight raka’ahs not inluding witr – as sown in the hadith of Aishah r.a, “Allaah’s Messenger did not increase upon eleven raka’ahs in ramadhan or outside it.” [Bukhari 3/16, Maalik 1/114, & ‘Abdur Razaaq 7723]
The statement by Aishah is confirmed by Jaabir Ibn ‘Abdullaah r.a, who mentioned: “When the Prophet led the people in salah during the night in ramadhan, he (s.a.w) prayed eight raka’ah and the witr.” [Ibn Hibbaan in his saheeh 920, At-Tabaraanee in As-Sagheer p.108 – Its isnaad is Hasan]
When ‘Umar Ibn Al-Khataab r.a revived this sunnah he ordered it as eleven raka’ahs, in agreement with the auhentic sunnah. This is reported by Maalik (1/115) with a saheeh isnaad [chain of narration], by way of Muhammad Ibn Yoosuf; from As-Saa’ib Ibn Yazeed who said: ‘Umar Ibn Al-Khataab r.a ordered Ubayy Ibn Ka’b and Tameem Ad-Daree to lead the people in eleven raka’ahs of prayer, and the recitor would recite soorahs containing hundreds of aayaat to the extent that we would have to suport ourselves due to the length of the standing and we would not depart untill the first signs of dawn.
This narration is contradicted by that of Yazeed Ibn Khusaifah who said: “…with 20 raka’ah…” but this is shaadh [Shaadh: Contradicting that which is better].
It cannot be said that this is an addition made by a reliable narrator and therefore acceptable, since a reliable narrators addition cannot contain a contradiction. Rather it contains only extra knowledge not found in the narration of the first reliable narrator as occurs in Fathul-Mugheeth (1/199), Mahaasinul-Istilaah (p.185) and Al-Kifaayah (Pp. 424-425). Even if the narration of Yazeed Ibn Khusaifah were authentic, it contains the report of an action, whereas the narration of Muhammad Ibn Yoosuf contains a saying (i.e. ‘Umar’s order to pray eleven raka’ahs). As is well known from the principles of fiqh, that the sayings are given precedence over actions.
‘Abdur-Razaaq reports in his Musannaf (No. 7730) from Dawud Ibn Qays and others: from Muhammad Ibn Yoosuf: from As-Saa’ib Ibn Yazeed: “That ‘Umar gathered the people in ramadhan behind Ubayy Ibn Ka’b, and Tameem Ad-Daaree, in twenty-one raka’ahs reciting soorahs composed of hundreds of aayaat,and they would depart at the first sight of dawn.”
This report contradicts what Maalik narrates from Muhammad Ibn Yoosuf; from As-Saa’ib Ibn Yazeed, and the isnaad [chain of narration] appers to be authentic since al its narrators are reliable. Some peope attempt to use this narration to claim that the hadith of Muhammad Ibn Yoosuf is self-contratdictory (mudtarab) – in order to abandon it and prefer the saying that it should be twenty raka’ahs as occurs in the hadith of Yazeed Ibn Khusaifah.
This claim is rebutted by the fact that a self-contradictory (mudtarab) hadith is one which is reported more than once from a single narrator, or from two or more narrators, which disagree and are all of similar strength – such that one cannot be prefered to the others [Tadreebur-Rawee (1/262)].
This condition is not present in the hadith of Muhammad Ibn Yoosuf, since the narration of Maalik can certainly be referred over that of ‘Abdur-Razaaq on the basis of strength of memory, and we say this taking it to be that the isnaad [chain of narration] is free from hidden defects [illa’]. However, this is not the case (for ‘Abdur-Razaaq‘s narration) since:
(A) There are a number of people who narate the Musannaf from ‘Abdur-Razaaq, one of them is Ishaaq Ibn Ibraheem Ibn Abbaad Ad-Dabaree.
(B) This hadith is one of those narrated by Ad-Dabaree from ‘Abdur-Razaaq, since it is he who narrated the book of fasting [Al-Musannaf (4/153)].
(C) Ad-Dabaree heard ‘Abdur-Razaaq‘s work from him at the age of seven [Meezaanul-I’tidaal (1/181)].
(D) Ad-Dabaree was not a companion of hadith and it was not his field.
(E) Therefore he makes many mistakes in what he narates from ‘Abdur-Razaaq and he reports reprehensible narrations from him which contradict what is authentic. Some scholars have written a whole book containing the mstakes and errors in transmition of Ad-Dabaree with regards to the Musannaf [Meezaanul-I’tidaal (1/181)].
So from what has proceede it can be seen that this is munkar [Munkar: Rejected; that narration which is not only daeef (weak) but contradicts other authentic narrations.] since Ad-Dabaree contradicts those more reliable than himself. This is one of his errors in transmittion – which he has changed from eleven raka’ahs to twenty-one raka’ahs – and you are now aware that his errors are many [See Tahdheeb (6/310) & Meezaanul-I’tidaal (1/181)].
So this narration is munkar [rejected] and a mistake in transmittion so it cannot be used as proof. Instead the autentic Sunnah reported in Al-Muwatta (1/115) with an authentic isnaad [chain of narration] from Muhammad Ibn Yoosuf; from As-Saa’ib Ibn Yazeed is established, so be aware.
[For a further discussion and a reply to doubts please refer to:
(A) Al-Kashfus-Sareeh ‘An Aghlaatis-Saaboonee Fee Salaatit-Taraweeh, of ‘Alee Hasan ‘Abdul Hameed.
(B) Al-Masaabeeh Fee Salaatit-Taraweeh, of As-Suyootee, with my footnotes.]
[Taken from “Sifah Sawm An-Nabee” by Sh. Saleem Al-Hilaali & Sh. ‘Alee ‘Abdul Hameed Pp. 94-97]