He then cited the proofs adduced by the opposing camp who prohibit the practice, and, in truth, nothing among them deserves a lengthy refutation except for two claims they make: 1. “The first tashahhud should be kept brief, and when the Prophet ﷺ sat for it he behaved as though he were sitting on hot stones.” 2. “There is no sound report showing that the Prophet ﷺ actually did so in that sitting.” Response to the first claim: the hadith they rely on is weak and unfit for argument, because it is narrated by Abu Ubayda b. Abd Allah b. Masud from his father, and—as noted repeatedly—he never heard directly from him. The report was recorded by the compilers of the Sunan (except Ibn Majah), by al-Hakim (1:269), al-Bayhaqi (2:134), al-Tayalisi (p. 44), and Ahmad (1:386, 410, 428, 436, 460) through various chains from Saad b. Ibrahim reporting from Abu Ubayda. Al-Hakim declared it “authentic according to the criteria of the Two Shaykhs,” but al-Dhahabi replied, “One must first determine whether Saad actually heard from Abu Ubayda.” That objection is of little value, for Saad explicitly stated that he heard from Abu Ubayda in the versions of al-Tayalisi and al-Tirmidhi (who transmits the report from him), and he affirmed the same in one of Ahmad’s routes. The real flaw is precisely what we mentioned: Abu Ubayda never heard from his father. Tirmidhi himself acknowledged this when he said, “This is a hasan hadith, except that Abu Ubayda did not hear from his father.” It is surprising that he could call the hadith hasan while simultaneously mentioning a defect that prevents such a ruling—especially when the report has no other chain whatsoever.