Shattering the Mirage: A Response to ‘Abdul Hussain Sharaf al Din’s al Muraja’at: Letter 47 and 48

BACK Return to Table of contents

 

Letter 47

 

Muharram 7, 1330 A.H.

 

I. Requesting testimonial traditions

 

1) I wish you had stated those traditions supporting such texts and thereby complemented your research, Wassalam.

 

Sincerely,

S

 

Letter 48

 

Muharram 8, 1330

 

I. Forty Ahadith supporting the texts

 

Consider forty such supporting ahadith:

 

1) Consider the statement of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, while holding ‘Ali’s neck, “This is the Imam of the righteous, the slayer of the debauchees; victorious is whoever supports him, forsaken (by Allah) is whoever abandons him.” He salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam raised his voice while saying the last phrase. This is included by al Hakim as narrated by Jabir on page 129, Vol. 3, of Al Mustadrak,1 where the author comments saying: “This is one hadith the authenticity of which is attested to by its own chain of narrators, though both authors (of sahih books) did not record it.”

 

2) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “It has been revealed to me that ‘Ali has three exclusive merits: that he is the chief of the Muslims, the Imam of the righteous, and the leader of those whose foreheads radiate with the mark of faith.”

It is included by al Hakim at the beginning of page 138, Vol. 3, of his Mustadrak2 where the author comments: “This is one hadith the accuracy of which is attested to by its own chain of narrators, though both authors (of the sahih books) did not record it.”

 

3) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “It has been revealed to me that ‘Ali is the chief of the Muslims, the wali of the pious, and the leader of those whose foreheads radiate with the mark of faith.” It is recorded by Ibn al Najjar]3 and many other authors of books of traditions.

 

4) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, to ‘Ali: “Welcome, chief of the Muslims, Imam of the pious!” It is included by Abu Na’im in Hilyat al Auliya’.4

 

5) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “The first to enter through this door is the Imam of the pious, the chief of Muslims, the head of the religion, the seal of the wasis, and the leader of those whose foreheads radiate with the mark of faith,” whereupon ‘Ali entered and he, peace be upon him and his progeny, stood up happily excited, hugged him and wiped his sweat saying: “You shall fulfill my covenant, convey my message, and after me clarify whatever seems to be ambiguous.”5

 

6) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “Allah has promised me that ‘Ali is the standard of guidance, the Imam of whoever accepts my wilayat, the light for whoever obeys me, and the word which I have mandanted unto the pious.”6

As you see, these six ahadith contain obvious texts regarding his imamate and the obligation to obey him, peace be upon him.

 

7) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, pointing to ‘Ali, “This is the first to have believed in me, the first to shake hands with me on the Day of Resurrection; he is the foremost friend, and he is the faruq of this nation who distinguishes between right and wrong; he is the chief of the believers.”7

 

8) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “O you group of the Ansars! Shall I lead you to that which, as long as you adhere to it, you shall never go astray? It is ‘Ali; love him as you love me, and respect him as you respect me, for Gabriel has commanded me to say so to you on behalf of Allah, the Almighty, the Omniscient.”8

 

9) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “I am the city of knowledge, and ‘Ali is its gate; whoever aspires to attain knowledge, let him approach through the gate.”9

 

10) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “I am the house of wisdom and ‘Ali is its gate.”10

 

11)       Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “‘Ali is the gateway of my knowledge, the one who is to explain to my nation after me what I have been sent with; loving him is a mark of genuine faith, and hating him is hypocrisy.”11

 

12) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, to ‘Ali: “You shall clarify to my nation all matters wherein they differ.” This is recorded by al Hakim on page 122, Vol. 3, of his Mustadrak12 as reported by Anas. The author then comments: “This is an authentic hadith according to the endorsement of both Sheikhs [Bukhari and Muslim], although they did not quote it themselves.”

In fact, whoever scrutinizes this hadith and others similar to it will come to know that ‘Ali’s status with relevance to the Messenger of Allah is similar to that of the Messenger of Allah to the Almighty Himself, for Allah says to His Messenger: “We have sent you Our revelations only so that you may clarify for them all the matters in which they dispute, and as guidance and mercy unto those who believe;” while in this hadith the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam tells ‘Ali: “You shall clarify to my nation all matters wherein they differ after me.”

 

13) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, as recorded by Ibn al Sammak from Abu Bakr, “‘Ali’s status to me is similar unto that of mine to my Lord.”13

 

14) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, as recorded by al Dar Qutni in Al Afrad where the author quotes Ibn ‘Abbas citing the Prophet saying: “‘Ali ibn Abu Talib is (like) the gate of salvation to the Israelites; whoever enters through it becomes a true believer [mu’min], and whoever gets out of it becomes infidel.”14

 

15) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, on the day of ‘Arafat during Hijjatul Wada’ [the farewell pilgrimage]: “‘Ali is of me, and I am of ‘Ali, and nobody pays my debts other than I or ‘Ali.”15

“It is the statement of a glorious Messenger empowered by the One Who manifests the Throne, Able, Obeyed: how trustworthy He is! Nay! Your fellow is not possessed at all.” (Qur’an, 81:19-22)

“He does not speak out of his own personal inclination; it is but a revealed inspiration.” (Qur’an, 53:3-4)

So, whither are you going? And what shall you say about these clear arguments and explicit texts?

If you carefully scrutinize this much, examine the wisdom behind making such an announcement during the supreme pilgrimage in front of the witnesses, truth will then appear to you most manifestly. And if you examine his words how few, and their meaning how encompassing, you will then have a great reverence for him, for he has learned a great deal and digested and researched what he has learned.

None other than ‘Ali remains to be worthy of discharging any responsibility. No wonder, then, that he, and only he, executes the Prophet’s own will, taking his own position of leadership as vicegerent and vizier; praise be to Allah Who has guided us to all this, for without Allah’s guidance, we would not have been thus guided.

 

16) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “Whoever obeys me obeys Allah, and whoever disobeys me disobeys Him; and whoever obeys ‘Ali obeys me, too; and whoever disobeys ‘Ali also disobeys me.” This is recorded by al Hakim on page 121, Vol. 3, of his Mustadrak, and by al Thahbi in his Talkhis. Both authors have relied on the authority of both Sheikhs to endorse this hadith.

 

17) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “O ‘Ali! Whoever abandons me abandons Allah; and whoever abandons you abandons me, too.” This is recorded by al Hakim on page 124, Vol. 3, of his Sahih, where he comments saying: “This hadith is authentic through isnad, though the Sheikhs did not record it.”

 

18) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, as quoted by Umm Salamah, “Whoever denounces ‘Ali denounces me, too,” which is recorded by al Hakim at the beginning of page 121, Vol. 3, of Al Mustadrak as ascertained by both Sheikhs, and it is narrated by al Thahbi in his Talkhis where the author testifies to its authenticity.

It is recorded by Ahmed among the ahadith narrated by Umm Salamah on page 323, Vol. 6, of his Musnad, and by al Nisa’i on page 17 of Al Khasa’is al Alawiyya, in addition to many other traditionists. So is the statement of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, as included among the ahadith narrated by ‘Amr ibn Shash thus: “Whoever harms ‘Ali harms me, too.”16

 

19) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “Whoever loves ‘Ali loves me, too; and whoever despises ‘Ali despises me, too.” This hadith is recorded by al Hakim who describes it as authentic on page 130, Vol. 3, of Al Mustadrak, and it is narrated by al Thahbi in his Talkhis where he admits reference to its authenticity for the same reason. Such is the case of ‘Ali’s statement:17 “I swear by the One Who has cleft the seed [so that a plant may grow therefrom] and created the breeze from nothing, the Ummi Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam has promised me that nobody loves me except a true believer (mu’min), and nobody hates me except a hypocrite.”18

 

20) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “O ‘Ali! You are a leader in this life and the life hereafter; whoever loves you loves me, too, and whoever loves me is loved by Allah; your foe is my foe, and my foe is Allah’s foe; woe unto whoever despises you after me.”19 This is recorded by al Hakim at the beginning of page 128, Vol. 3, of Al Mustadrak, and its authenticity is ascertained by both Sheikhs.20

 

21) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “O ‘Ali! Glad tidings to whoever loves and believes in you, and woe unto whoever hates you and tells lies about you.” This is recorded by al Hakim on page 135, Vol. 3, of his Al Mustadrak, where he comments saying: “This hadith is authentic by way of its being consecutively reported (through isnad, consecutive reporting). Neither Sheikh records it.”

 

22) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “Whoever wishes to live the way that I have lived and die the way that I shall die and reside in the Eternal Garden, which is promised to me by my Lord, let him accept ‘Ali as his/her wali, for surely he never gets you out of guidance, nor will he ever hurl you into misguidance.”

 

23) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “I enjoin whoever believes and trusts in me to be mindful of the wilayat of ‘Ali ibn Abu Talib, for whoever accepts him as the wali accepts me as such, and whoever accepts me as the wali has indeed accepted Allah as such; and whoever loves him loves me, and whoever loves me loves Allah; and whoever hates him hates me, too, and whoever hates me hates Allah, the Almighty, the Omniscient.”

 

24) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “Whoever is pleased to live my life and die my death, and then reside in the Garden of Eden, planted for me by my Lord, then let him take ‘Ali as the wali after me, and let him accept the authority of whoever ‘Ali places in charge, and let him follow the examples of my progeny after me, for they are my offspring: they are created out of my own mould and blessed with my understanding and knowledge; therefore, woe unto those who deny their favours from among my nation, who cut their ties with them; may Allah never grant them my intercession.”

 

25) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “Whoever loves to live my life and die my death and enter the Garden my Lord has promised me, the Garden of Eternity, then let him take ‘Ali and his descendants after him as his walis, for they shall never take you out of guidance, nor shall they ever drag you into misguidance.”21

 

26) At the beginning of page 156, Vol. 6, of Kanz al ’Ummal, al Daylami quotes Ammar citing the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam telling ‘Ammar the following: “O ‘Ammar! If you see ‘Ali walking on one path while other people walk on another, walk with ‘Ali and leave the people, for he shall never lead you to destruction, nor shall he ever take you out of right guidance.”

 

27) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, according to one hadith narrated by Abu Bakr, “My hand and ‘Ali’s are equal when it comes to justice.” This is hadith 2539 recorded on page 153, Vol. 6, of Kanz al ’Ummal.

 

28) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “O Fatima! Are you not pleased that Allah, the Unique, the Sublime, has looked unto the inhabitants of the earth and chose from among them two men: one of them is your father and the other is your husband?”22

 

29) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “I am the Warner, and ‘Ali is the Guide; through you, O ‘Ali, shall guidance be attained after me.” This is recorded by al Daylami who quotes Ibn ‘Abbas, and it is hadith 2631 on page 157, Vol. 6, of Kanz al ’Ummal.

 

30) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “O ‘Ali! Nobody is permitted to remain in the state of janaba other than I and you.”23 Likewise is the hadith recorded by al Tabrani as quoted by Ibn Hajar in his Al Sawa’iq al Muhriqa as narrated by Umm Salamah, al Bazzar, and Sa’d; so, refer to hadith 13 of Al Arba’in al Nawawiyya which he quotes in Chapter 9. The latter quotes the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, saying: “Nobody is permitted to be in the state of janaba in this mosque except I and ‘Ali.”

 

31) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “I and this (meaning ‘Ali) are the Proofs unto my nation on the Day of Judgement.” This is recorded by al Khatib as narrated by Anas. How could the father of al Hassan ‘alayh al Salam be Proof just like the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was, had he not been his vicegerent and successor?

 

32) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “It is written on the gate of Paradise: ‘There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, ‘Ali is the Brother of the Messenger of Allah.’“24

 

33) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “It is written on the Throne’s leg: ‘There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, I (God) have supported him (Muhammad) through ‘Ali, and I have aided him through ‘Ali.”

 

34) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “Whoever wishes to discern Noah’s determination, Adam’s knowledge, Ibrahim’s clemency, Moses’ discretion, Christ’s asceticism, then let him look unto ‘Ali.” This is recorded by al Bayhaqi in his Sahih and by Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal in his Musnad.25

 

35) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “O ‘Ali! There is a resemblance in you to Jesus ‘alayh al Salam who was hated by the Jews to the extent that the latter even cast doubts about his mother’s honour, and loved by the Christians to the extent that they attributed to him a status which is not his.”

 

36) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “The foremost (among believers) are three: Joshua son of Nun [of the tribe of Ephraim – tr.] who was the foremost to believe in Moses, the believer implied in Surat Yasin [Chapter 36 of the Holy Qur’an] who was the foremost to believe in Jesus, and ‘Ali ibn Abu Talib who was the foremost in believing in Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.”26

 

37) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “The foremost in testifying (to the Prophets’ truth) are three: Habib al Najjar, the believer implied in Surat Yasin, who said: ‘O my people! Follow the Messengers (of God);’ Izekiel [whose name means “Strength of God” – tr.], the believer from the family of Pharaoh, who said: ‘Do you intend to kill a man just for saying that his Lord is Allah?,’ and ‘Ali ibn Abu Talib, who is superior to all of them.”27

 

38) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, to ‘Ali: “The nation will turn treacherous to you; you shall live adhering to my faith and will be murdered for safeguarding it; whoever loves you loves me, too, and whoever hates you hates me, too, and this (‘Ali’s beard) will be drenched with blood from this (‘Ali’s head).”28 ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam himself has said: “One of the Prophet’s predictions is that the nation will be treacherous to me after his demise.”

Ibn Abbas has quoted the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, telling ‘Ali, “You will certainly encounter a great deal of hardship after me;”29 ‘Ali inquired: “Shall I be able to keep my faith intact?” and the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, answered him in the affirmative.

 

39) Consider his statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, “Among you is one who will fight for its (Qur’an’s) interpretation just as I fought for its revelation.” The audience was very excited. Among them were Abu Bakr and ‘Umar. Abu Bakr asked: “Am I the one?” and the Prophet’s answer was negative. ‘Umar inquired: “Is it I?” and the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam answered: “No; but it is the one who is mending the shoes,” meaning thereby ‘Ali; therefore, we visited ‘Ali to convey the good news to him, but he did not even raise his head, as if he had already heard it from the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny.”30

Similar narrative is the hadith narrated by Abu Ayub al Ansari during ‘Umar’s caliphate. According to al Hakim, who relies on two references which he indicates on page 139 and the page that follows it, Vol. 3, of his Mustadrak, ‘Umar has said that the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, ordered those who reneged from their faith, and who dissented, to be fought. Ibn ‘Asakir, as indicated in hadith 2588 on page 155, Vol. 6 of Kanz al ’Ummal, states that ‘Ammar ibn Yasir has said that the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, has said, “O ‘Ali!

The oppressive gang will fight you; but you are on the right track; whoever refrains from supporting you is not of me.” Abu Tharr al Ghifari, as al Daylami is quoted at the close of page 155, Vol. 6, of Kanz al ’Ummal, has quoted the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, saying: “I swear by the One in whose hands my life is placed that among you is a man who shall fight after me for the interpretation of the Qur’an just as I fought the polytheists for its revelation.”

Muhammad ibn ‘Ubaidullah ibn Abu Rafi’, as indicated by al Tabrani in his Mujma’ al Kabir and indicated on page 155, Vol. 6, of Kanz al ’Ummal, has quoted his father and grandfather Abu Rafi’ saying that the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, has addressed him thus: “O Abu Rafi’! A group of people shall fight ‘Ali after me; Allah has made mandated that they should be fought. Whoever is unable to fight them with his hands, let him fight them with his tongue; if he still is unable to do so, then by his heart.” Al Akhdar al Ansari31 has quoted the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, saying: “I fight for the revelation of the Qur’an, while ‘Ali fights for its interpretation.”

 

40) He, peace be upon him and his progeny, has said: “O ‘Ali! I am superior to you due to my being a Prophet, while you are superior to all other people due to seven merits: You are the foremost among them to believe in Allah, the most just in fulfilling Allah’s Promise, the most obedient to the Commandments of Allah, the most equitable, the most fair in dealing with the public, the most far-sighted in all issues, and the one who enjoys the highest status in the sight of Allah.”

Abu Sa’id al Khudri quotes the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, saying: “O ‘Ali! You possess seven qualities about which nobody can dispute with you: You are the first to truly believe in Allah, the most just in fulfilling Allah’s Promise, the most obedient to Allah’s Commandments, the most compassionate to the public, the most informed of all issues, and the highest among them in status.”32

There is no room here to quote all such traditions which, as a whole, support one another and are all indicative of one meaning, and that is: ‘Ali is second only to the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, in faring with this nation, and that he is next only to the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, in leading it. These traditions convey such a meaning, even if their texts are not consecutively reported, and this much should suffice as an irrefutable proof, Wassalam.

 

Sincerely,

Sh

 


Footnotes

1. This is hadith number 2527 of the ones cited in Kanz al ’Ummal, page 153, Vol. 6, and it is quoted by al Tha’labi from Abu Tharr when the author attempts to interpret the verse of wilayat in his book Al Tafsir al Kabir.

2. It is also quoted by al Barudi, Ibn Qani’, Abu Na’im, and al Bazzar. It is hadith 2628 of the ones cited in Kanz al ’Ummal, page 157, Vol. 6.

3. It is hadith 2630 of the ones cited in Kanz al ’Ummal, page 157, Vol. 6.

4. It is news item number 11 of the ones Ibn Abul Hadid states on page 450, Vol. 2, of Sharh Nahjul Balaghah, and it is hadith number 2627 of the ones cited in Kanz al ’Ummal, page 157, Vol. 6.

5. This is quoted by Abu Na’im in his Hilyat al Auliya’ from Anas and transmitted in detail by Ibn Abul Hadid on page 450, Vol. 2, of his Sharh Nahjul Balaghah; so, refer to news item 9 on that page.

6. This is quoted by Abu Na’im in his Hilyat al Auliya’ from one hadith narrated by Abu Barzah al Aslami and Anas ibn Malik, and it is transmitted by the Mu’tazilite scholar on page 449, Vol. 2, of his Sharh Nahjul Balaghah; so, refer to the third news item on that page.

7. This is quoted by al Tabrani in his Kabir from the ahadith narrated by Salman and Abu Tharr. It is quoted by al Bayhaqi in his Sunan, and by Ibn ‘Uday in his Al Kamil; it also is hadith number 2608 of the ones included in Kanz al ’Ummal, Vol. 6, page 156.

8. This is quoted by al Tabrani in his Kabir, and it is hadith number 2625 of the ones included in Kanz al ’Ummal, Vol. 6, page 157, and the tenth on page 450, Vol. 2, of Sharh Nahjul Balaghah by Ibn Abul Hadid; so, look and see how he has made their right guidance conditional upon upholding ‘Ali; thus, those who do not do so would certainly stray. See how he has commanded them to love him just as they love the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and to respect him in the same way they respect the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. This is so only because of his being his successor, the one to take charge after him. If you consider the verse “Gabriel has commanded me to tell you so,” then truth becomes manifest to you.

9. This is quoted by al Tabrani in his Kabir from Ibn ‘Abbas as stated on page 107 of Al Jami’ al Saghir by Sayyuti. It is also quoted by al Hakim in Manaqib ‘Ali, page 226, Vol. 3 of his authentic Mustadrak from two sources: one of them is Ibn ‘Abbas from yet two authentic sources, and the other from Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah al Ansari. He has brought forth irrefutable proofs for its authenticity. Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal ibn al Siddiq al Magharibi, of Cairo, has dedicated an entire book only to prove the authenticity of this hadith, and he has crammed it with information and titled it Fath al Malak al ’Ali Bisihhati Hadith Babul ‘Ilm ‘Ali, printed in Egypt at the Islamic Press.

It is worthy of the attention of researchers, for it contains invaluable information. Views of the Nasibis and their likes are worthless vis-a-vis this hadith that is as commonly used as a popular proverb by both the elite and the common residents of the urban districts and the countryside. We have even considered their criticism, and we have found it to be sheer submission to sentiment, lacking in proof, full of extreme fanaticism, as declared by al Hafiz Salahud-Din al ’Ala’i when he quoted the false allegation of al Thahbi and others who charge that it is incorrect. He comments saying: “These have not produced any proof for their claim except its being a fabrication so that it may not indict them.”

10. This is quoted by al Tirmithi in his Sahih, in addition to Ibn Jarir, and from them it is quoted by several authorities such as al Muttaqi al Hindi on page 401, Vol. 6, of his Kanz al ’Ummal, where he quotes Ibn Jarir saying: “This is a tradition of whose authenticity we are quite sure.” It is also quoted from al Tirmithi by Jalalud-Din al Sayyuti while discussing the “hamza” in language in his Jami’ al Jawami’ and Al Jami’ al Saghir; so, refer to page 170, Vol. 1, of Al Jami’ al Saghir.

11. This is quoted by al Daylami from Abu Tharr’s hadith as stated on page 156, Vol. 6, of Kanz al ’Ummal

12. Ibid.

13. This is quoted by Ibn Hajar in the fifth maqsad of the maqasid of chapter 14 of the ones discussed in Chapter 11 of his Al Sawa’iq al Muhriqa; so, refer to page 106 of the same.

14. This hadith is number 2528 among the ones cited in Kanz al ’Ummal, page 153, Vol. 6.

15. This is quoted by Ibn Majah in his chapter on the virtues of the Prophet’s companions on page 92, Vol. 1, of his Sunan, by al Tirmithi and al Nisa’i in their respective sahihs, and it is hadith number 2531 among the ones cited in Kanz al ’Ummal, page 153, Vol. 6. It is also quoted by Imam Ahmed on page 164, Vol. 4, of his Musnad from hadith narrated from various authentic sources by Janadah.

Suffices you the fact that it is quoted from a chain of narrators which includes: Yahya ibn Adam, Isra’il ibn Younus and his grandfather Abu Ishaq al Subay’i who quotes Habashi. All of these men are authorities relied upon by both Sheikhs in their respective sahihs. Whoever studies this hadith in Ahmed’s Musnad will come to know that it was said during the Farewell Pilgrimage which shortly preceded the departure of the Prophet, peace be upon him and his progeny, from this vanishing world. Prior to that, he, peace be upon him and his progeny, had sent Abu Bakr to recite ten verses of Surat Bara’a to the residents of Mecca, then he, according to Imam Ahmed on page 151, Vol. 1, of his Musnad, said to him: “Go see Abu Bakr before he discharges his mission, and as soon as you meet him, take the message from him, then carry it yourself to the people of Mecca and read it to them.”

‘Ali met Abu Bakr at the Juhfa and took the tablets from him. Abu Bakr went back to the Prophet, peace be upon him and his progeny, and asked him: “O Messenger of Allah! Have you received any message from Allah against me?” He answered: “No, but Gabriel has come to me and told me that nobody conveys Allah’s Message except I or a man of my own family.” Another narration, recorded by Ahmed on page 510, Vol. 1, of his Musnad from ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam, says that when the Prophet dispatched him with Surat Bara’a, he said to him: “Either I should carry it, or you.” ‘Ali said: “If it cannot be avoided at all, then I will go.” He salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said: “Then proceed, for Allah will make your tongue firm, and He will guide your heart.”

16. You have come to know by now the hadith narrated by ‘Amr ibn Shash with our commentary in Letter 36.

17. As quoted by Muslim in his chapter on iman, page 46, Vol. 1, of his Sahih. Ibn ‘Abdul Birr explains its gist while narrating ‘Ali’s biography in the Isti’ab from a group of companions. Buraydah’s hadith has been quoted in Letter No. 36 above. His hadith, peace be upon him and his progeny, “O Allah! Befriend whoever befriends ‘Ali, and be the enemy of whoever sets himself as the enemy of ‘Ali” is consecutively reported (mutawatir), as admitted by the author of Al Fatawa al Hamidiyya in his treatise titled “Al Salat al Fakhira fil Ahadith al Mutawatira].”

18. Narrated, through al Azhar, by ‘Abdul-Razzaq, Mu’ammar, al Zuhri, ‘Ubaidullah, and Ibn ‘Abbas, each from the other, and all are reliable authorities. For this reason, al Hakim, having labelled the hadith as “sahih” because of its endorsement by both Sheikhs, says: “Abul-Azhar, according to their consensus view, is trustworthy, and if authorities unanimously agree on the authenticity of one hadith, then it has to be held authentic,” then he continues to say: “I have heard Abu ‘Abdullah al Qarashi saying that he heard Ahmed ibn Yahya al Halwani saying: ‘When Abul-Azhar came from San’a and started narrating this hadith to the people in Baghdad, Yahya ibn Ma’in rejected it. When he opened his place to the public, as usual, he inquired about the Nisaburi writer who quotes ‘Abdul-Razzaq stating such ahadith, Abul-Azhar stood up and said that it was he. Yahya ibn Ma’in laughed at his statement, stood up, and brought him to sit closer to him and inquired of him about how I personally came to be the only one who heard such hadith from ‘Abdul-Razzaq. I told him that I had just come from San’a, and when I bade him farewell, he told me that he owed me a unique hadith which nobody else had ever heard, and by Allah it was this hadith verbatim. Yahya ibn Ma’in then believed him and apologized to him.’“

19. We have quoted this hadith in Letter No. 10 above.

20. We have quoted this hadith, too, in Letter No. 10; so, refer to our commentary about it and about the one that precedes it.

21. Refer to our comment on this hadith and the one that precedes it in our Letter No. 10.

22. This is quoted by al Hakim on page 129, Vol. 3, of his authentic Al Mustadrak, and it is narrated by quite a few authors of books and traditions, all testifying to its authenticity.

23. Refer to our comment on this hadith in Letter No. 34, and also scrutinize the books of traditions to which we have referred.

24. This is quoted by al Tabrani in his Awsat, and by al Khatib in his Al Muttafaq wal Muftaraq, as stated at the beginning of page 159, Vol. 6, of Kanz al ’Ummal. We have quoted it in Letter No. 34 and commented on it in a way which hopefully benefits the researcher.

25. This is transmitted from both of them by Abul-Hadid in the fourth news item of his news to which he has referred on page 449, Vol. 2, of Sharh Nahjul Balaghah. It is also quoted by Imam al Razi while discussing the meaning of the verse of Mubahala in his Al Tafsir al Kabir, p. 288, Vol. 2, taking for granted the authenticity of this hadith according to the views of those who act upon it as well as those who do not. This hadith is also quoted by Ibn Battah from Ibn ‘Abbas’s hadith, as stated on page 34 of Fath al Malik al ’Ali Bisihhati Babil ‘Ilm ‘Ali by Imam Ahmed ibn al Sadiq al Hassani al Magharibi of Cairo. Among those who have admitted that ‘Ali is the one who is acquainted with the secrets of all prophets combined is the Sheikh of all men of knowledge, namely Muhiyud-Din ibn al ’Arabi, as quoted by the learned al Sha’rani in Section 32 of his book Al Yawaqit wal Jawahir, page 172.

26. This is quoted by al Tabrani and Ibn Mardawayh who rely on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas. It is also quoted by al Daylami from ‘Ayesha, and it is one of the lengthy traditions.

27. This is quoted by Abu Na’im and Ibn ‘Asakir from Abu Layla, and quoted also by al Najjar from Ibn ‘Abbas; so, refer to ahadith 30 and 31 of the forty ahadith cited by Ibn Hajar in Part Two, Section 9, of his Al Sawa’iq al Muhriqa, at the conclusion of page 74 and the page following it.

28. This is quoted by al Hakim on page 122, Vol. 3, of his Al Mustadrak where the author admits its authenticity. Al Thahbi quotes it in his own Talkhis, admitting its authenticity.

29. This hadith and the one succeeding it, i.e. Ibn ‘Abbas’s hadith, are quoted by al Hakim on page 140, Vol. 3, of his Mustadrak, and al Thahbi quotes him in his Talkhis al Mustadrak. Both authors admit the authenticity of this hadith due to its endorsement by both Sheikhs.

30. This is quoted by al Hakim on page 122, Vol. 3, of Al Mustadrak, saying that it is an authentic hadith according to its endorsement by both Sheikhs who have not included it in their books. Al Thahbi has admitted its authenticity for the same reason when he quoted it in his Talkhis al Mustadrak. Imam Ahmed has produced it from Abu Sa’id on pages 82 and 33, Vol. 3, of his Musnad, and al Bayhaqi has quoted it in Shu’ab al Iman. Imam Ahmed has included Abu Sa’id’s hadith on pages 82 and 33, Vol. 3, of his Musnad, and al Bayhaqi quotes it in his Shu’ab al Iman, Sa’id ibn Mansur in his Sunan, Abu Na’im in his Hilyat al Auliya’, and Abu Ya’li in his Sunan numbering it 2585, page 155, Vol. 6, of Kanz al ’Ummal.

31. His name is Ibn Abul-Akhdar. Ibn al Sakan mentions him and quotes this hadith in his regard from al Harith ibn Hasirah from Jabir al Ju’fi from Imam al Baqir from his father Zaynul-’Abidin, peace be upon them, from al Akhdar from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Ibn al Sakan says: “He is not quite famous among the Prophet’s companions, and his traditions ought to be verified.” This is quoted by al Asqalani in his biography of al Akhdar in Al Isabah. Al Dar Qutni has produced this hadith in his Ifrad, saying: “This hadith is narrated only by Jabir al Ju’fi, who is a Rafizi.”

32. Abu Na’im has quoted it among the traditions reported by Ma’ath, as well as the hadith succeeding it, that is, that of Abu Sa’id, in his Hilyat al Auliya’, and they are on page 156, Vol. 6, of Kanz al ’Ummal.

 
 

Discussions

‘Abdul Hussain has brought forty narrations which he claims proves the Imamah of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. While many of these narrations are forgeries or extremely unreliable, there are some narrations which are in fact sound. We will point out the weakness in the flawed narrations and provide an explanation for the sound narrations as these are vague and ambiguous.

 

1. The narration attributed to Jabir radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration appears in al Mustadrak by way of Ahmed ibn Abdullah ibn Yazid — ‘Abdul Razzaq — al Thawri — ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Uthman ibn Khuthaym — ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Bahman — Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah radiya Llahu ‘anhu[1]

It is interesting that ‘Abdul Hussain quoted the exact page number for this narration. He usually quotes al Dhahabi as well. This time he chose not to do so, and for a good reason. Al Dhahabi says about this narration, “By Allah, it is a forgery! Ahmed (ibn Abdullah ibn Yazid) is a confounded liar![2]‘Abdul Hussain knew full well that the scholars of Hadith consider this narration a forgery yet he quotes it as if it were reliable.

This narration has also been narrated by al Khatib al Baghdadi with the same chain, from Ahmed ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Yazid.[3] Immediately after narrating it he says, no one narrates it from ‘Abdul Razzaq besides this Ahmed; and it is the most objectionable of all his narrations He then cites his chain to Ibn ‘Adi who said that Ahmed ibn Abdullah ibn Yazid used to fabricate narrations in Samarra. He goes on to cite his chain to al Daraqutni who says that he, Ahmed ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Yazid, used to graft narrations using the chain from ‘Abdul Razzaq.[4]

This is clearly one of his forgeries.

Furthermore, the narration in the footnote, from Abu Dharr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, is none other than the narration about ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu giving his ring in charity while praying. The details of it have already been dealt with under the discussion on Letter 40.

 

3. The narration attributed to As’ad ibn Zurarah radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration is known by the following chain:

Amr ibn al Hussain — Yahya ibn al Ala al Razi — Hilal ibn Abi Humaid — ‘Abdullah ibn As’ad ibn Zurarah — his father, As’ad ibn Zurarah[5]

Al Khatib al Baghdadi narrates it with numerous variations of this chain, each one interrupted, and some which place a narrator between Hilal ibn Humaid and ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d.[6] Further still, the name given to ‘Abdullah ibn As’ad is altered in some versions. These irreconcilable variations not only creates confusion about the identity of ‘Abdullah ibn As’ad ibn Zurarah, but shows the chain to be questionable.

After discussing the identity of ‘Abdullah ibn As’ad ibn Zurarah, Ibn Hajar says, “Most of the narrators appearing in this chain are weak, and the text is erroneous.”[7]

‘Abdul Hussain conveniently omitted to mention that this narration has been declared a forgery by three major Hadith experts. The tragedy is that it is mentioned in Kanz al Ummal, the source from where ‘Abdul Hussain found this narration. ‘Ali al Muttaqi has quoted Ibn ‘Imad, al Dhahabi and Ibn Hajar, all declaring this narration baseless.[8]

As a matter of fact, al Dhahabi, states in his abridgement of al Mustadrak, that this narration is a forgery, and that Amr ibn al Hussain and his teacher Yahya ibn al Ala are suspected of forgery.[9]

Abu Hatim, Abu Zur’ah and al Daraqutni all agree that Amr ibn al Hussain is severely impugned. Ibn ‘Adi states that he is known for attributing baseless narrations to reliable narrators.[10]

Abu Hatim al Razi and Yahya ibn Ma’in both state that Yahya ibn al Ala is weak; whereas al Daraqutni and Ahmed ibn Hanbal suggest that he might have forged Hadith.[11]

 

3. The narration attributed to As’ad ibn Zurarah radiya Llahu ‘anhu in the addendum to Tarikh Baghdad by Ibn al Najjar.

This is the exact narration appearing in no. 2 above. He merely tried to decieve the readers by adding another reference. In any case, it suffers with the same problem of interruption, and the anonymity of ‘Abdullah ibn As’ad ibn Zurarah. Ibn Sa’d says that As’ad ibn Zurarah left no male offspring, his brother Sa’d ibn Zurarah left behind male off-spring.[12] Ibn Taymiyyah has pointed out that the text describes ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu in a way that is only appropriate for the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam; this is further evidence of the problematic nature of this narration.[13]

 

4. The narration attributed to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration has been related by Abu Nuaim al Asfahani by way of Ali ibn Abbas al BajaliAhmed ibn YahyaHassan ibn HussainIbrahim ibn Yusuf ibn Abi Ishaq — his father — al Sha’bi — ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu[14]

The problems with this narration are too many to count. Firstly, there is an interruption between al Sha’bi and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Al Sha’bi is only known to have narrated one Hadith from ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu; the Hadith of stoning the adulter; Ibn Hajar qoutes al Daraqutni on this without objection.[15]

Secondly, according to al Dhahabi there is an interruption in the chain between Ibrahim ibn Yusuf and his father.[16] This is in addition to his weak memory. His narrations are only accepted when corroborated, and he was known to err in his hadith.[17]

Thirdly, Ḥasan ibn Ḥusayn al Uranī is seriously compromised as a narrator. Ibn Abī Ḥātim said that he was not trustworthy, a leading figure among the Shī’ah. Ibn ‘Adī says that his narrations are contrary to what others narrate. Ibn Ḥibbān commented that he attributed baseless narrations to reliable narrators.[18]

Finally, notwithstanding the objectionable implication of the narration’s wording, Ali ibn Abbas al Bajali and his teacher Ahmed ibn Yahya are considered Majhul (unknown). Very little biographical information is available on them.

 

5. The narration attributed to Anas radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration has been recorded by Abu Nuaim — and from him ibn ‘Asakir — by way of Muhammad ibn Uthman ibn Abi ShaybahIbrahim ibn Muhammad ibn MaymunAli ibn AbisHarith ibn HasirahQasim ibn Jundub — Anas ibn Malik radiya Llahu ‘anhu[19]

The scholars are divided about Muhammad ibn Uthman ibn Abi Shaybah.[20]Some accuse him of forging Hadith for the Shia, whereas others consider him reliable. Considering the level of controversy on his grade as a narrator, let us look beyond him.

Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn Maymun is included among the weak narrators according to al Dhahabi.[21] Ibn Hajar quotes al Azdi describing him as extremely weak.[22] In both references they cite this narration of his as a specimen of the baseless narrations he was known to have transmitted.[23]

Ali ibn Abis is no better; the scholars are in unanimity that he is weak and unreliable.

Yahya ibn Ma’in says, “‘Ali ibn ‘Abis is not a good transmitter.”[24]

Al Juzajani, al Nasa’i and al Azdi say, “He is weak.”

Ibn Hibban says, “His mistakes are dreadful, to the extent that deserves to be abandoned (as a narrator).”[25]

Ibn Hajar says: “He is a weak narrator.”[26]

 

Qasim ibn Jundub is considered Majhul, without biographical data.

This narration has been included in the works on Mawduat [fabricated hadith] by Ibn al Jawzi, al Dhahabi, al Suyuti, ibn ‘Arraq, al Shawkani among many others.[27]

While it might be assumed that since the narrations from 2 – 5 appear similar in the way they are worded they might support each other, the extent of the weakness in all versions render them unsupportable. In all likelihood, the unscrupulous narrators in most versions have grafted their own isnad on a forged text. The anomalous wording of the narration supports the view of those who consider this a forgery. Taken literally, the narration would infer that the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam only task in this world was to preach the Imamah of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu!

 

6. The narration attributed to Abu Barzah al Aslami

This narration has been found with two chains

  • Abu Nuaim and Ibn ‘Asakir narrate by way of Abbad ibn Said ibn Abbad al JufiMuhammad ibn Uthman ibn Abi BahlulSalih ibn Abi al AswadAbu al Mutahhir al Razi — al A’sha al Thaqafi — Salam al Jufi — Abu Barzah radiya Llahu ‘anhu[28]
  • Ibn ‘Adi and Abu Nuaim narrate by way of Lahiz ibn Abdullah — Mu’tamir ibn Sulaiman — his father — Hisham ibn ‘Urwah — his father — Anas — Abu Barzah radiya Llahu ‘anhuma[29]

In the first chain, all the narrators placed in bold, with the exception of Salih ibn Abi al Aswad, are considered Majhul (unknown) and are without biographic data. As for Salih, ibn ‘Adi said that he was not well-known and his narrations were inconsistent with what his peers narrated, in addition to some serious flaws found in them.[30] Al Dhahabi and ibn Hajar declared him significantly weak.[31]

Under the biography of ‘Abbad ibn Sa’id, al Dhahabi provides no data besides this chain and then states, “This is absolutely baseless! The chain is [filled] with darkness!”[32] Ibn al Jawzi also declared this narration a forgery.[33]

The problem in the second chain in Lahiz ibn Abdullah. Ibn ‘Adi says:

This narration is baseless. Not only baseless in the chain, but in the text as well as I do not know of any narration with the Isnad from Sulaiman al Taymi [father of Mu’tamir] — from Hisham ibn ‘Urwah — from his father [‘Urwah ibn al Zubair] — from Anas besides this narration here. Lahiz is Majhul, unknown. The blunder is his, and I do not know of any other narration of his besides this one.[34]

 

Al Dhahabi comments on this narration saying that it is one of the most blatant forgeries.[35] Ibn al Jawzi includes it in his book on forged Ahadith.[36]

These six narrations which ‘Abdul Hussain alleges are explicit and ‘obvious’ in proving the Imamah of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, are anything but reliable. They are well-known forgeries! The scholars have diligently identified the narrators responsible for transmiting these false reports, with Allah is their reward.

7. The narration, “Verily, this is the first to believe in me…”

This narration has been attributed to three of the companions; Abu Dharr, Salman and ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhum

a. The narration attributed to Abu Dharr radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration has been transmited by al Bazzar by way of ‘Abbad ibn Ya’qud al Rawajini — ‘Ali ibn Hashim — Muhammad ibn Ubaidullah ibn Abi Rafi — his father — his grandfather — Abu Dharr radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[37]

Al Bukhari states that the scholars considered Muhammad ibn Ubaidullah ibn Abi Rafi significantly weak. Abu Hatim is on record saying that he is severely criticised as a narrator. Al Dhahabi concurs with this assessment and ends off his biographical note with a statement from Ibn ‘Adi who said that he is considered among the Shia of Kufah.[38]

While ‘Abbad ibn Ya’qub is generally considered a truthful narrator, his prejudice may have prevailed here. He was a committed Shia.[39]

 

b. The narration attributed to both Abu Dharr and Salman radiya Llahu ‘anhuma

This narration appears in al Tabarani’s collection, al Mujam al Kabir, by way of ‘Ali ibn Ishaq ibn al Wazir — Ismail ibn Musa al SuddiUmar ibn Said (Sad)Fudayl ibn MarzuqAbu Sakhilah — Abu Dharr and Salman radiya Llahu ‘anhuma[40]

Abu Sakhilah al Kufi is considered Majhul by Ibn Hajar.[41]

Fudayl ibn Marzuq is a narrator found in Sahih Muslim, though the scholars are divided on him. The summary is that he is a fair narrator who is known for serious errors as well. Where he is found in conformity with the reliable narrators, and he narrates from a reliable narrator, he will be accepted. However, his level of competency is not strong enough that his solitary narrations would be relied upon in a matter such as this, especially when one considers his Shia leanings.[42] Ibn Hibban says of him, “He is among those whom I do Istikharah before accepting their narrations.”[43] In this narration he is narrating from someone who is considered Majhul, which is problematic.

Umar ibn Sad has been criticised by al Bukhari among others.[44]

Ismail ibn Musa was a commited Shia. the scholars graded him fairly as a narrator, but they pointed out that despite being an honest narrator he erred at many places.[45]

This narration has been declared significantly weak by a number of scholars.[46]

 

c. The narration attributed to Abdullah ibn Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma

Ibn ‘Adi narrates it by way of Abdullah ibn Dahir his father — al A’mash — ‘Abayah — Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma.

Ibn ‘Adi lists this narration under the biography of Abdullah ibn Dahir; quoting Yahya ibn Ma’in that he was unreliable and severly impugned. Ibn ‘Adi concludes saying, “‘Abdullah ibn Dahir has many other narrations besides these, most of which are about the virtues of ‘Ali. He is suspected of forging many of them.”[47]

Dahir ibn Yahya al Razi was an extreme Rafidi, and his narrations were not corroborated. Al ‘Uqayli then cites this narration as one of his anomalous narrations.[48] Al Dhahabi flags both father and son for the forging of Hadith. Under the biography of Dahir he describes him as, “A vengeful Rafidi whose dreadful narrations are uncorroborated.”[49]

 

8. The narration attributed to al Hassan ibn ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhuma

This narration appears in both al Mujam al Kabir of al Tabarani and Hilyat al Auliya’ of Abu Nuaim by way of Muhammad ibn Uthman ibn Abi ShaybahIbrahim ibn Ishaq al SiniQais ibn al RabiLayth ibn Abi Sulaim — Abu Layla — Hassan ibn ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[50]

We have already pointed out the divergent views on Muhammad ibn ‘Uthman ibn Abi Shaybah under Narration no. 4.

Ibrahim ibn Ishaq al Sini is considered Matruk (suspected of forgery), and it is on account of him the Hadith is considered severely weak.[51]

Qais ibn al Rabi was truthful but weak in memory. This, in addition having Shia leanings. When Imam Ahmed was asked why some of the Muhaddithun abandoned his narrations he responded saying, “He had Shia inclinations, but mostly because of his abundant errors and the baseless narrations he was known to have narrated. Waki’ and ‘Ali ibn al Madini considered him weak.”[52] Ibn Hibban adds to this saying that he had a devilish son who would falsely include narrations into his books and he would not reliaze they had been corrupted.[53]

Layth ibn Abi Sulaim ibn Zunaym, is considered weak.

‘Abdullah ibn Ahmed, relates from his father, “… irreconcilable inconsistency in what he narrates, however some have narrated from him”[54]

Ibn Ma’in said of him, “Weak. Although, his narrations may be recorded.”[55]

Yahya ibn Sa’id did not narrate from him, and Ibn ‘Uyaynah considered weak the narrations of Layth ibn Abi Sulaim.

Ibn Abi Hatim said, “I heard my father and Abu Zur’ah saying, ‘Layth ibn Abi Sulaim is fairly weak, his narrations are not independently authoritative according to the scholars of Hadith.”[56]

Ibn Sa’d has said, “He has a man of righteousness and worship, he was weak as a narrator. It is said he would ask ‘Ataʾ, Tawus and Mujahid about something and they would differ. However, he would – unintentionally – narrate it as though they were in agreement.”[57]

Al Tirmidhi said, “Muhammad said that Ahmed would say of Layth that his narrations were not pleasing. Muhammad said that Layth is truthful, but makes mistakes”[58]

All these factors considered, the narration is significantly weak. Some have tried to bring corroborating narrations but those suffer from the same weakness, or are even more discredited than this.

 

9. The narration attributed to ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma

Ibn al Jawzi has listed this narration in his book al Mawduat and after a thorough examination of all of its variant narrations concluded that it is false. [59]

Ibn Tahir al Maqdisi mentioned it in his book Tadhkirat al Mawduat and said:

(Appearing) in its (chain) is Abu al Salt. His name is ‘Abdul Salam. Also (appearing) in its (chain) is ‘Uthman ibn Khalid, and Ismail ibn Muhammad ibn Yusuf, all of whom are liars. [60]

 

‘Abdul Salam ibn Salih al Harawi, Abu al Salt, was known to be a commited Shia. with the exception of Ibn Ma’in all the experts on narrators are in agreement that his narrations are substantially weak. They include, but are not limited to, Abu Hatim al Razi, Abu Zur’ah al Razi, al Nasa’i, Ibn ‘Adi, Abu Jafar al ‘Uqayli, al Daraqutni, and Ibn Hibban among others. Ibn Ma’in seems to have mixed views about him and therefore it cannot be established with certainty what he thought of Abu al Salt’s narrations.[61]

The editor of al Shawkani’s al Fawa’id al Majmuah, ‘Abdul Rahman al Mu’allimi, provides a detailed discussion on this narration wherein he demonstrates that it is flawed by all counts. [62]

Ibn Kathir mentions it in al Bidayah wal Nihayah and says:

This hadith is known by way of Abu al Salt al Harawi. Ahmed ibn Salamah among others who comprise a group of unreliable transmitters got it from him, then fraudulently ascribed it to themselves.

 

He goes on to say:

Ahmed ibn Muhammad ibn Qasim ibn Mihraz relates from Ibn Ma’in who said, “Ibn Ayman narrated to me that Abu Muawiyah narrated this hadith initially but then refrained from it. He says, ‘Abu al Salt was a wealthy man who used to honour the scholars who would narrate these ahadith to him.’”

Ibn ‘Asakir records this hadith with an unreliable chain reaching the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, by way of Jafar al Sadiq — from his father — from his grandfather — from Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah; He also narrates it from a different chain, from Jabir. Ibn ‘Adi said that this version is also fabricated. Abu al Fath al Awdi says, “There is no authentic hadith like this.” [63]

 

Aside from the problems in the chain, the wording of this narration suggests that it is problematic as well. The Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is an ocean of knowledge. It is inconceivable that the knowledge of the Final Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is only accessible via one door.

It is well-known that knowledge has been transmitted from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam by other than ‘Ali. Knowledge was spread in the different regions and cities based on whichever of the Companions had settled there. Much of ‘Ali’s knowledge was spread in Kufah. Despite that, the people of Kufah began learning the Qur’an and the Sunnah even before ‘Uthman’s era.

When ‘Ali arrived in Kufah, Shurayh was already appointed the judge. He and ‘Abidah al Salmani learnt from others before ‘Ali. Therefore, Islamic knowledge preceded ‘Ali’s arrival in Kufah.

Overlooking the weakness of this narration, there is nothing in it that proves ‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu pre-eminence for succession. At most it could be said that he is a leader in terms of knowledge.

 

10. The narration ascribed to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration is an adaptation of the narration before it. It appears in the Jami of al Tirmidhi with the following chain:

Ismail ibn Musa — Muhammad ibn Umar al Rumi Sharik — Salamah ibn Kuhayl — Suwaid ibn Ghaflah — al Sunabihi — ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu[64]

After relating it al Tirmidhi points out that it is severely weak saying, “This narration is Gharib Munkar. Some have narrated this Hadith from Sharik without including al Sunabihi [as a link in the chain]. We are not aware of this Hadith being narrated by any other reliable narrators; only this version from Sharik. There is a similar narration from Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma.[65]

Al Dhahabi appears to grade this narration as a forgery. When discussing the biography of Muhammad ibn Umar al Rumi, one of the unreliable narrators appearing in this chain, he quotes Abu Zur’ah and Abu Dawood both declaring him weak. He goes on to say that al Bukhari transmits his narration in his other works; not in his Sahih. He then cites the chain of al Tirmidhi for this narration and concludes, “I am not certain who forged it.”[66]

Ibn Hibban discusses a narrator, ‘Umar ibn ‘Abdullah al Rumi, a narrator of Hadith who transmits from Sharik. He says that he switches Isnads, erroneously ascribing the text of a Hadith narrated by weak and unreliable narrators to an Isnad with reliable narrators. He then cites the isnad in al Tirmidhi by way of Sharik and concludes saying:

There is no basis for this narration from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam whatsoever, nor is it from the narration of Sharik, nor Salamah, nor al Sunabihi. What appears to be the case is that this narrator heard of the Hadith from the likes of Abu al Salt, with the chain via Abu Muawiyah. While he remembered the wording, he confused the isnad and ascribed it to Sharik with the aforemoentioned chain.[67]

 

Al Dhahabi points out that Ibn Hibban confused the names and instead of mentioning this under the biography of Muhammad ibn ‘Umar al Rumi, who is a narrator from Sharik, he mentioned it under the biography of his father, ‘Umar, who narrates from a generation higher than Sharik.[68]

Sharik ibn Abd-Allah al Nakhai al Qadi. He is considered weak, especially in that which he narrated from memory after being assigned a post in the judiciary. The narrations which are accepted from him are those which he narrated prior to his appointment as judge, or when he narrated from his books and not from memory.

Ibn Hibban said about him:

Towards the end he erred regularly and his memory failed him. Therefore, those narrations of those who heard from him in his early days in Wasit do not have confusion — like Yazid ibn Harun, Ishaq al Azraq — as for those who heard from him later on in Kufah, their narrations have many mistakes.[69]

 

Ibn ‘Adi said:

In general his narrations is are acceptable. However, his narrations were affected on account of weakness of memory so he began to fairly contradictory reports. None of is objectionable reports were deliberate.[70]

 

11. The narration ascribed to Abu Dharr radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration is found in Musnad al Firdaws by al Daylami at it appears by way of Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah — Ahmed ibn ‘Ubaid al Thaqafi — Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn Khalaf al ‘Attar — Musa ibn Jafar ibn Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn Ali ibn Abdullah ibn Jafar ibn Abi TalibAbdul Muhaymin ibn al Abbas — his father — Sahl ibn Sa’d — Abu Dharr.[71]

Appearing in this chain is Musa ibn Jafar al Jafari. Ibn Hajar cites al ‘Uqayli, agreeing with him, that there are blunders in what Musa ibn Jafar narrates.[72]

The other problematic narrator is Abdul Muhaymin ibn al Abbas. Al Bukhari criticized him severely as a narrator of Hadith saying, “Munkar al Hadith.”[73] Abu Hatim al Razi described him with the same words,[74] whilst al Nasa’i graded him Matruk.[75] Al Saji said that he possessed a manuscript which was filled with baseless reports; he narrated these from his father, from his grandfather.[76]

In the footnotes of al Murajaat this narration was referenced to Kanz al Ummal, a secondary source. ‘Ali al Muttaqi al Hindi, the compiler of Kanz al Ummal, has clearly indicated that if he references any Hadith to a specific set of works, that his mere referencing is sufficient to point out the unreliablity, and possible forgery, of those narrations.

He writes:

Whatever is acribed [in this work of mine] to Ibn ‘Adī, al ‘Uqaylī, al Khaṭīb, Ibn ‘Asākir, al Ḥakīm al Tirmidhī in Nawādir al Uṣūl, al Ḥākim in his Tārīkh, Ibn Jārūd in his Tārīkh, and al Daylamī in Musnad al Firdaws; is considered weak. Mere reference to any of these works suffices in pointing out the fact that the narrations quoted are unreliable.[77]

 

The severity of weakness in this narration means that it is beyond support.

 

12. The narration attributed to Anas radiya Llahu ‘anhu

It has been recorded by al Hakim, by way of Dirar ibn Surad — Mu’tamir ibn Sulaiman — his father — al Hassan — Anas radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[78]

Al Dhahabi said in his Talkhis, “I believe this to be the forgery of Dirar! Ibn Ma’in said that he is a liar!”[79] Under the biography of Dirar, al Dhahabi states, “Dirar is a famous liar. Yahya ibn Ma’in said that there were two famous liars in Kufah called Abu Nuaim. Dirar is one of them.”[80]

Ibn Abi Hatim says about Dirar that he narrated a report by way of Mu’tamir — from his father — from al Hassan — from Anas radiya Llahu ‘anhu , which the scholars of Hadith reject and consider to be baseless.[81]

Ibn Hibban stated that he would attribute the text of an unreliable hadith to reliable narrators.[82]

 

13. The narration ascribed to Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration is found in the tenth-century book, al Sawaiq al Muhriqah, without any chain of transmission, only a reference to Ibn al Samman. The absence of these details compounds the skepticism on the veracity of this narration. The general principle employed in Sunni scholarship is to ignore any narration unless it can be evaluated in terms of its Isnad. The absence of isnad in this case means that this narration is to be set aside.

 

14. The narration attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma

It is recorded by al Daylami by way of Hussain al AshqarSharik — al A’mash — ‘Ata’ — Ibn ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[83]

Hussain ibn Hassan al Ashqar has been discredited by al Bukhari, Abu Zur’ah—who considered him completely unreliable—and Abu Hatim. Al Juzajani calls him an extremist Shia accused of cursing the companions. Ibn ‘Adi has pointed out the fact that he was known to have narrated many baseless narrations. Al Dhahabi cites this very narration as one of the baseless narrations related by Hussain al Ashqar.[84]

The weakness of Sharik was discussed under narration no. 10 above.

 

15. The narration of Hubshi ibn Junadah radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration appears in Musnad Ahmed, Sunan ibn Majah and Jami al Tirmidhi among other primary Hadith collections.[85]

There is a divided opinion among the scholars on the reliability of this narration. The famous versions of this Hadith are by way of Abu Ishaq al Sabi’i — from al Bara ibn ‘Azib[86]; and by way of Abu Ishaq al Sabi’i — from Hani’ ibn Hani’ and Hubayrah ibn Yarim — from ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[87] The fact that the narration from Hubshi ibn Junadah radiya Llahu ‘anhu is narrated by way of Sharik is cause for concern among some scholars, due to the reasons cited earlier. However, Sharik is not the only narrator of this report, there are supplementary versions where Sharik is supported by Isra’il.[88]

While we are inclined to accepting the soundness of this narration, our interpretation differs significantly from what ‘Abdul Hussain has written. His version of events is handicapped with oversights.

The first of his claims which ought to be addressed is the claim of multiple chains; this narration is only known by way of Abu Ishaq al Sabi’i. The narrations of al Bara ibn ‘Azib and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu only mention the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam statement, “Ali is from me and I from him.” The addition whichs pertains to conveying on his salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam behalf is only known through this version from Hubshi radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

Furthermore, these words are not unique for ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam used similar words for the people of the Ash’ari tribe[89], Julaybib[90] and even his uncle, al ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhum.[91] We have elaborated on this under the discussions on Letter 32.[92]

Secondly, ‘Abdul Hussain seems to have misunderstood the meaning of the narrations in Musnad Ahmed. The mention of the Farewell Hajj is cited to prove that Hubshi radiya Llahu ‘anhu was a companion of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam; not that he heard this Hadith during the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam Farewell Hajj!

Due to his oversight, ‘Abdul Hussain goes on to reveal the correct context in which the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said these words. This was the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam instruction that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu recite the verses of Surah al Tawbah which revoked the original amnesty granted by the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to the Mushrikin.

It well-known that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam instated Abu Bakr as the leader of the Hajj in the ninth year after the Hijrah. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was subsequently sent to join Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu as a follower during that Hajj, and to recite the verses of Surah al Tawbah. These were revealed after Abu Bakr’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu departure. This disproves ‘Abdul Hussain’s claim that Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu departed with Surah al Tawbah, also referred to as Surah al Bara’ah.

Al Tabari, Ishaq ibn Rahuyah in his Musnad, Nasa’i, Darimi, Ibn Khuzaimah, and Ibn Hibban all narrate by way of Jabir radiya Llahu ‘anhu who said:

 

The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam sent Abu Bakr to lead the Hajj after his salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam return from the ‘Umrah which commenced at Ji’irranah, We proceeded until we were close to al ‘Arj when the adhan for Fajr was called out and the sound of Messenger’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam camel was heard, and sitting on it was ‘Ali.

Abu Bakr said to him, “Have you been sent as a leader or a messenger?”

He said, “Rather, the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam sent me with (Surah) al Bara’ah to recite to the people.”

We arrived in Makkah and one day before the day of Tarwiyyah. Abu Bakr came and addressed the people with regards to their rituals. Upon the completion of his address ‘Ali stood up and recited (Surah) al Bara’ah to the people until he completed it. The Day of al Nahr passed by in the same manner and the Day of al Nafr passed by in the same manner.[93]

 

During this Hajj, Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu proclaimed that no mushrik may perform Hajj after that year, and no person may perform tawaf in an unclothed state. He commanded his other companions to do the same. This is supported by what al Bukhari narrates from Abu Hurairah, who said:

 

بعثني أبو بكر في تلك الحجة في مؤذنين يوم النحر نؤذن بمنى أن لا يحج بعد العام مشرك، ولا يطوف بالبيت عريان‏.‏ قال حميد بن عبد الرحمن ثم أردف رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عليا، فأمره أن يؤذن ببراءة قال أبو هريرة فأذن معنا علي في أهل منى يوم النحر لا يحج بعد العام مشرك، ولا يطوف بالبيت عريان‏.

Abu Bakr sent me during that Hajj amongst the announcers on the Day of Nahr at Mina that no mushrik may perform the Hajj after that year and no person may perform tawaf naked.

Humaid ibn Abdul Rahman says, “Then the Messenger seated ‘Ali (on his camel) and instructed him to announce (recite Surah) al Bara’ah (to the people).”

Abu Hurairah says, “Then ‘Ali announced (Surah) al Bara’ah with us amongst the people in Mina on the Day of al Nahr, and that no polytheist may perform the Hajj after that year, and that no person may perform tawaf unclothed.”[94]

 

The reason for sending ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was to uphold the customary diplomatic protocol since the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was a leader. The protocol among the Arabs when they discussed matters relating to withdrawing from a pledge, or consenting, or reconciliation, cancelling agreements, that the only persons mandated were the leader or his closest relative. Anyone besides these would not be considered mandated for the task.[95]

Thus we realize that the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam dispatching ‘Ali under the command of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhuma does not prove ‘Ali’s right to immediate succession in any way. Instead, it indicates that Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu was the most eligible candidate for the Caliphate as he was appointed by the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to lead the Hajj. It also provides context for this Hadith.

There is another version of this Hadith by way of Yahya ibn Bukayr with the same isnad from Abu Ishaq al Sabi’i but it is worded, “None shall repay my debts except ‘Ali.”[96] Whichever version is prefered, neither proves the immediate succession to the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. May Allah shower His mercy on ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and his beloved family.

 

16. The narration ascribed to Abu Dharr radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration appears in al Mustadrak by way of Ali ibn Said ibn Bashir al Razi — Hassan ibn Hammad al Hadrami — Yahya ibn Yala — Bassam al Sayrafi — Hassan ibn ‘Amr al Fuqaymi — Muawiyah ibn Thalabah — Abu Dharr radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[97]

‘Abdul Hussain lied though, when he said that both al Hakim and al Dhahabi graded it authentic on the criteria of al Bukhari and Muslim. Al Hakim graded the isnad, Sahih, and al Dhahabi remained silent offering no grading. Al Hakim’s grading of Sahih is a farcry from the criteria of either al Bukhari or Muslim, let alone their joint-criteria. As a matter of interest, al Hakim’s individual grading in al Mustadrak holds very little weight to Hadith scholars as he did not put as much academic rigour into his grading. He was found to have graded spurious narrations authentic, and thus is not relied upon in terms of his grading.

Al Daraqutni said that Ali ibn Said was known for some Ahadith which could not be corroborated, he considered him lacking in terms of reliabilty.[98]

Yahya ibn Yala al Aslami was considered a weak narrator, this in addition to being a Shia.[99]

Muawiyah ibn Thalabah is considered Majhul.

All these factors considered, this narration is unreliable without question.

 

17. The narration ascribed to Abu Dharr radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration appears by way of Abu al Jahhaf Dawood ibn Abi AufMuawiyah ibn Thalabah — Abu Dharr radiya Llahu ‘anhu[100]

Al Dhahabi grades this narration significantly weak.[101] It appears that he considers Abu al Jahhaf as the cause. While the scholars do not reject his narrations outright, he is known for being an extreme Shia and also known for a number of unreliable narrations. This is one of those that are used to demonstrate his problematic narrations.[102]

The problem with this isnad is exacerbated by the anonymity of Muawiyah ibn Thalabah.

 

18. The narration of Umm Salamah radiya Llahu ‘anha

This narration appears in Musnad Ahmed and al Mustadrak among other works.[103] The scholars are divided on the authenticty of this narration and those who consider it to be reliable have credible evidence. It is not surprising that there is nothing to suggest succession from this narration. It is no different from the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam statement:

 

لا تسبوا أصحابي فو الذي نفسي بيده لو أن أحدكم أنفق مثل أحد ذهبا ما بلغ مد أحدهم ولا نصيفه

Do not revile my Sahabah, for I swear by the One Who controls my life, if any of you have to spend gold equal to Mount Uhud, it will never equal one mudd[104] spent by the Sahabah, and not even half.[105]

 

The translator has taken liberties by translating the Arabic word Sabb [revile] as ‘denounce’. This is not the only deception, ‘Abdul Hussain alleges that al Hakim grades this authentic on the criteria of al Bukhari and Muslim. Al Hakim only states that the chain is sound. Abu ‘Abdullah al Bajali, the narrator from Umm Salamah does not appear in either of the Sahih collections.

‘Abdul Hussain cited the narration of ‘Amr ibn Shas radiya Llahu ‘anhu to support this narration. It appears in Musnad Ahmed by way of Ya’qub ibn Ibrahim ibn Sa’d — his father — Muhamad ibn Ishaq ibn Yasar — Aban ibn Salih — Fadl ibn Abdullah ibn Maqil ibn Sinan — ‘Abdullah ibn Niyar al Aslami — ‘ Amr ibn Shas.

Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq has narrated with ananah and not with Sama, this means that he implied but did not explicitly state that he heard the narration from Aban, and Ibn Ishaq is known for Tadlis.

Fadl ibn Abdullah ibn Maqil ibn Sinan is considered Majhul.[106]This, in addition to the interruption in the chain between ‘Abdullah ibn Niyar and ‘Amr ibn Shas. Yahya ibn Ma’in indicates that ‘Abdullah ibn Niyar narrates via an intermediary who is omitted from this chain.[107]

These factors are sufficient to consider this narration weak and unreliable, even though there is nothing objectionable in the text.

There is another narration which—despite its weakness—is in better standing in terms of its narrator. ‘Abdullah ibn Mughaffal radiya Llahu ‘anhu relates that the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said:

 

عن عبد الله بن مغفل قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم الله الله في أصحابي الله الله في أصحابي لا تتخذوهم غرضا بعدي فمن أحبهم فبحبي أحبهم ومن أبغضهم فببغضي أبغضهم ومن آذاهم فقد آذاني ومن آذاني فقد آذى الله ومن آذى الله فيوشك أن يأخذه قال أبو عيسى هذا حديث حسن غريب لا نعرفه إلا من هذا الوجه

Fear Allah regarding my Companions! Fear Allah regarding my Companions! Do not make them objects of insults after me. Whoever loves them, it is out of love of me that he loves them. And whoever hates them, it is out of hatred for me that he hates them. And whoever harms them, he has harmed me, and whoever harms me, he has offended Allah, and whoever offends Allah, [then] he shall soon be punished.[108]

 

Appearing in this chain is ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Ziyad, some have said his name is ‘Abdul Rahman ibn ‘Abdullah, and others ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abdul Rahman. Some have considered him Majhul and others have said that he is slightly weak. As such, it is deemed a weak narration even if its weakness is subtle.

It is evident that the features in the narration cited in al Muraja’at are not exclusive for ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Despite its weakness it only speaks of his merits and warns against causing harm to him, physically or otherwise. Contrary to what ‘Abdul Hussain posits they do not indicate immediate succession in any way. May Allah be pleased with ‘Ali.

 

19. The narration of Salman radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration appears in al Mustadrak by way of Ahmed ibn ‘Uthman ibn Yahya al Muqri — Abu Bakr ibn Abi al ‘Awam — Abu Zaid Sa’id ibn Aws al Ansari — ‘Auf[109] — Abu ‘Uthman al Nahdi.[110]

Al Hakim’s grading it authentic on the criteria of al Bukhari and Muslim, and al Dhahabi’s approval appear to be an oversight since Sa’id ibn Aws al Ansari is not cited in either of the Sahihayn.

This narration expresses the meaning of the Hadith, “Whomsoever, I am his Mawla, ‘Ali is his Mawla.”

Likewise the Hadith, “Indeed it is the covenant of the unlettered prophet to me that none shall love me except a believer and none shall hate me except a hypocrite.”[111]

This was also said of the Ansar. We find the Hadith of al Bara’ ibn ‘Azib radiya Llahu ‘anhu wherein the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam mentioned the Ansar radiya Llahu ‘anhum, “None but the believer loves them, none but the hypocrite hates them. He who loves them loves Allah and he who hates them hates Allah.”[112]

Despite the narration pertaining to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu being sound, the virtue established therein was shared by the Ansar and this debunks ‘Abdul Hussain’s claim of exclusivity. Furthermore, there is nothing in the narration to suggest leadership. The Hadith speaks about maintaining a loving relationship towards ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and this is part of the belief of Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah.

 

20. The narration ascribed to ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration appears in al Mustadrak.[113]The Hadith expert, al Dhahabi, criticized this narration severely and considered it unreliable.[114] In many of his works he pointed out that this narration was unreliable, the error being an oversight from the reliable narrator, ‘Abdul Razzaq of San’a.[115]He was not alone in his grading this narration. He was preceeded by the Hadith Master, Yahya ibn Ma’in,[116]Ibn ‘Adi, [117] and Abu al Faraj ibn al Jawzi.[118]The scholars after al Dhahabi also considered extremely weak; these include al Suyuti[119] and Ibn ‘Arraq al Kinani.[120]

 

21. The narration attributed to ‘Ammar radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration has been recorded by al Hakim, Abu Ya’la, al Khatib al Baghdadi and Ibn ‘Asakir, all with a common chain by way of Said ibn Muhammad al WarraqAli ibn al Hazawwar — Abu Maryam al Thaqafi — ‘Ammar radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[121]

Al Dhahabi commented on this narration in his Talkhis, “Sa’id and ‘Ali are both Matruk!”[122]

Said ibn Muhammad al Warraq was declared weak by a number of critics including Ibn Sa’d, al Nasa’i and Ibn ‘Adi; Ibn Ma’in, al Daraqutni and al Dhahabi considered him severely weak.[123]

Ali ibn al Hazawwar was from the Shia of Kufah, and was suspected of forgery. He was criticised harshly by al Bukhari, Yahya ibn Sa’id, Abu Hatim and al Nasa’i. Ibn ‘Adi cited this narration as an example of his baseless narrations.[124]

The problem is compounded since Abu Maryam al Thaqafi, who narrates from ‘Ammar is considered Majhul by al Daraqutni.[125]Forgers of Hadith were known to invent a narrator from whom they would transmit their forgeries. This was a neat trick to avoid being caught out immediately since the teacher they were citing was an imaginary person and the narration could never be verified from the teacher. It is possible that this is the case here.

 

22. The narration ascribed to Zaid ibn Arqam radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration has been discussed in detail under the discussions on Letter 10. It is the third narration. This narration is either severely weak or perhaps a fabrication.[126]

 

23. The narration ascribed to ‘Ammar radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration has been discussed in detail under the discussions on Letter 10. It is the fourth narration. This narration is extremely unreliable.[127]

 

24. The narration ascribed to ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma

This narration has been discussed in detail under the discussions on Letter 10. It is the first narration. This narration is either extremely weak or perhaps a fabrication.[128]

 

25. The narration ascribed to Ziyad ibn Mutarrif radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration has been discussed in detail under the discussions on Letter 10. It is the second narration. This narration is extremely weak and cannot be relied upon.[129]

 

26. The narration ascribed to Abu Ayub al Ansari radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration has been recorded by ibn ‘Asakir by way of Mualla ibn Abdul Rahman — Sharik — al A’mash — Ibrahim al Nakha’i — ‘Alqamah and al Aswad — Abu Ayub radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[130]

The common narrator, Mualla ibn Abdul Rahman al Wasiti, is considered a liar and suspected of forging Hadith. This in addition to the fact that he was suspected of being a Rafidi as well. Yahya ibn Ma’in was asked about him and he related the final moments in the life of Mu’alla. He was asked why he did not seek Allah’s forgiveness and he responded, “Should I not hope that I will be forgiven, [afterall] I have fabricated over seventy Ahadith about the virtues of ‘Ali.”[131]

There is no other source for this narration and it can easily be understood to be one of his forgeries.

On the other hand we have many narrations from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wherein he says about the Ansar:

 

عن عبد الله بن زيد بن عاصم، قال لما أفاء الله على رسوله صلى الله عليه وسلم يوم حنين قسم في الناس في المؤلفة قلوبهم ولم يعط الأنصار شيئا، فكأنهم وجدوا إذ لم يصبهم ما أصاب الناس فخطبهم فقال يا معشر الأنصار ألم أجدكم ضلالا فهداكم الله بي، وكنتم متفرقين فألفكم الله بي وعالة، فأغناكم الله بي‏ كلما قال شيئا قالوا «الله ورسوله أمن‏ قال ما يمنعكم أن تجيبوا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ؟‏‏‏ قال كلما قال شيئا قالوا الله ورسوله أمن‏‏ قال لو شئتم قلتم جئتنا كذا وكذا‏‏ أترضون أن يذهب الناس بالشاة والبعير وتذهبون بالنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى رحالكم لولا الهجرة لكنت امرأ من الأنصار ولو سلك الناس واديا وشعبا لسلكت وادي الأنصار وشعبها الأنصار شعار والناس دثار إنكم ستلقون بعدي أثرة فاصبروا حتى تلقوني على الحوض

‘Abdullah ibn Zaid ibn ‘Asim radiya Llahu ‘anhu relates that when Allah granted victory to His Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on the Day of Hunayn, he distributed the Fay’ [booty] amongst those whose hearts have been (recently) reconciled (to Islam), but did not give anything to the Ansar.

So they seemed to have felt disappointed and sad as they did not get as others had received. The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then addressed them, saying, “O assembly of Ansar, did I not find you astray, and then Allah guided you on the Right Path through me? You were divided into groups, and Allah brought you together through me? You were poor and Allah made you rich through me?”

Whatever the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said , they (the Ansar) said, “Allah and His Messenger have done greater favours [for us].”

The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “What stops you from answering the Messenger of Allah?”

But whatever he said to them, their response was, “Allah and His Messenger have done greater favours [for us].”

The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then said, “The thought might cross your minds, ‘You came to us in such-and-such state (at Madinah).’ Would it not please you to see the people go away with sheep and camels while you return with the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to your homes? Were it not for the Hijrah, I would have been one of the Ansar. And if the people took their own paths through a valley or mountain pass, I would select the valley or mountain pass of the Ansar. The Ansar are Shiar (those clothes which are in direct contact, i.e. inner garments), and the [rest of] people are Dithar (those clothes which are not in direct contact with the body, i.e. outer garments). No doubt, you will see other people favoured over you after my passing but you should be patient until you meet me at the Pond [of Kawthar].”[132]

 

Abu Hurairah radiya Llahu ‘anhu related a similar narration

 

عن أبي هريرة رضى الله عنه عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أو قال أبو القاسم صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏لو أن الأنصار سلكوا واديا أو شعبا، لسلكت في وادي الأنصار ولولا الهجرة لكنت امرأ من الأنصار‏‏.‏فقال أبو هريرة ما ظلم بأبي وأمي آووه ونصروه‏ أو كلمة أخرى

The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam or Abu al Qasim said, “If the Ansar took their way through a valley or a mountain pass, I would take Ansar’s valley. Were it not for the Hijrah, I would have been one of the Ansar.”

Abu Hurairah used to say, “The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was not unjust; may my parents be sacrificed for him. Indeed the Anssar sheltered and helped him.”[133]

 

27. The narration ascribed to Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu

The reference given for this narration in al Murajaat is simply a sequential number, volume and page number from Kanz al Ummal. What it conveniently excludes is the actual reference in Kanz al Ummal: al Wahiyat of Ibn al Jawzi![134]

Ibn al Jawzi compiled a work titled, al Ilal al Mutanahiyah fi al Ahadith al Wahiyah, which is an anthology of weak and unreliable narrations. ‘Abdul Hussain disguised the unreliability of this narration with his reference to Kanz al Ummal.

The narration appears with a lengthy chain in Ibn al Jawzi’s work: al Qazzaz — Ahmed ibn ‘Ali — Muhammad ibn Talhah al Niali — Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Ibrahim al Shafi’i — Abu Bakr Ahmed ibn Muhammad ibn Salih al Tammar — Muhammad ibn Muslim ibn Warah — ‘Abdullah ibn Raja’ — Isra’il — Abu Ishaq — Hubshi ibn Junadah — Abu Bakr al Siddiq radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[135]

This narration has been recorded with the same chain of transmission by al Khatib al Baghdadi, and by way of him by Ibn ‘Asakir.[136]

Appearing in this chain is Muhammad ibn Talhah al Niali, about whom al Khatib al Baghdadi says, “He would seek out the false and baseless narrations… he was a Rafidi.”[137] He was considered unreliable by both al Dhahabi and Ibn Hajar.[138]

The gretaer problem in this chain is Ahmed ibn Muhammad ibn Salih al Tammar. Ibn ‘Asakir suspects that he is the one who forged it, or popularized the forged report.[139] Al Dhahabi endorses that statement saying that he, al Tammar, transmitted a false Hadith.[140]

Al Khatib recorded this narration with another chain going to Abu Hurairah radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[141] After narrating it he says, “This is only narrated with chain by way of Qasim al Malati; and he used to forge Hadith!”[142]

Ibn ‘Asakir also narrates it, with the same chain, by way of al Khatib al Baghdadi which means that the same problem affects it.[143]

‘Abdul Hussain truncated the narration in his letter. The original narration speaks about either Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu or Abu Hurayarah radiya Llahu ‘anhu observing that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu distributed dates, and the amount of dates that filled his palm was equal to number of dates which filled the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam palm. Nonetheless, the explanation would only be required if the narration were sound. Considering the extent of weakness in it, there is no mystery why Ibn al Jawzi included it in his work of suficiently unreliable Ahadith.

 

28. The narration wherein the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam allegedly said, “O Fatimah, does it not please your that Allah has looked at all the people of this world and [from them] chosen for you two men; one of them your father and the other your husband?”

This narration is ascribed to a number of companions; Abu Hurairah, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas, Abu Ayub al Ansari and Ma’qil ibn Yasar radiya Llahu ‘anhum.

a. The narration ascribed to Abu Hurairah radiya Llahu ‘anhu is recorded by al Hakim and appears by way of Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ahmed ibn Sufyan al Tirmidhi — Surayj ibn Yunus — Abu Hafs al Abbar — al A’mash — Abu Salih — Abu Hurairah radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[144]

Al Dhahabi objects to al Hakim’s inclusion of such a narration stating, “It appears to be forged [and] attributed to Surayj.”[145]

Al Dhahabi says about Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ahmed al Tirmidhi, “He narrated a fabricated report from Surayj ibn Yunus for which he is suspected forging.”[146]

This is not the only problem with this narration. The wording indicates that it might be a forgery. The text of the narrates states that Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha objected to the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam marrying her off to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu because he was too poor! Surely this would cause inconvenience to ‘Abdul Hussain, therefore he decided to reveal only that which suited his agenda.

 

b. The version ascribed to Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma appears by way of ‘Abdul Razzaq — Ma’mar — Ibn Abi Najih — Muhajid — Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma

All these narrators in the chain above are sound narrators. The problem arises when we look at those who transmit this narration from ‘Abdul Razzaq:

  • Ibrahim ibn al Hajjaj[147]Al Dhahabi claims that he is Majhul, and that he narrated a baseless report citing this very narration.[148] Ibn al Jawzi has also declared this arration significantly flawed.[149] Al Haythami also alludes to the fact that he is Majhul.[150]
  • Abu al Salt al Harawi[151]Significantly weak, suspected of lying. He is known specifically for transmitting baseless narrations by way of ‘Abdul Razzaq.[152]
  • Ahmed ibn Abdullah ibn Yazid al Hushaymi[153]is suspected of forgery of Hadith. Al Daraqutni states that he would narrate many false narrations by way of ‘Abdul Razzaq. [154]
  • Hassan ibn Ali al Mamari[155]the scholars are divided about his status a narrator of Hadith and he is known for having narrated uncorroborated narrations. There were many discrepencies in what he narrated when compared against what his peers narrated. His version of this narration is further marred by the fact that he did not receive it from ‘Abdul Razzaq; rather he narrates it via Abu al Salt, ‘Abdul Salam ibn Salih al Harawi.[156]
  • Muhammad ibn Jaban al Jindaysapuri[157] is considered Majhul and no biographical data on him can be found.

All these narrators are problematic, and none of them are from the mainstream narrators from ‘Abdul Razzaq. The narrators from ‘Abdul Razzaq are either suspected of forging Hadith or unknown entities. We have previously pointed out that unscrupulous narrators would invent a name and ascribe false narrations to reliable Muhaddithin by way of this anonymous, invented narrator. The experts have long suspected this of being a forgery.

 

c. The narration ascribed to Abu Ayub al Ansari radiya Llahu ‘anhu appears by way of a common chain Qais ibn al Rabi — Al A’mash — Abayah ibn Ribi — Abu Ayub al Ansari radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[158]

Qais ibn al Rabi was considered weak in terms of his memory. The difference of opinion among the scholars is how serious that was. It is believed that in his old age his son corrupted his books by adding narrations to them, and when he would narrate from his books he would not realize that they had been tampered with. He was also known for being a Shia, which could have influenced the way he narrates the Fada’il of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Despite his weakness, he was held to be trustworthy by some of the scholars.[159]

Abayah ibn Ribi was a fanatic Shia, known for narrating baseless reports.[160]

The narration is interrupted between al A’mash and ‘Abayah ibn Rib’i.[161]

It does not help that both narrators from Qais ibn al Rabi’ are problematic:

  • Yahya al Himmani was accused of Sariqat al Hadith; he would graft his own isnad on another Hadith. Ibn Numair and Ahmed ibn Hanbal called him a liar.[162]
  • Hussain al Ashqar has been discredited by al Bukhari, Abu Zur’ah, and Abu Hatim. Abu Zur’ah considered him completely unreliable. Al Juzajani accused him of being an extremist Shia suspecting of cursing the Companions. Ibn ‘Adi states that he was known for narrating many baseless narrations.[163]

This narration appears to contradict the earlier ones in terms of its context. The other versions mention this under the circumstances of ‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu proposal and Fatimah’s radiya Llahu ‘anha reluctance to wed because of ‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu lack of means. The version ascribed to Abu Ayub Al Ansari radiya Llahu ‘anhu places this conversation at the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam deathbed.

 

d. The version ascribed to Ma’qil ibn Yasar radiya Llahu ‘anhu is worded differently and appears by way of Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah al Asadi — Khalid ibn Tahman — Nafi’ ibn Abi Nafi’ — Ma’qil ibn Yasar radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[164]

Khalid ibn Tahman lost his memory about ten years before he passed away.[165]

 

29. The narration attributed to ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma

The narration can be traced via the Tafsir of al Tabari by way of Hassan ibn Hussain al AnsariMuaz ibn Muslimal Harawi — ‘Ata’ ibn al Sa’ib — Sa’id ibn Jubayr — Ibn ‘Abbas.[166]

Hassan ibn Hussain al Ansari al Urani is extremely unreliable and considered a Shia. Ibn ‘Adi says that his narrations are contrary to what others narrate. Ibn Hibban noted that he attributed baseless narrations to reliable narrators. Al Dhahabi cited this narration as an example of one of the anamalous, uncorroborated, baseless narrations for which he was known.[167]

Muaz ibn Muslim is Majhul.[168]

Al Harawi is also Majhul. [169]

The anonymity of these narrators compounds the problem in this chain, confirming its unreliability.Ibn Kathir has criticized this narration both in terms of its unreliable chain, and anomolous meaning.[170]

 

30. The narration about entering the Masjid in the state of Janabah

This narration has been discussed in detail under Letter 34.[171]The narration was found to be unreliable via both chains. Even if it were reliable there is nothing in it to infer ‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu leadership.

 

31. The narration attributed to Anas radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration is transmitted with a common chain by way of ‘Ubaidullah ibn Musa — Matar ibn Abi Matar — Anas ibn Malik radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[172]

Matar ibn Abi Matar is also known as Matar ibn Maymun al Muharibi. He is described by al Bukhari, Abu Hatim, and al Nasa’i in very harsh terms, “Munkar al Hadith.”[173] Ibn al Jawzi classifies this narration a forgery and suspects that Matar was the one responsible for this. Al Dhahabi agrees with Ibn al Jawzi’s conclusion and supports the claim by citing other examples of forged, and baseless narrations known by way of Matar.[174] Ibn ‘Arraq al Kinani also declares this a forgery citing Matar as the cause.[175]

Even if this were not a forged narration, it does not support the greater doctrine of Imamah held by the Twelver Shia since it excludes the remaining Imams. ‘Abdul Hussain did not realise that this forged narration could not possibly support his cause.

 

32. The narration attributed to Jabir radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration has been discussed in detail under the narrations found in Letter 34. It was proven to be a fabrication.[176]

 

33. The narration attributed to Abu al Hamra radiya Llahu ‘anhu

a. This narration appears by way of Ubadah ibn Ziyad al AsadiAmr ibn ThabitAbu Hamzah al Thumali — Sa’id ibn Jubayr — Abu al Hamra.[177]

Abadah ibn Ziyad al Asadi is a commited Shia about whom the scholars differ.[178] Due to his below-average rating as a Hadith narrator, and the fact that he is a commited Shia calls into question the reliability of this Hadith for this reason alone; were there no other factors.

Amr ibn Thabit is a famous Shia from Kufah. Yahya ibn Ma’in said of him that he is worth nothing. Al Nasa’i held him in contempt and said that he is severely impugned. Ibn Hibban accused him of narrating forgeries. Finally, Abu Dawood pointed him out as an extremist among the Shia of Kufah.[179]

Abu Hamzah al Thumali, also known as Thabit ibn Abi Safiyyah is considered weak and unreliable by consensus. He was also known for being a Rafidi.[180] Ibn Hibban stated that he erred abundantly and was not relied upon in terms of his narrations.[181]

Al Haythami suggests that the major problem in this narration is ‘Amr ibn Thabit and rejects it on account of him.[182]

 

There is an alternative chain that connects to Sa’id ibn Jubayr by way of:

b. Muhammad ibn Hussain ibn Mirdas — Ahmed ibn Hassan al Kufi — Ismail ibn ‘Ulayyah — Yunus ibn ‘Ubaid — Sa’id ibn Jubayr — Abu al Hamra radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[183]

This narration could not possibly corroborate the earlier narration due to the severity of weakness in both versions. Appearing in this chain is Ahmed ibn Hassan al Kufi who is suspected of forging narrations and attributing forged narrations to reliable narrators.[184]

‘Abdul Hussain referenced the narration to Kanz al Ummal[185] but conveniently omitted to mention that it has been ascribed to Ibn al Jawzi’s anthology of weak and dubious narrations, Al Ilal al Mutanahiyah.[186]

The narration is in direct conflict with the verse of the Qur’an wherein Allah confirms His divine assistance to the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam through the believers; not one believer only.

 

هُوَ ٱلَّذِيٓ أَيَّدَكَ بِنَصْرِهِ وَبِالْمُؤْمِنِيْنَ

It is He who supported you with His help and with the believers.[187]

 

Before it is argued that this refers to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu specifically, the verses that follow prove, beyond a doubt, that the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam Companions in general were intended, and it could not have possibly referred to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu in isolation:

 

وَأَلَّفَ بَيْنَ قُلُوْبِهِمْ لَوْ أَنفَقْتَ مَا فِي الْأَرْضِ جَمِيْعًا مَّا أَلَّفْتَ بَيْنَ قُلُوْبِهِمْ وَلٰكِنَّ اللَّهَ أَلَّفَ بَيْنَهُمْ إِنَّهُ عَزِيْزٌ حَكِيْمٌ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ حَسْبُكَ اللَّهُ وَمَنِ اتَّبَعَكَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِيْنَ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ حَرِّضِ الْمُؤْمِنِيْنَ عَلَى الْقِتَالِ إِن يَكُنْ مِّنكُمْ عِشْرُوْنَ صَابِرُوْنَ يَغْلِبُوا مِائَتَيْنِ وَإِنْ يَكُنْ مِّنكُمْ مِّائَةٌ يَّغْلِبُوْا أَلْفًا مِّنَ الَّذِيْنَ كَفَرُوْا بِأَنَّهُمْ قَوْمٌ لَّا يَفْقَهُوْنَ الْآنَ خَفَّفَ اللَّهُ عَنكُمْ وَعَلِمَ أَنَّ فِيْكُمْ ضَعْفًا فَإِنْ يَّكُنْ مِّنكُمْ مِّائَةٌ صَابِرَةٌ يَّغْلِبُوْا مِائَتَيْنِ وَإِنْ يَكُنْ مِّنكُمْ أَلْفٌ يَّغْلِبُوْا أَلْفَيْنِ بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ مَعَ الصَّابِرِيْنَ

And brought together their hearts. If you had spent all that is in the earth, you could not have brought their hearts together; but Allah brought them together. Indeed, He is Exalted in Might and Wise. O Prophet, sufficient for you is Allah and for whoever follows you of the believers. O Prophet, urge the believers to battle. If there are among you twenty [who are] steadfast, they will overcome two hundred. And if there are among you one hundred [who are] steadfast, they will overcome a thousand of those who have disbelieved because they are a people who do not understand. Now, Allah has lightened [the hardship] for you, and He knows that among you is weakness. So if there are from you one hundred [who are] steadfast, they will overcome two hundred. And if there are among you a thousand, they will overcome two thousand by permission of Allah . And Allah is with the steadfast.[188]

 

34. The narration wherein the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam allegedly said, “Whoever wishes to Nuh in his resolve, Adam ibn his knowledge, Ibrahim in his forbearance, Musa in his discernment, and ‘Isa ibn his ascetism; let him look at ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib.”

This narration has been referenced in al Murajaat to al Bayhaqi’s ‘Sahih’ and Ahmed’s Musnad. In the footnotes he has cited Ibn Abi al Hadid, the Shia commentator of Nahj al Balaghah, as a secondary reference.

What can be said about the deception and cunning strategies? ‘Abdul Hussain either misled his audience deliberately, or he relied on the misdirection of Ibn Abi al Hadid, whom he tried to pass off as a neutral figure. To begin with, al Bayhaqi does not have any work that bears the title ‘Sahih’ – denoting higher authenticity – nor has he made that a condition in any of his works. Furthermore, this narration cannot be found in any of al Bayhaqi’s works, nor in the Musnad of Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal.

It is found in the Mawduat works, wherein most fabricated material is compiled under a single title.[189] In this works the narration has been referenced to earlier works, and in most places they mention the chain of narration by which the Hadith is narrated. This narration is attributed to four of the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam Companions: Abu al Hamra, Anas ibn Malik, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas, and Abu Sa’id al Khudri radiya Llahu ‘anhum.

a. The version ascribed to Abu al Hamra radiya Llahu ‘anhu

I. Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Ahmed ibn Said al Razi — Muhammad ibn Muslim ibn Warah — ‘Ubaidullah ibn Musa — Abu Amr al Azdi/Abu Umar al Asadi[190] — Abu Rashid al Hubrani — Abu al Hamra

Al Suyuti ascribes this narration to al Hakim al Naysapuri’s Tarikh. It can also be found with this common chain in Tarikh Dimashq of Ibn ‘Asakir.[191]

Appearing in this chain is Abu Jafar, Muhammad ibn Ahmed ibn Said al Razi, whom al Dhahabi considers Majhul. Beyond this, al Dhahabi suspects him of forging a narration of Hadith.[192]This means that the only biographical data that we have on him that is of any use in the science of Hadith is the fact that he is suspected of forging a Hadith; this renders his narration severely weak and beyond support.

The narration is put under further scrutiny by the presence of Abu Amr al Azdi, considered Majhul and without biographical data; or Abu Umar al Asadi who is extremely weak in Hadith as well.[193]

Ibn Kathir declared this narration severely weak and completely unreliable.[194]

II. Al Daylami — ‘Ali ibn Dukayn al Qadi — ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Yusuf — al Fadl al Kindi — ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Hassan — ‘Ali ibn Hussain — Muhammad ibn Abi Hashim al NAufali — ‘Abdullah ibn Musa — al ‘Ala — Abu Ishaq al Sabi’i — Abu Dawood Nufay — Abu al Hamra.[195]

This chain comprises of a series on unknown narrators, without biographical entries. Worse still is the presence of Nufay ibn al Harith, Abu Dawood, who is suspected of forgery, and severely criticized by Ibn Ma’in, Abu Zur’ah al Razi, al Nasa’i and al Daraqutni.[196]

 

b. The version ascribed to Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu

Abu Dharr ibn al Baghindi — his fatherMisar ibn Yahya al NahdiSharik — Abu Ishaq al Sabi’i — his father — ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma.[197]

After stating that Misar ibn Yahya is unknown, al Dhahabi cited this narration as an example of his baseless narrations.[198]

The father of Abu Dharr ibn al Baghindi is Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Sulaiman ibn al Baghindi. He was criticised for ascribing narrations to his teachers which he had received from his peers; also known as Tadlis. In his case it was quite severe since he was known to have ascribed narrations to teachers of his while omitting numerous links between himself and the said teacher. Ibn ‘Adi states that he was known to have narrated a number of baseless narrations.[199]

The details of Sharik’s weakness have been discussed under narration 10 above.

Abu Ishaq al Sabii’s father is not known for narrating Hadith; as a matter of fact no biographical entry can be found to establish his status as a narrator. As such, this report comprises of narrators who are Majhul and those whose memory and accuracy has been comprised.

This narration is flawed severely; it cannot be used to support another narration.

 

c. The version ascribed to Anas radiya Llahu ‘anhu

I. Abu Muhammad ibn al Akfani — ‘Abdul ‘Aziz ibn Ahmed — Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn Muhammad al QirmisiniUmar ibn Ali ibn SaidYusuf ibn Hassan al BaghdadiMuhammad ibn Qasim — Ahmed ibn ‘Ali ibn al Muthanna — Muhammad ibn Bakkar — his father — Thabit — Anas. [200]

After recording this narration Ibn ‘Asakir concudes that it is severely compromised and in cannot possibly attributed to the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.[201] This narration mentions merits for Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, ‘Uthmanradiya Llahu ‘anhu and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, likening him to Zakariyya ‘alayh al Salam.

Abu Ishaq al Qirmisini is without discretionary mention. Similarly, Yusuf ibn Hassan al Baghdadi, Muhammad ibn Qasim, and Bakkar ibn Rayyan al Hashimi are all considered Majhul.

Umar ibn Ali ibn Said is also mentioned with very little biographical data; this narration of his has been identified as false by al Dhahabi and endorsed by Ibn Hajar.[202]

II. Abu Ahmed, Abbas ibn Fadl ibn Jafar al MakkiIshaq ibn Ibrahim al Dabari — ‘Abdul Razzaq — Hammad ibn Salamah — Thabit — Anas radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[203]

After recording this narration ibn ‘Asakir concludes that it is a basleless report.[204] Abu Ahmed al Makki is pointed out to be Majhul; and Ishaq ibn Ibrahim al Dabari is known to have transmitted extremely unreliable reports from ‘Abdul Razzaq specifically.[205]

 

d. The version ascribed to Abu Sa’id radiya Llahu ‘anhu

Ibn Shahin — Muhammad ibn Hussain ibn Humaid ibn al Rabi’ — Muhammad ibn Imran ibn Hajjaj — ‘Ubaidullah ibn Musa — Abu Rashid al Himmani — Abu Harun al Abdi — Abu Sa’id.[206]

Muhammad ibn Imran is considered Majhul; whereas Abu Harun al Abdi is suspected of forgery.[207]

 

All these versions are severely compromised and their weakness eliminates any potential of corroboration. In all likelihood someone must have forged it and others copied their forgery.

 

35. The narration ascribed to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration has been recorded by ‘Abdullah ibn Ahmed ibn Hanbal, al Nasa’i, al Hakim, and Abu Ya’la with a common chain by way of al Hakam ibn Abdul Malik — al Harith ibn Hasirah — Abu Sadiq — Rabi’ah ibn Najidh — ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[208]

Al Hakim graded it sound but al Dhahabi pointed out the fact that he overlooked the weakness of al Hakam ibn Abdul Malik,[209] a common narrator in all these books.

On different occasions Yahya ibn Ma’in said about al Hakam, “Weak”, “Unreliable”, “Not worth anything”.

Ibn Abi Khaythamah said, “His narrations are worthless!”

Abu Hatim, Abu Zur’ah and al Nasa’i stated that he is not a reliable narrator.

Abu Dawood said, “Munkar” indicating the veracity of his weakness.

Ibn Hibban stated that he would narrate – by way of reliable narrators – that which could not be corroborated; he did this quite often.[210]

 

If we ignore the weakness of this Hadith for a moment and consider its wording, we will find that it fits very well. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu is said to resemble ‘Isa ‘alayh al Salam in terms of the polar ends of extremism. Those who hated him accused his mother of indecency; and those who loved him exceeded his limits and attribute to him a status that was not his. The same can be said for ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu; he is a person of immense virtue but the Nawasib and the Khawarij are blind to it. On the other hand, the Shia have exaggerated his virtues such that they have elevated him to being infallible. The consequence of this extreme position was that they stripped the other Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum of all their virtues and accused them of being renegades and apostates!

The path of moderation is the way of Ahlus Sunnah: We love ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and believe in whatever has authentically been mentioned about him, his virtues and merits. We also acknowledge the virtues and merits of all the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum.

 

36. The narration ascribed to ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma

This narration has been recorded by al Tabarani by way of Hussain ibn Ishaq al Tustari — Hussain ibn Abi al Sari al AsqalaniHussain al Ashqar — Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah — ibn Abi Najih — Mujahid — Ibn ‘Abbas.[211]

Hussain al Ashqar has appeared repeatedly in our discussions and we have demonstrated that he is unreliable and known to relate false narrations.[212]

Hussain ibn Abi al Sari al Asqalani has been called a liar by his brother and his nephew, the seekers of Hadith were cautioned by them from taking Hadith from him. Abu Dawood also declared him unreliable. Al Dhahabi listed this narration of his as an example of the baseless narrations transmitted by Hussain ibn Abi al Sari al ‘Asqalani.[213]

Ibn Kathir and al Munawi have emphatically declared this narration completely unreliable.[214]

 

37. The narration ascribed to ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Abi Layla, from his father

This has been recorded by al Qati’i, Abu Nuaim, and Ibn ‘Asakir with a common chain from Amr ibn Jumay — Ibn Abi Layla — his brother ‘Isa — ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Abi Layla — his father.[215]

‘Amr ibn Jumay’ has been accused of forging Hadith by Ibn Ma’in, Ibn ‘Adi al Daraqutni among others. Al Bukhari critisized him in very severe terms, “Munkar al Hadith.”[216]

Ibn Taymiyyah and al Dhahabi have declared this narration baseless.[217]

 

38. The narration attributed to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu

a. This narration has been recorded by al Hakim without a chain, from Hayyan al Asadi who heard ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu saying that he heard the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam saying, “The Ummah will be disloyal to you after me. You will be upon my teachings and fight in accordance with my Sunnah…”[218]

Fortunately, we can trace the chain for this narration from Ithaf al Maharah of Ibn Hajar: Abu ‘Ali al Hafiz — al Haytham ibn Khalaf — Muhammad ibn ‘Umar ibn Hayyaj — Yahya ibn ‘Abdul Rahman — Yunus ibn Abi Yafur — his father — Hayyan — ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[219]

The scholars are divided over Yunus ibn Abi Ya’fur. Some of the early scholars like Ibn Ma’in, Ahmed ibn Hanbal, and al Nasa’i have considered him weak. Al Saji stated that he is weak and he was a commited Shia. Abu Hatim al Razi considered him truthful; without mention of his competence. Ibn Hajar has reconciled all the earlier positions by stating that Yunus ibn Abi Ya’fur is honest, but known for abundance of errors.[220]

A narration with this isnad would not meet the criteria of Sahih due to the status of Yunus ibn Abi Ya’fur. It has the potential to be sound if it is properly corroborated.

b. Abu Hafs ‘Umar ibn Ahmed al Jumahi — ‘Ali ibn ‘Abdul ‘Aziz — ‘Amr ibn ‘Awn — Hushaym — Ismail ibn Salim — Abu Idris al Awdi — ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu who said, “Among that which the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam promised me was that the Ummah will be disloyal to me after he [is gone].” [221]

The issue in this chain is Abu Idris al Awdi. Abu Hatim said that he is Majhul and that his narration from ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu is interrupted.[222]

Again, the chain of this narration is not independantly Sahih due to the interruption between Abu Idris and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Whether each version supports the other is a matter of debate among Hadith scholars.

If the narration of Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma[223] is cited to support the two versions from ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu then it also clarifies what is meant. The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam warned ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu that he would encounter hardships after he salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was gone. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu asked if this would be at the detriment of his faith and the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam comforted him saying that it would not affect his faith in any way.

This narration disproves the theory of Imamah since ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu asked about possible negative effects. A question of this nature unhinges the argument for infallibility firstly. It further dismisses divine appointment since such appointment has no potential for negative consequences to one’s faith. The only plausible circumstance which accomodates for this question is one where ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu is appointed by the Ummah and his decisions are governed by Shura and Ijtihad.

This prophecy came to pass when ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu fought the Khawarij. The members of the Khawarij were initially from the army of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and it was after Siffin that they broke their allegiance with him on account of which he fought them at Nahrawan. He radiya Llahu ‘anhu was assasinated at the hands of the Khawarij as well.

This narration could not possibly refer to the period immediately after the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam demise since ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu made no claim for the Caliphate at that time nor was he harmed in any way. If anything, his relationship with the rest of the Sahabah was cordial and friendly. This is an exchange between ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and his companions; it is recorded in one of the classical works of the Shia:

“O Amir al Mu’minin! Inform us about your comrades.”

He asked, “About which comrades of mine?”

They said, “About the Sahabah of Muhammad.”

He said, “All of the Sahabah of Muhammad are my comrades.”[224]

 

If we examine this narration of Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma it appears no different from the ahadith wherein the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam warns ‘Uthman of the treachery that will befall him; and that he should not relinquish the mantle which Allah will clothe him with.

The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam predicted that ‘Uthman would enter Jannat, and that he would be afflicted by tribulation prior to his death. Abu Musa al Ash’ari radiya Llahu ‘anhu reports:

 

عن أبي موسى الأشعري رضي الله عنه أنه توضأ في بيته ثم خرج فقال‏ لألزمن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ولأكونن معه يومي هذا فجاء المسجد، فسأل عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم الله عليه وسلم فقالوا‏ وجه ههنا قال‏‏ فخرجت على أثره أسأل عنه حتى دخل بئر أريس فجلست عند الباب حتى قضى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم حاجته وتوضأ فقمت إليه فإذا هو قد جلس على بئر أريس وتوسط قفها وكشف عن ساقيه ودلاهما في البئر فسلمت عليه ثم انصرفت فجلست عند الباب فقلت‏ لأكونن بواب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم اليوم فجاء أبو بكر رضي الله عنه فدفع الباب فقلت‏‏ من هذا‏‏ فقال‏ أبو بكر فقلت على رسلك، ثم ذهبت فقلت‏‏ يا رسول الله هذا أبو بكر يستأذن فقال‏ ‏ائذن له وبشره بالجنة‏ فأقلبت حتى قلت لأبي بكر‏‏ ادخل ورسول الله يبشرك بالجنة فدخل أبو بكر حتى جلس عن يمين النبي صلى الله عليه وسلمى الله عليه وسلم معه في القف ودلى رجليه في البئر كما صنع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وكشف عن ساقيه ثم رجعت وجلست وقد تركت أخي يتوضأ ويلحقني فقلت‏ إن يرد الله بفلان يرد أخاه خيراً يأت به فإذا إنسان يحرك الباب فقلت‏ من هذا‏‏ فقال‏‏ عمر بن الخطاب‏‏ فقلت‏‏ على رسلك ثم جئت إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فسلمت عليه وقلت‏ هذا عمر يستأذن‏‏ فقال‏ ائذن له وبشره بالجنة‏ فجئت عمر فقلت‏‏ أذن ويبشرك رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بالجنة فدخل فجلس مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في القف عن يساره ودلى رجليه في البئر ثم رجعت فجلست فقلت‏ إن يرد الله بفلان خيراً يعني أخاه يأت به فجاء إنسان فحرك الباب‏.‏فقلت‏ من هذا ‏فقال‏ عثمان بن عفان فقلت‏ على رسلك وجئت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم الله عليه وسلم فأخبرته فقال‏‏ ‏‏ائذن له وبشره بالجنة مع بلوى تصيبه‏‏ فجئت فقلت له‏‏ ادخل ويبشرك رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بالجنة مع بلوى تصيبك فدخل فوجد القف قد ملئ فجلس وجاههم من الشق الآخر‏.قال سعيد بن المسيب‏ فأولتها قبورهم

One day, I performed ablution in my house. When I left home I did so with the idea of staying close to Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and spending the entire day with him. I came to the Masjid and enquired about him. The Companions told that he salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had gone off in a particular direction. I continued enquiring about him until I came to Bi’r Aris (a well in a particular area of al Madinah). I sat down at the door until the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam relieved himself and performed ablution. Then I went to him and saw him sitting at the edge of the well with his shins uncovered and his legs dangling in the well. I greeted him and returned to the door of the garden, thinking to myself, “Today I will be the gatekeeper of the Messenger of Allah.” Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu came and knocked at the door. I said, “Who is it?” He said, “Abu Bakr.” I said, “Wait a moment.” Then I went to the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and said, “O Messenger of Allah! Abu Bakr is at the door seeking permission to enter.” He said, “Allow him in and give him the glad tidings of Jannat.” I returned and said to Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, “You may enter and Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam has given you the glad tidings of Jannat.” Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu came in, sat down on the right of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam at the edge of the well, dangling his legs in the well with his shins exposed, as the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had done. I returned to the door and sat down. I had left my brother at home while he was performing ablution and anticipated that he would to join me. I said to myself, “If Allah intends good for him (i.e., to be blessed to come at this time and receive the glad tidings of entering Jannat), He will bring him here.” Someone knocked at the door and I said, “Who is it?” He said, “‘Umar ibn al Khattab.” I said, “Wait a moment.” Then I proceeded towards Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. I greeted him and said, “‘Umar is at the door, seeking permission to enter.” He said, “Allow him in and give him the glad tidings of Jannat.” I went back to ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu and said to him, “The Messenger of Allah has given you permission to enter, as well as glad tidings of Jannat.” He entered and sat down with Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on his left, dangling his feet into the well. I returned to the door and sat down and said to myself, “If Allah intends well for my brother, He will bring him here.” Someone knocked at the door and I said, “Who is it?” He said, “‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan.” I said, “Wait a moment.” I went to Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and informed him about his arrival. He said, “Let him in and give him glad tidings of entering Jannat together with a tribulation which he will have to face.” I came back to him and said, “You may enter; and Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam gives you the glad tidings of entering Jannat together with a tribulation which will afflict you.” He entered and saw that the one side of the well was fully occupied. So he sat on opposite side. Sa’id ibn al Musayyab – a narrator in the chain – commented: The order in which they sat down indicated the places of their burial.”[225]

 

The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam also confirmed that ‘Uthman will be upon guidance at the time of this Fitnah

 

عن أبي الأشعث الصنعاني أن خطباء قامت بالشام وفيهم رجال من أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقام آخرهم رجل يقال له مرة بن كعب فقال لولا حديث سمعته من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ما قمت ‏وذكر الفتن فقربها فمر رجل مقنع في ثوب فقال هذا يومئذ على الهدى فقمت إليه فإذا هو عثمان بن عفان قال فأقبلت عليه بوجهه فقلت هذا قال نعم

Abu al Ash’ath al San’ani said that people were delivering sermons in al Sham, and among them were Companions of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Finally, the last of them, a man called Murrah bin Ka’b, stood up and said, “Were it not for a hadith which I heard from the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, I would not have stood (to address you). He salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam mentioned tribulations, and that they would be coming soon. Then a man, who was concealed by a garment, passed by and he salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “This one will be upon guidance that day.” So I went towards him, and it was ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan. I turned, facing him, and I said: “This one?” He said: “Yes.”[226]

 

This Hadith has been transmitted by more than one chain from Murrah ibn Ka’b,[227] and has also been narrated by ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar[228] and ‘Abdullah ibn Hawalah.[229]

In his final days, the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam summoned ‘Uthman and consoled him over the difficulty he was to face in the future. Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha relates:

 

عن عائشة قالت قال رسول الله ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم في مرضه وددت أن عندي بعض أصحابي قلنا يا رسول الله ألا ندعو لك أبا بكر فسكت قلنا ألا ندعو لك عمر فسكت قلنا ألا ندعو لك عثمان قال ‏نعم فجاء عثمان فخلا به فجعل النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يكلمه ووجه عثمان يتغير قال قيس فحدثني أبو سهلة مولى عثمان أن عثمان بن عفان قال يوم الدار إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عهد إلى عهدا وأنا صائر إليه وقال علي في حديثه وأنا صابر عليه ‏قال قيس فكانوا يرونه ذلك اليوم

When the Messenger of Allah was ill he said, “I wish to have some of my Companions with me.”

We said, “O Messenger of Allah! Shall we call Abu Bakr for you?” But he remained silent so we said, “Shall we call ‘Umar for you?” But he remained silent so we said, “Shall we call ‘Uthman for you?”

He said, “Yes.”

So ‘Uthman came and he spoke to him in private. The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam spoke to him and ‘Uthman’s expression changed.

A narrator in this chain, Qais ibn Abi Hazim, said, “Abu Sahlah, the freed slave of ‘Uthman, narrated to me that on the day he was assassinated in his home, ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan said, ‘The Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam told me what would come to pass and now I am coming to that day [Sa’ir].’” In another narration of the Hadith, it appears, ‘I am going to bear it with patience [Sabir].[230]‘ Qais said, “They understood it to refer to the day he was assassinated.”[231]

 

In another version she states that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said:

 

يا عثمان إن ولاك الله هذا الأمر يوما فأرادك المنافقون أن تخلع قميصك الذي قمصك الله فلا تخلعه

O ‘Uthman, one day if Allah places you in authority over this matter (Caliphate) and the hypocrites want to rid you of the garment with which Allah has clothed you (i.e. the Caliphate,) do not take it off.

He said that three times.[232]

 

All these prophecies came to pass. ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu was murdered on account of a Fitnah. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was murdered as a consuquence of that Fitnah by the Khawarij; the group that defected from his army.

 

39. The narration of Abu Sa’id al Khudri radiya Llahu ‘anhu

We have discussed this narration at length under Letter 44 about ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu mending his sandal. By accepting this narration as authentic here, ‘Abdul Hussain has inadvertently dealt a blow to his own argument there. We have established that this narration is sound; however, it does not support the idea of his immediate succession in any way. ‘Abdul Hussain has mentioned a number of narrations which are meant to clarify what is meant by this Hadith.

a. The narration attributed to Abu Ayub al Ansari radiya Llahu ‘anhu

I. Abu Sa’id Ahmed ibn Ya’qub al Thaqafi – Hassan ibn ‘Ali ibn Shabib — Muhammad ibn HumaidSalamah ibn al Fadl Abu Zaid al Ahwal narrated to me — from Attab ibn Thalabah[233] — Abu Ayub al Ansari radiya Llahu ‘anhu narrated to me during the era of ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu, “The Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam instructed Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu with killing those who are disloyal, those who are unjust, and those who defect.”[234]

Muhammad ibn Humaid al Razi is considered significantly weak; known for narrating many a baseless narration. Salih Jazarah and Ya’qub ibn Shaybah al Sadusi both indicated the severity of his weakness as did al Bukhari and Abu Zur’ah al Razi.[235]

Salamah ibn al Fadl al Abrash is another problematic narrator in this chain. Ishaq ibn Rahuyah, al Nasa’i, Abu Hatim al Razi among others have declared him weak. Some have pointed out the fact that he narrates that which cannot be corroborated and has an abundance of errors. Ibn ‘Adi states that while he is weak overall, whatever he narrates from Ibn Ishaq in the genre of Maghazi, is slightly better than the rest of his narrations as they were found to be uncorroborated and contradictory in many instances.[236]

Abu Zaid al Ahwal is considered Majhul and his narration from ‘Attab ibn Tha’labah has been declared baseless by al Dhahabi. “Abu Zaid al Ahwal has narrated from him the narration of killing those who are disloyal, the chain is appalling and the text is rejected.”[237]

II. Abu Bakr ibn Balawayh — Muhammad ibn Yunus al Qurashi — ‘Abdul ‘Aziz ibn al Khattab — ‘Ali ibn Ghurab — Ali ibn Abi Fatimah Asbagh ibn Nubatah — Abu Ayub.

In this chain appears Muhammad ibn Yunus al Qurashi al Kudaymi al Basri, a liar and fabricator. Ibn Hibban said about him, “It is possible that he has fabricated over a thousand narrations!”[238] Ibn ‘Adi said that he has been accused of fabrication.[239]

Ali ibn Abi Fatimah is ‘Ali ibn Hazawwar. He was from the Shia of Kufah, and was suspected of forgery. He was criticized harshly by al Bukhari, Yahya ibn Sa’id, Abu Hatim and al Nasa’i. Ibn ‘Adi said that he was from the Shia of Kufah, extremely weak and the irregularities are evident in his narrations.[240]

Asbagh ibn Nubatah is consisdered extremely weak; Abu Bakr ibn ‘Ayyash said that he was a liar whilst al Nasai and Ibn HIbban said that he is Matruk, which means he was suspected of forgery. Abu Hatim said that he is merely weak, and Ibn Ma’in used terms to indicate the severity of his weakness. Ibn Hibban said that he was infatuated with his love for ‘Ali that he was found to narrate baseless narrations about the virtues of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu to the extent that he deserved to be abandoned. Al Dhahabi cited this chain, and this narration specifically, as a sample of the false narrations by way of ‘Ali ibn Hazawwar — from Asbagh — from Abu Ayub radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[241]

 

b. The narration atributed to ‘Ammar radiya Llahu ‘anhu is transmitted by way of Abu Ahmed Muhammad ibn Ahmed al ‘Assal — Abu Yahya al Razi — Abdullah ibn Jafar al Maqdisi — Ibn Wahb — Abdullah ibn Lahiah — Abu ‘Ashshanah — ‘Ammar radiya Llahu ‘anhu that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “O Ali, the rebellious party will fight you and you shall be upon the truth. Whoever fails to aid you on that day is not from me.”[242]

This chain is weak due to the presence of Abdullah ibn Jafar al Maqdisi who is an unknown entity.[243]

Abdullah ibn Lahiah is another disputed narrator in this chain. He is on ‘Abdul Hussain’s list of 100. Ibn Sayyid al Nas has discussed his status as a narrator of Hadith at length, as did the editor of al Nafh al Shadhi, the commentary on al Tirmidhi by Ibn Sayyid al Nas. He concludes after thirty pages of discussion that Ibn Lahi’ah is independently weak, but his narrations have the potential to be elevated if they are corroborated or supported by other narrations. This applies to his narrations prior to his books even getting burnt.[244]

The text of this narration contradicts what has been authentically related from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wherein he expressed pity on ‘Ammar radiya Llahu ‘anhu saying that the rebellious party would kill him.[245] The narration under discussion is in conradiction with this on two counts. Firstly, the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam identified the rebellious party being rresponsible for killing ‘Ammar radiya Llahu ‘anhu and that is how we are able to determine without doubt that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was in the right. Secondly, the additional sentence is at variance with the Qur’an.

Allah says: “If two parties from the believers fight each other; then bring about reconciliation between them…”[246]

Abu Sa’id al Khudri radiya Llahu ‘anhu relates that the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “A faction will renegade at a time when there is division among the Muslims; and the party, among two parties, which is closer to the truth will fight them.”[247]

Ibn Taymiyyah said:

Allah says in His book, “If two groups among the believers fight each other then seek to reconcile…” [Surah al Hujurat: 9] so He has referred to them both as believers and brothers despite the fighting and rebelling. It has also been established in the authentic narrations that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “A group will defect which will be fought by the party which is closest to the truth” and he salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, also said, “Indeed this son of mine is a Sayyid…” and he said to ‘Ammar, “The rebellious party will kill you.” Note that he did not say disbelievers. And these narrations are authentic according to the scholars, and have been narrated by variant chains; none of them taking from the other. The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said that the two divided parties are both Muslims, and he praised the one who brought about reconciliation among them. He further predicted that a group would dissent and that the closest of the two parties would fight them.”[248]

 

In light of the verse and hadith cited above, we can clearly see why this narration, the narration attributed to ‘Ammar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, is fount wanting in both its chain of transmission and its text. It is severely weak, and clearly demonstrates the lack of precision on the part of at least one of the narrators.

 

c. The narration attributed to Abu Dharr radiya Llahu ‘anhu is referenced in Kanz al Ummal to al Daylami. We have previously pointed out that such a reference is indicative of the weakness of the said narration. Nonetheless, this narration has been deliberately truncated by ‘Abdul Hussain since the complete version speaks about fighting those who testify to the oneness of Allah.

There are additional phrases in this narration which could not possibly be corroborated. The absence of the isnad, its reference to al Daylami, and the objectionable additional wording indicate that this narration is problematic.

 

The sound narration is the original Hadith, and its explanation appears in detail under Letter 44. There is nothing in this narration to suggest ‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu immediate succession. It does give a subtle indiation that he will take charge of the affairs of the Muslims at some stage; and that came to pass.

 

40. The narration attributed to Muaz ibn Jabal radiya Llahu ‘anhu

This narration is recorded by Abu Nuaim, and Ibn ‘Asakir relates it via Abu Nuaim, by way of Khalaf ibn Khalid al Abdi al BasriBishr ibn Ibrahim al Ansari — Thawr ibn Yazid — Khalid ibn Mi’dan — Muaz ibn Jabal radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[249]

Khalaf ibn Khalid al Basri is barely known as a narrator of Hadith yet stands accused of forging Hadith by al Daraqutni. This narration is provided as an example of his forgeries.[250]

Bishr ibn Ibrahim al Ansari is a known fabricator of Hadith; this has been confirmed by Ibn ‘Adi, Ibn Hibban and others. Abu Nuaim, himself, states that Bishr would attribute forged narrations to al Awza’i.[251]

This narration has been declared a forgery by Ibn ‘Adi, Ibn al Jawzi, al Dhahabi, Ibn Hajar, al Suyuti and Ibn ‘Arraq.[252]

The supplementary narration provided by ‘Abdul Hussain is of no avail since it appears by way of Ismah ibn Muhammad — Yahya ibn Sa’id al Ansari — Sa’id ibn al Musayyib — Abu Sa’id al Khudri.[253]

Appearing in this chain is ‘Ismah ibn Muhammad. Abu Hatim says that he is weak; wheras Yahya ibn Ma’in calls him a liar and states that he forged Hadith. Al ‘Uqayli says the he used to attribute false narrations to reliable narrators and al Daraqutni states that he is severely compromised as a narrator of Hadith.[254]

 

Conclusion

Where is the compelling evidence? With over forty narrations—not counting all the supplementary narrations—’Abdul Hussain has only managed to produced barely a handful of sound narrations. None of these sound narrations indicate Imamah in any way whatsoever. They are ahadith of virtue and merit for ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and he is worthy of merit since loving him is iman and hating him is a symptom of hypocrisy. We have provided explanations and commented on all the sound narrations.

The remaining thirty-odd narrations are either complete forgeries or extremely weak, not reliable. Many of these narrations suffer from the same lack of clarity on immediate succession. Those narrations which do indicate this were clear fabrications. Where is the claim that there is not enough room to mention all the narrations that support his Imamah?

In contrast to these forty narrations we have collected forty sound narrations about the virtues of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma, their candidacy for succession, and their lofty rank. These narrations will be presented under the discussions on Letter 52.

 

NEXT⇒ Letter 49 and 50


[1] Al Mustadrak vol. 3. Pg. 129

[2] Ibid

[3] Tarikh Baghdad vol. 5 pg. 358

[4] Ibid

[5] Al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg.138, Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42. Pg 303

[6] Al Mudih vol. 1. Pgs 189- 191

[7] Al Isabah vol. 4 pg. 6

[8] Kanz al ‘Ummal vol. 5 pg. 157 (old edition)

[9] Al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 138

[10] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 252

[11] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 4 pg. 397

[12] Al Tabaqat vol. 3 pg. 608

[13] Minhaj al Sunnah vol. 7 pg. 386-387

[14] Al Hilyah vol. 1 pg. 66

[15] Tahdhib al Tahdhib vol. 5 pg. 68

[16] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 77

[17] Ibid

[18] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 482

[19] Hilyat al Auliya’ vol. 1 pg. 63; Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 386

[20] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 642-643

[21] Mizan al I’tidal vol.1 pg. 64

[22] Lisan al Mizan vol. 1 pg. 356

[23] Ibid

[24]Al Mawdu’at by Ibn al Jowzi, vol. 1, p. 376-377.

[25]Al Mizan, vol. 3, p. 134-135,

[26]Taqrib al Tahdhib, vol. 1, p. 697.

[27] Al Mawdu’at vol. 2 pg. 376, Talkhis al Mawdu’at (125), Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 64, al La’ali’ al Masnu’ah vol. 1 pg. 329, Tanzih al Shari’ah vol. 1 pg. 357, al Fawa’id al Majmu’ah (322)

[28] Hilyat al Auliya’ vol. 1 pg. 66, Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 291

[29] Al Kamil vol. 7 pg. 141, Hilyat al Auliya’ vol. 1 pg. 66

[30] Al Kamil vol. 1 pg. 200

[31] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 2 pg. 288, Lisan al Mizan vol. 4 pg. 280

[32] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 2 pg. 366

[33] Al ‘Ilal al Mutanahiyah vol. 1 pg. 236

[34] Al Kamil vol. 7 pg. 141

[35] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 4 pg. 356

[36] Al Mawdu’at vol. 1 pg. 388

[37] Al Bahr al Zakhkhar vol. 9 pg. 342, Siyar A’lam al Nubala’ vol. 23 pg. 79

[38] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3pg. 634-635

[39] See discussion on letter 16

[40] Al Mujam al Kabir vol. 6 pg. 269

[41] Al Taqrib bio (8115)

[42] Al Jarh wal Ta’dil vol. 7 pg. 75, al Tarikh al Kabir vol. 7 pg. 122, Su’alat al Sijzi pg. 44, Tahdhib al Kamal vol. 23 pg. 305,

[43] Al Majruhin vol.2 pg. 210

[44] Al Jarh wal Ta’dil vol. 6 pg. 112, al Tarikh al Kabir vol. 6 pg. 158, Lisan al Mizan vol. 6 pg. 105

[45] Al Kamil vol. 1 pg. 528, al Du’afa by ibn al Jawzi vol.1 pg. 122, Tahdhib al Kamal vol 2. Pg. 210,

[46] Jami’ al Masanid by Ibn Kathir vol.3. pg 527

[47] Al Kamil vol. 5 pg. 380

[48] Al Du’afa al Kabir vol. 2 pg. 47

[49] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 2 pg. 2

[50] Al Mujam al Kabir vol. 3 pg88, al Hilyah vol. 1 pg. 63

[51] Majma’ al Zawa’id vol.9 pg 132, Lisan al Mizan vol. 1 pg. 236

[52] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 393

[53] Ibid

[54] Al Du’afa al Kabir vol.4 pg16

[55] Tarikh ibn Ma’in narration of al Duri vol. 1 pg. 158

[56] Al Jarh wal Ta’dil vol.7 pg.178

[57] Al Tabaqat al Kubra vol. 6 pg.349

[58] Al ‘ilal al Kabir (293), al Tahdhib vol.8 pg.418

[59]Al Mawdu’at by Ibn al Jawzi, vol. 1, p. 349-354.

[60]Tadhkirat al Mawdu’at p. 33

[61] Al Majruhin vol. 2 pg. 151; Tarikh Baghdad vol. 11 pg. 46-51; Tahdhib al Kamal vol. 18 pg 73-82; Siyar A’lam al Nubala’ vol. 11 pg. 446; Mizan al I’tidal vol. 2 pg. 616

[62]Al Fawa’id al Majmu’ah p. 348

[63] Al Bidayah wal Nihayah vol. 11 pg. 97 (al Hajar edition)

[64] Al Tirmidhi, Abwab al Manaqib, Hadith no: 3723

[65] Ibid

[66] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 668

[67] Al Majruhin vol. 2 pg. 68

[68] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 212

[69] Al Thiqat vol. 6 pg. 444

[70] Al Kamil vol. 5 pg. 36

[71] Musnad al Firdaws by al Daylami vol. 2 pg. 299

[72] Lisan al Mizan vol. 8 pg. 193

[73] Al Tarikh al Kabir vol. 6 pg. 137

[74] Al Jarh wal Ta’dil vol. 6 pg. 67

[75] Al Du’afa’ Bio: 386

[76] Ikmal Tahdhib al Kamal vol. 8 pg. 359

[77] Muntakhab al Kanz vol. 1 pg. 9

[78] Al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 122

[79] Ibid

[80] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 2 pg. 327

[81] Al Jarh wal Ta’dil vol. 4 pg. 465

[82] Al Majruhin vol. 1 pg. 486

[83] Musnad al Firdaws vol. 3 pg. al Jami’ al Saghir Hadith no: 5592, Fayd al Qadir vol. 4 pg. 356

[84] Mizan al I’tidal vol.1 pg. 531

[85] Musnad Ahmed vol. 29 pgs. 49-53 Hadith no: 17505, 17506, 17510, 17511, 17512; Sunan ibn Majah, Fadl ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu, Hadith no: 119; Jami’ al Tirmidhi, Abwab al Manaqib, Hadith no: 3719

[86] al Bukhari, Kitab al Sulh Hadith 2699; al Tirmidhi cites a sentence from it and alludes to the background story, Abwab al Manaqib, Hadith 3716

[87] Musnad Ahmed vol. 2 pg. 249, Hadith no. 931

[88] Musnad Ahmed vol. 29 pgs. 49-53 Hadith no: 17505, 17506, 17510, 17511, 17512

[89] Sahih al Bukhari, Kitab al Shirkah, Hadith no. 2483; Sahih Muslim, Fada’il al Sahabah, Hadith no. 2500

[90] Sahih Muslim, Fada’il al Sahabah, Hadith no. 2272

[91] Al Tirmidhi, Manaqib al ‘Abbas, Hadith no:3759; Sunan al Nasa’i vol. 8 pg. 33 Hadith 4775

[92] Previous  REFERENCE

[93]Fath al Bari vol. 8 p. 171

[94]Sahih al Bukhari, Kitab al Tafsir, Hadith no. 4378

[95]Tuhfat al Ahwadhi, vol. 10, p. 152.

[96] Musnad Ahmed vol. 29 pg. 43 Hadith 17505

[97] Al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 121

[98] Lisan al Mizan vol. 5 pg. 542

[99] Al Taqrib bio: 7677

[100] Al Bahr al Zakhkhar vol. 9 pg. 455; al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 123

[101] Al Talkhis vol. 3 pg. 124

[102] Al Kamil vol. 3. Pg 544, Mizan al I’tidal vol. 2 pg. 18

[103] Musnad Ahmed vol. 44 pg. 328 Hadith no: 26748, al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 121

[104] A measurement of volume equivalent to approximately 750 ml.

[105]Sahih al Bukhari Hadith no. 3470

[106] Al Jarh wal Ta’dil vol. 7 pg. 67

[107] Tarikh ibn Ma’in, Riwayah of al Duri (504)

[108] Al Tirmidhi, Abwab al Manaqib, Hadith no: 3862

[109] In the original it read ‘Auf ibn Abi ‘Uthman al Nahdi which appears to be a typographical error. The editor might have read the word ‘an as bin since the two can easily be confused.

[110] Al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 130

[111] Sahih Muslim, Kitab al Iman, Hadith no. 78

[112] Sahih Muslim, Kitab al Iman, Hadith no. 75

[113] Al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 128

[114] Ibid – al Talkhis

[115] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 82, vol. 2 pg. 613, Siyar A’lam al Nubala’ vol. 9 pg. 574

[116] Tahthib al Tahdhib vol. 1 pg. 10

[117] Al Kamil vol. 6 pg. 539

[118] Al ‘Ilal al Mutanahiyah vol. 1 pg. 220

[119] Al Dhayl vol. 1 pg. 257

[120] Tanzih al Shari’ah vol. 1 pg. 398

[121] Al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 135; Musnad Abi Ya’la vol. 3 pg. 178 Hadith no: 1602, Tarikh Baghdad vol. 10 pg. 102; and Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 281

[122] Al Talkhis vol. 3 pg. 135

[123] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 2 pg. 152

[124] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 118

[125] Tahdhib al Tahdhib vol. 12 pg. 233

[126] PLS PROVIDE PG REFERENCE

[127] PLS PROVIDE PG REFERENCE

[128] PLS PROVIDE PG REFERENCE

[129] PLS PROVIDE PG REFERENCE

[130] Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 472

[131] Tahdhib al Tahdhib vol. 10 pg. 238

[132] Sahih al Bukhari, Kitab al Maghazi, Hadith no: 4330; Sahih Muslim, Kitab al Zakat, Hadith no: 1061

[133] Sahih al Bukhari, Kitab Manaqib al Ansar, Hadith no: 3779

[134] Kanz al ‘Ummal vol. 6 pg. 153 Hadith no: 2539 (old edition); vol. 11 pg. 604 Hadith no: 32921 (Risalah edition)

[135] Al ‘Ilal al Mutanahiyah vol.1 pg. 213

[136] Tarikh Baghdad vol. 6 pg. 180; Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 369

[137] Tarikh Baghdad vol. 3 pg. 380

[138] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 588; Lisan al Mizan vol. 7 pg. 219

[139] Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 369

[140] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 146

[141] Tarikh Baghdad vol. 8 pg. 630

[142] Ibid

[143] Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 368

[144] Al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 129

[145] Ibid

[146] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3. Pg. 457

[147] Tarikh Baghdad vol. 5 pg. 319; Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 135

[148] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 26

[149] Al ‘Ilal al Mutanahiyah vol. 1 pg. 220

[150] Majma’ al Zawa’id vol. 9 pg. 112

[151] Al Mujam al Kabir vol. 11 pg. 94 Hadith no: 11154; Tarikh Baghdad vol. 5 pg. 319, Tarikh Dimashq vol 42. Pg 136

[152] Al Majruhin vol. 2 pg. 151; Tarikh Baghdad vol. 11 pg. 46-51; Tahdhib al Kamal vol. 18 pg 73-82; Siyar A’lam al Nubala’ vol. 11 pg. 446; Mizan al I’tidal vol. 2 pg. 616

[153] Tarikh Baghdad vol. 5 pg. 319, Tarikh Dimashq vol 42. Pg 136; Al Ilal al Mutanahiyah vol. 1 pg. 353

[154] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg; 109 Lisan al Mizan vol. 1 pg. 501

[155] Al Mujam al Kabir vol. 11 pg. 93 Hadith no: 11153

[156] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg 505; Lisan al Mizan vol. 3 pg. 71

[157] Ibid

[158] Al Mujam al Kabir vol. 4 pg. 171-172

[159] Al Kashif biio. 4600, Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 393, al Taqrib bio. 5573

[160] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 2 pg. 388, Lisan al Mizan vol. 4 pg. 417

[161] Ibid

[162] Al Du’afa wal Matrukin by ibn al Jawzi vol. 3 pg. 197

[163] Mizan al I’tidal vol.1 pg. 531

[164] Musnad Ahmed vol. 33 pg. 422 Hadith no: 20307; Al Mujam al Kabir vol. 20 pg. 229

[165] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 633

[166] Tafsir al Tabari vol. 13 pg. 442

[167] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 483

[168] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 4 pg. 132

[169] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 483

[170] Tafsir ibn Kathir vol. 4 pg. 434 (Al Tayyibah edition)

[171] Narration no:24

[172] Tarikh Baghdad vol. 2 pg 437; Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 309

[173] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 4 pg 127

[174] Ibid, al Mawdu’at vol. 1 pg. 383

[175] Tanzih al Shari’ah vol. 1 pg. 360

[176] Narration no: 12

[177] Al Mujam al Kabir vol. 22 pg. 200; Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 309

[178] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 2 pg. 381; Lisan al Mizan vol. 4 pg. 399

[179] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3, pg. 249

[180] Taqrib al Tahdhib bio. 818

[181] Al Majruhin vol. 1 pg. 206

[182] Majma’ al Zawa’id vol. 9 pg. 121

[183] Hilyat al Auliya’ vol. 3 pg. 27

[184] al Majruhin vol. 1 pg.145; Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 90

[185] Kanz al ‘Ummal vol. 6 pg. 158 (earlier edition)

[186] Al ‘Ilal al Mutanahiyah vol. 1 pg. 234

[187] Surah al Anfal: 62

[188] Surah al Anfal: 63-66

[189] Al Mawduat of ibn al Jawzi vol. 1 pg. 370; al La’ali al Masnu’ah of al Suyuti vol. 1 pg. 355, Tanzih al Shari’ah al Marfu’ah by ibn ‘Arraq al Kinani vol. 1 pg. 385

[190] The spelling of these two names is very similar in Arabic.

[191] Tarikh Dimaqsh vol. 42 pg. 313

[192] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 457

[193] Tanzih al Shari’ah vol. 1 pg. 385

[194] Al Bidayah wal Nihayah vol. 7 pg. 356

[195] Al La’ali al Masnu’ah vol. 1 pg. 356

[196] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 4 pg. 272

[197] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 4 pg. 99 with a reference to Ibn Battah.

[198] Ibid

[199] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 4 pg. 26; Lisan al Mizan vol. 7 pg. 473-475

[200] Tarikh Dimashq vol. 7 pg. 112

[201] Ibid

[202] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 214; Lisan al Mizan vol. 6 pg. 122

[203] Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 288

[204] Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 289

[205] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 181

[206] Sharh Madhaib Ahlus Sunnah vol. 1 pg. 151 Hadith no: 107; al La’ali al Masnu’ah vol. 1 pg 356

[207] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 173

[208] Musnad Ahmed vol. 2 pg. 469 Hadith no:1376,1377; Khasa’is ‘Ali Hadith no: 103, al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 123, Musnad Abi Ya’la vol. 1 pg. 404 Hadith no: 534

[209] Talkhis al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 123

[210] Ma’rifat al Rijal vol. 1 pg. 73 al Du’afa wal Matrukin pg. 190, al Majruhin vol. 1 pg. 302, Tahdhib al Kamal vol. 7 pg. 110

[211] Al Mujam al Kabir vol. 11 pg. 93

[212] Mizan al I’tidal vol.1 pg. 531

[213] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 536

[214] Tafsir ibn Kathir vol. 6 pg. 50; Fayd al Qadir vol. 4 pg. 135

[215] Fada’il al Sahabah vol. 2 pg 627 Hadith no: 1072, Ma’rifat al Sahabah vol. 1 pg 86-87; Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 313

[216] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 251

[217] Minhaj al Sunnah vol. 7 pg. 225; al Muntaqa pg. 309

[218] al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 142, both al Hakim and al Dhahabi said, “Sahih.”

[219] Ithaf al Maharah vol. 11 pg. 297

[220] Tahdhib al Kamal vol. 32 pg. 559, Tahdhib al Tahdhib vol. 11 pg. 452; al Taqrib bio: 7920

[221] Al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 140, both al Hakim and al Dhahabi said, “Sahih.”

[222] Al Jarh wal Ta’dil vol. 2 pg 96

[223] Al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 140

[224]  Al Thaqafi: Al Gharat vol. 1 p. 177

[225] Sahih Al Bukhari, Kitab Fada’il Ashab al Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, Hadith no: 3674 ; Sahih Muslim, Kitab Fada’il al Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, Hadith no. 2403

[226] Musnad Ahmed vol. 29 pg. 609 Hadith no: 18068; al Tirmidhi, Abwab al Manaqib, Hadith no: 3704

[227] Musnad Ahmed vol. 29. Pg. 608 Hadith no: 18067 – his name is either Murrah ibn Ka’b or Ka’b ibn Murrah

[228] Musnad Ahmed vol. 10. Pg. 169 Hadith no: 5953; al Tirmidhi, Abwab al Manaqib, Hadith no: 3708

[229] Musnad Ahmed vol. 28. Pg. 213 Hadith no: 17004

[230] The script of these two words are the same, the difference is on the dots. As such it can be read in two different ways, even though neither negates the meaning of the other.

[231] Musnad Ahmed vol. 42 pg. 521 Hadith no: 25797; Ibn Majah, Kitab al Muqaddimah, hadith no: 113

[232] Musnad Ahmed vol. 41 pg. 113 Hadith 24566 (worded slightly different) ; al Tirmidhi, Abwab al Manaqib, Hadith no: 3705; Ibn Majah, Kitab al Muqaddimah, Hadith 112

[233] In the printed version its written ‘Iqab ibn Tha’labah which appears to be a misprint. The correct name can be found in Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 27

[234] Al Mustadrak vol. 3 pg. 139

[235] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 530

[236] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 2 pg. 192, al Kashif bio.2043, Taqrib al Tahdhib bio. 2505

[237] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 27

[238] Al Majruhin vol. 2 pg. 313

[239] Al Kamil vol. 6 pg. 292

[240] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 118

[241] Al Du’afa wal Matrukin pg. 183, Tahdhib al Kamal vol. 3 pg. 308, Ikmal Tahdhib al Kamal vol. 2 pg. 252

[242] Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 473

[243] Lisan al Mizan vol. 4 pg. 450

[244] Al Nafh al Shadhi vol. 2 pg. 792

[245] Sahih al Bukhari, Kitab al Salah, Hadith no: 447; Sahih Muslim, Kitab al Fitan, Hadith no: 2916

[246] Surah al Hujurat: 9

[247] Sahih Muslim, Kitab al Zakat, Hadith no: 1065

[248] Minhaj al Sunnah vol. 4 pg. 449

[249] Hilyat al Auliya’ vol. 1 pg. 65; Tarikh Dimashq vol. 42 pg. 58

[250] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 659; Lisan al Mizan vol. 3 pg. 368

[251] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 311; Lisan al Mizan vol. 2 pg. 287-290

[252] Al Mawduat vol. 1 pg. 343; Mizan al I’tidal vol. 1 pg. 313, 659; Lisan al Mizan vol. 2 pg. 290, al La’ali al Masnu’ah vol. 1 pg. 323, Tanzih al Shari’ah vol. 1 pg. 352

[253] Hilyat al Auliya’ vol. 1 pg. 66

[254] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3. Pg 67; Lisan al Mizan vol. 5 pg. 438