أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو القَاسِمِ الشَحَّامِيُّ، أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو عُثْمَانَ إِسْمَاعِيْلُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ الصَّابُونِيُّ إذْنًا، أَخْبَرَنَا الحَاكِمُ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللهِ الحَافِظُ، حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عِيْسَى، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ أَحْمَدُ بْنُ الحَجَّاجِ بْنِ عَاصِمِ بْنِ مِرْدَاسٍ النِيْسَابُوْرِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا جُبَارَةُ بْنُ المُغَلِّسِ الحِمَانِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ زِيَادٍ الطَّحَّانُ، عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَجْلَانَ، عَنْ أَبِي الزُبَيْرِ، عَنْ جَابِرٍ، قَالَ: أُتِيَ رَسُوْلُ الله بِجَنَازَةِ رَجُلٍ لِيُصَلِّيَ عَلَيْهِ، فَلَمْ يُصَلِّ عَلَيْهِ، قَالَ: فَقِيْلَ: يَا رَسُوْلَ اللهِ، مَا رَأَيْنَاكَ تَرَكْتَ الصَّلَاةَ عَلَى أَحَدٍ إِلَا عَلَى هَذَا، فَقَالَ: إِنَّهُ كَانَ يُبْغِضُ عُثْمَانَ، قَالَ: بَغَضَهُ الله.
A Janazah (funeral prayer) was brought to the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to pray upon, but he did not perform the prayer upon him.
He was asked, “O Prophet of Allah, we did not see you declining to perform on anyone besides this one.”
The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “He used to hate ‘Uthman.”
He then said, “Allah detests him [in return].”
 The narration is Mawdu’ (a fabrication). Al Tirmidhi (3709) narrates it with his chain to Muhammad ibn Ziyad and said, “This is a strange narration and we do not know of it except from this chain. Muhammad ibn Ziyad was Maymun ibn Mihran’s companion; he is extremely weak according to the scholars of Hadith.” I say: Ibn al Jawzi mentioned it in his al Mawdu’at (1/247),along with a number of accusations directed at Muhammad ibn Ziyad, who is deemed a liar. Ahmed ibn Hanbal said, “A wretched liar who forged narrations.” Yahya said, “He is a wretched liar.” Al Sa’di and al Daraqutni both said he was a liar. Al Bukhari, al Nasa’i, al Fallas, and Abu Hatim al Razi said, “He is Matruk al Hadith (suspected of forging narrations).” Ibn Hibban said, “He would fabricate narrations and attribute it to reliable scholars. It is not permissible to mention them in books unless it is done to express astonishment [in other words indicate its weakness]. The narration has an alternate chain that was mentioned by Al Dhahabi in al Mizan (5/26) from ‘Umar ibn Musa—who was suspected of lying—from who Ishaq ibn Bishr—who was also suspected of lying. It is not farfetched to assume that one of them assumed the chain of transmission for themselves and omitted Muhammad ibn Ziyad from it.Back to top