May Allah curse the one who lags behind the army of Usamah

None recognises you, O ‘Ali, besides Allah and I
March 6, 2019
Every nabi has a wasi and heir and ‘Ali is my wasi
March 6, 2019

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

May Allah curse the one who lags behind the army of Usamah

 

لعن الله من تخلف عن جيش أسامة

May Allah curse the one who lags behind the army of Usamah.

 

Based on this fabrication, is it correct for us to declare: may Allah curse those who avoided the imamah of the Muslims for 1200 years? If one who failed to join the army of Usamah radiya Llahu ‘anhu is accursed, then is the one who failed to accept the imamah of the Muslims not deserving of curse?

Let us not forget that the Rawafid acknowledge that Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu did not join the expedition of Usamah, after asking Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam permission. However, they bring no proof for this.

The hadith is munkar. Al Jawhari recorded it in Kitab al Saqifah. He is a rafidi. ‘Abdul Hussain al Musawi, the author of al Muraja’at acknowledges this. His narrations includes the text:

 

أن جيش أسامة كان فيه جلة المهاجرين و الأنصار منهم أبو بكر و عمر و أبو عبيدة بن الجراح

The army of Usamah comprised of the prominent members of the Muhajirin and Ansar the likes of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and Abu ‘Ubaidah ibn al Jarrah.[1]

 

If hypothetically we agree that anyone failed to join, it was due to another important task, without doubt. The Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum were forerunners and at the spearhead of jihad without doubt.

‘Abdul Hussain al Musawi supposes that al Shahrastani reported it mursal. This indicates his inability to locate it in any of his books.

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was not accustomed to cursing. He did not curse the munafiqin who failed to join the expeditions. The verses of the Qur’an bear testimony that he would seek forgiveness for them.

Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala declares:

اِسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ أَوْ لَا تَسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ إِنْ تَسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ سَبْعِيْنَ مَرَّةً فَلَنْ يَّغْفِرَ اللَّهُ لَهُمْ

Ask forgiveness for them, [O Muhammad], or do not ask forgiveness for them. If you should ask forgiveness for them seventy times – never will Allah forgive them.[2]

 

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would accept their excuses and seek forgiveness for them assigning their secrets to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala.

 

The inconsistency of the Rawafid:

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam prayed:

إنما أنا بشر فمن لاعنته أو ساببته فاجعلها رحمة له

I am only but human. So whoever I have cursed or sworn, make it mercy for him.

 

They object: It is not befitting for you to narrate that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would curse.

But here, they are in dire need of a narration to establish Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam curse for his Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum so that their false creed may be established which is founded on cursing the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum. They have held onto this hadith, but are guilty of inconsistency.

The only reason they require this hadith so urgently is so that they may aim their curses at Sayyidina Abu Bakr and Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu. They claim that these two luminaries failed to join the army of Usamah radiya Llahu ‘anhu and lagged behind.

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam despatched Sayyidina Usamah ibn Zaid ibn Harithah radiya Llahu ‘anhuma to Sham when the latter had not yet reached 20 years. He commanded him to let his horses trample al Balqa’ and al Darum of the land of Palestine. People prepared and the pioneer Muhajirin left with Sayyidina Usamah radiya Llahu ‘anhu. This happened during the fatal illness of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam delayed the dispatchment of people in Usamah’s army. He had heard what the people said of his tender age and him leading the prominent Muhajirin and Ansar. So he praised Allah and announced:

 

أيها الناس أنفذوا بعث أسامة فلعمري لئن قلتم في إمارته لقد قلتم في إمارة إبيه من قبله و إنه لخليق بالإمارة و إن كان أبوه لخليقا لها

O people, send the army of Usamah. By my life, if you criticise his leadership, then you have criticised the leadership of his father aforetime. And he is deserving of leadership just as his father was deserving of the same.

 

People rushed to prepare themselves and Sayyidina Usamah radiya Llahu ‘anhu left with his army. Meanwhile, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam departed to his Highest Friend. So Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu grabbed hold of the reigns of caliphate and ordered the army of Usamah to proceed saying:

 

ما كان لي أن أحل لواء عقده رسول الله و خرج ماشيا ليودع الجيش بينما أسامة راكبا فقال له يا خليفة رسول الله لتركبن أو لأنزلن فرد أبو بكر والله لا تنزل و والله لا أركب و ما علي أن أغبر قدمي في سبيل الله ساعة ثم استأذنه في أن يبقى إلى جانبه عمر بن الخطاب قائلا له إن رأيت أن تعينني بعمر فافعل ففعل و سار الجيش و حارب الروم و قضى على خطرهم و عاد الجيش بلا ضحايا و قال المسلمون عنه ما رأينا جيشا أسلم من جيش أسامة

Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu announced, “It is not permissible for me to open a flag tied by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.”

He left on foot to see the army off while Usamah was mounted. Usamah submitted, “O khalifah of the Messenger of Allah, you will most certainly mount or I will dismount.”

Abu Bakr remarked, “By Allah, you will not alight and by Allah I will not mount. Why should my feet not become dusty in the Path of Allah for a short while?”

He then sought his permission to leave ‘Umar ibn al Khattab behind at his side saying, “If you feel it appropriate to assist me with ‘Umar, then do so.” Usamah acceded to his request.

The army left and fought the Romans and treaded dangerous and hazardous terrain. The army then returned without losses. The Muslims commented, “We have not seen an army safer then the army of Usamah.”

 

This is not far-fetched from the creed of a nation founded on swearing the Sahabah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Those Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum who assisted Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and conquered the world after his demise and made them subservient to the laws of Islam.

They water the seed of swearing the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum which was planted by ‘Abdulla ibn Saba’. Their only backing is their false claim that the Sahabah oppressed the Ahlul Bayt. Had this not been, people would not have tolerated the evil practice of cursing the Sahabah. This is just another lie of theirs.

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam commanded Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to lead the salah on his behalf. And after he passed away, Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu sought Sayyidina Usamah’s permission to leave Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhum behind for consultation and support and he assented to the request.

Would Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam have cursed them when they are the greatest Muhajirin? It is inconceivable for Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to curse the cream of his Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, viz. Sayyidina Abu Bakr and Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma, the greatest of the Muhajirin. In fact, it is unfathomable for him to curse anyone of the Muhajirin and Ansar who have been praised by Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala in the Qur’an. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala praises them on one side and Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam dispraises them on the other? Impossible!

Another deception of ‘Abdul Hussain al Musawi is to label a hadith without an isnad as mursal (irsal of musallamat (accepted reports)). Despite the fact that al Shahrastani mentioned the narration without a sanad, ‘Abdul Hussain labels it mursal. From where did he discern al Shahrastani’s proficiency in hadith? Al Shahrastani is one who surprisingly acknowledged his devotion to the study of debating and philosophy to the extent that he quoted in his book Nihayat al Iqdam these two couplets:

و سيرت طرفي بين تلك المعالم

لقد طفت في تلك المعاهد كلها
على ذقن أو قارعا سن نادم

فلم أر إلا واضعا كف حائر

Verily, I toured all those institutes and I travelled to all those landmarks.

I have not seen but someone placing his palm on his chin in dismay or gloomy in misfortune.

 

To cite a man like al Shahrastani as proof is a joke to the masters of hadith especially when the liar claims that he narrates it mursal. This is one of the most blatant lies and evil plots of ‘Abdul Hussain al Musawi.

The majority agree that marasil cannot stand as proof, nor can they oppose that which is established and qat’i (categorical). This is al Nawawi’s view in al Taqrib which he attributed to majority of the scholars from the Huffaz of hadith and hadith critics. This is also the view of Muslim.[3]

Some have accepted them with conditions like al Shafi’i.

 

Hafiz quotes from al Isfarayini in al Nukat:

If a Tabi’i says, “Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said,” it is not considered anything. It cannot be used for tarjih (to favour), forget being used as proof.”[4]

 

Especially when the fraud wishes to oppose the Qur’an with it.

This is one of the greatest lies and deceptions of ‘Abdul Hussain. He is not the servant of Allah. He uses this text in his book al Muraja’at to turn our marasil into sahih isnads.

The Rawafid did not find a sanad for the hadith except from the chain of a discarded majhul narrator both according to the Rawafid and Ahlus Sunnah. This proves their inability and bankruptcy for he could not locate the hadith in any sources of the Ahlus Sunnah. He was thus forced to say that ‘Abdul ‘Aziz al Jawhari recorded it in Kitab al Saqifah. Al Jawhari is a Rafidi author who is unknown to the people of his own creed. Men of their ilk are not proof against us. And to top it all, he fabricated a sanad filled with majhul narrators.

So the Rawafid are compelled to attribute the hadith to their books and sources. They say, “Ibn Abi al Hadid narrated it in Sharh Nahj al Balaghah.[5]” as said by al Majlisi[6] or al Shahrastani—who has not tasted the science of hadith—but rather wasted his life in the science of logic and philosophy and was afflicted with the ailments of confusions and misgivings.

 

Biography of Ahmed ibn ‘Abdul ‘Aziz al Jawhari

Here is a great humiliation for the Rawafid. The commentator of Nahj al Balaghah has mentioned that he took a determination to use the books of the Ahlus Sunnah as proof against them. He then affirms that Ahmed ibn ‘Abdul ‘Aziz al Jawhari is a great reliable scholar of the masters of hadith and is the author of Kitab al Saqifah.

Humiliation is your lot since al Khu’i corrected him saying, “The explicit speech of Ibn Abi al Hadid is that the man is from the Ahlus Sunnah. However, mentioning him in al Fahrist reveals that he is shia. Anyways, the reliability of the man is not proven since the tawthiq of Ibn Abi al Hadid is worthless.”[7]

What al Khu’i has mentioned reveals that al Jawhari is majhul. Citing al Tusi, the author of al Fahrist strengthens this saying, “He has Kitab al Saqifah,” but did not add onto this revealing that he is unknown among the Shia.

Let me take the opportunity to clarify here that majority of the fabrications, tales, and lengthy anecdotes, as well as the debates between Sayyidah Fatimah and Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhuma as far as the inheritance of the land of Fadak is concerned is part of the string of lies of this al Jawhari fellow. He fabricated it and inserted it in his book al Saqifah. All praise belongs to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala who saved us the trouble and made the assessment of being majhul and unreliable from the side of the Shia themselves.

Al Tusi’s statement in the introduction of al Fahrist supports this, “When I mention any of the authors or the men of usul (principles), it is necessary that I indicate what has been said about him, whether he has been endorsed or criticised, and whether his narration should be relied upon or not.”[8]

Praise belongs solely to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala. It has been proven that al Jawhari is unknown both to us and the Rawafid, opposed to what ‘Abdul Hussain says in al Muraja’at deceiving the readers into believing that al Jawhari is a prominent scholar of the Ahlus Sunnah.[9]

Furthermore, the isnad of al Jawhari is da’if for there are majhul narrators therein.

Al Jawhari says:

حدثنا أحمد بن إسحاق بن صالح عن أحمد بن سيار عن سعيد بن كثير الأنصاري عن رجاله عن عبد الله بن عبد الرحمن

Ahmed ibn Ishaq ibn Salih narrated to us from―Ahmed ibn Sayyar from―Sa’id ibn Kathir al Ansari from―his men from―’Abdullah ibn ‘Abdul Rahman.

 

Ahmed ibn Ishaq ibn Salih

  • Al Albani says, “I did not find him.”

 

Who are his men? Probably ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’ is one of them.

 

‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abdul Rahman

  • It appears that most probably he is ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Abi ‘Amrah al Ansari who is majhul as stated by Ibn Abi Hatim.[10]

 

If this narration appears in the books of the Rawafid, then it is meaningless. We do not consider the lies of the Rawafid, leave alone it standing as evidence. They have fabricated far worse things. They believe that Allah descends to the earth to visit the grave of Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu (Allah forbid!) and that the Imam is the Deity. Hence, their books are worthless in our sight.[11]

 

Next⇒ Every nabi has a wasi and heir and ‘Ali is my wasi


[1] Al Muraja’at pg. 374; al Mustarshad pg. 116.

[2] Surah al Tawbah: 80.

[3] Sahih Muslim vol. 1 pg. 30.

[4] Al Nukat vol. 2 pg. 545.

[5] Wusul al Akhyar ila Usul al Akhbar pg. 68.

[6] Bihar al Anwar vol. 30 pg. 432.

[7] Mujam Rijal al Hadith vol. 2 pg. 142.

[8] Al Fahrist pg. 2.

[9] Al Muraja’at pg. 91.

[10] Al Jarh wa al Ta’dil vol. 2 pg. 884.

[11] See a detailed refutation in Silsilat al Ahadith al Da’ifah Hadith: 4972.

Back to top