BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

Misconceptions related to his relationship with Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam

 

Misconception 1 – Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam cursed him when he ridiculed the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam

 

This doubt is based on the narration recorded wherein ‘Amr ibn al ‘As ridiculed Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam with some stanzas of poetry. Upon hearing this Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said:

 

اللهم إني لا أحسن أن أقول الشعر فالعن عمراً بكل بيت لعنة

O Allah, I am unable to recite poetry, so curse ‘Amr with a curse for every stanza.[1]

 

Answer

This doubt can be answered in two ways:

 

1. Studying The Chains of Transmission

Ibn Qutaybah[2] has recorded it with a chain of transmission from Abu al Khattab Ziyad ibn Yahya ibn Hassan — from Sahl ibn Hammad Abu ‘Itab al Dallal.

Ibn Abi Hatim[3], al Ruyani in his Musnad[4], Al Jawzaqani[5] and Ibn ‘Asakir[6] have also recorded it with a chain of transmission from Muhammad ibn al Muthanna — from Sahl ibn Hammad Abu ‘Itab al Dallal.

Al Tahawi has recorded it with a chain of transmission from Ahmed ibn al Mufaddal al Hafri.

All the narrators record from ‘Isa ibn ‘Abdur Rahman — from ‘Adi ibn Thabit — from Bara ibn ‘Azib who reports, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said:

 

اللهم ان عمرو بن العاص هجاني وهو يعلم أني لست بشاعر فاهجه والعنه عدد ما هجاني او مكان ما هجاني

O Allah, ‘Amr ibn al ‘As ridiculed me knowing well I do not say poetry. Ridicule and curse him in lieu of what he has ridiculed me.

 

The ‘Isa ibn ‘Abdur Rahman under discussion here could be al Zarqi as explicitly recorded by al Jawzaqani in al Abatil. Ibn Qutaybah in Gharib al Hadith, and Ibn Abi Hatim have opined him to be al Sulami. We will discuss both.

 

i. ‘Isa ibn ‘Abdur Rahman, Abu ‘Ubadah or Abu ‘Ubbad al Zarqi:

• Ibn Hajar said, “‘Isa ibn ‘Abdur Rahman ibn Farwah or ibn Saburah al Ansari, Abu ‘Ubadah al Zarqi is discarded from the seventh category[7].”
• Al Jawzaqani said, “This narration is Batil (false). I do not know anyone who has narrated it except ‘Isa ibn ‘Abdur Rahman ibn Farwah al Zarqi al Madini. He is Munkar al Hadith (one who reports unacceptable reports).
• Abu Hatim al Razi said, “‘Isa ibn ‘Abdur Rahman ibn Farwah is Munkar al Hadith, weak in hadith, and is likened to a Matruk narrator (one who is suspected of forgery).”
• Abu Zur’ah al Razi said, “‘Isa ibn ‘Abdur Rahman ibn Farwah is not strong.”[8]

 

ii. ‘Isa ibn ‘Abdur Rahman al Sulami, reliable from the sixth category.[9]

Perhaps the more correct is that it is al Sulami since he has been explicitly recorded on another chain of transmission:

Ibn Abi Hatim said, and Abu Zur’ah narrated to us — from Abu Na’im — from ‘Isa ibn ‘Abdur Rahman al Sulami — from ‘Adi ibn Thabit who reported — from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam who said. This is a mursal narration.[10]

Even though al Sulami is reliable, the chain of transmission is defective by it being mursal.

Ibn Abi Hatim said, “I asked my father regarding the narration of Sahl ibn Hammad — from ‘Isa ibn ‘Abdur Rahman — from ‘Adi — from al Bara’ — from al Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.”

My father replied, ‘This is incorrect. He narrates — from ‘Adi — from al Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam as a mursal narration without Bara’.’”[11]

Thus, the narration is not authentic due to it being mursal and mursal is a type of weak narrations.

There is another chain of transmission for this hadith:

Ibn Abi Hatim said, and I heard Abu Zur’ah — Sa’id ibn Muhammad al Jurmi — from Abu Tumaylah — from Abu Hamzah al Sukuni — from Jabir al Ju’fi — from ‘Adi ibn Thabit from Zir ibn Hubaysh — from Hudhayfah.[12]

This chain of transmission is despotic since there is Jabir ibn Yazid al Ju’fi in it.

 

Jabir ibn Yazid al Ju’fi

• Ibn Ma’in, Za’idah, Layth ibn Abi Sulaim, Ayub, and Ibn ‘Uyaynah have all called him a liar.
• Abu Hanifah said, “I have not met anyone who is a greater liar than Jabir al Ju’fi. He brought forth a narration for anything I said to him. He claimed to have thirty thousand narrations which he had not made apparent.”
• Abu Hatim quotes Ahmed ibn Hambal who said, “They, i.e. Yahya and ‘Abdur Rahman, suspected him of forgery.”
• Al Nasa’i said, “His narrations are discarded.”
• Al Hakim Abu Ahmed said, “His narrations are worthless.”[13]

This is besides the fact that he, as established, does tadlis and did not specify hearing here.

Ibn Hajar said, “Al Thawri, al ‘Ijli, and Ibn Sa’d have characterized him as one who does tadlis.”

Ibn Hajar has placed him in the fifth category amongst those who are weak even after overlooking their penchant for tadlis. Thus, their narrations are rejected even if they explicitly mention having heard it.[14]

Ibn ‘Asakir[15] has recorded this with another chain from Abu Jafar Ahmed ibn Abi Talib ‘Ali ibn Muhammad — from my father — from Abu ‘Amr Muhammad ibn Marwan ibn ‘Umar al Qurashi — from Jafar ibn Ahmed ibn Ma’dan — from al Hassan ibn Jahur — from Al Qasim ibn ‘Urwah — from Ibn Daʾb who said:

 

قدم أبو الأسود الديلي على معاوية بن أبي سفيان بعد مقتل علي بن أبي طالب وقد استقامت له البلاد فأدني معاوية مجلسه وأعظم … فقال: يا أمير المؤمنين إن هذا الذي ترى هجا رسول الله و بأبيات من الشعر فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم اللهم إني لا أحسن أن أقول الشعر فالعن عمراً بكل بيت لعنة

Abu al Aswad al Dili came to Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan after the martyrdom of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib when the matter of leadership had settled in his favour. Muawiyah brought him close and welcomed him with esteem… He said, “Amir al Mu’minin, this person that you see ridiculed Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam with some stanzas of poetry. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam countered him by saying, ‘O Allah I am unable to recite poetry, so curse ‘Amr for every stanza a curse.’”

 

This chain is not authentic as well, since it has in it Ibn Daʾb.

 

Ibn Daʾb, ‘Isa ibn Yazid ibn Bakr Daʾb al Laythi al Madani

• Al Hafiz said, “He was an historian, knowledgeable, and a genealogist. His hadith though are worthless.”
• Khalaf al Ahmar said, “He would fabricate hadith.”
• Al Bukhari and others have said, “His hadith are discarded (due to being suspected of forgery).”
• It is said that he enjoyed the good graces of al Mahdi and al Hadi who one day gave him thirty thousand gold coins.
• Abu Hatim said, “His hadith are discarded.”[16]

 

Abu al Aswad al Dili or al Duʾali or al Basri

His name is Zalim ibn ‘Amr ibn Sufyan or ‘Amr ibn Zalim or ‘Amr ibn ‘Uthman ibn ‘Amr. He is reliable, worthy, a Mukhadram.[17]     

Based in this, it is evident that the narration is mursal and mursal is a category of weak narrations. This is besides Ibn Daʾb, who is in the chain of transmission, being suspected of forgery.

 

2. Studying the Content of the Narration

If we were to, for arguments sake, accept the narration to be true and established. The answer would be that this was during his era of ignorance after which he accepted Islam. He had laid down the condition of forgiveness for himself when accepting Islam at the hands of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam at which point Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam informed him that Islam wipes out all that came before it. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then accepted his pledge and praised him much, as already explained.

Ibn Qutaybah said:

 

نرى هذا من قول رسول الله صلى اللeه عليه وسلم كان قبل إسلام عمرو بن العاص رضي الله عنه

This was said by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam before ‘Amr ibn al ‘As radiya Llahu ‘anhu accepted Islam.

 

Ibn ‘Asakir said:

في إسناده مقال وهذا قبل إسلامه والإسلام يجب ما قبله

There is an issue with its chain of transmission. And this was before his acceptance of Islam. Islam wipes out all that came before it.

 

Al Dhahabi said after mentioning this narration:

 

يعني قبل أن يسلم والحديث منكر

This was before his acceptance of Islam. The hadith itself is Munkar.[18]

 

NEXT⇒ Misconception 2 – Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam prayed against him

---

[1] Ibn al Dimashqi: Jawahir al Matalib fi Manaqib al Imam ‘Ali, vol. 2 pg. 219; al Ahmedi al Miyanji: Mawaqif al Shiah, vol. 2 pg. 383.

[2] Gharib al Hadith, vol. 1 pg. 287.

[3] ‘Ilal al Hadith, vol. 2 pg. 444.

[4] Hadith: 382.

[5] Al Abatil, vol. 1 pg. 321.

[6] Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 46 pg. 118.

[7] Al Taqrib: 5306.

[8] Al Abatil, vol. 1 pg. 322.

[9] Al Taqrib: 5308.

[10] Ibn Abi Hatim: ‘Ilal al Hadith, vol. 2 pg. 344.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid.

[13] See, Al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, vol. 4 pgs. 468- 469.

[14] Ibn Hajar: Ta’rif ahl al Taqdis, vol. 1 pg. 53: 133.

[15] Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 25 pg. 177.

[16] Ibn Hajar: Lisan al Mizan, vol. 4 pg. 408.

[17] Ibn Hajar: Al Taqrib: 7940.

[18] Al Dhahabi: Mizan al I’tidal, vol. 5 pg. 382.