The likeness of my Ahlul Bayt is like Nuh’s ark

مثل أهل بيتي كمثل سفينة نوح

The likeness of my Ahlul Bayt is like Nuh’s ark.

This ark has no helmsman to navigate it. The imaginary fellow is hiding in a cave for over 1300 years. This ark is determined to sink for the helmsman has absconded.

This sinking ship is in polarity to sincerity to Allah. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala informs us that He saves those who sincerely implore him when they are in a ship. But as soon as He saves them, they ascribe partners with Him.

Imploring the dead and leaving aside the Ever-Living who never dies; belief in making tawaf around graves, eating sand, the practice of keeping it round and flat to prostrate, believing that sand has cure for every illness more than black seed and honey, jumping on ‘Ashura’ together with beating their heads with axes and cutting the children with blades which they term latm. I do not know where Shaitan is leading them. Probably this latm will be followed by rakl (kicking).

This is actually a pirate’s ship and not the ark of Sayyidina Nuh ‘alayh al Salam. The established din on the pattern of Hanafiyyah is established on sincerity and tawhid. Moreover, the Qur’an which the occupants of this ark have is not sahih since it has alleged tahrif from the side of the Sahabah according to your warped understanding. There is consensus upon this as affirmed by Ni’mat Allah al Jaza’iri. Furthermore, your books are not authentic. So how will this ark sail?

Before continuing, I would like to remind you of al Albani’s severe scrutiny of this narration.^[1]

Al Albani reveals the trickery and treachery of ‘Abdul Hussain by asserting, “He does not discuss the isnads which support his creed. Rather he narrates them all as accepted authenticated ahadith, if the reader is unaware of their authenticity, just as he perpetrated here by saying, “Sahihat al Mustadrak.” Besides this, he does not quote the scholars of hadith; the flaws of the isnad or the inconsistencies of the text.”

He adds, “You will realise that Khomeini went a step further than ‘Abdul Hussain in falsehood. He claims in Kashf al Asrar^[2] that the hadith is from the accepted mutawatir ahadith. He means by accepted, i.e. by the Ahlus Sunnah. He thereafter lies again as is his habit and said, ‘This has appeared in eleven ahadith from the chains of the Ahlus Sunnah.’”^[3]

Al Haythami reported the hadith is Majma’ al Zawa’id^[4]. He apprised of the presence of ‘Abdullah ibn Dahir and Hassan ibn Abi Jafar in the isnad who are both matruk.

Al Haythami says, “It is reported from three chains from Abu Dhar:

Chain 1: Al Mufaddal ibn Salih al Asadi Abu Jamilah is in there.

Al Dhahabi says, “They have labelled him da’if.”^[5]
Al Bukhari and Ibn Abi Hatim labelled him munkar al hadith.
Ibn Hajar graded him da’if.^[6]

Chain 2: By al Tabarani. ‘Abdullah ibn Dahir is present.

Al Dhahabi, Ibn al Jawzi, and others have commented, “A rafidi. They have classified him da’if.”^[7]

Chain 3: By al Tabarani. Hassan ibn Abi Jafar al Jafri is in this isnad.

Al Bukhari labelled him munkar al hadith.^[8]

Al Bazzar mentioned that Hassan ibn ‘Ali Abi Jafar al Jafri is in the sanad and has not been corroborated.^[9]

It is noted in Tahdhib al Kamal that the worst report of al Mufaddal ibn Salih from Hassan ibn ‘Ali is this one.^[10]

Ibn ‘Adi mentioned this hadith in the biography of Hassan after citing the scholar’s criticism of him and declaring him da’if, which emphasises the weakness of this narration.

Haythami classifies both of them as matruk.^[11]

Al Hakim narrated it in al Mustadrak and labelled it sahih. But al Dhahabi reprimanded him saying, “al Mufaddal ibn Salih who is therein has been declared da’if.” Al Munawi explains, “Al Dhahabi correcting al Hakim and the latter remaining quiet shows that he agrees with al Dhahabi in the verdict.”^[12]

Al Hakim is very gullible when making tashih. That is why it was necessary for the scholars to examine his book and correct it due to his profuse gullibility or leniency. How many a time he classifies a hadith as sahih supposing it to meet the standards of al Bukhari and Muslim and the scholars correct him and explain that it is actually mawdu’.

Allow us to briefly mention some statements of the ‘Ulama’ who point out his tasahul (leniency):

Hafiz Ibn al Salah has said that he blunders profusely in the standards of sahih and he is mutasahil^[13] in passing such a verdict.^[14]
Al Nawawi al Shafi’i says, “al Hakim is mutasahil as has been explained a number of times previously.”^[15]
Hafiz Ibn Hajar says, “Al Hakim listed a group of people in his Kitab al Du’afa’ and determined that their narrations should be discarded and prohibited them being used as proof. Thereafter, he goes on to document the ahadith of some of them in his al Mustadrak and authenticate them as well.”^[16]

He mentions an example of this. Al Hakim documents a hadith of ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Aslam and declared the isnad sahih whereas he had mentioned in his Kitab al Du’afa’ that ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Zaid ibn Aslam reported fabrications from his father. And that the criticism of these has become apparent to him.^[17]

Al Dhahabi notes, “He authenticates many saqit (wholly unreliable) ahadith in his Mustadrak. And he does this profusely.”^[18]
Al Zayla’i al Hanafi says, “Al Hakim: His tasahul and authentication of da’if, in fact mawdu’ ahadith is common.”^[19]
Al Kanawi al Hanafi al Hindi, “How many ahadith al Hakim judged authentic was labelled by al Dhahabi as da’if or mawdu’. Hence, reliance should not be put on Mustadrak of al Hakim until one does not study its Mukhtasar by al Dhahabi.”^[20]

مثل أهل بيتي كمثل سفينة نوح من ركبها نجا و من تخلف عنها غرق

The likeness of my Ahlul Bayt is like Nuh’s ark. Whoever boards it is safe and whoever fails to drowns.

This narration is da’if. It is reported from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas, ‘Abdullah ibn al Zubair, Abu Dhar, Abu Sa’id al Khudri, and Anas ibn Malik radiya Llahu ‘anhum.

The hadith of Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma:

Hassan ibn Abi Jafar narrates it from―Abu al Sahba’ from―Sa’id ibn Jubayr from―Ibn ‘Abbas.

Al Bazzar, al Tabarani, and Abu Nuaim report it.^[21]

Abu Nuaim said, “It is gharib from the hadith of Sa’id. We did not write it except from this chain.”
Al Bazzar commented, “We only know that Hassan narrated it. He is not reliable. He was from among the worshippers.”
Al Haythami said, “Al Bazzar and al Tabarani narrated it. Hassan ibn Abi Jafar is present and he is matruk.”^[22]

Hassan ibn Abi Jafar

He is matruk
Al Bukhari labelled him munkar.
He is mentioned in al Mizan. This hadith has been listed as one of his munkar reports.

Abu al Sahba’

He is a Kufi. Only Ibn Hibban gave him credibility.

The hadith of Ibn al Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhu:

Ibn Lahi’ah narrates it from―Abu al Aswad from―’Amir ibn ‘Abdullah ibn al Zubair from―his father.

Al Bazzar documents it.^[23]

‘Abdullah ibn Lahi’ah is da’if due to his poor memory.

The hadith of Abu Dhar radiya Llahu ‘anhu:

There are two chains.

a. From Hassan ibn Abi Jafar from―’Ali ibn Zaid from―Sa’id ibn al Musayyab from―Abu Dhar.

Al Fasawi, al Tabarani, and al Bazzar narrated it.^[24]

Al Bazzar commented, “Ibn Abi Jafar is the only narrator.” He is matruk.

‘Ali ibn Zaid ibn Jud’an

Da’if

b. From ‘Abdullah ibn Dahir al Razi―’Abdullah ibn ‘Abdul Quddus narrated to us from―al A’mash from―Abu Ishaq from―Hanash ibn al Mu’tamir who heard―Abu Dhar al Ghifari.

Al Tabarani narrated it and commented, “Only ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abdul Quddus reports it from al A’mash.^[25]

‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abdul Quddus

Coupled with his rafd, he has been labelled da’if by majority. Al Dhahabi says, “Ibn ‘Adi said: Majority of his reports are concerning the virtues of the Ahlul Bayt.
Yahya said: “He is worthless. A wretched Rafidi.”
Al Nasa’i and others said: He is not reliable.
Al Daraqutni said: da’if.”^[26]

‘Abdullah ibn Dahir al Razi is worse than him.

Ibn ‘Adi comments, “Generally his reports are about the virtues of ‘Ali. He has been indicted for this.”

Al Dhahabi says thereafter, “I declare: Allah has made ‘Ali independent from his excellences being established though lies and untruths.”

Al Haythami says, “Al Bazzar and al Tabarani narrated it. Hassan ibn Abi Jafar al Jafri appears in the isnad of al Bazzar and ‘Abdullah ibn Dahir appears in the isnad of al Tabarani. Both are matruk.

However, they have been corroborated. Al Mufaddal ibn Salih narrated it from Abu Ishaq. Al Hakim documented it and said, “Sahih according to the standards of Muslim.”^[27] Again al Dhahabi rejected him saying, “Only al Tirmidhi documents al Mufaddal’s narrations. They have classified him da’if.” He says at another juncture, “Mufaddal is weak.”

My comments:

Al Mufaddal ibn Salih

Actually extremely weak.
Al Bukhari labelled him munkar al hadith.
Ibn ‘Adi said: “The most despicable narration of his I saw is the hadith of Hassan ibn ‘Ali.”

I say: His text is omitted from al Mizan. His words in Muntakhab Kamil of Ibn ‘Adi are:

From Hassan ibn ‘Ali who said, “Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah came to me while I was among the kuttab (scribes). He said, ‘Uncover your stomach for me.’

Accordingly, I uncovered my stomach. He touched his stomach onto my stomach and said, ‘Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam ordered me to covey his salam to you.’”

I say: This is evidently mawdu’. It is regarding this that Ibn ‘Adi said, “It is the most despicable thing I saw of his.” Al Dhahabi goes one further and says, “The hadith of Nuh’s ark is far more despicable.”

Hence, his mutaba’ah (corroboration) is not worthy substantiation. Add to this that Abu Ishaq al Sabi’i is a mukhtalit (disorientated) mudallis.

Hanash ibn al Mu’tamir

There is du’f in him.
In fact, Ibn Hibban said, “His ahadith do not resemble the narrations of reliable narrators.”

Al Fasawi narrated it from the chain of Isra’il from―Abu Ishaq from―a man who Hanash narrated it to.

I then located a third chain of the hadith which ‘Abdul Karim ibn Hilal al Qurashi narrates saying―Aslam al Makki informed me―Abu al Tufayl narrated to me that he saw Abu Dhar standing at this door calling out,

ألا من عرفني فقد عرفني و من لم يعرفني فأنا جندب ألا و أنا أبو ذر سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم يقول … فذكره

Harken! Whoever recognises me recognises me. And whoever does not, I am Jundub. Listen up, and I am Abu Dhar. I heard Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam saying …”

The hadith of Abu Sa’id al Khudri radiya Llahu ‘anhu:

‘Abdul ‘Aziz ibn Muhammad ibn Rabi’ah al Kilabi narrated it―’Abdul Rahman ibn Abi Hammad al Muqri’ narrated it from―Abu Salamah al Sa’igh from―’Attiyah from―Abu Sa’id.

Al Tabarani narrated it and said, “Only ibn Abi Hammad narrated it from Abu Salamah. ‘Abdul ‘Aziz ibn Muhammad ibn Rabi’ah is the sole narrator.”^[28]

I have not found his biography written by anyone. Similarly the two narrators before him. ‘Attiyah is da’if. Al Haythami says, “Al Tabarani narrated it in al Saghir and al Awsat. There are a group of narrators therein who I do not know.”

The hadith of Sayyidina Anas radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

Aban ibn Abi ‘Ayyash narrated it from him. Al Khatib documented it.^[29]

Aban ibn Abi ‘Ayyash

He is matruk, accused of hadith forgery.

After this takhrij and research, it will become manifest to an observant critic that most of the chains of the hadith are extremely da’if, so the hadith does not receive strength by joining them up.

It will also became clear that Sheikh Salih al Muqbili did not examine it thoroughly and did not scrutinise it carefully. Otherwise he would not have said in his book, “al Hakim documented it in al Mustadrak from Abu Dhar. Al Khatib, Ibn Jarir, and al Tabarani documented it from Ibn ‘Abbas and Abu Dhar. Al Bazzar narrated it from Ibn al Zubair. Hence, al Dhahabi’s declaration of it being munkar is unacceptable since this judgement is from the discernment of passions.”^[30]

My comment: Yes, due to it being flawed per se, it is not possible to declare it sahih by the combination of its chains. The condition for this is that the du’f should not be severe as established in ‘ilm al hadith. However, this is not the case just as explained. I think that had the Sheikh―may Allah have mercy on him―examined and scrutinised all the chains just as we had, he would not have opposed al Dhahabi in rejecting the hadith. And Allah knows best!

What supports al Muqbili’s statement: this judgement is from the discernment of passions is that Sheikh ‘Abdul Hussain al Musawi al Shia in his book al Muraja’at attributed this hadith to al Hakim duping the readers into believing that it is sahih by saying:

أخرجه الحاكم بالإسناد إلى أبي ذر من الجزء الثالث من صحيحة المستدرك

Al Hakim documented it with an isnad leading up to Abu Dhar in the third volume of Sahihat al Mustadrak.^[31]

As is his habit, he does not discuss the isnads which support his creed. Rather he narrates them all as accepted authenticated ahadith, if the reader is unaware of their authenticity just as he perpetrated here by saying, “Sahihat al Mustadrak.” Besides this, he does not quote the scholars of hadith; the flaws of the isnad or the inconsistencies of the text.

It came to mind that I should examine all his ahadith that are of such a type and gather them in a book, to notify the Muslims and warn them of the deceitful actions of the fraudsters. Probably, this will happen soon. I then realised that Khomeini has surpassed ‘Abdul Hussain in fabrication and concoction. He goes to the extent of declaring the hadith mutawatir and accepted. He means by accepted, i.e. by the Ahlus Sunnah. He thereafter lies again as is his habit and says, “This has appeared in eleven ahadith from the chains of the Ahlus Sunnah.”^[32] But he only writes the hadith of Ibn ‘Abbas which has the matruk narrator as explained before.

Next⇒ One who loves you loves me and who loves me loves Allah. One who hate you hates me and who hates me hates Allah.

[1] Al Rawd al Nadir pg. 953; Da’if al Jami’ al Saghir vol. 5 pg. 131 Hadith: 5251; Silsilat al Ahadith al Da’ifah Hadith: 4503.

[2] Kashf al Asrar pg. 171.

[3] Silsilat al Ahadith al Da’ifah vol. 10 pg. 5 – 11 Hadith: 4503.

[4] Majma’ al Zawa’id vol. 9 pg. 168.

[5] Al Mustadrak vol. 2 pg. 343; al Kashif vol. 3 pg. 170.

[6] Taqrib al Tahdhib Biography: 6855.

[7] Al Mughni fi al Du’afa’ vol. 1 pg. 337; al Du’afa’ wa al Matrukun vol. 1 pg. 337; Mizan al I’tidal vol. 4 pg. 92; al Kamil fi al Du’afa’ vol. 4 pg. 228.

[8] Al Tarikh al Kabir vol. 2 pg. 288 Biography: 2500.

[9] Musnad al Bazzar vol. 9 pg. 343.

[10] Tahdhib al Kamal vol. 28 pg. 411.

[11] Majma’ al Zawa’id vol. 9 pg. 168.

[12] Fayd al Qadir vol. 5 pg. 517.

[13] One who practices tasahul.

[14] ‘Ulum al Hadith pg. 18.

[15] Al Majmu’ Sharh al Muhadhab vol. 7 pg. 64.

[16] Al Lisan vol. 5 pg. 233.

[17] Al Nukat ‘ala ibn al Salah.

[18] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 3 pg. 608.

[19] Nasb al Rayah vol. 1 pg. 360.

[20] Al Ajwibah al Fadilah pg. 161.

[21] Musnad al Bazzar Hadith: 2615; Kashf al Asrar; al Mujam al Kabir vol. 3 pg. 160; al Hilyah vol. 3 pg. 306.

[22] Majma’ al Zawa’id vol. 9 pg. 168.

[23] Musnad al Bazzar Hadith: 2612.

[24] Ma’rifat al Tarikh vol. 1 pg. 538; al Mujam al Kabir vol. 3 pg. 34 Hadith: 2636; Musnad al Bazzar vol. 3 pg. 222 Hadith: 2624.

[25] Al Mujam al Saghir pg. 78.

[26] Al Mizan.

[27] Al Mustadrak vol. 2 pg. 343; vol. 3 pg. 150.

[28] Al Mujam al Saghir pg. 170.

[29] Tarikh Baghdad vol. 12 pg. 91.

[30] Al ‘Ilm al Shamikh pg. 250.

[31] Al Muraja’at pg. 23.

[32] Silsilat al Ahadith al Da’ifah vol. 10 pg. 5 – 11 Hadith: 4503.

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents