The Second Narration

The Third Narration
January 20, 2016
The First Narration
January 21, 2016

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

The Second Narration

 

May Allah curse the rider, and the leader, and the driver.

 

The Narration of Safinah:

 

It is narrated by al Bazzar in his Musnad (9/286): al Sakan ibn Sa’id narrated to us – he said – ‘Abdul Samad narrated to us – he said – my father narrated to us, and Hammad ibn Salamah narrated to us — from Sa’id ibn Jumhan[1] — from Safinah radiya Llahu ‘anhu:

 

The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was sitting when a man passed by riding a camel, in the front was a man leading the camel, and from the back there was a man driving the camel [urging it on], so he — salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam — said: “May Allah curse the rider, and the leader, and the driver.”

 
 

The response to this is as follows:

  1. Supposing the authenticity of this narration, it does not mention Muawiyah.
  2. The narration is rejected on account of weakness in addition to it being uncorroborated. A clear indication of this is what has been narrated by al Baladhuri in Ansab al Ashraf (129), by way of ‘Abdul Warith ibn Sa’id , from Sa’id ibn Jumhan, from Safinah… “May Allah curse the carrier, the one being carried, the leader, and the driver.” The carrier is a camel, is it imaginable that the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would curse an animal? It has being narrated in Sahih Muslim (narration no. 2598) that he – salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam – said: “Those who curse shall not be witnesses and intercessors on the Day of Judgement,” and it is he – salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam – who said, as narrated in Sahih Muslim (2595) by ‘Imran ibn Hussain: “We were with Allah’s Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in some of his journeys and there was a woman from the Ansar riding a she-camel that it shied and she invoked curse upon that. Allah’s Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam heard it and said, ‘Unload that and set it free for it has been cursed.’” ‘Imran said: “I still perceive that (she-camel) walking amongst people and none taking any notice of it.”
  3. The teacher of al Bazzar, al Sakan ibn Sa’id , is an “unknown” as it appears that no biographical details of him are available. Al Haythami, in Majma’ al Zawa’id (7/395) said: “The teacher of al Bazzar, al Sakan ibn Sa’id , I do not know him”
 

The Narration of Hassan

 

Al Tabarani narrates in al Mujam al Kabir (3/71, narration 2798):

 

Zakariyya ibn Yahya al Saji narrated to us — he said — Muhammad ibn Bashshar narrated to us — he said — ‘Abdul Malik ibn al Sabbah al Masma’i narrated to us — he said — ‘Imran ibn Hudayr narrated to us — I think — from Abu Mijlaz, who said: “‘Amr ibn al ‘As and al Mughirah ibn Shu’bah said to Muawiyah that Hassan ibn ‘Ali is unable to express himself distinctly and he has something to say and an opinion to express, we know what he says and he speaks but does not get any kind of response. So Muawiyah told them not to do anything, but they relented and ‘Amr ascended the pulpit and praised Allah and then spoke ill of ‘Ali. Thereafter, al Mughirah ascended the pulpit, praised Allah and spoke ill of ‘Ali. It was then said to Hassan to ascend but he refused to do so unless he was given assurance that if he spoke the truth they should believe him and if he spoke falsely they should repudiate him. He was then given that assurance and then ascended the pulpit, praised Allah and said: “By Allah, O ‘Amr, and you O Mughirah, you both are aware that the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, ‘Allah has cursed the driver and the rider’, one of them is so-and-so.” They replied, “by Allah, certainly,” he then said, “I ask you by Allah, O Muawiyah and you O Mughirah, are you both not aware that the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam cursed ‘Amr, with every statement he ended it with a curse?” to which they replied, “by Allah, certainly.” He then said, “I ask you by Allah, O ‘Amr, and you O Muawiyah, are you both not aware that the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam cursed the nation of this individual [al Mughirah]?” They replied, “Certainly!…”

 

This narration is baseless, both in terms of the text and of the chain of narration.

In terms of the chain, ‘Imran ibn Hudayr said, “I think it is from Abu Mijlaz,” but it is not certain who the speculator is exactly. Whoever the speculator is, there is no absolute certainty that it is from Abu Mijlaz, Lahiq ibn Humaid, as it could be from him or from anybody else.

As for al Maliki, he has cut the narration short and not mentioned it in its entirety. The incident related in this narration has objections to it since it describes the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam cursing ‘Amr ibn al ‘As with the ending of every statement he made in a sermon. How is it possible that the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam cursed an individual with every statement in a single sermon, yet appoint him as the leader of a military expedition in the Battle of Dhat al Salasil as is mentioned in Sahih Al Bukhari (3462)?!

Furthermore, does this not contradict that which has been authentically narrated in Sahih Muslim (121) that on the occasion of the demise of ‘Amr ibn al ‘As he

began to cry, and then his son consoled him telling him: “O my beloved father, has not the Messenger of Allah given you glad tidings of such-and-such?”

Does this narration not contradict what has been mentioned of the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam testifying to the faith of ‘Amr ibn al ‘As as is related by Ahmed in al Musnad (17843), al Nasa’i in al Sunan al Kubra (8301) and Ibn Hibban (7092), all of them by way of the narration of Musa ibn ‘Ali ibn Rabah — from his father — from ‘Amr ibn al ‘As radiya Llahu ‘anhu who said:

 

There was a great panic in Madinah which caused people to scatter in different directions. I noticed Salim the freed slave of Abu Hudhayfah taking his sword, after having seen what he had done I also took my sword when the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam entered upon us and he said: “O people, were it not be that your fear be towards Allah and His Messenger? What is this? Why have you not done as these two believing men have done?”

 

The reply to this is left to the one who distorts the texts.

With the above, the following two chains of this narration are responded to since they are narrated from the same chain:

  • The Narration of ‘Amr ibn al ‘As
  • The Narration of al Mughirah ibn Shu’bah
 

The Narration of Bara’ ibn ‘Azib

 

Imam al Bukhari has related in al Tarikh al Kabir (1/274), al Tirmidhi in al ‘ilal (381), al Tabarani in al Awsat (4/208) by way of the narration from Salamah ibn al Fadl — from Muhammad ibn Ishaq — from Salamah ibn Kuhayl — from Ibrahim ibn al Bara’ ibn ‘Azib — from his father. Abu ‘Isa al Tirmidhi said of this as it appears in al ‘ilal (714):

 

I asked Muhammad about this narration and he said: “I know it.” I am not aware of him knowing this narration except by this one chain.

 

It has also been narrated by Ibn ‘Asakir in Tarikh Dimashq (59/204) by way of Salamah ibn al Fadl — from Muhammad ibn Ishaq — from Ibrahim ibn al Bara’ ibn ‘Azib — from his father. It has also been narrated by al Ruyani in his Musnad (325) and this narration has a number of defects:

  1. Appearing in this chain is Salamah ibn al Fadl, Abu ‘Abdullah, al Abrash, and he is weak. He has many contradictions and solitary narrations. As for that which he narrates from Muhammad ibn Ishaq under the genre of Maghazi only, it is stronger than the rest even though a general status of weak is accorded to his narrations.
  2. The implicit narration of Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Yasar, and he was described — may Allah have mercy on him — with evasiveness. When he narrates in the implicit form he is evasive, especially if he narrates other than the Maghazi genre. So if his evasiveness is present, the narration is not accepted.
  3. The irreconcilable disorder in this chain since it appears from Muhammad ibn Ishaq from Salamah ibn Kuhayl, from Ibrahim ibn al Bara’, from al Bara’ ibn ‘Azib, and it also appears without the mention of Salamah ibn Kuhayl from the narration of Muhammad ibn Ishaq, from Ibrahim ibn al Bara’, from his father [al Bara’ ibn ‘Azib]. For this reason al Bukhari says in al Tarikh al Kabir (1/274): “They differ regarding its chain.”
  4. Ibrahim ibn al Bara’ ibn ‘Azib is relatively unknown as a narrator since none of the scholars have verified him as a narrator besides Ibn Hibban in al Thiqat (4/6). Al Bukhari in al Tarikh al Kabir (1/274) and Ibn Abi Hatim in al Jarh wa al Ta’dil (2/89) have both mentioned him but remained silent on him. The silence of al Bukhari and ibn Abi Hatim al Razi does not amount to anything.
  5. This narration is from the solitary narration of Salamah ibn Kuhayl, from Ibrahim ibn al Bara’, and it is only Muhammad ibn Ishaq who narrates it from him. It appears in Atraf al Ghara’ib wa al Afrad (2/285):
 

The narration, “the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was sitting in a tent…” it has only been narrated by Salamah ibn Kuhayl, and it has been solely narrated from him by Muhammad ibn Ishaq. An alternative narration has been narrated from al Bara, related by Nasr ibn Muzahim in a book Siffin (218) from ‘Abdul Ghaffar ibn al Qasim, from ‘Adi ibn Thabit, from al Bara’ ibn ‘Azib who said: “Abu Sufyan came along with Muawiyah, so the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, ‘O Allah, curse the follower and the one being followed. O Allah deal with the one with a protruding chest!’” So the son of al Bara’ asked him who was the one with the protruding chest, he replied, “Muawiyah.”

 

This is not authentic since Nasr ibn Muzahim is abandoned.

 
  • Abu Hatim said in al Jarh wa al Ta’dil (8/468): “Exceptionally weak, his narrations are abandonned, his narrations are not to be recorded.”
  • Abu Jafar al ‘Uqayli in al Du’afa’ (4/300): “He adopted Shia thought, in his narrations there are many mistakes as well as irreconcilable disorder.”
  • Al Juzajani said in al Shajarah fi Ahwal al Rijal (biography.109): “He used to deviate from the truth and inclined [towards the Shia].”
  • Abu Khaythamah said: “He was a confounded liar!”[2]
  • Yahya said: “His narrations are not [worth] anything.”[3]
  • Al Daraqutni said: “Weak.”[4]
  • Salih ibn Muhammad said: “He narrated from the weak narrators, rejected narration [contradicting the reliable narrations].”[5]
  • Abul Fath al Azdi said: “He was extreme in his school, not praiseworthy in his narration.”[6]
  • Al Dhahabi said in Mizan al I’tidal (4/253): “They abandoned him [his narrations].”
 

As for what al Maliki had said:

 

He has been ratified by Ibn Hibban, as well as Ibn Abi al Hadid and al Khatib has mentioned his biographical details.

 

I say: what next?! Besides Ibn Hibban[7], all the other scholars of the science of adjudicating narrators have a unanimous declaration of abandonment of his narrations. Furthermore, Ibn Hibban is sometimes known for leniency when it comes to ratifying narrators. What about when he is contradicted by all these other scholars?[8]

As for Ibn Abi al Hadid, he is ‘Izz al Din, ‘Abdul Hamid ibn Abi al Hussain al Mada’ini, the author of the book Sharh Nahj al Balaghah (d. 655 A.H) from the major proponents of innovation and from those who sought to destroy Islam.[9]

As for the biographical data provided by al Khatib, it does not make any difference to the reliability of this narrator.

 

[In the chain of narration is] ‘Abdul Ghaffar ibn al Qasim, Abu Maryam, al Ansari, he was a Rafidi and a fabricator.

  • ‘Ali ibn al Madini said: “He used to fabricate narrations.”
  • Yahya ibn Ma’in said: “Not [worth] anything.”[10]
  • Al Bukhari said: “‘Abdul Ghaffar ibn al Qasim ibn Qais ibn Fahd, not considered strong by them [scholars of hadith].”[11]
  • Abu Dawood said: “I heard from Shu’bah — who said — I heard Simak al Hanafi saying to Abu Maryam regarding something he said, ‘by Allah, you have lied!’ and I — Abu Dawood — testify that Abu Maryam is indeed a confounded liar, because I had met him and heard from him. His name is ‘Abdul Ghaffar ibn al Qasim. Most of his narrations are baseless. Ahmed said that Abu Maryam used to narrate of the affliction regarding ‘Uthman.”[12]
  • Abu Hatim and al Nasa’i among others have said: “He is abandoned in narration.”[13]
  • Al Ajurri said that he asked Abu Dawood regarding him and he said: “He used to fabricate narrations.”[14]
  • Al Daraqutni said: “Abandoned.”
  • Al Saji, al ‘Uqayli, Ibn al Jarud and Ibn Shahin have included him in the category of weak narrators.
 

Now look at the academic bankruptcy of al Maliki by his statement:

 

… so the correct view regarding him — and Allah knows best — is that he is acceptable in complimentary and corroboratory narrations only, for three reasons:

 

i. He was ratified by some of the scholars even though they be few in number…

I say: None of them have ratified him besides Ibn ‘Uqdah, Ahmed ibn Muhammad ibn Sa’id ibn ‘Uqdah. Who is this Ibn ‘Uqdah, and what is his rank in the science of adjudication of narrators?

 
  • Ibn ‘Abdan said: “Ibn ‘Uqdah is beyond the general meaning of the people of hadith, and he should not be mentioned among them.”
  • Hamzah al Sahmi said: “I asked Abu Bakr ibn ‘Abdan regarding Ibn ‘Uqdah, if something has been transmitted from him regarding the evaluation of narrators will it be accepted. He responded, ‘it will not be accepted.’”[15]
  • Al Daraqutni said of him: “He was a sinister person.” See also al Kamil (5/327)
  • Al Barqani said: “I asked Al Daraqutni what was it that disturbed him most about Ibn ‘Uqdah, he said that it was the abundance of rejected narrations [contradictions by weak narrators].”
  • Ibn ‘Abdul Hadi said in al Tanqih: “He was the gathering point of solitary, rejected weak narrations.”[16]
  • Al Dhahabi said in Siyar A’lam al Nubala’ (15/142): “He wrote from every young, old, unknown and gathered the lean and the fat — meaning he wrote all sorts of narrations without consideration.” In Mizan al I’tidal (1/128) he said: “Ibn ‘Uqdah and Ibn Kharrash have innovation and Rafd [Shi’ism].”[17]

Furthermore, I say that the reason for him being considered weak by the scholars of hadith is because he fabricates narrations, not because of his innovation as al Maliki claims from Imam Ahmed and Abu Hatim al Razi:

  • ‘Ali ibn al Madini said: “He used to fabricate narrations.”[18]
  • Al Ajurri said that he asked Abu Dawood regarding him and he said: “He used to fabricate narrations.”[19]
 

[Continuing with the reasons al Maliki cited for accepting these narrations:]

ii. This narration has only one complimentary narration, it is from those narrations which are fairly acceptable which was addressed by Ibn ‘Adi.

 

I say, Ibn ‘Adi in al Kamil (5/328) has said: “Among his narrations are those that are not corroborated,” this is one of them.

 

iii. Shu’bah and Qatadah have narrated from him and they are from the foremost scholars.

 

This is responded to from three angles:

  • Shu’bah did not narrate from ‘Abdul–Ghaffar ibn al Qasim, Abu Maryam, al Ansari, except two narrations. The first narration Shu’bah narrates from him from Nafi’ from Ibn ‘Umar, and the other from ‘Ata’ from Jabir.Shu’bah only narrated from him before his situation became apparent. When it became apparent that he forged narrations he abandoned him.
  • Al Daraqutni said: “Abandoned in hadith, and he is the teacher of Shu’bah. Shu’bah praised him, however his situation was concealed from Shu’bah; and he remained after Shu’bah and used to confuse narrations.” Abu Dawood said, “Shu’bah erred with regards to him.”[20] Abu Jafar al ‘Uqayli in al Du’afa’ (3/852) has related from Imam Ahmed: “Shu’bah knew him from old, as for what happened to him it came afterwards.”
  • As for Qatadah narrating from him, the opposite is true. He narrates from Qatadah.[21]
 

The narration of ‘Asim al Laythi

 

Al Tabarani narrates in al Mujam al Kabir (17/176):

 

Al ‘Abbas ibn al Fadl al Asfati narrated to us — he says — Musa ibn Ismail narrated to us and ‘Abdur Rahman ibn al Hussain al ‘Aburi al Tusturi — he said — ‘Uqbah ibn Sinan al Dari’ — they both said — Ghassan ibn Mudar narrated to us — from Sa’id ibn Yazid Abu Maslamah — from Nasr ibn ‘Asim al Laythi — from his father, who said: “I entered the masjid of Madinah when I suddenly heard people saying, ‘we seek refuge in Allah from the anger of Allah and the anger of His Messenger,’ so I said, ‘what is it?’ they said, “the Messenger of Allah was delivering a sermon on the pulpit when a man stood up, grabbed hold of the hand of his son and exited the masjid. The Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then said, “may the curse of Allah be on the leader and the one being led, woe unto this nation from so-and-so who has a large rear-end.’”

 

Ibn Abi ‘Asim narrates it in al Ahad wa al Mathani (938) in an abridged form, and Ibn ‘Abdul Barr in al Isti’ab (575) with similar wording, however there is absolutely no mention of Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

 

Some scholars have held the opinion that Abu Nasr, ‘Asim ibn ‘Amr al Laythi is not a Sahabi, Ibn ‘Abdul Barr in al Isti’ab (575) says:

 

Ahmed said I am not certain if ‘Asim heard this from the Prophet or not.

 

It appears in al Isabah (3/574):

 

Al Baghawi said: “I am not certain if he is a companion or not.”

 

Furthermore, the narration does not expressly mention Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu as the intended individual who was cursed. In addition to this, the text of the narration is rejected and contradictory since it casts impairment on the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and all Muslims, if the person who ratifies this narration has any sense.

 

Ibn Taymiyyah, in Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah (4/445) said:

 

Verily the sermons of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam were many. Instead, he delivered numerous sermons on the days of Jumu’ah, ‘Id, Hajj among other occasions. Muawiyah and his father attended these sermons as did the rest of the believers. Is it conceivable that they would get up and leave at every such occasion, and were free to do so if they so wished?

This casts serious doubt on the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and all the Muslims since they could not prevent two individuals from getting up and leaving the sermon, and if it was indeed the truth that they did attend the sermons, why would they not want to listen to one particular sermon, before it has been spoken?

 

The Narration of Ibn ‘Umar

 

It has been narrated by Nasr ibn Muzahim in the book Siffin (220) by way of Talid ibn Sulaiman — from al A’mash — from ‘Ali ibn al Aqmar who said:

 

We visited Muawiyah as a delegation, and after completing our tasks we said let us try to meet a persom who was present during the life of the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and saw him; so we came to Ibn ‘Umar… and in it: “the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam looked at Abu Sufyan, Muawiyah and his brother, one of them leading the camel, and the other driving it from the back so he – salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam – said: ‘O Allah, curse the leader, and the rider, and he driver.’ So we said, “have you heard this from the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam?” He said, “Yes, otherwise may my ears become deaf just as my eyes have lost their sight!”

 

In this narration appears, Nasr ibn Muzahim, the Rafidi [Shi’a], abandoned in narration and the opinions of the expert scholars have been previously mentioned regarding his weakness.

Talid ibn Sulaiman, he is al Muharibi, the Kufan.

Abu Jafar al ‘Uqayli in al Du’afa’ (1/155) said: “Ahmed and Yahya both said that he is a liar!”

In another narration from Yahya: “Not [worth] anything, he used to utter profanities against ‘Uthman or one of the other Sahabah, he is a Dajjal.”[22]

Al Nasa’i and al Daraqutni both said he is weak.

  • Ibrahim said: “According to me he used to lie!”[23]
  • Salih Jazarah said: “The people of hadith used to call him “balid” meaning foolish — instead of talid, his narrations are not admissible.”
  • Ibn ‘Adi in al Kamil (2/86) said: “It is clear from his narrations that he is weak.”
  • Al Saji said: “Confounded liar!”
  • Ibn Hibban in al Majruhin (1/204) said: “He narrated the most strange narrations regarding the virtue of the Noble Household.”
  • Al Tirmidhi narrated one narration of his under the chapter of merits.
  • Al Marwazi relates from Ahmed: “He adopted Shia thought, and there was no harm seen in him.” He also said: “I narrated from him many narrations from Abu al Jahaf.

Perhaps Imam Ahmed mentioned this before his situation became apparent since it appears in another narration that Imam Ahmed considered him a liar.

  • Al ‘Ijli said: “No harm in him, although he adopted Shia thought and he used to evade.”[24]

As for al ‘Ijli, he was considered from the scholars who were more lenient in ratifying narrators.

  • Al Hakim Abu Sa’id al Naqqash said: “Foul in terms of his school of thought, very weak in narration, he narrated from Abu al Jahaf many fabricated narrations as mentioned in Tahdhib al Tahthib (1/257).”
 

From this it is clear that he is a liar and fabricator, his weakness is not simply because of his creed but on account of his lying.

So this narration is from a fabricator who relates from a narrator whose narrations are abandoned.

Add to that the fact that Ibn ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu was the most distant from criticising the Sahabah, and the one who narrated of their merits in abundance and his praise for Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu is well-known and established. He said:

 

I have not seen a more skilled governor after the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam than Muawiyah. It was said to him, “What about Abu Bakr and ‘Umar?” He responded, “they were better than him, however, I have not seen a more skilled governor than Muawiyah.”[25]

 

Narrated by Ibn ‘Asakir in Tarikh Dimashq (59/173) and al Lalaka’i in Sharh al Sunnah (2781) and al Khallal in al Sunnah (1/443). It is also supported by what has been narrated by al Bukhari in Tarikh al Kabir (7/327) and (2/442), Ibn ‘Adi in al Kamil (6/110), Ibn ‘Asakir in Tarikh Dimashq (59/174) by way of Nafi’ from Ibn ‘Umar, see also Siyar A’lam al Nubala’ (3/153) therefore it is sound.

 

The Narration of Muhajir ibn Qunfudh

 

Al Maliki said:

 

The Musnad of Muhajir is in those sections of the Mujam of al Tabarani that have been lost. Therefore, I cannot give a ruling on the chain. However, this chain is a complimentary chain that strengthens the original narration, especially with the ratification of al Haythami.[26]

 

I say: in al Mujam al Kabir of al Tabarani (20/230) he says:

 

Al Miqdam ibn Dawood narrated to us — he said — Asad ibn Musa narrated to us — he said — Abu Muawiyah Muhammad ibn Kazim narrated to us — from Ismail ibn Muslim — from Hassan — from Muhajir ibn Qunfudh — who said that the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam saw three people on a camel and said, “the third is accursed.”

 

In Mu’jam al Sahabah (3/60), Hassan ibn ‘Ali al ‘Anzi said that Abu Kurayb narrated to us from Abu Muawiyah with the same narration. This chain has two defects:

  1. Ismail ibn Muslim al Makki is abandoned in narration.
  2. Al Hassan ibn Abi al Hassan al Basri did not hear from Muhajir ibn Qunfudh, instead he narrated it via Hudayn ibn al Mundhir al Qurashi.[27]
 

Ibn Taymiyyah, in Minhaj al Sunnah (4/445), said:

 

Firstly, we call for establishing the authenticity of the narration before using it as proof. And we only say this from the position of debating it, otherwise we are fully convinced that this is a lie. Secondly, this narration is a fabrication and a lie according to the unanimous view of the scholars of hadith… — until he goes on to say — thereafter, it is well-known from the biography of Muawiyah that he was a very tolerant and patient person, even with those who sought to harm him. How is it that he would be turned away from the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam while he — salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam — is the most lofty in status from all of creation in this world and the next, and Muawiyah is in need of him for all his affairs? How is it possible that Muawiyah cannot bear to hear his speech? After having established his rule, he even tolerated those who swore him on his face. Why then should he not listen to the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam? Thereafter, how is it possible that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam took him as a scribe if he was aware of all of this?

 
 

NEXT⇒ The Third Narration


[1]  This is the correct name, it appears in the original as Juhman, which is an error.

[2]  See Lisan al Mizan (3/267)

[3]  Ibid

[4]  Ibid

[5]  Ibid

[6]  Ibid

[7] al Thiqat (9/215)

[8]  For further reading on ibn Hibbans leniency in this regard, see ‘al Sarim al Manki’ by ibn ‘Abdul Hadi (104), Mizan al I’tidal(3/175), Lisan al Mizan 1/208), and ‘al Tankil’ by ‘Abd ar-Rahman al Mu’allimi (1/437)

[9]  See what al Mu’allimi has written about him in ‘al Anwar al Kashifah’ (pg152)

[10]Tarikh ibn Ma’in (3/366) narration of al Duri

[11]al Tarikh al Kabir (6/122)

[12]al Du’afa al Kabir (3/101)

[13] al Jarh wa al Ta’dil (6/53)

[14] Lisan al Mizan (2/226)

[15]Tadhkirat al Huffaz (3/822)

[16]Lisan al Mizan (1/603)

[17]  See also al Tankil (1/170)

[18] see al Kamil (5/327)

[19] Lisan al Mizan (2/226)

[20]  See Lisan al Mizan (2/228), Su’alat al Barqani (316)

[21]al Kamil (5/328)

[22]Tarikh ibn Ma’in (2/285), (3/546)

[23] Ahwal al Rijal (biography no. 93)

[24]  Ma’rifat al Thiqat (1/257)

[25]  See Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah (4/445)

[26]  Pg. 202 of his book al Suhbah wal Sahabah

[27]  See Tahdhib al Kamal (28/578)

Back to top