Salam alaikum, good work done by brother Mohammad:
Hadeeth Thaqalain: A systematic takhreej of its different wording.
This hadith has been narrated from several Sahabah, viz. Ali, Abdur-Rahman bin Awf, Abu Dharr, Zaid bin Thabit, Ibn Abbas, Ibn Umar, Jabir, Hudhaifa bin Usaid, Khuzaimah bin Thabit, Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri, Zaid bin Arqam, Sahl bin Sa’d, Dhumairah, ‘Aamir bin Lailah, ‘Adi bin Hatim, ‘Uqbah bin ‘Aamir, Abu Rafe’, Abu Shuraih al-Khuza’i, Abu Qudamah al-Ansari, Abu Hurairah, Abul Haitham bin at-Tayyahan, Umm Salamah, Umm Hani and a person from Qureish. However, most of these traditions are not established. [See the detail of these traditions in “Istijlab Irtaqa’ al-Ghuraf” (1/336-364) by Hafiz As-Sakhawi]
My intention is to analyze the authenticity of different wordings of this tradition. Continue reading
Explanation taken from ibn Hajar – “Tahzib at-Tahzib” , Darul Fikr, (8/410):
Ibn Hajar said:
ثم ظهر لي في الجواب عن ذلك أن البغض ها هنا مقيد بسبب وهو كونه نصر النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم لأن من الطبع البشري بغض من وقعت منه إساءة في حق المبغض والحب بعكسه وذلك ما يرجع إلى أمور الدنيا غالبا والخبر في حب علي وبغضه ليس على العموم فقد أحبه من أفرط فيه حتى ادعى أنه نبي أو أنه إله تعالى الله عن إفكهم والذي ورد في حق علي من ذلك قد ورد مثله في حق الأنصار وأجاب عنه العلماء أن بغضهم لأجل النصر كان ذلك علامة نفاقه وبالعكس فكذا يقال في حق علي وأيضا فأكثر من يوصف بالنصب يكون مشهورا بصدق اللهجة والتمسك بأمور الديانة بخلاف من يوصف بالرفض فإن غالبهم كاذب ولا يتورع في الإخبار والأصل فيه أن الناصبة اعتقدوا أن عليا رضي الله عنه قتل عثمان أو كان أعان عليه فكان بغضهم له ديانة بزعمهم ثم انضاف إلى ذلك أن منهم من قتلت أقاربه في حروب عليThen it appeared to me that the answer is that hatred is tied with a reason and that it is his support of the prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa alihi wa sallam), because the human nature is that hatred is directed towards he who wronged the one who hates, and love is the opposite and this matter is because of worldly issues. As for the narration about loving ‘Ali then it is not to be taken in general because some loved him to the extent of making him a prophet or a god, this same Hadith was also directed towards al-Ansars but the scholars have replied that it is tied to hating them because of their support of the prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa alihi wa sallam) and the same applies to ‘Ali and we see that most of those accused of Nasb are famous for their honesty and they are attached to the religion as opposed to those who are accused of Rafd because most of them are liars who fabricate stories. The origin of the Nawasib is that they believed that ‘Ali killed ‘Uthman or helped in this so they claimed that his hatred was like worship, add to it that some of them had their relatives killed in the wars with ‘Ali.
Praise to Allah, in one from our previous posts we explained that there is sound report in praise of Muawiyah.
But we can see shias using saying which is attributed to Imam al-Muhadith Ishaq ibn Rahaweyh, as if he has said: There is nothing authentic from prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) in praise of Muawiyah.
We answer to this doubt:
1) Let us suppose that these words were correctly attributed to Imam. What would they mean? There is no sound reports in this as he said? No. That would mean that he didn’t come across with such reports. All that he has seen weak or fabricated reports about this.
2) This expression from ibn Rahaweyh was narrated by Hakim as it is in Siyar of Dhahabi (3/132) and “Fawaid al Majmua” of Shawkani from the way of al-Asm Abul Abbas Muhammad ibn Yaqub al-Asm, which said “narrated to me my father, which said: I heard ibn Rahaweyh saying”. And in “Fawaid” words “narrated to my father” were dropped. And it is established, (because) al-Asm didn’t hear from ibn Rahaweyh.
Yaqub ibn Yusuf ibn Maqal, Abu Fadl an-Naysaburi, father of al-Asm – status was unknown. His bio was given by al-Hatib in his history (14/286), and what added upon these words (of ibn Rahaweyh, that this Yaqub) came to Baghdad and narrated this from Ishaq ibn Rahaweyh. And from him narrated Muhammad ibn Mukhalad.
ونا أَبُو مُحَمَّدٍ الْحَسَنُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ ، قَالَ : نا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عُمَرَ التَّمَّارُ ، مِنْ أَصْلِ كِتَابِهِ ، قَالَ : نا جَعْفَرُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ الْحَكَمِ الْوَاسِطِيُّ ، قَالَ : نا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ الأَبَّارُ أَبُو الْعَبَّاسِ ، قَالَ : نا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ إِسْحَاقَ الصَّاغَانِيُّ ، قَالَ : نا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ الْمُنْذِرِ الْحِزَامِيُّ ، قَالَ : نا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ فُلَيْحٍ ، عَنْأَبِيهِ ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ الْحَارِثِ ، عَنْ عُبَيْدِ بْنِ حُنَيْنٍ ، قَالَ : بَيْنَا أَنَا جَالِسٌ فِي الْمَسْجِدِ إِذْ جَاءَ قَتَادَةُ بْنُ النُّعْمَانِ فَجَلَسَ يَتَحَدَّثُ وَثَابَ إِلَيْهِ نَاسٌ ، فَقَالَ : انْطَلِقْ بِنَا يَابْنَ حُنَيْنٍ إِلَى أَبِي سَعِيدٍ فَأُخْبِرْتُ أَنَّهُ اشْتَكَى ، قَالَ : فَانْطَلَقْنَا حَتَّى دَخَلْنَا عَلَى أَبِي سَعِيدٍ فَوَجَدْنَاهُ مُسْتَلْقِيًا رَافِعًا رِجْلَهُ الُيْمَنى عَلَى الْيُسْرَى ، فَسَلَّمْنَا عَلَيْهِ وَجَلَسْنَا ، فَرَفَعَ قَتَادَةُ يَدَهُ إِلَى رِجْلِ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ فَقَرَصَهَا قَرْصَةً شَدِيدَةً ، فَقَالَ أَبُو سَعِيدٍ : سُبْحَان اللَّهِ يَابْنَ أَخِي ! أَوْجَعْتَنِي ، قَالَ : ذَاكَ أَرَدْتُ إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ، صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : ” إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَمَّا قَضَى خَلْقَهُ اسْتَلْقَى ثُمَّ رَفَعَ إِحْدَى رِجْلَيْهِ عَلَى الأُخْرَى ، ثُمَّ قَالَ : لا يَنْبَغِي لأَحَدٍ مِنْ خَلْقِي أَنْ يَفْعَلَ هَذَا ” فَقَالَ أَبُو سَعِيدٍ : لا جَرَمَ وَاللَّهِ لا أَفْعَلُهُ أَبَدًا . قَالَ أَبُو مُحَمَّدٍ الْخَلالُ : هَذَا حَدِيثٌ إِسْنَادُهُ كُلُّهُمْ ثِقَاتٌ ، وَهُمْ مَعَ ثِقَتِهِمْ شَرْطُ الصَّحِيحَيْنِ مُسْلِمٍ وَالْبُخَارِيِّ .
….Ubaid ibn Hunain said while i was sat in the mosque , Qatadah ibn al-Numan came so he sat talking to people then we visited Abu Saeed so we found him lying on his back and putting one leg over the other (right leg over left leg) so we greated him and we sat soo Qatadah raised his hand to Abu Saeed leg and pinched him so Abu Saeed said: oh brother, you hurt me, so he answered him: that’s what i wanted, because Rasoolallah (s) said : when Allah finisdhed creating he lied on his back and put one leg over the other and (Rasulallah) said: nobody should do this.
Abu Muhammad al-Khallal said: All of the narrators are truthworthy, and they all truthworthy according to the conditions of two Sahihs of Bukhari and Muslim.
Brother Farid answered:
Assuming that Al-Khallal did say this, and that his opinion is correct, it still doesn’t imply that he necessarily accepts it as authentic, for the strength of the narrators is but a single condition of the authentication of a hadith.
Furthermore, by examining the chain, we realize that the common view is that Ubayd ibn Hunayn was 75 years old when he died. See Al-Siffaat by Al-Bayhaqi (3/917), Al-Tabaqat Al-Sagheer by Ibn Sa’ad (1/199), and Ibn Hibban in Mashaheer Ulama’a Al-Amsaar (p. 73).
105 AH – 75 (years old) = 30 AH
The hadith is still mursal.
Here we would like to present to you an benefiticial answer from Shaykh al-Muhadith Shuaib al-Arnawut, which was recorded by one of his students from Turkey, Anbiya Yildirim.
It is taken from book of Anbiya Yildirim “Hadisler ve zihinlerdeki sorular” (p 269), printed by Ragbet in Turkey.
Shaykh Shuaib (hafizahullah) said:
As for takfir from modern shias toward some (people from) Ashara al-Mubashara, (and they saying that) “Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Sad were disbelievers. Only Ali, Fatima and their two sons saved from disbelief”, when modern shias didn’t exist, this hadith (about 10 which were gladden by heaven) was in our books. When was written “Musnad” and “Saheeh al-Bukhari” shias were not like shias of our time. In that time when (someone said that such and such person) was shia, that mean he loved Ali more than Abu Bakr. There is nothing in love; man can love someone more than other. (In the past) there was no scientist (meaning) of tashayu like in this time. There was no ghulat (extreme view between shias) in the time of the mutakadimin. They (ghulat) emerged after the 4-th year of hijra. I can show you bios of shia narrators, there are shias of fist generation in Bukhari, Muslim, Musnad. So, Ahmad ibn Hanbal died in 241 h, and this hadith (about Ashara al-Mubashara) was recorded long time before his death.
So, before shias distinguished from ahlesunnah, (before) they made themselves as independent school, (before) they took idea that they believe in, as a (major) point of their movement, these ahadeth (about companions which were gladden by paradise) took their place in books. Did in that time were shias like these, so (someone could claim) that this hadith (about Ashara al-Mubashara) was fabricated (in attempt) to protect (companions) from their charges? So issue of takfir of muteahirin shias didn’t present in the time of mutakadimin.
Btw here an in-depth rebuttal of one of the biggest Rafidi claims and lies i.e. nearly that the Ahl Al-Sunnah did not take (many) narrations from the Ahl Al-Bayt. Ironically the opposite is the truth:
Bismillah Al-Rahman Al-Raheem,
The following is a list of narrators that are considered to be from Ahlul Bayt according to Shia standards. I don’t need to spell it out because anyone who reads this can make their observations themselves. I chose to keep things simple by quoting the judgements Ibn Hajar in Al-Taqreeb (Dar Ibn Hazm – First Edition) and Al-Jawahiri in Al-Mufeed min Mu’jam Rijal Al-Hadith (Mu’sasat Al-Tareekh Al-Arabi – First Edition) because they generally included final judgements on narrators based on the opinions of early scholars. Furthermore, even though none of the two are perfect, they are considered reliable references when it comes to determining the general status of narrators.
Note: Some of the tawtheeqaat by Al-Jawahiri are relied upon the views of Al-Mufeed in Al-Irshad. However, some Shia scholars consider this book a history book and don’t consider his comments regarding rijal as final due to his leniency in this book.
Surprisingly one shia dare to protect the honour of their shaykh, and objected to one of our posts by sending us report from Sayeed ibn Musaib. As usual shia closed eyes on other 2 examples of clear lie from his shaykh, and focused on defence of Liar al-Amidi in one particular case.
Here report from ibn Musaib (rahmatullahi alaih) which cited shia: Continue reading
Hadith: The first one would change my way – man from clan of Umeyyah.
Hadith with such text was narrated by ibn Abu Asim in “al-Awail” with such text: Narrated to us Ubeydullah ibn Muaz, narrated to us my father, from al-Muhajir ibn Mukhalad from Abul Aliyah from Abu Dhar, that he heard him saying to Yazid ibn Abu Sufyan: I heard messenger of Allah (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) said: The first one would change my way (sunnah) – man from clan of Umeyyah.
This chain seems disconnected from the very first look. Continue reading
Imam Tirmizi narrated in his “Sunnan”:
4033 – حَدَّثَنَا يُوسُفُ بْنُ مُوسَى الْقَطَّانُ الْبَغْدَادِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا مَالِكُ بْنُ إِسْمَاعِيلَ، عَنْ مَنْصُورِ بْنِ أَبِي الأَسْوَدِ، حَدَّثَنِي كَثِيرٌ أَبُو إِسْمَاعِيلَ، عَنْ جُمَيْعِ بْنِ عُمَيْرٍ التَّيْمِيِّ، عَنِ ابْنِ عُمَرَ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ لأَبِي بَكْرٍ ” أَنْتَ صَاحِبِي عَلَى الْحَوْضِ وَصَاحِبِي فِي الْغَارِ ” . قَالَ هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ غَرِيبٌ .
From ibn Umar: Messenger of Allah (sallalahu alaihi wa sallam) said to Abu Bakr: You are my companion on the pool, and companion in the cave”.
Imam Tirmizi said it is hasan -saheeh – gharib. Shaykhana Albani said report is weak in “Daeef at-Tirmizi”.
In the chain of this hadith Jami ibn Umayr at-Taymi, Abul Aswad. He was accused in lie by ibn Hibban and ibn Numayr and weakened by Bukhari and ibn Adi. (See Tazhib at-Tahzib 1/315). Ibn Hibban said that he was rafidi which use to fabricate ahadeth.
إن الله يدعو الناس يوم القيامة بأمهاتهم سترا منه على عبادة
Indeed Allah would call people in the doomsday by their mothers, (and that is) shield from Him upon His slaves.
Muhammad ibn Darwish al-Hoot in “Asna al-Mattalib” said: Continue reading
Muhammad as-Sind :
In responce to question about ayat at-tathir, this shia shaykh said: