Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

11. Hadith Al-Qadha, ‘Ali Versus ‘Umar

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 H) launches a spirited campaign to bring down ‘Ali’s status as the best judge in theUmmah in order to place ‘Umar above him. He simply cannot stomach the possibility ofAmir al-Muminin ‘Ali,‘alaihi al-salam , surpassing the second Sunnikhalifah in anything, especially in such highly sensitive, knowledge-based areas as justice dispensation. The reason for these panicky moves can be discerned from these words of our dear Shaykh:

و في الترمذي و غيره عنه عليه الصلاة و السلام انه قال لو لم ابعث فيكم لبعث فيكم عمر و لفظ الترمذي لو كان بعدي نبي لكان عمر قال الترمذي حديث حسن

In (Sunan ) al-Tirmidhi and others, it is narrated from him, peace and blessings be upon him, that he said,“If I had not been sent as a messenger among you, ‘Umar would have been sent as a messenger among you instead.” The text of al-Tirmidhi reads,“If there were to be a prophet after me, it would have been ‘Umar” . Al-Tirmidhi says: Ahasan hadith .143

Elsewhere, he reiterates this:

وفي الترمذي لو لم أبعث فيكم لبعث فيكم عمر ولو كان بعدي نبي لكان عمر

It is recorded in (Sunan ) al-Tirmidhi: “If I had not been sent as a messenger among you, ‘Umar would have been sent as a messenger instead and if there were to be a prophet after me, it would have been ‘Umar”.144

Those two one-sided, sectarian reports establish two realities:

1. ‘Umar and the Messenger of Allah,sallallahu ‘alaihi wa alihi , had equal credentials and abilities to be the master of the prophets, sent to the entirety of mankind till the Hour. Therefore, ‘Umar was a perfect replacement for the Prophet.

2. Due to ‘Umar’s status as the sole match – in qualification – to the Messenger, he was the only one qualified to be the first prophet after Muhammad, had prophethood not ceased.

The bottom-line is that ‘Umar was far better than Abu Bakr in all ways and in all things! So, if ‘Ali were superior to ‘Umar, then he was the master of both the first and the secondkhalifah s. In any case, those twohadith s are one-sided (and therefore of no probative value in our research), and contradict the Verse ofIstafa , the Verse ofTaṭhir and severalsahih andmutawatir ahadith (such asHadith al-Ghadir, Hadith al-Manzilah, Hadith al-Tayr, Hadith al-Thaqalayn , etc). The most important part is that both reports about ‘Umar go against well-established historical facts about him, his knowledge and his abilities. From all angles, bothhadith s were motivated by polemical motives, and manufactured to “raise the stakes” for the secondkhalifah .

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah makes an interesting strike:

و قد وجد لعمر و علي و غيرهما فتاوى كثير ة تخالف النصوص حتى جمع الشافعي مجلدا في خلاف علي و ابن مسعود و جمع محمد بن نصر المروزي كتابا كبيرا في ذلك

There were LOTS of fatwas from ‘Umar, ‘Ali and others that contradicted the revealed texts (i.e the Qur’an and Sunnah), such thatal-

Shafi’i compiled a whole volume on the contradictions of ‘Ali and Ibn Mas’ud (to the Qur’an and Sunnah), and Muhammad b. Nasr al-Maruzi compiled a huge book on that .145

He concedes that both ‘Umar and Ibn Mas’ud contradicted the Qur’an and Sunnahmassively in their verdicts. We agree with him, as there exists solid evidence from both Sunni and Shi’i sources confirming that. It is a wonder then how our dear Shaykh manages to believe that ‘Umar was perfectly fit for prophethood despite this embarrassing fact! What else would he have been other than a prophet who would have opposed the Qur’an and the Sunnah on “lots” of occasions?! This reality reveals that the purely one-sided, sectarianhadith s could not have genuinely originated from the Messenger of Allah. Henever uttered anything that falls out of line with simple logic.

But then, did Imam al-Shafi’i and al-Maruzi really compiled books detailingAmir al-Muminin Ali’s “contradictions” to the Qur’an and Sunnah? Well, there is no evidence of any such books in our times! Besides, our dear Shaykh seems confused on the exact authorship of those “books”. First, he claims that both al-Shafi’i and al-Maruzi wrote separate books. However, this is a contrary submission he also makes:

وقد جمع الشافعي ومحمد بن نصر المروزي كتابا كبيرا فيما لم يأخذ به المسلمون من قول علي لكون قول غيره من الصحابة أتبع للكتاب والسنة

Al-Shafi’i AND Muhammad b. Nasr al-Maruzi compiled a huge book about what the Muslims rejected from the statement of ‘Ali, because the statement of others from the Sahabah were more in compliance with the Qur’an and Sunnah.146

So, it was after all a joint authorship! What exactly do we believe now? Moreover, where exactly is this book? Has anyone in history ever quoted it? Has anyone in history ever referenced it? The reality is that no such book ever existed! Imam al-Subki (d. 773 H) reveals the truth about the book of al-Maruzi:

وقال أبو ذر محمد بن محمد بن يوسف القاضى كان الصدر الأول من مشايخنا يقولون رجال خراسان أربعة ابن المبارك ويحيى بن يحيى وإسحاق بن راهويه ومحمد بن نصر المروزى وقال أبو بكر الصيرفى لو لم يصنف المروزى إلا كتاب القسامة لكان من أفقه الناس فكيف وقد صنف كتبا سواها وقال الشيخ أبو إسحاق الشيرازى صنف محمد هذا كتبا ضمنها الآثار والفقه وكان من أعلم الناس باختلاف الصحابة ومن بعدهم فى الأحكام وصنف كتابا فيما خالف فيه أبو حنيفة عليا وعبد الله رضى الله عنهما

Abu Dharr Muhammad b. Muhammad b. Yusuf al-Qadhi said, “The pioneers among our Shaykhs used to say that the scholars of Khurasan (in Iran) were four: Ibn al-Mubarak, Yahya b. Yahya, Ishaq b. Rahwayh andMuhammad b. Nasr al-Maruzi .” Abu Bakr al-Sayarfi said, “If al-Maruzi had never authored any book except Kitab al-Qasamah alone, he would nonetheless have been among the most knowledgeable of mankind.

Meanwhile, he wrote many books other than it.” Shaykh Abu Ishaq al-Shirazi said, “Muhammad (b. Nasr al-Maruzi) wrote books which contained reports and Islamic jurisprudence, and was one of the most knowledgeable of mankind concerning the differences of the Sahabah and those after them on al-ahkam (jurisprudence).He wrote a book concerning the contradictions of Abu Hanifah to ‘Ali and ‘Abd Allah (b. Mas’ud), may Allah be pleased with them both.147

So, the book – in reality - was only about Abu Hanifah’s contradictions to ‘Ali and Ibn Mas’ud! We leave the judgment to the esteemed reader.

There are authentic Sunni reports which further expose the fallacy of the allegations of Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah againstAmir al-Muminin . For instance, Imam Ahmad (d. 241 H) records:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي حدثني يحيى عن الأعمش عن عمرو بن مرة عن أبي البختري عن على رضي الله عنه قال: بعثني رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم إلى اليمن وأنا حديث السن قال قلت تبعثني إلى قوم يكون بينهم أحداث ولا علم لي بالقضاء قال ان الله سيهدى لسانك ويثبت قلبك قال فما شككت في قضاء بين أثنين بعد

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – Yahya – al-A’mash – ‘Amr b. Marrah – Abu al-Bakhtari – ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him:

I was sent by the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, to Yemen, and I was young of age. I said, “You are sending me to a people among whom exist disputes, and I have no knowledge in justice dispensation.” He replied,“Verily, Allah will guide your tongue and make your heart firm.” I never have doubt while dispensing justice between any two people ever after .148

Shaykh al-Arnauṭ says:

صحيح رجاله ثقات رجال الشيخين

Sahih , its narrators are trustworthy, narrators of the two Shaykhs149

Imam al-Hakim (d. 403 H) also records:

حدثني علي بن حمشاد ثنا العباس بن الفضل الأسفاطي ثنا أحمد بن يونس ثنا أبو بكر بن عياش عن الأعمش عن عمرو بن مرة عن أبي البختري قال علي رضي الله عنه: بعثني رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى اليمن قال : فقلت : يا رسول الله إني رجل شاب وأنه يرد علي من القضاء ما لا علم لي به قال : فوضع يده على صدري وقال اللهم ثبت لسانه واهد قلبه فما شككت في القضاء أو في قضاء بعد

‘Ali b. Hamshad – al-‘Abbas b. al-Fadhl al-Asfaṭi – Ahmad b. Yunus – Abu Bakr b. ‘Ayyash – al-A’mash – ‘Amr b. Marrah – Abu al-Bakhtari – ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him:

The Messenger of Allah, may Allah be pleased with him, sent me to Yemen. So, I said, “O Messenger of Allah, I am a young man, and disputes will be brought to me for judgment, of which I have no knowledge.” Therefore, he placed his hand on my chest, and said, “O Allah, make firm his

tongue and guide his heart.” I never have doubt while dispensing justice ever after .150

Al-Hakim comments:

هذا حديث صحيح على شرط الشيخين

Thishadith issahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs151

Al-Dhahabi (d. 748 H) agrees:

على شرط البخاري ومسلم

(Sahih ) upon the standard of al-Bukhari and Muslim152

Imam Abu Dawud (d. 275 H) documents amutaba’ah for the report of Abu al-Bakhtari:

حدثنا عمرو بن عون قال أخبرنا شريك عن سماك عن حنش عن علي عليه السلام قال :بعثني رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم إلى اليمن قاضيا فقلت يارسول الله ترسلني وأنا حديث السن ولا علم لي بالقضاء ؟ فقال " إن الله سيهدي قلبك ويثبت لسانك فإذا جلس بين يديك الخصمان فلا تقضين حتى تسمع من الآخر كما سمعت من الأول فإنه أحرى أن يتبين لك القضاء " قال فما زلت قاضيا أو ما شككت في قضاء بعد .

‘Amr b. ‘Awn – Sharik – Simak – Hanash – ‘Ali, peace be upon him (‘alaihi salam):

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, sent me to Yemen as a judge. So, I said, “O Messenger of Allah, you are sending me while I am young of age and have no knowledge of justice dispensation.” Therefore, he said, “Verily, Allah will guide your heart and will make firm your tongue . Whenever two disputants sit in front of you, do not give judgment until you have heard both parties. This will make clear to you the (correct) judgment.”I never cease to be a judge, or never have doubt while dispensing justice, ever since .153

‘Allamah al-Albani (d. 1420 H) says:

حسن

Hasan 154

Imam Ahmad also records this shahid:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي ثنا يحيى بن آدم ثنا إسرائيل عن أبي إسحاق عن حارثة بن مضرب عن على رضي الله عنه قال: بعثني رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم إلى اليمن فقلت إنك تبعثني إلى قوم وهم أسن مني لأقضي بينهم فقال اذهب فإن الله سيهدي قلبك ويثبت لسانك

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – Yahya b. Adam – Israil – Abu Ishaq – Harithah b. Mudhrab – ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him:

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, sent me to Yemen. So, I said, “You are sending me to a people who are older than me that I should judge between them.” He replied, “Go, for Allah will guide your heart and make firm your tongue.” 155

Shaykh al-Arna’uṭ states:

إسناده صحيح

Its chain issahih 146

WheneverAmir al-Muminin set out to judge on any matter, Allah would always guide both his heart and his tongue, and would also make them firm. This removes the possibility of error or misguidance in whatsoever judgments he ever gave:

ومن يهد الله فما له من مضل

And whomsoever Allah guides,for him there can be NO misleader .157

With this in mind, it is apparent that whosoever attributes errors to the judgments and verdicts of ‘Ali is actually attributing them to Allah as well! So, we ask Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah and his followers: was it Allah Who was “guiding” his heart and his tongue to those “contradictions” to the Qur’an and Sunnah? We seek His refuge from such blasphemy. No truth – whether in narrations or mere submissions – can be inanything that denigrates the Almighty Lord.

12. Hadith Al-Tafdhil, Investigating Its Authenticity

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 H) states:

لا نسلم أن عليا أفضل أهل زمانه بل خير هذه الأمة بعد نبيها أبو بكر ثم عمر كما ثبت ذلك عن علي وغيره

We do not agree that ‘Ali was the overall best of his time. Rather, the best of thisUmmah after its Prophet are Abu Bakr, then ‘Umar, as is authentically narrated from ‘Ali and others.158

It is true that our Sunni brothers consider Abu Bakr to be the best of ourUmmah , followed only by ‘Umar. However, during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah,sallallahu ‘alaihi wa alihi , it was a different story entirely. There is irrefutable evidence in the Sunni books establishing that the Sahabah used to considerAmir al-Muminin ,‘alaihi al-salam , to be their best during the lifetime of the Messenger. Imam Ahmad (d. 241 H) presents one of such proofs:

حدثنا عبد الله قال حدثني أبي قثنا محمد بن جعفر نا شعبة عن أبي إسحاق عن عبد الرحمن بن يزيد عن علقمة عن عبد الله قال : كنا نتحدث ان أفضل أهل المدينة علي بن أبي طالب

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad b. Hanbal) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – Muhammad b. Ja’far – Shu’bah – Abu Ishaq – ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Yazid – ‘Alqamah – ‘Abd Allah (b. Mas’ud):

“We used to saythat the overall best of the people of Madinah was ‘Ali b. Abi Talib.”159

“We” (in thehadith )160 apparently refers to the Sahabah generally, and more specifically to the most senior of them living in Madinah. Ibn Mas’ud was obviously making a reference to a past which was then different from the present. This was why he said “we USED TO”. In other words, at that point in time when he was making his statement, things had become different. People were now giving ‘Ali’s place to another person. Ibn Mas’ud was, no doubt, speaking about the time of the Prophet. All the most senior Sahabah and their neighbours were living in Madinah with the Messenger of Allah. The phrase “people of Madinah” originally referred to them (excluding only the Prophet, of course).161 These, needless to say, included Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthman.

So, is the above report authentic? Al-Hafiz (d. 852 H) says about the first narrator:

عبد الله بن أحمد بن محمد بن حنبل الشيباني أبو عبد الرحمن ولد الإمام ثقة

‘Abd Allah b. Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Hanbal al-Shaybani, Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman: son of the Imam,thiqah (trustworthy) .162

What about his father? Al-Hafiz answers:

أحمد بن محمد بن حنبل بن هلال بن أسد الشيباني المروزي نزيل بغداد أبو عبد الله أحد الأئمة ثقة حافظ فقيه حجة

Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Hanbal b. Hilal b. Asad al-Shaybani al-Maruzi, a Baghdad resident, Abu ‘Abd Allah: One of the Imams,thiqah (trustworthy) ,hafiz , jurist,hujjah (an authority).163

Al-Hafiz also has these comments about the third narrator:

محمد بن جعفر الهذلي البصري المعروف بغندر ثقة صحيح الكتاب إلا أن فيه غفلة

Muhammad b. Ja’far al-Hazali al-Basri, better known as Ghandar:Thiqah (trustworthy) ,sahih al-kitab (i.e.ahadith from his books aresahih ) except that there was some negligence in him.164

Whatever negligence he had does not affect hisahadith from Shu’bah at all. He used to accurately record the latter’s reports. So, he narrated them from his books with perfect precision. Al-Hafiz provides further information in this respect:

وقال ابن مهدي كنا نستفيد من كتب غندر في شعبة وكان وكيع يسميه الصحيح الكتاب .وقال أبو حاتم عن محمد بن ابان البلخي قال ابن مهدي غندر أثبت في شعبة مني وقال ابن المبارك إذا اختلف الناس في حديث شعبة فكتاب غندر حكم بينهم وقال ابن أبي حاتم سألت أبي عن غندر فقال كان صدوقا وكان مؤدبا وفي حديث شعبة ثقة

Ibn Mahdi said: “We used to benefit from the books of Ghandar on Shu’bah. Waki’ named himsahih al-kitab .” Abu Hatim narrated from Muhammad b. Aban al-Balakhi that Ibn Mahdi said: “Ghandar is more accurate than me as far as Shu’bah is concerned.” Ibn al-Mubarak said,“When the people disagree about the hadith of Shu’bah, the book of Ghandar used to judge between them.” Ibn Abi Hatim said: “I asked my father about Ghandar and he replied, ‘He was saduq (very truthful), and was a teacher andin the hadith of Shu’bah, he is thiqah (trustworthy) .’”165

The fourth narrator, Shu’bah, is a pillar of Sunniahadith . Al-Hafiz gives the catch-phrases about him:

شعبة بن الحجاج بن الورد العتكي مولاهم أبو بسطام الواسطي ثم البصري ثقة حافظ متقن كان الثوري يقول هو أمير المؤمنين في الحديث

Shu’bah b. al-Hajjaj b. al-Ward al-‘Atki, their freed slave, Abu Busṭam al-Wasiṭi, al-Basri:Thiqah (trustworthy) ,hafiz ,extremely precise . Al-Thawri used to say:“He was the amir al-muminin (the supreme leader) in al-Hadith.” 166

Abu Ishaq al-Sabi’i is the fifth narrator, and al-Hafiz has this to say about him:

عمرو بن عبد الله بن عبيد …. أبو إسحاق السبيعي بفتح المهملة وكسر الموحدة ثقة مكثر عابد من الثالثة اختلط بأخرة

‘Amr b. ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Ubayd Abu Ishaq al-Sabi’i:Thiqah (trustworthy) ; narrated a lot (ofahadith ), a great worshipper (of Allah), from the third (ṭabaqat ). He became confused (in his narrations) during the end part of his lifetime.167

Of course, Shu’bah heard from him before the memory loss. ‘Allamah al-Albani (d. 1420 H) explains:

وتابعهم سفيان الثوري وشعبة عن أبي إسحاق، ولكنهما لم يذكرا النزول،

وروايتهما أصح، لأنهما سمعا منه قبل الاختلاط

Sufyan al-Thawriand Shu’bah also narrated from Abu Ishaq, although both did not mention the Descent. The reports of both of them (from Abu Ishaq) are more authentic, because they both heard from him BEFORE he became confused .168

Another relevant point is that Abu Ishaq is a mudalis and has, on the surface, narrated the report of Ibn Mas’ud above is an‘an-‘an form from ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Yazid. However, thetadlis does NOT, in reality, affect the‘an-‘an reports of Abu Ishaq – among others - as long as it is Shu’bah narrating from him. Allamah al-Albani states further:

قال الترمذي: " حديث حسن صحيح، رواه الثوري وشعبة عن أبي إسحاق ".

قلت: وهو كما قال، وهما قد رويا عنه قبل اختلاطه، وشعبة لا يروي عنه إلا ما صرح فيه بالتحديث كما هو مذكور في ترجمته، فبروايته عنه أمنا شبهة تدليسه.

Al-Tirmidhi said: “Ahasan sahih hadith , al-Thawri and Shu’bah narrated it from (‘an) Abu Ishaq.”

I say: It is (trulyhasan sahih ) as he (al-Tirmidhi) has stated, and both of them (i.e. al-Thawri and Shu’bah) narrated from him (i.e. Abu Ishaq) before his confusion.As for Shu’bah, he never narrated anything from him (i.e. Abu Ishaq) except what he (Abu Ishaq) explicitly stated to have directly heard from the person he is narrating from (i.e. tahdith) , as stated in his tarjamah (biography).Due to his (Shu’bah’s) narration from him (i.e. Abu Ishaq), the problem of his tadlis is removed .169

In a clearer word, whenever Shu’bah narrates from Abu Ishaq (as in this case of Ibn Mas’ud’shadith ), all the problems associated with the latter’s reports are removed. The former narrated from him before his confusion in hisahadith , and never transmitted anytadlis -infested reports from him. So, whenever Shu’bah narrates an‘an-‘an report from Abu Ishaq, there actually is tahdith by the latter from his Shaykh. The‘an-‘an form is only Shu’bah’s convenience style. No wonder, Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256 H) includes thissanad in hisSahih :

حدثنا سليمان بن حرب حدثنا شعبة عن أبي إسحاق عن عبد الرحمن بن يزيد

Sulayman b. Harb –Shu’bah – Abu Ishaq – ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Yazid .170

This is an‘an-‘an report by Abu Ishaq from ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Yazid (the same Shaykh as in theathar of Ibn Mas’ud). Nevertheless, Imam al-Bukhari considers the chain to besahih .

Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal has also documented a similar‘an-‘an chain:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي قال حدثنا يزيد قال أنا شعبة عن أبي إسحاق عن أبي ميسرة

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad b. Hanbal) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – Yazid –Shu’bah – Abu Ishaq – Abu Maysarah.171

Al-Arnauṭ comments:

إسناده صحيح على شرط الشيخين

Its chain is sahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs.172

‘Allamah al-Albani too authenticates yet another‘an-‘an chain of Abu Ishaq:

إسناده: حدثنا حفص بن عمر: ثنا شعبة عن أبي إسحاق عن الأسود عن عبد الله.

قلت: وهذا إسناد صحيح على شرط البخاري

Its chain: Hafs b. ‘Umar –Shu’bah – Abu Ishaq – al-Aswad – ‘Abd Allah.

I say:This chain is sahih upon the standard of al-Bukhari.173

Imam Abu Ya’la (d. 307 H) also documents an‘an-‘an chain by Abu Ishaq, from ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Yazid, like al-Bukhari:

حدثنا إسحاق حدثنا عبد الصمد حدثنا شعبة عن أبي إسحاق عن عبد الرحمن بن يزيد عن الأسود

Ishaq – ‘Abd al-Samad – Shu’bah – Abu Ishaq – ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Yazid – al-Aswad174

Shaykh Dr. Asad gives this verdict:

إسناده صحيح

Its chain issahih 175

Let us now move to the sixth narrator in thesanad of Ibn Mas’ud’sathar : ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Yazid. The status of ‘Abd al-Rahman as athiqah (trustworthy) narrator ofSahih al-Bukhari is already well-known. Nonetheless, we are pleased to present this further confirmation by al-Hafiz:

عبد الرحمن بن يزيد بن قيس النخعي أبو بكر الكوفي ثقة

‘Abd al-Rahman b. Yazid b. Qays al-Nakha’i, Abu Bakr al-Kufi:Thiqah (trustworthy) .176

Finally, concerning the seventh and last narrator (‘Alqamah), al-Hafiz al-‘Asqalani proclaims with full strength:

علقمة بن قيس بن عبد الله النخعي الكوفي ثقة ثبت فقيه عابد

‘Alqamah b. Qays b. ‘Abd Allah al-Nakha’i al-Kufi:Thiqah (trustworthy) , thabt (accurate), faqih (a jurist), ‘abidun (a great worshipper of Allah).177

With this, it is absolutely clear and undeniable that Ibn Mas’ud’s report that the Sahabah used to consider ‘Ali as the overall best among them has an impeccablysahih chain. All the narrators arethiqah , and the chain is fully and perfectly connected.

Even then, the sameathar has been recorded with a secondsahih chain in that sameFadhail al-Sahabah :

حدثنا عبد الله قال حدثني جدي قثنا أبو قطن قثنا شعبة عن أبي إسحاق عن عبد الله بن يزيد عن علقمة عن عبد الله وهو بن مسعود قال : كنا نتحدث ان أفضل أهل المدينة علي بن أبي طالب

‘Abd Allah (b. Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz al-Baghwi) –my grandfather (Ahmad b. Muni’ al-Baghwi) – Abu Qaṭan – Shu’bah – Abu Ishaq –‘Abd Allah b. Yazid – ‘Alqamah – ‘Abd Allah b. Mas’ud:

“We used to say thatthe overall best of the people of Madinah was ‘Ali b. Abi Talib.”178

We already know the status of Shu’bah, Abu Ishaq and Alqamah. So, let’s find out about these new names.

This is al-Hafiz’s verdict on the first narrator of this newsanad :

عبد الله بن محمد بن عبد العزيز أبو القاسم البغوي الحافظ الصدوق مسند عصره ….قلت وقد وثقه الدارقطني والخطيب وغيرهما قال الخطيب كان ثقة ثبتا مكثرا فهما عارفا …. قلت الرجل ثقة مطلقا

‘Abd Allah b. Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, Abu al-Qasim al-Baghwi:Al-hafiz ,al-saduq (the extremely truthful) , the top scholar of his time....I (al-‘Asqalani) say: He has been declared thiqah (trustworthy) by al-Daraqutni, al-Khatib and others. Al-Khatib said, “He wasthiqah (trustworthy), accurate, and narrated a lot (ofahadith )”....I (al-‘Asqalani) say: The man is absolutely thiqah (trustworthy) .179

Concerning his grandfather, al-Hafiz further submits:

أحمد بن منيع بن عبد الرحمن أبو جعفر البغوي ….ثقة حافظ

Ahmad b. Muni’ b. ‘Abd al-Rahman, Abu Ja’far al-Baghwi....:Thiqah (trustworthy) ,hafiz .180

Abu Qaṭan too isthiqah (trustworthy), as confirmed by al-Hafiz:

عمرو بن الهيثم بن قطن … أبو قطن البصري ثقة

‘Amr b. al-Haytham b. Qaṭan Abu Qaṭan al-Basri:Thiqah (trustworthy) .181

Of course, ‘Abd Allah b. Yazid was a junior Sahabi, and therefore needed no investigation. He is automaticallythiqah (trustworthy). Al-Hafiz states:

عبد الله بن يزيد بن زيد بن حصين الأنصاري الخطمي بفتح المعجمة وسكون المهملة صحابي صغير ولي الكوفة لابن الزبير.

‘Abd Allah b. Yazid b. Zayd b. Husayn al-Ansari al-Khaṭmi:a junior Sahabi . He was the wali (ruler) of Kufah for Ibn al-Zubayr.182

So, we have a second impeccablesanad for thehadith .

2. Hadith Al-Qadha, Confessions Of The Sahabah

The companions of the Messenger of Allah,sallallahu ‘alaihi wa alihi , used to admit, unanimously, thatAmir al-Muminin ‘Ali b. Abi Talib,‘alaihi al-salam , was indeed the best judge among them. Imam Ahmad (d. 241 H), for instance records:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي ثنا وكيع ثنا سفيان عن حبيب بن أبي ثابت عن سعيد بن جبير عن بن عباس قال قال عمر رضي الله عنه: علي أقضانا وأبي أقرؤنا

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad b. Hanbal) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – Waki’ – Sufyan – Habib b. Abi Thabit – Sa’id b. Jubayr – Ibn ‘Abbas:

‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, said:“‘Ali is the best judge among us , and Ubayy is the best reciter among us.”28

Shaykh al-Arnauṭ says:

إسناده صحيح على شرط الشيخين

Its chain issahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs.29

Imam Ahmad further records:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي ثنا يحيى بن سعيد عن سفيان حدثني حبيب يعنى بن أبي ثابت عن سعيد بن جبير عن بن عباس رضي الله عنهما قال: قال عمر علي أقضانا وأبي أقرؤنا

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad b. Hanbal) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – Yahya b. Sa’id – Sufyan – Habib b. Abi Thabit – Sa’id b. Jubayr – Ibn ‘Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them both:

‘Umar said:“‘Ali is the best judge among us , and Ubayy is the best reciter among us.”30

Al-Arnauṭ again comments:

إسناده صحيح على شرط الشيخين

Its chain issahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs.31

This is the thirdathar recorded on the same matter by Ahmad b. Hanbal:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي ثنا سويد بن سعيد في سنة ست وعشرين ومائتين ثنا علي بن مسهر عن الأعمش عن حبيب بن أبي ثابت عن سعيد بن جبير عن بن عباس قال خطبنا عمر رضي الله عنه على منبر رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم فقال: علي رضي الله عنه أقضانا وأبي رضي الله عنه اقرؤنا

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad b. Hanbal) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – Suwayd b. Sa’id – ‘Ali b. Mashar – al-A’mash – Habib b. Abi Thabit – Sa’id b. Jubayr – Ibn ‘Abbas:

‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, delievered a sermon on the pulpit of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and said:“‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, is the best judge among us, and Ubayy, may Allah be pleased with him, is the best reciter.” 32

Shaykh Shu’ayb al-Arnauṭ has a simple verdict on it:

صحيح

Sahih 33

Notably, ‘Umar mentioned this publicly and none among the Sahabah present – including the most senior ones - objected. This evidences their unanimous concurrence with him on the matter.

Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256 H) records the sameathar in hisSahih :

حدثنا عمرو بن علي حدثنا يحيى حدثنا سفيان عن حبيب عن سعيد بن جبير عن ابن عباس قال قال عمر رضي الله عنه: أقرؤنا أبي وأقضانا علي

‘Amr b. ‘Ali – Yahya – Sufyan – Habib – Sa’id b. Jubayr – Ibn ‘Abbas:

‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, said: “The best reciter among us is Ubayy,and the best judge among us is ‘Ali.” 34

Apart from ‘Umar, all the other Sahabah also explicitly declared that the best judge among them – including their most senior ones living in Madinah - was none other thanAmir al-Muminin . Imam al-Hakim (d. 403 H) records:

أخبرني عبد الرحمن بن الحسن القاضي بهمدان ثنا إبراهيم بن الحسين ثنا آدم بن أبي إياس ثنا شعبة عن أبي إسحاق عن عبد الرحمن بن يزيد عن علقمة عن عبد الله قال كنا نتحدث أن أقضى أهل المدينة علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه

‘Abd al-Rahman b. al-Hasan al-Qadi – Ibrahim b. al-Husayn – Adam b. Abi Iyas – Shu’bah – Abu Ishaq – ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Yazid – ‘Alqamah – ‘Abd Allah (b. Mas’ud):

“We used to SAY that the best judge among the people of Madinah was ‘Ali b. Abi Talib , may Allah be pleased with him.”35

Al-Hakim says:

هذا حديث صحيح على شرط الشيخين

Thishadith issahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs.36

Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748 H), on his part, keeps silent about it. The reason is unclear since theathar has a perfectlysahih chain. Meanwhile, he has personally authenticated thesanad and all its narrators in the same book in otherahadith ! For example, al-Hakim records this chain:

أخبرنا عبد الرحمن بن الحسن القاضي ثنا إبراهيم بن الحسين ثنا آدم بن أبي إياس ثنا شعبة عن منصور عن إبراهيم عن علقمة عن عبد الله رضي الله عنه

‘Abd al-Rahman b. al-Hasan al-Qadi – Ibrahim b. al-Husayn – Adam b. Abi Iyas – Shu’bah – Mansur – Ibrahim –‘Alqamah – ‘Abd Allah (b. Mas’ud) , may Allah be pleased with him.37

The only differences in thissanad from that of theathar are Mansur and Ibrahim. Al-Hakim declares:

هذا حديث صحيح على شرط الشيخين

Thishadith issahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs.38

Interestingly, al-Dhahabi confirms the verdict:

على شرط البخاري ومسلم

(Sahih ) upon the standard of al-Bukhari and Muslim.39

This proves that ‘Abd al-Rahman b. al-Hasan al-Qadi, Ibrahim b. al-Husayn, Adam b. Abi Iyas, Shu’bah and ‘Alqamah arethiqah (trustworthy) narrators!

But, what is the status Abu Ishaq and ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Yazid – the only remaining narrators of Ibn Mas’ud’sathar ? Note this chain documented by Imam al-Hakim:

أخبرنا أبو زكريا العنبري ثنا محمد بن عبد السلام ثنا إسحاق أنبأ يحيى بن آدم ثنا إسرائيل عن أبي إسحاق عن عبد الرحمن بن يزيد عن عبد الله رضي الله عنه

Abu Zakariyah al-‘Anbari – Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Salam – Ishaq – Yahya b. Adam – Israil –Abu Ishaq – ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Yazid – ‘Abd Allah (b. Mas’ud), may Allah be pleased with him.40

Al-Hakim comments:

هذا حديث صحيح على شرط الشيخين

Thishadith issahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs.41

Al-Dhahabi also reiterates:

على شرط البخاري ومسلم

(Sahih ) upon the standard of al-Bukhari and Muslim.42

As such, all the narrators of theathar arethiqah (trustworthy).

But then, is there any break between Shu’bah and Abu Ishaq? We have seen the unbroken connection between all the other narrators except these two. This chain, recorded by al-Hakim, puts the seal on things:

حدثني محمد بن صالح بن هانئ ثنا المسيب بن زهير ثنا عاصم بن علي ثنا شعبة عن أبي إسحاق قال : سمعت وهب بن جابر يحدث عن عبد الله بن عمرو رضي الله عنهما

Muhammad b. Salih b. Hani – al-Musayyab b. Zuhayr – ‘Asim b. ‘Ali –Shu’bah – Abu Ishaq – Wahb b. Jabir – ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Amr, may Allah be pleased with them both43

Al-Hakim states:

هذا حديث صحيح على شرط الشيخين

Thishadith issahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs.44

Al-Dhahabi agrees:

على شرط البخاري ومسلم

(Sahih ) upon the standard of al-Bukhari and Muslim.45

Simply put, the chain of theathar of Ibn Mas’ud issahih . All the narrators arethiqah (trustworthy), and there is no disconnection whatsoever in thesanad .

3. Hadith Al-Qadha, ‘Ali’s Superior Knowledge Of The Qur’an And Sunnah

There is no dispute about the fact thatAmir al-Muminin ,‘alaihi al-salam , was the most competent in justice dispensation among all the Sahabah. In fact, he is the best judge in our wholeUmmah till the Day ofal-Qiyamah after its Prophet,sallallahu ‘alaihi wa alihi . On a specific level, he was better - in terms of justice dispensation - than Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthman. So, what is the direct implication of this?

In Islam, justice dispensation is based squarely upon the Qur’an and Sunnah:

فاحكم بينهم بما أنزل الله

So, judge between themby what Allah has revealed .46

The Qur’an itself, in its entirety, is described as “a judgment” by its Master:

وكذلك أنزلناه حكما عربيا

And thus We have sent it down asa judgment in Arabic47

As such, complete knowledge of everything in it is required for effective justice dispensation.

Moreover, the Sunnah is the divinely inspired explanations of this “judgment” called al-Qur’an:

وأنزلنا إليك الذكر لتبين للناس ما نزل إليهم

And We have sent down unto you (Muhammad)al-Dhikr (i.e. the Qur’an)that you may explain clearly to mankind what is sent down to them.48

Apparently, a person does not know the Book of Allah until he has known its explanations by the Messenger of Allah. These explanations, according to the same Book, only originated from the Lord as well:

وما ينطق عن الهوى إن هو إلا وحي يوحى

He (Muhammad) never speaks of (his own) desire or caprice.It is nothing but a wahy that is revealed (to him) .49

It is obvious. If anyone were more knowledgeable of the Qur’an and Sunnah than ‘Ali in thisUmmah , he (‘Ali) would not have been its best judge. It is simply unfathomable that Allah and His Messenger would have conferred upon him such a rank while there was/is another – in theUmmah as a whole - who was/is more competent with the tools of justice dispensation than he was!

It is noteworthy that knowledge of the revelations of Allah surpasses mere knowledge ofal-halal (the permissible) andal-haram (the prohibited). It covers everything from the Lord to humanity. Most importantly, merely knowing the legal status of a thing is not enough for justice dispensation. The judge must equally be fully aware of the penalties (if any) prescribed for it, and the best ways and circumstances to exercise personal discretion in different cases in line with the Wish of Allah. None, apparently, is as competent in these fields as ‘Ali.

At this point, it is apposite to quote this groundbreakingriwayah referenced by al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir (d. 774 H):

قال شعبة بن الحجاج ، عن سِمَاك ، عن خالد بن عَرْعَرَة أنه سمع عليا وشعبة أيضًا ، عن القاسم بن أبي بزَّة ، عن أبي الطُّفَيْل ، سمع عليًا. وثبت أيضًا من غير وجه ، عن أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب : أنه صعد منبر الكوفة فقال : لا تسألوني عن آية في كتاب الله ، ولا عن سنة عن رسول الله ، إلا أنبأتكم بذلك.

Shu’bah b. al-Hajjaj, from Simak, from Khalid b. ‘Ar’arah that he heard ‘Ali; and Shu’bah again narrated from al-Qasim b. Abi Barrah from Abu al-Tufayl that he heard ‘Ali; and IT IS ALSO AUTHENTICALLY TRANSMITTED through many chains thatAmir al-Muminin ‘Ali b. Abi Talib climbed the pulpit of Kufah and said,“You will not ask me about ANY verse in the Book of Allah, or about ANY Sunnah from the Messenger of Allah, except that I will inform you about that.” 50

None of the Sahabah was ever able to make a similar claim!

Secondly, justice must be administered with utmost fairness and equity:

وإن حكمت فاحكم بينهم بالقسط

If you judge, judge between them with fairness and equity.51

This verse allows the use of personal discretion in the administration of justice, especially in all cases where no divinely fixed penalties or judgments are available. But even then, it also reiterates the notion that the judge must know everything in the Qur’an and the Sunnah! Full knowledge of both is required to determine whether or not there is a fixed penalty or judgment concerning a particular case. If there is none, then the judge uses his discretion. Where the judge does not know whether Allah has already fixed the judgment for the issue before him – due to an insufficient knowledge of the Book and the Tradition - he is most likely to effect a miscarriage of justice, without even realizing it!

Moreover, the judge must give his judgments with the best interests of fairness and equity at heart. This is the second message of the above verse. Where there is a divinely fixed penalty or judgment, he must apply it in the fairest and most equitable manners. Where there is no such fixed penalty or judgment, then he equally must adopt his personal discretion in ways that best ensure a completely fair and equitable dispensation of justice.

Amir al-Muminin has been declared the best judge by Allah and His Messenger. Apparently, he is the one, within Islam, with the best knowledge and practice in justice dispensation. Most importantly, he is the fairest and the most equitable among us all – including the Sahabah - in the application of Allah’s Fixed Verdicts and in the just administration of personal discretion.

The most crucial part of this discourse, probably, is stated in this verse:

يا داوود إنا جعلناك خليفة في الأرض فاحكم بين الناس بالحق

O Dawud! We have appointed you akhalifah over the earth. Therefore, judge between mankind with the truth.52

First and foremost, it is clear from this verse that justice dispensation is the job of thekhalifah , to the exclusion of all others. He is the judge of “mankind”. Every single other human beings comes under his juridical authority. Of course, he might appoint subordinate judges to assist him, under his close supervision. However, the job belongs to him alone. Therefore, whoever is the most qualified to be judge is also the most qualified for thekhilafah !

Besides, the competent judge is he who is able to discern the truth, and who judges with the truth. Judgment with the truth involves the objective application of Allah’s Fixed Verdicts over relevant issues, as well as the selfless administration of personal discretion in deserving cases. The judge therefore must be very intelligent and completely truthful. Application of personal discretion to reach true justice requires an extremely high level of intelligence, selflessness, sincerity and honesty. An unintelligent person cannot be expected to skillfully detect the truth from a clog of complex arguments and proofs before him. Moreover, a corrupt or self-serving fellow cannot be expected to judge others with the truth, or to apply his personal discretion fairly. With these facts in mind, one can then safely conclude and proclaim thatAmir al-Muminin - being the best judge in thisUmmah - was the most qualified for thekhilafah immediately after the Prophet. In addition, he is the most truthful, the most intelligent, the most selfless, the most sincere, the most honest, and the best in recognizing and applying the truth in thisUmmah after the Messenger.

4. Hadith Al-Qadha, An Age Of Jungle Justice I

Thekhalifah of Muslims is also their sovereign judge:

يا داوود إنا جعلناك خليفة في الأرض فاحكم بين الناس بالحق

O Dawud! We have appointed youa khalifah over the earth. Therefore,judge between mankind with the truth.53

Since ‘Umar was recognized by most Muslims of his time as theirkhalifah , it follows naturally that he was also their sovereign judge. The question is: was ‘Umar a competent judge? To find the answer, we must look at some iconic cases decided by ‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭab.

Imam Ibn Khuzaymah (d. 311 H) records about an interesting case:

ثنا يونس بن عبد الأعلى و محمد بن عبد الله بن الحكم قالا ثنا ابن وهب أخبرني جرير بن حازم عن سليمان بن مهران عن أبي ظبيان عن ابن عباس قال: مر علي بن أبي طالب بمجنونة بني فلان قد زنت أمر عمر برجمها فردها علي و قال لعمر : يا أمير المؤمنين أترجم هذه ؟ قال: نعم قال : أما تذكر أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم قال: رفع القلم عن ثلاثة عن المجنون المغلوب على عقله و عن النائم حتى يستيقظ و عن الصبي حتى يحتلم قال : صدقت فخلى عنها

Yunus b. ‘Abd al-A’la and Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah b. al-Hakam – Ibn Wahb – Jarir b. Hazim – Sulayman b. Mihran – Abu Zibyan – Ibn ‘Abbas:

‘Ali b. Abi Talib passed bya lunatic woman from so-and-so tribe, and she had committed adultery.‘Umar ordered that she be stoned to death . So, ‘Ali returned her and said to ‘Umar, “OAmir al-Muminin ! Do you want to stone this (woman)?” He (‘Umar) replied, “Yes”. He (‘Ali) said, “Do you remember that the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said: ‘The pen has been lifted about three people: the mentally ill, the person sleeping until he wakes up, and the child until he becomes an adolescent.” He (‘Umar) responded, “You have said the truth”. So, ‘Umar freed her (i.e. the lunatic woman).54

‘Allamah al-Albani (d. 1420 H) comments:

حديث صحيح رجاله ثقات

It is asahih hadith . Its narrators arethiqah (trustworthy).55

Elsewhere, Imam Ibn Khuzaymah also records:

أنا أبو طاهر نا أبو بكر نا يونس بن عبد الأعلى و محمد بن عبد الله بن عبد الحكم قالا أخبرنا ابن وهب أخبرني جرير بن حازم عن سليمان بن مهران عن أبي ظبيان عن ابن عباس قال: مر علي بن أبي طالب بمجنونة بني فلان قد زنت أمر عمر برجمها فرجعها علي وقال لعمر : يا أمير المؤمنين ترجم هذه ؟ قال : نعم قال : أو تذكر أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم قال : رفع القلم عن ثلاث عن المجنون المغلوب على عقله وعن النائم حتى يستيقظ وعن الصبي حتى يحتلم قال : صدقت فخلى عنها

Abu Tahir – Abu Bakr Yunus b. ‘Abd al-A’la and Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah b. al-Hakam – Ibn Wahb – Jarir b. Hazim – Sulayman b. Mihran – Abu Zibyan – Ibn ‘Abbas:

‘Ali b. Abi Talib passed by a lunatic woman from so-and-so tribe, and she had committed adultery. ‘Umar ordered that she be stoned to death. So, ‘Ali returned her and said to ‘Umar, “OAmir al-Muminin ! Do you want to stone this (woman)?” He (‘Umar) replied, “Yes”. He (‘Ali) said, “Do you remember that the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said: ‘The pen has been lifted about three people: the mentally ill, the person sleeping until he wakes up, and the child until he becomes an adolescent.” He (‘Umar) responded, “You have said the truth”. So, he freed her (i.e. the lunatic woman).56

‘Allamah al-Albani rules:

إسناده صحيح

Its chain issahih 57

The exact narration above is documented by Imam Ibn Hibban (d. 354 H) in hisSahih through the route of his teacher, Imam Ibn Khuzaymah, with the same chain.58 ‘Allamah al-Albani again says:

صحيح

Sahih 59

Shaykh al-Arnauṭ also comments:

رجاله ثقات رجال مسلم

Its narrators arethiqah (trustworthy), narrators of (Sahih ) Muslim.60

Imam al-Hakim (d. 403 H), a student of Ibn Hibban, records thehadith as well:

حدثنا أبو بكر بن إسحاق الفقيه وعبد الله بن محمد بن موسى قالا : أنبأ أحمد بن عيسى المصري أنبأ ابن وهب أخبرني جرير بن حازم عن سليمان بن مهران عن أبي ظبيان عن ابن عباس قال مر علي بن أبي طالب بمجنونة بني فلان وقد زنت وأمر عمر بن الخطاب برجمها فردها علي وقال لعمر : يا أمير المؤمنين أترجم هذه ؟ قال : نعم قال : أو ما تذكر أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : رفع القلم عن ثلاث : عن المجنون المغلوب على عقله وعن النائم حتى يستيقظ وعن الصبي حتى يحتلم قال صدقت فخلى عنها

Abu Bakr b. Ishaq al-Faqih and ‘Abd Allah b. Muhammad b. Musa – Ahmad b. Isa al-Misri - Ibn Wahb – Jarir b. Hazim – Sulayman b. Mihran – Abu Zibyan – Ibn ‘Abbas:

‘Ali b. Abi Talib passed bya lunatic woman from so-and-so tribe, and she had committed adultery.‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭab ordered that she be stoned to death . So, ‘Ali returned her and said to ‘Umar, “OAmir al-Muminin ! Do you want to stone this (woman)?” He (‘Umar) replied, “Yes”. He (‘Ali) said, “Do you remember that the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said: ‘The pen has been lifted about three people: the mentally ill, the person sleeping until he wakes up, and the child until he becomes an adolescent.”

He (‘Umar) responded,“You have said the truth” . So, he freed her (i.e. the lunatic woman).61

Al-Hakim says:

هذا حديث صحيح على شرط الشيخين

Thishadith issahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs62

Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748 H) concurs:

على شرطهما

(Sahih ) upon the standard of both of them63

Imam Abu Dawud (d. 275 H) documents a fuller version of thehadith that gives some disturbing details:

حدثنا عثمان بن أبي شيبة ثنا جرير عن الأعمش عن أبي ظبيان عن ابن عباس قال: أتي عمر بمجنونة قد زنت فاستشار فيها أناسا فأمر بها عمر أن ترجم فمر بها على علي بن أبي طالب رضوان الله عليه فقال ما شأن هذه ؟ قالوا مجنونة بني فلان زنت فأمر بها عمر أن ترجم قال فقال ارجعوا بها ثم أتاه فقال يا أمير المؤمنين أما علمت أن القلم قد رفع عن ثلاثة عن المجنون حتى يبرأ وعن النائم حتى يستيقظ وعن الصبي حتى يعقل ؟ قال بلى قال فما بال هذه ترجم ؟ قال لا شىء قال فأرسلها قال فأرسلها قال فجعل يكبر

‘Uthman b. Abi Shaybah – Jarir – al-A’mash – Abu Zibyan – Ibn ‘Abbas:

A lunatic woman, who had committed adultery, was brought to ‘Umar.So, he consulted with some people about her, and therefore ordered that she be stoned to death . But, ‘Ali b. Abi Talib, ridwanullah ‘alaihi, passed by her and said, “What is the issue with this (woman)”? They replied, “She is a lunatic woman from so-and-so tribe. She committed adultery and ‘Umar ordered that she be stoned to death.” So, he (‘Ali) said, “Return with her (to ‘Umar).” Then he (‘Ali) came to him (‘Umar), and said, “OAmir al-Muminin ! Do you know that the pen has been lifted in the case of a lunatic until he is cured, and of someone sleeping until he wakes up, and in the case of a child until he becomes mentally mature?” He (‘Umar) replied, “Yes, I do”.He (‘Ali) asked, “So, why do you want to stone this (woman)?” He (‘Umar) replied, “There is NOTHING! ” He (‘Ali) said, “Free her”. So, he (‘Umar) freed her, sayingAllahu Akbar !64

‘Allamah al-Albani says:

صحيح

Sahih 65

Reading all the narrations together, one gets the full picture of what happened:

1. A lunatic woman was charged with adultery, which she apparently committed in her still extant state of insanity.

2. TheShari’ah provides that crimes committed in a state of insanity are not justiciable.

3. ‘Umar was well aware of this rule, and was fully convinced that the lunatic woman truly committed the adultery in a state of insanity. He

nonetheless consulted with his team of judicial advisers (which excluded ‘Ali) on the matter, and eventually made up his mind to execute her.

4. While convicting the lunatic woman and passing the death sentence against her, ‘Umar fully remembered the above-mentioned rule of theShari’ah .

5. Nonetheless, ‘Umar ordered the execution of the lunatic woman for “nothing”, in his own words.

6.Amir al-Muminin ‘Ali saw a clear miscarriage of justice in the judgment of ‘Umar, and stood against the order of the commander-in-chief, at great personal risks. He prevented ‘Umar’s executioners from carrying out their illegal orders.

7. ‘Ali asked ‘Umar if the latter knew theShari’ah ruling concerning lunatic people. ‘Umar replied: “Yes, I do”. Surprised, he further asked the latter why he wanted to execute the lunatic woman in that case. ‘Umar made no secret of his intention. There was simply “nothing”! There was no reason. He only wished to kill the woman, and that was it!

8. ‘Ali reminded him of thehadith of the Prophet on the matter. Perhaps, ‘Umar had forgotten the source of the Shari’i ruling. Luckily, ‘Umar admitted to the truth of thehadith .

9. At this point, ‘Ali advised him to free the innocent lunatic woman. Fortunately for her, ‘Umar accepted ‘Ali’s advice and allowed her to go free.

Without ‘Ali’s timely intervention, ‘Umar would have deliberately executed the innocent woman for “nothing”!

5. Hadith Al-Qadha, An Age Of Jungle Justice II

Imam Ibn Abi Hatim (d. 327 H) records about another iconic judgment delivered by ‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭab in his capacity as thekhalifah over theUmmah :

أخبرنا أبي ، ثنا أبو بكر محمد بن بشار ، ثنا إبن أبي عدي ، عن سعيد ، عن قتادة عن أبي حرب ، يعني : ابن أبي الاسود الديلي ، عن أبيه ، ان عمر بن الخطاب ، رفعت اليه امراة ولدت ستة اشهر ، فهم برجمها ، فبلغ ذلك عليا فقال : ليس عليها رجم ، قال الله تعالى : والوالدات يرضعن اولادهن حولين كاملين وستة اشهر ، ذلك ثلاثون شهرا .

My father (Abu Hatim) – Abu Bakr Muhammad b. Bashar – Ibn Abi ‘Adi – Sa’id – Qatadah – Abu Harb b. Abi al-Aswad al-Dili – his father (Abu al-Aswad al-Dayli):

A woman was brought to ‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭab.She had delivered after (only) six months of pregnancy. So, he (‘Umar) resolved to stone her to death . This (decision) reached ‘Ali. Therefore, he (‘Ali) said, “She does not deserve any penalty of stoning to death. Allah says: ‘The mothers shall give suck to their children for two whole years (2:233)’. This (period) plus six months equals thirty months (mentioned in 46:15 as the total for both pregnancy and suckling)’”.66

Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748 H) submits about the first narrator:

أبو حاتم الرازي محمد بن إدريس بن المنذر بن داود بن مهران: الامام الحافظ، الناقد، شيخ المحدثين

Abu Hatim al-Razi, Muhammad b. Idris b. al-Mundhir b. Dawud b. Mihran:al-imam (the leader in Hadith), al-hafiz (the hadith scientist) , al-naqid (thehadith critic),shaykh al-muhadithin (teacher of thehadith scientists and narrators).67

About the second narrator, al-Hafiz (d. 852 H) says:

محمد بن بشار بن عثمان العبدي البصري أبو بكر بندار ثقة

Muhammad b. Bashar b. ‘Uthman al-‘Abdi al-Basri, Abu Bakr Bandar:Thiqah (trustworthy) .67

What of the third narrator? Al-Dhahabi submits:

محمد بن إبراهيم بن أبي عدي أبو عمرو، بصري، ثقة

Muhammad b. Ibrahim b. Abi ‘Adi, Abu ‘Amr, from Basra:Thiqah (trustworthy) 66

Al-Hafiz agrees:

محمد بن إبراهيم بن أبي عدي وقد ينسب لجده وقيل هو إبراهيم أبو عمرو البصري ثقة

Muhammad b. Ibrahim b. Abi ‘Adi.... Abu ‘Amr al-Basri:Thiqah (trustworthy) .67

The fourth narrator is Sa’id, and al-Hafiz comments on him in this manner:

سعيد بن أبي عروبة مهران اليشكري مولاهم أبو النضر البصري ثقة حافظ له تصانيف لكنه كثير التدليس واختلط وكان من أثبت الناس في قنادة

Sa’id b. Abi ‘Arubah Mihran al-Yashkiri, their freed slave, Abu al-Nadhar al-Basri:Thiqah (trustworthy), hafiz (a hadith scientist) , he wrote books. However, he did a lot oftadlis , and became confused.He was one of the most authoritative narrators from Qatadah .68

Concerning the fifth narrator, al-Hafiz further submits:

قتادة بن دعامة بن قتادة السدوسي أبو الخطاب البصري ثقة ثبت

Qatadah b. Da’amah b. Qatadah al-Sudusi, Aboo al-Khaṭṭaab al-Basri:Thiqah (trustworthy) , thabt (accurate).69

Like the fourth narrator, he too is accused oftadlis , as proclaimed by al-Hafiz:

قتادة بن دعامة السدوسي البصري صاحب أنس بن مالك رضي الله تعالى عنه كان حافظ عصره وهو مشهور بالتدليس وصفه به النسائي وغيره

Qatadah b. Da’amah al-Sudusi al-Basri, the companion of Anas b. Malik, may Allah the Most High be pleased with him. He was thehafiz (hadith scientist) of his time,and he is famous for tadlis . Al-Nasai and others described him with it.70

The sixth narrator is trustworthy as well, as affirmed by al-Hafiz:

أبو حرب بن أبي الأسود الديلي البصري ثقة

Abu Harb b. Abi al-Aswad al-Dili al-Basri:Thiqah (trustworthy) 71

With regards to the last narrator, al-Hafiz states:

أبو الأسود الديلي ….ثقة

Abu al-Aswad al-Dili....:Thiqah (trustworthy) 72

In a word, all the narrators are trustworthy. But, there are three issues with the chain. The fourth narrator (Sa’id) didtadlis a lot and also became confused. The question is: does histadlis affect his narrations from Qatadah, especially as he has narrated in an‘an-‘an manner? Moreover, did the third narrator (Ibn Abi ‘Adi) hear from him before or during his confusion? Lastly, Qatadah himself was famous fortadlis . So, does histadlis affect his‘an-‘an reports from Abu Harb?

Some of these questions are answered in the following isnad documented by Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256 H) in hisSahih :

حدثنا محمد بن بشار حدثنا يحيى وابن أبي عدي عن سعيد عن قتادة عن أنس بن مالك

Muhammad b. Bashar – Yahya andIbn Abi ‘Adi – Sa’id – Qatadah – Anas b. Malik73

Interestingly, this chain is almost identical to the one we are investigating! We see that Sa’id has narrated‘an-‘an from Qatadah, and al-Bukhari considers thesanad to besahih . This proves that Sa’id’stadlis does not affect his‘an-‘an reports from Qatadah. It is noteworthy that Qatadah’s‘an-‘an reports from Anas are also accepted assahih , as in the above chain.

In thissanad of al-Bukhari, Ibn Abi ‘Adi is conjoined with Yahya. However, in another chain in the sameSahih , he stands alone:

حدثني محمد بن بشار حدثنا ابن أبي عدي عن سعيد عن قتادة عن أنس رضي الله

Muhammad b. Bashar – Ibn Abi ‘Adi – Sa’id – Qatadah – Anas b. Malik74

As such, Ibn Abi ‘Adi authentically transmitted from Sa’id. He apparently narrated from the Sa’id before the latter’s confusion. Moreover, this isnad reiterates the fact that Sa’id’s‘an-‘an reports from Qatadah aresahih . In other words, histadlis does not affect them.

‘Allamah al-Albani (d. 1420 H) confirms all our words:

حدثنا ابن المثنى: ثنا ابن أبي عدي عن سعيد عن

قتادة قلت: وهذا إسناد صحيح على شرط الشيخين.

Ibn al-Muthanna –Ibn Abi ‘Adi – Sa’id – Qatadah .... I (al-Albani) say:This chain is sahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs. 75

Imam Ibn Khuzaymah (d. 311 H) also records:

حدثنا محمد بن بشار و أبو موسى قالا : حدثنا ابن أبي عدي عن سعيد عن قتادة عن أبي تميمة عن الأشعري ـ يعني أبا موسى

Muhammad b. Bashar and Abu Musa –Ibn Abi ‘Adi – Sa’id – Qatadah – Abu Tamimah – Abu Musa al-Ash’ari.76

Dr. Al-A’zami declares:

إسناده صحيح

Its chain issahih 77

Needless to say, Ibn Khuzaymah also considers thesanad to besahih , and has therefore included it in hisSahih .

The bottom-line is as follows:

1. Ibn Abi ‘Adi authentically narrated from Sa’id, before the latter’s confusion.

2. The‘an-‘an reports of Sa’id from Qatadah aresahih . The former’stadlis does not affect them.

3. Some‘an-‘an reports of Qatadah – like those from Anas and Abu Tamimah – are alsosahih . Qatadah’stadlis has no effect on them.

The big question, at this point, is: what is the status of Qatadah’s‘an-‘an narrations from Abu Harb? According to high-ranking Sunnimuhadithun , such narrations aresahih . For instance, ‘Allamah al-Albani states:

حدثنا مسدد: نا يحيى عن ابن أبي عَرُوبة عن قتادة عن أبي حَرْب

ابن أبي الأسود عن أبيه عن علي.

قلت: وهذا إسناد صحيح

Musaddad – Yahya –(Sa’id) b. Abi ‘Arubah – Qatadah – Abu Harb b. Abi al-Aswad – his father – ‘Ali.

I say: This chain issahih .78

This chain, like some others, is almost identical with that of the report from Ibn Abi Hatim. Here, the ‘Allamah confirms that the‘an-‘an reports of

Sa’id from Qatadah aresahih , as well as Qatadah’s‘an-‘an narrations from Abu Harb. Shaykh al-Arnauṭ too backs him:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي ثنا عبد الصمد بن عبد الوارث ثنا هشام عن قتادة عن أبي حرب بن أبي الأسود عن أبيه عن علي رضي الله عنه إسناده صحيح على شرط مسلم

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad b. Hanbal) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) - ‘Abd al-Samad b. ‘Abd al-Warith – Hisham –Qatadah – Abu Harb b. Abi al-Aswad – his father – ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him.... Its chain is sahih upon the standard of Muslim .79

Imam Abu Ya’la further records:

حدثنا عبيد الله حدثنا معاذ بن هشام حدثني أبي عن قتادة عن أبي حرب بن الأسود الديلي عن أبي الأسود عن علي بن أبي طالب

‘Ubayd Allah – Mu’adh b. Hisham – my father –Qatadah – Abu Harb b. al-Aswad al-Duli – Abu al-Aswad – ‘Ali b. Abi Talib.80

Shaykh Dr. Asad comments:

إسناده صحيح

Its chain issahih 81

In a simple summary, theathar from Ibn Abi Hatim about how ‘Umar sentenced a woman to death for delivering the baby only after six months of pregnancy has an impeccablysahih chain. All the narrators arethiqah (trustworthy), and thesanad is fully connected.

There are some serious substantive and procedural problems with the judgment of ‘Umar, which reveal a lot about him. He sentenced the woman to death by stoning. This suggests that he had convicted her of adultery. His only proof against her was that she delivered her baby only after six months of her known pregnancy. In the obviously invalid view of ‘Umar, a six-month pregnancy was absolutely impossible. As such, the woman must have been secretly pregnant before her husband started counting the days of her pregnancy – apparently, from the date of their last successful encounter (by his calculations). In other words, while her husband was having sexual intercourse with her (and most probably, it was their first time), she was already secretly pregnant for another man.

The Book of Allah has laid down the procedural law in all cases ofzina :

والذين يرمون المحصنات ثم لم يأتوا بأربعة شهداء فاجلدوهم ثمانين جلدة ولا تقبلوا لهم شهادة أبدا وأولئك هم الفاسقون

Those who accuse chaste women,and do not produce four witnesses , flog them with eighty stripes, and reject their testimony forever,they indeed are the liars. 82

So, in order to establish the charge ofzina against anyone, four witnesses who saw the crime with their own eyes must be called upon to testify. Without the production of those four witnesses, the accuser himself must be penalized, and declared an eternal liar whose future testimonies must always be rejected.

Was ‘Umar aware of the above verse? The answer is not clear. What is undeniable however is that he paid absolutely no attention to it. He never demanded the testimony of four eye-witnesses to support his charge ofzina against the woman. He simply convicted her based upon his mere suspicion. This singular incident casts a huge dark cloak over ‘Umar till the Hour.

Firstly, ‘Umar had wrongly convicted the woman of adultery without evidence. He never demanded or presented four witnesses to support his conviction (which in essence is also an accusation). Therefore, he himself deserved to be flogged with eighty stripes and declared a persona non grata within the IslamicUmmah . The other persons who dragged the woman to him also needed to be investigated. If they too had accused her ofzina without calling four eye-witnesses to testify, then each of them must also be punished in the same manner as ‘Umar.

Secondly, let us assume that ‘Umar did not merely rely upon unfounded suspicion in convicting the woman. Rather, four eye-witnesses who saw her in the middle of the adultery were summoned, and they testified. Therefore, she was indeed guilty and truly deserved the stoning penalty. Where then was her partner in the crime? What sentence did ‘Umar hand down upon him? If two people committedzina , is it only the woman that can be punished? Are men supposed to go scotfree for their crimes of adultery? It is extremely strange that ‘Umar was itching to send the woman to her grave, without asking a single question about her accomplice!