Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

Reliability of the Companions

The issue of reliability of the Companions is quite critical, about which much talk was there, beside lengthy dispute throughout all ages. Hence this subject deserves good attention and much care so as to have moderate opinion about it, and any dispute be eliminated.

There was much dispute and controversy among Muslims regarding this adalah (reliability), while it being in itself an issue in which favour of the Qur’an and the Messenger can be clearly sensed. Thus it neither calls to disagreement, nor needs controversy. So is it right to enter into debate about an issue in which the merit of the Qur’an and the Messenger is established?

A group of people have gone too far in this matter to the extent they deemed them (Sahabah) to be reliable in all, even those indulged in fitnah (sedition), or in whose hypocrisy a Qur’anic verse was revealed, making it impermissible to criticize anyone of them, or raise doubt about his riwayah, accusing anyone doing so with debauchery.1 And this verily is an exaggeration in trust and extravagance in appreciation. Besides, it contravenes the principles stated in the Qur’an and Prophetic Sunnah regarding the firm evidences, and can never agree with the human tempers and nature.

It can be said that claiming the reliability of all the Sahabah, and consecrating books of hadith constitute the two main factors that facilitated for the enemies of Islam to attack it, and led to close-mindedness of its friends among thinkers! That is because adalah of all the Sahabah undoubtedly necessitates trusting whatever they narrate as cited in books of hadith, while it is known they contained many weak and poor traditions that constituted source of harm and detriment. If we intend to enumerate all the detriments that afflicted the Muslims as a result of that belief, it would be so lengthy, but we suffice here with stating only two detriments:

First: That intense dispute which inflicted the Ummah so seriously causing disunity among Muslims, from the days of Uthman till the present day and even to the days to come! This dispute scattered the Muslims, renderring them inconsistent parties, wrangling cults, and differing schools, either in ibadat (rituals) or transactions. And despite the efforts exerted by many ulama’ who endeavoured to reuniting the Muslims throughout hundreds of years, so as to make them hold fast together to the cable of Allah and not to separate, but the moth of disagreement was and is still eating into the bones of the Islamic Ummah, the fact that no one can deny.

Second: The fatal attacks and stabs that inflicted Islam everyday, because of what hadith books contained of traditions including superstitions and confusions, and other things that no free mind can approve of or right knowledge can support, till our religion came to be called Din of superstitions and misconceptions and that it being unfit and incompetent for ages of science and civilization. There is no dispute that those who reported those dubious traditions were the Sahabah themselves, and from them the narrators took and men of hadith inscribed in their books.

So if we exclaim that: The tribulation inflicting Islam is actually caused by two things: Absolute reliability of the Sahabah, and blind trust in books of hadith which contain together the poor and strong traditions, we would never alienate or neglect the truth.

If we go along the straightforward path, and obligate the express hujjah, following logic of aql (reason), adopting the programme adopted by contemporary ulama’ in studying the issues, unaffected by any conventional or passional impact whether in respect of analyzing the characters of the Sahabah or what they narrated, the truth will be manifested explicitly and light of Islam will brightly shine, and Muslims all over the world will hold fast to the cable of Allah, united and not separated. And since the reliability of the Sahabah – as said before – is quite a perilous issue, I find it proper here to write this chapter so as to reinstate the matter aright and show – through strong indisputable evidences from the Book of Allah and His Messenger’s traditions – the correct aspect that safeguards us from committing a mistake and protects against nonsense.

Who Is The Companion?

Before broaching the subject of reliability of the Sahabah, I have to define who the Sahabi is as identified by them (Sunnis), and the most adequate definition in view of the Jumhur (Sunnis) being that one mentioned by al-Bukhari:

In his book,2 he said: Whoever from among Muslims kept company with the Prophet (S) or saw him, he would be verily a Sahabi.3

In his exposition for the definition of al-Bukhari, Ibn Hajar al-Asqallani declared: What he wants to say is that the epithet Suhbat al-Nabi (Companionship of the Prophet) fits that who kept company with the Prophet (S), a degree less than what the word suhbah means lexically, though the prevalent norm stipulated for it some mulazamah (association). It is also used for anyone who saw him (S) even from a remote distance.

What al-Bukhari stated is the preponderant notion, but is it stipulated that the seer should discern what he has seen! Or mere seeing being enough? Still there is controversy regarding this point but the practice of those who were counted among the Sahabah indicates the second option. As they mentioned Muhammad ibn Ali Bakr al-Siddiq, who was born only three months and few days before the demise of the Prophet, as recorded in the Sahih, stating that his mother Asma’ bint Umays gave birth to him during the Hijjat al- Wada’ (Farewell Pilgrimage), before enterring Mecca, in the last days of Dhu al-Qa’dah in the year 20H.

Ali ibn al-Midyani says: Whoever accompanied or saw the Prophet even for only one hour, should be counted among the companions of the Prophet. It seems that they supported this definition with a hadith reported from the Prophet as saying: Some people will launch invasion, when it will be said to them: Is there among you anyone saw the Messenger of Allah? (When an affirmative answer is given) Then they will verily conquer.

In his introduction to the book al-Isabah fi tamyiz al-Sahabah, he (Ibn Hajar), in defining who the Sahabi is, said: The best definition I managed to get being: The Sahabi is that who met the Prophet (S), having faith in him, dying as a Muslim, he will be counted among those who met him, an fought beside him or those who did not participate in a battle. Also is that who saw him by his own eyes, even if he did not sit beside him, and that who could not see him due to a casualty like blindness.4

While making jarh and ta’dil of the narrators an obligation incumbent upon every narrator whatever his status be, they could not transgress the boundaries of the Sahabah, as they held

The ulama’ have – a manifested in the previous chapter - obligated investigation about narrators of hadith, sarcasting some and moderating some others. And they have right in this as it is improper to admit the claim of any man whatever he may be, without investigation or verification or scrutiny them all to be reliable not liable to criticism, nor sarcasm can be levelled at them. What they said in this regard: “Their carpet had been folded”(i.e. there is no room for attacking them).

The wonderful point here is that they adopt such a stance while the Companions themselves used to criticize each other and even charging each other with impiety, as stated before and will be manifested later on in this book.

In his al-Taqrib, al-Nawawi writes: The Sahabah are altogether reliable, those who were involved in the fitnah and others. Al-Dhahabi, in his Risalah, said about the trustworthy narrators:5

If we open the door of jarh and ta’dil, a good number of Companions, Followers and leaders (imams) would enter it, as some of the Sahabah charged each other with impiety, according to some interpretation!! And Allah is pleased with all and forgives them, as they are not infallible, and their disagreement or contending them can never make them mild in our eyes.

Then he said: But the Sahabah, are not liable to sarcasm, despite whatever happened, and even if they erred as other trustworthy men erred! No one can be immune against mistake, but it being a very rare error causing no harm at all! As their reliability should be accepted and whatever they reported should be approved of, and acted according to, with which we charge Allah the Exalted.

While the Tabi’un are nearly free from anyone deliberately telling lies, but they may err and have misconceptions, and whoever committing very rare errors would be admitted, but that making multiple mistakes, though being among men of knowledge, his error would be forgiven too, with reporting his hadith and acting according to it. But determined ulama’ would hesitate in referring to narrators, with such description and acting alone in argumentation, as whoever making numerous mistakes, his hadith can never be used in dispute and debate.

Concerning the companions of the Tabi’un – like Malik and al-Awza’i and their likes – they are also classified in the same categories, and it was found in their time some who would deliberately lie or perpetrate so many errors, as a result of which his hadith would be ignored.

For instance, Malik who was known as the guiding star among the Ummah, could never be immune against sarcasm!! And if anyone talked against Malik while using him in argumentation, his talk would be for an excuse! And so also is al-Awza’i, who was thiqah (trustworthy) and hujjah (authority), and he probably reported hadith alone and misconceived, with his reporting from al-Zuhri being doubted! In his regard Ahmad ibn Hanbal said that he was of weak opinion and weak hadith. So also spoke that who could not yet acquainted with al-Zuhri since he dyed with black colour, was wearing like soldiers, and served Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik.

This is a vast section. Also a reference should be made to Muhammad ibn Idris al-Shafi’i, who was widely known as a virtuous, trustworthy and honest man and a verifying memorizer that rarely erring. But Abu Umar ibn Abd al-Birr said: I heard Muhammad ibn Waddah saying: I inquired Yahya ibn Mu’in about al-Shafi’i, when he said: He is not a thiqah. The clause of Ibn Mu’in6 about al-Shafi’i was only a slip of the tongue (lapsus lingue) out of desire and bigotry,7 as Ibn Mu’in was a Hanafi, though being an upstart.

Beside Ja’far ibn Muhammad al-Sadiq, who was deemed trustworthy by Abu Hatam and al-Nasa’i, whereas al-Bukhari did not consider him a hujjah (authority)!8 Also Sa’id ibn Abi Urubah, in whose regard Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: He is thiqah, an imam of bad memory, and his traditions were recorded in the books, but he was a qadari (fatalist).

And al-Walid ibn Muslim: He was the learned man of Damascus, thiqah, and a memorizer but he used to defraud from weak narrators, with his traditions being cited in all books. That was what we quoted of this treatise in brief.

In al-Ahkam9 al-‘Amudi says:

The Sunnah Imams concurred in believing in the reliability of the Sahabah, with some of them holding: Their judgement in adalah is like that of those who followed them necessitating investigation and verification about their reliability in riwayah. Some of them said: They (Sahabah) continued to be reliable till the time when conflict and seditions erupted among them. After that we should look into the reliability of the narrator or the witness among them, when he being not widely-known to be reliable. Some others said: Whoever fought against Ali, being aware, is verily a debauchee of refuted narration and witness against the true Imam. Some others believed in rejecting the narration and testimony of all of them, as one of the two parties should be fasiq, and he is unknown and unidentified.10

Al-Gazzali, in al-Mustasfi, says: Some people held them to be like others in respect of necessity of investigation. Some others said: They used to be characterized with reliability from the beginning till the eruption of battles and enmities, when the situation changed and blood was shed, the fact entailing investigation and scrutiny. The basis upon which those believing in reliability of all the Sahabah depended was the hadith they used to report from the Messenger of Allah: Verily, my Companions are like the nujum (stars), whichever of them you follow, you shall be guided rightly. But this hadith is false and baseless.

A Research on Disagreement

Al-Imam al-Muqbili,11 in his book al-‘Ilm al-shamikh fi tafdil al-haqq ala al-aba’ wa al-mashayikh, dedicated a separate chapter in which he discussed the issue of disagreement in religious affairs, including the reliability of Sahabah. Due to the numerous advantages and valuable rules it contained, I cite herewith a brief abstract of it:

Allah, Subhanahu, has hinted to difference in religion, reiterating this several times in His holy Book, as He is fully aware of its detriment in the world, repeating it in regard of the Children of Isra’il, saying: “And they were not divided until after the knowledge came unto them, through rivalry among themselves.” Allah said the truth, as we could not find disagreement but only where truth could be ascertained. Then came the Messenger of Allah (S) and forbade from suspicions entailing conflict, warning against them, like controvery about qadar (fate), regarding which the Almighty said: “O ye who believe! Ask not of things which, if they were made known unto you, would trouble you…”

And the Messenger of Allah said: “Depart me as long as I leave you”. Allah, the Glorified, has perfected the Din on His Prophet’s tongue, so nothing drawing us near paradise but he would show it to us, and so also with the Fire, nothing was ignored by Allah or His Messenger. Because Allah never likes us to search for everything with our powerless minds, as all the world was created in a limited measure within His Knowledge, after which the apostles were sent to perfect that what completing the favour, and establishing the hujjah.

Whatever other than this being only officiousness the detriment of which is feared and no benefit is expected. This mission was undertaken by the best of men, who used to evade disagreement, making up for every slip made by them, not insisting on the wrong they did knowingly, as did by Talhah and al-Zubayr and ‘A’ishah.

Those Companions who survived till after the demise of the Prophet, bore patiently despotic rulers till the emergence of heresies due to searching for whatever left by Allah and His Messenger, of which if there was any good for them, Allah would certainly make them acquainted with all these things through His Messenger never leaving them groping about awkwardly. Then some novel things appeared among Muslims, like talking about qadar and issue of creation of the Qur’an, and interfering in what occurred among the Companions, followed by debate before kings and emirs which turned to partisanship.

Each party was claiming this to be religiosity, while in fact it is not so. But when they overleapt the bounds, not observing their limit at which Allah and His Messenger ordered them to stop, Allah forsook them alone bewildering them with dissension and making them taste the tyranny one of another. Consequently, one caliph would agree with those people, launching severe attack against their opponents, while another one would invalidate what the first one did, speaking ill of these and belittling those, till evil prevailed and people divided into schisms.

Sometimes we see someone convert from a madhhab to another for the sake of some shaykh, or a ruler or any other worldly cause and natural bigotry. It is also reported that Ibn Abd al-Hakam inquired for majlis (meeting) of al-Shafi’i after his death, when it was said to him: Al-Shafi’i said: Al-Rabi’ is more rightful to my majlis. Al that time he was enraged, converting to the Maliki School, compiling a book calling it: Al-Radd ala Muhammad ibn Idris fima khalafa fih al-Kitab wa al-Sunnah. Thus was mentioned by Ibn al-Sabki, and only Allah and those who are of sound instruction know well that haqq (truth) could never be wholly beside a certain party, and falsehood with the rest, but the truth – thanks to God – can never come out from among them altogether.

In fact truth was quite on the side of those who committed themselves to what the Prophet (S) brought with him, and it is inevitable for him to err in his exertions too in respect of minor issues not in major issues. And who can keep on his state and accept the teaching taught from Allah and His Messenger, never adopting any madhhab, preferring the ancestors to the Book and the Sunnah and abandoning this irremediable blight, committing himself to equity in reporting? By God I know not anyone in all these extinct books but he would grope about and confuse, being bigoted to his madhhab without any fairness, referring the Book of Allah to his belief and perverting!

After exposing the biography of the mutakallimun, he embarked on talking about the narrators, saying:

These muhaddithun, who claim the Sunnah to be firm, forbidding from kalam (theology),12 were afflicted with corruption and deviation more than others, as they being on the centre of way of the Shari’ah, and demorality, war, assault, serpents, scorpions, poisons and lions when being on the road are verily more detrimental than when they be on the sideways.

However, their calamity being caused by indulgence in kalam, becoming more fanatic than the mutakallimun since the latters based their work on examination, without blaming the knowledge-seeker for discussion and putting questions and inventing explanations, rather counting this as a kind of elegancy and perfection. With succession of views, the latters, might discover the rapprochement in kalam of the two parties and alike, as falshood of jabr (determinism) was uncovered for the followers of al-Ash’ari, who clung then to acquisition and after finding it defective they converted to the Mu’tazilah school on the basis of meaning as stated before.

Also establishment of option never appertains to the Mu’tazilah alone so as to be averse to it, but it being verily the Din and hujjah of Allah, and when being verified by any of the latters he would take easy what was aggrandized by the ancestors and be calm. While the muhaddithun have adopted something through the first sight, never criticizing, as if this being an innovation which they believed in, while it being an innovation from first to last, so why did they engaged themselves in it? It seems that their indulgence was unintentionally, but they were enticed by the Satan saying to them: You are Ahl al-Sunnah (followers of the Prophetic Sunnah), so who would defend it if you forsake these people? Thus they neither were satisfied with what they had, nor realized the intention of those people so as to be able to refute their claim!

Al-Imam Ahmad, with his full knowledge of the Sunnah and dedication to God the Glorious, was not ignorant of this, but when discussing the issue of creation of the Qur’an and was afflicted because of it, he considered it equal to Tawhid (monotheism) or even more! Once he was told that Muhammad ibn Harun said to Isma’il ibn Ulayyah: O the son of prostitutor! Do you claim the Qur’an to be invented? Or a similar expression! Ahmad said: May God forgive him (i.e. Muhammad ibn Harun). While Isma’il ibn Ulayyah was more entitled to imploring of Ahmad, since he was his equal in being an imam of knowledge and piety. And if supposedly he has erred in regard of what Ahmad alleged, then God’s forgiveness is certainly more expansive. And his error in its regard is only like that who assumes caliphate while being devoid of its provisions and traits, plunged (ya’uth)13 in blood and properties of Muslims!

May God forgive Ahmad, he has gone too far in bigotry in this issue, to the extent that whoever opposing him would be rebuffed with rejecting his riwayah, which being a treachery to the sanad. Because that who obligated approval of the report of the reliable, would obligate accepting such khabar, as he used to say: ‘We report from the Qadariyyah’, and when checking al-Basrah we will find two thirds of their people to be Qadariyyah, as reported in Tahdhib al-‘Izzi and other books.

This issue cannot exceed the limit if there being steadiness in the disagreement regarding the two issues, but he exaggerated and began to reject the waqif saying: So and so is an ill-omened waqifi.14 He even overstated and said: I never like reporting from that who responded in the ordeal like Yahya ibn Mu’in, though Ahmad was not among the obstinate nor among the hardliners. His shaykhs (in hadith) included ‘Amir ibn Salih ibn Abd Allah ibn Urwah ibn al-Zubayr ibn al-Awwan, in whose regard al-Nasa’i said: He is not thiqah, and al-Daraqutni recommended to reject his hadith. Ibn Mu’in said about him: He is a liar, villain, enemy of Allah, and of no value, and also said: Ahmad turned mad, is he reporting from ‘Amir ibn Salih? Al-Dhahabi said: He is very weak…Ahmad has never reported from anyone weaker than him.

Despite guluww of al-Dhahabi15 in regard of Ahmad and approving of him, but he would not doubt that he was not covetous toward his narrators, but only when the issue be related to the Qur’an. We want to ask him: What do you know about the Qur’an and the Sunnah, is the Qur’an not invented? Or is it invented? And your research and that of others are both innovations! And Allah described the Qur’an as an Arabic Qur’an containing no crookedness, saying:

وَلَقَدْ جِئْنَاهُم بِكِتَابٍ فَصَّلْنَاهُ

“We made it,” and ‘We have revealed it’, and ‘We have expounded it’ (7:52)

never saying, We have invented (created) it, nor saying it is not invented. So wherefrom you have brought this Sunnah.

When Ali ibn al-Midyani, in whose regard al-Bukhari16 said: ‘I never despised myself but only near him’, responded during the tribulation, being subject to sarcasm, though he might be excused when responding in the abandonment, in regard of the issue of invention of the Qur’an, till was defended by Muslim17 though being known of leniency toward his rijal.

Even more amazing than this being the fact that those supporting Ali ibn al-Midyani couldn’t find any fault except their saying: From him many narrators reported that he said: “Whoever claims the Qur’an to be makhluq (invented) has denied God! And whoever said, Allah does not see has denied God!” This exemption, if being right, has in fact incited vindictive feelings against him, since it is charging a Muslim with impiety without a proof shouldered by one of them, the charge that was levelled against ‘A’ishah and some of the Sahabah and Tabi’un in negation of vision (ru’yah of God).

But the muhaddithun could not recognize the extent of error in kalam as this being out of their capacity, and every owner of anything should have knowledge of that thing alone. So we should search for this meaning and learn every art from its leaders, and beware of aliens in it. They used to reiterate this rule, and when intending to exempt anyone from error or extol him they would say: Whoever claims the Qur’an to be makhluq (invented) he is a disbeliever. That was said in regard of some people, among whom being Ibn Luhay'ah and others, and rather they said: Al-Muhasibi left the heritage of his father adding: the followers of two cults can never inherit each other, since his father was a waqifi.

Yahya ibn Mu’in, leader of jarh and ta’dil, said: ‘Amr ibn Ubayd was a dahri (atheist, sceptic)! When asked, who is the dahri? He replied: He who says: nothing…while ‘Amr was not so. Had we referred to the greatest of mutakallimun, or rather the venturous story-tellers, we would have never found anyone daring to that extent against a man known widely of knowledge, asceticism and gnosticism, followed by about half the Ummah.

In regard of Unbasah ibn Sa’id ibn al’As ibn Umayyah, Yahya ibn Mu’in said: He is thiqah, and used to keep company with al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf; and so also said al-Nasa’i and Abu Dawud and al-Daraqutni, with al-Bukhari and Muslim reporting from him. Further al-Bukhari has reported from Marwan ibn al-Hakam, who accused Talhah while being among his army, and the one who prompted him to revolt against Ali, doing every sort of calamity.

Ibn Hajar al-Asqallani, a leader of the recent narrators (al-Kamil), in his exposition on Marwan, said: If his companionship is proved, no vilification would affect him! As if suhbah being like prophethood or the Companion being infallible,18 the fact being an imitation in investigation after reliability of the Sahabah became intuitive among the Jumhur.

Truly what is intended by this being only the majority, as the praise from Allah and His Messenger – the evidence for their reliability – has not identified individuals by names but it came in general, though the evidence for the Companionship including every seer (one who only saw the Prophet) and alike, is a very meagre evidence, and would that be known who is the addressed recommended? Is he the same recommended in the Prophet’s hadith: Do not insult my Companions…if anyone of you spends the weight of each of them in gold, he can never attain to the measure or half of anyone of them.

Here it is obvious what kind of factors lying behind those traditions,19 when the latters in Islam talking in regard of the formers, as when he said to Ammar (may God be pleased with him): Does this slave insult me? If we intend to generalize the epithet of companionship from upward going downward, i.e. starting from the sabiqun (ancestors) up to that who could only see the Prophet, so from looking at the positions of extolling cited in the Qur’an and the Sunnah, we can distinguish between one telling of a lofty status the least of which being reliability, and one telling of some kind of honour, though the Prophetic distinguishing probably came very explicit as his (S) saying in regard of one poor Companion: “He is verily better than the earthful of this”, i.e. some of the heads among the latters in Islam.

Generally-speaking, whoever following up these and other cases among the Sahabah, he is either blind or feigning blindness. As reliability of some of them should be recognized out of necessity, who constitute the majority as stated before, in a way making it unnecessary to investigate their biographies.

Among the Sahabah there being very few who were devoid of reliability, like wine-imbibers, so we should drive them out of reliability not out of companionship. Some of them have embraced Islam for fear from the sword (killing) like the freed prisoners of war (tulaqa’),20 and others, of whom if his good state couldn’t be confirmed, he would be quite unknown for all, who being very rare in number.

Nevertheless, reliability verily is not like ‘ismah (infallibility), but people have exaggerated in regard of those whose companionship was confirmed in insisting on proving their adalah. Had we admitted the inclusion of subhah (companionship) and after it adalah to all, the case would not have reached that level portrayed by ghulat among the narrators.

If suhbah benefitted one like Bishr ibn Marwan, if supposedly it was proved, or al-Walid, it would become clear for us that no act would be detrimental along with companionship except infidelity, when suhbah would be greater than faith, and this belief would be more special than madhhab of Muqatil and his followers, the Murji’ah.

And what is the position and consideration of the ahadith: “You don’t know what they have done after you”, which were mutawatir (successive) in meaning. Rather, if tawatur in words was claimed in some of them that belief would be justifiable, and Sunnah-claimants have claimed companionship or its confirmation for those no evidence was established in their regard, deriving from it as many as they liked of ramifications, founding then the Din on this. Hasn’t God said: “If an evil-liver bring you tidings verify it...” in regard of a man of an ascertained suhbah,21 though his state was uncovered together with the suhbah.

Among the Sahabah there were some addicted to drinking wine22 , beside innumerable (bad) practices that were not divulged as an observation for the right of the Prophet (S), unless there being a religious necessity when it should be mentioned. The worst infliction is verily inference of a religious ruling out of narrations of Marwan and al-Walid ibn Uqbah23 and others. This being verily the greatest betrayal to the Din of Allah and contradiction to the express text of the holy verse, the consequence of which would not bring the Sahabah as a whole any defect, but rather it being a vindication for them, so beware of self-conceit.

No doubt al-Bukhari was one of the leaders of lofty muhaddithun, so how would be the case with those having lower position despite the fact that al-Bukhari evaded reporting from so many devout huffaz,24 as stated in books of jarh and ta’dil. Also Ali al-Midyani was ignored by Muslim. In regard of Umar ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas, al-Ijli said: He is a Tabi’i and thiqah, from whom people reported hadith, and it was him who embarked on murdering al-Imam al-Husayn.

So is there jarh (defamation) in religion worse than this? And this being a warning only, as it is a vast section when opened for researchers to compile in it, this would take a full book. So also said the other muhaddithun in regard of their opponents in aqa’id (doctrines), that can be put to test.

The evidence for this claim can be found in the books of jarh, from which we can meditate statements about the supporter and opponent, considering them as witness from the foes, and would that they made this inward and outward, but they say that they report from the innovators while treating them in such a way. Yahya ibn Mu’in - when authenticating Sa’id ibn Khalid al-Bajali and being told that he was a Shi’i - said: a Shi’i and thiqah, and a qadari, thiqah.

Al-Ijli, described Imran ibn Hattan as a thiqah, while he flattered Ibn Muljam25 (may God’s curse be upon him), saying:

O smite by a pious desiring nothing from it,

But to attain to pleasure of throne Owner!

Here we can identify who was pleased with killing of Ali, and who killed Talhah, and who killed al-Husayn, and how they were deemed trustworthy by others. While the faithful and true ulama and huffaz of the Ummah, like Hammad ibn Salamah - the known leader - and the ascetic scholar Makhul, were avoided and ignored by al-Bukhari and Muslim too.

The beliefs and opinions held by the muhaddithun differed much regarding the narrators, as we see the same man may be described once with the epithet Amir al-Mu’minim by some and the biggest liar by others or something alike. We can have a look into the two Sahihs, and see how their authors shunned the great imams, against whom malice should be harboured, and if avoiding the best of them was considered, it (malice) would vanish, and it would never affect the supposition of their truthfulness but only like a drop in the sea.

And among the rijal they cited in their books there were some who were vilified by many leaders of hadith, and harshly attacked by some others, though they both - i.e. authors of the two Sahihs - would not be obliged but to act according to their ijtihad. More wonderful than this is the fact that their rijal included some whose ta’dil could never be established, but rather their position was like that of unknown or ignored ones.

In his exposition of Hafs ibn Bughayl, al-Dhahabi said: Ibn al-Qattan said: He is of unknown condition and unrecognized, meaning he was not known to be unreliable and he himself was unknown, gathering both the ignorances. Al-Dhahabi said: I haven’t mentioned such kind (of people) in my book al-Mizan. Ibn al-Qattan said: He has discussed those subjects that were not broached by any imam (leader) or one lived contemporaneously with that man, indicating his reliability, which being something great.

In the two Sahihs there can be found so many of these concealed people who were neither deemed weak by anyone nor considered unknown. In his tarjumah of Malik al-Khayr al-Zabbadi he said: Among narrators of the two Sahihs, there being a large number (of narrators) whose authentication was not confirmed by anyone. How marvellous is that! The reporting is done from the unknown while eminent leaders and compilers are abandoned because they believed in invention of the Qur’an or were among the Waqifah or something of the sort. What causes wonder here is the courtesy of al-Dhahabi when he said: “...and they are not unknown,” as that whose reliability was not proved would not be included with the evidences of khabar al-ahad relevant particularly to the reliable.

Besides the term mastur (hidden, concealed) can never bring its owner into the fold of the reliable who being meant by proofs of approving the ahad (single) narrators. To ignore men like Abu Hanifah, Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, Ibn Ishaq and Dawud al-Zahiri, among whom some were admitted by people in the maghazi (moral lessons), and some others were imitated by half the Ummah, and reporting from an unidentified man that no one knows who is he and what is he.

My intention is not defaming or belittling the two Sahihs, but to make known that the corruption of disagreement has prevailed everywhere, and this is exactly what I intend to manifest out of inviting to disdaining from disagreement and conflict, the fact to be known for all.26

In a footnote to this book, which is called al-Arwah al-nawafikh, al-Muqbili27 explained the statement “they claimed suhbah (companionship) and proved it for that no evidence was established for it in his regard, “saying” The outside aspect of this speech is the fact we reiterated before that they term something emerged in recent times, embarking then on interpreting the Book and the Sunnah with their renewed term... and suhbah has no legal Identity, but it and other words about merits of the Sahabah were used on the basis of lexical meaning.

But the traditionists termed and decided, without any evidence, that the term suhbah was used for everyone saw the Prophet, or seen by the Prophet even when he was a child, provided that he be a Muslim, keeping this until death and not apostatizing. No equitable or sane man can doubt that these restrictions being only in terminology not necessitated by the language, as the derivation being from sahaba (accompanied) not from ra’a (saw) or sighted certainly or hypothetically, so as to include even the blind one. It was better for them to say close hypothetically or a similar expression, so as to include even the contemporary people who did not see the Prophet or even every and each one, as hypothesis has capacity to cover everything. This is verily the origin of misconception of the issue, as we cautioned previously against this mistake that was perpetrated by so many people.

After identifying the word suhbah (companionship), they added to it an appendix by cancelling what was practised by the Sahabah. Some of them disguised under claim of ijtihad, that could be proved false by exigency in numerous cases, and some others would declare openly! How wonderful is this impudence in claiming ijtihad on the part of Bisr ibn Arta’ah28 , who was known of doing all kinds of evil, as he was envoy of the mujtahid Mu’awiyah, advisor of Islam in slandering Ali ibn Abi Talib and his Shi’ah (party). Beside Marwan and the debauchee al-Walid, and the ijtihad in swearing allegiance to Yazid and that who suggested it and endeavoured to achieve it or advocated it, beside innumerable cases.

They claim that all these practices aimed only at gaining God’s pleasure, except some ignorant ones unaware of what they are saying, giving premises, nourishing on desire and blind imitation, that became their diet. After that on this basis they dared to construct identical things from which no one could be free, though they differed in religious status, with the purpose that the pious disdaining from approving such calamities. That who was absent in time of committing a sin but showed his consent then would be viewed like that who attended and participated in it, and vice versa, as stated in the Prophetic hadith.29

Adopting Reliability Of All The Sahabah

While the Jumhur believe in reliability of all the Companions, refusing any jarh and ta’dil regarding them with accepting that for other narrators, considering them (Sahabah) all infallible against error, inadvertence and forgetfulness, there being many researchers not believing in this (absolute) reliability for all the Sahabah. But they hold the same view held by al-Allamah al-Muqbili that it includes the majority not all, and that they are liable to error, forgetfulness, inadvertence and even caprice, as they are human beings doing what others do, that which belongs to the human nature.

Besides, their master (S) who was chosen by Allah, Who knows better where to place His Message, said: “I am only a human being, that may be right or mistaken,” supporting their judgement with those (companions) who were during the lifetime of the Prophet (S) among the hypocrites and liars, and many of whom apostatized after his demise. Truly they have instigated wars and seditions that consumed everything, with their bad consequences still sensed nowadays and will continue in future. It seems that the Messenger (S) could discern with his penetrating insight what will his Companions do after his passing away, as a result of which he said in the Hijjat al-Wada’ Pilgrimage (Farewell): “Do not return after me disbelievers beheading and killing each other.”30

Al-Bukhari reported from Ibn Abbas, that the Prophet (S) said: “Verily you will be resurrected bare-footed and naked, and a group of my Companions will be driven to the left (Fire). I would say, (God! Aren’t they) my Companions! He (God) would say: They were still apostatizing and renegading since the time you departed them. I would say as the righteous bondman (al-Abd al-Salih) said: “I was a witness of them while I dwelt among them”.

Muslim reported the same hadith thus: “A group of my Companions will be brought to me at the Pond (of al-Kawthar), and as soon as I recognize them they shall be dragged away. I would say, (God! Aren’t they) my Companions! He (God) would say: ‘You don’t know what they did after you.”

Al-Bukhari reported from Abu Hurayrah as the Prophet saying: “When I was standing, a group of people came toward me. As soon as I recognized them a man emerged between me and them saying: Come on! I said: Where to? He said: Toward the Fire, by God. I said: ‘What did they do?’ He said: ‘They retraced their steps backwards after you.’ Then another group appeared, and as soon as I recognized them, a man came out in between me and them, saying: Let’s go, I said: whereto? He said: Toward the Fire, by God. I said: What did they do? He said: They retreated backwards. And I never think any of them will be delivered but as few as the ignored cattle.31

In another version of the hadith, the Prophet (S) said: “On the Day of Resurrection, a group of my Companions will come toward me, and will be dragged away from the Hawd (Pond). I would say: O God, (aren’t they) my Companions. He (God) would say: You have no knowledge of what they did after you... they have retreated backwards”.

Sahl ibn Sa’d reported that the Prophet said: A group of people will be brought to me (on the Doomsday), whom I know and they know me. Then something will intervene between me and them. Abu Hazim said: Al-Nu’man ibn Abi Ayyash heard me and said: Did you hear it in this way from Sahl? I said: Yes. He said: I give evidence against Abu Sa’id al-Khudri that I heard him - adding to it- and me (the Prophet) would say: But they are from me. It would be said to him: You don’t know what they did after you. I would say: Remote be everyone who changed after me.

Al-Bukhari, under “bab Ghazwat al-Hudaybiyyah”, reported from al-Ala’ibn al-Musayyab, from his father, as saying: I met with al-Bara’ ibn Azib when I said to him: Blessed be you, you kept company with the Prophet (S) and swore allegiance to him under the tree. He said: O my nephew, you don’t know what we did after him!

He also reported from Abd Allah, that the Prophet (S) said: I will precede you on the Pond, and some men from among you will be brought to me, and will be dragged away from me. I would say: O God, (aren’t they) my Companions! It would be said: You don’t know what they did after you. Al-Bukhari said: He was followed by Asim who reported from `Wa’il. Husayn said: It is reported from Abu Wa’il, from Hudhayfah, from the Prophet (S).

And he reported from Asma’ bint Abi Bakr as saying: The Prophet said: I will be at the Pond waiting to see who from among you will come toward me. And a group of people will be dragged away from me, when I would say: O my Lord (aren’t they) from me and from among my Ummah? It would be said: Did you realize what they did after you? By God, they kept on retreating and falling backwards.

Al-Bukhari said: Ibn Abi Mulaykah used to say: O God, we seek Your protection against retreating backwards and being seduced away from our Din.

Those were some traditions I quoted from al-Bukhari and Muslim, which contained so many (odd) things I disdained from citing for sake of brevity.

Hypocrites Among Sahabah And Surat Al-Tawbah

Al-Baghawi and others reported from Ibn Abbas as saying: The Messenger of Allah was not aware of the hypocrites till the revelation of Surat Bara’ah (al-Tawbah). Before it he could recognize some of their distinguishing qualities, sayings and deeds, out of what is revealed in their regard in several surahs before Surat al-Tawbah, like al-Munafiqun, al-Ahzab, al Nisa, al-Anfal, al-Qital and al-Hashr.

Surat Bara’ah has in fact disgraced them and divulged all sorts of their outward and inward hypocrisy, the reason for which it was called also al-Fadihah, al-Muba’thirah, al-Musharridah, al-Mukhziyah, al-Muthirah, al-Hafirah, al-Munakkilah, al-Mudamdimah and Surat al-Adhab.

Herewith exposition of some facts about them in the Battle of Tabuk and its limit, with their acts and signs of their hypocrisy, and scandals, and their punishment, arranged according to the course of the verses of Surat al-Tawbah not according to the letters.32

1. Their asking permission to remain behind, which can never be done by a believer, as none asks permission to abandon jihad but only that who believes neither in Allah nor in the Hereafter (467).

2. Had they intended really to go out they would have made ready for it (174)

3. Allah was averse to their resurgence, so He hindered them (471)

4. Had they risen out among the believes, they would have only increased in their perplexity, with wishing for their disgrace (473).

5. They have adopted the course of sedition before Battle of Tabuk, during Battle of Uhud, when they instigated discord among Muslims, discouraging some of them (474).

6. They reversed the facts for the Prophet in the outset till truth was revealed to make him victorious and manifesting of Allah’s decree, while they being averse to this (475).

7. Some of them took leave from the Prophet to stay behind (in battles), with the excuse of fearing from being infatuated by prettiness of the Roman women but they were afflicted with the fascination of disobeying Allah and His Messenger by practice (477).

8. Every good befalls the Prophet would bother them, and every disaster strikes him would delight them, thinking themselves to be decisive in remaining behind (478).

9. The believers await for the hypocrites to be afflicted with a doom from Allah directly or at their hands (479).

10. Their almsgiving would not be accepted due to their debauchery, impiety, performing prayers while being idlers, and paying their contribution only unwillingly (481).

11. Punishing them with their wealth and children in this world, and passing away of their souls while being disbelievers (485-574).

12. Their swearing for the believers that they be in truth of them, with describing their failure and being afraid of them (485).

13. Pointing of some of them at the Messenger in the alms, and if they be given from them they would be pleased, otherwise they would be enraged (487).

14. Their vexing the Prophet (S) by saying: He is only a hearer (516).

15. Their swearing for the believers to please them without pleasing Allah and His Messenger (522).

16. Their fearing from revelation of a surah proclaiming what be in their hearts, and threatening them (by God) for their scoffing with disclosing what they fear (525).

17. Their apologizing for their scoffing by saying that they were only prating and jesting, which being the same as infidelity, with threatening to punish a party of them because of their insistence on their guilt, and possibility of forgiving another party (528-532).

18. Manifesting the conditions of the hypocrites and their general qualities, males and females, and throwing them together with the disbelievers into Hellfire and cursing them (533).

19. Resembling them to the hypocrites of the ancient peoples in having nothing to do but to enjoy what they stated when prating in falsehood and perishing of their works in the world and the Hereafter like them (527), with reminding them with the fate of the hypocrites folks who were before them (539).

20. The hypocrites are verily the transgressors (the verse 67).

21. Connecting them (hypocrites) to the disbelievers in respect of obligation of striving against them, with being harsh in treating them and threatening them (549).

22. Their swearing (by Allah) on denying what they said of the word of disbelief, and God’s proving what they denied, (and He inspired them that which they could not attain), which being the attempt to assassinate the Prophet (551-555).

23. Making some of them a covenant with Allah to give alms when being straitened, but breaching their covenant and lying after attaining richness and affluence, with (Allah’s) making the consequence of this to be hypocrisy accompanying them until the day of meeting God. And their unawareness that Allah knows both their secret and what they announce (558).

24. Their pointing at and carping the believers in giving the alms, and deriding them (563).

25. Depriving them from asking forgiveness by the Messenger due to their disbelief in Allah and His Messenger, with no hope to be guided (by Allah) through abandoning their rudeness. (666).

26. Rejoicing of those who were left behind at sitting still behind the Messenger of Allah, and their recommendation not to go forth in the heat with reminding them with the fire of hell (569).

27. Its being more proper for them to be sad, laugh a little and weep much (572).

28. The Prophet’s forbidding from praying for the dead of them, giving the reason to be their disbelief and dying while being disbelievers.(573).

29. Asking leave by men of wealth among them to stay behind of jihad whenever a surah is revealed commanding to gather between faith and jihad (581).

30. The state of the wandering Arabs and asking permission by some of them to sit and be exempted from jihad, and sitting of the liars without an excuse, with threatening that a painful doom will fall on those who disbelieve (583).

I suffice with citing these qualities of the hypocrites in the Battle of Tabuk, as stated in Surat al-Tawbah, Whoever seeking more information or desiring to recognize all the acts done by the hypocrites, he can refer to the Surahs of al-Munafiqun, al-Ahzab, al-Nisa’, al-Anfal, al-Qital and al-Hashr.

In the two Sahihs, in hadith al-Ifk, it is reported that Asid ibn al-Khudayr said to Sa’d ibn Ubadah: You are a hypocrite, and you dispute on behalf of the hypocrites. Then there was a heated wrangling between them till the Prophet reconciled between them. These were the Badrites among whom someone said to the other: you are hypocrites, but the Prophet never charged with impiety anyone of them.

There are so many reports in this regard, and anyone desiring to know the names of the hypocrites among the Khazraj and Aws (Tribes), he can refer to the first volume of Ansab al-Ashraf, in which their names filled ten pages from p.274 upto p.283.

Preferring Trade and Pastime to Prayers

It seems proper to state here what was done by the Sahabah toward the Messenger of Allah, and how they broke away from him toward merchandise and pastime, preferring this to prayers, leaving him standing performing the Jumu’ah (congregation) prayer, alone. That was after the commandment of Allah the Glorified to them to haste unto remembrance of Allah and leave the trading, as that is better for them, if they but knew. Nevertheless, they disobeyed Allah’s order and dispersed toward their merchandise and pastime, leaving the Messenger of Allah!

The following verse can divulge the truth about them:

وَإِذَا رَأَوْا تِجَارَةً أَوْ لَهْوًا انفَضُّوا إِلَيْهَا وَتَرَكُوكَ قَائِمًا قُلْ مَا عِندَ اللَّـهِ خَيْرٌ مِّنَ اللَّـهْوِ وَمِنَ التِّجَارَةِ وَاللَّـهُ خَيْرُ الرَّازِقِينَ

“And when they see merchandise or pastime, they break away unto it, and leave thee standing. Say thou (O Our Apostle Muhammad!) What is with God is better than pastime and (better) than merchandise, and God is the Best of sustainers” (62:11).

Hypocrisy of Companions during and after Prophet’s Lifetime

The following is a hadith reported by al-Bukhari and others33 from Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman, in which he manifests clear the hypocrisy of the Sahabah during the Prophet’s lifetime and after him.

Hudhayfah said: The contemporary hypocrites are worse than those who lived during the Prophet’s lifetime and used to conceal their truth but today they declare publicly! In another narration by al-Bukhari from him (Hudhayfah) too; who said: Verily hypocrisy was found in the time of the Prophet (S), but today it is no more than disbelief after faith. In another narration (he said): It is in fact disbelief and faith.

Al-Bazzar reported from Abu Wa’il as saying: I said to Hudhayfah: Which is worse, the hypocrisy of today or that which was found during the time of the Messenger of Allah? He - banging his forehead by hand - said: Oh! It is today manifest, while in the time of the Messenger of Allah they used to hide it.

I support this chapter with a statement written by Dr. Taha Husayn in his book Uthman, in which he referred to the issue of fitnah (disorder) that happened during the time of Uthman, and some comments of the historians about it.

The stances of people toward the events during the days of Uthman and his role in them differed much. Some of them relieved themselves of the job saying: Most of these events were falsified and innovated, and their occurrence was not established. But they were claimed to exist by claimants, some of whom intended to hatch plots against Islam, with some others being compelled to do so, because of the severe animosity that was found among the parties. Therefore they would reject and deny most of the events, viewing those ones accepted by them to be not so perilous, but were subjected to exertion of opinion (ijtihad) by the madhhab leader (imam) that if he would be correct, two rewards will be his share but if mistaken one reward.

However, his intention of that was only good, as he could not intend but good, the opinion that was held by them (the latters) in regard of the narrations approved by them, which were exposing the antagonism that was going on between Uthman and the Prophet’s Companions. So most of these events were viewed by them to be composed and very few of them could be accepted according to the above-mentioned interpretation, i.e. they were produced as a result of ijtihad.

Most of those holding this notion, are in fact compelled to it, due to their consecration to that era of Islam, and being averse to accuse the Prophet’s Companions with charges that were usually ascribed to those caring only for the worldly lusts, out of what they harbour of readiness to rivalry and struggling on transient wishes that never suit people accompanied the Messenger of Allah, striving hard in the way of Allah and founding the State, through what they expended of money , wealth and efforts.

Despite the possibility of being wrong or correct but they used to strive all the time, rushing to do good, so it was not possible for them to be involved in major sins, nor to perpetrate such minor sins that Allah forgive for His benevolent bondmen! Few of those holding this belief are impelled to hold it due to the mental inactivity that curbs them from researching, investigation and inquiry.

There being others who make it easy for themselves by denying the possibility of occurrence of such events and seditions at the hands of the Prophet’s Companions, viewing them to be conspiracies hatched by enemies of Islam, like Abd Allah ibn Saba’ and his likes from among People of the Book and other than them. It is quite obvious that we can never believe in this or that notion, as we neither like laziness nor incline towards comfort, nor exaggerate in consecrating people to that far extent, nor ascribing to the Prophet’s Companions traits which they don’t attribute to themselves.

They used to consider themselves to be human beings, liable to what others are subject to, of sins and guilts, exchanging serious charges, with some of them accusing each other with infidelity and liberatinism. As an example, it is reported that Ammar ibn Yasir used to charge Uthman with impiety, deeming it lawful to kill him, calling him with the name of Na’thal.

It is reported too that Ibn Mas’ud used to deem shedding the blood of Uthman to be lawful when he was in Kufah, where he used to address the people saying: The worst of things are verily their invented ones, and every invented thing is a heresy (bid’ah), and every bid’ah is dalalah (deviation), and every deviation is in fire, meaning with this Uthman and his deputy al-Walid. Further it is reported that Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf said to some of his companions, when he was in deathbed: Precipitate him (i.e. Ali), before his sovereignty exceeds the bounds.

Those who supported Uthman from among the Prophet’s Companions, were of the opinion that their opponents had renegaded religion and violated his commandment, the reason for which they deemed fighting each other as lawful. And actually so they did, as in the Battles of al-Jamal and Siffin, except in the case of Sa’d and his few companions.

While the Prophet’s companions have obliged themselves toward such disagreement, reciprocating charges with major sins and fighting each other to please God! So how can our opinion of them be better than the way they viewed themselves, and we can’t hold the belief held by those denying most of the akhbar (reports) that conveyed to us the sedition and conflict occurred among them. Doing so, we would only negate the Islamic history as a whole since the mission of the Prophet, since those who narrated the reports of these seditions were the same narrators relating the news of conquest and reports of maghazi, beside sirah (conduct) of the Prophet and caliphs.

Hence it is not for us to believe them when narrating that which pleases us, and belie them when reporting that which we dislike. And we should not approve of a part of history and negate its other part, for the only cause that some of it pleases us while some other part of it bothers or harms us. Also it is improper to believe whatever is narrated or belies it as a whole, as the narrators being ordinary people liable to err and be correct, and may tell the truth or falsehood.

The earlier traditionists themselves realized this fact, and made ready for it, laying down certain rules and regulations for ta’dil and tajrih, and believing and refuting, beside ways of preponderation and disapproval, and suspecting that which is doubtful. So we are not to blame when adopting the same method they followed, and to add to the rules known for them the new rules recognized by recent traditionists, which they employed to verify, investigate and analyze the texts so as to comprehend their denotations.

The point that has no room for any doubt being that, the Muslims have differed in opinions regarding Uthman, and this disagreement resulted in a disorder and insurrection that created disunion and discord after which they haven’t attained unity or agreement till the present time.34

Taha Husayn concluded this chapter with some elaboration about the rules that everyone studying the Islamic history should follow and base his research on their principles, so as to employ them to verify, investigate and analyze the texts and comprehend their denotations.

He also obligated upon anyone intending to study these reports properly, to adopt a stand toward narrators of reports as that of a psychologist, viewing them as ‘ordinary people liable to err and be right, and may tell the truth or falsehood.” Further, he should seek truth and equity when investigating their narrations, believing nothing out of malignance, or denying nothing out of self desire.

If these healthy rules cited by Dr. Taha Husayn enrage some people, they undoubtedly deserve approval and confidence of ilm (knowledge), truth and religion altogether.

I conclude this chapter with a word recorded by Dr. Ahmad Amin (may God’s mercy be upon him) in his book Duha al-Islam,35 through a letter by some Zaydis, saying:

“We noticed how the Sahabah used to criticize each other, or rather curse each other, and if the Companions were at a position where no criticism or cursing be permitted, we would be able to recognize this fact through them themselves, as they are better aware of their status than common people of our present time.36

For example Talhah, al-Zubayr and A’ishah and their supporters have forsaken Ali, with Mu’awiyah and Amr ibn al-As having not fallen short of smiting him and his followers with the sword. It is also reported that Umar used to vilify and refute the narrations of Abu Hurayrah,37 standering Khalid ibn al-Walid and charging him with debauchery, accusing Amr ibn al-’As and Mu’awiyah with dishonesty and looting the spoils of war and deducting them. In fact we can rarely find among the Sahabah anyone whose tongue and hand be free from fault, beside many similar instances found in history books.

The Tabi’un used to follow this way in regard of the Sahabah, holding such belief about the rebels among them, while common people considered them as masters after that. It can be said that the Companions were only ordinary people, and should be judged and viewed in the same way of other people. Whoever of them doing any offence is to be censured, and that who does good should be extolled, having no merit over others but in sighting and accompanying the Messenger. Rather, the sins they perpetrated might be more obscene than those of others, since they have witnessed all the landmarks and miracles, therefore our guilts should be considered lighter as we are far from that time and more excused.”

After finishing talk on reliability of the Sahabah, I am going to manifest how the Ummah ulama’ were viewing the akhbar al-ahad.

Attitude of Ulama’ Toward Akhbar Al-Ahad

In a comment on utterance of Ibn al-Salah38 , “The Ummah received al-Bukhari and Muslim with approval” al-Jaza’iri said: “He didn’t manifest what he meant by Ummah! Or what he intended by receiving them both with approval! And he had to elucidate that clearly so as not to let doubts and questions raised in the minds of people. If he meant by Ummah all the Ummah throughout all ages, he would prove his dishonesty, as these two books were only approved in the 3rd century after the time of al-Bukhari and leaders of known schools of mudhahib (Islamic Law). And if he meant some of it - who came on the scene after the two Sahihs and they truly constituted part of the Ummah - his proof cannot be established. But if he meant by it its ulama’ - which is apparently sensed - the ulama’ here are on three divisions: Mutakallimun, Fuqaha’ and Grammarians.

But the ulama’ to whom this description can be applied, being in fact those who emerged after coming out of these two books in the 3rd Hijrah century. Whereas those who came before them from among people of ancient centuries, in regard of whom a hadith ascribed to the Prophet was cited, that ‘they were the best of peoples of all centuries’, had never seen these two books so as to seek their opinion regarding them, nor the way they received them.

Let’s go back to the ulama’ who came after the appearance of these two books, to inquire about the way they viewed them and how they received them.

The Mutakallimun

Out of what is known about them, they used to refute and reject every hadith contradicting their beliefs, even if it was among the conjectural issues. When any such hadith was cited before them, they would interpret it if finding its interpretation accessible. Or they would reject it contenting with saying: This is of akhbar al-ahad indicating only conjecture, and it is impermissible to take decision based on conjecture in the case of kalami issues, since the basic principle in ilm al-kalam being always: The naqli evidences can never indicate certainty”39

As an example for this, we can refer to the hadith: A dispute was heated between the Paradise and Fire. The Fire said: I have been distinguished with the supercilious and despots. While the Paradise said: What is the matter with me that no one enters me but only the weak and mean among people! Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, said to the Paradise: You are My mercy, with you I bestow My mercy upon whoever I choose from among My bondmen. And to the Fire He said: You are only a torment, with you I punish whoever I wish from among My bondmen. For every one of them is her filling! As the Fire is never filled till He (We seek God’s forgiveness) puts His leg, when it would say: Never, never, never. Only then it would be filled and would seclude itself altogether, and Allah the Glorious and Exalted never oppresses anyone. Concerning the Paradise, Allah will verily prepare for it certain creatures.

This hadith is unanimously concurred, and was reported by al-Bukhari and Muslim from Abu Hurayrah, from the Prophet (S). In another narration by al-Bukhari, from Abu Hurayrah, it reads thus: the Paradise and Fire quarrelled before their Lord - the hadith - saying in it: Allah will originate creatures for the Fire. In another narration by Muslim: “Till Allah puts His leg.” The researchers believed that the narrator intended to mention the Paradise, but he was distracted and his tongue slipped and said the Fire.

No mutakallim can believe in veracity of this hadith and its likes – which being so many – and rather he can never be determined in their regard! And if he be obliged to believe in their veracity he would spare no effort to interpret them, even if when the words cannot conduce it, in a way the hearer gets to know that the speaker never holds it permissible inwardly. This fact has created strong antagonism between the mutakallimun and muhaddithun, that is known for anyone looking into history books, to the extent that the mutakallimun called the muhaddithun with the name al-mushabbihah (anthropomorphists), while the muhaddithun used to give them the title al-mu‘attilah (prorogators).40

The Fuqaha’

In relation to the fuqaha’, it is commonly known about them that they used to interpret every hadith contradicting the notions held by the ulama’ of their madhhab, even if being among the latters. Or they used to refute the hadith by another hadith, though being unfamiliar among leaders of hadith, and that one they refuted being recorded in the two Sahihs or reported in al-Sihah al-Sittah.

Whoever looking into the expositions of the two Sahihs, everything will be explicitly manifested. Some have avoided courtesy to the muhaddithun, expressing that preponderating two Sahihs over other books being a preponderation without a preponderated, and those who showed courtesy were content with the apparent indications. To this fact a reference was made by al-Izz ibn Abd al-Salam in Kitab al-qawa’id by saying:

What raises wonder here is the fact that even when any of the imitating fuqaha’ be acquainted with the weakness of doubt aroused by his imam, he would keep on following him in it, though failing to find an escape for him. Moreover he would leave alone those who witnessed and attended the revelation of the Book and the (Prophetic) Sunnah, and the correct criteria for his madhhab, clinging strictly to imitating his imam, and rather he may follow some trickery so as to divert and repel the phenomena of the Book and Sunnah, interpreting them with false illogical interpretations for defending his imitated imam.

They used to meet and gather in one place, and when anyone of them hearing some hadith contradicting what he used to have in mind, he would be so astonished, not bothering himself to seek the evidence, rather being stiffly adherent to what he was familiar to, that is imitating his imam. But had he pondered over it, his amazement of the madhhab of his imam would have been much more and prior to that of any other madhhab!

Hence, debating with such people is verily futile and useless, leading only to antagonism and discord of which no benefit is hoped. I have never known of anyone converted from madhhab of his imam after coming to know that truth and right be in the side of another madhhab! Rather such person would insist on it despite his awareness of its weakness and remoteness from truth. It is better then to refrain from debating such people who when one of them failing to keep pace with madhhab of his imam, he would say: There may be an Imami who comprehended a proof that I couldn’t understand, or be guided to it. This poor man is unaware of the fact that this is encountered by its equal, and he is distinguishing his rival with the manifest evidence and clear proof mentioned by him. Glorified is Allah, many are those whose sight was covered by imitation, till impelling him to hold the belief I referred to.

May Allah help us to follow the truth wherever it be and no matter by whom it is disclosed. (End of statement of al-Izz).

Al-Jaza’iri (may God’s mercy be upon him) concluded this discussion with an important notice, in a commentary on their criticism for the hadith of disputation between Paradise and Fire), that the Fire is never filled till Allah originates another creation, saying:

What is strange in this respect being the attempt of some unknown man, who has no experience in this profession, whether in respect of riwayah or dirayah to ascribe error to it, believing that criticism has closed its door for all, or thinking that criticizing the text is unjustifiable since he fearing that pleasure-seekers may enter from it, unknowing that when criticism being practised according to the normal course it would not be deplored.

Many of leaders of hadith have experienced this case, like al-Isma’ili, who after citing the hadith “Abraham will meet his father Azar on the Day of Resurrection with darkness covering Azar’s face”, said: This is a report in whose veracity there being doubt, with respect to the fact that since Abraham is well aware that Allah never fails to keep is well aware that Allah never fails to keep the tryst, so he may consider what befell his father as a disgrace for him, with telling him that Allah promised not to disgrace him on the Doomsday, though being aware that He never breaks His covenant. We can see here how he found defect in the text he stated.

Some of the usulis said that the traditions contained things that can’t be ascribed to the Prophet (S), as they can’t be held in accordance with their apparent aspect due to their being contradictory to the proof, and other than their appearance being far from his(S) eloquence.41

Sayings of Madhahib Imitators

After completing the speech of those who refuted Ibn al-Salah, I am going to cite a number of sayings about imitators of madhahib and their standpoint in respect of hadith, so as to perfect what al-Izz ibn Abd al-Salam previously said.

The indisputable fact being that a certain hadith may be adopted by some Hanafi due to its good fame, but some Shafi’i may come then and reject it due to weakness (he claimed) in its sanad! While some Maliki follower may neglect the same hadith since the practices and acts proceeded in its contrariety, with a Shafi’i acting according to it due to strength of its sanad in his view, and so on and so forth.

In Mir’at al-usul and its exposition Mirqat al-wusul, there can be found principles laid by the Hanafis on investigating the position of the narrator. They hold that if he was a faqih, all of his narrations will be approved, whether he agreeing with the qiyas (analogy) or contradicting it. But if he was not a faqih, like Abu Hurayrah and Anas, his narration would be rejected when disagreeing with the hadith he reported.

Some ulama’ hold: Riwayah of akhbar from the Messenger of Allah (S) is not accepted but only when being khabar by common people from common people, or the ulama’ of all regions concurring on acting according to them. This method was followed by the fuqaha’ of Iraq: Abu Hanifah and his companions.

This matter was elucidated by al-Imam Abu Yusuf, the companion of Abu Hanifah, in his book which he compiled from al-Awza’i. And in the book al-Umm of al-Imam al-Shafi’i42 the following statement was quoted from Abu Yusuf the disciple of al-Shafi’I: “You have to take the hadith which is widely-known by ‘ammah (common people)43 and beware of the odd one, as Ibn Abi Karimah related to us from Ja’far that the Messenger of Allah has one day summoned the Jews and put to them some questions, when they related to him some traditions in which they told lies about Jesus Christ. Thereafter he assumed the pulpit and addressed the people saying:

Verily the traditions ascribed to me will spread among you. When what is reported to you from me agrees with the Qur’an, it is certainly from me, but when it contradicts the Qur’an it is verily not from me. And as we were told, Umar was not approving of any hadith reported from the Messenger of Allah (S) but only with two witnesses (confirming it). Ali ibn Abi Talib also used to reject every hadith reported from the Messenger of Allah.

The narrations are multiplied, producing strange things unknown by the fuqaha’, and inconsistent with the Book and Sunnah, so avoid the odd traditions, and take only the traditions approved unanimously by men of hadith and fiqh, and which agree with the Book and the (Prophetic) Sunnah.44 So you have to measure everything according to this rule, whatever contradicting the Qur’an is verily not uttered by the Messenger of Allah, even if cited through narrations. And even if related by trustworthy narrators from the Messenger of Allah (S) that he said when was on death-bed: I forbid - in another narration: I never forbid but only - what is forbidden by the Qur’an and Allah, and they never retain anything against me.45 Make the Qur’an and the Sunnah your Imam and leader, and keep on this, and take it as a criterion for measuring whatever is cited to you, of that which was never clarified in the Book and the Sunnah!

Al-Imam Alam Al-Din Al-Maliki, In His Book Iqaz Al-Himam,46 Writes:

We may see someone that when coming across some hadith agreeing with his madhhab, he would be delighted and would admit and yield to it. But if coming across a correct hadith free from abrogation and contradiction, supporting the madhhab of other than his imam, he would open wide the door for remote probabilities, turning away from it, seeking for his leader’s madhhab aspects of preponderation, despite its contradiction with the Suhabah, Followers and express text; when failing in all this he would claim abrogation47 , without any evidence, or specification, or non-acting according to it, or any other plea presented by ill-minded people.

When being unable to do all this, he would allege that his imam had knowledge of all the narrations or most of them, and he (imam) had left this noble hadith only when coming across a refutation against it in his view. Hence he would take of the ulama of his madhhab as lords, opening for their excellences and noble acts many doors, thinking that whoever opposing this to be mistaken and misled. And if he was being counselled by anyone of the Sunni ulama, he would take him as an enemy, even if he was an intimate friend before!

Opinion of Malik and his companions

The opinion held by Malik and his companions being thus: The Sunnah can be established through two manners: One of them lies in finding some leaders among the Prophet’s Companions holding an opinion agreeing with it. The second way being: Not to find people disagreeing in its regard. And he (Malik) used to toil and exert efforts all the time, abandoning every other thing though several traditions were cited in its regard, saying: The most beloved traditions to me are those upon which there being unanimous agreement among people.

We have to return to the original topic. Al-Shatibi, in al-Muwafiqat,48 said. About the hadith “washing the pot from the licking of the dog seven times”, the imam (of madhhab) said: This hadith is cited, and I don’t know the truth about it! He deemed it weak saying: When its (dog’s) game trophy is eaten so how its saliva being abhorred? Malik also disregarded the hadith: “Whoever dies while owing some days fasting, his wali (custodian) should fast on his behalf,49 in accordance with the Qur’anic principle: “No laden soul can bear another’s load.”

Ibn al-Arabi says: If khabar al-wahid comes contradictory to any of the legal rules, is it permissible to act according to it or not? Abu Hanifah said: No, it is impermissible to act according to it. Whereas al-Shafi’i holds: It is permissible. Malik said: When the hadith be supported by a rule, it can be adopted, but if it be alone it should be neglected, as in the case of the dog’s licking. That is because this hadith contradicted two great principles: One of them being the Almighty’s saying: “... so eat of that which they catch for you...”.

The second one is that: The cause of taharah (purity), which is hayat (animation), is incarnated in the dog. He also forbade from fasting six days of the Month of Shawwal – despite the establishment of the hadith that is reported by al-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud and al-Nasa‘i, saying: Whoever fasts Month of Ramadan, following it with six days of Shawwal it will counted as he has fasted all the life – which he refuted, relying on the principle of sadd al-dhara’i.

Abu Hanifah holds: When khabar al-wahid is cited contradictory to the qiyas (analogy) it will never be accepted, that is why they have never approved of the hadith of al-misrat.

Al-Tahawi,50 the Imam of the Hanafis, who was mujtahid in the madhhab, used to disagree with his father when the evidence being established, criticizing the hadith in respect of its meaning despite the veracity of the sanad in the view of the traditionists.

Al-Awza’i And Abu Hanifah

Ibn al-Hammam reported that al-Awza’i said: Why don’t you raise your hands (to the chest) during ruku’ and standing up? He (Abu Hanifah) said: Because there is no confirmed hadith about it from the Messenger of Allah. Al-Awza’i said: “How is that, while al-Zuhri related to me from Salim, from his father Ibn Umar, that the Messenger of Allah used to raise his hands when starting the prayers and during ruku’ and when standing up after it. Abu Hanifah said: It was related to us by Hammad, from Ibrahim (i.e. al-Nakha’i), from Alqamah and al-Aswad, from Abd Allah ibn Mas’ud that the Prophet was not raising his hands but only when starting the prayers, not returning to it again. Al-Awza’i said: I relate to you from al-Zuhri, from Salim, from his father, and you say: It was related to me by Hammad, from Ibrahim! Abu Hanifah said: Hammad was afqah (more knowledgeable) than Salim, and Alqamah was not lower than Ibn Umar in fiqh and if Ibn Umar was merited with his company (to the Prophet), al-Aswad also was of great virtue.

The Moroccan Hafiz, in al-Intiqa’,51 said:

Many of men of hadith used to permit sarcasm against Abu Hanifah because of his refuting a large number of reliable akhbar al-ahad, as he used to compare them to what got unanimous agreement of traditions and meanings of the Qur’an, rejecting whatever deviated of them and calling it odd.

Al-Nawawi says: Abu Hanifah was keen in taking the knowledge, defending God’s sanctuaries against violation, taking only those traditions he considered to be correct that were reported by trustworthy narrators, beside the acts of the Messenger and Kufah ulama’ he could see.

Al-Awza’i used to say: We never harbour malice against Abu Hanifah because of exerting his opinion,52 as we all do that also, but the reason for our malice against him lies in the fact that when relating to him any hadith from the Messenger of Allah he would disagree with it by approving of another hadith.53

Despite all these facts, Abu Hanifah is and will be counted as the greatest Imam, and his followers are spreading all over the world, east and west, with no one being allowed to doubt their faith or suspect their devotion. In A’lam al-muq’in Ibn al-Qayyim enumerated about one hundred traditions that were not adopted by imitators of the fuqaha’, taking them from the books regarded authentic by Ahl al-Sunnah.

Sibt ibn al-Jawzi has also cited a number of traditions taken from the two Sahihs that were disregarded by the Shafi’is, when they approved other contradictory ones. And so also was the case with other madhahib.

Al-Khatib reported from Abu Salih al-Farra’ as he said: I heard Yusuf ibn Asbat saying: Abu Hanifah refuted four hundred or more traditions reported from the Messenger of Allah. He also reported from Wukay’ as saying: We know about Abu Hanifah that he disapproved of two hundred traditions. Further he reported from Hammad ibn Salamah through two ways, as saying: Abu Hanifah received the athar (old traditions) and sunan and refuted them by his opinion.54

We conclude this chapter with a statement uttered by Abu Shamah:

Madhhab Being Altered Religion

He (Abu Shamah), in his Mukhtasar Kitab al-Mu‘ammal li al-radd ila al-amr al-awwal, writes: One of gnostics was inquired about the meaning of the madhhab, when he replied: It gives the meaning of an altered Din, as Allah the Exalted said: “... and be not of those who ascribe partners (unto Him). Of those who split up their religion and became schismatics.”55

Points of Disagreement among Fuqaha’

The opinions of fuqaha’ differed due to the fact that everyone of them adopted a single hadith, adhering to it alone with ignoring others, the example for which can be seen in the hadith related by Abd al-Warith56 ibn Sa’id who said: I came to Makkah where I found Abu Hanifah. I said to him: What is your opinion regarding a man who sold something with stipulating a certain provision? He replied: The selling transaction is invalid and the provision is invalid! I came then to Ibn Abi Layla and inquired him about the same issue, when he said: The selling is valid and the condition is invalid. Then I (Abd al-Warith) put the question to Ibn Shubrimah, who said: The selling is valid and the condition is valid. I said to myself: Glorified is Allah, three of the fuqaha’ of Iraq do not concur in opinion on one issue! After that I returned to Abu Hanifah and apprised him with what his two companions said, when he said: I don’t know what they said to you. It was related to me by ‘Amr ibn Shu’ayb, from his father, from his grandfather saying: The Messenger of Allah has forbidden from selling with condition, so the selling transaction is invalid then and the condition. Then I betook myself again to Ibn Abi Layla and informed him of what his friends said, when he said: I have nothing to do with what they said to you, I was told by Hisham, reporting from his father, that A’ishah said: The Messenger of Allah ordered me to buy a slave girl and set her free the selling is valid and the condition is invalid57 .

Then I went to Shubrimah and made him aware of the opinions of his two companions, when he said: It is not my business to know what the opinions of them are. It was reported to me by Mis’ar ibn Kudam, from Muharib ibn Dithar, from Jabir who said: I sold to the Prophet (S) a camel, and he stipulated to me to carry it to al-Madinah, so the selling is valid and the condition is valid58 .

I suffice with these evidences, as citing all of them will need a full volume.

Grammarians and Linguists

As was stated before, the Ummah ulama’ were divided, in respect of manners of receiving the hadith, into three parts: Mutakallimun, Usulis – Fuqaha’ – and Muhaddithun. For perfecting this discussion, I have to refer to the viewpoint of the grammarians and linguists, who have not depended on hadith as an evidence for proving rules of language and grammar. Al-Suyuti, in his book al-Iqtirah fi usul al-nahw, stated: From his (Prophet’s) speech, it can be inferred as was confirmed, that he said it with the narrated wording, which is very rare, but it can be found in the short traditions, so rarely too.

Because most of the traditions were reported on the basis of meaning, and were transmitted by the non-Arabs who were born before committing them to writing. So they narrated them in accordance with the meaning indicated by the expressions they used, increasing and omitting, changing the places of the words, and substituting words with other ones. That is why we see different narrations with unsimilar expressions for the same hadith related to one subject. Then he disapproved for Ibn Malik his confirmation of grammatical rules with the words used in the hadith.

Then he reported from Abu al-Hasan ibn al-Da’i’ (d. 86 H.) as saying in Sharh al-jumal:

Permitting narration through the meaning is the reason – as I believe – behind relinquishing inference of hadith to establish rules of language, by imams (of linguistics) like Sibawayh and others. They relied in this regard upon the Qur’an and correct traditions reported by the Arabs (from the Messenger), and had not been there the declaration of ulama’ in permitting the reporting of hadith on basis of meaning, the Prophet’s speech would have more deserving to be used in confirming the rules of language, as he being the most eloquent of all the Arabs.

The author of Thimar al-sina’ah says: “Grammar (nahw) is a science deduced through qiyas and istiqra‘ (investigation) into the Book of Allah and speech of the eloquent among the Arabs.” So he confined it (grammar) to these two ways without citing the hadith.

In Sharh al-Tashil, responding to Ibn Malik (d. 672) who permitted inference of hadith and compiled al-Alfiyyah, Abu Hayyan (d. 740) said:

“The compiler has abundantly inferred what came in the traditions for establishing the universal rules in the language of Arabs. I have never come across anyone among the formers and latters to adopt this method other than him. But the first founders of ilm al-nahw (grammar), the investigators of ahkam from language of Arabs, like `Amr ibn al-Ala’ (d.154), Isa ibn Umar (d.149), al-Khalil (d.175), Sibawayh (d.188) among the Basran notable ulama’, al-Kisa’i (d.189), al-Farra’ (d.207), Ali Ibn Mubarak al-Ahmar (d.194) and Hisham ibn al-Darir, the Kufah leaders, have never done so.

They were followed by the latters among the two sects and others among the grammarians of all regions, like those of Baghdad and al-Andalus. On this topic there was some discussion with one of the smart latters who said: The ulama’ have in fact abandoned this (inference by hadith) due to not trusting the words to be uttered actually by the Messenger of Allah (S), as if they trusted that it would be counted identical to the Qur’an in establishing the general rules. But that was for two factors:

First: The narrators permitted reporting on basis of meaning, as a result of which we may see a certain event occurred in his (S) time, but never reported with the same words uttered by the Prophet, like: his saying: “I married her to you (zawwajtukaha) with what you know (by heart) of the Qur’an” and “I made her your property (mallaktukaha) with what you have...” and other alike words mentioned in this story.

Thus we can realize for sure that he (S) has not disclosed all these words, or rather we can never determine that he said some of them, since it is probable he said some words identical to these ones, and the narrators have used the identical words not the original ones. Because what is intended being the meaning, particularly with passage of long time on hearing without precising the hadith by writing, and depending upon memorization with precision of meaning,59 as precising of words being far-reaching especially in the long traditions. Sufyan al-Thawri said: If I tell you that I relate to you the hadith exactly in the way I heard it, never believe me, as it is verily the denotation. And whoever making the least glance at the hadith he would recognize certainly that they (narrators) used to relate hadith on basis of meaning.

Second: So much solecism occurred in the narrated traditions, because a large number of narrators were non-Arabs and unaware of the language of Arabs in the art of nahw, the fact leading to occurrence of solecism in their speech unknowingly. Hence their words and narrations included so many non-eloquent words, of and it is certainly known for all that the Messenger of Allah (S) was the most eloquent among people, not using but the chaste language with the best, most famous and clearest expressions. And the compiler (i.e. Ibn Malik) has abundantly inferred what is cited in the athar pursuing - as he alleged - the grammarians, without meditating much in this nor accompanying that who was of acute discernment, as Badr al-Din ibn Jama’ah - who was among those taking from Ibn Malik - said to me.

I said to him: Sir, this hadith is narrated by the non-Arabs, and their narrations are known to contain within them words and expressions which were never uttered by the Messenger (S)! But he couldn’t give any answer. Abu Hayyan says: I have insisted on discussing this issue so that no beginner would say: What is the matter with the grammarians, they infer the utterances of the Arabs, among whom Muslims, and disbelievers are there, and do not infer what is narrated in the hadith reported by reliable narrators like al-Bukhari and Muslim and their equals. Whoever going through what I have mentioned, he would verily realize the reason why hadn’t the grammarians inferred the hadith.

Ibn al-Anbari, in al-Insaf, discussed the prevention of (inna) in the khabar (predicate) of kada (almost be), saying: Concerning the hadith “Poverty has almost been kufr (infidelity)” was changed and altered by the narrators, since he (S) was the most eloquent among the Arabs, and this hadith is da’if (weak). Also in the book al-Nahw of Ibrahim Mustafa, a hadith is recorded, that reads: Verily the severest torment on the Day of Resurrection will befall the photographers,” so its narrator has solecized60 . This hadith was reported by Muslim.

Among those who refuted Ibn Malik, we can mention also Abu Ishaq Ibrahim al-Andalusi al-Shatibi al-Ghirnati, in his exposition (sharh) of Alfiyyat Ibn Malik, who said.61

Ibn Malik, by inferring the Prophetic hadith, has in fact disagreed with all the earliers (grammarians), as in none of their grammar books we can see inference of a hadith reported from the Prophet (S), but only in a way which I later on will indicate, God-willing. This while they quote the speech of the insolent and uncivil men among the Arabs, and their poems which include obscene words and abomination.

Abu Hatam reported from al-Jarmi that Abu Ubaydah Mu’ammar ibn al-Muthanna brought him some portion of his book Tafsir Gharib al-Qur’an al-Karim, when he said to him: From whom you have taken this, O Abu Ubaydah? As it contradicts the tafsir of fuqaha’! He replied: This is the tafsir of the backward bedouins (who urinate on their heels)! If you like you can take, or otherwise you can leave! Thus they depend on such people and forsake the correct traditions, for such people and forsake the correct traditions, for the only reason that they infer in grammar and language those ones proved to be, in their view, reported on basis of meaning, and permitted by imams, as what is intended for understanding the legal rules being the meaning not the words.

Therefore we see so many differences in the traditions as for the same hadith on one event we find the expressions differ greatly between what is agreeing with what was commonly known of speech of Arabs and what was unknown. Hadn’t the case been another way, it was unjustifiable for the narrators to report hadith on basis of meaning, in contravention to the case with transmitting poetry and utterances of Arabs, as the intention in quoting them being the words not the meaning, as indicated by tongue rules.

Hence the grammarians cared much for inference from the speech of Arabs reported from trustworthy men, leaving the traditions reported due to possibility of the narrator’s perverting the wording of the hadith from the Arabic criterion (standard), the fact leading to base it on other than the origin, and that was one of the things they prohibited for safeguarding the tongue rules. If we make a glance at their ijtihad in taking from the Arabs we would be astonished, as it was not abominable in their view to refrain from inferring the Prophetic traditions and deducing from them. How is that while they used to depend upon the narrations reported by men of readings, from the Qur’anic words, since they paid much attention to reporting of words.

Then he (al-Shatibi) said: I have never known any other one among the earlier grammarians be equal to him (Ibn Malik) but only Ibn Kharuf. It is probable that Ibn Malik has Allah knows better - adopted the opinion of forbidding from narration of hadith through meaning outright, which is a weak notion refuted by the determined reporting of the same issues through different words, the fact that was not specified to the time of the Sahabah alone, not to the Arabs other than them. Whoever pondering over books of hadith will verily find a lot of such instances, with a large number of words that are perverted from their Arabic origin, to the extent leading to charge with error the narrators among the scrutinizing imams and ulama’ knowledgeable of speech of Arabs, without distinguishing them from others. Al-Shaykh Abu Ishaq al-Shatibi says: Ibn Malik is surely not right in respect of this rule... etc.

The dear reader may have noticed in this book abundance of quotations of utterances of leaders of grammar about this theme. That was due to the fact that in each utterance of everyone of them there can be found benefits that cannot be seen in that of the other, and their evidences altogether can convince men of thought and opinion (with truth), so that no dispute can be there but only by the ignorant and bigoted.

There were several other cults and groups who took various positions toward hadith, like the Shi’ah, Zaydis, Kharijites (Khawarij) and others, as every people have their own Sunnah and their own leader (imam).

In regard of the Shi’ah, in particular the Imamiyyah, they never approve but only the traditions that proved to be correct in their view, through the way of Ahl al-Bayt from their grandfather (S). That means, they accept only those traditions reported by al-Sadiq (Ja’far), from his father al-Baqir, from his father Zayn al-Abidin, from al-Husayn al-Sibt, from his father Amir al-Mu’minin, from the Messenger of Allah, (God’s peace be upon them all. Whereas the traditions reported by people like Abu Hurayrah, Samurah ibn Jundub, Marwan ibn al-Hakam, Imran ibn Hittan, and Amr ibn al-As and their likes, have no consideration even an atom in their view.62

Concerning the Khawarij,63 they used to take and adopt only those traditions reported by the Sahabah followed by them. So the traditions accepted and deemed authentic by them being only those which were propagated to people before the fitnah (disorder, sedition)64 , white after it they have disregarded all the Jumhur due to their following of the imams of tyranny - as they claimed - as a result of which they could not attain their trust.

Opinion Of Al-Imam Muhammad Abduh

Hadith al-ahad, whatever degree of veracity it attained with the traditionists, was rejected and disapproved alright by al-Imam Muhammad Abduh, when it be contradictory to and disagreeing with reason, Qur’an and knowledge. The following are some excerpts of his sayings in this regard.

Talking about the sorcery ascribed to the Prophet, he said: Many of (blind) imitators who never recognize what the Prophethood is and the rights to be considered for it, were of the opinion that effect of sorcery on the noble soul of the Prophet was correct,65 so it should be believed, with disapproving and rejecting all the innovations of the heretics since they denied sorcery while some Qur’anic verses were revealed on confirming it.

We can clearly notice here how the correct Din and manifest truth being rendered to heresy by the imitators! We seek God’s protection! That the Qur’an is used as a hujjah to prove and establish presence of sihr (sorcery)! While it is ignored and disregarded when negating sorcery to be a trait of the Prophet (S), with, considering that only a lie fabricated by the polytheists.

How is it possible that interpretation is applied to this fact while it is unallowed in that case? Though what is intended by the polytheists being so manifest. Because they say that the Satan used to transfigurate the Prophet (S), and this transfiguration was counted by them to be sorcery and one of its modes. This being the very sorcery ascribed to Labid,66 in regard of whom they claimed that sorcery had intermixed with his mind and perception!

The fact in which all should strongly believe is that the Qur’an being confidently affirmed, and the Book of Allah through successive tawatur (transmission) from the Infallible (S). So we should be believed in whatever it establishes, and disbelieve in whatever it denies. And in it there being verses refuting the charge of sorcery from his (S), when ascribing assertion of this charge to the polytheists, his enemies, censuring them for this allegation. So he is definitely not afflicted with sorcery.

Sorcery Hadith Is Of Ahad

The hadith on sorcery - supposing it to be correct, is a singly narrated one (hadith ahad), and the ahad traditions are not approved in the bab of aqa’id (doctrines). And the Prophet’s infallibility against impact of sorcery being one of the aqa’id, that cannot be refuted and discarded off him but only by yaqin (certainty), nor it can be adopted through suspicion and suspected! While in regard of the hadith reaching us through the way of ahad, suspicion occurs only for that who deemed it veracious, but that for whom it was proved to be incorrect, he has no hujjah to establish against us. Anyhow, we have to give full authority in the matter of hadith, not making it arbitrator in regard of our creed, and take hold of the text of the Book and evidence of ’aql (reason).

Since if the Prophet became disordered in mind - as alleged by them - he would be warranted to suppose that he propagated something while he did not do so actually, or that something was revealed to him while it was not so, and this fact is so manifest needing no elucidation. Till he (Muhammad Abduh) said: How detrimental is the ignorant lover, and how severe being his danger against that whom he thinks to love. We seek protection by God against disappointment.

It is to be noted that the denier of sorcery outright can never be regarded a heretic, since Allah the Exalted has clarified what is that the believer should believe in the verse: آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ “The Messenger believed...”67 (2:285), and in other verses. Also there were commandments showing the things in which the Muslim should believe so as to be counted a (true) Muslim, with no any reference to sorcery.

He also said: Had these people given the Book its rightful value, and knowing of the language that much enough for a wiseman to speak, they would have neither prated all that nonsense, nor disgraced Islam with that blemish. But with that who got accustomed to believe in the impossible, it is not possible to debate with him whatsoever. We seek refuge by God against insanity.68

Charging the Prophet with sorcery was negated and refuted by the earlier ulama’ among whom I can refer, beside al-Imam (Abduh), to al-Jassas in his Tafsir.

Al-Imam (Abduh) has also refuted many traditions on doctrinal and non-doctrinal matters like hadith al-gharaniq (crowned-cranes), and hadith on Zaynab bint Jahash and others, regarding which his comments we cannot cite here.

Opinion of Sayyid Rashid Ridha’

I conclude this topic with a valuable comment for al-Allamah al-Sayyid Rashid Ridha’ (upon whom be God’s mercy):

Some of the ahadith al-ahad may constitute a hujjah against that for whom they were established and attained his trust, not being a hujjah against other than him according to which he should act. For this reason the Companions were not writing all the traditions reaching them nor inviting to follow them, but used to call to follow and act according to the Qur’an and the followed practical Sunnah (Prophet’s acts) manifesting it (Qur’an), except few cases where they would refer to the Sahifah of Ali that included some rules such as diyah (blood-money), emancipation of the captive, tabooing a city like Makkah.

Al-Imam Malik disapproved of the caliphs al-Mansur and al-Rashid their compelling people to act according to his books, even al-Muwatta’, but obligated following the ahadith al-ahad upon that who believed in them, in respect of narration and indication, necessitating on that trusting the riwayah of anyone and comprehending part of it to learn from him, but not to make of this as a law for all.

Whoever hearing a hadith that proved to be authentic in his view, should act according to it, and whoever contradicting some traditions due to not-being confirmed for him or due to being unaware of them, is not to blame. And ahadith al-ahad should not be followed in case of aqa’id (doctrines), but to be applied in the legal rules, since the proofs of the aqa’id being the mutawatir akhbar (reports).

It is not to blame also that who found a defect in narration of any hadith, disbelieving its chain of transmission due to that defect, and it is not fair to describe him as a denier of so and so hadith. They (ahadith al-ahad) indicate surmise, and the Ummah have based their worship on a khabar whose truth prevails over surmise, till considering among their rules that judgement is established through overwhelming surmise, of which its veracity is not binding in reality. And among the important foundations agreed among ulama’ of usul being: Occurrence (unexpectedly) of probability in the marfu’ actual conditions and events, can cover them with garb of wholeness, as a result of which its inferring will be invalid.69

Asking For Hadith Without Fiqh

Asking For Hadith Without Fiqh (And What The Traditionists Nicknamed With)

There remained one point worth mentioning, which is asking for the hadith in the recent eras, since it being relevant to the topic of my book.

Abu Umar ibn Abd al-Barr said: In regard of seeking the hadith, as done by a large number of present time70 people without comprehending it or deliberating its meanings, is something reprehensible among a group of men of knowledge.71

Al-Dhahabi (d.748) in his book Bayan zaghal al-ilm wa al-talab an ilm al-hadith, writes:

Most of the muhaddithun, have no knowledge (of hadith), and are not resolved to comprehend the hadith, or following it. And it is not to blame Sufyan al-Thawri for saying: Had the hadith been good, it would have gone away as the good goes away! (The full text of statement of Sufyan is thus: Had this hadith been khayr (good) it would have decreased as the good decreases, but it is evil, so it increases as the evil increases). By God he said the truth! As what good is there in a hadith whose sahih and weak words being intermixed, and not verified, nor its transmitters be investigated, nor being fit for recognizing teachings of the Din. He continued by saying: By God, it is better to forget about these things, as we have become a subject of teasing and mockery for men of intellect, who started to look at us differently, saying: These are the people of hadith!

After reviewing the course of riwayah and notable narrators in the earlier ages, he said: This intense situation retreated in the 4th Century as compared to the 3rd century, and it is continuing to come down up to the present time. Now the best of today traditionists - though numbering so few - are equal to those who were of low position in the past, despite their large number. Also there can be someone renowned with fiqh and opinion in the past who excels many among the latters in hadith, besides, some of ancient time mutakallimun being more knowledgeable in ilm al-athar than the mashayikh (chiefs) of present time... etc.72

These were the statements of leaders of hadith in regard of the condition of muhaddithun during the 5th and 8th Hijrah centuries... so how would be the case with those claiming nowadays to be among the muhaddithun, with their level of knowledge being only reading some of hadith books, and learning by heart a few of the traditions contained in them? This alone can never be enough to make of anyone a knowledgeable man, of whose knowledge people can benefit, or trust his sayings or verdicts.

In regard of a man said to be striving much till reaching a degree that could not be attained by any other one, learning by heart all of Sahih al-Bukhari, al-Imam Muhammad Abduh said: “One copy increased in the country…“By God al-Imam said the truth: what he meant that the worth of this man, who was admired by all people due to his memorizing of al-Bukhari, was not more than the value of a copy of al-Bukhari’s book, that can’t move or comprehend !

Al-Dhahabi, from whom we quoted these words, being in fact the great traditionist and historian of Islam, in regard of whom al-Safadi in his book Nukat al-himyan has said: I have met him and learned from him so many of his compilations, never seeing in him the inaction of traditionists, or non-originality of transmitters.73

That was not to be said by al-Safadi but only due to the inertia widely known to afflict the men of hadith. Al-Imam described them also with putrefication and narrow-mindedness, in his book Risalat al-Islam wa al-Nasraniyyah.74

If all that was said by al-Safadi about his shaykh for the sake of exempting him from the defect of jumud (stiffness) known to be common among men of hadith, his shaykh al-Dhahabi himself has uttered the following words in their regard in his valuable book Siyar a’lam al-nubala’, in the biography of al-Faqih al-Muhaddith Shaykh al-Islam Abu Bakr ibn Ayyash:

I reported from the book Fawa’id of Abu `Amr Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Nisaburi, from Abu Turab Muhammad ibn al-Faraj who said: I heard Khalid ibn Abd Allah al-Kufi saying: On the way of Abu Bakr ibn Ayyash there was a dog, that on seeing any inkpot owner (i.e. one of scribes of hadith) it would attack him. One day men of hadith have fed it something which caused its death. Abu Bakr then went out, and on seeing it dead said: We all belong to God that who used to bid to good and forbid from evil has gone away. Nu’aym ibn Hammad says: Abu Bakr ibn Ayyash used to spit at men of hadith.

In Ta’wil mukhtalif al-hadith (p.96) Ibn Qutaybah writes:

We cannot exempt most of men of hadith from censure and blame in our books, due to neglect acquiring knowledge of what they wrote, and comprehend what they compiled, with rushing into seeking to obtain the hadith from ten or twenty ways! And in every correct way and the two ways sufficient evidences are there for that intending to recognize God through his knowledge till going away of their lives, getting nothing of all that but a number of asfar,75 that fatigued the knowledge-seeker and never benefitted the successor! Whoever be of this class we will view him as a loser of his right, demanding other than which can benefit him.

Such people were called Hashwiyyah and Nabitah76 and Mujbirah, or it is said Jabriyyah. Also they were given the names of: Ghutha’77 Ghuthr,78 which all being nicknames.79

Al-Wazir al-Yamani, in al-Rawd al-basim, says: They were called Hashwiyyah because they used to yahshun (insert) baseless traditions into those ones reported from the Messenger of Allah. That is they used to foist these fabricated traditions into the original ones while they had never been among them.

In his book Diya’ al-ulum, Muhammad ibn Nashwan writes: The reason for calling the Hashwiyyah with this name lies in their approval of so many akhbar without negation.80

Al-Shi’bi says: The earlier righteous men were averse to relating the hadith abundantly, and if I was able to be moderate and fair in accepting and rejecting, I would not relate any hadith but that which got unanimity of men of hadith.

Al-A’mash said: By God to give in charity a piece of bread is much better for me than relating sixty traditions.

Shu’bah inquired Ayyub al-Sakhtiyani about some hadith, when he replied: I suspect it. He (Shu’bah) said: Your suspicion is to me more lovable than certainty of seven ones.

It is reported too that Shu’bah ibn al-Hajjaj said: O people, the more you progress in hadith, the more you retrograde in the Qur’an.

He also said: I never fear anything to cause me to enter the Fire but only the hadith.

Further he said: I wish I was a bathhouse igniter, and never being engaged in hadith.

Ubayd Allah ibn `Amr said: I was in the meeting in al-A’mash’s house, when some man came and asked him about an issue, for which he couldn’t give him any answer. But he looked at Abu Hanifah saying: O Nu’man, declare your opinion in its regard. And he said: The opinion about it is so and so.

He (Ubayd Allah) said: From where (is that)? He (Abu Hanifah) said: From the point you related it to us. Al-A’mash said: We are the pharmacists, and you are the physicians. That is: men of hadith are like the pharmacists while the fuqaha’ being like the physicians.

Shu’bah says: I used to (in the past) be delighted whenever sighting anyone of men of hadith! While nowadays nothing is more detestable in my eyes than to see one of them. He also used to say: Verily, this hadith curbs you from remembering Allah, and from salat (prayers). So would you give up (relating the hadith)?

Al-Shi’bi was of the opinion that to be engaged in poetry is safer than relating the hadith. Once upon a day he said to his companions: If I sought (to serve) Allah, I wouldn’t go out for you, and if you sought Allah (His pleasure), you wouldn’t come to me... but we all like flattery and dislike censure.

‘Amr ibn al-Harith says: I have never seen knowledge more honourable, nor people more foolish than people of hadith!

Sufyan looked at the men of hadith saying: You are going too far. Had we and you altogether been present in the time of Umar ibn al-Khattab, he would have severely beaten us.81

Mughirah al-Dabbi said: By God I am much more frightened from the debauchees than them (men of hadith).

Sufyan al-Thawri said: We have been indulged in the hadith for sixty years, and I wish I had come out from it self-sufficient, neither against me nor for me.82

Muhammad ibn Salam says: Yahya ibn Sa’id al-Qattan related to me saying: Reciters of poetry are more mindful than narrators of hadith, since the latters narrate a lot of fabricated traditions. While reciters of poetry recite the masnu’ (falsified), criticize it and say that this being falsified.83

Al-Mazini (the eminent grammarian) was asked about characteristics of men of knowledge, when he said: Men of the Qur’an are charged with confusion and weakness, while men of hadith are charged with hashw (insertion) and raqa’ah (impertinence). And the poets are known with hawaj (i.e. recklessness and rashness), and the grammarians are known with sluggishness, and in narration of akhbar are quite elegant.84

If we intend to cite all the sayings uttered in regard of inanimation of men of hadith, it would be so protracted, so we suffice with what we have already stated.

I conclude this chapter with a regrettable issue, as it indicates how Islam was inflicted with the malady of discord, and partition into several groups. Among the Muslims communities and sects, I can refer to the Mu’tazilah group which was called also al-Adliyyah and its rival group which was called Ashab al-Sunnah, between which there was heated conflict that led them to defame and attack each other.

Notes

1. Refer to my reply to al-Ajjaj and others in my book Shaykh al-mudirah.

2. Fath al-Bari, vol. III, p.2.

3. Al-Allamah al-Muqbili, in his reply to those proving the companionship for that who saw the Prophet: They term something very late, coming then and interpret the Book and Sunnah with their abstract term. And suhbah (companionship) has no legal origin but only used lexically, and so also are the rest of words used for indicating the merits of the Sahabah. But the muhaddithun termed and decided, with no any proof, that suhbah is used for everyone the Prophet saw, or he saw the Prophet even if he be a child! on condition that he be a true Muslim, and dying on this without apostatizing.

4. Al-Isabah, p. 4.

5. Al-Taqrib, pp. 3 - 21.

6. Yahya ibn Mu'in was one of great leaders of jarh and ta'dil whose opinions about the rijal were deemed a decisive authority (hujjah).

7. The result of bigotry can be realized here.

8. If al-Bukhari does not depend on such lofty magnate as hujjah so on whom does he depend? You can see what al-Bukhari did to Imams of Ahl al-Bayt, from whom he disdained to report, as stated before.

9. Al-Ahkam, vol. II, p. 128.

10. Ibn Qutaybah, in Ta'wil mukhtalif al-hadith, writes: What is wonderful about them being their charging the Shaykh with falsity, without reporting from him what the traditionists agreeing with him, of censuring Yahya ibn Mu'in and Ali ibn al-Midyani and their likes, while they argue with the hadith of Abu Hurayrah (as hujjah) in cases not agreed by anyone of the Sahabah, though he was belied by Umar and Uthman and A'ishah (pp. 10, 11).

11. He is al-Shaykh Salih Mahdi al-Muqbili, one of Yemen mujtahidun. He died in 1108 H. In origin he was a follower of Zaydiyyah school (madhhab), seeking truth then by not imitating, which led him to abandon embracing any religion, and admitting the truth that is established on evidence. Al-Imam al-Shawkani certified his absolute ijtihad.

12. That is 'ilm al-kalam.

13. It is said: 'atha - ya'thi - and 'atha - ya'ith which is the severest kind of corruption. See al-Qirtayn, p. 43.

14. The waqif is that who never talked about the issue of creation of the Qur'an.

15. Al-Muqbili described al-Dhahabi as that who used to feign calumniating Ahl al-Bayt, being blind to their virtues and merits, taking the side of the Umayyads, particularly the Marwanis.

16. One of those discussing the issue of creation of the Qur'an was al-Bukhari who said: Our acts are created and our words are taken from our acts.

17. Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj, is the author of the famous book.

18. See their definition of the Sahabi, stated before in this book.

19. This hadith was said when Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf stickled with Khalid ibn al-Walid in one of the battles, and Khalid used harsh words against Abd al-Rahman. When this news reached the Messenger of Allah, he said: Never insult my Companions … (the hadith). Hence it is said in a certain occasion, and it was reported by Muslim.

20. Like Abu Sufyan and Mu'awiyah and their supporters.

21. That is, his being one of the Sahabah, who was al-Walid ibn Uqbah.

22. Like Qudamah ibn Maz'un.

23. It is him in whose regard the verse "…If an evil-liver bring you tidings, verify it…" was revealed.

24. Refer to what I stated earlier about this issue.

25. Ibn Muljam was the one who perpetrated the guilt of murdering Ali (A).

26. Al-'Ilm ol-shamikh, pp. 297-312.

27. Al-Arwah al-nawafikh, pp. 678-688.

28. Ibn Hajar, in al-Isabah reported that Mu'awiyah has delegated Bisr ibn Arta'ah to Yemen and Hijaz, commanding him to find those who followed Ali and kill them altogether. It was him who killed two kids for Ubayd Allah ibn Abbas.

29. Those who were considered among the Sahabah, some who carped the Prophet (S) in regard of the alms (sadaqat), and some who vexed him saying: He is only a hearer, and some who chose a place for worship out of opposition and disbelief, and separation among the believers, with those in whose hearts there was disease, and the disabled, and those asked to stay behind in the Battle of Tabuk, who were eighty-plus men, and swore to the Prophet who accepted their declaration. In their regard the verses:

"They will swear unto you by God, when ye return unto them, that ye may turn aside from them; so turn ye aside from them; verily they are unclean and their abode is hell; a recompense for what they did earn. They will swear unto you that ye may be pleased with them, but (even) if ye be pleased with them, verily God is not pleased with people who are wicked," (9:94-96)

were revealed. Al-Bukhari reported from Zayd ibn Thabit as saying: When the Prophet went out toward (Battle of) Uhud, some of his Companions retreated backwards, when a group said: We should kill them. Another group said: We should not kill them. At that time this verse: was revealed "What hath happened to you (that) ye are two parties about the hypocrites? Verily God hath reversed them for what they have earned…". Al-Raghib, in his Mufradat, said: "reversed them, meaning: he returned them to the disbelief." There is so much talk about this bad.

30. See al-'Ilm al-shamikh, of al-Muqbili, p. 92.

31. Hummal al-na'am means the cattle which have no shepherd, which means that only very few of them will be delivered from the hell.

32. This chapter is taken from the tenth volume of Tafsir al-Qur'an al-hakim, of al-Imaman Muhammad Abduh and Muhammad Rashid Ridha’, and the numbers placed before the words are the numbers of the pages of this volume.

33. Fath al-Bari, vol. XIII, pp. 62, 63.

34. Al-Fitnah al-kubra, p. 17 and following pages.

35. Duha al-Islam, vol. III, pp. 75, 76.

36. Similar to them are the commoners of our time, though disguising among people under cloak of ulama'.

37. Refer to my book Shaykh al-mudirah.

38. Tawjih al-nazar, p. 125.

39. Al-Mawaqif by al-Ibji and al-Jurjani, p. 79, Istanbul edition.

40. Also al-mutakallimun used to call the muhaddithun with the term al-Hashwiyyah, describing them as the most ignorant of what they have of knowledge, and the miserest among people in what they seek. They contented of knowledge with its outward only, and were pleased to say: So and so is expert in ways and narration of hadith, but was indifferent to be said: He is aware of what is written and applying what he has knowledge of.

Refer to Ibn Abd al-Barr's Jami' bayan al-ilm wa fadlih, vol. II. And I will give more elaboration on this in the chapter: "Seeking Hadith without Fiqh."

41. Tawjih al-nazar, pp. 130, 131, 136, 137 and following pages.

42. Al-Umm, vol. II, pp. 307, 308.

43. With the word ammah (common people) the jumhur (Sunnis) not the opposite of khassah (the upper class).

44. The Sunnah is the practical one (acts), which was commonly known among them in this way.

45. See Sirat Ibn Hisham, vol. IV, p. 332.

46. Qawa'id al-tahdith, p. 72.

47. Al-Zuhri says: The weariest and most incompetent among fuqaha' is that who failed to recognize the abrogating hadith and abrogated one of the Messenger of Allah.

48. Al-Muwafiqat, vol. III, p. 21.

49. It is reported by the two Shaykhs (Al-Bukhari and Muslim) and Abu Dawud.

50. He is Abu Ja'far al-Tahawi, who learnt fiqh under his uncle al-Muzni the companion of al-Shafi'i. He compiled Ma'ani al-Qur'an and Mushkil al-athar and other books. He was born in 229 H. and died in 321. H.

51. Al-Intiqa', p. 149.

52. Abu Hanifah was leader of men of opinion (who used to exert their opinion).

53. Ta'wil mukhtalif al-hadith, p. 63.

54. See vol. XIII, p. 390.

55. See p. 10.

56. In another narration: al-Layth ibn Sa'd.

57. This hadith was reported by al-Bukhari under bab "al-Shurut fi al-wala".

58. Al-Batliyosi, al-Insaf, pp. 70, 71.

59. It is too difficult for him to convey the meaning exactly and accurately.

60. Al-Insaf, p. 65.

61. I have quoted this statement from the book al-Mawahib al-fathiyyah, of al-Shaykh Hamzah Fath Allah, vol. I, pp. 39-41, in which he briefed what was reported by al-Allamah Abu Ubayd Allah Muhammad al-Andalusi al-Maliki, who was widely-known with al-Ra'i, from chief of his shaykhs Abu Ishaq Ibrahim al-Andalusi.

Among those who talked about the standpoint of the grammarians toward the hadith, claiming that they were never inferring it, was Abd al-Qadir al-Baghdadi, the author of Khazanat al-adab, so refer to pages 5 and 6 of vol. I of his book.

62. Al-Allamah Muhammad Husayn Al Kashif al-Ghita', Asl al-Shi'ah wa usuluha, p. 149, 10th edition.

63. They are those who renounced allegiance and revolted against Ali (A).

64. How is it possible to distinguish between what was produced before the fitnah and what was produced after it.

65. The hadith of sorcery was reported by Ahmad and the two Shaykhs and al-Nasa'i.

66. Labid ibn al-A'sam, who was said to have bewitched the Prophet (S).

67. Full text of the ayat quoted:

آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْهِ مِن رَّبِّهِ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ كُلٌّ آمَنَ بِاللَّـهِ وَمَلَائِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّن رُّسُلِهِ وَقَالُوا سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا غُفْرَانَكَ رَبَّنَا وَإِلَيْكَ الْمَصِيرُ

“The messenger believes in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, and (so do) the believers; they all believe in Allah and His angels and His books and His messengers; We make no difference between any of His messengers; and they say: We hear and obey, our Lord! Thy forgiveness (do we crave), and to Thee is the eventual course”.(2: 285)

68. The tafsir of part of 'amma, pp. 183-186. Some ulama' refuted and disapproved narration of hadith of sorcery, among whom being the faqih exegete Abu Bakr al-Jassas in his book Ahkam al-Qur'an.

69. Al-Manar Journal, vol. XXVII, p. 784.

70. Ibn Abd al-Barr died in 463 H.

71. Jami' bayan al-ilm, vol. II, p. 127.

72. See pp. 6, 9, 11.

73. See p. 242. In Lisan al-Arab: Kawdan is the cross-bred (hajin), and it is said to be the mule.

74. See 4th edition, p. 107.

75. Asfar means books, and plural of sifr.

76. See Asas al-balaghah of al-Zamakhshari, and this is the notion held by al-Nabitah and al-Nawabit, who are the Hashwiyyah.

77. Al-Ghutha' is whatever comes on the surface of flood, including scum and filth, and the alike. This name was used for them metaphorically.

78. Ghuthr is plural of aghthar, meaning in origin the despicable and mean among people.

79. It means nicknames.

80. See vol. I, p. 120.

81. Umar used to hit whoever narrating the hadith. Those whom he beat were Abu Hurayrah and Ka'b al-Ahbar. Refer to my book Shaykh al-mudirah.

82. All these news and others can be found in the 2nd volume of the book Jami' bayan al-ilm wa fadlih, of the Moroccan Hafiz Ibn Abd al-Barr.

83. Abu Ali al-Qali, al-Amali, p. 105.

84. Mu'jam al-udaba', vol. VII, p. 123.

Causes

Postponement of writing down the hadith and recording its words till after the 1st century A.H. and beginnings of the 2nd century, led to expansion of categories of riwayah, and multiplication of composition without any regulation or restriction. Consequently the number of fabricated traditions reached tens of thousands, most of which are still recorded in the books circulated among Muslims all over the world, East and West.

Beginning of Invention in Riwayah and Falsifying the Messenger’s Hadith

There is unanimity among all researchers and investigating scholars that invention in riwayah and composition of hadith with ascribing it to the Messenger of Allah (S) started during the days of the caliphate of Uthman, after the insurrection that ended with his death. Invention became more intense and increased after swearing allegiance to Ali. As soon as Muslims acknowledged him as the competent ruler, the Umayyad devil began hatching the plot after another to seize caliphate from its true owner and rendering it to an Umayyad sovereignty. And that came true, alas!

Al-Ustadh al-Imam Muhammad Abduh (may God’s mercy be upon him) in his Muqaddimat on Risalat al-Tawhid, referred to the great sedition by saying: “This sedition led to the decline of a significant cornerstone of the temple of caliphate, causing to Islam and Muslims a shock that dislodged them from the straight path they have trodden steadily, and on whose course the Qur’an remained established.” Then he wrote an accurate sincere statement declaring:

“After that the sequence of events continued with breaching the covenant by some of those who swore allegiance to the Fourth Caliph,1 and eruption of several wars among the Muslims that led to the shifting of power to the Umayyads. But the structure of the company was split, and bonds of their unity were severed, with people being divided into several schools of thought regarding caliphate, and parties embarking on supporting the opinion of some school against that of its opponent, verbally and practically.”

Then originated the invention in narration and interpretation, with every sect going to the extremes, leading then to disagreement and disunity among people2 ...etc.

The Fabricated Hadith

The fabricated hadith is the forged invented one ascribed to the Messenger of Allah (S), falsely and slandrously, whether it be deliberately or mistakenly.

And as one of the Imams said, fabricating the hadith and ascribing it to the Messenger of Allah (S) being more dangerous to religion and of severer detriment to Muslims than bigotry of people of the east and of the west. And separation of Muslims into schisms, communities, schools of thought (madhahib) and cults is but only one of the effects and consequences of fabrication and composition in the Din.

In his book Ithar al-haqq, al-Murtada al-Yamani said: Most of the innovations of the heretics among the Muslims, originate from the following two apparently invalid factors: addition to and omission from religion (hadith). One form of addition to religion is verily falsifying and fabricating it.

Al-Nawawi in Sharh Muslim, reports from al-Qadi `Iyad as saying: Liars are of two sorts: one of them a group known of forgery and falsity in the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (S), who are of several categories: some known of composing traditions that were never uttered by the Messenger of Allah (S) at all, such as the Zanadiqah and their likes who were never observing any commitment to Allah, either out of favouritism as they alleged, and religiosity like the ignorants among worshippers,3 who fabricated traditions on virtues and recommendable deeds, or out of doing something strange and seeking fame like the debauchees among traditionists. Or out of bigotry and argumentation like the propagators among the heretics and fanatics to madhahib (schools of thought), or for satisfying the desires of world-seeking people to attain to their goals, and asking for success for their doing.4

Among them also were those who would not fabricate text of hadith, but would bring in a correct authentic chain of transmission for the weak text. Some of them would reverse the chains (asanid) or add to them on purpose either for the sake of saying what is stranger than others or to take away ignorance from himself. Some would lie by claiming to have heard what he did not really hear, and meet whom he did not really meet, reporting correct traditions from them. Some others would take the speech of the Companions or others, and maxims of the Arabs and sages, ascribing them to the Prophet (S).

Besides the reasons mentioned by al-Nawawi for fabricating the hadith and falsifying the Messenger’s traditions, many others are there that were stated by the ulama’, the most important of which being the following:5

First: Which is the most important of all. It includes the traditions fabricated and falsified by the Zanadiqah disguising cheatingly and hypocritically under the guise of Islam, with the purpose of corrupting and ruining the religion with creating conflict and disunity among Muslims.

Hammad ibn Zayd said: The Zanadiqah have fabricated four thousand traditions. This being the number he could realize through his knowledge and investigation in discovering their falsity, whereas the traditionists reported that only one zindiq had composed this number of traditions. They say that” When Ibn Ali al-Awja’ was taken to be beheaded, he said: “I fabricated for you four thousand traditions, forbidding in them the halal (lawful) and deeming lawful the haram (unlawful)”.

Second: Fabrication of hadith for the sake of backing and supporting the schools of thought in regard of principles (usul) and branches of religion. Since when Muslims were separated into schisms and madhahib, every group embarked on doing its utmost to prove the legality of its madhhab, especially after the door of debate and disputation regarding the madhahib was opened wide.

The aim of this was only dumbfounding the opponent and showing of superiority over him, to the extent they have made dispute a science compiling on it many works, though their religion was averse to nothing but to dispute and conflict. This cause seems to be one of the consequences and effects of the previous one. This cause was cited by some of the traditionists who had written about causes of fabrication, saying: Someone among the heretics repented and embarked on expressing: You should investigate the source from which you take the hadith, as we used to render to a hadith whatever we desired or loved to be attained.

Fabrication of hadith for supporting the madhahib was not restricted to the heretics and owners of schools in usul. Rather many among Ahl al-Sunnah, who having disagreement about the branches (furu’) of religion, were known of composing traditions each for supporting one of the schools of thought or glorifying any of the leaders (imams)...

I introduce here one hadith as an example: “There shall be a man in my Ummah called Muhammad ibn Idris, who will be more detrimental to my Ummah than Iblis. And there shall be among my Ummah a man called Abu Hanifah, who is verily the beacon for my Ummah.”

It is said that among the chain of transmitters there are two fabricators: Ma’mun ibn Ahmad al-Salami, and Ahmad ibn Abd Allah al-Khunbari. The hadith was reported by al-Khatib on the authority of Abu Hurayrah with a chain of transmitters, sufficing with the part related to Abu Hanifah, adding: It is a fabricated hadith, composed by Muhammad ibn Sa’id al-Maruzi al-Bawraqi. Then he said: He narrated it in this way in Khurasan and then in Iraq, adding to it: “There shall be among my Ummah a man called Muhammad ibn Idris, who will cause a sedition that be more detrimental to my Ummah than that of Iblis”.

It is said that no need is there to prove the baselessness of this intentional violation of truth. Nevertheless, there are some considerable jurisprudents who mention in their fiqhi books the part of the hadith labelling Abu Hanifah as the beacon of the Ummah,6 without any objection. Rather they even infer it for giving superiority for their leader over other leaders (imams). Despite all this, they are considered the example for the Ummah whose sayings and judgements on religious affairs are so dependable, that the Book and the Sunnah are put under their disposal since these two – as they claim – are specifically handled by the religious high authorities (mujtahidun).

In his Sharh Sahih Muslim, Abu al-Abbas al-Qurtubi says: Some of the self-opinionated fuqaha’ permit to verbally ascribe to the Messenger of Allah the ruling that is indicated by a clear-cut analogy (qiyas), saying in this regard: “The Messenger of Allah said so and so”. Hence we find their books replete with traditions whose texts testify on themselves being fabricated since they seem to be identical with verdicts (fatawa) of the fuqaha’, and never be fit to the eloquency of the speech of the Master of Apostles, beside their being unsupported by isnad.

Abu Shamah, in his book Mukhtasar Kitab al-Mu’ammal, is reported to have said: “The practice followed by chiefs of fiqh regarding the Prophetic traditions and reported old speeches being abundant inference by weak traditions to support their beliefs and their claims, with deleting some words once and adding some others to the hadith. Many examples for these cases can be found in the works of Abu al-Ma’ali and his companion Abu Hamid.7

Third: Neglecting memorization due to be busy with asceticism and devotion in worship. These ascetics and Sufis were thinking well of people considering sarcasm as a forbidden backbiting. Therefore they were deceived by the lies circulated here and there, reporting traditions without any knowledge or verification. So no trust should be put to the traditions filling the books of preaching, exorcization and maysticism without indicating their sources and degree of authenticity. This judgement is not related only to the books whose authors have precedence in knowledge, like the book Nuzhat al-Majalis, which is replete with falsities on hadith and other fields. Rather, even some books of the leaders (imams) of ulama’, such as al-Ihya’ of al-Ghazzali, can never be free from numerous fabricated traditions.

Fourth: The intention of seeking favoritism near the kings’ sovereigns and emirs, as stated by several memorizers. And as the hireling ‘ulama’ fabricated many of the Messenger’s traditions for gaining the pleasure of the monarchs and rulers, they also falsified many fiqhi rules and branches of religion for this purpose. Among the traditions composed in this regard are those containing flattery and extolling for the rulers, through which the ignorant cajole the kings presently as they used to do in the past.

Fifth: Error and inadvertence that befell some of the narrators who, despite recognizing the truth, abstained from forsaking their viewpoints, out of disdain and to evade any error be ascribed to them. Frailty in faith and dishonesty in the task of narrating the hadith could not be realized until experiencing those events that are known for all.

Sixth: Reporting the hadith by memorizing from those having reliable books, with being inaccurate in memorization, entailing consequently the loss of books and occurrence of mistakes and errors.8

Seventh: Mental confusion inflicting people at the end of life, as in the case of a group of trustworthy narrators, who were excused for this reason, except those who were free from all the faults ascribed to them, with no distinction between what is reported from them in the state of maturity and sanity and that which is reported in the state of insanity and decrepitude.

Eighth: Trying to overcome the opponent in debate and controversy particularly when being in public, the condition differing from fabrication of hadith for supporting the schools of thought. Ibn al-Jawzi says: Among the causes of fabrication of hadith being the inference exercised by an impious person during debates in public meetings, to prove his claims in the way complying to his desires...for putting his argument in order, edifying his statement, gaining superiority over his opponent, desiring for achieving triumph, satisfying his lust for power and escaping scandal when being defeated by his opponent in debate.

Ninth: Pleasing people and seeking their approval with attracting them to attend their preaching congregations, and expanding the sphere of their allies and supporters. The narrators have attached this cause to the talebearer. Maybe Ibn al-Jawzi was not to compile his book on fabricated traditions until practising the job of preaching with experiencing the corruption caused to religion at the hands of the preachers. About himself he said that he used to disapprove the traditions that were usually cited during the preaching meetings held by him, the fact arousing the grudge of all talebearers against him.9

Detriment of Tales and Talebearer

Al-Salafi reports on the authority of al-Fadl ibn Ziyad that he said: I heard Ahmad ibn Hanbal saying: The biggest liars among people being the questioner and story-teller.

Abu Qullabah is reported to have said: Knowledge is never deadened but by the story-teller.

Al-Uqayli reported on the authority of ‘Asim as saying: Abu Abd al-Rahman used to say: Be cautious of the story-teller.

Mu’awiyah Was Fabricator of Tales

In Akhbar al-Madinah, al-Zubayr ibn Bakkar reports from Nafi’ and other men of knowledge as saying: Story-telling was neither exercised in the lifetime of the Prophet (S), nor during the caliphate of Abu Bakr, nor that of Umar, but it was only an innovation invented by Mu’awiyah when fitnah (sedition) erupted.

Ibn Abi Shaybah has reported the same khabar from Ibn Umar, and it is known that Umar (ibn al-Khattab) forbade from story-telling.

Tenth: Severity of intimidation and excess in temptation for the sake of guiding people. This kind of falsified traditions was even accelerated for their fabricators by the scholars’ stating that the weak traditions could be applied and followed regarding the virtuous deeds,10 and what is related to them in meaning which be unrelevant to rules and rights, as if considering Din incomplete needing something to complete and perfect it. This while Allah the Glorified and Most High says:

الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا

“This day have I perfected for you, your religion, and have completed My favour on you, and chosen for you Islam (to be) the religion.” (5:3)

Besides, all the heresies in religion that people call good heresies (bida’), being no more than addition to religion...would that it be excess in acts alone, but in fact it was excess in beliefs and doctrines. An example for this is to believe in intercession of some of the righteous men (dead ones) between Allah and people in order to get their demands be accomplished, either by themselves due to having supernormal invisible power, or by the Almighty God for their sake. That means, Allah’s Will shall be subordinate to their will in this regard, as this expression was widely known to be uttered by them: “There are certain bondmen for Allah, that He wills whatever they will”. Beside other similar claims.

When it is said to them that Allah has never permitted such a law, they cite examples and similitudes from which Allah is quite free and far above, like anthropomorphizing Him to the kings and emirs through whom favoritism is sought near those they were loving,11 so as to do the acts that they would have never done had those ones been not present. They were unaware that the Will of Allah the Exalted never changes for the sake of anyone whomsoever, since specifying and preponderating it should be in accordance with the eternal knowledge that is never liable to change or alteration.

Eleventh: Permission to fabricating chains of transmission (asanid) for the euphonious speech12 , so as to make a hadith out of it. This reason was mentioned independently, while it is to be included within the previous one.

Twelfth: Dissembling of the knowledge-claimant to be superior to his opponent in debate when controversy reaches topic of hadith, whereat the hypocrite who having feeble faith and corrupt knowledge would say: This hadith is reported by so and so and confirmed by so and so. Further he would ascribe this hadith to very scarce books (as sources) so as to delude people of his having preknowledge of things unknown or realized by others, or would invent a new chain of transmission for the hadith.

Al-Suyuti reported that Ibn al-Jawzi was among those whose traditions were fabricated, and that falsity and reversion are of several forms: some of the narrators were overcome by asceticism so they forgot about memorization. Or some whose books (of hadith) were lost so he used to narrate out of what he memorized, committing thus numerous mistakes and errors. Some others were trustworthy, but they were inflicted with mental disorder at the last days of their lives. Some who used to report the errors inadvertently, but when recognizing the truth and being certain of it, disdained from returning or repenting fearing from that blunder be attributed to them. Among them too were the Zanadiqah who used to fabricate and falsify the traditions on purpose with the aim of corrupting the Shari’ah (Islamic Law), and creating doubt and suspicion into religion making it as a plaything. Some of the Zanadiqah used to take advantage of the Shaykh’s inadvertence and to foisting something strange to his hadith.

Some used to fabricate hadith for seeking content and temptation. Some others would compose chains of transmission through flowery language, with some doing so for gaining pleasure of the ruler, and the story-tellers who used to relate feeble unauthentic traditions.13 In order not to expatiate on this topic, I suffice with the examples already cited.

Concerning the hadith fabricators, they were innumerable, the most outstanding of whom being the following four: Ibn Abi Yahya in al-Madinah, al-Waqidi in Baghdad, Muqatil ibn Sulayman in Khurasan and Muhammad ibn Sa’id in the Sham.14

Hereunder one example on fabrication of hadith for seeking favoritism near the kings and emirs:

Al-Rashid was so fond of pigeons and amusing himself with them. One day he received doves as a present at the presence of Abu al-Bukhtari al-Qadi15 when he said: Abu Hurayrah reported from the Prophet (S) that he said: “No race is there but in the pad or hoof or wing”. The word ‘wing’ was added from his own for pleasing al-Rashid, for which he was gifted a valuable reward. When he went out, al-Rashid said: By God I got to know that he was a liar. Then he issued his orders to slaughter the pigeons, when it was said to him: What sin the pigeons perpetrated? He replied: Because of them a lie was composed against the Messenger of Allah!

Political Fabrication Or For Sake Of Politics

Before concluding this chapter I have to reveal a critical aspect in regard of fabrication of hadith, that having a long-term effect on life in Islam. This effect is still in force through the putrid thoughts, retrogressive minds and bigoted souls. This aspect being the intrusion of politics in this issue (fabrication of hadith), and its having an extreme impact and influence upon it, employing it for backing the rulers and statesmen, making it the strongest pillar for reinforcing the basis of their power.

Such political situation reached its peak and exceeded all the bounds during the reign of Mu’awiyah, who supported and encouraged it by employing his influence and dedicating his money for pushing it forward. So we witnessed the continuation of this situation, with the hadith being lost and fully dedicated for the purpose of indicating Mu’awiyah’s honour and extolling him. They have exaggerated in supporting and showing strong fanaticism toward him, elevating the status of the Sham ruled by him, giving it a position that was neither attained by al-Madinah of the Messenger of Allah nor by the Sacred Town (Makkah) in which he was born, going to the extremes in this respect to the extent that certain compilations were authored specifically for this purpose.

Though this subject needs in itself a separate book, I shall commit myself – within this book – to be brief and concise, demonstrating only a few indications and evidences.

Here are some examples on this fabrication:

We can refer to the hadith fabricated by al-Bakriyyah (supporters of Abu Bakr), and reported by Ibn Asakir from Abu Hurayrah, that the angels on the Day of Badr were exchanging announcement of good tidings saying: Aren’t you witnessing al-Siddiq with the Messenger of Allah in the canopy?! Al-Khatib reported on the authority of Ibn Abbas that the Prophet (S) said: Gabriel, upon whom be God’s peace, descended upon me putting on a rug and making friends (with angels)...I asked him: O Gabriel! What is that? He replied: Allah the Exalted commanded the angels in the heavens to make friends with each other as is done by Abu Bakr on earth.

Abu Ya’la reported from Abu Hurayrah that he said: The Messenger of Allah said: I ascended (by God) to the heaven, and by each heaven I passed I found my name written on it: (Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and Abu Bakr al-Siddiq is my successor).

Abu Ya’la reported again from Ibn Umar that the Prophet said: Verily the angels are ashamed of Uthman as they are ashamed of Allah and His Messenger.

In another hadith, it is reported that the Messenger of Allah (S) said: The excellence of ‘A’ishah over all women is like that of the sop over all other foods. It is reported yet in another hadith that her portrait was sent to the Prophet in a piece of silky cloth with Gabriel who said to him” “This is you wife in the world and Hereafter”.

Another hadith says: Take half of your religion from this Humayra’ (i.e. A’ishah). In another narration he (S) said: Take part of your religion from this Humayra’.

This chapter is so expansive that no room is there to enumerate all its contents.

Mu’awiyah and Sham

Concerning Mu’awiyah and the Sham that he and his relatives ruled over for a very long epoch, there are many traditions that were fabricated on their merits.

Mu’awiyah, as is known, embraced Islam together with his father on the day of Makkah conquest, being thus among the freed captives (tulaqa’). He was also one of those whose hearts are to be reconciled, who were receiving some fees for their (embrace of) Islam. It was him who subverted the principle of the rightly-guided caliphate in Islam, for which no trace is left and no edifice is established till the present time. He made of Damascus as the capital of his sovereignty and rule. Hereunder a recapitulation of the traditions composed on his excellence:

Al-Tirmidhi reported that the Prophet (S) said once to Mu’awiyah: O God! Make him a guide.

In another hadith, the Prophet said: O God! Teach him knowledge of the Book and arithmetic, and protect him against torment. There is an addition made to this hadith as follows: “and let him enter paradise”.

However, despite the abundant traditions cited on the merit of Mu’awiyah that were baseless and of no authentic origin, Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, the eminent leader (imam) and shaykh of al-Bukhari, is reported to have said: None of the traditions about merits of Mu’awiyah could be confirmed or approved.

Under the chapter “Merits of the Prophet’s Companions”, “bab dhikr Mu’awiyah”,16 al-Bukhari, without citing traditions with chain of transmission going back to the Prophet, quoted two statements ascribed to Ibn Abbas giving an account of Mu’awiyah. In the first one he said, that he kept company with the Messenger of Allah, and in the second statement he said that Mu’awiyah was a faqih.

In regard of the Sham, they claimed that it was the land of assembly (mahshar) and resurrection, and land of substitutes (abdal)... and that the descent of Jesus Christ shall be in this land. Here you are with some of the numerous traditions cited in its regard:

Ahmad, Abu Dawud, al-Baghawi and al-Tabarani and others reported that the Prophet (S) said: Consider the importance of Sham, as it is Allah’s choice of the best land, toward which He selects and guides the best of His bondmen. Allah appointed Himself as the agent to take care of the Sham and its people.

In another hadith, he said: The Sham is the best choice of Allah in His land. Toward it He selects and leads the best among His bondmen. Whoever departs the Sham betaking himself to other than it, will verily deserve God’s wrath and anger... and whoever enters it coming from other than it, shall verily be included in His mercy and grace.

Al-Bayhaqi, in al-Dala’il, reports from Abu Hurayrah, through a chain of transmission, as saying: Caliphate is (confined) in al-Madinah while the sovereign power is seclusively in the Sham. Ka’b al-Ahbar is reported to have said: People of Sham are one of God’s swords, with whom He will verily revenge Himself upon whoever disobeyed Him and rebelled against His orders.

In another hadith, he (S) said: The Sham will verily be conquerred for you. When you are asked to choose abodes in it, you have to select a town that is called Dimashq (Damascus), which is the metropolis of the Umayyads. It is verily the stronghold of the Muslims during fierce battles and invasions, and its marquee is situated in a land called al-Ghawtah.

They (narrators) made of Damascus17 the rabwah (height) to which the holy Qur’an referred in the verse:

وَآوَيْنَاهُمَا إِلَىٰ رَبْوَةٍ ذَاتِ قَرَارٍ وَمَعِينٍ

“...and We gave them a shelter on a lofty ground having meadows and springs.” (23:5)

. In a transmitted hadith. Abu Hurayrah made of it one of the cities of paradise in a hadith with a chain of transmission reaching to the Prophet, with the following text: Four cities are among the paradise cities, which being: Mecca, Medina, Quds and Damascus, whereas the Fire cities are: Constantinople, Tabariyyah, Antaqi and San’a.

At the time they consider Constantinople in this hadith one of Fire (Hell) cities, they cite the following hadith on its excellence after its becoming the aspiration of all sights Constantinople will verily be conquerred what an excellent emir is its emir and what an excellent army is that army! Probably this hadith was fabricated for the sake of Yazid ibn Mu’awiyah, since it was him who commanded over the army during the Constantinople Battle.

I am not intending to follow up whatever is cited on the merit of the Sham, as it needs a number of separate compilations to cover, as said by Ibn Taymiyyah in his book Iqtida’ al-Sirat al-mustaqim.18

A group of people composed several works on the advantages of Quds (Bayt al-Maqdis) and other localities in the Sham, citing in them some of the transmitted traditions and statements from Ahl al-Kitab and those who took from them, upon which it is unlawful for Muslims to base and found their religion. The most outstanding man from whom these falsified traditions (Israeliyyat) were reported, being Ka’b al-Ahbar, who was the source of such traditions for the people of Sham.

Origin of Substitutes Village

The epithet with which the land of the Sham was distinguished – after imparting upon it and its people multiple traits – was calling it the land of abdal (substitutes). This belief was one of the factors that led to destruction and subversion of Islam, as the Sufis adopted it as a principle and source for their tariqah (creed; system of belief), on which they based and constructed their fancies and superstitions.

Al-Waqidi19 reported that when Mu’awiyah returned from Iraq to the Sham, after swearing allegiance to (al-Imam) al-Hasan (in 41 H), he addressed people saying: “O people! The Messenger of Allah said: You will verily succeed me in assuming the post of caliphate! So choose the socred land that verily contains the substitutes.” Here I have informed you, so curse Abu Turab! (i.e. Ali ibn Abi Talib).

The next day he wrote a letter, gathering them then and reciting it for them, in which was the following: This document is written by Amir al-Mu’minin Mu’awiyah, the owner of the revelation (wahy) of Allah, who delegated Muhammad as a Prophet, who was illiterate neither knowing to read nor to write. Then He chose for him from among his family, a trustworthy vizier as a scribe. When the revelation was sent down to Muhammad, I was writing it down, without his being aware of what I was writing. No one was there as an intermediary between me and Allah from among His creatures.” The attendants there said: You said the truth!20

As soon as the Sham was described as the land of substitutes by Mu’awiyah, a number of traditions about these abdal, ascribed to the Prophet emerged on the scene, among which we can refer to the following21 :

1. “The abdal (substitutes) in this Ummah are thirty men, whose hearts are sympathetic with that of Ibrahim the Friend of Allah. Whenever one of them dies Allah will verily substitute him with another man (reported from Ubadah ibn al-Samit).

2. “The substitutes in my Ummah are thirty. With them the earth is established! And through their help you will be verily triumphant and will be showered with raining” (reported from Ubadah).

3. “The substitutes are among people of the Sham, through them God will verily help and provide them with means of living – (reported from Awf ibn Malik).

4. “The substitutes are in the Sham, and they are forty men. Whenever one of them deceases, Allah shall substitute him with another man. Through them rain will be watering the earth and victory will be obtained against the enemies. With them the torment will be verily turned away from people of the Sham” – (reported from Ali).

5. “The substitutes are forty men and forty women! Whenever a man dies Allah will verily substitute him with another man. And whenever a woman dies Allah will substitute her with another woman” – (from Anas ibn Malik).

6. “The substitutes are among the mawali (masters)” – (reported from ‘Ata’ ibn Abi Rabah).

A question about these traditions was raised to the traditionist jurisprudent al-Sayyid Rashid Ridha’ (upon whom be God’s mercy) in the following way by an inquirer: What is the meaning behind distinguishing people of the Sham with them? What denotation is indicated by removing of torment, aiding to triumph and providing by substitutes to people of the Sham? And are people of the Sham provided with livelihood, helped to triumph, and delivered from torment seclusively and alone from among inhabitants of the earth?

Al-Sayyid gave him a scholastic, attentive and accurate reply, the abstract of which I present hereunder:22

He initiated his speech by saying: “These traditions are altogether false and invalid in respect of narration and dirayah (knowledgeability), and also regarding their sanad and text. That which made them so commonly circulated among the Ummah was the much care and concern exerted toward it by the Sufis. To all of them a reference was made by the traditionist Ibn al-Jawzi in his book al-Mawdu’at, who proved their invalidity one by one.

The substitutes traditions were commonly fabricated by the Sufis, Shi’ah,23 Batinites, and narrators of the foisted traditions (Israeliyyat) like Ka’b al-Ahbar and others among circulators of superstitious traditions, other than owners of the correct traditions.24 Our sage the researcher Ibn Khaldun through his discussion of the science of Sufism in the introduction to his Ta’rikh, after stating origin of Sufism and condition of Sufis in respect of knowledge and conduct, said the following in the very words:25

“Then the latters among Sufis and Mutakallimun on revelation (kashf) and supersensible matters, have penetrated deeply into this subject, in a way that most of them were believing and calling to compromise solutions and agreement of opinions, filling the newspapers with this call, like al-Harawi and others, followed by Ibn al-Arabi, Ibn Sab’in and their disciple Ibn al-Afif. Their ancestors were coexisting with the Isma’ilites, the latters among the Rafidites believing too in the compromises and divinity of the Imams, a doctrine that was never held by their formers. Consequently each party was imbued with the doctrine of the other, with their speech being confused and beliefs being intermingled, and the Sufis starting to believe in the magnate, which meaning the head of gnostics.

They were claiming that no one could be equal to him in respect of his status in knowledge till God takes his life, when his position is to be inherited by another gnostic. Moreover they started to talk about the order of substitutes to follow this magnate, as held by the Shi’ah regarding the Nuqaba’ (headmen), to the extent that when intending to find origin of the piece of cloth of Sufism for making it a principle for their system of belief and seclusion (takhliyah), they ascribed it to Ali, may God be pleased with him, the fact included too in this meaning.

Otherwise, Ali was not distinguished from among the Companions with a certain way of seclusion or manner of wearing or conduct, rather Abu Bakr and Umar were the most ascetic and devoted in worship after the Messenger of Allah (S)... No one among them was singled out with any certain act reported about him in particular, but all the Sahabah were ideal in religiosity, asceticism and strife. Many of the fuqaha’ and men of verdict (mujtahidun) were commissioned with the task of refuting and dumbfounding the contemporary writers of these articles and their likes, including in their disapproval campaign whatever they faced within the system of belief”.

The scholars of hadith have expressed their views regarding the asanid (chains of transmission) of these traditions.26 Al-Hafiz Ibn al-Jawzi judged that they were all fabricated. Followed him in this regard Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, al-Sakhawi and al-Suyuti who was one of the disciples of Ibn Hajar. But the first of them was the most accurate and nearest to scrutiny. He said: Report of the substitutes has certain methods with various words that all being feeble. This saying is closer to truth than that of Ibn Hajar himself, who said: Some of them are correct and some are incorrect!”

Al-Sayyid Rashid, after disproving these traditions one by one, said: Mulla Ali al-Qari reported from Ibn al-Salah about the fabricated traditions, that he said: The strongest hadith we narrated about the substitutes being Ali’s utterance: The substitutes will be verily in the Sham. This saying agrees with what Ibn Taymiyyah said in his treatise27 about Ahl al-Siffah and the Sufis with respect to the narrator. While the investigation held by Shaykh al-Islam on this issue with regard to cognizance is truly the end of extremities. Following are some excerptions of his statements in this regard:

(Section): Concerning the names that were circulated recurringly among a large number of hermits and common people, such as the succour (ghawth) that will be in Mecca, the four stakes, the seven magnates, forty substitutes and three hundred pedigrees (nujaba’), they altogether have neither existence in the Book of Allah, nor been reported from the Prophet (S), through a veracious isnad or probable weak one. Excepted from these is the term Abdal (substitutes), in whose regard a decisively confirmed Shami hadith is reported from Ali ibn Abi Talib, on the authority of the Prophet (S) as saying: “Among them – i.e. people of the Sham – are the substitutes, who are forty men...whenever anyone of them dies Allah will verily substitute him with another man.” The ancestors have never referred throughout their speeches and researches to these names in the order previously mentioned…etc.

Then he stated that the term ghawth (help) and ghiyath (helper) can never fit but to Allah the Exalted. After that, Shaykh al-Islam uttered some rational sensible words about the issues of stakes (awtad) and magnate, returning then to the substitutes when he said: “Regarding the chain (marfu’) hadith, it is more likely not among the utterance of the Prophet (S), as faith was found in Hijaz and Yemen before the conquests of the Sham, when the Sham and Iraq were lands of kufr (infidelity).

Furthermore, during the caliphate of Ali, an authentic hadith was reported from the Prophet (S) that he said: “A group of renegades will verily rebel against the best community (firqah) of Muslims, and will be killed by the cult that is more entitled to truth”. Hence Ali and his companions were more entitled to truth than those whom he fought from among people of the Sham.

Resuming his speech, al-Sayyid Rashid (may God’s mercy be upon him) said: “The reason behind what is reported from Ali, may God be pleased with him, being that some of his followers used to insult and revile people of the Sham, but he forbade them from that absoluteness saying: Among them are the Abdal. That is, Allah the Exalted will substitute from among the supporters of Mu’awiyah with others, or what gives such meaning. Then some narrators sychophant to the Umayyads, followed by the Sufis, came and added abundantly to, making of it a chain authentic hadith, composing other traditions on flattery and censure to be circulated throughout the famous metropolises.

Ibn Asakir reported that Ka’b al-Ahbar28 said: The substitutes are thirty men. He also said: The substitutes are in the Sham, and the Nujaba’ are in the Kufah. Then he stated a good number of such sayings reported from that time people about the substitutes, pedigrees (Nujaba’), heads (Nuqaba’) and the righteous. The term ‘Abdal’ was the most widely known of these terms, while people during the 2nd and 3rd centuries were unable to perceive from this word yet what the Sufis were claiming about it. Rather, al-Imam Ahmad said: “The substitutes are men of hadith”.

In regard of what these narrations claim that Allah the Most High will succour people of the Sham and provide them with the substitutes, is verily one of the defects of their texts and signs of their fabrication. Since the Almighty Allah made certain means for victory that can be recognized from His Book and sunan (methods, ways) in His creation. The best people led by the best of apostles (peace be upon them), fell short of some of these means during Battle of Uhud, the fact led to their defeat and be overcome by the polytheists after they were victorious. When finding that strange and incredible, the following verse was revealed by Allah the Exalted to His Messenger (S) for demonstrating this fact for them: “What! When a misfortune befell you (at Uhud) while ye had already inflicted twice as much (on the disbelievers), ye said: “Whence is this?” Say (unto them, O Muhammad): “This is from your (own) selves...”

Among these social means and factors is the one manifested by God through these words: “...if ye help (in the way of) God, He will (also) help you”, and also through His saying: “...and quarrel ye not, for then ye will be weakened in heart, and will depart your power...”

And among the spiritual and moral means of victory it can be referred to the holy verse: (“O’ ye who believe!) when ye meet a party (the contingent of the infidels) then be firm, and remember God much, (that ye be successful).”

After throwing light upon the wretchedness and straitened conditions experienced by people of the Sham in 1927,29 with the French troops devastating their homeland, and many of them starving to death, he (al-Sayyid Rashid) said: So where are those substitutes and where are their secrets?

Then he concluded his utterance by saying:

“These narrations have demolished the might of the Islamic Ummah, with the Sufis and followers of this system turning to be a sedition for all the Muslims, startling away those having intellectual independence and modern sciences, from Islam, deeming it as a religion of superstitions and fancies like other religions. They were also a shame to the Muslims before the advanced peoples of the world. Their ignorance and corrupt religion and morals reached an extent that they became collaborators for France in Africa from frontiers of Tunisia up to the cultivated land of Morocco.

It is high time to comprehend and perceive our religion from the Qur’an not from these abominable narrations which diverted us far from the Book of Allah and Sunnah of His Messenger (S), that are neither liable to interpretation nor can be subjected to perversion. The time has come to tread under foot all those misleading perverters with all their supporters and those interpolating (the facts) for them from among the sacristans of the worshipped tombs, due to the belief prevailed among common people that sustenance and world felicity can be acquired from those buried under earth. Because of such superstition our Ummah became downtrodden under the feet of all nations, with its common people keeping on to believe that the dead and invisible men are the source of its sustenance and keeping it safe against misfortune.30 ”

Concerning the story of al-Nasa'i (to which Ibn Hajar referred), who is the author of one of widely-known hadith books, it was reported by al-Dhahabi who said: When being in Damascus, al-Nasa'i was inquired about merit's of Mu'awiyah, when he said: Isn't he pleased to be compared head to head (i.e. to be likened to Ali), so as to be preferred? Al-Dhahabi says: Then people kept on pushing him till driving him out of the majlis (meeting), when he was carried toward Kufah where he died.

The Abbasid State

While many traditions were reported on merit of Mu’awiyah and the Sham, the Abbasid State had also a good share of traditions in its support after disintegration of the Umayyad State, and establishment of the Abbasid State on its debris. The following are some of them:

Al-Bazzaz reported on the authority of Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allah said to al-Abbas: “Prophethood and kingdom will be verily among you”. It is also reported by Abu Na’im in al-Dala’il, Ibn Adiyy in al-Kamil, and Ibn Asakir who reported it thus: “Among you shall be the Prophethood and among you shall be the kingdom.”

Al-Tirmidhi reported from Ibn Abbas, that the Messenger of Allah (S) prayed for al-Abbas with the following supplication: (O God), make caliphate perpetual in his descent.

Al-Tabarani reported that the Messenger of Allah (S) said: Successorship will be verily among my cousins and full brother of my father, till they hand it over to Christ.31

Fabrication of hadith extended to include al-Saffah. Ahmad reported from Abu Sa’id al-Khudri that the Messenger of Allah said: At the end of the Time and occurrence of seditions, a man from my household will verily appear, that will be called al-Saffah!!

Since course of speech is about the Abbasid State, we quote here what al-Suyuti reported, in his book Ta’rikh al-khulafa’, about al-Mutawakkil, saying:

He has showed inclination toward the Sunni creed, supported its followers, sending for the narrators to come to Samarra’, giving them abundantly, and ordering them to narrate traditions related to traits and vision. People embarked on praying to God for al-Mutawakkil, exaggerating in extolling and glorifying him, that even some would say: The (real) caliphs are only three: Abu Bakr al-Siddiq due to exterminating the apostates (Ahl al-Riddah), Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz due to his restoration of the seized trusts (mazalim), and al-Mutawakkil due to his revival of the Sunnah and mortification of frowning.

As some of the eminent historians stated, some of the consequences and traces left for us by the Abbasid State, were dispersion of word of Islam, obliteration of the name of Arabs with the State being controlled by the Daylamites and then the Turks who founded for themselves a great sovereignty, after which the world kingdoms were divided into several parts.

Censuring the Turks

On the occasion of making a reference to the Turks I intend to say: Al-Mu’tasim32 brought a large number of the Turks into the country till they occupied everywhere in Baghdad, embarking on annoying and oppressing its people, who were averse to their coming, since they constituted a bad omen for them wherever they be. Then the traditionists started to narrate traditions on censuring the Turks, ascribing them to the Prophet (S), some of which are the following:

“Verily the Turks are the first to plunder of my Ummah whatever be on their way”.

Ibn Abbas also reported that the Prophet said:

“Kingdom – or caliphate – shall be verily among my sons (or descendants), till they – at the peak of might – be conquerred by the red-faced people, whose faces are like hammered pots.

Abu Hurayrah reported that the Prophet said:

The Last Hour (Doomsday) will never come before the coming of wide-faced, small-eyed, flat-nosed people, who will tie their horses at the coast of Tigris. It was reported also by Ahmad in his Musnad from Abu Hurayrah with different wording: The Messenger of Allah said: The Doomsday will not come till you fight the Turks, who are small-eyed, red-faced and flat-nosed, and whose faces resemble harmed pots.

Besides, the Constantinople hadith was previously referred to. Anyone asking for more traditions can refer to al-Suyuti’s Ta’rikh al-khulafa’.

How Fabrication of Hadith Was Permitted

It was not for fabricators of hadith to let alone their science without supporting it with evidences permitting and justifying whatever they used to compose. Al-Tahawi, in al-Mushkil, reported a hadith from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet said: Whenever you are told a hadith from me, that you know and never deny (by mind), you have to believe it, whether I actually uttered it or not! Verily I utter that which can be known and not denied. And when it is reported to you a hadith from me, that you deny and never recognize, you have to disbelieve it, as I never utter that which is to be disapproved and cannot be known.

A similar hadith was reported by Ahmad, that the Messenger of Allah (S) said: When hearing any hadith ascribed to me, with which your hearts are acquainted and toward which you incline, finding it near to you, I am verily more entitled than you to it. But when you hear a hadith from me, which your hearts disapprove and from which your senses are alienated, finding it quite far from your conception, I will be verily farther than you from it. Al-Sayyid Rashid Ridha’ says that the isnad (chain of transmission) of this hadith is good and authentic.33

Khalid ibn Yazid is reported to have said: I heard Muhammad ibn Sa’id al-Dimashqi saying: When the speech being fluent, I see no harm in finding an isnad for it.34

In al-Hilyah, he reported from Ibn Mahdi, from Abu Luhay’ah that he heard a shaykh from among the Kharijites saying (after repenting): These traditions are verily a religion, so you should be careful from whom you take your religion. We used to invent a hadith for anything we desired much.

The traditionist Ibn Hajar says: By God these traditions are actually backbreaking to those arguing with the mursal (hadith), as the heresy of Khawarij was during the early period of Islam with the presence of so many Companions, extending then to the age of the Tabi’un and those succeeding them.

When these people admire and approve of anything, they make of it a hadith with circulating it everywhere. Then it may happen that someone would hear something, relating it then without referring to that who firstly narrated it, out of good intention. From him it will be reported by another one, after whom comes that arguing with the assertives and takes it as a means for argumentation, despite its origin to which we referred before.

The Righteous Fabricators

Fabrication of hadith against the Messenger of Allah was not confined only to enemies of Din and capricious people – as we stated before – but some of the righteous among Muslims used to do so thinking it to be a merit bringing them nearer to Allah, and yet they reckon that by this they do good work. When questioning them: Why do you lie against the Messenger of Allah? They would say: We lie for him not against him! And the one to blame for falsity is that who did it on purpose.

Muslim reported in his book from Yahya ibn Sa’id al-Qattan as saying: We have never found the righteous falsifying in anything more than that in hadith. In another narration: We have never seen the munificent people telling lies in anything more than in hadith. That is as Muslim put it: falsity comes out from their mouths incidentally or inadvertently not deliberately35 . Muslim reported on the authority of Abu al-Zinad that he said: I met a hundred men in Medina, all of whom were trustworthy, and hadith was not taken from them.36

Ibn Hajar writes: Some of the ignorants, after being self-conceited, embarked on fabricating traditions of temptation and intimidation saying: We haven’t told lies against him, but we did so for backing his Shari’ah.37

They were unaware that ascribing to him (S) that which he never said, entails falsity against Allah, since it asserts a legal judgement or decree, whether an obligatory or recommendable one. And so also regarding their opposites: the haram (unlawful) and makruh (reprehensible). No consideration is to be given to opposers to this from among the Karamiyyah, who permitted composing of falsity in cases of temptation and intimidation, for confirming the rules cited in the Qur’an and the Sunnah, arguing that it be falsity for him not against him, which is verily an ignorance of the Arabic language.38

Abd Allah al-Nahawandi says: I said to the lad of Ahmad: Wherefrom you brought these traditions which you relate through the parchments? He replied: We fabricated them for making the hearts of people mild and sympathetic. About this lad (servant), Ibn al-Jawzi said: He was an ascetic who used to forsake the worldly pleasures and lusts, living on eating the broad-beans merely... on the day of his death all the markets of Baghdad were closed (as a sign of mourning).

And Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Faqih al-Maruzi was the most opinionated and strongest defender of the Sunnah in his time, degrading whoever contradicting it. Despite all that, he was among those known of composing and perverting the hadith.

In al-Ta’rikh al-awsat, al-Bukhari reported from Umar ibn Sabih ibn Imran al-Tamimi, that he said: I was the one who composed the Prophet’s sermon.

In al-Madkhal, al-Hakim on the authority of Abu Ammar al-Maruzi, that it was said to Abu ‘Ismah: Wherefrom you got these traditions from ‘Ikrimah, from Ibn Abbas on the merits of the Qur’an, surah by surah, while they can never be found with the companions of ‘Ikrimah? He said: When I found people turning away from the Qur’an, engaging themselves in the fiqh of Abu Hanifah and incursions of Ibn Ishaq, I fabricated this hadith for seeking favour.

A Witty Saying

Not satisfied with all this, they would even fabricate hadith for trivial reasons. One of the traditions that al-Hakim reported on the authority of Sayf ibn Umar al-Tamimi,39 that he said: I was in the company of Sa’d ibn Tarif, when his son returned from the elementary school crying! His father inquired him: What is the matter with you? The teacher has beaten me. He said: I will verily disgrace them today.

‘Ikrimah reported from Ibn Abbas a hadith ascribed to the Prophet as saying: “The teachers of your boys are the wicked among you the least of them in pitiness toward the orphan, and the rudest toward the indigent”.

There are innumerable reports in this regard.

Fabrication through Inclusion

Sometimes the narrator may compose some addition to the hadith indeliberately, which was to the hadith indeliberately, which was considered by traditionists as inclusion (idraj). The mudraj tradition was a term used for a hadith having an addition that was not originally found in it. Scholars of hadith say that inclusion is of two kinds: Inclusion (idraj) in the isnad (chain of transmission) and inclusion in the text.

The text inclusion comes at the beginning of the hadith, like hadith of Abu Hurayrah that was reported by al-Khatib saying: The Messenger of Allah said: “Complete the ablution, woe be to those lagging behind from the Fire (hell)”. The words” complete (asbighu) the ablution” are included by Abu Hurayrah.

Idraj may occur also in the midst of the hadith like hadith of Faddalah reported by al-Nasa’i that the Prophet said: “I am a za’im (guarantor of paradise) – and za’im is hamil (undertaker) – for that who believes in me and struggles on the way of Allah, with a house in the gardens of heavens”. His saying: ‘and the za’im (guarantor) is the undertaker’ is included by him into the hadith.

In regard of the inclusion at the end of the hadith, it occurred in the eclipse hadith which was recorded in the Sahih that (the Prophet said): The sun and moon are verily two signs (marvels) among God’s signs (ayat). They never eclipse because of the death or life of anyone. When you see this, betake yourselves to remembrance of Allah and prayers (salat). Al-Ghazzali says that the reporting of this addition was not confirmed, so its utterer should be belied.

Can The Fabricated Hadith Be Recognized

The investigators have stated generalities through which recognizing which hadith being fabricated becomes feasible:

Its contradiction to the Qur’an and authentic successive Sunnah or decisive unanimity or determined rules of the Shari’ah, or to the rational proof, or to the senses and conspicuousness and all certainties. Or the hadith’s including temerities in regard of promise and threats, reward and punishment. Or its being contradictory to the rules brought by the clear Sunnah, or the hadith’s being invalid by itself, or its invalidity being established by correct evidences. Or the hadith’s being unlike the speech of prophets, or its being nearer to the speech of physicians, or its containing the chronicles of coming days, or its being awkward or a laughing-stock or other than this. Among them also are those traditions on whose baselessness several veracious evidences, or established knowledge experiments, or those ones that be poor in meaning.

Ibn Hajar al-Asqallani writes: From the word ‘poor’ the meaning is intended, and whenever it is found it indicates presence of fabrication, as this religion (Islam) comprises only good points, while poorness in wording never indicates this, due to the possibility that the hadith being reported according to meaning by the narrator who might exchange its words with non-eloquent ones.

Ibn al-Jawzi said: The disapproved hadith makes knowledge-seeker shudder, with causing his heart to have aversion to it, particularly that one using the terms of the law-maker, having experience in them, their splendour and resplendence.

He also said: When finding the hadith contrary to the reasonable or incongruous to the manqul (transmitted), or opposite to the usul (principles), only then you should know that it is fabricated.

Al-Rabi’ ibn Khaytham says: Hadith has a light identical to the daylight that is manifest for all, and a darkness like that of night that is ignored, (reported by al-Khatib).

Ibn Abi Hatam reported from Ibn Mas’ud as saying: Whenever I relate to you any hadith I verily give you an evidence confirming it from the Book of Allah.

Ibn Jubayr says: I never received any hadith with its shape, without finding its confirmation in the Book of Allah.40

Al-Bayhaqi reported on the authority of Ibn Abbas that he said: Whenever I relate to you any hadith from the Messenger of Allah, the confirmation of which you can never find in the Book,41 or it may seem good in the eyes of people, it will be verily false.42

It is out of scope here to enumerate all the composed traditions, of which Ibn al-Jawzi and al-Suyuti and others compiled numerous volumes, to which any knowledge-seeker can refer.

In his book Qawa’id al-tahdith, al-Qasimi has dedicated a section on the fabricated hadith, concluding it with two chapters, the titles and summary of which are the following:

Can We Recognize The Fabricated Without Looking Into Its Sanad?

Al-Imam Shams al-Din ibn al-Qayyim was asked once: Is it possible to recognize the fabricated hadith through a regulation without looking into its sanad (chain of transmission)? He replied.

This is truly a very important question. This (fabricated) hadith can only be recognized by that who is thoroughly acquainted with knowing the correct sunan, in a way they be intermingled with his flesh and blood, and he having an instinctive knowledge and good talent in recognizing the sunan and old methods. Besides knowing the sirah (biography) of the Messenger of Allah (S), with his guiding directions including to which he bids and from which he forbids, of what he apprises and to what he invites, what he loves and what he detests, and what he legislates for the Ummah, as if he enjoyed his (S) company for a long time.

Such a man can verily be acquainted with his conditions, guidance, speech, acts and sayings, and what is permissible to tell and what is impermissible, that which can never be realized by others. This is verily the state of every followed (matbu’) with his follower, as his favorite, who is serious in following up his words and deeds, out of knowledge of them, and distinguishing between what is proper to ascribe to him and what is improper to ascribe, such one differs from that who is deprived of such traits...etc.

Ibn Daqiq al-‘Id is reported to have said: “Most often charging with composition (of hadith) happens to be due to things related to what is narrated and words of the hadith. The conclusion of this is due to the fact that, because of the extensive use and transmission of the Prophet’s words and expressions, these people came to possess a psychological fashion and strong intuition through which they could recognize which of the Prophet’s words are more proper to be used and which are not”.

Whole Heart Has Full Knowledge Of The Fabricated Hadith

In another chapter, Abu al-Hasan Ali ibn Urwah al-Hanbali is reported to have said:

“If the heart be pure, clean and sanctified, it will be able to discern between right and falsehood, truth and lie, and guidance and misguidance, especially when being bestowed with illumination and adroitness from the Prophetic light. Only then it shall have the power to penetrate and find out the concealed facts and hidden aspects, with discerning between the veracious and the falsified. And even if correct isnad was combined to a text of composed words ascribed to the Messenger, or feeble isnad to a sahih text, it would be able to distinguish, recognize and taste this, discerning between the lean and strong, correct and false among them, as the Messenger’s words can never be hidden from a sane man who experienced them.

For this reason the Prophet (S) said: “Be cautious of the physiognomy of the believer as he sees with the light of Allah.”43 This hadith was reported by al-Tirmidhi from Abu Sa’id. Some of the ancestors commented on the holy Qur’anic verse:

إِنَّ فِي ذَٰلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِّلْمُتَوَسِّمِينَ

“ Surely in this are signs for those who examine.” (15:75)

taking the word ‘mutawassimin” to mean those who practise physiognomy (firasah).

Mu’adh ibn Jabal said: “Verily for truth there is a beacon like the road light-stand.”

Further, the sincere pure heart can sense and recognize any deviation and perversion in deeds and conduct. Whenever hearing any hadith, it can immediately recognize its real source, though no one of the memorizers and critics had any say about it. Anyone whose acts be sincerely devoted for Allah, in conformity with the Sunnah, would be able to discern between things: their falsity and truth.

Every truthful smart person is inspired by Allah, the Glorified and Exalted, the ability to discern between truth and falsity as the hadith affirms: “Truth (sidq) is peacefulness and calmness and falsity is suspicion”. He (S) said to Wasibah: “Consult your heart”. The Prophet left his Ummah with clear signs, its night be like its day. And the Messenger’s utterance has a veneration and fluency that no other person can ever possess.

Ibn Taymiyyah says: When the pious heart recommences and seeks its own opinion, this will verily be a legal preponderance. Whenever it appears and that heart comes to think that this matter or that speech being better pleasing to Allah and His Messenger, this would be preponderance with a legal proof. Mistaken are those who denied the inspiration not being absolutely a means for attaining to realities. As when man does his best and strives on the way of God’s obedience and piety, his preference for what he preponderated would be stronger than numerous feeble evidences.

So inspiration of this would be an evidence on its behalf, which is more forceful than many of the weak and fancied analogies, phenomena and istishabat that are used as means of argumentation by those concerned with schools of thought, controversy and usul al-fiqh (principles of jurisprudence).

Umar said: “Truth (haqq) is apparent, and can’t be concealed from any intelligent one”. Hudhayfah ibn al-Yeman is reported to have said: “Inside the believer’s heart there is a lamp that is blooming”. And as stronger as faith becoming inside the heart, all things would be disclosed before it and it would be able to recognize and discern the real from the false ones. The opposite is true, that is whenever faith becoming faint, ability to discover realities would become weaker, in the same way as the effect of the strong and weak lamp inside a dark house.

In Sahih al-Bukhari it is reported that the Prophet said: “Among the nations that preceded you there were inspired (muhaddath) people, and if one of them is to be found among my Ummah, Umar shall be verily that one.” The muhaddath is that who is inspired and addressed in secrecy. Abu Sulayman al-Darani used to call Ahmad ibn ‘Asim al-Antaki with the epithet “Heart Spy” (Jasus al-Qulb) due to the sharpness of his physiognomy.

Thus we concluded the briefed quotation from these two chapters.44

Among the criteria through which we can recognize sahih (veracious) hadith, first its being not discarded by good taste and adroitness like hadith of flies, and also its non-being contradictory to the sublime objectives of Islam that are aimed at bringing felicity to man in this world and hereafter.

Liars and Their Slanders against the Prophet

Hammad ibn Zayd is reported to have said:

The Zanadiqah (atheists) have fabricated twelve thousand traditions, ascribing them to the Messenger of Allah (S).

Al-Mahdi said: One of the Zanadiqah has confessed before me that he composed four hundred traditions, and they were being circulated and conveyed among people.

Ibn Asakir reported that a zindiq was brought once to al-Rashid who gave his orders to behead him, when he (zindiq) said: O Amir al-Mu’minin, aren’t you aware of four thousand traditions I fabricated, in which I forbid what is lawful (halal) and deem lawful what is forbidden (in the Qur’an). It is reported too that when Abd al-Karim ibn Abi al-Awja’ intended to behead him, he said: I have composed for you four thousand traditions forbidding through them what is lawful, and sanctioning what is unlawful (haram).

Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, who was the teacher of al-Bukhari, said: I commit to memory four thousand falsified traditions.

Sahl ibn al-Sirri al-Hafiz says: Ahmad ibn Abd Allah al-Jubyari, Muhammad ibn Ukashah al-Kirmani and Muhammad ibn Tamim al-Farabi falsified and fabricated more than ten thousand traditions against the Messenger of Allah.

Al-Bukhari writes: I commit to memory one hundred correct traditions and two hundred falsified traditions. Reports (akhbar) in this respect are countless, and whoever wants to get acquainted with more of them can refer to their sources, especially al-Suyuti’s book Tahdhir al-Khawass.

This is the last point I quote here, which I deem sufficient.

Traditions Fabricated By the Jews

When the Muhammadan Da’wah (invitation) got so much valour and prowess, becoming much strong, with smash of all the powers and forces combating it, those opposing and restraining it found no choice but to hatch plans and conspire against it through trickery and deceit, after failing in weakening it through means of force and contest.

Since the most vehement of mankind in hostility to those who believe are the Jews, as they allege to be God’s chosen people, recognizing no favour for any other nation, admitting no scripture for any prophet after Moses, their rabbis and monks found no other means – especially after being overcome and driven forth from their homes45 – but to resort to cunning and use finesse to attain to their sought desire. Hence the Jewish artifice led them to pretend and show Islam, concealing their religion inside their hearts, so as to hide their resentment, and deceive the Muslims. The influential and vehement in cunning among these priests were Ka’b al-Ahbar, Wahb ibn Munabbih and Abd Allah ibn Sallam.

When observing that their tricks have found way and prevailed among people, due to their false pretense of godliness and piety, and the Muslims having confidence in and being beguiled by them, they resolved first to direct a fatal blow to the Muslims, to the core of their religion. This was achieved by foisting into the foundations on which religion was established, the legends, superstitions, fancies and trifles in order to enfeeble and undermine these foundations and principles.

On failing to degrade the holy Qur’an due to its being preserved through tadwin (writing), memorized by thousands of Muslims, and immune against addition of one word or insertion of one letter, they resorted to fabricating and foisting so many traditions that were never uttered by the Prophet.46 What helped them to do so was the fact that the Prophet’s traditions were not of determined signs, nor of preserved roots and sources, since they were never inscribed during his life-time as was the case with the Qur’an, nor committed to writing by his Companions after his demise. This fact made it possible for every capricious or evil-intentioned one to foist into them as much as he liked, and assault them with falsity.

That which even facilitated and paved the way for their deception was the fact that the Companions used to refer to them to get the solutions for the questions regarding the affairs of the past world that were unknown to them. And the Jews, due to the Scripture they possessed, and the ulama’ they had, were considered teachers for the Arabs in respect of all the issues related to ancient religions, if they be sincere and honest. The sage Ibn Khaldun,47 when discussing the traditional (naqli) interpretation and stating that it included the meagre and the stout, the acceptable and disapproved, is reported to have said:

“The reason behind this is that the Arabs were not people of a scripture or knowledge, but most of them were bedouins and illiterate, who when desiring to have information about origin of the universe, beginning of creation and mysteries of existence, they would inquire people of the Book (Ahl al-Kitab) and get all the solutions from them48 .

Among them were the Jews, followers of the Torah and those who followed their religion from among the Christians, like Ka’b al-Ahbar, Wahb ibn Munabbih and Abd Allah ibn Sallam and their likes. Then books of exegesis were filled with the traditions they reported, with the exegetes showing leniency toward such fabrications, the source of all of which was the Torah, or whatever they used to falsify and forge.”

In another place of his Maqaddimah49 he said:

“Most often the historians and exegetes have committed so many errors in the episodes and events they used to report with the leaders of transmission, due to their dependence on mere transmission whether be poor or authentic, without subjecting them to their sources, nor comparing with their likes, nor fathoming them with the criterion of wisdom, to comprehend the temperaments of the creatures, nor investigating the veracity of the reports, going astray from path of truth and wandering in the desert of deception and error.”

Dr. Ahmad Amin also said:

“Some of the Companions used to frequent to Wahb ibn Munabbih,

Ka’b al-Ahbar and Abd Allah ibn Sallam, while the Tabi’un (Followers) used to refer to Ibn Jarih. All these men got information they used to report from the Torah and Gospel, with their expositions and margins, so the Muslims found no harm to relate them beside the Qur’anic verses, the fact leading to their becoming another source of overproduction.”50

For all this, the rabbis embarked on propagating within the Islamic religion, so many falsities and trifles claiming them once to be taken from their scripture or latent knowledge, and another time to be among what they heard from the Prophet (S), while they being in fact foisted and forged by them. How could the Companions discern between truth and falsity in the rabbis’ utterances, while they were on one hand unaware of the Hebrew51 language which was used in their books, and on the other they were less than them (rabbis) in sagacity and weaker in cunning.

Therefore these falsities became so current and circulated among the Companions and their followers who used to take whatever those cunning men were relating without any investigation or verification, considering it to be certainly correct (sahih).

Before embarking on demonstrating some of the Jewish falsified traditions with which books of tafsir (exegesis) and hadith and history were replete, I would like to refer briefly to the biographies of the chiefs of these rabbis: Ka’b al-Ahbar, Wahb and Abd Allah ibn Sallam.

Ka’b Al-Ahbar

Ka’b al-Ahbar52

He is Ka’b ibn Mani’ al-Himyari, from Al Dhi Ra’in, and it is said that he belongs to Dhu al-Kila’. His surname was Abu Ishaq, and he was one of the eminent rabbis of the Jews, known with the title Ka’b al-Ahbar. He embraced Islam during the time of Umar, and settled at al-Madinah in the period of his caliphate, keeping his company during the conquest of Quds. Then he shifted to the Sham during the reign of Uthman, when Mu’awiyah chose and appointed him as one of his consultants, due to his abundant knowledge.53 Also they were claiming that it was Mu’awiyah who ordered him to relate tales in the land of Sham,54 becoming thus the first of Akhbaris in respect of the Jewish and Islamic traditions.”

Through Ka’b and Ibn Munabbih and others from among the Jews who embraced Islam afterwards, some of the Talmud tales (Isra’iliyyat) crept into the hadith, turning to be so soon part of the religious and historic reports.

About him al-Dhahabi, in Tadhkirat al-huffaz, writes: “He came from Yemen during the caliphate of Umar, when the Companions and others began to take and report from him, with some of the Followers (Tabi’un) reporting from him without referring to the chain of narrators. He died at Hams55 (Syria) in 32 or 33 or 37 (Hijrah), after disseminating throughout the Sham and other Islamic and Jewish countries his narrations and tales derived from Akhbar, as done by Tamim al-Dari in the Christian reports56 .

Reason behind his embracing Islam

A surprising reason was invented by this priest (Ka’b) for his adoption of Islam, in order to penetrate and occupy the Muslims’ minds and hearts! Ibn Sa’d, through a reliable sanad, reported from Sa’id ibn al-Musayyab, that he said:

Al-Abbas said to Ka’b: What kept you from embracing Islam during the lifetime of the Prophet and that of Abu Bakr? He replied: My father wrote me a letter (quoting it) from the Torah, saying: Hasten in conveying it! Then he sealed all his books, conjuring me with the right the father has upon his son not to break the seal of them. As soon as witnessing advent of Islam, I said to myself: Maybe my father has kept from me some knowledge! So I unsealed the letter seeing in it the characteristics of Muhammad and his Ummah! Only then I became Muslim.

Abd Allah ibn Umar57 reported that one of the Yemenis came to Ka’b al-Ahbar and said to him: The Jewish Rabbi so and so sent me to hand you a letter. Ka’b said: Give it. The man said: He says to you: Weren’t you an honourable influential master! So what brought you out of your religion toward Ummah of Muhammad? Ka’b replied: Do you intend to return to him? He said: Yes. Ka’b said: When you go back to him, catch him from his garment skirt so as not to let him flee, and say to him:

He says to you: I beg you by That Who split the sea for Moses, and I ask you by Allah Who gave Musa ibn Imran the tablets which containing the knowledge of everything! Don’t you find in Allah’s words that the Ummah of Muhammad are three thirds: one third of them will verily enter paradise without reckoning. The second third will be subjected to slight reckoning, and enter paradise afterwards. And the other third will enter the heavens through the intercession of Ahmad, he will verily reply: Yea. Then say to him: Ka’b says to you: Make me within any of these thirds that you wish!”

In al-Isabah, Ibn Hajar says that he related from the Prophet mursal traditions, and from him (Ka’b) some of the Companions reported, like Ibn Umar, Abu Hurayrah, Ibn Abbas, Ibn al-Zubayr and Mu’awiyah beside others.58

Al-Dhahabi, in Siyar A’lam al-nubala’, writes: From him hadith was reported by Abd Allah ibn Hanzalah,59 Aslam mawla of Umar, Tubay’ al-Himyari and Abu Salam al-Aswad. Also from him a number of the Followers, like ‘Ata’ ibn Yasar and others, reported some mursal traditions (with no reference to chain of transmitters). Some of his narrations appeared in Sunan of Abu Dawud and of al-Tirmidhi and al-Nasa’i.60

Wahb Ibn Munabbih

It is stated by the historians that he was of a Persian origin, and that his grandfather came to Yemen among those dispatched by Chosro for aiding Yemen against Abyssinia, where they settled down and multiplied by generation. Then they were known with the term ‘the sons’, i.e. sons of the Persians, among whom we can refer to Tawus ibn Kaysan, the well-known follower.

The religion adopted by the forefathers of Wahb was that of the Persians (Magianism or Zoroastrianism). When they resided at Yemen among the Jews, they learnt from them the Jews’ customs and traditions with a bit of the Christianity. He was able to speak in the Greek language, with abundant knowledge taken from Ahl al-Kitab, but was inflicted with insolvency.61

He lived contemporaneously with several Companions, and reported hadith from them. Also from him many Companions used to report, among whom being Abu Hurayrah, Abd Allah ibn Umar and Ibn Abbas, and others, who were trustworthy among the Arabs.

Al-Imam Ahmad says that his father Munabbih was a Persian man dispatched by Chosro toward Yemen, where he embraced Islam, and the son (Wahb) used to frequent after him to his homeland after its being conquerred. Following is one of his sayings: “I have read 72 of God’s scriptures!

In Tadhkirat al-huffaz al-Dhahabi said about him: He was the learned of the people of Yemen. He was born in 34 H. And died in San’a in 110 H. Or after that with one year or more. It is said that he died in 116 H.62

Abd Allah Ibn Sallam

He is Abu al-Harith al-Israeli. He embraced Islam after coming of the Prophet (S) to al-Madinah. He was one of the Jewish rabbis. From him Abu Hurayrah and Anas ibn Malik and others reported hadith. About him Wahb ibn Munabbih said: Al-Israeli was the most knowledgeable among the people of his time, and Ka’b was the most learned of his time people. He died in the year 40 Hijrah.

How Did They Seize Muslims’ Minds

Unusual and strange means were followed by these rabbis through their astonishing shrewdness, in order to possess and seize minds of Muslims and gain their trust and veneration. Some of these surprising methods are as follows:

Al-Tirmidhi reported from Abd Allah ibn Sallam63 – who was one of the distinguished Jews who embraced Islam – that in the first line of Torah it was written: Muhammad the Messenger of Allah is His chosen bondman. His birthplace is Mecca, and migration place is Tibah (Medina). He also reported: The attribute of the Prophet is recorded in the Torah, and that Jesus, son of Mary will be buried with him.

This being what was reported by al-Tirmidhi in regard of Ibn Sallam, which was confirmed by the sage Ka’b: About him al-Darimi reported, under the Prophet’s attribute in the Torah, saying: In the first line (of Torah) it is written: Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and His chosen bondman. His birthplace is Mecca, migration is Tibah, and reign is in the Sham.64

I searched for the second line of this legend till I found it in Sunan al-Darimi, that was reported also from the great sage Ka’b, from whom Dhakwan reported saying: In the first line, it is written: Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and His chosen bondman. He is neither rude nor unmannerly, nor clamorous in the markets. He never requites evil with evil, but pardons and forgives. His birth was in Mecca, migration is toward Tibah, and rule being in the Sham.65

In the second line: Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. His followers (ummah) are the praisers, who praise Allah in ease, in adversity, and wherever they be, and be greater than every honour. They are sun observers, who perform the prayers in its due time even if be on the top of a synagogue, wearing a wrapper on their waists, cleansing their limbs, producing voices (of prayers and supplications) during night through the sky atmosphere similar to the voices of bees (bumbles).

This statement was cited by Ibn Sa’d in his Tabaqat, on the authority of Ibn Abbas in a reply he gave to Ka’b. This superstition spread till reaching one of the disciples of Ka’b, who was Abd Allah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-’As.

Al-Bukhari reported on the authority of Abd Allah ibn Yasar as saying: I met Abd Allah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-’As and said to him: Tell me about the attribute of the Messenger of Allah that is stated in the Torah. He said: True, by Allah66 he is described in the Torah with some of his attributes that are cited in the Qur’an:

“O Prophet! Verily We have sent thee as a Witness, and as a Bearer of Good Tidings and as a Warner,” and a fortress for the illiterate. You are verily My slave and apostle. I called you the dependent. You are neither rude nor rough, nor boisterous (sakhkhab)67 through the markets...one who never requites evil with evil, but pardons and forgives. God will never take away his life before straightening through him the tortuous (deviant) creed (millah), making people to say: “There is no god but Allah”, rendering open with it blind eyes and deaf ears and enclosed hearts.

Ibn Kathir added to this: Ibn Yasar said: Then I met the rabbi Ka’b and asked him (the same question)...when he gave me the reply, there was no difference between their answers even in one letter. How would they differ while it was Ka’b who taught him (Abd Allah ibn Amr).

In al-Itqan,68 al-Suyuti reported that Ka’b al-Ahbar said:

In the Torah it is stated: O Muhammad! I am sending you a new Torah, that can open blind eyes, deaf ears and enclosed hearts.

Al-Jawaliqi, in Kitab al-Maghrib,69 is reported to have said:

Ibn al-A’rabi said: It is reported that Ka’b al-Ahbar said: The Prophet’s names recorded in the ancient books are: Muhammad and Ahmad and Himyat, i.e. the Sanctuary Guardian (Hami al-Haram).

Al-Qadi Iyad, in al-Shifa’,70 writes that Wahb ibn Munabbih said: I read through seventy-one books, noticing in all of them that the Prophet (S) was the wisest of people and best in opinion. In another narration: In all of them I found that Allah the Exalted, from the outset of the world till its end, never bestowed upon all people of the world the intellect that can be compared to his (S), unless it can be counted as one particle of the world sand.

Ka’b And Umar

On his arrival to al-Madinah and announcing his Islam, during the reign of Umar, Ka’b embarked on employing his sagacity and cunning for attaining to the goal for which he embraced Islam: that is corrupting the religion and fabricating lies against the Prophet (S).

The fact that prompted him to narrate and fabricate hadith was that Umar ibn al-Khattab, in the beginning of his rule, used to listen and heed to him, taking into consideration his becoming a Muslim of true faith, the fact pushing him to falsify as many as he could of traditions. Ibn Kathir says71 : “When Ka’b embraced Islam during government of Umar, he started to relate hadith to Umar, who used to pay attention to him, the fact that paved the way before people to listen to his narrations and convey his fabricated weak traditions.”

But so soon Umar took notice of his stratagem and discovered his evil intention, when he forbade him from narrating the hadith, threatening him with exile to the land of apes shouldn’t he leave reporting hadith from the first72 .

Despite Umar’s lying in wait for this crafty man with his decisiveness and wisdom, penetrating into his wicked designs through his insight and discernment, as seen in the rock story, but the extreme cunning and artifice of this Jew (Ka’b) managed to overcome Umar’s perception and good intention. So he continued to hatch plots, secretly and openly, till they were concluded with murder of Umar. All evidences indicate clearly that this murder was a plot engineered by an underground society, among whose senior members being this cunning man, and headed by Hormuzan, King of Khozustan73 , who was brought as a captive to the Medina. The execution of this plot was entrusted to the non-Arab Abu Lu’lu’ah.

Murder of Umar and Ka’b’s Hand in It

Al-Musawwar ibn Makhramah74 reported that when Umar went home after being threatened by Abu Lu’lu’ah, he was visited by Ka’b al-Ahbar75 who said to him: O Amir al-Mu’minin, I am certain that you will die within three nights. (According to al-Tabari’s narration: three days). He said:

How could you know this? He said: It is mentioned in the Torah. Umar said: Do you find name of Umar ibn al-Khattab in the Torah? He replied: It is not so, but I find in it your ornament and attribute, and that the end of your life is approaching. When he uttered these words Umar was never feeling any pain. The next day, Ka’b came to Umar saying: Only two days are left. After passage of another day, Ka’b came to him and said: Two days passed and only one day is left. In another narration by al-Tabari: One day and one night are left, and it (night) is yours up to its morning.

The next morning, Umar went out for (establishing) prayers, charging some men with the task of arranging the rows, when he would utter the takbirah (God is Greater). At that time Abu Lu’lu’ah entered among the rows, holding a two-headed dagger with its haft being in its centre part. He stabbed Umar six times, one of which being under his navel, which led to his death. It is known that Abu Lu’lu’ah was one of Nahavand captives.

In a narration reported by Abu Ishaq from Ibn Sa’d, it is said: Ka’b came to Umar and said to him: “Haven’t I told you that you will never die but only as a martyr while you say: “How would that happen while I be in the Arab Peninsula?”76

I present here an unusual report conveyed by this priest that can eradicate any doubt you may have regarding his collaboration in this conspiracy. Al-Khatib reported on the authority of Malik, that Umar entered upon his wife Umm Kulthum one day, and saw her weeping, when he said: What is the reason of your crying? She replied: This Jew,77 i.e. Ka’b al-Ahbar he says that you will stand (on Doomsday) at one of Fire gates. Umar said: Masha’Allah!

Then he went out and sent for Ka’b al-Ahbar, who came to him and said: O Amir al-Mu’minin, do not speed things up. By Him in Whose hand is my soul, (month of) Dhu al-Hijjah will never end till you enter paradise. Umar said: What is that (you say)? Once you say I will be in paradise, and another time in Fire? Ka’b said: O Amir al-Mu’minin, by Him in Whose hand is my soul, we find you in the Book of Allah78 (standing) at one of the hell gates preventing people from breaking into it. When you die, they will continue breaking into it till the Day of Resurrection! After his death, Ka’b came and started weeping at the door (of Umar’s house), saying: by God, had Amir al-Mu’minin asked Allah to delay his death He would have surely done this.79

His oath – may God curse him – came true, as Umar was killed on Wednesday, only four nights left of Dhu al-Hijjah, in 23 Hijrah and was buried on Sunday, 1st of Muharram 24 Hijrah.

All these evidences prove that assassination of Umar by Abu Lu’lu’ah, was only a consequence of that conspiracy engineered by Hormuzan, due to the grudge and hatred harboured in his heart toward the Arabs, after their seizure of power and throne from the Persians and ruining their State and sovereignty. The fact that can never be disputed or refuted only by the ignorant, is that Ka’b al-Ahbar was among those who participated in this plot, with playing a great role in planning and executing it.

Hadith of Istisqa’

We learn from history (books) that a very extreme dearth and barrenness occurred to the land during caliphate of Umar, in the Ramadah80 Year, Ka’b didn’t miss this chance without exploiting it as a means for directing to Islam one of his fierce stabs. So he said to Umar: When the Children of Israel were afflicted with such a calamity, they would seek water (from God) through the prophets’ ismah (infallibility). Hence many narrations were reported stating that Umar said: This is the uncle of the Messenger of Allah, and full brother of his father, and doyen of Banu Hashim: al-Abbas. Then they betook themselves to him and sought water.

Anas81 said that the words uttered by Umar in this istisqa’: (O God) We used to implore You with our Prophet and You give us water, and now we beseech You with the uncle of our Prophet, and You will give us water.

Undoubtedly the purpose intended by this Jew through these words was only to mislead Umar regarding the first foundation upon which Islam was established, that is the sincere monotheism, so as to make him fall into the abyss of solicitation (tawussul) which means polytheism in itself. Then on falling of Umar into this abyss and his being an example to follow, with his act turning to be a sunnah having an influential impact on all Muslims in respect of the Islamic doctrine throughout ages and generations, the fact entailing demolition of the firm basis of the Din. But Umar, who had that insight and knowledge of religion, took notice of the intrigue and did not fall in the trap set by this impostor. So he never sought water through imploring anyone even the Prophet (S), satisfying himself with istighfar (asking for forgiveness).

Abu Bakr Abu al-Dunya in his book al-Matar, and the book Mujabi al-da’wah on the authority of Khuwat ibn Jubayr, said: Umar went out for seeking water (from God). He performed two-rak’ah prayer and said (in supplication): O God, we ask You to pardon and give us water. Before departing his place it started to rain.

Al-Shi’bi said: Umar went out for istisqa’ with people, but he sufficed only with asking forgiveness till coming back. People began to inquire: O Amir al-Mu’minin, but you haven’t implored God to provide us with water? He said: I asked for rain through the sky majadih82 (extreme parts, roots) from which rain is sought to come down. Then he cited the verse:

اسْتَغْفِرُوا رَبَّكُمْ إِنَّهُ كَانَ غَفَّارًا يُرْسِلِ السَّمَاءَ عَلَيْكُم مِّدْرَارًا

“...Seek ye the forgiveness of your Lord! Verily He is the Most-Forgiving. He will send (down) upon you the cloud raining in torrents.”(70:10-11)

Then he cited:

وَأَنِ اسْتَغْفِرُوا رَبَّكُمْ ثُمَّ تُوبُوا إِلَيْهِ

“And that Seek ye the forgiveness of your Lord, then turn ye unto Him repentant.”(11:3) 83

Al-Shi’bi says: He (Umar) went out for asking God to send down rainwater. Then he ascended the minbar (pulpit) and cited the following verses:

اسْتَغْفِرُوا رَبَّكُمْ إِنَّهُ كَانَ غَفَّارًا

“Seek ye the forgiveness of your Lord! Verily He is the Most-Forgiving,”(11:3)

And:

وَأَنِ اسْتَغْفِرُوا رَبَّكُمْ ثُمَّ تُوبُوا إِلَيْهِ

“And that Seek ye the forgiveness of your Lord, then turn ye unto Him repentant.” (11:3)

As he descended (from minbar), he was asked: O Amir al-Mu’minin, what prevented you from seeking rainwater? He answered: I asked for rain through the sky majadih from which water drops are coming down.

Abd Allah ibn Dinar al-Aslami reported from his father as saying: When Umar decided to ask for rainwater and go out with people, he wrote letters to his deputies to go out on so and so day, and beg their Lord asking Him to deliver them from this misfortune. Then he went out on that determined day putting on the cloak of the Messenger of Allah (S), till reaching the mosque.

Thereat he addressed the people, and beseeched God, making people to insist in invocation. The point on which he insisted more in his supplication was asking for pardon and forgiveness. Then as he intended to return, he raised his hands toward the sky, converting his cloak putting the right side on the left, and vice versa. Thereat he extended his hand, persisting in supplication and invocation, weeping bitterly and shedding tears till his beard was moistened.84

Further it is reported in al-Mughni and al-Sharh al-kabir, that Umar went out for seeking rainwater (from God), but his invocation was no more than seeking forgiveness, exclaiming: I have asked for rainwater from the sky majadih.85

Al-Jahiz said: When Umar ascended the minbar gripping al-Abbas’s hand on the day of istisqa’, he sufficed with invocation and prayer. It was said to him: You have never sought rainwater but only asking for forgiveness. He said: I asked for rainwater through the sky majadih. Then he cited the holy verse:

اسْتَغْفِرُوا رَبَّكُمْ إِنَّهُ كَانَ غَفَّارًا يُرْسِلِ السَّمَاءَ عَلَيْكُم مِّدْرَارًا

“...Seek ye the forgiveness of your Lord! Verily He is the Most-Forgiving. He will send (down) upon you the cloud raining in torrents.”(70: 10-11)86

If the case was truly in this way, no harm in it as long as all of them were invoking Allah. It is almost certain that Umar has never pleaded with anyone in his istisqa’ supplication, never taking any means or medium to God except invocation and seeking forgiveness.

Ka’b’s Cunning and Stratagem

In Malik’s Muwatta’ it is reported that when Ka’b became aware that Umar ibn al-Khattab intended to go out toward Iraq, he said to him: O Amir al-Mu’minin! It is better not to go there, as in it there is nine-tenth of sorcery: the debauchees of jinn and it has the irremediable malady.87

Jewish Traditions Spread By Ka’b and Wahb

To be acquainted with the Jewish fabricated traditions (Israeliyyat) spread by these two priests, that constituted suspicions with which enemies of Islam used to argue against it, being beyond its followers’ power, and turning to be among the most detrimental troubles getting rid of which being so problematic. Following are some of them given as an example:

Mu’awiyah said to Ka’b: You say that Dhu al-Qarnayn used to tie his horse to the chandelier. Ka’b said: If I said so, these words are said by God: “...and We gave him the means of access to every thing.”

Ibn Kathir, in his Tafsir,88 writes: What Mu’awiyah disapproved against Ka’b being the correct, and Mu’awiyah has the right in this denial, as he used to say in regard of Ka’b: We used to put falsity to test through him.

Al-Qurtubi, in his interpretation of Surat Ghafir, reported from Khalid ibn Mi’dan, from Ka’b that he said: When God created the Throne, it said: God has never created anything greater than me, and it moved out of pride. So God encircled it with a snake having seventy thousand wings, each wing having seventy thousand feathers, each one having seventy thousand faces, in each one there are seventy thousand tongues. Everyday these mouths produce hymns (of praise) that equal in number the rain drops, leaves of trees, stones and soil, all days of life, and all angels. Thereat the snake twisted around the Throne, which reached half the snake while it was twisted around it. Only then it (Throne) behaved humbly!

In the Tafsir89 books, it is reported that Abd Allah ibn Qullabah went out looking after his camel, till reaching the garden of Shaddad where he collected from there whatever he could. When this news reached Mu’awiyah, he sent for him, when he came and told him about the event. Then Mu’awiyah sent for Ka’b and asked him (about the region). He said: It is the many-columned Iram...and it will be visited by a Muslim man during your time, who will be red-faced, blond, short (of stature), with a mole on his eye-brow and another mole on his neck, going out in request of his camels.

Then he turned his face, and on seeing Ibn Qullabah, he said: By God, this is the man meant (in the hadith),90 and no man will ever enter al-Madinah after him till the Day of Resurrection.91 When Ka’b finished his speech, Mu’awiyah said to him92 : O Abu Ishaq, Tell me about the chair of Sulayman ibn Dawud, and what was on it, and from what it was made. In his reply he embarked on citing what he had of superstitions and legends that are out of scope here, and can be found in Tafsir books.

Abu al-Shaykh in his book al-’Adamah, reported from Ka’b as saying: The seven earths rest upon a rock, and the rock is in an angel’s hand, and the angel is on a wing of a whale. The whale is in the water, and the water is on the wind, and the wind is over the air. It is a barren wind that never pollinates (the plants), and its horns are hanging from the Throne.

Wahb ibn Munabbih is reported to have said: Four angels hold the Throne on their shoulders, each one of them (angels) has four faces: an ox face, a lion’s face, an eagle’s face, and a human being’s face. Every angel has four wings, two on his face so as to keep him from looking to the Throne, when he would stun and float in the air. Thereat he can say nothing but the words: Quddus (the All Holy), the Mighty King... Whose Greatness has filled the heavens and the earth.93

Ibn al-Faqih, in his Ta’rikh, reports:

The Prophet (may God’s peace and benediction upon him and his Progeny) was asked once about the earth, can it be seven? He replied: Yes and the heavens are seven. Then he cited the verse:

اللَّـهُ الَّذِي خَلَقَ سَبْعَ سَمَاوَاتٍ وَمِنَ الْأَرْضِ مِثْلَهُنَّ

“God is He Who created the seven heavens and of the earth, the like unto them...” (65:12)

One of those present there said: So are we (living) on the first face of the earth? He said: Yea...and on the second one there are creatures, who obey God and never disobey Him. On the third one creatures are there. On the fourth one there is a smooth rock. On the fifth face there is a shallow of water. On the sixth one there is baked clay upon which rests throne of Iblis. And on the seventh one there is an ox, which is over a fish, and the fish is on the water, and the water is on the air. The air is on the soil, and the soil (thara) is separated, containing the knowledge of the scholars.94

Mu’awiyah once read the verse: “Until when he reached the place where settest the sun (the Western most land)”, till reaching the words: “a black muddy pool,” Ibn Abbas said: It is a black muddy pool. Then they decided to make Ka’b as an arbitrator between them, so they sent for him and questioned him about meaning of these words. He said: Regarding the sun, it sets in tha’t, which means mud. Again he said: It sets in a black mud.

It is also reported that Ibn Abbas and Amr ibn al-’As differed regarding the way of reading these words: “...in a black muddy pool”, raising the issue for arbitration95 to Ka’b al-Ahbar, to settle the dispute.

Ibn Khaythamah reported on the authority of Qatadah as saying: It came to Hudhayfah’s knowledge that Ka’b was saying: The sky revolves round an axis like a quern (handmill), when he said: Ka’b has lied...Allah says: “Verily God holdeth the heavens and the earth lest they come to naught.96

Ibn Hajar said that Ka’b al-Ahbar narrated that the heaven door which is called “the angels lift” (mas’ad al-mala’ikah) is opposite to Bayt al-Maqdis97 (Quds). From it some ulama’ learnt that the philosophy behind isra’ (circulating) to Bayt al-Maqdis before ‘uruj (ascension), was that to make the ascension occur smoothly and in a straight way, without any crookedness.

In this way the Jewish falsified traditions passed into our beliefs and tenets. After citing this superstition, Ibn Hajar said: There should be some consideration in this hadith due to stating that in every heaven there is a populated house, and the house which is in the lowest heaven is located opposite to the Ka’bah. It was more proper for the Prophet to ascend from Mecca so as to reach the inhabited house (al-bayt al-ma’mur) without any crookedness! Since he ascended from one heaven to another till reaching al-bayt al-ma’mur.

Ka’b reports that in the Paradise there is an angel, whom I can name if I will. He coins for paradise inhabitants the ornaments, from the day he was created till the Day of Resurrection. If one bracelet of them was to be brought out, it would drive back the sun ray as the sun repels the moon’s ray.

The evidence confirming that the Companions used to refer to him (Ka’b) even in respect of questions of which they were aware, especially when he said: “Nothing is there but recorded in the Torah”, can be found when Abu Abd al-Rahman reported that Umar said to Ka’b – after referring to poetry: O Ka’b, is there any mention of poetry in the Torah? Ka’b said: I find in the Torah people from among the offspring of Isma’il, having their gospels kept in their hearts, pronouncing only wisdom and coining the proverbs. We know them to be none but the Arabs.98

Yazid ibn Habib reported that Mu’awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan asked Ka’b al-Ahbar: Do you find in the Book of Allah any reference to this (River of) Nile? He said: Yea, by Him Who split the sea for Moses (peace be upon him) I find in the Book of Allah, the Glorified and Exalted, that: God reveals to it twice a year, and reveals to it when it flows that: Allah orders you to flow. Then it flows in the way ordained by God. After that God reveals to it: Return commendably99 .

Al-Bayhaqi, in al-Asma’ wa al-sifat, through a reliable sanad, reports from Ibn Abbas, saying: In regard of the Almighty’s saying: “God is He Who created the seven heavens and of the earth, the like unto them” he (Ka’b) said: They are seven earths, in each one there is a prophet like yours, Adam like yours, Noah like yours, Abraham like yours and Jesus like Jesus Christ. But he never referred to any equal to Moses! In his book al-Shu’ab, al-Bayhaqi said: He is extremely eccentric.

Al-Suyuti says: This utterance of al-Bayhaqi is quite handsome, as he doesn’t necessitate veracity of text as a condition for veracity of the isnad, due to possibility of the isnad’s being correct with the text having eccentricity or a defect that deprives it of veracity.

After ascribing this hadith to Ibn Jarir with the wording: “Every earth is similar in respect of creation to this earth, its Adam is like your Adam and Ibrahim is like Ibrahim you have”, Ibn Kathir says: It is probably thought – if be correctly reported from Ibn Abbas – that he (Ibn Jarir) has taken from Jewish falsified traditions (Israeliyyat).

Makhul reported that Ka’b said: Four of the prophets are alive so as to be safety for the inhabitants of the earth, two of whom are on the earth: al-Khidr and Ilyas, and two are in the heaven: Idris and Jesus.100

In Tafsir al-Tabari it is reported that Ibn Abbas inquired Ka’b about Sidrat al-Muntaha (the Lote-tree of the all-Comprehensive Terminus). He said: It is over the heads of the Throne-bearers, and towards it ends the knowledge of all creatures, beyond which no one has any knowledge, the reason for which it was called Sidrat al-Muntaha, due to the end (intiha’) of knowledge at it. This being what he said to his second disciple. Whereas his first disciple Abu Hurayrah, has answered his question by a hadith saying in it: It is a tree from whose root come out rivers of unpolluted water, rivers of milk, rivers of wine, and rivers of honey. It is a tree under the shade of which the passenger moves forward without being able to cover it as a whole. Every leaf of this tree can cover and include the Ummah altogether – O God protect us!

In the ascension hadith, it is stated that when Allah prescribed fifty prayers upon His bondmen during day and night, none of the apostles, except Moses, could comprehend the impossibility of performing them by mankind. And he alone took notice of this fact, urging Muhammad (S) to refer to his Lord ten times, according to a narration, and five times in another narration, and a few times in a third narration.

All these narrations state that whenever any number of prayers was revealed from God upon the Prophet, Moses would tell him to refer to his Lord to decrease them till reaching them to five (salats), as if when Allah Subhanahu prescribed the prayers upon the Muslims, He was unaware – Higher be He than this so highly – of the extent of endurance of His slaves to perform them. And also Muhammad, whom He chose for conveying the universal message to all mankind as God knows best where to put His Message – does not know whether those to whom he was delegated tolerate the burden of this worship or be unable to perform it, until when he was enlightened by Moses.

In this manner, the Jewish falsified traditions penetrate into our religion and prevail among our beliefs, having their corruptive effects, with no one found, but very rarely, to reveal their falsehood and refute them. But, alas, we find them believed by some from among the Hashwiyyah (interpolators) of the end of Time, who trade with religion never caring for ascribing ignorance to the Seal of Apostles (S), keeping on referring to Ka’b al-Ahbar with mastery titles.101 I suffice with these examples believing them to be enough to get content.102

Is It Permissible To Narrate Israeliyyat?

The Islamic Shari’ah came and abrogated all the precedent statutes (laws), though reserving the foundations of the doctrines and whatever be non-contradictory with the rules with which Allah sent all the messengers to His creatures. The holy Qur’an declared clearly that People of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) have inscribed books from their own for parting with them for a trifling price.

Because of this, the Messenger of Allah forbade Muslims from learning or taking from Ahl al-Kitab any thing that contradicts the principles, rules and norms of the Din of Allah, flying into a rage when observing any of the Muslims reporting anything from them. Ahmad reported from Jabir ibn Abd Allah that Umar ibn al-Khattab brought the Prophet a book he got from someone of Ahl al-Kitab and read it for him. Thereat the Prophet became angry exclaiming: Are you believing in them, O Ibn al-Khattab? By Him in Whose hand is my soul, had Moses been alive, it would have not been within his power but to follow my guide.

In another narration: He became furious and said: I have brought to you a pure pristine law (shari’ah). Never inquire Ahl al-Kitab about any matter, as they either tell you the truth and you belie it, or tell you falsehood and you believe it.

Al-Bukhari reported on the authority of Abu Hurayrah as saying: Never believe Ahl al-Kitab and never belie them (all the time), but you should say: we believe in Allah and in that which was revealed to us and that was revealed to you, and our God and yours is One, and unto Him we have surrendered.

Al-Bukhari also reported the hadith of al-Zuhri on the authority of Ibn Abbas that he said: How do you inquire Ahl al-Kitab about anything, while your Book, which Allah revealed to His Messenger, being the last of books (scriptures), so pure and devoid of any blemish, for you to read. It revealed to you that Ahl al-Kitab have made many changes and alterations in the Book of Allah, writing by their hands a book claiming it to be from God so as to part with it for a trifling price! Doesn’t the knowledge revealed to you forbid you from questioning them? No by God, we never saw a man asking you about that which was revealed to you.

Ibn Jarir reported that Abd Allah ibn Mas’ud said: Never inquire about anything from Ahl al-Kitab, as verily they never guide you (to truth) while they are misguided. You either deny the truth, or believe in falsehood.

These being the correct narrations that agree with religion and reason (‘aql), and were known among the researchers.

The above-mentioned were some of the traditions reported from the Prophet (S) in respect of forbidding from taking knowledge from Ahl al-Kitab. But so soon the matter was reversed after Muslims be beguiled by some of the Jewish rabbis who embraced Islam for misleading others. That was with the emergence of some traditions ascribed to the Prophet (S) that permit learning from Ahl al-Kitab and abrogate the ones in which he forbade this.

Abu Hurayrah and Abd Allah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-’As and others reported that the Messenger of Allah said: “There is no bjection to relate from Banu Israel.103 It is known that Abu Hurayrah and Abd Allah ibn ‘Amr were among disciples of Ka’b al-Ahbar. The reports indicate that the second one – i.e. Abd Allah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-’As – got during the Battle of Yarmuk two scholarships of the sciences of Ahl al-Kitab, and used to relate from them. Ibn Hajar added to this: “For this reason many of the Imams of the Followers avoided reporting from him.”104

Some Companions Relating From Jewish Rabbis

The Companions’ trust in the Ahl al-Kitab’s embrace of Islam and being beguiled by them made them (Sahabah) to believe their utterances and relate from them their fabricated traditions. Men of hadith state in their books that the three ‘Abds105 , Abu Hurayrah106 , Mu’awiyah and Anas beside others, have reported from Ka’b al-Ahbar and his brothers (Jewish rabbis). It is known that Abu Hurayrah was much more than all the Companions in having trust in and relating from him and following him, as can be seen clearly from his biography which I published in a separate book under the title Shaykh al-mudirah to which everyone can refer.

This Jew (Ka’b al-Ahbar) managed, through his devilish methods and plans, to foist so many superstitions, fancies and falsities into religion, that filled books of tafsir, hadith and history, in a way that distorted them and created doubt among people in their regard, and still causing us detriments and troubles that only God knows. I have previously referred to some of these superstitions as covering all of them requires independent full compilations.

Companions Disproving Ka’b

As is known, the Companions used to trust Ka’b in the beginnings, but some of them did not wait to take notice of his truth after disclosure of his falsities and revelation of his reality, whereat they stripped him of this trust and started to suspect his reports, or even belied him. Whereas some of them, among whom be Abu Hurayrah and three Abds and others, kept on believing and taking from him till his last hour.

Umar has forbidden Ka’b from relating the hadith, threatening to exile him to his homeland in case of continuing this practice, saying to him: You should give up narration of hadith or otherwise I shall make you join the land of apes.107 Ali used to say in his regard: He is verily a liar.

Al-Bukhari reported from al-Zuhri that Hamid ibn Abd al-Rahman heard Mu’awiyah addressing a group of the Qurayshis, when he referred to Ka’b saying: He was the most truthful108 of all the narrators from among Ahl al-Kitab though we used to put falsity to test through him.

Ibn Abi Khaythamah, through a good sanad (chain of narrators), reported from Qatadah as saying: Hudhayfah was informed that Ka’b used to say: The sky revolves round a pivot like a handmill. Thereat he said: Ka’b told a lie, as Allah says: “Verily God holdeth the heavens and the earth lest they come to naught.”109 Ibn Abbas said to a man coming from the Sham: Whom did you meet? He replied: I met Ka’b. He asked him: What did you hear him saying? He said: I heard him say: The heavens revolve round a shoulder of an angel. Ibn Abbas said: Ka’b uttered falsehood...hasn’t he abandoned his jewishness yet? Then he recited: “Verily God holdeth the heavens and the earth lest they come to naught.”110

There are numerous reports in this regard, but I suffice with the examples cited above.

Story of the Rock between Umar And Ka’b

After conquest of Ilya and its land during the reign of Umar in Rabi’ al-Thani 16 H., and when Umar entered Bayt al-Maqdis, he summoned Ka’b al-Ahbar and said to him: Where do you think better to build the oratory (musalla)? Ka’b said: Beside the rock.111 Umar said: O Ka’b, by God you have resembled the Jewish creed.112

In another narration: O son of the Jewish woman, the Jewishness is mingled with you (with your blood). I shall build it at the forefront of the mosque, as to us belong the forefronts of the mosques, and I saw you and the way you took off your shoes! He said: I liked to conduct it with my foot! When he started to clean Bayt al-Maqdis from the sweeping which the Romans buried into it,113 he heard the takbir (God is Greater) from behind him, while he was averse to evil of dissimulation114 in everything. He said: What is this? They replied: Ka’b said God is Greater and people repeated after him. He (Umar) said: Bring him here. Ka’b said: O Amir al-Mu’minin, a prophet foretold of what you did today five hundred years ago. He asked: How is that? He replied: The Romans attacked Banu Israel and buried it (Bayt al-Maqdis), till you were appointed a ruler, when Allah delegated a prophet over the sweepings who said: O Jerusalem, I have good tidings for you, al-Faruq has come to cleanse you of that which inside you.115

In another narration: Al-Faruq came to you with obedient soldiers, who will retaliate and take vengeance of your people upon the Romans... etc. Beside other similar superstitions that were fabricated by this impostor and liar.

The rock remained uncovered during caliphate of Umar and Uthman when ruling over the Sham, and also caliphate of Ali though he didn’t rule over it (Sham), continuing till the government of Mu’awiyah, his son and the son of his son. When Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan came to power, with that known sedition that occurred between him and Ibn al-Zubayr, it was him who built the dome over the rock,116 extolling the position of the rock through what he built and the garment he covered it in winter and summer. All this was aimed at encouraging larger number of people to make pilgrimage to Bayt al-Maqdis (Quds), and abandon their visit to Ibn al-Zubayr, since people usually follow religion of the kings. In this way, people started from that time to venerate and sublimate this rock to an extent unanticipated by Muslims, with some embarking on reporting Jewish fabricated traditions in its praise and high status. To cite an example for this, some have reported from Ka’b al-Ahbar near Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan, with the presence of Urwah ibn al-Zubayr, that he said: “Allah said to the rock: You are My lowermost Throne”.

Some others have even made compilations on the merits of Bayt al-Maqdis and other regions of the Sham, transmitting many reports from Ahl al-Kitab and those who followed them, upon which the Muslims are unallowed to establish their religion. Ka’b al-Ahbar was the most vivid example from whom those Jewish traditions were reported, as in the case of the people of Sham.

In his Mir’at al-zaman, al-Sibt ibn al-Jawzi writes: People hesitated in regard of the traditions reported by Ka’b al-Ahbar from the Messenger of Allah (S), since he embraced Islam under the hands of al-Faruq (Umar), who used to hit him with the pearl saying to him: Let us be far from your Jewishness.117

Jewish Traditions on Excellence of Bayt Al-Maqdis

Ka’b said: Allah looked at the earth and said: I am treading a portion of you. Thereat the mountains contended in a race toward Him, and the rock became dilapidated, when He appreciated that conduct on its part and placed His foot on it.

He also said: Presentation and reckoning (on Doomsday) will be verily done in Bayt al-Maqdis, and anyone buried in this place no torment will ever befall him.

He further said: It (Quds) is only eighteen miles nearer to the heaven, and it is the land of mahshar (gathering) and manshar (resurrection).

He again said: The Hour (Doomsday) will never come till when Bayt al-Haram (Ka’bah) visits Bayt al-Maqdis, and both of them including their inhabitants will be led toward the paradise.

In another place he said: In the Torah it is written that Allah said to the Rock of Bayt al-Maqdis: You are My lowermost Throne, and from you I ascended to the heaven. From underneath you I stretched out the earth, and whatever flowing down from the tops of mountains passes too from under you. When one dies on you it is as if he has died in the heaven etc.

Also Abu Hurayrah – the disciple of Ka’b al-Ahbar – reported that the Prophet (S) said: All the rivers, clouds, seas and winds are altogether under the Rock of Bayt al-Maqdis.

Ka’b again said: Allah, the Glorified and Exalted, said to Bayt al-Maqdis: You are my Garden, Holiness, and choice from among my land. Whoever inhabits you, it verily be out of My mercy, and that who departs you, it is only through a wrath on My part against him.

Ka’b said too: In Bayt al-Maqdis the day is like a thousand days, the month is like a thousand months, and the year is like a thousand years. Whoever dies in it, it is as if he has died in the heaven, and when anyone dies around it, it is as if he has died inside it.118

Wahb ibn Munabbih is reported to have said: People of Bayt al-Maqdis are neighbours of Allah, and Allah’s right is not to torment His neighbours. Whoever is buried in Bayt al-Maqdis will be verily delivered from the trial and distress of the grave.

In a hadith, it is said that the party from among his Ummah, standing by the truth, who are never harmed or affected by their opponents till God’s command is revealed to them, are living in Bayt al-Maqdis and its vicinities.

Al-Allamah al-Ustadh Ni’mat Allah al-Saljuqi, the head of Fakhr al-Madaris (Herat) in Afghanistan, in his review of my book Adwa’ ‘ala al-Sunnah al-Muhammadiyyah, in a valuable book he sent to me, says:

“Concerning the traditions reported on the merit of Sham, we admit that most of them were only foisted by the Jews. Of them some are recorded in books stating that whoever begins the new moon for hajj from al-Masjid al-Aqsa, Allah shall verily forgive all his past and latter sins. This narration – though indicating the excellence of al-Masjid al-Aqsa – leads to atheism and negligence in regard of perpetrating guilts, paving the way for debauchery.

Among the superstitions that were foisted by the Jews and recorded in the biography and some exegesis books are the following: Some of the heavens are of silver and some are of olivine; the planets are transfixed in the heavens according to the order stated in the Greek books; the moon is transfixed in the lower heaven, and the planet Mercury is in the second heaven, and so forth till the seventh heaven. And so on the heavens are placed on a vertex of a mountain surrounding the earth called Qaf, and the earth is put on a horn of an ox standing on a whale swimming in water.

All that was due to the scholars’ unawareness and negligence of the untoward consequences of the traditions fabricated and foisted by enemies of religion among the Muslims.”

Traditions on Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa

The reliable traditions were in the beginning concerned with the merit of al-Masjid al-Haram (Ka’bah) and Masjid al-Rasul (Mosque of the Messenger of Allah), but after building the Rock Dome (Qubbat al-Sakhrah) several traditions began to be reported on the excellence of al-Masjid al-Aqsa.

Abu Hurayrah reported (that the Prophet said): “No pilgrimage should be made but only to three mosques: My mosque, and al-Masjid al-Haram and al-Masjid al-Aqsa.” In another narration, he (S) said: Travel should be made only to three mosques: the Ka’bah, my mosque and Mosque of Ilya (al-Aqsa).

Malik reported in al-Muwatta’, and Muslim in his book (Sahih) reported from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet said: One prayer (salat) in my mosque is verily better than a thousand prayers in other mosques other than al-Masjid al-Haram. In another narration: is like a thousand prayers in any other mosque except al-Masjid al-Haram.

Abu Umar reported that the Prophet said: A prayer in my mosque is better than a thousand prayers in any other mosque except al-Masjid al-Haram.

Ibn Abbas reported: A woman made a complaint saying: If Allah recovers me I commit myself to perform prayers in Bayt al-Maqdis. On regaining her health she got ready to go out, when Maymunah, the Prophet’s wife, came to greet her, the time in which she told her about her vow. Maymunah said to her: Sit down and eat what I prepared for you, and pray in the Mosque of the Messenger of Allah, as I heard him saying: One prayer performed in it (Masjid al-Rasul) is preferred to a thousand prayers in any other mosque except the Ka’bah Mosque. Had these traditions were truly reported on the excellence of al-Masjid al-Aqsa, Maymunah would have never prevented that woman from carrying out her vow.

Jewish Role in Preferring the Sham

We stated before that the extolling made by the Jewish rabbis that the Prophet’s rule would be in the Sham was only for a purpose harboured inside their hearts. It is to be stated here that the Sham would have never deserved that extol and flattery, but only because of the establishment of the Umayyad State in it. That State which reversed the rule from a just and fair caliphate to a mordacious deviant government, under whose wing and during whose days the Islamic sects were established, the fact that led to disintegration and decline of the Islamic State, beside prevalence and abundance of hadith fabrication.

This phenomenon was exploited by the Jewish priests who embarked on blowing the fire of sedition, providing it with more and more lies and deceit. Among these falsities we can refer to their exaggeration in extolling the Sham and its people, claiming that all good being in it and all evil being in other than it.

However, as previously manifested, the climax of the claims of these priests was that the Prophet’s reign would be verily in the Sham, and that Mu’awiyah alleged as the Messenger said that he was to succeed him as a caliph and asked him to choose the sacred land where the substitutes were living. Through this it is exposed for us another aspect of the Jewish stratagem against Muslims and their religion and rule. That is the claims uttered by the Jews in the Sham, to some of which we referred before, could never quench their grudge but they added to them the claim that the right-supporting sect would be in the Sham too, and in it would be the descension of Jesus, about whom they said he would be in his land.

In the two Sahihs it is reported (that the Prophet said): A group of my Ummah is still backing the truth, and never be harmed by those who disappointed or opposed them, till God’s decree coming to them on this state. In another narration: …. While they be in the Sham.119

In Sahih Muslim, Abu Hurayrah reported that the Prophet said: People of the west keep on supporting the truth till the Doomsday. Ahmad and others said: They (meant by the hadith) are verily the people of the Sham.

When Andalusian land was conquered, they (Jews) considered it the west that is intended in the hadith, making this hadith as if said in regard of their homeland. In al-Mu’jib fi talkhis akhbar al-Maghrib, it is reported from Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas that the Messenger of Allah (S) said: People of the Maghrib continue to stand by the truth (haqq), unaffected or harmed by whoever disappointed them, till when the (destined) Hour comes.120

In Kashf al-khafa’, it is reported that Ka’b al-Ahbar said: People of the Sham are one of God’s swords with whom Allah revenges upon the rebels. Maybe the term rebels or insurgents here is used for those refusing to submit and be under the command of Mu`awiyah, following other than him, the term used for Ali, may God be pleased with him!

Urwah ibn Ruwaym said: Some man met Ka’b al-Ahbar, saluted him and prayed to God for him. Ka’b asked him: From where are you? He replied: I am from people of the Sham. He (Ka’b) said: You may be one of the host among whom seventy thousand will enter paradise without being called for reckoning, or tormented? He said: who are they? He replied: People of Damascus! He said: I am not among them. Ka'b again asked. You may be from among the host to whom Allah looks twice a day? He said: Who are they? He replied: People of Palestine. He said: I am of them.

In another narration. You might be from the troops whose martyr intercedes for seventy persons? He said: Who are they? He replied: People of Hams.121

Ka'b said: The first wall built on the surface of the earth after the inundating flood, was the wall of Harran, then of Damascus, then of Babylon.122

Nafi reported from Ibn Umar, that Ka'b said: A fire will verily appear that takes off people. When you hear news about it you have to go out toward the Sham.123 It is known that Ibn Umar was a disciple of Ka'b.

Following are some traditions recorded in al-Jami‘ al-saghir of al-Suyuti, that were confirmed by Ka'b:

Sham is God's choice from among the lands (He created). For it He selects the best of His bondmen. Whoever departs the Sham toward another place, he will face wrath (of God), and whoever enters it shall be deserving God's mercy.

Blessed be the Sham, the Beneficent is extending His mercy upon them.

From a town in the Sham called Hams, Allah will verily forward seventy thousand persons on the Day of Resurrection. They will neither be subject to reckoning nor to torment. He shall despatch them in it between the olive and the wall... etc.

This town of Hams must be in this high status - even in the Hereafter - to the extent that no other town, even the Medina, can ever be compared to it. That is due to the fact that the Jewish priest, who is considered as a great follower by a large number of shaykhs (leaders) of Muslims, has taken it a place of residence, beside its being his burial ground after death. I do not intend to prolong the discussion by citing all the available reports of the kind, sufficing with what I have already stated.

Investigators' Opinion about Israeliyyat and Their Narrators

Before ending discussion about Jewish fabricated traditions from which Islam suffered a lot, I present here a number of statements uttered by leaders (Imams) of Muslims about these priests, who pretended to be Muslims, and about their fabricated foisted narration.

About the Jewish traditions cited in honour of Bayt al-Maqdis and other regions of the Sham, Ibn Taymiyyah said the following.

Some have compiled several works on the merits of Bayt al-Maqdis and other places in the Sham, stating in them the reports transmitted from Ahl al-Kitab and from those who followed them, of the kind that no Muslim can take them as a source for religious rules. Ka'b al-Ahbar was the most famous one from whom these Jewish fabricated traditions were reported, particularly by people of the Sham.

In this regard Mu'awiyah said: We haven't seen among these traditionists of Ahl al-Kitab anyone more exemplary than Ka'b, though we sometimes would put falsity to test through him. In Sahih al-Bukhari it is reported from the Prophet (upon whom be God's peace and benediction) as saying: "When People of Scripture relate to you any hadith, you should neither believe or belie them. Since they either tell you lies which you may believe, or tell you the truth which you may belie.124

It is surprising that this preserved125 and guarded Shari'ah, with this protected Ummah that never comes together on misguidance - when any hadith be related from the Prophet(s) by some of eminent Followers, like `Ata' ibn Abi Rabah, al-Hasan al-Basri and Abu al-Aliyah and others, who were the most notable scholars and religious authorities- can suspend men of knowledge at their marasil. Then some of them would repulse the marasil (traditions transmitted with no asanid), and some others would conditionally accept them. Till he said. And between any of these people and the Prophet (s), as a chain of transmission, none was there but only one or two or three men, for instance.

In regard of those traditions recorded in the present books of Muslims, that are reported in a mursal way, their veracity can never be confirmed as unanimously agreed by the ulama’. So what about those which were reported by Ka'b al-Ahbar and his likes from the prophets while about a thousand years were separating between him and the prophet from whom he used to report. Besides, he did not support these traditions with a chain of trustworthy men, but his intention was only to convey hadith from some books that were compiled by chiefs of the Jews.126

When Allah informs about their alteration and perversion, so how would it be permissible for any Muslim to believe anything of that through this kind of transmission. Rather he should neither believe nor belie it, but only through evidence proving its falsity. Truly in this way we have been ordered by the Prophet (S). Only God knows how much falsity against the prophets and what is rejected in our Shari'ah, contained in these Israeliyyat (Jewish falsified traditions).127

Ibn Kathir, in his interpretation of Surat al-Naml, after stating the Israeliyyat that went on in the episode of the Queen of Saba’ with Sulayman, said the following:

“What is nearer to mind being that these contexts have been taken from Ahl al Kitab, through what their books contained, such as narration of Ka'b and Wahb may God pardon them both for what they reported to this Ummah including the reports of Banu Israel, oddities, and strange things about what occurred and that which never occurred, and what was perverted, altered and abrogated. Allah has substituted us with that which is more veracious, beneficial, obvious and eloquent, praise and grace are God's.

Ibn Khaldun, in many places of his Muqaddimah, referred to Ka'b and Wahb and whatever was reported from them, to which can refer whoever desiring more details. I haven't come across, in the present age or even throughout the recent ages, anyone taking notice of the cunning and stratagem of Ka'b and Wahb, like the Faqih traditionist al-Sayyid Muhammad Rashid Ridha’ (may God's mercy be upon him). Herewith I quote a portion of what he said in regard of Ka'b in particular, and about him and his friend Wahb in general.

In regard of Ka'b in refuting those who described him as being a receptacle of knowledge, he said the following:128

“Establishment of abundant knowledge does not necessitate denial of falsity. Most of his (Ka'bs) knowledge in their view was confined in whatever he used to relate and quote from the Torah, or some other books of his people with ascribing everything to it (Torah) so as to get approval among people. Undoubtedly Ka'b was the most sagacious among the Jewish `ulama’ before embracing Islam, and most competent in cheating the Muslims through his narration after adopting Islam.

He also said that he was among the atheists (Zanadiqah) of the Jews, who used to display Islam and devotion so as to delude people to accept his sayings in regard of religious affairs. His intrigue became so rife that even some of the Companions were beguiled by him and embarked on reporting from him, and communicating his utterances without ascribing them to him (in the chain of transmission). Some of the followers and their followers have even thought them (his traditions) to be among what they heard from the Prophet, with some authors counting them among the mawqufat that having the degree of marfu' traditions (whose sanad goes back to the Prophet), as stated by Ibn Kathir in several places of his Tafsir.129

About him he also said: He was a volcano of superstitions, I decisively determine his being a liar, and rather I never trust his faith.130

In regard of both Ka'b and Wahb, he said:131 “The worst of the narrators of these Israeliyyat or the most of them in deceiving and cheating the Muslims were these two men. They were the source of every superstition foisted into books of exegesis and Islamic history, concerning the issues of creation, existence, prophets and their folks, seditions, the Hour and Hereafter, as in every place there is a trace of Tha`labah.

Seeing some of the Companions and Followers beguiled by reports that were spread by these two men (Ka'b and Wahb) and their likes, can never be deemed distressing by anyone, as every one may believe the liar, even the infallible apostles. That is due to the fact that infallibility pertains only to propagation of the Message and acting according to it, since the apostles are impeccable against telling lies, committing error in propagation, and acting in contrary to the Shari'ah they brought to people, as this contradicts their being an example and disturbs the establishments of proof.

But if the Messenger believes the liar in a matter related to him and his conduct, or convenience of the Ummah, Allah the exalted will verily manifest this for him, an example for which can be seen in the behaviour of one of his wives, about which the first verses of Surat al-Tahrim, were revealed, and he realized through God's words in her regard:

قَالَتْ مَنْ أَنبَأَكَ هَـٰذَا

"...she said: "Who informed thee of this?" (66:3)

قَالَ نَبَّأَنِيَ الْعَلِيمُ الْخَبِيرُ

He said: "Informed me the All-Knowing, the All-Aware."( 66:3)

That is he couldn't discover the artifice through the faculty of infallibility (‘ismah), but through God's revelation after its occurrence. Of this also God's words regarding the hypocrites who lied to him and asked him to excuse them from rising out with him(S) to Tabuk: "God forgive thee (O Our Apostle!) Why didst thou give them leave (to stay behind) until it was manifest unto thee those who spoke the truth, and thou hadst known the liars.”

What al-Zarqani quoted of his opinion that whatever is reported from the Companion which can't be counted among the entailed (mawquf) traditions, has the position of a marfu' tradition (though having the option of being taken from Ahl al-Kitab as a sign of thinking well of it, is a false and rejected opinion, that can never be taken as a rule and principle in our religion. And what he gave as a reason for it is totally false as no room be here neither for good intention nor for the opposite way.

It is usually known in the tempers of human beings to believe every report for whose utterer no evidence is there to charge (as a liar) nor to prove its falsehood by itself. If some of the Companions believe some of the fabrications which Ka'b al-Ahbar used to delude them as learning from the Torah or other scriptures of Banu Israel, as he being one of their rabbis, or in other than this, it will never entail having evil intention regarding them.

Had these Israeli superstitions been among restrainers of Islam and of which people used to speak ill, though being reported from those whose sayings and opinions were neither regarded as religious texts nor legal proofs, despite their being among `ulama’ of ancestors - as is actually true - so what would be our standpoint in regard of those defaming Islam, among the atheists and callers to religions who harbour enmity against Islam and Muslims, and also the Zanadiqah of Muslims beside Muslims among Zanadiqah of Muslims too, when holding that these Israeli superstitions and trifles were narrated by Companions in part, and counted among the traditions whose chain of transmission goes back to the Prophet (S) in which should all believe?

But this being a vast bab on defamation and restraining of Islam, had it been opened by other than al-Zarqani from among the imitators of darksome medieval ages, we would have closed it to his face saying to him the scholars of usul have unanimously concurred that occurrence of potentiality in the marfu’ (hadith reported from the Prophet) in regard of existing states, will clothe them with garment of generality whereat inference would lose its validity.

This probability is more proper than that one, in preventing from considering the mawquf as marfu’, and taking it as a legal evidence.

He further said:132 We, after experiencing a third of a century in tackling and solving the ambiguities and debating the atheists and their likes from among the opponents of Islam, and refuting them orally and in writing, it was already proved for us that the narration of Ka'b and Wahb, recorded in books of exegesis, history and tales, constituted numerous suspicions not only for the atheists and apostates, but also for the believers. The free-thinking people reject their saying that; whoever believed to be reliable by men of sarcasm and modification (jarh wa ta’dil) is verily reliable, though known for their successors to be having means of sarcasm that were unknown for them.

He also said: Through their133 narration I found a lot whose falsity is definitely certain for us, due to its contradiction to what they used to ascribe to the Torah and other scriptures of the prophets. So we were sure of their being liars, the fact that was undiscovered by the predecessors since they were never acquainted with the books of Ahl al-Kitab. Besides, refuting their narrations would drive so many suspicions away from the books of Islam, particularly Tafsir Kitab Allah, which is replete with superstitions.

About their narrations he said: Most of them are Israeli superstitions that spoiled books of tafsir and others, and constituted doubts into Islam with which its enemies from among the atheists used to argue, charging Islam to be a religion of superstitions and fancies. While suspicion in any other religion might be bigger than this, like what Ka'b stated about attribute of the Prophet in the Torah.134

But though the investigating imams have confuted the narration of these two priests, still there are - regrettably - some who trust them and believe in their narrations as a whole, refusing any criticism against them.

Political Stratagem

To complete our discussion in demonstrating the extent of Jewish stratagem against Islam and Muslims - though it being a protraction that may divert me from my intended purpose - I disclose another aspect of the conduct of the Jewish sages, that is the political aspect. The Jews' deception in fighting Islam aimed at attacking Islam on two aspects: one is religious and the other one being political. Their vilification in the religious aspect, it was exposed to you before. Herewith a few examples of their political stratagem.

Abd Allah Ibn Saba

Rafiq al-Adum about the most renowned men of Islam said:135

“The seeds of sedition have been planted all over the Islamic Kingdom and its grand capitals, like Egypt, Basrah, and Kufah, through a secret da’wah (propagation) launched by Abd Allah ibn Saba’, who was known with the nickname of Ibn al-Sawda'. He was a Jew from the tribe of Himyar. He embraced Islam during the caliphate of Uthman instigated by a secret assembly seeking through this to achieve one of these two goals: Sowing discord among Muslims either in respect of religion or in respect of politics.

On embracing Islam, he stopped at Basrah, staying near Hakim ibn Jibillah al-`Abdi, where a number of people gathered. Thereat he embarked on seducing them toward the da’wah he launched, which was accepted by them. This news reached Ibn ‘Amir, who exiled him from Basrah, after which he went to Kufah, from which he was exiled too.

Then he betook himself toward Egypt, where he settled down and a number of the Egyptians gathered round him, among whom being Kinanah ibn Bishr, Sawdan ibn Humran and Khalid ibn Muljam and their likes, whom he addressed saying. It is to wonder at whoever believing that Jesus will come back (from the heaven), and denying that Muhammad will come back (on Doomsday). So he laid down for them the principle of Raj`ah (return), which was accepted by them.

Among the statements uttered by Ibn Saba’: For every prophet there is an executor (wasi) and Ali is the wasi of Muhammad, and the Raj`ah after Muhammad shall be for Ali - which is one of the beliefs held by the Shi`ah - and that `Uthman seized the right of Ali.

In his book Fajr al-Islam,136 Dr. Ahmad Amin says: It was him (Abd Allah ibn Saba’) who enticed Abu Dharr al-Ghifari to propagate for socialism,137 and instigated the towns against Uthman, making of `Ali as a deity. From his biography it is learnt that it was him who laid down teachings for demolishing Islam, founding an underground society for spreading his teachings, taking Islam as a shield to cover up his intentions. The most notable of his teachings were the wisayah (executorship) and Raj`ah, initiating his utterance by saying that Muhammad will return (to the earth). His statement was thus: "It is to wonder at whoever believing Jesus will come back (from the heaven) and denying that Muhammad will come back (on Doomsday)." Then he turned to say that Ali will come back (to the earth).

Ibn Hazm said: When Ali was killed, he (Ibn Saba’) said: "If you bring us his brain a thousand times, I will never believe his being dead. He will never die till he fills the earth with justice as was filled will oppression."

This idea of Raj`ah Ibn Saba' learnt from the Jewish Madhhab as it believes that the Prophet Khidr al-Yas has ascended to the heaven and will verily come back when he will restore the religion and law. The idea was also held by the Christian Madhhab during its early ages.

The abstract of speech in regard of these Jews - as said by some researchers - being that their weapon was slander, falsity, cunning, foisting perversion of speech, raising skepticism and suspicions and creating malevolence among Muslims.

It became clear that murder of Umar was engineered by an underground society, that was joined by the Jew Ka'b al-Ahbar, while assassination of Uthman was partially executed through intrigues of the Jew Abd Allah ibn Saba'. Besides, all the political seditions and fabrications of narration in the first era of Islam belong to the society of Saba'ites and associations of the Persians.

I recorded this in the first edition of my book relying on what was written by eminent historians and their successors quoting it from Ibn Saba'. A valuable book under the title Abd Allah ibn Saba’. authored by the great Iraqi scholar al-Ustadh Murtada al-Askari was published, in which he proved through convincing strong evidences that such name had no existence in truth. That is due to the fact that the first source upon which depended all the historians beginning with Tabari till the present time to prove his existence, was Sayf ibn Umar al-Tamimi (died in 170H.). And his narrations were refuted by all the Sunnah Imams, with al-Hakim saying in his regard: He was accused with atheism (zandaqah), and he was corrupt in narration.

We, to be fair toward knowledge and truth, say: Dr. Taha Husayn was doubtful, before, regarding the existence of this Abd Allah ibn Saba'.

Following is some excerption of what he stated in his precious book al-Fitnah al-kubra, the 2nd volume, under the chapter "Ali wa banuh" (Ali and his sons), when discussing the Battle of Siffin.138

The least thing indicated by the historians' shunning the Saba'ites and Ibn al-Sawda' in the Battle of Siffin, being that their affair was only superficially imposed and lean, with being lately innovated when controversy heated between the Shi`ah and other Islamic sects. That was when the Shi'ah opponents intended to foist a Jewish element into this (Shi'i) madhhab, vigorously in teasing and defaming them. Had the claim of Ibn al Sawda' been based on even one foundation of truth and reliable history it would have been natural to see its impact when Ali's companions differed regarding the issue of government, and also in particular in forming this new party, which was averse to reconciliation, charging with impiety anyone inclining to it or taking part in it.

But no reference was made to Ibn al-Sawda' when mentioning the Khawarij. How can this negligence be explained? Or what reason we can give for ignorance of Ibn Saba' to the Battle of Siffin and establishment of the Court Party? On my part, I explain both the cases with one reason, being that Ibn al-Sawda' was nothing but an imaginary character... and had he actually existed, he was not of that danger portrayed by the historians, who illustrated his activities too during the reign of Uthman and first year of Ali's caliphate! In fact he was a person reserved by the Shi’ah alone not for the Khawarij... etc.

Following is a sample of this craft in regard of a critical matter through which the Islamic history changed its course:

Ka'b and Mu'awiyah

I have stated before139 that Umar ibn al-Khattab forbade Ka'b al-Ahbar from narrating hadith, threatening him with exile should he relate any of his Jewish traditions (Israeliyyat), or what he used to claim as being reported from the Prophet (S) after taking notice of his deceit and evil intention. As a consequence to this threat, no alternative was left before Ka'b but to surrender unwillingly and angrily. Then he started to work stealthily for attaining the purposes for which he embraced Islam, finding no access to this but through getting rid of this violent rock impeding his way, and preventing him from reaching his goal. So soon it was opportune that chance of the plot hatched by an underground society to murder Umar, in which he collaborated, fanning its fire!

With murder of Umar, he felt free and safe, giving the reins to himself to disseminate whatever the Jewish deception would let him, of the superstitions and Jewish fabricated traditions that spoiled and defamed religion, aided in this task by his senior disciples like: Abd Allah ibn `Amr, Abd Allah ibn Umar and Abu Hurayrah.

He was not sufficed with that, nor content with seeing no opponent to his plans, or to find through Muslims' negligence and aid of rulers someone to listen to or appreciate his fabricated traditions. Rather, he kept on his cunning seizing every opportunity to direct to Islam one of his malicious stabs.

We suffice here with citing only one example for this case: When fires of riot erupted during the last days of Uthman's reign, and heated up till causing murder of Uthman inside his house, this crafty priest never missed this chance, rushing to fan its flames and contributing with his Jewish stratagem as much as he could. Among the deceit he added to this sedition, was his claim that caliphate after Uthman would go to Mu`awiyah.

Wukay' reported from al-A‘mash, from Abu Salih,140 that a singer was chanting in regard of Uthman saying:

The emir after him shall be Ali,

And al-Zubayr has a pleasant morality.

Threat Ka'b al-Ahbar said: Never, but he (the emir) will be verily the owner of the gray she-mule! (meaning Mu'awiyah), as he used to see him riding a she-mule. On hearing this, Mu'awiyah came to him saying: O Abu Ishaq, what for do you utter this! while Ali and al-Zubayr and Companions of Muhammad (S) are present here! He (Ka'b) said: You are verily its (real) owner. He might have added by saying: I found this (recorded) in the first book.

In recognition of this favour, Mu'awiyah started to overwhelm Ka'b with his kindness. From history of this priest, it is learnt that during the era of Uthman he moved to the Sham, living under care of Mu'awiyah, who brought him nearer, making him among his favourites, for narrating as many falsities and Jewish traditions as he could in support of him (Mu`awiyah) and reinforcing pillars of his rule. In al-Isabah Ibn Hajar al-Asqallani reported that it was Mu'awiyah who ordered Ka'b to relate tales in the Sham.141 Sufficient be the aforementioned traditions, and the narrations he falsified in respect of preferring the Sham and its people.142

Our wonder is raised when knowing that these Israeliyyat are still nowadays believed and rather sanctified by some people. When enlightening and asking those people to give them less importance, some of contemporary knowledge claimants, particularly the grandsons and flatterers of the Umayyads, would rise and object us, giving reins to themselves in slandering and abusing us, out of bigotry and idiocy.

This was only one example we cited, of Ka'b’s standpoints with Mu`awiyah in particular, and the misfortunes that befell Islam due to his stratagem and cunning in general. All this was due to the fact that Ali was the cousin of the Prophet (S) for whom these priests prepared and amassed all their might and forces to combat and fight his Shari'ah. Had I intended to cover all the stratagem and evil intended by this priest against Islam and Muslims, this would have required me to dedicate a separate full book, as I did in regard of his most eminent disciple Abu Hurayrah.143

We should never forget that Ali used to say about Ka'b that he was verily a liar.144

Notes

1. Talhah and al-Zubayr were the first people who breached the swear of allegiance (bay'ah), supported by A'ishah, because of the malice and grudge they harboured against Ali (A). These two were - as is known - among the ten men whom the Prophet (S) augured with paradise.

2. Risalat al-Tawhid, 1st edition, pp. 7, 8.

3. I will discuss the righteous fabricators at the end of this chapter.

4. The Islamic encyclopedia says: After the demise of Muhammad (S), the original religious opinions and treatments that prevailed among the vanguard of Muslims could not remain intact without being inflicted with changes. As a new era of development emerged on the scene, when the ulama' started to make advancement on an orderly system of acts and beliefs compatible with the new circumstances. As after the great conquests, Islam prevailed and spread over spacious areas, borrowing from downtrodden peoples new opinions and principles, with the life and thinking of Muslims being affected then in many respects not only by Christianity and Jewism, but also by Hellenism, Zoroastrianism and Buddhism.

Anyhow, the Muslims have abided strictly by the principle: The Sunnah of the Prophet and the foremost in Islam was the only basis fit to be the moral ideal example to be followed by the believers. This led to fabrication of ahadith, with the narrators allowing themselves to invent traditions of their own, containing saying and act, ascribing them to the Prophet so as to make them agree with the opinions of the coming era. So that era witnessed circulation of falsified ahadith ascribed to the Prophet, showing him to say or do something that was recommendable in the following era.

Besides, the narrators began to foist into the hadith utterances taken from the innovated sayings of apostles and gospels, and Jewish notions and Greek philosophical doctrines … etc. which were approved by a certain group of Muslims, who found no harm in making the Prophet elaborating by this story-telling style some issues referred to in the Qur'an so briefly, calling to new opinions and beliefs. Rather, a large number of these invented contained important rules (ahkam), like halal and haram, purity (taharah), and rules of food, law, etiquette, good morals, beliefs, Reckoning Day, heavens and hell … etc.

With passage of time reporting the saying and acts of the Prophet gradually multiplied, and during the first centuries coming in the wake of the demise of the Messenger, the disagreement among Muslims exacerbated regarding some opinions about divergent issues, and every party embarked on supporting its opinion by a saying or an act cited, in fabricated contradictory traditions ascribed to the Prophet's Sunnah. And in the main disputes that were resulted from bigotry, every sect resorted to the Messenger to prove its right, as some group ascribed to him (S) a saying foretelling of the establishment of the Abbasid State.

As a whole, they made him prophesy in a way where vision intermingles with prophethood, in respect of political events and religious movements, or rather the new social phenomena that came into being out of the great conquests, like elevation of honour, with the purpose of justifying all these things in view of the new Islamic group. Certain numbers of these traditions were composed in a form of utterances ascribed to Muhammad (S), talking about various places and regions that were not conquered by Muslims but only very lately.

Hence, we cannot - due to multiplicity of ahadith - give a correct historical description for the Prophet's Sunnah, but on the contrary, they - ahadith - stand for opinions adopted by some men of influence during the first centuries that followed demise of Muhammad (S), and were ascribed to him only then (vol. VII, pp. 330-335).

Some ignorant men may think that by quoting this speech we intend to make it as one of our evidences to prove our claim, counting this among matters for which we deserve censure, unaware that our only aim of this being to manifest for them and their illiterate brethren that the orientalists have knowledge of facts of our religion of which they themselves (ignorant) being unaware. Glorified is He the Bestower of intellects!

5. Refer to journal of al-Manar, vol. III.

6. For this reason the Shafi'is were forced to narrate (falsely) a hadith in regard of their leader giving him by it superiority over all other leaders, which reads: The Messenger of Allah (may God's peace and benediction be upon him and his Progeny) said: "Dignify Quraysh, as its 'alim will verily fill the whole earth with knowledge"!

On their part, the followers of al-Imam Malik have also invented the following hadith in regard of their leader: "People will migrate from the East toward the West, where they will not find a man more knowledgeable than the 'alim of people of al-Madinah." They reported also another hadith with the same meaning from Abu Hurayrah. Refer to Ibn Abd al-Barr's al-Intiqa'.

7. See p. 21.

8. These people, as said by Ibn Asakir in his Ta'rikh, used to: "make of the mursal as marfu' once, give sanad for the mawquf another time, and approve of the isnad once and insert a hadith into another one, another time." (Vol. II, p. 10).

9. Among them a group of beggars who used to stand at the bazaars and mosques, falsifying against the Messenger of Allah traditions with correct asanid, which they have learned by heart, mentioning thus the themes through those asanid (Tafsir al-Qurtubi, vol. I, p. 69).

10. This saying and its holders have brought so much detriment to people, in respect of their religion and life.

11. The following basis was laid down by them in this regard: "Unless the intercession be there, the intercessor would be of no use.

12. Refer to the section: Fabrication of hadith for rhetoric speech, in this book.

13. Kashf al-khafa', vol. II, p. 409.

14. Ibn Khallikan, vol. II, p. 113.

15. Abu al-Bukhtari was the judge of al-Madinah after Bakkar ibn Abd Allah. After that he undertook adjudication of Baghdad after Abu Yusuf, the companion of Abu Hanifah. He died in 200 H. during the caliphate of al-Ma'mun. Tafsir al-Qurtubi, vol. I, p. 69.

16. In his exposition of this bab, Ibn Hajar said: "Notice: Al-Bukhari used, in this statement, the word dhikr (remembrance) not the word fadilah (virtue) nor manqabah (merit), since the virtue cannot be understood from the hadith of this section, as out of Ibn Abbas' acknowledging of his fiqh and companionship indicates much honour. In al-mawdu'at, Ibn al-Jawzi reported that Ibn Rahawayh said: No hadith on excellences of Mu'awiyah has been confirmed, so al-Bukhari's refraining from using the word manqabah (for Mu'awiyah) came in fact in reliance upon the utterance of his shaykh 'Ibn Rahawayh'. The same can be said in regard of al-Nasa'i when he depended on words of his shaykh Ishaq, and so also with al-Hakim. Ibn al-Jawzi reported again from Ibn Abd Allah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal as saying: I asked my father: How do you view Ali and Mu'awiyah?

He paused for a while and then said: You should know that Ali had so many enemies, who endeavoured to find any fault for him, but on failing they resorted to a man who fought against him, flattering him out of vengeance against Ali. Then this man embarked on citing many merits for Mu'awiyah, which were invented by his followers, that having no origin whatsoever. So many ahadith were reported showing excellences of Mu'awiyah, but no one of them could prove to be correct through isnad (chain of transmitters), the fact determined by Ishaq ibn Rahawayh and al-Nasa'i and others. And God knows better. Thus ended the speech of Ibn Hajar, in Fath al-Bari, vol. VII, p. 83.

Concerning the story of al-Nasa'i (to which Ibn Hajar referred), who is the author of one of widely-known hadith books, it was reported by al-Dhahabi who said: When being in Damascus, al-Nasa'i was inquired about merit's of Mu'awiyah, when he said: Isn't he pleased to be compared head to head (i.e. to be likened to Ali), so as to be preferred? Al-Dhahabi says: Then people kept on pushing him till driving him out of the majlis (meeting), when he was carried toward Kufah where he died.

17. Of what is narrated in regard of excellence of Damascus, I can refer to what is reported by Abu Dawud, from Abu al-Darda', that he said: The Messenger of Allah (S) said: The fustat (tent) of Muslims on the day of epic in Ghautah, at the region near a city called Damascus, which is the best of the cities of the Sham.

18. See p. 208, and refer too to my book Shaykh al-mudirah.

19. Sharh Nahj al-balaghah, p. 261.

20. Mu'awiyah was never one of scribes of revelation (wahy), and had never inscribed even one word of the Qur'an.

21. These traditions are cited by al-Suyuti in his book al-Jami' al-saghir.

22. Journal of al-Manar, vol. XXVII, pp. 747-754.

23. The Shi'ah categorically deny their participation in fabrication of substitutes (abdal) traditions, since they had no abdal, so as to compose traditions for them, nor they acknowledged them at all.

24. The eminent 'alim al-Izz ibn Abd al-Salam had a printed treatise about the abdaI, ghawth qutub (magnate), and the nujaba' (the dignified), stating in it that these names have no origin in Islam and were not reported from the Prophet (S), neither in a sahih tradition nor a weak one.

25. Refer to the Muqaddimah, Edition of Beirut, p. 473.

26. That is the traditions of substitutes (We gave them a shelter on a lofty ground having meadows and springs. abdal).

27. It is the 3rd treatise in the book al-Rasa'i wa al-masa'il of Ibn Taymiyyah.

28. In every place there is trace for Tha'labah.

29. The year in which this fatwa was written.

30. Let those who still look at the realities with obstinacy hear this.

31. The prophecy of the hadith came true, as sovereignty remainted in the hands of Banu al-Abbas till the Jesus Christ received it from them.

32. Mother of al-Mu'tasim was Turkish.

33. Tafsir al-Manar, Vol. IX, p. 228.

34. Sharh al-Nawawi ala Muslim, Vol. I, p.33.

35. This being in fact one of the misfortunes of that word "muta'ammidan" (deliberately), to which cling those who claim to be among the muhaddithun (Fath al-mulham, Vol. I, p. 132).

36. One of the rules in which they believe being: Piety never necessitates veracity of narration.

37. Fath al-Bari, Vol. I, p. 161.

38. I wish the Hashwiyyah apprehend what is said by Ibn Hajar. But wherefrom they can have understanding or apprehension!

39. This Sayf ibn Umar was a big liar and was the most famous among those from whom al-Tabari reported in his Ta'rikh and other books.

40. Al-Mirqat, p. 39.

41. That is the Book of Allah.

42. Al-Suyuti, Miftah al-Jannah fi al-ihtijaj bi al-Sunnah, p. 17.

43. Aws ibn Hajar said: The brilliant who suspects you, is like that who has seen and heard.

44. See pp. 147 - 155.

45. Umar evacuated the Jews of Khaybar toward Adhra'at and other places in the year 20H., and evacuated the Jews of Najran toward the Kufah, dividing then al-Qura Valley and Najran among the Muslims (Ibn Kathir's al-Bidayah wa al-nihayah, vol. VIII, p. 108). He did so with those who had no covenant from the Messenger of Allah (S).

46. Ibn al-Jawzi says: When no one managed to foist into the Qur'an anything strange to it, some people started to add to the hadith and fabricate things that were never uttered in origin (Ta'rikh Ibn Asakir, vol. II, p. XIV).

47. Muqaddimat Ibn Khaldun, pp. 439,440.

48. Ibn Ishaq used to defend the Jews and Christians calling them in his books 'people of first knowledge (Mu'jam al-udaba', Vol. XVIII, p. 8.

49. Al-Muqaddimah, Vol. II, p. 139.

50. Duha al-Islam, Vol.II, p. 139.

51. Al-Bukhari reported from Abu Hurayrah as saying:

People of the Book (Ahl al-Kitab) used to read the Torah with the Hebrew language, interpreting it with the Arabic for the Muslims (Vol. II, p.285).

52. Professor Sa'id al-Afghani, in an article published in al-Risalah Journal, stated that the first Zionist being Abd Allah ibn Saba'. In reply to this I wrote an elaborated article proving in it that the first (staunchest) Zionist being Ka'b al-Ahbar. This reply appeared in issue No. 656 of al-Risalah.

53. Al-Islam wa al-hadarah al-Arabiyyah, p. 164. How can't Ka'b al-Ahbar be described as having abundant knowledge, while it was him who said to Qays ibn Kharshah al-Qausi: "No span of the earth but was recorded in the Torah, which Allah revealed to His prophet Musa (peace be upon him), with whatever will be on it and whatever goes out of it till the Day of Resurrection." This hadith was reported by al-Tabari and al-Bayhaqi in al-Dala'il, beside Ibn Abd al-Barr in al-Isti'ab, Vol. II, p. 533.

54. Al-Isabah, vol. V, p. 323.

55. Though Ka'b al-Ahbar died and was buried in Hams, but in Egypt a tomb was made with a high dome over it, with people paying tribute to it, seeking blessing through it. This dome is nowadays erect inside a big mosque on al-Nasiriyyah street in Cairo, with all its expenses being shouldered by the Ministry of Endowments (Awqaf) from its treasury.

Hams, in which Ka'b was buried, differs from other Muslim cities, as a hadith is reported in its regard, ascribed to the Prophet (S), reading thus: "Verily Allah will on the Day of Resurrection resurrect from a city in the Sham, called Hams, seventy thousand men who will never be subject to reckoning or torment". Undoubtedly, all this is due to blessings of the body of Ka'b … and he has right on Allah!! What is surprising here the fact that they ascribed this hadith to Umar!! Refer to al-Jami' al-saghir of al-Suyuti. Also Ibn Jubayr, in his Rihlah (p.25), said that there is a tomb for Ka'b al-Ahbar in al-Jizah.

56. Duha al-Islam, vol. II, p. 97.

57. Hayat al-hayawan, vol. I, p. 266.

58. Al-Isabah, vol. V, p.323. See also my book Shaykh al-mudirah.

59. Siyar a'lam al-nubala', Vol. III, p. 218.

60. Ibid., p. 322.

61. Muqaddimat Fath al-Bari, vol. II, p. 171.

62. Ibid. vol. II, p. 171.

63. Ibid, Vol. IV, p. 274.

64. Abu Hurayrah and Anas ibn Malik were among those who reported from Abd Allah ibn Salam.

65. Distinguishing the Sham with rulership in Ka'b's speech has a critical political goal, about which I gave some information, and later on more will come.

66. In this way his teacher puts him in trouble to make him swear by Allah. There is neither might nor power but in God.

67. Sakhab with sin, is a word confirmed by al-Farra' and others, but it is more known with sad.

68. Al-Itqan, vol. I, p. 53

69. Al-Maghrib, p. 123.

70. Al-Shifa', vol. I, p. 55.

71. Tafsir, vol. IV, p. 17.

72. Al-Bidayah wa al-nihayah, vol. VIII, p. 206. In another narration reported by al-Dhahabi in his Siyar a'lam al-nubala': "You should give up relating the hadith or otherwise I will exile you to the land of apes" (vol. II, p. 433).

73. He was the governor of Tustar and the greatest among commanders of the Persians. He undertook the right wing of the armies of Rustam, the vizier of the king of Persia in the Battle of Qadisiyyah. When Rustam was killed, al-Hurmuzan fled with those who survived among his soldiers.

The Muslims kept on chasing him till he sought refuge in the Town of Tustar, where he was fortefied by it, and the Muslims besieged him severely till compelling him to surrender to the verdict of Umar, bringing him to al-Madinah (in 17 H.). The Muslims used to slander the Iranians and take them as slaves. Some of them who were in al-Madinah used to frequent to al-Hurmuzan, among whom I can refer to Feirouz, nicknamed 'Abu Lu'luah', who was a servant for Ibn Shu'bah, and it was him who stabbled Umar.

74. Tarikh Ibn al-Athir , vol III, p. 24, Tarkih al-Tabari, vol V.

75. This man (Ka’b) had wonderful designs with which he could cojole wuith minds of Muslims. As an example the following is one of his frauds as reported by trustworthy historians: Ka’b said to Umar: In the Torah it is stated that you will be killed as martyr! Umar said: How can I attain martyrdom while in the Arab peninsula? Besides other designs which can be seen in Tarikh al-Khulafa’, pp. 90, 98 and Ibn Al-Athir’s Tarikh al-Kamil, Vol. II, p. 357.

76. Tabaqat Ibn Sa'd, vol. III, p. 236.

77. He is truly a cunning Jew. This report can be seen in Fath al-Bari, vol. XIII, p. 41, and Tabaqat Ibn Sa'd vol. III, p. 253.

78. He used to attribute all of his malicious reports to the Book of Allah while it being totally free from that.

79. Tabaqat Ibn Sa'd, Vol. II, p. 262.

80. Ibn Sa'd and others stated that the year of Ramdah was the year 18 H. , and it lasted for nine months. Al-Ramdah is with fathah on ra' and sukun on mim, and the year was called so due to severe barrenness that inflicted the land because of lacking of rain, with death of the cattle, and people starving to death, till were obliged to swallow the ash, and drill the holes of jerbons and rats extracting what they contained (Tabaqat Ibn Sa'd, Vol. II, p. 223).

81. Undoubtedly this narration of Anas or other ones can never withstand the strong narration contraditing them. Anas was one of those whose narrations were not trusted, and Abu Hanifah was never trusting him, or Abu Hurayrah or Samurah ibn Jundub.

82. In Asas al-balaghah of Jar Allah, under the bab "jim-dal-ha'" and khafq al-mijdah means the posteriors (latter parts), whose rain is abundant. It is said: The rain majadih have flowed. In a hadith by Umar: "I have sought a drink by majadih of the heaven", meaning to ask forgiveness.

83. Al-Bidayah wa al-nihayah, vol. VII, p. 92.

84. Tabaqat Ibn Sa'd, vol. II, p. 231.

85. See vol. II, p. 290.

86. Al-Bayan wa al-tabyin, vol. IV, p. 279. This khabar was reported also by Ibn Qutaybah in his book al-Shi'r wa al-shu'ara', under the biography of Yazid ibn Ubayd, beside al-Tabari in his Tafsir.

87. Siyanat al-insan 'an waswasat Ibn Dahlan, p. 538.

88. Tafsir Ibn Kathir, vol. III, p. 101.

89. The word here is quoted from Tafsirs of al-Fakhr al-Razi, al Tabari, Abu al-Su'ud, and al-Nisaburi, in a margin of Tafsir al-Tabari, vol. III, p. 87.

90. One of their legends being: 'Ad had two sons with the names Shaddad and Shadid, who ruled and subdued the world. When Shadid died, the sovereignty became under Shaddad who dominated the whole world, subduing its kings to his rule. When he heard of the paradise he said: I will build one like it. Then he built an Iram in some of Eden deserts within 300 years, when he was 900 years old. It was a magnificent city with golden and silver palaces, and its pillars made of olivine and ruby, containing various kinds of trees and rivers. When its construction was completed, he marched together with people of his kingdom toward it. When being at a distance of one day and one night to reach it, Allah sent down a scream from the sky upon them, when they all perished…

91. By this he confined the route before Mu'awiyah, as if any other one reaching it to search for him would disgrace him and reveal truth about his narrations and superstitions.

92. Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Vol. IV, p. 36.

93. Al-Malati, al-Tanbih fi al-Radd ala ahl al-ahwa' wa al-bida', p. 99.

94. Ta'rik al-Adab al-Jughrafi al-Arabi, by the Orientalist Aghnatyaus Yolya Novitch Czechoviski.

95. Sunan al-Tirmidhi, published in India, Vol. II, p. 112.

96. Al-Isabah fi tamyiz al-Sahabah, Vol. V, p. 323.

97. Fath al-Bari, Vol. VII, p. 156.

98. Ibn Rashiq, al-Umdah, p.8.

99. Al-Nujum al-Zahirah, Vol,. I, p.33.

100. Fath al-Bari, vol. VI, p. 337.

101. They used to consider Ka'b among the first calss of Tabi'un (al-Nujum al-Zahirah, vol. I, p. 90), and the Hashwiyah still give him this rank.

102. Refer to my book Shaykh al-mudirah, to be aware of the Jewish traditions (Israeliyyat), which Abu Hurayrah took from his teacher Ka'b al-Ahbar.

103. Tafsir Ibn Kathir, vol. I, p. 4.

104. Fath al-Bari, vol. I, p. 167.

105. The three Abds are: Abd Allah ibn Abbas, Abd Allah ibn Umar, and Abd Allah ibn 'Amr.

106. Refer to my book Shaykh al-mudirah, to see how has Abu Hurayrah contacted Ka’b al-Ahbar and how he has fallen in his trap.

107. Al-Bidayah wa al-nihayah, Vol. VIII, p. 106.

108. In another narration, the word used is amthal (the most distinguished).

109. Ibn Hajar, al-Isabah, vol. I, p. 323.

110. Ibn Hajar al-Asqallani, al-Kafi al-shafi, p. 139.

111. In another narration: If you seek my advice, I prefer to pray behind the rock, i.e. the rock would be the qiblah.

112. Mudahat the Jewism is to resemble and be like it in taking the rock as qiblah, due to the resemblance it had in view of that believing it to be still a qiblah.

113. The Roman Christians have thrown these sweepings out of pertinacity against the Jews who were attaching much importance to it and pray toward it (as qiblah).

114. The bad dissimulation and plety.

115. I have quoted this statement briefly from Tafsir al-Tabari, vol. IV, p. 160 and following pages.

116. In regard of Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan who built the rock, I cite here what Ibn al-Athir said in vol. IV, p. 190 of hid book: Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan went on pilgrimage in 75 H., when he addressed people in al-Madinah saying: After all I am neither the oppressed caliph (i.e. Uthman), nor the sycophant caliph (meaning Mu'awiyah), nor the ma'fun caliph (meaning Yazid). I will never treat this Ummah but with the sword till make you submit to my will, and you learn by heart the acts of the earlier immigrants, but never act like them. You bid us to God-fearing but forget about yourselves. By God no one of you would bid to God-fearing after this incident, but I will behead him!

117. See vol. I, p. 35.

118. Refer to al-Nuwayri's Nihayat al-arab , vol. I, p. 232 to see these reports and more wonderful than them.

119. In the narration of Abu Umamah al-Bahili: When the Prophet was questioned he said: Bayt al-Maqdis and its vicinities (Nihayat al-arab, Vol. I, p. 333).

120. See p. 15.

121. Ta'rikh Ibn Asakir (the manuscript), Vol. I, p. 57; and Hams is the place where his (Ka'b's) corpse was buried.

122. Ibid, p. 14.

123. Fath al-Bari, vol. XIII, p. 69.

124. This is the correct hadith through which the light of Prophethood emanates. But one of the disciples of Ka'b, Abd Allah ibn 'Amr ibn al-As, would come and report from the Prophet the following hadith:

"Relate from me even one verse, and relate from Banu Israel with no harm," contradicting the Prophet's order then and enraging him by relating from the Zamilatan (two Sahihs).

125. That is the Islamic Shari'ah.

126. That with supposing them to report from their shaykhs, but in fact they used to invent and fabricate (traditions) from their own!

127. Iqtida' al-sirat al-mustaqim, pp. 208, 209.

128. Al-Manar Journal, p. 541 and following pages.

129. Ibid., vol. XXVII, p. 752.

130. Ibid., Vol. XXVII, p. 697.

131. Ibid., Vol. XXVII, p. 783.

132. Ibid., Vol. XXVII, p. 539.

133. I mean Ka'b and Wahb.

134. See Vol. XXVII, p. 618.

135. See p. 763.

136. See pp. 330, 331.

137. When Ibn al-Sawda' met Abu Dharr in Syria (Sham) he said to him: O Abu Dharr! Aren't you amazed at the saying of Mu'awiyah: "All wealth is for Allah, and everything belongs to Allah"? It seems as if he intends to curb Muslims from reaching it (Ashhar mashahir al-Islam, p. 734).

138. See pp. 98, 99.

139. See section on this subject in this book.

140. Al-Maqrizi in Treatise: Al-Niza' wa al-takhasum fima bayna Bani Umayyah wa Bani Hashim, p. 51.

141. See Vol. V, p. 323.

142. See p. 171 and following pages of this book (Arabic).

143. Refer to my book Shaykh al-mudirah.

144. Refer to section: "Companions Belie Ka'b".