Question Any refutations on this ?

Discussion in 'Islamic Theology and Ideology' started by Abu Thar, Oct 13, 2008.

  1. Abu Thar

    Abu Thar New Member

    asalamu alaykum wa rahmatullah

    i need some explanation about this ahadeeth and their isnaad please

    Some time after Rasul Allah, (May Allah bless him and grant him peace), had passed away, 'Abd Allah Ibn 'Umar [May Allah be pleased with Him] was in Najd where one day his foot became numb. As a remedy to alleviate the pain, a person said to him. "Remember the one whom you love the most!"<!--coloro:#0000ff--> <!--/coloro-->Upon hearing this Ibn 'Umar [May Allah be pleased with Him] said "Ya Muhammad! [May Allah bless him and grant him peace]"<!--colorc--><!--/colorc--> and his foot made an immediate recovery from numbness.
    [Imam Bukhari, Adab al Mufrad al Kalim al Tayyab; Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyya and Qadi Shawkani, Tuhfah al Dakireen chapter on Khadirat Rijluhu, and also Imam Nawawi's Kitab al Adkar]

    Hafidhh Ibn Kathir, Imam Tabari and Imam Ibn Athir all wrote [that]:
    During the Khilafa of Abu Bakr as- Siddique, may Allah be pleased with Him, there was a battle against the false Prophet Musaylima [of Najd]. When the battle commenced, the Muslims lost their footing at which point Khalid bin Walid, may Allah be pleased with Him,<!--coloro:#0000ff--> <!--/coloro-->and the rest of the companions called out "Ya Muhammad!" [May Allah bless him and grant him peace] and proceeded to win the battle.<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
    [Tarikh at Tabari, Tarikh Ibn Kathir and Tarikh Qamil by Imam Tabari, Hafidhh Ibn Kathir and Imam Ibn Athir and Ibn Jarir in Chapter Musaylima Kadhaab]

    Hafidhh Ibn Kathir and Imam Tabari both write that
    After the occasion of Karbala, Sayyida Zaynab, May Allah be well pleased with her, [the sister of Hussayn, may Allah be pleased with Him] and her company were taken as prisoners to Syria. When she passed the dead bodies she proclaimed:<!--coloro:#0000ff--> <!--/coloro-->"Ya Muhammad!" [May Allah bless him and grant him peace] Your Hussayn is drenched in blood without a shroud or a grave, and Ya Muhammad! [May Allah bless him and grant him peace], your daughters are taken prisoners and your children have been killed".<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
    [Ibn Jarir and Tarikh Ibn Kathir in Chapter of Karbala*]
  2. Salahadeen

    Salahadeen Ahl at-Tawheed

    Wa alaykum as-salam.


    Bro, there is a misunderstanding about saying "Ya Rasool-Allah". It is not always forbidden to say.

    Yes, saying "Ya Rasool-Allah Madad" is ALWAYS forbidden to say, at least after the Prophet died.

    As for saying "Ya Rasool-Allah", it depends in what context it is said in. The way the extreme Sufis and Shias say it, yes that is shirk! The reason is that they ask the Prophet for things. So they say "Ya Rasool-Allah Madad" or "Ya Rasool-Allah, fulfill my need" or "Ya Rasool-Allah, remove my hardship", etc.

    But if, for example, you say in durood, "Ya Rasool-Allah" and then send peace and blessings upon him...then that is not haram...rather, we say it in every prayer! You are sending peace and blessings on the Prophet , NOT asking him for anything.

    As Maulana Muhammad Yusuf Ludhianvi said:

    My view on this is, that there are various occasions and condotions for saying "Ya Rasulullah"(salalahu alayhi wa salam), and each occasion warrants a different ruling.​

    When the Arabs used to get hurt, they would mention the name of the person they love the most. This is true amongst Pakistanis as well. When I stub my toe, I say "Ya Mama!" Does this mean that I am asking my mom to remove my pain? NO! I am not asking her for anything. It's just a natural thing for a human to say the name of the person they love most when they are hurt.

    This is mentioned in the narration itself, where the person says "Remember the one whom you love the most!" So if a person loves his two year old daughter the most, and he calls out her name in pain, does this mean he is actually asking his helpless two year old daughter to help him!? No!

    Similarly, the Arabs used to say "O my grief" or "O my sorrow" ...does this mean that they were calling on their grief or sorrow for help or aid?

    Maulana Muhammad Yusuf Ludhianvi said:

    Another occasion is when people in love, sometimes, call the name of the beloved or when a mother calls the name of her deceased child, knowing her voice would not reach him (the deceased) in his grave, nor can he respond to her call, she only does so due to the maternal love for the child.

    Similarly those who possess true love for Rasulullah salalahu alayhi wa salam and who only gain comfort in taking his name knowing that Rasulullah salalahu alayhi wa salam cannot hear them. The calling of "Ya rasulullah" (salalahu alayhi wa salam) of such people is permissible provided there exists no corruption in their beliefs.​

    This was just a battle cry. They were not asking for the Prophet to help them in battle. If that were the case, they would have said "Ya Muhammad madad"....rather, this was just a battle people yell "Remember the Alamo" or "bombs away!" If, for example, a certain Muslim sister's honor were tarnished, (say her name was Bushra), and the Muslims waged war against that city for this reason, then they would yell out "Ya Bushra", meaning O Bushra we will avenge you! Again, not asking for help or aid.

    This is like how the poets use the phrase "ya Muhammad". Maulana Muhammad Yusuf Ludhianvi said:

    Poets, sometimes address the mountains, animals, birds, etc in their poetry. None of these poets hold the belief that these objects listen and respond to their poetry. These are merely imaginary words upon which no reality is determined.

    Similarly when poets address Rasulullah salalahu alayhi wa salam or any other saint in this manner, no truth or reality is determined in their address. I regard such forms of address permissible ​

    Again, there is no request for help or aid.

    And also, this is just the emotional rhetorical usage of the name, like it is done in poetry. Please see my earlier quote of Maulana Muhammad Yusuf Ludhianvi.

    Fi Aman Allah
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2008
  3. 'Abd al-Kareem

    'Abd al-Kareem Scaffolding

    I think, when ahl al-bid'ah approaches you with narrations, the first thing to do is check the isnaad. Most times you are 'off the hook' at that point because these people usually come with weak and fabricated reports.

    If the isnaad is strong enough, then look for the actual Arabic text. As is the case with shi'a and neo-sufis, their horrid english translations will sometimes imply things which, if you would turn to the original Arabic, cannot even come close to what is clearly and implicitly stated.

    If the Arabic is also ambiguous or it seems like they actually have something here, then you will most definitely find that the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah have certainly commented on these narrations and explained them.

    In shaa' Allah some knowledgeable brothers will comment and clear up the matter for us regarding these specific narrations.
    It was my understanding that the battle cry was 'Waa Muhammadaa" which is different than "Ya Muhammad."
  4. Adeel

    Adeel Active Member

    A Research Paper

    On the oft Quoted Weak Hadeeth of Abdullah ibn Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhuma)

    The Narration

    “The foot of Ibn Umar went numb so a man said to him mention the name of the person most beloved to you from amongst the people so he said, “Yaa Muhammad.”


    Adaab al-Mufrad (no.992 ch. no.438 pg.261), Ibn as-Sunnee in Amal al-Yaum Wal-Lailah (no.168) with a Marfoo (raised) chain and from Ibn Abbaas without this chain)

    The Chain

    Bukhaari from Abu Nu’aym from Sufyaan from Abee Ishaaq from Abdur-Rahmaan bin Sa’ad and he said…..

    The Imaam the Muhaddith Naasir ud deen al-Albaanee said this hadeeth is weak in Saheeh al-Kalimut-Tayyib (no.235) aswell as in his checking of Adaab al-Mufrad.

    The Investigation


    This chain contains Abee Ishaaq and he is as-Sabee’ee Amr bin Abdullaah (d.127H) (al-Jarh Wat-Ta’deel (6/242), Tahdheeb (8/63), Tadhkirrah (1/114), Shadhraat (1/174) and Siyar (5/392).

    And Concerning him Haafidh Ibn Hajr said,

    “He became forgetful at the end but trustworthy.” (Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.5100 pg.739, with the checking of Abul-Ishbaal)

    Ibn as-Salaah (d.643H) said whilst explaining the ruling on the narrator who started to forget at the end of his life,

    “The ruling concerning such narrators is that the ahadeeth narrated by them before they started to forget are accepted and the ahadeeth they narrated after they started to forget are not accepted. Also concerning the narrators there are doubts about (is which ahadeeth of theirs) was narrated before or after they became forgetful are not accepted.” (Muqaddimah Ibn as-Salaah Fee Uloom al-Hadeeth (pg.220, Category no.62). He then went onto mention Sufyaan at-Thawree as one such narrator.

    Shaikh Ibn as-Salaah then went onto mention,

    “Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee was also forgetful and it is said Sufyaan ibn Uyainah heard from Sabee’ee after he started to forget. Abu Ya’ala Khaleelee has also mentioned this.” (Muqaddimah Ibn as-Salaah (pg.220)

    Allaamah Ibn Katheer said, (d.774H),

    “Those who became forgetful in later life, from them were A’taa bin Saa’ib, Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee. al-Haafidh Abu Ya’ala Khaleelee said, “Ibn Uyainah heard from (Sabee’ee) after he started to forget.” (Ikhtisaar Uloom al-Hadeeth of Ibn Katheer Ma’a Sharh al-Baa’ith al-Hatheeth (pg.229) of Allaamah Ahmad Muhammad Shaakir and Ikhtisaar Uloom al-Hadeeth (pg.190) with he notes and explanation of Saalah Muhammad Awaidah.

    Imaam Nawawee and Imaam Suyootee mention,

    “And from them is Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee, those who forget from amongst the trustworthy narrators.” (Tadreeb ar-Raawee Sharh Taqreeb (2/371-373) with the checking of Abdul-Wahhaab Abdul-Lateef and in another edition (2/895-897) with the checking of Abu Qutaibah Nazar Muhammad al-Faryaabee)

    Imaam Nawawee said in his Explanation of Saheeh Muslim,

    “From those narrators who started to forget are….Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee…” (Sharh Saheeh Muslim (1/34)

    Imaam Nawawee also said,

    “Ibn Uyainah heard from him (ie Abu Ishaaq) after he started to forget.” (Taqreeb Ma’a Tadreeb (2/897)

    Imaam Suyootee then said in explanation of this,

    “Khaleelee said Sufyaan heard from him after he started to forget.” (Tadreeb ar-Raawee (2/897), al-Irshaad (1/355)

    Imaam Dhahabee said,

    “He became old and made mistakes, but did not become forgetful so when Ibn Uyainah heard from him he only started to forget a little bit.” (Meezaan ul-Ei’tidaal (no.6399 5/326), Tadreeb ar-Raawee (2/897-898).

    Imaam Fusawee said,

    “Some people of knowledge have said he became forgetful and he is rejected due to forgetfulness in the narrations 0f Ibn Uyainah.” (Meezaan ul-Ei’tidaal (5/326)

    Imaam Yahyaa ibn Ma’een said,

    “Ibn Uyainah heard from him after he started to forget (or when he became forgetful).” (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.5263 8/55)

    Haafidh Abul-Wafaa Sabt bin al-Ajamee mentioned Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee in his book of narrators who became forgetful. (see his book al-Egtibaat Bi Ma’arifah Ramee Bil-Ikhtilaat (pg.11).

    Shaikh al-Ustaadh al-Allaamah Hamaad bin Muhammad al-Ansaari also mentions Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee from those narrators whose memories deteriorated and they started to forget. (See his book Yaan’e ath-Thamr Fee Mastalah Ahlil-Athar Juzz 1 pg.48)


    Both Imaams Sufyaan ath-Thawree and Ibn Uyainah narrated from Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee. The scholars of hadeeth have elucidated the Sufyaan in this chain is Ibn Uyainah. However it is difficult to make Ta’ayyun, so other possibilities are also discussed.

    The Ruling on the Narrator who’s Memory Deteriorated or He became Forgetful

    Ibn as-Salaah (d.643H) said,

    “The ruling concerning such narrators is that the ahadeeth narrated by them before they started to forget are accepted and the ahadeeth they narrated after they started to forget are not accepted. Also concerning the narrators there are doubts about (is which ahadeeth of theirs) was narrated before or after they became forgetful are not accepted.” (Muqaddimah Ibn as-Salaah Fee Uloom al-Hadeeth (pg.220)

    Imaam’s Nawawee and Suyootee said,

    “And it is accepted that which has been narrated from them before their memory deteriorated, but their narrations are not accepted which were narrated after (memory deteriorated) or their narrations upon which there are doubts.” (Tadreeb ar-Raawee Fee Sharh Taqreeb an-Nawawee (2/896) in another edition (2/372).

    Shaikh al-Allaamah Haafidh bin Ahmad al-Hakamee (d.1377H) also mentioned the statement of Haafidh Ibn Hajr from Nazhatan-Nazhar. He also mentioned the statement of Imaam Nawawee from Sharh Saheeh Muslim on Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee of him being from amongst the narrators whose memory deteriorated. (See Daleel al-Falaah Lee Tahqeeq Fan al-Istilah (pg.152-153)

    Shaikh Dr. Mahmood at-Tahaan said,

    “1. The narrations they narrated before their memories deteriorated are accepted.

    2. The narrations narrated after their memories deteriorated are rejected.

    3. Those narrations in which it cannot be ascertained whether the narrations were narrated before or after their memories deteriorated, then there is abstinence upon them up until further clarity.” (Tayseer Mastalah al-Hadeeth (pg.124)

    See also

    Balgatul-Hatheeth Ilaal Ilm al-Hadeeth (pg.52) of Imaam al-Allaamah Jamaal ud deen al-Mahaasain Abdul-Haadee a-Maqdisee (d.909H).

    al-Taqayyid Wal-Aydah (pg.422-443) of Haafidh al-A’raaqee

    al-Maqna’a (2/662-667) of Ibn al-Mulqin

    al-Yawaaqiyat Wad-Darar (2/476-477) of Allaamah Minawee.

    Mu’ajam Mastalahaat al-Hadeeth (pg.112-113).


    Abu Ishaaq is also a Mudallis

    Haafidh Ibn Sabt al-Ajamee said,

    “A major Successor (tabi’ee) and famous for tadlees.” (at-Tabayyeen Fee Asmaa al-Mudalliseen (pg.9)

    Haafidh Ibn Hajr said,

    “Famous for tadlees, he is a successor and trustworthy. Nasaa’ee and others have also said this.” (Ta’reef Ahlul-Taqdees Bi-Maraatab al-Mawsoofeen Bit-Tadlees al-Ma’roof beh Tabaqaat al-Mudalliseen (no.91) pg.101 of the third level)

    Imaam Ibn Hibbaan said,

    “He is a mudallis.” (ath-Thiqaat (5/177), (2/2/64) Qalmee, Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (8/55)

    Hasan Karbeesee and Abu Ja’afar at-Tabaree mention him to be from amongst the mudalliseen narrators (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (8/55).

    Ibn Ma’an said,

    “A’amsh and Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee rendered the ahadeeth of the people of koofah to be corruptive due to tadlees.” (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (8/55)

    The Two Imaams Sufyaan Ibn Uyainah and Sufyaan ath-Thawree and Tadlees

    As indicated above from the words of the scholars of hadeeth the Sufyaan in the chain is Ibn Uyainah. No doubt it is difficult to ascertain which Sufyaan this is whether Thawree or Ibn Uyainah so then the scholars of hadeeth look at the student of the Sufyaan and by this they make ta’ayyun which Sufyaan this is. However the student in this narration is Abu Nu’aym, which is another problem as he was the student of again both Sufyaan’s.

    He narrated from Sufyaan ath-Thawree (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.2538 4/102) and from Sufyaan Ibn Uyainah (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.2544 4/107).

    So for arguments if the Mukhaalifeen (opposers) say the Sufyaan in this chain is ath-Thawree and not Ibn Uyainah, then

    It is KNOWN Imaam, Ameer al-Mu’mineen Fil-Haadeth al-Hujjah al-Aabid, Sufyaan ath-Thawree was an Imaam of Ahlus-Sunnah and a preserver of hadeeth of the highest level yet still he was a mudallis

    Imaam Dhahabee said,

    “Sufyaan would to tadlees from weak narrators.” (Meezaan ul-Ei’tidaal (2/169), Siyaar A’laam an-Nabulaa (7/242, 7/274).

    Haafidh Ibn Hajr also said he was a mudallis. (Tabaqaat al-Mudalliseen (p.32 no.51) and Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.2458 pg.394) in another ed. (p.197), an-Nukt (2/621).

    Imaam Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak also said Sufyaan ath-Thawree would do tadlees. (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (4/102)

    As well as the following Imaams.

    Imaam Bukhaari (al-Ellal al-Kabeer (2/966) of Tirmidhee and at-Tamheed (1/34).

    Imaam Nasaa’ee. (Tabaqaat al-Mudalliseen (p.32 no.51))

    Yahyaa ibn Ma’een. (Sharh Ellal at-Tirmidhee (1/357-358) and al-Kifaayah Fee Ilm ar-Riwaayah (p.361) of Khateeb al-Baghdaadee.

    Yahyaa ibn Sa’eed al-Qattaan. (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (11/192)

    Khateeb al-Baghdaadee (al-Kifaayah(p.361)

    Haafidh Ibn as-Saalah (Muqaddimah pg.60)

    Abu Mahmood al-Maqdisee. (Qaseedah Fil Mudalliseen (p.47, second poem)

    Salaah ud deen al-Laa’ee. (Jaam’e at-Tahseel Fee Ahkaam al-Maraaseel (p.99)

    Haafidh Ibn Rajab. (Sharh Illal at-Tirmidhee (1/358)

    Imaam Nawawee and Imaam Suyootee (Tadreeb ar-Raawee Sharh Taqreeb (1/263) in another ed. (1/230).

    What is Tadlees

    A Mudallis is the one who commits Tadlees which is when a narrator narrates from someone he does not directly hear from and omits the person he really hears from (See al-Fiyyah (1/180) of Haafidh al-A’raaqee, see also Nazhatun-Nazhar (p.82), an-Nukt (2/614) of Ibn Hajr and Tayseer Mastalah al-Hadeeth (p.78) of Dr. Mahmood at-Tahhaan.

    The Ruling Concerning a Mudallis Narrator.

    Imaam Ibn as-Salaah (d.643H) said,

    “The ruling is that the only narration of a Mudallis that will be accepted is the one in which he clarifies who he heard it from, and this is upon every that individual who commits Tadlees once.” (Muqaddimah Ibn as-Salaah (p.60) another ed. (pg.99).

    Imaam Ibn as-Salaah said this was the position of Imaam Shaafi’ee. (see ar-Risaalah (pg.379-380), Sharh Ellal at-Tirmidhee (1/353) and Muqaddimah Ibn as-Salaah (p.60)

    Imaam Yahyaa ibn Ma’een (d.233H) said,

    “The Mudallis is not a proof in is Tadlees.” (al-Kifaayah (p.362) and Sharh Ellal at-Tirmidhee (1/353) and (1/357-358)

    Other Chain For This Hadeeth

    Ibn as-Sunnee mentions 3 more chains for this hadeeth they are as follows,

    The First Chain

    Muhammad bin Ibraaheem al-Anmatee and Amr bin Junaid bin Eesaa from Mahmood from Abu Bakr bin A’ayaash from Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee from Abu Shu’bah……

    The Second Chain

    Muhammad bin Khaalid Muhammad Barzaa’ee from Haajib bin Suleimaan from Muhammad bin Mus’ab from Israa’eel from Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee from Hushaim….

    The Third Chain

    Ahmad bin Hasan Soofee from Yahyaa bin Ja’ad from Zuhair from Abu Ishaaq from Abdur-Rahmaan ibn Sa’ad……

    Then since the incident mentioned at the end of these chains seems to be the same one, then Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee has performed Idhtiraab in the hadeeth.

    What is Idhtiraab

    Idhtiraab is when a narrator interchanges the names in a chain he sometimes narrates from person A and then sometimes narrates from Person B (the same incident). This is idhtiraab of the chain, there is also idhtiraab of the matn (text). There is a lot of variance in the statement of the scholars on its exact definition but it can be summarized as below.

    Haafidh Ibn Hajr said,

    “If by changing the name of a narrator a trustworthy narrator is opposed, and none of them can be given precedence over the other, then such a hadeeth is mudhtarib.” (Nazhatun-Nazhar (pg.81).

    See also

    Tawdheh al-Afkaar (1/221) of Sana’anee.

    Muaqaddimah Ibn as-Saalah (pg.73).

    Ikhtisaar Uloom al-Hadeeth (pg.54).

    al-Baa’ith al-Hatheeth (pg.78).

    Taqayyid Wal-Aydah (pg.124).

    Fath al-Mugeeth (1/237).

    Tadreeb ar-Raawee (1/308).

    an-Nukt (2/772-802).

    Bulgatul-Hatheeth Ilaa Imal-Hadeeth (pg.26).

    Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee and Idhtiraab.

    Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee used to do idhtiraab in his hadeeth and this is hadeeth is a prime example of that.

    (see al-Ellal (1/193) of Imaam Daarqutnee,

    al-Baa’ith al-Hatheeth (pg.79),

    Tadreeb ar-Raawee (1/312)

    and an-Nukt (2/772).

    So these three narrations are also weak from this angle. As well as Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee being a central narrator in all three chains the previous criticisms mentioned about him that his memory deteriorated in later life and that he was a mudallis, render all three narrations to be weak.

    Further Analysis of the First Chain of Ibn as-Sunnee.


    The chain contains Abu Bakr bin A’ayaash. Many scholars of hadeeth of eminent level graded him to be trustworthy and reliable, however a greater majority scholars of hadeeth declared him to be weak, having bad memory and one who made many mistakes.

    Imaam’s Bukhaari and Ibn Khuzaimah used him in a narration (s) they transmitted in their Saheeh’s. Abdullah ibn Mubaarak praised him. Yazeed bin Haaroon said, “Good and the learned.” al-Ejlee said, “Trustworthy who made mistakes.” And he also said, “He made mistakes.” Sufyaan ath-Thawree said, “There are errors in his hadeeth and there was something with his memory.”

    Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal said, “Trustworthy, made many mistakes.” Ibn Sa’ad said, “Trustworthy, truthful but made many mistakes.” Imaam Saajee said, “Truthful, but had mistakes.” Imaam Ibn Hibbaan said, “Would make mistakes in what he narrated.” (Imaam Ibn Hibbaan also included him in his book of trustworthy narrators (ath-Thiqaat)

    Ya’qoob bin Shaybah said, “His hadeeth contained idhtiraab.” Abu Umar said, “There are mistakes in his hadeeth and his memory had something in it.” Abu Ahmad Haakim said, “He is not a Haafidh according to me.” Muhammad bin Abdullaah bin Numair said, “He is weak.” (see Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (12/38-40) and Meezaan ul-Ei’tidaal no.10024 7/337-338)

    Imaam Abu Dawood said he was trustworthy. There are two statements concerning him by Imaam Yahyaa ibn Ma’een. Once he said he is trustworthy and another time he said weak. (See Taareekh Baghdaad.)

    Imaam Tirmidhee said, “Made many mistakes.” (Tirmidhee (2/84).

    Imaam Ibn Hazm said, “He is weak.” (al-Muhalla (7/485).

    Imaam Baihaqee said, “Not a Haafidh.” (Sunan al-Kubraa 4/12).

    Imaam Dhahabee said, “His hadeeth are incorrect and have errors.” (Meezaan ul-Ei’tidaal no.10024 7/337-338).

    Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, “When he became old his memory went bad and deteriorated in later times, trustworthy and a worshipper, but his book is authentic.” (Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (pg.576), Fath ul-Baaree from Taujeeh al-Qaaree (pg.336).


    Abu Bakr bin A’ayaash and Ikhtilaat (forgetfulness)

    Abu Bakr bin A’ayaash’s memory deteriorated and he became forgetful as mentioned by the scholars of hadeeth as mentioned above.

    See al-Kawaakib an-Neeraat Fee Ma’arifah Min Ikhtilaat Min Rawaah ath-Thiqaat (pg.439-444) of Ibn Akyaal.

    al-Egtibaat Bi Ma’arifah Min Ramee Bil-Ikhtilaat (pg.26).

    Nasb ur-Raayah (1/409) of Zailaa’ee.

    Imaam Ibn Hibbaan has mentioned this more clearly in his book ath-Thiqaat he says,

    “When Ibn A’ayaash became old his memory deteriorated. When he would narrate he would make mistakes and became forgetful. The correct position is that which he forgot or made an error in it is to be abandoned and the narration without the errors will be used as evidence.” (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (12/39).

    And an important point:
    Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, “His (Abu Bakr bin A’ayaash’s) hadeeth in Saheeh al-Bukhaari are only used for support and not as the Usool (as the base or foundation).”(Haadee as-Saaree Muqaddimah Fath ul-Baaree (pg.456).


    In the chain is a narrator who is Abu Shu’bah and it cannot be established who he is and what his status is.

    Further Analysis of the Second Chain.

    Muhammad bin Khaalid Muhammad Barzaa’ee from Haajib bin Suleimaan from Muhammad bin Mus’ab from Israa’eel from Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee from Hushaim….

    Muhammad bin Mus’ab would make many mistakes.

    Haafidh Ibn Hajr said,

    “Truthful but makes many mistakes.” (Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (pg.471)

    Imaam Ibn Hibbaan said,

    “He was from amongst those people who’s memories deteriorated to the extent that he would mix and confuse the chains and he would make the mursal narrations into Marfoo (ie raised to the Messenger of Allaah). So if he is alone (in reporting) then his narration is not to be used as evidence.” (Mukhtasar adh-Dhu’afaa (pg.106).

    Imaam Ibn Abee Haatim said,

    “I asked Abu Zur’ah about Muhammad bin Mus’ab al-Qursaanee? So he replied, “He is truthful in hadeeth but he narrates rejected narrations.” So I said, “Does this not make him weak.. He (Abu Zur’ah) replied, “I think he used to make mistakes in them.” I then asked my father (Imaam Abee Haatim) about him (ie Muhammad bin Mus’ab) so he said, “He is weak in hadeeth.” Then I told him what Abu Zur’ah had said, so my father said, “It is not like this according to me, he is weak as he narrates rejected narrations.” (al-Jarh Wat-Ta’deel (4/102).

    Also another problem in this chain is that the teacher of Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee and a narrator in this chain is majhool (unknown) and that is Hushaim bin Hansh.

    Imaam Abu Bakr Khateeb al-Baghdaadee said,

    “The unknown according to the people of hadeeth (Ashaabul-Hadeeth) is the narrator who is not known to be a student of knowledge and nor do the scholars know him and they do not know his hadeeth except through one chain. Like Umarzee Murrah, Jabbaar Ta’ee, Abdullaah bin Aghar al-Hamdaanee, Hushaim bin Hansh, Maalik bin Aghar, Sa’eed bin Dheelawaan, Qais bin Karkam, Dhamr bin Maalik, from all of them Abu Ishaaq Sabee’ee is alone in reporting from them.” (al-Kifaayah Fee Ilm ar-Riwaayah (pg.88).

    Abu Ishaaq Juzjaanee said,

    “Abu Ishaaq used to narrate from unknown people and their narrations did not spread amongst the people of knowledge, except that Abu Ishaaq is the only one who narrates them. According to me it is better to abstain from them. (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (8/67).

    Further Analysis of the Third Chain.

    Ahmad bin Hasan Soofee from Yahyaa bin Ja’ad from Zuhair from Abu Ishaaq from Abdur-Rahmaan ibn Sa’ad……

    Zuhair bin Mu’awiyyah is in the third chain and he heard from Abu Ishaaq as-Sabee’ee after he started to forget and when his memory deteriorated.

    Haafidh Ibn Hajr said,

    “Thiqatun-Thabt (affirmed trustworthy), except that he heard from Abu Ishaaq at the end.” (Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (pg.167)

    The likes of this has also been mentioned in Tadreeb ar-Raawee (1/263) and Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (3/351-352).

    Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal said about his hadeeth from Abu Ishaaq,

    “Weak and he heard from him at the end (when his memory faded).”

    Imaam Yahyaa ibn Ma’een said,

    “He heard from Abu Ishaaq after he started to forget.”

    Abu Haatim said,

    “Zuhair is beloved to us in everything from the Israa’eel (narration’s), except the hadeeth of Abu Ishaaq.” (Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (3/351-352).


    In some of the manuscripts the words ‘Yaa’ is not present just the name of the Messenger of Allaah. (Fadhallaa us-Samad Sharh Adaab al-Mufrad (2/429).

    Also this hadeeth is not Marfoo (raised) it is mawqoof ie stops at a successor. So in this regard Imaam Shawkaanee said,

    “It is not in this (ie hadeeth) that the command was Marfoo (raised).” (Tuhfatul-Dhaakireen (pg.239).

    The chain contain unknown narrators and as far as I remember even Sayf ibn Umar who is discarded.

    Don't know about this one.
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2008
  5. Abul Hasan

    Abul Hasan Aim High.

    It was Waa Muhammadaa, and not Ya Muhammad. Similarly, it was Wa Islamah, wa Mua'atasimah etc. There's a difference.
  6. Salahadeen

    Salahadeen Ahl at-Tawheed

    Excellent post, bro Adeel. Jazakh-Allah khair.
  7. Adeel

    Adeel Active Member

    And nobody should be confused by what Ahlul Bidah say that their narration is in Bukhari or Muslim, because all the narrations of mudallisin with the mode "An" are only for support in the two Sahihs.
  8. Abu Thar

    Abu Thar New Member

    as wr wb

    barakAllahu feekum
    may Allaah increase your 'Ilm


Share This Page