A Research Paper On the of The Quoted Weak Hadeeth of Alee bin Abee Taalib (Radhiallaahu Anhu)

Go down

A Research Paper On the of The Quoted Weak Hadeeth of Alee bin Abee Taalib (Radhiallaahu Anhu)

Post by Fundamental on Mon Jun 29, 2009 6:16 pm

Bismillâhi-r-Rahmâni-r-Rahîm

Al-Hamdulillâhi Was-Salâtu Was-Salâmu 'Alâ Rasűlillâh, Wa Ba'd:

As-Salâmu 'Alaikum Wa Rahmatullâhi Wa Barakâtuh


Compiled by
Abu Hibbaan & Abu Khuzaimah Ansaari


There is no doubt Alee (Radhiallaahu Anhu) was very brave and the examples he
set in bravery were ones of praise. Also with this he was one of the three chosen
to be a representative in the battle of Badr, and with all that is known about him
from the authentic narrations that have come to us regarding his bravery, might,
boldness and firmness then all of them were ones of example and
praiseworthiness. So from the narrations that are mentioned in this regard is the
following narration,

The freed slave of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-
Sallam), Abu Raaf’e said, “We were with Alee (Radhiallaahu Anhu) when
the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalahu Alayhee Was-Sallam) gave him the flag
of the fort of Khaybar. So when we approached the fort, its people came
forward to fight. So we fought with them and during the fighting, Alee
(Radhiallaahu Anhu) whilst in battle with a jew lost his shield, so he (Alee
(Radhiallaahu Anhu) pulled the gate of the fort of Khaybar and used it as a
shield and continued to fight, and Allaah granted us victory. Then the gate
was left on the ground, which I and 8 other people were unable to lift.”

The First chain
This narration has been transmitted by Hishaam in as-Seerah an-Nabawiyyah
(3/349-350), Ibn Jareer in Taareekh al-Malook Wal-Umam (2/94), Baihaqee in
Dalaa’il an-Nabuwwah (4/212), Ahmad in his Musnad (Fath ur-Rabbaanee
(21/120, 326), via the route of,

Ibn Ishaaq from Abdullaah bin Hasan from some of his family members.

The narrators of this chain are all trustworthy except the part Abdullaah bin
Hasan from some of his family members which is majhool (unknown), hence
this narration is weak.

Allaamah Haithamee after mentioning this narration said, “The name of one
narrator is not mentioned.” (al-Majma’a az-Zawaa’id (6/152).

The Second chain
However there seems to be another chain which maybe used as a supporting
narration for his which has been transmitted by Baihaqee in Dalaa’il an-
Nabuwwah (4/212) via the route of Haakim from Haitham bin Khalf Dooree
form Ismaa’eel bin Moosaa as-Sadee from Mutallib bin Ziyaad from Laith bin
Abee Saleem.
However this chain also has two defect.

Firstly.
Concerning Muttalib bin Ziyaad, Haafidh Ibn Hajr said, “Truthful, but makes
mistakes sometimes.”(Taqreeb ut-Tahdheeb (no.6755 pg.948).

So when he is alone in reporting and does not oppose anyone, his narration is of
the level of Hasan.

Imaam Ahmad said he was trustworthy, Yahyaa ibn Ma’een said he is
trustworthy, Abu Haatim said write his hadeeth but he does not constitute
evidence. According to ad-Dooree, Yahyaa ibn Ma’een said there is no harm in
him and according to ad-Doorqee’s clarification he is weak in hadeeth. Abu
Dawood said he is good, Eesaa bin Shadhaan said he has rejected narrations and
Ibn Hibbaan mentioned him in his book of trustworthy narrators.

(See Kitaab al-Illal (2/32), at-Taareekh al-Kabeer (4/2, Cool, Tabaqaat Ibn Sa’ad
(6/387), Taareekh ad-Dooree (2/570), al-Illal (1/24 no.350) of Imaam Ahmad,
Meezaan ul-Ei’tidaal (4/no.8591), Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (10/177-178),
Tahdheeb ul-Kamaal (28/78 no.6005).

Secondly.
The second defect is the narrator Laith bin Abee Saleem. Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaanee
said about him, “Truthful but became very forgetful and his ahadeeth could not
be distinguished and hence he has been declared to be Matrook (abandoned).”
(Taqreeb (pg.817-818). Some editions mention he became forgetful at the end of
his life.

For criticism concerning refer to Kitaab al-Illal (2/32), Suwaalaat ad-Daarimee
(no’s 560, 720), at-Taareekh al-Kabeer (7/no.1051), Tabaqaat Ibn Sa’ad (6/349),
Taareekh ad-Dooree (2/501), al-Illal (1/389, 2/332) of Imaam Ahmad, Meezaan
ul-Ei’tidaal (2/no.6001), Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb (10/177-178), Tahdheeb ul-
Kamaal (24/279 no.5017), Ahwaal ar-Rijaal (no.132) of Juzjaanee, al-Ma’arifah
(1/519, 706), of Ya’qoob, Sunan Tirmidhee (no.2801), Taareekh Abu Zur’ah
(no.551), adh-Dhu’afaa (no.511) of Nasaa’ee, Dhu’afaa al-Kabeer (4/14 no.1569)
of Uqailee, al-Jarh Wat-Ta’deel (7/no.1014), Tuqaddimah al-Jarh Wat-Ta’deel
(gp.45, 73), al-Maraaseel (of al-Haatim (no.181), al-Majrooheen (3/231) of Ibn
Hibbaan, al-Kaamil of Ibn Adiyy, Sunan Daarqutnee (1/68, 2/231), Kashf al-
Astaar (163-699), Tahdheeb al-Asmaa (1/2 no.75) of Nawawee, al-Egtibaat
(no.382), al-Asaamee Wal-Kunaa (2/143 no.528, 345 no.879), Haadee as-Saaree
(no.458).

The Third chain
There also maybe another supporting narration for this incident, which Haakim
has referenced as Zarkashee has mentioned in al-Tadhkirrah (pg’s 118-119 and
152), Imaam Baihaqee has also referenced it in Dalaa’il an-Nabuwwah (4/212) in
note form.

via the route of Ismaa’eel bin Muhammad bin al-Fadhal from Ibraaheem bin
Hamzah from Abdul-Azeez bin Muhammad from Haraam bin Uthmaan from
Abu A’teeq bin Jaabir from his father Jaabir bin Abdullaah.

All the narrators are trustworthy and reliable, except Haraam bin Uthmaan and
he is abandoned.

Imaam Mu’ammar Imaam Maalik and Yahyaa bin Ma’een said he is not
trustworthy. Imaam Ahmad said the people have denied his hadeeth. Imaam
Shaafi’ee said it is Haraam (unlawful) to narrate the narrations of Haraam and
something similar has been mentioned by Yahyaa bin Ma’een and Juzjaanee.

Abu Haatim said he is rejected in hadeeth (Matrook al-Hadeeth) and abandoned
in hadeeth (Munkar al-Hadeeth) Imaam Abu Zur’ah said da’eef al-Hadeeth (weak
in hadeeth) Imaam al-Bukhaari said, Munkar al-hadeeth.

Zubairee said Haraam was shee’ah. Ibn Ma’een and Abu Dawood said he is
nothing. Ya’qoob bin Sufyaan, Ahmad bin Saaleh and Haithamee said he is
Matrook. Imaam Daarqutnee said he is weak.

Imaam Ibn Adiyy’s position is most of his ahadeeth were rejected. Falaas said he
is Matrook. Imaam Ibn Hibbaan said he was an extreme shee’ah and he wound
interchange the chains, he would make the maraaseel narrations into Marfoo, and
Ibn Hajr said he is Matrook.

at-Taareekh al-Kabeer (1/2 no.101), Meezaan ul-Ei’tidaal (1/468 no.1766), al-
Majrooheen (1/269), al-Jarh Wat-Ta’deel (1/2 282--283), Leesaan ul-Meezaan
(2/182 no.865), al-Kaamil (2/851), al-Majma’a (3/76), Taareekh Baghdaad
(8/278).
The summary is that this narration is not worthy to constitute evidence and a
group of the scholars of hadeeth have declared it to be weak, Imaam Baihaqee
has declared it to be weak, but only the narration of Haraam.

So this narration is not reliable in any of its chains and this is the reason why
Imaam Ibn Katheer mentioned the chain of Ibn Ishaaq and said, but there is an
unknown narrator in it hence the chain is disconnected and he declared the
narration of Laith to be weak. (al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah (6/273).

Haafidh ibn Hajr declared all of its chains to be mistakes and errors. Haafidh
Sakhawee has also said the same and E’jloonee agreed with both of them. (al-
Maqaasid al-Hasanah (pg.312-313, 418).

Ibn Rabee’ah Atharee writes, “All its chains are mistakes and errors due to which
some of the scholars have said they are rejected and this is the saying of our
Shaikh.” (Tameez at-Tayyab Minal-Khabeeth (pg.87).

Zarkashee said, “Some of the scholars have firmly designated that this hadeeth
has no basis…” (Tadhkirrah (pg.118).

Compiled by the weak slaves of Allaah, in need of your supplications.
Abu Hibbaan & Abu Khuzaimah Ansaari
Maktabah Ashaabul-Hadeeth, Birmingham UK.

Completed Friday 23rd of January 2004
avatar
Fundamental
New User

Male Number of posts : 11
Registration date : 2008-04-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum