You are here:
Shaykh Rabee Bin Haadee on the Report of Ibn Umar Regarding the Adhaan of the Caliph Uthmaan
Posted by Abu.Iyaad, Editor in Articles
In his treatise (الذب عن الخليفة الراشد عثمان رضي الله عنه) Shaykh Rabee' refutes one of the fanatical followers of Yahya al-Hajuri called Alee bin Rasheed al-Ifree and addresses his use of the alleged report of Ibn Umar in which he states that the (additional) adhaan of Jumu'ah initiated by Uthmaan (radiallaahu anhu) is an innovation.
The Shaykh commented with the following:
1. The statements regarding the first adhaan (of Jumu'ah), that it is an innovation, are all centered around Hishaam bin al-Ghaaz and he has not been described with hifdh (memorization) and itqaan (precision). Even though some of the people of hadeeth have labelled him as thiqah (trustworthy), and they are Yahya bin Ma'een, Duhaym and Muhammad bin Abdullaah bin Ammaar, what is correct is that he is "saalih" as has been said by Imaam Ahmad, and Ibn Ma'een also has another saying about him, wherein he said, "There is no harm in him (laa ba's bihi)." And through this al-Dhahabee said about him, "He is saduq (truthful)". And the saying of al-Haafidh Ibn Hajar about him, "He is thiqah (trustworthy)" requires a review. And the likes of this (narrator), it is not said regarding his hadeeth (report) that it is saheeh and nor hasan.
2. That which is apparent to me is that his (Hisham's) report from Naafi' is considered rejected (munkar), because he is unique with respect to it amongst the multitude of of companions of Naafi', and amongst them are the best of the people of his city, al-Madinah al-Nabawiyyah. So amongst the narrators from him (Naafi') are:
"His sons, Abu Umar, Umar and Abdullaah. Abdullaah bin Deenaar, Saalilh bin Kaysaan, Abd Rabbihi and Yahyaa - the two sons of Sa'eed al-Ansaaree. And Yunus bin Ubayd, Yazeed bin Abi Habeeb, Abu Ishaaq al-Subay'ee, al-Zuhree, Moosaa bin Uqbah, Maymoon bin Mahraan, Ibn Ajlaan, Ayub al-Sakhtiyaanee, Jareer bin Haazim, al-Hakam bin Utaybah, Sa'd bin Ibraaheem, Abdullaah bin Sa'eed bin Abee Hind, Ubaydallaah bin Umar al-Umree and his brother Abdullah. And Ibn Jurayj, al-Awzaa'ee, Ibn Ishaaq, Abdul-Kareem al-Jazaree, Ataa' al-Khurasaanee, Layth bin Abee Saleem, Muhammad bin Sawqah, Hisham bin Sa'd, Matar al-Warraaq, Maalik bin Anas, Ismaa'eel bin Umayyah, Usaamah bin Zayd al-Laythee, Ismaa'eel bin Ibraaheem bin Uqbah, Ayub bin Moosaa al-Qurashee, Bukayr bin Abdullaah bin Ashajj, Ya'laa bin Hakeem, Juwayriyah bin Asmaa', Abu Sakhr Hameed bin Ziyaad, Handhalah bin Abi Sufyaan, Raqabah bin Musaqqalah, Sa'eed bin Hilaal, Sakhr bin Juwayriyah, al-Dahhaak bin Uthmaan, Abdul-Azeez bin Umar bin Abdul-Azeez, Ubaydallah bin Abi' Ja'far, Umar bin Zayd bin Abdullaah bin Umar, Eesaa bin Hafs bin Aasim bin Umar bin al-Khattaab, Yunus bin Yazeed, Fulayh bin Sulaymaan, Katheer bin Farqad, al-Waleed bin Katheer, Shu'ayb bin Abi Hamzah, al-Layth bin Sa'd and a great portion (of others)." Tahdheedb al-Tahdheeb (10/143)
Hence, Hisham bin al-Ghaaz being singled out (in relating this) from Naafi' amongst this great number, and from them are his own sons (those of Naafi'), and amongst them are the best of the people of Madinah, yet this strange text has not been narrated from them. And this alongside (the fact) that the narrator (of this) from him, Hishaam bin al-Ghaaz is not from the people of Madinah. Rather, he is a stranger, he is originally from Damascus, then he was a resident of Baghdad, and he was appointed over the Bayt al-Maal for Abu Ja'far al-Mansoor. And the likes of this hadeeth of his - whilst his condition is like this - is considered to be munkar (rejected).
And Muslim said in the muqaddimah to his book (p.7):
Because the judgement of the people of knowledge and that which we know from their madhhab in accepting that in which a narrator (muhaddith) is unique in narrating of hadeeth is that he should have shared in the thiqaat (trustworthy) from the people of knowledge and memorization in some of what they narrated and he should have used skill and care in being in agreement with them in that (i.e. what he shared in narrating from them). So when that is found (to be present with him), and then after that he adds something which is not (found) with his companions, then his addition can be accepted. And as for the one whom you see focused on the likes of al-Zuhree in his loftiness and abundance of his companions who are huffaadh mutqineen (precise memorizers) of his hadeeth and the hadeeth of others, or the likes of Hishaam bin Urwah, and the hadeeth of them both are well-spread, shared, their companions have quoted their hadeeths from them upon agreement from them in most of it. So then (when) he narrates from them both or from one of them a number of hadeeths what are not known by any of the associates of them both, and he is not one who has shared with them (the associates) in (narrating) the authentic that is with them, then it is not permissible to accept the hadeeths of this type amongst the people. And Allaah knows best.
Reflect upon the statement of Imaam Muslim, "that he should have shared in the thiqaat (trustworthy) from the people of knowledge and memorization in some of what they narrated and he should have used skill and care in being in agreement with them in that (i.e. what he shared in narrating from them)... [until] ... then it is not permissible to accept the hadeeths of this type amongst the people" and this is not found with Hishaam bin al-Ghaaz, for he is scarce in narration, and he has not shared with the associates of Naafi' in some of what they narrated of authentic hadeeths, and he did not use skill and care in being in agreement with them. And for this reason, the two Imaams, al-Bukhari and Muslim did not narrate from him any connected hadeeth from Naafi', save that al-Bukhari brought a single hadeeth from him in mu'allaq form in the mutaaba'aat, refer to hadeeth 1742.
And none of the Imaams from amongst all of them related this report except Ibn Abee Shaybah, and he did not adhere to authenticity in what he related, which is from what emphasizes the rejection of this report ascribed to Ibn Umar.
Al-Haafidh Ibn al-Rajab said, commenting upon the statement of Imaam Muslim:
So he stated clearly that when the thiqah (trustworthy) takes care in being in agreement with the thiqaat in their hadeeth, then he is unique amongst them with respect to a hadeeth, then what he was unique (in reporting) and relating from the people of knowledge is accepted from him.
See "Sharh Ilal al-Tirmidhi" (1/456-457). And Hisham bin al-Ghaaz is from this type whose hadeeths it is not permissible to accept when they are alone in relating from the likes of Naafi' and al-Zuhree in what no one from the trustworthy ones of their associates have shared with him (in relating from them).
3. Then, if we accept that this is established from Abdullah bin Umar (radiyallaahu anhumaa) then it is taken to mean that his intent by "bid'ah" is the linguistic (usage) of innovation not the legislated (shar'iyy) usage of innovation, as is said by some of the people of knowledge and just as Umar applied the word "bid'ah" upon the Tarawih prayer.
4. Indeed Abdullah bin Umar (radiyallaahu anhumaa) is from those who reveres the rightly-guided Caliph Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu), and from those who defend him. So what Hishaam bin al-Ghaaz has ascribed to him is what would bring revilement upon Uthmaan, the rightly-guided Calip (radiyallaahu anhu). Imaam al-Bukhaaree said in "Chapter on the Virtues of Uthmaan" (Hadeeths 3698 and 3699):
Muhammad bin Haatim bin Bazeegh narrated to us: Shaadhaan narrated to us: Abdul-Aziz bin Abi Salamah al-Maajishoon narrated to us from Ubaydallaah from Naafi' from Ibn Umar (radiyallaahu anhumaa): "During the lifetime of the Prophet we considered Abu Bakr as peerless and then 'Umar and then 'Uthman (coming next to him in superiority) and then we used not to differentiate between the companions of the Prophet."
Musa bin Ismaa'eel narrated to us: Abu Awaanah narrated to us: Uthmaan, and he is Ibn Mawhab, narrated to us, saying: An Egyptian who came and performed the Hajj to the Ka'bah saw some people sitting. He enquire, "Who are these people?" Somebody said, "They are the tribe of Quraysh." He said, "Who is the old man sitting amongst them?" The people replied, "He is Abdullah bin Umar." He said, "O Ibn Umar! I want to ask you about something; please tell me about it. Do you know that Uthman fled away on the day (of the battle) of Uhud?" Ibn Umar said, "Yes." The (Egyptian) man said, "Do you know that Uthman was absent on the day (of the battle) of Badr and did not join it?" Ibn Umar said, "Yes." The man said, "Do you know that he failed to attend the Ar-Ridwan pledge and did not witness it (i.e. Hudaibiya pledge of allegiance)?" Ibn Umar said, "Yes." The man said, "Allahu Akbar!" Ibn Umar said, "Let me explain to you (all these three things). As for his flight on the day of Uhud, I testify that Allah has excused him and forgiven him. And as for his absence from the battle of Badr, it was due to the fact that the daughter of Allah's Messenger was his wife and she was sick then. Allah's Messenger said to him, "You will receive the same reward and share (of the booty) as anyone of those who participated in the battle of Badr (if you stay with her).' As for his absence from the Ar-Ridwan pledge of allegiance, had there been any person in Mecca more respectable than Uthman (to be sent as a representative). Allah's Messenger would have sent him instead of him. No doubt, Allah's Messenger had sent him, and the incident of the Ar-Ridwan pledge of Allegiance happened after Uthman had gone to Mecca. Allah's Messenger held out his right hand saying, 'This is Uthman's hand.' He stroke his (other) hand with it saying, 'This (pledge of allegiance) is on the behalf of 'Uthman.' Then Ibn 'Umar said to the man, 'Bear (these) excuses in mind with you.'
I say: Look at this noble Companion, how he defends against Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu) and then mentions his virtues. And look at this envious (hateful) man against Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu), for alongside his envious hate he did not ask Ibn Umar about the adhaan of Uthmaan, and this would be the most apparent and well known of affairs he would have asked about. So this shows that this adhaan (of Uthmaan) was one of the accepted affairs with him and with with the Ummah (at large).
Imaam al-Bukharee said (rahimahullaah) in his Saheeh (3704):
Muhammad bin Raafi' narrated to us: Husayn narrated to us from Zaa'idah from Abi Husayn from Sa'd bin Ubaydah who said: "A man came to Ibn Umar and asked about Uthman and Ibn Umar mentioned his good deeds and said to the questioner. "Perhaps these facts annoy you?" The other said, "Yes." Ibn Umar said, "May Allah stick your nose in the dust (i.e. degrade you)!' Then the man asked him about Ali. Ibn Umar mentioned his good deeds and said, "It is all true, and that is his house in the midst of the houses of the Prophet. Perhaps these facts have hurt you?" The questioner said, "Yes." Ibn Umar said, "May Allah stick your nose in the dust (i.e. degrade you or make you do things which you hate) ! Go away and do whatever you can against me.
So it is clear that you (al-Ifree, student of Yahya al-Hajuri) and your likes from those who follow up Uthmaan and his likes from the Noble Companions are from the sort of these two men (in the hadeeths above) and upon their vile methodology of investigating into what disregards their status and then spreading it (amongst the people), not (a methodology of investigating) their virtues, distinguishing lofty qualities for which the Lord of the Worlds and His truthful and trusted Messenger praised them for. Look at Ibn Umar how he speaks enthusiastically about the virtues of Uthmaan and Alee (radiyallaahu and slaps the faces of their enemies. This is the correct methodology that the Righteous Salaf traversed upon - may Allaah be pleased with them - that is the methodology whose opposer they revile.
End of the Shaykh's words. May Allaah reward the Shaykh greatly for a) defending the honour of the Caliph Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu) from the charge levelled against him by Yahya al-Hajuri al-Haddaadi and his fanatical followers who have fought an intense war just to prove Uthmaan initiated a blameworthy bid'ah, and likewise for b) pointing out the error of those who consider this report to be authentic.
Link to this article: Show:
Add a Comment
You must be registered and logged in to comment.