Yahya al-Hajuri

Yahya Al-Haddadi: A Revilement Upon Hamza, the Chief of the Martyrs
Posted by Abu.Iyaad on Wednesday, May, 28 2014 and filed under Articles

In his book (شرح لامية إبن الوردي) pp. 33-34 (مكتبة صنعاء الأثرية), al-Hajuri is speaking about the dangers of alcohol:

وهكذا ما يفلح في عقله يصير مثل الأبله مجنون إذا شرب الخمر فهو مجنون، خاصة بعد الطفح، قال علي بن أبي طالب: كانت لي شارف من نصيبي من المغنم يوم بدر، وكان رسول الله ﷺ أعطاني شارفًا من الخمس يومئذ؛ فلما أردت أن أبتني بفاطمة بنت رسول الله ﷺ واعدت رجلًا صواغًا من بني قينقاع أن يرتحل معي فنأتي بإذخر، أردت أن أبيعه من الصواغين فأستعين به في وليمة عرسي، فبينا أنا أجمع لشارفي متاعًا من الأقتاب والغرائر والحبال، وشارفاي مناخان إلى جنب حجرة رجل من الأنصار، أقبلت حين جمعت ما جمعت، فإذا بشارفي قد اجتبت أسنمتهما، وبقرت خواصرهما، وأخذ من أكبادهما، فلم أملك عيني حين رأيت ذلك المنظر، فقلت: من فعل هذا ؟ قالوا: فعله حمزة بن عبد المطلب، وهو في هذا البيت في شرب من الأنصار غنته قينة وأصحابه، فقالت في غنائها: ألا ياحمز للشرف النواء

فوثب إلى السيف، فاجتب أسنمتهما وبقر خواصرهما، وأخذ من أكبادهما، قال علي: فانطلقت حتى أدخل على رسول الله ﷺ وعنده زيد بن حارثة فعرف رسول الله ﷺ الذي لقيت، فقال رسول الله ﷺ: ?مالك؟? قال: قلت: يا رسول الله ما رأيت كاليوم عدا حمزة على ناقتي فاجتب أسنمتهما وبقر خواصرهما، وها هو ذا في بيت معه شرب، فدعا رسول الله ﷺ بردائه فارتداه، ثم انطلق يمشي واتبعته أنا وزيد بن حارثة حتى جاء البيت الذي فيه حمزة فاستأذن فأذن له، فإذا هم شرب فطفق رسول الله ﷺ يلوم حمزة فيما فعل، فإذا حمزة ثمل محمرة عيناه، فنظر حمزة إلى رسول الله ﷺ ثم صعد النظر، فنظر إلى ركبتيه ثم صعد النظر، فنظر إلى سرته ثم صعد النظر، فنظر إلى وجهه، ثم قال حمزة: وهل أنتم إلا عبيد لأبي؟.

فيصير الشارب الذي قد طفح مثل المجنون، قد يقع على أمه وعلى أخته، وعلى بنته

In the above passage, Yahya al-Hajuri al-Haddadi starts by saying:

وهكذا ما يفلح في عقله يصير مثل الأبله مجنون إذا شرب الخمر فهو مجنون، خاصة بعد الطفح

And thus, he will not prosper in his intellect, he will become like the idiot (dolt, fool), mad, when he drinks khamr, then he is mad, especially after excess (of it)...

Then in the rest of the passage he goes on to bring a narration in which it occurs that Hamza (radiyallaahu anhu) was intoxicated and after using this as an illustrative example he says at the end:

فيصير الشارب الذي قد طفح مثل المجنون، قد يقع على أمه وعلى أخته، وعلى بنته.

So the drinker who has (drunk to) excess becomes like the mad person, who may have intercourse with his mother, or sister or daughter (due to his drunken state.

Al-Hajuri did not point out anywhere that this incident was before intoxicants had been made unlawful. He described the drinker of alcohol as an idiot (dolt, fool) and mad and right at the end he said that a drunk person may have intercourse with his mother, sister or daughter (due to his drunken state) and he said all of this whilst providing Hamza bin Abd al-Muttalib as an example without pointing out that this incident was well before intoxicants had been made unlawful - and all Hamza (radiyallaahu anhu) had done was to take a camel that Ali (radiyallaahu anhu) had received as booty and slaughtered it whilst in a drunken state, taking some of its meat, and saying some unbefitting speech. So look at these evil statements and insinuations, using the word "idiot, fool" and then using Hamza, the Chief of the Martyrs as an illustrative example?!


The Hajaawirah have brought a defence of Yahya al-Hajuri through two statements, one of Ibn al-Qayyim from Zaad al-Ma'aad, where he is discussing the ruling of the intoxicated person when he pronounces divorce. Ibn al-Qayyim mentioned the incident of Hamza (radiyallaahu anhu), but he never used anything more than the word (سكران), "intoxicated" as a description and his use of the hadeeth was to establish a principle that a person who does not know what he is saying (due to his intellect not being present), his saying is not considered. There is no revilement here. As for the second statement, it is from Shaykh Abd al-Muhsin al-Abbaad, and Shaykh al-Abbaad was explaining the hadeeth as he came across it during his explanation of Sunan Abee Dawood and within it there occurs:

He [Hamza] said this due to his intellect not being present, and this is from the harms and evils of alcohol, it makes a person to be devoid of his intellect. So how can a person to whom Allaah has given intellect strive to make it go and remove it by drinking intoxicants? Hence it has been called the mother of all evils because it leads to all evils, to killing, fornication, even fornication with mahaarim and near-relatives, because the intellect has been lost (whilst drunk) and this is from the evils of alcohol, and Ibn al-Wardee has a qaseedah laamiyyah regarding morals and manners, and from what he said therein: And abandon intoxicants if you are a youth. How can a person with intellect strive to enter junoon (madness). So the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), when he saw Hamza in that state, he withdrew, because so long as he was intoxicated, then there could be some harmful behaviour that may come from him, such as attacking them or harming them, so he withdrew because there is no room for speaking with one whose intellect is absent.

There is a difference between this and between how it came from al-Hajuri. Shaykh al-Abbaad explained the benefits from the hadeeth, and that is because he came upon the hadeeth, naturally, in the course of the explanation of Sunan Abee Dawud. And through the hadeeth he explained the evils of alchohol and explained the behaviour of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) in withdrawing and the fact that Hamza did not know what he was saying or doing. And the Shaykh criticized the one who (after the legislative prohibition) strives to damage his intellect through intoxicants. As for al-Hajuri, he was speaking about the evils of alchohol (as a subject area), and he described the drinker of alcohol as an idiot (dolt, fool). He then exemplified this by citing the narration about Hamza (radiyallaahu anhu). Why exemplify this (after using the word, idiot, fool) through the narration of Hamza (radiyallaahu anhu)? So the two scenarios are not the same and al-Hajuri is not free of blame as much as his followers try to exonerate him. They try to overshadow all the blatant examples of revilement of the Companions by al-Hajuri, by making a meal out of the defence they have brought for al-Hajuri in this particular example.