ABU HURAYRA AND THE FALSIFICATION OF HADITH Yasin T. al-Jibouri.
In the same year (7 A.H./629 A.D.), a young and very poor man from the Daws tribe of southern Arabia (Yemen), met the Prophet immediately after the battle of Khaybar and embraced Islam. He is well known in history as “Abu Hurayra,” the fellow of the kitten, after a kitten to which he was very much attached. His name shone neither during the lifetime of the Prophet nor of the four “righteous caliphs” but during the un-Islamic reign of terror of the Umayyads which lasted from 661 to 750 A.D. It was then that the Islamic world witnessed an astronomical number of “traditions” which were attributed, through this same Abu Hurayra, to the Prophet of Islam. Since these traditions, known collectively as hadith, constitute one of the two sources of the Islamic legislative system, the Shari`a, it is very important to shed a light on the life and character of this man even if some readers may consider this chapter as a digression from the main topic.
It is of utmost importance to expose the facts relevant to Abu Hurayra so that Muslims may be cautious whenever they come across a tradition narrated by him or attributed to him which, all in all, reached the astronomical figure of 5,374 “traditions,” although he spent no more than three years in the company of the Prophet, a fact supported by the renown compiler al-Bukhari, whenever such company did not involve any danger to his life, and despite the fact that Abu Hurayra did not know how to read and write... The reader can easily conclude that this figure is unrealistic when he comes to know that Abu Bakr, friend of the Prophet and one of the earliest converts to Islam, narrated no more than 142 traditions. `Omer ibn al-Khattab, the story of whose conversion to Islam is narrated earlier in this book, narrated no more than 537 traditions. `Othman ibn `Affan narrated no more than 146 traditions. And Ali, the man who was raised by the Prophet and who was always with him, following him like his shadow, and whose memory and integrity nobody at all can question, narrated no more than 586 traditions. All these men, especially Ali and Abu Bakr, spent many years of their lives in the company of the Prophet and did not hide when their lives were in jeopardy, as is the case with Abu Hurayrah, yet they did not narrate except a tiny fraction of the number of “traditions,” many of which cannot be accepted by logic and commonsense, narrated by or attributed to Abu Hurayra. This is why it is so important to discuss this man and expose the factories of falsification of hadith established by his benefactors, the Umayyads, descendants and supporters of Abu Sufyan, then his son Mu`awiyah, then his son Yazid, all of whom were outrightly hypocrites and had absolutely nothing to do with Islam.
Abu Hurayra's name is said to be `Omayr ibn `Amir ibn `Abd Thish-Shari ibn Tareef, of the Yemenite tribe of Daws ibn `Adnan29. His mother's name is Umaima daughter of Safeeh ibn al-Harith ibn Shabi ibn Abu Sa`b, also of the Daws tribe. His date of birth is unknown, but he is said to have died in 57, 58, or 59 A.H., and that he had lived to be 78. This would put the date of his birth at 677, 678 or 679 A.D.
When he came to the Prophet, he was young and healthy and, hence, capable of enlisting in the Prophet's army. But he preferred to be lodged together with the Muslim destitutes at the Suffa referred to above. Most of the time which Abu Hurayra spent with the Prophet was during the lunches or dinners the Prophet hosted for those destitutes. Abu Hurayra himself admitted more than once that he remained close to the Prophet so that he could get a meal to eat. Another person who used to shower the destitutes of the Suffa with his generosity was Ja`fer ibn Abu Talib (588 - 629 A.D.), the Prophet's cousin and a brother of Ali ibn Abu Talib. He was, for this reason, called “Abul Masakeen,” father of the destitutes. This is why, Abu Hurayra used to regard Ja`fer as the most generous person next only to the Prophet. When the Prophet mandated military service for all able men in the Mu'ta expedition, Ja`fer ibn Abu Talib did not hesitate from responding to the Prophet's call, but Abu Hurayra, who considered Ja`fer as his patron, preferred not to participate, thus violating the order of the Prophet. History records the names of those who did likewise.
In 21 A.H./642 A.D., during the caliphate of `Omer ibn al-Khattab, Abu Hurayra was appointed as governor of Bahrain. After two years, he was deposed because of a scandal. The details of that scandal are recorded in the books of Ibn `Abd Rabbih, the Mu`tazilite writer, and in Ibn al-Atheer's famous classic book Al-`Iqd al-Fareed. A summary of that incident runs as follows:
When Abu Hurayra was brought to him, `Omer said to him: “I have come to know that when I made you governor of Bahrain, you did not even have shoes to wear, but I am now told that you have purchased horses for one thousand and six hundred dinars.” Abu Hurayra said, “I had horses which have multiplied, and I received some as gifts.” `Omer then said, “I would give you only your salary. This (amount) is a lot more than that (more than your salary for both years). Pay the balance back (to baytul-mal, the Muslim state treasury)!” Abu Hurayra said, “This money is not yours.” `Omer said, “By Allah! I would bruise your back!” Saying this, `Omer whipped Abu Hurayra till he bled. Then he thundered: “Now bring the money back!” Abu Hurayra replied: “I am to account for it before Allah.” `Omer said, “This could be so only if you had taken it rightfully and had paid it back obediently. I shall throw you back to your mother as though you were dung so that she would use you to graze donkeys.”
According to the sequence employed by Ibn Sa`d in his Tabaqat, Abu Hurayra ranks in the ninth or tenth class. He came to the Messenger of Allah near the end of the seventh Hijri year. Hence, historians say that he accompanied the Prophet no more than three years30 according to the best estimates, while other historians say it was no more than two years if we take into consideration the fact that the Prophet sent him to accompany Ibn al-Hadrami to Bahrain, then the Messenger of Allah died while he was still in Bahrain.31
Abu Hurayra was not known for his jihad or valour, nor was he among those who were regarded as brilliant thinkers, nor among the jurists who knew the Qur'an by heart, nor did he even know how to read and write... He came to the Messenger of Allah in order to satisfy his hunger as he himself said, and as the Prophet came to understand from him, so he lodged him among the people of the Suffa to whom the Prophet used to send some food.
Yet he became famous for the abundance of ahadith which he used to narrate about the Messenger of Allah. This fact attracted the attention of verifiers of hadith especially since he had not remained in the company of the Prophet for any length of time and to the fact that he narrated traditions regarding battles which he had never attended.
Some verifiers of hadith gathered all what was narrated by the “righteous caliphs” as well as by the ten men given the glad tidings of going to Paradise in addition to what the mothers of the faithful and the purified Ahl al-Bayt, and they did not total one tenth of what Abu Hurayra had narrated all alone. This came despite the fact that among the latter was Ali ibn Abu Talib who remained in the company of the Prophet for thirty years.
Then fingers were pointed to Abu Hurayra charging him with telling lies and with fabricating and forging hadith. Some went as far as labelling him as the first narrator in the history of Islam thus charged. Yet he is called by some “Islam's narrator” and is surrounded with a great deal of respect. They totally rely on him, even go as far as saying “Radiya Allhu `anhu,” Allah be pleased with him, whenever they mention his name. Some of them may even regard him as being more knowledgeable than Ali due to one particular tradition which he narrates about himself and in which he says, “I said, `O Messenger of Allah! I hear a great deal of your hadith which I have been forgetting!' He said, `Stretch your mantle,' had created the heavens, the earth, and all creation in seven days. When `Omer heard about it, he called him in and asked him to repeat that hadith. Having heard him repeating it, `Omer struck him and said to him, “How so when Allah Himself says it was done in six days, while you yourself now say it was done in seven?!” Abu Hurayra said, “Maybe I heard it from Ka`b al-Ahbar...” `Omer said, “Since you cannot distinguish between the Prophet's ahadith and what Ka`b al-Ahbar says, you must not narrate anything at all.”32
It is also narrated that Ali ibn Abu Talib has said, “Among all the living, the person who has told the most lies about the Messenger of Allah is Abu Hurayra al-Dawsi.”33 Mother of the faithful `Ayisha, too, testified to his being a liar several times in reference to manyahadith which he used to attribute to the Messenger of Allah. For example, she resented something which he had once said so she asked him, “When did you hear the Messenger of Allah say so?” He said to her, “The mirror, the kohl, and the dyestuff have all diverted you from the hadith of the Messenger of Allah,” but when she insisted that he was lying and scandalized him, Marwan ibn al-Hakam interfered and took upon himself to verify the authenticity of the hadith in question. It was then that Abu Hurayra admitted, “I did not hear it from the Messenger of Allah; rather, I heard it from al-Fadl ibn al-`Abbas.”34 It is because of this particular narration that Ibn Qutaybah charged him with lying saying, “Abu Hurayra claimed that al-Fadl ibn al-`Abbas, who had by then died, testified to the authenticity of that tradition which he attributed to him in order to mislead people into thinking that he had heard it from him.”35 In his book Ta'weel al-Ahadith, Ibn Qutaybah says, “Abu Hurayra used to say: `The Messenger of Allah said such-and-such, but I heard it from someone else.” In his book A`lam al-Nubala, al-Thahbi says that Yazid ibn Ibrahim once cited Shu`bah ibn al-Hajjaj saying that Abu Hurayra used to commit forgery.
In his book Al-Bidaya wal Nihaya, Ibn Katheer states that Yazid ibn Haroun heard Shu`bah ibn al-Hajjaj accusing him of the same, that is, that he forges hadith, and that he used to narrate what he used to hear from Ka`b al-Ahbar as well as from the Messenger of Allah without distinguishing one from the other.
Ja`fer al-Iskafi has said, “Abu Hurayra is doubted by our mentors; his narrations are not acceptable.”36
During his lifetime, Abu Hurayra was famous among the sahaba for lying, forging and narrating too many fabricated ahadith to the extent that some of the sahaba used to deride him and ask him to fabricate ahadith agreeable with their own taste. For example, a man belonging to Quraish put on once a new jubbah (a long outer garment) and started showing off. He passed by Abu Hurayra and [sarcastically] said to him, “O Abu Hurayra! You narrate quite a few traditions about the Messenger of Allah; so, did you hear him say anything about my jubbah?!” Abu Hurayra said, “I have heard the father of al-Qasim saying, `A man before your time was showing off his outfit when Allah caused the earth to cave in over him; so he has been rattling in it and will continue to do so till the Hour.' By Allah! I do not know whether he was one of your people or not.”37
How can people help doubting Abu Hurayra's traditions since they are so self-contradictory? He narrates one “hadith” then he narrates its antithesis, and if he is opposed or his previously narrated traditions are used against him, he becomes angry or starts babbling in the Ethiopian language.38
How could they help accusing him of telling lies and of forgery after he himself had admitted that he got traditions out of his own pouch then attributed them to the Prophet?
Al-Bukhari, in his Sahih, states the following:
Abu Hurayra said once, “The Prophet said, `The best charity is willingly given; the higher hand is better than the lower one, and start with your own dependents. A woman says: `Either feed me or divorce me.' A slave says, `Feed me and use me.' A son says, `Feed me for the woman who will forsake me.'” He was asked, “O Abu Hurayra! Did you really hear the Messenger of Allah say so?” He said, “No, this one is from Abu Hurayra's pouch.”39
Notice how he starts this “tradition” by saying, “The Prophet said,” then when they refuse to believe what he tells them, he admits by saying, “... this one is from Abu Hurayra's pouch”! So congratulations to Abu Hurayra for possessing this pouch which is full of lies and myths, and for which Mu`awiyah and Banu Umayyah provided a great deal of publicity, and because of which he acquired position, authority, wealth, and mansions. Mu`awiyah made him the governor of Medina and built him the Aqeeq mansion then married him off to a woman of honourable descent for whom he used to work as a servant...
Since Abu Hurayra was the close vizier of Mu`awiyah, it is not due to his own merits, honour, or knowledge; rather, it is because Abu Hurayra used to provide him with whatever traditions he needed to circulate. If some sahaba used to hesitate in cursing “Abu Turab,” finding doing that embarrassing, Abu Hurayra cursed Ali in his own house and as his Shi`as heard:
Ibn Abul-Hadeed says,
When Abu Hurayra came to Iraq in the company of Mu`awiyah in the Year of the Jama`a, he came to Kufa's mosque. Having seen the huge number of those who welcomed him, he knelt down then beat his bald head and said, “O people of Iraq! Do you claim that I tell lies about the Messenger of Allah and thus burn myself in the fire?! By Allah! I heard the Messenger of Allah saying, `Each prophet has a sanctuary, and my sanctuary is in Medina from Eer to [the mountain of] Thawr; so, anyone who makes it unclean will be cursed by Allah, the angels, and all people, and I bear witness that Ali had done so.” When Mu`awiyah came to hear this statement, he gave him a present, showered him with his generosity, and made him the governor of Medina.40
Suffices us to point out to the fact that he was created governor of Medina by none other than Mu`awiyah. There is no doubt that verifiers and researchers who are free from prejudice will doubt anyone who befriended the enemy of Allah and His Messenger and who was antagonistic towards the friends of Allah and of His Messenger...
There is no doubt that Abu Hurayra did not reach that lofty position of authority, namely the governor of Medina, the then capital of the Islamic domains, except by virtue of the services which he had rendered to Mu`awiyah and other authoritative Umayyads. Praise to the One Who changes the conditions! Abu Hurayra had come to Medina with nothing to cover his private parts other than a tiny striped piece of cloth, begging passers-by to feed him. Then he suddenly became ruler of the sacred precincts of Medina, residing in the Aqeeq mansion, enjoying wealth, servants and slaves, and nobody could say a word without his permission. All of this was from the blessings of his pouch!
Do not forget, nor should you be amazed, that nowadays we see the same plays being repeatedly enacted, and history certainly repeats itself. How many ignorant indigent persons sought nearness to a ruler and joined his party till they became feared masters who do and undo, issuing orders as they please, having a direct access to wealth without being accounted for it, riding in automobiles without being watched, eating foods not sold on the market...? One such person may not even know how to speak his own language, nor does he know a meaning for life except satisfying his stomach and sexual appetite. The whole matter is simply his having a pouch like the one Abu Hurayra used to have with some exception, of course, yet the aim is one and the same: pleasing the ruler and publicizing for him in order to strengthen his authority, firm his throne, and finish his foes.
Abu Hurayra loved the Umayyads and they loved him since the days of `Othman ibn `Affan, their leader. His view with regard to `Othman was contrary to that of all thesahaba who belonged to the Muhajirun and the Ansar; he regarded all the sahaba who participated in or encouraged the killing of `Othman as apostates.
Undoubtedly, Abu Hurayra used to accuse Ali ibn Abu Talib of killing `Othman. We can derive this conclusion from the statement he made at Kufa's mosque and his saying that Ali made Medina unclean and that he, therefore, was cursed by the Prophet, the angels, and everyone else. For this reason, Ibn Sa`d indicates in his Tabaqat that when Abu Hurayra died in 59 A.H./679 A.D., `Othman's descendants carried his coffin and brought it to the Baqee` to bury it as an expression of their appreciation of his having had high regards for `Othman.41
Surely Allah has his own wisdom in faring with His creation. `Othman ibn `Affan, the master of Quraish and their greatest, was killed although he was the Muslims' caliph bearing the title of “Thul-Noorayn” and of whom, according to their claim, the angels feel shy. His corpse did not receive the ceremonial burial bath nor was it shrouded; moreover, it was not buried for full three days after which it was buried at Medina's then Jewish cemetery. Yet Abu Hurayra died after having enjoyed pomp and power. He was an indigent man whose lineage and tribal origins were not known to anybody. He had no kinship to Quraish. Despite all of this, the caliph's sons, who were in charge of running the affairs during Mu`awiyah's reign, took to bearing his corpse and to burying it at the Baqee` where the Messenger of Allah was buried...! But let us go back to Abu Hurayra to examine his attitude towards the Prophet's Sunnah.
In his Sahih, al-Bukhari quotes Abu Hurayra as saying, “I learned the fill of two receptacles [of ahadith] from the Messenger of Allah: I have disseminated only one of them; as for the other, if I disseminate it, this throat will be slit.”42
Here is Abu Hurayra revealing what erstwhile is hidden, admitting that the only traditions he quoted were the ones that pleased the ruling authorities. Building upon this premise, Abu Hurayra used to have two pouches, or two receptacles, as he called them. He used to disseminate the contents of one of them, the one which we have discussed here that contains whatever the rulers desired. As for the other, which Abu Hurayra kept to himself and whose ahadith he did not narrate for fear his throat would be slit, it is the one containing the authentic traditions of the Prophet. Had Abu Hurayra been a reliable authority, he would have never hidden true ahadith while disseminating illusions and lies only to support the oppressor, knowing that Allah curses whoever hides the clear evidence.
Al-Bukhari quotes him saying once, “People say that Abu Hurayra narrates too manyahadith. Had it not been for two [particular] verses in the Book of Allah, I would not have narrated a single hadith: `Those who conceal what We have revealed of clear proofs and the guidance, after Our having clarified [everything] for people in the Book, these it is whom Allah shall curse, and those who curse shall curse them, too' (Qur'an, 2:159). Our brethren from the Muhajirun used to be busy consigning transactions at the market-place, while our brethren from the Ansar used to be busy doing business with their own money, while Abu Hurayra kept in the shadow of the Prophet in order to satisfy his hunger, attending what they did not attend, learning what they did not learn.”43
How can Abu Hurayra say that had it not been for a couple of verses in the Book of Allah, he would not have narrated a single hadith, then he says, “I learned two receptacles [of ahadith] from the Messenger of Allah: I have disseminated one of them; as for the other, if I disseminate it, this throat will be slit”?! Is this not his admission of having concealed the truth despite both verses in the Book of Allah?!
Had the Prophet not said to his companions, “Go back to your people and teach them”?44 Had he not also said, “One who conveys is more aware than one who hears”? Al-Bukhari states that the Prophet urged the deputation of `Abd Qays to learn belief and scholarship “... then convey what you learn to those whom you have left behind.”45 Can we help wondering: Why should the throat of a sahabi be slit if he quotes the Prophet ?! There must be a secret here which the caliphs do not wish others to know. Here, we would like to briefly say that “the people of the remembrance” was [a phrase in] a Qur'anic verse revealed to refer to Ali succeeding the Prophet in leading the Islamic nation.
Abu Hurayra is not to blame; he knew his own worth and testified against his own soul that Allah cursed him, and so did those who curse, for having hidden the Prophet's hadith. But the blame is on those who call Abu Hurayra the narrator of the Sunnah while he himself testifies that he hid it then testifies that he fabricated it and told lies in its regard, then he further goes on to testify that it became confused for him, so he could not tell which one was the statement of the Prophet and which one was made by others. All of these ahadith and correct admissions are recorded in al-Bukhari's Sahih and in other authentic books of hadith.
How can anyone feel comfortable about a man whose justice was doubted by the Commander of the Faithful Ali ibn Abu Talib who charged him with lying, saying that among the living, nobody told more lies about the Prophet than Abu Hurayra?! `Omer ibn al-Khattab, too, charged him of the same; he beat him and threatened to expel him. `Ayisha doubted his integrity and many times called him a liar, and many other sahabacast doubts about his accuracy and rejected his contradictory ahadith, so he would once admit his error and would sometimes prattle in Ethiopian.46 A large number of Muslim scholars refuted his traditions and charged him with lying, fabricating, and throwing himself at Mu`awiyah's dinner tables, at his coffers of gold and silver.
Is it right, then, for Abu Hurayra to become “Islam's narrator” from whom the religion's injunctions are learned?
Judaica and Jewish doctrines have filled the books of hadith. Ka`b al-Ahbar, a Jew, may have succeeded in getting such doctrines and beliefs included into the books of hadith, hence we find traditions likening or personifying Allah, as well as the theory of incarnation, in addition to many abominable statements about the prophets and messengers of Allah: all of these are cited through Abu Hurayra.
The vast majority of Sunni Muslims regard Abu Hurayra as being an “infallible” narrator of hadith and beyond reproach despite all the above, and they are entitled to their opinion. Some of them may even become angry if any doubt is cast about his truthfulness. Nevertheless, we may divide the traditions which Abu Hurayra reported into four categories:
1) Authentic traditions that are accepted by the vast majority of Muslims regardless of their sects or sub-sects because they agree with the texts of the Holy Qur’an, are historically authenticated and are supported by the Sunnah.
2) Traditions the authenticity of which is in doubt even by open-minded Sunnis who are free of prejudice and who are open-minded. Commoners, however, will find it hard to distinguish one of these four categories from another.
3) Traditions that were either manufactured by Abu Hurayra intentionally in order to gain position, wealth and prestige and to please his sponsors, the Umayyads, who used him to put a seal of approval on many of their un-Islamic practices such as changing the form of government from democratic to autocratic, justifying mistakes committed in Fiqh, granting unrestricted power to the monarch, making obedience to him compulsory, forcing women to remain backward and not demand their rights..., etc.
4) Traditions that were manufactured by successive Umayyad rulers who attributed them to Abu Hurayra, some of them even after the man's death, in order to serve their own vested interests. Surely Abu Hurayra’s name and reputation have suffered during and after his lifetime because of these “traditions” which the man never reported or could not have reported.
To conclude, one has to apply extreme caution when coming across traditions reported by or attributed to Abu Hurayra. May Abu Hurayra be richly rewarded by the Almighty for the authentic traditions which he transmitted and which have enriched the Prophet’s Sunnah, may he be forgiven for the ones which he fabricated, and may those who fabricated traditions then attributed them to him bear their sins as well as those of Abu Hurayra who has nothing to do with them..., Allahomma Aameen…
29According to Al-Munjid fil lugha wal a`lam, however, Abu Hurayra's name is recorded as `Abd al-Rahman ibn Sakhr al-Azdi, and that he died in 59 A.H./678 A.D. The same reference indicates that this man spent “a long time in the company of the Prophet,” which is not true at all; he accompanied the Prophet from time to time for only 3 years. The Publisher of this Munjid, namely Dar al-Mashriq of Beirut, Lebanon, is sponsored by the Catholic Press of Beirut. Undoubtedly, the information about Abu Hurayra in this Arabic-Arabic dictionary must have been furnished by some Sunnis who try their best to elevate the status of Abu Hurayra even at the risk of sacrificing historical facts and data.
30Al-Bukhari, Sahih, Vol. 4, p. 175, where the author quotes Abu Hurayra talking about himself in a chapter dealing with the characteristics of Prophethood.
31This paragraph and the ones that follow are excerpted from my translation of Dr. Muhammed al-Tijani al-Samawi's book Shi`as are the Ahl al-Sunnah(New York: Vantage Press, 1996), pp. 207-215.
32Refer to the book titled Abu Hurayra by the Egyptian author Mahmoud Abu Rayyah.
33Ibn Abul-Hadeed, Sharh Nahjul-Balagha, Vol. 4, p. 28.
34Al-Bukhari, Sahih, Vol. 2, p. 232, in a chapter dealing with a fasting person who wakes up finding himself in the state of janaba. Malik, Mawta', Vol. 1, p. 272.
35This is stated in al-Thahbi's book Siyar A`lam al-Nubala.
36Ibn Abul-Hadeed, Sharh Nahjul-Balagha, Vol. 4, p. 68.
37Ibn Katheer, Al-Bidaya wal Nihaya, Vol. 8, p. 108..
38Al-Bukhari, Sahih, Vol. 7, p. 31.
39Al-Bukhari, Sahih, Vol. 6, p. 190, in a chapter dealing with spending on the wife and children.
40Ibn Abul-Hadeed, Sharh Nahjul-Balagha, Vol. 4, p. 67.
41Ibn Sa`d, Tabaqat, Vol. 2, p. 63.
42Al-Bukhari, Sahih, Vol. 1, p. 38, in a chapter dealing with learning.
43Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 37.
44Al-Bukhari, Sahih, Vol. 1, p. 30.
46Abu Hurayra was bilingual. He spoke Arabic (his mother tongue) and Amharic. Historically speaking, during Abu Hurayra's time, Amheric was the language of “aristocrats” due to the fact that the Ethiopians had for many years colonized Yemen till they were kicked out of it at the hands of Sayf ibn Thi Yazun (or Yazin), Himyar's king who died in 574 A.D.
With best regards of Yasin T. al-Jibouri. I invite you to visit my Scribd Web Page by clicking on this link: http://www.scribd.com/yasinaljibouri to review 41 of my books and articles. Publish, reprint, quote or just enjoy them! I also invite you to visit my Amazon web page to see a list of some of the books which I have written, edited or translated; the link is: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=yasin+t.+al-jibouri&x=0&y=0
Abu Hurayrah extract of book
If the traditions of the Messenger of Allah were altogether the cornerstone of religion — like the Qur'an — upon which Din is set up, and source of all rulings that every Muslim should know and follow, as he follows the Qur'an and if the Prophet (S) commanded his Companions to memorize these traditions so as to be followed after his demise, those Companions exaggerating in narrating them would be of higher religious position, firmer firm in faith, and sublimer in knowledge. Further, those narrating less would be lower than them in religious status, having degree of knowledge, honour and consideration beyond theirs. But in fact the situation — as revealed in the well-known hadith books — being on the contrary of this!! as the best of Companions in rank, higher in status, broader in knowledge of Din and sincerest in safe-guarding it, who were entrusted with shouldering the precepts of religion which they learnt from their teacher, like the Rightly-guided Caliphs and the Ten who claimed that he (S) died while being pleased with them or augured them with paradise, beside magnates of the Muhajirun and Ansar and others, were less than others in relating hadith to the extent that some of them have not reported from the Messenger even one hadith!!
Being unsatisfied with all this, the magnates among the Companions shunned relating the hadith and forbade others from doing so. Their extreme precaution in this regard led them to set to fire whatever was written down, as was known before. This fact made us dedicate a separate biography for the most prolific in relating hadith from the Messenger of Allah among the Companions, and broader in narration, though being one of the common companions who was neither here nor there... that was. Abu Hurayrah.
Had not these abundant traditions — due to the commoners trust in them filled the hadith books deserved respect and trust inside the Muslims' hearts and seized their minds and thinking, to the extent they regarded them of the general rules of religion, though having intricate problems embarrassing the minds of the believers, with suspicions and superstitions constituting weak points in religion and reliable asanid to confirm the Israeliyyat and Masihiyyat (Jewish and Christian fabricated traditions) and other creeds... had not all these things been there, I would have never prepared this research, nor cared that much for it.
Disagreement about His Name:
During the pre-Islamic era and advent of Islam, there was no disagreement regarding any name like the one that was in regard of the name of Abu Hurayrah. No one had verified knowledge of the name his family gave to him so as to be called with among people.
Al-Nawawi says: Abu Hurayrah's name is Abd al-Rahman ibn Sakhr, according to authentic reports from thirty sources.
The Moroccan Hafiz Ibn Abd al-Barr, in al-Isti‘ab 358 writes:
There was much controversy and disagreement regarding the original names of Abu Hurayrah and his father, in a way that no one could know it exactly and accurately whether during the pre-Islamic period or after it in the Islamic era.. With such disagreement and confusion, nothing can be so reliable, and his nickname was more common than his name, as if he had no name other than that, with which he was called everywhere .
The author of al-Mishkat said: People differed much concerning the name of Abu Hurayrah and his descent, and he was only called with that kunyah as if he having no other name. The kunyah became so widely known to the extent that the original name was forgotten, since much disagreement was there regarding it.
From what is exposed, giving him any definite special name would be no more than conjecture. So we suffice with mentioning his kunyah, which he himself manifested its real cause saying: I used to pasture the sheep of my family, having a little pussy (hirrah) which I used to place inside a tree at night. During daytime I would take it with me and play with it. That is why people gave me the nickname of "Abu Hurayrah"!!
His Growth and Origin:
Beside the disagreement regarding the name of Abu Hurayrah, nothing was known about his growing up or his biography before embracing Islam, except what he exposed about himself: that he used to play with a little she-cat, and he was poor and destitute, serving people in return for having food for living on. The only information available about his origin and descent, being that he descended from Tribe of Sulaym ibn Fahm that belonged to Tribe of Azd and of Dous then.
About this he said: I grew up as an orphan, and migrated as a destitute, and was a servant in return for food as sustenance (as a payment).
In his book al-Ma'arif, after referring to the disagreement among people regarding his name, and that he was from a tribe in Yemen called Dous, stated what follows:
"Abu Hurayrah said: I grew up as an orphan, and migrated as a destitute, and was a servant hired by Bisrah bint Ghazwan with my pay being only some food to sustain on... I used to serve them when they got down, and urge forward by singing when they mounted the horsebacks. And I was nicknamed with Abu Hurayrah because of having a little pussy (hirrah) I used to play with."
His coming to Medina and Going to Khaybar:
After passing the thirty, Abu Hurayrah came to al-Medina, when the Prophet (S) was out (participating) in the Battle of Khaybar which took place in the seventh Hijrah year.
Ibn Sa'd in al-Tabaqat al-kubra, writes: The Dousis including Abu Hurayrah arrived at al-Madinah while the Messenger of Allah was in Khaybar. Thereat the Messenger asked his Companions to give Abu Hurayrah a share from the booty, which they did. And due to being poor, he betook himself to the Siffah 359 after r returning to al-Madina, living in it as long as he was residing in al-Madinah, being the most famous among those frequenting to it.
Reason of His Companionship to the Prophet:
Abu Hurayrah was frank and honest in revealing the reason behind his companionship to the Prophet (S), as he was honest in uncovering the truth about his growth. He didn't claim that he kept his company out of affection and seeking guidance — as the case with other Muslims but he said: "I kept his company for only filling my abdomen"
In a hadith reported by Ahmad and the two Shaykhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim), from Sufyan, from al Zuhri, Abd al-Rahman al-A'raj 360 said: "I heard Abu Hurayrah saying: I was a destitute man, who used to keep the company of the Messenger of Allah in return for filling my belly." In another narration by Muslim, he said: I used to serve the Messenger of Allah, and according to him also... for satiating my abdomen."
In another narration by Muslim. He said: I was a destitute man, serving the Messenger of Allah in return for satiating my belly. In another narration by him too. I accompanied the Messenger of Allah (as a servant) with satiating my abdomen in return.
In history books it is recorded that he was gluttonous and greedy, being fed everyday in the Prophet's house, or the house of any of his Companions to the extent that some of them were averse to him.
Al-Bukhari reported that he said: I used to ask someone to cite for me a Qur'anic verse that was with me, so as to make him turn toward me and give me food. And the most benevolent of people to the needy was Ja'far ibn Abi Talib, who used to receive us and feed us of whatever he had in his house (of food).
From him too al-Tirmidhi reported: Whenever asking Ja'far about a verse, he would not give me any reply but only after going home (i.e. bringing food). That is why this Ja'far was considered by Abu Hurayrah as the best of all the Companions, giving him priority over Abu Bakr, Umar, Ali and Uthman, beside other great Companions (may God be pleased with them all).
Al-Tirmidhi and al-Hakim, through a reliable isnad (chain), reported that Abu Hurayrah said: No man has ever put on a sandal, or got on mounts, or trodden the earth, after the Messenger of Allah, better than Ja'far ibn Abi Talib. 361
358. See pp. 718, 719.
359. The Saffah is a shadowy place in the rear northern part of the Mosque of Prophet. And Ahl al-Suffah are - as said by Abu al-Fida' in his al-Ta'rikh al-mukhtasar - poor people having neither houses nor tribes, sleeping during lifetime of the Prophet in the mosque and staying there all night. So the ledge of the mosque was their abode, hence they were called with this nickname. When the Messenger of Allah was having supper, he would invite some of them to share him, dispersing the others among the Sahabah to feed them.
360. Al-A'raj is his disciple and companion.
361. Fath al-Bari, vol. VII, p. 62
Author: Abdul-Hussayn Sharafuddeen al-Musawi
Translator: Abdullah al-Shahin
Publisher: Ansariyan Publications – Qum
First Edition 1380 – 1422
Itrat Press Number of pages: 192
Copies: 2000 Size: 143 x 205 mm
Ansariyan Publications 22, Shohada St., P.O. Box 187 — Qum
Islamic Republic of Iran Tel: ++98 251 7741744 Fax: 7742647
TOC \o "2-3" \h \z \t "Heading 1;1"
IN THE NAME OF ALLAH, THE BENEFICENT, THE MERCIFUL
This is a survey of one of Prophet Mohammed’s companions’ biography. He narrated from the prophet (s) so much many traditions until he exceeded all the limits, and the Sunni books of Hadith quoted from him until they exceeded the limits too. We didn’t have any way in front of this large number of traditions narrated by this man (Abu Hurayra) except to search for their sources because they concerned our religious and mental life directly; otherwise we would leave them and their sources aside and look for something more important.
This large number of traditions narrated by this man spread in the branches and fundamentals of the religion that made the Sunni jurisprudents depend upon widely in dealing with the laws of Allah and the Sharia.
It was not strange of them, for they thought that all the companions were fair and just. And since there was no evidence to prove that, we had no way save to research on this man and his traditions to be certain about what concerned the branches and fundamentals of the laws made by Allah. This made us obliged to study with scrutiny the biography of this man (Abu Hurayra) and his traditions. I went too far in research until the truth appeared in this book and the sun of certainty shone, thanks to Allah for that.
As to Abu Hurayra himself, we will let you see the history of his life and his psychology as it was exactly. And as for his traditions, we studied them thoughtfully as quantity and quality and it was not possible for us, I swear by Allah, except to deny them as what his fellows did at his days. You will read that in details at its place in this book, inshallah.
Was it possible for any wise man to accept this large number of traditions narrated by this man, which were more than all what were narrated by the four caliphs, the nine wives of the prophet (s) and all the Hashemites, men and women?
Could an illiterate man, lately became a Muslim and therefore the period of his companionship with the prophet (s) was short, to comprehend from the prophet (s) so much many traditions that the first Muslims and the relatives of the prophet could not?
The good sense and the scientific criterion would not accept a lot of the plentifulness and the wonders narrated by this man.
The Sunna in its philosophy, its methods and its aspects has certain characteristics that the wise, men of sense and the linguists know clearly. When they hear or read something of the Sunna, they find it distinct according to their common sense and criteria. They find its aspects and signs distinct too without any doubt or suspect.
The Sunna was higher than to have thorny weeds, by which Abu Hurayra had stung the good senses and had wounded the scientific criteria before he distorted the exalted Sharia and wronged to the prophet (s) and his umma.
In short, the Sunna was the method of Islam and the law of life, according to which life must be typical in morals, beliefs, social relationships, science and literature. So it was no logic to be silent about this disgraceful intervention in the essence of Islam وwhich called for being free from absurd beliefs and superstition, which mind definitely denied.
So it was necessary to clear the books of Hadith by removing many traditions narrated by this man that mind does not accept.
I say that and I may see some faces frown, and others shrink away from me. They may, because of inheritance, upbringing and environment, shrink away from a fact shone by research different from what they thought that all the companions were just and fair without testing their deeds and sayings according to the criteria the prophet (s) put for his umma. Because companionship, in their point of view, was as sanctum and whoever resorted to, could not be accused of anything whatever he did. This was unacceptable, against the evidences and far away from rightness.
In fact, companionship was a great virtue but it did not make the prophet’s companions infallible. Among the prophet’s companions, there were saints, veracious and honest men, as well as the unknown ones. Also there were the hypocrites, who committed guilts and crimes. The holy Qur’an declared that clearly (..and from among the people of Medina (also); they are stubborn in hypocrisy; you do not know them; We know them).9:101. So we can depend upon the just companions and research to be certain about the unknown ones, whereas the guilty and criminals have no any value, neither they nor their traditions.
This was our point of view about whoever narrated a prophetic tradition. The holy Qur’an and the Sunna were our guide. We never excused the liars even if they were called companions, because it was disloyalty to Allah, His Apostle and people. It was enough for us to depend upon the jurisprudents, veracious, and virtuous of the great companions of the prophet (s) and his family, whom he (s) ordered to be at the same rank with the holy Qur’an and to be the example for the wise.
As a result, we have agreed upon, even we were somehow different at the beginnings, that the Sunni respected Abu Hurayra, Samara bin Jundub, al-Magheera, Mu’awiya, Amr bin al-Aass, Marwan bin al-Hakam and the likes because they (the Sunni) sanctified the prophet (s) and those, who were among the prophet’s companions. At the same time we criticized them just to sanctify the prophet and his Sunna just like an open minded, who understood the meaning of holiness and greatness.
Of course, after that, he, who denied whoever ascribed to the prophet (s) something unbelievable, was worthier to honour the prophet and worthier to be in the way, which the prophet wanted for his umma. The prophet (s) had warned that there would be many liars fabricating lies when narrating untrue traditions and he had threatened them to be in Hell.
Here I publish this study in the book (Abu Hurayra) just for showing the truth and to purify the Sunna and its ascription to the great sacred prophet (s), who (..never speaks out of desire) 53:3, to be sincere for the truth in good thinking and honest in consideration and to be impartial for the sake of the truth according to the scientific and mental bases, which deny to respect a liar fabricating lies and ascribing them to the prophet (s) and to be exempted from criticism just because he was one of the prophet’s companions. We deny submitting blindly to the traditions narrated by this man concerning the prophetic Sunna, which was worthier to be honoured because it is the prophet’s mission to the world until the Day of Resurrection.
No one is to frown or to be depressed when we present this book with an impartial study, for we respect free thinking and don’t let it be low under the feet of superstitions and then to be surrounded by an illusory wall of holiness (..with a wall having a door in it; (as for) the inside of it, there shall be mercy in it, and (as for) the outside of it, before it there shall be punishment) 57:13.
We don’t want any face to frown or any one to be depressed, but in fact we want every one who goes under the black cloud of bad traditions, reached him age after age, to be free from fanaticism and to read this book thoughtfully (Those who listen to the word, then follow the best of it; those are they whom Allah has guided, and those it is who are the men of understanding) 39:18.
We do not intend with this book, I swear by Allah, to split the unity between the different sects of Muslims, which is now going to be active at these days of waking, but to strengthen it with freedom in option and belief to put it in the right way.
The mental dignity is the best of dignities that rational people seek out even if it costs them their money or their lives because it is the way to glory and the bridge for unity.
But if some one of our Muslim brothers turns his face away in disdain, I ask him just to listen to these simple notes and then to give his suggestion. He will find us, inshallah, more determined to strengthen the unity between the Muslims in spite of those thorns, which prick the intellect and sting the conscience.
We will talk about different thoughts here; some of them dealt with mind and its power and horizon, some touched the belief in its aspects and meanings, some touched the natures, others were contradictory refuting each other, some were away from the scientific bases derived from the essence of the religion and many of them were adulation to the Umayyads or to the public opinion at those days, and some were of imagination and insanity. But all of them were away from rightness at all.
One of Abu Hurayra’s wonders is that the angel of death used to come to people visibly, but when he came to Prophet Moses (s) to take his life, Moses slapped him, gouged his eye, and sent him back on his sumpter to his God one-eyed. After this accident, the angel of death went to people invisibly!
One other wonder of Abu Hurayra’s was the competition between Moses and the rock. Moses (s) put his cloths on the rock to swim in the sea away from people. The rock ran away with Moses’ cloths in order to force him to follow it nakedly as he was born in front of the Israelites in order to refute the rumor saying that Moses had a hernia. Moses ran after the rock shouting: “O, rock, my cloths. O rock, my cloths.” The rock stopped after ending its task. Moses began beating the rock with his stick severely until he made some scars in the rock. There were six or seven scars in the rock.
The funniest thing in this tradition was the hesitation of Abu Hurayra about the number of the scars in the rock, because his piety imposed upon him not to narrate a tradition unless he was so certain as if he was certain of the sun’s light!
And: the gold locusts falling over Prophet Ayyub (Job) when he was bathing and that he began to collect them in his cloths.
And: two newborn babies talking with reason and rationality about the unseen where there was no cause to break the natural rules.
And: a cow and a wolf speaking eloquent Arabic showing that they had reason, wisdom and knowledge about the unseen where there is no any cause for challenge and miracles. Abu Hurayra narrated this tradition to show the virtues of the first and the second caliphs.
And another wonderful superstition: that the Satan came to Abu Hurayra’s house in three successive nights to steal some food for his hungry children.
And: that an Israelite nation was lost and after looking for them they found that they had been turned into mice. The evidence was that when they were given camel’s milk they did not drink and when they were given ewe’s milk they drank.
And: that he (Abu Hurayra) was with al-Ala’ with an army of four thousand soldiers. They came to a bay, which had not been crossed before them and would never be crossed after them. Al-Ala’ grasped the rein of his horse and walked above the water! The army followed him without a foot, a slipper or a hoof became wet!
And: his tradition about his haversack, which had a few dates, that he fed all the army while the dates still as they were. He had been living by this haversack along the period of the prophet (s), Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman until it was stolen during the revolution against Othman.
And: his tradition about Dawood (Prophet David), who finished reading the holy Qur’an in a very short time. He ordered to saddle his horse and before it was saddled, he had finished reading all the Qur’an. Is that not like someone’s saying: He put the entire world inside an egg?
In some of his traditions, he dealt with Allah, glory be to Him. His imagination made some images for Allah. Far it be from Him!
He said that Allah had created Adam like His own shape. He was sixty cubits height and seven cubits breadth. Abu Hurayra diversified in this tradition. Sometimes he said: If one of you quarreled with another, let avoid the face because Allah had created Adam according to His image. Another time he said: if someone beat another, let avoid the face and never say: what an ugly face you have, because Allah had created Adam according to His image. Sometime he said: Adam had been created according to the image of the Beneficent.
This man was fascinated by his imagination to draw such images for Allah and Adam with skilled literature and instructions, which if we ascribe to Islam, we will find many strange things that make us laugh and cry at the same time.
He narrated another tradition saying that Allah comes to this nation in the Day of Resurrection in a shape different from what they know and says: I am your god. They say: God forbid! We will not move from here until our god comes to us. If He comes we will know Him. Then Allah comes in the shape that they know and says: I am your god. They say: You are our god. Then they follow Him. He narrated that in a long dark story full of imagination, showing Allah in different shapes, disguising, coming and going in dramatic actions with jokes, dialogues and deception. The tradition made fun of Allah in a way that not only contradicted the Islamic beliefs and the simplest bases of rationality but also the royal etiquette if we accept-God forbid-the thought of embodiment, far be it from Allah, the Almighty.
And his tradition that Hell will not be full until Allah puts His leg in it! In one of his wonders showing that Hell will be proud on having the tyrants and disdainful people, while Paradise will be humble to have poor and miserable people.
And his tradition that Allah comes down to the lower sky every night and says: “Who prays to me, so that I grant him?” And many others like that which were the cause for the thought of embodiment to arise at the age of complexity of thoughts, and because of which many kinds of heresies and errors came out.
* * *
Abu Hurayra narrated many traditions about the prophets (s). He described them however he liked. In one of those traditions, he described the terrors of the Day of Resurrection. People resort to Adam then to Noah then to Abraham then to Moses then to Jesus (s) in useless clamor, for these prophets (as Abu Hurayra pretended) are prevented to be intercessors by Allah, Who became very angry with them (before) to a degree that He didn’t become so angry before that nor would be after that because they (the prophets) had committed sins (invented by Abu Hurayra’s imagination). Abu Hurayra did not find any way to prefer Prophet Muhammad (s) except to defame the other prophets (peace be upon them). Also his tradition when he ascribed doubt to Prophet Abraham (s) when he says (according to the Qur’an): (And Ibrahim when he said: My Lord! Show me how Thou givest life to the dead…) 2:260, in which Abu Hurayra made Prophet Muhammad worthier to be doubtful than Abraham and made Prophet Joseph better than Prophet Muhammad for he was patient. He criticized Prophet Lot when he says: (Ah! that I had power to suppress you, rather I shall have recourse to a strong support). 11:80.
And his tradition which showed that Prophet Solomon broke his father’s verdict about a baby that two women pretended to be theirs, and Prophet David judged that the baby was the old woman’s. Solomon said: “Bring me a knife to cut the baby into two halves, one half for each of them.” The young woman cried: “Don’t do that.” So he judged that the baby was hers. The contradiction between two prophets about one of Allah’s verdict was unacceptable according to the Islamic Sharia. The funniest part in this superstition was that Abu Hurayra said that he had never heard of sikkeen (knife) in his life where they used to call it midya.
And his tradition that prophet Solomon said: “I will go to bed with a hundred women tonight that every one of them will give birth to a boy, who will fight for the sake of Allah.” The angel asked him to say inshallah. He did not say. So no one of his wives gave birth to a baby save one, who gave birth to half a human being!
And another one about an ant that pinched Prophet Moses (s). Moses ordered his followers to burn the village of the ants. Then Allah inspired to him: “Because of an ant that pinched you, you burnt a nation, which praised Allah!”
And his tradition about Prophet Muhammad (s) that he harmed, abused, cursed and whipped innocent ones just because of anger, therefore his harming, abusing, cursing and whipping them would be a penance for their sins.
If that was ascribed to Pharaoh, it would be shameful for him. How about our infallible prophet! Some people were cursed by the prophet and they did not deserve forgiveness, could Abu Hurayra force us to love and respect them as virtuous people? What are the right criteria after this funny criterion of Abu Hurayra?
In another tradition he said that the Satan came to the prophet (s) to disturb his prayers. Prophet Muhammad strangled the Satan and wanted to tie him to a column to let people look at him tied up, but he remembered Solomon’s saying: (He said: My Lord! do Thou forgive me and grant me a kingdom which is not fit for (being inherited by) anyone after me) 38:35, and set him free. And his tradition saying that Prophet Muhammad (s) was sleeping and missed the Fajr (dawn) prayer.
And many others, which opened the door to say that the prophets were not infallible and they might make mistakes. This is unacceptable for it cancels the real sense and essence of prophecy.
* * *
There was another kind of his traditions showing you the contradiction clearly. Notice the two traditions of Abu Salama, which he heard from Abu Hurayra about infection. He denied it in the first one and proved it in the second. Abu Salama asked him: “Didn’t you say that there is no infection?” Abu Hurayra denied his first tradition and began to murmur in Abyssinian.
See his tradition about Solomon and his wives. Sometime he said that they were one hundred. Sometime he said they were ninety, seventy and sixty. All of that were mentioned in the books of Hadith.
If you see his tradition about his migration, you will find clearly that he was a poor hungry bare-footed servant. He served this and that for a meal. How did he have a servant, about whom he talked in Sham (Damascus)? He said (during the reign of Mu’awiya): “When I came to meet the prophet (s), my servant escaped in the way. While I had been with the prophet to pay homage, my servant came in. the prophet said to me: “Is this your servant?” I said: “I set him free for the sake of Allah.”
Look at his traditions talking about himself during his living in the (suffa)  shelter. You will find that he was one of its destitute inhabitants. He lived in it along the life of the Prophet (s). It was his abode day and night, for he neither had a clan nor a house in Medina. He clothed himself with a woolen piece, which lice crept on. He tied it around his neck to reach his legs. He gathered it with his hands in order that his private parts not to be seen. Hunger threw him down unconsciously between the minbar and the room of the mosque. So wherefrom did he get a house that he pretended in the last days of his life? It was a part of a tradition he told in Damascus about himself and his mother who became Muslim by the prophet’s praying for her and her son-as he said.
Look at his protest against those, who denied his traditions. You will find it contradictory and invalid that hearings turn away from for its silliness and minds deny for its uselessness. Abu Hurayra’s evidence against those, who condemned his traditions was a tradition narrated by him saying that once he spread his garment in front of the prophet (s). The prophet began to ladle knowledge with his hands and put it into the garment saying to Abu Hurayra: “Join it to your chest.” Abu Hurayra joined it to his chest and became infallible from forgetting; therefore he was the best of companions in keeping Sunna in mind and the most aware of it.
What ridiculous evidence that served his opponents more than to serve him! It confirmed that what they had ascribed to him was right that he narrated traditions according to his temper without knowing what he was saying. But we do not have save Allah to judge between us.
It was enough for us that he narrated traditions without seeing or hearing and then he pretended that he saw and heard. Here is an example:
Abu Hurayra said that one day he entered the house of Ruqayya, the daughter of the prophet and the wife of Othman. She had a comb in her hand. She said: “The prophet (s) was here and left a moment ago. I combed his hair.”
It was certain that Ruqayya died in the third year of hijra after the battle of Badr and Abu Hurayra came to Medina and became a Muslim in the seventh year of hijra after the battle of Khaybar. So where could he meet Ruqayya and her comb?
* * *
Here is an example of his traditions, which were far away from the scientific bases of Islam. He said: “Prophet Muhammad (s) sent us in a mission and said: “If you find that man and that man (he called them by names) burn them both in fire.” When we wanted to set out he said: “I had ordered you to burn those two men in fire, but it is only Allah that may torture people with fire, so if you find them kill them.”
It was an abrogation of a matter before its time to be achieved. It was impossible for Allah and his Apostle.
He had many incredible and imaginative traditions. We mentioned six of them at the end of his forty traditions in this book to be examples for the others.
* * *
He flattered the Umayyads and their assistants servilely. He also flattered the public opinion at those days very much. We mentioned some of his traditions in this concern in the later chapters. You may inspect them impartially to find that he was hungry and wanted to fill his stomach via inventing traditions for the sake of this and that. He wanted to satisfy his imagination, an imagination of someone who was deprived of the pleasures of an ordinary life. He, after that, confessed that he was a foothold in an age that scorned and starved him and then he was thrown to an age that satisfied his hunger just to invent traditions. After that, do we trust in him and depend on him as evidence? Do we throw our minds and beliefs under his feet unthoughtfully?
If that was right according to mentality and the Sharia, then let Abu Hurayra and his followers go to their sanctum, which politics erected and put between traditions and inheritances.
And if that traditions and inheritances were a cause of separation or an object of disagreement, let them be until the sun rises. (I desire nothing but reform so far as I am able, and with none but Allah is the direction of my affair to a right issue; on Him do I rely and to Him do I turn) 11:88.
He narrated from the prophet Muhammad (s) extra traditions. The six Sunni books of Hadith and the rest of their books quoted from him much many traditions. In front of this large number of traditions, we had no way but to research on their sources, because they concerned our religious and mental life directly. Otherwise we would turn away from them and their narrator to take care of something more important.
But these numerous traditions spread into the branches and fundamentals of the religion that made all the Sunnis of the four sects and the Ash’arites and their lecturers trust in and depend upon when dealing with the Sharia. So there was no way save to research on the narrator himself and his traditions to be certain about the laws of Allah and His Sharia.
Abu Hurayra was obscure in ancestry and family. People were very different about his name and his father’s. His name was unknown in the pre-Islamic and Islamic era. He was known by his surname. He was from Douss. It was a Yemeni tribe descended from Douss bin Adnan bin Abdullah bin Zahran bin Ka’b bin al-Harith bin Ka’b bin Malik bin an-Nazhr bin al-Azd bin al-Ghouth.
It was said that his father’s name was Omayr and he was the son of Aamir bin Abd Thi ash-Shara bin Tareef bin Ghiyath bin Abu Sa’b bin Hunayya bin Sa’d bin Tha’laba bin Sulaym bin Fahm bin Ghanam bin Douss.
His mother was Omayma bint (daughter of) Sufayh bin al-Harith bin Shabi bin Abu Sa’b bin Hunayya bin Sa’d bin Tha’laba bin Sulaym bin Fahm bin Ghanam bin Douss. 
He was surnamed with Abu Hurayra because of a small cat he was fond of. Perhaps it was because of his fondness of his cat that he narrated a tradition that Prophet Muhammad (s) had said: “A woman would be in Hell because of a cat. She tied it. She neither fed it nor let it feed on ground’s insects.” Aa’isha (the Prophet’s wife) denied this tradition as you will read it at its place of this book, inshallah.
He was born in Yemen and grew up there until he passed the thirty years old. He was so ignorant that he had not a bit of insight, nor a little perception. He was a pauper forgotten by the age, an orphan hit by poverty, serving this and that, man or woman just to fill his stomach, barefooted, naked, contented with this disgrace, comforted with his condition.
But when Allah had confirmed His apostle’s mission in Medina after the battles of Badr, Uhud and al-Ahzab and so and so, there was no way for this miserable pauper to go in but that of Islam. He migrated to pay homage to the prophet Muhammad (s) after the battle of Khaybar in the seventh year of hijra according to all of the historians.
As for his companionship with the prophet, it was three years as he declared in one of his traditions mentioned by al-Bukhari. 
When Abu Hurayra became a Muslim, he joined the destitute of Suffa who, as Abul-Fida’ said in his book at-Tareekh al-Mukhtassar (brief history), were poor people with no houses or relatives. They slept in the mosque and they stayed in it at the time of the prophet (s). Suffa was their shelter, so they were called by that name (ahlus-suffa). When the prophet had his dinner, he invited some of them to dine with him and sent some others to dine with his companions. One of the famous inhabitants of suffa was Abu Hurayra. 
Abu Na’eem al-Isfahani said in his book Hilyatul-Awliya’ that Abu Hurayra was the most famous inhabitant of suffa. He lived in it along the life of the prophet (s) and he did not move out. He was the introducer of the suffa
He told about himself that he was one of the destitute inhabitants of the suffa, in a long tradition mentioned by al-Bukhari. 
Abu Hurayra said as in al-Bukhari’s Sahih: “I saw seventy of the inhabitants of suffa, no one of them had a dress on him. They either had loincloth or a piece of cloth tied to their necks, some reached half of their legs and some reached their heels, which they gathered in order that their private parts not to bee seen.
Al- Bukhari mentioned another long tradition that Abu Hurayra said he had kept to the prophet just for feed.
And another narrated by Ibnul-Musayyab and Abu Slama that Abu Hurayra said: “I kept to the prophet just for feed.”
In another tradition, he talked about himself: I was one of the suffa inhabitants. Once I remained fasting. I suffered a stomachache. I went to relieve myself and when I came back I found that the food was eaten. The rich people of Quraysh used to send food to the suffa inhabitants. I said: to whom should I go? I was told to go to Omar bin al-Khattab. I went to him. I found him busy praising Allah after the prayer. I waited until he finished. I said to him: Recite me some of Qur’an and give me some food. He recited some verses of sura (Aal Imran). He went in and left me at the door. He was late. I thought he might change his cloths and then bring me some food. There was nothing of that. I left to meet Prophet Muhammad (s). I went with him until we reached his house. He called a black maid of his and said to her: “Bring us that bowl.” She brought us a bowl with a little of eaten food remained at its sides. I thought it was barley. I ate until I became satiate.”
He often described himself by saying: “I swear by Allah, who there is no god but Him, that I slept on the ground and put a rock on my abdomen because of hunger. Once I sat in their way, by which they (prophet’s companions) got out from the mosque. Abu Bakr passed by me. I asked him about a Qur’anic verse just to give me some food. He went away without giving me anything. Then Omar passed by me and I asked him the same. He went away without giving me any food. Then the prophet Muhammad (s) passed by me. He smiled when he saw me and knew what was in my mind. He said: “Abu Hirr. I said: “Here I am.” He said: “Follow me.” He went and I followed him. He went in his house and allowed me to go in. We found a cup of milk. He asked: “Where is this milk from? They (household) said: “It is a gift from someone.” He said: “Abu Hirr, go and invite the inhabitants of suffa to come”. They were the guests of Islam. They did not have relatives to live with. When the prophet got some charities, he sent all charities for them and when he got a gift he shared it with them. I became disturbed. I thought that I was worthier than those of suffa to have a drink from this milk. I thought that if they came the prophet (s) would order me to give them from the milk. So what could I get from this milk? I had to obey the prophet. I went and invited them. They came and asked permission. They were allowed to go in and take their seats. The prophet said: “Abu Hirr, take the cup of milk and give them to drink.” I took the cup of milk and began to give one after the other and they all became satiate until I came to the prophet. He took the cup, smiled and said: “Abu Hirr, no one remained except me and you.” I said: “That’s right.” He said: “Sit and drink.” I sat and drank. He asked me to drink, too. I drank. He still asked me to drink until I said: “I swear by Allah, who has sent you with the rightness, that I can’t drink more.” He said: “Show me it.” I gave him the cup. He praised Allah and said, in the name of Allah, and drank the leftover.”
Also it was mentioned in al-Bukhari’s sahih that Abu Hurayra said: “I often fainted between the minbar of the prophet (s) and the room of Aa’isha. The comers put their feet on my neck thinking I was mad. But I was not mad. It was just because of hunger.”
Thujjanahayn (two-winged) Ja’far bin Abu Talib was very charitable, sympathetic and almsgiver to the poor. He often fed Abu Hurayra when hungry. So Abu Hurayra supported him and considered him the best of people after the prophet (s), as it was mentioned in al-Issaba (Ja’far’s biography).
Al- Bukari mentioned that Abu Hurayra said: “People say that Abu Hurayra narrated much many traditions that the prophet might have not said. I kept to the prophet just to satisfy my hunger. I neither ate good food nor wore new cloths. I was not served by anyone. I stuck my abdomen to the ground because of hunger. I asked some people to recite me a Qur’anic verse, which I already knew, that they might invite me for some food. The best one for the poor was Ja’far bin Abu Talib. He took us with him to give us whatever food was there in his house.
Al- Baghawi mentioned a tradition narrated by al-Maqbari that Abu Hurayra had said: “Ja’far bin Abu Talib liked the poor and sat with them. He served them and they served him. He talked to them and they talked to him. Therefore the prophet Muhammad (s) called him father of the poor.”
At-Tarmithi and an-Nassa’ei mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “No one, who put on shoes, rode sumpters and trod on the ground, was better than Ja’far bin Abu Talib after the prophet Muhammad (s).”
Suffa was Abu Hurayra’s home, day and night. He did not leave it to any other place until the prophet (s) left this worldly evanescent life and joined the Beneficent Companion. Before that Abu Hurayra did not achieve anything that made him be able to fill his stomach save to sit in the way of the passersby complaining his hunger. No great matter attracted his attention. He was mentioned neither in war nor in peace. Yes! It was mentioned that he fled from the army in the battle of Mu’ta.
He pretended that he was one of the delegation sent to Mecca by the prophet (s) with Imam Ali carrying the sura of Bara’a, and that he was announcing in the day of great hajj until his voice became hoarse. He had two contradictory traditions about that. You will see them in their certain chapter of this book, inshallah.
He pretended that the prophet (s) made him almoner to keep zakat of Ramadan in a long tradition.
We surveyed the age of the two caliphs, Abu Bakr and Omar bin al Khattab, and investigated what had happened at their days but we didn’t find any thing worth mentioning about Abu Hurayra except that Omar had sent him to be the wali of Bahrain in the year twenty-one of hijra. In the year twenty-three the caliph Omar deposed him and appointed Othman bin Abul-Aass ath-Thaqafi. The caliph not only deposed him but also he saved from him ten thousand dinars for the treasury, alleging that he had stolen them, which they were of the Muslims. It was a famous case. Ibn Abd Rabbih al-Maliki mentioned (in his book al-Aqd al-Fareed, in the first pages of vol. 1) that the caliph Omar called for Abu Hurayra and said to him: “You know well that I had appointed you as wali of Bahrain and you were barefooted and now came to my ears that you have bought horses for one thousand and six hundred dinars. Abu Hurayra said: “We had some horses that bore and gifts that cumulated”. The caliph said: “I counted your livelihood and income and I found that it is over than yours and you have to return it”. Abu Hurayra said: “You can’t do that”. Omar said: “Yes, I can and I will beat you on the back.” Then Omar got up and beat him with his stick until he wounded him and said to him: “Pay the money back.” Abu Hurayra said: “Exempt me for the sake of Allah.” Omar said: “That would be if it was halal and that you paid it back obediently. Have you come from the farthest lap of Bahrain with people’s taxes to be in your pocket, neither for Allah nor for the Muslims? Omayma begot you just to graze donkeys.”
Ibn Abd Rabbih mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “When Omar deposed me in Bahrain, he said to me: “O enemy of Allah and enemy of His Qur’an, did you steal the wealth of the Muslims?” Abu Hurayra said: “I am not an enemy of Allah or His book, but I am an enemy of your enemies. I did not steal the wealth of the Muslims. Omar said: “Then how did you get ten thousand dinars?” He said: “We had some horses that bore, gifts that cumulated and shares that multiplied.” Omar took the money from me but when I offered the Fajr (dawn) prayer, I asked Allah to forgive him.” This tradition was also mentioned by Ibn Abul-Hadeed in his book Sharh Nahjul-Balagha, vol. 3, and was mentioned by Ibn Sa’d in his book at-Tabaqat al-Kubra (Abu Huraya’s biography)narrated by Muhammad bin Seereen that Abu Hurayra had said: “Omar said to me: “O enemy of Allah and enemy of his Qur’an, did you steal the wealth of the Muslims…etc.” Ibn Hajar mentioned this tradition in his book al-Issaba but he modified it and changed the truth in a way dissented from all the others in order to purify the fame of Abu Hurayra. But he forgot that he defamed the man, who beat Abu Hurayra on the back and took his money and deposed him.
Abu Hurayra became very sincere for the family of Abul-Aass and all the Umayyads when Othman became the caliph. He adjoined Marwan bin al-Hakam and flattered the family of Abu Ma’eet, therefore he became an important person especially after the blockade of Othman’s house during the revolution against him because that Abu Hurayra was with him in the house. Hence he obtained bloom after fading and fame after obscurity.
He got an opportunity during that sedition to slip into Othman’s house and did the family of Abul-Aass and the other Umayyads a favor that had a great impression upon them and their assistants and it strengthened their state later on. So they wiped the dust of obscurity from him and praised him to be well-known. Although they knew that he did not slip into the house of the caliph to be among the blockaded ones until the caliph ordered his companions to be quiet and to stop fighting.
The caliph did that just to spare his and his companions’ blood. Abu Hurayra knew well that the rebellious people did not want but Othman and Marwan. That encouraged him to be among the blockaded ones.
Anyhow the man seized the opportunity, his deal gained much, and his goods (traditions) sold well. Henceforth the Umayyads and their supporters listened to his traditions carefully and tried their best to spread them. At the same time, he told of traditions according to their wishes.
For example, he narrated that the prophet Muhammad (s) had said: “Every prophet had a bosom friend and mine is Othman.”
He also said: “I heard the prophet (s) saying: “Othman is modest so the angels become modest in front of him.”
He also said that Prophet Muhammad (s) had said: “Every prophet has a mate in Paradise. My mate in Paradise is Othman.”
Abu Hurayra also narrated that the prophet had said: “Gabriel came and said to me: Allah orders you to marry Othman with Um Kulthoom (the prophet’s step-daughter) with a dowry same as to that of Ruqayya (the prophet’s other step-daughter).”
Abu Hurayra said: “Once I entered the house of Ruqayya, the daughter of the prophet (s) and wife of Othman. She had a comb in her hand. She said: “The prophet was here and just left a moment ago. I combed his hair. He said to me: “How do you think of Abu Abdullah (Othman)?” I said: “He is good.” He said: “Grace him, because he is the most similar to me in morals among my companions.”
He might change the tradition as he did with the prophet’s saying: “There will be a sedition and disagreement after me.” They said: “What do you order us to do then?” He (s) said, pointing to Imam Ali: “Keep to the emir and his companions.”
But Abu Hurayra preferred to flatter the family of Abul-Aass, Abu Ma’eet and Abu Sufyan, therefore he turned this tradition to Othman and in return for that they rewarded him for his favor.
Abu Hurayra’s voice died down during the reign of Imam Ali (s). He was wrapped in obscurity again and was about to return to his first condition. He turned away from Imam Ali and did not try to assist him. In fact his destination was the laps of Imam Ali’s enemies.
Once Mu’awiya sent Abu Hurayra and an-Nu’man bin Basheer-they were in Damascus-to Imam Ali asking him to send the killers of Othman to Mu’awiya in order to punish them for killing Othman. Mu’awiya wanted by doing so that when they come back to Damascus, they would excuse him and blame Imam Ali, although he knew that imam Ali would not send the killers of Othman to him. So he wanted to make Abu Hurayra and an-Nu’man as evidence in front of people of Damascus to show them that Mu’awiya had an excuse to fight Imam Ali.
Mu’awiya said to Abu Hurayra and an-Nu’man: “Go to Ali and ask him to send us the killers of Othman for he has sheltered them. If he did, there would be no war between him and us. If he refused, you would be witnesses against him. Then you come in front of people and tell them of that”. They went to Imam Ali. Abu Hurayra said to him: “O Abu Hassan, Allah has given you a virtue and honor in Islam, for you are Prophet Muhammad’s cousin. Your cousin (Mu’awiya) has sent us to you asking you for something to calm down this war and to end the enmity between you that is to send him the killers of his cousin Othman to kill them and may Allah reconcile you. Hence the nation will be safe from sedition and disagreement”. Then an-Nu’man said something like that. Imam Ali said to them: “Let not talk about that. O Nu’man, tell me about you. Are you the best of your people (Ansar) in guidance?” He said: “No.” Imam Ali said: “All of your people have followed me except three or four deviants of them. Are you one of the deviants?” An-Nu’man said: “Verily I came to be with you and to keep to you, but Mu’awiya asked me to tell you that. I hoped that it would be a cause for me to meet you and I hoped that Allah may reconcile you. If you see other than that, I will be with you and won’t leave you”.
Historians said that Imam Ali did not talk with Abu Hurayra a word. He left to Damascus and told Mu’awiya about what happened. Mu’awiya ordered him to tell people about that. He did and did many things else that satisfied Mu’awiya.
An-Nu’man lived with Imam Ali and then fled to Damascus and told its people about what happened…to the end of this incident.
When it became serious and the war began, the terror entered Abu Hurayra’s heart to make his legs tremble. At the beginning of that sedition he didn’t think that Ali would win the war, so he cowered to the ground and began to wet-blanket the others in order not to help Imam Ali by telling untrue prophetic traditions secretly. One of his traditions then was that he said: “I heard the Prophet (s) saying: “There will be a sedition; the sitting is better than the standing and the standing is better than the walking and the walking is better than the running. Any one finds a shelter, let him resort to it”.
Abu Hurayra still as he was until the Kharijites rebelled against Imam Ali and Mu’awiya became stronger. He occupied Egypt and killed its wali, who was appointed by Imam Ali. He began to ravage and make raids against the state of Imam Ali. He sent Bissr bin Arta’a with an army of three thousand soldiers to Hijaz and Yemen ravaging and spoiling there. They killed, burnt and tore people savagely. They profaned the laws of Allah. They disgraced the honor of women and captured boys and girls of the Muslims there to blacken the face of history.
After all those atrocities, Bissr extorted homage to Mu’awiya from all people of Hijaz and Yemen. Then Abu Hurayra spread what was hidden in his heart to Bissr bin Arta’a. Bissr found that he was sincere to Mu’awiya and loyal in taking homage to Mu’awiya from people. Bissr appointed Abu Hurayra as wali of Medina when he left after ordering people to obey him. He led people in prayers and thought he was the real wali until Jariya bin Qudama as-Sa’di came to Medina with two thousand knights sent by Imam Ali. Abu Hurayra was leading people in offering prayer. He fled. Jariya said: “If I found Abu Sannour, I would kill him.”
While Jariya was in Hijaz, he knew that Imam Ali was martyred. He took homage to Imam Hassan bin Ali bin Abu Talib (s) and went back to Kufa. Abu Hurayra came back to Medina leading prayers and became stronger until Mu’awiya dominated.
Abu Hurayra lived the best days of his life during the reign of Mu’awiya. Mu’awiya realized many of this man’s hopes, so he told traditions as Mu’awiya liked. He told people incredible traditions about the virtues of Mu’awiya and some others.
Fabricated traditions exceeded the limits in the state of Mu’awiya according to what his media wanted and his policies needed to spite the Hashimites. The state of Mu’awiya had many liars fabricating prophetic traditions as the Prophet (s) had warned of. They were advanced in inventing traditions according to what they were inspired with by the rulers. The first of them was Abu Hurayra. He told people of abominable traditions talking about the virtues of Mu’awiya. One of those traditions was mentioned by Ibn Assakir in two ways, Ibn Adiy in two ways, Muhammad bin Aa’ith in a fifth way, Muhammad bin Abd as-Samarqandi in a sixth way, Muhammad bin Mubarak as-Souri in a seventh way and al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi in an eighth way that Abu Hurayra had said: “I heard the Prophet (s) saying: “Allah has entrusted three men with His inspiration; me, Gabriel and Mu’awiya!”
And another mentioned by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi that Abu Hurayra said: “The prophet (s) gave Mu’awiya an arrow and said to him: “Take this arrow until you meet me in Paradise!”
Another mentioned by Abul-Abbas al-Waleed bin Ahmad az-Zouzani in his book Shajaratul-Aql, in two ways that Abu Hurayra had said: “I heard the Prophet (s) saying: “There will be a dome of white pearl with four doors for Abu Bakr. The wind of mercy flows through it. Its outside is Allah’s pardon and its inside is Allah’s contentment. Whenever he longs for Allah, a shutter opens to look at Allah through it.”
Another mentioned by Ibn Habban that Abu Hurayra had said: “When the Prophet (s) came out from the cave towards Medina, Abu Bakr held his stirrup. He said: O Abu Bakr, may I tell you good news? In the Day of Resurrection, Allah appears to the creatures in general and appears to you privately!”
And what was mentioned by Ibn Habban that Abu Hurayra said: “While Gabriel was with the Prophet, Abu Bakr passed by them. Gabriel said: It is Abu Bakr. The Prophet said: O Gabriel, do you know him? Gabriel said: He is in the heaven more famous than him on the earth. The angels call him the discerner of Quraysh. He is your minister in your life and the caliph after your death.”
Another tradition mentioned by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi that Abu Hurayra said: “Prophet Muhammad (s) said: The angels rejoiced at the birth of Abu Bakr. Allah looked at the Garden of Eden and said: I swear by My glory and loftiness that I will not enter anyone into it except who loved this newborn baby.”
And another one mentioned by Ibn Adiy that Abu Hurayra said: “I heard the Prophet saying: When I ascended the heaven, in each sky I passed by I found that it was written; Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah, Abu Bakr is…”
Abul-Faraj ibn aj-Jawzi mentioned a tradition that Abu Hurayra had said: “The prophet told me that Paradise and Hell once prided. The Hell said to the Paradise: I am better than you for I have the Pharaohs, the tyrants, the kings and their progenies. Allah inspired to Paradise to say: I am better than you because Allah had adorned me for Abu Bakr.”
And another mentioned by al-Khateeb that Abu Hurayra had said: “One day the Prophet got out leaning on Ali bin Abu Talib. They met Abu Bakr and Omar. The Prophet said to Ali: Do you love these two men? Ali said: yes, I do. The Prophet said to Ali: Love them in order to enter Paradise!”
Another one mentioned by al-Khateeb in his book History of Baghdad and by Ibn Shahin in his Sunan in two ways that Abu Hurayra said: “I heard the prophet (s) saying: “There are in the lower heaven eighty thousand angels asking Allah to forgive whoever loves Abu Bakr and Omar and in the second heaven there are eighty thousand angels cursing whoever hates Abu Bakr and Omar.”
Another one mentioned by al-Khateeb that Abu Hurayra said: “I heard the prophet (s) saying: Allah has seventy thousand angels in the heaven cursing whoever abuses Abu Bakr and Omar.”
All these traditions are untrue. All of those who mentioned them declared unanimously that they were null.
As-Sayouti arranged all the fabricated traditions according to their series of narrators and texts in his book al-La’ali al-Massnou’a. But they always defended Abu Hurayra by blaming the others who narrated from Abu Hurayra according to their point of view that every Muslim saw the Prophet or narrated from him was infallible!
They did the same with all what Abu Hurayra’s imagination had invented, like his saying: “I heard the Prophet (s) saying: This is Gabriel telling me, from Allah, that whoever loves Abu Bakr and Omar is a pious believer and whoever hates them is a rogue hypocrite.”
Abu Hurayra said: “The Prophet (s) said: Allah had created me of His light and created Abu Bakr of my light and created Omar of the light of Abu Bakr and created my nation of Omar’s light. Omar is the lamp of people in Paradise.”
He also said: “I heard the prophet saying: Abu Bakr and Omar are the best of the first and the last Muslims.”
And his saying: “The prophet said: My companions are like the stars. Whoever imitates some of them will be guided.”
And his saying: “The prophet (s) said: There was a chapter in the Bible describing me and my companions; Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman and Ali… as seed‑produce that puts forth its sprout…”
And many others that he let his imagination go here and there to invent. Al-Bukhari and Muslim’s books of Hadith had many many of the likes.
You will recognise easily the Umayyads’ gifts for this man if you think of his two conditions; one before their state where he was mean and subservient, looking at the lice creeping on his garment and his condition during their reign where they pulled him out of the mud of misery and clothed him with silk. They made him button his cloths with silk and they clothed him with slender flax. They built him a palace in al-Aqeeq. They surrounded him with their charity and covered him with their gifts. They spread his mention and announced his name. They made him wali on Medina, the town of the prophet (s) and married him, during his rule, to Bissra bint Ghazwan bin Jabir bin Wahab al-Maziniya, the sister of the emir Otba bin Ghazwan and he wouldn’t dream of that or his imagination would ever think of that, because he strove to serve her barefooted just for feed.
Mudharib bin Jiz’ said: “I was walking at night and there was a man exclaiming (Allahu Akbar-Allah is great). I followed him. I found that he was Abu Hurayra. I said: “What is this?” He said: “I am thanking Allah. I was employed by Bissra bint Ghazwan just for my feed. I led their sumpters when they rode and served them when they got down and now I became her husband. Now I ride and when I get down, she serves me. Before that, when she reached a plain, she got down and said: “I won’t leave unless you make me porridge.” Now when I reach the same place I say to her: “I won’t leave unless you make me porridge.”
He often said, during his emirate of Medina: “I grew up as an orphan. When I emigrated I was poor. I was employed by Bissra bint Ghazwan jus for feed. I led their sumpters when they rode and served them when they got down and now Allah has married me to her. Thanks to Allah, Who made the religion as basis and made Abu Hurayra imam.”
Once he said: “I was employed by Bissra bint Ghazwan for my feed. She ordered me to ride erectly and to go barefooted. After that Allah made her my wife. I ordered her to ride erectly and to go barefooted.”
One day he led people in prayer and when he finished he said loudly: “Praise be to Allah, Who made religion as basis and made Abu Hurayra imam after he was an employee for Bissra bint Ghazwan for his feed and a sumpter to ride.”
One day he ascended the minbar of the Prophet (s) and said: “Praise be to Allah, Who made me eat good food, wear silk cloths and marry me to Bissra bint Ghazwan after I was her employee for my feed. She made me carry her baggage and then I made her carry my baggage.”
The Umayyads enslaved Abu Hurayra by their favours. They appropriated his hearing, sight and heart and made him tractable. So he was the media of their policies. He changed according to their tendencies. Sometimes he invented traditions to show their virtues and sometimes he fabricated traditions showing the virtues of the two caliphs; Abu Bakr and Omar according to the wish of Mu’awiya and his oppressive group. For they had political purposes against imam Ali and the Prophet’s progeny (s), which would not be realised-as they thought-except by preferring the two caliphs. Hence he advanced in fabricating traditions, which we mentioned some of.
There were many traditions we didn’t mention, for example, the tradition about making Abu Bakr emir of hajj in the ninth year of hijra, the year when sura of Bara’a was revealed to the Prophet (s), and the tradition saying that the angels talked with Omar.
The Umayyad policy of subduing the Hashimites required certifying and spreading these two traditions as possible as Mu’awiya and his assistants could. They did by any means they could until all Sunni books of Hadith (Sahih) mentioned them as true traditions.
Abu Hurayra, sometimes, cut off the traditions concerning Imam Ali to distort their meaning, like his saying: “I heard the Prophet saying: The sun hadn’t been withheld or returned for anyone except for Prophet Usha’ bin Noon (Joshua) when he walked towards Jerusalem at night.”
And his saying: “When the Qur’anic verse (And warn your nearest relations) 26:214, was revealed the prophet stood up and said: O people of Quraysh,…” Abu Hurayra cut off the tradition and didn’t mention all the text to distort it according to what the Umayyad policy required. We don’t have but to say that there is no power save in Allah!
And his saying: “The Prophet said: My heirs are not to inherit what I have left.”
And: “Prophet Muhammad (s) said to his uncle Abu Talib: Say there is no god but Allah…until Allah revealed to the Prophet (Surely you cannot guide whom you love..) 28:56” and many other fabricated traditions. They used to subdue Imam Ali and the family of the Prophet (s).
Imam Abu Ja’far al-Iskafi said: “Mu’awiya had forced some of the Prophet’s companions and some of the companions’ successors to narrate bad traditions about Ali to defame and disavow him. He gave them bribes for that. So they fabricated what satisfied him. Among them were Abu Hurayra, Amr bin al-Aass, and al-Mugheera bin Shu’ba. Among the successors was Urwa bin az-Zubayr..”
Abu Ja’far al-Iskafi also said: “When Abu Hurayra came to Iraq with Mu’awiya in the year of (Jama’a), he came to the mosque of Kufa. When he saw that many people had come to receive him, he knelt on his knees and hit his head with his hand many times and said: “O people of Iraq, you say that I fabricate Allah and His apostle’s sayings to be in Hell. I swear by Allah that I heard the Prophet saying: “Every apostle had a sanctum. My sanctum is Medina. Whoever spoils in Medina, will be cursed by Allah, the angels and all the people.” I swear by Allah that Ali has spoiled in it! When Mu’awiya heard him saying that, he endorsed him, rewarded him and made him wali of Medina.”
Sometimes he invented traditions defending the Umayyad hypocrites, whom Allah and His apostle had cursed to protect the religion and umma from their hypocrisy and ravage. But Abu Hurayra flattered Marwan and Mu’awiya and their assistants by saying: “I heard the Prophet (s) saying: “O Allah, Muhammad is but a human being. He becomes angry like all the human beings. Every believer I have hurt, abused or whipped, You may make that as a cause to forgive him and to bring him closer to You in the Day of Resurrection.”
Marwan and his sons tried their best to spread this tradition in many ways until the books of Hadith (Sahih, Sunan and Musnad) mentioned it as true tradition.
The role of Marwan and his sons in raising Abu Hurayra to a high level and preferring him to all the others in memorising, accuracy and piety, had had its effect until nowadays.
They had done many things to satisfy people that Abu Hurayra was trustee and pious.
One of them was that Marwan pretended that he had seated his clerk in a secret place that he wouldn’t be seen by any one at all and called for Abu Hurayra to come in. He began to ask him about many things. He asked him too many questions. Abu Hurayra answered with the Prophet’s traditions and the clerk, whose name was Zu’ayza’a, was writing down without letting any one feel of him. He wrote down too many traditions. Marwan waited for a year and then called for Abu Hurayra and asked him the same questions. He answered with the same answers, no word more no word less. Marwan and his clerk spread this lie among the people of Damascus to reach everywhere until al-Hakim mentioned it in his book al-Mustadrak, vol. 3, p.p. 510.
And that when Marwan wanted to bring his knights and soldiers in order not to let the Hashimites bury Imam Hassan beside his grandfather, Prophet Muhammad’s tomb, he preconcerted with Abu Hurayra that the latter would oppose Marwan and blame him hardly in front of people to deceive them and to make them perceive that Abu Hurayra was a veracious man. He didn’t fear anyone save Allah and His apostle and that no one could stand against him when he became angry for the sake of Allah and His apostle.
When Abu Hurayra did his opposition, Marwan showed his anger. There was a false argument and untrue rage between them. Abu Hurayra protested strongly against Marwan justifying that he (Abu Hurayra) had a special position to the Prophet which no one of the Prophet’s companions or relatives had and that he had an ability of perceiving and memorising from the Prophet by which he surpassed the first Muslims like Omar, Othman, Ali, Talha, az-Zubayr and the others. He let himself go farther in describing his aspects, which imposed for him the highest ranks of the close companions. So the disagreement between them ended and Marwan submitted to the great position of Abu Hurayra in Islam and his high rank of knowledge in Sunna. All that happened in front of people. The plan succeeded and Marwan would use Abu Hurayra as a means to fight Imam Hassan, Imam Hussayn, their father and their sons. It was the most successful propaganda for their policies. (Woe, then, to those who write the book with their hands and then say: This is from Allah, so that they may take for it a small price; therefore woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn). 2:79.
All those who collected the Hadith agreed unanimously that Abu Hurayra had narrated traditions more than any one else at all. They counted his traditions to find that they were five thousand and three hundred and seventy-four traditions. He had in al-Bukhari’s Sahih only four hundred and forty-six traditions.
We found that all what was narrated by the four caliphs in comparison with Abu Hurayra’s traditions was less than twenty-seven percent. Abu Bakr had narrated one hundred and forty-two traditions. Omar had narrated five hundred and thirty-seven traditions. All what Othman had narrated were one hundred and forty-six traditions. And five hundred and eighty-six traditions were narrated from Imam Ali. So the total is one thousand and four hundred and eleven traditions, which if you compare to Abu Hurayra’s traditions you will find the ratio exactly as we said.
Let any prudent one think of Abu Hurayra, the short period of his being a Muslim, his obscurity, his illiteracy and all what would make him be mean, then think of the four caliphs, their priority in Islam, their attendance during the legislation of the laws of Sharia, their braveries throughout fifty-two years; in twenty-three of them they were at the service of the Prophet (s) and in twenty-nine of them, they governed the umma and mastered the other nations. They conquered the countries of Kasra and Caesar. They built towns and countries, spread Islam, and declared laws of Sharia and Sunna. So how would it be possible for Abu Hurayra, alone, to narrate so many times as much as they had narrated of the Prophet’s traditions?
Also Abu Hurayra was not like Aa’isha, although she narrated too much. The Prophet (s) had got married to her ten years before Abu Hurayra became a Muslim. She was in the house where Allah’s inspiration was revealed to the Prophet (s) and the place of coming and going of Gabriel and Michael for fourteen years. She died a little before Abu Hurayra’s death.
What a difference between the two companionships and the two ones’ acumen was! As to the companionship it was known. But as to acumen, her acumen competed with her hearing and her heart preceded her ears. She was very acute. Nothing happened to her unless she recited poetry about it. Orwa said that he had not seen anyone having more knowledge in jurisprudence, medicine, or poetry than Aa’isha. Masrouq said that he had seen some of great companions asking her about religious duties.
She was forced to spread her traditions that she sent her callers to the countries and led that great army to Basra. And in spite of all that, her traditions were two thousand and two hundred and ten. So her traditions were less than a half of Abu Hurayra’s traditions.
If you add Aa’isha’s traditions to that of Um Salama (the Prophet’s wife), who died after the death of Abu Hurayra in a long time, the rest of the Prophet’s wives, Imam Hassan, Imam Hussayn, Fatima (the daughter of the Prophet) and the four caliphs, you find that they altogether were less than Abu Hurayra’s traditions. This was a terrible thing! Let the prudent think of it.
Besides that, Abu Hurayra pretended that the Prophet (s) had informed him alone of some traditions that he would never reveal to any one. He kept them inside his conscience and buried them in his chest. And as you know that Abu Hurayra had a well-fortified chest and an inscrutable conscience! So he said: “I had kept from the Prophet two vessels. I spread the first, but if I would spread the other, this throat would be cut.”
He said: “If I told you all what I knew, people would throw potteries at me and say: Abu Hurayra is mad.”
He said: “If I told you all what I had in my chest, you would throw dung at me.”
He said: “They say that Abu Hurayra told too many traditions. I swear by Allah that if I told you all what I had heard, you would throw dunghill at me and you would never debate with me.”
He said: “I had memorized from the Prophet (s) some traditions that I didn’t tell you of. If I told you of them you would throw stones at me.”
He said: “I had memorized from the Prophet (s) five bags of traditions. I told of two of them and if I told of the third, you would throw me with stones.”
Abu Hurayra was neither the Prophet’s heir apparent nor the caliph after him to prefer to the others and tell him secrets and knowledge that he would not tell anyone of his close companions or relatives.
What was the use of telling him those secrets since he was a weak man with meanness that prevented him to say something of those secrets unless he would be thrown with stones, dung and trashes or that his throat would be cut?
Would it not be better for the Prophet to tell those secrets for the caliphs after him, who led people by one will and to whom the nations submitted and the necks of the Arabs and non-Arabs yielded? They were better than Abu Hurayara in doing that. If they had had those secrets, they would spread them throughout the countries like the rays of the sun. Far be it from the Prophet to do something in vain. Would he entrust Abu Hurayra with his secrets to be lost uselessly? And who was Abu Hurayra to be singled out of the first Muslims? (And the foremost are the foremost. These are they who are drawn nigh (to Allah)) 50:10-11.
Abu Hurayra often said: “Abu Hurayra neither keeps secret nor writes down.” How did this saying agree with his saying: “I had memorized from the Prophet two vessels. I spread one of them. If I spread the other, this throat would be cut” and the other sayings having the same meaning that he kept secret?
Let us ask those, who research for the divine secrets that the Prophet (s) entrusted Abu Hurayra with and that Abu Hurayra kept secret to preserve himself or to keep his dignity. Were those secrets of the kind of secrets that the Prophet (s) entrusted his guardian Imam Ali with? Did they concern the caliphate and caliphs after him? Were they of another kind? If they were of the first kind, why would Abu Hurayra turn away from them and contradict them completely? His opinion would be like all the other Muslims’ opinion for he was just one person among the others. But if those secrets were of another kind, he would not refrain from telling offensive and disgraceful traditions!
Did he not narrate that the Prophet slept and missed the Fajr prayer? And that the Satan came to him to disturb his prayers?
Didn’t he narrate that once the Prophet forgot and offered a two section prayer instead of four and when they asked him: Did you forget or restrict the prayer? He answered: I neither forgot nor restricted?
Did he not tell that the Prophet hurt, abused, cursed and whipped innocent people just because he became angry?
Did he not ascribe to the apostles many things that were impossible for them to commit according to the Sharia and reason? He narrated that Prophet Muhammad (s) had said: “We are worthier than Abraham to be in doubt.” He also narrated that Prophet Lot’s trust in Allah was not certain.
Did he not dare to defame Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus, who must be honored?
Did he not ascribe to Moses that he had slipped the angel of death and gouged his eye? And that once Prophet Moses ran nakedly in front of the Israelites, who looked at his private parts?
Did he not narrate that Solomon, the son of David, had broken the verdict of his father? And that he refused to say inshallah, so his deed failed?
Did he not ascribe to Allah what could never be accepted neither by the Sharia nor by reason? He said that Hell will not be full, unless Allah puts His leg in it. In his tradition about the Day of Resurrection, he said that Allah comes to people in an image different from that which they know saying to them: “I am your god.” They say: “Allah forbid!” Then He comes to them in the image, which they know! They say: “You are our god.” Abu Hurayra said that Adam was created in an image like the image of the Beneficent (Allah)! And that Allah had created Adam like His image. He was sixty cubits long and seven cubits wide.
You will find many many of his wonders in the next chapter which cause to cut the throat, so why he told of them easily? In fact he narrated those traditions as if he had done people a favor. He told of superstitions but no one threw at him a stone, dung, or trash as it was clear for any one knew him. But we are afflicted with unjust people and we do not have save Allah to resort to.
We want to draw the prudent researchers’ attention that Abu Hurayra said: “No one have narrated traditions from the Prophet (s) more than I have, except Abdullah bin Amr bin al-Aass, because he wrote down but I didn’t.”
He confessed that Abdullah bin Amr had narrated traditions more than he had. We researched on Abdullah’s traditions and we found that they were no more than seven hundred. So they were less than one seventh in comparison with Abu Hurayra’s traditions.
The researchers were very confused how to excuse Abu Hurayra in this contradiction. But Ibn Hajar al-Qastalani and sheikh Zakariya al-Ansari found an excuse when they explained this tradition in their books that Abdullah bin Amr bin al-Aass lived in Egypt and those, who went to Egypt, were very few, therefore he narrated a little of his traditions, while Abu Hurayra lived in Medina, which was the destination of Muslims from everywhere, so his traditions were so many.
Abu Hurayra’s saying was clear to abort this excuse. He acknowledged that no one had narrated traditions from the Prophet (s) more than he had except Abdullah bin Amr. The man, himself, confessed that Abdullah’s traditions were more than his so there was no way for the excuse of the two authors.
The great position and respect Abdullah bin Amr had in Egypt were a good cause to let him narrate his many traditions. There was no one else than him in Egypt, whom people knew very well, except some very few companions or travelers. So he was the only expert in the Qur’an, the Sharia and the Sunna that people resorted to. What a difference between his position in Egypt and Abu Hurayra’s position in Medina was! For Abdullah had the rank of the veracious jurisprudent and the glory of the conqueror’s son in the Egyptians’ hearts, where Abu Hurayra, in Medina, was just one of thousands of the Prophet’s companions. The delegations visiting Medina went to the famous great companions, whom Abu Hurayra was not one of. Also he was accused of narrating too much many traditions from the Prophet (s). People of Medina often blamed him by saying: “Why didn’t the Muhajireen and the Ansar narrate as much as his traditions.” His position in Medina would not let him narrate so many traditions. It was unbelievable that his traditions were more than Abdullah’s; especially after his confession that Abdullah’s traditions were more than his. In addition that Abdullah bin Amr lived long after Abu Hurayra’s death. In fact Abu Hurayra confessed of that at the beginning after the Prophet’s death, when he was not so excessive in narrating traditions. He became so excessive during the reign of Mu’awiya where there was neither Abu Bakr, Omar, Ali nor any one of the great companions whom Abu Hurayra feared.
The good tact does not accept many of Abu Hurayra’s styles of traditions and the scientific and mental criteria do not assent to them. Here are forty of his traditions in front of you. Let you ponder on them with our annotations prudently and impartially, and then you can show your point of view.
The two sheikhs; al-Bukhari and Muslim mentioned a tradition narrated by Abdur-Razak from Ma’mar from Humam bin Munabbih that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet (s) said: “Allah had created Adam like His own image in sixty cubits long.” Ahmad added from another way by Sa’eed bin al-Musayyab that Abu Hurayra had said: “..and seven cubits wide. When Allah had finished creating him, He said to him: Go and greet those sitting angels and listen to what they will greet you with. It will be your and your progeny’s greeting. Adam went and said to them: As-salamu alaykum (peace be upon you). They said: As-salamu alayk wa rahmatullah. They added (wa rahmatullah-and the mercy of Allah). Every one entered Paradise was like Adam in sixty cubits long. The human beings began to grow less gradually until nowadays.”
This could never be ascribed to Prophet Muhammad (s) or any of the other prophets nor to their guardians. Perhaps Abu Hurayra learnt that from the Jews by his friend Ka’bul Ahbar or some one else. The content of this tradition is exactly the same as the twenty-seventh paragraph of the first chapter of the Hebrew Scriptures (the Old Testament). Here is the text as it is: (Allah had created man like His own image. Like the image of Allah He had created him. Male and female He had created them).
Glorified is Allah than to describe Him with imaging, limitation and likeness. Be He exalted and they lost who ascribed that to Him. They might interpret the tradition by ascribing the pronoun (his image) to Adam himself not to Allah. Then the meaning would be that Allah had created Adam in Paradise in an image same to that when he descended to the earth. That Allah had completed him in one time and made him sixty cubits long and seven cubits wide, the same image, which his offspring on the earth saw, and he did not advance from a state to another. Adam was not a seed then became a clot then a lump of flesh then bones clothed with flesh then a fetus then a suckling infant then a weaned child then a teenager then a man with the normal length and width.
This what they, who glorify Allah and deny embodying Him, can say to interpret this tradition. But it was narrated by Abu Hurayra in these words: “Adam had been created corresponding to the image of the Beneficent (Allah).” Abu Hurayra had another tradition saying: “Prophet Moses (s) beat the rock with his stick for the Israelites and water gushed out. He said to them: “Drink water, donkeys.” Then Allah revealed to him: “You intended to compare the human beings, whom I had created according to My image, to donkeys.”
This embarrassed those who defended Abu Hurayra and made them give in to this (pronoun) looking for another interpretation.
They interpreted Abu Hurayra’s sayings: (Allah had created Adam according to His image) and (Adam had been created according to the image of the Beneficent) and in his tradition about Moses (I had created them according to my image) that Allah had created Adam and his progenies according to the attributes of Allah. Allah is alive, hearer, seer, talker, aware, willing and disliker. So He had given these attributes to Adam and his progeny.
They fell into what they fled from, because the attribute of Allah is far above comparison. This is agreed upon unanimously among those who believe in transcendence of Allah. Especially when we say that His attribute is He Himself and that He is the Truth as it is fixed in our principles of jurisprudence.
Abu Hurayra advanced in this tradition. Sometime he narrated it as above and sometime he said: “If someone of you quarrels with another, let him avoid the face because Allah had created Adam according to His image.” Sometime he said: “If someone of you hits another, let avoid the face and not say: May Allah uglify your face and the face of whoever looks like you, because Allah had created Adam according to His image.”
It was clear that he closed the way before his defenders to recede to any of the two interpretations. The pronoun his in (according to his image) could not refer to Adam in either of the two traditions but it must refer to Allah in order to correct the meaning of the traditions. One might justify forbidding to hit or uglify the face. Creating Adam as a living, hearing, seeing, talking, perceiving, willing and unwilling creature does not make it necessary to preserve the face rather than the other organs. To interpret the two traditions according to either of these interpretations was invalid. In fact these two traditions had no meaning, unless they meant the face of man for it looked like the face of Allah. Glory be to Allah, the Exalted, the Almighty!
Hence the Sunni researchers who believed in transcendence of Allah became confused about the meaning of these traditions and resorted to Allah, the most Aware.
First: If Adam was sixty cubits long, so he must be, according to the conformity of his organs, seventeen and one seventh cubits wide. If his width was seven cubits, his length must be twenty-four and a half cubits, because the width of the normal man equals two sevenths of his length. Why did Abu Hurayra say that Adam was sixty cubits long and seven cubits width? Did Adam have an unconformable structure and a disfigured form? Certainly not! Allah said: (Certainly we created man in the best make) 95:4.
Second: The greeting of Islam was legislated when Islam came. Prophet Muhammad said: “The Jews didn’t envy you a thing as much as they envied you your greeting (salaam).” If salaam did not concern this umma only, the Jews would not envy it. How did Abu Hurayra say: “When Allah had created Adam, he said to him: Go to greet those angels and listen to what they will greet you with because it is your and your progenies’ greeting.” What would the prudent researchers say about this tradition? And what would they say about his saying that people began to grow less (in size) since then until now?
The two sheikhs mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “Some people asked: “O messenger of Allah, can we see our god in the Day of Resurrection?” He said: “Would you be unable to see the sun when there were no clouds?” They said: “No, messenger of Allah.” He said: “Would you be unable to see the full moon when there were no clouds?” They said: “No, messenger of Allah.” He said: “You will see Allah like that in the Day of Resurrection. Allah gathers people and says: “Whoever worshipped a thing, let him follow it.” Then whoever worshipped the sun, would follow the sun, whoever worshipped the moon, would follow the moon and whoever worshipped the tyrants would follow the tyrants. This umma will stay with its hypocrites. Allah comes to them in a shape different from what they know and says: “I am your god.” They say: “Allah forbid! We will not leave until our god comes to us. If he comes, we will know Him.” Then Allah comes to them in the shape that they know and says: “I am your god.” They say: “Yes, You are our god.” They follow Him. Then He creates the bridge of Hell. I am the first to cross it. The prophets pray: “O Allah, save us, save us!” The bridge has hooks like the thorns of sa’dan. Have you seen the sa’dan?” They said: “Yes, we have.” The hooks are like the thorns of sa’dan, but no one knows how great they are save Allah. They snatch people according their deeds. Some will be perished and some will be felled then saved. When Allah finishes off the judgment among His people and wants to save from Hell whomever He wants of those, who witnessed that there was no god but Allah, He orders the angels to get them out of Hell. They will be known by the vestige of prostration (in prayers). Allah forbids Hell (fire) to burn the vestiges of prostration of man. The angels take them out of Hell. They are burnt. Water, called water of life, is poured upon them and they grow like the seed in the fertile ground. There is a man facing the fire and saying: “O my Lord, the wind of fire hurt me and its flame burnt me. Turn my face away from fire.” He still prays Allah until Allah says: “If I do that, you may ask me something else.” H said: “I swear by Your glory that I won’t ask You anything else.” Allah turns the man’s face away from fire. Then he says: “O my Lord, approach me to Paradise.” Allah says: “Didn’t you say not to ask me anything else? Woe to you, man! What perfidious you are!” He still prays Allah, until Allah says: “If I do that, you may ask Me something else.” He says: “I swear by Your glory that I won’t ask You anything else.” He promises Allah with many covenants not to ask Him else than that. Allah approaches him to the gate of Paradise. When he sees what is there in Paradise, he becomes quiet for a period of time then he says: “O my Lord, let me enter into Paradise.” Allah says: “Didn’t you promise not to ask Me else than that? Woe to you, man! What perfidious you are!” He says: “O my Lord, don’t make me the most miserable of Your people.” He still prays Allah, until Allah (laughs)!! When Allah laughs at him, He permits him to enter into Paradise. When he enters into Paradise, he is asked to wish what he likes. He wishes. Then he is asked to wish. He wishes until he does not find anything to wish. Allah says to him: “All this is for you and else as much as it.”
Muslim mentioned the tradition from another way that Abu Hurayra said: “Allah comes to this umma that has pious and lewd people in the Day of Resurrection in a shape different from His shape that they saw before, saying to them: “I am your Lord.” They say: “Allah forbid!” He says: “Is there a special sign between you and Him by which you know Him?” They say: “Yes, There is.” Then He bares a leg. Whoever prostrated faithfully (in the worldly life) for the sake of Allah, Allah permits him to prostrate and whoever prostrated in hypocrisy and dissimulation, Allah makes his back as one layer that whenever he wants to prostrate, he falls on his back. Then they raise their heads and see that Allah has turned into His shape that they saw at the first time. He says: “I am your Lord.” They say: “Yes, You are.” Allah creates a bridge on Hell…etc.” It was a long tradition but al-Bukhari summarized it when he interpreted sura of Noon in his Sahih. The text of the tradition is as the following: “I (Abu Hurayra) heard the Prophet (s) saying: “Our Lord bares his leg and every believer, men and women, will prostrate in front of Him, while he, who prostrated in hypocrisy and dissimulation in the worldly life, goes to prostrate but he cant for that his back becomes as one layer.”
It is a terrible tradition. I want to ask the learned and educated people if it is acceptable for them that Allah may have different shapes, which people denies some and know the others! Does Allah have a leg to be a distinctive mark leading to know Him? Why is it the leg and no any other organ? Is it possible to ascribe to Allah laughing or coming and going in movement? Is this speech rational? Is it like the Prophet’s speech? Certainly not! I swear by Who had sent him with the rightness (..An Apostle from among themselves, reciting to them His communications and purifying them, and teaching them the Book and the wisdom, although before that they were surely in manifest error) 3:164.
The Sunnis agreed unanimously that seeing Allah with the eyes was possible in the worldly life and in the afterlife and they agreed too that it would happen certainly in the afterlife. The believers would see Allah in the Day of Resurrection with their eyes but the unbelievers would never see Him at all. Most of them thought that seeing Allah would not happen in the worldly life. Some of them might say that it would be. Those, who believed in embodiment (of Allah), said that they would see Allah in the Day of Resurrection by the connection of the rays between their eyes and His (body!) to look at Him as they looked at each other. They would have no doubt about that as they had no doubt about the sun and the full moon when there were no clouds according to the tradition of Abu Hurayra. They, who believed in embodiment, contradicted the mental and traditional principles and broke the unanimity of the umma and they reneged their religion and the Islamic necessities. So we have no word with them.
As for the others of the Ash’arites, who believed in transcendence of Allah, they said that seeing Allah was an ability, which Allah would grant to the believers in particular to make them see Him not by the connection of the rays between the seer and Him, nor by facing Him, nor by limiting Him nor.. nor.. It would not be like the normal sight of people. It would be a special sight falling from the believers upon Allah. It would have no limitation, no modification, nor any of the six directions.
This is impossible and cannot be imagined, unless Allah gives the believers in the afterlife another sight with aspects different from these of the sight in this worldly life, in a way that the sight of the eyes will be like the sight of the heart (perception of the mind). This is far away from the cause of the disagreement between us. Perhaps the disagreement between us is because of the usage of the words.
The two sheikhs mentioned a tradition narrated by Abdur Razak from Ma’mar from Humam that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Paradise and the Hell disputed about what each had. The Hell said: “I am favored by having the haughty people and the tyrants. The Paradise said: “What about me that I have but the poor and miserable people.” Allah said to Paradise: “You are My mercy, which I grant to whomever I will.” He said to Hell: “You are My torture, which I punish with whomever I will.” Each of them must be filled. But Hell will not be filled until Allah puts His leg into it and it says: “Enough, enough.” Then it becomes full and some of its parts join the others.”
Whatever Abu Hurayra became wealthier, he became more stupid. He saw that Hell is larger than to be filled with the disobedient people and Allah said that He would fill it:(He said: The truth then is and the truth do I speak that I will certainly fill Hell) 38:84-85. So Abu Hurayra stopped, in front of these two matters, confused pondering how to reconcile between them, until he found a solution for this problem that Allah would put His leg into Hell, because, according to Abu Hurayra’s opinion, the leg of Allah must be greater than Hell whatever Hell was great and wide. And since Abu Hurayra was so clever and brilliant so no wonder to gather between the contradictories. But if he pondered about the saying of Allah: (He said: The truth then is and the truth do I speak that I will certainly fill Hell with you and with those among them who follow you, all) 38:84-85, his tongue would be tied and he would go away stumbling with his dirty garment, because the verse declared that Hell would be filled with him and his likes, the devils and who followed them of people.
However, this tradition is impossible according to reason and the Sharia. Does any Muslim glorifying Allah believe that Allah has a leg? Does any sane man believe that Allah puts His leg in Hell in order to be filled? What is the maxim of that? Does this speech have any importance? With which language do Paradise and Hell dispute? With what senses do they perceive and know those, who enter into them? What favor do the arrogant and tyrants have that Hell prides of while they are suffering torture? And does Paradise think that those who entered into it are pauper and miserable people while they are those, whom Allah prefers? They are the prophets, the veracious people, the martyrs, and the righteous people. I do not think that Paradise and Hell are so ignorant, stupid and dotard.
The two sheikhs mentioned a tradition narrated by Ibn Shihab from Abu Abdullah al-Agharr and Abu Salama bin Abdur-Rahman that Abu Hurayra had said: “Our god descends to the lower heaven at the last third of every night and says: Let any one ask me to grant him what he asks for.”
Was He exalted and far above ascending and descending, coming and going, moving about and any other happening. This tradition and the three before were the source of embodiment in Islam as it appeared in the time of the intellectual complication. Many heresies and aberrations came out by the Hanbalis, especially Ibn Taymiya, who ascended the minbar of the Umayyad mosque in Damascus on one Friday preaching. He said through his heresies: “Allah descends to the lower heaven every night like my descending now.” He descended one step of the minbar to show them how Allah descends in a real motion from up to down. A Maliki jurisprudent called Ibn az-Zahra’ contradicted him and denied what he had said. The people in the mosque rushed to the Maliki jurisprudent and beat him with hands and shoes severely until his turban fell down on the ground. They carried him to the judge of Hanbalis in Damascus, who was called Izzuddeen bin Muslim. He ordered to put him in prison and he punished him after that…etc.
The two sheikhs mentioned a tradition narrated by Abu Hurayra that the Prophet had said: “ There were two women with their two babies. A wolf came and snatched one of the babies. The women disputed that each pretended the baby was eaten by the wolf was of the other. They went to Prophet David to judge between them. He judged that the remained live baby was the elder woman’s baby. They went to Prophet Solomon, the son of Prophet David, and told him their story. He said: “Bring me a knife  to cut the baby into two halves to give each one a half.” The younger woman cried: “Please, don’t do that, Allah may have mercy upon you. It is of that woman.” Then Prophet Solomon judged that the baby was of the younger woman.” Abu Hurayra said: “I swear by Allah that I haven’t heard of sikkeen (knife) before that. We called it midya (knife).”
We have some notes about this tradition:
First: David (s) was a prophet, whom Allah had delegated to guide His people and entrusted to rule on the earth with justice. Allah said: (O Dawood! surely We have made you a ruler in the land; so judge between men with justice) 38:26. Allah had praised him in the holy Qur’an by saying: (..and remember Our servant Dawood, the possessor of power; surely he was frequent in returning (to Allah). Surely We made the mountains to sing the glory (of Allah) in unison with him at the evening and the sunrise, And the birds gathered together; all joined in singing with him. And We strengthened his kingdom and We gave him wisdom and a clear judgement) 38:17-20, and: (And most surely he had a nearness to Us and an excellent resort) 38:40, and: (and certainly We have made some of the prophets to excel others, and to Dawood We gave a scripture) 17:55. Allah had favoured Prophet David with the Book of Psalms. He was infallible, especially in judgement and rule according to what Allah had said in the Qur’an: (and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust) 5:45. The son Solomon was the inheritor of his father David’s knowledge, wisdom and rule. He also was an infallible prophet. Hence, how could he break his father’s judgement though he knew very well that his father was an infallible prophet? If, nowadays, a mufti having all the legal conditions of judgement judges between two persons, then it will be compulsory for all the other muftis to regard the validity of his verdict unless they know certainly that it is wrong. But among the prophets wrong was impossible because they all were infallible. So it was not possible for Solomon, who was a prophet, to break the verdict of his father, whom Allah had made prophet and ruler. His breaking the verdict of his father meant denying the will of Allah and impoliteness and impiety towards his father.
Second: The contradiction between the verdicts of these two prophets was clear, according to this tradition. It means that one of them was wrong. This was impossible for the prophets especially when they judged according to the laws of Allah. Allah said: (..and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors) 5:47.
Third: The tradition showed that David (s) had judged that the baby was the elder woman’s baby without any evidence just because she was the elder. Judgements like these didn’t come except from an ignorant man, who didn’t know anything about the legal criteria and the laws of trials. Glory be to Allah and His prophets.
Fourth: Solomon judged that the baby was the younger woman’s baby just because she feared for the baby to be cut by the knife. This was not an enough evidence for Solomon to judge according to it, especially after that the younger woman had confessed that it was the other woman’s baby and after his father’s judgement.
Fifth: I wonder, by Allah, at those who believed Abu Hurayra when he said: “I swear by Allah that I haven’t heard of sikkeen before that. We didn’t call it but midya.” Sikkeen was more common among the Arabs, and I don’t think that there was one who didn’t know its meaning. In fact, many of the common people didn’t know the midya. Did Abu Hurayra not read or hear Allah saying in sura of Yousuf: (...and gave each of them a (sikkeen) knife) 12:31.
Didn’t he, himself, narrate that the Prophet (s) had said: “He, who was made a judge for people, as if he was slaughtered without a (sikkeen) knife.”
Abu Hurayra thought that David and Solomon (when they gave judgement concerning the field..) 21:78, were contradictable in their judgements so it became easy for him to fabricate that imaginary story where he didn’t know that they both were right and the judgement and knowledge of each of them were from Allah.
The case was that some sheep had entered into a vineyard, which its grapevines’ clusters had come out, and ate it in the night. The vineyard keeper and the sheep keeper went to Prophet David (s) to judge between them. He found, according to the Sharia revealed to him by Allah, that he had to judge that the vineyard keeper would take the sheep because the value of the sheep was equal to the value of the damage in the vineyard. When he wanted to give his judgement, Allah abrogated it by revealing to Solomon, who was a partner with his father in prophecy, that the judgement in this case was to give the sheep to the vineyard keeper to make use of their milk and wool and to give the vineyard to the sheep keeper to restore it as it was before then each of them would take his property.
Allah made by this judgement a use for the vineyard by the sheep in return for his loss without possessing the sheep and made the sheep keeper work in the vineyard to restore it as before.
When Allah instructed Solomon with that, he offered it to his father. His father asked him insistently to do what Allah had revealed to him.
This is the summery of what happened between them. There was no contradiction or disagreement like any two divine laws, which one abrogated the other.
Here is the saying of Allah, the most exalted, which explains this fact: (And Dawood and Sulaiman when they gave judgement concerning the field when the people's sheep pastured therein by night, and We were bearers of witness to their judgement. So We made Sulaiman to understand it; and to each one We gave wisdom and knowledge; and We made the mountains, and the birds to celebrate Our praise with Dawood; and We were the doers) 21:78-79. Look at the saying of Allah (and to each one We gave wisdom and knowledge), you will find that both of them were right, because the knowledge and judgement of each of them were from Allah.
But Abu Hurayra thought it easy to condemn the prophets that they might misjudge like the other muftis.
(And they do not assign to Allah the attributes due to Him) 6:91, when they permitted themselves to give fatwas according to their own thinking against the prophets, who were the means between Allah and His people. They thought that the prophets might misjudge even in the legal judgements and laws, which were, no doubt, revealed to them from Allah (and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers) 5:44.
If discernment returned to their minds, they would know that the prophets didn’t give decisions and judgements according to their thought because they would know that by revelation. This was possible for the mujtahids of umma because it was the best of what they can do. But it was impossible for the prophets because it often led to one’s own thought.
If the prophets judged according to their thought, it would be possible for the other mujtahids to contradict them. Then the dignity of prophecy and the prophets would be lost. Could any faithful mujtahid dare to contradict Prophet Muhammad (s) and break his verdict? Certainly not! It is blasphemy unanimously!
The holy Qur’an declares clearly that Prophet Muhammad (s) acted according to the revelation (..nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed) 53:3-4. So did all the prophets and apostles (peace be upon them all).
The two sheikhs mentioned a tradition that Abu Hurayra had said: “Prophet Muhammad said: Sulayman ibn Dawood (Solomon, the son of David) said: I will go to bed with a hundred of women tonight. Each woman will give birth to a boy, who will fight for the sake of Allah. The angel said to him: Say inshallah. He did not say and went to bed with them. No one of them did bear except one, who gave birth to half a human being. If he said inshallah, he wouldn’t break his oath and his desire would be realized.”
We also have some notes about this tradition:
First: The human power is unable to go to bed with one hundred women in one night, however strong the man is. This is against the rules of nature and cannot be happened at all.
Second: It was not possible for the prophet Solomon (s) to turn his back on the will of Allah, especially after the precaution of the angel to him. What prevented him to say inshallah? Was he not the prophet, whom Allah had delegated to guide people in the way of Allah? It was the ignorant that turned their backs on the will of Allah and ignored that all their affairs were in His hand! The prophets were far above the inattention of the ignorant. They were far above what the dotards thought.
Third: Abu Hurayra was confused about the number of Solomon’s wives. Sometimes he said they were one hundred, and sometimes he said they were ninety, seventy, and sixty. All these traditions were mentioned in al-Bukhari, Muslim, and Ahmed’s books. I do not know what they would say, those who defended this man! Would they say that Solomon had done this thing several times with his wives? So they were a hundred at the first time and ninety at the second time and seventy or sixty at the other times. And every time the angel precautioned him but he did not say inshallah. I do not think they would say that. It would be better for them to say: The tear became wider for the patcher to repair.A liar has no good memory.
The two sheikhs mentioned a tradition that Abu Hurayra had said: “The prophet Muhammad (s) said: The angel of death came to Moses and said to him: Respond to the order of your god! Moses slapped the angel of death on his eye and gouged it. The angel of death returned to Allah and said to Him: You sent me to one of Your slaves, who did not want to die. He gouged my eye. Allah restored to him his eye and said to him: Go back to My slave and say to him: If you want to live, you are to put your hand on a bull’s back and see how many hairs stick in your hand. You will live for every hair a year.”
Ahmed bin Hanbal mentioned this tradition in his Musnad that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet (s) said: The angel of death used to come to people visibly. He came to Moses. Moses slapped him and gouged his eye…” Ibn Jareer at-Tabari in his book Tareekh al-Umam wel- Mulook (the history of the nations and the kings) vol. 1, mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The angel of death used to come to people visibly until he came to Moses. Moses slapped him and gouged his eye…” and at the last of the tradition that “the angel of death began to come to people invisibly after the death of Moses.”
You note clearly that this tradition has many things, which can never be ascribed to Allah, His prophets, and His angels. Is it suitable for Allah to choose among His people one, who assaults like the tyrants even upon the angels of Allah just because of anger and acts like the mutinous arrogant or to hate death so much like the ignorant? Was that possible for Moses, whom Allah had chosen for His mission and entrusted with His revelation? Was that possible for Moses, whom Allah had favored with His talking to and made one of the best prophets? How did he hate death while he desired to meet Allah and to be near Him? What was the guilt of the angel of death, who was but a messenger from Allah to him to be slapped and his eye be gouged? Was it suitable for the arch-prophets to insult and beat the angels, who were sent by Allah to inform them of the missions and orders of Allah? Allah and His prophets and angels be far above that! Why did we disavow the dwellers of ar-Rass, the Pharaoh, Abu Jahl and the likes and curse them day and night? Was that not because they offended the prophets when they came to them with the missions and orders of Allah? How do we, then, ascribe the same to the prophets? Allah forbid! What a great slander it is!
It is well-known that the power of the human beings altogether, or in fact, the power of all the creatures since the beginning of creation until the Day of Resurrection, cannot stand against the power of the angel of death. How was it easy for Moses to beat him? Did the angel not defend himself although he was able to put Moses to death especially that he was ordered by Allah to do that? And when did the angel have an eye to be gouged? And do not forget that the angel lost his right for the slap and the gouged eye. He wasn’t ordered by Allah to avenge himself upon Moses, in whose Torah Allah had said: (that life is for life, and eye for eye, and nose for nose, and ear for ear, and tooth for tooth, and (that there is) reprisal in wounds), nor Allah blamed Moses, but He revered him by giving him the option to choose between dying or living for many other years as much as the hairs of the bull stuck in his hand.
I swear by the dignity of rightness and the honour of truthfulness and by their being above nullness and falsehood, that this man had burdened his defenders with what they couldn’t bear and overtaxed them with his traditions, which their minds couldn’t put up with, especially his saying: (the angel of death used to come to people visibly before the death of Moses but he came to them invisibly after the death of Moses). May Allah save us from torpor of mind and nonsense of saying and doing. There is no power save in Allah, the most Exalted, the Almighty.
The two sheikhs mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The prophet Muhammad (s) said: “The Israelites bathed nakedly. They looked at each other’s private parts. Moses bathed alone. They said: “By Allah, nothing prevented Moses to bathe with us, unless he had a hernia.” Once Moses went to bathe, He put his cloths on a rock. The rock ran away with Moses’ cloths. Moses followed the rock crying: “O rock, my cloths! O rock, my cloths!” The Israelites looked at Moses private parts and said that Moses was all right. After that the rock stopped. Moses took his cloths and began to beat the rock. I swear by Allah that the rock had six or seven scars.”
Al-Bukhari and Muslim mentioned in their Sahihs that Abu Hurayra had said that it was this event, which Allah had referred to in His saying: (O you who believe! be not like those who spoke evil things of Musa, but Allah cleared him of what they said, and he was worthy of regard with Allah) 33:69.
You see what impossibility there was in this tradition. It was not possible to defame the prophet Moses, who had the honour of talking with Allah, by unveiling his private parts in front of his people, because that would disgrace him and diminish his dignity, especially when they saw him running after a rock, which didn’t see or hear, and crying: “O rock, my cloths! O rock, my cloths!” Then to stop at the rock in front of people nakedly and beat it while the people were looking at his private parts as if he was mad!
If that thing were true, Allah would have done it. Then why would Moses be angry to punish the rock, which was obliged to do so because it had no mind or option? What was the use of beating a rock, which had no any feeling?
The running away of the rock with Moses cloths wouldn’t give him any excuse to disgrace himself by unveiling his private parts in front of people. He could stay in his place until someone brought him his cloths or any thing else to veil himself like any sane man would do if something like that happened to him.
The running away of the rock was a miracle and an extraordinary thing. It would not happen unless there was a cause for challenge or to prove a very great thing like the moving of the tree for the prophet Muhammad (s) in Mecca, when the polytheists suggested to the Prophet (s) to make it move. Allah made the tree move from its place to another to prove Muhammad’s prophecy and to certify his mission. It was clear that the case of Moses bathing in the sea didn’t required miracles or any challenge, especially when it would cause a scandal for the prophet in front of his people in a way that any one saw or heard about it would scorn him and make fun of him. As to prove that he had no hernia was not so important that it required disgracing the prophet or diminishing his dignity nor it was one of the necessities, which required miracles. It could be known easily by his wives, who might, then, tell the truth.
Let suppose that he had a hernia, what was the wrong of that? The prophet Shu’ayb (Jethro) became blind and the prophet Ayyoub (Job) was sick for forty years. All of the prophets became sick and died. It was not a defect that they had some sicknesses, especially when they were unknown by people like hernia. It was not possible for them to have something affecting their minds or their generosity or something that would lead people to keep away from them or make fun of them. Certainly the hernia was not of that kind.
It was not narrated by anyone that the Israelites thought Moses had a hernia except by Abu Hurayra!
But the event that Allah referred to in the holy Qur’an by saying: (O you who believe! be not like those who spoke evil things of Musa, but Allah cleared him of what they said) 33:69, was, as narrated by Imam Ali and Ibn Abbas, about the case that the Israelites accused him of killing Aaron. It was also said that it was about the case of the prostitute, whom Qaroun (Croesus) had seduced to accuse Moses of having a corrupted relationship with her but Allah acquitted him from this accusation where she, herself, said the truth. And it was said that they hurt him by ascribing to him magic, lying and madness after they saw the miracles.
I wonder at al-Bukhari and Muslim that they added these traditions to the virtues of Moses! Was beating the angel and gouging his eye a virtue? Was running in front of people nakedly honour? What was the meaning of this nonsense? The prophet Moses was far above that. It was enough for him what the holy Qur’an had declared about his virtues and honourable position.
The two sheikhs mentioned a long tradition of Abu Hurayra’s saying that: “The Prophet (s) said: In the Day of Resurrection Allah gathers all peoples, the first and the last of them, in one place. The caller can see them all and they all can hear him. The sun comes nearer. People cannot tolerate the grief and worry. They say to each other: “Don’t you see what grief you are in? Don’t you find someone to intercede for you with your god?” They go to Adam (s) and say to him: “You are the father of the human beings. Allah created you with His hands and blew in you some of His mercy. He ordered the angels to prostrate in front of you and they did. Please intercede for us with your god. Don’t you see what we are in?” Adam says: “My god became so angry today to a degree that He hadn’t become so angry before nor He will be so angry after that. He forbade me to eat from the tree but I disobeyed Him. Myself, myself, myself! Go to another than me. Go to Noah.” They go to Noah and say to him: “O Noah, you were the first prophet to the people of the earth. Allah called you a grateful slave. Please intercede for us with your god. Don’t you see what we are in?” Noah says: “My god became so angry today that He hadn’t become so angry like that before, nor He will be so angry like that after today because I had, once, cursed my people. I shall keep to myself, myself, myself! Go to another than me. Go to Abraham.” They go to Abraham (s) and say to him: “O Abraham, you are the prophet of Allah and His true friend among all the people of the earth, please intercede for us with your god. Don’t you say what we are in?” He says: “My god became so angry today that He hadn’t become so angry like that before, nor he will be so angry like that after today. I had told lies three times. I will keep to myself, myself, myself! Go to another than me. Go to Moses.” They go to Moses and say to him: “O Moses, you are the prophet of Allah. He preferred you with His mission and talked with you alone among all the people; please intercede for us with your god. Don’t you see what we are in?” He says: “My god became so angry today that He hadn’t become so angry like that before nor He will be so angry like that after today. I had killed someone, whom I was not ordered to kill. I will keep to myself, myself! Myself! Go to another than me. Go to Jesus.” They go to Jesus (s) and say to him: “O Jesus, you are the prophet of Allah and His word, which He communicated to Miriam (the Virgin Mary) and a spirit from Him. You spoke to people when you were in the cradle; please intercede to us with your god. Don’t you see what we are in?” Jesus (s) says: “My god became so angry today that He hadn’t become so angry like that before, nor He will be so angry like that after today. (Abu Hurayra did not mention guilt) I will keep to myself, myself! Myself! Go to Muhammad.” They go to Muhammad (s) and say to him: “O Muhammad, you are the prophet of Allah and the last of the prophets. Allah forgave you all your guilts. Please intercede for us with your god. Don’t you see what we are in?” Then I (Muhammad) go to be under the Empyrean and prostrate in front of my god. Allah grants me to praise and thank Him in a way that no one was granted with before me. Then it is said: “O Muhammad, raise your head and ask whatever you like, you will be granted that and intercede, your intercession will be accepted.” I say: “O my god, my umma! O my god, my umma!” It is said: “O Muhammad, enter among your umma those, who won’t be punished, from the right gate and they will participate the other gates with people.”
Abu Hurayra, in this tradition, did dare audaciously to defame and disgrace the prophets, whom Allah had chosen to spread His missions among His people, in a way that the divine Sharia and Sunna denied it completely. The Sunna had a way of glorifying the prophets that made the hearts full of sacred regard and respect and the fronts submit to them. It was the Sunna of the prophet Muhammad (s) and his holy Qur’an that spread the glories of these prophets (s) allover the universe, on the land, in the sea and filled the ears of the age with praising them. All what the nations knew about these prophets of glory, which made the eyes submit in front of, and greatness, which made the ambitions cringe and lower their wings meanly before, was by virtue of the Qur’an and Muhammad’s Sunna. Without the infallible Sunna of the prophet Muhammad (s) and the holy Qur’an, no one of the later generations would know any thing about these prophets (s) where there was no certain evidence or a true news or a reasonable narration about them. So the prophet Muhammad (s) preserved the history of the prophets and the nations and completed, by the Sunna and the Qur’an, the noble characters and the best of morals and manners. He spread the divine laws and the wise systems that were revealed to him from Allah, which would insure the happiness of the worldly life and the afterlife. They both, the Qur’an and the Sunna, included science, wisdom, politics, the dignity of the life and the hereafter and preserved the Arabic language until the Day of Resurrection.
This tradition of Abu Hurayra, with its prattle and nonsense, was strange and different from the speech of the prophet Muhammad (s) and too far contrary to the Sunna. It was too far from our Prophet to ascribe what this tasteless trivial tradition included. Adam was far above disobedience by committing a fault made Allah be so angry with him. Allah forbade him to go near the tree to exalt and guide him. Glory be to Noah. He would not curse any people except the enemies of Allah in order to be nearer to his god. Abraham was too much honest than to lie! He never did a thing made Allah be so angry with him. Moses did not kill anyone, whom Allah would be so angry for, but he killed someone that had no sanctity or value. Allah, the most exalted, would not treat His prophets but with benevolence as He said: (Is the reward of goodness but goodness) 55:60. The prophets were greater than to think of their god that He became so angry with them that He would never be angry like that neither before nor after. Also the prophet Muhammad would never tell about them but praise and glorification.
How can people deliberate and intercommunicate in the Day of Resurrection? They are as Allah says: (every woman giving suck shall quit in confusion what she suckled, and every pregnant woman shall lay down her burden, and you shall see men intoxicated, and they shall not be intoxicated but the chastisement of Allah will be severe) 22:2, and (The day on which a man shall fly from his brother, And his mother and his father and his spouse and his son. Every man of them shall on that day have an affair, which will occupy him) 80:34-37.
How can they, in that difficult situation, go to the prophets, who are, then, on the A’araf (the partition between Paradise and Hell)? What prevents them to go to the prophet Muhammad from the first time? Is he not of the glorious status, the high rank and the acceptable intercession? No one, then, ignore him. Why doesn’t Adam or Noah or Abraham or Moses advise them to go to Muhammad directly? Can’t any one of the prophets comfort those poor people at the first they ask for intercession? Do the prophets not know the glorious status of the prophet Muhammad at that day or do they prefer to increase the suffering of those poor believers asking for help?
We may ask Abu Hurayra about those poor people: are they from the nation of Muhammad or from another nation? If they are from the nation of Muhammad, what will prevent them to go to him from the first time they ask for intercession? And if they are from another nation, of course he won’t abort their efforts and disappoint them with all his mercy that Allah has granted him and has made him the means to intercede between Him and His people. Certainly he will not disappoint them since he is the hope for the desirous and the peace for the scared. He answers the needy with his liberality and sates the thirsty asker before his echo comes back.
The two sheikhs mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The prophet Muhammad (s) said: We are worthier of doubt than Abraham when he said (as in the holy Qur’an): (And when Ibrahim said: My Lord! Show me how Thou givest life to the dead, He said: What! And do you not believe? He said: Yes, but that my heart may be at ease) 2:260. May Allah have mercy upon Lot; he recoursed to a strong support. If I stayed in prison as long as Yousuf (Joseph) had stayed, I would respond to the inviter.”
This tradition was impossible for some reasons:
First: This tradition proved that Abraham was in doubt but Allah said: (And certainly We gave to Ibrahim his rectitude before) 21:51, and: (And thus did We show Ibrahim the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and that he might be of those who are sure) 6:75. Sureness is the best degree of knowledge. He, who is sure of a thing, cannot be in doubt about it. Reason, itself, denies that the prophets, all of them, were in doubt about things. It is too obvious.
As to the saying of Allah: (And when Ibrahim said: My Lord! show me how Thou givest life to the dead) 2:260, it might mean that Abraham asked his god about how to give life to the dead and not about giving life, itself. This wouldn’t be, unless the giving of life to the dead was certain for him.
That is to say: using how in a question means to ask about the state of something existed and known for the asker and the asked one. For example: How is Zeid? means that is he all right or sick? And how did Zeid do? means that did he do well or bad? And so his saying (My Lord! show me how Thou givest life to the dead) was but a request to be shown how what he was certain of-giving life to the dead-would be done.
But because that someone, who didn’t know the high status of Abraham, might think that this request of Abraham came out from his doubt in the power of Allah to give life to the dead, Allah wanted to remove this illusion so He said to him: (What! and do you not believe? He said: Yes). Abraham said: “yes” to mean: “I believe in the power of giving life, but I requested that in order to ease my heart when I would see how the dead could be alive again after the separation of its parts in the graves, in the caves, inside the stomachs of the beasts and in the sites of dying in the deserts or in the seas.” As if he was eager to see how that would happen so he said (to ease my heart), which meant to cool his burning thirst by seeing such.
This was the meaning of the verse. Whoever ascribed doubt in the power of Allah to Abraham, would definitely go astray.
Second: It was clear from his saying: “We are worthier than Abraham in doubt.” that the prophet Muhammad and all of the other prophets were in doubt and worthier than Abraham in that.
Suppose that he didn’t mean all the prophets, but definitely he meant himself. The text was so clear to show that the prophet Muhammad was worthier than Abraham in doubt. Glory to Allah! This was a great slander! The consensus and the mental and traditional criteria certified the nullity of this tradition.
We don’t know, I swear by Allah, why the prophet Muhammad was worthier than Abraham in doubt, in spite of that Allah had granted him what He hadn’t granted Abraham and all the other prophets or the angels!
The Prophet Muhammad’s guardian, Imam Ali, who was the gate of the Prophet’s town of knowledge and was to him as was Aaron to Moses, but there was no prophet after him, said: “If the blind between Allah and me was removed, I wouldn’t be more sure (than I am sure of Allah).” That was to say that his faith in Allah was at the highest degree and it would not increase because he, really, knew Allah very well and he was so sure about Him and his power. Thus was Imam Ali, so how about the master of the prophets and the last of them all (peace be upon them)!
Third: in his saying: “ May Allah have mercy upon Lot, he resorted to a strong support” he criticised Lot and accused him of being not so confident in Allah, where, in fact, Lot wanted to provoke his tribe and relatives and to overcome by his assistants for the sake of Allah to order the people to do good deeds and forbid them to do bad deeds. The prophet Muhammad (s) would never blame Lot or disprove his saying. The prophet Muhammad (s) would never think of Lot else than what he deserved as great glorious prophet, but he had warned that there would be many liars fabricating traditions!
Fourth: in his saying: “If I stayed in prison as long as Yousuf (Joseph) stayed, I would respond to the inviter” he preferred, clearly, Yousuf to the prophet Muhammad. This contradicted the consensus, the books of Hadith and what was proved to be a necessity among the Muslims.
If you said that the prophet Muhammad was humble to admire Yousuf’s prudence, patience and wisdom in proving his innocence until the truth appeared and he was set free from prison, we would say that it was not possible for the Prophet to say such even in humility, because if he was tried by the same problem of Yousuf, he would be more prudent and patient to clear the truth. How impossible it was for the Prophet to respond to the inviter by just inviting him to get out of prison and lose the wisdom, which Yousuf preferred when he said to the messenger of the king when set him free from prison as Allah says: (Go back to your lord and ask him, what is the case of the women who cut their hands; surely my Lord knows their guile. He said: How was your affair when you sought Yusuf to yield himself (to you)? They said: Remote is Allah (from imperfection), we knew of no evil on his part. The chief's wife said: Now has the truth become established: I sought him to yield himself (to me), and he is most surely of the truthful ones) 12:50-51.
He didn’t get out of prison until his innocence shone like the sun without clouds.
So Yousuf was prudent and patient that he didn’t try to get out of prison so soon until he got what he wanted. More than that the prophet Muhammad (s) was prudent, patient, lenient, firm, determined, wise and infallible in all doings and sayings. It was he, who if they put the sun in his right hand and the moon in his left hand in order to give up his mission, would never do.
It would be better for Abu Hurayra to say: if the prophet Muhammad stayed in prison many times as long as Yousuf stayed, he would never beseech anybody to get him out of prison as Yousuf did when (he said to him whom he knew would be delivered of the two: Remember me with your lord) 12:42. That was to say: describe my morals and manners to the king and tell him about my story that he may have mercy on me and rid me of this trouble (but the Shaitan caused him to forget mentioning (it) to his lord) 12:42, that the Satan made the man forget to mention Yousuf to the king (so he remained in the prison a few years) 12:42. The forgetfulness of the man and the stay of Yousuf in prison for some years were a warning for him because he did the unworthier thing. He didn’t have to beseech but the mercy of Allah. It was mentioned by the prophet Muhammad as such.
Prophet Muhammad (s) suffered from what was greater than the trouble of Yousuf’s prison and much worse than all what the family of the prophet Jacob (s) suffered. He never became weak or gave in. He didn’t beseech but Allah. He and all his tribe (the Hashimites) were blockaded in the defile for years. They were in an absolute distress. He, his tribe and the believers all were offended too much that no any prophet before him suffered like him. They (the polytheists) clamoured him and his tribe as possible as they could. Here are some of the sayings of Allah: (And when those who disbelieved devised plans against you that they might confine you or slay you or drive you away) 8:30, and (If you will not aid him, Allah certainly aided him when those who disbelieved expelled him, he being the second of the two, when they were both in the cave, when he said to his companion: Grieve not, surely Allah is with us. So Allah sent down His tranquillity upon him and strengthened him with hosts which you did not see) 9:40, and (And Allah did certainly assist you at Badr when you were few) 3:123 and (When you ran off precipitately and did not wait for any one, and the Apostle was calling you from your rear, so He gave you another sorrow instead of (your) sorrow) 3:153 and (When they came upon you from above you and from below you, and when the eyes turned dull, and the hearts rose up to the throats, and you began to think diverse thoughts of Allah. There the believers were tried and they were shaken with severe shaking) 33:10-11 and (and on the day of Hunain, when your great numbers made you vain, but they availed you nothing and the earth became strait to you notwithstanding its spaciousness, then you turned back retreating. Then Allah sent down His tranquillity upon His Apostle and upon the believers) 9:25-26, in addition to his other generous situations, in which he met many gravities, but in all of them he was firmer than the mountains. He met the difficulties with a great heart and a steady soul, so they faded in front of his wide mind and gentle character. He didn’t beseech save Allah to get him out from distress into easiness. He carried out his affairs by patience and depending upon Allah. So where were his determination, patience, prudence and wisdom relative to those of Joseph, Jacob, Isaac, Abraham and the rest of the prophets (peace be upon them, all)?
The two sheikhs mentioned in many ways a tradition that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet said: while Ayyoub (Job) was bathing (in the sea) nakedly, gold locusts fell down over him. He began to collect them in his cloths. His god said to him: “Couldn’t I make you have no need for this?” He said: “Yes, by Your glory, but I needed Your blessing.”
No one believed this saying except those of no insight or sense. Creating gold locusts was a miracle and an extraordinary thing. Allah did not do like that except where there was a necessity. For example, if proving the prophecy depended on a miracle, Allah would do to be an evidence for the prophecy and the mission. Allah would not create gold locusts in vain to fall down over Ayyoub while he was bathing nakedly alone.
If they fell down over him and he began to collect them in his cloths, it would be a reasonable doing. It would be a gift from Allah, who favored him with, and it must be thanked by accepting it respectably and not by giving it one’s back depreciatingly, because turning away from it would be ingratitude, which the prophets were far above.
If the prophets gathered wealth, they would spend it for the sake of Allah to gain His contentment. They would make use of it to carry out their reformative plans. Allah was aware of their intents so He would never blame them for gathering wealth.
The two sheikhs mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “Prophet Muhammad said: An ant pinched one of the prophets (Moses, as said by at-Tarmithi). He ordered to burn the village of ants and it was burned. Allah revealed to him: “Why did you burn one of the nations that praised Allah, because an ant had pinched you?”
Abu Hurayra was fond of the prophets. He wandered about every odd disaster, which sored the eyes and blocked the ears. The prophets had longer patience, greater hearts, and higher statuses than what this dotard told about.
The Prophet Muhammad’s guardian, Imam Ali bin Abu Talib (s) said in one of his speeches: “I swear by Allah, if I had been given the seven states with all what was there under their skies to disobey Allah by snatching a crust of a barely seed from an ant, I would never do. This worldly life, for me, is cheaper than a leaf in the mouth of a locust crunching it. What had Ali to do with a passing ease and a transient pleasure?”
Although Imam Ali was not a prophet, but a veracious guardian, his case represented the infallibility of the prophets against what the ignorant ascribed to them. Allah did never choose, for His missions, anyone, who would not be far away from those accusations. Glory be to Allah and exalted was He above what the idiots say!
I don’t know, by Allah, what the defenders of this tradition would say about this prophet, who tortured the ants with fire, in spite of the prophet Muhammad’s saying: “No one is to torture with fire but Allah.” They agreed unanimously that burning with fire was forbidden for all the animate beings, except that when a man made another man die by burning him with fire, then the dead man’s guardian had the right to burn the doer with fire.
Abu Dawood mentioned a true tradition that Ibn Abbas said that the Prophet (s) had forbidden killing the ant, the bee, the hoopoe, and the shrike.
The two sheikhs mentioned a tradition that Abu Hurayra had said: “Prophet Muhammad offered one of the day prayers, I think it was the Asr prayer, in two sections (rak’ah) instead of four and he finished it. Then he stood up to a piece of wood was in the front of the mosque and put his hand on it. Among the people in the mosque were Abu Bakr and Omar, but they feared to ask the Prophet about that. The hurried people left the mosque and asked if the prayer had been lessened. Someone, whom the Prophet called Thul-Yadayn, asked the Prophet: “Did you forget or lessen the prayer?” The Prophet said: “I didn’t forget and the prayer wasn’t lessened.” Thul-Yadayn said: “Yes, you forgot.” The Prophet offered two additional rak’ahs, made tassleem (the ending of a prayer), said Allahuakbar (Allah is great) and prostrated for the forgetness.”
This tradition was untrue for many reasons:
First: It was not possible that this forgetness came from someone, who went to prayer with heart and soul. It came from that, who was inattentive in his prayers. The prophets were too far above inattentiveness and too glorious than to be defamed by the swindlers. We have not found that such forgetness happened to any of the prophets especially the master and the last of them (peace be upon them).
I swear by the master of the prophets (s) that if such forgetness came from me, shame and shyness would occupy me and the prayers, behind me, would make fun of me and of my worship, so how about the prophets, whom Allah had chosen to be the excellent models for people!
Second: Prophet Muhammad said: “I didn’t forget and the prayer wasn’t lessened.” So how would it be for him, after that, to declare that he forgot? Suppose that he was not infallible in forgetting, but he was infallible not to be obstinate and imprudent in his sayings if they were in contradictory to the reality. This was certain among all the Muslims.
Third: Abu Hurayra was confused in this tradition and his sayings were different. Sometimes he said: “The prophet Muhammad led us in one of the day prayers; either the Zuhr (noon) prayer or the Asr (afternoon) prayer.” He was doubt between them. Another time he said: “The Prophet led us in the Asr prayer”, as if he was certain. In the third he said: “While I was offering the Zuhr prayer with the Prophet…” These traditions were in al-Bukhari and Muslim’s Sahihs. Those, who explained the Sahihs, were confused to a degree led them into affectedness and they took upon themselves what they couldn’t bear in order to defend these traditions as they did when they refuted the opinion of az-Zuhri when he confirmed that Thul-Yadayn and Thush-shamalayn was the same man.
Fourth: The tradition showed that the Prophet left his place of praying, stood up and put his hand on a piece of wood in the front the mosque. The hurried people left the mosque and said: “Was the prayer lessened?” Thul-Yadayn said to the Prophet: “Did you forget or lessen the prayer.” The Prophet said: “I didn’t forget nor lessen the prayer.” He said to the Prophet: “Yes, you forgot.” Then the Prophet said to his companions: “Was he right?” They said: “Yes, he was.” Another one mentioned by Abu Hurayra that the Prophet entered the room (of the mosque) and came out then the people returned. All that invalidated the prayer, because according to the Islamic Sharia, the prayer is a continuous unit, which can not be interrupted. So how could the Prophet depend on his first two rak’ahs to complete them by other two rak’ahs to be four, the right number of rak’as for the Zuhr or Asr prayer?
Fifth: Thul-Yadayn, who was mentioned in the tradition, was the same as Thush-Shamalayn, Ibn Abd Amr, the ally of the tribe of Zuhra. The two names referred to one person. He was martyred during the battle of Badr. That was confirmed by the imam of the tribe of Zura and the best of those, who knew about their allies, Muhammad bin Muslim az-Zuhri, as it was mentioned by Ibn Abdul-Birr in his book al-Isstee’ab, ibn Hajar in his book al-Issaba, Sharh Sahih Muslim and Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari. Also the same was confirmed by Sufyan ath-Thawri and Abu Haneefa when they considered the tradition as untrue one and gave fatwas contradicting it. An-Nassa’ei declared in his tradition that Thul-Yadayn and Thush-Shamalayn referred to the same person. He said: …Thush-Shamalayn ibn Amr said to him (to the Prophet): “Did you lessen the prayer or did you forget?” The Prophet said: “What did Thul-Yadayn say?” So he confirmed that Thush-Shamalayn was the same as Thul-Yadayn. Clearer than that was a tradition mentioned by Ahmed bin Hanbal narrated by Abu Salama bin Abdur Rahman and Abu Bakr bin Abu Khaythama that Abu Hurayra had said: “Prophet Muhammad offered the prayer of Zuhr or Asr in two rak’ahs and finished it by tasleem (saying assalamu alaykum). Thush-Shamalayn bin Abd Amr, the ally of the tribe of Zuhra, said to him: “Did you lessen the prayer or did you forget?” The Prophet (s) said: “What did Thul-Yadayn say?” They said: “He was right.”
Abu Musa mentioned a tradition narrated by Ja’far al-Mustaghfiri from Muhammad bin Katheer from al-Awza’ee from az-Zuhri from Sa’eed bin al-Mussayab, Abu Salama and Obaydullah bin Abdullah that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet ended the prayer after two rak’ahs instead of four. Abd Amr bin Nadhla, who was from the tribe of Khuza’a and an ally of the tribe of Zuhra, stood up and said to the Prophet: “Did you lessen the prayer or did you forget?”…including the saying of the Prophet (was Thush-Shamalayn true?)
All these traditions showed clearly that Thul-Yadayn, mentioned in Abu Hurayra’s tradition was Thush-Shamalayn ibn Abd Amr, the ally of the tribe of Zuhra. No doubt that Thush-Shamalayn, mentioned above, was killed in the battle of Badr more than five years before Abu Hurayra became a Muslim. His killer was Ossama aj-Jasmi. Ibn Abdul Birr and all of the historians said that. So how could it be possible for Abu Hurayra to meet him in one prayer behind the prophet Muhammad (s)?!
Some, who defended Abu Hurayra, justified that the companion might narrate about something that he didn’t attend either by hearing about it from the Prophet or from another companion. Hence the death of Thul-Yadayn five years before Abu Hurayra became a Muslim would not prevent Abu Hurayra to narrate the tradition.
This excuse was definitely wrong. Abu Hurayra pretended that he had attended the prayer, and that was confirmed by all those, who mentioned this tradition. Al-Bukhari mentioned the tradition in his Sahih narrated by Adam bin Shu’ba from Sa’d bin Ibrahim that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet (s) led us in the Zuhr prayer or Asr prayer... etc.”
Muslim mentioned in his Sahih that Muhammad bin Seereen had said: “I heard Abu Hurayra saying: The prophet Muhammad (s) led us in one of the day prayers, either the Zuhr prayer or the Asr prayer…etc.”
Imam at-Tahawi was confused about this tradition. He said that it was a true tradition, although he was certain that Thul-Yadayn was Thush-Shamalayn himself, the ally of the tribe of Zuhra, who was martyred in the battle of Badr, five years before Abu Hurayra became a Muslim, so it was impossible for them to be together at one prayer. Hence he was obliged to interpret Abu Hurayra’s saying as the following: “The Prophet led us in prayer (metaphorically) that he meant: he led the Muslims in prayer.”
The answer for their excuse was that Abu Hurayra confirmed his definite attendance in a way, which could not be interpreted here and there. Muslim mentioned a tradition in his Sahih that Abu Hurayra had said: “While I was offering the Zuhr prayer with the prophet Muhammad (s), he ended the prayer after two rak’as…etc.” What about this saying? Was it possible to look for excuses to defend it? Certainly not! But we were afflicted with those, who never ponder! We do not have but Allah to resort to!
The two sheikhs mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The prophet Muhammad (s) said: O Allah, Muhammad is not but a human being. He becomes angry like the other human beings. I had a promise with You that You would not break it. Every believer I hurt, abused, cursed or whipped, let it be expiation for his guilt and a cause for making him closer to You.”
It was not probable for Prophet Muhammad and all the prophets to hurt, whip, abuse or curse anyone, who did not deserve that whether they were comfortable or angry. In fact they never became angry in vain save for the sake of Allah. Glory be to Allah. He is far above than to send prophets, who would be moved by anger to whip, curse, abuse or hurt innocent people. The prophets were far above every saying or doing would conflict with their infallibility or with all what would not be fit for the prudent and the wise.
The pious and the obscene, the believer and the unbeliever knew well that hurting, whipping, abusing or cursing an innocent one was ugly injustice and frank transgression, which the believers denied. Then how would it be probable for the master of the prophets to do such? The Prophet said: “Abusing a Muslim is transgression.” Abu Hurayra said: “It was said to the Prophet: “O messenger of Allah, you may curse the hypocrites.” He said: “I had not been sent (by Allah) to be a curser but as mercy for people.” Thus he was with the hypocrites, how would he be with the innocent believers? He (s) said: “The cursers will never be intercessors or witnesses in the Day of Resurrection.” Abdullah bin Amr said: “The Prophet (s) wasn’t impolite or dishonest. He (the Prophet) said: “The best of you are those, who are high-minded.” Anass bin Malik said: “The Prophet wasn’t impolite, a curser or an abuser.” Abu Zarr said to his brother when he had heard about the Prophet (s): “Ride to that valley and try to hear from him.” When his brother came back, he said to him: “I found him ordering with the noble characters.” Abdullah bin Amr said: “I wrote down everything I heard from the Prophet (s) in order to memorize it. Some people of Quraysh forbade me to do that and said: “Do you write everything you hear from the Prophet whereas he talks whether he is comfortable or angry?” I told the Prophet about that. He pointed to his mouth with his finger and said: “Write down! I swear by Him, in Whose hand my soul is, that nothing comes out of it (his mouth) but rightness.” Amr bin Shu’ayb said that his father had said that his grand father had said: “Do I write down whatever I hear from you?” He said: “Yes, you do.” I said: “Comfortable or angry you are?” He said: “Yes, because I don’t say at all save rightness.”
Someone asked Aa’isha (the Prophet’s wife) about the morals of the prophet Muhammad (s). She said to him: “Did you read the Qur’an?” He said: “Yes, I did.” She said: “The Qur’an was his morals.”
What a word it was that indicated her eloquence and knowledge of the very morals of the Prophet (s). No wonder! She saw him, with the Qur’an in front of his eyes, imitating its guidance, seeking light in its sciences, worshipping according to its orders and forbids, being well-mannered with its ethics, being disposed for its wisdom, following its influences and tracking its suras. You can see his morals in these sayings of Allah: (And those who speak evil things of the believing men and the believing women without their having earned (it), they are guilty indeed of a false accusation and a manifest sin) 33:58, (And those who, shun the great sins and indecencies, and whenever they are angry they forgive) 42:37, (and those who restrain (their) anger and pardon men; and Allah loves the doers of good (to others)) 3:134, (and when the ignorant address them, they say: Peace) 25:63, (Take to forgiveness and enjoin good and turn aside from the ignorant) 7:199, (Repel (evil) with what is best, when lo! he between whom and you was enmity would be as if he were a warm friend) 41:34, (and you shall speak to men good words) 2:83, (and avoid false words) 22:30, (and do not exceed the limits; surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits) 5:87, (And what reason have we that we should not rely on Allah? And He has indeed guided us in our ways; and certainly we would bear with patience your persecution of us; and on Allah should the reliant rely) 14:12, (and you shall certainly hear from those who have been given the Book before you and from those who are polytheists much annoying talk; and if you are patient and guard (against evil), surely this is one of the affairs (which should be) determined upon) 3:186, (And be kind to him who follows you of the believers) 26:215 and (Thus it is due to mercy from Allah that you deal with them gently, and had you been rough, hard hearted, they would certainly have dispersed from around you; pardon them therefore and ask pardon for them, and take counsel with them in the affair; so when you have decided, then place your trust in Allah)3:159.
These were the morals of the prophet Muhammad (s) and his relationship with the believers and other than the believers. He said: “The real man is he, who can control himself when becomes angry.” “He, who has no kindness, will be deprived of welfare.” “If kindness is added to a thing, it will become beautiful and if it is deprived of a thing, it will become ugly.” “Allah is kind. He loves kindness and gifts people for their kindness what He doesn’t gift for violence or anything else.” “The real Muslim is he, from whose tongue and hand people are in safe.” It is enough for us the saying of Allah addressing the prophet Muhammad (s): (And most surely you conform (yourself) to sublime morality) 68:4. After that, how would it be probable for prophet Muhammad (s) to curse, abuse, whip and hurt just because he became angry? Allah forbid! (They have not estimated Allah with the estimation that is due to Him) 22:74, (but patience is good and Allah is He Whose help is sought for against what you describe) 12:18.
In fact this tradition was fabricated during the reign of Mu’awiya. Abu Hurayra flattered Mu’awiya and the family of Abul-Aass and the rest of the Umayyads by this tradition and to suspend other traditions, in which it was proved that the Prophet had cursed a number of the Umayyad hypocrites and oppressors, who (hindered (people) from Allah’s way and seek to make it crooked), to mark them with eternal disgrace and to make people know that they were far away from Allah and His prophet. Thus, Islam and the umma would be in safe from their hypocrisy and ravage. It was an admonition by the Prophet for the sake of Allah, His book, the leaders and the common Muslims.
Once the Prophet (s) had seen in the dream that the family of al-Hakam bin Abul-Aass were leaping on his minbar like the monkeys and hindering people backward. After that he was never seen smiling until he died. Allah revealed to the Prophet a verse of the Qur’an, which was recited by the Muslims day and night, talking about that: (and We did not make the vision which We showed you but a trial for men and the cursed tree in the Qur’an as well; and We cause them to fear, but it only adds to their great inordinacy) 17:60. The cursed tree, mentioned in the Qur’an, was the Umayyad family. Allah revealed to the Prophet that they would occupy his situation, kill his progeny and ravage the umma. Because of that he wasn’t seen smiling until he joined the Most High Mate. It was one of the signs of his prophecy and Islam. There were many true traditions, especially by the infallible imams, talking about this event.
The Prophet (s) declared the matter of these hypocrites that (he who would perish might perish by clear proof, and he who would live might live by clear proof), (and nothing is incumbent on the apostle but a plain delivering (of the message)).
Once al-Hakam bin Abul-Aass asked permission to meet the Prophet (s). The Prophet knew him by his voice. He said: “Permit him to come in! Curse be upon him and upon every one of his offspring except the believers of them and what a few they will be! They will be honourable in the worldly life and mean in the afterlife. They are full of cunning and deceit. They are given every thing in this life but they will have no share of good in the hereafter.”
The Prophet (s) said: “If the family of Abul-Aass becomes thirty men, they will divide the wealth of the Muslims among them, make people slaves for them and distort the religion of Allah according to their interests.”
He also said: “If the Umayyads become forty men, they will make people as slaves, take the wealth of the Muslims as their properties and distort the Qur’an to serve their interests.”
If every one had a newborn baby, he would bring him to the Prophet to pray for him. When Marwan bin al-Hakam was born, they brought him to the Prophet. The Prophet said: “Take out this gecko and the son of a gecko, the cursed and the son of the cursed.”
Aa’isha (the Prophet’s wife) said: “The Prophet cursed the father of Marwan and Marwan was not yet born. So Marwan was included in the curse of Allah.”
Ash-Shi’bi said that Abdullah bin az-Zubayr had said: “The Prophet cursed al-Hakam (Marwan’s father) and his sons.”
The books of Hadith mentioned these recurrent traditions and others like them. They confirmed that the Umayyads were cursed by the Prophet. Al-Hakim mentioned in his Mustadrak, in the chapter of al-Fitten wel-Malahim (seditions and braveries) enough traditions of this kind, which were a good message for the prudent to ponder about. He concluded the chapter by saying: “Let the researcher for the truth know that I didn’t mention in this chapter one third of what were narrated in this concern. The first sedition in this umma was their (Umayyads) sedition. I couldn’t end the book without mentioning them.”
This was enough to prove what we had said that they fabricated this tradition and others like it to suspend those curses delivered by the Prophet upon them. But unfortunately the public preferred those cursed hypocrites to their Prophet unconsciously, when they defended this superstition to preserve the fame of those cursed ones. They didn’t pay any attention that they did wrong to the Prophet (s).
The umma didn’t have to conserve the dignity of those, whom the Prophet had cursed and exiled for their corruption. The umma lost, by doing that, the benefit, which the Prophet wanted to them by cursing and exiling those hypocrites, who trundled the rocks in the night of (al-Aqaba) to startle the Prophet and to throw him down when he was coming back from the battle of Tabouk. It was a true long tradition, in which it was mentioned that the Prophet cursed them at that time.
It was too odd of the Muslims to defend those people, who caused many agonies to the Prophet and tried their best to revenge! They hurt him and hurt his family after his death. The Prophet cursed them to dismiss them from the mercy of Allah and to make the believers avoid them because of what they committed and what they would commit, and not to make them be near to Allah as the distorters said!
The two sheikhs mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet (s) offered one of his prayers and said: “The Satan came upon trying his best to interrupt my prayer. Allah helped me that I could throttle him. I wanted to tie him to a pole that you would see him in the morning, but I remembered Solomon’s Saying: (My Lord! do Thou forgive me and grant me a kingdom which is not fit for (being inherited by) anyone after me) 38:35.”
The Prophets were far above that and away from it because it contradicted their infallibility and defamed their dignity and high status. Allah forbid! Could the Satan struggle with the prophets or disturb them or even think of that? Allah said addressing the Satan: (Surely. as regards My servants, you have no authority over them except those who follow you of the deviators) 15:42.
All the Muslims knew that the Satan was distracted by the birth of the prophet Muhammad (s), astonished by delegating him as prophet, stunned by his hegira, became inapt by his rise with the mission, melted like the salt in the water by his guidance, laws and systems, fled like a ray from his prayer, in which Allah had put maxims and secrets that made it (the prayer) prevent from committing atrocities and abominable deeds.
When the Prophet (s) stood up for the prayer, he gave up everything and divested his soul of every thing save Allah. He offered his prayer with a calm heart in slavery to the oneness of Him, the One and Only. If he began his prayer by saying (Allahuakbar), he would seek protection of Allah from the Satan before reciting Qur’anic verses in obedience to the saying of Allah: (So when you recite the Qur’an, seek refuge with Allah from the accursed Shaitan) 16:98.
Of course, when he asked protection of Allah from the Satan, Allah would grant him that. The Satan knew well this fact even if the dotards ignored it!
Abu Hurayra narrated a tradition saying that if the Satan heard the azan (the call for prayers) from any Muslim, he would flee scaredly and would (fart) because of terror. So how would the Satan dare to come to the Prophet, who devoted to Allah, stood in front of Him in a loyal praying and asked His protection? How did the Satan interrupt the Prophet’s prayer? Why didn’t he flee scaredly with his farting? How impossible it was! Allah said: (Surely he (the Shaitan) has no authority over those who believe and rely on their Lord. His authority is only over those who befriend him and those who associate others with Him) 16:99-100.
If you say: “What do you say about this Qur’anic verse: (And if an interference of the Shaitan should cause you mischief, seek refuge in Allah; surely He is the Hearing, the Knowing) 41:36.”
We say: “Allah, the Almighty, had educated His beloved Muhammad with morals, by which He preferred him to the entire universe that every prophet, angel, devil and human being submitted to his politeness and surrendered to his morals. There was no order in the Qur’an, unless he obeyed and no forbid, unless he complied with or a maxim, unless he put it in his mind. The Qur’an was before his eyes. He tracked its purposes and followed its suras. The verse above concerned his politeness and morals, as well as the verses before it in the same sura: (Repel (evil) with what is best, when lo! he between whom and you was enmity would be as if he were a warm friend. And none are made to receive it but those who are patient and none are made to receive it but those who have a mighty good fortune) 41:34-35.
This was the best of morals, with which Allah had educated his slave and prophet (s). He, really, was so since the beginning of his mission when he said while blood was flowing on his face and beard: “O Allah, guide my people for they don’t now (the truth)”, until his caller cried in the day of Fat-h (victory) when he conquered Mecca and he was at the last days of his life that whoever entered the house of Abu Sufyan, would be safe.
Allah had evened all the ways to make his prophet bear these morals, which made the necks bow to the glory of his characters and the honour of his manners. Allah not only made him bear these morals, but also let him long to them until he reached the highest status and being lucky with these morals. So Allah said: (And none are made to receive it but those who are patient and none are made to receive it but those who have a mighty good fortune) 41:35. Then Allah warned him from an incitement of anger, which He had molded the human beings with, and wrath of heart when one was hurt by his enemy. Allah called that as incitement or interference of the Satan, metaphorically, to make the Prophet avoid it and be far above it. So Allah said: (And if an interference of the Shaitan should cause you mischief, seek refuge in Allah; surely He is the Hearing, the Knowing) 41:36. It meant that if an incitement to anger, which might be like the satanic temptations, would make you uncomfortable or impatient then you (seek refuge in Allah). In the same concern was this saying of Allah: (Take to forgiveness and enjoin good and turn aside from the ignorant.. And if a false imputation from the Shaitan afflict you, seek refuge in Allah; surely He is Hearing, Knowing) 7:199-200. Allah wanted to keep his beloved away from to encounter the ignorant, who saw the evidences but they denied them and went too far in their unbelief, so He ordered him to avoid them. And for more carefulness in educating and preferring the Prophet to all the human beings, Allah warned him not to bear any grudge or spite in his heart when the ignorant attacked him with their foolishness and abusiveness. Allah called this natural emotion as incitement or interference of the Satan, in metaphor, to make His prophet avoid it and to shun it, because the prophet Muhammad (s) didn’t shun anything more than his shunning the Satan and the deeds that were like the Satan’s. Allah wanted, by saying this verse, to tell the Prophet to be patient before the foolishness of the ignorant and not to be angry with them.
So where was this meaning from what Abu Hurayra said that the Satan attacked the Prophet to interrupt his prayer, which was unacceptable according to the mental and traditional regards?
If you said: What about these Qur’anic verses: (And We did not send before you any apostle or prophet, but when he desired, the Shaitan made a suggestion respecting his desire; but Allah annuls that which the Shaitan casts, then does Allah establish His communications, and Allah is Knowing, Wise. So that He may make what the Shaitan casts a trial for those in whose hearts is disease and those whose hearts are hard; and most surely the unjust are in a great opposition. And that those who have been given the knowledge may know that it is the truth from your Lord) 22:52-54.
It was well-known, as necessity of Islam, that the prophet Muhammad (s) and all the other prophets (s) would not hope anything that Allah disagreed with. The prophets were far away from hoping anything that didn’t please Allah and didn’t benefit people.
The prophet Muhammad hoped that every one, anywhere on the earth, to believe and be faithful to Allah. The Satan, by his tricks and temptation, distorted this hope and tempted people like Abu Lahab (the Prophet’s uncle) and Abu Jahl, who were obsessed by him, and led them away from what the Prophet hoped for them to gain the good of this life and the afterlife. But the Satan tempted them until they fought the Prophet to get rid of him.
The Prophet hoped for every one, who became a Muslim, to be sincere to Allah, His Qur’an, His prophet and to the all of people in a way that his interior would be like his exterior and his openness like his mystery. The Satan seduced some people and confused their minds by distorting this blessed hope, hence they became hypocrites.
The Prophet (s) hoped every one of his umma to imitate his own straight method, not to deviate from his holy Sunna. All what he hoped that the whole umma would agree to guidance and to be conducted according to his orders and forbids and no two of them would be in disagreement. But the Satan whispered evil to them and deceived them to be away from the Sunna. Thus the one umma divided into many sects. The accursed deceptive Satan tried his best to distort all what the prophet hoped for people and made those, who were tempted by him, turn away from the Prophet and his hopes.
Those, who were deluded by the false of the Satan, were many. He prepared his snares and traps for them and stood ready to show them the rightness, by his temptation, as false and the false as rightness. He used every trick to distort the Prophet’s hopes and to lead people away from him.
All that harmed the Prophet and made him uncomfortable and always be in fear of people from the deceptive Satan. He was afraid that the heresies and delusions might defeat the rightness. Because of that Allah comforted and eased him by revealing to him: (And We did not send before you any apostle or prophet, but when he desired, the Shaitan made a suggestion respecting his desire) 22:52. It meant that when every prophet hoped a desire for the private or general benefit, the Satan would distort his desire by tempting and deceiving people to drive them away from the prophets and their missions. All of the prophets hoped that all people anywhere on the earth to be faithful to Allah. They hoped that the believers were to have real sincerity to Allah. The best desire of theirs was to see their nations in agreement on their guidance and no any two of them to be in disagreement. But the Satan fought their desires by deceiving people and reversing the facts. Hence the nation of Moses divided into seventy-one sects, the nation of Jesus divided into seventy-two sects and so on for the nations of the rest of the prophets. O Muhammad, don’t worry so much about the defeat of your holy hopes in many times by the Satan because the previous prophets’ hopes had faced the same fate. So you and they are the same in this matter. ((This is Our) course with regard to those of Our apostles whom We sent before you, and you shall not find a change in Our course) 17:77.
Since the prophet Muhammad was afraid that the heresies of the Satan might prevail over the rightness, Allah assured him when He said: (but Allah annuls that which the Shaitan casts) at your hopes and the hopes of the previous prophets. But Allah presaged him that the rightness, he and the previous prophets brought from their god, would dominate. Allah said: (then does Allah establish His communications) and (And Allah will show the truth to be the truth by His words, though the guilty may be averse (to it)) 10:82 and (as for the scum, it passes away as a worthless thing; and as for that which profits the people, it tarries in the earth; thus does Allah set forth parables) 13:17.
Allah wanted to make the Prophet be quite sure that the prophets would win and the Satan would be defeated. He said: (and Allah is Knowing, Wise). He knew the loyalty of the prophets in their desires, therefore He assisted them with Holy Spirit and put them in their honoured status and He knew the enmity of the Satan towards Allah and His apostles. Surely Allah would disgrace the Satan for his evil deeds according to wisdom that to honour those, who deserved honour and to disgrace those, who deserved disgrace for wisdom was to put things in their suitable places.
Allah wanted to distinguish the wicked and the good among His people so that He tried them by the Satan (He may make what the Shaitan casts a trial for those in whose hearts is disease) because of hypocrisy (and those whose hearts are hard) which didn’t become tender by mentioning Allah an what He had revealed because their hearts were seized by unbelief that the Satan seduced them with and took them away from belief and guidance (and most surely the unjust) of hypocrites and unbelievers (are in a great opposition) to Allah and His prophet. Their eyes didn’t see the truth, their ears became deaf and their hearts were overcome by the Satan. They cawed whenever there was an evil cawer. (And that those who have been given the knowledge may know) of the oneness of Allah, His wisdom and His sending apostles (that it is the truth from your Lord so they may believe in it) without paying any attention to the Satan or to his frightening and misleading.
When Allah tried people to distinguish between the wicked and the good, the hearts of the (hard hearted) wicked became harder and the believers became stronger in their faith and certainty. Allah said: (Do men think that they will be left alone on saying, We believe, and not be tried? And certainly We tried those before them, so Allah will certainly know those who are true and He will certainly know the liars) 29:1-2 and (On no account will Allah leave the believers in the condition which you are in until He separates the evil from the good) 3:179 and (And that He may purge those who believe and deprive the unbelievers of blessings) 3:141.
No wonder that Allah would try people by different kinds of afflictions and distresses to have the excuse to reward or punish them. Allah said: (Then Allah's is the conclusive argument; so if He please, He would certainly guide you all) 6:149 and (that he who would perish might perish by clear proof, and he who would live might live by clear proof) 8:42.
Let go back to the same verse (And We did not send before you any apostle or prophet, but when he desired, the Shaitan made a suggestion respecting his desire). It didn’t mean that the Satan cast his evil into the Prophet’s heart (Allah forbid!) but it did mean that the Satan cast his evil into the desire of the Prophet by distorting it to make his followers (the Satan’s followers), who cawed with him, turn their backs to what the Prophet hoped in order that the hope not to be realised.
This was, definitely, the meaning of the verse, which stroke the mind, although no one of the interpreters or any other-as I know-mentioned it. I wonder how they missed it whereas it was the most suitable to the holy Qur’an, to the prophet Muhammad and to the all other prophets (peace be upon them). It couldn’t be interpreted in any way other than that at all.
Let us return to the tradition of Abu Hurayra: (The Prophet (s) offered one of his prayers and said: The Satan came upon trying his best to interrupt my prayer. Allah helped me that I could throttle him. I wanted to tie him to a pole that you would see him in the morning, but I remembered Solomon’s Saying: (My Lord! do Thou forgive me and grant me a kingdom which is not fit for (being inherited by) anyone after me) 38:35).
I would like to ask the two sheikhs, who respected and defended Abu Hurayra’s traditions: did the Satan have a physical frame that could be tied to a pole as bound captive to be seen by people in the morning? I don’t think any one would say that.
What encouraged Abu Hurayra to say that was the failure of his mind to perceive the meanings of the holy Qur’an. He thought that some of the Qur’anic verses sensed something like that when he heard the saying of Allah talking about Solomon: (Then We made the wind subservient to him; it made his command to run gently wherever he desired and the shaitans, every builder and diver and others fettered in chains) 38-36-38.
He thought that they were fettered in chains like the human beings. He didn’t perceive that they were fettered according to their satanic world with chains corresponding with their satanic nature to prevent them from ravaging whereas no one of the human beings could see them.
Abu Hurayra said in his tradition that the prophet Muhammad (s) had set the Satan free, because he had hated to have a kingdom like that of Solomon.
But Abu Hurayra forgot that Allah had given Solomon a kingdom, in which He subjected for him the wind, which made a month’s journey in the morning and a month’s journey in the evening. Allah made a fountain of molten copper to flow out for Solomon and (of the jinn there were those who worked before him by the command of his Lord; and whoever turned aside from Our command from among them, We made him taste of the punishment of burning). The jinn made for Solomon fortresses, sculptures, bowls and cooking- pots. Allah had given Solomon (s) what He had not given to the prophet Muhammad (s). Even if the prophet Muhammad fettered Abu Hurayra’s Satan, he would not be equal to Solomon in his kingdom, for Solomon still had the peculiarity of the wind, the flowing of molten copper and the working of the jinn. The justification Abu Hurayra gave was invalid and his tradition was untrue. The Prophet would never confuse the senses or astound the feelings. The Prophet (s) depended on reason in his arguments and in everything. He made reason be the judge between the right and the wrong and made the validity of the evidences be in accordance with the holy Qur’an, which he ordered us to follow (Is he who goes prone upon his face better guided or he who walks upright upon a straight path?) 67:22.
The two sheikhs mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “We travelled in the night with the Prophet (s) and slept at a late time. We didn’t wake up until the sun rose. The Prophet (s) said: “Let every one lead his sumpter and move from here. It is a place attended by the Satan.” We did. Then he asked for some water to do wudu’. He did two prostrations then he offered the prayer in the morning.”
The guidance of the prophet Muhammad (s) was far above such a tradition. Allah said: (O you, who have wrapped up in your garments! Rise to pray in the night except a little, half of it or lessen it a little or add to it and recite the Qur’an as it ought to be recited) 73:1-4 until He said: (Surely your Lord knows that you pass in prayer nearly two‑thirds of the night, and (sometimes) half of it) 73:20. Allah addressed the Prophet in another saying: (Keep up prayer from the declining of the sun till the darkness of the night and the morning recitation; surely the morning recitation is witnessed. And during a part of the night, pray Tahajjud beyond what is incumbent on you; maybe your Lord will raise you to a position of great glory) 17:78-79. Allah asked the Prophet to pray in the night moreover than the five prayers, which were obligatory for all of the Muslims, while the night prayer (nafila) was obligatory for the Prophet alone. Allah said: (And rely on the Mighty, the Merciful, who sees you when you stand up and your turning over and over among those who prostrate themselves before Allah) 26:17-19. It did mean that Allah saw you when you stood up to worship Him in the night when there was no one seeing you except Him and saw your doings among the believers when you led them in offering the prayers. Also Allah said addressing him: (and sing the praise of your Lord before the rising of the sun and before the setting and glorify Him in the night and after the prayers) 50:39-40.
He offered prayers all the night and he hanged his chest with a rope in order not to feel sleepy. He kept on standing up, sitting and prostrating until his feet swelled. Then Gabriel said to him (from Allah): “Take care of yourself. It has to be cared by you.” Then he revealed to him: (Ta Ha. We have not revealed the Qur’an to you that you may be unhappy. Nay, it is a reminder to him who fears) 20:1-3. The verse meant that: We didn’t reveal to you the holy Qur’an in order to tire yourself with worshipping, but we revealed it to be a reminder to him, who fears Allah. So take care of yourself and don’t burden yourself with more than you can bear.
Al-Bukhari assigned particular chapters in his Sahih for the Prophet’s night prayer, his long prostration in the night prayer and his standing until his legs swelled and his feet chapped.
Thus he accustomed himself to do in the night. How about the five obligatory prayers, which were one of the bases, upon which Islam was based? Would he sleep and miss the prayer? Allah forbid! And it was far away from the Prophet, who recited to the people: (Attend constantly to prayers and to the middle prayer and stand up truly obedient to Allah) 2:238 and he incited people: (Successful indeed are the believers, who are humble in their prayers) 23:1-2 and described the believers: (And those who keep a guard on their prayers; these are they who are the heirs, who shall inherit the Paradise; they shall abide therein) 23:9-11 and called out to people: (keep up prayer; surely prayer is a timed ordinance for the believers) 4:103 and made all people hear: (He indeed shall be successful who purifies himself and magnifies the name of his Lord and prays) 87:14-15.
The holy Qur’an is full of verses like these that the Prophet taught people their maxims and good sermons. How many times the Prophet did prick the inattentive by: (Woe to the praying ones, who are unmindful of their prayers, who do (good) to be seen) 107:4-6 and exposed the hypocrites when Allah revealed to him about their characters: (and they do not come to prayer but while they are sluggish, and they do not spend but while they are unwilling) 9:54 and he criticised someone, who slept and didn’t offer the night prayer until the morning came, by saying: “The Satan made water in his ear.”
What a metaphor it was about those, who accustomed themselves to sleep without offering the night prayer and what a rhetoric it was from (an honored messenger, The processor of strength, having an honorable place with the Lord of the Dominion, one (to be) obeyed, and faithful in trust).
What a hard word it was, which would make the believers worry and never sleep without offering the night prayer if they thought right of themselves. The pious and the obscene, the believer and unbeliever knew and witnessed that the prophet Muhammad (s) was the first who carried out his principles and was the best worshipper, who kept on his principles sincerely. He educated his umma by his deeds more than his sayings. He wouldn’t criticise that, who slept without offering the night prayer so hardly, if he himself slept in front of his companions and missed the Fajr prayer. Glory be to Allah! What a great slander it was!
Abu Hurayra himself narrated that the Prophet (s) had said: “The Satan ties three knots upon the nape of every one of you when he sleeps. If he wakes up and mentions Allah, one knot will open. If he makes wudu’, the second knot will open and if he offers the prayer the third knot will open. Then he will be active and in good spirits, otherwise he will be lazy and in bad spirits.”
This tradition had a rhetorical metaphor like the previous one. The Prophet (s) wanted to warn his umma from the Satan and to incite them to obey Allah. If Abu Hurayra was true in this tradition, he must be a liar when he told that tradition of the Prophet’s sleeping and missing the Fajr prayer.
Abu Hurayra narrated that the Prophet had said: “No prayer is heavier for the hypocrites than the prayers of Fajr and Isha’. If they know what these two prayers have, they will come to offer them even creepingly. I was about to order the caller of azan to say the iqama and then to order a man to lead people in prayer and I would take a torch to threaten with fire whoever didn’t come to offer the prayer yet.”
The Prophet (s) urged people to offer the prayers, paid much attention to the Fajr prayer and threatened those, who didn’t come to offer the prayer, by burning them with fire. After all that, was it believable that he himself slept and didn’t offer the prayer? Certainly not!
Allah might have mercy upon Abdullah bin Rawaha, the martyred companion, when he said:
“Among us was the Prophet,Reciting the holy book when the dawn began to send its rays.
He made us see the guidance after our blindness,so our hearts faithed in him that whatever he said would happen.
He spent the night away from his bed,while the others were in a deep sleep.”
Let us go back to the tradition to state what remained to refute it.
Firstly: they (the jurisprudents and the authors of books of Hadith) said that the Prophet’s heart (senses) didn’t sleep even when his eyes were sleeping. Their Sahihs declared that clearly.
This was one of the signs of the prophecy and Islam; therefore it was not probable for him to sleep and missed the Fajr prayer, because if his eyes slept, his heart would be attentive, especially to his god. Nothing of sleeping would make him inattentive to his duties. Once he offered the night prayer and went to sleep before he offered the witr prayer. One of his wives said to him: “O messenger of Allah, do you sleep before you offer the witr prayer?” He said: “My eyes sleep but my heart doesn’t sleep.” He meant that he was certain he would not miss the witr prayer because he was fond of it and his heart was attentive to it even his eyes were sleeping. If he was so with the witr prayer, how about him when he slept before the Fajr prayer?
Secondly: Abu Hurayra declared, as mentioned by Muslim in his Sahih, that this event happened to the Prophet during his return from the battle of Khaybar. How did Abu Hurayra pretend that he was with the Prophet then? Abu Hurayra became a Muslim after this battle as the historians mentioned unanimously.
Thirdly: Abu Hurayra said in the tradition: (The Prophet said: “Let every one of you lead his sumpter. This is a place attended by the Satan.” We did so).
It was well-known that the Satan didn’t near to the Prophet (s) and all people knew well, too, that Abu Hurayra was very poor and didn’t have anything to satiate his hungry stomach with, so wherefrom did he get a sumpter to lead away as he said: we did so?
Fourthly: Abu Hurayra said: “…then the Prophet asked for some water to do wudu’. He prostrated twice and then offered the Morning Prayer.”
The Prophet offered Morning Prayer to compensate the Fajr prayer, which was missed (according to Abu Hurayra), but we didn’t know the two prostrations the Prophet did what fore and what they were! An-Nawawi skipped them when he explained this tradition.
Fifthly: It was normal for the armies and leaders to have guards to ward them when they wanted to sleep, especially if there was a king or some one important among them. As for the Prophet, he had many enemies. There were many hypocrites within his army, who were awaiting to wreak themselves upon the Prophet. The Prophet (s) would not differ from the leaders to safekeep himself and his army. He wouldn’t sleep, with his companions, in that desert surrounded by his enemies of the polytheists and the recusant Jews, unless there were guards to ward them. Would he pay no attention to this important matter, where he was the master of the wise men before being the master of the prophets? So were the guards sleeping, too as the callers for azan were? Certainly not! But it was the liars, whom the Prophet (s) had warned against!
Sixthly: At that night, the Prophet was with an army of one thousand and six hundred men; among them were two hundred knights. It was not possible that all of them were sleeping and no one of them woke up at all. Let suppose that they didn’t wake up by themselves, weren’t they woken up by the neighing and noise of beating the ground by hoofs of two hundred horses wanting their fodder at time in the morning? What torpor the all were in, men and horses! It might be one of Abu Hurayra’s miracles.
The two sheikhs mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The prophet Muhammad (s) offered the Fajr prayer, came in front of people and said: “Once there was a man leading his cow. He rode it and beat it. The cow said: We were not created to be beaten but for plowing!” People said: “Praise the Lord! A cow speaks!” The Prophet said: “We believe in that; me, Abu Bakr and Omar, although they, both, are not here. Also there was a man grazing his sheep. The wolf came and took one of them. The man followed the wolf and saved the sheep. The wolf said to the man: “You saved it from me! Who will save it if the lion comes one day to take it, when there will be no keeper for it but me?” people said: “Praise the Lord! A wolf speaks!” The Prophet (s) said: “We believe in this; me, Abu Bakr and Omar, although they, both, are not here.”
Abu Hurayra was fond of wonders and unusual things. He was mirthful when he talked about unusual things like the running away of the rock with Moses’ cloths or when Moses slapped the angel of death and gouged his eye, the falling down of gold locusts upon Ayyoub (Job) and the likes of his impossibilities.
And here he told of a talking cow and a talking wolf, which spoke in eloquent Arabic to show that they had reason, knowledge, and wisdom. He told of something, which definitely never happened nor would happen at all. The natural rules, which Allah made for all what He had created, made this thing impossible unless there was a necessity for a miracle to be a sign to prove the prophecy of one of the apostles or something related to Allah. The matter of the man, who led his cow to the field and rode it, did not need any challenge or miracle that Allah would break the rules of nature for him. The same was for the sheep keeper, when the wolf invaded his sheep. This tradition was completely untrue, for Allah would not make miracles in vain.
Abu Bakr and Omar were not in need for such a virtue. In fact if they had heard him telling of it, they would have punished him. But he mentioned Abu Bakr and Omar as a means to satisfy his tendency to the oddities, at the same time to walk in their shadow because he knew well that no one could deny what he said, otherwise would be accused of defaming the two caliphs; Abu Bakr and Omar.
The two sheikhs mentioned that Hameed bin Abdur Rahman bin Awf said that Abu Hurayra told him that Abu Bakr had sent him (Abu Hurayra) during the hajj, of which the Prophet made Abu Bakr emir a year before the Farewell Hajj, with some men in the Day of Immolation to inform people of that no polytheist would be permitted to come to hajj and no one was to go around the Kaaba nakedly after this year.
Al-Bukari mentioned another tradition narrated by Hameed that Abu Hurayra had said: “Abu Bakr sent me among a group of callers to Mina in the Day of Immolation to announce that no polytheist would be allowed to come to hajj and no one was to go around the Kaaba nakedly after this year. Then the Prophet (s) sent Ali after us to inform of sura of Bara’a. Ali announced with us to the people of Mina in the Day of Immolation.”
No wonder if the Umayyads’ policy imposed upon Abu Hurayra and Hameed this falsehood and no wonder if they both volunteered to do that.
In fact Abu Hurayra went to Damascus, the capital of the Umayyads, trading with his goods (traditions), which sold well there. Propaganda against Imam Ali and the progeny of the Prophet was the best profitable trade for the charlatans there.
Hameed was formed by the hands of Mu’awiya to carry like these traditions. He pretended to be pious and abstinent. He was fond of hearing from Imam Ali’s enemies. He was like the bitter Umayyad enemies of Imam Ali. It was not strange of him because he was their son. His mother was Um Kulthoom bint Aqaba bin Abu Ma’eet bin Thakwan bin Umayya bin Abd Shams. She was the sister of al-Waleed bin Aqaba. His grandmother was the mother of Othman bin Affan. Her name was Arwa bint Kurayz bin Rabee’a bin Habeeb bin Abd Shams. His father, Abdur Rahman was against Imam Ali. So no wonder that Abu Hurayra and Hameed agreed to spread this falsehood, which the mercenaries transferred to everywhere faster than the wind.
What invalidated this tradition that Abu Hurayra (before he enjoyed the pleasures of the Umayyads) said: “I was among the delegation that the Prophet sent with Ali to inform of sura of Bara’a.” His son, al-Muharrir asked him: “What did you inform of?” He said: “We announced: “No one enters Paradise except the believers, no polytheist is to come to hajj after this year, no one is to go around the Kaaba nakedly and whoever has a covenant with the Prophet, it will be valid for four months. I cried of that until my voice became hoarse.”
This was his true tradition mentioned in the historians’ books and of those, who collected the Hadith. He did not mention Abu Bakr. He said that the pilgrims, whom the Prophet sent to Mecca, were under the emirate of Imam Ali, the same emirate, which Abu Hurayra ascribed to Abu Bakr.
If Abu Hurayra was sent with Imam Ali by the Prophet, what would be the meaning of his Saying (Abu Bakr sent me with other callers in the Day of Immolation of that hajj) and his saying (then the Prophet sent Ali to follow after us and call out with us)? It was not but a contradiction. (They desire to put out the light of Allah with their mouths, and Allah will not consent save to perfect His light) 9:32.
Inshallah, I will clear the truth of this tradition to you in some points:
Firstly: it is to clear the reality of the task (the send with Bara’a) in summery.
When sura of Bara’a was revealed to the prophet Muhammad (s), he sent Abu Bakr to recite it in the day of the greater hajj in front of all the attendants and to declare the dispensation of Allah and his messenger from the covenants between the Muslims and the polytheists, no polytheist would be permitted to come to the Kaaba, no one would enter Paradise but the believers and no one was to go around the Kaaba nakedly.
When Abu Bakr went with Bara’a not so far, Allah revealed to the Prophet that no one would carry out his divine tasks save him or a man of his family. The Prophet called for Imam Ali and ordered him to follow after Abu Bakr and take Bara’a from him, then to go to Mecca to carry out the task himself. The Prophet gave Imam Ali full authority to be the emir of hajj in that year and to give Abu Bakr the option either to go back to Medina or to go on with the pilgrims. Imam Ali rode the she-camel of the Prophet called al-Adhba’ and followed after Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr asked Imam Ali: “Why did you come, Abul-Hassan?” Imam Ali said: “The Prophet (s) ordered me to take the verses of Bara’a from you and to go to void the covenant of the polytheists. You are free to return to him or to go with me.” He said: “I return to him.” Ali went to Mecca with the pilgrims of Medina. Abu Bakr went back to Medina. He said to the Prophet: “You honored me with a thing I looked forward to it, but when I went to do it you ordered to bring me back. Did Allah reveal to you something about me?” The Prophet said: “No, but Gabriel (s) told me from Allah that no one would carry out my divine tasks save me or a man of my family. Ali is of mine and so he will do instead of me.” Traditions with this meaning were frequently narrated by the infallible imams.
Secondly: some of what was mentioned by the public (the Sunnis) confirmed what we mentioned above. Here is the saying of Abu Bakr as clear evidence. He said: “The Prophet sent me with Bara’a to Mecca to announce that no polytheist was to come to hajj after this year, no one was to go around the Kaaba nakedly, no one would entered Paradise save the believers, whoever had a covenant with the Prophet, it would be valid until its date and that Allah and His apostle were acquitted from the polytheists. I went away for three days then the Prophet (s) said to Ali: “Follow after Abu Bakr and let him come back to me. Take Bara’a from him and go to inform of it.” When I went back to the Prophet in Medina, I cried and said to him: “Did some thing happen about me?” He said: “Nothing but good happened about you. But I was ordered that no one was to carry out my divine tasks except me or a man of my family.” This was the tradition of Abu Bakr. Do you think that his crying and emotion went well with making him emir of hajj or with excluding him from that?
Such was the tradition of Imam Ali when he said: “When ten verses of Bara’a had been revealed to the Prophet (s), he called for Abu Bakr and sent him to recite them for the people of Mecca. Then he called for me and said: “Follow after Abu Bakr. Wherever you get him, take the book from him and go to recite it for the people of Mecca. I got him and took the book from him. He went back to the Prophet and said to him: “O messenger of Allah, was anything revealed about me?” The Prophet said: “No, but Gabriel told me that no one would inform of the revelation except me or a man of me.”
Imam Ali said in another tradition: “The Prophet (s) sent Bara’a to the people of Mecca with Abu Bakr then sent me after him and said to me: “Take the book from Abu Bakr and go to Mecca.” I got him and took the book from him. He went back depressedly to Medina. He asked the Prophet: “Was anything revealed about me?” The Prophet said: “No, but I was ordered that I would inform of it or one of my family.”
Another tradition narrated by Ibn Abbas, who protested against the opponents of Imam Ali and began to talk in details about the virtues of Imam Ali and the conditions of preferring him to the whole umma after the Prophet (s). He said: “…then the Prophet sent Abu Bakr with sura of at-Tawba (Bara’a) and sent Ali after him to take it from him. The Prophet said: “No one will go with it save a man, who is from me and I am from him.”
Ali’s opponents gave in to Ibn Abbas. If Abu Bakr was the emir in that year, they would not give in to Ibn Abbas. They found his evidence definite, so they submitted to him.
Ibn Abbas, once said: “I was walking with Omar somewhere in Medina, when he said to me: “O ibn Abbas, I think that your companion (Imam Ali) is wronged.” I thought that I would not let it go in vain. I said to him: “O Amirul mu’mineen, give his right back to him.” He pulled out his hand from mine and went away murmuring for a while and stopped. I followed him. He said: “O ibn Abbas, I think they prevented him that (the caliphate) because they found him too young.” I said: “I swear by Allah, that Allah and His apostle didn’t find him too young when they ordered him to take Bara’a from your companion.” He left and hurried away.”
How brilliant he was when he overcame the caliph with this eloquent argument. He did not let any way to the Caliph to answer so he turned away and left hurriedly. If his companion was the emir of that season of hajj, as Abu Hurayra pretended, he would not leave hurriedly unless he knew the truth, because he was with Abu Bakr when he left towards Mecca with Bara’a and when he returned before achieving the task. So he knew every thing about that event more than any one else.
Once al-Hassan al-Basri was asked about Imam Ali. He said: “What can I say about him, who owned the four qualities; being entrusted with Bara’a, the saying of the Prophet to him in the battle of Tabouk, the Prophet’s saying to the Muslims: “I have left to you two important things; the holy Qur’an and my family” and the fourth that he always was the commander and he was never commanded by any one while the others (Abu Bakr, Omar... etc.) were commanded by the leaders.”
It was well-known that al-Hassan al-Basri was sincere to Abu Bakr and devoted himself to spread his virtues. If Abu Bakr was the emir of hajj in the year of Bara’a, al-Hassan al-Bassri would not hide that and would not witness to Ali that he was never commanded by any one and would not imply that Abu Bakr was commanded by the others. If you inspected his speech, you would know that he appreciated the entrusting with Bara’a and thought that it was an attribute concerning Ali and no other than him was well-qualified for it.
When the companions commended Ali in Medina during the reign of Abu Bakr and Omar, they mentioned this attribute as one of his virtues and no one debated with them about it.
Sa’d (bin Abu Waqqas) said: “The Prophet (s) sent Abu Bakr with Bara’a. When he passed some of the way, the Prophet sent Ali after him to take it and go with it to Mecca. Abu Bakr became uncomfortable. The Prophet (s) said: “No one is to carry out my divine tasks save me and a man of my family.”
Anass (bin Malik) said: “The Prophet (s) sent Bara’a with Abu Bakr, then he called for him and said: “No one is to inform of this except a man of my family.” He called for Ali and gave it to him.
Jamee’ bin Omayr al-Laythi asked Abdullah bin Omar about Imam Ali. Ibn Omar scolded him and said: “This is the house of the Prophet in the mosque and this is the house of Ali. Once the Prophet sent Abu Bakr and Omar with Bara’a to Mecca. While they were on their way to Mecca, a rider came. They asked who he was. He said: “I am Ali. O Abu Bakr, give me the book, which is with you.” He said: “Is there anything wrong about me?” Ali said: “I don’t think but good.” Ali took the book and went to Mecca. Abu Bakr and Omar went back to Medina and asked the Prophet: “What happened about us?” He said: “Nothing happened about you save good, but it was revealed to me that no one was to carry out my divine tasks except me or a man of my family.”
The books of Hadith mentioned clearly that Abu Bakr returned to Medina uncomfortably and was afraid that something was revealed to the Prophet about him. This didn’t fit hat he was the emir of that season of hajj. But the propaganda against Imam Ali was so strong that it made a great effect during the beginning of Islam.
Thirdly: the acquittal of the covenant with the polytheists brought great results to the Muslims. As well it brought Imam Ali more glory and highness near all of the Arabs, when Allah and His apostle chose him to do this task especially after the bringing back of Abu Bakr. Many other qualities confirmed that Ali was the best one of the umma and the closest to the Prophet alive or dead.
When the Prophet (s) acquitted the covenant of the polytheists, prevented them to come to hajj and to Mecca and declared that Paradise was prohibited for them, the religion became complete and the state of the Muslims became better and stronger than ever before.
The Muslims gained honor and glory. The fury of the polytheists was reposed and their necks submitted to the Muslims. So the religion was all for Allah, glory be to Him.
Allah willed all that to be achieved by His slave and His apostle’s guardian, Ali bin Abu Talib, to extol him, to show his virtue, to exalt his fame, to declare his great significance, to pave the way to entrust him with the caliphate and to declare practically in the next year that he would be the caliph after the Prophet (s). The fame of Ali spread among the Arabs like the light of morning, for the acquittal of any covenant, according to their rules, was to be done by the chief, who had concluded that covenant, and no one other than him could do that except that, who represented him or would be his successor, who must be brave and strong, didn’t fall into error and didn’t doubt in his decisions or when he broke or confirm the verdicts.
What would guide you to all that was the saying of the Prophet (s) to Imam Ali when he sent him to take Bara’a from Abu Bakr: “Either I go with it or you go.” Imam Ali said: “If it must be, then I will go.” The Prophet (s) said: “Go off. Allah will confirm your tongue and guide your heart.”
It was clear that the task, which wouldn’t be carried out except by the Prophet or by someone like him (in status) was a very great task that Ali won a victory by achieving it. He overcame the time; no one would precede him and no one would come up with him or look forward to his position.
He, who inspected well the bringing back of Abu Bakr from the task, would find the truth clear.
It was to say that the Prophet certified the reason when he said: “Gabriel came and said to me: “No one is to carry out your divine tasks save you or a man of your family.” In the Arabic text he used (LEN), which means (will never). The meaning of the tradition is (no one at all is to carry out anything (of the divine tasks) instead of you except a man of your family).
If you say that this tradition might concern this very task only and not any task in general.
We say that this tradition was not the only tradition having this meaning. The likes of it were many.
In the Day of Arafa of the farewell hajj (the last hajj of the Prophet) the Prophet, from above his she-camel, tried to attract the pilgrims’ attention to inform them of their resort in order to complete his mission. He called them loudly. They all turned towards him with their eyes, ears and hearts. He said: “Ali is from me and I am from Ali. No one is to carry out my tasks except me and Ali.”
What an entrustment that it was light for the tongue but heavy in the scale. It gave Ali the authority to carry out the Prophet’s own tasks and made him be entrusted with the Prophet’s secrets as Aaron was for Moses but Ali was not a prophet but a vizier and a guardian, who conducted like his prophet and judged among people instead of him.
That was a top, which Allah and His apostle didn’t let anyone other than Ali ascend. (..then look again, can you see any disorder? Then turn back the eye again and again; your look shall come back to you confused while it is fatigued) 67:3-4. The Prophet (s) raised Ali to a level much higher than the level of the umma. He mixed his flesh with his own flesh and his blood with his own blood and his hearing, sight, heart and soul with his own when he said: “Ali is from me and I am from Ali.” This was not enough for him until he said: “No one is to carry out my tasks except me and Ali.” He put everything in this saying and made people perceive what he wanted to say. It was no wonder of that, for Allah said: (And certainly We chose them, having knowledge, above the nations and We gave them of the communications wherein was clear blessing) 44:32-33.
Let the prudent inspect this covenant well to know that it was no less in importance than the traditions of the day of Ghadeer. The carrying out of the Prophet’s tasks, which concerned the Prophet and Ali only and was prohibited for the others to do, was itself the legal execution with infallibility like the infallibility of the holy Qur’an. So it was a definite excuse that the umma had to obey as they obeyed the orders of the holy Qur’an.
This was confirmed by the saying of the Prophet (s): “Ali is with the Qur’an and the Qur’an is with Ali. They never separate” and his saying: “Mercy be upon Ali! O Allah, turn the rightness with Ali wherever he turns.” And many other traditions like that, which declared the infallibility of Imam Ali. (Our Lord! we believe in what Thou hast revealed and we follow the apostle, so write us down with those who bear witness) 3:53.
Fourthly: the enemies of Ali, who wronged him and tried to defame him, as well as Abu Hurayra, who flattered Ali’s enemies, all distorted this tradition and turned his virtues aside from him.
His enemies of the hypocrites and his opponents, who broke their homage and fought him in the battle of the Camel, those who rebelled against his rule when they fought him in the battle of Siffeen and the Kharijites, who reneged from the right way of Islam, altogether tried to do that. His enemies, especially the dominants like Mu’awiya and his companions, employed their mercenaries to distort Imam Ali’s virtues as possible as they could or the mercenaries themselves flattered the Umayyads by doing that. Ali had no guilt and they would never be excused for Allah honoured Ali by these high qualities because he reached a high position near Allah by his faith and jihad. They couldn’t put up with the glory and honour of Ali and the qualities he owned; his sincerity to Allah, to the apostle and to the umma, his personality, his virtues, his kinship with the Prophet, his wife and his progeny, so they tried their best to defame him and to distort all his virtues. The scorpions of envy crept into the hearts of the hypocrites. The sons of the livers eater occupied the top of the enmity to Ali. They didn’t leave any way to fight him, to disgrace him and to incite people against him. They advanced in their cunning; broke their homage to him, deprived him of his legal rule and killed his progeny. They turned their backs to what the Prophet had ordered them to love and obey.
What they committed against him filled the space and covered the earth. All that didn’t satisfy them until they: announced curse upon him, like the announcement of Iqama.
Would they not involve themselves in the holy Sunna where they tore every thing referred to preferring Imam Ali? They decided, with no evidence, that the true traditions were false. They interpreted the clear ones according to their wishes. They accused the narrators of being oppositionists. They distorted much of the Sunna and changed the fair meanings of the traditions as what Abu Hurayra mentioned in this tradition when he said: “Abu Bakr sent me…then he sent Ali after us to announce with us…” as if Ali was, in that season of hajj, just one of the callers sent by Abu Bakr to call out with Abu Hurayra.
It was no wonder of Abu Hurayra for his boldness in inventing traditions and directing them ornamented with the brocade that the rabble liked and the general policy preferred and spread by the false propaganda.
Didn’t he transmit the virtue from Ali to Abu Bakr flattering the government and endearing himself to the public by inventing what pleased them?
What a doing he did! He gagged the mouths to speak a word of the truth for fear of the public to plot against them and the government to revenge then. And what about then!
Abu Hurayra wanted by his tradition to sweep away the honoured position that Allah and His apostle chose Ali for in that season of hajj. He tended to say that:
(1) The task, which Ali went to carry out, was by the command of Abu Bakr, who was the emir of hajj as Abu Hurayra pretended. That Ali didn’t suffice to do the task so Abu Bakr sent Abu Hurayra with some of the strong and hard men like Abu Hurayra to take much care about it.
(2) Ali had nothing more than what Abu Hurayra and his group, who were sent by Abu Bakr, had in that task, because they did the same as he did.
It was enough to refute this tradition that Allah saw Abu Bakr was not suitable for that task. He revealed to the Prophet to bring him back and to choose one of the only two efficient men for this task; either the Prophet himself or his guardian Ali.
Abu Hurayra, before he was employed to serve the Umayyad propaganda, told of this event without mentioning that Abu Bakr was the emir or ever mentioned him. He pretended that he and the other callers were with Ali. Refer to his tradition mentioned above.
We don’t trust in both of his traditions nor that he called out in the Day of Immolation or that he ever attended that season of hajj at all. I swear by Allah that we do never trust in whatever he narrated.
Fifthly: The political propaganda, during the Umayyad reign, had committed a serious crime against the prophetic traditions besides what their mercenaries invented of fabricated traditions to flatter the rulers and how hard they tried to make the tradition of Hameed narrated from Abu Hurayra be true.
Inventing traditions was a good craft for the adulators to live by. Those adulators had a skill to ornament and promote their goods (traditions), which no one felt of at that time except the discerners and how few they were! Behind those adulators were the mercenaries of those, who collected and wrote down Sunna and Hadith, the flattering learned ones, the hypocrites, who pretended to be pious and abstinent like Hameed bin Abdur Raman, Muhammad bin Ka’b al-Qardhi and the likes, the chiefs of the tribes in the towns and the sheikhs of the clans in the desert, who whenever heard anything from those adulators, spread it among the public and the rabble of the new conquered countries, told of it from upon the minbars, depended upon it as excuse and regarded it as base of Sharia. The trustworthy faithful ones had nothing to do but to be silent in front of those flattering mercenaries, who were defended by the rulers. If those poor were asked about what the liars invented of traditions, especially that talked about the virtues of Abu Bakr and Omar, they would fear the public, who followed the rulers blindly, if they said the truth. They would fear the flattering and the flattered ones. Thus many facts were lost many heresies were kept as bases of the Sharia. This heresy, of Hameed and Abu Hurayra, was the best lucky to be the stronger against the Prophet’s family. They fabricated many other traditions having the same meaning and ascribed one of them to Ali himself, the second to his cousin Abdullah bin Abbas, the third to his companion Jabir bin Abdullah al-Ansari and the fourth to his grandson, the inheritor of his knowledge, Imam Muhammad al-Baqir. It was a conspiracy that the enemies of Ali used to do and they kept on it to disgrace the Hashimites without letting the public know the truth. The people, who came after them, collected those traditions as they were and wrote them down admiringly. They regarded what they had collected as true traditions inattentively.
The defect of the series of narrators of the tradition, which was ascribed to Imam Ali was Abu Zar’a Wahab bin Rashid. He was so hostile to Imam Ali. He acquired the hostility to the Hashimites from his teacher Abu Yazeed Yunus bin Yazeed bin an-Najjad al-Ibli, the freed servant of Mu’awiya.
The defect in the series of narrators of the tradition ascribed to ibn Abbas was Abul Qassim Muqsim bin Majza’a. He declared his enmity to Imam Ali. Al-Hakim thought that this man was one of al-Bukhari’s men of Hadith and mentioned his fabricated tradition ascribed to ibn Abas in his Mustadrak. Muqsim was not trusty as al-Bukhari mentioned in his book. Ath-Thahabi in his book Mizan al-I’tidal quoted from al-Bukhari and ibn Hazm that this man was not trusty. Ibn Sa’d said in his Tabaqat that he was excessive in narrating traditions and he was not trusty.
Because he was not trusty, al-Bukhari and Muslim didn’t mentioned his traditions except one mentioned by al-Bukhari that Abdul Kareem bin Malik said that he had heard Muqsim saying: “Ibn Abbas said: “Those, who didn’t go to fight in the battle of Badr and those, who fought would never be regarded as equal.”
Al-Bukhari didn’t mentioned in his Sahih except this tradition of Muqsim, certifying that he was not trusty. He mentioned this tradition for it didn’t have any legal verdict besides that it wasn’t said by the Prophet (s).
The defect in the tradition ascribed to Jabir was Abu Salih Iss-haq bin Najeeh al-Malti. He was offensive, malicious and excessive in lying. He was so daring in fabricating traditions as mentioned by the all, who wrote about the men of Hadith.
The defect of the tradition ascribed to Imam Muhammad al-Baqir (s) was Muhammad bin Iss-haq, who mentioned the tradition in his biography, which he filled with heresies and wonders that couldn’t be believed.
Anyhow it was easy to refute these fabricated traditions for they were mean like their narrators. Their texts were weak and contradictory to the fact of those, whom they were ascribed to. In fact they were contradictory to the traditions narrated by Abu Bakr, Ali, ibn Abbas, ibn Omar, Sa’d and Anass that we mentioned in the second point of this chapter. It didn’t fit the conduct of the Prophet, who did never appoint any one to command Ali along his lifetime but Ali always was the commander and the bearer of the banner in all the battles of the Prophet. It was different for the others like Abu Bakr, Omar and others, who were under the commandership of the teenager Ussama when the Prophet (s) went to the better world. In the battle of That as-Salassil, they (Abu Bakr and Omar) were under the commandership of Amr bin al-Aass.
As for Ali, he was not commanded by any one along the life of the Prophet (s). The Prophet didn’t send him with the army of Ussama nor with the army of Amr bin al-Aass or the army of Abu Bakr and Omar when he sent them to Khaybar. When they returned he sent Ali and both of them were under Ali’s commandership until he conquered Khaybar. When the Prophet sent Khalid bin al-Waleed to Yemen with an army and sent Ali with another army, he said to them that if they met, Ali would be the commander of the two armies and if they separated each one would be the commander of his army.
Abdullah bin Abbas said: “Ali had four qualities that no one other than him had; he was the first of the Arabs and the foreigners, who offered prayer to Allah with the Prophet, he was the bearer of the Prophet’s banner in all of his battles…etc.”
Al-Bukhari mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet (s) said: “Some men of the Israelites, who lived before you, were talked with (by the angels) although they were not apostles. If there is someone of my umma like them, it will be Omar.”
Al-Bukhari mentioned another tradition narrated by Abu Hurayra that he said: “The Prophet (s) said: “There were among the nations, who had lived before you, some people, who were talked with (by the angels). If my umma has someone like those, it will be Omar.”
It was a fabricated tradition that Abu Hurayra had invented with adorned words years after the death of Omar. It came out just like what the policy of the upper class wanted and the public at that time jogged with it joyfully. The hostile Umayyad policy against Imam Ali and the Hashimites required raising Abu Bakr and Omar to the position of the prophets and the infallible saints. The masses were so ardent with the victories achieved during the reign of the two caliphs, Abu Bakr and Omar, so Abu Hurayra flattered both; the ruler and the ruled people by this tradition and the likes, therefore he got a favoured position near the rulers and among the public. If Abu Hurayra had told of these traditions during the lifetime of Omar, the caliph’s stick would have got its share from his back, but the space was free for him to talk whatever he liked. It was well-known for the discerners and the prudent that those, whom the angels talked with, were either prophets or prophets’ guardians, who all were infallible. The angels talked with the prophets face to face but as for the guardians, Allah inspired them with the truth as if an angel talked with them, but in fact no talker was there.
No doubt that Omar got a high status in Islam and did well for the umma, but he was not a prophet nor an infallible guardian, so the angels would not talk with him.
Moreover that the doings of Omar during the life of the Prophet (s) and after his life didn’t fit him to be talked with by the angels at all.
The two sheikhs mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet (s) said: My heirs are not to divide a dinar of mine among them. What I have left, after taking away the spending of my wives and my employee, is to be for charity.”
This tradition was narrated by Abu Bakr only. He used it as an excuse to prevent Fatima az-Zahra’ (the daughter of the Prophet) her heritage after the death of her father. The two sheikhs and others mentioned that Aa’isha (the Prophet’s wife) said: “Fatima, the daughter of the Prophet (s), sent to Abu Bakr asking him for her father’s heritage. Abu Bakr said: “The Prophet said: We don’t bequeath. What we leave is to be for charity.” Abu Bakr refused to give her anything of her father’s heritage. Fatima became very angry with Abu Bakr. She deserted him and didn’t talk to him until she died. She lived six months after her father’s death. When she died, her husband buried her in the night (as she wanted in her will) and Abu Bakr didn’t offer the prayer (for the dead) for her.
Yes, she became very angry. She wore her hijab and left her house with her companions of women. Her gait was just the same as her father’s, until she came to Abu Bakr, who was among a crowd of Muhajireen, Ansar and others. They put a veiling between her and them. She moaned and made all the attendants sob. The gathering shook. She waited a while until their sob and passion calmed down. She began her speech with praising Allah. She went on her speech that made the sights submit and the souls surrender. She would bring them back to the right way, but the politics overcame every thing then!
He, who heard her speech she made in that day, would know what there were between her and the people (Abu Bakr, Omar…). She proved her rights with clear evidences derived from the holy Qur’an that couldn’t be denied.
She said: “Did you turn your backs purposely to the book of Allah, who said: (And Sulaiman was Dawood's heir) 27:16, and said when he talked about Zechariah: (grant me from Thyself an heir, who should inherit me and inherit from the children of Yaqoub, and make him, my Lord, one in whom Thou art well pleased) 19:5-6, (and the possessors of relationships are nearer to each other in the ordinance of Allah) 8:75, (Allah enjoins you concerning your children: The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females) 4:11 and said: (Bequest is prescribed for you when death approaches one of you, if he leaves behind wealth for parents and near relatives, according to usage, a duty (incumbent) upon those who guard (against evil)) 2:180.
Then she said: “Had Allah specialized you with a verse of the Qur’an and excluded my father? Are you more aware of the Qur’an than my father and my cousin (Ali)? Or you say: those of two different religions are not to bequeath each other?”
She argued with them by showing evidences from the holy Qur’an, which confirmed clearly that the prophets bequeathed their offspring through the verses about David and Zechariah. She was, definitely, more aware of the essence of the Qur’an than those, who came lately after the revelation of the Qur’an and distorted the meaning of heritage from properties to prophecy and wisdom without any evidence. They just played with the real meaning of the words! If that was true, Abu Bakr and the other attendants of Muhajireen and Ansar at that time would disagree with her about that. There were some evidences confirming inheriting properties by the prophets as mentioned by Alam al-Huda in his book ash-Shafi.
Then she argued with them justifying her right of heritage by showing them the other Qur’anic verses concerning heritage. If she was different from the others in this concern, her father and her cousin would definitely explain it to her and would not let her be liable to appear as ignorant in asking for what she didn’t deserve and to disgrace herself and dignity by arguing without any evidence that it wouldn’t result but enmity. It was impossible for the Prophet and his guardian to do so.
The prophet Muhammad (s) was very fond of his daughter Fatima Az-Zahra’ and cared for her much more than the kind fathers with their children. He embraced her with his warm mercy and was ready to sacrifice himself for her. He was very happy to be with her. He had much care to bring her up with the highest of morals and dignity. He tried his best to educate her. He fed her with the knowledge of Allah and the Sharia, until she reached the top of every virtue and every nobility of character. After all, would he keep secret what concerned her legal duties? Allah forbid! How would he do that and let her put up with all what she met after his death because of the heritage? How would he cause sedition to the umma because of the heritage? Certainly not! He was far above that.
Did her husband, the Prophet’s mate and brother, ignore this tradition in spite of his great knowledge and wisdom and that he was the first to be a Muslim, the Prophet’s cousin and son-in-law besides his honour, high position, guardianship and the special respect the Prophet had towards him? Why did the Prophet (s) keep it a secret and not reveal it to Imam Ali, who had all those virtues and noble qualities that no one else had? What about all of the Hashimites, who never heard of this tradition until they became astonished by hearing it after the death of the Prophet (s)? Why didn’t the Prophet’s wives know anything about this tradition that they sent Othman to ask for them about their shares from the Prophet’s heritage? How was it possible for the Prophet to tell someone, who didn’t have anything to do with his heritage, about it and not to tell his real heirs? The Prophet’s conduct was not so. He announced the divine orders frankly. It was never told that he kept the legal laws a secret. He treated his tribe and relative so kindly and solemnly.
There was still a word said by Fatima (s) that invoked the zeal of people and moved their fury at most. It was her saying: “or do you say that those of two different religions are not to bequeath each other?” That was to say: when you prevented me my father’s heritage, you wanted to say that I was not on the religion of my father (not a Muslim) and if you proved that (I am not a Muslim) you would have a legal excuse for preventing me my father’s heritage. We don’t seek save Allah’s judgement!
Anyhow Fatima (s) failed to get her heritage because of this tradition, which the caliph alone, told of. It was not narrated by any other than him. It might be said that it was narrated by Malik bin Ouss bin al-Hadthan.
It was said that Ali and al-Abbas went to Omar during his caliphate to judge between them. Othman, Abdur Rahman, az-Zubayr and Sa’d were there with the caliph. The caliph said to them: “Do you know that the Prophet had said: (We (the prophets) don’t bequeath. What we leave is to be for charity).” The attendants were obliged to believe him. It was not possible for them except to submit to the two caliphs’ sayings especially at that time.
As for Abu Hurayra, he was nothing to be mentioned at those days. No one listened to him or paid any attention for him. Moreover, he was accused of his bad accent. He didn’t dare, with those great figures, to tell of Hadith. In fact, he didn’t find himself fit to join those, whom the caliph trusted and listened to, therefore he didn’t say any word about this subject at that time until all the great companions died and countries like Sham, Egypt, Africa, Iraq, Persia, India and other countries were conquered and their peoples became Muslims. The Muslims entered a new era. Then the Umayyads praised Abu Hurayra and raised his name and mention. They take off his dress of obscurity and made him bloom after his fade. It became easy for him to say whatever he liked. So he began to tell the public of what made them like him and be attached to him. Hence he flattered the rulers and the public by this tradition, which boosted their beloved caliph among the general public.
Abu Hurayra said: “The prophet Muhammad (s) said to his uncle Abu Talib: “Say that there is no god but Allah and I will witness it for you in the day of Resurrection.” His uncle said: “I would say it to comfort you but I was afraid that Quraysh would blame me and say that he did it because of impatience.” Therefore, Allah revealed to the Prophet this verse: (Surely you cannot guide whom you love, but Allah guides whom He pleases) 28:56
Abu Hurayra said in another place: “The Prophet (s) said to his uncle when he was dying: “Say that there is no god but Allah and I will witness it for you in the Day of Resurrection.” His uncle refused to say. Therefore Allah revealed to the Prophet (s): ((Surely you cannot guide whom you love, but Allah guides whom He pleases).
Abu Talib, may Allah have mercy upon him, died in the tenth year of the prophethood of Muhammad (s), i.e. three years before hijra. It was also said that he died in the ninth or eighth year. So he died ten years before Abu Hurayra came to Hijaz. Then how could Abu Hurayra meet the Prophet and his uncle while they were talking about what he narrated as if he had seen with his eyes and heard with his ears? But he was of those, whose faith and reason didn’t guide their tongues!
This tradition was one of many invented by the mercenaries to flatter the enemies of Ali and his progeny. The Umayyad state tried whatever was possible to spread it. There were enough works written by the scholars that refuted this tradition and proved Abu Talib’s faithfulness with definite evidences. Whoever wants to know the truth of the faithfulness of Abu Talib, the Prophet’s uncle, who was responsible for the Prophet since his childhood, brought him up, secured and safeguarded him, let refer to those books.
Abu Talib said in one of his poems:
O Allah, may You witness
I have believed in the mission of Muhammad.
The two sheikhs mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “When Allah revealed to the Prophet (And warn your nearest relations) 26:214, he stood up and said: “O people of Quraysh, I don’t substitute for you near Allah (in the Day of Resurrection). O family of Abd Manaf, I don’t substitute for you near Allah. O Abbas, I don’t substitute for you near Allah. O Safiyya, I don’t substitute for you near Allah. O Fatima bint Muhammad, ask for anything of my wealth but I don’t substitute for you near Allah.”
This Qur’anic verse was revealed to the Prophet in the beginning of Islam and before its spread in Mecca when Abu Hurayra was still in Yemen. He came to Hijaz twenty years after the revelation of this verse. He cut off the tradition and distorted it as usual according to the Umayyad policy and requirements of its propaganda against Imam Ali and the Hashimites. When this verse was revealed to the Prophet (s), he gathered his relatives, among whom were his uncles; Abu Talib, Hamza, al-Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them) and Abu Lahab (curse be upon him) and asked them to believe in Allah. He said to them: “Who of you will support me to carry out my mission and be my brother, vizier, guardian, heir and successor?” Ali, who was the youngest of them at that time, said: “I will be your vizier in carrying your mission.” The Prophet touched Ali’s neck and said: “This is my brother, vizier, guardian, heir and successor. You are to listen to him and to obey him.”
Al-Bukhari mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “While the Abyssinians were playing with their bayonets in front of the Prophet in the mosque, Omar entered and began to throw them with pebbles. The Prophet said to Omar: “Let them do that.”
The Prophet was far away from play and higher than levity. He knew well, more than any one else, of the prohibited actions. He would never let the ignorant to play in the mosque in front of him. He was busy, all the time, with the divine tasks. He had no time to spend with play or in vain. He was far above to let his honoured mosque be for play and vanity. (A grievous word it is that comes out of their mouths; they speak nothing but a lie) 18:5.
Al-Bukhari mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet sent us in a delegation and said to us: “If you find (those two men), burn them with fire!” Then he said to us when we wanted to leave: “I ordered you to burn (those two men) with fire, but no one is to torture with fire save Allah. So when you find them, kill them both.”
This tradition was untrue because it showed abrogation of an order before performing it. It was impossible for Allah and His apostle to do that. When the Prophet said: (burn them with fire), it was revealed to him by Allah (Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed) 53:3-4, so when the Prophet abrogated it (according to Allah’s revelation) before performing it that would show ignorance of Allah! Allah forbid! Glory be to Him, the Exalted, the Almighty.
Al-Bukhari mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The prophet Muhammad said: The holy Qur’an was eased for Prophet David. He ordered his men to saddle his sumpter and he finished reciting the Qur’an before they finished saddling the sumpter.”
It was impossible in two ways;
First: the holy Qur’an was revealed to the prophet Muhammad and it was not revealed before that. How did Prophet David read it?
The defenders of Abu Hurayra justified that by saying that he meant by Qur’an the Psalms and the Torah because they were miracles as the Qur’an was.
They interpreted Abu Hurayra’s saying, as they liked not as he himself meant. And Allah is the most Aware!
Second: the period of saddling the sumpter was too short for David to recite the Qur’an, whether he meant the Qur’an of Muhammad or the Psalms or the Torah. It is definite that reason doesn’t accept like these impossibilities.
So it was nonsense what al-Qastalani mentioned in this concern when he said: “This tradition confirmed that Allah condensed time for whomever He will of His people as He condensed distance for them. An-Nawawi said: “Some people recited all the Qur’an four times in the night and four times in the day. I had seen Abut-Tahir in Jerusalem in eight hundred and sixty-seven of hijra and I had heard then that he recited all the Qur’an more than ten times in the night and in the day. Sheikh of Islam al-Burhan bin Abu Shareef told me that Abut-Tahir had recited the Qur’an fifteen times in a day and a night. This is something that we cannot perceive except by referring it to the divine emanation.”
It can never be possible except when we can put the world inside the egg.
Reasonable people know well that condensing time and distance is something unreal. Suppose that it was real. What was the use of it then? It would certainly cause many problems.
If he had talked about condensing speech, it might have been more suitable although it would be unreal.
This tradition couldn’t be considered as a miracle for the prophet David (s), because miracles were extraordinary things but what Abu Hurayra talked about in his tradition was (extra-reasonable).
The two sheikhs mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet (s) said: “A nation of the Israelites was lost and they didn’t know what they had done. I think they were metamorphosed into mice, because when mice were given camel’s milk they didn’t drink it and when they were given ewe’s milk they drank.”
What a folly it was that even the foolish would disdain, unless they were mad. But the two sheikhs trusted in this dotard and mentioned his absurdities as evidences. If what he said did not disgrace Islam, we would put his rope on his neck and let him graze freely with his likes, but we had to defend the infallible Sunna as possible as we could because these superstitions were the worst of defects that afflicted Islam.
Muslim mentioned that Abdul Melik bin Abu Bakr said that Abu Bakr had said: “I heard Abu Hurayra narrating in his stories: “Whoever was impure when it dawned, he was not to fast.” I told Abdur Rahman of that and he asked his father. His father denied it. Abdur Rahman and I went to Aa’isha and Um Salama (the Prophet’s wives). Abdur Rahman asked them and said to me: “Both of them said that the Prophet became impure in the morning without a wet dream and he fasted. Then we went to Marwan, who was the wali of Medina by Mu’awiya. Abdur Rahman told Marwan of that. Marwan said: “I ask you to go to Abu Hurayra to refute his saying.” We went to Abu Hurayra. Abdur Rahman told him that. He said: “Did they (the Prophet’s wives) say that?” he said: “Yes, they did.” Abu Hurayra said: “They knew more than me. I heard that from al-Fadhl and didn’t hear it from the Prophet (s).” He changed his mind and ascribed the tradition to al-Fadhl.
It was certain that al-Fadhl had died during the reign of Abu Bakr and this case happened during the reign of Mu’awiya. So it was easy for Abu Hurayra to say that he had heard it from al-Fadhl and not from the Prophet. If al-Fadhl was alive, Abu Hurayra would not dare to say so.
Al-Bukhari mentioned a tradition narrated by Abu Salama that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet (s) said: “There is no infection, no Safar and no Hama.” One of the nomads asked him: “O messenger of Allah, our camels move on the sands like the antelopes, but why do they, when mix with a mangy camel, become mangy?” The Prophet said: “Then, who infected the first one?”
Directly after this tradition, al-Bukhari mentioned another one narrated by Abu Salama that he had heard Abu Hurayra saying: “The Prophet (s) said: “No sick is to mix with a healthy one.” Abu Salama said to Abu Hurayra: “Didn’t you narrate that there is no infection.” He denied his first tradition and began to murmur in Abyssinian.”
This, always, was the state of those, who walk in two different ways! (This is a sufficient exposition for the people and that they may be warned thereby, and that they may know that He is One God and that those possessed of understanding may mind) 14:52.
The two sheikhs mentioned a tradition narrated by Abu Hurayra that the Prophet (s) had said: “There was an Israelite man called Jurayj. While he was offering his prayer, his mother came and called him. He said with himself: “Do I answer her or offer my prayer?” His mother said: “O Allah, don’t let him die until he meets the prostitutes.” One day, while Jurayj was in his hermitage, a prostitute came to seduce him. He refused to respond to her. She went to a shepherd and made love with him. She gave birth to a boy and pretended it was Jurayj’s son. People came to him, destroyed his hermitage, brought him down and abused him. He made wudu’ , offered prayer and came to the newborn baby. He asked the baby: “Who is your father?” The newborn baby said: “My father is the shepherd.” The people said to Jurayj: “We shall build your hermitage with gold.” He said: “Nothing but clay.” While an Israelite woman was suckling her baby, a man on his sumpter passed by her. She said: “O Allah, make my son be like him.” The baby left its mother’s breast, came near the man and said: “O Allah, don’t make me be like him.” Then it came back to suckle his mother’s breast. (Abu Hurayra said: as if I looked at the Prophet suckling his finger!). Then the mother passed by a bondwoman. She said: “O Allah, don’t make my son be like this bondwoman.” The baby left its mother’s breast and said: “O Allah, make me be like her.” The mother asked her baby: “Why did you do that?” The baby said: “That man on the sumpter was one of the tyrants, but as for that bondwoman, people said: “Zaynab stole” but she didn’t.”
Neither Jurayj was a prophet nor any of the two babies. There was not any reason for miracles to happen. What these two babies did, was against (the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah's creation; that is the right religion, but most people do not know) 30:30.
Al-Bukhari mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The prophet Muhammad (s) entrusted me with keeping the zakat of Ramadan. Someone came (to my house) and began to gather some food (of the zakat). I caught him and said: “By Allah, I will take you to the Prophet.” He said: “I am very needy and I have children.” I set him free. In the morning the Prophet said to me: “What did your captive do last night?” I said: “He complained to me that he was in need and had hungry children. I had pity for him and set him free.” The Prophet said: “He told you a lie. He will come again.” I watched him. He came and began to gather some food. I caught him and said I would take him to the Prophet. He said: “I am in need and have children. Let me go and I won’t come back again.” In the morning the Prophet said to me: “What did your captive do last night?” I said: “He complained to me that he was in need and had children. I felt pity for him and set him free.” The Prophet (s) said: “He told you a lie. He will come back again.” I watched him in the third night. He came and began to gather some food. I caught him and said that I would take him to the Prophet. He said: “Let me teach you some words, which Allah will benefit you with. When you go to bed, recite the Qur’anic verse (al-Kursi). You will be kept by an angel and the Satan won’t near you until the morning.” I set him free. In the morning, the Prophet said to me: “What did your captive do last night?” I told him all what happened. He said to me: “Do you know with whom you talked for the last three nights?” I said: “No, I don’t.” he said: “He was the Satan.”
This was a superstition, which no one would believe except that whose mind was in a holiday or was brainsick. Abu Hurayra declined with this tradition into a deep hole. When he felt pity for the thief, it meant that he believed him. In believing the thief, Abu Hurayra denied the saying of the Prophet, when he said to him: “He told you a lie” for three times.
Abu Hurayra fell to the bottom on the other side when he swore by Allah that he would take the thief to the Prophet but he broke his swear and had pity for the thief and set him free in the first, the second and the third time. Was breaking the swear according to Abu Hurayra’s thought permissible?
There was a third fall, which could not be forgiven. Abu Hurayra was not permitted to give from the zakat but he was entrusted to keep it only as he said in the beginning of the tradition. So how did he let the thief take from the zakat? Was it permissible for the trustee to breach his deposit for three times? After this breach, could he be described as trusty?
What strange stories Abu Hurayra told us about his Satan! Sometimes he said that he came to steal some food for his children. In another time he said that he would run away with his fart, if he heard azan. In a third time he said that the Satan was tied to a pole in the mosque to be seen by people and many other stories, which the reasonable and wise men would disdain to listen to them. We pray Allah to save us from the torpor of mind!
Muslim mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “I used to invite my mother to be a Muslim when she was polytheist. One day when I invited her for that, she abused the Prophet (s). I went to the Prophet and I was crying. I said to him: “My mother abused you. Please, pray Allah to guide her.” He said: “O Allah, may You guide Abu Hurayra’s mother.” I went out happily. When I got home, I found the door closed. My mother heard my steps. She said: “Stay where you are, Abu Hurayra.” I heard the murmur of water. She washed and put on her garment and veil and then she opened the door. She said: “I witness that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is his slave and messenger.” I went back to the Prophet and I was crying because of happiness. I said to the Prophet: “Be delighted! Allah responded to your pray. He guided my mother.” The Prophet praised Allah. I said to him: “O messenger of Allah, pray Allah to endear me and my mother to the believers and to endear them to us.” He said: “O Allah, endear Your this slave and his mother to the believers and endear the believers to them.” So every believer, who heard of me or saw me, loved me.”
We have some notes about this tradition:
First: this tradition was not narrated from the Prophet by anyone except Abu Hurayra alone. So it is to be considered as its likes.
Second: if his mother was so polytheist, insisted on polytheism and unbelief, refused to be a Muslim and abused the Prophet whenever she was invited to be Muslim so why did she emigrate from Yemen, her birthplace and country, to Medina, the country of Islam and the capital of the Prophet and his assistants? Why did she not stay, as she was, in her country with her idols like the rest of the people of Yemen at that time? How will the defenders of Abu Hurayra answer this question? Do they know anything about her migration, being a Muslim and other things about her mentioned by any one rather than Abu Hurayra? If they have anything about her, let them lead us to it. I, by Allah, did not find any of the companions mentioned her except the caliph Omar when he deposed Abu Hurayra from the emirate of Bahrain. He said to him: “Omayma begot you just to graze donkeys.” This did not show more than knowing her name. The historians mentioned her according to what Abu Hurayra said about her and no one else.
Third: Abu Hurayra was one of the most destitute inhabitants of suffa. He asked people in the roads for a bite to keep him alive. You heard him talking about himself during the reign of the Prophet that he often fainted between the minbar of the Prophet and the room of Aa’isha and the comers put their feet on his neck thinking he was mad but he had no madness. It was just because of hunger. You heard his confession about himself and the rest of the inhabitants of suffa. They had no relatives and no houses. They used to sleep in the mosque. The suffa of the mosque was their home day and night. Abu Hurayra was the most famous of those who lived in the suffa. In fact he was the introducer of the suffa. So wherefrom did he get that house, which he talked about in this tradition?
Fourth: if what Abu Hurayra said in this tradition was true, it would be one of the signs of the prophecy and Islam where Allah responded to the prayer of the Prophet immediately and guided Abu Hurayra’s mother and turned her from being excessive in unbelief and aberration into being an obedient faithful. The signs and miracles of the prophecy were so famous and spread. All of the companions told of them. Why did they turn their backs to this sign that no one of them narrated except Abu Hurayra?
Fifth: if it was true that the Prophet prayed Allah for Abu Hurayra and his mother to endear them to the believers and to endear the believers to them, the family of the Prophet, who were the masters of the believers and the leaders of the umma and the religion, would love him. If it was so then why did the twelve imams and the jurisprudents of their followers degrade him and not have any regard to his traditions? They did not pay any attention to his traditions. Imam Ali said: “The falsest of people, or he said: the falsest of the living people is Abu Hurayra ad-Doussi.”
If Abu Hurayra was beloved by the believers and they were beloved by him, then Omar, when he deposed him from the emirate of Bahrain, would not say to him: “O enemy of Allah and enemy of his Qur’an, you stole the wealth of the Muslims…etc.” How would the enemy of Allah be beloved by the believers and they be beloved by him? Once Omar stroke him on the chest that made him fall to the ground. Another time he beat him with his stick until he wounded his back and took from him ten thousand dinars he had stolen them from the treasury of the Muslims. He beat him in the third time when he said to him: “You narrated too many traditions of the Prophet and I think you fabricated and told lies.” One day Omar said to him angrily: “You have to leave narrating traditions or I will expel you to the land of Yemen or the land of monkeys.”
There were many other events happened between Abu Hurayra and Abdullah bin Abbas and between him and Aa’isha and others that didn’t show any sense of love.
Yes, there was mutual love between him and the family of Abul Aass, Abu Ma’eet and Abu Sufyan. His traditions endeared him to them for they found their long-sought goal in them to spread their false propaganda. What endeared them to him was their favors and gifts. They bloomed him after his fade and famed him after his obscurity. Marwan bin al-Hakam often appointed him as his deputy whenever he left Medina. He married him to Bisra bint Ghazwan, whom he would not glance at unless the Umayyads did that. When he became sick before his death, Marwan often visited him, gifted him and prayed for him to be recovered. When Abu Hurayra died, Marwan was in front of the funeral. Othman’s sons carried his coffin until they got to Baqee’. Al-Waleed bin Otba bin Abu Sufyan offered the prayer for the dead and sent a messenger to his uncle, Mu’awiya, telling him about the death of Abu Hurayra. Mu’awiya ordered to pay Abu Hurayra’s heirs ten thousand dinars and to treat them well. You saw the care and favors of the Umayyads towards Abu Hurayra and his devotion to serve them. Were they the believers, whom Allah endeared to him and endeared him to according to his terminology?
Al-Bukhari mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “When I came (from Yemen) to meet the Prophet (in Medina) I said in the way:
What a long troubled night it was!
But I was saved from the land of unbelief.
My servant escaped on my way to Medina. I came to the Prophet and paid homage to him. While I was with the Prophet, my servant appeared. The Prophet said to me: “O Abu Hurayra, this is your servant.” I said: “I set him free for the sake of Allah.”
Abu Hurayra did confuse the minds and did astonish the feelings! He said that he grew up as orphan and when he emigrated, he was very destitute. He was employed by so and so just for feed. He led their sumpters when they rode and served them when they got off. After that he pretended that he had a servant when he emigrated and then set him free for the sake of Allah! It was clear that he told of this tradition in the last days of his life when he enjoyed the comfort of the Umayyads’ favors. So he forgot how he was during his migration, after and before it when he was starving, empty handed, dejected and gloomy. His gut moaned and his intestines croaked. He was thrown on the road depending upon his liver because of hunger, asking the passers by for a bite to keep him alive. He himself said: “I swear by Allah, who there is no god but Him, I depended on my liver because of hunger. I put a rock on my stomach... etc.” He said in another tradition: “I often fainted between the minbar of the Prophet and the room of Aa’isha. The comers put their feet on my neck thinking I was mad. But it was no madness, it was hunger.” Many others of his sayings, which showed that he did not care for disgrace and that contempt did not pain him. All what he wanted was to satiate his empty stomach. So wherefrom did he get that servant whereas he was in that miserable condition?
If we asked Abu Hurayra that how the Prophet knew the servant when he just came in, we would embarrass his highness for the Prophet did not know the servant before! Perhaps Abu Hurayra had exaltedness and magnificence that made him be able to inspire to the Prophet about himself and his servant!
Muslim mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The prophet Muhammad (s) said: “While a man was in the desert, he heard a voice in one of the clouds saying: “Go and water the farm of that man (it called him by name).’’ The cloud moved and rained over the farm of that man. There was a man in the farm flowing water with his spade. He asked him about his name. He answered with the same name he heard in the cloud. The farmer asked the man: “Why do you ask about my name?” He said: “I heard a voice in the cloud. It ordered the cloud to rain over your farm and mentioned your name. Would you tell me what you do with your farm?” He said: “I wait until my trees fruit, then I give a third of the fruits as charity.”
This was impossible to happen for it was against the rules of nature. Abu Hurayra invented it as a fable intending to refer to the good results of charity. He ascribed it to the Prophet as he used to do with his imaginative stories. So we do not have save Allah to resort to.
Al-Bukhari mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: “The prophet Muhammad (s) said: “An Israelite man asked someone of his people to lend him one thousand dinars. He asked to bring his witnesses to witness of that. He said: “Allah is a sufficient witness.” He asked him to bring his guarantor. He said: “Allah is a sufficient guarantor.” He gave him the money to be repaid at a certain date. The borrower traveled by sea. After finishing his task he tried to find a ship to come back in order to repay the money to its owner but he did not find any. He took a piece of wood and hollowed it out. He put the one thousand dinars with a letter into the piece of wood. He glazed it and came with it to the sea. He said: “O Allah, You know that I have borrowed one thousand dinars from that man. He asked for a guarantor. I said that Allah was a sufficient guarantor and he agreed. He asked for a witness. I said that Allah was a sufficient witness and he agreed. I tried my best to find a ship to repay him his money but I could not. Now You are my depositee.” He threw the money into the sea and left. The lender went to the sea hoping that a ship might bring his money. He found a piece of wood in the water. He took it home as firewood. When he broke it, he found the money and the letter.” This tradition is too far away from any regard.
Neither the Sharia nor reason would permit to throw one thousand dinars into the sea. It would not be considered as acquittance if the money did not reach its owner. The wise men considered this doing as foolishness or madness and the doer must be under interdict. If this thing happened to the Israelites or to another nation, the prophet Muhammad (s) would not told of it without any comment in order not to encourage the believers of his umma to do like it. Anyhow it was impossible for the Prophet to say like that but Abu Hurayra worded it like the imaginative stories and ascribed it to the Prophet (s) just to sell his goods well.
Al-Bukari mentioned a tradition narrated by Abu Hurayra that the Prophet (s) had said: “There were three Israelite men. One was leprous, the other was bald and the third was blind. Allah wanted to try them. He sent an angel to them. The angel came to the leprous one and asked him: “What do you like the best?” He said: “A nice hue and a good skin. People disliked me.” The angel patted on him and he was recovered. He was given a nice hue and a good skin. The angel asked him: “Which of wealth do like?” He said: “Camels.” He was given a pregnant she-camel, which was about to beget. The angel said: “Allah may bless it for you.”
He came to the bald man and asked him: “What do you like the best?” he said: “Good hair. People disliked me.” The angel patted on him and he was given good hair. The angel asked him: “Which of wealth do like?” he said: “Cows.” He gave him a pregnant cow and said to him: “Allah may bless it for you.”
Then he came to the blind man and asked him: “What do you like the best?” He said: “To have my sight again.” He patted on him and Allah made him see. He asked him: “Which of wealth do you like?” He said: “Sheep.” He gave him a ewe. The she-camel, the cow and the ewe bore. The first man had a valley of camels. The second had a valley of cows and the third had a valley of sheep.
The angel came to the leprous in a shape like the leprous’ before he was recovered and said to him: “I am a poor man. I lost everything in my travel and I have no one to help me save Allah and you. I ask you, by Him, Who gave you the pretty hue, the good skin and the wealth, to give me a camel to carry me in my travel.” The man said that he had a lot of expenses and refused to give him a camel. The angel said: “I think I know you. Were you not leprous and poor and that people disliked you? Then Allah provided you with all of these blessings.” He said: “I inherited that from my forefathers.” The angel said: “If you told a lie, let Allah return you to what you had been before.”
He came to the bald man in a shape like his shape when he was bald and poor and asked the same as he asked the leprous man. He gave the same answer. The angel said: “If you told a lie, let Allah return you to what you had been before.”
Then he came to the blind man in a shape like his when he was blind and poor and said to him: “I am poor and a wayfarer. I have nothing and there is no one to help me save Allah and you. I asked you by Him, Who gave you back your sight to give me a ewe to benefit me in my travel.” The man said: “I was blind and Allah gave me back my sight. I was poor and Allah made me rich. You can take whatever you like. By Allah, I won’t prevent you from taking anything for the sake of Allah.” The angel said: “I tried you all. Allah became pleased with you but discontented with your two friends.”
This tradition was one of Abu Hurayra’s textiles, which he brocaded and mottled. It appeared as a modern imaginary play, which the actors play on their theatres nowadays. He just wanted to show, by this tradition, the result of gratefulness and ungratefulness.
The two sheikhs mentioned a tradition narrated by Abu Hurayra that the Prophet had said: “A woman was entered Hell because of a cat. She tied it. She neither fed it nor let it feed on insects.”
This tradition was denied by Aa’isha (the Prophet’s wife). She said to Abu Hurayra: “The believer is more honorable near Allah than to be tortured with fire because of a cat. When you tell of the Prophet’s traditions, think well how you will tell!”
Al-Bukhari mentioned a tradition narrated by Abu Hurayra that the Prophet had said: “A prostitute saw a dog panting at a well. It was about to die of thirst. She took off one of her shoes, tied it with her veil and got the dog some water from the well. Allah forgave her sins for doing that.”
Al-Bukhari mentioned a tradition by Abu Hurayra that the Prophet had said: “While someone was walking in his way, he felt very thirsty. He found a well and got down to drink some water. When he got out, he found a dog panting as if it ate the earth because of thirst. The man got down, filled his shoe with water, caught the shoe with his mouth and made the dog drink. He thanked Allah and Allah forgave his sins for that.”
This tradition and the previous one came out of Abu Hurayra’s imagination to show the good result of pity and mercy.
Muslim mentioned that Ma’mar had said: “Az-Zuhri said to me: “Do I tell you of two wondrous traditions? Hameed bin Abdur Rahman told me that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet (s) said: “Someone was too excessive in committing sins. When he was about to die, he ordered his sons: “If I die, you are to burn me, crush me and scatter me in the sea in a windy day. If my god seizes me, He will torture me to a degree that He has never tortured any one else like me.” They did what he ordered them to do. Allah said to the ground: “Give what you have taken!” The man was recovered as before his death. Allah asked him: “Why did you do that?” He said: “I was afraid of You, my god.” Then Allah forgave his sins. Hameed told me, too, that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet said: “Some woman was entered Hell because of a cat. She tied it and neither fed it nor let it feed on insects.”
If the woman, who tied the cat, was believer, as Aa’isha said, she would be more honorable near Allah than to be tortured in Hell because of a cat. If she was unbeliever, she would be in Hell because of her unbelief.
As for that excessive sinful man, he did not deserve forgiveness. He not only exceeded the limits in committing sins along his life, but also he insisted on his unbelief even when he was about to die that he was desperate of the mercy of Allah. He thought Allah would not be able to resurrect him if they burned him and scattered his ashes. So he was unbeliever. The unbeliever would never deserve forgiveness at all.
The style of this tradition was like the style of the imaginative stories. The tradition tended to show that man was not to be desperate of the mercy of Allah even if he was excessive in committing sins and not to think that he would be safe from His torture even if he was believer. These two facts did not need to be shown by Abu Hurayra’s fables. They were confirmed clearly by the holy Qur’an: (and despair not of Allah's mercy; surely none despairs of Allah's mercy except the unbelieving people) 12:87 (do they then feel secure from Allah's plan? But none feels secure from Allah's plan except the people who shall perish) 7:99. The holy Qur’an and the Sunna were far above this tradition and its style.
Suppose that the will of that excessive sinful man was real and was a cause for his sins to be forgiven by Allah, the Prophet would not tell of it without any comment! He would encourage the excessive sinful men of his umma to keep on their sins. This was, definitely, impossible for the Prophet to do.
Abu Hurayra said that the Prophet had said: “Someone committed a sin and asked Allah to forgive him. Allah said: “My slave committed a sin and perceived that he had a god, who forgave the sin and punished for the sin.” He committed a sin again and asked Allah to forgive him. Allah said: “My slave committed a sin and perceive that he had a god, who forgave the sin and punished for the sin.” Then he committed a sin again and asked Allah to forgive him. Allah said: “My slave committed a sin and perceived that he had a god, who forgive the sin and punished for the sin. Do whatever you like. I have forgiven you.”
This was like his previous traditions in meaning and style. It was woven by Abu Hurayra’s hands with the threads of his imagination to be like the stories of old grandmothers and storytellers. He tended to say that forgiveness of Allah was unlimited. This fact was clearly proved by the holy Qur’an, the Sunna, reason and the consensus of the umma, in fact the consensus of all nations and religions. It was one of the necessities of Islam and the other religions. It didn’t need Abu Hurayra’s fables to prove it.
Allah had no leniency with any one of His creatures if he committed what Allah had prohibited. He said: (And if he had fabricated against Us some of the sayings, We would certainly have seized him by the right hand, then We would certainly have cut off his aorta and not one of you could have withheld Us from him) 69:44-47. After that, how would Allah compliment this sinful man, who broke his repentance many times and say to him: Do whatever you like. I have forgiven you? What for did this weak believer deserve this complement of Allah that no one of the prophets, apostles or the veracious got?
How many such stories Abu Hurayra told the tyrants of to ease their crimes and sins. He said: “The angel of death came to a dying man. He didn’t find anything (deed) good of him. He opened his heart but he didn’t find anything in it. He opened his jaws and found that his tongue was stuck to his jaw with the saying of (there is no god but Allah). Allah forgave him for that.”
One of Abu Hurayra’s absurdities was his saying: “The iqama for prayer was said and the prayers stood up in lines to offer the prayer. When the Prophet stood up in his oratory to lead the prayers, he remembered that he was impure.”
Glory be to the Prophet! He was pure all his times. He was always with wudu’. All the prophets were infallible and far above what this dotard raved. If what he said was ascribed to the veracious and faithful believers, away from the prophets, it would disgrace them, so how about the prophets?
He narrated a tradition talking about forbidding preferring the prophet Muhammad to Moses. In another one he said: “Whoever said that the prophet Muhammad was better than Yunus bin Metti (Jonah), told a lie.”
The umma agreed unanimously that the prophet Muhammad (s) was preferred to all of the prophets. It was proved by clear evidences and considered to be as one of the necessities of Islam.
He narrated that the Prophet had said: “No one will be entered Paradise by his deeds.” They said: “Nor you, messenger of Allah.” He said: “Nor I.”
This tradition was to be thrown away because it contradicted the holy Qur’an. Allah said: (Surely this is a reward for you, and your striving shall be recompensed) 76:22.
He narrated that the Prophet had said: “There was no prophet sent by Allah, unless he grazed sheep.’’ This tradition was no doubt null.
He also narrated a tradition that Jesus (s) saw someone stealing. He said to him: “Did you steal something.” The thief said: “No, I didn’t. I swear by Him, the only God.” Jesus believed him and didn’t believe his eyes.
Abu Hurayra narrated that the Prophet had said: “When Allah created Adam, he patted on his back. All human beings Allah would be creating until the Day of Resurrection fell from Adam’s back like the motes. Then Allah made between the eyes of every one of them a shine of light. Allah showed them to Adam. He asked: “Who are they, my god?” Allah said: “They are your progeny.” Adam saw someone that he admired the shine between his eyes. He asked Allah who he was. Allah said: “He is your son David.” Adam asked: “How long did You decide his age?” Allah said: “Sixty years.” Adam said: “Take forty years from my age and add them to his age to be one hundred years.” Allah said: “It will be written, sealed and never be changed.” When the angel of death came to Adam to make him die, Adam said: “There are still forty years of my age.” The angel said: “Didn’t you grant them to your son David?” Adam disavowed, so his progeny disavowed too.”
It was like his tradition about Adam and Moses when they argued, as if they were fatalist and determinist. He showed that Adam overwhelmed Moses with many excuses that didn’t fit the prophets, who must be glorified.
How fond he was of the extraordinary and unusual events. In addition to what you read in the previous pages, here are two traditions to end the chapter with:
The first: he said that once he was with al-Ala’ bin al-Hadhrami when they were sent to Bahrain with an army of four thousand men. They set out until they reached a gulf in the sea, which no one had gone into before them nor anyone would go into after them. Al-Ala’ grasped at the rein of his horse and walked over the water. The army followed him. I swear by Allah that no foot of ours nor a hoof of our sumpters’ became wet.”
If this was true, it would be narrated by every one of that army, who were four thousand men. Why was it narrated by Abu Hurayra alone?
The second: he said: “I was afflicted with three misfortunes when I became a Muslim that I had never been afflicted with the same before; the death of the Prophet that I was his companion, the killing of Othman and the haversack.” They asked: “What was the haversack?” I said: “We were with the Prophet (s) in a travel. He asked me: “Is there anything with you?” I said: “Some dates in a haversack.” He asked me to bring it. He touched it and prayed. He asked me to invite ten of the men. I did. They ate until they satiated. Then I invited other ten and so on until the whole army ate from the dates. The haversack still had some dates. The Prophet said to me: “If you want to take something from the haversack, enter your hand in it and never turn it over.” I had been eating from this haversack along the lifetime of the Prophet, Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman. When Othman was killed, the haversack was stolen. Do I tell you how much I had eaten from that haversack? I had eaten from it more than two hundred wasaqs.
No doubt that the Prophet fed a great number of people with a little food in many of his blessed days. That was one of the signs of his prophecy and mission. But this tradition especially was invented by Abu Hurayra to move the parties of the Umayyads and the mob of their followers, who were still devoted to the shirt of Othman and his wife’s fingers crying and wailing. He made that to incite their favours and to beg their charity. It was one of his amazing ways in flattering the Umayyads and requesting their favours.
What proved that it was invented by Abu Hurayra was that he dappled in this tradition like the chameleon. He narrated this tradition in many different ways, as it was well-known by the researchers, who inquired the books of Sunna and Hadith.
Abu Hurayra had a sack containing this haversack and other things. It was his bag of knowledge. He ladled out from it whatever, whenever and however he liked. He might be often asked: “Did you hear this from the Prophet (s)?” He answered: “No, it is from Abu Hurayra’s sack.”
This book would not contain all the wonders of Abu Hurayra. What we mentioned of them was enough to be as evidence to prove what we aimed at. Thanks be to Allah.
Abu Hurayra used to ascribe what he heard of prophetic traditions from any one to the Prophet as if he himself had heard them from the Prophet directly without looking for any evidence of certainty.
If you were in doubt of that, would you please notice his saying: “The prophet Muhammad (s) said to his uncle Abu Talib: “Say: there is no god but Allah. I will witness it for you in the Day of Resurrection.” His uncle said: “I am afraid that Quraysh may blame me for that.”
It was certain for the all that Abu Talib had died ten years before Abu Hurayra came to Hijaz. So how did he hear them (the Prophet and his uncle) talking to each other when he narrated this tradition in away as if he had seen them with his eyes and heard them with his ears?
He said: “When Allah revealed to the Prophet (And warn your nearest relations), he stood up and said: “O people of Quraysh, I don’t substitute for you near Allah (in the Day of Resurrection).
All of the jurisprudents and scholars agreed unanimously that this Qur’anic verse was revealed to the Prophet in the beginning of the Islamic mission and before declaring it in Mecca, where Abu Hurayra was still worshipping his idols in Yemen. He came to Hijaz twenty years after the revelation of this verse. He narrated this tradition as if he had been among the attendants to see the Prophet with his eyes standing up and hear him with his ears warning his tribe.
He said: “The Prophet prayed in his prayer saying: “O Allah, save Salama bin Hisham, save al-Waleed bin al-Waleed, save Ayyash bin Abu Rabee’a. O Allah, save the oppressed believers (who were held back by the polytheists in order not to emigrate with the others from Mecca to Medina).
This happened seven years before Abu Hurayra came to Hijaz and became a Muslim. He narrated it as if he had been with the Prophet when he was praying.
He said: “Abu Jahl said: “Does Muhammad prostrate for his god among you?’’ It was said: “Yes.”
If Abu Jahl really had said that, it would have been twenty years before Abu Hurayra came from Yemen and became a Muslim.
He narrated it as if he had seen and heard what happened.
Where was he from the combat of ar-Rajee’ and its leader Aassim bin Thabit al-Ansari, who was martyred in it to tell of it as if he had seen everything? It happened in the fourth year of hijra, three years before Abu Hurayra came to Hijaz and became a Muslim.
Any one, who inquired the manner of Abu Hurayra in narrating traditions, would know that he was just as what we said. These few traditions were enough to prove that.
Ahmed Ameen noticed that and said about Abu Hurayra: “It seemed that he didn’t narrate what he had heard from the Prophet only, but he narrated what he was told of by the others.”
Abu Hurayra himself confessed that. When he narrated that the Prophet had said: “Whoever was impure when it dawned, he was not to fast.” Aa’isha and Um Salama denied it. He accused al-Fadhl bin al-Abbas, who was dead then, of saying that. He said that he had heard it from al-Fadhl and had not heard it from the Prophet. Anyhow he confessed, whether it was true or false, that he ascribed to the Prophet what he had heard from the others.
If you say: what of it if he ascribed to the Prophet a tradition that he had heard from another one?
We say: it does not matter, but the tradition must not be considered as true tradition unless all the series of narrators would be known and proved to be trusty.
That is to say the honesty of the narrator must be proved as condition for the tradition to be true. The tradition must not be considered as true one if the narrator was unknown.
In a word, many of Abu Hurayra’s traditions were such that it could not be depended upon. They mixed with his true traditions that made us avoid the all according to the rule of suspicions.
This man obliged us to doubt him. He pretended that he had attended some events that he had never done.
He said: “Once I entered the house of Ruqayya, the Prophet’s daughter and Othman’s wife. She had a comb in her hand. She said: “The Prophet left just a little ago. I combed his hair. He said to me: “How do you find Abu Abdullah (Othman)?” I said: “he is good.” He said to me: “Grace him! He is the most similar to me in morals.” It was mentioned by al-Hakim, who said: “This tradition has a true series of narrators but untrue text, because Ruqayya had died in the third year of hijra during the battle of Badr, whereas Abu Hurayra came and became a Muslim after the battle of Khaybar.”
Ath-Thahabi mentioned this tradition in his book Talkheess al-Mustadrak and said: “It was true with its narrators but its text was denied for Ruqayya died at the time of the battle of Badr while Abu Hurayra became a Muslim at the time of the battle of Khaybar.”
Abu Hurayra said: “The Prophet led us in the Zuhr or Asr prayer and he ended the prayer after two ruk’as (instead of four). Thul-Yadayn asked him: “Did you lessen the prayer or forget?”
Thul-Yadayen was martyred in the battle of Badr some years before Abu Hurayra became a Muslim.
How many times he boasted: “We conquered Khaybar but we didn’t gain gold or silver. We gained sheep, cows, camels, wares and houses.”
He said so although he did never participate in the battle. He became a Muslim after the Muslims had conquered Khaybar and the battle had been finished. Thus those, who explained the tradition, were confused when they reached his saying (we conquered Khaybar). They justified it by saying that Abu Hurayra had said it metaphorically. He referred to his Muslim fellows.
He said: “We fought with the Prophet in Khaybar. The Prophet said to a man, who pretended to be a Muslim that he would be in Hell. When the fight began, the man fought courageously until he had many wounds. Some men were about to doubt the Prophet’s word. The man suffered the pain of his wounds. He took some arrows out of his quiver and suicided with them.”
We have two notes about this tradition.
The first: he pretended that he participated in the battle with the Prophet and it was proved that he had not been there. Those, who commented on the tradition, became confused and justified that Abu Hurayra said it metaphorically because he came from Yemen after the battle of Khaybar as al-Qastalani said.
The second: the man, who killed himself, was the hypocrite Qazman bin al-Harth, the ally of the tribe of Zafar. He fought for the sake of fame. His case, which Abu Hurayra mentioned, was famous. He was killed in the battle of Uhud many years before Abu Hurayra came to Hijaz and became a Muslim. Abu Hurayra was uncertain about him, therefore he confused everything.
Abu Hurayra said: “I had seen seventy of the suffa’s inhabitants that no one of them had a dress on him.”
Those seventy ones were all martyred in the combat of the well of Ma’ouna. The Prophet became very sad for them. He prayed against their killers for a month. This combat took place in the fourth year of hijra, some years before Abu Hurayra came from Yemen. So how did he saw them? Al-Qastalani said that the seventy ones, whom Abu Hurayra had seen, were other than those. Allah is the most aware!
After inspecting and inquiring about Abu Hurayra, we found that he often narrated prophetic traditions, which he had not heard from the Prophet (s) and often told about the events that he had not attended or he pretended that he had attended. He might admire something he had heard from Ka’bul Ahbar or another one and he narrated it as if he had heard it from the Prophet like he did in his tradition: “Allah created Adam according to His own shape in sixty cubits long and seven cubits width.” All that made the believers avoid his traditions.
I wonder why those, who collected Hadith, filled their books with traditions narrated by this man without paying any attention to his wonders and oddities or without taking any notice of his fabrication and invention! If you inspected the two Sahihs of al-Bukhari and Muslim, you would wonder at the naivety of these two sheikhs. Here is an example showing this fact:
Muslim mentioned in his Sahih (the chapter of Abu Sufyan’s virtues) a tradition narrated by Akrima bin Ammar al-Ijli al-Yamami that the Muslims did not look at Abu Sufyan and did not sit with him. He said to the Prophet: “O messenger of Allah, I ask you for three things to grant me them.” The Prophet said: “Yes, I do.” He said: “I have the best and the most beautiful one among the Arabs, my daughter Um Habeeba. I marry off her to you.” The Prophet said: “Yes.” He said: “My son Mu’awiya, you make him a clerk for you.” The Prophet said: “Yes.” He said: “and you order me to fight the unbelievers as I used to fight the Muslims.” The Prophet said: “Yes.”
It was mentioned by Muslim alone when he talked about the virtues of Abu Sufyan! It was considered unanimously to be null. Abu Sufyan became a Muslim forcedly after the conquest of Mecca. Before that he was an enemy to Allah and His apostle.
As for his daughter Um Habeeba, whose name was Ramla, she became a Muslim before hijra. She was one of the loyal Muslims. She was among those, who migrated to Abyssinia escaping from her father and people. The Prophet got married to her while her father was excessive in his unbelief and excessive in his fighting against the Prophet (s). When Abu Sufyan heard that the Prophet had married his daughter, he said: “(That obstinate wouldn’t be defeated).” He came to Medina tending to increase the period of the truce with the Prophet. He went to his daughter’s house. When he wanted to sit down, Um Habeeba, his daughter, folded the rug. He said: “Do you prevent me from sitting on your rug?” She said: “Yes, I do. This is the rug of the Prophet and you are an impure unbeliever.” Most of the historians mentioned this speech when they talked about Um Habeeba.
Thanks be to Allah for His guidance. Thanks be to Allah, Who made us able to distinguish the truth. Allah’s blessing and peace be upon our prophet Muhammad.
People denied and disapproved the excessiveness of Abu Hurayra in narrating traditions at his time. He exceeded all the limits and had a peculiar style that made people doubt him and doubt his traditions. They denied the quantity and the quality of his traditions and blamed him frankly.
He himself said: “People say that Abu Hurayra tells too many of traditions. Allah is the judge in the hereafter. They say that why the Muhajireen and the Ansar don’t tell like what he tells…”
He confessed that both the quantity and the quality of his traditions were subject to denying, therefore he threatened them painfully where he said: “Allah is the judge in the hereafter.” He showed at the end of this tradition that unless he was obliged according to his legal duties, he would never tell of anything at all for they doubted him. He said: “I swear by Allah that unless these two verses: (Surely those who conceal the clear proofs and the guidance that We revealed after We made it clear in the Book for men, these it is whom Allah shall curse, and those who curse shall curse them (too) Except those who repent and amend and make manifest (the truth), these it is to whom I turn (mercifully); and I am the Oft‑returning (to mercy), the Merciful) were in the Qur’an, I would never tell you of anything at all.” It was clear to prove what we said.
Another clearer one narrated by Abu Razeen that he said: “Abu Hurayra came out to us, beat his front with his hand and said: “You say that Abu Hurayra ascribes lies to the Prophet so that you will be guided and I will go astray.”
When he came to Iraq with Mu’awiya and saw the big crowd, who came to meet him, he knelt on his knees and began to beat his baldhead to draw their attention. When they gathered around him, he said: “O people of Iraq, do you pretend that I ascribe lies to the Prophet to burn myself in Hell?…and he began to abuse Imam Ali to flatter the Umayyads.
What sufficed this concern that those, who denied his traditions and criticized him, were of the great companions. Ahmed Ameen said about Abu Hurayra: “The companions often criticized him for his excessiveness in narrating prophetic traditions and doubted him (to be a liar) according to what Muslim mentioned in his Sahih.” Then he mentioned two traditions from Muslim’s Sahih showing criticizing and doubting him.
Mustafa Sadiq ar-Rafi’ei said in this concern: “The most in narrating traditions among the companions was Abu Hurayra. His companionship with the Prophet was three years only, therefore Omar, Othman, Ali and Aa’isha denied his traditions and doubted him. He was the first narrator in the history of Islam to be doubted (accused of fabricating). Aa’isha was the most extreme of those, who denied his traditions.”
An-Nazzam said: “Omar, Othman, Ali and Aa’isha considred Abu Hurayra as liar.”
Ibn Qutayba said: “An-Nazzam criticized Abu Hurayra by being accused of lying by Omar, Othman, Ali and Aa’isha that Abu Hurayra had accompanied the Prophet for three years only but he narrated from him so much many traditions, which were more than what had been narrated by any of the first and previous companions, who doubted him and denied his excessiveness. They said: “How did you alone hear all of that? Who heard it with you?” Aa’isha was the most extreme in denying his traditions for she remained alive for a long time, where Abu Hurayra told of his traditions. Omar also was very extreme against the excessive narrators or those, who told of legal verdicts without any evidence…to the end of his saying, which confirmed what an-Nazzam had said. He did so forcedly and in spite of him for rightness always spoke justly and obstinately!
As for what ibn Qutayba pretended that: “the companions gave in when Abu Hurayra told them about his special rank near the Prophet”, it was nonsense and vain. The great companions knew him well and did not need any one to introduce him to them. If they had a bit of respect towards him, they would never accuse him and consider him as liar. You noticed his saying that he fell to the ground faintingly (during the reign of the Prophet) between the minbar and the room. The comers put their feet on his neck thinking that he was mad. Did that fit respect and honor?
In brief: it was certain that all the great veracious companions doubted him and denied his sayings. But when they went to the better world and those, who came after them, decided that the companions all in all were just and fair and they forbade criticizing them. They made that as legal verdict of the Sharia and hence they imprisoned the minds, gouged out the eyes, put porches on the hearts and deafen the ears. People became (Deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they will not turn back) 2:18.
Glory be to the infallible imams where they put the companions in their suitable places, which they themselves had already been in. So their thought about Abu Hurayra was not different from the thought of Ali, Omar, Othman and Aa’isha. The Shias, since the age of Imam Ali until nowadays, kept to the same way of their imams.
All of the Mu’tazilites might have the same point of view. Imam Abu Ja’far al-Iskafi said: “Abu Hurayra was infected in his mind according to our sheikhs. His traditions were disapproved by them. Once Omar beat him and said to him: “You exceeded in your traditions. You might be a liar ascribing lies to the Prophet.” Sufyan ath-Thawri narrated a tradition from Mansoor that Ibrahim at-Taymi had said: “They didn’t depend upon Abu Hurayra’s traditions except those traditions, which were about Paradise and Hell.” Abu Ossama narrated a tradition that al-A’mash had said: “Ibrahim was trusty in narrating tradition. I used to show him whatever I heard of traditions. One day I brought him some traditions narrated by Abu Salih from Abu Hurayra. He said to me: “Let me away from Abu Hurayra! They left many of his traditions aside.” It was mentioned that Imam Ali had said: “The most untruthful one (or he said of the alive), who ascribes lies to the Prophet, is Abu Hurayra ad-Doussi.” Abu Yousuf mentioned that he had said to Abu Haneefa: “Some prophetic traditions that reach us, contradict our analogy. What do we do with them?” He said: “If they were narrated by trusty people, we would depend upon them and leave our points of view aside.” I said: “What do say about Abu Bakr and Omar?” He said: “They were trusty.” I said: “Ali and Othman?” He said: “So were they.” When he saw me mentioning the companions, he said: “All of the companions were fair and trusty except some ones.” He mentioned some, among them were Abu Hurayra and Anass bin Malik.
Imam Abu Haneefa and his companions left Abu Hurayra’s tradition aside if it would contradict their analogy as they did with his tradition about the (missrat). Abu Hurayra narrated that the Prophet had said: “Don’t confine milk in your sheep or camels’ udders. He, who buys them, will have the choice after he milks them either to keep them if he accepts or return them to their keeper with a certain measure (about three kilos) of dates.” They didn’t pay any attention to this tradition and said: “Abu Hurayra was not a jurisprudent and his tradition contradicted our analogy completely. Milking the animal was to be considered as trespassing the other’s right, which must be compensated with the like or the value, but that measure of dates would not be one of them.
We knew that Abu Haneefa and his companions thought that the prayer would be invalid by any kind of speech, which was not a part of the prayer whether by forgetting, unknowing or thinking that the prayer was finished. The Hanafite jurisprudence was clear about this matter. So was the thought of Sufyan ath-Thawri. Hence the tradition of Abu Hurayra had no value among them, when he said that once the Prophet had forgotten and ended the prayer after two ruk’as instead of four then he left his oratory and entered his room. When he came back, it was said to him: “Did you lessen the prayer or did you forget?” He said: “The prayer wasn’t lessened and I didn’t forget.” They said: “Yes, you did.” And after an argument between him and them, he believed them and completed his prayer with two other ruk’as. Then he offered the prostrate of the forgetting. According to this tradition, Malik, ash-Shafi’ei, Ahmed and al-Awza’ei gave a fatwa that talking (some speech that was not a part of the prayer) by someone, who forgot that he had been offering the prayer or he thought that he had ended the prayer, would not invalidate it. But Abu Hanifa, who didn’t pay any attention to Abu Hurayra’s tradition, said that talking during the prayer would make it invalid.
Let us conclude this chapter with some events happened between Abu Hurayra and some of the companions showing you how they regarded him.
Abu Hurayra said: “When my tradition was mentioned to Omar, he called for me and said: “Were you with us that day when we were in the house of that (man)?” I said: “Yes, I was, when the Prophet said: “Whoever ascribed to me an untrue tradition, his place would definitely be in Hell.”
This proved that he neither told of traditions in the presence of Omar, nor he was one of those, whom Omar saw and heard narrating traditions. In fact Omar had heard his tradition from the people and he accused him of lying. He called for him and warned him from Hell if he would lie.
One day Omar became very angry with him for his excessiveness in narrating prophetic traditions. He beat him with his stick and rebuked him by saying: “You exceeded with your traditions and I think you ascribed false traditions to the Prophet (s).”
Omar deposed him from the emirate of Bahrain after he had beaten him until he wounded him. He got back from him ten thousand dinars to the treasury. He rebuked him with terrible words.
During the reign of the Prophet (s), Omar beat him until he fell on his back to the ground.
When Imam Ali had heard Abu Hurayra’s traditions, he said: “The most lying of people, (or he said) of the alive people about the Prophet is Abu Hurayra ad-Doussi.”
Abu Hurayra often said: “My intimate told me” “I saw my intimate” “My intimate, the Prophet, said to me”. Ali heard of that. He said to Abu Hurayra: “When was the Prophet your intimate, Abu Hurayra?” Imam Ali denied Abu Hurayra’s saying because he distrusted him. Ali definitely was right for he (is with the Qur’an and the Qur’an is with Ali. They won’t separate until they come to the Prophet’s pond in the Day of Resurrection). Ali is with the rightness and the rightness is with Ali. It turns with him however he turns.
Aa’isha called for Abu Hurayra after she had heard his traditions. She said to him: “What were those traditions, which we heard that you told of about the Prophet? Did you hear other than what we heard or did you see other than what we saw?” He said: “Mother, the mirror and the kohl made you busy away from the prophet.”
Abu Hurayra narrated a tradition saying that woman, dog and donkey invalidate the prayer. Aa’isha denied that and said: “I saw the Prophet offering the prayer while I was cross between him and the kiblah.”
He narrated a tradition that the Prophet had forbidden to walk with one shoe. When Aa’isha heard that, she walked with one shoe and said that she would contradict Abu Hurayra.
He narrated that: “Whoever was impure when it dawned, he was not to fast.” When Aa’isha and Hafsa denied that, he unsaid his saying and excused that he hadn’t heard it from the Prophet (s), but he had heard it from al-Fadhl bin al-Abbas, who was dead then.
Once two men came to Aa’isha and said: “Abu Hurayra narrated that the Prophet had said: “Evil omen is but in women and sumpters.’’ Aa’isha became very excited and said: “I swear by Him, Who revealed the Qur’an to Abul Qassim (Muhammad) that he, who told of this tradition, was a liar.”
One day he sat beside the room of Aa’isha narrating traditions about the Prophet. She was busy glorifying Allah. When she finished, she said: “How wonder it is! Abu Hurayra sits beside my room ascribing traditions to the Prophet and making me hear that. I was busy glorifying Allah. If I got him, I would refute his traditions.”
He narrated that the Prophet had said: “Whenever one of you wakes up from sleep, let him wash his hands. He doesn’t know where his hands were in the night.” Aa’isha denied that and said: “How do we do with the (mihrass)?”
He narrated that the Prophet had said: “Whoever carries a coffin, has to do wudu’.” Ibn Abbas denied it and said: “Carrying dry pieces of wood doesn’t require wudu’.”
Abdullah bin Omar narrated a tradition saying: “The Prophet ordered to kill the dogs except the hunting-dogs and the cattle-dogs.” They said to ibn Omar that Abu Hurayra had added the farm-dogs. He didn’t care for that and said: “Abu Hurayra has a farm.” He accused him of adding the farm-dog to the Prophet’s tradition in order to keep his dog and farm.
Abu Hurayra narrated that the Prophet had said: “Whoever keeps a dog other than a hunting-dog, a cattle-dog or a farm-dog, Allah will take off one carat a day from his merits.” When they mentioned Abu Hurayra’s saying to ibn Omar, he said: “May Allah have mercy upon Abu Hurayra. He had a farm.” He accused him of adding that to the tradition for the sake of his benefit. Salim bin Abdullah bin Omar accused him of that, too, in a tradition mentioned by Muslim.
Ibn Omar didn’t believe Abu Hurayra’s tradition of the hedgehog and he still doubted about it.
When ibn Omar heard Abu Hurayra narrating: “Whoever followed a funeral, would have a carat of merit”, he didn’t believe him and said that Abu Hurayra had exceeded with his traditions. He sent someone to Aa’isha asking her about it. When she confirmed the tradition, then he believed it.
When Aamir bin Shurayh bin Hani heard Abu Hurayra narrating: “Whoever likes to meet Allah, Allah likes meeting him and whoever hates to meet Allah, Allah hates meeting him”, he didn’t believe him until he asked Aa’isha. She narrated it and explained it to him.
If we mentioned all the cases, in which the companions had denied Abu Hurayra’s traditions and refuted them, we would waste our time, but that would suffice to prove what we wanted to say.
It was enough that Omar, Othman, Ali and Aa’isha denied his traditions and refuted them. It was decided by the Islamic jurisprudence to prefer criticising (a companion) to justifying (what he was accused of) when there was an opposition. But in this case there was no opposition at all because passion alone did not oppose the denying of those great people.
As to regard the companions all in all as truthful and fair, there was no evidence proving that. The companions themselves knew nothing about that. If we supposed so, it would be applied to the unknown ones and not to whom Omar, Othman, Ali and Aa’isha considered as liar and having many defects, which was confirmed by many evidences.
We, the Shia, have a moderate thought about the companions, which we explained in details in our book (Answers of Musa Jarallah). Whoever wants to know about that, let refer to it.
Abu Hurayra protested against those, who accused him of excessiveness in narrating traditions by saying: “They say that Abu Hurayra narrates too much many traditions! Allah is our judge in the Day of Resurrection! They say why the Muhajireen and the Ansar do not narrate (prophetic traditions) so much as he does. My brothers of the Muhajireen were busy dealing in the markets and my brothers of the Ansar were busy working in their gardens (of date-palms), while I was a poor man keeping to the Prophet for feed. So I was attendant when they were absent and I perceived where they forgot.”
Once the Prophet said: “If one of you spreads his dress until I finish my speech then he joins it to his chest, he will never forget anything of my sayings at all. I spread my garment, which I had no cloths on me other than; until the Prophet (s) finished his speech then I joined it to my chest. I swear by Him, who had sent his Prophet with the rightness, that I never forgot anything of his sayings until this day. By Allah, unless there were two verses in the Qur’an (Surely those who conceal the clear proofs and the guidance that We revealed after We made it clear in the Book for men, these it is whom Allah shall curse, and those who curse shall curse them (too) Except those who repent and amend and make manifest (the truth), these it is to whom I turn (mercifully); and I am the Oft‑returning (to mercy), the Merciful), I would never tell you of anything.
Whatever Abu Hurayra became wealthier, he became more foolish. He wanted to convince his accusers, who accused him of the quantity and the quality of his traditions so he said this tradition to defend himself and to protest against them, but what a trivial protest he made! In fact he, unknowingly, gave his opponents evidence against himself, which proved that what they ascribed to him was true. I swear by the honor of truthfulness and the highness of the veracious that I have not seen among all what the fabricators did, a tradition colder or farther away from the truth than this one. I wouldn’t mention it or talk about it, unless the two sheikhs and their likes mentioned it in their (Sahihs) happily and worshipingly to their thought about the companions. They contradicted by that the rational and traditional evidences and contradicted the thoughts of the great first Muslims. We have some notes about the invalidity of this tradition:
Firstly: Abu Hurayra pretended that the Muhajireen were away from the Prophet because they were busy of dealing in the markets and the Ansar were busy working in their gardens. He drove all the first Muslims of Muhajireen and Ansar with one stick. Was there any value for his saying that all the Muhajireen were busy of dealings in the markets after the saying of Allah: (Men whom neither merchandise nor selling diverts from the remembrance of Allah)? Did what contradicted the holy Qur’an deserve but to be thrown off? And who was Abu Hurayra to be attendant while the close companions of the Prophet were away from him (s)? And that he memorized while they forgot? He said that full-mouthedly without shame or fear for he said that at the time of Mu’awiya, where there were no Omar, Othman, Ali, Talha, az-Zubayar, Salman, Ammar, al-Miqdade, Abu Zarr, or the likes. (A grievous word it is that comes out of their mouths; they speak nothing but a lie). How far his word was from the truth! All people knew the position of Ali to the Prophet, the close relationship and the special respect. He put him in his lap when he was a child, embraced him to his chest, his pure flesh touched his flesh, smelt him his fragrance, chewed the bite and put it in his mouth. He never find a lie in a saying of his nor a fault in a deed of his. Allah had joined to the Prophet (s) the greatest of His angels since he was weanling to take him into the ways of nobilities and highest morals of the world. Ali followed the Prophet as a young weaned camel following his mother. The Prophet raised for Ali a banner of morals every day. He ordered Ali to imitate him. Ali was with the Prophet (with the great Khadija, the Prophet’s wife) in the cave of Harra’ seeing the light of Gabriel and his mission and smelling the fragrance of the prophecy. After that he became the gate of the Prophet’s town of knowledge, the best judge of the umma, the bag of the Prophet’s secrets, his guardian, the inheritor of his rule, the dispeller of his grief, the most brilliant of his companions and who had the knowledge of the Book. After all that, did Ali forget of the Sunna what Abu Hurayra had kept, or did he keep a secret what Abu Hurayra announced? (Glory be to Thee! this is a great calumny) 24:16.
In fact, just a few of the Muhajireen were busy of dealing in the markets. Why didn’t those, who had nothing to do with trade or dealing like Abu Zarr, al-Miqdad, Ammar, and the seventy of Abu Hurayra’s companions in the suffa, who didn’t have cloths to cover their naked bodies except a piece of cloth tied around their necks…as he himself described them, narrated so much many traditions like him? In fact all of their traditions together were less than his.
So were the Ansar. Not all of them had gardens and properties as Abu Hurayra pretended. One of those, who did not have any property, was Salman al-Farisi, whom the Prophet had said about: “Salman is one of us, the family of the Prophet.” He also said: “If religion was on the Pleiades, Salman would get it.” Aa’isha said: “Salman had a meeting with the Prophet every night that he sat with him more than we did.” Ali said: “Salman al-Farisi is like the sage Luqman. He has known the knowledge of the first ages and the coming ages. He is a sea of knowledge that won’t drain off.” Ka’bul Ahbar said: “Salman is filled up with knowledge and wisdom.” This was besides other virtues mentioned about him. People knew well that Abu Ayyoub al-Ansari lived in subsistence that nothing took him away from knowledge and worship. So were Abu Sa’eed al-Khudary, Abu Fudhala al-Ansari and the other great jurisprudents of the Ansar.
The Prophet did not spend his time in disorder and confusion. He arranged his times, day and night, according to the tasks required at that time. He definitely specified a certain time for lecturing and teaching the Muslims about their religion and life, which would never contradict their times of work and labor or dealing in the markets. The Muhajireen and the Ansar adhered to these honored meeting of the Prophet and were more careful of knowing and learning than what the dotards raved.
Secondly: if what Abu Hurayra pretended that the Prophet (s) had said to his companions: “If any one of you spreads his dress until I finish my speech and then joins it to his chest, he will never forget anything of my saying at all” was true, all the companions would contend to do that. They would obtain a great virtue without striving and gain the eternal knowledge without spending money. So what frustrated them to win that and what prevented them to spread their dresses for that? How would they lose this great opportunity? Were they so trivial to renounce what the Prophet invited them for? Certainly not! They were his sincere companions, who strove to obey him whatever he said.
Thirdly: if what Abu Hurayra had said was true, the companions would extremely regret what they lost of that great virtue and copious knowledge. Their great sorrow about what they missed by not spreading their dresses in front of the Prophet, which was without any cost or tire, would spread among people and be mentioned in the books and that they would blame each other about their bad choice in leaving that important thing. At least they would envy Abu Hurayra, who had one dress only where they put on two or three, to win that virtue alone. There was nothing of that at all. Abu Hurayra had taken out this tradition from his own bag.
Fourthly: if what Abu Hurayra had told of was true, it would be narrated by the other companions, whom the Prophet had invited for that. In fact, if it was so, the companions would consider it as one of the signs of the prophecy and as evidence of the religion. It would be famous like the sun in the midday. It seemed that the sun of Abu Hurayra shone in the midnight where people were sleeping, therefore no one else than him told of it!
Fifthly: there were differences between his traditions about this story. One time he said as narrated by al-A’raj: “One day the Prophet said to his companions: “If any one of you spreads his dress until I finish my speech and then he gathers it to his chest, he will never forget anything of my speech.” I spread my garment, which I had no dress on me other than, until the Prophet (s) finished his speech. I gathered it to my chest. I swear by Him, who had sent the Prophet with the rightness, that I never forgot anything of that saying of the Prophet.”
Another time he said, as narrated by al-Maqbari: “I said: “O messenger of Allah, I sometimes forget what I hear from you.” He said: “Spread your dress!” He ladled with his hands (knowledge and put into the dress) then he said: “Gather it to your chest.” I did. I did never forget anything after that at all.”
You see that the story according to the first tradition narrated by al-A’raj was between the Prophet and his companions and that it was the Prophet, who invited them to spread their dresses fearing for them from forgetting, whereas, according to the second tradition narrated by al-Maqbari, it was just between Abu Hurayra and the Prophet and that Abu Hurayra asked the Prophet complaining his forgetting.
The first tradition, which was narrated by al-A’raj, showed that (not forgetting) concerned the Prophet’s speech in that certain time only for he said (that saying of the Prophet), whereas in the second tradition narrated by al-Maqbari, he generalized. That was to say he would not forget anything at all. He said: “I did never forget anything after that at all.” Those, who explained these traditions became confused and didn’t know how to justify that until ibn Hajar decided in his book that this case happened two times; one time not forgetting concerned that certain saying of the Prophet and the other time not forgetting concerned the all, whether the previous or the following sayings of the Prophet (s).
Muslim mentioned it in a third way narrated by Yunus from ibnul Musayyab that Abu Hurayra had said: “…I never forgot, after that day, whatever the Prophet told me of.” This tradition was more general than al-A’raj’s tradition and more adequate than al-Maqbari’s.
Ibn Sa’d in his Tabaqat mentioned a tradition narrated by Amr bin Mardas bin Abdur Rahman al-Jundi that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet asked me to spread my dress. I did. He told me all the day. Then I gathered my dress to my abdomen. I didn’t forget anything of what he had told me of.” His saying all the day was not mentioned in the other traditions except in this one narrated by al-Jundi.
Abu Ya’la mentioned it narrated by Abu Salama in a way different from all the ways of this tradition. He narrated that Abu Hurayra had gone to visit the Prophet when he was ill. He greeted the Prophet, while the Prophet was leaning on Ali’s chest and Ali’s hand was on the Prophet’s chest embracing him and the Prophet’s legs were extended. The Prophet said: “O Abu Hurayra, approach to me.” He approached. Then the Prophet said to him: “Approach to me.” He approached. Then he said to him: “Approach to me.” He approached until his fingers touched the Prophet’s fingers. The Prophet asked him to sit down. He sat down. The Prophet said to him: “Approach the end of your dress to me.” Abu Hurayra spread his dress and approached it to the Prophet. The Prophet said to him: “O Abu Hurayra, I recommend you of some practices that you are not to leave as long as you live; you are to bathe in the morning of every Friday, not to talk nonsense, not to play vainly, to fast three days of every month because it equals fasting the age, and the Fajr prayer, don’t leave it even if you pray all the night because it is full of merits.” He said that thrice. Then he asked him to gather his dress to himself. He gathered his dress to his chest.
Abu Ya’la mentioned a tradition narrated by al-Waleed bin Jamee’ that Abu Hurayra had said: “I complained to the Prophet my weak memorization. He said to me: “Open your garment.” I opened it. Then he said: “Join it to your chest.” I did. After that I did never forget any tradition.”
Abu Ya’la mentioned a tradition narrated by Yunus bin Obayd from al-Hassan al-Basri that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet said: “Who will take from me a word, two or three and wrap them with his dress to learn them and teach them to the others?” I spread my dress in front of him while he was talking then I gathered it. I hope that I did not forget a word of what he had said.
Ahmed mentioned a tradition, somehow like that, narrated by al-Mubarak bin Fudhala from Abu Hurayra.
Abu Na’eem mentioned a tradition narrated by Abdullah bin Abu Yahya from Sa’eed bin Abu Hind from Abu Hurayra that the Prophet had said to him: “O Abu Hurayra, you don’t ask me about the booties, which your friends ask me about!” I said: “I ask you to teach me what Allah has taught you.” I took off my garment and spread it between him and me. The lice were creeping on it. He told me until I perceived his speech. He said to me: “Join it to you.” After that I didn’t forget a letter from what he had told me of.”
Whoever inspected this tradition in his different ways of narration would find it different in words and meanings. Its words or meanings were different and they contradicted each other for certainly it was vain. Thanks be to Allah for that.
Sixthly: he said: “I spread my garment, which I had no dress on me other than.” This showed that his private parts would appear. Al-Qastalani and Zakariyya al-Ansari interpreted his saying in order to find an excuse for him. They said that he had spread some of his garment in order that his private parts no to be seen.
Seventhly: this story looked like the fables. Glory be to Allah! He would not let this raving be mixed with the miracles of the Prophet. No one of the rational and wise people would believe this nonsense. The miracles of the Prophet (s) dazzled the brilliant and defeated the tyrants by the good method and moderate way of them (the miracles).
The Prophet patted on Ali’s chest and said, when he sent him to Yemen as judge: “O Allah, guide his heart and direct his tongue.” Ali said: “I swear by Allah that I never doubted in any judgment (I made) between any two persons after that.”
When the Qur’anic verse (So that We may make it a reminder to you, and that the heeding ear might retain it) was revealed to the Prophet (s), he said addressing Ali: “I asked Allah to make it your ear.” Ali said: “I didn’t forget anything after that though I hadn’t forgotten before that.”
The Prophet said in the day of (the battle of) Khaybar when he gave the banner to Ali: “O Allah, save him from hot and cold.” Ali said: “After that I didn’t suffer hot or cold.” He put on light cloths in the winter and heavy cloths in the summer to prove and draw attention always to the Prophet’s miracle.
When Jabir complained to the Prophet that his father was in debt, the Prophet went with him to his threshing-floor. He walked around the heap of the fruits and prayed Allah and invoked His blessing. He sat near it. The creditors came and took their debts from that heap. What remained from the heap sufficed Jabir and his family? When the Prophet (s) wanted to do someone a favour, he prayed Allah for him and when he wanted to hurt someone (who deserved that), he prayed Allah against him as he did with Mu’awiya. He said: “Let Allah not satiate his stomach!” So did he with al-Hakam bin Abul Aass. But no one dared to say that the Prophet did something of what Abu Hurayra told of. Because his wisdom, which lighted the way for the deviate sights and paved it with the signs of guidance, was far above that.
We traced the traditions talking about the virtues of Abu Hurayra and we found that the only source of them, in the most cases, was Abu Hurayra himself.
Ibn Abdul Birr said in his book al-Isstee’ab: “Abu Hurayra became a Muslin in the year of (the battle of) Khaybar. He participated in the battle with the Prophet. Then he kept to the Prophet caring for knowledge. He was content of no more than his feed. His hand was in the Prophet’s hand. He went with him wherever he went. He was the most of the companions in memorizing the Prophet’s traditions. He attended with the Prophet what the Muhajireen and the Ansar didn’t attend because the Muhajireen were busy trading and the Ansar were busy working in their gardens. The Prophet witnessed that he (Abu Hurayra) paid much attention to knowledge and Hadith. Once he said to the Prophet: “I hear much from you and I am afraid that I may forget some.” The Prophet asked him to spread his dress. He did. The Prophet ladled (!) into his dress and asked him to join it to him. Abu Hurayra said: “I joined it to myself. I never forgot anything after that at all.”
These virtues were quoted from Abu Hurayra’s own traditions, in which he talked about himself. We didn’t find any source for these virtues save Abu Hurayra himself. The same was as to the other virtues ascribed to him undeservedly.
His becoming Muslim in the year of Khaybar was true because it was told by others than him, but that he had participated in the battle with the Prophet, was not told of by any one except him.
As for what he said that he kept to the Prophet for the sake of knowledge and learning for nothing other than to satiate his stomach, his hand was in the Prophet’s hand and he went with him wherever he went, all of these things were pretended by him where he said: “I came to Medina while the Prophet was in Khaybar. I was more than thirty years old then. I kept to him until he died. I went with him to his wives’ houses. I served him, fought with him and performed the hajj with him. I was the most aware of his traditions. By Allah, some of companions, who had accompanied the Prophet long before me, asked me about his traditions for they knew my keeping to him. Among those were Omar, Othman, Ali, Talha, az-Zubayr…” The wise might wonder at the daring of this man narrating such traditions, which were unreal and untrue. But when they knew the fact that he didn’t tell of these traditions and their likes at the time of the great companions but he dared to tell of them after the most of the companions had died and the countries of Sham, Iraq, Egypt, Africa and Persia were conquered where the companions spread here and there and that the new Muslims of the conquered countries didn’t know anything about what happened at the time of the Prophet. Then he and the other liars found themselves in another world that didn’t know anything about the first age of Islam. They found that their new world believed them and heard them worshipingly for they were the remainders of the Prophet’s companions, who were entrusted with his Sunna and that they had to announce it. Moreover, the Umayyad state did the best to support them. Hence they had a great opportunity to tell whatever they liked of wonders and oddities, which were unacceptable by the Sharia and reason. They told of absurd and null traditions for the sake of their benefits and to serve the policy of the unjust tyrants, who dealt with the religion of Allah as means to carry out their private aims and dealt with the people as their slaves. They divided the wealth of the Muslims among them as it was their heritage! Those liars devoted themselves to the unjust oppressors, who, in return for that, gifted them with all means of comfort and tried their best to support them especially at the age of Mu’awiya. Those liars were the right hand, the spokesman and the spy of the Umayyad state. (Woe, then, to those who write the book with their hands and then say: This is from Allah) 2:79.
How I wonder, by Allah, at al-Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmed and the others, who were well-advised and had great minds, to be led so foolishly by what Abu Hurayra and his likes raved. Could they know when Ali, Omar, Othman, Talha, az-Zubayr and the other companions did ask Abu Hurayra? Did they ask him in the wakefulness, in the sleep or in the world of imagination? About which tradition did they ask him? Who did narrate that except Abu Hurayra? Which one of the historians or the authors of books of Hadith or biographies mentioned that one of these great companions had narrated even a single tradition from Abu Hurayra? When did they pay attention to his traditions? We didn’t find that he had told of traditions in the presence of them. He didn’t dare to. They often discarded him and denied his traditions as mentioned in details in the previous pages.
Now let us go back to what ibn Abdul Birr said about Abu Hurayra.
His saying (that Abu Hurayra was the best of the companions in memorizing the prophetic traditions) was quoted from Abu Hurayra’s tradition, in which he said: “I was the most aware of his traditions”.
His saying (that he attended the Prophet’s meetings, which the Muhajireen and the Ansar didn’t attend) was quoted from Abu Hurayra’s tradition, in which he talked about spreading his garment in front of the Prophet as we mentioned it before with our comments.
His saying (that the Prophet witnessed that he had paid much attention to the knowledge and the Hadith) was quoted from Abu Hurayra’s Saying: “I said: “O messenger of Allah, who is the happiest one to get your intercession? He said: “I thought that no one would ask me about this worthier than you when I saw you paying much attention to the Hadith.”
Among his virtues, which those, who wrote his biography, talked about in details, was his haversack, from which he had eaten more than two hundred wasaqs of dates, his escaped servant, whom he set free for the sake of Allah, his keeping two vessels of knowledge that he spread one and kept the other secret, the Prophet’s prayer for him and his mother, his walking above the water until he crossed a gulf without becoming wet and many others of his comic tragic stories at the same time! May Allah be with us to bear all that!
Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal mentioned a tradition about Abu Hurayra narrated by Muhammad bin Ziyad saying: “Marwan, who was wali of Medina during the reign of Mu’awiya, sometimes assigned Abu Hurayra to be his deputy when he left Medina. Abu Hurayra beat the ground with his feet saying: “Clear the way! Clear the way! The emir has come.” He referred to himself.
Ibn Qutayba ad-Daynouri mentioned in his book that Abu Rafi’ had said: “Marwan sometimes assigned Abu Hurayra to be emir of Medina (when he traveled). He rode a donkey with a saddle on its back and a fiber of date-palm on its head. When he met any one, he said: “Clear the way! The emir has come.” He might sometimes pass by the children playing in the night. He suddenly jumped among them and beat the ground with his feet…”
Abu Na’eem mentioned that Tha’laba bin Abu Malik al-Qardhi had said: “One day Abu Hurayra, who was then the emir assigned by Marwan, came through the market carrying a bundle of firewood. He said: “Clear the way for the emir, o ibn Abu Malik!” I said: “This is enough.” He said: “Clear the way for the emir with the bundle on him.”
Abu Na’eem also mentioned a tradition narrated by Ahmed bin Hanbal from Othman ash-Shahham that Farqad as-Sabkhi had said: “Abu Hurayra went around the Ka’ba saying: “Woe to my stomach! If I satiate it, it will be surfeited and if I leave it hungry, it will shame me.”
It was mentioned by Rabee’ul Abrar that Abu Hurayra said: “O Allah, grant me grinding teeth, a digesting stomach and a scattering anus.”
Also it was mentioned by Rabee’ul Abrar that Abu Hurayra liked (madheera). He ate it with Mu’awiya but when the time of prayer came, he offered the prayer behind Imam Ali. When he was asked about that, he said: “The (madheera) of Mu’awiya was fattier but the prayer behind Ali was better.” Therefore he was called (sheikh al-Madheera).
Abu Othman an-Nahdi said that once Abu Hurayra was in travel with others. They stopped to rest. When they served food, they sent one of them to invite Abu Hurayra where he was offering the prayer. He said that he was fasting. When they were about to finish eating, he came and began to eat. They looked at their friend, whom they sent to invite Abu Hurayra. He said: “Why do you look at me? I swear that he said to me he was fasting.” Abu Hurayra said: “He was true. I heard the Prophet saying: “Fasting Ramadan and three days of every month equals fasting all the age.” I fasted the first three days of the month. I fasted for the duplication of fasting and I broke my fasting according to the easing of Allah.”
Al-Bukhari mentioned that Muhammad bin Sireen had said: “We were with Abu Hurayra (in his house). He was clothed in two brocaded linen dresses. He blew his nose with his cloths and said: “What great! Abu Hurayra blows his nose with the linen. I remember when I fell to the ground faintly between the minbar of the Prophet and the room of A’isha. The comers put their feet on my neck thinking I was mad. But it was no madness. It was but of hunger.”
Ibnul Atheer said in his book al-Bidayeh wen-Nihayeh that Abu Hurayra had played (cider), which was a Persian game played by children.
Ibn Mandhoor, in his book Lissan al-Arab, added to that as in the tradition of Yahya bin Katheer: “The (cider) is the little Devil. He means that it is a satanic thing.”
Ad-Dimyeri said in his book Hayat al-Haywan (the animals’ life) about the chess: “As-Sa’louki narrated that Amirul Mu’mineen Omar bin al-Khattab, Abul Bissr and Abu Hurayra permitted playing chess. It was famous in the books of jurisprudence that Abu Hurayra played chess. Al-Aajuri narrated that Abu Hurayra had said: “The Prophet (s) said: “If you pass by those who play the azlam, the chess and the dice, don’t greet them.”
He died in his castle in al-Aqeeq. He was carried to Medina by the sons of Othman bin Affan until they reached al-Baqee’ (graveyard) as kind of gratitude in return for his good thought about their father. Al-Waleed bin Otba bin Abu Sufyan, who was the emir of Medina then, offered the prayer for the dead instead of Marwan, who was deposed. Al-Waleed advanced to offer the prayer, in spite of that ibn Omar, Abu Sa’eed al-Khudari and other companions were there, to honor Abu Hurayra in return for his great services he did for the Umayyads.
Al-Waleed sent his uncle Mu’awiya a letter telling him of the death of Abu Hurayra. Mu’awiya wrote to his nephew: “Look for his inheritors and pay them ten thousand dinars. Do them favors and let them be comfortable in your neighborhood because Abu Hurayra supported Othman and was with him in the house when he was killed.’’
He died in fifty-seven or (it was said) fifty-eight or fifty-nine of hijra. He was seventy-eight years old.
As for his offspring, as we knew, he had a son called al-Muharrir and a daughter. Al-Muharrir had a son called Na’eem, who narrated that his grandfather Abu Hurayra had had a thread with two thousand knots. He did not sleep until he glorified Allah with his two thousand knots thread.
Na’eem also narrated from his grandfather that someone had asked the Prophet: “What do you advise me to trade with? The Prophet said to him: “Deal with cloth! Because the dealer of cloth wishes people to be always in good and wealth.”
Ibn Sa’d mentioned al-Muharrir in his Tabaqat and said that he narrated a little traditions and that he was died during the reign of Omar bin Abdul Aziz.
Let us conclude our book with two words the Prophet (s) had said wisely as evidence to prove the aberration of those deviants in order to warn people from them.
The first word concerned Abu Hurayra, ar-Rahhal bin Anwa and al-Furat bin Hayyan. Once when they went out from the Prophet meeting, he said referring to them: “The thirst of one of you in Hell is greater than the other’s. He has a perfidious mind.”
Abu Hurayra and al-Furat often said after that that they didn’t feel safe until ar-Rahhal renegaded and was killed with Musaylama the Liar.
As if they (Abu Hurayra and al-Furat) tried to interpret the Prophet’s saying to refer to one of them only as ar-Rahhal renegaded and joined Musaylama after the death of the Prophet (s).
They confused the truth of the Prophet’s saying when he generalized. It was like the sayings of Allah: (Does one of you like that he should have a garden of palms and vines) 2:266, (one of them loves that he should be granted a life of a thousand years) 2:96, (And when one of them is given news of that of which he sets up as a likeness for the Beneficent God) 43:17, (And when a daughter is announced to one of them his face becomes black and he is full of wrath) 16:58 and many other examples in the Qur’an, the Sunna and the speech of the Arabs. The Arabs said in their praise: (The hand of one of them rains with gold. The heart of one of them overflows with compassion) and they said in their dispraise: (The face of one of them is a symbol of impudence. The heart of one of them is harder than the rocks). So the Prophet’s saying didn’t concern a certain one of them but it concerned the three of them. This was the fact of the tradition.
If the Prophet wanted to refer to a certain one of those three, he would show that clearly by mentioning his name or a distinguishing aspect and wouldn’t say a confused tradition, which was not possible for the Prophet, because the innocent ones would be wronged. So if it was known that one of them was perfidious and he would be in Hell without knowing exactly who he was, the three of them would participate in the verdict. After that it was not to trust or depend upon their sayings or witnesses and not to entrust them with any of the Muslims’ affairs. They would be forbidden from the civil rights in Islam and the umma had to avoid them in whatever concerned truthfulness and fairness according to the Islamic rule about suspicions. That was enough evidence to renounce the three of them.
Definitely the Prophet would define the perfidious one, who would be in Hell, and wouldn’t let the innocent ones suffer his prediction as long as they lived besides the bad thought of people about them. Certainly he wouldn’t do that, unless the three of them were the same.
If you say: the Prophet might refer to ar-Rahhal by saying something or pointing to him and that was unknown to us.
We say: if there was something of that, it would not be unknown for Abu Hurayra and al-Furat, who didn’t find anything to make them feel safe except when ar-Rahhal renegaded then they prostrated to thank Allah. After that they often said that they hadn’t felt safe until ar-Rahal did so.
If you say: the Prophet said that in general before ar-Rahhal renegaded and joined Musaylama the Liar and was killed with him. Hence, after ar-Rahhal did so, it became clear that he himself, whom the Prophet did mean by his tradition without the other two.
We say first: it was understood from the Prophet’s saying: “..one of you..” that it referred to the all without exception as we explained before and quoted some similar examples from the holy Qur’an. It had nothing to do with the renegade of ar-Rahhal for he was bad before that. So were his two friends.
Second: it was impossible for the prophets to hide the truth when it was required or to delay it until its time elapsed. The time in this case related to the same moment of uttering this word by the Prophet. If anyone of these three deserved any respect or regard, the Prophet would declare the perfidious one of them by the name. In fact since they became Muslims, they were suspected of their traditions, witnesses and everything else. If it was not necessary to renounce the three of them, the Prophet would show the name of one of them before he died. He would not leave the matter for the renegade of ar-Rahhal to explain his tradition!
Third: al-Furat bin Hayyan was a spy for the polytheist and an eye for Abu Sufyan to spy on the Prophet and the Muslims. When the Muslims wanted to kill him according to the Prophet’s order, he declared to be a Muslim in order to spare his life. The Prophet said: “There are some of you, I gift them to remain Muslims. One of them is al-Furat bin Hayyan.” So he was as bad as ar-Rahhal. Then how could we decide that the Prophet referred in his tradition to ar-Rahhal and not to al-Furat, who became a Muslim just to spare his life or Abu Hurayra, who had booked his ticket to Hell before his two friends according to the Prophet saying: “Whoever ascribes a fabricated tradition to me, is to occupy his seat in Hell.”
The second word concerned Abu Hurayra, Samara bin Jundub al-Fazari and Abu Mahthoora al-Jumahi, whom the Prophet warned one day by saying: “The last of you to die will be in Hell.”
It was a wise method of the Prophet to discard the polytheists from participating in the Muslims’ affairs. Since the Prophet knew the hidden reality of those three men, so he wanted to infuse into the minds of his umma the doubt about them to avoid them in order not to entrust any one of them with a task that had to be done by a trusty believer. He said that one of them, who was to die the last, would be in Hell without defining a certain one of the three of them. Days and nights elapsed and the tradition remained as it was without any definition or addition until the Prophet (s) joined his Exalted Lover in the best world. Then the umma had to discard them all from any position concerning the believers and to prevent them the rights according to the traditional and rational rule about suspicions. If the three were not the same in this matter, the Prophet definitely would define one of them.
If you say: there might be a definition about one of them but it became unknown for us because of the long period.
We say: if it was so, not all of those three would be so afraid from this warning.
There was no any difference in this matter if there was no definition or it became unknown. All the three men shared the same verdict of the Prophet; therefore it had to be applied to anyone of them.
If you say: the Prophet said that in general before the first and the second died. After their death it became clear that he, who remained after them, was the intended one to be in Hell. So there was no any problem.
We say first: you knew well as we had said before that it was impossible for the prophets to hide the truth when it was required or to delay it until its time elapsed. You knew, too, that its time was related to the same moment of uttering this warning. If one of these three men was virtuous or regardable, the Prophet would show that by defining one of them in order not to wrong the other innocent ones. The Prophet was far away from preventing someone his right or disgracing someone, who was innocent and didn’t deserve to be disgraced and to remain disgraced until he died without knowing his innocence except if he died, according to this null supposition, before his two friends.
Second: we, by Allah, tried our best in researching and inspecting to know who was the last of them in dying but we couldn’t because the sayings about the dates of their deaths were confused and contradicted.
Third: the great characters and the high morals of the Prophet, who (became grievous when the believers fell into distress, excessively solicitous about them and had compassion on them), would not face those, whom he respected, with this severe saying (the last of you to die will be in Hell). It was not possible for him, who had the sublime morality, to overtake someone innocent and didn’t deserve to be overtaken by such severe saying (the great thirst of one of you in Hell.). If one of these three men (or those) was good, the Prophet would not include him in this hard surprise and cruel defiance, but the revelation obliged him to do so for the sake of Allah and the umma because (Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed) 53:3.
It was enough for Abu Hurayra to be in his disgrace, which the prophetic traditions put him in. Let you yourself decide when you see the crimes committed by Samara; his horrible excessiveness in shedding the Muslims’ bloods, selling wine publicly, doing wrong to al-Ansari, disobeying the Prophet when he invited him to reconcile between him and a man in a case happened between them about Samara’s date-palm, which was inside the house of that man. The Prophet promised him to have one in Paradise instead of that but he refused in a way showing that he wasn’t faithful. Once he wounded the head of the Prophet’s she-camel disdainfully and scornfully, besides his many other bad deeds.
As for Abu Mahthoora, he was one of the freed captives and one of those, whom the Prophet gifted to attract them to Islam in order to be safe from their plots against the Muslims. He became a Muslim after the Prophet had conquered Mecca and after he had come back from the Battle of Hunayn victoriously against the big tribe of Hawazin. At that time no one was more hated to Abu Mahthoora than the Prophet and his orders. He often mocked at the Prophet’s caller, who announced azan, and imitated him loudly in ridiculous manner. But the purse of silver, which the Prophet used to give him, and the booties of Hunayn, which the Prophet granted to the freed captives of his enemies, who fought against him and his great morals that embraced whomever declared the shahada, with his severity towards those, who didn’t declare it, all that made the Arabs became Muslims group by group. And so Abu Mahthoora and his likes were obliged unwillingly to become Muslims. He didn’t immigrate to Medina until he died in Mecca. Allah knew well this man’s hidden intentions!
One word remained that was said by ibn Abdul Birr about this warning concerning these three men. He said in his book al-Istee’ab about Samara bin Jundub: “He died in Basra during the reign of Mu’awiya in fifty-eight of hijra. He fell into a pot full of hot water, which he was to sit on as treatment because he suffered from bad tetanus, and died. That confirmed the Prophet’s saying to him, Abu Hurayra and to a third one with them: “The last of you to die will be in (fire) Hell.”
It was an odd interpretation, which the text didn’t mean. No one understood it in this way even the three men, who were meant by this tradition, didn’t doubt about its meaning, therefore each of them wished, as it was mentioned by the historians, to die before his two friends. It was not certain that Samara died after the other two. Ibn Abdul Birr said that he died in fifty-eight of hijra whereas Abu Hurayra, according to the sayings of al-Waqidi, ibn Numayr, ibn Obayd, ibnul-Atheer and others, died in fifty-nine, in which Abu Mahthoora died too. It was also said that Abu Mahthoora died in seventy-nine. Ibnul-Kalbi said that Abu Mahthoora died after Samara. So the justification of ibn Abdul Birr about this tradition was but nonsense.
This was the last of what we wanted to say in order to clarify the holy Sunna from the disgraceful defects ascribed to the essence of Islam and its high soul. Thanks to Allah, who made us succeed to do this simple work, which we pray Allah to be of use for the believers and to make it as relic in the day of Resurrection.
Allah’s blessing and peace be upon the master and the last of the prophets, his progeny and his auspicious companions.
This book was completed in Soor on Thursday, twenty-three of Ramadan, 1362 AH, corresponding to twenty-three of September, 1943, by the author, who looks forward to the mercy of Allah, Abdul Hussayn bin the sharif Yousuf bin the sharif Jawad bin the sharif Isma’eel bin Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Sharafuddeen, whose name was Ibrahim, bin Zein al-Aabideen bin Ali Nooruddeen bin Nooruddeen Ali bin Izziddeen al-Hussayn bin Muhammad bin al-Hussayn bin Ali bin Muhammad bin Tajuddeen, who was famous as Abul Hassan bin Muhammad, whose surname was Shamsuddeen, bin Abdullah, whose surname was Jalaluddeen, bin Ahmed bin Hamza bin Sa’dullah bin Hamza bin Abus-Sa’adat Muhammad bin Abu Muhammad Abdullah, the head of the chiefs of the Talibites in Baghdad, bin Abul Harth Muhammad bin Abul Hassan Ali, who was famous as ibnud Daylamiyya, bin Abu Tahir Abdullah bin Abul Hassan Muhammad al-Muhaddith bin Abut Tayyib Tahir bin al-Hussayn al-Qat’ei bin Musa Abu Sibha bin Ibrahim al-Murtadha bin Imam al-Kadhim bin Imam as-Sadiq bin Imam al-Baqir bin Imam Zeinul Aabideen bin Imam Abu Abdullah al-Hussayn, the Master of the martyrs, the grandson of the Prophet and the son of Amirul Mu’mineen, the master of the guardians, Ali bin Abu Talib. Allah’s blessing and peace be upon the Prophet and all of his progeny.
 But the Sunni went too far by putting a holy nimbus around whoever called a companion until they became immoderate. They trusted in every one, good or bad. They imitated blindly the freed captives (whom the prophet (s) set free when he conquered Mecca) and every one heard or saw the prophet. They denied whoever contradicted them exceeding all the limits. Refer to p.p. 11-15 and p.p.23 in our book (the answers of Musa Jarallah).
 Now Syria, Jordan, Palestine, and Lebanon.
 A shelter made at a side of the mosque for the destitute and the poor to live in.
· In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful, and peace be upon His chosen slaves. Abdul-Hussein bin Sharafuddin al-Musawi al-Aamily, who hopes Allah’s forgiveness, says: This is an annotation included the references of this book. We did not leave a bit unless we had referred to its source. We hope researchers to refer to. I present this work for the sake of Allah and may Allah make it be useful for the others.
 This was mentioned exactly by Abu Omar bin Abdul-Birr in the biography of Abu Hurayra in his book Al-Issti’ab. If you read about his biography in other books like Al-Issaba, Usdul-Ghaba, Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat and others you will find that his ancestry and lineage were obscure.
 by Muhammad bin Hisham bin as-Sa’ib al-Kalbi mentioned in Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat in Abu Hurayra’s biography and certified by Abu Ahmed ad-Dimyati as in Ibn Hajar’s Issaba in Abu Hurayra’s biography.
 As it was mentioned by Ibn Sa’d in his Tabaqat p.p. 52, part 2, vol. 4.
 Ibn Qutayba ad-Daynouri mentioned in his book Al-Ma’arif p.p.93 that Abu Hurayra said: “I was surnamed with Abu Hurayra because of a small cat (in Arabic, hirra means cat and hurayra means small cat (kitten)) I used to play with.” Ibn Sa’d in his Tabaqat, in Abu Hurayra’s biography mentioned that Abu Hurayra said: “I grazed sheep and I had a small cat. When night came I put it on a tree and in the morning I took it to play with, so they called me Abu Hurayra.) Whoever wrote about Abu Hurayra’s biography mentioned that or something like that. He kept on fondness of his cat and playing with it at the days of Islam until prophet Muhammad (s) saw him putting his cat inside his sleeve. This was mentioned by al-Fayrooz Abadi in his book Al-Qamoos Al-Muheet, article of (hirra).
 Mentioned by al-Bukhari in his Sahih, vol.2 p.p.149 and by Ahmed bin Hanbal in his Musnad, vol.2 p.p.261.
1 I came from (Yemen) while the prophet was in Khaybar. I was, then, more than thirty years old.
Abu Hurayra told about himself and said as mentioned in his biography in Issaba, Hilyatul-Awliya, and other books: “I was a servant for ibn (son of) Affan and bint (daughter of) Ghazwan. I led their sumpters when they rode and served them when they got down just for food to stay alive.”
In his Sahih, p.p.182, vol.2. Also mentioned in Abu Hurayra’s biography in Issaba and Tabaqat.
Refer to chap. (The last days of the prophet’s life) on mentioning the prophet’s companions.
Vol. 1, p.p.376.
 Sahih, vol. 1, p.p.1.
 These seventy of suffa were martyred in the day of (Ma’ouna well) before Abu Hurayra came to be a Muslim. It was like his tradition when he said: (I entered the house of Ruqayya and she had a comb in her hand…) whereas she was dead before his coming to Medina.
 Sahih, Vol.1, p.p.24. It was also mentioned by others like Abu Na’eem in his book Hilyatul-Awliya’.
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.1.
 Abu Na’eem’s Hilyatul-Awliya’, vol.1, p.p.378.
 We never knew or heard that there was a black maid in the prophet’s house.
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.4,p.p.81and Abu Na’eem in his book Hilyatul-Awliya’ (Abu Hurayra’s biography).
 Abu Hurayra.
 This tradition is mentioned in Al-Bukhari’s Sahih in many places of the book, which he considered to be one of the miracles of the prophecy-if it was true-.We don’t know why it was not narrated by any other than Abu Hurayra, at least by one of those who participated Abu Hurayra in drinking the milk. Was there any necessity for that challenge and inimitability? Was it necessary to break the natural rules? Miracles didn’t happen unless there was a necessity for them, though we believe in inimitability of Allah and His apostles. It is apparent that this tradition was invented by Abu Hurayra to fawn on ordinary people especially after the death of the great companions and those whom Abu Hurayra was feared.
 Sahih, vol.2,p.p.197. it was also mentioned by Abu Na’eem in his book Hilyatul-Awliya’, vol.1, p.p.117.
 Ibn Abd Rabbih al-Andalussi mentioned in his book al-Aqd al-Fareed, vol.1 that Abu Hurayra said: “One day I followed Ja’far bin Abu Talib and I was hungry. When he reached his house, he turned and saw me. He asked me to come in. I came in. He thought for a while but he didn’t find anything to eat except a sack having some butter. He brought it from on a shelf and opened it between us. We began to lick what it had while he was citing some poetry: Allah has not asked one more than his ability and a hand doesn’t give generously except what it has.
 Refer to al-Issaba by ibn Hajar (Ja’far’s biography).
 It was also mentioned by Abu Na’eem in his book Hilyatul-Awliya’, vol.1, p.p.117, narrated by al-Maqbari from Abu Hurayra.
 It was also mentioned by Ibn Abdul-Birr in his book al-Isstee’ab.
 Refer to al-Mustadrak, vol.3, p.p.42, you will find that Abu Hurayra was blamed for that and he didn’t know what to say.
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.29.
 When the wali, al-Ala’ bin al-Hadhrami, who was appointed by the prophet, Abu Bakr and Omar, died.
 It was mentioned in Ibnul-Atheer’s History and by others when talking about the incidents of this year (23AH).
 A dry bunch of dates he used to hold in his hand.
 A proverb. Omayma was his mother’s name. This speech of the caliph was the worst of abuse.
 P.p.104,Egypt edition.
 Vol.4, p.p.90.
 All the intelligent people agreed that this tradition was untrue, but Abu Hurayra’s friends acquitted him from the falseness by blaming Iss-haq bin Najee’ al-Balti, who was one of the series of the narrators of this tradition. Ath-Thahabi mentioned the tradition in his book Mizan al-I’tidal confirming that it was untrue.
 Ibn Katheer in his book al-Bidaya wen-Nihaya, vol.7, p.p.203.
 This tradition was false unanimously. But Abu Hurayra’s friends turned the blame to Othman bin Khalid bin Omar bin Abdullah bin al-Waleed bin Othman bin Affan who was one of the series of the narrators of this tradition. Ath-Thahabi denied this tradition in his book Mizan al-I’tidal.
 Ibn Munda mentioned this tradition and said that it was odd and it was narrated by Othman bin Khalid al-Othmani only. Ibn Hajar al-Assqalani in his book al-Issaba, vol.4 (Um Kulthoom’s biography) said that it was odd and was not narrated except by Othman bin Khalid al-Othmani.
 For this reason, al-Hakim in his book al-Mustadrak, vol.3, p.p.99 mentioned this tradition under the subject of (Othman’s virtues).
But the truth was that it must be mentioned in Ali’s virtues, like the prophet’s saying: (There will be a separation and disagreement among people, so this and his companions will be on the side of rightness. He pointed to Ali). It was mentioned by at-Tabarani in his book Kanzul-Ommal, narrated by Ka’b bin Ajra, tradition no. 2635, vol.6. And the prophet’s saying: (There will be a sedition after me (after my death), so keep to Ali bin Abu Talib, because he was the first who believed in me (in Islam) and he will be the first to shake hands with me in the Day of Resurrection. He is the great veracious and he is the distinguisher of this nation). It was mentioned by Abu Ahmed, Ibn Munda and others, narrated by Abu Layla al-Ghifari. It was also mentioned by Ibn Abdul-Birr in his Isstee’ab, ibn Hajar in his Issaba and by others in (Abu Layla’s biography). And the prophet’s saying to Ammar bin Yassir: (O Ammar, if you see Ali going through a valley and the rest of people going through another valley, follow Ali and leave people because he neither leads you to a bad fate nor takes you away from right guidance). It was mentioned by ad-Daylamy in his book Kanzul-Ommal, vol.6, p.p.155, tradition no.259, narrated by Ammar and Abu Ayyoub. And also the prophet’s saying: (O Abu Rafi’, there will be after my death a group of people fighting Ali. The duty will be to fight them). It was mentioned by at-Tabarani in Kanzul-Ommal, vol.6, tradition no.2589, narrated by Muhammad bin Obaydillah bin Abu Rafi’, from his father, from his grandfather. There are many traditions like that but we cannot mention them all here. It is enough for us the prophet’s saying: (There is someone of you will fight for the interpretation of Qur’an as I fought for its revelation. People looked up to that, among them were Abu Bakr and Omar. Abu Bakr said: is it me? The prophet said: No. Omar said: Is it me? The prophet said: No. But he is the mender of the shoes). It was mentioned by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, vol.3, p.p.122 saying that it was a true tradition according to al-Bukhari and Muslim. It was also mentioned by at-Thahabi in his Talkheess and by Ahmed in his Musnad, vol.3, p.p.33, narrated by Abu Sa’eed and by Abu Na’eem in his book Hilyatul-Awliya’, vol.1,p.p.67 in (Ali’s biography), and abu Ya’la in his Sunan, and Sa’eed bin Mansour in his Kanz vol.6, p.p.155, tradition no.2585. The traditions talking about the necessity of fighting the perfidious people (battle of the Camel) and the outlaws (battle of Siffeen) and the apostates (the Kharijites) were certified and each confirming the other. The prophetic traditions talking about the sedition after his death were recurrent and they were of the signs of the prophecy of Muhammad (s). They were clear in urging to follow Imam Ali. The tradition mentioned by al-Hakim and narrated by Abu Hurayra was one of them. What confirmed that was that the Prophet (s) hadn’t called anyone with Amir except Ali at all. And here is the prophet’s saying to Anass: (The first who enters from this door is amirul-mu’mineen (commander of the believers) and the master of guardians…). It was mentioned by al-Isfahani in his book Hilyatul-Awliya’, vol.1, (Ali’s biography). The prophet (s) ordered his companions to call Ali with amirul-mu’mineen when saluting him. This was certified by many traditions narrated by the Prophet’s progeny (s).
 One of Imam Ali’s surnames.
 (helpers). The people of Medina who believed and assisted the prophet and his companions when they migrated from Mecca to Medina.
 This incident was mentioned by Ibrahim bin Hilal ath-Thaqafi in his book al-Gharat and by Ibn Abul-Hadeed in his book Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol.1, p.p.213. Let him who want to know the details refer to , to see Mu’awiya’s intentions and an-Nu’man’s malfunction in this incident. Imam Ali turned away from Abu Hurayra and didn’t talk to him because he saw that Abu Hurayra was very mean that he flattered Mu’awiya and sold his faith to Mu’awiya for a short worldly life. Imam Ali knew what Mu’awiya’s aim was by sending these two men, so he didn’t answer them, neither positively nor negatively. In fact he turned away from their demand and talked with an-Nu’man about something else. It showed his compact policy.
 It was mentioned by Ahmed bin Hanbal in his Musnad, vol.2, p.p.282. It was untrue, because Allah says: (And if two parties of the believers quarrel, make peace between them; but if one of them acts wrongfully towards the other, fight that which acts wrongfully until it returns to Allah's command..) 49:9.
 Refer to Sharh an-Nahj al-Hameedi, vol.1, p.p.116-121 for details. All the historians, who wrote about the incidents of the year forty of hijra, mentioned this event committed by Mu’awiya. It is famous like battles of Harra and at-Taff of his son Yazeed.
 Mentioned by Ibrahim bin Hilal ath-Thaqafi in his book al-Gharat and Ibn Abul-Hadeed in his book Sharh Nahjul-Balagha , vol.1, p.p.128.
 In Arabic (sannour) means cat. Jariya meant Abu Hurayra.
 Mentioned by Ibnul-Atheer in his book at-Tareekh al-Kamil, vol.3, p.p.153.
 Also mentioned by al-Khateeb in his book History of Baghdad, vol.5, p.p.445.
 This tradition was considered to be untrue unanimously. Ath-Thahabi mentioned this tradition in his book Mizan al- I’tidal (in Ibrahim bin Malik al-Ansari’s biography) and said that it was untrue. Every one used nullity to fight the rightness, he, no doubt, would lose.
 This tradition was also considered to be untrue unanimously. Ath-Thahabi mentioned it in his book Mizan al-I’tidal (biography of Ahmed as-Samarqandi). Refer to it to see that it was untrue and that it contradicted the holy Qur’an. And they lost, who wanted to hide the clear rightness by the shameful nullity.
 This is like the two previous in nullity. Ath-Thahabi mentioned it in Mizan al-I’tidal (Jeiroun bin Waqid’s biography) and said it was null.
 Ath-Thahabi mentioned this tradition in his Mizan (biography of the judge, Ja’far bin abdul-Wahid) and said it was one of Abu Hurayra’s afflictions.
 It was mentioned in ath-Thahabi’s Mizan (biography of Muhammad bin Musa bin Atta’ ad-Dimyatti) but they always blamed the others who narrated from Abu Hurayra! The tradition included a Qur’anic verse, 48:29.
 Muslim, here, is a name of someone who collected the Hadith in a book called Sahih.
 This was taken from Abu Hurayra’s saying: I took a garment off my back and spread it between the Prophet and me while I was looking at the lice creeping on it…It was mentioned by Abu Na’eem in his Hilyatul-Awliya’, vol.1, p.p.381.
 Ibn Sa’d mentioned in his Tabaqat (Abu Hurayra’s biography) from Wahab bin Kaysan, Qatada and al-Mugheera that Abu Hurayra put on silk cloths.
 Al-Bukhari in his Sahih, vol.4, p.p.175, mentioned that Muhammad bin Sireen said: We were at Abu Hurayra’s and he was wearing two slender flax dresses.
 He died in this palace as mentioned by Ibn Hajar in his Issaba, Ibn Qutayba’s Ma’arif and Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat.
 Mentioned by imam Ahmed in his Musnad, vol.2, p.p.430, narrated by Muhammad bin Ziyad, Ibn Qutayba in his Ma’arif, narrated by Abu Rafi’ and imam Abu Ja’far al-Iskafi in his book Sharh an-Nahj al-Hameedi, vol.1, p.p.359, edition of Egypt.
 He was an ally of the tribe of Abd Shams. The caliph Omar (may Allah be pleased with him) made him leader during the Islamic conquests. He established the town of Basra and became its emir. He conquered many countries and was one of the famous Prophet’s companions and one of the heroes. He died during the reign of Omar. But Abu Hurayra got married to his sister after a long time of his death. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his book al-Issaba mentioned Bissra and Abu Hurayra’s story with her. He said that she had employed him at the time of the Prophet, then he got married to her when Marwan entrusted him with the emirate of Medina during the reign of Mu’awiya.
 Mentioned by Abul-Abbas as-Sarraj in his History and Ibn Hajar in his Issaba (biography of Abu Hurayra).
 Mentioned by Abu Khuzayma and Ibn Hajar in his book al-Issaba.
 Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat, second part of vol.4, p.p.53.
 Refer to Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat, second part of vol.4, p.p.53.
 Refer to Abu Na’eem’s Hilyatul-Awliya’, vol.1, p.p.379.
 Refer to Abu Na’eem, Hilyatul-Awliya’, vol.1, p.p.384.
 Al-Khateeb in his book History of Baghdad, vol.7,p.p.35,and vol.9, p.p.99.
 Sharh Nahj al-Balagha al-Hameedi, vol.1, p.p.358.
 Sufyan ath-Thawri narrated from Abdur-Rahman bin Qassim from Omar bin Abdul-Ghaffar that when Abu Hurayra came to Kufa with Mu’awiya, he sat at the gate of Kinda in the night and people sat around him. One day a young man from Kufa-he might be al-Asbagh bin Nabata-came and said to him: “O Abu Hurayra, I ask you , by Allah, if you had heard the Prophet saying to Ali bin Abu Talib: “O Allah, support whoever supports him and be an enemy of whoever opposes him.” Abu Hurayra said: “yes, I had.” The young man said: “I swear by Allah that you have supported his enemies and opposed his assistants.” Then he left.
 In a tradition mentioned by Ibn Sa’d and Ibn Hajar in his Issaba. We shall comment on this tradition in a next chapter of this book.
 Refer to the last line of page240, vol.4.of Ibn Hajar’s book al-Issaba which included the book al-Issti’ab in the margins.
 Refer to al-Qastalani’s book Irshad as-Sari,vol.1, p.p.212, the explanation of the first tradition of Abu Hurayra mentioned by al-Bukhari in his Sahih, you will find that Abu Hurayra had narrated from the Prophet (s) 5374 traditions and that he had in al-Bukhari’s Sahih 446 traditions. Ibn Hazm in his book al-Milal wen-Nihal vol.4, p.p.138, said that Abu Hurayra had narrated 5374 traditions.
 It was mentioned by as-Sayouti in his book Tareekh al-Khulafa’ (the history of the caliphs), an-Nawawi in his book at-Tahtheeb. Ibn Hazm in his book al-Milal wen-Nihal, vol.4, p.p.137 and ath-Thahabi in his book Mizan al-I’tidal, who said that the true traditions of Abu Bakr were less than twenty.
 As-Sayouti said in his book Tareekh al-Khulafa’ that Omar’s traditions were five hundred and thirty-nine. Ibn Hazm mentioned in his book al-Milal wen-Nihal, vol.4, p.p.138 the same number and said that the true traditions of Omar were nearly fifty traditions.
 Jalaluddin as-Sayouti in his book tareekh al-Khulafa’.
 As-Sayouti, Tareekh al-Khulafa’ (Ali’s biography). Ibn Hazm in his book al-Milal wen-Nihal, vol.4,p.p.137.
 Ibn Abdil-Birr said in his book al-Isstee’ab that the Prophet (s) had got married to Aa’isha in the tenth year after his prophecy –three years before hijra-so her marriage was before Abu Hurayra being a Muslim in ten years because he became Muslim in the seventh year of hijra.
 She died in fifty-seven of hijra before Abu Hurayra’s death in a short time. Abu Hurayra offered the prayer for her-the prayer for the dead-by order of al-Waleed bin Otba bin Abu Sufyan, who was made wali of Medina by his uncle Mu’awiya. He wanted to honor Abu Hurayra by that. Aa’isha was buried in Baqee’.
 Ibn Hazm’s book al-Milal wen-Nihal, vol.4,p.p.138.
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.24.
 The three previous traditions were mentioned by Ibn Sa’d in his book Tabaqat, vol.4, p.p.57.
 Al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, vol.3, p.p.509, ath-Thahabi in his Talkheess. What a dignity Abu Hurayra had! He said:..you would throw at me stones, potteries, dunghill. And when he said about himself:… the comers put their feet on my neck.. and when he talked about his stomach, lice and his other affairs.
 Abu Na’eem, Hilyatul-Awliya’, p.p.381 ( biography of Abu Hurayra).
 Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat, vol.2,p.p.119.
 A tradition narrated by Wahab bin Munabbih from his brother Humam from Abu Hurayra, mentioned in al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1,p.p.22.
 Al-Qastalani’s book Irshad as-Sari fee Sharh Sahih al- Bukhari, vol.1, p.p.373.
 Al-Qastalani’s Irshad as-Sari and Zakariya’s Tuhfatul-Bari. They were printed together in twelve volumes. You will find this excuse in vol.1,p.p.373.
 Muhajireen (emigrants): the first Muslims of Mecca who emigrated to Medina. Ansar (helpers and assistants): the people of Medina who believed in the prophet and assisted him and his companions.
 Abu Hurayra died, as it was mentioned in al-Issaba of Ibn Hajar, in fifty-seven or fifty-eight of hijra and it was said fifty-nine. Abdullah died, according to the same reference, in sixty-five or sixty-eight or sixty-nine of hijra. Al-Qaysarani said in his book Rijal-as-Sahihayn that he had died in ninety-two. Allah is the most aware.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.4,p.p.57, Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2,p.p.481 and Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.2, p.p.315.
 Irshad as-Sari,vol.7,p.p.90.
 He quoted many things from them, like his saying: Sayhan, Jayhan, the Euphrates and the Nile of Egypt all are parts of Paradise. It was mentioned by al-Khateeb in his book History of Baghdad, vol.2,p.p.235. It was quoted from the Old Testament.
 Al-Qastalani mentioned this tradition in his book Irshad as-Sari, vol.10, p.p.491and said that the pronoun (his) in Abu Hurayra’s tradition (Allah had created Adam according to His image..), referred to Allah and not to Adam.
 Ibn Qutayba mentioned this tradition in his book (Interpretation of different traditions) p.p.280, and made it as evidence that the pronoun (his) in Abu Hurayra’s saying: (Allah had created Adam according to His image) referred to Allah and not to Adam.
 Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2,p.p.397.
 Mentioned by al-Bukhari in al-Adab al-Mufrad and by Ahmed in his Musnad, vol.2, p.p.434.
 I wish Abu Hurayra would justify forbidding to hit the face for its niceness and beauty and that it has the important organs; ears, eyes, nose, mouth, lips, teeth, eyebrows, front and others, because most of perceiving is by them. Hitting the face may harm them and leave them idle or disfigure the face and that will be ugly because the face is apparent and can’t be covered. But Abu Hurayra preferred to distort the facts whether his partisans knew or not. We don’t have save Allah to resort to!
 Imam an-Nawawi said: Some of the jurisprudents refrained from interpreting all these traditions and said: We believe that they were true and their literal meaning was not intended. They might have suitable meanings. He said: This was the thought of the Sunni predecessors, which was more precautionary and safer… Refer to Sharh Sahih Muslim, which was printed in the margins of Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, vol.12, p.p.18. Al-Qastalani mentioned something like that in his book Irshad as-Sari , vol.10, p.p.491, then he said: ..and this is safer. This shows that they believed that these traditions were true. Allah forbid! (..and most surely the frailest of the houses is the spider’s house-did they but know) 29:41.
 Refer to al-Qastalani in his book Irshad as-Sari, vol.10, p.p.492.
 Al-Bukhari and Muslim.
 A kind of thistle found in the Arabia.
 Sahih of Muslim, vol.1, p.p.88.
 vol.2, p.p.138.
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.3, p.p.127. Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2. p.p.482. Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.2, p.p.314.
 Sahih of al-Bukhari, vol.4, p.p.68 and vol.1, p.p.136. Sahih of Muslim, vol.1,p.p.283.Musnad of Ahmed bin Hanbal, vol.2, p.p.258.
 The explorer Ibn Battouta attended this incident and mentioned what he had seen in his book Rihla (travel), vol.1, p.p.57.
 Sahih of al-Bukhari. Vol.2, p.p.166. Sahih of Muslim, vol.2,p.p.57. Musnad of Ahmed bin Hanbal, vol.2, p.p.322.
 In Arabic it is called sikkeen.
 Sura of Yousuf was revealed to Prophet Muhammad (s) in Mecca except four verses which were revealed in Medina, the first three verses and the fourth: (Certainly in Yusuf and his brothers there are signs for the inquirers) 12:7. Abu Hurayra became a Muslim seven years after the revelation of this sura, which it had been recited by the Muslims day and night and he heard them read it in their prayers many times.
 Mentioned by imam Ahmed bin Hanbal in his book Musnad, vol.2, p.p.230, that it was narrated by Muhammad bin Ja’far from Shu’ba from al-Ala’ from his father from Abu Hurayra.
 As it was narrated from Imam Abu Ja’far al-Baqir and Imam Abu Abdullah as-Sadiq (s).
 i.e. We instructed Solomon this judgement and it was to abrogate the judgement, which We had instructed David before.
 Sahih of al-Bukhari, vol.3, p.p.176. Musnad of Ahmed, vol.2, p.p.229 and p.p.270.
 ibid, vol.4, p.p.107.
 ibid, vol.2, p.p.165.
 Sahi of Muslim, vol.2, p.p.23. In the same chapter Muslim mentioned a tradition narrated by Abu Hurayra from another way that they were seventy and another tradition narrated by him from a third way that they were ninety.
 A proverb.
 A proverb.
 Sahih of Muslim, vol.2, p.p.309. Sahih of al- Bukhari, vol.2, p.p.163 and vol. 1, p.p.158.
 vol.2, p.p.315.
 If the angel of death came to people visibly, that would be widespread among the all, like the rays of the sun in the midday. Why did the narrators and the historians of the other nations miss this news if it had had any reality? Why didn’t the imagination of the fictionists and fablers hover about this excitement? Did they leave the honor of that for Abu Hurayra?
 Sura of al-Ma’ida, Verse:45. We found that the twenty-third paragraph of the twenty-first chapter of the Exodus of the Torah, which is among the Jews and the Christians nowadays have the following meaning: (If a harm happened, a soul would be given for a soul, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a leg for a leg, a burn for a burn, a wound for a wound and a bruise for a bruise).
 We mentioned the tradition according to Muslim in his book Sahih, vol.2, p.p.308. Al-Bukhari mentioned it in his Sahih, vol,1 p.p.42 and vol. 2, p.p.162. It was mentioned by Ahmed in his Musnad in many ways from Abu Hurayra, vol.2, p.p.315.
 This text is according to al-Bukhari in his Sahih, vol.3, p.p.100. It was mentioned by Muslim in his Sahih, vol.1, p.p.97 and Ahmed in his Musnad, vol.2.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol,2,p.p.158, Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.71 and Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.2.
 This saying of Imam Ali was famous. Al-Bouseiry, the poet, referred to it in his poem: The vizier of his cousin in great deeds,
Would be happy if the vizier was a relative,
Removing of the blind added to his sureness nothing,
It was the sun without a cover.
 Refer to al-BuKhari’s Sahih , vol. 1, p.p.42 and vol.2 ,p.p.160.
 Refer to al-Qastalani’s book Irshad as-Sari, vol.6, p.p.288
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s book Sahih, vol.2, p.p.114, Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.267, Abu Dawood’s al-Adab, Ibn Maja, an-Nassa’ei and Ahmed’s Musnad.
 Refer to an-Nawawi’s book Sharh Sahih Muslim, vol. 11, p.p.6, printed in the margins of the book Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari.
 What prudent and cautious Abu Hurayra was! Don’t you see that he didn’t decide certainly it was the Asr prayer and didn’t certify his guess!
 The piety of Abu Hurayra led him to mention even that piece of wood and that the Prophet put his hand on it, which had nothing to do with the subject of the tradition, but because he was so cautious in mentioning the details!!
 Exactly as it was mentioned in al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.145 and in other places of the book. Refer to Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.215 and Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.2, p.p.234.
 His name was Omayr or Amr as mentioned in Ibn Hajar’s book al-Issaba.
 Refer to an-Nawawi’s book Sharh Sahih Muslim, vol.4 p.p.235, printed in the margins of al-Qastalani’s book Irshad as-Sari and Zakariyya al-Ansari’s book Tuhfa.
 Refer to al-Qastalani’s Irshad as-Sari, vol.3, p.p.267.
 In his book Musnad ,vol.20, p.p.271 and p.p.284.
 Refer to Ibn Hajar’s book al-Issaba, vol.20, p.p.271 and p.p.284.
 As it was mentioned in al-Issaba. Notice he said that the name of Thush-Shamalayn was Abd Amr.
 Vol.1, p.p.145.
 vol.1, p.p.215.
 Refer to al-Qastalani’s book Irshad as-Sari, vol.3,p.p.266.
 vol.1, p.p.216.
 Mentioned by Muslim in his book Sahih, vol.2, p.p.392, al-Bukhari in his Sahih, vol.4,p.p.71 and Ahmed in his Musnad, vol.2, p.p.243.
 Mentioned in al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.4, p.p.39.
 Refer to Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.393.
 In Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.393.
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.4,p.p.38.
 Sahih of al-Bukhari, vol.4, p.p.39.
 ibid, vol.4p.p.38.
 Refer to Ibn Abdul-Birr’s book Jami’ Bayan al-Ilm, p.p.36.
 Refer to Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.396.
 ibid. vol.2, p.p.390.
 ibid. vol.2, p.p.390.
 ibid. vol.2, p.p.390.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.6.
 Refer to al-Hakim’s Mustadrak, vol.4, p.p.480.
 ibid. vol.4,p.p.481.
 This poor believer had no chance, according to Abu Hurayra’s tradition, to be near to Allah or to get a share of mercy, where the Prophet excluded him from this curse, whereas the defenders of Abu Hurayra preferred that he wouldn’t be excluded and hoped if the Prophet had cursed them and their fathers to be as a penance for their guilts and a cause to make them near to Allah!
 Refer to al-Hakim’s Mustadrak, vol.4, p.p.480.
 ibid. vol.4, p.p.479.
 ibid. vol.4, p.p.479.
 ibid. vol.4, p.p.481.
 Refer to al-Hakim’s Mustadrak, vol.4, p.p.481.
 vol.4, p.p.481. It was clear from his speech that he was afraid of the common people (the Sunni Public) to deny the traditions he mentioned, but apologized to them that he couldn’t end his book without mentioning them. Then I knew what the poet meant by his saying: The Muslims were not Muhammad’s umma, but they were his enemy’s umma.
 Refer to Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.2.
 Az-Zubayr bin Bukar mentioned a case happened in Damascus between Imam Hassan (s) and his opponents; Mu’awiya, his brother Otba, Ibnul-Aass, ibn Oqba and ibn Shu’ba. The argument between them was so strong. Something of what Imam Hassan had said then was: “You know well that the Prophet cursed Abu Sufyan (Mu’awiya’s father) in seven situations that you cannot deny.” He mentioned them all one after the other and then said to Amr bin al-Aass: “You and all these people know well that you satirized the Prophet with seventy verses of poetry and the Prophet said: O Allah, You know that I don’t say poetry and I won’t do. O Allah, curse him for every letter of his poem a thousand curses, so there are countless curses from Allah upon you.” Refer to Sharh an-Nahj al-Hameedi, vol.2, p.p.104, at-Tabrasi in his book al-Ihtijaj, al-Majlisi in his Bihar, and others, Sunni and Shia. Muslim mentioned in his Sahih, vol.2, p.p.392 that ibn Abbas said: “The Prophet asked me to call Mu’awiya to come. I came back and said to the Prophet: He is eating. He said: Go and call him! I came back and said: He is eating. The Prophet said: Let Allah not satiate his stomach!” In our books (Shia books) concerning this tradition it was mentioned that Ibn Abbas said that the Prophet had cursed Mu’awiya then. What proved it that Muslim mentioned this tradition in the chapter of (those, who were cursed by the Prophet) in his book Sahih, but they distorted the traditions to preserve the dignity of those hypocrites.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.143, Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.204 and Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.2, p.p.298.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.78 and Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.153.
 I mentioned this interpretation in al-Irfan magazine, vol.31, p.p.113 and the pages after.
 This is quoted from Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.254.
 Ritual ablution as prerequisite to offer the prayer.
 Allah made this verse to show the time of the prayers. Zuhr (noon) and Asr (afternoon) prayers participated in the time from the noon until the sunset but the Zuhr prayer was to be before the Asr prayer. The Maghrib (sunset) and Isha’ (night) prayers participated in the time from the sunset until the darkness of the night but the Maghrib prayer was to be before the Isha’ prayer. Allah also mentioned the Fajr (dawn) prayer in the verse to declare that these prayers were obligatory and to declare the time of offering them.
 As mentioned in the book Majma’ul Bayan, in the interpretation of the verse of (Taha). It was narrated by Qatada.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.135. Refer to al-Kashshaf, when interpreting the verse of Taha.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.136.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.136. What a strange of al-Bukhari it was that he mentioned this tradition in his book as well as the tradition talking about the sleeping of the Prophet and missing the prayer! Also refer to Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.2, p.p.153.
 Specified wordings to be said after the azan as a forepart for the prayer.
 Refer to Al-Bhkhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.138.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.179.
 one of night prayers.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.179 and Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.2, p.p.251.
 vol.1, p.p.254.
 Abu Hurayra said in the last days of his life: “I and a few of my tribe came to Medina to confess our Islam where the prophet had left to Khaybar and appointed Siba’ bin Arafat al-Ghifari as his successor in Medina. We offered fajr prayer with him. He supplied us with some food and money. We set out until we came to the prophet where he conquered Khaybar. The prophet talked to the Muslims to participate us with their shares.” This tradition was not narrated by any one except Abu Hurayra but the public (the Sunnis) depended upon it, as they always did with Abu Hurayra’s traditions, and confirmed Abu Hurayra’s attendance at Khaybar with the prophet without any true evidence. According to our infallible imams, Abu Hurayra came to Medina and became a Muslim after the return of the prophet from Khaybar.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.171 and 190, Muslim’s Sahih,vol.2, p.p.316 and later page and Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.2, p.p.246.
 Certainly, he invented this tradition after their death.
 The last hajj of the prophet Muhammad (s) before he died.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.192 and Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.517.
 A place near Mecca.
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.3, p.p.90.
 He narrated from Mu’awiya, an-Nu’man bin Basheer, al-Magheera bin Shu’ba, Abdullah bin az-Zubayr, Marwan and others like them. His traditions were mentioned by al-Bukhari and Muslim.
 (bint) means: daughter of and (bin) means: son of.
 Refer to al-Hakim’s Mustadrak, vol.2, p.p.131, ath-Thahabi’s Talkheess and imam Ahmed bin Hanbal’s Musnad, vol.2, p.p.299.
 The jurisprudents denied this saying (it will be valid for four months) because what the speech of Imam Ali included at that day was (any polytheist has a covenant with the prophet, it will be valid until its date, whatever its period is and whoever has a covenant without a limit of time, it will be valid for four months). It was clear that Abu Hurayra didn’t attend the season of hajj to know what they announced of. It was ordinary for him, because many times he pretended to attend the events he talked about but, in fact, he didn’t attend them therefore he narrated them falsely.
 The contradiction between the two traditions was clear concerning the sender of Abu Hurayra and the other callers, the place of the send; Medina or Mecca and the date of the send; either the Day of Immolation or before it.
 Refer to at-Tabarsi’s book Majma’ul Bayan, vol.3, p.p.3.
 If you say: why did the prophet order Abu Bakr to go with Bara’a to void the covenant of the polytheists in the day of hajj and then he deposed him before the time of hajj came? Wasn’t that a kind of abrogation of something before the coming of its time of carrying out, which was impossible for Allah and His apostle? Certainly not! The prophet sent Abu Bakr and then ordered him to come back and sent Ali instead, to add to Ali a virtue, which wouldn’t be so if he sent Ali from the first. The same happened to Abraham. Allah ordered him to slaughter his son. When he tried to do, Allah revealed to him: (You have indeed shown the truth of the vision; surely thus do We reward the doers of good) and ransomed his son with a sacrifice and didn’t let him slaughter his son that Abraham was not, really, ordered, by Allah, to slaughter his son but to try to do that to show people the virtue of Abraham and his son and there was no any abrogation in this matter.
The same was when the prophet sent Abu Bakr to conquer Khaybar then he sent Omar, but they returned unsuccessfully. The prophet said: “Tomorrow I will give the banner to a man, who loves Allah and His apostle and They love him. He triumph with help of Allah.” He gave it to Ali and Ali conquered Khaybar. The virtue of Ali appeared much better than to be sent from the first. There were many cases like these.
 Refer to Ali bin Ibrahim in his Tafseer, when he interpreted sura of at-Tawba (Bara’a) and sheikh al-Mufeed in his Irshad.
 Refer to Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.1,p.p.2.
 ibid. vol.1, p.p.151.
 mentioned by an-Nassa’ei in his book al-Khassa’is al-Alawiya, p.p.20, imam Ahmed bin Hanbal and others.
 Refer to al-Hakim’s Mustadrak, vol.3, p.p.32, ath-Thahabi in Talkhees aal-Mustadrak, an-Nassa’ei’s book al-Khassa’is al-Alawiya, p.p.6 and Ahmed in his Musnad, vol.1, p.p.331.
 Commander of the believers.
 It was mentioned by az-Zubayr bin Bukaar bin Abdullah bin Mus’ab bin Thabit bin Abdullah bin az-Zubayr bin al-Awwam in his book al-Muwaffaqiyyat, which he wrote for al-Muwaffaq bil-lah, the son of al-Mutawakkil, the Abbasid caliph. It was Allah’s secret, which could never be hidden and His light, which could never be put out that az-Zubayr bin Bukaar himself mentioned such a tradition in his book. Ibn Bukaar was known for his enmity to Imam Ali and the Hashimites. He, who was asked by one of the Hashimites to swear between the holy tomb and minbar of the prophet and he swore falsely, therefore Allah afflicted him with leprosy. He abused the Alawites (the descendants of Imam Ali) and their grandfather Imam Ali. They decided to kill him. He fled to his uncle Mus’ab bin Abdulla bin Mus’ab and asked him to beg al-Mu’tassim, the Abbasid caliph, to safeguard him but his uncle didn’t respond to him because his uncle was not like him in his enmity to the Alawites. (This was mentioned by ibnul Atheer in his book at-Tareekh al-Kamil-al-Mu’tassim’s biography). His father Bukaar was a bitter enemy to Imam Reza. Imam Reza invoked Allah against him. He fell down from his castle and broke his neck. His grandfather, Abdullah bin Mus’ab gave a fatwa to Haroon ar-Rasheed, the Abbasid caliph, to kill Yahya bin Abdullah bin al-Hassan. He said to ar-Rasheed: “O amirul mu’mineen, kill him and I will be the responsible for him.” Ar-Rasheed said: “He has a covenant with me to safeguard him.” He said: “He doesn’t deserve that.” He pulled out the document of the covenant from Yahya by force and tore it with his own hands. It was the enmity they inherited, one after the other, from their grandfather Abdullah bin az-Zubayr until it reached az-Zubayr bin Bukaar, by which he got the favor near al-Mutawakkil by choosing him to educate his son al-Muwaffaq. Al-Mutawakkil ordered to give him ten thousand dirhams, ten wardrobes of cloths and ten mules to carry his baggage to Samarra’. He educated his son al-Muwaffaq and wrote him his book al-Muwaffaqiyyat, which was excellent wonderful book that we quoted from it much, in this book and other books.
 Refer to Sharh an-Nahj al-Hameedi, vol.1, p.p.369.
 Refer to an-Nassa’ei’s book al-Khassa’is al-Alawiyya, p.p.20 and Ahmed’s Musnad.
 Ibid. p.p.20 and Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.3, p.p.216.
 Omar was a fellow to Abu Bakr at that time. He was among three hundred companions, who went away with Abu Bakr. But Omar was a close companion of Abu Bakr, therefore he went back with him to Medina. The companions, after the return of Abu Bakr, joined Ali, who led them as the emir to Mecca. The all witnessed that Abu Bakr returned to Medina uncomfortably.
 The acquittal of the covenant was in the ninth year of hegira and the Prophet declared Ali to be the caliph after him in the tenth year of hegira, when he was coming back from his last hajj.
 Refer to Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.1, p.p.150.
 The 9th of Dhul-Hijja, when the pilgrims perform certain actions on the mountain Arafat.
 Refer to Ibn Maja’s Sunan, vol.1, p.p.92. it was mentioned by at-Tarmithi and an-Nassa’ei. It was the tradition no.2531 in p.p.153, vol.6, Kanzul Ommal. It was mentioned by Ahmed in his Munad, vol.4, p.p.164.
 Mentioned by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, vol.3, p.p.124.
 It was Hind, the wife of Abu Sufyan and the mother of Mu’awiya. She tore the chest of Hamza (the prophet’s uncle) when he was killed in the battle of Uhud, and ate his liver.
 Specified wordings to be recited before commencing the prayer.
 Abu Nasr al-Kalabathi, Abu Bakr al-Isbahani and Abul Fadhl ash-Shaybani, who was known as ibnul Qaysarani, mentioned in their books that Yunus bin Yazeed was the freed servant of Mu’awiya. Refer to Ibnul Qaysarani’s book, p.p.485. This very Yunus narrated that Abu Talib was unbeliever when he died. Refer to Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.30.
 vol.5, p.p.346.
 Refer to al-Hakim’s Mustadrak, vol.3, p.p.43 and ath-Thahabi in his Talkhees.
 Refer to Ahmed’s Musnsd, vol.5, p.p.356.
 Refer to al-Hakim’s Mustadrak, vol.3, p.p.111.
 In his Sahih, vol.2, p.p.194.
 Rfer to al-Qastalani’s book Irshad as-Sari, vol.7, p.p.349.
 Sahih, vol.2, p.p.171.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.125 and Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.74.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.3, p.p.37-, Muslim’s Sahi, vol.2, p.p.72 and Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.1, p.p.6.
 This tradition was denied by Fatima and all the infallible imams.
 Refer to Irshad as-Sari, vol.8, p.p.157.
 Islamic cloths.
 Refer to at-Tabarsi’s book al-Ihtijaj and Bihar al-Anwar. Some of the Sunni historians mentioned this speech in their books like Abu Bakr Ahmed bin Abdul Aziz aj-Jawhari in his book Kitab as-Saqifa and Fadak. Refer to Sharh an-Nahj al-Hameedi, vol.4, p.p.87, p.p.93 and p.p.94.
 She said to Abu Bakr when he refused to give her her father’s heritage: “O Abu Bakr, if you die, who will inherit you?” He said: “My sons and family.” She said: “Then why did you inherit the prophet’s heritage instead of his offspring and family?” He said: “I didn’t, daughter of the prophet.” She said: “Certainly you did. You took Fadak (a large planted area), which was the prophet’s own property and prevented us from what Allah had revealed from the heaven to be ours.” Refer to Abu Bakr bin Abdul Aziz’s book Kitab as-Saqifa and Fadak, vol.4, p.p.87. It was also mentioned in p.p.82, that when Fatima asked Abu Bakr for her heritage, he said to her: “I heard the prophet saying: “A prophet doesn’t bequeath.” But I support whomever the prophet supported and spend on whomever the prophet spent on.” She said: “O Abu Bakr, do your daughters inherit you but the prophet’s daughters don’t inherit their father?” He said: “It is so.” Ahmed also mentioned such a tradition in his Musnad, vol.1, p.p.10. Aj-Jawhari mentioned in Kitab as-Saqifa and fadak, vol.4, p.p.81 a tradition narrated by Um Hani bint Abu Talib that Fatima said to Abu Bakr: “If you die, who will inherit you?” He said: “My offspring and family.” She said: “Then why do you inherit the prophet instead of us?” He said: “O daughter of the messenger of Allah, your father didn’t leave anything.” She said: “Yes, he did. It was the share, which Allah made for us (according to the Qur’an) and became our property, which is now in your hands.” He said to her: “I heard the prophet saying: “It (Fadak) is aliment that Allah gave to us and when I die, it will be for the Muslims.” There was an other speech of Fatima (s) concerned the caliphate mentioned in aj-Jawhari’s book Kitab as-saqifa and Fadak, vol.4, p.p.87 that Fatima bint al-Hussayn said: “When Fatima, the daughter of the prophet (s) became very sick, the women of the Muhajireen and the Ansar gathered around her and asked her: “How are you, daughter of the prophet?” She said: “I hated your evil life and detested your men…” it was also mentioned by Imam AbulFadhl Ahmed bin Abu Tahir in his book Balaghat an-Nissa’, p.p.23, al-Majlisi in his book Bihar al-Anwar and by at-Tabarsi in his al-Ihtijaj.
 They didn’t disagree with her about the Prophet’s inheritage (whether it was knowledge and wisdom away from properties) or anything other. They only expropriated her heritage, where Abu Bakr said: “O daughter of the Prophet, Allah hadn’t created any one more beloved to me than your father, the prophet Muhammad (s). I wished the sky would fall over the earth when your father died. I swear by Allah, that if Aa’isha (Abu Bakr’s daughter) becomes needy is better for me than you to be needy. Do I give the white and the red (people) their rights and I wrong you with your right, while you are the daughter of the Prophet? This wealth was not the Prophet’s own property but it was of the Muslims. He spent it for the sake of Allah. When he died I became responsible for it.” She said: “I will never talk to you after now.” He said: “But I won’t desert you.” She said: “I will pray Allah against you.” He said: “I will pray Allah for you.” Before she died she recommended that Abu Bakr not to pray the prayer of the dead for her. Refer to Kitab as-Saqifa and Fadak, vol,4, p.p.80, you will find that he didn’t disagree with her about the meaning of inheriting when she mentioned the two verses of David and Zechariah, but he pretended that that wealth was not the Prophet’s. She wasn’t satisfied for she was the best aware of her father’s affairs. But there is no power save in Allah, the Almighty, the Exalted.
 Alam al-Huda considered that Zechariah was afraid from his cousins to inherit his wealth, for he had no son, and they were evil and lewd. It was not possible that they would be prophets or pious wise men that he feared they would inherit his rank of knowledge, wisdom and prophecy, but he was afraid that they would inherit his wealth and spend it in their ravage and corruption, therefore he asked his god to grant him a boy to be worthier to inherit his wealth than his evil cousins. Alam al-Huda also considered that when Zechariah asked his god to make his inheritor be content that meant inheriting his wealth. If Zechariah meant inheriting of the prophecy, it would be nonsense to ask his god to make his son be content exactly as saying: O Allah, send us a prophet and make him be honest and not a liar.
 Once he mentioned her and said: “Her father sacrifices himself for her.” He repeated that three times in a tradition narrated by Ahmed bin Hanbal and by ibn Hajar in his book as-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqa, p.p.109.
 Refer to Kitab as-Saqifa and Fadak by Abu Bakr aj-Jawhari and refer to Sharh an-Nahj al-Hameedi, vol.4, p.p.83.
 Refer to Sharh an-Nahj al-Hameedi, vol.4, p.p.91.
 The prophet and Ali’s uncle.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.124.
 Syria, Jordan, Palestine and Lebanon.
 Refer to Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.31.
 Refer to (al-Hujja ala ath-Thahib ila Takfeer Abu Talib) by imam Shamsuddeen Abu Ali Fakhar bin sharif Ma’d al-Musawi and Sheikh al-Abtah by seyyid Muhammad Ali Sharafuddin al-Musawi.
 Abu Talib had much poetry showing his faith.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.86, Muslim’s Sahih and Amed’s Musnad.
 Quraysh was the great tribe living in Mecca. Abd Manaf was one of the prophet’s grandfathers. Abbas was his uncle. Safiyya was his aunt and Fatima was his daughter.
 Refer to al-Muraja’at by Sharafuddin al-Musawi.
 In his Sahih, vol.2, p.p.120.
 Refer to Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.3, p.p.101 and vol.2, p.p.164.
 Refer to Irshad as-Sari, vol.8, p.p.500.
 ibid. vol.7, p.p.182 and vol.8, p.p.500.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.149 and Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.536.
 He scorned him when he regarded him as a storyteller, who took money for telling fables.
 The prophet was more perfect, honored and glorified than what they thought. He was too far away from impurity and wet dreams especially during the days of fasting. All the prophets had no wet dreams. They were exalted and infallible.
 Marwan wanted to keep Abu Hurayra’s fame before the news might spread and cause him a scandal.
 Refer to Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.412.
 This was correct although it was said that he had died during the reign of Omar. Any how, he had died before this case happened. Refer to al-Fadhl’s biography in Isti’ab, Issaba, Osdul Ghaba, ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat and other books.
 Refer to his Sahih, vol.4, p.p.15 and Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.258.
 Perhaps he denied what the Arabs thought that in this month (Safar) misfortunes happened, especially the last Wednesday of it.
 A bird, which the pre-Islam Arabs pretended that the soul or the bones of the dead turned into. Islam refuted this superstition. It might also be said that hama was the owl, which they saw an evil omen in, and when Islam came refuted that.
 The tear became wider for the patcher to repair.(a proverb). How would the defenders of Abu Hurayra interpret these two traditions to avoid the contradiction between them?
 He murmured in Abyssinian for his Arabic failed him after being confused what to say.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.49, vol.1, p.p.143 and Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.377.
 Didn’t Abu Hurayra know that wudu’ was not legislated before Islam?
 In his Sahih, vol.2, p.p.29.
 Refer to al-Gastalani’s Irshad as-Sari, vol.5, p.p.231.
 in his Sahih, vol.2, p.p.357, Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.2.319, ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat, vol.4, p.p.54 and ibn Hajar in his book al-Issaba.
 Abu Hurayra said that she washed up and put on her garment and veil then she opened the door.
 There were many traditions narrated by the infallible imams having the same meaning. Refer to Sharh an-Nahj al-Hameedi by Abu Ja’far al-Iskafi vol.1, p.p.360.
 Refer to Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.334.
 Refer to Sharh an-Nahj al-Hameedi, vol.1, p.p.360.
 Refer to Kanzul Ommal by ibn Assakir, vol.5, p.p.239.
 Refer to ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat, ibn Qutayba’s Ma’arif and Ahmed’s Musnad.
 As in his Sahih, vol.3, p.p.55 and refer to ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat.
 Refer to Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.533.
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.26.
 Refer to Irshad as-Sari, vol.7, p.p.84.
 Sahih,vol.2, p.p.150.
 ibid. vol.4, p.p.36 and vol.2, p.p.35.s
 Az-Zuhri had a right to be astonished at these two traditions. All of the wise men would be astonished at them!
 Notice that he didn’t believe that Allah was able to resurrect him after carrying out his will. So he unbelieved of that.
 Refer to Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.444.
 Refer to Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.445.
 Refer to the History of Baghdad by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, vol.9, p.p.125.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.41.
 ibid. vol.2, p.p.40
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.82.
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.4, p.p.6.
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.22.
 ibid. vol.4, p.p.65.
 He might inherit this adze from his forefather Noah, who had used it in making his Ark!
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol. 2, p.p.168.
 Refer to al-Hakim’s Mustadrak, vol.2, p.p.325 and ath-Thahabi’s Talkheess al-Mustadrak.
 It was mentioned in Sahih of al-Bukhari, vol.2, p.p.163.
 It was mentioned by Abu Bakr bin Muhammad al-Waleed al-Fihri at-Tartoushi, who was known as ibn Randa. Ad-Dimyari quoted this from him in his book Hayat al-Haywan (the life of the animals). It was also mentioned in Istee’ab and Issaba.
 Wasaq was a unit of measurement used by the Arabs at that time. Two hundred wasaqs were nearly equal to thirty-five thousand kilos.
 This tradition was mentioned by Ahmed bin Hanbal in two ways and by Abu Bakr al-Bayhaqi in two ways. It was mentioned by some others in different ways with a lot of contradictions. Refer to ibn Katheer, who mentioned many of those contradictions in his book al-Bidaya wen-Nihaya, vol.6, p.p.116.
 Refer to Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.3, p.p.189.
 Musnad: a tradition that was narrated by true well-known series of narrators. Mursal: a tradition that was narrated by unknown narrators or without mentioning the narrators.
 It was mentioned by Muslim in his Sahih, vol.1, p.p.31.
 It was mentioned by al-Bukhari in his Sahih, vol.2, p.p.86, by Muslim in his Sahih and Ahmed in his Musnad. We mentioned it in the previous chapter and commented on it.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol,2, p.p.105.
 Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.467.
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.117.
 Fajrul Islam (the dawn of Islam), p.p.262.
 Refer to Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.225.
 Refer to his Mustadrak, vol.4, p.p.48.
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.3, p.p.37.
 Refer to p.p.154, vol.8 of Irshad as-Sari and Tuhfatul Bari, which were printed together as one book. So said As-Sindi in his comment on the tradition in the margin of al-Bukhari’s Sahih.
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.3, p.p.34 and vol.2, p.p.120.
 in his book Irshad as-Sari, vol.6, p.p.322.
 It was mentioned by al-Waqidi, ibn Iss-haq, ibn Hajar in his Issaba and others. This Qazman fought courageously in the battle of Uhud against the polytheists until it was said to the prophet: “No one of us did as what he did.” The prophet said: “Nevertheless, he will be in Hell.” He was wounded seriously. He erected his sword on the ground, pressed his chest against it and killed himself. Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.101.
 Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.60.
 in his book Irshad as-Sari, vol.2, p.p.220.
 A Jew later became a Muslim.
 Sahih of Muslim, vol.2, p.p.361. It was untrue tradition fabricated by Akrima al-Yamami as it was confirmed by ibn Hazm. Ath-Thahabi said in his book Mizan al-I’tidal that Akrima al-Yamami fabricated a denied tradition mentioned in Muslim’s Sahih about the three things that Abu Sufyan asked the prophet for. Another false tradition narrated by Akrima that the prophet had said: “Abu Bakr is the best of people.” It was mentioned by ibn Adiy in his book al-Kamil, which was the best of books in distinguishing those, who fabricated tradition. Such was said by ath-Thahabi in his Mizan.
 Refer to an-Nawawi’s Sharh, printed in the margins of Irshad as-Sari and Tuhfat al-Bari, vol.11, p.p.360.
 Qur’an, 2:159-160.
 Mentioned by al-Bukhari and Muslim in their Sahihs. We will mention it with comments in the next chapter inshallah.
 Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.217.
 Refer to an-Nahj al-Hameedi by Abu Ja’far al-Iskafi, vol.1, p.p.359.
 in his book Fajrul Islam, p.p.262.
 Refer to his book Adab al-Arab, vol.1, p.p.282.
 Refer to Ta’weel Mukhtalif al-Hadith by ibn Qutayba, p.p.27.
 Ta’weel Mukhtalif al-Hadith, p.p.48.
 Ibn Qutayba wanted to refute an-Nazzam, but unknowingly he confirmed his saying and added to the list of deniers all the first companions
 in his book Ta’weel Mukhtalif al-Hadith, p.p.50.
 At the beginnings of this book.
 Ahmed Ameen said in his book Fajrul Islam, p.p.259: “It seemed that the companions themselves criticized each other and preferred one to the other at their time. If someone narrated a tradition, he would be asked for the evidence. Once Abu Hurayra narrated a tradition, which ibn Abbas denied and he narrated another tradition that Aa’isha denied. Fatima bint Qays narrated a tradition from her husband that Omar denied and said: “Do we leave our god’s book and our prophet’s Sunna for a woman’s saying? We don’t know if it is true or false, she memorizes or forgets! Aa’isha also denied it and said to Fatima: “Don’t you fear Allah.” There were many cases of the like.
 Sharh an-Nahj al-Hameedi, vol.1, p.p.360.
 A cow, a ewe or a she-camel that was not milked for some days to let the milk remain in the udders in order to deceive the buyer that it gave a lot of milk.
 Refer to Fajr al-Islam by Ahmed Ameen, p.p.263.
 Refer to an-Nawawi’s Sharh Sahih Muslim, vol.4, p.p.234.
 it was mentioned by Musaddad in his Musnad and by ibn Hajar in his Issaba.
 Refer to Kanzul Ommal by Ibn Asakir, vol.5, p.p.239.
 The birthplace of Abu Hurayra.
 Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.34.
 Ibn Qutayba said that in his book Ta’weel Mukhtalif al-Hadith, p.p.52.
 Mentioned by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, at-Tabari in his Awsat and by ibn Asakir in his Kanzul Ommal, vol.6, p.p.153.
 Refer to Kanzul Ommal, vol.6, p.p.157.
 Refer to al-Hakim’s Mustadrak, vol. 3, p.p.509 and ath-Thahabi’s Talkheess al-Mustadrak. Of course Aa’isha refused his excuse.
 If they were in front of someone during offering the prayer (according to Abu Hurayra).
 It was so mentioned in Ta’weel Mukhtalif al-Hadith, but it was Aa’isha and Um Salama, who denied this tradition.
 These three traditions (about woman, dog and donkey, walking in one shoe and this one) were mentioned in Ta’weel Mukhtalif al-Hadith by ibn Qutayba, p.p.27-.
 Ta’weel Mukhtalif al-Hadith, p.p.126.
 Refer to Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.358 and 538.
 Refer to Fajrul Islam by Ahmed Ameen, p.p.259. Aa’isha denied his tradition because she didn’t trust him but her excuse about the (mihrass) was not logical.
 A big hollow rock was filled with water for wash. It was very heavy.
 It was mentioned by Ahmed Ameen in his book Fajrul Islam, p.p.259.
 Refer to Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.625.
 in his Sahih, vol.1, p.p.626.
 Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.349-. Al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, vol.3, p.p.510 mentioned something like that.
 Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.422.
 It was mentioned by al-Bukhari in his Sahih, vol.2, p.p.34, Muslim in his Sahih, Ahmed in his Musnad, vol.2 and all of those collected Hadith.
 Qur’an, 2:159-160.
 A proverb.
 Refer to our book Tuhfatul Muhadditheen.
 Qur’an, 24:37.
 Qur’an, 18:5.
 Refer to al-Bukhai’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.34 and Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, p.p.375. Al-Bukri mentioned in his Sahih, vol.2, p.p.1 a tradition narrated by Sa’eed bin al-Musayyab from Abu Salama that Abu Hurayra had said: “The prophet said in one of his traditions: “No one of you will spread his dress until I finish this speech and then to join it to his chest, unless he perceives all what I say.” I spread a garment I had on me until he finished his speech. Then I gathered it to my chest. I never forgot anything of that speech.”
 Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.1, p.p.24.
 Refer to Irshad as-Sari by al-Qastalani, vol.1, p.p.380.
 If this case happened one time rather than two or more, it would spread like the light. So why did the companions take no notice of it that no one of them narrated it except Abu Hurayra?
 In his Sahih, vol.2, p.p.358.
 vol.4, p.p.565.
 Refer to ibn Hajar’s Issaba, (Abu Hurayra’s biography).
 In his book Hilyatul Awliya’, p.p.381.
 Qur’an, 69:12.
 It was mentioned by az-Zamakhshari in his Kashshaf, ath-Tha’labi in his Tafseer, ar-Razi and others.
 It was mentioned by Ahmed bin Hanbal in his Musnad, ibn Abu Shayba and ibn Jareej. Refer to Muntakhab Kanzul Ommal, vol.5, p.p.44.
 Did the high morals of this great prophet permit so and so to mix with his wives so easily as this imprudent pretended?
 In Arabic, the verb he used had the sense of continuity, which meant that: he used to perform the hajj with the prophet every year. It was definitely untrue because after the hegira, the prophet didn’t perform the hajj except one time, which was the farewell hajj.
 Syria, Jordan, Palestine and Lebanon.
 Al-Hakim (in the biography of Abu Hurayra) counted those, who narrated traditions from Abu Hurayra. They were twenty-eight companions. Ali, Omar, Othman, Talha and az-Zubayr were not among them. The others, who narrated from him, narrated something about Paradise and Hell or morals and knowledge. No one of them narrated even a single tradition about the legal verdicts and duties.
 It was mentioned by al-Bukhari in his Sahih and ibn Hajar in his Issaba, where Abu Hurayra said: “I accompanied the prophet for three years. No one was better than me in perceiving the Hadith.”
 It was a unit of measurement among the Arabs. Two Hundred wasaqs were about thirty-five thousand kilos.
 In his Musnad, vol.2, p.p.43.
 Al-Ma’arif, p.p.94.
 It was also mentioned by ibn Sa’d in his Tabaqat, vol.4, p.p.60.
 In Hilytul Awliya’, vol.1, p.p.382.
 A kind of soup cooked with sour yogurt.
 According to this story it seemed that he attended the battle of Siffeen (between Ali and Mu’awiya) and that he flattered the two sides in order not to prevent himself to return to the victorious side. I have seen near Siffeen, between Iraq and Syria, a shrine called Abu Hurayra. More than one had told me that Abu Hurayra, in some days of the battle of Siffeen, offered the prayer with the army of Imam Ali and ate with the army of Mu’awiya, but if the fight began he went to the mountain. When he was asked about that, he said: “Ali is more aware, Mu’awiya’s (food) is fattier and the mountain is safer.”
 Refer to Abu Na’eem’s Hilyatul Awliya’, vol.1, p.p.385.
 Refer to his Sahih, vol4, p.p.157. It was also mentioned by Abu Na’eem in his Hilytul Awliya’, vol.1, p.p.379.
 Refer to Lissan al-Arab, vol.6, p.p.30.
 A game of gamble.
 Ad-Dimyeri doubted the narrators of this tradition and denied what as-Sawli said that Imam Zeinul Aabideen had permitted playing the chess. It was certain that all the infallible imams prohibited playing chess. So did Malik bin Anass, Ahmed bin Hanbal and Abu Haneefa.
 It was mentioned by ibn Hajar in al-Issaba, ibn Abdul Birr in al-Isstee’ab, ibnul Hakim in al-Mustadrak and other historians.
 Refer to ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat, vol.4, p.p.63.
 Refer to Isstee’ab, Issaba, Tabaqat and al-Mustadrak (Abu Hurayra’s biography).
 Refer to Hilyatul Awliya’, vol.1, p.p.380 and 383.
 Refer to al-Issaba and al-Isstee’ab (biography of Furat). Also it was mentioned by other historians.
 Refer to al-Issaba and al-Isstee’ab (al-Furat biography). It was mentioned by other historians, too.
 Their prostration and saying such were mentioned in al-Isstee’ab, al-Issaba and in other history books.
 Refer to al-Istee’ab and al-Issaba. Al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, vol.4, p.p.366 mentioned that al-Furat was a spy and an ally of Abu Sufyan. The prophet ordered to kill him. He passed by some of the Ansar and said: “I am a Muslim.” They said to the prophet that he said he was a Muslim. The prophet said: “There are some of you that we consign them to their pretended faith. One of them is al-Furat bin Hayyan.’’
 Refer to al-Issaba and al-Istee’ab (biography of Samara bin Jundub).
 As it was clear for those, who inspected their affairs in this concern in the historians’ books.
 One of the historians said that Samara had died in fifty-seven of hijra and Abu Hurayra had died in fifty-nine. This was contradicted by another saying that Abu Hurayra had died in fifty-seven of hijra and so on for the rest of the historians’ sayings. But the more alike of the sayings showed that all of the three had died in fifty-nine without specifying the month and the day of their deaths.
 As Allah described him in the Qur’an.
 Refer to Sharh an-Nahj al-Hameedi, vol.1, p.p.363 to see the details of that. Refer to at-Tabari’s Tareekh, the events of the year fifty of hijra and chapter eight in our book al-Fusool al-Muhimma.
 Refer to Ahmed’s Musnad, vol.1, p.p.25.
 Refer to Sharh Nahjul Balagha by ibn Abul Hadeed, vol.1, p.p.363.
 Refer to al-Issaba (biography of Abu Mahthoora).
 A city in Lebanon.
 Bin and ibn mean the son of.
 Related to the progeny of Abu Talib.
WHO WAS IBN TAIMIYAH
this article we shall seek to present to our readers a brief overview of the
beliefs of Ibn Taimiyah. His full name was Taqi ud-Din Abu-l-'Abbas Ahmad Ibn 'Abd
al-Halim Ibn 'Abd as-Salam Ibn Taimiyah al-Harrani al-Hanbali. He was born on
Monday the 10th of Rabi' al-Awwal 66l H./22nd of January 1263 C.E. at Harran. He
spent his life on a personal crusade against those Muslims that he deemed
deviants ranging from the Shias, Sufis through to the ‘ignorant’ man on the
street. He courted much controversy, reviled by his contemporary 'ulama'. He was
imprisoned by the authorities on many occasions.
This controversial man may have just remained a normal Mullah, with no real rank and status. But the British-supported Wahabi movement that successfully overthrew the Sunni Caliphate changed all that. Abdul Wahab was inspired by the teachings of Ibn Taimiyah. His objective was to cascade his teachings across the Arabian Peninsula. In the decades that have followed, Saudi petro dollars have in effect ensured that the controversial Ibn Taimiyah has become a common household name in the Wahabi mindset, to the point that he is always remembered by Salafis and Deobandis as Shaykh ul Islam. Since the vast bulk of Sunni and, for that matter, Salafis only know of Ibn Taimiyah what their scholars tell them, we felt it important that we present to our readers the true image of Ibn Taimiyah from his own pen, and that of the Ulema that assessed him.
On reading the complete article we are confident that our readers will in a far better position to make a true judgment of the Godfather of Salafism.
ABU HANIFA from http://www.answering-ansar.org/
A refutation of Ansar's allegation that 'Abu Hanifa was NOT a student of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as)
TOC \o "1-3" 1. A refutation of Ansar's allegation that 'Abu Hanifa was NOT a student of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) PAGEREF _Toc695968 \h 3
1.1 Proving the Teacher - Student relationship PAGEREF _Toc695969 \h 3
1.2 Allamah Sharawi's admission that Imam Abu Hanifa was Imam Ja'far (as)'s student PAGEREF _Toc695970 \h 5
2. The beliefs of Imam Abu Hanifa PAGEREF _Toc695971 \h 6
3. Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) also taught Imam Malik PAGEREF _Toc695972 \h 7
4. Condemnation of 'Abu Hanifa PAGEREF _Toc695973 \h 8
4.1 Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal condemned Imam Abu Hanifa PAGEREF _Toc695974 \h 8
4.2 Imam Malik condemned Abu Hanifa PAGEREF _Toc695975 \h 9
4.3 Imam Idrees Shafi'i condemned Imam Abu Hanifa PAGEREF _Toc695976 \h 9
5. Copyright PAGEREF _Toc695977 \h 10
This article will seek to expose the
false claim of Ansar that Abu Hanifa was NOT a student of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq
(as). Their leading champion Abu Sulaiman asserts:
"The claim that Abu Hanifah was taught by Ja'far Al-Sadiq is a lie that is known to anyone who read something about the life of Abu Hanifah. What is known and famous is that Abu Hanifah was taught by some of the grandest scholars at his time, most notably Isma'il bin Hammad Abu Sulayman Al-Kufi who was one of the most distinguished teachers of Abu Hanifah. In addition, Abu Hanifah was taught by Ibraheem bin Muhammad Al-Muntashir, Ibraheem bin Zayd Al-Nakh'ei, Ayyub Al-Sikhtiyani, Al-Harith Al-Hamadani, Rabee'a Al-Madani, Salim bin Abdullah bin 'Umar bin Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased at him, Sa'eed bin Masrooq the son of Sufyan Al-Thawry, Sulayman Al-Hilaly, A'asim bin Kaleeb and many others".
This is the perfect example of Abu Sulaiman's resentment towards Ahl'ul bayt (as). He is willing to deny an established historical fact so as to lower the status of the Ahl'ul bayt (as) in the eyes of actual Sunnis. Fortunately actual Sunnis have caught on to the efforts of such individuals and we present the lengthy text from modern day Hanafi scholar Mufti Ghulam Rasul who has refuted lies such as this in his excellent biography of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq "Subeh Sadiq". We are quoting with a link of the full pages from pages 186 - 191:
mufti_ghulam_rasul.jpgMufti Ghulam Rasul's Subeh Sadiq
Imam Abu Hanifa is one of the distinguished students of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as), as has been confirmed by Ibn Hajar al Makki in his Sawaiq al Muhriqa, Allamah Shiblinji in his Nur al Absar, Abdul Haleem Jindi in his Mohqaq, Abu Zohra in his various writings, and other Ulema. Imam Abu Hanifa had previously studied under Imam Baqir (as) and then subsequently Abu Hanifa extended the link of knowledge with Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as). In this regard, Abdul Haleem Jindi writes that Abu Hanifa stated that if he 'hadn't spent two years of his life with Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as), he would have been dead'. (Al-Imam Ja'far As-Sadiq, page 162). Sunni research scholar Abu Zohra states that these words of Imam Abu Hanifa's are widely known namely 'if these two years had not been available to me due to my good fortune, Numan (Abu Hanifa) would have been dead. (Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq, page 83). Imam Abu Hanifa had also remarked 'I have never seen a greater scholar of fiqh than Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as)'.
It is therefore proven that Imam Abu Hanifa was Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as)'s student for a complete two years, and that he remained with him in Madina during that time. Notwithstanding that, whenever there happened to be any other meeting between the two, Imam Abu Hanifa took full academic advantage of it, he had immense respect for Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq.
Sometimes when questioned on a matter by Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as), Imam Abu Hanifa would intentionally remain silent on account of the immense reverence he had for the Imam. This has been acknowledged by Abdul Haleem Jindi and Ibn Ammar Hanbaliand. They both record an incident when Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) asked Imam Abu Hanifa the penalty for a Hajji in a state of Ihram, if he (the hajji) were to break the rubaya (front four teeth of a deer). Imam Abu Hanifa replied, "O son of the Prophet PBUH, I have no idea." Upon which Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) replied, "A deer does not have any rubaya". (Shadharat al Dhahab, page 220 Jeem Alif) , (Al-Imam Ja'far As-Sadiq, page 162)….
Question: Ibn Taymeeya wrote that Abu Hanifa was not a student of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) but a contemporary hence not a student.
Answer: This is an incorrect assertion, Abu Hanifa was Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as)'s student, as has been vouched for by Hafidh Ibn Hajar Asqlani, Ibn Ammar Hanbali, Ibn Hajar Makki, Allamah Shiblinji, research scholar Abu Zohra and many others.
Furthermore, Allamah Shibli Numani refuted Ibn Taymeeya's claim stating:
"Abu Hanifa sat for a long time at Imam Baqir's feet and acquired from him much valuable knowledge of Fiqh and Hadith not available anywhere else. Shia's and Sunni's are agreed that Abu Hanifa derived much of his learning from Baqir. He learned a great deal from the imam's son, Ja'far al-Sadiq also, which fact is generally mentioned in the history books. Ibn Taymeeya, however, denies this on the ground that Abu Hanifa and Ja'far al-Sadiq were contemporaries and equals, which ruled out the probability of the former being the latter's pupil. But I consider this sheer imprudence and lack of comprehension on Ibn Taymeeya's part. For all his greatness as an original thinker and master of fiqh, Abu Hanifa could not compare in learning with Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq. The Ahl'ul bayt were the fountainhead of Fiqh and Hadith and, in fact, all religious learning. "The master of the house knows best what is in it", to quote a well-known Arabic saying". (Imam Abu Hanifa, by Allamah Shibli Numani page 40).
Our note, this book has also been rendered in to English and we attch the English translation of the text.
shibli_ref.gifAllamah Shibli Numani refuted Ibn Taymeeya's claim
From this it has been proven that Imam Abu Hanifa was Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as)'s student, and also that in the realm of knowledge and guidance, there is no one like the People of the House PBUT, even if one is mujtahid or learned man….
Thus Ibn Taymeeya's assertion has been proven to be false and baseless. The fact is that Imam Abu Hanifa was the student of Imam Ja'far as al-Sadiq. Abu Zohra writes that Imam Abu Hanifa obtained the vast bulk of traditions from Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) and would consult with him regularly. He also attributed traditions to Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) that can be found in Imam Abu Yusuf's book Al Aa'saar (183 A.H.), and in Imam Muhammad bin Hasan Shaybani's book Al Aa'saar (189 A.H.). In both these books, the traditions that Imam Abu Hanifa attributes to Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) are great in number.
Abu Zohra writes that 'the truth is that religious bigotry makes a man blind and deaf. In the same way that the evil statements of slanderers were unsuccessful in tarnishing the image of his ancestor Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (as), no one could hope to reduce the immense stature of Imam Ja'far as al-Sadiq, whether they are liberal or puritanical. This case is also similar to those who had sought to malign Jesus son of Mary, when one group of people denied his Prophethood and another group was bent upon elevating him. (Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq, page 84).
We therefore conclude that those who have sought to belittle the image of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as), such as Ibn Taymeeya et al. have not obtained even the slightest success. It has also been proven that Imam Abu Hanifa was a student of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) and frequently obtained traditions from him. Allamah Muhammad Khizri writes that Abu Hanifa and most of the Imams of Medina obtained traditions from Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as), but Imam Bukhari did not obtain a single tradition from him".
We also present with a link, the "Musnad Imam Azam" rendered in to Urdu by Maulana Sa'd Hasan Sahib. The text is a collection of traditions that have been narrated and compiled by Imam Abu Hanifa. On page 23 of the preface of the Musnad, Maulana Abdur Rashid Numani, whilst giving an overview of the life of Imam Abu Hanifa states:
"Imam Abu Hanifa stayed for a long time in the pure (city of) Madina and continuously attended the circles of Imam Baqir (r). In jurisprudence (fiqh) and traditions (hadith) he learnt many things during his time with Imam Baqir (r) which he didn't know before. Imam Baqir (r) passed away on 7 Dhu'l Hijja 114 AH.
After Imam Baqir's death, Imam Abu Hanifa had the greatest respect for his son Imam Ja'far Sadiq (r). He would attend Imam Ja'far's classes quite often to acquire knowledge. Imam Abu Hanifa used to hold the opinion about the Ahl al-Bayt that hadith and fiqh, indeed all religious sciences, have surfaced from their Household".
musnad_imam_azam.gifMusnad Imam Azam
Pakistani Sunni Scholar Mohammad Hameedullah Khan in his book “The Schools of Islamic Jurisprudence – A comparative study, states in his brief biography of Imam Abu Hanifa on page 61:
“He got an opportunity to meet Anas, a famous companion of Prophet Muhammed (PBUH), at the age of 12 or 13 years and attended the lectures of Imam Jafar as Sadiq. Regarding his place in history of Fiqh, Abu Hanifa said:
I have not seen a jurist of high rank like Imam Jafar as Sadiq [taken from Tabayeen page 69 by Shah Moinuddin Ahmed Nadvi]”
Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah Allamah Shaykh
Sharawi Azhari in his famous Egyptian Risala Al Ahraam ul Sunnah page 103
periodical number 32932 wrote:
"The Imam of the Shi'a Imamiya, Hadhrath Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq was the teacher of Imam 'Abu Hanifa. These are the Imamia Ja'fari who as we previously explained adhere to a pure religion. It is with regards to them that our Shaykh Shaltoot issued a fatwa deeming it permissible to follow this madhab because this is a legitimate Islamic madhab, that acts as a source of guidance for its adherents. In Egypt we have incorporated certain principles of Shi'a fiqh on divorce and inheritance into our Law".
Abu Sulaiman also commented:
"Even if Ja'far Al-Sadiq taught Abu Hanifah, then the matter will not be more than that Abu Hanifah took knowledge from Al-Saddiq and it does not mean that Abu Hanifah became a Jaffari. I am saying this as a supposition, otherwise it is confirmed that Abu Hanifah used to give religious verdicts at the time of Abi Jaffar, the father of Ja'far Al-Sadiq!"
We are also not saying this and it is absurd for Abu Sulaiman to arrive at this conclusion. If I study fiqh under a teacher with different beliefs to myself it does NOT automatically mean I have converted to that belief system! Nonetheless what is of interest is that Imam of Ahl'ul Sunnah al Muhaddith Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlavi had in fact referred to Abu Hanifa as a Shi'a. He writes in Tuhfa Ithna Ashariyya page 25:
"Imam Abu Hanifa [r] was counted amongst the Shi'a of Kufa and he considered Zaid bin 'Ali bin Husayn to be on the path of truth"
During that era Islamic sciences were being spread through the empire and students were benefiting from the teachings of scholars with differing views, far and wide. Students took the opportunity to gain knowledge from Ulema, in the same way Abu Hanifa learnt from Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as).
Abu Sulaiman stated:
"Al-Shafi'i read "Al-Muwti" on Malik and the book has only 9 hadeeths that are narrated by Ja'far Al-Saddiq. And no one said that Malik was one of the students of Abu Hanifah, but they said that Malik was contemporary with Abu Hanifah".
Yet again Abu Sulaiman fails to cite any sources as evidences, just his own bigoted Nasibi views. Like Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik also benefited from the knowledge of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as):
Abu Nu'aym Isfahani (d. 430 Hijri) wrote in Hilayat al-Awliya page 199 Volume 3 that:
"Imam Malik bin Anas was a student of Imam Ja'far (as). He attained knowledge from him and attended his gatherings".
In his tactical attempt to reach out to
actual Sunnis, Abu Sulaiman sought to make a special reference to the following
tradition, commenting as follows:
"Here, their master
Al-Kulayni narrates in their most trustworthy book which equals
Al-Buikhari for us, "Usool Al-Kafi":
This tradition does not in any way negate the fact that 'Abu Hanifa was a student of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as). It is not uncommon for a student to leave his teacher and formulate his own thinking. If Imam Ja'far (as) was criticizing Abu Hanifa, it was because he felt that he had gone astray in his teachings, and this is linked to Abu Hanifa's introduction of Qiyas as an addition to fiqh. If Abu Sulaiman is seeking to strike a chord with his Sunni brethren that the Shi'a Imams have condemned their Imam, we should also point out that such condemnation is not exclusively by Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq, the Ulema of Ahl'ul Sunnah have been scathing in their attacks on Abu Hanifa, attacks that were far worse than the comments of Imam Ja'far (as). For the sake of brevity we will present the fatwas of the three Sunni fiqh Imams against Abu Hanifa.
Ahl'ul Sunnah's recognized scholar Imam
Fakhruddin Razi, writes as follows in "Risalaah thurjeeya Madhhab Shaafee" as
taken from "Isthaksa Al Alhfam" page 233:
"Imam Ahmad Hanbal was asked about Imam Malik. The reply was 'his Hadith are correct but the narrators are weak.' Then someone asked him about Imam Shafi'i, the reply was, 'his Hadith and opinion is correct.' Then someone asked about Imam Abu Hanifa, he said "Numan's opinion and his hadith bear no value'."
Baihaqi noted that:
"Imam Ahmad cautioned Imam Abu Hanifa because he would accept weak and fabricated Hadith" (Tarikh al Baghdad Volume 13 page 411)
"Imam Hanbal said that a goats faeces is on par with fatwas of Abu Hanifa" (Tarikh al Baghdad Volume 13 page 418)
"…Ahmad bin Hassan Tirmidhi quotes, 'I heard Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal say that Abu Hanifa is a liar". (Tarikh al Baghdad Volume 13 page 418)
Dr Islam Mahmood Misri, wrote an article
"Shi'a aur Sunni" for the Egyptian magazine "Mukhthar al Islami" - issue
90, 8th edition, Jamadhi al Awwal 1406 Hijri. On page 13 (where the article is
located) we read:
"Imam Malik said that Abu Hanifa was the worst of people and that it would have been easier for him to raise his sword against the Muslims".
In Tarikh al Baghdad Volume 13 page 392, we read:
"Imam Malik said that for the Muslims Abu Hanifa's Fitnah is more damaging than the Fitnah of Shaytan".
In the same book we read further comments by Imam Malik:
"Imam Malik bin Anas stated that in Islam, no one has damaged it more than Numan" (Tarikh al Baghdad Volume 13 page 396)
"Once Imam Malik asked Walid bin Muslim: 'do people listen to Abu Hanifa in your city? he said: 'yes.' Imam Malik replied 'its amazing that your city has not been destroyed….Imam Malik said Abu Hanifa mocked Allah's Deen, whoever does so is irreligious." (Tarikh al Baghdad Volume 13 page 400)
In Tarikh Baghdad Volume 13 page 398 we
"Imam Shafi'i said that no-one more mischievous has appeared in Islam than Abu Hanifa"
Again Baghdad records this:
Also in Tarikh Baghdad Volume 13 page 411 we read:
"Imam Shafi'i said that Imam Abu Hanifa's Fatwas are like a chameleon, they continually changes their colors"
It is indeed sad that the Ansar.org are seeking to cover up the facts of history in their efforts to keep people hidden in the dark about the true position of the Ahl'ul bayt (as). Try as they might the efforts of Abu Sulaiman and his likes are in vain for they will never be able to eliminate the role of Ahl'ul bayt (as) in aiding the deen, as Imam 'Ali (as) had once remarked "Truth will always overcome falsehood".
All rights, including copyright, in the content of these Answering-Ansar.org web pages are owned or controlled for these purposes by the Answering-Ansar.org.
You can distribute this “downloaded document” version of the Answering-Ansar.org article, as long as this document remains in its original shape and none of the contents are changed in any format.
BUKHARY'S SAHIH, THE EXAMPLE OF CORRUPTION
Date: Thu, Feb 24, 2000, 11:46 PM
Many of the Muslims in general talk about the Hadiths collection with a respect that matches and sometimes exceeds that of the Quran. While the Quran does not leave any doubt as to where God wants us to look for the guidance and perfect happiness, those who do not believe God in His own words usually find in the Hadiths and Sunna a refuge that has been condemned by the Quran repeatedly. God already informed us in the Quran that His book is the BEST HADITHS 39:23,and that we should only seek His Hadiths (Quran) 7:185, and wonders why the
people are not satisfied with His words, 45:6 !!
Imam Al-Bukhary or Bukhary for short, is just one of several scholars who decided to collect the Hadiths and Sunna despite the clear prohibition by the Prophet Muhammed himself and all the Khalifas who followed him of collecting and writing anything but the Quran.
Many of the Muslims today look at Bukhary with a respect he did not deserve or earn. His elevation to the level of a Saint by the Muslims and Scholars who came after him made of his books of Hadiths and Sunna a second Quran .
While modern Christianity is the product of Paul's corruption and hallucination , traditional Sunni Islam as practiced today,is the product of corruption of the true religion of Islam by people like Bukhary.
As soon as the Muslims deserted the Quran in favor of the Hadiths and Sunna books, their true Islam was corrupted beyond belief and their practice of Islam today is but a reflection of
the Islam of the Scholars like Bukhary, Moslem, Nesaay, Termethy, Abu-Daoud...etc. and not a reflection of the Islam (Submission in English) presented to us by the Prophet Muhammed.
While those who defend Bukhary praise him for his methodology of collecting the hadiths for his book known as "Sahih Al-Bukhary". They only reflect ignorance with what Bukhary actually collected in his book .
Not only did Bukhary broke the rules that he claimed he used to ensure the authenticity of the hadiths but his own personal feelings, political alliance and hatred to people like Ali Ibn Abu Talib affected his choice of what hadiths to list in his book and what hadiths to refuse. He cared less about the content of the hadiths itself . He listed many hadiths that contradict the Quran, contradict other hadiths , contradict common sense, insult God,
insult the Prophet Muhammed, insult the Prophet's wives and his family . The position that Bukhary took regarding Ali Ibn-Abu Talib Vs his position towards Mu'aawyiah is but a reflection of the political corruption of Bukhary and his bias in listing the Hadiths that put down Ali while making of his ardent enemy Mu'aawyiah, a pure and righteous man despite his known corruption and defiance of the simple Islamic laws. Bukhary narrated
Many Hadiths in his book that the public call "Sahih" (Authentic) for people who were considered liars, corrupted and untrustworthy. Muslim Scholars who came after him were afraid to expose the truth and the shortcoming of Bukhary and other scholars of Hadiths and Sunna like him. As a simple example, in the famous book "Al-Mustadrek", the author states that Bukhary listed Hadiths taken from 434 persons who
were not accepted by Moslem for his book "Sahih Moslem" as good trustworthy people. On the other hand Moslem accepted for his book 625 persons who narrated Hadiths ,who were refused
The corruption of Islam by Hadiths and Sunna started right during the Prophet's life and soon after his death. This collection of the so called Hadiths and Sunna was condemned by God, the
Prophet and the Sahaba (companions of the Prophet). This act reached its peak by the end of the second Hijra century when the famous six books (references) of Hadiths were written.
God Almighty predicted this corruption and told us in 6:112-113 why He permitted this corruption to happen and also told us ahead of time that the messenger will complain to Him on the day of Judgment of the Muslims DESERTING THE QURAN (not deserting the Hadiths and Sunna). See 25:30
BUKHARY AND SAHABA, CLEAR CORRUPTION
Many of the Muslim brothers and sisters talk about the companions (Sahaba) of the Prophet Muhammed as if they were a different breed of people or a different race. They made them flawless who are unable to make mistakes. They made them worth the respect and love that only the Prophet Muhammed deserved for what he was, the messenger of God and the last prophet.. While we can witness many people defending the Sahaba (companions) of the prophet irrespective of what they did, many of those actually do not know what the word Sahaba means or how it was or should be used.
The student of the Muslim history will be shocked to know the different definitions of the word Sahaba (Companion) of the Prophet. Knowing such a definition make it easy for us to talk about our history, our religion and our books.
In general the Muslim scholars disagreed on the definition of : who should be counted as one of the Sahaba (companions) of the Prophet ?!! Studying these definitions will clarify for us the position of many people like Imam Al-Bukhary who used his definition of the word Sahaba to accept many of the false and fabricated Hadiths that were included in his book, Sahih Al-Bukhary. Here are the definitions considered by the Muslim Scholars:
(1) The definition of Imam Al-Bukhary : Bukhary defined the Sahaby (single of Sahaba) as the one who was in the company of the prophet Muhammed or just SEEN him. Ibn Hanbal who also
has a book of his own collecting more Hadiths than Bukhary accepted this definition and clarified it by saying ; "The Sahaby is anyone who accompanied the Prophet for
a year, a month, a day or even an hour or even just seen him."
(2) The definition by Abdullah Ibn Omar Ibn Al-Khattab " anyone who has seen the Prophet Muhammed even for one hour as long as he reached the puberty, and is a known Muslim who understood his religion and accepted it."
According to this definition all the children (who had not reached puberty) who witnessed the Prophet cannot be counted as Sahaba.
(3)The definition of Al-Tabaey Saeed Ibn Al-Museeb; "Only those who accompanied the Prophet Muhammed for a year or two and fought with him in a battle or two should be considered Sahaba" This is a definition accepted and encouraged by Imam Al-Ghazali
>From the above three definitions, any sincere and guided Muslim can sense the corruption and confusion of Bukhary, a reason for him to get all these corrupted hadiths included in his book.
With these corrupted Hadiths, the Muslims after Bukhary changed their religion from the religion of the Prophet Muhammed (the Quran), to the religion of Bukhary and his likes (the fabricated hadiths and Sunna). Let us look at the definition by Bukhary; and reflect on its corruption;
(1) His definition that anyone who seen the Prophet is a Sahaby has no support from the Quran or even from the Islamic history given by other Muslims of the early life of the Prophet and his companions.
The Quran is full of the stories of the hypocrites and the wicked people of Medina where the Prophet lived who seen the prophet and listened to his message and his ceremonies and they cannot be considered his Sahaba (Companions) as Bukhary did; "Among the Aarabs around you, there are hypocrites. Also among the city dwellers, there are those who are accustomed to hypocrisy......" 9:101 And in 63:1 "When the HYPOCRITES come to you they say, "We bear witness that you are the messenger of God." God knows that you are His messenger, and God
bears witness that the hypocrites are liars,"
And in 33:60 "Unless the hypocrites, and those with disease in their hearts and the vicious liars of the city (Medina) refrain (from persecuting you) we will surely grant you the upper hand, then they would not be your neighbors within a short while."
All these hypocrites and wicked people witnessed the Prophet Muhammed and listened to him. They are according to Imam AL-Bukhary's definition, SAHABA. His corrupted definition of the word Sahaba definitely played a role in the collection of Hadiths form such FAKE Sahaba.
(2) Again the corruption of Bukhary appears in his acceptance of children who witnessed the Prophet as Sahaba, and he accepted their narration of Hadiths despite the fact that they were too little to realize what was going on at the time.
Bukhary had many hadiths narrated by Abdullah Ibn Abbas who was a young child during the Prophet's life. He was never documented to accompany the Prophet as one of the Sahaba, but Bukhary made him one. Other children who narrated hadiths and accepted by Bukhary are Al-Nuaman Ibn Basheer (8 years old), Mahmoud Ibn Al-Rabee (5 years), Abdullah Ibn Al-Zubeer (9 years), Al-Hussein Ibn Ali (7 years), Al-Hassan Ibn Ali ( 8 years), Omar Ibn Aby Muslima ( 9 years)......etc.
Who would accept to take his religion from these children ??!!!!!
(3) Because Bukhary identified himself with the Abbasyeen and politically was against the Talibeen (followers of Ali Ibn Abu-Talib), he gave in his book many pages to the hadiths of Abdullah Ibn Abbas, the grandfather of the Abbasyeens with whom Bukhary identified. Here we witness politics influencing what hadiths to report and what to omit (those praising Ali Ibn Abu Talib). Some of the Hadiths narrated by Ibn Abbas contradict the laws of the Quran , e.g. the laws of inheritance. To witness the political corruption of Bukhary in reporting hadiths that would serve his views and please his masters (Abbasyeen then) is to witness the corruption that God described 6:112-113 in action.
(4) The position that Bukhary took in elevating people who were hypocrites and wicked to the level of Sahaba by his corrupted definition helped nothing but to corrupt the book that he called SAHIH (Authentic). His personal disregard to the TRUE SAHABY (Companion) of the Prophet, Ali Ibn Abu Talib only reflects his misguidance and underachievements.
Those who refused to believe God and accept His assertion that the Quran is COMPLETE, PERFECT AND FULLY DETAILED will only fall to the false lords of religion who decided to
improve on God's book and add to it by collecting all kinds of lies and fabrications and put them in a book and allege them to the Prophet. Those who seek to "obey the messenger" and follow the steps of the Prophet can do such that by following the book that was never fabricated and was definitely given to us by God through His Prophet, the Quran. Those who seek to follow the Prophet by following Bukhary and his likes are just following Bukhary and his likes and the messenger will complain to God from them on the day of Judgment that they deserted the Q U R A N . See 25:30
BUKHARY'S HADITHS INSULT THE PROPHET MUHAMMED
God in the Quran is very clear in telling the true believers that His book is complete, perfect and fully detailed. God called His book the BEST HADITH ( 39:23) and commanded us to see no other Hadiths but His (7:185, 45:6, 77:50). Even in the choice of the word hadith to describe the book of God, the Quran, we witness how God knew that someone (enemy of the prophet and enemy of God and enemy of the TRUE Islam) will fabricate lies about Muhammed, God, the believers, and Islam and call it HADITH, See 6:112. That is why we find all these verses talking about Quran as the only acceptable Hadiths. In previous posts I discussed how the books of Hadith were written against the wish of the Prophet Muhammed.
He told the TRUE believers not to write but the Quran. The four Khalifas that followed the prophet refused to permit the writing of the hadiths and the Hadiths books themselves narrated the story of Abu Baker and Omar destroying the written hadiths. Abu Hurayra who narrated more Hadiths than anyone else and more lies than anyone else even mention that the prophet Muhammed collected what the Muslims then wrote of his Hadiths and burn them. The guided Muslim (submitter) would not need to go the extremes (Hadiths books) to find the truth about the condemnation of the alleged prophet's Hadith by God and by the Prophet himself, it is written all over the Quran. The ONLY SAHIH HADITH that we know now is the QURAN. All those who alleged having Sahih Hadiths are but disbelievers in God's words, the Quran despite their claim to the opposite.
The Sahih books of Bukhary and Moslem for example are full of shameful hadiths that insult God, the Prophet Muhammed, the submitters (Muslims in Arabic), Submission (Islam in Arabic) and the intelligence of any NORMAL human being.
In this post we will check some of the insults to the prophet Muhammed himself by the same people who claim to be trying to preserve his hadiths. Their lies and fabrication are OBVIOUS but they still call them SAHIH.
(1) The Sahih books have many regulations that contradict the Quran, e.g. the punishment of the adulterer and adulteress as stated in the Quran in 24:2, they claim the verse of stoning the adulteress to death was eaten by a goat and so removed from the Quran. What an insult ?!!
(2) In Bukhary's Sahih, section of "Ghussull" (Washing afterintercourse), the Hadith tells that the prophet Muhammed was to have intercourse with his wives, 11 of them, within one hour, day or night. And that he was given the sexual power of 30 men.
What does this shameful lie have to do with "WORSHIP GOD ALONE" What kind of honor is Bukhary giving the Prophet by this Hadith ? Did the prophet Muhammed has anything else to do other than spending the time taking care of his wives ? Of course he did, but Bukhary and the other Hadithists do not give him the credit. It is interesting to see that Bukhary accepts this hadiths that talks about 11 wives for the prophet when historically he is known to have only 9 wives. Bukhary did not care about the contents of these hadiths.
It is just a dishonor for the Muslims to accept having this Hadith and any other hadith from those who insulted the prophet.
We only have one BEST HADITH, the Quran.
(3) In Bukhary's Sahih, Vol. 3, and in Moslem Vol. 7 the Hadith of Aysha, the prophet's wife, that the prophet was lying down with Aysha when his other wives sent Fatima first, then one of his wives to ask him for a matter of their business, so Aysha and the other wife get in argument and cursed each other so the prophet sided with Aysha and smiled and approved Aysha's revenge from his other wife.
The story is naive and insignificant but meant to place Aysha above all the other wives and completely showing the Prophet as careless man who was not shy from receiving people, even his daughter while in bed with his wife in a compromised position. He was shown in this fabricated SAHIH Hadith to disobey the Quran and being unfair to all his wives as God commands in the Quran.
(3) In Moslem's Sahih, when narrating the qualities of Othman Ibn Affan, another story was repeated , Abu Baker entered the house with the prophet lying down with his wife with his thighs exposed and did not cover them when Abu baker and Omar entered but did when Othman did, (because as the Hadith states, The Angels are shy from Othman and so should be Muhammed ). Another fabrication to boost the position of Othman against people like Ali Ibn Abu Talib. Naive hadith fabricators insulted the prophet to give Othman a higher degree over Ali.
(4)In Moslem's Sahih, a Hadith in the section of washing after intercourse that Muhammed answered a man about washing after having sex with his wife. Aysha was sitting there listening, and
Muhammed answered, I do it all the time with this (woman-Aysha) and wash right away.
What a shame!! With the prophet talking about his sexual habits in the presence of Aysha with no embarrassment. Teaching of sexual practice and matters can be taught without pointing fingers to the wife and her sacred relationship with her husband, especially if the husband happened to be the Prophet Muhammed. This was not our beloved Prophet. This is the fabrication of the fabricators.
(5) In Bukhary's Sahih, vol. 4 and 7, a Hadith about a magic spill casted on the prophet Muhammed until he did not know what he is doing even to the point that he would think he had intercourse with his wives when he in reality did not. Our Hadithist made the Prophet absent minded even for a minute ?!! What a shame. Should we respect them and accept their SAHIH ??!!! NO
(6) Bukhary's Sahih, vol. 2, narrates the hadith about Muhammed occasionally losing his concentration until he does not know how many Rakaat he prayed. What kind of message did Bukhary want to
give to the people with such Hadith.
(7) Moslem's Sahih, vol. 2, hadith about the prophet start to urinate standing up, so one of his companions start to walk away but the prophet called him back to stay close. What a lie. And what
is the significance ?!!
Our Prophet being insulted in the books that he ordered not to be written but the Muslims call them SAHIH Hadith. They forgot that there is ONLY one SAHIH Hadith, the BEST HADITH, the Quran.
(8) In the book of Tayymum (Dry Ablution) of Bukhary, vol. 1 and Moslem's Sahih vol. 1, is the story of a necklace lost by Aysha, so the prophet instructed all the Muslims with him to find the
lost necklace, while he slept on Aysha's thigh for hours, did not do his prayers or remember God, and did not tell the people what to do for ablution since they did not have water. So God decided to give the Muslims the Tayymum (Dry ablution).
Another shameful SAHIH Hadiths.
(9) In another Hadith reported by Bukhary and Hanbel, "A group of people >from the Oreyneh and Oqayelh tribes came to the prophet to embrace Islam, the prophet advised them to drink the urine of the camels. Later on when they killed the prophet's shepherd, the prophet seized them, gouged out their eyes, cut their hands and legs, and left them thirsty in the desert to die."
This is the picture that Hadith books depict our prophet, the man that God described him in the Quran as being compassionate and of high moral character.. Now do we know why God described His book, the Quran as the best Hadith, the most truthful Hadith, the non-fabricated Hadith ? Do we know why we should believe God in the Quran ?
Only the enemies of God, the enemies of the prophet Muhammed and the enemies of Islam are the ones who want us to believe these Sahih Books.
May be we now know why God said it is the enemies of the prophet who will fabricate these books and the lost ones are the ones who will accept them and uphold them. No wonder then that the messenger will complain to God on the day of judgment that the Muslims deserted the QURAN. 25:30
BUKHARY'S HADITHS INSULT GOD
Many of the Muslims of this generation and the previous generations, specially the Suuni Muslims and some others who do not call themselves Sunni have been following the steps of their parents
blindly without thinking for one moment for their own good. Generations after generations and the Muslims nowadaysdeserted the Quran and took books like the Sahih of Bukhary and Moslem as the truth that is equal and in many occasions supersede the Quran. In doing so they disregard the Quran and disregard God Almighty who told them repeatedly to follow only the Quran the best HADITH. They mixed up between the meaning of such statements in the Quran as in "Obey the messenger" and obeying Bukhary, Moslem, Abu Daoud, Malik...etc. , scholars who had books full of fabrications that contradict the Quran, contradict other Hadiths ,contradict the Prophet Muhammed, contradict the common sense and insult the intelligence of normal human beings.
In this post today we will look at some of the insults that Bukhary carried in his books to God Almighty, insulting God and insulting the Prophet Muhammed who could not have said such fabrications
and insulting the sincere Muslim (Submitter) who cannot accept such lies as statements by the Prophet Muhammed.
Let us first find what God Almighty says about Himself in His book, the Quran , the BEST HADITH. "No visions can encompass Him, but He encompasses all visions. He is the Compassionate, the Cognizant." 6:103
"... There is nothing like Him, ..." 42:11 And when Moses asked to see Him, God told him that he cannot see Him. 7:143
What kinds of fabrications Bukhary and Moslem have in their books describing God and claim it to be the Prophet's hadiths ?
(1) God appears to His believers and that they see Him as they see the FULL MOON. Bukhary.
(2) God descends to the lower Heaven every night.
(3) God put His feet in the fire of Hell so that it would become full.
(4) God shows his leg to the believers to recognize Him.
(5) God laughs and wonders.
(6)God has five fingers, on the first He puts the Heaven, on the second finger He puts the Earth, on the third, He puts the trees, on the fourth, He puts the water and the land and on the fifth, He puts the rest of His creation.
(7) God has a mansion in Heaven and Muhammed is permitted to enter it three times a day.
These lies and fabrications are kept hidden by our Scholars because they expose the true Bukhary and the true Moslems as collectors of lies and fabrications. These Hadiths and many others expose the true nature of these books that made the majority of the what is practiced today in the name of Islam. Islam as practiced today by the majority of Muslims is corrupted beyond recognition. If the prophet Muhammed would come back today , he would not recognize his Islam that he brought to this world.
The true Islam (Submission) that Muhammed brought to this world is well preserved in the book that God called the BEST HADITH, the Quran.
Those who seek to follow the steps of the Prophet Muhammed and "Obey the messenger" can do that by following the Quran. Those who follow Bukhary and his likes are the followers of Bukhary and his likes but not the followers of Islam or the Prophet Muhammed. It is no wonder then that the Prophet Muhammed himself will complain to God on the Last Day that his people DESERTED the Quran (not because they deserted the so called Hadiths and Sunna). 25:30
OTHER EXTRACTS from Book
The 4 Sunni Schools of Fiqh An Introduction
REASONS FOR THE PROHIBITION 21
FIRST REASON: JUSTIFICATIONS OF ABUBAKR 23
THE HADITH OF ARIKAH (THE COUCH) 36
WHICH DECISION PRECEDED THE OTHER? 38
SECOND REASON: JUSTIFICATIONS OF `UMAR IBN AL-KHATTAB 41
THIRD REASON: JUSTIFICATIONS OF IBN QUTAYBAH AND IBN HAJAR 47
FOURTH REASON: JUSTIFICATIONS OF ABU-ZAHW AND `ABD AL-GHANIY 51
FIFTH REASON: JUSTIFICATIONS OF AL-KHATIB AL-BAGHDaDIY AND IBN `ABD AL-BARR 56
SIXTH REASON: JUSTIFICATIONS OF SOME ORIENTALISTS 61
SEVENTH REASON: JUSTIFICATIONS OF MOST OF THE SHI`AH 63
OBJECTIONS TO THE JUSTIFICATION 64
REPORTS OF `ABDULLaH IBN MAS`UD'S PROHIBITING THE RECORDATION OF THE HADITH 81
THE LAST REASON: THE AUTHOR'S OPINION 95
FIRST FACTOR 95
SECOND FACTOR 96
THIRD FACTOR 97
FOURTH FACTOR 97
FIRST INTRODUCTION: THE RISE OF IJTIHAD 99
THE SITUATIONS OF ABU-BAKR AND `UMAR TOWARDS THE TWO GROUPS 104
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION 123
TWO MORE JUSTIFICATIONS 130
SECOND INTRODUCTION 135
`UMAR AND THE SAHABAH 141
(1) MU`ADH IBN JABAL 141
(2) ZAYD IBN THABIT 141
(3) ABU'UBAYDAH IBN AL-JARRAH 142
(4) HUDHAYFAH IBN AL-YAMAN 142
(5) `ABDULLAH IBN MAS`UD 143
(6) UBAYY IBN KA`B 144
(7) AL-DAHHAK IBN SUFYAN AL-KILABIY 144
(8) SHAYBAH IBN `UTHMAN 145
(9) `ABDULLAH IBN `ABBAS 145
(10) `ALI IBN ABI-TALIB 145
(11) `ABD AL-RAHMAN IBN `Awf 146
CONTINUATION OF THE TWO TRENDS AFTER THE HOLY PROPHET CRISIS AND SOLUTION 149
A PERSPECTIVE ON THE MATTER 165
THE SAHABAH'S LEARNING FROM THE HOLY PROPHET 167
THE IDENTIFICATION OF ADVANTAGE AND THE SACRED TEXTS 173
ITEMS OF IJTIHAD 182
MODELS OF THE PERPETUITY OF THE TWO TRENDS 191
THE SAHABAH OBJECTING TO OPINIONISM 198
(1) Imam `Ali ibn Abi-talib (martyred in AH 40) 198
(2) Ubayy ibn Ka`b al-Ansariy (died in AH 22) 199
(3) Mu`adh ibn Jabal (died in AH 18) 199
(4) Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman (died in AH 36) 199
(5) `Abdullah ibn Mas`ud al-Hudhaliy (died in AH 32) 199
(6) `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf (died in AH 31) 200
(7) Abu-`Ubaydah ibn al-Jarrah 200
(8) Zayd ibn Thabit (died in AH 45) 200
(9) `Abdullah ibn `Abbas (died in AH 68) 201
(10) Al-Dahhak ibn Sufyan al-Kilabiy 201
(11) Shaybah ibn `Uthman al-`Abdariy (died in AH 57) 201
(12) A woman that found fault with `Umar 201
(13) `Ammar ibn Yasir (martyred during the Battle of Siffin) 202
(14) Abu-Musa al-Ash`ariy (died in AH 42) 202
(15) Sa`d ibn Malik; Abu-Sa`id al-Khidriy (died in AH 74) 202
(16) Zayd ibn Arqam (died in AH 66) 203
(17) Al-Barra ibn `azib (died in AH 72) 203
(18) `Abdullah ibn `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB (died in AH 74) 203
(19) Salman al-Farisiy (died in AH 32) 203
(20) Abu-Hurayrah al-Dusiy (died in AH 59) 204
(21) Tamim al-Dariy 204
(22) Al-Miqdad ibn al-Aswad 204
(23) Abu-Dharr al-Ghifariy 204
DETAINMENT OF THE REPORTERS OF HADITH 207
CONFLICTING OPINIONS 209
THE CLAIM OF THE HOLY PROPHET'S ADOPTION OF PERSONAL OPINIONS 213
THE SAHABAH'S FREQUENT INQUIRIES TO THE CALIPH 220
INFLUENCE OF OPINIONISM ON MUSLIM JURISPRUDENCE 222
ACQUIESCENCE WITH `UMAR ON THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE PROHIBITION 229
THE AHL AL-BAYT'S ATTITUDE TO THE TREND OF IJTIHAD 235
INTERPRETATIONS AND OPINIONS 239
PLURALITY OR UNITY 242
IBN QAYYIM AL-JAWZIYYAH'S OPINION 248
THE BOOK OF ALLAH IS SUFFICIENT FOR US! 250
VIEWS ABOUT OPINIONISM 255
DEVELOPMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS 262
BACK TO THE MAIN TOPIC 263
EXPOSITION OF IMAM `ALI 265
PERSONALITIES OF IJTIHAD AND CALIPHATE 274
`ABDULLAH IBN `UMAR DISAGREES WITH HIS FATHER 282
THE EXTENSION OF THE TWO TRENDS AFTER `UMAR IBN AL-KHATTAB 291
JOINING the HAJJ TO THE `UMRAH 292
NEGLECT OF QIRA'AH 294
RULING OF WIVES OF THE LOST 294
THE ONE-SIXTH SHARE OF MOTHERS 295
ZAKAT OF HORSES 295
THE KALALAH 296
THE KHUMS 299
THE PERPETUITY OF OPINIONISM AND IJTIHAD DURING THE REIGN OF MU`AWIYAH 301
DISCOURSE OF IBN QAYYIM ABOUT TEMPORARY MARRIAGE 306
THE RULERS AND THE JURISPRUDENTIAL NORMALIZATION 313
PRACTICAL EXAMPLES ON THE SAHABAH'S VIOLATION OF THE HADITH 324
First Example 325
Second Example 327
Third Example 329
SIGNIFICANT ITEMS 337
`UMAR IBN `ABD AL-`AZIZ AND THE PROHIBITION OF RECORDING THE HADITH 340
WONDERMENTS AND IRONY 345
THE AHL AL-BAYT AND THE CIRCULATING SUNNAH 347
ANTICIPATION AND CONSOLIDATION 359
`UMAR IBN AL-KHATTAB AND THE UMAYYADS 368
ACCEPTABILITY OF THE SAHABAH'S SAYINGS 371
FIRST STAGE 379
SECOND STAGE 382
First Text 384
Second Text 388
THIRD STAGE 392
SUMMARY OF THE LAST REASON 399
FIRST PRESENTATION 399
SECOND PRESENTATION 401
THIRD PRESENTATION 402
FOURTH PRESENTATION 404
FIFTH PRESENTATION 405
SIXTH PRESENTATION 406
STAGES OF THE PROHIBITION OF RECORDING THE HADITH 409
(1) THE HADITH CIRCULATED INCREASINGLY 409
(2) ABUBAKR PROHIBITED THE REPORTING AND SET FIRE TO HIS BOOK OF HADITH 410
(3) `UMAR ORDERED THE SAHABAH TO REDUCE REPORTING THE HADITH 410
(4) `UMAR COLLECTED AND SET FIRE TO THE SAHABAH'S RECORDS OF HADITH 410
(5) `UMAR DETAINED SOME OF THE SAHABAH AND ORDERED THE ALL TO STOP REPORTING AND RECORDING THE HADITH 412
(6) THE TWO CALIPHS RESTRICTED THE RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS TO THE HOLY QUR'AN 413
(7) `UMAR ALLOWED THE SAHABAH TO PRACTICE IJTIHAD AND ACT UPON ANALOGY 413
(8) `UMAR ATTEMPTED TO RESTRICT THE IJTIHAD 413
GENERAL SUMMARY 414
FIRST ISSUE 414
SECOND ISSUE 420
IMAM `ALI'S ATTITUDE 423
COMPARISON BETWEEN THE TWO TRENDS 430
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TWO TRENDS DURING THE UMAYYAD REIGN 433
THE CALIPHS AND THE RECORDATION OF HADITH 433
THE AHL AL-BAYT AND THE RECORDATION OF HADITH 444
THE BOOK OF `ALI AGAIN 448
IMAM `ALI IBN ABI-TALIB 452
FATIMAH AL-ZAHRA'; DAUGHTER OF THE HOLY PROPHET 457
IMAM AL-HASAN IBN `ALI AL-MUJTABA 458
IMAM AL-HUSAYN IBN `ALI, THE MARTYR 459
IMAM `ALI IBN AL-HUSAYN AL-SAJJAD 461
IMAM MUHAMMAD IBN `ALI AL-BAQIR 464
IMAM JA`FAR IBN MUHAMMAD AL-SADIQ 469
IMAM MUSA AL-KAZIM 473
IMAM `ALI IBN MUSA AL-RIDA 484
IMAM MUHAMMAD IBN `ALI AL-JAWaD 488
IMAM `ALI IBN MUHAMMAD AL-HADI 490
IMAM AL-HASAN IBN `ALI AL-`ASKARIY 492
IMAM MUHAMMAD IBN AL-HASAN AL-MAHDI 495
THE FOUR HUNDRED PRINCIPLES (AL-USUL AL-ARBA`MI'AH) 500
THE SHIAH DERIVE FROM THE USUL 506
BIOGRAPHY OF THE COMPILERS OF THE AL-KUTUB AL-ARBA`AH 512
PRACTICAL EXAMPLES ON THE JURISPRUDENTIAL METHODS OF THE TWO TRENDS 518
(1) LAWS OF INHERITANCE 519
(2) A QUESTION ABOUT GAME 522
(3) THE PENALTY OF DRINKING INTOXICANTS AND WINES 524
(4) THE BLOOD MONEY FOR TEETH 530
MOTIVES OF DISTORTION AND DEVIATION FOR BOTH THE TRENDS 536
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TWO SCHOOLS 543
First Difference 543
Second Difference 544
Third Difference 547
Fourth Difference 551
Fifth Difference 551
Sixth Difference 552
Seventh Difference 552
THE EFFECTS OF THE PROHIBITION OF RECORDING THE HADITH 555