Re: Who falsified this hadith?
- Details
- Category: Philosofaith
- Written by Aisha Umar-Yusuf
- Hits: 1734
While in far away Khartoum pursuing a post-graduate degree, the highly energetic former national Amir of the Muslim Students Society of Nigeria, Abdullahi Abubakar Lamido, still kept in touch with ‘home’ via the internet. He read and sent a well-researched response to my piece ‘Who falsified this Hadith?’ enjoy this scholarly treatise.
Feminists and their co-travellers have recently launched a series of attacks on the Hadith narrated by the great companion of the Messenger of Allah (SAW), Abubakrah, Nufai’u Ibn al-Harith al-Thaqafi, reported by, among others, most celebrated scholar of Hadith, Imam al-Bukhari, which states that “Any nation that makes a woman its ruler shall never prosper,” to the extent of vilifying that pious companion. Perhaps the most well-known among those who question the veracity of that Hadith is the Moroccan feminist Dr Fatima Mernissi. But the fact that Mernissi is not qualified to be counted among even ordinary conscious Muslims let alone Islamic scholars, is a pointer to her disqualification to talk about highly scholarly matters like authenticating a Prophetic Hadith, especially one that, as we can see in this piece, has been accepted as authentic by Hadith scholars and jurists throughout the 14 centuries of Islamic scholarship.First of all, the Hadith, unlike the wrongly popularized view, was not only transmitted by Imam Al-Bukhari. It has also been recorded by Imams al-Tirmidhi (Hadith number 2365), al-Nasa’i (8/200); al-Baihaqi (3/90 & 10/117); al-Hakim (3/118-119& 4/291); Abu Dawud and Ahmad (5/51.) The wording in the version of Imam Ahmad and al-Hakim is: “Any society that is led by a woman shall never prosper.” There are at least four other versions/wordings of the Hadith. A supportive version (Shahid) of the Hadith has also been narrated by another companion, Jabir Ibn Samurah in which the Prophet (SAW) says: “Any society whose ra’y is controlled by a woman shall never prosper.”
AUTHENTICITY OF THE HADITH
Fatima Mernissi and her students question the authenticity of the Hadith on the basis of what she presumes to be the questionable character of Abubakrah. But what has been recorded in the most reliable books of hadith and history since the golden days of Islamic history has already debunked her rather misleading propositions. Muhaddith al-Madinah (leading hadith scholar of Madinah), Sheikh AbdulMuhsin al- ‘Abbad (May Allah protect him) in his 56 paged booklet Difa’un ‘an Abi Bakrah (In Defense of Abubakrah) has dealt, quite scholarly, with the claim that the Hadith in question is not authentic and that the basis for its questionability is the claimed suspicious character of Abubakrah (RA). In this piece, most of the discussions on the veracity of the hadith are abridged translations from that book. It should be noted therefore, that I am not writing on this subject as one who claims scholarship or mastery of the subject matter. My work is to report, albeit in summary, what experts in the field have said throughout ages.
Sheikh al-Abbad traces that throughout the history of Islam, scholars, beginning from the Sahabah themselves (May Allah be pleased with them all), have always held Abubakrah with respect and reverence. Although he made reference to one contemporary scholar who challenged the Hadith, Al’Abbad explained that he contacted that scholar on phone asking him whether he had read in any book where any of the jurists ever criticized that Hadith, and the scholar answered in the negative. Al’Abbad cited 11 scholars across centuries, who have recorded the virtues of that great companion. I have hereunder presented some of their statements:
Imam Ibn Kathir says: “Abubakrah was great and highly ranked among the companions.” Imam al-Dhahabi states:”Abubakrah was one of the leading jurists among the companions.” Imam Al-Nawawi writes: “Abubakrah was among the most virtuous and righteous companions. He never ceased to be dedicated to ‘Ibadah until his death.” Both Imam Hassan al-Basri and Abu Salamah, Musa bin Sulaiman al-Tabuzaky opined that: “Abu Bakrah was the most honest companion who resided in Basra after ‘Imran Ibn Hussain, though he was better than ‘Imran in terms of telling the truth.” Ibn Sa’ad in al-Tabaqat believes: “He (Abubakrah)was an honorable and pious person.” Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr and Ibn Hajar assert: “He was among the most virtuous companions”. Abul Hassan al-‘Ajali reports that: “He was among the distinguished companions of the Prophet (SAW).”
The major misconception (shubhah) usually raised against Abubakrah and his narrations is that he was ordered to be flogged by Caliph Umar for a false testimony he gave against another companion. But this claim also does not hold water for at least two reasons. First, it is not true that he deliberately gave a false testimony against the companion, but he mistook the companion’s wife to be another woman who, coincidentally, resembled the accused companion’s wife. After all, they were flogged because the 4 witnesses required by the Shari’ah were not fulfilled.
Second, the actions of the Sahabah themselves who continued to relate with him as a pious and trustworthy gentleman despite the cited incidence, as well as the statements of pious scholars of Islam through the ages, are enough to debunk the claim of the 21st century “independent researchers”.
Scholars have extensively discussed the matter, advancing cogent reasons based on the established precepts of Islamic jurisprudence, on why neither the Sahabah nor the proceeding generations of scholars had ever doubted or rejected the narrations of Abubakrah. For instance, Imam Abu Ishaq al-Shirazi in his Sharh al-Luma’ (2/638) states: “The narrations of Abubakrah and the others flogged together with him are no doubt acceptable because they did not appear in the (issue) as initiators of qazaf (slander). They rather were witnesses. And Umar’s punishment for them was based on Ijtihad. For this there is no reason for rejecting their narratives.”
In his al-Wadih fi Usul al-Fiqh (5/27), Abu al-Wafa’ Ibn Aqil al-Hambali, states: “Ahmad (Ibn Hambal) says: ‘the narrations of Abubakrah and those flogged together with him cannot be rejected. This is because they appeared (in the case) as witnesses. They did not concoct the qazaf, but their testimony was based on Ijtihad (which is subject to mistakes.) And it is common principle that narrations (of a person) are not rejected based on issues that are subject to personal Ijtihad.’”
Other scholars who spoke in the same line with Imam al-Shirazi and Ahmad Ibn Hambal include Imam al-Shafi’I, Imam Abubakar al-Baihaqi, Abu al-Khattab Mahfuf al-khulaudhani, Ibn Qudamah, al-Shanqiti, al-Zarkashi, and a host of others.
Hadiths of Abubakrah are authentically recorded in the most reliable Hadith literature. Among the scholars who recorded his narrations are Imams al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, al-Nisa’i, al-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah. In the Kutub al-Sittah (The six most authentic Hadith collections), 55 of his narrations have been recorded. Imam al-Mizzi has mentioned some of the narrations in Tuhfah al-Ashraf from hadith number 11654 to 11708. In the Musnad of Imam Ahmad, he (Abubakrah) has 152 hadiths (including repeated narrations), i.e. from number 20373 to 20524. Among them, Bukhari and Muslim have agreed upon 9; then Bukhari singly recorded 1, while Muslim alone recorded 5.
Al-Isma’ili (d 371 AH) says “None among the Tabi’un (the generation after that of the Sahabah) and the Tabi’ al-Tabi’in (those who came after them) had ever rejected the narrations of Abubakrah or denied using them as proofs, nor has there been any who ever doubted transmitting hadith from him, neither has any accused his narrations on the basis of his testimony against al-Mugirah.”
Let me add here also that Imam Ibn kathir in his al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah (7/357) has related that after Ali Bn Abi Talib became the Caliph he visited Abubakrah at his house (while the latter was sick.) After greeting him, Ali offered to him the governorship of Basra but Abubakrah rejected the offer and suggested that Ibn Abbas be appointed. Now, since Ali (RA) was part of the government of ‘Umar and was fully aware of what transpired between Abubakrah and ‘Umar more than any so-called “independent researcher”, it is clear that Ali and the companions around him never understood the incident in the manner interpreted by Mernissi and her students. Ali (RA) would never have offered position of leadership to a person of questionable character.
All the above explanation is in addition to the two generally established facts that all Sahabah are just and that all the Hadiths reported with a complete chain of narrators by Imam al-Bukhari and Muslim are authentic.
Another “reason” for rejecting the Hadith by Mernissi and her comrades is that the Hadith contradicts some “historical facts” where some nations prospered under women leaders. They cite examples of the Queen of Sheba, and in contemporary history Indira Ghandi, Golder Maier (Israel) Margret Thatcher etc. They argue that the successes of these “outstanding” women as leaders are “historical realities” that are contradicted by the Hadith, and for this, the Hadith is not authentic.
To be continued
Articles
Re: Who falsified this hadith?
Category: Philosofaith Written by Aisha Umar-Yusuf Hits: 1734
While in far away Khartoum pursuing a post-graduate degree, the highly energetic former national Amir of the Muslim Students Society of Nigeria, Abdullahi Abubakar Lamido, still kept in touch with ‘home’ via the internet. He read and sent a well-researched response to my piece ‘Who falsified this Hadith?’ enjoy this scholarly treatise.
Feminists and their co-travellers have recently launched a series of attacks on the Hadith narrated by the great companion of the Messenger of Allah (SAW), Abubakrah, Nufai’u Ibn al-Harith al-Thaqafi, reported by, among others, most celebrated scholar of Hadith, Imam al-Bukhari, which states that “Any nation that makes a woman its ruler shall never prosper,” to the extent of vilifying that pious companion. Perhaps the most well-known among those who question the veracity of that Hadith is the Moroccan feminist Dr Fatima Mernissi. But the fact that Mernissi is not qualified to be counted among even ordinary conscious Muslims let alone Islamic scholars, is a pointer to her disqualification to talk about highly scholarly matters like authenticating a Prophetic Hadith, especially one that, as we can see in this piece, has been accepted as authentic by Hadith scholars and jurists throughout the 14 centuries of Islamic scholarship.First of all, the Hadith, unlike the wrongly popularized view, was not only transmitted by Imam Al-Bukhari. It has also been recorded by Imams al-Tirmidhi (Hadith number 2365), al-Nasa’i (8/200); al-Baihaqi (3/90 & 10/117); al-Hakim (3/118-119& 4/291); Abu Dawud and Ahmad (5/51.) The wording in the version of Imam Ahmad and al-Hakim is: “Any society that is led by a woman shall never prosper.” There are at least four other versions/wordings of the Hadith. A supportive version (Shahid) of the Hadith has also been narrated by another companion, Jabir Ibn Samurah in which the Prophet (SAW) says: “Any society whose ra’y is controlled by a woman shall never prosper.”
AUTHENTICITY OF THE HADITH
Fatima Mernissi and her students question the authenticity of the Hadith on the basis of what she presumes to be the questionable character of Abubakrah. But what has been recorded in the most reliable books of hadith and history since the golden days of Islamic history has already debunked her rather misleading propositions. Muhaddith al-Madinah (leading hadith scholar of Madinah), Sheikh AbdulMuhsin al- ‘Abbad (May Allah protect him) in his 56 paged booklet Difa’un ‘an Abi Bakrah (In Defense of Abubakrah) has dealt, quite scholarly, with the claim that the Hadith in question is not authentic and that the basis for its questionability is the claimed suspicious character of Abubakrah (RA). In this piece, most of the discussions on the veracity of the hadith are abridged translations from that book. It should be noted therefore, that I am not writing on this subject as one who claims scholarship or mastery of the subject matter. My work is to report, albeit in summary, what experts in the field have said throughout ages.
Sheikh al-Abbad traces that throughout the history of Islam, scholars, beginning from the Sahabah themselves (May Allah be pleased with them all), have always held Abubakrah with respect and reverence. Although he made reference to one contemporary scholar who challenged the Hadith, Al’Abbad explained that he contacted that scholar on phone asking him whether he had read in any book where any of the jurists ever criticized that Hadith, and the scholar answered in the negative. Al’Abbad cited 11 scholars across centuries, who have recorded the virtues of that great companion. I have hereunder presented some of their statements:
Imam Ibn Kathir says: “Abubakrah was great and highly ranked among the companions.” Imam al-Dhahabi states:”Abubakrah was one of the leading jurists among the companions.” Imam Al-Nawawi writes: “Abubakrah was among the most virtuous and righteous companions. He never ceased to be dedicated to ‘Ibadah until his death.” Both Imam Hassan al-Basri and Abu Salamah, Musa bin Sulaiman al-Tabuzaky opined that: “Abu Bakrah was the most honest companion who resided in Basra after ‘Imran Ibn Hussain, though he was better than ‘Imran in terms of telling the truth.” Ibn Sa’ad in al-Tabaqat believes: “He (Abubakrah)was an honorable and pious person.” Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr and Ibn Hajar assert: “He was among the most virtuous companions”. Abul Hassan al-‘Ajali reports that: “He was among the distinguished companions of the Prophet (SAW).”
The major misconception (shubhah) usually raised against Abubakrah and his narrations is that he was ordered to be flogged by Caliph Umar for a false testimony he gave against another companion. But this claim also does not hold water for at least two reasons. First, it is not true that he deliberately gave a false testimony against the companion, but he mistook the companion’s wife to be another woman who, coincidentally, resembled the accused companion’s wife. After all, they were flogged because the 4 witnesses required by the Shari’ah were not fulfilled.
Second, the actions of the Sahabah themselves who continued to relate with him as a pious and trustworthy gentleman despite the cited incidence, as well as the statements of pious scholars of Islam through the ages, are enough to debunk the claim of the 21st century “independent researchers”.
Scholars have extensively discussed the matter, advancing cogent reasons based on the established precepts of Islamic jurisprudence, on why neither the Sahabah nor the proceeding generations of scholars had ever doubted or rejected the narrations of Abubakrah. For instance, Imam Abu Ishaq al-Shirazi in his Sharh al-Luma’ (2/638) states: “The narrations of Abubakrah and the others flogged together with him are no doubt acceptable because they did not appear in the (issue) as initiators of qazaf (slander). They rather were witnesses. And Umar’s punishment for them was based on Ijtihad. For this there is no reason for rejecting their narratives.”
In his al-Wadih fi Usul al-Fiqh (5/27), Abu al-Wafa’ Ibn Aqil al-Hambali, states: “Ahmad (Ibn Hambal) says: ‘the narrations of Abubakrah and those flogged together with him cannot be rejected. This is because they appeared (in the case) as witnesses. They did not concoct the qazaf, but their testimony was based on Ijtihad (which is subject to mistakes.) And it is common principle that narrations (of a person) are not rejected based on issues that are subject to personal Ijtihad.’”
Other scholars who spoke in the same line with Imam al-Shirazi and Ahmad Ibn Hambal include Imam al-Shafi’I, Imam Abubakar al-Baihaqi, Abu al-Khattab Mahfuf al-khulaudhani, Ibn Qudamah, al-Shanqiti, al-Zarkashi, and a host of others.
Hadiths of Abubakrah are authentically recorded in the most reliable Hadith literature. Among the scholars who recorded his narrations are Imams al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, al-Nisa’i, al-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah. In the Kutub al-Sittah (The six most authentic Hadith collections), 55 of his narrations have been recorded. Imam al-Mizzi has mentioned some of the narrations in Tuhfah al-Ashraf from hadith number 11654 to 11708. In the Musnad of Imam Ahmad, he (Abubakrah) has 152 hadiths (including repeated narrations), i.e. from number 20373 to 20524. Among them, Bukhari and Muslim have agreed upon 9; then Bukhari singly recorded 1, while Muslim alone recorded 5.
Al-Isma’ili (d 371 AH) says “None among the Tabi’un (the generation after that of the Sahabah) and the Tabi’ al-Tabi’in (those who came after them) had ever rejected the narrations of Abubakrah or denied using them as proofs, nor has there been any who ever doubted transmitting hadith from him, neither has any accused his narrations on the basis of his testimony against al-Mugirah.”
Let me add here also that Imam Ibn kathir in his al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah (7/357) has related that after Ali Bn Abi Talib became the Caliph he visited Abubakrah at his house (while the latter was sick.) After greeting him, Ali offered to him the governorship of Basra but Abubakrah rejected the offer and suggested that Ibn Abbas be appointed. Now, since Ali (RA) was part of the government of ‘Umar and was fully aware of what transpired between Abubakrah and ‘Umar more than any so-called “independent researcher”, it is clear that Ali and the companions around him never understood the incident in the manner interpreted by Mernissi and her students. Ali (RA) would never have offered position of leadership to a person of questionable character.
All the above explanation is in addition to the two generally established facts that all Sahabah are just and that all the Hadiths reported with a complete chain of narrators by Imam al-Bukhari and Muslim are authentic.
Another “reason” for rejecting the Hadith by Mernissi and her comrades is that the Hadith contradicts some “historical facts” where some nations prospered under women leaders. They cite examples of the Queen of Sheba, and in contemporary history Indira Ghandi, Golder Maier (Israel) Margret Thatcher etc. They argue that the successes of these “outstanding” women as leaders are “historical realities” that are contradicted by the Hadith, and for this, the Hadith is not authentic.
To be continued