Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Hadith Looking to Face of Ali is Worship of Allah and Mentioning is Worship of Allah

Hadith Looking to Face of Ali is Worship of Allah and Mentioning is Worship of Allah

Ratings: (0)|Views: 3|Likes:

More info:

Published by: Faheem Muhammad Chishti FC on Aug 13, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Analyses of narrations: Looking at the face of Ali is worship.Looking at Ali is worship. Mentioning Ali is worship.
All praise is due to Allah, the Rabb of all mankind, jinn and all that exists. May the peaceand blessings of Allah be upon our Prophet the Seal of all Messengers, Muhammad, hisfamily, Companions and all those who follow him till the Day of Judgement. – Ameen.InshAllah in this short booklet I would discuss authenticy of 3 famous narrations that falselyhave been attributed to our beloved prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa ala alihi wa sallam).It was reported that Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa ala alihi wa sallam) said:
"To look at theface of Ali is worship”
. You can see this hadith in many shia polemic works, shia scholars quoting it, and using itduring their debates with people of sunnah.First of all we should notice that in accordance to shia narrations such superiority wasn’tsomething special for Ali (r.a), but for all believers.Shia muhadith Hussain Noore Tabarsi in his “Mostadrak al wasail” (9/152/10527) narratedhadith:
“Looking of believer with love to other believer is worship”
.And in the same volume he narrated hadith (10525):
“Looking of child to his parents isworship”
.Second, in books of ahlesunnah there is no single authentic chain for hadith where statedthat looking at the face of Ali is worship.
Opinion of Islamic scholars on this narration:
 Those who said it’s weak or fabricated:1)Ibn Hibban al-Busti in “Majroohen” (1/292) regarding such hadith that was reportedfrom Abu Bakr, said: “Fabricated”.
Ibn Jawzi in “al-Mawdua” (1/361) said it’s not authentic from all ways of transmission.3) Dhahabi said in “Mizanul itidal” (4/401) said it’s fabricated.4)Ibn Qaysarane said it’s false in “Tazkiratul al-huffaz” (434).5)Same opinion shared Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in “Lisanul mizan” (1/572).6)Albani said it’s fabricated in “Daif al-jame” (5992) and “Silsila ad-daifa” (4702).7)Muhammad ibn Darwish ibn Muhammad al-Khot, he included it in his “Asnamattalib” and noticed there opinions of Dhahabi and ibn Jawzi. Those who said it’s authentic:1)Hakim in his “Mostadrak”.
Ibn Hajar al-Makki in his “Sawaiq al-muhrika” said chain of hadith is good.
Ways of transmission.
Narration from Abdullah
.It was transmitted by al-Hakim in “Mostadrak” (4682). In the chain Yahya ibn Eesa ar-Ramli.Nasai said he’s not strong. Yahya said he was weak
“Mizanul itidal” 4/401/n9600.
Also in this chain is al-Amash, thiqat but famous for his tadlis, and he narrated this hadith in/anana/ form. It’s mean he didn’t make clear that he heard this hadith from next narrator ornot.Also in this chain Salih ibn Muqatil. Daraqutni said he’s not strong
.Same two problems present in similar hadith in “Mustakraj at-Toose” by Abu Ali al-Hasanibn Ali ibn Nasir at-Toose (n103), in “Sharkhul mazhab ahles-unnah” by ibn Shaheen, and in“Mojam al-kabeer” at-Tabarane. In the chain of Tabarani also present Ahmad ibn Budayland Muhammad ibn Abi Shayba. Daraqutni said there is softness in ibn Budayl. Ibn Adinoticed he’s weak
. As for ibn Abi Shayba scholars differed in him.Dhahabi in “Talkhis” said this hadith was fabricated.Suyuti in “Leal” cited two ways of transmission as witnesses, but both of them are weak. Infirst one Ahmad ibn al-Hajjaj ibn Salat, he was accused by Dhahabi
. And second one wouldbe discussed later. There is another way till al-Amash, it was transmitted by al-Halabi and ibn Asakir, in thechain is Khammad ibn Mubarak and he’s unknown.
Narration from Imran ibn al-Hussain
.It was transmitted by al-Hakim in “Mostadrak” (4681) with wording: “Looking at the Ali isworship”.In the chain some narrators unknown for me, like Ibrahim ibn Ishaq al-Jufi, Abdullah ibnAbdurabeh. These two narrators also present in the chain from “Marifat” by Abu Nuaym.Dhahabi said narration is fabrication.From Imran it was also narrated by his great-great-grandson Imran ibn Khalid, that hadithwas transmitted by Abu Nuaym in “Marifat”.Dhahabi cited it in “Mizanul itidal” (3/236/n6280) in the bio of this Imran, and said it’s false.His full name was Imran ibn Khalid ibn Taliq ibn Imran ibn Hussain. He also part of thechain, which was transmitted by Tabarani. Al-Heythami in “Majmau zawaid” (14695) saidthis narrator was weak.
Narration from Abdullah ibn Masood
.It was transmitted by Hakim in “Mostadrak” (4683). In the chain Aseem ibn Ali. Ibn Muinsaid he’s nothing. Nasai said he’s weak. Scholars differed in grading of this narrator
.Also in chain Abdurrahman ibn Abdullah al-Masoode, truthful narrator that becameconfused in the end of his life. Sulayman ibn Harb, Abu Ubeyd and Ahmad ibn Hanbal said:He died in 160
. In this chain he is shaykh of Aseem ibn Ali, and Aseem died in 221. It’spossible that he heard from him in the end. Allah knows best.Also I couldn’t find any praise or critic about narrators Musab ibn Zuhayr. Seems hisreliability isn’t known.
Narration from Aisha
.It was transmitted by Abu Nuaym in “Hiliyah” (2/182-183) via chain: Abad ibn Suhayb fromHisham ibn Urwa from father from Aisha.Abu Nuaym himself noticed: “Ghareeb from narrations of Hisham ibn Urwa, didn’t wrote itexcept from (this) hadith of Abad”.
“Mizanul itidal” 2/301/n3830.
“Mizanul itidal” 1/84/n305.
“Silsila ad daifa” 4702.
“Tahzib at-tahzib” 5/44.
“Tahzib at-tahzib” 6/190.
And this Ubada is liar. Bukhari and Nasai said he was abandoned (martook)
.Hadith of Aisha was also transmitted by ibn Asakir via chain of Dinaware: Ali ibn Sayed –Muhammad ibn Abdullah al-Qade – Abu Usama – Hisham.Shaykhana Albani in “Silsila ad daifa” noticed uncertainty Muhammad ibn Abdullah. In thatperiod lived Muhammad ibn Abdullah ibn Numayr, he was thiqat, but wasn’t labeled as al-QadeAli ibn Sayed that’s Razi, and he was weakened by Daraqutni
.Dinaware himself is disputed, he was Ahmad ibn Marwan Abu Bakr al-Qade al-Maliki and hewas accused in fabrication by Daraqutni.Other way was transmitted by Abul Qaseem al-Halabi and ibn Asakir via chain: Abu Ali al-Hussain ibn Abdulghafar ibn Amr al-Azdi – Duhaym – Shuyab ibn Iskhaq – Hisham.Narrator al-Hussain was abandoned
.Other way from Aisha present in the “Zayl tareh al-bagdad”. In the chain is al-Muwamal ibnIhab. Nasai said he’s thiqat. Abu Khatim said saduq, but ibn Muin noticed that he wasweak
.Also in this chain Uthman ibn Umar ibn Abdurrahman ash-Shafei and Ahmad ibn Eesa al-Washa, I couldn’t find any good or bad information about them.Other way was present in the work “Fadhail khulafa ar-rasheden” by Abu Nuaym al-Isfahani.In the chain Ali ibn al-Muthanna at-Tahawe al-Koofe. Ibn Hibban mentioned him in “Thiqat”,but I can’t find any other good opinion on this narrator. His lever as a narrator seems to beclose to uncertainty. Dhahabi in “Mizanul itidal” (3/152/n5918) noticed that he wasweakened by Al-Azdi.In this chain also such narrators like Asem ibn Umar al-Bajali and Ahmad ibn Jafar ibnAsram. I couldn’t find any info on them. And this was second witness chain that was citedby Suyuti in “Leal”.
Narration from Abu Khurayra
.Abul Wafa Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn Sibt al-Halabi in his book “Kashf al khasais amanramie bil wudu al-hadeth” (n626) quoted this hadith from Abu Khurayra in the bio of Muhammad ibn Ismaeyl ibn Mosa ibn Haroon, as an example of his ahadeth. In the sameplace Abul Wafa quoted Khatib Bagdade saying about this narrator: “Not truthful”, andnoticed that Dhahabi accused him in fabrication.Other way was transmitted via al-Hasan ibn Ali ibn Zakariya al-Adawe, and he was accusedin lie by ibn Adi.
Narration from Sawban
.It was transmitted via Yahya ibn Salamah ibn Kuhayl. He was abandoned as stated Nasaiand Daraqutni.
Narration from Uthman ibn Affan
. Transmitted by ibn Asakir via chain of Abbase caliphs. Their level as narrators is uncertain
“Mizanul itidal” 2/367/n4122.
“Mizanul itidal” 3/131/n5850.
“Mizanul itidal” 1/540/n2019.
“Mizanul itidal” 4/229/n8950.
Suyuti “Leal al masnua” 1/314.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->