|Reciting Quran in the 'order of revelation'|
|Re: Terrible Allegation Against Sayyidina Muawiyah ra|
|Friend is looking for a spiritual path|
A teacher from a well known Institution (Salafi oriented) is telling his students to read the Quran in the order of revelation (in which he compiled the list of the order).
I have the book Etiquette with the Quran by Sidi Musa Furber, and on page 50 & 51, he does mention about reciting in order & in reverse order, and he mentions that some scholars disliked violating the order of the mushaf altogether (whether in prayer or outside of prayer).
However, this could be an "arbitrary" reverse order, but what about specifically reading the quran "in the order of revelation"? Is there any basis for this? This is referring to reciting the Quran "outside" of prayer.
So it is permissible to read it thus, but with the following conditions:
1. One must rely on established, authoritative and competent sources in the determination of such order; so the teacher's compilation must be well-grounded; and one must also be aware of the existent khilaf concerning certain Ayas or Suras and acknowledge it in a conscientious and informed manner;
2. without even thinking of comparing the historical sequence with the established sequence in legal standing or probative force as the former is a matter of conjecture open to individual scholarly opinion while the latter is a matter of revelation and a categorical and binding proof on the Umma!;
3. emphatically, as long as one is not saying it is the preferable ordering of the Suras, the way some modernists and orientalists have claimed, the latter being an innovation of misguidance in ignorance of the fact that the established ordering is both Divinely-ordained and the pivot of very early Consensus;
4. as long as one is not attempting to bring such a reading sequence into the purview of an act of worship. With respect to worship, neither the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace, nor the Sahaba, nor the Tabi`in read the Quran in the order of revelation but rather in the final Divinely-ordained sequence into which Allah Most High commanded Jibril, upon him peace, to inform the Prophet to put it, and which has reached us Divinely-protected to this day and shall continue thus until the Qur'an is lifted and the final Hour rises.
The following was quoted from a Rafidi website:
Ishaq and Bakr bin Haytham from Abdurazaq bin Hamam from Mu'amar from Ibn Taous from Taous bin Kisan from Abdullah Ibn Amr ibn Al-'as who stated: 'I was sitting with the Prophet of Allah (s) when He (s) said: 'A man will come out of this mountain pass, who will die and he will be outside my nation (Islam)'. I had left behind my father there for wudhu, and I feared, as if holding back my urine, that he would be the one to come, but Mu'awiyah came out. The Prophet (s) said: 'He is the one'.
Ansab al-Ashraf, Volume 2 page 120
Ishaq bin Abi Israel: Ibn Hajar said: 'Seduq' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p79), Dahabi said: 'Thiqah' (Al-Kashif, v1 p234). Abdulrazaq bin Hamam: Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p599), Dahabi said: 'Thiqah' (Siar alam alnubala, v9 p563). Mu'amar bin Rashid: Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah Thabt' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p202), Dahabi said: 'Hujja' (Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v1 p190). Abdullah bin Taous: Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p503), Dahabi said: 'Thiqah' (Siar alam alnubala, v6, p103). Taous bin Kisan: Ibn Hajar said: 'Thiqah' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p448), Dahabi said: 'He had a great magnificence' (Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v1 p90). Abdullah bin Amro bin al-Sas: A Sahabi. Moreover, Hafiz Ahmad bin al-Sidiq said about this tradition: 'Sahih according to Muslim's condition' (Jawnat al-Attar, v2 p154)
Could someone kindly provide some information on the narration in question. Is it really sahih according to the condition of Muslim?!?
First, some rules and findings that are relevant to this narration:
1. As a rule all narrations praising or disparaging Mu`awiya (Allah be well-pleased with him) are weak and/or forged as stated by Ibn al-Jawzi, Ibn al-Qayyim, Mulla `Ali al-Qari, and others in their books on forgeries, Allah have mercy on them.
2. Among the forgeries are what is called copycat fabrications attempting to reduplicate the Prophetic idiom along the lines desired by the forgers. A hilarious example is the dietetic forgery "Eggplant fulfills whatever need it is eaten for," which was made up on the model of the authentic hadith "Zamzam fulfills whatever need it is drunk for."
Similarly, this particular narration is a "copycat rewording" type of doctrinal forgery, both:
2.1 in its text (matn), patterned after: "A man will come out of this mountain pass who belongs to the people of Paradise...."
2.2 and in the attribute of the transmission chain as "meeting the criterion of al-Bukhari and Muslim."
The latter matn is authentically related:
(a) about `Abd Allah b. Salam (Allah be well-pleased with him) from Sa`d b. Abi Waqqas by Imam Ahmad in the Musnad with a fair chain.
(b) a man from the Ansar (Allah be well-pleased with him and them) by `Abd b. Humayd in his Musnad. Imam Shihab al-Din al-Busiri said in Ithaf al-Khiyarat al-Mahara (6:78 §5383):
`Abd b. Humayd said:
`Abd al-Razzaq informed us:
Ma`mar informed us:
that Anas b. Malik (Allah be well-pleased with him) told him:
"We were one day sitting with Rasul Allah salla Allah `alayh wa-Sallam when he said: 'Someone shall come out to meet you from this crag--a man from the people of Paradise!' Whereupon a man man from the Ansar emerged, his beard dripping with the water of his ablution; he had hung his sandals on his left hand. He gave salaam. The next day the Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) said the same and the same man emerged, and likewise the day after. After the Prophet rose, `Abd Allah b. `Amr b. al-`As followed the man in question and said to him: 'I quarreled with my father and swore an oath to him that I would not stay under the same roof with him for three days; could you shelter me until they pass?' He said yes.
"Anas said: `Abd Allah would narrate that he spent with him three nights and he never saw him rise for late night prayers except that whenever he turned over in his bed he would make dhikr and takbir, and so until he rose. `Abd Allah said: and I never heard him say other than good things. But when the three nights elapsed I was on the verge of considering his deeds insignificant. I said to him: O `Abd Allah, trhere was no anger nor rejection between me and my father; but I heard Rasulullah salla Allahu `alayh wa-Sallam say three times about you: Now shall come out to meet you a man from the people of Paradise--and you came out! so I wanted to spend time with you and observe your practice to follow you, but I did not see you do anything special. What is it then that made you reach what the Prophet said?
"He replied: Nothing other than what you saw.
"As I was leaving he called me back and said: Nothing other than what you saw, except that I cannot recall that I do not feel any resentment toward any Muslim who cheated me, nor do I envy anyone over any bounty Allah Most High gave them. `Abd Allah said: That is what made you reach that, and which we are incapable of doing!"
Al-Busiri then said: This is a sound chain by the criterion of al-Bukhari and Muslim and al-Nasa'i, and this is also what Ibn hajar said in his marginalia on al-Mundhiri's Targhib wal-Tarhib.
3. The narration of the anti-Mu`awiya forgery in al-Baladhuri is mentioned in Ansab al-Ashraf (Dar al-Ma`arif ed. 5:134) and comes through two chains, neither of which is correct:
3.1 "Ishaq and Bakr b. al-Haytham narrated to me and both said: `Abd al-Razzaq b. Hammam narrated to us: Ma`mar informed us: from Ibn Tawus: from his father: from `Abd Allah b. `Amr b. al-`As..."
This unknown Bakr b. al-Haytham is a direct teacher to al-Baladhuri for many chains in Ansab al-Ashraf and Futuh al-Buldan, narrating anti-Umayyad slurs from `Abd al-Razzaq al-San`ani, from Ma`mar, from Qatada/al-Kalbi/al-Zuhri. It could not possibly be Abu Bakr b. al-Haytham al-Anbari the teacher of al-Hakim (d. 405) and Abu Nu`aym (d. 430).
As for Ishaq, it is NOT Ishaq b. Abi Isra'il al-Marwazi al-Baghdadi (d. 246) as claimed, since he is not known to narrate from `Abd al-Razzaq (nor does he narrate anything in the two Sahihs whatsoever, but only a single hadith in al-Nasa'i and a single hadith in Abu Dawud so even if it were him the chain would still not be "sahih according to Muslim's condition!"); but rather it is the musnid of San`a': Ishaq b. Ibrahim b. `Abbad al-Dabari (d. 285) who was only six or seven when he heard from `Abd al-Razzaq according to Imam Ibrahim al-Harbi; hence the saying of Ibn `Adi in al-Kamil (1:338): "He was deemed too young to be reliable from `Abd al-Razzaq;" and al-Dhahabi in Mizan al-I`tidal said that as a consequence the hadiths which he alone narrates from `Abd al-Razzaq are disclaimed (munkar), and this is one of them. "Meaning," Ibn Hajar said in the Lisan (1:349-350), "His narrations from `Abd al-Razzaq other than those found in the Musannaf."
Ibn al-Salah said in his Muqaddima (Type 62: Knowledge of the trustworthy masters who became senile in old age):
"`ABD AL-RAZZAQ B. HAMMAM. Ahmad b. Hanbal mentioned that he became blind in old age and he used to be dictated to and endorse the dictation [yulaqqan fa-yatalaqqan, e.g.: 'You narrated from X, Y and Z' - 'Yes, I narrated from X, Y and Z'] so the audition (sama`) of whoever heard from him after his blindness is worthless. Al-Nasa'i said [in al-Du`afa' wal-Matrukin]: 'Anything that one narrated from him in his latter period needs re-examination.' I [Ibn al-Salah] say: Thus is the saying of `Abbas b. `Abd al-`Azim understood when he returned from San`a': 'By Allah! I endured every hardship to go study with `Abd al-Razzaq and I bear witness that he is certainly a liar and that al-Waqidi is more truthful!' I say: I myself have found that what is narrated from al-Tabarani (*), from Ishaq b. Ibrahim al-Dabari, from `Abd al-Razzaq, hadiths I found thoroughly disclaimed and which I counted of that category, for the audition of al-Dabari is very late [in `Abd al-Razzaq's life]."
(*) Al-Tabarani narrates a version of this hadith that does not name the man who came out of the crag. Majma` al-Zawa'id 5:243, cf. also Abu Nu`aym, Tarikh Asbahan (2:77).
3.2 "`Abd Allah b. Salih narrated to me: Yahya b. Adam narrated to me: from Sharik: from Layth: from Tawus: from `Abd Allah b. `Amr..."
This is an incomplete chain missing the actual forger as hinted by al-Bukhari and Ahmad and as identified by al-Khallal:
Al-Bukhari said in his Tarikh al-Awsat (Luhaydan ed. 1:255-256), mentioning some forgeries disparaging Mu`awiya (Allah be well-pleased with him):
"and it is narrated from Ma`mar, from Ibn Tawus, from his father, from a certain man, from `Abd Allah b. `Amr, and he [the narrator] raised it [to the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace] while recounting his story. This is broken-chained and unreliable.... and all this shows, regarding those reports, that they have no bases (laysa laha usul) and that they are inauthentic (la tathbut) from the Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) in that regard. Such is only said by typically weak people (innama yaquluh ahl al-da`f), one on top of another."
Ibn Qudama in his Muntakhab min al-`Ilal lil-Khallal (p. 228 §136) said:
"Al-Khallal narrated from Muhanna: I asked Ahmad [b. Hanbal] of the hadith of Sharik: from Layth: from Tawus: from `Abd Allah b. `Amr, etc. and he said: 'Rather, Ibn Tawus narrated it from his father, from `Abd Allah b. `Amr or someone else'--he was not sure.
"Al-Khallal said: `Abd al-Razzaq narrated it, from Ma`mar, from Ibn Tawus who said: I heard Furkhaash narrating this hadith from my father [Tawus], from `Abd Allah b. `Amr."
This Furkhaash is identified as:
- "`Uthman b. Khaash or Furkhaash" al-Basri, a colleague of the Mu`tazili imam `Amr b. `Ubayd. Lisan under `Uthman b. Khaash.
- `Uthman b. Famarkaash in al-`Uqayli's Du`afa', under `Amr b. `Ubayd.
- "A man named `Uthman who is the brother of al-Samri" in Ya`qub b. Sufyan al-Fasawi's al-Ma`rifa wal-Tarikh (2:262-263).
In conclusion each of the two chains mentioned above (3.1 and 3.2) has a mortal defect, consisting either in the narrator from `Abd al-Razzaq or in the presence of an extremely obscure Mu`tazili in its makhraj (high up in the chain) which, in addition, was characterized as broken-chained and appears also to be jumbled (mudtarib). Hence it it is forged or, at best, extremely disclaimed, but certainly not authentic, even less "by the criterion of Bukhari and Muslim"!
4. Ibn Taymiyya explicitly declared it "a forged lie by agreement of all the experts of hadith" in his Minhaj al-Sunna al-Nabawiyya (4:443-444). The version he was addressing was from `Abd Allah b. `Umar, which is a chain adduced by the discarded Rafidi Nasr b. Muzahim in his book Kitab Siffin, in which the latter also concocted another chain from Jabir, all for the same wording.
5. Before adducing this forgery, al-Baladhuri himself first adduces the same hadith but with the wording "a man from the people of Paradise shall come out of this crag, and Mu`awiya came out. The Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) said: 'He is the one'."
May Allah Most High grant him and all the Companions the Highest Paradises and grant us but one minuscule ray from the suns of their good deeds.
Let him wash his face, sit and meditate on God for 5 minutes anytime before sunrise each night, and conclude it with one prostration.
Hajj Gibril Haddad