Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Questions About Hadith From Sahih Muslim

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Salaamun Alaikum

I came upon this hadith a while ago but I didn't realize its true potential until i'd been through a couple of lectures.. the hadith is like so..

Sahih Muslim (031.5920)

"....One day Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) stood up to deliver sermon at a watering place known as Khumm situated between Mecca and Medina. He praised Allah, extolled Him and delivered the sermon and. exhorted (us) and said: Now to our purpose. O people, I am a human being. I am about to receive a messenger (the angel of death) from my Lord and I, in response to Allah's call, (would bid good-bye to you), but I am leaving among you two weighty things: the one being the Book of Allah in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it. He exhorted (us) (to hold fast) to the Book of Allah and then said: The second are the members of my household I remind you (of your duties) to the members of my family...."

So..

Where do the ashaab fit in these two categories of guidance?

What were the 'duties' that the Prophet(saww) was refering to at the end?

Lastly.. why is it that neither the Quran nor the household of the Prophet(saww) was consulted when the issue of caliphate was raised?

Sincere and to-the-point answers please :)

Assalaam Alaikum

Link to post
Share on other sites

The tradition of Qur'an wa'l sunnah is not da'if and was recorded in the Muwatta of Imam Malik, one of the foremost kutuwb of Sahih Sittah. This is cheap Shi'a propaganda at best. Akhi Gibr'ail expounded on this matter when he recieve the question:

This hadeeth mentioning Ahlul Bayt and Quran as inseparable is very significant and has been narrated by 35 Sahaba and is given in the Sahihs of Ahlu Sunnah and the many books of their scholars.

This is absolutely false, the hadith is NOT mutawatir nor narrated by anywhere near even 10 Sahaba.

I would like to ask: Why do the preachers of Ahlu Sunnah promote the weak hadeeth (mentioning Quran and Sunnah as the two weighty things) which is narrated by only one source (in Muwata' of Malik, who hated Ali ibn abi Talib and favoured his enemies - hence he did not list in his Muwata' one hadeeth through Ali) and YET they ignore the mutawatir (extremely prevalent) true hadeeth.

Four crass lies in one breath? One, the hadith in question is not weak (see below). Two, there are anywhere between 10 and 15 narrations from `Ali in the Muwatta'. Three, the other hadith is not mutawatir as I already said. Four, Imam Malik was so respectful of Ahl al-Bayt that he forgave the governor of Madina who had him leashed and had his shoulder dislocated only because that governor was from Ahl al-Bayt.

The hadith of the Thaqalayn being the Qur'an and the Sunna is narrated from (1) Ibn `Abbas by al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan al-Kubra (10:114 #20108) and - as part of a longer hadith - by al-Hakim (1:93=1990 ed. 1:171) who declared it sahih and - without chain - by Malik in his Muwatta' and Ibn `Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhid (24:331) and from (2) Abu Hurayra by al-Hakim (1:93=1990 ed. 1:172), al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan al-Kubra (10:114 #20109), al-Daraqutni in his Sunan (4:245 #149), al-Lalika'i in Sharh Usul I`tiqad Ahl al-Sunna (1:80), al-Khatib, al-Jami` li Akhlaq al-Rawi (1983 ed. 1:111=1991 ed. 2:165-166 #89), Ibn `Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhid (24:331), and Ibn Hazm who declared it sahih in al-Ihkam (6:243) while al-Suyuti declared it hasan in al-Jami` al-Saghir (#3923).

May Allah have mercy on the Ahl al-Bayt and clear them from any association with corpse-eaters and other defamators on the Day of Judgment.

Hajj Gibril ©

The second narration is mutawattir and has 2 forms that I'm aware of, both of which I have information for.

Lastly.. why is it that neither the Quran nor the household of the Prophet(saww) was consulted when the issue of caliphate was raised?

Zafaryab

They were consulted except in the first instance (and later they were given the chance to voice their opinions as Abu Bakr was ready to set aside his title for a better candidate) because:

(1) Hazrat Ali (ra) had to be left behind per the hadith of Sunan Abi Dawud where the family of the deceased must remain for burial rites.

(2) Abu Bakr wasn't aware of what was about to unfold, he was convinced to come by Umar who wanted to stop the Ansar from electing 'Saad Bin Ubaadah' as the man was being elected by a very small group of people and Umar/Ibn Jarrah and others feared that the new ruler of the Ansar would be rebeled against (as so few people were at the saqifah) causing a civil war.

(above two points per the rudud of Mufti Muhammad Ashraf against a certain lie being directed at Umar).

Edited by deathpasser
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been through much of the book already, one of the claims is rather weak (against the merit of hadith of holding onto sunnah of kulafa rashiduwn):

"Firstly, he says, the tradition has been narrated solely by Sunnis, unlike the Hadith al-Thaqalayn which has been narrated widely both by Shi`i and non-Shi`i narrators."

If we use this as a basis of accepting ahadith, than we have to accept the ahadith which states that mutah is forbidden. This hadith comes with the same matn in Ahlus Sunnah books as well as the SHi'a Istibar of Tusi where he grades it Sahih. The same general narrations are also found in the collections of Ibadiyyah. That's 3 groups narrating it from different companions. So this can't be a basis of hadith criticism for Shi'as.

Another one of 4 claims against the narration of following their sunnah made by the Shi'a author is that the hadith isn't Sahih. This is also not supported as the chain that (at least 4) of the narrations travel through is composed of thiqah narrators.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
I've been through much of the book already, one of the claims is rather weak

:!!!:

Such an arrogant takfeeri.

The book proves the tawatur of the narration, as well as its being reported from thiqah narrators (according to sunni and Shi'a standards).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
This hadeeth mentioning Ahlul Bayt and Quran as inseparable is very significant and has been narrated by 35 Sahaba and is given in the Sahihs of Ahlu Sunnah and the many books of their scholars.

This is absolutely false, the hadith is NOT mutawatir nor narrated by anywhere near even 10 Sahaba.

I would like to ask: Why do the preachers of Ahlu Sunnah promote the weak hadeeth (mentioning Quran and Sunnah as the two weighty things) which is narrated by only one source (in Muwata' of Malik, who hated Ali ibn abi Talib and favoured his enemies - hence he did not list in his Muwata' one hadeeth through Ali) and YET they ignore the mutawatir (extremely prevalent) true hadeeth.

Four crass lies in one breath? One, the hadith in question is not weak (see below). Two, there are anywhere between 10 and 15 narrations from `Ali in the Muwatta'. Three, the other hadith is not mutawatir as I already said. Four, Imam Malik was so respectful of Ahl al-Bayt that he forgave the governor of Madina who had him leashed and had his shoulder dislocated only because that governor was from Ahl al-Bayt.

The hadith of the Thaqalayn being the Qur'an and the Sunna is narrated from (1) Ibn `Abbas by al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan al-Kubra (10:114 #20108) and - as part of a longer hadith - by al-Hakim (1:93=1990 ed. 1:171) who declared it sahih and - without chain - by Malik in his Muwatta' and Ibn `Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhid (24:331) and from (2) Abu Hurayra by al-Hakim (1:93=1990 ed. 1:172), al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan al-Kubra (10:114 #20109), al-Daraqutni in his Sunan (4:245 #149), al-Lalika'i in Sharh Usul I`tiqad Ahl al-Sunna (1:80), al-Khatib, al-Jami` li Akhlaq al-Rawi (1983 ed. 1:111=1991 ed. 2:165-166 #89), Ibn `Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhid (24:331), and Ibn Hazm who declared it sahih in al-Ihkam (6:243) while al-Suyuti declared it hasan in al-Jami` al-Saghir (#3923).

May Allah have mercy on the Ahl al-Bayt and clear them from any association with corpse-eaters and other defamators on the Day of Judgment.

Hajj Gibril

Really deathpasser?.. corpse eaters eh.. heheh.. how in the world can you believe him? :)

Plus sahih muslim has more authority than Imam Malik's book.. thats the concensus

Zafaryab

They were consulted except in the first instance (and later they were given the chance to voice their opinions as Abu Bakr was ready to set aside his title for a better candidate) because:

(1) Hazrat Ali (ra) had to be left behind per the hadith of Sunan Abi Dawud where the family of the deceased must remain for burial rites.

(2) Abu Bakr wasn't aware of what was about to unfold, he was convinced to come by Umar who wanted to stop the Ansar from electing 'Saad Bin Ubaadah' as the man was being elected by a very small group of people and Umar/Ibn Jarrah and others feared that the new ruler of the Ansar would be rebeled against (as so few people were at the saqifah) causing a civil war.

Okay.. the Ahlul Bayt(as) were held up.. why didn't these ppl consult the Quran to decide upon a caliph?.. wassalaamun alaikum

Edited by Zafaryab
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Salam Alaikum

The tradition of Qur'an wa'l sunnah is not da'if and was recorded in the Muwatta of Imam Malik, one of the foremost kutuwb of Sahih Sittah. This is cheap Shi'a propaganda at best.

Just speaking of the hadeeth in Muwatta of Malik ibn Anas for now, firstly, there is the matter of the character of Malik ibn Anas and what the other scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah thought of him in regards to his reliability. Details of this can be provided if anybody wishes. However, the main deciding factor here is that this hadeeth is without any chain. The wording of the book tells us that it reached Malik that the Prophet said...and so on. No chain.

The rest later, Insha'Allah.

Wassalam

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Salam Alaikum

I will deal in turn with every riwayah that I know of that tells us that the Thaqalayn which the Rasoolullah left for us was the Quran and Sunnah, as delivered in his khutbah around the time of the final Hajj. Insha'Allah I will start tomorrow.

The only book of the Sihah Sittah in which such a hadith is narrated is Al-Muwatta of Malik ibn Anas. In fact it is debated whether it or Sunan ibn Majah or Sunan Al-Darimi is the sixth of the Sihah Sittah, so it could be possible that the six Sihah may not even include this hadith.

Anyhow, I have already dealt with this hadith already, where I have mentioned that it is MURSAL, i.e. without any isnad (chain of narration). The defence of Sunnis, particularly advocated by Ibn Abd Barr, is that it was so famous and mash'hoor that there was no need for a chain. The fact that there is no MUSNAD HADITH (hadith with a continuous isnad) in the Sihah Sittah proves that this claim is merely an attempt to pull at straws.

Next, Insha'Allah, I will discuss the riwayah by Al-Hakim in Al-Mustadrak.

Wassalam

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

(salam)

Hajj Gibril seems to be quite knowledgeable in the teachings of the Ahl Sunnah which is apparent in his various works. However many of his statements or his answers to questions posed, which concern the Ahl Bayt/Shi’ism has a lot to be desired. Whether he is purposely subjecting people to false teachings through his exaggerated or misleading comments to try and extinguish the light of guidance, well we will leave it to Allah (swt) to be the judge.

Inshallah I shall leave it to Abbas to continue and go though the Isnaads for the tradition of Quran and Sunnah. In reality though there exists only four chains and each one is un-reliable (which i'm very sure Dr Haddad knows but fails to mention).

Edited by carlos
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

AL-HAKIM Al-NISABURI, Al-MUSTADRAK

Two narrations are given in this book.

First narration:

Al-Hakim heard from:

Abu Bakr Ahmad ibn Ishaaq, from Al-Abbas ibn Al-Fadhl Al-Askati

And

from Ismael ibn Mohammad ibn Al-Fadhl Al-Sha’rani, from Al-Fadhl Al-Sha’rani

Both narrate from:

Ismaeel Ibn Abi Uwais

from Abu Uwais

from Thawr ibn Zaid Al-Dayli

from Ikramah

from Ibn Abbas

The Weak Rijal:

Ismaeel ibn Abi Uwais and Abu Uwais (his father)

Ahmad ibn Hanbal: “Ibn Abi Uwais, there is no problem with him, but his father is weak.”

Yahya: “Truthful, weak of intellect, not with it (in reporting ahadith)”

Yahya also reported to have said: “confused, weak, has nothing”

Abu Hatim: “In his own place truthful, but careless.” and in regards to the father: "His narrations can be written but cannot be used to prove a point"

Al-Nisai: “Weak”

Al-Darqutni: “I do not choose him in Al-Sahih”

Ibn Ma’een (via Ahmad ibn Abi Yahya): “Him and his father stole ahadith”

Al-Dulabi: “I heard Al-Nadr ibn Salmah saying he is a liar”

Ibn Uday: “He narrated from his maternal uncle Malik and Sulaiman ibn Bilal strange narrations which nobody followed.”

Muawiyah ibn Salih reports that Ibn Ma’een said: “Him and his father are weak”

Al-Lalkai: “Al-Nisai spoke against him so much that his narrations should be abandoned”

Sayf ibn Mohammad said: “Ibn Abi Uwais used to fabricate hadeeth.”

Salmah ibn Shubaib said: “I heard Ismaeel ibn Abi Uwais saying that he would sometimes fabricate hadeeth for the people of Madinah when they disagreed upon that thing amongst themselves.”

Ibn Hajr, in his introduction of his commentary of Sahih-ul-Bukhari said: "One cannot argue using the hadeeth of Ibn Abi Uwais"

Al-Hakim then says that Al-Bukhari used the hadeeth of Ikrimah, and Muslim used the hadeeth of Abu Uwais, then makes the statement that all the narrators of this hadeeth are agreed upon.

This statement is misleading, as Al-Hakim fails to make it clear that Muslim did not use Ikrimah and Al-Bukhari did not use Abu Uwais. Therefore, this hadeeth would not be Saheeh either to Al-Bukhari or Muslim. Al-Hakim has made this misrepresentation a few times in his book.

Al-Hakim further states that this hadeeth of this Khutbah whereby holding on to the Sunnah is urged alongside the Quran is GHAREEB, i.e. only narrated by Ibn Abbas, and the isnad after him is only through one person at a time.

Al-Hakim makes this statement in comparison to the hadeeth in which he delivers the true hadeeth-e-Thaqalayn, for which he gives several chains and shows that it is mash'hoor and well-known and widely-narrated.

If Al-Hakim calls this hadeeth GHAREEB, which is the lowest kind of Ahad hadeeth, then how do people now call it Mutawatir?

Second Narration:

Al-Hakim gives a further narration to back the above one up, and narrates from:

Abu Bakr ibn Ishaq

from Mohammad ibn Isa ibn Al-Sukn Al-Wasiti

from Dawud ibn Umr Al-Dhabbi

from Salih ibn Musa Al-Tulahi

from Abdul-Aziz ibn Rafee

from Abu Salih

from Abu Hurayrah

Salih ibn Musa Al-Tulahi

Al-Bayhaqi: “weak in hadeeth”

Abdullah ibn Ahmad asked his father about him and he said: “I don’t know”, as though he was not pleased.

Bukhari: “His hadeeth are rejected”

Al-Nisai: “His hadeeth are discarded”

Yahya ibn Mu’een said: “He has nothing”

Al-Dhahabi: “weak”

Abu Ish’aq: “weak in hadeeth”

Ibn Uday: “What he narrates is not followed by anyone”

Ibn Majah: “weak”

Al-Tirmidhi: “some scholars talk against Salih ibn Musa”

Al-Darqutni: “weak in hadeeth”

Ibn Hajr: “weak”

Ibn Abd Barr: “not amongst the reliable”

Clearly a fabricator, and a weak isnad.

Edited by Abbas
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Ibn Abd Barr, Al-Tamheed

Two narrations as below:

First narration:

Isnad from Ibn Abd Barr:

Abdur-Rahman ibn Marwan

Ahmad ibn Sulaiman Al-Baghdadi

Al-Baghawi

Dawud ibn Umr Al-Dhabbi

Salih ibn Musa Al-Tulahi

Abdul-Aziz ibn Rafee

Abu Salih

Abu Hurayrah

Salih ibn Musa Al-Tulahi

Al-Bayhaqi: “weak in hadeeth”

Abdullah ibn Ahmad asked his father about him and he said: “I don’t know”, as though he was not pleased.

Al-Bukhari: “His hadeeth are rejected”

Al-Nisai: “His hadeeth are discarded”

Yahya ibn Ma’een said: “He has nothing”

Al-Dhahabi: “weak”

Abu Ish’aq: “weak in hadeeth above his goodness”

Ibn Uday: “What he narrates is not followed by anyone”

Ibn Majah: “weak”

Al-Tirmidhi: “some scholars talk against Salih ibn Musa”

Al-Darqutni: “weak in hadeeth”

Ibn Hajr: “weak”

Ibn Abd Barr: “not amongst the reliable”

Ibn Abd Barr's own admittance that he is not reliable is enough.

Second narration

Isnad from Ibn Abd Barr:

Abdur-Rahman ibn Yahya

Ahmad ibn Saeed

Mohammad ibn Ibrahim Al-Daybali

Ali ibn Zaid Al-Araidhi

Ishaq ibn Ibrahim Al-Hunaini

Kathir ibn Abdullah ibn Umr ibn Awf

Abdullah ibn Umr ibn Awf

Umr ibn Awf

Kathir ibn Abdullah ibn Umr ibn Awf

Abdullah ibn Ahmad said: “my father (Ahmad ibn Hanbal) striked out the hadeeth of Kathir ibn Abdullah ibn Umr”

Ahmad also reported to have said: “his hadeeth are rejected, he has nothing”

Ahmad also said to Abu Khuthaimah: “do not narrate from him anything”

Ibn Ma'een said: “His grandfather was a Companion, but he is weak in hadeeth”

Abu Dawud: “he was one of the liars”

Abu Zar’ah: “flimsy in hadeeth, not firm”

Al-Darqutni: “his hadeeth are rejected”

Al-Shafi’i: “He is one of the rukn of falsehood”

Al-Nisai: “His hadeeth are rejected” and “he is not reliable”

Abu Hatim: “he is not strong”

Al-Aqili narrates from Matraf ibn Abdullah who said: “I saw Kathir ibn Abdullah ibn Umr ibn Awf Al-Al-Mazani, and he was very contravertial, and none amongst our companions took from him anything”

Yahya: “weak in hadeeth”

Ali ibn Al-Madini: “weak”

Ibn Sa’d: “he had a few hadeeths, deemed weak”

Ibn Hajr says: “Al-Saji, Yaqoob ibn Sufyan and Ibn Al-Barqi deemed him weak”.

Ibn Abd Barr: “Kathir’s hadeeth is rejected”

Ibn Hiban: “He narrated from his father from his grandfather a fabricated transcription whose mention in the books is not permissible.”

Ibn As-Sukn: “He narrated from his father from his grandfather ahadeeth in which there is a problem”

Al-Hakim said: “He narrated from his father from his grandfather a transcription in which there are rejected narrations”

Ishaq ibn Ibrahim Al-Hunaini

Ibn Uday: “Weak and despite his weakness, his hadeeth is written”

Al-Buhkari: “There is a problem in him”

Al-Nisai: “Not reliable”

Ibn Abd Barr: “Al-Hunaini is weak, with too much error and mistakes”

Abu Hatim saod: “I saw Ahmad ibn Salih not pleased by him” and “he used to err”

Abul-Fath Al-Azdi: “Erred in narrations”

Ibn Hajf: “one of the weak ones”

Al-Aqili mentioning two of his hadeeths said: “Unanimously, nobody follows them, and as for the hadeeth from Malik there is no foundation for them.”

Ibn Abd Barr was again amongst those who weakened these two narrators of his hadeeth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Al-Bayhaqi, Al-Sunan Al-Kubra

Two narrations:

First Isnad from Al-Bayhaqi

Abu Abdullah Al-Hafiz

Ismaeel ibn Mohammad ibn Al-Fadl Al-Sha’rani

Al-Fadl Al-Sha’rani

Ibn Abi Uwais

Abu Uwais

Thawr ibn Zaid Al-Dayli

Akramah

Ibn Abbas

Weak rijal:

Ismaeel Ibn Abi Uwais and Abu Uwais (his father)

Already discussed above and their weakness shown

Thawr ibn Zaid Al-Dayli

Al-Bayhaqi regards him as Majhool (unknown), so for Al-Bayhaqi himself this hadeeth will not be regarded as Sahih.

Second Isnad from Al-Bayhaqi

Abul-Hussan ibn Bashran Al-Adl

Abu Ahmad Hamzah ibn Mohammad ibn Al-Abbas

Abdul-Kareem ibn Al-Haitham

Al-Abbas ibn Al-Haitham

Salih ibn Musa Al-Tulahi

Abdul-Azeez ibn Rafee

Abu Salih

Abu Hurayrah

Salih ibn Musa Al-Tulahi

Already shown his weakness, including Al-Bayhaqi's own words against him.

Al-DARQUTNI, Al-SUNAN

Isnad from Al-Darqutni:

Abu Bakr Al-Shafi’i

Abu Qabisah Mohammad ibn Abdur-Rahman ibn Ammarah

Dawud ibn Umr

Salih ibn Musa Al-Tulahi

Abdul-Azeez ibn Rafee

Abu Salih

Abu Hurayrah

Salih ibn Musa Al-Tulahi

As above, including Al-Darqutni's own words against his reliability.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

IBN HIBAN, TABAQAT-UL-MUHADDITHEEN

One Isnad:

Ahmad ibn Saeed ibn Urwah Al-Saffar

Abdul-Wahid ibn Ghiyath

Hisham ibn Sulaiman

Yazeed ibn Aban Al-Raqashi

Anas ibn Malik

Rijal deemed weak:

Yazeed ibn Aban Al-Raqashi

Al-Nisai: “Rejected”

Ibn Majah: “weak”

Al_tirmidhi: “weak”

Al-Haithami: “weak”

Ibn Sa’d: “weak”

Al-Darqutni: “weak”

Shu’bah: “he was humiliated fue to adultery” and “I would rather commit adultery than narrate from him”

Ahmad ibn Hanbal: “it (the news of adultery) reached us regarding Aban (his father)”

Ahmad also said: “his hadeeth are unsupported”

Ibn Mu’een: “in his hadeeth is weakness”

Al-Falas: “not strong”

Al-Bukhari: “one of the weak ones”

Ibn Hiban: “It is not halal to narrate from him”

Hisham ibn Sulaiman Al-Makhzoomi

Al-Aqili: “his hadith narrated from other than Juraih is error”

Abu Hatim: “disturbance in his hadeeth, though he is truthful in his own place”

Al-Haithami: “a group of the imams have deemed him weak”

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Al-QADHI IYADH, AL-IMLA’

One isnad:

Abul-Fadhl Ahmad ibn Ahmad Al-Asbahani

Abu Na’eem Ahmad ibn Abdullah Al-Hafiz

Abdullah ibn Mohammad ibn Jafar

Banan ibn Ahmad Al-Qattan

Abdullah ibn Umar ibn Aban

Shuaib ibn Ibrahim

Sayf ibn Umar

Aban ibn Ishaq Al-Asadi

Al-Sabah ibn Mohammad Al-Ahmasi Al-Kufi

Abu Hazim

Abu Sa’eed Al-Khudri

Weak rijal:

Al-Sabah ibn Mohammad ibn Abi Hazim Al-Ahmasi Al-Kufi

Ibn Hajr: “Weak” and “he was amongst those who narrated fabrications from reliable people”

Al-Darqutni: “not strong”

Al-Aqili: “There is doubt in his hadeeth, and he used to elevate the mawqoof (suspended) hadeeth”

Ibn HIban: “he narrated fabrications”

Sayf ibn Umar

Ibn Ma’een: “weak in hadeeth”

Abu Hatim: “his hadeeth are rejected”

Abu Dawud: “he has nothing”

Al-Nisai: “weak”

Al-Darqutni: “weak”

Ibn Uday: “some of his hadeeth are common and usually are discarded and are not followed”

Ibn Hiban: “accused of being Zindeeq”

Al-Hakim: “accused of being Zindeeq”

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

So I have presented the Rijal of the ahadith in:

Muwatta of Malik

Mustadrak of Al-Hakim

Sunan of Al-Bayhaqi

Sunan of Al-Darqutni

Al-Tamheed of Ibn Abd Barr

Al-Imla' of Qadhi Iyadh

Tabaqat of Ibn Hibban

If there are any other narrations, I'd be happy to have a look at them.

All the isnads are weak and are ahad and ghareeb from each sahabi purported to have reported the hadeeth.

They also conflict with the undisputable mutawatir ahadith of the true Hadith-e-Thaqalayn.

As such, the claim that the "Quran and Sunnah" hadeeth is mutawatir is very flawed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...