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

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I was doing quick research on the path that Ahlu Sunnah sect took to gather their hadiths amid the plethora of hadiths that were narrated by Ahlulbayt.

It is well accepted that Hadith documentation and teaching was forbidden in the times of the 3 Khulafa. A closer look though shows that this forbiddance was not absolute. The history shows a number of companions who went against this law, taught hadiths to other Muslims and confronted the authority with it. Shia school usually focuses on the Ahlulbayt contribution and role in those hard times and usually ignores the rest of the companions. A great number of Shia scholars reasoned this ban to be directed against Ahlulbayt specifically. Ibn Um Abd or Ibn Masoud is an intersting hadith narrator, he is not usually associated with the Shia of Imam Ali, but in the same time he had narrated many hadiths about Ahlulbayt. Some Shia scholars concluded from this that the 3 banned the hadith to cover their defeciency in knowledge.

Ibn Masoud was the sixth Muslim man, he was among the earlist men who recited Quran loudly in Mekkah and was one of those who attended Bay'atulRidhwan.

He was forced to saty in Madinah during Umar time by a direct order from Umar. Umar forced many Sahabah to stop spreading the hadith of prophet, some were leashed, some were imprisoned and others were exiled. Among them was Ibn Masoud who was forced to stay in Madinah. It is also important to note that during Abu Bakr rule and Umar rule, there were a number of Muslims who wrote hadiths despite the ban. These incidents appear discreatly in history books while mentioning the ban of hadith documentation. Some narrations will mention the burning of hadith books that were written during Umar time which tells that people did not stop writing the hadiths. Ibn Masoud is thought to be one amongst those who did not stop documenting the hadith.

It is also important to note that we some narrations mention that Ibn Masoud himself destroyed a book of hadith that was speaking specifically about the merits of Ahlulbayt. Acouple of other narrations mention that Ibn Masoud had rarely narrated something from the prophet and when he dide he shivered and sweat.

It is worth telling as well that by the time Uthman was the Khalifah, total hadith ban policy proved to be ineffective, Uthman and the Umayad rulers allowed certain set of hadiths to be taught to people most of which were hadiths related to fiqh that Umar had approved.

I wonder if any Sunni here will have the gut to tell me how Ibn Masoud died? It was during Uthamn time .....Uthman did not like Ibn Masoud, he beat him ... Ibn Masoud passed away later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This link answers this accusation. (I already posted the link on a different thread.)

It is a discussion between a Shia and Sunni about the banning of Hadeeths.

I dont understand why you sunnis always call it an accusation....WHEN ITS IN YOUR BOOKS

Checked out the link...meh its more opinionated with assumptions then with evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A great number of Shia scholars reasoned this ban to be directed against Ahlulbayt specifically. Ibn Um Abd or Ibn Masoud is an intersting hadith narrator, he is not usually associated with the Shia of Imam Ali, but in the same time he had narrated many hadiths about Ahlulbayt.

great topic !

But ibn masud was generally discontent with the khilafah of uthman, as were many other senior sahaba.In times of abu bakr /umar there was not this great discontent amongst the sahaba.

You have to realize that uthmans policies were very different from abubakr/umar

And so many sahaba have narrated merits of AHlulbayt, esp if we see Kufa the future nucleus of shiaism was the home of

ibn masud

hudhayfa al yaman

salman muhmmadi

and other sahaba who were close to ALi were also residents of kufa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

great topic !

But ibn masud was generally discontent with the khilafah of uthman, as were many other senior sahaba.In times of abu bakr /umar there was not this great discontent amongst the sahaba.

You have to realize that uthmans policies were very different from abubakr/umar

And so many sahaba have narrated merits of AHlulbayt, esp if we see Kufa the future nucleus of shiaism was the home of

ibn masud

hudhayfa al yaman

salman muhmmadi

and other sahaba who were close to ALi were also residents of kufa

Generally Sunnis sees Uthman as great man, even if he did some theft from the treasure house, I am not sure how they look at this story in which Ibn Masud is being called names on Minbar, kicked in belly in public then imprisoned in his house till he passed away.

Uthman policies regarding hadith narrations are the same as Umar's, actually, many sahaba considered Umar to be more strict about the ban. Uthamn policies regarding the treasure house are the same as the ones before him, he was just more blunt about it. He refused to give Ayishah the money that was given to her during her father rule and he refused to give her her inheretance from prophet because she had witnessed for her father against Fatimah that prophets do not leave inheretance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In times of abu bakr /umar there was not this great discontent amongst the sahaba.

All that discussion above indicate a massive black out of information during the rule of Sheikhyn in particular Hz Umar (ra). His censorship of information made it difficult for us to assess whether Companions were truly content with his rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ but why didnt the sahaba and taabeen rise up in open revolt at the time of umar ? like they did in the time of uthman ?

Umar did prohibit senior companions from leaving medina as he was suspicious of their political motives e.g Talha , Ali and even zubair was sent only once to Egypt IMHO, was this not a good approach btw ? esp since he kept the balance amongst the tribes and amingst banu hashim there were some who did contribute to Futuhat e.g abdullah b zubair b abdul muttalib , fadl b abbas

Why fired khalid b walid was also likely because a makhzumi like him was gaining too much power aminsgt the armies and may be tempted to break away from medina

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All that discussion above indicate a massive black out of information during the rule of Sheikhyn in particular Hz Umar (ra). His censorship of information made it difficult for us to assess whether Companions were truly content with his rule.

Ibn Alqayyim counted 100 issue that Umar and Ibn Masoud had disagreed about. The inventions of Umar (Awaliyiat Umar) are also a sign that after his death many had narrated the events of his era. It is not in the amount of narrations but rather on the interpretation of it from the side of the narrator and the side of the recipient.

^ but why didnt the sahaba and taabeen rise up in open revolt at the time of umar ? like they did in the time of uthman ?

Umar did prohibit senior companions from leaving medina as he was suspicious of their political motives e.g Talha , Ali and even zubair was sent only once to Egypt IMHO, was this not a good approach btw ? esp since he kept the balance amongst the tribes and amingst banu hashim there were some who did contribute to Futuhat e.g abdullah b zubair b abdul muttalib , fadl b abbas

Why fired khalid b walid was also likely because a makhzumi like him was gaining too much power aminsgt the armies and may be tempted to break away from medina

Those who revolted against Uthman were a mixture from all Muslims (Eygpt, Iraq, Madinah etc), add to that the anti Uthman slogan by Um Almo'mineen.

When Ibn Masud recieved the order to head back to Madinah, Kufah men asked him to stay and offered him protection, Ibn Masud said that he knew (as if there was a known prophecy) about a Fitnah coming, he told them that he did not wanted to be the one who inflame it.

Umar once asked a group of sahaba in his majlis about the fitnah that will act like the waves of the sea, the sahaba felt silent and only Huthaufah spoke, he offered to tell Umar about it, Umar said to him " you are brave", I am not sure why Umar said that but then Huthayfah told him that Umar will not be alive during it though he (umar) is the door of fitnah.

These sort of hadiths about prophecies are not in abundance but are incompelete or are vague.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ yes but isnt umar the "door against fitna" per hudhayfa ? so AFTER umar the fitna will start

When Ibn Masud recieved the order to head back to Madinah, Kufah men asked him to stay and offered him protection, Ibn Masud said that he knew (as if there was a known prophecy) about a Fitnah coming, he told them that he did not wanted to be the one who inflame it.

indeed but Ashtar appoints abu musa and hudhayfa as governers over kufa indicating his defiance of uthman, my question is if the Sahaba were as displeased with umar as they were with uthman why didnt similar events occured in times of umar ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ yes but isnt umar the "door against fitna" per hudhayfa ? so AFTER umar the fitna will start

indeed but Ashtar appoints abu musa and hudhayfa as governers over kufa indicating his defiance of uthman, my question is if the Sahaba were as displeased with umar as they were with uthman why didnt similar events occured in times of umar ?

I think the reason was financial. In Ibn Masud case, he spoke against Uthman when Uthman assigned Wlid bin Uqbah on the treasure house of Kufah, Ibn Masud did not recieve his salary from the treature house like before (in days of Umar and Abu Bakr) and Uthman did not concern himself about anyone else beside his tribe.

In the case of Umar though, sahabah feared him even if he did not give them the money they deserve from the treasure house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ yes partly it was a financial reason, but why did sahaba fear Umar ? he was from a small tribe and his sternness made him not a very likable character

I think the answer will be multifold , on one hand Uar was a bully and on the other he was buying people with money.

He had beaten many people like his sister Fatimah and his brother in law and his son and his wife and Um farwah and Sayida Fatimah Azahara,

and the slave of bani mo'amil and Um Abdullah bint Hantamah and the head of Rabi'ah tribe and he had beaten who asked about the tafsir of Quran, He had beated Abu Hurairah for narrating hadiths and threatened other companions, he had beaten the crying woman in a funeral till her hijab full of her head,and a slave for wearing a a free woman cloths,and the muslim women during jahileyyah and the women who cried over the death of Zainab the daughter of prophet, and Buraidah bin alhaseeb for protesting over the burning of Fatimah's house, Umar order sahabah to beat him and kick him out of madinah, buraidah died in Maru. Umar had beaten who fast without a pause and those who prayed after the asr prayer and those who named themselves with prophets names and those who fast rajab,and those who buy meat for 2 days in a raw, he had beated a man had visited Jerusalem, and a man who yawned infront of umar, he had kicked Sa'ad bin Ubadah on his belly and broke the nose of Habab bin Monther in Saqifah

But there are some who made an allaiance with him. It should be noted that Umar had changed the sunnah of prophet in terms of how to distribute the money among muslims. Umar was the first who gave the earliest muslims more money than the later Muslims. He had given more money to Muhajreen than the Ansar and more money to the Muhajreen from Quraish. Arabs were given more money than Ajams, he had given more money to Mudhar than Rabi'ah and more money to Awes than Khazraj. He had given more money to Ayshah and Hafsah than the other wives. He wasthe first to establish the caste system in Islam.

The relationship between Umar and Ibn Masud is funny, Umar himself had narrated a number of hadiths from prophet (which is contradictory to his policy)that praise Ibn Masud being a great Quraan reciter, then there are another number of reports were Umar imprisoned Ibn Masud or wrote to him to teach people the Quraan using Quraish accent rather than Hatheel accent (hatheel the tribe of Ibn Msud).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buraidah bin alhaseeb for protesting over the burning of Fatimah's house, Umar order sahabah to beat him and kick him out of madinah, buraidah died in Maru.

bro can you give me the reference for that ? and Buraidah died in Merv during time of Yazid decades later IMHO

Buraida Aslami is a enigmatic character , sunni sources are silent on his support for ALi but in imami sources he is potrayed as a loyal supporter of ALi.More on his allegedly shiite beliefs will be appreciated

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've used plenty of Arabic history books online, i did not check the accuracy of them all because it is well know. Buraidah died out of Madinah is all what I am saying.

It is well known that he burried his daughter during Jahiliyyah and well known that he changed the prophet sunnah regarding the equation between all muslims in the amount of money given to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Im actually side trracking you, Im not disputing what you said but I was more interested in Buraida, yes he died outside medina but not because of umar's beatings he is said to be on a campaign in times of yazid ( which does not imply he held ummayyads in high regard by any means)

Also why is he such a fav Imami sahabi depsite almost no mention of his shiite beliefs in sunni sources, although sunni sources usually openly state the allegience of certain personalities in Alid or uthmani camps

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He had beated Abu Hurairah for narrating hadiths

can you blame him ? come on man when abu hurairiah narrates hadith we dont like we call him an ummayyad agent when he is prohibited by umar to narrate hadith we call it a conspiracy against ahlulbayt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can you blame him ? come on man when abu hurairiah narrates hadith we dont like we call him an ummayyad agent when he is prohibited by umar to narrate hadith we call it a conspiracy against ahlulbayt

If he was not up to be a Khalifah, he should just stepped down. If he think that Sahabah narrating hadiths will leave him no space to show off his talents, he should just stepped down. If he was this narrow minded and thought that people will speak badly about him after his death about how bad he was , he should have been taken down. He suffered from inferiority complex. Umar did not like Abu Hurairah because he felt Abu Huraira might cheat on him, after all Abu Hurairah did not send the full tax to Madinah when he was governor over Bahrain, when Umar found out he brought him to Madinah and beat him i guess .... I should check that story again some day...I am not in the mood to track back Abu Hurairah life. Ibn Masud is more entertaining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he was not up to be a Khalifah, he should just stepped down. If he think that Sahabah narrating hadiths will leave him no space to show off his talents, he should just stepped down. If he was this narrow minded and thought that people will speak badly about him after his death about how bad he was , he should have been taken down. He suffered from inferiority complex. Umar did not like Abu Hurairah because he felt Abu Huraira might cheat on him, after all Abu Hurairah did not send the full tax to Madinah when he was governor over Bahrain, when Umar found out he brought him to Madinah and beat him i guess .... I should check that story again some day...I am not in the mood to track back Abu Hurairah life. Ibn Masud is more entertaining.

I know abu hurairah was not the most scrupulous when it came to hadith or taxes, but how was umar so successful in his bullying that virtually no negative opinions of him existed even after his death ? again unlike uthman

Even those who agitated against uthman and openly supported Ali , did not blame umar for any wrong doing ( wrt to the stipends yes it is accepted that abu bakr and ali both disagreed with umar over this issue but still no charges of corruption were brought against umar)...furthermore and probably the most telling difference is that even the supporters of Ali and Muawiyah differed sharply in their opinion of uthman NOT in their opinion of abubakr/umar

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...