Chapter 15 : ‘Ammār would be Killed by Transgressors

Ibn Hanbal says:

Abu Mu‘āwiyah has related to us from A‘mash from ‘Abd al-Rahmān bin Ziyād who quotes ‘Abdullāh bin Harth as saying:

I was with Mu‘āwiyah (ibn Abī Sufyān) when he was returning from (the Battle of) Siffīn and I was riding between him and ‘Amr bin ‘As, when ‘Abdullāh the son of ‘Amr bin ‘As said:

Don't you remember the Messenger of Allah had told ‘Ammār

“Waihaka yā ibn al-Sumayyah, taqtuluka al-fi’ah al-bāghiyah (Bravo O son of Sumayyah! You will be killed by a group of transgressors).”

‘Amr bin ‘As turned to Mu‘āwiyah and said:

Did you not hear what he says?

Mu‘āwiyah replied:

You find fault with us! Did we kill him? Those who brought him here are responsible for his death![58]

This hadith has been recorded over twenty times in the Musnad on the authority of eight companions of the Prophet with variations in its text.[59] Ahmad Shākir considers this hadith not only sahīh but mutawātir (regularly transmitted throughout the first three generations of Muslims by a large number of transmitters) and says that scholars have never doubted its veracity. Explaining the word hannahu (finding fault) as used by Mu‘āwiyah, he writes:

It is clear that Mu‘āwiyah is not disputing this hadith but is censurng ‘Abdullāh bin ‘Amr (bin ‘As) for remembering it in this situation (when ‘Ammār has been killed by his troops), since he fears that if his army knows that he is on the wrong track they would desert him. In view of this fact, Mu‘āwiyah was trying to misinterpret and give a wrong connotation to this hadith by saying that the killers of ‘Ammār are those that brought him to the battlefield.

Ahmad Shākir, quoting Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalānī’s comments in Fath al-Bārī fī Tafsīr Sahīh al-Bukhārī (vol. 1, p. 452), further writes:

This hadith has been related by several companions of the Prophet including Qatādah bin Nu‘mān, Umm Salamah, Abī Hurayrah, ‘Abdullāh bin ‘Amr bin ‘As, ‘Uthmān bin ‘Affān, Hudhayfah al-Yamānī, Abu Ayyub al-Ansārī, Abu Rāfi‘, Khuzaymah bin Thābit, Mu‘āwiyah, ‘Amr bin ‘As, Abu al-Yasar and ‘Ammār bin Yāsir himself.  This hadith is a firm proof of the virtues of (Imam) ‘Alī [(‘a)] and ‘Ammār and their standing with the Prophet. It is also a fitting reply to the enemies of (Imam) ‘Alī (nawāsib pl. of nāsib) who accuse him of error in his wars (during his caliphate).[60]

Chapter 16 : Prophecy of the Martyrdom of Imam Husayn (‘a)

Ibn Hanbal says:

Muhammad bin ‘Ubayd has related to us from Sharhabīl bin Madrak from ‘Abdullāh bin Nujayy from his father who narrates that he was marching with (Imam) ‘Alī [(‘a)] towards Siffīn and when we reached Ninevah, (Imam) ‘Alī [(‘a)] cried in a loud voice:

“O Abā ‘Abdillāh! Be patient. O Abā ‘Abdillāh! Be patient beside the River Euphrates.”

I asked him:

For what?

He said:

“Once when I went to the Prophet I saw tears in his eyes and asked him:

O Messenger of Allah (S) who has made you upset? Why are your eyes moist with tears?

He said:

Bal qāma min ‘indī Jibra’īlu qabl, fahaddathanī anna al-Husayn yuqtulu bishatt al-Furāt. Qāla: Hal laka an ushimaka min turbatih? Qāla: Qultu: Na‘am. Famadda yadahu faqabaza qabzatan min turābin fa a‘tānīhā. falam amliku ‘aynī an fāzatā (A while ago [the Archangel] Gabriel left. He has informed me that indeed Husayn will be killed beside the River Euphrates.

Then he [the Prophet] said:

Do you like to smell part of his soil [where Imam Husayn (‘a) will be killed].

I said:

Yes.

He stretched his hand and taking a fistful of soil gave it to me. As a result, tears started rolling down uncontrollably from my eyes.)”[61]

The annotator of the Musnad regards the isnād of this hadith as sahīh and writes that Nujayy is not the only one to narrate this from Imam ‘Alī (‘a).

Chapter 17 : The Number of the Prophet’s Righteous Successors

Ibn Hanbal says:

A. Hasan bin Musā has related to us from Hammād bin Zayd from Mujālid from Sha‘bī from Masruq who says that in Kufa ‘Abdullāh bin Mas‘ud was giving us lessons from the Holy Qur’ān when a person asked:

O Abā ‘Abd al-Rahmān! Did you not ask the Prophet how many caliphs would this ummah have?

‘Abdullāh bin Mas‘ud said:

Since my coming to Iraq no one has posed me this question so far except you.

Then he added:

Yes! We did ask the Messenger of Allah (S) about this matter and he said:

“Ithnā-‘Ashara ka ‘iddati nuqabā’ Banī Isrā’īl (Twelve, equal to the number of the Chieftans of Banī Isrā’īl).”[62]

The isnād of this hadith are sahīh according to Ahmad Shākir.

Ibn Hanbal says:

B. Sufyān bin ‘Uyaynah has related to us from ‘Abd al-Malik bin ‘Umayr from Jābir bin Samrah al-Suwā’ī who narrates that he heard the Messenger of Allah (S) say:

“Lā yazāl hādha al-amr māziyan hattā yaqum ithnā-‘ashara amīran (This affair [religion] will continue until twelve leaders [Amīr] will rise).”

Then he mentioned something which I did not hear, so I asked my father (who was sitting beside me), who said:

“All of whom will be from the Quraysh.”[63]

This hadith has been recorded over 40 times in Ibn Hanbal’s Musnad[64] and in some versions the word Khalīfah is found instead of Amir.[65] The version which I have selected here has the shortest chain of authority and reaches the Prophet through the medium of three narrators. Sunni scholars and exegetes of hadith have rather been perplexed and come up with unconvincing comments in their explanation of this particular hadith of the Prophet. They have been unable to reconcile with their beliefs the meaning of the figure of “twelve caliphs” as used by the Prophet. As a result we find conflicting and self-contradictory answers in their explanations.[66]

Chapter 18 : The Uprising of the Mahdī (‘a)

Ibn Hanbal says:

A. Hajjāj and Abu Na‘īm have related from Fitr from Qāsim bin Abī Bazzah from Abī al-Tufayl from (Imam) ‘Alī [(‘a)], who quoted the Messenger of Allah (S) as saying:

Law lam yabqa mina al-dunyā illā yawmun laba‘atha Allahu rajulan minnā yamla’uhā ‘adlan kamā muli’at jawran (If only a day were to remain for the end of the world, Allah will raise a man from my progeny who will fill it [the earth] with justice as it was filled with oppression)”[67]

Ibn Hanbal says:

B. Fazl bin Dukayn has related to us from Yāsīn al-‘Ijlī from Ibrāhīm bin Muhammad bin Hanafiyyah from his father (Imam) ‘Alī [(‘a)], who quoted the Messenger of Allah (S) as saying:

“al-Mahdī minnā Ahla al-Bayt yuslihuhu Allahu fī laylatin (The Mahdī is from us the Ahl al-Bayt, Allah will set right his affairs in [the course of] one night).”[68]

Ibn Hanbal says:

C. Sufyān bin ‘Uyaynah has related to us from ‘Asim (bin Abī al-Najud) from Zirr (bin Hubaysh) from ‘Abdullāh (bin Mas‘ud) who narrates from the Messenger of Allah (S):

“Lā taqum al-sā‘ah hattā yalia rajulan min Ahli Baytī yuwātiu ismuhu ismī (The Day of Resurrection will not come until a man who is from my Ahl Bayt and whose name is my name, will rise).”[69]

Ahmad Shākir has termed the isnād of all three hadith as sahīh, and has criticised the North African scholar ‘Abd al-Rahmān bin Muhammad bin Khaldun (1332-1406) for rejecting the reports concerning the Mahdī (‘a). It is worth noting that Ibn Khaldun in his famous Muqaddimah or Introduction to History has embarked on a lengthy discussion on the ahādīth concerning the Mahdī (‘a), and writes:

It has been well known (and generally accepted) by all Muslims in every epoch, that at the end of time a man from the Ahl al-Bayt (of the Prophet) will without fail make his appearance, one who will strengthen the religion and make justice triumph. The Muslims will follow him, and he will gain domination over the Muslim realm. He will be called the Mahdī...Evidence for this matter has been found in the ahādīth that religious leaders have published. They have been discussed by those who disapprove of (the matter) and have often been refuted by means of certain (other) akhbār.[70]

Ibn Khaldun in his discussion on the ahādīth concerning the Mahdī (‘a) says that those who reject the coming of the Mahdī have criticised these reports, which he acknowledges have been narrated on the authority of some of the prominent companions of the Prophet and have been recorded in all authoritative Sunni books, whose names he has mentioned.

He writes:

Hadith scholars acknowledge negative criticism to have precedence over positive criticism. If we find that some person in the chain of transmitters is accused of negligence, poor memory, weakness or poor judgement, it affects and weakens the soundness of the hadith. It should not be said that the same faults often affect the persons (mentioned as authorities) in the two Sahīhs (Bukhārī and Muslim). The general consensus of hadith transmitters confirms the soundness of the contents (of the two Sahīhs) as presented by Bukhārī and Muslim. The uninterrupted general consensus in Islam also confirms the acceptibility of (the two Sahīhs) and the necessity of acting in accordance with their contents. General consensus is the best protection and defence. Works other than the two Sahīhs are not on the same level with them in this respect...[71]

He goes on to quote, one after another, several of the ahādīth from the Prophet concerning the Mahdī (‘a), along with the chain of transmitters as found in the orginal sources, and tries to find fault with them in a manner which is clearly artificial. One of the ahādīth which he criticises is the narration that Ibn Hanbal has recorded on the authority of ‘Abdullāh bin Mas‘ud. Ibn Khaldun then directs his attack at ‘Asim bin Abī al-Najud even after acknowledging him to be “one of the seven authoritative Qur’ān readers.”[72] To deflect criticism from his assumption, he writes:

Were someone to argue that (Bukhārī and Muslim) published traditions of his, (we should reply that) they published them when there were also other (authorities for the same tradition), and that they did not use him as their basic authority.[73]

The annotator of the Musnad, Ahmad Muhammad Shākir, finds the criticism of Ibn Khaldun unconvincing and rejecting it, writes:

Ibn Khaldun attempted something for which he was not qualified and ventured into an arena which was not his domain. His preoccupation with state and political affairs and his serving of kings and nobles dominated his thought and speech, and as a result induced him to imagine that the report of the uprising and revolution of the Mahdī [(‘a)], was a (purely) Shi‘ite belief. However, it is worth noting that first Ibn Khaldun has not properly understood the statements of hadith compilers that negative criticism (jarh) takes precedence over positive criticism (ta‘dīl). If he had properly understood their statements he would not have commented in this manner. It is also possible that he understood their purpose but since his thoughts were profoundly influenced by the political views of his times, he has tried to weaken the ahādīth concerning the Mahdī (‘a).

Second, ‘Asim bin Abī al-Najud is considered one of the reputed reciters of the Holy Qur’ān and is also regarded as a trustworthy transmitter of hadith. Maybe he has made mistakes in some ahādīth but these are not to the extent that his narration should be rejected. The strongest criticism against him is that he was not of good memory.  But on the basis of such a single criticism, could we ignore him and consider this as a means of rejecting a report whose authenticity has been confirmed through various other chains and narrated in the words of several companions (of the Prophet)? The soundness of this report is to the extent that no one has any doubts about it, because among the transmitters could be seen just, truthful and candid persons. Moreover, since this hadith has been narrated by other transmitters as well, the likelihood of a slip concerning someone whose memory being sharp is somewhat under doubt, is completely eliminated.[74]

These were some of the examples of the large number of hadith concerning the virtues of the Prophet’s Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) found in the Musnad of Ahmad bin Hanbal. The writer of the article had to limit his selection in view of the space. It is hoped that this article would serve the purpose of bridging the gap between the Muslims and promote better understanding of each other.