KHUTAB XI: 14. THE POSITION OF THE ṢAḤĀBAH (7)
14. THE POSITION OF THE ṢAḤĀBAH (7)
Besides the Qur’ānic verses and the ḥadīths
of the Prophet (ﷺ) here are
some statements of the ‘ulamā’ about the position of the ṣaḥābah,
as follows:
a. ‘Abd al-Raḥmān al-Ījī (700-756/1301-1355): “It is
necessary to honour all of the ṣaḥābah, and refrain from defaming them,
because Allah has honored and praised them in many verses of the Qur’ān, and
the Prophet has loved them and praised them in many ḥadīths.”
b. His student Sa‘d al-Dīn
al-Taftāzānī (722-792/1322-1390): “Adherents of the truth have agreed on honouring
the ṣaḥābah, and refraining from defaming them, especially the Muhājirīn
and the Anṣār, because praising them has been mentioned in the
Qur’ān and the Sunnah.”
As mentioned earlier the number of the ṣaḥābah
of the Prophet was about 120 thousands. According to al-Ṣadūq Ibn Bābawayh
al-Qummī (305-381/923-991) of the Twelver Shī‘ah the number of the ṣaḥābah
was twelve thousands, eight thousands were in al-Madīnah, two thousands were in
Makkah, whereas the remaining two thousands lived in other places. He said
further that none of them were followers of Qadariyyah, Murji‘ah, Khawārij,
Mu‘tazilah, nor adherents of personal opinions أَصْحَابُ الرَّأي)).[1]
According to al-Shāfi‘ī their number was about sixty thousands. Al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar
al-‘Asqalānī (733-852/1372-1448) recorded 12,297 names of men and women among
the ṣaḥābah in his Iṣābah (الإصَابَةُ فِي مَعْرِفَةِ الصّحَابة), whereas those who narrated ḥadiths
from the Prophet were about three thousands, and about 90% of the ḥadīths
were transmitted by only twenty people among them. Ibn al-Jawzī (d. 597/1201)
mentioned that there were only 1,858 ṣaḥābah who transmitted ḥadīths,
while other scholars say that they were 1,500 of them.
According to Baqī ibn Makhlad al-Qurṭubī (201-276/816-889) that the
number of ḥadīths transmitted by Abū Hurayrah was 5,874, but actually it
was the number of channels through which the ḥadīths were transmitted.
Recent research shows that the actual number of ḥadīths transmitted by
him was 1,236 only. If one ḥadīth, for example, is transmitted by Abū Hurayrah
through five channels, then the ḥadīth is considered five ḥadīths, some
are strong, others are weak, depending on the ‘adālah (honesty,
honourable record) and ḍabṭ (accuracy, precision) of the transmitters.
In other words, one matn (text) of a ḥadīth consists of five isnāds
(chains of transmitters on which a ḥadīth is based), in the above
example, are five ḥadīths. Abū Hurayrah had at least nine students who
wrote ḥadīths from him.
Ibn ‘Umar who was said to have transmitted 2,630 ḥadīths and had written a collection
of ḥadīths had at least eight students who wrote ḥadīths from
him. Anas ibn Mālik who transmitted 2,286 ḥadīths had at least sixteen
persons had ḥadīths from him in
written form. ‘Ā’ishah who transmitted 2,210 ḥadīths had at least three
persons who wrote ḥadīths from her, including her nephew, ‘Urwah. Ibn
‘Abbās who transmitted 1660 ḥadīths had at least nine students who wrote
ḥadīths from him. Jābir ibn ‘Abdullah who transmitted 1,540 ḥadīths
had at least fourteen students who wrote ḥadīths from him. ‘Umar the
second caliph had transmitted 537 ḥadīths, and he used to quote them in
his official letters, so that many of them were recorded by him. ‘Ali the
fourth caliph had transmitted 536 ḥadīths had at least eight students
who had them in written form. These collections of ḥadīths are extremely
important to learn as our guidance after the Holy Qur’ān.
The ‘adālah
(honesty, honourable record) of the Ṣaḥābah
The term ‘adālah (الْعَدَالَة) of the ṣaḥābah according to Ahl al-Sunnah wa
’l-jamā‘ah (“the Upholder of the Sunnah of the Prophet and Muslim
community”, i.e., Sunni Muslims) means that they do not lie intentionally about
the Prophet due to their strong faith, and their preserving their piety,
virtues, eminent morality, and being away from inferior stuffs. Their ‘adālah
does not mean that they are infallible from sin, forgetting or mistake, as
no one among scholars say that. Therefore, we should know that those among
them, who had committed sin, were punished as expiation for their sins and repented
sincerely, and were a very small minority; their case should not be taken
predominant over the vast majority of the eminent ṣaḥābah who were
upright, and avoid minor or major sin and disobedience, either apparent or
hidden. Al-Imām Abū’l-Ḥasan al-Abyārī
(d. 616/1219) confirmed this view and said that their ‘adālah does not
mean that they are infallible from sin, and that they are free from
disobedience; it means that their reports are accepted without endeavour to
find the reasons of their ‘adālah or requiring their credibility…[2]
There
are many different views concerning the ‘adālah of the ṣaḥābah,
among which are as follows:
1. According to many ‘ulamā’,
such as Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ (d.643/ 1245), Ibn Ḥazm and Ibn al-Ḥājib (570-646/1174-1249)
from the Mālikī school, as the ṣaḥābah
are the only people whose salvation was guaranteed by Allah—as mentioned in
many Qur’ānic verses and ḥadīths-- they are reliable people. Their ‘adālah
does not need investigation, and their reports should be accepted without any
condition. Unlike the ṣaḥābah, people of the following generation (tābi‘īn)
and of further generations do not have such a guarantee of salvation, and
therefore, in Ibn Ḥazm’s view, their ‘adālah should be investigated.
According to the Shāfi‘ī qāḍī Abū Bakr al-Bāqillānī (338-402/950-1013), this is
also the view of the ṣaḥābah and the tābi‘īn. According to the
Shāfi‘ī jurist al-Imām al-Ḥaramayn al-Juwaynī (d. 478/1085), the ‘adālah
of the ṣaḥābah is ijmā‘ based on certain Qur’ānic verses and ḥadīths
mentioned earlier.
2. The view of Abū ’l- Ḥusayn
ibn al-Qaṭṭān (d. 359/970), the Mu‘tazilī Ibrāhīm al-Naẓẓām (185-231/791-845),
and the Shī‘ah Rāfiḍah is that the ‘adālah of the ṣaḥābah, like
that of other people, should be investigated. Ibn al-Qaṭṭān gives the examples
of the ṣaḥābah whose ‘adālah was rejected, like al-Wahshī who
killed Ḥamzah, and al-Walīd who drank intoxicants (khamr). Al-Naẓẓām among the
Mu‘tazilīs gave the example of a ṣaḥābī who slandered another ṣaḥābī.
If the slanderer was right, al-Naẓẓām contends, the slandered would not be ‘adl.
Yet, if the slanderer was wrong, he would not be ‘adl. Muḥammad Bāqir
al-Majlisī (428-504/1037-1111), the shaykh of Ṣafawī dynasty and the resource
and authority of contemporary Twelver Shī‘ah, said that like the rest of the
people, some of the ṣaḥābah were ‘udūl, others were hypocrites,
and misguided godless which were the majority.[3]
Contemporary scholars of Shī‘ah Imāmiyyah Muḥammad Jawād Mughanniyyah
(1322-1400/1904-1979) and ‘Abd al-Karīm al-Zanjānī (1304-1388/1887-1968) held
the same view that some ṣaḥābah were good and others were godless.
3. The view of the Mu‘tazilī
‘Amr ibn ‘Ubayd (d. 142/760) who maintains that the ṣaḥābah were all ‘udūl,
before the fitan (sing. fitnah, dissentions), i.e., the civil
wars, e.g., the battles of Ṣiffīn and al-Jamal. After these fitan, the ‘adālah
of the ṣaḥābah should be investigated.
4. The view of a group among
the Mu‘tazilīs and the Shī‘īs who maintain that all of the ṣaḥābah were ‘udūl.
5. The view of al-Māwardī (d. 450/1058) who maintains
that a ṣaḥābī who was known for his keeping company with the Prophet (ﷺ) was ‘adl; otherwise, his ‘adālah
should be investigated.
Ibn Ḥazm
(d. 456/1064) and al-Shawkānī (d. 1255/1839) accept the first view and reject
the four others. Ibn Ḥazm asserts that the ṣaḥābah include the infidel
who heard the Prophet (ﷺ) and later
became Muslims. He was then also ‘adl.
According to Ibn Ḥazm the ‘adālah of a person in the time of the ṣaḥābah
became a condition only during the time he was giving the warning and the
report, not when he was witnessing what he had reported. This is because there
were hypocrites in Madīnah during the time of the Prophet (ﷺ), as well as people whose conditions were
unfavorable. There were also an unidentified man who falsely claimed to have
been sent and authorized by the Prophet
(ﷺ) to rule
the people of an area at Banī ’l-Layth, two miles outside of Madīnah. With his trick he intended to marry a girl
who had rejected him in the time of the Jāhilīyah (pre-Islamic
paganism). But his scheme was discovered when people came to the Prophet (ﷺ). This man, and any person who deceived
the Prophet (ﷺ), was not
considered a ṣaḥābī. He contends further that reports are accepted only
from respectable persons whose merit is known. This statement seems to
contradict the previous one where Ibn Ḥazm maintained that all the ṣaḥābah
were ‘udūl. What he meant was
that if a person is known to be a ṣaḥābī he is ‘adl. There are
many ways to know whether a person is a ṣaḥābī, among which are: his
participation in one of the Prophet’s campaigns and battles, e.g., the
battles of Badr, Uḥud, Ḥunayn, etc., his participation in one of the two
pledges of ‘Aqabah, and his participation as a member of the envoys from the Arab
tribes which visited the Prophet (ﷺ). On the other hand, there were only 130 and some ṣaḥābah who
reported fatāwá (formal legal opinions) in matters of ‘ibādāt
(acts of devotion) and aḥkām (legal judgments).
According to Shi‘ah’s understanding
the term ṣaḥābah is in its linguistic term, not in its technical term.
Therefore, some of them are praised in the Qur’ān, such as those early coverts
(Q. 9:100), who pledged allegiance under the tree (Q. 48:18), the Muhājirīn
(Emigrants), and the Anṣār (Helpers) (Q. 59:8-10). Others are
blameworthy, such as the hypocrites, the sinners, and doubters. According to
the Sunni view, they are still considered ṣaḥābah with the exception of
the hypocrites, unless they repented and became Muslims. The sinners if they
were punished for their sins and earnestly repented, and the doubters when they
became convinced, they were all included among the ṣaḥābah. Otherwise,
they would not be considered ṣaḥābah. If they conceal their sins Allah
would either punish them in the Hereafter or forgive them. Worldly punishment
is atonement for sin, so that no more punishment would await for the sinners in
the Hereafter. The Prophet (ﷺ) said:
...
وَمَنْ أَصَابَ مِنْ ذَلِكَ شَيْئًا فَعُوقِبَ بِهِ فَهُوَ كَفَّارَتُهُ., وَمَنْ أَصَابَ
شَيْئًا مِنْ ذَلِكَ، فَسَتَرَهُ اللَّهُ، فَهُوَ إِلَى اللَّهِ إِنْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ
عَذَّبَهُ، وَإِنْ شَاءَ غَفَرَ لَهُ (رواه البخاري)
…and (whoever
committed any of them (i.e., stealing
and
adultery) and was punished for it, then it became his
atonement
[for his sin], and whoever committed any of
them,
and Allah concealed it, then if Allah wills, He
would
punish or forgive him. (Reported by
al-Bukhārī)
التَّائِبُ مِنْ الذَّنْبِ كَمَنْ لَا ذَنْبَ لَهُ
(رواه الطبراني و ابن ماجة)
The
person who repents is like the one who has
no sin
(Reported by al-Ṭabrānī and Ibn
Mājah)
CIVIC, 9 December, 2016)
المراجع:
المكتبة الشاملة
تفسير الطبري (ت. 310 هـ(
تفسير القرطبى (ت. 671 هـ
تفسير ابن كثير (ت. 774 هـ(
M.A. Samad. Ibn Ḥazm’s
Concept of Ijmā‘. M.A. Thesis
M.M. Azami. Studies
in Hadīth Methodology and Literature
http://www.dd-sunnah.net/forum/showthread.php?t=136726.
http://shiaweb.org/books/adalat_alsahaba/pa3a.htm
http://alburhan.com/Article/index/8627
http://al-imamia.blogfa.com/page/3aidsa.aspx
Comments
Post a Comment