Ghulam Rasool Saeedi: A Weak Hadith and the Obligation of Qurbani?
الحمد لله رب العالمين والصلوٰة والسلام على رسوله الامين، اما بعد:
Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Barelvi Sahib, while interpreting the Holy Quran, wrote: And the obligation of performing Qurbani is established from the following hadiths, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said:
ضحوا و طيبوا بها انفسكم
Perform Qurbani with gladness.
In this hadith, the command to perform Qurbani has been given, and the command generally indicates obligation, especially when there are no contradictory indications.
Answer
It is stated that the hadith commanding to slaughter (sacrifice) is neither found in Sunan Tirmidhi nor in Sunan Ibn Majah, nor is it found in Mustadrak or Sharh al-Sunnah by Al-Baghawi; therefore, all the mentioned references are incorrect.
To our knowledge, this hadith is present only in the works of the author Abdul Razzaq
, narrated by Imam Abdul Razzaq from Abu Saeed Al-Shami, who said: Ata bin Abi Rabah narrated from Aisha. The main narrator of this narration, Abu Saeed Abdul Quddus bin Habib Al-Shami, is described as follows:
➊ Imam Abdullah bin Al-Mubarak Al-Marwazi, may Allah have mercy on him, said about Abdul Quddus bin Habib: A great liar.
➋ Imam Abu Hatim Al-Razi, may Allah have mercy on him, said:
متروك الحديث، كان لا يصدق
A rejected narrator; he was not considered truthful or he did not speak the truth.
➌ Imam Abu Hafs Umar bin Ali Al-Fallas, may Allah have mercy on him, said:
أجمع أهل العلم على ترك حديثه
There is a consensus among the scholars to abandon his hadith.
➍ Imam Muslim bin Al-Hajjaj Al-Qushayri, may Allah have mercy on him, said:
ذاهب الحديث
Meaning he is a passerby in hadith.
Regarding the hadith narrator
➎ Imam Bukhari, may Allah have mercy on him, said:
فى حديثه مناكير
There are rejected narrations in his hadiths.
➏ Imam Nasai, may Allah have mercy on him, said:
أبو سعيد الشامي، متروك
➐ Hafiz Ibn Mandah said:
With fabricated chains and texts, Abdullah bin Masur, Amr bin Khalid, Abu Dawood Athi Sulayman bin Amr, Ghiyath bin Ibrahim, Muhammad bin Saeed Al-Shami, Abdul Quddus bin Habib, and Ghalib bin Ubaidullah Al-Jazari are well-known.
➑ Hafiz Ibn Hibban said:
وكان يضع الحديث على الثقات، لا تحل كتابة حديثه ولا الرواية عنه
He fabricated hadiths and attributed them to trustworthy narrators; writing his hadith is not permissible, nor is narrating from him permissible.
➒ Hafiz Ibn ‘Adi said:
وهو منكر الحديث إسنادا و متنا
He was one who narrated rejected hadiths both in chain and text.
➓ Imam Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Ammar Al-Mawsili said:
وهو ذاهب الحديث
He is a passerby in hadith.
Note that these words are attributed to severe criticism. See Kitab al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil
Besides these, many other hadith scholars and Ahl al-Sunnah scholars have criticized Abu Saeed Abdul Quddus bin Habib Al-Shami, details of which can be seen in Lisan al-Mizan
and Kutub al-Majruhīn.
This research has proven
that the narration presented by Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Sahib is fabricated according to the principles of Hadith, which he is spreading among the general simple-minded people under the pretext of Quranic exegesis, not with criticism but as an argument.
Second Chain of Transmission:
In the book Al-Tamhid by Hafiz Ibn Abdul Barr, there is also a second chain of narration for this hadith, in which Nasr bin Hammad Al-Wari is present. According to the evaluation of narrators, his status is as follows:
➊ Imam Yahya bin Ma’in said:
نصر بن حماد كذاب
➋ Imam Abu Hatim Al-Razi said:
هو متروك الحديث
➌ Imam Abu Zur’ah Al-Razi said:
لا يكتب حديثه
His hadith is not recorded.
➍ Imam Muslim said:
ذاهب الحديث
➎ Al-Aqili said:
ونصر بن حماد متروك
➏ Imam Ya’qub bin Shaybah said:
ليس بشيء
He is nothing.
➐ Hafiz Ibn Abdul Barr himself wrote about Nasr bin Hammad Al-Warraq:
يروي عن شعبة مناكير، تركوه
He narrated rejected reports from Shu’bah; the muhaddithin have abandoned him.
➑ Imam Dar Qutni mentioned him in the book Al-Du’afa wal-Matrukin
.
➒ Hafiz Al-Dhahabi said:
حافظ متهم
➓ Al-Haythami said:
وهو متروك
For further criticisms, refer to Tahdhib al-Tahdhib and others, and those who attribute themselves to Hafiz should also read Nasb al-Rayah
.
This second narration has also been proven to be fabricated; therefore, Saeedi Sahib’s attempt to prove obligation through the imperative form in his presented narration is false and rejected.
It was necessary for them to first investigate their presented narration, to refrain from presenting fabricated and rejected narrations, and then to engrave on the throne; otherwise, they would not have to witness the day when the narration of such and such is embraced to prove the obligation of the Eid al-Adha sacrifice.
Is this the usual approach of a commentator of the Quran and the commentators of the two Sahihs?
As a warning, it is stated that the word “Zahwa” does not exist in the other references presented by Saeedi Sahib, and in the narrations of Sunan Tirmidhi
, Sunan Ibn Majah
, and Mustadrak al-Hakim
, at the end of the virtue of sacrifice: فطيبوا بها نفسا “So please your hearts.” These words do not establish the obligation of sacrifice. Secondly, this narration is neither Hasan nor Sahih but weak. The narrator Abu al-Muthanna Sulaiman bin Yazid al-Kaabi has been declared weak and defective by the majority of hadith scholars, some of whose testimonies are as follows:
And Ibn Abd al-Hadi said: He is an old man whose hadith is not accepted, and he said in a place: The hadith is rejected and not accepted (Al-Sarim al-Mustaki fi al-Radd ‘ala Iskami: pp. 176-174) [Mu’adh]
➊ Imam Abu Hatim al-Razi said: A narrator of rejected hadith, not strong.
➋ Dar Qutni said: وأبو المثنى ضعيف
➌ Hafiz al-Dhahabi said: واه weak.
➍ Hafiz Ibn Hajar said: ضعيف
Hafiz Ibn Hibban both authenticated and criticized him, so his two statements contradict each other and are invalid, and compared to the majority of hadith scholars, the authentication by Tirmidhi and Hakim is weak. Also, there is an issue in Abu al-Muthanna’s hearing from Hisham bin Urwah.
In summary, the narration in Sunan Tirmidhi is weak and does not serve as evidence for Saeedi Sahib’s claim.
Another Hanafi Argument
Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Sahib further wrote:
Also, you said:
على اهل كل بيت فى كل عام أضحية و عتيرة
Every household member has a sacrifice and an atirah every year.
And it implies obligation, meaning it is obligatory to offer a sacrifice for every household member every year, and the atirah was abrogated in the early days of Islam
Response
Does ‘Alaa’ always mean obligation everywhere or not? Regardless of this, in the chain of this narration, Abu Rumalah is a narrator with an unknown status; to our knowledge, besides Tirmidhi, no one has declared him trustworthy, truthful, or good in hadith.
Rather, Hafiz Dhahabi said: فيه جهالة There is ignorance, meaning unknown status, in him.
And he said: لا يعرف He is unknown.
Hafiz Ibn Hajar said: لا يعرف He is unknown.
Hafiz Abdul Haq Ashbili called this chain weak, and Ibn al-Qattan (al-Fasi) confirmed him due to the ignorance (unknown status) of ‘Aamir.
Next Hanafi Evidence
After these weak narrations, Saeedi Sahib has also presented the narration from Sunan Ibn Majah
and others that whoever does not offer sacrifice should not come near our Eidgah.
Saeedi Sahib has written: In this hadith, there is a warning for not offering sacrifice, and warning is only for abandoning an obligatory act
.
Answer
It is stated that this is not a warning but a prohibition, as mentioned in a hadith: Whoever eats garlic should not come near our mosque.
In another narration: Whoever eats garlic or onion should keep away from us or keep away from our mosque.
And it is said: Do not come near us and never pray with us.
If a person eats raw onion or garlic, is it obligatory for you near Bareilly that he should not enter the mosque and should not pray in congregation with Muslims? If yes, then present references, and if not, then Saeedi Sahib’s argument is invalid.
Another Hanafi Argument
Saidi Sahib has written: Also, your statement is:
من ذبح قبل الصلاة فليعد اضحيته
Whoever offers a sacrifice before the Eid prayer, let him offer another sacrifice.
In this hadith, you have commanded to repeat the sacrifice, and this is a sign of obligation. Al-Kh
Answer
At the end of this hadith, it is mentioned that و من ذبح بعد الصلاة فقد تم نسكه وأصاب سنة المسلمين and whoever slaughtered after the Eid prayer, his sacrifice was complete and he followed the Sunnah of the Muslims.
Regarding those who try to prove obligation from this hadith, Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani wrote:
ورده الطحاوي بأنه لو كان كذلك لتعرض إلى قيمة الأولى ليلزم بمثلها، فلما لم يعتبر ذلك دل على أن الأمر بالاعادة كان على جهة الندب.
And it was refuted by Tahawi, because if this were the case, the price of the first sacrifice would have been incumbent upon him so that its equivalent would be necessary. Therefore, since it was not accepted, this is evidence that the ruling of repetition (i.e., repeating the sacrifice) is recommended (mustahabb).
The statement of Imam Shafi’i, may Allah have mercy on him, falls under the category that sacrifice is a confirmed Sunnah. InshaAllah, Tahawi’s view is that Abu Burda, may Allah be pleased with him, had himself considered the first sacrifice obligatory, therefore he was commanded to repeat it.
❀ Also, Tahawi wrote:
وذهب أكثر أهل العلم سواه إلى أنها ماموربها، محضوض عليها، غير واجبة
Except for Imam Abu Hanifa, the majority of scholars hold the view that this is a commanded recommendation, meaning it is a ruling that is highly encouraged but not obligatory.
❀ Qurtubi wrote:
ولا حجة فى شي من ذلك واضحة لأن المقصود بيان كيفية مشروعية الأضحية لمن أراد أن يفعلها أو من التزمها فأوقعها على غير الوجه المشروع غلطا أو جهلا فبين له النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم وجه تدارك ما فرط فيه.
And there is no clear evidence in this reasoning because the intended matter is the manner of the Sunnah sacrifice for the one who wants to do it or has made it obligatory upon himself, then he does it without the Sunnah method due to error or misunderstanding. So the Prophet, peace be upon him, informed him of what would correct his mistake.
From this, it is proven that Saeedi Sahib’s reasoning from the mentioned hadith is incorrect, and also the mention of supporting indications is coming ahead. InshaAllah.
