مشكوة المصابيح
Mishkat al-Masabih
كتاب العلمThe Book of Knowledge
(فَضِيلَةُ أَهْلِ العِلْمِ)(The virtue of the people of knowledge)
Hadith 218
اُردوEn
وَعَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «طَلَبُ الْعِلْمِ فَرِيضَةٌ عَلَى كُلِّ مُسْلِمٍ وَوَاضِعُ الْعِلْمِ عِنْدَ غير أَهله كمقلد الْخَنَازِير الْجَوْهَر واللؤلؤ وَالذَّهَبَ» . رَوَاهُ ابْنُ مَاجَهْ وَرَوَى الْبَيْهَقِيُّ فِي شُعَبِ الْإِيمَانِ إِلَى قَوْلِهِ مُسْلِمٍ. وَقَالَ: هَذَا حَدِيثٌ مَتْنُهُ مَشْهُورٌ وَإِسْنَادُهُ ضَعِيفٌ وَقَدْ رُوِيَ من أوجه كلهَا ضَعِيف
Anas reported God’s messenger as saying, “The search for knowledge is an obligation laid on every Muslim, but he who commits it to those who are unworthy of it is like one who puts necklaces of jewels, pearls and gold on swine.” Ibn Majah transmitted it. Baihaqi transmitted it in Shu'ab al-iman up to the word “Muslim”, saying that this is a tradition whose text is well known but whose isnad is weak, it being transmitted by many ways all of which are weak.
Related hadith on this topic
Explanation & Benefits
Hafiz Zubair Ali Zai
Authentication of the Hadith:
The chain of narration for this report is severely weak.
◄ Its narrator, Qari Abu ‘Umar Hafs bin Sulayman al-Asadi al-Bazzaz al-Kufi: Hafs bin Abi Dawud, the companion of ‘Asim, was severely weak and criticized in hadith narration.
◄ Abu Hatim al-Razi said:
“He is weak in hadith, does not speak the truth, and is abandoned in hadith.” [كتاب الجرح والتعديل 3؍174]
◄ Imam Muslim said:
«متروك الحديث» [كتاب الكنيٰ قلمي ص71؍147]
◄ Imam al-Bukhari said:
«تركوه» “That is, the hadith scholars have declared him abandoned.” [كتاب الضعفاء : 73]
◄ The majority of hadith scholars have criticized Qari Hafs bin Abi Dawud, and the most just statement regarding him is as follows:
«متروك فى الحديث، ثقة فى القرآن»
“He is abandoned in hadith, but trustworthy (thiqah) in the transmission of the Qur’an.” See: [تحفة الاقوياء ص29]
◄ Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani said:
«متروك الحديث مع إمامته فى القراءة.»
“Despite being an imam in recitation, he is abandoned in hadith.” [تقريب التهذيب :1405]
Benefit:
The detailed referencing of the narrations with «طلب العلم فريضة عليٰ كل مسلم» has been done by Shaykh al-Albani rahimahullah in his book: [تخريج أحاديث مشكلة الفقر وكيف عالجها الإسلام ص 48۔ 62 ح86], and he has declared it authentic, but all its chains are weak and rejected. For example:
➊ In the narration of [تاريخ دمشق لابن عساكر 58؍144، دوسرا نسخه 15؍1461/ 1], [امالي ابن سمعون 23], and [مشيخة الآبنوسي 154], the reliability of Abu ‘Ali Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Abi Hudhayfah Qasim is unknown, Qatadah was a well-known mudallis (obfuscator), and the narration (if authentic up to him) is with «عن».
◄ Shaykh al-Albani rahimahullah could not find information about one of the narrators of this chain, Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Abi al-Khanajir, even though he is mentioned in the books al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dil [2؍73], Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala’ [13؍240], and al-Mustadrak of al-Hakim [4؍399 ح8207 وقال ابن صاعد : وكان ثقة مأمونًا], and he was trustworthy and truthful.
➋ In the narration of [المعجم الصغير للطبراني 1؍16 ح22 بترقيمي، دوسرا نسخه ص6], Hukm bin ‘Atiyyah is weak according to the majority; see: [سنن الترمذي بتحقيقي : 3668].
‘Abbas bin Isma‘il al-Hashimi is of unknown status «وثقه ابن حبان وحده بتوثيق لين», and the reliability of Ahmad bin Bishr bin Habib al-Bayruti is unknown.
➌ In the narration of al-Fawa’id by Tamam al-Razi [مخطوط ص9ب، مطبوع 1؍32 ح56، دوسرا نسخه 8؍2], the reliability and status of Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Baghdadi are unknown.
◄ Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Shabib bin Ziyad and Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah were trustworthy, but in the narration of al-Fawa’id, it is Muhammad bin Ahmad, not Ahmad bin Muhammad, and it is not known on what basis Shaykh al-Albani changed Muhammad bin Ahmad to Ahmad bin Muhammad.
➍ ‘A’idh bin Ayyub al-Tusi is unknown, and the narration with Isma‘il bin Abi Khalid, who was a mudallis, is also weak.
↰ In summary, the narration “seeking knowledge is an obligation” is weak and rejected with all its chains.
Al-Bayhaqi said regarding «اطلبو العلم ولو بالصين فإن طلب العلم فريضة عليٰ كل مسلم»:
«هذا حديث متنه مشهور وأسانيده ضعيفة. لا أعرف له إسنادا يثبت بمثله الحديث. والله أعلم»
The text of this hadith is well-known, but its chains are weak. I do not know of any chain by which this hadith is established. «والله اعلم» [المدخل الي السنن الكبريٰ : 325]
◄ Whereas Abu ‘Ali al-Husayn bin ‘Ali al-Hafiz al-Naysaburi rahimahullah considered this hadith authentic, but the preferred view is that this narration is not established and is weak. «والله اعلم»
The chain of narration for this report is severely weak.
◄ Its narrator, Qari Abu ‘Umar Hafs bin Sulayman al-Asadi al-Bazzaz al-Kufi: Hafs bin Abi Dawud, the companion of ‘Asim, was severely weak and criticized in hadith narration.
◄ Abu Hatim al-Razi said:
“He is weak in hadith, does not speak the truth, and is abandoned in hadith.” [كتاب الجرح والتعديل 3؍174]
◄ Imam Muslim said:
«متروك الحديث» [كتاب الكنيٰ قلمي ص71؍147]
◄ Imam al-Bukhari said:
«تركوه» “That is, the hadith scholars have declared him abandoned.” [كتاب الضعفاء : 73]
◄ The majority of hadith scholars have criticized Qari Hafs bin Abi Dawud, and the most just statement regarding him is as follows:
«متروك فى الحديث، ثقة فى القرآن»
“He is abandoned in hadith, but trustworthy (thiqah) in the transmission of the Qur’an.” See: [تحفة الاقوياء ص29]
◄ Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani said:
«متروك الحديث مع إمامته فى القراءة.»
“Despite being an imam in recitation, he is abandoned in hadith.” [تقريب التهذيب :1405]
Benefit:
The detailed referencing of the narrations with «طلب العلم فريضة عليٰ كل مسلم» has been done by Shaykh al-Albani rahimahullah in his book: [تخريج أحاديث مشكلة الفقر وكيف عالجها الإسلام ص 48۔ 62 ح86], and he has declared it authentic, but all its chains are weak and rejected. For example:
➊ In the narration of [تاريخ دمشق لابن عساكر 58؍144، دوسرا نسخه 15؍1461/ 1], [امالي ابن سمعون 23], and [مشيخة الآبنوسي 154], the reliability of Abu ‘Ali Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Abi Hudhayfah Qasim is unknown, Qatadah was a well-known mudallis (obfuscator), and the narration (if authentic up to him) is with «عن».
◄ Shaykh al-Albani rahimahullah could not find information about one of the narrators of this chain, Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Abi al-Khanajir, even though he is mentioned in the books al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dil [2؍73], Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala’ [13؍240], and al-Mustadrak of al-Hakim [4؍399 ح8207 وقال ابن صاعد : وكان ثقة مأمونًا], and he was trustworthy and truthful.
➋ In the narration of [المعجم الصغير للطبراني 1؍16 ح22 بترقيمي، دوسرا نسخه ص6], Hukm bin ‘Atiyyah is weak according to the majority; see: [سنن الترمذي بتحقيقي : 3668].
‘Abbas bin Isma‘il al-Hashimi is of unknown status «وثقه ابن حبان وحده بتوثيق لين», and the reliability of Ahmad bin Bishr bin Habib al-Bayruti is unknown.
➌ In the narration of al-Fawa’id by Tamam al-Razi [مخطوط ص9ب، مطبوع 1؍32 ح56، دوسرا نسخه 8؍2], the reliability and status of Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Baghdadi are unknown.
◄ Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Shabib bin Ziyad and Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah were trustworthy, but in the narration of al-Fawa’id, it is Muhammad bin Ahmad, not Ahmad bin Muhammad, and it is not known on what basis Shaykh al-Albani changed Muhammad bin Ahmad to Ahmad bin Muhammad.
➍ ‘A’idh bin Ayyub al-Tusi is unknown, and the narration with Isma‘il bin Abi Khalid, who was a mudallis, is also weak.
↰ In summary, the narration “seeking knowledge is an obligation” is weak and rejected with all its chains.
Al-Bayhaqi said regarding «اطلبو العلم ولو بالصين فإن طلب العلم فريضة عليٰ كل مسلم»:
«هذا حديث متنه مشهور وأسانيده ضعيفة. لا أعرف له إسنادا يثبت بمثله الحديث. والله أعلم»
The text of this hadith is well-known, but its chains are weak. I do not know of any chain by which this hadith is established. «والله اعلم» [المدخل الي السنن الكبريٰ : 325]
◄ Whereas Abu ‘Ali al-Husayn bin ‘Ali al-Hafiz al-Naysaburi rahimahullah considered this hadith authentic, but the preferred view is that this narration is not established and is weak. «والله اعلم»
Source: Adwa al-Masabih fi Tahqiq Mishkat al-Masabih, Page: 218
Maulana Ataullah Sajid
Commentary:
(1)
By "every Muslim" is meant both men and women, because acting upon the rulings of the Shariah is obligatory upon both men and women; therefore, they should know what is permissible and what is impermissible. The Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam taught both men and women the religion and explained its rulings to them.
(2)
This narration is weak in its chain of transmission, but its first part (the obligation of seeking knowledge) is correct in meaning, i.e., acquiring the necessary knowledge of the rulings of Shariah is obligatory upon every Muslim man and woman.
(1)
By "every Muslim" is meant both men and women, because acting upon the rulings of the Shariah is obligatory upon both men and women; therefore, they should know what is permissible and what is impermissible. The Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam taught both men and women the religion and explained its rulings to them.
(2)
This narration is weak in its chain of transmission, but its first part (the obligation of seeking knowledge) is correct in meaning, i.e., acquiring the necessary knowledge of the rulings of Shariah is obligatory upon every Muslim man and woman.
Source: Commentary on Sunan Ibn Mājah by Mawlānā ‘Atā’ullāh Sājid, Page: 224
