الحمد للہ رب العالمین و الصلوٰۃ و السلام علی رسولہ الأمین ، أما بعد:
Hammad: Hu Ibn Salamah: Ammar narrated from the chain of Ibn Abbas a dream in which Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Abbas (رضی اللہ تعالیٰ عنہ) saw the Prophet ﷺ.
It is narrated from Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Abbas (رضی اللہ تعالیٰ عنہ) that one day at noon I saw the Holy Prophet ﷺ in a dream. His hair was disheveled and dusty, and in his hand was a bottle of blood. I asked: May my parents be sacrificed for you, what is this? He ﷺ said: This is the blood of Hussain (رضی اللہ تعالیٰ عنہ) and his companions, I have been collecting it since morning.
In response to a question, after research, I wrote: This narration is Hasan Lazatah.
The following scholars have declared this narration authentic and strong:
(1) Hakim
(2) Dhahabi
(3) Ibn Kathir, who said: And its chain is strong
(4) Al-Albani
(5) Wasiullah Abbas Al-Madani Al-Makki
(6) Bousiri
(7) Shoaib Arnaout (Hanafi) and other researchers of Musnad Imam Ahmad said: Its chain is strong according to the condition of Muslim
The famous Ahl al-Hadith scholar of Yemen, Sheikh Muqbil bin Hadi al-Wadi’i, has also declared it authentic. See “Al-Sahih al-Musnad Mimma Laysa Fi al-Sahihayn”
Sheikh Hamood bin Abdullah al-Tuwaijri said: و إسنادہ صحیح علیٰ شرط مسلم and its chain is authentic according to Muslim’s condition.
To my knowledge, no reliable muhaddith or trustworthy scholar has declared this narration weak, rejected, or anomalous.
In the modern era, Hafiz Sanaullah Zia Sahib wrote a refutation of the hadith’s authentication in the monthly magazine Al-Sirat.
Its reply was published by the author in Al-Hadith (Issue: 20)
which Hafiz Sanaullah Sahib responded to in Al-Sirat (Vol. 2: Issue: 1, April-May 2002).
The detailed reply to this refutation was written by the author in thirty-two (32) pages, the summary of which with benefits and additions is as follows:
Hafiz Sanaullah Sahib has criticized the hadith of Ibn Abbas from the following aspects:
➊ Criticism on Imam Sheikh al-Islam Hammad bin Salamah, may Allah have mercy on him
Monthly
has proven that Hamad bin Salmah is a primary narrator of Sahih Muslim and is considered trustworthy and authentic by the majority of hadith scholars. The narration of such a narrator does not fall below the grade of Hasan.
Hafiz Zahabi writes:
ولم ینحط حدیثہ عن رتبۃ الحسن
And his (Hamad’s) hadith has not fallen below the grade of Hasan.
Hafiz Sanaullah Sahib writes: The writer has no disagreement regarding Hamad bin Salmah, may Allah have mercy on him, being trustworthy, truthful, and having good hadith. However, the question is whether a trustworthy, truthful narrator can be subject to confusion?
After this self-admission by Hafiz Sahib, the criticism against Sheikh al-Islam Hamad bin Salmah, may Allah have mercy on him, is rejected. والحمد للہ
➋ Confusion
Narrations from Hammad bin Salamah, may Allah have mercy on him, through Abdul Rahman bin Mahdi, Affan bin Muslim, and others are present in Sahih Muslim.
And the rule is that if any specification is established regarding a narrator with mixed and variable memory in the two Sahihs, Ibn al-Salah, the famous Zahiri, writes: واعلم أن من کان من ھٰذا القبیل محتجاً بروایتۃ فی الصحیحین أو أحدھما فإنا نعرف علی الجملۃ أن ذلک مما تمیز و کان مأخوذاً عنہ قبل الإختلاط ، واللہ أعلم And know that if a narrator is of this type and his narration is present as evidence in the two Sahihs or in one of them, then we generally understand that he has been distinguished and this was taken before his mixing. واللہ اعلم
This statement can have two meanings:
First: All narrations of the mixed narrators in the two Sahihs are from before their mixing.
Second: The narrations of the students of the mixed narrators in the two Sahihs are from before that mixing.
Both meanings are correct and are also supported by the phrases of Hafiz al-Iraqi.
Warning
◈ Only those narrations will be exempt from this rule about which the majority of hadith scholars have explicitly stated that they are narrations after the mixing. It should be noted that, to our knowledge, it is not established from any single hadith scholar that Abdul Rahman bin Mahdi, Affan, Sulaiman bin Harb, and others heard hadiths from Hammad bin Salamah after his (alleged) mixing. Rather, Yahya bin Saeed al-Qattan said: Whoever wants to write the hadith of Hammad bin Salamah should necessarily take Affan bin Muslim.
Warning
◈ Sheikh Abdul Rahman Al-Alami believes that no one except Al-Bayhaqi has mentioned Hammad’s poor memory (or mixing) in his later years.
Warning
◈The hadith scholars who have declared this narration authentic and strong consider (on the condition of accepting mixing) that Hamad narrated this narration before the mixing.
Hafiz Sanaullah Sahib has not yet been able to prove that a certain narrator heard from Hamad before the mixing and another narrator heard from Hamad after the mixing. According to his research, all narrations of Hamad should be weak due to lack of discernment.!!
➌ Tadlis:
Accusing Hamad bin Salmah of tadlees by Hafiz Sanaullah Sahib is not established in the scholarly field. The introduction of Sahih Ibn Hibban, whose passage he presented, is not accepted. Hafiz Sahib tried to attribute this statement to Imam Bukhari, may Allah have mercy on him, but in many respects, he was not successful, for example:
◈ Hafiz Ibn Hibban was born after the death of Imam Bukhari, so even if he explicitly attributed this statement to Imam Bukhari, it would be rejected due to the discontinuity.
◈ There is no evidence in any book of Imam Bukhari, or with an authentic chain from him, that Hamad bin Salmah was accused of tadlees.
◈ Hafiz Ibn Hibban, in the introduction of Sahih Ibn Hibban, refutes the accusations against Hamad bin Salmah and Abu Bakr bin Ayyash, etc., and it is known even to common students that Abu Bakr bin Ayyash, may Allah have mercy on him, has many narrations in Sahih Bukhari; therefore, this rejected person is someone else, and it is not necessary that all parts of the refutation are necessarily against only one person.
Warning
In the research of the author, Abu Bakr bin Ayyash, may Allah have mercy on him, is considered a trustworthy and truthful narrator by the majority of hadith scholars; therefore, he is a good hadith narrator. It should be noted that the narration he reported, which omits the raising of the hands, is weak due to the statements and anomalies of the noble hadith scholars.
In the mentioned narration, Hammad bin Salamah has clarified the hearing (sama‘).
◈ Sulaiman bin Harb from Hammad:
صرح بالسماع
◈ Affan bin Muslim from Hammad:
صرح بالسماع
◈ Hajjaj bin al-Munhal from Hammad:
صرح بالسماع
Despite this clarification of hearing, the accusation of deliberate concealment (tadlees) against Hammad Mazloom here is rejected.
A Subtle Point:
in a narration إن أبی و أباک فی النار from Hammad bin Salamah from Thabit from Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), we did not find the clarification of Hammad bin Salamah’s hearing. What do you think?
◈ Attack on Imam Affan bin Muslim
According to the primary narrators of Sahihain
and the majority of hadith scholars, it is a great injustice to distort and attack the statement of Ibn Adi regarding the trustworthy Affan bin Muslim, an offense for which the attacker will have to account on the Day of Judgment. انشاءاللہ، واللہ غفور رحیم
In the mentioned narration, two trustworthy narrators (Sulaiman bin Harb, Hajjaj bin Minhal) have explicitly stated the hearing, and six trustworthy narrators (Sulaiman bin Harb, Abdul Rahman bin Mahdi, Hajjaj bin Minhal, Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Uthman Al-Khuza’i, Abu Nasr Abdul Malik bin Abdul Aziz Al-Tammar, and Hasan bin Musa Al-Ashib) have followed Affan. Despite so many chains of transmission, attacking Affan, may Allah have mercy on him, is equivalent to degrading the science of hadith.
➍Disturbance
In this narration, six trustworthy students of Hammad (Sulaiman bin Harb, Affan, Abdul Rahman bin Mahdi, Muhammad bin Abdullah Al-Khuza’i, and Hajjaj bin Minhal)
قتل ذالک الیوم
and words of similar meaning are mentioned.
There is a difference in the narration of the seventh student, Hasan bin Musa Al-Ashib.
◈ Abd bin Humayd / قتل ذالک الیوم states.
◈ Bishr bin Musa Al-Asadi
قتل قبل ذلک بیوم
Even a student of the principles of Hadith knows that a narration from a more trustworthy (awthaq) or multiple trustworthy narrators is more authentic and preferable compared to a single trustworthy narrator; therefore, the claim of confusion regarding this Hadith is rejected.
Brief and concise referencing of narrations
❀ Sulaiman bin Harb
◈
[قد قتل یومئذ]۱۲۸۳۷[قتل ذلک الیوم]
◈
[قتل فی ذالک الیوم]
◈
و حماد بن سلمۃ صرح بالسماع عندہ [قد قتل ذالک الیوم]
◈
و حماد صرح بالسماع عندہ[فوجد وہ قتل یومئذ]
❀ Affan bin Muslim
◈
حماد صرح بالسماع [فوجد وہ قتل فی ذالک الیوم]
◈
حماد صرح بالسماع [فوجد قد قتل فی ذالک الیوم]
❀ Abdul Rahman bin Mahdi
[فوجد ناہ قتل ذلک الیوم]
❀ Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Uthman Al-Khuza’i
[فإذا ھو فی ذالک الیوم قتل]
❀ Hajjaj bin Al-Munhal
◈
[فوجد قتل ذالک الیوم]۱۲ ؍۱۸۵ح ۱۲۸۳۷[فوجد قد قتل یومئذ])
◈
حماد صرح بالسماع [فوجد وہ قتل یومئذ]
◈ ابن عسا کر فی تاریخ دمشق (۱۴؍۲۲۸) حماد صرح بالسماع[فوجدوہ قتل یومئذ]
❀ Abu Nasr (Abdul Malik bin Abdul Aziz Al-Qushayri) Al-Tammar
◈
[قتل فی ذالک الیوم]
❀ Hasan bin Musa Al-Ashib
◈
[قتل ذلک الیوم ]
◈
[قتل قبل ذالک بیوم]
❀ Denial of the Selected Musnad of Abd bin Humayd
Hafiz Sanaullah Sahib, while practically denying the selected Musnad of Abd bin Humayd, writes:
And the selected cannot be preferred over the original
It is submitted that if Hafiz Sahib has obtained a manuscript of Abd bin Humayd’s Al-Musnad Al-Kabeer from somewhere, he should present it; otherwise, the selected Musnad of Abd bin Humayd, printed, manuscript, and illustrated, is available with us, in which this hadith is written exactly as I have presented it. Therefore, there is no issue of preferring the selected over the original here. The book Al-Muntakhab has been unanimously famous among scholars; for example, see
Its chain of narration is also present, none of whose narrators are weak.
It is unknown why Hafiz Sahib denies this magnificent book?
❀ Imam Al-Hakim: Possessor of an immortal power of memory.
The author wrote two possibilities regarding the only narration in Al-Mustadrak which is against six plus one equals seven trustworthy narrators, summarized as follows:
◈ This narration is rare, i.e., rejected, because it is against trustworthy narrators.
◈ It is possible that the word “Qabl” is a scribe’s error, an abrogator, or a misconception of Imam Hakim himself. See Monthly Al-Hadith: 20, page 22.
In response to this, Hafiz Sanaullah Sahib also wrote that since Imam Hakim possessed an unfailing memory and a strong mind, to call him a victim of misconception is a direct and aggressive attack on Imam Hakim.
Hafiz Sanaullah Zia Sahib’s statement is extremely strange. The misconceptions in Al-Mustadrak are not hidden from scholars; there are some printing errors and in some places Imam Hakim himself had misconceptions. For example,
Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani writes: “And some mentioned that he experienced change and negligence in his later years,” and some have mentioned that he (Hakim) suffered from change and negligence in his final years…
Imam Hammad bin Salamah, may Allah have mercy on him, was prone to many mistakes and confusion, while Imam Hakim was “possessor of an unending power of memory.” SubhanAllah! What an extraordinary justice this is.
❀ Contradiction of the Text with Other Authentic Hadiths
While applying the incident of the dream to real life, Hafiz Sanaullah Sahib has tried to make the text of this hadith conflict with other hadiths. It is stated that this hadith has been declared authentic and strong by Hakim, Zahabi, Busiri, Ibn Kathir, Albani, and other scholars. They do not consider its text to be against other authentic hadiths, but Hafiz Sanaullah Sahib certainly does. To our knowledge, there is no single muhaddith or reliable scholar who has declared this hadith weak, fabricated, or contradictory to authentic hadiths. The Prophet ﷺ, after departing from this world, is in Paradise in the Barzakh realm. It is not proven that after death, the worldly body and worldly life accompany His presence in this world. This dream is an example whose summary is that Sayyiduna Hussain (may Allah be pleased with him) was martyred in an extremely oppressed manner, and the Prophet ﷺ was deeply saddened by the oppressed martyrdom of his son (grandson). Apart from this, whatever else there is, are Hafiz Sanaullah Sahib’s philosophical speculations through which an attempt has been made to bulldoze the authentic (Hasan Lidhatah) hadith.
❀ Major Error or Frequent Errors
Whether the criticism of Imam Hamad bin Salamah, may Allah have mercy on him, is of a major error or a minor error, whether it is criticism of frequent errors or infrequent errors, all these criticisms are rejected in comparison to the authentication by the majority of the muhaddithin. If it is explicitly proven by the noble muhaddithin that a trustworthy and truthful narrator has made a mistake or error in a particular narration, then that mistake or error is disregarded; however, in all other narrations, that narrator remains authentic and reliable. It is not established from any muhaddith or imam that Hamad made a mistake in the mentioned narration.
Warning
According to the esteemed Muhaddithin, if a narrator makes many mistakes, then his hadith is abandoned, meaning such a narrator is weak and rejected.
Even the most basic students of hadith know that the Muhaddithin did not abandon the hadiths of Hamad bin Salamah; therefore, it is established that the criticism of “frequent mistakes” against Hamad bin Salamah has no validity and is outright rejected.
❀ Hamad bin Salamah and Sahih Bukhari
The following nineteen (19) narrations of Hamad bin Salamah are present in the evidences and follow-ups of Sahih Bukhari:
❀ Absence of Narrator or Narrations in Sahih Bukhari
The absence of narration from a particular narrator in Sahih Bukhari is by no means proof that the narrator is weak in the eyes of Imam Bukhari, and similarly, the absence of a narration in Sahih Bukhari is not proof that the narration is weak according to Imam Bukhari. Bukhari and Muslim never claimed to include all authentic narrations or all trustworthy narrators.
The silence of the Muhaddithin (scholars of hadith) on a narration or their not declaring it Sahih is not proof that the narration is weak according to them.
❀ The chain under discussion “Min ‘an Sahih Muslim”
The narration transmitted through the chain “Hammad bin Salamah from Ammar from Ibn Abbas” regarding the martyrdom of Hussain (may Allah be pleased with him), with the same chain “Min ‘an” and exactly as in Sahih Muslim, is present.
Imam Tirmidhi considers such a chain Hasan Gharib.
❀ Hadith of the Martyrdom of Hussain ؓ and Maulana Irshad-ul-Haq Asri
Maulana Irshad-ul-Haq Asri, may Allah preserve him, has classified the Hadith of the martyrdom of Hussain رضي الله عنه as Hasan in his research on Zawaid of Musnad Ahmad. In this regard, one can contact the As-hab-e-Maktabah Asriya Faisalabad or Maulana Asri himself, may Allah preserve him.
❀ Apparent Meaning of the Dream
The Prophet ﷺ once saw in a dream cows being slaughtered.
The interpretation of this was that around seventy companions were martyred in Uhud. May Allah be pleased with them all.
Once the Prophet ﷺ saw in a dream that Sayyiduna Umar ؓ was dragging his shirt.
If someone tries to prove from this hadith that dragging a shirt, etc. (on the ground) is completely correct, or tries to contradict this hadith with other hadiths, then according to the scholars, this action will be extremely wrong and blameworthy. Exactly the same applies to the hadith of Ibn Abbas about the dream; it should be understood to mean a state of sorrow and grief, and nothing more.
❀ Hakim’s saying that a narration is ‘ala shart al-shaykhayn’ or ‘ala ahadihima’
Hakim (and Al-Dhahabi) saying that a narration is ‘ala shart al-shaykhayn’ or ‘ala ahadihima’ is of three types:
◈ The narrators of this narration have been taken as proof (or as evidence and follow-ups) in Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.
◈ Narrations from narrators like them have been taken as proof (or as evidence and follow-ups) in Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. In this case, it is not necessary that the narrators of Al-Mustadrak be present in Sahihayn or one of them.
◈ From this particular chain, the narration has been taken as proof (or as evidence and follow-ups) in Sahihayn. If this is taken as the meaning, then Hakim has fallen into many misconceptions.
❀ Conclusion of the Discussion
The narration of the martyrdom of Hussain رضي الله عنه as narrated by Sheikh al-Islam Hammad ibn Salamah رحمه الله is authentic in terms of chain and text (correct) according to his own statement. Hafiz Sanaullah Zia Sahib has not been able to prove this narration weak or fabricated. The summary of his entire effort in this regard is criticism on Hammad ibn Salamah, Affan ibn Muslim, and the selection from Musnad Abd ibn Humayd (etc.). To remove Hafiz Sahib’s doubts and misunderstandings, one can refer to hadith scholars such as Maulana Irshad-ul-Haq Asri and others. Respected readers are requested to also study the issues number 10 and 20 of the monthly magazine Al-Hadith Hazro in this regard.
وما علینا إلا البلاغ
