Arguments of the Hanafis regarding the obligation of sacrifice

This excerpt is taken from Sheikh Zubair Ali Zai Rahimahullah's Book on the Rules and Issues of Qurbani.

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.

Reference: (Sunan Tirmidhi Hadith No: 1493, Musannaf Abdul Razzaq Hadith No: 8167-12234 Qadeem, Sunan Ibn Majah Hadith No: 3126, Al-Mustadrak Vol. 3 p. 221, Sharh al-Sunnah Hadith No: 1124)

In this hadith, the command to perform Qurbani has been given, and the command generally indicates obligation, especially when there are no contradictory indications.

Reference: (Tibyan al-Quran Vol. 9 p. 937)

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

Reference: (Hadith 8167, second version: 8198)

, 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.

Reference: (Muqaddimah Sahih Muslim: 82 and its authentic chain, with explanation by Ghulam Rasool Saeedi, p. 231)

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.

Reference: (Kitab al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil 6/56, also see Amal al-Hadith 1/459 1380)

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.

Reference: (Kitab al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil 6/56, Tarikh Baghdad 11/128, and its authentic chain)

➍ Imam Muslim bin Al-Hajjaj Al-Qushayri, may Allah have mercy on him, said:
ذاهب الحديث
Meaning he is a passerby in hadith.

Reference: (Kitab al-Kunni Qalami Musawwar 25/121, Tarikh Baghdad 11/128, and its authentic chain)

Regarding the hadith narrator

Reference: (See the same series reference number 10)

➎ Imam Bukhari, may Allah have mercy on him, said:
فى حديثه مناكير
There are rejected narrations in his hadiths.

Reference: (Kitab al-Du'afa Tahqiqi: 246 Tuhfat al-Aqwiya p. 77)

➏ Imam Nasai, may Allah have mercy on him, said:
أبو سعيد الشامي، متروك

Reference: (Kitab al-Du'afa wa al-Matrukin: 377)

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.

Reference: (Fadl al-Akhbar wa Sharh Madhahib al-Athar 1/81, Tahqiqi Maqalat 5/541)

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.

Reference: (Kitab al-Hajar wa al-Ta'dil 2/131, second version 2/113)

➒ Hafiz Ibn 'Adi said:
وهو منكر الحديث إسنادا و متنا
He was one who narrated rejected hadiths both in chain and text.

Reference: (Al-Kamil li Ibn 'Adi 5/1981, second version 7/46)

➓ Imam Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Ammar Al-Mawsili said:
وهو ذاهب الحديث
He is a passerby in hadith.

Reference: (Tarikh Baghdad 11/138, and its authentic chain)

Note that these words are attributed to severe criticism. See Kitab al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil

Reference: (2/37)

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

Reference: (4/45-48)

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

Reference: (Kitab al-Du'afa by Al-Aqili 301/4, second edition 1426/4, and its chain is authentic)

➋ Imam Abu Hatim Al-Razi said:
هو متروك الحديث

Reference: (Kitab al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil 470/8)

➌ Imam Abu Zur'ah Al-Razi said:
لا يكتب حديثه
His hadith is not recorded.

Reference: (Kitab al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil 470/8)

➍ Imam Muslim said:
ذاهب الحديث

Reference: (Kitab al-Kunni manuscript illustrated p. 29/102, Tarikh Baghdad 282/13 and its chain is authentic)

➎ Al-Aqili said:
ونصر بن حماد متروك

Reference: Kitab al-Du'afa 301/4, second edition 4/1426

➏ Imam Ya'qub bin Shaybah said:
ليس بشيء
He is nothing.

Reference: (Tarikh Baghdad 281/13 no. 7244)

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.

Reference: (Al-Tamhid 50)

➑ Imam Dar Qutni mentioned him in the book Al-Du'afa wal-Matrukin

Reference: (p. 380 no. 546)

.
➒ Hafiz Al-Dhahabi said:
حافظ متهم

Reference: (Al-Kashif 213/3 no. 5805)

➓ Al-Haythami said:
وهو متروك

Reference: (Majma' al-Zawa'id 6/91 chapter on those killed from the polytheists on the day of Badr)

For further criticisms, refer to Tahdhib al-Tahdhib and others, and those who attribute themselves to Hafiz should also read Nasb al-Rayah

Reference: (387/2)

.
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

Reference: (1493, and he said: Hasan Gharib)

, Sunan Ibn Majah

Reference: (3126)

, and Mustadrak al-Hakim

Reference: (221/4, 222, Hadith 7523, and he said: Authentic chain, individually by Al-Dhahabi with his statement: Sulaiman and some left it)

, 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:

Reference: Mentioned by Ibn al-Jawzi in Al-Du'afa (1550)
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.

Reference: (Kitab al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil 149/4)

➋ Dar Qutni said: وأبو المثنى ضعيف

Reference: (Kitab al-‘Ilal 51/15, question 3823)

➌ Hafiz al-Dhahabi said: واه weak.

Reference: (Talkhis al-Mustadrak: 7523)

➍ Hafiz Ibn Hajar said: ضعيف

Reference: (Taqrib al-Tahdhib: 8340)

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.

Reference: And Ibn Abd al-Hadi said: It has become clear that Ibn Hibban contradicted himself in mentioning Abu al-Muthanna in the two books, Kitab al-Thiqat and Kitab al-Majruhin, as if he thought they were two different men, which is a mistake; rather, he is one man, a narrator of rejected hadith whose hadith is not accepted (Al-Sarim al-Makki: p. 176) [Mu'adh]

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.

Reference: (Sunan Abi Dawood, Hadith number: 2788; Sunan al-Tirmidhi, Hadith number: 1518; Sunan al-Nasa'i, Hadith number: 4224; Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith number: 3125)

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

Reference: (Tibyan al-Qur'an 9/937)

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.

Reference: (Mizan al-I'tidal 363/2, no. 4097)

And he said: لا يعرف He is unknown.

Reference: (Diwan al-Du'afa wal-Matrukin 2, no. 2061)

Hafiz Ibn Hajar said: لا يعرف He is unknown.

Reference: (Taqrib al-Tahdhib: 3113)

Hafiz Abdul Haq Ashbili called this chain weak, and Ibn al-Qattan (al-Fasi) confirmed him due to the ignorance (unknown status) of 'Aamir.

Reference: Al-Ahkam al-Wustaa 126/4,

Reference: Bayan al-Wahm wal-Yahm 577/3, Ibn Abd al-Hadi said: Wa fihi jahalah (Tanzeeh al-Tahqeeq: 2377565/3) Ibn Hazm said: Majhool, la yudra (Ahla: 8/6) [Mu'adh]

Reference: (Mizan al-I'tidal 363/2)

Next Hanafi Evidence​

After these weak narrations, Saeedi Sahib has also presented the narration from Sunan Ibn Majah

Reference: (3123)

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

Reference: (Tibyan al-Qur'an 937/9)

.

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.

Reference: (Sahih Bukhari: 853)

In another narration: Whoever eats garlic or onion should keep away from us or keep away from our mosque.

Reference: (Sahih Bukhari: 5352)

And it is said: Do not come near us and never pray with us.

Reference: (Bukhari: 852 Muslim: 562)

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.

Reference: (Sahih Bukhari Hadith No: 5556, Sahih Muslim Hadith No: 1552, Sunan al-Tirmidhi Hadith No: 1508, Musnad Ahmad Vol. 2, p. 297)

In this hadith, you have commanded to repeat the sacrifice, and this is a sign of obligation. Al-Kh

Reference: (Tibyan al-Qur'an Vol. 9, p. 937)

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.

Reference: (Sahih Bukhari: 5556 Sahih Muslim: 1961, Darussalam: 5079)

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).

Reference: (Fath al-Bari vol. 10 p. 16 under hadith 5556-5557)

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.

Reference: (See Sharh Mushkil al-Athar 379/12 under hadith 4877)

❀ 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.

Reference: (Mushkil al-Athar 379/12)

❀ 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.

Reference: (Al-Mufham lima Ashkala min Talkhees Kitab Muslim vol. 5 p. 352)

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.

Reference: Maqalat 276/9