Letter and Poem of Imām Ibn al-Mubārak to al-Fuḍayl ibn ʿIyāḍ – Authenticity and Chain Analysis
Source: Fatāwā ʿIlmiyyah (Tawḍīḥ al-Aḥkām), Vol. 2, p. 207
Is it true that Imām ʿAbdullāh ibn al-Mubārak رحمه الله wrote a letter from the battlefield to Qāḍī al-Fuḍayl ibn ʿIyāḍ رحمه الله containing the famous poem:
"Yā ʿābida al-ḥaramayn law abṣartanā
Laʿalimta annaka fī al-ʿibādati talʿabu"
“O worshipper of the two sacred mosques, if you could see us, you would know that your worship is but play…”
Abū Nuʿmān Sayfullāh Qasūrī mentioned this incident in Zād al-Mujāhid (p. 110–111) with references to:
Al-ḥamdu lillāh, waṣ-ṣalātu was-salāmu ʿalā Rasūlillāh, ammā baʿd!
The incident with its chain is found in:
Chain:
Abū al-Mufaḍḍal Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh al-Shaybānī → Abū Muḥammad ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad ibn Saʿīd ibn Yaḥyā al-Qāḍī → Muḥammad ibn Ibrāhīm ibn Abī Sukaynah (al-Ḥalabī)
The chain contains a fabricator and an unknown narrator, making it mawḍūʿ (fabricated) and baseless.
This incident is not authentic and should not be narrated as a proven historical fact.
ھذا ما عندي والله أعلم بالصواب
Source: Fatāwā ʿIlmiyyah (Tawḍīḥ al-Aḥkām), Vol. 2, p. 207
Question:
Is it true that Imām ʿAbdullāh ibn al-Mubārak رحمه الله wrote a letter from the battlefield to Qāḍī al-Fuḍayl ibn ʿIyāḍ رحمه الله containing the famous poem:
"Yā ʿābida al-ḥaramayn law abṣartanā
Laʿalimta annaka fī al-ʿibādati talʿabu"
“O worshipper of the two sacred mosques, if you could see us, you would know that your worship is but play…”
Abū Nuʿmān Sayfullāh Qasūrī mentioned this incident in Zād al-Mujāhid (p. 110–111) with references to:
- Ṭabaqāt al-Shāfiʿiyyah by Ibn al-Subkī (Vol. 1, p. 287)
- Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ (Vol. 8, p. 412)
- al-Nujūm al-Zāhirah (Vol. 2, p. 103)
- Āthār al-Bilād by al-Qazwīnī (p. 457)
Answer:
Al-ḥamdu lillāh, waṣ-ṣalātu was-salāmu ʿalā Rasūlillāh, ammā baʿd!
Authenticity Check:
- In Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ, the incident is mentioned without a chain.
- A narration without an isnād — even if found in Siyar, Āthār al-Bilād, al-Nujūm al-Zāhirah or countless other works — is not acceptable academically.
Earliest Source with a Chain:
The incident with its chain is found in:
- Tārīkh Dimashq by Ibn ʿAsākir (Vol. 34, p. 307)
- Ṭabaqāt al-Shāfiʿiyyah (manuscript 1, pp. 150–151)
Chain:
Abū al-Mufaḍḍal Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh al-Shaybānī → Abū Muḥammad ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad ibn Saʿīd ibn Yaḥyā al-Qāḍī → Muḥammad ibn Ibrāhīm ibn Abī Sukaynah (al-Ḥalabī)
Chain Analysis:
- Abū al-Mufaḍḍal Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh al-Shaybānī – Severely unreliable.
- Al-Azharī: “Kāna Abū al-Mufaḍḍal dajjālan kadhdhāban”
(Tārīkh Baghdād, Vol. 5, p. 467, T. 3010 – authentic report) - Listed in Lisān al-Mīzān (Vol. 5, pp. 231–232) and Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl (Vol. 3, p. 607) with strong criticism.
- Al-Azharī: “Kāna Abū al-Mufaḍḍal dajjālan kadhdhāban”
- Abū Muḥammad ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad ibn Saʿīd ibn Yaḥyā al-Qāḍī – Unknown (mafqud al-khabar). No biographical details found so far.
Conclusion:
The chain contains a fabricator and an unknown narrator, making it mawḍūʿ (fabricated) and baseless.
Ruling:
This incident is not authentic and should not be narrated as a proven historical fact.
ھذا ما عندي والله أعلم بالصواب
