Author: Hafiz Zubair Ali Zai, Pakistan
In this article, we present the investigation and analysis of the well-known hadith, "Khilafat al-Nubuwwah for thirty years," to clarify the truth for the general public.
Imam Abu Dawood Al-Sijistani has narrated in "Sunan" (vol. 2, p. 290, Kitab al-Sunnah, chapter on the Caliphs, hadith no. 4646), Imam Abu Isa Al-Tirmidhi in "Sunan" (vol. 2, p. 46, chapters on Fitan, hadith no. 2226), Imam Abu Abdurrahman Al-Nasa'i in "Sunan al-Kubra" (vol. 5, p. 47, hadith no. 8155, Kitab al-Manaqib, chapter 5), and Imam Abu Hatim Ibn Hibban Al-Busti in "Sahih" (Al-Ihsan, 6904, 6623, Mawarid al-Zam'an: 1535, 1534) and other muhaddithin have narrated with various chains from Saeed bin Jumhan, who narrated from Safina Abu Abdurrahman (RA), the freed slave of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH):
"The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: 'The Prophetic Caliphate will last for thirty years; then Allah will give His Kingdom to whomever He wills or His Kingdom to whomever He wills.' Saeed said: Safina told me: Count, Abu Bakr's two years, Umar's ten years, Uthman's twelve years, and Ali's such and such (i.e., six years). Saeed said: I said to Safina: They claim that Ali was not a caliph. He replied: The backsides of Banu Az-Zarqa, meaning Banu Marwan, lied." These words are from Abu Dawood. Other narrations have minor differences in length and brevity, but the meaning is the same.
Regarding this hadith, Imam Tirmidhi said: "This hadith is hasan." Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal said:"The hadith of Safina about the caliphate is authentic, and I adhere to this hadith regarding the caliphs."(Jami' Bayan al-'Ilm wa Fadlih by Ibn Abd al-Barr, vol. 2, p. 225, also see Kitab al-Sunnah by Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Hanbal, vol. 2, p. 590, hadith no. 1400)Imam Ibn Abi Asim said: "The hadith is confirmed in terms of transmission; Saeed bin Jumhan narrated it from Safina, and Hammad bin Salamah, Al-Awam bin Hawshab, and Hashraj bin Nabat narrated it from him." (Kitab al-Sunnah by Ibn Abi Asim, vol. 2, pp. 549, 550, hadith no. 1181, 1185).
Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah also declared it authentic (Al-Silsilah al-Sahihah by Al-Albani, vol. 1, p. 744). Imam Hakim also declared it authentic (Al-Mustadrak: vol. 3, p. 71). The narrator Saeed bin Jumhan was considered reliable by Imam Yahya bin Ma'in, Imam Nasa'i, Imam Ibn Hibban, and Imam Ahmad. Imam Abu Dawood also authenticated him. Ibn Adi said: "I do not see any harm in him" (see Tahdhib al-Tahdhib: vol. 1, p. 14). Hafiz Dhahabi said: "Truthful, middle" (Al-Kashif, vol. 1, p. 282). Hafiz Ibn Hajar said: "Truthful, has singular narrations" (Taqrib al-Tahdhib: 2279).
In contrast, Imam Abu Hatim Al-Razi said: "His hadith is written, but not used as evidence."
This criticism is rejected for several reasons:
Among these rejectors of Hadith is an individual named “Tamanna Imadi Phulwari,” who, in his self-authored book "Intizar-e-Mahdi wa Masih," attacks this Hadith with vehement criticism, writing:
"In this chain of narration, you see the name of Hashraj bin Nabat al-Kufi. According to almost all the scholars of hadith, he is considered weak in hadith, unreliable, and his narrations are generally not followed." (p. 57)
It should be noted that regarding Hashraj bin Nabat, Imam Ahmad said: Thiqah (trustworthy), Ibn Ma'in said: Saleh, Thiqah, La Ba'sa Bih (there is no harm in him), Abu Zur'ah said: La Ba'sa Bih, Mustaqeem al-Hadith (straightforward in hadith), Ibn Adi said: La Ba'sa Bih, and Tirmidhi declared his hadith as Hasan.
In contrast, Abu Hatim said: Saleh, Yuktab Hadithuhu wa La Yuhtaj Bih (his hadith is written but not used as evidence), Al-Saji said: Da'if (weak), Ibn Hibban said: He had few hadiths and his narrations were rejected; it is not permissible to use his reports as evidence when he is alone, Al-Nasa'i criticized him once saying: Laysa bil Qawi (not strong) and authenticated him on another occasion saying: La Ba'sa Bih (there is no harm in him) (summarized from Tahdhib al-Tahdhib). Al-Hakim and Al-Dhahabi authenticated one of his hadiths. (Al-Mustadrak vol. 3, p. 606) Ali (probably Ibn al-Madini) also declared him trustworthy (Mizan al-I'tidal vol. 1, p. 551). Hafiz Ibn Hajar said: Saduq Yuhim (truthful but makes mistakes) (Taqrib).
In summary, this narrator is considered trustworthy and truthful by the majority of scholars of hadith. Therefore, Tamanna Imadi is lying in his claim that "he is considered weak in hadith by almost all the scholars of hadith..."
Tamanna Imadi’s book contains so many lies that compiling them would result in another book. For example, on page 54 of the same book, he writes:
"In Yemen, Muammar bin Rashid, who was a freed slave of the Azd tribe, passed away in 154 AH. He was actively involved in the compilation of hadith and narrated from the famous liar Aban bin Abbas, but presented the name of Thabit al-Banani instead of Aban." (Tahdhib al-Tahdhib vol. 1, p. 101)
Now, check the referenced page in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, and it states:
"And Al-Khalili narrated in Al-Irshad with an authentic chain that Ahmad said to Yahya bin Ma'in while he was writing a manuscript from Abdul-Razzaq from Muammar from Aban. 'Are you writing this and you know that Aban is a liar?' So, Yahya bin Ma'in said: 'May Allah have mercy on you, O Abu Abdullah! I am writing it to memorize it so that if a liar like (Tamanna Imadi) comes and narrates it from Muammar from Thabit from Anas, I can say to him: You lied. It is narrated by Aban, not by Thabit.'" (Tahdhib vol. 1, p. 101)
Now, readers, tell me, what is the fault of Muammar in this? He narrated what he heard. He presented Aban’s name instead of Aban's name and Thabit’s name instead of Thabit's name. Therefore, if the scholars did not consider him trustworthy, what should they have considered him? But the tongues and pens of liars like Tamanna Imadi are free. They can prove day as night and night as day, but remember, a day of judgment is surely coming. Then everyone will have to account for all their deeds, big or small!
This was the correct position on Hashraj bin Nabat. It should also be remembered that he is not alone in narrating this hadith, as the following people have corroborated his narration:
"And this is a well-known hadith narrated by Hammad bin Salamah, Abdulwarith bin Saeed, Al-Awam bin Hawshab, and others from Saeed bin Jumhan... And Imam Ahmad and others relied on it to establish the caliphate of the four Rightly Guided Caliphs, and Ahmad authenticated it. He used it as proof against those who hesitated in accepting the caliphate of Ali: due to the division of people at that time, Imam Ahmad said: Whoever does not consider Ali the fourth caliph is more misguided than his household donkey, and he prohibited marrying such a person. This is agreed upon by the jurists, scholars of Sunnah, those who understand the religion, and the righteous people, and this is the general belief. And those who oppose this are some of the people of innovations, such as the rejectors (Rafidha) who criticize the caliphate of the three caliphs or the Kharijites who criticize the caliphate of the two sons-in-law of the Prophet (PBUH), Uthman and Ali, or some Nasibis who criticize Ali's caliphate, or some ignorant pseudo-Sunnis who hesitate in accepting Ali's caliphate." (Majmu' Fatawa vol. 35, pp. 18-19)
Contradiction with the Hadith of Jabir bin Samurah (RA) in Sahih Muslim:
Some late scholars have claimed that the hadith of Safina (RA) contradicts the hadith in Sahih Muslim narrated by Jabir bin Samurah (RA) that states:
"Indeed, this matter (the caliphate) will not end until twelve caliphs have passed among them, all of them from Quraysh." (Sahih Muslim, Book of Leadership, Chapter: People follow Quraysh and the Caliphate is in Quraysh, Hadith 1821; and also in Sahih Bukhari: 7223, 7222)
However, this objection is a clear sign of the objector's lack of knowledge because it is possible to reconcile these two authentic hadiths. The hadith of Safina refers to the rightly guided caliphate and the caliphate on the prophetic methodology, while the hadith of Jabir refers to the general caliphate. Therefore, the first hadith negates the rightly guided caliphate after thirty years, and the second affirms the non-rightly guided caliphate. Hence, there is no contradiction between the two.
Hafiz Ibn Hajar pointed towards this reconciliation in Fath al-Bari (vol. 13, p. 212, under Hadith 7223), and Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned it in Majmu' al-Fatawa, and this is the correct view. For more details, see Nasiruddin Al-Albani’s book Al-Silsilah al-Sahihah (1/742-749, Hadith 459), where he wrote extensively on this topic.
Objections by Hakim Faiz Alam Siddiqi in "Haqiqat Mazhab Shia":
In his book "Haqiqat Mazhab Shia," page 24, Faiz Alam Siddiqi wrote:
"At this point, some ingenious person fabricated the hadith of Safina, which Imam Muslim included in his Sahih, handing a significant weapon to the world of Rafd (Shiism). The words of this hadith are: The caliphate will last for thirty years, and then it will become a monarchy..."
There are three objections to this statement by Faiz Alam Siddiqi, who is a Nāsibī:
I ask what weapon has this hadith provided to the world of Rafd (Shiism) and falsehood? This hadith clearly indicates that Amir al-Mu'minin Abu Bakr (RA), Amir al-Mu'minin Umar (RA), and Amir al-Mu'minin Uthman (RA) are all rightly guided caliphs on the prophetic methodology.
Hafiz Zubair Ali Zai
(23-7-93)
In this article, we present the investigation and analysis of the well-known hadith, "Khilafat al-Nubuwwah for thirty years," to clarify the truth for the general public.
Imam Abu Dawood Al-Sijistani has narrated in "Sunan" (vol. 2, p. 290, Kitab al-Sunnah, chapter on the Caliphs, hadith no. 4646), Imam Abu Isa Al-Tirmidhi in "Sunan" (vol. 2, p. 46, chapters on Fitan, hadith no. 2226), Imam Abu Abdurrahman Al-Nasa'i in "Sunan al-Kubra" (vol. 5, p. 47, hadith no. 8155, Kitab al-Manaqib, chapter 5), and Imam Abu Hatim Ibn Hibban Al-Busti in "Sahih" (Al-Ihsan, 6904, 6623, Mawarid al-Zam'an: 1535, 1534) and other muhaddithin have narrated with various chains from Saeed bin Jumhan, who narrated from Safina Abu Abdurrahman (RA), the freed slave of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH):
"The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: 'The Prophetic Caliphate will last for thirty years; then Allah will give His Kingdom to whomever He wills or His Kingdom to whomever He wills.' Saeed said: Safina told me: Count, Abu Bakr's two years, Umar's ten years, Uthman's twelve years, and Ali's such and such (i.e., six years). Saeed said: I said to Safina: They claim that Ali was not a caliph. He replied: The backsides of Banu Az-Zarqa, meaning Banu Marwan, lied." These words are from Abu Dawood. Other narrations have minor differences in length and brevity, but the meaning is the same.
Regarding this hadith, Imam Tirmidhi said: "This hadith is hasan." Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal said:"The hadith of Safina about the caliphate is authentic, and I adhere to this hadith regarding the caliphs."(Jami' Bayan al-'Ilm wa Fadlih by Ibn Abd al-Barr, vol. 2, p. 225, also see Kitab al-Sunnah by Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Hanbal, vol. 2, p. 590, hadith no. 1400)Imam Ibn Abi Asim said: "The hadith is confirmed in terms of transmission; Saeed bin Jumhan narrated it from Safina, and Hammad bin Salamah, Al-Awam bin Hawshab, and Hashraj bin Nabat narrated it from him." (Kitab al-Sunnah by Ibn Abi Asim, vol. 2, pp. 549, 550, hadith no. 1181, 1185).
Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah also declared it authentic (Al-Silsilah al-Sahihah by Al-Albani, vol. 1, p. 744). Imam Hakim also declared it authentic (Al-Mustadrak: vol. 3, p. 71). The narrator Saeed bin Jumhan was considered reliable by Imam Yahya bin Ma'in, Imam Nasa'i, Imam Ibn Hibban, and Imam Ahmad. Imam Abu Dawood also authenticated him. Ibn Adi said: "I do not see any harm in him" (see Tahdhib al-Tahdhib: vol. 1, p. 14). Hafiz Dhahabi said: "Truthful, middle" (Al-Kashif, vol. 1, p. 282). Hafiz Ibn Hajar said: "Truthful, has singular narrations" (Taqrib al-Tahdhib: 2279).
In contrast, Imam Abu Hatim Al-Razi said: "His hadith is written, but not used as evidence."
This criticism is rejected for several reasons:
- Contrary to the majority's authentication.
- In Nasb al-Rayah by Al-Zayla'i (vol. 2, p. 439), it is stated:"The statement of Abu Hatim: 'His hadith is not used as evidence' is not detrimental here, as he did not mention the reason. This phrase has been repeated by him for many reliable narrators of Sahih books without stating the reason, like Khalid al-Hadhdha, etc. And Allah knows best."
- Hafiz Dhahabi said:"When Abu Hatim declares someone reliable, adhere to his statement because he only declares reliable those who are truly authentic in hadith. And if he criticizes someone or says about them: 'His hadith is not used as evidence,' then pause until you see what others have said about him. If someone has authenticated him, then do not rely on Abu Hatim's criticism, for he is strict in (the science of) men. He has said about a group of narrators of Sahih books: 'Not an evidence, not strong,' or similar statements." (Siyar A'lam al-Nubala, vol. 3, p. 260)
- Some scholars have accused Imam Abu Hatim of being strict. Therefore, in comparison to moderate researchers like Ahmad bin Hanbal, his statement is rejected.
The Machinations of Hadith Rejectors:
The true objective of the rejectors of Hadith of the Prophet (PBUH) is to deceitfully discredit authentic Hadith so that doubts and mistrust about the compilations of Islam are ingrained in the minds of the common Muslims. Then, these cunning deceivers can lead the naive masses away from the straight path with their opinions. Consequently, neither Hadith nor the Quran would remain preserved!Among these rejectors of Hadith is an individual named “Tamanna Imadi Phulwari,” who, in his self-authored book "Intizar-e-Mahdi wa Masih," attacks this Hadith with vehement criticism, writing:
"In this chain of narration, you see the name of Hashraj bin Nabat al-Kufi. According to almost all the scholars of hadith, he is considered weak in hadith, unreliable, and his narrations are generally not followed." (p. 57)
It should be noted that regarding Hashraj bin Nabat, Imam Ahmad said: Thiqah (trustworthy), Ibn Ma'in said: Saleh, Thiqah, La Ba'sa Bih (there is no harm in him), Abu Zur'ah said: La Ba'sa Bih, Mustaqeem al-Hadith (straightforward in hadith), Ibn Adi said: La Ba'sa Bih, and Tirmidhi declared his hadith as Hasan.
In contrast, Abu Hatim said: Saleh, Yuktab Hadithuhu wa La Yuhtaj Bih (his hadith is written but not used as evidence), Al-Saji said: Da'if (weak), Ibn Hibban said: He had few hadiths and his narrations were rejected; it is not permissible to use his reports as evidence when he is alone, Al-Nasa'i criticized him once saying: Laysa bil Qawi (not strong) and authenticated him on another occasion saying: La Ba'sa Bih (there is no harm in him) (summarized from Tahdhib al-Tahdhib). Al-Hakim and Al-Dhahabi authenticated one of his hadiths. (Al-Mustadrak vol. 3, p. 606) Ali (probably Ibn al-Madini) also declared him trustworthy (Mizan al-I'tidal vol. 1, p. 551). Hafiz Ibn Hajar said: Saduq Yuhim (truthful but makes mistakes) (Taqrib).
In summary, this narrator is considered trustworthy and truthful by the majority of scholars of hadith. Therefore, Tamanna Imadi is lying in his claim that "he is considered weak in hadith by almost all the scholars of hadith..."
Tamanna Imadi’s book contains so many lies that compiling them would result in another book. For example, on page 54 of the same book, he writes:
"In Yemen, Muammar bin Rashid, who was a freed slave of the Azd tribe, passed away in 154 AH. He was actively involved in the compilation of hadith and narrated from the famous liar Aban bin Abbas, but presented the name of Thabit al-Banani instead of Aban." (Tahdhib al-Tahdhib vol. 1, p. 101)
Now, check the referenced page in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, and it states:
"And Al-Khalili narrated in Al-Irshad with an authentic chain that Ahmad said to Yahya bin Ma'in while he was writing a manuscript from Abdul-Razzaq from Muammar from Aban. 'Are you writing this and you know that Aban is a liar?' So, Yahya bin Ma'in said: 'May Allah have mercy on you, O Abu Abdullah! I am writing it to memorize it so that if a liar like (Tamanna Imadi) comes and narrates it from Muammar from Thabit from Anas, I can say to him: You lied. It is narrated by Aban, not by Thabit.'" (Tahdhib vol. 1, p. 101)
Now, readers, tell me, what is the fault of Muammar in this? He narrated what he heard. He presented Aban’s name instead of Aban's name and Thabit’s name instead of Thabit's name. Therefore, if the scholars did not consider him trustworthy, what should they have considered him? But the tongues and pens of liars like Tamanna Imadi are free. They can prove day as night and night as day, but remember, a day of judgment is surely coming. Then everyone will have to account for all their deeds, big or small!
This was the correct position on Hashraj bin Nabat. It should also be remembered that he is not alone in narrating this hadith, as the following people have corroborated his narration:
- Abdulwarith (Abu Dawood: 4646)
- Al-Awam bin Hawshab (also: 4647)
- Hammad bin Salamah (Musnad Ahmad vol. 5, pp. 221, 220)
"And this is a well-known hadith narrated by Hammad bin Salamah, Abdulwarith bin Saeed, Al-Awam bin Hawshab, and others from Saeed bin Jumhan... And Imam Ahmad and others relied on it to establish the caliphate of the four Rightly Guided Caliphs, and Ahmad authenticated it. He used it as proof against those who hesitated in accepting the caliphate of Ali: due to the division of people at that time, Imam Ahmad said: Whoever does not consider Ali the fourth caliph is more misguided than his household donkey, and he prohibited marrying such a person. This is agreed upon by the jurists, scholars of Sunnah, those who understand the religion, and the righteous people, and this is the general belief. And those who oppose this are some of the people of innovations, such as the rejectors (Rafidha) who criticize the caliphate of the three caliphs or the Kharijites who criticize the caliphate of the two sons-in-law of the Prophet (PBUH), Uthman and Ali, or some Nasibis who criticize Ali's caliphate, or some ignorant pseudo-Sunnis who hesitate in accepting Ali's caliphate." (Majmu' Fatawa vol. 35, pp. 18-19)
The Authentication of This Hadith by Scholars:
- Ahmad bin Hanbal
- Al-Tirmidhi
- Ibn Jarir al-Tabari
- Ibn Abi Asim
- Ibn Hibban
- Al-Hakim
- Ibn Taymiyyah
- Al-Dhahabi
- Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (Al-Silsilah al-Sahihah 1/745, Hadith 459)
- From Abu Bakra (RA), narrated by Al-Bayhaqi in Dala'il al-Nubuwwah (vol. 6, p. 342) with a weak chain, as it includes Ali bin Zaid bin Jad'an, who is weak.
- From Jabir bin Abdullah (RA), narrated by Al-Wahidi in Al-Wasit (referenced in Al-Sahihah, p. 745), and its chain is also weak.
Addressing Certain Claims Against This Hadith:
Contradiction with the Hadith of Jabir bin Samurah (RA) in Sahih Muslim:
Some late scholars have claimed that the hadith of Safina (RA) contradicts the hadith in Sahih Muslim narrated by Jabir bin Samurah (RA) that states:
"Indeed, this matter (the caliphate) will not end until twelve caliphs have passed among them, all of them from Quraysh." (Sahih Muslim, Book of Leadership, Chapter: People follow Quraysh and the Caliphate is in Quraysh, Hadith 1821; and also in Sahih Bukhari: 7223, 7222)
However, this objection is a clear sign of the objector's lack of knowledge because it is possible to reconcile these two authentic hadiths. The hadith of Safina refers to the rightly guided caliphate and the caliphate on the prophetic methodology, while the hadith of Jabir refers to the general caliphate. Therefore, the first hadith negates the rightly guided caliphate after thirty years, and the second affirms the non-rightly guided caliphate. Hence, there is no contradiction between the two.
Hafiz Ibn Hajar pointed towards this reconciliation in Fath al-Bari (vol. 13, p. 212, under Hadith 7223), and Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned it in Majmu' al-Fatawa, and this is the correct view. For more details, see Nasiruddin Al-Albani’s book Al-Silsilah al-Sahihah (1/742-749, Hadith 459), where he wrote extensively on this topic.
Objections by Hakim Faiz Alam Siddiqi in "Haqiqat Mazhab Shia":
In his book "Haqiqat Mazhab Shia," page 24, Faiz Alam Siddiqi wrote:
"At this point, some ingenious person fabricated the hadith of Safina, which Imam Muslim included in his Sahih, handing a significant weapon to the world of Rafd (Shiism). The words of this hadith are: The caliphate will last for thirty years, and then it will become a monarchy..."
There are three objections to this statement by Faiz Alam Siddiqi, who is a Nāsibī:
- This Hadith was not fabricated by an ingenious person. It was narrated by the trustworthy and truthful companion Safina (RA) and further narrated by many reliable narrators, making it an absolutely authentic hadith.
- This hadith is not present anywhere in Sahih Muslim. Thus, Faiz Alam Siddiqi’s statement is a slander against Sahih Muslim.
I ask what weapon has this hadith provided to the world of Rafd (Shiism) and falsehood? This hadith clearly indicates that Amir al-Mu'minin Abu Bakr (RA), Amir al-Mu'minin Umar (RA), and Amir al-Mu'minin Uthman (RA) are all rightly guided caliphs on the prophetic methodology.
Hafiz Zubair Ali Zai
(23-7-93)