In hadith nr. 390 of the work by shaykh ‘Abd al-Ghaffar Hasan “The Way of the Prophet” we read: On the authority of Anas b. Malik (r.) that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) said: ‘Go forth [in jihad against the enemy] with the Name of Allah, by [the capability and support of] Allah and [remain steadfast] upon the way of the Messenger of Allah. Do not kill the frail, old man, the small child or the woman. Do not steal from the war booty. Gather your gains and behave with righteousness and excellence, for truly, Allah loves those who show excellence.’ Abu Dawud (Mishkat, Chapter on Fighting during jihad, hadith nr. 3956)
In the commentary it is said: Islam has explained the fundamental etiquette of war, that one should only fight enemy combatants. One must not target innocent children, women or decrepit, elderly people.
Other etiquettes of war from this hadith:
- jihad (only) in the name of Allah
- rely on Allah’s help and assistance
- folllow the sunna of the Prophet s.a.w.s.
- don’t steal from the booty / spoils of war
- gather the gains
- behave with righteousness (islah) and excellence (ihsan)
In hadith nr. 1316 of Bulugh ul-Maram by imam Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani rahimahullah we can read the following: Abu Ayyub (al-Ansari) -may Allah be pleased with him- narrated that this verse (Q. 2:195) was revealed concerning us (al-Ansar). He was referring to the verse “And don’t throw yourselves into destruction (at-tahlukah)“. Abu Ayyub said that to answer those who disapproved of the action of those who attacked ar-Rum (Byzantines) till they were amidst their army. Related by the three imams. At-Tirmidhi, Ibn Hibban and al-Hakim graded it as sahih.
In the accompanying footnote it is said: When the Muslims confronted the Rum at Constantinopel, a Muslim fighter attacked the lines of the Rum until he was in their midst, and then returned. People then cried: ‘He is throwing himself into destruction.’ Abu Ayyub then told them that they are misinterpreting the verse which was revealed concerning the Ansar, when Allah granted them victory they said to themselves secretly: our property was lost, so why don’t we stay here to take care of our property and regain what we have lost (and leave jihad in the cause of Allah). Allah the Almighty then revealed this verse to show them that the real destruction occurs by staying back in their dwellings and not spending their wealth in the cause of Allah.
Shaykh dr. ‘Abd ul-‘Azim Badawi -in his work Al-Wajiz fi Fiqh as-Sunnah wa’l-Kitab al-‘Aziz (English translation, pp. 651, 652) mentions this as well and refers to the tafsir of Ibn Kathir where this story has been mentioned.
This aya and hadith are proofs for the permissibility of inghimas / taghrir bi’l-nafs in a jihad.
I wrote an article on the recent important discovery of a lost poem on ‘aqidah of the Kittani family in Morocco.
Download it here: The important discovery of a lost poem
Imam Malik and weak narrators?
Did Imam Malik narrate (ahadith) from weak narrators? We read statements from several scholars that:
– “Imam Malik never narrates except from the trustworthy narrators.” (Imam ‘Ali b. al-Madini)
– “Everyone whom imam Malik narrates from is trustworthy.” (Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal)
And there are more similar statements from the ‘ulama.
But we also read:
وقال يحيى بن معين كل من روي عنه مالك بن أنس فهو ثقة إلا عبد الكريم البصري أبو أمية ” تهذيب الكمال ”
And Yahya b. Ma’in said: “Whoever Malik b. Anas narrated from (him), (and he) is trustworthy, (or in another translation: Everyone from whom Malik ibn Anas narrates is a trustworthy narrator) except for ‘Abd al-Karim al-Basri Abu Umayyah”. (Tahdhib ul-Kamal) He was considered “matruk” (left / abandonded), which means: a narrator whose hadith transmission was discarded due to unreliability.
More info on ‘Abd al-Karim al-Basri Abu Umayyah we can read in at-Ta’liq al-Mumajjad, a commentary on the Muwatta of Imam Muhammad by shaykh ‘Abd al-Hayy al-Laknawi rahimahullah: ‘Abd al-Karim ibn Abi’l-Mukhariq. Two [narrators] are called ‘Abd al-Karim. (..) The second was Ibn Abi’l-Mukhariq whose kunya was Abu Umayyah, and he is to be abandonded, as is in al-Qawl al-Musaddad fi’dh-Dhibb ‘an Musnad Ahmad by Hafiz Ibn Hajr al-‘Asqalani. He said in at-Tamhid (by imam Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr): “He is weak, about which people of hadith are unanimous.” (..) his way of living deceived Malik [about his qualities as a narrator of hadith], for he was not one of the people of his town so that he could know him. He died in 126 AH or 127 AH. As-Suyuti said in Mirqat as-Su’ud: It is not sound in that which ‘Abd al-Karim ibn Abi’l-Mukhariq alone narrates to judge that he fabricated, because Malik narrated from him, and it is well known that it was his habit only to narrate from those he regarded as trustworthy narrators even if others discovered what necessarily required taking a critical view of him.
Imam Malik related several ahadith in the Muwatta (both most well-known versions of Imam Muhammad and al-Laythi) from ‘Abd al-Karim al-Basri Abu Umayyah.
He is not the only weak narrator (each differing in grade of weakness) imam Malik narrates from, there are more (about which some doubts have been raised), for example:
– Sharik b. Abi Namir / Numayr (although trustworthy according to Ibn Sa’id and Abu Dawud)
– ‘Asim b. ‘Ubayd Allah
– ‘Ata al-Khurasani (Imam al-Bukhari regarded him as weak although Yahya b. Ma’in and Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr disagreed with imam al-Bukhari)
– Dawud b. al-Husayn (although Yahya b. Ma’in regarded him as trustworthy)
Does this mean the Muwatta contains weak narrations? This question is answered here: http://english.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=274981 Although this fatwa is anonymous the information is correct as I have heard the same from my teacher. The different versions do have some mursal and mawquf ahadith, which technically means they are weak, and it has some balaghat, but those issues have been resolved by later scholars.
While researching on Allah’s Most Beautiful Names I stumbled upon some strange statements I couldn’t withhold from the general public.
In the introduction of the translator “Abu Rumaysah” of the book “Explanation to the Beautiful and Perfect Names of Allah”, which is a translation of an extraction of the tafsir by shaykh Abu ‘Abd ar-Rahman Nasir as-Sa’di rahimahullah on the Most Beautiful names of Allah he mentions imam ar-Razi rahimahullah and says: “and he is from the greatest opponents of Ahlu-s-Sunnah” p. 31). See here:
This is a blatant lie, intellectual fraud and academic dishonesty. Imam ar-Razi was not an opponent of Ahl us-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah, instead he was a defender of Ahl us-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah. This is well-known and doesn’t need reference.
Is it because the translator is a Salafi and as such opposed to the Asha’irah whom are not considered from Ahl us-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah in his limited view? I find this odd and very strange.
After that I stumbled upon what should be seen as a fatwa aparently from the in Salafi circles popular Saudi ‘shaykh’ Assim al-Hakeem where he outright denies there is a verse of the Qur’an or hadith that mentions Allah has 99 names subhan’Allah. He says: “There isn’t any verse or hadeeth that tells us what are these 99 names but there are speculations of scholars whether a particular set of names are actual names or attributes.” See here:
In another ‘fatwa’ he mentions that hadith which mentions the 99 names is not authentic. See here:
So firstly he contradicts himself and then mentions the hadith is not authentic.
I can’t take this ‘shaykh’ seriously. Imam Tirmidhi rahimahullah mentions the hadith with the 99 names in his Jami’ and says it is hasan; imam an-Nawawi mentions this in his Kitab al-Adhkar (Bab Asma’iLlahi al-Husna). This suffices I think. Who is Assim al-Hakeem compared to imam Tirmidhi?