TAKEN FROM

AHLU SUNNAH WAL

JAMAAH.COM

AN INVESTIGATION INTO
THE CLAIMS OF THE
TAKFIRES REGARDING THE
NUMEROUS ATHARS
ATTRIBUTED TO IBN ABBAS
CONCERNING HIS TAFSEER
OF THE VERSE “AND WHO SO
EVER DOES NOT RULE BY
WHAT ALLAH HAS
REVEALED, SUCH ARE THE
DISBELIEVERS”

BY ABDUL KAREEM IBN

OZZIE
The takfires have claimed the only authentic narration concerning the
tafseer (explanation) of the verse, “And whosoever does not judge by
what Allah has revealed, such are the disbelievers”, from Ibn Abbas is
the following:

We were informed by Mu’amar from Ibn Tawoos from his father: “Ibn
‘Abbas was asked about His saying: “and whoever does not rule
by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers”, [so]
he said: “In it there is kufr”. (This athar is saheeh and is part of a
longer athar from Ibn Abbas)

They also claim every other athar which is a tafseer of this verse
which is attributed to Ibn Abbas is weak. So this is a very important
claim so it is upon us to investigate this claim.

The 1st Takfire Claim

Ibn Jareer reported, “Narrated to me, Hunaad Narrated to me, my

father from Sufyaan from Mu’amr Ibn Rashaad from Ibn Tawoos
from his father from Ibn ‘Abbas “and whosoever does not
judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the
disbelievers”. [He said] ‘In it there is Kufr, but not like Kufr
in His Angels and His Books and His Messengers’ [Tafseer
Ibn Jareer, Vol. 6/256]

Ibn Jareer reported, “narrated to me, Ibn Wakee’ah who said,

‘Narrated to me, my father from Sufyaan from Mu’amr Ibn Rashaad
from Ibn Tawoos from his father from Ibn ‘Abbas, “and
whosoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such
are the disbelievers”. [He said] ‘In it there is Kufr, but not
like Kufr in His Angels and His Books and His Messengers’
[Tafseer Ibn Jareer, Vol. 6/256]
They say this isnaad is saheeh for these two athars, but many people
have not noticed the idraaj (interpolation) of Ibn Tawoos, which is
made clear by the narration found in the collection of

Imaam ‘Abdurazzaaq (who said): “We were informed by Mu’amar

from Ibn Tawoos from his father:

“Ibn Abbas was asked about His saying: “and whoever does not
rule by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers”,
[so] he said: “In it there is kufr.”

Ibn Tawoos said: “But not like kufr in His angels, and His books and
His messengers”‘

Idraj is an additional wording in the narration (in the hadeeth or

athar) which is the wording of the reporter of the text but seem to be
apart of the text itself, this is termed mudraj (interpolated). Such an
addition to the wording of the text may be found in the beginning, in
the middle, or at the end, often in explanation of a term used. Idraj
(interpolation) is mostly found in the text, a few examples show that
such additions can be found in the isnad as well, this is where the
reporter grafts a part of one isnad into another.

The 1st Rebuttal

Ibn Jareer reported, “Narrated to me, Hunaad Narrated to me, my

father from Sufyaan from Mu’amr Ibn Rashaad from Ibn Tawoos
from his father from Ibn ‘Abbas “and whosoever does not
judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the
disbelievers”. [He said] ‘In it there is Kufr, but not like Kufr
in His Angels and His Books and His Messengers’ [Tafseer
Ibn Jareer, Vol. 6/256]

Ibn Jareer reported, “narrated to me, Ibn Wakee’ah who said,

‘Narrated to me, my father from Sufyaan from Mu’amr Ibn Rashaad
from Ibn Tawoos from his father from Ibn ‘Abbas, “and
whosoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such
are the disbelievers”. [He said] ‘In it there is Kufr, but not
like Kufr in His Angels and His Books and His Messengers’
[Tafseer Ibn Jareer, Vol. 6/256]

Shaykh Albaanee states the isnaad (chain of narration) is saheeh

(authentic), in Silsilah as-Saheehah (vol 6. no.2552), however he did
not specify which of the two is the saheeh. However both isnaads
seem to be saheeh and even if one is not saheeh both narrations act
like supporting narrations to each other. So together both athar help
raise each others individual isnaads authenticity.

The takfires claim both these isnaads are saheeh however they claim
the wording in the above two athars “but not like Kufr in His
Angels and His Books and His Messengers” is that of Ibn
Tawoos and not Ibn ‘Abbas.

So they think there is idraj (interpolation) of Ibn Tawoos in both

athars.

The takfires claim that both athars have idraj (interpolation) of Ibn
Tawoos however this is very doubtful.

Firstly no scholar has stated that these two athars contain idraj from
Ibn Tawoos, even Shaykh Albaanee one of the greatest scholars of
hadeeth of this era did not mention any idraj (interpolation) of Ibn
Tawoos in his authentication of these athars.

Another thing is there are many shawahid narrations (supporting

narrations) supporting the fact that Ibn Abbas did state these two
athars with out any idraaj.
Ibn Taimiyyah said a shahid narrations (supporting narration) are,
“other narrations from the same reporters, a narration which
supports the text (meaning) of the original hadith, although it
 may be through a completely different isnad (or may be a
through the same or a similar isnad), is called a shahid
("witness").” Principles of Tafseer of Ibn Taimiyyah (trans.
M.A.H. Ansari, Al-Hidaayah, Birmingham, 1414/1993), p p. 156.
The shawahids to Ibn Abbas narration, “and whosoever does not
judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers”. ‘In
it there is Kufr, but not like Kufr in His Angels and His
Books and His Messengers’, are;
Imaam Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah in his book Hukm Taarik us-Salaah
(p.74) stated Via Abdur Razzaaq, (Sufyaan ath-Thawree from
Ma’mar from ’Abdullaah bin Taawoos from)
Ibn Abbas said: Within him is kufr and it is not like the kufr
one who disbelieves in Allaah, His Angels, His Books
and His Messengers.
And then in the same book the shaykh brings a supporting narration
to the first narration he gave of Ibn Abbas, the supporting narration is
Ibn Abbas said: “It is the kufr which does not expel one
from the religion” (about this second narration of Ibn Qayyim al-
Jawziyyah in his book Hukm Taarik us-Salaah of Ibn Abbas, Ibn
Katheer transmitted in his Tafseer, vol.6, p.163 from al-Haakim a
slight longer narration from Ibn Abbas including these words and he
said: “the hadeeth (athar) is Saheeh (authentic) on the conditions of
Shaykhayn (Bukhari and Muslim).”

Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah also stated in Madaarij us-Saalikeen,

vol.1, pp.335-336:

…Ibn Abbas said: “It is not the kufr which expels from the
religion, rather if one does it he has kufr within him but it is
not like the kufr of the one who disbelieves in Allah and the
Last Day.”
As Taawoos said. (In this statement Ibn Qayyim has clarified that
Ibn Tawoos said the same or a very similar statement to Ibn Abbas
hence Ibn Qayyim did not narrated what he said but he narrated what
Ataa said as his statement was completely different in wording from
Ibn Abbas statement though the meaning was the same).

Ataa said: “It is kufr less than kufr, dhulm less than dhulm and fisq
than fisq.”

Al-Waahidee stated in al-Waseet, vol.2, p.191 a similar narration as

those in Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyahs book Hukm Taarik us-Salaah
(p.74) and in the book Madaarij us-Saalikeen, vol.1, pp.335-336, from
Ibn Tawoos from Ibn Abbas. Al-Waahidee said:

Tawoos said: I said to Ibn Abbas: “Whoever does not rule by what
Allaah has revealed is he a disbeliever?”

Ibn Abbas replied: “Within him is kufr, yet it is not like the
kufr of the one who disbelieves in Allaah, the Last Day, His
Angels, His Books and His Messengers.”

So far in these section refuting the claim that there is Idraaj of Ibn
Tawoos in the two athars we have established there are three similar
narrations of Ibn Abbas (not including the two dispute narrations)
and one shahid (supporting narration).

The narrations are as follows:

The disputed athars of Ibn Abbas in this section are;

Ibn Jareer reported, “Narrated to me, Hunaad Narrated to me, my

father from Sufyaan from Mu’amr Ibn Rashaad from Ibn Tawoos
from his father
from Ibn ‘Abbas “and whosoever does not judge by what Allaah has
revealed, such are the disbelievers”. [He said] ‘In it there is Kufr,
but not like Kufr in His Angels and His Books and His
Messengers’ [Tafseer Ibn Jareer, Vol. 6/256]

Ibn Jareer reported, “narrated to me, Ibn Wakee’ah who said,

‘Narrated to me, my father from Sufyaan from Mu’amr Ibn Rashaad
from Ibn Tawoos from his father from Ibn ‘Abbas, “and whosoever
does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the
disbelievers”. [He said] ‘In it there is Kufr, but not like Kufr in
His Angels and His Books and His Messengers’ [Tafseer Ibn
Jareer, Vol. 6/256]

The three similar narrations which support the meaning of the

above two are;
1. Imaam Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah in his book Hukm Taarik us-
Salaah (p.74) stated “Via Abdur Razzaaq, (Sufyaan ath-Thawree
from Ma’mar from ’Abdullaah bin Taawoos from)
Ibn Abbas said: “Within him is kufr and it is not like the
kufr of the one who disbelieves in Allaah, His Angels,
His Books and His Messengers.”…”
2. Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah also stated in Madaarij us-Saalikeen,
vol.1, pp.335-336:

…Ibn Abbas said: “It is not the kufr which expels from the
religion, rather if one does it he has kufr with in him but it
is not like the kufr of the one who disbelieves in Allah and
the Last Day.”

3. Al-Waahidee stated in al-Waseet, vol.2, p.191 Tawoos said: I

said to Ibn Abbas: “Whoever does not rule by what Allaah has
revealed is he a disbeliever?”
Ibn Abbas replied: “Within him is kufr, yet it is not like the
kufr of the one who disbelieves in Allaah, the Last Day, His
Angels, His Books and His Messengers.”

The narration which supports the meaning of the above three is;

Ibn Abbas said: “It is the kufr which does not expel one
from the religion (it is not major kufr it is minor kufr)” Ibn
Qayyim al-Jawziyyah in his book Hukm Taarik us-Salaah, Ibn
Katheer transmitted in his Tafseer, vol.6, p.163 from al-Haakim a
slight longer narration of this athar from Ibn Abbas including these
words and he said: “the hadeeth (athar) is Saheeh (authentic) on the
conditions of Shaykhayn (Bukhari and Muslim).”

All of the above narrations are similar in wording and identical in

meaning and they are all from Ibn Abbas and no scholar as stated
they are not from him for that in any of these narrations there is any
Idraj from Ibn Tawoos.

The fact that all of these narrations have been deemed as athars of
Ibn Abbas by all the scholars of the past and present with out idraj
and are similar in wording and identical in meaning prove that the
takfires have been mistaken when they claimed that the two
narrations in Tafseer Ibn Jareer, Vol. 6/256 have idraj of Ibn Tawoos
in them.

The takfires tried to prove this Idraj by stating a narration of Imaam

‘Abdurazzaaq (who said): “We were informed by Mu’amar from Ibn
Tawoos from his father:

“Ibn Abbas was asked about His saying: “and whoever does not
rule by what Allaah has revealed, such are the disbelievers”,
[so] he said: “In it there is kufr.”
Ibn Tawoos said: “But not like kufr in His angels, and His books and
His messengers”‘

This narration gives the impression that the words ‘But not like kufr
in His angels, and His books and His messengers’ are idraaj of Ibn
Tawoos and that only the words ‘In it there is kufr’ are from Ibn
Abbas in the two narrations in Tafseer Ibn Jareer, Vol. 6/256.

The problem is this narration with this wording does not exist as a
narration of Imaam ‘Abdurazzaaq and is their incorrect.

What does exist as a narration from Imam ’AbdurRazzaaq in his

Tafseer, vol.1, p.1, no.191, is this correct narration:

Sufyaan ath-Thawree from Ma’mar from ’Abdullaah bin Taawoos

was asked "Is it (major) Kufr?" (Regarding the verse “and
whosoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the
disbelievers”)

Ibn Taawoos said “It is not like the kufr of the one who
disbelieves in Allaah, His Angels, His Books and His
Messengers.”

• This is reported by Imaam Ahmad in al-Eemaan, vol.4, p.160,

no.1420;

• Ibn Nasr al-Marwazee, Ta’dheem Qadr us-Salaah, vol.2, p.521,

no.570;

• at-Tabaree, Jaami’ Bayaan, vol.6, p.166;

• Ibn Abee Haatim, Tafseer, vol.4, p.1143, no.6435;

• Qaadee Wakee’, Akhbaar ul-Qudaat, vol.1, p.41;

 • Ibn Battah, al-Ibaanah, vol.2, p.736, no.1009 –

• and all of them from Imam ’AbdurRazzaaq in his Tafseer, vol.1,

p.1, no.191.

This correct narration proves there is no narration narrated by

ImamAbdurRazzaaq which indicates any idraaj from Ibn Tawoos in
the two narrations in Tafseer Ibn Jareer.

If the takfires try to dispute the correct narration of Imam

AbdurRazzaaq claiming there is correct and mine is incorrect. Then
below is shahid (supporting narrtion) to my narration I transmitted
from Imam AbdurRazzaaq.

From Wakee’ and Aboo Usaamah both from ath-Thawree from

Ma’mar bin Raashid from

’Abdullaah bin Taawoos (who said), “Within him is kufr, but

it is not like the kufr of one who disbelieves in Allaah, His
angels, His Books and His Messengers.”

Shaykh al-Albaanee authenticated it in his commentary on the book

al-Eemaan (p. 307) by Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah. So this
shahid is saheeh (authentic).

Ruling On The Two Athars

The two athars are saheeh narrations in Tafseer Ibn Jareer, Vol.
6/256 which are both from Ibn Abbas with out any Idraaj from Ibn
Tawoos.

The 2nd Takfire Claim

al-Haakim narrated, from the way of ‘Ali bin Harb, from Sufyaan bin
‘Uyaynah from Hishaam bin Hujayr from Tawoos, that Ibn ‘Abbas
said: “It is not the kufr which you tend to, ‘Whoever does not
rule by what Allaah has revealed, such are the
disbelievers’ is kufr lesser than [greater] kufr”. [-See al-
Mustadrak, volume 2/313]

They claim this athar is weak due to Hishaam bin Hujayr who they
believe to have been declared weak by some amongst the salaf.

The 2nd Rebuttal

al-Haakim narrated, from the way of ‘Ali bin Harb, from Sufyaan bin
‘Uyaynah from Hishaam bin Hujayr from Tawoos, that Ibn ‘Abbas
said: “It is not the kufr that you are going towards (in your
minds), it is not the kufr that expels one from the religion,
“And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed –
then it is those who are disbelievers.” {al-Maa’idah (5): 44}...is
kufr less than kufr. [-See (al-Haakim) al-Mustadrak, volume
2/313]

• This athar of Ibn Abbas is also reported by: Sa’eed bin Mansoor,
Sunan, vol.4, p.1482, no.749;

• Ahmad, al-Eemaan, vol.4, p.160, no.1419 via Ibn Battah in his al-
Ibaanah, vol.2, p.736, no.1010;

• Muhammad bin Nasr al- Marwazee, Ta’dheem Qadr us-Salaah,

vol.2, p.521, no.569;

• Ibn Abee Haatim, Tafseer, vol.4, p.1143, no.6434 (al-Baaz

edition);

• Ibn ’AbdulBarr, at-Tamheed, vol.4, p.237;

• al-Bayhaqee, vol.8, p.20.

The takfires have alleged that this athar of Ibn Abbas is weak (daeef)
due to the presence of a narrator called Hishaam bin Hujayr, who the
takfires claim he is a weak narrator.

Al-Jarh wa al- Tadeel (Criticism and Praise) of Hishaam bin

Hujayr

Ibn Shabramah said: “there is no one in Makkah like him”,

al-’Ijlee said: “he was thiqah (trustworthy) and a man of

theSunnah.”

Aboo Haatim ar-Raazee said: “his hadeeth are to be

documented (i.e. accepted)”,

Ibn Sa’d said: “he is thiqah and has narrated ahaadeeth.”

Ibn Shaaheen said: “he is thiqah” and

Ibn Hibbaan also deemed him to be thiqah.

Zakariyyah bin Yahyaa as-Saajee (d.307 AH), one of the

students of Imaam al-Muzanee, stated: “Sudooq (truthful and
thus acceptable)”

adh-Dhahabee said: “he is thiqah” and adh-Dhahabee stated in

al-Kaashif: “Hishaam bin Huajyr is thiqah (trustworthy).”

Abdullaah bin Ahmad said: “I asked Yahyaa bin Ma’een about

Hishaam bin Hujayr and he weakened him very much”. [See al-'Ilal
wa ma'rifat ar-Rijaal, volume 2/30]

Abdullaah bin Ahmad,“I asked Yahyaa bin Ma’een about him

(Hishaam bin Hujayr) and he said that he is very weak. I asked Yahya
‘Is Hishaam bin Hujayr more beloved to you than ’Amru bin Muslim?’
Yahya replied: ‘Na’am (‘yes’).’”

Shaykh Saleem al-Hilaalee states “Amru bin Muslim…is al-

Janadee”

Yahyaa Ibn Ma’een weakened him in the narration of ad-Dooree

yet in the narration of Ibn ul-Junayd Yahyaa ibn Ma’een said about
Amru: “there is no problem with him” and in at-Taqreeb it is
reported that Yahyaa bin Ma’een stated about Amru: “he is sudooq
yet has some errors.”

So based on the testimony of Yahyaa bin Ma’een, Hishaam bin Hujayr

is stronger than ’Amru bin Muslim about whom Imaam Ibn Ma’een
said: “there is no problem with him.”

It is claimed that Imaam Yahyaa bin Ma’een intended a severe

weakness of Hishaam bin Hujayr, yet he described Hishaam in the
narration of Ishaaq bin Mansoor as being “Saalih (acceptable in
narration)” and this is a commendation.

Yahya bin Ma’een, has two narrations on Hishaam, one in which he

weakens him and the other wherein he commends him. In this
instance we are to refer to the views of other scholars in order to
ascertain the correct view on the narrator.

Abdullaah bin Ahmad said, “I heard my father [Imaam Ahmad]

say: ‘Hishaam bin Hujayr is a Makki, and he is weak in hadeeth’”
[al-'Ilal wa ma'rifat ar-Rijaal, volume 1/204].

Yahyaa al-Qattaan deemed Hishaam bin Hujayr to be weak.

Ali bin al-Madeenee and Yahya bin Sa’eed deemed Hishaam bin
Hujayr to be weak. [al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel, volume 9/54]
These jarhs (criticisms) of Hishaam bin Hujayr by Ali bin al-
Madeenee, Yahya bin Sa’eed, Yahyaa al-Qattaan and Imaam Ahmad
are known as jarh al-mubham (the vague general jarh), this can be
understood by the fact they only considered Hishaam weak (daeef).

Shaykh Muqbil said, “And as for the Jarh which is not Mufassar,
then it is like saying, "Daeef" (weak).”

Shaykh Muqbil when asked,When it is said, al-Jarh al-Mufassar",

then what is this al-Jarh al-Mufassar"? The Shaykh replied,
“Examples of this has preceded, saying "Matrook Da'eef Jiddan
(Abandoned and very weak), Munkar al-Hadeeth (His Hadeeth are
rejected), Kadhdhaab (Liar), Akdhabun-Naas (the greatest of liars),
ilaihil-muntahaa fil-kadhib (all lies end with him)

The narrator Hishaam bin Hujayrs adaalah (integrity), has been

established by many scholars (his tabdeels (praises) were previously
mentioned). So only a jarh al-mufassir can be accepted as a criticism
of him. So the jarh al-mubhams of Ali bin al-Madeenee, Yahya bin
Sa’eed, Yahyaa al-Qattaan and Imaam Ahmad can not be accepted as
jarhs on him.

Imaam Ahmad said “he (Hishaam bin Hujayr) is not strong.”

(Many people have mistakenly taken this commented to mean

Hishaam bin Hujayr is completely weak and is thus a weak narrator.
However this is not the case as this statement only implies Imam
Ahmad did not think he was thiqah (reliable), which would mean he
was completely strong. But this means based on the statement of
Imam Ahmad Hishaam bin Hujayr should be classified as Sudooq
(trustworthy, the level under thiqah) due to some of his errors. These
errors meant Hishaam was a strong narrator of hadeeth however he
had some weakness therefore he was not a completely strong narrator
of hadeeth.
The adh-Dhahabee of his time, Shaykh al-Mu’allimee al-
Yamaanee stated in at-Tankeel (vol.1, p.240): The words ‘he is not
strong’ negates absolute strength even if absolute weakness is not
affirmed; and the words “he is not strong” only negates a complete
level of strength.

Imaam al-Haafidh adh-Dhahabee stated in al-Muqaddimat ul-

Muqidhah (p.319 – with the explanation of Shaykh Saleem al-
Hilaalee) that: “It has been stated about a group of narrators
that “he is not strong” yet they have been utilised (i.e. their hadeeths
have been relied upon to make Islamic rulings)”

Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah in regards to Iqaamat ud-

Daleel [Establishing the Evidence] as found in al-Fataawaa al-
Kubraa, vol.3, p.243, in discussing ’Utbah bin Humayd ad-
Dabbee al-Basree: “It has been relayed from Imaam Ahmad that
he said: “he is weak and he is not strong” however, the intent of
this term of expression (for a narrator) is that: his hadeeth are not
saheeh but rather is hadeeth are hasan. So they (some of the
early scholars) would name such hadeeth as being “da’eef” yet still
utilise them because they were hasan.”

Shaykh al-Albaanee also said (p.254): The statement of

Ahmad…:“he is not strong” does not negate the narrator as only
absolute strength is negated from a narrator described with this as is
apparent to those with understanding of this science.)

Conclusion On Hishaam bin Hujayr

After all the jarh and tabdeel on Hishaam bin Hujayr what seems to
be the most correct classification of him is, that he is not thiqah
because he has been weakened by some scholars, nor is he daeef due
to the strengthening of him by other scholars so he is as Haafidh
Ibn Hajar said: “he (Hishaam bin Hujayr) is Sudooq
(trustworthy) but he does have some errors.” This is tabdeel
mufassar as he has replied to the weakening of hishaam by other
scholars.

Ruling On The Athar

Al-Haakim said: “This hadeeth has an authentic chain of

transmission and Shaykhayn did not transmit it.”

Adh-Dhahabee agreed with him (Al-Haakim).

al-Albaanee stated in as-Saheehah, vol.6, p.113: It would have been

more deserving that they (said: “...on the conditions of Shaykhayn
(Bukhaaree and Muslim)” as the isnad is of this type. Then I saw that
al-Haafidh Ibn Katheer transmitted in his Tafseer, vol.6, p.163
from al-Haakim that he said: “the hadeeth is Saheeh on the
conditions of Shaykhayn (Bukhari and Muslim).” So it is obvious that
this statement is omitted in the printed edition of ‘al-Mustadrak (by
al-Haakim)” and ibn Katheer also ascribes the narration, (in)
summarised (form), to ibn Abee Haatim.

The 3rd Takfire Claim

al-Haafith Ibn Nasr said: “Narrated to us Yahya bin Yahya, Sufyaan

bin ‘Uyaynah informed us, from Hishaam (bin Hujayr), from Tawoos
that Ibn ‘Abbas said concerning His saying, “…such are the
disbelievers”, he said ‘It is not the kufr which you are going
to’.

They believe this sanad (chain of narration) has all its people are
trustworthy (sudooq) narrators except Hishaam bin Hujayr.

They state he has been weakened by the great scholars: Such as ‘Ali
bin al-Madeenee, Yahya bin Sa’eed. [see: al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel, volume
9/54]
Abdullaah bin Ahmad said: “I asked Yahya about Hishaam bin Hujayr
and he weakened him very much”. [See al-'Ilal wa ma'rifat ar-Rijaal,
volume 2/30]

And he also said: “I heard my father [Imaam Ahmad] say: ‘Hishaam

bin Hujayr is a Makki, and he is weak in hadeeth’” [See: Ibid, volume
1/204]

And also, al-’Uqayli recalled him in ad-Du’afaa’.

They therefore conclude this athar is weak due to the presence of

Hishaam bin Hujayr in the sanad.
The 3rd Rebuttal

al-Haafith Ibn Nasr said: “Narrated to us Yahya bin Yahya, Sufyaan

bin ‘Uyaynah informed us, from Hishaam (bin Hujayr), from Tawoos
that Ibn ‘Abbas said “And whoever does not judge by what
Allah has revealed – then it is those who are
disbelievers.”{al-Maa’idah (5): 44} It is not the kufr (the major
kufr) that you are going towards (in your minds as it is
minor kufr).

The takfires have asserted this athar of Ibn Abbas is weak because
although all the narrators are Sudooq (trustworthy) they assert the
narrator Hishaam bin Hujayr is a weak narrator in the isnad, who
makes the isnad weak.

However the jarh wal al- tadeel (criticism and praise) of Hishaam bin
Hujayr has preceded and it has been proved beyond doubt that he is
at least on the level of a Sudooq narrator.

Also a similar athar (the previous one in this article) was deemed as
saheeh by Al-Haakim , Adh-Dhahabee and al-Albaanee even though
Hishaam bin Hujayr was in the isnad, so they must have at least
deemed him to be Sudooq.
Ruling On The Athar

This athar is at least hasan and at best saheeh. What supports this is
the fact that all the narrators are Sudooq (trustworthy).

The 4th Takfire Claim

Ibn Jareer at-Tabari said, narrated to us al-Muthanna, ‘Abdullaah bin

Saaleh said, Mu’awiyah bin Saaleh told us, that ‘Ali bin Abi Talhah,
from Ibn ‘Abbas that he said concerning His saying: “Whoever
does not rule by what Allaah has revealed, such are the
disbelievers”, ‘Whoever rejects what [He] revealed then he
has disbelieved, and whoever affirms it, and does not rule
by it, then he is a thaalim and faasiq’” [See Ibn Jareer's tafseer,
volume 4/256]

The takfires belief this athar of Ibn Abbas is very weak due to:
• Abdullah bin Saaleh being a weak narrator in the isnaad
• Ali ibn Talah being a weak narrator in the isnaad
• And the isnad having a missing narrator which makes the athar
munqati (broken- a type of daeef (weak) hadeeth or athar).

The 4th Rebuttal

Ibn Jareer at-Tabari said, narrated to us al-Muthanna, ‘Abdullaah

bin Saaleh said, Mu’awiyah bin Saaleh told us, that ‘Ali bin Abi
Talhah, from Ibn ‘Abbas that he said concerning His saying:
“Whoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed, such are the
disbelievers”, ‘Whoever rejects what Allaah has revealed has
disbelieved, whoever acknowledges it yet does not rule by it is a sinful
transgressor (thaalim and fasiq).’”

Reported by at-Tabaree in Jaami’ ul-Bayaan, vol.6, p.166; and

Ibn Abee Haatim in his Tafseer, vol.4, p.1142, no.6426 and p.1146,
no.6450

The takfires belief this athar of Ibn Abbas is very weak due to two
narrators in the isnad of this athar Abdullah bin Saaleh and Ali ibn
Talah both being weak. Also they further claim the athar is very weak
because the isnad has a missing narrator which makes the athar
munqati which means it is daeef.

Al-Jarh wa al- Tadeel (Criticism and Praise) of Abdullaah

bin Saaleh

And Abdullaah bin Saaleh is: Ibn Muhammed bin Muslim al-Juhni
al-Misree,

al-Layth bin Sa’d described him as weak.

al-Manwaawi quotes, in Fayd al-Qadeer, volume 2/397, Ibn Abi

Haatim saying regarding ‘Abdullaah bin Saaleh: “He is really bad in
hadeeth when narrating from Mu’awiyah bin Saaleh”.

Abdullaah bin Ahmad said: I asked my father about ‘Abdullaah

bin Saaleh, the scribe of al-Layth bin Sa’d, so he said: “He was at first
firm, then he became corrupt, and he is nothing.”

Ibn al-Madeenee said: “I do not narrate from him anything”. [See

al-'Ilal wa Ma'rifat ar-Rijaal, volume 2/213]

an-Nisaaee said: “He is not trustworthy”

Ahmad bin Saaleh said: “He is accused, and is nothing”

Saaleh Jazarah said: “… he is to me a liar in hadeeth”

Abu Haatim said: “Trustworthy, truthful, I never knew him as such”

Ibn Hibbaan mentions: He was righteous within himself, but many
false ahadeeth were given to him by his neighbour, and I heard Ibn
Khuzaymah say, ‘He had a neighbour, with whom there was much
enemity, and he [the neighbour] would narrate the false ahadeeth
upon the Shaykh of Abu Saaleh, and write it in a handwriting similar
to ‘Abdullaah and he would throw it in his house amongst his books,
so ‘Abdullaah would imagine that that was his own handwriting, and
so he would end up narrating it. [See al-Majrooheen for Ibn Hibbaan]

Ibn Mu’een used to consider him trustworthy

Abu Zur’ah said: “To me he wasn’t a person who intentionally lied,

and he was acceptable in hadeeth”. [See, al-Mizaan for ath-Thahabi,
volume 4/441]

Conclusion

The jarh on Abdullaah bin Saaleh is jarh al-mufassal and al-mufassar

(the detailed and the explained criticism) and the tadeel on him is
tadeel al-mubham (the vague general praise). As this is the case the
criticism takes precedence over the praise on him. So he is deemed as
a weak narrator.

Shaykh Muqbil when asked, ‘When both Jarh and Tadeel are
combined in a person, then which of them is given precedence?’ He
replied, "When the Jarh is Mufassar (explained), it is given
precedence (over the tadeel that is general).

Al-Jarh wa al- Tadeel (Criticism and Praise) of Ali bin Abi

Talhah

And in the isnaad is ‘Ali bin Abi Talhah, and his full name was Saalem
bin al-Makhaariq al-Haashimi.
Ahmad bin Hanbal said: “‘Ali bin Abi Talhah, has many criticisms
upon him (an important point here is Imam Ahmad himself is not
criticising him or even saying the criticism against Ali are correct).”
[See ad-Du'afaa`, volume 3/234]

Ya’qoob narrated from Sufyaan that he is weak and not reliable

(not thiqah (reliable).

Shaykh Muqbil said, “And as for the Jarh which is not Mufassar,
then it is like saying, "Da'eef" (weak).”

Aboo Ja’jar an-Nahaasee stated in an-Naasikh wa’l-Mansookh

(p.75): He (Ali) himself is thiqah and Sudooq.

an-Nisaaee said: “There is no problem with him.” [See al-Mizaan for

ath-Thahabi, volume 3/134]

al-’Ajali said: “He is trustworthy.” [See Tareekh al-Thiqaat, page

283]

Ibn Hibban considered him from the trustworthy reliable narrators,

as can be seen in ath-Thiqaat, volume 7/211.

Ibn Hajar also said in al-’Ujaab fee Bayaan il-Asbaab, vol.1, p.207
(Dammaam: Daar Ibn Jawzee, 1997 CE):26’Ali is Sudooq…

Adh-Dhahabee stated in Meezaan ul-I’tidaal (vol.1, pp.3-4) that:

I have not resorted to refer to those about whom it has been said “his
station is that of sidq (truthfulness)”, “there is no problem with him”,
“Saalih ul-Hadeeth”, “his hadeeth are to be documented” or “Shaykh”
– for these terms of expression and the likes indicate the lack of
absolute weakness.

Ibn Abee Haatim stated in al-Jarh wa’t-Ta’deel, vol.2, p.37:

If it is said about a narrator: “Sudooq”, “his level is that of sidq
(truthfulness)” and “there is no problem with him” – then his hadeeth
are documented and looked at and this is of the second level.”

So Ibn Abee Haatim and adh Dhahabee consider the term, “Sudooq
(truthful)”, that which renders a narrator as having his hadeeth (or
athars) documented and recorded and does not prove that the
narrator is completely weak. So the narrator only has some slight
weakness (not absolute weakness), but his hadeeth are still good
enough to be used. So the hadeeth (or athars) of Ali bin Abi Talhah
narrates are not saheeh (authentic) or daeef (weak) but they are
hasan (good).

Conclusion

The narrator Ali bin Abi Talhah has had his adaalah (integrity)
established by the scholars as they have stated he was a thiqah and
sudooq.

So only a jarh mufassir can be accepted as a criticism of him.

However the jarh against him is not mufassir it is mubham (vague
and general).

Also this jarh has been over looked due to this tadeel mufassar of Ibn
Hajar in which he explains the condition of Ali and his narrations.

In Hadee us-Saaree (p.414) Ibn Hajar stated, “What is apparent

from the words of those Imams is that his (Ali’s) hadeeth at the
beginning were sound (saheeh) and then he began to get confused.

This demonstrates that what he narrated from the Ahl ul-Hadhq

(such as Yahyaa bin Ma’een, al-Bukhaaree, Aboo Zur’ah and Aboo
Haatim who were all major hadeeth scholars of the past) are
authentic hadeeth (athars as well). As for what other Shaykhs have
narrated from him then these are to be withheld (from accepting or
rejecting).”

In conclusion as this hadeeth has been narrated in Ibn Abee Haatim

in his tafseer based on the words of Ibn Hajar above and the fact that
the tadeel in Ali’s case is given preference to the jarh as the tadeel is
mufassar and the jarh is mubham. In this narration there is no
problem in Ali he is at lest sudooq at best thiqah.

Is The Isnad Munqati (Broken)?

A munqati hadeeth/athar is a hadeeth/athar where the name of a

narrator anywhere before the Taabieen (successor) is missing. So a
munqati narration has a missing link in the isnad, which is closer to
the hadeeth scholar who recorded the narration (like Bukhari).

Sufyaan said: “He is a Shaami, he is not avoided nor taken as

evidence. As for his narration from Ibn ‘Abbas, then is it munqati (not
connected), for he did not hear from him. Ibn Abi Haatim said: I
heard my father say, I heard Daheem saying: ‘Ali bin Abi Talhah did
not hear tafseer from Ibn ‘Abbas.” [See al-Maraseel, page 117]

Ibn Hibban said: “He narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas and never saw him”.
[See, ath-Thiqaat, 7/211]

Aboo Ja’jar an-Nahaasee stated in an-Naasikh wa’l-Mansookh

(p.75): The one who attacks this chain of transmission says ‘Ibn Abee
Talhah did not hear from Ibn ’Abbaas, he only took the tafseer from
Mujaahid and ’Ikrimah’, yet this fact should not be a cause for attack,
because Ibn Abee Talhah took from two trustworthy men (Mujaahid
and ’Ikrimah’). He himself is thiqah and Sudooq.

As-Suyootee stated in al-Itqaan, vol.2, p.188: A people have said

that: ‘Ibn Abee Talhah did not hear tafseer from Ibn ’Abbaas, rather
he took from Mujaahid or Sa’eed bin Jubayr.’
Ibn Hajar stated in Tahdheeb ut-Tahdheeb, vol.7, p.339:
’Ali bin Abee Talhah narrated from Ibn ’Abbaas but he did not hear
from him, Mujaahid is in between them both.

Adh-Dhahabee stated in Meezaan ul-’I’tidaal, vol.3, p.134:

He took the tafseer of Ibn ’Abbaas from Mujaahid yet he did not
mention Mujaahid rather he hurried it (mursal) from Ibn ’Abbaas.

Ibn Hajar also said in al-’Ujaab fee Bayaan il-Asbaab, vol.1, p.207
(Dammaam: Daar Ibn Jawzee, 1997 CE):26… he did not meet Ibn
’Abbaas rather he took from the thiqaat from his companions and for
this reason al-Bukhaaree, Ibn Abee Haatim and others depend upon
this copy.

So the isnaad is not munqati (not connected) as some takfires think

because the missing narrator has been identified through other
sources. So now the isnaad is no longer munqati but now it is muttasil
(connected). The missing narrator was Mujaahid as stated by Ibn
Hajar previously in this article.

He was a great scholar of tafsir who learnt tafsir from Ibn Abbas
directly. He was deemed as thiqah as state previously in this section.
Due to this his inclusion in the isnaad, he helps to strength the isnaad
as he is a thiqah and therefore does not to weaken the isnaad.

Ruling On The Athar

As-Suyootee stated in al-Itqaan, vol.2, p.188: Al-Haafidh Ibn

Hajar said: after I realised the route of the transmission, which is
thiqah (trustworthy), (I saw that) there s no problem in it.

Shaykh Aboo Usaamah Saleem bin ’Eeid al-Hilaalee said “The

chain of transmission is hasan and the narrators are all thiqaat
(trustworthy).”
The Shawahids (The Supporting Narrations)
Below are two saheeh narrations from Abdullaah bin Tawoos and
Ataa Bin Abee Rabaah that act as supporting narrations to the
five athars that are from Ibn Abbas which were discussed earlier
in this article.
Ibn Taimiyyah said shahid narrations (supporting narration) are,
“other narrations from the same reporters, a narration which
supports the text (meaning) of the original hadeeth (athar),
although it may be through a completely different isnad (or may
be a through the same or a similar isnad), is called a shahid
("witness").” Principles of Tafseer of Ibn Taimiyyah (trans.
M.A.H. Ansari, Al-Hidaayah, Birmingham, 1414/1993), p p. 156.
So shahid athars support each other's authenticity like witnesses to
each other. Therefore the five athars document so far in this article
from Ibn Abbas which are all either saheeh or hasan now become
either saheeh li dhatihi (authentic in and of its self) if the athar was
already saheeh or saheeh li ghayrihi (authentic due to supporting
narrations) if the athar was hasan before.

1st Shahid Of Abdullaah bin Tawoos

Abdullaah bin Taawoos also transmits it and he is thiqah

(trustworthy), for he reported via his father: Within him is kufr,
but it is not like the kufr of one who disbelieves in Allaah
and the Last Day.

This is reported by Sufyaan bin Sa’eed ath-Thawree (d.161 AH) in his

Tafseer (vol.101, p.241) via at-Tahaawee in Mushkil ul-Aathaar, vol.2,
p.317.

The chain of transmission is authentic and the narrators are thiqah

and are utilised by the Shaykhayn (Bukhari and Muslim) and deemed
authentic based on the conditions of the Shaykhayn.
Sa’d bin ’Abdullaah Aal Humayd, in his edit of Sunan Sa’eed bin
Mansoor (vol.4, p.1484), has claimed that this narration has a defect
due to a severance of the narrations between ath-Thawree and Ibn
Tawoos.

Yet this is an error because ath-Thawree heard from ’Abdullaah bin

Tawoos and ath-Thawree narrated from him as documented in a
hadeeth in Saheeh Muslim! So how can it be said that ath-Thawree
did not hear from ’Abdullaah bin Tawoos?!

This is another narration which supports the one above, from: Wakee’
and Aboo Usaamah both from ath-Thawree from Ma’mar bin Raashid
from ’Abdullaah bin Tawoos: Within him is kufr, but it is not
like the kufr of one who disbelieves in Allaah, His angels,
His Books and His Messengers.

The chain of transmission is saheeh; shaykh al-Albaanee

authenticated it in his commentary on the book al-Eemaan (p. 307)
by Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah.

• It was reported by: Imaam Ahmad in al-Eemaan, vol.4, pp.158-

159, no.1414;

• Muhammad bin Nasr al-Marwazee, Ta’dheem Qadr us-Salaah,

vol.2, p.521, no.571, p.522, no.572;

• al-Fareeyaabee, Tafseer as documented in ad-Durar al-

Manthoor, vol.3, p.87

• at-Tahaawee also records it via him, vol.2, pp.317-318;

• at- Tabaree, Jaami’ ul-Bayaan, vol.6, p.166;

• Ibn Battah, al-Ibaanah, vol.2, p.734, no.1005;

Another narration which supports the other two previously
mentioned narration of ’Abdullaah bin Tawoos is Sufyaan ath-
Thawree from Ma’mar from ’Abdullaah bin Tawoos: “it is kufr”, Ibn
Tawoos said It is not like the kufr of the one who disbelieves
in Allaah, His Angels, His Books and His Messengers.

• This is reported by Imaam Ahmad in al-Eemaan, vol.4, p.160,

no.1420;

• Ibn Nasr al-Marwazee, Ta’dheem Qadr us-Salaah, vol.2, p.521,

no.570;

• at-Tabaree, Jaami’ Bayaan, vol.6, p.166;

• Ibn Abee Haatim, Tafseer, vol.4, p.1143, no.6435;

• Qaadee Wakee’, Akhbaar ul-Qudaat, vol.1, p.41;

• Ibn Battah, al-Ibaanah, vol.2, p.736, no.1009 –

• and all of them from ’AbdurRazzaaq in his Tafseer, vol.1, p.1,

no.191.

Also Shaykh Albaanee narrates another athar of Abdullah bin Tawoos

with different wording from the pervious three athars above but the
meaning is the same, so it supports them as a shahid.

Shaykh Albaanee said from Sa’eed is ibn Ziyaad ash-Shaybaanee al-

Makki from Tawoos about the verse ,“And whosoever does not
judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the disbelievers”, “it is
not the kufr that ejects one from the religion.” Its isnaad is
saheeh said Shaykh Albaanee in Silsilah as-Saheehah (vol 6. no.2552).
Shaykh Albaanee said, “ibn Ma’een and al-Ijlee and ibn Hibbaan and
others declared him (Sa’eed) trustworthy, and a group narrate from
him.”

2nd Shahid Of Ataa Bin Abee Rabaah

Ataa said: “Kufr less than kufr, dhulm less than dhulm
and fisq less than fisq.” It was relayed via the route of Sufyaan
ath-Thawree from Ibn Jurayj from Ataa’.

This has been recorded by: Imaam Ahmad, al-Eemaan, vol.4, pp.159-
160, no.1417 and p.161,
no.1422;

Imaam Ahmad, Masaa’il Abee Daawood, p.209;

at-Tabaree, Jaami’ ul-Bayaan, vol.6, p.165, 166;

Muhammad bin Nasr al-Marwazee, Ta’dheem Qadr us-Salaah, vol.2,

p.522, no.575;

Ibn Battah, al-Ibaanah, vol.2, p.735, no.1007 and pp.736-737,

no.1011;

Ibn Abee Haatim, Tafseer, vol.4, p.1149, no.6464

and al-Qaadee Wakee’, Akhbaar ul-Qudaat, vol.1, p.43. This chain of

transmission has narrators who are all thiqaat and

Imaam al-Albaanee authenticated it in as-Saheehah, vol.6, p.114

Final Conclusion

The takfires have claimed the only authentic narration concerning the
tafseer (explanation) of the verse, “And whosoever does not judge by
what Allah has revealed, such are the disbelievers”, from Ibn Abbas is
the following: We were informed by Mu’amar from Ibn Tawoos from
his father: “Ibn ‘Abbas was asked about His saying: “and whoever
does not rule by what Allaah has revealed, such are the
disbelievers”, [so] he said: “In it there is kufr”. They also claim
every other athar which is a tafseer of this verse which is attributed to
Ibn Abbas is weak.

But this assertion of theirs is incorrect because from what has

preceded it is clear that there are at lest six athars some of which are
saheeh li dhatihi (authentic in and of its self) and others which are
saheeh li ghayrihi (authentic due to supporting narrations).

These six athars from Ibn Abbas are supported by two saheeh
supporting narrations.