Debunking the Harra Adhan Narration

Critical Analysis of the Harra Adhan Narration’s Authenticity

It is narrated from Sa’id ibn Abd al-Aziz that he stated that during the incident of the days of al-Harra, the adhan (call to prayer) and iqamah (call to commence prayer) were not called in the Prophet’s Mosque for three days. Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib remained in the Prophet’s Mosque during those days. He says, “When the time for prayer came, a sound of the adhan would be heard from the Prophet’s grave. Hearing this sound, I would say the iqamah and perform the prayer.”

This narration has been reported from Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib by three people:

1. Sa’id ibn Abd al-Aziz al-Tanukhi
2. Abu Hazim, Salama ibn Dinar
3. Muhammad ibn Sa’id al-Qurashi al-Makhzumi

The Narration of Sa’id ibn Abd al-Aziz:

Imam al-Darimi (may Allah have mercy on him) says:

أخبرنا مروان بن محمد، عن سعيد بن عبد العزيز، قال: ’’لما كان أيام الحرة لم يؤذن فى مسجد النبى صلى اللّٰه عليه وسلم ثلاثا، ولم يقم، ولم يبرح سعيد بن المسيب المسجد، وكان لا يعرف وقت الصلاة إلا بهمهمة يسمعها من قبر النبى صلى اللّٰه عليه وسلم فذكر معناه‘‘

[Sunan al-Darimi: 1/227]

This narration is mursal (disconnected) because Sa’id ibn Abd al-Aziz was not even born at the time of the incident of al-Harra.

The incident of al-Harra occurred in the year 63 AH (as mentioned in common history books).

And Sa’id ibn Abd al-Aziz’s birth was in the year 90 AH. Imam al-Dhahabi says:

’’ وُلِدَ: سَنَةَ تِسْعِيْنَ، فِي حَيَاةِ سَهْلِ بنِ سَعْدٍ ‘‘[Siyar A’lam al-Nubala: 8/32]

Meaning, the aforementioned was born twenty-seven years after the incident occurred. Therefore, it is clear that he heard this incident from someone else and did not mention their name, hence the narration is mursal.

It cannot be said that Sa’id ibn Abd al-Aziz heard this narration from Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib because, firstly, he narrated it using a format that indicates a disconnected chain (sigha al-irsal).

Secondly, Sa’id ibn Abd al-Aziz was born in 90 AH, as referenced above, and Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib passed away approximately three years after his birth.

Imam al-Dhahabi (may Allah have mercy on him) says:

’’ وَقَالَ أَبُو نُعَيْمٍ، وَعَلِيُّ بنُ المَدِيْنِيِّ: تُوُفِّيَ سَنَةَ ثَلاَثٍ وَتِسْعِيْنَ‘‘

[Siyar A’lam al-Nubala, Al-Risala ed.: 4/246]

This shows that it is not possible for Sa’id ibn Abd al-Aziz to have heard this narration from Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib.

The Narration of Abu Hazim Salama ibn Dinar:

Imam Ibn Sa’d (may Allah have mercy on him) says:

أخبرنا الوليد بن عطاء بن الأغر المكي قال: أخبرنا عبد الحميد بن سليمان عن أبي حازم قال: سمعت سعيد بن المسيب يقول: لقد رأيتني ليالي الحرة وما فى المسجد أحد من خلق اللّٰه غيري، وإن أهل الشام ليدخلون زمرا زمرا يقولون: انظروا إلى هذا الشيخ المجنون، وما يأتى وقت صلاة إلا سمعت أذانا فى القبر ثم تقدمت فأقمت فصليت وما فى المسجد أحدغيري.

[Al-Tabaqat al-Kubra by Ibn Sa’d: 5/132, and through the chain of Ibn Sa’d, it was narrated by Ibn al-Jawzi in (Muthir al-‘Azm al-Sakin: 2/301) with it, and narrated by Ibn Khuzaymah in his Tarikh: 4/119) and al-Lalika’i in (Karamat al-Awliya’: 9/183) and Abu Nu’aym in (Dala’il al-Nubuwwah: p. 567), all of them through the chain of Muhammad ibn Sulayman ibn Luwayn from ‘Abd al-Hamid with it].

The central narrator of this narration, ‘Abd al-Hamid ibn Sulayman al-Khuza’i, is weak (da’if).

Imam Ibn Ma’in (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 233 AH) says:

’’ لم یکن عبد الحمید بن سلیمان أخو فلیح بن سلیمان بثقۃ ‘‘[Ma’rifat al-Rijal by Ibn Ma’in: 1/57]

(Abd al-Hamid ibn Sulayman, the brother of Fulayh ibn Sulayman, was not trustworthy.)

Imam Ali ibn al-Madini (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 234 AH) says:

’’ کان فُلَیْح، وأخوہ عبد الحَمِیْد، ضَعِیْفَین‘‘[Su’alat Muhammad ibn Uthman ibn Abi Shaybah li ‘Ali ibn al-Madini – al-Faruq: p. 48]

(Fulayh and his brother ‘Abd al-Hamid were both weak.)

Imam Abu Zur’ah al-Razi (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 264 AH) says:

’’ضعیف الحدیث‘‘[Al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil: 6/14, and its chain is authentic]

(Weak in hadith.)

Imam Abu Hatim al-Razi (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 277 AH) says:

’’ عبد الحمید بن سلیمان أخو فلیح ، لیس بقوی ‘‘[Al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil: 6/14]

(‘Abd al-Hamid ibn Sulayman, the brother of Fulayh, is not strong.)

Imam al-Nasa’i (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 303 AH) says:

’’ عبد الحمید بن سلیمان أخو فلیح ضعیف ‘‘[Al-Du’afa’ wa al-Matrukin: p. 72]

(‘Abd al-Hamid ibn Sulayman, the brother of Fulayh, is weak.)

Imam Ibn Hibban (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 354 AH) says:

’’کَانَ مِمَّن یخطیء ویقلب الْأَسَانِید فَلَمَّا کثر ذَلِک فِیمَا روی بَطل الِاحْتِجَاج بِمَا حدث صَحِیحا لغَلَبَۃ مَا ذکرنَا علٰی رِوَایَتہ‘‘ [Al-Majruhin by Ibn Hibban: 2/141]

(He was among those who made mistakes and mixed up chains of narration. When this became frequent in what he narrated, using what he related as evidence became invalid, even if authentic, due to the prevalence of what we mentioned in his narrations.)

Imam al-Daraqutni (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 385 AH) mentioned him among the weak and abandoned narrators.

’’ عبد الحمید بن سلیمان مدنی ‘‘[Al-Du’afa’ wa al-Matrukun by al-Daraqutni: p. 27]

Imam al-Dhahabi (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 748 AH) says:

’’عبد الحمید بن سلیمان اخو فلیح عن أبی الزناد ضعفوہ جدا ‘‘[Al-Mughni fi al-Du’afa’ by al-Dhahabi: p. 44]

(‘Abd al-Hamid ibn Sulayman, the brother of Fulayh, from Abu al-Zinad; they considered him very weak.)

Hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 852 AH) says:

’’عبد الحمید بن سلیمان الخزاعی الضریر أبو عمر المدنی نزیل بغداد ضعیف ‘‘[Taqrib al-Tahdhib: p. 249]

(‘Abd al-Hamid ibn Sulayman al-Khuza’i al-Darir, Abu ‘Umar al-Madani, who settled in Baghdad, is weak.)

The Narration of Muhammad ibn Sa’id al-Qurashi:

Imam Ibn Sa’d (may Allah have mercy on him) says:

قال: أخبرنا محمد بن عمر قال: حدثني طلحة بن محمد بن سعيد عن أبيه قال: كان سعيد بن المسيب أيام الحرة فى المسجد لم يبايع ولم يبرح، وكان يصلي معهم الجمعة ويخرج إلى العيد، وكان الناس يقتتلون وينتبهون وهو فى المسجد لا يبرح إلا ليلا إلى الليل. قال فكنت إذا حانت الصلاة أسمع أذانا يخرج من قبل القبر حتي أمن الناس وما رأيت خبرا من الجماعة .

[Al-Tabaqat al-Kubra by Ibn Sa’d: 5/132]

This narration is mawdu’ (fabricated). It has several defects (‘ilal):

First Defect:

“Muhammad ibn Sa’id” has not been declared trustworthy (thiqah) by anyone other than Ibn Hibban; therefore, his reliability is unknown.

Second Defect:

“Talha ibn Muhammad” is unknown (ghayr ma’ruf).

Imam Abu Hatim al-Razi (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 277 AH) said:

’’ لا اعرف طلحۃ بن محمد بن سعید بن المسیب‘‘[Al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil by Ibn Abi Hatim: 4/476]

(I do not know Talha ibn Muhammad ibn Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib.)

Third Defect:

Imam Ibn Sa’d’s teacher, “Muhammad ibn ‘Umar” [al-Waqidi], is a known liar (kadhdhab).

Imam al-Shafi’i (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 204 AH) said:

’’ کتب الواقدی کذب ‘‘[Al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil by Ibn Abi Hatim: 208, and its chain is authentic]

(The books of al-Waqidi are lies.)

Imam Ali ibn al-Madini (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 234 AH) said:

’’ ولا ارضاہ فِی الحدیث، ولا فِی الانساب ولا فِی شیء ‘‘[Tarikh Baghdad: 5214]

(I do not accept him in hadith, nor in genealogy, nor in anything.)

Imam Ishaq ibn Rahwayh (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 237 AH) said:

’’ عندی ممن یضع الحدیث ‘‘[Al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil by Ibn Abi Hatim: 208, and its chain is authentic]

(In my view, he is among those who fabricate hadith.)

Imam Ibn al-Qaysarani (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 507 AH) said:

’’ اجمعوا علی ترکہ ‘‘[Ma’rifat al-Tadhkirah by Ibn al-Qaysarani: p. 163]

(There is a consensus to abandon him.)

Based on these defects, this narration is fabricated (mawdu’).

Conclusion: The incident narrated concerning Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib (may Allah have mercy on him) is not established. Therefore, its use as evidence by the Saba’iyyah and the Quburiyyun (grave-worshippers) for their respective purposes is baseless and rejected.

By:Kifayatullah Sanabali

Reference: https://ahlussunnah.net/?p=2756