PDA

Voir la version complète : "Blacks" in early Islamic history (Arabs, Non-Arabs, Sahaba, Ahlul-Bayt) - Shaykh Dawud Walid



Page : [1] 2

talib abdALLAH
08/07/2019, 21h24
اَلحَمدُلِلهِ رَبِ العَلَمِينَ ؕ وَالصَّلَوةُ وَ السَّلَامُ عَلَى سَيِـّـدِ المُرسَلِين
اَمَّا بَعدُ فَاَعُوذُ بِاللهِ مِنَ الشَّيطَنِ الرَّجِيمِ

بِسمِ اللهِ الرَّحمَنِ الرَّحِيم


السلام عليكم ورحمة الله تعالى وبركاته

Asalamu 3alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh







*






"Blacks" in early Islamic history

(Arabs, Non-Arabs, Sahaba, Ahlul-Bayt)





Shaykh Dawud Walid






*






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaYePyQ7rd0

talib abdALLAH
11/07/2019, 21h02
Centering Black Narrative: An Interview with Imam Dawud Walid

Source : https://sapelosquare.com/2017/02/23/centering-black-narrative-an-interview-with-imam-dawud-walid/

By Dawud Walid & Will Caldwell







We interviewed Imam Dawud Walid about a new book he co-authored with Ahmad Mubarak, Centering Black Narrative: Black Muslim Nobles among the Early Pious Muslims. The book profiles various dark-skinned companions of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ who, today, would would be perceived as “black.” The authors also address the historical relationship between Arabia and Africa, early Muslim perceptions of blackness, and the limitations of our current racial categories for comprehending this history. Pick up a copy on Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/Centering-Black-Narrative-Muslim-Muslims/dp/099827819X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1487872375&sr=1-1&keywords=centering+black+narrative)!



Could you tell us a little bit about the premise of the book and who you’re writing for?


Well, the book that Ahmad Mubarak and I wrote is called Centering Black Narrative: Black Muslim Nobles among the Early Pious Muslims. So what happened was that, during Black History Month two years ago, Ahmad and I began to start writing short pieces every day about a few different personalities in early Islamic history that, if they were alive in contemporary time, looked at based upon phenotype, they’d be considered black. And the reason why we started writing these posts is that, in early Islamic history, it seemed that the only black person that Muslims would talk about is Bilal. So we got tired of the tokenization of Bilal so we decided to start some posts. We assessed from the positive feedback we got that we would expand on some of what we wrote and put that into book form. So that is the genesis of the project.


Now this book has three audiences. The first primary audience is Black American Muslims. The primary reason for this is we believe that Muslims who are African American or from African descent have basically been relegated as not having as much interpretive authority on Islam in the West. We also believe that, if people who are black were to read about this, and to see that people who would be considered black, were involved in the early formation of the ummah of the Prophet Muhammad this would be something positive and be therapeutic since blackness has been erased or relegated, in most cases, in early Islamic history.


The second audience is Muslims who aren’t black, for the similar reasons that it’s important for Muslims who aren’t black to know about these early Islamic personalities. But also how many Arabs who were alive in the early times would have been considered black today, and to clarify the misperception of Arab-Black mutual exclusivity. Of course, those two identities are not mutually exclusive. So we elaborate on that in the book because we think that’s important for Muslims who aren’t black and especially for Arabs to learn something about their lineage and their roots–how Arabs were described in the early history of Islam.


The third audience would be people who are Afrocentrists, Black Nationalists, Black Orientalists, and what some have called the Hottep-ers. That is a very important demographic because many of them have this framework of, “Black people who accept Islam are basically trading one slave master for another.” Or the sense that there was the so-called Arab slave trade and, actually, that was worse than the trans-Atlantic slave trade… so why would anyone black want to accept Islam when this is a religion that subjugates black people just like Christianity? So we also want to, again, try to clarify some of the miscommunication or the misinformation that the Black Nationalists and the Hotepers have received so that they can actually see not only the position of African Muslims in early Islam but also that many of these Arabs themselves were black. That also needs to be clarified for them because when they think of Arabness and Blackness, they view these identities as mutually exclusive and don’t understand the historical context. “Arab” is not a race anymore than “Latino” is not a race. There are white Latinos and black Latinos–the same way with Arabs. So we have this chronicled and described in our book.


You mention the tokenization of Bilal. Is that, would you say, a product of the political situation surrounding blackness today or it more of a benign ignorance?


I think there are historical roots to this. Over time, there’s been the erasure or the relegation of blackness that’s based upon postmodern geopolitics. But what I will say is that the effect of colonialism has not escaped the Muslim mind. Muslims are very influenced by colonialism in several ways. That includes how the Islamic narrative is talked about and even how Muslim are depicted or described. So one prime example of this–and of course, this is not faulting him entirely in his work but it’s a prime example–so Moustapha Akkad made the movie called Ar-Risalah in Arabic and he did an English version of it called The Message. And when you look at that movie, besides Bilal and couple people who are enslaved that they show, basically you don’t see any black Companions. And even Companions who were black and described as being black, such as Sumaiyah, the first martyr of Islam, that was a black woman. She’s depicted like a Greek.So you have these people described as black or with dark brown skin looking like white folks. And there’s nothing wrong with people being white and being Muslims but that’s not the historical reality. So I’m sure that the people who made that movie had access, or could have had access, to authentic Islamic information about their descriptions. The reason why I say that is that the movie, The Message, it opens up and says that “this movie was approved for its fidelity by al-Azhar University and the Supreme Shi’a Council of Lebanon.” They had Sunni and Shi’a scholars who cosigned these depictions of the Arabs who looked like white people. And really a lot of it has to do with aspirational whiteness and standards of civility, civilization, and beauty that many Muslims, Arabs, Persians, and I’ll say even South Asians too have, unfortunately, absorbed this from the era of colonialism. It’s still perpetuated by corporate media to this day regarding standards of beauty, who’s perceived to be more civilized, more intelligent, who looks less beautiful, who looks more violent–it’s all perpetuated to this day.




https://i1.wp.com/sapelosquare.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/project2f15872fbilal.jpg?resize=431%2C718&ssl=1

So how would you describe black identity, if we can use that term, how would you describe it at the time of the Prophet?


Well, we talked about this in the book. The introduction was written by Ustadh bin Hamid Ali, who’s a teacher of shariah at Zaytuna College and who also runs Lamppost. Then Sidi Ahmad and I also leveraged on this in early chapters. Basically, what we describe is that the racial constructs used or produced through colonialism and post-colonialist anthropology of Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid, those were not racial classifications that were used 1,400 years ago. And there was no particular virtue given to people based upon phenotype in the times of the Sahabah, unlike European anthropology that basically tried to assign certain traits–not just physical but even intellectual traits–based upon one being Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid. So we describe what would be considered black from a couple of categories as described in the old books of ta’rikh [history] or descriptions of men and women in early Islamic history. One was the descriptions used of skin color, which the early Muslims used. Even Prophet Muhammad himself described Musa in Sahih Bukhari as being tall and dark brown. So we used skin color descriptions. And the second thing is descriptions of certain traits such as their hair being described as kinky. Of course we know that black people have different grains of hair. You can have Somalis who have straight hair. People in the part of African have straight hair. You have curly hair and you have kinky hair. But there are some companions who are specifically described as their hair being kinky or what is called ja’ad.Some people would use the term “nappy,” though I don’t use that term; I think it’s more of a pejorative. Nonetheless, you have companions in the books of ta’rikh as well as the tabi’een and the tabi’ tabi’een whose hair is described as being ja’ad or kinky.


So is phenotype, at the time, not being valued one way or the other? Or is there a different valuation placed upon black skin at that time that’s discussed in these sources? And is there any black identity formation that you see being discussed or rebuked there?


The identity formation 1,400 years ago, in the Hijaz, is primarily Arab, then what nation, and then what tribe one comes from. So one was an Arab in that society. Then there was a little more fadl, or a little more virtue, given to Arabs over non-Arabs. Of course, our beloved Prophet said that the Arab does have any virtue over the non-Arab, nor does the non-Arab have virtue over the Arab. But, of course, we can read in Islamic history that, during the time of the Bani Ummayah, this began to creep back up in the Muslims. By the time the Bani Abbas became the rulers, there was a type of de facto caste system that began to be practiced among the Muslim in the lands of the Arabs. But the primary identity was first Arab, and being Arab meant that one’s paternal lineage came from an Arab tribe. Everyone in the Hijaz was speaking Arabic. Then someone’s sha’ab would be next. Sha’ab means nation so Quraysh was a nation among the Arabs that was the most influential. They had different clans and tribes amongst themselves like the Bani Hashim, Bani Ummayah, tribes underneath Quraysh. But we show in our book that there were even people from the Hashimites who were described as being black. For instance, the predominant description of Imam Ali ibn Ali Talib, the fourth khalifah, he is described as Kaana Adam shaded al-Udmah, that is he had very dark skin. He was described as having skin the same color as Bilal the Ethiopian. But of course Ali was an Arab and he came from Bani Hashim. And Abu Dharr is described as having dark brown skin. He was an Arab from Bani Ghaffar.


There’s a hadith that’s mentioned a lot regarding racism in Islam that I think some people misread in terms of an act where Abu Dharr got mad at Bilal and said Yaa ibn as-Sawdaa, “Oh you son of a black lady.” But this was more of a statement of class because Abu Dharr himself was a dark skinned man but his mother was an Arab and a free woman whereas Bilal’s mother was Ethiopian and she had been enslaved. So that statement, although he called him the son of a black woman, that was more of an issue of him not coming from an Arab tribe and that his mother basically… you know, if you want to insult someone you talk about their mom. It’s the same that his mother came from a higher class. Unfortunately people tell “yo mama” jokes, right? That’s a quick way of getting into a fight, right? And that’s what Abu Dharr did putting down Bilal’s mom as a woman who had been enslaved, who was Ethiopian. But it wasn’t necessarily about the racial constructs that we have today. That’s really a mistake when people talk about racism in the Muslim community or want to be involved in anti-racism work. There has to be a consciousness of the racial constructs that we face today from the influence of white supremacy, that that cannot be imposed on the Sahabah 1,400 years ago. That will give a skewed reading of history if read in contemporary terms.


You mention being Arab at that time as being analogous to being Latino today. It’s not a race, it’s something quite broad. Is that a good analogy, would you say, for thinking about the relationship between Blackness and Arabness at that time?


Yeah, even to this day you have lighter-skinned Arabs and dark Arabs. You have Arabs in Sudan and Mauritania who are shurafaa’, they are descendants of Fatimah az-Zahra. And then you have very light Arabs who are also her descendants who are ahl al-bayt that are in Syria or Lebanon. So there are black Arabs and very light Arabs, even with blue eyes, to this day. It’s just that, in those times, in Yemen and the Hijaz, that Arabness was predominantly darker people. What happened was that, as Islam spread, it Arabized different people. So for instances, people in bilad ash-sham, or greater Syria, were not predominantly Arabs. Islam came and Arabized those people. Egyptians were not Arabs until Islam came. ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas, the Companion, when he was governing Egypt, said that the Egyptians were the best of the ‘ajam, or the best of the non-Arabs. Same thing with Morocco, with Algeria and the Amazigh, or what some would call Berber people. The Arabs spread Islam there and Arabized those people when they blended with them. Arab men took Persian women as wives, and sometimes as right hand possessions. Same thing with Turks and Armenians. Over time, Arabs came to be lighter people just as African Americans or Native American people, our physical characteristics have changed over time, over centuries of intermingling with white people who took black women as slaves and had children with them. You know, I’m considered African American but when I spend time in West African, no one thinks I’m from the Bambara people or the Wolof people. I don’t look like them. That’s because white blood has gotten into me. And that’s the same thing that happened to Arabs over the centuries. Today many of them don’t look like ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab or Abdullah ibn Masud. These were darker people that, if they were walking around urban areas today with suits on or some jeans and a hoodie, they would probably blend in with African American communities.




https://i0.wp.com/sapelosquare.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/centering-black-narrative-black-muslim-nobles-among-the-early-pious-muslims.jpg?resize=324%2C500&ssl=1


So I have a question about the first thing that struck me about your book. In the title, you use the word “noble.” That’s a word that has a pretty storied history in Black Americas Islam–and I’m thinking of Noble Drew Ali here. I found it striking for that reason, so I’m curious why you chose that word, which word it might be translation of, and why you decided to go with it over another one.


Well, we used that word “Noble” to try to uplift and show the nobility of these early black Muslims and also as a means of, black people in particular who have been put down and described as having no heritage and no history, of really centering and uplifting blackness. Again, as I stated earlier, we believe this book is a type of therapy or a type of medicine for black people and Muslims who are black who have been put down and erased, made to feel like blackness is not as authentic as so-called “Arabness.” Again, those two identities are not mutually exclusive. Now, the term “Noble,” you mention in connection to Noble Drew Ali, there’s also a connection with our history here. We could also perhaps translate this word as kareem. When Mr. Fard Muhammad came to my city, Detroit, Michigan, he met Elijah Poole in the year 1931 upon Sister Clara Muhammad inviting him to their home. As the story goes, Mr. Fard came into Elijah Poole’s home and spoke to him and Elijah Poole gave Mr. Fard all the money he had, which wasn’t much, but gave him some money. And the first name that Mr. Fard gave to Elijah Poole was not Elijah Muhammad, he called him Elijah Kareem. Kareem means honorable and noble but it also means generous. So in the Arabic language, the word kareem–someone who’s kareem or has karam–is different from the word sakhiyy. So sakhiyy is a word that means generosity that means, if you ask someone for something, let’s say you ask me for five dollars and I give you five dollars, that’s a form of generosity called sakhiyy. But karam or someone who’s kareem, you ask them for five dollars, I go in my pocket and I have fifty dollars. I give you fifty dollars. I give you more than what you ask for. I give you all my money. I say “hey, you just take this fifty dollar bill.” That’s being noble or being generous or being kareem. So we think the word for these individuals, these personalities, that we highlight in the book, what they gave Islam and still offer today, is a type of nobility. Actually, more than what many people would have expected from such personalities. So this is our take on the issue.


Mahshallah. On that note, can we close with you telling us your favorite Black Muslim Noble from the book, the one who most impressed you?


One of the Black Muslim Nobles who I think is a very important person is Umm Ayman. Umm Ayman was an Ethiopian woman. She was a servant of Abdullah, the father of the Prophet Muhammad. When Aminah, the blessed mother of the Prophet, was giving birth to the Rasulallah, Umm Ayman was present and helped deliver the Prophet Muhammad. And when Aminah died, she was temporarily the primary caregiver of the Prophet Muhammad. This is why he said of Umm Ayman —that Umm Ayman is my mother after my biological mother. He freed Umm Ayman at the time of his marriage to Sayyidah Khadijah bint Khuwaylid, the first wife of the Prophet. She later on, when Revelation came, she was one of the early people to accept Islam. She was one of those amongst the muhajireen, or the immigrants to Medinah. Later on, when she migrated, her husband became a martyr and he also was black. And her son, Ayman, also became a martyr. Her real name was Barakah, which means “blessing.” After her husband and son were martyred, the Prophet went to the Sahabah and said “Who would like to marry a woman from the people of Paradise. And he then called Umm Ayman. It was Zaid bin Haritha who stepped up and married Umm Ayman. This was the foster son of the Prophet who married Umm Ayman. And actually Zaid bin Haritha is described by Ibn al-Jawzi as having the same skin color as Bilal. So he was a black Arab. They gave birth to a son name Usama whom the Prophet loved so much he called him al-hibb ibn al-hibb, beloved son of the beloved, because of course he loved Zaid whom he raised like a son. So this woman whose name literally meant blessing, Barakah, married a blessed man and gave birth to a blessed son. Zaid, as a teenager, was the last appointed commander of a campaign during the life of the Prophet Muhammad. This young black man as a teen was appointed over some of the greatest of the Sahabah. He was chosen over Abu Bakr and Umar. And when some of the Companions actually questioned that, like how are you going to put this young guy over senior people, the Prophet told them they should follow just as they follow Zaid because Zaid had also been a commander. So Umm Ayman is one of my favorite personalities among the Sahabah and she’s one of those who we wrote about in the book.





Dawud Walid is currently the Executive Director of the Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-MI), which is a chapter of America’s largest advocacy and civil liberties organization for American Muslims and is a member of the Michigan Muslim Community Council (MMCC) Imams Committee.


Will Caldwell is a doctoral candidate in Islam and American Religions at Northwestern University. He specializes in the history of early twentieth-century African American Muslims, with a focus on issues of race, empire, and internationalism.

talib abdALLAH
11/07/2019, 21h07
In this presentation Dawud Walid gives an insightful lecture into the little know links between the family of the Prophet (Sallallahu `alayhi wa alihi wa sahbihi wa sallim) Ahl al Bayt and African identity.




Ahl al Bayt & Blackness



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfC6pHzHiBU

talib abdALLAH
13/07/2019, 20h59
On the genealogy of Sayyiduna `Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him).

His father and grandfather, who had mothers of Ethiopian (Abyssinian) origin, are quoted by Ibn al-Jawzi (rahimahullah) in the book: Tanwir al-Ghabashfadl al-Sudan wa al-Habash .



The book is available here (page 246):

https://archive.org/details/waq39605/page/n245
(https://archive.org/details/waq39605/page/n245)
https://i.imgur.com/xkpteDq.png

talib abdALLAH
14/07/2019, 04h31
Narrations about Sayyiduna `Umar ibn al-Khattab (RadhiAllahu `anhu) described with very dark skin color "adam shadeed al-udmah"

(He was described as having skin the same color as Sayyiduna Bilal ibn Rabah (RadhiAllahu `anhu), the first muezzin




Ibn Birr said in his book Al Istiyaab fee Mariftu Al Ishaab Chapter 3 page 1146


” Zir ibn Habaysh and other than him recorded that Umar was Adam Shadeed Al Udmah and most of the scholars of the days of the people and their biographies and their news knew that.”……


Al Waqdy has recorded from hadith Aasim Ibn Abdullah on the authority of Saalim bn Abdullah Ibn Umar about his father , he said: Verily Al Udmah came to them from before his maternal uncles of Bani Ma’dhoon and Umar was white in colour and he did not marry to full fill his desires but rather he married when he wanted children. and Aasim Ibn Abdullah’s hadith is not needed nor is the hadith of Al Waqdy .


And Al Waqdy determined that the Sumaratu and Udamah of Umar bin Al Khattab came from eating oil in the year of famine, And this narration is rejected. And what is most correct in this issue , and Allah knows best is the narration of Sufyan Al Thawry on the authority of Aasim bin Buhdalah on the authority of Zir bin Habaysh who said, ” I saw Umar and he was Adam Shadeed Al Udmah..


Shu’bah said on the authority of Samaak on the authority of Hilal Ibn Abdullah , ”I saw Umar bin Al Khataab may Allah be pleased with him, an Adam coloured man, huge as if was from the men of Sudoos,…”

L


قال ابن بر في كتابه الاستیعاب فی معرفة الأصحاب ، ج 3 ص

…. ذكره زر بن حبيش وغيره بأنه كان آدم شديد الأدمة وهو الأكثر عند أهل العلم بأيام الناس وسيرهم وأخبارهم
قد ذكر الواقدي من حديث عاصم بن عبيد الله عن سالم بن عبد الله بن عمر عن أبيه قال : إنما جاءتنا الأدمة من قبل أخوالي بني مظعون وكان أبيض لا يتزوج لشهوة إلا لطلب الولد وعاصم بن عبيد الله لا يحتج بحديثه ولا بحديث الواقدي
….وزعم الواقدي أن سمرة عمر وأدمته إنما جاءت من أكله الزيت عام الرمادة . وهذا منكر من القول . وأصح ما في هذا الباب والله أعلم حديث سفيان الثوري عن عاصم بن بهدلة عن زر بن حبيش قال : رأيت عمر شديد الأدمة
… قال شعبة عن سماك عن هلال بن عبد الله : رأيت عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه رجلا آدم ضخما كأنه من رجال سدوس


J

How do we know that narration of Zirr Ibn Habeesh is authentic? كيف نعرف ان الحديث زر ابن حبيش صحيح؟


In the book Mustadrik ala Saheehain( a book that scrutinised narrations according to the requirements of Bukhari and Muslim) Abu Abdullah Al Haakim classifies the narration as authentic.


Imam Al Dhahabi reviewed the works of Abu Abdullah Al Hakeem and also grades it as authentic in his book Takhlees Al Dhahabi, hadeeth 4479.


k

في كتاب المستدرك على الصحيحين ر 4479 ج 3 ص 86 – 87
قال ابو عبد الله الحاكم – 405 هـ

كتاب معرفة الصحابة رضي الله عنهم

ومن مناقب أمير المؤمنين عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو الْعَبَّاسِ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَعْقُوبَ ثنا أَبُو أُسَامَةَ ثنا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أَبِي أُسَامَةَ الْحَلَبِيُّ ثنا حَجَّاجُ بْنُ أَبِي مَنِيعٍ عَنْ جَدِّهِ وَهُوَ عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أَبِي زِيَادٍ الرُّصَافِيُّ عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ وَحَدَّثَنِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ بَالَوَيْهِ ثنا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ إِسْحَاقَ الْحَرْبِيُّ حَدَّثَنِي مُصْعَبُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الزُّبَيْرِيُّ قَالَا

عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ بْنُ نُفَيْلِ بْنِ عَبْدِ الْعُزَّى بْنِ رِيَاحِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ قُرْطِ بْنِ رَزَاحِ بْنِ عَدِيِّ بْنِ كَعْبِ بْنِ لُؤَيِّ بْنِ غَالِبِ بْنِ فِهْر…إلخٍ

قَالَا وَأُمُّهُ حَنْتَمَةُ بِنْتُ هَاشِمِ بْنِ الْمُغِيرَةِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عُمَرَ بْنِ مَخْزُومٍ وَأُمُّهَا الشِّفَاءُ بِنْتُ عَبْدِ قَيْسِ بْنِ عَدِيِّ بْنِ سَعْدِ بْنِ تَيْمٍ يُكَنَّى أَبَا حَفْصٍ…إلخٍ

( ر 4477 )

أَخْبَرَنِي عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ الْحُسَيْنِ الْقَاضِي ثنا الْحَارِثُ بْنُ أَبِي أُسَامَةَ ثنا أَبُو النَّضْرِ ثنا شَيْبَانُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ النَّحْوِيُّ عَنْ عَاصِمٍ عَنْ زِرٍّ قَالَ

خَرَجْتُ مَعَ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ فِي يَوْمِ عِيدٍ فَرَأَيْتُ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ يَمْشِي حَافِيًا شَيْخٌ أَصْلَعُ أَدَمُ. أَعْسَرُ يُسْرٍ طُوَالًا مُشْرِفًا عَلَى النَّاسِ كَأَنَّهُ عَلَى دَابَّةٍ…إلخ

التعليق – من تلخيص الذهبي 4479 – صحيح

المستدرك على الصحيحين ر 4479 ج 3 ص 86 –


J

How do we know that the narrations of Al Waqdi a.k.a Mohammed Ibn Umar are weak?


First of all , there is a consensus amongst the scholars that Al Waqdi is not reliable. More than 40 major scholars have graded him either to be a liar or a very weak The scholars who are part of this consensus include , Imam Al Bukhari, As Shaafee’, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Abu Dawood, Al Nisaai, Al Dhahabi, Imam Al Nawawy , Ibn Hajar ،Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Al Qayyim and Nasr Al Deen Al Albaany just to name a few. Read more about Al Waqdi here.

م

The narration that gives the story about Umar changing from white to black also has another extremely weak narrator called Abdullah bin Yazeed Al Hadhal Al Madani


In Imam Al Dhahabi’s book called Meezan Al Itidaal fee Nafd Al Rijaal Chapter 4 page 228 he says :


Abdullah bin Yazeed Al Hadhal Al Madani


It is said he is Ibn Qantas


Imam Bukhari said , it is said that he was accused with heresy , and he said he was accused of serious matter and Al Nisaai said that he is not reliable.

k


ميزان الاعتدال في نقد الرجال للذهبي ج ٤ ص ٢٢٨

عبد الله بن يزيد الهذلي المدني.
يقال: هو ابن قنطس. قال البخاري: يقال يتهم بالزندقة وقال – مرة: يتهم بأمر عظيم
وقال النسائي: ليس بثقة

ls



Conclusion


Umar bin Al Khattab may Allah be pleased with him was Adam Shadeed Al Udmah according to the the saheeh hadith and the understanding of the scholars of the past.



Wa Allahu A`lam


Source : alajamwalarab





On the genealogy of Sayyiduna `Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him).

His father and grandfather, who had mothers of Ethiopian (Abyssinian) origin, are quoted by Ibn al-Jawzi (rahimahullah) in the book: Tanwir al-Ghabashfadl al-Sudan wa al-Habash .



The book is available here (page 246):

https://archive.org/details/waq39605/page/n245
(https://archive.org/details/waq39605/page/n245)
https://i.imgur.com/xkpteDq.png

talib abdALLAH
14/07/2019, 07h15
More explanations from this article to read entirely here, inch'Allah (click to view full text article) : Anthropological Synopsis of Skin Color Regarding Moses, and Some Companions (Dark and black skin) (https://forumislam.com/forum_musulman_mariage/showthread.php?t=64189)


Extract :

[...]




The following research was conducted by Ustadh Abdus Shakur with slight editing for easier reading and to a general audience

I think people need to learn to distinguish between “black” as a complexion and “African” as a race. There were many black skin/very brown dark skin (and still are) Arabs. In fact if anyone has done any studying regarding the classical books about the biography of Sahabah, you would’ve found that many great and famous Sahabah were described as “shadīd udmah” which translate as “very dark brown skin”. And interestingly, even Bilal رحمه الله is described with the SAME complexion. Now the interesting part is, while Muslims tend to know about the “dark skin” (shadid udmah) of Bilal, they are ignorant of “shadid udmah” or “adlam” (another term for dark skin) of much greater Sahabah, in SPITE OF THE FACT that these descriptions are found in the relied up CLASSICAL WORKS. Had I mentioned the name of a few, the readers would probably be like “no way!” And the reason is because Muslims seem to be conveniently ignorant about every skin complexion except that of Bilal رضي الله عنه and hilariously, people assume he must be “dark skin”, “black”, or “negroid” because he is from Ethiopia (in spite of the fact that many of them are actually light skin), yet they have not concluded such from any actual reference themselves.

Black skin isn’t only found in Africa. In fact Imam Qurtubi stated in his commentary on Sahih Muslim that the Hadith that states that the Prophet ﷺ was sent to every ahmar (reddish/ fair skin) and aswad (darkskin/black), that aswad is in reference to the Arabs because their overwhelming skin tone is dark skin.

Let me just show something here for a taste based on classical references.





https://theboriqeenotes.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/1ea6d517-f326-4629-ae42-69040571b057.jpeg?w=1100





In a hadith in the Musnad of Imam Ahmad, Umar ibnul-Khattab رضي الله عنه is described as “Adlam”. Now instead of me telling you want that means, lets look at the Arabic reference (added as a pic here) from the erudite classical Hadith scholar Ibn Al-Atheer (606 AH), from his famous lexicon on hadith words called “al-Nihayah”: he states that the word “adlam” means tall and ASWAD (black/dark drown skin).

al-Nihayah is one of the most relied upon lexicons for hadith words in classical studies.

So never mind the assumption that Arabs in Mecca could not be black/dark brown skinned, we have a number of Sahabah described as such, Umar ibnul-Khattab isn’t the only one.

Ali رضي الله عنه is also described in Imam Suyuti’s famous work al-Khulafah Al-Rashideen as “shadid udmah” in complexion. Reference in pic:




https://theboriqeenotes.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/e24ea18f-5047-4cea-8d6b-f783dd89233e.jpeg?w=1100







As for Bilal رضي الله عنه here is a description of his complexion as “shadid udmah” taken from al-Baghawi’s famous work Ma’rifah as-Sahabah.







https://theboriqeenotes.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/af4308c7-18aa-4693-8d02-195376ce2bb9.jpeg?w=1100







Lastly here is the quote from Imam Qurtubi in his al-Mufhim (2/116) that the word Aswad in the Hadith refers to the Arabs and the rest of darkskin people. But the important part here is the reasoning he states: “… because the overwhelming complexion of Arabs is udmah” so see how he ties the meaning of “aswad” to “udmah”.






https://theboriqeenotes.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/ded37a1e-c05c-4f30-8ece-017aa4855cdb.jpeg?w=1100








Source : theboriqeenotes.com

talib abdALLAH
17/07/2019, 03h30
What the scholars said about Al Waqdy

AL WAQDY : الواقدي
قال الإمام الشافعي ( ت 204 هـ ) : ( كتب الواقدي كذب ) تاريخ بغداد 3 / 14 )

L
قال يحيى بن معين ( 232 هـ ) : ( ليس بثقة ) ، وقال ايضاً : ( ليس بشيء ) ، وسئل مرة عن الواقدي وأبي البختري ، فقال : ( الواقدي أجودهما حديثاً ) وقال أيضاً : ( لا يُكتب حديث الواقدي ) تاريخ بغداد ( 3 / 12 ، 13 ) الجرح والتعديل لابن أبي حاتم 8 / 21 )

L
قال علي بن المديني ( ت 234 هـ ) : ( الواقدي ليس بموضع للرواية ، ولا يُروى عنه ) وضعَّفه ، تاريخ بغداد ( 3 / 13 ) وقال أيضاً : ( الهيثم بن عدي أوثق عندي من الواقدي ) فقال الذهبي معلقاً : ( أجمعوا على ضعف الهيثم ) سير أعلام النبلاء 9 / 462 )
L
قال محمد بن عبد الله بن نمير ( ت 234 هـ ) : ( ولستُ أحب أن أحدث عنه ) تاريخ بغداد 3 / 14 )

L
قال إسحاق بن راهويه ( ت 238 هـ ) : ( كان عندي ممن يضع ) تاريخ بغداد 3 / 16 )
;
قال الإمام أحمد ( ت 241 هـ ) : ( هو كذاب ) ضعفاء العقيلي 4 / 108 )
[
قال البخاري ( ت 256 هـ ) : ( متروك الحديث ، تركه أحمد وابن المبارك وابن نمير وإسماعيل بن زكريا ) الضعفاء ( 4 / 107 ) ، وقال أيضاً : ( ما عندي للواقدي حرف ، وما عرفت من حديثه فلا أقنع به ) سير أعلام النبلاء 9 / 463 )

L
قال الجوزجاني ( ت 259 هـ ) : ( الواقدي لم يكن مُقْنَعاً ) وقال أيضاً : ( الواقدي مختلف فيه ، فيه ضعف بيِّن في حديثه ) أحوال الرجال 35 ، 153 )
K
قال أبو زرعة الرازي ( ت 260 هـ ) : قال ابن ( سألتُ أبا زرعة عن محمد بن عمر الواقدي ، فقال : ضعيف ، قلت : يُكتبُ حديثه ، قال : [ ما يعجبني إلا على الاعتبار ترك الناس حديثه ] ) الجرح والتعديل لابن أبي حاتم ( 8 / 21 ) ، وقد أورده أبو زرعة في كتابه الضعفاء
L
وقال مسلم بن الحجاج ( ت 261 ) : ( متروك الحديث ) الكنى والأسماء 1 / 499 )

;
قال أبو داود ( ت 275 هـ ) : ( لا أكتب حديثه ) تاريخ بغداد 3 / 15 )
L
قال النسائي ( ت 303 هـ ) : ( متروك الحديث ) وقال أيضاً : ( الكذابون الوضاعون على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أربعة : … ) فذكر منهم : الواقدي ، الضعفاء والمتروكين ( 303 ) والملحق منه ص 265
L
قال ابن عدي ( ت 365 هـ ) بعد أن ذكر عدة أحاديث للواقدي : ( … وهذه الأحاديث التي أمليتها للواقدي والتي لم اذكرها كلها غير محفوظة ، ومن يروي عنه الواقدي من الثقات فتلك الأحاديث غير محفوظة عنهم إلا من رواية الواقدي ، والبلاء منه ، ومتون أخبار الواقدي غير

محفوظة ، وهو بَيِّنُ الضعف ) الكامل في ضعفاء الرجال ( 6 / 2247 )
L
قال الدارقطني ( ت 385 هـ ) : ( مختلف فيه ، فيه ضعف بَيِّن فيه حديثه ) وقال أيضاً : ( ضعيف ) وقال أيضاً : ( غيره أثبت منه ) الضعفاء والمتروكون ( 478 ) السنن 2 / 157 ، 164 )
L
قال البيهقي ( 458 هـ ) : ( ضعيف ) وقال أيضاً : ( لا يُحتج به ) وقال أيضاً : ( ليس بحجة ) وقال أيضاً : ( ليس بالقوي ) وقال أيضاً : ( لا يُحتج بروايته فيما يسنده ، فكيف بما يرسله ؟! ) السنن الكبرى ( 1 / 38 ، 382 ) و ( 5 / 37 ) و ( 6 / 221 ) معرفة السنن

والآثار ( 2 / 79 ) و ( 6 / 239 )

.
( قال ابن عبد البر ( ت 463 هـ ) : ( ضعيف الحديث ) وقال أيضاً : ( ضعيف عند أكثرهم ) التمهيد ( 21 / 211 ) و ( 24 / 274 )
قال عبد الحق الأشبيلي ( ت 581 هـ ) : ( ترك الناس حديثه ) الأحكام الكبرى 3 / 281 )
L
(653 /13) قال ابن الجوزي ( ت 587 هـ ) : ( قال أحمد : هو كذاب ، وقال البخاري والرازي والنسائي : متروك ) التحقيق في أحاديث الخلاف 2 / 54 ) و قال ايض في كتابه العلل المتناهية (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=v-9HCwAAQBAJ&pg=PT156&lpg=PT156&dq=%D9%88+%D8%B0%D9%83%D8%B1+%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8 %A7%D9%82%D8%AF%D9%8A+%D9%85%D9%86+%D8%AD%D8%AF%D9 %8A%D8%AB+%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%B5%D9%85+.....%D9%88+%D9 %87%D8%B0%D8%A7+%D9%84%D8%A7+%D9%8A%D8%B5%D8%AD&source=bl&ots=bsZjYySY0R&sig=j2U1rAXUcF4tRqG9CGf0FNKHfk8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjj0YO74PbQAhVCKsAKHdbIBf8Q6AEIHTAA#v=on epage&q=%D9%88%20%D8%B0%D9%83%D8%B1%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88 %D8%A7%D9%82%D8%AF%D9%8A%20%D9%85%D9%86%20%D8%AD%D 8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AB%20%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%B5%D9%85%20.... .%D9%88%20%D9%87%D8%B0%D8%A7%20%D9%84%D8%A7%20%D9% 8A%D8%B5%D8%AD&f=false)
K
قال بندار بن بشار : ( ما رأيتُ أكذب شفتين من الواقدي ) تاريخ بغداد 3 / 412 )

;
قال أبو الحسن بن القطان ( ت 682 هـ ) : ( ضعيفٌ بل متروك ) بيان الوهم والإيهام في كتاب الأحكام 2 / 226 )
L
قال ابن الصلاح ( ت 643 هـ ) : ( وكتاب [ الطبقات الكبير ] لمحمد بن سعد كاتب الواقدي كتاب حفيلٌ كثير الفوائد ، وهو ثقة ، غير أنه كثير الرواية فيه عن الضعفاء ، ومنهم الواقدي ، وهو محمد بن عمر الذي لا ينسبه ) مقدمة ابن الصلاح ص 73
K
– قال النووي ( ت 676 هـ ) : ( ضعيف باتفاقهم ) المجموع شرح المهذب ، كتاب الغسل

J
قال شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية ( ت 728 هـ ) : ( … ومعلوم أن الواقدي نفسه خير عند الناس من مثل هشام بن الكلبي وأبيه محمد بن السائب وأمثالهما ، وقد علم كلام الناس في الواقدي ، فإن ما يذكره هو وأمثاله يُعتضد به ، ويُستأنس به ، وأما الاعتماد عليه بمجرده في العلم : فهذا لا يصلح ) رأس الحسين ص 20 ، وقال أيضاً : ( كثير من الناس لا يُحتج بروايته المفردة ، إما لسوء حفظه ، وإما لتهمة في تحسين الحديث وإنْ كان له علم ومعرفة بأنواع من العلوم ، ولكن يصلحون للاعتضاد والمتابعة ، كمقاتل بن سليمان ومحمد بن عمر الواقدي وأمثالهما ) منهاج السنة النبوية 1 / 56 )
.
قال ابن الهادي : ( قال أحمد : هو كذاب ) تنقيح تحقيق أحاديث التعليق 3 / 117 )

L
25 – قال الذهبي ( ت 748 هـ ) : ( استقر الإجماع على وهن الواقدي ) وقال أيضاً : ( وهو مع عظمته في العلم ضعيف ) وقال أيضاً : ( مجمعٌ على ضعفه ) وقال أيضاً : ( وقد وثقه غير واحد لكن لا عبرة بقولهم مع توافر من تركه ) وقال أيضاً : ( لا شيء للواقدي في الكتب الستة إلا حديث واحد، عند ابن ماجة … ) وذكر الحديث بإسناد ثم قال : ( … فما جَسُرَ ابن ماجه أن يفصح به، وما ذاك إلا لوهن الواقدي عند العلماء ) وقال أيضاً : ( أحد أوعية العلم على ضعفه المتفق عليه … ) وقال أيضاً : ( … وخلط الغث بالسمين ، والخرز بالدر الثمين ، فاطَّرحوه لذلك ) وقال أيضاً : ( وقد تقرر أن الواقدي ضعيف ، يحتاج إليه في الغزوات والتاريخ ، ونورد آثاره من غير احتجاج ، أما في الفرائض ، فلا ينبغي أن يذكر ، فهذه الكتب الستة ومسند أحمد ، وعامة من جمع في الأحكام نراهم يترخصون في إخراج أحاديث أناس ضعفاء بل ومتروكين ، ومع هذا لا يخرجون لمحمد بن عمر شيئاً ، مع أن وزنه عندي : أنه مع ضعفه يُكتب حديثه ويروى ، لأني لا أتهمه بالوضع ، وقول من أهدره فيه مجازفة من بعض الوجوه ، كما أنه لا عبرة بتوثيق من وثقه كيزيد وأبي عبيد والصاغاني والحربي ومعن وتمام ، عشرة محدثين، إذ قد انعقد الإجماع اليوم على أنه ليس بحجة وأن حديثه في عداد الواهي ، رحمه الله ) ميزان الاعتدال ( 3 / 662 ) تاريخ الإسلام ( 14 / 362 ، 364 ، 367 ) سير أعلام النبلاء ( 9 / 454 ، 469 )

K
قال ابن القيم ( ت 751 هـ ) : ( لا يحتج به ) وقال أيضاً : ( … وإن كان ضعيفاً … ) المنار المنيف ص 6 حاشيته على تهذيب سنن أبي داود 6 / 321 )

J
قال العلائي ( ت 761 هـ ) : ( متروكٌ باتفاق لا يُحتج به ) ، المصدر : توفية الكيل ص 72
J
قال ابن الملقن ( ت 804 هـ ) : ( كذاب ، قاله أحمد ، وزاد النسائي : وضّاع ) البدر المنير في ( 4 / 542 )
L
قال الهيثمي ( ت 807 هـ ) : ( كذاب ) بغية الرائد بتحقيق مجمع الزوائد ومنبع الفوائد ( 1 / 571 ) رقم الحديث 1325

L
قال البوصيري ( ت 840 هـ ) : ( كذاب ) إتحاف الخيرة المهرة بزوائد المسانيد العشرة ( 4 / 291 )
L
قال ابن حجر العسقلاني : ( ت 852 ) : قال عدة عبارات في تضعيفه : ( ليس بمعتمد ، لا يُحتج به ، ضعيف ، شديد الضعف إذا انفرد فكيف إذا خالف ؟! ، متروك ، متروك مع سعة علمه ) وقال أيضاً : ( وقد تعصب مغلطاي للواقدي فنقل كلام من قوَّاه ووثقه وسكت عن ذكر من وَهَّاه واتهمه وهم أكثر عدداً وأشد إتقاناً وأقوى معرفة به من الأولين ، ومن جملة ما قواه به : أن الشافعي روى عنه ، وقد أسند البيهقي عن الشافعي أنه كذّبه ، ولا يُقال : فكيف روى عنه ؟! لأنّا نقول : رواية العدل ليست بمجردها توثيقاً ، فقد روى أبو حنيفة عن جابر الجعفي وثبت عنه أنه قال : [ ما رأيت أكذب منه ] ) ، المصادر : مقدمة فتح الباري ص 417 فتح الباري ( 4 / 73 ) و ( 5 / 166 ) و ( 9 / 113 ) و ( 13 / 545 ) المطالب العالية ( 1 / 364 ) و ( 8 / 157 ) التلخيص الحبير ( 1 / 479 ) تقريب التهذيب ص 498

;
قال السخاوي ( ت 902 ) : ( ضعيف ) المقاصد الحسنة في بيان كثير من الأحاديث المشتهرة على الألسنة ( حديث رقم 618 )
L
قال ابن عراق الكناني ( ت 963 هـ ) : ( قال أحمد : كذاب يقلب الأخبار ، وقال أبو حاتم والنسائى : يضع الحديث ) تنزيه الشريعة المرفوعة عن الأحاديث الشنيعة الموضوعة 1 / 111 )

;
قال المناوي ( ت 1031 هـ ) : ( كذاب ) التيسير في شرح الجامع الصغير

;
قال ابن العماد الحنبلي ( ت 1089 هـ ) : ( ضعفه الجماعة كلهم ، قال ابن ناصر الدين : [ أجمع الأئمة على ترك حديثه حاشا ابن ماجه ، لكنه لم يجسر أن يسميه حين أخرج حديثه في اللباس يوم الجمعة ، وحسبك ضعفاً بمن لا يجسر أن يسميه ابن ماجه ] ) شذرات الذهب 2 / 18 )

;
قال الشوكاني ( ت 1250 هـ ) : ( متروك ) نيل الأوطار شرح منتقى الأخبار 3 / 105 )
L
قال العظيم آبادي ( ت بعد 1310 هـ ) : ( ضعيف جداً ) عون المعبود 5 / 183 )

;
قال المباركفوري ( ت 1354 هـ ) : ( متروك ، قد استقر الإجماع على وهنه ) تحفة الأحوذي 1 / 208 )

;
قال المعلمي ( ت 1386 هـ ) : ( متروك مرمي بالكذب ) الأنوار الكاشفة لما في كتاب أضواء على السنة من الزلل والتضليل والمجازفة

;
قال الشيخ الألباني ( ت 1421 هـ ) : ( كذاب ) سلسلة الأحاديث الضعيفة ( 1 / 215 )





Source : alajamwalarab





Narrations about Sayyiduna `Umar ibn al-Khattab (RadhiAllahu `anhu) described with very dark skin color "adam shadeed al-udmah"

(He was described as having skin the same color as Sayyiduna Bilal ibn Rabah (RadhiAllahu `anhu), the first muezzin




Ibn Birr said in his book Al Istiyaab fee Mariftu Al Ishaab Chapter 3 page 1146


” Zir ibn Habaysh and other than him recorded that Umar was Adam Shadeed Al Udmah and most of the scholars of the days of the people and their biographies and their news knew that.”……


Al Waqdy has recorded from hadith Aasim Ibn Abdullah on the authority of Saalim bn Abdullah Ibn Umar about his father , he said: Verily Al Udmah came to them from before his maternal uncles of Bani Ma’dhoon and Umar was white in colour and he did not marry to full fill his desires but rather he married when he wanted children. and Aasim Ibn Abdullah’s hadith is not needed nor is the hadith of Al Waqdy .


And Al Waqdy determined that the Sumaratu and Udamah of Umar bin Al Khattab came from eating oil in the year of famine, And this narration is rejected. And what is most correct in this issue , and Allah knows best is the narration of Sufyan Al Thawry on the authority of Aasim bin Buhdalah on the authority of Zir bin Habaysh who said, ” I saw Umar and he was Adam Shadeed Al Udmah..


Shu’bah said on the authority of Samaak on the authority of Hilal Ibn Abdullah , ”I saw Umar bin Al Khataab may Allah be pleased with him, an Adam coloured man, huge as if was from the men of Sudoos,…”

L


قال ابن بر في كتابه الاستیعاب فی معرفة الأصحاب ، ج 3 ص

…. ذكره زر بن حبيش وغيره بأنه كان آدم شديد الأدمة وهو الأكثر عند أهل العلم بأيام الناس وسيرهم وأخبارهم
قد ذكر الواقدي من حديث عاصم بن عبيد الله عن سالم بن عبد الله بن عمر عن أبيه قال : إنما جاءتنا الأدمة من قبل أخوالي بني مظعون وكان أبيض لا يتزوج لشهوة إلا لطلب الولد وعاصم بن عبيد الله لا يحتج بحديثه ولا بحديث الواقدي
….وزعم الواقدي أن سمرة عمر وأدمته إنما جاءت من أكله الزيت عام الرمادة . وهذا منكر من القول . وأصح ما في هذا الباب والله أعلم حديث سفيان الثوري عن عاصم بن بهدلة عن زر بن حبيش قال : رأيت عمر شديد الأدمة
… قال شعبة عن سماك عن هلال بن عبد الله : رأيت عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه رجلا آدم ضخما كأنه من رجال سدوس


J

How do we know that narration of Zirr Ibn Habeesh is authentic? كيف نعرف ان الحديث زر ابن حبيش صحيح؟


In the book Mustadrik ala Saheehain( a book that scrutinised narrations according to the requirements of Bukhari and Muslim) Abu Abdullah Al Haakim classifies the narration as authentic.


Imam Al Dhahabi reviewed the works of Abu Abdullah Al Hakeem and also grades it as authentic in his book Takhlees Al Dhahabi, hadeeth 4479.


k

في كتاب المستدرك على الصحيحين ر 4479 ج 3 ص 86 – 87
قال ابو عبد الله الحاكم – 405 هـ

كتاب معرفة الصحابة رضي الله عنهم

ومن مناقب أمير المؤمنين عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو الْعَبَّاسِ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَعْقُوبَ ثنا أَبُو أُسَامَةَ ثنا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أَبِي أُسَامَةَ الْحَلَبِيُّ ثنا حَجَّاجُ بْنُ أَبِي مَنِيعٍ عَنْ جَدِّهِ وَهُوَ عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أَبِي زِيَادٍ الرُّصَافِيُّ عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ وَحَدَّثَنِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ بَالَوَيْهِ ثنا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ إِسْحَاقَ الْحَرْبِيُّ حَدَّثَنِي مُصْعَبُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الزُّبَيْرِيُّ قَالَا

عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ بْنُ نُفَيْلِ بْنِ عَبْدِ الْعُزَّى بْنِ رِيَاحِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ قُرْطِ بْنِ رَزَاحِ بْنِ عَدِيِّ بْنِ كَعْبِ بْنِ لُؤَيِّ بْنِ غَالِبِ بْنِ فِهْر…إلخٍ

قَالَا وَأُمُّهُ حَنْتَمَةُ بِنْتُ هَاشِمِ بْنِ الْمُغِيرَةِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عُمَرَ بْنِ مَخْزُومٍ وَأُمُّهَا الشِّفَاءُ بِنْتُ عَبْدِ قَيْسِ بْنِ عَدِيِّ بْنِ سَعْدِ بْنِ تَيْمٍ يُكَنَّى أَبَا حَفْصٍ…إلخٍ

( ر 4477 )

أَخْبَرَنِي عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ الْحُسَيْنِ الْقَاضِي ثنا الْحَارِثُ بْنُ أَبِي أُسَامَةَ ثنا أَبُو النَّضْرِ ثنا شَيْبَانُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ النَّحْوِيُّ عَنْ عَاصِمٍ عَنْ زِرٍّ قَالَ

خَرَجْتُ مَعَ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ فِي يَوْمِ عِيدٍ فَرَأَيْتُ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ يَمْشِي حَافِيًا شَيْخٌ أَصْلَعُ أَدَمُ. أَعْسَرُ يُسْرٍ طُوَالًا مُشْرِفًا عَلَى النَّاسِ كَأَنَّهُ عَلَى دَابَّةٍ…إلخ

التعليق – من تلخيص الذهبي 4479 – صحيح

المستدرك على الصحيحين ر 4479 ج 3 ص 86 –


J

How do we know that the narrations of Al Waqdi a.k.a Mohammed Ibn Umar are weak?


First of all , there is a consensus amongst the scholars that Al Waqdi is not reliable. More than 40 major scholars have graded him either to be a liar or a very weak The scholars who are part of this consensus include , Imam Al Bukhari, As Shaafee’, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Abu Dawood, Al Nisaai, Al Dhahabi, Imam Al Nawawy , Ibn Hajar ،Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Al Qayyim and Nasr Al Deen Al Albaany just to name a few. Read more about Al Waqdi here.

م

The narration that gives the story about Umar changing from white to black also has another extremely weak narrator called Abdullah bin Yazeed Al Hadhal Al Madani


In Imam Al Dhahabi’s book called Meezan Al Itidaal fee Nafd Al Rijaal Chapter 4 page 228 he says :


Abdullah bin Yazeed Al Hadhal Al Madani


It is said he is Ibn Qantas


Imam Bukhari said , it is said that he was accused with heresy , and he said he was accused of serious matter and Al Nisaai said that he is not reliable.

k


ميزان الاعتدال في نقد الرجال للذهبي ج ٤ ص ٢٢٨

عبد الله بن يزيد الهذلي المدني.
يقال: هو ابن قنطس. قال البخاري: يقال يتهم بالزندقة وقال – مرة: يتهم بأمر عظيم
وقال النسائي: ليس بثقة

ls



Conclusion


Umar bin Al Khattab may Allah be pleased with him was Adam Shadeed Al Udmah according to the the saheeh hadith and the understanding of the scholars of the past.



Wa Allahu A`lam


Source : alajamwalarab

talib abdALLAH
17/07/2019, 03h39
Source : http://www.twelvershia.net/2014/02/19/response-to-shiapens-biography-of-mohammad-bin-omar-al-waqidi/


What the scholars said about Al Waqdy

AL WAQDY : الواقدي


Mohammad bin Omar bin Waqid Al-Waqidi Al-Aslami was an infamous historian from the second century AH. A large portion of the fabrications that we currently find in our history books today, whether it may be in the books of history or hadith come from his path alone. This is simply due to the fact that Al-Waqidi, unlike other liars of his time, was good at covering it up. Due to this, there was no consensus that the man fabricated traditions, even though this is the correct opinion since it is held by the major Rijali scholars that were his contemporaries.

To get a better perspective of this, we shall quote the opinions of those that declared him a liar:

-Ahmad bin Hanbal said: He is a liar.
-Yahya bin Ma’een said: He used to take the hadith of Ma’amar and attribute it to Yunus; he is not trustworthy.
-Ali bin Al-Madeeni said: Al-Haytham bin Adi is more reliable than Al-Waqidi, and I don’t take hadiths, genealogy, or anything from him.
-Al-Shafi’ee said: All his books are lies.
-Al-Nasa’ee included him as one of the four infamous liars.
-Abu Dawud: I have no doubts that he fabricated hadiths.
-Ishaq bin Rahawaih said: He is a fabricator of narrations.
-Abu Hatim said: He fabricated.

All of the above quotes can be found in the Tahdheebayn (Tahdheeb al-Kamal & Tahdheb al-Tahdheeb). Moreover, these statements do not include other ambiguous statements of weakening, like, “We didn’t narrate from him,” or “he is weak,” even though such words fit in the realm of “liar”. However, we purposefully chose some of the harshest criticisms to not leave a fragment of doubt in the minds of the objective reader. Also, note that we didn’t quote the opinions of other scholars that are not experts in Rijal. For those quotes, refer to Mizan Al-I’itidal and the Tahdheebayn.



What the scholars said about Al Waqdy

AL WAQDY : الواقدي


قال الإمام الشافعي ( ت 204 هـ ) : ( كتب الواقدي كذب ) تاريخ بغداد 3 / 14 )

L
قال يحيى بن معين ( 232 هـ ) : ( ليس بثقة ) ، وقال ايضاً : ( ليس بشيء ) ، وسئل مرة عن الواقدي وأبي البختري ، فقال : ( الواقدي أجودهما حديثاً ) وقال أيضاً : ( لا يُكتب حديث الواقدي ) تاريخ بغداد ( 3 / 12 ، 13 ) الجرح والتعديل لابن أبي حاتم 8 / 21 )

L
قال علي بن المديني ( ت 234 هـ ) : ( الواقدي ليس بموضع للرواية ، ولا يُروى عنه ) وضعَّفه ، تاريخ بغداد ( 3 / 13 ) وقال أيضاً : ( الهيثم بن عدي أوثق عندي من الواقدي ) فقال الذهبي معلقاً : ( أجمعوا على ضعف الهيثم ) سير أعلام النبلاء 9 / 462 )
L
قال محمد بن عبد الله بن نمير ( ت 234 هـ ) : ( ولستُ أحب أن أحدث عنه ) تاريخ بغداد 3 / 14 )

L
قال إسحاق بن راهويه ( ت 238 هـ ) : ( كان عندي ممن يضع ) تاريخ بغداد 3 / 16 )
;
قال الإمام أحمد ( ت 241 هـ ) : ( هو كذاب ) ضعفاء العقيلي 4 / 108 )
[
قال البخاري ( ت 256 هـ ) : ( متروك الحديث ، تركه أحمد وابن المبارك وابن نمير وإسماعيل بن زكريا ) الضعفاء ( 4 / 107 ) ، وقال أيضاً : ( ما عندي للواقدي حرف ، وما عرفت من حديثه فلا أقنع به ) سير أعلام النبلاء 9 / 463 )

L
قال الجوزجاني ( ت 259 هـ ) : ( الواقدي لم يكن مُقْنَعاً ) وقال أيضاً : ( الواقدي مختلف فيه ، فيه ضعف بيِّن في حديثه ) أحوال الرجال 35 ، 153 )
K
قال أبو زرعة الرازي ( ت 260 هـ ) : قال ابن ( سألتُ أبا زرعة عن محمد بن عمر الواقدي ، فقال : ضعيف ، قلت : يُكتبُ حديثه ، قال : [ ما يعجبني إلا على الاعتبار ترك الناس حديثه ] ) الجرح والتعديل لابن أبي حاتم ( 8 / 21 ) ، وقد أورده أبو زرعة في كتابه الضعفاء
L
وقال مسلم بن الحجاج ( ت 261 ) : ( متروك الحديث ) الكنى والأسماء 1 / 499 )

;
قال أبو داود ( ت 275 هـ ) : ( لا أكتب حديثه ) تاريخ بغداد 3 / 15 )
L
قال النسائي ( ت 303 هـ ) : ( متروك الحديث ) وقال أيضاً : ( الكذابون الوضاعون على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أربعة : … ) فذكر منهم : الواقدي ، الضعفاء والمتروكين ( 303 ) والملحق منه ص 265
L
قال ابن عدي ( ت 365 هـ ) بعد أن ذكر عدة أحاديث للواقدي : ( … وهذه الأحاديث التي أمليتها للواقدي والتي لم اذكرها كلها غير محفوظة ، ومن يروي عنه الواقدي من الثقات فتلك الأحاديث غير محفوظة عنهم إلا من رواية الواقدي ، والبلاء منه ، ومتون أخبار الواقدي غير

محفوظة ، وهو بَيِّنُ الضعف ) الكامل في ضعفاء الرجال ( 6 / 2247 )
L
قال الدارقطني ( ت 385 هـ ) : ( مختلف فيه ، فيه ضعف بَيِّن فيه حديثه ) وقال أيضاً : ( ضعيف ) وقال أيضاً : ( غيره أثبت منه ) الضعفاء والمتروكون ( 478 ) السنن 2 / 157 ، 164 )
L
قال البيهقي ( 458 هـ ) : ( ضعيف ) وقال أيضاً : ( لا يُحتج به ) وقال أيضاً : ( ليس بحجة ) وقال أيضاً : ( ليس بالقوي ) وقال أيضاً : ( لا يُحتج بروايته فيما يسنده ، فكيف بما يرسله ؟! ) السنن الكبرى ( 1 / 38 ، 382 ) و ( 5 / 37 ) و ( 6 / 221 ) معرفة السنن

والآثار ( 2 / 79 ) و ( 6 / 239 )

.
( قال ابن عبد البر ( ت 463 هـ ) : ( ضعيف الحديث ) وقال أيضاً : ( ضعيف عند أكثرهم ) التمهيد ( 21 / 211 ) و ( 24 / 274 )
قال عبد الحق الأشبيلي ( ت 581 هـ ) : ( ترك الناس حديثه ) الأحكام الكبرى 3 / 281 )
L
(653 /13) قال ابن الجوزي ( ت 587 هـ ) : ( قال أحمد : هو كذاب ، وقال البخاري والرازي والنسائي : متروك ) التحقيق في أحاديث الخلاف 2 / 54 ) و قال ايض في كتابه العلل المتناهية (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=v-9HCwAAQBAJ&pg=PT156&lpg=PT156&dq=%D9%88+%D8%B0%D9%83%D8%B1+%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8 %A7%D9%82%D8%AF%D9%8A+%D9%85%D9%86+%D8%AD%D8%AF%D9 %8A%D8%AB+%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%B5%D9%85+.....%D9%88+%D9 %87%D8%B0%D8%A7+%D9%84%D8%A7+%D9%8A%D8%B5%D8%AD&source=bl&ots=bsZjYySY0R&sig=j2U1rAXUcF4tRqG9CGf0FNKHfk8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjj0YO74PbQAhVCKsAKHdbIBf8Q6AEIHTAA#v=on epage&q=%D9%88%20%D8%B0%D9%83%D8%B1%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88 %D8%A7%D9%82%D8%AF%D9%8A%20%D9%85%D9%86%20%D8%AD%D 8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AB%20%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%B5%D9%85%20.... .%D9%88%20%D9%87%D8%B0%D8%A7%20%D9%84%D8%A7%20%D9% 8A%D8%B5%D8%AD&f=false)
K
قال بندار بن بشار : ( ما رأيتُ أكذب شفتين من الواقدي ) تاريخ بغداد 3 / 412 )

;
قال أبو الحسن بن القطان ( ت 682 هـ ) : ( ضعيفٌ بل متروك ) بيان الوهم والإيهام في كتاب الأحكام 2 / 226 )
L
قال ابن الصلاح ( ت 643 هـ ) : ( وكتاب [ الطبقات الكبير ] لمحمد بن سعد كاتب الواقدي كتاب حفيلٌ كثير الفوائد ، وهو ثقة ، غير أنه كثير الرواية فيه عن الضعفاء ، ومنهم الواقدي ، وهو محمد بن عمر الذي لا ينسبه ) مقدمة ابن الصلاح ص 73
K
– قال النووي ( ت 676 هـ ) : ( ضعيف باتفاقهم ) المجموع شرح المهذب ، كتاب الغسل

J
قال شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية ( ت 728 هـ ) : ( … ومعلوم أن الواقدي نفسه خير عند الناس من مثل هشام بن الكلبي وأبيه محمد بن السائب وأمثالهما ، وقد علم كلام الناس في الواقدي ، فإن ما يذكره هو وأمثاله يُعتضد به ، ويُستأنس به ، وأما الاعتماد عليه بمجرده في العلم : فهذا لا يصلح ) رأس الحسين ص 20 ، وقال أيضاً : ( كثير من الناس لا يُحتج بروايته المفردة ، إما لسوء حفظه ، وإما لتهمة في تحسين الحديث وإنْ كان له علم ومعرفة بأنواع من العلوم ، ولكن يصلحون للاعتضاد والمتابعة ، كمقاتل بن سليمان ومحمد بن عمر الواقدي وأمثالهما ) منهاج السنة النبوية 1 / 56 )
.
قال ابن الهادي : ( قال أحمد : هو كذاب ) تنقيح تحقيق أحاديث التعليق 3 / 117 )

L
25 – قال الذهبي ( ت 748 هـ ) : ( استقر الإجماع على وهن الواقدي ) وقال أيضاً : ( وهو مع عظمته في العلم ضعيف ) وقال أيضاً : ( مجمعٌ على ضعفه ) وقال أيضاً : ( وقد وثقه غير واحد لكن لا عبرة بقولهم مع توافر من تركه ) وقال أيضاً : ( لا شيء للواقدي في الكتب الستة إلا حديث واحد، عند ابن ماجة … ) وذكر الحديث بإسناد ثم قال : ( … فما جَسُرَ ابن ماجه أن يفصح به، وما ذاك إلا لوهن الواقدي عند العلماء ) وقال أيضاً : ( أحد أوعية العلم على ضعفه المتفق عليه … ) وقال أيضاً : ( … وخلط الغث بالسمين ، والخرز بالدر الثمين ، فاطَّرحوه لذلك ) وقال أيضاً : ( وقد تقرر أن الواقدي ضعيف ، يحتاج إليه في الغزوات والتاريخ ، ونورد آثاره من غير احتجاج ، أما في الفرائض ، فلا ينبغي أن يذكر ، فهذه الكتب الستة ومسند أحمد ، وعامة من جمع في الأحكام نراهم يترخصون في إخراج أحاديث أناس ضعفاء بل ومتروكين ، ومع هذا لا يخرجون لمحمد بن عمر شيئاً ، مع أن وزنه عندي : أنه مع ضعفه يُكتب حديثه ويروى ، لأني لا أتهمه بالوضع ، وقول من أهدره فيه مجازفة من بعض الوجوه ، كما أنه لا عبرة بتوثيق من وثقه كيزيد وأبي عبيد والصاغاني والحربي ومعن وتمام ، عشرة محدثين، إذ قد انعقد الإجماع اليوم على أنه ليس بحجة وأن حديثه في عداد الواهي ، رحمه الله ) ميزان الاعتدال ( 3 / 662 ) تاريخ الإسلام ( 14 / 362 ، 364 ، 367 ) سير أعلام النبلاء ( 9 / 454 ، 469 )

K
قال ابن القيم ( ت 751 هـ ) : ( لا يحتج به ) وقال أيضاً : ( … وإن كان ضعيفاً … ) المنار المنيف ص 6 حاشيته على تهذيب سنن أبي داود 6 / 321 )

J
قال العلائي ( ت 761 هـ ) : ( متروكٌ باتفاق لا يُحتج به ) ، المصدر : توفية الكيل ص 72
J
قال ابن الملقن ( ت 804 هـ ) : ( كذاب ، قاله أحمد ، وزاد النسائي : وضّاع ) البدر المنير في ( 4 / 542 )
L
قال الهيثمي ( ت 807 هـ ) : ( كذاب ) بغية الرائد بتحقيق مجمع الزوائد ومنبع الفوائد ( 1 / 571 ) رقم الحديث 1325

L
قال البوصيري ( ت 840 هـ ) : ( كذاب ) إتحاف الخيرة المهرة بزوائد المسانيد العشرة ( 4 / 291 )
L
قال ابن حجر العسقلاني : ( ت 852 ) : قال عدة عبارات في تضعيفه : ( ليس بمعتمد ، لا يُحتج به ، ضعيف ، شديد الضعف إذا انفرد فكيف إذا خالف ؟! ، متروك ، متروك مع سعة علمه ) وقال أيضاً : ( وقد تعصب مغلطاي للواقدي فنقل كلام من قوَّاه ووثقه وسكت عن ذكر من وَهَّاه واتهمه وهم أكثر عدداً وأشد إتقاناً وأقوى معرفة به من الأولين ، ومن جملة ما قواه به : أن الشافعي روى عنه ، وقد أسند البيهقي عن الشافعي أنه كذّبه ، ولا يُقال : فكيف روى عنه ؟! لأنّا نقول : رواية العدل ليست بمجردها توثيقاً ، فقد روى أبو حنيفة عن جابر الجعفي وثبت عنه أنه قال : [ ما رأيت أكذب منه ] ) ، المصادر : مقدمة فتح الباري ص 417 فتح الباري ( 4 / 73 ) و ( 5 / 166 ) و ( 9 / 113 ) و ( 13 / 545 ) المطالب العالية ( 1 / 364 ) و ( 8 / 157 ) التلخيص الحبير ( 1 / 479 ) تقريب التهذيب ص 498

;
قال السخاوي ( ت 902 ) : ( ضعيف ) المقاصد الحسنة في بيان كثير من الأحاديث المشتهرة على الألسنة ( حديث رقم 618 )
L
قال ابن عراق الكناني ( ت 963 هـ ) : ( قال أحمد : كذاب يقلب الأخبار ، وقال أبو حاتم والنسائى : يضع الحديث ) تنزيه الشريعة المرفوعة عن الأحاديث الشنيعة الموضوعة 1 / 111 )

;
قال المناوي ( ت 1031 هـ ) : ( كذاب ) التيسير في شرح الجامع الصغير

;
قال ابن العماد الحنبلي ( ت 1089 هـ ) : ( ضعفه الجماعة كلهم ، قال ابن ناصر الدين : [ أجمع الأئمة على ترك حديثه حاشا ابن ماجه ، لكنه لم يجسر أن يسميه حين أخرج حديثه في اللباس يوم الجمعة ، وحسبك ضعفاً بمن لا يجسر أن يسميه ابن ماجه ] ) شذرات الذهب 2 / 18 )

;
قال الشوكاني ( ت 1250 هـ ) : ( متروك ) نيل الأوطار شرح منتقى الأخبار 3 / 105 )
L
قال العظيم آبادي ( ت بعد 1310 هـ ) : ( ضعيف جداً ) عون المعبود 5 / 183 )

;
قال المباركفوري ( ت 1354 هـ ) : ( متروك ، قد استقر الإجماع على وهنه ) تحفة الأحوذي 1 / 208 )

;
قال المعلمي ( ت 1386 هـ ) : ( متروك مرمي بالكذب ) الأنوار الكاشفة لما في كتاب أضواء على السنة من الزلل والتضليل والمجازفة

;
قال الشيخ الألباني ( ت 1421 هـ ) : ( كذاب ) سلسلة الأحاديث الضعيفة ( 1 / 215 )





Source : alajamwalarab

talib abdALLAH
17/07/2019, 03h47
Other Source


Muhammad Ibn ‘Umar al-Waqidi as a Narrator



He is the famous historian, the author of Maghazi and other books on history. His reliability is an issue of debate among scholars. Most of the scholars do not consider him reliable although they do not see any problem in quoting his narrations and reports related to history but not for evidence. The correct view is that of the majority scholars who do not take him as evidence.


His full name was Muhammad bin ‘Umar bin Waqid Al-Waqidi Al-Aslami, Abu ‘Abdullah Al-Madani. He was a Qadhi in Baghdad. He has narrated from the likes of Zaid bin Aslam, Thawr bin Yazid, Sufyan Ath-Thawri, Al-Awza’I, Ibn Juraij, Malik bin Anas, Ibn Abi Dhi’b, Ma’mar, Ibn Abi Saburah and many others. Those who have narrated from him include Ahmad bin Mansur Ar-Rammadi, Harith bin Abi Usamah, Husain bin Marzuq, Sulaiman Ash-Shadhkuni, Abu Bakr Ibn Abi Shaibah, Qasim bin Sallam, Ibn Sa’d (his scribe) and many others. He died in the year 207 AH.


Those who have made criticism on him are:




Ibn Mubarak who abandoned him as reported by Bukhari.

Ash-Shafi’i

Wakee’

Ibn Numair who abandoned him as reported by Bukhari.

Isma’eel bin Zakariyyah

Ishaq bin Rahwayh

Ahmad bin Hanbal

Ali bin Madeeni

Ibn Ma’een

Bundaar

Al- Bukhari

Abu Zur’ah Ar-razi

Abu Hatim Ar-Razi

Muslim

Abu Dawud

Nasai

Ad-Daarqutni

Ibn ‘Adi

As-Saaji

Ibn Hibban

Abu Ahmad Al-Hakim

Al-Bazzar

Al-‘Uqaili

Al-Jawzjani



Refer to Tahdheeb al-Kamal (26-180-194) by Al-Mizzi, Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb (9/363-368) by Ibn Hajar, Meezan al-I’tidal (3/662-666) by Dhahabi etc.



There are those who have praised him include: Al-Darawardi, Muhammad bin Salam Al-Jumahi, Ibrahim al-Harbi, Mus’ab Az-Zubairi, Abu ‘Aamir al-‘Uqdi, Mujahid bin Musa, As-Saghani, Al-Musayyibi, Ma’n bin ‘Isa, Abu Yahya al-Azhari, Ibn Numair, Qasim bin Sallam, ‘Abbas al-‘Anbari




Ad-Darawardi who said that Al-Waqidi was Ameer al-Mumineen in the field of hadith. Besides that, Ad-Darawardi himself did not have the status as compared to the scholars quoted against Al-Waqidi. Al-Darawardi was criticized for his memory.

Muhammad bin Sallam al-Jumahi said regarding him that he was the scholar of his time. This does not necessitate Tawtheeq in the terminology of hadith science. No wonder Hafiz Dhahabi says in Meezan (3/567) that he [Al-Waqidi] was one of the people of knowledge along with the weakness in him. Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani said, “He was Matrook along with the vastness of his knowledge.”

Ibrahim al-Harbi said that he was the most knowledgeable person regarding the Islamic history. He also considered that Al-Waqidi was most reliable regarding the opinions of Malik and Ibn Abi Dhi’b.
Mus’ab az-Zubairi said, “I have never seen someone like him.” Ibrahim al-Harbi narrates from him that Al-Waqidi was Thiqah.
Abu ‘Aamir al-‘Uqdi said, “We are being asked regarding him? He is to be asked regarding us.” The same was said by Ma’n bin ‘Isa regarding him.
Mujahid bin Musa said, “I have not written from anyone greater in memorizing than Al-Waqidi.” Al-Dhahabi said, “He said the truth. He was on the peak in memorizing the historical reports, Seerah, Maghazi, incidents, the timeline of people, Fiqh and other things.”
Muhammad bin Ishaq al-Musayyibi said, “He was Thiqah.”

Abu Yahya Az-Zuhri said, “He was Thiqah Ma’moon.”

Ibn Numair said, “His narrations from us is alright, as for his narration from people of Madinah then they are more aware of it.”

Abu ‘Ubaid said, “He was Thiqah.”
Muhammad bin Ishaq As-Saaghani also declared him Thiqah.
Yazeed bin Haroon declared him Thiqah.
‘Abbas Al-‘Anbari said as reported by Khateeb, “Al-Waqidi is more beloved to me than Abdur-Razzaq.” In a report of Ibn ‘Adi he said, “Al-Waqidi was more truthful than Abdur-Razzaq.” This statement doesn’t necessitate Tawtheeq because according to ‘Abbas, Abdur-Razzaq was a liar and to downgrade him he compared him with Al-Waqidi as Al-Waqidi was famous as a rejected narrator. Note that no one from the scholars rely on ‘Abbas in his Jarh on Abdur-Razzaq As-San’ani.

Ibn Sa’d praised him with knowledge.







Comparison between praise and disparagement:


After listing out all the statement of scholars regarding him we see that:




Jarh regarding him is explained. For instance Imam Ahmad said, “We never cease to defend him until he narrated from Ma’mar from Az-Zuhri from Nabhan from Um Salamah that the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) to his wives, “Are you blind too?” And this is the hadith of Yunus, no one else narrates it besides him.” Similarly Ibn Ma’een said, “He used to mix up the hadith of Yunus to the hadith of Ma’mar. He was not reliable.” Abu Ahmad said, “He was Dhaahib al-Hadith.” Muslim said, “He was Matrook al-Hadith.” Similarly Ibn al-Madeeni accused him of fabricating hadith. The most conclusive statement was given by Ibn Adi who said, “These are the hadith which I mentioned and with it also those which I did not mention, none of them are preserved. Those narrations are not preserved from those Thiqaat through whom al-Waqidi narrates except through the route of al-Waqidi, and the evil is from al-Waqidi. The texts of the reports of al-Waqidi are not preserved and his weakness is obvious.” Ibn Hibban said, “He would narrate from Thiqaat reversed [Maqloob] reports, and from Thabt narrators severely disconnected narrations so much so that sometimes it appears to the heart that he does it intentionally.” Ad-Daarqutni said, “Weakness is clearly apparent in his narrations.” I say: Anyone who is slightly familiar with the methodology of scholars of hadith would smell weakness in the reports of Al-Waqidi for the weakness of a narrator is observed in his narrations.

Majority criticized him as compared to very few scholars who made Tawtheeq. Those who made Tawtheeq were not famous for their criticism and praise on narrators, hence barely anyone will see them commenting on narrator’s status in the books of Jarh and Ta’deel.



So based on these conclusions we are sure about the unreliability of Muhammad bin ‘Umar al-Waqidi. Finally I quote a beautiful observation of Hafiz Dhahabi: It has already been mentioned that Al-Waqidi is weak,but he is needed in case of incidents of Battles and History. We mention his works without taking evidence from them. As for Faraidh then it is not good to mention him. Here are the six books of Hadith and Musnad Ahmad and you will see them reporting the narrations of several weak narrators, rather even Matrook reporters, but they do not mention al-Waqidi. This is besides the fact that his status according to me is that his hadith narrations are to be written as I do not accuse him of fabricating hadith. There is extremism, from some point of view, in the statement of those who totally left him just like there is nothing to rely on in the statement of those who declared him Thiqah like Yazeed, Abu ‘Ubayd, As-Saghani, Al-Harbi, Ma’n and all ten hadith scholars because there is agreement among scholars in these days that he is not Hujjah and his narrations are of the category of severely weak narrations (waahi).” Siyar (9/469).



Source : http://www.twelvershia.net/2014/02/19/response-to-shiapens-biography-of-mohammad-bin-omar-al-waqidi/


What the scholars said about Al Waqdy

AL WAQDY : الواقدي


Mohammad bin Omar bin Waqid Al-Waqidi Al-Aslami was an infamous historian from the second century AH. A large portion of the fabrications that we currently find in our history books today, whether it may be in the books of history or hadith come from his path alone. This is simply due to the fact that Al-Waqidi, unlike other liars of his time, was good at covering it up. Due to this, there was no consensus that the man fabricated traditions, even though this is the correct opinion since it is held by the major Rijali scholars that were his contemporaries.

To get a better perspective of this, we shall quote the opinions of those that declared him a liar:

-Ahmad bin Hanbal said: He is a liar.
-Yahya bin Ma’een said: He used to take the hadith of Ma’amar and attribute it to Yunus; he is not trustworthy.
-Ali bin Al-Madeeni said: Al-Haytham bin Adi is more reliable than Al-Waqidi, and I don’t take hadiths, genealogy, or anything from him.
-Al-Shafi’ee said: All his books are lies.
-Al-Nasa’ee included him as one of the four infamous liars.
-Abu Dawud: I have no doubts that he fabricated hadiths.
-Ishaq bin Rahawaih said: He is a fabricator of narrations.
-Abu Hatim said: He fabricated.

All of the above quotes can be found in the Tahdheebayn (Tahdheeb al-Kamal & Tahdheb al-Tahdheeb). Moreover, these statements do not include other ambiguous statements of weakening, like, “We didn’t narrate from him,” or “he is weak,” even though such words fit in the realm of “liar”. However, we purposefully chose some of the harshest criticisms to not leave a fragment of doubt in the minds of the objective reader. Also, note that we didn’t quote the opinions of other scholars that are not experts in Rijal. For those quotes, refer to Mizan Al-I’itidal and the Tahdheebayn.

talib abdALLAH
17/07/2019, 03h57
Shadeed Al Udmah – Dodgy translations




By now, everyone should know what the true meaning of Adam Shadeed Al Udmah means according to how it was understood by the Arabs themselves and the scholars of the past. You would think that authors of books and people who are supposed to have knowledge would know too but don’t be fooled. The following is a few translations that can be found online by doing a quick google search.


History of Islamic Philosophy: With View of Greek Philosophy and Early ...


By I.M.N. Al-Jubouri


Ali himself said, ‘The Messenger of Allah was sent (on his prophetic mission) on Monday and I accepted Islam on the Wednesday.’ As an old man Ali was stout and a little under average height, with a very tawny complexion, thick hair receding at the front and an extremely full beard that spread across his entire chest



History of Caliphs –Translated from the Original Arabic, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta, 1881 p.171

“Adam Shadid al-Udma”, translated as; “very tawny complexioned” by Major S.H. Jarret


It’s a shame that people have to revert to those who are not recognised Islamic scholars of the past to understand the language, history and culture of the Arabs to get their understandings.



What does very tawny even mean?


The scholars of he past made it very very clear that Adam Shadeed Al Udmah means jet black and that it is of the darkest of complexions that a human can have.

Here is a reminder of what the scholars said Adam Shadeed Al Udmah means :



This phrase is used a countless number of times to describe various companions of the Prophet Mohammed صلى الله عليه و سلم and others such as Ali Ibn Abi Talib (http://alajamwalarab.com/index.php/ali-ibn-abi-talib/), Umar bin Al Khataab (http://alajamwalarab.com/index.php/umar-ibn-khattab/), Muadh Ibn Jabal (http://alajamwalarab.com/index.php/muadh-ibn-jabal/) , Abdullah Ibn Masood (http://alajamwalarab.com/index.php/abdullah-ibn-masood/), Yazeed Ibn Muawiyyah (http://alajamwalarab.com/index.php/yazeed-ibn-muawiyyah/), Fadhl ibn Abbaas Ibn Utabah (http://alajamwalarab.com/index.php/fadhal-ibn-abbass/), Bilal Ibn Rabah (http://alajamwalarab.com/index.php/bilal-and-abu-dhar/) may Allah be pleased with them and Musa (http://alajamwalarab.com/index.php/musa/) alayhi Al Salam just to name a few.

d
Let us look at the colour Adam (ادم) first:


1.The great scholar Al Thaa’labi said in his book Fiqqatu Luggha wa Al Arabiyyah,Page 348.


”The colour Adam is black(ness) in humans and white(ness)in camels.”

س



قال ابو منصور الثعالبي في كتابه فقة اللغة ص ٣٤٨

الادم من الناس السود و من الابل الابيض

فقة اللغة و سر العربية

ابو منصور الثعالبي


As you can see, the colour Aadam(آدم ) by itself is very dark and not a light colour which most English speaking translators try to claim without any evidence.




2. Another great scholar called Ibn Sayaadah said, when explaining the meaning of the word Asham(اسحم ) in his book:


Al Hakm Al Muheet Al A’dam , Chapter 3, page 215


‘Al Asham wa Al Suhaam wa Al Sahmah means black(ness) and every black is Asham…. And the two suhaams are shadeed Al Udmah.



ب

المحكم والمحيط الأعظم – ج 3 ص 215

السّحَمُ والسُّحامُ والسُّحْمَةُ: السوَاد وكل أسود أسْحَمُ…والإسْحِمانُ، الشَّديد الأدمة


l

l

3. In another section he said السواد شدة الأدمة which translates to ” jet black is an intense Udmah”in other words jet black and Shadeed Al Udmah mean the same thing.




4. Imaam Al Alaamah Al Dhahabi says in his book Seera A’laam Al Nubalaa Chapter 2 page 168


‘They said Aswad (jet black) and this means whoever is covered in blackness. They said (jet )black or Shadeed Al Udmah.”



ظ

سير أعلام النبلاء ج٢ ص ١٦٨

قالوا اسود و كذا كل من غلب عليه السواد قالوا اسود او شديد الادمة




5. In Kitaab Al Alfaadh by Ibn Sakeet in the Chapter of colours, page 153 he said


‘ … from the the black men , and he is Shadeed al Udmah” in other words and from the people who are (jet) black in complexion they are also called Shadeed Al Udmah.



س

كتاب الألفاظ ١٥٣

قالوا : و من الرجال الاسود، و هو شديد الادمة


h




6. Another clear explanation of this can be found in the book called Fiqqatu Al Lughah( (http://alajamwalarab.com/index.php/degrees-of-blackness-in-humans/)فقة (http://alajamwalarab.com/index.php/degrees-of-blackness-in-humans/)اللغة (http://alajamwalarab.com/index.php/degrees-of-blackness-in-humans/)). Chapter 13 , page 126. (http://alajamwalarab.com/index.php/degrees-of-blackness-in-humans/)In this chapter, the scholar explains the levels of blackness in humans.


‘….. and if it (the colour) is darker than (the colour) Adam then it is (called) Asham( refer to point 2).



إذا عَلاَهُ أدنى سَوَاد فهو أسْمَر، فإنْ زاد سَوَادُهُ مَعَ صُفْرَةٍ تعلوه فهو أصْحَمُ، فإن زاد سَوَادُه على السُّمْرَة فهو آدم، فإن زاد على ذلك فهو أسحم، فإن اشتدّ سواده فهو أدلم.


k

l




7. The student of Sibaweey was nicknamed Natftweey because his udmah complexion resembled crude oil, which is a jet black colour.



لطائف المعارف ص٤٨

قال الثعالبي لقب نفطويه لدمامته و ادمته تشبيها (له ) بالنفط



m

8. Ibn Syadah said when given a description , in his book Kitaab Al Mukhassas ( المخصص) Chapter 1 Page 202




”and Aswad ( jet black ) is Shadeed Al Udmah a (jet)black man”



المخصص ج 1 ص202

والسواد شدة الأدمة رجل اسود


j




9. Imam Al Tabari gives a description of Mohammed Al Nafs Al Zaky in his book Tarikh Al Tabary(تاريخ الطبري), page 562.


‘‘Mohammed was Adam Shadeed Al Udama , Adlam and he was nicknamed father of Black coal because of his Udmah. Abu Ja’far called him charcoal.”





كان محمد آدم شديد الأدمة، أدلم جسيما عظيما، وكان يلقب القاري من أدمته، حتى كان أبو جعفر يدعوه محمما



Without even having to explain what Adlam means it is quite clear as to what shaded Al Udmah meant to Al Tabary.


The great grammarian Ibn Sakeet gives us further clarification here:


Ibn Sakeet tell us in his book Kitaab Al Al Faadh ( pages 152-153 ) that


”They say from the black men he is As Shadeed Al Udmah and from them is the Adlam and he is As Shadeed Al Udmah”



قال ابن السكيت في كتاب الافاظ ص ١٥٢ – ١٥٣

وقالوا من الرجال الأسود وهو الشديد الأدمة…ومنهم الأدلم وهو الشديد الأدمة


j




10. Al Baladhaari reports in Ansaab Al Ashraaaf Chapter 1 page 505


And when Abdul Malik mentioned Ibn Abi Bakarah, he says, ” The black ( Abi Bakarah) is a master of the people of the East”, and Abdullah Ibn Abi Bakarah was Adam Shadeed Al Udmah ( jet black ) ….

j



انساب الاشراف ج ١ ص ٥٠٥

وَكَانَ عبد الملك ، إِذَا ذكر ابن أبي بكرة ، يقول : الأسود سيد أهل المشرق ، وَكَانَ عُبَيْد الله آدم شديد الأدمة ، مفلج الثنايا ، طوالا ، أبرج العينين ، ضخم الرأس ، غليظ الوسط.

ن