Fada'il of Mu`awiyah

[Farid]

Nader, as you may have guessed, when a contemporary of the Prophet (salalahu alaihi wa salam) narrates from him with a clear seeghat sama'a, it is accepted that this person is a sahabi if the chain up to him is authentic. Please refer to Al-Isaba where Ibn Hajar discusses this issue and its relevance to Ibn Abi Umaira.

[Farid]

Note: His name is Ibn Abd Al-Barr, not Birr.

See Surat Al-Tur : 28.

إنه هو البر الرحيم

[Nader Zaveri]

Assalaamu `Alaykum,

Nader, as you may have guessed, when a contemporary of the Prophet (salalahu alaihi wa salam) narrates from him with a clear seeghat sama'a, it is accepted that this person is a sahabi if the chain up to him is authentic. Please refer to Al-Isaba where Ibn Hajar discusses this issue and its relevance to Ibn Abi Umaira.

Correct, I have read Ibn Hajar's discussion in his al-Isaabah. My issue is this:

1.) This narration according to Ibn Abi Hatim is not seeghah sama`ah (I heard the Messenger of Allah), rather it is "The Messenger of Allah said"

2.) The other narration of Ibn Abi `Umayrah that has Seeghah sama`ah is not authentic because we do not know the Shaykh of al-Walid b. Muslim
وقال ابْنُ سَعْدٍ: روَى الوليد بن مسلم، عن شيخ من أهل دمشق، عن يونس بن ميسرة بن حَلْبَس: سمعتُ عبد الرحمن بن أبي عَمِيرة المزني يقول: سمعت رسولَ الله صَلَّى الله عليه وسلم يقول: "يَكُونُ فِي بَيْتِ الْمَقْدِسِ بَيْعَة هُدًى"(*).

3.) All other hadith from Ibn Abi `Umayrah have the wording "The Messenger of Allah said" without any seeghat sama`ah.


The first narration which would be Sahih (according to the majority) has seeghat sama`ah, but as Ibn Abi Hatim says that Ibn Abi `Umayrah did not hear this particular hadith, rather it should be "The Messenger of Allah said".

The Second narration which has seeghat sama`ah is weak due to the unknown person in the chain from al-Walid b. Muslim.

The other narrations do not have Seeghat sama`ah.


If the above is the case, then what grounds do we have that he was a Sahabah, other than peoples statements of him being one? I believe his Suhbah could still be questioned if we analyze the hadith that the scholars are using to prove his suhbah. I believe this is how Ibn `Abd al-Barr analyzed the situation, unfortunately, I believe scholars dismissed his opinion because they believed that he misunderstood Ibn Abi Hatim's statement.


Wallaahu A`lim.

Wa `Alaykum Assalaam

[Farid]

Sorry for the delay Nader. I read a detailed research into this earlier. I'll try to find it and share it with you.

[Farid]

Nader, have you looked into Tareekh Dimashq? Ibn Asakir quotes several chains that all include seeghat sama'a.

In Tareekh Baghdaad, it says that Sa'eed bin Abdulaziz is the person that that mentioned that Ibn Abi Umaira is a companion.

[Nader Zaveri]

Assalamu `Alaykum,

I am aware of Sa'ad statement of him being a companion. I haven't seen all the narrations from Tarikh Dimashq, can you quote for us the hadith that specifically have seeghat sama'ah? Thank you.

[Furkan]

Any development?

[Optimus Prime]

What is the narration that's being or was disputed or discussed in the thread?

[Abu Rumaysah]

Bismillah.

Salam alaikum.

http://gift2shias.com/2010/04/12/sahih-hadith-in-praise-of-muawiyah-2/