Moses slaps the angel of death!!!!

The two sheikhs mentioned a tradition that Abu Hurayra had said: "The prophet Muhammad (s) said: The angel of death came to Moses and said to him: Respond to the order of your god! Moses slapped the angel of death on his eye and gouged it. The angel of death returned to Allah and said to Him: You sent me to one of Your slaves, who did not want to die. He gouged my eye. Allah restored to him his eye and said to him: Go back to My slave and say to him: If you want to live, you are to put your hand on a bull's back and see how many hairs stick in your hand. You will live for every hair a year." 1

Ahmed bin Hanbal mentioned this tradition in his Musnad 2 that Abu Hurayra had said: "The Prophet (s) said: The angel of death used to come to people visibly. He came to Moses. Moses slapped him and gouged his eye…" Ibn Jareer at-Tabari in his book Tareekh al-Umam wel- Mulook (the history of the nations and the kings) vol. 1, mentioned that Abu Hurayra had said: "The angel of death used to come to people visibly until he came to Moses. Moses slapped him and gouged his eye…" and at the last of the tradition that "the angel of death began to come to people invisibly after the death of Moses."3

You note clearly that this tradition has many things, which can never be ascribed to Allah, His prophets, and His angels. Is it suitable for Allah to choose among His people one, who assaults like the tyrants even upon the angels of Allah just because of anger and acts like the mutinous arrogant or to hate death so much like the ignorant? Was that possible for Moses, whom Allah had chosen for His mission and entrusted with His revelation? Was that possible for Moses, whom Allah had favored with His talking to and made one of the best prophets? How did he hate death while he desired to meet Allah and to be near Him? What was the guilt of the angel of death, who was but a messenger from Allah to him to be slapped and his eye be gouged? Was it suitable for the arch-prophets to insult and beat the angels, who were sent by Allah to inform them of the missions and orders of Allah? Allah and His prophets and angels be far above that! Why did we disavow the dwellers of ar-Rass, the Pharaoh, Abu Jahl and the likes and curse them day and night? Was that not because
they offended the prophets when they came to them with the missions and orders of Allah? How do we, then, ascribe the same to the prophets? Allah forbid! What a great slander it is!

It is well-known that the power of the human beings altogether, or in fact, the power of all the creatures since the beginning of creation until the Day of Resurrection, cannot stand against the power of the angel of death. How was it easy for Moses to beat him?

Did the angel not defend himself although he was able to put Moses to death especially that he was ordered by Allah to do that? And when did the angel have an eye to be gouged? And do not forget that the angel lost his right for the slap and the gouged eye. He wasn't ordered by Allah to avenge himself upon Moses, in whose Torah Allah had said: (that life is for life, and eye for eye, and nose for nose, and ear for ear, and tooth for tooth, and (that there is) reprisal in wounds),4 nor Allah blamed Moses, but He revered him by giving him the option to choose between dying or living for many other years as much as the hairs of the bull stuck in his hand.

I swear by the dignity of rightness and the honour of truthfulness and by their being above nullness and falsehood, that this man had burdened his defenders with what they couldn't bear and overtaxed them with hi  traditions, which their minds couldn't put up with, especially his saying: (the angel of death used to come to people visibly before the death of Moses but he came to them invisibly after the death of Moses). May Allah save us from torpor of mind and nonsense of saying and doing. There is no power save in Allah, the most
Exalted, the Almighty.

References:

1. Sahih of Muslim, vol. 2, p.p. 309. Sahih of al-Bukhari, vol. 2, p.p. 163 and vol. 1, p.p. 158.

2. vol. 2, p.p. 315.

3. If the angle of death came to people visible, that would be widespread among the all, like the rays of the sun in the midday. Why did the narrators and the historians of the other nations miss this news if it had had any reality? Why didn't the imagination of the fictionists and fablers hover about this excitements? Did they leave the honor of that for Abu Hurayra ? 

4. Sura of al-Ma'ida, Verse: 45. We found that the twenty-third paragraph of the twenty-first chapter of the Exodus of the Torah, which is among the Jews and Christians nowadays have the following meaning: (If a harm happened, a soul would be given for a soul, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a leg for a leg, a burn for a burn, a wound for a wound and a bruise for a bruise).

Solomon goes to bed with a hundred women in one night

The two sheikhs mentioned a tradition that Abu Hurayra had said: "Prophet Muhammad said: Sulayman ibn Dawood (Solomon, the son of David) said: I will go to bed with a hundred of women tonight. Each woman will give birth to a boy, who will fight for the sake of Allah. The angel said to him: Say inshallah. He did not say and went to bed with them. No one of them did bear except one, who gave birth to half a human being. If he said inshallah, he wouldn't break his oath and his desire would be realized."

We also have some notes about this tradition:

First: The human power is unable to go to bed with one hundred women in one night, however strong the man is. This is against the rules of nature and cannot be happened at all.

Second: It was not possible for the prophet Solomon (s) to turn his back on the will of Allah, especially after the precaution of the angel to him. What prevented him to say inshallah? Was he not the prophet, whom Allah had delegated to guide people in the way of Allah? It was the ignorant that turned their backs on the will of Allah and ignored that all their affairs were in His hand! The prophets were far above the inattention of the ignorant. They were far above what the dotards thought.

Third: Abu Hurayra was confused about the number of Solomon's wives. Sometimes he said they were one hundred, 1 and sometimes he said they were ninety, 2 seventy3, and sixty 4. All these traditions were mentioned in al-Bukhari, Muslim, and Ahmed's books. I do not know what they would say, those who defended this man! Would they say that Solomon had done this thing several times with his wives? So they were a hundred at the first time and ninety at the second time and seventy or sixty at the other times. And every time the angel precautioned him but he did not say inshallah. I do not think they would say that. It would be better for them to say: The tear became wider for the patcher to repair.5 A liar has no good memory.6


References:

1. Sahih of al-Bukhari, vol. 3, p.p. 176. Musnad of Ahmed, vol. 2, p.p. 229 and p.p. 270.

2. ibid, vol. 4, p.p. 107.

3. ibid, vol. 2, p.p. 165.

4. Sahih of Muslim, vol. 2, p.p. 23. In the same chapter Muslim mentioned a tradition narrated by Abu Hurayra from another way that they were seventy and another narrated by him from a third way that they were ninety.

5. A proverb.

6. A proverb.

Solomon breaks his father David's verdict!!!

The two 1 sheikhs mentioned a tradition narrated by Abu Hurayra that the Prophet had said: " There were two women with their two babies. A wolf came and snatched one of the babies. The women disputed that each pretended the baby was eaten by the wolf was of the other. They went to Prophet David to judge between them. He judged that the remained live baby was the elder woman's baby. They went to Prophet Solomon, the son of Prophet David, and told him their story. He said: "Bring me a knife 2 to cut the baby into two halves to give each one a half." The younger woman cried: "Please, don't do that, Allah may have mercy upon you. It is of that woman." Then Prophet Solomon judged that the baby was of the younger woman." Abu Hurayra said: "I swear by Allah that I haven't heard of sikkeen (knife) before that. We called it midya (knife)."

We have some notes about this tradition:

First: David (s) was a prophet, whom Allah had delegated to guide His people and entrusted to rule on the earth with justice. Allah said: (O Dawood! surely We have made you a ruler in the land; so judge between men with justice) 38:26 (Quran). Allah had praised him in the holy Qur'an by saying: (..and remember Our servant Dawood, the possessor of power; surely he was frequent in returning (to Allah). Surely We made the mountains to sing the glory (of Allah) in unison with him at the evening and the sunrise, And the birds gathered together; all joined in singing with him. And We strengthened his kingdom and We gave him wisdom and a clear judgement) 38:17-20 (Quran), and: (And most surely he had a nearness to Us and an excellent resort) 38:40 (Quran), and: (and certainly We have made some of the prophets to excel others, and to Dawood We gave a scripture) 17:55 (Quran). Allah had favoured Prophet David with the Book of Psalms. He was infallible, especially in judgement and rule according to what Allah had said in the Qur'an: (and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust) 5:45 (Quran). The son Solomon was the inheritor of his father David's knowledge, wisdom and rule. He also was an infallible prophet. Hence, how could he break his father's judgement though he knew very well that his father was an infallible prophet? If, nowadays, a mufti having all the legal conditions of judgement judges between two persons, then it will be compulsory for all the other muftis to regard the validity of his verdict unless they know certainly that it is wrong. But among the prophets wrong was impossible because they all were infallible. So it was not possible for Solomon, who was a prophet, to break the verdict of his father, whom Allah had made prophet and ruler. His breaking the verdict of his father meant denying the will of Allah and impoliteness and impiety towards his father.


Second: The contradiction between the verdicts of these two prophets was clear, according to this tradition. It means that one of them was wrong. This was impossible for the prophets especially when they judged according to the laws of Allah. Allah said: (..and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors) 5:47 (Quran).


Third: The tradition showed that David (s) had judged that the baby was the elder woman's baby without any evidence just because she was the elder. Judgements like these didn't come except from an ignorant man, who didn't know anything about the legal criteria and the laws of trials. Glory be to Allah and His prophets.


Fourth: Solomon judged that the baby was the younger woman's baby just because she feared for the baby to be cut by the knife. This was not an enough evidence for Solomon to judge according to it, especially after that the younger woman had confessed that it was the other woman's baby and after his father's judgement.


Fifth: I wonder, by Allah, at those who believed Abu Hurayra when he said: "I swear by Allah that I haven't heard of sikkeen before that. We didn't call it but midya." Sikkeen was more common among the Arabs, and I don't think that there was one who didn't know its meaning. In fact, many of the common people didn't know the midya. Did Abu Hurayra not read or hear Allah saying in sura of Yousuf 3: (...and gave each of them a (sikkeen) knife) 12:31 (Quran).


Didn't he, himself, narrate that the Prophet (s) had said: "He, who was made a judge for people, as if he was slaughtered without a (sikkeen) knife." 4


NOTE

Abu Hurayra thought that David and Solomon (when they gave judgement concerning the field..) 21:78 (Quran), were contradictable in their judgements so it became easy for him to fabricate that imaginary story where he didn't know that they both were right and the judgement and knowledge of each of them were from Allah.



The case was that some sheep had entered into a vineyard, which its grapevines' clusters had come out, and ate it in the night. The vineyard keeper and the sheep keeper went to Prophet David (s) to judge between them. He found, according to the Sharia revealed to him by Allah, that he had to judge that the vineyard keeper would take the sheep because the value of the sheep was equal to the value of the damage in the vineyard. When he wanted to give his judgement, Allah abrogated it by revealing to Solomon, who was a partner with his father in prophecy, that the judgement in this case was to give the sheep to the vineyard keeper to make use of their milk and wool and to give the vineyard to the sheep keeper to restore it as it was before then each of them would take his property. Allah made by this judgement a use for the vineyard by the sheep in return for his loss without possessing the sheep and made the sheep keeper work in the vineyard to restore it as before.


When Allah instructed Solomon with that, he offered it to his father. His father asked him insistently to do what Allah had revealed to him.

This is the summery of what happened between them. There was no contradiction or disagreement like any two divine laws, which one abrogated the other.

Here is the saying of Allah, the most exalted, which explains this fact: (And Dawood and Sulaiman when they gave judgement concerning the field when the people's sheep pastured therein by night, and We were bearers of witness to their judgement. So We made Sulaiman to understand it ; and to each one We gave wisdom and knowledge; and We made the mountains, and the birds to celebrate Our praise with Dawood; and We were the doers) 21:78-79 (Quran).

Look at the saying of Allah (and to each one We gave wisdom and knowledge), you will find that both of them were right, because the knowledge and judgement of each of them were from Allah.

But Abu Hurayra thought it easy to condemn the prophets that they might misjudge like the other muftis.

(And they do not assign to Allah the attributes due to Him) 6:91 (Quran), when they permitted themselves to give fatwas according to their own thinking against the prophets, who were the means between Allah and His people. They thought that the prophets might misjudge even in the legal judgements and laws, which were, no doubt, revealed to them from Allah (and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers) 5:44 (Quran).


If discernment returned to their minds, they would know that the prophets didn't give decisions and judgements according to their thought because they would know that by revelation. This was possible for the mujtahids of umma because it was the best of what they can do. But it was impossible for the prophets because it often led to one's own thought.


If the prophets judged according to their thought, it would be possible for the other mujtahids to contradict them. Then the dignity of prophecy and the prophets would be lost. Could any faithful mujtahid dare to contradict Prophet Muhammad (s) and break his verdict? Certainly not! It is blasphemy unanimously!


The holy Qur'an declares clearly that Prophet Muhammad (s) acted according to the revelation (..nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed) 53:3-4 (Quran).

So did all the prophets and apostles (peace be upon them all).

References:


1. Sahih of al-Bukhari. vol. 2, p.p.166. Sahih of Muslim, vol. 2, p.p.57.Musnad of Ahmed bin Hanbal, vol.2, p.p. 322.

2. In Arabic it is called sikkeen.

3.Sura of yousuf was reveealed to prophet Muhammad(s)in Mecca except four verses which were revealed in Medina,the first three verses and the fourth:(certainly in Yusuf and his brothers there are signs for the inquirers)12:7.

Abu Hurayra became a Muslim seven years after the revealation of this inquires) 12:7. Abu Hurayra became a Muslim seven years after the revelation of this sure, which it had been recited by the Muslims day and night and he heard them read it in their prayers many times.

4. Mentioned by imam Ahmed bin Hanbal in his book Musnad, vol. 2, p.p. 230, that it was narrated by Muhammed bin Ja'far from Shu'ba from al-Ala' from his father from Abu Hurayra.

Allah descends to the lower heaven every night!!!

The two sheikhs mentioned a tradition narrated by Ibn Shihab from Abu Abdullah al- Agharr and Abu Salama bin Abdur-Rahman that Abu Hurayra had said: "Our god descends to the lower heaven at the last third of every night and says: Let any one ask me to grant him what he asks for." 1

He is exalted and far above ascending and descending, coming and going, moving about and any other happening. Many heresies and aberrations came out by the Hanbalis, especially Ibn Taymiya, who ascended the minbar of the Umayyad mosque in Damascus on one Friday preaching. He said through his heresies: "Allah descends to the lower heaven every night like my descending now." He descended one step of the minbar to show them how Allah descends in a real motion from up to down.

A Maliki jurisprudent called Ibn az-Zahra' contradicted him and denied what he had said. The people in the mosque rushed to the Maliki jurisprudent and beat him with hands and shoes severely until his turban fell down on the ground. They carried him to the judge of Hanbalis in Damascus, who was called Izzuddeen bin Muslim. He ordered to put him in prison and he punished him after that…etc. 2


Reference:

1. Sahih of al-Bukhari,vol. 4, p.p.68 and vol. 1, p.p. 136. Sahih of Muslim, vol. 1, p.p. 283.Musnad of Ahmed bin Hanbal, vol.2,p.p.258.

2.The explorer Ibn Battouta atternded thi incident and mentioned what he had seen in his book Rihla(travel), vol.1, p.p.57.

Hell won't be full until Allah puts His leg in it

The two sheikhs mentioned a tradition narrated by Abdur Razak from Ma'mar from Humam that Abu Hurayra had said: "The Paradise and the Hell disputed about what each had. The Hell said: "I am favored by having the haughty people and the tyrants. The Paradise said: "What about me that I have but the poor and miserable people." Allah said to Paradise: "You are My mercy, which I grant to whomever I will."

He said to Hell:
"You are My torture, which I punish with whomever I will." Each of them must be filled.

But Hell will not be filled until Allah puts His leg into it and it says: "Enough, enough."

Then it becomes full and some of its parts join the others." 1

When Abu Hurayra became wealthier, he became more stupid. 2

He saw that Hell is larger than to be filled with the disobedient people and Allah said that He would fill it:(He said: The truth then is and the truth do I speak that I will certainly fill Hell) 38:84-85 (Quran).

So Abu Hurayra stopped, in front of these two matters, confused pondering how to reconcile between them, until he found a solution for this problem that Allah would put His leg into Hell, because, according to Abu Hurayra's opinion, the leg of Allah must be greater than Hell whatever Hell was great and wide. And since Abu Hurayra was so clever and brilliant so no wonder to gather between the contradictories. But if he pondered about the saying of Allah: (He said: The truth then is and the truth do I speak that I will certainly fill Hell with you and with those among them who follow you, all) 38:84-85 (Quran), his tongue would be tied and he would go away stumbling with his dirty garment, because the verse declared that Hell would be filled with him and his likes, the devils and who followed them of people.

However, this tradition is impossible according to reason and the Sharia.

Does any Muslim glorifying Allah believe that Allah has a leg? Does any sane man believe that Allah puts His leg in Hell in order to be filled? What is the maxim of that? Does this speech have any importance?

With which language do Paradise and Hell dispute? With what senses do they perceive and know those, who enter into them? What favor do the arrogant and tyrants have that Hell prides of while they are suffering torture? And does Paradise think that those who entered into it are pauper and miserable people while they are those, whom Allah prefers? They are the prophets, the veracious people, the martyrs, and the righteous people. I do not think that Paradise and Hell are so ignorant, stupid and dotard.

References:

1. Al-Bukhari`s Sahih, vol.3, p.p. 127. muslim`s Sahih, vol. 2. p.p. 482.Ahmed`s Musnad, vol.2, p.p. 314.

2. Proverb.

Abu Hurayra pretended that the Prophet (s) had informed him alone of some traditions

Abu Hurayra pretended that the Prophet (s) had informed him alone of some traditions that he would never reveal to any one. He kept them inside his conscience andburied them in his chest. And as you know that Abu Hurayra had a well-fortified chest and an inscrutable conscience! So he said: "I had kept from the Prophet two vessels. I spread the first, but if I would spread the other, this throat would be cut." 1


He said: "If I told you all what I knew, people would throw potteries at me and say: Abu
Hurayra is mad."

He said: "If I told you all what I had in my chest, you would throw dung at me."

He said: "They say that Abu Hurayra told too many traditions. I swear by Allah that if I
told you all what I had heard, you would throw dunghill at me and you would never
debate with me." 2

References:

1. Al-Bukhari's Sahih, vol. 1, p.p. 24.

2. The three previous tradition were mentioned by Ibn Sa'd in his book, Tabaqat, vol 4, p.p. 57.




He said: "I had memorized from the Prophet (s) some traditions that I didn't tell you of. If
I told you of them you would throw stones at me." 1

He said: "I had memorized from the Prophet (s) five bags of traditions. I told of two of
them and if I told of the third, you would throw me with stones." 2
Abu Hurayra was neither the Prophet's heir apparent nor the caliph after him to prefer to
the others and tell him secrets and knowledge that he would not tell anyone of his close
companions or relatives.

What was the use of telling him those secrets since he was a weak man with meanness
that prevented him to say something of those secrets unless he would be thrown with
stones, dung and trashes or that his throat would be cut?

Would it not be better for the Prophet to tell those secrets for the caliphs after him, who
led people by one will and to whom the nations submitted and the necks of the Arabs and
non-Arabs yielded? They were better than Abu Hurayara in doing that. If they had had
those secrets, they would spread them throughout the countries like the rays of the sun.
Far be it from the Prophet to do something in vain. Would he entrust Abu Hurayra with
his secrets to be lost uselessly? And who was Abu Hurayra to be singled out of the first
Muslims? (And the foremost are the foremost. These are they who are drawn nigh (to
Allah)) 50:10-11.

Abu Hurayra often said: "Abu Hurayra neither keeps secret nor writes down." How did
this saying agree with his saying: "I had memorized from the Prophet two vessels. I
spread one of them. If I spread the other, this throat would be cut" and the other sayings
having the same meaning that he kept secret?

Let us ask those, who research for the divine secrets that the Prophet (s) entrusted Abu
Hurayra with and that Abu Hurayra kept secret to preserve himself or to keep his dignity.
Were those secrets

References:

1. Al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, vol. 3, p.p. 509, ath-Thahabi in his Talkhees. What a dignity Abu Hurayra had! He said .... you would throw at me stones, potteries, dunghill. And when he said about himself..... the comers put their feet on my neck.. and when he talked about his stomach,lice and his other affairs.

2. Abu Na'eem, Hilyatul-Awliya', p.p. 381 (biography of Abu Hurayra).

3. Ibn Sa'd's Tabaqat, vol. 2, p.p. 119.

of the kind of secrets that the Prophet (s) entrusted his guardian Imam Ali with? Did they concern the caliphate and caliphs after him? Were they of another kind? If they were of the first kind, why would Abu Hurayra turn away from them and contradict them completely? His opinion would be like all the other Muslims' opinion for he was just one person among the others. But if those secrets were of another kind, he would not refrain from telling offensive and disgraceful traditions!

Did he not narrate that the Prophet slept and missed the Fajr prayer? And that the Satan came to him to disturb his prayers?

Didn't he narrate that once the Prophet forgot and offered a two section prayer instead of four and when they asked him: Did you forget or restrict the prayer? He answered: I neither forgot nor restricted?

Did he not tell that the Prophet hurt, abused, cursed and whipped innocent people just because he became angry?

Did he not ascribe to the apostles many things that were impossible for them to commit according to the Sharia and reason? He narrated that Prophet Muhammad (s) had said:

"We are worthier than Abraham to be in doubt." He also narrated that Prophet Lot's trust in Allah was not certain.

Did he not dare to defame Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus, who must be
honored? Did he not ascribe to Moses that he had slipped the angel of death and gouged his eye? And that once Prophet Moses ran nakedly in front of the Israelites, who looked at his private parts?

Did he not narrate that Solomon, the son of David, had broken the verdict of his father?

And that he refused to say inshallah, so his deed failed?

Did he not ascribe to Allah what could never be accepted neither by the Sharia nor by reason? He said that Hell will not be full, unless Allah puts His leg in it. In his tradition about the Day of Resurrection, he said that Allah comes to people in an image different from that which they know saying to them: "I am your god." They say: "Allah forbid!"

Then He comes to them in the image, which they know! They say: "You are our god."

Abu Hurayra said that Adam was created in an image like the image of the Beneficent (Allah)!


And that Allah had created Adam like His image. He was sixty cubits long and seven cubits wide.

You will find many many of his wonders in the next chapter which cause to cut the throat, so why he told of them easily? In fact he narrated those traditions as if he had done people a favor. He told of superstitions but no one threw at him a stone, dung, or trash as it was clear for any one knew him. But we are afflicted with unjust people and we do not have save Allah to resort to.


We want to draw the prudent researchers' attention that Abu Hurayra said : "No one have narrated traditions from the Prophet (s) more than I have, except Abdullah bin Amr bin al-Aass, because he wrote down but I didn't."


He confessed that Abdullah bin Amr had narrated traditions more than he had. We researched on Abdullah's traditions and we found that they were no more than seven hundred. 2
So they were less than one seventh in comparison with Abu Hurayra's traditions.

The researchers were very confused how to excuse Abu Hurayra in this contradiction.

But Ibn Hajar al-Qastalani and sheikh Zakariya al-Ansari found an excuse when they explained this tradition in their books 3 that Abdullah bin Amr bin al-Aass lived in Egypt and those, who went to Egypt, were very few, therefore he narrated a little of his traditions, while Abu Hurayra lived in Medina, which was the destination of Muslims from everywhere, so his traditions were so many.

Abu Hurayra's saying was clear to abort this excuse. He acknowledged that no one had narrated traditions from the Prophet (s) more than he had except Abdullah bin Amr. The man, himself,confessed that Abdullah's traditions were more than his so there was no way for the excuse of the two authors.

The great position and respect Abdullah bin Amr had in Egypt were a good cause to let him narrate his many traditions. There was no one else than him in Egypt, whom people knew very well, except some very few companions or travelers.


So he was the only expert in the Qur'an, the Sharia and the Sunna that people resorted to. What a difference between his position in Egypt and Abu Hurayra's position in Medina was! For Abdullah had the rank of the veracious jurisprudent and the glory of the conqueror's son in the
Egyptians' hearts, where Abu Hurayra, in Medina, was just one of thousands of the Prophet's companions. The delegations visiting Medina went to the famous great companions, whom Abu Hurayra was not one of. Also he was accused of narrating toomuch many traditions from the Prophet (s). People of Medina often blamed him by saying: "Why didn't the Muhajireen and the Ansar narrate as much as his traditions."

His position in Medina would not let him narrate so many traditions. It was unbelievable
that his traditions were more than Abdullah's; especially after his confession thatAbdullah's traditions were more than his. In addition that Abdullah bin Amr lived long after Abu Hurayra's death. In fact Abu Hurayra confessed of that at the beginning after the Prophet's death, when he was not so excessive in narrating traditions. He became so excessive during the reign of Mu'awiya where there was neither Abu Bakr, Omar, Ali nor any one of the great companions whom Abu Hurayra feared.

References:

1. A tradition narrated by Wahab bin Munbbih from his brother Hummam from Abu Hurayra, mentioned in al-Bukhari's Sahih, vol. 1, p.p. 22.

2. Al-Qastalani's book Irshad as-Sari fee Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 1, p.p. 373.

The Quality of Abu Hurayra's traditions

All those who collected the Hadith agreed unanimously that Abu Hurayra had narrated
traditions more than any one else at all. 1
They counted his traditions to find that they were five thousand and three hundred and seventy-four traditions. He had in al-Bukhari's Sahih only four hundred and forty-six traditions. 2

We found that all what was narrated by the four caliphs in comparison with Abu Hurayra's traditions was less than twenty-seven percent. Abu Bakr had narrated one
hundred and forty-two traditions. 3

Omar had narrated five hundred and thirty-seven traditions. 4

All what Othman had narrated were one hundred and forty-six traditions. 5

References:

1. Refer to the last line of page 240, vol. 4, of Ibn Hajr's book al-Issaba which included the book al-Issti'ab in the margins.

2. Refer to al-Qastalani's book Irshad as-Sari, vol. 1, p.p. 212, the explanation of the first tradition of Abu Hurayra mentioned by al-Bukhari in his Sahih, you will find that Abu Hurayra had narrated from the Prophet (s) 5374 tradition and that he had in al-Bukhari's Sahih 446 traditions. Ibn Hazm in his book al- Milal wen-Nihal vol. 4, p.p. 138, said tha Abu Hurayra had narrated 5374 traditions.

3. It was mentioned by as-Sayouti in his book Tareekh al-Khulafa' (the history of the caliphs), an-Nawawi in his book at-Tahtheeb. Ibn Hazm in his book al-Milal wen-Nihal, vol. 4, p.p. 137 and ath-Thahabi in his book Mizan al-I'tidal, who said that the true traditions of Abu Bakr were less than twenty.

4. As-Sayouti said in his book Tareekh al-Khulafa' that Omar's traditions were five hundered and thirt-nine.

Ibn Hazm mentioned in his book al-Milal wen-Nihal, vol. 4, p.p. 4, 138 the same number and said that the true traditions ot Omar were nearly fifty traditions.

5. Jalaluddin as-Sayouti in his book tareekh al-Khulafa'.




And five hundred and eighty-six traditions were narrated from Imam Ali 1 .

So the total is one thousand and four hundred and eleven traditions, which if you compare to Abu Hurayra's traditions you will find the ratio exactly as we said.

Let any prudent one think of Abu Hurayra, the short period of his being a Muslim, his obscurity, his illiteracy and all what would make him be mean, then think of the fourcaliphs, their priority in Islam, their attendance during the legislation of the laws of Sharia, their braveries throughout fifty-two years; in twenty-three of them they were atthe service of the Prophet (s) and in twenty-nine of them, they governed the umma and mastered the other nations. They conquered the countries of Kasra and Caesar.

They built towns and countries, spread Islam, and declared laws of Sharia and Sunna.

Sohow would it be possible for Abu Hurayra, alone, to narrate so many times as much as they had narrated of the Prophet's traditions?

Also Abu Hurayra was not like Aa'isha, although she narrated too much. The Prophet (s)
had got married to her ten years before Abu Hurayra became a Muslim. 2

She was in the house where Allah's inspiration was revealed to the Prophet (s) and the place of coming and going of Gabriel and Michael for fourteen years. She died a little before Abu
Hurayra's death. 3

References:

1. As-Sayouti, Tareekh al-Khulafa' (Ali's biography). Ibn Hazm in his book al-Milal wen-Nahl, vol. 4, p.p.137.

2. Ibn Abdil-Birr said in his book al-Isstee'ab that the Prophet (s) had got married to Aa'isha in the tenth year after his Prophecy - three years before hijr - so her marriage was before Abu Hurayra being a Muslim in ten years because he became Muslim inthe seventh year of hijra.

3. She died i fifty-seven of hijra before Abu Hurayra's death in a short time. Abu Hurayra offered the prayer for her - the prayer for the dead - by order of al-Waleed bin Otba bin Abu Sufyan, who was made wali of Medina by his uncle Mu'awiya. He wanted to honor Abu Hurayra by that. Aa'isha was buried in Baqee.