Response to: Caliphate of Bani Umayya? Caliphate or Evil Rule?

Share

The following is a response to SlaveOfAhlubait’s article entitled: “Caliphate of Bani Umayya? Caliphate or Evil Rule?” The article can be found here.

SoA don’t waste any time and quote the narration that they use as evidence:

حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ مَنِيعٍ ، حَدَّثَنَا سُرَيْجُ بْنُ النُّعْمَانِ ، حَدَّثَنَا حَشْرَجُ بْنُ نُبَاتَةَ ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُمْهَانَ ، قَالَ :
حَدَّثَنِي سَفِينَةُ ، قَالَ : قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : ” الْخِلَافَةُ فِي أُمَّتِي ثَلَاثُونَ سَنَةً ثُمَّ مُلْكٌ بَعْدَ
ذَلِكَ ” ، ثُمَّ قَالَ لِي سَفِينَةُ : أَمْسِكْ خِلَافَةَ أَبِي بَكْرٍ ، ثُمَّ قَالَ : وَخِلَافَةَ عُمَرَ ، وَخِلَافَةَ عُثْمَانَ ، ثُمَّ قَالَ لِي :
أَمْسِكْ خِلَافَةَ عَلِيٍّ ، قَالَ : فَوَجَدْنَاهَا ثَلَاثِينَ سَنَةً ، قَالَ سَعِيدٌ : فَقُلْتُ لَهُ : إِنَّ بَنِي أُمَيَّةَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّ الْخِلَافَةَ
فِيهِمْ ، قَالَ : كَذَبُوا بَنُو الزَّرْقَاءِ بَلْ هُمْ مُلُوكٌ مِنْ شَرِّ الْمُلُوكِ ، قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى : وَفِي الْبَابِ عَنْ عُمَرَ ، وَعَلِيٍّ ،
قَالَا : لَمْ يَعْهَدِ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي الْخِلَافَةِ شَيْئًا ، وَهَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ ، قَدْ رَوَاهُ غَيْرُ وَاحِدٍ ، عَنْ
سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُمْهَانَ ، وَلَا نَعْرِفُهُ إِلَّا مِنْ حَدِيثِ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُمْهَانَ
جامع الترمذي » كِتَاب الْفِتَنِ » بَاب مَا جَاءَ فِي الْخِلَافَةِ

TRANSLATION

saeed bin jehman narrated from safina that he said that holy prophet asws said that caliphate will remain for 30 years, and then there will be kingship. then safina told me: so abu bakr got caliphate, and then umar got caliphate, and then uthman got caliphate; and then he told me; ali got caliphate and then the 30 years completed
saeed said that i said to him: bani umayya presume that they have got caliphate
safina said: liars, these banu zarqa, they are kings from evil kings

There are three problems with the narration, which makes it unlikely that Safeena uttered these words about Bani Umayyah.

The first is that he is responding to a claim that Bani Umayyah supposedly made, but is referring to them as Bani Al-Zarqa’a. This is not logical, since Al-Zarqa’a is the grandmother of Marwan bin Al-Hakam. See Nasab Quraish by Mus’ab Al-Zubairi (p. 394).

The second problem is that this narration comes from the path of Hashraj bin Nubata. Even though his narration is too bad, but he has been weakened or slightly weakened by Abu Hatim, Al-Nasa’ee, Ibn Adi, Al-Saji, Al-Bukhari, and Ibn Hibban. He has been strengthened by some scholars like Ahmad and Yahya too.

Finally, the other narrators that have narrated this hadith from Sa’eed bin Jumhan do not mention Bani Umayyah, but rather, refer to Bani Al-Zarqa’a as the children of Marwan. See the narration of Awwam bin Hawshab in Al-Sunnah by Abdullah bin Ahmad (p. 355) and the narration of Abd Al-Warith bin Sa’eed in Sunan Abi Dawud #4028.

In other words, the addition that these are evil kings and that they are Bani Umayyah cannot be accepted, since the more reliable narrators did not mention this, nor does it fit in with the name of Bani Al-Zarqa’a.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*