Name:
المِنْهال بن عَمْرو الأَسَديُّ، أسد خُزَيْمة مولاهم، الكوفي.
Al-Minhaal
bin Amr al-Asdi, Asad Khuzaymah, their client, al-Koofi
Tabaqah:
Death: 111-120
H
Narrated by:
Teachers: Zadaan
al-Kindi, Sa’eed bin Jubayr, Aamir bin Sa’d bin Abi Waqqaas, Abdur Rahmaan bin
Abi Layla, Ali bin Abdullah bin Abbaas, Mujaahid bin Jabar al-Makki, Aa’ishah
bint Talhah, Ali bin al-Husayn bin Ali bin Abi Taalib, and others.
Students: Hajjaaj
bin Artaat, Salamah bin Kuhayl, Sulemaan al-A’mash, Shu’bah bin al-Hajjaaj,
Abdullah bin Awn, Abd Rabbih bin Sa’eed, Ataa al-Khurasaani, Layth bin Abi
Sulaym, Muhammad bin Abdur Rahmaan bin Abi Layla, Abaan bin Taghlib and others.
Status:
Opinions of Ahl ul-Jarh wat Ta’deel:
Those who praised him:
1-
[
2-
[
3-
[
And this is a
proof of the reliance of Imaam Bukhaari on Al-Minhaal.
Haafidh Ibn
Hajar al-Asqalaani writes: “Every reasonable person should know that the narration of
a narrator by the author of As-Saheeh points towards his uprightness (Adaalah)
according to him, the strength of his preciseness (Dhabt), and the lack of his
negligence; especially when the Jumhoor A’immah have also agreed upon in naming
these books ‘Saheehayn’. And this position can not be given to those whose
narrations are not narrated in As-Saheeh. Thus those (i.e. the narrators) who are
mentioned in them (i.e. Saheehayn) are reliable according to the Jumhoor
Muhadditheen”
[Fath al-Baari
Sharh Saheeh al-Bukhaari (1/384)]
Muhaddith
ul-Asr, Muhammad Naasir ud-Deen al-Albaani (rahimahullah) said while refuting
the Jarh on Al-Minhaal bin Amr that: “It is enough to refute that (i.e. criticism) that
he is one of the narrators of Al-Bukhaari”
[Tahqeeq
al-Ayaat al-Bayyinaat fi Adm Samaa al-Amwaat (P. 84)]
4-
[
5-
[
This proves two
things: First that the one who declares Qur’aan to be a creation is an opposer
of Sunnah according to Imaam Abu Dawood; and second that Al-Minhaal bin Amr is
Thiqah and reliable according to Imaam Abu Dawood and his hadeeth is also a
proof in the basic matters of religion i.e. Aqaaid.
6-
[
7-
[
8-
[See,
9-
[
10-
[
11-
[
12-
[
13-
[
14-
[
15-
[
16-
[
17-
[
18-
[
19-
[
20-
[
21-
[
Moreover,
Imaam Dhahabi said about a narration narrated by al-Minhaal that: “This chain is Saalih”
[Taareekh
al-Islaam (4/107)]
22-
[
Ibn Hajar also
said: “Al-Minhaal bin Amr is criticized without
any Hujjah”
[Hadi al-Saari
(1/464)]
Those who criticized him:
1- It is said
[
Answer:
This saying is
not to be found in any of the books of Imaam al-Haakim, nor has anyone narrated
this saying from Imaam Yahya bin Sa’eed with a chain. There is a difference of
about three and a half centuries between Imaam al-Haakim and Imaam Dhahabi; and
there are about two centuries between Imaam al-Haakim and Imaam Yahya bin
Sa’eed. How can we accept that Imaam Yahya bin Sa’eed used to lower his status
without any chain?
Secondly, even
if we consider this narration to be authentic, it still does not prove any Jarh
of Ibn al-Qattaan on al-Minhaal bin Amr because it is a very unclear statement.
It is possible that Ibn al-Qattaan used to lower his status compared to another
person who was more thiqah than him according to al-Qattaan, and this is not a
Jarh.
Haafidh Ibn
Hajar said about this Jarh: “And the statement of al-Haakim from al-Qattaan is Ghayr
Mufassar”
[Fath al-Baari
(1/446)]
2- It is said
[
This saying is
not proven from Imaam Yahya bin Ma’een because the narrator of this saying “Abu
Bakr Muhammad bin Ahmed bin Muhammad bin Moosa Baabisayri” is Majhool.
Even if this
saying is authentic, Haafidh Ibn Hajar said: “As for the statement of al-Ghulaabi
then it is possible that Ibn Ma’een would have dropped his level as compared to
another (more Thiqah) person, as is also proven from Ahmed; the proof for this
is that Abu Haatim has mentioned from Ibn Ma’een that he said (Al-Minhaal) is
Thiqah”
[Fath al-Baari
(1/446)]
3- It is said that
There are two
types of narrations narrated from Imaam Shu’bah on this issue. The first is
that Imaam Shu’bah heard the Qur’aan being recited in a melodic (song-like)
voice from the house of al-Minhaal.
[
Similarly, one
narration says: “He heard the sound of Qira’ah
with a rhythmic voice, thus he abandoned writing from him due to that”
[Al-Jarh wat
Ta’deel (1/172)]
The other
narration says that he heard the voice of a song from the house of al-Minhaal
[Ad-Du’afa
al-Kabeer by al-Ukaylee (4/236), Chain Saheeh]
So in reality,
it was the recitation of the Qur’aan not a song. And reciting Qur’aan in such a
way is not a Jarh as the famous Muhaqqiq of Arab, Doctor Bashshaar Awwaad says:
“This
Jarh is Mardood, wallahu a’lam. If this saying is proven that I don’t
understand why Shu’bah permitted for himself to abandon him for reciting the
Qur’aan in a melodic voice. Whereas the necessity of beautifying and the
Tatreeb of Qira’ah is proven from the Prophet (peace be upon him)”
[Haashiah
Tahdheeb al-Kamaal fi Asmaa ur-Rijaal (28/570)]
And even the
other narration, in which it is said that he heard the voice of a song from his
house, is not any Jarh on him. This is the reason when Imaam Shu’bah mentioned
this incident to Wahb bin Jareer so Wahb bin Jareer criticized this act of Imaam
Shu’bah and asked him a question which left Imaam Shu’bah speechless and he
could not answer him. Wahb bin Jareer narrates from Imaam Shu’bah that he said: “I came to the place of Minhaal bin Amr thus I heard
the voice of a song from his house, so I came back and did not ask him (about
hadeeth). I (Wahb) said: Why did you not ask him! It is possible that he was unaware
of it.”
[Ad-Du’afa
al-Kabeer by al-Ukaylee (4/236), Chain Saheeh]
So the first answer
of Imaam Shu’bah’s criticism was given by Imaam Wahb bin Jareer during the
lifetime of Shu’bah. And many other later Muhadditheen have also refuted this
Jarh of Shu’bah such as: Haafidh Abu al-Hasan Ibn al-Qattaan al-Faasi said
about this Jarh of Shu’bah that: “Certainly this (reciting with a melodious voice)
is not a Jarh unless it crosses the boundary of hurmah (i.e. when it involves
mistakes), and there is no such thing mentioned in this incident.”
[Bayaan
al-Wahem wal Ayhaam (3/363)]
Similarly, Ibn
Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, Adh-Dhahabi, Ibn Hajar and others have also given
answers to this Jarh of Shu’bah.
4- It is narrated from
[
Whereas, the
wording narrated by Al-Aynee al-Hanafi is that Al-Juzjaani said: “He is Sunni ul-Madhab”
[Maghaani
al-Akhyaar (3/85)]
Haafidh Ibn
Hajar said about this Jarh that: “As for al-Juzjaani’s statement then we have said
many times before that his (i.e. Juzjaani’s) Jarh is not accepted about the
people of Koofah due to his strict biasness and Nasab”
[Fath al-Baari
(1/446)]
5-
[
Haafidh Ibn
Katheer said: “Ibn Hazm has criticized him and rejected his hadeeth about the
questioning of the grave narrated from Zadaan from al-Baraa, thus Ibn Hazm has
erred in that”
[Al-Takmeel
fil Jarh wat Ta’deel (1/211)]
Conclusion:
Al-Minhaal bin Amr is Thiqah.
He, as Ibn Hajar says, has been criticized for no reason.
No comments:
Post a Comment