No announcement yet.

Refuting the Shia Argument That Umar Forbade Narrating The Comments of the Prophet

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Refuting the Shia Argument That Umar Forbade Narrating The Comments of the Prophet

    The Shias said:

    This is what Quran states:


    SHAKIR: O you who believe! do not go near prayer when you are Intoxicated until you know (well) what you say, nor when you are under an obligation to perform a bath-- unless (you are) travelling on the road-- until you have washed yourselves; and if you are sick, or on a journey, or one of you come from the privy or you have touched the women, and you cannot find water, betake yourselves to pure earth, then wipe your faces and your hands; surely Allah is Pardoning, Forgiving.

    And this is Umar’s opinion, which even contradicts not only the Quran but also Sahabi of rasool Ammar:

    Sahih Muslim, Book 003, Number 0718:

    Abd al-Rabmin b. Abza narrated It on the authority of his father that a man came to 'Umar and said: I am (at times) affected by seminal emission but find no water. He ('Umar) told him not to say prayer. 'Ammar then said. Do you remember,0 Commander of the Faithful, when I and you were in a military detachment and we had had a seminal emission and did not find water (for taking bath) and you did not say prayer, but as for myself I rolled in dust and said prayer, and (when it was mentioned before) the Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: It was enough for you to strike the ground with your hands and then blow (the dust) and then wipe your face and palms. Umar said: 'Ammar, fear Allah. He said: If you so like, I would not narrate it.

    A hadith like this has been transmitted with the same chain of transmitters but for the words: 'Umar said: We hold you responsible for what you claim."

    Question is do Sunnis follow the Sunnah of Prophet or Sunnah of Umar regarding this?
    Based on the above the Shias argue two things:

    1) That Umar ibn Al Khattab did not like Sahabah narrating the hadith of the Prophet when it appeared to "refute his position".

    2) That Umar ibn Al Khattab was ignorant of such an easy and basic fiqh issue.

    As for the first argument, all of us could easily see how silly this assertion is. We all know that Umar ibn Al Khattab narrated hadith and he didn't stop people from doing so during his Caliphate even if it went against his position (e.g. 1 Abu Musa al Ashari narrating the hadith about seeking permission to enter the house three times to Umar, e.g. 2 Abu Bakr using the hadith to justify fighting the apostates when he was disputing the issue with Umar, e.g. 3 Umar kicking out the Jews from Khaybar once he heard about the hadith of expelling them from the Arabian Peninsula, etc.)

    When Umar ibn Al Khattab told Ammar "fear Allah" he meant to say to him that he should fear Allah in regards to what he is narrating, for it is possible that he forgot the incident because Umar who was with him didnt' remember the story that way.

    This is a possibility as stated by Imam Nawawi:

    ‏معناه قال عمر لعمار : اتق الله تعالى فيما ترويه وتثبت . فلعلك نسيت , أو اشتبه عليك الأمر . وأما قول عمار إن شئت لم أحدث به فمعناه , والله أعلم

    And when Ammar replied back saying "If you so like, I would not narrate it", its not that he was willing to compromise his faith in order to obey Umar. Rather, the man was trying to say that if Umar saw that there was a greater benefit in the man not narrating the story over narrating it, then he would obey Umar in regards to that. Another possible meaning is that Ammar wouldn't narrate it in order to avoid becoming famous. So basically when Umar is telling Ammar "fear Allah", it meant "fear Allah and make your intention for narrating this hadith for the sake of Allah and not to gain fame". So Ammar thought it would have been better to avoid this potential sin by not narrating the hadith.

    This is again what Imam Nawawi stated:

    إن رأيت المصلحة في إمساكي عن التحديث به راجحة على مصلحة تحديثي به أمسكت , فإن طاعتك واجبة علي في غير المعصية , وأصل تبليغ هذه السنة وأداء العلم قد حصل , فإذا أمسك بعد هذا لا يكون داخلا فيمن كتم العلم . ويحتمل أنه أراد إن شئت لم أحدث به تحديثا شائعا بحيث يشتهر في الناس , بل لا أحدث به إلا نادرا . والله أعلم

    As for the second argument (i.e. Umar not knowing the fiqh ruling of Tayammum), the opinion that Tayammum cannot take care of ghusl as a result of sexual intercourse was held by Ibn Mas'ud as well. Apparently, Umar ibn Al Khattab and Ibn Mas'ud understood "touch women" in the verse in the Qur'an to refer to touching them without sexual intercourse.

    It seems that the authentic hadith on the matter did not reach them (there are several cases of this happening) and thus they made a valid ijtihaad based on the knowledge that reached them.

    Markaz Fatwa of Islamweb states:

    أما القول إن عمر خالف بهذا المذهب ظاهر القرآن ، فالجواب أنه كان متأولاً في ذلك ، إذ كان يعتقد أن الجنب لا يدخل في المعنى المراد بقوله تعالى (وإن كنتم مرضى أو على سفر أو جاء أحد منكم من الغائط أو لامستم النساء فلم تجدوا ماءً فتيمموا صعيداً طيباً) فكان يذهب إلى أن الملامسة ما دون الجماع ، وكان مجتهداً في ذلك ، ولم تبلغه الأحاديث الخاصة في ذلك السالمة من المعارضة ، مثل حديث أبي ذر. وفي ذلك كما يقول ابن كثير :" ما يدلك على أن أخبار الآحاد العدول من علم الخاصة قد يخفى على الجليل من العلماء منها الشيء)
    فليس فيما ذهب إليه عمر ما يحط من قدره ، طالما أنه قال على سبيل الاجتهاد ، والنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول:" إذا اجتهد الحاكم فأصاب فله أجران ، وإذا اجتهد وأخطأ فله أجر" متفق عليه.
    والله أعلم.

    Again, this is just more evidence of the desperation of Shias trying to discredit Umar ibn Al Khattab.