Commentary on Sunan Abi Dawud 1521

Abu Dawud said in his Sunan (Hadith 1521):

حَدَّثَنَا مُسَدَّدٌ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو عَوَانَةَ، عَنْ عُثْمَانَ بْنِ الْمُغِيرَةِ الثَّقَفِيِّ، عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ رَبِيعَةَ الأَسَدِيِّ، عَنْ أَسْمَاءَ بْنِ الْحَكَمِ الْفَزَارِيِّ، قَالَ سَمِعْتُ عَلِيًّا، – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – يَقُولُ كُنْتُ رَجُلاً إِذَا سَمِعْتُ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم حَدِيثًا نَفَعَنِي اللَّهُ مِنْهُ بِمَا شَاءَ أَنْ يَنْفَعَنِي وَإِذَا حَدَّثَنِي أَحَدٌ مِنْ أَصْحَابِهِ اسْتَحْلَفْتُهُ فَإِذَا حَلَفَ لِي صَدَّقْتُهُ قَالَ وَحَدَّثَنِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَصَدَقَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ – رضى الله عنه – أَنَّهُ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ ‏”‏ مَا مِنْ عَبْدٍ يُذْنِبُ ذَنْبًا فَيُحْسِنُ الطُّهُورَ ثُمَّ يَقُومُ فَيُصَلِّي رَكْعَتَيْنِ ثُمَّ يَسْتَغْفِرُ اللَّهَ إِلاَّ غَفَرَ اللَّهُ لَهُ ‏”‏ ‏.‏ ثُمَّ قَرَأَ هَذِهِ الآيَةَ ‏{‏ وَالَّذِينَ إِذَا فَعَلُوا فَاحِشَةً أَوْ ظَلَمُوا أَنْفُسَهُمْ ذَكَرُوا اللَّهَ ‏}‏ إِلَى آخِرِ الآيَةِ

Asma’ b. al-Hakam said: I heard Ali say: I was a man; when I heard a tradition from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), Allah benefited me with it as much as He willed. But when some one of his companions narrated a tradition to me I adjured him. When he took an oath, I testified him. AbuBakr narrated to me a tradition, and AbuBakr narrated truthfully. He said: I heard the apostle of Allah (ﷺ) saying: When a servant (of Allah) commits a sin, and he performs ablution well, and then stands and prays two rak’ahs, and asks pardon of Allah, Allah pardons him. He then recited this verse: “And those who, when they commit indecency or wrong their souls, remember Allah” (Al-Qur’an 3:135).

This Hadith is reported also by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih (Hadith 623) with the same chain as Abu Dawud.

It is also reported by Al Nasaa’i in his Al Sunan Al Kubra (Hadith 10178) and Al Tirmidhi in his Jami’ (Hadith 406 & 3006) with the same chain as Abu Dawud except they took it from Qutaybah who took it from Abu Awaanah meanwhile Abu Dawud took the report from Musaddad from Abu Awaanah

Ibn Majah also reported the Hadith in his Sunan (Hadith 1395) via Sufyan and Mis’ar from Uthman b. Mugheerah with similar wording except there is no mention of the verse 3:135 at the end of Abu Awaanah’s report.

Al Tirmidhi graded the report Hasan after relaying the Hadith in his Sunan saying:

حَدِيثُ عَلِيٍّ حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ لاَ نَعْرِفُهُ إِلاَّ مِنْ هَذَا الْوَجْهِ مِنْ حَدِيثِ عُثْمَانَ بْنِ الْمُغِيرَةِ

“The Hadith of Ali is a Hasan Hadith which we don’t known except via this path from the Hadith of Uthman b. Al Mugheerah”

One problem in this report is the presence of Asmaa’ b. Al Hakam Al Fazari who has been labelled majhul as he has only one narrator who reports from him (Ali b. Rabi’ah Al Asadi) & the Hadith critics have not mentioned anything regarding his status as a narrator.

Al Bazzaar in his Musnad (see Hadith 11) comments:

وأسْماءُ مَجْهُولٌ لَمْ يُحَدِّثْ بِغَيْرِ هَذا الحَدِيثِ، ولَمْ يُحَدِّثْ عَنْهُ إلّا عَلِيُّ بْنُ رَبِيعَةَ

“And Asmaa is unknown. He did not relay a Hadith except this one and no one relayed Hadith from him except Ali b. Rabi’ah”

However, Ibn Hajar quotes Musa b. Harun (see Tahdheeb Al Tahdheeb 1/267-268) saying that he is not majhul as another reporter (Al Rukayn b. Al Rabee’) relays from Asmaa’. Thus, he’s not majhul Al ‘ayn. Musa b. Harun also defends Asmaa from being labelled majhul Al haal by saying that Ali b. Rabi’ah also heard from Ali b. Abi Talib and so if Asmaa’ was not someone trustworthy and reliable to Ali b. Rabi’ah, he would not have put him in between himself and Ali b. Abi Talib. And Ali b. Rabi’ah is a thiqah. Ibn Hajar himself labels Asmaa’ as saduq (Taqreeb Al Tahdheeb 408) and Al ‘Ijli labelled him a thiqah (Al Thiqaat 1/223)

Also, Asmaa’ only reports this Hadith and one other report which is why ibn Sa’d described him as qaleel al hadith (Al Tabaqaat Al Kubraa 6/247)

أسماء بن الحكم الفزاري. روى عن علي بن أبي طالب. وكان قليل الحديث

Al Tirmidhi also mentioned (Jami’ Al Tirmidhi 406) that he only knows of this one marfu’ report that Asmaa’ relayed.

وَلاَ نَعْرِفُ لأَسْمَاءَ بْنِ الْحَكَمِ حَدِيثًا مَرْفُوعًا إِلاَّ هَذَا 

Ibn Adi said that Asmaa’ is only known for this Hadith and perhaps another Hadith (Al Kaamil Fi Du’aafa Al Rijaal (2/143))

وأسْماءُ بْنُ الحَكَمِ هَذا لا يُعْرَفُ إلا بِهَذا الحَدَيثِ ولَعَلَّ لَهُ حَدِيثًا آخَرَ

Ibn Hibbaan said Asmaa’ would err (Al Thiqaat 4/59). But he only has two reports and Ibn Hibbaan relayed this report in his Saheeh as aforementioned and so the mistake must be, according to Ibn Hibbaan, in the other report that Asmaa’ relayed.

أسماء بْن الحكم الفَزارِيّ يروي عَن عَليّ بْن أبِي طالب روى عَنهُ عَليّ بْن ربيعَة الوالِبِي يخطىء

I said: I could not find this other report. Nor could I find a report where anyone other than Ali b. Rabi’ah reports from Asmaa’.

Ibn Abi Hatim relayed from his father Abu Hatim Al Razi that Asmaa’ had one narrator transmit from him and that was Ali b. Rabi’ah and that Asmaa’ only took from Ali b. Abi Talib (Al Jarh Wa Al Ta’deel 2/325).

أسماء بن الحكم الفزاري روى عن علي روى عنه علي بن ربيعة الوالبي سمعت أبي يقول ذلك

And so perhaps what’s strongest is that Asmaa’ b. Al Hakam Al Fazari is majhul Al haal

Some Hadith critics (like Al Bukhari in Tarikh Al Kabir 1663) rendered the first part of the report which mentions the adjuring of the companions by Ali b. Abi Talib whenever they would relay a report from the Prophet and Ali only accepting it after they took an oath as being munkar.

ولم يرو عن اسماء ابن الحكم إلا هذا الواحد وحديث آخر ولم يتابع عليه، وقد روى أصحاب النَّبِيّ ﷺ بعضهم عَنْ بعض فلم يحلف بعضهم بعضا

This is because it is established that the companions relayed from each other without adjuring each other and seeking oaths before accepting their reports. And as nobody corroborated this part of Asmaa’s report and Asmaa’ is someone who is qaleel al hadith and majhul al haal, this part of the report is munkar

Al Uqayli also labelled this part of the report as munkar due to what has been established from Ali that he would take reports from Umar without adjuring him or seeking an oath from him (Al Dua’faa Al Kabir 1/106 126) which contradicts what Asmaa’ cites in the report from the conduct of Ali b. Abi Talib.

وقَدْ رَوى عَلِيٌّ عَنْ عُمَرَ ولَمْ يَسْتَحْلِفْهُ، وهَذا حَدِيثٌ لَمْ يُتابَعْ عَلَيْهِ أسْماءٌ وقَدْ رَوى أصْحابُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ﷺ بَعْضُهُمْ عَنْ بَعْضٍ فَلَمْ يُحَلِّفْ بَعْضُهُمْ بَعْضًا

However, some have responded to this by saying Ali’s conduct was done for reassurance and to attain further increase in his knowledge about this, similar to how Prophet Ibrahim said: “Yes I do, but just so my heart can be reassured” [2:160] and not of out doubt.

The final part of this report has many supporting narrations (shawaahid) that, when combined with this report, enables us to conclude that there’s a foundation for this part of the report.

Examples of such supporting narrations include:

• The Hadith of Ibn Mas’ud (Sahih Al Bukhari 526)
• The Hadith of Abu Al Dardaa’ (Al Tabarani in Al Awsat 5/186 Hadith 5026)
• The Hadith of Anas (Sahih Al Bukhari 6823)
• The Hadith of Abu Umamah Al Baahili (Sahih Muslim 2765)
• The Hadith of Muaadh (Jami’ Al Tirmidhi 3113)

For the last part of the report, Asmaa’ is corroborated by Abu Sa’eed Al Maqburi in a weak report reported by Al Bazzaar (Hadith 6)

حَدَّثَنا الحارِثُ بْنُ الخَضِرِ العَطّارُ قالَ: ثنا سَعْدُ بْنُ أبِي سَعِيدٍ المَقْبُرِيُّ، عَنْ أخِيهِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ سَعِيدٍ، عَنْ جَدِّهِ أبِي سَعِيدٍ المَقْبُرِيِّ قالَ: سَمِعْتُ عَلِيَّ بْنَ أبِي طالِبٍ يُحَدِّثُ عَنْ أبِي بَكْرٍ، قالَ: قالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ﷺ: «ما مِن مُسْلِمٍ يَتَوَضَّأُ فَيُحْسِنُ الوُضُوءَ، ثُمَّ يَأْتِي المَسْجِدَ فَيُصَلِّي فِيهِ رَكْعَتَيْنِ، ثُمَّ يَسْتَغْفِرُ اللَّهَ إلّا غَفَرَ اللَّهُ لَهُ

Al Tirmidhi highlighted that Sufyan and Mis’ar relayed this part of the report as mawquf (the saying of a companion, in this case Abu Bakr).

وَرَوَاهُ سُفْيَانُ الثَّوْرِيُّ وَمِسْعَرٌ فَأَوْقَفَاهُ وَلَمْ يَرْفَعَاهُ إِلَى النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم

If the mawquf report is stronger, such a statement is given the ruling of marfu’ as this is an issue that is not suitable for ijtihad. However, the marfu’ rendition of Shu’bah, Abu Awaanah, Mis’ar and others is stronger.

This Hadith is used as evidence for the legislation of Salat Al Tawbah, the prayer of repentance. All 4 Fiqh schools, and some have mentioned consensus, say it is recommended to pray this prayer after committing any sin, be it major or minor. And this Hadith, along with its supporting narrations and verses from the Quran, are used as evidence.

Ibn Adi said that he hopes this Hadith is authentic (Al Kaamil Fi Dua’faa Al Rijaal 2/143). Ibn Taymiyyah said that this report is mahfoodh in the Sunan (Al Istiqaamah 2/184) as we have shown above. Al Tirmidhi, Ibn Al Arabi Al Maliki, Ibn Kathir and Ibn Hajar all rendered the report hasan. Al Albani, Ibn Baz and Ahmed Shakir all authenticated the report.

This Hadith can also be used to show that solitary reports (khabar al wahid) can show definite knowledge if there are external causes (qaraa’in).

Ali b. Abi Talib accepted the solitary report of Abu Bakr without any reassurances by way of an oath and he said that Abu Bakr spoke the certain truth. Thus, the knowledge that Abu Bakr imparted upon Ali was sure knowledge despite it coming from one individual. What was the external factor in play here that made Ali say what he said? Abu Bakr’s being Al-Siddeeq, the truthful one.

And Allah knows best