Tamam al-Minnah - Nasir al-Din al-Albani - (105)

Tamam al-MinnahNasir al-Din al-Albani

I say: All of this is based on the assumption that the author’s claim—that the Rightly Guided Caliphs acted contrary to the hadith—is actually proven. If not, I must ask: where is the sound chain of transmission for such a claim? Producing an authentic isnād (chain of narration) is the least that should be required of anyone who wishes to set aside a hadith of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ on the grounds that someone else disagreed with it.

The author has no evidence or chain whatsoever for his assertion, save his reliance on al-Nawawī’s words in his commentary on Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim: “The majority hold that eating camel meat does not nullify ablution, and among those who held this view are the four Rightly Guided Caliphs….”

Yet this allegation is a mistake on al-Nawawī’s part—may Allah have mercy on him—as Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah—may Allah likewise have mercy on him—pointed out in Al-Qawāʿid al-Nūrāniyyah, p. 9:

“As for those who report that the Rightly Guided Caliphs or the majority of the Companions did not perform ablution after eating camel meat, they are mistaken about them. People only imagined this because it is reported that the Companions did not perform ablution for food that had been touched by fire. Their point was simply that mere contact with fire is not, in their view, a cause obligating ablution. The Prophet’s command to perform ablution after eating camel meat, however, was not based on the meat’s having been exposed to fire. It is like saying: ‘So-and-so does not perform ablution merely for touching his private part, yet he does so when pre-seminal fluid exits.’”

I add: What Ibn Taymiyyah stated is supported by the fact that al-Ṭaḥāwī (1/41) and al-Bayhaqī (1/157) narrated from Jābir ibn ʿAbd Allāh —may Allah be pleased with him—that Abū Bakr al-Ṣiddīq and ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb ate bread and meat, then prayed without performing ablution. They also recorded something similar from ʿUthmān, and al-Bayhaqī narrated it from ʿAlī as well.

Thus you see that none of these reports mention camel meat whatsoever; rather, they speak only of meat in general

أقول: هذا على افتراض أن ما ذكره المؤلف عن الخلفاء الراشدين من مخالفة الحديث ثابت عنهم وإلا فإني أقول: أين السند الصحيح بذلك عنهم؟ وهذا أقل ما يجب على من يريد أن يرد حديث رسول الله ﷺ بمخالفة غيره له؟! وليس للمؤلف أي دليل أو سند في إثبات ذلك إلا اعتماده على ما ذكره النووي في "شرح مسلم" أنه: "ذهب الأكثرون إلى أنه لا ينقض الوضوء يعني أكل لحم الجزور وممن ذهب إليه الخلفاء الأربعة الراشدون ... ". وهذه الدعوى خطأ من النووي ﵀ قد نبه عليه شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية ﵀ فقال في "القواعد النورانية" ص ٩: "وأما من نقل عن الخلفاء الراشدين أو جمهور الصحابة أنهم لم يكونوا يتوضؤون من لحوم الإبل فقد غلط عليهم إنما توهم ذلك لما نقل عنهم أنهم لم يكونوا يتوضؤون مما مست النار وإنما المراد أن كل ما مست النار ليس سببا عندهم لوجوب الوضوء والذي أمر به النبي ﷺ من الوضؤ من لحوم الإبل ليس سببه مس النار كما يقال: كان فلان لا يتوضأ من مس الذكر وإن كان يتوضأ منه إذا خرج منه مذي". قلت: ويؤيد ما ذكره شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية ﵀ أن الطحاوي ١ / ٤١ والبيهقي ١ / ١٥٧ رويا عن جابر بن عبد الله ﵁ أن أبا بكر الصديق وعمر بن الخطاب أكلا خبزا ولحما فصليا ولم يتوضيا. ثم أخرجا نحوه عن عثمان والبيهقي عن علي. فأنت ترى أنه ليس في هذه الآثار ذكر للحم الإبل البتة وإنما ذكر فيها.