Silsilat al-Ahadith al-SahihahNasir al-Din al-Albani

Ibn Hibban’s al-Thiqat; indeed, al-‘Ijli included him in his own al-Thiqat and said: “A trustworthy Kufan.” As for Amr ibn Salamah, he is trustworthy. He is mentioned in al-Tahdhib, where Ibn Sa‘d and Ibn Hibban (5/172) declare him trustworthy. The compiler, however, overlooked al-‘Ijli’s statement in his al-Thiqat (364/1263): “A trustworthy Kufan Successor.”

In Refutation of Shaykh al-Habashi (p. 45), I had stated that the Successor in this account was ‘Umarah ibn Abi Hasan al-Mazini. This is an error whose reason need not be explained, so let it be corrected there.

The hadith also has another route from Ibn Masud in al-Musnad (1/404), which includes the additional wording, and its chain of transmission is sound. This wording also occurs in reports from a group of Companions recorded by Muslim in his Sahih (3/109–117). I cited it through this route only because of Ibn Masud’s account with the people of those circles, for it contains a lesson for followers of Sufi orders and circles of dhikr (remembrance) that depart from the sunnah. Whenever someone denounces what they are doing, they accuse him of rejecting dhikr itself! This is disbelief of which no Muslim on earth could be guilty. Rather, what is objectionable is the forms and gatherings attached to it, which were not prescribed in the time of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him.

For what, otherwise, did Ibn Masud, may Allah be pleased with him, disapprove of in the people of those circles? Nothing but this gathering on a specified day, and dhikr performed a number of times for which no textual basis has been reported—a number fixed by the shaykh leading the circle, who commands them to observe it on his own authority, as though he were legislating on behalf of Allah Most High! “Or do they have partners who have ordained for them a religion that Allah has not authorized?”

Moreover, the established sunnah from him, peace and blessings be upon him, in both deed and word, is to recite tasbih on one’s fingertips, as explained in Refutation of al-Habashi and elsewhere.

Among the benefits derived from the hadith and the account is that what matters is not the abundance of worship, but rather

" الثقات " لابن حبان، فقد أورده العجلي في " ثقاته " وقال: " كوفي ثقة ". وأما عمرو بن سلمة، فثقة مترجم في " التهذيب " بتوثيق ابن سعد، وابن حبان (٥ / ١٧٢) ، وفاته أن العجلي قال في " ثقاته " (٣٦٤ / ١٢٦٣) : " كوفي تابعي ثقة ". وقد كنت ذكرت في " الرد على الشيخ الحبشي " (ص ٤٥) أن تابعي هذه القصة هو عمارة بن أبي حسن المازني، وهو خطأ لا ضرورة لبيان سببه، فليصحح هناك. وللحديث طريق أخرى عن ابن مسعود في " المسند " (١ / ٤٠٤) ، وفيه الزيادة، وإسنادها جيد، وقد جاءت أيضا في حديث جمع من الصحابة خرجها مسلم في " صحيحه " (٣ / ١٠٩ - ١١٧) . وإنما عنيت بتخريجه من هذا الوجه لقصة ابن مسعود مع أصحاب الحلقات، فإن فيها عبرة لأصحاب الطرق وحلقات الذكر على خلاف السنة، فإن هؤلاء إذا أنكر عليهم منكر ما هم فيه اتهموه بإنكار الذكر من أصله! وهذا كفر لا يقع فيه مسلم في الدنيا، وإنما المنكر ما ألصق به من الهيئات والتجمعات التي لم تكون مشروعة على عهد النبي ﷺ، وإلا فما الذي أنكره ابن مسعود ﵁ على أصحاب تلك الحلقات؟ ليس هو إلا هذا التجمع في يوم معين، والذكر بعدد لم يرد، وإنما يحصره الشيخ صاحب الحلقة، ويأمرهم به من عند نفسه، وكأنه مشرع عن الله تعالى! * (أم لهم شركاء شرعوا لهم من الدين ما لم يأذن به الله) *. زد على ذلك أن السنة الثابتة عنه ﷺ فعلا وقولا إنما هي التسبيح بالأنامل، كما هو مبين في " الرد على الحبشي "، وفي غيره. ومن الفوائد التي تؤخذ من الحديث والقصة، أن العبرة ليست بكثرة العبادة وإنما

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies