Is Ghadeer about campaigns in Yemen?
- Anonymous
- May 30
- 14 min read
Updated: 6 days ago
« Next Part: How did the Sahaba view Ghadeer? »
« Previous Part: Does Mawla Mean Friend? »
Perhaps the most infamous of your opponents' responses regarding the Hadith al-Ghadeer is the response that this announcement was made in regard to some of the Sahaba complaining about some of ‘Ali’s actions in Yemen. They assert that the declaration at Ghadeer was simply the Prophet’s way of clearing up the negative complaints about ‘Ali (AS), and that the Shia have taken the events out of context in order to push their narrative regarding ‘Ali. In this article, we shall examine the basis of this claim and demonstrate that it is not only incorrect but laughably so.
Before we begin, it is important to note that we have already proven that the announcement at Ghadeer was about authority, and that the Prophet spoke about his impending death as well as the two weighty things; he never once mentioned Yemen or brought up criticisms against ‘Ali. This is important because it shows us that even within context, the argument that the announcement related to Yemen makes no sense. With that being said, we shall now go into the origin of the Yemen argument.
The First Mention of the Yemen Argument
The earliest reference to this argument that the reason behind the Ghadeer announcement is related to Yemen comes from al-Bayhaqi. We read in his al-I'tiqad, pg. 354 - 355:
وأما حديث الموالاة، فليس فيه -إن صح إسناده- نص على ولاية علي بعده.
فقد ذكرنا من طرقه في كتاب «الفضائل» ما دل على مقصود النبي الله من ذلك، وهو أنه لما بعثه إلى اليمن، كثرت الشكاة عنه، وأظهروا بغضه، فأراد النبي الله أن يذكر اختصاصه به ومحبته إياه، ويحثهم بذلك على محبته وموالاته وترك معاداته. فقال: « من كنت وليه فعلي وليه». وفي بعض الروايات: «من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه. اللهم وال من والاه، وعاد من عاداه».
والمراد به ولاء الإسلام ومودته. وعلى المسلمين أن يوالي بعضهم بعضاً، ولا يعادي بعضهم بعضاً.
وهو في معنى ما ثبت عن علي رضي الله عنه أنه قال: والذي فلق الحبة، وبرأ النسمة، إنه لعهد النبي الأمي، إلى أنه: لا يحبني إلا مؤمن ولا يبغضني إلا منافق.
وفي حديث بريدة حين شكا علياً، فقال النبي ﷺ: «أتبغض علياً؟» فقلت: نعم. فقال: «لا تبغضه وأحببه وازدد له حباً». قال بريدة: فما كان من الناس أحد أحب إلي من علي بعد قول رسول الله صلى الله.
As for the Hadith of al-Muwalat, even if its chain of transmission is authentic, it does not contain an explicit text proving Ali’s succession after the Prophet ﷺ.
We have mentioned its various routes in the book Fada'il, which clarify the Prophet’s ﷺ intent behind it. When he sent Ali to Yemen, complaints against him increased, and people openly expressed their dislike for him. The Prophet ﷺ wanted to emphasize Ali’s closeness to him, his love for him, and to encourage them to love and support ‘Ali while abandoning their hostility toward him. Thus, he said: "Whoever I am his wali (successor), Ali is his wali (successor)." In some narrations, the wording is: "Whoever's mawla (successor) I am, Ali is his mawla (successor). O Allah, befriend whoever befriends him and oppose whoever opposes him."
What is meant by this is the bond of Islamic allegiance and love, for Muslims must be allies to one another and must not harbor enmity toward each other.
This is similar in meaning to what has been authentically reported from Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: "By the One who split the seed and created life, the Unlettered Prophet made a covenant with me that none will love me except a believer, and none will hate me except a hypocrite."
Likewise, in the hadith of Buraidah, when he complained about Ali, the Prophet ﷺ asked him: "Do you dislike Ali?" I replied, "Yes." The Prophet ﷺ said, "Do not dislike him; rather, love him and increase in your love for him." Buraidah then said: "After the words of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, there was no one more beloved to me than Ali."
Al-Bayhaqi’s claim is dubious for multiple reasons. Firstly, al-Bayhaqi affirms that he does not know the level of authenticity of the Hadith of al-Ghadeer. It is well established that the Hadith is Sahih and Mutawatir, and al-Bayhaqi’s ignorance regarding the Hadith’s authenticity immediately shows the reader that he has no business interpreting the Hadith or discussing its meaning if he lacks the knowledge regarding its authenticity.
Furthermore, we see that al-Bayhaqi has claimed that what the Prophet ﷺ meant by his declaration was “the bond of Islamic allegiance and love, for Muslims must be allies to one another and must not harbor enmity toward each other.” Al-Bayhaqi has not provided any evidence for his claim, and we have already refuted this interpretation in the previous article.
Furthermore, we ask the reader to note that al-Bayhaqi has quoted the Hadith of Burayda al-Aslami (RA). This is very important, as before that, he cited the Hadith of ‘Ali (AS), and how none but a believer would love him and none but a hypocrite would hold a grudge against him. We can thus see that al-Bayhaqi is referring to these two hadiths as separate from Hadith al-Ghadeer, (as he previously stated he did not know of its authenticity) and using them to provide context to the Hadith.
As for the Hadith of Burayda (RA), we read in Musnad Ahmad b. Hanbal Vol 16, pg. 471, Hadith # 22841:
حدثنا الفضل بن دكين ، حدثنا ابن أبي غنية ، عن الحكم ، عن سعيد ابن جبير ، عن ابن عباس، عن بريدة ، قال:
غزوت مع علي اليمن فرأيت منه جفوة فلما قدمت على رسول الله (ص)ذكرت عليا فتنقصته فرأيت وجه رسول الله (ص) يتغير ، فقال : يا بريدة ألست أولى بالمؤمنين من أنفسهم ، قلت : بلى يا رسول الله ، قال : من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه.
Al-Fadl b. Dukayn narrated to us, he said: Ibn Abi Ghuniyah narrated to us from al-Hakam, from Sa'id b. Jubayr, from Ibn 'Abbas, from Buraydah, who said:
I went on an expedition with Ali to Yemen, and I saw some harshness from him. When I returned to the Messenger of Allah (SAW), I mentioned Ali and criticized him. I saw the face of the Messenger of Allah (SAW) change, and he said, "O Buraydah, am I not closer to the believers than they are to themselves?" I replied, "Yes, O Messenger of Allah." He said, "Whoever I am his master, Ali is his master."
This same tradition can be found in Nisa’i’s Sunan al-Kubra Vol 7, pg. 309, Hadith # 8089.
This is the variant of Burayda’s report that our opponents usually cite to prove that the Ghadeer declaration was made due to some of the Sahaba having complaints regarding ‘Ali ‘s conduct in Yemen, and this is mainly due to the wording; Buraydah, am I not closer to the believers than they are to themselves?" I replied, "Yes, O Messenger of Allah." He said, "Whoever I am his master, Ali is his master." While this wording is nearly identical to the wording the Prophet (SAW) used at Ghadeer Khumm, this is an invalid argument, as there is no mention of Ghadeer Khumm in this report at all, thus our opponents would have to provide evidence that the two are related instead of begging the claim.
Ibn Kathir Popularized the Yemen Argument
Ibn Kathir is one of the most famous and widely read scholars from the schools of our opponents. We thus see that while al-Bayhaqi may have been the first to tie the events of Yemen and Ghadeer together, the argument has become popular due to its inclusion in Ibn Kathir’s famous history book al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya. We shall now examine his argument and the evidence he provided and show our readers the basis for the argument.
We read in al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah Vol. 7, pg. 394 - 396:
وقال البيهقي: أنبأنا أبو الحسين محمد بن الحسين بن محمد بن الفضل القَطَّانُ، أنبأنا أبو سهل بن زياد القَطَّانُ، حدثنا أبو إسحاق إسماعيل ابن إسحاق القاضي، ثنا إسماعيل بن أبي أُوَيْسٍ، حدثني أخي، عن سليمان ابن بلال، عن سعد بن إسحاق بن كعب بن عُجْرةً، عن عمته زينب بنتِ كعب ابن عجرة، عن أبي سعيد الخدري أنه قال:
بعث رسولُ اللهِ ﷺ علي بنَ أبي طالب إلى اليمن. قال أبو سعيد: فكنتُ فيمن خرج معه، فلما أَخَذَ مِن إبل الصدقة سألناه أن نركب منها ونُرِيحَ إبلنا -وكنا قد رأينا في إبلنا خَلَلًا- فأتى علينا وقال: إنما لكم فيها سهم كما للمسلمين. قال:
فلما فرغ علي وانطلق من اليمن راجعا، أمر علينا إنسانًا وأسرع هو فأدرك الحج، فلما قضَى حَجَّتَه قال له النبي ﷺ: «ارجع إلى أصحابك حتى تَقْدَمَ عليهم». قال أبو سعيد: وقد كنا سألنا الذي استَخْلَفَه ما كان على منعنا إياه، ففعل، فلما عرف في إبل الصدقة أنها قد ركبت، ورأى أثر الراكب (دم) الذي أمره ولامه،
فقلتُ: أما إن لله على لكن قدِمْتُ المدينةَ، لَأَذكُرَنَّ لرسولِ اللهِ ولَأُخْبِرَنَّه ما لقينا من الغلظة والتضييق.
قال: فلمَّا قَدِمْنا المدينة غدَوْتُ إلى رسول الله ﷺ أريد أن أفعل ما كنتُ حلَفْتُ عليه، فلَقِيتُ أبا بكر خارجا من عند رسول الله ﷺ، فلما رآني وقف معي ورحب بي، وساءَلَني وساءلته وقال: متى قَدِمْتَ؟ فقلتُ: قدمت البارحة. فرجع معي إلى رسول الله. فدخل وقال: هذا سعد بن مالك ابن الشهيد. فقال: «ائذن له» فدخلت فحيَّيْتُ رسولَ اللهِ ﷺ وحياني، وأقبل علي وسألنى عن نفسي وأهلي وأخفى المسألة،
فقلت: يا رسول الله، ما لقينا من علي مِن الغِلظة وسُوءِ الصُّحْبَة والتضييق؟ فانتَبَذ رسول الله له، وجَعَلْتُ أنا أُعَدِّدُ ما لقينا منه حتى إذا كنتُ في وسط كلامي، ضرب رسول الله له على فخذي، وكنتُ منه قريبًا، وقال: «يا سعد بن مالك، ابن الشهيد، مه بعض قولك لأخيك على، فوالله لقد عَلِمْتُ أَنه أَخْشَنَ في سبيل الله»، قال: فقلتُ في نفسي: ثكلتك أمك سعد بن مالك! ألا أُرَاني كنتُ فيما يكره منذ اليوم وما أدري، لا جرم والله لا أذكره بسوء أبدا سرا ولا علانية.
وهذا إسناد جيد على شرط النسائي، ولم يَرْوِه أحدٌ من أصحاب الكتب الستة.
Al-Bayhaqi said: Abu al-Husayn Muhammad b. al-Husayn b. Muhammad b. al-Fadl al-Qattan informed us, saying: Abu Sahl b. Ziyad al-Qattan informed us, saying: Abu Ishaq Ismail b. Ishaq al-Qadi narrated to us, saying: Ismail b. Abi Uways narrated to us, saying: My brother narrated to me, from Sulayman b. Bilal, from Saad b. Ishaq b. Kaab b. Ujrah, from his aunt Zaynab bt. Kaab b. Ujrah, from Abu Saeed al-Khudri, who said:
The Messenger of Allah SAW sent Ali b. Abi Talib to Yemen. Abu Saeed said: I was among those who went out with him. When he took from the camels of the alms (zakat), we asked him to let us ride some of them and relieve our own camels—since we had noticed some weakness in ours. He came to us and said: "You have no more right to them than any other Muslim. You only have your share in them."
When Ali had completed his task and left Yemen heading back, he appointed someone over us and hurried ahead, reaching the Hajj. When he had completed the Hajj, the Prophet SAW said to him: “Return to your companions until you rejoin them.” Abu Saeed said: We had asked the one Ali left in charge about what had prevented him (Ali) from allowing us (to ride), and he (the deputy) complied and allowed it. But when Ali saw the camels of alms had been ridden and noticed the signs of riding on them, he blamed the one he had left in charge and rebuked him.
I said to myself: Indeed, I have an obligation to Allah. When I reach Medina, I will certainly inform the Messenger of Allah SAW of what we faced of harshness and restriction.
So when we reached Medina, I went early to the Messenger of Allah SAW, intending to fulfill what I had vowed. I met Abu Bakr coming out from the presence of the Messenger of Allah SAW. When he saw me, he stopped, greeted me, welcomed me, and asked me questions, and I asked him in return. He said, “When did you arrive?” I said, “I arrived last night.” He then returned with me to the Messenger of Allah SAW, entered and said, “This is Saad b. Malik, the son of the martyr.” The Prophet said, “Let him in.” So I entered and greeted the Messenger of Allah SAW, and he greeted me, turned toward me, and asked about me and my family in a gentle and indirect way.
I said: O Messenger of Allah, what we faced from Ali—of harshness, bad companionship, and restriction!
The Messenger of Allah SAW turned aside from him (Ali), and I began listing what we experienced until, while I was in the middle of my words, the Messenger of Allah SAW struck his own thigh—I was sitting close to him—and said:
“O Sa’ad b. Malik, son of the martyr, stop saying such things about your brother Ali. By Allah, I know that he is stern in the path of Allah.”
I said to myself: May your mother lose you, Saad b. Malik! Look at me—I’ve been saying things disliked by the Prophet since this morning, and I didn’t even know it! By Allah, I will never mention Ali again with anything but good, neither in secret nor in public.
And this is a good chain of transmission according to the criteria of al-Nasa’i, and none of the authors of the six canonical books narrated it.
Reply to Ibn Kathir's First Report
As we can see, Ibn Kathir cited al-Bayhaqi as his source for this report, and the primary source can be read in al-Bayhaqi’s Dalaʾil al-Nubuwwah Vol. 6, pg. 298 - 299. While Ibn Kathir stated that the chain of transmission is good and acceptable on the standards of al-Imam al-Nasa’i, we beg to differ. This report is unacceptable because of the presence of Isma’il b. Abi Uways, a self admitted liar in the chain of transmission.
قلت لأبي الحسن: لم ضعف أبو عبد الرحمن النسائي إسماعيل بن أبي أويس؟
فقال: ذكر محمد بن موسى الهاشمي، قال أبو الحسن: وهذا أحد الأئمة، وكان أبو عبد الرحمن يخصه بما لم يخص به ولده، فذكر عن أبى عبد الرحمن أنه قال: (حكى لى سلمة بن شبيب عنه، قال: ثم توقف أبو عبد الرحمن، قال: فما زلت بعد ذلك أداريه أن يحكى لي الحكاية، حتى قال لي قال لي سلمة بن شبيب: سمعت إسماعيل بن أبي أويس يقول: ربما كنت أضع الحديث لأهل المدينة إذا اختلفوا في شيء فيما بينهم)
I said to Abu al-Hasan: Why did Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Nasai weaken Ismail b. Abi Uways?
He replied: Muhammad b. Musa al-Hashimi mentioned it. Abu al-Hasan said: And he is one of the imams, and Abu Abd al-Rahman used to favor him in a way he did not favor his own son. So he mentioned that Abu Abd al-Rahman said — Salamah b. Shabib narrated to me from him — he said: Then Abu Abd al-Rahman hesitated. He said: I kept urging him to narrate the story to me until he said: Salamah b. Shabib said to me: I heard Ismail b. Abi Uways say: Sometimes I would fabricate hadiths for the people of Medina when they disagreed about something among themselves.
We also have the words of the contemporary scholar Bashar ‘Awad Ma’ruf in his critical edition of Muwatta' Malik b. Anas, Vol. 2, pg. 480:
وهذا إسناد ضعيف فإن إسماعيل بن أبي أويس ضعيف في روايته خارج الصحيحين عند تفرده، ولم يتابع في هذا الحديث إذ مداره عليه.
This chain of narration is weak, for Ismail b. Abi Uways is weak in his narrations outside of the two Sahihs (Bukhari and Muslim) when he narrates alone, and he was not followed up in this hadith, as it revolves around him.
Thus we see that the chain which Ibn Kathir claims is acceptable on the conditions of al-Nasai is in fact unacceptable as al-Nasa’i himself rejected the reports of Ibn Abi Uways due to Ibn Abi Uways admitting that he was a fabricator of Hadith.
Furthermore, even within this report, Abu Sa’id al-Khudri supposedly says that he complained to the Prophet (SAW) in Medina; If this is the case then the Ghadeer declaration already took place, as it was made on the Prophet’s way back from Medina. This renders the argument useless, as if the Ghadeer declaration was already made before the complaints, then it is impossible that it was made because of the complaints.
Reply to Ibn Kathir's Second Report
As for the second tradition, Ibn Kathir then quotes it in al-Bidayah wa al-Nihaya Vol. 7, pg. 396 - 397:
وقد قال يونس، عن محمد بن إسحاق، حدثني يحيى بن عبدِ اللَّهِ بنِ أبي عَمْرَةَ، عن يزيد بن طلحة بن يزيد بن رُكانة قال:
إنما وجد جيش علي بن أبي طالب الذين كانوا معه باليمن؛ لأنهم حين أقبلوا خلف عليهم رجلا، وتعجَّل إلى رسول الله ﷺ. قال: فعمد الرجل فكسا كل رجل حُلَّة، فلما دنوا خرج علي يستقبلهم، فإذا عليهم الحلل، قال علي: ما هذا؟ قالوا: كسانا فلان. قال فما دعاك إلى فما دعاك إلى هذا قبل تَقْدَمُ على رسول الله ﷺ فيصنع ما شاء؟ فنزع الحلل منهم، فلما قدموا على رسول الله ﷺ اشتكوه لذلك، وكانوا قد صالحوا رسول الله ﷺ، وإنما بعث عليا إلى جزية موضوعة.
قلت: هذا السياق أقرب من سياق البيهقي، وذلك أن عليا سبقهم لأجل الحج، وساق معه هَدْيا، وأهل بإهلال كإهلال النبي ﷺ، فأمره أن يمكن حراما. وفي رواية البراء بن عازب أنه قال له: «إني سُقْتُ الهَدْيَ وقَرَنْتُ»
والمقصود أن عليا لما كثر فيه القيل والقال من ذلك الجيش؛ بسبب منعه إياهم استعمال إبل الصدقة، واسترجاعه منهم الحلل التي أطلقها لهم نائبه، وعلي معذور فيما فعل، لكن اشتهر الكلام فيه في الحجيج، فلذلك –والله أعلم– لما رجع رسول الله له من حجته وتفرغ من مناسكه ورجع إلى المدينة فمر بغدير خم، قام في الناس خطيبًا فبرأ ساحة علي، ورفع من قدره ونبه على فضله؛ ليزيل ما وقر في نفوس كثير من الناس، وسيأتى هذا مُفَصَّلًا في موضعه، إن شاء الله، وبه الثقة.
Yunus reported from Muhammad b. Ishaq, who said: Yahya b. Abd Allah b. Abi Amrah narrated to me from Yazid b. Talhah b. Yazid b. Rukanah, who said:
"The army of Ali b. Abi Talib that was with him in Yemen only found themselves in that situation because, when they set out, he appointed a man over them and hastened ahead to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. That man then took it upon himself to clothe each soldier with a robe.
When they drew near, Ali went out to meet them and saw them wearing the robes. He asked, 'What is this?' They replied, 'So-and-so clothed us.'
Ali said, 'What made you do this before arriving at the Messenger of Allah ﷺ so that he may do as he pleases?' Then he took the robes from them.
When they reached the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, they complained about this to him. They had, in fact, already made a treaty with the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, and Ali had only been sent to collect a prescribed tribute."
I said: This account is closer to accuracy than that of al-Bayhaqi. The reason is that Ali had gone ahead of them for Hajj, bringing along sacrificial animals, and he entered the state of ihram with the same intention as the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. The Prophet ﷺ then instructed him to remain in the state of ihram. In the narration of al-Bara b. Azib, he said to the Prophet ﷺ: "I have brought the sacrificial animals and have combined (the rituals)."
The point is that there was much talk about Ali among that army because he prevented them from using the camels of charity and took back from them the robes that his deputy had given them. Though Ali was justified in what he did, the issue became widely discussed among the pilgrims.
For this reason—and Allah knows best—when the Messenger of Allah ﷺ returned from his Hajj, completed his rituals, and was on his way back to Medina, he stopped at Ghadir Khumm. There, he stood before the people to deliver a sermon, clearing Ali’s name, elevating his status, and emphasizing his virtues, in order to remove what had settled in the hearts of many people.
This will be discussed in detail in its proper place, if Allah wills, and upon Him is our reliance.
Once again, we see that Ibn Kathir cited al-Bayhaqi as his source for this report, while al-Bayhaqi in turn transmitted it from Muhammad b. Ishaq, who recorded it in al-Sira al-Nabawiyya pg. 669.
We say: This report is also unacceptable, and this is because it is weak (as noted even by the editor of the report we just cited) due to a disconnection in the chain of transmission, as the chain goes back to Yazid b. Talha b. Yazid b. Rukanah, who is from the third generation of Muslims as attested to by Ibn Sa’ad (See Tabaqat Ibn Sa’ad Vol 5, pg. 239 & 324.)
Furthermore, this report makes no mention of Ghadeer Khumm or the announcement of Ghadeer.
Conclusion
So we see that Ibn Kathir based this narrative of Hadith al-Ghadeer being about Yemen on two reports; a weak report with a fabricator in the chain of transmission, and a disconnected report from the Sira of Ibn Ishaq. We ask our readers to think fairly and critically: is this narrative acceptable considering the weakness of the sources, as well as the late appearance of the false narrative? There is not a single report from any of the Sahaba indicating that Ali’s actions in Yemen had anything to do with the Prophet’s announcement in Ghadeer, and so our opponents are forced to rely on a Mamluk era scholar desperately trying to connect the two incidents. In our next chapter we shall go over reports highlighting how the Sahaba and the Tabi’in understood the hadith, and our readers will see that it is in fact the Shia who follow the Salaf, as opposed to innovating an understanding for a hadith when it could not be censored.
« Next Part: How did the Sahaba view Ghadeer? »
« Previous Part: Does Mawla Mean Friend? »