The ten virtues of ‘Ali narrated by Ibn ‘Abbas

Anonymous
3 days ago
12 min read

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

There is a famous Hadith narrated on the authority of Ibn Abbas in which he lists 10 prominent virtues of Imam Ali (AS) with a reliable chain. We have dedicated an entire article on this report because of its importance in Shi’a-Sunni dialogue and its establishment of the Imamate of ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (AS).

We hope every Shi’a will be confident in using this report onward to demonstrate the virtues and Imamate of ‘Ali (AS) after reviewing this article.

The Tradition

The certification of the tradition

Addressing the criticisms against Abu Balj

Refuting Ibn Ma’in and Ibn al-Jawzi’s criticism of Abu Balj

Refuting Ibn Hanbal’s criticism of Abu al-Balj

The objection of Ibn Hibban

Objection of Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali

Refuting the objection of Shu’ayb al-Arnaut

Conclusion

The Tradition

The tradition, certified by Shaykh Ahmad Shakir, can be read in Musnad Ahmad b. Hanbal Vol 3, pg. 331 - 333, Hadith # 3062, as follows: :

Yahya b. Hammad told us, Abu Awanah told us, Abu Balj told us, Amr b. Maymun said:

I was sitting with Ibn Abbas when nine men came to him. They said: “O Abu Abbas, either you stand up with us, or let these people leave us alone.” Ibn Abbas said: “Rather, I will stand with you.” He was at that time in good health before he went blind.

They began to speak, and we do not know what they said. Then he came shaking his garment and saying: “Uff and tuff! They attacked a man who has ten (virtues).

The hadith of the banner at Khaybar

They attacked a man to whom the Prophet said: ‘I will send a man whom God will never disgrace, who loves God and His Messenger.’”

Those who hoped for that distinction raised their heads. He said: “Where is Ali?” They said: “He is in the tent grinding.” He said: “Could none of you have done the grinding?!”

Ali then came, suffering from eye inflammation, hardly able to see. The Prophet spat into his eyes, then shook the banner three times and handed it to him. Ali returned with Safiyyah bt. Huyayy.

The hadith of ‘Ali being sent to deliver Bara’a

Then the Prophet sent a man with Surat al-Tawbah, and sent Ali after him to take it from him, saying: “Only a man from me and I from him may carry it.”

Hadith al-Indhar

He also said to his cousins: “Which of you will be my ally in this world and the next?” Ali was sitting with him, and they refused. Ali said: “I will be your ally in this world and the next.”

The Prophet said: “You are my ally in this world and the next.”

He left him, then turned to another man among them and said: “Which of you will be my ally in this world and the next?”

They refused. Ali said: “I will be your ally in this world and the next.”

He said: “You are my ally in this world and the next.”

‘Ali was the first to accept Islam and the revelation of the verse of purification

He (Ibn Abbas) said: He was the first to accept Islam after Khadijah. And the Messenger of God took his cloak and placed it over Ali, Fatimah, Hasan, and Husayn, and recited: {God only desires to remove defilement from you, People of the House, and to purify you completely.}

‘Ali takes the Prophet’s place in his bed during the hijra

He (Ali) risked his own life: he wore the Prophet’s cloak and slept in his place. The polytheists would pelt the Prophet with stones. Abu Bakr came while Ali was sleeping, and Abu Bakr assumed he was the Prophet. He said: “O Prophet of God!”

Ali replied: “The Prophet has gone toward Bir Maymun- catch up with him.” Abu Bakr went and entered the cave with him.

Ali was then stoned as the Prophet used to be stoned. He curled up in pain, having wrapped his head in the garment without uncovering it, until morning. When they uncovered his head, they said: “You are vile! Your companion used to be stoned and he did not writhe, but you writhe, and we found this strange!”

Hadith al-Manzila

He (Ibn Abbas) said: The Prophet went out with the people on the expedition to Tabuk. Ali said to him: “Shall I go out with you?”

The Prophet said: “No.”

Ali wept. Then the Prophet said: “Are you not pleased to be to me as Harun was to Musa, except that there is no prophet after me? It is not fitting that I depart unless you are my successor.” He also said: “You are the ally of every believer after me,”

Hadith of closing the doors

And: “Close all the doors opening into the mosque except the door of Ali.”

He would enter the mosque in a state of major ritual impurity, for it was his only path; he had no other way.

Hadith al-Ghadeer

He also said: “Whoever I am his master, Ali is his master.”

Ibn ‘Abbas affirms that ‘Ali is praised in the Quran

Ibn Abbas said: God informed us in the Quran that He was pleased with the people of the Tree (those of the pledge), for He knew what was in their hearts. Has He informed us that He was displeased with them afterwards?

And the Prophet said to ‘Umar, when ‘Umar asked permission to strike (a man’s) neck: “Would you really have done it? And what makes you know? Perhaps God has already looked upon the people of Badr and said: ‘Do whatever you will.’”

Similar chains of transmission can be found in the following sources:

This Hadith poses two major issues for our Sunni opponents:

This Hadith invalidates a merit cited by our opponents to claim Abu Bakr’s superiority (afazaliyya) over the other companions and his succession of the Holy Prophet (SAW). Per this tradition, the Prophet (SAW) did not choose Abu Bakr to accompany him during the Hijra; rather, Abu Bakr caught up with him after ‘Ali (AS) informed him that the Prophet had already left Mecca.
In the aforementioned hadith, the Prophet explicitly stated that he cannot leave without appointing ‘Ali as his successor and as the guardian of every believer after him. This is direct proof of the caliphate of ‘Ali (AS), and thus invalidates the Sunni belief system that negates a divine designation of ‘Ali.

Consequently, our opponents find themselves compelled to devise a justification to dismiss this tradition. In the following segment, we will examine the authentication of this tradition and review the narrator whom our opponents attempt to undermine, namely, Abu Balj.

The certification of the tradition

All of the transmitters in Ibn Hanbal’s chain of transmission are narrators of Bukhari and Muslim and hence do not warrant much discussion. The only controversial narrator is Abu al-Balj, whose name is Yahya b. Sulaym al-Fazari.

The report was also quoted in Fada'il al-Sahaba Vol. 1, pg. 682 - 685, Hadith # 1168 by Ahmad b. Hanbal and the editor graded the chain as ‘Hasan’.

Al-Hakim transmitted this tradition from Ahmad b. Hanbal in al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihain Vol 3, pg. 143 - 144, Hadith # 4652, and al-Dhahabi agreed with al-Hakim that the chain is Sahih.

Al-Tabarani transmitted the tradition in al-Mu’jam al-Kabir Vol 9 pg. 3103 - 3104, Hadith # 12953, and the narrators are certified by al-Haythami in Majma' al-Zawa'id Vol. 9, pg. 109 - 111, Hadith # 14696.

Addressing the criticisms against Abu Balj

As previously mentioned, the only ‘controversial’ narrator in the chain of transmission for this tradition is Yahya b. Salim, who is more popularly known by his kunya Abu Balj.

Our opponents have long argued that this tradition is unreliable due to said narrator. If we can prove his reliability, then this tradition is valid and the Shia beliefs regarding ‘Ali (AS) are confirmed, while the Sunni school of thought is left in an awkward position: their beliefs are contrary to the statement of the Prophet (SAW).

Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani records the following criticisms of Abu Balj in his Tahdhib al-Tahdhib pg. 498 - 499, Bio # 4:

Abu Balj al-Fazari al-Wasiti al-Kufi al-Kabir…

Al-Bukhari said about him: Fihi Nadhr

Ibn Abd al-Barr and Ibn al-Jawzi transmitted that Ibn Ma’in weakened him.

Ahmad said: he narrated a hadith that is munkar.

Note that we have only focused on the criticism while the majority of scholarly opinions mentioned regarding Abu Balj are positive.

The only cited critics are three: Al-Bukhari, Ibn Ma’in and Ahmad b. Hanbal. However, upon investigation, we find that none of them have criticised his reliability.

We shall now sequentially respond to these points.

Refuting Bukhari’s criticism of Abu al-Balj

Bukhari's statement of “Fihi Nadhar” is not a criticism of the narrator (jarh al-rawi); rather, it simply indicates that al-Bukhari had a neutral perspective. This is confirmed by his student, al-Tirmidhi, in Ilal al-Tirmidhi al-Kabir pg. 390:

وَحَكِيمُ بْنُ جُبَيْرٍ لَنَا ‌فِيهِ ‌نَظَرٌ وَلَمْ ‌يُعْزَمْ فِيهِ عَلَى شَيْءٍ.

And Hakim b. Jubayr, Fihi Nadhar, and no firm judgment has been made concerning him.

He explains that ‘Fihi Nadhr’ denotes neutrality, neither a dismissal of the narrator nor an endorsement. As such, how can it be used as a disapproval or weakening?

Refuting Ibn Ma’in and Ibn al-Jawzi’s criticism of Abu Balj

As for Ibn al-Jawzi and Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr weakening of Abu Balj, we have found no chain of transmission from Ibn al-Jawzi to Yahya b. Ma’in for this criticism, and strangely enough, Ibn Hajar also reported that Ibn Ma’in certified Abu Balj! We read in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib pg. 499, Bio # 4:

Ibn Ma'in, Ibn Sa'd, al-Nasa'i, and al-Daraqutni said: Trustworthy.

Furthermore, we have evidence of Yahya b. Ma’in certifying Abu Balj from one of the primary sources of Ilm al-Rijal. We read in al-Jarh wal Ta'dil by Ibn Abi Hatim, Vol. 9, pg. 188, Bio # 16289:

I heard my father say that. 'Abd al-Rahman said: My father mentioned it from Ishaq b. Mansur, from Yahya b. Ma'in, that he said: Abu Balj is trustworthy.

Moreover, when reviewing the original works of Ibn al-Jawzi, we could not find any statement in which he claimed that Ibn Ma’in had weakened Abu Balj. In his Kitab al-Du‘afaa’ wal-Matrukeen Vol. 3, p. 196, Bio #3722, Ibn al-Jawzi mentions several criticisms of Abu Balj, but does not refer to Ibn Ma’in’s weakening. This indicates that Ibn Hajar most likely mistakenly attributed this to Ibn al-Jawzi.

In the case of Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr, he in fact certified Abu al-Balj. He transmitted a truncated version of the same tradition which we are analyzing in al-Isti'ab fi Ma’rifat al-Ashab Vol. 5, 302, and commented the following regarding the chain of transmission:

Abu ʿUmar said: This chain has no flaw against it, for its narrators are reliable and it is sound.

Thus, neither Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr nor Yahya b. Ma’in weakened Abu Balj.

Refuting Ibn Hanbal’s criticism of Abu al-Balj

Ibn Hanbal’s claim that he narrated munkar reports does not imply they were fabricated or invalid. Ibn Hanbal’s usage of munkar conveys that the report had no corroboration (in other words: a khabir al-wahid). The was confirmed by Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani in Hadi al-Sari, pg. 437:

I say: “Al-Munkar was used by Ahmad b. Hanbal and a group (of scholars) referring to a solitary hadith that has no supporting narration.”

Sheikh Ahmad Muhammad Shakir wrote the following in the footnote of this hadith, in Musnad Ahmad b. Hanbal Vol 3, pg. 331:

Its chain is sound. Abu Balj is trustworthy; Ibn Maʿin, Ibn Saʿd, al-Nasaʾi, al-Daraqutni, and others declared him reliable.

In al-Tahdhib it is stated that al-Bukhari said: “Fihi Nadhr.” I do not know where he said this, for he included him in his Tarikh al-Kabir and mentioned no criticism of him, he did not translate him in al-Saghir, and neither he nor al-Nasaʾi listed him among the weak.

Moreover, Shu’ba narrated from him, and he narrated only from someone trustworthy.

Per this analysis, we find that the overwhelming majority of scholars certify Abu Balj and consider him reliable. Even large figures, such as al-Shu’ba, narrate Hadiths from him.

This is a method of authentication as Ibn ‘Udayy relates in al-Kamil fi Du'faa' al-Rijal Vol. 9, pg. 81, Bio # 2128:

And Abu Balj has, in addition to what I mentioned, other reports. Those who narrated from Abu Balj were eminent figures such as Shubah, Abu Awanah, and Hishim, and there is no harm in his hadith.

The objection of Ibn Hibban

In recent years, our Sunni opponents have attempted to weaken Abu Balj’s tradition by referring to Ibn Hibban’s comment on him. We read in Kitab al-Majruhin min al-Muhaddithin Vol 2, pg. 464, Bio # 1195:

Yahya b. Abi Salim, Abu Balj al-Fazari, was from Kufa, and it was said that he was from Wasit. He narrated from Muhammad b. Hatib and Amr b. Maymun, and Shubah and Hushaym narrated from him.

He was among those who err, though his errors were not excessive to the point that he deserved to be abandoned, and nothing came from him beyond what humans cannot avoid, such that he would be placed among the upright.

I hold that his solitary narrations should not be used as proof, and he is among those concerning whom I seek God’s guidance.

This quote, of Ibn Hibban, is inappropriately used to reject this tradition of Abu Balj, however, it is unacceptable for two reasons:

The content of this tradition is not a solitary narration, rather, it is very well corroborated. Every merit of ‘Ali (AS) is substantiated in the hadiths of Ibn ‘Abbas (AS), as well as other Sahaba. For this reason, we labelled each merit mentioned in the hadith individually.
Ibn Hibban clarified that weakening Abu Balj’s arose from error, not lying or fabricating traditions. Consequently, these objections fall flat, as it is merely desperation to reject this particular tradition for the obvious danger it poses to our opponents.

Objection of Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali

To discredit the report, Ibn Rajab composed a new argument which goes as follows in Sharh ‘Ilal al-Tirmidhi Vol. 1, pg. 821 - 822:

‘Abd al-Ghani b. Saʿid al-Masri (d. 409 H), the hafiz, mentioned that Abu Balj erred regarding the name of this Amr b. Maymun, and that he is not the well-known Amr b. Maymun.

Rather, he is Maymun Abu Abdullah, the client of Abd al-Rahman ibn Samurah, and he is weak. This is not unlikely, and God knows best.

We reply: this is merely a claim which ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Miṣrī made with no evidence. Abu Balj is well known for narrating from ʿAmr b. Maymūn, while he has never narrated before from Maymun Abu ʿAbdullah. On what basis did this scholar make this conclusion, when it is not present in any variants of the reports we have found?

Moreover, Abu Balj clearly states that he heard directly from ‘Amr b. Maymun, so this possibility does not seem plausible. As such, even Ibn Rajab found doubt and hesitation in this, and only concedes to its possibility, without providing strength to this claim nor evidence to support it.

Refuting the objection of Shu’ayb al-Arnaut

Perhaps the most common objection, which our opponents invoke, is that in the Risala publication of Musnad Ahmad, the editor Shu’ayb al-Arna’ut has weakened the report. (See Musnad Ahmad b. Hanbal, Vol 5, pg. 178 - 181 Hadith # 3061)

We say: this is one of the most absurd examples of our opponents’ scholars demonstrating academic dishonesty. The same Shu’ayb al-Arna’ut certified no less than 10 traditions reported by Abu Balj in his comments on Musnad Ahmad b. Hanbal. See Hadiths 6479, 6959, 6973, 7966, 7967, 8426, 8660, 8753, 9233, 10738, where he grades the hadiths as hasan due to Abu Balj, but then weakens this merit of ‘Ali (AS) and says it is due to Abu Balj.

Furthermore, we see that the same Shu’ayb al-Arna’ut, along with another famous modern Sunni researcher Bashar ‘Awad Ma’ruf, in their joint book Tahrir Taqrib al-Tahdhib—a commentary on Ibn Hajar’s Taqrib al-Tahdhib—certified Abu Balj.

We read in Tahrir Taqrib al-Tahdhib, Vol. 4, pg. 163 - 164, Bio # 8003:

[Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani]: Abu Balj al-Fazari al-Kufi, al-Wasiti, al-Akbar, his name is Yahya b. Sulaym or b. Abi Sulaym or b. Abi al-Aswad: Truthful (saduq), sometimes errs, from the fifth generation.

[Shu’ayb al-Arna’ut]: Rather, he is truthful and his hadith is reliable (Hasan), for he was declared reliable by Ibn Ma'in, Ibn Sa'd, al-Nasa'i, and al-Daraqutni. Abu Hatim said: his hadith is sound, there is no harm in him. Ya'qub b. Sufyan said: there is no harm in him. Al-Bukhari and al-Jawzajani weakened him.

Ibn Hibban said: he was among those who erred; his error did not become excessive so as to merit abandonment, nor did he commit what humans cannot avoid, so he is placed in the path of the upright. I see that his solitary reports should not be used as proof. He is one of those for whom I seek Allah's guidance. Al-Dhahabi said: his hadith is sound.

Conclusion

Per this analysis, it is evident that the Abu Balj tradition stands on firm grounds. The report is transmitted through reliable narrators and its contents are well-corroborated across the Hadith corpus.

Claims of weakness are based on unfounded objections against Abu Balj, which, upon examination, prove to be either misattributed or methodologically insufficient to undermine his reliability.

To digress, the content of this tradition has profound theological value. The Prophet’s (SAW) explicit statement that he cannot depart without appointing Imam Ali (AS) is a clear and direct affirmation of Imam Ali’s divinely sanctioned authority. This hadith remains a central proof in polemics and discourse on the topic of succession, such that it presents a serious challenge for our Sunni opponents.