Sheikh Nasir-ud-Deen Albany writes in Silsila Ahadeeth Saheehiyya, 7/719, Hadeeth 3240 regarding the cursing of Hakam bin A’as by Holy Prophet (asws), and He says:-

 (لَيدخُلنَّ عليكُم رجلٌ لَعِينٌ. يعني: الحكم بن أبي العاص) . أخرجه أحمد (2/163) ، والبزار في “مسنده ” (2/247) من طريق عبد الله
ابن نُمير: ثنا عثمان بن حكيم عن أبي أمامة بن سهل بن حُنيف عن عبد الله 3240 بن عمرو قال:

[A man would enter who is cursed. This means: Hakam bin Abi A’as]. Mentioned by Ahmad & Bazaar with the chain……..

And on the next page, Albany writes

قلت وهو اسناد صحيح

رواه احمد والبزار والطبراني ورجال احمد رجال الصحيح
وله شاهدان قويان ساقهما البزار
احدهما

سمعت عبد الله ابن الزبير يقول
وهو مستند الى الكعبه ورب هذا البيت لقد لعن الله الحكم وما ولد على لسان نبيه-ص-
قلت وهو اسناد صحيح

I say that This chain is Saheeh/Authentic, Narrated by Ahmad, Bazaar, Tabarani and Narrators of Ahmad are that of Saheeh. And it has strong supporting narrations, like one is mentioned by Bazaar

I heard Abdullah bin Zubair who said while standing by Ka’ba: By the lord of This House, Allah cursed hakam, and his son by the tongue of Holy Prophet asws

I say this Chain is Saheeh

Then he starts speaking about Scholars of Ahlu Sunnah, and what They did regarding this Narration. He writes

هذا واني لاعجب اشد العجب من تواطؤ بعض الحفاظ المترجمين لــــــــــــ(الحكم) على عدم سوق بعض هذه الاحاديث وبيان صحتها في ترجمته

اهي رهبه الصحبه وكونه عم عثمان ابن عفان
وهم المعروفون باهم لا تاخذهم في الله لومه لائم
ام هي ظروف حكوميه او شعبيه كانت تحول بينهم وبين ماكانو يريدون التصريح به من
الحق؟ فهذا مثلا ابن الاثير يقول في اسد الغابه
وقد روي في لعنه ونفيه احاديث كثيره لاحاجه الى ذكرها الا ان الامر المقطوع به ان النبي-ص- مع حلمه واغضائه على مايكره-مافعل به ذلك الا لامر عظيم-
واعجب منه صنيع الحافظ –يعني ابن حجر العسقلاني– في الاصابه فانه مع اطالته في ترجمته
صدرها بقوله
قال ابن السكن-يقال ان النبي-ص- دعا عليه ولم يثبت-

وسكت عليه ولم يتعقبه بشي بل تبعه بروايات كثيره فيها ادعيه مختلفه عليه كنت ذكرتت بعضها في الضعيفه وسكت عنها كلها وصرح بضعف بعضها
–وختمها بذكر حديث عائشه المتقدم–ان رسول الله-ص- لعن اباك وانت في صلبه ولكنه
—بديل ان يصرح بصحته- المح الى اعلاله بمخالفته روايه البخاري المتقدمه فقال عقبها

قلت-واصل القصه عند البخاري بدون الزياد
فاقول—ماقيمه هذا التعقيب وهو يعلم ان هذه الزياده صحيحه السند
ويكمل الى ان يصل الى
وقد وردت احاديث في لعن الحكم والد مروان وما ولد اخرجها الطبراني وغيره غالبها فيه مقال وبعضها جيد ولعل المراد تخصيص الغلمه المذكورين

بذلك واعجب من ذلك كله تحفظ الحافظ الذهبي بقوله في ترجمته —الحكم—
وقدوردت احاديث منكره في لعنه لايجوز الاحتجاج بها وليس له في الجمله خصوص من الصحبه بل عموما

This has been very strange to see conspiracy/immorality/Deception on behalf of some Scholars, (who chose) not to mention some of these narrations and telling about authenticity of these
Whether it is because of fear of him being Sahabi, or due to him being cousin of uthman and they are the those famous in being fearless of anyone’s blame. Or whether it is due to stress of government or fame, which made them to alter between who they were and those who used to mention the truth explicitly?

like for example ibn Atheer said in usd ul ghaba that there are many narrations about him being cursed and rejected that we do not need to mention them, unless that this is true that the Prophet(saw) despite his tolerance and forebearance towards things he disliked did not do that(i.e. cursing him) except due to a big deal.

and strange it is from Hafiz ibn hajar in al isaba that even though he writes a long biography for him, he finishes it by saying that Ibn Sukn said that it is said the Prophet prayed against him, but it is not proven.

and He kept silent, and did not refute it with any thing, rather followed it with many narrations which their aims are contradictory that I mentioned some of them in my book Al-Daeefa, and he kept silent about all, and only said about some of them that they are weak.

and ended with narration of ayesha previously that Prophet cursed your father, and you were in his loin, but rather than expressing it as authentic he hinted to find critics against it by mentioning that it contradicts narration of bukhari mentioned before.

I say that this narration is present in bukhari without this extra part. and i say that why he stood with this refutation when he knew that this extra part is with authentic chain (and therefore it is accepted), …

no doubt, ahadeeth regarding cursing of hakam, father of marwan, and his son, narrated by tabarani etc most of these are faulty, and some of them are good, and maybe this refers just to those mentioned kids in particular. and even more strange is that Dhabi tried to defend this in the biography of hakam in his Tarikh by saying that: there are rejected(munkar) narrations regarding his cursing, and it is not allowed to argue with them, and there is no exact saying for him being Sahabi rather even generally.

Advertisements