Ibn Kathir said in his "Tafsir" regarding the statement of the Exalted
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Here is a question about a famous story. The questioner says: Ibn Kathir said in his "Tafsir": [An-Nisa 4:20] The verse, what is its summary? Another route from 'Umar. Al-Hafiz Abu Ya'la said: Abu Khaythama narrated to us, Ya'qub ibn Ibrahim narrated to us, my father narrated, from Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Rahman narrated to me, from Khalid ibn Sa'id, from al-Sha'bi, from Masruq, who said: 'Umar ibn al-Khattab mounted the pulpit and called for limiting the mahr. A woman from Quraysh objected to him and said: "You have forbidden people from increasing the mahr of women," and she recited the verse. 'Umar returned and said: "May Allah forgive me, every person is more knowledgeable than 'Umar." He mounted the pulpit and retracted his opinion. Ibn Kathir said: Is its chain good and strong?
My answer to this is that this chain contains a man whose name was written incorrectly in the printed copy, as you just heard, from Khalid ibn Sa'id; this is a distortion of Mujalid ibn Sa'id. Khalid ibn Sa'id does not exist among the narrators, and the correct name is Mujalid ibn Sa'id. This is how it is in "Musnad Abu Ya'la," to which Ibn Kathir attributed the hadith. This Mujalid ibn Sa'id has much criticism from the hadith scholars, and al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani says in his book "Taqrib al-Tahdhib": "He is not strong." This is the critique of the chain, which is called by some contemporary writers external critique.
I have a critique of the text; this is called internal critique, and it is from two aspects. One of them relates to what is known among hadith scholars as a shadh (anomalous) or munkar (denounced) hadith. That is, this Mujalid ibn Sa'id, despite his weakness in memorization, contradicted the correct route by which the hadith of 'Umar's (may Allah be pleased with him) prohibition of the Companions from increasing the mahr of women beyond the mahr of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), which he set for his wives, is four hundred dirhams, was transmitted.
It is authentic in "Sunan al-Tirmidhi" and "Musnad Ahmad" and others from 'Umar that he forbade people, the fathers who are guardians of women, from taking mahr for them more than four hundred dirhams. This amount is the mahr that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) prescribed for his wives. Up to this point, the story is correct. When Mujalid ibn Sa'id, with his weakness, adds to the trustworthy narrators who narrated the story without this addition, which is the story of the old woman; then his addition becomes denounced. This is from the perspective of his contradiction of the trustworthy narrators.
And from the perspective of meaning, what I understand from the statement of the Exalted:[An-Nisa 4:20], this verse was not revealed to establish a principle or rule in regulating mahr and not being excessive in it. Rather, this verse was revealed to command the husband to fulfill what he prescribed for his wife as mahr, even if it were qintars of gold. The verse was cited for the purpose of encouraging fulfillment, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said in a hadith in al-Bukhari: ; meaning: a man who married a woman with a mahr of one hundred thousand, he must fulfill this for her if he wants to divorce her and replace her. He does not say, "I mean this woman is no longer suitable for me, so I do not pay her what was written for her!" He must pay her. [An-Nisa 4:20], so the verse was cited for the principle of the obligation to fulfill what the husband contracted with his wife.
The questioner : Make room, make room.
The Shaykh : ... You are dealing with one matter, and the verse is dealing with another matter. 'Umar's admonition encourages Muslims not to be excessive in the mahr of their women. The verse encourages the husband to fulfill his condition with his wife, whatever mahr he contracted for her. So, two separate matters, one completely separate from the other. And in another sense, if I spoke, and who am I in relation to 'Umar? Nothing. If I spoke on the topic of not being excessive in the mahr of women, and a man of noble character, not a woman, objected to me with the verse, I would say to him: "My brother, the verse does not contradict what I am encouraging people to do. I am encouraging people to follow the Sunnah of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), who established for Muslims not being excessive in mahr in practice, and mentioned in some hadiths what indicates that the best of women are those with the least mahr. So I am speaking to affirm this verbal and practical Sunnah, and I encourage Muslims to adhere to it, hold fast to it, and bite down on it with their teeth. But if a man proposed to a woman with a very high mahr, and he built his life with her on this condition, and he lived with her as long as he did, and then he wanted to divorce her, he does not take a single cent from that, even if he wrote for her a qintar. There is no contradiction between my guidance and the verse. If I, and as I told you, who am I in relation to 'Umar? If I were told and objected to with the verse, I would clarify that the verse does not contradict the principle of reducing mahr, but rather the verse commands fulfillment of the conditions on which the man married the woman."
The questioner : Like 'Umar, did he forbid or encourage?
The Shaykh : He encouraged, he encouraged, but his encouragement was strong to the extent that he threatened that whoever it reached him that...
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : That he, that he, it does not concern us in any case. We are now in the process of explaining what is in this hadith of contradiction.
The questioner : There is a difference between admonishing people not to have high mahr and forbidding or preventing.
The Shaykh : Does this have a relation to explaining the weakness of the hadith? This is another matter; we do not mix Sha'ban with Ramadan.
The questioner : Explain to us from the perspective that there is no contradiction between the verse and the hadith.
The Shaykh : Yes, and I am still, if 'Umar forbade, there is no contradiction; because 'Umar went, I will tell you: 'Umar forbade, and prohibited that the guardian of the girl should not be excessive in the mahr. We say this: He prohibited. Then it reached him that a man proposed to a woman with a qintar, and he entered her and built his life with her on this. Does 'Umar say to him: "Do not fulfill what you contracted?" No, my speech is still valid. This is on one side; that is, what 'Umar was upon, whether he explicitly prohibited or not, this does not enter into the category of unconnected public interests. He encourages Muslims to follow the Sunnah of the Master of the Messengers. This is from one angle. From another angle, he threatens them that if it reaches him that someone took a mahr of more than four hundred, he leaves the four hundred for the girl and the increase he adds to the treasury of the Muslims. This does not contradict that the verse commanded fulfillment, even if he gave her a qintar, so he does not take anything from it.
The questioner : Meaning, did 'Umar not retract, meaning upon him?
The Shaykh : No, he did not retract, there is no retraction.
So, it is established from my previous explanation that the hadith has three defects:
The first defect: The weakness of Mujalid ibn Sa'id, and not Khalid ibn Sa'id, according to the most likely opinion among hadith scholars.
The second defect: Mujalid ibn Sa'id's contradiction of the trustworthy narrators who narrated the story without the addition of the woman in it.
The third defect - and the last - is that the old woman's objection to 'Umar is not consistent with 'Umar's intention, as we explained earlier.
But if you want to replace one wife
وَإِنْ أَرَدْتُمُ اسْتِبْدَالَ زَوْجٍMy answer to this is that this chain contains a man whose name was written incorrectly in the printed copy, as you just heard, from Khalid ibn Sa'id; this is a distortion of Mujalid ibn Sa'id. Khalid ibn Sa'id does not exist among the narrators, and the correct name is Mujalid ibn Sa'id. This is how it is in "Musnad Abu Ya'la," to which Ibn Kathir attributed the hadith. This Mujalid ibn Sa'id has much criticism from the hadith scholars, and al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani says in his book "Taqrib al-Tahdhib": "He is not strong." This is the critique of the chain, which is called by some contemporary writers external critique.
I have a critique of the text; this is called internal critique, and it is from two aspects. One of them relates to what is known among hadith scholars as a shadh (anomalous) or munkar (denounced) hadith. That is, this Mujalid ibn Sa'id, despite his weakness in memorization, contradicted the correct route by which the hadith of 'Umar's (may Allah be pleased with him) prohibition of the Companions from increasing the mahr of women beyond the mahr of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), which he set for his wives, is four hundred dirhams, was transmitted.
It is authentic in "Sunan al-Tirmidhi" and "Musnad Ahmad" and others from 'Umar that he forbade people, the fathers who are guardians of women, from taking mahr for them more than four hundred dirhams. This amount is the mahr that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) prescribed for his wives. Up to this point, the story is correct. When Mujalid ibn Sa'id, with his weakness, adds to the trustworthy narrators who narrated the story without this addition, which is the story of the old woman; then his addition becomes denounced. This is from the perspective of his contradiction of the trustworthy narrators.
And from the perspective of meaning, what I understand from the statement of the Exalted:
But if you want to replace one wife with another and you have given one of them a great amount [in gifts], do not take [back] from it anything
وَإِنْ أَرَدْتُمُ اسْتِبْدَالَ زَوْجٍ مَكَانَ زَوْجٍ وَآتَيْتُمْ إِحْدَاهُنَّ قِنْطَارًا فَلَا تَأْخُذُوا مِنْهُ شَيْئًاThe most worthy of conditions to be fulfilled is that by which you made lawful the private parts
أحقُّ الشروط بالوفاء ما استحلَلْتُم به الفروجand you have given one of them a great amount [in gifts], do not take [back] from it anything
وَآتَيْتُمْ إِحْدَاهُنَّ قِنْطَارًا فَلَا تَأْخُذُوا مِنْهُ شَيْئًاThe questioner : Make room, make room.
The Shaykh : ... You are dealing with one matter, and the verse is dealing with another matter. 'Umar's admonition encourages Muslims not to be excessive in the mahr of their women. The verse encourages the husband to fulfill his condition with his wife, whatever mahr he contracted for her. So, two separate matters, one completely separate from the other. And in another sense, if I spoke, and who am I in relation to 'Umar? Nothing. If I spoke on the topic of not being excessive in the mahr of women, and a man of noble character, not a woman, objected to me with the verse, I would say to him: "My brother, the verse does not contradict what I am encouraging people to do. I am encouraging people to follow the Sunnah of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), who established for Muslims not being excessive in mahr in practice, and mentioned in some hadiths what indicates that the best of women are those with the least mahr. So I am speaking to affirm this verbal and practical Sunnah, and I encourage Muslims to adhere to it, hold fast to it, and bite down on it with their teeth. But if a man proposed to a woman with a very high mahr, and he built his life with her on this condition, and he lived with her as long as he did, and then he wanted to divorce her, he does not take a single cent from that, even if he wrote for her a qintar. There is no contradiction between my guidance and the verse. If I, and as I told you, who am I in relation to 'Umar? If I were told and objected to with the verse, I would clarify that the verse does not contradict the principle of reducing mahr, but rather the verse commands fulfillment of the conditions on which the man married the woman."
The questioner : Like 'Umar, did he forbid or encourage?
The Shaykh : He encouraged, he encouraged, but his encouragement was strong to the extent that he threatened that whoever it reached him that...
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : That he, that he, it does not concern us in any case. We are now in the process of explaining what is in this hadith of contradiction.
The questioner : There is a difference between admonishing people not to have high mahr and forbidding or preventing.
The Shaykh : Does this have a relation to explaining the weakness of the hadith? This is another matter; we do not mix Sha'ban with Ramadan.
The questioner : Explain to us from the perspective that there is no contradiction between the verse and the hadith.
The Shaykh : Yes, and I am still, if 'Umar forbade, there is no contradiction; because 'Umar went, I will tell you: 'Umar forbade, and prohibited that the guardian of the girl should not be excessive in the mahr. We say this: He prohibited. Then it reached him that a man proposed to a woman with a qintar, and he entered her and built his life with her on this. Does 'Umar say to him: "Do not fulfill what you contracted?" No, my speech is still valid. This is on one side; that is, what 'Umar was upon, whether he explicitly prohibited or not, this does not enter into the category of unconnected public interests. He encourages Muslims to follow the Sunnah of the Master of the Messengers. This is from one angle. From another angle, he threatens them that if it reaches him that someone took a mahr of more than four hundred, he leaves the four hundred for the girl and the increase he adds to the treasury of the Muslims. This does not contradict that the verse commanded fulfillment, even if he gave her a qintar, so he does not take anything from it.
The questioner : Meaning, did 'Umar not retract, meaning upon him?
The Shaykh : No, he did not retract, there is no retraction.
So, it is established from my previous explanation that the hadith has three defects:
The first defect: The weakness of Mujalid ibn Sa'id, and not Khalid ibn Sa'id, according to the most likely opinion among hadith scholars.
The second defect: Mujalid ibn Sa'id's contradiction of the trustworthy narrators who narrated the story without the addition of the woman in it.
The third defect - and the last - is that the old woman's objection to 'Umar is not consistent with 'Umar's intention, as we explained earlier.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.