The hadith of 'A'ishah: "So he ordered that my seat be moved to face the qiblah"

The questioner: Regarding the hadith from Khalid ibn Abi al-Salt, one of the narrators in the chains of transmission, and from 'A'ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), concerning the well-known disagreement regarding Khalid ibn Abi al-Salt.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner: Al-Zuhri, what does he say? He says: "The hadith is munkar (denounced)." And Shakir says, based on his verification with Ibn Hazm, that he says the hadith is sahih (authentic) and meets the conditions of Muslim, just as al-Hakim said.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner: Do you know it? I think the hadith?

The Shaykh: No, I have not remembered it yet.

The questioner: From 'A'ishah (may Allah be pleased with her): That the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) heard that some people disliked turning their backs to the qiblah when urinating or defecating, so he ordered a seat.

The Shaykh: So it was moved to face the qiblah.

The questioner: So it was moved to face the qiblah.

The Shaykh : What Allah willed!

The questioner: I was very surprised, meaning, by Shakir's authentication of it. So I want, I want the man Khalid and I want the hadith.

Another questioner: Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh: And upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah and His blessings. Welcome, how are you?

Another questioner : Praise be to Allah.

The Shaykh : If Allah wills, well?

Another questioner: By the grace of Allah.

The Shaykh : Welcome.
In our region in the Levant, they say: "A guest without standing up for him!" Do you have the same here?

Another questioner: ... regarding standing up, I will never stand up anymore, whoever comes ... .

The Shaykh : And upon you be peace, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.
The measure is by what is in the hearts.

Another questioner: We are apologizing to you, meaning.

The Shaykh: The measure is by what is in the hearts.

Another questioner: We are apologizing to you. When I said to him, "My Shaykh," "What if I enter?" He said, "If you enter, I do not want to stand up for you?" He said to me, "If the Messenger of Allah enters, you do not have to stand up for him; because he is your command." He was silent.

The Shaykh: And we recited for them a poem by one of the scholars, a poem with some length, but the point now is his saying:
And if our hearts are sincere among us *** We are content to tire our bodies
We are all confident in the affection of our brother *** So what is our agitation and for what?


The Shaykh: There is no doubt in the weakness of the hadith and its denunciation (nukrah). As for the weakness, it is from the side of the isnad (chain of narration), but my mind does not recall anything at all about this Khalid right now. However, I say a general statement about him: if al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi considers him unknown (majhul) and Ahmad Shakir authenticates him (thiqah).

Eid Abbasi: He said: "The hadith is munkar (denounced)." Is that not so?

The questioner: No, al-Dhahabi did not bring anything about Khalid.

The Shaykh : From whom?

The questioner: He said: From Khalid, from 'Arrak, from 'A'ishah.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: This is a munkar (denounced) hadith.

The Shaykh: Okay; I checked.

The questioner: And Ibn Hazm said: Unknown (majhul).

The Shaykh: Did you check "al-Mizan" or not?

The questioner: "al-Mizan."

The Shaykh: Yes, what, but, he does not say?

The questioner: No, he does not say.

The Shaykh : What does he say?

The questioner: He says: From Khalid ibn Sulthan, from 'Arrak, from 'A'ishah (may Allah be pleased with her). He cites the hadith in his biography and says: This is munkar (denounced).

The Shaykh: All right.

The questioner: But it is not sufficient.

Eid Abbasi: What does "unknown" (majhul) mean?

The Shaykh: Yes, it means unknown. Did he mention more than this?

The questioner: He did not mention, he did not authenticate him or...

The Shaykh: Meaning, Khalid ibn Abi al-Salt, from 'Arrak, from 'A'ishah, and he mentioned the hadith.

The questioner: And he mentioned the hadith and said: This is munkar (denounced).

The Shaykh: Yes, this means that he is unknown (majhul).

Eid Abbasi: He has no other hadith - also.

The Shaykh: Yes, this means, my brother, that al-Dhahabi judges him as unknown (majhul); and therefore I said that al-Dhahabi's judgment of him as unknown (majhul) is countered by Ahmad Shakir's authentication of him. We know from Ahmad Shakir his leniency.

The questioner: He relies on the authentication of Ibn Hibban.

The Shaykh: Yes, this is what I wanted to say; we know from Ahmad Shakir his leniency in authentication, and part of his leniency in authentication is that he considers the authentication of Ibn Hibban valid, and the authentication of Ibn Hibban is not considered valid by the scholars of this field; because he authenticates the unknown (majhul) narrators. And we know this well from his book "al-Thiqat" (The Trustworthy); because he sometimes says about a narrator: So-and-so ibn So-and-so, I do not know him. How can you not know him and include him in the book "al-Thiqat"? Then Ahmad Shakir comes and is told, quoting from "al-Thiqat," that this narrator was mentioned by Ibn Hibban in "al-Thiqat," so he says then he is trustworthy (thiqah); because Ibn Hibban mentioned him in the book "al-Thiqat." And he may be one of those about whom Ibn Hibban said: I do not know him. Even so, what? He said: He mentioned him in "al-Thiqat." And stranger than this, sometimes he says: So-and-so ibn So-and-so, I do not know him and I do not know who his father is. How did this become trustworthy? And so on. So the leniency of Ibn Hibban in authentication is a known matter. Therefore, if the authentication of Ibn Hibban and those who relied on it conflicts with the declaration of ignorance (tajhili) by al-Dhahabi, then his declaration of ignorance is undoubtedly the basis. This is what concerns the chain of narration. As for what concerns the text of the hadith, the denunciation (nukrah) in it is clear; because the text of the hadith, perhaps some of our brothers who attended recently did not hear the question.