And from Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him and his father): that a virgin girl came to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and mentioned that her father had married her off while she was unwilling.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said: "And from Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him and his father): Bulugh al-Maram 8:24 It was narrated by Ahmad, Abu Dawud, and Ibn Majah, and it was criticized for being mursal"
Pay attention, my son, pay attention,
He says: From Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him and his father) The term "jariyah" (girl/servant) is used for a young female, for a female slave, and for a female in general. It has various usages depending on the context, but the most common usage for "jawaari" (girls/servants) is young women.
Yes, he says: This is an explanatory apposition clarifying that this girl is a virgin, not a previously married woman, Bulugh al-Maram 8:24.
The phrase here is a circumstantial clause, meaning: and the state was that she was unwilling; she did not accept the marriage or did not accept the husband. The important point is that she disliked this contract, whether her dislike was for the specific husband or for the marriage itself. So the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) gave her the choice. He gave her the choice between remaining with the husband or dissolving the marriage, even though she was a virgin and her guardian was her father.
And the author's statement that this hadith: was criticized for being mursal, "It was narrated by Ahmad, Abu Dawud, and Ibn Majah, and it was criticized for being mursal" "A'ala" (criticized): The 'illah (defect) is a hidden description that only the most knowledgeable scholars are aware of, which necessitates criticizing the hadith. This is because if the defect were apparent, it would be known to everyone, such as if Imam Ahmad narrated a hadith from 'Umar ibn al-Khattab; the defect in this hadith would be obvious and clear. Yes, but if a contemporary of a person narrates a hadith from him without having heard it from him, this is hidden from many people that the contemporary did not hear from the one from whom the hadith was narrated. This is a defect. For this reason, Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his commentary on "Nukhbat al-Fikrah": "This is one of the most obscure types of hadith," meaning: it is obscure. Not everyone can grasp this. The mursal status is a defect without doubt. What is missing in it? The continuity of the chain. But if the hadith is narrated as mursal at one time and as connected (musnad) at another, and the one who connected it is trustworthy, then this defect does not invalidate it, because with the trustworthy narrator comes additional knowledge. For example: the hadith was narrated by four men: one, two, three, four. Sometimes the hadith is narrated with this entire chain of four men, and sometimes it is narrated with a chain of one, two, four, where one is dropped. This second narration is mursal. But if the narrator of the first one is trustworthy, then the mursal status in the second one does not invalidate it. Why? Because he has additional knowledge. The possibility of forgetting in the second narration is present; the narrator who made it mursal may have forgotten. Yes, for this reason, I said in my marginal note that Ibn al-Qayyim said: "The narration of this hadith as mursal is not a defect, because it has been narrated as musnad and mursal. If we adopt the opinion of the jurists regarding continuity and addition, and that the one who connected it takes precedence over the one who made it mursal, then this is apparent, and this is their practice in most hadiths. And if we rule that it is mursal according to the opinion of many hadith scholars, then this is a strong mursal, supported by authentic and explicit athar, analogy, and the principles of the Shari'ah. End of quote" (may Allah have mercy on him).
So the defect here is not invalidating, neither according to the opinion of the jurists nor the opinion of the hadith scholars, because it has corroborating narrations supporting it, including what is established in the two Sahihs as mentioned previously:Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1107Sahih (Darussalam) And in a narration by Muslim, it is explicit: If she is not to be married until she is asked for her permission, then if she is married without being asked, the marriage becomes prohibited.
But it is objected to us: if it is prohibited, how do we give the woman the choice? Is not the principle that if something is prohibited, it is not valid? Then if she chooses the marriage, do we renew the contract? It is said: The prohibition here is not for the right of Allah the Exalted, but for the right of the human being. So if the human being is pleased to drop his right and validate the contract, then the cause of the prohibition is removed. For this reason, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) gave her the choice. He gave her the choice and did not dissolve the marriage.
A virgin girl came to the Prophet (ﷺ) and mentioned that her father had married her against her will, so Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) allowed her to exercise her choice
أن جارية بكراً أتت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فذكرت أن أباها زوجها وهي كارهة ، فخيرها رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلمPay attention, my son, pay attention,
He says: From Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him and his father)
That a virgin girl
أن جارية بكراًYes, he says:
A virgin girl
جارية بكرًاcame to the Prophet (ﷺ) and mentioned that her father had married her against her will
أتت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فذكرت أن أباها زوجها وهي كارهةHer father had married her off while she was unwilling
زوجها وهي كارهةAnd the author's statement that this hadith: was criticized for being mursal, "It was narrated by Ahmad, Abu Dawud, and Ibn Majah, and it was criticized for being mursal" "A'ala" (criticized): The 'illah (defect) is a hidden description that only the most knowledgeable scholars are aware of, which necessitates criticizing the hadith. This is because if the defect were apparent, it would be known to everyone, such as if Imam Ahmad narrated a hadith from 'Umar ibn al-Khattab; the defect in this hadith would be obvious and clear. Yes, but if a contemporary of a person narrates a hadith from him without having heard it from him, this is hidden from many people that the contemporary did not hear from the one from whom the hadith was narrated. This is a defect. For this reason, Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his commentary on "Nukhbat al-Fikrah": "This is one of the most obscure types of hadith," meaning: it is obscure. Not everyone can grasp this. The mursal status is a defect without doubt. What is missing in it? The continuity of the chain. But if the hadith is narrated as mursal at one time and as connected (musnad) at another, and the one who connected it is trustworthy, then this defect does not invalidate it, because with the trustworthy narrator comes additional knowledge. For example: the hadith was narrated by four men: one, two, three, four. Sometimes the hadith is narrated with this entire chain of four men, and sometimes it is narrated with a chain of one, two, four, where one is dropped. This second narration is mursal. But if the narrator of the first one is trustworthy, then the mursal status in the second one does not invalidate it. Why? Because he has additional knowledge. The possibility of forgetting in the second narration is present; the narrator who made it mursal may have forgotten. Yes, for this reason, I said in my marginal note that Ibn al-Qayyim said: "The narration of this hadith as mursal is not a defect, because it has been narrated as musnad and mursal. If we adopt the opinion of the jurists regarding continuity and addition, and that the one who connected it takes precedence over the one who made it mursal, then this is apparent, and this is their practice in most hadiths. And if we rule that it is mursal according to the opinion of many hadith scholars, then this is a strong mursal, supported by authentic and explicit athar, analogy, and the principles of the Shari'ah. End of quote" (may Allah have mercy on him).
So the defect here is not invalidating, neither according to the opinion of the jurists nor the opinion of the hadith scholars, because it has corroborating narrations supporting it, including what is established in the two Sahihs as mentioned previously:
a virgin should not be given in marriage until her permission is sought
لا تنكح البكر حتى تستأذنA virgin's father seeks her permission.
البكر يستأذنها أبوهاBut it is objected to us: if it is prohibited, how do we give the woman the choice? Is not the principle that if something is prohibited, it is not valid? Then if she chooses the marriage, do we renew the contract? It is said: The prohibition here is not for the right of Allah the Exalted, but for the right of the human being. So if the human being is pleased to drop his right and validate the contract, then the cause of the prohibition is removed. For this reason, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) gave her the choice. He gave her the choice and did not dissolve the marriage.