King Abdulaziz University

Research and Consulting Institute

Muallim Muhammad 'Awad

Bin Laden Chair of Qur'anic Studies

The Series of "Replying to Anti-Islamic

Allegations"

(5)

A Reply to the Allegation

Casting doubts on Ibn 'Abbas'

Exegesis of the Qur'an

Prepared by

Professor Hekmat Bin Basheer

Bin Yaseen

Muallim Muhammad Awad Bin Laden Chair

of Qur'anic Studies

Translated by: Tamer Muhammad Saleem

Translation Revised by: Dr. Khaled Tawfik

0
 Introduction

All praise is due to the Lord of the Worlds, and peace and
blessings be upon Allah's Messenger Muhammad and all those
loyal to him.

To commence, some orientalists have aroused allegations

casting doubts on Ibn (Son of) 'Abbas' exegesis of the Qur'an.
Unfortunately, some Muslim scholars have been influenced by
such allegations such as the author of ‫" تاريخ التراث العربي‬History of
Arab Heritage", Professor Fuat Sezgin. In his book, he cited some
gems of the heritage of the first four centuries and early 5th
century A.H., whether they were existent or lost. Skillfully and
beneficially, Sezgin cited them in his work, however, he committed
some scholarly mistakes because of the various quotes he took
from spiteful orientalists like Goldziher. In fact, Sezgin borrowed
many of their arguments, be them valid or not, without tracing
their origins, criticizing them or even adding insights, except in
certain cases. One of these mistakes he committed was attacking
and undermining the exegesis of the great Companion Abdullah
Ibn ‘Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them both! Due to the
gravity of that attack, I was keen to pinpoint his words,
highlighting their inherent defects in defense of that great
Companion of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and to preserve his
exegesis in face of those who wrongfully attack him.

I would like to express deep thanks to the sponsors of this

Chair: Engineer Bakr Bin Muhammad Bin Awad Bin Laden, the
General Manager and the Head of the Board of Directors of Bin

1
Laden Group and Engineer Yahia Bin Muhammad Bin Awad Bin
Laden, the Acting General Manager and the Head of the Board of
Directors. May the Mercy of Allah Almighty be upon the father of
those in charge of the Chair, Mu'allim Muhammad Awad Bin
Laden, after whose name our Chair has been named. Special
thanks are also due to Bin Laden Group Advisor and Director of
the Post-Millennium Development Program, Professor 'Abdul-
Lateef Khamakhim, for his blessed efforts, concern with and
appreciation of the Chair. I would also like to extend thanks to the
University President, Professor Osama Bin Sadeq Tayyib, the
University Vice President for Business and Cognitive Creativity,
Ahmad Bin Hamid Naqadi, the Dean of the Research and
Consulting Institute, 'Abdul-Malek Bin Ali Al-Juneidi, and his Vice
Deans, Professor Abdullah Bin Ahmad Al-Ghamdi and Professor
Haitham Bin Hasan Lingawi. Thanks also go to the members of the
KAU Scientific Chairs Research Committee.

Let me also express deep gratitude to Chair Supervisor, Dr.

Muhammad Bin Abdullah Al-Halawani, who exerted praiseworthy
efforts in revising this research paper. I also thank Assistant
Researcher, Sheikh Ibraheem Bin Muhammad Awwal, who typed
this research paper.

Allah Almighty is the Source of all success!

Prof. Hekmat Bin Basheer Bin Yaseen

Professor of Mu'allim Muhammad Awad Bin Laden Chair

of Qur'anic Studies

2
 Highlights of the Allegation

Professor Fuat Sezgin reported the doubts cast on Ibn 'Abbas'

exegesis of the Qur'an are mentioned by Orientalist Ignác
Goldziher in his "Die Richtungen der Islamischen
Koranauslegung". Narrators said about Ibn 'Abbas, "There are
myriads of other commentaries attributed to Ibn 'Abbas.
Apparently, they are taken from the books of his disciples that
were sometimes written during his public scholarly sessions, and
sometimes during his private sessions and discussions. However,
the differences, and even the contradictions, between these
exegeses can be somehow viewed as a result of the development of
Ibn 'Abbas' intellect and that of his disciples who used to ask him
questions, then write their exegesis books.

Texts show that the Qur'anic exegesis remarkably and

rapidly evolved at that time. Add to this, there is an impression
that Ibn 'Abbas and his disciples could not avoid the free
interpretation of the Qur'an at a time when the Qur'anic exegesis
swiftly developed. They so much relied on the principle of opinion
and adopted it in the domain of exegesis. Also, out of keenness to
interpret the Qur'an, Abdullah Ibn 'Abbas and some of his
disciples resorted to scholars of the People of the Scripture:
Christians and Jews."1

3
 Replying to the Allegation

With respect to hinting at the differences and contradictions

without providing a proof or an indication of them, this is but an
allegation against the reliable narrators who belonged to the
School of Ibn 'Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them both, given
that they are reliable (narrators) according to the Two Sheikhs, Al-
Bukhari and Muslim, and are even elite exegetes among the
Followers of Prophet Muhammad's Companions. These so-called
differences and contradictions must not be cited without a
supporting proof and indications.

Indeed, the above-mentioned allegation is unfounded due to

two things: the chain of narrators transmitting Ibn 'Abbas' exegesis
is either weak or authentic; the weak chain issue is off-point and
generally belongs to the category of weak narrations. As for the
authentic chain of narrators, whatever difference that might exist
in its narrations is one of diversity, not conflict or contradiction.
This was explained in detail by Sheikh of Islam, Ibn Taymeyah,
may Allah have mercy on him, who said in his ‫مقدمة فً أصول التفسٌر‬
"An Introduction to the Basics of Exegesis", "The differences
among the Salaf (the Prophet's Companions and their Followers)
with regard to the exegesis are few; their differences regarding
rulings are more than those regarding the exegesis. The majority
of their authentic differences are ones of diversity, not
contradiction. Such differences are of two kinds: the first is like
finding each of them referring to the intended meaning using
words different from those of the others, yet still all bearing the
same meaning. These words are equal in meaning; something

4
between synonymous words and those having semantic
variations as is the case of the words referring to 'Saif' i.e. 'sword'
in Arabic: 'As-Sarim' and 'Al-Muhannad'. The same applies to the
Most Beautiful Names of Allah and those of His Prophet
Muhammad, peace be upon him, and the Qur'an. In fact, all the
Names of Allah are Divine Attributes of One God. Thus, invoking
Him with one of His Most Beautiful Names does not contradict
invoking Him with another one. Rather, this is exactly as Allah
Almighty says, "Say: 'Invoke God, or invoke the Most Gracious:
by whichever name you invoke Him, [He is always the One – for]
His are all the attributes of perfection." (The Qur'an, 17:110).

Then Ibn Taymeyah talked about the Divine Names and

Attributes and those of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and the
Qur'an; Ibn Taymeyah said, "Given the above, the Salaf used to
express one word using other words referring to it, even if it
implies something not implied by other words, as is the case of
someone saying that Ahmad (i.e. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)) is
Al-Hashir (literally, 'the Gatherer' i.e. the one at whose feet people
will be gathered on Doomsday), Al-Mahi (literally, 'the Eraser' i.e.
the one with whom Allah erases disbelief) and Al-'Aqib (literally,
'the Successor' i.e. the last Prophet who succeeded other Prophets
and who will not be succeeded by any Prophet), and Al-Quddous
(the Holiest Lord) is the All-Forgiving and the Most Gracious.
Hence, one word may be referred to through different words.

It is a fact that such a difference is not one of contradiction

as some might argue. For example, As-Sirat Al-Mustaqeem
(literally, 'the straight path') is interpreted by some as the Qur'an
i.e. following its Path, for Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), as

5
reported by Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, according to the
narration of At-Tirmidhi, Abu Nu'aym through various
transmitters, said, '… it is the strong bond of Allah, the wise
Remembrance and As-Sirat Al-Mustaqeem…'2 .

Some said that the term refers to Islam as in the Saying

transmitted by An-Nawwas Ibn Sam'an, according to the
narration of At-Tirmidhi and others, the Prophet (PBUH) said,
'Allah has set an example of As-Sirat Mustaqeem; and on both
sides of As-Sirat, there are two walls; and in the two walls, there
are open gates; and on the gates, there are curtains drawn; and
there is a caller calling out on As-Sirat and a caller calling out at
the head of As-Sirat. He said, 'As-Sirat Al-Mustaqeem is Islam,
and the two walls are the rulings of Allah, and the open gates are
the things prohibited by Allah, and the caller at the head of As-
Sirat is the Book of Allah (the Qur'an) and the caller on As-Sirat is
Allah-sent admonisher in the heart of every believer' ” 3.

These two views are congruent as the religion of Islam is

based on following the Qur'an, but each view implied a
description different from that of the other. Also the word 'Sirat'
has a third implication as some say it refers to the (view of)
Sunnah and the majority of Muslim scholars, while others said
that it implies the way of servitude to Allah, and others said that it
implies obedience to Allah and His Messenger (PBUH).

Also related to this is specifying the occasion of revealing a

certain verse, especially when they say, 'This verse refers to a
certain person'; this is like mentioning the reasons for revealing
verses as found in the exegesis, as is the case of those saying that
the verse on Zihar (a pre-Islam type of divorce) was revealed in

6
reference to the wife of Aws Ibn As-Samit, and that the verse of
the imprecation was revealed in reference to 'Uwaymir Al-'Ajlani
or Hilal Ibn Umayyah and that the verse of 'Kalalah' (an Arabic
word referring to the one who has a legacy, but no direct
ascendants or descendants i.e. no direct heirs) was revealed in
reference to Jabir Ibn Abdullah, and that the verse, “So judge
between them by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not
their desires, but beware of them lest they seduce thee from some
part of that which Allah hath revealed unto thee. And if they turn
away, then know that Allah‟s Will is to smite them for some sin of
theirs. Lo! Many of mankind are evil-livers” (The Qur'an, 5:49)
refers to the Jews of Bani Qurayzah and Bani An-Nadeer, and
that the verse, “Whoso on that day turneth his back to them,
unless manoeuvring for battle or intent to join a company, he
truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be
hell, a hapless journey‟s end” (The Qur'an, 8:16) was revealed on
the occasion of Badr Battle, and that the verse, “O ye who believe!
Let there be witnesses between you when death draweth nigh
unto one of you, at the time of bequest - two witnesses, just men
from among you, or two others from another tribe, in case ye are
campaigning in the land and the calamity of death befall you. Ye
shall empanel them both after the prayer, and, if ye doubt, they
shall be made to swear by Allah (saying): We will not take a
bribe, even though it were (on behalf of) a near kinsman nor will
we hide the testimony of Allah, for then indeed we should be of the
sinful” (The Qur'an, 5:106) was revealed in reference to the case
of Tameem Ad-Dari and 'Adi Ibn Bada', and that Abu Ayyoub,
may Allah be pleased with him, said the verse, 'Spend your wealth
for the cause of Allah, and be not cast by your own hands to ruin;

7
and do good. Lo! Allah loveth the beneficent' (The Qur'an, 2:195)
refers to his people, Al-Ansar, (the Medinan Helpers of the
Prophet).

There are many similar cases in which the verse is said to

refer to some polytheists in Mecca, or some of the people of the
Scripture: the Jews and Christians, or some believers. Those who
said that did not mean that the verse has to do only with those
specific people and excludes others; this cannot be the view of any
Muslim or sane person. Even if people find the reference of a
general word said about a particular reason controversial, will
that word be somehow related to that reason or not? No Muslim
scholar has ever said that the general words of the Qur'an and
Sunnah are peculiar to specific people. Rather, they would say
that such words are related to the persons mentioned in their
contexts and so, their reference extends to include all those like
them.

So the general sense of a word is not based on the word

itself. And the verse that was revealed for a particular reason, if it
comprises an order and a prohibition, has to do with the person
mentioned therein and his likes, and if it is a statement praising
or rebuking some person, it applies to his likes too. These are the
two categories mentioned with regard to the diverse exegeses.
This diversity is either caused by the diversity of names and
adjectives, or by the mention of some types and such as forms of
figure of speech.

These two are the common cases in the exegeses of the

Muslim Salaf (the Prophet's Companions and their Followers)
which are allegedly said to be contradictory. Another form of

8
alleged controversies among those exegetes is the case of a word
that can be interpreted in two ways, either due to having a case of
homonymy, as is the case of the word, 'Qaswarah' (The Qur'an,
74:51) which means both a shooter and a lion, or a case of
polysemy like the word ' 'as'as' (The Qur'an, 81:17) which
connotes both the coming and departure of night, or due to
sharing one origin, but referring to one of the two items or things
mentioned, like the pronouns in the verses: "and then drew near,
and came close, and then drew near, and came close…" (The
Qur'an, 53:8-9) and like the words, "By the Dawn And ten nights,
And the Even and the Odd…" (The Qur'an, 89:1-3), and the like.
Such words may, or may not, refer to all the meanings mentioned
by Salaf; they may refer to those meanings whether because the
verse in question was revealed twice, thus referring to both
meanings, or because one word may refer to two meanings. This
was deemed permissible by the majority of Maliki, Shafe'i, and
Hanbali scholars of Islamic jurisprudence and many scholastic
theologians, or because the word considered is semantically
flexible so that it may have a general meaning if nothing
necessitates its being specific. If this type of words can be
interpreted both ways, it belongs to the other group i.e. the
general meaning group.

Also in some of the quotes by the Salaf, which some regard

as a sign of disagreement, the Salaf express certain meanings
using words that are semi-synonymous, not synonymous, given
that synonyms, i.e. words having identical meanings, are few in
Arabic, and in the Qur'an in particular, they are rare or even non-
existent. In few cases in the Qur'an, one word expresses another
word that conveys its full meaning, rather the meaning of that

9
word is only close to the others, which is one of the secrets of
Qur'anic inimitability.

So, by saying that in the verse, 'the Day when the sky will
tremble, a horrible trembling…' (The Qur'an, 52:9), the Arabic
word for 'trembling' (i.e. 'Mawr' means 'movement', one will be
only referring to a close meaning of the word i.e. a layer of its
meaning, for 'Mawr' exactly means 'a light swift movement'. The
same goes for those who argue that 'revealing' exactly means
'informing' or argue that 'We revealed to you' exactly means 'We
sent down to you', or say that the verse, 'And We decreed to the
Children of Israel…' (The Qur'an, 17:4) exactly means, 'And We
informed the Children of Israel' and so on.

Actually, all these are only shades of meaning, not the exact
meaning, for 'revelation' in Arabic, i.e. 'Wahy', exactly means
'informing in a swift secret fashion' and 'decreeing' i.e. 'Qada' ' in
Arabic, is more specific than 'informing'; 'Qada' ' implies 'sending
down and revealing'. Also, by holding that the verse, 'That Divine
Writ' (The Qur'an, 2:2) exactly means, 'This Qur'an', one will be
only getting a close meaning of the verse because although the
noun referred to in both the verse and its suggested interpretation
is but one and the same, using a pronoun that refers to something
present or nearby i.e. 'This', is different from using one that refers
to something distant and absent i.e. 'That'; ('Dhalika' in Arabic
'which is used in the given verse. Add to this, the word, 'Writ'
('Kitab' in Arabic) implies it is a written content, which is different
from the word, 'Qur'an' which, in Arabic, means 'it is explicitly
read or recited'.

10
 Such differences do exist in the Qur'an. For example,
someone may say that the word, 'seized' ('Tubsal' in Arabic) in the
verse: 'lest one should be seized for what he did', means 'kept'
('Tuhbas' in Arabic) and another may say that it means, 'confined'
('Turtahan' in Arabic') and so forth. These two meanings are not
different as opposites, given that the one 'kept' may be 'confined'
or not. As said above, such interpretations just provide close
meanings and those differences may be because the proof is
hidden, or it is unnoticed or unheard of or because of erroneous
understanding of the given text or due to a valid opposite view.
The point here is defining totalities rather than details." 4

Add to the statement of Sheikh of Islam Ibn Taymeyah, the

difference may be because of the attributed Qur'anic lections. In
some cases, each lection has a meaning. Also, some cite some odd
lections for the sake of interpretation, not recitation. This is
regarding the allegation concerning the difference and
contradiction in Qur'anic exegeses.

Based on that allegation, it is claimed that the result was a

change in Ibn 'Abbas' way of thinking and that of his disciples.
Here, it must be noted that this deduction is invalid because its
proof is invalid and Ibn 'Abbas' way of thinking and that of his
disciples never changed simply because their ideology and
methodology conform to the verses of the Holy Qur'an and the
Pure Prophetic Sunnah and rely on textual proofs. In an authentic
narration, 'Ubaidullah Ibn Abi Yazeed said, "Whenever Ibn 'Abbas
was asked about an affair, if it was referred to in the Qur'an, he
would answer according to it, and if it was not referred to in the
Qur'an and was mentioned by Allah's Messenger (PBUH), he

11
would answer according to Allah's Messenger's words, and if it
was not found in the Qur'an or mentioned by Allah's Messenger,
and was mentioned by Abu Bakr and 'Umar, he would answer
according to their words. But if none of the above sources was
available, he would introduce his own view based on independent
reasoning."5 Ibn 'Abbas was up to exercising independent
reasoning; why not if he obtained knowledge from tens of the
Prophet’s Companions. In an authentic narration, Ibn 'Abbas said,
"I would ask thirty of the Companions of the Prophet (PBUH)
about one issue."6

Moreover, Ibn 'Abbas did not express his views on all

questions; he would give no answer if asked about something he
had knowledge of, refusing to speak ignorantly. For instance, Abu
'Ubaid Al-Qasim ibn Salam reported that Muhammad Ibn Ja'far
narrated that Shu'bah mentioned that 'Amr Ibn Murrah said that a
man said to Sa'eed Ibn Jubair, "Did not you see Ibn 'Abbas when
he was asked about this verse, '(Also prohibited are) the women
already bound in marriage, except the bondwomen you come to
own' (The Qur'an, 4:24) and he said nothing about it?" Sa'eed
said, "He had no knowledge concerning it."7

Sheikh of Islam Ibn Taymeyah also said, "Ibn Jareer said

that Ya'qoub Ibn Ibraheem said that Ibn Aleyyah said that
Ayyoub said that Ibn Abi Maleekah said, 'Ibn 'Abbas was asked
about a verse on which some of you, if asked about it, would
comment, yet he refused to comment on it.” This is an authentic
narration.

Abu 'Ubaid also said, "Isma'eel Ibn Ibraheem said that

Ayyoub said that Ibn Abu Maleekah said, 'A man asked Ibn

12
'Abbas about the verse, '…a day the length of which is fifty
thousand years.' and Ibn 'Abbas said, '…a day the length of which
is fifty thousand years.' (The Qur'an, 70:4) The man said, 'I asked
you so you will talk to me (about it).' Ibn 'Abbas said, 'There are
two days mentioned by Allah in Allah's Book; Allah knows them
best.' He did not like to speak ignorantly about Allah's Book." 8

Ibn 'Abbas gave a Fatwa concerning the exchange issue 9; Al-

Bukhari narrated, according to his chain of narrators, that Abu
Saleh Az-Zayyat said, "I heard Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (may Allah be
pleased with him) said: Dinar (gold) for gold and dirham for
dirham can be (exchanged) with equal for equal; but he who gives
more or demands more in fact deals at interest. I said to him: Ibn
'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them) says otherwise,
whereupon he said: I met Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with
them) and said: do you see what you say; have you heard it from
Allah's Messenger (PBUH), or found it in the Book of Allah, the
Glorious and Majestic? He said: I did not hear it from Allah's
Messenger (PBUH) and I did not find it in the Book of Allah
(Glorious and Majestic), but Usamah Ibn Zaid narrated it to me
that Allah's Prophet (PBUH) said: There can be an element of
interest in Nasee'ah (i.e. postponing, deferring, or waiting and
referring to the time that is allowed for the borrower to repay the
loan in return for the addition or the premium)." 10 But he
changed his view later on.

Also, Al-Hakim reported, according to his chain of narrators,

that Abdullah Ibn Maleek Al-'Ajli narrated that he had heard Ibn
‘Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them both, say, three days
before his death, "O Allah, I repent to You with regard to the

13
Fatwas I gave to people concerning the exchange issue." This
saying was authenticated and agreed upon by Adh-Dhahabi and
Al-Hakim commented on it saying, "This is one of the loftiest
manners of Abdullah Ibn 'Abbas; he went back on his fatwa,
given that he did not do any other thing which he was to blame
for."11

In Muslim's Book of Authentic Sayings, it is mentioned that

Abu As-Sahba' asked Ibn 'Abbas in Mecca about that issue, but he
detested it.12

Hence, it could be deduced that Ibn 'Abbas' thought did not

change; he was one of Prophet Muhammad's Companions who
took the methodology of Qur'anic recitation and exegesis from the
Prophet (PBUH). In his ‫" البٌان‬The Manifestation", Abu 'Amr Ad-
Dani reported, according to his chain of narrators, that 'Uthman,
Ibn Mas'oud and Ubai said, "Allah's Messenger (PBUH) would
recite ten verses before them and they would not move on to
another ten verses until they learned how to act on them. So he
would teach them both the Qur'an and how to act on it." 'Abdur-
Raziq also mentioned that Mu'ammar reported that 'Ata' Ibn As-
Sa'ib narrated that Abu 'Abdur-Rahman As-Salmi said, "Whenever
we learned ten verses of the Qur'an, we would not learn the next
ten until we knew about the permissible and impermissible things
in the former and the (Divine) orders and prohibitions therein."13
Ibn 'Asakir and Adh-Dhahabi quoted Ibn Mas'oud as saying the
same.14

Suffice it to mention the testimony of Ibn Mas'oud who said

in an authentic saying, "The best interpreter of the Qur'an is Ibn
'Abbas."15 Moreover, Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) invoked Allah

14
saying, "O Allah, let him be versed in religion and teach him how
to interpret (the Qur'an)." 16

As for Professor Sezgin’s words about Ibn 'Abbas and his

disciples saying that many times, they resorted to the independent
opinion principle, applying it to the exegesis domain. Sezgin
further added that the keenness on interpreting the Qur'an pushed
Abdullah Ibn 'Abbas and some of his followers to resort to some
scholars from the People of the Scripture; Christians and Jews.

The reply is that before jumping to the conclusion that they

interpreted the Qur'an based on their independent opinions, one
has to see whether or not the interpretations considered belong to
them, for the narrations attributed to them by Al-Kalbi, 'Ateyyah
Al-'Awfi, Abu Saleh Badham (or Badhan), or Ad-Dahhak Ibn
Muzahem are all unreliable. As for the authentic narrations on the
opinion-based exegeses by Ibn 'Abbas and his disciples, they
actually are praiseworthy; not dispraised like the opinions of
Zindikites and those propagating falsities.

In fact, the views of Ibn 'Abbas and his disciples are based on
four major elements: deductions from the Qur'an, Sunnah and
sayings by the Prophet's Companions, as indicated hereinafter on
talking about Mujahid Ibn Jabr, or from their deep knowledge of
the Arabic language, or from frequently transmitted Qur'anic
lections, or from the knowledge of the people of the Scripture, be it
uncommented-on in Islam or congruent with the Qur'an and
Sunnah.

According to Sheikh of Islam Ibn Taymeyah, the Isra'iliyat

(i.e. the body of sayings originating from Judeo-Christian

15
traditions, rather than from other well-accepted sources that quote
Prophet Muhammad) is divided into three categories:

1. Sayings known to be true based on the Muslim sources

attesting to their authenticity.

2. Sayings known to be false based on the Muslim sources

contradicting them.

3. Uncommented-on sayings, thus they are considered

neither true nor false and so; Muslims neither believe nor
disbelieve in them. Thus, it is permissible to mention these sayings
in particular because most of them are of no religious use in
Islam.17

As for the first category, sayings they are cited in Al-

Bukhari's and Muslim's Books of authentic Sayings, like the Saying
on the man who killed one hundred people, and the Saying on the
leper, the bald and the blind; both are agreed-upon versions.
Moreover, Al-Bukhari dedicated a whole section in his book to
"What Has Been Mentioned about the Children of Israel" 18. Such
versions are truthful, provided they are passed down to Muslims
via authentic narrations.

Here comes the reply to the doubts cast on Ibn 'Abbas' and
his disciples' relying on the narrations taken from the People of the
Scripture. Again and again, they would never rely on versions
contradicting the Qur'an and Sunnah; and in case any version of
the like is attributed to Ibn 'Abbas and his disciples, one has make
sure of its origin, for ill-will people have attributed many sayings to
Ibn 'Abbas, but thanks to those scholars versed in Sayings, their

16
chains of narrators could be well examined to expose their evil
intentions and conspiracies.

17
Replying to the Allegations Regarding the Sources
of Ibn 'Abbas' Linguistics-Based Exegesis

This allegation was also mentioned by Professor Sezgin

relying on the questions aroused by Nafi' Ibn Al-Azraq directed to
Ibn 'Abbas and orientalist sources of people like Lott and
Goldziher. Professor Sezgin argued that the pure linguistic exegesis
of the Holy Qur'an started with Ibn 'Abbas' answers to Nafi' Ibn Al-
Azraq's questions. Professor Sezgin said that it seems that the pure
linguistics-based attempts to interpret the Holy Qur'an started
with Ibn 'Abbas' answers to Nafi' ibn Al-Azraq who was a Kharijite
chief 19.

The reply is: this deduction does not support Professor

Sezgin's argument because the questions referred to here are not
proven to be true, for they have been passed down to Muslims by
At-Tabarani in his ‫المعجم الكبٌر‬ 20 "The Unabridged Dictionary", Ibn
Al-Anbari in his ‫اإلٌضاح فً الوقف واالبتداء‬21 "An Explanation of the
Starts and Pauses of Verses" and As-Seyouti in his ‫اإلتقان فً علوم‬
‫القرآن‬22 "Mastery of Qur’anic Disciplines".

All these sources are so much unreliable; At-Tabarani's

version, transmitted by Juwaibir, is abandoned as in Ibn Hajar's
"Approximation" ‫التقرٌب‬. Also, Al-Anbari's narration was reported
by Muhammad Ibn Zeyad Al-Yashkari who was a liar fabricating
sayings.23 As for As-Seyouti's narration, it was transmitted by 'Eisa
Ibn Da'b whose narrations are unreliable and he was a fabricator of
sayings.24 So, all these sources are false and cannot be taken as
supporting proofs.

18
 Indeed, it is weird that Professor Sezgin agrees with some
orientalists quoting their mistakes and objects to some of their true
views, albeit few, such as the unauthentic questions by Ibn Al-
Azraq, which were deemed unreliable by Goldziher, the Jew!
Professor Sezgin commented on that saying that there are other
reasons that make one disagree with Goldziher on regarding that
issue of questions as a myth. Sezgin went on saying that Ibn
'Abbas, providing proofs from Pre-Islamic poetry, explained the
words, almost two hundred, which Nafi' Ibn Al-Zraq, a Kharijite
chief, inquired about.25

On the same page, Sezgin agrees with orientalists Goldziher,

the Jew, and Lott on some allegations regarding Ibn 'Abbas, may
Allah be pleased with them. Sezgin said that the rest of the quotes
attributed to Ibn 'Abbas sometimes mention a number of
narrators, adding that in these quotes, it is clear that Ibn 'Abbas
cited narrations of Sayings by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and
major Companions, relying, on the other hand, in explaining the
denotations of Arabic words, on a man who lived one half of his life
during the pre-Islamic period and the other half after Islam,
namely Abu Al-Jald Jilan Ibn Farwah who was well learned and
proud of having read old books.

Sezgin also noted that in such texts, the names of two Jews
who were converted to Islam were cited and these were Ka'b Al-
Ahbar ("rabbis") and Abdullah Ibn Salam, given that Ka'b was a
Yemeni Rabbi and Lott described that School of Ibn 'Abbas as
Jewish-colored.

In fact, the above words contain two allegation-related

aspects:

19
 First: He said that Ibn 'Abbas narrated sayings reported by
Abu Al-Jald, then he supported his argument with five specific
narrations from At-Tabari's exegesis. These narrations are listed
hereunder in the same order he mentioned:

At-Tabari said, "Ahmad Ibn Ishaq said that Abu Ahmad Az-
Zubairi said that Bishr Ibn Isma'eel quoted Abu Katheer as
saying, 'I was with Abu Al-Jald when Ibn 'Abbas' messenger came
to him carrying a message to him. He wrote to him: You wrote
asking me about thunder; thunder is wind.' "26

Ahmad Ibn Ishaq Al-Ahwadhi said, "Abu Ahmad Az-Zubairi

said Bishr Ibn Isma'eel quoted Abu Katheer as saying, 'I was with
Abu Al-Jald when Ibn 'Abbas' messenger came to him carrying a
message to him. He wrote to him: You wrote asking me about
lightning; lightning is water.' "27

Ibraheem Ibn Abdullah said, " 'Umran Ibn Maisarah said,

'Ibn Edrees said that Al-Hasan Ibn Al-Furat quoted his father as
saying, 'Ibn 'Abbas wrote to Abu Al-Jald asking him about
lightning. He said, 'lightning is water.' "

Ibn Humaid said, "Jareer Ibn 'Ata' said that a man from
Basra, namely one of their reciters, said, 'Ibn 'Abbas wrote to Abu
Al-Jald, a man from Hajar, asking him about lightning. He wrote
to him: You wrote to me asking me about lightning; it is water.'" 28

Al-Muthanna Ibn Ibraheem said, "Muslim Ibn Ibraheem

said, 'Al-Qasim said, 'A man from Bani Tameem told me that Ibn
'Abbas wrote to Abu Al-Jald asking him about the tree from which
Adam ate and the one he repented at. Abu Al-Jald wrote to him
saying, 'you asked me about the tree which was forbidden to

20
Adam; it is a spike tree, and you asked me about the tree at which
Adam repented; it is an olive tree.' "29

All these narrations are unauthentic; the first two were

reported by Bishr Ibn Isma'eel, given that Ibn Abu Hatim reported
that his father said that Ibn Isma'eel is an unknown narrator 30.
Adh-Dhahabi said the same in his ‫" دٌوان الضعفاء والمتروكٌن‬A Record of
Unauthentic and Unreliable Narrators" and so did Ibn Hajar in his
‫" لسان المٌزان‬The Tongue of Balance" in Ibn Isma'eel's biography.

Regarding the third narration, the chain of narrators

includes Furat Ibn Abi 'Abdur-Rahman Al-Qazzaz who is reliable,
but his narration quoting Ibn 'Abbas has an incomplete chain of
narrators, so it is an unsound chain.

As for the fourth and fifth narrations, they contain

anonymous men. Also, in the first and second narrations, Abu
Katheer is unknown. Sheikh Ahmad Shakir said about that, "This is
a problematic chain of narrators; I did not find the biography of
Bishr Ibn Isma'eel and I did not know who he is. I also did not
know who Abu Katheer, the narrator quoting Abu Al-Jald, is."

This is as far as the chain of narrators is concerned. As for

the content of these sayings, some of them suggest that Ibn
'Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them both, said that thunder
refers to wind. But in an authentic narration, he said that thunder
is one of Allah's angels entrusted with clouds, as reported by Imam
Ahmad31, At-Tirmidhi32, An-Nasa'i33 and Ibn Abu Hatim34 as
transmitted by Bakeer Ibn Shihab who narrated that Sa'eed Ibn
Jubair quoted Ibn 'Abbas as saying, "The Jews came to Allah's
Messenger (PBUH) and said, 'O Abu Al-Qasim! Tell us about the

21
thunder. What is it?‟ He said, „One of Allah's angels who is
entrusted with the clouds. He has in his hand entwined shreds of
fire with which he pushes the clouds and drives them wherever
God wills.‟ They asked, „What is this sound, then, which is heard?‟
He said, „It is his.‟ They said, „You have spoken the truth!‟" The
wording here is of Ibn Abu Hatim who cited this Saying specifying
the part on thunder in this long Saying. At-Tirmidhi said it is a
sound unheard-before Saying, and according to ‫" تحفة األحوذي‬Al
Ahwadhi’s Masterpiece", it is a sound, authentic and unheard-
before Saying.35 Al-Haithami mentioned it attributing it to Ahmad
and At-Tabarani saying, "Their narrators are reliable."36 It was
also authenticated by Ahmad Shakir in his commentary on
Ahmad's ‫" مسند‬A Compilation of Sayings according to Chains of
Narrators"37 and by Al-Albani in ‫ صحٌح سنن الترمذي‬At-Tirmidhi's
"Authentic Book of Sayings"38.

In light of the above, how could an authentic version agree

with an unauthentic one? Did Ibn 'Abbas have an old school of
thought and a new one, like Ash-Shafe'i? No. It is just a question of
authenticity and unauthenticity; Professor Sezgin relied on
unauthentic narrations which do not serve as proofs.

Actually, many narrations have been attributed to Ibn

'Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them both, and they appear as
contradictory, but after thorough examination, one can realize
which is authentic and which is not. To further clarify this point,
consider the following example: Concerning the exegesis of the
verse in which Allah Almighty says, "And when [other] near of kin
and orphans and needy persons are present at the distribution [of
inheritance], give them something thereof for their sustenance,

22
and speak unto them in a kindly way." (The Qur'an, 4:8), there are
two interpretations attributed to Ibn 'Abbas:

The first was reported by Al-Bukhari according to his

authentic chain of narrators quoting Ibn 'Abbas as saying, "It is
definite (i.e. it has a clear single meaning) and not abrogated."39

The second was reported by Ibn Abu Hatim in his "Exegesis"

‫ تفسٌر‬40 and Ibn Al-Jawzi in "Qur'anic Abrogating Verses" ‫نواسخ القرآن‬41
according to their chains of narrators reporting that 'Ata' Al-
Khurasani narrated that Ibn 'Abbas said that it is abrogated. This
version was transmitted by An-Nahhas in his "Qur'anic Abrogating
Verses" ‫ الناسخ والمنسوخ‬as narrated by Humaid Al-A'raj who reported
that Mujahid attributed this Saying to Ibn 'Abbas.42

So, are these two versions contradictory? No way! This is

simply because the first version is mentioned according to an
authentic chain of narrators, while that of the second is unsound as
it includes 'Ata' Al-khurasani who would implicitly refer to a
certain narrator (e.g., referring to him using his title without his
name) with the aim of giving the impression that that narrator is
reliable, though he is not, and he would drop the name of the
Companion who narrated a Saying from the chain of narrators, and
he would fabricate the chain of narrators by putting the name of an
unreliable narrator between two reliable names so as to conceal the
defects of the unreliable one. Besides, he did not meet Ibn 'Abbas
face-to-face. The same applies to An-Nahhas' chain of narrators
that includes Humaid Al-A'raj, so it is unsound. Besides, it was
transmitted by Ibn Mardawaih according to an unsound chain of
narrators.43

23
 Second: Professor Sezgin quoted the Jewish Orientalist,
Goldziher, as saying that also in these texts which he had referred
to earlier, there are the names of two Jewish men who converted to
Islam, namely Ka'b Al-Ahbar and Abdullah Ibn Salam.44

Sezgin talked about "these texts" without specifying them.

Perhaps, he meant those texts which he referred to and which I
mentioned earlier quoting At-Tabari. If not, then Sezgin should
have specified these texts for me to confound them clarifying their
falsities or explaining their implications.

Sezgin also quoted Orientalist Lott as saying that they i.e.

Ka'ab Al-Ahbar and Abdullah Ibn Salam, constitute a Jewish-
colored school of thought belonging to Ibn 'Abbas.

The reply to those propagating such views and their followers

is: their arguments are totally unfounded because that is not a
Jewish colored school in the first place! If so, where are the texts
and narrations that belong to it?! Even if Ibn 'Abbas quoted Ka'b
Ibn Malik and Abdullah Ibn Salam, according to those claims,
would such a school belong to Ibn 'Abbas?! How come, if he was
the one who is said to have quoted them?! Supposing that they
came across some texts by these two narrators, this would not
make it a Jewish school of thought, simply because these two had
already embraced Islam. As for their reporting of narrations about
the people of the Scripture, this point was discussed in detail
earlier on handling similar allegations.

As a matter of fact, the Judeo-Christian texts Sezgin

imported from those orientalists do distort the exegesis based on
the texts transmitted by those men who are attacked through such

24
allegations. Verily, the distortion of that text-based exegesis and
casting doubts on its authorities is but a distortion of Islamic
exegesis as a whole, for traditional text-based exegesis is the corner
stone of, and a prerequisite for, the science of Qur'anic exegesis. In
fact, the former complements the latter by identifying the reasons
for verses revelation, the verses revealed in Mecca and those
revealed in Medina, pauses and starts of verses, Qur'anic rulings,
abrogating and abrogated verses, beside highlighting the verses
which are controversially-interpreted, specific and non-specific,
general and detailed, or restricted and unrestricted as well as
lections and uncommon Qur'anic lexis, as well as the merits of
Qur'anic verses and Chapters. All these disciplines emanate from
that traditional text-based exegesis which is an indispensable pillar
of the science of exegesis as a whole.

25
 References

- ‫الصحابة‬ ‫تمٌٌز‬ ً‫ف‬ ‫اإلصابة‬ by Ibn Hajar Al-'Asqalani,

authenticated by Ali Muhammad Al-Bajawi, An-Nahdah
Publishers, Egypt, Cairo.

- ً‫ تارٌخ التراث العرب‬by Fuat Sezgin, Al-Imam Muhammad Ibn

Saud Islamic University, 2nd edition, 1402 A.H., Riyadh.
- ‫ تحفة األحوذي بشرح سنن الترمذي‬by Al-Mubarkafuri, Dar Al-Kotob
Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut.
- ‫ تفسٌر القرآن العظٌم‬by Ibn Katheer, Al-Sha'b edition, Cairo.
- ‫ الجامع ألحكام القرآن‬by Al-Qortubi, Dar Ehya' At-Turath Al-
Arabi edition, Beirut.
- ‫ جامع البٌان فً تأوٌل آي القرآن‬by Ibn Jareer At-Tabari,
authenticated by Mahmud Shakir and Ahmad Shakir, 2nd
edition, Dar Al-Maarif Publishers, Cairo.
- ‫ سنن الترمذي‬authenticated by Ahmad Muhammad Shakir,
Lebanon, Dar Ehya' At-Turath Al-Arabi.
- ‫ سٌر أعالم النبالء‬by Adh-Dhahabi, authenticated by a group of
authenticators, Resalah Foundation.
- ‫ صحٌح مسلم‬by Imam Muslim Ibn Al-Hajjaj Al-Qushairi An-
Nisaburi, authenticated by Dr. Muhammad Fu'ad 'Abdul-
Baqi, Dar Ehya' At-Turath Al-Arabi, Beirut, Lebanon.
- ‫ الطبقات الكبرى‬by Ibn Sa'd, Dar Sader Publishers, Beirut.
- ‫ فتح الباري بشرح صحٌح البخاري‬by Ibn Hajar Al-'Asqalani, Dar
Al-Fikr edition, Beirut, a photocopy of the Egyptian Salafi
edition.
- ‫ لسان المٌزان‬by Ibn Hajar Al-'Asqalani, India.

26
- ‫ مجمع الزوائد ومنبع الفوائد‬by Al-Haithami, Dar Al-Kutub
Printing Press, Beirut, 2nd edition, 1967 A.D.
- ‫ المستدرك على الصحٌحٌن‬by Al-Hafez Al-Hakim, Summary
attached, by Al-Hafez Adh-Dhahabi, a photocopy of the
Indian edition.
- ‫ مسند اإلمام أحمد بن حنبل‬authenticated by Shu'aib Al-Arna'ut
and a group of scholars, supervised by Professor Abdullah
Bin 'Abdul-Mohsen At-Turki, Resalah Foundation, Beirut,
1st edition, 1421 A.H.
- ‫ المعجم الصغٌر‬by At-Tabarani, authenticated by 'Abdur-
Rahman Muhammad 'Uthman, Dar Al-Nasr Printing
Press, Cairo, 1388 A.H.
- ‫ مقدمة فً أصول التفسٌر‬by Sheikh of Islam Ibn Taymeyah,
published by Dar Al-Hayat Book Shop, Beirut, 1980 A.D.
- Al-Faisal Magazine, volume 25.

27
 End Notes

1. ً‫ اتجاهات التفسٌر القرآن‬quoted from ً‫تارٌخ التراث العرب‬, 1/60.

2. ‫ باب ما جاء فً فضل القرآن‬،‫ كتاب فضائل القرآن‬،‫سنن الترمذي‬, 5/172, Saying
2906, and Abu Nu'aym in ‫الحلٌة‬, 2/380.

3. ‫ ما جاء فً مثل هللا‬:‫ باب‬،‫ كتاب األمثال عن رسول هللا صلى هللا علٌه وسلم‬،‫سنن الترمذي‬
،‫ لعباده‬5/144, Saying 2859.

4. ‫مقدمة فً أصول التفسٌر‬, PP 11-20.

5. Transmitted by Ibn Sa'd and Ad-Daremi according to the same

narration of 'Ubaidullah Ibn Abi Yazeed, ‫ الطبقات الكبرى‬2/366, and
authenticated by Ibn Hajar in ‫ اإلصابة فً تمٌٌز الصحابة‬4/149.

6. Cited by Adh-Dhahabi through Yazeed Ibn Ibraheem through

Sulaiman Al-Ahwal through Tawous through Ibn 'Abbas, then he
Adh-Dhahabi said, "Its chain of narrators is authentic". ‫سٌر أعالم‬
‫النبالء‬, 3/344.

7. ‫ فضائل القرآن‬827, transmitted by At-Tabari according to the same

narration of Muhammad Ibn Ja'far, ‫ التفسٌر‬9013.

8. ‫ مقدمة فً أصول التفسٌر‬p 48.

9. "Sarf" ("Excahnge" in Arabic) implies exchanging gold for silver

and vice versa on two conditions: the prohibition of Nasee'ah in
cases of similar and different items; which is agreed upon by
scholars, and the prohibition of favoring one item over the other
which is the view of the majority of scholars. ‫ فتح الباري‬4/382.

10. ‫ باب بٌع الدٌنار بالدٌنارنساء‬-‫ البٌوع‬-‫ الصحٌح‬2178-2179.

28
11. ‫ المستدرك‬3/452.

12. ‫ باب بٌع الطعام مثال بمثل‬-‫ كتاب المساقاة‬-‫ صحٌح مسلم‬No.100.

13. ‫ الجامع ألحكام القرآن‬1/39.

14. ‫ تارٌخ دمشق ترجمة ابن مسعود‬pp 93-94, and ‫ سٌر أعالم النبالء‬1/490.

15. Transmitted by At-Tabari according to his chain of narrators

through Ibn Mas'oud and authenticated by Sheikh of Islam Ibn
Taymeyah, ‫ مقدمة فً أصول التفسٌر‬P 40.

16. Transmitted by Ahmad, Al-Fasawi and At-Tabarani according

to chains of narrators attributed to Ibn 'Abbas, and authenticated
by Ahmad Shakir. Al-Haithami said, "Ahmad has two chains of
narrators who narrated authentic Sayings." ‫ المسند‬3033, ‫المعرفة‬
‫ والتارٌخ‬1/494, ‫ المعجم الصغٌر‬1/197, and ‫ مجمع الزوائد‬9/276, and
transmitted by Al-Bukhari and Muslim with the same meaning,
‫ صحٌح البخاري‬7270, and ‫ صحٌح مسلم‬2477.

17. ‫ مقدمة فً أصول التفسٌر‬P42.

18. ‫ باب ما ذكر عن بنً إسرائٌل‬،‫ كتاب أحادٌث األنبٌاء‬- ‫ صحٌح البخاري‬No. 3277.

19. ً‫ تارٌخ التراث العرب‬1/61.

20. 10/304-312.

21. PP 76-98.

22.1/158-175.

23. ‫ لسان المٌزان‬3/555.

24.‫ لسان المٌزان‬4/408.

25. ً‫ تارٌخ التراث العرب‬1/65.

29
‫‪ 1/342, and 343, No. 437 and 443.‬تفسٌر الطبري ‪26.‬‬

‫‪27. Ibid.‬‬

‫‪ 1/343, 344, and 517, No. 444, 445 and 723, and Ibid.‬تفسٌر الطبري ‪28.‬‬

‫‪ 1/343, 344, and 517, No. 444, 445 and 723, and Ibid.‬تفسٌر الطبري ‪29.‬‬

‫‪ 2/352.‬الجرح والتعدٌل ‪30.‬‬

‫‪ No. 2483.‬المسند ‪31.‬‬

‫‪ No. 3117.‬السنن‪ -‬تفسٌر سورة الرعد ‪32.‬‬

‫‪ 4/394.‬تحفة األشراف ‪ as in‬السنن الكبرى ‪33.‬‬

‫‪ No. 186.‬التفسٌر ‪34.‬‬

‫‪ 8/542-544.‬تحفة األحوذي ‪35.‬‬

‫‪ 8/242.‬مجمع الزوائد ‪36.‬‬

‫‪ No. 2483.‬المسند ‪37.‬‬

‫‪38. No. 2492.‬‬

‫الصحٌح‪ -‬كتاب التفسٌر‪ -‬سورة النساء‪ -‬باب "وإذا حضر القسمة أولو القربى والٌتامى ‪39.‬‬
‫‪, No. 4576.‬والمساكٌن"‬

‫‪, No. 3366.‬تفسٌر القرآن العظٌم‪ -‬سورة النساء ‪40.‬‬

‫‪41. P 255.‬‬

‫‪42. P 95.‬‬

‫‪ 8/242.‬فتح الباري ‪43.‬‬

‫‪ 1/65.‬تارٌخ التراث العربً ‪44.‬‬

‫‪30‬‬
 Contents

Subject Page
Introduction 1
Highlights of the Allegation 3
Replying to the Allegation 4

Types of Isra'iliyat 15
Replying to the Allegations 18
Regarding the Sources of Ibn
'Abbas' Linguistics-Based
Exegesis

Aspects of Allegations 19
Regarding Quoting Ibn 'Abbas
First Aspect 20
Second Aspect 24
References 26
End Notes 28

31