Imaduddin Ibne Kathir
Ibne Kathir Damishqi in Al-Bidaya wan Nihaya1 has based his statement on
the same premise, on which persons before him had raised and omitted the
negative incident and made some spurious additions. When he says:
Abu Zar condemned the rich for having hoarded wealth and restrained them
from gathering wealth that was necessary and he thought that excess amount
should be given away in alms and interpreted the verse of:
وَٱلَّذِينَ يَكْنِزُونَ ٱلذَّهَبَ وَٱلْفِضَّةَ وَلَا يُنفِقُونَهَا فِى سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ فَبَشِّرْهُم بِعَذَابٍ أَلِيمٍۢ (٣٤)
“And (as for) those who hoard up gold and silver and do not
spend it in Allah’s way, announce to them a painful
chastisement,”2
Muawiyah forbid him from propagating this belief, but he did not desist.
And he did not give up his beliefs and statements. So he sent someone to Uthman
and complained about him. Uthman wrote to Abu Zar to come to Medina and he
went there. Uthman scolded him for his acts and told him to desist and repent.
But he didn’t desist.
So he ordered him to go and settle down in Rabdha, which was to the east of
Medina. And it is said that he himself asked Uthman to be allowed to settle over
there. Indeed, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) told me that: When Medina
expands upto Sala, you leave Medina and at that time the city had expanded to
that extent. So Uthman permitted him to go and settle down in Rabdha. And he
ordered him to come to Medina now and then and renew his pledge so that he
may not revert back to the circle of disbelief.3 And he did that and settled in
Rabdha till he died.
When he mentions the passing away of Abu Zar, he writes:4
“Numerous traditions are mentioned regarding his excellence. The most
famous of them being what Amash has narrated from Abu Yaqzan, Uthman bin
Umair from Abu Harb bin Aswad from Abdullah bin Amr that the Messenger of
Allah (s.a.w.a.) said: The heavens have not shaded and the earth has not carried
anyone more truthful than Abu Zar. And this report is weak…”
This is from same falsehood, which Ibne Kathir has in his vessel at this point
and in that there are some doubts: “Accusing Abu Zar that he flayed the rich for
gathering wealth…”
Since ages, this viewpoint is falsely attributed to this great companion; and
during recent period they have distorted it further and attributed socialism to him.
We will discuss this in detail under the discussion of that statement.
2. Ibne Kathir regards settling down of Abu Zar in Shaam and going to
Rabdha as per his own choice, after he hints that Uthman ordered him to settle in
Rabdha. As for the tradition of Rabdha: we have a little before this informed you
that Abu Zar was banished over there; and was expelled from Medina of Holy
Prophet (s.a.w.a.) in a bad manner.
And those encounters took place between Ali (a.s.) and Marwan and
Uthman and between Uthman and Ammar and Uthman admitted having exiled
Abu Zar. And Ali Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) argued against him regarding this
issue. And some have also heard from the truthful Abu Zar, the tradition that
Uthman forced him to a life of desert dweller after his acceptance of Islam. And
this was the demand of Prophet’s informing Abu Zar that very soon he would be
expelled from Medina and driven out of Mecca and Shaam.
As for the report of Shaam: It was mentioned that at last he would be exiled
and this was not at his discretion.
3. As for the tradition of reaching of buildings till the Salaa; it is a
fabrication and it is falsely attributed to Umme Zar. This tradition is mentioned in
Mustadrak Hakim.5
And as was mentioned before, Balazari has mentioned it.
And as is mentioned in the tradition of Tabari, he has taken this tradition as the
reason of going away of Abu Zar to Shaam and not the cause of going away to Rabdha.
In addition to that Ibne Kathir has taken this tradition from Tarikh Tabari
and most of what he has written is the summary of points mentioned in Tarikh
Tabari, although he had distorted them in any way he liked as was mentioned
previously. The narrators of this report in Tarikh Tabari are either fabricators and
liars are unknown, or accused of heresy or infidelity and they are as follows: 1.
Sirri 2. Shuaib 3. Saif 4. Atiyya 5. Yazid Faqasi.
If one of these individuals is present in a chain of reporters of a tradition, it
is not paid attention to. [what to say when all of them are present] and supposing
this tradition is reliable, it does not stand scrutiny before authentic traditions
opposed to it and which prove that Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) informed that
Abu Zar would be expelled from Mecca, Medina and Shaam? And this authentic
report mentioned in words of Abu Zar, Uthman and others regarding expulsion of
Abu Zar at the behest of Uthman is strengthened.
Add to them excuses and weak arguments of Ahle Sunnat, have mention in
justification of this vile crime of Uthman [and these same justifications and
excuses is best evidence that banishment of Abu Zar was upon orders of Uthman
and not through his own choice].
4. As for what he has mentioned that Uthman ordered Abu Zar to visit
Medina now and then so that he may not get converted into Bedouin and an
ignorant infidel; this is fabricated like tradition of Salaa. Through channels of
Balazari, it is narrated through authentic chains that Abu Zar said: Uthman made
me a desert dweller after migration (Hijrat). In addition to that some have
narrated that Abu Zar during period of his banishment in 30 A.H. till his passing
away in 32 A.H. should have come to Medina to fulfill the orders of Uthman.
5. As for what he said: Numerous traditions have come down regarding
excellence of Abu Zar, most famous of them being…
Indeed, the habit of Ibne Kathir in mention of excellence is that whenever he
writes the history of one with whom he is inclined that is Umayyads and
dishonest people, he spreads many statements and mentions useless weak and
fabricated traditions without providing chains of narrators or saying anything
contradicting them, even though he may fabricate pages of history.
But when it is the turn of stating the excellence of Ahle Bayt (a.s.) or Shia or
their followers and senior personalities of Ummah, like Abu Zar, the earth
becomes narrow for him inspite of its wideness, and he hesitates, as if he has
become dumb or that his ears have become deaf from listening to these merits. If
he is compelled to mention something from these merits, he does so a in brief and
off hand manner.
In this case also, he followed the same style and regards the most famous of
excellence of Abu Zar as weak, whereas he knows that the channel of this report
relied on channel of Ibne Amr from whom Ibne Saad, Tirmidhi, Ibne Majah and
Hakim have narrated and he himself has mentioned. It is also narrated by Ali Ameerul Momineen (a.s.), Abu Zar, Abu Darda, Jabir bin Abdullah, Abdullah
bin Umar and Abu Huraira. Tirmidhi in his Sahih, has regarded some of its
channels good.6
لَّقَدْ كُنتَ فِى غَفْلَةٍۢ مِّنْ هَـٰذَا فَكَشَفْنَا عَنكَ غِطَآءَكَ فَبَصَرُكَ ٱلْيَوْمَ حَدِيدٌۭ (٢٢)
“Certainly you were heedless of it, but now We have removed
from you your veil, so your sight today is sharp.”7