Fawāids |Qur'ān | Authentic Sunnah

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Abū ʿUbaydah (ibn Abdullāh ibn Mas’ūd) narrated: ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd said: “Hasten to the Jumuʿah prayers, for indeed Allāh — The Mighty and Majestic — reveals Himself to the people of Paradise every Jumuʿah upon a dune of white camphor, and they are [positioned] near to Him in accordance with their hastening to Jumuʿah.

He then bestows upon them a [new] honour the like of which they had never seen before, then they return to their families while Allāh has bestowed [something new] for them.”

And ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd set out intending the mosque on the day of Jumuʿah, and behold — two men had preceded him to the mosque.

So ʿAbdullāh said: “Two men, and I am the third — if Allāh wills, there is blessing in the third.”

‘Abdul-Qādir b. Mahmūd b. Abdul-Qādir al-Arnā’ūt said: “(Collected by) Al-Sunnah of ʿAbdullāh ibn Ahmad (460); Ibn Khuzaymah in al-Tawhīd (2/193); al-Tabarānī in al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr (9169); Ibn Abī ʿĀsim in al-Sunnah (620); and its isnād is jayyid.

Abū ʿUbaydah is the son of ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd. Even though he did not hear directly from his father, his narrations from him are treated as connected [muttasil], because he was among the most knowledgeable of people regarding his father’s narrations — having received them from the members of his household and the senior companions of his father, Ibn Masʿūd…

Yaʿqūb ibn Shaybah said: “Our colleagues only permitted the inclusion of Abū ʿUbaydah’s narrations from his father in the musnad — meaning in the category of connected narration — on account of Abū ʿUbaydah’s knowledge of his father’s narrations and the soundness thereof, and because he never transmitted anything objectionable therein.”

ʿAlī ibn al-Madīnī said — regarding a narration that Abū ʿUbaydah transmits from his father —: “It is disconnected [munqatiʿ], yet it is a established [thābit] narration.”

Al-Nasāʾī said: “Abū ʿUbaydah did not hear from his father, yet the narration is good [jayyid].”

Al-Tahāwī said: “If someone were to say: ‘The earlier reports are more authoritative than this one, because they are connected whereas this one is disconnected — since Abū ʿUbaydah did not hear anything from his father’ — it would be said to him: It is not on this basis that we have relied upon the statement of Abū ʿUbaydah. We have relied upon it because someone of his standing — given his precedence in knowledge, his proximity to ʿAbdullāh, and his close association with ʿAbdullāh’s inner circle after him — would not be unaware of something of this nature concerning his father’s affairs. We have therefore taken his statement as evidence.”

Al-Dāraqutnī said: “[The chain of] Abū ʿUbaydah from ʿAbdullāh is authentic [Sahīh].”

Ibn Taymiyyah said: “It is said that Abū ʿUbaydah did not hear from his father; however, he was knowledgeable of his father’s affairs and received his narrations from the senior companions of his father. This was a recurring practice of ʿAbdullāh’s, and as such it would have been well-known among his companions — making it widely transmitted. Nor were there among ʿAbdullāh’s companions any who were suspected of unreliability, such that one might fear that such a person served as the intermediary. For this reason, scholars have continued to rely upon the narrations of [ʿAbdullāh’s] son from him, even if it is said that he did not hear directly from his father.”

Ibn Rajab said: “Abū ʿUbaydah did not hear from his father, but his narrations from him are authentic.”

Ibn Taymiyyah said: “What Ibn Masʿūd has reported here is a matter that none could know except a prophet or one who received it from a prophet.

It is therefore known by this that Ibn Masʿūd received it from the Prophet (ﷺ), and it is not permissible that he could have received it from the People of the Book, for several reasons:

The first: The Companions were prohibited from affirming the People of the Book in what they reported to them.

It is therefore inconceivable that Ibn Masʿūd would narrate — as [something received from] what the Jews relayed — [something] by way of instruction and then build a ruling upon it.

The second: Ibn Masʿūd in particular was among the most vehement of the Companions in his rejection of those who took from the narrations of the People of the Book.

The third: Jumuʿah was only legislated for us, and coming early to it exists only in our law. It is therefore remote that something like this could have been taken from the earlier prophets, and it is equally remote that a Jew would narrate such a virtue for this ummah — given that they are [the very people] described by concealing knowledge, withholding it, and envying this ummah.”

(Yawm al-Jumu’ah pg. 86 – 88)