Saheeh Seerah Al Albaanee English

Chapter 35: Mentioning of `Umar’s conversion to Islaam
Ibn Is-ḥaaq said: When `Amr Ibn al-`Aaṣ and `Abdullaah Ibn Abu Rabee`ah returned to
Quraish, having failed to achieve their aim, i.e. bringing back the Companions of the
Messenger of Allaah ‏,ﷺ and having been rudely rejected by al-Najaashee, (it was
during this period) that `Umar Ibn al-Khaṭṭaab رضيُاهللُعنه accepted Islaam. He was a man
known for his determination and fearless nature, capable of defending his supporters.
The Companions of the Messenger of Allaah ﷺ had protection through him and
through Hamza, so that they could stand up to Quraish.
`Abdullaah Ibn Mas`ood رضيُاهللُعنه used to say: “We were unable to pray at the Ka`bah
until `Umar accepted Islaam. When he accepted Islaam, `Umar fought the Quraish until
he was able to pray at the Ka`bah, and we prayed with him.” 259
I (Ibn Katheer) say: It has been established in Ṣaḥeeḥ al-Bukhaaree that Ibn Mas`ood
Islaam.” 260 said: “We have been powerful since (the day) `Umar accepted رضيُاهللُعنه
Ziyaad al-Bakkaa’ee said: Mis`ar Ibn Kidaam informed me, from Sa`d Ibn Ibraaheem,
who said: Ibn Mas`ood رضيُاهللُعنه narrated: “`Umar’s conversion to Islaam was a (source
of) victory (for the Muslims), his migration (to al-Madeenah) was a (source of) help (for
them), and his reign was a (source of) mercy. We could not pray at the Ka`bah until
`Umar accepted Islaam, and when he did, he fought the Quraish until he was able to
pray at the Ka`bah, and we prayed with him.” 261
259 This was reported by Ibn Sa`d in “al-Ṭabaqaat al-Kubraa” (3/270) with a “Ṣaḥeeḥ” chain; and it is also
supported by the next narration.
260 Ṣaḥeeḥ al-Bukhaaree (3684, 3863). It was also reported by al-Ḥaakim in “al-Mustadrak” (4490) and he
wrongfully claimed that it was not reported in the Ṣaḥeeḥain.
261 (Shaikh al-Albaanee said): This is a more complete statement of Ibn Is-ḥaaq than the previous, and it is also
mentioned in “al-Seerah” of Ibn Hishaam (1/342) and its chain is “Ḥasan”, except for the disconnection between
Sa`d (Ibn Ibraaheem) and Ibn Mas`ood. Ibn Sa`d also reported with this wording in “al-Ṭabaqaat al-Kubraa”
(3/270), but in place of Sa`d he mentioned al-Qaasim Ibn `Abdul Ramḥaan (as a sub-narrator). But al-Ḥaakim
mentioned this in his “al-Mustadrak” (4487) with a connected chain, from the route of `Aaṣim Ibn `Alee, that al-
Mas`oodee narrated, from al-Qaasim Ibn `Abdul Ramḥaan, from his father, from `Abdullaah (Ibn Mas`ood). But al-
Ḥaakim only reported the second part of the narration, and said: “Its chain is “Ṣaḥeeḥ””, and al-Dhahabee agreed
with him.
Ilm4all.blogspot Page 189