Introduction

المقدمة

In the Name of Allah, the Merciful, the Beneficent - All praise is due to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and the [praiseworthy] end is for those who fear Him; and may Allah send blessings upon Muhammad, seal of the Prophets, and upon all the Prophets and Messengers.

As for what follows:

Indeed you mentioned, may Allah have mercy on you, by the guidance of your Creator, that you were interested in an examination of what is known of all the transmitted reports on authority of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings upon him, regarding traditions of the Dīn, its rulings, and everything from it regarding rewards, punishments, motivations, admonishments, and other descriptive topics through chains of narration which were related by and circulated between Ahl ul-Ilm.

Thus you wished, may Allah guide you aright, to be informed about all of [the transmitted reports] in the form of a calculated composition and you asked me to abridge [it] for you in writing without a great amount of repetition. You allege that [much repetition] would distract you from what you intended in terms of understanding and deriving rulings from [the reports].

And because of that which you have asked, may Allah be generous with you, when I am attributed to its successful management and whatever condition can be construed by it, if Allah wills, (it will lead to) a praiseworthy ending and obtainable benefit.

I thought at the time you asked me to undertake that [task]- if it was determined for me to do so, and preordained for me to complete it- that the first to benefit from that would be me specifically before anyone else and this is due to a great number of reasons which are too lengthy to describe except [to say] that in summary, having precision regarding a select few [narrations], and accuracy in them, is easier for a person than to undertake of a great number of them, and especially for one who is indistinguishable in it from the common people [in this matter] unless someone else informs him of the distinction.

If the matter is just as we described, then focusing on the few authentic narrations is worthier for them than seeking an abundance of weak narrations. Although indeed it is hoped for that some benefit is attained by seeking after a large number [of Ḥadīth] of this type, and gathering the repetitions for them, but only for the elite who are endowed with some awareness and knowledge in their means [of ascertaining authenticity] and defects.

Thus that, if Allah wills, will happen through whatever will be brought to bear of that [awareness, distinction, knowledge of the means, and defects] on the advantage in seeking large numbers of [the various categories of Ḥadīth]. And as for the common people who are different from the elite in terms of awareness and knowledge, then it is senseless for them to seek large numbers [of various categories of Ḥadīth], while they are unaware of the few [Sahīh].

Then we, if Allah wills, will begin to extract and compose what you have asked upon conditions which we shall mention to you. We set ourselves upon the entirety of what is transmitted from the reports on authority of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings upon him. Then we divided it up into three sections and three levels of people without repetition except:

1) When coming to a point where it was essential to repeat a narration in which there is an addition that clarifies the meaning of the first one; or

2) When there is a second chain that supports the first one in some hidden defect present since the additional significance in the second Ḥadīth assumes the position of a complete Ḥadīth.

Repeating narrations which have the kind of ‘addition’ we described is inevitable [since it eliminates the perceived hidden defect of the first narration]; or that significance [of the addition] is separated from the entire narration by abbreviating it when it is possible [to understand the significance from a small part of the narration], however separating the relevant part of the narration from the rest might make it difficult to understand the link between them, so repeating it in its original form when that proves difficult is safest.

Thus when we find that it is avoidable to repeat the narrations in their entirety we take care not to do so, if Allah wills.

As for the first category, we aspired to advance the report which is safer from defects than any others, and is purified due to being related by people of integrity in Ḥadīth, and certitude for what they relate; there are no strong disputes found [compared to the reports of other Thiqāt] regarding their transmissions, and no excessive inconsistencies [in their own reports] - just as is the case regarding a great number of Muhaddithīn and which appears in their narrations.

Thus when we examined reports of this description from the people, we also came across reports in whose chains there fell some of those who are not described with memorization and precision, like those of the previous description before them. Although they fell below what we described [from the first group], they still have the designation of protection [from ill-repute] and truthfulness; and they acquired knowledge, included among them are the likes of Atā’ bin is-Sā’ib, and Yazīd bin Abī Ziyād, and Layth bin Abī Sulaym, from among the carriers of Āthār and the relaters of Akhbār.

So even though they possessed what we described of knowledge, protection and being known as scholars among Ahl ul-Ilm, their contemporaries who we mentioned as precise and sound in transmission were above them in status and rank because this [the first category] is a high rank and sublime characteristic according to Ahl ul-Ilm.

Do you not see that when you weigh these three people we mentioned- Atā’, Yazīd, and Layth- with Mansūr bin il-Mu’tamir, Sulaymān al-A’mash and Ismā’īl bin Abī Khālid in regards to precision in Ḥadīth and soundness in it, you will find them distinct from others and not near them [in rank?]- there is no doubt regarding that among the people knowledgeable in Ḥadīth since the soundness of the memorization of Mansūr, al-A’mash, and Ismā’īl, and their precision in Ḥadīth was well-known among [the people knowledgeable in Ḥadīth] and they were not aware of examples of that from Atā’, Yazīd, and Layth.

Upon the same course as the above, when you weigh between the two levels like Ibn Awn and Ayyūb as-Sakhtiyānī with Awf ibn Abī Jamīlah and Ash’ath al-Humrānī- and all 4 are companions of al-Hasan and Ibn Sīrīn- there is disparity between the two groups. Between these two groups is a distance in terms of perfection of virtue and soundness of reporting even though Awf and Ash’ath are not repelled from [the status] of truthfulness and honesty according to Ahl ul-Ilm, rather the situation is as we described regarding their position.

We only mentioned these examples by way of naming them specifically so that their examples might be an indication for whoever is ignorant of the path to return to understanding of Ahl ul-Ilm regarding the ranking of its people. Thus there is no shortchanging the men of elevated rank any amount of what is due his level, and there is no elevation of those who are lower any amount of knowledge above his position- and each who possesses the right is given his right and is settled in his rank.

It has been mentioned on authority of Ā’ishah, may Allah be pleased with her, that she said: ‘The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah upon him, ordered us to afford people their (rightful) positions according to what the Qur’ān states: {And above all who possess knowledge is another who is knowledgeable}[Yūsuf: 76] . Thus based on the example of what we mentioned [regarding the narrators of Hifẓ and Itqān, and narrations which lack excessive inconsistency or strong contradiction], we compiled what you asked for of [those kind] of reports on authority of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah upon him.

As for anything of that wherein the people were charged [with some criticism] by the people of Ḥadīth, or by the majority of [the people of Ḥadīth], then we did not preoccupy ourselves with bringing forward their narrations, such as Abd Allah ibn Miswar Abī Ja’far il-Madā’inī, Amr bin Khālid, Abd il-Quddūs ash-Shāmī, Muhammad ibn Sa’īd il-Maslūb, Ghiyāth ibn Ibrāhīm, Sulaymān bin Amr Abī Dāwud an-Nakha’ī, and those like them whereof they were accused of fabricating narrations and manufacturing reports; and like that are those whose narrations are dominated with Munkar, or mistakes- we withheld from their narrations as well.

An indication of Munkar in the narration of a Muhaddith is when his transmission differs with the transmission of a Muhaddith from the people of memorization and acceptance, or does not agree with it when the two are compared. When the majority of a person’s narrations are like that, he is abandoned [Mahjūr] in Ḥadīth, and not accepted in it, and his narrations are not acted upon. The following are those Muhaddithīn who are among this group: Abd Allah ibn Muharrar, Yahyā bin Abī Unaysah, Al-Jarrāh bin ul-Minhāl Abūl-Atūf, Abbād bin Kathīr, Husayn bin Abd Illah ibn Ḍumayrah, Umar bin Suhbān, and those of the same type in terms of transmission of Munkar Ḥadīth. We did not pause upon their narrations or preoccupy ourselves with them due to the ruling of Ahl ul-Ilm.

That which we are aware of from their school of thought in accepting what is singularly reported by a Muhaddith from the narrations is that (the Muhaddith) took part along with the trustworthy narrators from Ahl ul-Ilm wal-Hifẓ in transmitting some of what they transmitted, and [the Muhaddith] is predominantly in agreement with them; when one is found like that, then if he adds to [the transmission] anything not found with his companions, then his addition is accepted.

As for those who you see resorting to the likes of az-Zuhrī due to his greatness, and due to the great number of his companions being among the precise Huffāẓ, [resorting to] his Ḥadīth and the Ḥadīth of those like him, or to the likes of Hishām ibn Urwah, then their Ḥadīth are extensively shared among Ahl ul-Ilm. The greater majority of their companions related their Ḥadīth in agreement with one another [with few having contradictions]. Thus to transmit from [Urwah and az-Zuhrī], or one of them, from among the multitude of Ḥadīth, what is not known among any of their companions, and [the Rāwī] is not of those who share in the Sahīh narrations [found] among them, then it is not allowed to accept the narrations of this category of people, and Allah knows best.

We have explained from the school of Ḥadīth and its people some of what those who wish to traverse the path of [the Muhaddithīn] should aim for, and be guided towards. We will, if Allah wills, add to the explanation and clarification in another place in this book upon the mention of defective reports [Mu’allalah] when we come to it, in the places where explanation and clarification are appropriate, if Allah wills.

And what follows:

May Allah have mercy on you, if not for that which we saw of an evil act, largely from those who claim to be Muhaddithīn, in what they were supposed to adhere to when putting forward weak narrations and abominable transmissions and their neglect for the investigation of famous Sahīh narrations related by the trustworthy narrators, well-known for their truthfulness and honesty, after knowledge of them and affirmation with their tongues, that a great many of [weak and abominable narrations] which were cast towards heedless people are denounced and spoken of as not acceptable whereof the A’immah of the people of Ḥadīth criticized their transmissions- A’immah like Mālik ibn Anas, Shu’bat bin al-Hajjāj, Sufyān bin Uyaynah, Yahyā bin Sa’īd al-Qattān, Abd ir-Rahman ibn Mahdī, and other A’immah- then the establishment of what you asked for of distinction [between the types of Ḥadīth] and collection [of those which were Sahīh] would be easy for us. However on account of what we informed you of regarding the people’s circulation of abominable reports with weak, unknown chains, and their casting them towards the common people who are not aware of their defects, responding to what you asked became lighter upon our hearts.

Chapter 4: The Weak Narrators, Liars, and Those Whose Hadith are Avoided

Muhammad bin Rāfi’ narrated to me, Abd ur-Razzāq narrated to us, Ma’mar informed us, on authority of Ibn Tāwus, on authority of his father, on authority of Ibn Abbās, he said

‘Indeed we would take Ḥadīth and they would be taken on authority of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah upon him. However if you take every difficult and docile [narration] then how far that is [from being upright]!

Abū Ayyūb Sulaymān bin Ubayd Allah al-Ghaylānī narrated to us, Abū Āmir, meaning al-Aqadī, narrated to us, Rabāh narrated to us, on authority of Qays bin Sa’d, on authority of Mujāhid, he said Bushayr ul-Adawī came to Ibn Abbās then he set about narrating to him, saying

‘The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah upon him, said…’, ‘the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah upon him, said…’. Then it seemed that Ibn Abbās was not listening to his Ḥadīth and not reflecting on them, so [Bushayr] said: ‘Oh Ibn Abbās, why is it that I see you not listening to my Ḥadīth? I narrate to you on authority of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah upon him, however you are not listening’. Ibn Abbās said: ‘Indeed once upon a time we would listen to a man saying, ‘the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah upon him, said…’ rushing towards him with our eyes and harkening towards him with our ears; then when the people took the difficult and the docile we no longer took from people except those whom we knew’.

Dāwud bin Amr aḍ-Ḍabbī narrated to us, Nāfi’ bin Umar narrated to us, on authority of Ibn Abī Mulaykah, he said

‘I wrote to Ibn Abbās asking him to write something [pertaining to knowledge] for me and he withheld from me quite a bit, and said: ‘As [if he were] a sincere child, I will write for him something especially suited to his status withholding from him what would not benefit him’. [Ibn Abī Mulaykah] said: ‘So [Ibn Abbās] called for the judgment of Alī [bin Abī Tālib which was a book with which Alī would pass verdicts in Kuffah], and he began to write from it [with respect to the request of Ibn Abī Mulaykah] and he came upon something [not appropriate to the station of Alī regarding the science of verdicts]. So [Ibn Abbās] said: ‘By Allah, Alī did not give judgment according to this unless he was astray’.’

Amr an-Nāqid narrated to us, Sufyān bin Uyaynah narrated to us, on authority of Hishām bin Hujayr, on authority of Tāwus, he said

‘A book was brought to Ibn Abbās which contained the verdicts of Alī, may Allah be pleased with him, and he effaced but a small amount,’ and Sufyān bin Uyaynah indicated with his arm [the amount].

Hasan bin Alī al-Hulwānī narrated to us, Yahyā bin Ādam narrated to us, Ibn Idrīs narrated to us, on authority of al-A’mash, on authority of Abī Ishāq who said

‘When they narrated these things after Alī, may Allah be pleased with him, a man from the companions of Alī said: ‘May Allah curse them. Did they corrupt every [type of] knowledge!?’

Alī bin Khashram narrated to us, Abū Bakr, meaning Ibn Ayyāsh, informed us, he said ‘I heard al-Mughīrah saying

‘There are no Ḥadīth on authority of Alī, may Allah be pleased with him, that are confirmed except from the companions of Abd Allah bin Mas’ūd.’

Chapter 5: That Which is Related to the Statements ‘The Chain of Narration is from the Religion’; ‘Transmissions are not Taken Except from Trustworthy Narrators’; and ‘Criticism of the Narrators With What is Permissible Regarding Them, Even Obligatory and That It is not the Prohibited Kind of Backbiting, Rather it is the Defense of the Noble Sharī’ah’

Hasan bin ur-Rabī’ narrated to us, Hammād bin Zayd narrated to us, on authority of Ayyūb and Hishām [bin Hassān], on authority of Muhammad [bin Sīrīn] ; and Fuḍayl [bin Īyāḍ] narrated to us on authority of Hishām [bin Hassān]; he said Mukhlad bin Husayn narrated to us, on authority of Hishām [bin Hassān], on authority of Muhammad bin Sīrīn , that he said

‘Indeed this knowledge is faith, so carefully consider from whom you take your faith’.

Abū Ja’far Muhammad bin us-Sabbāh narrated to us, Ismā’īl bin Zakariyyā’ narrated to us, on authority of Āsim il-Ahwal, on authority of Ibn Sīrīn that he said

‘They would not ask about the chains of narration, and when the Fitnah occurred, they said: ‘Name for us your men’. So Ahl us-Sunnah would be regarded, and their Ḥadīth were then taken, and Ahl ul-Bi’dah would be regarded, and their Ḥadīth were not taken’.

Ishāq bin Ibrāhīm al-Hanthalī narrated to us, Īsā, and he is Ibn Yūnus, informed us, al-Awzā’ī narrated to us, on authority of Sulyamān bin Mūsā, he said

‘I came across Tāwus and said: ‘So-and-so narrated to me such-and-such’. Then he said: ‘If your companion is trustworthy, then take from him.’

Abd Allah bin Abd ir-Rahman ad-Dārimī narrated to us, Marwān, meaning Ibn Muhammad ad-Dimashqī informed us, Sa’īd bin Abd il-Azīz narrated to us, on authority of Sulaymān bin Mūsā, he said, I said to Tāwus

‘So-and-so narrated to me like this-and-that’. He said: ‘If your companion is trustworthy, then take from him.’

Nasr bin Alī al-Jahdhamī narrated to us, al-Asma’ī narrated to us, on authority of Ibn Abī-Zinād, on authority of his father, he said

‘I met one hundred [transmitters] in al-Madīnah, each of whom were reliable. Narrations were not taken from one about who it was said, ‘he is not from its people’.’

Muhammad bin Abī Umar al-Makkī narrated to us, Sufyān narrated to us; and Abū Bakr bin Khallād al-Bāhilī narrated to us – and the wording is his, he said, I heard Sufyān bin Uyaynah, on authority of Mis’ar, he said, I heard Sa’d bin Ibrāhīm saying

‘There is to be no narrating on authority of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah send blessings and peace upon him, except by trustworthy narrators (Thiqāt)’.

Muhammad bin Abd Allah bin Quhzādh from the people of Marw narrated to us, he said I heard Abdān bin Uthmān saying, I heard Abd Allah bin al-Mubārak saying

Muhammad said, I heard Alī bin Shaqīq saying, I heard Abd Allah bin al-Mubārak saying in front of the people: ‘Abandon the Ḥadīth of Amr bin Thābit for indeed he would curse the Salaf [i.e., the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them]’.

Chapter 6: Unveiling Defects of the Transmitters of Ḥadīth and Relaters of Reports and the Statements of the A’immah Regarding That

Muslim said: Similar instances to what we mentioned from the words of Ahl ul-Ilm regarding those transmitters who are imputed in Ḥadīth, and reports about their defects, are great in number, it would lengthen this book to mention its investigation, and what we [already] mentioned should be sufficient for whoever reflects upon and understands the way of the people [Muhaddithīn] in terms of what they said and clarified of all of that.

Indeed [the Muhaddithīn] concerned themselves with the unveiling of the defects of transmitters of Ḥadīth and narrators of reports; they delivered verdicts in that at the time they were asked when there was a great danger involved considering that the reports are regarding affairs of the Dīn; whether [the transmissions] present a permission or proscription, a command or prohibition, encouragement or admonition.

If the transmitter for it is not a source of truthfulness or reliability, then those who know [his condition], who risk transmitting on his authority, and not declaring [his condition] to others whom are ignorant of his [state], are sinning through doing that, and deceiving the common Muslims, since he should not feel secure in that some of those who heard these reports will act upon them, or act upon some of them, and perhaps they are lies which have no basis, or a majority of them; this along with the fact that authentic reports from the trustworthy chains and the people who are satisfactory [to the majority of Ahl ul-Ilm] are in too great a number to compel relating from those who are not trustworthy and who are not satisfactory.

I do not think highly of those who would permit from the people what we described of these weak narrations and unknown chains, and who judge by these transmissions after knowing what is in them of those who are imputed and weak unless he, through his conveyance and judgment by them, desires to accumulate [status] through that among the commoners, or that it can be said, ‘How great is the number of Ḥadīth that so-and-so has gathered and compiled!’. Those who held this ideology regarding knowledge and traversed this path have no share in it and that they were designated as being ignorant is more deserving than for them to be attributed to knowledge.

Abū Bakr ibn in-Naḍr bin Abīn-Naḍr narrated to me, he said Abūn-Naḍr Hāshim bin ul-Qāsim narrated to me, Abū Aqīl, companion of Buhayyah, narrated to us, he said

‘I was sitting near al-Qāsim bin Ubayd Allah and Yahyā bin Sa’īd [bin Qays al-Madanī al-Qāḍī], when Yahyā said to al-Qāsim: ‘Oh Abā Muhammad! Indeed it is gravely harmful for the likes of you to be asked about something from the affair of this Dīn, and then knowledge of it is not found with you, and no relief [in the form of an answer]’ -or- ‘…knowledge and no articulation’. So al-Qāsim said [to Yahyā bin Sa’īd]: ‘Where did that come from?’ [Yahyā] said: ‘It is because you are the son of two Imāms of guidance- a descendent of Abu Bakr and Umar.’ [al-Qāsim] said to him: ‘More harmful than that- according to whoever reflects about Allah- is to speak without knowledge or to take [Ḥadīth] from someone who is not trustworthy’. [Abū Aqīl] said: ‘So [Yahyā bin Sa’īd] was quiet and did not respond to him’.

Bishr bin ul-Hakam al-Abdī narrated to me, he said, I heard Sufyān bin Uyaynah saying, they informed me on authority of Abī Aqīl, companion of Buhayyah, that a descendent of Abd Allah bin Umar was asked about something that he did not have knowledge about, so Yahyā bin Sa’īd said to him

‘By Allah, indeed it is a grave matter that the likes of you, a descendent of two Imāms of guidance – meaning Umar and Ibn Umar – is asked about a matter and you have no knowledge of it’. So [al-Qāsim] said: ‘By Allah, more grave than that according to Allah, and to whoever reflects about Allah, is to speak without knowledge or to report on authority of one who is not trustworthy’. [Ibn Uyaynah] said that Abū Aqīl Yahyā bin al-Mutawakkil witnessed them both when they said that.

Amr bin Alī Abū Hafs narrated to us, he said I heard Yahyā bin Sa’īd, he said

‘I asked Sufyān ath-Thawrī , Shu’bah, Mālik, and Ibn Uyaynah about a man who is not reliable (Thabt) in Ḥadīth, and someone comes and asks me about him, and they said: ‘Inform [others] against him that he is not reliable’.’

Ubayd Allah bin Sa’īd narrated to us, he said, I heard an-Naḍr saying

‘Ibn Awn was asked about the Ḥadīth of Shahr and he was standing at the threshold of the door, so [Ibn Awn] said: ‘Indeed they criticized Shahr, indeed they criticized Shahr’. Muslim, may Allah have mercy on him, said ‘He means- the tongues of men were busy criticizing him’.’

Hajjāj bin ush-Shā’ir narrated to me, Shabābah narrated to us, he said, Shu’bah said

‘I had met Shahr then abandoned transmitting from him’.

Muhammad bin Abd Allah bin Quhzādh, from the people of Marw, narrated to me, he said Alī bin Husayn bin Wāqid informed me, he said Abd Allah bin al-Mubārak said, I said to Sufyān ath-Thawrī

‘Indeed Abbād bin Kathīr, about whose condition you are aware, when he related [narrations] he introduced a grave matter- do you believe that it should be said to the people ‘Do not take from him?’ Sufyān said: ‘Indeed!’ Abd Allah [bin al-Mubārak] said: ‘So when I was in an assembly and Abbād was mentioned there, I praised him regarding his Dīn and said: ‘Do not take from him.’ Muhammad said, Abd Allah bin Uthmān narrated to us, he said, my father said, Abd Allah bin al-Mubārak said: ‘I ended up in an assembly of Shu’bah, and he said: ‘This is Abbād bin Kathīr so be warned against him.’

Al-Faḍl bin Sahl narrated to me, he said, I asked Mu’allā ar-Rāzī about Muhammad bin Sa’īd whom Abbād transmitted from, so he informed me about what Īsā bin Yūnus said

‘I was at his door and Sufyān was with [Muhammad bin Sa’īd], then when he came out I asked [Sufyān] about him. So he informed me that he was a liar.’