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 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.
‘Al-Barā’ [bin Āzib, the Companion] narrated to us’; he said: ‘Zayd bin Arqam narrated to us’- and he mentioned that [those chains] to Qatādah. [Qatādah] said ‘He lied; he did not hear from them. He would beg the people asking [about Ḥadīth] at the time of the plague’ [circa 67H].
‘Whoever carries arms against us then he is not from us’. [Awf bin Abī Jamīlah] said ‘Amr lied, by Allah. Rather he intended it as a way to permit his filthy opinion.’
‘Indeed I have fifty thousand Ḥadīth that I have not narrated from at all’. [Zuhayr] said: ‘Then that day he related a Ḥadīth and said, ‘This is from the fifty thousand’.
{Thus I will never depart from the land until my father permits me or Allah decides for me, and He is the best of Judges}[Yūsuf: 80]. Jābir said: ‘An interpretation has not come to me about these [verses]’. Sufyān said: ‘He lied’. We said to Sufyān: ‘What did he mean by this?’ [Sufyān] said: ‘Indeed the Rāfiḍah say, ‘Alī is in the clouds and we will not emerge along with he who will emerge from his children [the Khalīfah] until a caller calls from the heaven, meaning Alī: ‘Ride out along with so-and-so [meaning the promised Mahdī]’. Jābir said, ‘that is an interpretation for these verses’, and he would lie as they were regarding the brothers of Yūsuf, peace be upon him’.
‘I did not see Ayyūb speaking ill of anyone, ever, except for Abd al-Karīm- meaning Abū Umayyah’. So he mentioned him and said, may Allah have mercy on him ‘He is not trustworthy- he had asked me about a Ḥadīth of Ikrimah then said ‘I heard from Ikrimah’ [when relating the Ḥadīth].’
Hajjāj narrated to me, he said Ahmad- and he is Ibn Yūnus- narrated to me, Zā’idah narrated to us, on authority of Mansūr and al-Mughīrah, on authority of Ibrāhīm that al-Hārith was imputed.
‘Murrah al-Hamdānī heard something from al-Hārith and said to him: ‘sit by the door’. [Hamzah] said: ‘So Murrah went inside and took his sword and al-Hārith sensed evil and left’.
‘We would catch up with Abū Abd ar-Rahman as-Sulamī and at the time we were young men, so he would say to us: ‘Do not sit with story-tellers other than Abūl-Ahwas and beware of Shaqīq [Abū Abd ar-Rahīm]’. [Muslim] said: ‘This Shaqīq held the view of the Khawārij and is not Abū Wā’il [Shaqīq bin Salamah, the righteous Tabi’ī]’.
‘Indeed this one alleges he has met eighteen of the warriors of the battle of Badr’. Qatādah said: ‘This one was barely asking [about Ḥadīth] before the plague; he did not attend to anything from [seeking Ḥadīth] and he did not speak [to any scholars] regarding it. By Allah, al-Hasan did not narrate to us from a witness of the battle of Badr without an intermediary; and Sa’īd bin al-Musayyib did not narrate to us from a witness of the battle of Badr without an intermediary except from Sa’d bin Mālik’.
Uthmān bin Abī Shaybah narrated to us, Jarīr narrated to us, on authority of Raqabah that ‘Abū Ja’far al-Hāshimī al-Madanī was fabricating narrations with words of truth, and they were not from the narrations of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah upon him, though he was transmitting them on authority of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah upon him.’
‘Amr bin Ubayd would lie regarding Ḥadīth’.
‘Write from Baqiyyah what he transmits on authority of those who are well-known, and do not write from him what he transmits on authority of those who are not; do not write from Ismā’īl bin Ayyāsh what he transmits on authority of those who are well-known or otherwise ’.
‘Yahyā bin Ma’īn narrated to me, Hajjāj narrated to us, Ibn Abī Dhi’b narrated to us on authority of Shurahbīl bin Sa’d , and he was imputed [with lying regarding Ḥadīth near the end of his life]’.
‘Do not take [Ḥadīth] from my brother ’.
‘Indeed Farqad is not a companion of Ḥadīth’.
‘More weak than Ya’qūb bin Atā ’?’ He said: ‘Yes’. Then he said: ‘I did not see anyone transmitting on authority of Muhammad bin Abd Allah bin Ubayd bin Umayr’.
‘Amr bin Ubayd narrated to us before what happened’ [i.e. before he became Mu’tazilī].
‘Abd ul-Quddūs was narrating to us saying,‘Suwayd bin Aqalah said…’ [when it should be ‘bin Ghafalah’] Shabābah said: ‘And I heard Abd ul-Quddūs saying, ‘The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah upon him, prohibited taking a Rawḥ by accident’. [Shabābah] said: ‘So it was said to him, ‘What does this mean?’ [Abd ul-Quddūs] said: ‘It means to make an opening in a wall [thus letting] a breeze enter [by accident]’.’ [He changed the original Ḥadīth, switching ‘Rūḥ’ meaning ‘soul’ to ‘Rawḥ’ or ‘breeze’, and he switched ‘Gharaḍān’ meaning ‘as a target’ to ‘Arḍān’ or ‘accidentally’. All simply by changing a few letters in the words]Muslim said, I heard Ubayd Allah bin Umar al-Qawārīrī saying, I heard Hammād bin Zayd saying to a man after he sat with Mahdī bin Hilāl for days: ‘What is this salty well [i.e. useless or harmful] which has sprung up in your direction?’ He said: ‘Yes, oh Abā Ismā’īl [in agreement]’.
‘What an excellent man is Baqiyyah, if it were not for the fact that he would provide a nickname for [those who were better-known by] the birth name, and he would provide the birth name for [those who were better-known by] a nickname. For a long time he would narrated to us on authority of Abī Sa’īd al-Wuhāthī, then when we investigated [we were surprised that] he was Abd ul-Quddūs ’.
‘I heard Abū Nu’aym and he mentioned al-Mu’allā bin Urfān, so [Abū Nu’aym] said, [al-Mu’allā] said: ‘Abū Wā’il narrated to us, he said ‘Ibn Mas’ūd attacked us on the day of Siffīn’. So Abū Nu’aym said: ‘Do you think he was raised after death? [Ibn Mas’ūd passed away in 32 or 33H, several years before the day in question]