Al-Ilzamat - Daraqutni, Muqbil Ibn Hadii

8/18/2019 Al-Ilzamat - Daraqutni, Muqbil Ibn Hadii

1/28

Translated and Annoted by www.fahmalhadeeth.com | www.the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com


2/28


Translator’s Note and Index :

I took on this small project work with the intention of adding this work to our ongoing series “

defending saheeh al-Bukhaari “ on www.fahmalhadeeth.com and to serve as an answer against the

accusations of munkirul hadeeth on the hadeeth status of saheehyan.

While Shaykh Muqbil did not go in depth with analysing and explaining the answers to the `Ilal

pointed out by Hafidh ad-daraqutni, but his 20 page introduction sure teaches us and even the

hadeeth rejector religion much regarding the nature of the criticism of scholars upon saheehayn.

The language of shaykh muqbil and his sentence construction combined with the mustalah of

hadeeth sciences is not something easy to translate, atleast for me. So I request you to e-mail any

flaws or errors found herein at [email protected] . Footnotes have been added now

and then to clarify certain wordings, terminologies while others have been left as it is presuming the

one reading this and studying it would be a student of hadeeth sciences.

Index :

-

The fallacies (awhaam) of Hafidh Daraqutni rahimahullah in (his book) at-tattabu`

- The agreement of Nawawi and Hafidh ibn Hajar and other Huffadh regarding the critique of

Daqarutni on some instances

- About the addition of a trustworthy narrator

-

Some difficulties that I (Muqbil ibn hadi) came across during research

http://www.fahmalhadeeth.com/http://www.fahmalhadeeth.com/http://www.fahmalhadeeth.com/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.fahmalhadeeth.com/


3/28


Shaykh Muqbil ibn Hadi rahimahullah (who needs no introduction to the students of Islamic

sciences) praises allah and then begins from the 4th

parah as follows :

Àmma Ba`d,

Know that the sciences of hadeeth is among the best of knowledge after qur’an and saheehaan(Bukhari and Muslim) are the most authentic of books after the book of Allah and the muslims are

agreed upon the acceptance of the narrations present in these two books. But there are some

narrations on which some huffadh such as daraqutni1 and others like him. I sought to read such

narrations and our shaykh Muhammad al-Ameen Misri rahimahullah used to present (expose) us

with this subject and he presented (taught) us with the book “ tattabu` wal ilzamaat” and I

expressed my agreement (with its content). He rahimahullah provided me with the images of his

copy (of that book) and he said : “ Look at this (undhurha) . After having studied it I agreed with it

and some reasons have prompted me to present this (such as).

1)

My inclination to benefit from the study of the differences among the huffadh inauthenticating and weakening narrations and how do they find the hidden defects in the

ahadeeth and determine if this hidden defect detriments (دا) the hadeeth or not .

2) My desire to publish these books due to the vast benefit therein. Benefits for which one may

even pursue travel (to find/learn it)

3) The most important of aspects to me was that the (explanation regarding the) narrations of

saheehayn which were criticised should be known because in our times some heads have

been raised which cast doubts upon the books of sunnah and authenticate narrations which

are in accordance to their desires even if it were weak or fabricated and weaken narrations

which aren’t in accordance to their desires even if they (the narrations) were in saheehayn

4) And when it is said to the one who does this (against saheehayn) that this Ummah has

accepted what is in the saheehayn so they respond saying (Look!) this is daraqutni (who

criticised some of the ahadeeth of saheehayn) and Abu masòod ad-dimishqi and Abu Àli al-

Jiyani Ghassani who have rectified (or criticised) upon saheehayn , thus I preferred to enlist

the refutation of the people of knowledge regarding such criticism are levelled on its

compilation/route ( اصدٌث ) instead of its content and an example among these is the

narration recorded By Muslim about Ùmar (radhiallahu ànhu kissing the) stone.

Daraqutni rahimahullah said in al-istadrakat :

“And Muslim narrated from maqdami from Hammad from Ayyoub from Nafi` from ibn Ùmar from

Ùmar regarding him kissing the stone . And with regards to this hadeeth there is a dispute

between (it being transmitted from) Ayyoub and from Hammad ibn Zayd and Musaddad as-sawdi2

has narrated this mawsoolan (connected) via Hammad ibn Zayd . But Sulayman and Abu Rabi` and

1 Bio and Praise regarding Imam of his time daraqutni

:http://www.mediafire.com/download/l7rvraexb1gxzqo/Imaam+ad-Daaraqutni.pdf 2 Al-hawdhi – he is Hafs ibn Ùmar as reported in tahdheeb ut-tahdheeb

http://www.mediafire.com/download/l7rvraexb1gxzqo/Imaam+ad-Daaraqutni.pdfhttp://www.mediafire.com/download/l7rvraexb1gxzqo/Imaam+ad-Daaraqutni.pdfhttp://www.mediafire.com/download/l7rvraexb1gxzqo/Imaam+ad-Daaraqutni.pdfhttp://www.mediafire.com/download/l7rvraexb1gxzqo/Imaam+ad-Daaraqutni.pdf


4/28


Àasim opposed them and have narrated this from Hammad’s route mursalan (instead of

mawsoolan). Ibn Ùliyah said from Ayyoub that it has reached me about Ùmar but Nafi` was not

in it but the one authentic from Ùmar is from the hadeeth of Suwaid ibn ghaflah and Àabis ibn

rabiàh and Ibn Sarjas from Ùmar. “ End of daraqutni’s statement

So Daraqutni passes a verdict for this hadeeth on its strength from three routes from ùmar and he

grades one of these routes to be weak based on the difference or dispute surrounding the (grading

of the) narrators and daraqutni himself mentions this difference (of opinion among scholars)3 and

he himself after mentioning this ikhtilaaf says that

“ the saying of Hammad ibn Zayd is more dear to me meaning” (the narration reported via him is)

muttasil (connected)

as it will come ahead by the will of Allah. And daraqutni also said in Tatabù

“ And Bukhari narrated the narration from Ìmran ibn Hattan from Ibn Ùmar from Ùmar

regarding wearing silk . And Ìmran is matrook for having bad doctrinal belief and some filthy

opinions and this narration from Ùmar is established based on various routes”

And he mentions the hadeeth from a route which has weakness based on ùluw

Imam nawawi (rahimahullah) quoting Ibn Salah said 4:

“and it was narrated to us from Saèed ibn Àmr al-barzaÌ that he came to abu zuràh ar-raazi and

mentioned saheeh Muslim and his (abu zuràh’s) dismissal (inkar) of the narration (which imam

muslim took in his saheeh) from asbaat ibn nasr and Qutan ibn Nusayr and Ahmad ibn Ìsa al-Misri

and he also said : ‘ This (if not done) would pave way for the ahl al-bidàh whom when we refutewith a narration they would (try to counter our refutation by finding an excuse in saying) this is

not in the saheeh (of Bukhari and muslim)”

Saèed ibn Àmr said “ So when I returned to naysaboor I mentioned the inkaar of abu zuràh to

Muslim and he told me “ What you say is right and I did use narrations of asbat, Qutn and Ahmad.

At times when authentic narrators narrate from their teachers ; I have those narrations from

those very teachers but from a superior (aali) way (i.e a shorter /elevated chain and I use that)

even if (often) I have (the same) narrations from narrators more stronger and trustworthy than

them but via naazil5 (i.e. a longer chain) so I indulge in opting them (the one’s which come via a

shorter chain and leave the longer chain even if may have stronger narrators in them) and the àsl ofsuch narrations are well known to come from the stronger route (i.e. the longer route so it doesn’t

really affect the authenticity of the text/matan)”

And likewise has been mentioned by Hafidh ibn Rajab (al-Hanbali) in his Sharh Ìlal at-tirmidhi on

page no. 479 .

3 In al-Ìlal 1/27. Shaykh Muqbil is trying to say that even this weakening of daraqutni is not based on

something that is agreed upon but rather from his ijtihaad which also has differences and dispute among

scholars.

4

Muqaddamah sharh saheeh muslim 1/255 To understand the concept of Aali and Nazil chains see my friend’s article :

http://ahlulisnaad.blogspot.com/2014/09/subtletiesof-isnaad-lataaif-ul-isnaad.html

http://ahlulisnaad.blogspot.com/2014/09/subtletiesof-isnaad-lataaif-ul-isnaad.htmlhttp://ahlulisnaad.blogspot.com/2014/09/subtletiesof-isnaad-lataaif-ul-isnaad.htmlhttp://ahlulisnaad.blogspot.com/2014/09/subtletiesof-isnaad-lataaif-ul-isnaad.html


5/28


I (Muqbil ibn Hadi) say : And similar to this (reason) is why Imam Bukhari selected the narration

from Ismaèel ibn Abi Uwais as Hafidh (ibn Hajar) has stated in the muqaddamah6 of his Fath ul-Bari

page 391. And this is what we have shown that they use these narrators even if they have (slight)

weaknesses as shawahid and mutaabiàt.

Nawawi said in his Sharh Muslim on page 25 :

“And secondly these (usage of slightly weak narrators) occur in (the usage of these narrations as)

mutabiàt (plural of mutaabiàh) and shawaahid7 and not (necessarily always) in (accordance to the)

usool (bukhari and muslim conditioned their books upon). And that they first narrate a hadeeth with

a strong chain having trustworthy narrators and use this as their àsl narration and thereafter follow

it with a chain or chains with some weaknesses from the angle of using them as mutaabiàh or as

ziyadat (addition) so as to elaborate on the benefit in what has preceded it.

And Abu Àbdullah al-Hakim has included the narrations from a jamaàt (of narrators) that aren’t as

per the conditions of the saheeh (laid down by its authors- Bukhari and Muslim) among themutabiàt and among them are (narrations via) Matr al-waraq and Baqiyah ibn waleed and

Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Yasaar and Àbdullah ibn Àmr al-Àmri and Nu`man ibn raashid

I say : And Muslim rahimahullah has clarified this published with sharh Nawawi 1/50 (of his sharh

Muslim)

“And when we narrated these types of reports i.e. via Huffadh of precision then we followed it

with reports that did not have narrators who were mawsoof (characterised) in preservation and

precision as was characterised by the narration(s) that preceded them ; even if these (secondary

narrators) were of sorts other than them (the primary narrators) but most definitely their names

grasp and include (qualities like) sidq followed with knowledge and among them are Àta ibn

saa’ib and Yazeed ibn abi Ziyad and Layth ibn Abi Sulaym and (muhadditheen) like them who

carried athar and akhbaar

And they are thus well known to be among the categories of those who were covered with ìlm

near the scholars and the scholars preferred them in comparison to others of their par on the basis

of (their) istiqamat and precision ..until the end of Imam Muslim’s statement”

Hafidh (Ibn Hajar) mentioned in the muqaddamah of Fath ul-Bari page 411 under the tarjamah of

Talha ibn Yahya after enlisting the speech of scholars weakening him

“I say : A narration of his (Talha) is present in Bukhari on Hajj as a mutaabi` of Sulayman ibn Bil al

and these both (Talha and sulaiman) narrate from Yunus ibn Yazeed”

And he (Ibn Hajar) said under the tarjuma of Àbbad ibn Rashid at-tameemi on page 412 after

enlisting those who authenticated him and those who weakened him

“I say – There is one narration from him (Àbbad) in Saheeh (Bukhari) in the tafseer of Surah

baqarah as a mutaabi` to Yunus who narrates from Hasan from Ma`qool ibn Yisaar and the

authors of the sunan have narrated this except (Imam) Tirmidhi “

6 Haadi as-sari

7 http://ahlulisnaad.blogspot.com/2014/08/mutaabiaat-shawaahid-and-itibaar.html

http://ahlulisnaad.blogspot.com/2014/08/mutaabiaat-shawaahid-and-itibaar.htmlhttp://ahlulisnaad.blogspot.com/2014/08/mutaabiaat-shawaahid-and-itibaar.htmlhttp://ahlulisnaad.blogspot.com/2014/08/mutaabiaat-shawaahid-and-itibaar.htmlhttp://ahlulisnaad.blogspot.com/2014/08/mutaabiaat-shawaahid-and-itibaar.html


6/28


And Hafidh under the tarjuma of Àbbad ibn Ya`qoob ar-rawajini after enlisting those who

authenticated him and those who spoke about (or against) him

“I say – Bukhari narrated from him under Kitab at-tawheed a single narration which includes and

that is the hadeeth of Ibn Masòod “ which is the most virtuous of deeds” and near Bukhari there

were other routes (than that of Àbbad) as well for this narration “

And at times a hadeeth is recorded so as to imply the defect of another narration . Imam Bukhari

rahimahullah on 1/36 says

Narrated to us Ishaq ibn Mansour informed us Àbdullah ibn Numayr narrated to us Ùbaydullah

from Saèed ibn Abi Saèed al-maqbari from Abu Huraira radhiallahu ànhu that

Narrated Abu Huraira:

A man entered the mosque while Allah's Messenger (ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص) was sitting in one side of the mosque. The

man prayed, came, and greeted the Prophet. Allah's Messenger (ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

) said to him, "Wa 'AlaikasSalam (returned his greeting). Go back and pray as you have not prayed (properly)." The man

returned, repeated his prayer, came back and greeted the Prophet. The Prophet (ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص) said, "Wa

alaika-s-Salam (returned his greeting). Go back and pray again as you have not prayed (properly)."

The man said at the second or third time, "O Allah's Messenger (ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص)! Kindly teach me how to pray".

The Prophet (ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص) said, "When you stand for prayer, perform ablution properly and then face the

Qibla and say Takbir (Allahu-Akbar), and then recite what you know from the Qur'an, and then

bow with calmness till you feel at ease then rise from bowing, till you stand straight, and then

prostrate calmly (and remain in prostration) till you feel at ease, and then raise (your head) and sit

with calmness till you feel at ease and then prostrate with calmness (and remain in prostration) till

you feel at ease, and then raise (your head) and sit with calmness till you feel at ease in the sitting

position, and do likewise in whole of your prayer. And Abu Usama added, "Till you stand straight."

So he narrated the statement of Abu Usamah so as to show its preference above the narration

(above) via Ibn Numayr that gives us the benefit of the command regarding jalsa istirahat 8 as Hafidh

explained it in Fath ul Bari

And Imam Muslim rahimahullah has clarified in the beginning (of his book) that he will jot down

certain traditions so as to describe some of its defects .

He (Daraqutni) rahimahullah said in 1/59 as it comes by Nawawi (in his sharh)

“And by the will of Allah we will soon clarify ahead in instances in the book where muallal

narrations will be mentioned (discussed) when we reach those narrations on those instances

where its explanation is required. “

8

Here is a document that entails the method and posture of prayer step by step with images and referenceswhere you can understand what this jalsa istiraha means in more depth : http://the-

finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2012/11/pray-salah-step-by-step-with-posture.html

http://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2012/11/pray-salah-step-by-step-with-posture.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2012/11/pray-salah-step-by-step-with-posture.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2012/11/pray-salah-step-by-step-with-posture.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2012/11/pray-salah-step-by-step-with-posture.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2012/11/pray-salah-step-by-step-with-posture.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2012/11/pray-salah-step-by-step-with-posture.html


7/28


And it is not the case that whatever has come in at-tattabu` understood by daraqutni to be defective

is in reality a defect that is detrimental to the narration rather he (Daraqutni) rahimahullah said

about certain ahadeeth that these narrations aren’t as per the highest/elevated ranks of authenticity

(as conditioned by the imams bukhari and muslim for their work) and then he objects on its strength

and this is a proof that daraqutni is free from desire9

Daraqutni rahimahullah said in at-tattabu` :

“Bukhari and Muslim are agreed upon narrating from abu uthman who said that `Umar (ibn

khattab) wrote to us regarding the (clothes having) silk except leaving two finger spaces . And Abu

Uthman did not hear this from `Umar but it was via writing and this is a proof in the acceptance of

permission. “

9 Imam muqbil means to say that daraqutni criticises some narrations of saheehayn because they are not in

par with the conditions stipulated by the very two imams in their books and thus his criticism is based for an

academic reason and not on desire as many munkirul hadeeth or rejectors of ahadeeth or people of desires dowhom imam muqbil ibn hadee spoke about in the very first parah where our translation began.


8/28


The fallacies (awhaam) of Hafidh Daraqutni rahimahullah in (hisbook) at-tattabu`

And Imam daraqutni rahimahullah has some fallacies (or error) in at-tattabu` from them is what

Imam daraqutni says :

“Muslim brought a narration from Àbdan from his father from Shu`bah from Abi Ishaq from Ibn

Àbdur rahman ….”

But this hadeeth is not in Saheeh Muslim rather it is in Saheeh Bukhari and Bukhari rahimahullahsaid 5/406

“And Àbdaan said I was informed by my father from Shu`bah from Abi Ishaq from Abi Àbdir

rahman that When 'Uthman (ra) was circled (by the rebels), he looked upon them from above and

said….”10

And then Daraqutni rahimahullah (elsewhere) said

“ and he brought – meaning Muslim in his saheeh – a narration of thawri and Shu`bah from

Àlqama which stated ‘ the best of you is one who learns Qur’an and then teaches it to others’11

10 This is a very beautiful hadeeth. But before that, among many rulings that can be deduced from this, there

is a very important ruling from this narration which Imam bukhari titled it as

ن لسهاشرطرورضفذب

ٌ

س ا

Chapter: If somebody keeps an endowment, or stipulates that he should benefit by it as the other Muslims do

The entire hadeeth is as follows:

Abu 'Abdur-Rahman narrated:

When 'Uthman (ra) was circled (by the rebels), he looked upon them from above and said, "Ias you by Allah, Iask nobody but the Companions of the Prophet (

ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

), dont you know that Allah's Messenger (ملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

) said, 'Whoever

will (buy and) dig the well of Ruma will be granted Paradise,' and I (bought and) dug it? Don't you know that he

said. 'Whoever equip the army of 'Usra (i.e., Tabuk's Ghazwa) will be granted Paradise,' and I equipped it ?"

They attested whatever he said. When 'Umar founded his endowment he said, "Its administrator can eat from

it." The management of the endowment can be taken over by the founder himself or any other person, for

both cases are permissible.

More such virtues of Uthman can be read from this link :

http://sunnah.com/search/?q=%D8%B9%D8%AB%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86+%D8%AD%D9%8A%D9%86+%D8

%AD%D9%88%D8%B5%D8%B1+%D8%A3%D8%B4%D8%B1%D9%81

11

This among various other is a proof that one should first learn himself about a particular subject and thenteach others . More similar to what Al-Farooq e Azam radhiallahu ànhu said :

http://sunnah.com/search/?q=%D8%B9%D8%AB%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86+%D8%AD%D9%8A%D9%86+%D8%AD%D9%88%D8%B5%D8%B1+%D8%A3%D8%B4%D8%B1%D9%81http://sunnah.com/search/?q=%D8%B9%D8%AB%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86+%D8%AD%D9%8A%D9%86+%D8%AD%D9%88%D8%B5%D8%B1+%D8%A3%D8%B4%D8%B1%D9%81http://sunnah.com/search/?q=%D8%B9%D8%AB%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86+%D8%AD%D9%8A%D9%86+%D8%AD%D9%88%D8%B5%D8%B1+%D8%A3%D8%B4%D8%B1%D9%81http://sunnah.com/search/?q=%D8%B9%D8%AB%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86+%D8%AD%D9%8A%D9%86+%D8%AD%D9%88%D8%B5%D8%B1+%D8%A3%D8%B4%D8%B1%D9%81http://sunnah.com/search/?q=%D8%B9%D8%AB%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86+%D8%AD%D9%8A%D9%86+%D8%AD%D9%88%D8%B5%D8%B1+%D8%A3%D8%B4%D8%B1%D9%81


9/28


But this narration is in Bukhari and not in Muslim and Bukhari rahimahullah said 9/74

“Narrated to us from Hajjaj ibn Minhal narrated to us Shu`bah who said I was informed by

Àlqamah ibn marthad from his father from Àbdir rahman from Uthman with this..”

And even Hafidh al-Mundhari in Targheeb wa tarheeb 2/352 had a similar wahm when he said

“ narrated by Bukhari and Muslim”

but this is not in Muslim .

And Hafidh Abu Masòod ad-dimishqi12

also spoke about instances wherein Hafidh Daraqutni was

subject to more such fallacy with respect to narrations in Bukhari and Muslim and one from them is

which he labelled as 7th

narration on page 55 of his book wherein he said

وا

ل

ْ

ونق

ُ

د س

“Gain an understanding of the religion before you are placed in the position of leadership (such as an Admin,

or a judge, or etc).” *Ref: See http://www.sahab.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=141151 ]

This is also precisely why this narration has been used in the article “the dangers of being an administrator of a

group/page/its likes” : http://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-danger-of-being-admin-of-page-

group.html . Something I would advise all social media brethren to read

12 He is Abu Masòod Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn Ùbayd ad-dimishiq (D. 401 a.h). Known for his two main

works titled

(i)

أطراف

ٌ

صا .

(ii) سغٌدارقطادشسوأواب

اوأاظاشٌرازداأوأواسطاسا:وس.ادطواسرت

اصرا

.سووصأن

ٌ

طرصوصأأ

ٌ

خادوروس

ٌ

وساد

.وقودصرو

.

ادأون

.

سو:أسااأوذيورازوساٌاو .

[Ref: Tareekh ul-Islam of Imam Dhahabi 8/812 ]

You can find his arguments here : http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?t=323370

http://www.sahab.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=141151http://www.sahab.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=141151http://www.sahab.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=141151http://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-danger-of-being-admin-of-page-group.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-danger-of-being-admin-of-page-group.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-danger-of-being-admin-of-page-group.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-danger-of-being-admin-of-page-group.htmlhttp://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?t=323370http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?t=323370http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?t=323370http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?t=323370http://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-danger-of-being-admin-of-page-group.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-danger-of-being-admin-of-page-group.htmlhttp://www.sahab.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=141151


10/28


“Abul Hasan (Àli ibn ̀ Umar ibn Ahmad ad-daraqutni D. 385 A.H) said Muslim reported from

Dawood ibn Rasheed from waleed from awzaèe from Yahya ibn Abi Katheer13

from Abi Salamah

from Abu Huraira radhiallahu ànhu who said “ When the Ìqamah during the time of the

Messenger of Allah may allah send peace and blessings upon him and upon his family the people

was called the people would take their seats prior to the arrival of the Messenger of Allah

sallalahu àlayhi wa aalahu wa sallam”

And this seems like his probable error because other than waleed have narrated this from al-

Àwzaèe with the sanad reaching up to the Prophet wherein the narrations says that the Messenger

of Allah (sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam) once came to lead the people in prayer when the iqamah was

given but (he realized) he was in a state of junub… 14 and this is how it was found in the copy of Abil

Hasan (daraqutni’s ) letter

Abu masòod ad-dimisqhi further said : Àli ibn Ùmar (daraqutni) probably traced this route from his

own memory or from a source which he did not verify . As for this narration (above) which was

summarized is among the lone narrations of Waleed and Imam Muslim narrated this but via Ibrahim

ibn Musa instead15

and not as daraqutni attributed which is via Dawood (ibn Rasheed) from Waleed

from awzaèe from Zuhri from Abi Salamah from Abu Huraira a similar narration. And the narration

reported by Muhammad ibn Wazeer from Waleed is other than that from Dawood ibn Rasheed as

Imam Muslim has also narrated from Ibrahim ibn Moosa from Waleed.

13 There were six main early scholars of hadeeth who are almost solely responsible for transmitting all what we

know today and in front of them even the likes of Ahmad ibn Hanbal seems dwarfed. One of them is the Imam

al-Àazam Yahya ibn abi katheer [See this for details : http://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-

narration-of-narrator-who-is-qaleel.html ] Notice how in the chain he comes before imam al-Àwzaèe and the

likes of giant like awzaèe narrated from him so what can his status be?! And people then have the audacity toleave these giants and title someone far inferior to them and junior as Imam ul-Àadham?! Where is the justice

!

14 This narration is narrated from al-Awzaèe from Muhammad ibn Yunus from Ishaq from Bukhari via this

chain as well. The complete narration is :

Once Iqama was pronounced and the people had straightened the rows, Allah's Messenger ( ) went forwardملسو هيلع هللا ىلص

(to lead the prayer) but he was Junub, so he said, "Remain in your places." And he went out, took a bath and

returned with water trickling from his head. Then he led the prayer.

In another chapter under the book of ghusl, Imam Bukhari brings the same narration with a few slight

wordings but from another chain which doesn’t include awzaèe but includes Muhammad ibn Yunus whichshows that the mistake here seemed to be from waleed.15

The same narration daraqutni criticises and mentiones a chain attributing it to Muslim is actually not the

chain which Imam Muslim used. Imam Muslim brought that narration via this chain :

رة

ْ

ر ن و س د لق ري زا ن ازوا ن ْن س ٌد َا ر خ ى

وس

بن

ام

بر

د

Whereas the chain Imam of his time attributed to Imam Muslim’s saheeh was in fact the chain brought by Abu

dawood and others but not Muslim . This is that chain for the same narration :

َ

نودد

ْ

خ

دد

ٌ

رقلقلا

دد ندا

ْ

شر

داد

ٌ

-ذهظ-نازوانير زان

س

So this giant imam radhiallahu ànhu made an error by mixing two narrators (yahya ibn abi katheer as well)

into Muslim’s narration.

http://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-narration-of-narrator-who-is-qaleel.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-narration-of-narrator-who-is-qaleel.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-narration-of-narrator-who-is-qaleel.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-narration-of-narrator-who-is-qaleel.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-narration-of-narrator-who-is-qaleel.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-narration-of-narrator-who-is-qaleel.html


11/28


And the second hadeeth which is anticipated to be correct is famously known to be from Awzaèe

from Zuhri from Abi salamah from abu huraira.

“And he narrated from16

Yahya ibn Abi Katheer and via him narrated by Waleed ibn Muslim and a

group of people all of them narrated from the students of Awzaèe from Imam Awzaèe from Zuhri

“

Imam Abu Masòod says “ and his (daraqutni’s) statement that Muslim reported from dawood is a

mistake, likewise his attribution in saying narrated via Yahya ibn abi kather is also a mistake for

these two ahadeeth are famously known to be from Awzaèe. “

I (Muqbil) say : This hadeeth in Saheeh as found (published) along with Nawawi’s sharh 5/101-102

and it is not present in this nuskha of tattabu` which we have in our hands maybe Abul Hasan

rahimahullah removed it

And Abu Masòod rahimahullah discussed the narrations (of saheehayn) which Daraqutni had a

wahm over , some of which are present in the current edition of the book “tattabu’” we have and

some aren’t present.

And among those narrations are no. 8, no. 13, no. 23 which is about not being treacherous and

these narrations (which abu masòod refuted saying it was present in daraqutni’s book) are not

found in the current copy of daraqutni we have and it is as Abu Masòod said that in Saheeh Muslim

1/15-16 it is narrated with a connected chain and not irsalan and from them are narrations such as

no. 19 and it is as Abu Masòod said that Muslim did not record this narration and rather it has been

recorded by other criticised routes as mentioned in 14/94

16 The asl nuskha says that he narrated from Yahya ibn abi katheer but what is right is that he did not narrate it

from yahya ibn abi katheer.


12/28


The agreement of Nawawi and Hafidh ibn Hajar and other Huffadh

regarding the critique of Daqarutni on some instances

And this doesn’t mean that all of daraqutni’s objections are wrong and Hafidh ibn Hajar says in the

Muqaddamah page 383 after mentioning those criticised narrations:

“And not all of these narrations actually possess damaging defects and most of them are free fromsuch defects as is apparent and to introduce defects in them is acting hastily . While answering

some of these allegations is probable but answering for a very few among them is unfair (فس

) orت

unnecessary because they truly have some defects) “

And Hafidh Ibn Hajar in his Muqaddamah on page 376 speaks about hadeeth no. 83 saying that

“Daraqutni has deemed this narration to be Mudtarib and I too say the same and denying or

refuting this would be unnecessary and unfair . “

And Here is nawawi rahimahullah in his sharh Muslim in its muqaddamah on page 27 after

mentioning them who have criticised narrations of Muslim says :

“And in them are some on whom these ilzamat hold ground but they have been responded to “

And he said regarding the ziyadat on 3/123 that Daraqutni has criticised this

addition and after enlisting those who have weakened this addition Nawawi says:

“And the agreement of all of these Huffadh upon the weakness of this addition is preceden t over

the authentication of (Imam) Muslim and Muslim did not narrate this in his saheeh in a Musnad

form and Allah knows best”

I (muqbil) say that rather it is narrated musnadatun as will follow by the will of Allah

And Huffadh other than daraqutni appreciate his criticism and they hold it with value (and not

redundant). Ibn salah rahimahullah in ‘ Uloom al-Hadeeth’ said that these ahadeeth in saheehayn

give definitive source of knowledge except the few upon whom some of the Huffadh have criticised

such as Daraqutni and others. And most of the scholars of terminology have traversed likewise

after him.

Translator’s note: Shaykh Muqbil after the above on page 11 has mentioned 2 rhymes from Hafidh

`Iraqi’s alfiyyah – an appropriate english translation of which is difficult for me . Apologies. *

And Hafidh al-`Iraqi has mentioned it in his sharh of ibn Salah (1/70)


13/28


About the addition of a trustworthy narrator

And Imam nawawi rahimahullah has spoken much replying to Daraqutni on the necessity on

accepting the addition of a trustworthy narrator and I (Muqbil) saw it prudent to mention the

statements of scholars on that so that it is clarified if the ziyadat (addition) is accepted unrestrictedly

or restrictedly . Imam Nawawi rahimahullah has graded right the opinion of those who refute the

addition by a thiqah based on the verse of qur’an “ and this is the ziyadat of

Sulayman at-taymi who is trustworthy. My aim from this presentation is only to clarify the truth andlegislate what is just because Allah subhanahu wa ta`la says (interp.) “ And when you speak, be just”

. And the companions of the Messenger of Allah sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam used to pledge to him

that they would traverse upon truth irrespective of where they are and will not fear the blame of the

blamer in this matter of Allah. As has come in the saheehayn in the hadeeth of Ùbadah ibn saamit

that the Messenger of Allah (sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam) advises Abu Dhar to speak the truth no

matter how bitter it is as has come in Musnad Ahmad 5/15917 And precisely is why it is obligatory

upon us to adopt balance and justice with regards to Hafidh Daraqutni , Shaykhayn and those who

have defended them .

I think the one to discuss this topic most at length is Hafidh ibn Rajab in Sharh Ìlal at-tirmidhi, whorahimahullah said on page 307 :

And tirmidhi mentioned about the ziyadat that if it comes from a haafidh whose preservation can be

relied upon then his addition will be accepted; meaning if the narrator who indulged in ziyadat and

his preservation cannot be relied upon then his addition will not be accepted and this is also what is

apparent from Imam Ahmad’s speech . Imam Ahmad said on the narration of Saalih that this

addition of Malik in a narration “from the Muslimeen “ has been rejected’ and when Malik who is

thiqah , if he is alone in narrating a narration and someone says it is from an opinion then know that

Malik is more established in hadeeth than him and he said that al-Ùmari as-sagheer and Al-Jumhi

and Malik narrated this word.

And Ahmad mentioned that Imam Malik’s lone (tafarrud) narrations/reports will be accepted based

on the mutabi` but his addition will be defective despite his strength in comparison to other

narrators until Hafidh Rajab also said that Ahmad said I hesitated in accepting the lone report of

Malik “ min al-Muslimeen” until I learned of another route from the hadeeth of Ùmrayn.

17 Abu dhar (radhiallahu ànhu) relates that the Prophet (sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam) said :“ and he (sallalahu

àlayhi wa sallam) ordered me to say the truth even if it is bitter” *Ref: Musnad Ahmad 21453 shamela+


14/28


It was said to Imam Ahmad if the lafz “minal muslimeen” was preserved (as the part of the tradition)

near him so he replied yes. And this narration (of Imam Ahmad) is a proof on the stance that Imam

Ahmad would be sceptical or caution in accepting the ziyadat of any thiqah narrator even if that

thiqah narrator was (a giant) similar to Malik and even if it had a corroborating route. And this is also

a proof for the principle that even the corroborating route coming from a narrator (inferior in status

than Malik such as) Ùmri strengthens the addition of Imam Malik and removes the objection of

shuzooz and rejection. And similar will come ahead by the will of Allah from the route of Yahya

Qattan.

Hafidh ibn Rajab said that Imam Ahmad held a similar stance in the hadeeth that came from Ibn

Fudayl from Àmash from Ùmara ibn Ùmayr from Abi Atiyah from Àisha regarding the Talbiyah of

the Messenger of Allah (sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam) and (Imam Ahmad) said that in it “wal-Mulku

Laa sharika Lak” was an addition.

Ahmad said Fudayl committed an error in reporting this addition via Àisha and it is not well known

from her but from Àbdullah ibn Ùmar (radhiallahu ànhu) and he mentioned that Abu Mua`wiyah

narrated this without any addition and Imam Bukhari also reported this narration without the

addition from Thawri from Àmash and said that Abu Muàwiyah corroborated this report.

Imam Khallal said that Abu Àbdullah (meaning Imam Ahmad) disregards any opposition to Abu

Mua`wiyah reporting from Àmash except in the case of ath-thawri. And he mentioned that this

addition has also been reported by Ibn Numayr and others from Àmash . And Ahmad said likewise

in the narration of Al-Maymooni that the narration of Abu Huraira regarding Istisà reported by Ibn

Abi Ùrooba and as for Shu`bah and Hammam they did not mention this and neither do I incline

towards (the narration of) Istisà.

Thus what is proven from the statements of Imam Ahmad on this topic here is that if a thiqah

narrator narrates a wording as an addition in a hadeeth and if he in terms of Hifdh and Ithbaat isn’t

superior over the other group of thiqah narrators who did not narrate this hadeeth with the addition

he did , and if there is no other mutabi` for this addition of his then this single addition of his will not

be accepted . But if the thiqah narrator is superior in preservation and trustworthiness over other

narrators who did not narrate this addition then regarding this there are two statements from Imam

Ahmad.

In one instance Imam Ahmad said regarding the addition of Imam Malik “ minal muslimeen” that I

feared about it until I got another route corroborating it from the narration of Ùmrayn and as perthe other statement/view of Ahmad he said that If malik ( a thiqah narrator ) narrates an addition

and another (person) narrates/speaks with rai (opinion/logic) then Malik is stronger than him (so his

addition will be or can be accepted).

And he (Ahmad) said regarding the hadeeth of Ayyoub from Nafi` from ibn Ùmar which is marfoo`

that whoever takes an oath and says In sha allah then there is no sin on breaking the oath But

Ùbaydullah and some others among the people (of narration) have opposed this (as marfooàn)

thus it is mawqoofan (i.e. via ibn ùmar from this route)

Until Ibn Rajab rahimahullah in page 311 said :


15/28


And in this book we have discussed the differences in a hadeeth being mawsoo, mursal, mawqoof or

marfoo` and the statements of Ahmad (ibn Hanbal) along with other Huffadh is a proof that the one

more stronger and preserved is relied upon. And Ahmad in a narration which Hammad ibn Salamh

has narrated which states “Which thing would benefit..” but others narrate this Irsalan.

And Imam Hakim mentioned that Aimmatul Hadeeth are upon the notion that most irsaal narrations

will be accepted however this statement of Hakim is against what he himself practised in his

Mustadrak. And Hafidh khateeb has written a beautiful work on this subject titling it “Tammizul

Mazeed fir Muttasil Asaanid” and he mentioned two types :

1) First: is about the status of a narration in whose isnaad there is an addition and in whose

there isn’t.

2) Second : What is the verdict on it with the negation of addition and its lack of acceptance.

Khateeb later on fell into contradiction and he mentioned in his book al-Kifayah that the people of

Madhahib have a difference of opinion in the issue of narrators narrating a hadeeth irsalan or

mawsoolan (connected) and that all of these (later) views (of different madhahib) are not well

known to be from the earlier huffadh rather these views (on usool al-hadeeth) have been taken from

the books of people of kalaam (or rai) and then he (khateeb) opined that the ziyadat of a thiqah is

always taken generally and some of the people of kalaam and much of the fuqaha have agreed with

this (principle)

But this perspective of his is opposite to what he opined in his book tamyeez al-Mazeed and due to

his opinion (on this particular topic) in al-Kifayah, many Muhadditheen - fuqaha (i.e. muhaddith withfiqh) have disapproved (àab) and criticised18 khateeb for affirming this view of the mutakallimeen in

al-Kifayah . And khateeb in al-Kifayah narrated the event when Imam Bukhari was questioned about

the hadeeth of Abi Ishaaq regarding the marriage contract in the absence of a wali so Imam bukhari

said “ the addition of thiqah (az-ziyadatu minath-thiqati maqboolatun) is accepted19

and Israil is

18 The Arabic in the print I am using dar al-Kutub Ilmiyyah of Beirut in this taba`t ath-thaniyah seems to have

printed the word here as طو but it should probably be wa-taàna. Maybe it is atypo. allahu àlam

19 Imam Muqbil says : This hadeeth is in Mustadrak 2/169 and Imam Hakim rahimahullah after mentioning

those who narrated this hadeeth mawsoolan via isarail said that This hadeeth via Abi Ishaq has been reportedmawsoolan after them by Zuhayr ibn Muàwiyah and Abu Àwanah al-waddah. And the people of naql (the

shaykh used this word probably to imply that the deen is based on naql and not àql) have a consensus about

the status and preservation of these two narrators . Then Imam hakim narrated this hadeeth from his own

narration via them and then said that a group of the leaders of Muslimeen have narrated this hadeeth from abi

ishaaq in a mawsool (connected) way except those whom we have mentioned and among them is Abu Hanifa

nu`man ibn thabit, Ruqbah ibn masqala al-Àbdi, Muttarif ibn Tareef al-harith , Àbdul Hameed ibn Hasan al-

Hilali, Zakariyyah ibn abi zaidah and other than them whom we have mentioned in this chapter

And this hadeeth has been narrated mawsoolan even via abu burdah, apart from abu ishaaq then he

mentioned it from the path of Yunus ibn abi ishaq from abi burdah from abu musa (r.a) who said that the

Messenger of Allah (sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam) “ there is no nikah without a wali” until Imam hakim (r.h) said

that and the one who narrated this mawsoolan from abu burdah is Ùthman ibn Àasim ath-thaqafi and thenhe narrated this chain and then said that we have taken proof from the authentic tradition and based on the

statements of the scholars of this science regarding the status of the hadeeth of abi musa and in it is that


16/28


thiqah “ . If this event is authentic then what is implied by it is the presence of an addition in a

narration

Whoever carefully studies Imam Bukhari’s kitab at-tareekh then it will be definitively clarified for

him that Imam Bukhari was not of the view that every ziyadati (addition) by a thiqah raawi was to be

accepted

And likewise Dhahabi mentioned in some instances that the ziyadati of a trustworthy narrator is

accepted but then on many instances he also disproves or refutes the addition of trustworthy

narrators and retrieves the chain of narration to the level of irsaal and thus this action of his is a

proof that what he meant by accepting the ziyadati of a thiqah raawi was limited to the narrator

whose preservation abilities were well grounded (mubarrazan)

And in an instance when two thiqah narrators made an addition but Sufyan ath-thawri opposed

them in that so Daraqutni did not narrate that ziyadati and said “ If thawri hadn’t opposed them

then it (addition) would have been accepted from them because the addition of a thiqah raawi isaccepted.” And this is a proof that the addition of a thiqah will be accepted as long as a more thiqah

narrator well-grounded in his hifdh doesn’t oppose him.

I (Muqbil) say : The verdict of daraqutni in at-tattabu` resembles that of Ibn Rajab’s

Imam sanàni in “Tawdeehil-Afkaar” 1/339 said : BaqqaÌ said that ibn salah (r.h) here in this

junction has combined the ways of the Usooliyeen with that of the Muhadditheen because the

perspective of the well-known or expert Muhadditheen in this issue was beforehand but he (Ibn

salah) did not narrate it. And this (what Ibn salah mentioned) is that perspective from which

honesty or justness cannot be done because Muhadditheen do not pass a monotonic verdict on an

issue but they analyse based on the corroborating evidences and context. “ End of baqqaÌ’s

comment

And the statement of Hafidh ibn Hajar (rahimahullah) will come ahead from which we will benefit as

al-BaqqaÌ took this perspective (mentioned in the above parah) from him as he (Ibn Hajar) was his

teacher and this ìbarat will show us that this proficiency is only with few expert Muhadditheen and

not with everyone.

which would suffice the one who looks and ponders carefully. And on this chapter/topic we have narrations

from Àli ibn Abi Taalib (karamallahu wajhahu) , Àbdullah ibn Àbbas (karamallahu wajhahu); Muàdh ibn Jabal(karamallahu wajhahu); Àbdullah ibn Ùmar (karamallahu wajhahu) ; Abi Dharr al-Ghiffari (karamallahu

wajhahu) , Miqdad ibn al-Aswad (karamallahu wajhahu); Àbdullah ibn Masòod (karamallahu wajhahu); Jabir

ibn àbdillah (karamallahu wajhahu); Abu Huraira (karamallahu wajhahu); Imran ibn Husain (karamallahu

wajhahu); Àbdullah ibn Àmr (karamallahu wajhahu); Miswar ibn Makhramah (karamallahu wajhahu); Anas

ibn Malik (karamallahu wajhahu) radhiallahu ànhum ajmaèen and many more sahaaba and most of these

narrations are saheeh and likewise narrations on this are authentic also from the wives of the prophet

sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam such as Àisha (àlayhis salaam); Umm Salamah (àlayhis salaam) Zaynab bint Jahsh

(àlayhis salaam) radhiallahu ànhum ajmaèen.

And Hafidh az-zaylee in Nasbir-raya 3/183-184 have narrated likewise so we learn from this that Imam Bukhari

had authenticated Israil’s narrations based on the corroboration of many narrators and based on the various

routes of this hadeeth and Allah knows best. End of shaykh Muqbil’s hashiyah.


17/28


Haifdh ibn Hajar said :

As for khateeb authenticating it then near him the condition was the presence of àdalah and

dhaabta of a narrator but as for the fuqaha and usooliyyeh then accept it unrestrictedly and

between these two views is a great difference. And here is when one is alerted about the

condition (of Bukhari) that the narrations he include not be shadh and Shadh here is explained to

mean a thiqah narrator opposing more thiqah narrators who are stronger than him in preservation

as well.20

Then he said that addition would be accepted unrestrictedly and the issue arises when a group of

trustworthy narrators who are well grounded in their preservation and writing down of narrations

and happen to narrate a hadeeth mursalan in contrast to those who are weaker than them in

preservation and accuracy then will be accept their mursal (to be the right mode of transmission)

or not? And will be label it shadh or not?

Thus it becomes mandatory that either the distinction (between both these cases of transmission)be highlighted or the (apparent) contradiction be resolved. And truth on this subject is that the

addition of a thiqah is not always accepted and whoever has reported the opposite view which is

the unrestricted view from the fuqaha and usooliyeen then they haven’t done well. And they

(Muhadditheen) accept this (addition) if the traits of the two group of narrators are similar in

virtue (or ranks such as preservation, etc) and the rest of the narrators (in these two seemingly

contradictory reports) do not negate or oppose the addition by other group of narrators either via

wording or in meaning and one who has explained this stance is Imam fakhrud-deen and Ibn al-

Anbari who is the explanatory of the book “Burhaan” and other than them.

Ibn as-samàni said that If the narrator who doesn’t narrate the addition wasn’t unaware of theaddition (the other group/narrator added) and was in the same sitting (study circle yet he didn’t

narrate this addition) then the right position near us is that the addition narration will not be

accepted. End of Hafidh’s quote

As-Sanàni said on page 341 after mentioning the hadeeth narrated by Abi Ishaq from Abu Burdah

from Abi Musa (r.a) :” there is no nikah without a wali” said that Bukhari accepted the ziyadat of

israil wherein Shu`bah and sufyan narrated this mursalan.

Hafidh ibn Hajar said that taking this event (where Bukhari accepted the ziyadati of israil due to him

being thiqah and him narrating it mawsoolan) as a proof to deduce that this (accepting the ziyadati)

is the monotonic rule in the circumstance when a thiqah narrator narrates it connected (mawsoolan)

is a wrong deduction and this is not from the actions (or manhaj) of Bukhari for this is a specific

tradition and deducing the aforementioned principle from this is not right Because he did not merely

authenticate this based on the addition coming in a connected form but based on other

corroborating sources (see page no. 4 above) and among those reasons one such is that Yunus ibn

abi ishaq, his son and Israil and Ìsa narrated this addition all from Abu Ishaq mawsoolan and there is

no doubt that the family members of a narrator are more closer in taking from him than others and

also note that Abu Àwanah, Sharik an-Nakhai and Zuhayr ibn Mua`wiyah and all the ten students of

20 Hafidh ibn Hajar in his Nukhbah and its sharh also has a likewise statement and in that statement ibn hajar

said that Shadh is that narration in which a thiqah opposes more thiqah and dhaabit narrators than himself.


18/28


Abu Ishaq corroborated with israil in narrating this (mawsoolan the way israil did) even if there is a

difference in them taking this in the same sitting or in their (date/time of) hearing and as for those

who narrated this mursalan then they are shu`bah and Sufyan and they have taken it from Abu Ishaq

in one majlis and tirmidhi narrated it21 who said Mahmoud ibn Ghaylan narrated who said Abu

Dawood at-tayalasi narrated to us in Musnad who said Shu`bah narrated to us who said I heard from

Sufyan at-thawri ask Abu Ishaq have you heard this narration of the messenger of Allah “ there is no

nikah without a wali” from abu burdah? Abu Ishaq replied yes. So this shows that shu`bah and

sufyan have taken this in the same majlis from abu ishaq as we see.

And (in this particular or likewise scenario) there is nothing worrying about taking a narration’s

wording from a (thiqah) narrator and preferring it above the narration taken by narrators in the

same majlis with their teacher via àrd22

Even though it is known that shu`bah and sufyan’s preservation is stronger than others yet ash-shafÌ

says that the (assurance of preservation that comes combined from) big numbers (of

narrators/routes) is stronger than a lone strong narrator. Thus Bukhari giving preference to this

mawsool narration along with its addition over the mursal one is not without a reason but rather it is

in accordance to what he saw as qarain which made him prefer the mawsool over the mursal. And

this fact is further affirmed due to him (Bukhar) preferring a mursal narration over a mawsool one in

another narration for example the narration reported from Sufyan from Muhammad ibn abi bakr ibn

hazm from Àbdul Malik ibn abi bakr and he is Ibn Àbdur rahman from his father from Umm

salamah from the messenger of Allah regarding the narration { تشتن

كس – if you wish I will stay

with you for seven days} and Malik (ibn anas) from Àbdullah ibn abi bakr ibn Harith from the

Prophet sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam (mursalan) who said to Umm salamah….Imam Bukhari in his

tareekh23 said that the correct one is the route that has come irsalan via Malik and the irsal here is

21 Under hadeeth 1125. Also visit this article , see under objection no.2 the same debate with more details can

be seen wherein these companions are the strongest of abu ishaq’s students and israil’s memorization from

abu ishaq is stronger than that of shu`bah and sufyan when it comes to abu ishaq only. This article refutes this

objection as well as the objections of apostate munkirul hadeeth who completely reject all narrations of

hadeeth : http://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/08/2-defending-saheeh-bukhari-change-of.html

22 Àrdh : Here the students read (back the ahadeeth) to the teacher (and the teacher verifies it). example is

that Yahya ibn Maèen rahimahullah went to the students of Hammad ibn Salamah (d 169 Ah) , including

haroon and Musa ibn Ismaèel and wanted to read back what he took from the other routes so as to verify if

what he received is correct. One may ask what is the basis of this "process of verification" usually classified inmustalahal hadeeth under the baab of Turuk at-tahammaul (means of transporting the hadeeth) as " Àrdh "

Though the term may be new but where is the Àsl of this practise? it goes back to the prophet sallalahu

àlayhi wa sallam and Zaid ibn thabit but here is another example of another sahaabi approving this method

and validating it :

I used to write whatever I learnt from Abu Huraira. Then as I intended to organize them/ depart from him - I

came to him with the book and read it to him (to verify back) and asked, “This is what I heard from you

(right)?” Abu Huraira said, “Yes.”

[Ref: this article was compiled to refute the modern , liberal and deviant sects and people who attack the

muhaddithen for concocting principles as per their desires :

http://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2014/12/defending-muhadditheen-from-forging.html ]23 1/47, 48

http://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/08/2-defending-saheeh-bukhari-change-of.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/08/2-defending-saheeh-bukhari-change-of.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/08/2-defending-saheeh-bukhari-change-of.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2014/12/defending-muhadditheen-from-forging.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2014/12/defending-muhadditheen-from-forging.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2014/12/defending-muhadditheen-from-forging.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/08/2-defending-saheeh-bukhari-change-of.html


19/28


right due to the corroborating evidences and context which are apparent24 and this it becomes clear

that this action (of bukhari preferring mawsool due the ziyadati of a thiqah narrator) is not

unrestricted.25

Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al-wazeer rahimahullah in Tanqihul-Andhar page 343 after narrating the

statements of the people of knowledge said :

“ I say that near me the verdict on this subject (of accepting a thiqah’s addition) does not remain

stagnant with one view but rather due to the differences in the qarain the verdict also changes

and this is a region of ijtihad. “

Imam Sanàni (rahimahullah) said : Ibn daqeeq al-Eid has spoken of this before and has shown this to

be the way of the Muhadditheen and has said that whoever narrates from Ahl al-hadeeth (i.e. the

Muhadditheen) or from more than them that if there were to be a clash between those who narrate

it as a Musnad narration vs Mursal; or as a marfoo` narration vs mawqoof; or reporting deductions

vs additions and says that the hukm on this is that the addition is preferred ; then (whoever said

this) he hasn’t been fair (or sensible) with this generalization . Because this is not such a general

unrestricted rule and upon carefully examining their verdicts we learn regarding if what we say is the

right stance. And this is also an excerpt from Hafidh al-àlayi who said that the leaders of

mutaqaddimeen such as Àbdur rahman ibn Mahdi and Yahya ibn saèed al-Qattan and Ahmad ibn

Hanbal and Bukhari and their likes – their statement clarifies that in this particular subject there is

not to be a general verdict on it. Rather their actions in this regards are based on preference which is

further based on a strong basis near them in a narration. Al Hafidh said : And this action which he

has traced from the muhadditheen makes it apparent that they decided based on factors whichwere held to be preferential and in cases where there is no tarjeeh (preference) that can be held to

then what is known is that the ruling will be enjoined / reverted back to what is known àsalan.

Ibn Wazeer said : If a thiqah narrator were to be overcome by probability in narrating a narration

marfooàn and mawsoolan while in this he is opposing many Huffadh who took this narration

along with him from his shaykh itself in the same sitting and there be present other corroborating

contexts and evidences which are also in opposition to what this thiqah narrates (as mawrfoo and

mawsoolan) then to say that the hukm of marfoo` and mawsool is preferred and the verdict is also

likewise then this verdict and statement is against both one’s intellect as well what is reported . As

for the reason it opposing the intellect then this is apparent26

And as for Naql then a group of the

24 Imam Muslim and Abu Dawood have also brought this narration with good chains. Imam Muslim’s

chain is similar to the above quoted one :

َ

نرد دش

نبونم

ٌ

ار-ظار-و قدندٌ سنن سن

د

نرند ك دنرنا ن

رثنار هنشنا

ٌ

نم س

25

This is what al-Hafidh ibn Hajar says in Nukt àla ibn salah 1/21026 As-sanàni says because àql decides that we follow whatever is raajih .


20/28


sahaaba refrained from accepting a doubtful khabarul wahid27

(which wasn’t authentic and

opposed other authentic narrations and qarain) and this is well known as appears from the verdict

of Ùmar ibn al-Khattab in the narration of Fatima bint Qays in the issue of a divorced women

having no maintenance28

And the hadeeth of Abu Musa in the matter of seeking permission is also a proof for this

instance29 until he (al-Hafidh) said regarding the incident wherein the prophet sallalahu àlayhi wa

sallam missed a rakàh during his prayer in congregation and when the sahaabi dhul yadain

informed him that he did this the prophet sallalahu ̀ alayhi wa sallam at first rejected it because

the jamaàh dwas silent but when dhul yadain insisted he later verified it with others asking “ is

this dhul yadain speaking rightly?”

When two thiqah narrators narrate likewise or near to each other (and they contradict) then the

hukm will be in favour of he who has reported an addition or more and when one (via his

narration) establishes something and the other negates it and they are both likewise (in strength

or report) then the hukm will be in favour of one who is establishing something. There are various

levels of strength and weakness between these two (decisions) and it is not possible to limit or

block it (رصح) . Rather the one who examines should be very meticulous and examine everything

that has appeared regarding a contradiction and then rule about it in accordance to his strongest

approximation.30

27

As an additional note, see : The Authority of Khabar Wahid and refutation of those who oppose itLink : http://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-authority-of-khabar-wahid-and.html

28 As-sanàni said for this that we have researched into this and the case was not as ùmar r.a said i.e. it being

dhanni or uncertain , rather the hadeeth of Fatima bint qays is applicable and can be followed (as the similar

circumstance comes) and I have clarified this in Subul as-salam as well as the hashiya of Daw al-nahar al-

mushriq 'ala safahat al-azhar TN : I am not quoting that hadeeth here because it would then demand also

mentioning its fiqhi position which would lengthen the issue here. What the readers should know is that Ùmar

(r.a) rejected the narration of Fatima bint qays due to the doubt if she remembers what she says or not

properly. The matter was also brought to aisha and she got angry because Fatima bint qays r.a was applying or

implying that the specific ruling given to her as an exemption is or can be applied upon every muslim women in

the Muslim lands.

29 While I was present in one of the gatherings of the Ansar, Abu Musa came as if he was scared, and said, "I

asked permission to enter upon 'Umar three times, but I was not given the permission, so I returned." (When

'Umar came to know about it) he said to Abu Musa, "Why did you not enter?'. Abu Musa replied, "I asked

permission three times, and I was not given it, so I returned, for Allah's Apostle said, "If anyone of you asks the

permission to enter thrice, and the permission is not given, then he should return.' " 'Umar said, "By Allah! We

will ask Abu Musa to bring witnesses for it." (Abu Musa went to a gathering of the Ansar and said). "Did

anyone of you hear this from the Prophet ?" Ubai bin Ka'b said, "By Allah, none will go with you but the

youngest of the people (as a witness)." (Abu Said) was the youngest of them, so I went with Abu Musa and

informed 'Umar that the Prophet had said so. (See Hadith No. 277, Vol. 3)

[Ref: The sahaaba and salaf verifying the prophetic traditions : http://the-

finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/12/yes-sahaaba-and-salaf-used-to-verify.html ]

30 Imam sanàni said in his ‘ marajjihat al-ma`roofa fil-usool

http://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-authority-of-khabar-wahid-and.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-authority-of-khabar-wahid-and.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-authority-of-khabar-wahid-and.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/12/yes-sahaaba-and-salaf-used-to-verify.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/12/yes-sahaaba-and-salaf-used-to-verify.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/12/yes-sahaaba-and-salaf-used-to-verify.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/12/yes-sahaaba-and-salaf-used-to-verify.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/12/yes-sahaaba-and-salaf-used-to-verify.htmlhttp://the-finalrevelation.blogspot.com/2013/12/yes-sahaaba-and-salaf-used-to-verify.htmlhttp://fahmalhadeeth.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-authority-of-khabar-wahid-and.html


21/28


Imam al-Hakim rahimahullah said :

The third issue is about “Mukhtalif feehi” is about a khabar which a thiqah narrates from an Imam

among the Imams of muslimeen in a musnadan way and then from the same Imam another jama`t

of thiqah narrators narrate it but mursalan (instead of a musnad way) . We have many examples

of this kind in existence and the methodology of fuqaha this is an acceptable narration and near

them their saying is that whoever makes an addition in the chain or text then his addition is

accepted provided he is thiqah. But near the ahl al-hadeeth (the muhadditheen) the verdict of the

majority is accepted for those who narrate it mawqoofan or mursalan because there is uncertainty

in accepting the doubtful single narration “ *Ref: tawdhee al-Afkaar 1/91]

Hafidh ibn Hajar rahimahullah in sharh nukhbah page 13 that it is known from a group of scholars

who rule that the addition (ziyadati) is accepted unrestrictedly without any clarification but this does

not coincide with the methodology of the muhadditheen who have prescribed certain rules for a

hadeeth to be saheeh such as it should not be shadh and then he (Ibn Hajar) explains the meaning of

shadh (which in short) means a thiqah narrator opposes a more trustworthy narrator than him. And

surprise is from those who have been careless in this issue despite the agreement or well

acquaintance of the fact that (among the various conditions) a hadeeth to be free from shudhoodh is

a pre-requisite for it to be counted among saheeh. And then he (Ibn Hajar) mentions what the

mutaqaddimeen have said and also what ibn daqeeq al-Èid has said.

Ibn Hajar also said in al-Fath 12/312 ط : ج

The researched and verified opinion about the shaykhaan(Bukhari and Muslim) preferring mawsool

is not a general methodology but rather this is based on the qarain with which they find the

mawsool to be raajih. And there are many such narrations in whose authentication they haveabstained from (ضرأ) due to the differences in them being mursal or mawsool

And Sakhawi said in Fath ul-Mugheeth 1/166 said likewise as al-Hafidh (his teacher ibn hajar) said in

tawdeeh ul-Afkaar and An-Nukbah

And suyuti in tadreeb ur-rawi page 138 mentioned the statement of Ibn Hajar on abu ishaq’s

hadeeth with the seegha of “qeela” (it is said) and he spoke in a brilliant way on this topic. And on

page 157 he mentioned the statement of hafidh ibn hajar which has preceded above

And the reason behind quoting the statements of these muhadditheen is to show that no muhaddith

has ever said to accept the addition of a thiqah narrator unrestrictedly and here is Nawawi

rahimahullah who has shown daraqutni saying that the addition of sulayman at-taymi (wa iza qar’a

fa-ansatu) as will come ahead by the will of Allah and know that sulayman is a thiqah narrator.

And likewise this perspective is also mentioned in Tadreeb ar Raawee fee Sharh Taqreeb an Nawawi

page 392 wherein he says that in the addition of a muttasil asanid which ibn Mubarak has

narrated who said haddathana sufyan àn Àbdur rahman ibn yazeed haddathani Busr ibn

ubaydullah who said I heard Aba Idrees who said heard from wathila who heard from aba

marthad who said I heard from the Messenger of Allah (sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam) say “ do not

sit upon the graves” . Mentioning in the chain Sufyan and abu Idrees is a addition which is a

wahm ( fallacy ). As for the wahm of adding sufyan then it is from the narrator after ibn Mubarak

because the thiqat narrated this same tradition from ibn Mubarak from ibn yazeed and some


22/28


among these thiqat are those who reported this chain using the expression “ akhbarna” . As for

the addition of abu Idrees then this wahm is from ibn Mubarak because the thiqat narrate this

from ibn yazeed and did not mention abu Idrees and some among these thiqat have also narrated

with the mention of Busr ibn Ubaydullah hearing from al-wathila (without mentioning abu Idrees

in between the two)

Imam suyuti rahimahullah said that the scholars in this topic have ruled ibn Mubarak to be subject

to wahm in his reporting here such as Bukhari and others and abu hatim ar-razi has said that most of

the times the narration is Busr from abu Idrees from al-wathila and Busr has heard this from al-

wathila itself. Suyuti then says that this hadeeth has two routes near Imam Muslim and Imam

Tirmidhi.

And know that Àbdullah ibn Mubarak is that great narrator about whom the (scholars and even) Ibn

Hajar in taqreeb said that he is trustworthy, Established, faqeeh of this world, scholar, warrior, and

all the great qualities summoned in him.

And this is Ibn Salah rahimahullah who mentions the statement of Khateeb al-Baghdadi

rahimahullah regarding the acceptance of an addition by a thiqah narrator and he has shown how

khateeb rejected the addition of (the thiqah narrator ) Malik . Ibn Salah said on page no. 73 from

Uloom al-hadeeth that

And the former example is the one in which he is lone and in opposition to what the group of thiqat

narrated and this is the narration of Malik from Zuhri from Àli ibn Hussayn from Ùmar ibn Ùthman

from Usamah ibn Zayd from the Messenger of Allah (sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam) who said : A muslim

does not inherit from a kafir nor does a kafir inherit from a muslim” and Malik opposed other than

him from the thiqah in the statement of Ùmar ibn Ùthman by annexing the statement withع

(i.e.Imam malik said Ùmar when it is actually Àmr)

And Imam Muslim in his Saheeh said whoever has narrated this from the students of Zuhri they in

then narrated it from Àmr ibn Ùthman with a fatha on the alphabet àin . And Malik used toع

point out towards the house of Ùmar ibn Ùthman and he (Malik) learnt that the thiqat oppose

Malik in this and Àmr and Ùmar both are the sons of Ùthman but the matter is that this hadeeth

which Malik narrates via Ùmar is actually not Ùmar but the other son named Àmr and Muslim said

that Imam Malik fell into wahm regarding this.

And Al-Hafidh ibn Hajar regarding Imam Malik said in his Taqreeb under the characteristics/mention

of Imam malik : Al-Faqeeh, Imam dar al-Hijra, The best and on the top most and the head of all the

muttaqeen, the most established of all and Bukhari said that the best of chains is the one that is

from Malik from Nafi` from Ibn Ùmar31

31 The shaykh here is trying to show how despite the amazing status of some giants, their mistakes are not

defended, nor are their additions and sayings blindly accepted, rather the madhab of insaaf (justice) is that we

take whatever is proven to be right and leave whatever is wrong or incorrect no matter who the Imam is. On

the contrary there are some who have invested centuries and volumes after volumes in somehow proving that

how one Imam or one or two Imams of their madhab are infallible meaning they can never err and whatever

they say or have said has to have a valid proof in their support. Such a mentality is truly devastating. Whilesome call this Taqleed among the ahl al-hadeeth, one may also call this fanatism or hizbiyyah of the highest

level. The same Imam malik radhiallahu ànhu said everyone’s narration can be taken and left except the


23/28


These are some of the texts on this topic from the books of Mustalah . As for the books of Ìlal then if

we were to see the defects the addition of a thiqah narration who is lone and in opposition to other

thiqah narrators bring then an entire volume can be written on it. And as an example I will mention a

few such as from the book of Ìlal of Ibn abi hatim and others .

Ibn Abi Hatim in his book of Ìlal 1/221 said: I asked my father and abu zuràh regarding the hadeeth

which is narrated from Àbdur razzaq from Ma`mar from Zayd ibn Aslam from Àta ibn Yisar from

Abu saèed from the Messenger of Allah “ charity is not permissible except for five . One who buys

holdings from his money , an administrator of zakat (or one sent to collect it), one who is a debtor,

one who fights in the cause of Allah, or a poor man who receives the charity and gives it as a gift

to a rich man” so they said : This is a mistake

This narration is narrated by Thawri from Zayd ibn Aslam who said Haddathani thabat who said

the Messenger of Allah said … And that is better? So my father said if one were to say that athbat

who is he? Is he not Àta ibn Yisar? So tell him that if it had been Àta ibn Yisar we wouldn’t have

said Athbat . And Ibn Uyaynah from Zayd from Àta from the Messenger of Allah mursalan and my

father said the preservation of Thawri is better32

Imam muqbil says : You are seeing that Abu Hatim and Abu Zuràh are giving preference to thawri’s

narration over ma`mar because thawri is stronger. And likewise is Imam Ahmad rahimahullah

grades a route muàllal (in short weak) which seems to be musnad via a mursal way as has come in

fath ul- Mugheeth 1/136

Ibn al-Madeeni said in al-Ìlal on page 91 regarding the hadeeth of Abi salamah from Abu Huraira

from the Prophet sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam that { من

ار

َ

شنن

ار }33

“This has been narrated from Muhammad ibn Àmr from Abi Salamah from Abu Huraira . And this

near me is incorrect without a doubt because az-zuhri narrated this from abu salamah and he from

abu rawwad al-laythi and he from abdur rahman ibn àwf and this near me is what is correct. “

And this is because Zuhair is the one who is preferred or surpassed over Muhammad ibn Àmr in

this . Àli ibn madeeni is that giant about whom Hafidh ibn Hajar rahimahullah said in his

companion of this grave (i.e. pointing towards the prophet sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam). Also a very important

point to note here is that these advises are not for the self-declared mujtahid kids or junior students . You haveno authority to reject or take anything unless you study that matter under scholars and if what you think is

actually what the scholars agree with or corroborate. Unfortunately some have taken these statements as an

excuse to self-interpret and come up with arguments and claims which the salaf or scholars haven’t.

32 There are two chains. The first one is marfooàn and the second is mursalan. Abu Hatim said that thawri is

better than Ma`mar in preservation and thus his chain which is marfooàn is given priority over the mursal one

which stops at Àta. And the reason why he said that some may ask if this athbat was actually none other than

Àta ibn yisar , is because in the mursal chain of Ibn Uyaynah the same hadeeth is coming from Àta so if one

were to cross check and inquire if the kunyah or other name for Àta is athbat or if there was a genuine

mistake in replacing àta with athbat so Abu hatim advised his son to reply that there is no such mistake but

rather the narration from thawri which has athbat connecting to the prophet is stronger to the one coming via

ata disconnected to the prophet .

33 "Ties of kinship (rahim) is derived from the All-Merciful (ar-Rahman).


24/28


introduction to al-Fath page 347 : “ There is no difference among the scholars that Àli ibn Madeeni

knew more than his contemporaries in the hidden defects of hadeeth”

Al Hakim said in Ma`rifat Ùloom al-hadeeth page 114 :

And the third type from the defects of hadeeth is as narrated to us by Abu Àbbas Muhammad ibnYa`qoob who said Haddathana Muhammad ibn Ishaaq as-saghani who said heard from ibn Abi

Maryam who said Haddathana Muhammad ibn ja`far ibn abi katheer from Musa ibn Ùqbah from

Abi Ishaaq from abu burdah from his father from the Messenger of Allah sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam

who said Verily I seek forgiveness from my lord in a day a hundred times

Abu Àbdullah (al-Hakim) said :

“…And this is a chain that whoever ponders upon it will realize that this is upon the conditions of an

authentic narration and when the madeenian narrators narrate from koofi narrators then it is *a

slip/probable error*34

Haddathana Abu Ja`far Muhammad Saalih ibn Hani who said Haddathani Yahya ibn Muhammad ibn

Yahya who said haddathana Abul-Rabi` who said haddathana Hammad ibn zayd from thabit al-

Bunani who said I heard from aba burdah narrate from Al-agr al-Muzni and he is a sahaabi who said

the Messenger of Allah (sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam) said : “ إغلعيبقإوغتسولا

ئر " } Sometimes I perceive a veil over my heart, and I supplicate Allah for forgiveness a

hundred times in a day." – This has been narrated by Imam Muslim in his saheeh from Abi rabi` and

this is the one which is authentic and preserved. And this hadeeth has been narrated by the kufi

narrators as well such as Misàr, Shu`bah and other than them from Àmr ibn murrah from Abi

burdah in the same way. “

Imam muqbil says: So Hakim rahimahullah declares the narration of Musa ibn Ùqbah al-Madini from

Abi Ishaq from Abi burdah al-Kufiyeen as defective because it has come from the route of kufic

narrators and they narrate from Abu burdah from al-Aghar al-Muzni. If Hakim were to traverse upon

the way in which an-Nawawi rahimahullah traversed then he too would have said the hadeeth is

authentic from the route of Abi burdah from Abi Musa and from the route of Abu burdah from al-

aghar al-Muzni but he has given preference to the narration route which was in abundant .

And imam zayli` in Nasb ur-rayah 1/336 said : There are some who accept the addition of a thiqah

unrestrictedly and those who do not accept it (at all) and what is right is between them and is

detailed which is that the addition is accepted at times and rejected at times. So this addition will be

accepted if the narrator who narrated this addition is thiqah, established and a haafidh and those

narrators who did not narrate this are similar to his status or lower than him ..until he (zayli`) said

that the addition will be accepted based on the qarain which will act as a specification for that

scenario and those who have issued a general verdict on this issue (such as either generally

34 The print which I have of this book shows the word to be and I don’t know what this word means andزوا

this is a typo because after checking what Imam Hakim said originally the word was as expected considering

the statement of other scholars on the issue of madinian narrating from koofiyyeen the word isزوا

. Whichroughly means to make an error . So the statement of Imam Hakim as in his Ma`rifat on page 114 is -

ون

ٌ

داذإ

وا ر

ٌ

والز

" -


25/28


accepting it always or negating it always) have errd . Rather what is right is that every addition has a

specific ruling on it which makes it khaas..until the end of what imam zayli` said.

And Imam al-Hazmi rahimahullah in al-Ìtibaar page 11 enlisted a sabab for giving preferences as“Kathrat al-Àdad fi Ahad al-Janibayn” (roughly meaning the increase in the number of routes on any

side) and then he gave an e.g and then said : the second way of giving preference (to a narration) is

that one among the two narrators is more strong and reliable than the other. For example if Malik

and shuàib ibn Abi Hamza in (reporting from) Zuhri then shuàib though he is a haafidh and is thiqah

but he is not equal to Malik in itqan and hifdh and one who ponders on their ahadeeth he will find a

a big difference (baèed) between them

And Hafidh al-Àraqi also quoted al-Hazami in Taqiyyid wal-Izah on page 286 .

And here we end of brief discussion on the addition of a thiqah narrator and now I will mention

some of the mushkilaat which I faced and how I resolved those difficulties.


26/28


Some difficulties that I came across during research

1) The biggest of troubles was from Hafidh Daraqutni rahimahullah in his al-Ilzamat where he many

times narrates the chain but not the matan (text of the hadeeth) and an example among them is as

follows:

He rahimahullah in one instance said : and the takhreej will be mentioned ahead for the hadeeth of

Muhammad ibn Hatib from the Prophet (sallalahu àlayhi wa sallam) from the narration of Abu

Malik al-Ashjaè and those who narrate from him. And even others have narrated from him such

as samak ibn Harb and other than him such as ibn Àwf and Yusuf ibn Sa`d and others among them35

So due to these issues I had to revert back to books such as Tuhfath al-Ashraaf of Hafidh al-Mizzi and

other books of the same genre (wa zakhair al-Mawarith) and I also reverted to the biography of the

sahaabi in al-Isabah for perhaps al-Hafidh ibn Hajar might have narrated the narration from the

sahaabi (whom daraqutni is implying towards). And also I referred to Musnad Ahmad and usually Iwould find the narration. And at times it happened that I couldn’t find many other narrations except

until after a while so I used to mark it. Such as the hadeeth of Rafi` ibn abi Rafi` at-tai’ and I did not

find this hadeeth with this sanad except after a very long time (of searching) and I found that

hadeeth in al-Hafidh khateeb al-Baghdadi’s al-Mudhi awhaam al-Jam` wat-tafreeq 2/96

And likewise in al-tattabu` al-Hafidh daraqutni said that “and Bukhari recorded the hadeeth of

Khansa bint Khudam and we have written it “ and he (rahimahullah) said elsewhere “ and Muslim

recorded the hadeeth of Ibn Wahb who narrated it from Abi sakhr from Abi Hazim on the mention

regarding jannah and no one corroborated him in this and there are others more established than

him”

And he said that in Musnad Ùmar that Bukhari recorded the hadeeth of dawood ibn abi al-qurrat

from ibn buraidah and I have mentioned its defect elsewhere. And he (rahimahullah) also said in

Musnad Ùmar that Muslim recorded the hadeeth of Qatadah from Saalim from Ma`dan and I also

mentioned its defect elsewhere.

35 See Ilzamat narration no. 6


27/28


So examples of these three kinds are easy to research into for the (giant) huffadh as for us36 then we

are dependent on finding it in the Musnad for that sahaabi until we find the narration with that

criticised chain or we revert back to books such as Hafidh al-Mizzi’s al-Itraaf 37

and the narrations in

Bukhari which were criticised couldn’t be found with the criticised asaneed mentioned by the critics

except after (exerting) a long time

And at times it happened that a hadeeth was found in another place where it wasn’t expected to be

such as the hadeeth “ Whoever doesn’t recite the qur’an in (an appropriate) rhythm then he is not

one of us” so the place that is expected for this be found is under the chapter of fadhail al-qur’an as

Imam Bukhari has narrated a hadeeth that is similar to the meaning of this hadeeth that states

“Allah does not listen so attentively to anything as He listens to the recitation of the Qur'an by a

Prophet who recites well with a melodious and audible voice."

But the hadeeth “ whoever doesn’t recite the qur’an in rythym” was not found in the chapter of

fadhail al-qur’an but rather in the

Documents

Al-Ilzamat - Daraqutni, Muqbil Ibn Hadii