الله الذي يحيى و يميت … اغفر لأني فاطمة بنت أسد و لقنها حجتها
Allah who gives life and death … forgive my mother Fatimah bint Asad and inspire her with her proof.
Ibn al Jawzi says, “Ruh ibn Salah is the only narrator. He is in the list of unknown narrators. And Ibn ‘Adi has classified him da’if.”
Al Haythami said, “Al Tabarani narrated it in al Kabir and al Awsat. Ruh ibn Salah is therein. Ibn Hibban and al Hakim gave him credibility but he has du’f. the rest of the narrators are the narrators of al Sahih.”
Abu Nuaim reported it from the chain of al Tabarani. His isnad according to both of them is da’if because Ruh ibn Salah is the only narrator as stated by Abu Nuaim himself.
Ruh ibn Salah
We learn from here that majority label him da’if. Hence his hadith will be munkar since he is the only narrator. Everyone who narrated this hadith clearly stated that he is the only narrator. This is an indication from them to this flaw.
This tafarrud is considered munkar according to Muslim. He says in the introduction to his al Sahih:
فأما من تراه يعمد لمثل الزهري في جلالته و كثرة أصحابه الحفاظ المتقنين لحديثه و حديث غيره أو لمثل هشام بن عروة و حديثهما عند أهل العلم مبسوط مشترك قد نقل أصحابهما عنهما حديثهما على الاتفاق منهم في أكثره فيروى عنهما أو عن أحدهما العدد من الحديث مما لا يعرفه أحد من أصحابهما و ليس ممن قد شاركهم في الصحيح مما عندهم فغير جائز قبول حديث هذا الضرب من الناس
As regards one you see narrating from the likes of al Zuhri in his prominence and abundance of students―proficient perfect Huffaz who have memorised his ahadith and ahadith of others―or like Hisham ibn ‘Urwah. Their ahadith are plentiful by the scholars and common among them. Their students narrated their ahadith from them with consensus and unanimity in majority of them. So this fellow narrates from both of them or one of them few ahadith which none of their students recognise. And he is not from those who partnered them in their authentic ahadith, then it is not permissible to accept the hadith of this type of people.
Some have opted to give credibility to the hadith due to Ibn Hibban’s and al Hakim’s tawthiq of Ruh. However, this is not beneficial to them since the two are known to display carelessness in tawthiq. Hence, their views do not hold any weight when clashing. Al Suyuti has quoted from Hafiz al ‘Iraqi, “Al Hakim displays more carelessness than him (i.e. Ibn Hibban).”
 Al ‘Ilal al Mutanahiyah fi al Ahadith al Wahiyah vol. 1 pg. 269.
 Majma’ al Zawa’id vol. 9 pg. 257.
 Hilyat al Awliya’ vol. 3 pg. 121.
 Al Mujam al Awsat vol. 1 pg. 68; al ‘Ilal al Mutanahiyah vol. 1 pg. 270.
 Muqaddamat Sahih Muslim vol. 1 pg. 7.
 Tadrib al Rawi vol. 1 pg. 108; al Taqyid wa al Idah vol. 1 pg. 31.Back to top