BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

Chapter 4

From the Atba’ al Tabi’in to the Authors of the Famous Books

 

In this chapter, I study the development of narration from the previous class: the class of Malik (d. 179 AH), Shu’bah (d. 160 AH), Sufyan al Thawri (d. 161 AH) and others until I reach the famous Sunnah books. By this, I mean the six collections, which are Sahih al Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sunan al Nasa’i, Sunan Abi Dawood, Sunan al Tirmidhi, and Sunan Ibn Majah. Added to them are Musnad Ahmed, al Darimi and others.

In this chapter, I explain the features of the transformation in narration from the second century to the third century in the first discussion. Then in the second discussion, I select the scholar who was most involved in criticism and practiced it during his era, namely Yahya ibn Ma’in, and study his critical approach and elaborate on it. Thereafter, I conclude with Imam al Bukhari and the arrival of all Hadith and critical heritage to him, in the third discussion.

 

Features of the transition from the second to the third century

Narrations developed extensively after the era of the Atba’ al Tabi’in, as narrations spread and isnad branched out tremendously, and many new types of Hadith books appeared. Scholarly views appeared which influenced the paths of narrations. Thus, the Muhaddithin tended to include complete chains of narrations in their writings. The criticism accompanying the narration also spread widely, until the school of the Muhaddithin became distinct from other schools. Among those features are:

 

The First Feature: From the stability of texts to the spread of isnad

Texts of sahih ahadith had spread and settled in the Islamic cities among scholars and critics and they had become apparent, even though they were not all collected in one place, as each city had its own specific ahadith that its people circulated until the first half of the second century. Then it spread in the Islamic cities due to travel and Hadith gatherings in the second half of it. However, no one collected all of these marfu’ ahadith in one book. Rather, every compiler and every narrator had some part of it.

Accordingly, there was no established, authentic text that appeared in the third century that was not known to scholars or narrators in the second century, as all authentic texts were transferred from the second century to the third century.^[1]

This is evident in several aspects:

1. The critics would rebut some of the texts that were not known in the second century. In fact, that text would lead to criticism of its narrator. Examples of this are many, of which I will limit myself to two examples of texts that were narrated by thiqah narrators; however, critics rebutted them, and even criticised their narrators because of them.

Example 1: A hadith was mentioned to Ibn Ma’in (d. 233 AH) which was narrated from his sheikh ‘Abdul Razzaq (d. 211 AH) — from Ma’mar (d. 154 AH) — from al Zuhri (d. 124 AH) — from ‘Ubaydah ibn ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Utbah (d. 98 AH) — from Ibn ‘Abbas (d. 68 AH) who said:

 

نظر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى علي فقال أنت سيد في الدنيا سيد في الآخرة حبيبك حبيبي وحبيبي حبيب الله وعدوك عدوي وعدوي عدو الله فالويل لمن أبغضك بعدي

The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam looked at ‘Ali and said, “You are a leader in this world and a leader in the Hereafter. Your lover is my beloved and my beloved is the beloved of Allah. Your enemy is my enemy and my enemy is the enemy of Allah. Woe to whoever hates you after me.”^[2]

 

This hadith was not known before that. ‘Abdul Razzaq is from the sheikhs of Ibn Ma’in and Ahmed. They travelled to him and heard thousands of ahadith from him; however, they did not hear this hadith before. Ibn Ma’in immediately shouted out, falsifying the one who narrated this from ‘Abdul Razzaq, saying:

 

من هذا الكذاب الذي روى هذا عن عبد الرزاق

Who is this liar who narrated this from ‘Abdul Razzaq?

 

The narrator of this hadith, Ahmed ibn al Azhar al Naysaburi (d. 263 AH)—a well-known Imam, thiqah and frequent narrator^[3]—stood up and said:

 

هو‏ ذا أنا

Here I am.

 

Yahya ibn Ma’in smiled and said:

 

أنما إنك لست بكذاب

You are not a liar.

 

He was amazed at his integrity and said:

 

الذنب لغيرك في هذا الحديث

The fault lies with someone other than you in this hadith.^[4]

 

The hadith was definitely false according to Ibn Ma’in and others,^[5] but the source of the lie is unknown. Initially, he attributed it to the narrator from ‘Abdul Razzaq. Then the narrator turned out to be a trustworthy companion of Ibn Ma’in, which surprised him, but he insisted that the hadith is a lie, saying, that the fault in it is from someone else.

This is what prompted scholars and critics to search for the source of the error in this hadith.^[6]

The problem with this hadith is that its text was not known at all in the second century, neither through the chain of ‘Abdul Razzaq nor anyone else. ‘Abdul Razzaq had great students who spread throughout the Islamic cities. Such a hadith pertaining to the virtues of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu would be widespread. Thus, the isolated narration of its narrator from ‘Abdul Razzaq became the means of falsifying the hadith and its narrator. The reason was not its content that confirmed the virtue of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Critics have authenticated dozens of ahadith about the virtue of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. In fact, it has been said that no other Companion’s merits have been narrated as much as ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.^[7] Some ahadith mention a higher merit than this one, such as the hadith of Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas radiya Llahu ‘anhu, which is reported in Sahih al Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and most of the books of the Sunnah, wherein the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu:

 

أنت‏ مني بمنزلة هارون من موسى

You are to me in the position of Harun to Musa.^[8]

 

Some scholars have stated that the overall meaning of the text of the hadith of Abu al Azhar al Naysaburi is correct.^[9]

 

Example 2: Nuaim ibn Hammad was judged as da’if for adding one sentence to the hadith of Iftiraq (disunity). Nuaim narrated this hadith from ‘Isa ibn Yunus — from Hariz ibn ‘Uthman — from ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Jubayr ibn Nufayr — from his father — from ‘Awf ibn Malik radiya Llahu ‘anhu who said:

 

قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم استفترق أمتي على بضع وسبعين فرقة أعظمها فرقة قوم يقيسون الأمور برأيهم فيحرمون الحلال ويحللون الحرام

The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “My Ummah will be divided into more than seventy sects, the greatest of which is the group who will analyse matters according to their opinion. They will forbid what is permissible and legalise what is forbidden.”^[10]

 

The hadith is famous and well-known, without that last addition. Nuaim ibn Hammad is known for his extreme stance towards Abu Hanifah and the Ahl al Ra’y (people of opinion), and the last sentence indicates to the disparagement of the Ahl al Ra’y. It was as if his personal opinion entered into his hadith. Thus, the critics declared him da’if, as it was a severe delusion. In fact, some of them even discarded Nuaim because of it. Ibn ‘Adi states:

 

فتكلم الناس فيه بجراه

People spoke about him because of his boldness.^[11]

 

‘Abdul Ghani ibn Sa’id al Misri states:

 

سقط نعيم بهذا الحديث عند أهل الحديث

Nuaim was discarded by the Ahl al Hadith (scholars of Hadith) because of this hadith.^[12]

 

Some people disagreed with Ibn Ma’in and maintained Nuaim’s tawthiq due to his strong knowledge and integrity; however, they ruled this hadith to be false in general,^[13] believing that Nuaim made a mistake in it and did not intend to lie, but rather he was confused.^[14]

Since this transmission was unknown, prior to that, and the first person to narrate it was Nuaim, the scholars exposed its falsehood and criticised Nuaim because of it, and some of them discarded his Hadith, whereas he was thiqah initially.

As for the ahadith that were narrated isolated by da’if narrators in that era, critics judge them as da’if and rejected, and they are numerous.^[15]

 

2. Scholars have stipulated the number of sahih marfu’ ahadith. Most of them stated that it is close to 4,400 ahadith only, with some differences in that. These four-thousand are the well-known established ones that have spread and settled. Perhaps they are unanimously agreed upon. As for those narrations wherein there are differences of opinion or are likely to be sahih or da’if, they are more than that.

Texts have been reported from scholars stating that they knew this and captured it since the second century. Al Thawri (d. 161 AH), Shu’bah (d. 160 AH), Yahya ibn Sa’id al Qattan, (d. 198 AH), Ibn Mahdi (d. 198 AH), Ahmed ibn Hanbal, (d. 241 AH) and others state:

 

أن جملة الأحاديث المسندة عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يعني الصحيحة بلا تكرير أربعة آلاف وأربعمئة حديث

The total number of ahadith attributed to the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam—meaning sahih ahadith, without repetition—are 4 400 ahadith.^[16]

 

It is reported that ‘Abdul Razzaq al San’ani (d. 211 AH) discussed this with Ishaq ibn Rahawayh (d. 238 AH), and Ishaq said:

 

أربعة آلاف

4 000.

 

‘Abdul Razzaq says:

 

أقول ما قاله يحيى بن سعيد المسند أربعة آلاف وأربعمئة منها ألف ومئتان سنن وثمانمئة حلال وحرام وألفان وأربعمئة فضائل وأدب وتسديد

I say what Yahya ibn Sa’id said that musnad narrations are 4 400, of which 1 200 are Sunan, 800 are pertaining to Halal and Haram, and 2 400 are regarding virtues, etiquette, and guidance.^[17]

 

Different statements have been reported about that number. It is said that:

 

إن الثوري يراها خمسة آلاف أو ستة وأن ابن راهويه يراها سبعة‏ آلاف ونيف

Al Thawri believes it to be five or 6 000^[18] and that Ibn Rahawayh believes it to be 7 000 or more.^[19]

 

In any case, the most that has been reported about it is 8 000, as stated by Imam al Zarkashi (d. 794 AH).^[20]

This is the total number of ahadith in general, not the ahadith pertaining to rulings,^[21] as the ahadith about rulings are much less than that. They are 800 ahadith according to Yahya al Qattan and Ibn Mahdi.^[22] According to Ibn al Mubarak (d. 181 AH), there are 900 ahadith.^[23] In any case, the method of counting differs from one scholar to another. A scholar may see a single text as two separate ahadith, if they are narrated from more than two Companions and another scholar may see them as one hadith.

Some researchers in our time have counted the number of sahih ahadith, without repetitions, and they reached 3 921 ahadith,^[24] which is close to the number of the former scholars. Differences remain in the methodology of counting and in the Ijtihadi differences regarding tashih (authenticating) and tad’if of ahadith.^[25]

I believe that such a number of ahadith is not too much for someone who has devoted himself, poured his effort, and dedicated his time and life into it. Therefore, one cannot object to Shu’bah for falling ill when he hears a hadith that he does not know, as he said:

 

إني‏ لأذاكر بالحديث يفوتني فأمرض

When I am reminded of a hadith that escaped me, I fall ill.^[26]

 

Similarly, he said:

 

ذاكرت قيس بن الربيع (وهو ممن يكذب) حديث أبي حصين فلوددت أن البيت وقع علي وعليه حتى نموت من كثرة ما كان يغرب به علي

I reminded Qais ibn al Rabi’ (who is one of those who would lie) of the hadith of Abu Hussain. I wished that the house fell on me and on him until we died, because of the many times I used to be alienated due to it.^[27]

 

Likewise, Ibn al Madini said:

 

ستة كادت تذهب عقولهم عند المذاكرة يحيى وعبد الرحمن ووكيع وابن عينة وأبو داود وعبد الرزاق من شدة شهوتهم له

Six people almost lost their minds when studying. They are Yahya, ‘Abdul Rahman, Waki’, Ibn ‘Uyaynah, Abu Dawood, and ‘Abdul Razzaq because of the intense desire for it.^[28]

 

We see in our time those who memorise thousands of poetic stanzas or the names and news of famous and well-known people, whereas they do not devote themselves to it and put all their effort into it. Rather, it is a hobby and a desire. This is despite the presence of the products of modern life that distract him from memorising them. As for Shu’bah, he was free from everything except Hadith. In his era, there was nothing to distract him from memorisation except writing, as it was the new incoming tool for students of knowledge in their time.

Furthermore, the established texts narrated from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam were well-known and widespread among scholars in the second century, especially if they were pertaining to Halal and Haram. Al Shafi’i (d. 204 AH) said:

 

أصول الأحكام نيف وخمسمئة حديث كلها عند مالك إلا ثلاثين حديثا وكلها عن ابن عيينة إلا ستة أحاديث

The principles of rulings are (found) in more than five-hundred ahadith. All of them are by Malik, except thirty ahadith. All of them are from Ibn ‘Uyaynah except for six ahadith.^[29]

 

However, the spread of travel, the abundance of Hadith gatherings, the widespread interest in seeking Hadith, and the strong desire for it led to two things:

First: The ease of collecting all ahadith from various Islamic cities in one book, prior to which, each city had its own sheikhs and ahadith.

Second: Increment of isnad and their divergence for a single text. Prior to that, the text was narrated through a Tabi’i, who narrated it from a Companion. Then through this, it spread widely from the class of junior Tabi’in and Atba’ al Tabi’in. The matter ended up such that for one text, from one Companion’s narration, there were great number of narrators, reaching into the dozens, and sometimes even the hundreds, as is clear in the tree of isnad (see Figure 1). A researching Muhaddith is the one who collects all these narrations, and no one can alienate him in them. Therefore, travel, collection, exploration, and investigation became more emphasised and more important for a scholar.

From here we understand the statements, at the end of the second century and in the third century, that speak of hundreds of thousands of ahadith, as they are the sum of the divergence of the isnad for the texts, and not the texts themselves. In addition to that, ahadith that are mawquf on a Companion or maqtu’ on a Tabi’i are included in that number.^[30] Furthermore, it includes sahih, hassan, da’if and mawdu’ (fabricated) ahadith.

Among the statements that were reported regarding the large number of ahadith in the third century is the statement of Yahya ibn Ma’in (d. 233 AH) when he was asked:

 

كم كتبت من الحديث فأجاب كتبت بيدي هذه ستمئة ألف حديث

How many ahadith did you write?

He replied, “I wrote six-hundred-thousand ahadith with this hand of mine.”^[31]

 

Likewise, the statement of Muhammad ibn Nasr al Tabari who said:

 

دخلت على يحيى بن معين فوجدت عنده كذا وكذا سفطا دفاتر وسمعته يقول كتبت بيدي ألف ألف حديث وكل حديث لا يوجد ههنا وأشار بيده إلى الأسفاط فهو كذب

I came to Yahya ibn Ma’in and found such-and-such baskets of notebooks by him. I heard him say, “I wrote a million ahadith with my hand. Any hadith that is not found here—and he pointed with his hand to the notebooks—is a lie.”^[32]

 

Similarly, Ishaq ibn Rahawayh (d. 238 AH) said:

 

لكأني أنظر إلى مئة ألف حديث في كتبي وثلاثين ألفا أسردها

It is as if I were looking at a 100 000 ahadith in my books, and 30 000, which I narrated.^[33]

 

One of his students said:

 

وأملى علينا إسحاق أحد عشر ألف حديث من حفظه ثم قرأها علينا فما زاد حرفا ولا نقص حرفا

Ishaq dictated 11 000 ahadith to us from his memory and then read them to us. He neither added a letter nor subtracted a letter.^[34]

 

Al Dhahabi (d. 748 AH) commented on this, saying:

 

فهذا والله الحفظ

By Allah, this is memorisation.^[35]

 

He is reported to have said:

 

أعرف مكان مئة ألف حديث كأني أنظر إليها وأحفظ سبعين ألف حديث عن ظهر قلبي وأحفظ أربعة آلاف حديث مزورة فقيل له ما معنى حفظ المزورة قال إذا مر بي منها حديث في الأحاديث الصحيحة فليته منها فليا

I know the location of a 100 000 ahadith, as if I am looking at them. I memorised 70 000 ahadith by heart and memorised 4 000 fabricated ahadith.

Someone asked him, “What is the meaning of memorising fabricated ones?”

He replied, “If I come across any of those ahadith among the sahih ahadith, I would get rid of it.”^[36]

 

The Second Feature: From compilation and Muwattas to the Musnads, Sunan, and Sahihs

The Muhaddithin from the class of the Atba’ al Tabi’in would narrate Hadith in its broad meaning in their compilations. This included marfu’ ahadith of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, mawquf ahadith of the Companions, and maqtu’ ahadith of the Tabi’in,^[37] along with fiqhi views, mursal, munqati’ ahadith, and balaghat (those narrations from which the isnad is omitted). However, by the end of the second century, they began to extract the marfu’ muttasil ahadith of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and record them in famous books known as Musnads. Musnads are books that collect the ahadith of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam specifically, without the sayings of the Companions and Tabi’in.

Among the Musnads at the beginning of the second century are: Musnad Abi Dawood al Tayalisi al Basri (d. 204 AH), Musnad ‘Ubayd Allah ibn Musa al Kufi (d. 213 AH), Musnad Asad ibn Musa al Umawi al Misri (d. 212 AH), Musnad Musaddad ibn Musarhad al Basri (d. 228 AH), Musnad Nuaim ibn Hammad al Khuza’i (d. 228 AH), a resident of Egypt, and Musnad Yahya ibn ‘Abdul Hamid al Himmani al Kufi (d. 228 AH).^[38] A large group of scholars followed them. Thus, there were very few Imams among the Huffaz except that they compiled their ahadith in Musnads, such as Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal, Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, ‘Uthman ibn Abi Shaybah, and other eminent scholars.^[39]

The most famous of these Musnads is the Musnad of Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH), which contains more than thirty thousand marfu’ ahadith and very rarely we would find any mawquf or maqtu’ ahadith in it, unlike al Muwatta’, which contains more mawquf and maqtu’ ahadith than marfu’ ones. This shows a clear development in the narration system.

It appears that this development began at the end of the second century. Some researchers estimate its beginning to be in the year 183 AH. Then, it gradually spread until it became strong and prevalent around the year 195 AH.^[40] There are several texts regarding this. Among them is the statement of Bakr ibn Khalaf who said:

 

قال عبد الرحمن بن مهدي حين طلبوا المسند ما أحسن هذا إلا أني أخاف أن يحملهم هذا أن يكتبوا عن غير الثقات

‘Abdul Rahman ibn Mahdi said when they asked him for a Musnad, “How good is this; however, I fear that this will lead them to write from untrustworthy narrators.”^[41]

 

Ibn Mahdi passed away in the year 198 AH, which means that the request for the Musnad occurred before his death. What is meant by his statement ‘they asked for the Musnad,’ is that they asked for muttasil marfu’ ahadith, meaning that they began to confine themselves to it and pay special attention to it, as if that was a general situation that had spread among the ranks of the Muhaddithin. His statement ‘they asked’ indicates to a general attentiveness towards this approach to narration, to the point where Ibn Mahdi feared that this would lead to some overeagerness in narrating from untrustworthy narrators.^[42] The text of Imam Ahmed (d. 241 AH) clarifies the date of that request when he said:

 

جاءنا نعيم بن حماد ونحن على باب هشيم نتذاكر المقطعات فقال جمعتم حديث رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال فعنِينا بها منذ يومئذ

Nuaim ibn Hammad (d. 228) came to us while we were at the door of Hushaym, discussing maqtu’ ahadith. He said, “Did you gather the Hadith of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam?”

He says, “We have been concerned with it since that day.”^[43]

 

The maqtu’ narrations in this context include the sayings of the Tabi’in and the Companions. That is why they came in opposition to the Hadith of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Hushaym passed away in the year 183 AH, which confirms that the request for marfu’ ahadith occurred in the last two decades of the second century.

As for the reason for this, I see it being due to the theories of Imam al Shafi’i (d. 204 AH), which took a direction different to that of his sheikh Malik ibn Anas (d. 179 AH) of taking into consideration practices and relying on the sayings of the Companions and the Tabi’in. As for al Shafi’i, he turned to the centrality of sahih ahadith in rulings, regardless of whether it agreed with the actions of a specific people or a specific city. The basis is sahih ahadith. Hence, his statement became famous:

 

إذا صح الحديث فهو مذهبي

If a hadith is sahih, then it is my mazhab.^[44]

 

One of the most important conditions for a sahih Hadith is that it must be muttasil (continuous), not munqati’ (interrupted), and not mursal, as he himself detailed in his book al Risalah.^[45]

Similarly, Imam al Shafi’i also tended to believe that the statements of the Companions could not be used as evidence in opposition to sahih ahadith. This made marfu’ ahadith, extremely important in comparison to mawquf ahadith.

The Muhaddithin viewed al Shafi’i’s work and theories as a victory for Hadith and its people, so they celebrated him to such an extent that he was called Nasir al Hadith (The Supporter of Hadith).^[46] It was said:

 

لولا الشافعي لكان أصحاب الحديث في عمى

Had it not been for al Shafi’i, the people of Hadith would have been blind.^[47]

 

Likewise, it was said:

 

هو الذي فتح لأصحاب الحديث الأقفال

He was the one who opened the locks for the people of Hadith.^[48]

 

Similarly, it was said:

 

كان أصحاب الحديث رقودا حتى أيقظهم الشافعي

The people of Hadith were asleep until al Shafi’i woke them up.^[49]

 

Imam Ahmed stated:

 

كانت أقفيتنا في أيدي أصحاب أبي حنيفة ما تنزع حتى رأينا الشافعي وكان أفقه الناس في كتاب الله وفي سنة رسول الله

Our necks were in the hands of Abu Hanifah’s students until we saw al Shafi’i. He was the most knowledgeable of people regarding the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.^[50]

 

Hence, these theories had a wide resonance in Hadith movement, as the actions of the Muhaddithin after that had a strong tendency to compile marfu’ muttasil ahadith, and in many cases sufficing on them, without the mawquf, maqtu’, and mursal ahadith that were famously compiled in the second half of the second century AH.

All of this explains the great development that took place at the beginning of the third century AH, of resorting to compiling Musnads, then Sahihs and Sunan. Imam Ahmed (d. 241 AH) compiled his great Musnad over many years in response to that scholarly need arising from those theories. The Musnad does not contain any mawquf or mursal ahadith that were intended for collection. Similar can be said regarding the six books.

This is not the only explanation for the scholars’ interest in that era in compiling marfu’ muttasil ahadith. The spread of many heretical sects and opposing schools of thought led them to compile these books to include their opinions on beliefs and fiqh and to respond to those who disagreed, so that they would be an alternative to an independent literature on fiqh and theology, and it can be an indirect way of responding to them.^[51]

 

The Third Feature: From the phenomenon of reduction in isnad to the phenomenon of its completion: from Mursal to Muttasil

Imams among the Atba’ al Tabi’in mentioned mursal ahadith frequently in the books. A mursal hadith is a narration whose isnad is not linked to the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam without any interruption. Usually, the Tabi’i narrates it directly from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam without mentioning the Companion. This can be represented by two important books: Jami’ Ma’mar and Muwatta’ Malik.

Ma’mar ibn Rashid mentioned more mursal ahadith in his compilation compared to muttasil ahadith.^[52] In his al Muwatta’, Imam Malik (d. 179 AH) deduced more from mursal ahadith than mentioning them. Their number reached close to 222 mursal ahadith.^[53]

I stop at mursal narrations of Malik, for example, as this reduction in the isnad of the Hadith was either from Malik himself or from Malik’s sheikh or the sheikh of his sheikh. It was either intentional or unintentional. Some scholars in the second century had a clear trend in reducing the isnad intentionally due to various reasons. It was Imam Malik’s approach to reduce the isnad if he had any doubts in it. Al Shafi’i said:

 

الناس‏ إذا شكوا في الحديث ارتفعوا وكان مالك إذا شك في الحديث انخفض

When people doubted a hadith, they would raise it (the isnad), and when Malik had doubts about a hadith, he would reduce it.^[54]

 

Ibn Hibban said in his commentary on a hadith:

 

وهذه كانت عادة لمالك يرفع في بعض الأحايين الأخبار ويوقفها مرارا ويرسلها مرة ويسندها أخرى على حسب نشاطه

This was Malik’s habit. He would raise the transmissions in some cases, and narrate it as mawquf many times. He would narrate it as mursal sometimes, whilst at other times, he would link it (i.e. mention the full isnad), according to his desire.^[55]

 

Al Daraqutni said:

 

ومن عادة مالك إرسال الأحاديث وإسقاط رجل

It is Malik’s habit to narrate mursal ahadith and omit a narrator.^[56]

 

This was also the situation with other scholars at the end of the first century and in the second century, such as Muhammad ibn Sirin (d. 110 AH), Ayub al Sakhtiyani (d. 131 AH), Mis’ar ibn Kidam al Kufi (d. 155 AH), and Hammad ibn Zaid al Basri (d. 179 AH).^[57] This is a phenomenon, which we can call ‘the phenomenon of intentional reduction in complete isnad.’ One of the most important reasons for this intentional reduction was the narrator’s doubt and caution, as previously mentioned in the texts from Malik. That is followed by the fact that some Muhaddithin might prefer brevity due to the lack of enthusiasm at the time of narrating, especially since the idea of ​​fiqhi work was strong in the minds of some Muhaddithin at that time, and the idea of ​​ marfu’ muttasil Hadith was not dominant on the Hadith group. One of the reasons may be the sheikh’s trust in the person he narrated from and the irrelevance of mentioning his name, or the student trusts his sheikh and him not asking the sheikh about the deficiency in the isnad.^[58]

However, this phenomenon was not the general phenomenon among the Muhaddithin, as the basis was to mention the hadith with its complete isnad, which is what most of the Muhaddithin practiced.

I traced Malik’s reduction in isnad in many ahadith in a separate study and showed that omission of some of the Companions’ names was out of precaution and doubt. For example, Malik narrated a hadith from his sheikh Hisham ibn ‘Urwah — from his father ‘Urwah — from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam regarding the time of ‘Asr Salah. Malik omitted the name of the Companion in this hadith, who is Ibn ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. A large group of Hisham ibn ‘Urwah’s students disagreed with Malik in this regard, so they narrated it from him — from his father ‘Urwah — from Ibn ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma — from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, by mentioning the name of the Companion in it. Their number reached 11 narrators, including senior thiqah narrators such as Waki’ ibn al Jarrah, Yahya ibn Sa’id al Qattan, ‘Abdah ibn Sulaiman, and others. The hadith is narrated through another path other than the path of ‘Urwah — from Ibn ‘Umar. It came via Nafi’ — from Ibn ‘Umar as well, which means that the name of Ibn ‘Umar is proven in the isnad without a doubt, but Malik omitted it for some reason.^[59] Examples of him reducing a narrator from the ahadith are many.^[60]

In any case, the phenomenon of intentional reduction from the isnad almost disappeared at the beginning of the third century and the practice of the Muhaddithin remained on the well-known method of mentioning the full isnad, especially with the influence of al Shafi’i’s advanced theories of paying attention to marfu’ muttasil ahadith.

Accordingly, the notion that the Muhaddithin, in the third century, included some narrators in the missing isnad to complete and establish the phenomenon of ittisal (uninterrupted chain) is incorrect, as it ignores the phenomenon of reduction in isnad in the second century, as I detailed it in my study Min Marasil Malik ila Muttasilat al Bukhari.^[61]

This notion being incorrect is confirmed by the fact that the senior critics noticed an important phenomenon, which is the error in adding in the isnad, in such a way that it becomes muttasil, whereas originally it was a mursal hadith. They found some narrators who used to make mistakes in narrating the mursal hadith as muttasil, and mention the name of a Companion in it, but (in reality) there is no name of a Companion in it. Based on that, critics differentiated between two scenarios:

That which was proven to them, that the narrator intentionally reduced it and that his peers disagreed with him and mentioned the isnad in full, and they were Huffaz and Dabitin. Here they preferred the narration to be muttasil.

That which was proven to them, that the reduction was original in the hadith and that the addition was an error on the part of some of the narrators. In this case, they preferred the narration to be mursal and declared and announced that. They had a famous expression in that, which was their saying, “And the mursal is more authentic.”

They had specific criticism of each hadith, based on the historical evidence surrounding that hadith, not based on their desires and mazhabs.

 

The Fourth Feature: The vast spread of criticism

The third century was the golden century of criticism, in which the names of great scholars appeared, their fame spread, and they became influential and prominent in Islamic society. In this era, the most important books of narrations and criticism appeared. The most important critics who enriched Hadith life with their criticism in that era were, Yahya ibn Ma’in (d. 233 AH), ‘Ali ibn al Madini (d. 234 AH), Ahmed ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH), Ishaq ibn Rahawayh (d. 238 AH), Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaybah (d. 235 AH), Abu Khaythamah Zuhayr ibn Harb (d. ‎234 AH), and others.

Another group followed them and acquired knowledge and criticism from them. These include al Bukhari (d. 256 AH), Muslim (d. 261 AH), Abu Zur’ah al Razi (d. 264 AH), Abu Hatim al Razi (d. 277 AH), Muhammad ibn Yahya al Dhuhali (d. 258 AH), al Darimi (d. 255 AH), al Tirmidhi (d. 279 AH), Abu Dawood (d. 275 AH), al Nasa’i (d. 303 AH), and others.

Among the books they compiled on criticism are:

• Ibn Ma’in: Tawarikh Ibn Ma’in fi al Hadith wa al Naqd wa ‘Ulum al Rijal, the narrations of al Duri, Ibn Muhriz, al Darimi, and others.
• ‘Ali ibn Al Madini: al ‘Ilal wa Ma’rifat al Rijal—which is one of the most prominent books of ‘Ilal despite its small size; al Ahadith al Mu’allalat; Su’alatuhu li Yahya ibn Sa’id al Qattan.
• Imam Ahmed: al ‘Ilal wa Ma’rifat al Rijal. It has many narrations, the most famous being the narration of his son ‘Abdullah.
• Al Dhuhali: ‘Ilal Hadith al Zuhri.
• Al Bukhari: al Du’afa’ al Saghir.
• Abu Zur’ah al Razi: Asma’ al Du’afa’; Ajwibatuhu ‘an As’ilat al Bardha’i fi al Du’afa’; Ajwibatuhu ‘an As’ilat al Bardha’i fi al Thiqat.
• Abu Dawood: al Marasil.
• Imam al Tirmidhi: al ‘Ilal al Saghir; al ‘Ilal al Kabir. His book al ‘Ilal al Saghir is a fundamental book on the science of ‘Ilal while al ‘Ilal al Kabir is a practical application.
• Imam Muslim: Kitab al Tamyiz. This book displays his high critical personality in the science of ‘Ilal.
• Al Nasa’i: al Du’afa’ wa al Matrukin.

 

I believe that the most important factors for the spread of criticism are:

First: The great need for it. With narrations spreading extremely widely throughout the countries and in every city, scholars raced to track them down and criticise them so that they do not miss anything from them.

Second: Large groups of scholars devoted themselves to this criticism. This devotion existed among the class of the Atba’ al Tabi’in and those after them, but it appeared among large groups of critics in this century, thus enriching critical life immensely.

This devotion means that Hadith criticism became their main preoccupation, from the time the critic woke up until he slept. The critic can hardly think of anything except criticism, narrators, and narrations, day and night, month, and year. This complete devotion qualified them to reach the pinnacle of precision, tracking, and knowledge. That is why they travelled, strove, stayed up late, starved, and spent huge amounts of money to achieve this.^[62]

In fact, some amusing incidents show that their preoccupation with criticism was such that it distracted them from everything else. From amongst these is the incident of Ibn Ma’in that he was seen in a dream after his death and was asked:

 

ما فعل الله بك

What has Allah done to you?

 

He mentioned the honour Allah granted him, that He married him to the large-eyed damsels, extended a tablecloth for him, made him sit among the people, and said to him:

 

يا يحيى تمن علي ما شئت

O Yahya, ask Me whatever you desire.

 

It is a great occasion. He could ask Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala for whatever he wanted and desired. However, his question was:

 

من‏ أوثق الناس

Who is the most trustworthy among the people?

 

Then Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala said:

 

شعبة وسفيان وزائدة

Shu’bah, Sufyan, and Za’idah.^[63]

 

This shows that Yahya’s determination, attention, and life were directed to this matter.

When Abu Zur’ah al Razi (d. 264 AH) was in the throes of death, isnad and studying it were his main concern. Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al Sawi, the scribe of Abu Zur’ah narrates:

 

حضرت‏ أبا زرعة بماشهران وكان في السوق (أي الاحتضار) وعنده أبو حاتم ومحمد بن مسلم بن وارة والمنذر بن شاذان وجماعة من العلماء فذكروا قول النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لقنوا موتاكم لا إله إلا الله فاستحيوا من أبي زرعة وقالوا تعالوا نذكر الحديث فقال أبو عبد الله بن وارة حدثنا الضحاك بن مخلد أبو عاصم قال ثنا عبد الحميد بن جعفر عن صالح ولم يجاوز والباقون سكتوا فقال أبو زرعة وهو في السوق ثنا بندار قال ثنا أبو عاصم قال ثنا عبد الحميد بن جعفر عن صالح بن أبي عريب عن كثير بن مرة الحضرمي عن معاذ بن جبل قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من كان آخر كلامه لا إله إلا الله دخل الجنة ومات رحمه الله

I came to Abu Zur’ah in Mashahran, and he was in the throes of death. With him were Abu Hatim, Muhammad ibn Muslim ibn Warah, al Mundhir ibn Shadhan, and a group of scholars. They mentioned the Hadith of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, “Prompt the dying person to recite la ilaha illa Allah.”^[64] They felt ashamed of (prompting) Abu Zur’ah and said, “Let us mention the hadith.”

Then Abu ‘Abdullah ibn Warah said, “Al Dahhak ibn Makhlad Abu ‘Asim narrated to us — ‘Abdul Hamid ibn Jafar narrated to us — from Salih.”

He did not go further and the rest remained silent. Then Abu Zur’ah, whilst in the throes of death, said, “Bundar narrated to us — Abu ‘Asim narrated to us — ‘Abdul Hamid ibn Jafar narrated to us — from Salih ibn Abi ‘Arib — from Kathir ibn Murrah al Hadrami — from Muaz ibn Jabal radiya Llahu ‘anhu who said that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, ‘He whose last words are la ilaha illa Allah will enter Jannat.’”

Then he passed away. May Allah have mercy on him.^[65]

 

This complete preoccupation and high specialisation resulted in the obvious spread of the science of Hadith criticism at that time.

Third: Collaboration among the scholarly groups: The phenomenon of scholarly critic groups appeared in the third century, in which the critic appears with a group of critics who move, travel, and strive. It is this company that was—obviously—influential in their study, activity, and diligence.

Perhaps the most important scholarly groups in the third century were three:

1. A group of senior critics in the first quarter of the third century: This group includes some of the senior influencers in the science of criticism throughout history. Among them were Yahya ibn Ma’in (d. 233 AH), ‘Ali ibn al Madini (d. 234 AH), Ahmed ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH), Ishaq ibn Rahawayh (d. 238 AH), Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaybah (d. 235 AH), Abu Khaythamah Zuhayr ibn Harb (d. 234), and others. Ibn Ma’in was the eldest and the most senior among them. They were one scholarly group. Some of them would often move together, travel, scrutinise, and work actively together. Al Dhahabi called them ‘the senior group’.^[66]

Among their incidents of collective testing of narrators is the famous story about Ahmed ibn Hanbal and Yahya ibn Ma’in’s testing their sheikh, Abu Nuaim al Fadl ibn Dukayn (130-219 AH). He is a senior thiqah narrator and a Hafiz. In fact, he had no equal in memorisation in his era. Yaqub al Fasawi states:

 

أجمع أصحابنا أن أبا نعيم كان غاية في الإتقان والحفظ وأنه حجة ومع ذلك فإن يحيى بن معين في طريق رجوعه من رحلته الطويلة مع أحمد بن حنبل وأحمد بن منصور الرمادي إلى اليمن للسماع من عبد الرزاق رغب في اختبار حفظ شيخه عندما نزلوا الكوفة متوجهين إلى بغداد فثبطه أحمد بن حنبل ونهاه أن يختبره فإنه ثقة معروف بالحفظ والإتقان وهو شيخهما فأصر يحيى على الاختبار قال الرمادي فأخذ ورقة فكتب فيها ثلاثين حديثا من حديث أبي نعيم وجعل على رأس كل عشرة منها حديثا ليس من حديثه ثم إنهم جاؤوا إلى أبي نعيم فخرج وجلس على دكان طين‏ وأخذ أحمد بن حنبل فأجلسه عن يمينه ويحيى عن يساره وجلست أسفل الدكان ثم أخرج يحيى الطبق فقرأ عليه عشرة أحاديث وأبو نعيم ساكت فلما قرأ الحادي عشر قال أبو نعيم ليس هذا من حديثي اضرب عليه ثم قرأ العشر الثاني وأبو نعيم ساكت فقرأ الحديث فقال أبو نعيم ليس هذا من حديثي فاضرب عليه ثم قرأ العشر الثالث ثم قرأ الحديث الثالث فتغير أبو نعيم وانقلبت عيناه ثم أقبل على يحيى فقال أما هذا وذراع أحمد بيده فأؤرع من أن يعمل مثل هذا وأما هذا يريدني فاقلّ من أن يفعل ذاك ولكن هذا من فعلك يا فاعل وأخرج رجله فرفس يحيى فرمى به من الدكان وقام فدخل داره فقال أحمد بن حنبل ليحيى ألم أمنعك وأقل لك إنه ثبت‏ قال والله لرفسته لي أحب إلي من سفرتي

Our companions unanimously agree that Abu Nuaim was extremely proficient, a Hafiz, and Hujjah (authority).^[67] However, Yahya ibn Ma’in, on his way back from his long trip with Ahmed ibn Hanbal and Ahmed ibn Mansur al Ramadi to Yemen to hear from ‘Abdul Razzaq, wanted to test his sheikh’s memorisation when they came to Kufah, heading to Baghdad. Ahmed ibn Hanbal discouraged him and prevented him from testing him—for he was thiqah and known for his memory and proficiency, and he was their sheikh. Yahya insisted on testing.

Al Ramadi says, “So he took a piece of paper and wrote thirty ahadith from the Hadith of Abu Nuaim on it and at the end of every ten of them he placed a hadith that was not from his ahadith. Then they came to Abu Nuaim. He came out and sat on a clay bench.^[68] He took Ahmed ibn Hanbal and seated him on his right and Yahya on his left, and I sat at the bottom of the bench. Then Yahya took out the slate and recited ten ahadith from it. Abu Nuaim remained silent. When he read the eleventh hadith, Abu Nuaim said, “This is not from my Hadith. Strike it out.”

He recited the second ten and Abu Nuaim was silent. Then he recited the (eleventh) hadith upon which Abu Nuaim said, “This is not from my Hadith. Strike it out.”

Then he recited the third ten and he read the third (extra) hadith. Abu Nuaim changed and his eyes turned. Then he turned to Yahya and said, “As for this person—and he pointed to Ahmed with his hand—he is too devoted to do such a thing, and as for this person—referring to me—he is too weak to do that. This is your doing, O actor.”

He took out his foot and kicked Yahya off the bench. He got up and entered his house. Ahmed ibn Hanbal said to Yahya, “Did I not prevent you and tell you that he is Thabit?”

He said, “By Allah, his kick is more beloved to me than my journey.”^[69]

 

In this incident, the group, their journey and criticism become evident. Abu Nuaim was one of the senior thiqah scholars who lived long, as he was born in the year 130 AH and passed away in the year 219 AH. The journey of Imam Ahmed and Ibn Ma’in to ‘Abdul Razzaq was at the end of the second century. Thus, them testing him is critical scholars testing of an old sheikh. Perhaps Ibn Ma’in wanted to confirm his memory after those years had passed and see that he did not get confused.

2. The group of Abu Zur’ah al Razi (d. 264 AH), Abu Hatim al Razi (d. 277 AH), Muhammad ibn Muslim ibn Warah (d. 270 AH), and Muhammad ibn Yahya al Dhuhali (d. 258 AH), which was a strong, mutually supportive group that had its own direction in criticism and its own stance against opponents. They would support each other, even against some of the other Muhaddithin. They had a strong stance on the members of the third group, which included al Bukhari (d. 256 AH), Muslim (d. 261 AH), and others.

They would move together as a group. They travelled, strove, and tested narrators in groups. Among that is an important incident about their testing of the narrators, which al Bardha’i—Abu Zur’ah’s student—mentioned in Su’alatuhu li Abi Zur’ah:

 

قلت‏ لأبي زرعة قرة بن حبيب تغير فقال نعم كنا أنكرناه بأخرة غير أنه كان لا يحدث إلا من كتابه ولا يحدث حتى يحضر ابنه ثم تبسم فقلت لم تبسمت قال أتيته ذات يوم وأبو حاتم فقرعنا عليه الباب واستأذنا عليه فدنا من الباب ليفتح لنا فإذا ابنته قد تخفت وقالت له يا أبت إن هؤلاء من أصحاب الحديث ولا آمن أن يغلطوك أو يدخلوا عليك ما ليس من حديثك فلا تخرج إليهم حتى يجيء أخي تعني علي بن قرة فقال لها أنا أحفظ فلا أمكنهم ذاك فقالت لست أدعك تخرج فإني لا آمنهم عليك فما زال قرة يجتهد ويحتج عليها في الخروج وهي تمنعه وتحتج عليه في ترك الخروج إلى أن يجيء علي بن قرة حتى غلبت عليه ولم تدعه قال أبو زرعة فانصرفنا وقعدنا حتى وافى ابنه علي قال أبو زرعة فجعلت أعجب من صرامتها وصيانتها أباها

I said to Abu Zur’ah, “Did Qurrah ibn Habib change?”

He said, “Yes, we denounced him later. He would not narrate except from his book and would not narrate until his son was present.”

Then he smiled, so I said, “Why did you smile?”

He said, “I came to him one day with Abu Hatim. We knocked on the door and asked for permission. He approached the door to open for us. Then his daughter became afraid and said to him, ‘O my father, these are people of Hadith and I am afraid that they will mislead you or infiltrate such Hadith which is not your Hadith. So do not go out to them until my brother—meaning ‘Ali ibn Qurrah—comes.’”

He said to her, “I have memorised. I will not allow them to do that.”

She said, “I will not let you go out, because I do not feel safe about you.”

Qurrah continued to try to argue with her to let him go and she continued arguing with him and preventing him from going out until ‘Ali ibn Qurrah came. She prevailed and prevented him from going out.

Abu Zur’ah said, “So we turned back, and sat until his son ‘Ali arrived.”

Abu Zur’ah said, “I was amazed at her firmness and protection of her father.”^[70]

 

What is noticeable from this incident is their movement in a group to test the narrators, and track all the stages of their change that affect their Hadith. Also noticeable is the frightening critical authority that they enjoyed, to such a degree that the narrator’s daughter understood that her father’s reputation would fall in the scholarly community if they tested him and announced that he mixed up the narrations. Hence, she insisted on preventing them and her father remained thiqah throughout history.

3. The group of al Bukhari (d. 256 AH), Muslim (d. 261 AH), and al Tirmidhi (d. 279 AH).

Al Bukhari was the sheikh and head of this group. Al Tirmidhi and Muslim followed him. When al Dhuhali took a strong stance against al Bukhari on the issue of Lafz bi al Qur’an,^[71] Muslim assisted him. He left the gathering wherein al Bukhari was criticised and remained attached to his sheikh. Al Tirmidhi maintained his veneration of al Bukhari until the end of his life, contrary to Abu Zur’ah and Abu Hatim’s stance towards him.

Accordingly, the emergence of these mobile, dynamic, mutually supportive critical groups had a major impact on the spread and development of criticism in the third century.

Fourth: Sense of distinction.

This is the feeling that began to accompany the group of the Ahl al Hadith (masters of Hadith) in the late second half of the second century. It increased from its inception and then became firmly established after the strife of Khalq al Qur’an, and after Imam Ahmed’s victory, representing the Ahl al Hadith, over the Mu’tazilah, which gave the Muhaddithin a feeling of power and splendour. Therefore, their knowledge and criticism spread. This requires detail as will be seen in the following feature.

 

The Fifth Feature: Distinction of the Muhaddithin’s school

The function of a Muhaddith became established in the third century, in terms of collecting and compiling narrations and in terms of criticising and examining them. The school of the Ahl al Hadith acquired a clear distinction from other schools, which was a distinction in the scholarly function without necessarily being an independent distinction in ideology. This is so because the basic function of a Muhaddith, when being regarded as a Muhaddith, requires devoting time to collecting, transmitting, disseminating, documenting, classifying, and arranging Hadith. Adding to that function is specialisation in criticism, distinguishing narrations and narrators, and elaborating on their conditions. This is what occupied many of them from other sciences and caused them to be completely immersed in the science of Hadith and criticism. Fundamentally, their Hadith description does not include the meaning of fiqh or understanding, interpreting, and explaining texts, as that is a function different to the function of a Muhaddith.^[72]

Groups of Muhaddithin remained in Hadith specialisation and did not go beyond their capabilities by interfering into other sciences without qualifications. Thus, Ibn Ma’in, despite his rare ability to criticise and distinguish between narrators and narrations, was a follower of Abu Hanifah in fiqh. Some of his sheikhs who were senior critics, were followers of Abu Hanifah in fiqh, such as Yahya ibn Sa’id al Qattan (d. 198 AH), Waki’ ibn al Jarrah (d. 197 AH), and others.

It is as if the trend of the Muhaddithin’s independence in their school began at the end of the second half of the second century with the spread of travel and complete devotion to the science of Hadith and its narrations and with the beginning of the collection of ahadith specifically. Prior to that, they had been collected for the purposes of fiqh and teaching. This appeared at the beginning of the Tasnif of Musnads. This was also evident in the emergence of some Muhaddithin who were not linked to the well-known fiqhi schools, i.e. the Kufi and Hijazi schools.^[73] However, a clear and evident distinction appeared among the ranks of the Muhaddithin in the third century due to various factors. Among them are:

• The expansion of disputes with the Ahl al Ra’y (people of opinion).
• The Mu’tazilah’s allegiance with the political authority and subsequently their persecution of the Ahl al Hadith during the strife of Khalq al Qur’an.^[74]
• The victory of the Ahl al Hadith, represented by Imam Ahmed, over the Mu’tazilah and those who were allied to them among the Ahl al Ra’y in that strife, was an important victory in the history of the Ahl al Hadith. This victory gave them a sense of strength and a special identity distinct from others, such as the Ahl al Ra’y and the innovators.

This feeling had positive effects, as those disagreements with others were one of the reasons for the Muhaddithin’s interest in Tasnif, arranging, and compiling sahih ahadith. An example of this is that among al Bukhari’s objectives in compiling his al Sahih was to respond to the Mu’tazilah in Kitab al Tawhid (book on monotheism), to respond to the Murji’ah in Kitab al Iman (book on faith), and the Ahl al Ra’y in Kitab al Hiyal (book on stratagem).

This feeling had negative effects also, especially with regard to some Hadith scholars exceeding their abilities and indulging into sciences in which they were not qualified. Some of them boldly issued fatawa in fiqh without being qualified to do so, whilst others boldly delved into beliefs and were not qualified for that science. As a result, they harmed themselves. Senior Muhaddithin disliked this situation when they became aware of it. In al Muhaddith al Fasil, al Ramahurmuzi (d. 360 AH) severely denounced Harb ibn Ismail al Kirmani (one of the students of Imam Ahmed (d. 280 AH))^[75] when he saw his treatise al Sunnah wa al Jama’ah,^[76] as he was not qualified for that science and ‘embarked on what he did not know well.’^[77] This made some of the Mu’tazilah refute him and ridicule the Muhaddithin after him. The reason for all of that is that Harb ibn Ismail was just a narrator in al Ramahurmuzi’s opinion and was not qualified to discuss these intricate topics. If Harb had been supported by understanding, along with his narration, he would have restrained his bridle and watched what was coming out of his tongue.^[78] Hence, it would have been more appropriate and excusable for him to leave what did not concern him.^[79]

Likewise, Ibn Qutaybah (d. 276 AH), al Khattabi (d. 388 AH), and others denounced some of the Muhaddithin for their preoccupation with fiqh and understanding it by collecting chains from ten or twenty different ways.^[80]

However, this situation of interference by the Muhaddithin, who were not competent in what was not their specialty, was not a general case. The general case was that the senior Muhaddithin were in the forefront of those who combined Hadith, Fiqh, and other sciences for education, Tasnif, and teaching. Perhaps the most important Muhaddith, who led the gatherings of Hadith, criticism, teaching, and Tasnif after Imam Ahmed, was Imam al Bukhari. He was not just a Muhaddith, but rather he was learned in various sciences and a Mujtahid in some of them. He had some opinions that differed from some opinions of the extremist among the Ahl al Hadith, such as the issue of Lafz bi al Qur’an. Al Bukhari believed that it was created. Some Muhaddithin rejected this, yet he was a leader and remained distinguished in the eyes of his students, such as Muslim and al Tirmidhi.

In any case, the critical situation remained continuous in the Muhaddithin’s criticism of others. The statements of those who were extreme among them against the Ahl al Ra’y and the Mu’tazilah were not accepted outright. Rather, every statement was evaluated and looked into. Therefore, they differed regarding many narrators. Some contemporaries’ exaggeration of what they called the Muhaddithin’s display of the weapon of criticism against those who disagree with them is inadequate,^[81] often selective and, in many cases, exaggerated.^[82]

 

The Sixth Feature: The spread of the Tasnif of Ahadith and its arrangement in many different forms

In this era, the means of Tasnif varied greatly. Among them were the Musnads, such as Musnad Abi Bakr ibn Abi Shaybah, Musnad ‘Ali ibn al Madini, Musnad Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, Musnad Ahmed ibn Hanbal, and Musnad Abi Zur’ah al Razi. Among them were books on a specific subject, such as Kitab al ‘Ilm of Zuhayr ibn Harb, Fada’il al Sahabah of Imam Ahmed, his al Zuhd, al Zuhd of Abu Dawood, his al Marasil, al Zuhd of Abu Hatim al Razi, al Shama’il al Muhammadiyyah by Imam al Tirmidhi, and al Zuhriyyat of Imam al Dhuhali. Among them were sahih books, such as Sahih al Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and among them were Sunan books, such as Sunan al Darimi, Sunan Abi Dawood, Sunan al Tirmidhi, Sunan Ibn Majah, Sunan al Nasa’i al Kubra and al Sughra.

I claim that in these books, they collected all the sahih ahadith or the overwhelming majority of them. In fact, they collected the overwhelming majority of all the ahadith; the sahih and the da’if ones, in such a way that very few are overlooked.

 

NEXT⇒ From Shu’bah to Ibn Ma’in… Consolidation of the critical approach and its expansion

---

^[1]  Hatim al ‘Awni: al Manhaj al Muqtarah, pg. 51-59; Nur al Din ‘Itr: Manhaj al Naqd, pg. 64 onwards.

^[2]  Al Tabarani: al Mujam al Awsat, Hadith: 4751. He said regarding him:

لم يرو هذا الحديث عن عبد الرزاق إلا أبو الأزهر النيسابوري

No one narrated this hadith from ‘Abdur Razzaq except Abu al Azhar al Naysaburi.

Al Hakim: al Mustadrak ‘Ala al Sahihayn, Hadith: 4703. He said regarding this hadith:

صحيح‏ على شرط الشيخين وأبو الأزهر بإجماعهم ثقة وإذا تفرد الثقة بحديث فهو على أصلهم صحيح

It is sahih according to the conditions of the two Sheikhs. Abu al Azhar, according to their consensus, is thiqah, and if a thiqah narrates an isolated hadith, then it is sahih according to their principles.

^[3]  See his biography by al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 12/363-369, wherein he describes him as:

الامام الحافظ الثبت أبو الازهر العبدي النيسابوري محدث خراسان في‎ زمانه

The Imam, Hafiz, thabt, Abu al Azhar al ‘Abdi al Naysaburi, the Muhaddith of Khurasan in his time.

^[4]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 5/68–69; Ibn ‘Adi: al Kamil, 1/441, 8/383–384.

^[5]  Al Hafiz al Khalili states in al Irshad, 2/813, regarding the biography of Abu al Azhar:

إلا‏ أنه روى عن عبد الرزاق حديثا أنكروه عليه

However, he narrated a hadith from ‘Abdur Razzaq that they denounced.

He then mentioned the hadith and commented on it by saying, 2/841:

ولا يسقط أبو الأزهر بهذا فإن أبا حامد الشرقي وكان إماما في وقته قال استغنينا عن العراق ببنادرة الحديث بنيسابور محمد بن يحيى الذهلي وعبد الرحمن بن بشر وأبي الأزهر

Abu al Azhar cannot be omitted due to this, for Abu Hamid al Sharqi, who was an Imam of his time, said, “We became independent of Iraq through the flag bearers of Hadith in Naysabur, i.e. Muhammad ibn Yahya al Dhuhali, ‘Abdur Rahman ibn Bishr, and Abu al Azhar.”

Meaning he has an extremely good memory. Al Dhahabi said in al Siyar, 12/364-365:

وهو ثقة بلا تردد غاية ما نقموا عليه ذاك الحديث في فضل علي رضي الله عنه ولا ذنب له فيه

He is thiqah without doubt. The most they criticise him for is that hadith about the virtue of ‘Ali and he is not at fault in it.

Refer to al Dhahabi: Mizan al I’tidal, 1/82.

^[6]  Some of them mentioned that the source of the error was Ma’mar:

كان له ابن أخ رافضي وكان معمر يمكنه من كتبه فأدخل عليه هذا الحديث وكان معمر رجلا مهيبا لا يقدر عليه أحد في السؤال والمراجعة فسمعه عبد الرزاق في كتاب ابن أخي معمر

He had a Rafidi nephew, and Ma’mar allowed him to have access to his books, so he infiltrated this hadith to him. Ma’mar was an awe-inspiring person, whom no one could question and review. Therefore, ‘Abdur Razzaq heard it from the book of Ma’mar’s nephew. (Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, ‎5/69, quoting Abu Hamid ibn al Sharqi.)

It seems as if al Dhahabi leaned towards this view and interpreted it as saying:

بأن عبد الرزاق سر بهذا الحديث لتشيعه فكتبه وما راجع معمرا فيه ولكنه ما جسر أن يحدث به لمثل أحمد وابن معين وعلي بل ولا خرجه في تصانيفه وحدث به وهو خائف يترقب

‘Abdur Razzaq was pleased with this hadith due to his Shi’ism, so he wrote it down and did not consult Ma’mar about it. He, however, did not dare to narrate it to someone like Ahmed, Ibn Ma’in and ‘Ali. He did not mention it in his books either and he narrated it while he was afraid. (Al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 12/376.)

This is contrary to what he said in ‘Abdur Razzaq’s biography regarding the story of Ma’mar’s nephew. He said:

قلت هذه حكاية منقطعة وما كان معمر شيخا مغفلا يروج هذا عليه كان حافظا بصيرا بحديث الزهري

I say, “This is an interrupted story. Ma’mar was not a foolish old man that this is being circulated about him. He was a Hafiz and had insight into the Hadith of al Zuhri.” (Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 9/576.)

In any case, the object here is that the critics agreed that the hadith was wrong, even if they disagreed over the reason.

^[7]  Ibn al Jawzi narrated with his isnad to ‘Abdullah ibn Ahmed ibn Hanbal that he said:

سمعت أبي يقول ما لأحد من الصحابة من الفضائل بالأسانيد الصحاح مثل ما لعلي رضي الله عنه

I heard my father saying, “None of the Companions have their merits narrated through as many sahih isnads like ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.” (Imam Ahmed: al Manaqib, pg. 220.)

Ibn Hajar: al Isabah, biography of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, Hadith: 2404.

^[8]  Sahih al Bukhari, book on the virtues of the Companions radiya Llahu ‘anhum, chapter on the merits of ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, Hadith: 3706; Sahih Muslim, book on the virtues of the Companions, chapter on the virtues of ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu, Hadith: 2404.

^[9]  Al Dhahabi: Mizan al I’tidal, 2/613.

^[10]  Al Bazzar: al Musnad, Hadith: 2755; al Tabarani: al Mujam al Kabir, Hadith: 90; al Hakim: al Mustadrak, Hadith: 6325, 8325, and he states at the last place, “This is a sahih hadith according to the conditions of Sheikhayn (al Bukhari and Muslim), but they did not narrate it.”

^[11]  Ibn ‘Adi: al Kamil, 5/587.

^[12]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 15/421, 425.

^[13]  Ibn Hajar: Tahdhib al Tahdhib, 10/460.

^[14]  Ibn Ma’in followed the Hanafi Mazhab, as will appear later, but he continued to deal with Nuaim objectively. He made tawthiq of him due to conviction in his integrity and did not use his ideology in his criticism.

^[15]  Scholars mentioned that Hatim ibn ‘Uthman al Ma’afiri Abu ‘Uthman al Afriqi used to narrate strange ahadith from Malik that no one else narrated. Among these false ahadith that he narrated was his hadith from Malik — from al Zuhri — from Abu Salamah — from Abu Hurairah radiya Llahu ‘anhu — from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam:

إذا جاء الموت طالب العلم ومات على حاله فهو شهيد

If death overtakes a student of knowledge and he dies as he is, then he is a martyr. (Ibn Hajar: Lisan al Mizan, 2/507.)

^[16]  Ibn Hajar: al Nukat, 1/299; al Zarkashi: al Nukat ‘Ala Muqaddamah Ibn al Salah, 1/182. As for what al Hakim narrated in his book al Madkhal ila Kitab al Iklil, pg. 35, from Imam Ahmed that:

صح من الحديث سبعمئة ألف حديث وكسر

There is a fraction more than 700 000 sahih ahadith.

 Al Bayhaqi answered it by saying:

أراد ما صح من‎ ‏الأحاديث وأقاويل الصحابة والتابعين

He meant sahih ahadith and the sayings of the Companions and Tabi’in. (Al Suyuti: Tadrib al Rawi, 1/67-69.)

In answer to the question that where did 700 000 ahadith come from, Ibn al Jawzi said:

فالجواب أن المراد‎ ‏بهذا العدد الطرق لا المتون

The answer is that what is meant here is the number of chains of transmission, not texts. (Talqih Fuhum Ahl al Athar, pg. 263.)

See a valuable study in the Turkish language by Professor Dr. Mustafa Karataş entitled, ‘Adad al Hadith wa Tazayuduha min Hayth al Riwayah (Number of Ahadith and their Increase in Terms of Narration), wherein he tracks the views of scholars and critics in the number of ahadith and explains the reasons for the increase in that: (Mustafa Karataş: Rivayet Tekniği Açsından Hadislerin Artmas ve Sayisı, pg. 241.)

^[17]  Al Zarkashi: al Nukat ‘Ala Muqaddamat Ibn al Salah, 1/182–183.

^[18]  Al Zarkashi: al Nukat, 1/183.

^[19]  Ibn Hajar: al Nukat, 1/299.

^[20]  Al Zarkashi: al Nukat, 1/183. It is reported from Abu Zur’ah that he denounced the fact that it was 4 000 ahadith; however, the narrator of it is unknown. Refer to al Khatib al Baghdadi: al Jami’, 2/293; Ibn al Jawzi: Talqih Fuhum Ahl al Athar, pg. 73; al Suyuti: Tadrib al Rawi, 3/196–197.

^[21]  Ibn Hajar: al Nukat, 1/297–300.

^[22]  Ibn Hajar: al Nukat, 1/299.

^[23]  Ibn Hajar: al Nukat, 1/300. Thereafter he states:

ومرادهم بهذه العدة ما جاء عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم من أقواله الصريحة في الحلال والحرام والله أعلم وقال كل منهم بحسب ما يصل إليه ولهذا اختلفوا

What they mean by this number is the explicit sayings of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam pertaining to Halal and Haram. Allah knows best. Each one’s view is according to what reached him; hence, they disagreed.

See Abu Dawood, his letter to the people of Makkah and the commentary on it, pg. 35-37.

^[24]  Sheikh Salih al Shami dedicated his work to collecting the ahadith of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and he published 14 books in this regard and concluded them with his important book, Ma’alim al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah (The Features of the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam Sunnah). This book was the result of that long collection, wherein he summarised what he deduced to be the sahih ahadith of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, without repetition, and they were 3 921 ahadith. With repetition of the texts and isnad, there were 114 194 ahadith. Then the repetitions of the isnad were deleted, and it became 28 430 ahadith. Thereafter, the repetitions of the texts were deleted, and it became 3 921. (Salih al Shami: Ma’alim al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, pg. 13–18.)

^[25]  In this important comparison between the views of the former scholars and the work of Sheikh Salih al Shami, I benefited from the study of ‘Abdul ‘Aziz Khalaf: Takathur al Sunnah am Tanaqusuha Bahth fi Jadaliyyat Shumuliyyat al Tadwin (Multiplication of the Sunnah or its Decrease? An Investigation into the Dialectical inclusivity of Tadwin), pg. ‎658-659.

^[26]  Abu Nuaim: Hilyat al Auliya’, 7/155.

^[27]  Al Dhahabi: Mizan al I’tidal, 3/395.

^[28]  Al Khatib Al Baghdadi: al Jami’, 2/274.

^[29]  Al Khalili: al Irshad, 1/194; al Bayhaqi: Manaqib al Shafi’i, 1/519. Al Shafi’i himself states:

ما رأيت صاحب بلغم أحفظ من الحميدي كان يحفظ لسفيان بن عيينة عشرة آلاف حديث

I have never seen a phlegmatic person memorise more than al Humaidi. He would memorise ten-thousand ahadith from Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah. (Al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 10/618.)

This means that Ibn ‘Uyaynah possessed more than that, but in terms of isnad, not the principles of rulings.

^[30]  Al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 11/187; Mustafa Karataş: Rivayet Techniği Açisndan Hadislerin Artmast and Sayusı, pg. 241, 243.

In this study, the professor tracked the number of ahadith over the years in the first three centuries. It was well tracked, but it was based on some technical programs that are now outdated, so this study can be developed based on newer technical programs.

^[31]  Ibn ‘Adi: al Kamil, 1/306; al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 16/270.

^[32]  Ibn ‘Asakir: Tarikh Dimashq, 65/13; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 31/548.

^[33]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 7/371; al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 11/373.

^[34]  Ibn ‘Adi: al Kamil, 1/312; al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 7/373.

^[35]  Al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 11/373.

^[36]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 7/373.

^[37]  The benefit of writing down the sayings of the Tabi’in is what al Khatib al Baghdadi said:

يلزم كتبها والنظر فيها لتتخير من أقوالهم ولا تشذ عن مذاهبهم

It is necessary to write them down, to consider them so that their sayings can be adopted, and not to deviate from their mazhab. (Al Jami’, 2/191.)

 Ibn Hajar: al Nukat, 2/514; al Sakhawi: Fath al Mughith, 1/139. They have more detail and clarification.

^[38]  Ibn ‘Adi said in al Kamil, 10/621:

وليحيى الحماني مسند صالح ويقال إنه أول من صنف المسند بالكوفة وأول من صنف المسند بالبصرة مسدد وأول من صنف المسند بمصر أسد السنة وأسد قبلهما وأقدم موتا

Yahya al Himmani has a commendable Musnad. It is said that he was the first to compile a Musnad in Kufah. The first to compile a Musnad in Basrah was Musaddad, and the first to compile a Musnad in Egypt was Asad al Sunnah. Asad was before them and passed away earlier.

See some other statements from al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 9/554, 10/164, 537.

^[39]  Ibn Hajar: Hady al Sari, 1/6.

^[40]  Hamzah al Bakri: Manhajiyyat al Tasnif al Hadithi fi al Qarn al Thalith Muqaranah bi al Qarn al Thani al Iqtisar ‘ala al Marfu’at Namudhajan (Methodology of the Tasnif of Hadith in the Third Century compared to the Second Century, limiting it to Marfu’ Ahadith as an example), printed with the book İslầm’da Medeniyet Bilimleri Tarihi, 1/72.

^[41]  Al Fasawi: al Ma’rifah wa al Tarikh, 3/60.

^[42]  Hatim al ‘Awni: Ida’at Bahthiyyah fi ‘Ulum al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah wa Ba’d al Masa’il al Shar’iyyah Bayan al Hadd al Ladhi Yantahi ‘Indahu Ahl al Istilah wa al Naqd fi ‘Ulum al Hadith (Research Highlights in the Sciences of the Prophet’s Sunnah and some Shar’i Rulings: Explaining the Limit at which Scholars of Terminology and Criticism in the Sciences of Hadith end), pg. 291.

^[43]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 15/420.

^[44]  Ibn Hajar: Tawali al Ta’nis bi Ma’ali Ibn Idris, pg. 147. Refer to the treatise of al Subki on explaining the meaning of Imam al Muttalibi’s statement, “If a hadith is sahih, then it is my mazhab.”

^[45]  Al Shafi’i: al Risalah, pg. 369 onwards and pg. 461 onwards.

^[46]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/408; al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 10/5.

^[47]  Al Yafi’i: Mir’at al Jinan, 2/16.

^[48]  Tawali al Ta’nis, pg. 144.

^[49]  Al Bayhaqi: Manaqib al Shafi’i, 1/225.

^[50]  Ibn Abi Hatim: Adab al Shafi’i wa Manaqibuhu, pg. 42; Ibn Abi Hatim: al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 7/203.

^[51]  Dr. ‘Abdul Majid Mahmud: Ittijahat al Fiqhiyyah ‘Ind Ashab al Hadith fi al Qarn al Thalith al Hijri, pg. 292.

^[52]  Refer to a valuable study by Professor Bünyamin Erul on the method of the narration in the second century, Ma’mar ibn Rashid wa Jami’uhu min Jihat al Riwayah, published in Turkish in AǕIFD magazine in 2002 and entitled: Bünyamin Erul: Hicri II. Asirda Rivayet Uslübu (Rivayet Açisından Ma’mer b. Raşid’in (ö.153) el-Cami’i, pg. 60.

^[53]  Al Suyuti: Tanwir al Hawalik, pg. 8-9. We have mentioned the statement of Hafiz al ‘Ala’i in Jami’ al Tahsil, pg. 67:

وأما التابعون فإرسالهم للأحاديث التي لا تدخل تحت الحصر مشهور شائع بينهم كابن المسيب وسعيد بن جبير والحسن ومن يطول الكلام بذكرهم ولم يكن روايتهم لها إلا للعمل بها وإلا فلو كانت لغوا لا تفيد شيئا ولا يحتج بها لأنكرها عليهم العلماء وبينوا أن إرسالهم الحديث يقتضي التوهين له وعدم الاحتجاج به فما أنكر ذلك عليهم نظراؤهم ولا من فوقهم وإنما أنكره من جاء من بعدهم

As for the Tabi’in, their narrating unlimited mursal ahadith is well-known among them, such as Ibn al Musayyab, Sa’id ibn Jubayr, al Hassan, and others that are too many to mention. Their narration of it was only to practice upon it. Otherwise, if they were mere twaddle that did not benefit anything and could not be used as evidence; the scholars would have denounced them and explained that narrating mursal Hadith would necessitate insulting them and not being worthy of being used as evidence. This was not rejected by their counterparts or those above them. It was only rejected by those who came after them.

^[54]  Al Bayhaqi: Bayan man Akhta’a ‘Ala al Shafi’i, pg. 110; Dr. ‘Ali al Sayyah: al Thiqat al Ladhina Ta’ammadu Wafq al Marfu’ aw Irsal al Mawsul, pg. 93.

^[55]  Ibn Hibban: al Sahih, 11/591–592.

^[56]  Al Daraqutni: al ‘Ilal, 6/63. I derived all the previous quotes from Dr. ‘Ali al Sayyah in his important book: al Thiqat al Ladhina Ta’ammadu Wafq al Marfu’ aw Irsal al Mawsul, pg. 93-95.

^[57]  See the statements about them in my research: Min Marasil Malik ila Muttasilat al Bukhari, pg. 155–156.

^[58]  Ahmed Snubar: Min Marasil Malik ila Muttasilat al Bukhari, pg. 162-163.

^[59]  Ahmed Snubar: Min Marasil Malik ila Muttasilat al Bukhari, pg. 128-130.

^[60]  Ahmed Snubar: Min Marasil Malik ila Muttasilat al Bukhari, pg. 125 onwards.

^[61]  Ahmed Snubar: Min Marasil Malik ila Muttasilat al Bukhari, pg. 155-167.

^[62]  Refer to many incidents of their patience during travel, hunger, and travelling long distances in pursuit of knowledge by Sheikh ‘Abdul Fattah Abu Ghuddah: Safahat min Sabr al ‘Ulama’, pg. 33 onwards.

^[63]  Ibn Hibban: al Majruhin, 1/56–57.

^[64]  Sahih Muslim, book on funerals, chapter on instructing the dying person to recite la ilaha illa Allah, Hadith: 916.

^[65]  Al Hakim: Ma’rifat ‘Ulum al Hadith, pg. 76. The hadith was narrated by Imam al Hakim in al Mustadrak also, Hadith: 1300, 1893. After narrating it in the last place, he said:

هذا‏ حديث صحيح الإسناد ولم يخرجاه وله قصة لأبي زرعة الرازي قد ذكرتها في كتاب المعرفة

This hadith has an authentic isnad and they did not narrate it. It contains a story of Abu Zur’ah al Razi, which I mentioned in the book al Ma’rifah.

^[66]  Al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 11/78.

^[67]  Al Fasawi: al Ma’rifah wa al Tarikh, 2/633; al Khatib Al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 14/315. Abu ‘Ubaid al Ajurri said:

قيل لأبي داود كان أبو نعيم حافظا قال جدا

Abu Dawood was asked, “Could Abu Nuaim memorise?”

He replied, “Very much.” (Su’alatuhu li Abi Dawood, pg. 79 (363).)

Ibn Abi Hatim al Razi states:

سألت أبي عن أبي نعيم الفضل بن دكين فقال ثقة كان يحفظ حديث الثوري ومسعر حفظا جيدا كان يحزر حديث الثوري ثلاثة آلاف وخمسمئة حديث وحديث مسعر نحو خمسمئة حديث كان يأتي بحديث الثوري عن لفظ واحد لا يغيره وكان لا يلقن وكان حافظا متقنا

I asked my father about Abu Nuaim al Fadl ibn Dukayn. He said, “He was thiqah. He would memorise the ahadith of al Thawri and Mis’ar very well. He memorised 3 000, 500 ahadith of al Thawri and about 500 of Mis’ar. He used to recite the Hadith of al Thawri exactly and did not change it. He did not accept talqin, and he was a reliable Hafiz and Mutqin. (Al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, ‎7/62.)

^[68]  Al Dukkan: It is a bench built to sit on. (Ibn al Athir: al Nihayah fi Gharib al Hadith wa al Athar, 2/128.)

^[69]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 14/316.

^[70]  Al Bardha’i: Su’alatuhu li Abi Zur’ah, pg. 286 (496).

^[71]  Lafz bi al Qur’an or Khalq al Qur’an was a heated controversy from the second century AH (8 century CE) regarding the Qur’an as to whether it is created speech or not.

^[72]  I explained this in detail in my research, Wazifat al Muhaddith al Naqid wa Wazifat al Faqih al Usuli wa Ishkaliyyat Naqd al Hadith fi ‘Asr al Hadathah (The Function of the Critical Muhaddith, the Function of the Fundamentalist Jurist, and the Problem of Hadith Criticism in the Era of Inception). This will soon be printed at Ibn Khaldun University in Istanbul with the book Dirasat fi al Naqd al Hadithi ‘Ind al Usuliyyin (Studies in Hadith Criticism among the Fundamentalists).

^[73]  ‘Abdul Majid Mahmud: al Ittijahat al Fiqhiyyah, pg. 70-74.

^[74]  Refer to Talat Koçyiğit: Hadis Tarihi, pg. 222, wherein he believes that among the factors that contributed to the spread of Tasnif among the Muhaddithin were; the beginnings of the science of theology, the Mu’tazilah accusing the Muhaddithin of collecting narrations without distinction, and the strife of Khalq al Qur’an.

^[75]  He is Sirjani, attributed to Sirjan, a town in the country of Kirman, next to Persia. A group of people of knowledge and goodness emerged from there. (Al Sam’ani: al Ansab, 7/341; al Kirmani: al Masa’il, edited by ‘Amir Bahjat, pg. 91-92).

^[76]  Yaqut al Hamawi mentioned in Mujam al Buldan, 3/296, a text from some scholars wherein he states:

حرب بن إسماعيل لقي أحمد بن حنبل وصحبه وله مؤلفات في الفقه منها كتاب السنة والجماعة قال شتم فيه فرق أهل الصلاة وقد نقضه عليه أبو القاسم عبد الله بن أحمد بن محمود الكعبي البلخي‏ وكتاب البلخي هو قبول الأخبار وهو مشهور في الرد على المحدثين وتعقبه بالرد عليه الرامهرمزي في كتابه المحدث الفاصل بين الراوي والواعي

Harb Ibn Ismail met Ahmed ibn Hanbal and accompanied him. He authored some books in fiqh. Among them is the book al Sunnah wa al Jama’ah. Some sects of the people of Salah slandered him regarding it. Abu al Qasim ‘Abdullah ibn Ahmed ibn Mahmud al Ka’bi al Balkhi refuted him. Al Balkhi’s book Kitab al Akhbar, is famous for responding to the Muhaddithin. Al Ramahurmuzi criticised and responded to him in his book al Muhaddith al Fasil Bay al Rawi wa al Wa’i.

^[77]  Al Ramahurmuzi said in al Muhaddith al Fasil, pg. 309:

وليس للراوي المجرد أن يتعرض لما لا يكمل له فإن تركه ما لا يعنيه أولى به وأعذر له وكذلك سبيل كل ذي علم وكان حرب بن إسماعيل السيرجاني قد أكثر من السماع وأغفل الاستبصار فعمل رسالة سماها السنة والجماعة تعجرف فيها واعترض عليها بعض الكتبة من أبناء خراسان ممن يتعاطى الكلام ويذكر بالرياسة فيه والتقدم فصنف في ثلب رواة الحديث

A mere narrator does not have the right to interfere in something he does not know well. To leave out what does not concern him is better and more excusable for him. Likewise is the situation of every person of knowledge. Harb Ibn Ismail al Sirjani acquired a lot but he lacked insight, so he wrote a treatise called al Sunnah wa al Jama’ah. He was arrogant in it. Some scribes from the people of Khurasan who were experts in theology and were mentioned with leadership and precedence in it, objected to it, and wrote to defame Hadith narrators.

^[78]  Al Ramahurmuzi: al Muhaddith al Fasil, pg. 311.

^[79]  Al Ramahurmuzi: al Muhaddith al Fasil, pg. 309.

^[80]  Ibn Qutaybah: Ta’wil Mukhtalaf al Hadith, pg. 135; al Khattabi: Ma’alim al Sunan, 1/2 – 5; Ibn ‘Abdul Barr: Jami’ Bayan al ‘Ilm wa Fadlihi, chapter on mention of those who criticise the abundance of Hadith without understanding it. 2/998-1036.

^[81]  See an example of this exaggeration and generalisation by our distinguished and expert professor, Dr. ‘Abdul Majid Mahmud in al Ittijahat al Fiqhiyyah, pg. 76.

^[82]  Some contemporaries mention al Hussain ibn ‘Ali al Karabisi (d. 248 AH) as an example of the Muhaddithin using the weapon of criticism against their opponents. They cite the statements of Ahmed and Ibn Ma’in regarding him and they exaggerate the statement of Abu Bakr al Sayrafi al Shafi’i (d. 330 AH) regarding him in Ibn ‘Adi: al Kamil, 4/32, where he states:

اعتبروا بهذين النفسين الكرابيسي وأبي ثور فالحسين في حفظه وعلمه وأبو ثور لا يعشره فتكلم فيه أحمد في باب اللفظ فسقط وأثنى على أبي ثور فارتفع للزومه السنة

They considered these two souls, al Karabisi and Abu Thawr. Al Hussain (al Karabisi) in his memorisation and knowledge; Abu Thawr did not possess one tenth of his knowledge. Ahmed criticised al Hussain due to the issue of Lafz bi al Qur’an and discarded him. He praised Abu Thawr and elevated him for adhering to the Sunnah.

(They claim) that this is evidence of the Muhaddithin using that weapon against their opponents.

I do not see it that way due to few factors:

Firstly: This statement contains a generalisation of groups of Muhaddithin who were not discarded, even though Ahmed and others criticised them. Perhaps the most prominent of them was ‘Ali ibn al Madini, as Ahmed criticised him for the issue of Khalq al Qur’an and he was not discarded. (Al ‘Uqayli: al Du’afa’, ‎3/235.) Likewise, students of Ahmed, such as Ibrahim al Harbi and others criticised him. (Al Khatib: Tarikh Baghdad, 6/‎534.) Abu Hatim and Abu Zur’ah discarded al Bukhari due to the issue of Lafz bi al Qur’an. (Ibn Abi Hatim: al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 7/191) Yet, al Bukhari was not discarded. There are many examples of this. So selecting some examples and exaggerating them is a clear generalisation.

Secondly: I believe that the expression ‘discarded’ here is confined to time and place and I have a problem in generalising this expression. This is so because Ahmed’s criticism of al Karabisi affected him only in the city of Baghdad, which was the city in which he lived, and only in the class of Ahmed’s students. Therefore, they did not narrate Hadith from him. Hence, his ahadith appear less frequently in the books of narrations. Al Khatib al Baghdadi expressed this in his Tarikh Baghdad, 8/612, by saying:

حديثه يعز جدا لأن أحمد بن حنبل كان يتكلم فيه بسبب مسألة اللفظ وهو أيضا كان يتكلم في أحمد فتجنب الناس الأخذ عنه

His ahadith are very rare because Ahmed ibn Hanbal criticised him because of the issue of Lafz bi al Qur’an, and he also used to criticise Ahmed, hence, people avoided taking from him.

It was as if that conflict between the Hanbalis, who were adherent to their sheikh’s beliefs, and al Karabisi had an effect on acquiring from him, and this is natural, looking at the increasing strength of the Hanbalis immediately after the strife.

However, this did not include other places or other times, and this becomes evident in several ways:

Al Bukhari narrated Hadith from him. In fact, he narrated the issue of Lafz bi al Qur’an itself from him, which Imam Ahmed denounced him for, as Ibn Mandah mentioned in Kitab al Iman, which Ibn Hajar quoted in al Tahdhib, 2/361-362.

A group of critics made his tawthiq and showered fragrant praises on him, after that ordeal and its repercussions had ended, including Ibn ‘Adi in al Kamil, 4/31, where he said:

والحسين الكرابيسي له كتب مصنفة وذكر فيها اختلاف الناس من المسائل وكان حافظا لها وذكر في كتبه أخبارا كثيرة ولم أجد منكرا غير ما ذكرت من الحديث والذي حمل أحمد بن حنبل عليه فإنما حمل عليه من أجل اللفظ في القرآن فأما في الحديث فلم أر به بأسا

Al Hussain al Karabisi had compiled books in which he mentioned people’s differences in Masa’il and he was a Hafiz in that. He mentioned many transmissions in his books and I did not find anything objectionable other than the Hadith I mentioned. Ahmed ibn Hanbal attacked him due to the issue of Lafz bi al Qur’an. As for his Hadith, I did not see anything wrong with it.

Al Hakam ibn al Mustansir al Umawi also praised him, saying:

كان الكرابيسي ثقة حافظا لكن أصحاب أحمد بن حنبل هجروه لأنه قال إن تلاوة التالي للقرآن مخلوقة فاستريب بذلك عند جهلة أصحاب الحديث

Al Karabisi was thiqah and a Hafiz, but the students of Ahmed ibn Hanbal abandoned him because he said, “The reader’s recitation of the Qur’an is created.”

Hence, he became doubtful among the ignorant people of Hadith. (Ibn Hajar: Lisan al Mizan, 3/195.)

Al Khatib al Baghdadi said the following about him:

وكان‏ فهما عالما فقيها وله تصانيف كثيرة في الفقه وفي الأصول تدل على حسن فهمه وغزارة علمه

He was an understanding scholar and a Faqih. He compiled many books in fiqh and principles that indicate his good understanding and in-depth knowledge. (Tarikh Baghdad, 8/611.)

Abu ‘Umar ibn ‘Abdul Barr said:

كان عالما مصنفا متقنا وكانت فتوى السلطان تدور عليه وكان نظارا جدليا

He was a scholar and a proficient author. The Sultan’s fatawa revolved around him. He was a controversial theorist. (Al Intiqa’ fi Fada’il al A’immah al Thalathah, pg. 165.)

Ibn Hajar’s discussion in al Lisan, 3/197, ended with his saying:

قلت ووقفت على كتاب القضاء للكرابيسي في مجلد ضخم فيه أحاديث كثيرة وآثار ومباحث مع المخالفين وفوائد جمة تدل على سعة علمه وتبحره ويقال إنه من جملة مشايخ البخاري صاحب الصحيح

I say, “I came across the book, al Qada’, by al Karabisi in a huge volume containing many ahadith, transmissions, discussions with opponents, and many benefits that indicate to his extensive and in-depth knowledge. It is said that he is among the sheikhs of al Bukhari, the author of al Sahih.”

The critics of Hadith praised some of his students who followed his viewpoint in Baghdad itself. The critics praised a well-known student of al Karabisi. In fact, some say that he was an extremist in al Karabisi’s viewpoint. He was Muhammad ibn Salih al Baghdadi, known as Kalijah (d. 271 AH).

Abu Dawood said regarding him:

صدوق

He is truthful.

Al Nasa’i and al Daraqutni made his tawthiq. Maslamah said about him in Kitab al Silah:

توفي بمكة وهو ثقة حافظ ونقم عليه أنه كان يغلو في مذهب حسين الكرابيسي واحتمل الناس له ذلك لثقته وحفظه

He passed away in Makkah and he was thiqah and a Hafiz. He was resented because he would exaggerate in the views of Hussain al Karabisi. People tolerated that because of his trustworthiness and memorisation. (Ibn Hajar: Tahdhib al Tahdhib, 9/226-227.)

Accordingly, the Muhaddithin accepted Kalijah and discarded his sheikh, al Karabisi, whereas both of them were on the same ideology. It is as if the omission was not due to the ideology, but rather due to other issues related to the intensity of the disagreement between him and Ahmed or his preoccupation with theology. In any case, I do not think that al Karabisi was among those who were preoccupied with Hadith as the Muhaddithin were. He was a Faqih and a theologian, and someone like him will not narrate frequently. I do not think that he was concerned about the Muhaddithin not narrating from him.

Based on this, some Muhaddithin may reject some of the opponents, but the reactive critical movement keeps the matter under evaluation and consideration. Thus, projecting the idea that ​​the Muhaddithin utilised the weapon of criticism against those who disagreed with them is a generalisation and an exaggeration.

Despite all this, the lack of the spread of al Hussain al Karabisi’s ahadith may be related to another matter, as Ibn Hibban, while mentioning his biography in al Thiqat, 8/189, states:

حسين بن علي الكرابيسي أبو علي من أهل بغداد يروي عن يزيد بن هارون والعراقيين حدثنا عنه الحسن بن سفيان وكان ممن جمع وصنف ممن يحسن الفقه والحديث ولكن أفسده قلة عقله فسبحان من رفع من شاء بالعلم اليسير حتى صار علما يقتدي ووضع من شاء مع العلم الكثير حتى صار لا يلتفت إليه

Hussain ibn ‘Ali al Karabisi, Abu ‘Ali was from the people of Baghdad who narrated from Yazid ibn Harun and the people of Iraq. Al Hassan ibn Sufyan narrated to us from him. He was one of those who compiled and wrote books and among those who were good in fiqh and Hadith, but he was corrupted by his lack of intelligence. Glory be to Him Who elevated whomsoever He willed with a little knowledge until he became an emulated prominent figure and degraded whomsoever He willed with abundant knowledge to a degree that he was ignored.