Module One: Issues of Methodology
Module Two: The Life of Imam al Tabari
Module Three: Tarikh al Rusul wa al Muluk of al Tabari
Module One: Issues of Methodology
Section One: The Causes of Interpolation in Islamic History
Section Two: Methodology of Studying Islamic History
Section Three: The Fiqh of the History of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum
Module One: Issues of Methodology
Section One: The causes of interpolation in Islamic History
I. Reasons that led to fabrications in narrations
Various early attempts to cloud the Islamic horizon resulted in the rejection of yielding to accept all historical narrations on face value. This further resulted in the non-acceptance of some narrations of our early historians which were contaminated by falsities.
Ibn al ‘Arabi, motivated by this, opted for a methodology of scrutiny in his book al ‘Awasim min al Qawasim in studying an important era of Islamic history; the era of the Rightly Guided Khalifas and early stages of the Umayyad dynasty. He uncovered some of the untrue perceptions that had become synonymous with that time period and exposed many of the lies that were directed against the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, specifically against ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
Ibn al Taymiyyah has mentioned the following causes for these lies and fabrications in narrations:
- Hereticism and apostasy in the faith of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala; Islam.
- Justification of desires and factions.
- Advices and admonitions.
- Worldly objectives and materialistic ambitions.
- Love for positions by narrating obscure ahadith.
Ibn Khaldun has authored his Muqaddimah primarily to develop a criterion upon which the historian can rely on in addressing the certainties of history. A criterion to assist in realising what holds probabilities of truth and possibilities of acceptance, and what doesn’t; thereby rejecting lies and fabrications.
Ibn Khaldun has mentioned the following reasons that led to fabrications and lies in narrations:
- Confirmation bias,e. the tendency to favour information in a way that confirms one’s pre-existing beliefs; a type of cognitive bias and a systematic error of inductive reasoning. If one is neutral and impartial in accepting narrations, he will give each narration its due right of scrutiny and study to conclude its acceptance or dismissal. On the other hand, if one is biased to accept a particular narration or is overtaken by prejudice due to his pre-existing notions, he will lean towards such narrations that conform to his view. This becomes a breeding ground for accepting and narrating lies.
- Relying on narrators. This is caused by not carrying out due diligence in investigating the character of the narrator and blindly accepting what he narrates.
- Being oblivious of intent. This is due to the narrator not being aware of the objective behind what he has heard or narrated whilst under the impression of the veracity of what he narrates.
- Ignorance in applying conditions to occurrences due to the deceit and exaggerations introduced. The narrator thus recalls and incident using hyperbole. Some of the story tellers would take advantage of the ignorance of people with regards to the laws natural phenomena are subject to. They would then distort facts and create delusions to achieve their purposes. The historian that would come across such exaggerated or made up incidents would fall for it and narrate it without meaning to spread lies.
- Hoping to gain proximity to people of influence and status. A sycophant would attempt to get close to the people of power, influence, and wealth by spreading fabricated narrations in order to appease them.
People of scant piety have done this to further their own agendas or fulfil their purposes. Ghayyath ibn Ibrahim is an example of such sycophancy. He came to al Mahdi who had a pigeon. In order to garner a reward, he narrated the following hadith:
لا سبق إلا في نصل أو خف أو حافر
Prize money is allowed only for racing camels, shooting arrows or racing horses.
He added on the words Aw Janah, i.e. ‘or birds’. Upon hearing this al Mahdi fixed a sum of reward for him. When he left, al Mahdi stated his lie and ordered the pigeon be slaughtered.
Another example of this is when Harun al Rashid came to Madinah Munawwarah. He found it disrespectful to ascend the pulpit of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam whilst wearing a coat and a waist tie. Qadi Abu al Bakhtari stated a hadith at this juncture wherein there is mention of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wearing the same. Yahya ibn Ma’in, who was present, belied him in front of everyone.
- The ignorance of the historians regarding the nature of civilizations. Ibn Khaldun was of the opinion that every phenomenon that occurred be it in relation to individuals or society, were ruled by certain laws. Individual phenomena were governed by the laws of astrology and more specifically by its relevance to the human, animal, and plant condition. Ibn Khaldun has criticized the historians who had no knowledge of these sciences. The result would be relating incidents that were scientifically impossible. An example of this is what Mas’udi has recorded of the building of the city of Nuhas (copper) with material from the dessert of Sijilmassa.
As for societal phenomena, he refers to the norms, customs, wealth, poverty, knowledge, ignorance, population growth, and state values.
Ibn Khaldun critiques those historians who erred in happenings connected to numerical values such as the amount of military troops or taxed wealth. Some people have a penchant for inflating numbers, enumerating accounts that simply does not make any sense and goes against the laws of population growth, as done by al Mas’udi in putting the army of the Banu Isra’il at sixty thousand when Musa ‘alayh al Salam counted them in the Tih valley. This was done knowing well that there were only four generations between Musa ‘alayh al Salam and Isra’il ‘alayh al Salam, i.e. it would not have been possible for the Banu Isra’il to grow from a few individuals to such a large number in just four generations. Ibn Khaldun has proposed to consider the nature of civilization in attesting to historical records as a primary measure with scrutinising narrators a secondary measure. He writes:
هو أحسن الوجوه وأوثقها في تمحيص الاخبار وتمييز صدقها من كذبها وهو سابق على التمحيص بتعديل الرواة ولا يرجع إلى تعديل الرواة حتى يعلم أن ذلك الخبر في نفسه ممكن أو ممتنع وأما إذا كان مستحيلا فلا فائدة للنظر في التعديل والتجريح
This is the best and most authentic manner in which traditions can be scrutinised and the true differentiated from the false. Screening the narrators will not be done until the possibility of the account is established. If the occurrence of such is not possible it will be futile to then look at the strengths or ills of the narrators.
Though this approach is broadly acceptable, some exceptions ought to be made as there are many traditions that have been narrated by authentic and reliable narrators that go against the norm. With the accepted conditions, such occurrences will be regarded as karamat (supernatural wonders performed by the pious). The safest, would be to accept such narrations and not place them beyond the realm of possibility. An example of this is the incident of conquering a fort of by al ‘Ala al Hadrami radiya Llahu ‘anhu in the era of ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
The importance of the approach of Ibn Khaldun cannot be overstated; however, it should be emphasised that the methodology adopted by the muhaddithin in narrating incidents is better and far more accurate.
Bringing together these methodologies and making them work concurrently by creating a unique gauge that inculcates the logical and societal approach of Ibn Khaldun, the methodology of the muhaddithin, and that of the historians which conform to Islamic principles will result in a monumental service to the field of Islamic history. It will eliminate the mistakes found in historical narrations and expose the reasons of fabrications therein. It will further assist the historian in adopting regulations that will limit falling into errors that are caused by blindly accepting all historical accounts.
II. Cause of fabrications in the early Islamic years
It is imperative for one studying Islamic history—especially the early era—to understand the need to remove the debris of delusions, innovations, and prejudice—that stems from internal bias and aligning to a school of thought—from the pristine history of Islam. All the above and other factors led the liars and fabricators attempting to spoil the untainted accounts of history. Looking at fabrications in the ahadith of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, one will understand the need to sift and scrutinise. There were so many liars implicated, that the erudite scholars were forced to write voluminous books on the weak and rejected narrators.
Furthermore, historical accounts and narrations were codified only after the emergence of different schools of thought and after the rise of innovators and heretics. This had an undeniable effect on historical records as one of the causes of fabrications is the fervent desire of innovators and heretics to call others to their cause. Many of those with political aspirations were part and parcel of this as well to further their goals.
The Islamic Empire spread to cover vast amounts of land during the era of the Rightly Guided Khalifas with the Muslims conquering territory after territory. This outraged the disbelievers who planned and plotted against the Muslims. In the beginning they confronted the Muslims on the battlefield seeking to destroy their power and number. This proved fruitless with suffering defeats in major campaigns such as Qadisiyyah, Nahawand, Tustar, and others. They then infiltrated the Muslims, outwardly accepting the Islamic faith with the sole purpose of causing divisions amongst the Muslims and destroying the Muslims from inside out. Ibn Hazam says:
ان الفرس كانوا من سعة الملك وعلو اليد على جميع الامم وجلالة الخطير في انفسهم حتى انهم كانوا يسمون انفسهم الاحرار والابناء وكانوا يعدون سائر الناس عبيداً لهم فلما امتحنوا بزوال الدولة عنهم على ايدي العرب تعاظمهم الامر وتضاعفت لديهم المصيبة وراموا كيد الاسلام بالمحاربة في اوقات شتى …فراوا ان كيده على الحيلة انجع فاظهر قوم منهم الاسلام واستمالوا اهل التشيع باظهار محبة اهل بيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم واستشناع ظلم علي رضي الله عنه ثم سلكوا بهم مسالك حتى اخرجوهم عن الاسلام
The Persians were a superpower having the upper hand over other nations, holding themselves as sublime and royal. They would call themselves ‘the liberated’ and ‘the sons’ considering all others their slaves. When their kingdom was taken away by the Arabs, they were astounded and bewildered at this great loss. They attempted to wage war against the Muslims on various occasions, without much luck. They then infiltrated the Muslims with a group outwardly accepting the Islamic faith whilst joining the ranks of the Shia. They made a show of love for the Ahlul Bayt and raised a hue and cry about the oppression of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. They then walked the treacherous path misguiding others, taking them out of the fold of Islam.
Amongst their schemes aimed to attack Islam was introducing false narrations and spreading false rumours that was designed to distort and tarnish the lives of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum. Questioning their integrity and reliability would lead to questioning the legitimacy of the Islamic faith. Furthermore, tarnishing the life and character of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum was in turn an avenue to tarnish Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Imam Malik says:
هؤلاء طعنوا – يعني الرافضة ومن على شاكلتهم من الزنادقة- في أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إنما طعنوا في أصحابه ليقول القائل : رجل سوء كان له أصحاب سوء، ولو كان رجلا صالحا لكان أصحابه صالحين
These people—the Rawafid and the heretics of their persuasion—disparage the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum so that one might say, ‘An evil man with evil Companions. If he was pious his Companions would have been pious.’
It is important to note that hands of the deviants in the past had attempted to make Islamic history a play thing for themselves. The Jews, Christians, Shia, and Majus who had characterized Islam whilst remaining on disbelief made efforts to skew Islamic history. Some of the Persians joined the ranks of the Shia, assumed their school of thought, and made a show of love for the Ahlul Bayt with the goal of spreading falsehood and views that clashed with Islam. Their pretence of standing by the Ahlul Bayt was a guise to continue their efforts in undermining the Islamic cause.
Their ideologies and slogans leave no doubt that this group merely posed as Muslims in order to cause damage to the faith and spread mischief within it. At their inception proclaiming their ideologies was problematic due to which they enclosed it within the pretence of love for the Ahlul Bayt. They attributed false statements to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the Ahlul Bayt to this end. Such acts were carried out by the likes of Mughirah ibn Sa’id and Abu al Khattab Muhammad ibn Abi Zainab.
Another group of Persians—heretics—joined the Muslim ranks going along with others who had done so. They pretended to enter the faith of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala whilst their hearts were bereft of faith. One reason for this is that they were well respected individuals before the Muslim conquests of their lands. With the fall of their lands and the abolishment of the master-slave society they became a forgotten bunch. This led to hate against Islam being deeply ingrained into them which fuelled the fire of malice and attempts to widen the gap of differences amongst the Muslims whenever the chance arose. They pushed their false beliefs and fabricated narrations which they presumed was sufficient to tarnish the lives of the foregone pious individuals. Amongst this group was the likes of ‘Abdul Karim ibn Abi al ‘Awja’ who admitted to fabricating four thousand ahadith before being put to death by Muhammad ibn Sulaiman ibn ‘Ali.
Another cause of fabrications was the immense discord and difference of opinion that followed the fitnah—after the murder of ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu—which triggered a break in Islamic civilization, the effects of which we feel to this day. Out of this fitnah hatred and hostility grew. Lies and fabrications spread. These happenings were exacerbated by the political climate that was a result of the conflicts between the Muslims at Jamal, Siffin, and Naharwan as these were the starting point of the emergence of many political parties such as the Shia and the Khawarij. The texts of the Qur’an and Ahadith did not provide any assistance for their cause which led them to lying. Thus, some of the Shia fabricated ahadith on the virtue of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and criticism of Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Similarly, those opposed to them fabricated ahadith on the virtue of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhum; an effort to refute those who criticized them. These fabrications—citing the virtue of some or a number of Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum—resorted to when vilifying the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum had become wide spread.
It should be borne in mind that most of the false narrations were fabricated in the 2nd and 3rd century A.H. However, these fabricated narrations largely dealt with matters that occurred in the first half of the 1st century of Islam. It ought to be noted that Iraq, especially Kufah, was a hub for creating and narrating fabricated ahadith as it was the city that bore the brunt of war with the Syrians, a result of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu taking it as his capital. It further remained a centre of opposition for the Umayyad dynasty.
It is common that fabrications of hadith and reports are a reflection of the ideological and political struggles between different groups. The focal point of the debate (at that time) between the opposing groups was the matter of Caliphate. This was the reason that some of these groups resorted to fabricating narrations in an atmosphere fraught with political hatred.
The multitude of fabricated narrations stemming from Kufah, the centre of the Shia, gave way to a bad portrayal of Iraq which was a hub of knowledge and hadith at the time. This resulted in the waning of their academic reputation in the Islamic world. Ponder over the following proclamation of Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha:
يا أهل العراق أهل الشام خير منكم . خرج إليهم نفر من أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم كثير ، فحدثونا ما نعرف ، وخرج إليكم نفر من أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قليل ، فحدثتمونا بما نعرف وما لا نعرف
O people of Iraq! The people of Sham are better than you. Many of the Companions of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam went to them and they narrated to us what we are aware of. And very few of the Companions of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam came to you, yet you narrate to us what we are aware of and what we are unaware of.
A group of Iraqis came to Abdullah ibn ‘Amr ibn al ‘As radiya Llahu ‘anhuma in Makkah asking him to narrate to them. He said to them:
إن من أهل العراق قوما يكذبون ويكذبون ويسخرون
There are people in Iraq who lie and lie, and mock.
A written judgement of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was brought to Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma from Kufah. Leaving the amount of an arm’s length, he wiped out the rest.
A’mash once mentioned that he saw an old man from Kufah interpolating the judgment of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu with regards to the law of a women divorced thrice citing people had incited him to do so.
Al Zuhri says:
إذا سمعت بالحديث العراقي فاردد به ثم اردد به
When you hear of an Iraqi hadith reject it, then reject it (again).
Imam Malik too, warns just as the other scholars warned of the narrations originating from Iraq. He has classified their status the same as the narrations from the Ahl al Kitab; their narrations are neither ratified nor rejected. ‘Abdul Rahman al Mahdi once commented to him that he hears more hadith in Iraq in a single day than what he hears in Madinah Munawwarah in forty. The Imam replied:
من أين لنا دار الضرب – السكة – التي عندكم – تضربون بالليل وتنفقون بالنهار
We do not have a mint—as you people have—minting by night and spending by day.
Ibn Taymiyyah says with regards to this:
كان جمهور الرأي من الكوفة ، إذ هو الغالب على أهلها ، مع ما كان فيهم من التشيع الفاحش ، وكثرة الكذب في الرواية فلم يكن الكذب في أهل بلد أكثر منه فيهم . ففي زمن التابعين كان بها خلق كثيرون معروفون بالكذب ، لا سيما الشيعة فإنهم أكثر الطوائف كذبا باتفاق أهل العلم . ولأجل هذا ورد عن مالك وغيره من أهل المدينة أنهم لم يكونوا يحتجون بعامة أحاديث أهل العراق ،
Most of the partisans of personal opinion were from Kufah together with them subscribing, deeply, to the Shia movement and fabricating, numerous, narrations. No other city had the amount of liars they had. There were many therein who were famed as liars during the era of the Tabi’in. This rings especially true to the Shia who hold the title for the most amount of liars by the consensus of the men of knowledge. It is for this reason that Imam Malik and others of Madinah would not cite proofs from the general ahadith originating from Iraq.
Based on what has previously been mentioned, it could be said that the popularity of fabricating narrations gained traction owing to the political climate present in Iraq at the time. The rift between the different groups ran much deeper after the incident of Siffin. The separation of the Shia and the Khawarij from the general populous had become distinct from then on. The Shia played the greatest role in undertaking the effort to spread fabrications as lying had become entrenched in them; more so than any other group of the faith. Furthermore, Iraq had become home to bloody events and rebellions that continued to breakout throughout the Umayyad reign. Thus, emerged their predilection for fabricated narrations to further political goals.
Another reason for fabricating narrations was the adoption of the Shia faith by Arabs who lied, championing the—false and unsolicited—cause of the Imam’s of the Ahlul Bayt with the purpose of gaining seats of leadership. Keeping this goal in front of them, they justified fabricating narrations and incidents to support the opposing view to undermine and damage the Umayyad Caliphate.
This can be understood from the following proposition of al Mukhtar al Thaqafi to a man of hadith:
ضع لي حديثا عن النبي الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أني كائن بعده خليفة وطالب ثأر ولده – يقصد الحسين – وهذه عشرة آلاف درهم وخلعة ومرکوب وخادم . فقال الرجل أما عن النبي صلى الله عيله و سلم فلا و لكن اختر من شئت من الصحابة و أحطك من الثمن ما شئت قال عن النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم أوكد قال و العذاب أشد
Mukhtar said, “Fabricate for me a hadith from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam that states I will emerge after him as a khalifah seeking to avenge his son—meaning Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu—in lieu of ten thousand dirhams, a robe, a conveyance, and a servant.”
The man said, “As for fabricating it from the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then this I cannot do. However, choose whoever you want from the Sahabah, and lessen from the fee whatever you wish .”
Mukhtar replied, “A narration from the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam holds more weight.”
The man responded, “The punishment is far worse.”
Whereas the following narration is authentically established from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam:
يكون في ثقيف كذاب وَمُبِيرٌ
In Thaqif there will be a great liar and destroyer. 
And the liar was Mukhtar.
Another reason for fabricating narrations was the spread of lies with the purpose of discrediting the third khalifah of Islam and the third of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum in status, ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan radiya Llahu ‘anhu. This plan was hatched by Abdullah ibn Saba’, the Jew, and his co-conspirators.
Ibn Saba’ was instrumental in conjuring lies against ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu and inciting people against him. The Shia narrators gobbled up his lies with historians relating them to this day. He was the one who established the principles of the Shia; al Raj’ah, Al Wasiyyah, al Ghaybah, and Swearing the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum. He used these concepts to reach his goal, exploiting the love of the Ahlul Bayt that every believer has and their position which every believer attests to. He created the—untrue—impressions of loving, assisting, and gaining closeness to them. He thus claimed such false things in their favour which the Ahlul Bayt were the first to reject.
He claimed amongst other ideas, that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu had nine times the knowledge of the Qur’an and that only a ninth of the Qur’an was present while the knowledge of the rest was with ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu emphatically prohibited him from such nonsensical ideas.
Abu al Jallas says:
سمعت عليا يقول لعبد الله بن سبأ : والله ما أفضى إلي بشيء كتمته أحدا من الناس . ولقد سمعته يقول : إن بين يدي الساعة ثلاثين كذابا وإنك أحدهم – يقصد ابن سبأ
I heard ‘Ali saying to Abdullah ibn Saba’, “By Allah! Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did not give me anything that he hid from the people. I heard him saying, ‘Verily before the Day of Judgment there will be thirty great liars.’ And you are one of them.” Meaning Ibn Saba’.
He also claimed that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu held ill feelings towards Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. Zaid ibn Wahab says that Suwaid ibn Ghafalah came to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu in the days of his Caliphate and said:
إني مررت بنفر يذكرون أبا بكر وعمر بسوء يرون أنك تضمر لهما مثل ذلك منهم عبد الله بن سبأ وكان عبد الله أول من أظهر ذلك فقال علي: ما لي ولهذا الخبيث الأسود ثم قال معاذ الله أن أضمر لهما إلا الحسن الجميل ثم أرسل إلى عبد الله بن سبأ فسيره إلى المدائن وقال لا تساكني في بلدة أبدا ثم نهض إلى المنبر حتى اجتمع الناس فذكر القصة في ثنائه عليهما بطولها…الاثر وفي آخره ألا ولا يبلغني عن أحد يفضلني عليهما إلا جلدته حد المفتري
I have come across a group who are talking evil of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar and opine that you bear the same feeling towards them. Amongst these people are Abdullah ibn Saba’. And Abdullah ibn Saba’ was the first to arouse such sentiment. ‘Ali said, “What do I have with this evil man?” He then said, “I seek protection from Allah that I have anything besides good and noble thoughts for them.” He then called for Abdullah ibn Saba’ and sent him to the outlying areas saying, “You should not be in the same city as me.” He then ascended the pulpit until the people had gathered. He then praised both of them – Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma – at length. He concluded by saying, “If it reaches me that anyone prefers me over them, I will flog him; the punishment of a slander.”
Another reason that led to fabrications was the delay of codification of history. Not much thought was given to it by the Muslims until the ‘Abbasid Caliphate. The distant time-line between the occurrence of incidents its codification had a profound effect in skewing historical incidents which narrators were charged with bearing. This was especially problematic as the time period before codification was one of dark trials that led to many factions within the Muslims. There were the Bakriyyah, ‘Umariyyah, ‘Uthmaniyyah, ‘Alawiyyah, ‘Abbasiyyah, and others. Each convinced of their own truth and the falsehood, oppression, and illegitimacy of all others.
This problem was compounded due to the fact the ‘Abbasid dynasty did not look favourably to those that narrated the good of the Banu Umayyah. Thus, codifying Islamic history was taken up by three groups. Firstly, there were those who sought luxury and riches by gaining closeness to those who resented the Banu Umayyah through their writings. Secondly, there were those who considered the codification of history as incomplete and of no reward without distorting the image of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhum, and the Banu ‘Abdul Shams. Thirdly and lastly, there were historians who were unbiased and men of true faith such as al Tabari, Ibn ‘Asakir, and Ibn Kathir. They were of the opinion that impartiality would dictate gathering the narrations of all schools of thought even the narrations of narrators such as Lut ibn Yahya—the Shia bigot—and Saif ibn ‘Umar al ‘Iraqi—the abuser. Perhaps some were forced to be inclusive to appease avenues of power and status. 
These scholars included the chain of transmission for every narration so that the one studying their works would have the ability to ascertain the authenticity of each narrator. They thus left us a legacy. Not a compilation of our history. Rather a legacy through which we can extract our history by studying and reviewing its material. This is possible and simple for one who understands the weak and strong in these sources by using the yardstick afforded to us by the Shari’ah. Through this one will extract historical actualities leaving behind fictitious accounts of the past. This will result in relying on the authentic narrations free from interpolations and fabrications. Referring to the books of hadith and the observations of the scholars will make this task easy.
III. The effects of the Shia in fabricating and twisting narrations
The scholars of al Jarh wa al Ta’dil are unanimous that lying and fabricating is found to a much higher degree amongst the Shia than any other. One studying the books of al Jarh wa al Ta’dil dealing with the narrators’ names and conditions such as the books of al Bukhari, Ibn Ma’in, Ibn ‘Adi, al Darqutni, and other such masters of this science will soon come to the realisation that there is consensus on the following: Amongst all the different sects, lying is found to a much greater degree amongst the Shia. It is said that they are greater liars than the Rawafid. Hereunder are some quotations from the erudite scholars of hadith and fiqh who clearly state that lying and fabricating goes hand in hand with the Shia.
Abu Muawiyah says, I heard A’mash saying:
أدركت الناس وما يسمونهم إلا الكذابين
I have met people who could only be called great liars.
سأل أبو عصمة أبا حنيفة ممن تأمرني أن أسمع – قال : من كل عدل في هواه إلا الشيعة فإن أصل عقدهم تضليل أصحاب محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم
Abu ‘Ismah asked Abu Hanifah, “Whom do you command me to listen to?” He replied, ‘From every impartial person except the Shia as their main goal is to discredit the Companions of Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.”
Hammad ibn Salamah says that a Sheikh of them—the Shia—narrated to him:
كنا إذا اجتمعنا فاستحسنا شيئا جعلناه حديئا
When we would gather and consider something good, we would make it a hadith.
احمل العلم عن كل من لقيته إلا الرافضة فإنهم يضعون الحديث ويتخذونه دينا
Take knowledge from everyone you meet except the Rawafid as they fabricate hadith and adopt it as religion.
سئل مالك فيه عن الرافضة فقال : لا تكلمهم ولا ترو عنهم فإنهم يكذبون
Malik was asked regarding the Rawafid. He said, “Do not speak to them and do not narrate from them as they are liars.”
Abdullah ibn al Mubarak says:
الدين لأهل الحديث ، والكلام والحيل لأهل الرأي ، والكذب للرافضة
Religion is for the people of hadith. Loopholes and theology is for the people of opinions and lying is for the Rawafid.
Harmalah says, I heard al Shafi’i saying:
لم أر أحدا أشهد بالزور من الرافضة
I have not seen anyone lying more than the Rawafid.
يكتب عن كل مبتدع إذا لم يكن داعية – أي إلى بدعته – إلا الرافضة فإنهم يكذبون
Narrations will be written from innovators as long as they are not inviting to it, i.e. their innovations, except the Rawafid as they lie.
The Shia made lying their salient feature and gave it a religious wrapping calling it Taqiyyah. They say:
لا ايمان لمن لا تقية له
The one who does not do Taqiyyah has no faith.
‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the Ahlul Bayt complained much of them and their lies as they would attribute lies to them.
قال أبو عبد الله – جعفر الصادق – : إنا أهل بيت صادقون لا نخلو من كذاب يكذب علينا ، فيسقط صدقنا بكذبه علينا عند الناس كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أصدق البرية لهجة وكان مسيلمة يكذب عليه ، وكان أمير المؤمنين – علي بن أبي طالب – أصدق من برأ الله من بعد رسول الله ، وكان الذي يكذب عليه عبد الله بن سبأ – لعنه الله – وكان أبو عبد الله الحسين بن علي قد ابتلي بالمختار الثقفي – ثم ذكر علي بن الحسين فقال : كان يكذب عليه أبو عبد الله بن الحارث الشامي وبنان ثم ذكر المغيرة بن سعيد والسري وأبا الخطاب … فقال : لعنهم الله ، إنا لا نخلو من كذاب يكذب علينا ، كفانا الله مؤنة كل كذاب ، وأذاقهم الله حر الحديد
We the Ahlul Bayt are truthful. We are not protected from liars who will attribute lies to us, and tarnish our honesty with their falsehood. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was the most truthful and Musaylamah attributed lies to him. Amir al Mu’minin—’Ali ibn Abi Talib— was most truthful after Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and Abdullah ibn Saba’—may the curse of Allah be upon him—attributed lies to him. Similarly, Abu Abdullah al Hussain ibn ‘Ali was tested by the falsities of Mukhtar al Thaqafi. (Then mentioning ‘Ali ibn al Hussain he said,) “Abu Abdullah ibn al Harith al Shami and Bunan attributed lies to him. So did Mughirah ibn Sa’id, Sari, Abu al Khattab and others.” He then said, “May Allah’s curse be upon them, we are not protected from liars who will attribute lies to us; however, Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala spared us the ill of every liar and punished them.”
The Rawafid transgressed the bounds in fabricating ahadith and incidents that were conducive to their desires. Just as they fabricated ahadith on the virtue of the Ahlul Bayt, they fabricated ahadith to vilify the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, especially Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. Ibn Abi al Hadid says in this regard:
فالأمور المستبشعة التي تذكرها الشيعة من إرسال قنفذ إلى بيت فاطمة وأنه ضربها بالسوط ، فصار في عضدها كالدملج ، وأن عمر ضغطها بين الباب والجدار ، فصاحت : يا أبتاه ، وجعل في عنق علي حبلا يقاد به ، وفاطمة خلفه تصرخ ، وابناه الحسن والحسين بيكيان – وأخذ ابن أبي الحديد في ذكر كثير من المثالب ثم قال – : فكل ذلك لا أصل له عند أصحابنا ولا يثبته أحد منهم ولا رواه أهل الحديث ولا يعرفونه ، وإنما هو شيء تنفرد الشيعة بنقله
Part of the abhorrent incidents recounted by the Shia is the sending of Qunfudh to the home of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha and his hitting her with a whip which formed a welt around her upper arm. They also say that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu pushed her between the door and wall upon which she cried ‘O my father!’ He then put a rope around the neck of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and dragged him with Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha behind him screaming and his two children al Hassan and al Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhuma crying. (Ibn Abi al Hadid after mentioning many such abhorrent incidents says,) “All of these have no origin according to our scholars. They do not recognise its authenticity nor do the Ahl al Hadith narrate such. It is incidents that are solely narrated amongst the Shia.
Similarly, they fabricated narrations vilifying Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu. An example of this is the narration attributed to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam:
إذا رأيتم معاوية على منبري فاقتلوه
When you see Muawiyah on my pulpit then kill him.
They narrated many other such fabrications with regards to the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum. This was done knowing full well that attributing lies to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is greater in severity than attributing lies to anyone else.
The books of Ibn al Taymiyyah are considered amongst the best authored that expose the plots of the Rawafid and uncover their fabrications in the fields of ‘aqa’id, hadith, fiqh, and tarikh. His books and legal verdicts are filled with defending the pristine sciences of Islam together with expounding on the actions taken by the Shia in planting and concocting incidents under the guise of love for the Ahlul Bayt.
He says regarding this:
وقد اتفق أهل العلم بالنقل والرواية والإسناد على أن الرافضة أكذب الطوائف ، والكذب فيهم قديم ، ولهذا كان أئمة الإسلام يعلمون امتیازهم بكثرة الكذب
The scholars have formed a consensus that the Rawafid are the greatest liars amongst the sects. Lying has been part of them since their inception. It is for this reason that they were renowned to the scholars by their great amount of lies. 
He further states:
القوم من أكذب الناس في النقليات وأجهل الناس في العقليات ولهذا كانوا عند العلماء أجهل الطوائف …. وإنما عمدتهم على تواريخ منقطعة الإسناد وكثير منها من وضع المعروفين بالكذب ، فيعتمدون على نقل أبي مخنف لوط بن يحيى ، وهشام بن الكلبي … والخوارج مع مروقهم من الدين ، فهم من أصدق الناس حتى قيل : إن حديثهم من أصح الحديث . والرافضة يقرون بالكذب حيث يقولون : ديننا التقية ، وهذا هو النفاق ، ثم يزعمون أنهم المؤمنون ويصفون السابقين الأولين بالردة والنفاق ، فهو كما قيل : « رمتني بدائها وانسلت » … بل هذه صفة الرافضة ، فشعارهم الذل ، ودثارهم النفاق والتقية ، ورأس مالهم الكذب والأيمان الفاجرة إن لم يقعوا في الغلو والزندقة ، يقولون بألسنتهم ما ليس في قلوبهم
In Islamic knowledge they were the worst of liars and in secular knowledge the most ignorant. They were pegged by the scholars as the most ignorant of sects. They rely on narrations that either have broken chains of transmissions or are made up of mostly fabrications by known liars. They rely upon the narrations of liars such as Lut ibn Yahya, Hisham ibn Kalbi. On the other hand, the Khawarij, though a sect that went astray, are considered to be amongst the most truthful of people. Some have said that their hadith is the most authentic. The Rawafid though, admit to their lies when asserting their faith as one of Taqiyyah. This is nothing other than hypocrisy. They then think they are believers whilst attributing apostasy and hypocrisy to the early Muslims!
A case of throwing stones from a glass house. This is the salient feature of the Rawafid. They are a cesspool of Taqiyyah, hypocrisy, and humiliation. Their greatest achievement: lies and faith bonded with immorality. This is if they are not already heretics. They speak that which is not in their hearts.
Whilst Ibn Taymiyyah comments on the reliability of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, their status, and their eminence as beacons of guidance based on the many and successive narrations found in the books of hadith, tafsir, and fiqh he indicates towards the fabrications that attempt to vilify them. He established these to be the false propaganda of the Shia. He says:
وإن أصل كل فتنة وبلية هم الشيعة ومن انضوى إليهم
The origin of every fitnah and tragedy is the Shia and those that rally around them.
Concerning his refutation of ‘Ali ibn al Mutahhar al Hilli al Rafidi and his statement that all the Shia narrators are reliable as in Minhaj al Karamah, Ibn Taymiyyah in Minhaj al Sunnah states:
نحن ننقد رجالنا من أهل السنة والحديث نقدا لا مزيد عليه ، ولنا مصنفات كثيرة جدا في تعديلهم وضعفهم وصدقهم وغلطهم وكذبهم ووهمهم ، لا تحابيهم أصلا – مع صلاحهم وعبادتهم – ونسقط الاحتجاج بالرجل منهم لكثرة غلطه وسوء حفظه ولو كان من أولياء الله . وأنتم حد الثقة عندكم أن يكون إماما سواء غلط أو حفظ أو كذب أو صدق …. وغالب ما في أيديكم صحف وأخبار على ألسنتكم مكذوبة ، أو لم تعلم صحتها كدأب أهل الكتابين سواء – اليهود والنصارى – وكذب الرافضة مما يضرب به المثل ، ونحن نعلم أن الخوارج شر منكم ، ومع هذا فما نقدر أن نرميهم بالكذب ، لأننا جربناهم فوجدناهم يتحرون الصدق ، لهم وعليهم ، وأنتم الصادق فيكم شامة ! … فأهل السنة والحديث لا يرضون بالكذب ولو وافق أهواءهم ، فكم قد روي من فضائل أبي بكر وعمر وعثمان بل ومعاوية وغيرهم أحاديث بالأسانيد يرويها مثل النقاش، والقطيعي والثعلبي والأهوازي وأبي نعيم والخطيب وابن عساكر وأضعافهم ، ولم يقبل علماء الحديث شيئا يتبينون الكذب منه ، بل إذا كان في إسناد الحديث واحد مجهول الحال توقفوا في الحديث . وأنتم شرط الحديث عندكم أن يوافق أهواء كم غثا كان أو سميئا
We heavily critique the narrators of the Ahlus Sunnah and people of hadith. We have many books dedicated to establishing their reliability, weakness, mistakes, and lies. We do not favour them at all, even though their lives are imbued with piety and worship. We discontinue using their narrations as proofs due to their weak memory and many mistakes, even if they are illustrious pious men. You on the other hand, gauge reliability based on a narrator being an Imami not bothering if they had made mistakes, lied, or were correct and truthful. Most of what is in your scrolls and on your tongues are either lies or its authenticity unknown—like the tales of the Jews and Christians. Furthermore, the lies of the Rawafid are so considerable that it is used as a precedent. We know that the Khawarij are worse than you; yet we cannot accuse them of lying as we studied them and found them to be truthful in matters that conform to them and go against them. As for you people, truthfulness amongst you is a smear! The Ahlus Sunnah and people of hadith are not okay with lies even of it conforms to their desires. How much hasn’t been narrated on the virtues of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and even Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhum amongst others with chains of narrations from the likes of Al Naqqash, Al Qati’i, Al Tha’labi, Al Ahwazi, Abu Nuaim, Al Khatib, and Ibn ‘Asakir. The scholars of hadith have not accepted any of these if they recognise a lie in it. The scholars went to the extent that if the chain of transmission had a single unknown narrator, they halted in accepting the hadith. You though, determine the status of a hadith based on its conformity to your ideas, be it strong or weak.
Ibn Taymiyyah further states in Majmu’ al Fatawa:
إن الرافضة أمة ليس لها عقل صریح ، ولا نقل صحيح ، ولا دین مقبول ، ولا دنيا منصورة ، بل هم من أعظم الطوائف كذبا وجهلا . ودينهم يدخل على المسلمين كل زندیق مرتد ، كما دخل فيهم النصيرية والإسماعيلية وغيرهم ، فإنهم يعمدون إلى خيار الأئمة يعادونهم ، ويعمدون إلى الصدق الظاهر المتواتر يدفعونه ، وإلى الكذب المختلق الذي يعلم فساده يقيمونه …. ولهذا كانوا أبهت الناس وأشدهم فرية مثلما يذكرون عن معاوية … والشيعة لا يكاد يوثق برواية أحد منهم من شيوخهم لكثرة الكذب فيهم ، ولهذا أعرض عنهم أهل الصحيح ، فلا يروي البخاري ومسلم أحاديث علي إلا عن أهل بيته كأولاده مثل الحسن والحسين ، ومثل محمد بن الحنفية ، وكاتبه عبيد الله بن رافع والحارث التيمي وقيس بن عباد وأمثالهم ، إذ هؤلاء صادقون فيما يروون في علي ،
The Rawafid are a nation that does not possess true intellect, truthful transmissions, an accepted faith, nor a supported creed. They are the liars and idiots of the highest degree in comparison to all other sects. Their creed allows heretics and apostates to be included under the banner of Islam, just as the al Nusariyyah, al Ismailiyyah, and others have done. The eminent personalities of the ummah and the successive true narrations are rejected by them whilst they hanker after the fabricated lies that are notorious. They are thus most slanderous when speaking of Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu. The Shia themselves, cannot commit to relying on almost any of the narrations from their scholars due to the spread of so much lies. Therefore, the people who rely on authentic narrations pay no heed to them. Al Bukhari and Muslim only narrate the ahadith concerning ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu coming from his family, such as, Al Hassan, Al Hussain, Muhammad ibn al Hanafiyyah, his scribe ‘Ubaidullah ibn Rafi’, al Harith al Taymi, Qais ibn ‘Ubad and such as they are truthful in what they narrate concerning him.
Ibn al Qayyim al Jawziyyah mentioning the Shia says:
أما علي بن أبي طالب فانتشرت أحكامه وفتاويه ، ولكن قاتل الله الشيعة . فإنهم أفسدوا كثيرا من علمه بالكذب عليه ، ولهذا نجد أصحاب الحديث من أهل الصحيح لا يعتمدون من حديثه وفتواه إلا ما كان من طريق أهل بيته وأصحاب عبد الله بن مسعود
As for ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, his judgments and legal verdicts are widespread. However, may Allah’s subhanahu wa ta ‘ala curse be upon the Shia, they corrupted much of his knowledge by fabricating lies against him. This is the reason why we find the scholars of hadith and those who rely on authentic narrations not giving the light of day to their narrations and verdicts, except that which came via his family or from the students of Ibn Mas’ud radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
It is important to note that a great majority of the narrators who have displayed hostility and related ill of Caliphate of ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu are of the Shia. Furthermore, none of those who witnessed these incidents reported anything of it, it is mere hearsay and lies upon lies. Many a times such narrations will have been reported by one who is decades apart from its occurrence. These narrators together with their lies and being inviters towards their cause, are party to those incidents as they follow the group who lit the flames of the fitnah. They are furthering the Saba’i cause by their speech and literary works just as their predecessors had done with body and spirit.
Hereunder are the comments of scholars of al Jarh and al Ta’dil regarding some of the Shia narrators. Narrators who are the primary source for historians and story tellers in relating incidents that occurred during the reign of ‘Uthman and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. Narrators that have skewed, dyed, and stretched incidents to spread the Shia creed after having deceived people in the name of faith and love for the Ahlul Bayt.
Three such narrators—narrators of Tarikh al Tabari no less—are discussed below as an insight to the twisted version of history they have presented. It will also serve as a beginning point of those wishing to further delve into this topic as the books of al Jarh and al Ta’dil are filled with the profiles of the Shia. These Shia narrators and their profiles have been gathered in a book called Rijal al Shia fi al Mizan.
- Abu Mihknaf Lut ibn Yahya
- Abu Hatim says, “He is Matruk (suspected of forgery).”
- Al Darqutni says, “Da’if (weak).”
- Ibn Ma’in says, “Laysa bi Thiqah (not reliable).”
- Murrah says, “Laysa bi Shay’ (He doesn’t amount to much.)”
- Ibn ‘Adi says, “A staunch Shia who relates their incidents.”
- Abu ‘Ubaid al Ajurri says, “I asked Abu Hatim regarding him in reply to which he dusted his hands and said, ‘Can someone ask about such a man?’”
- ‘Uqayli has included him in al Duafa’.
- Al Dhahabi says, “A foul story teller. Not to be relied upon.”
- Hisham ibn Muhammad ibn al Sa’ib al Kalbi
- Ahmed ibn Hanbal says, “He was just a story teller. I don’t think anyone would narrate from him.”
- Al Darqutni says, “He is Matruk (suspected of forgery).”
- Ibn ‘Asakir says, “A Rafidi, not reliable.”
- ‘Uqayli says, “He has weakness.”
- Ibn al Jarud, Ibn al Sakan, and others have included him amongst the weak narrators.
- Al Asma’i has accused him of lying.
- Ibn Hibban says, “He narrated from his father, Ma’roof mawla Sulaiman, and the people of Iraq strange incidents and stories that are baseless. He was a His falsities are far more notorious than need to be dissected.”
- Ibn ‘Adi says, Hisham al Kalbi is known for storytelling, I do not know of any linked narration of his. His father was a great liar as well.”
- Yahya ibn Ma’in says, “He does not amount to much, a great liar.”
- Al Dhahabi says, “Hisham is not to be relied upon.”
- Jabir ibn Yazid al Ju’fi
- Yahya ibn Ma’in says, “Jabir was a great liar.” In another place he says, “His narrations are not to be written.”
- Za’idah says, “As for al Ju’fi, he was, by Allah, a great liar who believed in the doctrine of Raj’ah.”
- Abu Hanifah says, “I have not met anyone, ever, who lied more than Jabir al Ju’fi. I did not present anything to him of my opinion except that he brought fought a narration in that regard.”
- Al Nasa’i says, “He is discarded.”
- Abu Dawood says, “I do not deem him as strong in his hadith.”
- Al Shafi’i says, “I heard Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah saying, ‘I heard the speech of Jabir al Ju’fi and hastened out fearing the roof would fall on us.’”
- Yahya ibn Ya’la says, “I heard Za’idah saying, ‘Jabir al Ju’fi is a Rafidi who vilifies the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum.’”
- Ibn Hibban says, “He was a Saba’i from the companions of Abdullah ibn Saba’. He would say, ‘‘Ali will return to the world.’”
- Al Juzajani says, “A great liar.”
 He is, Muhammad ibn Abdullah, Abu Bakr ibn al ‘Arabi al Andalusi al Ishbili al Maliki, al Imam al Hafiz. He was a prolific author who wrote on the subjects of hadith, fiqh, usul, study of Qur’an, literature, grammar, and history. Ibn Bashkwal says, “He was the seal of the Spanish scholars and the last of its great leaders and memorizers of hadith.” Al Dhahabi says, “He was intelligent, well spoken, of sublime character, and admired. He was appointed as the judge of Ishbilyah (Islamic Seville) and his political acumen was praiseworthy. He was stern and strict due to which he was later dismissed. He then began spreading and compiling knowledge. From amongst his books authored are: Ahkam al Qur’an, Kawkab al Hadith wa al Musalsalat, Kitab al Asnaf in fiqh, al Mahsul in usul, Hasm al Da’ ‘ala hadith al Sawda’ in language, Al ‘Awasim min al Qawasim in history. He passed away in the year 543 A.H corresponding to 1148 A.D. Ibn Bashkwal has written on his life in the book Al Silah fi tarikh a’immah al Andalus wa ‘ulama’ihim wa muhaddithihim wa fuqaha’ihim wa udaba’ihim, vol. 2 pg. 590, Ibn Sa’id al Andalusi in Al Mughrib fi hula al Maghrib, vol. 1 pg. 254, Al Nubahi in Tarikh Qudat al Andalus, pg. 105, Al Dhahabi in Siyar A’lam al Nubala vol. 20 pg. 197, Muhammad ibn Jafar al Kattani in Silwat al Anfas wa muhadathat al Akyas fi man aqbara min al ‘ulama’ wa al sulha’ bi Fas, vol. 3 pg. 198.
 Ibn al ‘Arabi: Al ‘Awasim min al Qawasim pgs. 61-108
 Ibn al Taymiyyah: Majmu’ al Fatawa vol. 18 pg. 46.
 He is, ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Muhammad ibn Khaldun, al Ishbili al Tanusi, scholar and historian. He travelled to Fes, Granada, Tlemcen, Spain, and Cairo where he assumed an occupation. The Sultan Al Zahir Barquq of the Mumluk Sultanate honoured him and appointed him as the maliki judge. From amongst his books are: His famous Muqaddimah, Al ‘Ibar in history, Al Hisab, Al Mantiq, and Shifa al Sa’il li tadhib al Masa’il. He passed away in 808 A.H corresponding to 1407 A.D. Al Sakhawi has written on his life in the book Al Daw al Lami’ li ahl al Qarn al Tasi’ vol. 4 pg. 145, Maqri in Nafh al Tib fi Ghusn al Andalus al Ratib, vol. 4 pg. 414, and Ibn al Qadi in a Jadhwa al Iqtibas fi man halla min al A’lam bi Fas, vol. 2 pg. 410.
 Ibn Khaldun: Muqaddimah, pg. 35.
 Ibid pg. 35.
 Ibid pg. 35.
 Ibid pg. 35.
 Ibid pg. 35.
 He is, Ghayyath ibn Ibrahim al Nakha’i al Kufi. Imam Ahmed says, “The people have left his narrations.” ‘Abbas ibn Yahya says. “He is not credible.” Al Juzajani says, “More than one person has said that he would fabricate hadith.” Imam al Bukhari says, “They have left him.” Al Nasa’i says, “His narrations have been left out. He lived in the early era of the Caliphate of al Mahdi al ‘Abbasi who ruled from 158 A.H/773 A.D to 169 A.H/785A.D. Refer to al Juzajani: Ahwal al Rijal pg. 201; Nasa’i: Kitab al Duafa’ wa al Matrukin, pg. 195; Al Dhahabi: Mizan al I’tidal fi naqd al Rijal, vol. 3 pg. 337.
 Muhammad al Mahdi ibn Abi ibn Abi Jafar al Mansur the ‘Abbasi khalifah. Al Dhahabi says regarding him, “He was generous, munificent, and loved by the masses. He investigated and destroyed the heretics. He was, like the other kings, drowning in the ocean of desires, entertainment and hunting. However, he was fearful of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala and opposed to misguided folk with whom he would be furious. Ibn Abi al Dunya has mentioned that al Mahdi wrote to the cities warning them not to let the people of desires hold podiums of speech. He passed away in the year 169 A.H/ 785 A.D. The following have recorded his biography, Khalifah: Al Tarikh, pgs. 436-445; Khatib: Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 5 pg. 391; Al Dhahabi in Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, vol. 7 pg. 400.
 Jami’ al Tirmidhi: Hadith: 1700.
 Ibn Hibban: Al Majruhin min al Muhaddithin wa al Duafa’ wa al Matrukin, vol.1 pg. 33; Ibn al Jawzi: Al Ahadith al Mawduah. vol. 1 pg. 42.
 He is Wahb ibn Wahb ibn Kathir. He lived in Baghdad and was appointed as the judge of ‘Askar by al Mahdi then of Madinah in the era of his son Rashid. He was extremely generous; however, he is accused of lying in hadith. Yahya ibn Ma’in says, “He used to lie, the enemy of Allah. He is the one who was disgraced in front of the people in the Masjid of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam when he pacified Rashid to climb the pulpit with a coat and waist tie citing that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would where it.” Ahmed says, “As we see it, he would fabricate narrations.” Al Bukhari says, “They have kept silent regarding him.” He passed away the year 200 A.H/835 A.D. His life has been recorded by al Darqutni: Al Duafa’ wa al Matrukun, pg. 384; Khatib: Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 13 pg. 541; Al Dhahabi: Al Mizan, vol. 4 pg. 353.
 He is, Yahya ibn Ma’in. The great Imam and scholar was well versed and had deep knowledge regarding the conditions and lineage of narrators. Ahmed says, “He is the most knowledgeable amongst us in ‘ilm al Rijal (the field of biographical evaluation).” Al Dhahabi has called him the chief of huffaz (one who memorizers a tremendous amount of ahadith).” Ibn Hajar has said regrading him, “The Imam of al Jarh wa al Ta’dil.” From amongst his books are: Al Tarikh and M’arifat al Rijal. His father had left a huge endowment for him after passing away. He was though, abstinent and altruistic preferring to spend in seeking hadith and gathering it due to his extreme desire for knowledge. He passed away in the year 233 A.H/848 A.D. His life has been recounted by Ibn Sa’d: Al Tabaqat, vol. 7 pg. 354; Al Bukhari: Al Tarikh al Kabir, vol. 4 pg. 307; Ibn al Nadim: Al Fihrist, pg. 322; Khatib: Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 14 pg. 177; Al Dhahabi: Tadhkirat al Huffaz, vol. 2 pg. 429; Ibn Hajar, Tahdhib al Tahdhib, vol. 11 pg. 177.
 Ibn Hibban: Al Majruhin, vol. 1 pg. 23; Ibn al Jawzi: Al Ahadith al Mawduah, pg. 5.
 The result of the ability granted by Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, The Most Wise, All Knowing. He guides whomsoever He wills.
 He is ‘Ali ibn Hussain ibn ‘Ali, Abu al Hassan al Mas’udi al Baghdadi. The historian who travelled far and wide. He is the author of Muruj al Dhahab. Al Dhahabi says regarding him, “He was a story teller who would narrate obscurities and marvels. He was a Mu’tazili. From his books authored are, Dhaka’ir al ‘Ulum wa ma kana fi sa’ir al Duhur, Al Istidhkar lima marra fi salif al A’sar, Al Tarikh fi Akhbar al Umam min al ‘Arab wa al ‘Ajam, and Al Tanbih wa al Ishraf. He died in the year 346 A.H./957 A.D.” His life has been recounted by Ibn al Nadim in Al Fihrist, pg. 219; Al Subki in Tabaqat al Shafi’iyyah, vol. 2 pg. 307; Al Dhahabi in Siyar A’lam al Nubala vol. 15 pg. 569; and Ibn Hajar in Lisan al Mizan, vol. 4 pg. 224.
 Ibn Khaldun: Muqaddimah, pg. 37.
 Ibn Khaldun: Muqaddimah, pg. 37.
 He entered the Gulf towards Darin, Bahrain with the Muslims, their horses, and wealth as though they were walking on land. The poet ‘Afif ibn al Mundhir has recounted this incident in the following couplets:
وأنزل بالكفار إحدى الجلائل
ألم تر أن الله ذلل بحره
بأعجب من فلق البحار الأوائل
دعونا الذي شق البحار فجاءنا
Have you not see, verily Allah subjugated his sea,
And inflicted upon the disbelievers of his greatness.
We call out to the one by whom the sea was traversed and,
Brought about even more astounding than splitting the sea.
See, Al Tabari: Tarikh al Rusul, pg. 3 pg. 310; Ibn Kathir: Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 6 pg. 329. Ibn Hajar has mentioned when recounting the life of Al ‘Ala al Hadrami radiya Llahu ‘anhu in Al Isabah, vol. 2 pg. 498 “He traversed the sea by a supplication as famous in the books of conquests”
 Books such as Al Duafa’ wa al Matrukin of Nasa’i, Al Duafa’ of ‘Uqayli, Al Majruhin of Ibn Hibban, Al Kamil fi al Duafa’ of Ibn ‘Adi, and Al Mizan of Al Dhahabi.
 Ibn Hazam: Al Fasl fi al Milal wa al Ahwa’ wa al Nihal, vol. 2 pg. 115.
 Ibn al Taymiyyah: Majmu’ al Fatawa, vol. 4 pg. 429.
 He is Mughirah ibn Sa’id al Bajali. Resident of Kufaf and of the Shia persuasion. Ibrahim al Nakha’i says, “Be careful regarding Mughirah ibn Sa’id and Abu ‘Abdul Rahim as both are liars”. A’mash says, “The first instance of rebuking Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma I heard was from Mughirah ibn Sa’id.” Ibn ‘Adi says, “There was no one who cursed in Kufah more than Mughirah ibn Sa’id in his false narrations from ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. He continuously attributed false statements to the Ahlul Bayt. I do not know of any Musnad narrations from him.” He was killed the year 129 A.H./737 A.D. by crucifixion on the hands of Khalid ibn Abdullah al Qasri. His life has been recorded by Ibn Habib in Al Muhabbar, pg. 483; Al Juzajani in Ahwal al Rijal, pg. 50; Al Tabari in Tarikh al Rusul wa al Muluk, vol. 7 pg. 129; and Ibn Hajar in Lisan al Mizan, vol. 6 pg. 75.
 He is Muhammad ibn Abi Zainab Miqlas, Abu al Khattab al Ajda’ al Asadi. His teknonym is Abu Ismail and Abu al Zaiban. Jafar al Sadiq had mentioned him unfavourably. Ibn al Ghada’iri says, “Muhammad ibn Abi Zainab Abu al Khattab al Ajda’ mawla of the Banu Asad. May Allah’s curses be upon him. His condition is well known. See Al Rijal of Al Kashshi, pg. 145 and Manhaj al Maqal fi Tahqiq Ahwal al Rijal, pg. 323.
 He is ‘Abdul Karim ibn Abi al ‘Awja’. Al Dhahabi says regarding him, “A heretic imbecile.” Abu Ahmed ibn ‘Adi says, “When he was taken to be executed he said, “I have fabricated four thousand narrations in which I have made the permissible impermissible and the impermissible permissible.” See, Ibn al Jawzi: Al Ahadith al Mawduah, vol. 1 pg. 37 and Al Dhahabi: Al Mizan, vol. 2 pg. 644.
 See, Ibn al Jawzi: Al Ahadith al Mawduah, vol. 1 pg. 37; Al ‘Iraqi: Al Fath al Mugith fi sharh alfiyah al Hadith, pg. 127.
 He is, Muhammad ibn Sulaiman ibn ‘Ali al ‘Abbasi, Abu Abdullah. The governor of Basra during the era of Al Mahdi. Ibn al Athir writes regarding the incidents of the year 160 A.H./776 A.D. “Muhammad ibn Sulaiman was the governor over Basra, Bahrain, Amman, and the districts of Ahwaz and the river Tigris. He would track the heretics upon the command of al Mahdi.” He passed away the year 173 A.H./ 789 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Habib in Al Muhabbar, pg. 61; Al Khatib in Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 4 pg. 291; and Ibn al Athir in Al Kamil fi al Tarikh, vol. 6 pg. 49.
 Al Dhahabi: Al Muntaqa fi Minhaj al I’tidal, pg. 313; Al Suyuti: Al La’ali al Masnu’ah fi al Ahadith al Mawduah, vol. 1 pg. 343.
 Al Suyuti: Al La’ali al Masnu’ah, vol. 1 pg. 286/315; Ibn ‘Iraq: Tanzih al Shari’ah al Marfu’ah ‘an al Akhbar al Shani’ah al Mawduah, vol. 1 pg. 371.
 Al Suyuti: Al La’ali al Masnu’ah, vol. 1 pg. 428; Al Karmi: Al Fawa’id al Mawduah fi al Ahadith al Mawduah, pg. 92.
 Al Fasawi: Al Ma’rifah wa al Tarikh, vol. 2 pg. 756.
 Ibn Sa’d: Al Tabaqat al Kubra’, vol. 4 pg. 267.
 Sahih Muslim (with the commentary of Al Nawawi), vol. 1 pg. 83.
 He is, Sulaiman ibn Mihran al Asadi, Abu Muhammad al A’mash. He is from amongst the Tabi’in. The scholars share a consensus on his reliability and authenticity only opposed to his tadlis. He was a scholar of the Qur’an, Ahadith, and laws of inheritance. He has transmitted about 1300 ahadith. Al Dhahabi says regarding him, “He was a fountainhead of beneficial knowledge and pious deeds.” He passes away the year 148 A.H/765 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Sa’d: Al Tabaqat al Kubra’, vol. 6 pg. 342; Al Khatib: Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 9 pg. 3; Al Dhahabi: Tadhkirat al Huffaz, vol. 1 pg. 154.
 Ibn ‘Adi: Al Kamil fi Duafa’ al Rijal, vol. 1 pg. 148.
 He is Muhammad ibn Muslim ibn Abdullah ibn Shihab al Qurashi al Zuhri al Madani. The Imam and Hafiz of his era. It is said that he was the first to codify hadith. Ayub al Sakhtiyani says, “I haven’t seen anyone more knowledgeable than Al Zuhri.” He passed away the year 124 A.H/724 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al Bukhari: Al Tarikh al Saghir, vol. 1 pg. 320; Ibn Abi Hatim: Al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, vol. 8 pg. 71; Ibn Khallikan: Wafayat al A’yan, vol. 4 pg. 177; Al Dhahabi: Tadhkirat al Huffaz, vol. 1 pg. 108 and Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, vol. 5 pg. 327.
 Al Fasawi: Al Ma’rifah wa al Tarikh, vol. 2 pg. 757.
 Al Dhahabi: Al Muntaqa fi Minhaj al I’tidal, pg. 88.
 He is ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Mahdi ibn Hassan al Basri, Abu Sa’id. He is counted amongst the great huffaz. Ibn al Madini says, “If I were to take an oath between the rukn and the maqam, I would do so that I haven’t seen anyone like ‘Abdul Rahman. He passed away the year, 198 A.H/813A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Sa’d: Al Tabaqat, vol. 7 pg. 297; Al Lalka’i: Sharh usul i’tiqad al Sunnah wa al Jama’ah min al Kitab wa al Sunnah wa ijma’ al Sahabah wa al Tabi’in min ba’dihim, vol. 1 pg. 44; Al Khatib: Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 10 pg. 240; Ibn Hajar: Al Tahdhib, vol. 6 pg. 2790.
 Al Dhahabi: Al Muntaqa, pg. 88.
 Ibn al Taymiyyah: Majmu’ Fatawa, vol. 10 pg. 358.
 Ibid. vol. 20 pg. 316.
 He is al Mukhtar ibn Abi ‘Ubaid ibn Mas’ud al Thaqafi. He is from amongst the leaders of those that rebelled against the Banu Umayyah. He tracked the killers of Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu and killed many of them including ‘Ubaidullah ibn Ziyad. He was a great liar who claimed prophethood and revelation. He was killed the year 67A.H/ 687 A.D by Mus’ab ibn Zubair. Refer to, Abu Hanifah al Dinwari: Al Akhbar al Tiwal, pg. 82 and Al Tabari: Tarikh al Rusul, vol. 6 pg. 7.
 Sahih Muslim (with the commentary of Al Nawawi), vol. 16 pg. 100.
 Al Nawawi: Sharh Muslim, vol. 16 pg. 100
 Al Tabari: Tarikh al Rusul wa al Muluk, vol. 4 pg. 340.
 See, Al Qummi: Al Maqalat wa al Firaq, pg. 20; Al Ash’ari: Maqalat al Islamiyyin, vol. 1 pg. 85; Al Sharastani: Al Milal wa al Nihal, vol. 1 pg. 15; Al Kirmani: Al Firaq al Islamiyyah, pg. 34.
 Al Juzajani: Ahwal al Rijal, pg. 38; Al Dhahabi: Al Mizan, vol. 2 pg. 426.
 Abu al Jallas al Kufi. Ibn al Hajar has mentioned him in Al Tahdhib saying, “He has narrated from ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib. Abu Hind al Harith ibn ‘Abdul Rahman al Hamdani has narrated from him, vol. 12 pg. 63.
 Ibn ‘Asakir: Tarikh Dimashq ‘Al Makhtut’, vol. 9 pg. 332; Ibn Hajar: Al Lisan, vol. 3 pg. 289.
 He is, Zaid ibn Wahab al Juhani, Abu Sulaiman al Kufi. He travelled to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam but did not meet him as the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam passed away whilst he was on the way. He has narrated from ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, Abu Dharr, and other Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum. Zuhayr narrates from Al A’mash who said, “When Zaid ibn Wahab narrates to you from someone, then it is as though you heard it directly from the person he narrated from.” Ibn Sa’d says, “He was reliable and narrated many hadith.” Al ‘Ijli says, “He is reliable.” Al Dhahabi says, “Zaid ibn Wahab is from the eminent Tabi’in. There is consensus on seeking rulings by his narrations except that which comes through Ya’qub al Fasawi as he has said in his Tarikh, ‘His narrations have many mistakes.’” He passed away before or after the year 90 A.H/709 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al ‘Ijli: Tarikh al Thiqat, pg. 171; Ibn Sa’d: Al Tabaqat, vol. 6 pg. 102; Al Dhahabi: Al Mizan, vo. 2 pg. 10; Ibn Hajar: Al Tahdhib, vol. 3 pg. 427.
 He is Suwaid ibn Ghafalah, Abu Umayyah al Ju’fi. Embraced Islam during the lifetime of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam but did not meet him, and of the eminent Tabi’in. He arrived in Madinah the day Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was buried. He was a powerful man. On the day of Qadisiyyah he heard people screaming Lion! Lion! He went forward and struck the lion on its head slitting through with his sword coming out at the tail. He was with ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu at the Battle of Siffin. He lived in Kufah and passed away in the era of Hajjaj the year 81 A.H/ 700 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al ‘Ijli: Tarikh al Thiqat, pg. 212, Al Dhahabi: Al Kashif fi Ma’rifah man lahu riwayah fi al Kutub al Sittah, vol. 1 pg. 329; Ibn Hajar: Al Isabah fi Ma’rifah al Sahabah, vol. 2 pg. 118.
 Ibn Hajar: Lisan al Mizan, vol. 3 pg. 290.
 Ibn al ‘Arabi: Al ‘Awasim min al Qawasim, pg. 246.
 He is ‘Ali ibn Hassan ibn Hibat Allah, Abu al Qasim ibn ‘Asakir al Dimashqi al Imam al Hafiz. A Historian and prolific author. He has authored Al Tasanif and Al Tarikh al Kabir. He was the muhaddith of Sham during his era and the companion of al Sam’ani in his travels. Al Sam’ani says regarding him, “Abu al Qasim was a Hafiz, reliable, trustworthy, pious, of exemplary character, knowing of both the subject matter and chain of transmission of the ahadith, and was extremely knowledgeable.” He was of superior merit with correct and reliable recitation. He travelled and expanded his efforts in seeking knowledge. He surpassed his contemporaries. He has written, Tarikh Dimashq al Kabir which is his magnum opus of eighty volumes! I have referred to it much in this book. He has recounted in this book the lives of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, Tabi’in, Tab’ al Tabi’in, eminent personalities, narrators, and leaders on the layout of Tarikh Baghdad of Al Khatib. Ibn Khallikan says, “Al Hafiz Zakiyy al Din ‘Abdul ‘Azim said whilst discussing this book of history, ‘This man had probably decided writing this book as soon as he reached the age of understanding and began gathering the material from that time. Otherwise life is too short for a man to write such a book.’” This book of history has addendums as well. Some of these are: The addendum of Al Qasimi, son of Ibn ‘Asakir, The addendum of Sadr al Din al Bakri, and The addendum of ‘Umar ibn al Hajib. It has abridgments as well. Some of these are, the abridgment of Imam Abu Shamah al Dimashqi, that of Al Qadi Jamal al Din ibn Manzur (author of Lisan al Arab), that of Badr al Din al ‘Ayni, and that of ‘Abdul Qadir Badran who has omitted the chain of transmission and repetitions. Jalal al Din al Suyuti has selected from it and compiled the book, Tuhfah al Mudhakir al Muntaqa min Tarikh ibn ‘Asakir. Amongst his other books are, Kashf al Mughtta fi fadl al Muwatta, Arba’un hadith min araba’in Sheikh min araba’in madinah, Mujam al Sahabah, Tahdhib al Multamis min ‘awali Malik ibn Anas, Tarikh al Mizzah, Mujam Asma’ al Qura wa al Amsar, Mu’jam al Shuyukh wa al Nubala’, Mujam al Niswan, Al Ashraf ‘ala M’arifat al Atraf, and Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari fi ma Nusiba ila Abi al Hassan al Ash’ari. He passed away the year 571 A.H/1176 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn al Jawzi: Mir’at al Zaman fi Tarikh al A’yan, vol. 8 pg. 336; Ibn Khallikan: Wafayat al A’yan, vol. 3 pg. 309; Al Subki: Tabaqat al Shafi’iyyah, vol. 4 pg. 273; Ibn Kathir: Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 12 pg. 294; Al Dhahabi: Tadhkirat al Huffaz, vol. 4 pg. 1330; Haji Khalifah: Kashf al Zunun ‘an Asami al Kutub wa al Funun, vol. 1 pg. 294.
 He is Ismail ibn ‘Umar ibn Kathir al Qurashi al Basrawi al Dimashqi, Abu al Fida’ al Hafiz. A Historian and theologian. He has authored, Ikhtisar ‘Ulum al Hadith, Tafsir al Qur’an al Karim, Al Takmil fi M’arifat al Thiqat wa al Duafa’ wa al Majahil, Al Ijtihad fi Talab al Jihad, and Tabaqat al Fuqaha’ al Shafi’iyyah. He passed away the year 774 A.H./1373 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Hajar: Al Durar al Kaminah, vol. 1 pg. 373; Ibn al ‘Imad: Shadharat al Dhahab fi akhbar man dhahab; Al Shawkani: Al Badr al Tali’ bi mahasin min ba’d al Qarn al Sabi’, vol. 1 pg. 153.
 Muhib al Din al Khatib: Footnotes of Al ‘Awasim min al Qawasim, pg. 177.
 He is Muhammad ibn Khazim al Tamimi al Sa’di, Abu Muawiyah al Darir al Kufi; one of the eminent reliable narrators. Ibn Sa’d say, “He was reliable, narrated many hadith, would make tadlis, and was a Murji’.” Al Nasa’i says, “Reliable in the narrations of A’mash.” Ibn Abi Hatim says, “The most reliable in the narrations of A’mash.” Ibn Khirash says, “Truthful and in the narrations of A’mash reliable. He passed away the year 195 A.H/ 810 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Sa’d: Al Tabaqat, vol. 6 pg. 392; al Bukhari: Al Tarikh al Kabir 1/1/74; Ibn Abi Hatim: Al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, vol. 7 pg. 246; Al Khatib: Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 5 pg. 242; Ibn Hajar: Al Tahdhib, vol. 9 pg. 137.
 Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah, vol. 1 pg. 16.
 He is Ahmed ibn ‘Ali ibn Thabit al Baghdadi, Abu Bakr famous as al Khatib; one of the great huffaz. He was eloquent and knowledgeable in the fields of fiqh, adab, and tarikh. There are very few sciences in the field of hadith that he hasn’t authored a book in. Hafiz Abu Bakr says, “Whoever is unbiased will know that the muhaddithin after al Khatib are dependent on his books.” When he was in his final illness he gave his books and wealth as endowments to avenues of good and seekers of hadith. He has authored among other books, Tarikh Baghdad, Sharf ashab al Hadith, Al Asma al Mubhamah, Al Sabiq wa al Lahiq fi taba’ud ma bayn wafat rawiyain ‘an sheikh wahid, Mudih awham al Jam’ wa al Tafriq, Al Jami’ li akhlaq al Rawi wa adab al Sami’, Maqlub al Asma wa al Ansab, Asma al Mudallisin, Taqyid al ‘Ilm, Riwayah al Sahabah ‘an Tabi’yy, Ijaza al Ma’dum wa al Majhul, Al Tarikh, Tamyiz muttasil al Isnad, Talkhis al Mutashabih fi al Rasm wa himayah ma ashkal minhu ‘an bawadir al Tashif wa al Wahm, and Al Mukmal fi bayan al Muhmal. Al Sam’ani has mentioned that he has authored fifty-six books. He passed away the year 463 A.H/ 1072 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Khallikan: Wafayat al A’yan, vol. 1 pg. 92; Al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, vol. 18 pg. 270; Dr Akram Diya’ al ‘Umri: Mawarid al Khatib al Baghdadi pgs. 13-84.
 He is Abdullah ibn al Mubarak al Hanzali al Tamimi al Marwazi, Abu ‘Abdul Rahman al Imam al Hafiz; the envy of warriors and leader of the ascetics. He spent his life in travelling for knowledge, pilgrimage, fighting in the path of Allah, and doing business. Al Hassan ibn Masarjis the freed slave of Ibn al Mubarak says, “A group with the likes of Fadl ibn Musa and Makhlad ibn al Hussain were gathered and they said, ‘Let us count the great qualities of Ibn al Mubarak.’ They said, ‘Knowledge, fiqh, adab, grammar, language, asceticism, eloquence, poetry, standing in prayer at night, worship, pilgrimage, fighting in the cause of Allah, bravery, excellence in horse riding, strength, leaving out speaking that which does not concern him, justice, very little difference of opinion from his companions.’” He passed away the year 181 A.H./ 797 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al Bukhari: Al Tarikh al Saghir, vol. 2 pg. 225; Al Dhahabi: Tadhkirat al Huffaz, vol. 1 pg. 274 and Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, vol. 8 pg. 378.
 He is Nuh ibn Abi Maryam, Yazid ibn ‘Abd ibn Abdullah, Abu ‘Ismah al Marwazi. He was from Marw and was known as Nuh al Jami’ as he had combined the knowledge of hadith, fiqh, tafsir, and history of battles. He ascended the role of judge over Marw in the Caliphate of al Mansur al ‘Abbasi. Ahmed says, “He wasn’t all that in hadith. He was stern against the Jahmiyyah. Muslim says, “He is weak in hadith.” Al Bukhari says, “Extremely weak in hadith.” Ibn ‘Adi says, “Though weak his hadith will be written.” He passed away the year 173 A.H./ 789 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al Darqutni: Al Duafa’; Al Dhahabi: Al Mizan, vol. 4 pg. 279; Ibn Hajar: Al Tahdhib, vol. 10 pg. 486.
 Al Khatib: Al Kifayah fi ‘ilm al Riwayah, pg. 303.
 Hammad ibn Salamah ibn dinar, Abu Salamah al Basri. He is from amongst the huffaz of hadith. He was an Imam in Arabic and an eloquent jurist. He was stern against the innovators. He has a book Al Sunan. He passed away the year 169 A.H/ 784 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Sa’d: Al Tabaqat, vol. 7 pg. 282; Ibn Ma’in: Al Tarikh, vol. 2 pg. 130; Ibn Nadim: Al Fihrist, pg. 317; Al Anbari: Nuzhah al Alba fi tabaqat al Udaba, pg. 50; Ibn al Kayyal: Al Kawakib al Nayyirat fi Ma’rifah man ikhtalat min al Ruwat al Thiqat, pg. 470.
 Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah, vol. 1 pg. 66.
 He is Muhammad ibn Sa’id ibn Sulaiman ibn Abdullah al Kufi Abu Jafar al Asfahani. He is from amongst the teachers of al Bukhari and al Nasa’i. Ya’qub ibn Shaibah says, “Strong”. Al Nasa’i says, “Reliable”. Ibn ‘Adi says, “Reliable, from Kufa”. Abu Hatim says, “I haven’t seen any Hafiz more reliable than him in Kufa.” He passed away the year 220 A.H./835 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al Bukhari: Al Tarikh al Kabir, 1/1/95; Ibn Abi Hatim: Al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, vol. 7 pg. 265; Al Dhahabi: Al Kashifat, vol. 3 pg. 41; Ibn Hajar: Al Tahdhib, vol. 9 pg. 188.
 He is Sharik ibn Abdullah ibn al Harith, Abu Abdullah al Kufi al Nakha’i. He is of the scholars of hadith and fiqh. He is known for his string intellect and quick wittedness. He was appointed as the judge for al Mansur and then for al Mahdi. He was a moderate Shia. He passed away the year 177 A.D./794 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al Khatib: Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 9 pg. 279; Ibn Khallikan: Wafayat al A’yan, vol. 2 pg. 464; Al Dhahabi: Al Tadhkirah, vol. 1 pg. 232.
 Al Dhahabi: Al Muntaqa, pg. 22.
 He is Yunus ibn ‘Abdul A’la ibn Maisarah, Abu Musa Al Sadafi. He is of the great jurists of Egypt. He was a scholar of history and hadith. He passed away the year 263 A.H./877 A.D. Hs life has been recorded by Ibn Khallikan: Wafayat al A’yan, vol. 2 pg. 417; Al Yafi’i: Mir’at al Jinan wa ‘ibrah al Yaqzan, vol. 2 pg. 172; Ibn Hajar: Al Tahdhib, vol. 11 pg. 440; Tash Kubra Zadah: Miftah al Sa’adah wa misbah al Siyadah, vol. 2 pg. 169.
 He is Ashhab ibn ‘Abdul ‘Aziz ibn Dawood al Qisi, Abu ‘Amr al Misri. He has narrated from Malik. Sahnun and Ibn ‘Abdul Hakam have narrated from him. Reliable and a jurist. Abu ‘Amr al Hafiz says, “Ashhab was a jurist, intelligent, handsome, from the Maliki researchers. He would write the tax of Egypt. His narrations from Malik are reliable. He has a book Al Hajj. He passed away the year 204 A.H./819A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Nadim: Al Fihrist, pg. 2810; Al Qadi ‘Iyad: Tartib al Madarik was Taqrib al Masalik li Ma’rifah a’lam mazhab Malik, vol. 3 pg. 262; Al Shirazi: Tabaqat al Fuqaha, pg. 150; Ibn Hajar: Al Taqrib, vol. 1 pg. 80.
 Al Dhahabi: Al Muntaqa, pg. 21.
 Ibid, pg. 480.
 He is Harmalah ibn Yahya ibn Harmalah ibn ‘Imran, Abu Hafs al Tajibi al Misri, the companion of al Shafi’i. He is truthful from the 11th level. Hafiz Abu Sa’id ibn Yunus says, “Harmalah knew more than anyone else regarding the narrations of Ibn Wahb. He passed away the year 243 A.H./858 A.D. His life is recorded by Ibn ‘Abdul Barr: Al Intiqa’, pg. 109; Al Dhahabi: Al Kashif, vol. 1 pg. 84; Ibn Hajar: Al Taqrib, vol. 1 pg. 80.
 Al Khatib: Al Kifayah fi ‘ilm al Riwayah, pg. 202.
 He is Mu’ammil ibn Ihab al ‘Ijli al Kufi, Abu ‘Abdul Rahman al Kirmani. Abu Hatim says, “Truthful.” Al Nasa’i says, “Reliable.” Ibn Hajar says, “Truthful, he has some mistakes.” He passed away the year 254 A.H./868 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al Dhahabi: Al Mizan, vol. 4 pg. 229; Al Kashif, vol. 3 pg. 168; Ibn Hajar: Al Taqrib, vol. 2 pg. 290.
 He is Yazid ibn Harun ibn Zadhan in Thabit, Abu Khalid al Wasiti al Sulami; from amongst the reliable huffaz. He had acquired a great amount of knowledge and was well respected amongst the people. He would say, “I have memorized twenty-four thousand ahadith with its chain of transmission. I say this with no pride.” Ahmed says, “Yazid was a reliable Hafiz.” Abu Hatim al Razi says, “Yazid was reliable and an Imam. The likes of him are not asked about.” Al Dhahabi says, “He was a fountainhead in knowledge and action, reliable and a proof. He was of great status.” He passed away the year 206 A.H./821 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Sa’d: Al Tabaqat, vol. 2 pg. 677; Ibn Ma’in: Al Tarikh, vol. 2 pg. 677; Al Bukhari: Al Tarikh al Saghir, vol. 2 pg. 307; Ibn Abi Hatim: Al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, vol. 9 p. 295; Al Khatib: Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 14 vol. 337.
 Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah, vol. 1 pg. 16.
 He is Muhammad ibn ‘Ali Zayn al ‘Abidin ibn al Hussain Abu Jafar al Hashimi al Qurashi; one of the eminent leaders of the Ahlul Bayt. He became famous by the title al Baqir (one who tore through knowledge) due to his knowledge of the apparent and hidden. He narrated from the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum and is counted amongst the jurists of Madinah. He passed away the year, 114 A.H./732 A.D. His life has been recorded by Abu Nuaim: Hilyat al Auliya’, vol. 1 pg. 180; Ibn al Jawzi: Sifat al Safwah, vol. 2 pg. 60; Al Dhahabi: Al Tadhkirah, vol. 1 pg. 124.
 Al Kulayni: Al Kafi fi al Usul, Chapter of Taqiyyah, vol. 2 pg. 19.
 He is Muhammad ibn ‘Umar ibn ‘Abdul ‘Aziz, Abu ‘Amr al Kashshi, hailing from Kash, a city in Transoxiana. He is amongst the Shia jurists. He has authored M’arifat Akhbar al Rijal. He died the year 340 A.H./951 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al Mamaqani in Tanqih al Maqal fi Tahqiq Aqwal al Rijal, pg. 142; Al Istarabadi in Manhaj al Maqal fi Tahqiq Aqwal al Rijal, pg. 312.
 He is Jafar ibn Muhammad al Baqir ibn ‘Ali ibn Zayn al ‘Abidin ibn al Hussain—grandson of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam -, Abu Abdullah al Sadiq. He was from amongst the great Tabi’in and an Imam in fiqh and hadith. Abu Hatim says, “Reliable, the likes of him are not asked about.” Abu Hanifah says, “I haven’t seen anyone more well versed in jurisprudence than Jafar ibn Muhammad.” He passed away the year, 148 A.H./765 A.D. His life has been recorded by Abu Nuaim: Al Hilyah, vol. 3 pg. 192; Ibn al Jawzi: Sifat al Safwah, vol. 2 pg. 94; Al Dhahabi: Al Tadhkirah, vol. 1 pg. 166.
 He is ‘Ali ibn al Hussain ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, Abu al Hassan Zayn al ‘Abidin al Hashimi al Qurashi. His piety, forbearance, and generosity was proverbial. After his passing it came to light that he was supporting one hundred homes. Ibn Ishaq says, “The people of Madinah were living not knowing where their expenses were coming from. When ‘Ali ibn al Hussain passed away they realised it was he who would come to their houses at night to see to their needs.” He passed away the year 94 A.H./712 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Sa’d: Al Tabaqat, vol. 5 pg. 211; Abu Nuaim: Al Hilyah, vol. 3 pg. 133; Ibn al Jawzi: Sifat al Safwah, vol. 2 pg. 52.
 Al Harith al Shami and Bunan. Their mention is found in Rijal al Kashshi wherein Jafar al Sadiq is reported to have criticized them and credited them with being liars. See pg. 249; Al Mamaqani in Tanqih al Maqal fi Tahqiq Aqwal al Rijal, pgs. 30-183.
 He is Sari ibn Ismail al Hamdani al Kufi. Yahya ibn Sa’id says, “His lies were exposed and he would not be narrated from.” Abu Talib narrates from Ahmed, “The people have left his hadith. Al Duri narrates from Ibn Ma’in, “He is worthless.” Abu Hatim says, “Pointless in hadith.” Al Ajurri narrates from Abu Dawood, “Extremely weak.” Al Nasa’i says, “Weak.” Ibn Hibban says, “He would corrupt chain of transmissions.” Refer to, Ibn Ma’in: Al Tarikh, vol. 2 pg. 170; Al Ajurri: Sualat Abi ‘Ubaid al Ajurri Aba Dawood al Sijistani, pgs. 179-180; Al Nasa’i: Kitab al Duafa’ wa al Matrukin, vol. 1 pg. 355; Ibn Abi Hatim: Al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, vol. 4 pg. 282; Ibn Hibban: Al Majruhin, vol. 1 pg. 355; Ibn Hajar: Al Tadhib, vol. 3 pg. 4559.
 Al Kashshi: Al Rijal, pg. 257.
 He is ‘Abdul Hamid ibn Hibat Allah ibn Muhammad ibn al Hussain ibn Abi al Hadid, Abu Hamid. He was a Shia Mu’tazili. He gained excellence in linguistics and composition. He served in the royal offices. He has written, Sharh Nahj al Balagah, Al Qasa’id al Sab’ al ‘Alawiyyat, and Nazm Fasih Tha’lab. He passed away the year 656 A.H./1358 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al Safdi in Al Wafi bi al Wafayat, vol. 2 pg. 259 and Ibn Kathir in al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 13 pg. 199.
 I have not come across his biography.
 Ibn Abi al Hadid: Sharh Nahj al Balagah, vol. 1 pg. 135.
 Al Suyuti: Al La’ali al Masnu’ah fi al Ahadith al Mawduah, vol. 1 pg. 323.
 Refer to the books authored in the field of fabricated narrations such as, Al Athar al Marfu’ah fi al Akhbar al Mawduah of Al Laknawi, Al Asrar al Marfu’ah fi al Akhbar al Mawduah of Mulla ‘Ali al Qari, Tanzih al Shari’ah al Marfu’ah ‘an al Akhbar al Shani’ah al Mawduah of Ibn ‘Iraq, Al Fawa’id al Mawduah fi al Ahadith al Mawduah of al Karmi, and Tadhkirah al Mawduat of al Fatni.
 Ibn al Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah, vol. 1 pg. 66.
 The Shia do not care about any sort of reliability, authenticity, or truth when narrating hadith. They narrate in al Kafi and other—reliable books according to them—such books from the worst of liars. Their criterion of authenticity is conformity to their bias together with hatred of eminent personalities and scholars. They accept only those narrations that conform to their ideology; being an Imami not caring whether they lie to tell the truth. They do not apply any laws of scrutiny to the ahadith, not bothering with authenticating the subject matter nor the chain of narration. This is in stark contrast to the scholars of the Ahlus Sunnah who rely on such techniques to differentiate the authentic from the weak. The Shia rely on attributed narrations and claim infallibility of their leaders which, they say, does not require scrutiny. When asked for a chain of narrations they state, Al Hussain, Muhammad al Baqir, or Musa al Kazim has narrated it whilst repeating on end the following couplet:
روی جدنا عن جبرائیل عن الباري
فشایع أناسا قولهم وحديثهم
Spread their words and narrations.
Our grandfather narrated from Jibril from The Maker.
See, Al Shia fi ‘Aqa’idihim wa Ahkamihim of Amir Muhammad al Kazimi al Qazwini pg. 6 taking from Wija’ Dawr al Majus of Dr Abdullah al Gharib pg. 121.
 This is because the tenants of their faith are based upon falsehood, delusions, and impossibilities. Nothing makes this point clearer than their belief that their 12th Imam is alive and hidden from view for the past millennia whose emergence they eagerly await and pray for.
 In the sense that a narrator before the Sahabi is omitted or an obscure narrator is mentioned.
 Al Dhahabi: Al Muntaqa pgs. 19 – 21 – 23 – 68.
 Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah, vol. 3 pg. 243.
 He is al Hassan ibn Yusuf ibn ‘Ali ibn al Mutahhar al Hilli; an extremist Rafidi. He has authored many books, amongst them is Minhaj al Karamah fi Ma’rifat al Imamah in which he has vilified the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, mentioning Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhum most heinously. Ibn Taymiyyah then refuted this book by writing Minhaj al Sunnah fi Naqd Kalam al Shia wa al Qadriyyah. He died the year, 1325 A.H./726 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn al Wardi: Ibid, vol. 2 pg. 279; Ibn Hajar: Al Durar al Kaminah fi akhbar al Mi’ah al Thaminah, vol. 2 pg. 71; Al Nujum al Zahirah, vol. 9 pg. 267.
 He is Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Amr ibn Mahdi al Naqqash al Asbahani al Hanbali; from amongst the reliable memorisers. He travelled seeking hadith, taking from Baghdad, Basra, Kufah, Marw, Jurjan, Daynur, Al Haramayn, Nisapur, Hamdhan, and other Islamic cities. Al Dhahabi says regarding him, “Al Imam al Hafiz, he was from the leaders of hadith.” From amongst his books are, Al Qudat wa al Shuhud, Tabaqat al Sufiyah, and Al Amali. He passed away the year 414A.H/1023A.D. His life has been recorded by Abu Nuaim: Dhikr Akhbar Asbahan, vol. 2 pg. 308; al Dhahabi: Tadhkirat al Huffaz, vol.3 pg. 1059; Al Safdi: Al Wafi bi al Wafayat, vol. 2 pg. 119.
 He is Ahmed ibn Jafar ibn Hamdan ibn Malik, Abu Bakr al Qati’i; Scholar and muhaddith. Al Darqutni says regarding him, “Reliable, ascetic, of the old times. I have heard that his prayers were readily accepted.” Abu al Hassan ibn al Furat says, “He had heard much hadith but his memory faltered at the end of his life.” He has written Musnad al ‘Asharah. He passed away the year, 368 A.H./979 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al Khatib: Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 4 pg. 73; Ibn Abi Ya’la: Tabaqat al Hanabilah, vol. 3 pg. 6; Ibn al Athir; Al Lubab fi Tahdhib al Ansab, vol. 3 pg. 48; Ibn Hajar: Lisan al Mizan, vol. 1 pg. 145; Ibn al Kayyal: Al Kawakib al Nayyirat, pg. 92.
 Perhaps this refers to Ahmed ibn Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al Tha’labi, Abu Ishaq al Nisabpuri; the commentator and historian. He has authored Al Kashf wa al Bayan fi Tafsir al Qur’an and Qasas al Ambiya’. He passed away the year 428 A.H./1035 His life has been recorded by, Ibn al Athir; Al Lubab fi Tahdhib al Ansab, vol. 1 pg. 194; Ibn Khallikan: Wafayat al A’yan, vol. 1 pg. 79; Ibn Kathir: Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 12 pg. 40.
 He is Al Hassan ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim ibn Yazdad, Abu ‘Ali al Ahwazi, the proficient reciter and scholar of hadith. Amongst his books are Sharh al Bayan fi ‘Uqud al Iman and Al Wajiz fi Sharh Ada’ al Qurra al Thamaniyah. He passed away the year 446 A.H/1073 A.D. His life has been recorded by Yaqut in Mu’jam al Udaba’, vol. 9 pgs. 34-39; Ibn al Jazri: Ghayah al Nihayah fi Tabaqat al Qurra’, vol. pg. 220; Ibn al ‘Imad: Shadharat al Dhahab, vol. 3 pg. 274.
 He is Ahmed ibn Abdullah ibn Ahmed al Asbahani, Abu Nuaim, al Hafiz al Thiqah. He renowned for his piety, worship, truthfulness, reliability, and for being an authority in the creed. Hamza ibn al Abbas al ‘Awali says regarding him, “The people of hadith would say, ‘Abu Nuaim lived for fourteen years with no equal, there was no one in the east nor in the west that had a higher and more authentic chain than him.” From his works are Fada’il al Khulafa al Arba’ah, Hilyat al Auliya’, Ma’rifat al Sahabah. Sifat al Jannat, Al Mu’taqad, Fadl al ‘Ilm, Al Duafa’, Al Amwal, and Tabaqat al Muhaddithin wa al Ruwat. He passed away the year, 430 A.H./1038 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Khallikan: Wafayat al A’yan, vol. 1 pg. 91; Al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, vol. 17 pg. 453; Al Mizan, vol. 1 pg. 111; Dr Faruq Hamadah; Muqaddimah Kitab al Duafa’, pgs. 5-22.
 Al Dhahabi: Al Muntaqa, pg. 480.
 He is ‘Ubaidullah ibn Abi Rafi’ al Madani. He was a scribe for ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu whose reliability is agreed upon. He is from the third level. His life has been recorded by Al Bukhari: Al Tarikh al Kabir, 3/1/381; Al ‘Ijli: Tarikh al Thiqat, pg. 316; Ibn Hibban: Al Thiqat, vol. 5 pg. 68.
 He is al Harith ibn Suwaid al Taymi, Abu Aisha al Kufi; reliable and strong, from the students of Abdullah ibn Mas’ud radiya Llahu ‘anhu. He passed away after the year 70 A.H/689 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Ma’in: Al Tarikh, vol. 2 pg. 93; Al Bukhari: Al Tarikh al Kabir, 1/2/269; Al ‘Ijli: Tarikh al Thiqat, pg. 102.
 He is Qais ibn ‘Ubad Al Dab’i al Basri; from the students of Abdullah ibn Mas’ud radiya Llahu ‘anhu. He is reliable from amongst the eminent Tabi’in. He came to Madinah during the Caliphate of ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu. The six major books besides Sunan al Tirmidhi have his narrations. He passed away the year 85 A.H/703 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Sa’d: Al Tabaqat, vol. 7 pg. 131; Al ‘Ijli: Tarikh al Thiqat, pg. 394; Ibn Hajar: Al Tahdhib, vol. 8 pg. 400; Al Khazraji: Khulasah Tahdhib Tahdhib al Kamal, pg. 270.
 Ibn Taymiyyah: Majmu’ al Fatawa, vol. 4 pg. 471/ vol. 13 pg. 31.
 Ibn al Qayyim: A’lam al Muqi’in, vol. 1 pg. 21.
 A work of ‘Abdul Rahman Abdullah al Zar’i, published by Dar al Arqam, Kuwait.
 He is Muhammad ibn Idris ibn al Mundhir ibn Dawood al Hanzali al Tamimi, Abu Hatim, the great memorizer. He was a contemporary of Imam al Bukhari and Imam Muslim. Al Khatib says regarding him, “He was one of the leaders of great memorizers who was reliable and famed for his knowledge. His name is taken with respect.” Al Lalka’i says, “He was an Imam and scholar of hadith. He had memorized hadith and was reliable and strong therein. He has written Tabaqat al Tabi’in, Tafsir al Qur’an al Azim, and A’lam al Nubuwwah. He passed away the year 277 A.H/890 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al Khatib: Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 2 pg. 73; Al Subki: Tabaqat al Shafi’iyyah, vol. 1 pg. 299; Ibn Hajar: Al Tahdhib, vol. 9 pg. 31.
 Ibn Abi Hatim: Al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, vol. 7 pg. 182.
 Al Darqutni: Al Duafa’, pg. 333.
 Ibn Ma ’in: Al Tarikh, vol. 2 pg. 500.
 Ibn ‘Adi: Al Kamil fi Duafa’ al Rijal, vol. 6 pg. 2110.
 He is Muhammad ibn al Hussain ibn Abdullah al Ajurri, Abu Bakr al Hafiz; scholar of hadith, fiqh and history. Al Dhahabi says regarding him, “He was a practising scholar who adhered to and followed the Sunnah. He has authored many books amongst them are Al Shari’ah and Akhlaq al ‘Ulama’. He passed away the year 60 A.H/970 A.D. His life has been recorded Al Dhahabi in Al Tadhkirah, vol. 3 pg. 936 and by Al Asnawi in Tabaqat al Shafi’iyyah, vol. 1 pg. 79.
 Ibn Hajar: Lisan al Mizan, vol. 4 pg. 492.
 He is Muhammad ibn ‘Amr ibn Musa ibn Hammad al ‘Uqayli al Makki, Abu Jafar; from the scholars of hadith. Abu al Hassan ibn Sahl al Qattan says regarding him, “Abu Jafar is reliable and a hadith scholar of great stature.” Maslamah ibn al Qasim says, “He was of great status. I haven’t seen the like of him.” He was a prolific author. From his writings is the book Al Duafa’. He passed away the year 322 A.H./943 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al Dhahabi in Al Tadhkirah, vol. 3 pg. 833; Al Safdi in Al Wafi bi al Wafayat, vol. 4 pg. 291; Ibn al ‘Imad in Shadharat al Dhahab, vol. 2 pg. 295.
 Al ‘Uqayli: Al Duafa’ al Kabir, vol. 4 pg. 18.
 Al Dhahabi: Al Mizan, vol. 3 pg. 419.
 Ahmed ibn Hanbal: Al ‘Ilal, vol. 1 pg. 219.
 Al Darqutni: Al Duafa’, pg. 387.
 Al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, vol. 10 pg. 101.
 Al ‘Uqayli: Al Duafa’ al Kabir, vol. 4 pg. 339.
 He is Abdullah ibn ‘Ali ibn al Jarud al Nisapuri, Abu Muhammad al Imam al Hafiz. Al Dhahabi says, “He was from amongst the leaders of hadith.” He has authored Al Muntaqa fi al Sunan wherein the narration is not lower than the status of Hassan, except a few wherein there is difference of opinion. He has also written, Al Jarh wa al Ta’dil li Ashab al Hadith and Al Asma’ wa al Kuna. He passed away the year 307 A.H/919 A.D. His life has been recorded by Abu Nuaim in Dhikr Akhbar Asbahan, vol. 1 pg. 794; Al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, vol. 14 pg. 239; Tadhkirat al Huffaz, vol. 3 pg. 794; Al Safdi in Al Wafi bi al Wafayat, vol. 7 pg. 215; Muhammad ibn Jafar al Kattani; Al Risalah al Mustatrafah, pg. 25.
 He is Sa’id ibn ‘Uthman ibn Sa’id ibn al Sakan al Baghdadi, Abu ‘Ali al Hafiz al Hujjah; from amongst the leaders of the great huffaz. He has written Al Sahih al Muntaqa. He passed away the year 353 A.H./694 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn ‘Asakir in Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 6 pg. 153; Al Dhahabi in Al Tadhkirah, vol. 3 pg. 937; Al Kattani in Al Risalah al Mustatrafah, pg. 20.
 Ibn Hajar: Lisan al Mizan, vol. 6 pg. 197. Al Asma’i is ‘Abdul Malik ibn Qarib, Abu Sa’id al Basri; port, historian, linguist and eminent personality. Abu Dawood says, “Truthful.” Ibn Ma’in says, He was not a liar.” Ibn Shaibah says, “I heard al Asma’i saying, ‘I have memorized sixteen thousand poems. He has written many books on the subjects of linguistics and history. He would roam amongst the Bedouins, learning their stories of old. The Khalifas would present him with much gifts. From his books are, Al Ibil, Khalq al Insan, Al Khayl, Al Mutaradif, Al Addad, Sharh diwan dhi al Rimmah, Jazirah al ‘Arab, Kitab Miyah al Ard, Kitab al Kharaj and Kitab al Nasab. He passed away the year, 215 A.H/ 831 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al Sayrafi in Akhbar al Nahwiyyin al Basriyyin, pg. 85; Ibn Nadim in Al Fihrist, pg. 60; Al Khatib in Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 10 pg. 410 and Al Dhahabi in Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, vol. 10 pg. 176.
 He is Muhammad ibn Hibban ibn Ahmed ibn Ma’bad al Tamimi Abu Hatim al Basri; the historian, geographer, traveller, and muhaddith. Yaqut says, “He has extracted from the sciences of hadith what others have unable to.” Al Hakim says, “Ibn Hibban was a keeper of knowledge in the subjects of fiqh, linguistics, hadith, and lecturing. He was extremely intelligent.” He has written, Al Musnad al Sahih, ‘Ilal awham ashab al Tawarikh, Al Sahabah, Al Tabi’in, Atba’ al Tabi’in, Atba’ al Tab’, Gharaib al Akhbar, Asami man yu’raf bi al Kuna, Wasf al ‘Ulum wa Anwa’iha, Rawdah al ‘Uqala’, and Al Mujam. He passed away the year 354 A.H/965 A.D. His life has been recorded by Yaqut in Mujam al Buldan, vol. 1 pg. 514; Al Dhahabi: Al Mizan, vol. 3 pg. 506-508; Al Subki: Tabaqat al Shafi’iyyah, vol. 2 pg. 141.
 Ibn Hibban: Al Majruhin, vol. 3 pg. 91.
 Ibn ‘Adi: Al Kamil fi Duafa’ al Rijal, vol. 6 pg. 2568.
 Ibn Hajar from Yahya ibn Ma’in: Lisan al Mizan, vol. 6 pg. 197.
 Al Dhahabi: Al Mizan, vol. 4 pg. 305.
 Ibn Ma ’in: Al Tarikh, vol. 3 pg. 364.
 He is Za’idah ibn Qudamah al Thaqafi al Kufi, Abu al Salt Al Hujjah al Imam. Abu Hatim al Razi says, “Reliable, a man of the Sunnah.” Abu Usamah says, “He was most truthful and most pious.” Abu Dawood al Tayalisi says, “He would not engage the innovators. He passed away the year, 161 A.H/777 A.D. His life has been recorded by Al ‘Ijli: Tarikh al Thiqat, pg. 163; Al Dhahabi: Al Tadhkirah, vol. 1 pg. 215; Ibn Hajar: Al Taqrib, vol. 1 pg. 256.
 Ibn Ma’in: Al Tarikh, vol. 3 pg. 281.
 Al Dhahabi: Al Mizan, vol. 1 pg. 380.
 Al Nasa’i: Kitab al Duafa’ wa al Matrukin, pg. 71.
 Al Ajurri: Al Su’alat, pg. 180.
 He is Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah ibn Maymun al Hilali al Kufi, Abu Ahmed. Al Dhahabi says, “He was an Imam, a Hujjah, had vast knowledge and great status. The ummah have consensus on using his narrations as proof due to his memory and reliability.” Al Shafi’i says, “If it wasn’t for Malik and Sufyan, the knowledge of Hijaz would have been lost.” From his books are, Al Jami’ on the subject of hadith and tafsir. He passed away the year 198 A.H. /814 A.D. His life has been recorded by Abu Nuaim in Al Hilyah, vol. 7 pg. 270; Al Khatib: Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 9 pg. 174; Al Dhahabi: Al Tadhkirah, vol. 1 pg. 262.
 Ibn Hajar: Al Tahdhib, vol. 2 pg. 49.
 He is Yahya ibn Ya’la al Muharibi, Abu Zakariyya al Kufi. Abu Hatim says, “Reliable.” Ibn Hibban has included him the reliable narrators. He passed away the year, 210 A.H./825 A.D. His life has been recorded by Ibn Abi Hatim in Al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, vol. 9 pg. 196; Al Bukhari: Al Tarikh al Kabir, 2/4/311; Al Dhahabi: Al Mizan, vol. 4 pg. 415; Ibn Hajar: Al Tahdhib, vol. 11 pg. 303.
 Al Dhahabi: Al Mizan, vol. 1 pg. 383.
 Ibn Hibban: Al Majruhin, vol. 1 pg. 208.
 Al Juzajani: Ahwal al Rijal, pg. 50.Back to top