Hadith 21: The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was receiving wahi (revelation) while his head was in the lap of ‘Ali. ‘Ali had not read Salat al ‘Asr and the sun had already set in…

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

Hadith 21

 

كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يوحى إليه، ورأسه في حجر علي فلم يصل العصرحتى غربت الشمس. فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: اللهم إن عليا كان في طاعتك، وطاعة رسولك، فاردد عليه الشمس. قالت أسماء: فرأيتها غربت، ورأيتها طلعت بعدما غربت.

The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was receiving wahi (revelation) while his head was in the lap of ‘Ali. ‘Ali had not read Salat al ‘Asr and the sun had already set in. The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “‘O Allah, verily, ‘Ali was in Your obedience and the obedience of Your Messenger, so bring forth the sun for him.” Asma’ said, “I saw the sun set and then I saw it rise after setting.”

 

---

The following people have dedicated an entire work on this hadith:

• Abu al Hassan ibn Shadhan,
• Jalal al Din al Suyuti: Kashf al Labs fi Radd al Shams (manuscript),
• Muhammad ibn Yusuf Shams al Din al Shami al Salihi (d. 942 AH): Muzil al Labs ‘an Hadith Radd al Shams (I have a manuscript copy).

 

This hadith is narrated by Asma’ bint ‘Umays, Abu Hurairah, Abu Sa’id al Khudri, ‘Ali, Jabir, Abu Rafi’ and al Hussain ibn ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhum.

 

The Hadith of Asma’ bint ‘Umays

This version has the following nine chains of transmission:

1. Al Tabarani, al Tahawi, Ibn al Maghazili, Ibn ‘Asakir, and al Juraqani all narrate from ‘Ubaidullah ibn Musa — from Fudayl ibn Marzuq — from Ibrahim ibn al Hassan — from Fatimah bint Hussain — from Asma’ bint ‘Umays.[1]

This version contains the following four ‘ilal[2] (hidden impairing defects):

• Ibrahim ibn al Hassan ibn al Hassan ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib. Ibn Abi Hatim makes mention of him without any jarh (impugning statements) or ta’dil (approving statements) regarding him.[3] Ibn Hibban mentions him in his work on reliable narrators.[4]
• Fudayl ibn Marzuq al Agharr al Raqqashi al Kufi. There is a difference of opinion regarding him. He narrates munkar (unacceptable) hadith, and therefore cannot be relied upon.
• ‘Ubaidullah ibn Musa. He is a Shia who is a thiqah (reliable). However, he narrates manakir (unacceptable reports), and commits many errors and mistakes; all of which should be known. Imam Ahmed considers him a person given to confusion (sahib takhlit). Imam Ahmed (also) says he narrates manakir (unacceptable reports). Ibn Sa’d says he narrates unacceptable ahadith. Ya’qub ibn Sufyan says he is a munkar al hadith (one who reports unacceptable reports). In fact, al Hafiz Abu Muslim al Baghdadi says he is matruk (suspected of forgery). It is true that most hadith critics say he is a thiqah (reliable); however, I restricted myself to those that have something negative to say so as to explain that, despite him being a thiqah (reliable), he narrates manakir (unacceptable reports). Additionally, if it becomes known that one of his narrations contain nakarah (unacceptability), we will say that it contains an ‘illah (hidden impairing defect). In fact, even if someone who is considered far more reliable than him like Malik, Shu’bah, and other mountains of knowledge were to narrate a hadith which contained an ‘illah (hidden impairing defect), we would regard the hadith as ma’lul (containing an impairing hidden defect). How then, if there exists hadith critics that actually criticised him? How then, if there exists other ‘ilal (hidden impairing defects), as have been previously alluded to?

‘Ubaidullah does enjoy a mutabi’ (parallel) narration from ‘Ammar ibn Matr al Rahawi, as reported by al ‘Uqayli[5]; however, he is considered a halik (worthless) narrator.[6]

I found another, stronger mutabi’ (parallel narration). Imam al Tabarani narrates from Muhammad ibn Fudayl — Fudayl ibn Marzuq narrated to us — from Ibrahim ibn al Hassan — from Fatimah bint ‘Ali — from Asma’ bint ‘Umays.[7]

• Ibn Taymiyyah found an ‘illah (hidden impairing defect) in that the incident, occurred in the presence of hundreds of people; so why then did only a small number of people, maybe four or five, witness it? And from these four or five people, only Asma’s chain of transmission for this hadith is—according to some—authentic?

Such an awesome event—the sun setting and then returning from sunset—and only Asma’ witnesses it? An incident of this nature should have been massively transmitted. Since it is only transmitted via Asma’, this is indicative of the error, or lie of the person narrating it. We do not intend Asma’ thereby, but rather those who narrate from her.[8]

After including this version of the hadith in his work, al Juraqani says, “This hadith is munkar (unacceptable) and mudtarib (unresolvably problematic).”[9]

 

2. Ibn ‘Asakir and Ibn Shahin (as it appears in al Mawdu’at of Ibn al Jawzi) narrate from Abu al ‘Abbas ibn ‘Uqdah — from Ahmed ibn Yahya al Sufi — from ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Sharik — from his father — from ‘Urwah ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Qushayr — from Fatimah bint ‘Ali — from Asma’.[10]

Ibn ‘Asakir says that this hadith is munkar (unacceptable). It contains more than one majhul (unknown narrator).

‘Abdul Rahman ibn Sharik and his father (Sharik) are both da’if (weak).

There is a difference of opinion regarding the status of Abu al ‘Abbas ibn ‘Uqdah; the preponderant opinion being that he is da’if (weak). In fact, it has been authentically reported that he used to make people lie.[11]

Ibn Taymiyyah adds that the incident actually contradicts the other ahadith. He writes, “This (hadith) requires that the sun returned back near the time of ‘asr; and that this (incident) occurred in Madinah. In the other narration, it occurred in Khaybar, and that the sun appeared above the mountains.”[12]

 

3. Al Tahawi and al Tabari narrate — from ‘Awn ibn Muhammad — from his mother, Umm Jafar —, from Asma’ bint ‘Umays.[13]

Ibn Hibban is the only person to regard ‘Awn ibn Muhammad al ‘Alawi as a thiqah (reliable). Ibn Hibban is known to regard majhul (unknown) narrators as reliable.

Umm Jafar has not been regarded as reliable (thiqah) by anyone, therefore she is majhulah (unknown).

 

4. Abu al Qasim al Haskani narrates in his work Tashih Radd al Shams — from Hussain al Ashqar — from Fudayl ibn Marzuq — from Ibrahim ibn al Hassan — from Fatimah — from Asma’ bint ‘Umays.[14]

Hussain al Ashqar is da’if (weak). The status of Ibrahim ibn al Hassan has already been mentioned.

 

5. Abu al Qasim al Haskani narrates in his work Tashih Radd al Shams — from Abu Hafs al Kattani — Muhammad ibn ‘Umar al Qadi (al Ja’ani) narrated to us — Muhammad ibn Ibrahim ibn Jafar al ‘Askari (from his original work) narrated to us — Ahmed ibn Muhammad ibn Yazid ibn Sulaym narrated to us — Khalaf ibn Salim narrated to us — ‘Abdul Razzaq narrated to us — Sufyan al Thawri narrated to us — from Ash’ath ibn Abi al Sha’tha’ — from his mother (Umm Ash’ath) — from Fatimah — from Asma’, “ Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam made du’a’ for ‘Ali until the sun returned (after setting).”[15]

Ahmed ibn Muhammad ibn Yazid ibn Sulaym is the mawla (client) of Banu Hashim in al ‘Askar (I think). He is a thiqah (reliable).[16]

Muhammad ibn Ibrahim ibn Jafar al ‘Askari and Muhammad ibn ‘Umar al Qadi al Ja’ani could not be traced.

Umm Ash’ath is majhulah (unknown).

 

6. Abu al Qasim al Haskani narrates in his work Tashih Radd al Shams — from Muhammad ibn Marzuq — Hussain al Ashqar narrated to us — from ‘Ali ibn Hashim — from ‘Abdul Rahman ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Dinar — from ‘Ali ibn al Hussain — from Fatimah bint ‘Ali — from Asma’ bint ‘Umays.[17]

As mentioned previously, Hussain al Ashqar is da’if (weak).

‘Ali ibn Hashim is ibn al Barid. He is a saduq (sincere); however, he is a munkar al hadith (narrates unacceptable reports).

Most hadith critics regard ‘Abdul Rahman ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Dinar as da’if (weak).

 

7. Abu al Qasim al Haskani narrates a fourth version — from Muhammad ibn ‘Umar al Qadi (al Ja’ani) — from al ‘Abbas ibn al Walid — from ‘Abbad al Rawajini — ‘Ali ibn Hashim narrated to us — from Sabbah ibn ‘Abdullah ibn al Hussain Abu Jafar — from Hussain al Maqtul — from Fatimah — from Asma’ bint ‘Umays.[18]

Sabbah ibn ‘Abdullah ibn al Hussain Abu Jafar could not be traced. Ibn Taymiyyah says, “This Sabbah is unknown.”[19]

‘Abbad ibn Ya’qub al Rawajini is a saduq (sincere); however, he narrates manakir (unacceptable reports) from famous people. I have explained in the original work that, based on the evidence, it is necessary to stop and suspend judgement regarding the hadith of ‘Abbad and others, those who are known to transmit reports that support particular innovations.

Ibn Taymiyyah explains how the wording of this fourth version contradicts the other three contradictory wordings (of the hadith).[20] But then I noticed him, in another place, explaining this same version in a different way than above. He says:

 

Shadhan says Abu Talib Muhammad ibn Subayh of Damascus informed me — ‘Ali ibn al ‘Abbas narrated to me — ‘Abbad ibn Ya’qub narrated to us — ‘Ali ibn Hashim narrated to us — from Sabbah ibn Yahya — from ‘Abdullah ibn al Hassan ibn Jafar — from Hussain al Maqtul — from Fatimah bint ‘Ali — from Umm al Hassan bint ‘Ali — from Asma’ bint ‘Umays…

‘Abbad narrated to us — ‘Ali ibn Hashim narrated to us — from Sabbah — from Abu Salamah — the mawla (client) of ‘Abdullah ibn al Harth ibn Naufil — from Muhammad ibn Jafar ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Ali — from his mother, Umm Jafar bint Muhammad — from her grandmother, Asma’ bint ‘Umays…[21]

 

We notice the previous chain of transmission reads, “…’Abbad al Rawajini — ‘Ali ibn Hashim narrated to us — from Sabbah ibn ‘Abdullah ibn al Hussain Abu Jafar — from Hussain al Maqtul — from Fatimah,” and the last chain of transmission reads, “…’Abbad ibn Ya’qub — ‘Ali ibn Hashim narrated to us — from Sabbah ibn Yahya — from ‘Abdullah ibn al Hassan ibn Jafar — from Hussain al Maqtul — from Fatimah.”

I think this last chain of transmission is the more preponderant version since the edition of Ibn Taymiyyah’s Minhaj al Sunnah, although it is generally all right, it contains several typographical errors and missing words.

Based on this, the narrator Sabbah, who was unknown to Ibn Taymiyyah, is actually ibn Yahya. He is matruk (suspected of forgery). In fact, he is accused of lying.[22]

His teacher, ‘Abdullah ibn al Hussain ibn Jafar, could not be traced. Similarly, in the second chain of transmission, again, his teacher could not be traced.

Abu Salamah, the mawla (client) of ‘Abdullah ibn al Harth ibn Naufil too could not be traced.

Regarding his statement in the other narration Hussain al Maqtul; it seems as though he is al Shahid al Hussain ibn ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. However, Ibn Taymiyyah states:

 

If Hussain ibn ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu is intended, then he is above narrating from another from Asma’ bint ‘Umays, irrespective of whether Fatimah is his sister or his daughter. If this incident was true, he would have narrated it directly rather than from these people, and he would have heard it from his father, and others, and from Asma’, the wife of his father, and other than her. He did not narrate it from his daughter, or his sister from Asma’, the wife of his father. However, he is not Hussain ibn ‘Ali, it is someone else, or it is ‘Abdullah ibn al Hassan Abu Jafar… The hadith is not established unless it is narrated from someone who is known to be a thiqah (reliable) with ‘adalah (integrity) and dabt (precision in narrating), those things that the hadith scholars can recognize. Simply knowing his nisbah (lineage) does not bring this about, whoever it may be. There are children of Sahabah and Tabi’in whose hadith are not acceptable, even though their fathers were the best of Muslims.[23]

 

8. Abu al Hassan Shadhan narrates —Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn al Hussain al Ashnani narrated to us — Ismail ibn Ishaq al Rashidi narrated to us — Yahya ibn Salim narrated to us — from Sabbah al Marwazi — from ‘Abdul Rahman ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Dinar — from ‘Abdullah ibn al Hassan — from his mother, Fatimah bint Hussain — from Asma’ bint ‘Umays.[24]

Ismail ibn Ishaq al Rashidi, Yahya ibn Salim, and Sabbah al Marwazi could not be traced. ‘Abdul Rahman ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Dinar has some weakness in him.

 

9. Ibn ‘Uqdah narrates — Yahya ibn Zakariyya narrated to us — Ya’qub ibn Ma’bad informed us — ‘Amr ibn Thabit narrated to us, “I asked ‘Abdullah ibn Hassan ibn Hassan ibn ‘Ali regarding the hadith of the sun returning (after setting) for ‘Ali, was it reliable according to you?” He said to me, “Allah has not revealed anything greater regarding ‘Ali than he did with the sun returning for him (after setting).” I said, “You have spoken the truth; may Allah make me your ransom! However, I would love to hear about it directly from you.” He said, “‘Abdullah narrated to me — Abu al Hassan narrated to me — from Asma’ bint ‘Umays…”[25]

Ya’qub ibn Ma’bad could not be traced.

‘Amr ibn Thabit is Ibn Hurmuz. He is da’if (weak). In fact, he is matruk (suspected of forgery). Ibn Hibban says, “He is from those who narrate fabrications; it is not permissible to mention him (i.e. his narrations) except for the purpose of i’tibar (consideration).”[26]

Ibn Hajar transmits the words of Ibn Hibban as follows, “Ibn Hibban says, ‘He (i.e. Ibn Hurmuz) narrates fabrications from reliable people.’”[27]

These statements regarding Ibn Hurmuz are akin to accusing him of being a liar.

Ibn Taymiyyah explains the wording of this fifth version contradicts the other contradictor wordings, which makes it all the more untrue and false.[28] I have transmitted this in the original work.

 

The Hadith of Abu Hurairah

Ibn Mardawayh narrates from the hadith of Dawood ibn Farahij — from Abu Hurairah.[29]

There is a difference of opinion regarding the status of Dawood ibn Farahij. Unfortunately, he did not transmit the remaining parts of the chain of transmission in order for us to have a look at.

Abu al Hassan Shadhan narrates in his work when collecting all the different chains of transmission for this hadith:

Abu al Hassan Ahmed ibn ‘Umair informed us — Ibrahim ibn Sa’id al Jawhari narrated to us — Yahya ibn Yazid ibn ‘Abdul Malik narrated to us — from his father — from Dawood ibn Farahij — from Abu Hurairah, and from ‘Ammarah ibn Fayruz — from Abu Hurairah.[30]

 

Similarly, al Haskani narrates this hadith in another way from Ahmed ibn ‘Umair.[31]

Most hadith critics regard Yahya ibn Yazid ibn ‘Abdul Malik al Naufili as da’if (weak). His father is even weaker than him.

 

The Hadith of Abu Sa’id al Khudri

Abu al Qasim al Haskani narrates — Muhammad ibn Ismail al Jurjani informed us (via writing) — Abu Tahir Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al Wa’iz informed them — Muhammad ibn Ahmed ibn Mun’im informed us — al Qasim ibn Jafar ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Umar informed us — my father informed me — from his father, Muhammad — from his father, ‘Abdullah — from his father, Muhammad — from his father, ‘Umar, who said that Hussain ibn ‘Ali said, “I heard Abu Sa’id al Khudri.”[32]

Muhammad ibn Ahmed ibn Mun’im could not be traced.

Al Khatib says regarding the above narrator al Qasim ibn Jafar, “He entered Baghdad and narrated ahadith from his father and his forefathers thereafter, most of which are munkar (unacceptable).”[33]

Al Dhahabi and Ibn Hajar also make mention of him.[34]

 

The Hadith of ‘Ali

There are a few versions of this hadith. Abu al Qasim al Hassani narrates — Abu al ‘Abbas al Farghani informed us — Abu al Fadl al Shaybani informed us — Raja’ ibn Yahya al Samani narrated to us — Harun ibn Muslim ibn Sa’id (of Samarra in the year 240) — ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr al Ash’ath narrated to us — from Dawood ibn al Kumayt — from his uncle al Mustahil ibn Zaid — from Abu Zaid ibn Sahlab — from Juwairiyah bint Mushir who said, “I went out with ‘Ali and he said, ‘O Juwairiyah, verily Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam received wahi (revelation) while his head was in my lap…’”[35]

Ibn Taymiyyah states:

 

This chain of transmission is the weakest yet. It contains majhul (unknown) narrators who are not known to have ‘adalah (integrity) and dabt (precision in narrating). When narrators of this nature transmit isolated reports such as this (reports that ‘Ali did in fact say, his well-known companions would have narrated it), with a chain of transmission such as this (from a woman whose status is unknown and the status of those who narrate from her are entirely unknown—let alone some of their qualities) they are baseless.[36]

 

It is exactly as he states.

Abu al Hassan Shadhan narrates — ‘Ubaidullah ibn al Fadl al Tahyani al Ta’i narrated to us — ‘Ubaidullah ibn Sa’id ibn Kathir ibn ‘Afir narrated to us — Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn Rashid al Hashimi al Khurasani narrated to us — Yahya ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Hassan ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib narrated to us — my father informed me — from his father — from his grandfather — from ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib.[37]

The teacher of Shadhan could not be traced.

Ibn Hibban says regarding ‘Ubaidullah ibn Sa’id ibn Kathir ibn ‘Afir, “He narrates things in an inverted fashion (maqlub) from his father, from reliable transmitters; however, his ahadith do not resemble the reliable narrators’ ahadith.”[38]

Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn Rashid al Hashimi al Khurasani could not be traced.

Ibn Abi Hatim and others have written on Yahya ibn ‘Abdullah; however, they mention nothing of his status as a narrator.

Abu al Hassan Shadhan narrates — Abu al Hassan ibn Safwah narrated to us — al Hassan ibn ‘Ali ibn Muhammad al ‘Alawi al Tabari narrated to us — Ahmed ibn al ‘Ala’ al Razi narrated to us — Ishaq ibn Ibrahim al Taymi narrated to us — Muhill al Dabbi narrated to us — from Ibrahim al Nakha’i — from ‘Alqamah — from Abu Dharr who said, ‘‘Ali said…’”[39]

Al Hassan ibn ‘Ali ibn Muhammad al ‘Alawi al Tabari, Ahmed ibn al ‘Ala’ al Razi, and Ishaq ibn Ibrahim al Taymi cannot be traced.

 

The Hadith of Jabir

Imam al Tabarani narrates — ‘Ali ibn Sa’id narrated to us — Ahmed ibn ‘Abdul Rahman ibn al Mufaddal al Harrani narrated to us — al Walid ibn ‘Abdul Wahid al Tamimi narrated to us — Ma’qal ibn ‘Ubaidullah narrated to us — from Abu al Zubair — from Jabir that the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam commanded the sun (to delay setting) and then it delayed slightly.[40]

Shadhan narrates in his work — Abu al Hassan Khaythamah ibn Sulaiman narrated to us — ‘Uthman ibn Kharzadh narrated to us — Mahfuz ibn Bahr narrated to us— al Walid ibn ‘Abdul Wahid narrated to us.[41]

There is no mention in the hadith that the sun stopped (setting) for ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

There is a difference of opinion regarding the status of ‘Ali ibn Sa’id al Razi.

Ibn Hibban is the only one to regard al Walid ibn ‘Abdul Wahid as a thiqah (reliable).

Abu al Zubair is a mudallis (obfuscates when he narrates).

Strangely enough, Ibn Hajar regarded the chain of transmission as Hassan (fair).[42]

 

The Hadith of Abu Rafi’

Ibn al Maghazili narrates this hadith with the following chain of transmission: Abu Tahir Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al Bayyi’ al Baghdadi (in what he wrote for me) — Abu Ahmed ‘Ubaidullah ibn Abi Muslim al Fardi al Baghdadi narrated to them — Abu al ‘Abbas Ahmed ibn Muhammad ibn Sa’id ibn ‘Uqdah al Hafiz al Hamdani narrated to us — al Fadl ibn Yusuf al Ju’fi narrated to us — Muhammad ibn ‘Uqbah narrated to us — from Muhammad ibn al Hussain — from ‘Awn ibn ‘Abdullah — from his father — from Abu Rafi’.”[43]

Ibn al Maghazili is da’if (weak).

It has been mentioned previously that Ibn ‘Uqdah is (also) da’if (weak).

Ibn Hibban is the only one to regard al Fadl as a thiqah (reliable).[44] His habit of regarding majhul (unknown) narrators as reliable is well-known.

Muhammad ibn al Hussain could not be traced.

 

The Hadith of Hussain ibn ‘Ali

Al Khatib, al Dulabi, and others narrate this version from Suwaid ibn Sa’id who said — al Muttalib ibn Ziyad narrated to us — from Ibrahim ibn Hayyan — from ‘Abdullah ibn al Hussain — from Fatimah al Sughra bint al Hussain — from al Hussain ibn ‘Ali.[45]

Al Khatib states, “Ibrahim ibn Hayyan is from Kufah who is listed amongst the majhul (unknown) narrators. Abu Zur’ah says he is majhul (unknown).”[46] No consideration will be given to Ibn Hibban’s statement regarding him as a thiqah (reliable) because he is famous for regarding several majhul (unknown) narrators as reliable.

There is a difference of opinion regarding the status of al Muttalib ibn Ziyad.

Suwaid ibn Sa’id is Suwaid ibn Sa’id al Hadathani. He is da’if (weak).

 

Statements of the Hadith Masters (Huffaz) Regarding this Hadith

The following people consider the hadith to be da’if (weak): Imam Ahmed, ‘Ali ibn al Madini, Ibn ‘Asakir, Muhammad ibn Hatim ibn Zanjawayh, Muhammad ibn ‘Ubaid al Tanafisi, Ya’la ibn ‘Ubaid al Tanafisi, and Ibrahim ibn Ya’qub al Juzajani.

The following people consider the hadith to be mawdu’ (fabricated): Ibn Nasir, ‘Ali al Qari, Ibn al Qayyim, Ibn al Jawzi, al Dhahabi, Ibn Taymiyyah, and al Mizzi.

The following people consider the hadith to be sahih (authentic): Ahmed ibn Salih al Misri, al Tahawi, al Qadi ‘Iyad, Abu al Qasim al Haskani, Abu al Fath al Azdi, Mughaltai, and al Suyuti.

Abu Zur’ah al Razi and Ibn Hajar both considered the hadith to be Hassan (fair).

The preponderant opinion is that the hadith is da’if (weak) because the matn (text) contains nakarah (unacceptable wording), and because all the different chains of transmission are da’if (weak).

 

NEXT⇒ Hadith 22

---

[1] Al Tabarani: al Mujam al Kabir, 24/148; al Tahawi: Sharh Mushkil al Athar, hadith hadith no. 1067; ibn al Maghazili: Manaqib ‘Ali, hadith no. 140; ibn ‘Asakir: Tarikh Dimashq, 42/314; al Juraqani: al Abatil wa al Manakir wa al Sihah wa al Mashahir, 1/154.

[2] ‘Ilal (hidden impairing defects) are flaws in the isnad of a hadith that only become evident when that isnad is compared with other chains of transmission for that hadith. [translator’s note]

[3] Ibn Abi Hatim: Kitab al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 2/92.

[4] Ibn Hibban: Kitab al Thiqat, 6/3.

[5] Al ‘Uqayli: al Du’afa’ al Kabir, 3/327.

[6] Al Dhahabi: Mizan al I’tidal, 3/169.

[7] Al Tabarani: al Mujam al Kabir: 24/152.

[8] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/179.

[9] Al Juraqani: al Abatil wa al Manakir wa al Sihah wa al Mashahir, 1/154.

[10] Ibn ‘Asakir: Tarikh Dimashq, 42/314; ibn al Jawzi: Kitab al Mawdu’at, 1/356.

[11] Ibn Hajar: Lisan al Mizan, 1/263; ibn ‘Adi: al Kamil, 1/206.

[12] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/184.

[13] Imam al Tahawi: SharhMushkil al Athar, hadith no. 1068; Imam al Tabarani: al Mujam al Kabir, 24/144.

[14] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/174.

[15] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/182.

[16] Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 5/119.

[17] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/182.

[18] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/184.

[19] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/186.

[20] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/184-185.

[21] Imam al Suyuti: al La’ali al Masnu’ah, 1/311.

[22] Imam al Dhahabi: Mizan al I’tidal, 2/306.

[23] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/187/

[24] Imam al Suyuti: al La’ali al Masnu’ah, 1/310.

[25] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/188.

[26] Ibn Hibban: Kitab al Majruhin, 2/76.

[27] Ibn Hajar: Tahdhib al Tahdhib, 8/9.

[28] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/189.

[29] Ibn al Jawzi: Kitab al Mawdu’at, 1/357.

[30] Imam al Suyuti: al La’ali al Masnu’ah, 1/309.

[31] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/190.

[32] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/191-192. See ibn Taymiyyah’s criticism of this narration in Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 9/192-193.

[33] Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 12/443.

[34] Imam al Dhahabi: Mizan al I’tidal, 3/369; ibn Hajar: Lisan al Mizan, 4/459.

[35] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/193-194.

[36] Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah, 8/194.

[37] Imam al Suyuti: al La’ali al Masnu’ah, 1/312.

[38] Ibn Hibban: Kitab al Majruhin, 9/161.

[39] Imam al Suyuti: al La’ali al Masnu’ah, 1/312.

[40] Al Tabarani: al Mujam al Awsat, hadith no. 4039.

[41] Imam al Suyuti: al La’ali al Masnu’ah, 1/312.

[42] Ibn Hajar: Fath al Bari, 6/221.

[43] Ibn al Maghazili: Manaqib ‘Ali, hadith no. 141.

[44] Ibn Hibban: Kitab al Thiqat, 9/8.

[45] Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Talkhis al Mutashabih fi al Rasm, 1/225; al Dulabi: al Dhurriyyah al Tahirah, hadith no. 164.

[46] Ibn Abi Hatim al Razi: Kitab al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 2/94.