The most important books in the era of the Atba’ al Tabi’in and its impact on Hadith Narrations

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

The most important books in the era of the Atba’ al Tabi’in and its impact on Hadith Narrations

 

Al Muwatta’ of Imam Malik as an example

Perhaps, the most important book written in the second century from the books I have mentioned before was the book al Muwatta’ by Imam Malik ibn Anas al Asbahi (d. 179 AH). It is the greatest Fiqhi Hadith book that has reached us from the generation of the Atba’ al Tabi’in and its author is one of the greatest scholars of this class. Imam al Dhahabi states about him:

 

ولم يكن بالمدينة عالم بعد التابعين يشبه مالكا في العلم والفقه والجلالة والحفظ

After the Tabi’in, there was no scholar in Madinah who resembled Malik in knowledge, Fiqh, greatness, and memory.^[1]

 

Hence, scholars after him relied heavily on it and paid attention to narrating it and adopting what was in it.^[2]

It can be said that it is the oldest organised and formatted book that reached us.

It contains about 600 marfu’ ahadith of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, along with many sayings of the Companions and the Tabi’in. He did not mention marfu’ ahadith only, but rather mixed it with all of this and his Fiqhi views.^[3] He pays attention to mentioning the Mazhab of the people of Madinah. Hence, he repeats his saying:

 

وأدركت أهل العلم ببلدنا وعلى ذلك أدركت من أرضى من أهل العلم

I found the people of knowledge in our city and I found those scholars with whom I am satisfied practicing on it.

 

Imam al Shafi’i said about al Muwatta’:

 

ما على وجه الأرض بعد كتاب الله كتاب أصح من كتاب مالك

There is no book on the face of the earth, after the Book of Allah, that is more authentic than the book of Malik.^[4]

 

Most scholars are of the opinion that all the marfu’ ahadith in it are authentic, except for a few criticised ahadith.

In fact, the political authority showed interest in the book. It is reported that the Khalifah Abu Jafar al Mansur asked to spread al Muwatta’ in the various countries,^[5] but Imam Malik opposed him in that. Imam Malik narrates:

 

قال لي أبو جعفر يوما ما على ظهرها أحد أعلم منك قلت بلى قال فسمهم لي قلت لا أحفظ أسماءهم قال قد طلبت هذا الشأن في زمن بني أمية فقد عرفته أما أهل العراق فأهل كذب وباطل وزور وأما الشام فأهل جهاد وليس عندهم كبير علم وأما أهل الحجاز ففيهم بقية علم وأنت عالم الحجاز فلا تردن على أمير المؤمنين قوله قال مالك ثم قال لي قد أردت أن أجعل هذا العلم علما واحدا فأكتب به إلى أمراء الأجناد وإلى القضاة فيعملون به فمن خالف ضربت عنقه فقلت له يا أمير المؤمنين أو غير ذلك قلت إن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم كان في هذه الأمة وكان يبعث السرايا وكان يخرج فلم يفتح من البلاد كثيرا حتى قبضه الله عز وجل ثم قام أبو بكر رضي الله عنه فلم يفتح من البلاد كثيرا ثم قام عمر رضي الله عنه بعدهما ففتحت البلاد على يديه فلم يجد بدا من أن يبعث أصحاب محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم معلمين فلم يزل يؤخذ عنهم كابر عن كابر إلى يومهم هذا فإن ذهبت تحولهم مما يعرفون إلى ما لا يعرفون رأوا ذلك كفرا ولكن أقر أهل كل بلدة على ما فيها من العلم وخذ هذا العلم لنفسك فقال لي ما أبعدت القول اكتب هذا العلم لمحمد

Abu Jafar said to me one day, “Is there anyone more knowledgeable than you on the surface of the earth?”

I said, “Yes.”

He said, “Name them for me.”

I said, “I do not remember their names.”

He said, “I enquired about this matter during the time of the Umayyads, so I know it. As for the people of Iraq, they are people of lies, falsehood, and fabrications. As for the people of Greater Syria, they are people of Jihad and they do not have much knowledge. As for the people of Hijaz, they have the remainder of knowledge, and you are a scholar of Hijaz, so do not reject the command of the Amir al Mu’minin.”

Malik states: Then he said to me, “I wanted to make this knowledge one knowledge. I would write it to the commanders of the armies and to the judges to practice upon it. Whoever disagrees, I would behead him.”

I said to him, “O Amir al Mu’minin, or something else?”

Then I said to him, “The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was in this Ummah. He would send armies and go out. He did not conquer much territory until he passed away. Then Abu Bakr rose, but he did not conquer much territory either. Thereafter, ‘Umar rose. Many countries were conquered at his hands. He had no choice but to send the Companions of Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam as teachers. Thereafter, people continued to learn from their predecessors until this day. If you go and change from what they know to what they do not know, they would see this as disbelief. Rather consolidate the people of each city on the knowledge they possess and take this knowledge for you.”

He said to me, “What a farfetched thing to say, write this knowledge for Muhammad.”^[6]

 

This text shows the distinction of countries over each other in Hadith narration, the interest of the political authority in the spread and stability of knowledge in the various countries, and Imam Malik’s insight of the development of knowledge and its spread in the various cities. This interest of the political authority was in spreading the book, not in its Tasnif. Dr. al A’zami studied the narrations which stated that the motives for writing al Muwatta’ were at the request of the Khalifah and illustrated their weakness.^[7]

For all of this, I have chosen it (al Muwatta’) here as a model representing that stage. Hence, I present here the most important features of transformation in the path of narration and dissemination of Hadith in that era, relying on al Muwatta’ and Malik in the narration of Hadith.

 

The First Feature: From personal scrolls to Tasnif and general dissemination

This is an important shift, as mentioned previously. Before that era, the sheikh generally relied on personal scrolls that he wrote, not for the purpose of public dissemination, but rather for personal purposes such as memorisation etc. He might erase them or destroy them. The sheikh would not take a well-known book that was classified and organised and begin teaching it to the students, as such a book did not exist in the first place. He would narrate from his memory or from some of his personal writings, as mentioned above, and those writings were not for public dissemination.

Among Malik’s teachers were several narrators who did not compile or write anything for personal purposes and did not have a well-known, organised general book.^[8] However, the situation was different with Malik and his class of senior scholars with their writings, the most important of which is al Muwatta’, as mentioned before.

Tasnif of a book and presenting it to students in gatherings is an important factor that assisted in disseminating, arranging, and organising knowledge; and this is what happened in that era. However, it was not complete, as Tasnif was in its initial stages. Therefore, it was not expected to produce a complete, comprehensive, systematic, and an organised book from the first presentation. Hence Malik narrated the al Muwatta’ through various narrations over the course of a dozen years. As a result, the narrations of his students also differed, which is natural, considering that period and the new experience of general dissemination in the Muslim Ummah.

It is not expected that the first written Hadith book will come out in a complete, comprehensive, organised, and prepared manner. As if it was a long-term project by Imam Malik, which he began in the 140s AH, then he revised, added, and subtracted until he reached where he reached, even though it spread with different narrations among the students.^[9]

It is noted in that era that the students came to listen to this book from Malik with great interest. The number of narrators of al Muwatta’ from Imam Malik reached more than seventy from amongst his students,^[10] which is a large number for one book at that time.^[11] The scholars differed in preference between these narrations, but the most famous of them is the narration by Yahya ibn Yahya al Laythi al Andalusi. Many commentaries have been written and it has been printed multiple times, even though the authors of the Sahihs and Sunans did not rely on it, because its author returned to Spain after an absence and spread his knowledge there. They relied on other reliable narrations of al Muwatta’, as will be mentioned in due course.

In fact, I have noticed that students in that era showed a great interest in al Muwatta’ by memorising it completely. I think it was the first book after the Book of Allah that scholars and narrators raced to memorise. Al Shafi’i is reported to have memorised it before he met Imam Malik.^[12] Similarly, ‘Abdullah ibn Wahb al Misri (d. 197 AH) is reported to have memorised it as well. He states:

 

حفظت موطأ مالك ما بين مصر إلى المدينة

I memorised Muwatta’ Malik (while travelling) between Egypt and Madinah.^[13]

 

Likewise, it is mentioned in the biography of al Ghazi ibn Qais al Umawi al Qurtubi (d. 199 AH) that he memorised al Muwatta’.^[14] Among the narrators of al Muwatta’ were those who memorised it and did not write it, such as ‘Abdullah ibn Nafi’ al Sa’igh (d. 186 AH). He states:

 

صحبت‏ مالكا أربعين سنة ما كتبت منه شيئا وإنما كان حفظا أتحفظه

I accompanied Malik for forty years. I did not write anything from him. It was only memorisation.^[15]

 

It is as if the scholars and narrators of that era were waiting for a book like that. As soon as it was completed and published, they raced to it, because after the Book of Allah—as Imam al Shafi’i put it—there was no book more authentic than al Muwatta’.

 

The Second Feature: From private gatherings and individual reception to public Hadith gatherings and general dissemination

It appears that during that era, Hadith gatherings spread widely, and al Muwatta’ gatherings were important gatherings, where hundreds of students gathered to hear Hadith from Malik. Before Malik and his class, the popularity of Hadith gatherings, their spread in the regions, and the influx of students to them was not like this. This does not mean that they did not exist, but rather they were not widespread and organised in this manner. This indicates that most of what Malik heard from his teachers was not in those gatherings, especially in acquiring it from Nafi’, the mawla of Ibn ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma, as he heard plenty Hadith from him before his death in the year 117 AH. He was not more than 24 years old at that time. He would learn from him in various situations. Among them is, while guiding him from his house to the Masjid. He had become blind. So he would ask him and Nafi’ would narrate to him. The residence of Nafi’ was towards al Baqi’.^[16] Sometimes he would form strategies to acquire knowledge from him. He is reported to have said:

 

كنت آتي نافعا نصف النهار وما تظلني الشجر من الشمس أتحين خروجه فإذا خرج أدعه ساعة كأني لم أرده ثم أتعرض له فأسلم عليه وأدعه حتى إذا دخل البلاط أقول له كيف قال ابن عمر في كذا وكذا فيجيبني ثم أحبس عنه وكان فيه حدة وكنت آتي ابن هرمز بكرة فما أخرج من بيته حتى الليل

I used to come to Nafi’ in the middle of the day. There were no trees to shade me from the sun. I would wait for him to come out. When he came out, I would leave him for a while as if I did not need him. Then I would go to him, greet him, and leave him until he entered the courtyard. Then I would ask him, “What did Ibn ‘Umar say about such-and-such?” He would answer me. Then I would stay away from him. He was a stern person. I used to go to Ibn Hurmuz early morning and would not leave his house until nightfall.^[17]

 

Likewise, acquiring from al Zuhri was not always in the Hadith gatherings, as he states:

 

لقيت ابن شهاب يوما في موضع الجنائز وهو على بغلة له فسألته عن حديث فيه طول فحدثني به قال فأخذت بلجام بغلته فلم أحفظه قلت يا أبا بكر أعده علي فأبى فقلت أما كنت تحب أن يعاد عليك الحديث فأعاده علي فحفظته

I met Ibn Shihab one day at one of the funerals while he was on his mule. I asked him about a lengthy hadith and he narrated it to me. I was holding the bridle of his mule, so I did not memorise it. I said to him, “O Abu Bakr, repeat it to me.”

He refused so I said, “Would you not like the hadith to be repeated to you?”

He thus repeated it to me and I memorised it.^[18]

 

All of this means that learning in those days was sometimes by attending gatherings. There were many private gatherings and special personal relationships between the student and the teachers, enabling the student to acquire some of the sheikh’s special knowledge. Contrary to the situation that Imam Malik and his students were in. Hadith gatherings had spread widely and had become the ambition of students and learners. Hence, it became difficult for a student to learn from a sheikh what others did not learn.

It has been reported that Imam Malik would hold gatherings during the lifetime of his teacher Nafi’. Shu’bah ibn al Hajjaj al Basri mentioned that he heard Hadith from Malik a year after Nafi’s death and he was hosting a gathering that day.^[19]

The spread of the gatherings reached such a stage that hundreds of students would gather in one gathering, as some narrations state that the number of scholars wearing turbans, sitting in Malik’s gathering reached sixty.^[20] This refers to those scholars who wore the turban, not just Hadith narrators,^[21] which means that there were a large number of students and other narrators who were not known to be scholars, but were mere students or merely interested in the narration. Some narrations revealed that the gatherings of al Muwatta’ included four-hundred students.^[22]

It appears from the description of Malik’s Hadith gatherings that they followed a certain, clear system. Perhaps, the clearest aspect about that system is that he preferred not to read to the students himself,^[23] rather he would instruct one of them to read and the rest to listen. Ismail ibn Abi Uways—the nephew of Malik—said:

 

سألت مالكا عن أصح السماع فقال قراءتك على العالم أو قال المحدث ثم قراءة المحدث عليك ثم أن يدفع إليك كتابه فيقول ارو هذا عني قال فقلت لمالك أقرأ عليك وأقول حدثني قال أو لم يقل ابن عباس أقرأني أبي بن كعب وإنما قرأ على أبي

I asked Malik about the most correct form of sima’,^[24] to which he said, “Your reading to the scholar (or the Muhaddith), then the Muhaddith reading to you, then for him to hand over his book to you and say, ‘Narrate this from me.’”

I then said to Malik, “I recite to you, and say haddathani (he narrated to me)?”

He replied, “Didn’t Ibn ‘Abbas say, ‘Ubayy ibn Ka’b recited to me,’ whereas he recited to Ubayy?”^[25]

 

Mutarrif ibn ‘Abdullah states:

 

صحبت مالكا سبع عشرة سنة فما رأيته قرأ الموطأ على أحد وسمعته يأبى أشد الإباء على من يقول لا يجزيه إلا السماع ويقول كيف لا يجزيك هذا في الحديث ويجزيك في القرآن والقرآن أعظم

I accompanied Malik for seventeen years yet I never saw him recite al Muwatta’ to anyone. I heard him vehemently refuting those who say that only hearing will suffice. He would say, “How will this not suffice in Hadith, but it is sufficient in Qur’an, whereas the Qur’an is greater?”^[26]

 

In fact, he would sometimes get angry if some students insisted on hearing the hadith from him in his own words. Once, when he finished the session, after his students had read to him, one of them stood up and said:

 

يا أبا عبد الله عوضني مما حدثته بثلاثة أحاديث تقرؤها علي

O Abu ‘Abdullah, exchange with me for what I have read to you with three ahadith that you recite to me.

 

He said:

 

أعراقي أعراقي أخرجوه عني

Is he from Iraq? Is he from Iraq? Take him away from me.^[27]

 

It was a new system in those gatherings for students to copy quickly what the sheikh dictated or to correct their copies while reading. Some students would write quickly in those gatherings and did not properly pay attention to what was written well. Years later, they would be confused with what was written by them and would declare that they did not know whether this sentence was Malik’s statement or from the text of the Hadith itself.^[28]

Some of them would make mistakes when reading to Malik in those gatherings that would lead to humorous situations.^[29]

Among the systems of the al Muwatta’ gatherings is the special preparation that Malik adopted for it. Ibn Bukayr states:

 

كان مالك إذا عرض عليه الموطأ تهيأ ولبس ثيابه وتاجه أو ساجه وعمامته ثم أطرق فلا يتنخم ولا يبزق ولا يعبث بشيء من لحيته حتى يفرغ من القراءة إعظاما لحديث رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وأنه كان إذا‏ أراد أن يجلس للحديث اغتسل وتبخر وتطيب

When al Muwatta’ would be read to Malik, he would prepare himself, put on his clothes, crown or gown, and turban, and then proceed. He would not snort, spit, or interfere with any part of his beard until he finished reading, out of respect for the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.^[30] When he wanted to sit for Hadith, he would take a bath, perfume with incense, and apply perfume.^[31]

 

This preparation was clearly different from the way it was received from Nafi’, which was mentioned previously.

All of this shows a clear difference and an emerging system in the method of narration in the Islamic scholarly community at that time, as the Hadith gathering combined with the compiled book and an arranged system, which affected the history of the entire narration.

These gatherings were not limited to Imam Malik and his book al Muwatta’. They spread in Basrah, Baghdad, Kufah, etc., in that class. Shu’bah ibn al Hajjaj had Hadith dictation gatherings in Baghdad. Abu Hatim al Razi states:

 

حضرت آدم بن أبي إياس العسقلاني وقال له رجل سمعت أحمد بن محمد بن حنبل وسئل عن شعبة كان يملي عليهم ببغداد أو يقرأ قال كان يقرأ وكان أربعة أنفس يكتبون آدم و… فقال آدم صدق كنت سريع الخط وكنت أكتب وكان الناس يأخذون من عندي وقدم شعبة بغداد فحدث فيها أربعين مجلسا في كل مجلس مئة حديث فحضرت أنا منها عشرين مجلسا سمعت ألفي حديث وفاتني عشرون مجلسا

I came to Adam ibn Abi Iyas al ‘Asqalani. A man said to him, “I heard Ahmed ibn Muhammad ibn Hanbal—when he was asked about Shu’bah as to whether he dictated to them in Baghdad or read to them—saying, “He would read and four people would write, viz. Adam and…”

Then Adam said, “He spoke the truth. I was fast in writing. I would write and people would copy from me. Shu’bah came to Baghdad, where he narrated Hadith in forty gatherings, with a hundred ahadith in each session. I attended twenty of them. I heard two thousand ahadith and missed twenty gatherings.”^[32]

 

It is an important text that confirms a new system in Hadith gatherings. The question can be posed: Was the Hadith narration of Shu’bah by dictation or by reading? This means that several methods of disseminating Hadith in those gatherings became well-known. Then it appears from the text that whoever wrote what the sheikh read, only wrote because he had fast handwriting, and not everyone could do that. Others did not write, so they took from his book, which means that there were specific organised traditions for the gatherings.^[33]

These traditions become evident in the number of specific gatherings and the number of specific ahadith in them, which means the existence of a system and method, unlike the spontaneous Hadith narration gatherings that existed in previous classes.

Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah’s Hadith gatherings were not far from that new system, as he had someone to dictate to the people what he heard from Sufyan. This means that there was a large number of attendees who could not hear Sufyan directly.^[34]

It was the system of some of the senior scholars of this class not to give permission to their students to correct errors in their books when reading to the sheikh. This means that the student would bring a copy of the sheikh’s Hadith and compare that copy with what he heard from the sheikh’s presentation and reading. Some scholars were strict about granting permission to the students to correct in their gathering. Perhaps this was done to encourage them to make copies before coming to the gathering, or because the gathering’s time did not allow for all these amendments, as this would disrupt the system.

Among these seniors was Imam ‘Abdullah ibn al Mubarak (d. 181 AH). He did not allow the students to correct by him. Therefore, he would recite it to them two, three, or four times, as they could not capture it well.^[35] Hajjaj ibn Muhammad al Missisi used to trick his sheikh Shu’bah in his gatherings to correct the book. He states:

 

قرأ علينا شعبة كتاب حماد بن أبي سليمان في مجلس فتشوش علي فقلت آه آه ثم قمت قلت أبول فخرجت من المجلس فقال شعبة لا والله ما به بول ولكنه خرج ينظر في كتابه

Shu’bah read the book of Hammad—ibn Abi Sulaiman—in a gathering. I was confused so I said, “Oh, oh.”

Then I got up and said, “I need to urinate.”

I then left the gathering and Shu’bah commented, “No, by Allah, he does not need to urinate, but he went out to look at his book.”^[36]

 

This kind of system for widespread dissemination is not known in previous eras. Perhaps the most famous person who held gatherings in which there was qira’ah (reading), ‘ard (presentation), and munawalah was Imam al Zuhri, but it does not represent a general, systematic, widespread situation.^[37]

Due to the widespread reception in this way, a narrator’s isolation from the famous Imams such as Malik, Shu’bah, Sufyan, Ma’mar, etc., when narrating a hadith that is not known to be from them, has become strange and denounced.

Imam al Dhahabi’s statement clarifies this:

 

فهؤلاء الحفاظ الثقات إذا انفرد الرجل منهم من التابعين فحديثه صحيح ‏ وإن كان من الأتباع قيل صحيح غريب وإن كان من أصحاب الأتباع قيل غريب فرد ويندر تفردهم فتجد الإمام منهم عنده مئتا ألف حديث لا يكاد ينفرد بحديثين ثلاثة ومن كان بعدهم فأين ما ينفرد به ما علمته وقد يوجد

These are the Huffaz, the Thiqat. If any Tabi’i narrates isolated, then his hadith is sahih (authentic). If he is one of the Atba’ al Tabi’in, it is said to be sahih gharib (authentic and strange) and if he is among the students of the Atba’ al Tabi’in, it is said to be gharib fard (strange and isolated). Their isolated narrations are rare. One would find an Imam among them having two-hundred thousand ahadith, with hardly two or three isolated ahadith. Then, how can anyone, coming after them, have isolated narrations? I do not know them, but they do exist.^[38]

 

It can be noted that there is no objection in the isolated narration of a Tabi’i and that there is a possibility of strangeness in the isolated narration of a Tab’ al Tabi’i. The strangeness intensifies in an isolated narration of a Tab’ al Tabi’i from a famous and well-known Tabi’i whose ahadith are sometimes collected, but isolated narrations of their students are surprisingly rare. In those after them, it is not found at all.

 

The Third Feature: From personal travels to the activity of widespread travelling

What I mean by this is that travels before Imam Malik were usually for personal purposes and were for specific needs. It was not a general widespread activity among students of Hadith, such that the Muhaddithin would be criticised for not travelling and hearing from the various sheikhs in different countries. An observer of the travels in the first century and the beginning of the second century will see that it did not reach the level of systematic general activity.^[39]

Perhaps one of the clearest examples of this is Imam Malik himself. He did not travel to any other country to seek Hadith. In fact, he never travelled anywhere except to Makkah for Hajj, being content with what he acquired from the knowledge of the people of Madinah. Therefore, the number of his sheikhs was little compared to those who travelled and journeyed to other countries. However, the situation was different among the class of his students,^[40] as travels and its activities became widespread in that class. Imam Malik himself was coveted from different parts of the earth. In fact, some scholars mentioned that the intended person in the hadith of Abu Hurairah radiya Llahu ‘anhu, who narrates from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam thus:

 

ليضربن الناس أكباد الإبل في طلب العلم فلا يجدون أحدا أعلم من عالم المدينة

People will definitely beat the livers of camels (i.e. travel extensively) in seeking knowledge. They will not find anyone more knowledgeable than the scholar of Madinah.

is Imam Malik, as mentioned by Ibn ‘Uyaynah and ‘Abdul Razzaq.^[41]

 

No scholar of Madinah is known to have been a target of travels as Malik. Many travelled to him, especially from Spain. Perhaps the most famous of those travels is the journey of Yahya ibn Yahya al Laythi al Andalusi, which was an important journey that showed the Hadith activity in that era. Yahya heard al Muwatta’ in Spain from Ziyad ibn ‘Abdul Rahman Shabtun, (d. 193 AH)—the first to introduce al Muwatta’ to Spain. He was proficient in hearing from Malik and the first to introduce the fiqh of Malik to Spain. Prior to that, they were practicing the fiqh of al Awza’i.^[42] Yahya was not satisfied with this, so he travelled to the East in the last days of Imam Malik and heard the full al Muwatta’ from him, except the chapters on I’tikaf. He doubted whether he heard it from him, hence, he narrated it from Ziyad ibn ‘Abdul Rahman Shabtun — from Malik.^[43]

Among the signs of his diligence in listening to Hadith and knowledge is the report that he was in the gathering of Imam Malik with a group of narrators. Someone said, “An elephant has arrived.” They all went out to see the elephant, but Yahya ibn Yahya did not go out, so Malik said to him, “Why did you not go out to see the elephant as it is not found in your country?” He replied, “I did not travel to see an elephant. Rather, I travelled to observe you and learn from your knowledge and guidance.” Imam Malik was very pleased with this and called him ‘the wisest man of Spain’.^[44]

It appears that this journey was not for the need to hear ahadith per se, as Yahya heard them from Shabtun in Spain, so this would not increase his knowledge by listening to them. Rather, the reason was the Hadith purposes, which is to acquire the Hadith from the sheikh himself without intermediaries, which is what is called ‘ulu al isnad (high chain of transmission), and this is something that widely spread among Malik’s students and subsequent classes.

From amongst the travels to Malik is what was mentioned by ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Mahdi. He says:

 

سأل رجل مالكا عن مسألة فقال لا أحسنها فقال الرجل إني ضربت إليك من كذا وكذا لأسألك عنها فقال له مالك فإذا رجعت إلى مكانك وموضعك فأخبرهم أني قد قلت لك إني لا أحسنها

A man asked Malik about a ruling. He said, “I do not know it well.”

The man said, “I travelled from such and such place to ask you about it.”

Malik said to him, “When you return to your place, tell them that I have told you that I do not know it well.”^[45]

 

Whoever studies the biographies of narrators from Imam Malik will be amazed at the large number of people who travelled to him from Egypt, Africa, and Spain, in addition to Greater Syria and Iraq.^[46]

Hence, Imam Malik’s method of reception and travelling became different from the method of the class of his students, as the systematic activity of travelling expanded in the second half of the second century. It became one of the important duties of a Muhaddith in the third century, to such an extent that he would be criticised if he limited himself to the Hadith of the people of his city and did not leave and acquire from the various sheikhs in different countries. There are important statements by Imam Ahmed and Yahya ibn Ma’in pertaining to this.^[47]

I believe that these three aspects—Tasnif, Hadith gatherings, and travel—were intertwined, influencing each other. Therefore, they were extremely influential in distinguishing narrations in that era, as the aspiration of the student of Hadith will be at its peak if he knows that if he travels, he will attain his goal of hearing from the sheikhs in the Hadith gatherings in Madinah. Furthermore, he will even have the opportunity to read an entire book by the greatest scholars of Madinah at that time. His aspiration in seeking and the travelling will not be similar to the aspiration of one who travels with the possibility of hearing and meeting. Therefore, the expansion in Tasnif and reading of books and the spread of Hadith gatherings definitely influenced the movement of the scholarly travels; and the matter is the same vice versa, as the Hadith gatherings would not have any lasting impact and students would not flock to them unless the scholarly travels were a widespread activity in that era.

 

The Fourth Feature: The development of expressions related to acquisition of Hadith from the Sheikh

With the great development that occurred in the system of narration among the class of the Atba’ al Tabi’in, the expression of the manner of acquisition from the sheikh differed from before. This is because the system of narration before the era of the Atba’ al Tabi’in and before the time of Hadith gatherings wherein compiled books were read, was usually based on hearing from the sheikh. Sometimes the sheikh would have some writing with him and he would read from it or the sheikh might give some of his students what he wrote and the students would copy it, as mentioned previously, or he might deviate from all of this. However, that was not a continuous systematic system, but rather situations of some scholars, sheikhs, and narrators.

As for the era of Imam Malik, the situation was different, as the Tasnif of compiled and classified books and the spread of Hadith gatherings had an impact on expressions related to methods of acquisition. Consequently, new methods of reception from the sheikh appeared. Perhaps the most famous of them was that students brought with them a copy of the sheikh’s compiled book to his gathering, presented it to him and corrected their copies. At times, presentation may be by the sheikh’s reading, while at other times, by the student’s reading or by his colleague’s reading as he listens. The students’ reading appeared clearly in al Muwatta’. Among the senior narrators from Imam Malik is the great proficient Imam ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Mahdi (d. 198 AH) as he narrated al Muwatta’ from him and Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal heard it from him, and he included much of it in his book al Musnad.^[48] ‘Abdullah ibn Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal states:

 

قلت لأبي هذه الأحاديث التي تقول قرأت على عبد الرحمن عن مالك سمعها أو عرضها قال قال عبد الرحمن أما كتاب الصلاة فأنا قرأته على مالك قال عبد الرحمن وسائر الكتب قرئت على مالك وأنا أنظر في كتابي

I asked my father, “These ahadith which you say that I read to ‘Abdul Rahman from Malik, did he hear them or did he present them?”

He explained, “‘Abdul Rahman said, ‘As for the book on Salah, I read it to Malik.’ ‘Abdur Rahman further said, ‘The whole book was read to Malik while I was looking in my book.’”^[49]

 

These are two methods of Ibn Mahdi’s reception from Malik. Either he himself recites to the sheikh or he hears others reading it. Imam Malik did not see, in all of these methods, anything that required a different form (of the verb) in the wording of the Hadith narration.

Ibn Bukayr states:

 

لما عرضنا الموطأ على مالك قال له رجل من أهل المغرب يا أبا عبد الله أحدث بهذا عنك فقال نعم قال وأقول حدثني مالك قال نعم أما رأيتني فرغت نفسي لكم وتسمعت إلى عرضكم وأقمت سقطه وزلله فمن حدثكم غيري نعم حدث بها عني وقل حدثني مالك

When we presented al Muwatta’ to Malik, a man from among the people of Morocco said to him, “O Abu ‘Abdullah, should I narrate this from you?”

Malik replied, “Yes.”

He said, “Should I say, ‘Malik narrated to me?’”

He said, “Yes, don’t you see me freeing myself for you, listening attentively to your presentation, and correcting its mistakes and slips? So who narrated to you besides me? Yes, narrate it from me and say, ‘Malik narrated to me.’”^[50]

 

Yahya ibn Salih said:

 

كنت عند مالك بن أنس جالسا فسأله رجل فقال يا أبا عبد الله الكتاب تقرؤه علي أو أقرؤه عليك أو تجيزه لي فكيف أقول فقال لي قل في ذلك كله إن شئت حدثنا مالك بن أنس

I was sitting with Malik ibn Anas when a man asked him, “O Abu ‘Abdullah, the book you read to me, or I read it to you, or you give me permission for it, how should I narrate it?”

He said to me, “Say in all of that, if you wish, Malik ibn Anas narrated to us.”^[51]

 

‘Abdullah ibn Wahb states:

 

كنت عند مالك بن أنس جالسا فجاءه رجل قد كتب الموطأ يحمله في كسائه فقال له يا أبا عبد الله هذا موطؤك قد كتبته وقابلته فأجزه لي فقال قد فعلت قال فكيف أقول أخبرنا مالك أم حدثنا مالك قال له مالك قل أيهما شئت

I was sitting with Malik ibn Anas, when a man, who had written al Muwatta’ and was carrying it in his garment, came to him, and said, O Abu ‘Abdullah, this is your al Muwatta’. I have written it and compared it, so give me permission for it.”

He said, “I have done so.”

The man said, “How should I say, akhbarana Malik, or haddathana Malik?”

Malik said to him, “Say whichever one you wish.”^[52]

 

It appears from these texts that this development in gatherings and books and its reading influenced the development in their expression among the Hadith scholars. Therefore, they began to differentiate between ‘haddathana’, which indicates hearing the sheikh’s words, and ‘akhbarana’, which means reading to him, as well as ‘‘an’, which, by itself, does not necessitate continuity.

However, Imam Malik chose that ‘haddathana’ and ‘akhbarana’ had the same meaning, so the student could express his acquisition of Hadith from the sheikh by whichever one he wanted.

In any case, had it not been for the spread of gatherings, compiled books, and the narration of Hadith through it, there would not have been a lot of ahadith, differences, and warnings about it.^[53] It is a natural development, which is consistent with the nature of the ongoing stage, and through it, the methods of acquisition became more abundant and more widespread. Therefore, the scholars declared that. Ismail ibn Abi Uways—the student and nephew of Imam Malik—states:

 

السماع على ثلاثة أوجه القراءة على المحدث وهو أصحها وقراءة المحدث والمناولة وهو قوله أرويه عنك وأقول حدثنا وذكر عن مالك مثل ذلك

Sima’ is in three ways. Reading to the Muhaddith, which is the most correct; the Muhaddith’s reading (to the students), and munawalah which is his saying, “I narrate it from you and I say ‘he narrated to us.’” Something similar is reported from Malik.^[54]

 

The abundance of discussion in these forms of wordings displays accurate following of all the ‘natural’ developments taking place in Hadith narration and criticising those who deviate from the path in general. Therefore, there has been a lot of discussion concerning Habib ibn Abi Habib—for example—Malik’s scribe. Critics merely criticise him for some of his actions when presenting al Muwatta’ to Malik, a criticism that was not common before.^[55]

This was not limited to Malik and his al Muwatta’, but it was widespread in other cities also. Yahya ibn Ma’in was asked about hearing some of the narrators from Ma’mar ibn Rashid (d. 154 AH) and he said:

 

بعضها سماع وبعضها عرض وبعضها كانت في البيت وكان معمر يقرؤها ويوقع عليها

Some of it was through sima’, some through ‘ard, and some of it was in the house. Ma’mar would read it and sign it.^[56]

 

One of the things that ‘Abdullah ibn Wahb was praised for was that he used to differentiate between what he acquired through ‘ard from what he acquired through sima’.^[57]

 

The Fifth Feature: Development in selecting narrations

Narrations among the class of the Atba’ al Tabi’in increased and spread. Travels began and the scholars’ communication increased. Narration and its paths expanded. This was one of the reasons for the concern of the senior scholars in ascertaining the trustworthiness of the Muhaddith teacher and the extent of the strength of the text narrated in the Hadith of the sheikh.

Imam Malik was clearly distinguished in these two matters, as he was one of the scholars who were most selective about sheikhs and the most selective about ahadith.

As for selecting the sheikhs, as Ibn Hibban said:

 

أول من انتقى الرجال من الفقهاء بالمدينة وأعرض عمن ليس بثقة في الحديث ولم يكن يروي إلا ما صح ولا يحدث إلا عن ثقة مع الفقه والدين والفضل والنسك

He was the first to select narrators from among the jurists in Madinah and he turned away from those who were not trustworthy in Hadith. He only narrated what was authentic and he only narrated from those who were trustworthy in fiqh, religion, virtue, and devoutness.^[58]

 

This precedence in Ibn Hibban’s expression is very important, as it means that the scholars before Malik would narrate from everyone, even weak narrators. When Malik came, he began examining when selecting the sheikhs. He would only take Hadith from the trustworthy among them.^[59] Malik himself declared and announced it. Hence, generally, we do not find weak ahadith in al Muwatta’. All of the sheikhs of Imam Malik from the people of Madinah are trustworthy. Bishr ibn ‘Umar states:

 

سألت مالكا عن رجل فقال رأيته في كتبي قلت لا فقال لو كان ثقة رأيته في كتبي

I asked Malik about a man. He said, “Did you see him in my books?”

I said, “No”.

He said, “If he was trustworthy, you would have seen him in my books.”^[60]

 

In fact, some scholars have mentioned that Imam Malik’s avoidance of any Madani narrator indicates that there was some objection in his Hadith. ‘Ali ibn al Madini said:

 

وكل مدني لم يحدث عنه مالك ففي حديثه شيءلا أعلم مالكا ترك إنسانا إلا إنسانا في حديثه شيء

Every Madani narrator from whom Malik did not narrate, there is some objection in his Hadith. I do not know of any person that Malik left out, except a person in whose Hadith there was some objection.^[61]

 

Malik met many narrators from whom he did not take anything, even if they were people of righteousness, piety, and religion, since the issue of memorisation, capturing, and proficiency is different to the issue of righteousness. Therefore, Malik said:

 

أدركت ببلدنا هذا مشيخة لهم فضل وصلاح وعبادة يحدثون فما كتبت عن أحد منهم حديثا قط

I met such sheikhs in this city of ours who—with virtue, righteousness, and worship—were narrating Hadith, but I never wrote a single hadith from any of them.

 

When he was asked the reason for it, he said:

 

لأنهم لم يكونوا يعرفون ما يحدثون

Because they did not know what they were narrating.^[62]

 

Similarly, he stated:

 

أدركت هذا المسجد وفيه سبعون شيخا ممن أدرك أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وروى عن التابعين فلم نحمل الحديث إلا عن أهله

I came to this Masjid and found seventy sheikhs in it who met the Companions of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and he narrated from the Tabi’in; however, we do not take Hadith except from its people.^[63]

 

This means that the Hadith has specific, well-known people, whose narrations are taken into account and consideration. In fact, he stipulated another condition for his sheikhs, which was that they should be people of Fiqh. Ibn Wahb states:

 

نظر مالك إلى العطاف بن خالد فقال بلغني أنكم تأخذون من هذا فقلت بلى فقال ما كنا نأخذ الحديث إلا من الفقهاء وأن يكونوا قد عقلوا وفهموا ما حملوا من الأحاديث

Malik looked at al Attaf ibn Khalid and said, “I have heard that you are taking Hadith from this man.”

I said, ‘Yes.”

Then he said, “We only take Hadith from jurists,^[64] and those who have comprehended and understood the ahadith they have narrated.”

 

Malik states:

 

أدركت بالمدينة مشايخ أبناء مئة وأكثر فبعضهم قد حدثت بأحاديثه وبعضهم لم أحدث بأحاديثه كلها وبعضهم لم أحدث من أحاديثه شيئا ولم أترك الحديث عنهم لأنهم لم يكونوا ثقات فيما حملوا إلا أنهم حملوا شيئا لم يعقلوه

I met more than a hundred sheikhs in Madinah. Some of them are such that I have narrated their ahadith, some of them I did not narrate all of their ahadith, and some of them are such that I did not narrate any of their ahadith. I did not refrain from narrating from them because they were not trustworthy in what they narrated; rather, it was because they narrated what they did not understand.^[65]

 

This is a high distinction in selection, as he divided those whom he heard from into three categories: those whom he narrated from, those whom he did not narrate from, and those whom he narrated some of their ahadith only. This was due to his knowledge of distinguishing what is correct from what is wrong in them, or what was being practiced and what was not being practiced, which indicates to the intensity of selection.

Therefore, the number of his sheikhs was not very great. It was about a hundred sheikhs, especially since Imam Malik did not leave Madinah except for Hajj, so the number of his sheikhs was small compared to those who travelled, narrated, and heard Hadith.

Since he was meticulous in choosing the sheikhs, he was also proficient in acquiring from them and discharging them. This is clearly apparent in the scholars’ preference for him over other students of al Zuhri in terms of proficiency in narration. He was the most proficient in narrating from al Zuhri, as mentioned by Yahya al Qattan, Yahya ibn Ma’in, Ahmed ibn Hanbal, and Abu Hatim al Razi,^[66] despite the fact that among al Zuhri’s students there were great reliable narrators, and jurists, such as Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah, Ma’mar ibn Rashid, al Awza’i, al Layth, and others

Despite this proficiency and desire for the accuracy of narrations, he was not free from errors in it, as is the norm of every trustworthy person. Scholars enumerated some of his very few errors in narrations, including some from his sheikh al Zuhri.^[67]

As for the selection of Hadith: This is clearly apparent in the fact that he did not narrate everything he heard, as his approach was that he would only narrate what was practiced upon in his city. If he needed to narrate what was not in practice, he would allude to that, which shows his extreme caution in narrating. Furthermore, he was not a Muhaddith only, but rather he was a Fiqhi Imam, and his careful selection of ahadith is evident in his selection from his reliable sheikhs and great scholars, most notably al Zuhri, the scholar who has preserved knowledge. Malik declared that he did not narrate everything he heard from al Zuhri. He is reported to have said:

 

سمعت من ابن شهاب أحاديث لم أحدث بها إلى اليوم فقيل له لم يا أبا عبد الله قال لم يكن العمل عليها فتركتها

“I heard ahadith from Ibn Shihab that I have not narrated to this day.”

He was asked, “Why, O Abu ‘Abdullah?”

He said, “They were not in practice, so I left them.”^[68]

 

When Imam al Shafi’i asked him:

 

إن عند ابن عيينة عن الزهري أشياء ليست عندك

Ibn ‘Uyaynah narrates from al Zuhri reports that you do not.

 

He answered him by saying:

 

وأنا كل ما سمعت من الحديث أحدث به أنا إذن أريد أن أظلمهم

Should I narrate every Hadith I hear? Then I would be doing injustice to them.^[69]

 

Thus, narrations by Malik are more specific and precise than the narration of al Zuhri, which displays an important precaution in the method of narration. The basis of that precaution is the vast Fiqh that Imam Malik enjoyed, so he only narrated that which was practiced upon.

This precaution in narration becomes evident in an incident mentioned by ‘Abdul Razzaq ibn Hammam al San’ani, in which al Thawri narrated to ‘Abdul Razzaq a hadith from Malik. ‘Abdul Razzaq states:

 

فلقيت مالكا فقلت له إن سفيان حدثنا عنك عن يزيد بن عبد الله بن قسيط عن ابن المسيب عن عمر وعثمان أنهما قضيا..(بقضية في الدية) فحدثني به فقال لا لست أحدث به اليوم صدق قد حدثته ثم تبسم ثم قال قد بلغني أنه يحدث به عني ولست أحدث به اليوم فقال له مسلم بن خالد عزمت عليك إلا حدثته به وهو إلى جنبه فقال له لا تعزم فلو كنت محدثا به اليوم أحدا حدثته قلت فلم لا تحدثني به قال ليس العمل عليه عندنا وقال إن صاحبنا ليس عندنا بذلك يعني يزيد بن عبد الله بن قسيط ‎

I met Malik and told him, “Sufyan narrated to us from you — from Yazid ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Qusayt — from Ibn al Musayyab — from ‘Umar and ‘Uthman that they passed a judgement… (on an issue of blood money), so narrate it to me.”

He said, “No, I am not narrating it today. He told the truth; I narrated it to him.”

Then he smiled and said, “Information has reached me that he is narrating it from me, but I am not narrating it today.”

Muslim ibn Khalid, who was by his side, said to him, “I swear upon you that you narrate it to him.”

Malik said to him, “Don’t swear. If I were to narrate it to anyone today, I would have narrated it.”

I asked, “Why don’t you narrate it to me?”

Malik said, “It is not in practice by us.”

Then he said, “Our companion is not like that according to us.” Referring to Yazid ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Qusayt.^[70]

 

Due to all of this, Ibn Ma’in answered when he was asked as to why Malik narrated very few ahadith by saying:

 

لكثرة تمييزه

Because of his great discernment.^[71]

 

This is an answer consistent with the precise practical personality of Imam Malik, which differentiates between hearing a hadith and narrating it. This shows an important stage of filtering and narrating Hadith at that time, as not everything that was heard was narrated. Narrators then rely on the likes of Malik.

Imam Malik’s approach of refraining from narrating ahadith that were not practiced upon is an important indication of the importance of distinguishing between the authenticity of the hadith and practicing upon it, as there is no correlation between them. The hadith may be authentic and the scholars do not practice upon it. This distinction was an important reason for saving ‘Abdullah ibn Wahb (d. 198 AH)—Malik’s student^[72]—from deviation. He is reported to have said, when mentioning the differences in ahadith and narrations:

 

‏ لقيت ثلاثمئة عالم وستين عالما لولا أني لقيت مالكا والليث لضللت في العلم

I met three-hundred and sixty scholars. Had I not met Malik and al Layth, I would have gone astray in knowledge.^[73]

 

The reason for the misguidance is explained by his statement:

 

لولا أن الله أنقذني بمالك والليث لضللت فقيل له كيف ذلك قال أكثرت من الحديث فحيرني فكنت أعرض ذلك على مالك والليث فيقولان لي خذ هذا ودع هذا

“If Allah had not saved me through Malik and al Layth, I would have gone astray.”

He was asked, “How is that?”

He said, “I gathered plenty ahadith and it confused me. I would present them to Malik and al Layth, and they would say to me, ‘Take this, and leave that.’”^[74]

 

The abundance of Hadith is confusing, as some of them contradict each other and some of them cannot be understood except in the context of other texts. Therefore, Malik’s answer, ‘Take this and leave that’, was a comprehensive answer that demonstrated fiqh and understanding, not merely apparent meaning and authenticity.^[75]

The selection also becomes evident in the fact that what he presented in al Muwatta’ was not all of his known ahadith. Rather, he presented specific ahadith in it for specific purposes. Otherwise, he possessed many ahadith that he narrated to students but did not present in al Muwatta’. Texts of the scholars and their practice have been reported regarding this. Al Bayhaqi said:

 

ولمالك بن أنس مسانيد لم يودعها الموطأ رواها عنه الأكابر من أصحابه خارج الموطأ

Malik ibn Anas has ahadith that he did not present in al Muwatta’. His senior students narrated them out of al Muwatta’.^[76]

 

NEXT⇒ The Critical Society in the era of the Atba’ al Tabi’in

---

^[1]  Al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 8/58.

^[2]  Interest in Imam Malik’s al Muwatta’ was very diverse from very early on. Therefore, it is very astonishing that orientalist Norman Calder claims that Malik was not the true compiler of al Muwatta’, as is well known, but rather it was projected on him between the years 250-270 AH by Ibn Waddah (d. 287 AH), a student of Yahya ibn Yahya (d. 234 AH), the student of Imam Malik. (Norman Calder: Studies in Early Muslim Jurisprudence, pg. 20-38.)

This claim can be discussed from many historical points of view. His idea was strongly criticised from within the Orientalist system with detailed methodological and historical evidence by Harald Motzki, Wael Hallaq, and others. They opposed the theory of projection from its roots regarding Imam Malik’s al Muwatta’. Refer to the following studies: Wael Hallaq: On Dating Malik’s Muwatta’, 1 UCLA J. Islamic & Near E.L. 00 2001-2002 473, pg. 47-65; ‎Harald Motzki: The Prophet and his Cat: on dating Malik’s Muwatta’ and legal traditions, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 22 (1998), pg. 18-83.

See a valuable research written in Turkish by Professor Rahila Kizilkaya Yilmaz on these two criticisms and their evaluation in: Oryantalist Bir Fikrin Kendi Paradigmas: lçinden Tenkid Bdilme Serencamina Omek: Norman Calder’n Muvatta’ Tarihlendirmesine Yöneltilen Eleştiriler, Ilahiyat Akademi / 7-8 (Aralik 2018) 269-282.

This article was translated into Arabic under the title: Naqd Fikrah Istishra’iyyah min Dakhil Anmudhajiha al Ma’rifi: al Intiqadat al Muwajjahah li Tarikh Nurman Jaldar li al Muwatta’ Anmudhaja (Criticism of an Orientalist idea from within its cognitive model: Criticisms directed at Norman Calder’s history of al Muwatta’ as an example), and was printed in the Journal of Academic Theology, Gaziantep University, no. 7-8, 2018, pg. 257-568.

^[3]  Al Suyuti: Tanwir al Hawalik, 1/8 – 9.

^[4]  Some scholars believe that it takes precedence over the two Sahihs. Among them are the Moroccan scholars and Abu Bakr ibn al ‘Arabi. It is obvious that this statement of Imam al Shafi’i was decades before the two Sahihs were compiled. (Al Qadi ‘Iyad: Tartib al Madarik, 2:170; al Bayhaqi: Manaqib al Shafi’i, 1/507; al Suyuti: Tadrib al Rawi, 2/287-289.)

^[5]  See the details of this by al A’zami: Muqaddamat al Muwatta’, 1/73 onwards.

^[6]  Ibn Abi Hatim: Muqaddamat al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 1/28-29.

^[7]  Al A’zami: Muqaddamat al Muwatta’, 1/81-74.

^[8]  Refer to the study of Dr. Rida Bushamah: Kitabat al Hadith ‘ind Shuyukh al Imam Malik ibn Anas (The writing of Hadith by the teachers of Imam Malik ibn Anas), al Mi’yar Magazine, no. 43, 2018, pg. 135-150. He collected a number of Malik’s teachers who wrote. Not even one of them compiled any classified organised book, despite some objections in this research in terms of exertion regarding some of the narrators, in addition to the fact that it was purely for collection without analysis.

^[9]  Al Kawthari believes that the compilation of al Muwatta’ took place during the reign of al Mahdi or in the late era of al Mansur after the death of Abu Hanifah; and that al Mansur’s conversation with Malik in requesting the compilation of the knowledge of Madinah was before his last Hajj in the year 148 AH; and that Imam Malik presented al Muwatta’ to the people in the year 159 AH. His student, Sheikh ‘Abdul Fattah Abu Ghuddah, disagreed with him in a long discussion of his. He preferred that Malik’s writing of his al Muwatta’ was likely in the year 145 AH or after 147 AH and that he finished it after the year 158 AH. Al A’zami disagreed with both of them and stated that Malik’s completion of writing his al Muwatta’ and its first presentation to the people was at the beginning of the year 140 AH. Hamzah al Bakri disagreed with him, giving preference to what al Kawthari mentioned. (Al Ta’liq ‘ala al Intiqa’ fi Fada’il al A’immah al Thalathah, pg. 44, 81; Sheikh ‘Abdul Fattah’s introduction to the book al Ta’liq al Mumajjad ‘ala Muwatta’ Muhammad, 1/10 -12; al A’zami, Muqaddamat al Muwatta’, 1/267-277; Hamzah al Bakri: Dr. Muhammad Mustafa al A’zami Muhaqqiqan, pg. 312-321.)

^[10]  Hafiz Ibn Nasir al Din al Dimashqi enumerated them in Ithaf al Salik bi Ruwat al Muwatta’ Imam Malik, pg. 124-469. They were 79 narrators. This is the number of those who narrated al Muwatta’ specifically. As for those who narrated from Imam Malik in general, their number is close to 1300, as will be mentioned later, quoting Qadi ‘Iyad in Tartib al Madarik, 1/13.

^[11]  Imam al ‘Ala’i said in Bughyat al Multamis, pg. 65:

وسبب كثرة الرواية عنه أنه انتصب للرواية ونشر العلم قديما وعمر كثيرا وقصده الناس من سائر الأمصار وكان بالمدينة النبوية المشرفة على ساكنها أفضل الصلاة والسلام وغالب من يمر بها حاجا يكتب عنه فانتشرت الرواية عنه في البلدان رضي الله عنه

The reason for the large number of narrations from him is that he devoted himself to narration and the spread of knowledge from early and lived a long life. People from all over the world came to him. He was in the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam city (may the choicest salutations and peace be on its inhabitant). Majority of those who passed by it during Hajj wrote from him. Hence, narrations from him spread throughout the countries. May Allah be pleased with him.

^[12]  Ibn ‘Abdul Barr: al Intiqa’ fi Fada’il al A’immah al Thalathah al Fuqaha’, pg. 118. It is reported by Abu Nuaim in Hilyat al Auliya’, 9/69 that:

أن عمر الإمام الشافعي حين قدم على الإمام مالك وقد حفظ الموطأ اثنا عشر سنة

The age of Imam al Shafi’i, when he came to Imam Malik, having memorised al Muwatta’ already, was twelve years.

^[13]  Ibn Nasir al Din al Dimashqi: Ithaf al Salik bi Ruwat al Muwatta’ Imam Malik, pg. 141.

^[14]  Ibn al Fardi: Tarikh ‘Ulama’ al Andalus, 1/387.

^[15]  Al Qadi ‘Iyad: Tartib al Madarik, 3/129.

^[16]  Al Qadi ‘Iyad: Tartib al Madarik, 1/132.

^[17]  Al Qadi ‘Iyad: Tartib al Madarik, 1/132.

^[18]  Ahmed ibn Hanbal: al ‘Ilal, 2/72 (1586); Ibn ‘Abdul Barr: al Intiqa’ fi Fada’il al A’immah al Thalathah, pg. 49.

^[19]  Al Nasa’i: al Sunan al Kubra, book on marriage, chapter on the virgin’s granting of permission regarding herself, Hadith: 5352; Ibn ‘Abdul Barr: al Intiqa’ fi Fada’il al A’immah al Thalathah, pg. 54.

^[20]  Al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 10/39.

^[21]  See the description of the dress of scholars in the class of the Atba’ al Tabi’in by al Khatib al Baghdadi: al Jami’.

^[22]  Al Tahir ibn ‘Ashur: Kashf al Maghatta min al Ma’ani wa al Alfaz al Waqi’ah fi al Muwatta’.

^[23]  Muhammad al Tahir ibn ‘Ashur: Kashf al Maghatta, pg. 26. See what was narrated from Malik regarding equating ‘ard (presenting) with hearing or preferring ‘ard to hearing by Ibn Hajar in Fath al Bari, 1/149-150.

^[24]  Acquisition of hadith from a teacher.

^[25]  Al Ramahurmuzi: al Muhaddith al Fasil, pg. 437; al Khatib: al Kifayah, pg. 276.

^[26]  Al Hakim: Ma’rifat ‘Ulum al Hadith, pg. 259.

^[27]  Al Ramahurmuzi: al Muhaddith al Fasil, pg. 421; al Khatib: al Kifayah, pg. 273. His statement ‘is he from Iraq’ was a well-known expression from the people of Madinah against the people of Iraq. They would regard them to be innovators, but the situation changed with Malik when he recognised Ayub al Sakhtiyani, Humaid al Tawil, and other people of Basrah. See al Dhahabi’s discussion in al Siyar, 8/68, and see the high praise from Imam Malik for Ayub al Sakhtiyani, an Iraqi Basri, by Ibn ‘Adi: al Kamil, 1/189–191. I have indicated previously to the competition between the people of Madinah and the people of Iraq.

^[28]  Al Bukhari states in his Sahih, book on the virtues of the Ansar, chapter on the virtues of ‘Abdullah ibn Salam radiya Llahu ‘anhu, Hadith: 3812:

حدثنا عبد الله بن يوسف قال سمعت مالكا يحدث عن أبي النضر مولى عمر بن عبيد الله عن عامر بن سعد بن أبي وقاص عن أبيه قال ما سمعت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول لأحد يمشي على الأرض إنه من أهل الجنة إلا لعبد الله بن سلام قال وفيه نزلت هذه الآية وَشَهِدَ شَاهِدٌ مِّن بَنِىٓ إِسْرَٰٓءِيلَ عَلَىٰ مِثْلِهِ ( الأحقاف: ‎١٠‏) الآية قال أي عبد الله بن يوسف لا أدري قال مالك الآية أو في الحديث

‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf narrates: I heard Malik narrating from Abu al Nadr, the mawla of ‘Umar ibn ‘Ubaidullah — from ‘Amir ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas — from his father who said, “I have never heard the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam say regarding anyone walking on earth that he is one of the people of Jannat, except for ‘Abdullah ibn Salam.”

He said, “The following verse was revealed regarding him:

And a witness from the Children of Israel attests to it. (Surah al Ahqaf: 10)

 ‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf said: I do not know whether Malik said the verse or it appears in the hadith.

Ibn Hajar states in Fath al Bari, 7/130:

أي لا أدري هل قال مالك إن نزول هذه الآية في هذه القصة من قبل نفسه أو هو بهذا الإسناد وهذا الشك في ذلك من عبد الله بن يوسف شيخ البخاري وروى ابن منده في الإيمان من طريق إسحاق بن سيار عن عبد لله بن يوسف الحديث والزيادة وقال فيه قال إسحاق فقلت لعبد الله بن يوسف إن أبا مسهر حدثنا بهذا عن مالك ولم يذكر هذه الزيادة قال فقال عبد الله بن يوسف إن مالكا تكلم به عقب الحديث وكانت معي ألواحي فكتبت‏

That is, I do not know whether Malik mentioned the revelation of this verse in this story from his side or is it with this chain of transmission. This doubt comes from ‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf, the teacher of al Bukhari. Ibn Mandah narrated this hadith in the chapter on faith from Ishaq ibn Sayyar — from ‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf with the addition. He states that Ishaq said, “I said to ‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf that Abu Mus-hir narrated this to us from Malik and he did not mention this addition.”

He states that ‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf said. “Malik spoke about it after the hadith, and I had my tablets with me, so I wrote it down.”

Then Ibn Hajar preferred the error of that addition from ‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf because it contradicted the narrators of al Muwatta’.

^[29]  A humorous incident of the jurist ‘Abdul Malik ibn Maslamah in Malik’s gathering, ‘where there was oblivion and carelessness.’ Yahya ibn Bukayr states:

أبطأ علينا يوما حبيب كاتب مالك فقال مالك يقرأ بعضكم فقلنا لعبد الملك بن مسلمة اقرأ فجعل يقرأ فكلما مر باسم ابن شهاب قال شهاب فعل ذلك مرارا حتى ضجر مالك ضجرا شديدا من كثرة ما يرد عليه حتى هم ألا يحدثنا بشيء وقال ابن بكير كنا عند مالك فربما لم يحضر معنا عبد الملك فإذا انصرفنا أخذنا ألواحه فكتبنا فيه بعض ما سمعنا مما لم يسمعه فنقول له اقرأ ألواحك فيقرؤها ويقول حدثنا مالك حتى إذا فرغ منها ضحكنا منه وقال يحيى كنا نقول له كتبنا لك فيقول هي ألواحي وأنا كتبتها وسمعتها من مالك قال فنعجب منه ونضحك من شدة غفلته

One day, Habib—Malik’s scribe—was delayed, so Malik said, “One of you should read.”

We told ‘Abdul Malik ibn Maslamah to read. He began reading. Whenever he passed by the name of Ibn Shihab, he would say ‘Shihab’. He did that repeatedly until Malik scolded him severely for repeatedly correcting him, that he thought of not narrating anything.

Ibn Bukayr states, “We were by Malik. Sometimes ‘Abdul Malik would not come with us. When we would leave, we would take his tablets and write some of what we heard which he did not hear. Then we would tell him, ‘Read your tablets.’

He would read them and say, ‘Malik narrated to us.’

When he would finish reading, we would laugh at him.”

Yahya states that we would say to him, “We wrote for you.”

He would say, “They are my tablets. I wrote them and I heard them from Malik.”

He says, “We were amazed at him. We laughed at the severity of his negligence.”

‘Abdul Malik is Munkar al Hadith.

Ibn Bukayr states:

و قرأ لنا عند مالك في النذور فقال فقربت إليه جزا وفتى مكسورا فضحك مالك وقال جرو قثاء مكسورا عافاك الله

He recited to us by Malik about vows and said, “So I pushed near to him juz’ wa fatan maksur (a portion and a youngster cut in pieces).”

Malik laughed and said (correcting him), “Jirw qiththa’ maksur (a small cucumber cut in pieces), may Allah cure you.” (Ibn Yunus: al Tarikh, 1/326–327.)

^[30]  Al Khatib: al Jami’, 1/385.

^[31]  Al Khatib: al Jami’, 1/406. See other texts describing Malik’s preparation for his gatherings in Abu Nuaim: al Hilyah, 6/318.

^[32]  Ibn Abi Hatim: al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 2/268.

^[33]  These traditions appear in Ibn Ma’in’s description of Shu’bah’s gatherings. He was asked:

كيف كان شعبة يحدث فقال قراءة ما أملى عليهم حديثا قط بالبصرة ولا ببغداد وكان يقرأ عليهم بحوز مرقعة فينظر فيها بعضهم وبعض لاينظر ثم يقومون فينسخونها كلهم

How would Shu’bah narrate Hadith?

He replied, “He would read. He never dictated a single hadith to them in Basrah or Baghdad. He would recite to them from a piece of rag that some of them would look at and some would not look at. Then they would all get up and copy it. (Ibn Ma’in: al Tarikh, narration of Ibn Muhriz, ‎2/75 (160).)

^[34]  Critics discussed Ibrahim ibn Bashshar al Ramadi’s narration from Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah pertaining to his Hadith gatherings. Ahmed ibn Hanbal said:

كان يحضر معنا عند سفيان بن عيينة فكان يملي على الناس ما يسمعون من سفيان فكان ربما أملى عليهم ما لم يسمعوا قال كأنه يغير الألفاظ فتكون زيادة ليس في الحديث… فقلت له يوما ألا تتقي الله ويحك تملي عليهم ما لم يسمعوا

He used to attend Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah with us. He would dictate to the people what they heard from Sufyan. Sometimes he dictated to them what they did not hear. It is as if he was changing the words. This would be an addition, which was not in the Hadith… So one day I said to him, “Don’t you fear Allah? Shame on you, you dictate to them what they did not hear.”

Ahmed did not praise him for that, rather, he criticised him severely. (Ahmed ibn Hanbal: al ‘Ilal, 3/438 (5865).) See another description of Sufyan’s dictation gatherings by Ibn Ma’in: al Tarikh, narration by Ibn Muhriz, 2/75 (159).

^[35]  Ibn Ma’in: al Tarikh, narration by Ibn Muhriz, 2/77 (169).

^[36]  Ibn Ma’in: al Tarikh, narration by Ibn Muhriz, 2/78 (171).

^[37]  The issue of Hadith gatherings and their development requires a special, independent study, in which the development of these gatherings is examined and attention is given to what was reported from al Zuhri, what was reported from his students, and the comparison between them. Among the reports from al Zuhri is that Sima’ of Ibn Abi Dhi’b was through ‘ard. Some say it was munawalah. Similar is the case about Ibn Jurayj’s Sima’ from him. (Ibn Ma’in: al Tarikh, narration by Ibn Muhriz, 2/126 (624); Ibn Ma’in: al Tarikh, narration by Ibn Muhriz, 3/178 (794).)

Abu Zur’ah states regarding the Hadith of Salih ibn Abi al Akhdar from al Zuhri:

كان عنده عن الزهري كتابان أحدهما عرض والآخر مناولة فاختلطا جميعا فلا يعرف هذا من هذا

He had two books from al Zuhri, one of which was through ‘ard, and the other was through munawalah. They were all mixed up; hence, one could not be differentiated from the other. (Al Dhahabi, Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 7/304.)

 Al Dhahabi states in Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 6/330:

وكان ابن جريج يروي الرواية بالإجازة وبالمناولة ويتوسع في ذلك ومن ثم دخل عليه الداخل في رواياته عن الزهري لأنه حمل عنه مناولة وهذه الأشياء يدخلها التصحيف ولا سيما في ذلك العصر لم يكن حدث في الخط بعد شكل ولانقطة

Ibn Jurayj used to narrate narration through ijazah and through munawalah, and he was lenient in that. As a result, an intruder entered upon him in his narrations from al Zuhri because he acquired it from him through Munawalah. These things are susceptible to misprinting; especially in that era, as forms and dots were not yet invented in the handwriting.

^[38]  Al Dhahabi: al Muqizah, pg. 77.

^[39]  I derived this idea from Professor Dr. Bekir Kuzudişli in extensive discussions during the writing of the draft of this treatise for students between the years 2012 to 2015. Then he mentioned it in his book Tarikh al Hadith, (Bekir Kuzudişli: Hadis Tarihi, pg. 109.)

^[40]  In addition, some of his contemporaries too. Regarding Ma’mar ibn Rashid al Basri, the author of al Jami’, Imam Ahmed is reported to have said:

هذا أول من رحل إلى اليمن وإلى الجزيرة

He is the first to travel to Yemen and to the Arabian Peninsula. (Ibn Hani’: al Masa’il, pg. 470 (2128).)

^[41]  Sunan al Tirmidhi, chapters on knowledge from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, chapter on what was reported regarding the scholar of Madinah, Hadith: 268. He states:

حديث حسن وهو حديث ابن عيينة وقد روي عن ابن عيينة أنه قال في هذا سئل من عالم المدينة فقال إنه مالك بن أنس وقال إسحاق بن موسى سمعت ابن عيينة‎ يقول هو العمري الزاهد وسمعت يحيى بن موسى يقول قال عبد الرزاق هو مالك بن‎ أنس والعمري هو عبد العزيز بن عبد الله من ولد عمر بن الخطاب

This is a hassan hadith. It is the hadith of Ibn ‘Uyaynah. Ibn ‘Uyaynah was asked regarding this, “Who is the scholar of Madinah?”

He said, “He is Malik ibn Anas.”

Ishaq ibn Musa said, “I heard Ibn ‘Uyaynah saying that he is al ‘Umari, the ascetic, and I heard Yahya ibn Musa saying, ‘‘Abdur Razzaq said that he is Malik ibn Anas.’”

Al ‘Umari is ‘Abdul ‘Aziz ibn ‘Abdullah, from the descendants of ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

Based on this text of al Tirmidhi, Ibn ‘Uyaynah’s statement about him differed. Ibn ‘Abdul Barr reported in al Intiqa’ fi Fada’il al A’immah al Thalathah al Fuqaha’, pg. 50, the details of this from al Zubair ibn Bakkar who said:

كان سفيان بن عيينة إذا حدث‎ بهذا الحديث في حياة مالك قال أراه مالكا فأقام على ذلك زمانا ثم رجع بعد ذلك فقال‎ أراه عبد الله بن عبد العزيز العمري

Whenever Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah narrated this hadith during the lifetime of Malik, he would say, “I think it is Malik.”

He held this view for a while. Then he retracted and said, “I think he is ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abdul ‘Aziz al ‘Umari.”

This means that both statements are proven from him. Then Ibn ‘Abdul Barr said:

ليس العمري هذا ممن يلحق في العلم والفقه بمالك بن أنس وإن كان عابدا شريفا

This al ‘Umari cannot be compared to Malik ibn Anas in knowledge and fiqh, even though he was an honourable worshipper.

I thank Professor Muhammad Amanah for assisting me in this successful transmission.

^[42]  Al Qadi ‘Iyad: Tartib al Madarik, 3/117; Ibn Yunus: al Tarikh, 2/87; al Dhahabi: Tarikh al Islam, 4/1104.

^[43]  Ibn ‘Abdul Barr: al Intiqa’ fi Fada’il al A’immah al Thalathah, pg. 106; al Qadi ‘Iyad: Tartib al Madarik, 3/381; al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 10/520.

^[44]  Al Humaidi: Jadhwat al Muqtabis, pg. 382 – 383; al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 10/521.

^[45]  Abu Nuaim al Isfahani: Hilyat al Auliya’, 6/323.

^[46]  Islamic scholars paid attention to enumerating Imam Malik’s students. Al Daraqutni, Abu Nuaim al Isfahani, al Khatib al Baghdadi, al Qadi ‘Iyad, al Dhahabi, and others authored concerning the narrators. Al Qadi ‘Iyad mentioned in Jamharat Ruwat Malik more than 1300 narrators and stipulated it as their number in Tartib al Madarik, 1/13; 2/170. Al Dhahabi enumerated them to be 1400, as stated in al Siyar, 8/52. He mentioned them separately in a large compilation. This is the number of all those who narrated from him. As for those who narrated al Muwatta’ from him specifically, they were much less. Al Qadi ‘Iyad enumerated some of the most eminent and famous amongst them in Tartib al Madarik, 2/86. Hafiz Ibn Nasir al Din al Dimashqi embarked on investigating all of their names in Ithaf al Salik bi Ruwat al Muwatta’ ‘an Imam Malik, pg. 124-469. There were 79 narrators, who were reported to have narrated al Muwatta’.

^[47]  ‘Abdullah ibn Imam Ahmed states:

سألت أبي عمن طلب العلم ترى له أن يلزم رجلا عنده علم فيكتب عنه أو ترى أن يرحل إلى المواضع التي فيها العلم فيسمع منهم قال يرحل يكتب عن الكوفيين والبصريين وأهل المدينة ومكة والشام يشام الناس يسمع منهم

I asked my father about someone who desired to seek knowledge. Do you think he should attach himself to a person who possesses knowledge and write from him, or he should go to places where there is knowledge and hear from them?

He said, “He should go and write about the people of Kufah, Basrah, Madinah, Makkah, and the Greater Syria. He should sniff out the people and hear from them.

(Ahmed ibn Hanbal: Masa’il, narration of his son ‘Abdullah, pg. 349 (1588); al Khatib al Baghdadi: al Rihlah fi Talab al Hadith, pg. 88.)

Ibn Ma’in said:

أربعة لا تؤنس منهم رشدا… ورجل يكتب في بلده ولا يرحل في طلب الحديث

Four people are such that no guidance can be expected from them …and a man who writes in his country and does not travel in search of Hadith. (Al Khatib: al Rihlah, pg. 98.)

^[48]  Ibn Nasir al Din al Dimashqi: Ithaf al Salik bi Ruwat al Muwatta’ ‘an Imam Malik, pg. 147 onwards; al A’zami: Muqaddamat al Muwatta’, 1/212 – 213.

^[49]  Ahmed ibn Hanbal: al ‘Ilal, 2/321 (2423).

^[50]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: al Kifayah fi ‘Ilm al Riwayah, pg. 309.

^[51]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: al Kifayah fi ‘Ilm al Riwayah, pg. 332- 333.

^[52]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: al Kifayah fi ‘Ilm al Riwayah, pg. 333.

^[53]  The issue of the development of the forms of wordings for acquisition in the era of the Atba’ al Tabi’in needs an independent study, wherein this development appears along with the development of the criticism that accompanies it. There are very many reports on that. From amongst that is al Humaidi’s stance on prohibiting some of his students from listening to Mutarrif ibn ‘Abdullah’s narration of al Muwatta’—Mutarrif was his neighbour in Makkah. He preferred al Qa’nabi’s narration to it because he preferred listening to reading and because the people of Madinah used to regard ‘ard as the same as sima’ and they were also negligent with regards to ‘ard. Furthermore, Ismail ibn Abi Uways used to say about al Muwatta’ gatherings:

كان‏ يقرأ عليه لقد كنت أحيانا أكون داخل الحجرة ويقرأ على مالك خارجا من الحجرة فكان ذلك يجزئ

Al Muwatta’ would be recited to him. Sometimes I would be inside the room and it would be read to Malik outside the room, and that was sufficient.

Al Humaidi disliked that. (Al Fasawi: al Ma’rifah wa al Tarikh, 2/177.)

^[54]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: al Kifayah fi ‘Ilm al Riwayah, pg. 327

^[55]  Habib used to read to Malik. When the gathering ended and the students would ask him to compare his book with their copies, he would take two dinars for each presentation from each person and he would sometimes deceive them, presenting five pages to them and saying, “I presented ten.”

Ibn Ma’in—or someone else—used to say:

أشر السماع من مالك عرض حبيب

The worst sima’ (hearing) from Malik is the ‘ard of Habib.

(Ibn Abi Khaythamah: al Tarikh al Kabir, 2/366-367; Ibn ‘Adi: al Kamil, 4/127.

Ibn Hibban said about him:

روي عن مالك وربيعة كان يورق بالمدينة على الشيوخ ويروي عن الثقات الموضوعات كان يدخل عليهم ما ليس من أحاديثهم فكل من سمعه بعرضه فسماعه ليس بشيء فإنه كان إذا قرأ أخذ الجزء بيده ولم يعطهم النسخ ثم يقرأ البعض ويترك البعض ويقول قد قرأت كله ثم يعطيهم فينسخونها فسماع ابن بكير وقتيبة عن مالك كان بعرض حبيب

He narrated from Malik and Rabi’ah. He was a scribe for the sheikhs in Madinah. He narrates fabricated narrations from reliable narrators. He would introduce narrations that were not from their ahadith. Whoever heard it from his ‘ard, his sima’ is worthless. When he would read, he would take the compilation in his hand and not give them the copies. Then he would read some, leave some, and say, “I have read all of it.” Thereafter, he would give it to them and they would copy it. The sima’ of Ibn Bukayr and Qutaybah from Malik was through the ‘ard of Habib.

(Ibn Hibban: al Majruhin, 1/265. See his biography by al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 5/366-370.)

^[56]  Ibn Ma’in: al Tarikh, narration by Ibn Muhriz, 1/125-126 (623).

^[57]  Ibn Abi Hatim: al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 5/189.

^[58]  Ibn Hibban: al Thiqat, 7/459; Ibn Manjuwayh: Rijal Sahih Muslim, 2/220.

^[59]  Ahmed ibn Hanbal said:

ما روى مالك عن أحد إلا وهو ثقة كل من روى عنه مالك فهو ثقة

Malik did not narrate from anyone except that he is thiqah. Whomever Malik narrated from is thiqah. (Ibn Hani’: Masa’il, pg. 504 (2360).

^[60]  Muslim: Muqaddamat al Sahih, 1/26; Ibn ‘Adi: al Kamil, 1/246; al Ramahurmuzi: al Muhaddith al Fasil, pg. 410. Imam al Dhahabi commented on his statement and said:

فهذا‏ القول يعطيك بأنه لا يروي إلا عمن هو عنده ثقة ولا يلزم من ذلك أنه يروي عن كل الثقات ثم لا يلزم مما قال أن كل من روى عنه وهو عنده ثقة أن يكون ثقة عند باقي الحفاظ فقد يخفى عليه من حال شيخه ما يظهر لغيره إلا أنه بكل حال كثير التحري في نقد الرجال رحمه الله

This statement gives you a notion that he only narrated from someone who is thiqah according to him. This does not mean that he narrates from all the thiqah narrators. Moreover, his statement that everyone who he narrated from is thiqah according to him does not necessitate that he must be thiqah according to the rest of the scholars. At times, the condition of his sheikh might be hidden from him but exposed to others. However, in every case, he did thorough investigations in analysing narrators. May Allah have mercy on him.

^[61]  Ibn ‘Adi: al Kamil, 1/246; al ‘Ala’i: Bughyat al Multamis, pg. 74; Ibn Rajab: Sharh ‘Ilal al Tirmidhi, 1:460, 2/879. Thereafter, in the last instance, he states:

وهذا على إطلاقه فيه نظر فإن مالكا لم يحدث عن سعد بن إبراهيم وهو ثقة جليل متفق عليه

This, in general, is debatable, as Malik did not narrate from Sa’d ibn Ibrahim, whereas he is thiqah and eminent unanimously.

Then he mentioned the statement of Ismail al Qadi, ‎1/381:

إنما يعتبر بمالك في أهل بلده فأما الغرباء فليس يحتج به فيهم وبنحو هذا اعتذر غير واحد عن مالك في روايته عن عبد الكريم بن أبي أمية وغيره من الغرباء

Malik’s view is only considered for the people of his city. As for foreigners, he cannot be used to judge them. Hence, several scholars have excused Malik for narrating from ‘Abdul Karim ibn Abi Umayyah and other foreigners.

As for Imam Malik’s abandoning of Sa’d ibn Ibrahim al Zuhri, who is one of the senior thiqah narrators of Madinah, it was not because of regarding him as da’if, but rather due to an incident between them. (Refer to al Fasawi: al Ma’rifah wa al Tarikh, ‎1/411, 3/31.) Alternatively, because he did not narrate in Madinah, as ‘Ali ibn al Madini mentioned. (Ibn Abi Hatim: al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 4/79; al Bukhari: al Tarikh al Kabir, 4/51.) See Ibn Hajar’s defence of Sa’d in Fath al Bari, 2/378 and see the biography of Sa’d in al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, ‎1/244. As for ‘Abdul Karim ibn Abi Umayyah, Ibn ‘Abdul Barr said about him in al Tamhid, 20/65:

لقيه مالك بمكة فروى عنه له عنه في الموطأ من مرفوع الأثر حديث واحد فيه ثلاثة أحاديث مرسلة تتصل من غير روايته وتستند من وجوه صحاح وعبد الكريم هذا ضعيف لا يختلف أهل العلم بالحديث في ضعفه إلا أن منهم من يقبله في غير الأحكام خاصة ولا يحتج به على حال ومن أجل من جرحه واطرحه أبو العالية وأيوب السختياني تكلم فيه مع ورعه ثم شعبة والقطان وأحمد بن حنبل وعلي بن المديني ويحيى بن معين… وكان حسن السمت غر مالكا منه سمته ولم يكن من أهل بلده فيعرفه كما غر الشافعي من إبراهيم بن أبي يحيى حذقه وبناهته فروى عنه وهو أيضا مجتمع على تجريحه وضعفه ولم يخرج مالك عن عبد الكريم بن أبي المخارق حكما في موطئه وإنما ذكر فيه عنه ترغيبا وفضلا

Malik met him in Makkah and narrated from him. Malik narrated one marfu’ hadith from him in al Muwatta’. It contains three mursal ahadith, which are muttasil (uninterruptedly linked) through other narrations and are linked through authentic chains of transmissions. This ‘Abdul Karim is da’if. The scholars of Hadith do not differ regarding his weakness, however, some of them accept his narrations in other than rulings, specifically, and do not use it as evidence in any situation. The most prominent of those who criticised him and rejected him are Abu al ‘Aliyah and Ayub al Sakhtiyani. Despite his piety, Shu’bah, al Qattan, Ahmed ibn Hanbal, ‘Ali ibn al Madini, and Yahya ibn Ma’in criticised him. He was of good character. Malik was deceived by his character, as he was not from his city where he would know him, just as al Shafi’i was deceived by Ibrahim ibn Abi Yahya due to his brilliance and intelligence, so he narrated from him. His criticism and tad’if is also unanimously agreed upon. Malik did not narrate any narration of ruling from ‘Abdul Karim ibn Abi al Mukhariq in his al Muwatta’. He only mentioned narrations of encouragement and virtue. (Ibn Hajar: Tahdhib al Tahdhib, 6/378.)

^[62]  Al Ramahurmuzi: al Muhaddith al Fasil, pg. 403–404; Ibn ‘Abdul Barr: al Intiqa’ fi Fada’il al A’immah al Thalathah, pg. 47.

^[63]  Ibn ‘Adi: al Kamil, 1/347.

^[64]  Al Qadi ‘Iyad: Tartib al Madarik, 1/139. See Malik’s statement regarding al ‘Attaf ibn Khalid by al ‘Uqayli: al Du’afa’, 3/425, wherein he says:

ويكتب عن مثل عطاف بن خالد لقد أدركت في هذا المسجد سبعين شيخا كلهم خير من عطاف ما كتبت عن أحد منهم وإنما يكتب العلم عن قوم قد جرى فيهم العلم مثل عبيد الله بن عمر وأشباهه

Can one write from someone like ‘Attaf ibn Khalid? I have met seventy sheikhs in this Masjid. All of them were better than ‘Attaf; I did not write from any of them. Rather, knowledge is written from people in whom knowledge has flowed, such as ‘Ubaidullah ibn ‘Umar and others like him.

However, Ahmed, Ibn Ma’in, Abu Dawood, and others declared him to be thiqah. See his biography by al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 20/138 -142. It is as if Imam Malik’s focus was on his fiqh and knowledge.

^[65]  Ibn ‘Abdul Barr: al Tamhid, 1/67.

^[66]  Ibn Ma’in: al Tarikh, 3/116 (479); Ma’rifat al Rijal, 1/120; al Muqaddam: al Tarikh, pg. 206; Ahmed ibn Hanbal: al ‘Ilal, 2/348; Ibn Abi Hatim: al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 1/15, 592.

^[67]  ‘Abdullah said:

 كنت أنا وعلي بن المديني فذكرنا أثبت من يروي عن الزهري فقال علي سفيان بن عبينة وقلت أنا مالك بن أنس وقلت مالك أقل خطأ عن الزهري وابن عيينة يخطئ في نحو من عشرين حديثا عن الزهري في حديث كذا وحديث كذا فذكرت منها ثمانية عشر حديثا وقلت هات ما أخطأ فيه مالك فجاء بحديثين أو ثلاثة فرجعت فنظرت فيما أخطأ فيه ابن عيينة فإذا هي أكثر من عشرين حديثا

I heard my father saying, “I was with ‘Ali ibn al Madini. We were discussing the most reliable person who narrates from al Zuhri. ‘Ali said that it was Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah. I said, “Malik ibn Anas.”

Furthermore, I said, “Malik makes fewer mistakes from al Zuhri. Ibn ‘Uyaynah makes mistakes in about twenty ahadith from al Zuhri. He makes mistakes in such-and-such hadith and such-and-such hadith.” I mentioned eighteen such ahadith and said, “Show me what Malik made a mistake in.” He brought two or three ahadith. Thereafter, I went back and looked at what Ibn ‘Uyaynah made a mistake in and found that they were more than twenty ahadith. (Ahmed ibn Hanbal: al ‘Ilal, ‎2/349 (2543).)

See what can be derived from this incident according to al Hazimi: Shurut al A’immah al Khamsah, pg. 126-128.

^[68]  Abu Nuaim al Asbahani: Hilyat al Auliya’, 6/322.

^[69]  Ibn Abi Hatim: Adab al Shafi’i wa Manaqibuhu, pg. 199; Abu Nuaim al Asbahani: Hilyat al Auliya’, 6/322.

^[70]  Ahmed ibn Hanbal: al ‘Ilal, 2/215 (2056). See Ibn Hajar’s critical comment in Tahdhib al Tahdhib, 11/343 on Ibn ‘Abdul Barr’s criticism of ‘Abdur Razzaq in this incident.

^[71]  Ibn Khalfun: Asma’ Shuyukh Malik, pg. 95; al Qadi ‘Iyad: Tartib al Madarik, 1/185.

^[72]  Ibn ‘Abdul Barr states in Fada’il al A’immah al Thalathah, pg. 94:

يقولون إن مالكا رحمه الله لم يكتب إلى أحد كتابا يعنونه بالفقيه إلا إلى ابن وهب وكان رجلا صالحا خائفا لله كان سبب موته أنه قرئ عليه كتاب الأهوال من جامعه فأخذه شيء كالغشي فحمل إلى داره فلم يزل كذلك إلى أن قضى نحبه

They say that Malik rahimahu Llah did not write a letter to anyone addressing him as a Faqih (jurist) except to Ibn Wahb. He was a righteous Allah-fearing man. The cause of his death was that the book of ahwal (terrifying occurrences) was read to him from his al Jami’. He was overtaken by fear and fainted. He was taken to his home and remained in that state until he passed away.

^[73]  Ibn Abi Hatim: Muqaddamat al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 1/21-22; Ibn Hibban: al Majruhin, and his wording is:

اقتدينا في العلم بأربعة اثنان بمصر واثنان بالمدينة الليث بن سعد وعمرو‎ ‏ابن الحارث بمصر ومالك والماجشون بالمدينة لولا هؤلاء لكنا‎ ضالين

We followed four people in knowledge, two in Egypt and two in Madinah. Al Layth ibn Sa’d and ‘Amr ibn al Harith in Egypt and Malik and al Majishun in Madinah. If it were not for these, we would have gone astray.

^[74]  Al Qadi ‘Iyad: Tartib al Madarik, 3/236.

^[75]  In this topic refer to the book of our teacher Sheikh Muhammad ‘Awwamah: Athar al Hadith al Sharif fi Ikhtilaf A’immah al Fuqaha’.

^[76]  Al Bayhaqi: al Sunan al Kubra, 5/567.