(*) Al-Bukhari, al-Tarikh al-kabir, 6/284; idem, al-Tarikh al-saghir, 2/363; al-Fasawi, Tarikh, 1/210; al-Uqayli, al-Duafaʾ, fol. 297; Ibn Abi Hatim, al-Jarh wa-l-taʿdil, 6/193-194 and 1/314, 320; Ibn al-Nadim, al-Fihrist, 286; al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Tarikh Baghdad, 11/458, 473; al-Shirazi, Tabaqat al-fuqahaʾ, 1/84-85; Ibn Abi Yaʿla, Tabaqat al-Hanabila, 1/225, 228; al-Nawawi, Tahdhib al-asmaʾ wa-l-lughat, 1/350-351; al-Mizzi, Tahdhib al-kamal, fols. 980, 984; al-Dhahabi, Tadhkirat al-huffaz, 2/428-429; idem, al-ʿIbar, 1/418; idem, Mizan al-iʿtidal, 3/138, 141; Ibn Hajar, Tadhhib al-tahdhib, 3/67, 69; al-Subki, Tabaqat al-shafiʿiyya, 2/145, 150; Ibn Kathir, al-Bidaya wa-l-nihaya, 10/312; Ibn Hajar, Tahdhib al-tahdhib, 7/349, 357; Ibn Taghribirdi, al-Nujum al-zahira, 2/276-277; al-Suyuti, Tabaqat al-huffaz, 184; Ibn Hajar, Khulasat tadhhib al-kamal, 275; Ibn al-ʿImad, Shadharat al-dhahab, 2/81. (1) The author, al-Dhahabi—may Allah have mercy on him—harshly rebuked al-ʿUqayli for listing ʿAli b. al-Madini in his book al-Duafaʾ (Weak Narrators). In his Mizan al-iʿtidal, 3/140-141, he writes: “He slipped once but then repented. This is Abu ʿAbd Allah al-Bukhari— and that is recommendation enough— who has filled his Sahih with hadith transmitted by ʿAli b. al-Madini. If you were to abandon the hadith of ʿAli, of his colleague Muhammad, of their teacher ʿAbd al-Razzaq, and of ʿUthman b. Abi Shayba, we would have to close the door; speech would cease, the traditions would die, the heretics would prevail, and the Dajjal would emerge. Have you no sense, O ʿUqayli? Do you realise about whom you are speaking? We have only followed you in mentioning this group so that we might defend them and refute what has been said against them. It is as though you do not know that each one of these men is many degrees more reliable than you, indeed more reliable than a host of trustworthy narrators you omitted from your book—something no hadith scholar doubts. I would like you to show me the unimpeachable, infallible narrator who never erred or reported something for which he has no corroboration. Rather, when a reliable hafiz stands alone with a number of hadith, that actually elevates him, perfects his rank, and proves his devotion to the science of tradition; he has preserved material that his peers missed, unless a particular mistake of his becomes evident and is then acknowledged. First look at the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and grant him peace, both senior and junior: not one of them failed to transmit a sunna for which he alone is the source, so people say to him, ‘This hadith has no corroboration!’ The same holds for the Successors (tabiʿun); each of them possessed knowledge that another did not. That, however, is not our present concern, for this matter is well established in the science of hadith. When a trustworthy, precise narrator (thiqah mutqin) is the sole transmitter of a report, it is classified as sahih gharib (sound yet solitary). When the solitary transmitter is merely saduq (truthful) or lower, the report is deemed munkar (denounced). Furthermore, if a narrator produces too many reports that are not corroborated—whether in wording or chain—he becomes matruk (abandoned).