Ghayat al-Maram fi Takhrij Ahadith al-Halal wa-l-HaramNasir al-Din al-Albani

I say: Both versions are correctly preserved—the one in which the Companion is omitted and the one with a connected chain. The defect lies with Abū Yahyā himself: because of his weakness and poor memory, he would sometimes omit the Companion and at other times give the report a connected chain. Al-Amash therefore narrated it from him in both forms; Qutbah accurately retained one and Sufyān the other.

As for Sharīk’s omission of Abū Yahyā, it is anomalous—indeed, objectionable—for Sharīk, in addition to his weakness and the poor memory for which he was notorious, contradicted the two trustworthy narrators, Qutbah and Sufyān.

In sum, the hadith is weak because of al-Qattāt’s weakness and his inconsistency in narrating its chain: sometimes he gave it a connected chain, and at other times he omitted the Companion. Through his route, al-Tabarānī narrated it in al-Mujam al-Kabīr (2/110/3). I later saw that Ibn Abī Hātim included it in al-Ilal (2/242) through Sharīk with the same chain, except that he said: “From Ibn Abbas or another Companion of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).” He also cited it through another route from him with the same chain, except that he reversed the attribution in the chain and said: “From Ibn Umar or another Companion of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).” He also narrated it by way of Ubayd Allah ibn Mūsā, from al-Amash, from Mujāhid, directly from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), with the Companion omitted. I say: It is as though he intended to point out the hadith’s defect and weakness arising from the conflicting chains and the omission of the Companion. Allah knows best.

Another form of this inconsistency is the report narrated by Muhammad ibn Mūsā al-Harashī: Ziyād ibn Abdullah narrated to us, from al-Amash, from al-Minhāl ibn Amr, from Mujāhid, from Ibn Abbas.

Ibn Adī narrated it (1/143).

Another is what Abū Jafar al-Rāzī narrated from Layth, from Mujāhid, from Ibn Umar:

“He disliked inciting animals against one another.”

Al-Bukhārī narrated it in al-Adab al-Mufrad (1232).

384 — (The two Sahīh collections narrate from Abū Hurayrah, who said: “While the Abyssinians

وأقول: كلاهما صحيح : المرسل والمسند ، وإنما العلة من أبي يحيى نفسه فإنه لضعفه ، وسوء حفظه كان تارة يرسله ، وتارة يسنده ، فرواه الأعمش عنه على الوجهين ، فحفظ أحدهما قطبة والآخر سفيان . وأما إسقاط شريك لأبي يحيى ، فشاذ بل منكر ، لأن شريكاً مع ضعفه وسوء حفظه الذي اشتهر به فقد خالف الثقتين قطبة وسفيان . وبالجملة فالحديث ضعيف ، لضعف القنات ، واضطرابه في إسناده ، فتارة يسنده وأخرى يرسله . ومن طريقه أخرجه الطبراني في « المعجم الكبير » ( ٢/١١٠/٣ ) . ثم رأيت ابن أبي حاتم أورده في « العلل » ( ٢/٢٤٢ ) من طريق شريك به إلا أنه قال : « عن ابن عباس أو غيره من أصحاب النبي ﷺ » . ومن طريق أخرى عنه به إلا أنه عكس الإسناد فقال : عن ابن عمر أو غيره من أصحاب النبي ﷺ . ومن طريق عبيد الله بن موسى عن الأعمش عن مجاهد عن النبي ﷺ مرسل . قلت : وكأنه يشير إلى إعلال الحديث وتضعيفه بالاضطراب والإرسال . والله أعلم . ومن وجوه الاضطراب ما رواه محمد بن موسى الحرشي ثنا زياد بن عبد الله عن الأعمش عن المنهال بن عمرو عن مجاهد عن ابن عباس : أخرجه ابن عدي ( ١/١٤٣ ) . وما رواه أبو جعفر الرازي عن ليث عن مجاهد عن ابن عمر « أنه كره أن يحرش بين البهائم » . أخرجه البخاري في « الأدب المفرد » ( ١٢٣٢ ) . ٣٨٤ - ( روى الصحيحان عن أبي هريرة قال : بينما الحبشة

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies