As for what (1) Abū Nuaym relates in al-Hilyah (The Adornment) or Fadā'il al-Khulafā' (Virtues of the Caliphs), and what al-Naqqāsh, al-Tha'labī, al-Wāhidī, and others like them relate in works of tafsīr, hadith experts have (2) agreed that much of what (3) they narrate is fabricated falsehood. They have also agreed that the aforementioned hadith, which al-Tha'labī related in his tafsīr (4), is fabricated. We shall present evidence by which it may be known that it is (5) fabricated. Moreover, [al-Tha'labī] (6) is not among those who possess knowledge * of hadith.
The point here, however, is to state a general principle: transmitted reports contain much truth and much falsehood * (7). In distinguishing between the two, recourse must be made to hadith scholars (8), just as we refer to grammarians to distinguish Arabic grammar from non-Arabic grammar (9), and to linguists to determine what belongs to the language and what does not. The same applies to scholars of poetry, medicine, and other disciplines, for every discipline has its recognized authorities,
(1) (S) and (B) read: “And what.”
(2) (S) and (B) read: *qad* (“indeed”), rather than *fa-qad* (“and indeed”).
(3) (N), (M), and (S) read: “that what.”
(4) A biography of Abū Ishāq Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Ibrāhīm al-Naysābūrī al-Tha‘labī (d. 427 AH) appeared above, 2:27. I noted there that his Quranic commentary, *al-Kashf wa-al-Bayān fī Tafsīr al-Qur’ān* (*Unveiling and Elucidation in Quranic Exegesis*), was unpublished. See also al-Dāwūdī, *Tabaqāt al-Mufassirīn* (*Classes of Quranic Exegetes*), 1:65–66; *Mu‘jam al-Mu’allifīn* (*Biographical Dictionary of Authors*), 2:60. In his article on al-Tha‘labī in the *Encyclopaedia of Islam*, Brockelmann states concerning al-Tha‘labī’s tafsīr: According to Ibn Taghrī Birdī, Ibn al-Jawzī criticized it because al-Tha‘labī relied on weak reports, particularly in the early surahs. See also *al-Bidāya wa-al-Nihāya* (*The Beginning and the End*), 12:40, where Ibn Kathīr says: “He knew many hadiths and had heard widely; hence, his books contain a great many unusual reports.”
(5) The word “that it” is absent from (M).
(6) The name “al-Tha‘labī” is absent from all the manuscripts; it is required to complete the sentence.
(7) The passage between the two asterisks is absent from (M).
(8) The text reads: “to the knowledge of hadith scholars”; (S) and (B) read: “to the science of hadith.”
(9) (S) and (B) read: “and what is not Arabic grammar.”