despite his having narrated from Anas: neither Yahyā ibn Saīd al-Qattān, Wakī, Abū Muāwiya, Abū Nuaym, Yahyā ibn Ādam, nor any of their peers narrated from him. This was despite the many Shiites in Kufa and the fact that many of its common people preferred Ali to Uthman, while the compilers of the Six Books narrated reports from such people. Indeed, even al-Tirmidhī and Ibn Mājah would sometimes narrate from weak transmitters, yet none of them narrated from Matar. The only person who narrated from him was Ubayd Allāh ibn Mūsā, because he was a man of sectarian bias inclined toward Shiism. His bias led him to narrate from this man and others like him, even if they were liars.

For this reason, Ahmad did not write down reports from Ubayd Allāh ibn Mūsā (1), though he did write from Abd al-Razzāq. Ahmad also stated that Ubayd Allāh (2) openly displayed his views, unlike Abd al-Razzāq.

Among the fabrications of this Matar is the report transmitted by Abū Bakr al-Khatīb in his History through Ubayd Allāh ibn Mūsā, from Matar (3), from Anas. He said:

“I was with the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—when he saw Ali approaching and said, ‘This man and I are Allah’s proof against my community on the Day of Resurrection.’”

Ibn al-Jawzī (4) said: “This is a fabricated hadith, and Matar is the one accused of fabricating it. Abū Hātim said, ‘He narrates fabricated reports from reliable transmitters; it is not permissible to narrate from him.’”

The third point is that Ali did not settle the debt of the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—(5),