Minhaj as-Sunnah - Ibn Taimiya - (8/191)

Minhaj as-SunnahIbn Taimiya

its falsity on several grounds. For although Dāwūd ibn Farāhīj was judged weak—Shu‘bah considered him weak, and al-Nasā’ī said, “He is weak in hadith”—the chain of transmission back to him is not established. It includes Yazīd ibn ‘Abd al-Malik al-Nawfalī, who narrated it from him and from ‘Imārah.

Al-Bukhārī said: “His hadith amount to almost nothing,” and judged him extremely weak. Al-Nasā’ī said: “He is abandoned [weak] (1) as a hadith narrator.” Al-Dāraqutnī said: “His hadith are exceedingly objectionable.” Ahmad said: “He has objectionable reports.” Al-Dāraqutnī also said: “He is weak.”

And if (2) he did narrate it to Ibrāhīm ibn Sa‘īd al-Jawharī, then the fault lies with this man. Although it may be said that its transmission has not been established back to either Ibrāhīm ibn Sa‘īd al-Jawharī or Ibn Hawsā’ (3), these two are well known, and their hadith are well known and have been transmitted from them by others (4). Thus, when Ibn Hawsā’ narrated the first route of transmission, the chain back to him was known, and he narrated it through known chains; the fault, however, lies with someone after him. In this chain, by contrast, those before Ibn Hawsā’ are unknown (5). Even supposing that its transmission from him is established, the fault lies after him.

Abū al-Faraj ibn al-Jawzī mentioned that Ibn Mardawayh narrated it through Dāwūd ibn Farāhīj and noted Ibn Farāhīj’s weakness. Moreover, the chain of transmission back to him is also open to criticism.

The compiler said: “As for Abū Sa‘īd al-Khudrī’s report, Muhammad ibn

(1) Da'īf (“weak”) is an addition in (m). (2) n, s, b: “Weak, if…” This is an error. (3) s: “No one established it except Ibrāhīm ibn Sa'īd al-Jawharī, nor back to Ibn Hawsā'”; b: “No one established it except Ibrāhīm ibn Sa'īd al-Jawharī, and except Ibn Hawsā'…” (4) All manuscripts read: “For these two are well known, and their hadith are well known and have been transmitted from them by others.” This is an error. (5) n, m, s: “And they are not known.”

كَذِبُهُ مِنْ وُجُوهٍ ; فَإِنَّهُ وَإِنْ كَانَ دَاوُدُ بْنُ فَرَاهِيجَ مُضَعَّفًا، كَانَ شُعْبَةُ يُضَعِّفُهُ، وَقَالَ النَّسَائِيُّ: ضَعِيفُ الْحَدِيثِ لَا يَثْبُتُ الْإِسْنَادُ إِلَيْهِ، فَإِنَّ فِيهِ يَزِيدَ بْنَ عَبْدِ الْمَلِكِ النَّوْفَلِيَّ، وَهُوَ الَّذِي رَوَاهُ عَنْهُ وَعَنْ عِمَارَةَ. قَالَ الْبُخَارِيُّ: أَحَادِيثُهُ شِبْهُ لَا شَيْءَ، وَضَعَّفَهُ جِدًّا. وَقَالَ النَّسَائِيُّ: مَتْرُوكُ [ضَعِيفُ] (١) الْحَدِيثِ. وَقَالَ الدَّارَقُطْنِيُّ: مُنْكَرُ الْحَدِيثِ جِدًّا. وَقَالَ أَحْمَدُ: عِنْدَهُ مَنَاكِيرُ. وَقَالَ الدَّارَقُطْنِيُّ: ضَعِيفٌ. وَإِنْ (٢) كَانَ حَدَّثَ بِهِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ بْنَ سَعِيدٍ الْجَوْهَرِيَّ، فَالْآفَةُ مِنْ هَذَا. وَإِنْ كَانَ يُقَالُ: إِنَّهُ لَمْ يُثْبِتْهُ لَا إِلَى إِبْرَاهِيمَ بْنِ سَعِيدٍ الْجَوْهَرِيِّ وَلَا إِلَى ابْنِ حَوْصَاءَ (٣) ، فَإِنَّ هَذَيْنِ مَعْرُوفَانِ، وَأَحَادِيثُهُمَا مَعْرُوفَةٌ قَدْ رَوَاهَا عَنْهُمَا النَّاسُ (٤) ; وَلِهَذَا لَمَّا رَوَى ابْنُ حَوْصَاءَ الطَّرِيقَ الْأَوَّلَ كَانَ الْإِسْنَادُ إِلَيْهِ مَعْرُوفًا عَنْهُ، رَوَاهُ بِالْأَسَانِيدِ الْمَعْرُوفَةِ، لَكِنَّ الْآفَةَ فِيهِ مِمَّنْ بَعْدَهُ. وَأَمَّا هَذَا فَمَنْ قَبْلَ ابْنِ حَوْصَاءَ لَا يُعْرَفُونَ (٥) . وَإِنْ قُدِّرَ أَنَّهُ ثَابِتٌ عَنْهُ، فَالْآفَةُ بَعْدَهُ. وَذَكَرَ أَبُو الْفَرَجِ بْنُ الْجَوْزِيِّ أَنَّ ابْنَ مَرْدَوَيْهِ رَوَاهُ مِنْ طَرِيقِ دَاوُدَ بْنِ فَرَاهِيجَ، وَذَكَرَ ضَعْفَ ابْنِ فَرَاهِيجَ، وَمَعَ هَذَا فَالْإِسْنَادُ إِلَيْهِ فِيهِ الْكَلَامُ أَيْضًا. قَالَ الْمُصَنِّفُ: وَأَمَّا رِوَايَةُ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ، فَأَخْبَرَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ

(١) ضَعِيفُ: زِيَادَةٌ فِي (م) (٢) ن، س، ب: ضَعِيفٌ إِنْ. . .، وَهُوَ خَطَأٌ (٣) س: لَمْ يُثْبِتْهُ إِلَّا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ سَعِيدٍ الْجَوْهَرِيُّ وَلَا إِلَى ابْنِ حَوْصَاءَ، ب: لَمْ يُثْبِتْهُ إِلَّا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ سَعِيدٍ الْجَوْهَرِيُّ وَإِلَّا ابْنُ حَوْصَاءَ. . . (٤) فِي جَمِيعِ النُّسَخِ. فَإِنَّ هَذَيْنِ مَعْرُوفَانِ، وَأَحَادِيثُهُمْ مَعْرُوفَةٌ، قَدْ رَوَاهَا عَنْهُمُ النَّاسُ، وَهُوَ خَطَأٌ. (٥) ن، م، س: وَلَا يُعْرَفُونَ.