to those well versed in this field that al-Hasan al-Basri practised tadlīs. Thus, judgment must be withheld as to whether this hadith is established from ‘Amr ibn Taghlib, since al-Hasan did not explicitly state that he heard it directly from him. However, the hadith is authentic in view of the supporting evidence that follows.

In sum, the defect in this chain of transmission is the ambiguous “from” formula, not its being mursal, as Dr. Fu’ad mistakenly imagined in his notes to al-Mawardi’s al-Hukm wa-al-Amthal (p. 100). After declaring the hadith weak and citing al-Hakim’s statement, “No one narrated from ‘Amr ibn Taghlib other than al-Hasan,” he added: “He was a Basran Successor, and he attributed it directly to the Messenger; thus, the hadith is mursal!”

I say: He joined this addition to al-Hakim’s words in such a way that no one who had not first seen al-Hakim’s preceding statement could distinguish it from what follows, which is Dr. Fu’ad’s own statement—unless he noticed the ignorance of this discipline displayed in it, from which even one far inferior to al-Hakim in knowledge would rise above! Allah is the One whose help is sought.

In al-Amthal, the hadith appears with “killing and turmoil” in place of “ignorance,” and “injustice” in place of “knowledge”; I consider this to be a scribal error. Dr. Fu’ad did not draw attention to any of this. Rather, as mentioned above, he attributed the hadith to al-Hakim—despite the differences between al-Hakim’s version and that in al-Amthal! I found no corroborating report for the wording “injustice,” unlike “knowledge.”

I did, however, see the hadith in Abu ‘Amr al-Dani’s al-Fitan (folio 15/2), through the route of ‘Ali ibn Ma‘bad, who said: ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Ismah narrated to us from Abu Hamzah, from al-Hasan, who said: The Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, said… He then mentioned the hadith, omitting the two clauses concerning ignorance and tribulations, and added: “Ibn Ma‘bad said: that is, the scribes.”

I say: I do not know ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Ismah. Abu Hamzah apparently is the one mentioned in al-Dulabi’s al-Kuna (1/156):