Silsilat al-Ahadith al-SahihahNasir al-Din al-Albani

concealment in transmission, as I have demonstrated at length in my detailed sourcing of certain hadiths. Abdullah ibn Buraydah was never accused of any concealment in transmission, and his having heard directly from his father has been soundly established, as I demonstrated in the preceding hadith (2904) and elsewhere. His father died in 63 AH. Indeed, it is established in Musnad Ahmad (5/347) that he entered upon Muawiyah with his father; Muawiyah died in 60 AH, while Aisha died in 57 AH. Thus, he certainly lived during her lifetime. Accordingly, the two Shaykhs included his narrations from certain Companions who died in the same year as she did, or near it, such as Abdullah ibn Mughaffal; and similarly Samurah ibn Jundub, who died in 58 AH. Indeed, they also listed him among those who narrated from Abdullah ibn Masud, who died in 32 AH, without judging his narration defective on grounds of a break in the chain.

Perhaps for the reason I have mentioned, al-Hafiz al-Mizzi did not bother to mention the aforementioned assertion, thereby indicating its weakness. Likewise did al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi in his History; and al-Hafiz al-Ala'i followed their approach in Jami al-Tahsil (252/338), mentioning him in connection with disconnected transmission only in his narration from Umar. This is very clear, for he was born three years after the beginning of Umar's caliphate.

The foregoing verification and refutation of any break in the chain would stand even if there were nothing by which the hadith could be corroborated. How much more so when there are two further considerations:

The first is that some narrators identified Ibn Buraydah as Sulayman, as occurs in al-Nasa'i (500/877) and al-Mustadrak (1/530), through the route of Alqamah ibn Marthad from him. Al-Hakim said: “Authentic according to the criteria of the two Shaykhs.” Al-Dhahabi agreed with him, and al-Mundhiri endorsed it.

However, al-Hafiz critiqued this in Takhrij al-Adhkar—as Ibn Allan relates in al-Futuhat (4/346)—saying:

“There is room for scrutiny in this, for al-Bayhaqi stated definitively in the Book of Divorce in al-Sunan that Abdullah ibn Buraydah did not hear from Aisha!”

التدليس، كما حققته مبسطاً في تخريج بعض الأحاديث، وعبد الله بن بريدة لم يرم بشيء من التدليس، وقد صح سماعه من أبيه كما حققته في الحديث المتقدم (٢٩٠٤) وغيره، وتوفي أبوه سنة (٦٣) ، بل ثبت أنه دخل مع أبيه على معاوية في "مسند أحمد" (٥/٣٤٧) ، ومعاوية مات سنة (٦٠) ، وعائشة ماتت سنة (٥٧) ، فقد عاصرها يقيناً، ولذلك أخرج له الشيخان روايته عن بعض الصحابة ممن شاركها في سنة وفاتها أو قاربها، مثل عبد الله بن مغفل، وقريب منه سمرة بن جندب مات سنة (٥٨) . بل وذكروه فيمن روى عن عبد الله بن مسعود المتوفى سنة (٣٢) ، ولم يعلوها بالانقطاع، ولعله- لما ذكرت- لم يعرج الحافظ المزي على ذكر القول المذكور، إشارة إلى توهينه، وكذلك الحافظ الذهبي في "تاريخه "، ونحا نحوهما الحافظ العلائي في "جامع التحصيل " (٢٥٢/٣٣٨) ، فلم يذكره بالإرسال إلا بروايته عن عمر، وهذا ظاهر جدّاً؛ لأنه ولد لثلاث خلون من خلافة عمر. وما تقدم من التحقيق ونفي الانقطاع يقال، لو لم يكن هناك ما يمكن دعم الحديث به؛ فكيف وثمة أمران: أحد هما: أن بعض الرواة سمى (ابن بريدة) : (سليمان) كما وقع في "النسائي" (٥٠٠/٨٧٧) و"المستدرك " (١/ ٥٣٠) من طريق علقمة بن مرثد عنه، وقال: "صحيح على شرط الشيخين "، ووافقه الذهبي، وأقره المنذري. لكن تعقبه الحافظ في "تخريج الأذكار"- كما قال ابن علان في "الفتوحات " (٤/٣٤٦) - بقوله: "وفي ذلك نظر؛ فإن البيهقي جزم في كتاب الطلاق من "السنن " أن عبد الله بن بريدة لم يسمع من عائشة"!

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