Bro Hajji and the Athar of Imam Ibrahim an-Nakha’i Backbiting Tyrannical Rulers

>>> DOWNLOAD HERE

ʿAudhu Billāhi min ash-Shayṭān al-Rajīm

Bismillāh al-Raḥmān al-Raḥīm

Alḥamdullilāhi Rabbil ʿAlamīn, Waṣalatu Wassalām ʿAla Rasūlillahil Karīm, Wa ʿAla Alihī Wa Aṣḥābīhi Wa Man Tabiāhum Bi-Eḥsan Ilaʾ Yaum al-Dīn; Wa Baʿd

All Praise belongs and is directed to the Rabb of everything

that exists, Praise and Salutations be upon His

Final beloved Messenger, his revered family

and his noble Companions and upon

those who follow them in good

until the end of times,

To proceed,

Bro Hajji and the Athar of Imam Ibrahim an-Nakha’i – Backbiting Tyrannical Rulers

Introduction

Bro Hajji presents this Aathar among others in his following Youtube video

BACKBITING TYRANNICAL RULERS & THE INNOVATORS?!?!?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yaZU7ccg_0&t=33s

This video was clipped from a longer one and it was clipped from the following video at approximately 1:00:38

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GxTGzufsNs

Bro Hajji failed to show the chain of transmission. He is usually pedantic in identifying these matters as they often feature as pivotal elements of his refutation. He failed to show the chain of transmission for this report – this was essential for trying to refute detractors.

In his YouTube video, Bro Hajji exhibits a scan of page 90 of Ibn Abi Dunya’s al-Ghibah wan-Namimah,[1] however on page 89 we can see the chain of transmission as… “Abdullah from Yusuf bin Musa from Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a from al-A’mash from Ibrahim….” Bro Hajji should have shown the chain of transmission and proven the authenticity of this report.

The muhaqqiq – Mustafa Abdul Qadir Ata, of the same edition used by Bro Hajji mentions in the footnotes under Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a,

Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a, al-Dawsi, Abu Nusayr (should be Zuhayr) al-Kufi, he settled in Rayy, truthful but his hadith from al-A’mash have been criticised. From the major (scholars) of the 9^th level, He died in the year 90 something / Bukhari. (Taqrib (1/499), Tahdhib (6/274-275)[2]

In the video Bro Hajji failed to show page 89 of the book, hence the complete chain of transmission and the statement of the muhaqqiq! This is intellectual dishonesty and poor behaviour from someone who usually accuses others of underhand tactics!

So, the contentious narrator in the chain is Abdur Rahman bin Maghra’a, Abu Zuhayr. Bro Hajji failed to show the chain of transmission for this report and the trustworthiness of the narrator.

Criticism and Praise of Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a

Imam Ali bin al-Madini

Ali bin al-Madini said concerning Abdur Rahman bin Maghra’a,

He is nothing, he used to narrate 600 hadith from al-A’mash, we abandoned him (i.e. his narrations) as he was not of that standard[3]

Hafiz al-Mundhiri said if a narrator has been described with these words who has been declared trustworthy by other scholars, then any criticism by a scholar should be understood as,

“His hadith is not of the standard that it can be used as authoritative proof, but his hadith may be recorded for the purpose of comparison and corroboration.[4]

Shaykh Abdullah (Dhiya ur-Rahman) al-A’zami said,

“Laysa bi-Shay – He is nothing” has two meanings. [1] He has transmitted less hadith as al-Hafiz said in the biographical entry for Abdul Aziz bin al-Mukhtar al-Basri in the muqaddimah of Fath ul-Bari or [2] The intended meaning is that the narrator is weak, and this is the view of the majority of the hadith critical analysts (Muhaddithin – Nuqqad).[5]

Ikramullah Imdad ul-Haq studied the methodology of Imam Ali bin al-Madini in the science of praise and criticism and mentioned the following (summarised),

Looking at Ali bin al-Madini’s usage of the term [He is nothing] it becomes clear that it conveys the following meanings for him [1] severe criticism and the narrators hadith is determined to be unreliable [2] In his unique terminology of it being “weak, weak” [3] Ali bin al-Madini’s son, Abdullah interpreting this terminology indicating severe weakness [4] Considering it inappropriate to narrate from such a narrator [5] Extreme weakness [6] The narrator is to be abandoned and proceeded to give an example of Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a [7] The term applies to the narration and not the narrator.[6]

Muhammad Khalaf Salamah indicates the usage of this term when coupled with a further description is indicative of severe weakness of the narrator and he cites the example of Abu Bakr ad-Dahari.[7]

Imam Ibn Adiyy

Ibn Adiyy said,

This statement of Ali bin al-Madini is as he said. What I criticised Abu Zuhayr for, were his hadith narrated from al-A’mash – which trustworthy narrators did not corroborate. He also had unusual (odd) narrations from narrators other than al-A’mash. He is among the weak narrators whose hadith are written nonetheless.[8]

These statements show the criticism regarding Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a revolves around narrations from al-A’mash.

Imam Yahya bin Ma’in

Hafiz Ibn al-Jawzi quoted Imam Yahya bin Ma’in saying, “He is nothing”[9]

However, this seems to be an error for a number of reasons. Imam Yahya bin Ma’in replied to the Suwalat of Ibn Muhriz and said,

There was no harm in him.[10]

Dr. Bashar Awad Ma’ruf and others also mention this from Imam Yahya bin Ma’in from Ibn Muhriz[11] and Muhammad Sayyid Uthman also in his verification of the statements of Imam Yahya bin Ma’in.[12]

The muhaqqiq’s of Ikmal Tahdhib il-Kamal, Adil bin Muhammad and Usamah bin Ibrahim allude to the error of Hafiz Ibn al-Jawzi by saying,

The author (i.e. Ibn al-Jawzi) missed this in what Ibn Muhriz related in his questions to Ibn Ma’in (no’s. 347, 568) when he said, “There was no harm in him”, and this contradicts what Ibn al-Jawzi related and Allah knows best.[13]

Hafiz Ibn al-Jawzi

The second reason Hafiz Ibn al-Jawzi’s quoting Ibn Ma’in is incorrect is because the latest and most researched edition of adh-Dhu’afa wa’l Matrukin attributes this statement of “He is nothing” to Imam Ali bin al Madini. Thus, Hafiz Ibn al-Jawzi after bringing Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’s entry in his book of weak and abandoned narrators – quotes Imam Ali bin al-Madini saying,

He is nothing.[14]

So, it appears it was Imam Ali bin al-Madini’s statement and it was distorted to show Yahya and Allah knows best[15] and Hafiz Ibn al-Jawzi including an entry for him in his book also alludes to his weakness according to Ibn al-Jawzi.

Hafiz al-Mughlata’i

Hafiz al-Mughlata’i only specifies al-A’mash as someone Abdur Rahman transmitted from without mentioning anyone else, this is for emphasis only. He then mentioned the praise of Uthman bin Shaybah, Abu Zur’ah and others. He also quoted the detailed criticism of Ali bin al-Madini, Ibn Adiyy and the general criticism of as-Saji and Abu Ahmad al-Hakim. Al-Mughlata’i discusses all of this in his analysis of the weak narrators mentioned by Ibn al-Jawzi in his book. Furthermore, he also mentions the criticism of “He is nothing” and attributed to Imam Ali bin al-Madini and there is no mention of any statement of Imam Yahya bin Ma’in.[16]

Other Imams

As-Saji said,

He is from the truthful people but has weakness

Abu Ahmad al-Hakim said,

He narrated hadith that are not supported

Abu Zurah said,

Truthful

al-Khalili said, “Thiqah”. Thereafter he cites a report from Abdur Rahman from al-A’mash and said,

An lone report from the hadith of al-A’mash, no one transmitted it from him except Abu Zuhayr and he is thiqah.[17]

Refer to the following books for the references.[18]

Imam al-Bazzar

Imam al-Bazzar alludes to his weakness – after transmitting a hadith that included him in the chain he said,

We do not know of this hadith to be transmitted from al-A’mash from Abi Ishaq except by Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a, for indeed a number of narrators have transmitted it (differently) from Ibn Ishaq.[19]

Hafiz Ibn Hajr

After summarising all the statements he said,

Truthful, his hadith from al-A’mash have been criticised.[20]

And this report of Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a is from al-A’mash! Dr. Bashar Awad Ma’ruf and Shaykh Shu’ayb al-Arna’ut further summarise and qualify Hafiz Ibn Hajrs’ position by saying,

Truthful Hasan ul-Hadith, except in his narrations from al-A’mash – then he is weak.[21]

Imam adh-Dhahabi

Imam adh-Dhahabi quotes the statement of Imam Ali bin al-Madini, Imam Ibn Adiyy and Abu Ahmad al-Hakim as cited above.[22]

Mazin bin Abdur Rahman al-Buhsali al-Bayruti in his book on al-Imam al-A’mash grades Abdur Rahman bin Maghra’a as someone who narrated rejected narrations from al-A’mash. He supports his view through the words of Imam adh-Dhahabi who in turn said,

His hadith from al-A’mash are of the rejected type.[23]

Imam adh-Dhahabi summarises him in his work on the narrators of the six canonical books of hadith as,

Abu Zurah and others said thiqah – trustworthy and Ibn Adiyy said Layyin – weak.[24]

Another time in his book on weak narrators he said,

Abu Zur’ah said he was thiqah, Ibn al-Madini said he is nothing and Ibn Adiyy declared him Layyin.[25]

Another time in his book on weak and abandoned narrators he said,

Abu Zuhayr, truthful. Ibn al-Madini said, He is nothing.[26]

Imam adh-Dhahabi said about a narration in his summary of as-Sunan al-Kabir,

I say: This report is munkar due to the solitary narration of Abdur Rahman and he is not evidence.[27]

Hafiz al-Haythami

After transmitting a narration that included Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a, Hafiz al-Haythami said,

Transmitted by at-Tabarani in al-Awsath and al-Kabir and by al-Bazzar, and Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a is in the chain, he was declared thiqah by more than one (scholar), and there is weakness in him, the rest of the narrators of al-Bazzar are narrators of the Sahih.[28]

The muhaqqiqs of Majma’a az-Zawa’id, Hussayn Salim Asad ad-Durrani and Mirhaf Hussayn Asad said in the footnotes,

This chain is weak, the narrations of Abu Zuhayr’s Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a from al-A’mash are weak.[29]

Another time Hafiz al-Haythami said,

The narrators of Bazzar, and Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a is in the chain, he was declared thiqah by Abu Zur’ah and a group of others. He was criticised but this does not harm him, the rest of the narrators are the narrators of the Sahih.[30]

The muhaqqiqs said,

The narrators of this chain are thiqat except Abdur Rahman, he has questionable things from al-A’mash and Allah knows best.[31]

Imam at-Tabarani transmits the same narration in Mu’ajam al-Awsat and the muhaqqiq – Dr. Mahmud at-Tahhan also alludes to Abdur Rahman’s weakness by quoting al-Haythami’s statement (which has preceded).[32]

Shaykh al-Albani

Shaykh al-Albani also alluded to his weakness while discussing a hadith he transmitted. He said,

This chain is Hasan and its narrators are trustworthy and the narrators of Muslim except Abdur Rahman bin Maghra’a, for he was only criticised in his narrations transmitted from al-A’mash, but this is not one of them…[33]

He also said while discussing another hadith,

I say this chain is good, its narrators are thiqat and the narrators of al–Bukhari except Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a – and there is disagreement over him…” and then the Shaykh quoted adh-Dhahabi from al-Kashif and Hafiz Ibn Hajr from his at-Taqrib.[34]

Other Scholars and Researchers

The muhaqqiq, Shaykh Mahfuz ur-Rahman Zaynullah as-Salafi also alluded to his weakness by singling out Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a and then quoting Hafiz ibn Hajr from his Taqrib, namely the weakness of his hadith from al-A’mash.[35]

Tariq Iwadullah in his additional notes to Hafiz Ibn Hajr’s view in Taqrib ut-Tahdhib he adds the following statements of Imam adh-Dhahabi which illustrate his view on Abdur Rahman, he said,

“al-Muhaddith al-Imam” “He was someone who sought knowledge and he was Hasan ul-Hadith” “There is no harm in him In-Sha-Allah” “His hadith from al-A’mash are not supported” “His hadith from al-A’mash have rejected things”. (Siyar A’lam an-Nubala (9/300), Tarikh al-Islam (13/278), Mizan al-I’tidal (2/592)[36]

Shaykh Hamdi Abdul Majid as-Salafi discusses a hadith that contains Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a from al-A’mash and he alludes to his weakness by saying,

The hadith of Jabir is gharib (solitary lone report which has Abdur Rahman in the chain)”….and then proceeded to cite al-Haythami’s statement from Majma’a az-Zawa’id on Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a alluding to his weakness.[37]

Shaykh Mahfuz ur-Rahman Zaynullah as-Salafi and Shaykh Khalid b. Ibrahim al-Misri said about him,

Truthful, but he was criticised regarding his hadith transmission from al-A’mash.[38]

Shaykh Abdullah (Dhiya ur-Rahman) al-A’zami said while discussing a narration,

al-Bazzar – (Kashf ul-Astar no.1901)[39] transmits from Yusuf bin Musa from Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a with his chain of transmission and this Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a – there is criticism concerning him in his hadith from al-A’mash. Al-Haythami said in al-Majma’a (5/19)[40], The narrators of Bazzar, and Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a is in the chain, he was declared thiqah by Abu Zur’ah and a group of others. He was criticised but this does not harm him, the rest of the narrators are the narrators of the Sahih.[41]

Khalid bin Dhayfullah ash-Shalahi alludes to the criticism levied against him using the statements of Imams Ali bin al-Madini and Ibn Adiyy. He also mentions Imam at-Tabarani saying about one of his narrations,

No one transmitted it from Umar except through this chain – this is a solitary report of Abdur Rahman.[42]

Al-Harith bin Ali al-Hasani said,

Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a – he was criticised in his hadith from al-A’mash.[43]

Abdul Quddus bin Muhammad Nazir, the muhaqqiq of Nur ud-Din al-Haythami’s Majma’a al-Bahrayn said regarding a narration from Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a,

Abu Zuhayr is truthful but his hadith from al-A’mash have been criticised, refer to hadith no.51.[44]

He then further quotes al-Haythami saying,

al-Haythami said in al-Majma’a (9/178)[45], Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a is in the chain and more than one person said he was thiqah, and there is weakness in him, the rest of the narrators of al-Bazzar are narrators of the Sahih. I say: The chain is weak, however the text of the hadith is authentic due to other established through other chains.[46]

Najm Abdur Rahman said in his checking of as-Samt,

Its chain is Hasan and Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a is truthful.

And then he said,

They (scholars of hadith) resented the hadith he transmitted from al-A’mash since he was not supported by other trustworthy narrators.[47]

So, there is a problem with al-Maghra’a from al-A’mash and his saying the chain is Hasan is incorrect.

Mahmud Muhammad Khattab as-Subki, after quoting Abu Zurah’s, Ibn Hibban’s and Abu Khalid al-Ahmar’s praise and then the criticism of Ali bin al-Madini and Ibn Adiyy, he said while discussing his hadith,

It is weak due to the weakness of Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a…[48]

He further said,

The point regarding the weakness of this hadith is that the chain of narration includes Abdul Rahman bin al-Maghra’a…[49]

Abu Ishaq al-Huwayni who is favoured by certain factions – those who lean towards modern geo-politicism, political activism, who advocate openly rebuking rulers, in summary those upon the ideology of Muhammad Surur, alludes to the weakness of this narrator. He said,

There is weakness in the chain. Although Abdur Rahman bin Maghra’a is truthful his hadith from al-A’mash have been criticised.[50]

He said elsewhere,

Truthful but his memory had weakness.[51]

He said elsewhere that is well known regarding the criticism of the narrations of Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a from al-A’mash.[52]

Abu Uways Ashraf al-Kurdi said concerning one narration,

…Since Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a narrations from al-A’mash are weak, Ali bin al-Madini said, Abdur Rahman bin Maghra’a Abu Zuhayr, he is nothing, he used to narrate 600 hadith from al-A’mash, but we left him since he was not of the standard of reliability.[53]

Nabil Hashim al-Ghamari also alluded to Abdur Rahman bin Maghra’a’s narrations from al-A’mash being criticised and that his reports from him were unsupported. He declared the chain of the report to be hasan, due to a supporting report in Imam al-Lalaka’i’s Sharh Usul I’tiqad[54].[55]

Shaykh Mahmud bin Ahmad Mayrah while discussing a hadith and its chain which included Abdur Rahman bin Maghra’a, he said,

This is the lone and solitary report of Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a, he is from the truthful people but there is weakness in him. Abu Ahmad al-Hakim said, He transmits hadith which he is not supported in.[56]

Shaykh Abdul Qadir al-Junayd said,

Ad-Darimi (no.394) also transmitted it but without the words “The oppressive ruler.” He ad-Darimi transmits, From Makhlad bin Malik from Abdur Rahman bin Maghra’a from al-A’mash who said, Ibrahim (an-Nakha’i) did not consider it backbiting when speaking about innovators.[57]

This shows the wording especially the phrase, “The oppressive/unjust ruler” is controversial and disputed by the very fact it is lost in transmission in some reports. This is further problematic when the transmission is through the same narrators. Since the chain of transmission is the same in Ibn Abi Dunya except Yusuf bin Musa and Makhlad bin Malik.

Makhlad bin Malik is awthaq than Yusuf bin Musa and thus his riwayah is taken and accepted. Makhlad is a narrator of Sahih al-Bukhari and Imam al-Bukhari’s Shaikh. His narration in Sahih al-Bukhari.[58]

Abi Nasr Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Bukhari al-Kalabadhi (d.398H) has an entry for him in his book on the narrators of al-Bukhari. He says,

al-Bukhari transmitted from him in the Ghazwa of Uhud.[59]

There is no doubt he is thiqah.[60]

Abul Walid Sulayman bin Khalf al-Baji (d.474H) brings his entry in his book Kitab at-Ta’dil.[61] Al-Hasan bin Muhammad al-Adawi and Umari (d.650H) has an entry for him in his book in the Shuyukh of Imam al-Bukhari.[62]

For further details on Makhlad refer to the following books.[63]

For arguments sake, some researchers did authenticate this riwayah in Sunan ad-Darimi, like Shaykh Subhi Hasan Hallaq[64] and his saying the rijal are trustworthy and ad-Darimi is the only one who reported it, it is still not worthy of evidence since it does not contain the words which are disputed, namely the oppressive or unjust ruler.

Shaykh Muhammad Ilyas, a student of Shaykh Ibn Baz, alludes to its weakness. He says,

The narrators of this narration are thiqah however there is criticism regarding Abdur Rahman bin Maghra’a’s narrations from al-A’mash and al-Lalaka’i transmits it with an authentic chain.[65]

Again, this is not opposing the weakness of the former report since its words are different, this report does not mention the oppressive or unjust ruler.

Shaykh Abdul Qadir al-Junayd’s Critical Analysis of this Report

This is reported by Ibn Abi Dunya in as-Samt (no.222)[66] and al-Ghibah wan-Namimah (no.85) through the transmission of Yusuf bin Musa from Abdur Rahman bin Maghra’a from al-A’mash from Ibrahim (an-Nakha’i)

Abdur Rahman bin al-Maghra’a’s trustworthiness and reliability is disputed. Ali bin al-Madini, Ibn Adiyy and others criticise d him for his narrations from al-A’mash and this report is from and through the route of al-A’mash.

Ad-Darimi (no.394) also transmitted it but without the words “the oppressive ruler.” He ad-Darimi transmits,

From Makhlad bin Malik from Abdur Rahman bin Maghra’a from al-A’mash who said, Ibrahim (an-Nakha’i) did not consider it backbiting when speaking about innovators.

Al-Lalaka’i also transmitted it in his book Sharh Usul I’tiqad Ahlus-Sunnah (no.276) through the route of Sulayman bin Hayyan from al-A’mash from Ibrahim with the wording,

It is not backbiting when speaking about the people of innovation.

The chain is Hasan but not Muhammad bin al-Hasan ash-Sharqi and perhaps he is Muhammad bin Ahmad bin al-Hasan ash-Sharqi, I could not any biographical information for an entry of that name.

Ibn Abi Dunya also transmitted it in as-Samt (no.226)[67] and in al-Ghibah wan-Namimah (no.89) from Ahmad bin Imran al-Akhnasi from Sulayman bin Hayyan from al-A’mash from Ibrahim who said,

It is not backbiting speaking against three people, the oppressor, the wicked sinner and the person of innovation.

Ahmad bin Imran bin Abdul Malik al-Akhnasi in the chain is weak and there is an unknown link between al-Akhnasi and Ibn Abi Dunya.

This also does not mention the word ruler.[68]

In summary, this narration is weak and not authentic in its attribution to Ibrahim an-Nakha’i. It is tragic that Bro Hajji was a person who rallied making the most noise attacking Salafis for not presenting authentic narrations and he failed embarrassingly amid his own squalor.

Wa Sallallahu Ala Sayyidina Muhammad Wa-Ala Alihi Wa-Ashabihi Wa-Sallam Tasliman Kathira

Written by

Abu Khuzaimah Ansari

Jumada al-Ula 1448/ October 2026

Birmingham, UK

NOTES

[1] It is referenced in other editions of the same book in the Mawsuat of Ibn Abi Dunya as (1/257 no.82, Dhamm ul-Ghibah wa’n Namimah) (DKI) titled Mawsu’a Rasa’il Ibn Abi Dunya, (4/429 no.83) Dar ul-Atlas al-Khadra’), However, the narration seems to be omitted and replaced with no.77 as an editing error.

[2] al-Ghibab wan-Namimah (p.89 no.86) (Muassasah al-Kutub ath-Thaqafiyyah)

[3] Al-Kamil fi’dh Dhu’afa ar-Rijal (7/153 no.1116) (Maktabah ar-Rushd), (5/324 no.1116) (ar- Risalah Alamiyyah), Mizan ul-I’tidal (2/520 no.4730) (ar-Risalah Alamiyyah) Tahdhib ul-Kamal (17/421) (ar-Risalah al-Alamiyyah), Tahdhib ut-Tahdhib (7/854 no.4215) (Jamiyyah Dar ul-Birr) Tarikh Dimashq (35/460 no.3969) (Dar ul-Fikr)

[4] Jawab al-Hafiz Abi Muhammad Abdul A’zim al-Mundhiri al-Misri An Asilah fi’l Jarh wa’t Ta’dil (p.86) (Maktab al-Matbuat al-Islamiyyah)

[5] Mu’ajam Mustalahat al-Hadith wa Lata’if al-Asanid (p.300) (Dar Imam Muslim), also refer to the Shaykh’s Dirasat fi’l Jarh wa’t Ta’dil (p.256-258) (Jamia as-Salafiyyah bil-Hindh)

[6] al-Imam Ali bin al-Madini wa Manhajuhu Fi Naqd ar-Rijal (p.582-586) (Dar ul-Basha’ir al-Islamiyyah)

[7] Lisan ul-Muhaddithin (4/406) (Dar al-Andalusia)

[8] Al-Kamil fi’dh Dhu’afa ar-Rijal (7/153-154 no.1116) (Maktabah ar-Rushd), (5/324 no.1116) (ar-Risalah Alamiyyah), Mizan ul-I’tidal (2/520), Tarikh Dimashq (35/460), Tahdhib ut-Tahdhib (7/854), Tahdhib ul-Kamal (17/421), Tadhhib Tahdhib al-Kamal (6/56), Khulasah Tadhhib Tahdhib (p.235), al-Kawkabani in Ittihaf al-Khasah Bi-Tas-hih al-Khulasah (p.235 margin)

[9] This criticism was quoted by Hafiz Ibn al-Jawzi in his adh-Dhu’afa wa’l Matrukin (2/101 no.1904) (DKI), and repeated by al-Mughlata’i (Ikmal Tahdhib il-Kamal (8/231) and others.

[10] Ma’rifah tur-Rijal (also known as Suwalat Ibn Muhriz) (no.347 p.136, no.1523 p.364) (al-Faruq al-Hadithiyyah)

[11] Mawsua’ Aqwal Yahya bin Ma’in fi Rijal al-Hadith wa Illalihi (3/223 no.2309) (Dar ul-Gharb al-Islami)

[12] Mawsua’ Tarikh Ibn Ma’in (2/32 no.347 (Juz al-Awwal), 2/144 no.568 (Juz ath-Thani) (DKI)

[13] Ikmal Tahdhib il-Kamal (8/231)

[14] Ibn al-Jawzi, Asma adh-Dhu’afa wa’l Wadhi’in wa Zikru Man Jarahahum Min al-A’imah al-Kibar al-Hafizin (3/430 no.2036) (Sutur al-Bahath al-Ilmi)

[15] The muhaqqiq of Asma adh-Dhu’afa wa’l Wadhi’in, Mazin as-Sarsawi alludes to this distortion based on manuscript (z) (3/430 footnote no.7)

[16] al-Iktifa Fi Tanqih Kitab adh-Dhu’afa (4/239-241 no.1096) (Dar ul-Minhaj al-Qawim)

[17] Al-Irshad Fi Ma’rifah Ulama al-Hadith (no.557 p.273) (al-Faruq al-Hadithiyyah)

[18] al-Iktifa Fi Tanqih adh-Dhu’afa (2/406), Mukhtasar al-Kamil (p.490),

adh-Dhu’afa wal-Matrukin (2/101) of Ibn al-Jawzi, Diwan ad-Dhu’afa wal Matrukin (p.246), Mughni Fidh-Dhu’afa (1/614), Mizan ul-I’tidal (2/520), Qanun adh-Dhu’afa (p.229) from Shady al-Nu’man’s al-Jam’i li-Kutub adh-Dhu’afa wal-Matrukin wal Kadhabin (8/441 no.6433) (Dar Ibn Abbas) and his al-Jam’i Li-Jawami Kutub ar-Rijal (11/56-57 no.11427) (Dar ibn Abbas), Tahdhib ul-Kamal (17/420-422), Tahdhib ut-Tahdhib (7/854), Tadhhib Tahdhib al-Kamal Fi Asma ur-Rijal (6/56 no.4037), Ikmal Tahdhib al-Kamal (8/230-231 no.3249) (al-Faruq al-Hadithiyyah), al-Khazraji in Khulasah Tadhhib Tahdhib (p.235) (Maktab Matbu’at al-Islamiyyah al-Halab), Tarikh Dimashq (35/460)

[19] Al-Bahr ul-Zakhhar Bi-Musnad al-Bazzar (2/262 no.272) (Maktabah al-Ulum wa’l Hikam)

[20] Taqrib ut-Tahdhib (no.4039 p.600) (Dar ul-Asimah), (no.4013 p.475) Muassasah ar-Risalah)

[21] Tahrir Taqrib ut-Tahdhib (no.4013 p.475) (Muassasah ar-Risalah)

[22] Tadhhib Tahdhib al-Kamal Fi Asma ur-Rijal (6/56 no.4037) (al-Faruq al-Hadithiyyah)

[23] Tarikh al-Islam (4/1152) from Mazin al-Bayruti’s, al-Imam al-A’mash (p.272)

[24] al-Kashif Fi Ma’rifah Man Laha Riwayah Fi Kutub as-Sittah (2/217 no.3311) (Dar ul-Hadith)

[25] al-Mughni Fidh-Dhu’afa (1/614 no.3641) (DKI)

[26] Diwan adh-Dhu’afa wa’l Matrukin (2/21-22 no.2698) (Dar ul-Basha’ir al-Islamiyyah)

[27] al-Muhazzab Fi Ikhtisar as-Sunan al-Kabir lil-Bayhaqi (2/867 no.3816) (Dar al-Watan)

[28] Majma’a az-Zawa’id wa Mamba’a ul-Fawa’id (18/500 no.15046) (Dar ul-Minhaj)

[29] Majma’a az-Zawa’id (18/500 footnote no.2)

[30] Majma’a az-Zawa’id (11/18 no.7951)

[31] Majma’a az-Zawa’id (11/17 footnote no.2)

[32] Mu’ajam al-Awsat (2/481-482 no.1831 footnote no.1) (Maktabah al-Ma’arif)

[33] Ath-Thamar al-Mustatab Fi Fiqh as-Sunnah wa’l Kitab (2/473) (Gharas)

[34] Silsilah Ahadith as-Sahihah (7/563 no.3185) (Maktabah al-Ma’arif)

[35] al-Bahr ul-Zakhhar Bi-Musnad al-Bazzar (2/262 footnote.3) and (6/81 no.2136 footnote no.1)

[36] Tadhhib Taqrib ut-Tahdhib (3/326 no.4039) (Maktabah ar-Rushd)

[37] al-Mu’ajam al-Kabir (Juz 3 2/26 no.2597) (Dar Ihya at-Turath)

[38] al-I’llal al-Waridah fi’l Ahadith an-Nabawiyyah of Imam ad-Daraqutni (1/314-315, footnote 9) (Dar Taybah)

[39] Kashf ul-Astar An Zawa’id al-Bazzar Alal Kutub as-Sittah (2/381 no.1901) (ar-Risalah al-Alamiyyah)

[40] Majma’a az-Zawa’id (11/18 no.7951)

[41] al-Jam’i al-Kamil fi’l Hadith ash-Shamil (11/503) (Darussalam), (17/295 no.14366 (Dar Ibn Bashir), (13/705 no.14366) Dar Abi Tayyab)

[42] Rawdah al-Mumti’ Fi Takhrij Ahadith ar-Rawdh al-Murbi’ (3/165-166) (Maktabah ar-Rushd)

[43] Muntaqa al-Alfadh Bi-Taqrib Ulum ul-Hadith Li-Huffadh (1/243) (Maktabah Dar ul-Bayan)

[44] Majma’a al-Bahrayn Fi Zawa’id al-Mu’ajamyan (6/322 no.3775 footnote) (al-Mu’ajam al-Awsath wal Mu’ajam as-Saghir lit-Tabarani) of Nur ud-Din al-Haythami. (Maktabah ar-Rushd)

[45] Majma’a az-Zawa’id wa Mamba’a ul-Fawa’id (18/500)

[46] Majma’a al-Bahrayn (6/322), Ittihaf al-Jama’ah Bima Ja’a fi’l Fitan wa’l Malahim wa Ashrat as-Sa’ah (3/32) of Shaykh Hamud at-Tuwayjari (Dar as-Sami’i)

[47] Kitab as-Samt wa Adab al-Lisan of Ibn Abi Dunya (p.338 no.223).

[48] al-Manhal al-Adhb al-Mawrud Sharh Sunan al-Imam Abu Dawud (2/188) (Mu’assasah at-Tarikh al-Arabi)

[49] al-Manhal al-Adhb al-Mawrud Sharh Sunan al-Imam Abu Dawud (2/188)

[50] Kitab as-Samt wa Adab al-Lisan of Ibn Abi Dunya (p.142 no.222)

[51] Risalatan Fi’s Salah Was-Salam Alan-Nabi Sallalahu Alayhi Wasallam (p.58). (From Nathlu n Nibal Li-Mu’ajam ar-Rijal (2/305 no.1985) (Dar Ibn Abbas)

[52] A’wz ul-Jani Bi-Tasdid al-Awham fi Ma’jma’ai at-Tabarani (3/286-287 no.464 (3591) (Dar Ilaf ad-Dawliyyah)

[53] Silsilah al-Fawa’id al-Hadithiyyah wa’l Fiqhiyyah (6/262) (Dar al-Lu’lu)

[54] Sharh Usul I’tiqad (1/158 no.276) (Dar Taybah)

[55] Fath ul-Manan Sharh Musnad al-Jam’i (4/418 no.427) (Lebanon: Dar al-Basha’ir al-Islamiyyah, 1436H/2014, 2^nd Edn. Ed. Nabil Hashim)

[56] al-Mustadrak Alas Sahihayn (20/151 no.8431 footnote no.4) (Dar ul-Minhaj)

[57] al-Athar al-Waridah Fi Jawaz Ghibah al-Hakim al-Ja’ir Ma’a Dirasah Asanidiha wa Alfadhuha wa Bayan Dhu’afuha wal Ijabah Anha Waradal Istidlal Biha (p.13)

[58] Sahih al-Bukhari (no.4074).

[59] Rijal Sahih al-Bukhari (2/725 no.1205) (Lebanon: Dar al-Ma’rifah, 1407H/1987, 1^st Edn. Ed. Abdullah al-Laithi).

[60] Refer to al-Jam’a Bayna ar-Rijal as-Sahihayn (2/507), at-Taqrib (2/235), Tahdhib ut-Tahdhib (10/75), al-Kashif (3/113) as mentioned in Rijal Sahih al-Bukhari.

[61] Kitab at- Ta’dil wat-Tajrih Liman Kharaja Lahu al-Bukhari F’il Jam’i as-Sahih (2/740 no.672) (Tunisia: Dar ul-Gharb, 1431H/2010) 2^nd Edn. Ed. Abu Lubaba at-Tahir Salih Hussain. In another edition (p.259 no.672) (Lebanon: DKI, 2010, 1^st Edn. Ed. Ali Ibrahim Mustafa)

[62] Asami Shuyukh al-Bukhari (p.218-219 no.280) (Syria: Dar ul-Kamal, 1437K/2916, 1^st Edn. Ed. Hussain Salman Mahdi)

[63] Imam al-Bukhari’s Tarikh al-Kabir (4/438 no.1914), Tahdhib ul-Kamal (27/340), Tahdhib Tahdhib (12/625-626 no.6937), al-Hidayah wal-Irshad (2/725), al-Mu’ajam al-Mushtamil (p.289)

[64] Sunan ad-Darimi, (p.106 no.408)

[65] Sunan ad-Darimi (1/240 no.408)

[66] as-Samt wa Adab al-Lisan (In the Mawsua’ Ibn Abi Dunya) (3/554 no.6335 (222) (Dar ul-Atlas al-Khadra’a) (1/153 no.220) DKI (in Mawsua’ Rasa’il Ibn Abi Dunya)

[67] as-Samt wa Adab al-Lisan (In the Mawsua’ Ibn Abi Dunya) (3/554 no.6338 (225) (Dar ul-Atlas al-Khadra’a), (1/153 no.224) DKI (in Mawsua’ Rasa’il Ibn Abi Dunya)

[68] al-Athar al-Waridah Fi Jawaz Ghibah al-Hakim al-Ja’ir (p.13-14)