status of hadith in mishkat about shaykhayn

Discussion in 'Hadith' started by abu Hasan, Jul 18, 2022.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    that clears it. you need to probably read a few books on usul.
    wa's salam.
  2. Ali_Bash

    Ali_Bash Active Member

    No problem

    I dont think i have ever stated or even come accross as that, The Imams of Hadith have their differences there are times where Ibn Hajar has gone against a ruling of Imam Bukhari on certain Hadith (not the ones included in Sahih) who in that instance do we take from, even in our school the hanafis when we present the hadith of Raf ul-yadain of Ibn Mas'ud these were considered Da'eef with alot of defects by the like of Imam Bukhari, Imam Nawawi ibn Hajar and many others yet we the Ahnaf claim it to be Sahih and righfully so. Yet when we say it is sahih we dont intend by it that we know more than the likes of Imam Bukhari or Ibn Hajar, a difference of opinion can occur and if we are respectful in our difference of opinion then that is good. However if we are disrespectful (like the likes of Albani and the Ghali anti-hanafi Muqbil bin Hadi) in our difference opinion then they should be refuted.

    I believe Hafidh ibn Hajar was merely just quoting Imam Tabrizi when he said: "mentioned by Razin" and did not posess the book of Imam Razin. As we see in his Takhrij of Mishkat he doesn quote his own ruling on the hadith.

    Wallahu 'Alam

    Jazakumullahu Khair[/QUOTE]

    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 18, 2022
  3. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    it is ok brother. i understand what you are trying to say. please ignore certain words or phrases said in the course of argument. no offence intended.

    this is what i have been warning against.
    you are assuming guilt in the absence of evidence.

    unless you have proof, you cannot claim that imam razin "could have placed a forged hadith". and the reason other hadith masters refrained from commenting is because of imam razin's reputation. know that personal reputation and integrity is the most important aspect of this science. follow the lead of imams in this science who repudiated one narration, but remained silent on another. unless of course, we know better than ibn hajar, ali al-qari and sh. abdul haq dihlawi.

    bad generalisation. this does not apply to mawDu'at and it would be a violation of the rule followed by muhaddithin. if a muhaddith knows that a certain hadith is forged, it is necessary for him to state it so. you will find this in any of the manuals of hadith principles.
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2022
    Umar99 likes this.
  4. Ali_Bash

    Ali_Bash Active Member

    Allah as my witness i am not trying to force my opinion. I had said dhahabi and al-suyuti used some of the wording of Mishkaat and the overall meaning of the Ḥadīth is the same. We are not talking about the context of the Ḥadīth.
    Yes it is true Imām Razin is a Ḥadīth master but that does not prevent him from placing “forged hadiths” in his book (if this Ḥadīth is forged Allah knows best) for ibn Majāh who is greater than Imām razin placed some forged or very weak Ḥadīth in his book
    A muhaddith staying quiet on a Ḥadīth does not necessarily endorse it is Ṣaḥīḥ hasan or da’if unlesss stated by themselves like Abū Dawud did in his Sunan.

    The reason for them stayong quiet is possibly they did not have the chain in hand or as you said it is different from al-kahtibs narration
    As per my last post it is best to stay silent on this Ḥadīth for we do not know its chain
    Wallahu ‘Alam

    Jazakumullahu Khair

    Its been a good discussion and i have benefitted from you.​
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 18, 2022
  5. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    i will deem it to acceptable to be cited because muhaddithin such as ibn hajar and haytami and tibi and al-qari did not mind. and since it is in a matter of virtue and superiority, it is mughtafar.

    wAllahu a'alam.
    Umar99 and Aqdas like this.
  6. Ali_Bash

    Ali_Bash Active Member

    So as per my last post we both agree it is best to stay silent on the Ḥadīth since we do not know its chain?
  7. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    it appears that later muhaddithin preferred to remain silent about this as it was cited by imam razin. if they deemed it the same as burayh's narration, they would have noted it as a forgery.

    especially dhahabi and ibn hajar - because dhahabi mentioned razin's book and noted that it had weak narrations; yet when he commented on the burayh narration, he didn't say: "razin has also quoted this". and ibn hajar did takhrij of mishkat and did not comment that "this is the same narration found in khatib's tarikh, citing burayh."

    yet modern day editors (arnaut/albani) were more confident than ibn hajar in considering it as the same narration.

    Allah ta'ala knows best.
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2022
    Umar99 likes this.
  8. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    notice that ibn al-athir did not class it as mawDu'u. even if we assume that he was lax, what about other muhaddithin who came later?

    as we have also seen below - khatib al-tabrizi (d.737 AH) has cited via razin in his mishkat (and this is what is being discussed.)

    let us examine what the commentators of mishkat have to say about it.

    1. al-kashif an haqa'iq al-sunan, sharh of tibi on mishkat
    sharafuddin husayn ibn abdullah ibn muhammad al-tibi (d.743AH)

    no comment on this hadith.


    2. sharif al-jurjani's annotations on mishkat [d.816 AH] - no comment on this hadith


    3. ibn hajar al-haytami in his fat'h al-ilah sh. mishkah - no comment on this hadith


    4. mirqat al-mafatih of mulla ali al-qari, 11/217

    mirqat, v11p217.png

    "perhaps it is because he preceded in islam - Allah knows best what is meant by this"

    note that al-qari has not marked it as mawDu'u, even though he has criticised a similar narration in his mawduat (as mentioned earlier)

    5. lam'at al-tanqih sh. mishkat al-masabih - shaykh abdu'l haq muhaddith dihlawi (d. 1052 AH)

    on a moonlit night - the reason it is mentioned is just incidental and that was the time when she asked him sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam. it is not that there were stars in the sky at that time - so one cannot criticise that "one does not see too many stars in a moonlit night". it was absolutely about the stars in the sky (whether visible or not).


    {like one deed among the good deeds of abu bakr}: that is in number and in quality. if one supposes that umar's deeds are more in number than those of abu bakr, yet abu bakr is superior due to the superiority of the deeds as we can draw from the hadith: "abu bakr has not gained superiority over you by more prayer and fasting; rather due to that which is instilled in his heart"

    ghazali has mentioned this and iraqi said: "i did not find a marfu narration". but hakim tirmidhi mentioned in al-nawadir via bakr ibn abdullah al-muzani; thus it is in tamyiz al-tayyib mina'l khabith of ibn al-dayba'a the teacher of our teacher in hadith; among the great ulama of yemen. may Allah's mercies be upon him.

    ibn al-dayba'a al-shaybani: abdur rahman ibn ali ibn muhammad al-zabidi al-shafiyi [866-944]

    and shaykh abdul haq did not mark this hadith as a forgery. especially as he seems to have perused ibn al-dayba's work which is a treatise on validation of well-known hadith

    6. in the list of questions about various hadith in mishkat answerd by shaykh al-islam ibn hajar, this particular hadith does not figure.

    but in the takhrij of mishkat, ibn hajar himself attributes to razin and remains silent.

    takhrij mishkat ibn hajar, v5p412.png

    "razin mentioned it; raDi'Allahu anhu"

    and ibn hajar did not comment about it - nor attributed it to burayh. which clearly indicates that he considered the riwayah of razin as different to the one cited by khatib, else he would mark it thus - or at the least - indicate that it was a forgery; after all, he had already criticised burayh's narration in lisan al-mizan.

    sh. abdu'l haq's farsi commentary on mishkat: 4/365:

    ashiat-lam'at, v4p365.png
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2022
    Umar99, Unbeknown and Noori like this.
  9. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    imam majduddin ibn al-athir in his jamiy al-usul cited this hadith via razin. however in the footnote, it is referenced as khatib's citation via burayh:

    jamiy-usul, v8p632.png

    the editor of the above work is abdul qadir arna'ut and he has probably copied albani's footnote in mishkat; but it could also be vice-versa. regardless, it is obvious that both the footnotes were penned by one of them and copied by the other.

    mishkat,albani, 6029.png
  10. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    i have updated translations in the post below on imam razin.

    summary: imam razin is considered as a prominent hadith master and many others after him trusted him to cite him even when he didn't provide the sanad. as in the case of ibn al-athir (majduddin).
    Umar99 likes this.
  11. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    editors of the printed editions who add footnotes in our time and those writing articles treat these narrations as one and they use the criticism of one narration to label another as forged. and you might have picked it from there.

    no need to be sorry. you asked a proper question and we are attempting to answer it.

    wa billahi't tawfiq.
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2022
    Umar99 likes this.
  12. AR Ahmed

    AR Ahmed Veteran

    JazakumAllah sayyidi again

    it may have been me who conflated this hadith from Mishkat sharif with the hadith of sayyidina 'Ammar radhiyAllahu anhu, based on something a mufti from ashrafiya mubarakpur told me.


    also, i do not consider the hadith in question as mawdu'. i just wanted answers to the objections presented.
  13. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    mashaAllah good discussion

    qn: who conflated the discussion with the hadith of Ammar bin Yasir - some forum member, some modern albani-ist ruwwat, or some older authors/scholars perhaps?

    I'm lost on that point and curious.
  14. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    as i have said, this is hasty assumption. we will see shortly in sha'Allah why.


    i will talk about this in a separate post.

    but certainly the hadith of mishkat is NOT the same as hadith of burayh.

    not at all. both dhahabi and suyuti use buryah's narration cited in khatib.
    and you are ignoring the obvious reason why the narration of burayh is objectionable and an obvious lie.

    the narration cited by suyuti is almost identical to that in khatib. you have to be wilfully blind to claim that it is "uses mishkat's wording".
    whereas dhahabi's narration does not match khatib's at all!

    you are simply trying to force your opinion that dhahabi and suyuti were both "using" mishkat's wording. while suyuti's wording is entirely that of khatib, except for the taS'Hif of a couple of words - dhahabi's citation doesn't match either mishkat or khatib's citation. but since he clearly mentions that it is burayh's narration, it SHOULD be from khatib's citation.

    and did we miss that both dhahabi and suyuti (and the rest) point it to burayh's narration from khatib's tarikh?

    you are attempting a retrofit. according to your logic:

    1. khatib cited burayh in his tarikh.

    2. this narration by burayh is criticised and classed as a forgery.

    3. suyuti mentioned khatib's citation of burayh and affirmed it as a forgery

    4. dhahabi mentioned khatib's citation of burayh and affirmed as a forgery

    5. there is a similar hadith in mishkat via razin

    6. suyuti's and dhahabi's citations "use mishkat's wording"

    7. we must assume that razin used khatib's narration because we don't have razin's book

    8. therefore, mishkat's narration is the same as khatib's citation.

    that is what critics of our time have done - and they have overlooked what disproves their claim.

    whereas my contention is that mishkat's narration is not the same as burayh's narration in khatib's tarikh.

    aside: there is another burayh who is ibn umar ibn safinah - apparently his name was ibrahim, but was shortened to burayh. (william>bill; robert>bob)

    Allah knows best.
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2022
    Umar99 and Noori like this.
  15. Ali_Bash

    Ali_Bash Active Member

    If we do not have the book of Razin with us and dont have access to the chain it's better for us to assume that he narrated this through al-Khatib.

    Maybe it would be better for us to stay silent on this narration for we do not know its chain unless it can be provided.

    I appreciate this dialouge

    Jazkumullahu khairun
  16. Ali_Bash

    Ali_Bash Active Member

    [QUOTE and it is obvious from the matn itself![/QUOTE]

    We see in the books of hadith that the same narrations even via the same chain sometimes have different wordings but the overall meanng of the hadith stays the same.

    [QUOTE first: 'the good deeds of umar are like one good deed...
    second: 'umar is one of the good deeds of abu bakr...[/QUOTE]

    We see even when Imam al-Dhahabi and Imam al-Suyuti have narrated this report in their books they have used some of the wording from Mishkat and al-Khatibs

    Screenshot 2022-07-17 21.00.14.png

    This is in al-La'ali where it states " Yes Umar" same wording as Mishkat where as in Khatib it is Sayyidah Aishah who asks who it is. In the wording of Mizan Imam Dhahabi adds the wording "umar is one of the good deeds of abu bakr O A'isha"

    Screenshot 2022-07-17 20.59.44.png
    In the wording of Mizan Imam Dhahabi also uses the wording of Mishkat in regards to The Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam sayin "Yes Umar" adds the wording "Umar is one of the good deeds of abu bakr O A'isha"

    So even if the wroding is a little different the meaning of the Narrations is still the same

    As for Imam Razin he passed away in the year 535 ah (Siyar 'Alam al-Nubala 20/205)
  17. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    razin ibn muawiyah

    [see siyar of dhahabi, 20/204]

    siyar, v20p204.png

    razin ibn mu'awiyah ibn ammar; famous imam and hadith master.
    abul hasan al-abdari al-andalusi al-sarqustiy.

    the author of the book: 'tajrid al-sihah'.

    i say: he has included in his book some additional weak narrations, and if he had kept it free from them it would be better.
    he passed away in makkah in muharram of the year 535.

    ibn al-athir al-jazary - imam majduddin abi's sa'adaat al-mubarak ibn muhammad [544-606 AH] compiled a consolidated collection of hadith alphabetically found in six collections: muwatta, bukhari, muslim, abu dawud, tirmidhi, nasayi and about which he himself says:

    jamiy al-usul, 1/48:

    jamiy-usul, v1p48.png

    ...among these later scholars who compiled books consolidating hadith from the books of early scholars with some changes and summarisation as done by abu bakr ahmad ibn muhammad al-barqani (d.425AH), abu mas'ud ibrahim ibn muhammad ibn ubayd al-dimashqi (d. 401 AH) and abu abdullah muhammad ibn abi naSr al-humaydi (d.488 AH) followed in their footsteps.

    they combined the hadith of bukhari and muslim and organised these according to the isnad, omitted the chapters as mentioned earlier.

    and among the latest to follow them was abu'l hasan razin ibn mu'awiyah al-abdari al-sarqusti; he compiled the hadith of bukhari, muslim, muwatta imam malik, jamiy of abu yisa tirmidhi, sunan of abu dawud and sunan of abu abdu'r rahman al-nasa'i - may Allah have mercy upon all of them.

    he organised the book according to topics - but sans isnad (he omitted the sanad); except that all of them mentioned the text of the hadith without any explanation - according to their plan of compilation - and they did an excellent job and earned the fruits of this world and the hereafter; and they struck a path for those who came after them and paved the way for the seekers in this science. may ALlah give them a beautiful reward.

    further in jamiy al-usul, 1/49:

    jamiy-usul, v1p49.png

    reason in brief for compiling this book

    when i perused these books and found them excellent in composition and a beautiful order; and then saw the book of razin (i.e. tajrid al-sihah) and which is the biggest of them and more common - as it covers these six books which are the motherbooks - and they are famous among the people; and hadith in them are relied upon by scholars, and used as evidence by jurists and issue rulings and strengthen the foundations of islam.

    and the authors of those books are famous scholars of hadith; most of them are huffaz and are very knowledgeable about the correct and erroneous - and (in matters related to this science) the ultimate authorities; and the judgement (related to these issues) is dependent on their opinion...

    ibn al-athir mentions that he had seen razin's book and his own compilation is based on his collection.

    jamiy-usul, v1p55.png

    and i could not find the hadith i found in razin's book in the original books (i.e. the motherbooks); but i copied it in my compilation from razin's book as i found them in specific instances (where i couldn't find the original source) and left them without marking them and left a blank space about who had reported this hadith in the hope that i would find other copies of these motherbooks where i would probably find the name of the book where it could be found (lit. name of who extracted it).

    Last edited: Jul 18, 2022
    Umar99 and Noori like this.
  18. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    so let us not talk about the hadith of hazrat ammar.

    when we talk about the hadith of sayyidah ayeshah, an astute observer might have noted that the two narrations are not the same. the hadith quoted in mishkat is markedly different from the hadith slammed as forged in khatib's tarikh and the rest of the critics (suyuti, dhahabi, et al).

    and it is obvious from the matn itself!

    let us place the two hadith - the one in mishkat and the one in khatib's forged by burayh:


    narrated by sayyidah ayishah (raDi'Allahu anha) and she said:
    the (blessed) head of RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam was in my lap on a bright night (i.e. a full-moon night) and i said:
    "O Messenger of Allah! is there anyone whose good deeds equal in number to the stars in the sky?"
    he said: "yes, umar"
    i said: "what about the good deeds of abu bakr?"
    he said: "all the good deeds of umar are like just one good deed among the good deeds of abu bakr"
    narrated by razin.

    khatib citing burayh:

    it was my (turn) night with RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam; and when the bed had joined me and him, i looked at the sky and saw the twinkling stars. i asked: "O Messenger of Allah is there any man in this world whose good deeds equal in number to the stars in the sky?"
    he said: "yes"
    i said: "who?"
    he said: "umar; and he is one good deed among the good deeds of your father"

    these are two different narrations. the first is plausible, the second has silly mistakes (the test of absurd wording rakakah)

    in the first: his (sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam) head in my lap.
    in the second: we were lying together

    second: i looked at the sky and saw twinkling of stars.
    obviously, that would indicate lying in bed - not under a roof but an open sky. which is absurd and impossible.

    then comes the last wording:

    first: 'the good deeds of umar are like one good deed...
    second: 'umar is one of the good deeds of abu bakr...

    so the narration cited by khatib via burayh is a totally different narration and all the criticism of hadith masters does not apply to the hadith in mishkat as we will see more on this, in sha'Allah.

    at this point we need to learn a bit more about razin.
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2022
    Umar99, Noori and Aqdas like this.
  19. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    you cannot work with assumptions and hasty connection of dots.

    take the statement above - how can you say that razin narrated through khatib? just because of albani's blunder, should you follow his barking up a wrong tree?

    my contention is that the hadith in mishkat via razin is NOT the same as the hadith cited by khatib in tarikh (via burayh).
    please be a little patient. wa billahi't tawfiq.
    Umar99 likes this.
  20. Ali_Bash

    Ali_Bash Active Member


    Asalam alaikum,

    I agree there is no harm in accepting weak narrations especially in the case of Fada'il.

    But in the case of forged narrations it is not to be accepted for the hadith on the authority of Sayyidah A'isha is forged from the route of al-Khatib. We do not have the book Razin with us and it is possible that he narrated this through al-Khatib.

    As for the narration of Ammar i have not looked into this, so jazakallah for that i will look into both especially the one narrated by hasan bin arafah.

    A question, what should our position towards al-Shawkani be in terms of Hadith? For if it is negative should we be citing him

    Jazakumullah Khair

Share This Page