Just a dude online. Maturidi.
Joined February 2021
- Tweets6.1K
- Following201
- Followers4.4K
- Likes10.1K
Kerr retweeted
translated the researcher fawaz al-shammari's article on the defense of muḥammad ibn abī bakr al-siddīq from the blood of amir al-muʾminīn amīr al-muʾminīn ʿuthmān ibn ʿaffān. may gods good pleasure be with both of them.
read: redbridegroom.substack.com/p…
You can read over my articles on hadith which (indirectly) addresses tafarrud in parts 2 and 3. Though the series main focus is against orientalists it still explains issues like these.
kerrs.blog/tags/hadith-serie…
That is the difference between the weak and reliable.
...Amount of tafarrud is so bad, that while I don't have an exact count, a skim shows the total number of marfu hadiths in Amr's Musnad are greater than all sahih marfu hadiths transmitted by Ali in all other books combined.
Use a random number generator to pick ~10 random hadiths in Amr's book. Apply the exercise in the Ibn Hibban example above. You will get very poor results.
Now do it for an actually reliable transmitter like Malik for his musnad hadiths. You will get a totally different outcome.
2) Saying that there are other transmitters who have tafarrud is a ridiculous point. The named examples are tabi'un or companions. They are not applicable to Amr. Go back and read what Dhahabi and Ibn Hibban said. The issue of tafarrud depends on the *position in the isnad.*
1) Saying Amr narrated reports from Zayd nobody else did due to persecution doesn't really solve the issue. There are other transmitters who suffered persecution too but didn't have this. Even if we accept this explanation, it only helps with this link in the isnad. Not the rest.
I don't think you have understood anything I've posted if you think that stuff is relevant at all. I'm not sure you understood the implications of what I sent.
You are speaking of “being the sole narrator” and “reliability” as if they are different issues. How often (or not) someone's reports are corroborated or exclusively/solely transmitted by them is one of the main criteria to determine their reliability to begin with.
It is very common for what Malik narrates from his teachers to be narrated by their other pupils. We see similar results with the Kitab al-Jami' of Ma'mar. This is what a credible narrator's compilation actually looks like! Not hundreds of exclusive/isolated reports!
This is the chain for *hundreds* of reports in the Musnad Zayd. Now, guess what will happen if we apply the logic of Ibn Hibban's example here? You will find countless times (the bulk of the book not just a few instances) where the report would have to be denounced.
Now the chain in question here is:
Amr b. Khaled Al-Wasiti → Zayd bin Ali → his father [Ali ibn al-Husayn] → his grandfather [Hussein bin Ali] → Ali ibn Abi Talib.
Sometimes the report is mawquf from Ali, other times Ali narrates from Rasulallah (ﷺ).
Even if we suppose there were other people who transmitted it but, that their transmission didn't reach us, this is still far too late for a (genuine) marfu hadith to remain isolated.
The hypothetical report from Hammad is not plausible. It would require Rasulallah (ﷺ) teach a hadith, then only Abu Huraira transmitted it, then only Ibn Sirin transmitted it from Abu Huraira, only Ayyub transmitted from Ibn Sirin, and then only Hammad transmitted from Ayyub.
There exists no chains for this report that do not go back to Malik and his chain. All sound chains lead to him. This hadith is “sahih gharib” as per the quote from Al-Dhahabi. As the quote explains, the severity of the issue of tafarrud also depends on the position in the chain.
Let us take the following report in the Muwatta: sunnah.com/urn/509520
Malik exclusively narrated it from Al-Zuhri, that is to say, nobody else narrated from Al-Zuhri but Malik. Al-Zuhri exclusively narrated it from Anas, and Anas exclusively narrated it from Rasulallah (ﷺ).
You have missed the original point regarding tafarrud, or the isolated transmissions. Just put aside what classical hadith scholars said about him for a moment. Let's examine the principles of hadith and the notion of isolated transmission. Al-Dhahabi:
Regardless of what one thinks of the position it was certainly around extremely early:
From the indications that the Salaf gave consideration to the idea of whether al-Khaḍir is still alive or not, is the statement of Maʿmar (d. 153), from the students of Qatādah (d. 118), al-Zuhrī (d. 124), Thābit (d. 127), et al.:
“It has reached me that it is al-Khaḍir who will be killed by al-Dajjāl, and then he will revive him.”
[al-Muṣannaf of ʿAbd al-Razzāq (d. 211) | 11:393, al-Maktab al-Islāmī]
