His full name is Abu Bakr Muhammad
Ibn Muslim Ibn ‘Abdullah Ibn Shihab Zuhri (d:124 AH). While he has
been generally regarded as a reliable personality by the scholars of ‘Ilmu’l-Rijal,
evidence is found to the contrary as well. In fact, this evidence coupled
with the fact that he is inevitably found in the chain of narrators of
many Ahadith which disparage the status of the Qur’an, that
of the first two caliphs as well as that of A’ishah (rta), the beloved
wife of the Prophet (sws)2
cast dense clouds of doubt on his personality.
This contrary evidence shows that
Zuhri is guilty of the following:
1. Idraj
2. Tadlis
3. Irsal
1. Idraj: In the text of a Hadith,
this means the insertion of something in it that does not belong to it
without giving any indication of this insertion. (Mahmud Tahhan, Taysir
Mustalih al-Hadith, [Karachi: Qadimi Kutub Khanah], p. 102)
Idraj is prohibited by all
the authorities:
Idraj deliberately done by a narrator is totally
prohibited in all its types. There is a consensus among the scholars of
Fiqh, Hadith and Usul, besides others on this because it
is camouflage and deceit and an attribution of something to someone who
never said it. Ibn Sam‘ani and others besides him say: ‘He who deliberately
does Idraj becomes unreliable, and a person who changes a passage
in any way is a liar’. (Ahmad Muhammad Shakir, Al-Ba‘is al-Hathith Sharah
Ikhtisaru’l- ‘Ulum al-Hadith (Ibn Kathir) 3rd ed., [Cairo: Daru’l-Turath,
1979], p. 64)
It is known that Zuhri was a Mudrij
(person who does Idraj):
Zuhri used to explain various Ahadith a
lot and many a time he would not mention the particle [of speech] from
which would be known whether the words were from the Prophet (sws) or from
Zuhri. So some of his contemporaries would always ask him to separate
his words from those of the Prophet (sws). (Sakhawi, Fathu’l-Mughis,
vol. 1, [Beirut: Daru’l Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, 1996], p. 267-8)
Rabi‘ah would say to Ibn Shihab: My situation
is totally different from you. Whatever I say, I say it from my own self
and you say it on the authority of the Prophet (sws) and so you must be
careful, and it is not befitting for a person to waste himself [like this].
(Bukhari, Tacrikhu’l-Kabir, vol. 3, [Beirut: Daru’l-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah],
pp. 286-7)
Rabi‘ah would say to Ibn Shihab: When you
narrate something according to your own opinion, always inform the people
that this is your own view. And when you narrate something from the Prophet
(sws), always inform them that it is from the Prophet (sws) so that they
do not consider it to be your opinion. (Khatib Baghdadi, Al-Faqih wa
Al-Mutafaqqih, vol. 1, [Lahore: Daru’l-Ahya al-Sunnah], p. 148)
Ibn Rajab records the following opinion
of Imam Bukhari:
Zuhri would narrate Ahadith and on most
occasions would insert sentences from his own self. Some of these would
be Mursal and some of them would be his own. (Ibn Rajab, Fathu’l-Bari,
1st ed., vol. 5, [Jaddah: Dar Ibn al-Jawzi, 1996], p. 286)
2. Tadlis: In Asnad, this
means the narration from a person, whom a narrator has met, of something
which is not heard from him giving the impression that it has actually
been heard from him. (Ibn Salah, Muqaddamah, 4th ed., [Multan, Faruqi
Kutub Khanah, 157 AH], p. 34)
Imam Shu‘bah comments on Tadlis
in the following words:
It is the brother of falsehood. (Khatib Baghdadi,
Al-Kifayah, 1st ed., [Hyderabad: Da’iratu’l-Ma‘arif, 1357 AH),
p. 355)
It is worse than committing fornication.
(Khatib Baghdadi, Al-Kifayah, 1st ed., [Hyderabad: Da’iratu’l-Ma‘arif,
1357 AH], p. 356)
Ibn Mubarak says:
That we plunge down from the sky is dearer to me than
we do Tadlis in a Hadith. (Khatib Baghdadi, Al-Kifayah,
1st ed., [Hyderabad: Da’iratu’l-Ma‘arif, 1357 AH], p. 356)
Imam Shaf‘i says:
We will not accept the narration of a Muddalis unless
he says Haddathani [It has been narrated to me] or Sami‘tu [I have
heard]. (Shaf‘i, Al-Risalah, [Beirut: Daru’l-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah],
p. 380)
Zuhri’s Tadlis is recorded in the
following words:
Imam Shaf‘i, Dara Qutani and many others have
attributed Tadlis to Zuhri. (Ibn Hajar, Tabaqatu’l-Mudallisin,
[Cairo: Maktabah Kulliyyat al-Azhar], pps. 32-3)
3. Irsal: It means that the person
before a Tabi‘i at the beginning of the chain is not mentioned.
(Mahmud Tahhan, Taysir Mustalih al-Hadith, [Karachi: Qadimi Kutub
Khanah], p. 70)
On the status of Mursal Ahadith
(Ahadith afflicted with Irsal), authorities say:
In reality, Mursal Ahadith are weak and worthy
of being forsaken because they do not fulfil one condition of Maqbul
Ahadith [Ahadith which are acceptable], which is Ittisal
[continuity in the chain of narrators], and because the status of the
person who is not mentioned is unknown as there is a chance that he may
not be a Sahabi [companion]. (Mahmud Tahhan, Taysir Mustalih
al-Hadith, [Karachi: Qadimi Kutub Khanah], p. 71)
Imam Abu Da’ud says:
Out of the twenty two hundred Ahadith narrated
by Zuhri only half are Musnad3
[the rest are Mursal]. (Dhahabi, Tadhkiratu’l-Huffaz, vol.
1, [Beirut: Daru’l-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah], p. 109]
Ibn Hajar records the following
words about Zuhri in this regard:
Yahya Ibn Sa‘id Qattan is of the opinion that
the Mursalat of Zuhri are baseless. (Ibn Hajar, Tahdhibu’l-Tahdhib,
1st ed., vol. 5, [Beirut: Daru’l-Ma‘rifah, 1996], p. 269)
Imam Dhahabi has reported the following
words of Yahya Ibn Sa‘id Qattan:
The Mursalat of Zuhri are the worst of all since
he is a Hafiz. Whenever, he wants he can disclose the name of a
person, and whenever he wants he can conceal his name. (Dhahabi, Sayar
A‘lam al-Nubala, 8th ed., vol. 5, [Beirut: Mu’ssasah al-Risalah,
1992], p. 338)
Imam Shaf‘i says:
The Mursalat of Zuhri are baseless since
he even narrates from [a person as unreliable as] Sulayman Ibn Arqam.
(Dhahabi, Sayar A‘lam al-Nubala, 8th ed., vol. 5, [Beirut: Mu’ssasah
al-Risalah, 1992], p. 339)
Besides these three major aspects, it
seems that Zuhri is guilty of other blemishes as well:
Sometimes, a group of people would present a Hadith
to him to corroborate something. So, at times, he would narrate from
the whole group and sometimes from one person of that group. This would
be according to the way he felt during the narration. Sometimes, he would
insert the Hadith narrated by one into that narrated by someone
else as he has done so in the Hadith of Ifk besides others.
When he would feel lazy, he would narrate Mursal Ahadith, and when
he would be feeling fresh, he would narrate Muttasil ones. It is
because of this that his companions differ a lot about him. (Zarqani,
Sharah Mu’atta, vol. 3, [Beirut, Daru’l-Fikr], p. 377)
In a letter to Imam Malik, Imam Layth
Ibn Sa‘ad writes:
When we would meet Ibn Shihab, there would arise
a difference of opinion in many issues. When any one of us would ask him
in writing about some issue, he, in spite of being so learned, would give
three very different answers, and he would not even be aware of what he
had already said. It is because of this that I have left him – something
which you did not like. (Ibn Qayyim, I’lamu’l Muwaqqi‘in, vol. 3,
[Beirut: Daru’l-Jayl], p. 85)
In the light of this evidence, any narrative
none of whose texts is without Zuhri in its chain of narrators becomes
suspect.
_____________________
1. For more details see Tamanna
‘Imadi. Imam Zuhri and Imam Tabari, Rahman Publishing Trust,
Karachi, 1994.
2. See Khalid Mas‘ud, Muhammad
Ibn Shihab Zuhri, Tadabbur, No. 21 (May 1987), 7-9).
3. Ahadith in which there
is no break in the chain of narrators and they are continuous up to the
Prophet (sws). (See: Mahmud Tahhan, Taysir Mustalih al-Hadith, [Karachi:
Qadimi Kutub Khanah], p. 134)