Hadith on Prophetic Succession


Bismillah al Rahman al Rahim

Assalaamu ‘Alaykum Shaykh Gibril Haddad,

Inshallah everything is well. Had the honor of taking a class with you online through Seekers Guidance on Ibn Hajar’s Nukhbat al-Fikr a while back. Just have one question in regard to a Hadith and would be delighted to have it clarified.

In the Mu’jam of Ibn al A’raabi (340 AH), the Hadith on Prophetic Succession “تسوسوهم الأنبياء” (Hadith ) contains a distinct chain of narration in that Ghaylan bin Jami’ narrates that Furat ibn Abi ‘Abd al Rahman al Qazzaz al Tamimi narrates from an apparently unknown narrator, Muhammad al Nadri, who in turn then narrates from Abu Hazim al Ashja’i.

Whereas, all the authentic narrations state that Furat narrated it directly from Abu Hazim as authentically narrated by Shu’ba (who as a matter of principle only narrated from narrators who heard directly from who they narrated from), ‘Anbasa bin Sa’id, Muhammad bin Juhada, ‘Amru bin Abi Qays al Razi, and Hasan bin Furat, as well as Isra’il bin Yunus. Shu’ba’s narration through Muhammad bin Ja’far al Hazli ‘Ghundar’ is the only narration which contains an explicit statement of tahdith from Furat hearing Abu Hazim (‘sam’itu‘ Aba Hazim while Abd al Samad’s from Shu’ba does not). Understand that Ghundar is most authentic specifically in regard to Shu’ba, and had put soundly into writing the Hadith he heard from Shu’ba. However, how can one know that this Hadith on Prophetic Succession was narrated by Ghundar via his checking his book or narrating from it if no explicit statement exists in that regard. Stating this only because it is also said he had ghafla as Ibn Hajar conveyed in Taqrib al Tahthib.

Dear Shaykh, my question is how does one account for such an occurrence in the narration contained in the Mu’jam stating that Furat narrated it from Muhammad al-Nadri and not Abu Hazim directly and also maintain the definitive authenticity of the other narrations which state Furat narrates directly from Abu Hazim?

There are other noteworthy things in the narration found in the Mu’jam of Ibn al A’raabi:
1) In terms of the sanad, it appears that there is a gap between Ya’la bin Yahya and Ghaylan bin Jami’ given the rather large time gap and that Ya’la narrates other narrations through his father to Ghaylan.
2) The matn does not contain the specification ‘Bani Isra’il‘ with respect to the Prophets (peace be upon them) إِنّ مَنْ كَانَ قَبْلَكُمْ كَانَتْ تَسُوسُهُمُ الأَنْبِيَاءُ كُلَّمَا ذَهَبَ نَبِيٌّ خَلَفَ نَبِيٌّ
3) The matn also does not contain the introductory statement of Abu Hazim
قَاعَدْتُ أَبَا هُرَيْرَةَ خَمْسَ سِنِينَ فَسَمِعْتُهُ يُحَدِّثُ

Baraka Allah fiikum.
Jazak Allah khayr


Alaykum Salam,

Bukhari in his Tarikh al-Kabir states that Furat ibn Abi ‘Abd al Rahman al Qazzaz al Tamimi

1) was originally from Basra
2) and his kunya was Abu Muhammad.

So the sanad in Ibn al-A`rabi does not contain an extra link, rather, it is one and the same narrator — Furat — but you have to correct two typos that slipped in. Namely:

غيلان ، عن فرات ، أن محمدا النضري ، قال : نا أبو حازم

غيلان ، عن فرات أبي محمد البصري ، قال : نا أبو حازم


Hajj Gibril Haddad

This entry was posted in Hadith, Takhrij and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.