Hadith al-Tayr Part III: Why This Hadith Is Mutawatir
- Anonymous
- Jun 26
- 41 min read
Updated: Jul 23
« Previous Part: Hadith al-Tayr Part II: What This Hadith Really Proves »
Introduction
The defining feature that distinguishes the virtues of Amir al-Mu’mineen (as) from the other companions is their mass-transmission. Indeed, when something was truly uttered by the Prophet (saw) and carries major significance, we will find that many people narrate it. The Prophet (saw) would be more wise than to say a significant virtue that carries a theological implication to just a single person.
In contrast, many of these significant virtues of Abu Bakr and Umar are mostly Ahad (solitary) reports, such as those that say Umar would’ve been a Prophet. A report of such theological significance, yet hardly remains reported?
As for Hadith al-Tayr, the Prophet (saw) clearly said in front of a group of companions who all testified to its occurrence. Many more Sahaba, other than the ones who narrated it, can be proven to have known of this Hadith. Up to even 20 different companions that include Ibn Mas’ud, Umm Salamah, Asma bt. Umays, Mu’awiyah, Abu Bakr, Umar, Aisha, Hafsa and many more.
Now, what is the extent of the mass-transmission of Hadith al-Tayr and how can we establish its authority as a tawatur report?
Defining Tawatur
A tawatur report is one that carries certainty of its utterance by the Holy Prophet (saw) because of the impossibility of it being conspired upon. This impossibility is proven by the corroboration of the report’s transmission, because it is not possible for a nation to conspire upon a lie, for instance, we know World War I happened despite not living through it.
The criterion and requirement for what certifies as tawatur was explained by Imam al-Suyuti in Tadrib al-Rawi, Vol. 2, pg. 104:
وأن الحديث الفلاني متواتر وهو قليل لا يكاد يوجد في رواياتهم، وهو ما نقله من يحصل العلم بصدقهم ضرورة بأن يكونوا جمعاً لا يمكن تواطؤهم على الكذب (عن مثلهم من أوله) أي الإسناد إلى آخره ولذلك يجب العمل به من غير بحث عن رجاله، ولا يعتبر فيه عدد معين في الأصح. قال القاضي الباقلاني: ولا يكفي الأربعة، وما فوقها صالح، وتوقف في الخمسة، وقال الاصطخري: أقله عشرة، وهو المختار، لأنه أول جموع الكثرة
The statement, "And that such-and-such Hadith is mutawatir"—this is rare and scarcely found in their narrations.
It refers to what is transmitted by those whose truthfulness leads to certain knowledge by necessity, such that they are a group it is impossible to imagine colluded on a lie (transmitting from people like them from the beginning to the end of the chain).
Therefore, it must be acted upon without investigating the individual narrators, and no specific number is required for it according to the more correct view.
Qadi al-Baqillani said: "Four are not sufficient, but anything above that is acceptable." He hesitated about five. Al-Iskafi said: "The minimum is ten," and this is the preferred view, because it is the first level of what is considered a large group.
Al-Suyuti’s point is a valid one, because setting the requirement for tawatur under a specific number lacks rational evidence for its validity. Is it possible that 9 chains does not suffice for tawatur but somehow 10 does? What is the difference in that case, which makes one tawatur but not the other? It’s invalid reasoning.
The other point al-Suyuti makes was supported by Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani in al-Nukat ala Nuzhar, pg. 60, where he says:
والمتواتر لا يُبحث عن رجاله، بل يجب العمل به من غير بحث
And the mutawatir (i.e. mass-transmitted Hadith) is not subject to scrutiny of its narrators; rather, it must be acted upon without any investigation.
Thus, once a Hadith is shown to be tawatur, the investigation of the individual narrators of every chain becomes meaningless, as it is established that the Hadith is mass-transmitted.
Now, how do we verify a Hadith as being mutawatir?
Once we prove the impossibility of it having concurred through a lie through rational analysis, we can come to conclude it being tawatur. This impossibility can be proven through a list of ways that is case by case specific, such as opposing groups narrating the same report, historical corroboration- which means that the report can be found and cited in historical sources and not just Hadith, large narrators and a list of other reasons that are based on what the intellect agrees with.
Shahid al-Thani (ra) likewise takes this viewpoint in al-Ri'ayah fi 'Ilm al-Dirayah, pg. 62:
هو: ما بلغت رواته في الكثرة مبلغاً، أحالت العادة تواطؤهم -أي: اتفاقهم- على الكذب. واستمر ذلك الوصف، في جميع الطبقات حيث يتعدد؛ بأن يرويه قوم عن قوم، و هكذا إلى الأول. فيكون أوله في هذا الوصف كآخره، ووسطه كطرفيه
It is: Those whose narrators have reached such a large number that it is customarily impossible for them to have conspired on a lie. This characteristic continues throughout all levels (of transmission), such that it is narrated by a group from another group, and so on, all the way back to the origin. Thus, its beginning shares this quality with its end, and its middle is like its two ends.
Lastly, while establishing the report of Hadith al-Tayr, we can use multiple chains to strengthen other chains, and this was mentioned by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami in al-Minah al-Makkiyah, pg. 587 - 588:
تنبيه : ورد في مناقب علي رضي الله عنه حديث كثر كلام الحفاظ فيه ، فأردت أن ألخص المعتمد فيه ، ولفظه عن أنس : كان عند النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم طير ، فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : « اللَّهُمَّ ؛ أثْتِنِي بِأَحَبِّ خَلْقِكَ إِلَيْكَ يَأْكُلْ مَعِي هَذَا الطَّيْرَ ، فَجَاء عَلِيٌّ فَأَكَلَ » رواه الترمذي
والمعتمد عند محققي الحفاظ : أنه ليس بموضوع ، بل له طرق كثيرة ، قال الحاكم في « المستدرك » : ( رواه عن أنس أكثر من ثلاثين نفساً ) اهـ
وحينئذ : فيتقوى كل من تلك الطرق بمثله ، ويصير سنده حسناً لغيره ، والمحققون أيضاً : على أن الحسن لغيره يحتج به كالحسن لذاته ، ومن جملة طرقه طريق رواتها كلهم ثقات إلا واحداً ، قال بعض الحفاظ : لم أر من وثقه ولا من جرحه ، وطريق أخرى رواتها كلهم ثقات أيضاً إلا واحداً ، قال النسائي فيه : ليس بالقوي ، وهو معارض بأن غير واحد وثقه ، وذكر الحاكم : أنه صح عن علي وأبي سعيد وسفينة ، لكن تساهله في التصحيح معلوم ، فالحق ما سبق : أن كثرة طرقه صيرته حسناً يحتج به ، ولكثرتها جداً خرج الحافظ أبو بكر بن مردويه فيها جزءاً
The wording of the Hadith from Anas is: "The Prophet (saw) had a bird and said: 'O Allah, bring me the most beloved of Your creation to You to eat this bird with me.' Then Ali came and ate with him." This Hadith was narrated by Tirmidhi.
The accepted view among the meticulous Hadith scholars is that this Hadith is not fabricated, but rather it has numerous chains of transmission. Al-Hakim stated in Al-Mustadrak that more than thirty people narrated it from Anas.
Thus, each of these chains strengthens the other, making its chain of transmission hasan li ghayrihi (good due to corroboration).
Furthermore, the meticulous scholars agree that a Hadith which is hasan li ghayrihi is acceptable as evidence, similar to a Hadith which is hasan li dhatihi (good in itself).
For some reason though, the boys from TwelverShia.net and other dishonest websites reject this reasoning, yet are the same ones who implement it in other articles. For example, in their Ashara Mubashira article:
The first two narrations that we have first examined do have some weakness, but when combined with the three narrations that are attributed to anonymous students of Sa’eed bin Zaid, we can be certain that this narration was indeed said by Sa’eed himself.
If two/three weak reports can be used to strengthen one another in the case of Hadith Ashra Mubashra, then the same principle can also be applied in this case where different independent chains can strengthen one another. But when this principle is used for Hadith al-Tayr, there always comes objections for some reason. Subhan’Allah.
Response to TwelverShia.net about Tawatur
In rejection of Hadith al-Tayr, the boys from twelvershia.net say:
As we can see from the above, no one agreed upon a number for the limit of narrators for a Hadith to be shifted to the Mutawatir category. Due to this, the Mutawatir Hadith, which is supposed to represent complete certainty, becomes something subjective.
The hypocrisy and double standards of TwelverShia.net never fail to amaze their readers when their argument against Hadith al-Tayr’s authenticity and mass chains falls to the objection of ‘subjectivity’. Yet, at the same time will claim about Hadith al-Afazaliyyah (where Ali (as) allegedly claims Abu Bakr and Umar are better than him):
It is clearly obvious from our research that this Hadith from `Ali, is mass transmitted, it is Mutawatir from him, and that no one can reject his statement except a stubborn ignorant who follows his desires. Sadly, this is the case of the Shia in our days, as they are Rafidhah (rejecters) who reject the Shaykhayn -Abu Bakr & `Umar- and curse them and swear at them, may Allah disown them as they disowned them.
This emotional rant will be followed up momentarily in our upcoming article. But the incoherence of our opponents really reveals to us the value of their so-called ‘research’ if it even deserves that label. Wasn’t tawatur supposed to be subjective? Then why are we suddenly branded as ignorant and desire-driven simply because our "subjective standards" don’t align with theirs?
Their scholars' rejection of this Hadith is not even in regards to the unreliability of the report itself or the nature of the narrators. Rather, this report is rejected due to a biased belief pertained by Ahlus Sunnah, and not due to an objective methodology that weakens the report itself. And even if the authenticity of Hadith al-Tayr was to be proven before the Sunnis, they would still reject it on account of the content, due to their spite against Ali (as)!
This is the pinnacle of abandoning objective methodology and a clear illustration of their deep-seated aversion to the virtues of Imam Ali (as). Had this report been about Abu Bakr, Umar, or anyone else, they would have rushed to use it at every opportunity, even if it had only a single authentic chain. But because it’s about Ali (as), the fact that we have tons of authentic chains for it, they still cannot and will not submit to accepting the report.
Even Al-Albani admits this in his Silsalat al-Ahadith al-Dha’eefa, Vol. 14, pg. 183:
وبالجملة ؛ فالحديث لا ينقصه كثرة طرق ، وإنما يفتقر إلى سلامة المتن ، فإنما أنكر من الأئمة هذا الحديث لما يظهر من متنه من تفضيل علي على الشيخين رضي الله عنهم ، بالإضافة لما في متنه من ركة اللفظ والاضطراب
In general, the problem with this narration is not the abundance of its sources, but rather its lack of reliability in terms of the content. Some of the Imams rejected this narration because of the apparent preference of Ali over the two shaykhayn, Abu Bakr and Umar, in addition to the awkward phrasing and confusion in the narration's text.
Is their preference of Abu Bakr and Umar more authoritative than the Hadiths of the Prophet (saw)? So while they try to make a baseless accusation of us adhering to desires, we claim that they suffer from a disease in their hearts, worse than any desire followed. Some Sunnis may object to the wording of its content and say for that reason they’ll reject it, but we have revealed the hypocrisy of this reasoning in our previous article.
As for their first claim, the unagreed criterion of tawatur does not refute the objectivity of tawatur itself because this disagreement comes through the inability to draw a line to a self-evident matter. Take for instance past historical events, we can confidently conclude that World War II is a mutawatir event, occurred without a doubt, yet we are unable to draw the line at when or how many narrators it required in order to be perceived as such. All self-evident matters are difficult to express as is known by anyone who studies logic.
As al-Suyuti says, which is the opinion that the Shi’a scholars have generally accepted upon, is that tawatur is understood through each relevant case in which its tabaqat (levels) of narrators reveal an impossibility for a fabrication to have occurred. If we, for instance, have many chains to multiple companions from opposing companions and narrators, such as we do for the Hadith regarding the killers of Ammar b. Yasir: “A rebellious group will kill him”, we can conclude it to be mutawatir because of the impossibility of it being fabricated by both sides.
When we investigate Hadith al-Afazaliyyah, we find the clear pattern behind who the narrators of the Hadith are. In contrast, those who narrate Hadith al-Tayr are both Shi’a and Sunni alike, despite them not adhering to such a viewpoint! This will be elaborated on.
The incompetent writers at twelvershia.net go on to quote al-Shaykh ‘Abd al-Hadi al-Fadhli (qaddas Allah ruha) who refutes them in the same passage:
Shi`ee scholar of Hadith `Abd al-Hadi al-Fahdli says in Usool `Ilm al-Hadith (p. 73) that a big group of people can transmit a lie even if they did not conspire to do so, what leads them to doing this are their desires and their love of advertising or spreading what agrees with their beliefs without the need to conspire together to achieve this. He then says on the same page: “Knowing that these folks have not conspired does not remove the possibility of intentional lying. So we must add to the definition (of Mutawatir): ‘In a way that it is safe to assume that they have not lied.’ This safety can be realized by the the number of narrators and their reliability, or that there is no reason to lie in that specific topic as well as other factors.”
Their aim in quoting this passage is to prove that a group of people can narrate a report and conspire to lying. Where has any scholar disagreed on this? It does not mean we throw away the fact that a large quantity of narrators can equate to tawatur, and Shaykh al-Fadhli goes to explain the criterion in the same passage: there is safety to assume they have not lied. Thus, when we lay out to describe something to be mutawatir, we can agree that quoting a lot of chains does not suffice. However, illustrating and proving through rational reasoning that the quantity and nature of chains make it impossible for it to have conspired upon a lie, then we can confidently call this Hadith mutawatir.
In other words, the criterion of tawatur is not just the number of chains, but also the nature of the chains and external criterias.
Sahaba Who Narrated Hadith al-Tayr
There are at least 12 different companions in Sunni sources who narrate this tradition, they are:
Anas b. Malik, Safina, Imam Ali himself, Ibn Abbas, Abu Tufayl, Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, Ya’la b. Murra, Sa’ad b. Abi Waqqas, Abu Rafi’, Habshi b. Janada, Jabir b. Abdullah al-Ansari, Amr b. al-’Aas.
Remember, these are only examples of companions that narrated the report, but many more can be proven to know of this report that were mentioned within this report as we explained before.
Shi’a Sources of Hadith al-Tayr
The best source for Hadith al-Tayr from a Shi’a perspective is:
Abad b. Ya’qubs chain to Imam Ali (as), which while we have lost, was preserved by a Sunni scholar in Kifayat al-Talib, pg. 154 - 155.
Shaykh al-Saduq (rh) has recorded at least 5 different chains mentioning Hadith al-Tayr: Abu al-Tufayl’s (ra) narration on the day of Shura narrated by Imam Ali (as) is in al-Khisal, vol. 3, pg. 42 - 63. Al-Tabari al-Imami also confirmed this happening on the day of Shura in Mustarshid Fil Imamah, pg. 336. Even the Sunni scholar al-Khawarizimi records it in Manaqib al-Khawarizmi, pg. 313 - 315.
Shaykh al-Saduq also recorded a separate chain which narrates a detailed conversation between Imam Ali (as) and Abu Bakr in al-Khisal, vol.3 , pg. 32 - 38, in which Imam Ali (as) mentioned Hadith al-Tayr as a proof for his right of Caliphate. He also recorded another report mentioning the Hadith in Uyun akhbar al-Riḍa, vol 2, book 1, chapter 15.
Abi Hadiyya’s report in Amali al-Saduq, Ch. 49, H. 3, with an authentic chain to Abi Hadiyya, who while is maj’hul, has no jarh (criticism) put against him and his report is corroborated by tawatur which makes it acceptable.
Imam al-Sadiq (as) in an independent incident confirms this report to be true to Mufaddal b. Umar al-Ju’fi in ‘Ilal al-Shara’i, vol. 1, pg. 313 - 314.
Sunni scholar Abu al-Shaykh reports that Maymun Abi Khalaf narrates it from Imam al-Sadiq as well in Tabaqat al-Muhaddithin, vol. 3, pg. 453 - 454.
Al-Shaykh al-Tusi also records this report with his chain to Anas b. Malik in Amali al-Tusi, pg. 253. Ibn Uqdah al-Kufi also reports 3 different chains to Anas in Fadh’ail Amir al-Mu’minin, pg. 73 -74.
Now why did the Shi’a not narrate Hadith al-Tayr as much as the Sunnis? As we saw in part 1, merely narrating Hadith al-Tayr would lead to your criticism, attack and heavy controversy. Under enough persecution already, the Shi’a were not able to narrate this report as much probably because it would lead to them being put under danger.
Secondly, as Allama al-Hilli essentially argued: If your own chains prove it, we don’t need to cite it from ours. This made a mass transmission in Shia works less necessary since the point could be established from the opponent's literature. The opponent narrating against himself is proof and indication for the report’s truthfulness.
This was explained by Sayyid Ali al-Milani in Nafuhat al-Azhar, vol. 14, pg. 134:
والثالث: إنه لا ريب في عداء أنس لأمير المؤمنين عليه السلام والشواهد على ذلك عديدة، منها موقفه منه عليه السلام في قصة الطائر - فإذا روى شيئاً في فضله ومنقبته قبل، لأن الفضل ما شهدت به الأعداء ... ومن الواضح أنه لو روى هذا الحديث عمر بن الخطاب أو أبو بكر لكان اعتباره أكثر والإعتماد عليه أشد، وكان أدخل في الإلزام والإفحام .
قال الشيخ رحمة الله السندي في بيان أمارات الحديث الموضوع : منها إقرار واضعه به، وليس هذا قبولاً لقوله مع فسقه، وإنما هو مؤاخذة بموجب إقراره، كما يؤخذ بالإعتراف بالزنا أو القتل
Third: There is no doubt about Anas’s hostility toward Imam Ali and the evidence for this is numerous, and among them is his stance toward him in the story of the bird. Thus, if he narrates something in his virtue and merit, it is accepted, for virtue is what the enemies testify to. It is clear that if this hadith were narrated about ʿUmar ibn al-Khattab or Abu Bakr, it would have been given greater consideration, more heavily relied upon, and more compelling in argument and refutation.
Shaykh Rahmatullah al-Sindi said in explaining the signs of a fabricated Hadith: Among them is the admission of its fabricator. This is not an acceptance of his statement despite his sinfulness, but rather holding him accountable for what his admission entails, just as one is held accountable for confessing to adultery or murder.
Thirdly, The Shi’a have always accepted the report, there has been an ijma’ of its acceptance from the early scholars until the later. We see al-Mufid, al-Murtada, Allama al-Hilli and many more scholars all using the Hadith as a proof.
Lastly, the report is mutawatir, it is a report narrated by both opponents and proponents on a large scale with no proof, motive or sign for fabrication, which is evidence for its truthfulness.
It is as al-Shaykh al-Mufid says in al-Fusul al-Mukhtara, pg. 97 by Sharif al-Murtada:
مع أن التواتر قد ورد بأن أمير المؤمنين - عليه السلام - احتج به في مناقبه يوم الدار فقال: أنشدكم بالله هل فيكم أحد قال له رسول الله (ص): " اللهم ائتني بأحب خلقك إليك يأكل معي من هذا الطائر " فجاء أحد غيري؟ فقالوا: اللهم لا، فقال اللهم اشهد فاعترف القوم بصحته ولم يك أمير المؤمنين - عليه السلام - بالذي يحتج بباطل لا سيما وهو في مقام المنازعة والتوسل بفضائله إلى أعلى الرتب التي هي الإمامة والخلافة للرسول (ص) وإحاطة علمه بأن الحاضرين معه في الشورى يريدون الأمر دونه مع قول النبي (ص): " علي مع الحق والحق مع علي يدور حيثما دار " وإذا كان الأمر على ما وصفناه دل على صحة الخبر حسبما بيناه.
Despite that, the report has reached the level of tawatur that the Commander of the Faithful (ع) used it as proof of his virtues on the Day of al-Dar. He said: “I ask you by Allah, is there anyone among you to whom the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: ‘O Allah, bring to me the most beloved of Your creation to You to eat this bird with me,’ and someone other than me came?” They replied: “By Allah, no.” So he said: “O Allah, bear witness.”
The people acknowledged its authenticity, and the Commander of the Faithful (ع) was not one to use a false argument, especially not in a moment of contention, where he sought to affirm his virtues in pursuit of the highest ranks, namely Imamate and succession to the Messenger (saw), while knowing that those present with him in the council were aiming for the position in his stead, despite the Prophet’s (saw) saying: “Ali is with the truth, and the truth is with Ali; it turns wherever he turns.” If the matter is as we have described, it indicates the authenticity of the report, just as we have explained.
The following scholars likewise affirm it:
Allama al-Majlisi after mentioning several chains also concludes with the fact that the report is mutawatir in Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 38, pg. 358.
Amin al-Islam al-Tabrasi says the report is widespread in A'lam al-Wara, vol. 1, pg. 316, and the editor also agrees with its tawatur.
Lastly, al-Mas’udi, being an expert historian, confirms the incident to be true in his Muruj al-Dhahab, vol. 2, pg. 330.
Thus, this reports authority is established through its tawatur nature and the ijma of scholars for its acceptance.
Sunni Sources of Hadith al-Tayr
As mentioned earlier, at least 12 companions narrate this tradition, and probably even more can be included such as Ibn Mas’ud and Umm Salamah (sa) as indicated by other reports.
However, it is not surprising that we cannot find all their narrations today, as many of them were destroyed or lost, and all we know is that they narrated it. We already mentioned in part 1 examples of how scholars would censor the reports.
For example, we do not have the narrations of Abu Rafi’ and Habshi b. Janada, Ibn Kathir just mentions they narrated it without a chain in al-Bidaya wal-Nihaya Vol 11, pg. 83.
Ya’la b. Murra’s report was mentioned before in part 1 as the censored version.
Additionally, we do not have the report of Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, but al-Hakim mentions it in Al-Mustadrak Ala al-Sahihain Vol 3, pg. 141 - 142, Hadith # 4650 and states it was sahih:
وقد رواه عن أنس جماعة من أصحابه زيادة على ثلاثين نفساً ثم صحت الرواية، عن علي، وأبي سعيد الخدري، وسفينة. وفي حديث ثابت البناني عن أنس زيادة ألفاظ.
It has been narrated from Anas by more than thirty of his companions, and the narration has also been authentically transmitted from Ali, Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri, and Safinah. In the version reported by Thabit al-Bunani from Anas, there are additional wordings.
His authentication is taken with value as mentioned in Ma'rifat Ilm al-Hadith, pg. 90 by Ibn Salah al-Shahruzi:
فنقول : مَا حَكَمَ بِصِحَتِهِ وَلَمْ نَجِدْ ذلكَ فيه لغيرِهِ مِنَ الأَئِمَّةِ ، إِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ مِنْ قَبيلِ الصحيح فَهوَ مِنْ قَبيلِ الحسن يُحتج بِهِ وَيُعْمَلُ به ، إلا أن تظهر فيهِ عِلْةٌ تُوجِبُ ضَعْفَهُ ويُقَارِبُهُ فِي حُكْمِهِ " صحيح أبي حاتم بن حِبَّانَ البُسْتِي "رَحِمَهُمُ اللهُ أجمعين - والله أعلم .
So we say: If a narration is judged by him (al-Hakim) to be authentic, and we do not find that judgment from any other of the Imams, then if it is not considered sahih, it is at least hasan, used as proof and acted upon, unless a defect appears in it that necessitates its weakness. Similar in ruling to this is the Sahih of Abu Hatim b. Hibban al-Busti, may Allah have mercy on them all. And Allah knows best.
These reports all are taken as corroboration.
Reliable Chains For Hadith al-Tayr
As noted earlier, al-Hakim deemed the report of Safina as authentic, and his gradings are mentioned by Ibn al-Salah as authoritative.
Safina’s Report
We read this tradition in Mu’jam al-Kabir by al-Tabarani. Vol. 4, pg. 30 - 31, H. # 6323 with the chain of:
حَدَّثَنَا عُبَيْدُ الْعِجْلي، ثنا ! الْعِجْلي، ثنا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بن سَعْدِ الْجَوْهَرِيُّ، تَنَا حُسَيْنُ بن مُحَمَّدٍ، ثنَا سُلَيْمَانُ بن قَوْمٍ، عَنْ فَطْرِ بن خَلِيفَةَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بن أَبِي نُعْمٍ، عَنْ سَفِينَةَ،
Ubaidullah al-’Ijli, from Ibn Sa’ad al-Jawhari, from Husayn b. Muhammad, from Sulayman b. Qaram, from Fitr b. Khalifa, from Ibn Abi Nu’aym, from Safina.
The chain was considered authentic in Majma’ al-Zawa’id. Vol. 9, pg. 118 - 119.
However, some Sunnis will try to weaken Sulayman b. Qaram. Al-Shaykh Ahmad Shakir says the following about him in a separate Hadith from Musnad Ahmad b. Hanbal, vol. 5, pg. 231:
إسناده صحيح، سليمان بن قرم بن معاذ الضبي النحوي: ثقة.
قال عبد الله بن أحمد بن حنبل: "كان أبي يتتبع حديث قطبة بن عبد العزيز وسليمان بن قرم ويزيد بن عبد العزيز بن سياه، وقال: هؤلاء قوم ثقات، وهم أتم حديثاً من سفيان وشعبة، وهم أصحاب كتب، وإن كان سفيان وشعبة أحفظ منهم"
وترجمه البخاري في الكبير فلم يذكر فيه جرحاً
وضعفه ابن معين وأبو زرعة وأبو حاتم وغيرهم، وشهادة أحمد وتوثقه صحة كتبه، مع إعراض البخاري عن جرحه، أقوى عندنا من تضعيف من تكلم فيه.
The chain is authentic. Sulayman b. Qarram b. Mu‘adh al-Dabbi al-Nahwi is thiqah (reliable).
Abdullah b. Ahmad b. Hanbal said: “My father used to follow up the Hadith of Qutbah b. Abd al-Aziz, Sulayman b. Qarram, and Yazid b. Abd al-Aziz b. Siyah. He said: These are reliable people, and their narrations are more complete than those of Sufyan and Shu‘bah, and they are authors of books, even though Sufyan and Shu‘bah have better memory than them.”
Al-Bukhari mentioned him in al-Kabir without any criticism.
Ibn Ma‘in, Abu Zur‘ah, Abu Hatim, and others weakened him, but the praise of Ahmad and his validation of Sulayman’s books, along with al-Bukhari’s silence, carries more weight with us than the criticism of those who weakened him.
This is an important principle in Sunni rijal, that the silence of jarh (criticism) of a narrator such as by al-Bukhari serves as evidence for a narrator’s reliability. This was clarified in Darasat Fi Minhaj al-Naqd, pg. 277 by Dr. Muhammad Ali Qasim al-Umri:
و ممن نسب هذا إلى البخاري وابن أبي حاتم العلامة التهانوي، حيث قال: كل من ذكره البخاري في تواريخه، ولم يطعن فيه فهو ثقة
Among those who attributed this view to al-Bukhari and Ibn Abi Hatim is the scholar al-Tahanawi, who said: “Everyone whom al-Bukhari mentioned in his Tarikh works without criticizing is considered trustworthy.”
Ahmad b. Hanbal relied on him as quoted by Ahmad Shakir. Ibn Hibban included him in his Kitab al-Thiqat and Ibn ‘Awaynah in his Kitab al-Sahiha, refer to Ikmal al-Tahdhib, vol. 3, pg. 481 by Ibn Muhghlatay.
Additionally, he narrates in Sahih al-Bukhari 4931. Although, it is a mutabi’a (corroboration), according to Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani this is still considered a form of ta’dil (praise) by al-Bukhari in Hadi al-Sari, vol. 1, pg. 1002:
فأما إن أخرج له في المتابعات والشواهد والتعاليق ، فهذا يتفاوت درجات من أخرج له منهم في الضبط وغيره مع حصول اسم الصدق لهم، وحينئذ إذا وجدنا لغيره في أحد منهم طعنا ، فذلك الطعن مقابل لتعديل هذا الإمام
As for when he (Bukhari) includes someone in the sections of follow-up reports (mutaba’at), supporting narrations (shawahid), or suspended chains (ta’aliq), this varies in level—depending on the precision of those he includes and other factors, along with their general reputation for truthfulness. In such cases, if we find criticism of one of them from another authority, that criticism stands in opposition to this Imam’s praise (ta’dil) of them.
He also narrated in Sahih Muslim 2640b and in Ma'arifat Ilm al-Hadith, pg. 84 - 85 by Ibn al-Salah al-Shahruzi, he says:
وأما ما رويناه عن أبي علي الحافظ النيسابوري أستاذ الحاكم أبي عبد الله الحافِظ مِنْ أَنَّهُ قَالَ : « مــــا تحت أديم السماء كتاب أصحُ مِنْ كتاب مُسلم بن الحجاج » فهذا وقولُ مَنْ فَضَّلَ مِن شيوخ المغرب كتاب مسلم على كتاب البخاري إن كان المراد به أن كتاب مسلم يترجح بأَنَّهُ لَمْ يُمَازِجه غير الصحيح ،
There is nothing wrong with the statement we heard from the expert Abu Ali al-Hafız al-Nisaburi: "There is no book on earth sounder than the book of Muslim b. al-Hajjaj," and there is nothing wrong with the doctrine of the North African scholars who prefer the book of Muslim to that of Bukhari; if what is meant is that the book of Muslim is superior since no unauthentic Hadith are mixed into it.
Thus, this is the first reliable report. As it establishes the reliability of the report of Safinah, however if someone still speculates that Sulayman is the one fabricating these reports, let us refer these people to a completely independent chain to Safina without Sulayman.
This is the censored report found in Fada’il al-Sahaba, vol. 2, pg. 560 - 561 by Ahmad b. Hanbal that goes:
حدثنا عبد الله بن محمد نا عبدالله بن عمر نا يونس بن ارقم قثنا مطير بن ابي خالد عن ثابت البجلي عن سفينة
Abdullah b. Muhammad - Abdullah b. Umar - Yunus b. Arqam - Mutayr b. Abi Khalid - Thabit al-Bajali.
The editor of this report says it is weak, however it corroborates with an authentic chain, which shows that none of the narrators here lied otherwise we could not find identical reports between them.
Moreover, we find a third completely independent chain to Safina in Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 42, pg. 257:
أخْبَرَنَا أَبُو مُحَمَّد بن طاوس، أنا أبو الغنائم بن أَبي عُثْمَان، أَنَا أَبُو مُحَمَّد عَبْدِ الله بن عبيد الله بن يَحْيَى ، نا أبو عبد الله المحاملي نا عبد الأعلى بن واصل، نا عون بن سلام أنا سهل بن شعيب، عَن بُرَيْدة بن سفيان، عن سفينة
Abu Muhammad Ibn Tawus - Abul Ghana’im b. Abi Uthman - Abdullah b. Ubaydullah b. Yahya - Abd al-’Ala b. Wasil - Abu Abdillah al-Muhamili - Awn b. Salam - Sahl b. Shu’ayb - Burayda b. Sufyan - Safina.
Again, we find none of these narrators in either of the previous chains, these are all independent narrations to Safina which corroborate one another, indicating that the report of Sulayman b. Qaram is definitely true in both Ibn Abbas’ and Safina’s narrations.
Thus, this is the first reliable report, with the other two strengthening the other.
Ibn Abbas’ Report
He (Sulayman b. Qaram) is also the one who narrates this report in a different chain to Ibn Abbas in Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 42, pg. 246 with all the other narrators as reliable:
نا يَحْيَى بن مُحَمَّد بن صاعد نا إبراهيم بن سعيد الجوهري، نا حسين بن محمد، نا سُلَيْمَان بن قرم، عَن مُحَمَّد بن شعيب، عن داود بن علي بن عبد الله بن عباس، عن أبيه، عن جده ابن عباس
Narrated to us Yahya ibn Muhammad ibn Sa‘id, narrated to us Ibrahim ibn Sa‘id al-Jawhari, narrated to us Husayn ibn Muhammad, narrated to us Sulayman ibn Qaram, from Muhammad ibn Shu‘ayb, from Dawud ibn Ali ibn Abd Allah ibn Abbas, from his father, from his grandfather Ibn Abbas.
Thus, it’s the second reliable report.
Jabir’s Report
As for Jabir, his report has been reliably transmitted in Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 42, pg. 244 - 245 but with a slight difference:
أَخْبَرَنَا أبو سعد أحمد بن مُحَمَّد بن البغدادي ، نا أبو المُظَفّر محمود بن جعفر بن مُحَمَّد الكوسج ، وأبو منصور مُحَمَّد بن أحمد بن شكروية ، قالا: أنا أبو علي الحسن بن علي بن أحمد بن سُلَيْمَان بن البغدادي، نا أبو الحسن أحمد بن مُحَمَّد بن عمر بن أبان العبدي، نا أبو إسماعيل مُحَمَّد بن إسماعيل الترمذي، نا أبو صالح عبد الله بن صالح، حدثني ابن لهيعة ، عَن مُحَمَّد بن المُنْكَدِر عَن جابر بن عبد الله الأنصاري:
صنعت امرأة من الأنصار الرَسُول الله ﷺ أربعة أرغفة، وذبحث له دجاجة فطبختها فقدمته بين يدي النبي ، فبعث رَسُول الله ﷺ إلى أبي بكر وعمر فأتياه، ثم رفع رَسُول الله ﷺ يديه إلى السماء ثم قال : «اللهم سن إلينا رجلاً رابعاً محباً لك ولرسولك، تحبه اللهم أنت ورسولك فيشركنا في طعامنا، وبارك لنا فيه ثم قال رَسُول الله ﷺ : «اللهم اجعله علي بن أبي طالب ، قال : فوالله ما كان بأوشك أن طلع علي بن أبي طالب، فكبر رَسُول الله ﷺ وقال : الحمد لله الذي سرى بكم جميعاً وجمعه وإياكم ثم قال رَسُول الله ﷺ : انظروا هل ترون بالباب أحداً؟ قال جابر : وكنت أنا وابن مسعود، فأمر بنا رَسُول الله ﷺ فأدخلنا عليه، فجلسنا معه، ثم دعا رَسُول الله ﷺ بتلك الأرغفة فكسرها بيده ثم غَرَفَ عليها من تلك الدجاجة ودعا بالبركة، فأكلنا جميعاً حتى تملأنا شبعاً، وبقيت فضلة لأهل البيت
With his reliable chain to Abu Salih Abdullah b. Salih, from Ibn Lahi’a, from Muhammad b. al-Munkadr, from Jabir b. ‘Abdullah al-Ansari (ra):
A woman from the Ansar made four loaves of bread for the Messenger of Allah (saw), and slaughtered a chicken for him and cooked it, then placed it before the Prophet. The Messenger of Allah (saw) sent for Abu Bakr and Umar, and they came to him.
Then the Messenger of Allah (saw) raised his hands to the sky and said: “O Allah, bring to us a fourth man who loves You and Your Messenger, and whom You and Your Messenger love, so he may share our food and You bless it for us.” Then the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “O Allah, make him Ali ibn Abi Talib.” He said: By Allah, it was not long before Ali ibn Abi Talib appeared.
The Messenger of Allah (saw) said “Allahu Akbar” and praised Allah who united them all together. Then the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “Do you see anyone at the door?” Jabir said: I was there with Ibn Mas’ud, so the Messenger of Allah (saw) ordered for us to be brought in. We sat with him. Then the Messenger of Allah (saw) brought the loaves, broke them with his hand, and placed some of the chicken on them, and invoked blessings. We all ate until we were full, and there was still food left for the Ahlul Bayt.
Comments: Though the content varies slightly, it corroborates with the established content of Hadith al-Tayr so is known to refer to the same thing and includes Ibn Mas’ud as one of the companions. It is also a reliable chain, thus contributing to the tawatur nature of this Hadith. This is the third reliable report.
Imam Ali’s report was mentioned narrated in Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 42, pg. 245 - 246 by Ibn Asakir:
أخبرنا أبو القاسم بن السمرقندي، أنا أبو الفتح هبة الله بن علي بن محمد بن الطيب بن الجار القرشي الكوفي - ببغداد - أنا أبو الحسن محمد بن جعفر بن محمد التميمي النحوي يعرف بابن النجار الكوفي، أنا أبو عبد الله محمد بن القاسم بن زكريا المحاربي، نا عباد بن يعقوب، نا عيسى بن عبد الله بن محمد بن عمر بن علي، حدثني أبي، عن أبيه، عن جده، عن علي قال:
أُهدي لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله طير يقال له الحُبارى فوضِع بين يديه، وكان أنس بن مالك يحجبه، فرفع النبي يده إلى الله ثم قال: اللهم ائتني بأحب خلقك إليك يأكل معي من هذا الطير، قال: فجاء علي فاستأذن، فقال له أنس: إن رسول الله - يعني - على حاجة، فرجع، ثم دعا رسول الله فرجع، ثم دعا الثالثة فجاء علي فأدخله، فلما رآه رسول الله قال: اللهم والِ، فأكل معه، فلما كان رسول الله خرج علي، قال أنس: اتبعت علياً فقلت: يا أبا حسن استغفر لي، فإن لي إليك ذنباً، وإن عندي بشارة، فأخبرته بما كان من النبي، فحمد الله، واستغفر لي، ورضي عني، أذهب ذنبي عنده بشارتي إياه.
…From Ibn al-Najjār al-Kūfī from Muḥammad b. al-Qāsim b. Zakariyyā al-Muḥāribī from ʿAbbād b. Yaʿqūb from ʿĪsā b. ʿAbd Allāh b. Muḥammad b. ʿUmar b. ʿAlī from his father told me, from his father, from his grandfather, from ʿAlī, who said:
From Ali (as): A bird called al-Hubara was gifted to the Messenger of Allah, and it was placed before him, and Anas b. Malik was guarding the door. The Prophet raised his hand to Allah and said: O Allah, bring to me the most beloved of Your creation to You, to eat with me from this bird.
Then Ali came and asked permission to enter. Anas said to him: The Messenger of Allah is occupied. So Ali went back. Then the Prophet called again, and Ali returned. Then he called a third time, and Ali came and was allowed in. When the Messenger of Allah saw him, he said: O Allah, befriend him. Then he ate with him.
When the Prophet left, Ali also left. Anas said: I followed Ali and said: O Abu al-Hasan, ask forgiveness for me. I have wronged you, and I have glad tidings for you. Then I told him what happened with the Prophet. He praised Allah, asked forgiveness for me, and was pleased with me. My glad tidings erased my sin in his eyes.
Comments: There is an addition made by Anas b. Malik at the end where it states Anas sought from Imam Ali (as) forgiveness and that he was forgiven, however this detail isn’t mentioned elsewhere so cannot be established, it was inserted by one of the narrators no other variant includes this detail, it is Ahad and not part of the tawatur Hadith.
All narrators are considered reliable, and the presence of munkar narrations by ‘Isa b. Abdullah does not harm his reliability. It is the fourth reliable report.
Historical Reports by Sahaba Proving Tawatur
The reports of these three companions highlight the true tawatur nature of this Hadith, as they all mention the Hadith in an entirely different context that comes after the Prophet (saw) has passed away. Their mention and talk of this Hadith clearly illustrates that the Sahaba were well aware of this report because they mention it in contexts outside of the Hadith itself. When a Hadith is being found and corroborated in historical reports by multiple companions, it strongly shows the widespread nature and knowledge of this report amongst the companions.
Sa’ad’s Report
Sa’ad b. Abi Waqqas is recorded to narrate this tradition in Hilyat al-Awliya, Vol 4, pg. 356 by al-Isfahani.
ثنا رجاء بن الجارود ابو المنذر قال ثنا سليمان بن محمد المباركي قال ثنا محمد ابن جرير الصنعاني واثنى عليه خيرا قال ثنا شعبة عن الحكم عن ابن أبي ليلى عن سعد بن أبي وقاص .
قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: في علي ابن ابي طالب ثلاث خلال: «لأعطين الراية غدا رجلا يحب الله ورسوله»، وحديث الطير، وحديث غدير خم.
Rajā’ b. al-Jārūd Abū al-Mundhir narrated to us, he said: Sulaymān b. Muhammad al-Mubārakī narrated to us, he said: Muhammad b. Jarīr al-Ṣan‘ānī—whom he praised greatly—narrated to us, he said: Shu‘bah narrated to us, from al-Ḥakam, from Ibn Abī Laylā, from Sa‘d b. Abī Waqqāṣ who said:
In Ali ibn Abi Talib there are three virtues: "I will surely give the banner tomorrow to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger," the Hadith of the bird, and the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm.
All the narrators of this chain are reliable and hence the editor of the print said it was Hasan (good). This report doesn’t even mention which report, but simply refers to it as Hadith al-Tayr which has nothing else to refer to except this. This is the fifth reliable report.
Amru’s Report
Amru b. al-’Aas’ report can be found in Manaqib al-Khawarizmi, pg. 197 - 200, where he writes to Mu’awiyah:
وبهذا الإسناد عن أحمد بن الحسين هذا، أخبرنا أبو الحسين بن بشران، أخبرني أبو عمرو بن السماك، حدثنا حنبل بن إسحاق، حدثنا يعلى بن أسد، حدثنا حاتم بن وردان، حدثني علي بن زيد، حدثني رجل من بني سعد قال:
و يحك يا معاوية، أما علمت أن أبا حسن بذل نفسه بين يدى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وبات على فراشه وهو صاحب السبق الى الإسلام والهجرة وقد قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله : هو منى وأنا منه، وهو منى بمنزلة هارون من موسى إلا أنه لا نبي بعدى، وقد قال فيه يوم غدير خم: ألا من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه اللهم وال من والاه وعاد من عاداه، وانصر من نصره، واخذل من خذله، وهو الذي قال فيه عليه السلام يوم خيبر: لأعطير الراية غداً رجلاً يحب الله ورسوله، ويحبه الله ورسوله، وهو الذي قال عليه السلام فيه يوم الطير: اللهم آتني بأحب خلقك اليك ، فلما دخل اليه قال إلى وإلي .
And through this chain from Ahmad bin Al-Husayn: Abu Al-Husayn bin Bishran informed us, Abu Amr bin Al-Sammak informed me, Hanbal bin Ishaq narrated to us, Ya’la bin Asad narrated to us, Hatim bin Wardan narrated to us, Ali bin Zayd narrated to me, a man from Banu Sa‘d narrated to me, who said:
Woe to you, O Muawiyah! Do you not know that Abu al-Hasan offered his life for the Messenger of Allah (saw) and slept in his bed, and he was the first to embrace Islam and migrate? The Messenger of Allah (saw) said about him: “He is from me and I am from him,” and: “He is to me as Harun was to Musa, except that there is no prophet after me.” He said about him at Ghadir Khumm: “Indeed, whoever I am his master, then Ali is his master. O Allah, befriend whoever befriends him, and show enmity to whoever shows enmity to him, support whoever supports him, and abandon whoever abandons him.”
And he is the one about whom the Prophet (saw) said on the Day of Khaybar: “Tomorrow I will give the banner to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger, and whom Allah and His Messenger love.” And he is the one about whom he (saw) said on the day of the bird: “O Allah, bring to me the most beloved of Your creation to You.” Then when Ali entered, he said: “It is to me and for me.”
We must emphasise that this is an entirely historical report, which means Hadith standards are not applied to it to derive its accuracy. All the contents of this report are in line with what we read from other reports, and it is well-recorded that Amr b. al-’Aas was not allied with Mu’awiyah during the killing of Uthman, rather he joined him after a while by the request of his sons. One can read the narrative in Tarikh al-Tabari, vol. 16, pg. 193 - 196 for reference.
If it is asked: Why is Amr narrating Ali’s (as) virtues, if he was a nasibi?
We say: The enemies of Rasulullah (saw) would narrate his virtues, and hence it shows us not praise for the narrator but rather only for the one praised. This letter was written before Amr joined Mu’awiyahs side, which he did after the killing of ‘Uthman.
Abu Tufayl’s Report
As for Abu al-Tufayl’s report, it was recorded in Manaqib al-Khawarizmi, pg. 313 - 315:
قال: أمنكم احد قال له رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله حين قرب اليه الطير فاعجبه فقال اللهم ائتنى باحب خلقك اليك يأكل معى من هذا الطير فجئت وانا لا اعلم ما كان من قوله، فدخلت
He said: “Is there anyone among you to whom the Messenger of Allah (saw) said when a bird was brought to him and he was pleased by it, so he said: O Allah, bring to me the most beloved of Your creation to You to eat with me from this bird so I came while I did not know what he had said, and I entered.
Comments: This is a portion of a large report during the shura where Imam Ali (as) lists a tonne of his well-documented virtues as a Hujjah as to why he deserves the caliphate. We have already discussed elsewhere about Ali’s belief regarding his position of caliphate.
Hajjaj’s Report from Anas
While we are at historical reports, let us quote the report narrated from al-Hajjaj b. Yusuf al-Thaqafi (LA) in Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 42, pg. 251 - 252 by Ibn 'Asakir.
أخبرنا أبو بكر محمد بن أبي نصر بن أبي بكر، أنا أبو الخير محمد بن أحمد بن محمد بن عبد الله الإمام، وأبو مسعود سليمان بن إبراهيم بن سليمان، قالا: أنا أبو الفرج عثمان بن أحمد بن إسحاق البرجي، أنا أبو جعفر محمد بن عمر بن حفص الجورجيري، نا أبو يعقوب إسحاق بن الفيض، نا المضاء بن الجارود، عن عبد العزيز بن زياد.
أن الحجاج بن يوسف دعا أنس بن مالك من البصرة، فسأله عن علي بن أبي طالب، فقال: أهدي للنبي طائر، فأمر به فطبخ وصنع، فقال النبي ﷺ: اللهم ائتني بأحب الخلق إلي يأكل معي، فجاء علي فرددته، ثم جاء ثانية فرددته، ثم جاء الثالثة فرددته، فقال النبي ﷺ: يا أنس إني قد دعوت ربي وقد استجيب لي، فانظر من كان بالباب فادخله، فخرجت فإذا أنا بعلي، فأدخلته، فقال النبي ﷺ: إني قد دعوت ربي أن يأتيني بأحب خلقه إلي، وقد استجيب لي، فما حبسك؟ قال: يا نبي الله حبست أربع مرات كل ذلك يردني أنس، قال النبي: ما حملك على ذلك يا أنس؟ قال: قلت: يا نبي الله، بأبي أنت وأمي، إنه ليس أحد إلا وهو يحب قومه، وإن علياً جاء فأحببت أن يصيب دعاؤك رجلاً من قومي، قال: وكان النبي ﷺ نبي الرحمة فسكت، ولم يقل شيئاً.
…Abu al-Faraj ‘Uthman b. Ahmad b. Ishaq al-Burji, who said: narrated to us Abu Ja‘far Muhammad b. ‘Umar b. Hafs al-Jurjani, narrated to us Abu Ya‘qub Ishaq b. al-Fayd, narrated to us al-Mada’ b. al-Jarud, from ‘Abd al-‘Aziz b. Ziyad:
Al-Hajjaj b. Yusuf summoned Anas b. Malik from Basra and asked him about Ali b. Abi Talib. He said: A bird was gifted to the Prophet, and he ordered that it be cooked and prepared. Then the Prophet (saw) said: “O Allah, bring to me the most beloved of Your creation to eat with me.” So Ali came, and I turned him away. Then he came a second time, and I turned him away. Then he came a third time, and I turned him away.
The Prophet (saw) said: “O Anas, I have supplicated to my Lord and He has answered me. See who is at the door and let him in.” I went out, and it was Ali, so I let him in. The Prophet (saw) said: “I had supplicated to my Lord to bring to me the most beloved of His creation, and He answered me. So what delayed you?”
Ali replied: “O Prophet of Allah, I was turned away four times, each time Anas rejected me.” The Prophet asked: “What made you do that, O Anas?” I said: “O Prophet of Allah, may my father and mother be your ransom, there is no one but he loves his own people, and when Ali came, I wished that your supplication would reach a man from my people.” The Prophet (saw), being the Prophet of mercy, remained silent and said nothing.
Anas b. Malik’s Reports of Hadith al-Tayr
The most famous narrator of Hadith al-Tayr is Anas b. Malik himself. In the first Hadith we mentioned by Ibn Hajar in the beginning we showed how Anas himself was not even favourable for the Hadith to be towards Ali (as). The fact that he narrates this thus shows that he has neither an intention to lie nor would it be something that Ahlus Sunnah would accept. They see problems with those who narrate from him, but Ibn Kathir mentions tons of Tabi’in that narrate from him. Let us cover just a few.
Yahya b. Abi Kathir
Yahya b. Kathir is the reliable Tabi’i and narrator of Hadith who narrates this from Anas b. Malik in Mu’jam al-Awsat by al-Tabarani. Vol. 2, pg. 206 - 207.
حدثنا أحمد قال: نا سلمة بن شبيب قال نا عبد الرزاق قال أنا الأوزاعي عن يحيى بن أبي كثير عن أنس بن مالك
Ahmad narrated to us, he said: Salamah b. Shubayb narrated to us, he said: Abd al-Razzaq narrated to us, he said: Al-Awza’i from Yahya b. Abi Kathir from Anas b. Malik.
All narrators have met each other and all were deemed as reliable by their scholars. As for Yahya, there is a reliable report showing he met Anas b. Malik in Tabaqat Ibn Sa’ad, vol. 7, pg. 13.
This chain is the sixth reliable chain.
Ubaydullah b. Anas
We read from Musnad Abi Ya’a, quoted in Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani’s Matalib al-Aliyah, Vol. 16, pg. 108, H. # 3935:
وقال أبو يعلى: حدثنا قطن بن نسير، ثنا جعفر بن سليمان، عن عبد الله بن المثنى، عن عبد الله بن أنس، عن أنس
Abu Ya‘la said: Qutn b. Nusayr narrated to us, Ja‘far b. Sulayman narrated to us, from Abdullah b. al-Muthanna, from Ubaydullah b. Anas, from Anas.
This chain consists of all reliable narrators according to Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani. However Ibn Hajar objects to the chain due to Ja’far b. Sulayman being a Shi’i, and rejects it for him narrating his bid’ah (innovation).
This concept is completely illogical though, for how can someone be reliable yet still fabricate reports for things in his favour? If he cannot be trusted at certain times, then he can never be trusted at any time. This is a made up principle that their scholars made up that has no logical consistency. Even Al-Albani dismisses this principal’s authority in Silsalat al–Ahadith al-Sahiha, vol. 5, pg. 262:
فإن قال قائل : راوي هذا الشاهد شيعي ، وكذلك في سند المشهود له شيعي آخر، وهو جعفر بن سليمان، أفلا يعتبر ذلك طعناً في الحديث، وعلة فيه ؟!
فأقول : كلا ؛ لأن العبرة في رواية الحديث إنما هو الصدق والحفظ، وأما المذهب فهو بينه وبين ربه فهو حسيبه، ولذلك نجد صاحبي الصحيحين، وغيرهما، قد أخرجوا لكثير من الثقات المخالفين كالخوارج والشيعة وغيرهم، وهذا هو المثال بين أيدينا
If someone were to say: The narrator of this supporting report is a Shi’i, and likewise there is another Shi’i in the isnad of the main report, namely Ja’far ibn Sulayman, so should this not be considered a flaw in the Hadith and a cause for its rejection?
I say: No; because what matters in the transmission of a Hadith is truthfulness and precision. As for a narrator’s sectarian affiliation, that is between him and his Lord, He is the One to take him to account. That is why we find that the compilers of the two Sahihs and others have narrated from many trustworthy individuals who held differing views, such as the Khawarij and the Shia. This is exactly the case before us.
This is the seventh reliable chain.
‘Ata b. Abu Rabah
‘Ata b. Abu Ranah is a reliable transmitter of Hadith who is recorded to narrate this report through multiple chains. The authentic ones come through Abdul-Malik b. Abi Sulayman. His report is recorded in al-Bukhari’s Tarikh al-Kabir, vol. 2, pg. 283:
وقال إسحاق بن يوسف عن عبد الملك هو ابن أبي سليمان عن أنس
شهد النبي ﷺ بهذا مرسل
Ishaq b. Yusuf said: from Abd al-Malik b. Abi Sulayman – from Anas:
The Prophet (saw) witnessed this; (but it’s) mursal.
The narrators of this report are reliable, but al-Bukhari claims there’s irsal (disconnection), between Abd al-Malik and Anas. However, Abd al-Malik is not narrating from Anas, rather he is narrating from ‘Ata b. Abu Ranah, but this rendition of the report has him missing.
In another chain to Abd al-Malik, it is made clear that he is narrating from ‘Ata in Tabarani’s Mu’jam al-Awsat, vol. 7, pg. 267:
حدثنا محمد بن شعيب ثنا حفص بن عمر المهرقاني ثنا النجم بن بشير عن إسماعيل بن سليمان أخي إسحاق بن سليمان عن عبد الملك بن أبي سليمان عن عطاء عن أنس بن مالك
Muhammad b. Shuayb narrated to us, Hafs b. Umar al-Muharaqani narrated to us, al-Najm b. Bashir narrated to us, from Ismail b. Sulayman, from Abd al-Malik b. Abi Sulayman, from Ata, from Anas b. Malik.
This highlights that the irsal (disconnection) that Bukhari mentioned was wrong, because Abdul Malik was narrating from ‘Ata. Both reports have independent narrators to ‘Ata, which illustrates that he narrated this. Al-Bukhari’s report is also authentic. This is the eighth reliable chain.
Isma’il Al-Suddi
Al-Suddi is a reliable Tabi’i, he narrates in Sahih Muslim 708b and we mentioned before how all narrators of Muslim are reliable. Ibn Hajar records in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, Vol. 1, pg. 294 - 295 that the following scholars praise and authenticate him:
Yahya Ibn Sa’eed al-Qattan - Ahmad Ibn Hanbal - Abdul-Rahman Ibn Mahdi - Al-Nasa’i - Ibn Uday - Al-’ijli - Al-Saaji - Al-Hakim - Ibn Hibban.
At-Tirmidhi also says in Jami’ at-Tirmidhi 3721 that the following scholars authenticated him:
Al-Sha’bi, Sufyan al-Thawri and Al-Qattan.
This is why even Al-Albani concludes him to be reliable in his Silsalat al-Ahadith al-Saheeha, Vol. 7, pg. 998.
There are multiple narrations of al-Suddi. Those who narrate from him include ‘Isa b. Umar who is a reliable narrator (ref. Siyar A'lam al-Nubala, vol. 7, pg. 200).
His report is the one in Jami’ at-Tirmidhi 3721, where the chain is:
Sufyan ibn Waki‘ – ‘Ubayd Allah ibn Musa – ‘Isa ibn ‘Umar – al-Suddi – Anas ibn Malik
Sunnis will try to weaken the chain through Sufyan b. Waki’ or ‘Ubayd Allah, however it is reliably corroborated in Musnad Abi Ya'la, vol. 7, pg. 105 - 106, where the chain is:
Al-Hasan b. Hammad - Mishar b. Abdul-Malik - ‘Isa b. Umar - al-Suddi - Anas b. Malik
The editor tries to discredit Mishar, however his bio was recorded in:
Kitab al-Thiqat, vol. 5, pg. 536 - 537 by Ibn Hibban.
Al-Jarh wa-Ta'dil, vol. 8, pg. 459 - 460 by Ibn Abi Hatim.
Tarikh al-Kabir vol. 9, pg 450 by al-Bukhari.
None of these scholars graded them as weak or criticised them. Their silence is proof for authentication, and Abu Ya’la states in his report that Mishar is thiqah. This is the ninth reliable chain.
Ishaq b. Abdullah b. Abi Talha
Ishaq is a very reliable Tabi’i, whose report is narrated from al-Sa’adi in Hilyat al-Awliya, vol. 5, pg. 261 - 263:
حدثنا علي بن حميد الواسطي، ثنا أسلم بن سهل، ثنا محمد بن صالح بن مهران، ثنا عبد الله ابن محمد بن عمارة القداحي، ثم السعدي، قال: سمعت هذا من مالك بن أنس سماعا يحدثنا به عن إسحاق بن عبد الله بن أبي طلحة عن أنس:
Narrated to us Ali ibn Humayd al-Wasiti, he said: Aslam ibn Sahl narrated to us, he said: Muhammad ibn Salih ibn Mihran narrated to us, he said: Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Amarah al-Qaddahi, then al-Sa’di, he said: I heard this directly from Malik ibn Anas, who narrated to us from Ishaq ibn Abdullah ibn Abi Talhah from Anas: [...]
The editor of the print says the report is ‘Hasan’, and he justifies his position in the footnote. It suffices for the proof of its authentication. This is the tenth reliable chain.
Uthman al-Taweel
Uthman Al-Taweel is a reliable Tabi’i whose bio was recorded in Tarikh al-Kabir by al-Bukhari, without any criticism mentioned on him. His report was also recorded under a different bio in Tarikh al-Kabir, vol. 2, pg. 283:
أَحْمَد بْن زُرَيْق بْن إِبْرَاهِيم، أَبُو الْحَسَنِ الْمَرْوَزِيّ، قال لي مُحَمَّد بْن يُوسُف: حَدَّثنَا أَحْمَد بْن نَصْر، قَالَ: نا عُثْمَان الطَّوِيل، عَن أَنَس بْن مَالِك
Ahmad b. Zurayq b. Ibrahim, Abu al-Hasan al-Marwazi, said: Muhammad b. Yusuf told me: Ahmad b. Nasr narrated to us, he said: 'Uthman al-Tawil narrated to us from Anas b. Malik: [...]
This chain has all reliable narrators, but al-Bukhari tries to argue that Uthman did not hear from Anas, however Ibn Hibban states otherwise in Kitab al-Thiqat, vol. 2, pg. 358, which is that Uthman does narrate from Anas.
This is the eleventh reliable report.
Al-Hasan al-Basri
Hasan is the famous reliable Tabi’i of the Sunnis, and he heard from Anas b. Malik as explained by al-Shaykh Abdullah b. Abdur-rahman al-Sa’udi here.
We have two chains of this report to al-Hasan al-Basri, one found in Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 42, pg. 249:
أَخْبَرَنَا إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ أَحْمَدَ قَالَ نا إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ مَسْعَدَةَ قَالَ أَنَا حَمْزَةُ قَالَ أَخْبَرَنَا ابْنُ عَدِيٍّ قَالَ نا جَعْفَرُ بْنُ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ عَاصِمٍ قَالَ نا ابْنُ مُصَفَّى قَالَ نا حَفْصُ بْنُ عُمَرَ الْعَدْنِيُّ عَنْ مُوسَى بْنِ مَسْعُودٍ عَنِ الْحَسَنِ عَنْ أَنَسٍ
Isma'il b. Ahmad narrated to us, he said: Isma'il b. Mas'adah narrated to us, he said: Hamzah narrated to us, he said: Ibn 'Adi narrated to us, he said: Ja'far b. Ahmad b. 'Asim narrated to us, he said: Ibn Musaffa narrated to us, he said: Hafs b. 'Umar al-'Adani from Musa b. Mas'ud from al-Hasan from Anas: [...]
The second chain independently goes back to Hafs b. Umar al-’Adani found in Al-Mu'jam al-Awsat by al-Tabarani, vol. 9, pg., 146, H. 9372:
حدثنا هارون بن محمد بن المُنَخّل الحارثي الواسطي : ثنا العباس بن طالب : نا حفص بن عمر العدني : نا موسى بن سعد البصري ، عن الحسن عن أنس بن مالك
Harun b. Muhammad b. al-Munakhkhal al-Harithī al-Wasitī narrated to us: al-Abbas b. Talib narrated to us: Hafs b. Umar al-Adani narrated to us: Musa b. Sa’d al-Basri from al-Hasan, from Anas b. Malik: [...]
Both of these chains have different paths that meet Hafs b. Umar al-Adani (who was authenticated by Abdullah al-Tahrani and mentioned by Bukhari without criticism), and he narrates from two individuals from Hasan al-Basri.
As for the first chain, Musa b. Mas’ud, he is given reliability by Ibn Hajar and al-Dhahabi, and no criticism of him was mentioned therein. As for Musa b. Sa’d, he is mentioned by Ibn Abi Hatim without any criticism. This is the twelfth reliable report.
Abi al-Nadhr
Abi al-Nadhr is a reliable narrator whose report is transmitted in ‘Ilal al-Mutanahiya, vol. 1, pg. 233:
مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الأَنْدَلُسِيُّ قَالَ نا سُلَيْمَانُ بْنُ أَحْمَدَ الْبَلْخِيُّ قَالَ نا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ سَعِيدِ بْنِ فَرْقَدٍ الْجُدِّيُّ قَالَ نا أَبُو حُمَّةَ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يُوسُفَ الْيَمَامِيُّ قَالَ نا أَبُو قُرَّةَ مُوسَى بْنُ طَارِقٍ عَنْ مُوسَى بْنِ عُقْبَةَ عَنْ أَبِي النَّضْر
Muhammad ibn Abdillah al-Andalusi narrated to us, he said: Sulaiman ibn Ahmad al-Balkhi narrated to us, he said: Ahmad ibn Saeed ibn Farqad al-Juddi narrated to us, he said: Abu Hummah Muhammad ibn Yusuf al-Yamami narrated to us, he said: Abu Qurrah Musa b. Tariq from Musa b. Uqbah from Abi al-Nadhr: [...]
The narrators of this chain are all reliable except for Ahmad b. Sa’eed b. Farqad al-Juddi, and he was the one mentioned in part 1 as someone weakened for merely narrating this report which is not a valid jarh.
Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani admits the authenticity of the chain in Lisan al-Mizan, Vol. 1, pg. 469, Bio # 525:
احمد بن سعيد بن فرقد الجدي، روى عن أبي حمة، وعنه الطبراني، فذكر حديث الطير باسناد الصحيحين فهو المتهم بوضعه انتهى.
Ahmad b. Sa’id b. Farqad al-Jaddi narrated from Abu Hamma, and from him al-Tabarani. He reported the Hadith of the bird with an isnad like that of the two Sahihs, so he is the one accused of fabricating it. End.
Merely narrating the report is not sufficient evidence to discard the narrator, thus it is the thirteenth reliable report.
Sa’eed b. al-Musayyib
He is a famous reliable narrator whose report can be found in Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 42, pg. 248:
أبو حفص بن شاهين، نا يَحْيَى بن مُحَمَّد بن صاعد، نا عبد القدوس بن مُحَمَّد بن عبد الكبير بن شعيب بن الحبحاب - بالبصرة - حدثني عمي صالح بن عبد الكبير، نا عبد الله بن زياد أبو العلاء عن علي بن زيد، عن سعيد بن المسيب، عن أنس
Abu Hafs b. Shahin, from Yahya b. Muhammad b. Saad, from Abd al-Quddus b. Muhammad b. Abd al-Kabir b. Shuayb b. al-Habhab, from Salih b. Abd al-Kabir, grom Abd Allah b. Ziyad Abu al-Ala, from Ali b. Zayd, from Said b. al-Musayyab, from Anas:[...]
Ibn Asakir then quotes:
قال ابن شاهين : تفرد بهذا الحديث عبد القدوس بن مُحَمَّد عن عمه لا أعلم حدث به غيره، وهو حديث حسن غريب
Ibn Shahin said: This Hadith was uniquely narrated by Abd al-Quddus b. Muhammad from his uncle, I do not know of anyone else who narrated it. It is a hasan gharib (good but rare) Hadith.
Thus, this is the fourteenth reliable report.
Ibrahim al-Nakhi’i
Ibn al-Athir records in Usd al-Ghaba, pg. 880 - 881 the narration of the famous Tabi’i, Ibrahim al-Nakhi’i:
أنبأنا أبو الفرج الثقفي، حدثنا الحسن بن أحمد، وأنا حاضر أسمع، أنبأنا أحمد بن عبدالله الحافظ حدثنا محمد بن إسحاق بن إبراهيم الأهوازي، حدثنا الحسن بن عيسى حدثنا الحسن ابن السميدع، حدثنا موسى بن أيوب، عن شعيب بن إسحاق، عن أبي حنيفة، عن حماد، عن إبراهيم، عن أنس
Narrated to us Abu al-Faraj al-Thaqafi, narrated to us al-Hasan b. Ahmad, and I was present and listening, narrated to us Ahmad b. Abd Allah al-Hafiz, narrated to us Muhammad b. Ishaq b. Ibrahim al-Ahwazi, narrated to us al-Hasan b. Isa, narrated to us al-Hasan b. al-Sumaydiʿ, narrated to us Musa b. Ayyub, from Shuʿayb b. Ishaq, from Abu Hanifa, from Hammad, from Ibrahim, from Anas [...]
All narrators of this chain are reliable, and this is the report of Abu Hanifa. It is the fifteenth reliable report.
Yahya b. Sa’id
His report is found in Al-Mustadrak Ala al-Sahihain Vol 3, pg. 141 - 142, Hadith # 4650:
حدثني أبو علي الحافظ، أنبأ أبو عبدالله محمد بن أحمد بن أيوب الصفار، وحميد بن يونس بن يعقوب الزيات قالا : ثنا محمد بن أحمد بن عياض بن أبي طيبة ثنا أبي، ثنا يحيى بن حسان عن سليمان بن بلال، عن يحيى بن سعيد، عن أنس
Abu Ali al-Hafiz narrated to me, who was informed by Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Ayyub al-Saffar and Humayd ibn Yunus ibn Ya‘qub al-Zayyat who both said: Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn ‘Iyad ibn Abi Taybah narrated to us, from his father, from Yahya ibn Hassan, from Sulayman ibn Bilal, from Yahya ibn Sa‘id, from Anas: [...]
All narrators of this report are reliable. As for Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Ayyadh, al-Dhahabi changed his view in Mizan al-’Itidal, vol. 7, pg. 53:
محمد بن أحمد بن عياض. روى عن أبيه أبي غسان أحمد بن عياض عن أبي طيبة المصري، عن يحيى بن حسان، فذكر حديث الطير. وقال الحاكم:
هذا على شرط البخاري ومسلم.
قلت: الكل ثقات إلا هذا، فإنها أتهمه به، ثم ظهر لي أنه صدوق.
Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Iyad narrated from his father, Abu Ghassan Ahmad b. Iyad, from Abu Taybah al-Misri, from Yahya b. Hassan, who narrated Hadith al-Tayr. Al-Hakim said:
This is according to the conditions of al-Bukhari and Muslim.
I (al-Dhahabi) said: All of them are trustworthy except this one, I had accused him regarding this, but it later became clear to me that he is truthful.
This is the sixteenth reliable report.
Thumama b. Abdullah
Thumama is another reliable Tabi’i authenticated by Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani, whose report can be found in Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 42, pg. 246:
نا أبو الحسن علي بن عمر الدار قطني، نا مُحَمَّد بن مخلد بن حفص العطار، نا حاتم بن الليث الجوهري، نا عبد السلام بن راشد، نا عَبْد الله بن المثنى، عن ثمامة عن أنس.
Al-Daraqutni narrated to us, he said: Muhammad ibn Makhlad ibn Hafs al-‘Attar narrated to us, he said: Hatim ibn al-Layth al-Jawhari narrated to us, he said: Abd al-Salam ibn Rashid narrated to us, he said: Abd Allah ibn al-Muthanna from Thumamah from Anas: [...]
All the narrators are authenticated by al-Dhahabi and/or Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani, except ‘Abd al-Salam, but he does not have criticism (jarh) against him and this report is corroborated by many other reports.
More reports
Aiding our discussion earlier, we talked about the importance of not dismissing the unreliable reports as they strengthen and support the reliable ones, and all are used together to establish the tawatur. It cannot be that they fabricated the reports, as people independent of them corroborate what they say. Hence, it is all used together to illustrate the tawatur nature of Hadith al-Tayr.
To compile all possible chains and research every individual narrator in all chains is too much research that would not be necessary when enough chains have been already established as true. Nonetheless, it is worth mentioning a list of other Tabi’in who narrate this report from Anas b. Malik, whom al-Hakim says count to at least 30: Yughnam b. Salim, Qatadah, Muslim al-Mala’i, Abi Ja’far al-Samak, Ibn Nafi’, Abi al-Hindi, Abi al-Muhtadi, Zubayr b. Adi, Abi Hudayfa al-Uqayli, Muhammad b. Ali al-Salami, Husayn b. Hakam, Sukayn b. Abd al-Aziz, Thabit al-Banani, Abdul-Rahman b. Dabees, Abdul-Malik b. Umayr, Ibrahim b. Muhajir, Khalid b. Ubayd, and Dinyar b. Abdullah. And probably many more.
Final Remarks
So then we ask the dear reader to ponder upon this question: Why do you reject this report? Was the truthfulness of the report not proven to you? Were the amount of chains we brought insufficient? Was the content of the report not clarified?
Reflect on what the Qur’an says about the stubborn polytheists of Mecca:
إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ سَوَآءٌ عَلَيۡهِمۡ ءَأَنذَرۡتَهُمۡ أَمۡ لَمۡ تُنذِرۡهُمۡ لَا يُؤۡمِنُونَ
As for those who persist in disbelief, it is the same whether you warn them or not, they will never believe. [2:6]
Is it because the content is impossible to be true? We direct you to our previous part where we refute this objection. Is it because of your preference for Abu Bakr and Umar? In that case, your preference of them is not due to the words of Rasulullah (saw), but due to your blind love for them, which will not be a valid argument on the day of Judgement. So then what is it? What stops you from accepting the report that the Sunnis could not extinguish because of how widespread it is?
Indeed, God is the Most Wise and guides whom He pleases and misguides whom He pleases.
« Previous Part: Hadith al-Tayr Part II: What This Hadith Really Proves »