Ḥadīth: “The burial of a person in the soil from which he was created”!

I was asked about this ḥadīth, and I said: This is a munkar (denounced) ḥadīth!

It was narrated by al-Bazzār in his Musnad [as in Kashf al-Astār ʿan Zawāʾid al-Bazzār (1/396) (842)] from Bishr ibn Muʿādh al-ʿAqadī, from ʿAbdullāh ibn Jaʿfar ibn Najīḥ, from his father.

And it was narrated by Muḥammad ibn Abī ʿUmar al-ʿAdanī in his Musnad [as Ibn ʿAsākir brought it out in his Tārīkh (30/213)].

And al-Ājurī in al-Sharīʿah (5/2371) (1850) from Abū Muslim Ibrāhīm ibn ʿAbdillāh al-Kashshī, from Sulaymān ibn Dāwūd al-Shādhakūnī.

And Abū Ḥafṣ al-Nasafī in al-Qand fī Dhikr ʿUlamāʾ Samarqand (p. 374) in the biography of “ʿAbd al-Raḥīm ibn Zayd ibn Aḥmad ibn Yūsuf al-Dārī al-Nasafī” through the route of Abū Ḥassān Muhayb ibn Sulaymān al-Karminī, from Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl al-Bukhārī, from Saʿīd ibn Abī Maryam.

And al-Ḥākim in al-Mustadrak (1/521) (1356) through the route of ʿUthmān ibn Saʿīd al-Dārimī, from Yaḥyā ibn Ṣāliḥ al-Wuḥāẓī. [It was also brought out by al-Bayhaqī in Shuʿab al-Īmān (12/297) (9425) from al-Ḥākim].

All four (al-ʿAdanī, al-Shādhakūnī, Ibn Abī Maryam, and al-Wuḥāẓī) narrate from ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn Muḥammad al-Darāwardī.

Both (Jaʿfar ibn Najīḥ and al-Darāwardī) narrate from Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā, from his father, from Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī who said: I was walking with the Prophet ﷺ in part of Madīnah, and he passed by a grave and said: “Who is this?” They said: So-and-so, the Abyssinian. He said: “Subḥān Allāh! He was brought from his land and his sky to the soil from which he was created.”

And in another wording: “He passed through Madīnah, and saw a group digging a grave, so he asked about it. They said: An Abyssinian who came and died. The Prophet ﷺ said: Lā ilāha illā Allāh! He was brought from his land and his sky to the soil from which he was created.”

[And it was narrated by Abū ʿAbdillāh Ibn al-Najjār in al-Durra al-Thamīnah fī Akhbār al-Madīnah (p. 146) through the route of Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan ibn Zubālah, from ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn Muḥammad al-Darāwardī, from Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā, who said: “The Messenger of Allāh encountered a funeral in one of the alleys of Madīnah, and he asked about it. They said: So-and-so, the Abyssinian. The Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said: He was brought from his land and his sky to the soil from which he was created.”

I say: Ibn Zubālah shortened the isnād in this way, and he is matrūk al-ḥadīth (abandoned in narration), not trustworthy.]

[And it was narrated by al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmiḏī in Nawādir al-Uṣūl (2/114) (304) from ʿUmar ibn Abī ʿUmar, from Saʿīd ibn Abī Maryam al-Jumaḥī, from ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn Muḥammad al-Darāwardī, from Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā, from his father, from Abū Hurayrah.

So ʿUmar ibn Abī ʿUmar—who is majhūl (unknown)—made it from the Musnad of Abū Hurayrah, whereas it is actually from the Musnad of Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī, as was narrated by al-Bukhārī from Ibn Abī Maryam.]

Al-Bazzār said: “We do not know it from Abū Saʿīd except with this isnād, and Unays and his father were righteous. Those who narrated from Unays include: Ḥātim ibn Ismāʿīl, ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz, Ṣafwān ibn ʿĪsā, and others. As for Ibn Najīḥ, we do not know anyone who narrated from him besides his son.”

And al-Ḥākim said: “This ḥadīth has a Ṣaḥīḥ isnād, and al-Bukhārī and Muslim did not bring it out. And Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā al-Aslamī is the uncle of Ibrāhīm ibn Abī Yaḥyā, and Unays is thiqah, dependable. And this ḥadīth has shawāhid (supporting narrations), most of which are Ṣaḥīḥ.”

And al-Haythamī said in Majmaʿ al-Zawāʾid (3/42): “It was narrated by al-Bazzār, and in it is ʿAbdullāh, the father of ʿAlī ibn al-Madīnī, and he is ḍaʿīf.”

I say: I had once considered that what is in the isnād of al-Bazzār “from his father” is an addition that is not authentic; because ʿAbdullāh ibn Jaʿfar (d. 178 AH) is considered of the same level as al-Darāwardī (d. 187 AH). This means that the father of ʿAbdullāh could not have narrated from Unays!

And I also said: I do not rule out that one of them took it from the other. It is possible that al-Darāwardī took it from the book of ʿAbdullāh ibn Jaʿfar.

Abū Ṭālib said: Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal was asked about ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-Darāwardī, and he said: “He was known for seeking knowledge. If he narrated from his own book, it was Ṣaḥīḥ, but if he narrated from the books of others, he made mistakes.”

I say: This indicates that he used to narrate from the books of others. But it does not necessarily mean that whenever he narrated from others’ books he always erred in all that he reported. Rather, he may have narrated what was in them and attributed the ḥadīth to the shaykh whose book it was, though he had not heard it from him directly—thus becoming a follower of him. And it seems this ḥadīth is one of those cases.

In Tārīkh Bukhārā by Ghunjar: “Ṣāliḥ ibn Muḥammad said: I heard ʿAlī ibn al-Madīnī say: My father is ṣadūq, and he is more beloved to me than al-Darāwardī.” [Ikmāl Tahdhīb al-Kamāl (7/286)].

I say: The comparison of Ibn al-Madīnī between his father and al-Darāwardī points to a closeness in their ḥadīth. This, in my view, indicates that al-Darāwardī used to narrate from the books of ʿAbdullāh ibn Jaʿfar. And Allāh knows best.

Our brother Aḥmad ʿAwf—may Allāh reward him well—has pointed out that Ibn Kathīr transmitted this from al-Bazzār “from his father,” so it is established in the narration. The ḥadīth, however, remains in the sphere of weakness and munkar. And Unays is thiqah, as is his father. But the munkar is from the side of ʿAbdullāh ibn Jaʿfar and al-Darāwardī.

Thus, the ḥadīth is munkar, narrated by two weak narrators from Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā, while his other trustworthy companions did not narrate it. Their ḥadīth cannot be used as proof. And the criticism of ʿAbdullāh ibn Jaʿfar is harsher than that of al-Darāwardī, for he is matrūk al-ḥadīth, and his ḥadīth is not suitable even for consideration.

Note:

Al-Ḥākim’s statement: “And Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā al-Aslamī is the uncle of Ibrāhīm ibn Abī Yaḥyā” was also mentioned in his Suʾālāt al-Sijzī (49). Al-Sijzī said: I heard him say: “Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā is trustworthy and reliable, except that in his family there are weak ones. He is the uncle of Ibrāhīm ibn Muḥammad ibn Abī Yaḥyā, from whom al-Shāfiʿī—may Allāh be pleased with him—narrated.”

This is the statement of the critics.

Ibn al-Junayd said in Suʾālātuhu li-Ibn Maʿīn (26): I asked Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn about Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā, and his brother Muḥammad ibn Abī Yaḥyā, and his brother Saḥbal. He said: “These three brothers are trustworthy.” Yaḥyā said: “And Ibrāhīm ibn Abī Yaḥyā is the son of this Muḥammad, and he is nothing (i.e., worthless).”

And ʿAbdullāh ibn Aḥmad said in al-ʿIlal wa Maʿrifat al-Rijāl (2/535) (3534): My father said: “Saḥbal’s name is ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad ibn Abī Yaḥyā, the brother of Ibrāhīm. There is no harm in him. And his father Muḥammad ibn Abī Yaḥyā—we were narrated from him by Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd about twenty aḥādīth, from him and from Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā.”

And al-Bukhārī said in al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr (2/42) (1624): “Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā, the brother of Muḥammad and ʿAbdullāh, the freedman of Aslam.”

And Ibn Abī Ḥātim said in al-Jarḥ wa al-Taʿdīl (2/334): I mentioned to my father the statement of Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd about him, and he said: “Unays is more beloved to me than Muḥammad. And he is the uncle of Ibrāhīm ibn Abī Yaḥyā, the weak one. And this one (Unays) is thiqah.”

And Ibn Ḥibbān said in Mashāhīr ʿUlamāʾ al-Amṣār (p. 214) (1052), and in al-Thiqāt (6/81) (6820): “Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā, the freedman of Aslam, the brother of Muḥammad and ʿAbdullāh. He is the uncle of Ibrāhīm ibn Abī Yaḥyā al-Aslamī. He died in the year 144 AH.”

But it has come in Suʾālāt Muḥammad ibn ʿUthmān ibn Abī Shaybah li-ʿAlī ibn al-Madīnī [Dār al-Fārūq edition, ed. Abū ʿUmar al-Azharī (p. 50) (155), and in al-Maʿārif edition, ed. Muwafaq ʿAbd al-Qādir (p. 124) (153)]: I heard ʿAlī say: “Ibrāhīm ibn Abī Yaḥyā is a liar. He used to say with Qadar. His brother, Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā, was thiqah with us.”

So here it is stated that Ibrāhīm ibn Abī Yaḥyā is the brother of Unays! And it seems this was in the original manuscript of the Suʾālāt, because Abū Nuʿaym al-Iṣbahānī transmitted this in al-Ḍuʿafāʾ (p. 56) (1), saying: “Ibrāhīm ibn Muḥammad ibn Yaḥyā al-Madanī al-Aslamī used to hold the Qadar belief. His ḥadīth was abandoned due to his lying and weakness, not due to his madhhab. And he is the brother of Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā. And Unays was thiqah. ʿAlī ibn ʿAbdullāh al-Madīnī said: A liar, saying with Qadar.”

I say: This is strange from Ibn al-Madīnī, that he would make Ibrāhīm the brother of Unays. For Ibrāhīm is the son of Muḥammad, and Muḥammad is the brother of Unays. And Ibn al-Madīnī knew that, so it is impossible that this was hidden from him!

Ṣāliḥ ibn Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal said, from ʿAlī ibn al-Madīnī: I asked Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd about Muḥammad ibn Abī Yaḥyā. He said: “There was no harm in him, but his brother Unays was more firmly grounded than him.”

And in Tārīkh Ibn Abī Khaythamah (2/321) (3136): “I saw in the book of ʿAlī: I asked Yaḥyā about Muḥammad ibn Yaḥyā. I said: Was he a ḥāfiẓ? He said: There was no harm in him, and his brother was firmer than him. I said: Unays ibn Abī Yaḥyā? He said: Yes.”

So Ibn al-Madīnī knew that Muḥammad was the brother of Unays, and it is impossible for him to consider Ibrāhīm as his brother!

What appears to me is that in the manuscript there is an omission: Ibn al-Madīnī was speaking about Muḥammad (the father of Ibrāhīm) after speaking about Ibrāhīm, and then he spoke about his brother Unays. And Allāh knows best.

And neither of the two editors of the Suʾālāt pointed this out!

Another narration of the ḥadīth

The ḥadīth was narrated by Abū Bakr al-Qaṭīʿī in Zawāʾidihi ʿalā Faḍāʾil aṣ-Ṣaḥābah (1/360) (528) through ʿAbd Allāh ibn aṣ-Ṣaqr as-Sukkarī.

It was also narrated by Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm ath-Thaqafī as-Sarrāj, the transmitter of Musnad al-ʿAdanī, after he narrated the previous ḥadīth from Ibn Abī ʿUmar al-ʿAdanī.

Both of them (Ibn aṣ-Ṣaqr and as-Sarrāj) narrated from Sawwār ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn Sawwār al-ʿAnbarī, who said: My father once narrated to a group of people, and among what he narrated to them was: that the Prophet ﷺ passed by a grave being dug and said: “Whose grave is this?” They said: The grave of so-and-so, the Abyssinian. He said: “Subḥān Allāh! He was carried from his land and his sky to the soil from which he was created.” My father said: “O Sawwār! I do not know of a virtue for Abū Bakr and ʿUmar greater than that they were created from the same soil from which the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ was created.”

And in another wording: “O my son! Abū Bakr and ʿUmar have no virtue greater than that the Prophet, Abū Bakr, and ʿUmar were all created from one soil.”

I say: This was narrated by Sawwār from his father, ʿAbd Allāh ibn Sawwār al-Qāḍī, without an isnād, and ʿAbd Allāh, the father of Sawwār, died in the year 228 AH.

Another chain

It was narrated by Abū Ṭāhir al-Ḥasan ibn Aḥmad ibn Fīl al-Asadī al-Bālisī in his Juzʾ (p. 159) (139), and by aṭ-Ṭabarānī in al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr [vols. 13, 14 (p. 268) (14022)], from ʿAbd Allāh ibn Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, and by al-Khaṭīb in Mūḍiḥ Awhām al-Jamʿ wa’t-Tafrīq (2/217) through ʿAbd Allāh ibn Isḥāq al-Madāʾinī. All three of them (Ibn Fīl, ʿAbd Allāh ibn Aḥmad, and ʿAbd Allāh ibn Isḥāq) narrated from ʿUqbah ibn Mukrim al-ʿAmmi al-Baṣrī.

It was also narrated by Abū Nuʿaym in Tārīkh Iṣbahān (2/275) through Ibn Abī Ḥātim, and by al-Khaṭīb in Mūḍiḥ Awhām al-Jamʿ wa’t-Tafrīq (2/217) through Muḥammad ibn Makhlad. Both of them (Ibn Abī Ḥātim and Ibn Makhlad) narrated from ʿUmar ibn Shabbah.

Both (ʿUqbah and Ibn Shabbah) narrated from Abū Khalaf ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿĪsā al-Khazzāz al-Baṣrī, the silk seller, from Yaḥyā al-Bakkāʾ, from Ibn ʿUmar: that an Abyssinian was buried in al-Madīnah, and the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said: “He was buried in the clay from which he was created.”

Al-Haythamī said in Majmaʿ az-Zawāʾid (3/42) (4228): “Narrated by aṭ-Ṭabarānī in al-Kabīr, and in it is ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿĪsā al-Khazzāz, and he is weak.”

I say: ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿĪsā is munkar al-ḥadīth, not trustworthy!

Another route

Al-Ṭabarānī narrated it in al-Muʿjam al-Awsaṭ (5/216) (5126), he said: “Muḥammad ibn Hishām al-Mustamlī narrated to us, he said: ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿUmar ibn Abān narrated to us, he said: We were once with Abū Usāmah, and al-Mustamlī said: ‘Take this from me: al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm narrated to me, from Rāshid ibn Saʿd and Abū az-Zāhiriyyah, both of them said: We heard Abū al-Dardāʾ say: The Prophet ﷺ passed by us while we were digging a grave, and he said: “What are you doing?” We said: ‘We are digging a grave for this black man.’ He said: “His death has brought him to his soil.”’

Abū Usāmah said: “Do you know, O people of Kūfah, why I narrated this ḥadīth to you? Because Abū Bakr and ʿUmar were created from the soil of the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ.”

Al-Ṭabarānī said: “This ḥadīth is not narrated from Abū al-Dardāʾ except with this chain. Abū Usāmah was the only one to transmit it!”

Al-Haythamī said in Majmaʿ az-Zawāʾid (3/42) (4227): “It was narrated by al-Ṭabarānī in al-Awsaṭ. In its chain is al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm. Al-ʿIjlī declared him reliable, but the majority weakened him.”

I say: Some of the people of Kūfah spoke against Abū Usāmah, because he used to borrow people’s books and narrate from them!

Abū Dāwūd said: Wakīʿ said: “I forbade Abū Usāmah from borrowing books, and he had buried his own books.”

Sufyān ibn Wakīʿ said: “Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh ibn Numayr mentioned something to me about Abū Usāmah regarding ḥadīth, and he kept marveling at it… and Abū Usāmah had buried his books and then pursued ḥadīths afterwards from people.”

Sufyān ibn Wakīʿ said: “I wonder how the ḥadīth of Abū Usāmah was accepted, when his affair was obvious; he was among the greatest thieves of fine ḥadīth.” (Ikmāl Tahdhīb al-Kamāl).

I say: Abū Usāmah is trustworthy, but the problem lies in these odd reports of his which are unbearable. And the source of this was his following up people’s books and narrating from them!

And even if it were authentic that Abū Usāmah heard this ḥadīth from al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm, it is rejected, because al-Aḥwaṣ is weak and his ḥadīth is not used as proof!

Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn said regarding al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm: “He is nothing.” And he said another time: “Al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm is neither trustworthy nor reliable.”

Ibn Hānīʾ said: I asked Abū ʿAbdillāh Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal about al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm, and he said: “Weak, his ḥadīth is worthless.” Abū ʿAbdillāh said: “I once had something from him but I tore it up.”

Al-Maimūnī said: I heard Abū ʿAbdillāh say: “Al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm is feeble.”

Al-Tirmidhī said: I asked Muḥammad (i.e. al-Bukhārī) about al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm, and he said: ʿAlī ibn ʿAbdillāh said: “Sufyān ibn ʿUyaynah affirmed him, but Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd criticized him.”

Abū Ḥātim said: “Al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm is not strong, he narrates objectionable reports. Ibn ʿUyaynah used to prefer al-Aḥwaṣ over Thawr in ḥadīth, but he erred in this, for Thawr is truthful, while al-Aḥwaṣ narrates objectionable reports.”

Yaʿqūb ibn Sufyān al-Fasawī said: “Al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm is narrated from by Ibn ʿUyaynah and others. They claimed he was a devout and striving man, but his ḥadīth is not strong.”

Al-Jawzajānī said: “Al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm is not strong in ḥadīth.”

Al-Nasāʾī said: “Al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm ibn ʿUmayr is weak, a Shāmī.”

Ibn Ḥibbān said: “He narrates rejected reports from well-known people, and he used to disparage ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib. He was abandoned by Yaḥyā al-Qaṭṭān and others.”

Ibn ʿAdī said, after listing some aḥādīth he was alone in narrating: “Al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm has other reports besides what I mentioned. He is among those whose ḥadīth is written down. A group of reliable narrators, such as Ibn ʿUyaynah, ʿĪsā ibn Yūnus, Marwān al-Fazārī, and others, narrated from him. None of his narrations contain objectionable texts, but he brings chains of narration for which no one else follows him.”

Ibn Abī Ḥātim said in al-Jarḥ wa al-Taʿdīl (2/327): My father narrated to us, he said: Surayj ibn Yūnus narrated to us, he said: Sufyān narrated from al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm, and he was trustworthy.

Al-ʿIjlī said: “Al-Aḥwaṣ ibn Ḥakīm was a Shāmī, there was nothing wrong with him.”

I say: And this ḥadīth has another defect: the lack of hearing of Rāshid ibn Saʿd and Abū az-Zāhiriyyah from Abū al-Dardāʾ!

Ibn Abī Ḥātim said in al-Marāsīl (p. 49) (173): I heard my father say: “The narration of Abū az-Zāhiriyyah from Abū al-Dardāʾ is mursal.”

Al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar said in Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb (3/226), in the biography of Rāshid ibn Saʿd: “His narration from Abū al-Dardāʾ is questionable.”

I say: Abū al-Dardāʾ died during the caliphate of ʿUthmān, in the year 32 AH, and it is also said 33 AH.

And Rāshid ibn Saʿd al-Ḥimṣī was known for many mursal narrations; he died in the year 108 AH, and it is also said 113 AH.

And some of the critics explicitly said that he did not hear from Thawbān, who died in the year 54 AH, so there is no doubt that he did not hear from Abū al-Dardāʾ, who died twenty-two years before him!

Mughlaṭāy said in Ikmāl Tahdhīb al-Kamāl (4/305):

“And al-Mizzī mentioned his narration from Thawbān in a form that implies direct transmission. In al-ʿIlal of Abū Isḥāq al-Ḥarbī it says: Rāshid ibn Saʿd did not hear from Thawbān, because Thawbān died in the year 54, and Rāshid died in the year 113, and between their deaths is fifty-nine years.

And in al-ʿIlal of al-Khallāl from Aḥmad: It is unlikely that he heard from him, because Thawbān died long ago.

And in al-Marāsīl of Ibn Abī Ḥātim from him: He did not hear from him. End of their words. But there is an issue here, due to the statement of Abū Dāwūd and al-Bukhārī: He witnessed Ṣiffīn, and lost his eye there.

So if he was a man fighting at Ṣiffīn, how could he not have heard from someone who died seventeen years after Ṣiffīn? For this reason, al-Bukhārī did not give weight to this objection and explicitly stated that he did hear from him.”

I say: Most of the scholars denied that Rāshid ibn Saʿd heard from Thawbān.

ʿAbdullāh ibn Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal reported from his father, who said: “Rāshid ibn Saʿd did not hear from Thawbān.”

Mughlaṭāy objected to those who denied his hearing from Thawbān, arguing that he was a man at Ṣiffīn (36H). And Baqiyyah ibn al-Walīd narrated from Ṣafwān ibn ʿAmr al-Saksakī who said: “Rāshid ibn Saʿd lost his eye on the day of Ṣiffīn.”

Also, al-Bukhārī explicitly affirmed his hearing from him.

Al-Bukhārī said in al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr (3/292) (994): “Rāshid ibn Saʿd al-Ḥimṣī al-Muqriʾī, heard from Thawbān, and Yaʿlā ibn Murrah.”

I say: Al-Bukhārī affirmed his hearing from Thawbān because he mentioned in his biography that he witnessed Ṣiffīn with Muʿāwiyah, and also due to what occurs in some of his ḥadīth that he heard from Thawbān. Then he also mentioned his hearing from Yaʿlā ibn Murrah, who was a companion who died after the year 50H, very close to the death of Thawbān. However, Yaʿlā was in Iraq and died there. When Ibn ʿAsākir mentioned him in Tārīkh Dimashq (74/197), he said: “It was said that he came to Damascus.” The ḥadīth of Rāshid from him about al-Ḥasan and al-Ḥusayn being from the grandsons (al-asbāṭ) is not authentic. Whoever declared it authentic or ḥasan erred!

And if we assume that Rāshid did indeed attend the battle of Ṣiffīn with Muʿāwiyah, this proves contemporaneity, but it does not establish that he heard from him! And what is found in some reports of explicit mention of hearing is questionable, for the ḥadīth of the Shāmīs often contain erroneous mentions of hearing inserted by narrators!

How precise is the statement of Imām Aḥmad—he was asked about Rāshid ibn Saʿd, and he said: “He was easy in taking (ḥadīth)”—meaning he was lax in what he took of ḥadīth, so he may have taken from anyone, including the weak!

It has been reported that Rāshid narrated three ḥadīth from Thawbān which became well-known from him:

First: Narrated by Baqiyyah ibn al-Walīd, from Ṣafwān al-Saksakī, who said: I heard Rāshid ibn Saʿd say: I heard Thawbān say: The Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said to me: “Do not reside in the villages (al-kufūr), for the one who resides in the villages is like the one who resides in the graves.” (al-kufūr: villages).

In another narration from Baqiyyah: “Indeed Allāh will open for you the lands. So let no man appoint himself as leader over ten, for whoever appoints himself as leader over ten will come to Allāh on the Day of Resurrection with his right hand shackled to his neck; justice will release him, or his injustice will destroy him. And do not reside in the villages, for the one who resides in the villages is like the one who resides in the graves.”

Al-Bukhārī included it in al-Adab al-Mufrad! But it is a munkar ḥadīth!

Second: Narrated by Thawr ibn Yazīd al-Ḥimṣī, from Rāshid, from Thawbān, who said: “The Messenger of Allāh ﷺ sent out a detachment, and they complained of the cold that afflicted them. So the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ commanded them to wipe over the turbans (al-ʿaṣāʾib) and the leather socks (al-tasākhīn).”

Al-Ḥākim recorded it in al-Mustadrak (1/275) and said: “This ḥadīth is Ṣaḥīḥ according to the conditions of Muslim, though they (al-Bukhārī and Muslim) did not record it with this wording. They only agreed on wiping over the turban with another wording, and it has a corroborant.”

Al-Dhahabī summarized his words in his Talkhīṣ and said: “According to the conditions of Muslim.”

And he said in Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ (4/491): “Its isnād is strong. Al-Ḥākim recorded it, saying: upon the conditions of Muslim. But he erred, for the two Shaykhs did not use Rāshid nor Thawr. So it is not on the conditions of Muslim.”

I say: This from al-Dhahabī refutes the claim, “And al-Dhahabī agreed with him”, for al-Dhahabī only summarized al-Ḥākim’s words in al-Mustadrak as he did here, and sometimes he critiques him in his summary.

Al-Zaylaʿī said in Naṣb al-Rāyah (1/165): “It was narrated by Aḥmad in his Musnad and al-Ḥākim in his Mustadrak. He said: on the conditions of Muslim. But this is disputable, for it is through the narration of Thawr ibn Yazīd from Rāshid ibn Saʿd. Thawr is not narrated from by Muslim—only al-Bukhārī narrated from him. And Rāshid ibn Saʿd was not used by the two Shaykhs. Aḥmad said: It is unlikely that Rāshid heard from Thawbān, because he died long ago. This statement is disputable, for they say Rāshid attended Ṣiffīn with Muʿāwiyah, while Thawbān died in 54H, and Rāshid died in 108H. Ibn Maʿīn, Abū Ḥātim, al-ʿIjlī, Yaʿqūb ibn Shaybah, and al-Nasāʾī all declared him trustworthy, while Ibn Ḥazm disagreed and weakened him. The truth is with them.”

Ibn Ḥajar criticized it in al-Talkhīṣ al-Ḥabīr (1/281) saying: “Abū Dāwūd recorded it through Rāshid ibn Saʿd from Thawbān, and it is munqaṭiʿ (disconnected).”

Third: Narrated by ʿĪsā ibn Yūnus, from Abū Bakr ibn Abī Maryam, from Rāshid ibn Saʿd, from Thawbān who said: “We went out with the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ in a funeral, and he saw people riding on mounts, so he said: Do you not feel ashamed? The angels of Allāh are on their feet, and you are on the backs of beasts.”

It was also narrated by Baqiyyah ibn al-Walīd, from Abū Bakr ibn Abī Maryam, from Rāshid ibn Saʿd, from Thawbān, the freed slave of the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ, that he went out in a funeral and saw people coming out on their mounts riding. So Thawbān said to them: “Do you not feel ashamed! The angels of Allāh are on their feet, and you are riding.”

Al-Tirmidhī, after recording the marfūʿ version, said: “The ḥadīth of Thawbān has been narrated from him mawqūf. Muḥammad said: the mawqūf is more correct.”

Al-Bayhaqī said: “What is preserved with this isnād is mawqūf.”

It was also narrated mawqūf by Thawr ibn Yazīd, from Rāshid ibn Saʿd.

Ibn Abī Shaybah recorded it in his Muṣannaf (7/218) (11372), from Wakīʿ, from Thawr, from Rāshid ibn Saʿd, from Thawbān: “That he saw a man riding in a funeral, so he seized the reins of his mount and restrained it, and said: You ride while the servants of Allāh are walking?”

So it seems to me that Rāshid ibn Saʿd took these ḥadīth from Thawbān through some intermediary, and sent them on.

Conclusion: There is doubt concerning Rāshid ibn Saʿd’s hearing from Thawbān. And even if his hearing from him is assumed correct, then his hearing from Abū al-Dardāʾ is very far-fetched, because Abū al-Dardāʾ died in the year 32H.

As for Abū al-Zāhiriyyah, he is: Ḥudayr ibn Kurayb al-Ḥaḍramī al-Ḥimṣī. Al-Ghulābī and Abū ʿUbayd al-Qāsim ibn Sallām said: He died in the year 100H. It was also said that he died during the caliphate of ʿUmar ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz, and it was said that he died during the rule of ʿAbd al-Malik. Ibn Saʿd said: He died in the year 129H, during the caliphate of Marwān ibn Muḥammad.

Al-Bukhārī said in al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr (3/98) (340):
“Ḥudayr ibn Kurayb Abū al-Zāhiriyyah al-Shāmī: heard from ʿAbd Allāh ibn Busr and Abū Umāmah.”

I say: Al-Bukhārī indicated that the level of Abū al-Zāhiriyyah’s hearing was from the Companions who died after the year 85H. For Abū Umāmah died in 86H, and ʿAbd Allāh ibn Busr died in 88H. Thus, he certainly did not meet Abū al-Dardāʾ, and his narration from him is disconnected.

Another Route

ʿAbd al-Razzāq narrated it in his Muṣannaf (3/515) (6531), from Ibn Jurayj, who said: ʿUmar ibn ʿAṭāʾ ibn Warāz informed me, from ʿIkrimah, the freed slave of Ibn ʿAbbās, that he said:
“Every human being is buried in the soil from which he was created.”

This is munkar!

ʿUmar ibn ʿAṭāʾ ibn Warāz was declared weak by Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn, Aḥmad, Abū Zurʿah, and al-Nasāʾī.

Ibn Maʿīn said: “He is nothing.”
He also said: “Everything that comes from Ibn Jurayj from ʿIkrimah is from ʿUmar ibn ʿAṭāʾ ibn Warāz, and they declared him weak.”

Aḥmad said: “He is not strong in ḥadīth.”

Al-Barḏaʿī said: I asked Abū Zurʿah: “ʿUmar ibn ʿAṭāʾ who narrates from ʿIkrimah?” He replied: “ʿUmar ibn ʿAṭāʾ ibn Warāz narrates from ʿIkrimah; he is weak in ḥadīth.”

Ibn Abī Ḥātim said: Abū Zurʿah was asked about ʿUmar ibn ʿAṭāʾ ibn Warāz, and he said: “A Makkan, lenient.”

Al-Nasāʾī said: “Weak.” And in another place: “Not trustworthy.”

Ibn Khuzaymah said: “Our companions criticize his ḥadīth due to his poor memory.”

Yaʿqūb ibn Sufyān al-Fasawī mentioned him in Bāb man yurghabu ʿan al-riwāyah ʿanhum wa samiʿtu aṣḥābanā yuḍaʿʿifūnahum, and said: “ʿUmar ibn ʿAṭāʾ ibn Warāz: a Makkan, lenient.”

Al-ʿUqaylī, al-Balkhī, Ibn al-Jārūd, al-Sājī, Abū al-ʿArab, and Ibn Shāhīn all listed him among the weak [Ikmāl Tahdhīb al-Kamāl (10/103)].

Al-Dhahabī said: “Wāhī (feeble).”
Ibn Ḥajar said: “Weak.”

Thus, the ḥadīth is weak and munkar in all its routes!

And the words of some scholars using it as proof that Abū Bakr and ʿUmar were created from the soil of the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ, since they were buried beside him, are rejected!

Abū Usāmah Ḥammād ibn Usāmah al-Kūfī (d. 181H) said, when this ḥadīth was read to him:
“Do you know, O people of Kūfah, why I narrated this ḥadīth to you? Because Abū Bakr and ʿUmar were created from the soil of the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ.”

I say: Abū Usāmah narrated this ḥadīth to the people of Kūfah because they used to exaggerate in Shīʿism—that is, giving precedence to ʿAlī over Abū Bakr and ʿUmar, may Allāh be pleased with them. So Abū Usāmah wanted to refute them by clarifying their rank, showing that they were created from the soil of the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ.

Al-Ājurrī said in al-Sharīʿah (5/2370), after narrating the ḥadīth:
“This statement indicates that a person is buried in the soil from which he was created from the earth. Likewise, the Prophet ﷺ, Abū Bakr, and ʿUmar were created from one soil, and the three of them were buried in one soil.”

Ibn al-Najjār (d. 643H) said in al-Durrah al-Thamīnah fī Akhbār al-Madīnah (p. 146), after narrating the ḥadīth:
“I say: Based on this, the clay from which the Prophet ﷺ was created is from Madīnah, and the clay of Abū Bakr and ʿUmar, may Allāh be pleased with them, is from the clay of the Prophet ﷺ. This is a lofty station.”

I say: All of this is false and munkar! For how many a righteous man was buried beside a hypocrite, or a sinner, or otherwise!

The burial of Abū Bakr and ʿUmar beside him ﷺ cannot be compared to anyone else, for they were buried near the best of creation, the master of the messengers ﷺ. Even so, the claim that they were created from the soil in which they were buried is not correct!

Ibn Ḥazm ruled the ḥadīth fabricated.

He said in al-Muḥallā (5/332):

“They argued with fabricated reports that must be pointed out and warned against.

Among them: a report we narrated that ‘the Prophet – peace and blessings be upon him – saw a dead man and said: He was buried in the soil from which he was created.’ They said: The Prophet – peace and blessings be upon him – was buried in Madīnah, therefore from its soil he was created, and he is the best of creation, so it is the best of all lands. And this report is fabricated, because in one of its two routes is Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan b. Zubālah, and he is completely unreliable. Yaḥyá b. Maʿīn said about him: He is not trustworthy, and in general there is agreement on abandoning him. Moreover, it is also from Unays b. Yaḥyá in mursal form, and it is not known who Unays b. Yaḥyá is. The other route is from the narration of Abū Khālid, who is unknown, from Yaḥyá al-Bakkāʾ, who is weak.

Then, even if it were authentic, it would not be a proof, because the virtue would only be for his grave – peace and blessings be upon him – alone. Otherwise, the hypocrites were also buried there, and prophets – peace be upon them – such as Ibrāhīm, Isḥāq, Yaʿqūb, Mūsá, Hārūn, Sulaymān, and Dāwūd, and others, were buried in al-Shām. Yet no Muslim says that al-Shām is better than Makkah.”

I say: Ibn Ḥazm’s statement regarding the text of the ḥadīth is solid.

But as for what relates to the isnāds, he erred in them!

He mentioned the mursal route of Ibn Zubālah and fell short in its chain. I already pointed out earlier in my takhrīj of the ḥadīth that a group narrated it from ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz b. Muḥammad al-Darāwardī – they are: al-ʿAdanī, al-Shādhakūnī, Ibn Abī Maryam, and al-Waḥāẓī – and they did not shorten it, but narrated it from Unays b. Abī Yaḥyá, from his father, from Abū Hurayrah.

As for his statement: “and it is not known who Unays b. Yaḥyá is” – it is rejected! He is Unays b. Abī Yaḥyá al-Aslamī from the people of Madīnah, a well-known trustworthy narrator.

And his statement: “the other route is from the narration of Abū Khālid, who is unknown” – this too is rejected! The text was miscopied for Ibn Ḥazm, for it seems it appeared in his isnād as “from Abū Khālid,” while in reality it is “from Abū Khalaf.” “Khalaf” was mistakenly read as “Khālid.” He is ʿAbdullāh b. ʿĪsá al-Khazzāz al-Baṣrī, the silk-seller.

The ḥadīth was narrated by ʿUmar b. Shabbah, who said: Ḥaddathanā Abū Khalaf Ṣāḥib al-Ḥarīr, from Yaḥyá al-Bakkāʾ.

Al-Albānī’s authentication of the ḥadīth

Al-Albānī cited the ḥadīth in his al-Silsilah al-Ṣaḥīḥah (4/473) (1858): “Buried in the soil from which he was created,” and said: “It was narrated by Abū Nuʿaym in Akhbār Aṣbahān (2/304) and al-Khaṭīb in al-Mūḍiḥ (2/104), from ʿAbdullāh b. ʿĪsá: Ḥaddathanā Yaḥyá al-Bakkāʾ, from Ibn ʿUmar: that an Abyssinian was buried in Madīnah, and the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said: [the wording].

I say: This isnād is weak. Yaḥyá al-Bakkāʾ, who is Ibn Muslim al-Baṣrī, is weak. Likewise ʿAbdullāh b. ʿĪsá, the al-Khazzāz al-Baṣrī. Because of him alone, al-Haythamī declared it defective (3/42) after attributing it to al-Ṭabarānī in al-Kabīr. It has a supporting narration from ʿAbdullāh b. Jaʿfar b. Najīḥ: Ḥaddathanā Abī, Ḥaddathanā Unays b. Abī Yaḥyá, from his father, from Abū Saʿīd: that the Prophet ﷺ passed by Madīnah and saw a group digging a grave. He asked about it, and they said: An Abyssinian came and died. The Prophet ﷺ said: ‘Lā ilāha illā Allāh, he was brought from his land and his sky to the soil from which he was created.’ Narrated by al-Bazzār (no. 842 – Kashf al-Astār) and (p. 91 – Zawāʾid Ibn Ḥajar). He said: “We do not know it from Abū Saʿīd except through this isnād, and Unays and his father are ṣāliḥ.”

I say: ʿAbdullāh b. Jaʿfar is weak, and his father I did not know. It also has another supporting narration from Abū al-Dardāʾ with a similar wording. Al-Haythamī said: “Narrated by al-Ṭabarānī in al-Awsaṭ. In it is al-Aḥwaṣ b. Ḥakīm, whom al-ʿAjlī declared reliable but the majority declared weak.”

I say: Therefore, the ḥadīth according to me is Ḥasan due to its collective routes. And Allāh knows best.” End of his words.

I say: This is the way of al-Albānī – authenticating and grading ḥasan fabricated and weak reports by combining routes!

All its routes are munkar and cannot support one another.

I have clarified the defect in every narration he mentioned.

And praise be to Allāh for His blessings and grace.

Written by: Khālid al-Ḥāyik.