An Example of Poor Verifications by Contemporary Scholars!

It is found in the book Maʿrifat aṣ-Ṣaḥābah by Abū Nuʿaym al-Aṣbahānī (4/2364) [edited by ʿĀdil ibn Yūsuf al-ʿAzzāzī, Dār al-Waṭan edition, Riyadh]:

[2496] Qafīz, the servant of the Prophet ﷺ.

5804 – [....] narrated to us, he said: Muḥammad ibn Sulaymān al-Ḥarrānī narrated to us, from Zuhayr ibn Muḥammad, from Abū Bakr ibn ʿUbaydullāh ibn Anas, from Anas, who said: The Prophet ﷺ had a servant called Qafīz.

[And Salamah ibn Shabīb narrated from Muḥammad the same] – End.

I say: This is how the editor left it, and he pointed in the footnote that what was inside the first set of brackets was a blank in the original, and what was inside the second set was missing from manuscript (B)!

And this is all the editor did! Does a student of knowledge benefit anything from this?! The editor did not clarify whether the companionship of Qafīz is established by this ḥadīth, nor did he mention what the scholars have said about it.

If this text were in front of me, I would have said:

Ibn ʿAsākir narrated in Tārīkh Dimashq (4/277) with his chain to Abū ʿAbdillāh ibn Mandah, who said: Sahl ibn as-Sarī informed us, he said: Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn al-Munkadir narrated to us, he said: Muḥammad ibn Yaḥyā – he is Ibn Kathīr al-Ḥarrānī – narrated to us, from Muḥammad ibn Sulaymān al-Ḥarrānī, from Zuhayr ibn Muḥammad, from Abū Bakr ibn ʿUbaydullāh ibn Anas, from Anas: “The Prophet ﷺ had a servant called Qafīz.”

Ibn Mandah said: “Muḥammad ibn Sulaymān alone transmitted it.”

He (Ibn ʿAsākir) also narrated (4/278) with his chain to Abū Naṣr ʿAlī ibn Hibatullāh ibn ʿAlī ibn Jaʿfar al-Ḥāfiẓ, who said: “As for Qafīz, his name begins with Qāf and ends with Zāy. He was the servant of the Prophet ﷺ. I think his name was Qafīz. This was narrated by Anas ibn Mālik.”

Ibn Ḥajar said in al-Iṣābah (5/453): “Qafīr: the servant of the Prophet ﷺ. Ibn Shāhīn mentioned him in aṣ-Ṣaḥābah, and he (Ibn Shāhīn) and Abū ʿAwānah both transmitted from the route of Zuhayr ibn Muḥammad, from Abū Bakr ibn ʿUbaydullāh ibn Anas, who said: The Prophet ﷺ had a servant named Qafīz. Ibn Mandah also transmitted it, and said: Muḥammad ibn Sulaymān al-Ḥarrānī alone transmitted it from Zuhayr. I (Ibn Ḥajar) say: And he is weak, and his shaykh is criticized! This is one of the additions of Abū ʿAwānah over Muslim. ʿAbd al-Ghanī ibn Saʿīd recorded it as Qafīz, with Qāf and Fāʾ and ending with Zāy, in the pattern of “ʿAẓīm.””

I say: This isnād is not authentic for several reasons:

1. It is uniquely transmitted by Muḥammad ibn Sulaymān ibn Abī Dāwūd al-Ḥarrānī, known as Būmah! An-Nasāʾī declared him trustworthy, and Ibn Ḥibbān mentioned him in ath-Thiqāt (9/69). But Abū Ḥātim ar-Rāzī said: “Munkar al-ḥadīth” (al-Jarḥ wa at-Taʿdīl 7/267).
2. It is not known that Zuhayr ibn Muḥammad al-Khurāsānī narrated from any of the descendants of Anas ibn Mālik!
3. There exists no such person as Abū Bakr ibn ʿUbaydullāh ibn Anas! As I have established elsewhere.

Accordingly, the companionship of this servant is not proven, and the ḥadīth is not authentic.

And there remains a very serious matter: the editor pointed out that in one manuscript there was an additional note: “[And Salamah ibn Shabīb narrated from Muḥammad likewise].”

This would imply that Salamah ibn Shabīb followed Muḥammad ibn Sulaymān in transmitting from Zuhayr!! But this is impossible; for their layers (ṭabaqāt) are different: Muḥammad ibn Sulaymān died in the year 213H, while Salamah died in 247H, and Zuhayr died in 162H. So how could Salamah, who died in 247H, narrate directly from Zuhayr who died in 162H?!

What happened is that a portion of the text dropped, and the correct version is: “And Salamah ibn Shabīb narrated [from Muḥammad ibn Sulaymān] from Muḥammad likewise.”

And it is known that Salamah ibn Shabīb narrates from Muḥammad ibn Sulaymān, for whoever examines his biography in the books of the scholars.

And all praise is due to Allah, by Whose grace righteous deeds are completed.

Written by: Khālid al-Ḥāyik

16 Muḥarram 1429H