Question

[Adeel]

Assalam O Alaikum!

Can someone bring me the biography of the narrator Usama Ibn Zayd al Laythi?! And how his hadiths are looked upon?

[Expergefactionist]

I am sure you would find tahdhib al-tahdhib or taqreeb online to do that yourself?

[Abu'l 'Eyse]

http://waqfeya.com/list.php?cat=17

http://www.almeshkat.net/books/list.php?cat=23

[Turyalai]

Assalam O Alaikum!

Can someone bring me the biography of the narrator Usama Ibn Zayd al Laythi?! And how his hadiths are looked upon?

أسامة بن زيد الليثي مولاهم أبو زيد المدني صدوق يهم

[Adeel]

Assalam O Alaikum brothers!
Actually I want to know what is the credibility of narrator or his hadiths who has been termed as "Saduq Yahim" by Ibn Hajr?! This is how this narrator has been critisized:

In his biography in Tahdheeb al-Tahdheeb (1/209) it says: He was regarded as matrook by Yahya ibn Sa’eed. Ahmad said: he is nothing. Abu Haatim said: His hadeeth may be written down but should not be used as evidence. Al-Nasaa’i said: He is not strong. Ibn Hibbaan said: He makes mistakes although he is of sound character. End quote. No one narrated that he was trustworthy except Yahya ibn Ma’een, but in another report from him he said that his ahaadeeth were regarded as munkar.

I would be thankful if you provide the details in english!

Jazak Allah

[Turyalai]

Assalam O Alaikum brothers!
Actually I want to know what is the credibility of narrator or his hadiths who has been termed as "Saduq Yahim" by Ibn Hajr?! This is how this narrator has been critisized:

In his biography in Tahdheeb al-Tahdheeb (1/209) it says: He was regarded as matrook by Yahya ibn Sa’eed. Ahmad said: he is nothing. Abu Haatim said: His hadeeth may be written down but should not be used as evidence. Al-Nasaa’i said: He is not strong. Ibn Hibbaan said: He makes mistakes although he is of sound character. End quote. No one narrated that he was trustworthy except Yahya ibn Ma’een, but in another report from him he said that his ahaadeeth were regarded as munkar.

I would be thankful if you provide the details in english!

Jazak Allah

wa `alaykum as-salâm wa rahmatullâh,

With all due respect, brother, if you require that things be explained in English then that is indicative of you approaching a subject that, perhaps, you are not prepared for.

One needs to understand that Ibn Hajar's Taqrîb is meant as a concise abridgment of his Tahthîb which itself is an abridgment of al-Mizzî's Tahthîb al-Kamâl fî Asmâ' ar-Rijâl. So each of these works has their own purpose.

When you get into the more verbose works such as al-Mizzî's Tahthîb, then you find harsh criticisms and some lofty vindication for the same narrator. Sometimes you will find some serious blasting against narrators even cited by al-Bukhârî in his Sahîh. Often times, deviant groups utilize these harsh criticisms to invalidate an authentic Hadîth.

Yet, it must be understood that there were masters of Jarh wa Ta`dîl who were known for being harsh and there were those for being balanced and there are those who were known as being lenient. This must be known about the people you are quoting to criticize or validate a narrator.

Now, in this case here, for some reason you have cited only the criticisms against Usâmah bin Zayd al-Laythî, yet ignored his vindications from such famous masters of Rijâl as Imâm al-Bukhârî. What this tells me is that you really want to invalidate this narrator to prove a particular point. This is a severe defect in your methodology.

Also, I did not find your quote to be from Tahthîb at-Tahthîb, but you actually copied it from the internet. This is what Tahthîb at-Tahthîb says:

قال عبد الله بن أحمد عن أبيه أخشى أن لا يكون بقوي في الحديث وقال صالح بن أحمد بن حنبل عن أبيه منكر الحديث ضعيف وقال يحيى بن معين أسامة وعبد الله وعبد الرحمن أولاد زيد بن أسلم إخوة وليس حديثهم بشيء وقال مرة ضعيف وقال عثمان الدارمي عنه ليس به بأس وقال الجوزجاني ضعفاء في الحديث من غير خربة في دينهم وقال أبو حاتم يكتب حديثه ولا يحتج به وقال بن أبي حاتم سئل أبو زرعة عن أسامة بن زيد بن أسلم وعبد الله بن زيد بن أسلم أيهما أحب إليك قال أسامة أمثل وقال النسائي ليس بالقوي قال محمد بن سعد مات في زمن أبي جعفر قلت وقال بن سعد كثير الحديث وليس بحجة وقال بن حبان كان واهيا يهم في الأخبار فيرفع الموقوف ويصل المقطوع وقال بن عدي لم أجد له حديثا منكرا لا إسنادا ولا متنا وأرجو أنه صالح وقال أبو زيد القلوسي سمعت علي بن المديني يقول ليس في ولد زيد بن أسلم ثقة وقال البخاري ضعف علي عبد الرحمن بن زيد وأما اخواه أسامة وعبد الله فذكر عنهما صلاحا وذكره يعقوب الفسوي في باب من يرغب عن الرواية عنهم وكنت أسمع أصحابنا يضعفونهم وقال بن الجارود وهو ممن يحتمل حديثه وقال الآجري عن أبي داود ضعيف قليل الحديث

`Abdullâh bin Ahmad related from his father, “I fear that he is not strong in Hadîth.” Sâlih bin Ahmad bin Hanbal related from his father, “Munkar al-Hadîth. Weak.” Yahyâ bin Ma`în stated, “Usâmah and `Abdullah and `Abdur-Rahmân, the sons of Zayd bin Aslam are brothers whose Hadîth count for nothing.” He also said, “He is a weak man.” `Uthmân ad-Dârimî said, “There is no fault in him.” Jawzjânî stated, “They are weak narrators (Turyalai’s note: Tahthîb doesn’t mention al-Jawzjânî’s full quote from Ahwâl ar-Rijâl, but it’s talking about him and his brothers) but not to the point that it spoils their religion.” Abû Hâtim stated, “His Hadîth were recorded but not resorted to.” Ibn Abî Hâtim said, “I asked Abu Zur`ah about Usâmah bin Zayd bin Aslam and `Abdullâh bin Zayd bin Aslam, ‘Which was preferred by you?’ He replied, ‘Usâmah is better’. An-Nasa’î said, “He is not strong.” Muhammad bin Sa`d said, “He died in the era of Abû Ja`far.” Ibn Sa`d said, “He narrated many Hadîth, but they were not used for evidence.” Ibn Hibbân said, “He was very weak (wâhîyan) and erred in narrations, so he made the Mawqûf (narration stopping at a Companion) into Marfû` (narration going up to the Prophet sallallâhû `alayhî wa sallam) and made Mutasil (having normal isnâd) the Maqtû` (having severed isnâd).” Ibn `Adî said, “I did not find from him any Munkar Hadîth, not by chain of transmission (isnâd), nor by content (matn), so I like to believe that he is upstanding (Sâlih).” Abû Zayd al-Qulûsî said, “I heard `Alî bin al-Madînî say, ‘None of the sons of Zayd bin Aslam were trustworthy (thiqqah).” Al-Bukhârî said, “`Alî weakened `Abdur-Rahmân bin Zayd, but regarding his brothers Usâmah and `Abdullâh he said laudable things about the two of them. Ya`qûb al-Fasawî mentioned him in the chapter of those who were sought for narrations and I used to hear that our companions would weaken them.” Ibn al-Jârûd said he was from those who would relate his Hadîth, Al-Akhirî related from Abû Dâwûd who said, “He is weak with few Hadîth.”

So, brother, even this is not enough for a layperson to grade a narrator, nor is it even close to enough for a layperson to grade a Hadîth with that narrator.

w-Allâhû A`lam...

I would like to know which Hadîth with Usâmah bin Zayd bin Aslam al-Laythî concerns you. was-salâm.

[Adeel]

Assalam O Alaikum
jazak Allah brother for this information! Brother actually I was confused because I have found some weakening the hadith of Usaamah Ibn Zayd and some saying that his hadiths are good!(this is what really confuses me, by Allah and nothing else) Yes brother I got this detail of the narrator from Islam-qa.com and it only says this regarding this narrator. And I know that Ibn Hajr says about him "saduq yahim", and I wanted to know what Hafidh means when he says this regarding a narrator. By Allah, I just wanted to know this from more knowledgable brothers.

[Turyalai]

Assalam O Alaikum
jazak Allah brother for this information! Brother actually I was confused because I have found some weakening the hadith of Usaamah Ibn Zayd and some saying that his hadiths are good!(this is what really confuses me, by Allah and nothing else) Yes brother I got this detail of the narrator from Islam-qa.com and it only says this regarding this narrator. And I know that Ibn Hajr says about him "saduq yahim", and I wanted to know what Hafidh means when he says this regarding a narrator. By Allah, I just wanted to know this from more knowledgable brothers.

Akhî, I believe you were sincere in your questions. I am sorry if I indicated otherwise. It was not my intent. I was just concerned that perhaps there is a Hadîth in particular with this narrator that is concerning you. That's all.

So if there is such a Hadîth you can present it and maybe someone here can help, inshâ' Allâh.

Again, I am sorry if I sounded like I was accusing you of not being sincere, w-astaghfir Allâh wa atûbû ilayh.

[Adeel]

Assalam O Alaikum brother!

Example:
Over the verse, " the Day when the Saaq (Shin) will be exposed."

At-Tabaree also relates from Muhamamd ibn Ubayd al-Muharabee who relates from ibn al-Mubaarak from Usama ibn Zayd, meaning al-Lythee, from Ikrimah, from ibn Abbaas, that the Shin in the above verse means, quote, "A Day of war and direness" all these narrators are those of the saheeh - except Usama ibn Zaid whose hadeeth are hasan."

This claim includes a number of misconceptions, unfounded allegations and distortions.

Firstly: the narrations that at-Tabaree reports from ibn Abbaas via a number of routes, regarding these Shaykh Saleem al-Hilaali says, "Summarising what has been reported from ibn Abbaas on this issue: with this you will know, O beloved (reader) - may you learn the good - that the chains of narration that are reported from ibn Abbaas to do with his explanation of His saying, "the Day when the Shin will be exposed" cannot be used to establish a proof, because they are all da'eef.

The above is what Shaikh Salim says regarding his narration. While others say it is hasan. That's why I wanted to know the credibility of this narrator and what hafidh means regarding a narrator who is "saduq yahim" to him! Jazak Allah.

[Turyalai]

Assalam O Alaikum brother!

Example:
Over the verse, " the Day when the Saaq (Shin) will be exposed."

At-Tabaree also relates from Muhamamd ibn Ubayd al-Muharabee who relates from ibn al-Mubaarak from Usama ibn Zayd, meaning al-Lythee, from Ikrimah, from ibn Abbaas, that the Shin in the above verse means, quote, "A Day of war and direness" all these narrators are those of the saheeh - except Usama ibn Zaid whose hadeeth are hasan."

This claim includes a number of misconceptions, unfounded allegations and distortions.

Firstly: the narrations that at-Tabaree reports from ibn Abbaas via a number of routes, regarding these Shaykh Saleem al-Hilaali says, "Summarising what has been reported from ibn Abbaas on this issue: with this you will know, O beloved (reader) - may you learn the good - that the chains of narration that are reported from ibn Abbaas to do with his explanation of His saying, "the Day when the Shin will be exposed" cannot be used to establish a proof, because they are all da'eef.

The above is what Shaikh Salim says regarding his narration. While others say it is hasan. That's why I wanted to know the credibility of this narrator and what hafidh means regarding a narrator who is "saduq yahim" to him! Jazak Allah.

I don't know on what grounds he says they are Da`îf because I don't think citing criticism of Usâmah bin Zayd al-Laythî is enough to dismiss a Hadîth, w-Allâhû A`lam.

Thanks for relating the Hadîth. I'll look into the narrations from Ibn `Abbâs and see if I can understand the matter better.

Jazâk Allâhû khayr.