Usama Ibn Zayd al Laythi Mawlahum

Discussion in 'Advanced Hadith Studies' started by Adeel, Dec 26, 2007.

  1. Adeel

    Adeel Active Member

    Assalam O Alaikum!

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

    Expergefactionist hmmm... Staff Member

    I am sure you would find tahdhib al-tahdhib or taqreeb online to do that yourself?
  3. Abu'l 'Eyse

    Abu'l 'Eyse Rep-manz

  4. Turyalai

    Turyalai New Member

    أسامة بن زيد الليثي مولاهم أبو زيد المدني صدوق يهم
  5. Adeel

    Adeel Active Member

    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
  6. Turyalai

    Turyalai New Member

    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.
  7. Adeel

    Adeel Active Member

    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 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.
  8. Turyalai

    Turyalai New Member

    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.
  9. Adeel

    Adeel Active Member

    Assalam O Alaikum brother!

    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.
  10. Turyalai

    Turyalai New Member

    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.
  11. Adeel

    Adeel Active Member

    Assalam O Alaikum brother!

    Don't we take the opinion of majority of the scholars and the majority says he is weak? And brother won't the hadith he is alone in reporting be weak? What "Saduq Yahim" means to ibn hajr? Is it that the lone hadith of such narrator are weak?
  12. أبو نافع

    أبو نافع Formerly - Abu_Abdallah

    The Meaning of Saduq with Hafidh Ibn Hajar


    The Saduqin with an additional remark by the Hafidh, in his Taqrib al-Tahdhib, are placed by him in the 5th level of narrators. This is what I've said:

    The Hafidh himself said in the Introduction of his Taqrib in the 5th level of narrators:

    "The one who is less than the fourth degree, a little bit, and referred to in terms like sadûq sayy' al-hifdh (trusty but bad in memory), sadûq yahim trustful but fancies) or lahu awhâm (he has fancies), or yukhti'u (trustful but mistakes), or taghayyar bi-akhirihi (changed in the end). Also falling in this level are those blamed for innovation, such as Shi'ism, Qadarism, Nasb, Irja' and Jahmism, with explanation if he is caller or not."

    The Hafidh said in the same Introduction about his verdicts:

    "I rule upon every individual of them by a judgement that is inclusive (or comprehensive, complete) of the most sound (asahh) that is said about him, and by what he is described most just with (a'dal)."

    The judgement Ibn Hajar seeks, in his Taqrib, is the inclusive, comprehensive and just, fair one (shâmil, 'âdil). So if there is Jarh and Ta'dil upon a narrator, he seeks to find the most sound judgement and the fairest.

    It is not difficult to judge certain classes of narrators, that is: the first, second and third level of narrators. Neither the lowest levels of the disparaged narrators. Differences are there about the middle levels, i.e. these described:

    The first 6 levels are called the levels of Ta'dil, while the second half are the levels of Tajrih. Obviously, the first three mentioned above: level four, five and six fall in the first half. And the Saduq yahim is from the 5th level, i.e. part of the levels of Ta'dil.

    Yet, the 5th and 6th are of the weakest levels of Ta'dil, which is attested by the ample differences scholars have about them. What I will do is to show how the Hafidh Ibn Hajar viewed the narrators from the 5th level.

    Let us mention a few popular or well-known narrators who fall in this category of transmitters:

    - Ibrahim b. 'Uyayna al-Hilali (the brother of the famous Hafidh)
    - Ibrahim b. Yusuf b. Ishaq al-Sabi'i
    - Isma'il b. Mujalid al-Kufi (the son of a famous narrator)

    These men have been declared trusty, weakened and softened. They transmit narrations in few of the six books, two even in al-Bukhari's Sahih (the latter two).

    Some of the Huffâdh have stipulated that a narrator where the critics differ about, the narration's chain is judged Hasan. This is cited from al-Mundhiri, Ibn al-Salah, Ibn Daqiq al-'Id, al-Zayla'i and others.

    The Hafidh himself said (Tahdhib 5:260), about a narrator who falls in the 5th level:

    "Hishâm b. Sa'd, he has been weakened because of his memory. Muslim narrated from him, so his narrations are from the grade of the Hasan."

    In the Taqrib he said: "Saduq he has fancies, blamed for Shi'ism."

    There are many more examples, all point to the fact that Ibn Hajar views the narrator about which critics differ (i.e. the mukhtalif fih) that he is described by descriptions of the 5th level and his narrations are Hasan. Indeed, the Hasan li-dhâti narrations are narrated - in some Huffâdh's view Ibn Hajar included - by a narrator of this degree. So if a chain contains only one narrator of the 5th level, the rest trustworthy, the chain becomes Hasan.

    In al-Dhahabi's terminology he calls a narration of them: Salih al-Hadith, which is of a similar description compared to Ibn Hajar's verdict.

    The narrators of the 5th level are used in the Usul in the Sahih al-Bukhari (and Muslim's Sahih), and elsewhere (mutâbi'ât and shawâhid).

    For example, the Ibrahim b. Yusuf referred to above is muhtaj bih by al-Bukhari and Muslim. The Hafidh said about him: "Saduq, he fancies" - similarly to Usama b. Zayd al-Laythi.

    Another example: Isma'il b. Mujalid al-Hamadani referred to above. The Hafidh said about him: "Saduq, he fancies". al-Bukhari used him too.

    There are tens of narrators like these, i.e. judged in the 5th level and from the ahl al-ihtijâj with al-Bukhari or Muslim, and whose narrations are judged Hasan according to the practice of the Hafidh and others.

    The scholars have however said that most of the narrators functioning in other than the Usul, i.e. they are not from the ahl al-ihtijâj but narrators from the mutabi'at, ta'liqât and the shawahid etc. then many of them also are called Hasan. Not all, of course, but many are. In fact, the mutabi'at and the shawâhid are mostly Hasan li-dhati. This is argued by Ibn Hajar too, in the Hadi al-Sari the Introduction to al-Fath al-Bari.

    The Hafidh says (Nukat 1:316):

    "al-Hakim has added in the book al-Madkhal a seperate chapter mentioned therein whom the two Shaykhs extracted narrators of in the Mutâbi'ât. He counted what they extracted from it. Then he, while being aware of this, extracted the narrations of these [narrators] in the Mustadrak, asserting that it is according to their condition [of narrators]. There is no doubt concerning their lowliness of their narrations from the degree of the Sahih. Nay, they might contain the aberrant (shâdh) and the weak (da'if). However, the majority of them are not made lower than the level of Hasan."

    So the Hafidh Ibn Hajar considers the narration of this level to be Hasan (li-dhâti), unless after close study there is evidence that the narrator made a mistake or fancied which would make his narration of the weak.

    According to a researcher, Ibn Hajar hasn't weakened any narration because of a narrator of this level in any of his books he checked. Actually, he even made sometimes Tashih of narrations from narrators of the 5th level.

    This is the Hafidh Ibn Hajar's understanding. And Allah Knows best.


    The Hafidh Ibn Hajar is somehow more inclined to being lenient, as a critic. Many narrators of the 5th and 6th levels, whose narrations have been judged Hasan and sometimes even Sahih by him, contain men who have been disparaged greatly by some.

    There are scholars who disagree with him or have - in my view - a better judgement. al-Dhahabi for example. He is more fair, giving less the benefit of the doubt. His Kashif and the Ma'rifat are more just. There is also a crucial difference between the two Huffâdh, which is important to recognize:

    Where Ibn Hajar tries to give a comprehensive verdict, he considers all previous judgements of the critics and forces to use them in fact all in creating a final - in his view - just verdict.

    al-Dhahabi, if you see his works, gives also much regard to inclusiveness. However, he rejects a verdict of a critic more or overrules one for another. In this vein, he has a good consideration of the type of critic who makes Ta'dil or Jarh. Is he just critic, lenient or harsh? See another post.

    So where Ibn Hajar tries to find balance, in let say 10 verdicts: 3 very bad, 4 in the middle and 3 good, and the result is: the 5th or 6th level. a-Dhahabi rejects 2 or 3 verdicts, explains a few and come to his conclusion. This is better.

    Also, consideration to the explained Jarh is a must in general. Many of the 5th and 6th level are 'injured' because of the memorization or their uprightness, as said before. Ibn Hajar neglects many times the Jarh mufassar or considers it, but he doesn't give it its due. If he did, as others have done of a greater calibre then him, he would be more fair.

    wa-Allahu A'lam.
  13. Adeel

    Adeel Active Member

    Assalam O Alaikum brother!

    Jazak Allah for this information brother! May Allah bless you! Brother can you provide how the scholars rule the folloeing hadith:

    ‘Indeed Allah possesses Angels besides the Hafazah (the Angels of Protection) who write (of even) the leaf which falls from a tree so when one of you suffers a limp in a deserted land he should call “Assist (me) O slaves of Allah”’

    Al-Haythami said in Al-Majma’uz Zawaid (10/132): ‘Al-Bazzar related it and its narrators are reliable.
  14. nobody

    nobody حامدا و مصلیا

    Baseless or Fabricated, which is the harsher tad'eef ? sorry if i sound too stupid. this thing came to my mind after the 'china' hadeeth.
  15. Abu Maryam PK

    Abu Maryam PK New Member

    By the way Al-Haithami according to the link above said
    "It's narrators are reliable even though theior is weakness in some of them".
    See also:
    Also a statement of Al-Haithami that the narrators are all fine is a general tautheeq (بالجملة), which does not mean specific thautheeq (commendation) in general.
  16. Adeel

    Adeel Active Member

    Assalam O Alaikum brother!
    Can you translate it in English plz?!
  17. nobody

    nobody حامدا و مصلیا

    ok this is my last question insha'Allah.

    can a mursal be used to strengthen a marfu' hadeeth ?
  18. أبو نافع

    أبو نافع Formerly - Abu_Abdallah

    That depends on many factors.

    If the Marfu' Hadith is of a tolerable weakness; the very weak can not be strenghtened by any other weak narration.

    So some narrator criticized strongly or there is an element of shadid al-du'f or something alike, cf.

    - inqita'
    - jahalat al-'ayn
    - lots of mistakes and fancies
    - narrating Munkar narrations
    - accused of lying or forgery etc.

    All this is of a severe weakness, not the du'f al-muhtamil. This type of weak narration if it is Marfu' can not be strenghtened by a Mursal, whatever the soundness of the latter.

    If the Mursal Hadith is soundly transmitted, containing no narrator being criticized for a weakness. Meaning: all men are reliable, no 'an'ana of a mudallis of the worst degree etc. Also: the narration is related by an elderly Follower i.e. the likes of Sa'id b. al-Musayyab and his generation, the Mursal may strenghten the Marfu' Hadith which is weak.

    But scholars differ on this.

    Ibn Hajar describes in a passage (Nuzhat p.111) the attribute for following-up of a Hadith (mutabi'at) and he mentions: the sayi al-hifdh who is of his like or better than the weak transmitter of the other report, or the mukhtalit narrator, or the mastur narrator (all these: when the chain is muttasil), or the mursal (!), or the mudallis.

    But if a hadith is Mursal, and it is from the Irsal of Sa'id, 'Alqama, al-Aswad, Qays b. Abi Hazim and its likes, I would tend to agree with the early Fuqaha' who accepted them. Of course, the text should not be shadd or munkar.

    wa-Allahu A'lam.
  19. Adeel

    Adeel Active Member

    Assalam O Alaikum
    I think on the first page brother turyalai has mistakenly provided the biography of Usama ibn zayd ibn aslam instead of Usama Ibn Zayd al Laythi.

Share This Page