The groundlessness of the chain of transmission of Ḥadīth aḍ-Ḍuḥḍāḥ
As it has been stated earlier, the narrators of Ḥadīth aḍ-Ḍuḥḍāḥ are Sufyān ibn Sa‘īd ath-Thawrī, ‘Abd al-Malik ibn ‘Umayr, ‘Abd al-‘Azīz ibn Muḥammad ad-Darāwardī, and Layth ibn Sa‘d.
Now, we will cite some statements of Sunnī scholars of ‘ilm ar-rijāl in order to have a clear idea of the personal records of these narrators:
a. Sufyān ibn Sa‘īd ath-Thawrī
Abū ‘Abd Allāh Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad ‘Uthmān adh-Dhahabī, a renowned Sunnī scholar of ‘ilm ar-rijāl, says regarding Sufyān:
“.الضّعفاء عن يدلّس كان”
“He used to narrate fabricated ḥadiths from weak narrators.”[1]
This statement confirms that Sufyān ath-Thawrī’s narrations are deceitful and related by weak or unknown narrators. Consequently, his ḥadīths are void of all credibility.
b. ‘Abd al-Malik ibn ‘Umayr
Referring to Ibn ‘Umayr, adh-Dhahabī says:
.حفظه تغيّر بحافظ، ليس أبوحاتم: قال .حفظه وساء عمره طال
ابن قال و مخلط، :معين بن قال و يخلّط، ضعيف :أحمد قال و
.جدًّا ضعّفه انّه احمد عن الكوسج ذكر و لايرضاه شعبه كان :خراش
He has grown old and his memory became defective. Abū Ḥātam says: “He is unable to memorize ḥadīths and his memory changed.” Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal says: “‘Abd al-Mālik ibn al-‘Umayr is weak and makes mistakes (that is, he narrates fabricated traditions).” Ibn Mu‘īn says: “He mixes false ḥadīths with authentic [ṣaḥīḥ] ones.” Ibn Kharāsh says: “Shu‘bah was not pleased with him.” Kawsaj says that Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal has enormously weakened ‘Abd al-Mālik ibn ‘Umayr.”[2]
We understand from these statements that ‘Abd al-Mālik ibn al-‘Umayr:
- has weak memory and is forgetful;
- is, according to ‘ilm ar-rijāl, “weak”; a term referred to a person whose traditions cannot be trusted;
- makes a lot of mistakes; and
- is mukhliṭ, i.e. he mixes false traditions with authentic [ṣaḥīḥ] ones.
It is evident that detecting any of the mentioned shortcomings can contribute to the groundlessness of the ḥadīths of ‘Abd al-Mālik ibn ‘Umayr, in which all these weaknesses are detected.
c. ‘Abd al-‘Azīz ibn Muḥammad ad-Darāwardī
Sunnī scholars of ‘ilm ar-rijāl regard ad-Darāwardī as a forgetful person whose memory is so weak that his traditions cannot be relied on.
Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal says about ad-Darāwardī:
“.ببواطيل جاء حفظه من حدّث إذا”
“When he narrated ḥadīths from memory, he presented unfounded and irrelevant statements.”[3]
Also, Abū Ḥātam says about him:
“.به لايحتجّ”
“One cannot rely on him.”[4]
Abū Zurā‘ah describes him as “الحفظ سيّئ” [sayya’u’l-ḥifẓ], i.e. a person who has poor memory.[5]
d. Layth ibn Sa‘d
When we study the Sunnī books on ‘ilm ar-rijāl, we find that all the narrators whose name is “Layth” are either unknown or weak whose narrations are not trusted.[6]
Layth ibn Sa‘d is one of the weak and heedless narrators who was nonchalant about what to hear and what to narrate.
Yaḥyā ibn Mu‘īn says about him:
“.السّماع و الشّيوخ في يتساهل كان إنّه”
“He was not careful as to whom he narrated from or to the kind of ḥadīth he heard.”[7]
Nabātī also regards Layth as a weak narrator, and mentions his name in his book, At-Tadhlīl ‘ala’l-Kāmil, in which he mentions the name of weak narrators only.[8]
From what have been stated so far, it is evident that the principal narrators of Ḥadīth aḍ-Ḍuḥḍāḥ are very weak and their ḥadīths are not reliable.
