Simaak Bin Harb Al-Dhahli (Rahimahullah)

Full Name: Simaak bin Harb bin Aws bin Khaalid bin Nazaar bin Mu’awiyah bin Haarithah bin Rabi’ah bin Aamir bin Dhahal bin Tha’labah

Nasab: Al-Dhahli, Al-Bukri, Al-Koofi

Tabaqah: 4

Kuniyah: Abul Mugheerah

Status: Thiqah

Simaak bin Harb is the narrator of Sihah Sittah and is one of the Tabi’een

His narrations in Sahihayn are as follows:

Saheeh Bukhaaree = H. 6722

Saheeh Muslim = 224, 128/436, 458, 459, 499, 606, 618, 643, 670, 734, 862, 866, 965, 978, 173/1075, 1385, 11/1504, 6/1628, 18/1651, 13/1671, 1680, 1692, 1693, 1748, 6,7/1821, 1846, 1922, 1984, 2053, 2135, 2248, 2277, 44/2305, 2322, 2329, 2339, 2344, 2361, 2745, 42,43/2763, 78/2919, 2923, 2977, 2978

According to the counting of Fawaad Abdul Baaqi, these are the forty five (45) narrations. Some narrations among them are repeated more than once, so we come to know that there are more than 45 narrations of Simaak in Saheeh Muslim. Many of his narrations are also present in Sunan Abi Dawood, Sunan Tirmidhi, Sunan Ibn Maja, and Sunan Nasaa’ee.

Now let’s come and read about Simaak bin Harb and the reasearch on him.

Jariheen (Criticizers) and their Jarah (Criticizm)

1. Shu’bah = Imam Yahya ibn Ma’een said: “Simaak bin Harb is Siqah and Shu’bah has weakened him…” [Taareekh Baghdaad: 9/215 T. 4792]

Ibn Ma’een was born in 157 H, and Shu’bah bin al-Hajjaj died in 160 H. Meaning, this narration is rejected due to being Munqati’.

2. Sufyaan ath-Thawree = Al-Ijlee said: “He is Jaaiz in hadeeth….. He is Eluquent except through Ikrimah From Ibn Abbaas… And Sufyaan ath-Taree weakened him..” [Taareekh ath-Thiqaat: 621, and Taareekh Baghdaad: 9/216]

Imam Ijlee was born in 182 H, and Imam Sufyaan ath-Thawree died in 161 H. Therefore this chain is also Munqati’.

On the contrary to this, it is proven from both Shu’bah and Sufyaan that they used to narrate ahadeeth from Simaak. Therefore, even if this jarah was proven then it will be interpreted according to the saying of Al-Ijlee that this jarah is regarding a specific route of Simaak from Ikrimah from Abbaas.

Ibn Adee has narrated from Ahmed bin al-Hussain as-Soofi (?) who narrated from Muhammad bin Khalf bin Abdul Humayd, From Sufyaan Thawree that: “Simaak is Da’eef” [Al-Kaamil: 3/1299]

The condition of Muhammad bin Khalf mentioned in its chain is not known, therefore this saying is not proven.

3. Ahmed bin Hanbal = “He is Mudtarib ul-Hadeeth” [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel: 4/279]

One narrator of this saying is Muhammad bin Hamwiyah bin al-Hassan, whose tawtheeq is not known. But it has one shaahid in Kitaab al-Ma’rifat wal Taareekh Ya’qoob al-Faarsi (2/638). From the saying of Imam Ahmed in Kitaab al-Illal wal Ma’rifat ar-Rijaal “Simaak yarfa’huma An Ikrimah An Ibn Abbaas” we come to know that the Jarah of Imam Ahmed of Mudtarib ul-Hadeeth is related to this specific chain of “Simaak – AN – Ikrimah – AN – Ibn Abbaas”. Moreover see the sayings of Ta’deel: 7.

4. Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Ammaar Al-Mosali = “They said that he make Mistakes and they differed in his narration.” [Taareekh Baghdaad: 9/216]

In this saying, the subject of “They said” is unknown.

5. Saalih bin Muhammad Al-Baghdaadi = “He weakened him” [Taareekh Baghdaad: 9/216]

Its narrator is Muhammad bin Ali Al-Maqri, who is not clarified. The teacher of Khateeb Baghdaadi, Qaadhi Abul ‘Alaa al-Waasiti is included among the students of Abu Muslim Abdur Rehmaan bin Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Mihraan bin Salamah Al-Thiqah Al-Saalih [Taareekh Baghdaad: 10/299]. This Abul ‘Alaa is Muhammad bin Ali Al-Qaari [Taareekh Baghdaad: 3/95] Al-Maqri and Al-Qaari are two titles for the same person. The conditions of Abul ‘Alaa al-Maqri are present in Ma’rifat ul-Qurra Al-Kibaar by Dhahabi [1/391 T. 328] etc, and this person is Majrooh (criticized). See: Mizaan ul-I’tidaal [3/254 T. 7971] and others. Therefore this saying is not proven.

6. Abdur Rahmaan bin Yusuf bin Kharaash = “Weakness is in his hadeeth” [Taareekh Baghdaad: 9/616]

The condition of the Student of Ibn Kharaash, Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Dawood al-Karji, is not known; and Ibn Kharaash himself is weak acording to the Jumhoor, See: Mizaan ul-I’tidaal [2/600 T. 5009]

7. Ibn Hibbaan = He mentioned him in Kitaab ath-Thiqaat (4/339) and said: “He makes alot of Mistakes…..Thawree and Shu’bah have narrated from him.”

This saying is Mardood, due to three reasons:

If he is “Yakhtai Katheeran (Makes alot of Mistakes)” then he can’t be Siqah, therefore why did he mention him in Kitaab ath-Thiqaat? And if he is Siqah then he can’t be “Yakhtai Katheeran”.
Haaifdh Ibn Hibban has himself narrated several ahadeeth of Simaak in his Saheeh. For example see: Al-Ihsaan bi Tarteeb Saheeh Ibn Hibbaan [1/143 H. 66, Pg 144 H. 68, 69 etc], and Athaaf al-Maharah [3/63, 64, 65 etc]. Therefore, according to Ibn Hibban this jarah is not related to the narration of Hadeeth, that is why declares his ahadeeth to be Saheeh.
Haafidh Ibn Hibbaan, in his book, “Mashaaheer Ulama al-Amsaar” ha mentioned Simaak bin Harb and did not narrate any criticizm on him (Pg 110 T. 840). Meaning, According to Ibn Hibbaan himself, the jarah on him is Baatil and Mardood.

8. Al-Ukaylee = He mentioned in Kitaab ad-Du’afaa al-Kabeer [2/178, 179]

9. Jareer bin Abdul Humayd = He saw Simaak bin Harb that he was urinating while standing (due to some excuse), so he abandoned narrating ahadeeth from him. [Ad-Du’afa by Al-Ukaylee: 2/179, and Al-Kaamil by Ibn Adee: 3/1299]

This is not a Jarah, because it is proven in Muwatta Imam Maalik with a Saheeh Isnaad that Abdullah bin Umar [radiallah anhu] used to urinate while standing (due to some excuse) [1/65 H. 140 with the Tahqeeq of Shaikh Zubayr]. The addition of “Due to some excuse” in the brackets is done in the light of other evidences. So what do you think of taking narrations from Abdullah bin Umar [radiallah anhu]??

10. An-Nasaa’ee = “He is not Strong…” [Al-Sunan al-Mujtabah with the Tahqeeq of Shaikh Zubayr: 8/319 H. 5680]

The saying of Imam Nasaa’ee in Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: “He is not Hujja when he narrates alone” [Tuhfat ul-Ashraaf by Al-Mizzi: 5/137, 138 H. 6104]

11. Ibn al-Mubaarak = “Simaak is Da’eef in Hadeeth” [Tahdheeb al-Kamaal: 8/131, Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 4/204]

This narration is narrated without any chain. In Kaamil Ibn Adee (3/1299), the same Jarah is narrated briefly through Ibn al-Mubarak from Sufyaan ath-Thawree, with a Da’eef chain, as is passed in number 2.

12. Al-Bazzaar = He is a Famous Person. I do not know anyone who abandoned him. He memory got deteriorated before his death. [Tahdheeb at-Tadheeb: 4/205]

Firstly: This saying is Chain-less, Secondly: It is related to Ikhtilaat, the answer to which is coming ahead.

13. Ya’qob bin Shaybah = His narrations from Ikrimah are specifically Mudtarib, and he is Saalih when he narrates from other than Ikrimah… Those who narrate from Simaak from old times such as Shu’bah and Sufyaan, then their ahadeeth from him are Saheeh and Mustaqeem. Ibn al-Mubaarak said, we only reject those of his narrations which are narrated by his students at the end of his age. [Tahdheeb al-Kamaal: 8/131]

This saying is related to the chain of “Simaak AN Ikrimah (AN Ibn Abbaas)” and Ikhtilaat. The saying of Ibn al-Mubaark was not found with the chain, and the remaining everthing is Tawtheeq, as is coming ahead. [The sayings of Ta’deel: 27]

Mu’addaleen (Admirers) and their Ta’deel (Praise)

1. Imam Muslim = He took narrations from him in his Saheeh. See Mizaan ul-I’tidaal (2/233)

2. Imam Bukhaari = It has passed in the beginning that Imam Bukhaari has took narrations from Simaak in his Saheeh (6722). Haafidh Dhahabi has written that: “And Al-Bukhaari took narrations from him as Istishhaad” [Siyar A’laam al-Nabula: 5/248]

It has passed under Ithbaat at-Ta’deel fi Tawtheeq Mu’ammal bin Ismaa’eel (Part 2 – Sayings of Criticizm # 6) that the narrator from whom Imam Bukhaari takes narration as Istishhaad, is SIqah according to Imam Bukhaari.

3. Shu’bah = He took narrations from him. [Saheeh Muslim H. 224 etc]

There is a principle regarding Shu’bah that he only takes the narrations of those who are Siqah according to him. See: Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: Vol 1 Pg 4,5, and Quwaaid fi Uloom ul-Hadeeth by Ashraf Ali Thanvi Pg 217.

4. Sufyaan ath-Thawree = “No hadeeth of Simaak is Saaqit (unacceptable).” [Taareekh Baghdaad: 9/215, Chain Saheeh]

The criticizm of Ibn Hajar on this saying is very strange [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 4/205]. It should be kept in mind that the Jarah of Sufyaan ath-Thawree on Simaak, is not proven.

5. Yahya ibn Ma’een = “Siqah (Reliable)” [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel: 4/279, and Taareekh Baghdaad: 9/215, Chain Saheeh]

6. Abu Haatim ar-Raazi = “Sudooq Siqah (Truthful, Reliable)” [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel: 4/280]

7. Ahmed bin Hanbal = “Simaak is good in the hadeeth from Abdul Malik bin Umayr” [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel: 4/279, 280]

8. Abu Ishaaq as-Sabi’ee = “Abu Bakr bin Ayyaash narrated, and he is Da’eef, From Abu Ishaaq that he said: ‘Take knowledge from Simaak bin Harb.'” [Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel: 4/275]

This saying is not proven due to Abu Bakr bin Ayyaash.

9. Al-Ijlee = “Jaaiz ul-Hadeeth” (See: The saying of Jarah: 2) And he mentioned him in Taareekh ath-Thiqaat.

10. Ibn Adee = “…He is Sudooq and there is nothing wrong in him.” [Al-Kaamil: 3/1300]

11. Tirmidhi = He has graded many of the narrations of Simaak to be “Hassan Saheeh”. See: H. 65, 202, 227 and others. In fact Imam Tirmidhi has started his Sunan with the hadeeth of Simaak (H. 1)

12. Ibn Shaaheen = He mentioned him in his Kitaab ath-Thiqaat (505)

13. Al-Haakim = He authenticated him in Al-Mustadrak [1/297 and others]

14.  Adh-Dhahabi = “He authenticated him in Talkhees ul-Mustadrak.” [1/297]. And Imam Dhahabi said: “He is Sudooq Jaleel” [Al-Mughni fi Du’afa: 2649], and he said: “Al-Haafiz Al-Imam Al-Kabeer” [Siyar A’laam al-Nabula: 5/245]

15. Ibn Hibbaan = “He took narrations from him in his Saheeh.” [See: The sayings of Jarah: 7]

16. Ibn Khuzaymah = “He authenticated him in his Saheeh” [1/8 H. 8 and others]

17. Al-Baghwi = He graded his hadeeth to be Hasan. [Sharh us-Sunnah: 3/31 H. 570]

18. Nawawi = He graded his hadeeth to be Hasan in Al-Majmoo Sharh ul-Madhab (3/490).

19. Ibn Abdul Barr = He authenticated him in Al-Ist’yaab (3/615).

20. Ibn al-Jarood = He mentioned his hadeeth in Al-Muntaqa (H. 25)

Ashraf Ali Thaanvi said while commenting on a hadeeth that: “Ibn Al-Jarood narrated this hadeeth in Al-Muntaqa, and it is Saheeh according to him.” [Bawadir al-Nawadir Pg 135]

21. Al-Ziyaa al-Maqdasi = He took evidence from him in Al-Mukhtara [12/11]

22. Al-Mundhiri = He graded his hadeeth to be Hasan. See Al-Targheeb wa Tarheeb: 1/108 H. 150

23. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaani = “He is truthful, his narrations from Ikrimah are specifically Mudtarib, and his memory got deteriorated at the end of his age.” [Taqreeb at-Tahdheeb: Pg 137]

Ibn Hajar has kept silent in one of his hadeeth in Fath ul-Baari (2/224 Under H. 740). Zafar Ahmed Thanvi said: “Such a narration is Saheeh or Hasan or according to Haafidh Ibn Hajar” (Therefore this narrator is Saheeh ul-Hadeeth or Hasan ul-Hadeeth according to Ibn Hajar). [See Qawaaid fi Uloom ul-Hadeeth Pg 89]

24. Abu Awaanah = He took evidence from him in his Saheeh al-Mustakhraj upon Saheeh Muslim (1/234)

25. Abu Nu’aym al-Asbahani = He took evidence from him in his Saheeh Al-Mustakhraj Ala Saheeh Muslim [1/289, 290 H. 535]

26. Ibn Sayyid an-Naas = He authenticated his hadeeth in Sharh Tirmidhi.

27. Ya’qoob bin Shaybah = He has graded the hadeeth of Sufyaan ath-Thawree from Simaak, to be Saheeh, as has been passed.

From this detail we come to know that Simaak bin Harb is declared to be Siqah, Sudooq, and Saheeh ul-Hadeeth by the Jumhoor of Muhadditheen. Therefore the Jarah of a few Muhadditheen upon him is rejected. Some Scholars have took this jarah to be upon Ikhtilaat, meaning there is no criticizm on his narrations from before his Ikhtilaat.

Discussion on Ikhtilaat

Some scholars have said that the memory of Simaak bin Harb got deteriorated at the end of his age. See: Al-Kawakib al-Niraat by Ibn al-Kiyaal Pg 159.

Ibn as-Salaah said in Uloom ul-Hadeeth ma’a Taqiyeed wal aizaah Pg 466, which means that, The narrations of Mukhtalateen (Pl. Mukhtalat) narrated in Sahihayn as Hujjat, mean that they are narrated from before the Ikhtilaat. This saying is absolutely authentic in light of the other qaraain. In Saheeh Muslim, the following are the students of Simaak bin Harb:

1. Abu Awaanah (224)
2. Shu’bah (224)
3. Zaaidah (224)
4. Israa’eel (224)
5. Abu Khaythamah Zuhayr bin Mu’awiyah (436)
6. Abul Ahwas (436)
7. Umar bin Ubayd al-Tanafsi (499/242)
8. Sufyaan ath-Thawree (270/287, Tuhfat ul-Ashraaf by Al-Mizzi: 2/154 H. 2164)
9. Zikriyah bin Abi Zaidah (270/287)
10. Hassan bin Saalih (734)
11. Maalik bin Maghool (965)
12. Abu Yunus Haatim bin Abi Sagheerah (1680)
13. Hammaad bin Salamah (7/1821)
14. Idrees bin Yazeed al-Awdi (2135)
15. Ibraaheem bin Tahmaan (2277)
16. Ziyaad bin Khaythama (44/2305)
17. Asbaat bin Nasar (2329)

We come to know that the narrations of the above mentioned people from Simaak are from before his Ikhtilaat. Therefore criticizm on the hadeeth of Sufyaan narrated from Simaak, is rejected.

[Taken From: Nasar ul-Rab Fee Tawtheeq Simaak bin Harb]

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s