Name:
محمد بن مسلم بن عبيد الله بن عبد الله بن شهاب بن عبد الله بن الحارث
بن زهرة القرشى الزهرى ، أبو بكر المدنى
Muhammad
bin Muslim bin Ubaydullah bin Abdullah bin Shihaab bin Abdullah bin al-Haarith
bin Zuhrah al-Qurashi az-Zuhri, Abu Bakr al-Madani
Tabaqah:
4 - Next to the Taabi'een of Middle Level
Birth: 50
A.H. and this is the most preponderant opinion concerning his date of birth.
Death: 17th
of Ramadaan, 124 A.H. on his property in Shaghab.
Imaam Sufyaan bin Uyaynah said: “Az-Zuhri, Muhammad bin Muslim bin Ubaydullah bin Shihaab,
died in 124 A.H.”
[Al-Taareekh al-Kabeer lil
Bukhaari (1/220)]
Ibn Sa’d, Khaleefah bin
Khayyaat, and az-Zubayr also said the same thing.
Narrated by:
Al-Bukhaari –
Muslim –
Abu Dawood –
Tirmidhi –
Nasaa'ee –
Ibn Maajah
Note: Imaam Ibn Shihaab
az-Zuhri is one of the central authorities of hadeeth. There is no book of
hadeeth which does not contain his narrations!
Teachers: He
narrated from Ibn Umar, Jaabir bin Abdullah (a small part), Sahl bin Sa’d, Anas
bin Maalik, Saa’ib bin Yazeed, Abdullah bin Tha’labah bin Su’ayr, Mahmood bin
ar-Rabee’, Mahmood bin Labeed, Abu at-Tufayl Aamir, Abdur Rahmaan bin Azhar,
Rabee’ah bin Abbaad ad-Daylee, Abdullah bin Aamir bin Rabee’ah, Maalik bin Aws
bin al-Hadathaan, Sa’eed bin al-Musayyab, Alqamah bin Waqqaas, Katheer bin
al-Abbaas, Abu Umaamah bin Sahl, Ali bin al-Husayn, Urwah bin az-Zubayr, Abu
Idrees al-Khawlaani, Qabeesah bin Dhu’ayb, Abdul Malik bin Marwaan, Saalim bin
Abdullah, Muhammad bin Jubayr bin Mut’im, Muhammad bin an-Nu’maan bin Basheer,
Abu Salamah bin Abdur Rahmaan, Ubaydullah bin Abdullah bin Utbah, Uthmaan bin
Ishaaq al-Aamri, Abi al-Ahwas Mawla Bani Thaabit, Abu Bakr bin Abdur Rahmaan
bin al-Haarith, Qaasim bin Muhammad, Aamir bin Sa’d, Khaarijah bin Zayd bin
Thaabit, Abdullah bin Ka’b bin Maalik, Abu Umar – a man from Bilaa who has also
a Companion – and Abaan bin Uthmaan
Students: Ataa
bin Abi Ribaah (who was elder than him), Umar bin Abdul Azeez (he died a little
before Az-Zuhri in one hundred and twenty some Hijri), Amr bin Deenaar, Amr bin
Shu’ayb, Qataadah bin Di’aamah, Zayd bin Aslam, Mansoor bin al-Mu’tamir, Ayyoob
as-Sakhtiyaani, Yahya bin Sa’eed al-Ansaari, Abu az-Zinaad, Saalih bin Kaysaan,
Uqayl bin Khaalid, Muhammad bin al-Waleed az-Zubaydee, Muhammad bin Abi Hafsah,
Bakr bin Waa’il, Amr bin al-Haarith, Ibn Jurayj, Ja’far bin Burqaan, Ziyaad bin
Sa’d, Abdul Azeez bin al-Maajishoon, Abu Uways, Ma’mar bin Raashid,
Al-Awzaa’ee, Shu’ayb bin Abi Hamzah, Maalik bin Anas, Layth bin Sa’d, Ibraaheem
bin Sa’d, Sa’eed bin Abdul Azeez, Fulayh bin Sulemaan, Ibn Abi Dhi’b, Muhammad
bin Ishaaq bin Yasaar, Sufyaan bin Husayn, Saalih bin Abi al-Akhdar, Sulemaan
bin Katheer, Hishaam bin Sa’d, Hushaym bin Bushayr, Sufyaan bin Uyaynah, and a
nation of people other than these.
Status:
Thiqah Haafidh Faqeeh, there is consensus on his might and mastery
Opinions of Ahl ul-Jarh wat Ta’deel:
Note: It is not possible
to enclose all the virtues and praises of Imaam az-Zuhri in one short article;
hence we will only mention a few sayings to be concise.
Those who praised him:
1- Imaam Ibn Shihaab az-Zuhri said:
“ما استعدت
حديثًا قط، ولا شككت في حديث إلا حديثًا، احدًا، فسألت صاحبي، فإذا هو كما حفظت”
“I have never requested that a
hadeeth be repeated to me neither was I unsure of any hadeeth except one
hadeeth. And when I asked my colleague, he told me that it was exactly as I had
memorized it”
[Al-Ilal by Ahmed (160) & Hilyat al-Awliyaa (3/363)]
Hakeem bin
Hakeem said that when he told Ibn Shihaab that Rabee’ah bin Abi Abdur Rahmaan
says, “Sa’eed bin al-Musayyab said such and such.” He said:
“أوهم
ربيعة أنا كنت أحفظ لحديث سعيد بن المسيب من ربيعة”
“Rabee’ah was mistaken. I have
the mastery of Ibn al-Musayyab’s ahaadeeth more than Rabee’ah”
[Taareekh Dimashq by Ibn Asaakir (55/326), Chain Hasan]
Ibn Ishaaq
said that he asked Az-Zuhri about something and that he said:
“ما بقي
أحد فيما بين المشرق والمغرب أعلم بهذا مني”
“There is none of those who
are between the East and West more knowledgeable about this than me.”
[Taareekh Dimashq by Ibn Asaakir (55/326), Chain Hasan]
2- Ameer ul-Mu’mineen, Umar bin Abdul Azeez (D. 101) said:
“عليكم
بابن شهاب هذا فانكم لاتلقون أحدا أعلم بالسنة الماضية منه”
“Necessary upon you is to hold
on to this Ibn Shihaab, for indeed you would not have met anyone more
knowledgeable of the past Sunnah than him”
[Al-Jarh wat Ta’deel by Ibn Abi Haatim (8/72), Chain Saheeh]
3- Imaam Amr bin Deenaar (D. 126) said:
“مَا
رَأَيْتُ أَحَدًا أَبْصَرَ بِحَدِيثٍ مِنَ الزُّهْرِيِّ”
“I have not seen anyone as
precise in Hadeeth as Az-Zuhri”
[Tabaqaat al-Kubra by Ibn Sa’d (1/174), Chain Saheeh]
4- Imaam Sa’d bin Ibraaheem bin Abdur Rahmaan bin Awf (D. 125-127)
said:
“ما أرى
أحدا بعد رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلى اللَّهُ عَلَيه وسَلم جَمَعَ ما جَمَعَ ابْن شِهاب”
“I have not seen anyone after
the Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) who gathered what Ibn
Shihaab gathered”
[Al-Taareekh al-Kabeer by Al-Bukhaari (1/220), Chain Saheeh]
5- Imaam Maalik bin Anas al-Madani (D. 179) said:
“أول من
أسند الحديث ابن شهاب الزهري”
“The first person who (wrote down) the chains of Hadeeth was Ibn Shihaab az-Zuhri”
[Muqaddimah Al-Jarh wat Ta’deel (1/20), Chain Saheeh]
Another
version says: “The first person to record down
the knowledge in written form was Ibn Shihaab”
[Hilyat
al-Awliya (3/363), Chain Weak]
6- Imaam Sufyaan bin Uyaynah (D. 198) said:
“مَا
أَحَدٌ أَعْلَمُ بِالسُّنَّةِ منه”
“There is no one more
knowledgeable of the Sunnah than him (i.e. Zuhri)”
[Al-Kaamil by Ibn Adee (1/139), Chain Hasan]
Al-Qaasim bin
Abi Sufyaan al-Ma’mari said, I asked Sufyaan bin Uyaynah:
“أيما أفقه
أو أعلم إبراهيم النخعي أو الزهري قال الزهري”
“Which one of the two is
bigger Faqeeh or Aalim: Ibraaheem an-Nakha’ee or Az-Zuhri?” Sufyaan answered:
“Az-Zuhri”
[Taareekh Dimashq by Ibn Asaakir (55/355), Chain Hasan]
7-
Imaam
Muhammad bin Sa’d (D. 230) said:
“كَانَ الزُّهْرِيُّ ثِقَةً كَثِيرَ الْحَدِيثِ وَالْعِلْمِ
وَالرِّوَايَةِ فَقِيهًا جَامِعًا”
“Az-Zuhri was Thiqah, possessed a lot of ahaadeeth, knowledge
and narrations, he was a complete Faqeeh”
[
Tabaqaat al-Kubra by Ibn Sa'd (1/185)]
8-
Imaam
Abu Abdur Rahmaan Al-Nasaa’ee (D. 303) said:
“أحسن أسانيد تروى عن رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وسلم) أربعة منها
الزهري عن علي بن الحسين عن حسين بن علي عن علي بن أبي طالب عن رسول الله (صلى
الله عليه وسلم) والزهري عن عبيد الله بن عبد الله بن عتبة بن مسعود عن ابن عباس
عن عمر عن النبي (صلى الله عليه وسلم)”
“The best of chains narrated from the Messenger of Allaah
(sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) are four among them is (what) Zuhri narrated from
Ali bin al-Husayn from Husayn bin Ali from Ali bin Abi Taalib from the
Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), and (what) Zuhri narrated
from Ubaydullah bin Abdullah bin Utbah bin Mas’ood from Ibn Abbaas from Umar
from the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) [and he mentioned two other
routes]”
[
Taareekh Dimashq by Ibn Asaakir (55/339), Chain Hasan]
9-
Imaam
Ayyoob as-Sakhtiyaani (D. 131) said:
“ما رأيت
أحدًا أعلم من الزهري، فقال له صخر بن جويرية: ولا الحسن: قال: ما رأيت أحدًا أعلم
من الزهري”
“I have not seen anyone more knowledgeable than Az-Zuhri, so
Sakhr bin Juwayriyyah said to him, ‘not even Hasan (al-Basri)?’ He said
(again): I have not seen anyone more knowledgeable than Az-Zuhri”
[
Al-Ilal by Imaam Ahmed (3/313), Chain Saheeh]
10-
Imaam
Ahmed bin Hanbal (D. 241) said:
“الزُّهْريّ أَحْسَنُ النَّاسِ حَدِيثًا وَأَجْوَدُ النَّاسِ
إِسْنَادًا”
“Az-Zuhri is the best of people in Hadeeth and the most skilled
of people in Isnaad”
[
Al-Kaamil by Ibn Adee (1/139), Chain Hasan]
11-
Imaam
Abu Zur’ah ar-Raazi (D. 264) was asked:
“أي الإسناد أصح؟ قال الزهري عن سالم عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ
صَلَّى الله عليه وسلم صحيح”
“Which Isnaad is the most authentic?” He replied: “(the Isnaad
of) Az-Zuhri from Saalim from his Father from the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi
wasallam) is Saheeh…” [and he mentioned two other chains]
[
Al-Jarh wat Ta'deel by Ibn Abi Haatim (2/26)]
12-
Imaam Abu Haatim
ar-Raazi (D. 275) said:
“الزهري
احب إلى من الاعمش، يحتج بحديثه، واثبت اصحاب انس الزهري”
“Az-Zuhri is more beloved to
us than Al-A’mash, his hadeeth is to be taken evidence from, and the most
proficient of Anas’ students was Az-Zuhri”
[Al-Jarh wat Ta’deel by Ibn Abi Haatim (8/74)]
13-
Imaam
Ibn Hibbaan (D. 354) said:
“رأى عشرَة من أَصْحَاب رَسُول اللَّه صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ
وَسَلَّمَ وَكَانَ من أحفظ أهل زَمَانه وَأَحْسَنهمْ سياقا لمتون الْأَخْبَار
وَكَانَ فَقِيها فَاضلا”
“He saw ten companions of Allaah’s Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi
wasallam) and he was the most preserving of the people of his era, and the best
of them in mentioning the contexts of the texts of narrations, and he was a
Faqeeh Faadil”
[
Ath-Thiqaat by Ibn Hibbaan (5/349)]
14-
Imaam
Abu al-Hasan al-Ijlee (D. 261) said:
“تَابِعِيّ ثِقَة أدْرك الزهرى من أَصْحَاب النَّبِي صلى الله
عَلَيْهِ وَسلم أنس بن مَالك الْأنْصَارِيّ وَسَهل بن سعد السَّاعِدِيّ وَعبد
الرَّحْمَن بن أَيمن بن نابل ومحمود بن الرّبيع الْأنْصَارِيّ وروى عَن عبد الله
بن عمر نَحوا من ثَلَاثَة أَحَادِيث وروى عَن السَّائِب بن يزِيد”
“He is a Thiqah Taabi’ee. Zuhri met Anas bin Maalik al-Ansaari,
Sahl bin Sa’d as-Saa’idi, Abdur Rahmaan bin Ayman bin Naabil, and Mahmood bin
ar-Rabee’ al-Ansaari from the Companions of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi
wasallam), and he narrated from Abdullah bin Umar about three narrations, and
he (also) narrated from Saa’ib bin Yazeed”
[
Ath-Thiqaat by al-Ijlee (2/253)]
15-
Imaam
Shams ud-Deen adh-Dhahabi (D. 748) dedicated 24 pages to the biography
of Imaam az-Zuhri in Siyar A’laam al-Nabula and said:
“الإِمَامُ، العَلَمُ، حَافِظُ زَمَانِه”
“Al-Imaam al-Alam, the Haafidh of his time”
[
5/326]
16-
Haafidh
Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaani (D. 852) said:
“الفقيه الحافظ متفق على جلالته وإتقانه وثبته”
“Al-Faqeeh al-Haafidh, his might, mastery and precision is
agreed upon”
[
Taqreeb at-Tahdheeb (6296)]
Those who criticized him:
None
The Accusation of being a Shi’aa on Imaam
az-Zuhri:
A person named Abu al-Khayr Asdi
writes in his book named “Islaam main Nuzool-e-Maseeh ka Tasawwur (The concept
of Eesa’s descendance in Islaam)” that: “The confession of the A’immah
Rijaal of Shi’aas that Ibn Shihaab az-Zuhri was counted among the companions of
Imaam Ja’far Saadiq. Hence the famous
Imaam of Shi’aa Rijaal, Maamqaani writes in his book ‘Tanqeeh ul-Maqaal fi
Asmaa ur-Rijaal’ that: The Shaykh counted him among his Rijaal among the
companions of as-Saadiq (3/186)”
[P. 41, 42]
Answer:
We have proven above that Imaam
az-Zuhri was one of the highest authorities of Ahl us-Sunnah wal Jama’ah and a
Thiqah with consensus Imaam and a Wali of Allaah. His ahaadeeth are present in
all the hadeeth books of Ahl us-Sunnah. The Sunni Ulama have praised him and
have declared his narrations to be Saheeh, in fact, the most authentic of all
narrations. And not a single Sunni Muhaddith has accused him of being a Shi’aa.
Therefore, this accusation is rejected.
Secondly, if Rawaafid mention
someone in their books to increase their numbers, this is not at all the
evidence for saying that this person would actually be a Shi’aa and a Raafidi.
The Rawaafid have also mentioned
the following people in their books of Rijaal, so does that mean they would
also become Shi’aa or Raafidi?
1. Ali bin Abi Taalib radiallah anhu [Al-Usool min al-Kaafi (1/452)]
2. Al-Hasan bin Ali bin Abi Taalib radiallah anhu [Rijaal at-Toosi
(P. 15); and Al-Usool min al-Kaafi (1/463)]
3. Al-Husayn bin Ali bin Abi Taalib radiallah anhu [Rijaal at-Toosi
(P. 15); and Al-Usool min al-Kaafi (1/463)]
4. Jaabir bin Abdullah al-Ansaari radiallah anhu [Tanqeeh ul-Maqaal
of Maamqaani (1/99); Rijaal at-Toosi (P. 12)]
5. Sa’eed bin Jubayr rahimahullah [Tanqeeh ul-Maqaal (2/25); Rijaal
al-Helli (P. 29)]
6. Abu Haneefah an-Nu’maan bin Thaabit rahimahullah [Tanqeeh
ul-Maqaal (3/272); Rijaal at-Toosi (P. 325)]
7. Ya’qoob bin Ibraaheem Abu Yoosuf al-Qaadhi [Tanqeeh ul-Maqaal (3/329)]
8. Muhammad bin Idrees ash-Shaafi’ee [Tanqeeh ul-Maqaal (2/76 #
10360)]
9. Maalik bin Anas [Tanqeeh ul-Maqaal (2/48 # 10022)]
10. Ibraaheem bin Yazeed
an-Nakha’ee and others [Tanqeeh ul-Maqaal (1/43); Rijaal at-Toosi (P. 35)]
Does anyone have the courage to
declare these Sahaabah and Taabi’een to be Shi’aa or Raafidi and reject their
narrations? Therefore, it is proven that mere mention of some Sunni people in
Shi’aa Rijaal does not make them Raafidi.
In fact on the contrary,
Maamqaani Raafidi has narrated in Ibn Abi al-Hadeed’s Sharh of Nahj ul-Balaghah
that:
“كان الزهري من المنحر فين عنه يعني عليا”
i.e. Az-Zuhri was among the opposers of Ameer ul-Mu’mineen
Ali bin Abi Taalib radiallah anhu
[Tanqeeh
ul-Maqaal (3/187)]
And similarly, Abu Ja’far
at-Toosi ar-Raafidi writes:
“محمد بن شهاب الزهري عدو...”
“Muhammad bin Shihaab az-Zuhri is an enemy…”
[Rijaal
at-Toosi (P. 101)]
Now decide as to whether we can
declare Imaam az-Zuhri to be a Naasibi on the saying of Raafidah?
Imaam az-Zuhri & the accusation of
Tadlees:
It is not proven from any of the
early Muhadditheen that they declared Imaam az-Zuhri to be a Mudallis. It is
only a few Muta’khireen who declared him a Mudallis without any reference from
the Mutaqaddimeen. On the contrary, all the Scholars have accepted his
narrations with AN. That is why, Haafidh al-Alaa’ee said:
“وقد قبل الأئمة قوله عن”
“And indeed the A’immah have (unanimously) accepted his
saying with An”
[Jaami
at-Tahseel (1/109)]
There are only three proven
references from the early Muhadditheen that are presented in order to prove the
Tadlees of Zuhri, and the reality of each of them is explained as follows:
1. The Saying of Imaam Abu
Haatim:
Imaam Abu Haatim ar-Raazi said
while commenting on a Hadeeth:
“الزهري لم يسمع من عروة هذا الحديث، فلعله
دلسه”
“Az-Zuhri did not hear this hadeeth from Urwah, probably he did
Tadlees”
[Ilal
al-Hadeeth by Ibn Abi Haatim (3/407)]
“He probably did Tadlees”
is not sufficient to declare a giant Imaam like Zuhri to be a Mudallis. Imaam
Abu Haatim himself is not certain of the reality, so how can this saying become
a proof?
2. The saying of Imaam
Tirmidhi
Some people have presented the
following saying of Imaam Tirmidhi to prove that Imaam az-Zuhri used to do
Tadlees. Imaam Tirmidhi said while commenting on a hadeeth:
“هذا حديث لا يصح لأن الزهري لم يسمع هذا
الحديث من أبي سلمة”
“This hadeeth is not Saheeh because az-Zuhri did not hear
this hadeeth from Abu Salamah”
[Sunan
at-Tirmidhi (1524)]
If Zuhri did not hear this
hadeeth from Abu Salamah, this does not necessarily mean that he committed
Tadlees! There could be several other reasons for not listening this hadeeth
from Abu Salamah other than Tadlees, such as this route is not proven from
Zuhri, or Zuhri in actuality did not hear this hadeeth from Zuhri but the one
who narrated from him could have mistake in narrating it from Abu Salamah! And
reading the context of the saying of Imaam Tirmidhi also suggests that he is
not talking about Tadlees but the opposition of Zuhri’s student in narrating it
from Abu Salamah with the other students of Zuhri! As long as these possibilities
are there, this saying cannot be presented as a proof of his Tadlees.
3. The saying of Abu Ja’far
at-Tahaawi
Abu Ja’far at-Tahaawi al-Hanafi
said while commenting on a hadeeth:
“وهذا الحديث أيضا لم يسمعه الزهري من عروة
إنما دلس به”
“Zuhri also did not hear this hadeeth from Urwah, rather
he did Tadlees in it”
[Sharh
Ma’aani ul-Athaar (1/72)]
Although Abu Ja’far At-Tahaawi
is Sadooq and Thiqah in Hadeeth but he was a Muta’assib Hanafi. He does not
even hesitate to suggest far-fetched Ta’weelaat of ahaadeeth in support of his
Madhab. Ilm al-Hadeeth was not his field of specialty as it was with other Muhadditheen
that we should decide the fate of a narrator based only on his saying.
Shaykh ul-Islaam, Imaam Ibn
Taymiyyah said:
“وَالطَّحَاوِيُّ لَيْسَتْ عَادَتُهُ نَقْدَ الْحَدِيثِ كَنَقْدِ أَهْلِ
الْعِلْمِ ; وَلِهَذَا رَوَى فِي " شَرْحِ مَعَانِي الْآثَارِ "
الْأَحَادِيثَ الْمُخْتَلِفَةَ، وَإِنَّمَا يُرَجِّحُ مَا يُرَجِّحُهُ مِنْهَا فِي
الْغَالِبِ مِنْ جِهَةِ الْقِيَاسِ الَّذِي رَآهُ حُجَّةً، وَيَكُونُ أَكْثَرُهَا
مَجْرُوحًا مِنْ جِهَةِ الْإِسْنَادِ لَا يَثْبُتُ، وَلَا يَتَعَرَّضُ لِذَلِكَ ;
فَإِنَّهُ لَمْ تَكُنْ مَعْرِفَتُهُ بِالْإِسْنَادِ كَمَعْرِفَةِ أَهْلِ الْعِلْمِ
بِهِ، وَإِنْ كَانَ كَثِيرَ الْحَدِيثِ، فَقِيهًا عَالِمًا”
“The manner in
which the Scholars scrutinize ahaadeeth, At-Tahaawi does not have this habit
because the narrations that he mentions in Sharh Ma’aani al-Athaar and gives
one precedence over the other then he does most of it based upon Qiyaas and
considers this to be evidence, whereas most of them are weak in terms of their
chains. The reason for this is because although he was Katheer al-Hadeeth Faqeeh Aalim, but
he did not have knowledge of the chains as did the other Scholars of hadeeth.”
[Minhaaj
us-Sunnah al-Nabawiyyah by Ibn Taymiyyah (8/195-196)]
And if you open this hadeeth
under which Tahaawi has said this about Imaam az-Zuhri, you would see that he
is unsuccessfully defending the Hanafi Madhab even there and is constantly busy
in criticizing Thiqah narrators. Hence, Jarh wa Ta’deel (as Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah
said) is not the field of At-Tahaawi. And basing the opinion of someone’s Jarh
wa Ta’deel on an non-expert is not the habit of Muhaqqiqeen.
Moreover, the reason based on
which Tahaawi has accused Imaam az-Zuhri of Tadlees in this hadeeth is also
very odd and strange which is not supported by any other Expert, but we do not want
to go into its details.
At the end we say that the
narration in which Tahaawi accused Imaam az-Zuhri of committing Tadlees, in
another route of that very hadeeth, Imaam az-Zuhri himself has affirmed his
samaa from Urwah (See, Taareekh Baghdaad (10/451, Chain Saheeh)). So when Imaam
az-Zuhri did not even commit Tadlees in the narration in which he is wrongfully
accused of committing Tadlees, then what value does the accusation have
remaining!?
Therefore, the accusation of
Tadlees upon Imaam az-Zuhri is wrong. He is free from Tadlees and hence all his
narrations narrated with An are acceptable, wa lillaahi-l-hamd!
The Maraaseel of Imaam az-Zuhri:
Imaam Yahya bin Sa’eed
al-Qattaan said: “The Mursal of Zuhri is worse
than that of others; because he was an erudite Scholar. He was able to mention
the name of any narrator in the sanad if he wanted to. He only omitted the
names of those he did not like.”
[Taareekh Dimashq (5/368)]
Imaam adh-Dhahabi said: “The Maraaseel of az-Zuhri is like a Mu’dal Hadeeth [a mu’dal
is a report in which two or more of the narrators on his chain of narrators are
missing], in the sense that he might have omitted the names of two narrators.
And it is not justifiable to think that he dropped only the name of a
Companion. If he had heard the hadeeth directly from a Companion, he would have
mentioned his name and would not have been unable to connect the sanad. If he
said, ‘from some Companions of the Prophet’, that would not have been
sufficient indication that he heard the hadeeth directly from a Companion.
Whoever equated the Mursal of az-Zuhri with that of [senior Taabi’een] like Sa’eed
ibn al-Musayyab, and Urwah bin az-Zubayr, did not know what he was saying. Yes,
his Mursal is like that of people like Qataadah”
[Siyar A’laam al-Nabula (5/338)]
Ahmed bin Abi
Shurayh said that he heard ash-Shaafi’ee saying: “Az-Zuhri’s
Mursal is valueless, for we find him narrating from Sulemaan bin Arqam”
[Ibid]
Ash-Shaafi’ee
also said: “We are being accused of partiality.
If we had to be partial in favor of anyone, we would have been partial in favor
of az-Zuhri. But az-Zuhri’s Mursal is valueless for we find him narrating from
Sulemaan bin Arqam”
[Taareekh Dimashq
(55/368), Chain Saheeh up to Ahmed bin Abi Shurayh]
Conclusion:
Imaam Ibn Shihaab az-Zuhri is
unanimously proven to be Thiqah Imaam Faqeeh and one of the highest authorities
of hadeeth. He is not proven to be a Mudallis, nor is he a Shi’aa as some
people recently claimed. His Maraaseel are weak, and his Muttasil narrations
are Saheeh.
For a detailed biography of Imaam
az-Zuhri, read the book by Shaykh Salaahuddeen ‘Alee ‘Abdul-Mawjood by Darussalam
posted here
