← Previous Page 1740 of 6550 Next →
ʿAbd Allāh ibn Saʿīd ibn Abī Hind from Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAmr ibn ʿUthmān from his mother Fāṭimah bint al-Ḥusayn from Ibn ʿAbbās as a marfūʿ report. (See the correction number 51/22). and this isnād is ḥasan, if Allāh wills, its narrators are trustworthy except for this Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh, who was deemed trustworthy by al-Nasāʾī, but he also said once: "He is not strong." al-Bukhārī said: "He is hardly followed in his ḥadīth." al-Ḥāfiẓ said in "al-Taqrīb" that he is "truthful," which does not agree with his statement in "al-Fatḥ" (10/130): "Ibn Mājah reported it and its isnād is weak." He was followed by Ibn Abī al-Zinād from Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh with it. It was reported by Ibn Mājah, al-Ṭayālisī (number 1601), Lawīn in "Aḥādīth" (26/1), Ibn Wahb in "al-Jāmiʿ" (p. 106), Abū al-Qāsim al-Hamadhānī in "al-Fawāʾid" (1/199/1), and al-Ḍiyāʾ in "al-Mukhtārah" (67/103/2). al-Haythamī mentioned it in "al-Majmaʿ" (5/101) and said: "It was narrated by al-Ṭabarānī and it contains Ibn Lahīʿah, whose ḥadīth is ḥasan, and the rest of its narrators are trustworthy." It seems he overlooked its presence in "Sunan Ibn Mājah," and perhaps it is with al-Ṭabarānī through another route, which is why he mentioned it. And Allāh knows best. Then I confirmed this as follows. It has a supporting narration reported by ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Imām Aḥmad in "Zawāʾid al-Musnad" (1/78), Abū Yaʿlá in "Musnad" (317/2), and Ibn ʿAsākir in "Tārīkh Dimashq" (19/247/1) from al-Faraj ibn Faḍālah from ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿĀmir from ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAmr ibn ʿUthmān from his mother Fāṭimah bint Ḥusayn from Ḥusayn from his father ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib with it. (1) And this isnād is weak, as al-Faraj ibn Faḍālah and his teacher ʿAbd Allāh - who is al-Aslamī - are weak as mentioned in "al-Taqrīb," and in "al-Majmaʿ": "It was narrated by ʿAbd Allāh ibn Aḥmad, and it contains al-Faraj ibn Faḍālah, who was deemed trustworthy by Aḥmad and others, but weakened by al-Nasāʾī and others, and the rest of its narrators are trustworthy unless someone is missing from the isnād."
عبد الله بن سعيد بن أبي هند عن محمد بن عبد الله بن عمرو بن عثمان عن أمه فاطمة بنت الحسين عن ابن عباس مرفوعا به. (انظر الاستدراك رقم ٥١ / ٢٢). وهذا إسناد حسن إن شاء الله تعالى، رجاله ثقات غير محمد بن عبد الله هذا، وثقه النسائي، وقال مرة: " ليس بالقوي ". وقال البخاري: " لا يكاد يتابع في حديثه ". وقال الحافظ: في " التقريب " إنه " صدوق " وهذا لا يتفق مع قوله في " الفتح" (١٠ / ١٣٠) : " أخرجه ابن ماجه وسنده ضعيف ". وقد تابعه ابن أبي الزناد عن محمد بن عبد الله به. أخرجه ابن ماجه والطيالسي (رقم ١٦٠١) ولوين في " أحاديثه " (٢٦ / ١) وابن وهب في " الجامع " (ص ١٠٦) وأبو القاسم الهمداني في " الفوائد " (١ / ١٩٩ / ١) والضياء في " المختارة " (٦٧ / ١٠٣ / ٢). وأورده الهيثمي في " المجمع " (٥ / ١٠١) وقال: " رواه الطبراني وفيه ابن لهيعة وحديثه حسن وبقية رجاله ثقات ". وكأنه ذهل عن كونه في " سنن ابن ماجه" ولعله عند الطبراني من طريق أخرى فلذلك أورده. والله أعلم. ثم تأكدت من ذلك كما يأتي. وله شاهد أخرجه عبد الله بن الإمام أحمد في " زوائد المسند " (١ / ٧٨) وأبو يعلى في " مسنده " (٣١٧ / ٢) وابن عساكر في " تاريخ دمشق " (١٩ / ٢٤٧ / ١) عن الفرج بن فضالة عن عبد الله بن عامر عن عبد الله بن عمرو ابن عثمان عن أمه فاطمة بنت حسين عن حسين عن أبيه علي بن أبي طالب به. (١) وهذا سند ضعيف، الفرج بن فضالة وشيخه عبد الله - وهو الأسلمي - ضعيفان كما في " التقريب " وفي " المجمع ": " رواه عبد الله بن أحمد، وفيه الفرج بن فضالة وثقه أحمد وغيره وضعفه النسائي وغيره وبقية رجاله ثقات إن لم يكن سقط من الإسناد أحد ".
← Previous Page 1740 of 6550 Next →