Wata matsala ta ƙarshe da har yanzu ta rage ita ce, wani mai ƙi zai iya cewa Sahifar Madina an rawaito ta ta hanyar Mursal (watau wanda wani Tabi'i ya rawaito ba tare da ambaton Sahabi a cikin sarkar isnadi ba), kuma ba mu san wata sarkar rawaya Muttasil (watau mai ci gaba da cikakkiyar sarka) a gare ta ba. Saboda haka, ba ta tsaya a matsayin hujja ba, kuma ba halal ba ne a yi amfani da ita wajen istinbadi. Mu kuwa muna cewa: Al'amarin ba haka yake ba. Maimakon haka, rubutu ne da aka kwafo daga wani takardar rubutu da masu rawaya suka kwafa tsara bayan tsara, abin da ke bayyana daga kusancin kalmomi da jimloli, wanda za mu iya kira mai daidaituwa ko mai jituwa. Ta zo ta hanyoyin rawaya masu yawa, waɗanda ba shakka sarkokinsu ci gaba ne kuma cikakku, kuma za mu tattauna su a lokacinsu. Don haka, muna neman shiriya daga Allah, muna cewa: Sahihiya ce (ingantacciya), kuma tana tsaya a matsayin dalili da hujja. Da a ce wannan Sahifa ta fito daga wajen Yahudawa ko Nasara, da waɗannan masu ƙi sun yi tafiya tare da ita gaba ɗaya. Su ne mutanen da suka dame kawunanmu da sarkokin rawayarsu na Mursal da Munqati' (katsattsu) waɗanda suke da'awar an rubuta su alhali Ruhul Qudusi yana tsaronsu! Yanzu za mu gabatar da nazari mai zurfi da cikakken bincike kan sarkokin rawayar Sahifar Madina, sarka bayan sarka:

One important issue remains and this is that an objector may say in objection that the Sahifah of Al-Madinah has been transmitted in a Mursal (i.e. related by a Taabi’ without mention of the Sahabi in the chain) manner and we are not aware of any Muttasil (i.e. continuous and complete) chain of transmission for it. Consequently, it does not stand up as a proof and it is not permissible for it to be used for the purpose of deduction. We say: The matter is not like that. Rather, it is a transcription of a written document that has been transcribed by transmitters generation following generation, which is apparent from the closeness of the worded expressions and which we could call congruous or in accord. It has come via a host of transmission paths which are without doubt continuous and complete in their chain of transmission and which we will come to discuss in due course. As such, whilst seeking guidance from Allah, we say: It is Sahih (authentic) and stands up as evidence and proof. Had this Sahifah come from the Jews or the Christians we would have these objectors going fully along with it. These are the same people who have pained our heads with their Mursal and Munqati’ (interrupted) chains of narrations which they claim to have been written whilst being guarded by the holy spirit! We will now present a detailed and meticulous study of the chains of transmission of the Sahifah of Al-Madinah, one chain following another:

Isnadin farko (silsilar watsawa): Kamar yadda Al-Baihaqi ya rubuta:

The first Isnad (chain of transmission): As recorded by Al-Baihaqi:

Abu Abdullah Al-Hafizh, ya ruwaito daga Abu Al-‘Abbas Muhammad bin Ya’qub, daga Ahmad bin Abdul Jabbar, daga Yunus bin Bukair, daga Ibn Ishaq, daga Uthman bin Muhammad bin Uthman bin Al-Akhnas bin Shariq wanda ya ce: An karbo shi daga iyalan ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab, Allah ya yarda da shi. An haɗa shi da rubutacciyar takardar Sadaqah wadda ‘Umar ya rubuta wa gwamnoni.

“Abu Abdullah Al-Hafizh, related from Abu Al-‘Abbas Muhammad bin Ya’qub, from Ahmad bin Abdul Jabbar, from Yunus bin Bukair, from Ibn Ishaq, from Uthman bin Muhammad bin Uthman bin Al-Akhnas bin Shariq who said: It was taken from the family of ‘Umar bin Al- Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him. It had been attached to the written document of As-Sadaqah which ‘Umar had written to the governors”.

- Dangane da Imam Al-Baihaqi, shi ne: Al-Hafizh, Al-‘Alamah, wanda aka tabbatar da matsayinsa, Faqih (malamin fiqhu), Sheikh ul-Islam, Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Al-Husain bin ‘Ali bin Musa Al-Khusrawjirdi. Wannan yana kamar yadda yake a cikin “Siyar A’alam An-Nubulaa’” (35/145/86). - Abu Abdullah Al-Hafizh kuwa shi ne: Al-Hakim Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Hamduwaih; Imam, Al-Hafizh, An-Naqid (mai sukar hadisi), Al-‘Alamah, Sheikh ul Muhaddithin, Abu Abdullah bin Al-Bayyi’ Ad-Dabbiy At-Tahmaniy An-Naisaburiy Ash-Shafi’iy, kuma marubucin ayyukan adabi. Wannan yana kamar yadda yake a cikin “Siyar A’alam An-Nubulaa’” (33/157/100).

- As for Imam Al-Baihaqi, then he is: Al-Hafizh, Al-‘Alamah, the established, the Faqih (jurist), Sheikh ul-Islam, Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Al-Husain bin ‘Ali bin Musa Al-Khusrawjirdi. This is according to “Siyar A’alam An-Nubulaa’” (35/145/86). - Abu Abdullah Al-Hafizh is: Al-Hakim Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Hamduwaih; the Imam, Al-Hafizh, the Naqid (critic), Al-‘Alamah, Sheikh ul Muhaddithin, Abu Abdullah bin Al-Bayyi’ Ad- Dabbiy At-Tahmaniy An-Naisaburiy Ash-Shafi’iy and author of literary works. This is according to “Siyar A’alam An-Nubulaa’” (33/157/100).

- Abu Al-‘Abbas Muhammad bin Ya’qub bin Yusuf bin Ma’qil bin Sinan Al-Umawiy, Mawla Bani Umayyah An-Naisaburiy Al-Asammu (kurma) (ranar rasuwa: 346 AH). Ya kasance Muhaddith na zamaninsa ba tare da wani mai hamayya da shi ba. Wannan yana cikin “Tarikh ul-Islam” (7/841/243). Babu wanda yake tambayar malamai irin wadannan sai wanda hankalinsa ya lalace. - Ahmad bin Abdul Jabbar: Mun takaita al’amarinsa a cikin karin bayani karkashin taken: “Tabbatar da Ahmad bin Abdul Jabbar Al-‘Utaridiy”. A cikinsa mun bayyana cewa: [Ahmad bin Abdul Jabbar bin Muhammad Al-‘Utaridiy, Abu ‘Umar Al-Kufi, babu wata matsala ko aibi da ke tare da shi. Karbar Seera daga gare shi ingantacce ne, kuma amintacce ne a yi amfani da shi a matsayin hujja. Ya kasance daga matsayi na goma (na silsila). Ya rasu a shekara ta 72 (wato 172 AH) yana da shekaru 95]. Wannan domin gyara babban kuskure da Imam Al-Hafizh ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani ya aikata, lokacin da ya ce a cikin “Taqrib At-Tahdhib” (1/81/64): [Ahmad bin Abdul Jabbar bin Muhammad Al-‘Utaridiy, Abu ‘Umar Al-Kufi, Da’if (rauni) ne, kuma karbar Seera daga gare shi ingantacce ne, daga matsayi na goma (na silsila). Ba a tabbatar cewa Abu Dawud ya ruwaito daga gare shi ba. Ya rasu a shekara ta 72 (wato 172 AH) yana da shekaru 95]. Haka kuma domin mayar da martani ga Abdul Qadir Al-Muhammadi, daya daga cikin masu bin Al-Hafizh kuma daga cikin masu da’awar “An-Nazhar Wa t-Tahqiq” (bincike da tabbatarwa), wanda ya rubuta a shafin intanet na “Ahl ul-Hadith” a ranar 19/03/2007, lokacin da yake tattaunawa kan hanyoyin watsa Sahifah ta Madinah. Ya ambaci wasu watsawa marasa cikakke daga wasu Imamai, sannan ya kammala da cewa: [Al-Hafizh ibn Hajar ya ce: Da’if (rauni) ne, kuma jin sa ko karbar Seera daga gare shi Sahih (ingantacce) ne. Na ce: Ba a fahimci daga wannan maganar ta Ibn Hajar cewa Thiqah (amintacce) ne dangane da Seera ba! Maimakon haka, manufarsa kawai ita ce kawar da zargin Tadlis (wato] misrepresentation in the chain of transmission) from him because he had been accused of that, as has previously been mentioned. That is because he heard (received) the "Maghaziy" (i.e. Seera) from an early age, alongside his father, from Yunus bin Bukair Ash-Shaibani. He was accused "that the books that he narrates from (actually) belonged to his father and that he had claimed to have received (heard) them alongside him". Al-Hafizh (Al- Asqalaniy) wanted to establish that he had received it himself and Al- Khatib had transmitted a story that makes clear the authenticity of his receiving from Yunus. That is in the case where he transmitted, with its chain, from Muhammad bin Al-Hasan bin Humaid bin Ar- Rabee' from his father, the following: "… That they asked Abu Kuraib about the Maghaziy (i.e. Seera) and he said: "Go to see a young man in Al-Kunas (place). His name is Al-'Utaridiy and he received (heard it) alongside us and his father". So, we came to him and he said: "I don't know where it is. Since the time of hearing it I have not looked in it. However, it is in Qimatr (what books are preserved in) which contains books, so seek it there". I sought and found it and there were pigeon droppings upon it. He had recorded it with his father with an old script. I asked him to give to me and allow me to publish it, and so he did". If this story is affirmed, then the narrator classifies his memory (by heart) as being weak as he had forgotten it and did not recall it. It also made clear the weakness of his concern to it (the book) as he had left it in the tower with pigeons, to the point that it had pigeon droppings upon it! Consequently, the man is Da'if (weak) just as the Imams who specialise in this matter have stated] [End of Quote]. This is also a recorded text in the archives of "The Ahl ul- Hadith Portal" in the Shamela e-program library (2 - 51/390).

- Yunus bin Bukair: Mun kuma taƙaita maganarsa a cikin ƙarin bayani ƙarƙashin taken: "Tabbatar da ingancin Yunus bin Bukair". A ƙarshen ƙarin bayanin mun bayyana, don gyara maganar Al-Hafizh a cikin littafinsa "At-Taqrib": [Yunus bin Bukair bin Wasil Ash-Shaibani, Abu Bakr Al-Jamal Al-Kufi, amintacce ne (Thiqah), Imami ne game da Seera da Maghaziy, kuma a game da su hujja ce tabbatacciya, daga tabaqa ta tara. Ya rasu a shekara ta 99 (ma'ana + 100, watau 199)]. Mun kuma ƙaryata da'awar Abdul Qadir Al-Muhammadi da hujjojinsa na karkatarwa, waɗanda ke nuna cewa shi mutum ne mai son ra'ayinsa, wanda ke son ya sanya Sahifah ta Madina a matsayin mai rauni (Da'if), yana amfani da duk wata dabara domin cimma hakan. Cikakken raddinmu yana cikin ƙarin bayanin "Tabbatar da ingancin Yunus bin Bukair".

- Yunus bin Bukair: We have also summarized his case in the addendum under the heading: “The authentication of Yunus bin Bukair”. In the conclusion of the addendum we stated in correction to the speech of Al-Hafizh in his “At-Taqrib”: [Yunus bin Bukair bin Wasil Ash-Shaibani, Abu Bakr Al-Jamal Al-Kufi, is Thiqah (trusted), an Imam in respect to the Seera and the Maghaziy and he is in respect to it an established source of evidence, from the ninth. He passed away in the 99th year (meaning + 100 i.e. 199)]. We also refuted the contention of Abdul Qadir Al-Muhammadi and his casuistic argumentation, which allude to him being a man of whims, who wants to classify the Sahifah of Al-Madinah as being weak (Da’if), employing every possible stratagem to accomplish that. Our detailed refutation can be found in the addendum “The authentication of Yunus bin Bukair”.

- Ibn Ishaq: Shi ne Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Ishaq bin Yasar, Imamin malamai na Seera, Maghaziy da tarihi wanda ba a yi jayayya a kansa ba; shi ne tushen magana na ƙarshe a fannonin nan. An kusa samun yarjejeniya a kan amincinsa, gaskiyarsa da jagorancinsa a wannan fanni. Duk da haka, abokanmu da ake kira Abdul Qadir Al-Muhammadi ba su iya rinjayar son zuciyarsu ba. Saboda haka, bayan ya tabbatar da hakan ta hanyar cewa: [Game da Ibn Ishaq, akwai abubuwa da yawa da aka faɗa a kansa, jimillarsu ita ce: shi Saduq ne (mai gaskiya), Mudlis ne (watau ɓoye wani mai ba da labari a cikin Isnad) game da Hadith. Shi Imamin Maghazi da Seera ne kuma shi ne tushen magana na ƙarshe a kansu], ya kasa kubuta daga son zuciyarsa, sai ya ambaci abin da ya yi imanin zai jefa mummunan ko kuma mara kyau inuwa a kan Ibn Ishaq, lokacin da ya ce: [Abbas Ad-Dawri ya ce: an tambayi Ahmad bin Hanbal game da Ibn Ishaq sai ya ce: "Waɗannan Ahadith (watau game da Maghazi da Seera) ana rubuta su (watau ana ba da labarinsu) daga gare shi. Amma idan ya zo da Halal da Haram, za mu so mutane su zama kamar haka." Sannan ya haɗa hannayensa, yana sanya babban yatsunsa biyu a kan yatsunsa]. Idan na mayar da martani, zan tambaya: Me wannan ke nufi? Na farko: Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal malami ne na Fiqhu da Hadith kawai, ba daga cikin malaman Seera, Maghazi, tarihi ko Tafsir ba. Ba shi da zurfin ilimi game da manyan masu ba da labarinsu, haka nan ba shi da yawan riwayoyi daga abokan Ibn Ishaq da zai iya bincika abin da suka kawo. Hakika, ya yi magana ba tare da bambance-bambance ba, ko kuma gaba ɗaya, lokacin da ya ce littattafan Maghazi, Fitan (fitintinu) da Tafsir ba su da tushe. Daga cikin manyan kuskurensa kuma akwai maganarsa game da Imam Al-Hujjah (hukuma mai cancanta) a fannin Al-Maghazi (Seerar yakokin soji); Muhammad bin ‘Umar Al-Waqidiy, wanda yanayinsa da gaskiyar al'amarinsa mun yi nazari a kansa da kulawa mai zurfi cikin shekaru masu yawa, kuma za mu gabatar da shi nan ba da jimawa ba karkashin take “Adalci ga Al-Waqidiy”.

- Ibn Ishaq: He is Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Ishaq bin Yasar, the indisputable Imam of the scholars of Seera, Maghaziy and history; representing the final point of reference in respect to them. A consensus has virtually been established concerning his authenticity, truthfulness and leadership in the field. Despite that, our companions called Abdul Qadir Al-Muhammadi could not overcome his whims. So, after affirming that by stating: [As for Ibn Ishaq, then regarding him there is a lot that has been said, the sum of which is: That he is Saduq (truthful), Mudlis (i.e. conceal a narrator in the Isnad) in respect to the Hadith. He is the Imam of the Maghazi and Seera and is the final point of reference in respect to them], we was nevertheless unable to escape from his whims and so he mentioned what he believed would cast a bad or negative shadow upon Ibn Ishaq, when he stated: [‘Abbas Ad-Dawri said: Ahmad bin Hanbal was asked about Ibn Ishaq and so he said: “These Ahadeeth (i.e. concerning the Maghazi and Seera) are written (i.e. transmitted) from him. However, if he comes with the Halal and the Haram, we would want a people to be like this” He then clasped his hands together, placing his two thumbs over his fingers]. In response I ask: What does this signify? Firstly: Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal is exclusively a scholar of Fiqh and Hadith and is not from the scholars of Seera, Maghazi, history or Tafsir. He does not have a deep knowledge of its main transmitters just as he doesn’t have a great deal of transmissions from the companions of Ibn Ishaq for him to have examined what they brought. Indeed, he was indiscriminate or over general when he stated that the books of Maghazi, Fitan (trials and tribulations) and Tafsir had no basis. And from among the greatest of his errors, was his speech regarding the Imam Al-Hujjah (the competent authority) of Al-Maghazi (Seera of military expeditions); Muhammad bin ‘Umar Al-Waqidiy, whose condition and reality we have studied in a painstaking precise manner over a period of many years and which we will present shortly under the title “Fairness to Al-Waqidiy”.

Na biyu: Game da Ibn Ishaq, ya ce "An faɗi abubuwa da yawa (game da shi)". Bisa wane dalili ko kāriya ne mutumin da ake kira Abdul Qadir Al-Muhammadi ya gabatar da wannan ƙaramin sashe daga cikin wannan "An faɗi abubuwa da yawa", yayin da ya yi watsi da duk abin da aka faɗa wanda ke karyata sashen da ya ambata gaba ɗaya? Misali shi ne maganar Imam Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyah a cikin littafinsa "Tahdhib Sunan Abi Dawud Wa Iedaah Mushkilaatuhu" (2/373 – ɗakin karatu na lantarki na Shamela): [Game da Hadisin Ibn Ishaq wanda ya ƙunshi "Lallai kursiyinSa yana bisa sammai kamar Qubbah (kubba)" da kuma yadda Al-Mundiri ya samu aibi a cikinsa. Sannan ya ce: Malaman Ithbaat (tabbatarwa) sun ce: Babu wani abu a cikin wannan da zai ba ka damar ƙin Hadisin. Dangane da zargin da ake yi wa Ibn Ishaq game da shi, to amsar ita ce: Ibn Ishaq abu ne da Allah ya sanya ilimi da amana a cikinsa. ʿAli Ibn Al-Madiniy ya kuma ce: Hadisansa a ganina Sahihai ne. Ash-Shuʿbah ya ce: "Ibn Ishaq shi ne Ameer ul-Mu'minin dangane da Hadisi". Ya kuma ce: shi Saduq ne (mai gaskiya). ʿAli bin Al-Madiniy shi ma ya ce: "Ban sami daga gare shi ba sai Hadisai biyu Munkar (marasa inganci da aka ƙi)". Wannan magana ta ƙarshe tana nuna matsayin yabo mafi girma, domin an ƙi Hadisai biyu kawai duk da yawan Hadisan da ya ruwaito. ʿAli ya kuma ce: "Na ji Ibn ʿUyainah yana cewa: Ban taɓa jin wani yana magana game da Ibn Ishaq ba face maganarsa ta ƙunshi godiya ko girmamawa. Kuma babu shakka mutanen zamaninsa sun fi sanin sa fiye da waɗanda suka yi magana a kansa bayansu". Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Abdul Hakam ya ce: Na ji Ash-Shafiʿiy yana cewa: Az-Zuhri ya ce: Ilimi zai ci gaba da kasancewa a wannan fanni muddin wannan matashi mai hangen nesa yana cikinsa (yana nufin Ibn Ishaq).] Yaʿqub bin Shaibah ya ce: Na tambayi Yahya bin Maʿeen: "Yaya matsayin Ibn Ishaq yake?" Ya amsa: "Ba haka yake ba (watau a tambaye shi). Na ce: "Shin kana ɗauke da wani abu a cikin zuciyarka (mara kyau) game da hadisansa?" Ya amsa: "A'a, shi mai gaskiya ne." Yazid bin Harun ya ce: Na ji Shu'bah yana cewa: "Idan ina da iko, da na naɗa Ibn Ishaq a matsayin shugaban malaman hadisi." Ibn 'Adiy ya ce: "Na bincika hadisan babban malami Ibn Ishaq, ban same a cikin hadisansa abin da zai ba mu damar tabbatar da cewa shi da rauni (Da'if) ba. Ya iya yin kuskure ko ya yi kuskuren rubutu, kamar yadda wasu ke yi. Kuma ba a san cewa labarinsa ƙarya ne a wajen amintattun masu ruwaito ba." Ya'qub bin Shaibah ya ce: Na tambayi Ibn ul-Madiniy game da Ibn Ishaq, sai ya ce: "Hadisansa Sahihai ne (ingantattu) a ra'ayina." Na ce: "Me za a ce game da abin da Malik ya ce a kansa?" Ya amsa: "Malik bai zauna tare da shi ba, bai san shi ba, ko kowane al'amari da aka tattauna a Madina!" Na ce: "Hisham bin 'Urwah ma ya yi magana a kansa?" Ya amsa: "Abin da Hisham ya faɗa ba hujja ba ne. Yana yiwuwa (watau Ibn Ishaq) ya haɗu da matar yana yaro ya ji daga gare ta. Gaskiya a bayyane take a cikin hadisansa: Yakan ruwaito yana cewa: Abu Az-Zinad ya gaya mini, wani lokaci kuma yana cewa: Abu Az-Zinad ya ambata, sannan yana cewa: Al-Hasan bin Dinar ya ruwaito mini daga Ayub daga 'Amr bin Shu'aib (a kan Salaf da Ba'i (watau al'amuran cinikayya)). Kuma ya ruwaito fiye da kowa daga 'Amr bin Shu'aib." Haka kuma akwai abin da ya zo a littafin "Nasb Ar-Rayah Takhrij Ahadeeth Al-Hidayah" na babban malami Jamal Ad-Din Az-Zai'aliy, tare da taimakon Ayman Salih Sha'ban (1/252): [Abdullah ibn Mubarak ya ce: Ibn Ishaq Thiqah ne, Thiqah ne, Thiqah ne (amintacce).] Idan mai sukar adalci ya yi tunani a kan maganar Imam na Imamai wajen neman aibi a cikin Hadisi, ‘Ali Ibn Al-Madiniy, wanda shi ma yana cikin manyan Imamai na ilimin Hadisi kuma daga cikin mafiya girma a ilimin Al-Jarh wa t-Ta’dil (ilimin bincika masu ruwaito Hadisi don sanin amincinsu), game da Ibn Ishaq gabaki ɗaya, da abin da ya fada game da Hadisin “Salaf da Ba’i” musamman, zai sani cewa yana kare shi har ma game da zargin Tadlis (wato ɓoye wani mai ruwaitowa a cikin Isnadi). Hakan ya faru ne saboda ko wannan shakka ko kokwanto ba shi da tushe. Abin da ya faru kawai shi ne barin wasu hanyoyin ruwaiton, ko taƙaita su, don kiyaye gudanarwar abubuwan da labaran tarihi. Wannan hanya ce sananniya. Wajibi ne kuma babu laifi a cikinta. Bukatar hakan ta ƙunshi hanyar game da littattafan Sira da tarihi, kuma ba ya shiga cikin rukunin Tadlis (wato sauya sarƙoƙin ruwaiton da gangan) tun daga farko ko ta fuskar tsari. Idan ana son ƙarin bayani game da “An faɗi abubuwa da yawa (game da shi)” dangane da Imam Al-Hafiz Al-Hujjah, Amirul-Mu’minina a fannin Hadisi, Muhammad bin Ishaq bin Yasar Al-Qurashi, to za a iya komawa ga ƙarin bayanin da ke ƙarƙashin taken “Muhammad bin Ishaq bin Yasar, Amirul-Mu’minina a fannin Hadisi”. Yana ƙunshe da ƙarin hujjoji game da girmansa a matsayin Imam, da kuma karyata zargin Tadlis (wato sauya sarƙoƙin ruwaiton da gangan) wanda aka danganta masa abin ba’a. - Uthman bin Muhammad bin Uthman bin Al-Akhnas bin Shariq: Yawanci ana kiransa da sunan Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi ko Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah ko kuma kawai Uthman Al-Akhnasi. Wanda ake kira Abdul Qadir Al-Muhammadi, wanda ya wallafa a dandalin intanet na Ahl ul-Hadith a ranar 19/03/2007, ya bayyana haka, yana koyi da Al-Hafizh bin Hajar, a lokacin da yake magana kan silsilar isnadin Sahifah ta Al-Madinah: [Amma game da Uthman bin Muhammad bin Mughirah Al-Akhnas Ath-Thaqafi Al-Hijazi, to shi Saduq ne (mai gaskiya) wanda yake da Awham (kurakurai a riwayoyi) da Manaakir (hadisai da wasu suka ki karɓa)]. An kuma adana wannan a cikin tarihin dandalin Ahl ul-Hadith a ɗakin karatu na lantarki na Shamela (2 - 51/390). Wannan ita ce kawai abin da (Abdul Qadir) ya faɗa domin ya goyi bayan ƙarya tasa: layi ɗaya kawai da ya tara ilimin waɗanda suka gabata da waɗanda suka shude tun daga lokacin!! Har ma maganarsa: “Manaakir” ta fito daga wata majiya daban, domin ba daga maganar Al-Hafizh ibn Hajar take ba, wanda ya faɗa a cikin “Taqrib At-Tahdhib” (1/386/4515): [Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah bin Al-Akhnas bin Shariq Ath-Thaqafi Al-Akhnasiy Al-Hijazi Saduq ne (mai gaskiya) wanda yake da Awham, daga matakin na shida (na silsila)]. A cikin ƙarin bayani mai shafuka tara a ƙarƙashin taken: “Tabbatar da Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah Al-Akhnasi”, mun tabbatar sosai da gyara takaitaccen bayanin Al-Hafizh (Ibn Hajar) wanda ya yi ƙasa sosai a kimantawarsa, ban da kafa hujja cewa maganar da ta dace game da shi ita ce: [Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah bin Al-Akhnas Ath-Thaqafi al-Akhnasi Thiqah ne (amintacce a riwaya), masanin shari'a, malami a fannin Maghazi da tarihi, daga matakin na huɗu]. Ana iya komawa zuwa ga wannan ƙarin bayani domin yana ƙunshe da fa'idodin tarihi masu yawa, tare da tattaunawa kan lahanin sanannen hadisi mai muhimmanci: “Duk wanda ya ɗauki nauyin shari'a (ko aka naɗa shi alƙali), to an yanka shi ba da wuƙa ba”. Allah ya sa ya zama abin farin ciki da izinin Allah.

- Aali (iyalan) ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab, Allah ya yarda da shi: A cikin ƙarin bayanin mai taken “Tabbatar da Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah Al-Akhnasi” mun faɗa cewa: [Dangane da Aali (iyalan) ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab, waɗanda Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah Al-Akhnasi ya samu takardar rubutu ta “Sahifah ta Al-Madinah” a wurinsu, to babu shakka su ne Abdullahi ɗan ‘Umar, ‘Asim bin ‘Umar da ‘yan’uwansu, ‘ya’yansu da matansu. Dukansu, da yabon Allah, Thiqaat (masu ruwaito abin dogaro da karɓuwa) ne na mafi ƙarfin matsayi, a kololuwar amana, gaskiya da tsoron Allah, alhali ba a san maƙaryaci ko mai ƙirƙira daga cikinsu ba – Allah ya kiyaye].

- Aali (the family of) ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him: In the addendum entitled “The authentication of Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah Al-Akhnasi” we stated: [As for the Aali (the family of) ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab, among whom Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah Al-Akhnasi found the written document of the “Sahifah of Al-Madinah”, then they are without doubt Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, ‘Asim bin ‘Umar and their brothers, children and wives. All of whom, by the praise of Allah, are Thiqaat (trustworthy and accepted relators) of the firmest degree, at the height of trustworthiness, truthfulness and God-fearing, whilst a liar or fabricator has not been known from among them – Allah forbid].

A takaice: Hadisin yana da Muttasil (sarkar ruwaitonsa ba ta katsewa ba daga farko zuwa karshe) kuma Sahih (ingantacce), kowane mahaɗi a cikin sarkar yana fitowa daga Thiqaat (amintattu kuma karɓaɓɓun masu ruwaya), kuma ta hanyarsu ne ake kafa dalili da hujja (Al-Hujjah). Ba haka abin yake ba kamar yadda wanda ake kira Abdul Qadir Al-Muhammadi ya yi iƙirari ba, lokacin da ya yi babban kuskure yana cewa: "Ba a yi farin ciki da wannan Isnad (sarkar ruwaya) ba, domin ya ƙunshi Al-'Utaridiy da Ibn Bukair, baya ga shakka ko kokwanto game da faruwar katsewa, a inda Uthman bai bayyana daga cikin iyalan 'Umar bin Al-Khattab wanda ya karɓi (watau Sahifah) daga gare shi ba. Yana yiwuwa ya yi kuskure a cikin hakan, ko kuma kuskuren ya samo asali ne daga Bukair, domin an san shi da aikata keta, a inda zai ɗauki maganar Ibn Ishaq ya haɗa kansa da Hadisin (watau sarkar ruwaya)]. Shin wannan shi ne sakamakon bincike da nazari mai kyau? Ana neman tsari daga Allah."

In conclusion: The Hadith is Muttasil (a continuous unbroken chain from beginning to end) and Sahih (authentic), each link in the chain is from the Thiqaat (trustworthy and accepted narrators), through which evidence and proof (Al-Hujjah) is established. It is not how the one named Abdul Qadir Al-Muhammadi claimed when he made a gross error stating: “This Isnad (chain of narration) is not rejoiced at, as it contains Al--‘Utaridiy and Ibn Bukair, in addition to the suspicion or doubt of the occurrence of an interruption, in the case where Uthman did not state who from among the family of ‘Umar bin Al- Khattab he had taken it (i.e. the Sahifah) from. It could be that he could have been mistaken in that or that the mistake originated from Bukair as he is well known to commit violations, in the case where he would take the speech of Ibn Ishaq and connect himself to the Hadith (i.e. the chain of narration)]. Bravo, is this the result of proper research and examination is undertaken? May Allah’s refuge be sought.

- Isnadi na biyu (silsilar rawaya): Wannan ita ce silsilar yadda Ibn Sayyid An-Nas ya rubuta ta a cikin littafinsa "Uyun Al-Athar Fee Funun Al-Maghazi wa Ash-Shama'il Wa As-Siyar", wanda Ibn Abu Khaithama ya rawaito.

- The second Isnad (chain of transmission): This is the chain as recorded by Ibn Sayed An-Nas in his “Uyun Al-Athar Fee Funun Al- Maghazi wa Ash-Shama’il Wa As-Siyar”, transmitted by Ibn Abu Khaithama:

[Ahmad bin Jinab Ab Al-Walid ya ruwaito daga ‘Eisa bin Yunus, daga Kathir bin Abdullah bin ‘Amr al-Muzani, daga mahaifinsa daga kakansa]. Al-Baihaqi ya kuma ambaci silsilar ruwaya (Isnad) a takaice: [Kathir bin Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin ‘Awf ya ruwaito daga mahaifinsa, daga kakansa … Abu Abdullah Al-Hafizh da Abu Bakr Al-Qadi sun ba mu labari cewa Abu Al-‘Abbas ya ba mu labari daga Muhammad bin Ya’qub daga Muhammad bin Ishaq Ad-Daghani, daga Mu’awiyah bin ‘Amr daga Abu Ishaq (Al-Farazi) daga Kathir bin Abdullah, wanda ya faɗa ta (watau Hadisin)].

[Ahmad bin Jinab Ab Al-Walid related from ‘Eisa bin Yunus, from Kathir bin Abdullah bin ‘Amr al-Muzani, from his father from his grandfather]. Al-Baihaqi also mentioned the Isnad (chain of transmission) in a summarized form: [Kathir bin Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin ‘Awf related from his father, from his grandfather … It was related to us by Abu Abdullah Al-Hafizh and Abu Bakr Al-Qadi who said Abu Al-‘Abbas related to us from Muhammad bin Ya’qub from Muhammad bin Ishaq Ad-Daghani, from Mu’awiyah bin ‘Amr from Abu Ishaq (Al- Farazi) from Kathir bin Abdullah, who stated it (i.e. the Hadith].

Da farko, muna cewa: Dangane da maganar Ibn Sayed An-Nas a cikin littafinsa “Uyun Al-Athar Fee Funun Al-Maghazi wa Ash-Shama’il Wa As-Siyar” (1/330), bayan ya gabatar da rubutun Sahifah na Al-Madinah daga Ibn Ishaq a cikakkiyar tsawonsa: [Haka Ibn Ishaq ya ambace shi, kuma Ibn Abu Khaithama shi ma ya ambace shi (watau rubutun Sahifah). Sannan ya gabatar da Isnad (silsilar masu ruwaitawa), sannan ya ce: Ya ambace shi haka kuma], ba zai yiwu a ce ya faɗi haka ba sai dai idan rubutun biyu sun yi daidai da juna ko kuma sun yi kama da juna. Ba a yarda a yi tsammanin wani abu dabam daga Imamin Musannaf da babban Hafiz kamar Ibn Sayed An-Nas ba, in ba haka ba hakan zai zama wata irin cin amana da yaudara. Gaskiya ita ce, ya ga bai zama wajibi ba ya ambaci rubutun Ibn Abu Khaithama saboda kasancewar rubutun Ibn Ishaq (wanda yake daidai da shi). A lokacin mutane suna rubutu da hannayensu, kuma ba su da kwamfutoci da za su sauƙaƙa kwafi da liƙawa. Saboda haka babu wani muhimmanci a cikin abin da wanda ake kira Abdul Qadir Al-Muhammadi ya tayar da shi lokacin da ya ce: [Wannan Hadisi bai yi daidai da Hadisin Ibn Ishaq ba. Ya zo ne a takaice kamar ruwayoyin da za su zo nan gaba. Ibn Sayed An-Nas kawai ya ambace shi kamar yadda ya faɗa, watau kamar takardar da Ibn Ishaq ya ruwaito. Sai aka biyo shi daga waɗanda suka biyo shi, alhali kuwa ba a tabbatar da shi a wurinsa ba. Wannan ya faru ne saboda Ibn Sayed An-Nas bai ambaci mana rubutunsa ba, wanda ake ɗauka yana cikin abin da ya ɓace daga tarihin Ibn Abu Khaitham. Wannan yana da goyon baya daga cewa Al-Baihaqi ya ruwaito shi a takaice kamar yadda za a iya gani].

Firstly, we say: Concerning the statement of Ibn Sayed An-Nas in his “Uyun Al-Athar Fee Funun Al-Maghazi wa Ash-Shama’il Wa As-Siyar” (1/330), after presenting the text of the Sahifah of Al-Madinah from Ibn Ishaq in its complete and full length: [This is how Ibn Ishaq mentioned it and Ibn Abu Khaithama also mentioned it (i.e. the text of the Sahifah). He then presented the Isnad (chain of transmitters) and then stated: He mentioned it in the same way], it is not conceivable that he said that unless the two texts conformed to each other or were mutually similar. It is not permitted to expect other than that from the Imam of the Musannaf and a great Hafizh like Ibn Sayed An-Nas, otherwise it would represent a form of treachery and deceit. The truth is that he found it sufficient not to mention the text of Ibn Abu Khaithama due to the presence of the text of Ibn Ishaq (which was the same). At that time the people would write by their own hands and they didn’t have computers to facilitate copying and pasting. There is therefore no significance in what the one named Abdul Qadir Al-Muhammadi stirred up when he said: [This Hadith does not conform to the Hadith of Ibn Ishaq. It rather came in a summarized form like the forthcoming narrations. Ibn Sayed An-Nas merely mentioned it as he stated i.e. like the document that Ibn Ishaq related. It was then followed up by those who followed it up, whilst not being established to him. That is because Ibn Sayed An-Nas did not mention to us its text, which is considered to be from among that which has been lost from the history of Ibn Abu Khaitham. This is supported by the fact that Al-Baihaqi related it in a summarized form as can be seen].

Kuma game da Al-Baihaqi da ya ruwaito shi a takaice, to hakan ya faru ne saboda dacewar wannan sashe na rubutun da babin da yake magana a kai. Al-Baihaqi yana bin wannan hanya sosai, musamman a cikin littafinsa "Sunan Al-Kubra". Al-Bukhari ma ya yi irin wannan kafin shi a cikin littafinsa "Sahih", haka kuma yawancin masu tattara hadisai sun yi hakan. Babu wata alaka tsakanin wannan da kuma batun ko hadisin ya isa gare su a takaice ko cikakke, balle kuma ya isa ga wasu ban da su, a takaice ko cikakke. An ambata game da shi a cikin "Dhail At-Taqyid Fee Ruwaat As-Sunan Wa Al-Asaneed" (1/247/483) kamar haka:

As for Al-Baihaqi having related it in a summarized form, then that was due to the suitability of that section of the text in respect to the (topic of the) chapter he was addressing. Al-Baihaqi follows this approach a lot and particularly in his “Sunan Al-Kubra”. It was also practised by Al-Bukhari before him in his “Sahih” and by the majority of the compilers of Hadith. There is no relationship between this and it having reached them in a summarized or complete form and by greater reason, reaching other than them, in a summarized or complete form. The following was mentioned concerning him in “Dhail At-Taqyid Fee Ruwaat As-Sunan Wa Al-Asaneed” (1/247/483):

Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Yahya bin Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Abu Al-Qasim bin Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Abdul ‘Aziz bin Sayed An-Nas bin Abu Al-Walid bin Mundhir bin Abdul Jabbar bin Sulaiman Al-Ya’mariy Al-Hafizh Fat’h ud-Din Abu Al-Fat’h bin Ash- Sheikh Abu ‘Umar bin Ash-Sheikh Abu Bakr, wanda aka fi sani da sunan Ibn Sayed An-Nas Al-Ya’mari. Ya karɓi Sahih Al-Bukhari a hannun Al-‘Izz Abdul ‘Aziz bin Abdul Mun’im Al-Harani, sannan Sahih Muslim daga Muhammad Abdul ‘Aziz bin Al-Hafizh Abu Al-Futuh Nasr Abu Al-Farah Al-Husari. Ya karɓi Sunan Abu Dawud a hannun Al-Mu’ayed At-Tousi da Abdur Rahim bin Yusuf bin Khatib Al-Mizza. Ya karɓi Al-Ghilaniyat ta hanyar karatun mahaifinsa a kanta, da kuma Al-Ghilaniyat daga Ghazi Al-Halawi ta hanyar karatunsa. Ya karɓi Jami’ na At-Tirmidhi daga Muhammad bin Ibrahim bin Tarjam Amazani, ta hanyar karatunsa, sannan Wa’l Abu ‘Ali Ya’qub bin Ahmad bin Fada’il Al-Halabiy ya ruwaito masa Sunan Ibn Majah ta hanyar karatunsa. Ya karɓi “(Seera) An-Nabawiyah Tahdhib Ibn Hisham” daga Abu Al-Ma’aliy Ahmad bin (…), ta hanyar karatunsa, sai dai wani ɗan ƙaramin sashi da ya karɓa daga wani ba shi ba. Ya karɓi mafi yawan “Maghazi” na Musa bin ‘Uqbah daga Al-‘Izz Ahmad bin Ibrahim Al-Fariqiya, baya ga littafin “Adh- Dhuriyah At-Tahirah” na Ad-Dulabi. Ya karɓi wani ɓangare na “Maghazi” na Abu Abdullah Muhammad bin ‘Abid Al-Qurashi Al-Katib daga Al-Khadr bin Al-Husain bin Al-Khadr bin ‘Abdan. Ya karɓi mafi yawan littafin “At-Tabaqat Al-Kubra” na Muhammad bin Sa’d daga Abdul Muhsin bin As-Sahib Muhyi ud-Din Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Jaradah Al-‘Uqaili, ta hanyar karatunsa. Ya karɓi “Al- Mu’jam As-Saghir” na At-Tabarani daga Muhammad bin Abdul Mu’min bin Abu Al-Fat’h As-Suwariy, ta hanyar karatunsa, baya ga karatun Al-Hafizh Abu Al-Hajjaj Al-Mizzi da Musnad na Abu Ya’la Lamousli. Ya karɓi "Mu'jam" na Ibn Jami' daga 'Umar ibn Al-Qawwas, ta hanyar karatunsa, a Gharbil da ke Ghouta a lardin Damascus. Ya karɓi "Ash-Shifa'" na Al-Qadi 'Iyad daga Al-Qadi 'Ilm ud-Din Muhammad bin Al-Husain bin Rashiq Ar-Rib'iy, ta hanyar karatun mahaifinsa wanda ya saurare shi daga Ibn Jubair. Ya karɓi littattafan ilimi da yawa, kuma malamansa sun yi yawa. Ya ƙware a cikin Hadisi, Adab (adabi) da sauran fannoni, kuma ya shahara saboda kyakkyawan bayaninsa na mafi yawan "At-Tirmidhi". Ya kuma rubuta littafi a kan Sirar Annabi ﷺ wanda ya ƙunshi fa'idodi masu yawa, ya kira shi "'Uyun Al-Athar Fee Funun Al-Maghazi wa Ash-Shama'il Wa As-Siyar". Ya taƙaita shi, ya kuma sa wa taƙaitaccen littafin suna "Nur ul-Uyun". Waƙoƙinsa sun haɗa da littafin: "Bushra Al-Labib Bi-Dhikra Al-Habib". Ya kasance yana ruwaito daga gare shi da kuma daga "'Uyun Al-Athar" da sauran rubuce-rubucensa ko tarin littattafansa. Ya rasu kwatsam a ranar 11 ga Sha'aban a Alkahira, a shekara ta 734 AH, yayin da aka haife shi a shekara ta 671 AH. Ya zauna a Damascus tare da Ibn Al-Mujawir, kuma ya karɓi (ilimi) daga gare shi. Abokinsa Al-Qutb Al-Halabi ya karɓi ilimi daga gare shi, haka kuma Ahmad bin As-Sabouni da Al-Jamal Ibrahim bin Muhammad bin Abdur Rahim Al-Amyouti.

Wannan ma an ambata shi (game da Ibn Sayed An-Nas) a cikin "Mu'jam na sahabban Sheikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah" (shafi na 161 [Shamela E-library]):

The following also came mentioned (about Ibn Sayed An-Nas) in the “Mu’jam of the companions of Sheikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah” (p. 161 [Shamela E-library]):

Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Yahya bin Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Abu Al-Qasim bin Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Abdul ‘Aziz bin Sayed An-Nas bin Abu Al-Walid bin Mundhir bin Abdul Jabbar bin Sulaiman, Abu Al-Fat’h Fat’h ud-Din Al-Ya’mariy Ash-Shafi’iy [671–734 AH]. An haife shi a watan Dhu l-Qa’dah a cikin wani gida mai sarautar wani matsayi da iko, kuma kawun mahaifinsa ya taba zama shugaban soji a Seville. Lokacin da mahaifinsa ya zauna a ƙasar Masar, ya kawo tare da shi Ummuhaat (uwayen littattafan ilimi, watau manyan tushe) na littattafan ilimi, ciki har da Al-Musannaf na Ibn Abi Shaibah, Musnadinsa, Al-Musannaf na Abdur Razzaq, Al-Muhalla, Al-Istidhkar da sauran manyan tarin littattafai. Tun yana ƙarami, mahaifinsa ya kai shi domin ya koyi ilimi daga Shams ud-Din Al-Maqdasi. Haka kuma ya karɓi ilimi a hannun Al-Qutb Al-Qastalani, Ibn Al-Anmatiy, Ghazi, Ibn Al-Khaimiy da Shamiya bint Al-Bakri. Ya nemi ilimi da kansa, kuma ya rubuta da hannunsa. Ya ɗauki ilimi mai yawa daga abokan Al-Kindi da Ibn Tabarzadh. Ya yi tafiya zuwa Damascus, kuma isowarsa ta zo daidai da rasuwar Al-Fakhr bin Al-Bukhari, lamarin da ya ba shi baƙin ciki. Ya ɗauki ilimi mai yawa daga As-Suwariy, Ibn ‘Asakir, Ibn Al-Mujawir, kuma Ash-Sheikh Al-Mizziy ya ƙarfafa shi ya ɗauki ilimi daga Ash-Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah. Sai ya haɗu da shi, ya karɓi ilimi daga gare shi. Ibn Sayed An-Nas ya ce game da shi (Ibn Taymiyyah): [Na same shi daga cikin waɗanda suka samu babban rabo na ilimin ilimomin Musulunci. Kusan ya haddace Sunan (watau Hadisi) da Athar (rahotanni) baki ɗaya. Idan ya yi magana game da Tafsir, yana ɗaga tutarsa (watau ya fito fili). Idan ya bayar da hukuncin shari'a, yana sane da manufarsa ko yana sane da ita, kuma idan aka ambaci Hadisi a gare shi, to shi ne mai ilimin sa da kuma ruwaitonsa. Ko kuma idan ya mai da hankali ga bayarwa da koyarwa, ba za ka ga wani da ya fi shi karimci wajen bayarwa ba, kuma ya fi shi ilimi. Ya yi fice a kowane fanni fiye da takwarorinsa. Babu wani ido da ya taɓa ganin irinsa, kuma babu ido da ya taɓa shaida irin yanayin da yake a lokacin da yake bayani a kan Tafsir, inda taron jama'a mai yawa ke halartar zamansa, shi kuwa yana ambato daga tekun iliminsa mai daɗi da tsarki. Suna jin daɗin falalarsa mai kyau a cikin lambu da magudanar ruwa. Haka abin ya ci gaba har sai da wasu mutane daga ƙasarsa suka kamu da hassada, mutanen sukar kuma suka fara tunzura a kansa game da ra'ayoyinsa na Hanbali a fagen Aqeedah (akida). Don haka suka kama wasu daga maganganunsa game da hakan, suka nemi su mai da hakan dalilin zargi a kansa. Suka shirya kibau don zargin shi da karkata, suka yi iƙirarin cewa ya saɓa tafarkinsu kuma ya raba ƙungiyarsu. Ya yi musu jayayya, suma suka yi masa jayayya; ya ƙauracewa wasu daga cikinsu, suma suka ƙauracewa shi. Sannan ya yi jayayya da wata ƙungiya daga cikin waɗanda ba su da tafarki, waɗanda suka yi iƙirarin cewa suna kan cikakken ilimi na abin da yake ɓoye a waɗannan al'amura (watau na Aqeedah), da kuma gaskiyarsa a bayyane. Ya fallasa waɗannan ƙungiyoyi, ya kuma ambaci bala'an abin da suke iƙirari. Sai suka nemi taimako daga ƙungiyar farko ta waɗanda suka yi masa jayayya, suka nemi goyon bayan waɗanda ke da ƙiyayya a kansa. Sakamakon haka, suka sa al'amarinsa ya kai ga kunnuwan sarakuna, dukkansu kuma suka himmatu wajen ayyana kafircinsa tare da yin aiki don hana tunaninsa yaɗuwa. Sannan suka shirya wata takarda, suka tunzura masu ƙiyayya su yaɗa ta a tsakanin manyan mutane. Suka yi ƙoƙarin kai ta ga sarakunan da ke mulkin ƙasashen Masar. Daga nan aka kama shi, aka kama shi da ɗaurin kurkuku nan take da ya isa. Daga nan suka taru don zub da jininsa, suka hallara don wannan manufa daga mazauna wurin da mazauna makarantu, daga cikin waɗanda suka shiga cikin rikicin kuma suke da dabara wajen ɓad da kai, da kuma waɗanda a fili suke kiransa kafiri, da kuma manyan waɗanda suka ƙaurace masa, suna kiransa "Raib ul-Manun" (Mai shakka game da ƙaddara). Ubangijinka ya san abin da yake ɓoye a cikin zukatansu da abin da suke bayyanawa. Waɗanda suke bayyana kafircinsa a fili ba su fi waɗanda suke yaudara ba muni. Kunamai sun yi ta rarrafa zuwa gare shi, amma Allah ya mayar da makircin dukkansu baya. Ya cece shi ta hannun waɗanda Allah ya zaɓa, kuma Allah ne mai mulki bisa al'amarinsa. Bayan haka, ba a barshi daga jarrabawa ɗaya bayan ɗaya ba, kuma a sauran rayuwarsa bai taɓa motsawa daga wata wahala ba face wata ta same shi. Har ya kai ga kai al'amarinsa ga wasu daga cikin alƙalai. Suka saka shi a kurkuku, kuma ya zauna a wannan kurkukun har lokacin da ya rabu da duniya zuwa rahamar Allah Ta'ala, da mutuwarsa. Zuwa ga Allah ne dukkan al'amura ke komawa, kuma Shi ne masani kan cin amanar mutane da abin da zukata ke ɓoye. Ranar da aka yi jana'izarsa an shaida ta, titunan suka matse saboda jana'izarsa, suka cika da Musulmai da suke zuwa daga ko'ina suna neman albarka a taronta, domin Ranar da shaidu za su tsaya, suna riƙe da akwatin gawarsa har suka karya sandunansa. Hakan ya kasance a dare na ashirin ga watan Zul-Ƙa'da a shekara ta 728 bayan hijira, a kagarar Dimashƙu da ake tsaronta. An haife shi a Harran a ranar 10 ga Rabi'ul Awwal a shekara ta 661 bayan hijira, Allah ya yi masa rahama da mu duka." [Ƙarshen nakalto]

(Ci gaba) Ya karɓi wasu daga cikin littafin “Al-Juz’” daga Ibn ‘Arafah. Adh-Dhahabi ya ce: “Ibn Sayed ya kusa kai ga Al-Fakhr (watau Al-Bukhari) amma ya rasa shi da kwana biyu. Malamansa daga cikin malaman sun kai kusan dubu. Ya rubuta da hannunsa, ya tace (ilimi) kuma aka ba shi aikin shaida na wani lokaci. Yana da kyawawan halaye, mai fara'a, kuma mutum mai barkwanci da wasa. Ya kasance Saduq (mai gaskiya) game da Hadisi, kuma abin dogaro ne game da abin da ya isar. Yana da ido mai kaifi da zurfin fahimta game da fasaha, da gogewa game da masu isar da hadisi, da sanin bambancin ra'ayoyi, kuma yana fice wajen sanin harshe, yana da yawan kyawawan halaye. Ya ce: Da a ce na keɓe kaina ga ilimi yadda ya kamata, da na yi tafiya zuwa gare shi. Sai dai yakan nemi nishaɗi daga hakan ta hanyar rubutu, alhali shirye-shiryensa ba su da tsada. Yana da fara'a, hankali, mai sauƙin zumunci, kuma ba ya ɗauke da damuwa a tare da shi” (Ƙarshe).

(Continued) He (Ibn Sayed An-Nas) received from him some of the book “Al-Juz’” by Ibn ‘Arafah. Adh-Dhahabi said: “He (Ibn Sayed) almost reached Al-Fakhr (i.e. Al-Bukhari) but missed him by two days. His teachers from the scholars numbered close to one thousand. He transcribed in his own writing, sifted (through knowledge) and was assigned to testimony for a period. He gad good morals (character), cheerful and someone who was joke and be playful. He was Saduq (truthful) in respect to the Hadeeth and he was authoritative source in respect to what he transmitted. He had a sharp penetrating eye in respect to art, experience in respect to transmitters, knowledge of differences in opinion and was outstanding in the knowledge of the language and had abundant virtues. He said: And had I dedicated myself to knowledge as I should have done, I would have travelled to him. However, he would seek distraction from that through writing, while his arrangements were without cost. He was cheerful, intelligent, easy to get on with and did not carry any anxiety with him” (End].

(Ci gaba) Al-Barzali ya ce: "Yana daga cikin malamai masu girma. Kamala (kwarewa) da haddacewa, dangane da Hadisi, kuma ta fuskar fahimtar gazawarsu ko wuraren raunin su da silsilolin watsa su (Asaneed). Ya san wadanda suke Sahihi da wadanda suke da lahani. Ya kasance tushen ilimin Seera, kuma ya yi fice a harshen Larabci. An san shi da kyakkyawan tsari, da daidaiton Aqeedah, da saurin karatu, da kyakkyawar gabatarwa, da tawali'u sosai, da kyakkyawar abota, da walwala, da barkwanci, da hankali. Yana da kyawawan waka da zance mai ban mamaki. Dalibai masu ilimin Hadisi suna son sa, kuma babu wanda ya zo bayansa kamarsa, baki daya (watau da dukkan wadannan halaye tare)." [Karshen zance].

(Continued) Al-Barzali said: “He was one of the eminent people of knowledge. Perfection (excellence) and memorisation, in respect to the Hadith and in terms of comprehending their deficiencies or points of weakness and their Asaneed (chains of transmission). He was knowledgeable of those which were Sahih and those which were faulty. He was a knowledge base of the Seera and he excelled in the Arabic language. He was characterised by good classification, soundness in Aqeedah, quick reading, being well presented, greatly humble, good company, light-hearted, funny and intelligent. He had beautiful poetry and exceptional prose. He was loved by the students of Hadith and no one like him has come after him, as a whole (i.e. with all these qualities combined)” [End of Quote].

(Ci gaba) Ibn Hajar ya ce: "Ya haddace "At-Tanbih", kuma malamansa na ilimi sun kai kusan dubu. Ya dauki lokaci mai yawa tare da Ibn Daqiq Al-‘Eid. Ya kammala nazarin Usul ul-Fiqh a wurinsa. Ya koma gare shi, yana son sa da kaunarsa, yana sauraron maganganunsa kuma yana yaba masa. Ya karbi ilimin harshen Larabci daga Bahaa’ ud-Din Ibn An-Nuhas. Ya rubuta rubutun Maghreb da na Masar, ya kuma kware da su." Al-Kamal Al-Adfuwi ya ce (game da shi): "Ya haddace "At-Tanbih" a cikin Fiqh, ya kuma rubuta littafinsa a fannin Seera mai suna: "Uyun ul-Athar". Littafi ne mai kyau a fagensa, kuma ya yi niyyar bayyana (Sunan na) At-Tirmidhi. Da ya takaita kansa a kan ilimin Hadisi maimakon tattaunawa kan Asaneed (silsilar watsa labari), da littafin ya fi cika da kyau. Sai dai ya so ya bi malaminsa Ibn Daqiq Al-‘Eid, don haka ya kare kafin ya cimma abin da yake so ya cimma." [Karshen nakalto].

(Continued) Ibn Hajar said: “He memorised “At-Tanbih” and his (scholarly) teachers numbered perhaps close to a thousand. He spent a lot of time in the company of Ibn Daqiq Al-‘Eid. He completed the study of Usul ul-Fiqh under him. He returned to him and use to love and be fond of him, listen to his speech and commend him. He received the knowledge of the Arabic language from Bahaa’ ud-Din Ibn An-Nuhas. He wrote both the Maghreb and Egyptian scripts and perfected them. Al-Kamal Al-Adfuwi said (regarding him): “He memorised “At-Tanbih” in Fiqh and authored his book in Seera called: “Uyun ul-Athar”. It is a good book in its subject area and set out to explain (the Sunan of) At-Tirmidhi. Had he restricted himself in respect to that upon the art (knowledge area) of the Hadith rather than the discussion of the Asaneed (chains of transmission), it would have been more complete and better. However, he sought to follow his teacher Ibn Daqiq Al-‘Eid and consequently came to an end before accomplishing what he had wanted to accomplish” [End of Quote].

Ya kuma rubuta littattafai waɗanda suka burge mutane kuma suka shahara. Daga cikinsu akwai: "Nur ul-Uyun" da "Bushra Al-Labib Bi-Dhikra Al-Habib". Aiki ne na taƙaitawa a fannin Seera wanda Ibn Hajar ya yaba. Haka kuma ya rubuta waƙoƙin yabon Annabi ﷺ waɗanda ya yi bayaninsu a cikin littafi guda, da dogayen waƙoƙi na nasara, da sauran ayyuka.] [Ƙarshen jawabi daga "Mu'jam of the companions of Sheikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah" (shafi na 161 [Shamela E-library]).

He also authored books which dazzled and became famous. These include: “Nur ul-Uyun” and “Bushra Al-Labib Bi-Dhikra Al-Habib”. It was a summarised work in the area of the Seera which Ibn Hajar commended. He also authored Prophetic poetic works which he explained in a volume and long poetic proses among other works] [End of speech from the “Mu’jam of the companions of Sheikh Al- Islam Ibn Taymiyyah” (p. 161 [Shamela E-library]).

Bari mu yi tunani a kan maganar Imam Adh-Dhahabi, shugaban malaman Hadisi da tarihi a zamaninsa wanda babu wanda ya yi jayayya da shi, lokacin da ya ce game da wannan Imam (Ibn Sayyid An-Nas): "Ya kasance Saduq (mai gaskiya) dangane da Hadisi, kuma hujja ne dangane da abin da ya isar." Idan muka yi haka, za mu fahimci girman laifin da wanda ake kira Abdul Qadir Al-Muhammadi ya aikata a kan wannan Imam da kuma a kan gaskiya! Yanzu bari mu mai da hankali kan nazarin wannan hanya ta biyu ta isar da Sahifah (ta Madina).

Let us contemplate the speech of Imam Adh-Dhahabi (in the above text), the uncontested Imam of the scholars of Hadith and history of his age, when he said about this Imam (Ibn Sayed An-Nas): “He was Saduq (truthful) in respect to the Hadeeth and he was authoritative source in respect to what he transmitted”. We would then realise the magnitude of the crime that the one named Abdul Qadir Al- Muhammadi perpetrated against this Imam and against the truth! Let us now focus upon the study of this second path of transmission (of the Sahifah of Al-Madinah):

Dangane da babban malami mai ilimi Imam Al-Hafizh Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Abu Khaithama, marubucin “At-Tarikh Al-Kabir”, da ‘Eisa bin Yunus bin Abu Ishaq As-Sabee’I Al-Hamdani, to su malamai ne daga cikin Thiqat da Athbat (waɗanda amintattu ne kuma abin dogara ne wajen riwaya), kuma an yi ijma'i a kan haka. Ahmad bin Janab (Abul-Walid Al-Masisi) kuwa, amintacce ne bisa ijma'i, kuma shi amintacce ne mai tabbatacciyar riwaya musamman dangane da ‘Eisa bin Yunus. Idan aka haɗa da Al-Baihaqi, dukkansu malamai ne sanannun Athbat da Thiqat (amintattu kuma abin dogara) har sanadin ya kai ga Kathir bin Abdullah. Saboda haka, babu buƙatar bincika halin ko yanayin kowa face Kathir bin Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin ‘Awf. Mun ɗauki wannan aiki a wani babi da aka ware don haka mai take: “Adalci ga Kathir bin Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin ‘Awf Al-Muzani”. A cikinsa mun tabbatar da rashin ingancin abin da Al-Hafizh (Al-Asqalani) ya ambata a cikin “Taqrib At-Tahdhib” (1/460/5617) lokacin da ya ce: [Kathir bin Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin ‘Awf Al-Muzani Al-Madani rauni ne (Da'if). Waɗanda suka danganta masa ƙarya sun wuce gona da iri; daga cikin tabaka ta bakwai]. Wannan kuwa a halin da ya zama wajibi a maye gurbin rubutun da: [Kathir bin Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin ‘Awf Al-Muzani Al-Madani; babu matsala game da shi, kuma waɗanda suka danganta masa ƙarya sun yi kuskure, daga cikin tabaka ta bakwai]. Ta haka, an ɗaga zalunci daga wannan mutum, kuma an yi masa adalci cikin iyakokin matsakaicin hali.

As for the eminent accomplished Imam Al-Hafizh Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Abu Khaithama, the author of “At-Tarikh Al-Kabir”, and ‘Eisa bin Yunus bin Abu Ishaq As-Sabee’I Al-Hamdani, then they are Imams from among the Thiqat and Athbat (Those who are trustworthy and reliable in terms of transmission), and there is a consensus over that. As for Ahmad bin Janab (Ab Al-Walid Al-Masisi), then he is Thiqah (trustworthy) by consensus and he is Thiqah Thabit (trustworthy and reliable) in respect to ‘Eisa bin Yunus specifically. With the inclusion of Al-Baihaqi, they are all well-known Athbat and Thiqat (trustworthy and reliable) Imams up until the chain reaches Kathir bin Abdullah. Consequently, there is no need to study the circumstance or condition of anyone other than Kathir bin Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin ‘Awf. We have undertaken that in an attached section specified for that under the heading: “Fairness to Kathir bin Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin ‘Awf Al-Muzani”. In it we have established the invalidity of what Al-Hafizh (Al-Asqalani) mentioned in his “Taqrib At- Tahdhib” (1/460/5617) when he said: [Kathir bin Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin ‘Awf Al-Muzani Al-Madani is Da’if (weak). Those who attributed lying to him were excessive; from the seventh]. That is in the case where it is obligatory to replace the text with the following: [Kathir bin Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin ‘Awf Al-Muzani Al-Madani; there is no issue with him and those who attributed lying to him were in error, from the seventh]. In this manner, the injustice is raised from this man and he is dealt with fairly within the boundaries of moderation.

Saboda haka, ingancin Isnad din an tabbatar da shi, kuma yana da kyau (Hasan). Haka ma, yana yiwuwa ya isa a matsayin hujja da kansa, don kafa hujjar dalili. To, yaya idan muka ƙara masa Isnad na farko, wanda ingancinsa mun riga mun tabbatar da shi?! - Isnad na uku (sarkar watsawa): Isnad din Ubaid Al-Qasim bin Salam wanda aka rubuta a cikin babban littafinsa “Al-Amwal” (260/518): Yahya bin Abdullah bin Bukair da Abdullah bin Salih sun ba ni labari, dukkansu suka ce: Al-Laith bin Sa’d ya ba mu labari yana cewa: ‘Uqail ya ba ni labari daga Ibn Shihab, cewa ya ce: Ya kai ni cewa Manzon Allah ﷺ …].

As a consequence of that, the quality of the Isnad is affirmed and its being Hasan (good). Indeed, it is possible that it is sufficient as an evidence to be used as proof by itself, to establish an evidential argument. So, how about if we were to add to it the first Isnad, the authenticity of which we have already established?! - The third Isnad (chain of transmission): The Isnad of Ubaid Al-Qasim bin Salam recorded in his great book “Al-Amwal” (260/518): Yahya bin Abdullah bin Bukair and Abdullah bin Salih related to me and both said: Al-Laith bin Sa’d related to us saying: ‘Uqail related to me from Ibn Shihab, that he said: It reached me that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) …].

Da farko dai, wannan yana kama da riwayoyin Mursal na Az-Zuhriy, wadanda gabaki daya ba su cikin mafi inganci. Duk da haka, wannan isnadi (silsilar rahoto) yana cikin mafi girman matsayin inganci. Hakika, yana iya ma zama daga cikin mafi ingantattun silsilolin rahoto a wannan duniya.

This appears from the onset to be from the Mursal narrations of Az- Zuhriy which are generally not of the highest level of quality. However, this Isnad (chain of transmission) is of the highest level of quality. Indeed, it may even be the from the most authentic chains of this Dunya (world).

Madai daidai shi ne cewa wannan isnadi ba ya cikin hadisan mursal na gama-gari ba, a maimakon haka balaga ne, kuma Az-Zuhriy yana da wasu balaga bakwai ko takwas, duk daga cikinsu sahihai ne. Wannan yana nuna cewa balagan Az-Zuhriy sun sabawa hadisan mursal na gama-gari dangane da matakin ingancinsu. Asalin matanin dai daga takarda ne, koda yake Az-Zuhriy a fili ya fadi shi daga ƙwaƙwalwarsa.

The correct view is that this Isnad is not from among the general Mursal narrations, rather it is a Balagh (proclamation) and Az-Zuhriy has seven or eight other Balaghat (proclamations), all of which are authentic (Sahih), This indicates that the Balaghat of Az-Zuhriy are contrary to the general Mursal narrations, in respect to the extent of their quality (or soundness). The text in its origin was essentially from a document, even if Az-Zuhriy, evidently dictated it from his memory.

Saboda haka babu dalilin shakka game da ingancin wannan silsilar isnadi a kanta, musamman ma yayin da yawancin sassanta ko maudu'ansa suka zo daga wasu hanyoyi masu inganci, na mafi girman matsayin inganci.

There is therefore no cause to doubt the authenticity of this chain of transmission (Isnad) in itself and particularly as most of its paragraphs or articles have come mentioned from other authentic paths, of the highest level of authenticity.

Ko menene halin da al'amarin yake, tattaunawar wannan batu cikin cikakken bayani tana da wani sashe mai zaman kansa da aka keɓe dominsa.

Whatever its case may be, the discussion of this matter in complete detail has an independent section dedicated to it.