Tafseer of The Opening · Al-Faatiha · 1:4
Sovereign of the Day of Recompense.
Important: The Arabic source text is always authoritative. This translation is a study aid and has not been verified by scholars — do not use it as a basis for religious proof or for deriving rulings (ahkam). When in doubt, always consult the Arabic text and a qualified scholar.
Statement on the explanation of His word: مَالِكِ يَوْمِ الدِّينِ (Master of the Day of Judgment).
Abū Jaʿfar said: The Qurʾān reciters differ over the reading of ملك يوم الدين. Some recite it as "Maliki yawmi-d-dīn" (King of the Day of Judgment), others recite it as "Maliki yawmi-d-dīn" (with a short vowel), and yet others recite it as "Mālika yawmi-d-dīn" with a naṣb (accusative ending) on the kāf. We have set out at length the transmission of those to whom a reading thereof is attributed in the "Book of the Readings" (Kitāb al-Qirāʾāt), and we have communicated therein which reading we prefer, as well as the reason that necessitates the correctness of the reading we have chosen. Therefore we deemed it inappropriate to repeat that here, since what we have set ourselves to do in this book of ours is the exposition of the modes of interpretation of the verses of the Qurʾān, and not of the modes in which they are recited.
There is no disagreement among any of the experts in the languages of the Arabs that the word "malik" (king) is derived from "mulk" (kingship), and that "mālik" (owner) is taken from "milk" (ownership). The explanation of the reading of the one who recites this as Maliki yawmi-d-dīn is therefore that to Allah belongs the kingship on the Day of Judgment, exclusively and to the exclusion of all His creatures who before that time were kings and tyrants in this world, who contended with Him over the kingship and disputed His sole claim to pride, greatness, dominion, and omnipotence. But upon meeting Allah on the Day of Judgment they will know with certainty that they are the lowly and the humiliated, and that to Him — to the exclusion of them and of all others — belong the kingship, the greatness, the power, and the splendor, just as He, exalted is His remembrance and sanctified are His names, says in His revelation: يَوْمَ هُمْ بَارِزُونَ لا يَخْفَى عَلَى اللَّهِ مِنْهُمْ شَيْءٌ لِمَنِ الْمُلْكُ الْيَوْمَ لِلَّهِ الْوَاحِدِ الْقَهَّارِ [Surah Ghāfir: 16] (The Day when they come forth, when nothing of them is hidden from Allah. To whom belongs the kingship today? To Allah, the One, the Overwhelming). Thus He, exalted is His remembrance, has informed that on that Day He alone possesses the kingship, to the exclusion of the kings of this world, who on the Day of Judgment have fallen from their kingship into humiliation and lowliness, and who have fallen from their worldly possessions, at the return, into loss.
As for the explanation of the reading of the one who recites Mālik yawmi-d-dīn (Owner of the Day of Judgment), that is what:
166 — Abū Kurayb related to us, saying: ʿUthmān ibn Saʿīd related to us, on the authority of Bishr ibn ʿUmāra, who said: Abū Rawq related to us, on the authority of al-Ḍaḥḥāk, on the authority of ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbbās: Mālik yawmi-d-dīn — he says: no one possesses on that Day any power of decision besides Him, such as they possessed in this world. Then he said: لا يَتَكَلَّمُونَ إِلا مَنْ أَذِنَ لَهُ الرَّحْمَنُ وَقَالَ صَوَابًا [Surah al-Nabaʾ: 38] (They will not speak, except him to whom the Most Merciful grants permission, and who says what is correct). And He said: وَخَشَعَتِ الأَصْوَاتُ لِلرَّحْمَنِ [Surah Ṭā Hā: 108] (And the voices will be humbly still before the Most Merciful). And He said: وَلا يَشْفَعُونَ إِلا لِمَنِ ارْتَضَى [Surah al-Anbiyāʾ: 28] (And they will not intercede except for whom He is pleased with).
Abū Jaʿfar said: Of the two interpretations, the most fitting for this verse in my judgment, and of the two readings the most correct in recitation, is the first interpretation, namely the reading of the one who recites "Malik" in the meaning of "mulk" (kingship). For in the acknowledgment that to Him belongs the sole claim to the kingship lies the necessary affirmation that to Him also belongs the sole claim to ownership, and moreover the excellence that "malik" (king) encompasses more than "mālik" (owner), since it is known that there is no king but that he is also an owner, while an owner is sometimes not a king.
Furthermore: Allah, exalted is His remembrance, has already informed His servants, in the verse preceding His word Maliki yawmi-d-dīn, that He is the Owner of all the worlds, their Lord, their Provider, their Protector, and the Merciful toward them in this life and the Hereafter, with His word: الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ * الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ (All praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful).
And since He, exalted is His remembrance, has thus already informed them of His ownership over them with His word رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ (Lord of the worlds), the most fitting of His attributes, exalted is His remembrance, to follow it with is that which His word رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ * الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ did not yet encompass — all the more so given the close concatenation and proximity of the two verses, since His wisdom is the wisdom to which no other wisdom is equal. And in repeating His description, exalted is His remembrance, with the fact that He is Mālik yawmi-d-dīn (Owner of the Day of Judgment), there would lie a repetition of what has already preceded in the description of Him in His word رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ, given the proximity of the two verses and the adjacency of the two attributes. And in that repetition there would lie a repetition of different expressions with corresponding meanings, which offer the hearer of the repeated no benefit of which he has need. But that which His preceding attributes, exalted is His remembrance, before His word Mālik yawmi-d-dīn did not yet encompass, is the meaning that lies in His word Malik yawmi-d-dīn, namely the description of Him that He is the King.
It is therefore clear that the most correct of the two readings, and the most rightful of the two interpretations with respect to the Book, is the reading of the one who recites it as Maliki yawmi-d-dīn (King of the Day of Judgment), in the meaning that the kingship on the Day of Judgment belongs exclusively to Him — and not the reading of the one who recites Mālik yawmi-d-dīn, which has the meaning that He possesses the disposal of judgment among them and the pronouncement of the verdict, standing alone in that to the exclusion of the rest of His creatures.
Now if someone supposes that His word رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ is an account of His ownership over them in this world and not in the Hereafter, and that this necessitates that an account about Himself be attached to it, namely that He is the One who owns them in the Hereafter in the manner of His ownership over them in this world, with His word Mālik yawmi-d-dīn — then he has fallen into heedlessness and harbors an incorrect supposition.
That is because, if it were permitted to anyone to suppose that the meaning of His word رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ is limited to the report about the Lordship over the world of this life and not over the world of the Hereafter — while there is no indication that its meaning is so, neither in the outward wording of the revelation, nor in any transmitted report from the Messenger ﷺ about it, nor in any proof present in the intellect — then it would likewise be permitted to another to suppose that this is limited to the world of the time in which His word رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ was revealed, to the exclusion of all other worlds that come into being thereafter in later times. For it is, on the basis of the exposition we have given earlier, correct that the world of each time is other than the world of the time that follows it.
If anyone, with slowness of understanding, does not grasp the knowledge of the correctness of this, on the basis of what we have given earlier, then in the word of Allah, exalted is His praise: وَلَقَدْ آتَيْنَا بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحُكْمَ وَالنُّبُوَّةَ وَرَزَقْنَاهُمْ مِنَ الطَّيِّبَاتِ وَفَضَّلْنَاهُمْ عَلَى الْعَالَمِينَ [Surah al-Jāthiya: 16] (And indeed, We gave the children of Israel the Book, the judgment, and the prophethood, and We provided them with the good things and preferred them above the worlds) there lies a clear indication that the world of each time is other than the world of the time that was before it and the world of the time that comes after it. For Allah, exalted is His praise, has preferred the community (umma) of our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ above all bygone communities, and has informed them of this in His word: كُنْتُمْ خَيْرَ أُمَّةٍ أُخْرِجَتْ لِلنَّاسِ the verse [Surah Āl ʿImrān: 110] (You are the best community brought forth for mankind). It is thereby known that the children of Israel in the time of our Prophet — given their denial of him ﷺ — were not the best of the worlds; rather, the best of the worlds in that time and afterward, until the coming of the Hour, were those who believed in him and followed his way, and not the remaining communities who denied and strayed from his way.
And since the falsity is clear of the interpretation of one who would interpret His word رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ to mean that what is intended thereby is that Allah is the Lord of the worlds of the time of our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, and not of the worlds of all other times — so too is clear the falsity of the statement of whoever claims that its interpretation is: Lord of the world of this life and not of the world of the Hereafter, and that Mālik yawmi-d-dīn deserved to be attached to it so that one might know that He is in the Hereafter their owner and lord in the same manner as He was in this life.
And to the one who claims that it is asked: what is the difference between him and one who likewise judges arbitrarily in the interpretation of His word رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ — who judges arbitrarily and says: by this is only meant that He is the Lord of the worlds of the time of Muḥammad ﷺ, and not of the worlds of other bygone times before him and later times that came into being after him — just as the one who makes this statement claims that by it are meant the worlds of this life and not the worlds of the Hereafter? What principle or what indication distinguishes them? He will not be able to say anything about the one without being obligated to the same regarding the other.
As for the one who claims that the interpretation of His word Mālik yawmi-d-dīn is that He is the One who possesses the authority to bring about the Day of Judgment: the objection we have raised against the aforementioned previous speaker applies to him as well. For the bringing about of the Resurrection is nothing other than the restoration of the creatures who have perished, in their forms such as they had them before their demise, in the abode that Allah has prepared for them with what He has prepared. And they are the worlds about which He, exalted is His remembrance, has informed that He is their Lord in His word رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ.
As for the interpretation thereof according to the reading of the one who recites Mālika yawmi-d-dīn (with accusative): he means "O Owner of the Day of Judgment," and he has placed it in the naṣb (accusative) with the intention of calling and addressing, as He, exalted is His praise, says: يُوسُفُ أَعْرِضْ عَنْ هَذَا [Surah Yūsuf: 29] with the interpretation: "O Yūsuf, turn away from this," and as the poet of the Banū Asad said — a poem which, it is said, stems from the time of ignorance (jāhilī):
"If you have falsely accused me of that, O Jazʾ, may you then soon experience the same."
He means: "O Jazʾ." And as another said:
"You lie — by the House of Allah — you will not marry her, O sons of her whose two horns have grown gray, who ties off and milks."
He means: "O sons of her whose two horns have grown gray." What entangled him in this reading — with naṣb on the kāf of "mālik," according to the meaning I have described — was his confusion over how he should construe His word إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وَإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِينُ (You alone we worship and You alone we ask for help), together with the genitive reading of Mālik yawmi-d-dīn. He thought that its meaning would not be correct after the genitive of Mālik yawmi-d-dīn, and therefore he placed "Mālika yawmi-d-dīn" in the accusative, so that إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ would be an address to Him. It is as if he meant: "O Owner of the Day of Judgment, You alone we worship and You alone we ask for help." But had he known the interpretation of the beginning of the surah, and known that الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ is a command from Allah to His servant to say that — as we mentioned earlier in the report of Ibn ʿAbbās: that Jibrīl said to the Prophet ﷺ on behalf of Allah, exalted is His remembrance: "Say, O Muḥammad: الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ * الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ * مَالِكِ يَوْمِ الدِّينِ, and say also, O Muḥammad: إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وَإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِينُ" — and had he understood from the Arabs that it belongs to their custom, when they relate a statement or command the relating of a report that follows a quotation, first to address and then to report about an absent one, and to report about an absent one and then return to address — on account of the meaning of both the absent and the addressed that lies enclosed in the relating by means of the quotation, as they say to a man: "I said to your brother: 'if you stand up, I stand up,' and I said to your brother: 'if he stands up, I stand up'" — then there would have been easy for him what was difficult for him: the manner in which he should construe the genitive of "Mālik yawmi-d-dīn."
An example that corresponds to "Mālik yawmi-d-dīn" in the genitive, followed by the return to the address with إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ, on account of what we have mentioned earlier, is the well-known verse from the poem of Abū Kabīr al-Hudhalī:
"O alas for my soul! The youthful freshness of Khālid and the white of your face have fallen prey to the gray dust."
He returned to the address with his word "and the white of your face," after the report about Khālid had first proceeded in the manner of a report about an absent one.
To this also belongs the word of Labīd ibn Rabīʿa:
"The soul passed the night, complaining to me, bursting into sobs, but indeed, I have borne you seventy and seven years."
He returned to addressing his own soul, after the report about it had first preceded in the manner of a report about an absent one.
To this also belongs the word of Allah — and it is the most truthful statement and the most established proof: حَتَّى إِذَا كُنْتُمْ فِي الْفُلْكِ وَجَرَيْنَ بِهِمْ بِرِيحٍ طَيِّبَةٍ [Surah Yūnus: 22] (Until, when you are in the ships and they sail onward with them on a favorable wind). He first addressed ("you") and then returned to the report about an absent one ("with them"), and did not say "and they sailed onward with you." The proofs of this from the poetry and the language of the Arabs are too numerous to enumerate, and in what we have mentioned there is sufficiency for whoever has been granted the capacity to understand it.
The reading "Mālika yawmi-d-dīn" (with accusative) is therefore forbidden and not permitted, on account of the consensus of all the authoritative Qurʾān reciters and scholars of the community to reject recitation with it.
Statement on the explanation of His word, exalted is His praise: يَوْمِ الدِّينِ (the Day of Judgment).
Abū Jaʿfar said: "al-dīn" has in this place the interpretation of reckoning and requital for deeds, as Kaʿb ibn Juʿayl said:
"When they shoot at us, we shoot at them, and we requite them the like of that which they lend us."
And as another said:
"And know, and be convinced, that your kingship is perishable, and know that, as you requite, you are requited."
He means: as you requite, you are requited.
To this belongs the word of Allah, exalted is His praise: كَلا بَلْ تُكَذِّبُونَ بِالدِّينِ — that is to say: the requital — وَإِنَّ عَلَيْكُمْ لَحَافِظِينَ [Surah al-Infiṭār: 9, 10] (Nay, but you deny the Judgment, and indeed, there are guardians set over you) who record which deeds you perform. And His word, the Exalted: فَلَوْلا إِنْ كُنْتُمْ غَيْرَ مَدِينِينَ [Surah al-Wāqiʿa: 86] (Why then not, if you were not to be requited) — that is to say: not requited for your deeds and not called to account.
And "al-dīn" has in the language of the Arabs still other meanings, other than those of reckoning and requital, which we shall mention in their places, if Allah wills.
And in accordance with what we have said about the interpretation of His word yawmi-d-dīn have come the transmissions of the predecessors among the exegetes, with the corroboration of the proofs for the interpretation they have given to it.
167 — Abū Kurayb Muḥammad ibn al-ʿAlāʾ related to us, saying: ʿUthmān ibn Saʿīd related to us, saying: Bishr ibn ʿUmāra related to us, saying: Abū Rawq related to us, on the authority of al-Ḍaḥḥāk, on the authority of ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbbās: yawmi-d-dīn, he said: the Day of the reckoning of the creatures, and that is the Day of Resurrection. He will requite them according to their deeds: if good, then good, and if evil, then evil — except whom He forgives, for the disposal is His disposal. Then he said: أَلا لَهُ الْخَلْقُ وَالأَمْرُ [Surah al-Aʿrāf: 54] (Verily, to Him belong the creation and the command).
168 — And Mūsā ibn Hārūn al-Hamdānī related to me, saying: ʿAmr ibn Ḥammād al-Qannād related to us, saying: Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr al-Hamdānī related to us, on the authority of Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Suddī, on the authority of Abū Mālik, and on the authority of Abū Ṣāliḥ, on the authority of Ibn ʿAbbās — and on the authority of Murra al-Hamdānī, on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd — and on the authority of a number of companions of the Prophet ﷺ: Maliki yawmi-d-dīn, that is the Day of the reckoning.
169 — Al-Ḥasan ibn Yaḥyā related to us, saying: ʿAbd al-Razzāq informed us, saying: Maʿmar informed us, on the authority of Qatāda concerning His word: Mālik yawmi-d-dīn, he said: the Day on which Allah requites the servants according to their deeds.
170 — Al-Qāsim ibn al-Ḥasan related to us, saying: al-Ḥusayn ibn Dāwūd related to us, saying: Ḥajjāj related to me, on the authority of Ibn Jurayj: Mālik yawmi-d-dīn, he said: the Day on which the people are requited through the reckoning.
---
Footnotes:
(81) "al-jabriyya" and "al-jabarūt" are the same, and it belongs to the attributes of Allah, the Exalted. "al-Jabbār" (the Almighty): the Overwhelming above His servants, who overwhelms them with what He wills of command and prohibition — sanctified and exalted is He.
(82) "al-ṣaghara" is the plural of "ṣāghir": the one who accepts humiliation and acknowledges it. And "al-adhilla" is the plural of "dhalīl" (humiliated).
(83) Report 166 — the weakness of this isnād has already been discussed at length at no. 137. This report, with the rest that follows under no. 167, Ibn Kathīr (1:46) transmitted without isnād and without attribution, and al-Suyūṭī (1:14) transmitted it and also attributed it to Ibn Abī Ḥātim. Ibn Kathīr said: "Thus also said others among the companions, the Followers, and the predecessors. And it is clear."
(84) In the manuscript it reads: "al-milk ʿalā al-malik" (ownership over king), and both come to the same thing.
(85) His word "aghfala" is an intransitive verb, not transitive. Its meaning is: he fell into heedlessness and forgetfulness and became entangled therein. It is well-rooted Arabic, even though it is not in the dictionaries, comparable to their expression "anjada" (he entered the Najd) and the like. It suffices as proof of its Arabicness that it is the language of al-Shāfiʿī, who used it frequently in the Risāla and the Umm. To this belongs his word in the Risāla (42, no. 136): "And through blind following (taqlīd) has become heedless whoever of them has become heedless."
(86) The order of the sentence is: "And to the one who claims that it is asked: the difference ... what principle or what indication," and what stands between is an insertion.
(87) The poem is by a poet of the transitional period (mukhaḍram), namely Ḥaḍramī ibn ʿĀmir al-Asadī, who came with a group of the Banū Asad to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, whereupon they all accepted Islam. The occasion of this poem: his brothers were nine in number, and they were sitting by a well that collapsed upon them, whereupon he inherited from them. His cousin Jazʾ ibn Mālik ibn Mujammiʿ envied him and said to him: "Who is like you? Your brothers have died and you have inherited from them, so that you are in affluence and joy." It was not long before Jazʾ sat with nine brothers of his by a well, which collapsed upon his brothers while he himself was saved. This reached Ḥaḍramī, who said: "Verily, to Allah we belong and to Him we return — a word that coincided with fate and kept rancor alive," referring to his word to Jazʾ: "may you then soon experience the same." "Azannahu bi-shayʾ" means: he accused him of it. See Amālī al-Qālī (1:67), al-Kāmil (1:41-42), and others.
(88) It is attributed in the Lisān (entry "qarn") and in Majāz al-Qurʾān (100) to a man of the Banū Asad. The verse is found in Sībawayh (1:295 / 2:7, 65) and is a well-known evidentiary verse. "Banū shāba qarnāhā" refers to a people; he says: sons of her who is called "shāba qarnāhā," that is to say: O sons of the old shepherdess, who has no care other than tying off ("taṣurru," that is to say: she binds the tying-cord around the udder until the milk gathers) and then milking. This is a contemptuous description of her. "al-Qarn" is here the braided lock of hair.
(89) See nos. 151 and 155.
(90) Connected to his word: "But had he known ...".
(91) The answer-clause of "But had he known ... and understood ...".
(92) Dīwān al-Hudhaliyyīn (2:101). In the printed edition it reads "jalda," and that is an error; his word "jidda" means his fresh youth. "al-Jidda" is the opposite of decay. "al-turāb al-aʿfar" is the white dust, which people seldom tread on account of its barrenness. Khālid was a friend of his from his tribe, whom he laments.
(93) The second part of his Dīwān (46). Ibn Sallām said in Ṭabaqāt fuḥūl al-shuʿarāʾ (p. 50), where he mentions this verse and another verse with it, that both are transmitted on the authority of al-Shaʿbī (Ibn Saʿd 6:178), and that they are attributed to Labīd; then he said: "And there is no disagreement that this is a fabrication with which the transmissions are augmented and with which one helps oneself to stay awake before the kings — and kings do not investigate thoroughly." "Ajhasha bi-l-bukāʾ": he made himself ready to weep and weeping choked him.
(94) Al-Kāmil of al-Mubarrad (1:191), Waqʿat Ṣiffīn of Naṣr ibn Muzāḥim (1:52), al-Mukhaṣṣaṣ (17:155).
(95) Al-Kāmil of al-Mubarrad (1:192), attributed to Yazīd ibn Abī al-Ṣaʿq al-Kilābī; likewise in Jamharat al-amthāl of al-ʿAskarī (196) and al-Mukhaṣṣaṣ (17:155); in the Lisān (entries "znʾ" and "dān") attributed to Khuwaylid ibn Nawfal al-Kilābī, and in al-Khizāna (4:230) to a certain Kilābī. It is said: al-Ḥārith ibn Abī Shamir al-Ghassānī used, whenever a woman of Qays ʿAylān pleased him, to send for her and abduct her. He took the daughter of Yazīd ibn al-Ṣaʿq al-Kilābī while her father was absent; when the latter returned, he was informed. He betook himself to him, stood before him, and said:
"O exalted king, do you not see how night and morning succeed each other?
Can you make the sun appear by night? And do you have power over the King of kings?
O Ḥāriṯ, be convinced that your kingship is perishable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ."
(96) Report 167 — its source has already been given at report 166.
(97) Report 168 — this isnād is one of the most frequently occurring isnāds in the tafsīr of al-Ṭabarī, if not the most frequently occurring; scarcely a verse-tafsīr is free of a transmission with this isnād. Al-Ṭabarī himself has spoken about it (p. 121 Būlāq, line 28 ff.), where he — after having mentioned the report on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd and Ibn ʿAbbās with this isnād — said: "If that is correct — and I do not know whether it is correct, since its isnād is dubious ...". He did not set out the cause of his doubt about the isnād, and despite his doubt he transmitted with it frequently. But he never made it a proof.
Nevertheless I consider it an isnād that requires careful examination. The imams of ḥadīth have voiced criticism of it, and of some of the transmitters in it. I have traced what they have said and what its examination calls for, as far as I could, and I have arrived at a judgment which I hope is correct, if Allah wills. And my success lies only with Allah:
As for the teacher of al-Ṭabarī, namely "Mūsā ibn Hārūn al-Hamdānī": I have found for him no biography or mention in any of the reference works I have at hand, except what al-Ṭabarī likewise transmits on his authority in his historical work, in more than fifty places in the first two volumes thereof. We have no need of his biography from the standpoint of criticism and assessment of reliability (al-jarḥ wa-l-taʿdīl), for this tafsīr which he transmits on the authority of ʿAmr ibn Ḥammād is known among the experts of the science of ḥadīth. It is no more than the transmission of a book, not the transmission of a single ḥadīth.
"And ʿAmr ibn Ḥammād": that is ʿAmr ibn Ḥammād ibn Ṭalḥa al-Qannād, sometimes attributed to his grandfather, so that one says ʿAmr ibn Ṭalḥa. He is reliable (thiqa); Muslim transmitted on his authority in his Ṣaḥīḥ; Ibn Saʿd gave his biography in the Ṭabaqāt (6:285) and said: "He was reliable, if Allah wills." He died in the year 222. Ibn Abī Ḥātim gave his biography in al-Jarḥ wa-l-taʿdīl (3/1/228) and transmitted on the authority of his father and Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn that they said about him: "truthful (ṣadūq)."
Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr al-Hamdānī: about him there is disagreement; Aḥmad declared him weak, Ibn Ḥibbān mentioned him among the reliable ones (al-Thiqāt: 410), al-Bukhārī gave his biography in al-Kabīr (1/2/53) without mentioning any criticism, and Ibn Abī Ḥātim gave his biography in al-Jarḥ wa-l-taʿdīl (1/1/332) and transmitted on the authority of Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn that he said: "Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr is reliable." We have held his reliability to be correct in Sharḥ al-Musnad, at ḥadīth 1286.
Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Abī Karīma al-Suddī: that is al-Suddī the Elder, a Qurashī by clientage, freedman of Zaynab bint Qays ibn Makhrama, of the Banū ʿAbd Manāf, as al-Bukhārī expressly mentions in both his historical works: al-Ṣaghīr (141-142) and al-Kabīr (1/1/361). He is a Follower (tābiʿī), who heard Anas, as al-Bukhārī likewise expressly mentions, and who transmitted on the authority of other companions and of many Followers. He is reliable; Muslim transmitted on his authority in his Ṣaḥīḥ; Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal declared him reliable, according to what Ibn Abī Ḥātim transmitted in al-Jarḥ wa-l-taʿdīl (1/1/184). He also transmitted on the authority of Aḥmad, who said: "Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn once said to me in the presence of ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Mahdī: 'al-Suddī is weak,' whereupon ʿAbd al-Raḥmān became angry and disapproved of what he said." In the Mīzān and the Tahdhīb it stands: "that it was said to al-Shaʿbī: 'al-Suddī has been granted a portion of the knowledge of the Qurʾān,' whereupon he said: 'He has been granted a portion of ignorance about the Qurʾān!'" In my opinion this word of al-Shaʿbī may be the basis of the statement of everyone who has unjustly criticized al-Suddī. Therefore al-Bukhārī paid no heed to this word of al-Shaʿbī and did not transmit it; rather, he transmitted in al-Kabīr on the authority of Musaddad, on the authority of Yaḥyā, who said: "I heard Ibn Abī Khālid say: 'al-Suddī is more knowledgeable in the Qurʾān than al-Shaʿbī.'" And he transmitted in both his historical works on the authority of Ibn al-Madīnī, on the authority of Yaḥyā — that is al-Qaṭṭān — who said: "I have not seen anyone mention al-Suddī other than with good, and no one has rejected him." In the Tahdhīb it stands: "al-ʿIjlī said: 'reliable, knowledgeable in tafsīr, a transmitter thereof.'" We have held his reliability to be correct in Sharḥ al-Musnad (807). Al-Suddī died in the year 127.
And "al-Suddī": with a ḍamma on the sīn and a doubling of the undotted dāl, an attribution to "al-sudda," that is the door, because he used to sit by the door (sudda) of the main mosque at Kūfa and sell head-coverings there.
Abū Mālik: that is al-Ghifārī, and his name is Ghazwān. He is a reliable Follower from Kūfa. Al-Bukhārī gave his biography in al-Kabīr (4/1/108), Ibn Saʿd in the Ṭabaqāt (6:206), and Ibn Abī Ḥātim in al-Jarḥ wa-l-taʿdīl (3/2/55), and Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn transmitted his declaration of reliability.
Abū Ṣāliḥ: that is the freedman of Umm Hāniʾ bint Abī Ṭālib, and his name is Bādhām, also called Bādhān. He is a reliable Follower; we have held his reliability to be correct in Sharḥ al-Musnad (2030). Al-Bukhārī gave his biography in al-Kabīr (1/2/144) and transmitted on the authority of Muḥammad ibn Bashshār, who said: "Ibn Mahdī rejected the ḥadīth of Abū Ṣāliḥ." Likewise Ibn Abī Ḥātim transmitted this in his biography in al-Jarḥ wa-l-taʿdīl (1/1/431-432) on the authority of Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, on the authority of Ibn Mahdī. But he also transmitted on the authority of Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd al-Qaṭṭān, who said: "I have not seen any of our companions reject Abū Ṣāliḥ, the freedman of Umm Hāniʾ, and I have not heard anyone of the people say anything detrimental about him; neither Shuʿba, nor Zāʾida, nor ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿUthmān rejected him." And he also transmitted on the authority of Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn, who said: "Abū Ṣāliḥ, the freedman of Umm Hāniʾ, is not weak; but when al-Kalbī transmits on his authority, then it is worth nothing, and when someone other than al-Kalbī transmits on his authority, then it is not weak — for al-Kalbī relates it sometimes according to his own opinion, sometimes on the authority of Abū Ṣāliḥ, and sometimes on the authority of Abū Ṣāliḥ, on the authority of Ibn ʿAbbās." He means by this that the criticism of what is transmitted on his authority is directed at the transmission of al-Kalbī, as is clear.
This concerning the first part of this isnād. For it is in reality two or three isnāds. The first of them is this, which connects to Ibn ʿAbbās.
The second part, or the second isnād: "and on the authority of Murra al-Hamdānī, on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd." The one who transmits on the authority of Murra al-Hamdānī is al-Suddī himself.
And Murra: that is Ibn Sharāḥīl al-Hamdānī al-Kūfī, a reliable Follower, one of the older Followers; about him there is no disagreement among them.
The third part, or the third isnād: "and on the authority of a number of companions of the Prophet ﷺ." This too is from the transmission of al-Suddī himself on the authority of a number of companions.
Al-Suddī thus transmits these tafsīr interpretations of Qurʾānic verses: on the authority of two Followers on the authority of Ibn ʿAbbās, on the authority of one Follower on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd, and from his own transmission on the authority of a number of companions.
The old authoritative scholars have statements about this tafsīr with these isnāds, which could give the impression that it was compiled by someone below al-Suddī among the transmitters on his authority; but I have since become certain that it is a book compiled by al-Suddī himself.
To this belongs the statement of Ibn Saʿd in the biography of "ʿAmr ibn Ḥammād al-Qannād" (6:285): "the possessor of the tafsīr of Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr on the authority of al-Suddī." And he said in the biography of "Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr" (6:261): "He was the transmitter of al-Suddī, he transmitted the tafsīr on his authority." And earlier he said in the biography of "al-Suddī" (6:225): "Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Suddī, the possessor of the tafsīr." And earlier he also said, in the biography of "Abū Mālik al-Ghifārī" (6:206): "Abū Mālik al-Ghifārī, the possessor of the tafsīr, and he was scant in ḥadīth."
But what most renders it plausible that it is a book that al-Suddī compiled, in which he gathered the tafsīr along these three ways, is the statement of Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal in the Tahdhīb (1:314), in the biography of al-Suddī: "He relates ḥadīth excellently, but this tafsīr with which he comes, to it he has given an isnād and exerted himself thereto." And the statement of the Ḥāfiẓ (Ibn Ḥajar) likewise in the Tahdhīb (1:315): "Al-Ṭabarī, Ibn Abī Ḥātim, and others have in their tafsīr works transmitted the tafsīr of al-Suddī, scattered over the surahs, along the way of Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr on his authority."
And the statement of al-Suyūṭī in al-Itqān (2:224), according to what he transmitted on the authority of al-Khalīl in al-Irshād: "And the tafsīr of Ismāʿīl al-Suddī, which he brings forth with isnāds to Ibn Masʿūd and Ibn ʿAbbās. And the imams have transmitted on the authority of al-Suddī, such as al-Thawrī and Shuʿba. But the tafsīr which he compiled, Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr transmitted, and about Asbāṭ there is no agreement. Nevertheless the most excellent of the tafsīr works is the tafsīr of al-Suddī." Then al-Suyūṭī said: "And the tafsīr of al-Suddī to which he referred, from it Ibn Jarīr brings forth much, along the way of al-Suddī on the authority of Abū Mālik and of Abū Ṣāliḥ on the authority of Ibn ʿAbbās, and of Murra on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd, and of a number of companions. Thus. And Ibn Abī Ḥātim brought forth nothing from it, because he had bound himself to bring forth only the most authentic that is transmitted. And al-Ḥākim brings forth things from it in his Mustadrak and declares them authentic, however only along the way of Murra on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd and a number of companions, without the first way. And Ibn Kathīr has said: that al-Suddī with this isnād transmits things in which there is strangeness (gharāba)."
The first thing we point out in these statements is the contradiction between the statements of the Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar and al-Suyūṭī: namely that Ibn Abī Ḥātim brought forth the tafsīr of al-Suddī scattered in his tafsīr, as al-Ṭabarī did — according to the transmission of the Ḥāfiẓ — while he precisely turned away from it — according to the transmission of al-Suyūṭī. I cannot assert anything about that with certainty, since I have not seen the tafsīr of Ibn Abī Ḥātim. But I incline to hold the transmission of Ibn Ḥajar to be correct, because he is more accurate and more precise in transmission than al-Suyūṭī.
Then al-Suyūṭī was correct in what he transmitted on the authority of al-Ḥākim. For the latter transmits a part of this tafsīr in the Mustadrak, with his isnād, to Aḥmad ibn Naṣr: "ʿAmr ibn Ṭalḥa al-Qannād related to us, Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr related to us, on the authority of Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Suddī, on the authority of Murra al-Hamdānī, on the authority of ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd, and on the authority of a number of companions of the Prophet ﷺ." Then he declares it authentic according to the standard of Muslim, and al-Dhahabī concurs with him in his Talkhīṣ. To this belongs what is found in the Mustadrak (2:258, 260, 273, 321).
And al-Ḥākim is correct in this, for Muslim has transmitted from all the transmitters of this isnād — from ʿAmr ibn Ḥammād ibn Ṭalḥa al-Qannād to Murra al-Hamdānī. But he did not transmit from Abū Ṣāliḥ Bādhām, nor from Abū Mālik al-Ghifārī, in the first part of the isnād with which al-Suddī transmitted his tafsīr interpretations.
As for the word of the imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal about al-Suddī: "but this tafsīr with which he comes, to it he has given an isnād and exerted himself thereto" — by it he does not mean what could be understood from its outward meaning, namely that he invented an isnād that had no foundation; for if that were so, he would — according to his judgment — be a liar and a falsifier of transmission. He means rather — in my opinion, and Allah knows best — that he gathered these tafsīr interpretations from his transmission on the authority of these people: from Abū Mālik and Abū Ṣāliḥ on the authority of Ibn ʿAbbās, and from Murra on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd, and from a number of companions, and that he then brought them all forth in detail at the verses at which something of tafsīr was transmitted from this one or that one or these, and that he gave them all this one isnād and exerted himself to present them all according to one and the same presentation.
I mean: that he gathered the scattered parts of these tafsīr interpretations into one book, to which he gave at the beginning these isnāds, meaning thereby that what he transmits of tafsīr in this book does not fall outside these isnāds. I can scarcely understand that he transmits every word of these tafsīr interpretations on the authority of all of them together. It is therefore a compiled book on tafsīr, in which in a general sense — not in detail — recourse is had to the transmission of these.
What has only brought the people into this confusion is the scattering of these tafsīr interpretations over their places, such as the procedure of al-Ṭabarī which we have before us, and the procedure of Ibn Abī Ḥātim — according to what the Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar transmitted — and the procedure of al-Ḥākim in the Mustadrak. I almost dare to assert with certainty that this scattering is an error of theirs, because it gives the reader the impression that every word of these tafsīr interpretations is transmitted with all these isnāds together, since they bring them forth in full at each isnād. And al-Ḥākim chooses out one isnād which he mentions at each tafsīr interpretation thereof that he wishes to transmit. It may be that what al-Ḥākim — for example — transmitted with the isnād to Ibn Masʿūd does not belong to what al-Suddī transmitted verbatim on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd; rather it perhaps belongs to what he transmitted of the tafsīr of Ibn ʿAbbās, or to what a number of companions transmitted, from each of whom he transmitted something, so that he provided the whole with an isnād, but not the details.
And al-Suddī was no innovator in this, and this is no criticism of him and no blemish. He only means to trace these tafsīr interpretations back to the companions, some on the authority of Ibn ʿAbbās, some on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd, and some on the authority of others among them. And others besides him among the memorizers of ḥadīth and their imams have done something similar to what he did, and that was no point of criticism against them; rather, the memorizers after them accepted it and brought it forth in their collections. There comes to my mind now of this the procedure of his contemporary: the imam Ibn Shihāb al-Zuhrī. For he transmitted the account of the ḥadīth of the slander (al-ifk) and said: "Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyib, ʿUrwa ibn al-Zubayr, ʿAlqama ibn Waqqāṣ, and ʿUbaydullāh ibn ʿAbdillāh ibn ʿUtba ibn Masʿūd informed me about the ḥadīth of ʿĀʾisha, the wife of the Prophet ﷺ, when the people of the slander said about her what they said, whereupon Allah cleared her of what they said. And they all told me a part of her account, and some retained her account better than others and rendered it more accurately. And I have retained from each of them the account that he told me, and a part of their account confirms the other part," and so forth.
Thus he mentioned the ḥadīth in its full length. It is in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (2:333-335), and it will come in the tafsīr of al-Ṭabarī (18:71-74 Būlāq). The imam Aḥmad and al-Bukhārī transmitted it in his Ṣaḥīḥ, as in the tafsīr of Ibn Kathīr (6:68-73). Then Ibn Kathīr said: "And thus also Ibn Isḥāq transmitted it on the authority of al-Zuhrī, who said: 'And Yaḥyā ibn ʿAbbād ibn ʿAbdillāh ibn al-Zubayr related to me, on the authority of his father, on the authority of ʿĀʾisha; and ʿAbdullāh ibn Abī Bakr ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿAmr ibn Ḥazm related to me, on the authority of ʿAmra, on the authority of ʿĀʾisha.'" The last isnād of Ibn Isḥāq is likewise in al-Ṭabarī. Both isnāds Ibn Isḥāq transmitted on the authority of al-Zuhrī, in the Sīra (p. 731 of the Sīra of Ibn Hishām).
And the examples of this are numerous; it is now difficult to trace them.
And this examination has yielded us the benefit that the tafsīr of al-Suddī belongs to the first books that were compiled in the transmission of ḥadīth and the transmissions (āthār).
And he belongs to a high generation, to the generation of the teachers of Mālik among the Followers.
Furthermore: as for this report itself, al-Ḥākim transmitted it in the Mustadrak (2:258), with the isnād to which we have referred, from the transmission of al-Suddī on the authority of Murra on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd, and on the authority of a number of companions. And he said: "This is an authentic ḥadīth according to the standard of Muslim, but they did not transmit it." Al-Dhahabī concurred with him. And al-Suyūṭī transmitted it in al-Durr al-manthūr (1:14) on the authority of Ibn Jarīr and al-Ḥākim, and declared it authentic, on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd and a number of companions.
(98) Transmission 169 — al-Suyūṭī transmitted it (1:14) and attributed it to ʿAbd al-Razzāq and ʿAbd ibn Ḥumayd. And it is clear in this transmission of al-Ṭabarī — that it stems from the Muṣannaf of ʿAbd al-Razzāq. And al-Shawkānī (1:12) attributed it to both, as well as to al-Ṭabarī.
(99) Transmission 170 — this isnād has already been discussed at no. 144. As for the wording, none of them has mentioned it.
