Tafsir at-Tabari: Jami' al-Bayan - Dar al-Tarbiyah wa al-Turath Edition

Volume 1 · Page 167

Translation · EN

AI translation

And according to what we have said regarding the Interpretation of His statement: {Day of Recompense}, narrations have come from the Predecessors (Salaf) among the Exegetes, along with the validation of their Interpretation by the textual attestations that they used to interpret that.

167 - Abū Kurayb Muḥammad ibn al-ʿAlāʾ narrated to us, he said: ʿUthmān ibn Saʿīd narrated to us, he said: Bishr ibn ʿUmāra narrated to us, he said: Abū Rawq narrated to us, from al-Ḍaḥḥāk, from ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās: {Day of Recompense}, he said: "The Day of the Reckoning of creation, and it is the Day of Resurrection, when He requites them for their deeds—if good, then good; and if evil, then evil, except for whom He pardons, for the command is His command." Then he said: {Unquestionably, to Him belongs the creation and the command} [Sūrat al-Aʿrāf: 54]. (1)

168 - And Mūsā ibn Hārūn al-Hamdānī narrated to me, he said: ʿAmr ibn Ḥammād al-Qannād narrated to us, he said: Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr al-Hamdānī narrated to us, from Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Suddī, from Abū Mālik, and from Abū Ṣāliḥ, from Ibn ʿAbbās—and from Murra al-Hamdānī, from Ibn Masʿūd—and from people among the Companions of the Prophet, Peace and blessings of God be upon him: {Mālik of the Day of Recompense}, it is the Day of Reckoning. (2)

169 - Al-Ḥasan ibn Yaḥyā narrated to us, he said: ʿAbd al-Razzāq informed us, he said:

Notes

(1) Report 167 - Its extraction was previously given in Report 166.
(2) Report 168 - This chain of transmission is one of the most frequently recurring chains in the Tafsir of al-Ṭabarī, if not the most frequent of them. Hardly a verse's tafsir is free from a narration through this chain of transmission. Al-Ṭabarī himself addressed it in (p. 121 Būlāq, line 28 ff.), where he said, having mentioned the report from Ibn Masʿūd and Ibn ʿAbbās through this chain of transmission: "If that is authentic—and I do not know it to be authentic, as he was doubtful about its chain of transmission..." He did not explain the reason for his doubt regarding its chain of transmission, even though, despite his doubt, he narrated through it extensively. However, he never relied on it as an authoritative proof.
However, I view it as a chain of transmission that requires precise research. The leaders of Hadith have commented on it and on some of its narrators. I have tracked down what they said and what its investigation calls for, to the best of my ability, and an opinion on it has become apparent to me, which I hope is correct, God willing. And my success is only through God:
As for the Sheikh of al-Ṭabarī, namely "Mūsā ibn Hārūn al-Hamdānī": I have not found any biographical entry for him, nor any mention of him in any of the reference works at my disposal, except for what al-Ṭabarī himself narrates from him in his Tārīkh, which exceeds fifty instances in its first two volumes. We have no need for a biographical evaluation of him regarding discrediting and attestation, for this Tafsir that he narrates from ʿAmr ibn Ḥammād is well known among the people of knowledge of Hadith. It is nothing other than the narration of a book, not the narration of a specific individual Hadith.
And "ʿAmr ibn Ḥammād": He is ʿAmr ibn Ḥammād ibn Ṭalḥa al-Qannād, and he is sometimes attributed to his grandfather, being called ʿAmr ibn Ṭalḥa. He is trustworthy; Muslim narrated from him in his Ṣaḥīḥ, and Ibn Saʿd gave his biography in al-Ṭabaqāt (6:285), stating: "He was trustworthy, God willing." He died in the year 222 AH. Ibn Abī Ḥātim also gave his biography in al-Jarḥ wa-l-Taʿdīl (3/1/228) and narrated from his father and Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn that they both said regarding him: "Truthful." Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr al-Hamdānī: There is disagreement regarding him. Aḥmad graded him Da'if (Weak), while Ibn Ḥibbān included him in al-Thiqāt (410). Al-Bukhārī gave his biography in al-Kabīr (1/2/53) and did not mention any discrediting against him. Ibn Abī Ḥātim gave his biography in al-Jarḥ wa-l-Taʿdīl (1/1/332) and narrated from Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn that he said: "Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr is trustworthy." We preferred his attestation of reliability in the commentary on , in Hadith 1286. Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Abī Karīma al-Suddī: He is al-Suddī al-Kabīr, Qurashī by patronage (), client of Zaynab bint Qays ibn Makhrama, from Banū ʿAbd Manāf, as explicitly stated by al-Bukhārī in his two histories: (141–142) and (1/1/361). He is a Successor (Tabi'i) who heard from Anas, as al-Bukhārī also explicitly stated, and he narrated from other Companions and from many Successors (Tabi'i). He is trustworthy. Muslim narrated from him in his , and Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal declared him trustworthy, as narrated by Ibn Abī Ḥātim in (1/1/184). He also narrated from Aḥmad, who said: "Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn said to me one day in the presence of ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Mahdī: 'Al-Suddī is Da'if (Weak).' Whereupon ʿAbd al-Raḥmān became angry and disliked what he said." In and : "It was said to al-Shaʿbī: 'Al-Suddī has been given a share of knowledge of the Qurʾān.' So he said: 'He has been given a share of ignorance of the Qurʾān! '" In my view, this remark by al-Shaʿbī may be the foundation for the statement of everyone who spoke against al-Suddī unjustly. For this reason, al-Bukhārī paid no heed to this statement by al-Shaʿbī and did not narrate it; rather, he narrated in from Musaddad, from Yaḥyā, who said: "I heard Ibn Abī Khālid say: 'Al-Suddī is more knowledgeable of the Qurʾān than al-Shaʿbī.'" And he narrated in his two histories from Ibn al-Madīnī, from Yaḥyā—that is, al-Qaṭṭān—who said: "I have not seen anyone mention al-Suddī except favorably, and no one abandoned him." In : "Al-ʿIjlī said: 'Trustworthy, knowledgeable in Tafsir, and a major narrator of it.'" We preferred his attestation of reliability in the commentary on (807). Al-Suddī died in the year 127 AH. And "al-Suddī": With a on the and a doubled , both unpointed, in attribution to "al-Suddah", which is the doorway, because he used to sit by the doorway () of the congregational mosque in Kūfa and sell headcovers () there. Abū Mālik: He is al-Ghifārī, and his name is Ghazwān. He is a trustworthy Kūfan Successor (Tabi'i). Al-Bukhārī gave his biography in (4/1/108), Ibn Saʿd in (6:206), and Ibn Abī Ḥātim in (3/2/55), and Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn narrated his attestation of reliability. Abū Ṣāliḥ: He is the client of Umm Hāniʾ bint Abī Ṭālib, and his name is Bādhām, or said to be Bādhān. He is a trustworthy Successor (Tabi'i); we preferred his attestation of reliability in the commentary on (2030). Al-Bukhārī gave his biography in (1/2/144) and narrated from Muḥammad ibn Bashshār who said: "Ibn Mahdī abandoned the Hadith of Abū Ṣāliḥ." Likewise, Ibn Abī Ḥātim narrated in his biography in (1/1/431–432) from Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, from Ibn Mahdī. However, he also narrated from Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd al-Qaṭṭān that he said: "I have not seen anyone among our companions abandon Abū Ṣāliḥ, the client of Umm Hāniʾ, nor have I heard anyone among the people say anything against him; neither Shuʿba, nor Zāʾida, nor ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿUthmān abandoned him." He also narrated from Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn that he said: "Abū Ṣāliḥ, the client of Umm Hāniʾ, is fine; but when al-Kalbī narrates from him, it is nothing, whereas when someone other than al-Kalbī narrates from him, there is no harm in it, because al-Kalbī narrates it sometimes from his own opinion, sometimes from Abū Ṣāliḥ, and sometimes from Abū Ṣāliḥ from Ibn ʿAbbās." By this he meant that the criticism concerning what is narrated from him lies in the narration of al-Kalbī, as is apparent. This concerns the first section of this chain of transmission. For in reality, it consists of two or three chains of transmission. The first of them is this one, contiguous to Ibn ʿAbbās. The second section, or the second chain of transmission: "And from Murra al-Hamdānī from Ibn Masʿūd." The one who narrates from Murra al-Hamdānī is al-Suddī himself. And Murra: He is Ibn Sharāḥīl al-Hamdānī al-Kūfī. He is a trustworthy Successor (Tabi'i), from among the senior Successors (Tabi'i), about whom there is no disagreement among them. The third section, or the third chain of transmission: "And from people among the Companions of the Prophet peace and blessings of God be upon him." This also is from the narration of al-Suddī himself from people among the Companions. Thus al-Suddī narrates these interpretations for verses of the Qurʾān: from two Successors (Tabi'i) from Ibn ʿAbbās, from one Successor (Tabi'i) from Ibn Masʿūd, and from his own narration from people among the Companions. The early leading scholars have remarks concerning this Tafsir with these chains of transmission that might give the false impression that it was authored by narrators below al-Suddī who transmitted from him; however, I later became certain that it is a book authored by al-Suddī himself. Among these is the statement of Ibn Saʿd in the biography of "ʿAmr ibn Ḥammād al-Qannād" (6:285): "Transmitter of the Tafsir of Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr from al-Suddī." And he said in the biography of "Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr" (6:261): "He was the main narrator of al-Suddī; he narrated the Tafsir from him." Before that, in the biography of "al-Suddī" (6:225), he said: "Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Suddī, author of the Tafsir." And before that as well, in the biography of "Abū Mālik al-Ghifārī" (6:206): "Abū Mālik al-Ghifārī, owner of the Tafsir, and he narrated few Hadiths." However, what supports the likelihood that it is a book authored by al-Suddī, in which he gathered Tafsir through these three paths, is the statement of Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal in (1:314), in the biography of al-Suddī: "He is good in Hadith, except that this Tafsir which he brings, he constructed a chain of transmission for it and took pains over it." And the statement of al-Ḥāfiẓ in as well (1:315): "Al-Ṭabarī, Ibn Abī Ḥātim, and others narrated in their Tafsirs the Tafsir of al-Suddī, dispersed throughout the Suras, via the transmission of Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr from him." And the statement of al-Suyūṭī in (2:224), citing what he quoted from al-Khalīl in : "And the Tafsir of Ismāʿīl al-Suddī, he presents it with chains of transmission reaching Ibn Masʿūd and Ibn ʿAbbās. Imams such as al-Thawrī and Shuʿba narrated from al-Suddī. However, the Tafsir that he collected was narrated by Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr, and Asbāṭ is not agreed upon. Nevertheless, the most exemplary of Tafsirs is the Tafsir of al-Suddī." Then al-Suyūṭī said: "And the Tafsir of al-Suddī [which] he referred to, Ibn Jarīr cites much of it through the route of al-Suddī, from Abū Mālik and Abū Ṣāliḥ, from Ibn ʿAbbās, and from Murra, from Ibn Masʿūd, and [from] people among the Companions, like this. Ibn Abī Ḥātim did not cite anything from it because he committed himself to outputting only the most authentic of what was transmitted. Al-Ḥākim cites items from it in his and declares them authentic, but only through the route of Murra from Ibn Masʿūd and people, without the first route. Ibn Kathīr said: 'Al-Suddī narrates through this chain of transmission matters in which there is strangeness.'" The first thing we point out among these statements is the contradiction between the statements of al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar and al-Suyūṭī as to whether Ibn Abī Ḥātim cited the Tafsir of al-Suddī dispersed throughout his Tafsir, as al-Ṭabarī did, according to the report of al-Ḥāfiẓ, or whether he turned away from it, according to the report of al-Suyūṭī. I cannot assert anything decisively on this matter, since I have not seen the Tafsir of Ibn Abī Ḥātim. However, I am inclined to prefer the report of Ibn Ḥajar, as he is more cautious and precise in reporting than al-Suyūṭī. Furthermore, al-Suyūṭī was truthful in what he quoted from al-Ḥākim. For he narrates some of this Tafsir in , with his chain of transmission reaching Aḥmad ibn Naṣr: "ʿAmr ibn Ṭalḥa al-Qannād narrated to us, Asbāṭ ibn Naṣr narrated to us, from Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Suddī, from Murra al-Hamdānī, from ʿAbd Allāh ibn Masʿūd, and from people among the Companions of the Prophet peace and blessings of God be upon him." He then authenticates it according to the conditions of Muslim, and al-Dhahabī agrees with him in his . Examples of this in are (2:258, 260, 273, 321). And al-Ḥākim in that regard is correct, for Muslim narrated for all the men of this chain of transmission, from ʿAmr ibn Ḥammād ibn Ṭalḥa al-Qannād down to Murra al-Hamdānī. He did not narrate for Abū Ṣāliḥ Bādhām nor for Abū Mālik al-Ghifārī, who are in the first section of the chain of transmission through which al-Suddī narrated his interpretations. As for the remark of Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal concerning al-Suddī, "except that this Tafsir which he brings, he constructed a chain of transmission for it and took pains over it," he does not mean what might be understood from its literal sense: that he fabricated a chain of transmission that had no basis; for had that been the case, he would have been—in his view—a liar and a forger of narration. Rather, he means—as I see it, and God knows best—that he collected these interpretations from his transmission from these individuals: from Abū Mālik and Abū Ṣāliḥ from Ibn ʿAbbās, from Murra from Ibn Masʿūd, and from people among the Companions, then he presented them all detailed under the verses regarding which some Tafsir was narrated from this one, that one, or those ones, making this chain of transmission for all of them, and taking pains to present them under one unified transmission. I mean: he gathered the scattered parts of these interpretations into a single book, placing these chains of transmission at its beginning, intending thereby that whatever interpretations he narrated in this book do not fall outside these chains of transmission. I can hardly conceive that he narrated every single letter of these interpretations from all of them combined. Thus, it is an authored book of Tafsir whose reference is narration from these individuals in general, not in every detail. Rather, what led people into this misconception was the separation of these interpretations into their respective places, such as the practice of al-Ṭabarī before us, the practice of Ibn Abī Ḥātim according to what al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar quoted, and the practice of al-Ḥākim in . I am almost certain that this separation was a mistake on their part, because it gives the reader the false impression that every single letter of these interpretations is narrated through all of these chains of transmission, since they cite them in full with every chain of transmission, while al-Ḥākim selects a single chain from among them to mention with every piece of Tafsir he intends to narrate. It may well be that what al-Ḥākim narrated, for example, with the chain reaching Ibn Masʿūd, was not textually from what al-Suddī narrated from Ibn Masʿūd; rather, it might be from what he narrated from the Tafsir of Ibn ʿAbbās, or from what people among the Companions narrated, having narrated something from each of them, thus attributing the whole while not attributing every detail individually. Al-Suddī was not unique in doing this, nor does this constitute a flaw or discrediting against him. He merely intended to attribute these interpretations to the Companions—some from Ibn ʿAbbās, some from Ibn Masʿūd, and some from others among them. Others among the Hadith masters and leading scholars did something similar to what he did, and that was never considered a point of criticism against them; rather, subsequent Hadith masters accepted them and recorded them in their collections. What comes to mind now in this regard is the practice of his contemporary: Imam Ibn Shihāb al-Zuhrī. For he narrated the story of the Hadith of the Slander (), saying: "Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyib, ʿUrwa ibn al-Zubayr, ʿAlqama ibn Waqqāṣ, and ʿUbayd Allāh ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿUtba ibn Masʿūd informed me regarding the Hadith of ʿĀʾisha, the wife of the Prophet peace and blessings of God be upon him, when the people of slander said about her what they said, and God declared her innocent of what they said. Each of them narrated to me a portion of her Hadith, and some of them were more attentive to her Hadith than others and more reliable in narration; and I have comprehended from each one of them the Hadith that he narrated to me, and parts of their narrations confirm other parts..." etc. Then he mentioned the Hadith at length. It is in (2:333–335) and will come in the Tafsir of al-Ṭabarī (18:71–74 Būlāq). Imam Aḥmad and al-Bukhārī narrated it in his , as in the Tafsir of Ibn Kathīr (6:68–73). Then Ibn Kathīr said: "And likewise Ibn Isḥāq narrated it from al-Zuhrī similarly, saying: 'And Yaḥyā ibn ʿAbbād ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Zubayr narrated to me from his father, from ʿĀʾisha; and ʿAbd Allāh ibn Abī Bakr ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿAmr ibn Ḥazm narrated to me from ʿAmra, from ʿĀʾisha.'" The latter chain of transmission of Ibn Isḥāq is also in al-Ṭabarī. Both chains of transmission were narrated by Ibn Isḥāq from al-Zuhrī in (p. 731 of ). Examples of this are numerous and difficult to track down at present. This investigation has benefited us by showing that the Tafsir of al-Suddī is among the earliest books authored in narrating Hadiths and traditions. And it belongs to a high generation, the generation of Mālik's teachers among the Successors (Tabi'i). Furthermore, as for this specific report itself, al-Ḥākim narrated it in (2:258) with the chain of transmission to which we referred, from the narration of al-Suddī from Murra from Ibn Masʿūd, and from people among the Companions. He said: "This Hadith is Sahih (Authentic) according to the conditions of Muslim, though they did not record it." Al-Dhahabī agreed with him. Al-Suyūṭī cited it in (1:14) from Ibn Jarīr and al-Ḥākim, declaring it authentic, from Ibn Masʿūd and people among the Companions.

This translation was produced with AI assistance and is part of an ongoing human-review process. Found a mistake? Use the feedback option in the reader menu.

Arabic (Source)

وبما قُلنا في تأويل قوله (يوم الدين) جاءت الآثار عن السلف من المفسِّرين، مع تصحيح الشواهد تأويلَهم الذي تأوّلوه في ذلك.١٦٧ - حدثنا أبو كريب محمد بن العلاء، قال: حدثنا عثمان بن سعيد، قال: حدثنا بشر بن عُمارة، قال: حدثنا أبو رَوق، عن الضحاك، عن عبد الله بن عباس: (يَوْمِ الدِّينِ) ، قال: يوم حساب الخلائق، وهو يوم القيامة، يدينهم بأعمالهم، إن خيرًا فخيرًا، وإن شرًّا فشرًّا، إلا من عَفا عنه، فالأمرُ أمرُه. ثم قال: (أَلا لَهُ الْخَلْقُ وَالأَمْرُ) [سورة الأعراف: ٥٤] . (١)١٦٨ - وحدثني موسى بن هارون الهَمْدَاني، قال: حدثنا عمرو بن حماد القَنَّاد، قال: حدثنا أسباط بن نصر الهمداني، عن إسماعيل بن عبد الرحمن السُّدِّي، عن أبي مالك، وعن أبي صالح، عن ابن عباس - وعن مرة الهمداني عن ابن مسعود - وعن ناس من أصحاب النبي ﷺ: (مَلِكِ يَوْمِ الدِّينِ) ، هو يوم الحساب. (٢)١٦٩ - حدثنا الحسن بن يحيى، قال: أخبرنا عبد الرزاق، قال: أخبرنا

Notes

(١) الخبر ١٦٧ - سبق تخريجه في الخبر ١٦٦.(٢) الخبر ١٦٨ - هذا الإسناد من أكثر الأسانيد دورانًا في تفسير الطبري، إن لم يكن أكثرها، فلا يكاد يخلو تفسير آية من رواية بهذا الإسناد. وقد عرض الطبري نفسه في (ص ١٢١ بولاق، سطر: ٢٨ وما بعده) ، فقال، وقد ذكر الخبر عن ابن مسعود وابن عباس بهذا الإسناد: "فإن كان ذلك صحيحًا، ولست أعلمه صحيحًا، إذ كان بإسناده مرتابًا. . . . ". ولم يبين علة ارتيابه في إسناده، وهو مع ارتيابه قد أكثر من الرواية به. ولكنه لم يجعلها حجة قط.بيد أني أراه إسنادا يحتاج إلى بحث دقيق. ولأئمة الحديث كلام فيه وفي بعض رجاله. وقد تتبعت ما قالوا وما يدعو إليه بحثه، ما استطعت، وبدا لي فيه رأي، أرجو أن يكون صوابًا، إن شاء الله. وما توفيقي إلا بالله:أما شيخ الطبري، وهو "موسى بن هارون الهمداني": فما وجدت له ترجمة، ولا ذكرًا في شيء مما بين يدي من المراجع، إلا ما يرويه عنه الطبري أيضًا في تاريخه، وهو أكثر من خمسين موضعًا في الجزئين الأول والثاني منه. وما بنا حاجة إلى ترجمته من جهة الجرح والتعديل، فإن هذا التفسير الذي يرويه عن عمرو بن حماد، معروف عند أهل العلم بالحديث. وما هو إلا رواية كتاب، لا رواية حديث بعينه."وعمرو بن حماد": هو عمرو بن حماد بن طلحة القناد، وقد ينسب إلى جده، فيقال عمرو بن طلحة، وهو ثقة، روى عنه مسلم في صحيحه، وترجمه ابن سعد في الطبقات ٦: ٢٨٥، وقال: "وكان ثقة إن شاء الله" مات سنة ٢٢٢. وترجمه ابن أبي حاتم في الجرح والتعديل ٣ / ١ / ٢٢٨، وروى عن أبيه ويحيى بن معين أنهما قالا فيه: "صدوق".