Hadith Literature

The Sahīfahs, which emerged by writing down the words of the Messenger of Allah, constituted the first written example of hadith literature. Later on, the hadiths were edited and then classified by various methods, and a large number of hadith books began to be seen from the early periods. The books of hadith became a source that conveyed the words and behaviours of the Messenger of Allah, and thus the observations of the Companions who saw and learned his way of understanding and applying Islam, and the religious interpretations of the tâbiîs, who were the students of the generation of the Companions, to later Muslims. The careful transmission of the material contained in these works has led to the books on “narrated hadith”, and the studies on determining the degree of soundness of the material in these works have led to the works on “dirāyat al-hadith”.

A) Books of Rivâyet al-hadîs. The activity of recording hadiths in oral and written form since the time of the Prophet led Muslims to produce different types of works. At first, the most important issue was to record the hadiths verbatim without any system, but in later periods, the needs such as making easier use of the hadith material and reaching the sought hadiths more quickly made it necessary to compose books with different methods. These works, a significant part of which have survived to the present day, are grouped under various systems.

1-Sahīfas. Letters, treaties, and covenants dictated by the Prophet on various occasions (Muhammad Hamīdullah, al-Was̱āʾiḳ al-siyāsiyya, n.d.; Ahmad Zaqī Safwāt, I, 25-90) and the sahīfas written by some of the Companions are the first written documents of the era of the Prophet. The most important of these sahīfas are those of ‘Abdullah b. ‘Amr (al-Dārimī, “Muḳaddimah,” 42; Rāmhurmuzī, pp. 364-367), Saʿd b. ‘Ubāda (al-Tirmidhī, “Aḥkām,” 13), Muʿāz b. Jabal (Musnad, V, 228), ‘Ali b. Abū Ṣālib (Ṣaḥīfet al-ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib ʿan Rasūlillāh, ed. Rif’at Fawzī ‘Abd al-Muttalib, Cairo 1406/1986), ‘Amr b. Hazm al-Ansārī (al-Nasāʾī, “Ḳasāma,” 44-47), Samurah b. Jundub (Ibn Ḥajar, al-Tahẕīb al-Tahẕīb, IV, 236-237), ‘Abdullah b. ‘Abbas (al-Khatīb al-Baghdādī, Taḳyīd al-ʿilm, pp. 92, 102), Jābir b. ‘Abdullah (al-Tirmidhī, “Büyūʿ,” 72), ‘Abdullah b. Abū Awfā (al-Bukhārī, “Jihād,” 32), and Anas b. Malik (ibid, pp. 95-96). The Ṣaḥīfat al-Ṣaḥīf al-Ḥammām b. Munabih (al-Ṣaḥīf al-ṣaḥīḥa), dictated by Abū Hurayra to his disciple al-Ḥammām b. Munabih, was published for the first time by Muhammad Hamīdullah (MMIADm., 1953, 1954; Rif’at Fawzī ‘Abd al-Muttalib also published it with a commentary on its hadiths, Cairo 1406/1985). The sahīfahs, which were the product of the Sahāba period and whose scripts contain no one other than the sahāba who heard the hadīth from the Messenger of Allah (saw), were also called “copies” (for detailed information on sahīfahs and copies, see. Bakr b. Abdullah Abū Zayd, op. cit.).

2-Juzes. The works containing hadiths narrated by a Companion or a later generation or narrations on a certain subject were also called juz, and many books of this type were composed (for extensive information, see. Quṭānī, pp. 132-172; Koçak, op. cit.; DİA, VIII, 147-148).

3-Books. After the completion of hadiths, they began to be classified either according to their subjects or according to the names of the narrators. Some of the chapters such as “iman”, “ilim” and “edeb” of the works classified according to subjects such as the Qurtub-i Sitte were written by some of the early muhaddithis, and sometimes by the authors of the jāmi’ and sunnahs as separate works, and these works were generally referred to as “kitāb”. The Kitāb al-Zuhd wa’r-reḳāʾiḳ of ‘Abdullah b. Mubāraq (d. 181/797), which contains the sayings of the Prophet and the first two generations on subjects such as worship, ihlād, tawakkul, truthfulness, humility, and conviction (nşr. Habībürrahman al-A’zamī, Malegon/India 1966; Beirut, ts.), Abū Ubayd Qāsim b. Sallām’s Kitāb al-‘Imān (ed. Muhammad Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī, Kuwayt 1405/1985), Abū Ḥaysamah Zuhair b. Harb’s Kitāb al-ʿIlm (ed. Muhammad Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī, al-Kuwayt 1405/1985; tahkik and trc. Salih Tuğ, Istanbul 1984), al-Bukhārī’s al-Adab al-mufred, in which he collected hadiths on good morals (DIA, X, 411-412), al-Tirmidhī’s al-Ṣaḥīzī’s al-Ṣaḥīḥ on the Prophet’s morals and external behaviour, and al-Ṭirmidhī’s al-Ṣaḥīḥ on the Prophet’s morals and external behaviour. Tirmidhī’s Kitāb al-Shamāʾil, also known as Shamāʾil al-nabawiyya (ed. Ṭāḥā Abdurraūf Saʿd, Cairo 1988; ed. ʿAbdullah al-Shaʿ’ār, Beirut 1992), in which he collected hadīths about the Prophet’s morals, appearance, dress, and lifestyle, are the main examples of this genre (for the extensive literature on this subject, see Kettānī, pp. 42-90).

4-Musnads. The main characteristic of the musnad is the ordering of the hadiths according to the names of the companions, regardless of their subjects or whether they are sahih or weak. In this arrangement, the names of the Companions may be mentioned alphabetically, as well as their priority in their entry into Islam or the nobility of their lineage or their tribes. The mursnads attributed to some of the Companions or those who lived in later periods were classified in their names after their deaths. For example, Abū Bakr Aḥmad b. ʿAlī al-Marwazī (d. 292/905) collected 142 hadiths narrated by the Prophet Abū Bakr under the title Musnad al-Abī Baqr al-Ṣiddīḳ (ed. Shuʿayb al-Arnaūt, Beirut 1390/1970; tr. Ahmad Dawudoglu, Istanbul 1981), and later al-Suyūtī compiled 695 hadiths narrated by Abū Bakr or related to him in his Jamʿ al-jawāmiʿ under the title Musnad al-Abī Baqri al-Ṣiddīḳ (Bombay 1401/1981). Other Companions also have extant musnads. There are more than twenty musnads compiled by Abū Ḥanīfa’s disciples of hadiths narrated from him (India 1300; Istanbul 1309; Lahore 1312; Leknev 1318; Cairo 1327; Berlin 1929; Beirut 1985, etc.). Abū al-Muayyed Muḥammad b. Mahmūd al-Khārizmī collected ten of these musnāns in his work Jāmiʿ al-masānīd (I-II, Hyderābād 1913; I-II, Beirut 1987). Abdullah b. Mubārak’s al-Musnad (ed. Subhī al-Sāmerrāʾī, Riyadh 1987; ed. Mustafa ‘Uthman Muhammad, Beirut 1411/1991), Imam Shafi’i’s al-Musnad (al-Arre 1306; Cairo 1327, 1952 with al-‘Um) show that this tradition continued. Among the most well-known mursnads are Abū Dāwūd al-Tayālisī’s al-Musnad (Haydarābād 1321/1903; Beirut 1406/1985), which contains the narrations of 281 Companions and was compiled in his name after his death, Abdullah ibn. Zubayr al-Humaydi’s al-Musnadī’s al-Musnad, which compiles 1300 narrations (ed. Habībürrahman al-A’zamī, I-II, Hyderābād 1381-1382/1962-1963), Ahmad b. Hanbal’s al-Musnad, which contains 30,000 hadiths narrated by 904 Companions (I-VI, Cairo 1313; ed. Ahmad Muhammad Shāqir – Hamza Ahmad ez-Zayn, I-XX, Cairo 1416/1995). Al-Musnad al-kabīr, written by Baqī b. Mahlūd and containing 30,969 hadiths narrated by 1013 Companions, has not survived.

There are some musnad studies in our time. Bashshār Awwād Maʿrūf and four of his colleagues have published al-Muwāṭṭaʾ of Imam Mālik, al-Muṣnadī, Ahmad b. Ḥanbal, and ‘Abd b. ʿAbd. Humayd, Ṣaḥīḥayn and the four famous Sunnīs, Ibn Hudaymah’s al-Ṣaḥīḥ, some well-known books of al-Bukhārī and al-Nasāʾī, and al-Tirmidhī’s Shamāʾil al-nabawiyya, first in the form of a hadīth by the names of the Companions, and then by organising each hadīth according to its subject matter. 802 hadiths of 1237 Companions (I-XX, Beirut 1413/1993). Muhammad Fuād ʿAbd al-Bāqī, in his work called al-Jāmiʿ al-masānīd, organised the hadīths in al-Bukhārī’s al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ in the same way, first as the hadīths of 196 companions, and then arranged each hadīth according to its subject (I-VI, Cairo 1412/1991).

5-Mu’jams. In mu’jams, which are one of the types of books organised according to the names of the narrators, the narrations are arranged alphabetically either by the names of the Companions like the musnads, or by the names of the teachers of the muhaddith who classified the mu’jam, or by the cities and tribes of the narrators. One of the earliest examples of this genre is Abū Yaʿlā al-Mawsīlī’s al-Muʿjam (ed. Husayn Salīm Asad, Beirut 1410/1989), which contains one hadīth from each of his 330 teachers, arranged alphabetically, with those who bore the name Muhammad at the beginning. Abū Saʿīd Ibn al-Aʿrābī also organised the hadīths narrated from 336 of his teachers in the same way in his al-Muʿjam (ed. Ahmad al-Balūshī, I-VI, Riyadh 1412/1992, the published part is the first half of the work). The most well-known of these classifications are al-Tabarānī’s three muʿjam. The first of these is al-Muʿjam al-ṣaġīr, which contains 1198 hadīths (ed. ʿAbd al-Rahman Moḥammad ʿUthman, I-II, Medina 1388/1968; Beirut 1403/1983), in which the author records one hadīth from each of his 1000 shaykhs and mentions more than one hadīth with the same isnad in the last parts of the work. Muhammad Shakūr Mahmūd al-Ḥāj Amrīr published this work according to scholarly procedures by providing information about the hadīths and named it al-Rawż al-dānī ile al-Muʿjami alṣ-ṣaġīr (Beirut 1405/1985). The second book is al-Muʿjam al-awsaṭ (ed. Mahmūd al-Tahhān, I-XI, Riyadh 1405-1416/1985-1995), which al-Tabarānī liked very much but also included many weak hadīths. In this work, which contains 9485 narrations, the author put the names of his sheikhs in alphabetical order and gave the rare narrations he heard from each of them under their names. The most comprehensive of Tabarānī’s muʿjam is al-Muʿjam al-kabīr (nşr. Hamdī ‘Abd al-Majīd al-Salafī, I-XXV, Baghdad 1401-1415/1980-1994; volumes 14-16 and 21 of the 200-volume manuscript could not be published because they could not be found). Tabarani did not include Abu Hurayra’s narrations in this work and collected them in a separate book.

6-Musannefs. From the middle of the second (VIIIth) century onwards, the books that were classified according to their subjects and under the titles of babs called “terceme” were called “musannaf” because they had approximately the same classification system, even though some of them were later called “jāmi'” or “sunan”. The most prominent feature that distinguishes these works, also called “Muwatta'”, from other types of books organised according to the chapters of fiqh is that they contain many mawquf and maqtû hadiths as well as merfû hadiths. It is not known whether the first musannafs, which Hammād b. Salamah and Wajī’ b. Jarrah are said to have classified, have survived to the present day. One of the first examples of such works is Mālik b. Anas’s al-Muvaṭṭaʾ (Dehli 1216, 1323; I-III, Cairo 1303; I-II, Cairo 1318; ed. Muhammad Fuād ʿAbd al-Bāqī, I-II, Cairo 1951; tr. Aḥmad Mukhtar Büyükçınar et al., I-II, Istanbul 1982, I-IV, Istanbul 1984). Some of the 21,033 narrations in Abdurrezzāq al-San’ānī’s al-Muṣannaf fi’l-ḥadīs̱ (ed. Habībürrahman al-A’zamī, I-XI, Beirut 1971-1975, 1983) have been heavily criticised. Abū Bakr ibn Abū Shaybah’s al-Muṣannaf, which has the same characteristics and contains 37,943 narrations according to the edition of Kamāl Yūsuf al-Khūt, is one of the most important examples of this genre (ed. Mukhtār Aḥmad al-Nadwī et al., I-XV, Bombay 1386-1403; Karachi 1406; ed. Kamāl Yūsuf al-Khūt, I-VII, Beirut 1409/1989; ed. Saīd al-Lahhām, I-VIII, Beirut 1414/1994). It is also known that the books of hadith included in the genres of sunnah and jāmi’ are mostly referred to as “musannef” in the Maghrib.

7-Jāmi’s. It is a type of classification that is thought to cover all the issues dealt with in the hadiths, contains eight main topics and is generally organised according to babas. The first known example is Ma’mer b. Rāshid’s (d. 153/770) Kitāb al-Jāmiʿ. His pupil Abdurrezzāq both narrated it and added it to the end of his al-Muṣannaf (Beirut 1971-1975, X, 379-468 and vol. XI). One of the two copies of the work known to have survived is in the Library of the Faculty of Language and History-Geography in Ankara (Ismail Saib Sencer, nr. 164), and the other is in the Millet Library in Istanbul (Feyzullah Efendi, nr. 541). The most widely accepted jāmiʿs were classified in the third (IXth) century, and the most famous of these are the works of al-Bukhārī and Muslim, also known as Ṣaḥīḥayn. Al-Bukhārī’s al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ (I-IX, Bulak 1313-1315; nşr. Hacı Zihni Efendi, I-VIII, Istanbul 1315) is considered by some scholars to be the most reliable book after the Qurʾān due to the soundness of its hadīths alone and by others together with Muslim’s al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ. This work is similar to Muslim’s al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ (Calcutta 1265; Bulak 1290; nşr. Hacı Zihni Efendi, I-VIII, Istanbul 1329-1332; ed. Muhammad Fuād ʿAbd al-Bāqī, I-V, Cairo 1955-1956), followed by al-Tirmidhī’s al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ (Bulaq 1292; ed. Ahmad Muhammad Shāqir et al., I-V, Cairo 1356-1382/1937-1962; ed. İzzet Ubeyd, I-X, Homs, ts.) (for these three works see DİA, VII, 114-132). Muhammad Naṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī evaluated the hadīths in the latter work in his Ṣaḥīḥ al-Sunan al-Tirmiẕī (I-III, Riyadh-Beirut 1409/1988) and Żaʿīf al-Sunan al-Tirmiẕī (Beirut 1411/1990). Majd al-Dīn Ibn al-Asīr called his work Jāmiʿ al-uṣūl li-eḥādīs̱i al-Rasūl (Merut/India 1346; ed. Muḥammad Ḥāmid al-Fiqī, I-XII, Cairo 1370/1950; ed. ʿAbd al-Qādir al-Arnaūt, I-XI + IV, index volumes, Damascus 1389-1412/1969-1991). Various commentaries, ihtisar, and zawāid studies have been made on this work, and Ibn al-Dayba”s Teysīr al-wuṣūl ilā Cāmiʿi al-uṣūl min ḥadīs̱i al-Rasūl (Calcutta 1252; Cairo 1346) is important (DIA, VII, 136). The most important of the later efforts to collect all hadiths is al-Suyūtī’s Jamʿ al-jawāmiʿ (al-Jāmiʿ al-kabīr), which contains nearly 100,000 hadiths compiled from seventy-one sources (I-IV, Cairo 1970-1992, in progress). Noteworthy works are al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaġġīr by the same author (DİA, VII, 113-114), al-Jāmiʿ al-Azhar by Muhammad Abdurraūf al-Munāwī to supplement it, and al-Suyūtī’s Jāmiʿ al-eḥādīs̱, which contains 34,220 narrations with other additions (ed. Abbas Aḥmad Sakr – Aḥmad ʿAbd al-Jawwād, I-IX, no place and date of printing; These two editors wrote al-Aḥādīs̱ al-mawżūʿa mine al-Jāmiʿi al-kabīr wa’l-Jāmiʿi al-azhar [Beirut 1409/1988] to show that 819 narrations, 332 from al-Jāmiʿ al-kabīr and 487 from al-Jāmiʿ al-Azhar, were fabricated). Al-Muttaqī al-Hindī’s Kenz al-ʿummāl fī sunnī al-aḳwāl wa’l-efʿāl, in which he combined al-Jamʿ al-jawāmiʿ and al-Suyūtī’s al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaġīr and Ziyādat al-Jāmiʿi al-ṣaġīr and organised their hadīths according to books and chapters, is the most comprehensive hadīth book available (I-VIII, Hyderābād 1313; I-XVI, Beirut 1406/1985).

Although not in the same order as the aforementioned jāmiʿs, there are also books that are called jāmiʿ because they bring together hadiths and narrations on certain subjects. ‘Abdullah b. Wahb’s (d. 197/813) al-Jāmiʿ (fi’l-ḥadīs̱, fi’l-ʿilm wa’l-fiḳh), in which he gathered hadiths on fiqh (ed. J. David-Weill [Le Djāmi’ d’Ibn Wahb], I-II, Cairo 1939-1948; see also J. David-Weill, ed. Sezgin, GAS, I, 466), Ibn Abū Zayd al-Qayrawānī’s Kitāb al-Jāmiʿi (ed. ʿAbd al-Majīd Turki, Beirut 1990), Ibn ʿAbd al-Bar al-Namarī’s Jāmiʿu beyān al-ʿilm (DIA, VII, 107), in which he collected hadiths on ethics and manners.

8-Sunnahs and books on ethics. First of all, sunnas, which compile hadiths on ethics according to the order of the books of fiqh, were generally written from the third (IXth) century onwards. However, the works of al-Awzāʿī (d. 157/774), Kitāb al-Sunāʾan fi al-fiḳh (the narrations quoted in various sources were edited into seventy-six books by Marwan Muhammad al-Shaʿʿʿār and published as Sunān al-Awzāʿī [Beirut 1413/1993]), Ibn Abū Ziʿb, and Ibn Abū Zāʾida’s Kitāb al-Sunāʾan (Ibn al-Nadīm, pp. 281, 282), as well as the Sunnahs written in the previous century. Imam Shāfiʿī’s al-Sunān al-maʾs̱ūra (Cairo 1315; ed. ʿAbd al-Muʿtī Amīn Kalʿajī, Beirut 1406/1986) is also a source of this genre. Saīd b. Mansūr’s al-Sunnān (nşr. Sa’d b. ‘Abdullah b. ‘Abd al-‘Abd al-‘Aziz ‘Al-‘Humayyid, I-V, Riyadh 1414/1993; ed. Habībürrahman al-A’zamī, vol. III, parts I and II, Malegaon [India] 1387-1388/1967-1968; Bombay 1403/1982; Beirut 1405/1985) is important in that it contains information about the Prophet’s hadiths on ethics as well as various issues of daily life in the era of the Companions that are not included in other sources. Dārimī’s al-Sunan (Kanpūr 1293; Hyderābād 1309; Delhi 1337; Damascus 1349; nşr. Abdullah Hāshim Yemānī, I-II, Cairo 1382/1966; ed. Fawwāz Ahmad Zamarlī – Khalid Seb’ al-Alamī, I-II, Beirut 1407/1987; ed. Mustafa Dīb al-Bugā, I-II, Dımaşk 1991; tr. Abdullah Aydınlı, I-III, Istanbul 1994-1996), which also contains mursal and maqtū narrations, has been accepted by some scholars as the sixth book of the Qurtub al-Sitta instead of Ibn Māja’s al-Sunan. Ibn Māja’s al-Sunan (Dehli 1282, 1322/1905; nşr. Muhammad Fuād ʿAbd al-Bāqī, I-II, Cairo 1372-1373; ed. M. Mustafa al-A’zamī, I-IV, Riyadh 1404/1984) is distinguished by the perfect ordering of the chapters in terms of fiqh. Muhammad Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī authenticated the hadīths in his Ṣaḥīḥu Sunan Ibn Māja (I-II, Beirut 1406/1986) and Żaʿīfü Sunan Ibn Māja (Beirut 1409/1988). Abū Dāwūd al-Sijistānī’s al-Sunān (Leknev 1840, 1877, 1305, 1318; Dehli 1271; Cairo 1280; Hyderābād 1321; trans. Muhammad Muhyiddin ‘Abd al-Hamīd, I-IV, Beirut, 1403/1983; Cairo 1348; nşr. Kamāl Yūsuf al-Khūt, I-III, Beirut 1409/1988) contains both authentic and weak narrations, and the extremely weak ones are mentioned by the author. Muhammad Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī evaluated the hadīths in his Ṣaḥīḥu Sunan Abī Dāwūd (I-III, Riyadh 1409/1989) and Żaʿīfü Sunan Abī Dāwūd (Beirut 1412/1991). As for al-Nasāʾī, he first wrote his large-scale work al-Sunan al-qubrā (ed. ‘Abd al-Ghaffār Suleiman al-Bundārī – Sayyid Qazrawī Hasan, I-VI, Beirut 1411/1991), from which he selected the hadīths he considered more authentic and composed al-Sunān, which he called al-Mujtaba (Kanpūr 1265; I-II, Dehli 1281; I-II, no place of printing, 1312; with al-Suyūtī’s commentary and al-Sindī’s gloss: I-VIII, Cairo 1348/1930; the edition edited by ‘Abd al-Fattāḥ Abū Ghudda based on this edition, numbering the hadīths and preparing fihrists: I-IX, Beirut 1406, 1409; tr. Ahmed Muhtar Büyükçınar et al., I-VIII, Istanbul 1981). Muhammad Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī collected the sahih hadīths in al-Sunāʾīn in his Ṣaḥīḥ al-Sunāʾī (I-III, Beirut 1408/1988) and the weak hadīths in Żaʿīf al-Sunāʾī al-Nasāʾī (Beirut 1410/1990). One of the important works of this genre written later is al-Dārakutnī’s al-Sunānī (IV, Delhi 1306; ed. Abdullah Hāshim Yemānī, I-IV, Cairo 1386/1966). Abū Muhammad ‘Abdullah b. Yahyā b. Abū Bakr al-Gassānī made a study on the weak hadīths in the work entitled Taḫrīj al-eḥādīs̱i’ḍ-ḍıʿāf min Sunan al-Dāreḳuṭnī (Riyadh 1991).

From the early period onwards, works were written to bring together the ahkām ḥadīths separately from the sunnān in the order of the sunnān. Muhammad b. Hasan al-Shaybānī’s (d. 189/805) collection of merfū, mawquf and mursal hadiths narrated from his teacher Abū Hanīfa, al-Ās̱ār, is one of the first examples of this genre (DİA, III, 460). Abū Jaʿfar al-Taḥāwī’s Sharḥ al-Maʿāni al-ās̱ār, which he wrote to compile seemingly contradictory hadīths, should also be mentioned here (I-II, Leknev 1300-1302; nşr. Muhammad Sayyid Jādalhak – Muhammad Zuhrī al-Najjār, I-IV, Cairo 1386-1388/1966-1969). Ahmad b. Husayn al-Bayhaqakī’s voluminous work, al-Sunan al-qubrā’ (I-X, Hyderābād 1344-1356), in which he collected and evaluated the sayings of the companions and the tābiīn, together with many hadīths not included in other hadīth books, and organised the narrations according to the chapters of fiqh by prioritising Shāfiʿī fiqh, also includes the criticism of the narrators and the opinions of the imams of various sects. The author’s introduction to this work, al-Madḫal ilā Kitāb al-Sunān, is also important (ed. Muhammad Ziyāurrahman al-A’zamī, Kuwayt 1985). Najm ‘Abd al-Rahman Khalaf conducted a doctoral study on the work under the title al-Ṣināʿat al-ḥadīs̱iyya fi al-Sunān al-qubrā (Mansūrah 1412/1992). Again, al-Bayhaqī’s Maʿrifat al-sunan wa al-ʿās̱ār (ed. ʿAbd al-Muʿtī Amīn Kalʿājī, I-XV, Cairo 1411/1991) and al-Sunan al-ṣuġrā’ (ed. ‘Abd al-Mu’tī Amīn Kal’acī, I-IV, Karachi 1410/1989; ed. ʿAbd al-Salām ʿAbd al-Shāfī – Aḥmad Kabbānī, I-II, Beirut 1412/1992) is a noteworthy example of this genre. The Shāfiʿī scholar al-Farā al-Baghawī in his Sharḥ al-sunna (ed. Zuhair al-Shāwīsh – Shu’ayb al-Arnaūt, I-XVI, Dimashq 1390-1400/1970-1980; Beirut 1403/1983), he explained the hadīths he compiled from the works of well-known muhaddithis by drawing attention to the jurisprudential problems where the scholars differed. Ibn al-Harrāt’s al-Aḥkām al-ṣuġrā should also be mentioned here (Suleymaniye Ktp., Fātih, nr. 696, vr. 35-164; Brockelmann, GAL, I, 458; Suppl., I, 634). ‘Abd al-Ghanī al-Maqdisī, known as Jammā’īlī, compiled ʿUmdat al-aḥkām (al-ʿUmda fi al-aḥkām fī meʿālimi al-ḥalāl wa al-ḥarām) (Dehli 1895; Cairo 1342; ed. Mustafa ʿAbd al-Kādir ʿAṭā, Beirut 1406/1986), many commentaries, glosses and taʿliks were written on it. The most famous commentary is Taqiyy al-Dīn Ibn Daqīqul’īd’s Iḥkām al-aḥkām (Dehli 1313; ed. Aḥmad Moḥammad Shākir, I-II, Beirut 1374/1955; ed. ‘Abd al-Mu’tī Amīn Kal’acī, I-IV, Cairo 1410/1990), and his most famous commentary is Amīr al-San’ānī’s al-ʿUdda (ed. ‘Abd al-Mu’tī Amīn Kal’acī, I-IV, Cairo 1410/1990). The Hanbalī scholar Majd al-Dīn Ibn Taymiyya’s Münteḳa’l-aḫbār min eḥādīs̱i seyyidi’l-aḫyār (I-II, Cairo 1369/1950; ed. Moḥammad Ḥāmid al-Fiqī, I-II, Beirut 1398/1978) consists of ahkām hadīths selected from the Massa al-Sitta and Ahmad b. Ḥanbal’s al-Musnad. Shawkānī commented on this work, which contains the largest number of ahkām hadīths, under the title Nayl al-awṭār (I-VIII, Cairo 1357/1938), indicating the degree of soundness of the narrations and the other hadīth sources in which the hadīth appears. Zayn al-Dīn al-Irāqī did the most extensive work on the hadīths of ahkām with his Taḳrīb al-asānīd wa taṭīb al-masānīd (I-VIII, Beirut, ts.). The Shāfiʿī scholar Ibn Ḥajar al-Askalānī’s Bulūġu’l-merām min edillat al-aḥkām (Leknev 1253/1837, lithograph; Lahore 1305/1888, lithograph; 1312 with special Indian ta’lik; Egypt 1320, 1330/1912; ed. Abdurrahman Bedrân 1331/1913; 1352/1933; nşr. Ridwān Muhammad Ridwān, Beirut 1373) 1356 (in some editions 1373, 1400, 1477, 1596), only the names of the Companions are recorded in the hadīth’s senad and their degree of reliability is stated. One of his many commentaries, ‘Amīr al-San’ānī’s Sūl al-salām (Delhi 1302, 1311; Cairo 1911, lithograph; ed. Fawwāz Ahmad Zamarlī – Ibrāhīm Muhammad al-Jamal, Beirut 1405/1985) was translated into Turkish by Ahmet Davudoğlu under the title Bulūğu’l-merām Tercümesi ve Şerhi: Selâmet Yolları (I-IV, Istanbul 1965-1967; for other commentaries see DİA, VI, 413).

Some of the early works known as “Kitāb al-Sunnah” contain only hadiths on faith and have nothing to do with matters of ethics. Ahmad b. Hanbal’s Kitāb al-Sunnah containing 1481 narrations (ed. Abu Hājar Muhammad Saīd b. Bashyūnī Zaghlūl, Beirut 1405/1985), Ibn Abū Āsīm’s Kitāb al-Sunnah (ed. Muhammad Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī, Beirut 1400/1980) and Abū Bakr al-Khalāl’s al-Sunnah (ed. Atiyya al-Zehrānī, Riyadh 1410/1989) are the most well-known of these works.

9-Müstadrek. The hadiths that some of the muhaddithis who compiled the sahih hadiths could not include in their books even though they complied with the conditions they observed while writing their books, or for other reasons, were gathered together by later hadith scholars, and these works were called “müstedrek” in the sense of “addition and addenda”. Studies on müstedrek were mostly conducted on Ṣaḥīḥ al-Buḫārī and Ṣaḥīḥ al-Muslim. Among the major müstadrek is al-Dāraqutnī’s al-Ilzāmāt ʿalā al-Ṣaḥīḥayn (ʿalā ṣaḥīḥayi al-Buḫārī wa Muslim), which brings together seventy hadiths not included in Ṣaḥīḥayn in the order of a musnad (ed. Abū Abdurrahman Muqbil b. Hādī al-Wādiī, Beirut 1405/1985, 2nd ed.). Abū Zār al-Ḥarawī’s al-Mustadrek ʿalā Ṣaḥīḥi al-Buḫārī wa Muslim is, according to al-Kettānī, a preparatory work for al-Dāraqutnī’s al-Ilzāmāt (al-Risālat al-mustetrafe, p. 23). The best-known example of this genre is al-Mustadrek ʿalā al-Ṣaḥīḥayn, which contains 8803 narrations, written by Ḥākim al-Nīṣābūrī in the order of Ṣaḥīḥayn in order to reject the view of some of his contemporaries who argued that the number of sahih hadīths would not exceed 10,000 and that these would consist of those found in Ṣaḥīḥayn (I-IV, Hyderābād 1334-1342; ed. Mustafa ʿAbd al-Qādir Atā, I-IV, Beirut 1411/1990). The author also compiled some hadiths that were too weak to be trusted because they were not included in the books of al-Bukhārī or Muslim even though they met their conditions. In his Muḫtaṣar al-Mustadrek (I-IV, Hyderābād 1334-1342), al-Zaḥabī summarised Ḥākim’s work and also showed the weak and fabricated narrations, which constitute a quarter of the book (al-Zaḥabī collected about 100 fabricated narrations in al-Mustadrek in a work called al-Mustadrek ʿala al-Mustadrek). Among the works that summarise al-Zaḥabī’s Muḫtaṣar by criticising some of his views, Ibn al-Mulakkın’s Muḫtaṣar al-Mustadrak (ed. ‘Abdullah b. Hamed al-Lahīdān – Sa’d b. ‘Abdullah Āl-i Humayyid, I-VII, Riyadh 1411).

10-Müstahrecs. These are works written to strengthen the hadiths in a famous hadith book in various aspects. Müstahraj were mostly written on Ṣaḥīḥayn or one of them. Among the most well-known of the detachments on Ṣaḥīḥ al-Buḫārī are the extant detachments by Abū Bakr al-Ismāʿilī and Gītrīfī; among the most well-known of the detachments on Ṣaḥīḥ al-Musnāna al-Isferāyīnī’s al-Musnān al-muḫraj ʿalā Kitāb Muslim b. Ḥajjāj (DIA, X, 100), al-Jawzakī’s al-Musnad al-ṣaḥīḥ ʿalā Kitābi Muslim, Abū Nuaym al-Isfahānī’s al-Musnad al-mustaḫraj ʿalā Ṣaḥīḥi Muslim (Brockelmann, GAL, I, 446; Suppl, I, 617); and among the most well-known of the commentaries on both Ṣaḥīḥ al-Buḫārī and Ṣaḥīḥ al-Muslim are the works of Muhaddiths such as Ibn al-Ahram and Ibn Manjūya (for commentaries on other hadīth books, see Kettānī, pp. Ketānī, pp. 18-23).

11-Forty Hadiths. With the influence of a weak hadith encouraging the memorisation of forty hadiths, books of forty hadiths called “erbaūn” began to be written from early times. Although it is known that the first works in this genre were written by ‘Abdullah b. Mubārak and Muhammad b. Aslam al-Tūsī, these works have not survived. Hasan b. Sufyān’s (d. 303/916) Kitāb al-Arbaʿīn (ed. Muhammad b. Nāṣir al-Ajmī, Beirut 1414/1993), in which he recorded forty-five hadīths on ethics and worship with their senads, and Abū Bakr al-Ajurrī’s Kitāb al-Arbaʿīna ḥadīs̱en (ed. Bedr b. ‘Abdullah al-Badr, Kuwayt 1987; ed. Majdī Fathi al-Sayyid, Tanta [Egypt] 1411/1990), Dārakutnī’s Kitāb fīhi erbaʿūna ḥadīs̱ min Müsnedi Būrayd b. ʿAbdillāh b. Abī Būrayd (Suleymaniye Ktp, Şehid Ali Paşa, nr. 541) and Aḥmad b. Ḥusayn al-Bayhaqī’s al-Arbaʿūna alṣ-ṣuġrā (ed. Abū Ḥājar Muhammad Saīd b. Bashyūnī Zaghlūl, Beirut 1407/1987) are the main forty-hadīth works written in the early periods.

In later periods, Ibn al-Salāh’s al-Arbaʿūn, in which al-Nawawī added sixteen more hadiths to the twenty-six hadiths on the fundamentals of religion, most of which he selected from Ṣaḥīḥ al-Buḫārī and Ṣaḥīḥ al-Muslim and dictated to his students, was very popular and was commented on by more than forty scholars, including al-Nawawī. Prominent Islamic scholars have written books of forty hadiths on subjects such as theology, worship, ethics, morality, jihad, etc. Hāja ‘Abdullah al-Kharawī’s Kitāb al-arbaʿīn fī delāʾili al-tawḥīd (nşr. Ali b. Muhammad b. Nāṣir al-Fuqayhī, no locality, 1404/1984), Abū al-Qāṣim Ibn Asāqir’s Kitāb al-Arbaʿīn al-buldāniyya (ed. Muhammad Mutī’ al-Hāfiz, Beirut-Dimashq 1413/1992), the physician-philosopher ʿAbd al-Latīf al-Baghdādī’s Kitāb al-Arbaʿīna al-ṭṭibbiyya (ed. Abdullah Kennūn, Maghrib 1979), Ismāʿil b. Muhammad al-Aclūnī’s ʿIḳd al-jawhari al-s̱-s̱emīn fī erbaʿīna ḥadīs̱en min eḥādīs̱i Sayyid al-mursalīn (Cairo 1322), which he compiled by collecting forty hadīths from forty different books. Among the many works written by Shiʿite scholars under the Persian title “Çihl ḥadīs” or the Arabic title “Erbaʿūn ḥadīs”, Bahā al-Dīn al-ʿĀmilī’s Erbaʿūn ḥadīs̱ (Tehran 1274, 1310 lithograph), a compilation of hadīths narrated by Ahl al-Bayt, may be mentioned. Many commentaries were written on this work, which was annotated by the author himself. Famous Turkish poets such as Ali Şîr Nevâî, Fuzûlî, Āşık Çelebi, Hâkānî Mehmed Bey and Nâbî composed verse translations of forty hadiths (see KIRK HADITH).

12-Etrāf Books. From the IVth (X.) century onwards, the books of etrâf, which were generally written in order to easily access the narrations in hadith books and to see the various narrations of a hadith together, were either arranged in the form of a musnad according to the names of the Companions and some of the narrations were mentioned at the beginning or they were arranged alphabetically according to the hadith texts. The first examples of etrāf books are Khalaf al-Wāṣṭṭīrī’s (d. 401/1010) Eṭrāf al-Ṣaḥīḥayn (Dār al-kutūb al-Misriyya, Hadith, nos. 31, 42, 56; Dār al-kutūb al-Zāhiriyya, Hadith, no. 371) Abū Masʿūd al-Dimashkī’s Eṭrāf al-Ṣaḥīḥayn (Dār al-kutūb al-Zāhiriyya, Hadith, nr. 373). Abū al-ʿAbbās Aḥmad b. Sābit al-Ṣābit al-Tarkī composed his work al-Lawāmiʿ fi al-jamʿ beyna al-ṣıḥāḥ wa al-jawāmiʿ (Suleymaniye Ktp., Şehid ʿAlī Pasha, nr. 533), also known as Eṭrāf al-Qutub al-Ṣaḥīḥayn, which contains the Qutub al-Sitta except Ibn Māja, for this purpose. The most famous work on the subject of eṭrāf is Yūsuf b. ‘Abdurrahman al-Mizzī’s Tuḥfet al-ashrāf bi-maʿrifat al-eṭrāf, in which he gathered 19,626 hadiths of 1391 sahāba, tābiʿīn, and taba’t-tābiʿīn from books other than the Qaṭub al-Sitta. The work was published together with Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAskalānī’s al-Nuqṭat al-ẓẓirāf ʿalā al-eṭrāf (ed. ʿAbd al-Ḥajar al-ʿAskalānī, I-XIV, Bombay 1965-1966). Ibn Ḥajar al-Askalānī’s Itḥāf al-mehere bi-eṭrāfi al-ʿashara, one of the most important works of this genre (Millet Ktp, Murad Molla, nr. 349-364) and his Itḥrāf al-musnad al-muʿtelī bi-Eṭrāfi al-Musnad al-Ḥanbalī (ed. Zuhayr b. Nāṣir al-Nāṣir, I-X, Beirut 1414/1993), in which he made Ahmad b. Ḥanbal’s al-Musnad a subject of a separate study. Ẕeḫāʾir al-mawārīs̱ fi al-dalālati ʿalā mawāżıʿi al-ḥadīs̱ (ed. Mahmūd al-Rabī’, I-IV, Cairo 1352/1934), one of the last examples of ṭarāf studies, contains the Massa al-Sitta and Imam Mālik’s al-Muvaṭṭaʾ. Among the books of hadīth, organised alphabetically according to the hadīth texts, Abū Ḥājar Muhammad Saīd b. Bashyūnī Zaghlūl’s Mawsūʿat al-ṭrāfi al-ḥadīs̱i al-nabawiyy al-sharīf (I-XI, Beirut 1410/1989) is an important work. Two volumes of Mawsūʿat al-ḥadīs̱i al-nabawiyyī al-sharīf, which Nedīm Marʿashlī and Usāma Marʿashlī started to prepare in order to gather sahih and hasan hadiths alphabetically, have been published so far (Beirut 1411-1414-/1991-1994-). Al-Muʿjam al-mufahres li-elfāẓi al-ḥadīs̱i al-nabawī (Concordance et indices de la tradition musulmane), prepared by a committee headed by Wensinck, is the best-known example of this genre (I-VIII, Leiden 1936-1988).

13-Tahrīc Books. The studies carried out to determine the degree of soundness of the narrations mentioned in some of the books of tafsir, fiqh, theology, mysticism and hadith, but whose source is not shown, and to indicate to whom some of the narrations belong are called “tahrîc”. Among the tahrīc studies on some important works are the Kitāb al-Taḫrīci eḥādīs̱i al-ʿUm prepared by Ahmad b. Husayn al-Bayhaqī on Imam Shāfiʿī’s al-ʿUmm (Brockelmann, GAL, I, 447; Suppl, II, 619), Naṣb al-rāya by ‘Abdullah b. Yūsuf al-Zaylaī on Mergīnānī’s al-Hidāya on Hanafī jurisprudence, and al-Dirāya fī (münteḫabi) taḫrīci eḥādīs̱i al-Hidāya by Ibn Ḥajar al-Askalānī (Dehli 1882, lithograph, 1327; Leknev 1301; nşr. Sayyid ‘Abdullah Hāshim al-Yamānī al-Madanī, Beirut, ts. [Dār al-ma’rifa]), Ibn al-Mulakkin’s al-Badr al-munīr fī taḫrīci eḥādīs̱i al-Sharḥi al-kabīr on ʿAbd al-Karīm b. Muḥammad al-Rāfiʿī’s al-Sharḥ al-kabīr on Shāfiʿī fiqh (ed. Jamāl Muhammad al-Sayyid et al., I-III, Riyadh 1414; ed. Hamdī b. ʿAbd al-Majīd b. Ismāʿil al-Salafī [Ḫulāṣat al-Badri al-munīr], Riyadh 1410/1989), and Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAskalānī’s commentary on this work, Talḫīṣ al-ḥabīr fī taḫrīci eḥādīs̱i al-Rāfiʿiyyi al-kabīr (ed. Sha’bān Muhammad Ismāʿil, I-IV, Cairo 1399/1979), al-Muġnī ʿan ḥamli al-asfāri fi al-asfār fī taḫrīci mā fi al-Iḥyāʾi mine al-aḫbār (Cairo 1332-1333, 1348, together with al-Iḥyāʾ), al-Suyūṭī’s Menāḥil al-ṣafā fī taḫrīci eḥādīs̱i al-shifāʾ (nşr. Semīr al-Kādī, Beirut 1409/1988), Muhammad Abdurraūf al-Munāwī’s al-Fatḥ al-samāwī taḫrīj al-ḥādīs̱i al-Bayżāwī (ed. Aḥmad Mujtabā b. al-Nazīr al-Salafī, I-III, Riyadh 1409), Ibn al-Siddīq al-Gumārī’s Fatḥ al-wahhāb bi-taḫrīci eḥādīs̱i al-Shihāb (ed. Hamdī ʿAbd al-Majīd al-Salafī, I-II, Beirut 1408/1988), and al-Gumārī’s al-Ibtihāj bi-taḫrīci eḥādīs̱i al-Minhāj (al-Samīr Ṭāḥāʾ al-Majzūb, Beirut 1405/1985) on the narrations in Minhāj al-wuṣūl, a book of usul al-fiqh by Qāḍī Bayāwī. ‘Abd al-Qādir b. ‘Abd al-Hādī’s Ṭuruḳu taḫrīci ḥadīs̱i Rasūlillāh ṣallallallāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam (Cairo, ts, Dār al-iʿtisām) may be mentioned.

14-Zawāid Books. In the eighteenth (fourteenth) century, efforts to gather the hadiths that one or a few works contained in excess of or different from the main hadith books such as the Kitāb al-Sitta began in the eighteenth (fourteenth) century. Zawāid books are useful works in terms of reaching the narrations in many hadith books that are not easy to access in a shorter time. Nūr al-Dīn al-Haythamī (d. 807/1405), known for his various works in this genre, compiled three mu’jam of al-Tabarānī, Ahmad b. Hanbal, Bezzār, and Abū Yaʿla al-Mawṣilī, but not included in the Massa al-Sitta, in his Majmaʿ al-zawāʾid wa menbaʿ al-fawāʾid (I-X, Beirut 1967; ed. Abdullah Muhammad Dervīsh, I-X, Beirut 1414/1994), Mawārid al-ẓẓamʾān ilā wawāʾid Ibn Ḥibbān (ed. Muhammad Abdurrezzāq Hamza, Beirut, ts., [Dār al-kutub al-ilmiyya]; ed. Husayn Salīm Asad al-Dārānī – Abduh ʿAbd al-ʿAli al-Kūsh [?], I-VIII, Damascus 1411-1412/1990-1992), and al-Haythamī’s Majmaʿ al-baḥreyn fī zevāʾidi al-Muʿjamayn (ed. ‘Abd al-Quddūs b. Muhammad al-Nazīr, I-VIII, Riyadh 1413/1992) and al-Maḳṣad al-ʿalī fī wawāʾidi Abī Yaʿlā al-Mawṣilī (ed. Sayyid Qazrawī Hasan, I-IV, Beirut 1413/1993); and Ahmad b. Abū Bakr al-Būsīrī’s Miṣbāḥ al-zujājah fī zawāʾidi Ibn Māja (ed. Mūsā Muhammad ‘Ali – Izzat ‘Ali Atiyya, I-II, Cairo, ts.; ed. Kamāl Yūsuf al-Khūt, I-II, Beirut 1986) and his Itḥāf al-ḫıyarah bi-zawāʾidi al-masānīdi al-ʿasharah (for the author’s other ḥawāʾids, cf. DIA, VI, 468); Ibn Ḥajar al-Askalānī’s al-Meṭālib al-ʿāliye bi-zawāʾidi al-masānīdi al-s̱-s̱emāniya (ed. Habībürrahman al-A’zamī, I-IV, Kuwayt 1393/1973) and Muḫtaṣaru zevāʾidi Müsnedi al-Bezzār (ed. Sabrī b. ‘Abd al-Hāliḳ Abū Zer, I-II, Beirut 1412/1992). The study entitled Zawāʾid al-Dārimī ʿale al-Kutubi al-Sitta mine al-eḥādīs̱i al-merfūʿa (1397/1977), prepared by Seyfurrahman Mustafa at Umm al-Qurāʾa University, and the study entitled Zawāʾid al-Dārimī ʿalā al-Kutubi al-Sitta mine al-eḥādīs̱i al-merfūʿa (1397/1977), prepared by Muhammad b. Muhammad ibn al-Dārimī (ed. The thesis entitled Zawāʾid al-Muṣannefi ʿAbdirrezzāḳ ʿale al-Kutūbi al-Sitta (1401), prepared by Yūsuf Muhammad Siddiq at the University of Saʿd, shows that the study of zawāʾid continues today. ʿAbd al-Salām Moḥammad Illūsh also wrote a study on the nature of zawāid and books of zawāid entitled ʿIlm al-zawāʾidi al-ḥadīs̱ (Beirut 1415/1995).

15-Fawāid Books. The composition of fawāʾid books, which bring together the narrations of one scholar or several scholars, was initiated at an early period by hadīth scribes such as ʿAlī b. Jaʿd (d. 230/844-45), ʿAlī b. Hujr, al-Bukhārī, and ʿAbdān al-Aḥwāzī. Al-Dārakutnī wrote about sixteen fawā’ids, each of which is five to ten pages in volume. Among the famous fawāʾids is Abū Bakr al-Shāfiʿī’s (d. 354/965) al-Fawāʾid al-muntaḫabet al-ʿawālī ʿani al-shüyūḫ (for manuscript copies see Sezgin, GAS, I, 191), which contains the hadīths narrated by him from his teachers with authentic isnad. Abū Bakr Aḥmad b. Jaʿfar al-Qatīīī’s al-Fawāʾid al-muntaḳāt wa’l-afrād al-ġarāʾib al-ḥisān (al-Quwayt 1414/1993, the fifth book in the series) and al-Tammām al-Rāzī’s Fawāʾid, in which he compiled 1794 narrations of various scholars (ed. Abū Sulayman Jāsim b. Sulayman al-Fuhayd al-Dawsari, Beirut 1408-1414/1987-1994). There are also fawāʾid, which collect authentic and strange narrations transmitted with authentic isnad, compile the narrations of muhaddithis belonging to a certain region, and were written to reveal the provisions contained in a hadīth (for extensive information, see DİA, XII, 500-501).

16-Emālīs. Emālīs, which consist of hadīths recorded by hadīth scribes, especially on Tuesdays and Fridays while they were writing hadīths in the mosques, are incomparably more numerous than their counterparts in other sciences. Leys b. Saʿd’s (d. 175/791) Majlis min fawāʾid (ed. Muhammad b. Rizq b. Tarhūnī, Riyadh 1407/1987), Imam Abū Yūsuf’s al-Amālī (Sezgin, GAS, I, 421), Muhammad b. Hasan al-Shaybānī’s Juzʾ mine al-amālī (Haydarābād 1360), Abdurrezzāq al-Sanʿānī’s al-Amālī fī ās̱āri alṣ-ṣaḥāba are the earliest known amālīs. Husayn b. Ismāʿīl al-Mahāmilī’s al-Amālī (ed. Ibrāhīm Ibrāhīm al-Qaysī, Amman 1412/1991), also known as al-Ajjjāʾ al-Mahāmiliyyāt, which consists of 533 hadiths on different topics, is one of the most well-known examples of this genre. The ʿamālīs dictated by the Seljuk vizier Nizām al-Mulk, who had an outstanding place in the science of ḥadīth, at the Nizāmiya Madrasa and Jāmi al-Mahdī in Baghdad (ʿAbd al-Hādī Rīzā, “ʿAmālī Niẓām al-Mulk al-Wazīr al-Saljūḳī fi’l-ḥadīs̱”, MMMA, V [1959], pp. 349-378) give an idea of the prevalence and acceptance of these works. Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAskalānī, who dictated various amālīs in 1150 assemblies and revived the genre in his own time, should also be mentioned here, as should al-Amāl al-Mıṣriyya al-Baybarsiyya (Köprülü Ktp., nr. 251; Millet Ktp., Feyzullah Efendi, nr. 265), which he had copied at the Baybarsiyya Madrasa in Cairo (see also DİA, XI, 70-72).

17-Shamāil Books. Shamāil, which means the Prophet’s physical and spiritual characteristics, worship and life, clothing and attire, is not only one of the eight main subjects that make up the hadith books of the jāmi’ genre, but also the name of the works that compile the narrations in the hadith books about the aforementioned attributes of the Messenger of Allah. As far as is known, the first work on shamāʾil, which was very popular due to its perfect order, is al-Tirmidhī’s al-Shamāʾil al-Muḥammadiyya (Shamāʾil al-nabawiyya, Shamāʾil al-Rasūl), which contains about 400 narrations (Calcutta 1252, 1262, 1273; Istanbul 1264, 1285; Cairo 1273, 1280, 1290, 1317; Leknev 1288; Lahore 1309; Delhi 1313; nşr. Tāḥā Abdurraūf Sa’d, Cairo 1988; nşr. Abdullah al-Sha”ār, Beirut 1992). Among the more than sixty commentaries and glosses of the work is Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Qastallānī’s Sharḥu Shamāʾili al-nabī (Suleymaniye Ktp, Hagia Sophia, nr. 600), Ibn Hajar al-Haytemī’s Ashraf al-wasāʾil ilā fehmi al-shamāʾil (Şerḥu Shamāʾili al-nabī) (Köprülü Ktp., Fâzıl Ahmed Paşa, nr. 314; Süleymaniye Ktp., Hasan Hüsnü Paşa, nr. 198), Ali al-Kārī’s Jamʿu’l-vesāʾil fī sharḥi al-Shamāʾil (Istanbul 1290; I-II, Cairo 1317-1318, with Münāwī’s commentary), and Bājūrī’s al-Mawāhib al-ledunniyya (Cairo 1301, 1318). Among the studies that have identified Arabic and Turkish commentaries and translations of the work are Ali Yardim’s comprehensive study (DÜIFD, I [1983], pp. 349-409) and Ibrahim Bayraktar’s doctoral dissertation, The Prophet’s Shemaili (Istanbul 1990), in which he discusses this work and other shamāil books (see also Sezgin, GAS, I, 156-159). In the meantime, the work has been edited many times, usually under the title Muḫtaṣar al-Shamāʾili al-Muḥammadiyya, and the editions by ʿAbd al-Majīd al-Shernūbī (Bulak 1318) and Muḥammad Naṣr al-Dīn al-Albānī (Amman 1985) can be mentioned as examples. Among other works on Shamāʾil, al-Farā al-Beghawī’s al-Anwār fī Shamāʾili al-nabiyy al-muḫtār, which contains 1257 narrations, is also important (ed. Ibrāhīm al-Yaʿqūbī, Beirut 1409/1989). Kādī Iyāz’s al-Shifāʾ bi-taʿrīfi ḥuḳūḳi ḥaraf al-Muṣṭafā (Cairo 1276; Istanbul 1290; Morocco 1305; ed. Muhammad Amīn Karaalī et al., I-II, Dhimashq 1392; ed. Ali Muhammad al-Bijāwī, I-II, Cairo 1977), besides the Prophet’s shamāʾ, it also contains issues such as the duties of people towards him and the punishment to be given to those who do not fulfil these duties. The work has been subjected to commentaries, ihtisar, hâşiye, ta’lik and tahrîf of its hadiths. Among the most famous commentaries are Shahābed al-Dīn al-Hafājī’s Nesīm al-riyāż (I-IV, Istanbul 1267; Cairo 1312-1317, 1325, 1327), Ali al-Kārī’s Sharḥ al-Shifāʾ (Istanbul 1264, 1285, 1290, 1299, 1307, 1308, 1309, 1312, 1316, 1319; Bulak 1275; Cairo 1327) and Hanīf Ibrāhīm Efendi’s Hulāsat al-wafāʾ (Bulak 1257; I-II, Istanbul 1314-1317) among his Turkish translations. Abū al-Fidā Ibn Kathīr’s Shamāʾil al-Raṣūl wa delāʾil al-nubuwvetihī wa fażāʾilühū wa ḫaṣāʾiṣuhū (ed. Mustafa ʿAbd al-Wāḥid, Cairo, ts., Matbaat al-Mustafa al-Bābī al-Khalebī; Beirut, ts., Dār al-maʿrifa) Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Qastallānī’s al-Mawāhib al-ledunniyya bi al-minaḥi al-Muḥammadiyya (Cairo 1281; ed. Sālih Aḥmad al-Sāmī, I-IV, Beirut 1412/1991) and its commentary by Zürkānī (I-VIII, Bulak 1271/1854), as well as its translation by the divan poet Bāqī under the title Meālim al-yakīn fī sīrat seyyidi al-mursalīn (Istanbul 1261, 1313-1316, 1322-1326) should also be mentioned here.

The narrations about the miracles and other characteristics of the Messenger of Allah that prove his prophethood were gathered together in the genres of “delāil al-nubuwwwa” and “al-hasāis al-nabawiyya”.

B) Dirâyet al-hadîs Books. Since the science of dirāyat al-hadīth, which is more comprehensive than the science of narration, which deals only with the transmission of hadiths, often deals with the texts of hadiths along with their isnad, such works show a richer variety. In addition to the hadiths of the Prophet, determining which of the sahih, hasan and weak criteria the sayings and fatwas of the companions and tâbiîn fall into depends on knowing how reliable and competent the narrators are, as well as determining how these sayings were received and narrated. For this reason, in addition to the science of cerh and ta’dīl, which is the most important branch of “rijāl al-hadīs” that helps to determine the reliability of the narrators, it is necessary to know disciplines such as nāsih-mensuh, miscellaneous al-hadīs, gharīb al-hadīs, ilel al-hadīs, which examine the texts of hadiths from different aspects, and above all, it is necessary to learn the terms and rules of usūl al-hadīs.

1-Usūl al-Hadīth. The first information on usul al-hadīth, which constitutes the basis of dirāyat al-hadīth and is also known as mustalah al-hadīth, ulūm al-hadīth, etc., is given in Imam Shāfi’ī’s al-Risāla before it is discussed in separate books as a principle, It was found in the introduction of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Muslim, in Abū Dāwūd’s letter to the Meccans, especially in al-ʿIlāl, which al-Tirmidhī added to the end of his al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ, and in al-Bukhārī’s history books and works on cerh and taʿdīl. One of the first books on usul al-hadīth in which this information, especially the knowledge of the isnad system and the methods of learning hadīth, was collected with its senads as in the narration books, was Rāmhurmūzī’s (d. 360/971) al-Muḥaddis̱ü’l-fāṣıl bayna al-rāwī wa’l-wāʿī (ed. Muhammad Ajāj al-Khatīb, Beirut 1391/1971). Towards the end of the same century, Ḥākim al-Nīsābūrī wrote Maʿrifat al-ʿulūm al-ḥadīs̱ (ed. Sayyid Muẓam Husayn, Cairo 1937; offset from this edition: Medina 1397/1977). In al-Kifāya fī ʿilmi al-rivāya (Hyderābād 1357; ed. Muhammad Hāfiz al-Tijānī, Cairo 1972), written with the same technique to criticise those who attempted to narrate hadīth without knowing hadīth sciences, terms, and procedural matters, Khatīb al-Baghdādī covered many topics that had not been touched upon in previous books on usul. In his al-Ilmāʿ ilā maʿrifat al-uṣūli al-rwwāya (ed. Sayyid Aḥmad Sakr, Cairo 1389/1970), the first book on usul al-hadīth written in the Maghrib, al-Kādī Iyāz conveyed information on nineteen important issues related to the method of narration, usually with their senads. Later on, the era of usul books in which methodological and systematic information was transmitted without sūrahs began, and Ibn al-Salāḥ’s Muḳaddimet al-Ṣalāḥ (Leknev 1304; Cairo 1326; Aleppo 1350), also known as ʿUlūm al-ḥadīs̱, in which he dealt with usul topics under sixty-five types in a new order, became the centre of subsequent studies. Among his commentaries, Zayn al-Dīn al-Irāqī’s al-Taḳyīd wa’l-īżāḥ is important (ed. Muhammad Rāgib al-Tabbāḥ, no edition, 1350). Among the variously studied commentaries, al-Nawawī’s al-Taḳrīb wa al-tayṣīr li-maʿrifat al-sunnānī al-bashīri al-naẕīr (ed. Abdullah ‘Umar al-Bārūdī, Beirut 1406/1986), and Abū al-Fidā Ibn Kathīr’s Iḫtiṣāru ʿUlūm al-ḥadīs̱ (ed. Salāh Moḥammad Moḥammad Uwayza, Beirut 1409/1989). Irāqī’s versification of the Muḳaddimah in 1002 couplets, al-Alfiyya fī ʿUlūm al-ḥadīs̱, also attracted great attention (Delhi, ts., al-Matbau al-Fārūkī), and the book was commented on many times, first by its author (al-Tabṣıra wa al-taẕkire, Morocco 1354) and then by his student al-Sahāwī and others (DIA, XI, 29). The commentary on al-Nawawī’s al-Taḳrīb by al-Suyūtī, Tedrīb al-rāwī, was also highly regarded (Cairo 1307; ed. ʿAbd al-Wahhab ʿAbd al-Latīf, I-II, Cairo 1385/1966). Ibn Ḥajar’s Nuḫbet al-fiker (Delhi 1328; Istanbul 1329; Cairo 1357/1938), one of the most famous commentaries on Ibn al-Salāh’s Muḳaddima, gained a different character with its different organisation and the addition of new information; various commentaries, glosses, and verses were written on it, and it was also used as a textbook. It can be said that the most famous commentary of this work is Nuzhatt al-naẓar, also written by Ibn Hajar (Calcutta 1279/1862; Cairo 1308; Istanbul 1327; nşr. Nūr al-Dīn Itr, Dimashq 1413/1992). Among the later books on usūl al-ḥadīth, ‘Umar (Ṭāḥā) b. Muḥammad b. Fatṭūḥ al-Bayḳūnī al-Dimashkī’s treatise al-Bayḳūniyya (al-Manẓūmat al-Bayḳūniyya) (Egypt 1273, 1276, 1297, 1302, 1306, 1322; Bombay 1274), in which he summarises the relevant information in thirty-four couplets, attracted much attention (DIA, VI, 68). Among recent works, Jamāl al-Dīn al-Qāsimī’s Ḳawāʿid al-taḥdīs̱ (nşr. Muhammad Bahjat al-Baytār, Dimashq 1353/1935; Cairo 1380/1961; Beirut 1408/1987) and Tāhir al-Jazāirī’s Tawjīh al-naẓar (Cairo 1328; I-II, ed. ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Abū Gudda, Beirut 1416/1995), in which he examines these issues with criticism and preferences. Among the books on hadīth in Turkish, Babanzāde Ahmad Naim’s comprehensive introduction to Sahīh al-Bukhārī Muhtasarı Tajrīd al-Sarīh Translation and Commentary (Istanbul 1346) and Muhammad Tayyib Okiç’s Some Hadīth Matters on Investigations (Istanbul 1959) can be mentioned.

2-Ricāl al-hadīs. The science of rijāl al-hadīs, which analyses the narrators in terms of their competence in hadith narration since the early periods of hadith criticism, is also called “esmā al-ricāl”. In order to recognise the identity of the narrators in the script, while investigating their lives in all aspects and how reliable they are in terms of narration (their cerh and ta’dīl status), the opinions and convictions of the muhaddithis who knew these people closely were taken into consideration. (IX.) century, books of jarh and ta’dīl were written, and important critics were trained in the tradition of criticism that started from the generation of the companions and continued until the IX. (XV.) century. In addition, the munakkîs who made jarh and ta’dîl about the qarawîs have also been the subject of researches. In his book Ẕikru men yuʿtemedü ḳawlühū fi’l-jarḥ wa’t-taʿdīl, al-Zaḥabī lists 715 scholars in twenty-two strata starting from the generation of the tabaʿ al-taʿbīn (nşr. ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Abū Gudda, Beirut 1388/1968, in Erbaʿu resāʾil fī ʿulūm al-ḥadīs̱, pp. 151-227). At the end of his al-Iʿlān bi al-tawbīḫ li-man ẕamma al-tārīḫ, Muḥammad b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sahāwī introduced 209 hadīth critics in twenty-nine strata from the companions to his own time, and this section of the work is presented in al-Mutakallimūna fi al-ricāl (nşr. ‘Abd al-Fattāḥ Abū Gudda, in ibid., pp. 81-149) (see also Kandemir, pp. 96-115).

Sahāba. The life and virtues of the Sahāba generation, who were primarily influential in the transmission of hadiths to later generations and constituted the first stratum of the hadīth narrators, have been included in works such as hadīth, siyar, megāzī, tabāqāt, ansāb, and fafayāt, as well as in works such as city histories and general Islamic history, and there have also been separate works that list this generation according to their tribes, virtues, or alphabetical names. Among these, al-Tirmidhi’s Tesmiyet al-aṣḥābi Rasūlillāh (ed. Āmir Ahmad Haydar, Beirut 1410/1990; ed. Ali Yardim, “The Sources of Ashâb Knowledge and al-Tirmidhī’s ‘Tesmiyet al-asḥāb al-nabī’,” DÜIFD, II [1985], pp. 247-346) gives the names of 730 Companions and contains brief information about some of them. One of the oldest and most authoritative sources on the life of the companions is Ibn Abū Āsim’s al-Āḥād wa’l-mes̱ānī (ed. Bāsim Faṣal Ahmad al-Jawābire, I-VI, Riyadh 1411/1991). Abū al-Qāṣim al-Beghāwī’s Muʿjam al-ṣaḥāba (Dār al-kutūb al-Zāhiriyya, Majmua, nr. 94/11) is also among the first works of its kind. Ibn Kāni’s Muʿjam al-ṣaḥāba, a hadīth book in the genre of musnad, is an important source on the companions (the only copy is in Köprülü Ktp., nr. 452, 195 folios; Halil İbrahim Kutlay prepared the work for publication in his doctoral study). Ibn Hibbān’s Maʿrifat al-ṣaḥāba, also known as Esmāʾ al-ṣaḥāba (IU Ktp., nr. 1101, 55 folios; Medina Ārif Hikmet Ktp., Mecmua, nr. 239, 72 folios), Abū ‘Abdullah Ibn Menda’s voluminous Maʿrifat al-ṣaḥāba (Dār al-kutūb al-Zāhiriyya, Hadīth, nr. 344, volumes 37 and 42), Abū Nuaym al-Isfahānī’s Maʿrifat al-ṣaḥāba (ed. Muhammad Radī b. Hāj ‘Uthman, I-III, Medina-Riyadh 1408/1988), and especially Ibn ‘Abd al-Bar al-Namarī’s al-Istīʿāb fī maʿrifat al-aṣḥāb (I-II, Hyderābād 1318-1319/1900-1901; Beirut 1327/1909; in the margin of al-Iṣāba: I-II, 1323-1324/1905-1906; I-IV, Cairo 1328; nşr. Ali Muhammad al-Bijāwī, I-IV, Cairo 1957-1960) attracted great attention. In order to complete this work, its addenda were written by scholars such as Abū ʿAlī al-Gassānī, Muḥammad b. Khalaf al-Andalusī, known as Ibn Fathūn, and Yūsuf b. Muḥammad al-Tanūhī, known as Ibn al-Dawānīkī, and others wrote commentaries. Zehebī states that the book contains the lives of about 8000 Companions together with its annexes. The work was started to be translated into Turkish by the order of Sultan Ahmad I, but was left unfinished upon his death (Kashf al-ẓ-ẓunūn, I, 81). Izz al-Dīn Ibn al-Asīr’s Usd al-ġābe (I-V, Cairo 1285-1287; I-V, Tehran 1377/1958; ed. Muhammad Ibrāhīm al-Bannā et al., I-VII, Cairo 1390-1393/1970-1973) contains 7703 sahāba together with their duplicates. The most famous of these is al-Zahebī’s Tajrīd al-asmāʾi al-ṣaḥāba (I-II, Beirut, ts.), which contains some 8000 Companions. The most famous, comprehensive and reliable of the works on the companions is Ibn Hajar al-Askalānī’s al-Iṣāba fī tamyīzi al-ṣaḥāba, which includes 12,304 biographies together with their duplicates (nşr. Muhammad Wajīh et al., I-IV, Calcutta 1272-1290/1856-1873; I-VIII, Cairo 1323, 1325; with al-Istīʿāb: I-IV, Baghdad 1327/1909; I-IV, Cairo 1328/1910; I-IV, Cairo 1359/1940; ed. Ali Muhammad al-Bijāwī, I-VIII, Cairo 1390-1392/1970-1972). Some specialisations were also made on the work. Although there are separate studies on the tâbiîn and tebeu’tâbiîn who came immediately after the generation of the Ashâb, those who were known for narrating hadith were included in the following rijâl books.

Sika Narrators. Among the most important works that gathered only reliable (sika) narrators is Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ijlī’s (d. 261/875) Tārīḫ al-s̱-s̱iḳāt (nşr. ʿAbd al-Muʿtī Amīn Kalʿājī, Beirut 1405/1984, this edition contains 2116 narrators; ed. ʿAbd al-ʿAbd al-ʿAlīm ʿAbd al-ʿAzīm al-Bestawī, I-II, Medina 1405/1985, the copy on which this edition is based was also edited by Taqiyy al-Dīn al-Subqī and contains 2366 narrators), Ibn Hibbān’s al-S̱-S̱iḳāt, which Ibn Hibbān gathered in strata by accepting some unknown narrators as reliable, and which al-Nūr al-Dīn al-Haythamī arranged in alphabetical order (ed. Muhammad Abdurashīd, I-IX, Hyderābād 1393-1403/1973-1983). Ibn Hibbān’s Mashāḥīr ʿulamāʾiʿ al-amṣār (ed. Manfred Fleischhammer, Wiesbaden 1959), which includes only the famous sika qāwīs, is organised first by stratum and then by region. Ibn Shāhīn’s Tārīḫ al-ṣmāʾi al-s̱-s̱iḳāt, in which he evaluates 1569 qāwīs in short statements, is also an important book of this genre (ed. ʿAbd al-Muʿtī Amīn Kalʿajī, Beirut 1406/1986).

Zeḥabī’s Teẕkirat al-ḥuffāẓ (I-IV, Ḥaydarābād 1315-1334, 1376-1378/1956-1958), which is widely accepted among the muhaddithīs, brings together twenty-one strata of 1176 prominent figures, including twenty-three sahābīs known for narrating hadīth, up to Yūsuf b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Mizzī (d. 742/1341). Although the work, which has three separate annexes, generally contains sika narrators, there are also a few narrators who do not have this feature. Ibn Qudāma al-Maqdisī’s Ṭabaḳāt ʿulamāʾi al-ḥadīs̱ (nşr. Ekrem al-Būshī, I-IV, Beirut 1409/1989) is very similar in arrangement and content to al-Zaḥabī’s Ṭaẕkirat al-ḥuffāẓ, and it is not clear which of these two contemporaries benefited from the other. Kāsim b. Kutluboğa’s Tertīb al-s̱-s̱iḳāt mine al-ruvāt (Köprülü Ktp., nr. 264, 1060, vols. I and II; Rabat, al-Hizânet al-ʿāmma, nr. 361 K, part of it; Weisweller, nr. 112), based on Mizzī’s Tehẕīb al-Kamāl, and also benefited from Ibn Abū Ḥātim’s al-Jarḥ wa al-taʿdīl and Ibn Hibbān’s al-S̱iḳāt (Weisweller, nr. 112).

Weak Witnesses. The books written about the narrators whose weaknesses could be eliminated to some extent and those whose narrations lost their evidential quality because they were severely weak are generally referred to as “al-Duafā'” or “al-Duafā’ wa al-metrūkūn”. Such works include al-Bukhārī’s eḍ-Ḍuʿafāʾ al-ṣaġīr (Agra 1323), which contains 418 narrators, and al-Nasāʾī’s eḍ-Ḍuʿafāʾ wa al-metrūkīn (Agra 1323), which evaluates 706 narrators in one word, Ukaylī’s al-Ḍuʿafāʾ al-kabīr (ed. ʿAbd al-Muʿtī Amīn Kalʿajī, I-IV, Beirut 1404/1984), Ibn Hibbān’s Kitāb al-Majrūḥīn (ed. Mahmūd Ibrāhīm Zāyed, I-III, Aleppo 1396), Ibn ʿAdī’s al-Kāmil fī ḍuʿafāʾi al-ricāl (al-Kāmil fī ḍuʿafāʾi al-muḥaddis̱īn wa ʿilal al-ḥadīs̱) (Beirut 1405/1985), in which Ibn Ḥibbān’s Kitāb al-Majrūḥīn (ed, Dārakutnī’s Kitāb al-Ḍuʿafāʾ wa al-metrūkīn (ed. Muhammad b. Lutfī al-Sabbāg, Beirut 1401/1980; ed. Subhī al-Badrī al-Sāmerrāʾī, Beirut 1406/1986), Abū al-Faraj Ibn al-Jawzī’s eḍ-Ḍuʿafāʾ wa al-metrūqīn (ed. Abū al-Fidā ‘Abdullah al-Qādī, I-III, Beirut 1406/1986), in which he compiled the opinions of well-known commentators on 4018 narrators, and al-Zaḥabī’s three works on this subject. In his Dīwān al-ḍuʿafāʾ wa al-metrūkīn, al-Zaḥabī collected those who were considered weak even though they were not weak, those who made many mistakes in their narrations because of their poor memory, and those who were abandoned for narrating mawḍū ḥadīth (nşr. Hammād al-Ansārī, Mecca, ts.) and later expanded this work under the title Ẕeylü Dīwān al-ḍuʿafāʾ (Dār al-kutūb al-Zāhiriyya, Majmua, nr. 369, vr. 227-229; TSMK, Aḥmad III, nr. 3053/1), and in his work al-Muġnī fi’ḍ-ḍuʿafāʾ he evaluated 7854 weak narrators with short and concise information (ed. Nūr al-Dīn Itr, I-II, Aleppo 1971). His most important work on this subject is Mīzān al-iʿtidāl fī naḳdi al-ricāl (Leknaw 1301/1884; Cairo 1324-1327; I-III, Cairo 1355; nşr. Ali Muhammad al-Bijāwī, I-IV, Cairo 1382/1963). There are various addenda to this work. Zayn al-Dīn al-Irāqī, in his Ẕeylü Mīzānī al-iʿtidāl (ed. ʿAbd al-Qayyūm Abdurabbinnabī, Mecca 1406; ed. Subhī al-Badrī al-Sāmerrāʾī, Beirut 1408/1987), and Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAskalānī increased the number of jarḥ and taʿdīd narrators to 15,541 in his Lisān al-Mīzān (I-VII, Hyderābād 1329-1331; Beirut 1390/1971, offset edition).

Sika and Weak Narrators. In some of the books on rijāl, sika and weak narrators are discussed together. Ibn Saʿd’s al-Ṭabaḳāt al-qubrā’, in which he introduces some 4300 individuals from the generations of the Sahāba and the tābiʿīn by prioritising the time and place in which they lived, is the first and one of the most important works on this subject (al-Ṭabaḳāt al-kabīr, nşr. E. Sachau et al., I-IX, Leiden 1904-1940; with the differences in the European edition removed: I-VIII, Beirut 1957-1960). A significant number of early muhaddithis called their books on the biographies of hadith narrators “history”. Among them, Yahyā b. Maīn’s al-Tārīḫ (wa al-ʿilal) (nşr. Ahmad Muhammad Nurseyf, I-IV, Mecca 1399/1979), the same author’s Maʿrifat al-ricāl (I-II, Damascus 1985), which is mostly in the form of questions and answers and has survived incompletely, al-Bukhārī’s al-Tārīḫ al-kabīr (ed. ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Yahyā al-Yamānī et al., I-IV [I-VIII vols.], Hyderābād 1361-1364) and al-Tārīḫ al-ṣaġīr (ed. Muhammad al-Ja’farī, Allahābād 1324, lithograph; Ahmadābād 1325; ed. Mahmūd Ibrāhīm Zāyed, I-II, Cairo 1396-1397/1976-1977), al-Fasawī’s al-Maʿrifa wa al-tārīḫ (nşr. Ekrem Ziyā al-Ömerī, I-III, Baghdad 1394-1396/1974-1976; I-IV, Medina 1410/1990, in this edition the index has been made into a separate volume), Abū Zur’a al-Dimashqī’s al-Tārīḫ (nşr. Shukrullah b. Shukrullah b. Niʿmetollah al-Kūjūlāh al-Kūjī), which includes 2330 narrations about the Prophet, his companions, and the hadīth narrators with their senedān (nşr. Ni’metullah al-Kūjānī, I-II, Dimashq 1980), al-Bukhārī’s al-Tārīḫ al-kabīr, and Abū Ishaq al-Jūzjānī’s Aḥwāl al-ricāl (ed. Subhī al-Badrī al-Sāmerrāʾī, Beirut 1405/1985), in which he gives brief evaluations of 388 narrators, most of whom are weak. Ibn Abū Ḥātim’s al-Jarḥ wa al-taʿdīl (ed. ʿAbd al-Rahman b. Yahyā al-Muallimī, I-IX, Haydarābād 1941-1953), which contains the criticisms of the authorities of cerḥ and taʿdīl who lived before him about hadīth narrators and a total of 16,040 biographies, is the most important work on this subject (DİA, VII, 401-402). The author obtained most of the information in the book by asking his father Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī and his teacher Abū Zur’a al-Rāzī. Other hadith students also asked their teachers, who were authorities in the science of cerh and ta’dīl, questions about the reliability of hadith narrators and compiled their answers in books called “suâlât”. Among these, Ibn al-Junayd asked Yahyā b. Maīn 890 or 936 questions, Abū Ja’far Ibn Abū Shaybah asked Ali b. Medīnī 260 questions, Abū Dāwūd al-Sijistānī asked Ahmad b. Hanbal 595 questions. Hanbal, 607 questions asked by Abū Ubayd al-Ajurrī to Abū Dāwūd al-Sijistānī, 531 questions asked to al-Dāraqutnī by Ḥākim al-Nīsābūrī regarding jarh and ta’dīl, 531 questions asked by Muhammad b. al-Husayn al-Sulamī, and 531 questions asked to al-Dāraqutnī by al-Hākim al-Nīsābūrī. Husayn al-Sulamī, 621 questions asked by al-Barakānī, and 413 questions asked by Hamza b. Yūsuf al-Sahmī, which provide information about both sika and weak qāwīs. Among contemporary researchers, Sayyid Abū al-Maātī al-Nūrī and three of his friends, al-Bukhārī, Muslim, Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ijlī, Abū Zur’a al-Rāzī, Abū Dāwūd, al-Fasawī, Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī, al-Tirmidhī, Abū Zur’a al-Dimashkī, They have gathered the evaluations they found about 5496 rāwīs by scanning the works of al-Nasāʾī, al-Bazzār, and al-Dāraqutnī in their work al-Jāmiʿ fi al-jarḥ wa al-taʿdīl (I-III, Beirut 1412/1992).

Ricāl of Certain Books. There are also rijāl books that briefly introduce alphabetically the narrators of one or a few well-known books of hadīth, especially the books of the Kitāb al-Sitta. Among such works is Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Kalābāzī’s Ricāl al-Ṣaḥīḥi al-Buḫārī (ed. Abdullah al-Laysī, I-II, Beirut 1407/1987), Abū al-Walīd al-Bājī’s al-Taʿdīl wa al-tajrīḥ li-men ḫarreja leh al-Buḫārī fi’l-Jāmiʿi’ṣaḥīḥ (ed. Abū Lubāba Husayn, I-III, Riyadh 1406/1986), Ibn Manjūya’s Rijāl al-Ṣaḥīḥi Muslim (ed. Abdullah al-Laysī, I-II, Beirut 1407/1987), al-Suyūṭī’s Isʿāf al-muṭṭṭaʾ bi-ricāli al-Muvaṭṭṭaʾ (Dehli 1905, with al-Muvaṭṭṭaʾ, pp. 277-326; Beirut, ts, Dār al-kutūb al-ilmiyya, with al-Muvaṭṭṭaʾ, pp. 549-614). Many works with different characteristics have been written on the rijāʾ of Ṣaḥīḥayn. Among them are al-Dāraqutnī’s Ricāl al-Buḫārī and Muslim (Āsafiya Ktp, Rijāl, nr. 172, 40 folios) and Ḥākim al-Nīsābūrī’s Tesmiyet al-man aḫrejaḥümü al-Buḫārī wa Muslim (ed. Although there are detached works on the rijāli of the four Sunnahs included in the Qur’ān al-Sitta, the studies in this field have mostly concentrated on the rāwīs of the entire Qur’ān al-Sitta. The first work on this subject was written by ‘Abd al-Ghanī al-Maqdisī, known as al-Jammā’īlī, and his work al-Kamāl fī asmāʾi (maʿrifat) al-ricāl (Millet Ktp., Feyzullah Efendi, nr. 1506-1508) formed the basis for a series of later studies in the form of addenda and supplements. Yūsuf b. ʿAbd al-ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Mizzī, in the light of Ibn Abū Ḥātim’s al-Jarḥ wa al-taʿdīl, complemented al-Kamāl with some corrections and added biographies of some of the other works of the authors of the Qaṭub al-Sitta and called it Tehẕīb al-Kamāl fī asmāʾi al-ricāl (nşr. Bashshār Awwād Maʿrūf, IXXXV, Beirut 1403-1413/1983-1992). Zeḥabī supplemented this voluminous work of his teacher Mizzī by correcting some of the names and dates of death and adding new biographies to form Teẕhīb al-Tahẕībi al-Kamāl (Brockelmann, GAL Suppl., I, 606), which Safiyy al-Dīn Aḥmad b. ‘Abdullah al-Khazrajī edited under the title Ḫulāṣat al-Tahẕhīb al-Tahẕībi al-Kamāl (Cairo 1301, 1323, 1979). Al-Zahebī made a second abridgement of al-Thaẕīb al-Kamāl under the title al-Kāshif fī maʿrifat al-maʿrifat men lahū narratuna fi al-Qutub al-Sitta (I-III, Beirut 1983; I-II, Jeddah 1992), and this work attracted great attention from scholars. Abū al-Mahāsin al-Husaynī, too, made a second specialisation of his teacher Mizzī’s Tehẕīb al-Kamāl by excluding the biographies of those who were not from the Qutub al-Sitta, and then added the biographies of the Imams of the four sects in al-Muvaṭṭaʾ and al-Musnad, and produced al-Teẕkire fī rijāli al-ʿasharah (Köprülü Ktp., nr. 263, 290 folios). Although al-Mizzī’s work was the subject of supplementation and commentary by scholars such as Moghultay b. Kilic, Ibn al-Mulakkin, and Sibt Ibn al-ʿAjamī, Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAskalānī’s work received the greatest attention. Since Ibn Ḥajar attached primary importance to the information that would be useful for the cerh and taʿdī of the qarāh and taʿdī of the rāwīs, he made one-third of the volume of the work by omitting what he deemed superfluous in the biographies; he also included the biographies that were included in al-Kamāl but omitted by Mizzī, and he made extensive use of earlier works, especially al-Zaḥabī’s Taẕhīb al-Tahẕīb. 415 (12,191) biographies, which he called Tehẕīb al-Tahẕīb (I-XII, Hyderābād 1325-1327; I-VI, Beirut 1412/1991). Later on, he further expanded this work, which included 8826 narrators without repetitions and 11,973 with duplicates, by using pseudonyms, and called it Taḳrīb al-Tahẕīb (ed. ʿAbd al-Wahhāb ʿAbd al-Latīf, I-II, Beirut 1395/1975, 2nd ed.; ed. Muhammad Awwāme, Beirut 1398/1978, 2nd ed.). Ibn Ḥajar also has a work entitled Taʿjīl al-menfeʿa bi-zawāʾidi rijāli al-eʾimmadi al-arbaʿa (Ḥaydarābād 1324) on 1732 persons who are mentioned in the books of the imams of the four sects but are not among the narrators of the Qutub al-Sitta.

Rijāl of Certain Countries. Although the first books of rijāl dealt with the general characteristics of the narrators without any classification, the later books examined them according to the regions they lived in, their reliability or weakness, their nicknames and tags, and other characteristics. Abū Yaʿlā al-Khalīlī’s (d. 446/1055) al-Irshād fī maʿrifat al-ʿulamāʾi al-ḥadīs̱ (ʿulamāʾi al-bilād), in which he lists 914 scholars, most of them muhaddithis, who lived from the generation of the tabaʿ al-tābiʿin until his time according to their hometowns, is one of the first works on this subject (nşr. Muhammad Saīd b. ‘Umar Idrīs, I-III, Riyadh 1409/1989). In addition to works such as al-Irshād, which grouped muhaddithis according to the cities they lived in, there were also works that dealt separately with some cities where famous rāwīs and scholars lived. In these works, the muhaddithis and other scholars living in a city, those who came to that city for a short period of time and narrated the narrations, their places in the narrations are specifically mentioned and analysed alphabetically. Among the main works of this kind, in which weak and reliable narrators are mentioned together, are Ḥākim al-Nīsābūrī’s Ẕikru aḫbāri Iṣbahān, also known as Ẕikru aḫbāri Iṣbahān, which is said to be in six volumes and on which various addenda, muhtasar and muntehabs were written (Sezgin, GAS, I, 222), Abū Nuaym al-Iṣfahānī’s Ẕikru aḫbāri Iṣbahān, also known as Tārīḫu Iṣbahān (ed. Sven Dedering, I-II, Leiden 1931-1934; ed. Muhammad al-Sam’ānī, Ibn al-Dubaysī and Ibn al-Najjār al-Baghdādī wrote important addenda on it (I-XIV, Cairo 1931), Ibn Asāqir’s Tārīḫ al-Baghdād, The chronological Tārīḫu medīnat al-Dimashḳ, which is said to be at least eighty volumes in its entirety, and on which various addenda and miscellanies have been written (some volumes, chapters, and some biographies of the work have been published by various scholars, and a miscellany by Ibn Manzūr has been published [ed. Rūhiya al-Nahhās et al, I-XXIX, Dhimashq 1404-1408/1984-1988], the nineteen volumes in the Zāhiriyya Library have been facsimilated, and the book has been abridged by ʿAbd al-Qādir Bedrān [I-VII-, Beirut 1399/1979]). In addition, the history books of important cities such as Mecca, Medina, Kufa, Basra, Egypt, San’a, and Qazvin include information about the hadīth scholars who grew up in these cities.

Esmâ and Kunâ. The fact that a narrator, who is generally known by his name, is mentioned in some scripts or sources by his dog tags or that a person known by his dog tags is mentioned by his name has made it difficult to identify the narrators, and on the other hand, the similarity of some names and dog tags has caused confusion, so there is a need for works that examine the names and dog tags of the persons in the chain of narration. Ibn al-Salāh (DİA, XI, 419) categorised them into nine parts (DİA, XI, 419), and various works have been written by well-known muhaddithis since the third (IXth) century on the subject of asmā and kunā. Bukhārī’s Kitāb al-Kunāʾ (Ḥaydābād 1360), Muslim’s Kitāb al-Kunāʾ wa al-asmāʾ (ed. Abdurrahim Muhammad al-Kāshgarī, I-II, Medina 1404/1984), Abū Bishr al-Dūlābī’s Kitāb al-Kunāʾ wa al-asmāʾ (ed. The works of Abū Bishr al-Dūlābī, al-Kunāʾ wa al-asmāʾ (I-II, Hyderābād 1322), al-Kunāʾ wa al-asmāʾ (I-II, Hyderābād 1322), al-Hākim al-Kabīr’s Kitāb al-asmāʾ wa al-künāʾ, which contains important information about 2096 people (ed. Yūsuf b. Muhammad al-Duhayl, I-IV, Medina 1994; Zeḥabī alphabetised it under the title al-Muḳtenā fī serdi al-künā [Millet Ktp, Feyzullah Efendi, nr. 1531; Mektebet al-Ahmadiyya, nr. 328]), Abū al-Faraj Ibn al-Jawzī’s Kashf al-niḳāb ʿani al-asmāʾ wa al-elḳāb (ed. Barbier de Meynard, JA [1907], IX, 173-244, 365-428; X, 55-118, 193-273) are the major works of this genre. The books of asmā and kunā should be considered as a continuation of the works in the genre of jarh wa ta’dīl since they also examine the narratorial status of the people whose biographies they include, apart from the Prophet and the Companions, in terms of their general character.

Mu’telif and Miscellaneous. Identifying the identities of the narrators whose names, nicknames, tags and nouns are the same or close to each other in terms of spelling (mu’telif) and different in pronunciation (miscellaneous) is extremely important for evaluating the narrations, and many works have been written in order to prevent the confusion of mu’telif and miscellaneous names such as Sellâm-Salâm, Abbâd-Ubâd, Abbâs-Ayyâş. On the similarities in tribal names, Muḫtelif al-ḳabāʾil wa muʾtelifühā (ed. F. Wüstenfeld, Göttingen 1850; ed. Ibrāhīm al-Abyārī, Cairo-Beirut 1400/1980) is an early example of this genre. As far as is known, the first work of the same genre, especially on the hadīth narrators, is al-Dāraqutnī’s al-Muʾtelif wa’l-muḫtelif, a semi-alphabetical work (ed. Muwaffak b. ‘Abdullah b. ‘Abd al-Qādir, I-V, Beirut 1406/1986). Later, ʿAbd al-Ghānī al-Azdī wrote al-Muʾtelif waʿl-muḫtelif fī esmāʾi al-ricāl (fī esmāʾi naḳalat al-ḥadīs̱) to complement his teacher’s work (ed. Muhammad Jaʿfar al-Zaynabī, Allahābād 1327), and Jaʿfar b. Muhammad al-Mustaghfirī wrote an addendum to it entitled al-Ziyādāt fī Kitāb al-Muʾtelif wa al-muḫtelif (Dār al-kutūb al-Zāhiriyya, Hadith, nr. 525, vr. 45-67). Other studies were conducted to supplement al-Dārakutnī’s work, and al-Khatīb al-Baghdādī in his al-Muʾtanif fī takmilat al-Muḫtelif wa’l-muʾtelif (Brockelmann, GAL, I, 401) added to it, taking into account the work of ʿAbd al-Gānī al-Azdī, and al-Rūšātī made various corrections in his al-Iʿlâm bimā fī al-Muḫtelif wa al-muʾtelif li al-Dāreḳuṭnī mine al-awhām, some parts of which have survived. Later, Ibn Maqūlā, based on al-Khatīb al-Baghdādī’s al-Muʾṭanif, produced al-Ikmāl fī refʿi al-irtiyāb ʿani al-muʾtelif wa’l-muḫtelif fi al-asmāʾ wa’l-künā wa’l-ensāb, which is the largest work of this genre and has a more organised alphabetical system than its predecessors (nşr. Abdurrahman b. Yahyā al-Muallimī, I-VI, Hyderābād 1962-1967; ed. Nâyif Abbas, VII, Beirut 1976). The most important works to complete this work are Ibn Nuqta’s Ikmāl al-Ikmāl (ed. ʿAbd al-Qayyūm Abdurabbinnabī, Mecca 1408/1987) and Ibn al-Sābūnī’s Tekmilet al-Ikmāli al-Ikmāl fī al-ʿensāb wa al-asmāʾ wa al-elḳāb (ed. Mustafa Jawād, Baghdad 1377/1958; Beirut 1406/1986). The work Taḳyīd al-muhmal, written by Abū ʿAlī al-Gassānī on the muʿālīs and miscellaneous in Ṣaḥīḥayn alone, is an important work that differs from previous works in its classification style and content (DIA, XIII, 396). The content of the works on Ansāba is largely related to mu’telif and miscellaneous (see NISBE).

Allied and Mütfik and Müfterik. It is certain that the confusion of people whose names, nicknames, tags and nisbahs are the same in terms of both spelling and pronunciation, especially those who lived in the same century, will lead to great mistakes. Among the narrators, along with their names and father’s names, there are also some people whose grandfather’s names or tags and nisbahs are the same. For example, there are six people named Khalīl b. Ahmad and four people named Ahmad b. Ja’far b. Hamdān. Among the works belonging to the genre of allies and muttaqifs is Abū al-Fath al-Azdī’s Tesmiyet al-man wāfeḳa ismühū isma abīhi mine al-ṣaḥāba wa al-tābiʿîn wa man baʿdehüm mine al-muḥaddis̱în (nşr. Bāsim Faṣṣal Ahmad al-Jawābire, al-Quwayt 1408/1988), al-Khatīb al-Baghdādī’s al-Muttafiḳ wa’l-muftariḳ (Suleymaniye Ktp, Asad Efendi, nr. 2097, vol. II; Millet Ktp., Feyzullah Efendi, nr. 1515, vols. 10-19) are the best-known examples of this genre. Ibn al-Qayserānī’s al-Ansāb al-muttafiḳa, an original work of this genre, was published together with Abū Mūsā al-Madīnī’s addendum to it, al-Ziyādāt (ed. P. de Jong, Leiden 1865). Among the books written for the purpose of identifying the confederate and the fabricator in the names of places and cities, the muhaddith al-Khāzimī’s Me’ttefeḳa lafẓuhū wa’ftereḳa müsemmāḥu fi’l-amāqin wa’l-buldān (Süleymaniye Ktp, Lâleli, nr. 2140, 197 folios) and al-Mushtarik vażʿan wa’l-muftariḳ ṣuḳʿan (ed. Ferdinand Wüstenfeld, Göttingen 1846), which he compiled based on Yāqūt al-Hamāwī’s Muʿjam al-buldān.

Müştebih. The works written about persons whose names are the same but whose fathers’ names or nisbas are different in spelling or close to each other but different in pronunciation (e.g., Muḥammad b. ʿAqīl and Muḥammad b. Uqayl) constitute the genre of müştebih (mutashābih). Mushabih is also used in the sense of mu’telif and miscellaneous. ‘Abd al-Ghanī al-Azdī’s Müştebih al-nisba (nşr. Muhammad Jaʿfar al-Zaynabī, Allahābād 1327, together with the same author’s al-Muʾtelif wa’l-muḫtelif), Khatīb al-Baghdādī’s Talḫīṣ al-muḥtashābih fi al-resm wa ḥimāyāt al-muḥtashābih fi al-resm wa ḥimāyāt mā šākala minhü ʿan bawādiri’t-taṣḥīf wa’l-wahm (ed. Sukayna al-Shihābī, I-II, Damascus 1985) are among the first works of this nature. Zeḥabī’s al-Mushtabih fi al-ricāl (ed. P. de Jong, Leiden 1881; ed. ʿAli Muhammad al-Bijāwī, Cairo 1962) on the similarities in names, nisba, tag and nicknames, which he created by making use of the previous rich literature, attracted great attention, and studies were made on it in the form of addenda and corrections. Among these, Ibn Rāfi’s Ẕeylü Müştebihi’n-nisba (ed. Salāh al-Dīn al-Munajjid, Beirut 1394/1974, 1396/1976) consists of a small treatise. Ibn Nāṣir al-Dīn made two important studies on this book of al-Zahebī. One of them is a voluminous work in its field, Tawżīḥ al-Muḥtabih fī żabṭı asmāʾi al-ruvāt wa anṣābihim wa alḳābihim wa kunāḥum (nşr. Shuayb al-Arnaūt, I-VI, Beirut 1403/1982; ed. Muhammad Naīm al-ʿAraqsūsī, I-X, Beirut 1414/1993), and the other is al-Iʿlâm bimā vaḳaʿa fī Müştabih alẕ-Ẕaḥabī mine al-awḥām (ed. Abdurabbaynabī Muhammad, Mecca 1405/1984; Medina 1407/1987). The second important work on al-Zaḥabī’s work is Ibn Ḥajar al-Askalānī’s Tabṣīr al-muntabih bi-taḥrīri al-Muḥtabih (ed. Ali Muhammad al-Bijāwī, I-IV, Beirut, ts., al-Maṭabaṭ al-ʿilmiyya). Among the works on the obscure names and genealogies in certain books, Ibn Khatīb al-Dhahshah’s al-Muvaṭṭṭaʾ and Tuḥfat al-ẕaw al-abar fī obscure al-asmāʾ wa’n-neseb on Ṣaḥīḥayn should be mentioned here (ed. Traugott Mann, Leiden 1905).

Mubhemāt. In the hadīth’s senad, there are some narrators who are mentioned with ambiguous expressions such as “recul, sika” without mentioning their names, and in the text, there may be some people who are mentioned without mentioning their identities such as “recul, ibn al-fulān, bint al-fulān”. Since not knowing some of the names in the script would undermine the trust in that narration, works have been written to introduce them. ‘Abd al-Ghanī al-‘Azdī was one of the first to produce a work in this genre with his Kitāb al-‘Iawāmiż wa’l-mubhemāt (mühmelāt) (Millet Ktp., Feyzullah Efendi, nr. 261/2; Baghdad Evkaf Ktp., nr. 2886/1; Dâr al-kütübi al-Zâhiriyye, Umumi, nr. 1447, Sufism, nr. 129; for the Feyzullah Efendi copy, cf. Weisweiler, p. 94, nr. 62). Khatīb al-Baghdādī’s Kitāb al-ʿĀsmāʾi al-mubkamma fi al-anbāʾi al-muḥkamma (ed. Izz ad-Dīn ʿAlī al-Sayyid, Cairo 1405/1984), al-Nawawī reorganised it under the title Kitāb al-Ishārāt ilā beyān al-asmāʾi al-mubḥamāt in order to make it more useful and expressed different opinions on the pronunciation of many names (Lahore 1341; in the last part of Khatīb al-Baghdādī’s aforementioned work, pp. 531-622). Ibn Bashqūwāl’s style of organisation is similar to that of Kitāb al-ʿAsmāʾi al-mubḥamma. The same author’s extensive Kitāb al-awāmiżi al-asmāʾi al-mubḥamma al-wāḳıʿa fī mutūni al-eḥādīs̱i al-musnada (ed. Izz ad-Dīn ʿAlī al-Sayyid, I-II, Beirut 1407/1987) was edited by well-known hadīth scholars. Ibn al-Irāqī’s Kitāb al-Mustafād min mubhemāti al-metn wa al-isnād, in which he organised the hadīths with ambiguous names according to the chapters of fiqh in order to make it easier to find the person sought, is the most useful of the works in this genre (ed. ʿAbd al-Rahman ʿAbd al-Hamīd al-Ber, I-III, Jeddah 1414/1994).

Wafayat. Since the determination of whether the hadith narrators met each other or not while examining the hadiths depends on knowing their birth and death dates, various works called “tawārīhu al-ruvāt wa’l-wafayāt” have been written in hadith methodology. One of the earliest examples of the books on hadīth, which includes not only hadīth narrators but also those who served hadīth, is Abū al-Qāsīm al-Beghawī’s (d. 317/929) Tārīḫu vefāti al-shüyūḫ (Dār al-kutūb al-Zāhiriyya, Majmua, nr. 106). In the same century, Ibn Zabr al-Rabaʿī wrote Tārīḫu mawlīd al-ʿuʿamāʾ wa wafayātihim (ed. Abdullah b. Aḥmad b. Sulayman al-Hamed, I-II, Riyadh 1410), which lists the birth and death dates of the scholars, especially the sahāba and tābiīn, who lived from the Hijrah until 338 (949), and the dates of the occurrence of some important events. Various addenda were written to the work, among which Ẕeylü Tārīḫi mawlīd al-ʿulamāʾ wa wafayātihim (nşr. Abdullah b. Aḥmad b. Suleiman al-Hamed, Riyadh 1409) by the author’s disciple Abū Moḥammad ʿAbd al-ʿAbd al-ʿAbd al-ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz b. Aḥmad al-Qattanī includes the scholars who died between 338-462 (949-1070). Abū Muhammad Ibn al-Akfānī Hibatullah b. Aḥmad’s addendum to this work, which covers the years 463-483 (1071-1090), is a small volume (ed. Abdullah b. Aḥmad b. Sulayman al-Hamed, Riyadh 1409/1989). The addendum written by al-Munzirī to Ibn al-Mufaddal’s al-Wafayāt al-naḳalah, al-Takmila li-Wafayāt al-naḳalah, covering the years 581-642 (1185-1244), is the most voluminous of all (ed. Bashshār Awwād Maʿrūf, I-IV, Beirut 1401/1981). This work, like its predecessors, includes not only hadīth scholars but also various personalities such as poets, poets, viziers, and rulers. Ibn Hallikān’s famous Wafayāt al-aʿyān and Anbāʾ al-abnāʾi al-zamān are biographies of famous people and histories of literature, and have nothing to do with the study of rijāl, which is the goal of the hadīth methodology. Among the later books of fafayāt are Muḥammad b. Ibrāhīm al-Jazari’s Ḥawādis̱ al-zamān (DIA, VII, 506-507), al-Zaḥabī’s al-Ishāra ilā wafayāt al-aʿyān al-munteḳā min Tārīḫi al-Islam (nşr. Ibrāhīm Sālih, Beirut 1411/1991), the addendum al-Muḳtafā written by al-Birzālī to Abū Shāma’s ʿAẕ-Ẕayl ʿalā al-Rawżatayn (DIA, VI, 216), and the addendum al-Wafayāt written by his disciple Ibn Rāfiʿ in the lunar order of the muhaddiths from 737 (1336) to his death in 774 (1372-73) (ed. Bashshār Awwād Ma’rūf – Sālih Mahdī Abbas, I-II, Beirut 1402/1982) and al-Wafayāt of the muhaddith Ibn Kunfūz covering the years 11-807 (632-1404) (ed. Ādil Nuwayhiz, Beirut 1971). Ibn Kunfuz’s work, also known as Sharaf al-ṭṭālib fī asna al-maṭṭālib, can be found in his fellow Moorish compatriots al-Wafayāt of al-Wanṣarīsī (701-912/1302-1506) and Ibn al-ʿAlī Together with Kādī’s Laḳṭ al-ferāʾid (c. 700-1009/1301-1601), written as an addendum to Ibn Kunfuz’s work, it was published under the title Elf sene mine al-wafayāt fī s̱alās̱e kütub (ed. Muhammad Hajjī, Rabat 1396/1976).

3-Hadith Sciences. a) Jarh and Ta’dīl. Although the books of rijāl al-hadīs, which deal with the narrators according to their being sika or weak, were compiled in an early period, the principles of jarh and ta’dīl were compiled in much later periods. The issues of jarh and ta’dīl were dealt with as a scientific discipline in the books of usūl al-hadīth from al-Hākim al-Nīsābūrī onwards. As far as is known, the first book on the science of cerḥ and taʿdīl is Ḳāʿide fi’l-jarḥ wa’t-taʿdīl by Ḳāʿida al-Subkī (d. 771/1370) (nşr. ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Abū Gudda, Beirut 1388/1968, 1400/1980, 1410/1990 [in Erbaʿu resāʾil]; Cairo 1398/1978). Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Hayʾī al-Laqnawī’s al-Rafʿ wa al-takmīl fi al-jarḥ wa al-taʿdīl (ed. ‘Abd al-Fattāḥ Abū Gudda, Aleppo 1383/1963; Beirut 1388/1968; expanded edition, Beirut 1407/1987), Jamāl al-Dīn al-Qāsimī’s treatise al-Jarḥ wa’t-taʿdīl (Beirut 1399/1979, 1405/1985; Cairo, ts. ), Muhammad Mustafa al-Aʿẓamī’s Menḥajj al-naḳd ʿinde al-muḥaddis̱în (Riyadh 1982), in which he focuses on general hadīth criticism and responds to the Orientalists’ claims in this regard, Muhammad Ziyāurrahman al-A’zamī’s Dirāsāt fi’l-jarḥ wa’t-taʿdīl (Benāres 1403/1983), which can be considered a textbook, Fārūk Hamāde’s master’s thesis entitled al-Menhej al-Islamī fi’l-jarḥ wa’t-taʿdīl (Rabat 1409/1989), and Emin Āşıkkutlu’s Ph: The Science of Jarh and Taʿdīl (Istanbul 1992) are some of the studies on this subject.

b) Ilal al-hadith. Since the second half of the second (VIIIth) century, works on the subject of “illa” (plural “ilal”), which refers to the hidden defects in the text or senad of hadiths that prevent them from being accepted as authentic and can only be understood by hadith authorities, have been written according to the names of the narrators or subjects. The most famous of these is ʿAlī b. Medīnī’s ʿIlāl al-ḥadīs̱ wa maʿrifat al-ricāl (ed. M. Mustafa al-Aʿ zamī, Beirut 1972 [under the title al-ʿIlāl]; ed. ‘Abd al-Mu’tī Amīn Kalʿajī, Aleppo 1400/1980), and the Kitāb al-ʿIlāl wa maʿrifat al-ricāl (ed. Talāt Koçyiğit – Ismail Cerrahoğlu, I, Ankara 1963, II, Istanbul 1987; ed. Wassiyyullah b. Muhammad Abbas, I-IV [the last volume is a fihrist], Beirut-Riyadh 1408/1988; ed. Muhammad Ḥosām Beyzūn, I-II, Beirut 1410/1990 [al-Jāmiʿ fi al-ʿIlāl wa maʿrifat al-ricāl]); Min kalāmi al-Imām Abī ʿAbdillāh Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal fī ʿIlāl wa maʿrifat al-ricāl, which also contains his views on the subject of ilāl as recorded by some of his disciples. Ḥanbal fī ʿilal al-ḥadīs̱ wa maʿrifat al-ricāl (ed. Subhī al-Badrī al-Sāmerrāʾī, Riyadh 1409/1988), as well as al-Tirmidhī’s two books on the subject are the earliest examples of this genre. Of the latter two, al-ʿIlāl al-ṣaġīr at the end of al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ was commented on by Ibn Rajab al-Hanbalī under the title Sharḥ al-ʿIlāl al-Ṭirmīẕī (nşr. Subhī Jāsim al-Humayd, Baghdad 1396/1976; ed. Nūr al-Dīn Itr, I-II, Dimashq 1398/1978; ed. Hemmām ʿAbd al-Rahman Saīd, Zarqā/Jordan 1987). The second work is ʿIlāl al-Tirmidhī al-qabīr (ed. Subhī al-Badrī al-Sāmerrāʾī et al., Beirut 1409/1989), which contains 703 hadiths, most of which al-Tirmidhī transmitted from his teacher al-Bukhārī, and evaluations of some of the narrators. The work was reorganised by Abū Ṭālib al-Kādī according to the order of the books in al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ and Hamza Dīb Mustafa conducted a master’s degree study on it (I-II, no place, 1402). Ibn Abū Ḥātim’s ʿIlal al-ḥadīs̱ (I-II, Cairo 1343-1344/1924-1925; I-II, Baghdad 1971; I-II, Beirut 1405/1985) and al-Dārakutnī’s al-ʿIlāl al-wārida fi al-eḥādīs̱i al-nabawiyya (ed. Mahfūzurrahman Zaynullah al-Silafī, I-VIII, Riyadh 1405-1412/1985-1991) is one of the most well-known works in this field. Abū al-Faraj Ibn al-Jawzī, in his al-ʿIlāl al-mutanāhiyya fi al-eḥādīs̱i al-wāḥiyya (ed. Khalīl al-Mays, I-II, Beirut 1403/1983), evaluated 1579 narrations in thirty-nine books, and these evaluations were criticised by some later scholars as too harsh. Some works, such as Yahyā b. Maīn’s al-Tārīḫ wa’l-ʿilal, Ibn ʿAdī’s al-Kāmil fī ḍuʿafāʾi al-muḥaddis̱īn wa ʿilal al-ḥadīs̱, which are mentioned among the works on both weak and sika and weak narrators (ibid.), are also related to the subject of ilel.

c) Garīb al-hadīth. Although studies on explaining rare (gharīb) words in hadīth texts started from the early periods, it is controversial who wrote the first work on this subject. It is not known whether the works of Nadr b. Shumayl (d. 204/820) and Abū Ubayda Ma’mer b. Musnā (d. 209/824 [?]), which are known to be very small volumes, have survived. Ibn al-Nadīm says that he saw a 200-variety copy of Asmaī’s Kitāb al-Iarīb al-ḥadīs̱ (al-Fihrist, p. 61). Abū Ubayd Kāsim b. Sallām’s ʿIarīb al-ḥadīs̱ (ed. Muhammad Azīm al-Dīn, I-IV, Hyderābād 1384-1387/1964-1967; I-II, Beirut 1406/1986; ed. Husayn Muhammad Sharaf, I-II, Cairo 1405/1984) is the most voluminous of these works. Many studies have been carried out on the book in terms of supplementation, revision, alphabetisation and versification. Ibn Qutayba’s Ġarīb al-ḥadīs̱ (nşr. Sāmiya Muhammad Aḥmad, Paris 1970; ed. Abdullah Jubūrī, I-III, Baghdad 1977-1978; ed. Riza al-Suwaysī, Tunis 1979; I-II, Beirut 1408/1988), Ibrāhīm al-Harbī’s Iarīb al-ḥadīs̱ (ed. Suleiman b. Ibrāhīm b. Ibrāhīm b. al-Āyid, I-III, Baghdad 1977-1978; ed. Muhammad al-ʿĀyid, I-V, Jeddah 1405/1985), and al-Khattābī’s ʿIarīb al-ḥadīs̱ (ed. ʿAbd al-Karīm Ibrāhīm al-ʿAzbāwī, I-II, Damascus 1402/1982) and ʿAbd al-Gāfir al-Fārisī’s Majmaʿu’l-ġarāʾib wa menbaʿu’r-reġāʾib are important works in this field. Zamakhsharī’s al-Fāʾiḳ fī Ṭarīb al-ḥadīs̱ (I-II, Hyderābād 1324; ed. Ali Muhammad al-Bijāwī – Muhammad Abū al-Fazl Ibrāhīm, I-IV, Cairo 1364/1945), although alphabetical according to the first two letters of the words, is not very useful because it lists all the strange words in a hadīth together. Kādī Iyāz’s Mashāriḳ al-anwār ʿalā ṣıḥāḥi al-ās̱ār (Cairo 1332/1913; I-II, Tunis 1333/1914), Abū al-Faraj Ibn al-Jawzī’s Iarīb al-ḥadīs̱ (ed. ‘Abd al-Mu’tī Amīn Kal’acī, I-II, Beirut 1405/1985) and Majd al-Dīn Ibn al-Asīr’s al-Nihāya (I-IV, Bulak 1311, 1322; Cairo 1333/1905; ed. Mahmūd Muhammad al-Tanāhī – Thāhir Ahmad al-Zāwī, I-V, Cairo 1383/1963; Aleppo, ts. [al-Mektabat al-Islâmiyya]) are important works. A different type of works on this subject are those that deal with both Qurʾānic and hadīth gharīb words together. Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Kharawi’s (d. 401/1011) Kitāb al-‘Iʿarībayn (ed. Mahmūd Muhammad al-Tanāhī, Cairo 1970) set an example for later works in that he abandoned the hadiths in which the words occur and applied the alphabetical system. To complete this work, Abū Mūsā al-Madīnī wrote al-Majmūʿ al-muġīs̱ fī Sharība al-Ḳurʾān wa al-ḥadīs̱ (ed. ʿAbd al-Karīm al-ʿAzbāwī, I-III, Jeddah 1406-1408/1986-1988). Muhammad Tahir al-Fattanī’s Majmaʿu biḥāri al-anwār fī Sharāʾibi al-tanzīl wa leṭāʾifi al-aḫbār (I-II, Leknev 1248; I-IV, Leknev 1284, 1314; ed. Habībürrahman al-A’zamī, I-V, Hyderābād-Dekken 1967-1973; I-V, Medina 1415/1994) is a Qurʾānic and hadīth dictionary (DİA, XIII, 378).

d) Miscellaneous al-hadith. Studies have been carried out since the early periods in order to reconcile some hadiths that seem to be contradictory to each other with methods such as jum’ and te’līf, naskh, preference and tawakkuf. “Imam Shāfi’ī wrote Iḫtilāf al-ḥadīs̱ (Cairo 1321, in the margin of volume VII of al-ʿUmm; ed. Āmir Ahmad Haydar, Beirut 1405/1985; ed. Muhammad Ahmad ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, Beirut 1406/1987). Later, Ibn Qutayba wrote Taʾwīl al-muḫtelifi al-ḥadīs̱ (Cairo 1326; ed. Muhammad Zuhrī al-Najjār, Beirut 1393/1973; ed. ʿAbd al-Qādir Aḥmad Atā, Beirut 1408/1988; tr. M. Hayri Kırbaşoğlu, Hadith Mudafaası, Istanbul 1979). Other important works of this genre include Abū Jaʿfar al-Taḥāwī’s Müşkil al-ās̱ār (I-IV, Haydarābād-Dekken 1333; the copy in Millet Ktp, Feyzullah Efendi [nr. 273-279); the edition of the work made by Şuayb al-Arnaût under the title Sharḥu Müşkil al-âs̱âr [I-XVI, Beirut 1415/1994] contains 6179 narrations) and among the works on this work, Abū al-Walīd al-Bājī’s Muḫtaṣaru Müşkili al-ās̱ār and its second commentary by Jamāl al-Malatī under the title al-Muʿtaṣar mine al-Muḫtaṣar (I-II, Hyderābād 1307, 1317-1318, 1362; I-II, Beirut, ts. , Ālem al-kutub) should be mentioned. Again, in his Sharḥ al-Maʿāni al-ās̱ār, which he organised according to the chapters of fiqh, al-Taḥāwī dealt with the ahkām hadīths that scholars considered contradictory to each other, stated their nāsih and mensuh, and showed that there was no contradiction between them by compiling the hadīths that were thought to be contradictory. Bedr al-Dīn al-Aynī’s commentaries on this work, Mabāni al-aḫbār fī sharḥi Meʿāni al-ās̱ār and Nuḫab al-efkār fī tenḳīḥi Mabāni al-aḫbār, are important (for the manuscript copies of both works in the author’s calligraphy, as well as for the commentaries, cf. Sezgin, GAS, I, 440). Ibn Fūrek analysed the hadiths on the attributes of God, which the theologians outside the Ahl al-Sunnah objected to, in his work Müşkilü’l-ḥadîs̱ wa beyânühû (nşr. ʿAbd al-Muʿtī Amīn Kalʿajī, Aleppo 1402/1982; ed. Mûsâ Muhammad Ali, Beirut, ts., al-Mektabat al-asriyya), he interprets it in accordance with Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ash’arī’s sect. Other works in this genre were written in the following centuries, including Abdullah b. ‘Ali al-Najdī al-Qasīmī’s Müşkilāt al-eḥādīs̱i al-nabawiyya wa beyānühā (Beirut 1405/1985), in which he discusses and defends some thirty hadīths on various issues that are debated today, The works al-Teʾlīf beyna muḫtelifi al-ḥadīs̱ (Cairo 1405/1984), in which Muhammad Rashād Khalīfa analysed eighteen hadiths, and Ismail Lutfi Cakan’s Hadiths: Theoretical Aspects of the Disagreement in Hadiths and Ways of Solution (Istanbul 1982, 1996) can be mentioned.

e) Nāsih and Mensuh. The science of nāsih and mensuh, which deals with the hadiths that seem to be so contradictory that they cannot be reconciled due to the abrogation of some of the Prophet’s sunnahs by the Prophet himself in later periods, is closely related to muhtalif al-hadīth. One of the first works on naskh in hadith is Abū Bakr al-Asrem’s (d. 261/874-75 [?]) Nāsiḫu’l-ḥadīs̱ ve mensūḫuh (first two volumes DTCF Ktp., Ismail Saib Sencer, nr. 1323, the third volume is in Dârü’l-kütübi’l-Mısriyye, nr. 1587). Ibn Shāhin’s al-Nāsiḫ wa al-mensūḫ mine al-ḥadīs̱ (nşr. Samīr b. Amīn al-Zuhayrī, Amman 1408/1988; ed. Ali Muhammad Muawwaz – Ādil Ahmad ʿAbd al-Abd al-Mawjūd, Beirut 1412/1992), al-Khāzimī’s al-Iʿtibār fī beyān al-nāsiḫ wa al-mensūḫ mine al-ās̱ār (Hyderābād 1319, 1359/1940; Cairo 1346/1927; ed. Muhammad Ahmad ‘Abd al-Azīz, Cairo, ts. [Mektebet al-Atıf]; nşr. Muhammad Rāgib al-Tabbāḥ, Aleppo 1346/1927; ed. ‘Abd al-Mu’tī Amīn Kal’acī, Aleppo 1403/1982 [?]), Abū al-Faraj Ibn al-Jawzī’s Aḫbāru aḥli al-rüsūḫ (al-Nāsiḫ wa’l-mensūḫ mine al-ḥadīs̱) (Cairo 1322/1904; et al. ) and al-Ja’berī’s Rüsūḫ al-aḥbār fī mensūḫi al-aḫbār (ed. Hasan Muhammad Maqbūlī al-Ahdel, Beirut-San’a 1409/1989), in which he organised the nāṣih and mensūḥ hadīths according to their subjects. Ali Osman Koçkuzu, in his doctoral study titled Hadith Nāsih-Mensūh Meselesi (Istanbul 1985), analysed the nature of the issue and the subjects that are subject to the issue with examples.

f) Esbāb al-wurūd al-hadīth. It is a discipline that investigates the reasons why, where and when hadiths were narrated in order to better understand them. One of the two most well-known works on this discipline, in which few works have been written due to its underdevelopment, is al-Suyūṭī’s al-Asbāb al-wurūd al-ḥadīs̱ (al-Lümaʿ fī al-asbābi al-ḥadīs̱) (nşr. Yahyā b. Ismāʿil Aḥmad, Beirut 1404/1984; Cairo 1409/1988), and Ibn Hamza al-Husaynī’s al-Bayān wa al-taʿrīf fī esbābi wurūd al-ḥadīs̱i al-sharīf (I-II, Aleppo 1329/1911, 1929-1930; ed. Husayn ‘Abd al-Majid Hāshim, I-III, Cairo 1393-1395/1973-1975; ed. Seyf al-Dīn al-Kātib, I-II, Beirut 1401/1981). Ramazan Ayvallı conducted a doctoral study entitled Esbāb al-urūd al-hadīs and its place and importance in Islamic theology (AU Faculty of Theology, 1979).

5-Hadith Commentaries. The works written for the purpose of commenting on hadiths are, in a way, studies in which the sciences of dirāyat al-hadīth are applied. Determining the identities of the people in the scripts, their status in terms of cerh and ta’dīl, as well as determining the reason for the hadith texts, whether they are nāsih or mensuh, explaining the words of rare, compiling those that seem to be contradictory to each other, making judgements from hadiths, etc. issues constitute the main subjects of hadith commentaries. Although the explanations of some musannifs about the hadiths after recording them are also a kind of commentary, independent studies to explain all the words or parts of a hadith book that need to be explained, as far as known, started with al-Khattābī from the IVth (X.) century. In the meantime, especially the Qutub al-Sitta has been the subject of intensive commentary studies. Among the most important of the hundred or so works on al-Bukhārī’s al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ is al-Khatābī’s short commentary Aʿlâm al-sunan (Suleymaniye Ktp., Ayasofya, nr. 687; Millet Ktp., Feyzullah Efendi, nos. 261, 262, 437; TSMK, III. Ahmed, nr. 393), Shams al-Dīn al-Kirmānī’s voluminous commentary al-Kawāqib al-derārī (I-XXV, Cairo 1935-1945), Ibn Ḥajar al-Askalānī’s Fetḥ al-bārī, which is considered the most perfect of the commentaries on Ṣaḥīḥ al-Buḫārī (Delhi 1890; I-XIII, Bulak 1300-1301; ed. Muhibb al-Dīn al-Khatīb et al, I-XIII, Cairo 1407/1986-87), Bedr al-Dīn al-Aynī’s ʿUmdat al-ḳārī (I-XI, Istanbul 1308-1311; I-XIII, Cairo 1348; I-XXV, Cairo 1348; I-XX, Cairo 1348; I-XX, Cairo 1392/1972), Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Qastallānī’s Irshād al-sārī (I-X, Bulak 1267, 1275, 1276, 1285, 1288, 1288, 1292, 13092, 1304-1306, with al-Nawawī’s commentary on Ṣaḥīḥ al-Muslim in the margin), which is largely based on Fatḥ al-bārī, but unlike other commentaries, explains each word in a short and concise manner; Cairo 1276, 1306, 1306, 1307, 1325-1326; Leknev 1876; Nivalkishor 1284). One of the earliest commentaries on Muslim’s al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ was al-Muʿlim bi-fawāʾidi Muslim (I-VII, Cairo 1328; ed. Muhammad al-Shāzalī, I-III, Tunis 1987-1988), which the Sicilian muhaddith and jurist al-Māzerī did not have time to complete. Nawawī’s al-Minhāj fī sharḥi Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim b. al-Ḥajjāj (I-IV, Cairo 1271; I-V, 1283; see also DIA, VII, 126) is the most important of the commentaries on Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Among the commentaries on al-Tirmidhi’s al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ, Abū Bakr Ibn al-ʿArabī’s ʿĀriżat al-aḥwaẕī (Kanpūr 1299, together with three other commentaries on al-Tirmidhi; I-XIII, Cairo 1350-1352), and the Indian hadīth scholar al-Mubārakfūrī’s Tuḥfat al-aḥwaẕī (I-IV, India 1353), with a two-volume introduction on hadīth issues. Among the commentaries on Abū Dāwūd al-Sijistānī’s al-Sunnān are al-Khattābī’s Meʿālim al-Sunnān (ed. Muhammad Rāgib al-Tabbāḥ, I-IV, Aleppo 1920-1924, 1932-1934; ed. Izzat Ubayd al-De”ās – Ādil al-Sayyid, I-V, Homs 1389-1394/1969-1974; ed. Aḥmad Moḥammad Shāqir – Moḥammad Hāmid al-Fiqī, I-VIII, Cairo 1367-1369/1948-1950 [with al-Munzirī and Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya’s Tehẕīb]), and the Indian scholar Abū al-Tayyib Moḥammad Shams al-Haq al-Azīmābādī’s ʿAwn al-maʿbūd (I-IV, Delhi 1918-1923; ed. Abdurrahman Muhammad ‘Uthman, I-XIV, Medina-Qahira 1388-1389/1968-1969) and Khalīl Aḥmad al-Sahārenpūrī’s Beẕl al-majūd (ed. Muhammad Zakariyyā, I-XX, Leknev-Qahira 1393/1973). A small number of commentaries on al-Nasāʾī’s al-Sunan have been published, most notably al-Suyūtī’s Zahr al-rubā’ (I-II, Cairo 1312, 1348, 1932, I-VIII, 1964; Kanpūr 1848, 1882; Delhi 1272, 1281), with a commentary by Muḥammad b. ‘Abd al-Ḥādī al-Sindī completed in 1312 (1894). Among the works on Ibn Māja’s al-Sunan, Moğultay b. Kılıç’s commentary (Millet Ktp., Feyzullah Efendi, nr. 362, author’s line), Ibn al-Mülakkın’s Mā temessü ileyhi’l-ḫāja (Edirne Selimiye Ktp, nr. 487), al-Suyūtī’s Miṣbāḥ al-zujājah (Delhi 1847), Muḥammad b. Ismāʿil b. ‘Abd al-Ghānī al-Dihlawī’s Injāḥ al-ḫājah (Delhi 1847, 1905), and Muḥammad b. ‘Abd al-Hādī al-Sindī’s commentary on this work (Beirut, ts.).

Important commentaries were also written on some works other than the Qutub al-Sitta. Among these, Imam Mālik’s al-Muvaṭṭaʾaʾ, which is considered as reliable as Ṣaḥīḥ al-Buḫārī by the Andalusians and counted among the Qutub al-Sitta, is one of the most studied works. One of its most important commentaries is al-Tamhīd limā fi’l-Muvaṭṭṭaʾ mine al-maʿānī wa al-asānīd (ed. Saʿīd Aḥmad Aʿrāb et al., I-XXVI, Muḥammadiyya Ṭitwān 1387-1412/1967-1992). The author first listed alphabetically the teachers from whom Imam Mālik narrated, and then commented on the merfū hadiths he narrated from them according to this order. In al-Istiẕkār al-jāmiʿ li-meẕāḥibi fuḳahāʾi al-amṣār wa ʿulamāʾi al-aḳṭār fīmā tażammeneh al-Muvaṭṭṭaʾ min meʿāni al-raʾy wa al-ʿās̱ār (ed. ʿAbd al-Muʿtī Amīn Kalʿajī, I-XXX, Beirut 1414/1993), he commented on the mawqūf and maqtū ḥadīths in al-Muwaṭṭṭaʾ in accordance with its order. Other important commentaries on al-Muvaṭṭṭaʾ include al-Bājī’s al-Muntaḳāʾ (I-VII, Cairo 1331-1332), in which he first wrote an extensive commentary on al-Istīfāʾ and then summarised it, and Abū Bakr Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Kitāb al-Ḳabes fī sharḥi Muvaṭṭṭaʾi Mālik b. Anas (ed. Anas (ed. Muhammad ‘Abdullah Wald Kerīm, I-III, Beirut 1992), al-Suyūtī’s Tawwīr al-ḥawālik (I-III, Beirut, ts, Dār al-kutubi al-ilmiyya), Muḥammad b. ʿAbd al-Bāqī al-Zurkānī’s commentary (I-V, Cairo 1381-1382/1961-1962; I-IV, Beirut 1407/1987, 1990), Muḥammad Zakariyyā al-Qandahlawī’s Awjaz al-masālik ilā Muvaṭṭṭaʾi Mālik (I-XV, Beirut 1410/1989). Due to its great popularity in the Islamic world and especially among the Indian Muslims, one of the works on which the most commentaries have been written is al-Farā al-Beghawī’s Meṣābīḥ al-sunna (Cairo 1294, 1318; ed. Yūsuf Abdurrahman al-Marʿashlī et al., I-IV, Beirut 1407/1987) and Khatīb al-Tabrīzī’s Mishkāt al-Meṣābīḥ (Calcutta 1257, 1319; Bombay 1271; Delhi 1300; Lahore 1902; ed. Muhammad Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī, I-III, Damascus 1381/1961). Among the most renowned commentaries on Meṣābīḥ al-sunna are three commentaries by the VIIth (XIIIth) century scholar Zayn al-larab ‘Ali b. ‘Abdullah b. ‘Aḥmad al-Nahjwānī al-Misrī, entitled Sharḥ al-Maṣābīḥ al-sunna in large, medium and small volumes (Nuruosmaniye Ktp., nos. 790, 791, 792; Süleymaniye Ktp., Baghdadli Vehbi Efendi, nr. 273; for other copies, cf. Ferrā al-Beghāwī, introduction by the editor, I, 100-103), al-Bayḍāwī’s Tuḥfet al-ebrār (Suleymaniye Ktp., Hacı Beşir Ağa, nr. 149; Fâtih, nr. 968; Hasan Hüsnü Paşa, nr. 235) may be mentioned. Among the commentaries on Mishkāt al-Maṣābīḥ are Husayn b. Muhammad al-Tībī’s al-Kāshif ʿan ḥaḳāʾiḳi’s-sunān (ed. Naīm Ashraf Shabīr Aḥmad et al., I-XII, Karachi 1413), ʿAlī al-Kārī’s Mirḳāt al-mafātīḥ (I-V, Cairo 1309; Multan 1392/1972; ed. Sıdkī Muḥammad Jamīl al-Attār, I-X, Beirut 1412/1992), and ʿAbd al-Haqq b. Sayf al-Dīn al-Dihlawī’s Arabic commentary Lemaʿāt al-tanḳīḥ (ed. Muhammad Ubaidullah, Lahore 1390/1970, first two volumes published at this time, others later; Süleymaniye Ktp., Hasan Hüsnü Paşa, nos. 190, 466), a more voluminous commentary, the Persian Ashiʿʿʿʿat al-Lemaʿāt fī sharḥi Kitābi al-Mishkāt (I-IV, Leknev 1277), and Muhammad Idrīs Kandahlawī’s al-Taʿlīḳu’ṣ-ṣabīḥ (I-IV, Damascus 1354).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Lisān al-ʿArab, “kẕb” md.

Abū al-Baqā, al-Kulliyyāt, pp. 370-374, 402.

Translation of Kāmus, “ḥds̱” md.

M. F. ʿAbd al-Bābāqī, al-Muʿjam, mds. “ṭwʿa”, “resūl”.

Shāfiʿī, al-Risāla, pp. 78, 93, 103.

a.mlf., al-ʿUm, VII, 250, 254; ibid. (ed. M. Zehrā an-Najjār), Beirut, ts., V, 127-128.

Sunan al-Dārimī (tr. Abdullah Aydınlı), Istanbul 1994, translator’s preface, I, 7-22.

Ibn Saʿd, al-Ṭabaḳāt, VI, 9.

Ibn Qutayba, Taʾwīl al-muḫtelifi al-ḥadīs̱, Cairo 1326, pp. 143-145, 164-169, 212-215, 365-366, 432-433.

Tirmidhī, Kitāb al-ʿIlāl (in al-Sunān, ed. Ibrāhīm ʿAtwāwaz), Cairo 1395/1975, p. 738.

Yaʿqūbī, Tārīḫ, II, 261.

al-Qulaynī, al-Uṣūl mine al-Kāfī, I, 53, 65, 255-258, 273-274, see also al-Qāfī, I, 53, 65, 255-258, 273-274. Muqaddima by Ḥosayn ʿAlī Mahfūz, I, 4-8.

Rāmhurmuzī, al-Muḥaddis̱ü’l-fāṣil (ed. M. Ajāj al-Khatīb), Beirut 1391/1971, pp. 364-367, 611-620.

Ibn al-Nadīm, al-Fihrist (Tajaddud), pp. 208, 281-289.

Ibn Bābawayh, Men lā yaḥḍuruh al-faḳīh, Beirut 1401/1981, I, 3.

Abū Jaʿfar al-Tūsī, Iḫtiyāru Maʿrifat al-ricāl: Ricāl al-Kashshī (ed. Hasan al-Mustafavī), Mashhad 1348, introduction by the editor, p. 5.

Hakim, al-Mustadrek, I, 109-110.

Khatīb al-Baghdādī, Taḳyīd al-ʿilm (ed. Yūsuf al-Ish), Damascus 1974, pp. 32-33, 50-51, 58-63, 65-68, 92, 95-96, 102, 106.

a.mlf., Şerefü aṣḥābi al-ḥadīs̱ (nşr. Mehmed Saīd Hatīboğlu), Ankara 1971, pp. 87-93.

Ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAbd al-ʿAbd al-Ḥadīth, al-Jāmiʿ li-aḫlâḳı’r-rāwī wa ādābi’s-sāmiʿ (ed. Mahmūd al-Tahhān), Riyadh 1403/1983, I, 236-239.

Ibn ʿAbd al-Bar, Jāmiʿu beyān al-ʿilm (ed. Abū al-Ashbāl al-Zuhayrī), Dammām 1414/1994, I, 331; II, 1183.

Ferrā al-Beghawī, Meṣābīḥ al-sunna (ed. Yūsuf ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Mar’ashlī et al.), Beirut 1407/1987, ed. introduction, I, 63-74, 100-103.

al-Sam’ānī, Edeb al-imlāʾ wa al-istimlāʾ, Beirut 1401/1981, p. 109.

Ibn Shahrāshūb, Meʿālim al-ʿulamāʾ (ed. M. Sādiq ʿAlī Bahr al-ʿulūm), Beirut, ts. (Dār al-adwā), p. 2.

Ibn al-Asīr, al-Nihāya, IV, 159.

Ibn Taymiyya, Majmūʿ al-fatawaʿ, XIII, 366; XVIII, 10.

Mizzī, Tehẕīb al-Kamāl, editor’s introduction, I, 37-71.

Zeḥabī, Mīzān al-ʿtidāl, I, 271.

a.mlf., Teẕkirat al-ḥuffāẓ, I, 109-110.

Shāṭibī, al-Muwāfaḳāt, IV, 3-54.

Ibn Ḥajar, Fatḥ al-bārī (Hatīb), I, 174; XIII, 16.

a.mlf., al-Iṣāba, VII, 438.

a.mlf., al-Tahẕīb al-Tahẕīb, IV, 236-237; VII, 33; IX, 448.

Shahīd al-Sānī, al-Riʿāya fī ʿilmi al-dirāya (ed. ʿAbd al-Husayn M. ʿAli Baqqāl), Qom 1408/1987, pp. 77-80, 84-85.

Shaʿrānī, al-Mīzān (ed. ʿAbd al-Rahman Umeyra), Beirut 1409/1989, I, 212.

Kashf al-ẓunūn, I, 81, 521-522, 635-641, 834-835.

Hür al-Amilī, Wasaʾil al-Shīʿa (ed. Muhammad al-Rāzī – Abū al-Hasan al-Shaʿranī), Beirut 1412/1991, XX, 96-100, 151.

Majlisī, Biḥār al-anwār, Beirut 1403/1983, XXVI, 18-67, 121-125.

Rahmatullah al-Hindī, Izhār al-ḥaqq Translation (tr. Ömer Fehmi – Nüzhet Efendi), Istanbul 1972, pp. 572-614.

Jamāl al-Dīn al-Qāsimī, Ḳawāʿid al-taḥdīs̱ (ed. M. Bahjat al-Baytār), Damascus 1353/1935.

R. Dozy, Târîh-i İslâmiyyet (tr. Abdullah Cevdet), Cairo 1908, I, 161-165.

L. Caetani, History of Islam (tr. Hüseyin Cahid), Istanbul 1924-27, I, 86, 88, 90, 91.

D. S. Margoliouth, The Early Development of Mohammedanism, London 1914, pp. 66, 70, 76.

a.mlf., “On Moslem Tradition”, MW, II/2 (1912), p. 115.

E. Dermenghem, Muhammad’s Life (tr. Reşat Nuri), Istanbul 1930, pp. 1-7.

M. Zubayr al-Siddīkī, “Ahadith were Recorded During the Lifetime of Muhammad”, Proceedings of the Idara-i Maarif-i Islamia, First Session Held at Lahore (15th and 16th April, 1933), Lahore 1935, pp. 63-71.

a.mlf., History of Hadīth Literature (trc. Yusuf Ziya Kavakcı), Istanbul 1966.

a.mlf., “The Place of Hadīth in Islamic Law” (trc. M. Esad Kılıcer), AÜIFD, XII (1964), pp. 113-117.

Ahmad Zaqī Safwat, Jamheret al-Rasāʾili al-ʿArab, Cairo 1356/1937, I, 25-90.

Brockelmann, GAL, I, 401, 446, 446, 447, 458, 662; Suppl., I, 578, 606, 617, 619, 628, 630, 634, 917; II, 597.

I. Goldziher, Etudes sur la tradition islamique (trc. Leon Bercher), Paris 1952, pp. 41-53, 162-163, 217.

a.mlf., al-ʿAḳīda wa al-sharīʿa (ed. M. Yūsuf Mūsā et al.), Cairo, ts., p. 44.

a.mlf., “Struggles Around the Place of Hadīth in Islam” (tr. Cihad Tunç), AÜIFD, XIX (1973), pp. 223-235.

Fuat Sezgin, Research on the Sources of Bukhārī, Istanbul 1956, pp. 11-15, 37-40.

a.mlf., GAS, I, 53-84, 113, 156-159, 191, 222, 466.

M. Tayyib Okiç, Studies on Some Hadith Issues, Istanbul 1959.

M. Ajāj al-Khatīb, al-Sunna ḳable al-tedwīn, Cairo 1963, pp. 163-175.

Fazlurrahman, Islamic Methodology in History, Karachi 1965, pp. 10-11.

a.mlf., “Concepts Sunnah, Ijtihād and Ijmāʾ in the Early Period,” IS, I/1 (1962), pp. 10-11.

‘Abd al-Hamīd al-Allūjī, Muʾellefāt Ibn al-Jawzī, Bagdad 1385/1965, pp. 89-90.

A. Guillaume, The Traditions of Islam, Beirut 1966, p. 50.

a.mlf., Islam, London 1990, pp. 106-111.

P. K. Hitti, Islam and the West, New York 1962, pp. 105-107.

Mubārakfūrī, Muḳaddimet al-Tuḥfat al-aḥwaẕī (ed. M. ‘Abd al-Muhsin al-Kutubī), Cairo 1386/1967.

Muhammad Hamīdullah, Sahīfah of Ḥammām ibn Munabih (tr. Talaṭ Koṭyigit), Ankara 1967, p. 69.

a.mlf., al-Was̱āʾiḳ al-siyāsiyya, Beirut 1403/1983.

G. H. A. Juynboll, The Authenticity of the Tradition Literature, Leiden 1969, p. 1.

a.mlf., “Ḥadīth”, Dictionary of Middle Ages (ed. J. R. Strayer), New York 1989, VI, 45-48.

M. Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī, Fihris al-maḫṭūṭāti Dāri al-kutūbi al-Ẓāhiriyya, Damascus 1390/1970, p. 348.

Subhī al-Sālih, Hadīth Sciences and Hadīth Istılahları (tr. M. Yasar Kandemir), Ankara 1973, pp. 1-3, 39-41, 63-69.

Ḥāshim Maʿrūf al-Hasanī, al-Mawżūʿāt fi al-ʿās̱ār wa al-aḫbār, Beirut 1973, p. 53.

a.mlf., Uṣūlü al-taṣayyuʿ, Beirut, ts. (Dār al-kalem), pp. 253-258.

M. Yasar Kandemir, Mawzū Hadiths, Ankara 1975, pp. 17-19, 56-61, 96-115.

a.mlf., “al-Jāmi al-sahīh”, DİA, VII, 114-129.

a.mlf., “Juz”, ibid, VIII, 147-148.

Talât Koçyiğit, History of Hadith, Ankara 1977.

a.mlf., “I. Goldziher’s Some Views on Hadith,” AÜIFD, XV (1957), pp. 43-55.

Shāqir Mahmūd ‘Abd al-Mun’im, Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsḳalānī, Bagdad 1978, I, 506-513.

Āgā Buzurg al-Tahrānī, ẕ-Ẕarīʿa ilā taṣānīfi al-Shīʿa, Beirut 1398, XXV, 51.

Mustafa al-Sibāʾī, al-Sunna wa maqanat al-maqatuha fi al-Tashrīʿi al-Islamī, Damascus 1398/1978.

M. Abū Zahra, al-Imām al-Ṣādiḳ, Cairo, ts. (Dār al-fikri al-Arabī), pp. 357-460.

H. Lammens, Islam Beliefs and Institutions, London 1979, pp. 70-72.

J. Fueck, “The Role of Traditionalism in Islam”, Studies on Islam (ed. M. L. Swartz), Oxford 1981, pp. 99-111.

Hasan al-Sadr, Teʾsī al-Shīʿa, Beirut 1401/1981, pp. 278-295.

a.mlf., al-Shīʿa wa funūn al-Islam, Beirut, ts. (Dār al-maʿrifa), pp. 29-43.

M. Husayn Āl al-Kāshifi al-Ghitā, Aṣl al-Shīʿa wa uṣūlühā, Beirut 1402/1982, pp. 58, 79.

‘Abd al-Wahhāb Ibrāhīm Abū Sulaymān, Kitāb al-baḥs̱i al-ʿilmī, Jeddah 1403/1983, pp. 209-265.

Ali Osman Koçkuzu, Hadith Sciences and History of Hadith, Istanbul 1983.

Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period (ed. A. F. L. Beeston et al.), Cambridge 1983, pp. 271-298.

Aʿyān al-Shīʿa, I, 140-153.

Maʿa al-Mektaba, pp. 403-421.

Seyyed Husayn Nasr, Islam: Ideals and Realities (tr. Ahmet Özel), Istanbul 1985, pp. 89-95.

Mehmed S. Hatiboğlu, “On Hadith Studies in the West”, International First Islamic Studies Symposium, Izmir 1985, pp. 81-94.

D. B. Macdonald, Development of Muslim Theology, Jurisprudence and Constitutional Theory, London 1985, pp. 76-77.

M. Lokmān al-Salafī, Ihtimām al-muḥaddis̱īn bi-naḳdi al-ḥadīs̱ senadan wa metnen, Riyadh 1408/1987, pp. 417-474.

M. ʿAbd al-ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-Khawlī, Tārīḫu funūn al-ḥadīs̱i al-nabawī (ed. Mahmūd al-Arnaūt – M. Bedr al-Dīn al-Kahwajī), Damascus 1408/1988.

Fārūk Hamāda, al-Menḥajj al-Islamī fi al-jarḥ wa al-taʿdīl, Rabat 1409/1989, pp. 48-85.

M. Javād Mugniyya, al-Shīʿa fi al-mīzān, Beirut 1409/1989, pp. 317-320.

Ismail L. Cakan, Hadīth Edebiyātı, Istanbul 1989.

a.mlf., Usūl of Hadīth, Istanbul 1990.

a.mlf., “al-Jāmi al-sahīh”, DIA, VII, 129-132.

Ḥādim Ḥusayn Ilāhībahsh, al-Ḳurʾāniyyūn wa shubuḥātuḥum ḥawla al-sunna, Tāif 1409/1989.

M. Mustafa al-A’zamī, Menhej al-naḳd ʿinde al-muḥaddis̱în [no place of printing] 1410/1990 (Mektebet al-kevser), pp. 127-149.

a.mlf., First Period Hadith Literature (tr. Hulūsi Yavuz), Istanbul 1993, pp. 10-18, 34-161, 194-222.

a.mlf., Islamic Fiqh and Sunnah (tr. Mustafa Ertürk), Istanbul 1995.

Imtiyāz Aḥmad, Delāʾil al-taws̱īḳ al-mubakkir li al-sunna wa al-ḥadīs̱ (tr. ʿAbd al-Muʿtī Amīn Kalʿajī), Cairo 1410/1990.

‘Ali ‘Abd al-Fattāḥ ‘Ali Ḥasan, al-Ḥadīs̱ al-nabawī wa rivāyah, Mansūrah 1990.

Izziyya ‘Ali Ṭāḥā, Difāʿ ʿani al-sunnāt al-nabawiyyat al-sharīfah, Kuwayt 1410/1990.

ibid, “Min iftirāʾāti al-mustashriḳīn ḥavla eḥādīs̱i al-tawḥīd”, Majellat al-sharīʿa wa al-dirāsāti al-Islamiyya, VI/13, Kuwayt 1409/1989, pp. 19-76.

a.mlf., “Min iftirāʾati al-mustashriḳīn ʿalā eṣālībi al-muḥaddis̱īn fi al-ʿinâyati bi-mutūni al-eḥādīs̱”, Majellat al-buḥūs̱i al-Islamiyya, XXXI, Riyadh 1411, pp. 279-352.

S. Kemal Sandıkçı, Hadīth in Islamic Geography in the First Three Centuries, Ankara 1991.

Ali Yardim, Hadith, Izmir 1992, I-II.

Sıddîk Beşîr Nasr, Ḍavâbiṭü’r-rivâya ʿinde’l-muḥaddis̱în, Tripoli 1992, pp. 162-163, 165-181, 217, 281-354.

Bakr b. ‘Abdullah Abū Zayd, Maʿrifat al-nüsaḫ wa’ṣ-ṣuḥuf al-ḥadīs̱iyye, Riyadh 1412/1992.

Emin Āşıkkutlu, Rijāl Criticism in Hadith: Cerh ve Ta’dîl İlmi (doctoral dissertation, 1992), MÜ Institute of Social Sciences, pp. 20-23 (takzîbi of the Companions).

Tawhit Bakan, Adâleti of the Ashâb (doctoral dissertation, 1993), Atatürk University Institute of Social Sciences, pp. 72, 74.

Cemal Sofuoğlu, “Shia-i Imâmiye’nin Hadith Anlayışı”, International Symposium on Shi’ism in History and Today, Istanbul 1993, pp. 258-287.

Yusuf al-Qardāwī, The Method of Understanding Sunnah (tr. Bünyamin Erul), Kayseri 1993, pp. 56-60.

Nāṣir b. ‘Abdullah al-Kafārī, Uṣūl al-majīʿa al-Shīʿa [no place of printing] 1414/1993, pp. 307-399.

Quṭānī, al-Risālat al-mustetrafe (Uzbek), op. cit.

Farouk Koçak, Hadīth Juzleri in Istanbul Libraries (doctoral dissertation, 1995), MU Institute of Social Sciences.

‘Abd al-Ghanī ‘Abd al-Hāliḳ, Ḥujjiyyat al-sunna, Riyadh 1415/1995, p. 337.

Mehmet Erdoğan, Sunnah in the Balance of Reason and Revelation, Istanbul 1995, pp. 70-79.

James Robson, “Tradition, The Second Foundation of Islam”, MW, XLI/1-4 (1951), pp. 22-33.

a.mlf., “The Material of Tradition”, ibid, pp. 166-180.

a.mlf., “Hadit̲h̲h̲”, EI2 (Fr.), III, 24-25.

ʿAbd al-Hādī Riza, “Amālī Niẓāmilmulk al-Wazīr al-Saljūḳī fi’l-ḥadīs̱”, MMMA (Cairo), V (1959), pp. 349-378.

ʿAbd al-Jabbār ʿUlwān al-Nāyilah, “al-Ḥadīs̱ al-nabawiyy al-sharīf min meṣādiri al-dīn al-naḥwī”, Ādāb al-Rāfideyn, XIII, Mosul 1981, pp. 499-544.

Ṭamīra Khalīl, “al-Kutub al-merciʿiyya li-terājimi ruvāti al-ḥadīs̱ ḥatta al-ḳarni al-sādisi al-ḥijrī”, ʿĀlam al-kutub, no. 14, Riyadh 1987, pp. 4-14.

Yasin Dutton, “Sunna, Hadīth and Madinan ‘Amal,” Journal of Islamic Studies, IV/1, Oxford 1993, pp. 1-31.

Charles J. Adams, “The Authority of Hadīth in the Eyes of Some Contemporary Muslims -Mawdūdī’s Understanding of Hadīth” (tr. Nedim Alpdemir), Islamic Studies, pp. 3-4, Ankara 1994, pp. 291-303.

Th. W. Juynboll, “Hadîs”, IA, V/1, pp. 47-54.

a.mlf., “Ḥadîs̱”, DMİ, VII, 230-247.

F. Buhl, “Jerusalem”, IA, VI, 957.

J. Walker, “Dome of the Rock”, ibid, VI, 945.

A. K. C., “Ḥadīth”, EBr. (1981), VIII, 536-538.

L. T. Librande, “Ḥadīth”, ER, VI, 143-151.

Hasan al-Amin, “al-Uṣūl al-arbaʿa miʾe,” Dāʾirat al-maʿārifi al-Islamiyyat al-Shīʿiyya, Beirut 1401/1981, II, 33-46.

ibid, “Ḥadīs̱”, ibid, III, 117-126.

Ibrahim Canan, “al-Adab al-mufred”, DIA, X, 411-412.

Tahsin Görgün, “Goldziher, Ignaz”, ibid, XIV, 105-111.

R. Marston Speight, “Ḥadīth”, The Oxford Encyclopaedia of the Modern Islamic World, New York 1995, II, 83-87.

This article was included in the 15th volume of the TDV Encyclopaedia of Islam, published in Istanbul in 1997, pages 27-64.