This article revolves around a single narrator of Hadith: Abu Sakhr Ḥumayd bin Ziyād (also known as Ḥumayd bin Sakhr, Ḥumayd bin Abī al-Mukhāriq al-Madanī; kunyah: Abu Sakhr).
Those inclined toward grave-veneration present two well-known narrations which mention calling upon (nidā’) at the grave or a specific connection with the grave. However, both narrations are solitary and weak reports of Abu Sakhr.
◈ The Two Narrations in Question
①
Arabic Text:
«ثُمَّ لَئِنْ قَامَ عَلَى قَبْرِي فَقَالَ: يَا مُحَمَّدُ، لَأُجِيبَنَّهُ»
📖
Translation:
Abu Hurayrah رضي الله عنه reported that the Prophet ﷺ said:
“By the One in Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammad ﷺ, surely ʿĪsā ibn Maryam will descend … then if he stands at my grave and says, ‘O Muhammad,’ I will surely respond to him.”
Clarification:
The phrase:
«لَئِنْ قَامَ عَلَى قَبْرِي…»
is a solitary addition (ziyādah) reported only by Abu Sakhr. It is not found in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, nor in the authentic established routes. This addition rests entirely upon this narrator.
② Criticism (Jarḥ) of Abu Sakhr Ḥumayd bin Ziyād
Arabic Text:
«مَا مِنْ أَحَدٍ يُسَلِّمُ عَلَيَّ إِلَّا رَدَّ اللَّهُ عَلَيَّ رُوحِي حَتَّى أَرُدَّ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامَ»
📖
Translation:
The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:
“There is no one who sends salutations upon me except that Allah returns my soul to me so that I may return his greeting.”
Clarification:
This narration also comes solely through Abu Sakhr. Imām al-Dāraquṭnī and other scholars clarified that the established meaning is that salutations are conveyed to the Prophet ﷺ, but the description of the soul being returned is a rejected addition (munkar ziyādah).
◈ Criticism (Jarḥ) of Abu Sakhr Ḥumayd bin Ziyād
The majority of Hadith scholars declared him weak.
① Ibn al-Qayyim (751 AH)
Arabic:
«وَأُنْكِرَ عَلَيْهِ بَعْضُ حَدِيثِهِ، وَهُوَ مِمَّنْ لَا يُحْتَجُّ بِهِ إِذَا انْفَرَدَ.»
📖
Translation:
Some of his narrations were considered objectionable, and he is among those whose solitary reports are not used as proof.
② Imām al-ʿUqaylī (332 AH)
Included him in al-Ḍuʿafā’ al-Kabīr.
📖
This constitutes explicit criticism.
③ Ibn Shāhīn (385 AH)
Arabic:
«أبو صخر حميد بن زياد ضعيف.»
📖
Translation:
Abu Sakhr Ḥumayd bin Ziyād is weak.
④ Ibn al-Athīr (630 AH)
Arabic:
«… هو ضعيف.»
📖
Translation:
He is weak.
⑤ Ibn al-Jawzī (594 AH)
Arabic:
«قال أحمد: ضعيف، وقال النسائي: ليس بالقوي.»
📖
Translation:
Imām Aḥmad said: He is weak.
Imām al-Nasā’ī said: He is not strong.
⑥ Yaḥyā bin Maʿīn (233 AH)
Arabic:
«أبو صخر حميد بن زياد ضعيف.»
📖
Translation:
Abu Sakhr Ḥumayd bin Ziyād is weak.
Although another statement “lā ba’sa bihi” is reported, the later and preferred position is that he is weak.
⑦ Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar (852 AH)
Arabic:
«صدوق يهم من السادسة.»
📖
Translation:
Truthful but makes mistakes; from the sixth category.
Ibn Ḥajar clarified regarding this category:
«مقبول حيث يتابع، وإلا فليّن الحديث.»
Accepted when supported; otherwise, his hadith is weak.
Thus, when alone, he is not a proof.
⑧ Imām Aḥmad bin Ḥanbal (241 AH)
Two statements are reported:
- “Laysa bihi ba’s” (No harm in him)
- “Ḍaʿīf” (Weak)
The latter is considered the stronger position.
⑨ Imām al-Nasā’ī (303 AH)
«ليس بالقوي»
«ضعيف»
He is not strong; rather, weak.
⑩ Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī (748 AH)
Mentioned that Aḥmad declared him weak.
📖
⑪ Ibn ʿAdī (365 AH)
Mentioned that he narrates reports which are not supported by others.
📖
⑫ Shaykh al-Albānī (1420 AH)
Arabic:
«رجاله ثقات على ضعف يسير في أبي صخر.»
📖
Translation:
Its narrators are trustworthy except that there is weakness in Abu Sakhr.
◈ Response to Those Who Declared Him Trustworthy
✔ Imām al-ʿIjlī
Declared him “thiqah,” but al-ʿIjlī is known for leniency in declaring narrators trustworthy. His statement cannot outweigh the majority’s criticism.
✔ Imām al-Dāraquṭnī
Although he once called him “thiqah,” in al-ʿIlal and al-Tatabbuʿ, he preferred other narrators over him and stated that his reports lack support.
This indicates that even al-Dāraquṭnī did not rely upon his solitary narrations.
◈ Ruling on the Two Narrations
① Addition in Musnad Abī Yaʿlā:
«ثُمَّ لَئِنْ قَامَ عَلَى قَبْرِي…»
➝ This is a rejected solitary addition (munkar ziyādah).
It is not acceptable as proof.
② Narration in Sunan Abī Dāwūd:
«… رَدَّ اللَّهُ عَلَيَّ رُوحِي …»
➝ The portion mentioning the return of the soul is a rejected addition.
The established matter is that salutations are conveyed to the Prophet ﷺ and he responds, but the specific description of the soul being returned is not established authentically.
◈ Final Conclusion
① Abu Sakhr Ḥumayd bin Ziyād is weak according to the majority of Hadith scholars.
② His solitary narrations cannot be relied upon.
③ The narration of calling at the grave in Musnad Abī Yaʿlā and the narration of “return of the soul” in Sunan Abī Dāwūd are both rejected in their additional wording.
④ Deriving permissibility of grave-veneration or seeking help (istighāthah) from these narrations is invalid.
