Toggle above to switch between keyword search and direct hadith lookup
مستدرکِ حاکم
Mustadrak al-Hakim
كتاب معرفة الصحابة رضي الله تعالى عنهم
Book of Knowing the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them)
ذِكْرُ مَنَاقِبِ خَبَّابِ بْنِ الْأَرَتِّ وَيُكَنَّى أَبَا عَبْدِ اللهِ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُ
The virtues of Khabbab bin al-Aratt (may Allah be pleased with him), whose kunyah was Abu Abdullah
Mustadrak al-Hakim — Hadith 5735
اُردوEn
كما أخبرني أحمد بن علي المُقرئ، حدثنا أبو عيسى التِّرمِذي، حدثنا الحُسين بن علي بن يزيد الصُّدَائي، حدثنا يعقوب بن إبراهيم بن سعد، عن أبيه، قال: خَبّابُ بن الأَرتِّ مولى عُتبة بن غَزْوان (2). وأصحُّ هذه الأقاويلِ قولُ الزُّهْريّ، فإنَّ الروايةَ إليه صحيحةٌ.
Ya'qub bin Ibrahim narrates from his father that Sayyiduna Khabbab bin al-Aratt (may Allah be pleased with him) was a mawla of Sayyiduna Utbah bin Ghazwan (may Allah be pleased with him).
The most reliable of all these views is that of Imam al-Zuhri, because the narration reaching him has a completely sahih chain.
The most reliable of all these views is that of Imam al-Zuhri, because the narration reaching him has a completely sahih chain.
Explanation & Benefits
Shaykh Adil Murshid et al.
(2) رجاله ثقات، لكن أخطأ إبراهيم بن سعد - وهو ابن إبراهيم بن عبد الرحمن بن عوف الزُّهري - في قوله هذا بأنَّ خبّاب بن الأرتّ كان مولى عُتبة بن غزوان، وإنما الذي كان مولًى لعُتبة بن غزوان هو خَبّابٌ آخر لا يُعرف اسم أبيه، وكان يكنى بأبي يحيى، وخباب بن الأرتّ يكنى بأبي عبد الله. وقد ذكرهما الزهري جميعًا فيمن شهد بدرًا كما رواه عنه ابن أبي عاصم في "الآحاد والمثاني" (345)، وكذلك فَعَلَ ابن إسحاق كما في "سيرة ابن هشام" 1/ 680 و 681، وكذلك محمد بن حبيب البغدادي في "المحبّر" ص 288 ذكرهما جميعًا في تسمية من شهد بدرًا من الموالي، ونبَّه إلى التفريق بينهما أبو أحمد العسكري في "تصحيفات المحدثين" 2/ 427، والدارقطني في "المؤتلف والمختلف" 1/ 469، وابن ماكولا في "الإكمال" 2/ 148، وأبو علي الجياني في "تقييد المُهمل وتمييز المشكل" 1/ 235، وعز الدين بن الأثير في "أسد الغابة" 1/ 593 - 594، وغيرهم.
Grading: (2) Its narrators are trustworthy (thiqat),
Technical note / Defect ('illah): but Ibrahim bin Sa'd (Ibn Ibrahim bin Abd al-Rahman bin Awf al-Zuhri) erred in this statement of his that Khabbab bin al-Aratt was the mawla (freed client) of "Utbah bin Ghazwan". In fact, the one who was the mawla of Utbah bin Ghazwan was another Khabbab whose father's name is not known, and his kunyah was "Abu Yahya", whereas the kunyah of Khabbab bin al-Aratt was "Abu Abd Allah". Al-Zuhri mentioned both of them among those who took part in the Battle of Badr (as Ibn Abi Asim narrated from him in "al-Ahad wa al-Mathani" 345), and likewise Ibn Ishaq (in "Sirat Ibn Hisham" 1/ 680 and 681) and Muhammad bin Habib al-Baghdadi (in "al-Muhabbar" p. 288) named both of them among the freed clients who took part in Badr. Among those who drew attention to the distinction between the two are Abu Ahmad al-Askari ("Tashifat al-Muhaddithin" 2/ 427), al-Daraqutni ("al-Mu'talif wa al-Mukhtalif" 1/ 469), Ibn Makula ("al-Ikmal" 2/ 148), Abu Ali al-Jayyani ("Taqyid al-Muhmal" 1/ 235), and Izz al-Din Ibn al-Athir ("Usd al-Ghabah" 1/ 593 - 594), and others.
وقد وافق إبراهيمَ بنَ سعدٍ على قوله هذا: ابن حزم في "جوامع السيرة" ص 89، وابنُ عبد البر في "الدُّرر في اختصار المغازي والسير" ص 78، مع أنَّ ابن عبد البر ترجم لكلا الرجلين في "الاستيعاب" (656) و (658)!
Reference / Source: Ibn Hazm in his book "Jawami' al-Sirah" p. 89 and Ibn Abd al-Barr in "al-Durar fi Ikhtisar al-Maghazi wa al-Siyar" p. 78 agreed with this statement of Ibrahim bin Sa'd, even though Ibn Abd al-Barr gave separate entries to both men in "al-Isti'ab" at numbers (656) and (658).
Grading: (2) Its narrators are trustworthy (thiqat),
Technical note / Defect ('illah): but Ibrahim bin Sa'd (Ibn Ibrahim bin Abd al-Rahman bin Awf al-Zuhri) erred in this statement of his that Khabbab bin al-Aratt was the mawla (freed client) of "Utbah bin Ghazwan". In fact, the one who was the mawla of Utbah bin Ghazwan was another Khabbab whose father's name is not known, and his kunyah was "Abu Yahya", whereas the kunyah of Khabbab bin al-Aratt was "Abu Abd Allah". Al-Zuhri mentioned both of them among those who took part in the Battle of Badr (as Ibn Abi Asim narrated from him in "al-Ahad wa al-Mathani" 345), and likewise Ibn Ishaq (in "Sirat Ibn Hisham" 1/ 680 and 681) and Muhammad bin Habib al-Baghdadi (in "al-Muhabbar" p. 288) named both of them among the freed clients who took part in Badr. Among those who drew attention to the distinction between the two are Abu Ahmad al-Askari ("Tashifat al-Muhaddithin" 2/ 427), al-Daraqutni ("al-Mu'talif wa al-Mukhtalif" 1/ 469), Ibn Makula ("al-Ikmal" 2/ 148), Abu Ali al-Jayyani ("Taqyid al-Muhmal" 1/ 235), and Izz al-Din Ibn al-Athir ("Usd al-Ghabah" 1/ 593 - 594), and others.
وقد وافق إبراهيمَ بنَ سعدٍ على قوله هذا: ابن حزم في "جوامع السيرة" ص 89، وابنُ عبد البر في "الدُّرر في اختصار المغازي والسير" ص 78، مع أنَّ ابن عبد البر ترجم لكلا الرجلين في "الاستيعاب" (656) و (658)!
Reference / Source: Ibn Hazm in his book "Jawami' al-Sirah" p. 89 and Ibn Abd al-Barr in "al-Durar fi Ikhtisar al-Maghazi wa al-Siyar" p. 78 agreed with this statement of Ibrahim bin Sa'd, even though Ibn Abd al-Barr gave separate entries to both men in "al-Isti'ab" at numbers (656) and (658).
Source: Al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihayn (Takhrij & Tahqiq: Shaykh Adil Murshid et al.), Page: 5735
