✍ Written by: Ḥāfiẓ Nadīm Ẓahīr
Mubārak bin Ḥassān al-Sulamī al-Baṣrī al-Makkī, known by his kunyah Abū Yūnus, is a narrator found in Sunan Ibn Mājah among the Kutub al-Sittah. He narrates two aḥādīth in Ibn Mājah (Hadith nos. 2710 and 2939).
Although some regard him as a "varied" or weak narrator, based on research and the statements of majority scholars, he is trustworthy (thiqa) and truthful (ṣadūq). The detailed breakdown follows below.
"Mubārak bin Ḥassān – he is thiqa."
(al-Maʿrifah wa al-Tārīkh 2/199)
"Thiqa."
(Tārīkh Ibn Maʿīn, Riwayah of al-Dūrī, 2/548)
Kitāb al-Thiqāt (7/501) and remarked:
"He makes mistakes and contradicts."
➤ Note: This does not contradict his general reliability.
"Thiqa."
(Tārīkh Asmāʾ al-Thiqāt, no. 1438)
Declared his narration to have a Ṣaḥīḥ isnād.
(al-Mustadrak 1/543)
"Mubārak bin Ḥassān is thiqa and well-known."
(al-Aḥkām al-Kubrā 3/496)
"No criticism has been made of him by the early scholars."
"He is not mentioned among the weak narrators."
(Dhakhīrat al-Ḥuffāẓ 2/745, 3/1714)
Considered his ḥadīth to be ṣaḥīḥ.
(al-Mukhtārah 11/217)
"This chain's narrators are all thiqāt (trustworthy)."
(Ittiḥāf al-Khiyarat al-Mahrah 6/342)
Some minor criticisms exist, but are either:
"Munkar al-ḥadīth"
(Ikmāl Tahdhīb al-Kamāl 11/57)
This jarḥ is unreliable because its chain comes via Abū ʿUbayd al-Ājurrī, whose own reliability is unknown.
Note: After reviewing two manuscripts of Suʾālāt Abī ʿUbayd al-Ājurrī from Abū Dāwūd, no entry about Mubārak bin Ḥassān is found—so the attribution is doubtful.
"Laysa bi’l-qawī" (Not strong)
(Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl 4/512)
Not established with a sound chain.
"Ḍaʿīf" (Weak)
(Shuʿab al-Īmān 12/49; al-Daʿwāt al-Kabīr 2/321)
"Mat'rūk al-ḥadīth, not to be relied upon, accused of lying."
(al-Ḍuʿafāʾ wa al-Matrūkūn 3/32)
This jarḥ is rooted in al-Azdī, who is himself* controversial and weak.
➤ Imām al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī, Imām al-Dhahabī, and others have noted that al-Azdī declared people weak without proper evidence.
(Tārīkh Baghdād 3/36–37, Siyar 16/348, etc.)
"Wāh" (Feeble)
(Talkhīṣ al-Mustadrak 1/543)
"Līn al-ḥadīth" (Weak in ḥadīth)
(Taqrīb al-Tahdhīb, entry 6360)
"He errs and contradicts."
(al-Thiqāt 7/501)
➤ This does not denote unreliability unless the errors are excessive.
"He narrates reports which are not preserved."
(al-Kāmil fī Ḍuʿafāʾ al-Rijāl 9/495)
"No early scholar criticized him."
"He is not listed among the weak narrators."
(Dhakhīrat al-Ḥuffāẓ 2/745, 3/1714)
Mubārak bin Ḥassān is thiqa according to the majority and his aḥādīth are ṣaḥīḥ.
The majority's judgment outweighs later criticisms.
Someone might object that:
“Shaykh Zubair ʿAlī Zai رحمه الله also declared him weak in his research on Sunan Ibn Mājah.”
Response:
The writer of this article was a student and follower of Shaykh Zubair ʿAlī Zai, and the research presented here is based on the same methodology of ḥadīth verification (manhaj al-taḥqīq).
✒ “We have not found anyone more honest in returning to the truth than our respected teacher.”
This was the path of the salaf, and we strive to follow it. Alḥamdulillāh.
❖ Introduction
Mubārak bin Ḥassān al-Sulamī al-Baṣrī al-Makkī, known by his kunyah Abū Yūnus, is a narrator found in Sunan Ibn Mājah among the Kutub al-Sittah. He narrates two aḥādīth in Ibn Mājah (Hadith nos. 2710 and 2939).
Although some regard him as a "varied" or weak narrator, based on research and the statements of majority scholars, he is trustworthy (thiqa) and truthful (ṣadūq). The detailed breakdown follows below.
❖ Scholars Who Declared Him Reliable (Muʿaddilīn)
◈ Imām Yaʿqūb ibn Sufyān al-Fasawī (d. 277 AH) said:
"Mubārak bin Ḥassān – he is thiqa."
(al-Maʿrifah wa al-Tārīkh 2/199)◈ Imām Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn (d. 233 AH) stated:
"Thiqa."
(Tārīkh Ibn Maʿīn, Riwayah of al-Dūrī, 2/548)◈ Imām Ibn Ḥibbān (d. 354 AH) included him in:
Kitāb al-Thiqāt (7/501) and remarked:
"He makes mistakes and contradicts."
➤ Note: This does not contradict his general reliability.
◈ Imām Ibn Shāhīn (d. 385 AH) said:
"Thiqa."
(Tārīkh Asmāʾ al-Thiqāt, no. 1438)◈ Imām al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrī (d. 405 AH)
Declared his narration to have a Ṣaḥīḥ isnād.
(al-Mustadrak 1/543)◈ Imām ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq al-Ishbīlī (d. 581 AH) said:
"Mubārak bin Ḥassān is thiqa and well-known."
(al-Aḥkām al-Kubrā 3/496)◈ Imām Abū al-Faḍl al-Maqdisī al-Qaysarānī (d. 507 AH) said:
"No criticism has been made of him by the early scholars."
"He is not mentioned among the weak narrators."
(Dhakhīrat al-Ḥuffāẓ 2/745, 3/1714)◈ Ḥāfiẓ Ḍiyāʾ al-Dīn al-Maqdisī (d. 643 AH)
Considered his ḥadīth to be ṣaḥīḥ.
(al-Mukhtārah 11/217)◈ ʿAllāmah al-Būṣīrī (d. 840 AH) wrote:
"This chain's narrators are all thiqāt (trustworthy)."
(Ittiḥāf al-Khiyarat al-Mahrah 6/342)❖ Responses to Criticism (Jarḥ)
Some minor criticisms exist, but are either:
- Unestablished,
- Based on weak chains, or
- Rejected in the face of majority’s authentication.
❖ Examples:
◈ Imām Abū Dāwūd (d. 275 AH) reportedly said:
"Munkar al-ḥadīth"
(Ikmāl Tahdhīb al-Kamāl 11/57) This jarḥ is unreliable because its chain comes via Abū ʿUbayd al-Ājurrī, whose own reliability is unknown. Note: After reviewing two manuscripts of Suʾālāt Abī ʿUbayd al-Ājurrī from Abū Dāwūd, no entry about Mubārak bin Ḥassān is found—so the attribution is doubtful.◈ Imām al-Nasāʾī (d. 303 AH) reportedly said:
"Laysa bi’l-qawī" (Not strong)
(Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl 4/512) Not established with a sound chain.◈ Imām al-Bayhaqī (d. 458 AH) said:
"Ḍaʿīf" (Weak)
(Shuʿab al-Īmān 12/49; al-Daʿwāt al-Kabīr 2/321)◈ Ibn al-Jawzī (d. 597 AH) cited al-Azdī’s statement:
"Mat'rūk al-ḥadīth, not to be relied upon, accused of lying."
(al-Ḍuʿafāʾ wa al-Matrūkūn 3/32) This jarḥ is rooted in al-Azdī, who is himself* controversial and weak.➤ Imām al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī, Imām al-Dhahabī, and others have noted that al-Azdī declared people weak without proper evidence.
(Tārīkh Baghdād 3/36–37, Siyar 16/348, etc.)◈ Imām al-Dhahabī (d. 748 AH):
"Wāh" (Feeble)
(Talkhīṣ al-Mustadrak 1/543)◈ Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (d. 852 AH):
"Līn al-ḥadīth" (Weak in ḥadīth)
(Taqrīb al-Tahdhīb, entry 6360)◈ Ibn Ḥibbān (in al-Thiqāt):
"He errs and contradicts."
(al-Thiqāt 7/501)➤ This does not denote unreliability unless the errors are excessive.
◈ Imām Ibn ʿAdī (d. 365 AH):
"He narrates reports which are not preserved."
(al-Kāmil fī Ḍuʿafāʾ al-Rijāl 9/495)❖ Rebuttal to the Criticism
- Against the Jamhūr (Majority):
The criticisms from al-Bayhaqī, al-Dhahabī, and Ibn Ḥajar contradict the majority of earlier scholars, so they are not given weight. - Regarding Errors Noted by Some:
Scholars like Ibn Ḥibbān and Ibn ʿAdī highlight that Mubārak bin Ḥassān made mistakes, but do not label him as weak.
This shows he is a truthful narrator who may have made some errors, like many others.
✒ As Imām al-Maqdisī said:
"No early scholar criticized him."
"He is not listed among the weak narrators."
(Dhakhīrat al-Ḥuffāẓ 2/745, 3/1714)❖ Final Verdict (Khawlaṣat al-Taḥqīq)
Mubārak bin Ḥassān is thiqa according to the majority and his aḥādīth are ṣaḥīḥ.
The majority's judgment outweighs later criticisms.❖ A Possible Objection
Someone might object that:
“Shaykh Zubair ʿAlī Zai رحمه الله also declared him weak in his research on Sunan Ibn Mājah.”
Response:The writer of this article was a student and follower of Shaykh Zubair ʿAlī Zai, and the research presented here is based on the same methodology of ḥadīth verification (manhaj al-taḥqīq).
✒ “We have not found anyone more honest in returning to the truth than our respected teacher.”
This was the path of the salaf, and we strive to follow it. Alḥamdulillāh.
