Chain Analysis of the Report on al-Walīd ibn al-Mughīrah’s Praise of the Qur’an

Source: Fatāwā ʿIlmiyyah (Tawḍīḥ al-Aḥkām), Vol. 2, p. 485


Question:
Is it true that one of the chiefs of Quraysh, al-Walīd ibn al-Mughīrah al-Makhzūmī, upon hearing the Qur’an, said:


“By Allah! None of you knows more poetry than I do — neither rajaz, nor qasīdah, nor the rhymes of jinn. By Allah! The speech that comes from this man’s (Muḥammad’s ﷺ) mouth is unlike any of those. By Allah! It has sweetness, it has beauty. Its branches are fruitful, its roots are lush. It will surely be uppermost, nothing will overcome it, and it will crush everything beneath it.”


This is cited in al-Sīrah al-Nabawiyyah by Ibn Kathīr (1/499) via Mīzān by Jāved Ahmad Ghāmidī (p. 17).

1. The Source and Chain​

Hāfiẓ Ibn Kathīr reports this in al-Sīrah al-Nabawiyyah and al-Bidāyah wa-al-Nihāyah (3/274, verified edition) via Imām al-Bayhaqī (Dalāʾil al-Nubuwwah, 2/198) with the chain:


Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Ḥāfiẓ → Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Ṣanʿānī in Makkah → Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm → ʿAbd al-Razzāq → Maʿmar → Ayyūb al-Sakhtiyānī → ʿIkrimah → Ibn ʿAbbās


Al-Ḥākim also narrates it in al-Mustadrak (2/507, ḥadīth 3872) and graded it ṣaḥīḥ, as did al-Dhahabī.

2. Identification of Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm​

Here “Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm” is Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm al-Dabārī, not Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh.


Evidence:

• In al-Mustadrak, al-Ḥākim repeatedly narrates from Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī ibn ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd → Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm ibn ʿAbbād, sometimes explicitly saying “al-Dabārī” (4/422, ḥadīth 8302).
• Al-Wāḥidī also names him as al-Dabārī in Asbāb al-Nuzūl (pp. 375–376, Sūrat al-Muddaththir).
• Chronology makes meeting Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh impossible: if Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī died c. 381 AH, and Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh died 238 AH, Muḥammad’s age would be an implausible 143 years at the time of death.

Al-Dhahabī:


“He heard a large collection from Isḥāq al-Dabārī and narrated them in Makkah.” (Tārīkh al-Islām, 27/408)

3. Problems in the Chain​

(a) ʿAbd al-Razzāq’s Late Period (Ikhtiḷāṭ):
ʿAbd al-Razzāq became blind late in life and suffered memory problems.

• Imām Aḥmad: “We visited him before 200 AH while his eyesight was fine; whoever heard from him after blindness, his report is weak.” (Tārīkh Dimashq, Abū Zurʿah, 1160)
• Al-Nasāʾī: “There is some scrutiny regarding those who wrote from him later.” (Kitāb al-Ḍuʿafāʾ, 379)
• Isḥāq al-Dabārī heard from him in 210 AH; ʿAbd al-Razzāq died in 211 AH. (Muqaddimat Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ, 460, 498)

(b) Extreme Youth of al-Dabārī:
When he heard from ʿAbd al-Razzāq, he was about seven years old. (Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl, 1/181, 332)


(c) Conflicting Versions:

• In Thiqah Salamah ibn Shabīb’s version:
  
  ʿAbd al-Razzāq → Maʿmar → a man → ʿIkrimah… (Tafsīr ʿAbd al-Razzāq, 2/263, ḥadīth 3384)
  
  
• Another via Muḥammad ibn Thawr:
  
  Maʿmar → ʿAbbād ibn Manṣūr → ʿIkrimah (mursal). (Tafsīr al-Ṭabarī, 29/98)
  

4. Grading​

• The al-Dabārī route is shādh (irregular) or munkar (denied) due to the issues above.
• Even if connected to ʿAbd al-Razzāq, it would still be weak because:
  ◈ ʿAbd al-Razzāq was a mudallis, narrating with “ʿan”.
  ◈ Stronger routes are mursal with ʿAbbād ibn Manṣūr (weak mudallis) in the chain.

5. Conclusion​

• The narration of al-Walīd ibn al-Mughīrah’s emotional reaction to the Qur’an is weak.
• The chain has defects: a narrator with memory issues, a very young intermediary, and contradiction with stronger mursal versions.
• Reliance on it as authentic is methodologically incorrect.
• Jāved Ahmad Ghāmidī’s use of this report as a foundation in Mīzān reflects a lack of proper ḥadīth scrutiny.

Hādhā mā ʿindī, wallāhu aʿlam biṣ-ṣawāb.