Criticism and Validation of the Narrator Samāk ibn Ḥarb by the Muhaddithīn
Compiled by: Tauheed.com
Samāk ibn Ḥarb was a narrator found in the Six Canonical Books (Kutub al-Sittah) and counted among the middle generation of the Tābi‘īn. His narrations appear in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
Many narrations of his are also found in Sunan Abī Dāwūd, Tirmidhī, Ibn Mājah, and Nisā’ī.
1. Shu‘bah’s Statement:
“Yahya ibn Ma‘īn said: ‘Samāk ibn Ḥarb is trustworthy, but Shu‘bah used to weaken him…’” (Tārīkh Baghdād 215/9)
Note: Ibn Ma‘īn (d. 233 AH) was born about three years before Shu‘bah (d. 160 AH) died, so this statement is considered disconnected and weak, as Ibn Ma‘īn could not have directly heard from Shu‘bah.
2. Sufyān al-Thawrī’s Statement:
“He used to weaken him slightly.”
This was narrated by Imam al-‘Ajlī (d. 261 AH) with a broken chain. Both Shu‘bah and Sufyān narrated from Samāk themselves, and if this criticism applies, it only applies to the chain "Samāk from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbās,” as explained by al-‘Ajlī.
3. Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal:
Called Samāk’s narration “mutaḍrib” (conflicted). This was mainly related to “Samāk from ‘Ikrimah.”
4. Muḥammad ibn ‘Abdullāh ibn ‘Ammār al-Mawṣilī:
“They say he made mistakes and had contradictions in his narration.” (Tārīkh Baghdād 216/9)
The identity of “they” is unknown and no reliable source confirms this.
5. Ṣāliḥ ibn Muḥammad al-Baghdādī:
“He is weak.”
This is transmitted via Muḥammad ibn ‘Alī al-Muqri’, whose own status is uncertain.
6. Ibn Kharāsh:
“There is softness in his narration.”
Ibn Kharāsh is himself considered weak by the majority, and the chain contains unknown narrators.
7. Ibn Ḥibbān:
Mentioned him in Al-Thiqāt and said he “often made mistakes,” but also considered him trustworthy. This is a contradiction. Sheikh al-Albānī pointed out that if one makes many mistakes, he cannot be trustworthy.
Ibn Ḥibbān included many of Samāk’s narrations in his Ṣaḥīḥ collections, which confirms his acceptance.
8. Imam ‘Aqīlī:
Mentioned in Al-Ḍu‘afā’ al-Kabīr but gave no strong criticism that contradicts his trustworthiness.
9. Jarīr ibn ‘Abdul-Ḥamīd:
Stopped narrating from Samāk because he saw him urinating while standing—this is not criticism but an incident, and standing while urinating can have valid reasons.
10. Imam Nisā’ī:
“Not strong, and he accepted talaqqīn (prompted narration).”
Usually, scholars relate this criticism specifically to the “Samāk from ‘Ikrimah” chain.
11. Ibn al-Mubārak:
Called Samāk weak but the narration is unsourced and the chain is weak.
12. Imam Bazār:
“He was famous among narrators; I don’t know anyone who abandoned him, though he showed some ‘tahawwur’ (change/confusion) before his death.”
13. Ya‘qūb ibn Shaybah:
Clarified that narrations from Samāk except those through ‘Ikrimah are sound.
Many prominent scholars considered Samāk trustworthy or at least acceptable:
① Imam Muslim included his narrations in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
② Imam Bukhārī referenced him and regarded his narrations as trustworthy.
③ Shu‘bah narrated from him and generally accepted narrations only from trustworthy narrators.
④ Sufyān al-Thawrī said “no narration from Samāk is dropped.”
⑤ Yaḥyā ibn Ma‘īn called him trustworthy.
⑥ Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī: trustworthy and honest.
⑦ Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal: said Samāk’s narration is better than ‘Abd al-Malik ibn ‘Umayr’s.
⑧ Abū Isḥāq al-Sabī‘ī: “Take knowledge from Samāk.”
⑨ Imam al-‘Ajlī: “Acceptable narration.”
⑩ Ibn ‘Adī: “His narrations are good from those who narrated from him and he is trustworthy.”
⑪ Imam Tirmidhī: graded many of his narrations as Hasan Ṣaḥīḥ.
⑫ Ibn Shāhin mentioned him in his Al-Thiqāt.
⑬ Imam Ḥākim narrated from him with authentication.
⑭ Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī confirmed his validation multiple times.
⑮ Ibn Ḥibbān narrated from him in his Ṣaḥīḥ.
⑯ Ibn Khuzaymah declared his narration sound.
⑰ Al-Bughawī graded his narrations as Hasan.
⑱ An-Nawawī called his narrations Hasan.
⑲ Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said his narrations are Ṣaḥīḥ.
⑳ Ibn al-Jāruḍ, Imam Ḍiyā’ al-Maqdisī, Imam Mundhirī, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar (who qualified the “Samāk from ‘Ikrimah” narrations as problematic but accepted others) and many others praised him.
Some scholars mentioned that Samāk suffered from weak memory or mixing of narrations late in life:
However, the narrations from his main students such as Abū ‘Awānah, Shu‘bah, Zā’idah, and others are all from before this mixing and are reliable.
Some objected that only Sufyān al-Thawrī mentioned the phrase “‘alā ṣadrihi” while others like Abū al-Ḥawṣ did not.
Answer: Sufyān al-Thawrī was a trustworthy memorizer specifying his hearing, and additional words by a trustworthy narrator are accepted unless they contradict the original.
وَمَا عَلَيْنَا إِلَّا الْبَلَاغُ
“Our duty is only to convey the message.”
Compiled by: Tauheed.com
Brief Introduction of Samāk ibn Ḥarb
Samāk ibn Ḥarb was a narrator found in the Six Canonical Books (Kutub al-Sittah) and counted among the middle generation of the Tābi‘īn. His narrations appear in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
- Reference in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī:
(Hadith 6722: قال: تابعہ یونس وسماک بن عطیۃ وسماک بن حرب…) - Approximately forty-five narrations in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (some repeated):
(224, 128/436, 458, 459, 499, 606, 618, 643(670), 734, 862, 866, 965, 978, 173/1075, 1385, 11/1504, 6/1628, 18/1651, 13/1671, 1680, (1692), 1693, 1748, 6/1821, 18467, 1922, 1984, 2053, 2135, 2248, 2277, 44/2305, 2322, 2329, 2339, 2344, 2361, 2745, 42/2763, 43, 78/2919, 2923, 2977, 2978)
Many narrations of his are also found in Sunan Abī Dāwūd, Tirmidhī, Ibn Mājah, and Nisā’ī.
Part One: Critics and Their Criticisms
1. Shu‘bah’s Statement:
“Yahya ibn Ma‘īn said: ‘Samāk ibn Ḥarb is trustworthy, but Shu‘bah used to weaken him…’” (Tārīkh Baghdād 215/9)
Note: Ibn Ma‘īn (d. 233 AH) was born about three years before Shu‘bah (d. 160 AH) died, so this statement is considered disconnected and weak, as Ibn Ma‘īn could not have directly heard from Shu‘bah.
2. Sufyān al-Thawrī’s Statement:
“He used to weaken him slightly.”
This was narrated by Imam al-‘Ajlī (d. 261 AH) with a broken chain. Both Shu‘bah and Sufyān narrated from Samāk themselves, and if this criticism applies, it only applies to the chain "Samāk from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbās,” as explained by al-‘Ajlī.
3. Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal:
Called Samāk’s narration “mutaḍrib” (conflicted). This was mainly related to “Samāk from ‘Ikrimah.”
4. Muḥammad ibn ‘Abdullāh ibn ‘Ammār al-Mawṣilī:
“They say he made mistakes and had contradictions in his narration.” (Tārīkh Baghdād 216/9)
The identity of “they” is unknown and no reliable source confirms this.
5. Ṣāliḥ ibn Muḥammad al-Baghdādī:
“He is weak.”
This is transmitted via Muḥammad ibn ‘Alī al-Muqri’, whose own status is uncertain.
6. Ibn Kharāsh:
“There is softness in his narration.”
Ibn Kharāsh is himself considered weak by the majority, and the chain contains unknown narrators.
7. Ibn Ḥibbān:
Mentioned him in Al-Thiqāt and said he “often made mistakes,” but also considered him trustworthy. This is a contradiction. Sheikh al-Albānī pointed out that if one makes many mistakes, he cannot be trustworthy.
Ibn Ḥibbān included many of Samāk’s narrations in his Ṣaḥīḥ collections, which confirms his acceptance.
8. Imam ‘Aqīlī:
Mentioned in Al-Ḍu‘afā’ al-Kabīr but gave no strong criticism that contradicts his trustworthiness.
9. Jarīr ibn ‘Abdul-Ḥamīd:
Stopped narrating from Samāk because he saw him urinating while standing—this is not criticism but an incident, and standing while urinating can have valid reasons.
10. Imam Nisā’ī:
“Not strong, and he accepted talaqqīn (prompted narration).”
Usually, scholars relate this criticism specifically to the “Samāk from ‘Ikrimah” chain.
11. Ibn al-Mubārak:
Called Samāk weak but the narration is unsourced and the chain is weak.
12. Imam Bazār:
“He was famous among narrators; I don’t know anyone who abandoned him, though he showed some ‘tahawwur’ (change/confusion) before his death.”
13. Ya‘qūb ibn Shaybah:
Clarified that narrations from Samāk except those through ‘Ikrimah are sound.
Part Two: Validators and Their Praise
Many prominent scholars considered Samāk trustworthy or at least acceptable:
① Imam Muslim included his narrations in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
② Imam Bukhārī referenced him and regarded his narrations as trustworthy.
③ Shu‘bah narrated from him and generally accepted narrations only from trustworthy narrators.
④ Sufyān al-Thawrī said “no narration from Samāk is dropped.”
⑤ Yaḥyā ibn Ma‘īn called him trustworthy.
⑥ Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī: trustworthy and honest.
⑦ Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal: said Samāk’s narration is better than ‘Abd al-Malik ibn ‘Umayr’s.
⑧ Abū Isḥāq al-Sabī‘ī: “Take knowledge from Samāk.”
⑨ Imam al-‘Ajlī: “Acceptable narration.”
⑩ Ibn ‘Adī: “His narrations are good from those who narrated from him and he is trustworthy.”
⑪ Imam Tirmidhī: graded many of his narrations as Hasan Ṣaḥīḥ.
⑫ Ibn Shāhin mentioned him in his Al-Thiqāt.
⑬ Imam Ḥākim narrated from him with authentication.
⑭ Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī confirmed his validation multiple times.
⑮ Ibn Ḥibbān narrated from him in his Ṣaḥīḥ.
⑯ Ibn Khuzaymah declared his narration sound.
⑰ Al-Bughawī graded his narrations as Hasan.
⑱ An-Nawawī called his narrations Hasan.
⑲ Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said his narrations are Ṣaḥīḥ.
⑳ Ibn al-Jāruḍ, Imam Ḍiyā’ al-Maqdisī, Imam Mundhirī, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar (who qualified the “Samāk from ‘Ikrimah” narrations as problematic but accepted others) and many others praised him.
Part Three: The Issue of Mixing (Ikhtilāṭ)
Some scholars mentioned that Samāk suffered from weak memory or mixing of narrations late in life:
- “Taghayyar bākhiratih” (change in his later years)
- Ibn al-Kayyāl and others discussed this as a known issue in some narrators.
However, the narrations from his main students such as Abū ‘Awānah, Shu‘bah, Zā’idah, and others are all from before this mixing and are reliable.
The Phrase “‘Alā Ṣadrihi” and Its Objections
Some objected that only Sufyān al-Thawrī mentioned the phrase “‘alā ṣadrihi” while others like Abū al-Ḥawṣ did not.
Answer: Sufyān al-Thawrī was a trustworthy memorizer specifying his hearing, and additional words by a trustworthy narrator are accepted unless they contradict the original.
Other Important Notes
- The chain “Samāk from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbās” is weak, but other narrations of Samāk are reliable.
- Some claim Samāk was a muddallis (one who conceals a weakness in narration), but no authentic book states this.
- Scholars agree his narrations are trustworthy except for specific weak chains.
Summary of Validation
- Samāk ibn Ḥarb is deemed trustworthy and reliable by the majority of the scholars of Ḥadīth.
- His narrations are graded as Ṣaḥīḥ or at least Hasan, except some narrations specifically from the chain “Samāk from ‘Ikrimah,” which are weak.
- Objections like “mutaḍrib al-ḥadīth” and “accepts prompted narration” mostly apply to his later years or specific chains.
- The phrase “‘alā ṣadrihi” is authentically attributed to Sufyān al-Thawrī and is not a reason for criticism.
وَمَا عَلَيْنَا إِلَّا الْبَلَاغُ
“Our duty is only to convey the message.”
