The Main Report and Its Established Wording
The Main Chain (Authentic and Well-Known): Narrated by Yahya ibn Yahya al-Tamimi, Ja‘far ibn Abdullah, and others. A man asked Imam Malik about the verse, “The Most Merciful rose over the Throne”, saying, “How did He rise?” Malik became visibly angered, sweat covered him, and he said: “The kayf (how) is ghayr ma‘qul (not comprehended by our minds), the istiwa is not majhool (not unknown). Belief in it is wajib (obligatory), and asking about it is an innovation.
He then said, “I fear you are misguided,” and ordered that the man be removed.
Source: Kitab al-‘Uluw by al-Dhahabi, p. 139.
Grading: Al-Dhahabi declared it firmly established from Malik, also noting a similar report from his teacher Rabi‘ah.
Meaning: The istiwa is known in meaning, not unknown, and its manner (kayfiyyah) is beyond comprehension.
The Weak Wording: “The Kayf is Marfūʿ (Lifted Away)”
A variant reads, “as He described Himself, and it is not said ‘how,’ for the kayf is marfūʿ (lifted away).”
Source: Al-Tha‘labī in Tafsir (Dar al-Tafsir, vol. 12, p. 369).
Chain: Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Shuja‘ al-Baghdadi (Ibn al-Thalji) from Malik.
Evaluation: The isnad is very weak and disconnected (munqati‘); Muhammad ibn Shuja‘ never met Malik.
Jarh (criticsim):
- Muhammad ibn Shuja‘ al-Baghdadi was a Jahmi and was severely criticised by the imams of hadith.
- Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal called him “an innovator and a follower of desires.”
- Al-Qawariri called him “a disbeliever.”
- Al-Saji said, “A liar who schemed to nullify the hadith.”
- Ibn Adi said, “He fabricated hadiths about anthropomorphism to defame the people of hadith.”
- Al-Azdi: “A liar; it is not permissible to narrate from him.”
The chain is rejected. The correct wording from Malik is “not majhool”, not “not ma‘qul”.
The Report Through Abdullah ibn Wahb
Source: Al-Bayhaqi, al-Asma wa al-Sifat (vol. 2, p. 305).
Narrated by Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Ismail ibn Mihran from his father, from Abu al-Rabi‘, from Abdullah ibn Wahb.
Athar: Malik said, “The Most Merciful rose over the Throne as He described Himself. It is not said ‘how,’ and the kayf about it is marfū‘ (lifted away).”
Evaluation:
- The chain contains Muhammad ibn Ismail ibn Mihran, who became mute six years before his death.
- Al-Hakim said that hearing from him after his illness is unreliable.
- Therefore, while he is trustworthy in himself, the narration taken after his illness is weak.
Conclusion: Chain weak due to transmission period.
The Report of Abdullah ibn Nafi‘ al-Saigh al-Madani
Source: Ibn Abd al-Barr, al-Tamhid (Moroccan print, vol. 7, p. 138; Bashar ed., vol. 5, p. 149).
Chain: Abdullah ibn Ahmad → Ahmad ibn Hanbal → Sarij ibn al-Nu‘man → Abdullah ibn Nafi‘ → Malik.
Athar: Malik said, “Allah, Mighty and Exalted, is in the heaven, and His knowledge (encompasses everything). It was said to him, ‘The Most Merciful rose over the Throne, how did He rise?’ Malik said, ‘His istiwa is ma‘qul (understood), its kayfiyyah is majhool (unknown), and asking about it is bid‘ah.’”
Evaluation:
- The isnad is hasan (good).
- Abdullah ibn Nafi‘ al-Saigh was trustworthy in Malik’s narrations but had weaker memory in other hadiths.
- Yahya ibn Ma‘in called him thiqah.
- Imam Ahmad said he was the most knowledgeable of Malik’s opinions.
- Abu Dawud said he was a man of fiqh and devotion, although he erred later in life.
Conclusion: This chain is sound and reliable for Malik’s sayings.
The Report of Ja‘far ibn Abdullah
Sources: Al-Lalikai, Sharh Usul I‘tiqad Ahl al-Sunnah (vol. 3, p. 441); Abu Nu‘aym, Hilyat al-Awliya (vol. 6, p. 325); Abu Uthman al-Sabuni, Aqidat al-Salaf, p. 181–184.
Athar: A man asked Malik about the verse. Malik became angry and perspired, then said:
“The kayf (how) is ghayr ma‘qul (not comprehended), and the istiwa (rising over) is ghayr majhool (not unknown). Belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is bid‘ah.”
Narrators:
- Mahdi ibn Ja‘far al-Ramli – declared thiqah by Yahya ibn Ma‘in and others.
- Salamah ibn Shabib – trustworthy, used by Muslim.
- Ja‘far ibn Abdullah – declared trustworthy by al-Darimi.
Supporting routes:
- Abu Umayyah al-Ghalabi (judge of Basra) confirmed the same report.
- Abu al-Husayn Ali ibn al-Hasan narrated a similar version through reliable transmitters.
- Abu Muhammad al-Mukhlidi al-‘Adl (d. 405 AH), al-Hakim, and others deemed trustworthy.
Grading: Hasan (good). Consistent with the established wording “al-istiwā ghayr majhool, al-kayf ghayr ma‘qūl.”
The Report “His Istiwa is Majhool, and the Act Not Comprehended”
Source: Ibn Abd al-Barr, al-Tamhid (vol. 7, p. 151).
Chain: Muhammad ibn Abd al-Malik → Abdullah ibn Yunus → Baqi ibn Makhlad → Bakkar ibn Abdullah → Mahdi ibn Ja‘far → Malik.
Text: “His istiwa is majhool (unknown), and the fi‘l (act) from Him is not ma‘qul (not comprehended).”
Evaluation:
- Scholars agreed the phrase “His istiwa is majhool” is a scribal error.
- The rest of the chains confirm it should read “not majhool.”
- Muhammad ibn Abd al-Malik became confused in old age and was not among the precise narrators (Ibn al-Faradi, Tarikh ‘Ulama al-Andalus, vol. 2, p. 110).
Conclusion: Error in the text, not an authentic variation.
The Report of Yahya ibn Yahya al-Nisaburi
Sources: Al-Bayhaqi, al-Asma wa al-Sifat (vol. 2, p. 305); al-I‘tiqad, same page; Al-Dhahabi, al-‘Uluw, p. 168 (via Ibn Mandah).
Athar: “Al-istiwā is not majhool, and the kayf is not ma‘qool. Belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is bid‘ah.”
Chain:
- Yahya ibn Yahya al-Nisaburi (reliable transmitter from Malik).
- Muhammad ibn Amr ibn al-Nadr (trustworthy; heard from Yahya directly).
- Al-Bayhaqi’s intermediaries are sound.
- Ibn Mandah confirmed the same wording through al-Akhram (trustworthy).
Grading: Hasan sahih (good and authentic).
Meaning: Matches all reliable chains in wording and sense.
The Report of Muhammad ibn al-Nu‘man al-Taymi
Source: Abu al-Shaykh al-Isfahani, Tabaqat al-Muhaddithin (vol. 2, p. 214).
Chain: Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Fayd → Harun ibn Sulayman → Muhammad ibn al-Nu‘man → Malik.
Athar: “The istiwa from Him is not majhool, the kayf from Him is not ma‘qool, belief in it is obligatory, asking about it is bid‘ah.”
Narrators:
- Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Fayd – trustworthy (Abu Nu‘aym, Tarikh Isfahan, vol. 2, p. 79).
- Harun ibn Sulayman al-Khazzaz – trustworthy (Abu Nu‘aym, vol. 2, p. 313).
- Muhammad ibn al-Nu‘man – righteous, from a family of hadith transmitters.
Grading: Hasan.
The Report of Ismail ibn Abi Uways
Source: Ibn al-Maqri, Mu‘jam (vol. 1, p. 310).
Text: “The istiwa is not majhool, the kayf is not ma‘qool, belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is bid‘ah.”
Evaluation:
- Both the teacher (Abdallah ibn Sidah) and his teacher (al-Layth ibn Abdallah) are unknown.
- Therefore, the chain is weak due to anonymity.
The Report of Ayyub ibn Salih al-Makhzumi
Source: Ibn Abd al-Barr, al-Tamhid (vol. 7, p. 151).
Athar: “You asked about something not majhool (not unknown), and you spoke about something not ma‘qool (not comprehended). You are a man of evil; take him out.”
Evaluation:
- Ayyub ibn Salih al-Makhzumi was a Madani who settled in al-Ramla.
- Al-Daraqutni: “Upright, narrates a portion of the Muwatta.”
- Ibn Ma‘in: “Weak.”
- Ibn Abd al-Barr: “Not famous nor used as proof.”
- Ibn Adi: “Narrated from Malik what no one followed him on.”
Grading: Weak.
Final Overview of All Wordings and Chains
| Wording | Main Chain | Grading | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Al-istiwā ghayr majhool, al-kayf ghayr ma‘qool” | Yahya ibn Yahya al-Tamimi / Ja‘far ibn Abdullah / Yahya al-Nisaburi | Hasan sahih | Most authentic and consistent wording. |
| “Al-istiwā ma‘qool, al-kayf majhool” | Abdullah ibn Nafi‘ al-Saigh | Hasan | Strong in Malik’s narrations. |
| “Al-kayf marfū‘ (lifted away)” | Ibn al-Thalji (Jahmi) | Weak | Disconnected, unreliable narrator. |
| “His istiwā is majhool” | Muhammad ibn Abd al-Malik al-Qurtubi | Weak | Textual error; contradicts all others. |
| “Not majhool, not ma‘qool” | Muhammad ibn al-Nu‘man / Yahya al-Nisaburi | Hasan | Matches core authentic versions. |
| “Kayf not ma‘loom” (known) | Variant in manuscript of al-Sabuni | Acceptable | Equivalent to “not ma‘qool.” |
| “Ayyub ibn Salih version” | Al-Ramli route | Weak | Narrator not relied upon. |
Summary of Meanings
- The istiwā (rising over the Throne) is a real attribute affirmed for Allah, known in wording and meaning, not as a metaphor.
- The kayfiyyah (how) is beyond comprehension and not known to anyone.
- Belief in it is obligatory, as part of faith in Allah’s attributes.
- Questioning “how” is an innovation in religion, contrary to the way of the Salaf.
- Reliable versions all agree that the istiwā is not majhool and the kayf is not ma‘qool.
- The wording “kayf marfū‘” is weak, and “istiwā majhool” is a scribal mistake.
Final Conclusion: The narration of Imam Malik affirming “The istiwa is known, the kayf is unknown, belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is bid‘ah” is authentically established through several hasan and sahih chains, including those of Yahya ibn Yahya al-Tamimi, Yahya al-Nisaburi, Ja‘far ibn Abdullah, and Abdullah ibn Nafi‘ al-Saigh.
All weak or irregular versions either contain errors or unreliable narrators, and none of them alter the firmly transmitted wording recognised and accepted by the scholars of hadith.
Imam Malik ibn Anas (d. 179 AH) said, istiwa (rising over) is known, the kayf (how) is unknown, belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is bidah (innovation).
Some said, the narration the kayf is majhool (unknown) is not authentic, and they say, you are mushabbihah (anthropomorphists).
But this is wrong, rather it is established. And the one who claims this did not address the isnad of the narration, because he knows he would expose himself, or he did not encounter it then he rushed and denied, as will come. And some of them said, it has no isnad. I said, rather it has an isnad, as will come.
378 – Yahya ibn Yahya al-Tamimi, Jaafar ibn Abdullah, and a group narrated: A man came to Malik and said, O Abu Abdullah, “The Most Merciful rose over the Throne” (Taha: 5), how did He rise? He said: I never saw Malik so angered by anything like he was angered by this statement. Sweat poured from him, the people lowered their heads, then Malik recovered and said:
The kayf (how) is ghayr ma’qul (not comprehended by our minds).
The istiwa (rising over) is not majhool (unknown).
Belief in it is wajib (obligatory). Asking about it is bidah (innovation). I fear that you are a misguided man. Then he ordered that he be taken out.
Al Dhahabi (d. 748 AH) said: This is firmly established from Malik, and something similar has already been mentioned from Rabiah, the teacher of Malik.
It is the saying of Ahl al-Sunnah altogether: that the kayfiyyah (manner) of istiwa is la yuʿqal (not grasped by reason), rather it is majhool (unknown)
The istiwa is maʿloom (known), as Allah informed of it in His Book, and that it is in a way that befits Him.We do not taʿammuq (go into excessive depth), nor mutahadhluq (become overly sophisticated), nor do we enter into its necessary implications, whether in negation or affirmation. Rather, we remain silent and stop as the Salaf stopped.
You must know that if there was any ta’wil (interpretation away from the apparent meaning), the Companions and the Tabiʿun (those who followed them) would have hastened to clarify it.
It would not have been permissible for them to acknowledge it, to let it pass, and to remain silent about it. And you must also know with certainty that Allah, majestic is His glory, has no mithl (likeness) in His attributes, nor in His istiwa, nor in His nuzool (descending). Exalted is He, far above what the wrongdoers say, a great exaltation.
Kitab Al-`Uluw li al-`Ali al-Ghaffar By Ad Dhahabi Page 139
The wording, The kayf is marfu (lifted above us) is weak
This athar also came with the wording, as He described Himself, and it is not said, how, for the kayf is marfuu (lifted away), and in its chains are all weak.
Abu Abdillah Muhammad ibn Shuja al Baghdadi, Ibn al Thalji, from Malik ibn Anas.
It was brought out by al Tha’labi in his Tafsir, Dar al Tafsir print, vol. 12, p. 369, I heard Abu Muhammad al Hasan ibn Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Hamdan al Sijzi, the khatib, say, I heard the qadi Abu Sahl Muhammad ibn Sa’id say, I heard Abu Bakr al Bukhari say, I heard Abu Abdillah Muhammad ibn Shuja al Balkhi (jahmi) say, Malik ibn Anas, may Allah have mercy on him, was asked about the statement, the All Merciful rose over the Throne, how did He rise, he said, the kayf is majhool, and al istiwa is not ma’qul.
His statement, and al istiwa is not ma’qul, this is rejected and false, what Malik said is, not majhool, meaning known, as will come, and this isnad is very weak, then it is munqati (broken), Muhammad ibn Shuja did not meet Malik ibn Anas.
Muḥammad ibn Shujāʿ al-Baghdādī Abū ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Thaljī was a Jahmi and was heavily criticised by the imams of hadith.
Summary of Jarh on him found in Tahdhib al-Kamal fi Asmaʾ al-Rijal by al-Mizzi (25/363):
- Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal: “An innovator, a follower of desires.”
- Al-Qawariri (reported by Abdullah ibn Ahmad): “He is a disbeliever.”
- Ismail al-Qadi: Remained silent when told this, confirming it was due to something he heard from him.
- Al-Saji: “A liar who schemed to nullify the hadith of the Prophet.”
- Ibn Adi: “He used to fabricate hadiths about anthropomorphism and attribute them to the people of hadith to defame them.”
- Al-Azdi: “A liar. It is not permissible to narrate from him.”
- Al-Mizzi: Described him as one of the Jahmiyyah who believed in waqf regarding the Quran (that it is neither created nor uncreated).
It was brought out by al Bayhaqi in al Asma wal Sifat, vol. 2, p. 305, he said, Abu Abdillah al Hafiz, who is al Hakim, the author of al Mustadrak, informed us, he said, Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Ismail ibn Mihran informed me, he said, my father narrated to us, he said, Abu al Rabi, the nephew of Rushdin ibn Sa’d, narrated to us, he said, I heard Abdallah ibn Wahb say, we were with Malik ibn Anas, then a man entered and said, O Abu Abdillah, the All Merciful rose over the Throne, how is His istiwa.
He said, so Malik lowered his head and sweat covered him, then he raised his head and said, the All Merciful rose over the Throne as He described Himself, and it is not said, how, and the kayf about it is marfuu, and you are a man of evil, a companion of bidah, take him out. He said, so the man was taken out.
Its wording is strange, and in the isnad is weakness.
His statement, my father, meaning Muhammad ibn Ismail ibn Mihran.
He is trustworthy in himself, but whoever took from him after he became mute, in him is weakness.
Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Ismail ibn Mihran is Abu al Hasan al Isma’ili al Nisaburi. Al Hakim declared him sound.
Wording Kayf Is Majhool is Hasan
Abu Muhammad Abdallah ibn Nafi al Saigh al Madani, from Malik.
It was brought out by Ibn Abd al Barr in al Tamheed, Moroccan print, vol. 7, p. 138, and the Bashar edition, vol. 5, p. 149, he said, our shaykh Abu Muhammad Abdallah ibn Muhammad ibn Abd al Mumin narrated to us, he said, Ahmad ibn Ja’far ibn Hamdan ibn Malik narrated to us, he said, Abdallah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal narrated to us, he said, my father narrated to me, he said, Sarij ibn al Nu’man narrated to us, he said, Abdallah ibn Nafi narrated to us, he said, Malik ibn Anas said, Allah, Mighty and Exalted, is in the heaven, and His knowledge, then he said, and it was said to Malik, the All Merciful rose over the Throne, how did He rise, so Malik, may Allah have mercy on him, said, His istiwa is ma’qul (understood) and its kayfiyyah is majhoolah (unknown), and your asking about this is bidah, and I see you are an evil man.
Its isnad is hasan.
Abu Muhammad Abdallah ibn Muhammad ibn Abd al Mumin is al Tajibi al Qurtubi, known as Ibn al Zayyat, Ibn al Farradi said about him (Abdullah Ibn Nafi):
He had many hadith with full chains, sound in hearing, truthful in his narration, except that his precision was not good, and his handwriting was weak, he might err in spelling.
Tarikh Ulama al Andalus by Ibn al Farradi, (1/150)
Abdallah ibn Nafi al Saigh, is thiqah (reliable) regarding the statements of Malik, but in hadith his preservation has some issue, he might err, therefore one must distinguish the words of the imams in weakening a narrator and know what they intend exactly, and I will give an example for him below, but after I mention the words of the imams about him.
As for the words of the imams, Ibn Sa’d said, he clung to Malik ibn Anas with strong attachment and did not put anyone ahead of him, and he is below Ma’n. And Yahya ibn Ma’in, when asked who is firm in Malik, he mentioned them then said, and Abdallah ibn Nafi is firm in him.
And Dawud al Sajistani said, I heard Ahmad, meaning ibn Hanbal, say, Abdallah ibn Nafi was the most knowledgeable of people of the opinion of Malik and his hadith, he would memorize all the hadith of Malik, then doubt entered him at the end.
Tahdhib al Tahdhib by Ibn Hajar (3/268)
Tahdhib al Tahdhib by Ibn Hajar (2/443)
The critics gave a mixed but generally favourable assessment.
- Yahya ibn Ma‘in: “Thiqah.” (Trustworthy.)
- Al-Nasa’i: “Laysa bihi ba’s.” (No harm in him.)
- Abu Hatim al-Razi: “Weak in memory, but his written book is sound.”
- Al-Bukhari: “Tu‘raf wa tunkar.” (Some narrations are known and others are denied.)
- Ibn Sa‘d: “He clung to Malik firmly but was below Ma‘n ibn Isa in reliability.”
As an example, let us take Hammad ibn Salamah, if Hammad ibn Salamah narrates from Thabit al Bannani, he is among the firmest of people in him, but if he narrates from other shuyukh he may err, and the evidence is that Ahmad ibn Hanbal said, no one is more firm in Thabit than Hammad ibn Salamah. And Ahmad ibn Hanbal said, but Hammad ibn Salamah has confusion from Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman.
Sualat Abi Dawud for Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal Page 290
وقال أبو داود: سمعت أحمد. قال: ليس أحد أثبت في ثابت من حماد بن سلمة، هؤلاء الشيوخ يتوهمون.
And Imam Muslim, said, and the evidence for what we have explained is the agreement of the people of hadith and their scholars that the firmest of people in Thabit al Bannani is Hammad ibn Salamah, then he said, and Hammad is counted with them, meaning with Yahya al Qattan and others, if he narrates from other than Thabit, like his narration from Qatadah and Ayyub and Yunus and Dawud and al Jariri and the like of them, he errs in their hadith much. (al Tamyiz by Imam Muslim, edited by al A’zami, p. 217 to 218)
Then a person of desire comes and says, about a hadith narrated by Hammad ibn Salamah from Thabit al Bannani, he says, Imam Muslim said, Hammad errs much, so he deceives the people. But when people return to the book of Muslim they will uncover his lie, then they will say to him, O wicked one, Imam Muslim said, if Hammad narrates from Thabit he is firm in him, but if he narrates from Qatadah he errs in him, so why did you not distinguish.
And Hammad, according to them, when he narrates from other than Thabit al-Bannani, such as his narrations from Qatadah, Ayyub, Yunus, Dawud ibn Abi Hind, al-Jariri, Yahya ibn Sa’id, Amr ibn Dinar, and those similar to them, he errs much in their hadith.
Others besides Hammad are more reliable than him in narrating from those men, such as Hammad ibn Zayd, Abd al-Warith, Yazid ibn Zuray’, and Ibn Ulayyah.
And according to this statement that we have described concerning Hammad, regarding the goodness of his hadith and his precision when narrating from Thabit, to the extent that he became the most reliable of them in that, is the same as what applies to Ja’far ibn Burqan in his narrations from Maymun ibn Mihran and Yazid ibn al-Asam.
He is the most knowledgeable of people concerning them and their hadith. But if you were to weigh Ja’far in his narrations other than from Maymun and Ibn al-Asam, and compare his hadith from others such as al-Zuhri, Amr ibn Dinar, and the rest of the men, you would find him weak, poor in precision and reliability in narrating from them.
And know, may Allah have mercy on you, that the science of hadith and the knowledge of its causes, from what is sound and what is weak (saqim), belong only to the ahl al-hadith, because they are the preservers of the narrations of people and the ones who know them, to the exclusion of others.
The foundation upon which they build their religion is the sunnah and the transmitted athar passed down from generation to generation, from the time of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, until our time.
Therefore, those who oppose them and differ from them in methodology have no path to truly knowing hadith and knowing the transmitters among the scholars of the various lands throughout the past ages who transmitted the reports and carried the traditions.
al Tamyiz by Imam Muslim Page 218
Wording That The Kayf Is Ghayr Ma’qul (Incomprehensible) & Kayf Is Majhool
Ja’far ibn Abdallah from Malik.
It was brought out by al Lalikai in Sharh Usul I’itiqad Ahl al Sunnah, edited by al Ghamidi, vol. 3, p. 441, and al Zabidi transmitted it from him in Ithaf al Sadah al Muttaqin, vol. 2, p. 79. Ali ibn al Rabi al Tamimi mentioned it, and with al Zabidi, he said, Ali ibn al Rabi the reciter informed us in a study session, he said, Abdallah ibn Abi Dawud narrated to us, he said, Salamah ibn Shabib narrated to us, he said, Mahdi ibn Ja’far narrated to us, from Ja’far ibn Abdallah, he said, a man came to Malik ibn Anas and said, O Abu Abdillah, the All Merciful rose over the Throne, how did He rise.
He said, I never saw Malik become angry at something like his anger at this statement, and sweat covered him, meaning perspiration. He said, and the people lowered their heads and waited to see what would come from him about it. He said, then Malik calmed, and said, the kayf is ghayr ma’qul (not grasped by reason), and the istiwa from Him is ghayr majhool (not unknown), and belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is bidah, and I fear that you are astray, and he ordered that he be taken out.
Abdallah ibn Abi Dawud al Sijistani was followed.
Muhammad ibn Ali ibn Muslim al Uqayli is Abu Bakr al Basri, most of the time Abu Nu’aym narrated from him. (al Ansab by al Sam’ani, Indian print, vol. 9, p. 340)
Second, he was followed by Ali ibn al Husayn. Abu Uthman al Sabuni brought it in Aqidat al Salaf, edited by al Jadi’, p. 181 to 182, he said, Abu Muhammad al Mukhlidi al Adl informed us, Abu Bakr Abdallah ibn Muhammad al Isfaraayini, who is al Jurbadhi, narrated to us, Abu al Husayn Ali ibn al Hasan, and in one copy, ibn al Husayn, narrated to us, Salamah ibn Shabib narrated to us, Mahdi ibn Ja’far ibn Maymun al Ramli narrated to us, Ja’far ibn Abdallah narrated to us, he said, a man came to Malik ibn Anas, and in it, the kayf is not ma’qul (incomprehensible).
And in a manuscript copy, the kayf is not ma’loom (known), and the istiwa is not majhool (unknown).
Here, as you see, it came, the kayf is not ma’loom (known), as a synonym of the kayf is not ma’qul.
Abu Muhammad al Mukhlidi al Adl is al Hasan ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn al Hasan ibn Ali ibn Mukhlad ibn Shayban al Nisaburi.
al Ansab by al Sam’ani (5/227)
Siyar A’lam Nubala By Ad Dhahabi (16/540)
Abu al Husayn Ali ibn al Hasan, and in one copy, ibn al Husayn, I say, he is if Allah wills Abu al Hasan, without the ya, Ali ibn al Husayn ibn Hibban al Marwazi, trustworthy, he narrates from Salamah ibn Shabib, as in (Abu al Shaykh al Isfahani’s Akhlaq al Nabi, vol. 4, p. 54.)
وقال أبو أحمد بن عدي : يروي عن الثقات أشياء لا يتابعه عليها أحد .
وقال أبو سعيد بن يونس : قدم مصر سنة خمس وعشرين ومائتين .
وقال أبو سعيد بن يونس : توفي سنة سبع وعشرين ومائتين .
Abu Sa‘id ibn Yunus (d. 347 AH) said, “He came to Egypt in the year 225 AH.”
Abu Sa‘id ibn Yunus said, “He died in the year 227 AH.”
Tahdhib al-Kamal fi Asma’ al-Rijal by al-Mizzi (28/589-590)
Ja’far ibn Abdallah was declared trustworthy by al Darimi, as will come.
Third, he was followed by Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Abi Awn al Nasawi. Abu Uthman al Sabuni brought it in Aqidat al Salaf, edited by al Jadi’, p. 184, and my grandfather Abu Hamid Ahmad ibn Ismail narrated it to me, from the grandfather of my father, the martyr, Abu Abdillah Muhammad ibn Adi ibn Hamdawayh al Sabuni, he said, Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Abi Awn al Nasawi narrated to us, he said, Salamah ibn Shabib narrated to us, he said, Mahdi ibn Ja’far al Ramli narrated to us, he said, Ja’far ibn Abdallah narrated to us, he said, a man came to Malik ibn Anas, and in it, and he mentioned something similar.
Therefore al Sabuni did not present the exact wording.
Abu Abdillah Muhammad ibn Adi ibn Hamdawayh al Sabuni. (See Ikmal al Ikmal by Ibn Nuqtah, vol. 2, p. 285.)
Abu Hamid Ahmad ibn Ismail is Ahmad ibn Ismail ibn Ibrahim ibn Abid ibn Amir al Sabuni. (See Ikmal al Ikmal by Ibn Nuqtah, vol. 4, p. 88.)
Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Abi Awn al Nasawi, kunyah Abu Ja’far. Al Khateeb said, he was trustworthy. (Tarikh Baghdad, edited by Bashar, vol. 2, p. 149)
قال أبو بكر البيهقي: حدثنا إمام المسلمين حقا، وشيخ الإسلام صدقا، أبو عثمان الصابوني.
وقال أبو عبد الله المالكي: أبو عثمان ممن شهدت له أعيان الرجال بالكمال في الحفظ والتفسير.
قلت: ولقد كان من أئمة الأثر، له مصنف في السنة واعتقاد السلف، ما رآه منصف إلا واعترف له.
• Al Bayhaqi (d. 458 AH): “The true imam of the Muslims and the sincere Shaykh al Islam.”
• Al Kattani: “He was among the memorisers of hadith.”
And Abu Uthman al Sabuni brought it in Aqidat al Salaf, edited by al Jadi’, p. 180, he said, Abu al Hasan ibn Abi Ishaq al Muzakki ibn al Muzakki narrated to us, Ahmad ibn al Khadr Abu al Hasan al Shafi’i narrated to us, Shadhan narrated to us, Ibn Makhlad ibn Yazid al Quhistani narrated to us, Ja’far ibn Maymun narrated to us, that Malik ibn Anas was asked, and in it, al istiwa is not majhool (unknown), and the kayf is not ma’qul (incomprehensible).
Ibn Makhlad ibn Yazid al Quhistani, is majhool, there is no biography for him.
Ja‘far ibn Maymun is not recorded in any biography as narrating from Imam Malik. Al Mizzi In Tahdeeb Al Kamal lists who he narrates from and who narrated from him. So this would be an error.
The correct version, is from Mahdi ibn Ja‘far ibn Maymun, as appears in the earlier chains, even if his shaykh Ja‘far ibn Abdullah was omitted from the isnad.
The Wording Istiwa Is Majhool & The Act Is Incomprehensible
And Ibn Abd al Barr brought it in al Tamheed, Moroccan print, vol. 7, p. 151, he said, Muhammad ibn Abd al Malik narrated to us, he said, Abdallah ibn Yunus narrated to us, he said, Baqi ibn Makhlad narrated to us, he said, Bakkar ibn Abdallah al Qurashi narrated to us, he said, Mahdi ibn Ja’far narrated to us, from Malik ibn Anas, that he was asked about the statement of Allah, Mighty and Exalted, the All Merciful rose over the Throne, how did He rise, he said, so Malik lowered his head, then said, His istiwa is majhool (unknown), and the fi’l (act) from Him is not ma’qul (not grasped by our minds), and asking about this is bidah.
As it stands, His istiwa is majhool, this is mistaken, it conflicts with the rest of the chains, and perhaps ghayr (not) fell between His istiwa and majhool, so it would be, not majhool.
And his statement, and the fi’l from Him is not ma’qul, means the kayfiyyah of istiwa.
Muhammad ibn Abd al Malik is Abu Abdillah Muhammad ibn Abd al Malik ibn Difawn ibn Marwan al Lakhmi al Haddad al Qurtubi. Ibn al Farradi said, he heard in Cordoba from Abdallah ibn Yunus, meaning al Qabri, and he said, he was a righteous man, one of the upright witnesses, he narrated and people wrote from him, and when his age rose, he became disordered in some things that were read to him which were not from what he had heard, and he was not among the people of precision. (Tarikh Ulama al Andalus by Ibn al Farradi, vol. 2, p. 110 to 111)
This is also in Siyar A’lam Nubala By Ad Dhahabi (17/56)
Abdallah ibn Yunus is Abu Muhammad Abdallah ibn Yunus ibn Muhammad ibn Ubaydillah ibn Ibad ibn Ziyad ibn Yazid ibn Abi Yahya al Muradi al Andalusi al Qurtubi, known as al Qabri. Ibn al Farradi said, he heard a lot from Baqi ibn Makhlad, and kept his company, and people heard much from him. (Tarikh Ulama al Andalus, vol. 1, p. 265)
Bakkar ibn Abdallah al Qurashi is Bakkar ibn Abdallah ibn Bakkar ibn Abd al Malik ibn al Walid ibn Busar ibn Abi Arta’ah Umayr al Dimashqi. Abu Zur’ah al Razi and Abu Hatim al Razi wrote from him, and they said, truthful. (see al Jarh wal Ta’dil by Ibn Abi Hatim, vol. 2, p. 410, and Tarikh Dimashq by Ibn Asakir, vol. 10, p. 363, and al Ahad wal Mathani by Ibn Abi Asim, vol. 2, p. 139)
The Wording That Istiwa Is Not Majhool & The Kayf Is Not Ma’qul
Abu Zakariyya Yahya ibn Yahya al Nisaburi from Malik.
It was narrated by Muhammad ibn Amr al Nisaburi from Yahya, and he has two routes from him.
It was brought out by al Bayhaqi in al Asma wal Sifat, vol. 2, p. 305, and in al I’tiqad, he said, Abu Bakr Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn al Harith al Faqih al Asfahani informed us, Abu Muhammad Abdallah ibn Muhammad ibn Ja’far ibn Hayyan, known as Abu al Shaykh, narrated to us, Abu Ja’far Ahmad ibn Zirak al Yazdi narrated to us, I heard Muhammad ibn Amr ibn al Nadr al Nisaburi say, I heard Yahya ibn Yahya say, we were with Malik ibn Anas, then a man came and said, O Abu Abdillah, the All Merciful rose over the Throne, so how did He rise, he said, so Malik lowered his head until sweat covered him, then he said, al istiwa is not majhool, and the kayf is not ma’qul, and belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is bidah, and I do not see you except a mubtadi (innovator), and he ordered that he be taken out.
Muhammad ibn Amr ibn al Nadr al Nisaburi is Abu Ali al Jarashi or al Harashi, truthful.
Abu al Hasan al Bayhaqi said, and Kashmard, Qashmar, is the imam Abu Ali Muhammad ibn Amr ibn al Nadr ibn Humran al Nisaburi, and the dwelling of Abu Ali was Kashmard in the alley of Harb, and he had a known masjid, and he heard the imam Yahya ibn Yahya. (see Tarikh al Islam by al Dhahabi, edited by Bashar, vol. 6, p. 819, and Tarikh Bayhaq, arabized by Abu al Hasan al Bayhaqi, Dar Iqra print, p. 219)
Siyar A’lam Nubala By Ad Dhahabi (13/565)
And Abu Ja’far Ahmad ibn Zirak was followed. Ibn Mandah brought it as reported by al Dhahabi in al Uluw lil Ali al Ghaffar, p. 168, he said, Muhammad ibn Ya’qub al Shaybani, who is al Akhram, trustworthy, a hafiz, informed us, he said, Muhammad ibn Amr ibn al Nadr narrated to us, he said, Yahya ibn Yahya narrated to us, he said, I was with Malik, then a man came to him and said, O Abu Abdillah, the All Merciful rose over the Throne, so he lowered his head, then said, al istiwa is not majhool, and the kayf is not ma’qul, and belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is bidah.
The conclusion, its isnad is hasan sahih.
Muhammad ibn al Nu’man ibn Abd al Salam al Taymi from Malik.
It was brought out by Abu al Shaykh al Isfahani in Tabaqat al Muhaddithin, vol. 2, p. 214, he said, Abd al Rahman ibn al Fayd narrated to us, he said, Harun ibn Sulayman narrated to us, he said, I heard Muhammad ibn al Nu’man ibn Abd al Salam say, a man came to Malik ibn Anas and said, the All Merciful rose over the Throne, how did He rise, he said, so he lowered his head and began to sweat, and we waited to see what he would order, then he raised his head and said, al istiwa from Him is not majhool, and the kayf from Him is not ma’qul, and belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is bidah, and I do not see you except astray, take him out of my house.
Abd al Rahman ibn al Fayd is Abu al Aswad al Isfahani. Abu Nu’aym al Isfahani said, one of the trustworthy. (Tarikh Isfahan, vol. 2, p. 79)
Harun ibn Sulayman is Abu al Hasan Harun ibn Sulayman ibn Dawud ibn Bahram al Khazzaz al Isfahani. Abu Nu’aym and Abu al Shaykh al Isfahani both said, one of the trustworthy. (Tarikh Isfahan by Abu Nu’aym, vol. 2, p. 313, and Tabaqat al Muhaddithin by Abu al Shaykh, vol. 3, p. 14)
Muhammad ibn al Nu’man ibn Abd al Salam is Abu Abdillah Muhammad ibn al Nu’man ibn Abd al Salam ibn Habib ibn Hutaid al Taymi. Abu al Shaykh al Isfahani said, a hadith scholar, son of a hadith scholar, son of a hadith scholar, one of the godfearing, few hadiths, and Zayd ibn Akhram narrated from him and said, the worshipper of Isfahan, Muhammad ibn al Nu’man narrated to us. (Tabaqat al Muhaddithin by Abu al Shaykh, vol. 2, p. 211, and Tarikh Isfahan by Abu Nu’aym, vol. 2, p. 154)
The conclusion, its isnad is hasan.
Ismail ibn Abi Uways from Malik.
It was brought out by Ibn al Maqri in his Mu’jam, vol. 1, p. 310, he said, the qadi Abdallah ibn Sidah al Isfahani narrated to us, al Layth ibn Abdallah al Balsi narrated to us, he said, I heard Zakariyya ibn Muhammad ibn Marwan say, I was with Ismail ibn Abi Uways, then a man from the pilgrims asked him about the issue of the people of al Sham with Abu Abdillah Malik ibn Anas. So ibn Abi Uways said, yes, I was one day with Abu Abdillah Malik, then a man from al Sham sought permission with him, so he permitted him, then he greeted, then he said, cure me, O Abu Abdillah, may Allah cure you.
He said, what do you have. He said, inform me about the statement of Allah, the All Merciful rose over the Throne, how did He rise. He said, so he lowered his head for a long time, then he raised his head and said, al istiwa is not majhool, and the kayf is not ma’qul, and belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is bidah, stand up from me, may Allah not keep your feet firm, I do not see you except astray.
The shaykh of Ibn al Maqri (Abdallah ibn Sidah al Isfahani) and the shaykh of his shaykh are unknown narrators.
Abu Sulayman Ayyub ibn Salih al Makhzumi from Malik.
It was brought out by Ibn Abd al Barr in al Tamheed, edited by Bashar, vol. 7, p. 151, with slight variation, he said, our shaykh Muhammad ibn Abd al Malik narrated to us, he said, Abdallah ibn Yunus narrated to us, he said, Baqi ibn Makhlad narrated to us, he said, Ayyub ibn Salih al Makhzumi at al Ramla narrated to us, he said, we were with Malik when an Iraqi came to him and said, O Abu Abdillah, a question I want to ask you about. So Malik bowed his head.
He said to him, O Abu Abdillah, the All Merciful rose over the Throne, how did He rise. He said, you asked about something not majhool (not unknown), and you spoke about something not ma’qul (not grasped by our minds), you are a man of evil, take him out. So they took him by his two upper arms and took him out.
Abu Sulayman Ayyub ibn Salih al Makhzumi, a Madani who settled in al Ramla. Al Daraqutni said, Ayyub ibn Salih is upright in his affair, he narrates from Malik a portion of the Muwatta, and they erred in one hadith. (Lisan al Mizaan by Ibn Hajar, edited by Abu Ghuddah, vol. 8, p. 69)
(1490 – أيوب) بن صالح، عن مالك، ضعفه ابن معين انتهى. وقال الخطيب في الرواة عن مالك أيوب بن صالح بن سلمة الحراني المخزومي أبو سليمان المدني سكن الرملة، وروى عن مالك الموطأ وأورد له الدارقطني في ترجمة الزهري عن سعيد عن أبي هريرة رضي الله عنه حديثا خولف في سنده وذكره ابن عدي فقال روى عن مالك ما لم يتابعه عليه أحد ثم قال في كتابي عن محمد بن الحسن بن قتيبة عن أيوب هذا عن مالك عن يحيى بن سعيد عن انس ان أعرابيا بال في المسجد، قال ابن عدي وهذا في الموطأ مرسل ليس فيه انس رضي الله عنه، وأورده الدارقطني في غرائب مالك عن علي بن محمد بن علي الحصيني (1) بمصر من أصله عن ابن قتيبة كما قال ابن عدي، ثم أورده من كتاب يوسف بن القاسم الميانجي قاضى دمشق عن ابن قتيبة قال حدثنا أبي أو محمد بن أيوب بن سديد عن أيوب بن سويد عن مالك، وقد اختلف علي ابن قتيبة فيه وأورد له حديثا آخر عن الحصيني عن ابن قتيبة عن المسيب بن عبد الكريم عن أيوب بن صالح عن مالك عن نافع عن ابن عمر عن أبي ذر حديثا في ذم الولاية، وقال هذا باطل عن مالك وسأذكره في ترجمة المسيب، وقال ابن عبد البر ليس بالمشهور ولا يحتج به، روى عنه أبو المنذر سفيان بن المنذر.
Ayyub ibn Salih narrated from Malik (d. 179 AH). Ibn Main (d. 233 AH) declared him weak. Al Khateeb (d. 463 AH) said in his book Those Who Narrated from Malik: Ayyub ibn Salih ibn Salamah al Harrani al Makhzumi Abu Sulayman al Madani lived in al Ramla and narrated the Muwatta from Malik.
Al Daraqutni (d. 385 AH) mentioned him in the biography of al Zuhri from Saeed from Abu Hurayrah, may Allah be pleased with him, mentioning a hadith whose chain was disagreed upon.
Ibn Adi (d. 365 AH) mentioned him saying, “He narrated from Malik what no one else followed him on.”
Then he said in my book from Muhammad ibn al Hasan ibn Qutaybah from this Ayyub from Malik from Yahya ibn Saeed from Anas, that a Bedouin urinated in the masjid.
Ibn Adi said, “This is in the Muwatta as a mursal report, without Anas, may Allah be pleased with him.”
Al Daraqutni recorded it in Gharaib Malik from Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Ali al Husayni in Egypt, from his original manuscript, from Ibn Qutaybah just as Ibn Adi said.
Then he recorded it from the book of Yusuf ibn al Qasim al Miyangi, the judge of Damascus, from Ibn Qutaybah, who said, “My father, or Muhammad ibn Ayyub ibn Sadaid, narrated to us from Ayyub ibn Suwayd from Malik.”
There was disagreement about Ibn Qutaybah in this. Al Daraqutni also mentioned for him another hadith from al Husayni from Ibn Qutaybah from al Musayyib ibn Abd al Karim from Ayyub ibn Salih from Malik from Nafi from Ibn Umar from Abu Dharr, a hadith on the condemnation of leadership.
He said, “This is false from Malik, and I will mention it in the biography of al Musayyib.”
Ibn Abd al Barr (d. 463 AH) said, “He is not well known and is not used as proof.”
Abu al Mundhir Sufyan ibn al Mundhir narrated from him.
Lisan al Mizaan by Ibn Hajar
And Ibn Abd al Barr said, he is not famous for carrying knowledge, nor among those one uses as proof. (al Tamheed, Moroccan print, vol. 22, p. 327)
And Ibn Adi said, Malik narrated from him what no one followed him on, and it reached me from Yahya ibn Ma’in that he weakened him. (al Kamil by Ibn Adi, vol. 2, p. 32)
