Critical Analysis of al-Munabbihāt in Hadith Literature Based on the Context of Hadith Writing Methods

Critical Analysis of al-Munabbihāt in Hadith Literature Based on the Context of Hadith Writing Methods

¹Mohd Nor Adzhar Ibrahim, ²Rusni Mohamad, ³Mohd Solleh Ab Razak, ⁴Khairulnazrin Nasir

Faculty of Quranic and Sunnah Studies, Islamic Science University of Malaysia Bandar Baru Nilai 71800, Nilai, Negeri Sembilan, MALAYSIA

Faculty of Human Sciences, Sultan Idris Education University 35900, Tanjong Malim, Perak, MALAYSIA

Faculty of Islamic Studies, University of Malaysia Sabah 88450, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, MALAYSIA

Academy of Islamic Studies, University of Malaya Education Centre (UMEC) 16310, Bachok, Kelantan, MALAYSIA

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8090127

Received: 02 September 2024; Accepted: 12 September 2024; Published: 08 October 2024

ABSTRACT

Al-Munabbihāt is a renowned work attributed to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī. This study aims to analyze the credibility of attributing the book al-Munabbihāt to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī from the perspective of hadith writing methods. The research employs a qualitative library research method through content analysis design. The analysis specification is conducted by comparing the hadith writing methods of this book with the popular hadith book by Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī titled Bulūgh al-Marām. The findings indicate various issues related to the hadith writing methods, such as not clarifying the highest narrator’s name, narrated with ṣīghah al-tamrīḍ, not stating the hadith sources, lacking commentary and explanation on the hadith status, and the hadith not being found in Bulūgh al-Marām despite being in the same genre. Additionally, the hadith presented are mixed with wise sayings (ḥukamā’). This clearly justifies questioning the authenticity of attributing this work to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī. Therefore, it is suggested that this work should no longer be attributed to him to preserve the sustainability of hadith literature, as this attribution does not reflect the esteemed reputation of Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, who is revered as a great figure in the field of hadith and would undoubtedly tarnish his reputation as Amīr al-Mu’minīn fi al-Ḥadīth.

Keywords: Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, al-Munabbihāt, False Attribution, Hadith Writing Methods

INTRODUCTION

The status of the Sunnah as the second most important authority after the Quran has raised awareness among scholars to preserve, protect, and disseminate it to the muslim community. To ensure the Sunnah remains authentic, the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) stipulated that the hadiths being spread and conveyed must be assuredly genuine, without any additions or omissions that could alter their true meaning. Consequently, scholars have paid significant attention to this matter, as evidenced by the emergence of great works in the 2^nd century AH, such as the Muwaṭṭa’, and in the 3^rd century AH, such as the al-Kutub al-Sittah. These works were produced through a combination of memorization and documentation occurring simultaneously.

The works produced during these centuries have inspired subsequent generations of writers. This is undoubtedly due to the established methodologies developed by each hadith scholar. Each of them had their own methodology, and its application in writing was closely tied to the purpose and objectives of the book’s creation (Muḥammad Abū Zahw, 1984). For example, the purpose and objectives of writing Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī can be identified based on the hadith writing method clearly reflected in the title of the book, namely al-Jāmi’ al-Ṣaḥīḥ al-Musnad min Ḥadīth Rasūlullāh SAW wa Sunanih wa Ayyāmih. From this title, it can be understood that the writing of the book is not limited to specific issues but involves various aspects such as rulings, virtues, historical news, and others. At the same time, this title also indicates that its content only includes authentic hadiths with continuous chains of narration (Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, 1379H). Although this is not explicitly stated as the writing method or conditions used by the Imam of Hadith, also known as Amīr al-Mu’minīn fī al-Ḥadīth, scholars have successfully identified these authorship methodologies one by one. Certainly, the attitude and approach of these great scholars have been emulated by subsequent hadith scholars in producing hadith works, even if only compiling hadiths according to specific topics. This is aimed at producing quality hadith books as guidance for the ummah based on the approaches of past hadith scholars.

Based on the discussion of al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, it can be concluded that the works produced by influential individuals represent significant contributions to the field of knowledge and serve as valuable legacies for future reference by the Muslim community (Mohd Fauzi Hamat, 2000). At the same time, these works also reflect the identity of the author, their scholarly values, expertise, and mastery of their field (Mohd Nor Adzhar et al., 2023). Additionally, the works reflect the unique methodology of scholarly writing practiced by the author (Nurul Zakirah Mat Sin, 2014). However, the issue of falsely attributing a work to a particular figure is a reality that cannot be taken lightly as it affects the reputation of the individual. Therefore, scholars have actively discussed the issue of authorship attribution in Islamic manuscript studies for a long time (al-Anīs, 2022). They emphasize that the most important first step for researchers and manuscript editors before beginning their study of the manuscript’s content is to identify the authenticity of the work’s attribution to its original author (Muṣṭāfā, 2022). This step is crucial to avoid undermining the scholarly stature of a figure and the potential for negative assumptions about them. Consequently, hadith scholars emphasize the study of authorship attribution as a primary step in manuscript analysis. To achieve this, they employ various methods such as textual criticism (naqd al-matan) by examining the history of the work’s writing or understanding the author’s writing style (uslūb al-kātib). Therefore, this article is structured using these methods to trace the authenticity of the attribution of al-Munabbihāt to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī. This study is considered important because exonerating Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī from the attribution to this work has significant implications for his reputation in the field of hadith.

Problem Statement

The oldest printed manuscript attributing the writing of al-Munabbihāt to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī was published in Lahore, Pakistan in 1312H (1895 CE), approximately 133 Hijri years ago. Since then, al-Munabbihāt has been widely disseminated globally, translated into various languages, studied, and used as a subject of postgraduate research as a work of Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī. To this day, the attribution of al-Munabbihāt to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī remains intact. The discovery of several printed works published under slightly different titles justifies this. For example, a work printed under the title al-Isti‘dād li Yawm al-Ma‘ād, edited and commented on by ʻĀdil Abū al-Ma‘āṭī, was published in Cairo by al-Basyīr Publishing Company in 1986. In the introduction, Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī is clearly mentioned as the author. In another edition, this work was edited by ‘Umar al-Dirāwī Abū Ḥajlah and published in Beirut by Muassasah al-Ma’ārif without a publication date.

Additionally, this work was found printed under the title al-Munabbihāt ‘alā al-Isti‘dād li Yawm al-Ma‘ād. This edition was edited by Muḥammad Adīb al-Jādū and published in Kuwait by Dār Iqrā’ li al-Ṭibā‘ah wa al-Nasyr wa al-Tawzī‘ in 2003. At the same time, this work has been translated into various languages. For example, the original manuscript titled El-Isti’dād Li Jewmi El-Maed or al-Isti‘dād li Yawm al-Ma‘ād was translated into Bosnian and Herzegovinian under the title Priprema za Dan Povratka. This work was published in 1999, and the name Ibn Hadžer el Askalani is prominently displayed on the cover, indicating it as his work. Additionally, the name Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī also appears on the cover of Terjemah Nashaihul Ibad, published by Pustaka Amani, Jakarta in 2002.

The attribution of al-Munabbihāt to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī has become increasingly solidified in the Nusantara region, especially when it was commented on by a prominent scholar of this region named Muḥammad Nawawī bin Umar al-Bantānī, also known as K.H Nawawi Putra Banten (Karel, 1984; Ahmad Levi et al., 2015). He was a Nusantara scholar who taught in Mecca and Medina (Saifuddin Zuhri Qudsy, 2021). With extensive knowledge, al-Bantānī produced 115 works, including a commentary on the book al-Munabbihāt titled Nasā’iḥ al-‘Ibād, written in Arabic (Jawiah Dakir et al., 2012).

Despite the circumstances, this study found that al-Bantānī (n.d.) did not raise the issue of the attribution of this book. Instead, he continued to attribute al-Munabbihāt to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī in his introduction, and even printed Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī’s name on the cover of Nasā’iḥ al-‘Ibād. Since this work has been widely used in the Nusantara region, especially Indonesia, for a long time (Ahmad Levi et al., 2012; Arwansyah et al., 2020), this situation has the potential to damage al-Bantānī’s reputation, which is recognized by scholars in both the Nusantara and Arab regions.

From another perspective, the study of hadith in the Nusantara region has developed rapidly alongside the advancement of other religious sciences. It began with study circles (halaqah) in teachers’ homes, then expanded to studies in suraus and mosques. The next phase saw the establishment of more organized educational institutions in pondoks with curricula that included classical hadith texts (Nur Syahadah & Mohd Akil, 2016). Therefore, to meet the demands of disseminating knowledge, which is a form of enlivening the houses of Allah SWT that serve to remind people of Him and increase piety, the book Nasā’iḥ al-‘Ibād is still explained and taught in mosques, suraus, pondok pesantrens, and study circles throughout Indonesia since it was written by al-Bantānī until now (Abd Hadi et al., 2020; Arwansyah et al., 2020). Furthermore, to optimize the benefits of this work for the general public, it was translated into Indonesian by I. Solihin in 2002 and into Malaysian by Abu Mazaya in 2010.

Based on the review of the presented data, it cannot be denied that the work al-Munabbihāt has been legitimately attributed to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī. However, the authenticity of this attribution began to be questioned when this issue was raised by ʻĀdil Abū al-Ma‘āṭī (1986), the editor who conducted the manuscript verification process. In the introduction to the al-Munabbihāt published in Cairo by Dār al-Basyīr in 1986 under the title al-Isti‘dād li Yawm al-Ma‘ād, ʻĀdil Abū al-Ma‘āṭī explained that he faced difficulties in attributing this work to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī and in verifying the hadiths contained within it. During this process, he found that some hadiths were classified by some expert scholars as fabricated. Therefore, this raised his doubts about attributing this work to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, as it is impossible for such a renowned figure, an expert in evaluating narrators and chains of transmission, to include extremely weak and fabricated hadiths in his work. Hence, the issue of the authenticity of attributing this work to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī arises here. Nevertheless, ʻĀdil Abū al-Ma‘āṭī still attributed this work to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī in the 1986 edition, following the attribution that had occurred in various previous editions, and he hoped to refine this issue in subsequent editions. However, as mentioned in this study, until 2023, the work al-Munabbihāt is still attributed by many to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī.

In addition to ʻĀdil Abū al-Ma‘āṭī, Syākir Maḥmūd ‘Abd al-Mun‘im (1997) explained in his doctoral thesis that the language style and methods used in al-Munabbihāt differ from the hadith writing methods of Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī. However, he did not present any empirical studies to justify this statement. Therefore, this study attempts to examine the credibility of the attribution of al-Munabbihāt to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī through a comparative method of hadith writing found in this work with his famous work titled Bulūgh al-Marām min Adillah al-Aḥkām.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The objective of this study is to analyze the credibility of attributing the book al-Munabbihāt to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī from the perspective of hadith writing methods. A library research method was employed, referring to primary and secondary sources such as al-Munabbihāt by Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī (2003), al-Ḥadīth wa al-Muḥadithūn by Muḥammad Abū Zahw (1984), Manāhij al-Muḥaddithīn by Faisal Ahmad Shah et al. (2010), Bulūgh al-Marām by Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī (2014), and several other hadith books. Based on content analysis methods, the hadith writing techniques were extracted from al-Munabbihāt and listed. The identified information was compared with the writing methods of Bulūgh al-Marām, which has been confirmed as the work of Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī and is one of his well-known books among scholars. Bulūgh al-Marām was chosen because of its significance, making it a focal point and reference for many Muslims worldwide. Among its distinctions, most of its hadiths are authentic. Additionally, the book’s organization is very appealing as it follows the hadith writing methods. These advantages and distinctions are acknowledged and accepted by all scholars, regardless of their school of thought, to the extent that this work is dubbed as Qāmūs al-Sunnah. Consequently, dozens of commentaries on this book have been produced by both past and contemporary scholars (Mohd Muhiden, 2022). Therefore, this clearly justifies the appropriateness of Bulūgh al-Marām representing other hadith works of Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī as a cross-reference and basis for extracting the hadith writing methods he applied.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

The prominence of Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī in the field of hadith is undeniable, as he is recognized as one of the leaders of the faithful in the field of hadith (Amīr al-Mu’minīn fī al-Ḥadīth) (‘Abd al-Sattār al-Syaikh, 1992). However, the hadith writing in the work al-Munabbihāt does not reflect the author as someone meticulous and highly skilled in hadith and its sciences. For instance, this study compares the chapter on ‘two things’ (khaṣlatān) in al-Munabbihāt (Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, n.d.) with hadiths of similar themes found in the book al-jāmi‘, chapter on abstaining from bad morals (bāb al-rahb ‘an masāwi’ al-akhlāq) in Bulūgh al-Marām (Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, 2014). This comparison is illustrated in Table 1 below:

Table 1. Differences in Hadith Writing Methods between al-Munabbihāt and Bulūgh al-Marām

Based on the hadiths above, there are significant differences in several elements involving the hadith writing methods in these two works. For example, the hadith from Bulūgh al-Marām above is written by stating its highest narrator, Abū Sa‘īd al-Khudrī (RA), whereas all the hadiths from al-Munabbihāt do not mention their highest narrator and are directly attributed to the Prophet (SAW). Additionally, the hadiths in Bulūgh al-Marām are written with the assertive form (ṣīghah al-jazm), using the phrase (قَالَ رَسُولُ اَللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ), while not all hadiths in al-Munabbihāt use this form. Many hadiths in al-Munabbihāt use the tentative form (ṣīghah al-tamrīḍ) such as (رُوِيَ) and (عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ), indicating signs of weakness (al-Ghawrī, 2007). Another examples from al-Munabbihāt can be seen in Figure 1 below:

It is narrated from the Prophet (peace be upon him) that he said: “Whoever wakes up complaining about the hardship of livelihood, it is as if he is complaining about his Lord; and whoever wakes up sad about worldly matters, he has woken up displeased with Allah; and whoever humbles himself before a rich person because of his wealth, two-thirds of his religion is gone.”

It is narrated from the Prophet (peace be upon him) that he said: “Whoever disrespects five things will lose five things: Whoever disrespects scholars will lose religion; whoever disrespects rulers will lose the world; whoever disrespects neighbors will lose benefits; whoever disrespects the strong will lose friendship; and whoever disrespects his family will lose a good life.”

Figure 1: Examples of a hadith from al-Munabbihāt narrated using ṣīghah al-tamrīḍ

At the same time, the hadith writing method in al-Munabbihāt is also problematic as the author does not name the sources of the hadiths. This can be seen in all the hadith examples above. A different approach is taken by Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī (2014) when he clearly names al-Tirmidhī as the original source in the example hadith from Bulūgh al-Marām. His practice of clearly stating the source of each hadith makes it easier for readers to refer to the complete chain of transmission. This method aligns with the hadith writing techniques among later hadith scholars. He refers to authoritative and well-known books such as Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, Sunan Abū Dāwūd, Sunan al-Tirmidhī, and many others that are considered authentic sources of hadith or al-maṣādir al-aṣliyyah li al-ḥadīth (Mohd Mohiden, 2021). This is further supported by the findings of Mohd Nor Adzhar (2014), which indicate that the hadiths included in al-Munabbihāt were not taken from primary sources and are not recorded in any authoritative hadith works such as al-ṣaḥīḥ and al-sunan. Instead, these hadiths are only found in secondary works related to spiritual purification such as al-ādāb wa al-raqā’iq, or other types of works like al-takhrīj, al-masānīd, al-ma‘ājim, al-tawārīkh, and so on.

Furthermore, there are also significant differences in the commentary on the hadiths. If we examine the example hadith from Bulūgh al-Marām above, Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī (2014) provides commentary on the hadith he quotes by criticizing its chain of transmission as weak. However, this aspect is entirely absent in all the hadiths in al-Munabbihāt. Additionally, the hadith quoted by Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī (2014) in Bulūgh al-Marām above is not included in al-Munabbihāt (Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, n.d.). If al-Munabbihāt were truly the original work of Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, these hadiths should also be included in Bulūgh al-Marām as they align with the theme and discussion topics of both works, which focus on aspects of al-targhīb wa al-tarhīb. However, this is not the case. Therefore, all the findings above confirm the view of Syākir Maḥmūd ‘Abd al-Mun‘im (1997) that the language style and methods used in al-Munabbihāt differ from the hadith writing methods of Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, whether in terms of explaining the chain of transmission, selecting hadith texts, or critiquing them.

Furthermore, the doubts raised by ʻĀdil Abū al-Ma‘āṭī (1986) regarding the attribution of this work to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī are also addressed through empirical research using the takhrīj method conducted by Mohd Nor Adzhar (2014) on all 51 hadiths found in al-Munabbihāt. His findings indicate that most of the hadiths in this work are problematic, exhibiting characteristics such as being weak (ḍa‘īf), considered fabricated, having unknown status, and lacking identifiable sources. These issues account for a very high percentage, specifically 94.1%. At the same time, the percentage of hadiths with a continuous chain of transmission (sanad) to the Prophet (SAW) in a marfū‘ manner is also very low, at only 33.3%. All these situations depict the author’s lack of proficiency in hadith and its disciplines, making it impossible to attribute this work as an authentic writing of Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī.

This is entirely different from the review of certain hadiths found in Bulūgh al-Marām. The study by Mohd Muhiden (2021) on Kitāb al-Nikāḥ shows that out of 201 hadiths, 73%, representing 146 hadiths, are authentic (ṣaḥīḥ), and 13%, representing 27 hadiths, are weak (ḍa‘īf). His review of Kitāb Jināyah found that out of 44 hadiths, 35 hadiths are authentic, with a percentage of 79%, and 16 hadiths are weak, representing only 16%. Additionally, the review of Kitāb Hudud, involving 50 hadiths, found that 35 hadiths, representing 70%, are authentic, while only 6 hadiths, representing 12%, are weak (Mohd Muhiden et al., 2022). Although this data only involves a few sub-books within Bulūgh al-Marām, Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī’s approach is consistent in including more authentic hadiths than hasan and weak hadiths across all sub-books. This is because the method of selecting hadiths involves choosing from authoritative books such as Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, followed by other narrations from Kutub al-Sunan to ensure that truly authentic hadiths serve as the basis for referencing legal issues (Muhammad Arafat, 2020).

Furthermore, the analysis shows that al-Munabbihāt frequently quotes wise sayings (ḥukamā’) after including hadith excerpts (Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, n.d.). An illustration of this is as follows:

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “When the Day of Judgment arrives, the scales will be set up. The people of prayer will be brought forth and their rewards will be measured by the scales. Then, the people of fasting will be brought forth and their rewards will be measured by the scales. Next, the people of pilgrimage will be brought forth and their rewards will be measured by the scales. Finally, the people who endured trials will be brought forth, and no scales will be set up for them, nor will their records be opened. They will be given their rewards without measure, to the extent that those who were in good health will wish they had been in their place due to the abundance of Allah’s rewards.”

Some wise men said: “Man faces four stages of plundering: the Angel of Death seizes his soul, the heirs seize his wealth, the worms seize his body, and on the Day of Judgment, his deeds will be seized.”

Figure 2: Example of wise sayings (ḥukamā’) as an element of hadith commentary in al-Munabbihāt

Such an approach does not reflect the principles upheld by the majority of hadith scholars, including Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, in compiling hadith collections according to specific topics. This is evident in the presentation of hadith texts along with their chains of transmission (sanad) without mixing non-hadith statements with the sayings of the Prophet (SAW) (Faisal Ahmad Shah, 2010). Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī’s stance on this matter is clearly observed in the content of his renowned work, Bulūgh al-Marām, which exclusively contains hadiths without interspersing his own words or the proverbs of wise men (ḥukamā’), let alone the sayings of unnamed intellectuals alongside the hadith texts. The inclusion of non-hadith statements tends to imply that the hadiths can only be understood through these explanations. Although such presentations do not necessarily convey incorrect impressions, incorporating these statements into a collection of the Prophet’s hadiths does not add any value to the quality of the work, as the hadiths of the Prophet (SAW) should be the primary focus of study. This practice contradicts the methodology applied by thousands of hadith scholars from the 4^th to the 12^th century AH, as seen in works like al-Kutub al-Sittah and other collections that organize hadiths according to Islamic jurisprudence topics, such as Bulūgh al-Marām (Muḥammad Abū Zahw, 1984). If the intention behind such presentations is to aid readers in understanding the hadiths, this approach also violates the standards of hadith commentary, as hadiths are generally interpreted through other narrations using the method of jam‘ al-ṭuruq, explanations by companions in narrations, tābi‘īn, differences among the imams of various schools of thought regarding legal rulings, opinions of jurists (fuqahā’), linguists, and other elements (Faisal Ahmad Shah, 2010). Therefore, proverbs of wise men (ḥukamā’) are not among the elements used to elucidate the meanings of hadiths.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The analysis indicates that the hadith writing methodology in the book al-Munabbihāt contradicts the hadith writing methodology of Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, as evidenced in his famous work Bulūgh al-Marām. This contradiction involves key elements in the discipline of hadith writing as practiced by hadith scholars, including Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī himself. This is because hadith works are produced based on methodologies that reflect the principles of hadith scholars, such as presenting concise chains of transmission by mentioning the highest narrator (al-rāwī al-a‘lā) along with definitive transmission terms (jazm) for readers’ reference. This serves as an initial indication of the quality of a hadith, demonstrating the approach of a hadith compiler. Furthermore, the method of selecting hadiths or extracting hadiths from specific hadith collections significantly impacts the status of the presented hadiths. The book al-Munabbihāt clearly includes hadiths from secondary sources, whereas Bulūgh al-Marām includes hadiths from authoritative hadith collections. This approach is commonly practiced by hadith scholars in producing high-quality works for the ummah’s reference. The methodology exhibited in al-Munabbihāt starkly contrasts with the usual practices of hadith scholars.

Simultaneously, the laxity in the sources of hadith collection has resulted in the book al-Munabbihāt containing many weak (ḍa‘īf) hadiths. This is in stark contrast to the content of Bulūgh al-Marām, which predominantly comprises authentic (ṣaḥīḥ) hadiths. This aspect is closely related to the quality of a hadith collection and its benefit to the ummah. Certainly, legal rulings and Shariah are derived from the established texts (naṣ) of the Prophet (SAW), which also elevate the status of a hadith work within Arab society, even though this is not the primary objective of compiling a hadith collection. Finally, the production of hadith works on specific topics by knowledgeable and learned hadith scholars typically does not employ methods of commentary and explanation, let alone include excerpts of wise sayings that do not add value to the work. Even for hadith works that provide commentary on hadiths (kutub syuruḥ al-ḥadīth), wise sayings are not considered authoritative sources for explaining the meanings of hadiths. Therefore, based on all the presented elements, the attribution of the book al-Munabbihāt to Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī is easily refuted. Consequently, this work should no longer be attributed to him to preserve his reputation as one of the foremost figures in the field of hadith throughout history.

REFERENCES

1. ‘Abd al-Sattār al-Syaikh (1992). al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī Amīr al-Mu’minīn fī al-Ḥadīth. Dimasyq: Dar al-Qalam.
2. Al-Anīs, ‘A. H. 2022. al-Tawthīq al-‘Ilmī Ahammiyatuh wa Turuquh. Dubai: Islamic Affairs & Charitable Activities Department
3. Al-Bantānī, M. N. U. (t.t.). Nasā’iḥ al-‘Ibād ‘alā al-Munabbihāt ‘alā al-Isti’dād li Yawm al-Ma‘ād. Singapura – Jeddah – Indonesia: al-Haramayn.
4. Avivy, A. L. F., Dakir, J., & Ibrahim, M. Isra’iliyyat in Interpretive Literature of Indonesia: A Comparison between Tafsir Marah Labid and Tafsir al-Azhar. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(3), 401-407. doi:10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n3s2p401
5. Būzghaybah, M. 2022. Manhaj Taḥqīq al-Makhṭūṭ ‘ind al-Muḥaddithīn: al-Qāḍī ‘Iyāḍ Anmūdhajan. Kaherah: Institute of Arabic Manuscripts
6. Dakir, J., Avivy, A. L. F., Abdullah, W. N. W., Ibrahim, M., Sakat, A. A., Abdul Kadir, M. N., & Ahmad, M. N. 2012. The Trail of Hadith Scholars and their Works in the Malay Region. Advances in Natural and Applied Sciences, 6(7): 1156-1161.
7. Faisal Ahmad Shah, Mohd Khafidz Soroni & Rosni Wazir. (2010). Manahij al-Muhaddithin Metode dan Pendekatan Sarjana Hadith. Kuala Lumpur: Jabatan al-Quran dan al-Hadith, Akademi Pengajian Islam, Universiti Malaya.
8. Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, Aḥmad bin ‘Alī. (1379H). Fatḥ al-Bārī Syarḥ Saḥīḥ al-Bukharī. Beirut: Dar al-Ma ̒ rifah.
9. Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī. Aḥmad bin ‘Alī. (1424H). Bulūgh al-Marām min Adillah al-Aḥkām. Riyadh: Dar al-Falaq.
10. Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī. Aḥmad bin ‘Alī. 1986. al-Isti‘dād li al-Yawm al-Ma‘ād. ed. ʻĀdil Abū al-Ma‘āṭī. Kaherah: Dar al-Basyir li al-Tiba‘ah wa al-Nasyr wa al-Tawzi‘.
11. Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī. Aḥmad bin ‘Alī. (t.t) al-Isti‘dād li al-Yawm al-Ma‘ād. ed. ‘Umar al-Dirāwī Abū Ḥajlah. Beirut: Maktabah al-Ma’arif.
12. Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī. Aḥmad bin ‘Alī. 2003. al-Munabbihāt ‘alā al-Isti‘dād li Yawm al-Ma‘ād. ed. Muḥammad Adīb al-Jādū. Kuwait: Dār Iqrā’ li al-Ṭibā‘ah wa al-Nasyr wa al-Tawzī‘.
13. Kirin, A., Ismail, F. H., & Borham, A. S. 2020. Karya Naṣā’iḥ al-‘Ibād oleh Nawawi al-Bantani dan Sirāj al-Ṭālibīn oleh Ihsan Muhammad Dahlan al-Jampasi al-Kediri: Kajian Perbandingan Terhadap Metode Penulisan Hadith. Jurnal Usuluddin, 48(1): 33-56. doi:10.22452/usuluddin.vol48no1.2
14. Mohd Fauzi Hamat. 2000. Penghasilan Karya Sintesis Antara Mantik dan Usul al-Fiqh: Rujukan kepada Kitab al-Mustasfa min ’Ilm al-Usul, Karangan al-Imam al-Ghazzali (M. 505h. / 1111M.). Afkar-Jurnal Akidah & Pemikiran Islam, 1(1), 123–138. Retrieved from https://mojem.um.edu.my/index.php/afkar/article/view/5412
15. Mohd Muhiden Abd Rahman & Mohd Bakhit Haji Ali. (2021). Autentikasi Hadith-Hadith Kitab al-Nikah Daripada Kitab Bulughul Maram Karya al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani. Journal of Ma’alim al-Quran wa al-Sunnah 17 (2), 20-44.
16. Mohd Muhiden Abd Rahman, Shukriah binti Che Kassim, Thuraya Mohd Said@ Hashim. (2022). Autentikasi Hadis-Hadis Kitab al-Jinayah Dan Hudud daripada Kitab Bulughul Maram karya al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Journal of Hadith Studies 7 (2), 18-34.
17. Mohd Nor Adzhar Ibrahim (2014). Al-Munabbihat ̒ala al-isti ̒dad li Yawm al-Ma ̒ad oleh Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī: Takhrij dan Analisis. Disertasi master. Kuala Lumpur: Universiti Malaya.
18. Mohd Nor Adzhar Ibrahim, Mohammad Naqib Hamdan, Mohd Khairulnazrin Mohd Nasir & Muhammad Sobri Faisal. 2023. Analisis Kritikan ‘Azwu Karya al-Munabbihat kepada Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani. Islamiyyat: International Journal of Islamic Studies, 45(Isu Khas). https://doi.org/10.17576/islamiyyat-2023-45IK-03
19. Napiah Abdullah. 1982. Sahih al-Bukhari: Kitab Hadith Yang Disusun Pada Abad Ketiga Hijrah. Islamiyyat: International Journal of Islamic Studies, 4.
20. Muḥammad Abū Zahw. (1984). al-Ḥadīth wa al-Muḥaddithūn aw ̒Ināyah al-A’immah al-Islāmiyyah bi al-Sunnah al-Nabawiyyah. al-Riyadh: al-Mamlakah al-’Arabiyyah al-Sa’udiyyah.
21. Muhammad Arafat & Dzulkifli Hadi Imawan. (2020). Kajian Hukum Islam Dalam Kitab Bulūgh al-Marām dan Pengaruhnya Terhadap Praktek Keagamaan Masyarakat Masjid al-Hidayah Kimpulan. Al-Thullab Mahasiswa Islam 1 (2), 124-136.
22. Nur Syahadah Mohamed & Mohd Akil Muhamed Ali. 2016. Tahap Pengetahuan dan Persepsi Pelajar terhadap Pengajian Hadith di Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin. Islamiyyat: International Journal of Islamic Studies, 38(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.17576/islamiyyat-2016-3802-08
23. Nurul Zakirah Mat Sin. 2014. Contribution of ‘Abd al-Rahman Hasan Habannakah in The Field of Tafsir: Background Studies on The Principles of Tadabbur in the Qawa’id al-Tadabbur al-Amthal li Kitab Allah. Proceedings 1st International Conference on Global Trends in Academic Research (GTAR), 2014(1). 354-367.
24. 2006. Takhrij Hadis kitab Nasa’ih Al-‘Ibad :kajian analisis sanad dalam bab al-Suba’iy. Kertas Projek Ijazah Sarjana Muda. Jakarta: Universiti Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah.
25. Saifuddin Zuhri Qudsy, Zaenudin Hudi Prasojo, Ahmad Rafiq & Teuku Zulfikar. The Social History of Ashab Al-Jawiyyin and the Hadith Transmission in the 17th Century Nusantara. Islamiyyat: International Journal of Islamic Studies, 43(2). https://doi.org/10.17576/islamiyyat-2021-4302-09
26. Sayyid ‘Abd al-Mājid al-Ghawrī (2007). Mu‘jam Muṣṭalaḥāt al-Ḥadīthiyyah. Beirut: Dar Ibn Kathir.
27. Siti Ulfah. 2008. Analisis Terjemahan I. Solihin terhadap Nasa’ih al-‘Ibad karya Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (Study Kasus Model Terjemah dan Kalimat Efektif). Kertas Projek Ijazah Sarjana Muda. Jakarta: Universiti Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah.
28. Syākir Maḥmūd ‘Abd al-Mun‘im (1997). Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī Muṣannafātuhu wa Dirasāt fī Manhajih wa Mawāridih fī Kitābih al-Iṣābah. Beirut: Muassasah al-Risalah.