THE TAFSĪR OPINIONS IN TIRMIDHĪ’S SUNAN

By Mln. Justin Poe (Takmil Graduate, 2019)

INTRODUCTION

Throughout the tafsīr portions of his Sunan, Imām al-Tirmidhī quoted a group of scholars whom he referenced as “baʿḍ ahl al-ʿilm.” Tirmidhī used this expression several times, especially in his Kitāb al-Tafsīr and within a few narrations in other sections in which an āyah is mentioned. In some instances, Tirmidhī appended his own words to the end of the narration to explain the meaning of the āyah or the narration that pertains to it. Unlike the rest of his Sunan, where Tirmidhī attributes the legal opinions that he related within a chapter to the jurists, be them Companions,  Successors, or the imāms of the Schools of jurisprudence, within the Tafsīr section, he did not state the source of the opinions that he cited.[1] Rather, in these cases, Tirmidhī left the attribution ambiguous and simply stated: “Some of the People of Knowledge” (ar. baʿḍ ahl al-ʿilm).

The task then is to locate the authorities of the opinions from whom Tirmidhī transmitted and determine if his explanations agree with any of these authorities. His accuracy in the transmission of legal opinions is known, for he explicitly stated from whom he transmits in his al-ʿIlal al-Ṣaghīr.[2] I, however, will not restrict my investigation to only Kitāb al-Tafsīr, but will expand into the other sections in which an āyah is mentioned and interpreted. Furthermore, curiosity demands that I hypothesize why he decided to append the opinion of the “People of Knowledge” or his own words under certain narrations to the exclusion of others. An investigation into both these scenarios behooves the researcher to investigate namely for two reasons: locating the attribution of these exegetical opinions establishes Tirmidhī’s Sunan in the realm of exegesis as authoritative, and more importantly, one can compare Tirmidhī’s Sunan and these opinions to other scholars of tafsīr within or near Tirmidhī’s milieu, whether locally or historically.

Thus, this paper explores the research findings of the exegetical opinions, focusing specifically on the works of tafsīr around or near the time and milieu of Tirmidhī. The objective is to locate early authorities whose opinions coincide with those that Tirmidhī cited. The reason for Tirmidhī’s own words will also be considered. The extant works to be used are the tafsīrs of: Mujāhid (d. 104), Muqātil b. Sulaymān (d. 150), Sufyān al-Thawrī (d. 161), ʿAbd al-Razzāq (d. 211), al-Nasāʾī (d. 303), al-Ṭabarī (d. 310), Ibn al-Mundhir (d. 319), Ibn Abī Ḥātim (d. 327), al-Ṭabarānī (d. 360), and al-Samarqandī (d. 375).[3]

In instances where I was unable to locate the source of the attribution, I looked to those other extant works of tafsīr other than those mentioned in the first section and specifically the category of tafsīr entitled al-tafsīr bi al-riwāyah (narration-based tafsīr).[4] The works considered were: al-Māwardī (d. 450), al-Baghawī (d. 516), Ibn al-Jawzī (d. 597), Ibn Kathīr (d. 774), and al-Suyūṭī (d. 911).

A research topic that this paper could not cover is that of the same question for other sections not related to tafsīr, for any other chapter in which there is such an expression or in which Tirmidhī stated his own opinion.[5]

“THE PEOPLE OF KNOWLEDGE”[6]

There are eight places where Tirmidhī cited “some People of Knowledge” or a Successor or “some” of the Successors. Two of these occur in Kitāb al-Tafsīr and the other six outside of it. The six places that are outside of Kitāb al-Tafsīr involve the citing or exegesis of an āyah that is quoted in the narration or after. I list all eight of these narrations below, beginning with those outside of Kitāb al-Tafsīr. Each of the narrations have the expression of “some People of Knowledge”. I provided my own translation of the relevant section (bolded) after the original Arabic of each narration and thereafter offered a brief discussion.Also, Ṭāriq ʿIwaḍ Allāh published a monograph entitled ʿAqīdat Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamāʿah li al-Imām al-Ḥāfiẓ Abī ʿĪsā al-Tirmidhī (2000).[7] In this book, ʿIwaḍ Allāh extracted all the narrations regarding ʿaqīdah that Tirmidhī cited and to which he has at times appended his own explanation or that of other authorities. So, in these instances, I refer the reader to the relevant pages in ʿIwaḍ Allāh’s work. Furthermore, I overlook the grading of each narration as this is beyond the purview of this paper.

OUTSIDE KITĀB AL-TAFSĪR

To begin, in succession as recorded in the Sunan, with those narrations outside of Kitāb al-Tafsīr:

#657:

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو كُرَيْبٍ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ العَلَاءِ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا وَكِيعٌ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا عَبَّادُ بْنُ مَنْصُورٍ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا القَاسِمُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ، قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ أَبَا هُرَيْرَةَ يَقُولُ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: ” إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَقْبَلُ الصَّدَقَةَ وَيَأْخُذُهَا بِيَمِينِهِ فَيُرَبِّيهَا لِأَحَدِكُمْ كَمَا يُرَبِّي أَحَدُكُمْ مُهْرَهُ، حَتَّى إِنَّ اللُّقْمَةَ لَتَصِيرُ مِثْلَ أُحُدٍ، وَتَصْدِيقُ ذَلِكَ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ: {هُوَ يَقْبَلُ التَّوْبَةَ عَنْ عِبَادِهِ وَيَأْخُذُ الصَّدَقَاتِ} [التوبة: 104]، وَ {يَمْحَقُ اللَّهُ الرِّبَا وَيُرْبِي الصَّدَقَاتِ} [البقرة: 276] “: «هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ» وَقَدْ رُوِيَ عَنْ عَائِشَةَ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ نَحْوَ هَذَا، ” وَقَدْ قَالَ غَيْرُ وَاحِدٍ مِنْ أَهْلِ العِلْمِ فِي هَذَا الحَدِيثِ وَمَا يُشْبِهُ هَذَا مِنَ الرِّوَايَاتِ مِنَ الصِّفَاتِ وَنُزُولِ الرَّبِّ تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى كُلَّ لَيْلَةٍ إِلَى السَّمَاءِ الدُّنْيَا، قَالُوا: قَدْ تَثْبُتُ الرِّوَايَاتُ فِي هَذَا وَيُؤْمَنُ بِهَا وَلَا يُتَوَهَّمُ وَلَا يُقَالُ: كَيْفَ [ص:42] هَكَذَا رُوِيَ عَنْ مَالِكٍ، وَسُفْيَانَ بْنِ عُيَيْنَةَ، وَعَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ المُبَارَكِ أَنَّهُمْ قَالُوا فِي هَذِهِ الأَحَادِيثِ: أَمِرُّوهَا بِلَا كَيْفٍ “، وَهَكَذَا قَوْلُ أَهْلِ العِلْمِ مِنْ أَهْلِ السُّنَّةِ وَالجَمَاعَةِ، وَأَمَّا الجَهْمِيَّةُ فَأَنْكَرَتْ هَذِهِ الرِّوَايَاتِ وَقَالُوا: هَذَا تَشْبِيهٌ، وَقَدْ ذَكَرَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ فِي غَيْرِ مَوْضِعٍ مِنْ كِتَابهِ اليَدَ وَالسَّمْعَ وَالبَصَرَ، فَتَأَوَّلَتِ الجَهْمِيَّةُ هَذِهِ الآيَاتِ فَفَسَّرُوهَا عَلَى غَيْرِ مَا فَسَّرَ أَهْلُ العِلْمِ، وَقَالُوا: إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَمْ يَخْلُقْ آدَمَ بِيَدِهِ، وَقَالُوا: إِنَّ مَعْنَى اليَدِ هَاهُنَا القُوَّةُ “، وقَالَ إِسْحَاقُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ: ” إِنَّمَا يَكُونُ التَّشْبِيهُ إِذَا قَالَ: يَدٌ كَيَدٍ، أَوْ مِثْلُ يَدٍ، أَوْ سَمْعٌ كَسَمْعٍ، أَوْ مِثْلُ سَمْعٍ، فَإِذَا قَالَ: سَمْعٌ كَسَمْعٍ، أَوْ مِثْلُ سَمْعٍ، فَهَذَا التَّشْبِيهُ، وَأَمَّا إِذَا قَالَ كَمَا قَالَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى يَدٌ، وَسَمْعٌ، وَبَصَرٌ، وَلَا يَقُولُ كَيْفَ، وَلَا يَقُولُ مِثْلُ سَمْعٍ، وَلَا كَسَمْعٍ، فَهَذَا لَا يَكُونُ تَشْبِيهًا، وَهُوَ كَمَا قَالَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى فِي كِتَابهِ: {لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ البَصِيرُ} [الشورى: 11]

Translation:

More than one individual from the people of knowledge spoke about this narration, and other narrations like it that mention the Divine Attributes and the descending of the Lord every night to the heaven of the world. They said: “Some of the narrations are sound, we believe in them without trying to conceptualize them or to ask: “How?” Like what has been narrated from Mālik, Sufyān b. ʿUyaynah, and ʿAbd Allāh b. al-Mubārak that they said regarding these narrations: “Relate them without modality.” This is the opinion of the people of knowledge from the Ahl al-Sunnah wa-l-Jamāʿah.

The Jahmiyyah rejected these narrations and said: “This is tashbīh [trans. likening the Creator to the creation].” Allāh, the Mighty and Majestic, mentioned in more than one place in His Book: His hand, His hearing, and His seeing. And the Jahmiyyah interpreted these verses and explained them, but that was not based on the explanation of the people of knowledge. They [the Jahmiyyah] said: “Allāh did not create Ādam with His hand.” They said: “The meaning of ‘hand’ here is ‘power’.”

While Isḥāq b. Ibrāhīm said: “Tashbīh is when one says, ‘a hand like a [human] hand’ or ‘similar [to] a [human] hand’ or ‘hearing like [human] hearing’ or ‘similar [to human] hearing’. When he says, ‘hearing like [human] hearing’ or ‘similar [to human] hearing,’ then this is tashbīh. In the case when one says as Allāh, exalted is He, said, ‘hand’ and ‘hearing’ and ‘sight’ without saying ‘how’ and without saying ‘similar [to human] hearing’ or ‘like [human] hearing’, then this is not tashbīh. Rather, this is as Allāh, the Exalted, said in His Book: “And there is nothing at all like Him. And He is the all-Hearing, the all-Seeing.”

Tirmidhī’s comment is noticeably lengthy. From all the sections that follow, this is one of the most extensive. Here, Tirmidhī not only cited “more than one from the ahl al-ʿilm,” but attributed the opinion of this group to three major authorities: Mālik, Sufyān b. ʿUyaynah, and ʿAbd Allāh b. al-Mubārak. He further included these scholars in the group of “Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamāʿah”. Finally, Tirmidhī cited the statement of regarding the issue of anthropomorphism and the attributes of the Creator.[8]

However, it is here that Tirmidhī found it necessary to interject and highlight the position of the unorthodox Jahmiyyah and how their beliefs are contrary to the above Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamāʿah. As Tirmidhī stated, this group rejected the narrations that suggest physical attributes, such as a hand, hearing, seeing, as in the above narration (bi-yamīnih). The concern in this narration is Tirmidhī’s quoting Ibn Rahwayh’s use of the verse in Sūrat al-Shūrā as an explanation of the attribute mentioned here.[9] ʿIwaḍ Allāh has noted this narration in his work, sourcing the narration to other collections.[10] He did not, however, mention anything regarding the Jahmiyyah.

#989:

حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا عَبَّادُ بْنُ عَبَّادٍ المُهَلَّبِيُّ، عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَمْرٍو، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ ابْنِ عُمَرَ، عَنْ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ: «المَيِّتُ يُعَذَّبُ بِبُكَاءِ أَهْلِهِ عَلَيْهِ»، فَقَالَتْ عَائِشَةُ: يَرْحَمُهُ اللَّهُ، لَمْ يَكْذِبْ وَلَكِنَّهُ وَهِمَ، إِنَّمَا قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لِرَجُلٍ مَاتَ يَهُودِيًّا: «إِنَّ المَيِّتَ لَيُعَذَّبُ، وَإِنَّ أَهْلَهُ لَيَبْكُونَ عَلَيْهِ» وَفِي البَاب عَنْ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، وَقَرَظَةَ بْنِ كَعْبٍ، وَأَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، وَابْنِ مَسْعُودٍ، وَأُسَامَةَ بْنِ زَيْدٍ.: [ص:319] «حَدِيثُ عَائِشَةَ حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ، وَقَدْ رُوِيَ مِنْ غَيْرِ وَجْهٍ عَنْ عَائِشَةَ»، وَقَدْ ذَهَبَ أَهْلُ العِلْمِ إِلَى هَذَا، وَتَأَوَّلُوا هَذِهِ الآيَةَ: {وَلَا تَزِرُ وَازِرَةٌ وِزْرَ أُخْرَى} [الأنعام: 164]، وَهُوَ قَوْلُ الشَّافِعِيِّ

Translation:

The people of knowledge had maintained this [the interpretation, in accord with ʿĀʾishah] and interpreted [this ḥadīth in light of] this verse: “No soul shall bear another’s burden.” Shāfiʿī [also] took this the position.

Tirmidhī cited the interpretation of a group of scholars that the deceased person is not punished because their family crying over them, citing the āyah from Sūrat al-Anʿām. This interpretation coincides with the well-known position of Sayyidatunā ʿĀʾishah (d. 57), may Allāh be pleased with her. Having searched through the tafsīr works indicated to in the beginning of this paper, I found mention of this ḥadīth and the āyah together in two works. Ibn Abī Ḥātim cited a related narration in which ʿĀʾishah is asked about a child born out of wedlock. She responded that a child will not carry the sin of its parents. She then recited the above āyah.[11]

The second occurrence of ʿĀʾishah’s opinion is, curiously, mentioned in Imām al-Shāfiʿī’s (d. 204) tafsīr along with this āyah. Shāfiʿī used the narration under the āyah. In the first instance, he quoted ʿĀʾishah’s correction of Ibn ʿUmar, but with a different narration. Then, he quoted her saying, “The Qurʾān is sufficient for you.” He solved the apparent contradiction and preferred ʿĀʾishah’s understanding.[12] It would appear that Tirmidhī cited this narration and āyah in order to point out the apparent contradiction and how it can be solved. And Allāh knows best.

#1523:

حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو خَالِدٍ الأَحْمَرُ، عَنْ الحَسَنِ بْنِ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ، عَنْ سَعْدِ بْنِ عُبَيْدَةَ، أَنَّ ابْنَ عُمَرَ سَمِعَ رَجُلًا يَقُولُ: لَا وَالكَعْبَةِ، فَقَالَ ابْنُ عُمَرَ: لَا يُحْلَفُ بِغَيْرِ اللَّهِ، فَإِنِّي سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ: «مَنْ حَلَفَ بِغَيْرِ اللَّهِ فَقَدْ كَفَرَ أَوْ أَشْرَكَ»: هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ وَفُسِّرَ هَذَا الحَدِيثُ عِنْدَ بَعْضِ أَهْلِ العِلْمِ: أَنَّ قَوْلَهُ «فَقَدْ كَفَرَ أَوْ أَشْرَكَ» عَلَى التَّغْلِيظِ، وَالحُجَّةُ فِي ذَلِكَ حَدِيثُ ابْنِ عُمَرَ، أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ سَمِعَ عُمَرَ يَقُولُ: وَأَبِي وَأَبِي، فَقَالَ: «أَلَا إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَنْهَاكُمْ أَنْ تَحْلِفُوا بِآبَائِكُمْ»، وَحَدِيثُ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَنَّهُ قَالَ: ” مَنْ قَالَ فِي حَلِفِهِ وَاللَّاتِ، وَالعُزَّى فَلْيَقُلْ: لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ “: هَذَا مِثْلُ مَا رُوِيَ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَنَّهُ قَالَ: «إِنَّ الرِّيَاءَ شِرْكٌ» وَقَدْ فَسَّرَ بَعْضُ أَهْلِ العِلْمِ هَذِهِ الآيَةَ: {فَمَنْ كَانَ يَرْجُو لِقَاءَ رَبِّهِ فَلْيَعْمَلْ عَمَلًا صَالِحًا} [الكهف: 110] الآيَةَ، قَالَ: لَا يُرَائِي

Translation:

This is like what has been narrated from the Prophet ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayh wa sallam that he said: “Showing-off is [a form of] polytheism.” Some of the people of knowledge explained this verse, “Whoever hopes to meet his Lord, then he should perform righteous deeds […].” He said: “He does not show off.”

Tirmidhī cited the above narration the āyah from Sūrat al-Kahf, 110. The connection between the āyah, the narration, and the tafsīr of the scholars is in the end of the āyah, here abbreviated, “And let no one include another in the worship of his Lord.”[13] Tirmidhī cited another narration to explain the ḥadīth, he related and then quoted an āyah and its explanation to support his citing the supporting narration.[14] This interpretation of the meaning of shirk as, lā yurāʾī, is found in the tafsīr of Sufyān al-Thawrī and Ibn Abī Ḥātim as attributed to Saʿīd b. Jubayr (d. 95).[15] In addition, Ibn Abī Ḥātim quoted the opinion of al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī as the same.[16]

Tirmidhī recorded the above interpretation so one would not mistakenly understand that the shirk mentioned is limited to polytheism ,” but rather includes this “lesser form” of shirk. Tirmidhī appended the āyah and its tafsīr to support his own interpretation.

#1560:

حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ أَبِي عُمَرَ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا أَيُّوبُ، عَنْ أَبِي قِلَابَةَ، عَنْ عَمِّهِ، عَنْ عِمْرَانَ بْنِ حُصَيْنٍ، «أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَدَى رَجُلَيْنِ مِنَ المُسْلِمِينَ بِرَجُلٍ مِنَ المُشْرِكِينَ»: هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ وَعَمُّ أَبِي قِلَابَةَ هُوَ أَبُو المُهَلَّبِ وَاسْمُهُ عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ عَمْرٍو، وَيُقَالُ: مُعَاوِيَةُ بْنُ عَمْرٍو، وَأَبُو قِلَابَةَ اسْمُهُ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ زَيْدٍ الجَرْمِيُّ، وَالعَمَلُ عَلَى هَذَا عِنْدَ أَكْثَرِ أَهْلِ العِلْمِ مِنْ أَصْحَابِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَغَيْرِهِمْ أَنَّ لِلإِمَامِ أَنْ يَمُنَّ عَلَى مَنْ شَاءَ مِنَ الأُسَارَى، وَيَقْتُلَ مَنْ شَاءَ مِنْهُمْ، وَيَفْدِي مَنْ شَاءَ، وَاخْتَارَ بَعْضُ أَهْلِ العِلْمِ القَتْلَ عَلَى الفِدَاءِ وقَالَ الأَوْزَاعِيُّ: بَلَغَنِي أَنَّ هَذِهِ الآيَةَ مَنْسُوخَةٌ قَوْلُهُ تَعَالَى: {فَإِمَّا مَنًّا بَعْدُ وَإِمَّا فِدَاءً} [محمد: 4] نَسَخَتْهَا {وَاقْتُلُوهُمْ حَيْثُ ثَقِفْتُمُوهُمْ} [البقرة: 191] حَدَّثَنَا بِذَلِكَ هَنَّادٌ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ المُبَارَكِ، عَنِ الأَوْزَاعِيِّ. قَالَ إِسْحَاقُ بْنُ مَنْصُورٍ: قُلْتُ لِأَحْمَدَ: إِذَا أُسِرَ الأَسِيرُ يُقْتَلُ أَوْ يُفَادَى أَحَبُّ إِلَيْكَ؟ قَالَ: إِنْ قَدَرُوا أَنْ يُفَادُوا فَلَيْسَ بِهِ بَأْسٌ، وَإِنْ قُتِلَ فَمَا أَعْلَمُ بِهِ بَأْسًا قَالَ إِسْحَاقُ: الإِثْخَانُ أَحَبُّ إِلَيَّ إِلَّا أَنْ يَكُونَ مَعْرُوفًا فَأَطْمَعُ بِهِ الكَثِيرَ

Translation:

Some of the people of knowledge preferred execution over ransom. Awzāʿī said: “It reached me that this verse is abrogated. His statement, exalted is He, ‘Either favor execution or ransom,’ abrogated it: ‘Kill them wherever you find them’.”

In this narration, Tirmidhī cited the statement of Imām Awzāʿī (d. 157) that he heard the opinion that the āyah in Sūrah Muḥammad was abrogated due to the āyah in Sūrat al-Baqarah. Then, he quoted Imām Aḥmad’s (d. 241) opinion via Awzāʿī. In the tafsīr of ʿAbd al-Razzāq, we find the early authority Qatādah (d. 117) stating that the āyah in Sūrah Muḥammad was abrogated by the āyah in Sūrat al-Anfāl, 57.[17] There is no contradiction here since determining which āyah is the abrogator is a matter of scholarly effort, especially seeing that more than one verse could be the abrogator. Additionally, this is the opinion of Muqātil b. Sulaymān, although he opines that the abrogating āyah is in Sūrat al-Tawbah, 5.[18] Imām al-Ṭabarī quoted other authorities, such as Ibn Jurayj (d. 150), al-Suddī (d. 127), al-Ḍaḥḥāk (d. 102), and the companion Ibn ʿAbbās (d. 68).[19] Ṭabarī included the opinions of those who disagree with the āyah being abrogated after listing the above opinions.[20]

#1996:

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ المُثَنَّى، وَعَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، قَالَا: حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ حَمَّادٍ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا شُعْبَةُ، عَنْ أَبَانَ بْنِ تَغْلِبَ، عَنْ فُضَيْلِ بْنِ عَمْرٍو، عَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، عَنْ عَلْقَمَةَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ: «لَا يَدْخُلُ الجَنَّةَ مَنْ كَانَ فِي قَلْبِهِ مِثْقَالُ ذَرَّةٍ مِنْ كِبْرٍ، وَلَا يَدْخُلُ النَّارَ ـ يَعْنِي ـ مَنْ كَانَ فِي قَلْبِهِ مِثْقَالُ ذَرَّةٍ مِنْ إِيمَانٍ»، قَالَ: فَقَالَ لَهُ رَجُلٌ: إِنَّهُ يُعْجِبُنِي أَنْ يَكُونَ ثَوْبِي حَسَنًا وَنَعْلِي حَسَنَةً، قَالَ: «إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الجَمَالَ، وَلَكِنَّ الكِبْرَ مَنْ بَطَرَ الحَقَّ وَغَمَصَ النَّاسَ» وَقَالَ بَعْضُ أَهْلِ العِلْمِ فِي تَفْسِيرِ هَذَا الحَدِيثِ: «لَا يَدْخُلُ النَّارَ مَنْ كَانَ فِي قَلْبِهِ مِثْقَالُ ذَرَّةٍ مِنْ إِيمَانٍ»، إِنَّمَا مَعْنَاهُ لَا يُخَلَّدُ فِي النَّارِ وَهَكَذَا رُوِيَ عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الخُدْرِيِّ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ: «يَخْرُجُ مِنَ النَّارِ مَنْ كَانَ فِي قَلْبِهِ مِثْقَالُ ذَرَّةٍ مِنْ إِيمَانٍ» وَقَدْ فَسَّرَ غَيْرُ وَاحِدٍ مِنَ التَّابِعِينَ هَذِهِ الآيَةَ: {رَبَّنَا إِنَّكَ مَنْ تُدْخِلِ النَّارَ فَقَدْ أَخْزَيْتَهُ} [آل عمران: 192] فَقَالَ: مَنْ تُخَلِّدُ فِي النَّارِ فَقَدْ أَخْزَيْتَهُ: هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ غَرِيبٌ

Translation:

More than one Successor (tābiʿ) explained this āyah: “Our Lord! Whomever You enter into the Fire, You have indeed disgraced them.” They said: “Whomever You have made eternally reside in the Fire, You have disgraced them.”

The word idkhāl has been interpreted as ikhlād. Allāh, the Exalted, mentions the believers’ supplication, “Our Lord! Whomever You enter into the Fire, You have indeed disgraced them.” Then, Tirmidhī quoted several Successors as understanding the āyah as, “whomever You have made eternally reside in the Fire, You have disgraced them.” Tirmidhī brings this āyah and its accompanying tafsīr to interpret the ḥadīth that he cited due to its implications regarding the fate of believers in the Hereafter.[21] As for the identity of the scholars from the Successors, Ibn al-Mundhir quotes Qatādah and Ibn Jurayj as having this opinion.[22] Muqātil b. Sulaymān was also of this opinion, “yaʿnī man khalladtahu fī al-nār fa-qad ahantahu.”[23]

#2638:

حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا اللَّيْثُ، عَنْ ابْنِ عَجْلَانَ، عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ يَحْيَى بْنِ حَبَّانَ، عَنْ ابْنِ مُحَيْرِيزٍ، عَنْ الصُّنَابِحِيِّ، عَنْ عُبَادَةَ بْنِ الصَّامِتِ، أَنَّهُ قَالَ: دَخَلْتُ عَلَيْهِ وَهُوَ فِي المَوْتِ فَبَكَيْتُ، فَقَالَ: مَهْلًا، لِمَ تَبْكِي؟ فَوَاللَّهِ لَئِنْ اسْتُشْهِدْتُ لَأَشْهَدَنَّ لَكَ، وَلَئِنْ شُفِّعْتُ لَأَشْفَعَنَّ لَكَ، وَلَئِنْ اسْتَطَعْتُ لَأَنْفَعَنَّكَ، ثُمَّ قَالَ: وَاللَّهِ مَا مِنْ حَدِيثٍ سَمِعْتُهُ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَكُمْ فِيهِ خَيْرٌ إِلَّا حَدَّثْتُكُمُوهُ إِلَّا حَدِيثًا وَاحِدًا، وَسَوْفَ أُحَدِّثُكُمُوهُ اليَوْمَ وَقَدْ أُحِيطَ بِنَفْسِي، سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ: «مَنْ شَهِدَ أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ، حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ النَّارَ» وَفِي البَابِ عَنْ أَبِي بَكْرٍ، وَعُمَرَ، وَعُثْمَانَ، وَعَلِيٍّ، وَطَلْحَةَ، وَجَابِرٍ، وَابْنِ عُمَرَ، وَزَيْدِ بْنِ خَالِدٍ. سَمِعْتُ ابْنَ أَبِي عُمَرَ، يَقُولُ: سَمِعْتُ ابْنَ عُيَيْنَةَ، يَقُولُ: ” مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَجْلَانَ كَانَ ثِقَةً مَأْمُونًا فِي الحَدِيثِ: «هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ غَرِيبٌ مِنْ هَذَا الوَجْهِ، وَالصُّنَابِحِيُّ هُوَ عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ عُسَيْلَةَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ» وَقَدْ رُوِيَ عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ، أَنَّهُ سُئِلَ عَنْ قَوْلِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «مَنْ قَالَ [ص:24] لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ دَخَلَ الجَنَّةَ»، فَقَالَ: «إِنَّمَا كَانَ هَذَا فِي أَوَّلِ الإِسْلَامِ قَبْلَ نُزُولِ الفَرَائِضِ وَالأَمْرِ وَالنَّهْيِ»: «وَوَجْهُ هَذَا الحَدِيثِ عِنْدَ بَعْضِ أَهْلِ العِلْمِ أَنَّ أَهْلَ التَّوْحِيدِ سَيَدْخُلُونَ الجَنَّةَ، وَإِنْ عُذِّبُوا بِالنَّارِ بِذُنُوبِهِمْ فَإِنَّهُمْ لَا يُخَلَّدُونَ فِي النَّارِ» وَقَدْ رُوِيَ عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ مَسْعُودٍ، وَأَبِي ذَرٍّ، وَعِمْرَانَ بْنِ حُصَيْنٍ، وَجَابِرِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، وَابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، وَأَبِي سَعِيدٍ الخُدْرِيِّ، وَأَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَنَّهُ قَالَ: «سَيَخْرُجُ قَوْمٌ مِنَ النَّارِ مِنْ أَهْلِ التَّوْحِيدِ وَيَدْخُلُونَ الجَنَّةَ» هَكَذَا رُوِيَ عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ، وَإِبْرَاهِيمَ النَّخَعِيِّ، وَغَيْرِ وَاحِدٍ مِنَ التَّابِعِينَ فِي تَفْسِيرِ هَذِهِ الآيَةِ {رُبَمَا يَوَدُّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا لَوْ كَانُوا مُسْلِمِينَ} [الحجر: 2] قَالُوا: إِذَا أُخْرِجَ أَهْلُ التَّوْحِيدِ مِنَ النَّارِ وَأُدْخِلُوا الجَنَّةَ وَدَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا لَوْ كَانُوا مُسْلِمِينَ “

Translation:

It has been narrated from Saʿīd b. Jubayr, Ibrāhīm al-Nakhaʿī, and others  regarding the tafsīr of this āyah: “Perhaps those who disbelieved will wish they had been Muslims.” They said: “When the people of tawḥīḍ (monotheism) are taken out of the Fire and entered into Paradise, those who disbelieved will wish they had been Muslims.”

This and the previous narration are surprisingly related, despite being more than five hundred narrations apart. Tirmidhī adduced the interpretation of a number of Successors as support for the above narrations. The significance of this narration is again related to a group of believers that will enter the Fire but will be saved after some time. After citing the report of al-Zuhrī (d. 124), a group of scholars, and the addendum of another Prophetic report, Tirmidhī then cited the tafsīr.

This seems to be a pattern. Tirmidhī, like in the previous narration, is preserving the understanding of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamāʿah that any believer who has faith in their heart will be saved from eternal punishment. As for Ibrāhīm al-Nakhaʿī’s (d. 96) opinion, ʿAbd al-Razzāq provided its isnād in his Tafsīr.[24] Ṭabarānī explained the āyah likewise, in his own words.[25] The source of Saʿīd b. Jubayr’s opinion was not found, but Ibn al-Jawzī attributed the same position to Mujāhid (d. 104), ʿAṭāʾ (d. 114), Abū al-ʿĀliyah (d. 90), and Ibrāhīm in his Tafsīr, Zād al-Masīr.[26]

WITHIN KITĀB AL-TAFSĪR

And within Kitāb al-Tafsīr are the following:

Sūrat al-Ḥijr

#3147:

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ إِسْمَاعِيلَ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ أَبِي الطَّيِّبِ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا مُصْعَبُ بْنُ سَلَّامٍ، عَنْ عَمْرِو بْنِ قَيْسٍ، عَنْ عَطِيَّةَ، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الخُدْرِيِّ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «اتَّقُوا فِرَاسَةَ المُؤْمِنِ فَإِنَّهُ يَنْظُرُ بِنُورِ اللَّهِ»، ثُمَّ قَرَأَ: {إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِلْمُتَوَسِّمِينَ} [الحجر: 75]: ” هَذَا حَدِيثٌ غَرِيبٌ، إِنَّمَا نَعْرِفُهُ مِنْ هَذَا الوَجْهِ وَقَدْ رُوِيَ عَنْ بَعْضِ أَهْلِ العِلْمِ فِي تَفْسِيرِ هَذِهِ الآيَةِ: {إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِلْمُتَوَسِّمِينَ} [الحجر: 75] قَالَ: لِلْمُتَفَرِّسِينَ “

Translation:

It is related from some of the people of knowledge regarding the tafsīr of this āyah: “Indeed, in that are signs for the perspicacious.” They said, “for the mutawassimīn.”

The tafsīr cited here, the meaning of “mutawassimīn” as “the perspicacious,” is the opinion of Mujāhid, as quoted in Tafsīr al-Thawrī and Tafsīr Mujāhid.[27] It is also the tafsīr of the Companion, Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī. Ṭabarī cited this tafsīr exclusively as that of Mujāhid.[28] In this example, Tirmidhī merely defined the obscure meaning of mutawassimīn for the reader.

Sūrat al-Wāqiʿah

#3314:

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو كُرَيْبٍ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا رِشْدِينُ بْنُ سَعْدٍ، عَنْ عَمْرِو بْنِ الحَارِثِ، عَنْ دَرَّاجٍ، عَنْ أَبِي الهَيْثَمِ، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الخُدْرِيِّ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي قَوْلِهِ: {وَفُرُشٍ مَرْفُوعَةٍ} [الواقعة: 34] قَالَ: «ارْتِفَاعُهَا كَمَا بَيْنَ السَّمَاءِ وَالأَرْضِ، وَمَسِيرَةُ مَا بَيْنَهُمَا خَمْسُ مِائَةِ عَامٍ»: «هَذَا حَدِيثٌ غَرِيبٌ لَا نَعْرِفُهُ إِلَّا مِنْ حَدِيثِ رِشْدِينَ» وقَالَ بَعْضُ أَهْلِ العِلْمِ: مَعْنَى هَذَا الحَدِيثِ: «وَارْتِفَاعُهَا كَمَا بَيْنَ السَّمَاءِ وَالأَرْضِ» قَالَ: «ارْتِفَاعُ الفُرُشِ المَرْفُوعَةِ فِي الدَّرَجَاتِ، وَالدَّرَجَاتُ مَا بَيْنَ كُلِّ دَرَجَتَيْنِ كَمَا بَيْنَ السَّمَاءِ وَالأَرْضِ»

Translation:

Some people of knowledge said: “The meaning of this ḥadīth, ‘And its height will be like that between the Heaven and the Earth,’ is the height of the raised beds will be in levels and the distance between every two levels will be like that of the sky and the Earth.”

Although Tirmidhī stated that a group of the ahl al-ʿilm understood the meaning of this ḥadīth as what is quoted, it is by extension an interpretation of the āyah. As for this exact tafsīr of “furush marfūʿah” as “the height of the raised beds will be in levels and the distance between every two levels will be like that of the sky and the Earth,” I was not able to locate it verbatim. Specifically, the works categorized as narration-based were checked, whether classical or contemporary. I did, however, find al-Baghawī stating that a group of exegetes say, “Some of them [the beds] will be above others, and thus they will be raised high”.[29] Perhaps in this case, Tirmidhī saw a need to explain the difficult meaning of “raised beds” and thus appended the tafsīr.

TIRMIDHĪ’S EXPLANATION

As for Tirmidhī’s own explanation of an āyah within a narration, there are eight places where he provided his own commentary. One of these is outside of Kitāb al-Tafsīr. The reader should note that my placement of each narration in the sections may not fit perfectly such that Tirmidhī quotes both the “People of Knowledge” and provides his own explanation. Thus, I have only done so for organization.

OUTSIDE KITĀB AL-TAFSĪR:

As for Tirmidhī’s explanations within the narrations that he placed outside of Kitāb al-Tafsīr:

#2422:

حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ الزُّهْرِيُّ البَصْرِيُّ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا مَالِكُ بْنُ سُعَيْرٍ أَبُو مُحَمَّدٍ التَّمِيمِيُّ الكُوفِيُّ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا الأَعْمَشُ، عَنْ أَبِي صَالِحٍ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، وَعَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ، قَالَا: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: ” يُؤْتَى بِالعَبْدِ يَوْمَ القِيَامَةِ فَيَقُولُ اللَّهُ لَهُ: أَلَمْ أَجْعَلْ لَكَ سَمْعًا وَبَصَرًا وَمَالًا وَوَلَدًا، وَسَخَّرْتُ لَكَ الأَنْعَامَ وَالحَرْثَ، وَتَرَكْتُكَ تَرْأَسُ وَتَرْبَعُ فَكُنْتَ تَظُنُّ أَنَّكَ مُلَاقِي يَوْمَكَ هَذَا؟ فَيَقُولُ: لَا، فَيَقُولُ لَهُ: اليَوْمَ أَنْسَاكَ كَمَا نَسِيتَنِي: هَذَا حَدِيثٌ صَحِيحٌ غَرِيبٌ. وَمَعْنَى قَوْلِهِ: اليَوْمَ أَنْسَاكَ، يَقُولُ: اليَوْمَ أَتْرُكُكَ فِي العَذَابِ. هَكَذَا فَسَّرُوهُ: وَقَدْ فَسَّرَ بَعْضُ أَهْلِ العِلْمِ هَذِهِ الآيَةَ {فَاليَوْمَ نَنْسَاهُمْ} [الأعراف: 51] قَالُوا: إِنَّمَا مَعْنَاهُ اليَوْمَ نَتْرُكُهُمْ فِي العَذَابِ.

Translation:

The meaning of His statement, “Today, I forget you,” is His saying, “Today, I leave you for the Punishment.” This is how they explained it [the āyah]. And some of the people of knowledge explained this āyah, “Today, We will forget them.” They said: the meaning is only, “Today, .”

In this narration, Tirmidhī provided his own explanation of the meaning of al-yawma ansāka and cited the explanation of a group of scholars who offered a similar explanation. He did so to support his own. Tirmidhī provided this explanation because the apparent meaning of “forgetting” cannot be understood literally in relation to Allāh and His absolute knowledge. Thus, his interpretation as “I leave you today in the Punishment” is more appropriate.[30] Ibn ʿAbbās, Mujāhid, and al-Suddī also gave the tafsīr of “nansāhum” as “natrukuhum fī al-nār” as Ibn Abī Ḥātim recorded and as also found in the tafsīrs of Mujāhid, ʿAbd al-Razzāq, Ṭabarī, and Muqātil.[31]

WITHIN KITĀB AL-TAFSĪR

As for those narrations in which Tirmidhī provides his own commentary in Kitāb al-Tafsīr:

Sūrat al-Baqarah

#2971:

حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ بْنُ حُمَيْدٍ قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا عَبْدُ الرَّزَّاقِ، عَنْ مَعْمَرٍ، عَنْ هَمَّامِ بْنِ مُنَبِّهٍ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي قَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى: {وَادْخُلُوا البَابَ سُجَّدًا} [البقرة: 58] قَالَ: «دَخَلُوا مُتَزَحِّفِينَ عَلَى أَوْرَاكِهِمْ» أَيْ مُنْحَرِفِينَ

Translation:

Meaning, tampering with the meaning.

In the following narrations, Tirmidhī either provided one-word explanations for a word mentioned in the āyah or a more extensive tafsīr. The above narration falls into the former by extension as mentioned before. Meaning, Tirmidhī explains a word in the narration from the Messenger whose narration is in fact an exegesis of the āyah. Here, the narration explains the meaning of “sujjad_­­­” and then Tirmidhī explained a word in the narration. This explanation was not be found in the tafsīr works selected for this study. However, Tirmidhī’s proposed meaning of sujjad can still be examined. The tafsīr given, munḥarifīn, is a ḥāl [conditional noun] showing the state of the noun at the time of the action, that is, “tampering with the meaning.”[32] Ban Isrāʾīl were commanded to enter Jericho or Bayt al-Maqdis, while supplicating with this supplication. But a group of them tampered with it and changed the word “while prostrating” to another word that implies “crawling on one’s backside.”[33] Tirmidhī concisely explained this to his readers in one word.

#2980:

حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ بْنُ حُمَيْدٍ قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا جَعْفَرُ بْنُ عَوْنٍ قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا الأَعْمَشُ، عَنْ أَبِي صَالِحٍ، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: ” يُدْعَى نُوحٌ فَيُقَالُ: هَلْ بَلَّغْتَ؟ فَيَقُولُ: نَعَمْ، فَيُدْعَى قَوْمُهُ، فَيُقَالُ: هَلْ بَلَّغَكُمْ؟ فَيَقُولُونَ: مَا أَتَانَا مِنْ نَذِيرٍ، وَمَا أَتَانَا مِنْ أَحَدٍ، فَيُقَالُ: مَنْ شُهُودُكَ؟ فَيَقُولُ مُحَمَّدٌ وَأُمَّتُهُ “، قَالَ: «فَيُؤْتَى بِكُمْ تَشْهَدُونَ أَنَّهُ قَدْ بَلَّغَ»، فَذَلِكَ قَوْلُ اللَّهِ: {وَكَذَلِكَ جَعَلْنَاكُمْ أُمَّةً وَسَطًا لِتَكُونُوا شُهَدَاءَ عَلَى النَّاسِ وَيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ عَلَيْكُمْ شَهِيدًا} [البقرة: 143] وَالوَسَطُ: العَدْلُ: «هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ» حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بَشَّارٍ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا جَعْفَرُ بْنُ عَوْنٍ، عَنِ الأَعْمَشِ، نَحْوَهُ

Translation:

al-wasaṭ: justice.

In this narration, Tirmidhī clarified the meaning of the word al-wasaṭ. In the narration preceding this narration,[34] the same explanation is attributed to the Messengerand thus a Prophetic commentary. Why did Tirmidhī find it necessary to repeat the explanation? This tafsīr having come directly from the Messenger ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam means the source of the tafsīr is found.

#3000:

حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ بْنُ حُمَيْدٍ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا الهَاشِمُ بْنُ القَاسِمِ، عَنْ المُبَارَكِ بْنِ فَضَالَةَ، عَنْ الحَسَنِ، عَنْ مَعْقِلِ بْنِ يَسَارٍ، أَنَّهُ زَوَّجَ أُخْتَهُ رَجُلًا مِنَ المُسْلِمِينَ عَلَى عَهْدِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، فَكَانَتْ عِنْدَهُ مَا كَانَتْ، ثُمَّ طَلَّقَهَا تَطْلِيقَةً لَمْ يُرَاجِعْهَا حَتَّى انْقَضَتِ العِدَّةُ، فَهَوِيَهَا وَهَوِيَتْهُ، ثُمَّ خَطَبَهَا مَعَ الخُطَّابِ، فَقَالَ لَهُ: «يَا لُكَعُ أَكْرَمْتُكَ بِهَا وَزَوَّجْتُكَهَا فَطَلَّقْتَهَا، وَاللَّهِ لَا تَرْجِعُ إِلَيْكَ أَبَدًا آخِرُ مَا عَلَيْكَ»، قَالَ: «فَعَلِمَ اللَّهُ حَاجَتَهُ إِلَيْهَا، وَحَاجَتَهَا إِلَى بَعْلِهَا»، فَأَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ: تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى {وَإِذَا طَلَّقْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ فَبَلَغْنَ أَجَلَهُنَّ} [البقرة: 231]- إِلَى قَوْلِهِ – {وَأَنْتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ} [البقرة: 216] فَلَمَّا سَمِعَهَا مَعْقِلٌ قَالَ: «سَمْعًا لِرَبِّي وَطَاعَةً»، ثُمَّ دَعَاهُ فَقَالَ: «أُزَوِّجُكَ وَأُكْرِمُكَ»: «هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ، وَقَدْ رُوِيَ مِنْ غَيْرِ وَجْهٍ عَنِ الحَسَنِ وَهُوَ عَنِ الحَسَنِ غَرِيبٌ» وَفِي هَذَا الحَدِيثِ دَلَالَةٌ عَلَى أَنَّهُ لَا يَجُوزُ [ص:217] النِّكَاحُ بِغَيْرِ وَلِيٍّ لِأَنَّ أُخْتَ مَعْقِلِ بْنِ يَسَارٍ كَانَتْ ثَيِّبًا فَلَوْ كَانَ الأَمْرُ إِلَيْهَا دُونَ وَلِيِّهَا لَزَوَّجَتْ نَفْسَهَا وَلَمْ تَحْتَجْ إِلَى وَلِيِّهَا مَعْقِلِ بْنِ يَسَارٍ وَإِنَّمَا خَاطَبَ اللَّهُ فِي هَذِهِ الآيَةِ الأَوْلِيَاءَ فَقَالَ: {لَا تَعْضُلُوهُنَّ أَنْ يَنْكِحْنَ أَزْوَاجَهُنَّ} فَفِي هَذِهِ الآيَةِ دَلَالَةٌ عَلَى أَنَّ الأَمْرَ إِلَى الأَوْلِيَاءِ فِي التَّزْوِيجِ مَعَ رِضَاهُنَّ “

Translation:

Allāh addressed the guardians of women in this āyah, where He said: “Do not prevent them [women] from marrying their [former] husbands.” In this āyah there is an indication that the matter is directed to the guardians in marrying [them off] while they [the women] are pleased [with remarrying their former husbands].

The āyah that Tirmidhī highlighted is from Sūrat al-Baqarah, 232. In this case, the opinion of an early authority is sought that agrees with Tirmidhī’s exegesis, namely that Allāhis addressing the guardians of divorced women. Tirmidhī further added the condition of “while they [the women] are pleased [with remarrying their former husbands].”

In the tafsīr of Ṭabarī, the opinion of Qatādah is narrated: that the address is towards the guardians.[35] Thereafter, Ṭabarī related the same interpretation of Ibn ʿAbbās, Masrūq (d. 62), and Ibrāhīm al-Nakhaʿī. What is significant is that Tirmidhī’s wording is closest to the opinion of al-Ḍaḥḥāk: “So, Allāh commanded [qāla li al-awliyāʾ] the guardians of the woman […] When a woman is pleased with this and wishes to return to her ex-husband with a new marriage contract.”[36] Thus, Tirmidhī’s opinion has a precedent amongst the Successors. However, we can speculate on whom he is relying in this particular case, aside from Imām al-Shafiʿī. In his al-Umm, the Shāfiʿī stated that the guardians are addressed.[37] In addition, Shafiʿī stipulated that the women be pleased with the marriage.[38] And Allāh knows best.

Sūrat Āl ʿImrān

#3033:

حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ أَبِي عُمَرَ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، عَنْ جَامِعٍ وَهُوَ ابْنُ أَبِي رَاشِدٍ، وَعَبْدُ المَلِكِ بْنُ أَعْيَنَ، عَنْ أَبِي وَائِلٍ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ مَسْعُودٍ، يَبْلُغُ بِهِ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ: «مَا مِنْ رَجُلٍ لَا يُؤَدِّي زَكَاةَ مَالِهِ إِلَّا جَعَلَ اللَّهُ يَوْمَ القِيَامَةِ فِي عُنُقِهِ شُجَاعًا»، ثُمَّ قَرَأَ عَلَيْنَا مِصْدَاقَهُ مِنْ كِتَابِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ: {وَلَا يَحْسَبَنَّ الَّذِينَ يَبْخَلُونَ بِمَا آتَاهُمُ اللَّهُ مِنْ فَضْلِهِ} [آل عمران: 180] الآيَةَ، وقَالَ مَرَّةً: قَرَأَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مِصْدَاقَهُ: سَيُطَوَّقُونَ مَا بَخِلُوا بِهِ يَوْمَ القِيَامَةِ وَمَنْ اقْتَطَعَ مَالَ أَخِيهِ المُسْلِمِ بِيَمِينٍ لَقِيَ اللَّهَ وَهُوَ عَلَيْهِ غَضْبَانُ، ثُمَّ قَرَأَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مِصْدَاقَهُ مِنْ كِتَابِ اللَّهِ: {إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَشْتَرُونَ بِعَهْدِ اللَّهِ} [آل عمران: 77] الْآيَةَ. هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ. وَمَعْنَى قَوْلِهِ شُجَاعًا أَقْرَعَ، يَعْنِي: حَيَّةً

Translation:

The meaning of his statement, “shujāʿ aqraʿ [a viper],” is ḥayyah [a snake].

There is a similar case in ḥadīth #2971. Tirmidhī explained a word in the Prophetic report, which itself is commenting on verses from Sūrah Āl ʿImrān.[39] As for the particular explanation of shujāʿ as ḥayyah, Ṭabarānī agreed and cited a Prophetic report in his Tafsīr, albeit without a chain of transmission. He then followed up with “and some have said” and provided an attribution to Ibn Masʿūd, Ibn ʿAbbās, al-Shaʿbī [40] However, there may be more authorities in “some”. Ṭabarī, on the other hand, provided a chain through Abū Wāʾil that included the interpretation as ḥayyah.[41] Despite searching, I was unable to locate Ṭabarānī’s attribution of the same exegesis to the Messenger, ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam.

Sūrat al-Māʾidah

#3066:

حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ مَنِيعٍ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا يَزِيدُ بْنُ هَارُونَ قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ إِسْحَاقَ، عَنْ أَبِي الزِّنَادِ، عَنْ الأَعْرَجِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ: قَالَ [ص:251] رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «يَمِينُ الرَّحْمَنِ مَلأَى سَحَّاءُ لَا يُغِيضُهَا اللَّيْلُ وَالنَّهَارُ» قَالَ: «أَرَأَيْتُمْ مَا أَنْفَقَ مُنْذُ خَلَقَ السَّمَوَاتِ وَالأَرْضَ؟ فَإِنَّهُ لَمْ يَغِضْ مَا فِي يَمِينِهِ، وَعَرْشُهُ عَلَى المَاءِ، وَبِيَدِهِ الأُخْرَى المِيزَانُ يَرْفَعُ وَيَخْفِضُ». هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ. وَهَذَا الْحَدِيثُ فِي تَفْسِيرِ هَذِهِ الْآيَةِ: {وَقَالَتِ الْيَهُودُ يَدُ اللَّهِ مَغْلُولَةٌ غُلَّتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَلُعِنُوا بِمَا قَالُوا بَلْ يَدَاهُ مَبْسُوطَتَانِ يُنْفِقُ كَيْفَ يَشَاءُ} [المائدة: 64] وَهَذَا حَدِيثٌ قَدْ رَوَتْهُ الأَئِمَّةُ، نُؤْمِنُ بِهِ كَمَا جَاءَ مِنْ غَيْرِ أَنْ يُفَسَّرَ أَوْ يُتَوَهَّمَ، هَكَذَا قَالَ غَيْرُ وَاحِدٍ مِنَ الْأَئِمَّةِ: الثَّوْرِيُّ، وَمَالِكُ بْنُ أَنَسٍ، وَابْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ، وَابْنُ المُبَارَكِ أَنَّهُ تُرْوَى هَذِهِ الأَشْيَاءُ وَيُؤْمَنُ بِهَا وَلَا يُقَالُ كَيْفَ “

Translation:

This ḥadīth is regarding this āyah: “And the Jews said, ‘The hand of God is tied-up.’ May their hands be tied! And they were cursed because of what they said. Rather, His hands are open. He gives freely however He wishes.” This is a ḥadīth that the scholars (aʾimmah) have narrated. We believe in it as it has come to us without interpreting it. Likewise, more than one scholar has said, amongst them are Thawrī, Mālik b. Anas, Ibn ʿUyaynah, Ibn al-Mubārak, that these things are narrated and believed in as they are and

This narration fits into both categories since Tirmidhī commented both from his own side and by citing authorities (i.e. al-aʾimmah). The authorities are cited to support the general understanding of narrations and āyāt of this nature and to record the maxim of amodality (wa lā yuqālu kayf or bi lā kayf). This maxim may be thought of as a form of tafsīr, a maxim found in works of uṣūl al-tafsīr.

Firstly, Tirmidhī stated that the narration he brought under this Sūrah is an explanation of the āyah from Sūrat al-Māʾidah, 64. He then commented on the position of Ahl al-Sunnah regarding such narrations and āyāt that insinuate anthropomorphism as one of tafwīḍ, or entrusting the reality of the meaning to Allāh. Tirmidhī said, “This is a ḥadīth that the scholars narrated. We believe in it just as it was revealed without interpreting it or mentally conceiving it.”

This is a crucial point for those who study the creed and creedal positions of the Sunnī scholars. Tirmidhī neither interpreted the narration nor established an amodal reality based on its meaning. And to support his position, he cited numerous Successors. Tirmidhī stepped in as a mufassir here, informing his readers that the miṣdāq, application, of this ḥadīth is as a tafsīr for this āyah. Thus, I have included it under this section and under the general topic of this paper despite the lack of an explicit interpretation of exegetical authorities.

Sūrat al-Dukhān

#3273:

حَدَّثَنَا مَحْمُودُ بْنُ غَيْلَانَ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ المَلِكِ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ الجُدِّيُّ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا شُعْبَةُ، عَنْ الأَعْمَشِ، وَمَنْصُورٍ، سَمِعَا أَبَا الضُّحَى، يُحَدِّثُ عَنْ مَسْرُوقٍ، قَالَ: جَاءَ رَجُلٌ إِلَى عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، فَقَالَ: إِنَّ قَاصًّا يَقُصُّ يَقُولُ: إِنَّهُ يَخْرُجُ مِنَ الأَرْضِ الدُّخَانُ فَيَأْخُذُ بِمَسَامِعِ الكُفَّارِ وَيَأْخُذُ المُؤْمِنَ كَهَيْئَةِ الزُّكَامِ، قَالَ: فَغَضِبَ وَكَانَ مُتَّكِئًا فَجَلَسَ ثُمَّ قَالَ: إِذَا سُئِلَ أَحَدُكُمْ عَمَّا يَعْلَمُ فَلْيَقُلْ بِهِ – قَالَ مَنْصُورٌ: فَلْيُخْبِرْ بِهِ – وَإِذَا سُئِلَ عَمَّا لَا يَعْلَمُ فَلْيَقُلِ اللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ، فَإِنَّ مِنْ عِلْمِ الرَّجُلِ إِذَا سُئِلَ عَمَّا لَا يَعْلَمُ أَنْ يَقُولَ: اللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ، فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ تَعَالَى قَالَ لِنَبِيِّهِ {قُلْ مَا أَسْأَلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ أَجْرٍ وَمَا أَنَا مِنَ المُتَكَلِّفِينَ} [ص: 86] إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ [ص:380] عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَمَّا رَأَى قُرَيْشًا اسْتَعْصَوْا عَلَيْهِ قَالَ: «اللَّهُمَّ أَعِنِّي عَلَيْهِمْ بِسَبْعٍ كَسَبْعِ يُوسُفَ، فَأَخَذَتْهُمْ سَنَةٌ فَأَحْصَتْ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ حَتَّى أَكَلُوا الجُلُودَ وَالمَيْتَةَ» – وَقَالَ أَحَدُهُمَا: العِظَامَ – قَالَ: ” وَجَعَلَ يَخْرُجُ مِنَ الأَرْضِ كَهَيْئَةِ الدُّخَانِ، فَأَتَاهُ أَبُو سُفْيَانَ فَقَالَ: إِنَّ قَوْمَكَ قَدْ هَلَكُوا فَادْعُ اللَّهَ لَهُمْ ” قَالَ: ” فَهَذَا لِقَوْلِهِ {يَوْمَ تَأْتِي السَّمَاءُ بِدُخَانٍ مُبِينٍ يَغْشَى النَّاسَ هَذَا عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ} [الدخان: 11] ” قَالَ مَنْصُورٌ: ” هَذَا لِقَوْلِهِ: {رَبَّنَا اكْشِفْ عَنَّا العَذَابَ إِنَّا مُؤْمِنُونَ} [الدخان: 12] فَهَلْ يُكْشَفُ عَذَابُ الآخِرَةِ؟ قَالَ: مَضَى البَطْشَةُ، وَاللِّزَامُ، وَالدُّخَانُ ” وقَالَ أَحَدُهُمَا: الْقَمَرُ، وَقَالَ الْآخَرُ: الرُّومُ “. وَاللِّزَامُ يَعْنِي يَوْمَ بَدْرٍ. وَهَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ

Translation:

al-lizām: meaning, the Day of [the Battle of] Badr.

This is a unique example in which Tirmidhī quoted Manṣūr’s (d. 132) tafsīr of the āyah that the Messenger recited. Manṣūr stated that āyah 12 cannot refer to the Punishment of the Hereafter for in the 15^th āyah of the same Sūrah, Allāh  says that He will remove the Punishment for a brief time. Thus, he understood the Punishment to be an incident that already happened and thus he interprets  the meaning of al-dukhān, “the Smoke,” as a past event.

The question of whether Manṣūr’s statement is a description of one event or a reference to different events is unclear. Tirmidhī did not comment on the accuracy of Manṣūr’s understanding. Rather, he merely explained a word that is ambiguous, al-lizām, as the day of the Battle of Badr. Thus, it would appear that Tirmidhī is also of the opinion that this particular Punishment referenced in the āyah is referring to a past event, a victory for the Muslims. In this manner, he may understand Manṣūr’s mentioning three items as the same event.

Further investigation reveals a diversity of opinion regarding the possible explanations mentioned. Ṭabarānī related from Ibn Masʿūd that al-baṭshah refers to Badr, which Ṭabarānī agreed with. Then, there is the alternate opinion regarding “the Smoke” as referring to a Punishment in the Hereafter.[42] Ṭabarī in his Tafsīr provided chains for this opinion attributed to Ibn Masʿūd.[43]

Sūrat al-Mujādilah

#3321:

حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ بْنُ وَكِيعٍ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ آدَمَ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ الأَشْجَعِيُّ، عَنْ سُفْيَانَ الثَّوْرِيِّ، عَنْ عُثْمَانَ بْنِ المُغِيرَةِ الثَّقَفِيِّ، عَنْ سَالِمِ بْنِ أَبِي الجَعْدِ، عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ عَلْقَمَةَ الأَنْمَارِيِّ، عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ أَبِي طَالِبٍ، قَالَ: لَمَّا نَزَلَتْ: {يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا نَاجَيْتُمُ} [المجادلة: 12] الرَّسُولَ فَقَدِّمُوا بَيْنَ يَدَيْ [ص:407] نَجْوَاكُمْ صَدَقَةً قَالَ لِي النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ «مَا تَرَى؟ دِينَارٌ؟» قُلْتُ: لَا يُطِيقُونَهُ، قَالَ: «فَنِصْفُ دِينَارٍ؟»، قُلْتُ: لَا يُطِيقُونَهُ. قَالَ: «فَكَمْ؟» قُلْتُ: شَعِيرَةٌ. قَالَ: «إِنَّكَ لَزَهِيدٌ». قَالَ: فَنَزَلَتْ {أَأَشْفَقْتُمْ أَنْ تُقَدِّمُوا بَيْنَ يَدَيْ نَجْوَاكُمْ صَدَقَاتٍ} [المجادلة: 13] الآيَةَ. قَالَ: «فَبِي خَفَّفَ اللَّهُ عَنْ هَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ». ” هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ غَرِيبٌ إِنَّمَا نَعْرِفُهُ مِنْ هَذَا الوَجْهِ، وَمَعْنَى قَوْلِهِ شَعِيرَةٌ: يَعْنِي وَزْنَ شَعِيرَةٍ مِنْ ذَهَبٍ، وَأَبُو الجَعْدِ اسْمُهُ: رَافِعٌ “

Translation:

The meaning of his statement, “barley,” means, “the weight of barley in gold.”

In this last narration, Tirmidhī continued his pattern of explaining narrations in which an āyah is quoted. In this case, I did not find another tafsīr agreeing with his statement that the meaning of “barley” , in relation to the amount of charity that was required when this āyah was revealed, is “the weight of barley in gold.”

However, Ibn Kathīr related this from Tirmidhī in his Tafsīr and states, “and then Tirmidhī said,” which may imply that Ibn Kathīr did not locate any corroborating opinion.[44] Tirmidhī then acted as the mufassir and stated a legal opinion related to the history of this ruling, despite it being abrogated.

CONCLUSION

Tirmidhī appears to leave the authorities unnamed for two reasons. Firstly, he restricted the opinions he presented to a few scholars so that he would not need to list everyone who held the opinion he quoted. And secondly, the phrase “baʿd ahl al-ʿilm” allowed him to be brief in his comments, only citing sources by name in select instances.

I noted that Tirmidhī’s citing from  these authorities and his own comments were often in narrations that relate to creed and a few times to legal matters. Further instances like the above can be explored throughout the rest of the Sunan.

Most of the scholars whom Tirmidhī quoted as “baʿd ahl al-ʿilm” have been identified and his own explanations have been explained. The works of tafsīr that focus on transmission were the first sources consulted. Tirmidhī generally explained words in the narration that relate to the āyah instead of explaining or giving tafsīr for the āyah itself. Furthermore, his explanation frequently agreed verbatim with Mujāhid.

Throughout this study, the authorities that Tirmidhī left unnamed have been uncovered and most often than not his quotations agreed with Successors or a Companion, especially Ibn ʿAbbās or Ibn Masʿūd. Finally, Tirmidhī in a few instances stepped in as a mufassir when he felt the need arose, but his explanations have neither been obscure nor unprecedented.

وصلى الله تعالى على سيد الأنبياء والمرسلين والحمد لله رب العٰلمين

Bibliography

Abū Ḥātim ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Muḥammad. Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm li-Ibn Abī Ḥātim, ed. Asʿad Muḥammad. Maktabah Nizār Muṣṭafā al-Bāz, AH 1419.

Abū Ḥayyān Muḥammad b. Yūsuf. al-Baḥr al-Muḥīṭ, ed. Ṣidqī Muḥammad Jamīl. Beirut: Dār al-Fikr, AH 1420.

Baghawī, al-Ḥusayn b. Masʿūd al-. Maʿālim al-Tanzīl fī Tafsīr al-Qurʾān, ed. ʿAbd al-Razzāq al-Mahdī. Beirut: Dār Iḥyā al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, AH 1420.

Ibn Kathīr, Ismāʾīl b. ʿUmar. Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm, ed. Sāmī b. Muḥammad. Dār Ṭaybah, 1999.

ʿIwaḍ Allāh, Tāriq b. ʿAqīdah Ahl al-Sunnha wa al-Jamāʿah li-l-Imām al-Ḥāfiẓ Abī ʿĪsā al-Tirmidhī. Riyadh: Dār al-Waṭn l-l-Nashr, 2000.

Mujāhid b. Jabr. Tafsīr Mujāhid, ed. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Ṭāhir. Beirut: al-Manshūrāt al-ʿIlmiyyah.

Mundhir, Muḥammad b. Ibrāhīm b. al-. Kitāb Tafsīr al-Qurʾān, ed. Saʿd b. Muḥammad al-Saʿd. Madīnah: Dār al-Maʾāthir, 2002.

Razzāq,ʿAbd al-. Tafsīr ʿAbd al-Razzāq, ed. Maḥmūd Muḥammad ʿAbduh. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah, AH 1419.

Shāfiʿī, Muḥammad b. Idrīs al-. Tafsīr Imām al-Shafiʿī, ed. Aḥmad b. Muṣṭafā. Dār al-Tadmuriyah, 2006.

Shāfiʿī, Muḥammad b. Idrīs al-. al-Umm. Beirut: Dār al-Maʿrifah, 1990.

Sulaymān, Muqātil b. Tafsīr Muqātil b. Sulaymān, ed. Aḥmad Farīd. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah, 2003.

Ṭabarānī, Sulaymān b. Aḥmad al-. al-Tafsīr al-Kabīr, on The Prince Ghazi Trust for Qurʾānic Thought, accessed November 11, 2019, https://www.greattafsirs.com/ Tafsir_Library.aspx?SoraNo=15& AyahNo=2&MadhabNo=2&TafsirNo=91.

Ṭabarī, Muḥammad b. Jarīr al-. Jāmiʿ al-Bayān fī Taʾwīl al-Qurʾān, ed. Aḥmad Shākir. Muʾassat al-Risālah, 2000.

Thawrī, Sufyān b. Saʿīd al-. Tafsīr al-Thawrī. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah, 1983.

Tirmidhī, Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā al-. al-ʿIlal al-Ṣaghīr, ed. Aḥmad Muḥammad Shākir et al. Beirut: Dār Iḥyā al-Turāth al-ʿArabī.

———. Sunan al-Tirmidhī wa huwa al-Jāmīʿ al-Kabīr, ed. Markaz al-Buḥūth wa Taqniyyah al-Maʿlūmāt. Beirut: Dār al-Taʾṣīl.

———. Sunan al-Tirmidhī, ed. Maktabat al-Bushrā. Karachi: Maktabat al-Bushrā.

Zarkalī, Khayr al-Dīn b. Maḥmūd al-. al-Aʿlām. Dār al-ʿIlm li-l-Malāyīn, 2002.

[1] as within a few others, like Kitāb al-Qadar,

[2] Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā al-Tirmidhī, al-ʿIlal al-Ṣaghīr, ed. Aḥmad Muḥammad Shākir et al. (Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, n.d.), 736-737.

[3] Only the hijrī death dates will be given.

[4] Several scholars have divided tafsīr into two broad categories: al-tafsīr bi al-riwāyah and al-tafsīr bi al-dirāyah. For a detailed discussion see Gibril Haddad’s “Tropology and Inimitability: Ibn ʿĀshūr’s Theory of tafsīr in the Ten Prolegomena to al-Taḥrīr wa al-Tanwīr” p. 62-65 and Walid Saleh’s Review of “Schools of Qurʾānic Exegesis: Genesis and Development.”

[5] Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā al-Tirmidhī, Sunan al-Tirmidhī wa huwa al-Jāmīʿ al-Kabīr, ed. Markaz al-Buḥūth wa Taqniyyah al-Maʿlūmāt (Beirut: Dār al-Taʾṣīl, n.d.), 1:37-42. A note before moving to the first section: I decided to use “Sunan” as opposed to “Jāmiʿ” in reference to Tirmidhī’s book merely due to its common usage as such. The work, nonetheless, rightly meets the definition of a jāmiʿ and it is the title that the author himself gave his work. For more detail, see the editor’s introduction of the Dār al-Taʾṣīl print of Sunan al-Tirmidhī.

[6] Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā al-Tirmidhī, Sunan al-Tirmidhī, ed. Maktabat al-Bushrā (Karachi: Maktabat al-Bushrā, n.d.). For the ḥadīth numbering, I am relying on the Maktabat al-Bushrā print. I have used the Arabic text for the Sunan from Maktabah Shāmilah and corrected any typographical errors based on the Bushrā print. I have generally left the punctuation (e.g. colons, commas) unless misplaced.

[7] Tāriq b. ʿIwaḍ Allāh, ʿAqīdat Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamāʿah li al-Imām al-Ḥāfiẓ Abī ʿĪsā al-Tirmidhī (Riyāḍ: Dār al-Waṭn li al-Nashr, 2000).

[8] Ibn Rahwayh (d. 238 AH), the scholar of his time in Khurāsān. He was one of the great scholars of ḥadīth. (Khayr al-Dīn b. Maḥmūd al-Ziriklī, al-Aʿlām (Beirut: Dār al-ʿIlm li-l-Malāyīn, 2002), 1:292.

[9] Further research could be made into Tirmidhī’s position on the above matter and his position on amodality in these types of attributes.

[10] ʿIwaḍ Allāh, 78-80.

[11] Abū Ḥātim ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Muḥammad, Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm li-Ibn Abī Ḥātim, ed. Asʿad Muḥammad (Makkah: Maktabah Nizār Muṣṭafā al-Bāz, AH 1419), 5:1435 [ḥadīth #8187].

[12] Muḥammad b. Idrīs al-Shāfiʿī, Tafsīr Imām al-Shafiʿī, ed. Aḥmad b. Muṣṭafā (Riyāḍ: Dār al-Tadmuriyah, 2006), 2:844.

[13] My interpretive translation.

[14] ʿIwaḍ Allāh included this narration in his monograph, 30-31.

[15] Sufyān b. Saʿīd al-Thawrī, Tafsīr al-Thawrī (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah, 1983), 180.

[16] Ibn Abī Ḥātim, 7:2395.

[17] ʿAbd al-Razzāq, Tafsīr ʿAbd al-Razzāq, ed. Maḥmūd Muḥammad ʿAbduh (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah, AH 1419), 3:203.

[18] Muqātil b. Sulaymān, Tafsīr Muqātil b. Sulaymān, ed. Aḥmad Farīd (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah, 2003), 3:234.

[19] The Suddī mentioned here is probably Ismāʿīl b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān versus Muḥammad b. Marwān (“al-Suddī al-Ṣaghīr) because Sufyān al-Thawrī is counted amongst Ismāʿīl’s students (see Ṭabarī’s chain) and is not a student of Muḥammad.

[20] Muḥammad b. Jarīr al-Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ al-Bayān fī Taʾwīl al-Qurʾān, ed. Aḥmad Shākir (Beirut: Muʾassat al-Risālah, 2000), 22:154-155.

[21] This is also a narration which ʿIwaḍ Allāh details in his work, 43-44.

[22] Muḥammad b. Ibrāhīm b. al-Mundhir, Kitāb Tafsīr al-Qurʾān, ed. Saʿd b. Muḥammad al-Saʿd (Madīnah: Dār al-Maʾāthir, 2002), 2:535.

[23] Muqātil b. Sulaymān, 209.

[24] ʿAbd al-Razzāq, 2:251.

[25] Sulaymān b. Aḥmad al-Ṭabarānī, al-Tafsīr al-Kabīr, on The Prince Ghazi Trust for Qurʾānic Thought, accessed November 11, 2019, https://www.greattafsirs.com/Tafsir_Library.aspx?SoraNo=15& AyahNo=2&MadhabNo=2&TafsirNo=91.

[26] Ibn al-Jawzī, 2:523. This is another narration which ʿIwaḍ Allāh cites in his work, 16-17.

[27] Sufyān b. Saʿīd al-Thawrī, 161. Mujāhid b. Jabr, Tafsīr Mujāhid, ed. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Ṭāhir (Beirut: al-Manshūrāt al-ʿIlmiyyah, n.d.), 417.

[28] Ṭabarī, 17:122.

[29] al-Ḥusayn b. Masʿūd al-Baghawī, Maʿālim al-Tanzīl fī Tafsīr al-Qurʾān, ed. ʿAbd al-Razzāq al-Mahdī (Beirut: Dār Iḥyā al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, AH 1420), 5:9.

[30] ʿIwaḍ Allāh has mentioned this narration as well, 92-93

[31] Ibn Abī Ḥātim, 5:1492; Mujāhid, 337; ʿAbd al-Razzāq, 2:81; Ṭabarī, 12:475-76; Muqātil, 1:304.

[32] Abū Ḥayyān Muḥammad b. Yūsuf, al-Baḥr al-Muḥīṭ, ed. Ṣiddqī Muḥammad Jamīl (Beirut: Dār al-Fikr, AH 1420), 1:358.

[33] Ibn al-Jawzī, 1:68; al-Baghawī cites other opinions, 1:98-99.

[34] #2979, in the Jāmiʿ

[35] Ṭabarī, 5:21.

[36] Ibid., 5:22-23.

[37] Muḥammad b. Idrīs al-Shāfiʿī, al-Umm (Beirut: Dār al-Maʿrifah, 1990), 5:13.

[38] Ibid.

[39] This is according to ʿAbd Allāh b. Masʿūd, may Allāh be pleased with him.

[40] Ṭabarī, 1:425.

[41] Ṭabarānī, 7:438.

[42] Ṭabarānī, 7:383.

[43] Ṭabarī, 22:14-16.

[44] Ismāʾīl b. ʿUmar b. Kathīr, Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm, ed. Sāmī b. Muḥammad (Dār Ṭaybah, 1999), 4:393.