JOURNAL OF ARABIC AND ISLAMIC STUDIES

196
Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies 11 (2011)
collection that refers to al-Ḥārith’s tradition is the Musnad of Abū
ʿAwāna (d. 316/928–9). 117 Unfortunately, Abū ʿAwāna’s tradition on
the authority of al-Ḥārith is a collective isnād. According to Abū ʿAwāna
the isnād through al-Ḥārith b. Abī Usāma carries a matn that is identical
with the one he received via Yazīd b. Sinān and Muḥammad b. Isḥāq al-
Ṣaghānī ʿAbd Allāh b. Bakr al-Sahmī Saʿīd b. Abī ʿArūba.
The revelation preambles in the traditions of Ibn Manda (d. 395/1005),
Abū Nuʿaym (d. 430/1038) and al-Bayhaqī (d. 458/1066) through al-
Ḥārith b. Abī Usāma are almost identical. 118 At the same time they
depart from Abū ʿAwāna’s matn that is carried by the above mentioned
collective isnād in an important detail: Ibn Manda, Abū Nuʿaym and al-
Bayhaqī choose to adduce a short biographical note on ʿUbāda b. al-
Ṣāmit. In their words, ʿUbāda was one of the representatives (nuqabāʼ)
of the people of Yathrib who swore allegiance to the Prophet on the hill
of ʿAqaba, and subsequently fought along the Prophet in the battle of
Badr. This note was most likely introduced by Ibn Manda, the earliest
collector to include it in his variant tradition. Ibn Manda is known to
have compiled a biographical dictionary about the Companions (Maʿrifat
al-Ṣaḥāba), 119 which explains his interest in such a personal detail. Abū
Nuʿaym took advantage of Ibn Manda’s note in his own biographical
dictionary, Maʿrifat al-Ṣaḥāba. Insofar as Abū Nuʿaym reproduces
verbatim Ibn Manda’s note, it is highly likely that the former copied the
latter without revealing his actual source. Al-Bayhaqī would have copied
either Ibn Manda or Abū Nuʿaym, without paying attention that the
biographical note on ʿUbāda is superfluous to his ḥadīth collection, and,
for that matter, to al-Ḥārith b. Abī Usāma’s ḥadīth collection.
Apart from the biographical note about ʿUbāda, one may ask what is
the chance of Ibn Manda, Abū Nuʿaym and al-Bayhaqī’s reproducing
l-Madīna al-Munawwara, 1992]). The volume’s author, Ibn Ḥajar al-Haythamī (d.
807/1404–5), paid no attention to the khudhū ʿan-nī tradition.
117 Abū ʿAwāna, Musnad, 4:121, no. 6250.
118 Ibn Manda, Kitāb al-Īmān, ed. ʿAlī b. Muḥammad b. Nāṣir al-Faqīhī, 2 vols.
(2nd ed., Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Risāla, 1406/1985), 2:700–1, no. 696; Abū Nuʿaym,
Maʿrifat al-Ṣaḥāba, ed. ʿĀdil b. Yūsuf al-ʿAzzāzī, 7 vols. (1st ed., Riyadh: Dār al-
Waṭan li-l-Nashr, 1998/1419), 3:1923, no. 4840; al-Bayhaqī, al-Sunan al-Kubrā,
8:210.
119 EI 2 , s.v. “Ibn Manda” (F. Rosenthal). There is no entry on ʿUbāda b. al-
Ṣāmit in the surviving text of Ibn Manda’s Maʿrifat al-Ṣaḥāba (Ibn Manda,
Maʿrifat al-Ṣaḥāba, ed. ʿĀmir Ḥasan Ṣabrī, 2 vols. (1st ed., al-ʿAyn: Jāmiʿat al-
Imārāt al-ʿArabiyya al-Muttaḥida, 1426/2005).