Section 3: Answering The Claims Of Recognition And Testimony By The Scholars Regarding The Validity Of The Sadah Ba'alawi Lineage

Book title:  Indonesia Ulema Challenge Spurious Lineage: KH. Imaduddin Utsman al-Bantani's Refutation of the Book by Hanif Alatas et al
Title of Original / Indonesian version: Ulama Nusantara Menggugat Nasab Palsu: Jawaban KH. Imaduddin Utsman al-Bantani terhadap Buku Hanif Alatas dkk
Penulis: KH. Imaduddin Utsman Al-Bantani, pengasuh pesantren Nahdlatul Ulum, Banten
Cetakan pertama: November 2024
Publisher:  Lakeisha 2024
15,6 cm X 23 cm, 691 Pages
ISBN : 978-623-119-469-5 
Bidang studi: Sejarah Baalawi, sejarah Nabi, ilmu nasab, sejarah Islam, genealogi, garis keturunan, filologi/manuskrip, Tes DNA 
Publisher of English version: Al-Khoirot Research and Publication 
Fields of study: Ba'alawi history, history of the Prophet, science of lineage, Islamic history, genealogy, bloodline / lineage, philology/manuscripts, DNA testing  

Contents

1. Back to Book  Indonesia Ulema Challenge Spurious Lineage: KH. Imaduddin Utsman al-Bantani's Refutation of the Book by Hanif Alatas et al    

 CHAPTER 3: ANSWERING THE CLAIMS OF RECOGNITION AND TESTIMONY BY THE SCHOLARS REGARDING THE VALIDITY OF THE SADAH BA'ALWI LINEAGE

In the book Keabsahan Nasab Ba'alwi (The Validity of the Ba'alwi Lineage), Hanif Alatas et al. present several manuscripts that they claim serve as evidence for the Ba'alwi lineage, as follows:

The Manuscript of Hasan al-'Allal (460 AH)

    حدثنا الحسن بن محمد العلال قال حدثنا جدي أبو الحسن علي بن أحمد بن عيسى العلال العلوي بالبصرة قال حدثنا بن أحمد الأبح بن عيسى العلوي نزيل اليمن قال حدثنا محمد بن عبيد بن العسكري ببغداد قال حدثنا ابو بن الحسين الدقاق قال انبأنا القاسم بن بشر قال انبأنا الوليد بن مسلم قال حدثنا الاوزعي قال حدثني عبد الرحمن بن القاسم قال وحدثني القاسم بن محمد الحسين بن جعفر محمد مُحمد عن عائشة

This is the appearance of the manuscript presented by Hanif et al. This chain of transmission (sanad) mentions the name Abdullah "bin" Ahmad bin Isa (the father of Alwi), who allegedly received a hadith from Al-Husain bin Muhammad bin Ubaid bin al-Askari. This manuscript is clearly a "laughable manuscript"; it is a "bogus" manuscript completely devoid of identity. In their footnotes, Hanif et al. state that this chain of transmission originates from the book Musnad Hasan bin Muhammad al-Allal, which remains in manuscript form. Who is the person capable of producing this book, Musnad Hasan bin Muhammad al-'Allal? No one. It is a book narrated by Sheikh Yasin of Padang from a certain quotation, and modern people have subsequently engaged in cocokologi (forced correlation/conformation) with a descendant of Ahmad bin Isa named Hasan al-Dallal, who was recorded in the book Al-Majdi.

What this means is as follows: in the genealogical book Al-Majdi (5th century AH), Ahmad bin Isa and one of his children named Muhammad are recorded. This Muhammad has a great-grandson named Hasan al-Dallal. Later, the Ba'alwi discovered a hadith narrator (muhaddith) with a very similar name, namely Hasan al-'Allal (a name quoted, among others, by Sheikh Yasin of Padang). It was then claimed that the true name of Hasan al-Dallal was Hasan al-'Allal, who was a muhaddith, and a fantasy was subsequently constructed asserting that he possessed a chain of transmission that mentioned Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Isa as his uncle. In reality, all of this is pure fantasy.

According to the author, the book Musnad Hasan al-Allal is a forged book written in the 1960s CE by Salim bin Jindan. Regarding the reasons behind this accusation against Salim bin Jindan, the author will explain shortly.

The fraudulent nature of a chain of transmission is easily proven by examining the names of the narrators contained within that chain. Hadith narrators have been meticulously recorded by hadith experts. Upon close inspection, this specific chain of transmission is proven to be a grafted chain, copied from an authentic chain found in the book Tarikh Baghdad. Observe the authentic chain below:

    أَخْبَرَنَا علي بن محمد بن الحسن المالكي قال أنبأنا الحُسَيْن بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عُبَيْدٍ الْعَسْكَرِيُّ، قَالَ نبأنا محمد بن الحسين الدقاق نبأنا القاسم بن بشر قال نبأنا أَبُو الْعَبَّاسِ الْوَلِيدُ بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ الأوزاعي يقول حدثني عبد الرحمن بن الْقَاسِمِ قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي الْقَاسِمُ بن مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ عَائِشَةَ زَوْجِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَتْ: «إِذَا جَاوَزَ الخِتَانُ الخِتَانَ؛ فَقَد وَجَبَ الْغُسْلُ » فَعَلْتُهُ أَنَا وَالنَّبِيُّ صَلَّى الله عليه وسلّم وَسَلَّمَ فَاغْتَسَلْنَا.

This chain is the authentic chain found in a primary reference book for hadith experts, Tarikh Baghdad (Vol. 3, p. 18). Now, observe the grafted chain of Gus Rumail below:

    حدثنا الحسن بن محمد العلال قال حدثنا جدي أبو الحسن علي بن محمد بن أحمد بن عيسى العلال العلوي بالبصرة بن قال حدثنا عمي عبد الله بن أحمد الأبح بن عيسى العلوي نزيل اليمن قال حدثنا الحسين بن محمد بن عبيد بن العسكري ببغداد قال  حدثنا ابو جعفر محمد بن الحسين الدقاق قال انبأنا القاسم بن بشر قال انبأنا الوليد بن مسلم قال حدثنا الاوزعي قال حدثني عبد الرحمن بن القاسم قال وحدثني القاسم بن محمد عن عائشة

In the authentic chain found in the book Tarikh Baghdad, Ibn al-Askari has a student named Ali bin Muhammad bin Hasan al-Maliki; in Rumail's manuscript, Ibn al-Askari has a student named Abdullah (Ubaidillah) bin Ahmad "bin" Isa. Let us test this using Ittisal al-Riwayat (the continuity of transmission), namely by looking at the books of Tarikh al-Ruwat (history of narrators) that record a narrator along with his teachers and students. Is it proven that both Ali bin Muhammad bin Hasan al-Maliki and Abdullah (Ubaidillah) "bin" Ahmad bin Isa were students of Ibn al-Askari?

Let us examine the book Tarikh Baghdad regarding the figure of Al-Husain bin Muhammad bin al-Askari:

    الحُسَيْنِ بن مُحَمَّدِ بنِ عبيد بن أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مخلد بن أبان أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ أَبُو الْقَاسِمِ الدَّقاق المعروف بابن العسكري ... حَدَّثَنَا الأزهري ، وأبو مُحمَّد الجوهري، والحسن بن مُحَمَّدٍ الخلال، وأحمد مُحَمَّد العتيقي، وأبو الفرج بن برهان، والقاضي أبو العلاء بن الواسطي، وعبد العزيز بن عَلى الأزجى، وعلى بن مُحَمَّدِ بْن الحسَن المالكي، والقاضي أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ البيضاوي، وأحمد بن عُمَرَ بن روح النهرواني، وأبو الْقَاسِم التنوخي. (تاريخ بغداد: جزء ۸ ص. ٥٦٩)

In this book, Tarikh Baghdad by al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, it is mentioned that the students of Ibn al-Askari were: Abul Qasim al-Azhari, Abu Muhammad al-Jauhari, Al-Hasan bin Muhammad al-Khallal, Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Atiqi, Abul Faraj bin Burhan, Al-Qadi Abul Ala al-Wasiti, Abdul Aziz bin Ali al-Azji, Ali bin Muhammad bin al-Hasan al-Maliki, Al-Qadi Abu Abdillah al-Baidhawi, Ahmad bin Umar al-Nahrawani, and Abul Qasim al-Tanukhi.

Following our verification, Ali bin Muhammad bin al-Hasan al-Maliki is proven to be a student of Ibn al-Askari, whereas Abdullah is not proven to be so. Thus, Rumail's chain of transmission is proven to be a grafted chain or a forgery.

It is abundantly clear that this chain of transmission was deliberately fabricated, not for the purpose of narrating a hadith, but rather for the purpose of mentioning the name Abdullah—to serve as false evidence that his figure truly existed and even narrated hadith. Unfortunately, the creator of this chain forgot that the science of hadith is stricter than the science of lineage; the names of narrators have been neatly codified and written in the books of Tarikh Ruwat (History of Narrators). To confirm whether a narrator is a historical figure or not (and perhaps not merely a name deliberately attached without an actual person existing), one can look into the books of Tarikh Ruwat which have been written since the third century Hijriyah.

Consider the death of Abdullah: he is said to have passed away in the year 383 Hijriyah. If he were truly a narrator, his name would have been well-known among the scholars of his time, and his location would have been frequently visited by hadith seekers from various corners of the world. Consequently, his name should have been recorded in the books that documented narrators who were contemporary with him or close to his era, such as Ibn Shahin, who passed away in the year 385 Hijriyah (two years after the death of Abdullah), or the book of Al-Dhahabi, who passed away in the year 748 Hijriyah. And, of course, his name would also have been recorded by the genealogical books of his era, such as Al-Ubaidili (d. 437 AH). Yet, this name Abdullah is not recorded anywhere: neither in genealogical books, nor in the books of narrators.

The Chain of Transmission (Sanad) of Abul Qasim al-Naffath (490 AH)

Hanif et al. also present a fraudulent chain of transmission for a hadith attributed to Abul Qasim al-Naffath, which reads as follows:

    حدثنا ابو الحسن على بن جعفر الاشقر العلوى قال حدثنا ابو النقيب بن عیسی احمد القاسم محمد بن الحسن بن محمد بن على بن بن على العريضي بن جعفر العلوى الحسيني العراقي مُحمد بن النقاط مشافهة في منزله بالبصرة سنة ٤٦١ قال حدثني أبي المسند بن على محمد الامام النسابة النقيب المحدث ابو محمد الحسن بن العلال العلوى البصرى قرأة عليه وانا اسمع بالبصرة سنة ٤٥٩ قال احمد بن بصرى بن عبيد الله الله حدثنا الشريف المسند عبد بن بن عيسى بن محمد الازرق العلوى قال حدثني ابي وعمى جديد وعلوى ابنا عبيد الله بن احمد المهاجر بن عيسى الرومي العلوى اجازة . ٧٤

This time, Hanif et al. do not dare to mention the name of the book from which this chain of transmission was taken. This bogus chain of transmission is clearly a forgery. How could Ali bin Ja'far al-Asyqar receive a hadith from Al-Naffath in the year 461 AH when he had already passed away in the year 327 AH?

Below is a manuscript belonging to the family of Ali al-Asyqar indicating that he passed away in the year 327 AH.

It is clear that the sanad displayed by Hanif et al. was created not for the sake of Hadith Science, but rather for the purpose of mentioning the names of the Ba'alwi family. The method is exactly the same: they rely on the fact that the name Abul Qasim al-Naffath was mentioned by Sheikh Yasin of Padang as having a Musnad book; that book is then fabricated today, and a fantasy is subsequently constructed claiming that Abul Qasim al-Naffath mentioned the name Ubaidillah, who is described as a son of Ahmad bin Isa.

The question is, why dare to lie in such detail merely to defend a lineage? Unfortunately, no matter how detailed a lie is, the truth will always be able to dismantle it, because no matter how detailed a lie is, it can never be perfect. Abraham Lincoln said: "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

The Manuscript of Hasan bin Rasyid (638 AH)

Hanif Alatas et al. present a chain of transmission belonging to Hasan bin Rasyid as follows:

    فقد قرأ على الفقيه الأجل السيد الولي ... المحبوب في الله تعالى  محمد بن علي بن محمد بن  أحمد بن جديد الشريف الحسيني أحسن حاله وتمم ماله "جامع أبي عيسى الترمذي" - الله - بحق روايتي له قراءة على والده الشيخ الإمام العالم، أبي الحسين علي بن  مُحمد بن أحمد بن جديد الشريف الحسيني (ت: ٦٢٠ هـ)

Up to this point, what Hanif et al. present is still correct. The ijazah (authorization) of the book of Turmudzi from Hasan bin Rasyid to Muhammad bin Ali bin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Jadid does indeed exist; the author also possesses a microfilm of its manuscript. However, Ubaidillah bin Ahmad bin Isa is not mentioned there at all. The deception begins when Hanif et al. present a chain of transmission from Umar bin Ali al-Tiba'i, which mentions the lineage of Syarif Abul Jadid stretching back to the name Ubaidillah; this is where the lying starts. Please observe:

    اربعينية بوحده مسنده بالسند المتقدم الا الاوزري عن والده عن محمد بن عمر عن والده مظفر الدين عمر بن على التباعى بروايته له عن المؤلف الشريف الحافظ ابي الحسن على بن محمد بن احمد بن جديد بن على بن عیسی بن مُحمد بن جديد بن عبيد الله بن احمد بن بن على بن مُحمَّد بن على بن جعفر الصادق مُحمد بن الحسين بن على بن ابي طالب كرم الله وجهه قال نقلت هذه النسبة من خط بن جديد.

They claim that this chain is extracted from the tsabat (register of chains) of the book Al-Arba'un by Syarif Abul Hasan Ali bin Jadid, which was written by Umar bin Ali al-Tiba'i. They claim that the lineage chain of Ali bin Jadid reaching back to Ubaidillah bin Ahmad bin Isa was written by Abul Jadid himself—this is where the lie begins. The book Al-Arba'un belonging to Syarif Abul Jadid is already mafqud (lost). If it is discovered at a later date containing an added lineage chain that reaches back to Ubaidillah bin Ahmad bin Isa, then it is clearly a deliberately fabricated manuscript. Ubaidillah or Abdullah is not a son of Ahmad bin Isa. It is already clearly stated in Al-Syajarah al-Mubarakah (597 AH) that the children of Ahmad bin Isa were only three: Muhammad, Ali, and Husayn; there is no name Ubaidillah or Abdullah, let alone Ubaid.

Notice the book by Hanif et al.—from where did they obtain that sanad of Abul Jadid? It is stated in its footnote that it is a private collection. In the science of lineage, a book written or owned by someone who has a vested interest cannot be used as an authoritative proof (hujjah).

Abdul Majid al-Qaraja states in his book Al-Kafi al-Muntakhab:

    ٥- المصلحة فان ظهرت مصلحة عند المثبت او النافي يترك قوله غالبا، وقد يعمل بنقيض مصلحته في حالات مخصصة، ولا يؤخذ بقوله الا اذا وجد ما يعضده عند غيره ممن ليست لهم مصلحة ولم  ينقلوا عن من له مصلحة

"The fifth factor is al-maslahat (vested interest/benefit). Thus, if a clear interest appears from the one confirming (meng-itsbat) or denying a lineage, their opinion is usually abandoned. Sometimes, in specific instances, their opinion can be utilized if it goes against their own interest. And their opinion cannot be accepted unless it is corroborated by other scholars who hold no vested interest and who did not transmit from anyone who has a vested interest."

Yemeni researchers have already stated that the books containing chains of transmission for hadiths that mention the Ba'alwi family—such as Alwi and Bashri—are purely imaginary.Here is the English translation of the text provided:

The Manuscript of Umar bin Sa'ad al-Din al-Dzifari

According to Hanif et al., this is a manuscript by Umar ibn Sa'd Al-Din Al-Dzafari (d. 667 AH). They claim he authored a book titled Al-Arba'un, which contains 40 hadiths he received from the Faqih Muqaddam. How remarkable that the Faqih Muqaddam—whose name was never once mentioned by the scholars—could narrate 40 hadiths. Ever since he passed away in the year 653 AH, the Faqih Muqaddam's name was never mentioned by scholars as a scholar, let alone as a hadith narrator (muhaddith). He was mentioned for the very first time in the books of the Ba'alwi family in the ninth century, most notably in Al-Burqat al-Musyiqat by Ali al-Sakran.

From a mere scrap of paper claimed to be the bogus manuscript of the book Al-Arba'un above, it remains difficult for us to analyze. However, during a discussion at Rabithah Alawiyah (September 7, 2024), Rumail Abbas displayed one of the leaves of that Al-Dzifari manuscript. From that, the author discovered that the manuscript is actually the work of Salim bin Jindan of Jakarta (d. 1969 CE).

Below is one of Rumail's manuscripts showcased during the presentation at the Rabithah Alawiyah discussion in Jakarta (September 7, 2024). The text contains a hadith chain of transmission (sanad) from Umar ibn Sa'd al-Din al-Dzifari which, according to Rumail, he obtained from Muhammad Faqih Muqaddam, and the Faqih Muqaddam obtained it from Abul Hasan Ali bin Muhammad bin Jadid.

In that manuscript, it is stated that Umar bin Sa'd received the hadith from Muhammad bin Ali Faqih Muqaddam, and the Faqih Muqaddam received it from Abul Hasan Ali bin Muhammad bin Jadid. This sanad is clearly a fraudulent one, because Abul Hasan Ali bin Jadid did not have a student named Muhammad bin Ali Faqih Muqaddam. In the book Al-Suluk fi Thabaqat al-Ulama Wa al-Muluk, Al-Janadi (d. 732 AH) mentions the names of the students of Abul Hasan Ali bin Muhammad bin Jadid, but there is no one named Muhammad bin Ali Faqih Muqaddam. As for the names of Ali bin Jadid's students mentioned in Al-Suluk, they are: Muhammad bin Mas'ud al-Sufali, Ibn Nashir al-Himyari, Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Junaid, Hasan bin Rasyid, Muhammad bin Ibrahim al-Fasyali, and Umar bin Ali Sahibu Baiti Husain (Al-Suluk, Vol. 2, p. 136). In the book Banu al-Mu'allim al-Jaba'iyyun wa Banu al-Jadid al-Alawiyyun, Abu Umar mentions nine names of Ali bin Jadid's students, yet it does not mention at all that he had a student named Muhammad bin Ali Faqih Muqaddam (see p. 6). It is glaringly obvious that the manuscript containing the chains of transmission of the Faqih Muqaddam above consists of forged chains.

Rumail states that the year this manuscript was written was 667 Hijriyah. Judging by the physical appearance of the manuscript, it is highly unconvincing. Blue ink of that nature was not commonly used in the 7th century Hijriyah; lined paper of that kind was manufactured around the year 1960 CE. Therefore, apart from its text, even judging from the physical medium used, this manuscript is clearly a forgery. The style of handwriting in this manuscript is identical to the manuscripts of hadith books written by Salim bin Jindan (d. 1969 CE). Notice the excerpt of the manuscript found in the online media outlet "Jaringan Santri" (https://jaringansantri.com/manuskrip-ilmu-hadis-habib-salim-bin-jindan/), which contains a manuscript of a hadith book authored by Salim bin Jindan titled Riwayah bi al-Fi'li below:

Based on the handwriting style and the type of lined paper routinely used by Salim bin Jindan, Rumail's manuscript and Salim bin Jindan's text are identical. Rumail's text is 99% the handwriting of Salim bin Jindan, who passed away in Jakarta in the year 1969 CE.

So, what is the opinion of Yemeni scholars regarding Salim bin Jindan? Dr. Muhammad Badzib, on his social media account on the Telegram channel posted on May 16, 2024, stated that the books of Sheikh Salim bin Jindan "la yuhtajju biha wala yu'tamadu 'alaiha" (cannot be used as legal proof and cannot be relied upon). Dr. Badzib quoted the opinion of Abdullah Al-Habsyi in his book Mashadir al-Fikr al-Islami fi al-Yaman that the books of Salim bin Jindan are books drawn out of "thin air."

Abdullah Muhammad Al-Habsyi mentioned that the books of Sheikh Salim bin Jindan are of no benefit, and within those books there is "Mujazafah" (haphazard, reckless statements without references); inside them there is also "al-khaltu" (corrupted speech and the delusions of an unconscious person) (p. 558).

In addition to Abdullah Al-Habsyi, according to Badzib, Saggaf Ali al-Kaf holds the same view: that the books of Sheikh Salim bin Jindan regarding the science of lineage are filled with "akadzibu la yu'tamadu 'alaiha" (lies that cannot be relied upon).

Aside from those two scholars, there are many other scholars who evaluate Sheikh Salim bin Jindan's books on lineage as being of no value. Badzib also mentioned a scholar named Masyhur bin Hafidz, who stated that Sheikh Salim bin Jindan was a "hatibu lailin" (someone who gathers firewood at night / speaks about whatever crosses his mind). Furthermore, a researcher named Ziyad al-Taklah and Dr. Sa'id Tulah have both written pieces concerning Salim bin Jindan and his fantasies in fabricating baseless hadith chains of transmission.

According to Badzib, a professor and lawyer named Fu'ad Tarabulsi related to him that many of the names mentioned by Ibn Jindan in his books are fictitious names, "la wujuda laha" (they have no existence). Badzib cited an example: Sheikh Salim bin Jindan mentioned that one of his teachers was an individual described as the son of Al-Allamah Jamaluddin al-Qasimi al-Dimasqi. No one has ever known this person to be part of the Al-Qasimi family; the Al-Qasimi family themselves do not recognize him.

Moreover, according to Badzib, Sheikh Salim bin Jindan claimed the existence of musnad books belonging to the Ba'alwi family and stated that the manuscripts of those musnad books were located in the "Arif Hikmat" Library. These musnad books, according to Badzib, are forged and baseless. They do not even exist in the "Arif Hikmat" Library he mentioned. In fact, Badzib said they do not exist in any library on the face of the earth, except inside the house of Salim bin Jindan. It appears that what Badzib meant is the book Musnad Faqih Muqaddam, which is alleged to have been written by Umar bin Sa'd al-Dzifari, the manuscript of which was displayed by Rumail Abbas at Rabithah Alawiyah.

What Sheikh Salim bin Jindan did, according to Badzib, is explained by a rare text found in a personal letter from Alwi bin Thahir al-Haddad to his student, Professor Ali Ba'bud. The letter states that Ibn Jindan suffered from the disease of Melancholia: he imagined things that did not exist, assumed their reality, and then wrote down those imaginations. The public, being unaware of his health condition, simply accepted his writings as trustworthy information.

Unfortunately, according to Badzib, the people who quote him make no effort to confirm the sources Sheikh Salim bin Jindan used when writing his books. If they looked closer, they would find that he quoted from newly written, forged documents authored by fictitious individuals.

On his Telegram account, Badzib also shared a piece written by Ayman Al-Habsyi regarding Salim Bin Jindan titled Al-Tahdhir Min Ansab Ibni Jindan (A Warning Concerning the Lineages of Ibn Jindan). In his writing, Ayman stated, among other things, that he asked his uncle, Abu Bakar bin Ali al-Masyhur, about the books of Ibn Jindan, and his uncle replied that he had asked Abdul Qadir Ahmad al-Saqqaf, who said: "Salim bin Jindan is a good man, but his opinions on lineage and history cannot be relied upon."

Ayman al-Habsyi initially intended to edit (tahqiq) the book authored by Sheikh Salim bin Jindan titled Al-Durr al-Yaqut. However, when he saw that it was filled with "great catastrophes," he abandoned his intention. In fact, according to Ayman, there are many "great catastrophes" regarding the Ba'alwi lineages within that very book.

The following is a screenshot of Badzib's statement:

The two other hadith chains of transmission featured in the book by Hanif et al. are also forged chains obtained from that book of Salim bin Jindan. Those two chains are:

حدثنا محمد بن على الفقيه قال حدثنا ابو حسن على بن محمد بن جديد وابو عبد الله سالم بن بصرى بن عبد الله العلويان قرأة على الاول وسماعاً من الثاني قالا حدثنا ابو عبد الله محمد بن عبد الله الهروى قال الاول اجازة شافهني بها بمكة قال الثاني مكاتبة من تريم قال حدثنا المبارك بن على بن الطباخ الكريتى قرأة عليه وان اسمع حدثنا ابو بكر محمد بن عبد الباقى الخزرجى الانصاري قال حدثنا محمد بن أبي الحسن على الساحلى اجازة قال حدثنا عبيد الله القاسم الهمداني قال ابو عيسى العروضي قال حدثنا ابو عبد الرحمن احمد بن شعیب بن يحر النسائي الحافظ قال حدثنا ابو عمار الحسين بن حريث المروزي قال حدثنا الفضيل عن منصور عن أبي حازم عن أبي هريرة قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم من حج هذا البيت فلم يرفث ولم يفسق رجع كما ولدته امه . ٧۸

 حدثنا الشريف محمد بن على العلوى التريمi قال حدثنا الامام المحدث الفقيه العابد سالم بن بصرى بن عبد الله ابن يصرى بن عبيد الله بن احمد المهاجر بن عيسı النقیب بن محمد الازرق العلوى قرأة عليه في منزله بمدينة تريم المباركة سنة ٥٧٦ هجرية بقرأة القاضي مُحمد عبد الله بن ابى الحب القرشي قال حدثنا الشريف المحدث الامام ابو محمد حمزة بن محمد بن عبد الكريم الحسنى اليماني قرأة عليه وانا اسمع بمدينة تعز باليمن سنة ٥٦٢ قال حدثنا ابو الفضل جعفر بن على الهمداني البغدادي قال حدثنا ابو الطاهر احمد بن محمد بن احمد السلفى الاصفهاني قال حدثنا محمد بن احمد بن اسماعيل الطليطلي كتابة قال اخبرنا ابواحمد جعفر بن عبد الله 79

The efforts of the Ba'alwi clan to historicalize the names of their ahistorical ancestors by fabricating these false chains of transmission are not limited to what is found in the book of Hanif et al. Previously, Rumail Abbas endeavored to find books written prior to the 9th century AH that contained the names of the Ba'alwi family; however, his efforts failed. There is an authentic manuscript of Syarif Abul Jadid from the 7th century, but it contains absolutely no information regarding the lineage of the Abdurrahman Assegaf family. Consequently, he resorted to presenting chains of transmission from bogus manuscripts, just like those found in the book of Hanif et al.

The following are Rumail's efforts in tracing the names of the ahistorical Ba'alwi clan.

The Manuscript of the Authorization (Ijazah) of Kitab Sunan Turmudzi from the Year 589 AH

Rumail presents a manuscript authorizing the book Sunan Turmudzi. Perhaps Rumail intends that with the existence of this manuscript evidence, the figures of the Ba'alwi have been proven as historical entities because their existence was ontologically reported in the 6th century Hijriyah. This statement is fabricated because there is no connection between the Jadid family and the Abdurrahman Assegaf family (who later attributed themselves as Ba'alwi). They are two completely different families. The claim that Jadid was the older brother of Alwi bin Ubaid has only existed since the ninth century; prior to that, it was non-existent. There is not a single book from the era in which Jadid is assumed to have lived stating that he was the brother of Alwi.

Syarif Abul Hasan Ali, who was a descendant of Jadid and passed away in the year 620 Hijriyah, was reported by the book Al-Suluk as a scholar of hadith. He had a wife who was the daughter of Sheikh Mudafi'. Various cities where Ali moved are recounted by Al-Suluk, but it is never mentioned that he ever came to Tarim. Likewise, he is not mentioned as being born in Tarim or having a younger brother named Alwi there. Rumail cannot use the historicity of Abul Hasan Ali to argue for the historicity of the Abdurrahman Assegaf family because there is no connection whatsoever between the two.

Nevertheless, it is worth our while to examine the manuscript containing the authorization (ijazah) of the book Sunan Turmudzi from this Jadid family:

 

According to Abu Umar Mazin bin 'Amir al-Ma'syani al-Dzifari al-'Ummani, who restored this manuscript on 2 Dzulqo'dah 1444 AH, this manuscript is the Jami' of Imam Turmudzi located in the "Ra'is al-Kitab" Library in Turkey, number 154. Its copyist began from the chapter "La yaqbalullah Sholatan Bighairi Thuhurin" from the Book of Purification until the end of Kitab Al-Thibb (The Book of Medicine) across 15 volumes, written in the year 589 AH by the copyist Qasim bin Ahmad bin Abdullah al-Mu'allim al-Juba'i. Then, there is an additional note of authorization (ijazah) from Abu Muhammad Hasan bin Rasyid bin Salim bin Rasyid bin Hasan al-Hadrami al-Sakuni al-Umani (d. 638 AH) to Syarif Muhammad bin Ali bin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Jadid (the son of Abul Hasan Ali bin Jadid [d. 620 AH]) in faint, almost illegible handwriting (p. 3). This additional notation is undated and was most likely written after the year 620 AH. After restoration, it can be read as follows:

    بسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ، الحمد لله رب العالمين، وصلى الله على سيدنا Nabi الأمي وعلى آله وسلم، أما بعد : فقد قرأ على الفقيه الأجل السيد الولي ... المحبوب في الله تعالى محمد بن علي بن محمد بن  أحمد بن جديد الشريف الحسيني أحسن حاله وتمم ماله "جامع أبي عيسى الترمذي" - الله بحق روايتي له قراءة على والده الشيخ الإمام العالم، أبي الحسين علي بن بن محمد بن  أحمد بن جديد الشريف الحسيني (ت: (٦٢٠) هـ) ، - أحسن الله جزاءه وجعل الجنة مأواه - بحق قراءته على الشيخ الفقيه الإمام أبي عبد الله محمد بن عبد الله الهروي [ت: (٥٩١) هـ)، عن الشيخ الإمام الحافظ المبارك بن علي بن الحسين بن الطباخ (ت: (٥٧٥) هـ)، عن الشيخ الأجل، عبد الملك الكروخي ات ٥٤٨ هجرية )، عن المشيخة

"In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, Lord of all the worlds. May Allah send blessings and peace upon our master, the Unlettered Prophet, and upon his Family.

To proceed:

The most illustrious jurist, the saintly master, beloved in Allah the Exalted, Muhammad bin Ali bin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Jadid al-Syarif al-Husaini—may Allah rectify his state and complete his reward—read before me the Jami' of Abu Isa al-Tirmidhi.

This is by virtue of my authorization to transmit it, which I received by reading it before his father, the exemplary shaykh, the imam, the scholar, Abul Husain Ali bin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Jadid al-Syarif al-Husaini (d. 620 AH)—may Allah grant him the best reward and make Paradise his abode.

This, in turn, is by virtue of his reading before the jurist, the shaykh, the imam, Abu Abdullah Muhammad bin Abdullah al-Harawi (d. 591 AH), who transmitted it from the shaykh, the imam, the hadith-memorizer (hafiz), Al-Mubarak bin Ali bin al-Husain bin al-Thabbakh (d. 575 AH), who transmitted it from the most illustrious shaykh, Abdul Malik al-Karukhi (d. 548 AH), who transmitted it from the master-scholars (al-masyayikh)..."

The manuscript was written by Qasim bin Ahmad bin Abdullah with the date 589 AH; thus, that date is not the date of the 'additional note' in the form of the ijazah that mentions the name of Muhammad bin Ali. That year represents the year of completion for the transcription of the text, not the authorization of the book to Muhammad bin Ali. Notice the difference in the style of writing between the core content of the book and the ijazah.

It should also be noted that the time of completion for the writing and the time of study can certainly differ. However, if we refer to Al-Janadi, where Muhammad's father, Ali, passed away in the year 620 AH (the seventh century), and in Syamsu al-Dzahirah in the year 630 AH, then by using the method of Ibn Khaldun—where there are three generations within every single century—it can be estimated that the death of Muhammad bin Ali occurred in the year 653 AH. From there, we can also estimate that this Muhammad received the authorization for Sunan Tirmidzi within the timeframe of 620–653 AH. If divided in half, it is estimated he received the authorization in the year 636 AH; certainly, this is younger than Al-Syajarah al-Mubarakah, which was written in the year 597 AH.

That 'additional note' can serve as evidence for the Jadid family, showing that in the year 636 AH they were historical figures, starting from the name Muhammad (d. 653 AH) and his father, Ali (d. 620 AH). However, it cannot serve as evidence for their lineage back to Abdullah, because it only mentions 5 generations. The mujiz (granter of the authorization) only connects it as far back as Jadid Tsani; it requires 4 more generations to reach Abdullah, as mentioned by Al-Janadi. Following that, a source is also required that mentions Abdullah as a child of Ahmad. For the time being, Al-Janadi (732 AH) is the first person to connect the lineage of Bani Jadid to Ahmad bin Isa, which contradicts an older book, namely Al-Syajarah al-Mubarakah (597 AH). A source is likewise required to state that Jadid was truly the brother of Alwi bin Ubaid.

Since that 'additional note' is so weak as a witness for Jadid's lineage to Ahmad bin Isa, it will naturally be even weaker as a witness for the Abdurrahman Assegaf or Ba'alwi Ubaidillah family.

Kitab Tuhfat al-Murid Wa Uns al-Mustafid

According to Rumail, Muhammad ibn Ali Bathahan (d. 630 AH) produced a book titled Tuhfat Al-Murid wa Uns Al-Mustafid fi Manaqib Al-Syaikh Sa'd Al-Din ibn Ali Al-Dzafari. Rumail further states that this book confirms the intellectual network between Sa'd Al-Din Al-Dzafari and Muhammad ibn Ali Al-Alawi, who later, in the declaration of his son (Umar Al-'Abid ibn Sa'd Al-Din Al-Dzafari), was written as "Al-Faqih Al-Muqaddam".

Perhaps Rumail's intention with the phrase "intellectual network" is that within the book it is mentioned that Faqih Muqaddam wrote a letter to Sheikh Sa'd al-Din al-Dzifari and he subsequently replied to it, in line with information cited in Ba'alwi literature. The question is: is it true that Bathahan wrote that book? Where is the book? If it exists, is it true that it contains correspondence between Faqih Muqaddam and Sheikh Sa'd? News regarding that book originates solely from the claims of Ba'alwi writers, such as in the book Al-Burqat al-Musyiqat (p. 99).

Salih al-Hamid Ba'alwi (d. 1386 AH) claimed to have once seen the manuscript of that book (see Tarikh Hadramaut, Vol. 2, p. 824). According to Dr. Muhammad Yaslam Abd al-Nur, Salih al-Hamid claimed to have seen it in the Library of Husen bin Abdurrahman Bin Sahl, which was subsequently brought to the Al-Ahqaf Library in Tarim, written in the year 978 AH by Umar bin Ibrahim Al-Hubani. Is this news accurate? Dr. Muhammad Yaslam states that the book has now been lost (see Footnote Tarikh wa al-Muarrikhun al-Hadlarimah, p. 50).

Every important, contemporary external manuscript claimed to mention the Ba'alwi family is declared lost after being cited. For a researcher, this is a suspicious pattern. And for the author, it is highly probable that the book, if it ever existed at all, never mentioned Faqih Muqaddam; that is the very reason why the manuscript of the book had to be "made to disappear".

The Manuscript of Abul Qasim al-Naffath

According to Rumail, Abul Qasim An-Naffath (d. 581 AH) produced a book compiling 40 types of hadiths in a musnad, which he titled Al-Arba'un. In several narrations, both pass through Imam Ahmad Al-Muhajir, who is referred to as Nazil Al-Yaman (the settler of Yemen) and given the title Al-Abah.

Is Rumail's claim true? Observe Rumail's manuscript which the author displayed previously:

This is a chain of transmission strongly suspected of being written by Salim bin Jindan. Within it, it is also mentioned that Ahmad al-Abah is "Nazil al-Yaman" (the one who came to settle in Yemen). It seems that Rumail's claim regarding the discovery of the manuscript of Abul Qasim al-Naffath also originates from the writings of Salim bin Jindan. And it has been explained previously that Yemeni scholars consider what was written by Salim bin Jindan regarding lineages and chains of transmission as "la yuhtajju biha wa la yu'tamadu 'alaiha" (cannot be used as legal proof and cannot be relied upon). 

The Chain of Transmission (Sanad) of Muhammad Aqilah and the Assegaf Manuscript

According to Rumail, in the book Al-Silk al-Durar fi A'yan al-Qarn al-Thani 'Asyar by Muhammad Khalil al-Muradi bin Ali al-Muradi (d. 1206 AH), volume 4, page 30, there is a biography of a scholar named Muhammad Aqilah (d. 1150 AH). In that book, it is mentioned that he received the instruction of dhikr (talqin dzikir) from Abdullah bin Ali Bahusain al-Saqqaf. Besides the instruction of dhikr, Abdullah al-Saqqaf also authorized him to transmit a book authored by Ali bin Abdullah al-Aydarus, who resided in Surat, India.

Rumail argues that because Muhammad Aqilah was a tsiqah (trustworthy) person, his teacher—namely Abdullah bin Ali Bahusain—must also be a tsiqah person. Therefore, when Abdullah bin Ali al-Saqqaf writes a narration in another book, his narration is deemed tsiqah. For example, when Abdullah bin Ali, in a chain of transmission for a musalsal (interlinked) hadith, mentions that he received the hadith from his father Ali, from his father Abdullah, from his father Ahmad, from his father Ali al-Naqi, and so on all the way to the Faqih Muqaddam, this allegedly proves the factual and historical reality of the Faqih Muqaddam.

For Rumail, the mention of the Faqih Muqaddam's name in the year 1150 Hijriyah—500 years after his death—within a chain of transmission is acceptable and demonstrates that he is a historical figure, even without utilizing the methodology of hadith criticism. Rumail does not yet understand the methods used by hadith experts to analyze a chain of transmission to determine whether a sanad is continuous (muttasil) or whether individual narrators are liars, transgressive (fasiq), or fictitious.

The following is the manuscript of the musalsal hadith displayed by Rumail, which mentions the name of the Faqih Muqaddam:

The question that puzzles the author is: where did Rumail study Hadith Sciences to be able to claim that if a student is tsiqah, then their teacher must automatically be judged as tsiqah? This does not make sense. In Hadith Sciences, there is a discipline known as Ilmu Al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil (the science of narrator evaluation), which studies whether narrators are worthy of trust or not. Every single narrator in a chain is investigated one by one, from the beginning to the end. If any one of them is historically proven to be a liar, the hadith becomes weak (da'if) or is even judged as fabricated (mawdu'). When Muhammad Aqilah is judged as tsiqah (trustworthy), his teacher, Abdullah bin Ali al-Saqqaf, is not automatically declared tsiqah; he requires his own independent investigation, as does the rest of the sequence of narrators.

When a sanad analysis is conducted starting from Abdullah bin Ali al-Saqqaf, we find that the structure of the sanad is identical to the structure of their lineage. As the author once stated in the book I'anat al-Akhyar, the narrations from Ba'alwi scholars concerning their lineage and history hold the status of "muttaham bi al-kadzib" (suspected of lying) and cannot be trusted, because they contradict authoritative historical works and genealogical records. Thus, the structure of Abdullah bin Ali al-Saqqaf's sanad down to the Faqih Muqaddam, being based on the structure of their lineage, is also untrustworthy.

Rumail mentions the name of Muhammad Aqilah merely as a stepping stone to bring up the name of Abdullah bin Ali al-Saqqaf. In reality, Muhammad Aqilah never mentioned the name of the Faqih Muqaddam; the one who mentioned the Faqih Muqaddam was Abdullah bin Ali al-Saqqaf. The name of Muhammad Aqilah, a famous scholar, was brought up by Rumail simply to elevate the status of Abdullah bin Ali al-Saqqaf's name.

The Manuscript of the Book Musnad Ubaidillah al-Tamimi al-Iraqi

According to Rumail, Ubaidillah ibn Thahir Al-Tamimi (d. 488 AH) produced a book compiling dozens of hadiths titled Musnad Ubaidillah Al-Tamimi Al-Iraqi. Rumail further states that within it lies the sanad of Hasan ibn Muhammad Al-Allal. Hasan ibn Muhammad Al-Allal (d. <490 AH) produced a musnad book titled Al-Arba'un, containing 40 types of hadiths from various chains of transmission, in which the kinship of the text's transmitter to the Ba'alwi tribe is mentioned using terms like 'amm (paman / uncle), ibn 'amm (sepupu / cousin), and the like.

This assertion by Rumail is identical to his previous ones, seeking to connect a well-known name with the Ba'alwi family. Ubaidillah al-Tamimi does not mention the names of the Ba'alwi family at all; the person he mentions is Hasan bin Muhammad al-Allal, a genuine grandson of Ahmad bin Isa. A story was then constructed claiming that Hasan al-Allal referred to Ba'alwi names as uncles, cousins, or similar relations, so that it would appear as though a kinship truly existed between Hasan al-Allal and the Ba'alwi family. The question is: where is the manuscript of Hasan al-Allal's book? Is it true that it was written by Hasan al-Allal? Or is it merely a forged manuscript created today and attributed as the work of Hasan al-Allal? The answer: it is a chain of transmission strongly suspected of being written by Salim bin Jindan, not Hasan al-Allal.

The Manuscript of the Chain of Transmission of Abdul Haq al-Isbili Ibn al-Kharrat

In his YouTube community tab, Rumail posted several hadith chains of transmission that mention the name of Ubaidillah, who allegedly received the hadith from his father, Ahmad al-Abah. The sequence of the sanad is as follows:

انبأنا عبد الحق بن عبد الرحمن بن عبد الله الحسين بن سعيد بن ابو محمد الاشبلى قراءة عليه وانا اسمع في اخر المحرم سنة ٥٤٢ قال حدثنا عبد العزيز بن ... بن مديرة قراءة عليه ببغداد سنة ٤٦٧ قال حدثنا ابو العباس احمد بن دلهان [...] قراءة عليه وانا اسمع قال حدثنا الامام ابو القاسم النفاط بن الحسن بن محمد بن على بن مُحمد بن احمدالابح بن النقيب عيسى لقيته بمكة المكرمة بقرائتي عليه في ١٨ شوال سنة ٤١٢ قال حدثنا ابي المسند ابومحمد الحسن بن محمد العلال العلوى قال حدثنا ابي محمد بن على العلوى [...] حدثنا ابي وعمي عبيد الله ابنا احمد الابح بن عيسى النقيب قالا حدثنى الامام الابح السيد احمد بن عيسى بن البصرى فى منزلنا بالبصرة فى ذي [...] قال حدثنا ابي وابو القاسم عبيدالله بن احمد بن مُحَمَّد الازرق العلوى قالا

 Abdul Haq bin Abdurrahman bin Abdullah [al-]Husain bin Said bin Abu Muhammad al-Isybili informed us by way of reading to him while I was listening, at the end of [the month of] Muharram in the year 542 [AH]. He said: Abdul Aziz bin [...] bin Mudirah narrated to us by way of reading to him in Baghdad in the year 467 [AH]. He said: Abul Abbas Ahmad bin Dalhan [...] narrated to us by way of reading to him while I was listening. He said:

The Imam, Abul Qasim al-Naffath bin al-Hasan bin Muhammad bin Ali bin Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Abah bin al-Naqib Isa narrated to us—whom I met in Makkah al-Mukarramah by way of my reading to him on the 18th of Syawwal in the year 412 [AH]. He said: My father, the transmitter of chains (al-musnid), Abu Muhammad al-Hasan bin Muhammad [al-Khallal] al-Alawi narrated to us. He said: My father, Muhammad bin Ali al-Alawi [...] narrated to us. He said: My father and my paternal uncle, Ubaidullah, the two sons of Ahmad al-Abah bin Isa al-Naqib, narrated to us. They both said:

The Imam, al-Abah, the master Ahmad bin Isa bin [al-]Bashri narrated to me in our residence in Basra in [the month of] Dzul-[...] He said: My father and Abul Qasim Ubaidullah bin Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Azraq al-Alawi narrated to us, they both said...

Rumail displayed only a fragment of this chain of transmission without mentioning from which book he obtained it. It seems that this time, Rumail did not want a repeat of previous instances where his chains of transmission could be traced through the names of popular narrators. None of the narrators in this sanad are well-known, and it is not connected all the way to the Companions of the Prophet; it stops at Ubaidillah bin Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Azraq. This sanad is clearly an artificial, invalid one. If it were connected to the Companions of the Prophet, its continuity or lack thereof could be detected, because the names of hadith narrators since the era of the Companions have been codified in the books of Tarikh al-Ruwat (biographies of narrators).

It appears to be a chain of transmission obtained from the same source as the previous forged chains: the writings of Salim bin Jindan. Within the chain, there is a phrasing that looks forced, namely the mention of the name Ubaidillah as the uncle of Muhammad bin Ali bin Ahmad bin Isa al-Abah. As is widely known, the name Ali is confirmed in the book Al-Syajarah al-Mubarakah as a child of Ahmad bin Isa; it seems the creator of this sanad wanted the name Ubaidillah to ride on the coattails of Muhammad bin Ali's fame.

The Manuscript of the Chain of Transmission of Ali al-Syanini

    قال الفقيه ابو الحسن على بن عبد الله الشنينi [...] سنة ٧٦١ قال المحدث الصوفي الفقيه عبد الله بن مُحمد بن عبد الرحمن باعباد الحضرمى قال اخبرنا الشريف محمد بن على مُحمد الفقيه المقدم العلوى قال حدثنا الامام الحافظ المحدث ابو الحسن على بن محمد بن بن احمد جديد العريضى العلوى اجازة بجميع مسنده مكاتبة من [...] سنة ٦١١ قال حدثنا ابو عبد الله محمد بن عبد الرحمن بن مسعود بن احمد بن الحسين المسعودى الدمشقى قراءة عليه وانا اسمع بدمشق في [...] صفر سنة ٥٤٨ قال حدثنا ابو حفص عمر بن مُحَمَّد بن معمر بن طبرزد البغدادي...

The jurist (al-faqih) Abu al-Hasan Ali bin Abdullah al-Syanini [...] said in the year 761 [AH]: The scholar of hadith, the Sufi, the jurist Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Abdurrahman Ba'Abbad al-Hadrami said:

The master (al-syarif) Muhammad bin Ali bin Muhammad al-Faqih al-Muqaddam al-Alawi informed us, saying: The imam, the hadith-memorizer (al-hafiz), the scholar of hadith Abu al-Hasan Ali bin Muhammad bin Ahmad [bin] Jadid al-Uraidi al-Alawi narrated to us by way of general authorization (ijazah) for his entire compilation via correspondence from [...] in the year 611 [AH].

He said: Abu Abdullah Muhammad bin Abdurrahman bin Mas'ud bin Ahmad bin al-Husain al-Mas'udi al-Dimasyqi narrated to us by way of reading to him while I was listening in Damascus in [the month of] Safar in the year 548 [AH]. He said: Abu Hafs Umar bin Muhammad bin Ma'mar bin Thabarzad al-Baghdadi narrated to us...

In this sanad, there is the name of Muhammad bin Ali Faqih Muqaddam, who allegedly received the hadith from Ali bin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Jadid. This chain is clearly a forgery, because scholars have recorded that Ali bin Jadid did not have any student named Faqih Muqaddam. Aside from being a bogus chain of transmission whose manuscript source is unmentioned, it has already been proven false from the perspective of narration science (ilmu riwayah). Like the others, it appears to have been taken from the writings of Salim bin Jindan.

The Manuscript of Al-Thurfat al-Gharibat

Rumail displays a manuscript by Abul Abbas Taqiyyuddin Ahmad bin Ali Al-Maqrizi (d. 845 AH) titled Al-Thurfat al-Gharibat fi Akhbar Wadi Hadramaut al-Ajibat. According to Rumail, this text serves as proof that the Ba'alwi family name was recognized by external scholars in the mid-9th century AH as descendants of the Prophet.

Unfortunately, Rumail was not meticulous; this text actually reinforces that around the year 845 AH, the Ba'alwi family was still known as "Hadramaut Arabs" rather than as sadat (noble descendants). Notice an expression within this text:

    واخبرني الفقير المعتقد ابراهيم بن الشيخ عبد الرحمن بن محمد العلوي من قبيلة يقall لها ابا علوي من عرب حضرموت...

"And Al-Faqir al-Mu'taqid Ibrahim bin Syekh Abdurrahman bin Muhammad al-Alawi from a tribe called Aba Alwi of the Arabs of Hadramaut related to me..."

As a historian, when Al-Maqrizi received the claim from Ibrahim bin Abdurrahman Assegaf that he belonged to the Aba Alwi family, he instantly knew that this family was a family of Hadramaut Arabs, because since the 4th century Hijriyah, the name Bani Alwi had been recorded in history books as descendants of Qahtan. This is exactly as written by Al-Hamadani (d. 344 AH) in his book Al-Iklil fi Akhbaril Yaman wa Ansabi Himyar (The book of Al-Iklil contains accounts of the Country of Yemen and the lineages of Himyar) (p. 36).

The author has explained in several writings that the claim of the Abdurrahman Assegaf family being part of the Aba Alwi was also new to the 9th century AH. It is very clear that the Abdurrahman Assegaf family is not the Aba Alwi family written about by the book Al-Suluk (732 AH) when explaining the lineage of a scholar named Syarif Abul Hasan Ali bin Jadid. In the 9th century Hijriyah, the Abdurrahman Assegaf family inoculated themselves into the Aba Alwi family. This is further reinforced by the Y-DNA test results of the descendants of Abdurrahman Assegaf today—known as the Ba'alwi family—showing that their haplogroup is "G", which indicates they do not originate from Arabs. Present-day Arabs have their Y-DNA test results confirmed as haplogroup J.

Such are the manuscripts claimed by Rumail as an answer to the author's thesis that the Ba'alwi family names were not recorded as descendants of the Prophet Muhammad SAW from the 4th century Hijriyah up to the 9th century, neither in genealogical books nor in historical works. Unfortunately, what Rumail found turned out to be merely a series of chains of transmission proven to be false, both in terms of content and physical media. According to the author, looking at the historiographical algorithms spread across the 8th and 9th centuries Hijriyah, both in Yemen and other regions related to Ahmad bin Isa, it will be extremely difficult to find evidence linking the Ba'alwi family as descendants of the Prophet through the lineage of Ahmad bin Isa. Why? Because the Ba'alwi family is indeed not descended from the Prophet Muhammad SAW.

We return to the books that serve as the evidence for the book by Hanif Alatas et al. In that book, it is mentioned that the evidence for the lineage of Ba'alwi Abdurrahman Assegaf is: 

Al-Suluk Fi Thabaqat al-Ulama wa al-Muluk by Bahauddin al-Janadi (d. 732 AH)

In the discourse surrounding the Ba'alwi lineage, the name Jadid frequently surfaces in discussions. This is because Ali al-Sakran (d. 895 AH) claimed that Jadid was the brother of Alwi bin Ubaid (the ancestor of the Ba'alwi). According to Ali al-Sakran, Alwi had two brothers: Jadid and Bashri. Although the name Alwi is not explicitly mentioned in Al-Suluk, the mention of his brother implies that his historicity is nearly detectable. Is this claim true? This simple piece will review it.

The real name of Syarif Abul Jadid was Ali. His kunyah (patronymic nickname) was Abul Hasan. He is better known in the Thabaqat (biographical dictionary) books by the name Al-Syarif Abul Jadid. He was a quite renowned scholar in Yemen, particularly in the field of Hadith, who passed away in the year 620 AH. Al-Janadi (d. 732 AH) is the first recorded historian to mention his prominence in his book Al-Suluk fi Thabaqat al-Ulama wa al-Muluk. Prior to Al-Janadi, no scholar had highlighted his prominence. All books that record the name of Syarif Abul Jadid trace back to that primary and first source from Al-Janadi. Al-Janadi was also the very first historian to trace his lineage back to the Prophet Muhammad SAW through the line of Ahmad bin Isa.

The complete historical text concerning Syarif Abul Jadid written by Al-Janadi is as follows:

    وَقد انْقَضى ذكر اهل تعز من فقهائها واحببت ان الحق بهم الذين وردوها ودرسوا فِيهَا وهم جمَاعَة من الطَّبَقَة الاولى مِنْهُم ابو مُحَمَّد الحسن علي بن حَدِيد بن عبد الله بن أحمد بن بن حَدِيد بن علي بن محمد بن عَلَي ابْن جَعْفَر الصَّادِق بن محمد الباقر بن علي بن زين العابدين بن الحسين بن علي ابن ابي طَالب كرم الله وجهه ويعرف بالشريف ابي الحَدِيد عِند أهل اليمن اصله من حضرموت من اشراف هنالك يعْرِفُونَ بال ابي علوي بَيت صَلَاح وَعبادَة على طَرِيق التصوف وَفِيهِمْ فُقَهَاءِ يَأْتي ذكر من اتحقق ان شَاءَ الله تَعَالَى مَعَ أهل بلده قدم الى عدن فادrik القَاضِي ابراهيم ibn احمد القريظي فاخذ عَنهُ الْمُسْتَصْفى كَمَا اخذه عَن مُصنفه وقدم مَعَ اخ لَهُ اسْمه عبد الملك ثم خرج عَن عدن عازمين على زِيَارَة الشَّيْخ مدافع لما شهر به من الصلاح واستفاض عَنهُ فَقدما عَلَيْهِ الى قَرْيَة الوحيز ضبطها ان شَاءَ الله تَعَالَى فَرَحَبَ بهما واقاما عنده اياما وزوجهما بابنتين له فسكنا بِذِي هزيم قَرْيَة تقابل الوحيز وَيُقَال كَانَ بَيت الشريف ابي الحَدِيد الْحَائِط الَّذِي على باب المدرسة النظامية فأخذ النَّاس عَن أبي الحَدِيد أخذا كثيرًا فَمِمَّنْ أَخذ عَنهُ مُحَمَّد مَسْعُود السفالي وَابْن نَاصِر الحِمْيَرِي وَاحْمَد بن مُحَمَّد الجنيد وحسن بن راشد وَمُحَمّد بن ابراهيم الفشلي وَكَانَ مَتى ذكر عِنْده قَالَ ابو حَدِيد رجل ثِقَة كَانَ من الحفاظ وَمِمَّنْ اخذ عَنهُ الْفَقِيه عمر بن عَليّ صَاحِب بَيت حُسَيْن الاتي ذكره واقام في الجَبَل مُدَّة طَوِيلَة وَصَارَ لَهُ بَهَا ذكر شائع وقصده الناس من انحاء اليمن للأخذ عَنهُ فَلَمَّا قبض المسعود بن الْكَامِل على الشيخ مدافع قبض عَلَيْهِ مَعَه فَلبث بحصن تعز من مستهل رَمَضَان سنة سبع عشرة وستمائة الى سلخ ربيع الاول من سنة ثماني عشرة وستماية ثم انزلا عدن وسفر بهما الهِنْد فَذكرُوا ان الرّيح عصفت بمركبهم فدخل ظفار فَلَمَّا علم اهلها بالشيخ واصلوه وزاروه وحبوه وَصَحبه جَمَاعَة مِنْهُم وَقَالُوا ان اخْتَرْت أَن تقف فَقَالَ لَا أكون عبدا فِرَارًا سأكون عندكُمْ مِرَارًا ثُمَّ لما اسْتَوَى الرّيح سافرا في المركب حَتَّى دخلا بلد الدينول فلبثا بمَا شَهْرَيْن وَثَلَاثَةَ أَيَّامٍ ثُمَّ خرجا عَنْهَا لثلاث خلون من رَمَضَان سنة ثماني عشرة وستماية فدخلا ظفار ولبثا بهَا ثَمَانِيَة عشر يَوْمًا فَتوفي الشَّيْخ وقber بها على مَا سَيَأْتي ثُمَّ عَاد الشريف الى اليمن فلم يطب في الجبال بل نزل تهامة واقام بزييد مُدَّة ثم عزم الى المهجم فسكن من اعمالها بقرية تعرف بالمرjaf فدرس مُدَّة في مَسْجِدهَا ثُمَّ سَافِر إِلَى مَكَّة ثُمَّ عَادِ وَيُقَال انه التزمهُ الشَّيْخ عمران بن رفيع القرابلي فِي ذَلِكَ فَكَانَ لَا فِيهِ حَيْثُ كَانَ فاكثر قعوده بهَا بَين القريتين ثُمَّ سَافر الى مَكَّة يبرح فذكرُوا انه توفي هنالك نحو سنة عشرين وستماية وَكَانَ حَافظ عصره لم يكن لَهُ اذ ذاك في اليمن نَظِير في معرفة الحَدِيث

The mention of the scholars of Taiz from among its jurists has concluded, and I wished to append to them those who arrived there and taught in it. They are a group from the first tier.

Among them is Abu Muhammad al-Hasan Ali bin Jadid bin Abdullah bin Ahmad bin [bin] Jadid bin Ali bin Muhammad bin Ali ibn Ja'far al-Shadiq bin Muhammad al-Baqir bin Ali bin Zain al-Abidin bin al-Husain bin Ali ibn Abi Thalib, may Allah honor his face. He is known as Syarif Abi al-Jadid among the people of Yemen. His origin is from Hadramaut, from the nobles (ashraf) there who are known as the Al Abu Alwi, a household of righteousness and worship upon the path of Sufism; and among them are jurists whose mention will follow—if Allah the Exalted wills—alongside the people of his town.

He came to Aden and met the judge (al-qadhi) Ibrahim ibn Ahmad al-Quraidhi, from whom he took [learned] al-Mustashfa, just as the judge had taken it from its author. He arrived alongside a brother of his named Abdul Malik. Then they departed from Aden, intending to visit Shaykh Mudafi' due to what was renowned of his righteousness and widely circulated about him. They came upon him at the village of al-Wahaiz—its spelling [will be detailed] if Allah the Exalted wills. He welcomed them both, and they stayed with him for some days, and he married them to two of his daughters.

Consequently, they resided in Dzi Hazim, a village facing al-Wahaiz. It is said that the house of Syarif Abi al-Jadid was the enclosure situated at the gate of the Nizamiyyah school. The people took [learned] from Abu al-Jadid in great numbers. Among those who took from him were Muhammad Mas'ud al-Sifali, Ibn Nasir al-Himyari, Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Junaid, Hasan bin Rasid, and Muhammad bin Ibrahim al-Fasyli. Whenever he was mentioned in his presence, he would say: "Abu Jadid was a trustworthy man; he was among the hadith-memorizers (al-huffaz)." Among those who took from him was also the jurist Umar bin Ali, the master of Bait Husain, whose mention is forthcoming. He resided in the mountain for a long duration, achieving widespread renown there, and people from all parts of Yemen journeyed to him to learn from him.

When al-Mas'ud bin al-Kamil arrested Shaykh Mudafi', he arrested him [Syarif Abi al-Jadid] along with him. He remained in the fortress of Taiz from the beginning of Ramadan in the year 617 [AH] until the end of Rabi' al-Awwal in the year 618 [AH]. Then they were both brought down to Aden and deported by ship to India. They mentioned that the wind buffeted their vessel, forcing it into Dhofar. When its inhabitants learned of the Shaykh, they connected with him, visited him, and showed him affection. A group of them accompanied him and said: "If you choose to stay [we will support you]." But he replied: "I will not be a fleeing slave; I will be among you repeatedly [in the future]."

Then, when the wind stabilized, they sailed in the vessel until they entered the land of Daybul. They remained there for two months and three days, then departed from it when three days had passed of Ramadan in the year 618 [AH]. They entered Dhofar and remained there for eighteen days, whereupon the Shaykh passed away and was buried there, as will be detailed later.

Following this, the Syarif returned to Yemen. He did not find comfort in the mountains; instead, he went down to Tihamah and resided in Zabid for a period. Then he resolved to go to al-Mahjam, settling within its administrative districts in a village known as al-Marjaf. He taught for a period in its mosque, then traveled to Makkah, and subsequently returned. It is said that Shaykh Imran bin Rafi' al-Qarabali took financial responsibility for him in that regard, so he was with him wherever he was, and most of his stays there were between the two villages.

Then he traveled to Makkah without returning. They mentioned that he passed away there around the year 620 [AH]. He was the master-memorizer (hafiz) of his era; at that time, he had no equal in Yemen regarding the knowledge of hadith.

Based on the text of the book Al-Suluk above, several points can be concluded: 

1. The name and lineage of Syarif Abul Jadid is Abul Hasan Ali bin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Jadid bin Ali bin Muhammad bin Jadid bin Abdullah "bin" Ahmad bin Isa bin Muhammad bin Ali al-Uraidi bin Ja'far al-Shadiq bin Muhammad al-Baqir bin Ali bin Husain bin Ali bin Abi Thalib KW. He is popular in Yemen by the name Syarif Abul Jadid.
2. He originated from Hadramaut from the "Asyraf" family (the Syarifs) who were popular as the Abu Alwi family.
3. He had a younger brother named Abdul Malik.
4. The cities he resided in were: Aden, Wahiz, India, Dzifar, Daynul, Tihamah, Zabid, Mahjam, Marjaf, and Makkah.
5. His students included: Muhammad bin Mas'ud al-Sufali, Ibn Nashir al-Himyari, Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Junaid, Hasan bin Rasyid, Muhammad bin Ibrahim al-Fasyali, and Umar bin Ali Sahibi Baitu Husain.
6. He passed away in Makkah around the year 620 AH.

From the 6 points above, we can review them one by one as follows:

1. The lineage of Syarif Abul Jadid traced through Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Isa is null and void, because Ahmad bin Isa did not have a child named Abdullah. His children who left descendants were only three: Muhammad, Ali, and Husain (Al-Syajarah al-Mubarakah, Imam Fakhruddin al-Razi, year 597 AH).
2. Syarif Abul Jadid originated from the Abi 'Alwi family of the "Asyraf of Hadramaut". However, in Al-Suluk, it is not mentioned that he came from Tarim (the home of the Abdurrahman Assegaf family). The first to mention that he came from Tarim was Ali al-Sakran at the end of the 9th century AH (895 AH). Hadramaut is vast; among its cities are Tarim, Shibam, Daw'an, Barum Mifa', Thamud, Hijir, Huraidhah, Al-Dais, Rakhiyah, Rimah, Seiyun, Shihr, Al-Dali'ah, Al-Ibir, Al-Mukalla, and others. Thus, when someone is said to be from Hadramaut, it cannot be strictly associated with Tarim.
3. Al-Suluk states that Syarif Abul Jadid (d. 620 AH) had a younger brother named Abdul Malik. No other sibling's name for Syarif Abul Jadid is mentioned. However, Ali al-Sakran mentions that Syarif Abul Jadid had a brother who lived and died in Tarim named Abdullah (Al-Burqat, p. 81). This piece of news from Ali al-Sakran cannot be accepted because it lacks any foundational source. It was fabricated to strengthen the claim that Syarif Abul Jadid was part of the Abdurrahman Assegaf family in Tarim. Previously, the grandfather of Syarif Abul Jadid, who was named Jadid (living around 400 AH), was also claimed by Ali al-Sakran to have two younger brothers in Tarim named Alwi and Bashri (see Al-Burqat, p. 78). All of Ali al-Sakran's claims remain unproven. Is Ali al-Sakran capable of producing evidence from the seventh and eighth centuries stating that Syarif Abul Jadid was a person of Tarim? Where is the proof? Where is the book? Secondly, what is the proof that Syarif Abul Jadid had a younger brother named Abdullah in Tarim? Where is the proof? Where is the book? Ali al-Sakran will also be unable to produce evidence stating that Jadid bin Abdullah was the brother of Alwi and Bashri. Where is the proof? Where is the book from the 5th to the 9th century AH? Everything is a mere claim to link his family to the Jadid mentioned in Al-Suluk (732 AH).
4. Among the cities ever inhabited by Syarif Abul Jadid mentioned by Al-Suluk, none are named Tarim. And throughout the lengthy account of Syarif Abul Jadid, Al-Suluk does not mention even once a city named Tarim in connection with him. This demonstrates that Syarif Abul Jadid had no connection whatsoever with the Abdurrahman Assegaf family and Tarim.
5. Al-Suluk mentions the names of Syarif Abul Jadid's students. Yet, among those names, there is no mention of a student named Faqih Muqaddam, as claimed by Ba'alwi literature.

Even among the books of the eighth and ninth centuries that mention Syarif Abul Jadid, none link him to the Abdurrahman Assegaf family, as seen below:

Kitab Al-Athaya al-Saniyah by Al-Malik al-Abbas (d. 778 AH)

There is absolutely no mention in this book connecting Syarif Abul Jadid with the Abdurrahman Assegaf family and the city of Tarim.

Below is the text from Kitab Al-Athaya al-Saniyyah, p. 460:

    ٥٣٨ - أبو الحسن علي ابن محمد بن حدid بن عبد الله ابن أحمد بن محمد بن حديد بن علي بن أحمد بن عیسی بن مُحمد بن جعفر الصادق بن محمد الباقر بن علي زين العابدين بن الحسين بن علي بن أبي طالب كرم الله وجهه، ويعرف بالشريف أبي الحديد عند أهل اليمن أصله من حضرموت من أشراف هنالك، يعرفون بآل أبي . علوي بيت صلاح وعبادة على طريق التصوف، وفيهم علماء قدم عدن فأخذ فيها المستصفى» عن القاضي إبراهيم القريظي عن مصنفه وقدم مع أخ له اسمه عبد الملك إلى الشيخ مدافع إلى الوجيز من أعمال تعز بسبب الزيارة لما اشتهر عنه الصلاح، فرحب بهما وأقاما عنده أياماً وأزوجهما ) بابنتين له، وسكنا بذي هزيم، وأخذ الناس عن هذا الشريف أبي الحديد أخذاً كثيراً، ممن أخذ عنه محمد بن مسعود السفالي، وابن ناصر الحميري، وأحمد بن محمد الجنيد، وحسن بن راشد ومحمد بن إبراهيم الفشلي، وكان متى ذكر عند الفشلي قال : أبو حديد رجل ثقة، كان من الحفاظ، وأخذ عنه أيضاً الفقيه عمرو بن علي صاحب بيت حسين، وأقام الشريف بالجبال مدة طويلة، وصار له بها ذكر شائع، وقصده الناس من جميع نواحي اليمن، ولما حصل من المسعود بن الكامل ما حصل على الشيخ مدافع أشياء يطول ذكرها ، أقام الشريف بزبيد والمهجم، وسافر مكة وتوفي هنالك سنة عشرين وستمائة

Abu al-Hasan Ali ibn Muhammad bin Jadid bin Abdullah ibn Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Jadid bin Ali bin Ahmad bin Isa bin Muhammad bin Ja'far al-Shadiq bin Muhammad al-Baqir bin Ali Zain al-Abidin bin al-Husain bin Ali bin Abi Thalib, may Allah honor his face.

He is known as Syarif Abi al-Jadid among the people of Yemen. His origin is from Hadramaut, from the nobles (ashraf) there who are known as the Al Abi Alwi, a household of righteousness and worship upon the path of Sufism; and among them are scholars.

He came to Aden and there he took [learned] al-Mustashfa from the judge (al-qadhi) Ibrahim al-Quraidhi, who took it from its author. He arrived alongside a brother of his named Abdul Malik to visit Shaykh Mudafi' at al-Wajiz, within the administrative districts of Taiz, because of a visit [he intended] due to what was renowned of the Shaykh's righteousness. He welcomed them both, and they stayed with him for some days, and he married them to two of his daughters. Consequently, they resided in Dzi Hazim.

The people took [learned] from this Syarif Abi al-Jadid in great numbers. Among those who took from him were Muhammad bin Mas'ud al-Sifali, Ibn Nasir al-Himyari, Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Junaid, Hasan bin Rasid, and Muhammad bin Ibrahim al-Fasyli. Whenever he was mentioned in the presence of al-Fasyli, he would say: "Abu Jadid was a trustworthy man; he was among the hadith-memorizers (al-huffaz)." The jurist Umar bin Ali, the master of Bait Husain, also took [learned] from him.

The Syarif resided in the mountains for a long duration, achieving widespread renown there, and people from all parts of Yemen journeyed to him. When there occurred from al-Mas'ud bin al-Kamil what occurred toward Shaykh Mudafi'—matters that would be lengthy to recount—the Syarif resided in Zabid and al-Mahjam. He then traveled to Makkah and passed away there in the year 620 [AH].

Kitab Al-'Iqd al-Fakhir by Al-Khazraji (d. 812 AH)

Likewise, there is absolutely no mention in this book connecting Syarif Abul Jadid with the Abdurrahman Assegaf family and Tarim. Observe the text of this book, pp. 1486–1488:

    ٧٧٤ أبو الحسن علي بن أحمد بن حدid بن عبد الله ابن بن حديد بن علي بن أحمد بن عیسی بن محمد بن علي بن أحمد بن بن مُحمد جعفر بن محمد بن زين العابدين بن علي بن الحسين بن علي بن أبي طالب كرم الله وجهه وكان يعرف عند أهل اليمن بالشريف أبي الحديد، وأصله من حضرموت من أشراف هنالك يعرفون بآل أبي علوي، بيت صلاح وعبادة على طريق التصرف، ومنهم فقهاء مذكورون في مواضعهم من هذا الكتاب. وكان هذا أبو الحسن علي بن محمد، فقيهاً صالحاً، ناسكاً، مجتهداً، ورعاً، قدم إلى عدن فأدرك القاضي إبراهيم بن أحمد القريظي، (وأخذ عنه المستصفى كما أخذه عن مصنفه، وقدم معه أخ له اسمه عبد الملك، ثم خرجا من عدن عازمين على زيارة الشيخ مدافع بن الآتي ذكره إن شاء الله . لما شهر عنه من الصلاح، فاستفاض عند الخاصة والعامة؛ فقدما عليه إلى قرية الوحيز ؛ وهي بوار مفتوحة وحاء مكسورة بعدها مثناة من تحتها وآخر الاسم زاي، وهي قرية من تعز ؛ قبالة القرية المعروفة بذي هزيم من مدينة تعز. فرحب الشيخ مدافع بهما، وأقاما عنده أياماً، ثم أزوجهما على ابنتين له وسكنا بذي هزيم ويقال: كان بيت الشريف أبي الحديد، الحائط الذي على باب المدرسة النظامية، فأخذ الناس عن أبي الحديد) - المذكور - أخذاً كثيراً، وثمن أخذ عنه: محمد مسعود السفالي و أبو بكر بن ناصر الحميري، وأحمد الجنيد والحسن بن راشد ومحمد بن إبراهيم الفشلي، وكان محمد إبراهيم الفشلي إذا ذكر عنده أبو حديد هذا قال: هو رجل ثقة كان من الحفاظ وممن أخذ عنه الفقيه (عمرو) بن علي التباعي صاحب بيت حسين الآتي ذكره إن شاء الله. وأقام في الجبال مدة طويلة، وصار له فيها ذكر شائع، وقصده الناس من أنحاء اليمن للأخذ عنه، فلما قبض السلطان الملك المسعود على الشيخ مدافع – كما سيأتي ذكره إن شاء الله تعالى . قبض عليه معه؛ فأقاما في حصن تعز من غرة شهر رمضان سنة سبع عشرة وستمائة إلى سلخ شهر الأول شهر ربيع من سنة ثماني عشرة وستمائة، ثم أنزلا عدن في سفرتهما إلى الهند، فعصفت الريح بمركبهم، فدخلوا ظفار، فلما علم أهل ظفار بالشيخ مدافع وصلوه، وزاروه وأحبوه، وصحبه جماعة منهم وقالوا له: إن اخترت أن تقف عندنا فقف، فقال : لا أكون عبداً قراراً. ثم لما (استون) الريح؛ سافروا في مركبهم حتى دخلوا بلد الرسول; فأقاما فيها شهرين وثلاثة أيام، ثم خرجا عنها الثلاث خلون من رمضان سنة ثمان عشرة المذكورة ثم سافر إلى ظفار، فلما دخلاها فأقاما) فيها ثمانية عشر يوماً، وتوفي الشيخ مدافع، وفير بها على ما سيأتي ذكره، إن شاء الله تعالى ثم إن الشريف أبا الحديد عاد إلى اليمن، فلما وصلها لم تطب له الجبال فنزل الهامة وأقام في زبيد مدة، ثم تقدم إلى المهجم فسكن في قرية يقال لها : المرجف من اعمال سردد، فدرس مدة في مسجدها، ثم سافر إلى مكة المشرفة فتوفي بها سنة عشرين وستمائة تقريباً، وكان أبو حديد حافظ (عصره) لم يكن في عصره له نظير في اليمن في معرفة الحديث، والله أعلم.

Abu al-Hasan Ali bin Ahmad bin Jadid bin Abdullah ibn [bin] Jadid bin Ali bin Ahmad bin Isa bin Muhammad bin Ali bin Ahmad bin [bin] Muhammad Ja'far bin Muhammad bin Zain al-Abidin bin Ali bin al-Husain bin Ali bin Abi Thalib, may Allah honor his face.He was known among the people of Yemen as Syarif Abi al-Jadid. His origin is from Hadramaut, from the nobles (ashraf) there who are known as the Al Abu Alwi, a household of righteousness and worship upon the path of Sufism; and among them are jurists mentioned in their respective places within this book.This Abu al-Hasan Ali bin Muhammad was a righteous jurist, an ascetic, a diligent scholar (mujtahid), and a devoutly pious man. He came to Aden and met the judge (al-qadhi) Ibrahim bin Ahmad al-Quraidhi, taking [learning] al-Mustashfa from him just as the judge had taken it from its author. He arrived alongside a brother of his named Abdul Malik. 

Then they both departed from Aden, intending to visit Shaykh Mudafi'—whose mention is forthcoming, if Allah wills—due to what was renowned of his righteousness, which was widely known among both the elite and the common folk.They came upon him at the village of al-Wahaiz. It is spelled with an open waw ($\text{وَ}$), a broken ha ($\text{حِ}$), followed by a ya with two dots beneath it ($\text{ي}$), and the last letter of the name is a zay ($\text{ز}$). It is a village in Taiz, facing the village known as Dzi Hazim from the city of Taiz. Shaykh Mudafi' welcomed them both, and they stayed with him for some days. 

Then he married them to two of his daughters, and they resided in Dzi Hazim. It is said that the house of Syarif Abi al-Jadid was the enclosure situated at the gate of the Nizamiyyah school.The people took [learned] from the aforementioned Abu al-Jadid in great numbers. Among those who took from him were: Muhammad Mas'ud al-Sifali, Abu Bakr bin Nasir al-Himyari, Ahmad al-Junaid, al-Hasan bin Rasid, and Muhammad bin Ibrahim al-Fasyli. Whenever this Abu Jadid was mentioned in the presence of Muhammad Ibrahim al-Fasyli, he would say: "He was a trustworthy man; he was among the hadith-memorizers (al-huffaz)." Among those who took from him was also the jurist Umar bin Ali al-Taba'i, the master of Bait Husain, whose mention is forthcoming, if Allah the Exalted wills. He resided in the mountains for a long duration, achieving widespread renown there, and people from all parts of Yemen journeyed to him to learn from him. 

When the Sultan, King al-Mas'ud, arrested Shaykh Mudafi'—as will be mentioned later, if Allah the Exalted wills—he arrested him [Syarif Abi al-Jadid] along with him. They both remained in the fortress of Taiz from the first day of the month of Ramadan in the year 617 [AH] until the end of the first month of Rabi' in the year 618 [AH]. Then they were both brought down to Aden for their voyage to India. However, the wind buffeted their vessel, forcing them into Dhofar. When the people of Dhofar learned of Shaykh Mudafi', they connected with him, visited him, and showed him affection. A group of them accompanied him and said to him: "If you choose to stay with us, then stay." But he replied: "I will not be a fleeing slave."Then, when the wind stabilized, they sailed in their vessel until they entered the city of the Messenger [Daybul]. 

They remained there for two months and three days, then departed from it when three days had passed of the aforementioned month of Ramadan in the year 618 [AH]. Following this, he traveled to Dhofar. When they both entered it, they stayed there for eighteen days, whereupon Shaykh Mudafi' passed away and was buried there, as will be mentioned, if Allah the Exalted wills.Afterward, Syarif Aba al-Jadid returned to Yemen. When he reached it, the mountains did not suit him, so he went down to Tihamah and resided in Zabid for a period. Then he advanced to al-Mahjam, settling in a village called al-Marjaf within the administrative districts of Surdad. He taught for a period in its mosque, then traveled to the honored Makkah and passed away there around the year 620 [AH]. Abu Jadid was the master-memorizer (hafiz) of his era; during his time, he had no equal in Yemen regarding the knowledge of hadith. And Allah knows best.

Kitab Al-'Iqd al-Tsamin by Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Fasi al-Makki (d. 832 AH)

Likewise, there is absolutely no mention in this book connecting Syarif Abul Jadid with the Abdurrahman Assegaf family and Tarim. Observe the text of this book, Vol. 5, p. 304:

    ۲۱۱۹ – على بن مُحمد بن حدid بن علي بن أحمد : محمد بن حديد الحسيني الحضرمي اليمني: كان يعرف عند أهل اليمن بالشريف أبي الحديد. أخذ عن القاضي إبراهيم بن القريطي والمستصفى العثماني، عن مؤلفه، واحد منه جماعة، منهم المحدث محمد بن إبراهيم الفضلي، وكان إذا ذكر عنده قال: أبو حديد رجل ثقة من الحفاظ وكان توجه إلى زيارة الشيخ مدافع لما اشتهر عنه من الصلاح ، فلما قبض الملك المسعود على الشيخ مدافع قبض عليه معه فلما مات الشيخ مدافع، توجه الشريف أبو الحديد إلى مكة وذكر أنه مات بها في سنة عشرين وستمالة. لخصت هذه الترجمة من تاريخ الجندى، وقال: كان إذ ذاك حافظ عصره، لم يكن له إذا ذاك في اليمن نظير في معرفة الحديث.

Ali bin Muhammad bin Jadid bin Ali bin Ahmad [bin] Muhammad bin Jadid al-Husaini al-Hadrami al-Yamani:

He was known among the people of Yemen as Syarif Abi al-Jadid. He took [learned] from the judge (al-qadhi) Ibrahim bin al-Quraythi and [learned] al-Mustasfa al-Utsmani from its author. A group of people took [learned] from him, among whom was the scholar of hadith, Muhammad bin Ibrahim al-Fadhli, who, whenever [Syarif Abi al-Jadid] was mentioned in his presence, would say: "Abu Jadid was a trustworthy man from among the hadith-memorizers (al-huffaz)."

He had journeyed to visit Shaykh Mudafi' due to what was renowned of his righteousness. When King al-Mas'ud arrested Shaykh Mudafi', he arrested the Syarif along with him. After Shaykh Mudafi' passed away, Syarif Abu al-Jadid journeyed to Makkah, and it was mentioned that he passed away there in the year 620 [AH].

I have summarized this biography from the History of al-Janadi, who said: "At that time, he was the master-memorizer (hafiz) of his era; during his time, he had no equal in Yemen regarding the knowledge of hadith."

Kitab Al-Nafhah al-Anbariyah by Muhammad Kadzim (d. 880 AH)

Likewise, there is absolutely no mention in this book connecting Syarif Abul Jadid with the Abdurrahman Assegaf family and Tarim. Observe the text of this book, p. 52:

    فهاجر الى الرس فأولد عيسى ومن ولد عيسى السيد احمد المنتقل الى حضرموت. فمن ولده هناك السيد ابي الجديد بفتح الجيم وكسر الدال المهملة وسكون الياء المثناة من تحت وبعدها دال القادم الى عدن في ايام المسعود بن طغتكين بفتح الطاء المهملة وسكون الغين المعجمة وفتح التاء المثناة من فوق ونون بعد الياء المثناة من تحت والكاف المكسورة ابن ايوب بن شاذي بفتح الشين وكسر الدال المعجمتين سنة احدي عشرة وستمائة فتوحش منه الامرما فقبضه وجهزه الى ارض الهند ثم رجع الى المسعود حضرموت بعد وفاة المسعود . فمن ذريته ثمة بنو ابي علوي وهو مُحمد بن احمد بن ابو علوي بن أبي الجديد بن علي بن جديد بفتح الجيم وكسر الدال المهملة وسكون الياء المثناة من تحت و دال اخرى بعدها بن على بن محمد بن جديد بن عبد الله بن عيسى المتقدم الذكر بن احمد بن عيسى المتقدم الذكر  

So he migrated to al-Rass, where he fathered Isa, and from the offspring of Isa is Al-Sayyid Ahmad, who relocated to Hadramaut.Among his offspring there is Al-Sayyid Abi al-Jadid—with a fathah on the jim (جَ), a kasrah on the unpointed dal (دِ), a sukun on the ya with two dots beneath it (يْ), followed by another dal (د)—who arrived in Aden during the days of al-Mas'ud bin Toghtekin—with a fathah on the unpointed tha (طَ), a sukun on the pointed ghayn (غْ), a fathah on the ta with two dots above it (تَ), a nun (ن) after the ya with two dots beneath it (ي), and a broken kaf ($\text{كِ}$)—ibn Ayyub bin Syadzi—with a fathah on the syin ($\text{شَ}$) and a kasrah on the pointed dal ($\text{ذِ}$)—in the year 611 [AH]. An issue arose between them, so al-Mas'ud arrested him and deported him to the land of India. He subsequently returned to Hadramaut after the death of al-Mas'ud.Among his descendants there are the Banu Abi Alwi, who is Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Abu Alwi bin Abi al-Jadid bin Ali bin Jadid—with a fathah on the jim ($\text{جَ}$), a kasrah on the unpointed dal ($\text{دِ}$), a sukun on the ya with two dots beneath it ($\text{يْ}$), followed by another dal ($\text{د}$)—bin Ali bin Muhammad bin Jadid bin Abdullah bin Isa (the aforementioned) bin Ahmad bin Isa (the aforementioned).

Conclusion:

The Abdurrahman Assegaf family (d. 818 AH) hijacked the name Al Abu Alwi belonging to the family of Syarif Abul Jadid. This hijacking was formally written down by Ali bin Abubakar al-Sakran (d. 895 AH) in his book Al-Burqat al-Musyiqat. The method employed was: first, claiming that Jadid bin Abdullah (living around 400 AH) recorded in the book Al-Suluk (732 AH) had two younger brothers named Alwi and Bashri; second, claiming that Syarif Abul Jadid (a descendant of Jadid bin Abdullah, d. 620 AH) had a younger brother who died in Tarim named Abdullah. All of Ali al-Sakran's claims lack any foundational source that could serve as a scholarly reference from earlier literature.

The Names of the Jadid Family Mentioned in Al-Suluk Appropriated by the Abdurrahman Assegaf Family

In the book Al-Suluk by Al-Janadi (d. 732 AH), the names of scholars from the Alu Abi Alwi family—namely the family of Syarif Abul Jadid (d. 620 AH)—are mentioned. These names were later claimed by Ali al-Sakran as names belonging to the Abdurrahman Assegaf Ba'alwi family. The full text from Al-Suluk (Vol. 2, p. 463) is as follows:

    وَمِنْهُم أَبُو مَرْوَان لقبا واسمه عَليّ بن أَحمد بن سالم بن مُحَمَّد بن عَليّ كَانَ فَقِيها خيرا كَبِيرًا عَنهُ انْتَشَر العلم بحضرموت انتشارا موسعا لصلاح كَانَ وبركة في تدريسهِ وَكَانَ صَاحب مصنفات عديدة وَهُوَ أول من تصوف من بيت أَبَا علوي اذ أَنما يَعْرِفُونَ بالفقه ولما بلغ الْفَقِيه ذَلِكَ وَإِن هَذَا تصوف هجره وَمِمَّنْ تفقه بأبي مَرْوَان أَبُو زَكَرِيَّا خرج مقدشوه فنشر العلم بها وبنواحيها نشرا موسعا ولم أتحقق لأحد مِنْهُم تَارِيخا ومن بيت أبي علوي قد تقدم لَهُم بعض ذكر مع ذكر أبي جَدِيد مَعَ واردي تعز وهم بيت صَلَاح طَرِيق وَنسب فيهم جَمَاعَة مِنْهُم حسن بن مُحَمَّد بن عليّ اسمه عبد الرَّحْمَنِ بن عَليّ بن باعلوِي وَمِنْهُم عَلي بن باعلوي كَانَ كثير الْعِبَادَة عَظِيم القدر لا يكاد يفتر عَن الصَّلَاةِ ثُمَّ مَتى تشهد قَالَ السَّلَام عَلَيْكَ ايها النّبي ويكرر ذَلِك فَقِيلَ لَهُ فَقَالَ لَا إِزالَ افْعَلْ حَتَّى يرد النَّبي صلى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسلم فَكَانَ كثيرا ما يُكَرر ذَلِكَ ولعلي ولد اسمه مُحَمَّد وَلَه ابْن عَم اسمه علي بن باعلوي بعض تفاصيل ابا علوي احمد مُحَمَّد كَانَ فَقِيها فاضلا بن الله توفي سنة ٧٢٤ تَقْرِيبًا وَعبد بن علوي باق الى الآن التَّعَبُّد وسلوك التصوف

From that text, we gather the conclusion that those included in the Jadid or Alu Abi Alwi family are:

    Abu Marwan Ali bin Ahmad bin Salim bin Muhammad bin Ali. He was the first person to practice Sufism from the Aba Alwi family. The students of Abu Marwan included Abu Zakariya, who went to Mogadishu.

    Hasan bin Muhammad bin Ali Ba'alwi.

    Abdurrahman bin Ali Ba'alwi (uncle of Hasan bin Muhammad bin Ali Ba'alwi).

    Ali bin Ba'alwi; when praying, he always repeated the phrase "Assalamualaika ayyuhannabiy...".

    Muhammad bin Ali (son of Ali bin Ba'alwi in point 4).

    Ali bin Ba'alwi (cousin of Muhammad bin Ali in point 5).

    Ahmad bin Muhammad, who passed away around 724 AH.

    Abdullah bin Alwi (still alive during the writing of Al-Suluk, before the year 732 AH).

The Tragedy of Abu Marwan

Before proceeding, the reader must remember that the Ba'alwi are distinct from the Abu Alwi. The Ba'alwi refers to the family of Abdurrahman Assegaf, who claim that the accounts in Al-Suluk from 732 AH refer to their family. Meanwhile, the Abu Alwi family refers to the Jadid family mentioned in the book Al-Suluk. Out of the eight names above, 7 are claimed to stem from the Abdurrahman Assegaf Ba'alwi family—meaning everyone except number one: Abu Marwan. Despite Al-Suluk explicitly stating that Abu Marwan was the first person to practice Sufism from the Abu Alwi family, according to Ba'alwi literature, Abu Marwan is not part of the Aba Alwi family. They claim there was a copyist error in Al-Suluk, namely a missing phrase within that specific expression of Al-Suluk. We will see that the effort to synchronize the history of the Abdurrahman Assegaf family found in Al-Suluk leads to complete chaos. Abu Marwan, explicitly called a member of the Abu Alwi family by Al-Suluk, had to be eliminated from the list because his name is absent from the genealogical registry book of the Abdurrahman Assegaf (Ba'alwi) family today, namely Shams al-Dzahirah. If he were not eliminated, their claim to be the Abu Alwi who later became the Ba'alwi would be exposed.

Observe the original sentence in the book Al-Suluk:

    وَمِنْهُم أَبُو مَرْوَان لقبا واسمه عَليّ بن أَحمد بن سالم bin مُحَمَّد بن عَليّ كَانَ فَقِيها خيرا كَبِيرًا عَنهُ انْتَشَر العلم بحضرموت انتشارا موسعا لصلاح كَانَ وبركة في تدriسهِ وَكَانَ صَاحب مصنفات عديدة وَهُوَ أول من تصوف من بيت أَبَا علوي اذ هم أَنما يَعْرِفُونَ بالفقه ولما بلغ الْفَقِيه ذَلِكَ وَإِن هَذَا تصوف هجره

"Part of them is the one given the title (laqab) Abu Marwan, his name is Ali bin Ahmad bin Salim bin Muhammad bin Ali. He was a 'faqih' (jurisprudential expert), a man of immense goodness. From him, knowledge spread widely in Hadramaut due to the proficiency and blessing in his teaching. He had numerous writings. He was the first person to practice Sufism from the Abu Alwi family, because previously they were only known for the science of jurisprudence. And when news reached the Faqih (Abu Marwan) about Sufism and that this is what is called Sufism, he abandoned jurisprudence (Al-Suluk, Vol. 2, p. 463)."

So, how did the Ba'alwi manipulate the text of Al-Suluk so that the name of Abu Marwan would disappear from the Abu Alwi family? Observe the text of the book Tuhfat al-Zaman by Husain al-Ahdal (d. 855 AH), edited by Abdullah Muhammad Al-Habsyi. This book is allegedly a mukhtasar (abridgment of the book Al-Suluk):

    وَمِنْهُم أَبُو مَرْوَان عَليّ بن أَحمد بن سالم كَانَ فَقِيها كَبِيرًا انْتَشَر عَنهُ العلم بحضرموت انتشارا كبيرا لصلاحه وبركة تدريسه وَكَانَ صاحب مصنفات وبه تفقه محمد بن علي باعلوي وَهُوَ أول من تصوف من بيت با علوي اذهم أَنما يَعْرِفُونَ بالفقه والشرف وَلما بلغ الفقيه ابا مروان انه تصوف هجره

"Part of them is Abu Marwan Ali bin Ahmad bin Salim. He was a great 'faqih'. From him, knowledge spread widely in Hadramaut due to his righteousness and the blessing of his teaching. He possessed numerous writings. Muhammad bin Ali studied jurisprudence under him. He was the first to practice Sufism from the Ba'alwi family, because previously they were only known for the science of jurisprudence and nobility (sharaf, prophetic lineage). And when news reached the Faqih Abu Marwan that Muhammad bin Ali practiced Sufism, he left him."

The bolded sentence is an addition that does not exist in the original text of Al-Suluk. In that addition, the name of Muhammad bin Ali (Faqih Muqaddam) is inserted as a student of Abu Marwan, thereby rendering Abu Marwan as not being a part of the Abu Alwi family. Who added this sentence? Was it Husain al-Ahdal in the 9th century AH or the editor Abdullah Muhammad Al-Habsyi? Both are possible. Although Husain al-Ahdal was not from the Ba'alwi family, he was apparently close to them; in fact, in his book, he states that the Ba'alwi and Al-Ahdal families are cousins. However, the author is more inclined to accuse the editor (Abdullah Muhammad Al-Habsyi) as the culprit, given that several of his edited works contain many interpolations from the original manuscripts, such as when he edited the book Al-Baha fi Tarikh Hadramaut by Ibn Hisan (d. 818 AH).
Hasan Bin Muhammad Bin Ali Ba'alwi

This name is clearly not from the Abdurrahman Assegaf Ba'alwi family. There is no individual named Muhammad bin Ali from the Abdurrahman Assegaf family living during the era of Al-Suluk or prior who had a child named Hasan. There are two individuals named Muhammad bin Ali from the Abdurrahman Assegaf family who lived before the era of Al-Suluk, namely Muhammad bin Ali Sahib Mirbat (d. 556 AH) and Muhammad bin Ali Faqih Muqaddam (d. 653 AH); neither of them had a child named Hasan.
Abdurrahman Bin Ali Ba'alwi

This name is likewise not from the Abdurrahman Assegaf Ba'alwi family. There is no individual named Ali from the Abdurrahman Assegaf Ba'alwi family living before Al-Suluk who had a child named Abdurrahman.
Ali Bin Ba'alwi, the One Who Sent Greetings to the Messenger of Allah

Ali bin Ba'alwi is mentioned in Al-Suluk as part of the Abu Alwi family who consistently repeated greetings to the Messenger of Allah inside his prayers. This Abu Alwi family member was claimed by Ali bin Abubakar al-Sakran to be Ali Khali Qasam. In Al-Suluk, it is mentioned that this Ali bin Ba'alwi had a paternal uncle's son (a cousin) who was also named Ali. Clearly, he is not Ali Khali Qasam, because Ali Khali Qasam did not have an uncle. The grandfather of Ali Khali Qasam had only one child, namely Alwi (the father of Ali Khali Qasam) (see Al-Burqat, p. 70). How can someone who has no uncle have a cousin (an uncle's child)? Clearly, the claim that the Ali mentioned in Al-Suluk is Ali Khali Qasam is fabricated.

When it became evident that this Ali bin Ba'alwi could not be associated with Ali Khali Qasam, the book released by Rabitah Alwiyah written by Hanif Alatas et al. asserted that this Ali bin Ba'alwi was not Ali Khali Qasam, but rather Ali bin Alwi bin Faqih Muqaddam, who passed away in the year 699 AH (see the book Keabsahan Nasab Ba'alwi, pp. 37–38). This U-turn in interpretation is also rejected because Ali bin Alwi bin Faqih Muqaddam did not have a cousin named Ali either. His uncles were Abdurrahman, Abdullah, Ali, and Ahmad; none of them had a child named Ali (see Shams al-Dzahirah and Al-Ustadz al-A'dzam al-Faqih al-Muqoddam by Abubakar al-Adni bin Ali al-Masyhur, p. 110).

This shifting interpretation also directly opposes the commentary from Ba'alwi books of the ninth and tenth centuries Hijriyah, such as Ali al-Sakran in Al-Burqat (p. 137) and Al-Khirid in Al-Ghurar (p. 169). Both of these books explicitly interpret the Ali bin Ba'alwi in Al-Suluk who repeated greetings to the Prophet as being Ali Khali Qasam. So, which of the two interpretations is correct? The answer: neither is correct. They are merely claims and instances of forced harmonization (cocokologi) that are completely refuted by their own data.

Now that we know that what is found in Al-Suluk has no connection with the Abdurrahman Assegaf (Ba'alwi) family, is the lineage of Syarif Abul Jadid himself as a descendant of Ahmad bin Isa authentic? Let us review it together.

 Syarif Abul Jadid is Not a Descendant of Ahmad bin Isa

 The Book of Al-Suluk

Al-Suluk fi Tabaqat al-Ulama wa al-Muluk is a historical book containing the names of the scholars and rulers of Yemen. It was written by a historian from the city of Janad named Bahauddin al-Janadi (d. 732 AH). This book reports on a scholar named Syarif Abul Jadid from the Abu Alwi family and his younger brother named Abdul Malik. It was from this account that later, in the 9th century AH, the family of Abdurrahman Assegaf claimed this Syarif Abul Jadid as part of their own family.

When tracing the lineage of Syarif Abul Jadid, Al-Janadi connected it to Ahmad bin Isa without mentioning any basis or authoritative sources from genealogical books (kitab nasab). The complete lineage of Syarif Abul Jadid found in three manuscript versions of the book Al-Suluk is: Abul Hasan Ali (Syarif Abul Jadid) bin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Jadid bin Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Isa, etc.

This lineage is rejected by the genealogical books that document the descendants of Ahmad bin Isa. In these al-qadimah (classical/early) genealogical books, it is never mentioned that Ahmad bin Isa had a child named Abdullah. The book Al-Syajarah al-Mubarakah (597 AH) states that the descendants of Ahmad bin Isa who left posterity came from only three sons: Muhammad, Ali, and Husain. Ahmad had no son named Abdullah.

Genealogists (ahli nasab) stipulate that a historical book, such as Al-Suluk, cannot be used as a tool to validate (itsbat) lineage, especially if that historical book contradicts established genealogical records.

In the book Ushulu 'Ilmi al-Nasab wa al-Mufadlalah Bain al-Ansab by Fuad bin Abduh bin Abil Gaits al-Jaizani, pages 76–77, it is stated:

 وعندما نحقق النسب فان المصادر التى يمكن ان نستقي منها النسب يجب ان تكون من كتب الانساب القديمة التي كتبت فيما قبل العصر الحديث حيث كان الناس اقرب الى معرفة اصولهم
 "And when we verify (tahqiq) a lineage, the sources from which we may derive that lineage must be early genealogical books written before the modern era, when people were closer to knowing their ancestry."

Notice the phrase "must be early genealogical books". Since Al-Suluk is not a genealogical book, it does not meet the requirements set by genealogists to establish lineage.

The Master Genealogist (Syekh Al-Nassabah) Khalil bin Ibrahim states in his book Muqaddimat fi 'Ilm al-Ansab:

 لا يؤخذ هذ العلم الا من مصادره ومراجعه المعتمدة
 "This science (the validation of lineage) cannot be taken except from its authoritative genealogical references and sources." $^1$

Notice the words of this genealogist: the establishment of lineage cannot be drawn from books outside the authoritative references of genealogy. Meanwhile, Al-Suluk is a reference for historians, not a reference for genealogists.

Dr. Abdurrahman bin Majid al-Qaraja states in his book Al-Kafi al-Muntakhab:

 ولا يقدم بحال على ما يثبته النسابة خصوصا ان كانوا اقرب زمانا او مكانا
 "(Historians) must under no circumstances be given precedence over what has been established by genealogists, especially if those genealogists were closer in time or location." $^2$

Notice the words of this doctor and nassabah (genealogist): a historian must never take precedence over what has been verified by genealogists. Al-Janadi was a historian; his recording of the name Abdullah as a son of Ahmad contradicts what was established by genealogists of the preceding century. Therefore, what Al-Janadi wrote holds absolutely no weight in the validation of lineage. Furthermore, it is the habit of historians regarding claims of lineage to merely record the information they receive without verifying it, because to a historian, the claim itself is a part of history. Whether that claim is true or false is another matter to be proven or debunked by genealogists.

In the book Al-'Ibar by Ibn Khaldun, it is said:

 وكثيرا ما وقع للمؤرّخين والمفسرين وأئمة النقل من المغالط في الحكايات والوقائع لاعتمادهم فيها على مجرّد النقل غنّا أو سمينا ولم يعرضوها على أصولها ولا قاسوها بأشباهها ولا سبروها بمعيار الحكمة والوقوف على طبائع الكائنات وتحكيم النظر والبصيرة في الأخبار فضلوا عن الحق وتاهوا في بيداء الوهم والغلط
 "And many historians, commentators, and leading transmitters have fallen into errors regarding stories and events because they relied merely on reporting, without distinguishing the lean from the fat. They did not verify them against their primary sources, nor did they compare them with similar instances, nor evaluate them with the gauge of wisdom, an understanding of the nature of creation, or the exercise of critical thought and insight (bashirah) regarding reports. Consequently, they strayed from the truth and became lost in the wilderness of delusion and error." $^3$

Thus, books outside the field of genealogy—such as books of history, tabaqat (biographical dictionaries), sanad (chains of transmission), and Sufism like Al-Suluk, Al-Athaya, Al-Iqd al-Fakhir, Tuhfat al-Zaman, Al-Jauhar al-Syafaf, Al-Burqat, and the like—cannot be used to validate lineage. Such books can be used to test whether the names within the subject of study represent historical figures or not, but they cannot be used to validate a lineage. The validation of lineage can only be done through genealogical books written specifically for that purpose, such as Al-Syajarah al-Mubarakah.

The first genealogical book to validate Syarif Abul Jadid is Al-Nafhah al-Anbariyah, written in the year 880 AH. Unfortunately, this book contradicts earlier genealogical works. According to genealogists, a genealogical book can only serve as a tool for validation if its contents do not contradict preceding genealogical books. The book Al-Nafhah contradicts prior works which explicitly state that Ahmad bin Isa only left descendants through three sons: Muhammad, Ali, and Husain. There is no mention of the name Abdullah or Ubaidillah as cited in Al-Nafhah.

The name of Syarif Abul Jadid was never once mentioned in genealogical books prior to the ninth century as a descendant of Ahmad bin Isa. Seizing upon this highly precarious lineage of Syarif Abul Jadid, the family of Abdurrahman Assegaf grafted themselves onto it to link their line to Ahmad bin Isa. If the lineage being grafted onto is invalid, then those who grafted themselves onto it are even more invalid.



 Tuhfat al-Zaman by Husain al-Ahdal (d. 855 AH)

This historical book, Tuhfat al-Zaman, is an abridgment of Al-Suluk. This book was cited by Hanif et al. in their work as evidence for the Ba'alwi lineage. As the author has already laid out the arguments of genealogists that history books cannot be used as tools to validate lineage, it is nonetheless worthwhile to discuss the credibility of this book to see if it is fit to be a reference.

The printed version published by Abdullah Muhammad Al-Habsyi is highly suspected of containing numerous interpolations. At the very least, we can say this book attempts to guide readers toward a specific interpretation of Al-Suluk, particularly regarding the Ba'alwi family. According to genealogists, any book written, edited (tahqiq), or owned by an interested party loses its value as textual proof (hujjah).

Abdul Majid al-Qaraja states in his book Al-Kafi al-Muntakhab:

 ٥- المصلحة فان ظهرت مصلحة عند المثبت او النافي يترك قوله غالبا، وقد يعمل بنقيض مصلحته في حالات مخصصة، ولا يؤخذ بقوله الا اذا وجد ما يعضده عند غيره ممن ليست لهم مصلحة ولم ينقلوا عن من له مصلحة
 "Fifth, the existence of personal interest (al-maslahat). If a clear interest is apparent from the person validating or denying (a lineage), their opinion is generally abandoned. Sometimes, in specific instances, their opinion may be accepted if it goes against their own interest. Their opinion cannot be taken unless it is supported by other scholars who have no vested interest and who did not copy from those with an interest." $^4$

As the author mentioned previously, this book was edited by a member of the Ba'alwi family, namely Abdullah Muhammad Al-Habsyi. Its contents have undergone many alterations from the original source text of Al-Suluk. An example is when it mentions Abu Marwan:

 وَمِنْهُم أَبُو مَرْوَان عَليّ بن أَحمد بن سالم كَانَ فَقِيها كَبِيرًا انْتَشَر عَنهُ العلم بحضرموت انتشارا كبيرا لصلاحه وبركة تدريسه وَكَانَ صاحب مصنفات وبه تفقه محمد بن علي باعلوي وَهُوَ أول من تصوف من بيت با علوي اذهم أنما يعْرِفُونَ بالفقه والشرف وَلما بلغ الفقيه ابا مروان انه تصوف هجره
 "Some of them include Abu Marwan Ali bin Ahmad bin Salim. He was a great 'faqih' (jurist). Through him, knowledge spread widely in Hadramaut due to his righteousness and the blessing of his teaching. He authored many works. Muhammad bin Ali studied jurisprudence under him. He was the first to practice Sufism from the Ba'alwi family, for previously they were only known for jurisprudence and nobility (sharaf). And when it reached Al-Faqih (Abu Marwan) that Muhammad bin Ali practiced Sufism, he left him." $^5$

The text above is the passage from Tuhfat al-Zaman derived from Al-Suluk. In this text, there is an addition that inserts the name of Muhammad bin Ali (Faqih Muqaddam). Observe the original text of Al-Suluk below:

 وَمِنْهُم أَبُو مَرْوَان لقبا واسمه عَليّ بن أَحمد بن سالم بن مُحَمَّد بن عَليّ كَانَ فَقِيها خيرا كَبِيرًا عَنهُ انْتَشَر العلم بحضرموت انتشارا موسعا لصلاح كَانَ وبركة في تدريسهِ وَكَانَ صَاحب مصنفات عديدة وَهُوَ أول من تصوف من بيت أَبَا علوي اذ هم أَنما يَعْرِفُونَ بالفقه ولما بلغ الْفَقِيه ذَلِكَ وَإِن هَذَا تصوف هجره

The underlined sentence in the Tuhfat al-Zaman excerpt is an addition that does not exist in the original manuscript of Al-Suluk. This addition inserts the name of Muhammad bin Ali (Faqih Muqaddam) as a student of Abu Marwan, thereby altering the status of Abu Marwan so that he is no longer considered part of the Abu Alwi family, but merely the teacher of Faqih Muqaddam.

Who added this sentence? Was it Husain al-Ahdal in the 9th century AH, or the editor Abdullah Muhammad Al-Habsyi? Both are possible. Although Husain al-Ahdal was not from the Ba'alwi family, he was apparently close to them; in his book, he even states that the Ba'alwi and Al-Ahdal families are cousins. However, the author is more inclined to accuse the editor (Abdullah Muhammad Al-Habsyi) as the culprit, considering that several of his edited works contain many interpolations from the original manuscripts—such as when he edited Al-Baha fi Tarikh Hadramaut by Ibn Hisan (d. 818 AH).



 Thabaqat al-Khawash by Al-Syarji al-Zabidi (d. 893 AH)

One of the books presented by Hanif Alatas et al. is Thabaqat al-Khawash. This printed edition was also edited by Abdullah Muhammad al-Habsyi. This printed version has similarly suffered from interpolations or additions that compromise the book's credibility as proof.

Observe one example of interpolation in this printed version that the author will present.

In the printed edition, it is stated that the cousinship between the Ba'alwi and the Al-Ahdal is not a close cousinship (sharing a single grandfather), but a distant cousinship meeting at Ja'far al-Shadiq. Notice the text of the printed version of Thabaqat al-Khawash (p. 195) below:

 قدم جده محمد المذكور من العراق هو وابنا عم له على قدم التصوف فسكن بناحية الوادي سهام، وذهب أحد ابني عمه إلى ناحية الوادي سردد. وهو جد المشايخ بني القديمي، وذهب الثالث الى حضرموت، وهو جد المشايخ آل باعلوي هنالك، ونسبه ونسب بني عمه يرجع إلى الحسين بن علي بن أبي طالب ، ذكر ذلك الفقيه حسين الأعدل في تاريخه، وذكر الفقيه محمد المدهجن القرشي في كتابه جواهر التيجان في أنساب عدنان وقحطان، ان الاشراف بني القديمي وبني البحر وبني Mbhsi وبني الاحجن وبني قعيش يرجعون في النسب الى الاشراف الحسينيين بالتصغير ، وهم أولاد واحد. وان الاشراف بني الأهدل وآل باعلوي يجتمعون في جعفر الصادق، وهذا هو الأصح انتهى وكان الشيخ علي صاحب الترجمة...

Notice that the underlined sentence does not exist in the manuscript version dated 1070 AH.

From this discrepancy between the printed version and the manuscript version, we can see that in the manuscript version, the Ba'alwi and Al-Ahdal are only mentioned as both being descendants of Husain. Meanwhile, in the printed version published by Al-Dar al-Yamaniyah in 1986 CE, an explanatory note was added stating that both meet at a common ancestor, Ja'far al-Shadiq.

This addition or interpolation claiming that they meet at the common grandfather Ja'far is an attempt to synchronize the Ba'alwi lineage route, which shifted from Musa al-Kadhim bin Ja'far al-Shadiq to Ali al-Uraidi bin Ja'far al-Shadiq. Without this addition, the shift in the lineage path appears absurd, as two first cousins (sharing one grandfather) would suddenly have completely different lineages. With this addition, it creates the impression that the phrase "ibnu al-'am" (cousin) does not mean a close cousin, but a distant one. So, who altered the manuscript? Naturally, the party with a vested interest.

The claim that the "ibnu 'am" (cousin) in question refers to a distant cousin is refuted by the phrasing of Husain al-Ahdal (d. 855 AH) himself, as shown below:

 وحكي لنا عن بعضهم ان محمد المذكور خرج هو واخ له وابن عم فعمد اخوه وابن عمه الى الشرق فذريته ال با علوي في حضرموت
 “It was narrated to us from some of them that the aforementioned Muhammad (bin Sulaiman) set out together with a brother of his and a cousin. Then his brother and his cousin headed toward the east. The descendants of his cousin are the Ba'alwi family in Hadramaut.” $^6$

In the phrase "Akhun lahu wabnu 'ammin" (a brother of his and a cousin), the inclusion of the phrase "akhun lahu" (a brother of his) prevents "ibnu 'am" from being interpreted as a distant cousin. The pronoun "lahu" (his), though not repeated explicitly before "ibnu 'am", is understood to apply to it due to the coordinating conjunction ('athaf) preceding the word "ibnu 'am". Furthermore, if we look at the identical names shared between the Ba'alwi and Al-Ahdal families—namely Ubaid, Isa, Muhammad, and Alwi—even though their sequential order was later altered, it indicates that the lineages used today originate from the same source.

Despite these complex efforts at harmonization, neither family can legitimately connect their lineage to the Prophet Muhammad SAW due to the total absence of genealogical book sources confirming the validity of their lineage. The genealogical books spanning from the fourth to the ninth centuries do not confirm their lineage. The lineage strings of these two families can only begin to be confirmed in the 9th century, carrying various discrepancies that are difficult to accept.

Another book presented by Hanif et al. in Keabsahan Nasab Ba'alwi is Mir'at al-Jinan. This book makes absolutely no mention of names from the Abdurrahman Assegaf line, such as Faqih Muqaddam, Sahib Mirbath, and so on. It only mentions the name Aba Alwi. As previously explained, Aba Alwi is the family name belonging to Syarif Abul Jadid, which carries no connection to the Abdurrahman Assegaf family.

Other books include Al-Athaya al-Saniyah by Malik al-Abbas (d. 778 AH) and Al-Iqd al-Fakhir by Al-Khazraji (d. 812 AH). Both of these books mention Syarif Abul Jadid but completely fail to link him to the Abdurrahman Assegaf family. This reinforces the fact that Syarif Abul Jadid of the Alu Abi Alwi family had no connection to the Abdurrahman Assegaf family, who only later in the 9th century claimed the identity of Ba'alwi.

Many other books cited by Hanif in his work are history books dating from the 10th century AH down to the present day. None of these can be used as references to establish lineage, in accordance with the rules outlined by genealogy experts.

Dr. Abdurrahman bin Majid al-Qaraja states in his book Al-Kafi al-Muntakhab:

 ولا يقدم بحال على ما يثبته النسابة خصوصا ان كانوا اقرب زمانا او مكانا
 "(Historians) must under no circumstances be given precedence over what has been established by genealogists, especially if those genealogists were closer in time or location." $^7$

While a vast list of book titles is presented by Hanif et al. to prove the validity of the Ba'alwi lineage, unfortunately, all of those books date past the 9th century AH and ultimately converge upon a single 9th-century Ba'alwi book: Al-Burqat al-Musyiqah. Therefore, according to genealogy experts, those hundreds of books count as only a single source, because they stem from one sole reference.

The genealogy expert Khalil bin Ibrahim states:

 لا يحتج بكثرة المصادر اذا كانت تنقل من اصل واحد
 "A multiplicity of reference books cannot be used as text proof (hujjah) if they are all copied from a single source." $^8$



Sources & Citations:

1. Khalil bin Ibrahim, Muqaddimat fi 'Ilm al-Ansab, p. 85.
2. Dr. Abdurrahman bin Majid al-Qaraja, Al-Kafi al-Muntakhab, p. 86.
3. Ibn Khaldun, Al-'Ibar, p. 87.
4. Dr. Abdurrahman bin Majid al-Qaraja, Al-Kafi al-Muntakhab, p. 88.
5. Husain al-Ahdal, Tuhfat al-Zaman (edited by Abdullah Muhammad Al-Habsyi), p. 89.
6. Husain al-Ahdal, Tuhfat al-Zaman, p. 90.
7. Dr. Abdurrahman bin Majid al-Qaraja, Al-Kafi al-Muntakhab, p. 91.
8. Khalil bin Ibrahim, Muqaddimat fi 'Ilm al-Ansab, p. 92.