(6) The Chain of Narration of Muhammad Aqilah and the Assegaf Manuscript

 Book Title: Spurious Manuscripts of the Ba'alwi according to Rumail Abbas's Version
Originial version in Indonesian: Manuskrip-Manuskrip Palsu Ba'alwi Versi Rumail Abbas
Author: K.H. Imaduddin Utsman Al-Bantanie
Edition: 1st Printing
Page Count: 24 pages
Paper Size: B5
Publisher: Maktabah Nahdlatul Ulum Banten
Year of Publication: 2024 CE
Address: Tangerang, Banten, Indonesia
Field of Study: History, Science of Genealogy (Ilm al-Nasab), Genealogy

Table of Contents

1. (6) The Chain of Narration of Muhammad Aqilah and the Assegaf Manuscript
2. (7) The Manuscript of the Book Musnad Ubaidillah al-Tamimi al-Iraqi 
3. (8) The Manuscript of the Chain of Narration of Abdul Haq al-Isybili Ibnu al-Kharrath
4. (9) The Manuscript of Ali al-Syanini's Chain of Narration
5. (10) The Manuscript of Al-Thurfat al-Gharibat 
6. CHAPTER III: CONCLUSION
7. Back to  Book: Spurious Manuscripts of the Ba'alwi according to Rumail Abbas's Version    

6. The Chain of Narration of Muhammad Aqilah and the Assegaf Manuscript

According to Rumail, within the book Al-Silk al-Durar Fi A'yan al-Qarn al-Tsani 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 talqin of dhikr from Abdullah bin Ali Bahusain al-Saqqaf. Aside from the talqin of dhikr, Abdullah al-Saqqaf also granted him an ijazah (license) for a book authored by Ali bin Abdullah al-Aydarus, who resided in Surat, India.

Rumail argues that because Muhammad Aqilah was a tsiqah (trustworthy/reliable) person, his teacher, Abdullah bin Ali Bahusain, must also be a tsiqah person. Consequently, when this Abdullah bin Ali al-Saqqaf records a narration in another book, his narration is considered tsiqah. For example, when Abdullah bin Ali mentions in a chain of hadith musalsal (a continuously interconnected chain) 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 Faqih Muqaddam, this is used to argue for the factual and historical existence of Faqih Muqaddam.

For Rumail, the mention of Faqih Muqaddam's name in the year 1150 Hijriyah within a chain of narration—500 years after his death—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 scholars when examining a chain of narration (sanad) to determine whether it is muttasil (continuous) or not, or whether individual narrators within it are liars, transgressive (fasiq), or fictitious.

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

The question that intrigues the author is: where did Rumail study the Science of Hadith, such that he can claim that if a student is tsiqah, their teacher must automatically be judged as tsiqah too? This does not make sense. Within the Science of Hadith, there is a discipline known as Ilmu Al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil, which studies whether narrators are fit to be trusted or not. Every single narrator in a chain is examined one by one from the beginning to the end. If even one among them is historically proven to be a liar, the Hadith becomes dha'if (weak) or is even pronounced maudhu' (fabricated/forged). When Muhammad Aqilah is judged to be tsiqah, his teacher, Abdullah bin Ali al-Saqqaf, is not automatically declared tsiqah; he requires an independent investigation, as does the sequence of narrators that follows.

When a chain evaluation 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 (nasab). As the author has previously stated in the book I'anat al-Akhyar, narrations from Ba'alwi scholars concerning their own lineage and history hold the status of "muttaham bi al-kadzib" (suspected of fabrication) and cannot be trusted, because they directly contradict authoritative history and genealogy books. Therefore, the structure of Abdullah bin Ali al-Saqqaf's chain back to Faqih Muqaddam—being based on their genealogical lineage—is similarly untrustworthy.

Rumail only brings up the name of Muhammad Aqilah as a stepping stone to mention Abdullah bin Ali al-Saqqaf. In reality, Muhammad Aqilah never mentioned the name of Faqih Muqaddam; the one who mentioned Faqih Muqaddam was Abdullah bin Ali al-Saqqaf. Rumail highlights the name of Muhammad Aqilah as a well-known scholar simply to elevate the status of Abdullah bin Ali al-Saqqaf by association. 

7. 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 under the title Musnad Ubaidillah Al-Tamimi Al-Iraqi. Rumail further states that within it, there is a chain of narration from Hasan ibn Muhammad Al-Allal. Hasan ibn Muhammad Al-Allal (d. 490 AH) produced a musnad book titled Al-Arba'un containing 40 different Hadiths from various chains of narration, among which are mentions of kinship between the narrator (musnid) and the Ba'alwi clan, such as 'amm (uncle), ibn 'amm (cousin), and the like.

This assertion by Rumail is identical to the previous ones, aiming to link a well-known name with the Ba'alwi family. Ubaidillah al-Tamimi never mentioned the names of the Ba'alwi family at all; what he mentioned was Hasan bin Muhammad al-Allal, a genuine grandson of Ahmad bin Isa. Then, a narrative was constructed claiming that Hasan al-Allal referred to Ba'alwi names as uncles, cousins, or similar relations, in order to make it 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 spurious manuscript created today and falsely attributed as a work of Hasan al-Allal? The answer is: it is a sequence of narration (sanad) strongly suspected to have been written by Salim bin Jindan, not Hasan al-Allal. 

8. The Manuscript of the Chain of Narration of Abdul Haq al-Isybili Ibnu al-Kharrath

On his YouTube community tab, Rumail posted several chains of Hadith narration (sanad) mentioning the name Ubaidillah, who allegedly received the Hadith from his father, Ahmad al-Abah. The sequence of the chain of narration is as follows:

Rumail displayed this sequence of narration only as a fragment without specifying from which book he obtained it. It seems that this time, Rumail did not want a repeat of previous instances where his chains of narration could be easily traced through the names of popular narrators. None of the narrators in this chain are well-known, and it is not connected all the way to a Companion of the Prophet; rather, it stops at Ubaidillah bin Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Azraq. Clearly, this sanad is a "make-believe" chain that is completely invalid. If it were connected all the way to a Companion of the Prophet, its continuity or lack thereof could be readily detected, because the names of Hadith narrators since the era of the Companions have already been thoroughly codified within the books of Tarikh Ruwat (History of the Narrators).

In all likelihood, this is a sequence of narration obtained from the same source as the previous forged chains—namely, from the writings of Salim bin Jindan. Within this sequence of narration, there is a phrasing that appears highly contrived: 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 historically confirmed in the book Al-Syajarah al-Mubarokah as a son of Ahmad bin Isa; it appears the creator of this sanad wanted the name Ubaidillah to piggyback on the established historical validity of Muhammad bin Ali. 

9. The Manuscript of Ali al-Syanini's Chain of Narration

Within this chain of narration (sanad), the name Muhammad bin Ali Faqih Muqaddam appears, who allegedly received a Hadith from Ali bin Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Jadid. This chain is clearly a forgery because scholars have recorded that Ali bin Jadid never had a student named Faqih Muqaddam. Aside from being a fabricated sequence of narration that fails to mention from which book's manuscript it was extracted, it is already proven to be fake from the perspective of the science of narration. Like the others, it appears to be drawn from the writings of Salim bin Jindan.

10. The Manuscript of Al-Thurfat al-Gharibat

Rumail presented a manuscript authored 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-8th century AH as descendants of the Prophet.

Unfortunately, Rumail was not meticulous. This very text actually reinforces the fact that around the year 845 AH, the Ba'alwi family was still known merely as "Hadramaut Arabs" (Arab Hadramaut) and not as descendants of the Prophet (sadat). Observe one of the phrasings within this text:

"The poor, devout seeker (Al-Faqir al-Mu'taqid) Ibrahim bin Syaikh Abdurrahman bin Muhammad al-Alawi related to me, from a clan called Aba Alwi among the Arabs of Hadramaut . . ."

As a historian, when Al-Maqrizi received the claim from Ibrahim bin Abdurrahman Assegaf stating that he belonged to the Aba Alwi family, he immediately identified this family as a Hadramaut Arab family. This is because ever since the 4th century Hijriyah, historical books have recorded the name of Bani Alwi 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, which contains the histories 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 a part of Aba Alwi also only surfaced in the 9th century AH. It is glaringly obvious that the family of Abdurrahman Assegaf is not the same Aba Alwi family written about in 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 family of Abdurrahman Assegaf grafted themselves into a branch of 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 are not of Arabic origin. The Y-DNA test results of Arabs today are confirmed to belong to haplogroup J. 

CHAPTER III: CONCLUSION

Such are the manuscripts claimed by Rumail as an answer to the author’s thesis—namely, that the names of the Ba'alwi family were never recorded as descendants of the Prophet Muhammad SAW from the 4th century Hijriyah up until the 9th century Hijriyah, neither in books of genealogy nor in history. Unfortunately, what Rumail brought forward turned out to be nothing more than sequences of narration (sanad) proven to be forged, both in terms of content and the physical media used. In the author's view, considering the historiographical algorithm circulating in the 8th and 9th centuries Hijriyah—both in Yemen and other regions connected to Ahmad bin Isa—it will be extremely difficult to find any 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 simply not descended from the Prophet Muhammad SAW.