Al-ʿUṣūr al-Wusṭā 23 (2015): 141-142

Book Review

Th i s  i s  e v i d e n t l y  a n  e d i t i o n  o f Maḥjūbī’s doctoral dissertation from around 2003, under the direction of 
Muḥammad al-Ṣiqillī al-Ḥusaynī, presum-
ably in Fez. It is a highly systematic survey 
of hadith terminology in Ibn Abī Ḥātim’s 
huge biographical dictionary, al-Jarḥ wa-al-
taʿdīl. About half of his entries include an 
evaluation of the person’s hadith trans-
mission, especially (in descending order 
of frequency) from his father, Abū Ḥātim 
(d. 277/890), Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn (d. 233/848), 
Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal (d. 241/855), and Abū 
Zurʿah al-Rāzī (d. 264/878). Maḥjūbī takes 
one term after another and gives first its 
dictionary (non-technical) definition, then 
its technical meaning, its appearance in 
prophetic hadith, if any, then the way it is 
used in al-Jarḥ wa-al-taʿdīl.

This study will be useful principally as 
a reference, so that if one comes across an 
odd term, one can look it up to see how it 
used in al-Jarḥ wa-al-taʿdīl, e.g. malīʾ (new 
to me), meaning “trustworthy.” It seems 
to be accurate, at least as regards hadith 

terminology. Fairly often, Maḥjūbī goes 
beyond identifying usage in al-Jarḥ wa-al-
taʿdīl, as when he interprets Yaḥyā ibn 
Maʿīn’s calling someone ṣuwayliḥ by means 
of quoting Ibn ʿĀdī, al-Dhahabī, and Ibn 
Ḥajar concerning the same man (134-5). 
The dubious underlying assumption is 
evidently that characterizations of men 
are effectively observations of fact, so that 
Ibn ʿĀdī and the rest must have meant 
exactly the same thing as Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn. 
Occasionally, however, Maḥjūbī does 
recognize change over time; for example, 
the concentration of ninth-century critics 
on isnād comparison to define who was 
thiqah (“trustworthy”) where critics of 
the High Middle Ages such as Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ 
stressed personal characteristics such 
as probity and precision (81). He is not 
so good at terminology outside the field 
of hadith; for example, when he quotes 
Ibn Ḥibbān as saying that someone was 
a mujtahid as if it were relevant to his 
reliability as a traditionist (129), whereas 
this quotation must mean rather that he 

ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Maḥjūbī, Al-Muṣṭalaḥ al-ḥadīthī min khilāl Kitāb 
al-Jarḥ wa-al-taʿdīl li-Ibn Abī Ḥātim al-Rāzī (240-327 H) [Ḥadīth 
terms by way of Kitāb al-Jarḥ wa-al-taʿdīl by Ibn Abī Ḥātim al-Rāzī]. 
Baḥth li-nayl al-duktūrāh fī al-dirāsāt al-islāmīyah (Beirut: Dār Ibn 
Ḥazm, 1432/2011), 474 pages.

Christopher Melchert

University of Oxford

(christopher.melchert@orinst.ox.ac.uk)



Al-ʿUṣūr al-Wusṭā 23 (2015)

142  •  Christopher MelChert

was much given to supererogatory prayer. 
Another example: he defines the abdāl as 
ʿthe virtuous, trustworthy ones given to 
renunciation and worship’ (156) without 
reference to the theory of substitution 
(that each one can be said to have taken 
the place of another, deceased intercessor), 

association with Syria, and so on. I also 
missed a few terms, outstandingly laysa 
bi-dhāk. In all, then, this is a workmanlike 
s t u d y ,  s o m e w h a t  u n i m a g i n a t i v e  b u t 
useful, still, for understanding particular 
expressions of early hadith criticism.