Archive for the Hadith Studies Category

Ibn Taymiyyah’s View On Mursal Reports

Posted in Hadith Studies with tags , , , , , , on February 1, 2016 by TheAuthenticBase

Ibn Taymiyyah said:

“The scholars have differed whether to accept or reject the mursal reports. The most correct opinion is that some of them are acceptable, others are rejected, and others are mawqoof…

A mursal report that conflicts with the reports of trustworthy narrators is rejected. And if a mursal report is narrated by two narrators whose shaykhs are different, this confirms its truth, because one would not usually expect them to make identical errors.”

[From an unprinted manuscript by Al-Haafidh Ibn ‘Abdul-Haadee in Al-Maktabat Az-Zahiriyyah in Damascus]

See this post for more quotes regarding the Mursal narrations.

The Eloquent Speech Of The Prophet (saw) Are Known To The Scholars

Posted in Hadith Studies with tags , , , , , , on October 20, 2015 by TheAuthenticBase

From the signs in the text of a narration that point to its fabrication is when the matn (text) is of a stilted or awkward speech, lacking the Arabic eloquence.

The scholar who is familiar with the intricate details of the Arabic language knows when a given word or phrase is stiff or stilted (artificial, unnatural) and concludes that it is impossible to have emanated from one who is eloquent and well spoken – how then could such words have emanated from the most eloquent person to have ever spoken Arabic, Muhammad (saw)?

Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr pointed out that this is sign is valid when exact words of the Prophet (saw) are being quoted.

Ibn Daqeed Al-‘Eed said:

“Scholars often rule a narration to be fabricated based on this principle – based on the wording of the narration. Because of their extensive research in hadeeth literature, they have developed string mental and spiritual faculties, through which they are able to differentiate between what the prophet (saw) might have uttered and what the Prophet (saw) could not have uttered.”

Al-Bilqeenee said:

“If one serves under a master for a number of years, he knows what he loves and what he hates, so if a third party were to claim that the master hated something, while the servant knew for a fact that he loved that things, he would, immediately upon hearing the claim, reject it as a lie.”

For example scholars of this field are known to have statements like “There is darkness upon this hadeeth,” or “Its text is dark,” or “The heart denies it,” or “The soul does not find peace in it.”

Ar-Rabee’ Ibn Khuthaym said:

“Among hadeeths, there is the hadeeth that has the illumination of the day, by which you know it (to be true). And among hadeeths there is the hadeeth that has the darkness of the night, by which you know it (to be false).”

Ibn Al-Jawzee said:

“The skin of the student of knowledge quivers upon hearing the munkar hadeeth (that which is unauthentic as well as contradicting the authentic). And most of the time his heart has an aversion to it.”

[The Sunnah And Its Role In Islamic Legislation” p. 139]

Criticising Narrators In Hadeeth, By Ibn Rajab

Posted in Hadith Studies with tags , , , , , on April 25, 2015 by TheAuthenticBase

Ibn Rajab said:

“As for the people of knowledge and understanding and those who adhere to the sunnah and the Jamaa’ah, then indeed they only mention the defects of the hadeeth out of sincerity to the religion and in order to preserve and safeguard the Prophet’s sunnah and to identify what befell the narrators of hadeeth from error, forgetfulness, and weakness.

This type of criticism was not required for other than weak and defective hadeeths. Rather, in their view, this strengthened the authentic hadeeths, since they were free from these defects and errors. So these individuals are the ones who are truly aware of the sunnah of the messenger of Allaah. And they are the great intellectual critics who criticeze the hadeeth after having skillfully and efficiently examined them in order to discredit the fake from the authentic…

[Sharh ‘Ilal At-Tirmidhee, 2/808]

Elsewhere he said:

“The righteous Imaams went to great lengths in forsaking the weak sayings (opinions) of some of the scholars. And they refuted them with the highest degree of refutation, as Imaam Ahmad used to censure Aboo Thawr and others in their opinions that they were alone in saying. And he went to great extremes in refuting them in these opinions…

[Al-Farq Bayna An-Naseeha Wat-Ta’yeer, p.30]

Criticising Narrators Without Any Fear

Posted in Hadith Studies with tags , , , , , , , , on January 1, 2015 by TheAuthenticBase

From among the righteous Salaf, there were men, who knew no fear when it came to criticising narrators, regardless whether that man was a ruler or the lowest man in society.

Likewise, they did not fear the blame of anyone, nor did they hesitate to proclaim openly any defect found in narrators.

It was said to Yahyaa Ibn Sa’eed Al-Qattaan:

“Do you not fear that these whose narrations you have abandoned will be your opponents before Allaah on the Day of Judgement?”

He said:

For these to be my opponents is more beloved to me than for the Messenger of Allaah (saw) to be my opponent, saying to me, ‘Why did you not expel lies from my hadeeth?‘ “

[Quoted in “The Sunnah And Its Role In Islamic Legislation” p.130]

Accepting Narrations From Truthful Innovators On Conditions

Posted in Biddah / Innovation, Hadith Studies with tags , , , on October 10, 2014 by TheAuthenticBase

The people of the sunnah did not vilify or discredit their opponent unless:

1) His innovation led to disbelief,

2) He attacked one of the Companions,

3) He was inviting others to his innovation, or

4) The hadeeth he was narrating was in harmony with the innovation to which he was inviting others.

The scholars of hadeeth criticism would consider all of these points as evidence showing that the narrator was not truthful or sincere. This is why the books of the Sunnah, and in their forefront Bukhaaree and Muslim, related hadeeths from some innovators whom history has shown to be truthful.

Examples of such narrators are ‘Umraan Ibn Hattaan Al-Khaarijee and Abbaan Ibn Taghlab Ash-Shi’ee. As he was discussing the biography of Abbaan Ibn Taghlab Al-Koofee, Al-Haafidh Adh-Dhahabee said:

“A dyed-in-the-wool Shi’ee, but he is truthful. For us is his honesty and against him is his innovation.”

Imaam Aboo Is-haaq Ibraaheem Ibn Ya’qoob Al-Jawzjaanee said:

“Among them was he who deviated away from the truth, yet still possessed an honest tongue. And his hadeeth would be widespread amongst the people since he was forsaken for his innovation but trusted with is narration.

So concerning these individuals, I see no other alternative but to take from their hadeeth that which is (already) known, so long as his innovation does not become strengthened because of that.”

[Ahwaal Ar-Rijaal, p.538]

Orientalists & Hadeeth Origin

Posted in Hadith Studies with tags , , , , , , on September 24, 2014 by TheAuthenticBase

The Orientalist Schacht claims that hadeeth were all fabricated by the companions and successors whenever they saw a good practise in the lands they conquered. He says: “Mutilation as a punishment for coin clippers and counterfeiters is advocated by spurious “hadeeths” quoted in Baladhooree. R.S. Lopez in Byzantine, 16/445 ff, has suggested a Byzantine origin. If this is correct, it would be a case of proposed adoption of a judicial practice which existed in the conquered territories.” [Foreign Elements, 14]

Ash-Shaykh M. M. Al-Azami replies to this by stating: “In Baladhooree, there are references to the practice of Marwaan and Abaan Ibn ‘Uthmaan who punished coin-clippers by flogging or chopping off the hand. But there is no hadeeth; neither spurious nor authentic. Thus his statement is wrong.

Further, if they punished, and Romans also used to punish this crime, then to claim that it might have been taken from them is ridiculous. It is doubtful whether any government would reward the coin-clippers for their “fine-art” and “handskill”. It is quite normal that every government would punish them.” [Studies In Early Hadeeth Literature, p. 267]

Two Reasons Why Aboo Haneefah Differed With The Majority In His Rulings

Posted in Hadith Studies with tags , , , , , , , , , on July 10, 2014 by TheAuthenticBase

1) Unauthenticating Many Authentic Narrations:

Aboo Haneefah stipulated strict conditions for a narration to be accepted – very difficult conditions indeed, but he only did so because fabrication in hadeeth became a widespread phenomenon. During his time, Iraaq was the source of revolutionary and intellectual groups in the Islaamic world, and as such, it was fertile soil for fabrications and fabricators to thrive.

These factors impelled Imaam Aboo Haneefah to be more circumspect when accepting the authenticity of a hadeeth, and so he only accepted those hadeeth that were famous and widespread, and came from trustworthy people. In this regard he was more careful and strict than even the scholars of hadeeth which is why he deemed many hadeeths to be weak, which in the view of the scholars of hadeeth, were authentic and accepted.

2) Accepting Mursal Narrations:

Although he was strict in one aspect of judging the authenticity of hadeeths, he was more lenient in another: he would consider disconnected (mursal) narrations to be acceptable, but only if the one who narrated it was trustworthy.

Mursal narrations are narrations wherein one of the Taabi’een would narrate a hadeeth without mentioning the source from whom he took it.

Imaam Aboo Haneefah’s view in this matter is contrary to the view of the majority of Hadeeth Scholars, which led him to arguing issues based on hadeeths that were considered to be weak and inapplicable by others.

[Taken from “The Sunnah And Its Role In Islaamic Legislation” by Mustafa As-Sibaa’ee, p.492]