Archive for differ

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]


Sh. ‘Abdul-Muhsin’s Unity With Sh. Al-Albaanee Despite Their Differences

Posted in Killing The Fitna with tags , , , , , , , on May 4, 2013 by TheAuthenticBase

Shaykh ‘Abdul-Muhsin’s states:

“From the scholars of our time is As-Shaykh, Al-‘Allaamah, Al-Muhaddith Muhammad Naasir-ud-Deen Al-Albaani. I do not know of anyone like him in our time who had such a painstaking and meticulous (interest and service to) hadeeth. Nor do I know of anyone else who had such a vast knowledge of hadeeth. However, he was not free from some (opinions in matters of fiqh) that are considered by many to be mistakes. Such as:

1) His keen interest in the issue of hijaab, and his opinion that it is not waajib for the woman to cover her face rather it is only mustahabb for her to do so. Even if what he said were true, then it would be a truth better concealed because some women would use it as a pretext to uncover themselves.

2) Likewise, the Shaykh’s opinion that is mentioned in Sifatu Salaat An-Nabiyy (saw): “Placing the hands upon the chest after ruku’ is a bid’ah and a going astray.” However this is a mas-alah ikhtilaafiyyah (i.e. there is difference of opinion amongst the scholars about this issue and taking the other opinion doesn’t constitute a bid’ah and a going astray).

3) Also, what the Shaykh mentioned in Silsilat-ul-Ahadeeth Ad-Da’eefah that not cutting off from your beard what exceeds the length of your fist is a bid’ah idaafiyyah (i.e. something that has a basis in the Sunnah but is distorted in such a way that it became a bid’ah).

4) Also, the Shaykh said that it is haraam for women to wear gold if the item of jewelry forms a complete circle (i.e. such as a ring or a bangle).

Despite the fact that I disagree with the Shaykh’s opinions in these issues, I cannot do without his books and the benefits that they contain, nor can anyone else (i.e. from the students of knowledge or the scholars). Imam Maalik made a wonderful statement when he said: “Everyone’s opinion’s may be accepted or rejected, except the (the statements of) the one buried over there.” – and then he pointed to the grave of the Prophet (saw).”

[Taken from “People Of The Sunnah be Kind Towards One Another”, by Shaykh ‘Abdul-Muhsin, p.31, translated by Shaykh Aboo Rumaysah]

Words Of Imaam Ahmad Regarding The People Of Innovation

Posted in Biddah / Innovation with tags , , , , , on May 28, 2012 by TheAuthenticBase

Regarding the people of innovation, Imaam Ahmad said:

“They differ concerning the Book, they are in opposition to the Book, and they all agree with each other in contradicting the Book. They use the unclear and ambiguous texts as proof for their views and they misguide the people because of what they have difficulty understanding.”

[Majmoo’ Ar-Rasaa’il Al-Kubraa, 1/106]

Is A Fabricator Of Hadeeth A Disbeliever?

Posted in Hadith Studies with tags , , , , , , , , on February 5, 2012 by TheAuthenticBase

Rejecting The Narrations Of Fabricators 

The scholars agree that narrations of hadeeth are not accepted from one who lied even once about the Prophet (saw). They also agree that it is one of the greatest sins to lie about the Prophet (saw).

Is The Repentance Of A Fabricator Accepted?

There is a difference of opinion over this matter.

Opinion 1) Imaam Maalik said:

“But if one repents for his lies and then becomes known for truthfulness and uprightness, then the majority of scholars hold that both his repentance and narrations are accepted.”

Opinion 2) Imaaam Maalik said:

“Aboo Bakr As-Sairafee dissented, saying: ‘When we reject the narration of anyone for a lie that he was exposed with, we never return to accepting his narrations, not even after an outward repentance.‘ “

These scholars have said that anyone who has deliberately lied concerning a hadeeth or is involved in forgery is disqualified for ever and may never be admitted again even if he repents and corrects himself. [Al-Kifaaya of Al-Baghdaadee, p. 145]

Continue reading

An Example Of A Narrator Who The Scholars Have Differed Over

Posted in Hadith Studies with tags , , , , , , on January 24, 2012 by TheAuthenticBase

From the previous three posts, we came to realise why and how the Imaams of Hadeeth (in specific; the Imaams of Al-Jarh Wat-ta’deel) differed over a narrator of hadeeth. Below is an example of such a narrator:

A name among the early third century transmitters is Hajjaaj Bin Nusayrat Al-Fasaatitee of Basra (d. 214H).

Yahyaa Ibn Ma’een said he was “saadiq (truthful).”

Ibn Hibbaan mentioned him among the thiqaat (reliable).

‘Alee Ibn Al-Madeenee said “his hadeeth is dismissed.”

Aboo Haatim, Ar-Raazee, Aboo Daawood and An-Nisaa’ee have considered him weak and have said his hadeeth was abandoned.

And finally, Imaam Bukhaaree said that many remained silent about him.

[Mizaan Al-I’tidaal Fee Naqd Ar-Rijaal of Adh-Dhahabee, 1/116, 210 & As-Sunnah An-Nabawiyyah of ‘Umar Haashim, Pp. 100-102. See “Hadeeth Studies” by Mohammad Hasim Kamali Pp. 80-95 for more info]

When Scholars Differ Over The Reliability Of A Narrator, Part 3

Posted in Hadith Studies with tags , , , , , , , , on January 22, 2012 by TheAuthenticBase

Conflict In Grading Men

Should there be conflicting information concerning a narrator of hadeeth, some of whch qualifies him to be reliable and the rest does not, the evidence of al-jarh (discrediting) takes priority over the evidence on al-ta’deel (validating/uprightness). (1)

But if the negative evidence only related to an earlier part of the narrator’s life and he is subsequently known to have become upright and reliable, then his narration may be accepted.

It is important to note that in situations of uncertainty such as this, greater attention will be paid to the grounds/reasons that are given for al-jarh rather than validation (ta’deel).

Although the evidence in support of al-jarh (discrediting) takes priority over that of al-ta’deel (validation/uprightness), but if the number of validators exceed those of jarh (discreditors), then validation may take priority over the jarh.

The safer position, as Ibn As-Salaah points out, is still the first one, which is supported by the majority, namely that jarh takes priority over ta’deel.

Does Reference Have To Be Made When Discrediting A Narrator?

The scholars have differed over whether they accept the jarh (discrediting) and ta’deel (validation/uprightness) without any reference made to the reason thereof (2). There are three opinions n this matter:

Continue reading

When Scholars Differ Over The Reliability Of A Narrator, Part 2

Posted in Hadith Studies with tags , , , , , , , , on January 20, 2012 by TheAuthenticBase

In the case of jarh (discrediting), it is necessary, as already noted in the previous post, that a reference is made to the grounds or causes of jarh. People tend to vary in their assessment of what they may regard to be a valid ground of jarh, but even here it has been a tendency towards avoidance of detail in specifying the grounds of jarh.

Who Is/Isn’t Discredited

The scholars have often made brief statements that “so-and-so is weak (da’eef) or abandoned (matrook)” and the like without giving much detail. Brief comments of this type often fell short of explaining or specifying the grounds of jarh, but they succeeded nevertheless in casting doubt on the reliability of their subjects.

Scrutinising Those Lower In The Chain

The higher links in the chain of transmission, who were closer to the source, were given greater credibility and recognition than lower links. The scholars of hadeeth thus tended to scrutinise reports by their contemporaries or narrators of later generations more stringently compared to, for example, narrators who belonged to the taabi’oon or even the taabi’ taabi’oon (1).

What Is A Valid Ground For Discrediting A Narrator?

Al-Khateeb Al-Baghdaadee has a chapter in Al-Kifaaya in which he elaborates on what is not suitable nor valid to be considered as a ground for jarh (2). Below are some of the reasons why scholars may/may not discredit a narrator:

Continue reading