science of narrations 9

8/8/2019 Science of Narrations 9

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/science-of-narrations-9 1/24

Introduction to Hadith Studies

LESSON NINEThe General Authenticationsor Corrections

Scholars of consensus

The three MORSAL orunlinked

The four books



These are the narrations which

have been generally correctedby great scholars of Hadith. Andthese narrations can be classifiedin three types:

1 The narrations of narrators

corrected or authenticated byscholars by consensus (¶Ijma)

2 The correction of the threeunlinked narrator·s narrations Ibn

Umair, Safwan ibn Yahya, Ahmedibn al-Bezentian.

3 The correction of the four books



Correction of the scholar of consensus

K ASHI mentioned in his book of Rajaal

that our scholars unanimously agreed andare in consensus for considering thenarrations of 18 narrators from thecompanions of Imam (as) as authentic.

1 6 companions of Imam Baqir and ImamSadiq (as) among them are Zorarah ibnAyun, Fodhayl ibn Yasaar and AbuBaseer.

2 6 companions of Imam As-Sadiq (as)among them is Jameel ibn Darraj.

3 6 companions of Imam Al-Kadhim and Ar-Radha (as). Among these companions are3 authors of unlinked narrations: Safwan

ibn Yahya, Mohammad ibn Abu Umair,and Ahmed ibn al-Bezenty.

Most of these 18 narrators were praised bythe infallibles (as).



Possibility of correction:There is confusion regarding what

is meant by the corrections of theabove 18 narrators and thisstatement can be summed up intothree different possibilities:

1 Consider every narration narrated

by them is considered correct eitherdirectly by the Imam (as) orindirectly through other narrators, tobe correct.

2 Consider only narrations narrated bythem directly to be correct.

3 Consider whoever narrates anythingby them as saheeh (correct).

Narrator (Link) Scholar ofconsensus (link) Imam



Based on the first opinion the wholechain from the scholar of consensus to

the Imam (as) is excluded fromverification or justification. Based on the second opinion the whole

chain narrated by them goes under theprocess of verification except for thescholars of consensus (only the scholars

of consensus are excluded from theprocess of justification or verification.)

Based on the third opinion the link between the narrator who narrates fromthe scholar of consensus and from thelater to the infallible (as), are allexcluded both links pre and post of thescholar of consensus. (who narrates(conveys) to him and who receives fromhim)

Narrator (Link) Scholar of consensus

(link)

Imam



The second opinion can be moreacceptable because if they aretrusted then only them areexcluded from authentication ,and the narrators before them orafter them require investigationand authentication.

But there is a debate whether toconsider those 18 narratorstrusted without anyauthentication relying on EJMAA

of the scholars regarding theirauthentication. Therefore eventhese narrators of consensusrequire investigation too.



Type of ¶Ijma (the consensus)

1 Some said that the type of EJMAAof scholars regarding the 18narrators justification is the type oflegal and valid ¶Ijma whichincludes the infallible (as)

amongst them, because some ofthe narrators are verified by theinfallibles (as). Therefore suchconsensus is from the one whichindicates the acknowledgement

Imam (AS).(many scholars consider theEJMAA proof if it indicates theexistence of Imam (AS) amongstthe scholars of EJMAA.)



2 It is a consensus of anopinion of few scholarsand does not necessarilyindicate the existence ofthe infallible (as) among

the those scholars ofEJMAA ,and this kind ofEJMAA or an agreementof the scholars was afterthe minor occultation in

the time of Sheikh Mufid.



3 The corrections of thescholars of consensus are not

valid, this is the opinion ofmost of the recent scholarson top of them was S. Al-Khoe. We do not have theclues, criteria of

authentication in which theyrelied in their authenticationwhich lead to such consensusand agreement betweenthem so we can not just go

ahead and rely on theirconsensus. Therefore thebase of their ¶Ijma is unknownwhich makes it ineffective tous.



The authentication of the three

unlinked (Mursal)There is no doubt that these threewere very well-trusted and authenticsource of the narrations, and if theynarrate directly from the infallible (as)

it is accepted as proof. But we do notknow that the link between them andthe infallibles (as), and we do notknow what was their criterion ofdefining the trusted or their means of justification. This is why the recent

scholars do not issue fatwa (verdict) just based on there unlinkednarrations even though those threeare trusted.



But previous scholars based

their fataws (verdicts) on theseMursal Hadiths because theyused to say that a trustedperson narrates always throughor from a trusted narrator, he

investigates before he narrates .But the recent scholars prefer toverify those links, because suchnarrators investigation may behis deduction and intellectual

work, and since some links aremissing, these Hadiths areclassified as the unlink Hadiths.



The correction of the four booksIt was said that whatever is narrated inthese four books by those trustworthygreat authors of these books of Hadithsuch as Al-Kafi, are considered saheeh(correct). But the process of verificationdone by these great scholars, authors

of these books, was based upon their¶Ijtehad and every jurist is responsible ofverifying the authentication of eachnarrator and narration, as same theprevious author jurists did.



There were many points of support about¶correcting the Hadiths· of these four

books. Many of these points were weak

and easily debated, but one of the

strongest supporting point is that thegreat scholars of those 4 books clearly

mentioned that the Hadiths they narratewere correct and true, and these authors

are very well trusted and pious, so shouldwe rely on their words, due to the

principle :µthe word of the trusted (orJust) is proofµ. Or it was their personal

deduction and every mujtahid shouldperform their own ¶Ijtehad. So when they

mention that it is correct and truehadeeth, then it is based on their

investigation.



So the main point of debate as in the

previous discussions (the threeMursals and the scholars of ¶Ijma) thatshould we consider these three great

authors:

1 As trusted narrators and rely on

whatever they say, or;2 consider them great jurists (mujtahid)

and consider what they said as theiropinion and as a result of their

process of ¶Ijtehad (intellectual work)

, and therefore create an opinionbased on our own work andinvestigation as mujtahid (as same as

the issue of fataawa)



The Akhbaris accept the first opinion The recent ones mention that all the clues

and supporting evidences for theirreliance is absence due to the lapse oftime and centuries so it has to be dealtwith the matter as ¶Ijtehad and everymujtahid has to base his opinion on theclues and evidences he passes thereforeall what was mentioned in those books issubjected to authentication. There wasonly one written original for each of thesebooks written by the authors and theywere later handwritten by the kings and

rulers and others. And later after sometime the original was mixed with thecopies and there were differences in thecopies. Because of this mixing up of thesebooks· therefore authentication isrequired.



The words of Kulayni regarding

Al-K afi when some onerequested him to write a book which compiles the correcttraditions from the two sadiqs

(Baqir and Ja·far), heresponded that this is the book with fulfils such requests (i.e. allthe Hadiths in it is correct fromBAQIR and SADIQ (AS),therefore every hadeeth inALKAFI is supposed to becorreect.



Response of S. Al-Khoei The request did not include a

condition that there should be noother than correct Hadith in that book or should not include other Infallibles(as) sayings. So the request wasfulfilled but included more than whatwas requested for the sake of extrabenefit.

S. al-Khoe supports this point asfollows from the books itself:

1 There are sayings in Al-K afi which arenot narrated by any of the infallibles

(as)



2. If Al-K ulayni said that all narrations in his

Al-K

afi are correct and true then it can notbe taken seriously because if he meantthat all those narrations fulfill the

conditions of authentication than that isnot true, because there are narrations

narrated by those who were known infabricating and falsifying the Hadiths such

as Abu Al-Bakhtari. If it is said that maybethese narrations are of those which are

supported by other supportive clues

which might strengthen the weak Hadith.Response: Yes, that point can be valid byitself but it is not applicable because such

narrations are plenty in number, and suchcases are far from being accepted.



3 What Al-K ulayni mentions

about his book can be adeductive issue (¶Ijtehad) andnot his testimony. Maybe hehas some clues toauthenticate narrations, and in

that case every jurist isresponsible to make his owndeduction and concludebased on the clues availableto him.



4 There are some odd Hadithsnarrated by unknownnarrators which creates adoubt of being narrated bythe infallibles (as). Sheikh

Sadooq did not acceptmany of the narrations of Al-K afi.

5 Al-K ulayni himself mentionsthat he hopes that he has

fulfilled the request. This¶hope· is not based on themodesty and that he reliedon his deduction or ·Ijtehadand his personal studies.



Words of ¶Mun La Yadhorho Al-Faqih·

(Sheikh Sadooq)´My intention was to collect thenarrations which was source ofverdict and was consideredcorrect and I believe that it is a

proof between me and myLord«.µ From his words it can be

understood that what he did washis deduction (¶Ijtehad) in his

collection. His ¶Ijtehad wasbased on his personal study anddeduction cannot be a proof onanother mujtahid or jurist asstated by Al-K hoe.



As mentioned previously that

previous great scholars hadsome clues of strengtheningthe weak hadeeth, and theseclues did not fall under theiragreement, they haddisagreements on these clues,and not all the clues wereagreeable to all of them.Based on that there may besome weak narrations whichmay be supported by somedisputed clues of strengtheninga weak hadeeth.



Words of ¶Tahzeeb·

(Sheikh at-Tousee) He clearly mentioned that the book

includes his hard work and efforts todeduce or to define the correct andauthentic narration.

He did not mention that all what henarrates is correct as he mentioned

that if a false narration exists in thebook, then there is a reason behind it.

(he must have used some of thedisputed clues of supporting theweak hadeeth.)



Words of ¶Istbsaar ·

(Sheikh at-Tousee)

It is a summary or brief ofTahzeeb and he

mentioned that he took thesame approach in writingthis book as he took inTahzeeb. So not all in thefour books of Hadith is saheeh but is subjected tofurther authentication fromthe jurist.

science of narrations 9

Documents