Sunday, August 17, 2014

Musalsal Isnaad

Subtleties of Isnaad (Lataa’if ul-Isnaad): Part 1
Musalsal Isnaad

Meaning of Musalsal Linguistically and Technically

Linguistically, “Musalsal” refers to the connection of one thing with another i.e. bound together with a Silsilah or link, i.e. inter-linked, sequential, or serial. Such as a train or rings of iron joined together to make a chain

Technically, a Musalsal (uniformly-linked or continuous) isnaad is one in which all the reporters use the same mode of transmission or in other words, all of them while narrating a chain, share a common description (Siffah) or condition (Haal) whether it be in each of its narrator or narration, or whether its entire chain is narrated upon a single description or condition at all its levels.

The meaning of continuous or a common mode is that a narrator shares a common Description (Siffah) or Condition (Haal) with the remaining narrators of the chain.

The difference between Description (Siffah) and Condition (Haal) is that Description (Siffah) is what necessitates a human or is a part of him at all times and conditions just as how we say about a person that he is a Haafidh, or he is a Qaari, or he is an Imaam and other similar descriptions that describe or necessitate a human. And similarly, we also say that a Hadeeth is Musalsal (continuous) with Huffaadh, or Thiqaat, or Qudaat, and so on i.e. all the narrators in its chain are Huffaadh, or Thiqaat (Reliable), or Qudaat (Judges).

As for the Condition (Haal) then it is what a human achieves on a temporary basis and it does not necessarily necessitate his personality. Hence, Love and Hate are among the conditions of a human and similarly the entwining of fingers is a condition like other temporary conditions.

And with that “Tasalsul (continuity i.e. of the chain)” is divided into two categories, which are: (1) Succession or Continuity of Condition (Haal) and (2) Continuity of Description (Wasf).

Categories of Tasalsul:

First: Sharing of a common Condition (Haal):

It means that the condition of the narrator of the hadeeth while narrating the hadeeth was the same as that of his Teacher (whom it took it from) and likewise, the condition of that teacher while narrating the hadeeth was the same as that of his teacher until the end of the chain.

And it has three subdivisions:

1-    Sharing a common word while narrating: which means that all the narrators from the beginning of the chain to the end share a common word while narrating the hadeeth such as the following Hadeeth.

Imaam Ibn Abi ad-Dunya narrates in Kitaab ash-Shukr (1/39 H. 109):

حدثنا الجروي، حدثني عمرو بن أبي سلمة، ثنا أبو عبيدة الحكم بن عبدة، ثنا حيوة بن شريح، عن عقبة بن مسلم، عن أبي عبد الرحمن الحبلي، عن الصنابحي، عن معاذ، قال: قال لي النبي: " إني أحبك، فقل: اللهم أعني على ذكرك، وشكرك، وحسن عبادتك "، قال الصنابحي: قال لي معاذ: إني أحبك، فقل هذا الدعاء، قال أبو عبد الرحمن: وأنا أحبك فقل، قال حيوة: قال لي عقبة: وأنا أحبك فقل، قال أبو عبيدة: قال لي حيوة: وأنا أحبك فقل، قال لي عمرو: قال لي أبوعبدة: وأنا أحبك فقل، فقال لي حسن يعني الجروي: وأنا أحبك فقل

(Al-Jarawi) narrated to us, who narrated from (Amr bin Abi Salamah), who narrated from (Abu Ubaydah al-Hakam bin Abdah), who narrated from (Haywah bin Shurayh), from (Uqbah bin Muslim), from (Abu Abdur Rahmaan al-Hubuli), from (As-Sunaabihi), from (Mu’aadh) (radiallah anhu) who said that (the Prophet) (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) told me: ‘Indeed I love you, so say: O Allaah help me remember You, to be grateful to You, and to worship You in an excellent manner.’

(As-Sunaabihi) said that (while narrating this narration), (Mu’aadh) told me: ‘Indeed I love you, so say this Du’aa.’

(Abu Abdur Rahmaan) said (while narrating this narration), ‘Indeed I love you, so say…’

(Haywah) said that (Uqbah) told me, ‘Indeed I love you, so say…’

(Abu Ubaydah) said that (Haywah) told me, ‘Indeed I love you, so say…’

(Amr) said that (Abu Ubaydah) told me, ‘Indeed I love you, so say…’

Similarly, (the author of the book said) (Hasan Al-Jarawi) told me, ‘Indeed I love you, so say…’”

So this entire chain is continuous (Musalsal) with each narrator saying the words while narrating it to their students, “Indeed I love you, so say…” copying the exact method and words of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

2-    Sharing a common act or gesture while narrating: which means that all the narrators from the beginning of the chain to the end share a specific act or gesture in common while narrating the hadeeth such as Musalsal Bi’t Tashbeek (Each narrator interlocking his finger while narrating it to the next narrator) and Musalsal Bil Musaafahah (Each narrator shaking hands with the next while narrating).

3-    Sharing a common gesture as well as word while narrating: which means that all the narrators at all levels of the chain agree upon a common gesture along with a common word while narrating the hadeeth, such as the hadeeth in which each narrator grasps his beard while narrating and says the words, “I believe in the Qadr”.

Second: Sharing of a common Description or Trait (Siffah):

It refers to all the narrators of a chain sharing a common trait and it has two subdivisions:

1-    Sharing of a common description of the Narrator: which refers to the Tasalsul in the chain that comes under the characteristic or trait of a narrator. The traits of a narrator are divided into verbal traits (Sifaat Qawliyyah) and practical traits (Sifaat Fi’liyyah).

Thus sharing a common verbal trait of the narrators would mean that all the narrators agree upon the verbal trait of the narrator that relates to the narrator, such as their agreement upon narrating the most authentic of narration like the Musalsal Hadeeth of recitation of Surah Saff.

As for the agreement upon the practical traits of the narrators that it is when all the narrators of the chain from beginning to the end share a common description such has Hifdh (Memorization), Itqaan (Mastery), and others. Like the hadeeth of Musalsal bil Huffaadh (The chain of which contains all the Haafidh narrators), and Musalsal bil Fuqaha (The chain of which contains all the Faqeeh narrators), and Musalsal bil Basriyyeen (The chain of which contains all the Basri narrators) etc.

2-    Sharing of a common description of the way the hadeeth is related, such as:

-         The expression of narration: such as all the narrators agreeing upon narrating with the expression “Haddathana (He narrated to us)” or “Akhbarna (He informed us)”, or other forms of narrating.
-         The period of narration: such as all the narrators agreeing upon the narration of a hadeeth at a specific time or day.
-         The date of narration: such as all the narrators agreeing upon mentioning the date the narration was related, such as the first hadeeth he heard from his Shaykh, or that each narrator was the last one to hear that hadeeth from his teacher, like Musalsal Bil Awwaliyya and Musalsal bil Aakhariyyah.

Nature of Musalsal Asaaneed:

With regard to their continuity, Musalsal Asaaneed are divided into two forms:

First: al-Musalsalaat at-Taammah (Completely Continuous)

It is a Musalsal Isnaad which is continuous from the beginning of the chain until the end and this is what most of the Musalsal narrations are comprised of.

In the illustrations above some examples of Musalsal Taammah have been mentioned but among them there are some about which there is dispute whether their continuity is complete (Taammah) or there is a disconnection in it?

Second: al-Musalsalaat al-Naaqisah (not fully continuous)

The default in Musalsal Asaaneed is that they are completely continuous from the beginning of the chain until the end. However sometimes, a disconnection occurs in the continuity of the isnaad at some levels of the chain either at its beginning or at the end. This is called “Musalsal al-Naaqis”.

For example the Musalsal Bil Awwaliyyah (The narration which is the very first narration each of its narrators heard from his Shaykh in the beginning of his career in narrating).

The chain of this Isnaad goes as follows, Imaam Abu Taahir as-Salafi narrates:

(Ja’far bin Ahmad as-Siraaj) narrated to us and it was the first hadeeth that I heard, he said: (Abu Nasr as-Sijzi) narrated to us and it was the first hadeeth that I heard, he said: (Abu Ya’la Hamzah bin Abdul Azeez) narrated to, and it was the first hadeeth I heard from him, he said: (Abu Haamid al-Neesaaboori) narrated to us, and it was the first hadeeth I heard, he said: (Abdur Rahmaan bin Bishr al-Abdi) narrated to us, and it was the first hadeeth I heard, he said: (Sufyaan bin Uyaynah) narrated to us, and it was the first hadeeth I heard from Sufyaan, he narrates from (Amr bin Deenaar), from (Abu Qaaboos), from (Abdullah bin Amr bin al-Aas), who said that the (Prophet) (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: If you show mercy to those who are on the earth, He Who is in the heaven will show mercy to you

As we can see that this chain is continuous (Musalsal) with narrators who narrated this narration as their first narration. But this continuity is broken at and after (Sufyaan bin Uyaynah), so this is an example of “Musalsal Naaqis” whose continuity broke at the end of the chain.

Now here is an example of “Musalsal Naaqis” whose continuity brakes at the beginning of the chain.

Imaam Bayhaqi narrates in Sunan al-Kubra (2/107 H. 2519) with a Saheeh chain:

أخبرنا أبو عبد الله الحافظ، ثنا أبو عبد الله محمد بن عبد الله الصفار الزاهد إملاء من أصل كتابه قال: قال أبو إسماعيل محمد بن إسماعيل السلمي: " صليت خلف أبي النعمان محمد بن الفضل فرفع يديه حين افتتح الصلاة وحين ركع وحين رفع رأسه من الركوع "، فسألته عن ذلك، فقال: " صليت خلف حماد بن زيد فرفع يديه حين افتتح الصلاة وحين ركع وحين رفع رأسه من الركوع " فسألته عن ذلك، فقال: " صليت خلف أيوب السختياني فكان يرفع يديه إذا افتتح الصلاة وإذا ركع وإذا رفع رأسه من الركوع "، فسألته، فقال: " رأيت عطاء بن أبي رباح يرفع يديه إذا افتتح الصلاة وإذا ركع وإذا رفع رأسه من الركوع "، فسألته، فقال: " صليت خلف عبد الله بن الزبير، فكان يرفع يديه إذا افتتح الصلاة وإذا ركع وإذا رفع رأسه من الركوع "، فسألته، فقال عبد الله بن الزبير ": صليت خلف أبي بكر الصديق رضي الله عنه فكان يرفع يديه إذا افتتح الصلاة وإذا ركع وإذا رفع رأسه من الركوع " وقال أبو بكر: صليت خلف رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، " فكان يرفع يديه إذا افتتح الصلاة وإذا ركع وإذا رفع رأسه من الركوع "

(Abu Abdullah al-Haafidh) informed us, who narrated from (Abu Abdullah Muhammad bin Abdullah as-Saffaar) from the original text of his book, he said that (Abu Ismaa’eel Muhammad bin Ismaa’eel as-Sulami) said: I prayed behind (Abu al-Nu’maan Muhammad bin al-Fadl) so he raised his hands when he started the Salaah and when he bowed and when he raised his head from bowing, so I asked him about that so he said: I prayed behind (Hammaad bin Zayd), so he raised his hands when he started the Salaah and when he bowed and when he raised his head from bowing, when I asked him about that he said: I prayed behind (Ayyoob as-Sakhtiyaani), so he raised his hands when he started the Salaah and when he bowed and when he raised his head from bowing, when I asked him about that, he said: I saw (Ataa bin Abi Rabaah) raising his hands when he started the Salaah, when he bowed and when he raised his head from bowing so I asked him about that and he said: I prayed behind (Abdullah bin az-Zubayr) (radiallah anhu), so he raised his hands when he started the Salaah and when he bowed and when he raised his head from bowing, so I asked him about that so he said: I prayed behind (Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq) (radiallah anhu), so he raised his hands when he started the Salaah and when he bowed and when he raised his head from bowing, and Abu Bakr said: I prayed behind the (Messenger of Allaah) (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), so he raised his hands when he started the Salaah and when he bowed and when he raised his head from bowing.

So this chain is continuous (Musalsal) with each teacher practically illustrating the act of Raf’ ul-Yadayn to his student in prayer as done by and taught to him by his teacher until all the way to the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). However, this act of illustration and thus continuity is broken at the beginning of the chain before As-Sulami. So this is an example of “Musalsal Naaqis” whose continuity is broken at the beginning of the chain and it also is an example of the first category of Tasalsul shown above (i.e. the Tasalsul of Haal or condition).

Benefits of a Musalsal Isnaad:

A Musalsal hadeeth has benefits that are general as well as specific. The general benefits apply to all types of Musalsal hadeeth and as for the specific benefits then they are only restricted to some types.

One thing to keep in mind is that these benefits do not prevent a Musalsal hadeeth from being weak because the Asbaab (causes) of weakness are numerous.

Among the General benefits of Musalsal Isnaad are:

1-    Indication of Ittisaal (connection) and the absence of Inqitaa (interruption) in the chain such as the Musalsal chain in which all the narrators use the expressions “Sami’tu (I heard)” or “Haddathana (He narrated to us)” or “Akhbarna (He informed us)”. And likewise, it indicates towards the Dhabt (accuracy) of the narrators in that the narrator not only memorized the chain and the text but also the exact condition with which he received that chain.

2-    Protection from the Tadlees of some of the narrators and that is when the chain is Musalsal with the explicit expressions of Samaa from its narrators.

3-    Imitation of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) verbally as well as practically.

4-    Elevation of doubts in which repetition or reversal of the narrators is probable such as those narrators whose names are the same as that of their father and grandfather like “Hasan bin al-Hasan bin al-Hasan bin Ali bin Abi Taalib” radiallah anhum ajma’een.

As for the specific benefits they include the fact that a narration that is Musalsal with Huffaadh A’immah, it gives the benefit of certain knowledge according to many of the Muhadditheen as Haafidh Ibn Hajar affirms in Sharh al-Nukhbah that:

المسلسل بالحفاظ مما يفيد العلم القطعي

“A Musalsal with all Huffaadh in its chain is among those that give the benefit of certain knowledge.”

The condition stipulated with this is that it should not be a ghareeb chain. Hence an example could be given of a hadeeth narrated by Imaam Ahmed in which he is also supported by a Thiqah person, from Imaam Shaafi’ee in which he is also supported by a Thiqah person, from Imaam Maalik in which he is also supported by a Thiqah person, from Naafi’ and with him likewise a Thiqah person, from Ibn Umar (radiallah anhu). This is a Musalsal bil Huffaadh chain.

And there are two other benefits with which we will end this discussion of ours:

First: Musalsal narrations are rarely free from any weakness:

The experts of Hadeeth have done prolonged researches on the chains of Musalsal ahaadeeth and they have found that most of the Musalsal narrations are weak and only rare narrations among them are Saheeh.

The meaning of being weak here is that there is weakness within their Tasalsul (continuity) associated with a certain condition that makes it Musalsal such as the Musalsal hadeeth of Tashbeek (entwining of fingers). Even though the text of this hadeeth is found in Saheeh Muslim but the chain with which it is narrated as Musalsal is weak.

Hence, Imaam Ibn as-Salaah said:

وقلما تسلم المسلسلات من ضعف، أعني في وصف التسلسل لا في أصل المتن

“Musalsal narrations are rarely free from weakness, meaning: weakness in the very nature of Tasalsul, not in the original text.”

[Muqaddimah Ibn as-Salaah (P. 276)]

Allaamah Sakhaawi said:

وقلما يسلم التسلسل من ضعف يحصل في وصف التسلسل لا في أصل المتن، كمتسلسل المشابكة فمتنه صحيح، والطريق بالتسلسل فيها مقال

“And rarely are the Musalsal narrations free from the weakness that comes in the nature of Tasalsul not in the original text, such as the Musalsal narration of Interlocking the fingers, for its text is Saheeh but the route through which it comes as a Musalsal contains criticism.”

[Fath ul-Mugheeth (4/41)]

Imaam Dhahabi said:

وعامة المسلسلات واهية، وأكثرها باطلة؛ لكذب رُواتها، وأقواها: المسلسل بقراءة سورة الصف، والمسلسل بالدمشقيِّين، والمسلسل بالمصريين، والمسلسل بالمحمدين إلى ابن شهاب

“The common Musalsal narrations are weak and most of them are Baatil due to the lies of their narrators. The strongest of all Musalsal narrations is the Musalsal narration with the recitation of Surah Saff, and the Musalsal narration of Dimashqi narrators, and the Musalsal narration of Basri narrators, and the Musalsal narration of narrators by the name of Muhammad until Ibn Shihaab.”

[Al-Mawqadhah (P. 44)]

Second: The Most Authentic Musalsal Chain in the world:

The Musalsal hadeeth with the recitation of Soorah Saff is the most authentic of all Musalsal chains.

Allaamah Sakhaawi said in Fath ul-Mugheeth:

وأصحها مطلقا المسلسل بسورة الصف ثم بالأولية

“The most authentic Musalsal chain in absolute sense is the one with the recitation of Soorah Saff, then comes the Musalsal of the first hadeeth heard”

Allaamah Suyooti narrates from Haafidh Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaani that he said:

أصح مسلسل يرد في الدنيا المسلسل بقراءة سورة الصف

“The most authentic of all Musalsal narrations found in the world is the Musalsal narration of the recitation of Soorah Saff”

[Tadreeb ar-Raawi (2/643)]

Suyooti comments after this:

قلت: والمسلسل بالحفاظ والفقهاء أيضا

“I say that the Musalsal chain with Huffaadh and Fuqaha is also included”

Summary:

Musalsal (uniformly-linked or continuous) isnaad is one in which all the reporters use the same mode of transmission whether it relates to their Description/Trait/Siffah (a permanent trait which stays with the person all the time such as Hifdh or place of residence) or Condition/Haal (a temporary state which does not stay all the time such as shaking hands, saying a specific word, or interlocking the fingers etc)

With regard to the nature of continuity, Musalsal can either be Musalsal at-Taam (completely continuous) in which the entire chain is narrated with the same modes of either the Description or Condition, or it can be Musalsal Naaqis (not fully continuous) in which the chain is only partially continuous with the modes of either the Description or Condition, due to the occurrence of discontinuity of these modes at any level of the chain.

Musalsal Isnaad gives the benefit of connectivity in the entire chain and gives the indication of the narrator’s accuracy in narration, and most importantly it is done mostly in imitation of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

One important fact about the Musalsal chains is that most of them are usually weak and only rarely are such narrations found to be authentic in their continuity of a specific mode not in the original text of the hadeeth, and the most authentic of all Musalsal narrations is the one in which all the narrators have narrated the hadeeth with the recitation of Soorah Saff.

Books on this Topic:

Many authors have authored books in which they compiled Musalsal narrations with their chains. Such as:

1-    Musalsalaat Abi Bakr Ibn Shaazaan.
2-    Musalsalaat Abi Nu’aym al-Asbahaani.
3-    Musalsalaat al-Khateeb al-Baghdaadi.
4-    Musalsalaat Ibn Asaakir.
5-    Al-Musalsalaat by Ibn al-Jawzee.
6-    Ahaadeeth Muqtabasah min al-Arba’een al-Musalsalah.
7-    Al-Musalsalaat min al-Ahaadeeth wal Athaar by Sulemaan bin Moosa al-Kalaa’ee.
8-    Khamsah Ahaadeeth Musalsalaat by Zayaa al-Maqdisi.
9-    Al-Jawaahir al-Mufassilah fi al-Ahaadeeth al-Musalsalah by Ibn Taylasaan.
10-          Ahaadeeth Musalsalaat by Ibn Zahra as-Soofi.
11-          Ahaadeeth Musalsalah by Ibn Naaqah al-Hanafi.
12-          Musalsalaat Ibn Naasir ud-Deen.
13-          Al-Jawaahir al-Mukallalah fi al-Akhbaar al-Musalsalah by As-Sakhaawi.
14-          Al-Musalsalaat al-Kubra and Jayyaad al-Musalsalaat both by As-Suyooti.
15-          Al-Mawaarid as-Silsilah fil Ahaadeeth al-Musalsalah by Ibn at-Tayyab al-Faasi al-Madani al-Maaliki.
16-          Al-Manaahil as-Silsilah fil Ahaadeeth al-Musalsalah by Abdul Baaqi al-Ayyoobi.
17-          Al-Ayaat al-Bayyinaat fi Sharh wa Takhreej al-Musalsalaat by Abdul Hafeedh al-Faasi.
18-          Al-Fawaaid al-Jaleelah fi Musalsalaat Ibn Aqeelah by Muhammad bin Ahmed bin Sa’eed al-Hanafi.
19-          Risaalah al-Musalsalaat by al-Kattaani.
20-          Al-Aajilah fi al-Ahaadeeth al-Musalsalah by Abu al-Faydh al-Fadani.

And others

And Allaah knows best.

Mutaabi’aat, Shawaahid, and I’tibaar


1-            Mutaabi’aat (المتابعات):

It is the plural of Mutaabi’ah (متابعة) and it refers to the “support” or “accordance” of a narrator in the narration of a particular hadeeth with another narrator, with a condition that the Sahaabi who narrates the hadeeth from the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is the same.

For example: Naafi’ the freed slave of Ibn Umar (radiallah anhu) narrates a hadeeth from Ibn Umar.

And he is supported in the narration of this hadeeth by Saalim the son of Ibn Umar who also narrates it from his father i.e. Ibn Umar.

In this case since Saalim and Naafi both narrate the same hadeeth from Ibn Umar, it can be said that Saalim is the mutaabi’ (support) of Naafi, or Saalim has done the mutaabi’ah of Naafi’ and vice versa.

Example from an actual Hadeeth:

In his book “Al-Umm”, Imaam Shaafi’ee narrates from Imaam Maalik who narrates from Abdullah bin Deenaar who narrates from Ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “A month has twenty-nine days in it. Do not start the fast or break it until you see the new moon. If the new moon is obscured from you then complete Sha’baan as thirty days.

So the chain of this narration is:

Narrates (Ash-Shaafi’ee) – from – (Maalik) – from – (Ibn Deenaar) – from – (Ibn Umar) – from – (the Prophet)

A group of people thought that Imaam Shaafi’ee is alone in narrating the words “complete Sha’baan as thirty days” in this hadeeth as compared to the other companions of Imaam Maalik, so they counted this hadeeth among the “Ghareeb” narrations of Ash-Shaafi’ee.

But after I’tibaar (i.e. doing research and finding all the routes of the narration), we find that Imaam Shaafi’ee has other “Mutaabi’aat” as well (i.e. narrators that support him) and he is not alone here.

Hence, Imaam Bukhaari narrates this hadeeth in his Saheeh with the following chain:

Narrates (Abdullah bin Maslamah al-Qa’nabi) – from – (Maalik) – from – (Ibn Deenaar) – from – (Ibn Umar) – from – (the Prophet) who said: “A month has twenty nine days in it… until, complete Sha’baan as thirty days”

As we can see in this chain, Imaam Shaafi’ee has been supported by Al-Qa’nabi in narrating this narration from Imaam Maalik. So we can say that Al-Qa’nabi is the Mutaabi’ of Ash-Shaafi’ee in this narration or that Ash-Shaafi’ee is the Mutaabi’ of Al-Qa’nabi.

Benefit of Mutaabi’ah:

Mutaabi’aat serve the purpose of elevating Gharaabah (i.e. loneliness) of the narrator whose support has been done, so that it gives more strength to the hadeeth in that particular level of the chain, depending on the strength of the Mutaabi’.

One condition for the Mutaabi’ah is that it should share a common Isnaad (i.e. the same Sahaabi at the very least), and its text should at least share a common meaning if not wording.

Sometimes some Muhadditheen also call it “Shaahid” instead of Mutaabi’ah by making a wider use of the word and that is permissible too based on the language, but we will see below that the word Shaahid has a different and a more general connotation when used in a technical meaning.

Types of Mutaabi’ah:

Mutaabi’ah (support/corroboration) is divided into two categories:

1)   Mutaabi’ah Taammah (متابعة تامة) (i.e. full follow-up), which refers to sharing a common chain from the beginning to the end. Meaning, the narrator who supports another narrator, both, share a common chain from their Shaykh to the end.

2)   Mutaabi’ah Qaasirah (متابعة قاصرة) (i.e. incomplete follow-up), which refers to the follow-up of chain from the middle to the end. Meaning, the narrator who supports another narrator, both, share a common chain somewhere above their Shaykh i.e. either at the Shaykh of the Shaykh or further above, both their chains join to a common narrator.

Examples of both types:

The same hadeeth of Imaam Shaafi’ee illustrated above can be used to give examples of these types. After compiling all the chains of the narration of Imaam Shaafi’ee, we find that this hadeeth has one “Mutaabi’ah Taammah”, and two “Mutaabi’ah Qaasirah”.

The chain of the hadeeth, once again, is as follows:

Narrates (Ash-Shaafi’ee) – from – (Maalik) – from – (Ibn Deenaar) – from – (Ibn Umar) – from – (the Prophet): “complete Sha’baan as thirty days

The example of its Mutaabi’ah given above from Saheeh Bukhaari is its Mutaabi’ah Taammah, which once again, is as follows:

Narrates (Abdullah bin Maslamah al-Qa’nabi) – from – (Maalik) – from – (Ibn Deenaar) – from – (Ibn Umar) – from – (the Prophet): “complete Sha’baan as thirty days
                                                                                          
Its first Mutaabi’ah Qaasirah is as Ibn Khuzaymah narrates in his Saheeh through the following route:

Narrates (Aasim bin Muhammad al-Umari) – from – (Muhammad bin Zayd) – from – (Ibn Umar) – from – (the Prophet): “complete Sha’baan as thirty days

Its second Mutaabi’ah Qaasirah is as Imaam Muslim narrates in his Saheeh through the following route:

Narrates (Ubaydullah bin Umar) – from – (Naafi’) – from – (Ibn Umar) – from – (the Prophet): “complete Sha’baan as thirty days

As we can see, in the first chain (Al-Qa’nabi) agreed with (Ash-Shaafi’ee) in narrating it from (Maalik) with the same common chain so it is a full follow-up or Mutaabi’ah Taammah.

While in the second and third chain, (Aasim) and (Ubaydullah) both agree on narrating it from (Ibn Umar) so they are incomplete follow-ups or Mutaabi’ah Qaasirah.

2-            Shawaahid (الشواهد):

Shawaahid is the plural of “Shaahid” and it is a form of “Mutaabi’ah” except that it is only relevant or special to the one who narrated the hadeeth from the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) meaning, the Sahaabi. In other words, it is a Mutaabi’ah of a Sahaabi with another Sahaabi in narrating the text or meaning of a certain hadeeth.

Such as a hadeeth which is narrated by Jaabir bin Abdullah (radiallah anhu) and a similar hadeeth either in text or meaning is also narrated from Aa’ishah (radiallah anha). So it can be said about the hadeeth of Jaabir that, “It has a Shaahid from the hadeeth of Aa’ishah” and the opposite can also be said for the hadeeth of Aa’ishah.

Likewise, a Mursal narration (a Taabi’ee narrating directly from the Prophet) can also become a Shaahid for a Muttasil narration. It is known that the Mursal narration does not mention the name of a Sahaabi but it still can be a Shaahid based on its independence of narration from the Muttasil.

Examples of Shawaahid:

The same hadeeth used in the examples above can be used here again to illustrate a shaahid. We learned above that the hadeeth of Ash-Shaafi’ee had one Mutaabi’ah Taammah and two Mutaabi’ah Qaasirah. Now the same hadeeth has two Shawaahid as well (meaning, the same hadeeth narrated from two different Sahaabah).

Hence, Imaam Nasaa’ee narrates with the following route:

Narrates (Amr bin Deenaar) – from – (Muhammad bin Hunayn) – from – (Ibn Abbaas) – from – (the Prophet): “complete Sha’baan as thirty days

And similarly, Imaam Bukhaari narrates:

Narrates (Shu’bah) – from – (Muhammad bin Ziyaad) – from – (Abu Hurayrah) – from – (the Prophet): “complete Sha’baan as thirty days

So these two narrations contain different Sahaabah, so they are Shawaahid.

Summary:

(1) The Narrator ---------- (2) The Shaykh of the Narrator ---------- (3) The Taabi’ee ---------- (4) The Sahaabi ---------- (5) The Prophet

So, Mutaabi’ah Taammah: is that some other narrator narrates a similar narration from “The Shaykh of the Narrator” i.e. containing all (2), (3), (4), (5) in common.

Mutaabi’ah Qaasirah: is that some other narrator narrates a similar narration from the same or common Sahaabi i.e. containing (3), (4), (5) OR (4) & (5) as common in its chain.

Shaahid: refers to a similar hadeeth but narrated from a different Sahaabi, i.e. only having (5) as common.

3-            What is I’tibaar?

Linguistically, “I’tibaar (اعتبار) (i.e. consideration)” means to ponder over some things so as to be able to recognize several things of a single type.

In Istilaah (technical meaning), I’tibaar means to research the status of a given hadeeth by pondering over other ahaadeeth to see if anyone else has also narrated it or not. If someone else has also narrated it then what is its specification i.e. do they agree with each other or oppose each other? If they agree with each other, do they agree in literal words or in meaning? Similarly, do they both narrate from the same Sahaabi or different Sahaabah? If they oppose each other then what mutual relation do they have with each other due to which one of them can be preferred over another?

Hence, Ali bin Muhammad al-Jarjaani (D. 816) writes in “Al-Mukhtasar fi Usool al-Hadeeth” (P. 86) that:

والاعتبار هو النظر في حال الحديث هل تفرد به راويه أم لا وهل هو معروف أو لا

“I’tibaar refers to looking into the condition of the hadeeth, whether its narrator is alone in narrating it or not? And whether he is known or not”

If after research, it is known that this particular hadeeth is not narrated by anyone else then it will be termed “Fard” and “Ghareeb”. And if someone else has also supported the narration then it will be termed as a “Mutaabi’” or “Shaahid” based on their details. And if someone has opposed it then it will be termed “Shaadh” or “Munkar” accordingly, whose details will be dealt with later on, in-shaa-Allaah.

And Allaah knows best
Compiled from different sources.

Friday, August 15, 2014

The Confusion of Mutawaatir and Ahaad Hadeeth Caused by Heterodox Ideologies

The Confusion of Mutawaatir and Ahaad Hadeeth Caused by Heterodox Ideologies

Author: Brother Haitham Hamdan


Issue 1: What qualifies as a “mutawaatir” hadeeth?

Simply put: The istilaahi definition a Mutawaatir hadeeth is one which was proven not to have been an error.

Notice the difference between saying: ‘was not proven to have been an error’, and saying ‘was proven not to have been an error’. This distinction will be made abundantly clear after reviewing the following material inshaa’Allah

Al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi defined the Mutawaatir in his Kifaayah page 16 by saying:

هو ما يخبر به القوم الذين يبلغ عددهم حدا يعلم عند مشاهدتهم بمستقر العادة أن اتفاق الكذب منهم محال , وأن التواطؤ منهم في مقدار الوقت الذي انتشر الخبر عنهم فيه متعذر , وأن ما أخبروا عنه لا يجوز دخول اللبس والشبهة في مثله , وأن أسباب القهر والغلبة والأمور الداعية إلى الكذب منتفية عنهم

“It is a narration which has been related by people the number of whom was so high that made it habitually impossible for them to have collaborated on lying, and that it was unfeasible for them to have gathered in the period when the narration became widely spread, and that the act of narration did not lend itself to oppression, misunderstanding or promotion of lying.”

Ibn us-Salaah defined it in his Muqaddimah page 59 as:

الخبر الذي ينقله من يحصل العلم بصدقه ضرورة

“A narration which has been narrated by those whose truthfulness (collectively) has been proven, thru doubtless analysis, to be a necessity.”

Haafidh al-Iraqee, Haafidh Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaani, and Haafidh as-Sakhawee defined the Mutawaatir in a similar way.

From this we learn that a Mutawaatir hadeeth is NOT necessarily the hadeeth which was narrated by three, twelve or forty narrators in each layer of narrators. These numbers were considered by some to be the minimum required to achieve Tawaatur (proving it was not an error). These numbers are (to some) just the method of demonstrating Tawaatur, and should not be part of the definition of Tawaatur.

As-Suyooti said in Tadreeb ar-Rawee 2/176:

لا يعتبر فيه عدد معين في الأصح

“A specific number of narrators is not what should be considered.”

Then he related the dispute among the scholars on the minimum number of narrators required to achieve the criterion of Tawaatur.

Thus a hadeeth that is “ahad” is a hadeeth that does not meet the level of Tawaatur, regardless of the number of those who narrated it in each layer of narrators.

Again Abu Bakr al-Khateeb said:

خبر الآحاد فهو ما قصر عن صفة التواتر

"As for Ahaad narrations, it is that which falls short of the requirement of Tawaatur."

Ibn Hajr said in the Nukhbah page 1:

وكلها - سوى الأول - آحاد

"Everything other than (Mutawaatir) is Ahaad."

Many think that Ahaad hadeeth are limited to those narrated by one or two narrators in one or more layers of narration. This is not correct. Any hadeeth which could not be proven not to have been an error is Ahaad.


Issue 2: Who was the first to come up with the distinction of Mutawaatir vs. Ahaad hadeeths?

The specific person who first advocated this distinction is unknown. However we know the following:

1)   Ahlul-Hadeeth from the Salaf did not advocate this distinction. It was not mentioned in their numerous works in a favorable way.

2)   In fact, several of the early scholars of Islam condemned this distinction. Two of such scholars who were explicit in their condemnation were Imam Shaafi’ee (d. 204 AH) and Haafidh Uthmaan bin Sa’eed Daarimi (d. 280 AH).


Issue 3: Imam Shaafi’ee’s condemnation of the Mutawaatir vs. Ahaad distinction:

In his great book al-Umm; Imam Shaafi’ee documented several of his debates. One of those debates discussed the issue of the distinction at hand. The following is a translation of the debate starting with the discussion regarding the concept of Tawaatur.

Imam Shaafi’ee said in 7/283:

فقلت له حدد لي تواتر الأخبار بأقل مما يثبت الخبر واجعل له مثالا لعلم ما يقول وتقول قال نعم إذا وجدت هؤلاء النفر للأربعة الذين جعلتهم مثالا يروون واحدا فتتفق روايتهم أن رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم - حرم شيئا أو أحل شيئا استدللت على أنهم بتباين بلدانهم وأن كلا منهم قبل العلم عن غير الذي قبله عنه صاحبه وقبله عنه من أداه إلينا ممن لم يقبل عن صاحبه أن روايتهم إذا كانت هذا تتفق عن رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم - فالغلط لا يمكن فيها قال فقلت له لا يكون تواتر الأخبار عندك عن أربعة في بلد ولا إن قبل عنهم أهل بلد حتى يكون المدني يروي عن المدني والمكي يروي عن المكي والبصري عن البصري والكوفي عن الكوفي حتى ينتهي كل واحد منهم بحديثه إلى رجل من أصحاب النبي - صلى الله عليه وسلم - غير الذي روى عنه صاحبه ويجمعوا جميعا على الرواية عن النبي - صلى الله عليه وسلم - للعلة التي وصفت قال نعم لأنهم إذا كانوا في بلد واحد أمكن فيهم التواطؤ على الخبر ولا يمكن فيهم إذا كانوا في بلدان مختلفة فقلت له لبئسما نبثت به على من جعلته إماما في دينك

"I told him: define Tawaatur and give me an example for it.

He said: in the example you gave regarding the four narrators, if they agreed on the text of the Hadeeth, whether in prohibiting or permitting something, and each narrator was from a different country, each one of them received the narration from a different person than the other narrator, and delivered the narration to a person different than the other, only then would it be impossible for the narration to have been an error.

I said: so to you; Tawaatur is not achieved … unless a narrator from Madinah only narrated the Hadeeth from one who is from Madinah, and the Meccan narrator only from the Meccan, and a Basri from a Basri, and Kufi from Kufi, all the way until each one of them reached a different companion of the Prophet alayhi salatu salam? They all must agree on the text of the narration?

He said: yes, because if they were living in the same country, it would be conceivable for them to have collaborated (on lying). But if they were from different countries, it would be impossible.

I said: Woe to you for being accusatory for those whom you are making the source of your religion."


What is Imam Shaafi’ee saying here?

He is condemning his opponent for being so worried about his teachers lying to him, when they were supposed to be trustworthy in his eyes. They were his sources of religious knowledge.


Later, Imam Shaafi’ee continues to demonstrate how his opponent had no escape from applying the theory of Tawaatur on the Sahaabah as well, which is absurd.

He also tells his opponent that narrators used to travel. So just because one of them was from a particular country did not mean that it was impossible for him to have traveled and collaborated with another narrator.

So as we see, Imam Shaafi’ee condemned the idea of requiring Tawaatur as a proof of the narrators not to have collaborated on lying.


Issue 4: Addressing a doubt of the innovating propagandist regarding ash- Shaafi’ee’s use of Khabrul-Aammah

In several of his works, Imam Shaafi’ee accepted classifying some narrations as: Khabarul ‘Aammah2, so how can one say that Imam Shaafi’ee condemned Tawatur?

Khabarul ‘Aammah is not the same as a Mutawaatir Hadeeth. This could be demonstrated from the following:

First: When Imam Shaafi’ee asked his opponent: "How is a Prophetic Sunnah proven to be authentic in your opinion?

He replied: by one of three methods. Shaafi’ee said: what is the first?
He said: Khabarul A’aammah, information related by the masses from the masses.
                       
Shaafi’ee said: do you mean like dhuhr prayer being four Rak’as? He said: yes.

Shaafi’ee said: I do not know of anyone who disagrees with you on this. What is the second method?

He said: Tawaatur of narrations."

[Al-Umm (7/296)]

As we can see, there is a distinction between the two methods. So Khabarul ‘Aammah which was mentioned by Imam Shaafi’ee’s opponent and which Shaafi’ee accepted; is not Tawaatur.

Second: Imam Shaafi’ee condemned Tawaatur, so how could it be the same as Khabarul ‘Aammah which he accepted?

Thirdly: If we study the examples which Shaafi’ee gave for Khabarul ‘Aammah, we find that the requirement for Tawaatur is not fulfilled in them. For example, that Dhuhr is four Rak’as was not reported by a large number of narrators who lived in different countries … etc. So he could not have been talking about Tawaatur when discussing Khabarul ‘Aammah.

So what is Khabarul ‘Aammah?

It is the information which has been relayed by the Muslim masses on the authority of previous Muslim masses, and so on. Such as: the number or Rak'as of Dhuhr prayer and that the soul leaves the body after death.

This abundance in narration would make it acceptable by default. It is just like saying: the fact that the Tsunami occurred is acceptable by default. Because millions related the event of the Tsunami on the authority of millions, making it impossible for it to have been a fabrication.

So it is not the same as Tawaatur because Tawaatur is not demonstrated by default, rather by analysis. This is shown from the distinction which was made by the opponent of Imam Shaafi’ee in the debate.


Issue 5: Who was Imam Shaafi’ee debating in this debate?

Imam Shaafi’ee did not mention the name of his opponent in his book al-Umm. However, many believe that he was debating Bishr bin Ghiyaath al-Mareesi (d. 218 AH). Imam adh-Dhahabi and others referred to some of Shaafi’ee's debates with Bishr.

Who was Bishr al-Mareesi?
Imam adh-Dhahabi said in Siyaar A’laam an-Nabula’ 10/199:

كان بشر من كبار الفقهاء.أخذ عن: القاضي أبي يوسف. وروى عن: حماد بن سلمة، وسفيان بن عيينة. ونظر في الكلام، فغلب عليه، وانسلخ من الورع والتقوى، وجرد القول بخلق القرآن، ودعا إليه، حتى كان عين الجهمية في عصره وعالمهم، فمقته أهل العلم، وكفره عدة، ولم يدرك جهم بن صفوان، بل تلقف مقالاته من أتباعه

"Bishr bin Ghiyaath al-Mareesi … was one of the grand Fuqahaa’. He took (knowledge) from Abu Yusuf (student of Imam Abu Haneefah), and narrated the Hadeeth of Hammad bin Salamah and Sufyaan bin ‘Uyaynah.
Then he started to study Kalaam and it took him over. So he abandoned piety and God fearing, and promoted the saying that the Quran is a creature. Until he became an icon of Jahmis, and a scholar of theirs’.
So people of knowledge despised him, many of them considered him Kafir. He did not meet al-Jahm bin Safwaan, but he received Jahm’s opinions from his followers."

In other words, the source of the Mutawaatirs vs. Ahaad distinction was people of Bid’ah. And Imam Shaafi’ee was defending the Sunnah against this Bid’ee concept.


Issue 6: Imam Daarimi’s condemnation of the Mutawaatir vs. Ahaad distinction:

In his book ar-Rudd ‘Ala Bishr al-Mareesy al’Aneed, “Refuting Bishr al-Mareesi: the stubborn one” he said:

"وادعيت أيضا في دفع آثار رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ضحكة لم يسبقك إلى مثلها عاقل من الأمة، ولا جاهل، فزعمت أنه لا تقوم الحجة من الآثار الصحيحة التي تروى عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى كل حديث لو حلف رجل بطلاق امرأته أنه كذب لم تطلق امرأته. ثم قلت: ولو حلف رجل بهذه اليمين على حديث لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم صحيح عنه أنه كذب ما طلقت امرأته.
فيقال لهذا المعارض الناقض على نفسه: قد أبطلت بدعواك هذه جميع الآثار التي تروى عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، ما احتججت منها لضلالتك وما تحتج، ولو كنت ممن يلتفت إلى تأويله، لقد سننت للناس سنة وحددت لهم في الأخبار حدا لم يستفيدوا مثلها من أحد من العالمين قبلك، ولوجب على كل مختار من الأئمة في دعواك ألا يختار منها شيئا حتى يبدأ باليمين بطلاق امرأته فيحلف أن هذا الحديث صدق أو كذب البتة، فإن كان شيئا طلقت به امرأته استعمله وإن لم تطلق تركه.
ويلك! إن العلماء لم يزالوا يختارون هذه الآثار ويستعملونها وهم يعلمون أنه لا يجوز لأحد منهم أن يحلف على أصحها أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال البتة وعلى أضعفها أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لم يقله البتة، ولكنهم كانوا لا يألون الجهد في الأخبار الأحفظ نها والمثل فالأمثل من رواتها في أنفسهم ويرون أن الأيمان التي ألزمتهم فيها بطلاق نسائهم مرفوعة عنهم حتى ابتدعتها أنت من غير أن يسبقك إليها مسلم وكافر. ففي دعواك يجب على القضاة والحكام أن لا يحكموا بشهادة العدول عندهم إلا بشيء يمكن القاضي أن يحلف عليه بطلاق امرأته أن الشاهد به قد صدق. أو أنه إن حلف عليها بطلاق امرأته أنها كذب لم تطلق امرأته.
ويحك! من سبقك إلى هذا التأويل من أمة محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم؟"

"In an effort to reject Prophetic traditions, you claimed a laughable claim, which neither a wise nor ignorant member of the Ummah has claimed before you.

You claimed that a Prophetic tradition would not be reliable unless that in case a man swears that his wife is divorced if this certain tradition is a lie, that his wife would not be divorced. And that if a man swears that his wife is divorced if this particular Hadeeth which is considered authentic that it was not authentic that his wife would not be divorced.

So we say to this opponent who is contradicting to himself: by this claim, you have falsified all Prophetic traditions, those which you use to support your misguidance, and those which you do not use.

You are someone whom it is not worth it to pay attention. Nevertheless, you have introduced something which no human prior to you has introduced.

Based on your claim, it becomes incumbent on every Imam to ask those who narrate Prophetic traditions to ask the narrator to swear on divorcing their wives

Woe to you, scholars have always accepted and implemented Prophetic traditions without asking the narrators to swear that the most authentic narrations were said by the Prophet ASWS. Or that the weakest narrations were not said by the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).


Instead, they did not reserve any effort in ensuring that the narrators were trustworthy, and that the narrations were well preserved. They never felt obligated to swear as you asked them to do. You came up with something which neither a Muslim nor a Kafir before you came up with.

Based on your claim, judges and rulers should not rule based on the testimony of trustworthy witnesses unless the judge was willing to swear that if the witnesses were not truthful that his wife is divorced …

Woe to you, who among the nation of Muhammad ASWS said this before you?!"


This discussion demonstrates that the Salaf never made it a requirement to prove that a narration could not have been an error before accepting it. Which is what the advocates of Tawaatur claim. The Salaf did their best to analyze the narrations and to arrive at the authentic of them.


Issue 7: Does Mutawaatir Hadeeth exist in the Sunnah?

The simple answer is: No.

You will not find a Hadeeth which has been narrated by a minimum of three Sahaabah, and on the authority of each Sahaabi, three Taabi’een etc [meaning in each stage of transmission. This is known as “tabaqa” in Uloomul-Hadeeth]. In fact, the people of Hadeeth did not care about this issue. We saw from the previous issue that the scholars condemned this distinction to the point of considering it an innovation.

Imam Ibn us-Salaah said in his Muqaddimah 59:

ولعل ذلك لكونه لا تشمله صناعتهم، ولا يكاد يوجد في رواياتهم۔۔۔۔ومن سئل عن إبراز مثال لذلك فيما يروى من الحديث أعياه تطلبه

“(Mutawaatir Hadeeth) is not included in the trade of Hadeeth, and hardly exists in the narration of people of Hadeeth … and whoever is asked to produce such a (Mutawaatir) Hadeeth, will give up.”

The only example which Ibn us-Salaah and others were able to produce was Hadeeth: “whoever lies on me let him reserve his place in the hell fire.

If this is the case, then what do the scholars mean when they say: “it has been received with Tawaatur that the Prophet alayhis salaatu was salam said/did this”?

Those scholars did not mean Tawaatur in the technical sense: a minimum of three narrators on the authority of three in each tabaqa etc.

What scholars like ibn Abdul-Barr, ibn Hazm, ibn Taymiyyah and others meant by this is that this has been narrated in abundance on the authority of the Prophet alayhi salatu salam. That he, alayhi salatu salam, said/did it in several occasions under different circumstances. For example: the prohibition of taking graves as places of worship, the prayer of solar eclipse and the Hadeeth of the victorious group.

None of the individual narrations which relates to us these sayings/actions has been narrated by a minimum of three on the authority of three … etc.

Another way that some scholars used the term Tawaatur is to describe a concept which is prevalent in the Sunnah. Even if the texts which relate this concept are not Mutawaatir. This is known as "Mutawaatir in meaning (Mutawaatir al-Ma’nawi)". What they meant is that this concept is mentioned over and over in the Sunnah to the point of becoming indisputable. For example: the concept of Islamic brotherhood, that Allah SWT will be seen in the afterlife and that cleanliness is a virtue.

Again, none of the individual narrations which relates these concepts is
Mutawaatir in the technical sense.


Issue 8: Addressing a common doubts to the following questions

If someone says: It seems logical not to accept a narration unless it has been proven not to have been an error, doesn’t it?

The claim that this methodology stands to logic means:

1)   That the Salaf radiallah anhum, by which the religion is based on, were not logical in accepting narrations of trustworthy individuals without requiring the proof of it not being an error.

2)   That all our daily affairs are run in an illogical manner. When your mechanic calls to tell you that your car is ready, do you ask him to prove that he has not erred?!

Or when a doctor tells you that you have an infection and that you need to take this medicine for it, do you require a proof that he is not lying?!

Of coarse not, you trust your mechanic and doctor, so you accept the information which they relate to you.


But we are talking about matters of religion, not a broken car?

True. However, we will not be more protective of our religion than Allah
Subhaanahu wa ta’Ala.

He Subhaanahu wa ta’Ala says in Surah Hujuraat 6:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِن جَاءَكُمْ فَاسِقٌ بِنَبَإٍ فَتَبَيَّنُوا أَن تُصِيبُوا قَوْمًا بِجَهَالَةٍ فَتُصْبِحُوا عَلَىٰ مَا فَعَلْتُمْ نَادِمِينَ

“O ye who believe! if a wicked person comes to you with any news, ascertain the truth, lest ye harm people unwittingly, and afterwards become full of repentance for what ye have done.”

Which means that if a trustworthy person delivers news that we should accept it without requiring a demonstration of it not being a lie.

He Subhaanahu wa ta’Ala also said in Surat at-Tawbah 122:

وَمَا كَانَ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ لِيَنفِرُوا كَافَّةً ۚ فَلَوْلَا نَفَرَ مِن كُلِّ فِرْقَةٍ مِّنْهُمْ طَائِفَةٌ لِّيَتَفَقَّهُوا فِي الدِّينِ وَلِيُنذِرُوا قَوْمَهُمْ إِذَا رَجَعُوا إِلَيْهِمْ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَحْذَرُونَ

“If a contingent from every expedition remained behind, they could devote themselves to studies in religion, and admonish the people when they return to them, that thus they (may learn) to guard themselves (against evil).”

Allah did not make Tawaatur a concern.

In addition, we will not be more protective of the religion than our beloved Prophet alayhi salatu salam. He used to send individual Sahabis to teach Islam without being concerned about Tawaatur.

As a compromise, could we say that we will accept Ahaad Hadeeth for matters of Fiqh (action), but not matters of ‘Aqeedah (knowledge)?

It is the position of the four schools of thought that Ahhad Hadeeth warrant both action and knowledge. Refer to Ibnul Qayyim’s Mukhtasar as-Sawaa’iq al- Mursalah.

We never see this Fiqh/’Aqeedah distinction in the Quran, Sunnah or teachings of the Salaf. It was people of Kalam who first came up with it.

Another problem with this compromise was demonstrated by Imam al-Albani rahmatullahi alayh. He said once:

“If we were to consider this distinction, then how do we deal with a Hadeeth which contains both Fiqh and ‘Aqeedah issues?!

For example, the Hadeeth of seeking refuge in Allah Subhaanahu wa ta’Ala from the hellfire, punishment of grave and ad-dajjaal, before Tassaleem in Salah. Should we act upon it (Fiqh) without accepting its assertion of hell, the grave turmoil and the dajjaal ('Aqeedah)?! This would be using double standards.

So, this distinction is not acceptable.

Furthermore, we see people of Kalaam very often using this distinction only when it is in their best interest. Other times we see them using Hadeeth to support their Bida' even if it was not Mutawaatir.


Issue 9: Since the Mutawaatir/Ahaad distinction is neither Shar’ee nor logical, why did people of Kalaam resort to it?

As Imam Daarimi said to Bishr al-Mareesi, “In an effort to reject Prophetic traditions, you claimed a laughable claim … etc”. People of Bid’ah found the Sunnah to be in the way of spreading their deviance. So they resorted to this distinction to deny Sunnah based arguments against them.


Issue 10: Among those who advocated the Mutawaatir/Ahaad distinction were great scholars of Sunnah, such as al-Khateeb al-Baghdaadi, Ibn us-Salaah, and many others. Why is this?

This is a deep question. It will take a whole article to explain how Kalaam found its way to most Islamic and linguistic sciences. Hadeeth was not an exception.

Briefly, in an effort to repel the danger of Shi’a, Sunni dynasties such as the Saljuqis promoted Ash’arism. Ash’aris were doing a greater job in refuting Shi’ism than were Ahlul-hadeeth. Promotion of Ash’arism brought with it the promotion of Kalaam theology.

Ash’aris controlled Islamic schools, they designed the curriculums for them, and only graduates from those universities were employed by the government. The role of Ahlul-hadeeth was gradually diminished. This phenomenon was further exaggerated y the rise of the ruler Nidhaamul-Mulk. It was during this period where Islam in the Muslim world became flipped whereby the influx of Ash’arism the norm and Sunnism became the marginalized outcast.

Hadeeth was among the sciences affected by this infiltration and to many scholars, this new version of the science of Hadeeth became understood as the proper version.


Issue 11: Is this why most Islamic universities teach this distinction in their Hadeeth curriculums?

Yes. It is because of the systematic infiltration of the Kalaam methodology into the science of Hadeeth since past generations until now.


Issue 12: Qat’i (قطعي) vs. Dhanni (ظني) distinction:

This is a distinction which is based on the Mutawaatir/Ahaad distinction.

Qat’i means: definite.
Dhanni means: Probable.

These two classifications were applied by people of Kalaam to both the authenticity of the narration, and its meaning.

So four classifications resulted:

1)   Qat'i with respect to both authenticity and meaning. An example for this is the Quranic verse: “establish prayer”. This statement is definite in authenticity and has only one meaning.

2)   Qat’i with respect to authenticity, and Dhanni with respect to meaning. Its authenticity is definite but its meaning is probable. The meaning is not agreed upon.

3)   Dhanni with respect to authenticity but Qat’i with respect to meaning. Such as any Ahaad Hadeeth with a definite meaning.

4)   Dhanni with respect to both authenticity and meaning. Such as an Ahaad Hadeeth. Its authenticity is probable, and it could mean several things, so its meaning is probable as well.

We do not find this distinction in the works of the Salaf, and there is no evidence that it had an impact on the rulings to which they had arrived. The Salaf considered all authentic narrations warranting both knowledge and action.


This is all I have regarding this matter. Anything correct that I’ve said is from Allaah. Any error is from me and the Shaytaan.

I ask Allah Subhaanahu wa ta’ala to teach us that which benefits us and to benefit us from that which He teaches us.


Edited by Ahl ul-Isnaad