Islamic Salvation

A Comprehensive Compilation of Reliable Narrations

Rate this topic

92 posts in this topic

One of the brothers is kindly hosting the translations in his well-designed site.

It is an ambitious project that he has embarked upon and still in its infancy stages. It is hoped that it will eventually be a one-stop repository for all the major Shi'i Hadith works translated into good quality English.  

http://corpus.purifiedhousehold.com/muʿjam-al-aḥadith-al-muʿtabara/

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 12/22/2016 at 10:06 PM, Islamic Salvation said:

[1/51] الكافي: محمد بن يحيى، عن محمد بن الحسين، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن ابن أذينة، عن محمد بن مسلم قال: قلت لابي عبدالله عليه السلام: أسمع الحديث منك فأزيد وأنقص؟ قال: إن كنت تريد معانيه فلا بأس

[1/51] al-Kafi: Muhammad b. Yahya from Muhammad b. al-Husayn from Ibn Abi Umayr from Ibn Udhayna from Muhammad b. Muslim who said: I said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام: I hear the narration from you - am I allowed to add or decrease (some words to/from it)? he said: if you intend to convey the same meaning then there is no harm. 

 

Does Riwaya bil Ma’na mean that the Ahadith lose Hujiyyah?

(Adopted from the Discussion by al-Muhsini)

Beginning at first principles would require us not to accept Riwaya bil Ma’na (“narration by meaning”) because it entails addition and deletion of words at the narrator’s whim. “Narration by meaning” is Hadasi [involves the narrator’s own cognitive creativity in framing the narration such as in word-choice etc. depending on how he has understood the Imam’s words - and this understanding is not infallible but could be faulty]. Hadas of a narrator is not a Hujjah for other than him. But the Imam in the above reliable-by-chain narration permits this practice, and this permission does not seem to be limited to Muhammad b. Muslim. In reality we cannot ascertain the number of narrators who made use of this permission.

If it is proven that a large number of narrators made use of it - then - it is not far-fetched to hold the position that the apparent meaning of the narrations (Dhawahir al-Ahadith) that have been attributed to al-Sadiq and the `Aimma after him have lost any probative force (Hujiyya) they had. The logical conclusion of holding such a position would be the need to go for the epistemic theory of Insidād (closing the doors to certain knowledge).

And I wrote asking this question in my early student days to al-Sayyid al-Hakim, to which he answered: <<the narrator when he says: al-Sadiq “said”: such and such …, it is apparent that all the wordings are from him (i.e. the Imam) in toto, and this apparency is not abandoned because of the mere possibility of the narrator having used his discretion in selecting words while narrating the narration “by meaning” - to abandon the apparent would require a special indicator (Dalil Khass)>>. 

I say: Because of the existence of the permission from the Imam, and the inevitable presence of narrators who acted upon such a permission, we do not accept that the apparent meaning conveyed by the word “said” should be that a narration are the words of the Imam verbatim, and even if the default position is taken to be this - it is still possible to negate the Hujiyyah [of the narrations] because we have Ilm al-Ijmali [knowledge of a general kind] that narrators did indeed make use of their arbitrary judgment over the narrations’ wordings. In summary, this is an intractable problem (from among the Mushkilat), and the problem is even more severe in the case of lengthy narrations since there is no indicator in each specific case of the transmission being of a written nature. 

Conclusion of the Discussion

In a narration from the Prophet: “may Allah make radiant [the face] who hears my words and memorizes them and understands them and relays them to the one who did not hear them, for it may happen that a bearer of Fiqh is not a Faqih and it may happen that a bearer of Fiqh relays them to one who is more of a Faqih than him”. [This would seem to be demanding narration to be verbatim and underlining the unavoidability of variation in the comprehension of individual narrators].

However, al-Majlisi recounts in his Bihar: <<there is a consensus between most of the Salaf and the Khalaf from both the sects as to the permissibility of narrating “by meaning” if one is certain that he is relaying the exact meaning [of what the Prophet or `Aimma meant]. It is known that the companions of the prophet and those of the `Aimma were not writing down the narrations in the same instance as they were hearing from them. Furthermore, it is customarily impossible for them to have memorized the exact wordings especially if they have heard it just once or if it was a lengthy narration, and the problem is compounded when someone is recollecting after a passage of time. This would explain why it is common to come across the same point narrated from them via different wordings, however none rejected this practice of theirs …>>

I say: the condition that has been imposed for the permissibility of narrating "by meaning" - that is - the narrator should be certain that he is conveying the exact intended meaning - is not within the capability of ordinary narrators or even the adept ones to meet. For every Mujtahid has his own Hadas and subjective understanding gleamed from hearing the same words spoken. Furthermore, for latter-day scholars - who are far-removed from the age of the narrators who actually participated in transmitting narrations - to impose such a condition ex post facto - is to succumb to mere hubris which has no utility [it is purely theoretical]. It is ineffectual because it does not change an iota of what has already occurred before their life-times.

In fact, in some cases one might even be certain that the wordings were not conveyed exactly. Suppose that the Dua of Arafa at the Mawqif was Mu’tabar in its chain - would you accept that it actually goes back to al-Imam al-Husayn? Knowing that the narrator is an ordinary man who did not have writing-desk, ink-well and pen? Even if we grant that he had these things with him - was it possible for him to write it down at the time of a personal supplication? Whoever claims the authenticity of a narration in such circumstances then he is suspect in his thinking and in his intellect! As for the middling-length narrations from the `Aimma in whose time the use of pen and papers was prevalent then it is possible to accept them. All in all, there isn’t any intelligible answer that can be given to solve this quandary and the existence of differences in the contents of narrations probably owes its existence to this allowance of “narrating by meaning”.

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Panzerwaffe and Ali_Hussain like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Fifteenth chapter in the book is 

1.15Some of the Reasons for Differences in the Narrations

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-intellect-and-knowledge/some-of-the-reasons-for-differences-in-the-narrations

 

 [1/73] رجال الكشي: عن ابن مسعود، عن علي بن الحسن، عن العباس بن عامر وجعفر ابن محمد بن حكيم، عن أبان بن عثمان، عن أبي بصير قال: قيل لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام - وأنا عنده -: إن سالم بن أبي حفصة يروي عنك أنك تتكلم على سبعين وجها لك من كلها المخرج، قال: فقال: ما يريد سالم مني؟ أيريد أن أجيئ بالملائكة؟! فوالله ما جاء بها النبيون، ولقد قال إبراهيم: إني سقيم والله ما كان سقيما وما كذب، ولقد قال إبراهيم: بل فعله كبيرهم هذا وما فعله وما كذب، ولقد قال يوسف: إنكم لسارقون والله ما كانو سارقين وما كذب

[1/73] Rijal al-Kashshi: From Ibn Masud from Ali b. al-Hasan from al-Abbas b. A’mir and Ja’far b. Muhammad b. Hukaym from Aban b. Uthman from Abi Basir who said: It was said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام - while I was with him: Salim b. Abi Hafsa narrates from you that you speak with seventy facets - for each facet you have a way out [a possible alternative interpretation to escape speaking a lie], so he said: what does Salim want from me? does he want me to come with the angels (to prove my truth)?! For by Allah - not even the prophets came with them, and Ibrahim had said “I am sick” (37:88) but by Allah he was not sick nor did he lie, and Ibrahim also said: “rather this biggest one of them (idol) has done it” (21:63) while he had not done it nor did he lie, and Yusuf said: “you are thieves” (12:70) and by Allah they were not thieves nor did he lie.

--> Salim b. Abi Hafsa (d. 137) was a leader of the Batri Zaydis. It should be noted that the Imam had indeed said what is attributed to him here by Salim - for there are a number of corroborating narrations in which the `Aimma say something along the lines of:

إنا لنتكلم بالكلمة لها سبعون وجها لنا من كلها المخرج 

'We Speak a word which has seventy facets - we have for each - a way out'

--> As al-Muhsini comments: the presence of a Makhraj (way out/escape clause) in all the facets shows that the Imam would never lie outright, though they may equivocate for certain reasons.

--> Indirect speech is permitted in the Shariah and not considered a lie if it is employed as a way to avoid harm (Taqiyya/Tawriyya), or to fulfill a greater good such as to bring about resolution of conflicts between the people or to show people the error of their ways by conjuring up a hypothetical etc. Lying on the other hand is being mendacious in seeking to disprove a truth or to conceal a falsehood.

--> Al-Majlisi says: since Salim's objection originated from his lack of recognition of the Imam - the Imam addressed this first by saying: what does Salim want from me as evidence to return to his submission to me for haven’t I already provided aplenty? And if he is only to believe once I come with the angels and make them bear witness that I am truthful then this is something that not even the prophets did. Then the Imam addressed the objection raised by Salim by pointing out that the motive for speaking in such a manner is because of Taqiyya or fulfilling some greater good, and this does not amount to lies for even the prophets have done it.

--> Ibrahim had said “I am Sick” and he did not lie because they took it to mean that he is ill literally and cannot join them in their festival, while Ibrahim meant - according to some commentators - that he was sick in heart of witnessing their Shirk, and he made this Tawriyya to get them to leave so that he could get a chance to destroy their idols. 

--> Ibrahim also said “rather this biggest one of them has done it” and this was not a lie, that is because Ibrahim said it to shock them to think anew, he spoke this while predicating it on the condition that he (the idol) could speak and that is why he continued to say “if they should speak”, as if wanting to say - if he can speak then he can do it, and this is a way to rebuke them as part of argumentation.

--> And Yusuf said “O ye caravan - you are thieves”. This was not said by Yusuf in person but the Qur’an attributes it to him because it was commanded by him. He did not lie because he wished by this a reconciliation between himself and his brothers and it is permitted to 'lie’ so as to bring about peace between fighting parties. And it is also possible that this was Tawriyya because السارق also means weak in intellect. [Another possible meaning is that they were thieves in the sense that they had stolen him in his childhood from his father]

 

[2/74] الكافي: علي بن ابراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي نجران، عن عاصم بن حميد، عن منصور بن حازم قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام: ما بالي أسألك عن المسألة فتجيبني فيها بالجواب ثم يجيئك غيري فتجيبه فيها بجواب آخر؟ فقال: إنا نجيب الناس على الزيادة والنقصان قال: قلت: فأخبرني عن أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله صدقوا على محمد صلى الله عليه واله أم كذبوا؟ قال: بل صدقوا قلت: فما بالهم اختلفوا فقال: أما تعلم أن الرجل كان يأتي رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله فيسأله عن المسألة فيجيبه فيها بالجواب، ثم يجيبه بعد ذلك بما ينسخ ذلك الجواب فنسخت الأحاديث بعضها بعضا

[2/74] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi Najran from A’sim b. Humayd from Mansur b. Hazim who said: I said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام: what is my condition - I ask you about an issue so you answer me in it with a certain answer, then someone other than me comes to you so you answer him in it with a different answer? He said: we answer the people with addition (in-depth) and with deletion (in-brief). I said: so inform me about the companions of the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه واله - were they truthful about Muhammad صلى الله عليه واله or did they lie? He said: they were truthful, I said: so what was the matter with them that they differed? He said: don’t you know that a man used to come to the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه واله and ask him about a thing so he answers him in it with an answer, then he answers him after that with that which abrogates the former answer, so the narrations superseded one another.     

--> As to the different answers given by the Imam on a single issue, it is possible that it was necessary and justified because of Taqiyya i.e. the Imam had knowledge that the questioner will require such an answer to preserve his life, or it was for some other greater good. 

--> On the other hand different answers given by the Imam do not always mean that it is Taqiyya, because there is no question except that it has different aspects - which the different answers could be addressing. So if a scholar is asked the same question repeatedly and he answers differently each time - while having a different aspect of it in mind, all the answers are equally true, even if the questioner does not know the reasoning behind this, and the ignorance of the questioner does not detract from the correctness of the answers given, because what is required after ascertaining the greatness of status and the knowledge of the Imam is to submit to him unconditionally and believe in him.

 

[3/75] الكافي: أحمد بن إدريس، عن محمد بن عبدالجبار، عن الحسن بن علي، عن ثعلبة بن ميمون، عن زرارة بن أعين، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: سألته عن مسألة فأجابني ثم جاء ه رجل فسأله عنها فأجابه بخلاف ما أجابني، ثم جاء رجل آخر فأجابه بخلاف ما أجابني وأجاب صاحبي، فلما خرج الرجلان قلت: يا ابن رسول الله رجلان من اهل العراق من شيعتكم قدما يسألان فأجبت كل واحد منهما بغير ما أجبت به صاحبه؟ فقال: يا زرارة! إن هذا خير لنا وأبقى لنا ولكن ولو اجتمعتم على أمر واحد لصدقكم الناس علينا ولكان أقل لبقائنا وبقائكم قال: ثم قلت لابي عبدالله عليه السلام: شيعتكم لو حملتموهم على الاسنة أو على النار لمضوا وهم يخرجون من عندكم مختلفين، قال: فأجابني بمثل جواب أبيه

[3/75] al-Kafi: Ahmad b. Idris from Muhammad b. Abd al-Jabbar from al-Hasan b. Ali from Tha’laba b. Maymun from Zurara b. A’yan from Abi Ja’far عليه السلام, he (Zurara) said: I asked him about a matter so he answered me, then a man came to him and asked him about it so he answered him with a different answer to mine, then another man came so he answered him with a different answer to the one he gave me and the first man, so when the two men had exited I said: O the son of the messenger of Allah - two men from the people of Iraq from among your followers came to ask you - but you answered each one of them with a different answer? He said: O Zurara, this is better and more safe for us and you, for if you were all to unite upon one position the people would believe you [in what you say] about us and that would be a threat to both our and your survival, he (Zurara) said: then I [later] said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام: your followers - if you were to make them move in the face of arrows or on fire they would do it but they come out from you having differences! He said: so he answered me with the same reply as his father.

--> ان هذا خير لنا وأبقى لنا ولكن ولو اجتمعتم على أمر واحد لصدقكم الناس علينا ولكان أقل لبقائنا وبقائكم - If you were all to agree on everything [become one homogeneous and disciplined body within the wider society], and narrate all the identical rites and practices that mark you out - on our authority - your claim to have an association with the `Aimma would become more believable because of your unanimity, and they will consider you our followers in actual fact, consequently the door of infamy and persecution by our enemies will be opened, but if you were to diverge in what you attribute to us, and differ among yourself, they will consider the whole thing a charade and not believe that you are our followers rather mere charlatans. 

--> The success of this policy of the `Aimma was such that the proto-Sunni’s historically doubted whether there was any link between the `Aimma and their putative followers and many considered the whole thing to be a fabrication. 

--> The same narration in Ilal has it as -  ولو اجتمعتم على أمر واحد لقصدكم الناس علينا - "if you were to unite upon one position - the people would target you because of us". Which seems more natural.

 

[4/76] علل الشرائع: أبي، عن سعد، عن محمد بن الوليد والسندي، عن أبان بن عثمان، عن محمد بن بشير وحريز، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: قلت له: إنه ليس شئ أشد علي من اختلاف أصحابنا، قال: ذلك من قبلي

[4/76] Ilal al-Sharai: My father from Sa’d from Muhammad b. al-Walid and al-Sindi from Aban b. Uthman from Muhammad b. Bashir and Hariz from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he (Hariz) said: I said to him: there is nothing more difficult for me [to bear] than the differences [that exists] between our fellows, he said: that is from me (I purposely caused that).    

--> He caused that by reporting different things to them to maintain Taqiyya, and the wisdom behind this is to preserve the lives of the believers from the unjust aggressors. This is consonant with what the Imam said in a similar narration in Ilal when asked about Ikhtilaf - لو اجتمعتم على أمر واحد لاخذ برقابكم - "if you had been unanimous in all affairs - it would have been off with your necks".

 

[5/77] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن عثمان بن عيسى والحسن بن محبوب جميعا، عن سماعة، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: سألته عن رجل اختلف عليه رجلان من أهل دينه في أمر كلاهما يرويه: أحدهما يأمر بأخذه والآخر ينهاه عنه، كيف يصنع؟ فقال: يرجئه حتى يلقي من يخبره، فهو في سعة حتي يلقاه، وفي رواية اخرى بأيهما أخذت من باب التسليم وسعك

[5/77] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Uthman b. Isa and al-Hasan b. Mahbub all together from Sama’a from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he (Sama’a) said: I asked him about a man who is answered oppositely by two of his co-religionists (i.e. Shi’as) in regards a matter - [and] both transmit it [their answers - on your authority], one of them obligates it while the other forbids it - what should he do? he said: he withholds [doing anything] until he accesses one who will inform him (of the true position), and he is respited until such a time as he meets him. <And in another narration [the Imam said]: whichever of them he acts by -  suffices him - if done in subservience (with the intention of obeying)>.

--> If one receives conflicting reports - both attributed to the Imam - one obligating action and the other forbidding - the Imam advises postponing judgment until you can meet him who will resolve it. This is Tawaqquf. The seeker is also not blamable in the interim. Al-Kulayni includes another narration which says - he can choose to do either one and no fault will attach itself to him if this is done with the intention of obeying. This is Takhyir.

 

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

22 hours ago, Islamic Salvation said:

[1/73] رجال الكشي: عن ابن مسعود، عن علي بن الحسن، عن العباس بن عامر وجعفر ابن محمد بن حكيم، عن أبان بن عثمان، عن أبي بصير قال: قيل لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام - وأنا عنده -: إن سالم بن أبي حفصة يروي عنك أنك تتكلم على سبعين وجها لك من كلها المخرج، قال: فقال: ما يريد سالم مني؟ أيريد أن أجيئ بالملائكة؟! فوالله ما جاء بها النبيون، ولقد قال إبراهيم: إني سقيم والله ما كان سقيما وما كذب، ولقد قال إبراهيم: بل فعله كبيرهم هذا وما فعله وما كذب، ولقد قال يوسف: إنكم لسارقون والله ما كانو سارقين وما كذب

[1/73] Rijal al-Kashshi: From Ibn Masud from Ali b. al-Hasan from al-Abbas b. A’mir and Ja’far b. Muhammad b. Hukaym from Aban b. Uthman from Abi Basir who said: It was said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام - while I was with him: Salim b. Abi Hafsa narrates from you that you speak with seventy facets - for each facet you have a way out [a possible alternative interpretation to escape speaking a lie], so he said: what does Salim want from me? does he want me to come with the angels (to prove my truth)?! For by Allah - not even the prophets came with them, and Ibrahim had said “I am sick” (37:88) but by Allah he was not sick nor did he lie, and Ibrahim also said: “rather this biggest one of them (idol) has done it” (21:63) while he had not done it nor did he lie, and Yusuf said: “you are thieves” (12:70) and by Allah they were not thieves nor did he lie.

al-Muhsini says: As for the narration of al-Kashshi – then – the meaning of ’seventy facets’ is to employ words in different ways resulting in multiple possible interpretations. Sometimes the narration was meant to be understood literally and at other times a metaphorical or allegorical meaning was intended - as in the examples cited by the Imam from the words of Ibrahim and Yusuf. And this practice is unavoidable for a religious scholar or a political leader especially when he has a multitude of enemies. 

In my own personal experience, frequently has it occurred that believers ask me via mobile phone: “what is your opinion about serving in the western armed forces and being sent to different war-zones?” and I answer them differently (due to his suspicion that he is under surveillance), making sure that none of the answers reaches the level of being considered a lie or against the Sharia, but if one were to ask me man-to-man [in a physical meeting] I would make it clear to him that it is absolutely forbidden. 

And I sometimes answer by saying: “it is incumbent to preserve your life” if I have a suspicion that the questioner is a spy, and similar is the case in emotive and controversial matters such as the ruling on anal intercourse, where I may give a Fatwa at times that it “is permissible” and at others that it “is harmful according to some of the doctors”, and at other times I might say that it “is permissible to have any kind of [sexual] enjoyment with the wife” and … depending on the circumstance.

22 hours ago, Islamic Salvation said:

[2/74] الكافي: علي بن ابراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي نجران، عن عاصم بن حميد، عن منصور بن حازم قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام: ما بالي أسألك عن المسألة فتجيبني فيها بالجواب ثم يجيئك غيري فتجيبه فيها بجواب آخر؟ فقال: إنا نجيب الناس على الزيادة والنقصان قال: قلت: فأخبرني عن أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله صدقوا على محمد صلى الله عليه واله أم كذبوا؟ قال: بل صدقوا قلت: فما بالهم اختلفوا فقال: أما تعلم أن الرجل كان يأتي رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله فيسأله عن المسألة فيجيبه فيها بالجواب، ثم يجيبه بعد ذلك بما ينسخ ذلك الجواب فنسخت الأحاديث بعضها بعضا

[2/74] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi Najran from A’sim b. Humayd from Mansur b. Hazim who said: I said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام: what is my condition - I ask you about an issue so you answer me in it with a certain answer, then someone other than me comes to you so you answer him in it with a different answer? He said: we answer the people with addition (in-depth) and with deletion (in-brief). I said: so inform me about the companions of the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه واله - were they truthful about Muhammad صلى الله عليه واله or did they lie? He said: they were truthful, I said: so what was the matter with them that they differed? He said: don’t you know that a man used to come to the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه واله and ask him about a thing so he answers him in it with an answer, then he answers him after that with that which abrogates the former answer, so the narrations superseded one another.    

al-Muhsini says: As for the second narration then it is applies only to the time of the prophet (when he was alive), as there is no abrogation after his time except in a very rare scenario mentioned in Usul al-Fiqh. However, Takhsis [specification] and Taqyid [conditionalizing] are also sometimes referred to as Naskh [abrogation], so a Mufti might depend on the Amm (general rule) but mention a Khass (specific) instance of it or mention it Mutlaqan (in absolute terms) depending on the circumstances whilst having not exceeding the bounds to fall into lying. And this is what was meant by ‘addition’ and ‘deletion’ [in the narration]. And as for his words “they [the companions] were truthful [in what they relayed from Muhammad]” then it is taken to mean as a whole (since there was a group [of companions] within the whole group of companions who were truthful). 

22 hours ago, Islamic Salvation said:

[5/77] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن عثمان بن عيسى والحسن بن محبوب جميعا، عن سماعة، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: سألته عن رجل اختلف عليه رجلان من أهل دينه في أمر كلاهما يرويه: أحدهما يأمر بأخذه والآخر ينهاه عنه، كيف يصنع؟ فقال: يرجئه حتى يلقي من يخبره، فهو في سعة حتي يلقاه، وفي رواية اخرى بأيهما أخذت من باب التسليم وسعك

[5/77] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Uthman b. Isa and al-Hasan b. Mahbub all together from Sama’a from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he (Sama’a) said: I asked him about a man who is answered oppositely by two of his co-religionists (i.e. Shi’as) in regards a matter - [and] both transmit it [their answers - on your authority], one of them obligates it while the other forbids it - what should he do? he said: he withholds [doing anything] until he accesses one who will inform him (of the true position), and he is respited until such a time as he meets him. <And in another narration [the Imam said]: whichever of them he acts by -  suffices him - if done in subservience (with the intention of obeying)>.

al-Muhsini says: As for the last Hadith then it is dependent on the possibility of the Mukallaf to refer the matter back to the Imam or a Mufti who is a Marja of Taqlid, so he will postpone acting until he meets him, and the words of the two men [who report the Imams position] will have no Hujiyyah because they are contradicting, and in this age there is no great difficulty upon the Mukallaf [to access the Marja]. This narration while it has utility for the Mukallaf who is a layman both in the age of presence of the `Aimma and the Ghayba does not have utility for the Mukallaf who is a Mujtahid in the age of the Ghayba (because he has no one to refer it to) … and Allah Knows more.  

In conclusion, it is undeniable that contradictions have occurred between Mu’tabar narrations and I have mentioned some of the reasons for this in my book <<Hudud al-Shariah>>. Two of the main reasons that can be inferred from the narrations found in this chapter are abrogation and using indirect speech because of Taqiyya or some other reason as we have clarified previously. And Allah is the Protector and the Guide. 

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1.16Fitting Response Appropriate to the Understanding of the Questioner and the Addressee

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-intellect-and-knowledge/fitting-response-appropriate-to-the-understanding-of-the-questioner-and-the-addressee

 

[1/78] رجال الكشي: حمدويه، عن اليقطيني، عن يونس قال: العبد الصالح عليه السلام: يا يونس ارفق بهم، فإن كلامك يدق عليهم قال: قلت: إنهم يقولون لي: زنديق، قال لي: ما يضرك أن تكون في يديك لؤلؤة فيقول لك الناس: هي حصاة، وما كان ينفعك إذا كان في يدك حصاة فيقول الناس: هي لؤلؤة

[1/78] Rijal al-Kashshi: Hamduwayh from al-Yaqtini from Yunus who said: the Righteous Servant عليه السلام said: O Yunus - be more lenient towards them for your words are hard-hitting on them, I said: but they consider me a Zindiq, he said to me: what will it affect you if you have in your hands a pearl but the people say to you: it is a stone, and what will it benefit you if you have in your hand a stone but the people say: it is a pearl!

--> The companions of the Imam can broadly be divided into three categories: there were the traditionalists who stuck to narrating the Ahadith and did not go beyond this, there were the rationalists who despite narrating the Ahadith [which were mostly Fiqhi based] were more free-thinking, especially in theological matters (Kalam), they engaged in debates which the Aimma had permitted for some among them, and there were the Esotericists who concentrated on decoding the true nature of the Imam and claimed to have been initiated to possess secret knowledge. We have evidence that these camps did not necessarily get along and much bickering occurred between them which the Aimma had to put a stop to.

--> Yunus as a student of Hisham b. al-Hakam is someone who can firmly be placed in the rationalist camp, because of this and other reasons, some other fellow Shias despised him and considered him to have gone against the orders of the Imams, they complained to the Imam about him and ostracized him, in this narration he himself confirms that he was labelled a Zindiq [we even have fabricated narrations which portray the Imam cursing him and forbidding prayers behind him, narrations circulated by his adversaries].  

--> The Imam gives practical advice to Yunus that you should always speak to people at their level lest they misunderstand you. The Imam himself suffered from this and different companions varied as far as understanding the intricacy of the Imam's teaching was concerned. Yunus who came from an intellectual tradition could better appreciate what the Imam meant but this caused a divide between him and his fellows. Despite this, Yunus is advised not to reciprocate with harshness of tone and posture because it further estranges people from you. However, censure and blame from the people cannot affect you one whit provided you are assured of the Imam’s pleasure and your actions are based on true knowledge. 

 

 [2/79] الخصال: في الحديث الأربعمائة قال أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام: خالطوا الناس بما يعرفون ودعوهم مما ينكرون، ولا تحملوهم على أنفسكم وعلينا، إن أمرنا صعب مستصعب لا يحتمله إلا ملك مقرب أو نبي مرسل أو عبد قد امتحن الله قلبه للإيمان

[2/79] al-Khisal: In  the ‘Four Hundred’ Narration: the commander of the faithful عليه السلام said: Interact with the people on that which they know and leave them be as to that which they do not know, and do not impose them upon yourselves and us, our affair is hard (in of itself) and deemed hard (by others) - no one can bear it except an angel brought-near or a prophet sent or a slave whose heart has been tried for faith by Allah. 

--> The affair (Wilaya) of the `Aimma and the divine favour that came upon them is hard for many people to accept, similarly, the words of the `Aimma are like those of the gracious prophet -  no one can bear them [act upon its purport and fully comprehend it] except the prophets, the angels and the perfected believers whom Allah has tried and found them able and willing to bear its implications.

--> The hardship spoken about here is not necessarily a difficulty in understanding but of a reticence to submit and accept what they say and acknowledge their superiority. This is where many able-thinkers from the Mukhalifin stumbled. 

--> The Imam advises the Shia to mingle with the Mukhalifin and speak to them those things that are common between both, but not to confront them with that which they consider alien, because it will cause a revulsion in them "the people hate that which they do not know". This act of abandoning Taqiyya by divulging the secrets to them will also empower them against us, because they will use it to denounce and further persecute.

 

[3/80] علل الشرائع: أبي، عن سعد، عن البرقي، عن ابن بزيع، عن ابن بشير، عن أبي حصين، عن أبي بصير، عن أحدهما عليهما السلام قال: لا تكذبوا بحديث أتاكم به مرجى ء و لا قدري و لا خارجي نسبه إلينا، فإنكم لا تدرون لعله شيء من الحق فتكذبوا الله عز و جل فوق عرشه

[3/80] Ilal al-Sharai: My father from Sa’d from al-Barqi from Ibn Bazi from Ibn Bashir from Abi Husayn from Abi Basir from one of them عليهما السلام who said: do not reject a narration which is brought to you by a Murji or a Qadari or a Khariji which he attributes to us, for you do not know  - perhaps it is something of the truth and you will be rejecting Allah Mighty and Majestic above his throne.

--> The Murjia are an early grouping which held the opinion that judgement should be left to Allah as per someones Iman. Even someone who commits a major sin remains a believer, because faith is independent of deeds and requires but acknowledgment of the Shahada. "The one who commits Zina near the Ka'ba has equal faith to angel Gabriel near the Arsh".

-->  The Khawarij held the opposite position whereby they excommunicated anyone they felt was not living up to the high standards they expected a Muslim to demonstrate, this Takfir would make such a person’s blood permissible to be shed. 

--> The Qadariyya believed in absolute free-will, a reaction against the Jabriyya (pre-destinarians), they held that God had no role in human actions, and humans had full control over their actions and destiny.

--> al-Muhsini says: the narration concerns someone who is in doubt whether a Hadith is true or false, but if one is certain of a Hadith’s falsity then it is permitted for him to reject it, and there is no doubt that people lied and fabricated things and attributed them to the prophet, and the Aimma, even Allah the Exalted - for instance in some reports which are called the Qudsiyya which the Sufis and their likes have forged.

In conclusion: if a narration is not established to be originating from them then it is not permitted to depend upon it, as the Book and the narrations that are to come and have already come indicate - but one should avoid calling it a lie if one is in doubt as regards its status.

Edited by Islamic Salvation
guest050817 and Dhulfikar like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1.17No Excuse for the Ignorant One who Falls Short

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-intellect-and-knowledge/no-excuse-for-the-ignorant-one-who-falls-short

 

[1/0] امالي الطوسي: المفيد عن ابن قولويه عن محمد الحميرى عن ابيه عن هارون عن ابن زياد قال: سمعت جعفر بن محمد علهما السلام وقد سئل عن قوله تعالى "قل فلله الحجة البالغة" فقال: ان الله تعالى يقول للعبد يوم القيامة: عبدى أكنت عالما؟ فان قال: نعم قال له: أفلا علمت بما علمت؟ وان قال: كنت جاهلا قال: أفلا تعلمت حتى تعمل؟ فيخصمه فتلك الحجة البالغة 

[1/0] Amali al-Tusi: al-Mufid from Ibn Qulawayh from Muhammad al-Himyari from his father from Harun from Ibn Ziyad who said: I heard Ja’far b. Muhammad علهما السلام - and he was asked about His words the Exalted: “to Allah belongs the conclusive argument!” (6:149) - say: Allah the Exalted will say to a slave on the day of judgment: My slave did you possess knowledge? So if he says: yes, He will say to him: why did you not act by what you knew? And if he says: I was ignorant, He will say to him: why did you not seek knowledge so you could act? Thus he will be vanquished - and that is the “conclusive argument”.  

 

al-Muhsini: The chain of this Hadith is reliable except that the manuscript of the Amali of the Shaykh al-Tusi did not reach the authors of Bihar and Wasail [who incorporated it into their respective encyclopedic compilations] via a reliable chain. And the Majalis of Shaykh al-Mufid is similar in this regard. 

However, we have included this particular narration among the Mu’tabar because of a Qarina [indicator], and this is the fact that the merituous Shaykh Abi al-Hasan Sulayman b. al-Hasan al-Sahrishti who was one of the famous students of the Shaykh al-Ta’ifa al-Tusi quoted this narration in his book <<Qabs al-Misbah fi al-Dua>> - and he narrated it: “From a number of scholars like Abu Ya’la Muhammad b. al-Hasan b. Hamza al-Ja’fari and Shaykh al-Ta’ifa al-Tusi and Abu al-Husayn Ahmad b. Ali al-Kufi al-Najashi and Abu al-Faraj al-Mudhaffar b. Hamdan al-Qazwini all together - reported to us the august Shaykh al-Mufid Muhammad b. Muhammad b. al-Nu’man al-Harithi may Allah be pleased with him on the day of Saturday the third of the month of the mighty Ramadan in the year four hundred and ten - he said …” to the end of the narration having the same upper chain and similar content.   

And the Shaykh Muntajab al-Din said in his Fihrist about this man: “The trustworthy Shaykh Abu al-Hasan Salman (Sulayman) b. al-Hasan better known as Salman al-Sahrishti, jurisprudent, eminent, religious, he tutelaged under our felicitious Shaykh Abi Ja’far al-Tusi, and he attended the study-sessions of our Sayyid Murtadha may Allah have mercy on them, and he has authored a number of books …”

And he did not include <<Qabs al-Misbah>> among his authored works but al-Majlisi having attributed it to him is enough [to substantiate that].

This should have been enough to establish the reliability of the narration under discussion, despite this I do not consider it reliable, and that is because of the suspicion of a disconnection in its chain, because Harun b. Muslim could not have narrated from the companions of al-Sadiq directly, so an intermediary or two must have been dropped and are missing. [Ittisal of the chain would require Harun b. Muslim to have lived a very long life - approx. a hundred and thirty years in age, which would seem to indicate that the narration is Mursal]. 

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Ali_Hussain and Dhulfikar like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.18Narration that Contradicts the Qur'an

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-intellect-and-knowledge/narration-that-contradicts-the-quran

 

[1/81] الكافي: محمد بن إسماعيل، عن الفضل بن شاذان، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن هشام بن الحكم وغيره، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: خطب النبي صلى الله عليه وآله بمنى فقال: أيها الناس ما جاء كم عني يوافق كتاب الله فأنا قلته وما جاء كم يخالف كتاب الله فلم أقله

[1/81] al-Kafi: Muhammad b. Ismail from al-Fadhl b. Shadhan from Ibn Abi Umayr from Hisham b. al-Hakam and other than him from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله addressed the people in Mina and said: O people, whatever comes to you attributed to me which agrees with the Book of Allah then I have indeed said it, and whatever comes to you opposing the book of Allah then I never said it.

 

[2/82] الكافي: عدة من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن أبيه، عن النضر بن سويد، عن يحيى الحلبي، عن أيوب بن الحر قال: سمعت أبا عبدالله عليه السلام يقول: كل شئ مردود إلى الكتاب والسنة، وكل حديث لا يوافق كتاب الله فهو زخرف

[2/82] al-Kafi: A number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid from his father from al-Nadhr b. Suwayd from Yahya al-Halabi from Ayyub b. al-Hur who said: I heard Aba Abdillah عليه السلام saying: everything is referred back to the Book and the Sunna, and every Hadith that does not agree with the Book of Allah then it is a worthless embellishment.

 

What Does a Narration 'Agreeing' with the Qur'an Mean?

(Adopted from the Discussion by al-Muhsini)

There can be no doubt that a considerable number of narrations originating from the `Aimma do not seem to agree with the Qur’an (do not have a one-to-one harmonious correspondence). This is either because these narrations make Takhsis [specify a generality found in the Qur’an], or Taqyid [conditionalize an absolute found in the Qur’an], or because their purport cannot be found in the Qur’an [the Qur’an is silent - neither affirming nor rejecting]. One option to resolve this incongruity would be to interpret the Hadith to mean - “Every narration that contradicts with the Book of Allah then it is a worthless embellishment”. However, there is an alternative which would allow us to forego this far-fetched interpretation which compels us to equate agreement with non-contradiction. 

We could measure the degree of agreement between a narration vis a vis the Qur’an relative to the spirit of the Qur’an, the framework it provides and overall objectives it sets forth instead of confining ourselves to scrutinizing the Qur’an’s wordings to ensure an absence of  direct contradictions. Hence, what the Imam wishes to say in this statement of his is that - an authentic narration should not be inconsistent with the Qur’anic world-view and the broad vision conveyed by the prophet and the Awsiya. 

Practically speaking, an experienced and sincere scholar who delves into their words over a long period of time can get a ‘feel’ for whether a narration falls in line or not and this would be one of the conditions for the Hujiyya of a narration. 

Dhulfikar likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was the end of the Book of Intellect and Knowledge which al-Muhsini finished on 11th of Rajab 1431 AH in Kabul.

Next is the Book of Principles of Jurisprudence [Usul al-Fiqh].

         https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-intellect-and-knowledge

         http://corpus.purifiedhousehold.com/muʿjam-al-aḥadith-al-muʿtabara/

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Dhulfikar likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BOOK OF THE PRINCIPLES OF JURISPRUDENCE

 

2.1Prohibition of Giving Fatwa without Knowledge and Evidence

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/prohibition-of-giving-fatwa-without-knowledge-and-evidence

 

[-/1] الكافي: محمد بن يحيى، عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى، عن الحسن بن محبوب، عن علي ابن رئاب، عن أبي عبيدة الحذاء، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: من أفتى الناس بغير علم ولا هدى لعنته ملائكة الرحمة وملائكة العذاب، ولحقه وزر من عمل بفتياه

[1/-] al-Kafi: Muhammad b. Yahya from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa from al-Hasan b. Mahbub from Ali b. Riab from Abi Ubayda al-Hadhdha from Abi Ja’far عليه السلام who said: whoever gives Fatwa to the people without knowledge or true guidance the angels of mercy do curse him and so do too the angels of punishment and the burden of the one who acts by his Fatwa attaches itself to him.

 

[-/2] الكافي: علي، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن عبدالرحمن بن الحجاج قال: كان أبوعبدالله عليه السلام قاعدا في حلقة ربيعة الرأي، فجاء أعرابي فسأل ربيعة الرأي عن مسألة فأجابه فلما سكت قال له الاعرابي: أهو في عنقك؟ فسكت عنه ربيعة ولم يرد عليه شيئا فأعاد عليه المسألة فأجابه بمثل ذلك، فقال له الاعرابي: أهو في عنقك؟ فسكت ربيعة فقال له أبوعبدالله عليه السلام: هو في عنقه، قال أو لم يقل، وكل مفت ضامن 

[2/-] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr from Abd al-Rahman b. al-Hajjaj who said: Abu Abdillah عليه السلام was seated in a study-circle of Rabia al-Rayy when a bedouin came and asked Rabia al-Rayy about a matter and he (Rabia) proceeded to answer him, so when he was done (answering) the bedouin asked: is it upon your neck (do you accept responsibility for me following your answer)? Rabia remained silent and did not say anything, so he (the bedouin) repeated the question again and he (Rabia) answered in the same way, so the bedouin said to him again: is it upon your neck? but Rabia remained silent, then Abu Abdillah عليه السلام said to him: it is upon his neck whether he declares it to be so or not, and every giver of Fatwa is liable.

 

[-/3] الكافي: عدة من اصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن الحسن بن علي الوشاء، عن أبان الاحمر، عن زياد بن أبي رجاء، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: ما علمتم فقولوا، و ما لم تعلموا فقولوا: الله أعلم، إن الرجل لينتزع الآية من القرآن يخر فيها أبعد ما بين السماء والارض

[3/-] al-Kafi: A number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid from al-Hasan b. Ali al-Washsha from Aban al-Ahmar from Ziyad b. Abi Raja from Abi Ja’far عليه السلام who said: say what you know and if you do not know then say: “Allah is more knowing”, a man selectively picks out a verse from the Qur’an and falls in it (misinterpreting it) a farther distance than what is between the earth and the sky.

 

[-/4] الكافي: علي، عن ابيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن هشام بن سالم قال: قلت لابي عبدالله عليه السلام: ما حق الله على خلقه؟ فقال: أن يقولوا ما يعلمون، ويكفوا عما لا يعلمون، فإذا فعلوا ذلك فقد أدوا إلى الله حقه

[4/-] al-Kafi: Ali from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr from Hisham b. Salim who said: I said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام: what is the right of Allah over his creation? he said: that they should only say that which they know and should remain silent over that which they do not know - so if they were to do that then they have fulfilled the right of Allah.

 

Verses from the Qur'an with a similar theme

 

                                    فَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ افْتَرَىٰ عَلَى اللَّهِ كَذِبًا لِيُضِلَّ النَّاسَ بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ

Then who is more unjust than one who invents a lie about Allah to mislead the people by [something] without knowledge? (6:144)

 

                                  أَلَمْ يُؤْخَذْ عَلَيْهِم مِّيثَاقُ الْكِتَابِ أَن لَّا يَقُولُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ إِلَّا الْحَقَّ

Was not the covenant of the Scripture taken from them that they would not say about Allah except the truth (7:169)

 

                                                  آللَّهُ أَذِنَ لَكُمْ أَمْ عَلَى اللَّهِ تَفْتَرُونَ

Has Allah permitted you [to do so], or do you invent [something] about Allah (10:59)

 

                                                 أَمْ تَقُولُونَ عَلَى اللَّهِ مَا لَا تَعْلَمُونَ

Or do you say about Allah that which you do not know? (2:80)

 

                      وَلا تَقْفُ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ إِنَّ السَّمْعَ وَالْبَصَرَ وَالْفُؤَادَ كُلُّ أُولَـٰئِكَ كَانَ عَنْهُ مَسْئُولًا

And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge, verily, the hearing, the sight and the heart - about all those [one] will be questioned (17:36)

 

                                   ائْتُونِي بِكِتَابٍ مِّن قَبْلِ هَٰذَا أَوْ أَثَارَةٍ مِّنْ عِلْمٍ إِن كُنتُمْ صَادِقِينَ

Bring me a scripture [revealed] before this or a [remaining] trace of knowledge, if you should be truthful (46:4)

 

 

2.2Everything has a Ruling in the Book and the Sunna

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/everything-has-a-ruling-in-the-book-and-the-sunna

 

[-/1] الكافي: علي، عن محمد بن عيسى، عن يونس، عن حماد، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: سمعته يقول: ما من شئ إلا وفيه كتاب أو سنة

[1/-] al-Kafi: Ali from Muhammad b. Isa from Yunus from Hammad from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he (Hammad) said: I heard him saying: there is nothing except there is about it [a ruling in the] Book or Sunna.  

 

[-/2] الكافي: عدة من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن إسماعيل بن مهران، عن سيف بن عميرة، عن أبي المغرا، عن سماعة، عن أبي الحسن موسى عليه السلام قال: قلت له: أكل شئ في كتاب الله وسنة نبيه صلى اليه عليه وآله؟ أو تقولون فيه؟ قال: بل كل شئ في كتاب الله وسنة نبيه صلى الله عليه وآله 

[2/-] al-Kafi: A number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid from Ismail b. Mihran from Sayf b. ‘Amira from Abi al-Maghra from Sama’a from Abi al-Hasan Musa عليه السلام, he said: I said to him: is everything in the book of Allah and the Sunna of his prophet صلى الله عليه وآله or do you have a say in it? he said: rather everything is in the book of Allah and the Sunna of the prophet صلى الله عليه وآله

 

 

2.3Permanence of the Halal and the Haram unto the Day of Judgment

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/permanence-of-the-halal-and-the-haram-unto-the-day-of-judgment

 

[-/1] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن محمد بن عيسى بن عبيد، عن يونس، عن حريز عن زرارة قال: سألت أبا عبدالله عليه السلام عن الحلال والحرام فقال: حلال محمد حلال أبدا إلى يوم القيامة، وحرامه حرام أبدا إلى يوم القيامة، لا يكون غيره ولا يجيئ غيره، وقال: قال علي عليه السلام: ما أحد ابتدع بدعة إلا ترك بها سنة

[1/-] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from Muhammad b. Isa b. Ubayd from Yunus from Hariz from Zurara who said: I asked Aba Abdillah عليه السلام about the Halal and the Haram so he said: the Halal of Muhammad is Halal forever unto the day of judgment and his Haram is Haram forever unto the day of judgment, there will be nothing other than it and nothing apart from it will come, and he said: Ali عليه السلام said: no one has innovated a Bid’a except that he has abandoned a Sunna (by doing so).

 

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Dhulfikar likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.4. What Can be Used to Infer some General Principles

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/what-can-be-used-to-infer-some-general-principles

 

[1/83] الكافي: علي، عن أبيه، ومحمد بن إسماعيل، عن الفضل، جميعا عن ابن أبي عمير عن حفص بن البختري، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: سمعته يقول في المغمى عليه: ما غلب الله عليه فالله أولى بالعذر

[1/83] al-Kafi: Ali from his father AND Muhammad b. Ismail from al-Fadhl all together from Ibn Abi Umayr from Hafs b. al-Bukhtari from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he (Hafs) said: I heard him saying about the one who loses consciousness: what Allah has power over then Allah is more entitled to excuse. 

--> One who loses his senses cannot be held to account because it is something beyond his control (in fact, him being overcome is one of the signs of the might of God as opposed to human weakness). Narrations also confirm that such a one does not repay the Salat missed in such a state.

 

[2/84] الكافي: علي، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن حماد، عن حريز قال: كانت لإسماعيل بن أبي عبد الله دنانير وأراد رجل من قريش أن يخرج إلى اليمن فقال إسماعيل يا أبت إن فلانا يريد الخروج إلى اليمن وعندي كذا وكذا دينارا فترى أن أدفعها إليه يبتاع لي بها بضاعة من اليمن فقال أبو عبد الله عليه‌ السلام يا بني أما بلغك أنه يشرب الخمر فقال إسماعيل هكذا يقول الناس فقال يا بني لا تفعل فعصى إسماعيل أباه ودفع إليه دنانيره فاستهلكها ولم يأته بشيء منها ... فقال يا بني إن الله عز وجل يقول في كتابه يُؤْمِنُ بِاللهِ وَيُؤْمِنُ لِلْمؤْمِنِين يقول يصدق الله ويصدق للمؤمنين فإذا شهد عندك المؤمنون فصدقهم ...

[2/84] al-Kafi: Ali from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr from Hammad from Hariz who said: Ismail the son of Abi Abdillah had gold coins and a man from the Quraysh wanted to set out to Yaman, so Ismail said: O father - so and so wants to set out to Yaman and I have some gold coins do you think I should give them to him to buy me some goods from Yaman? Abu Abdillah عليه السلام said: O my son - has it not reached you that he drinks wine? Ismail said: this is what the people say, he said: O my son - do not do that, but Ismail did not obey his father and gave the gold coins to him so he (that man) lost it all and did not give anything of them (back) to him… he said: O my son - verily Allah Mighty and Majestic says in his book: “(he) believes in Allah and believes the believers” (9:61) - meaning: confirms the truth of Allah and considers the believers truthful, so if the believers witness something to you then accept it from them…

 

[3/85] الكافي: علي، عن أبيه، ومحمد بن إسماعيل، عن الفضل بن شاذان جميعا، عن حماد، عن حريز، عن زرارة قال: قال أبو جعفر عليه السلام: تابع بين الوضوء كما قال الله عز وجل ابدأ بالوجه ... ابدأ بما بدأ الله عز وجل به

[3/85] al-Kafi: Ali from his father AND Muhammad b. Ismail from al-Fadhl b. Shadhan all together from Hammad from Hariz from Zurara who said: Abu Ja’far said عليه السلام: follow in the Wudhu the way Allah Mighty and Majestic said - begin with the face… begin with what Allah Mighty and Majestic began with. 

--> The chronological arrangement of a series of commands found in a verse are significant in so far as the external rite should also conform to such an order.

 

[4/86] الكافي: علي، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، ومحمد بن إسماعيل، عن الفضل ابن شاذان، عن صفوان، وابن أبي عمير، عن معاوية بن عمار، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله حين فرغ من طوافه وركعتيه قال: أبدء بما بدء الله عز وجل به من إتيان الصفا إن الله عزوجل يقول: إِنَّ الصَّفَا وَالْمَرْوَةَ مِنْ شَعَائِرِ اللَّهِ ...

[4/86] al-Kafi: Ali from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr AND Muhammad b. Ismail from al-Fadhl b. Shadhan from Safwan and Ibn Abi Umayr from Muawiya b. Ammar from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام that when the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه واله finished his Tawaf and the two units (Salat al-Tawaf) he said: I begin with what Allah Mighty and Majestic began with - proceeding to Safa first - Allah Mighty ad Majestic says: “Verily Safa and Marwa are from among the signs of Allah” (2:158) ...   

--> The Sai begins with Safa because of the arrangement found in the verse, Safa is mentioned first before Marwa.

 

[-/5] الكافي: علي بن ابراهيم عن أبيه ومحمد بن اسماعيل عن الفضل ابن شاذان جميعا عن حماد بن عيسى عن حريز عن زرارة قال قلت: لابي جعفر عليه السلام الا تخبرني من أين علمت وقلت إن المسح ببعض الرأس وبعض الرجلين؟ فضحك ثم قال ... ثم قال: مَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيَجْعَلَ عَلَيْكُم (في الدين) مِّنْ حَرَجٍ والحرج الضيق

[5/-] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father AND Muhammad b. Ismail from al-Fadhl b. Shadhan all together from Hammad b. Isa from Hariz from Zurara who said: I said to Abi Ja’far عليه السلام: will you not inform me how you knew and ruled that the wiping should only be limited to a part of the head and a part of the feet? so he laughed and then said: … then he said: “Allah does not intend to place upon you [in the religion] any difficulty” (5:6) - and “difficulty” is “discomfort”. 

--> When the Imam recited the verse he included في الدين - this is put in brackets as it is not part of the verse as we have it today. Such ‘additions’ were also common among the companions who were involved in transmitting the Qur’an and the scribes from the Tabi’in. They were not considered part of the Qur’an but mnemonic marker to aid the correct interpretation of the Qur’an in personal Masahif. However, since the Arabic script was under developed and writing was still in its infancy stages no distinctions used to be made between the primary text and such interpretive comments, sometimes it occurred that the latter was mistakenly considered part of the former by transmitters, giving rise to variants even in the Qira’at.

 

[-/6] التهذيب: المفيد عن أحمد بن محمد عن أبيه عن الحسين بن الحسن بن أبان عن الحسين بن سعيد عن ابن أبي عمير عن ابن اذينة عن الفضيل قال سئل أبوعبدالله عليه السلام عن الجنب يغتسل فينتضح من الارض في الاناء فقال: لا بأس هذا مما قال الله تعالى: مَا جَعَلَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِي الدِّينِ مِنْ حَرَجٍ 

[6/-] al-Tahdhib: al-Mufid from Ahmad b. Muhammad from his father from al-Husayn b. al-Hasan b. Aban from al-Husayn b. Said from Ibn Abi Umayr from Ibn Udhayna from al-Fudhayl who said: Abu Abdillah عليه السلام was asked about the one in the state of Janaba who is bathing so [some of the used water] sprays off the ground and into the utensil, he said: there is no harm - this is covered by what Allah the Exalted said: “He has not placed upon you in the religion any difficulty” (22:78).

 

[7/87] توحيد الصدوق: عن العطار، عن سعد، عن ابن يزيد، عن حماد، عن حريز، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله: رفع عن امتي تسعة: الخطاء، والنسيان، وما أكرهوا عليه، وما لا يطيقون، وما لا يعلمون، وما اضطروا إليه، والحسد، والطيرة، والتفكر في الوسوسة في الخلق ما لم ينطق بشفة

[7/87] Tawhid al-Saduq: From al-Attar from Sa’d from Ibn Yazid from Hammad from Hariz from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه واله said: my Umma are absolved of nine things: error, forgetfulness, what they are coerced to do, what they do not have the strength for, what they are ignorant of, what they have to do out of necessity, jealousy, bad omen, and thinking about the whispered (Shaytan-inspired) prompts (doubts cast) in regards the creation - so long as it is not voiced aloud.

                                                                  NOTES:

Humans are not liable for

(a) Inadvertent errors AND

(b) Lapses in memory - 

This is because both are an unavoidable part of human nature. This should not be taken to extend to carelessness or become habitual. 

Similarly, actions which are done

(c) Because of compulsion (like cursing the Imam if ordered by the unjust ruler) OR

(d) Without information about the true state of affairs (like praying Salat in clothes which were Ghasbi or clothes which were Najis etc.) OR

(e) Beyond human capacity (causing irreparable injury) OR

(f) To preserve one’s life (such as eating a Haram animal if there is no other option) -

Will also be overlooked and not result in negative consequences because of God’s mercy. They are not punishable because man is not in total command of himself and has no freedom of choice to act as he deems best in such cases. 

(g) There is a difference of opinion as to what رفع  of الطيرة (bad omen) means here, some have taken it to mean the lifting of its prohibition [so one can act based on the import  of the bad omen], others have taken it to mean the opposite - the lifting of its permissibility [it was allowed for previous Umam] but not this one, others have taken it to mean that it is the effects of bad omen that have been lifted thus they do not affect the people of this Umma, while others take it to mean that the lifting cautions us to ignore the omen and not concern ourselves with it. I say: the lifting of its effects seems more appropriate. Note that the meaning of رفع changes just for this word since for the remaining articles it means lifting of punishment.

This interpretation is further supported by what al-Sadiq says:

علي بن إبراهيم عن أبيه عن عبد الله بن المغيرة عن عمرو بن حريث قال قال أبو عبد الله عليه السلام الطيرة على ما تجعلها ان هونتها تهونت وان شددتها تشددت وإن لم تجعلها شيئا لم تكن شيئا

"The omen is what you make it out to be, if you consider it light it becomes light, if you consider it severe it becomes severe and if you consider it nothing it becomes nothing".

(h) The jealousy which is not punishable is the type that is not acted upon, it has been lifted from the Umma because of the mercy of Allah who knows that it is impossible to avoid inklings of jealousy in the heart.

(i) There are two interpretations of التفكر في الوسوسة في الخلق - one is that it refers to pondering over the doubts originating when looking at the creation such as whether all this has a creator or not, this does not incur punishment so long as one is working to to obtain certainty about it and does not verbalize these doubts, another interpretation can be - having ill-thoughts about people and suspecting their intentions and internally discussing their faults, this is again not punishable so long as one does not vocalize this outwardly and spread his contentions. I say: the former is more evident even though the annotator of al-Faqih calls it far-fetched.  

 

[-/8] التهذيب: عن محمد بن علي بن محبوب، عن ابن عيسى، عن البزنطي قال: سألته عن الرجل يأتي السوق فيشتري جبة فراء لا يدري أذكية هي أم غير ذكية أيصلي فيها؟ فقال: نعم ليس عليكم المسألة إن أبا جعفر عليه السلام كان يقول: إن الخوارج ضيقوا على أنفسهم بجهالتهم إن الدين أوسع من ذلك

[8/-] al-Tahdhib: Muhammad b. Ali b. Mahbub from Ibn Isa from al-Bazanti who said: I asked him about a man who comes to the market and buys a cloak of fur but he is not sure whether it is pure or not pure - can he pray in it? he said: yes, you do not have to inquire about it, Aba Ja’far عليه السلام used to say: the Khawarij straitened things for themselves because of their ignorance, the religion is more expansive than that.

 

[-/9] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن محمد بن أبي عمير، عن ابن اذينة، عن بريد العجلي قال: قلت لابي جعفر عليه السلام: ... قال: ... ولم يجعل الله تبارك وتعالى في الدين من ذيق فالحرج أشد من الضيق ... 

[9/-] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Muhammad b. Abi Umayr from Ibn Udhayna from Burayd al-Ijli who said: I said to Abi Ja’far عليه السلام: … he said: … and Allah Blessed and Exalted did not place in the religion any discomfort for “difficulty” is more extreme than “discomfort”.

Al-Muhsini says: The previous Sahih Riwaya of Zurara (No. 5) equated between الحرج (difficulty) and الضيق (discomfort), but it is also possible to hold that الحرج is the highest particular form of the more general الضيق as this narration makes clear - and there would be no contradiction between the two. In other words, all الحرج is الضيق  but not all الضيق  can be considered to reach the level of الحرج

When the Imam says that Allah did not place in the religion any discomfort, it is as though he had in mind the verse that says “And He has not placed for you in the religion any difficulty” - and clarifies that difficulty in the verse means the highest form of discomfort, so if difficulty has been avoided in the religion then what to say of mere discomfort.  

 

The General Principles that can be inferred from these Narrations

1. The chronological order of commands in a verse is maintained in performance of a ritual.

2. Accepting the witness given by the believers.

3. Lifting of the Taklif or punishment because of lack of knowledge or ability.

4. Hujiyya of the ‘Markets of the Muslims’ or the non-obligation of scrutinizing things in the Mawduat.

5. Absolute lifting of the Taklif if it leads to difficulty - in the form discussed in the appropriate place for such a discussion [i.e. Usul al-Fiqh].   

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Dhulfikar likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.5. Authoritativeness of the Book and the Sunna

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/authoritativeness-of-the-book-and-the-sunna

 

INTRODUCTION

al-Muhsini: It should be known that we do not attempt to prove the authoritativeness of the mighty Book and the holy Sunna [the words of the prophet, his actions and approvals] using the numerous verses which obligate following the prophet and accepting his words or using solitary reports [Akhbar al-Ahad] because that would be a case of circular argumentation. [How can you use the Qur’an or the Sunna to prove its own authoritativeness!]

The meaning of faith is to believe in the unicity of Allah glory be to Him and the message of the final prophet, and this in of itself is enough to accept the Book and the Sunna, and the one who does not accept the Book and the Sunna then he is not a believer nor a Muslim.

Similarly, we do not use solitary reports as evidence to establish the authoritativeness of the words of the Aimma of the Ahl al-Bayt because it would mean making the same contemptible mistake as outlined above.

However, it is attributed to some of the Akhbariyya the position that the Dhawahir [apparent meanings] of the Qur’an have no authority without an interpretation from the `Aimma of the Ahl al-Bayt. This position of theirs is based on some narrations which have nothing to do with what they claim. It is for this reason that the Usulis from among us include a chapter in their books wherein they attempt to prove the authoritativeness of the apparent meanings of the Qur'an in absolute terms unless there is a specifier or a conditionalizer or a reliable indicator otherwise. And the Usulis have also made the apparent meanings of the Qur’an as a decisive resolver in cases where there are contradicting reports, and they also hold any narration contradicting the apparent meanings of the Qur’an to be nullified.

This is one reason for including this chapter, the other is that our motive in this compilation is  to collect together all the reliable-by-chain narrations from the gracious prophet and the `Aimma in all topics even if they have no formal utility as evidence such as when their purport are self-evident or necessary and etc.

Know also that the narrations that can be used to infer the authoritativeness of the Book and the Sunna and the words of the infallible are too many, they are scattered in different sub-books found in this compilation, and there is no need to collect all of them under a single heading or to keep repeating them, and we only include a few here by way of example.

 

[1/88] تهذيب الاحكام: باسناده عن الصفار عن محمد بن الحسين بن ابي الخطاب عن أحمد بن محمد بن ابي نصر عن حماد بن عثمان عن زرارة عن ابي جعفر عليه السلام في قوله عزوجل يَحْكُمُ بِهِ ذَوَا عَدْلٍ مِّنكُمْ فالعدل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله والامام من بعده يحكم به وهو ذو عدل فاذا علمت ما حكم به رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله والامام فحسبك ولا تسأل عنه

[1/88] Tahdhib al-Ahkam: Via his chain from al-Saffar from Muhammad b. al-Husayn b. Abi al-Khattab from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Abi Nasr from Hammad b. Uthman from Zurara from Abi Ja’far عليه السلام in regards His words Mighty and Majestic: “as ruled by two just men among you” (5:95) - the just man is the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله and the Imam after him - he rules on it whilst being just, so if you know how the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله ruled and the Imam then it is enough for you and do not inquire beyond that.

 

[2/89] الكافي: محمد بن يحيى، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن ابن فضال، عن ابن بكير، عن زرارة قال: سألت أبا جعفرعليه السلام عن قول الله عزوجل يَحْكُمُ بِهِ ذَوَا عَدْلٍ مِّنكُمْ قال: العدل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله والامام من بعده ثم قال: هذا مما أخطأت به الكتاب

[2/89] al-Kafi: Muhammad b. Yahya from Ahmad b. Muhammad from Ibn Fadhal from Ibn Bukayr from Zurara who said: I asked Aba Ja’far عليه السلام about the words of Allah Mighty and Majestic: “as ruled by two just men among you” (5:95) - he said: the just man is the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله and the Imam after him, then he said: this is among that which the scribes made a mistake in.  

NOTES:

I say: These two narrations require clarification. Firstly, what is this mistake of the scribes that the Imam is referring to?

This can be identified from another narration translated below:

علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن حماد بن عثمان قال: تلوت عند أبي عبدالله  ذَوَا عَدْلٍ مِّنكُمْ فقال ذُو عَدْلٍ مِّنكُمْ هذا مما أخطأت فيه الكتاب

Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr from Hammad b. Uthman who said: I recited in the presence of Abi Abdillah عليه السلام “as ruled by two just men among you” (5:95) so he said: “a just man among you” this is among that which the scribes made a mistake in.

What becomes apparent from this is that the Qira’a of the `Aimma was different from what we have in the Uthmani Mushaf today. They read the verse as يحكم به ذو عدل منكم ‘Yahkum bihi Dhu Adl Minkum’ and not يحكم به ذوا عدل منكم ‘Yahkum bihi Dhawa Adl Minkum’. In other words, the Qira’a of the Ahl al-Bayt is in the singular mode while the famous Qira’a has it in the dual mode.

Furthermore, this ذو عدل ‘a just man’ is identified as the Prophet in his age, and then the Imams after him each in his respective age. Al-Tabrasi says: the Qira’a of Muhammad b. Ali al-Baqir and that of Ja’far b. Muhammad al-Sadiq is ذو عدل منكم, al-Baydawi also accepts this possibility by saying: it is sometimes recited as ذو عدل

The verse itself is in the context of the penalty for killing game while in the state of consecration (Ihram) during pilgrimage. 

Most of the Sunni scholars understood the atonement prescribed by the verse for the wrong-doer to be the payment of an equivalent price as set and agreed upon by two just men. Two men are needed because it involves some subjectivity and they should haggle until they come to what is considered fair. 

The Shia as noted above have understood the verse differently. According to the most correct opinion - the work of the just man [not two just men] was to decide on the most appropriate specie as the counterpart for each animal killed e.g. for the antelope - sheep etc. This just man is either the prophet or the Imam after him. 

It is the prophet and the Imam alone who possess the attribute of refined justice in all their words and actions, thus, they are the ones who will judge as to what animal is appropriate in each case, and they have already done so via their reports that have been narrated on their authority.

 

[3/90] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن حماد بن عيسى، عن إبراهيم بن عمر اليماني عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: سألته عن قول الله عزوجل ذَوَا عَدْلٍ مِّنكُمْ قال: العدل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله والامام من بعده ثم قال: هذا مما أخطأت به الكتاب

[3/90] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Hammad b. Isa from Ibrahim b. Umar al-Yamani from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he said: I asked him about the words of Allah Mighty and Majestic: “two just men among you” (5:95) he said: the just man is the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله and the Imam after him, then he said: this is among that which the scribes made a mistake in.

NOTES:

al-Faydh said: the Rasm (consonantal skeleton) having an Alif in ذوا عدل is a mistaken addition by a copyist. [And this is one of the main reasons that has led to the divergence in recitation i.e. the seven or fourteen Qira’at - some codexes had additional letters here and there, the script being primitive as it did not have Haraka, this resulted in misunderstandings which occurred and the same word was orally read in different ways]. Deleting the Alif is more appropriate, otherwise it would mean that the judges are two, while in reality he is only one, either the messenger of Allah in his time, or every Imam in his time, replacing one another. 

 

[-/4] الكافي: علي، عن محمد بن عيسى، عن يونس، عن قتيبة قال: سأل رجل أبا عبدالله عليه السلام عن مسألة فأجابه فيها، فقال الرجل: أرأيت إن كان كذا وكذا ما يكون القول فيها؟ فقال له: مه ما أجبتك فيه من شئ فهو عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله لسنا من: " أرأيت" في شئ

[4/-] al-Kafi: Ali from Muhammad b. Isa from Yunus from Qutayba who said: a man asked Aba Abdillah عليه السلام about an issue and he answered him in it - so the man said: suppose if it were so and so - what would the answer be in it then? So he said to him: keep silent, whatever I have answered regarding it - then it is on the authority of the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله, we have nothing to do with ‘suppose’ whatsoever.

 

[-/5] الرسالة المؤلفة في احوال احاديث اصحابنا واثبات صحتها لسعد بن هبة الله الراوندي: عنه، عن أبيه، عن سعد بن عبدالله، عن يعقوب بن يزيد، عن محمد بن أبي عمير، عن جميل بن دراج، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: الوقوف عند الشبهة خير من الاقتحام في الهلكة، إن على كل حق حقيقة، وعلى كل صواب نورا، فما وافق كتاب الله فخذوه، وما خالف كتاب الله فدعوه

[5/-] The Treatise on the ‘Status of the Narrations of our Companions and Establishing their Authenticity’ authored by Sa’d b. Hibat Allah al-Rawandi: And from him (al-Saduq) from his father from Sa’d b. Abdallah from Ya’qub b. Yazid from Muhammad b. Abi Umayr from Jamil b. Darraj from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: stopping in the face of doubt is better then rushing headlong into destruction, there is upon every truth a [self-evident] certainty, and upon every correct thing a light [proof], so whatever agrees with the Book of Allah then take it, and whatever opposes the Book of Allah then leave it.

 

[-/6] الكافي: عدة من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن أبيه، عن النضر بن سويد، عن يحيى الحلبي، عن أيوب بن الحر قال: سمعت أبا عبدالله عليه السلام يقول: كل شئ مردود إلى الكتاب والسنة، وكل حديث لا يوافق كتاب الله فهو زخرف

[6/-] al-Kafi: A number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid from his father from al-Nadhr b. Suwayd from Yahya al-Halabi from Ayyub b. al-Hur who said: I heard Aba Abdillah عليه السلام saying: everything is referred back to the Book and the Sunna, and every Hadith that does not agree with the Book of Allah then it is a worthless embellishment.

 

[-/7] رجال الكشي: محمد بن قولويه، والحسين بن الحسن بن بندار معا، عن سعد، عن اليقطيني، عن يونس بن عبد الرحمن ... قال: حدثني هشام بن الحكم أنه سمع أبا عبد الله عليه السلام يقول: لا تقبلوا علينا حديثا إلا ما وافق القرآن والسنة ... 

[7/-] Rijal al-Kashshi: Muhammad b. Qulawayh and al-Husayn b. al-Hasan b. Bundar together from Sa’d from al-Yaqtini from Yunus b. Abd al-Rahmanhe said: Hisham b. al-Hakam narrated to me that he heard Aba Abdillah عليه السلام saying: do not accept a narration on our authority except that which is in agreement with the Qur’an and the Sunna ...

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: This narration is enough to negate the contention of the Akhabriyya that the interpretation of the Qur'an is necessarily dependent on the narrations of the `Aimma, the opposite is true i.e. it is the narrations which are to be compared and judged on the basis of the Qur'an.

 

[-/8] التوحيد والعيون والأمالي: ابن المتوكل، عن علي، عن أبيه، عن الريان بن الصلت، عن علي بن موسى الرضا، عن آبائه، عن أمير المؤمنين عليهم السلام قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله قال الله جل جلاله: ما آمن بي من فسر برأيه كلامي ...

[8/-] al-Tawhid and al-Uyun and al-Amali: Ibn al-Mutawakkil from Ali from his father from al-Rayyan b. al-Salt from Ali b. Musa al-Ridha from his forefathers from the commander of the faithful عليهم السلام who said: the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه واله said: Allah Majestic is His Majesty said: he has not believed in Me the one who interprets My words based on his opinion …

 

[-/9] تفسير العياشي: عن صفوان قال: سألت أبا الحسن الرضا عليه السلام عن قول الله: فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ فقال: قد سأل رجل أبا الحسن عليه السلام عن ذلك فقال: سيكفيك أو كفتك سورة المائدة يعني المسح على الرأس والرجلين ...

[9/-] Tafsir Al-Ayyashi: From Safwan who said: I asked Aba al-Hasan al-Rida عليه السلام about the words of Allah: “so wash your faces and your hands with the elbows and wipe part of your head and feet to the ankles” (5:6) - he said: a man asked Aba al-Hasan (al-Kadhim) عليه السلام about this so he said: Surat al-Maida is enough for you - meaning - wiping the head and the two feet …

NOTES:

While there is some evidence that people were washing their feet during ablution at first, al-Maida which was the last Sura to be revealed abrogated this by ordaining wiping, and thus when the Imam says: ‘al-Maida is enough for you’ he means acting on the purport of what it commands i.e. wiping. This explains the Khilaf that has occurred between the Muslims, whereby some groups failed to abide by the abrogating verse and stuck to what was common before the abrogation.

 

[-/10] الكافي: علي بن ابراهيم عن أبيه ومحمد بن اسماعيل عن الفضل ابن شاذان جميعا عن حماد بن عيسى عن حريز عن زرارة قال قلت: لابي جعفر عليه السلام الا تخبرني من أين علمت وقلت إن المسح ببعض الرأس وبعض الرجلين؟ فضحك ثم قال: يا زرارة قاله رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله ونزل به الكتاب من الله لأن الله عزوجل يقول: فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ فعرفنا أن الوجه كله ... فقال: فعرفنا حين قال بِرُءُوسِكُمْ أن المسح ببعض الرأس لمكان الباء ... 

[10/-] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father AND Muhammad b. Ismail from al-Fadhl b. Shadhan all together from Hammad b. Isa from Hariz from Zurara who said: I said to Abi Ja’far عليه السلام: will you not inform me how you knew and ruled that the wiping should only be limited to a part of the head and a part of the feet, so he laughed and then said: O Zurara - the messenger of Allah ruled it to be so and the Book from Allah descended with it - because Allah Mighty and Majestic says: “wash your faces” so we understood that the whole face … then he said: “and wipe part of your head” so we understood when He said بِرُءُوسِكُمْ  that the wiping is limited to part of the head because of the (letter) 'ب' (Ba) …

 

[-/11] الكافي: أحمد بن إدريس، عن محمد بن عبد الجبار، عن صفوان بن يحيى قال: سألني أبو قرة المحدث أن أدخله إلي أبى الحسن الرضا عليه السلام ... فقال أبو الحسن عليه السلام: ... إذا كانت الروايات مخالفه للقرآن كذبت بها، وما أجمع المسلمون عليه أنه لا يحيط به علم ولا تدركه الابصار وليس كمثله شئ

[11/-] al-Kafi: Ahmad b. Idris from Muhammad b. Abd al-Jabbar from Safwan b. Yahya who said: Abu Qurra the Hadith scholar asked me to facilitate his entrance into the presence of Abi al-Hasan al-Ridha عليه السلام … so Abu al-Hasan عليه السلام said: … if the narrations contradict the Qur’an then I reject them, and what the Muslims have all unanimously agreed upon is that He cannot be fully comprehended by knowledge, and the eye-sight cannot overtake Him, and there is nothing like Him.

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: The narration indicates the following:

(a) Narrations that oppose the Qur’an do not have probative force.
(b) The Ijma’ (consensus) of the Muslims has probative force.
(c) Narrations that oppose Ijma’ of the Muslims do not have probative force.
(d) The Dhawahir (apparent meanings) of the Qur’an have probative force. 

 

[-/12] ارشاد المفيد: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله: إني تارك فيكم الثقلين ما إن تمسكتم بهما لن  تضلوا بعدي: كتاب الله وعترتي ...  

[12/-] Irshad of al-Mufid: The messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله said: I leave behind in your midst the two weighty things, as long you hold on to them you will not go astray after me: the Book of Allah and my descendants …

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: This narration which is certain in provenance [is confirmed to have originated from the prophet because of Tawatur] indicates the authoritativeness of the Book and the words of the `Aimma among the descendants and the obligation of holding on and following them.   

 

[-/13] معاني الأخبار: ابن الوليد، عن الصفار، عن الخشاب، عن ابن كلوب، عن إسحاق بن عمار، عن جعفر، عن آبائه عليهم السلام قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله: ما وجدتم في كتاب الله عزوجل فالعمل لكم به لا عذر لكم في تركه ... 

[13/-] Ma’ani al-Akhbar: Ibn al-Walid from al-Saffar from al-Khashab from Ibn Kalub from Ishaq b. Ammar from Ja’far from his forefathers عليهم السلام: the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله said: whatever you find in the Book of Allah Mighty and Majestic then acting is to be based upon it and you have no excuse to abandon it … 

 

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Dhulfikar likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.6. Principle of Precaution

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/principle-of-precaution

 

[-/1] التهذيب: عن الحسن بن محمد بن سماعة عن سليمان بن داود عن عبدالله بن وضاح قال: كتبت إلى العبد الصالح عليه السلام ... فكتب إلي أرى لك أن تنتظر حتى تذهب الحمرة وتأخذ بالحايطة لدينك

[1/-] al-Tahdhib: From al-Hasan b. Muhammad b. Sama’a from Sulayman b. Dawud from Abdallah b. Wadhah who said: I wrote to the Righteous Servant (al-Kadhim) عليه السلام … so he wrote to me (saying): I deem for you that you delay [praying] until the reddish hue disappears and that you act prudently in your religion.

 

[-/2] الكافي: علي، عن أبيه، ومحمد بن إسماعيل، عن الفضل بن شاذان جميعا، عن ابن أبي عمير وصفوان بن يحيى جميعا، عن عبدالرحمن بن الحجاج قال: سألت أبا الحسن عليه السلام عن رجلين أصابا صيدا وهما محرمان الجزاء بينهما أو على كل واحد منهما جزاء؟ فقال: لابل عليهما أن يجزي كل واحد منهما الصيد، قلت: إن بعض أصحابنا سألني عن ذلك فلم أدر ما عليه، فقال: إذا أصبتم مثل هذا فلم تدروا فعليكم بالاحتياط حتى تسألوا عنه فتعلموا

[2/-] al-Kafi: Ali from his father AND Muhammad b. Ismail from al-Fadhl b. Shadhan all together from Ibn Abi Umayr and Safwan b. Yahya all together from Abd al-Rahman b. al-Hajjaj who said: I asked Aba al-Hasan عليه السلام about two men who kill game [together] while they are in Ihram - will the atonement be shared between them or will it be incumbent on each one of them individually? He said: Rather it will be on each one of them to atone individually for the hunted animal, I said: one of our fellows asked me about that but I did not know what would be upon him, so he said: if you encounter the like of this [such scenarios] and do not know what to do then upon you is acting by precaution until when you ask about it and know [the exact answer]. 

NOTES:

al-Majlisi says: Ihtiyat (precaution) here means not giving an answer one way or another (if you are the one asked) and not acting one way or the other (if you are the one asking) until you ask the Imam himself and obtain full knowledge.

I say: it is also possible that the Imam means by Ihtiyat here that you should answer or act in such a way that you bear the utmost burden possible, so in this case you would rule both of them to pay Kaffara individually for hunting instead of sharing the cost between themselves. As in Ihtiyat is to cover all bases and do more that what could be required so as to be on the safe side.

 

[-/3] التهذيب: باسناده عن محمد بن احمد بن يحيى عن هارون بن مسلم عن مسعدة بن زياد عن جعفر عن آبائه عليهم السلام ان النبي صلى الله عليه وآله قال: لا تجامعوا في النكاح على الشبهة يقول: إذا بلغك انك قد رضعت من لبنها وانها لك محرم وما اشبه ذلك فان الوقوف عند الشبهة خير من الاقتحام في الهلكة

[3/-] al-Tahdhib: Via his chain from Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya from Harun b. Muslim from Mas’ada b. Ziyad from Ja’far from his forefathers عليهم السلام that the prophet صلى الله عليه وآله said: do not unite in marriage upon doubt  <<He meant to say: if it reaches you [information that] that you have suckled of her milk [from the same source - she is your foster sister] and that she is a Mahram to you, or something similar to this then halting in the face of doubt is better than rushing headlong into destruction>>.  

NOTES:

al-Muhsini says: It is apparent that such precaution is not limited to cases of marriage.

 

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Dhulfikar likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.7. Authoritativeness of the Solitary Report of a Truthful Narrator

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/authoritativeness-of-the-solitary-report-of-a-truthful-narrator

 

Introduction (al-Muhsini): There should be no doubt about the Hujiyya [authoritativeness] of a report which produces trust. For trust or Itmi’nan [personal confidence] is an Aqli proof which the Law-giver has not repudiated, and the detractions raised against it by some of the scholars is weak. On the other hand, questions can be asked about the Hujiyya of the report of the truthful one if it does not bring about actionable Itmi’nan [in regards the report itself]. 

One cannot cite as evidence for it [the Hujiyya of the report of the truthful one] solitary reports for it will lead to circular argumentation, thus, the reports that indicate it should reach the level of certainty or Itmi’nan [by way other than the specifics of the chain]. And below is what we could gather in this chapter:

 

[-/1] الكافي: عن محمد بن عبدالله ومحمد بن يحيى جميعا، عن عبدالله بن جعفر الحميري قال: اجتمعت أنا والشيخ أبوعمرو رحمه الله عند أحمد بن إسحاق فغمزني أحمد بن إسحاق أن أسأله عن الخلف فقلت له: ... وقد أخبرني أبوعلي أحمد بن إسحاق عن أبي الحسن عليه السلام قال: سألته وقلت: من اعامل أو عمن آخذ وقول من أقبل؟ فقال له: العمري ثقتي فما ادى إليك عني فعني يؤدي وما قال لك عني فعني يقول، فاسمع له وأطع، فإنه الثقة المأمون، وأخبرني أبوعلي أنه سأل ابا محمد عليه السلام عن مثل ذلك فقال له: العمري وابنه ثقتان، فما أديا إليك عني فعني يؤديان وما قالا لك فعني يقولان، فاسمع لهما وأطعمها فإنهما الثقتان المأمونان ...

[1/-] al-Kafi: From Muhammad b. Abdallah and Muhammad b. Yahya both from Abdallah b. Ja’far al-Himyari who said: we gathered - me and the Shaykh Abu Amr (al-Amri) - may Allah have mercy on him - at Ahmad bin Ishaq’s, then Ahmad b. Ishaq signaled me to ask him (al-Amri) about the Remnant (al-Mahdi), so I said to him: … and Abu Ali Ahmad b. Ishaq has relayed to me on the authority of Abi al-Hasan (al-Naqi) عليه السلام - saying: I asked him and said: whom do I emulate or from whom do I take? and whose words do I accept? so he said to him: al-Amri is my Thiqa (trustee), so what he gives you on my behalf then his giving is truly on my behalf, and what he says to you on my behalf then his saying is truly on my behalf, so listen to him and obey him, for he is both Thiqa (trustworthy) and reliable, and Abu Ali also informed me that he had asked Aba Muhammad (al-Askari) عليه السلام about the same matter, so he said to him: al-Amri and his son are both Thiqa (trustees), so what they give to you on my behalf then their giving is truly on my behalf, and what they say to you on my behalf then their saying is truly on my behalf, so listen to them and obey them, for they are both Thiqa (trustworthy) and reliable …

--> This shows both Imams directing one of their followers to accept what al-Amri [the first Safir] and his son [the second Safir] attribute to them, furthermore, this is linked to them being Thiqa i.e. having Wathaqa. 

 

 [-/2] رجال الكشي: محمد بن قولويه عن سعد بن عبد الله، عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى، عن عبد الله بن محمد الحجال، عن يونس بن يعقوب قال: كنا عند أبي عبد الله عليه السلام فقال أما لكم من مفزع  أما لكم من مستراح تستريحون إليه ما يمنعكم من الحارث بن المغيرة النصري

[2/-] Rijal al-Kashshi: Muhammad b. Qulawayh from Sa’d b. Abdallah from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa from Abdallah b. Muhammad al-Hajjal from Yunus b. Ya’qub who said: we were at Aba Abdillah's عليه السلام place when he said: do you not have a secure shelter? do you not have a comforter whom you can seek comfort in? what prevents you from [referring to] al-Harith bin al-Mughira al-Nasri.

--> The Imam is referring his followers to an intermediary i.e. al-Harith to solve their problems in the Diin.

 

[-/3] رجال الكشي: محمد بن مسعود، عن محمد بن نصير، عن محمد بن عيسى، عن عبد العزيز ابن المهتدي قال: قلت لأبي الحسن الرضا عليه السلام: جعلت فداك لا أكاد أصل إليك لأسألك عن كل ما أحتاج إليه من معالم ديني، أفيونس بن عبد الرحمن ثقة آخذ عنه ما أحتاج إليه من معالم ديني فقال: نعم

[3/-] Rijal al-Kashshi: Muhammad b. Mas’ud from Muhammad b. Nusayr from Muhammad b. Isa from Abd al-Aziz b. al-Muhtadi who said: I said to Abi al-Hasan al-Ridha عليه السلام: may I be made your ransom, I cannot always reach you to ask you all that which I need from the teachings of my religion, is Yunus b. Abd al-Rahman Thiqa (trustworthy) and can I take from him what I need from the teachings of my religion? he said: yes.   

--> The Imam is directing Abd al-Aziz to go to Yunus when he cannot come to the Imam directly, and take from his his Diin, and this is linked to Yunus being Thiqa.

 

[-/4] رجال النجاشي: عن شيخنا المفيد في كتابه مصابيح النور: أخبرني ابن قولويه، عن علي بن الحسين بن بابويه، عن عبد الله بن جعفر، عن داود بن القاسم الجعفري قال: عرضت على أبي محمد صاحب العسكر عليه السلام كتاب يوم وليلة ليونس، فقال لي: تصنيف من هذا ؟ فقلت: تصنيف يونس مولى آل يقطين، فقال: أعطاه الله بكل حرف نورا يوم القيامة

[4/-] Rijal al-Najashi: From our Shaykh al-Mufid in his book “Masabih al-Nur”: reported to us Ibn Qulawayh from Ali b. al-Husayn b. Babawayh from Abdallah b. Ja’far from Dawud b. al-Qasim al-Ja’fari who said: I presented the book “Yawm wa Layla” of Yunus to Abi Muhammad al-Askari عليه السلام, so he said to me: who authored this? I said: it has been authored by Yunus the client of the family of Yaqtin, he said: may Allah give him for every letter a light on the day of judgment.

--> The Imam shows his pleasure at the books of Hadith. The Kitab Yawm wa Layla would have been a book with narrations about what one should do during the day and night of daily Ibadat. 

 

[-/5] الكافي: عدة من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن عيسى، عن أحمد بن محمد بن أبي نصر عن أبان بن عثمان، عن ابن أبي يعفور، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله خطب الناس في مسجد الخيف فقال: نضر الله عبدا سمع مقالتي فوعاها وحفظها وبلغها من لم يسمعها، فرب حامل فقه غير فقيه ورب حامل فقه إلى من هو أفقه منه ...

[5/-] al-Kafi: A number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Abi Nasr from Aban b. Uthman from Ibn Abi Ya’fur from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله gave a speech to the people in the Masjid of al-Khif and said: may Allah make radiant [the face of] a slave who hears my words and understands them and memorizes them and relays them to the one who did not hear them, for it may happen that a bearer of Fiqh is not a Faqih and it may happen that a bearer of Fiqh relays them to one who is more of a Faqih than him …

--> The prophet himself sanctions and encourages the practice of relaying his words to those that did not hear them [i.e. Hadith narration]. This is because as he says – it may happen that one can carry those words and not truly understand them, or have partial understanding, but can relay it to a scholar who possesses a better faculty than him for understanding, who will make use of the Hadith and explain it better.

 

[-/6] رجال الكشي: حمدويه بن نصير، عن يعقوب بن يزيد و محمد بن الحسين بن أبي الخطاب، عن محمد بن أبي عمير، عن إبراهيم بن عبد الحميد و غيره قالوا: قال أبو عبد الله عليه السلام رحم الله زرارة بن أعين لو لا زرارة و نظراؤه لاندرست أحاديث أبي عليه السلام

[6/-] Rijal al-Kashshi: Hamduwayh b. Nusayr from Ya’qub b. Yazid and Muhammad b. al-Husayn b. Abi al-Khattab from Muhammad b. Abi Umayr from Ibrahim b. Abd al-Hamid and others apart from him - they all said: Abu Abdillah عليه السلام said: may Allah have mercy on Zurara bin A’yan, if it was not for Zurara b. A’yan and his peers the narrations of my father would have perished.

--> The Pillars who safe-guarded the Diin were initially companions of al-Baqir and then senior companions of al-Sadiq. These include figures like Zurara who is singled out here, but also Muhammad b. Muslim, Layth and Burayd i.e. the great four among the Ashab al-Ijma’. They spent a lot of time with the Sadiqayn and then went on to relay the treasure trove of what they collected to the  next generation, thus, they are known for being prolific narrators.

 

[-/7] عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله: من حفظ احاديثنا أربعين حديثا بعثه الله يوم القيامة عالما فقيها

[7/-] From the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه واله who said: whoever preserves forty of our narrations Allah will raise him on the day of judgment as a scholar possessing understanding.

al-Muhsini says: The narration has different wordings and diverse chains.

al-Majlisi says: This purport is famous and dispersed both among the Khassa and the Amma, in fact, Tawatur has also been claimed for it.

 

[-/8] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن عمر بن أذينة، عن إسماعيل بن الفضل الهاشمي، قال: سألت أبا عبد الله عليه السلام عن المتعة، فقال: إلق عبد الملك بن جريح فسله عنها فإن عنده منها علما، فلقيته فأملى علي منها شيئا كثيرا في استحلالها، فكان فيما روى لي ابن جريح، قال: ليس فيها وقت ولا عدد إنما هي بمنزلة الإماء يتزوج منهن كم شاء، وصاحب الأربع نسوة يتزوج منهن ما شاء بغير ولي ولا شهود، فإذا انقضى الاجل بانت منه بغير طلاق ويعطيها الشئ اليسير، وعدتها حيضتان، وإن كانت لا تحيض فخمسة وأربعون يوما، فأتيت بالكتاب أبا عبد الله عليه السلام فعرضت عليه، فقال: صدق وأقر به

[8/-] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr from Umar b. Udhayna from Ismail b. al-Fadhl al-Hashimi who said: I asked Aba Abdillah عليه السلام about Mut’a so he said: go and see Abd al-Malik b. Jurayj and ask him about it for he has some knowledge about it, so I met him and he (Ibn Jurayj) dictated a lot of material in regards its permissibility to me, so from among that which Ibn Jurayj transmitted to me included: it (Mut’ah) has no fixed duration nor limit in number [of partners with whom you can contract], it has the same status as [union with] slave girls, a man marries with them as he likes, even someone who already has four wives can marry as many as he wishes, without [permission from] guardian required nor witnesses, so when the period terminates she departs from him without divorce, and he gives her some small thing [as her Mahr], and her Idda is two menstrual cycles, and if she does not menstruate then forty five days, so I came with the book to Aba Abdillah عليه السلام and presented its contents to him, so he said: he is truthful, and he agreed with it.  

--> We see here that the Imam is referring Ismail to someone who is not even from his followers, but rather a scholar of renown among the proto-Sunnis. al-Kashshi notes that Ibn Jurayj was from the Amma but had excessive Mahaba (love towards the Ahl al-Bayt). The Imam agrees with what Ibn Jurayj narrated, which shows that the Amma did not lose all prophetic truth rather a lot of authentic narrations can be found in their corpus. 

 

 [-/9] رجال الكشي: حمدويه، عن ابن يزيد، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن شعيب العقرقوفي قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام: ربما احتجنا أن نسأل عن الشئ فمن نسأل؟ قال: عليك بالأسدي - يعني أبا بصير

[9/-] Rijal al-Kashshi: Hamduwayh who said: narrated to us Ibn Yazid from Ibn Abi Umayr from Shuayb al-Aqraqufi who said: I said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام: it may happen that we require to ask about something - so whom should we ask? he said: upon you is al-Asadi - meaning by it - Aba Basir.

 

[-/10] الكافي: عدة من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن الحسن بن علي، عن وهيب بن حفص قال: كنا مع أبي بصير فأتاه عمرو بن إلياس فقال له: ياأبا محمد إن أخي بحلب بعث إلي بمال من الزكاة اقسمه بالكوفة فقطع عليه الطريق فهل عندك فيه رواية؟ فقال: نعم. سألت أبا جعفر عليه السلام عن هذه المسألة ولم أظن أن أحدا يسألني عنها أبدا فقلت لابي جعفر عليه السلام: جعلت فداك الرجل يبعث بزكاته من أرض إلى أرض فيقطع عليه الطريق فقال: قد أجزأت عنه ولو كنت أنا لاعدتها

[10/-] al-Kafi: A number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad from al-Hasan b. Ali from Wuhayb b. Hafs who said: we were with Abi Basir when Amr b. Ilyas came and said to him: O Aba Muhammad (i.e. Abi Basir) my brother is in Halab (Aleppo), he sent me some wealth as Zakat so that I can distribute it in Kufa, but the road was cut-off on him [brigands stole it] - do you have a narration about this? he said: yes, I asked Aba Ja’far عليه السلام this question and I don’t think anyone else has asked me about it before, I said to Abi Ja’far عليه السلام: may I be made your ransom, a man sends his Zakat from one land to another but it is intercepted on the road, he said: he is excused but if it were me I would have repeated again [giving Zakat a second time].

--> Observe how the Ashab stuck to the Riwayat of the Aimma and did not experiment with independent reasoning. Amr asks Abu Basir specifically if he has a Riwaya and not for his ‘opinion’ of what he should do. Although the Imam rules that one does not have repay the Zakat, yet he holds himself to a higher standard and would have repeated paying a second time, from this we recognize that doing so would be better.

 

[-/11] الفقيه: بإسناده عن ابراهيم بن هاشم ان محمد بن ابي عمير كان رجلا بزازا فذهب ماله وافتقره وكان له على رجل عشرة آلاف درهم فباع دارا له كان يسكنها بعشرة آلاف درهم وحمل المال إلى بابه فخرج اليه محمد بن ابي عمير فقال: ما هذا؟ فقال: هذا مالك الذي لك علي قال: ورثته؟ قال: لا قال: وهب لك؟ قال: لا قال: فهل هو ثمن ضيعة بعتها؟ قال: لا قال: فما هو؟ قال: بعت داري التي اسكنها لاقضي ديني فقال محمد بن ابي عمير: حدثني ذريح المحاربي عن ابي عبدالله (ع) انه قال: لا يخرج الرجل عن مسقط رأسه بالدين، ارفعها فلا حاجة لي فيها والله اني لمحتاج في وقتي هذا إلى درهم واحد وما يدخل ملكي منها درهم واحد

[11/-] al-Faqih: Via his chain from Ibrahim b. Hashim that - Muhammad b. Abi Umayr was a cloth merchant whose wealth perished and he fell into poverty, however he had loaned out ten thousand silver coins to someone, so the one he owed sold his house which he used to live in at a price of ten thousand silver coins and carried the whole sum to his (Ibn Abi Umayr’s) door, so Muhammad b. Abi Umayr came out to him and said: what is this? he said: this is your money which was due upon me, he said: you have inherited it? he said: no, he said: it has been gifted to you? he said: no, he said: is it the price of a land you have sold? He said: no, he said: then what is it? he said: I sold my house in which I live in so that I can repay my debt, so Muhammad b. Abi Umayr said: Dharih al-Muharibi narrated to me from Abi Abdillah that he said: a man is not driven out of his place of residence (his home) because of debt, take it away for I have no need of it, by Allah even though I do have a need of even a single silver coin at this time - I will not take a single one of them into my possession.

--> Ibn Abi Umayr bases his action of not accepting the debtor’s money [which he obtained from selling his house] on a narration from Dharih. This proves that narrations had probative force to the earliest companions. Scholars have also concluded from this that Dharih is Thiqa otherwise Ibn Abi Umayr would not have cited his report and acted on it.

 

[-/12] رجال الكشي: محمد بن قولويه، عن سعد، عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى، عن عبد الله الحجال، عن العلاء، عن ابن أبي يعفور قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام إنه ليس كل ساعة ألقاك و لا يمكن القدوم، و يجي‏ء الرجل من أصحابنا فيسألني و ليس عندي كلما يسألني عنه، قال فما يمنعك من محمد بن مسلم الثقفي فإنه قد سمع من أبي و كان عنده وجيها

[12/-] Rijal al-Kashshi: Muhammad b. Qulawayh from Sa'd from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa from Abdallah al-Hajjal from al-Ala from Ibn Abi Abi Ya'fur who said: I said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام - I am not with you at all times, and it is sometimes impossible to travel (i.e. to come to you from Kufah), and a man from among our companions comes and asks me - but I do not have everything regarding what he asks me about, he عليه السلام said: what prevents you from (going to) Muhammad bin Muslim al-Thaqafi - for he had heard from my father and had a most favorable position with him.

-->  It is such through narrations that the `Aimma delegated their own authority to those of the Rijal who performed various tasks on their behalf, such as guiding their followers in distant lands. It was not to any companion that the `Aimma would ask others to refer to, but only those special disciples to whom they devoted attention and brought close. Ibn Muslim spent a lot of time with al-Baqir and then al-Sadiq such that he is said to have 30,000 traditions from al-Baqir and 16,000 traditions from al-Sadiq during his four-year sojourn in Madina. And this made Hammad b. Uthman and Abd al-Rahman b. al-Hajjaj [themselves no light-weights] to exclaim that there was no one more Afqah among the Shia than Muhammad b. Muslim.

 

[-/13] الكافي: حميد بن زياد عن ابن سماعة عن ابن رباط عن عيص بن القاسم عن ابى عبدالله عليه السلام قال: سألته عن رجل خير امرأته فاختارت نفسها بانت منه؟ قال: لا انما هذا شئ كان لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله خاصة امر بذلك ففعل، ولو اخترن انفسهن لطلقن وهو قول الله عزوجل: قُلْ لأزْوَاجِكَ إِنْ كُنْتُنَّ تُرِدْنَ الحَيَاةَ الدُّنْيَا وَزِينَتَهَا فَتَعَالَيْنَ أُمَتِّعْكُنَّ وَأُسَرِّحْكُنَّ سَرَاحًا جَمِيلا قال الحسن بن سماعة وبهذا الحديث نأخذ في الخيار

[13/-] al-Kafi: Humayd b. Ziyad from Ibn Sama’a from Ibn Ribat from Iys b. al-Qasim from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he (Iys) said: I asked him about a man who derogates to his wife the option to choose - so she chooses herself, will this mean that the divorce is final? he said: No, this (i.e. Takhyir) is a thing which was only for the messenger of Allah specifically, he was ordered to do that so he did it, and if they had chosen themselves then he would have divorced them - and it is the words of Allah Mighty and Majestic “Say to your wives: if you prefer the life of this world and its adornment then come forth so that I provide you a provision and set you free in a goodly manner” (33:28). al-Hasan b. Sama’a said: by this Hadith do we take [rule] in the matter of Khiyar [giving an ultimatum to the wife to decide her future]

--> Takhyir in this context means a husband derogating power to his wife either to ‘choose him’ i.e. continue in the marriage, or ‘choose herself’. Many Sunni scholars upheld its continuing validity, while some considered the act of her choosing herself to be a three-in-one divorce by which she becomes permanently separated from him. The Imam rejects such an interpretation and makes it clear that this was a historical command exclusive only for the prophet who was told to place this ultimatum to his wives [after one of them misbehaved] - all of whom ‘chose him’ and that was the end of that. Note also that Ibn Sama’a sums up the Imami view in the issue as being represented by this solitary report.

 

[-/14] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن جميل بن دراج قال: لا يجبر الرجل إلا على نفقة الابوين والولد، قال ابن أبي عمير: قلت لجميل: والمرأة؟ قال: قد روى عن عنبسة، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: إذا كساها مايواري عورتها ويطعمها مايقيم صلبها أقامت معه وإلا طلقها

[14/-] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr from Jamil b. Darraj who said: a man is not obliged to provide food except for the two parents and the children, Ibn Abi Umayr said: I said to Jamil: what about the wife? He said: it has been narrated from Anbasa from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام that he said: if he (the husband) clothes her with what covers her Awra [what should be covered] and if he feeds her what keeps her back straight then she remains with him otherwise he divorces her.

--> Initially, Jamil gives a ruling in his own words which was undoubtedly based on a narration [variants have him speaking not in the first voice but quoting the Imam to this effect], however, when asked a question by Ibn Abi Umayr he cites the words narrated from al-Sadiq to answer it. 

 

Conclusion (al-Muhsini): What has come already within the pages of this book and what will come after, especially in the chapter on “reconciling the contradictory narrations”, in addition to the large number of unreliable narrations with this same import, such as those found in <<al-Wasail>> and <<Jami Ahadith al-Shia>> - are enough to compel the researcher to have Itmi’nan about the Hujiyya of the report of the truthful one. Furthermore, when one considers this in light of the practice of the companions both ancient ones and recent ones (who made use of such reports) - it leads to certainty. 

And the justification for this is the same 'foundation of the reasonable ones' (Bina al-Uqala). Reasonable people have historically relied on the report of the truthful one even before Islam and in the lifetime of the prophet and the `Aimma to this day of ours and will undoubtedly continue to do so unto day of judgment, and no objection to this was raised by the Law-giver of Islam.

It must be admitted that there are problems in inferring what we want [the Hujiyya of the report of the truthful one] from some of the narrations that have come in this chapter, in fact, the Sahih narration of Yunus - that is to come - narrated from al-Ridha says: “… do not accept a Hadith on our authority except that which agrees with the Qur’an and the Sunna or you find for it corroboration in our past Ahadith …” [as though it is placing another condition for acceptance beyond the truthfulness of the narrator], but this narration cannot be used to qualify the 'foundation of the reasonable ones' and the great number of narrations and the aforementioned practice, so there can be no option but to explain it away such as considering it limited to cases where it is required to prefer one narration over another contradictory one, this is also necessary so that this narration [Sahih of Yunus] is not itself affected by this rule [of having to compare]! 

And will come in the next book “Book of Narrators” a number of other narrations which support the Hujiyya of the words of the truthful.

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.8. Principle of “Whomsoever it reaches …”

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/principle-of--whomsoever-it-reaches

 

[1/91] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن هشام بن سالم، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: من سمع شيئا من الثواب على شئ فصنعه كان له وإن لم يكن على ما بلغه

[1/91] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr from Hisham b. Salim from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: whomsoever hears something about the Thawab to be got by doing a certain act and goes on to do it, then it (the Thawab mentioned) will be for him, even if it (the report conveying the Thawab) was not as had reached him (i.e. was not accurate). 

 

[-/2] محاسن البرقي: و عنه عن علي بن الحكم عن هشام بن سالم عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال من بلغه عن النبي صلى الله عليه وآله شيء من الثواب فعمله كان أجر ذلك له و إن كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله لم يقله

[2/-] Mahasin of al-Barqi: And from him (Muhammad b. Khalid al-Barqi) from Ali b. al-Hakam from Hisham b. Salim from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: whomsoever it reaches something about the Thawab - attributed to the prophet صلى الله عليه وآله - and he acts upon it, he will have the rewards of that, even if the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله had not said it.

--> And we have included this second narration in-spite of the weakness of its source [i.e. he does not accept al-Mahasin] - because - the first narration corroborates it which indicates that this is not a spurious interpolation added into the particular manuscript of al-Mahasin that reached al-Majlisi.

--> This narration is from among the famous narrations which has been narrated by both the Khassa and the Amma via a multitude of chains.


COMMENTARY (by al-Muhsini)

The two narrations in this chapter and those of a similar purport are called the narrations of “Man Balagh”.

What exactly it is that the narrations of “Man Balagh” imply has raised debate among the scholars [refer to the books of Usul al-Fiqh like al-Rasail, Kifaya and others for a detailed review]. 

Some scholars have used them to give Hujiyya to the weak and unknown Hadith, and have justified acting by them in matters regarding the Sunan (non-Wajib) i.e. in identifying the Mustahab (recommended) acts. This is what is called al-Tasamuh fi Addilat al-Sunan i.e. lowering standards for proofs of the non-Wajib.

Other scholars claim that Istihbab cannot be established on such a basis, to them these narrations of “Man Balagh” do not provide Hujiyya for that, they merely indicate that Thawab will accrue for the one who performs the act conveyed to him - either out of hope or as a precaution - not that the act itself should be considered Mustahab.

Critical questions that arise for those who believe in al-Tasamuh: Do these narrations of “Man Balagh” encompass only unknown reports or also weak ones? Do these narrations have in mind someone who is totally ignorant of the veracity or falsity of what has been conveyed to him or do they extend to cases where someone is aware of the possibility of it being a lie? Do these narrations establish only the Mustahab rulings or do they extend to the Makruh? Will this still hold assuming one has suspicion that “what has reached him” is probably a lie? Is this limited only to cases where a specific Thawab has been explicitly delineated or is it general to all cases of commands and prohibitions? Is it wider in also including the narrations of the non-Imami [like the Sunni prophetic Hadith] or is it only exclusive to the reports narrated by the Imamis? 

All these questions demand answers, but this is not the place to go into detail, however, one thing that needs to be pointed out here is that these narrations refer to good deeds and Thawab, they should not be extended to the Fadhail genre [merits of actions], as has been done by some of the Amma (ref. as an example to al-Sawaiq al-Muhriqa of Ibn Hajar, where they justify using spurious reports to establish the relative superiority of an action e.g. reading a certain Surah, arguing that this is a genre which does not require as much rigour as the Halal and the Haram).

In conclusion, my position is that we should stick to what we can be certain of from these narrations, that is, they rule that Thawab will  accrue, and not go so far as to allow Tasamuh in the proofs of the Sunan.

 

In another book al-Muhsini is even more harsh against the Principle saying:

قال الشهيد الثاني في درايته: وجوز الاكثر العمل بالخبر الضعيف في نحو القصص والمواعظ وفضائل الأعمال - لا في نحو صفات الله المتعال وأحكام الحلال والحرام - وهو من حيث لا يبلغ الضعف حد الوضع والاختلاق، لما اشتهر بين العلماء المحققين من التسامح بأدلة السنن - لما ورد عن النبي (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) من طريق الخاصة والعامة أنه قال: من بلغه عن الله تعالى ...

al-Shahid II said in his Diraya: the majority have allowed acting upon the weak report in matters of historical accounts, exhortations of piety and the merits of actions - not in critical matters such as the attributes of Allah the Exalted or the rulings of the Halal and the Haram - but this should be in a way that the weakness does not reach the extent of being considered a forgery or fabrication. This is what is famous among the scholars as al-Tasamuh bi Adillat al-Sunan [principle of charity] - because of what has come from the prophet - both from the paths of Amma and the Khassa - that he said: “whomsoever it reaches from Allah the Exalted …” 

ويقول ابن حجر من اهل السنة في كتابه تطحير الجنان واللسان الذي الفه للدفع عن سيده معوية بن ابي سفيان حشره الله معه: الذي أطبق عليه أئمتنا الفقهاء والأصوليون والحفاظ أن الحديث الضعيف حجة في المناقب كما أنه بإجماع من يعتد به حجة في فضائل الأعمال ... لكن شرطه علي الاصح ان لا يشتد ضعفه

And Ibn Hajar of the Ahl al-Sunnah says in his book “Tathir al-Jinan wa al-Lisan” which he authored in defense of his master Muawiya b. Abi Suyfan - may Allah resurrect him with him: What our Aimma and Fuqaha and Usuli scholars and Hufadh have all agreed upon is that the weak Hadith is a Hujjah [has probative force] in matters of Manaqib [establishing the merits of companions], just as it is - by Ijma’ of those who count - a Hujjah in the Fadhail al-A'mal (merits of actions) … but its condition - upon introspection - is that its weakness should not be excessive.  

اكول: امثال هذه الكلمات هي التي روجت سوق الاخبار الكاذبة والاحاديث الجعلية والتصوف فذلوا واذلو، واين هذا من قوله تعلي: <<ان جعاءكم فاسق بنبا فتبينوا ...>>، وقوله تعلي: <<لا تقف ما ليس لك به علم ...>>، ولعل مراد الشهيد من الاكثار هم الذين ذكرهم ابن حجر فليسوا منا

I say: these are the kinds of statements that gave currency to the market of false reports and fabricated narrations and to Tasawwuf (Sufis), so they became misguided and misguided others due to them, and how far removed are they from His words the Exalted: <<If a corrupt sinner comes to you with an account then investigate it …>> and His words the Exalted: <<Do not follow that of which you have no knowledge …>>, and perhaps what al-Shahid means when he says “a majority” are the same ones that Ibn Hajar is alluding to, and if so then they are not from us (Shi’is). 

وعلى كل لا يجوز العمل بالضعاف مطلقا، حتى في المستحبات والمواعذ، فذلا عن القصص، ولا يجوز اسناد مضامينها الي الشارع بوجه، فما شاع من التسامح بادلة السنن غير مدلل، واخبار (من بلغ) لا تثبت حجية الاخبار الضعيفة، بل ترشد الي ترتب الثواب علي العمل الماتي به بعنوان الاحتيات ورجاء الثواب

All in all, it is not allowed to act based on weak narrations in absolute terms, even in the Mustahhabat and for exhortations of piety, what to say about using it for reconstructing historical accounts. It is also not permitted to attribute such reports’ purports to the Law-giver in any way, for what has become common as al-Tasamuh bi Adillat al-Sunan is not backed up by evidence, and the narrations of “Man Balagh” do not establish the Hujiyya of the weak reports, rather all they do is illuminate the fact that Thawab accrues upon the one who acts on it under the heading of precaution or hoping for reward. 

Edited by Islamic Salvation
E.L King likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.9. The Necessity of Comparing the Hadith with the Qur’an

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/the-necessity-of-comparing-the-hadith-with-the-quran

 

[-/1] الكافي: عدة من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن أبيه، عن النضر بن سويد، عن يحيى الحلبي، عن أيوب بن الحر قال: سمعت أبا عبدالله عليه السلام يقول: كل شئ مردود إلى الكتاب والسنة، وكل حديث لا يوافق كتاب الله فهو زخرف

[1/-] al-Kafi: A number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid from his father from al-Nadhr b. Suwayd from Yahya al-Halabi from Ayyub b. al-Hur who said: I heard Aba Abdillah عليه السلام saying: everything is referred back to the Book and the Sunna, and every Hadith that does not agree with the Book of Allah then it is a worthless embellishment.

 

[-/2] الكافي: محمد بن إسماعيل، عن الفضل بن شاذان، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن هشام بن الحكم وغيره، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: خطب النبي صلى الله عليه وآله بمنى فقال: أيها الناس ما جاء كم عني يوافق كتاب الله فأنا قلته وما جاء كم يخالف كتاب الله فلم أقله

[2/-] al-Kafi: Muhammad b. Ismail from al-Fadhl b. Shadhan from Ibn Abi Umayr from Hisham b. al-Hakam and other than him from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله addressed the people in Mina and said: O people, whatever comes to you attributed to me which agrees with the Book of Allah then I have indeed said it, and whatever comes to you opposing the book of Allah then I never said it.

 

[3/92] رجال الكشي: محمد بن قولويه والحسين بن الحسن بن بندار معا، عن سعد، عن اليقطيني، عن يونس بن عبد الرحمن ... قال: حدثني هشام بن الحكم أنه سمع أبا عبد الله عليه السلام يقول: لا تقبلوا علينا حديثا إلا ما وافق القرآن والسنة أو تجدون معه شاهدا من أحاديثنا المتقدمة  ... فاتقوا الله و لا تقبلوا علينا ما خالف قول ربنا تعالى و سنة نبينا صلى الله عليه وآله ... فلا تقبلوا علينا خلاف القرآن فإنا إن تحدثنا حدثنا بموافقة القرآن و موافقة السنة ...

[3/92] Rijal al-Kashshi: Muhammad b. Qulawayh and al-Husayn b. al-Hasan b. Bundar together from Sa’d from al-Yaqtini from Yunus b. Abd al-Rahmanhe said: Hisham b. al-Hakam narrated to me that he heard Aba Abdillah عليه السلام saying: do not accept a narration on our authority except that which is in agreement with the Qur’an and the Sunna or you find for it a corroboration from our past narrations … so fear Allah and do not accept on our authority that which opposes the Word of our Lord the Exalted and the Sunna of our prophet صلى الله عليه وآله … so do not accept on our authority what opposes the Qur’an, for when we narrate we only do narrate what is in agreement with the Qur’an and in agreement with the Sunna …

 

[-/4] الرسالة المؤلفة في احوال احاديث اصحابنا واثبات صحتها لسعد بن هبة الله الراوندي: عن محمد وعلي ابني علي بن عبد الصمد، عن أبيهما، عن أبي البركات علي بن الحسين، عن الصدوق، عن أبيه، عن سعد بن عبدالله، عن يعقوب بن يزيد، عن محمد بن أبي عمير، عن جميل بن دراج، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: الوقوف عند الشبهة خير من الاقتحام في الهلكة، إن على كل حق حقيقة، وعلى كل صواب نورا، فما وافق كتاب الله فخذوه، وما خالف كتاب الله فدعوه 

[4/-] The Treatise on the ‘Status of the Narrations of our Companions and Establishing their Authenticity’ authored by Sa’d b. Hibat Allah al-Rawandi: From Muhammad and Ali the two sons of Ali b. Abd al-Samad from their father from Abi al-Barakat Ali b. al-Husayn from al-Saduq from his father from Sa’d b. Abdallah from Ya’qub b. Yazid from Muhammad b. Abi Umayr from Jamil b. Darraj from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: halting in the face of doubt is better then rushing headlong into destruction, there is upon every truth a reality, and upon every correct thing a light, so whatever agrees with the Book of Allah then take it, and whatever opposes the Book of Allah then leave it.

NOTES:

Sa’d (Sa’eed) b. Hibat Allah is Thiqa.

Ali b. Abd al-Samad (Junior) is a pillar of the religion and a Faqih who is Thiqa, he read under his father and also Abu Ali the son of the Shaykh Abi Ja’far (al-Tusi), this is according to the Shaykh Muntajab al-Diin (Ali b. Ubaydallah) [in his Fihrist]. 

His brother Muhammad is also merituous (Fadhil) and august (Jalil) according to al-Hurr al-Amili.

Ali b. Abd al-Samad (Senior) their father is Thiqa or righteous (Salih). 

Abu al-Barakat al-Jawzi is a righteous scholar and a Hadith narrator according to Muntajab al-Diin again.

Thus, the chain to al-Saduq is good (Hasan) and from him to the Imam it is Sahih.

Other non-reliable-in-chain narrations have also come down corroborating this purport - refer to Bihar al-Anwar and Jami al-Ahadith.

The only outstanding question would be the specifics of how this particular treatise reached al-Majlisi and al-Hurr - may Allah have mercy on both.

 

Hujiyya of the Hadith with Respect to the Qur’an: Reflections from the Chapter

1. A Hadith which contradicts the Qur’an lacks Hujiyya. The pieces of evidence for this proposition are the narrations found in this chapter and others. Furthermore, the first narration indicates that all rules and principles need to be referred back to the Book and the Sunna (not just the Ahadith). 

There is no difference in the necessity of doing this (i.e. referring back to the Qur’an) between cases where there exists contradictions between Ahadith themselves or otherwise - as is apparent from the absolute nature of the narrations found in the chapter.

 

2. The variance of a Hadith with respect to the Qur’an can be of: 

(i) Total dis-junction E.g. Qur’an says Zakat is Wajib but Hadith says it is Haram.  

(ii) Intersection E.g. Qur’an says Zakat must be paid once per annum and by all individuals whether male or female but Hadith says Zakat is on certain commodities and must be paid twice per annum.

(iii) Proper subset E.g. Qur’an says Zakat is Wajib but Hadith says Zakat is Wajib if your wealth reaches Nisab. 

As for (i): Such a Hadith (which differs with the Qur’an diametrically) is rejected outright because it entails an irreconcilable contradiction. 

In our example - either Zakat is Wajib or Haram, it cannot be both, the Hadith that says Zakat is Haram will be rejected.

As for (ii): The accurate opinion is to consider it (the Hadith which overlaps with the Qur’an partially) to be in the same league as the first (it is also to be rejected) - at the least what is found within the intersection region. 

In our example - we can accept the contradiction-free elements from both the Qur’an and Hadith: Zakat is on certain commodities and Zakat is to be paid by all individuals whether male or female. 

However, the contradiction within the intersection region - which pertains to the number of times Zakat is to be paid - has to be resolved: The Qur’an says once and Hadith says twice, here priority is given to the Qur’an.

As for (iii): The Hujiyya of such a Hadith (which ‘differs’ with the Qur’an while being totally contained within it) is not lost. This is because the narrations do not have this kind of ‘contradiction’ in mind.

The Usulis all agree in permitting the specification of the generalities and conditionalization of the absolutes found in the Qur’an. It has also been proven with certainty that narrations which do this [specify and conditionalize what is found in the Qur’an] have historically originated from the Aimma of the Ahl al-Bayt. Additionally, a number of scholars go a step further and argue that such a Hadith cannot even be considered to be “opposing” as far as Urf (customary use of language) is concerned. 

In our example - Zakat being Wajib when wealth reaches Nisab is fully contained in the universal-set which says Zakat is Wajib, thus the Hadith is retained. 

 

3. It is apparent from a number of these narrations that a Hadith has to ‘agree’ with the Qur’an and even with the Sunna for it to have Hujiyya. To understand what this means exactly is not devoid of difficulty because the purports of a lot of Ahadith do not oppose the Qur’an nor do they agree with it (are neutral). It would be incorrect to employ an interpretation far removed from the literal meaning of the word ‘agree’ to resolve this quandary.

A way out: It does not seem far-fetched to interpret this command to refer to cases where there is a scope for comparison and not otherwise. The evidence for this is his words in the second narration “or you find for it a Shahid (corroboration) from our past Ahadith” because it admits that referral-back is not limited to the Qur’an and the Qat’i (certain) Sunna alone (i.e. it speaks of referring back to ‘past Ahadith’). The same can be said about the second narration in a coming chapter which says “so if you do not find them in the book of Allah then compare it with the reports of the Amma”. 

This argument can be represented in this form:

Initial: Hujiyya of a Hadith is not always attained by comparing it with the Qur’an and the Qat’i Sunna alone. Sometimes comparing it with past Ahadith or reports of the Amma is called for.

Intermediate: The above implies that all rulings are not mentioned in the Qur’an and the Qat’i Sunna - for if they were then ‘comparison’ with these two alone would yield result and there would have been no need to compare with something else. 

Conclusion: Ruling for the reliability of a Hadith will only take Qur’an and Qat’i Sunna into consideration where feasible. 

Furthermore, if we were to accept the possibility raised previously that what is meant by 'agreement' is in relation to the general conception and spirit of the Qur’an and not just its literal wordings - we would be widening the scope [of comparison] for ourselves.

If someone were to say: the predominant position among scholars today is not to require the presence of a Shahid in agreement with the Hadith to establish its Hujiyya. The fact that the Hadith in question does not contradict the Qur’an, Sunna and intellect has been considered sufficient. How can this be reconciled with what some narrations in this chapter seem to be indicating in terms of requiring a Shahid as a prerequisite?

I will say: it is possible to answer that the third narration [which calls for a Shahid] contradicts with the fourth narration and others, so we might re-interpret what it is calling for as preferable without making it incumbent. So ponder and think over this.  

 

4. The Imam predicates the reliability of a Hadith on the mere fact of finding for it a Shahid (corroboration) from the Book of Allah or from the words of the messenger. He does not even allude to the requirement of the Wathaqa of the narrator while this was just the place for mentioning such a condition (if it was indeed required). 

I do not know whether someone has argued in this way and made finding a Shahid his main basis for judging narrations especially in cases where there exists a contradiction between the Shahid and the Hadith in some respect - or not.

This is a difficult argument to tackle and a satisfactory explanation to it eludes me at the moment.

 

5. It is not generally possible to judge the reliability of a narration on the basis of this “light” that a true Hadith is supposed to have because it is not something that is accessible to all except for a rare individual from among the perfect scholars who is granted such insight. If we were to permit this it would open the door to imagination and conjecture in the inference process, and that would cause the downfall of the structure of the Madhhab. In any case, we haven’t been instructed to use this “light” by the `Aimma.

 

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.10. Judging Conflict between Narrations

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/judging-conflict-between-narrations

 

[-/1] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن عثمان بن عيسى والحسن بن محبوب جميعا، عن سماعة، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: سألته عن رجل اختلف عليه رجلان من أهل دينه في أمر كلاهما يرويه: أحدهما يأمر بأخذه والآخر ينهاه عنه، كيف يصنع؟ فقال: يرجئه حتى يلقي من يخبره، فهو في سعة حتي يلقاه، وفي رواية اخرى بأيهما أخذت من باب التسليم وسعك

[1/-] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Uthman b. Isa and al-Hasan b. Mahbub all together from Sama’a from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he (Sama’a) said: I asked him about a man who is answered oppositely by two of his co-religionists (i.e. Shi’as) in regards a matter - both transmitting it [their answers - on your authority], one of them obligates it while the other forbids it - what should he do? he said: he withholds [doing anything] until he accesses one who will inform him (of the true position), and he is respited until such a time as he meets him. <And in another narration [the Imam said]: whichever of them you act by -  suffices you - if done in subservience (with the intention of obeying)>.

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: The ‘respite’ here can refer to permission to choose [Takhyir] between two conflicting Ahadith or it can refer to both of them losing Hujiyya [not acting on any of them]. It is also questionable whether this permission extends to the period of occultation [because the Imam is not here to be referred to], unless we take the absolute nature of the clause ‘the one who informs him’ as encompassing both the Imam and anyone else who is more knowledgeable and can resolve conflicts between Ahadith.

 

[-/2] الرسالة المؤلفة في احوال احاديث اصحابنا واثبات صحتها لسعد بن هبة الله الراوندي: الصدوق، عن أبيه، عن سعد بن عبدالله، عن أيوب بن نوح، عن محمد ابن أبي عمير، عن عبد الرحمن بن أبي عبدالله قال: قال الصادق عليه السلام: إذا ورد عليكم حديثان مختلفان فاعرضوهما على كتاب الله، فما وافق كتاب الله فخذوه، وما خالف كتاب الله فردوه، فان لم تجدوهما في كتاب الله فاعرضوهما على أخبار العامة، فما وافق أخبارهم فذروه، وما خالف أخبارهم فخذوه

[2/-] The Treatise on the ‘Status of the Narrations of our Companions and Establishing their Authenticity’ authored by Sa’d b. Hibat Allah al-Rawandi: al-Saduq from his father from Sa’d b. Abdallah from Ayyub b. Nuh from Muhammad b. Abi Umayr from Abd al-Rahman b. Abi Abdillah who said: al-Sadiq عليه السلام said: if there comes to you two divergent Hadith then compare them with the book of Allah, then take the one which agrees with the book of Allah and reject the one that opposes the book of Allah, so if you do not find anything to do with them in the book of Allah then compare both to the reports of the Amma, so the one that agrees with their reports then leave it, and the one that opposes their reports then take it.       

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: This is, on face-value, the only reliable narration about resolving contradictions between Ahadith, and the paucity is surprising because the subject [contradictions in Ahadith] is one that is pervasive. Having said this, there are multiple non-reliable narrations which corroborate the purport of this particular narration either wholly or partially. Some of them call for the measures outlined herein (comparison with the Qur’an or with the reports of the Amma) to be implemented immediately, while others call for them to be implemented after exhausting the possibility of resolving the contradiction by judging the relative merits of the respective narrators in terms of their judiciousness, moral probity, righteousness, and the fame of what they narrate. 

There also exist other non-reliable narrations on the subject. Some of them indicate that one should choose between contradicting Ahadith [Takhyir], two of them indicate that one should take the latter-most Hadith [that of the most recent Imam], while the remaining indicate that one should abstain from doing anything [Tawaquf] and withhold judgment. 

Refer to the first volume of Jami Ahadith al-Shia and the second volume of Bihar al-Anwar [Pg. 220 – 252] for a full survey.

It is said: ‘oppose’ in the narration refers to the opposition of a Hadith with respect to the generalities of the Qur’an or its absolutes and the like, for only then would comparison act as a criterion to give precedence [to one Hadith over another], not opposition in the sense of being diametrically or partially opposed in some respect to the Qur’an, for this latter would cause such a Hadith to lose Hujiyya outright [and not even need to be factored into the resolution process] as has been pointed out in the previous chapter.

However, this interpretation is refuted by pointing out that the narrations found in the preceding chapter have the same wording as this narration and one cannot interpret the two differently in any way [i.e. in the preceding chapter ‘opposition’ was taken to mean diametric or partial opposition in some respect to the Qur’an]. Moreover, ‘opposing’ in terms of a difference between general and specific, absolute and conditional is not even considered ‘opposition’ in customary usage as has been explicitly stated by a number of scholars. This point is further strengthened by noting that proof-texts used to limit Hujiyya only to the Hadith that do not oppose the Qur’an have not been interpreted to include those that specify the Qur’an. Finally, the authenticity of Hadith which conditionalize and specify the Book attributed to the `Aimma is undoubted.

This narration has other limitations: it does not address the possibility that the reports of the `Amma themselves contradict with each other nor does it cover instances wherein the `Amma do not have any reports in regards the subject of the contradiction. 

Some try to avoid the problem by differentiating between the generalities of the Qur’an and its absolutes, making degree of opposition to the generalities alone a criterion for resolving contradictions, with the claim that absoluteness is derived from the preliminaries of wisdom not from the wording of the Qur’an, so consider this also.

In summary, I do not act upon this narration in giving Fatwa i.e. I do not resolve contraditions between Ahadith by giving preference to a Hadith relative to its degree of agreement with the generalities of the Book or its Dhawahir [apparent meanings], even moreso with its absolutes, because of what you have already known. As for preferring a narration based on its opposition to the Fatawa of the `Amma then I have misgivings about it. Refer to the discussion in Usul al-Fiqh for more detail.

Other issues with the narration: The stronger position is to consider Abu al-Barakat al-Jawzi [in its chain] as unknown, also, the treatise cannot be authentically attributed to its putative author nor did its manuscript reach Sahib al-Wasail with a reliable chain. 

Refer to our book <<Hudud al-Sharia>> because what we have discussed there is more recent then our comments here which go back to the first attempt at authorship of this compilation. 

 

[-/3] التهذيب: باسناده عن احمد بن محمد عن العباس بن معروف عن علي بن مهزيار قال: قرأت في كتاب لعبد الله بن محمد إلى ابى الحسن عليه السلام إختلف أصحابنا في رواياتهم عن ابي عبدالله عليه السلام في ركعتي الفجر في السفر فروى بعضهم ان صلهما في المحمل، وروى بعضهم ان لا تصلهما إلا على الارض فاعلمني كيف تصنع انت لا قتدي بك في ذلك؟ فوقع عليه السلام: موسع عليك بأية عملت

[3/-] al-Tahdhib: Via his chain from Ahmad b. Muhammad from al-Abbas b. Ma’ruf from Ali b. Mahziyar who said: I read in a letter of Abdallah b. Muhammad to Abi al-Hasan عليه السلام [the following]: our fellows have differed in their narration from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام in regards the two units of Fajr whilst travelling, some of them narrated ‘pray them in your litter’ while others narrated ‘do not pray them except stationary on the ground’ so inform me what you personally do so that I can follow you in it? he wrote: it is accommodating for you whichever of them you act by.

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: The narration does call for Takhyir [choosing] explicitly, but it is not evident whether it is speaking of a clear-cut choice between two contradicting Ahadith both of which have Hujiyya - which is what the Usulis are after - or whether it is talking of a practical choice between two rulings of the Sharia i.e. permissibility of praying the Nafila of the morning either in the litter or upon the earth - both of which are equally valid even if the latter is more preferrable.

The Imam’s words “it is accommodating for you whichever of them you act by” evidently refers to acting upon either of the Ahadith. If he had said: “both are permitted” then it would have been possible to say that reference is being made to the rulings [not the Ahadith]. This point is also supported by the fact that the question of the narrator was about differences between Ahadith and so the Imam’s words ‘whichever of them’ would be most likely referring to Ahadith.

All this would mean that the original premise as far as contradictory narrations are concerned should be Takhyir [selecting whichever] and not Tasaqut [both being equally invalidated], even if this latter is what is entailed by first principle [al-Qa’ida al-Awaliyya]. 

 

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.11. Reasons for Differences between Narrations

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/reasons-for-differences-between-narrations

 

[-/1] الكافي: علي، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي نجران، عن ابن حميد، عن ابن حازم، قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام: ما بالي أسألك عن المسألة فتجيبني فيها بالجواب ثم يجيئك غيري فتجيبه فيها بجواب آخر؟ فقال: إنا نجيب الناس على الزيادة والنقصان. قال: قلت: فأخبرني عن أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله صدقوا على محمد صلى الله عليه واله أم كذبوا ؟ قال: بل صدقوا قلت: فما بالهم اختلفوا فقال: أما تعلم أن الرجل كان يأتي رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله فيسأله عن المسألة فيجيبه فيها بالجواب، ثم يجيبه بعد ذلك بما ينسخ ذلك الجواب فنسخت الأحاديث بعضها بعضا

[1/-] Ali from his father from Ibn Abi Najran from Asim b. Humayd from Mansur b. Hazim who said: I said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام: what is my condition - I ask you about a matter so you answer me in it with a certain answer, then someone other than me comes to you and you answer him with a different answer? He said: we answer the people with deletion [in-short] and [at other times] with addition [in-depth].  I said: so inform me about the companions of the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه واله - were they truthful about Muhammad or did they lie? He said: they were truthful, I said: so what was the matter with them that they differed? He said: don’t you know that a man used to come to the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه واله and ask him about a thing so he answers him in it with an answer, then he answers after that with that which abrogates the former answer, so the narrations abrogated one another.      

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: The Imam answering with Nuqsan [‘in-short’] can be interpreted as him answering ‘in general’/‘in absolute terms'. 

The Imam answering with Ziyada [‘in-depth’] can be interpreted as him answering  while ‘specifying particulars’/‘placing conditions’.

The Imam may also be alluding to variation in answers caused by the change in the subject of the ruling. For example it is sometimes said: 

(ã) It is obligatory to provide basic necessities to the wife.

(b) It is not obligatory to provide basic necessities to the disobedient wife [Nashiza].

(c) It is not obligatory to provide basic necessities to the wife unless it was a condition in the contract if it is a case of temporary marriage.

As can be seen, all answers above while essentially correct are dependent on the circumstances surrounding the question and the motives of the questioner. 

Sometimes someone was ordered to do an action (that is not obligatory) without there being any indicator in the phrasing of the order that the action is only recommended. This is justifiable for attaining a certain greater good, as will be affirmed by anyone who has held the responsibility of giving Fatwa and supervising the affairs of the people. 

Additionally, answers being given ‘at length’ and ‘tersely’ can also be referring to instances of Taqiyya.

The meaning of the Imam’s answer about the companions is that they (the companions) were truthful in their totality and that one of the main reasons for the differences in what they narrated is occurrence of abrogation. It cannot be taken to mean that each companion was individually truthful because that would contrary to Reason and the Book and the Sunna. 

Refer to what has been written about this by one of the merituous ones among the Ahl al-Sunnah in his book <<Adhwa al-Sunna al-Muhamadiyya/Lights on the Muhammadan Sunna>>, and refer also to our book <<Adala al-Sahaba>> which has been published together with the third edition of our book <<Buhuth fi Ilm al-Rijal>>.

 

[-/2] الكافي: أحمد بن إدريس، عن محمد بن عبدالجبار، عن الحسن بن علي، عن ثعلبة بن ميمون، عن زرارة بن أعين، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: سألته عن مسألة فأجابني ثم جاءه رجل فسأله عنها فأجابه بخلاف ما أجابني، ثم جاء رجل آخر ...

[2/-] Ahmad b. Idris from Muhammad b. Abd al-Jabbar from al-Hasan b. Ali from Tha’laba b. Maymun from Zurara b. A’yan from Abi Ja’far عليه السلام, he (Zurara) said: I asked him about a matter so he answered me, then a man came to him and asked him about it so he answered him with a different answer to mine, then another man came …

NOTES:

The following are just some of the reasons for differences between narrations:

(I) Fabrications, forgeries and lies being attributed to the Prophet and Imams. And such instances will hopefully not be found in our compilation which seeks to include only the Mu’tabar [reliable]. 

(II) Taqiyya. It can even be said that no Madhhab was tried by this more than ours.

(III) Ziyada (addition) and Nuqsan (deletion) - in the sense which we have described above.

(IV) The forgetfulness of narrators. They were after all mere humans and this comes as second nature to man.

(V) Inaccurate receiving and relaying of Hadith. This is because many of the narrators were not from the scholars rather from the laity. This is something that has affected the narrations of all sects.

(VI) The practice of narrators to transmit “by meaning” i.e. non-verbatim. This caused some to superimpose their own understanding onto narrations.

(VII) Editing narrations as was done by the authors of Hadith compilations. Some authors would only quote a relevant portion from the narration [excising the rest of the narration thereby inadvertently deleting the context which could have helped us understand the narration better].

(VIII) The loss of Qarain [circumstantial indicators] associated with a narration, especially as it was being conveyed originally. This is mainly a result of the passage of time (where we lose the original significance of a detail present in the narration). However, it is also caused by the narrators themselves not choosing to include such Qarain either because of forgetfulness or seeking brevity. 

 

[-/3] التهذيب: باسناده عن الحسين بن سعيد عن محمد بن أبي عمير عن معاوية بن عمار قال: قلت لابي عبدالله عليه السلام أقضي صلاة النهار بالليل في السفر؟ فقال: نعم، فقال له اسماعيل بن جابر أقضي صلاة النهار بالليل في السفر؟ فقال: لا، فقال: إنك قلت نعم: فقال: إن ذاك يطيق وأنت لا تطيق

[3/-] al-Tahdhib: Via his chain from al-Husayn b. Sai’d from Muhammad b. Abi Umayr from Muawiya b. Ammar who said: I said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام - do I repay the Salat of the day in the night whilst travelling? he said: yes, then Ismail b. Jabir said to him: do I repay the Salat of the day in the night whilst travelling? he said: no, so he said: you just said yes, he said: that one has the strength for it while you are not capable.

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: Meaning that the particular act is hard for him to do while it is not hard for you. Thus, answers can change depending on the person asking the question.

Continuing our former list:

(IX) Mistakes in copying down the Hadith and in-turn reading them as a result of bad handwriting [in manuscripts].

(X) Mistakes made by those strengthening narrators and weakening them in their Tawthiqat and their Tajrihat.

(XI) The Hadith abrogating each other.

(XII) Differences in the opinion of the Imams, either because of Tafwidh [law-making has been delegated to them and each one of them can set it as he likes] or for some other reasons. This is something I have not seen raised by anyone and is probably not acceptable to any of the Ulama of the Imamiyya. I do mention it here because it remains a possibility and not because I am accepting it as definitely the case. 

Some evidences for this: In the Sahih of al-Halabi which is narrated in both al-Kafi and Tahdhibayn from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: the commander of the faithful عليه السلام used to hold the launderer and the jeweler liable [to compensation - for any damages caused while in their possession] - as a precaution for the people, while my father used to be clement on him if he was trustworthy. 

However, it can be said that the clemency shown by al-Baqir is his own personal conduct not an official Fatwa, if that be the case, the narration cannot be used as evidence for there being a difference in opinion between two Imams. 

This latter interpretation is supported by another Sahih of al-Halabi from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام wherein he says: my father عليه السلام used to hold the jeweller and the launderer liable if they damaged while Ali b. al-Husayn عليهما السلام used to act  magnanimously towards them. 

This means that the Fatwa of al-Baqir is to hold such a person liable but his personal conduct was to overlook, and this is also how the magnanimity of al-Sajjad should be understood. 

However, there are other narrations that can be cited which seem to show difference of opinion between al-Sadiq and al-Baqir (consider the example below). 

 

[-/4] التهذيب: سعد بن عبدالله عن أحمد بن محمد عن الحسين بن سعيد عن حماد بن عيسى عن عمر بن اذينة عن زرارة قال: كنت قاعدا عند ابي جعفر عليه السلام وليس عنده غير ابنه جعفر فقال: يا زرارة ان ابا ذر رضي الله عنه وعثمان تنازعا على عهد رسول الله صلى الله وآله فقال عثمان: كل مال من ذهب أو فضة يدار به ويعمل به ويتجر به ففيه الزكاة إذا حال عليه الحول، فقال ابوذر رضي الله عنه: أما ما إتجر به أو دير وعمل به فليس فيه زكاة، إنما الزكاة فيه إذا كان ركازا أو كنزا موضوعا فاذا حال عليه الحول ففيه الزكاة، فاختصما في ذلك إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله قال فقال: القول ما قال ابوذر، فقال ابوعبدالله عليه السلام لابيه: ما تريد إلى أن تخرج مثل هذا فكيف الناس أن يعطوا فقراء هم ومساكينهم؟! فقال ابوه عليه السلام: إليك عني لا أجد منها بدا

[4/-] al-Tahdhib: Sa’d b. Abdallah from Ahmad b. Muhammad from al-Husayn b. Sa’id from Hammad b. Isa from Umar b. Udhayna from Zurara who said: I was seated at Abi Ja’far’s عليه السلام place and there was no one with him except his son Ja’far, so he (Abu Ja’far) said: O Zurara, Abu Dhar رضي الله عنه and Uthman argued in the life-time of the prophet, so Uthman said: every kind wealth whether it be gold or silver which circulates [is active i.e. having in-flow and out-flow], is worked with [as a capital], and is used for business - then there is Zakat on it if a year elapses, so Abu Dhar رضي الله عنه said: as for that which is used for business, is active, and is worked with - then there is no Zakat on it, rather Zakat is on that which is buried treasure (found fortuitously) and also on stored-up (saved) wealth, so if a year elapses on it then on it is Zakat, so they argued and referred it back to the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله, so he said: the true position is what was said by Abu Dhar, so Abu Abdillah عليه السلام said to his father: you do not want anything else but that such a one [narration] comes out [and is spread among the people] so that the people stop giving their poor and needy (anything of Zakat)?! So his father said: keep to yourself [don’t interfere], I do not find any option other than it (to narrate what happened and speak the truth).       

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: One can interpret this Hadith in such a way as not to entail a difference of opinion between the two Imams as far as the actual ruling is concerned. Know also that there exist other narrations attributed to al-Sadiq with him having a similar opinion to that of al-Baqir and corroborating him on this issue.

[I the translator say]: Know that some Ahadith indicate that the Ilm of the Imam is not complete until he assumes the Imama officially, and al-Sadiq was not the Imam when this incident occurred because al-Baqir was still alive. Secondly, the surprise of al-Sadiq about the ruling should not be taken to mean that he fundamentally disagrees with it, rather it was motivated by his desire to see as many of the needy and the poor helped.

al-Muhsini: It is also possible that differences arise because some rulings are dependent on the time-frame in which the question is asked and the location concerned.

 

[-/5] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن عبدالرحمن بن الحجاج، عن سليمان بن خالد قال: سمعت أبا عبدالله عليه السلام يقول: إن أصحاب أبي أتوه فسألوه عما يأخذ السلطان فرق لهم وإنه ليعلم أن الزكاة لا تحل إلا لاهلها فأمرهم أن يحتسبوا به فجال فكري والله لهم، فقلت له: يا أبة إنهم إن سمعوا إذا لم يزك أحد فقال: يابني حق أحب الله أن يظهره

[5/-] Al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr from Abd al-Rahman b. al-Hajjaj from Sulayman b. Khalid who said: I heard Aba Abdillah عليه السلام saying: the companions of my father came to him and asked him about that which is taken by the temporal ruler [as Kharaj - deeming it Zakat - is it sufficient], so he pitied them, while he knew that Zakat is not legitimate except for its people [only the true Imam can divide it to its rightful claimants], so he ordered them to count it [as Zakat], so my thoughts ran wild by Allah about them so I said: O father, if they have heard this then no one of them is ever going to give Zakat [in its right way]! so he said: O my son, it is a truth which Allah wanted to reveal [make apparent].

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: There are several problems with the narration:

(ã) The Imam’s knowledge that Zakat is not legitimate except if given to its rightful people cannot be reconciled with his order to count it so [what they give to the Sultan as Zakat] just because of the pity he felt towards them [they would have had to pay twice otherwise]. It is not allowed to change rulings just because of pity.

(b) al-Sadiq informing us that al-Baqir knew that Zakat is not legitimate except if it is given to its rightful parties contradicts what al-Baqir says “it is a truth which Allah wanted to make apparent”

(c) al-Sadiq himself ruled in a similar way to al-Baqir, even if he contradicts this in some instances.

In Summary, I have not managed to find a solid Dalil to disprove this reason [for the occurrence of differences between narrations], though I do not accept it [perhaps because of the theological implications it would have]. And Allah knows more.

Continuing our list:

(XIII) The change in the meanings of words over time, from the age of the prophet and the `Aimma to the age of the scholars engaged in Ijtihad, as is known to happen to all languages. The speakers in the early period had a specific understanding when they heard certain words and phrases spoken while we have our own understanding. This evolution has sometimes caused seeming contradictions between reports based on how we conceive of them. Finally, one must work to exhaust all such potential causes for differences between narrations.

One of the researchers from the Amma [Mahmud Abu Riyya] says: Know that the Hadith which is traced back to the messenger of Allah and his companions and the successors have differences between them, the causes of which can be categorized into eight:

1. The weakness of the chain.

2. Quoting the report based on its “meaning” and not verbatim.

3. Failures in correct vowelization [the early script was defective]

4. Scribal errors in writing.

5. Droppage of a significant portion from the Hadith with the exclusion of which the Hadith’s meaning becomes incomplete [this is because of faulty memory].

6. The narrator transmits the Hadith and overlooks mentioning the precipitating cause which led to the words being spoken or the context.

7. The narrator heard a part of the whole Hadith and did not hear it in its totality.

8. Narrating the Hadith from a page found without being licensed by Mashayikh who will follow the procedures of relay and correct any mistakes.

Then he commented in detail on each of these eight reasons [ref. al-Adhwa ala al-Sunna al-Muhammadiyya Pg. 98].

 

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.12. Invalidation of Analogical Reasoning

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/invalidation-of-analogical-reasoning

 

[-/1] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن محمد بن عيسى بن عبيد، عن يونس بن عبدالرحمن، عن سماعة بن مهران، عن أبي الحسن موسى عليه السلام قال: ... ومالكم وللقياس؟ إنما هلك من هلك من قبلكم بالقياس، ثم قال: إذا جاء كم ما تعلمون، فقولوا به وإن جائكم ما لا تعلمون فها - وأهوى بيده إلى فيه ...

[1/-] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from Muhammad b. Isa b. Ubayd from Yunus b. Abd al-Rahman from Sama’a b. Mihran from Abi al-Hasan Musa عليه السلام … he said: and what do you have to do with analogical reasoning? Verily they were destroyed who were destroyed before you because of analogical reasoning, then he said: if it comes to you that which you have knowledge of then say it, and if it comes to you that which you do not know then - he pointed with his hand to his mouth …

 

[-/2] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن محمد بن حكيم قال: قلت لابي الحسن موسى عليه السلام: جعلت فداك فقهنا في الدين وأغنانا الله بكم عن الناس حتى أن الجماعة منا لتكون في المجلس ما يسأل رجل صاحبه تحضره المسألة و يحضره جوابها فيما من الله علينا بكم فربما ورد علينا الشئ لم يأتنا فيه عنك ولا عن آبائك شئ فنظرنا إلى أحسن ما يحضرنا وأوفق الاشياء لما جاء نا عنكم فنأخذ به؟ فقال هيهات هيهات، في ذلك والله هلك من هلك يا ابن حكيم، قال: ثم قال: لعن الله أبا حنيفة كان يقول: قال علي وقلت، قال محمد بن حكيم لهشام بن الحكم: والله ما أردت إلا أن يرخص لي في القياس

[2/-] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr from Muhammad b. Hukaym who said: I said to Abi al-Hasan Musa عليه السلام - may I be made your ransom, we have gained understanding of the religion and Allah has made us self-sufficient from needing the people, so much so that a group of us may be in a meeting - not a man asks his fellow a question which comes to his mind except that he receives an answer for it, this is from the mercy of Allah on us through you, however it may happen that something is referred to us about which we have received nothing on your authority or that of your forefathers, can we look for the best-match in what we have and the closest to that which has come down to us from you and take it [as the answer]? So he said: not at all, not at all, in doing that - by Allah - were destroyed those who were destroyed O Ibn Hukaym, then he said: may Allah curse Aba Hanifa he used to say “Ali said but I say …”,  Muhammad b. Hukaym then reported to Hisham b. al-Hakam that: by Allah I did not want anything [in asking this] except that he permit Qiyas (analogical reasoning) for me.

 

[-/3] معاني الاخبار والامالي: حدثنا محمد بن علي ماجليويه عن عمه محمد بن أبي القاسم، عن أخيه، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن أبيه، عن محمد بن يحيى، عن غياث بن إبراهيم، عن الصادق جعفر بن محمد، عن أبيه، عن آبائه عليهم السلام قال: قال أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام: ... إن المؤمن أخذ دينه من ربه ولم يأخذه عن رأيه ...

[3/-] Ma’ani al-Akhbar and al-Amali: Muhammad b. Ali Majalwayh from his uncle Muhammad b. Abi al-Qasim from his brother from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid from his father from Muhammad b. Yahya from Ghiyath b. Ibrahim from al-Sadiq Ja’far b. Muhammad from his father from his forefathers عليهم السلام who said: the commander of the faithful عليه السلام said:  … the believer takes his religion from his Lord and not from his opinion …

 

[-/4] التوحيد والعيون والأمالي: ابن المتوكل، عن علي، عن أبيه، عن الريان بن الصلت، عن علي بن موسى الرضا، عن آبائه، عن أمير المؤمنين عليهم السلام قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله قال الله جل جلاله: ما آمن بي من فسر برأيه كلامي ...

[4/-] al-Tawhid and al-Uyun and al-Amali: Ibn al-Mutawakkil from Ali from his father from al-Rayyan b. al-Salt from Ali b. Musa al-Ridha from his forefathers from the commander of the faithful عليهم السلام who said: the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه واله said: Allah Majestic is His Majesty said: he has not believed in Me the one who interprets My words based on his opinion …

 

[-/5] الكافي: محمد بن يحيى، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن الوشاء، عن مثنى الحناط، عن أبي بصير قال: قلت لابي عبدالله عليه السلام: ترد علينا أشياء ليس نعرفها في كتاب الله ولا سنة فننظر فيها؟ فقال: لا، أما إنك إن أصبت لم تؤجر، وإن أخطأت كذبت على الله عز وجل

[5/-] al-Kafi: Muhammad b. Yahya from Ahmad b. Muhammad from al-Washsha from Muthanna al-Hannat from Abi Basir who said: I said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام: things are referred to us which we do not know of in the Book of Allah nor the Sunna - should we exercise reason in them? He said: no, for even if you were to get it right you will not be rewarded for it, and if you were to err in it then you have lied upon Allah Mighty and Majestic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.13. Primary Doubts

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/primary-doubts

 

“Primary”/“pure/“simple”/“elementary” doubts are those which are unmixed with any tinge of knowledge. They refer to cases when you have complete uncertainty, as opposed to “partial”/“secondary” doubts which are associated with non-specific knowledge.

 

[-/1] توحيد الصدوق: عن احمد بن محمد بن يحيى العطار، عن سعد بن عبدالله، عن يعقوب بن يزيد، عن حماد بن عيسى، عن حريز بن عبدالله، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله: رفع عن امتي تسعة: الخطاء، والنسيان، وما أكرهوا عليه، وما لا يطيقون، وما لا يعلمون، وما اضطروا إليه، والحسد، والطيرة، والتفكر في الوسوسة في الخلق ما لم ينطق بشفة

[1/-] Tawhid al-Saduq: From Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Yahya al-Attar from Sa’d b. Abdallah from Ya’qub b. Yazid from Hammad b. Isa from Hariz b. Abdallah from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه واله said: my Umma are exempted from nine things: error, forgetfulness, what they are coerced to do, what they do not have the strength for, what they do not know, what they have to do out of necessity, jealousy, bad omen, and thinking about the whispered (Shaytan-inspired) prompts (doubts cast) in regards the creation - so long as it is not voiced aloud.

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: Since “what they do not know” is absolute in its implication - it covers both “uncertainty concerning the nature of a ruling ” and also extends to “uncertainty concerning the subject of a ruling”.

I (the translator) say: “what they do not know” covers primary doubt having to do with the nature of a ruling, that is, primary doubt as to whether something is Wajib or not e.g. Salat of the two Id festivals and primary doubt as to whether something is Haram or not e.g. smoking.

But it also includes primary doubt as to the subject of a ruling [whether or not it has been realized], so for example, you may not be in doubt about the ruling that blood having dripped into a vessel makes the water Najis and consequently Haram to use for ablution, however, you may be in doubt in a primary way about the basic fact of any blood having dripped into it at all (did the blood in fact drip into the vessel or not?).

In such cases of primary doubt, the basic procedural principle of Precaution (Ihtiyat) is inverted and instead we follow the secondary procedural principle of the priority of Exemption (Bara’a) which advocates the non-mandatoriness of having to act with precaution in cases of primary doubt. Such cases have no implication for human conduct and one is not forced to exercise precaution in respect to them or to feel restricted by them. We are exempted and will not be held liable (not punished) for them.

 

[2/93] الفقيه والتهذيب: عن ابن محبوب عن عبدالله بن سنان قال: قال ابوعبدالله عليه السلام: كل شئ يكون فيه حرام وحلال فهو لك حلال ابدا حتى تعرف الحرام منه بعينه فتدعه

[2/93] al-Faqih and al-Tahdhib: From Ibn Mahbub from Abdallah b. Sinan who said: Abu Abdillah عليه السلام said: everything which has both Halal and Haram [elements mixed into it] then it is Halal for you forever until you know the Haram in it specifically so you abandon it.

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: It is apparent that the Hadith is limited to external uncertainty i.e. “uncertainty concerning the subject of the ruling” NOT “uncertainty concerning the nature of the ruling”.

I (the translator) say: This is proven by a variant which is weak in chain but is corroborated by the reliable narration under discussion.

علي بن إبراهيم، (عن أبيه) عن هارون بن مسلم، عن مسعدة بن صدقة عن أبي عبدالله ع قال: سمعته يقول: كل شئ هولك حلال حتى تعلم أنه حرام بعينه فتدعه من قبل نفسك وذلك مثل الثوب يكون قد اشتريته وهو سرقة أو المملوك عندك ولعله حر قد باع نفسه أو خدع فبيع أو قهر أو امرأة تحتك وهي اختك أو رضيعتك والاشياء كلها على هذا حتى يستبين لك غير ذلك أو تقوم به البينة

Ali b. Ibrahim (from his father) from Harun b. Muslim from Mas’ada b. Sadaqa from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he (Mas'ada) said: I heard him saying: everything is Halal for you until you know that it is Haram specifically - so you then abandon it on your part, and that is for example - clothes which you had bought but turns out were stolen, or a slave under you and perhaps he is a free-man who had already bought his own freedom, or he was sold off into slavery by treachery, or he was forced into slavery (whilst being a free-man), or a woman who is under you (your wife) while she is your biological sister or foster-sister [and you do not know], and everything is on this [principle - of being allowed] until such a time when the opposite is revealed to you or you have evidence to the contrary.

All the examples provided involve uncertainty having to do with the subject of the ruling and not the nature of the ruling.

al-Muhsini: The words of the Imam being absolute further imply that the principle of Exemption should be applied even to cases where we have non-specific knowledge (secondary doubt), this is indicated by him saying “specifically”. Despite this, there is no option but to remove [non-specific knowledge] from the range of the narration and continue to impose the principle of Precaution in them [in cases of non-specific knowledge]. Refer to the relevant discussion in Usul al-Fiqh.  

 

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2.14. Principle of Continuity

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/principle-of-continuity

 

I (the translator) say: The meaning of the principle of Continuity is that the Mukallaf (legal agent) should maintain adherence in practice to anything about which he or she was formerly certain but then subsequently has come to doubt that it persists. 

An example can be: you presume that the impure state of a garment continues (the impurity of which you were once certain) if there is doubt concerning the fresh occurrence of its cleaning.

 

[1/94] العلل: عن أبيه عن علي عن أبيه عن حماد عن حريز عن زرارة قال: قلت لابي جعفر عليه السلام انه أصاب ثوبى دم من رعاف أو غيره أو شئ من مني ... وحضرت الصلاة ونسيت أن بثوبى شيئا فصليت ثم اني ذكرت بعد؟ قال: تعيد الصلاة وتغسله ... قلت فان ظننت انه قد اصابه ولم اتيقن ذلك فنظرت فلم ار شيئا ثم طلبت فرأيته فيه بعد الصلاة؟ قال: تغسله ولا تعيد الصلاة، قال: قلت ولم ذاك؟ قال: لانك كنت على يقين من نظافته ثم شككت فليس ينبغى لك أن تنقض اليقين بالشك ابدا ... فانى رأيته في ثوبى وانا في الصلاة قال: تنقض الصلاة وتعيد اذا شككت في موضع منه ثم رأيته فيه وان لم تشك ثم رأيته رطبا قطعت وغسلته ثم بنيت على الصلاة فانك لا تدري لعله شئ وقع عليك فليس ينبغى لك ان تنقض بالشك اليقين

[1/94] al-Ilal: From his father from Ali from his father from Hammad from Hariz from Zurara who said: I said to Abi Ja’far عليه السلام - my clothes come into contact with blood either because of nose-bleeding or some other reason or it comes into contact with some amount of semen … and the time to pray arrives and I forget that my clothes have something (impure in them) - so I pray and then remember after finishing? He said: you repeat the prayer and you wash it off (the impurity) … I said: if I only suspect that it has come into contact with it and am not certain of that, and I try to inspect (to look for it) but find nothing, then I inspect it again after finishing the prayer and find it? he said: you wash it and do not repeat the prayer, I said: how come it is like that (repeat the prayer in the former case and not here)? he said: because you were certain of its purity (when you began praying) and then you doubted later, so it is not appropriate for you to override your certainty because of doubt ever … (Zurara said): what if I see it on my clothes whilst I am praying? He said: you will only break the prayer and repeat it anew if you had doubt about where exactly it was (location of it - having not found it before) and go on to find it (while praying), but if you had no doubt [of having contracted impurity at all] and then see it (the impurity) - still wet - you cut off your prayer and wash it, then you continue with the same prayer [where you left off], because you just don’t know perhaps it is something that fell on you [while praying], for it is not permissible for you to override certainty by doubt. 

NOTES:

Taken from Sayyid al-Khoei’s lecture notes (Taqrirat) recorded in Misbah al-Usul.

The 1st question was about the ruling concerning one who performs the Salat whilst being Najis - having forgotten to clean it despite having knowledge of the Najasa - so he replied that Salat should be repeated and also the clothes should be cleaned. And this fact has been substantiated by other narrations, and the reason for this given in some of them is that - the one who forgets has taken the matter of Tahara lightly unlike the one who is totally ignorant. And there is no controversy about this ruling. 

The 2nd question was about someone who had doubt about Najasa and prays in such circumstances - so he replied that cleaning off the Najasa is necessary but repeating the prayer is not required, because the person began the prayer while being certain of his Tahara (he even looked for the Najasa but did not find it), then he doubted and came to find it, and certainty is not overriden by doubt. 

The 3rd question was about noticing a Najasa in the course of praying - so he replied that this noticing if it was after someone had some non-specific knowledge [incomplete knowledge] about there being a Najasa but uncertainty about its exact location before the Salat began - it is mandatory upon him to repeat it, and if he notices it for the first time while praying without having any inkling of fore-knowledge of anything to do with it,  such that he does not know whether he contracted it before beginning to pray, or whether he contracted it while praying - then it is not mandatory on him to repeat the prayer, rather he washes it off and continues with the same Salat if it [the purification process] does not necessitate him breaking the prayer he is in, like turning away from the Qibla.

 

[2/95] الاستبصار: عن المفيد عن جعفر بن محمد عن أبيه عن سعد بن عبدالله عن أحمد بن محمد عن الحسن بن محبوب عن عبدالله بن سنان قال: سأل أبي أبا عبدالله عليه السلام وأنا حاضر إني أعير الذمي ثوبي وانا اعلم انه يشرب الخمر ويأكل لحم الخنزير فيرده علي فاغسله قبل ان أصلي فيه؟ فقال أبوعبدالله عليه السلام: صل فيه ولا تغسله من أجل ذلك فانك اعرته اياه وهو طاهر ولم تستيقن انه نجسه فلا بأس أن تصلي فيه حتى تستيقن انه نجسه

[2/95] al-Istibsar: From al-Mufid from Ja’far b. Muhammad from his father from Sa’d b. Abdallah from Ahmad b. Muhammad from al-Hasan b. Mahbub from Abdallah b. Sinan who said: my father asked Abi Abdillah عليه السلام while I was present [the following question]: I sometimes lend my clothes to a Dhimmi and I know that he drinks wine and eats the meat of swine, so when he returns them to me should I wash them before praying in them? Abu Abdillah عليه السلام said: pray in them and do not wash them because of that, for you lent them to him while you were certain that they were pure and you do not have certainty about its impurity (when he returns them), so there is no harm in you praying in it until you become certain that it is impure.  

 

[96/3] التتهذيب: بالاسناد عن الحسين بن سعيد عن حماد عن حريز عن زرارة قال قلت له: الرجل ينام وهو على وضوء أتوجب الخفقة والخفقتان عليه الوضوء؟ فقال يا زرارة: قد تنام العين ولا ينام القلب والاذن فإذا نامت العين والاذن والقلب فقد وجب الوضوء، قلت فان حرك إلى جنبه شئ ولم يعلم به قال: لا حتى يستيقن انه قد نام حتى يجيئ من ذلك أمر بين وإلا فانه على يقين من وضوئه، ولا ينقض اليقين أبدا بالشك ولكن ينقضه بيقين آخر

[3/96] al-Tahdhib: By the chain to al-Husayn b. Sa`id from Hammad from Hariz from Zurara who said: I said to him: a man in Wudhu falls asleep - closing his eyes for a beat or two - does this mean that he is obliged to renew Wudhu? he said: O Zurara, the eye may sleep while the heart and the ear are awake, only when the eye, the ear and the heart all sleep does Wudhu become obligatory, I said: what if something moves near him while he is not even aware of it, he said: no [that does not mean he has to renew Wudhu], unless he is certain that he has fallen asleep and unless there manifests a clear sign indicating that, if not then he was certain about his initial Wudhu and certainty is never overriden by doubt rather what overrides it [certainty] is another certainty [he become sure of a new event].

 

[97/4] الخصال: في حديث الأربعمائة: قال أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام: من كان على يقين فشك فليمض على يقينه فان الشك لا ينقض اليقين

[4/97] al-Khisal: In  the ‘Four Hundred’ Narration: the commander of the faithful عليه السلام said: whoever is upon certainty - and then doubts - should continue upon his certainty for doubt does not override certainty.

 

[5/98] الكافي: عدة من أصحابنا عن أحمد بن محمد، عن العباس بن عامر، عن عبدالله بن بكير، عن أبيه، قال: قال لي أبوعبدالله عليه السلام: إذا استيقنت أنك قد أحدثت فتوضأ وإياك أن تحدث وضوء ا أبدا حتى تستيقن أنك قد أحدثت

[5/98] al-Kafi: A number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad from al-Abbas b. A’mir from Abdallah b. Bukayr from his father who said: Abu Abdillah عليه السلام said to me: if you are sure that you have broken your Wudhu then renew it, beware of ever renewing a Wudhu unless you are certain that you have broken it.

 

[6/99] الكافي والتهذيبان: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، ومحمد بن إسماعيل، عن الفضل بن شاذان جميعا، عن حماد بن عيسى، عن حريز، عن زرارة، عن أحدهما عليه السلام قال: قلت له: من لم يدر في أربع هو أم في ثنتين وقد احرز الثنتين؟ قال: يركع ركعتين وأربع سجدات وهو قائم بفاتحة الكتاب ويتشهد ولا شئ عليه وإذا لم يدر في ثلاث هو أو في أربع وقد أحرز الثلاث قام فأضاف إليها اخرى ولا شئ عليه ولا ينقض اليقين بالشك ولا يدخل الشك في اليقين ولا يخلط أحدهما بالآخر ولكنه ينقض الشك باليقين ويتم على اليقين فيبنى عليه ولا يعتد بالشك في حال من الحالات 

[6/99] al-Kafi, al-Tahdhib and al-Istibsar: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father AND Muhammad b. Ismail from al-Fadhl b. Shadhan all together from Hammad b. Isa from Hariz from Zurara from one of them عليه السلام, he (Zurara) said: I said to him: the one who does not know whether he is in the fourth or the second (Rak’a) but is sure that he has completed two [what should he do]? He said: he will perform two units and four prostrations and he stands reciting al-Fatiha and makes the Tashahud, and there is nothing further upon him, and if he does not know whether he is in the third or the fourth but he is sure that he has completed three - he stands and adds another (unit) to them and there is nothing further upon him. Certainty is not overriden by doubt and doubt does not enter certainty, one of them does not mix with the other, rather doubt is overriden by certainty, and one completes upon certainty building upon it, and doubt is regarded in any situation whatsoever.  

 

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2.15. Legal Injunctions are Predicated on Pubescence

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/legal-injunctions-are-predicated-on-pubescence

 

[1/100] الخصال: عن أبيه، عن سعد بن عبد الله، عن أحمد بن محمد ابن عيسى، عن أحمد بن محمد بن أبي نصر البزنطي، عن أبي الحسين الخادم بياع اللؤلؤ، عن عبد الله بن سنان، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: سأله أبي وأنا حاضر عن اليتيم متى يجوز أمره قال: حتى يبلغ أشده قال: وما أشده قال: الاحتلام قلت: قد يكون الغلام ابن ثمان عشرة سنة أو أقل أو أكثر 

[1/100] al-Khisal: From his father from Sa’d b. Abdallah from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Abi Nasr al-Bazanti from Abi al-Hasan - the servant and seller of pearls - from Abdallah b. Sinan from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he (Abdallah b. Sinan) said: my father asked him about the orphan while I was present - when does his affair become permissible [when does the authority to oversee his affair devolve to him]? he said: when he attains his maturity, he said: what is his maturity? he said: beginning to have nocturnal emissions, he said: a boy may be eighteen years or a little below that or a little more than that and yet does not have nocturnal emissions (what then)? he said: if he becomes pubescent and something begins to be written for him (of good-deeds and sins by the angels) - then his affair [taking charge of financial decisions] is valid unless he is a fool or mentally incapacitated.

NOTES:

Ihtilam [“Nocturnal emissions” also “wet dreams”] - Refers to ejaculation of semen as a direct result of sexual desire and stimulation.

Safih [“fool”] - An irresponsible person “with the intellect of a child” who does not know what is good for him and society e.g. would thrift-spend to destruction. 

Dhaif  [“mentally incapacitated”] - Lit. weak. 

al-Muhsini says: this is also how this narration has been recorded in the Bihar of al-Majlisi. However, what is apparent is that the Imam’s answer at the end of the narration is vague (i.e. it does not answer the question of when the boy becomes pubescent) and such an answer does not befit the station of the Imam (he is casting doubt on the preservation of the exact wording of the narration).  

 

[2/101] الكافي: عن عدة من اصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى، عن الوشاء، عن عبدالله بن سنان، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: إذا بلغ أشده ثلاث عشرة سنة ودخل في الاربع عشرة وجب عليه ما وجب على المحتلمين احتلم أو لم يحتلم كتبت عليه السيئات وكتبت له الحسنات وجاز له كل شئ إلا أن يكون ضعيفا أو سفيها

[2/101] al-Kafi: From a number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa from al-Washsha from Abdallah b. Sinan from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: if he reaches his maturity, that is, completes thirteen years and enters the fourteenth - then it becomes obligatory on him what is obligatory on those who have nocturnal emissions whether he himself has emissions or not, and his sins are written down for him, and his good-deeds are also written down for him, and everything becomes permissible for him [in financial terms] except if he is mentally incapacitated or foolhardy.  

 

 [3/102] التهذيب: باسناده عن محمد بن علي بن محبوب، عن عن محمد بن الحسين، عن الحسن بن علي، عن عمرو بن سعيد، عن مصدق بن صدقة، عن عمار الساباطي، عن أبى عبدالله عليه السلام قال: سألته عن الغلام متى تجب عليه الصلاة؟ قال: إذا أتى عليه ثلاث عشرة سنة، فان احتلم قبل ذلك فقد وجبت عليه الصلاة وجرى عليه القلم، والجارية مثل ذلك ان أتى لها ثلاث عشرة سنة أو حاضت قبل ذلك فقد وجبت عليها الصلاة وجرى عليها القلم

[3/102] al-Tahdhib: Via his chain from Muhammad b. Ali b. Mahbub from Muhammad b. al-Husayn from al-Hasan b. Ali from Amr b. Sa`id from Musaddiq b. Sadaqa from Ammar al-Sabati from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he (Ammar) said: I asked him about a boy - when does prayer become obligatory on him? he said: if he completes thirteen years, but if he has nocturnal emissions before that then the prayer has already become obligatory on him and the Pen begins to record for him, and the girl likewise if she completes thirteen years or if she menstruates before that - the prayer become obligatory on her and the Pen begins to record for her.   

 

[4/103] الخصال: عن أبيه، عن علي، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن غير واحد، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: حد بلوغ المرأة تسع سنين 

[4/103] al-Khisal: From his father from Ali from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr from more than one from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: the threshold for a woman’s pubescence is nine years. 

 

[5/104] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن حماد بن عثمان، عن الحلبي وزرارة، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام أنه سئل عن الصلاة على الصبي متى يصلى عليه؟ قال: إذا عقل الصلاة قلت: متى تجب الصلاة عليه؟ فقال: إذا كان ابن ست سنين والصيام إذا أطاقه

[5/104] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr from Hammad b. Uthman from al-Halabi and Zurara from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام that he was asked about the prayer over a [deceased] child [Salat al-Mayyit] - when is it prayed over him? he said: when he can understand the prayer, I said: when is prayer obligatory on him (to begin praying)? he said: if he is a child of six years, and fasting is when he has the strength for it [is capable].    

NOTES:

The Hadith obligates prayer for a boy at the age of six, and this is among that which we have to return its knowledge to its people (we cannot explain it without recourse to the Ahl al-Bayt themselves). Unless obligation here is understood as recommendation [in light of the other narrations] - in which case the Hadith would be emphasizing that the training of the boy should begin at six so that he can become familiar with it and get used to it, otherwise he will rebel when it becomes Wajib on him later due to lack of practice and discipline.

 

[6/105] التهذيب: باسناده عن محمد بن علي بن محبوب، عن العباس بن معروف، عن حماد بن عيسى، عن معاوية بن وهب قال: سألت أبا عبدالله عليه السلام: في كم يؤخذ الصبي بالصلاة؟ فقال: فيما بين سبع سنين وست سنين قلت: في كم يؤخذ بالصيام؟ فقال: فيما بين خمس عشرة أو أربع عشرة، وان صام قبل ذلك فدعه فقد صام ابني فلان قبل ذلك وتركته

[6/105] al-Tahdhib: Via his chain from Muhammad b. Ali b. Mahbub from al-Abbas b. al-Ma`ruf from Hammad b. Isa from Muawiya b. Wahb who said: I asked Aba Abdillah عليه السلام: at what age is the boy taken to task over prayers? He said: between seven and six years of age, I said: at what age is fasting demanded from him? he said: between fifteen or fourteen years, and if he fasts before that then leave him to do it for one of my sons began fasting before that and I let him. 

 

[7/106] الفقيه: باسناده عن صفوان، عن إسحاق بن عمار قال: سألت أبا الحسن عليه السلام عن ابن عشر سنين يحج؟ قال: عليه حجة الاسلام إذا احتلم وكذلك الجارية عليها الحج إذا طمثت

[7/106] al-Faqih: Via his chain from Safwan from Ishaq b. Ammar who said: I asked Aba al-Hasan عليه السلام about a boy of ten years - can he make the Hajj? He said: upon him is the Hajj of Islam if he has begun getting nocturnal emissions, and the same is the case for the girl - Hajj is upon her if she has begun menstruating.

 

[8/107] الكافي: عدة من أصحابنا، عن سهل بن زياد، وعلي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه جميعا، عن ابن أبي نجران، عن عاصم بن حميد، عن محمد بن مسلم، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: لايصلح للجارية إذا حاضت إلا أن تختمر إلا أن لا تجده

[8/107] al-Kafi: A number of our companions from Sahl b. Ziyad AND Ali b. Ibrahim from his father all together from Ibn Abi Najran from Asim b. Humayd from Muhammad b. Muslim from Abi Ja’far عليه السلام who said: it is not proper for a girl if she has begun menstruating to not veil herself - unless she cannot find it.

 

[9/108] الكافي: محمد بن إسماعيل، عن الفضل بن شاذان، وأبوعلي الاشعري، عن محمد بن عبدالجبار جميعا، عن صفوان بن يحيى، عن عبدالرحمن بن الحجاج قال: سألت أبا إبراهيم عليه السلام عن الجارية التي لم تدرك متى ينبغي لها أن تغطى رأسها ممن ليس بينها وبينه محرم ومتى يجب عليها أن تقنع رأسها للصلاة؟ قال: لاتغطى رأسها حتى تحرم عليها الصلاة

[9/108] al-Kafi: Muhammad b. Ismail from al-Fadhl b. Shadan AND Abu Ali al-Ash`ari from Muhammad b. Abd al-Jabbar all together from Safwan b. Yahya from Abd al-Rahman b. al-Hajjaj who said: I asked Aba Ibrahim عليه السلام about a girl who has not attained puberty - when is it incumbent on her to cover her head from the one one with whom she does not share any relation? and when is it obligatory on her to veil her head fully in the prayer? He said: she does not have to cover her head until the prayer starts becoming prohibited on her [i.e. she begins menstruating].

 

[-/10] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن منصور بن يونس، عن منصور بن حازم، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله: لارضاع بعد فطام ولا وصال في صيام ولا يتم بعد احتلام ولا صمت يوما إلى الليل ولا تعرب بعد الهجرة ولا هجرة بعد الفتح ولا طلاق قبل نكاح ، ولا عتق قبل ملك ، ولا يمين للولد مع والده ولا للمملوك مع مولاه ولا للمرأة مع زوجها ولا نذر في معصية ولا يمين في قطيعة فمعنى 

قوله: لا رضاع بعد فطام ان الولد إذا شرب لبن المرأة بعد ما تفطمه لا يحرم ذلك الرضاع التناكح 

[10/-] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr from Mansur b. Yunus from Mansur b. Hazim from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله said: there is no suckling after weaning, there is no joining [two consecutive days] in fasting, there is no orphanhood after nocturnal emission, there is no vow of silence from morning to night, there is no return to the nomadic ways after migration [to the urban center of faith], there is no Hijra after the conquest [of Makka], there is no divorce before marriage, there is no setting free [of a slave] before ownership, there can be no oath from a child without the consent of his father, nor from a slave without the consent of his master, nor for a woman without the consent of her husband, there can be no promise to do an evil, nor an oath to break blood-ties. 

The meaning of his words: there is no suckling after weaning is that - a child if he drinks the milk of a woman after he has been weaned off milk [two years] then that suckling does not prevent marriage [she does not become his Mahram/foster mother].

NOTES:

The last statement is either the words of the Imam interpreting what the prophet said, one of the narrators in the chain, or the author of al-Kulayni himself.

The Hadith itself contains pithy legal maxims from the prophet which were easy to memorize and were a particularly important source of guidance in daily life. They summarize whole sections of the Law in a few words. Identical maxims have also been preserved in the two early Musannafs, those of Abd al-Razzaq and Ibn Abi Shayba [further confirming the fact that the Ahl al-Sunna have not wholly lost the prophetic legacy]. I have also found fragmentary traces of the some of the maxims in Sunan Abi Dawud. 

Vows of silence as taken by past communities like Buddhists and monks in monasteries have no significance in Islam.

The concept of “returning to the nomadic ways after migration” is understood in its modern context as moving to a place where one cannot practice his religion and is under constant temptation of sin.

There can be no “promise to do an evil” means that one is not supposed to give any credence to a promise which involves committing a sin to fulfill it, in fact such a promise has no value and should be ignored. Similarly, one cannot uphold an oath that calls on him to break ties of blood relationship.

 

[11/109] الكافي: محمد بن يحيى، عن احمد بن محمد بن عيسى، عن محمد بن عيسى، عن منصور، عن هشام بن سالم، عن ابي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: انقطاع يتم اليتيم الاحتلام وهو اشده وان احتلم ولم يؤنس منه رشد وكان سفيها أو ضعيفا فليمسك عنه وليه ماله

[11/109] al-Kafi: Muhammad b. Yahya from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa from Muhammad b. Isa from Mansur [b. Hazim] from Hisham b. Salim from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: the termination of the orphanhood of the orphan is by nocturnal emission and it is considered his maturity, however if he begins to have nocturnal emissions but signs of intellectual maturity are not detected from him such that he is foolhardy or mentally incapacitated then his guardian withholds from handing over his wealth to him.

NOTES:

Rushd rendered here as “intellectual maturity” refers to the capacity to behave in a responsible and constructive manner. It is the opposite of Safh “foolishness” of the Safih.

 

[12/110] الفقيه: عن البزنطي عن الرضا عليه السلام قال: يؤخذ الغلام بالصلاة وهو ابن سبع سنين ولا تغطي المرأة شعرها منه حتى يحتلم  

[12/110] al-Faqih: From al-Bazanti from al-Ridha عليه السلام who said: a boy is taken to task over prayers when he is seven years old, and a woman does not cover her hair from him until he begins to have nocturnal emissions. 

 

When do children become Baligh? 

Adapted from the discussion by al-Muhsini in Vol. 2 of Hudud al-Shar`ia

All the narrations above allude to the same thing and can be reconciled despite seeming to contradict. This is what we can take away from them when read together: 

It is sexual maturity, indicated by ejaculation in the case of a boy and menstruation in the case of a girl, which should be taken as the point at which someone enters his/her “age of majority” and assumes command of his/her own wealth, making financial decisions about it independently. This is also when he/she becomes a legal agent and his/her good-deeds and/or sins are recorded for him/her and he/she is held liable for performing the Wajibat and abstaining from the Muharamat. 

Those narrations which attempt to pin-point an exact age [e.g. thirteen, fourteen, fifteen etc] are to be understood as mere clues specifying when Bulugh occurs conventionally. They vary because this biological phenomenon varies in relation to genetic and environmental factors. This interpretation is also aided by the fact that the Imam is purposely non-committal in specifying an exact age because of his knowledge that such a thing cannot be universal.

As for the narrations that deem a lower age such as six or seven then there is no option but to understand them as an Istihbab [recommendation] to begin Ibadat early so that they can grow up with such habits and it also becomes a way by which the sins of the parents are forgiven God willing.

It can be claimed that nine years of age has a special significance for a girl by looking at the Sahiha of Muhammad b. Abi Umayr [No. 4 above]. However, it is very likely that those are not the exact words of the Imam himself rather the phrasing as we see it today embodies the understanding of Ibn Abi Umayr based on what he heard attributed to the Imam. 

Furthermore, when looking at another narration of a similar nature [Muwathaqa of Ibn Sinan - not included in this chapter] we see that even this age (nine) is dependent on her menstruating - which as we have noted is the indicator of sexual maturity for her. Thus, we conclude that even this particular age has no special significance apart from serving as a clue to when Bulugh usually occurs, and that it is menstruation which is essential.

Having said this - permission has been explicitly given to marry a girl when she is nine years old, this being the case, one cannot assume that after her marriage an obligation like bathing the Janaba (after intercourse) would not be mandatory upon her, this means that we have to add another exception to the Bulugh of the girl.

In conclusion: A boy becomes Baligh if he acquires the ability for sexual intercourse biologically speaking [the narrations specify ejaculation], and if there is any doubt about that having been met then by completing fifteen years (the uppermost age/ceiling mentioned in all the related narrations). A girl becomes Baligha if she acquires the ability for sexual intercourse biologically speaking [the narrations specify menstruation], unless she gets married and has intercourse after she has completed nine years.

al-Muhsini also notes that allowance of marrying a girl at nine while undeniable is lifted if there is any credible medical evidence that it would cause undue harm on her.

 

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2.16. Principle of “No Harm”

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/principle-of-no-harm

 

[1/111] الكافي: عن عدة من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن أبيه، عن عبدالله بن بكير، عن زرارة، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: إن سمرة بن جندب كان له عذق في حائط لرجل من الانصار وكان منزل الانصاري بباب البستان وكان يمر به إلى نخلته ولا يستأذن فكلمه الانصاري أن يستأذن إذا جاء فأبى سمرة فلما تأبى جاء الانصاري إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله فشكا إليه وخبره الخبر فأرسل إليه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وخبره بقول الانصاري وماشكا وقال: إن أردت الدخول فاستأذن فأبى فلما أبى ساومه حتى بلغ به من الثمن ماشاء الله فأبى أن يبيع فقال: لك بها عذق يمد لك في الجنة فأبى أن يقبل فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله للانصاري: اذهب فاقلعها وارم بها إليه فإنه لا ضرر ولا ضرار

[1/111] al-Kafi: From a number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid from his father from Abdallah b. Bukayr from Zurara from Abi Ja’far عليه السلام who said: Samura b. Jundub had a date-palm tree in the garden of a man from the Ansar, and the house of the Ansari was adjoined with the door to the garden, and he (Samura) used to pass by it on his way to the date-palm tree without asking for permission, so the Ansari talked to him about seeking permission when he comes through, but Samura refused, so when he had refused the Ansari came to the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله and complained to him and informed him of the matter, so the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله sent for him (i.e. Samura) and relayed to him what the Ansari had said and his complaint and then said: if you want to enter then ask permission first, but he refused, so when he had refused he (the messenger) bargained with him (to buy the tree from him) until he increased his offer to the the price that Allah wished - but he continued to refuse to sell it, so he said: you will get a palm tree to support you in heaven in return for it [if you give it up], but he refused to accept that, then the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله said to the Ansari: go and uproot it and throw it at him for there is no [causing] harm [in and of itself] nor harming with intent [in Islam].  

NOTES:

This has also been narrated by al-Saduq in al-Faqih in the following manner: 

وروى ابن بكير، عن زرارة عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: إن سمرة ابن جندب كان له عذق في حائط رجل من الانصار وكان منزل الانصاري فيه الطريق إلى الحائط فكان يأتيه فيدخل عليه ولا يستأذن، فقال: إنك تجئ وتدخل ونحن في حال نكره أن ترانا عليه، فإذا جئت فاستأذن حتى نتحرز ثم نأذن لك وتدخل، قال: لا أفعل هو مالي أدخل عليه ولا أستأذن، فأتى الانصاري رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله فشكى إليه وأخبره، فبعث إلى سمرة فجاءه، فقال له: استأذن عليه، فأبى وقال له مثل ما قال للانصاري، فعرض عليه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله أن يشتري منه بالثمن فأبى عليه وجعل يزيده فيأبى أن يبيع، فلما رأى ذلك رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله قال له: لك عذق في الجنة فأبى أن يقبل ذلك فأمر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله الانصاري أن يقلع النخلة فيلقيها إليه وقال لا ضرر ولا إضرار

And Ibn Bukayr narrated from Zurara from Abi Ja’far عليه السلام who said: Samura b. Jundub had a date-palm tree in the garden of a man from the Ansar, and the path to get to the garden passed through the house of the Ansari, so he (Samura) used to come and enter on him without seeking permission, so he said: you come and enter while we may be in a state in which we do not like for you to see us, so when you come make sure to seek permission so that we can prepare ourselves and then permit you to enter, he said: I will not do so for it (the tree) is my property and I do not require permission to get to it, so the Ansari went to the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله and complained to him and informed him of what had happened, so he sent for Samura who came, he said to him: seek permission from him, but he refused and replied in the same way he had replied to the Ansari, so the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله put to him that it should be bought from him at a price, but he refused, the messenger kept on raising the price but he kept on refusing to sell it, so when the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله saw that - he said to him: you will have a palm-tree in heaven [if you give it up - as compensation for it], but he refused to accept that, then the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله ordered the Ansari to uproot the date-palm tree and throw it at his feet and said: there is no [causing] harm [in and of itself] nor harming [another] purposely [in Islam].  

 

I (the translator) say: The legal maxim ‘La Dharar wa La Dhirar’ is a very important one in Islam. al-Suyuti says that all of Fiqh revolves around five narrations - and this is one of them. Volumes upon volumes have been written discussing it.

There has been a difference of opinion about what ‘Dharar’ and ‘Dhirar’ mean exactly.

The famous opinions are four:

(ã) Dharar is simply a harm [without any additional implications - could be unintended] while Dhirar is purposeful harm in the sense that one inflicts harm with the intention of harming. And this is what al-Muhaqiq al-Naini had concluded. I also found this to be a view of the near contemporary Salafi scholar Ibn Uthaymin.

- If someone opens the window to let in the air and it causes another person to get sick [without intending for that to happen] it is called Dharar. If someone purposely turns up the sound level of the TV so that his neighbor cannot sleep it is called Dhirar.

(b) Dharar is the first instance of inflicting harm [preemptively] while Dhirar refers to reciprocating by inflicting harm after having been harmed.

- If someone punches another person for no reason it is called Dharar, if the victim bides his time and then deflates his enemies tires it is called Dhirar.

(c) There is no difference between the two words and the second i.e. Dhirar is just an emphasis on the first i.e. Dharar

- The prophet is repeating it a second time to insist on it.

(dDharar is self-harm and Dhirar [Idhrar] is inflicting harm on others.

- If someone puts on thin clothes in winter which makes him vulnerable to sickness it is called Dharar but if he disregards another person's intellectual property and passes it as his own it is Dhirar.

--> After looking at the different options above, I have chosen (ã) because of Shaykh al-Irawani’s strong arguments in its favor. Anyone who wants more detail on this can refer to his book al-Durus al-Tamhidiyya Fi Qawaid al-Fiqhiyya [beginning at Vol. 1 Pg. 87].

 

How the maxim is interpreted is very significant.

Our Fuqaha are divided into two main camps:

(i) The ‘لا’ is a ‘لا’ of Nafy [negation], this being the case - the prophet is describing the nature of the Sharia and saying that it can never impose something that is harmful. This would mean that the Shar`i ruling is lifted if it entails undue harm. This interpretation was developed by Shaykh al-Ansari in his Rasail, and it is also the view in more recent times of Sayyid al-Khoei and his students like Sayyid al-Sistani (who has a separate treatise on this).

This interpretation gives the Mujtahid wide-ranging power because it allows him to lift the Wujub [obligatoriness] of a ruling if it entails causing harm on the believer. For example, if someone will be harmed because of making the ablution using cold water then making Wudhu is lifted for him and he can substitute it by Tayammum (for ‘there is no harm in Islam’). If he insists in making Wudhu despite the harm then that Wudhu is not acceptable. Similarly, the maxim would allow the lifting of the prohibition of shaving the beard if doing so would lead to harm, or lifting the prohibition of a woman exposing herself to a Non-Mahram like a doctor if not doing so would cause harm etc.

(ii) The ‘لا’ is a ‘لا’ of Nahy [prohibition], this being the case - the prophet is simply instructing us that it is not allowed for us to do something that harms ourselves or others, it has nothing to do with lifting the ruling of the Shar`ia. This was the view developed by Shaykh al-Shar`ia al-Isfahani. For example, if it is said that smoking is harmful then it would become prohibited. This is not accepted by the other scholars who demur, they say that incurring mere harm is not prohibited unless it reaches a level where it can be considered to be Tahluka [destruction] - which has been prohibited by the Qur'an.

 

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Hassan- likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.17. Ijtihad

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/ijtihad

 

[-/1] الكافي: أحمد بن محمد العاصمي، عن علي بن الحسن الميثمي، عن علي بن أسباط، عن عمه يعقوب بن سالم، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: كانت امرأة بالمدينة تؤتى فبلغ ذلك عمر فبعث إليها فروعها وأمر أن يجاء بها إليه ففزعت المرأة فأخذها الطلق فانطلقت إلى بعض الدور فولدت غلاما فاستهل الغلام ثم مات فدخل عليه من روعة المرأة ومن موت الغلام ما شاء الله فقال له بعض جلسائه: يا أميرالمؤمنين ما عليك من هذا شئ وقال بعضهم: وما هذا؟ قال: سلوا أبا الحسن فقال لهم أبوالحسن عليه السلام: لئن كنتم اجتهدتم ما أصبتم ولئن كنتم قلتم برأيكم لقد أخطأتم، ثم قال: عليك دية الصبي

[1/-] al-Kafi: Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Asimi from Ali b. al-Hasan al-Maythami from Ali b. Asbat from his paternal uncle Ya`qub b. Salim from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: there was a woman in Madina who used to be approached by men [she was a prostitute], this news reached Umar so he sent for her and frightened her and ordered that she be brought to him, so the woman became terrified and started getting contractions, she fled to one of the houses and gave premature birth to a boy, the boy cried out loud and then died, so it entered in his (Umar’s) heart what Allah wished to enter because of his frightening of the woman and the death of the boy, some of his sitting companions said to him: O commander of the faithful - you don’t have to do anything because of this, while others said: what is this? [belittling it - as if to say it is nothing], he said: ask Aba al-Hasan, so Abu al-Hasan عليه السلام said to them: if you have done Ijtihad then you have not got it right, and if you have said it based on your personal opinion then you have made a mistake, then he said: upon you is to give the blood-money of the child.

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: It has already come in the ninth and tenth chapter what evidences the need for Ijtihad, because comparing the Hadith with the Qur’an and the Sunna and preferring that which differs with the opinion of the `Amma is nothing but Ijtihad. 

I (the translator) say: Ijtihad was - in the early age - a bad word in Shi`a Islam because of what it connoted of independent reasoning and the incompleteness of the Shar`ia. We can only find censure for it in the Ahadith of the `Aimma. It is claimed that the companions did not need to do Ijtihad because they had access to the answers of the Imam which is the absolute truth. The Imam is not doing Ijtihad when giving an answer but sourcing it directly to what the prophet said or what the Divine Law intends.

The Usulis claim that with the passage of time, and in the age of the Ghayba, doubt crept back into the sources as a result of many factors, including loss of circumstantial indicators (Qarain). This meant that the door for Ijtihad [Ijtihad as they have redefined it - which they claim has the sanction of the `Aimma] needs to be open.   

A good book to trace how its meaning evolved to the extent that it was rehabilitated by the Usulis is that of the martyr Sayyid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr: A Short History of Ilm Ul Usul.

It is also true that the Akhbari point of view in the debate has been deliberately distorted by some Usulis setting up a straw-man argument to defeat it easily.

Hassan- likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2.18. Lapsing of both Injunctive and Declaratory Rulings in Cases of Necessity

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/lapsing-of-both-injunctive-and-declaratory-rulings-in-cases-of-necessity

 

المحسني: لاحظ ما يدل عليه في كتاب الصلاة. وتشخيص الاضطرار موكول الى المكلف نفسه كما يدل عليه ما ياتي ولاحظ ما ياتي في باب التقية

al-Muhsini: The one who is responsible for identifying the urgent circumstances which can cause a ruling to lapse is the legal agent himself. Refer to what is to come in the book of prayer (Kitab al-Salat) and the book of dissimulation (Kitab al-Taqiyya) as evidence for this.

NOTES:

I say: An injunctive ruling (Hukm Taklifi) is a ruling which imposes an obligation directly upon an individual legal agent. Specifically, the ruling that a particular act is categorized as one of the following: mandatory (Wajib), encouraged (Mustahab), permissible (Mubah), discouraged (Makruh), forbidden (Haram). 

Example can be: the prohibition of eating pork lapses when there is necessity to preserve life and avoid death by starvation.

A declaratory ruling (Hukm Wad‘i) is a ruling which does not impose an individual obligation directly but rather sets up an institution (such as marriage) from which a variety of individual obligations subsequently flow. Specifically, it enacts something as a cause (Sabab), a condition (Shart) or a hindrance (Mani). 

Example can be: The condition requiring presence of witnesses in a marriage lapses if someone is in a totally non-Muslim society and there is no one to do the witnessing.

Dhulfikar likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.