A Comprehensive Compilation of Reliable Narrations

[Islamic Salvation]

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-Rahman … he 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 January 23, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

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 January 25, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

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 January 29, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

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 January 31, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

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-Rahman … he 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 February 3, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

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 February 10, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

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 February 18, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

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.

[Islamic Salvation]

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 February 26, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Hassan-]

Thank you for this @Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

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 March 3, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

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 March 7, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

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.

(d) Dharar 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 March 9, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

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.

[Islamic Salvation]

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.

[Islamic Salvation]

2.19. Some Rulings which are Time-Bound

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/some-rulings-which-are-time-bound

 

al-Muhsini: The default position as far as the rulings of the Shar`ia are concerned is that they are permanent. This is true for all of them except those which are proven to be temporary. One can infer from some narrations that the rulings they propound are not permanent. We will include three examples of these though there may be more instances.

 

[-/1] الفقيه: باسناده عن عمر بن أذينه عن زرارة عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: سألته عن المريض كيف يسجد؟ فقال: على خمرة أو على مروحة أو على سواك يرفع إليه وهو أفضل من الايماء، إنما كره من كره السجود على المروحة من أجل الاوثان التي كانت تعبد من دون الله وإنا لم نعبد غير الله قط فاسجدوا على المروحة وعلى السواك وعلى عود 

[1/-] al-Faqih: Via his chain to Umar b. Udhayna from Zurara from Abi Ja`far عليه السلام, he (Zurara) said: I asked him about the sick person - how does he prostrate? He said: on a small palm-leaf mat or on a hand-held fan or on a tooth-stick which is raised to him [made to touch his forehead], and it is better than gesturing [without the forehead touching anything], verily the one who dislikes prostrating on the hand-held fan dislikes it because of the idols which used to be worshiped apart from Allah, and we never worship anything besides Allah ever - so prostrate on the fan and on the tooth-stick and on a piece of wood.

NOTES:

خمرة “Khumra” - a small mat made from palm tree leaves.

المروحة “Mirwah” - a hand-held fan made mostly from palm tree leaves. Could also have a wooden handle. They were usually rectangular or round in shape and used for both airing and swatting away flying insects.

سواك “Siwak” - a stick from the Arak tree used to brush teeth.

عود “Uwd” - a piece of wood; a wooden stick stemming from a tree branch.

The Imam is asked about the specifics of the prostration of a sick person [who is lying on his back]. There is an opinion which says that he should gesture using his head, or even his eyes if his head cannot move, but this Hadith indicates that it is preferable that he - either by himself or through assistance - raise certain items to his forehead. The items mentioned herein are those which would normally be found in a house. Note that a key feature of all the house-hold items mentioned like the small palm-leaf mat or the palm-leaf fan or the piece of wood (wooden stick) is that they all fulfill the condition of being from the earth.

In my research I came across some narrations proving that the `Amma did indeed dislike if not outright prohibit the indisposed to prostrate on such items. 

عَبْدِ الرَّزَّاقِ، عَنِ الثَّوْرِيِّ، عَنْ جَبَلَةَ بْنِ سُحَيْمٍ، قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ ابْنَ عَمْرَ يُسْأَلُ: أَيُصَلِّي الرَّجُلُ عَلَى الْعُودِ وَهُوَ مَرِيضٌ؟ فَقَالَ: لا آمُرُكُمْ أَنْ تَتَّخِذُوا مِنْ دُونِهِ أَوْثَانًا، مَنِ اسْتَطَاعَ أَنْ يُصَلِّيَ قَائِمًا فَلْيُصَلِّ قَائِمًا، فَإِنْ لَمْ يَسْتَطِعْ فَجَالِسًا، فَإِنْ لَمْ يَسْتَطِعْ فَمُضْطَجِعًا يُومِي إِيمَاءً

Ibn Umar was asked: does a man pray on a piece of wood when he is sick? he said: I do not order you to set up apart from Him idols, whoever is able to pray standing let him pray standing, the one who cannot should pray seated, and if he cannot then lying on his side and making gestures [Musannaf Abd al-Razzaq]

أبو عبد الله الحافظ، أنبأ أبو عمرو بن مطر، ثنا يحيى بن محمد، ثنا عبيد الله بن معاذ، ثنا أبي، ثنا شعبة عن جبلة قال: سئل ابن عمر - وأنا أسمع - عن الصلاة على المروحة، فقال: لا تتخذ مع الله إلها آخر، أو قال: لا تتخذ لله أندادا، صل قاعدا واسجد على الأرض، فإن لم تستطع فأومئ إيماء، واجعل السجود أخفض من الركوع

Ibn Umar was asked about prostrating on a hand-held fan - so he said: do not set up besides Allah another god, or he said: do not set up for Allah rivals, pray while sitting and prostrate on the earth, but if you cannot then make gestures, and make your prostration lower than your bowing (your prostration gesture should be lower than bowing one) [Sunan al-Bayhaqi]

نَا أَبُو مُعَاوِيَةَ، عَنِ الْأَعْمَشِ، عَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، عَنْ عَلْقَمَةَ قَالَ: دَخَلَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ عَلَى أَخِيهِ عُتْبَةَ يَعُودُهُ فَوَجَدَهُ عَلَى عُودٍ يُصَلِّي فَطَرَحَهُ، وَقَالَ: إِنَّ هَذَا شَيْءٌ عَرَّضَ بِهِ الشَّيْطَانُ، ضَعْ وَجْهَكَ عَلَى الْأَرْضِ فَإِنْ لَمْ تَسْتَطِعْ فَأَوْمِئْ إِيمَاءً

Abdallah entered upon his brother Utba visiting him [in his sickness], so he found him praying upon a piece of wood, he tossed it away and said: this is a thing which the Shaytan appeared with, put your face upon the earth, but if you cannot then make gestures [Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayba]

In another variant of the above, Utba was prostrating on a tooth-stick.

عَبْدُ الرَّزَّاقِ، عَنِ الثَّوْرِيِّ، عَنْ أَبِي إِسْحَاقَ، عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ مُعَاوِيَةَ، عَنْ عَلْقَمَةَ، وَالْأَسْوَدَ، أَنَّ ابْنَ مَسْعُودٍ دَخَلَ عَلَى عُتْبَةَ أَخِيهِ، وَهُوَ يُصَلِّي عَلَى مِسْوَاكٍ يَرْفَعُهُ إِلَى وَجْهِهِ، فَأَخَذَهُ فَرَمَى بِهِ، ثُمَّ قَالَ: أَوْمِ إِيمَاءً وَلْتَكُنْ رَكْعَتُكَ أَرْفَعَ مِنْ سَجْدَتِكَ

Abdallah entered upon his brother Utba and found him prostrating on a tooth-stick raising it to his forehead, so he took it and threw it away and then said: make gestures and your bowing should be higher than your prostration [Musannaf Abd al-Razzaq]

This position is also attributed to Zayd b. Ali

قَالَ زَيْدُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ: يُصَلِّي الْمَرِيضُ قَائِمًا، فَإِنْ لَمْ يَسْتَطِعْ فَجَالِسًا، وَيَرْكَعُ وَيَسْجُدُ عَلَى الْأَرْضِ، فَإِنْ لَمْ يَسْتَطِعْ أَوْمَأَ إِيمَاءً، قَالَ : لَا يَسْجُدُ عَلَى عُودِهِ ، وَلَا مُرُوحَةٍ ، وَلَا وِسَادَةٍ

Zayd b. Ali said: the sick person prays while standing, if he cannot he does so seated, and he bows and prostrates on the earth, if he cannot do so he makes gestures, he also said: one does not prostrate on his wooden stick, nor hand-held fan nor cushion [Musnad Zayd b. Ali]

As can be seen from the above, the aversion to prostrating on these items is connected in some way to idolatry. A clue as to what this could be is found in the words of Ibn Mas`ud below:

عَنْ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ ، عَنْ حَمَّادٍ ، عَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ ، عَنِ ابْنِ مَسْعُودٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ ، أَنَّهُ قَالَ : أَوَّلُ مَنْ جَاءَ بِالْعُودِ الَّذِي يَسْجُدُ عَلَيْهِ إِبْلِيسُ ، وَكَانَ يَكْرَهُهُ مِنْ أَجْلِ النَّصَارَى وَصُلُبِهِمْ

Ibn Mas`ud: the first one to come with the wood which they prostrate on is Iblis, and it is disliked because of the Christians and their wooden crosses [al-Athar of Abu Yusuf] 

Apparently, prostrating on wood was linked to the christian veneration of wooden crosses (which they touch on their foreheads) and thus in turn with polytheistic trinity.

Another possible reason could be the fact that the idols in the time of Jahiliyya were mostly constructed using wood and also palm leaves [Ref. to Kitab al-Asnam of al-Kalbi]. 

This is as far as the proto-Sunnis are concerned, as for us, the Imam makes clear that we never worship idols and any such aversion does not exist, because any association in these items with idolaters has ceased.

It is based on such an argument that Sayyid al-Khumayni legalized chess as it is played in the modern period because he considered the `Illa for its prohibition to be intimately related to the culture in which it was played in the early period [i.e. in gatherings of music, wine-drinking, gambling and dancing among the libertines]. Thus it became a symbol of being lax in the Shar`ia.

 

[-/2] كمال الدين: عن جماعة منهم علي بن عبدالله الوراق عن أبوالحسين محمدبن جعفر الاسدي قال: كان فيما ورد علي من الشيخ أبي جعفر محمدبن عثمان قدس الله روحه في جواب مسائلي إلي صاحب الزمان عليه السلام: ... وأما ماسألت عنه من أمر المصلي والنار والصورة والسراج بين يديه هل تجوز صلاته فإن الناس اختلفوا في ذلك قبلك، فإنه جائز لمن لم يكن من أولاد عبدة الاصنام أو عبدة النيران أن يصلي والنار والصورة والسراج بين يديه، ولايجوز ذلك لمن كان من أولاد عبدة الاصنام والنيران

[2/-] Kamal al-Diin:  From a number - among them Ali b. Abdallah al-Warraq - from Abu al-Husayn Muhammad b. Ja`far al-Asadi who said: among that which reached me from the Shaykh Abi Ja`far Muhammad b. Uthman قدس الله روحه in reply to my questions to the Master of the Age عليه السلام … as for that which you have asked about in regards the one who prays while the fire, or an image, or a lamp is in front of him - is his prayer accepted? [you ask this] because the people in your midst have differed about that - then - it is permissible for the one who is not a direct descendant of the idol-worshipers or fire-worshipers to pray while the fire, or an image, or a lamp is in front of him, and it is not permissible for the one who is a direct descendant of the idol and fire worshipers.

NOTES:

al-Muhsini: The reason for this difference in treatment is because of the differences in people’s up-bringing as well as mental states. Some of the rulings were issued having certain circumstances in mind, this being the case, the ruling lapses with the lapse of the concomitant circumstances, and this is a very wide door [which the Fuqaha can use in their Istinbat] but only for those who expend efforts on the `Ahadith and scrutinize all their different aspects thoroughly.  

I say: most of the converts who came to Islam in the newly conquered lands, like the melting pot of different traditions that was Iraq, continued to have an intimate attachment to their former religions. A lot of converts at the time converted only for reasons of political expediency and to improve their lot in life, this phenomenon was compounded by the fact that the temporal rulers were not from the Ahl al-Bayt and could not impress upon the people the authentic teachings of Islam. In such scenarios, one can easily see why a hybridized religion could be born which borrows practices from both Islam and the ancient pre-Islamic creeds. It is to avoid this that strict demarcations had to be in place so that the corruption of religion is minimized.

 

[-/3] العلل : عن محمد بن الحسن بن الوليد، عن محمد بن الحسن الصفار، عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى، عن عبد الرحمن بن أبي نجران، عن محمد بن حمران، عن محمد ابن مسلم، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: كان النبي صلى الله عليه وآله نهى أن تحبس لحوم الاضاحي فوق ثلاثة أيام من أجل الحاجة ، فأما اليوم فلا بأس به 

[3/-] al-Ilal: From Muhammad b. al-Hasan b. al-Walid from Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Saffar from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa from Abd al-Rahman b. Abi Najran from Muhammad b. Humran from Muhammad b. Muslim from Abi Ja`far عليه السلام who said: the prophet صلى الله عليه وآله had prohibited that the meat of the sacrificed animals (in the Id festival) be kept for more than three days because of the prevailing need, as for today then there is no harm in doing so.

NOTES:

The same ruling has also been narrated in Sunni sources which again demonstrates the convergence between our two sects in terms of the prophetic legacy. 

They quote Ali عليه السلام as saying: 

  حدثني حرملة بن يحيى أخبرنا ابن وهب حدثني يونس عن ابن شهاب حدثني أبو عبيد مولى ابن أزهر أنه شهد العيد مع عمر بن الخطاب قال ثم صليت مع علي بن أبي طالب قال فصلى لنا قبل الخطبة ثم خطب الناس فقال إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قد نهاكم أن تأكلوا لحوم نسككم فوق ثلاث ليال فلا تأكلوا

“The messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم prohibited you from eating the meat of your sacrifices beyond three nights, so do not eat it [after that]” [Sahih Bukhari & Muslim]

Some of their scholars rule based on this, they claim that the Khutba of Ali was after the death of the prophet and thus this command did not change.

However, the famous and stronger opinion is that the command was only a temporary one and was later abrogated, although there remains a question whether it was abrogated forever or whether the ruling returns if the situation changes.

The position that it was abrogated is based on the narration of Burayda quoted below (among others):

حدثنا أبو بكر بن أبي شيبة ومحمد بن المثنى قالا حدثنا محمد بن فضيل قال أبو بكر عن أبي سنان وقال ابن المثنى عن ضرار بن مرة عن محارب عن ابن بريدة عن أبيه قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ... نهيتكم عن لحوم الأضاحي فوق ثلاث فأمسكوا ما بدا لكم ...

“The messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: … I had prohibited you from eating the meat of the sacrificed animals (on the Id festival) beyond three days but now store it for as long as you want …” [Sahih Muslim]

It is because of this apparent contradiction that al-Shafi’i said:

وقال الشافعي : من قال بالنهي عن الادخار بعد ثلاث لم يسمع الرخصة . ومن قال بالرخصة مطلقا لم يسمع النهي عن الادخار . ومن قال بالنهي والرخصة سمعهما جميعا فعمل بمقتضاهما والله أعلم 

“Whoever prohibits storing it beyond three days did not hear the permission [to do so – from the prophet], and whoever rules about its absolute permissibility did not hear the prohibition of storing [from the prophet], but the one who has both prohibited it [under certain circumstances] and allowed it [otherwise] heard both statements [from the prophet] and acted upon its collective import. And Allah knows better” [al-Jami li Ahkam al-Qur’an of al-Qurtubi]

And this reveals an important point, recall that in another Hadith the Imam had said that the Sahaba did not lie about the prophet, but the main cause of their divergences was the phenomenon of abrogation. There can be no better case in point than this one.

Perhaps the best narrations to shed light on the matter and resolve it come from Aisha as follows:

حدثنا خلاد بن يحيى حدثنا سفيان عن عبد الرحمن بن عابس عن أبيه قال قلت لعائشة أنهى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أن تؤكل لحوم الأضاحي فوق ثلاث قالت ما فعله إلا في عام جاع الناس فيه فأراد أن يطعم الغني الفقير وإن كنا لنرفع الكراع فنأكله بعد خمس عشرة قيل ما اضطركم إليه فضحكت قالت ما شبع آل محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم من خبز بر مأدوم ثلاثة أيام حتى لحق بالله

Abis said to Aisha: the prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم prohibited the eating of the sacrificial meat [of the Id festival] beyond three? She said: he did not do that except the year in which the people went hungry, because he wished that the rich feed the poor, we used to keep the sheep’s trotters (of the sacrificed animal) and eat it after fifteen days, it was said: what made you do that (for it is a lowly part)? so she laughed and said: the family of Muhammad never satiated themselves from the bread of wheat with meat for three consecutive days ever until he returned to meet Allah [Sahih Bukhari]

حدثنا إسحق بن إبراهيم الحنظلي أخبرنا روح حدثنا مالك عن عبد الله بن أبي بكر عن عبد الله بن واقد قال نهى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عن أكل لحوم الضحايا بعد ثلاث قال عبد الله بن أبي بكر فذكرت ذلك لعمرة فقالت صدق سمعت عائشة تقول دف أهل أبيات من أهل البادية حضرة الأضحى زمن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ادخروا ثلاثا ثم تصدقوا بما بقي فلما كان بعد ذلك قالوا يا رسول الله إن الناس يتخذون الأسقية من ضحاياهم ويجملون منها الودك فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وما ذاك قالوا نهيت أن تؤكل لحوم الضحايا بعد ثلاث فقال إنما نهيتكم من أجل الدافة التي دفت فكلوا وادخروا وتصدقوا

Abdallah b. Waqid: the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم prohibited eating the sacrificial meat after three [days], Abdallah b. Abi Bakr said: so I mentioned that to Umra - she said: he is right, I heard Aisha saying: some families the desert-dwellers [bedouins] came to Madina close to Id al-Adhha in the time of the messenger of Allah, so the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: store it only for three days then give as charity whatever remains, but when it (the Id) occurred again (the next year) they said: O messenger of Allah - the people are used to making water-bags out of their sacrificed animals (curing the skins) and also melting fat out of them! So the messenger of Allah said: what about it? they said: you prohibited eating (and making use) of the sacrificed animals after three [days]? He said: I prohibited you then because of the bedouins who had come - so (as for now) you can eat of it and store it (as long as you want) and give it out as charity. 

دافة “Dafa” - the poor people who have migrated temporarily to the urban centers to find provisions to sustain life because of the suffering in the desert as a result of drought.

The explanation given by Aisha is the same one given by our Imams.

أحمد بن محمد بن يحيى العطار، عن أبيه ، عن محمد بن الحسين بن أبي الخطاب، عن محمد بن إسماعيل بن بزيع، عن يونس، عن جميل بن دراج قال : سألت أبا عبدالله عليه السلام عن حبس لحوم الاضاحي فوق ثلاثة أيام بمنى ، قال : لا بأس بذلك اليوم ، إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله إنما نهى عن ذلك أولا لان الناس كانوا يومئذ مجهودين، فأما اليوم فلا بأس

Ahmad b. Muhammad  b. Yahya al-Attar from his father from Muhammad b. al-Husayn b. Abi al-Khattab from Muhammad b. Ismail b. Baz`i from Yunus from Jamil b. Darraj who said: I asked Aba Abdillah عليه السلام about storing the meat of the sacrificed animals (in the Id festival) in Mina beyond three days, he said: there is no problem in doing that today, the messenger of Allah  صلى الله عليه وآله had only prohibited doing that at first because the people at that time were struggling, as for in our times then there is no impediment [in doing that]. 

قال الصدوق: وقال أبو عبدالله عليه السلام: كنا ننهي عن إخراج لحوم الاضاحي بعد ثلاثة أيام لقلة اللحم وكثرة الناس، فأما اليوم فقد كثر اللحم وقل الناس، فلا بأس بإخراجه

al-Saduq quotes Abu Abdillah عليه السلام as saying: we were forbidden to take out (continue to use) the sacrificial meat after three days because of the paucity of meat and the abundance of people, as for today then the meat has increased and the people have decreased so there is no problem with taking it out [after three days].

al-Muhsini: Know that the prophet  issued some commands that were temporary and he contradicted it later [with an opposite command] either with a clear explanation from him about the changed circumstance or without. And such instances exist in our narrations and in the narrations of the `Amma, whoever is able to research this and gather all such instances together in one book then he would have done good.

The commands and prohibitions are sometimes issued in the sense of a Fatwa, that is a permanent ruling which is established in the Shar`ia, and sometimes it is issued in the sense of a ruling that is dependent on certain external conditions [on the ground], thus the ruling will lapse with their [the conditions which led to the rulings] lapsing.

And the latter type of rulings, just as it is right that they issue from the prophet and the Awsiya, because of them being administrators of human affairs, similarly it is also appropriate if they are issued on the part of the Mujtahidin.   

Edited March 16, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Hassan-]

@Islamic Salvation i was literally about to post that lol and you beat me to it.

[Islamic Salvation]

2.20. Precedence is Given to what has been Established by the Qur’an over the Sunna

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/precedence-is-given-to-what-has-been-established-by-the-quran-over-the-sunna

 

[-/1] الكافي: علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن معاوية بن عمار، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: قلت له: رجل نسي أن يرمي الجمار حتى أتي مكة قال: يرجع فيرميها ... قلت: فاته ذلك وخرج؟ قال: ليس عليه شئ، قال: قلت: فرجل نسي السعي بين الصفا والمروة؟ فقال: يعيد السعي، قلت: فاته ذلك حتى خرج؟ قال، يرجع فيعيد السعي إن هذا ليس كرمي الجمار إن الرمي سنة والسعي بين الصفا والمروة فريضة

[1/-] al-Kafi: Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi Umayr from Muawiya b. Ammar from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he (Muawiya) said: I said to him: a man forgets to throw pebbles at the pillars [in the Hajj] and departs for Makka, he said: he goes back and throws them [makes up for it] … I said: he misses doing that and leaves [departs back to his land], he said: there is nothing further upon him [he does not have to do anything], I said: what if a man forgets the Sa`i [brisk walk] between Safa and Marwa? He said: he repeats the Sa`i, I said: he misses doing that and leaves? He said: he has to come back and make the Sa`i, this (Sa`i) is not like throwing pebbles at the pillars, throwing is a Sunna while Sa`i between Safa and Marwa is a Faridha.

NOTES:

Rami al-Jamarat [stoning the pillars] is Wajib, but it is a Wajib which has been established by the Sunna of the prophet [it is not mentioned in the Qur`an], Sa`i between Safa and Marwa is also Wajib but it is a Wajib which has been established from the Qur`an and thus called Faridha. 

al-Muhsini: other narrations which will be brought in their appropriate place indicate that the Fardh [that which has been proven from the Qur`an] is given precedence over the Sunna - assuming that they vie with each other [you only have time to perform one or the other].

And this Hadith also gives another difference between the two [i.e. Wajib Faridha and Wajib Sunna] - that is - what is derived from the Sunna will not need to be repeated in cases of forgetfulness while the Faridha remains as it is and still demands to be performed even if someone forgets.  

[Islamic Salvation]

2.20. One of the Reasons for Differences between Narrations

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

 

[1/112] التهذيب: محمد بن يحيى عن محمد بن الحسين عن عبدالرحمن بن أبي هاشم البجلي عن سالم أبي خديجة عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: سأل انسان وأنا حاضر فقال: ربما دخلت المسجد وبعض أصحابنا يصلي العصر وبعضهم يصلي الظهر فقال: انا أمرتهم بهذا لو صلوا على وقت واحد لعرفوا فأخذوا برقابهم

[1/112] al-Tahdhib: Muhammad b. Yahya from Muhammad b. al-Husayn from Abd al-Rahman b. Abi Hashim al-Bajali from Salim Abi Khadija from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he (Salim) said: a man asked [him] while I was present: I happen to enter the Masjid and one of our companions is praying the Asr prayer while another is praying Dhuhr [why this divergence]? He said: I ordered them to do that, if they were all to pray at one time they would be known and it would be off with their necks.

NOTES:

Taqiyya was so crucial that the `Aimma gave their Ashab different orders so that they do not stand out as a separate group leading to persecution. The amount of secrecy needed especially in the Abbasid time who were on the lookout for any threat to their rule cannot be overstated. 

[Islamic Salvation]

2.22. Principle of Impartiality

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

 

[1/113] الفقيه: محمد بن علي بن الحسين باسناده المعتبر عن عبدالله بن المغيرة عن غير واحد من أصحابنا عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام في رجلين كان معهما درهمان فقال أحدهما: الدرهمان لي، وقال الآخر: هما بيني وبينك، فقال: أما الذي قال: هما بيني وبينك فقد أقر بأن أحد الدرهمين ليس له وأنه لصاحبه ويقسم الآخر بينهما

[1/113] al-Faqih: Muhammad b. Ali b. al-Husayn via his reliable chain to Abdallah b. al-Mughira from more than one of our companions from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام in regards two men who have two Dirhams between them, one of them says: they are both mine, while the other says: they are between me and you (one is mine and the other is yours), he said: as for the one who says: ‘they are between me and you’ then he has acknowledged that one of the Dirhams is not his and that it belongs to his fellow (he has already abandoned his claim over one of the Dirhams), and the remaining one is divided between them (i.e. each one gets a half). 

 

[-/2] الفقيه: باسناده عن السكوني عن الصادق جعفر بن محمد، عن أبيه عليهما السلام في رجل استودع رجلا دينارين واستودعه آخر دينارا فضاع دينار منهما، فقال: يعطى صاحب الدينارين دينارا ويقتسمان الدينار الباقي بينهما نصفين

[2/-] al-Faqih: Via his chain to al-Sakuni from al-Sadiq Ja`far b. Muhammad from his father عليهما السلام in regards someone who gives a man two Dinars for safekeeping while another gives the man one Dinar (they become three), then one of the Dinars is lost, he said: the one who had two Dinars is given a Dinar and the remaining Dinar is divided between the both of them equally.

NOTES:

The principle of impartiality entails treating the two parties in an identical manner relative to their claim. What this means in this particular case is that the 2:1 ratio is maintained, since one Dirham has been lost and two remain, the one who had two Dirhams is is given one and a half and the one who had one Dirham is given a half (i.e. the difference remains one). 

 

[-/3] الكافي: محمد بن يحيى، عن محمد بن أحمد، عن الخشاب، عن غياث بن كلوب، عن إسحاق بن عمار، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام أن رجلين اختصما إلى أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام في دابة ... فقيل له: فلو لم تكن في يد واحد منهما وأقاما البينة؟ قال: أحلفهما فأيهما حلف ونكل الآخر جعلتها للحالف، فإن حلفا جميعا جعلتها بينهما نصفين ...

[3/-] al-Kafi: Muhammad b. Yahya from Muhammad b. Ahmad from al-Khashshab from Ghiyath b. Kalub from Ishaq b. Ammar from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام that: two men disputed with each other in front of the commander of the faithful عليه السلام about an animal (each one laid a claim to it) ... it was said to him: what if it is not in the hands of either one of them [no one has possession of it] but both produce evidence [have witnesses for it]? he said: I make them both to swear an oath and I rule in favor of the one who swears and against the one who reneges, but if both of them swear I rule for each of them to have one-half of it … 

NOTES:

Generally speaking such disputes are solved by producing evidence, and this in the Islamic context means admissible witnesses. It may happen that both sides are able to produce such conflicting witnesses, when this happens, the judge makes both parties to take a solemn oath affirming their ownership, it is hoped here that the false claimant shall fear God as is required and not swear falsely, the judgment is in favor of the one who can take the oath.

However, if both swear the oath, the Imam makes clear that prior possession [in whose hands it is] trumps all and the one in whose possession it is takes it, but if it is jointly possessed or no one has it in his possession and if they both swear the oath then it is divided equally between the both of them.

 

[-/4] الكافي: محمد بن يحيى، عن أحمد بن محمد عن محمد بن يحيى، عن غياث بن إبراهيم، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام أن أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام اختصم إليه رجلان في دابة وكلاهما أقام البينة أنه انتجها فقضى بها للذي هي في يده وقال: لو لم تكن في يده جعلتها بينهما نصفين

[4/-] al-Kafi: Muhammad b. Yahya from Ahmad b. Muhammad from Muhammad b. Yahya from Ghiyath b. Ibrahim from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام that: two people disputed about an animal in front of the commander of the faithful عليه السلام and both were able to produce evidence [witnesses] that they foaled it, so he ruled in favor of the one in whose hands it was [possessed it already], and he said: if it was not in his possession I would have divided it equally between them.

NOTES:

Note that such Ahadith indicate that Islam gives some value to the legal maxim "possession is nine-tenths of the law". In a property dispute (whether real or personal), in the absence of clear and compelling testimony or documentation to the contrary, the person in actual, custodial possession of the property is presumed to be the rightful owner. The rightful owner shall have their possession returned to them; if taken or used. The shirt or blouse you are currently wearing is presumed to be yours, unless someone can prove that it is not.

 

[-/5] الكافي: محمد بن يحيى، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن ابن فضال، عن أبي جميلة، عن سماك بن حرب، عن تميم بن طرفة أن رجلين عرفا بعيرا فأقام كل واحد منهما بينة فجعله أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام بينهما

[5/-] al-Kafi: Muhammad b. Yahya from Ahmad b. Muhammad from Ibn Fadhal from Abi Jamila from Simak b. Harb from Tamim b. Tarafa that: two men laid claim to a camel and each one of them produced evidence (to back up his claim) so the commander of the faithful عليه السلام made it out to both of them.

NOTES:

This same narration is found in the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shayba with the same upper chain [Simak > Tamim]. It is also found in the Ilal of Ibn Hanbal where he narrates it from Waki’i from Sufyan from Simak from Tamim. Except that in the Sunni sources it is the prophet who makes this judgment instead of Ali.

 

[6/114] التهذيب: عن علي بن الحسن، عن محمد بن الوليد، عن يونس بن يعقوب، عن ابى عبدالله عليه السلام في امرأة تموت قبل الرجل او رجل قبل المرأة قال: ما كان من متاع النساء فهو للمرأة وما كان من متاع الرجل والنساء فهو بينهما ...

[6/114] al-Tahdhib: From Ali b. al-Hasan from Muhammad b. al-Walid from Yunus b. Ya`qub from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام in regards a woman who dies before her husband or the man dies before his wife - he said: whatever of the possessions which [conventionally] belong to women then it is for the wife and whatever of the possessions which [conventionally] belong to both men and women then it is to be divided between them ...

NOTES:

Obviously if the man or the woman is dead then what is meant here is that the part of his/her estate will go to his/her inheritors.

 

[-/7] التهذيب: عن محمد بن أحمد بن يحيى عن محمد بن الحسين عن الحسن بن مسكين عن رفاعة النخاس عن ابي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: إذا طلق الرجل امرأته وفي بيتها متاع فادعت ان المتاع لها وادعى الرجل ان المتاع له كان له ما للرجال ولها ما للنساء وما يكون للرجال والنساء قسم بينهما

[7/-] al-Tahdhib: From Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya from Muhammad b. al-Husayn from al-Hasan b. Miskin from Rifa`a al-Nakhas from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: if a man divorces his wife and in her house are possessions which she claims are hers while the man claims are his then for him is what belongs to men [conventionally] and for her are what belongs to women [conventionally] and those which can belong to either of them are divided between the two. 

NOTES:

Something that conventionally belongs to men can be a sword while something that conventionally belongs to women can be a mirror.

Edited March 27, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

2.23. What has been Lifted from the Umma

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-principles-of-jurisprudence/what-has-been-lifted-from-the-umma

 

[1/115] الخصال: 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: الخطأ، والنسيان، وما اكرهوا عليه، ومالا يعلمون، وما لا يطيقون، وما اضطروا إليه، والحسد، والطيرة، والتفكر في الوسوسة في الخلق ما لم ينطق بشفة

[1/115] al-Khisal: 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 compelled to do, what they do not know, what they do not have the strength for, what they have to do out of necessity, jealousy, bad omen, and thinking over the whispered doubts in regards creation so long as it is not voiced aloud.

NOTES:

The clause “what they do not know” seems to be absolute, but the Fuqaha have limited it to specific instances like praying in clothes having Najis, or in a place which is usurped, or not raising the voice in a prayer which requires the voice to be raised like Maghrib and the like, more elaborate discussion is found in the books of Usul al-Fiqh.

The clause “thinking over the whispered doubts in regards creation” most likely refers to doubts along the lines of how could He have created something from nothing, or doubts about Him creating things that do not have any apparent benefit or harm, or questioning the diversity present in creation etc.

Edited March 28, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

That is the end of the Book of Principles of Jurisprudence Alhamdulillah. It had 23 sub-chapters.

Visit the revamped site for more: https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/

The Next chapter is the Book of Narrators.

Edited March 29, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

BOOK OF NARRATORS

3.1 Aban b. Taghlib

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-narrators/aban-b-taghlib

 

[1/116] رجال الكشي: عن حمدويه، عن يعقوب بن يزيد، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن علي بن إسماعيل بن عمار، عن ابن مسكان، عن أبان بن تغلب قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام: إني أقعد في المسجد فيجي‏ء الناس فيسألوني فإن لم أجبهم لم يقبلوا مني و أكره أن أجيبهم بقولكم وما جاء عنكم فقال لي انظر ما علمت أنه من قولهم فأخبرهم بذلك

[1/116] Rijal al-Kashshi: From Hamduwayh from Ya`qub bin Yazid from Ibn Abi Umayr from Ali bin Ismail bin Ammar from Ibn Muskan from Aban bin Taghlib who said: I said to Abi Abdillah عليه السلام: I do sit in the Masjid - and the people come and ask me questions, so if I do not answer them they do not accept from me (i.e. they insist on answers), and I dislike answering them based on your verdicts and according to what has come from you (i.e. since they are not Shia), so he عليه السلام said to me: look at what you know is from their own verdicts and inform them about that (i.e. answer them using their own sources and scholars).

 

[2/117] رجال الكشي: عن حمدويه، عن يعقوب بن يزيد، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن أبان ابن تغلب قال: قال لى أبو عبد الله عليه السلام: جالس أهل المدينة فاني أحب أن يرى في شيعتنا مثلك

[2/117] Rijal al-Kashshi: From Hamduwayh from Ya`qub b. Yazid from Ibn Abi Umayr from Aban b. Taghlib who said: Abu Abdillah عليه السلام said to me: sit and attend to the people of Madina (answer their questions) - for I like it that someone like you be seen amongst our Shia.

NOTES:

The Imam is proud to have someone like Aban among the Shia and even wants him to be known by the masses. And why not? Aban was a multi-dimensional character.

What follows below is adapted from al-Najashi.

Aban was was a Qari (a specialist of the Qur’an) and among the most notable of them, a jurisprudent, and a linguist (indeed he was a foremost authority in Grammar in his time - having reported a lot of reports (mostly poems) of the early pre-islamic Arabs which together with the Qur’an formed the basis of the Kufan school to which he belonged in their efforts to codify the rules of the language). He even transmitted his own Qira’a which was unique to him.

(ã) Aban b. Muhammad b. Aban b. Taghlib said: I heard my father say: I entered with my father (Aban b. Taghlib) to meet Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, so when he عليه السلام saw him he ordered a cushion to be placed for him which was laid down, and he shook his hand, and embraced him, and inquired about his health, and welcomed him. And he also said: when Aban used to enter Madina, the existing study circles (in the Masjid of the prophet) were all broken up (so that they could all attend to Aban’s teaching) and the pillar of the prophet was vacated for him (the pillar inside the Masjid which the prophet used to lean on while delivering instruction).

(b) Abd al-Rahman b. al-Hajjaj said: we were in the Majlis of Aban b. Taghlib when a young man came and said: O Aba Said (Aban) inform me: how many companions of the prophet were with Ali عليه السلام (in his wars)? So Aban said to him: it is as though you want to discern the merit of Ali by looking at who followed him from among the companions of the messenger of Allah? he said: it is so, he said: by Allah, we did not discern their (the companions’) merits except by their following of him (Ali) … Aban said: Do you know who are the Shia? The Shia are those who - if the people disagree on something from the messenger of Allah follow the verdict of Ali in it, and if the people disagree about something attributed to Ali they follow the ruling of Ja’far b. Muhammad in it.

(c) Aban b. Uthman said: Abi Abdillah عليه السلام said: Indeed Aban b. Taghlib has narrated from me thirty thousand narrations - so narrate them from him (on his authority).

(d) Abdalla b. Khafaqa said: Aban b. Taghlib said to me: I passed by a group who blamed me because of my narrating from Ja’far (al-Sadiq) عليه السلام, so I said: you blame me for narrating from a man whom I have never asked about anything except that he said about it - the messenger of Allah said.

I say: this last proves that all the Ahadith of the `Aimma are traceable back to the prophet.

Edited March 30, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

3.2 Ibrahim b. Abi Mahmud

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-narrators/ibrahim-b-abi-mahmud

 

[1/118] رجال الكشي: عن حمدويه، عن الحسن بن موسى الخشاب، عن إبراهيم بن أبي محمود قال: دخلت على أبي جعفر عليه السلام و معي كتب إليه من أبيه، فجعل يقرؤها و يضع كتابا كبيرا على عينيه و يقول: خط أبي و الله، ويبكي حتى سألت دموعه على خديه، فقلت له: جعلت فداك قد كان أبوك ربما قال لي في المجلس الواحد مرات: أسكنك الله الجنة أدخلك الله الجنة قال: فقال: و أنا أقول: أدخلك الله الجنة فقلت: جعلت فداك تضمن لي عن ربك أن تدخلني الجنة؟ قال: نعم، قال: فأخذت رجله فقبلتها

[1/118] Rijal al-Kashshi: Hamduwayh from al-Hasan b. Musa al-Khashab from Ibrahim b. Abi Mahmud who said: I entered upon Abi Ja’far (i.e. al-Jawad) عليه السلام and with me were letters to him from his father, he began reading them and placing the bigger letters upon his eyes and saying: ‘the handwriting of my father - by Allah!’ and crying until his tears reached his cheeks, so I said to him: may I be made your ransom, your father would sometimes say to me, in a single seating, numerous times: ‘may Allah lodge you in Jannah - may Allah make you enter Jannah’, he (Ibrahim) said: so he said: and I also say: ‘may Allah make you enter Jannah’. Then I said: may I be made your ransom, do you guarantee for me from your lord that you will make me enter the Jannah? he said: yes, he (Ibrahim) said: so I took his legs and kissed them.

NOTES:

Ibrahim b. Abi Mahmud was a Khurasani Mawla who was given Tawthiq by both Najashi and Tusi.

قال نصر بن الصباح: إبراهيم بن أبي محمود كان مكفوفا، روى عنه أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى مسائل موسى عليه السلام قدر خمس وعشرين ورقة، وعاش بعد الرضا عليه السلام

Nasr b. al-Sabah said: Ibrahim b. Abi Mahmud was blind, Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa transmitted his Masail [Fiqhi questions] to Musa عليه السلام of about twenty five pages, he outlived al-Ridha عليه السلام

Edited March 31, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

3.3. Ibrahim b. Abda

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-narrators/ibrahim-b-abda

 

[-/1] رجال الكشي: حكى بعض الثقات بنيسابور: أنه خرج لإسحاق بن إسماعيل من أبي محمد عليه السلام توقيع: يا إسحاق بن إسماعيل ... و على إبراهيم بن عبدة سلام الله و رحمته ... و كل من قرأ كتابنا هذا من موالي من أهل بلدك ... فليؤد حقوقنا إلى إبراهيم بن عبدة، و ليحمل ذلك إبراهيم بن عبدة إلى الرازي رضي الله عنه، أو إلى من يسمى له الرازي، فإن ذلك عن أمري و رأيي إن شاء الله ...

[1/-] Rijal al-Kashshi: One of the Thiqat in Naysabur relayed to us that: there came out a signed rescript from Abi Muhammad عليه السلام to Ishaq b. Ismail saying: O Ishaq b. Ismail … and upon Ibrahim b. Abda be peace from Allah and His mercy … and whoever reads this letter of ours from among our followers who are denizens of your town … they should hand over our dues to Ibrahim b. Abda, and Ibrahim b. Abda should carry that to al-Razi may Allah be pleased with him, or to the one al-Razi names for him, for that is by my command and my choice - if Allah wills …

NOTES:

This is sufficient praise for Ibrahim being part of a long signed rescript (Tawqi) in which are also mentioned Ishaq b. Ismail, Muhammad b. Musa al-Naysaburi, al-Razi, al-Bilali, al-Mahmudi, al-Dihqan and al-Amri.    

All of them were agents in a complex financial network set up by the `Aimma. The Tawqi sets out a hierarchy that is geographically structured and resolves sub-divisions of the areas of control. 

According to Dr. Jassim: According to this Tawqi: al‑ `Askari appointed Ishaq b. Muhammad as his agent in Nisapur, commanding him to pay the dues to Ibrahim b. `Abda, his agent in Bayhaq and its districts. The latter in turn was commanded to hand the dues to the agent of Rayy, Muhammad b. Ja’far al‑Razi or to the person appointed by al‑Razi. At the end of his letter the Imam pointed out that all the Khums and other taxes which were sent by his followers should be given to `Uthman b. Said, who would then hand them to him.  Such a statement reveals that `Uthman b. Said was at the top of the organization before the death of al‑`Askari in 260/874.

 

[2/119] رجال الكشي: قال أبو عمرو: حكى بعض الثقات أن أبا محمد صلوات الله عليه كتب إلى إبراهيم بن عبدة: و كتابي الذي ورد على إبراهيم بن عبدة بتوكيلي إياه لقبض حقوقي من موالي هناك نعم هو كتابي بخطي، أقمته أعني إبراهيم بن عبدة لهم ببلدهم حقا غير باطل، فليتقوا الله حق تقاته و ليخرجوا من حقوقي و ليدفعوها إليه، فقد جوزت له ما يعمل به فيها، وفقه الله ومن عليه بالسلامة من التقصير برحمته

[2/119] Rijal al-Kashshi: Abu Amr (al-Kashshi) said: one of the Thiqat relayed to me that Aba Muhammad صلوات الله عليه wrote to Ibrahim b. Abda [to show it to his doubters]: ‘and my letter which was issued to Ibrahim b. Abda [previously] appointing him as my agent to collect my dues from my followers over there - then yes - it is indeed by my own handwriting, I have appointed him - that is Ibrahim b. Abda - for them in their town - this a truth and it is not a falsehood, so they should fear Allah the way He ought to be feared and they should take out my dues and hand it over to him, for I have permitted him what he uses from it, may Allah enable him and favor him with protection from short-coming by His mercy.

NOTES:

Allama Tustari being ever observant in his usual way notices the incongruity of the Imam having written a letter to Ibrahim b. Abda and then speaking about him in the third person, he suggests that the letter could have been to Abdallah b. Hamduwayh al-Bayhaqi [looking at the succeeding Hadith]:

أمّا الأوّل: فلأنّه لا معنى لأن يقال: «كتب إلى إبراهيم الخ» فيكتب إلى إبراهيم في إبراهيم، و يكتب كتابي إليه كتابي، فالأوّل: كتوصية الشخص بنفسه، و الثاني: كاثبات الشي‏ء لنفسه و الظاهر أنّ الأصل «كتب إلى عبد اللّه بن حمدويه، و الكتاب الّذي ورد على إبراهيم بن عبدة»

However, in my interpretation there is no need for such a postulation as one can take it to have been written with the purpose of Ibrahim b. Abda showing the letter himself to his doubters and reading it out to them.

Edited April 1, 2017 by Islamic Salvation

[Islamic Salvation]

3.4. - 3.5. Ahmad b. Hammad al-Marwazi and his son Muhammad

https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-narrators/ahmad-b-hammad-al-marwazi-and-his-son-muhammad

 

[1/120] رجال الكشي: محمد بن مسعود، عن أبو علي المحمودي محمد بن أحمد بن حماد المروزي قال: كتب أبو جعفر عليه ‌السلام إلى أبي في فصل من كتابه، فكان توفي من يوم أو غد: ثم وُفِّيَتْ كُلُّ نَفْسٍ مَا كَسَبَتْ وَهُمْ لَا يُظْلَمُونَ أما الدنيا فنحن فيها متفرجون في البلاد ولكن من هوى هوى صاحبه ودان بدينه فهو معه، وإن كان نائيا عنه، وأما الآخرة هِيَ دَارُ الْقَرَارِ

[1/120] Rijal al-Kashshi: Muhammad b. Mas`ud from Abu Ali al-Mahmudi Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Hammad al-Marwazi who said: Abu Ja`far (al-Jawad) عليه ‌السلام wrote to my father in a part of his letter - and he (my father) went on to die on the same day or the next: then “every soul will be recompensed for that which it earned and they will not be dealt with unjustly” (3:25), as for this world then we are in it separated [far away from each other] in different lands, but whoever inclines to the