Light On the Muhammadan Sunnah Or Defence of the Hadith
Detriment of Narration Through Meaning Linguistically and Rhetorically
These were some of their sayings in regard of the detriment of reporting hadith through meaning, concerning the religious affairs. Whereas the linguistic and rhetoric detriment is elucidated through brief statement by the eminent Islamic litterateur al-Sayyid Mustafa Sadiq al-Rafi’i (may God’s mercy be upon him), when discussing the Prophetic rhetoric in his precious book I’jaz al-Qur’an, 164 saying: The words of Prophethood are inhabiting a heart connected to the Glory of its Creator, and burnished by a tongue upon which the Qur’an was revealed with the realities it contains. If they not being revealed (by God), however they came to be through way of revelation, and if they having no proof in it but they were verily among its evidences. That which of affirmed chapters has no even one separated handle, and in which meddling is absent has no even one preferred word. It is, in its brevity and indication, like a speaking heart pulse, and in its sublimation and efficiency is verily a manifestation of his (S) recollections” ... etc. 165
In his comment on the arrangement of the Prephetic rhetoric, he said: “It is not necessary that whatever reported as a hadith, should be taken as an utterance of the Prophet (may God’s peace and benediction be upon him and his Progeny) with its very words and expressions. Because many traditions have been reported on the basis of their meaning, the case in which most or
some of their words be uttered by the one to whom they were ascribed in transmission. Due to permission of narrating through meaning, Sibawayh and other Imams of the two Cities (Basrah and Kufah) have never quoted any hadith when compiling their books on grammar and linguistics, but they depended mainly on the Qur’an and authentic traditions reported from the Arabs. Had tadwin (writing down) been prevalent during the early stage (of Islam), with the possibility of recording all the traditions they (Companions) used to hear from the Prophet (S) with their original words and expressions and eloquence, this language would have been in an extremely different state”.
The procedure common among them was that the narrator’s being accurate in realizing the meaning of the hadith, with using words some of which being in agreement with the original texts, as in the case of his short traditions and aphorisms and proverbs, and some others disagreeing whereat the narrator inserting into them some of his own words. This fact led Sufyan al-Thawri to exclaim: If I tell you that I am narrating to you exactly as I heard (from the Prophet), never believe me, as it is no more than the meaning of it. 166
I have expatiated on discussing this section of the book due to its high significance.
Solecism and Mistake in Hadith:
The narrators were not satisfied with narrating the hadith according to meaning, but allowed themselves to cite hadith in a perverted way, finding no harm then in correcting its solecism and rectifying its error.
The Moroccan scholar Ibn Abd al-Barr, n his book Jami’ bayan al-’ilm wa fadlih, 167 says:
Al-Walid ibn Muslim related to us saying: I heard al-Awza’i saying: No harm is there in rectifying solecism and error in hadith. He also said: I heard al-Awza’i saying: Arabicize the hadith as the people (addressed by it) were Arabs.
It is reported that Jabir said: I asked ‘Amir i.e. al-Shi’bi, and Abu Ja’far (i.e. Muhammad ibn Ali) and al-Qasim (i.e. Ibn Muhammad), and ‘Ata’ (i.e. Ibn Abi Rabah) about that relating hadith and perpetrating solecism... shall I relate it as I heard or should I Arabicize it? They replied: No, you have to Arabicize it!
Yahya ibn Mu’in said: No objection is there to anyone rectifying his hadith according to the Arabic Language.
Al-Nadr ibn Shummayl is reported to have said: Hushaym was a solecist, so I clothed for you his hadith with a nice garment – i.e. Arabicization. Ali ibn al-Hasan related saying: I said to Ibn al-Mubarak: When noticing any solecism in the hadith should I rectify it? He replied: Yes, since the people (Arabs) were never committing grammatical mistakes! But solecism is only on our part.
This matter was broached by al-Imam Ibn Faris in a treatise calling it Ma’khadh al-’ilm, when he said: 168 “Some people claim that if any narrator committing a grammatical mistake when relating any hadith, it would be impermissible for the hearer to report from him but only in the same way he heard from him. Some others said: Rather, the hearer should relate it, if being aware of the Arabic Language grammar, in an Arabicized, correct, rectified manner, on the basis of an evidence accepted by us. That is, the fact that the Messenger of Allah (may God’s peace and benediction be upon him and his Progeny) was verily the most eloquent of all the Arabs with the best Arabic tongue...besides being protected by Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, against error.
Thus being the case, so it would be more proper to relate his hadith as rectified and free from any solecism or grammatical mistake.
Our Shaykh Abu al-Hasan Ali ibn Ibrahim al-Qattan used to record the hadith with its mistakes exactly as he heard it, with writing a note on the margin of his book: “he said so”, indicating that it is narrated in this way, with saying: And the correct hadith is so and so. This is verily the best of whatever I heard in this respect. Beside many other examples.
Advancing, Putting off, Addition and Omission in Hadith:
Furthermore, the narrators found no trouble in misplacing the hadith words, bring some forwards and some backwards.
Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaybah is reported to have said: Hafs related to us on the authority of Ash’ath, as saying that al-Hasan and al-Shi’bi were disdaining from bringing forwards and backwards the expressions of the hadith. 169
Jabir ibn Abd Allah quoted Abd Allah ibn Hudhayfah as saying: We are Arab people,...we cite the hadith with bringing forwards and backwards (its words). 170
They exaggerated in doing a bad turn to the narration of hadith to the extent that one of the narrators daring to add some words to the hadith that can’t be found in another’s narration. They (narrators) even laid down a rule for this calling it: “addition from the memorizer is accepted.”
To Narrate Part of Hadith and Shortening it:
Among other practices permitted by the narrators being to shorten the hadith and relate a part of it.
In Sunan al-Tirmidhi, Mujahid is reported to have said: Delete whatever you like from the hadith but never add to it.
Ibn Hajar, in Sharh al-Nukhbah, said: In regard of shortening the hadith, the majority of traditionists permit it, provided that epitomizing it should be a learned man (‘alim).
In Sharh Muslim, al-Nawawi says: The correct notion held by the multitude and investigators among scholars of hadith, being permission of narrating a portion of the hadith on the authority of a gnostic. He adds: Concerning classification of hadith into sections by the compilers, it is more proper for permission, or rather negating dispute in it is excluded. This practice was continuously followed by most of the memorizers among
‘ulama’ and traditionists (muhaddithun), and others among classes of scholars.
Muslim was among those permitting abridgement of hadith, referring to this fact in his introduction.
Abu Shamah, in his book Mukhtasar Kitab al-Mu’ammal,
‘That which is usually practised by pundits of fiqh in relation to the Prophetic traditions and narrated reports, being their abundant inferences from the weak (unauthentic) traditions to confirm their claims, and support their sayings, deleting some of the hadith words once, and adding to them another time. There are numerous examples for this practice in the books of Abu al-Ma’ali and his companion Abu Hamid. The most abominable act execised by some of them, being to argue with a weak report (khabar) which in fact be the proof used by his opponent against him. So they would introduce it, turning away from that which they have weakened before.
Their Leniency toward Narrations on Virtues
and their Detriment:
Ibn Mahdi is reported to have said: “Whenever narrating any hadith about halal (lawful) and haram (unlawful) rules, we would be very strict in the asanid (chains of transmission) with scrutinizing the rijal. And when relating anything on virtues, reward and punishment, we would show leniency in the asanid and indulgence in respect of rijal”. (Reported by al-Bayhaqi in al-Madkhal).
Among those permitting leniency in narrating the hadith when being concerned with the good deeds, it can be referred to the names of Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak. Al-Hakim said: I heard Abu Zakariyya al-Anbari say: When the report (khabar) is neither forbidding what is lawful nor legalizing what is unlawful, nor obligating a rule related to temptation or intimidation, it should be overlooked with being negligent
regarding its narration. And Ahmad has another opinion in this regard, that will be exposed later on.
Ibn Abd al-Barr says: The traditions on virtues need not any argument or proof... and the scholars in the past never showed that strictness in respect of reporting them from whomsoever of the narrators, without investigating deeply as they used to do with traditions on ahkam (rules). 173
In his commentary on the statement of the author of al-Adab al-Shar’iyyah (Ibn Muflih 174 ), that it is reported on the authority of al-Imam Ahmad what is indicating that it is unnecessary to adhere to the weak hadith on virtues and recommendable acts (mustahabbat), al-Sayyid Rashid Rida says: “May God be pleased with Ahmad, what vast knowledge and accurate comprehension has he!!... Verily to believe in acting in accordance with the weak hadith in the cases he referred to and calling to showing leniency in narrating it, opened for the Ummah a door for ghuluww (extravagance) in religion and multiplying the trouble-seeking rituals (‘ibadat), that are incongruous with the easy teachings of Islam, beside even making some of them among the rites of the Din. All this, beside incompetence of many people in establishing the obligatory prayers and abiding by and fulfilling the duties, the fact leading consequently to accept and believe in the Israeliyyat, superstitions and dreams, as reported by a latter compiler on the authority of Ibn Taymiyyah who said: The ‘ibadat (rituals) and virtues decisively confirmed in the Book (Qur’an) and Sunnah are quite sufficient for the Ummah. And I wish there were a large number of people falling not short of fulfilling them.”
Really true is the utterance of these religious leaders and what they manifested regarding the disadvantages caused by narration of the weak and unauthentic traditions to the Ummah, due to the practice followed by some of these leaders (imams) in respect of virtues.
Therefore, al-Qadi Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi al-Maliki said: “It is absolutely impermissible to act according to the weak traditions.”
The notable fluent Islamic writer Mustafa Sadiq al-Rafi’i (may God’s
mercy be upon him) has dedicated a long interesting chapter for narration (riwayah) in his valuable book Ta’rikh Adab al-Arab, of which we quote the following:
I'jaz al-Qur'an, p. 364, refer to the complement of this eloquent speech, in the following pages till p. 422.
Ibid., p. 364.
Ibid., p. 422.
See vol. I, pp. 78-81.
168 Tawjih al-nazar, pp. 308, 309.
Jami' bayan al-'ilm, vol. I, p. 80.
This khabar is recorded also in Uyun al-akhbar, vol. III, p. 136.
India Edition, p. 237.
See pp. 21, 22.
Jami' bayan al-'ilm, vol. I, p. 45.
Al-Adab al-Shar'iyyah, vol. II, pp. 313, 314. Another narration is ascribed to Ahmad ibn Hanbal, in which he held that it can be acted according to the weak hadith in virtuous deeds.
Al-Manar, vol. XXXI, p. 129.