Light On the Muhammadan Sunnah Or Defence of the Hadith
Conclusion
After finishing discussion of the Muhammadan hadith and its history, I found it proper to conclude my book with chapters containing researches related to hadith and comprehending it. And also which manner should be followed by the knowledge-seeker so as to realize the sahih of hadith, with rules and principles of Islam with which no one can dispense. Certainly these chapters are essential and complementary to the book, for which I will prelude with a pleasant statement for the eminent historian Ibn Khaldun in his discussion of philosophy of history and sociology.
In his widely-known Muqaddimah he wrote: When depending upon oral tradition in reporting the akhbar, without following the prevalent principles and rules of politics, nature of populousness, and conditions in the human society, nor analogy (qiyas) was adopted everywhere, then they would not be immune against slips and deviation from truth path. Mostly the historians, exegetes and leaders of transmission were liable to errors in tales and events due to reliance in citing them merely on oral tradition, whether be authentic or weak, without subjecting them to their foundations, nor comparing them to their identical ones, nor fathoming them with criterion of wisdom so as to be aware of the dispositions of mankind, nor investigating the akhbar, the fact caused them to wander from path of truth and go astray in the wilderness of illusion and error. 734
And since falsity naturally creeps into the khabar, with necessitating causes, of which being inclinations and bigotry toward opinions and madhahib, then if the self be moderate in approving the report, it will put it to the test and investigation till distinguishing its true aspect from the false one.
But if be overwhelmed by tashayy’ (partiality) to an opinion or some creed, it will easily approve of all the reports that suit it, as this inclination and partiality would curtain the mind’s eye from scrutiny and investigation, as a result of which the self would have no alternative but to accept and report the lies.
Among the reasons prompting to falsification of akhbar we can refer to having confidence in the transmitters, the verification of which is owing to jarh and ta’dil. Of them also is diversion from the intentions, a large number of transmitters were not aware of the purpose of what they used to see and hear, reporting the hadith according to their surmise and conjecture, the fact entailing their liability to falsity. Also of the reasons is imagining the truth, which occurs mostly because of trusting the transmitters. Besides unawareness of application of the states with the incidents, because of the obscurity and affectation overwhelming them, so they would be transmitted by the reporter in the way he saw them, that is by feigning other than their truth. Another reason is the people’s seeking favouritism near the magnates and chiefs through flattery and adulation, with circulation of remembrance to the extent that the reports would convey that contrarily to reality, as the selfs being fond of hearing flattery, and people are anxious to gain the worldly lusts and means, like magnanimity and affluence, not interested mostly in virtues or competing to be of their owners. The foremost of reasons leading to falsity being unawareness of nature of conditions in populousness, as for every incident — abstract or act — there should be a certain nature belonging especially to itself in essence, and to what it encounters. If the hearer be acquainted with natures of events and conditions in the existence, and their requirements, that will verily help him rectify the khabar so as to discern truthfulness from falsity, which being the most effective way in verification from every aspect. Most often it may occur to the listeners to admit and transmit some impossible akhbar, that would be taken from them.
Verification of Akhbar by Recognizing Tempers of People:
He (Ibn Khaldun) said also: The best and most authentic methods in verification of akhbar being only in recognizing the tempers of people, so as to discern the real from false ones. This method is prior to verification through ta’dil of the narrators, to which it should not be referred but only after realizing that the khabar being possible or impossible in itself. If it be impossible, then it would be futile to consider the ta’dil and tajrih (for giving judgement). Men of insight regarded impossibility of indication of the word and interpreting it with what is refused by reason, to be one of points of defamation in the khabar. Whereas ta’dil and tajrih (sarcasm) used to be the considered criterion for determining the veracity of legal reports, since most of them being originating impositions, which the legislator obligated to perform them till they were believed to be true, and the means to attain reality being having confidence in the narrators, in respect of reliability and precision. 736
When talking about longevity of the world he said: During the first epoch of Islam it was depended in this regard upon the traditions reported from the Sahabah, particularly those who embraced Islam from among the Children of Israel, like Ka’b al-Ahbar and Wahb ibn Munabbih and their likes.
In his statement about exegesis of the Qur’an he wrote: The antecedents have compiled books and were engaged in this job, but their books and reported traditions contained the poor and authentic, the accepted and rejected things. That was because the Arabs were not educated or knowledgeable, but mostly bedouins and illiterate, and when desiring to know anything, among what all the human souls love much including causes of beings, initiation of creation, and secrets of existence, they would inquire people of the book who preceded them and learn from them. These people include the followers of the Torah, among the Jews and those who adopted their religion, of the Christians. And people of the Torah were that time
bedouins like the Arabs, knowing nothing except what common people of the Book were aware of, most of whom were from Himyar, who embraced the Jewish religion. On embracing Islam, they kept on believing in things that had nothing to do with the legal rules for which they would take precautions such as reports on commencement of creation, and what is related to misfortunes of life and epics, and alike, among whom we can mention Ka’b al-Ahbar, Wahb ibn Munabbih and Abd Allah ibn Salam and their likes. The books of tafsir (exegesis) became then filled with these traditions reported by such people, since the exegetes showed leniency in this regard, filling their tafsir books with these reports brought by people of the Torah, the fact that made them acceptable among people since time immemorial. 737
Research on Sciences of Hadith 738
In this regard he said: The mujtahid leaders (imams) differed in opinion
regarding being prolific or unprolific in this art. About Abu Hanifah,
it is said that he narrated 17 traditions, and Malik approved of those
traditions he recorded in his Muwatta’ which numbered about 300 ones,
while Ahmad ibn Hanbal reported in his Musnad 50 thousand traditions.
739 Those who narrated less among them
have done so for evading the attacks that they faced on this way, and
the defects they encountered, particularly the sarcasm that was launched
by the majority of people. So this led them to abandon adopting the
traditions and ways of isnad that causing them to face such campaigns,
which when increasing would lead to diminish their narrations due to
weakness in ways of transmission. The narrations of al-Imam Ahmad were
only decreased when he became strict in the provisions of (accepting)
the riwayah, tolerance, and weakness in the narration of the positive
hadith when it be opposed by the psychological reaction,
others showed more leniency in the provisions, as a consequence of which their traditions were so numerous, since everyone had his own opinion.
He further said: 741 Not all the companions were competent to issue fatawa (verdicts), nor the teachings of religion were taken from them all, but these characteristics were appertaining only to the holders of the Qur’an, who being aware of its abrogating (nasikh) and abrogated (mansukh), mutashabih (allegorical) and muhkam (clear, decisive), and all other indications, in the way they learnt it from the Prophet or from those who heard it from him, who were called al-qurra’ (reciters), i.e. who used to recite the Book since the Arabs were illiterate at that time.
Muqaddimat Ibn Khaldun, p. 9.
Ibid., pp. 35, 36.
Ibid., p. 37.
Ibid., p. 439.
Ibid., pp. 444, 445.
Refer to my previous commentary on the Muwalta' and Musnad Ahmad.
That means to submit the matter to the psychological, environmental and social temperament.
Op. cit., p. 446. For this reason Abu Hanifah never approved or adopted whatever verdicts reported by Abu Hurayrah and Anas ibn Malik and Samurah ibn Jundab, for several reasons, among which their not being among men of verdict (casuists). Refer to my book Shaykh al-mudirah.
Muslim reported this statement in the introduction to his Sahih, from Yahya ibn Sa'id al-Qattan, with these words, and with the word al-salihin (the righteous) instead of ahl-al-khayr (benevolent).
Refer to the chapter of Isra'iliyyat in this book.
Refer to the chapter "The Good Fabricators" in this book.
Ta'rikh al-isnad of al-Imam Muhammad Abduh, vol. II, pp. 347-349.