Distortion and Forgery
There is no dispute over the occurrence of extensive forgery in the Hadith literature. The ulema of
Hadith are unanimous on this, and some have gone so far as to affirm that in no other branch of Islamic
sciences has there been so much forgery as in the Hadith. The very existence of a bulk of literature and
works by prominent ulema bearing the title al-Mawdu'at, or 'fabricated Hadith', bears witness to
extensive forgery in this area.
[82. Cf. Shabir, Authority of Hadith, p. 50.]
There is some disagreement over determining the historical origins of forgery in Hadith. While some
observers have given the caliphate of 'Uthman as a starting point, others have dated it a little later, at
around the year 40 Hijrah, when political differences between the fourth caliph, 'Ali, and Mu'awiyah led
to military confrontation and the division of the Muslims into various factions. According to a third
view, forgery in Hadith started even earlier, that is, during the caliphate of Abu Bakr when he waged
the War of Apostasy (riddah) against the refusers of zakah. But the year 40 is considered the more
likely starting point for the development of serious and persistent differences in the community, which
is marked by the emergence of the Kharijites and the Shi'ah. Muslims were thenceforth divided, and
hostility between them acquired a religious dimension when they began to use the Qur'an and Sunnah in
support of their claims. When the misguided elements among them failed to find any authority in the
sources for their views, they either imposed a distorted interpretation on the source materials, or
embarked on outright fabrication.
[83. Siba'i, Al-Sunnah, p. 75; Shabir, Authority of Hadith, p. 51.]
The attribution of false statements to the Prophet may be divided into two types: (1) deliberate forgery,
which is usually referred to as hadith mawdu'; (2) unintentional fabrication, which is known as hadith
batil and is due mainly to error and recklessness in reporting. For example, in certain cases it is noted
that the chain of narrators ended with a Companion or a Successor only but the transmitter instead
extended it directly to the Prophet. The result is all the same, and fabrication whether deliberate or
otherwise must in all cases be abandoned .
[84. Azami, Studies, pp. 68-70; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 292.]
Our present discussion is,
however, mainly concerned with deliberate fabrication in Hadith.
The initial forgery in Hadith is believed to have occurred in the context of personality cult literature
(fada'il al-ashkhas) which aimed at crediting (or discrediting) leading political figures with exaggerated
claims. The earliest forgery in this context, according to the Sunnis, was committed by the Shi'ah. This
is illustrated by the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm in which the Prophet is quoted to have said that "Ali is
my brother, executor and successor. Listen to him and obey him'. A similar statement attributed to the
Prophet is as follows: 'Whoever wishes to behold Adam for his knowledge, Noah for his piety, Ibrahim
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 66
for his gentleness, Moses for his commanding presence and Jesus for his devotion to worship - let him
behold 'Ali.
[85. For details see Siba'i, Al-Sunnah, pp. 76-80; Azami, Studies, pp.68-73.]
There are numerous fabricated ahadith condemning Mu'awiyah, including, for example, the one in
which the Prophet is quoted to have ordered the Muslims, 'When you see Mu'awiyah on my pulpit, kill
him.' The fanatic supporters of Mu'awiyah and the Umayyad dynasty are, on the other hand, known to
have fabricated Hadith such as 'The trusted ones are three: I, Gabriel and Mu'awiyah.
The Kharijites are on the whole considered to have avoided fabricating Hadith, which is due mainly to
their belief that the perpetrator of a grave sin is no longer a Muslim. Since they saw the fabrication of
Hadith in this light, they avoided indulgence in forgery as a matter of principle and a requirement of
their doctrine.
[87. Siba'i, p. 82.]
A group of heretic factions known as al-Zanadiqah (pl. of Zindiq), owing to their hatred of Islam,
fabricated Hadith which discredited Islam in the view of its followers. Included among such are:
'eggplants are cure for every illness'; and 'beholding a good-looking face is a form of 'ibadah'. It is
reported that just before his execution, one of the notorious fabricators of Hadith, 'Abd al-Karim b. Abu
al-'Awja', confessed that he had fabricated 4,000 ahadith in which halal was rendered haram and haram
was rendered halal. It has been further reported that the Zanadiqah fabricated a total of 14,000
ahadith,
[88. Siba'i, pp. 84-85; Azami, Studies, p. 68; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 290.]
a report which may or may not be credible. For a
statement of this nature tends to arouse suspicion as to its veracity: even in fabricated matters, it is not a
facile task to invent such a vast number of Hadith on the subject of halal and haram. Could it be that
exaggerated figures of this order were quote mainly for their subversive value?
Racial, tribal and linguistic fanaticism was yet another context in which Hadith were fabricated. Note
for example the following: 'When ever God was angry, He sent down revelation in Arabic, but when
contented, He chose Persian for this purpose.' The Arab fanatic too has matched this anathema by
claiming that 'Whenever God was angry he sent down revelation in Persian, but when contented He
chose to speak in Arabic.
[89. For these and more examples see Siba'i, Al-Sunnah, p. 85ff.]
These and other similar forgeries
relating to the virtues of superiority of certain tribes, cities, and periods of time over others have been
isolated by the ulema of Hadith and placed in the category of al-Mawdu'at.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~ Kamali 67
[86. Siba'i, p. 81.]
[90. Note e.g. Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti's (d. 911
A.H.) Al-La'ali al-Masnu'ah fi al-Ahadith al-Mawdu'ah; Shaykh 'Ali al-Qari al-Hanafi (d. 1014), Al-Mawdu'at al-Kabir, and Yahya b. 'Ali al-Shawkani (d. 1250),
Al-Fawa'id al-Majmu'ah fi'l-Ahadith al-Mawdu'ah.]
Known among the classes of forgers are also professional story-teller and preachers (al-qussas wa'lwa'izun),
whose
urge for popularity through arousing an emotional response in their audience led them
to
indulge in forgery. They made up stories and attributed them to the Prophet. It is reported that once a
story-teller
cited a Hadith to an audience in the mosque on the authority of Ahmad b. Hanbal
and
Yahya
b.
Ma'in which runs as follows: 'Whoever says 'there is no God but Allah', Allah will reward him, for
each
word uttered, with a bird in Paradise, with a beak of gold and feathers of pearls.' At the end of his
sermon,
the speaker was confronted by Ahmad b. Hanbal
and
Yahya
b
Ma'in who were present on the
occasion
and told the speaker that they had never related any Hadith
of
this kind.
Azami, Studies, p. 69; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 291.]
[91. Siba'i, Al-Sunnah, pp. 86-87;
Juristic and theological differences constitute another theme of forgery in Hadith. This is illustrated by
the following statement attributed to the Prophet: 'Whoever raises his hands during the performance of
salah, his salah is null and void.' In yet another statement, we read: 'Whoever says that the Qur'an is the
created speech of God becomes an infidel [...] and his wife stands divorced from him as of that
moment.'
Another category of fabricated Hadith is associated with the religious zeal of individuals whose
devotion to Islam led them to the careless ascription of Hadith to the Prophet. This is illustrated by the
forgeries committed by one Nuh b. Abu Maryam on the virtues of the various suras of the Qur'an. He is
said to have later regretted what he did and explained that he fabricated such Hadith because he saw
people who were turning away from the Qur'an and occupying themselves with the fiqh of Abu Hanifah
and the battle stories of Muhammad b. Ishaq. Numerous other names occur in the relevant literature,
including those of Ghulam Khalil and Ibn Abi 'Ayyash of Baghdad, who were both known as pious
individuals, but who invented Hadith on the virtues of certain words of praise (adhkar wa-awrad) and
other devotional matters.
[92. Siba'i, Al-Sunnah, pp. 86-87; Azami, Studies, p. 69; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 291.]
Without wishing to go into details, other themes on which Hadith forgery has taken place included the
urge on the part of courtiers who distorted an existing Hadith so as to please and flatter their overlords.
Similarly, the desire to establish the permissibility or virtue of certain varieties of food, beverages,
clothes and customary practices led individuals to introduce exaggerations and arbitrary changes in the
Hadith.
[93. See for details Siba'i, Al-Sunnah, p. 88; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 291.]
Classification and Value: II
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 68
once again classified into two categories: continuous (muttasil) and discontinued (ghayr muttasil). A
continuous Hadith is one which has a complete chain of transmission from the last narrator all the way
back to the prophet. A discontinued Hadith, also known as Mursal, is a Hadith whose chain of
transmitters is broken and incomplete. The majority of ulema have divided the continuous Hadith into
the two main varieties of Mutawatir and Ahad. To this the Hanafis have added an intermediate
category, namely the 'well-known', or Mashhur.
I. The Continuous Hadith
1. The Mutawatir
Literally, Mutawatir means 'continuously recurrent'. In the present context, it means a report by an
indefinite number of people related in such a way as to preclude the possibility of their agreement to
perpetuate a lie. Such a possibility is inconceivable owing to their large number, diversity of residence,
and reliability.
[94 Shawkani, Irshad, p. 46; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 84; Mahmassani, Falsafah (Ziadeh's trans.), p. 74.]
A report would not be
called Mutawatir if its contents were believed on other grounds, such as the rationality of its content, or
that it is deemed to be a matter of axiomatic knowledge.
[95 Khudari, Usul, p. 214; Aghnides, Muhammedan Theories, p. 40.]
A
report is classified as Mutawatir only when it fulfills the following conditions:
a. The number of reporters in every period or generation must be large enough to preclude their
collusion in propagating falsehood. Should the number of reporters in any period fall short of a
reliable multitude, their report does not establish positive knowledge and is therefore not
Mutawatir.
[96. Shawkani, Irshad, p. 47; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 294]
Some ulema have attempted to specify a minimum,
varying from as low as four to as many as twenty, forty and seventy up into the hundreds. All of
these figures are based on analogies: the requirement of four is based on the similar number of
witnesses which constitute legal proof; twenty is analogous to the Qur'anic ayah in sura alAnfal
(8:65) which reads: 'If there are twenty steadfast men among you, they will overcome two
hundred
[fighters].' The next number, that is seventy, represents an analogy to another
Qur'anic
passage where we read that 'Moses chose seventy men among his people for an
appointment
with Us' (al-A'raf, 7:155). Some have drawn an analogy from the number of
participants
in the battle of Badr. However, al-Ghazali is representative of the majority opinion
when
he observes that all of these analogies are arbitrary and have no bearing on the point.
For
certainty is not necessarily a question of numbers; it is corroborative evidence, the
knowledge
and trustworthiness of reporters, that must be credited even in cases where the
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 69
actual number of reporters is not very large.
[97. Ghazali, Mustasfa, I, 88; Shawkani, Irshad, p. 47; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 295.]
Thus when a reasonable number of persons report something which is supported by other
evidence, their report may amount to positive knowledge.
[98. Ghazali (Mustasfa), I, 87-88) illustrates this as follows:
supposing that five or six persons report the death of another, this does not amount to certainty, but when this is confirmed by seeing the father of the
deceased coming out of the house while obviously grief-stricken and exhibiting signs of disturbance that are unusual for a man of his stature, then the
two combined amount to positive knowledge. ]
b. The reporters must base their report on sense perception. If, therefore, a large number of
people report that the universe is created, their report would not be Mutawatir. The report must
also be based on certain knowledge, not mere speculation. If, for example, the people of
Islamabad inform us of a person they thought was Zayd, or a bird they thought was a pigeon,
neither would amount to certainty.
[99. Ghazali, Mustasfa, I, 86; Khudari, Usul, p. 214.]
c. Some ulema have advanced the view that the reporters must be upright persons ('udul), which
means that they must neither be infidels nor profligates (kuffar wa-fussaq). The correct view,
however, is that neither of these conditions are necessary. What is essential in Mutawatir is the
attainment of certainty, and this can be obtained through the reports of non-Muslims,
profligates and even children who have reached the age of discernment, that is, between seven
and fifteen. The position is, of course, entirely different with regard to solitary Hadith, which
will be discussed later.
[100. Shawkani, Irshad, p.48; Hitu, Wajiz, p.295.]
d. That the reporters are not biased in their cause and are not associated with one another
through a political or sectarian movement. And finally, all of these conditions must be met from
the origin of the report to the very end.
[101. Ghazali, Mustasfa, I, 86; Shawkani, Irshad, p.48.]
What is the value (hukm) of the Mutawatir? According to the majority of ulema, the authority of a
Mutawatir Hadith is equivalent to that of the Qur'an. Universal continuous testimony (tawatur)
engenders certainty (yaqin) and the knowledge that it creates is equivalent to knowledge that is acquired
through sense-perception. Most people, it is said, know their forefathers by means of Mutawatir reports
just as they know their children through sense-perception. Similarly, no one is likely to deny that
Baghdad was the seat of the caliphate for centuries, despite their lack of direct knowledge to that effect.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 70
When the reports of a large number of the transmitters of Hadith concur in their purport but differ in
wording or in form, only their common meaning is considered Mutawatir. This is called Mutawatir bi'lma'na,
or
conceptual Mutawatir.
Examples
of this kind of Mutawatir
are
numerous in the Hadith. Thus
the
verbal and actual Sunnah
which
explain the manner of performing the obligatory prayers, the rituals
of
hajj,
fasting,
the quantities of zakah,
rules
relating to retaliation (qiyas)
and
the implementation of
hudud,
etc.,
all constitute conceptual Mutawatir.
For
a large number of the Companions witnessed the
acts
and sayings of the Prophet on these matters, and their reports have been transmitted by multitudes
of
people throughout the ages.
[102. Isnawi, Nihayah, II, 185; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 84; Khallaf, 'Ilm, p. 41.]
The other variety of
Mutawatir, which is of rare occurrence compared to the conceptual Mutawatir, is called Mutawatir bi'llafz,
or
verbal Mutawatir.
In
this type of Mutawatir,
all
the reports must be identical on the exact
wording
of the Hadith
as
they were uttered by the Prophet himself. For example the Hadith which
reads:
'Whoever lies about me deliberately must prepare himself for a place in Hell-fire.'
Sunan (Hasan's trans.), III, 1036, Hadith no. 3643.]
The exact number of the verbal mutawatir is a subject of disagreement, but it is suggested that it does
not exceed ten ahadith.
[104. Badran, Usul, p. 78.]
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 71
. The Mashhur (Well-Known) Hadith
The Mashhur is defined as a Hadith which is originally reported by one, two or more Companions from
the Prophet or from another Companion but has later become well-known and transmitted by an
indefinite number of people. It is necessary that the diffusion of the report should have taken place
during the first or the second generation following the demise of the Prophet, not later. This would
mean that the Hadith became widely known during the period of the Companions or the Successors. For
it is argued that after this period, all the Hadith became well-known, in which case there will be no
grounds for distinguishing the Mashhur from the general body of Hadith.
[105. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 84; Aghnides,
Muhammadan Theories, p. 44. Shawkani's (Irshad, p. 49) definition of Mashhur, however, includes ahadith which became well-known as late as the second or
even the third century Hijrah.]
For Abu Hanifah and his disciples, the Mashhur Hadith imparts positive knowledge, albeit of a lesser
degree of certainty than Mutawatir. But the majority of non-Hanafi jurists consider Mashhur to be
included in the category of solitary Hadith, and that it engenders speculative knowledge only.
According to the Hanafis, acting upon the Mashhur is obligatory but its denial does not amount to
disbelief.
[106. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 84; Badran, Usul, p. 85.]
The difference between the Mutawatir and Mashhur lies
mainly in the fact that every link in the chain of transmitters of the Mutawatir consists of a plurality of
reporters, whereas the first link in the case of Mashhur consists of one or two Companions only. As for
the remaining links in the chain of transmitters, there is no difference between the Mutawatir and
Mashhur. Examples of the Mashhur Hadith are those which are reported from the Prophet by a
prominent companion and then transmitted by a large number of narrators whose agreement upon a lie
is inconceivable.
[107. Khallaf, 'Ilm, p. 41.]
The Mashhur, according to the Hanafis, may qualify the 'general' of
the Qur'an. Two such ahadith which have so qualified the Qur'an are as follows: 'The killer shall not
inherit',
is a Mashhur Hadith which qualifies the general provisions of the Qur'an on inheritance in sura al-Nisa'
(4:11). Similarly the Mashhur Hadith which provides: 'No woman shall be married simultaneously with
her paternal or maternal aunt . . .'
has qualified the general provisions of the Qur'an on marriage where the text spells out the prohibited
degrees of marriage and then declares 'it is lawful for you to marry outside these prohibitions' (al-Nisa',
4:24).
[108. Darimi, Sunan, Kitab al-fara'id, II, 384; Ibn Majah, Sunan, II, 913, Hadith no. 2735; Muslim, Sahih, p. 212; Hadith no. 817; Badran, Usul, p. 85.]
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 72
The list of prohibitions provided in this ayah does not include simultaneous marriage with the maternal
or paternal aunt of one's wife; this is supplied by the Hadith.
3. The Ahad (Solitary Hadith)
The Ahad, or solitary Hadith (also known as Khabar al-Wahid), is a Hadith which is reported by a
single person or by odd individuals from the Prophet. Imam Shafi'i refers to it as Khabar al-Khassah,
which applies to every report narrated by one, two or more persons from the Prophet but which fails to
fulfill the requirements of either the Mutawatir or the Mashhur.
Mahmassani, Falsafah, p.74.]
[109. Shafi'i, Risalah, p.159ff; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p.84;
It is a Hadith which does not impart positive knowledge on its own unless it is
supported by extraneous or circumstantial evidence. This is the view of the majority, but according to
Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal and others, Ahad can engender positive knowledge.
[110. Shawkani, Irshad, pp. 48-49.]
Some ulema have rejected it on the basis of an analogy they have drawn with a provision of the law of
evidence, namely that the testimony of one witness falls short of legal proof. Those who
unquestioningly accept the authority of Ahad, such as the Zahiri school, maintain that when the Prophet
wanted to deliver a ruling in regard to a particular matter he did not invite all the citizens of Madinah to
attend. The majority of jurists, however, agree that Ahad may establish a rule of law provided that it is
related by a reliable narrator and the contents of the report are not repugnant to reason.
Mahmassani, Falsafah, p. 74.]
Many ulema have held that Ahad engenders speculative knowledge acting upon
which is preferable only. In the event where other supportive evidence can be found in its favour or
when there is nothing to oppose its contents, then acting upon Ahad is obligatory.
Zahrah, Usul, p. 85.]
But Ahad may not, according to the majority of ulema, be relied upon as the basis of
belief (aqidah). For matters of belief must be founded in certainty even if a conjecture (zann) may at
time seem preferable.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~ Kamali 73
[111. Amidi, Ihkam, I, 161;
[112. Shawkani, Irshad, p. 47; Abu
[113. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 85; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 305. As for the Ahad pertaining to subsidiary matters which are not essential to
dogma such as the torture of the grave ('adhab al-qabr), intercession (shafa'ah), etc., these must be accepted and believed. Anyone who denies them is a sinner
(fasiq) but not a kafir, as he denies something which is not decisively proven.]
As the Qur'an tells us, 'verily conjecture avails
nothing against the truth' (al-Najm, 53:28) Ahad, being conjectural, does not establish the truth.
According to the majority of the ulema of the four Sunni schools, acting upon Ahad is obligatory even
if Ahad fails to engender positive knowledge. Thus in practical legal matters, a preferable zann is
sufficient as a basis of obligation. It is only in matters of belief where conjecture 'avails nothing against
the truth'.
[114. Badran, Usul, p. 91; Khudari, Usul, p. 227.]
Having said this, however, Ahad may only form the basis of
obligation if it fulfills the following requirements:
a. That the transmitter is a competent person, which means that reports communicated by a child
or a lunatic of whatever age are unacceptable. Women, blind persons and slaves are considered
competent for purposes of reporting the Hadith; it is only in regard to being a witness that they suffer some disability.
b. The transmitter of Ahad must be a Muslim, which means that a report by a non-Muslim is
unacceptable. However, the reporter must fulfill this condition only at the time of reporting the
Hadith, but not necessarily at the time when he received the information. There are instances of
Hadith, for example, reported by Companions pertaining to the acts of the Prophet which they
observed before they had professed Islam.'
[116. Khudari, Usul, p. 216.]
c. The transmitter must be an upright person ('adl) at the time of reporting the Hadith. The
minimum requirement of this condition is that the person has not committed a major sin and
does not persist in committing minor ones; nor is he known for persistence in degrading
profanities such as eating in the-public thoroughfare, associating with persons of ill repute and
indulgence in humiliating jokes. Although the ulema are unanimous on the requirement of
uprightness of character ('adalah), they are not in agreement as to what it precisely means.
According to the Hanafis, a Muslim who is not a sinner (fasiq) is presumed to be upright. The
Shafi'is are more specific on the avoidance of sins, both major and minor, as well as indulgence
in profane mubahat. To the Maliki jurist, Ibn al-Hajib, 'adalah refers to piety, observance of
religious duties and propriety of conduct. There is also some disagreement among the ulema on
the definition of, and distinction between, major and minor sins.
Shawkani, Irshad, pp. 48-52.; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 307ff; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 86; Mahmassani, Falsafah, p. 74.]
[117. For details on the conditions of Ahad see
The 'adalah of a transmitter must be established by positive proof. Hence when the 'adalah of a
transmitter is unknown, his report is unacceptable. Similarly, a report by an anonymous person
(riwayah al-majhul) such as when the chain of transmitters reads in part that 'a man' reported
such-and-such is unacceptable. The 'adalah of a narrator may be established by various means
including tazkiyah, that is when at least one upright person confirms it, or when the transmitter
is known to have been admitted as a witness in court, or when a faqih or a learned person is
known to have relied or acted on his report. But there must be positive evidence that the faqih
did not do so due to additional factors such as a desire on his part merely to be cautious.
Khudari, Usul, p.217.]
The qualification of 'adalah is established for all the Companions regardless of their juristic or
political views. This conclusion is based on the Qur'an which declares in a reference to the
Companions that 'God is well pleased with them, as they are with Him' (al-Tawbah, 9:100). A
person's reputation for being upright and trustworthy also serves as a proof of his reliability.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 74
According to some ulema of Hadith, such a reputation is even more credible than confirmation
by one or two individuals.
[119. Shawkani, Irshad, p.67; Badran, Usul, p. 92.]
With regard to certain figures such
as Imam Malik, Sufyan al-Thawri, Sufyan b. 'Uyaynah, al-Layth b. Sa'd, etc., their reputation
for 'adalah is proof of reliability above the technicalities of tazkiyah.
[120. Khudari, Usul, p.217.]
d. The narrator of Ahad must possess a retentive memory so that his report may be trusted. If he is
known for committing frequent errors and inconsistencies, his report is unacceptable. The
faculty of retention, or dabt, is the ability of a person to listen to an utterance, to comprehend its
meaning as it was originally intended and then to retain it and take all necessary precautions to
safeguard its accuracy. In cases of doubt in the retentiveness of a transmitter, if his report can
be confirmed by the action of his predecessors, it may be accepted. But in the absence of such
verification, reports by persons who are totally obscure and whose retentiveness cannot be
established are unacceptable.
[121. Shawkani, Irshad, p. 52; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 86; Badran, Usul, p. 93; Khudari, Usul, p. 218.]
e. That the narrator is not implicated in any form of distortion (tadlis) either in the textual contents
(matn) of a Hadith or in its chain of transmitters (isnad). Distortion in the text is to add to the
saying of the Prophet elements which did not exist, or to detract from its original content so as
to distort its purport and mislead the listener. Tadlis in the isnad is to tamper with the names
and identity of narrators, which is, essentially, not very different from outright forgery.
Shawkani, Irshad, p. 55.]
One form of tadlis is to omit a link in the chain of narrators. The motive for
such omission is immaterial. Sometimes it is observed, for example, that a single weak link in
an otherwise reliable chain of transmitters is omitted with a view to showing the isnad reliable
in every part. Whatever the motive may be, a tadlis of this kind is, for all intents and purposes,
equivalent to forgery. However, if the narrator is a prominent scholar of irreproachable
reputation, his report is normally accepted notwithstanding a minor omission in the chain of
isnad.
[123. Khudari, Usul, pp. 218-219.]
f. The transmitter of Ahad must, in addition, have met with and heard the Hadith directly from his
immediate source. The contents of the Hadith must not be outlandish (shadhdh) in the sense of
being contrary to the established norms of the Qur'an and other principles of Shari'ah. In
addition, the report must be free of subtle errors such as rendering ab as ibn ('father' as 'son') or
other such words that are similar in appearance but differ in meaning.
[124. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 85.]
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 75
The three Imams, Abu Hanifah, al-Shafi'i and Ahmad b. Hanbal rely on Ahad when it fulfills the
foregoing conditions. Abu Hanifah, however, has laid down certain additional conditions, one of which
is that the narrator's action must not contradict his narration. It is on this ground, for example, that Abu
Hanifah does not rely on the following Hadith, narrated by Abu Hurayrah: 'When a dog licks a dish,
wash it seven times, one of which must be with clean sand."
[125. Muslim, Sahih Muslim, p. 41, Hadith no. 119.]
Abu Hanifah has explained this by saying that Abu Hurayrah did not act upon it himself. Since the
requirement of washing is normally three times, the report is considered weak, including its attribution
to Abu Hurayrah.
[126. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 85.]
The majority, on the other hand, take the view that discrepancies
between the action and the report of a narrator may be due to forgetfulness or some other unknown
factor. Discrepancies of this kind do not, by themselves, provide conclusive evidence to render the
report unreliable.
The Hanafis further require that the subject matter of Ahad is not such that would necessitate the
knowledge of a vast number of people. If, for example, we are informed, by means of a solitary report,
of an act or saying of the Prophet which was supposed to be known by hundreds or thousands of people
and yet only one or two have reported it, such a Hadith would not be reliable. The Hadith, for example,
that 'Anyone who touches his sexual organ must take a fresh ablution',
[127. Tabrizi, Mishkat, I, 104, Hadith no. 319.]
is not accepted by the Hanafis. The Hanafis have explained: had this Hadith been authentic, it would
have become an established practice among all Muslims, which is not the case. The Hadith is therefore
not reliable. The majority of ulema, however, do not insist on this requirement on the analysis that
people who witness or observe an incident do not necessarily report it. We know, for example, that
countless numbers of people saw the prophet performing the pilgrimage of hajj, and yet not many
reported their observations.
[128. Hitu, Wajiz, p. 302; Badran, Usul, p. 95.]
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 76
And finally, the Hanafis maintain that when the narrator of Ahad is not a faqih, his report is accepted
only if it agrees with qiyas, otherwise qiyas would be given priority over Ahad. However, if the narrator
is known to be a faqih, then his report would be preferred over qiyas. It is on this ground, for example,
that the Hanafis have rejected the Hadith of musarrat, that is the animal whose milk is retained in its
udders so as to impress the buyer. The Hadith is as follows: 'Do not retain milk in the udders of a shecamel
or goat so as to exaggerate its yield. Anyone who buys a musarrat has the choice, for three days
after
having milked it, either to keep it, or to return it with a quantity [i.e. a sa'] of dates.
Muslim, p. 248, Hadith no. 928.]
The Hanafis regard this Hadith to be contrary to qiyas, that is, to analogy with the rule of equality
between indemnity and loss. Abu Hanifah has held the view that the sa' of dates may not be equal in
value to the amount of milk the buyer has consumed. Hence if the buyer wishes to return the beast, he
must return it with the cost of milk which was in its udders at the time of purchase, not with a fixed
quantity of dates. The majority of ulema, including Malik, Shafi'i, Ibn Hanbal and the disciples of Abu
Hanifah, (Abu Yusuf and Zufar), have on the other hand accepted this Hadith and have given it priority
over qiyas. According to the majority view, the compensation may consist of a sa' of dates or of its
monetary value. Dates were specified in the Hadith as it used to be the staple food in those days, which
may not be the case any more.
[130. Hitu, Wajiz, p. 304; Badran, Usul, pp. 97-98 ]
Imam Malik would rely on a solitary Hadith on condition that it does not disagree with the practice of
the Madinese (amal ahl al-Madinah). For he considers the standard practice of the people of Madinah to
be more representative of the conduct of the Prophet than the isolated report of one or two individuals.
In his opinion, the Madinese practice represents the narration of thousands upon thousands of people
from, ultimately, the Prophet. It is, in other words, equivalent to a Mashhur, or even Mutawatir. When
an Ahad report contradicts the practice of the Madinese, the latter is, according to the Maliki view,
given priority over the former. The Malikis have thus refused to follow the Hadith regarding the option
of cancellation (khiyar al-majlis) which provides that 'the parties to a sale are free to change their minds
so long as they have not left the meeting of the contract'.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 77
The reason being that this Hadith is contrary to the practice of the people of Madinah.
140; Muslim, Sahih Muslim, p. 251, Hadith no. 944; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 85.]
The Madinese practice on this point subscribed to the
view that a contract is complete when the parties express their agreement through a valid offer and
acceptance. The contract is binding as of that moment regardless as to whether the 'meeting of contract'
continues or not.
All the four Imams of jurisprudence have considered Ahad to be authoritative in principle, and none
reject it unless there is evidence to suggest a weakness in its attribution to the Prophet, or which may
contradict some other evidence that is more authoritative in their view.
The majority of ulema do not insist that the Ahad should consist of a verbatim transmission of what the
narrator heard in the first place, although this is the most authoritative form of transmission in any kind
of Hadith. They would instead accept the conceptual transmission of an Ahad, on condition, however,
that the narrator understands the language and purport of the Hadith in full. Only then would the
rendering of the Hadith in the narrator's own words, which conveys an equivalent meaning, be
acceptable. However if the narrator does not possess this degree of knowledge and is unable to transmit
the Hadith in its original form, all the four Sunni schools are in agreement that his own rendering of the
concept of the Hadith is unacceptable.
[132. Hitu, Wajiz, pp.317ff; Badran, Usul, pp. 93-94.]
Some ulema of the Hanafi and other schools have held that conceptual transmission is totally forbidden,
a view which is refuted by the majority, who say that the Companions often transmitted one and the
same Hadith in varying words, and no-one can deny this. One of the most prominent Companions, 'Abd
Allah b. Mas'ud, is noted for having reported many ahadith from the Prophet and made it known that
'the Prophet (S) said this, or something like this, or something very close to this'. No one has challenged
the validity of this manner of reporting; hence the permissibility of conceptual transmission is
confirmed by the practice of the Companions, and their consensus is quoted in its support. Having said
this, however, accuracy in the transmission of Hadith and retaining its original version is highly
recommended.
[133. Khudari, Usul, p. 229.]
This is, in fact, the purport of a Hadith from the Prophet which reads:
'May God bless with success one who heard me saying something, and who conveys it to others as he
heard it; and may the next transmitter be even more retentive than the one from whom he received it.'
[134. Tabrizi, Mishkat, I, 78, Hadith no. 230; Khudari, Usul, p. 229.]
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 78
Sometimes the transmitter reports a Hadith but omits a part of it. The question then arises as to whether
this form of transmission is permissible at all. In principle, the narrator of Hadith, of any type of Hadith,
must not omit any part which is integral to its meaning. For instance: when the omitted part consists of
a condition, or an exception to the main theme of the Hadith, or which makes a reference to the scope of
its application. However, the narrator may omit a part of the Hadith which does not affect the meaning
of the remaining part. For in this case, the Hadith at issue will be regarded, for all intents and purposes,
as two ahadith. It has been a familiar practice among the ulema to omit a part of the Hadith which does
not have a bearing on its main theme. But if the omission is such that it would bring the quoted part into
conflict with its full version, then the issue will be determined, not under the foregoing, but under the
rules of conflict and preference (al-ta'arud wa'l-tarjih). In any case, the preferred practice is not to omit
any part of the Hadith, as the omitted part may well contain valuable information on some point and
serve a purpose that may not have occurred to the narrator himself.
[135. Khudari, Usul, p.227; Hitu, Wajiz, pp.319-320.]
In certain ahadith which are reported by a number of transmitters, there is sometimes an addition to the
text of a Hadith by one transmitter which is absent in the reports of the same Hadith by others. The first
point to ascertain in a discrepancy of this nature is to find out whether the Hadith in question was
originally uttered in one and the same meeting/occasion or on different occasions. If the latter is the
case, then there is no conflict and both versions may be accepted as they are. But if it is established that
the different versions all originated in one and the same meeting, then normally the version which is
transmitted by more narrators will prevail over that which is variantly transmitted by one, provided that
the former are not known for errors and oversight in reporting. Consequently, the additional part of the
Hadith which is reported by a single transmitter will be isolated and rejected for the simple reason that
error by one person is more likely in this case than by a multitude. But if the single narrator who has
reported the addition is an eminently reliable person and the rest are known for careless reporting, then
his version will be preferred, although some ulema of Hadith do not agree with this. Additions and
discrepancies that might be observed in the isnad, such as when a group of narrators report a Hadith as a
Mursal whereas one person has reported it as a Musnad (that is, a Muttasil, or continous) - will be
determined by the same method which applies to discrepancy in the text. However, sometimes the
preference of one over the other version may be determined on different grounds. To give an example,
according to one Hadith, 'Whoever buys foodstuff is not to sell the same before it is delivered to him.'
However, according to another report the Prophet has issued a more general instruction according to
which the Muslims are forbidden from selling that which they do not have in their possession.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 79
The Hanafis have preferred the second version, as it is conveyed in broader terms which comprise
foodstuffs as well as other commodities.
Khudari, Usul, p. 233; Hitu, Wajiz, pp. 318-319.]
[136. Tabrizi, Mishkat, II, 863, Hadith no. 2844; Ibn Majah, Sunan, II, 737, Hadith no 2187;
II. The Discontinued Hadith (al-Hadith Ghayr al-Muttasil)
This is a Hadith whose chain of transmitters does not extend all the way back to the Prophet. It occurs
in three varieties: Mursal, Mu'dal and Munqati'. The Mursal, which is the main variety of discontinued
Hadith, is sometimes also referred to as Munqati'. The Mursal is defined as a Hadith which a Successor
(tabi'i) has directly attributed to the Prophet without mentioning the last link, namely the Companion
who might have narrated it from the Prophet. This is the majority definition. The Hanafis, however,
have defined Mursal as a Hadith that a reliable narrator has attributed to the Prophet while omitting a
part of its isnad. The missing link may be a Companion or even a Successor, according to the majority,
but it may be a narrator among the second generation of Successors according to the Hanafis. Since the
identity of the missing link is not known, it is possible that he might have been an upright person, or
not. Because of these and other similar doubts in its transmission, in principle, the ulema of Hadith do
not accept the Mursal.
[137. Hitu,Wajiz, p. 316; Khudari, Usul, p.229; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p.86.]
According to al-Shawkani, 'The
majority of ulema of usul have defined Mursal as a Hadith transmitted by one who has not met with the
Prophet, (S) and yet quotes the Prophet, (S) directly. The transmitter may be a Successor or a follower
(tabi' al-tabi'i) or anyone after that.' Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal does not rely on it, nor does Imam Shafi'i
unless it is reported by a famous Successor who is known to have met with a number of Companions.
Thus a Mursal transmitted by prominent Successors such as Said b. al-Musayyib, al-Zuhri, 'Alqamah,
Masruq, al-Sha'bi, Hasan al-Basri, Qatadah, etc., is accepted, provided that it fulfills the following
conditions.
[138. Shawkani, Irshad, p. 64; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 87.]
Firstly, that the Mursal is supported by another and more reliable Hadith with a continuous chain of
transmitters, in which case it is the latter that would represent the stronger evidence.
Secondly, that one Mursal is supported by another Mursal, and the latter is accepted and relied upon by
the ulema.
Thirdly, that the Mursal is in harmony with the precedent of the Companions, in which case it is
elevated and attributed to the Prophet. The process here is called raf', and the Hadith is called Marfu'.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 80
There is no dispute over the occurrence of extensive forgery in the Hadith literature. The ulema of
Hadith are unanimous on this, and some have gone so far as to affirm that in no other branch of Islamic
sciences has there been so much forgery as in the Hadith. The very existence of a bulk of literature and
works by prominent ulema bearing the title al-Mawdu'at, or 'fabricated Hadith', bears witness to
extensive forgery in this area.
[82. Cf. Shabir, Authority of Hadith, p. 50.]
There is some disagreement over determining the historical origins of forgery in Hadith. While some
observers have given the caliphate of 'Uthman as a starting point, others have dated it a little later, at
around the year 40 Hijrah, when political differences between the fourth caliph, 'Ali, and Mu'awiyah led
to military confrontation and the division of the Muslims into various factions. According to a third
view, forgery in Hadith started even earlier, that is, during the caliphate of Abu Bakr when he waged
the War of Apostasy (riddah) against the refusers of zakah. But the year 40 is considered the more
likely starting point for the development of serious and persistent differences in the community, which
is marked by the emergence of the Kharijites and the Shi'ah. Muslims were thenceforth divided, and
hostility between them acquired a religious dimension when they began to use the Qur'an and Sunnah in
support of their claims. When the misguided elements among them failed to find any authority in the
sources for their views, they either imposed a distorted interpretation on the source materials, or
embarked on outright fabrication.
[83. Siba'i, Al-Sunnah, p. 75; Shabir, Authority of Hadith, p. 51.]
The attribution of false statements to the Prophet may be divided into two types: (1) deliberate forgery,
which is usually referred to as hadith mawdu'; (2) unintentional fabrication, which is known as hadith
batil and is due mainly to error and recklessness in reporting. For example, in certain cases it is noted
that the chain of narrators ended with a Companion or a Successor only but the transmitter instead
extended it directly to the Prophet. The result is all the same, and fabrication whether deliberate or
otherwise must in all cases be abandoned .
[84. Azami, Studies, pp. 68-70; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 292.]
Our present discussion is,
however, mainly concerned with deliberate fabrication in Hadith.
The initial forgery in Hadith is believed to have occurred in the context of personality cult literature
(fada'il al-ashkhas) which aimed at crediting (or discrediting) leading political figures with exaggerated
claims. The earliest forgery in this context, according to the Sunnis, was committed by the Shi'ah. This
is illustrated by the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm in which the Prophet is quoted to have said that "Ali is
my brother, executor and successor. Listen to him and obey him'. A similar statement attributed to the
Prophet is as follows: 'Whoever wishes to behold Adam for his knowledge, Noah for his piety, Ibrahim
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 66
for his gentleness, Moses for his commanding presence and Jesus for his devotion to worship - let him
behold 'Ali.
[85. For details see Siba'i, Al-Sunnah, pp. 76-80; Azami, Studies, pp.68-73.]
There are numerous fabricated ahadith condemning Mu'awiyah, including, for example, the one in
which the Prophet is quoted to have ordered the Muslims, 'When you see Mu'awiyah on my pulpit, kill
him.' The fanatic supporters of Mu'awiyah and the Umayyad dynasty are, on the other hand, known to
have fabricated Hadith such as 'The trusted ones are three: I, Gabriel and Mu'awiyah.
The Kharijites are on the whole considered to have avoided fabricating Hadith, which is due mainly to
their belief that the perpetrator of a grave sin is no longer a Muslim. Since they saw the fabrication of
Hadith in this light, they avoided indulgence in forgery as a matter of principle and a requirement of
their doctrine.
[87. Siba'i, p. 82.]
A group of heretic factions known as al-Zanadiqah (pl. of Zindiq), owing to their hatred of Islam,
fabricated Hadith which discredited Islam in the view of its followers. Included among such are:
'eggplants are cure for every illness'; and 'beholding a good-looking face is a form of 'ibadah'. It is
reported that just before his execution, one of the notorious fabricators of Hadith, 'Abd al-Karim b. Abu
al-'Awja', confessed that he had fabricated 4,000 ahadith in which halal was rendered haram and haram
was rendered halal. It has been further reported that the Zanadiqah fabricated a total of 14,000
ahadith,
[88. Siba'i, pp. 84-85; Azami, Studies, p. 68; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 290.]
a report which may or may not be credible. For a
statement of this nature tends to arouse suspicion as to its veracity: even in fabricated matters, it is not a
facile task to invent such a vast number of Hadith on the subject of halal and haram. Could it be that
exaggerated figures of this order were quote mainly for their subversive value?
Racial, tribal and linguistic fanaticism was yet another context in which Hadith were fabricated. Note
for example the following: 'When ever God was angry, He sent down revelation in Arabic, but when
contented, He chose Persian for this purpose.' The Arab fanatic too has matched this anathema by
claiming that 'Whenever God was angry he sent down revelation in Persian, but when contented He
chose to speak in Arabic.
[89. For these and more examples see Siba'i, Al-Sunnah, p. 85ff.]
These and other similar forgeries
relating to the virtues of superiority of certain tribes, cities, and periods of time over others have been
isolated by the ulema of Hadith and placed in the category of al-Mawdu'at.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~ Kamali 67
[86. Siba'i, p. 81.]
[90. Note e.g. Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti's (d. 911
A.H.) Al-La'ali al-Masnu'ah fi al-Ahadith al-Mawdu'ah; Shaykh 'Ali al-Qari al-Hanafi (d. 1014), Al-Mawdu'at al-Kabir, and Yahya b. 'Ali al-Shawkani (d. 1250),
Al-Fawa'id al-Majmu'ah fi'l-Ahadith al-Mawdu'ah.]
Known among the classes of forgers are also professional story-teller and preachers (al-qussas wa'lwa'izun),
whose
urge for popularity through arousing an emotional response in their audience led them
to
indulge in forgery. They made up stories and attributed them to the Prophet. It is reported that once a
story-teller
cited a Hadith to an audience in the mosque on the authority of Ahmad b. Hanbal
and
Yahya
b.
Ma'in which runs as follows: 'Whoever says 'there is no God but Allah', Allah will reward him, for
each
word uttered, with a bird in Paradise, with a beak of gold and feathers of pearls.' At the end of his
sermon,
the speaker was confronted by Ahmad b. Hanbal
and
Yahya
b
Ma'in who were present on the
occasion
and told the speaker that they had never related any Hadith
of
this kind.
Azami, Studies, p. 69; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 291.]
[91. Siba'i, Al-Sunnah, pp. 86-87;
Juristic and theological differences constitute another theme of forgery in Hadith. This is illustrated by
the following statement attributed to the Prophet: 'Whoever raises his hands during the performance of
salah, his salah is null and void.' In yet another statement, we read: 'Whoever says that the Qur'an is the
created speech of God becomes an infidel [...] and his wife stands divorced from him as of that
moment.'
Another category of fabricated Hadith is associated with the religious zeal of individuals whose
devotion to Islam led them to the careless ascription of Hadith to the Prophet. This is illustrated by the
forgeries committed by one Nuh b. Abu Maryam on the virtues of the various suras of the Qur'an. He is
said to have later regretted what he did and explained that he fabricated such Hadith because he saw
people who were turning away from the Qur'an and occupying themselves with the fiqh of Abu Hanifah
and the battle stories of Muhammad b. Ishaq. Numerous other names occur in the relevant literature,
including those of Ghulam Khalil and Ibn Abi 'Ayyash of Baghdad, who were both known as pious
individuals, but who invented Hadith on the virtues of certain words of praise (adhkar wa-awrad) and
other devotional matters.
[92. Siba'i, Al-Sunnah, pp. 86-87; Azami, Studies, p. 69; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 291.]
Without wishing to go into details, other themes on which Hadith forgery has taken place included the
urge on the part of courtiers who distorted an existing Hadith so as to please and flatter their overlords.
Similarly, the desire to establish the permissibility or virtue of certain varieties of food, beverages,
clothes and customary practices led individuals to introduce exaggerations and arbitrary changes in the
Hadith.
[93. See for details Siba'i, Al-Sunnah, p. 88; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 291.]
Classification and Value: II
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 68
once again classified into two categories: continuous (muttasil) and discontinued (ghayr muttasil). A
continuous Hadith is one which has a complete chain of transmission from the last narrator all the way
back to the prophet. A discontinued Hadith, also known as Mursal, is a Hadith whose chain of
transmitters is broken and incomplete. The majority of ulema have divided the continuous Hadith into
the two main varieties of Mutawatir and Ahad. To this the Hanafis have added an intermediate
category, namely the 'well-known', or Mashhur.
I. The Continuous Hadith
1. The Mutawatir
Literally, Mutawatir means 'continuously recurrent'. In the present context, it means a report by an
indefinite number of people related in such a way as to preclude the possibility of their agreement to
perpetuate a lie. Such a possibility is inconceivable owing to their large number, diversity of residence,
and reliability.
[94 Shawkani, Irshad, p. 46; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 84; Mahmassani, Falsafah (Ziadeh's trans.), p. 74.]
A report would not be
called Mutawatir if its contents were believed on other grounds, such as the rationality of its content, or
that it is deemed to be a matter of axiomatic knowledge.
[95 Khudari, Usul, p. 214; Aghnides, Muhammedan Theories, p. 40.]
A
report is classified as Mutawatir only when it fulfills the following conditions:
a. The number of reporters in every period or generation must be large enough to preclude their
collusion in propagating falsehood. Should the number of reporters in any period fall short of a
reliable multitude, their report does not establish positive knowledge and is therefore not
Mutawatir.
[96. Shawkani, Irshad, p. 47; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 294]
Some ulema have attempted to specify a minimum,
varying from as low as four to as many as twenty, forty and seventy up into the hundreds. All of
these figures are based on analogies: the requirement of four is based on the similar number of
witnesses which constitute legal proof; twenty is analogous to the Qur'anic ayah in sura alAnfal
(8:65) which reads: 'If there are twenty steadfast men among you, they will overcome two
hundred
[fighters].' The next number, that is seventy, represents an analogy to another
Qur'anic
passage where we read that 'Moses chose seventy men among his people for an
appointment
with Us' (al-A'raf, 7:155). Some have drawn an analogy from the number of
participants
in the battle of Badr. However, al-Ghazali is representative of the majority opinion
when
he observes that all of these analogies are arbitrary and have no bearing on the point.
For
certainty is not necessarily a question of numbers; it is corroborative evidence, the
knowledge
and trustworthiness of reporters, that must be credited even in cases where the
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 69
actual number of reporters is not very large.
[97. Ghazali, Mustasfa, I, 88; Shawkani, Irshad, p. 47; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 295.]
Thus when a reasonable number of persons report something which is supported by other
evidence, their report may amount to positive knowledge.
[98. Ghazali (Mustasfa), I, 87-88) illustrates this as follows:
supposing that five or six persons report the death of another, this does not amount to certainty, but when this is confirmed by seeing the father of the
deceased coming out of the house while obviously grief-stricken and exhibiting signs of disturbance that are unusual for a man of his stature, then the
two combined amount to positive knowledge. ]
b. The reporters must base their report on sense perception. If, therefore, a large number of
people report that the universe is created, their report would not be Mutawatir. The report must
also be based on certain knowledge, not mere speculation. If, for example, the people of
Islamabad inform us of a person they thought was Zayd, or a bird they thought was a pigeon,
neither would amount to certainty.
[99. Ghazali, Mustasfa, I, 86; Khudari, Usul, p. 214.]
c. Some ulema have advanced the view that the reporters must be upright persons ('udul), which
means that they must neither be infidels nor profligates (kuffar wa-fussaq). The correct view,
however, is that neither of these conditions are necessary. What is essential in Mutawatir is the
attainment of certainty, and this can be obtained through the reports of non-Muslims,
profligates and even children who have reached the age of discernment, that is, between seven
and fifteen. The position is, of course, entirely different with regard to solitary Hadith, which
will be discussed later.
[100. Shawkani, Irshad, p.48; Hitu, Wajiz, p.295.]
d. That the reporters are not biased in their cause and are not associated with one another
through a political or sectarian movement. And finally, all of these conditions must be met from
the origin of the report to the very end.
[101. Ghazali, Mustasfa, I, 86; Shawkani, Irshad, p.48.]
What is the value (hukm) of the Mutawatir? According to the majority of ulema, the authority of a
Mutawatir Hadith is equivalent to that of the Qur'an. Universal continuous testimony (tawatur)
engenders certainty (yaqin) and the knowledge that it creates is equivalent to knowledge that is acquired
through sense-perception. Most people, it is said, know their forefathers by means of Mutawatir reports
just as they know their children through sense-perception. Similarly, no one is likely to deny that
Baghdad was the seat of the caliphate for centuries, despite their lack of direct knowledge to that effect.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 70
When the reports of a large number of the transmitters of Hadith concur in their purport but differ in
wording or in form, only their common meaning is considered Mutawatir. This is called Mutawatir bi'lma'na,
or
conceptual Mutawatir.
Examples
of this kind of Mutawatir
are
numerous in the Hadith. Thus
the
verbal and actual Sunnah
which
explain the manner of performing the obligatory prayers, the rituals
of
hajj,
fasting,
the quantities of zakah,
rules
relating to retaliation (qiyas)
and
the implementation of
hudud,
etc.,
all constitute conceptual Mutawatir.
For
a large number of the Companions witnessed the
acts
and sayings of the Prophet on these matters, and their reports have been transmitted by multitudes
of
people throughout the ages.
[102. Isnawi, Nihayah, II, 185; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 84; Khallaf, 'Ilm, p. 41.]
The other variety of
Mutawatir, which is of rare occurrence compared to the conceptual Mutawatir, is called Mutawatir bi'llafz,
or
verbal Mutawatir.
In
this type of Mutawatir,
all
the reports must be identical on the exact
wording
of the Hadith
as
they were uttered by the Prophet himself. For example the Hadith which
reads:
'Whoever lies about me deliberately must prepare himself for a place in Hell-fire.'
Sunan (Hasan's trans.), III, 1036, Hadith no. 3643.]
The exact number of the verbal mutawatir is a subject of disagreement, but it is suggested that it does
not exceed ten ahadith.
[104. Badran, Usul, p. 78.]
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 71
. The Mashhur (Well-Known) Hadith
The Mashhur is defined as a Hadith which is originally reported by one, two or more Companions from
the Prophet or from another Companion but has later become well-known and transmitted by an
indefinite number of people. It is necessary that the diffusion of the report should have taken place
during the first or the second generation following the demise of the Prophet, not later. This would
mean that the Hadith became widely known during the period of the Companions or the Successors. For
it is argued that after this period, all the Hadith became well-known, in which case there will be no
grounds for distinguishing the Mashhur from the general body of Hadith.
[105. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 84; Aghnides,
Muhammadan Theories, p. 44. Shawkani's (Irshad, p. 49) definition of Mashhur, however, includes ahadith which became well-known as late as the second or
even the third century Hijrah.]
For Abu Hanifah and his disciples, the Mashhur Hadith imparts positive knowledge, albeit of a lesser
degree of certainty than Mutawatir. But the majority of non-Hanafi jurists consider Mashhur to be
included in the category of solitary Hadith, and that it engenders speculative knowledge only.
According to the Hanafis, acting upon the Mashhur is obligatory but its denial does not amount to
disbelief.
[106. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 84; Badran, Usul, p. 85.]
The difference between the Mutawatir and Mashhur lies
mainly in the fact that every link in the chain of transmitters of the Mutawatir consists of a plurality of
reporters, whereas the first link in the case of Mashhur consists of one or two Companions only. As for
the remaining links in the chain of transmitters, there is no difference between the Mutawatir and
Mashhur. Examples of the Mashhur Hadith are those which are reported from the Prophet by a
prominent companion and then transmitted by a large number of narrators whose agreement upon a lie
is inconceivable.
[107. Khallaf, 'Ilm, p. 41.]
The Mashhur, according to the Hanafis, may qualify the 'general' of
the Qur'an. Two such ahadith which have so qualified the Qur'an are as follows: 'The killer shall not
inherit',
is a Mashhur Hadith which qualifies the general provisions of the Qur'an on inheritance in sura al-Nisa'
(4:11). Similarly the Mashhur Hadith which provides: 'No woman shall be married simultaneously with
her paternal or maternal aunt . . .'
has qualified the general provisions of the Qur'an on marriage where the text spells out the prohibited
degrees of marriage and then declares 'it is lawful for you to marry outside these prohibitions' (al-Nisa',
4:24).
[108. Darimi, Sunan, Kitab al-fara'id, II, 384; Ibn Majah, Sunan, II, 913, Hadith no. 2735; Muslim, Sahih, p. 212; Hadith no. 817; Badran, Usul, p. 85.]
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 72
The list of prohibitions provided in this ayah does not include simultaneous marriage with the maternal
or paternal aunt of one's wife; this is supplied by the Hadith.
3. The Ahad (Solitary Hadith)
The Ahad, or solitary Hadith (also known as Khabar al-Wahid), is a Hadith which is reported by a
single person or by odd individuals from the Prophet. Imam Shafi'i refers to it as Khabar al-Khassah,
which applies to every report narrated by one, two or more persons from the Prophet but which fails to
fulfill the requirements of either the Mutawatir or the Mashhur.
Mahmassani, Falsafah, p.74.]
[109. Shafi'i, Risalah, p.159ff; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p.84;
It is a Hadith which does not impart positive knowledge on its own unless it is
supported by extraneous or circumstantial evidence. This is the view of the majority, but according to
Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal and others, Ahad can engender positive knowledge.
[110. Shawkani, Irshad, pp. 48-49.]
Some ulema have rejected it on the basis of an analogy they have drawn with a provision of the law of
evidence, namely that the testimony of one witness falls short of legal proof. Those who
unquestioningly accept the authority of Ahad, such as the Zahiri school, maintain that when the Prophet
wanted to deliver a ruling in regard to a particular matter he did not invite all the citizens of Madinah to
attend. The majority of jurists, however, agree that Ahad may establish a rule of law provided that it is
related by a reliable narrator and the contents of the report are not repugnant to reason.
Mahmassani, Falsafah, p. 74.]
Many ulema have held that Ahad engenders speculative knowledge acting upon
which is preferable only. In the event where other supportive evidence can be found in its favour or
when there is nothing to oppose its contents, then acting upon Ahad is obligatory.
Zahrah, Usul, p. 85.]
But Ahad may not, according to the majority of ulema, be relied upon as the basis of
belief (aqidah). For matters of belief must be founded in certainty even if a conjecture (zann) may at
time seem preferable.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~ Kamali 73
[111. Amidi, Ihkam, I, 161;
[112. Shawkani, Irshad, p. 47; Abu
[113. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 85; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 305. As for the Ahad pertaining to subsidiary matters which are not essential to
dogma such as the torture of the grave ('adhab al-qabr), intercession (shafa'ah), etc., these must be accepted and believed. Anyone who denies them is a sinner
(fasiq) but not a kafir, as he denies something which is not decisively proven.]
As the Qur'an tells us, 'verily conjecture avails
nothing against the truth' (al-Najm, 53:28) Ahad, being conjectural, does not establish the truth.
According to the majority of the ulema of the four Sunni schools, acting upon Ahad is obligatory even
if Ahad fails to engender positive knowledge. Thus in practical legal matters, a preferable zann is
sufficient as a basis of obligation. It is only in matters of belief where conjecture 'avails nothing against
the truth'.
[114. Badran, Usul, p. 91; Khudari, Usul, p. 227.]
Having said this, however, Ahad may only form the basis of
obligation if it fulfills the following requirements:
a. That the transmitter is a competent person, which means that reports communicated by a child
or a lunatic of whatever age are unacceptable. Women, blind persons and slaves are considered
competent for purposes of reporting the Hadith; it is only in regard to being a witness that they suffer some disability.
b. The transmitter of Ahad must be a Muslim, which means that a report by a non-Muslim is
unacceptable. However, the reporter must fulfill this condition only at the time of reporting the
Hadith, but not necessarily at the time when he received the information. There are instances of
Hadith, for example, reported by Companions pertaining to the acts of the Prophet which they
observed before they had professed Islam.'
[116. Khudari, Usul, p. 216.]
c. The transmitter must be an upright person ('adl) at the time of reporting the Hadith. The
minimum requirement of this condition is that the person has not committed a major sin and
does not persist in committing minor ones; nor is he known for persistence in degrading
profanities such as eating in the-public thoroughfare, associating with persons of ill repute and
indulgence in humiliating jokes. Although the ulema are unanimous on the requirement of
uprightness of character ('adalah), they are not in agreement as to what it precisely means.
According to the Hanafis, a Muslim who is not a sinner (fasiq) is presumed to be upright. The
Shafi'is are more specific on the avoidance of sins, both major and minor, as well as indulgence
in profane mubahat. To the Maliki jurist, Ibn al-Hajib, 'adalah refers to piety, observance of
religious duties and propriety of conduct. There is also some disagreement among the ulema on
the definition of, and distinction between, major and minor sins.
Shawkani, Irshad, pp. 48-52.; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 307ff; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 86; Mahmassani, Falsafah, p. 74.]
[117. For details on the conditions of Ahad see
The 'adalah of a transmitter must be established by positive proof. Hence when the 'adalah of a
transmitter is unknown, his report is unacceptable. Similarly, a report by an anonymous person
(riwayah al-majhul) such as when the chain of transmitters reads in part that 'a man' reported
such-and-such is unacceptable. The 'adalah of a narrator may be established by various means
including tazkiyah, that is when at least one upright person confirms it, or when the transmitter
is known to have been admitted as a witness in court, or when a faqih or a learned person is
known to have relied or acted on his report. But there must be positive evidence that the faqih
did not do so due to additional factors such as a desire on his part merely to be cautious.
Khudari, Usul, p.217.]
The qualification of 'adalah is established for all the Companions regardless of their juristic or
political views. This conclusion is based on the Qur'an which declares in a reference to the
Companions that 'God is well pleased with them, as they are with Him' (al-Tawbah, 9:100). A
person's reputation for being upright and trustworthy also serves as a proof of his reliability.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 74
According to some ulema of Hadith, such a reputation is even more credible than confirmation
by one or two individuals.
[119. Shawkani, Irshad, p.67; Badran, Usul, p. 92.]
With regard to certain figures such
as Imam Malik, Sufyan al-Thawri, Sufyan b. 'Uyaynah, al-Layth b. Sa'd, etc., their reputation
for 'adalah is proof of reliability above the technicalities of tazkiyah.
[120. Khudari, Usul, p.217.]
d. The narrator of Ahad must possess a retentive memory so that his report may be trusted. If he is
known for committing frequent errors and inconsistencies, his report is unacceptable. The
faculty of retention, or dabt, is the ability of a person to listen to an utterance, to comprehend its
meaning as it was originally intended and then to retain it and take all necessary precautions to
safeguard its accuracy. In cases of doubt in the retentiveness of a transmitter, if his report can
be confirmed by the action of his predecessors, it may be accepted. But in the absence of such
verification, reports by persons who are totally obscure and whose retentiveness cannot be
established are unacceptable.
[121. Shawkani, Irshad, p. 52; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 86; Badran, Usul, p. 93; Khudari, Usul, p. 218.]
e. That the narrator is not implicated in any form of distortion (tadlis) either in the textual contents
(matn) of a Hadith or in its chain of transmitters (isnad). Distortion in the text is to add to the
saying of the Prophet elements which did not exist, or to detract from its original content so as
to distort its purport and mislead the listener. Tadlis in the isnad is to tamper with the names
and identity of narrators, which is, essentially, not very different from outright forgery.
Shawkani, Irshad, p. 55.]
One form of tadlis is to omit a link in the chain of narrators. The motive for
such omission is immaterial. Sometimes it is observed, for example, that a single weak link in
an otherwise reliable chain of transmitters is omitted with a view to showing the isnad reliable
in every part. Whatever the motive may be, a tadlis of this kind is, for all intents and purposes,
equivalent to forgery. However, if the narrator is a prominent scholar of irreproachable
reputation, his report is normally accepted notwithstanding a minor omission in the chain of
isnad.
[123. Khudari, Usul, pp. 218-219.]
f. The transmitter of Ahad must, in addition, have met with and heard the Hadith directly from his
immediate source. The contents of the Hadith must not be outlandish (shadhdh) in the sense of
being contrary to the established norms of the Qur'an and other principles of Shari'ah. In
addition, the report must be free of subtle errors such as rendering ab as ibn ('father' as 'son') or
other such words that are similar in appearance but differ in meaning.
[124. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 85.]
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 75
The three Imams, Abu Hanifah, al-Shafi'i and Ahmad b. Hanbal rely on Ahad when it fulfills the
foregoing conditions. Abu Hanifah, however, has laid down certain additional conditions, one of which
is that the narrator's action must not contradict his narration. It is on this ground, for example, that Abu
Hanifah does not rely on the following Hadith, narrated by Abu Hurayrah: 'When a dog licks a dish,
wash it seven times, one of which must be with clean sand."
[125. Muslim, Sahih Muslim, p. 41, Hadith no. 119.]
Abu Hanifah has explained this by saying that Abu Hurayrah did not act upon it himself. Since the
requirement of washing is normally three times, the report is considered weak, including its attribution
to Abu Hurayrah.
[126. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 85.]
The majority, on the other hand, take the view that discrepancies
between the action and the report of a narrator may be due to forgetfulness or some other unknown
factor. Discrepancies of this kind do not, by themselves, provide conclusive evidence to render the
report unreliable.
The Hanafis further require that the subject matter of Ahad is not such that would necessitate the
knowledge of a vast number of people. If, for example, we are informed, by means of a solitary report,
of an act or saying of the Prophet which was supposed to be known by hundreds or thousands of people
and yet only one or two have reported it, such a Hadith would not be reliable. The Hadith, for example,
that 'Anyone who touches his sexual organ must take a fresh ablution',
[127. Tabrizi, Mishkat, I, 104, Hadith no. 319.]
is not accepted by the Hanafis. The Hanafis have explained: had this Hadith been authentic, it would
have become an established practice among all Muslims, which is not the case. The Hadith is therefore
not reliable. The majority of ulema, however, do not insist on this requirement on the analysis that
people who witness or observe an incident do not necessarily report it. We know, for example, that
countless numbers of people saw the prophet performing the pilgrimage of hajj, and yet not many
reported their observations.
[128. Hitu, Wajiz, p. 302; Badran, Usul, p. 95.]
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 76
And finally, the Hanafis maintain that when the narrator of Ahad is not a faqih, his report is accepted
only if it agrees with qiyas, otherwise qiyas would be given priority over Ahad. However, if the narrator
is known to be a faqih, then his report would be preferred over qiyas. It is on this ground, for example,
that the Hanafis have rejected the Hadith of musarrat, that is the animal whose milk is retained in its
udders so as to impress the buyer. The Hadith is as follows: 'Do not retain milk in the udders of a shecamel
or goat so as to exaggerate its yield. Anyone who buys a musarrat has the choice, for three days
after
having milked it, either to keep it, or to return it with a quantity [i.e. a sa'] of dates.
Muslim, p. 248, Hadith no. 928.]
The Hanafis regard this Hadith to be contrary to qiyas, that is, to analogy with the rule of equality
between indemnity and loss. Abu Hanifah has held the view that the sa' of dates may not be equal in
value to the amount of milk the buyer has consumed. Hence if the buyer wishes to return the beast, he
must return it with the cost of milk which was in its udders at the time of purchase, not with a fixed
quantity of dates. The majority of ulema, including Malik, Shafi'i, Ibn Hanbal and the disciples of Abu
Hanifah, (Abu Yusuf and Zufar), have on the other hand accepted this Hadith and have given it priority
over qiyas. According to the majority view, the compensation may consist of a sa' of dates or of its
monetary value. Dates were specified in the Hadith as it used to be the staple food in those days, which
may not be the case any more.
[130. Hitu, Wajiz, p. 304; Badran, Usul, pp. 97-98 ]
Imam Malik would rely on a solitary Hadith on condition that it does not disagree with the practice of
the Madinese (amal ahl al-Madinah). For he considers the standard practice of the people of Madinah to
be more representative of the conduct of the Prophet than the isolated report of one or two individuals.
In his opinion, the Madinese practice represents the narration of thousands upon thousands of people
from, ultimately, the Prophet. It is, in other words, equivalent to a Mashhur, or even Mutawatir. When
an Ahad report contradicts the practice of the Madinese, the latter is, according to the Maliki view,
given priority over the former. The Malikis have thus refused to follow the Hadith regarding the option
of cancellation (khiyar al-majlis) which provides that 'the parties to a sale are free to change their minds
so long as they have not left the meeting of the contract'.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 77
The reason being that this Hadith is contrary to the practice of the people of Madinah.
140; Muslim, Sahih Muslim, p. 251, Hadith no. 944; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 85.]
The Madinese practice on this point subscribed to the
view that a contract is complete when the parties express their agreement through a valid offer and
acceptance. The contract is binding as of that moment regardless as to whether the 'meeting of contract'
continues or not.
All the four Imams of jurisprudence have considered Ahad to be authoritative in principle, and none
reject it unless there is evidence to suggest a weakness in its attribution to the Prophet, or which may
contradict some other evidence that is more authoritative in their view.
The majority of ulema do not insist that the Ahad should consist of a verbatim transmission of what the
narrator heard in the first place, although this is the most authoritative form of transmission in any kind
of Hadith. They would instead accept the conceptual transmission of an Ahad, on condition, however,
that the narrator understands the language and purport of the Hadith in full. Only then would the
rendering of the Hadith in the narrator's own words, which conveys an equivalent meaning, be
acceptable. However if the narrator does not possess this degree of knowledge and is unable to transmit
the Hadith in its original form, all the four Sunni schools are in agreement that his own rendering of the
concept of the Hadith is unacceptable.
[132. Hitu, Wajiz, pp.317ff; Badran, Usul, pp. 93-94.]
Some ulema of the Hanafi and other schools have held that conceptual transmission is totally forbidden,
a view which is refuted by the majority, who say that the Companions often transmitted one and the
same Hadith in varying words, and no-one can deny this. One of the most prominent Companions, 'Abd
Allah b. Mas'ud, is noted for having reported many ahadith from the Prophet and made it known that
'the Prophet (S) said this, or something like this, or something very close to this'. No one has challenged
the validity of this manner of reporting; hence the permissibility of conceptual transmission is
confirmed by the practice of the Companions, and their consensus is quoted in its support. Having said
this, however, accuracy in the transmission of Hadith and retaining its original version is highly
recommended.
[133. Khudari, Usul, p. 229.]
This is, in fact, the purport of a Hadith from the Prophet which reads:
'May God bless with success one who heard me saying something, and who conveys it to others as he
heard it; and may the next transmitter be even more retentive than the one from whom he received it.'
[134. Tabrizi, Mishkat, I, 78, Hadith no. 230; Khudari, Usul, p. 229.]
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 78
Sometimes the transmitter reports a Hadith but omits a part of it. The question then arises as to whether
this form of transmission is permissible at all. In principle, the narrator of Hadith, of any type of Hadith,
must not omit any part which is integral to its meaning. For instance: when the omitted part consists of
a condition, or an exception to the main theme of the Hadith, or which makes a reference to the scope of
its application. However, the narrator may omit a part of the Hadith which does not affect the meaning
of the remaining part. For in this case, the Hadith at issue will be regarded, for all intents and purposes,
as two ahadith. It has been a familiar practice among the ulema to omit a part of the Hadith which does
not have a bearing on its main theme. But if the omission is such that it would bring the quoted part into
conflict with its full version, then the issue will be determined, not under the foregoing, but under the
rules of conflict and preference (al-ta'arud wa'l-tarjih). In any case, the preferred practice is not to omit
any part of the Hadith, as the omitted part may well contain valuable information on some point and
serve a purpose that may not have occurred to the narrator himself.
[135. Khudari, Usul, p.227; Hitu, Wajiz, pp.319-320.]
In certain ahadith which are reported by a number of transmitters, there is sometimes an addition to the
text of a Hadith by one transmitter which is absent in the reports of the same Hadith by others. The first
point to ascertain in a discrepancy of this nature is to find out whether the Hadith in question was
originally uttered in one and the same meeting/occasion or on different occasions. If the latter is the
case, then there is no conflict and both versions may be accepted as they are. But if it is established that
the different versions all originated in one and the same meeting, then normally the version which is
transmitted by more narrators will prevail over that which is variantly transmitted by one, provided that
the former are not known for errors and oversight in reporting. Consequently, the additional part of the
Hadith which is reported by a single transmitter will be isolated and rejected for the simple reason that
error by one person is more likely in this case than by a multitude. But if the single narrator who has
reported the addition is an eminently reliable person and the rest are known for careless reporting, then
his version will be preferred, although some ulema of Hadith do not agree with this. Additions and
discrepancies that might be observed in the isnad, such as when a group of narrators report a Hadith as a
Mursal whereas one person has reported it as a Musnad (that is, a Muttasil, or continous) - will be
determined by the same method which applies to discrepancy in the text. However, sometimes the
preference of one over the other version may be determined on different grounds. To give an example,
according to one Hadith, 'Whoever buys foodstuff is not to sell the same before it is delivered to him.'
However, according to another report the Prophet has issued a more general instruction according to
which the Muslims are forbidden from selling that which they do not have in their possession.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 79
The Hanafis have preferred the second version, as it is conveyed in broader terms which comprise
foodstuffs as well as other commodities.
Khudari, Usul, p. 233; Hitu, Wajiz, pp. 318-319.]
[136. Tabrizi, Mishkat, II, 863, Hadith no. 2844; Ibn Majah, Sunan, II, 737, Hadith no 2187;
II. The Discontinued Hadith (al-Hadith Ghayr al-Muttasil)
This is a Hadith whose chain of transmitters does not extend all the way back to the Prophet. It occurs
in three varieties: Mursal, Mu'dal and Munqati'. The Mursal, which is the main variety of discontinued
Hadith, is sometimes also referred to as Munqati'. The Mursal is defined as a Hadith which a Successor
(tabi'i) has directly attributed to the Prophet without mentioning the last link, namely the Companion
who might have narrated it from the Prophet. This is the majority definition. The Hanafis, however,
have defined Mursal as a Hadith that a reliable narrator has attributed to the Prophet while omitting a
part of its isnad. The missing link may be a Companion or even a Successor, according to the majority,
but it may be a narrator among the second generation of Successors according to the Hanafis. Since the
identity of the missing link is not known, it is possible that he might have been an upright person, or
not. Because of these and other similar doubts in its transmission, in principle, the ulema of Hadith do
not accept the Mursal.
[137. Hitu,Wajiz, p. 316; Khudari, Usul, p.229; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p.86.]
According to al-Shawkani, 'The
majority of ulema of usul have defined Mursal as a Hadith transmitted by one who has not met with the
Prophet, (S) and yet quotes the Prophet, (S) directly. The transmitter may be a Successor or a follower
(tabi' al-tabi'i) or anyone after that.' Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal does not rely on it, nor does Imam Shafi'i
unless it is reported by a famous Successor who is known to have met with a number of Companions.
Thus a Mursal transmitted by prominent Successors such as Said b. al-Musayyib, al-Zuhri, 'Alqamah,
Masruq, al-Sha'bi, Hasan al-Basri, Qatadah, etc., is accepted, provided that it fulfills the following
conditions.
[138. Shawkani, Irshad, p. 64; Abu Zahrah, Usul, p. 87.]
Firstly, that the Mursal is supported by another and more reliable Hadith with a continuous chain of
transmitters, in which case it is the latter that would represent the stronger evidence.
Secondly, that one Mursal is supported by another Mursal, and the latter is accepted and relied upon by
the ulema.
Thirdly, that the Mursal is in harmony with the precedent of the Companions, in which case it is
elevated and attributed to the Prophet. The process here is called raf', and the Hadith is called Marfu'.
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~
Kamali 80
No comments:
Post a Comment