Reliable Shia abu al-Khattab

[Hani]

al-Salamu `Aleykum,


I will post the following Tarjamah from a Shia Rijali book and I will ask the people of knowledge for an explanation:



9989 - 9987 - 10012 -
محمد بن أبي زينب: مقلاص أبو الخطاب الأسدي - من أصحاب الصادق (ع) - ملعون غال ضال مضل إلا أنه ثقة حال استقامته
فرواياته حال استقامته تؤخذ.


[Muhammad bin abi Zaynab: Miqlaas, abu al-Khattab al-Asadi -from the companions of al-Sadiq- Cursed, Extremist, Misguided. However, he is reliable(Thiqah) during his period of uprightness and his narrations at that time are accepted.]


Other than the fact that it is a huge scandal that the Shia take religion from cursed people, I ask: How do the modern day Shia Rijalists distinguish the man's acceptable narrations from his rejected ones?

[Nader Zaveri]

Assalaamu `Alaykum,

This quote is from al-Tusi in his al-`Uddah. I will quote the full passage:

وأما ما ترويه الغلاة ، والمتهمون ، والمضعفون وغير هؤلاء ، فما يختص الغلاة بروايته ، فإن كانوا ممن عرف لهم حال استقامة وحال غلو ، عمل بما رووه في حال الاستقامة وترك ما رووه في حال خطاءهم ( 1 ) ، ولأجل ذلك عملت الطائفة بما رواه أبو الخطاب محمد بن أبي زينب [ 1 ] في حال استقامته وتركوا ما رواه في حال تخليطه ،

وكذلك القول في أحمد بن هلال العبرتائي [ 2 ] ، وابن أبي عذافر [ 3 ] وغير هؤلاء . فأما ما يرويه في حال تخليطهم فلا يجوز العمل به على كل حال .

وكذلك القول فيما ترويه المتهمون والمضعفون وإن كان هناك ما يعضد روايتهم ويدل على صحتها وجب العمل به . وإن لم يكن هناك ما يشهد لروايتهم بالصحّة وجب التوقف في أخبارهم ، ولأجل ( 2 ) ذلك توقف المشايخ عن أخبار كثيرة هذه صورتها ولم يرووها واستثنوها في فهارسهم من جملة ما يروونه من التصنيفات ( 3 ) .

As for what is narrated by the Ghulat, the Accused Ones, the Weak ones, and others of these, of what is pertaining to the ghulat and their narrations, and if they are known of their straight condition and their ghuluww condition, you act of what is narrated in the straight condition and abandon what is narrated in their erring condition. As a result, the Ta'ifah have acted of what is narrated by Abu al-Khattab Muhammad b. Abi Zaynab in his straight condition and they abandoned what he narrated in his erring condition.

And the belief is like that in (narrations of) Ahmad b. Hilal al-`Abarataa'i, Ibn Abi `Udhaafar and others of these. And as for what they narrate in their erring condition, it is not permissible to act by it under any circumstance.

And the belief is like that in what is narrated by the accused ones and the da`eef ones. And if there are support for their narrations and it shows upon its authenticity, it is wajib to act by it. And if there are no shawaahid for their narrations to be authentic, then it is necessary to do tawaqquf (desist) in their reports. As a result that tawaqquf of (our) Shaykhs from many of their reports these portray it, and their lack of narrated it, and including it in their categlogs from all together what is narrated from the compilations
Source:
al-Tusi, al-`Uddah Fee Usool al-Fiqh, pg. 151

[Hani]

So he mentioned abu Khattab, Ahmad bin Hilal and abu Ghadafir... He said that during their uprightness their Hadith is taken, but how does one know this? He never explained. Is their only criteria that it must have a Sahih Shahid?

[Nader Zaveri]

So he mentioned abu Khattab, Ahmad bin Hilal and abu Ghadafir... He said that during their uprightness their Hadith is taken, but how does one know this? He never explained. Is their only criteria that it must have a Sahih Shahid?

Yes, that is his general rule. Now for each particular narrator there are different ways and circumstances in order to determine when his takhleet took place. That is not mentioned.

Basically the narrators narrations are never taken, because if there is sahih shawaahid is needed, then that person isn't reliable in it of himself.

[Hani]

That's very true, Jazak-Allah.

[Farid]

Yeah, I was going to point out that Al-Tusi's comments are only theoretical and not practical, since we don't know of HOW to tell which narrations are reliable from the weak ones.

Back to topic! How is he thiqa and mal'oon? Nader's response doesn't answer this.

[sword_of_sunnah]

Well this case could be understood in a similar way as that of Umar bin Saad, the killer of Imam Hussain(ra). He was accursed, yet some of rijalists considered him thiqa.

[Nader Zaveri]

Assalaamu `Alaykum,

Back to topic! How is he thiqa and mal'oon? Nader's response doesn't answer this.

He was thiqah during the beginning of his life, and after he changed his belief to Ghuluww belief, he became Mal`oon. He was mal`oon because he started attributed false things to the A'immah (AS).

[Farid]

My bad. Hani needed to highlight حال استقامته in red...

[Hani]

I have one more additional question regarding Khu'i's words:


"However, he is reliable(Thiqah) during his period of uprightness and his narrations at that time are accepted."


I ask, is there any Tawtheeq for abu al-Khattab during his period of uprightness? Let's say he didn't have any evil beliefs at one point, but who said he was a Thiqah?