As we see all the chains of weakness, as already discussed in this thread. And they go against, the accurate structure of the wording, as explained in my previous post which you are deliberately avoiding to answer.
Al-Albani, Ibn Hajar, and many of the scholars of the the Ahlus-Sunnah did not consider the tradition in Saheeh Muslim (either Zayd b. Arqam (Radiyllahu anhu) in his very old aged and post-memory loss) or the hadith of Jabir b.Abdillah (radiyallahu anhu) to be in contradiction with the reliable
hasan chains contained in Mushkil al-Athar, of Imam at-Tahawi, or Musnad ibn Rawayh, the teacher of Imam al-Bukhari.
Rather, i will quote the view of
Al-Albani who summarises as follows:
"the mention, in this hadith, of the members of his household, alongside the Qur’an,
is like the mention of the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs alongside the Sunnah (way) of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the hadith: “I urge you to adhere to my way (Sunnah) and the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs…”
Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth as-Saheehah (4/260).According to,
Moulana Suhail Motala approved by Moulana Haroon Abasoomar of the Hanafi school, on hadithanswers.com:
"The Muhaddithun don’t regard issues like these as a contradiction, rather it is an addition, showing us the importance of Quran, Sunnah and the Ahlu Bayt"
https://hadithanswers.com/hadith-i-am-leaving-behind-two-things/ I feel this quote from the Shia researcher of the book “al-Masa’il al-Sarawiyyah” Sa’ib Abdul-Hameed, where he praises the author, the esteemed Shia Scholar Shaykh al-Mufeed for his scientific professional method in the book, is sufficient:
“In this book we can clearly see the correct methodology (of al-Mufeed) in his research and in how he extracts proofs. He holds on to the authentic established narration and leaves all else, even if what opposes it was related by the great ones such as al-Saduq and ibn al-Junayd. He shows complete disregard to the multitude of narrations whose chains are unreliable, instead he relies on the single authentic chain leaving behind a large pile of weak and fabricated reports. He is the expert diver who selects the pure pearls leaving behind the rubble that floats in the oceans.”[al-Masa’il al-Sarawiyyah, by Shaykh al-Mufeed, Tahqeeq by Sa’ib Abdul Hameed, page 12].
Al-Mufid had a stricter criteria over what narrations one could derive Yaqeen from. He was also critical of those before him who chose to include a mixture of reports into their collections.
However, on this topic, nobody denies that if the chains of narrators promote Shadh content, or contain within them narrators who are disparaged as fabricators, liars, or those with extreme open Rafdh (Fasiqs?), chains of narrations coming exclusively from this group, even if they number a large ammount would not give strength to the narration in our case on account of the Shawahid or Mu'tabaat.
In his Muqaddimah Ibn al-Salah states:"Not every weakness in the Hadith is eliminated by the hadith coming from different lines of transmission. Rather the situation varies:
… there are also types of weakness which are not eliminated by something similar to that, on account of severity of the weakness and the failure of this Jaber (consoler) to console it and mend it. An example of this is the weakness which arises from the transmitter being accused of lying, or the fact that the hadith is Shadh (irregular).
…Rather the situation varies: one weakness which the passage of the hadith through different lines of transmission eliminates
the weakness which arises from some deficiency in the retention of its transmitter, when he is otherwise veracious and pious. When we saw the hadith he related also came from another line of transmission, we realize that it is one of the hadith that he had retained properly, and that his accuracy in it was not impaired …”
Now in our case, we actually have the following:1. One tradition which is
Hasan li-Dhati, in and of itself. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Al-Albani, Shu'ayb al-Arnaut, Ahmad B. Abu Bakr b.Ismail Al Busri and the majority of your scholars have deemed the narrators in this chain to be 'Hasan', and therefore the Isnaad at the very least to be 'Hasan'. This is the tradition of Kathir b.Zayd, in two chains through him, Mushkil al-Athar of Imam at-Tahawi, and Musnad ibn Rawayh, the teacher of Imam Bukhari.
2. Many additional chains, from various other companions, from Zayd b. Arqam, Abu Tufayl, Abu Sa'id al-Khudri, in addition to Ali b. Abi Talib, whose narrators are not disparaged as liars, Rawafidh, nor fabricators, but are considered weak mainly on account of retention, or Tadlees. Several of these chains Muhadditheen such as Al-Albani and Al-Arnaut have regarded as
'Hasan bil Shawahid'. This means the various paths for the tradition elevate the chain from Dhai'f to 'Hasan'. I have made a compilation in the previous page.
3. Furthermore, Al-Albani as well as many of your Muhaditheen themselves have used reports where there is or may be a disconnection between narrators in strengthening the chains.
There are several narrations from Thiqah narrators,where the only question is that of Tadlees. For instance, Habib b. Abi Thabit --> AbuTufayl -->Zayd b.Arqam. Imam at-Tahawi regards the Sanad from this point as Saheeh, proof he believes Habib heard from Abu Tufayl. Nevertheless, if you believe this is still a disconnected report due to the question here, Al-Albani and others have still used reports where they may be a disconnection and weak itself, as proof and Shawahid.
Al-Albani strenghtening weaker chains/reports Niqab:
http://maktabasalafiya.blogspot.com/2011/06/shaykh-alabanis-position-of-niqab-of.htmlSheikh Al-Albani explains reasons behind this Hadith’s authenticity in great detail:
“. . . (The narration’s chain is) Bashir from Qatadah from Khalid ibn Duraik from Aishah. Ibn Adiy added that he (Khalid) once attributed it to Umm Salamah instead of Aishah. Abu Dawud said after citing it, ‘This Hadith is Mursal. Khalid ibn Duraik did not meet Aishah.’ Also, Sa’eed ibn Bashir is weak according to Hafidh ibn Hajar in At-Taqrib. However, this Hadith has been reported via other ways that strengthen it:
(1.) A Mursal report recorded by Abu Dawud (no. 437) from Qatadah with an authentic chain that includes neither ibn Duraik nor ibn Bashir: ‘Indeed, once a young girl reaches menses, it is not right for her to expose except her face and hands to the wrists.'
(2.) At-Tabarani (in Al-Kabir 24/143/378 and Al-Awsat 2/230/8959) and Al-Bayhaqi recorded via ibn Lahi’ah from Iyadh from Abdullah from Ibrahim bin Rufa’ah Al-Ansari from his father from (he believed) Asma bint Umays that Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) entered Aishah’s house while she had with her sister Asma bint Abi Bakr, who was wearing wide-sleeved clothes (see the report in question for the remainder of this Hadith’s text) . . . There is no doubt that a report by ibn Lahi’ah does not go below the level of Hasan when it has supportive narrations, as is the case here . . .”
(Jilbab Ul-Mar’at Il-Muslimah pp. 58-59)"
And here is another example, on the prophecy of Kerbala:"
قلت وبالجملة فالحديث صحيح بمجموع هذه الطرق، وإن كانت مفرداتها لا تخلو من ضعف، ولكنه ضعف يسير، لا سيما وبعضها قد حسنه الهيثمي، والله أعلم
“Altogether, the Hadith is authentic by collectively considering all the chains of narration. This is true even though each single chain is not free from defects, but it’s minor defects. This is not to mention that some of those chains were graded as Hassan [less authentic than Sahih, yet authentic] by al-Haythamee. And Allah knows best.”
70 Replies
5040 Views
February 22, 2015, 07:33:37 PM