إدريس عبدالله
_21 _November _2014هـ الموافق 21-11-2014م, 09:40 AM
What makes a hadith acceptable or rejectable is the examination of the sanad (chain), transmitter and matn (text). If a narrator is not omitted from the sanad and whose omission would not lead to the inability of attesting to the reliability of the omitted narrator; and the narrator's integrity is not questioned; and the matn is not weak nor does it contradict certain parts of the Qur'an or Sunnah mutawatir or definite ijma'a (consensus of scholars), in this case the hadith is accepted, acted upon and advanced as a legislative evidence, whether sahih or hasan.
As for when the hadith is contrary to these qualifications, it is rejected and not educed as proof. Therefore, the rejected hadith is the hadith rejected due to omission from the sanad of a narrator which results in the inability to attest the reliability of this narrator, or due to a narrator's integrity being questioned, or due to the weakness of the (matn) of the hadith or its contradiction to the Qur'an, hadith and Ijma'a which are definite.
Various types of hadith come under the hadith mardud (rejected) which do not exceed the following descriptions:
1. Mu'allaq
This is when one or more narrators are consecutively missing from the beginning of the sanad in a blatantly obvious manner. The term 'more' is more general to include the whole or part of the isnad. Also included, is the omission of the whole chain such as when the muhaddith or hadith compiler, says: the Messenger of Allah said so or did such and such thing.
2. Mu'dil
This is a chain in which two or more narrators are missing from one or more places, such as when the tabi ut-tabi'i (followers of the students of the companions) omits a tabi'i and sahabi from the isnad. But it does not include the statement of authors from the fuqaha (scholars of jurisprudence) when they say: 'the Messenger of Allah said'. Or their statement: 'from the Messenger of Allah'. This is not (mu'dil), because that is not transmission, rather it is quoting and educing a proof which is valid.
3. Munqati'
When a single narrator is missing before the Sahabi in any one place wherever it is, even if they are many, such that the missing narrator is not more than one from each place, so it will be munqati' in these places. Also considered to be munqati' is the chain in which there is an obscure narrator (mubham).
An example of a transmitter being omitted is what has been narrated by 'Abdur Razzaq > ath-Thawri > Abu Ishaq > Zayd b. Yathi' > Hudhayfa, which goes back to the Prophet that he said: "If you assigned it (authority) to Abu Bakr, indeed he is powerful and honest."
The isnad has breaks in two places. First, 'Abdur Razzaq did not hear from ath-Thawri but rather narrated it from al-Nu'man Ibn Abi Shaybah al-Jundi who narrated it from ath-Thawri. The second, ath-Thawri did not hear it from Abu Ishaq but rather narrated it from Shurayk who narrated it from Abu Ishaq. The hadith, therefore, is rejected. An example of a transmitter being obscure is what is narrated by Abu al-'Ala b. 'Abdullah b. Shukhayr > two men > Shaddad b. Aws the hadith of: 'O Lord! I ask you to make me steadfast in the matter.' Therefore, the hadith is rejected due to the presence of an unknown (majhul) narrator in the transmission.
4. Shadh
This is when a reliable transmitter narrates a hadith which contradicts what others have narrated. It is not shadh if a reliable narrator transmits something no one else has narrated, because the narration of a reliable transmitter is accepted even if others have not narrated it, and it is used as proof. That is like the hadith: ‘Actions are judged according to intentions'. Only 'Umar narrated it and from him only 'Alqama narrated it. A single narrator, Muhammad b. Ibrahim al-Tamimi narrated from him, and from him only Yahya b. Said al-Ansari narrated and from him Yahya b. Said, then there was a proliferation of transmission routes. Therefore, the shadh is only when a reliable narrator transmits something which contradicts what has been narrated by others, meaning the accepted narrator transmits a report that goes against the report which is stronger than it.
5. Mu'allal
A hadith which is found to have a defect ('illah) and impairs its authenticity through it appears to be sound. This applied to the isnad whose transmitters are reliable and which apparently includes the conditions of authenticity.
6. Munkar
What a single unreliable transmitter narrates alone. The munkar is the narration of a weak narrator which contradicts the report of a transmitter who is less weak.
7. Mawdu'u
The hadith mawdu'u is the fabricated hadith. The fabricated hadith is the worst among the weak ahadith. The narration of such hadith is not allowed if its condition is known except when it is linked to clarifying its fabricated status.
A hadith is known to be fabricated when the forger acknowledges its fabrication or something which takes the position of a confession. The fabrication can be understood from the condition of the transmitter, such as the narrator following the whims of certain leaders in his lies. Or while he is attributing the hadith he is caught out as a consummate liar, where the report is not narrated from any way other than him, nobody supported him and he has no witness. It could be also understood from the condition of what has been narrated, meaning the state of the matn, if it is deficient in its wording or meaning or it contradicts parts of the Qur'an, mutawatir sunnah and definite Ijma'a.
There are different types of hadith fabricators. The ones causing most harm are those associated with zuhd (pious ascetics), who fabricated Hadiths hoping to get reward for what they alleged. The danger is that people accept their fabrications, trusting and depending on them. Then, maybe a forger fabricated a saying coming from himself so he narrated it. Probably, he took a saying from the sages or others and falsely ascribed it to the Messenger of Allah.
From the fabricated ahadith are the ahadith about the merits of the Qur'an, surah by surah, especially narrations on the authority of 'Ubay b. Ka'b and those from Abu 'Ismah > 'Ikrimah > Ibn 'Abbas. Their fabrication has been established from the study (cross references) of scholars and through the confession of Abu 'Ismah. It has been narrated that he said: 'I saw that the people had turned away from the Qur'an and occupied themselves with the fiqh of Abu Hanifah and the maghazi of Muhammad b. Ishaq, so I forged these ahadith seeking reward in the Hereafter.'
This is a selection of the types of rejected ahadith, but they are not all the possible types that could be mentioned. There are many types of rejected ahadith for which mentioning a part is sufficient as an example for the criterion by which the acceptable hadith is identified from the rejected hadith.
A hadith is not rejected because it does not meet the conditions for the category of sahih as long as its sanad, transmitters and matn are acceptable, meaning it is hasan because its narrators are of lesser reliability than the narrators of the sahih hadith. Or if there was a mustur, (a transmitter whose record is unknown) or he had a bad memory, but he has been strengthened by a qarinah (indication) that weighs up its acceptance, such as when it is strengthened by another narrator agreeing with it or by a witness, meaning, strengthened by a narrator thought to be alone (in narration) or by another hadith. One should not be over strict in rejecting a hadith as long as it is possible to accept it according to the requirements of the sanad, transmitter and matn. Especially, when the majority of the scholars have accepted it and the fuqaha have generally used it. It is then worth to be accepted, even if it does not meet the conditions of the sahih, because it comes under hasan. Just as one should not be over strict in rejecting a hadith, at the same time it is not allowed to be complacent with respect to the hadith, thus accepting the hadith which is rejected due to the sanad, transmitter or matn.
Source: abridged from khilafah.com
As for when the hadith is contrary to these qualifications, it is rejected and not educed as proof. Therefore, the rejected hadith is the hadith rejected due to omission from the sanad of a narrator which results in the inability to attest the reliability of this narrator, or due to a narrator's integrity being questioned, or due to the weakness of the (matn) of the hadith or its contradiction to the Qur'an, hadith and Ijma'a which are definite.
Various types of hadith come under the hadith mardud (rejected) which do not exceed the following descriptions:
1. Mu'allaq
This is when one or more narrators are consecutively missing from the beginning of the sanad in a blatantly obvious manner. The term 'more' is more general to include the whole or part of the isnad. Also included, is the omission of the whole chain such as when the muhaddith or hadith compiler, says: the Messenger of Allah said so or did such and such thing.
2. Mu'dil
This is a chain in which two or more narrators are missing from one or more places, such as when the tabi ut-tabi'i (followers of the students of the companions) omits a tabi'i and sahabi from the isnad. But it does not include the statement of authors from the fuqaha (scholars of jurisprudence) when they say: 'the Messenger of Allah said'. Or their statement: 'from the Messenger of Allah'. This is not (mu'dil), because that is not transmission, rather it is quoting and educing a proof which is valid.
3. Munqati'
When a single narrator is missing before the Sahabi in any one place wherever it is, even if they are many, such that the missing narrator is not more than one from each place, so it will be munqati' in these places. Also considered to be munqati' is the chain in which there is an obscure narrator (mubham).
An example of a transmitter being omitted is what has been narrated by 'Abdur Razzaq > ath-Thawri > Abu Ishaq > Zayd b. Yathi' > Hudhayfa, which goes back to the Prophet that he said: "If you assigned it (authority) to Abu Bakr, indeed he is powerful and honest."
The isnad has breaks in two places. First, 'Abdur Razzaq did not hear from ath-Thawri but rather narrated it from al-Nu'man Ibn Abi Shaybah al-Jundi who narrated it from ath-Thawri. The second, ath-Thawri did not hear it from Abu Ishaq but rather narrated it from Shurayk who narrated it from Abu Ishaq. The hadith, therefore, is rejected. An example of a transmitter being obscure is what is narrated by Abu al-'Ala b. 'Abdullah b. Shukhayr > two men > Shaddad b. Aws the hadith of: 'O Lord! I ask you to make me steadfast in the matter.' Therefore, the hadith is rejected due to the presence of an unknown (majhul) narrator in the transmission.
4. Shadh
This is when a reliable transmitter narrates a hadith which contradicts what others have narrated. It is not shadh if a reliable narrator transmits something no one else has narrated, because the narration of a reliable transmitter is accepted even if others have not narrated it, and it is used as proof. That is like the hadith: ‘Actions are judged according to intentions'. Only 'Umar narrated it and from him only 'Alqama narrated it. A single narrator, Muhammad b. Ibrahim al-Tamimi narrated from him, and from him only Yahya b. Said al-Ansari narrated and from him Yahya b. Said, then there was a proliferation of transmission routes. Therefore, the shadh is only when a reliable narrator transmits something which contradicts what has been narrated by others, meaning the accepted narrator transmits a report that goes against the report which is stronger than it.
5. Mu'allal
A hadith which is found to have a defect ('illah) and impairs its authenticity through it appears to be sound. This applied to the isnad whose transmitters are reliable and which apparently includes the conditions of authenticity.
6. Munkar
What a single unreliable transmitter narrates alone. The munkar is the narration of a weak narrator which contradicts the report of a transmitter who is less weak.
7. Mawdu'u
The hadith mawdu'u is the fabricated hadith. The fabricated hadith is the worst among the weak ahadith. The narration of such hadith is not allowed if its condition is known except when it is linked to clarifying its fabricated status.
A hadith is known to be fabricated when the forger acknowledges its fabrication or something which takes the position of a confession. The fabrication can be understood from the condition of the transmitter, such as the narrator following the whims of certain leaders in his lies. Or while he is attributing the hadith he is caught out as a consummate liar, where the report is not narrated from any way other than him, nobody supported him and he has no witness. It could be also understood from the condition of what has been narrated, meaning the state of the matn, if it is deficient in its wording or meaning or it contradicts parts of the Qur'an, mutawatir sunnah and definite Ijma'a.
There are different types of hadith fabricators. The ones causing most harm are those associated with zuhd (pious ascetics), who fabricated Hadiths hoping to get reward for what they alleged. The danger is that people accept their fabrications, trusting and depending on them. Then, maybe a forger fabricated a saying coming from himself so he narrated it. Probably, he took a saying from the sages or others and falsely ascribed it to the Messenger of Allah.
From the fabricated ahadith are the ahadith about the merits of the Qur'an, surah by surah, especially narrations on the authority of 'Ubay b. Ka'b and those from Abu 'Ismah > 'Ikrimah > Ibn 'Abbas. Their fabrication has been established from the study (cross references) of scholars and through the confession of Abu 'Ismah. It has been narrated that he said: 'I saw that the people had turned away from the Qur'an and occupied themselves with the fiqh of Abu Hanifah and the maghazi of Muhammad b. Ishaq, so I forged these ahadith seeking reward in the Hereafter.'
This is a selection of the types of rejected ahadith, but they are not all the possible types that could be mentioned. There are many types of rejected ahadith for which mentioning a part is sufficient as an example for the criterion by which the acceptable hadith is identified from the rejected hadith.
A hadith is not rejected because it does not meet the conditions for the category of sahih as long as its sanad, transmitters and matn are acceptable, meaning it is hasan because its narrators are of lesser reliability than the narrators of the sahih hadith. Or if there was a mustur, (a transmitter whose record is unknown) or he had a bad memory, but he has been strengthened by a qarinah (indication) that weighs up its acceptance, such as when it is strengthened by another narrator agreeing with it or by a witness, meaning, strengthened by a narrator thought to be alone (in narration) or by another hadith. One should not be over strict in rejecting a hadith as long as it is possible to accept it according to the requirements of the sanad, transmitter and matn. Especially, when the majority of the scholars have accepted it and the fuqaha have generally used it. It is then worth to be accepted, even if it does not meet the conditions of the sahih, because it comes under hasan. Just as one should not be over strict in rejecting a hadith, at the same time it is not allowed to be complacent with respect to the hadith, thus accepting the hadith which is rejected due to the sanad, transmitter or matn.
Source: abridged from khilafah.com