| Posted By |
Topic: Al-fawaariq 'striking the differences between 'jarh wa ta'deel' and the 'radd 'alal mukhaalif' (refuting the one that opposes the usool)
|
|
 abu.hakeem
|
|
Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Sep 2002
|
Al hamdullillah was salaatu was salaamu 'ala rasoolillahi wa b'ad:-
From the very beginnings of the fitna of abil hasan, from the issues that our shaikh abu abdir rahmaan faalih bin naafi? al Harbi -hafidhahullah- has mentioned to us on numerous occasions in various sittings in his home is the mistake that abil hasan and thoses who are with him have fallen into concerning the ilm of al jarhi wat-ta?deel.Focusing primarily upon the fawaariq (differences) between al jarh wa ta?deel and the radd ?alal mukhaalif (refuting the one who opposes the sunnah).
There is no doubt that there are many aspects of jarh wa ta?deel that are utilised by ahlul hadeeth in the radd ?alal mukhaalif while there are at the same time affairs related to jarh wa ta?deel that are specific to riwaayah(narration). Thoses affairs have been misunderstood by abil hasan and those who support him, thus their ignorance in the affairs of the manhaj have lead them to confuse the two affairs and in doing so placing some of the qawaa?id of jarh wa ta?deel in there improper place.
Al hamawi mentioned in his book ?ghamzu ?uyoonil basaa?ir?(1/18)
??the intent with that (i.e. the ashbaah wa nadhaa?ir (the science that analyses those branches of knowledge that are resemblent but have differences)) are the issues that resemble each other while there is the presence of a difference in the ruling between them, due to subtle differences (that are present between them) that are perceived by the fuqahaa (jurists) due to their intricate understanding, thus they wrote books in the explanation of that??
He then goes on to mention some of the books in that regard, and from them those books that are referred to as the books of furooq. From those who wrote on the topic was the shaikh and teacher of shaikh ibn uthaimeen, shaikh abdur rahmaan bin Naasir as sa?dee rahimahumullah who mentioned a section concerning that in his book ? Al qawaa?idu wal usoolul jaami?ah wal furooq wat taqaaseemul badee?atun naafi?ah?(principles and comprehensive fundamentals and greatly beneficial divisions and categorizations)
Thus from the affairs that the taalibul ilm should get an understanding of are the furooq(differences) that occur in two branches of knowledge that have similarities and not confuse the issues that are specific to each branch of knowledge.
Therefore as it relates to the topic at hand, that which will clarify the fact that there are some differences between the two issues (ie al jarh wa ta?deel and the radd ?alal mukhaalif) is that which was mentioned by al imaam adh dhahabee in his book ?meezaanul I?tidaal?(1/118) in his discussion of a narrator known as abaan ibn thaghlab al koofi he says concerning him
?he is a pure and staunch she?ee (ie sh*te) even though he is sudooq (truthful and trustworthy in his narration) so for us is his truthfulness and his bidah is upon him??
then the imaam goes on to explain the fact that bid?ah is of two types the major bidah and the minor bidah, and such is the case with the bid?ah of tashayu?(the bid?ah of the she?ite).As for its major type then that is the bidah of the raafidhah (those who declared the sahabah to be apostates except a few etc)and the minor earlier type (ie to believe that ali was better than abu bakr and umar without making takfeer of them or referring to them as evildoers).
He explains that the majority of those who were described as being she?ee during the time of the taabi?een and the atbaa?u? taabieen were upon this lesser type and says ?if the ahaadeeth of this category were rejected then a large number of the prophetic narrations would be lost and that would be clear corruption..? but as for the raafidhah i.e. the other category(those upon the major type of tashayu?) then their narrations are rejected and he mentions ? and not one truthful or trustworthy man from this category comes to mind??
So we conclude from that a number of affairs :
1: That the narrations of ahlul bidah are occasionally accepted if we have the ability to ascertain the truthfulness of their narration.
2: That this narrator Abaan was given ta?deel in that which relates to his riwaaya.
3:That as for his aqeedah then we have a totally different stance with him and he receives nothing but radd and other than that from the affairs connected to the methodology of ahlus sunnah in dealing with ahlul bidah.
In a similar vein is the statement of that imaam Ali ibnil madeeni (rahimahullah) who said in a narration collected by khateebul baghdaadi in his book ?Al kifaayah? (p206)
?If the people of basra where left due to the bidah of qadr (which had become wide spread among them) and if the people of koofa were left due to that opinion (of theirs referring to tashayu?) the books (ie of hadeeth) would be destroyed?
then al imaam al khateeb mentions ?..he means by the books would have been destroyed that hadeeth would have been lost ?? and that is due to the large number of hadeeth that came by way of them(i.e. the people of basra and koofa).
The imaam khateeb likewise mentions (in his book ?al kifaayah) that which relates to the narrator ?ubaidillah ibn moosa al ?absee from that the statement of yahya ibn maeen concerning him when it was said to him that imaam ahmad said that the ahaadeeth of ubaidillah should be rejected because of his tashayyu?(his being upon the bid?ah of the she?ah) he (ie yahya ibn ma?een) said
? by Allah, he who there is no lord worthy of worship other than, abdur razzaaq (i.e. as san?aani) is 100 times more deeply involved in that(tashayu?) than him and I have heard(ie took hadeeth) from abdur razzaaq much much more that I have heard from ubaidillah??
This ubaidullah was incidently from the shyookh of al imaam bukhaari (an example of his narration occurring in the first few hadeeth in kitaabul imaan) and he occurs in the chains of narration of each one of the six books.
Thus we see from this (and the examples of that are many) that ahlul hadeeth in the affairs of narration have a stance with the people of bid?ah that differs somewhat from the general stance that they have with them due to their bid?ah and deviation, and it is extremely erroneous for us to confuse the two.
Thus here we conclude:
1. That the people of bid?ah are dispraised for their bid?ah
2. That they may be given ta?deel in the issues of narration if one is able to ascertain their trustworthy nature in that regard although that does not mean that we accept his bid?ah rather we only accept his narration.
3. That the principles of jarh wa ta?deel that are used in that which relates to his narration are different from those used in approaching him from the aspect of his bid?ah.
4. That ahlul hadeeth have a methodology with the people of bid?ah and dealing with them and speaking against them that may oppose certain of the well known principles of jarh wa ta?deel and vice versa.
Thus it does not necessitate that the one who has knowledge of the principles of jarhi wa ta?deel(that relate to narration) is likewise (due to his knowledge of that) well grounded in the manhaj of ahlus sunnah in dealing with the mukhaalif (those who oppose the sunnah, manhaj, aqeedah etc), this is a knowledge having its own principles and that is a knowledge having its principles, so reflect.
This point is made clear by shaikh naasirud deen al albaani in his book ?adh dhabul ahmad? (p34):
??and this is something that no one from the imams of hadeeth would say(referring to an erroneous statement that was mentioned earlier),not the early ones nor those from them who came later, and they alone are the ones who have the right to make jarh wa ta?deel, firstly due to this knowledge being their speciality, and secondly because they would not fear the blame of the blamers in that regard . For indeed they would make jarh of the one who was with them in aqeedah if the reasons for jarh were present with him and they would make tautheeq (ie refer to as trustworthy) the one who that was not present with (ie the reasons for jarh) even if they where in opposition to them in aqeedah??
From this statement of the shaikh we conclude:
1: that the shaikh here mentions that ?those who have the sole right to make jarh wa ta?deel are the imams of hadeeth?, clearly referring to that which is related to narration. For indeed it would not be percieveable that the shaikh here was referring to that which relates to the affairs of aqeedah. For if that were the case, if we had an aalim who was the most knowledgable of the people of the earth in any time of the usool of ahlus sunnah, their manhaj and aqeedah but didn?t have that same speciality in the more intricate sciences of hadeeth that if he clarifies the fact that such and such a person has opposed the usool of ahlus sunnah in such and such an affair that scholars statement is not accepted?!
2: That which clarifies that the intent of the shaikh is that which relates to riwaaya (narration) is his statement ??For indeed they would make jarh of the one who was with them in aqeedah if the reasons for jarh were present with him and they would make tautheeq (ie refer to as trustworthy) the one who that was not present with (ie the reasons for jarh) even if they where in opposition to them in aqeedah??
So we see therefore that the usage of the principles of jarh wa ta?deel are not absolute and a difference should be made between those issues that are specific to the refutation of the one who opposes the manhaj and one should not confuse the two matters???
|
|
| AbooTasneem
|
|
Member
Posts: 265
Joined: Sep 2002
|
Ahsanta Ya Aba Hakeem! Ahsant!
كن مستفيدا أو مفيدا
أو اسكت بحلم
|
|
| abulqayyim
|
|
Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Sep 2002
|
as salaamu alaikum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu,
baarakallaahu feek akh, this was an informative and beneficial post. i have a question though, because i want to know if i understand this right. concerning the quote from imaam adh-dhahabee from his book meezaanul i'tidaal about what he said about that narrator who was a "pure and staunch she'ee" but he was truthful, so i assume that his narrations were accepted because he was truthful, but the radd was made because of his aqeedah. my question is:
in this day and time, we have been warned against groups and individuals in particular, not to read their books nor take anything from them, but some of these individuals (and groups) do not have deviations that are as serious as this narrator that imaam adh-dhahabee mentions. and there are some individuals who have been warned against who are known to be truthful, have the aqeedah of the salaf, but have manaahij that are in opposition to the sunnah, yet if we take the truth from them and leave the evil (similar to what imaam adh-dhahabee said: "so for us is his truthfulness, and his bid'ah is upon him...")in this current time we could easily be accused of muwaazanah or accomodating the people of bid'ah. so where do we draw the line?
and what about a person who doesn't oppose the usool, but has deviations in the furoo', or has mistakes (major or minor) in manhaj (or aqeedah)? could we apply the same concept? i am in desperate need of more understanding concerning this, and any misunderstanding you may see on my part in what i have posted, i am in desperate need of correction as well.
was salaam alaikum
|
|
| abu.hakeem
|
|
Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Sep 2002
|
AL hamdullillah was salaatu was salaamu 'ala rasoolillahi , ammaa ba'd:-
Concerning this most important query it should be pointed out that the position of ahlul hadeeth in taking narrations from ahlul bid?ah differs from their position in taking ilm from them generally. Concerning taking their narration in hadeeth then ahlul hadeeth hold that to be permissible if one has the ability to ascertain their truthfulness in narration but as for taking ilm from them generally then their stance is no different and from the stance of the ulamaa of our time i.e. that of impermissibility except in certain very narrow circumstances.
For that reason sheikh ibraheem ar ruhaili in his book concerning the position of ahlus sunna with ahlul bid?ah mentions a chapter concerning the position of ahlus sunna in taking narrations from ahlul bid?ah then follows that up with a chapter concerning the position of ahlus sunna with regards to taking ilm from them generally and highlights the fact that the position of ahlus sunna in taking knowledge from them in general is quite different from their position with them in the affairs of narration.
He states: (vol 2 p 685) ??. even though narration (ar-riwaayah) it is a type of taking knowledge, it has a ruling that is specific to it due to that which is based upon ones accepting narrations or rejecting them from establishing a hadeeth and attributing it to the sunna or negating a hadeeth and passing the verdict upon it that it is not established upon the messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa salam) and passing a ruling in any of those cases is difficult.
For that reason the focal point in rejecting or accepting a narration with the scholars of hadeeth revolves around having an overwhelming belief that the narrator is truthful or not, with out looking towards the madhab of the narrator as long as he is a muslim as there is no way to be acquainted with that which is authentic or inauthentic from the sunnah except by way of that.
Thus the hadeeth of the messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa salam) is not taken from the liar even if he is from ahlus sunnah so as not to attribute to the messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa salam) that which is not from his sunnah.
Likewise the narration of the truthful is not rejected even if he has some innovation with him for if that were the case then that portion of the sunnah that some of the people of bid?ah were alone in narrating would have been lost?..(he goes on the state)?.as for the issue of taking knowledge from the people of bid?ah in that which is other than narration, like the explanation of some text and its exegesis or deriving and establishing rulings there from, then the case in that regard differs from narration and its rulings. For one would not look in this issue towards the truthful or untruthful nature (of the individual) as much as one would look towards the effect that he will or will not have upon his students in regards to that bid?ah. ?so from this stand point the two issues differ and have two different areas of study due to the difference in the ruling between them??
He then goes on to mention quotations from the salaf from them the statement of ali ibn abi taalib radhiyallahu anhu ?look towards who you take this knowledge from for indeed it is the religion? (collected by al khateebul baghdaadi in his book ?Al kifaayah? p 121)
wallahu ta'aala a'lam
|
|
|
01-01-2003 @ 12:00 AM
05-01-2003 @ 12:00 AM