الراوي المختلف فيه جرحًا وتعديلاً تعريفه - المؤلفات فيه - أسباب اختلاف النقاد - حکم روايته

عنوان المقالة [English]

The differing narrator has a wound and a modification of his definition - the literature on it - the reasons for the critics’ disagreement - the ruling on his narration.

المؤلفون [English]

Prof. Mustafa Abu Zaid Mahmoud Rashwan .

Assistant Professor of Hadith and its Sciences Faculty of Islamic and Arabic Studies for Girls in Sohag

المستخلص [English]

Abstract:

Defining the ranks of Hadith-tellers respecting the aspects of invalidation or amendment has become one of the most paramount affairs appertaining to 'the students learning the science of Hadith' However, confining the real rank of the disputed Hadith-narrator is regarded as the most difficult and sophisticated one of all as he is the one that critics' views have become various and contradictory.  Each has their evidences. Some consider it a kind of invalidation; on the contrary, others emphasize the fact of amendment and it is a compromise way between trustworthiness and weakness.

Each has their own proofs on which there are a lot of evidences and sound reasons are based. Some assume discordance. Others assert disagreement. Thus the reasons have become various and diverse.

Some see the reasons why they are disagreeing are due to their strictness, lenience and moderation whereas others see there's accordance between a critic and whose Hadith-transmission that could be reviewed so they are both peers and vehement to each other.

Some see that 'Hadith-teller is to be the one who is able to review his own works so he disagrees to be reviewed by anyone else.

Others see the idioms coined by some critics could be misunderstood while other ones see that's all owing to the dissimilarity of some critics' political or dogmatic doctrines that have resulted in severe criticism. However, others see that this is due to critic's insufficient experience and incomplete knowledge of whom he is criticizing.

Critics' views on the disputed Hadith-tellers are mainly based upon the following principles:-

1. The first principle is that the disputed Hadith-narrator's Hadith transmission is thus ranked "good" as long as he is the only one who does this, simultaneously no one else narrates such a Hadith. However, this is due to two restrictions: The first is concerning considering the reasons why the Hadith narrated is so weak owing to a certain Sheikh. In this way, the Hadith is ranked "Weak". The second is that the Hadith-teller isn't opposing whoever is stronger than him. (i.e. he shouldn't oppose a similar Hadith narrated by having strong confidence.)
2. The second principle is that the disputed Hadith-narrator must be more trustworthy. (i.e. he must be witnessed that he adheres to fairness and impartiality).
3. The third principle is that the reasons for considering the hadith narrated is somewhat weak are often owing to Hadith-narrator's misremembering.

Among all the disputed Hadith- narrators mentioned in this dissertation are apparently shown to be 'men of the fifth rank' listed out of the ranks of "Approximation of Rectification" by "Hafez  Ibn Hagar"  Consequently, the previous judgment applied only to Hadith-tellers of such this rank but not as some claim absolute weakness.

الکلمات الرئيسية [English]

(People of Trust) (Al-Jarh wa’l-Ta’deel) (Different in it) (Ratios of Narrators) (Weak) (Hadeeth Narrator).