فصلنامه علوم حدیث
سال بیست و یکم شماره 2 (پیاپی 80، تابستان 1395)

In the modern times the book Wasā'il al-Shī‘ah has been introduced among the jurisprudents and hadith scholars as the most important book that contains detrimental segmentations. Studying the characteristics of segmentation in the book Wasā'il al- Shī‘ah, this article finds and analyzes the detrimental cases of segmentation in this book and compares them with the book Jāmi` Ahādīth al- Shī‘ah with the purpose of evaluating the consequences of segmentation in this hadith collection. Exact detection of the cases of segmentation and the way it was done by the compiler, as well as the rareness of the detrimental cases of segmentation suggest the subtlety of Shaykh al-Ḥurr al-`Āmilī and the firmness of his method. With regard to cases other than the causes of issuance of hadith and transmitting the atmosphere surrounding it, the book Jāmi` Ahādīth al- Shī‘ah like Wasā'il al- Shī‘ah was prompted to segmentate the traditions. These cases represent that the detriments originating from segmentation in the book Wasā'il al-Shī`ah are very rare and can be prevented (by proper treatment).

Some of Shia scholars do not stipulate that the hadith transmitter must profess the Shia faith so that one may accept the hadith or a report he quotes from Prophet Muhammad (s. a. w) or from the pure Infallible Imams (a.s). They consider it sufficient that the hadith transmitters would be trustworthy. What confirms this is the history of Shia scholars denoting that they dealt with this subject from different standpoints to the extent that they had at times contradictory opinions about the reliability or unreliability of Sunni hadith transmitters. By making use of ascription-orientated way of library method and using descriptive-analytical way, this research intends to analyze the standpoints of the Shia scholars about the reliability of Sunni narrators during a time span between early scholars’ era and modern days. Contemplating the books of early scholars, particular authentications (tawthīqāt khāṣṣah) as well as general authentications (tawthīqāt ‘āmmah) about the Sunni narrators will be achieved. Later scholars, who follow the example of early ones, have stated in their works both types of authentications about the certain Sunni narrators. Making use of indications and evidences, they have analyzed their reports and have declared the reason for soundness of them. The present research has achieved comprehensive indications by juxtaposing different aspects of the fundamentals of both groups of Shia scholars. By studying some of the most important Rijal-orientated and hadith-orientated sources this research has stated statistics of the number of trustworthy Sunni narrators.

In certain Shia and Sunni hadith books some traditions are found denoting that the Prophet (s.a.w) and the Infallible Imams (a.s) had no shadows. The traditionists and writers that have recognized these traditions, maintained this characteristic as a miracle for the sacred pure Infallibles; however, on the contrary most of the thinkers either kept silent and adopted no stance) when they faced such traditions or did not cite them in their books to imply their weakness (in their opinion). In a broad outline most of these traditions suffer from weakness in their chains of transmission (isnads). In other words, their isnads suffer from the defect of infirād, and do not contain trustworthy transmitters, as well. Moreover, their texts seem to be unacceptable when they are criticized, or presented to the Quran. Unconditional acceptance of these traditions paves the way for the extravagant and extremist claims about the Infallibles. In addition, it gives the opponents pretext to mention sarcasms against the Shia.

Najāshī, the great Shia Rijal expert despite his style in the book of alFihrist (known as Rijāl al-Najāshī), when introduces Muhammad b. Hasan Shammūn, he quotes three traditions from him all relevant to his denomination and thought. Najāshī describes Muhammad b. Hasan as a Waqifite first, and then a ghālī (extremist). He has selected the first two traditions obviously in connection with the thought of the Waqifites. It seems that he has selected the third tradition to introduce an outstanding thought of the ghālīs. It is unanimously believed by the Rijal experts that Muhammad b. Hasan Shammūn was a ghālī. Moreover, his narrations of traditions confirm this claim to the extent that Dūwūd b. Kathīr al-Riqqī - an intermediary from whom Muhammad b. Hasan has received the tradition – is accused to be a ghālī and even one of key personalities of the trend of the ghuluww (extremism). In addition to this isnad – that cannot be found in any of Imamī sources – the purport of above tradition: "sawā' 'alā al-nāsibī ṣallā am zanā" (it does not make any difference for a Nāṣibī to pray or fornicate) has been quoted with four isnads – the common link of which being Ḥanān b. Sadīr, the Waqifite – in certain hadith sources. However, in addition to the textual incongruity (iḍṭirāb), imperfection in isnads or even lack of isnads (irsāl) in these traditions, this idea is reinforced that Sudayf Makkī is unknown, and Sahl b. Ziyād is accused of being a ghālī and that Ḥanān b. Sadīr – the shared transmitter of this tradition in different isnads- is likely a ghālī.

Amongst Shia hadith collections Biḥār al-Anwār has gained a greater significance due to its total comprehensiveness from the aspect of subjects, sources and its hadith content, as well as the scholarly presence of his compiler, 'Allamah Muhammad Baqir Majlisi in the book. By studying this book and the comments furnished by the compiler one clearly notices the selective treatment of 'Allamah Majlisi with regard to the sources and the traditions. Following in footsteps of the earlier traditionists in assessment of the validity of hadiths, he considered textual indications more important than the isnad-orientated indications. This article by making use of a descriptive-analytical method on the seventh volume of the book Biḥār al-Anwār dealing with the traditions addressing divinely appointed leadership (imamate) shows that the compiler was text-orientated in selecting the traditions, and mostly benefited from genuine early Shia sources which contained musnad hadiths (traditions furnished with isnads). His method in most of the cases was taking advantage of a collection of traditions of a chapter from a particular source to complete a hadith family on a particular subject. However, in certain cases, the reason for giving precedence to a source over another is not clear.

Islamic expense model requires the allowance of the individuals in profiting by their incomes to the extent of sufficiency and to spend money for their dependents this way. In the traditions, the expense that exceeds the extent of sufficiency is considered as an instance of extravagance (isrāf) and thus is prohibited. Government is bound to draw up a program that may pave the way for the gaining of income and living on it (expenditure) to the extent of sufficiency for all individuals. However, certain Muslim thinkers by relying upon certain traditions claim that an increase in someone's means of subsistence (tawsiah) is indeed the desired limit of expense in Islam, and that expenditure to the extent of this increase is not considered as isrāf. Therefore, it is desired that all individuals would make preparations for their dependents to the level of increase in their means of subsistence. The government is also bound to program for all individuals to this extent of income and expense. This study, carried out in the library method and through text analysis of Islamic sources with explaining the concept of sufficiency and increase in someone's means of subsistence, proves that what is meant in the traditions and other religious teachings by the phrase 'increase in someone's means of subsistence', is the same limit of sufficiency (kafāf).

Some of the traditions were narrated by individuals who had permission from the Infallibles in certain fields to act as proxy for them. Yet this proxy neither entails the approval of their trustworthiness by the Infallibles nor the reliability of their narrations. On the other hand, the things that can be considered as evidences for unreliability of these traditions are questionable. By contemplating the different expressions stated by the Imams about these hadith transmitters and considering their status and position it becomes proved, however, that the narrations of a group of them are reliable, while those of the others are not so.