فصلنامه علوم حدیث
سال بیست و ششم شماره 1 (پیاپی 99، بهار 1400)

One of the major sources of the commentary of the Qur’an is the traditions transmitted from the Infallibles (‘a.s.). Considering the occurrence of fabrication among certain of traditions, there is no disagreement about the necessity of validity assessment of the traditions transmitted from them. However, there is a terrible lack of harmony between the validity assessment of those traditions and the results achieved from them. Having applied a leniently acceptance some scholars have relied on unacceptable traditions for their commentary, while some others due to their impetuous rejection have excluded numerous interpretive traditions from the scope of validity. The damages occurred in the validity assessment of those traditions originate from weak foundations of certain scholars’ hadith scholarship. This article intends to detect the damages of the validity assessment fundamentals of the interpretive traditions and to explain them. They include: 1) assuming that all traditions cited from past sources have definitely been issued from the Infallibles; 2) the assumption of contradiction between extremism (ghuluww) and reliability (withāqah); 3) assumption of ghuluww of a hadith transmitter (rāwī) entails the fabrication of his traditions; 4) holding that the authenticity of the interpretive traditions depends on the occurrence of their purport in the Qur’an; 5) assuming that the validity of the isolated tradition (khabar al-wāhid) depends on the reporter's reliability  (withāqah mukhbiriyyah); 6) holding that the authenticity of the interpreted traditions depends on their conformity with the context (siyāq)..

This article chronically deals with the evaluation of the compilation method of any of the [three] compilers of the Four Book in the “kitāb al-mazār” (chapter of the ziyarat of the Infallibles) contained in these books. In a comparative study on the compilation method of any of the compilers of the Four Books in their kitāb al-mazār we find both similarities and distinctions. These similarities are easily found in the general structure of certain sections of them, however, concerning the proportion of the sections, the titles given to them, the order of hadiths, propounding the cases briefly or elaborately, the jurisprudential glosses on the traditions, discussions on hadith comprehension (fiqh al-ḥadīth) concerning the hadiths, and certain other aspects, they seem fully distinct from one another. The finding of this study is that in the course of time the kitāb al-mazār chapter of any of the Four Books compared with the earlier one is more comprehensive from the aspect of subject, and has more reasonable arrangement from the aspect of type of compilation  so that the kitāb al-mazār by Shaykh al-Ṭūsī compared with the two kitāb al-mazārs compiled by his predecessors is more comprehensive and more methodological; the sections are more organized from the aspect of arrangement and order, and the hadiths are longer and the scope of topics is broader. The same is true for the kitāb al-mazār by Shaykh al-Ṣadūq in comparison with the kitāb al-mazār compiled by Shaykh al-Kulaynī.

begins with “yā-man arjūhu li kulli khayr”(O He Whom alone I hope for all good things) cited along with its manner of recitation by Shaykh ‘Abbās al-Qummī in his Mafātīḥ al-Jinān (lit. keys to the gardens of Paradise) from Iqbāl al-A‘māl by Sayyid Ibn Ṭāwūs. The states of Imam Ja‘far al-Ṣādiq (‘a.s.) while reciting this du‘a, as Ibn Ṭāwūs has reported, suffers from ambiguities removal of which to discover the truth requires research and analysis. Making a search in the Imami old hadith texts indicates that such texts similar to this du‘a with differences in the text, isnad, and way of recitation have been transmitted in such sources as al-Kāfī, Rijal al-Kashshi, and Miṣbāḥ al-Mutahajjid. There exist evidences indicating that among the old sources the closest [i.e. the most similar] text to [that of the] Iqbāl al-A‘māl by Sayyid Ibn Ṭāwūs is the report of al-Kashshi. Allamah al-Majlisi in his Zād al-Ma‘ād has combined the report of Sayyid Ibn Ṭāwūs and that of al-Kashshī and seemingly by means of the traditions contained in the Kitāb al-Du‘ā’ of al-Kāfī, has commentated the ambiguous phrases in Sayyid Ibn Ṭāwūs’s report. The manner prevailing among the devotees while reciting this noble du‘a originates from what Allamah al-Majlisi has prescribed in his Zād al-Ma‘ād. This study indicates that although Allamah al-Majlisi has been somehow rightful in commentating the ambiguous phrases of Ibn Ṭāwūs’s report, his prescription seems partially incompatible with the text of [the du‘a in]  Iqbāl al-A‘māl. An investigation of the isnads of this du‘a shows that none of the versions of du‘a has an authentic isnad. However, the indications and evidences including the quotations of such personalities as al-Kulaynī, al-Kashshī, Shaykh al-Ṭūsī and Ibn Ṭāwūs can altogether bring about this certainty that such purports have been on the whole issued from Imam Ja‘far al-Sadiq (‘a.s.), although such a certainty is not gained with respect to the details related to it (including its recitation in a particular time or in a specific manner).

One of the obvious characteristics of Shi’a hadiths is that they have been transmitted in writing; therefore, for the early scholars one of the validity assessment methods has been the investigation of the hadith sources. Recognition of the existing methods in this kind of validity assessment requires analysis the early scholars’ function. Having applied a descriptive-analytical method this article presents methods of distinguishing the written sources of Shaykh al-Ṣadūq and the kind of his treatment with these works. Shaykh al-Ṣadūq’s way of validity assessment in the field of written hadiths can be divided in three categories: acceptance of the hadith-oriented source on the whole; rejection of the book wholly; and partial acceptance of the work. In these classifications such factors as a) identifying the correctness and incorrectness of the attribution of the book to the compiler, b) teachers and mentors (mashāyikh) of the compiler of the book, c) kind of the book content, d) method of receiving the book and transmitting it, e) validity rank of the copy of the book and f) the personality of the narrator (rāwī) of the book have been instrumental. It seems that the factors influencing in these classifications are true for other early scholars.

To model oneself on the Prophet (s.a.w.) is not always an easy task; at times due to historical limitations it becomes difficult to follow in his footsteps. In such conditions one should consider what the modern age requires and should modernize the Prophet’s behaviors according to the present culture; a case that will not occur by reliance upon the appearance of the texts dealing with the Prophet’s conduct and life story (sīrah), and is in need of defining the fundamentals and basic beliefs. The present article attempts to explain the fundamentals and the effective presumptions for modernization of the Prophet’s acts, and this way it paves the way for benefiting from this sort of the Prophet’s acts and to makes it possible to broaden the scope of the instances of the Prophetic conduct (sīrah nabawiyyah). The results gained from this study show that by accepting the five basic fundamentals that have been achieved through an analytical-exploratory method, it becomes possible to analyze the Prophet’s acts in a modern way, and that his behavior and conducts can be updated according to the modern cultural and environmental atmosphere.

Belittling the women, disregarding their capabilities and deeming the women’s management inefficient is one of the observable trends in the history of societies including the Muslim society. The case study of this research is the tradition “lan yaflihḥa qawmun asnadū amrahum ilā imra’atin” (Any people who commend their affairs to a woman will never see prosperity).  Analyzing the opinions of those who approve and those who disapprove the [reliability of the] tradition, as well as the cultural, political and social factors and backgrounds of the issuance of such traditions constitutes the problem of the present study. Having applied an analytical-critical method this research demonstrates limiting thoughts that by gradual return to the precedents of the Pre-Islamic era (jāhiliyyah) prevent the women not only from political and social macro management and decision making, but also from acquiring literacy, going to markets and even attending the mosques. It may even lead to house arrest of the women! Regardless of the discussions pertaining to the dating of this hadith, and supposing that it is authentic, it should be noted that this hadith had been accepted by most of intellectual trends of the Sunni community during the second to the eighth centuries AH, and that due to its frequent quotation it has also crept into Shi’a hadith collections such as  Kitāb al-Khilāf and Biḥār al-Anwār. Despite its occurrence in Shi’a sources, this idea has less advocates among the Shiites (compared with the Sunnis). Having studied the historical conditions of the early Islamic decades one notices that such factors and backgrounds as the conquests, the Companions' and the Successors' engagement in wars, and exertion of personal tastes by the caliphs [altogether] caused the return to the tribal precedents and those pertaining to the Pre-Islamic era, thus disregarding the women. The religious new thinking trend with its critical approach believes that whether the text of this kind of traditions is considered as fabricated, or is deemed originated from a historical and regional understanding, the achieved result will be the same: such traditions are rejected.

In order for them to evaluate the traditions, the Imami scholars used the two terms of ṣaḥīḥ (authentic) and da‘īf (weak). Based on the indications one of which was the isnad of hadith, judged a hadith as being ṣaḥīḥ or da‘īf, until the theory of tarbī‘ (quadripartite) was applied by Allamah al-Ḥillī. He classified the hadiths based on their isnads to the four categories of ṣaḥīḥ (authentic), ḥasan (good), muwaththaq (reliable) and da‘īf (weak). Considering the numerous criticisms of the scholars on this evaluation method, we decided in this study to statistically investigate the commitment degree of Allamah al-Ḥillī in acting on the coinage of new terms and the isnad-orientedness. Based on the achieved results, he has not been committed, in many cases, to his terms and that the number of da‘īf traditions upon which he acted exceeds the total number of sahaih, ḥasan and muwathathaq hadiths. Therefore, despite the fact that he is among the pioneers in the isnad-oriented approach of the criticism of hadith, he has not applied this method in his works.

For long there has been disputes (or controversies) about the character of Sulaym as well as authenticity and validity of Kitāb Sulaym ibn Qays in the Shi’a sources. Most of those who approve the validity of this book, insist on mentioning the confirmatory viewpoints of the early scholars and present acceptable isnads for it and this way they either prove the validity of this book or correct it or better its validity condition. In the meanwhile, one of the manuscripts of Kitāb Sulaym ibn Qays preceded with Shaykh al-Ṭūsī’s isnad is of high importance. However, considering the serious ambiguities existing in the isnad attributed to Shaykh al-Ṭūsī , along with evidences and indications available among the works of the Shaykh and the fundamentals of the early scholars, it seems that the newly written isnad existing in a manuscript of Kitāb Sulaym ibn Qays is not indeed the isnad and the path (ṭarīq) of the Shaykh, and that certain individuals have knowingly or unknowingly fabricated and added it to the late manuscript of the book attributed to Sulaym while transcribing it.