Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis Ae ISSN: 1411-6855 .
2548-4737 .
Vol.
No.
2 (Juli 2.
, hlm.
498-521, doi: 10.
14421/qh.
https://ejournal.
uin-suka.
id/ushuluddin/qurdis/index Article History: Submitted: 18-12-24 Revised: 13-02-25 Accepted: 20-06-25 The Consistency of Ibn ibbAn to the ujjiyyah Narrated by alMudallsn in auu Ibn ibbAn Konsistensi Ibn ibbAn dengan ujjiyyah yang diriwayatkan oleh al-Mudallsn dalam auu Ibn ibbAn Mohd Nor Adli bin Osman * .
Muhamad Rozaimi bin Ramle .
(*)Islamic Studies Section.
School of Humanities.
Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 USM.
Pulau Pinang.
Malaysia.
adliosman@usm.
Department of Islamic Studies.
Faculty of Human Sciences.
Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, 35900 Tanjung Malim.
Perak & Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Tuanku Syed Sirajuddin, 02000 Kuala Perlis.
Perlis Abstract Imam Ibn ibbAn was a prominent scholar in various Islamic sciences, particularly uadth.
Among his major works is auu Ibn ibbAn.
In this book, as well as in other works such as al-ThiqAt and alMajrun min al-Muuaddithn, he explicitly stated that he would not accept uadth narrations classified as riwAyah al-mudallas.
However, instances of such narrations appear in auu Ibn ibbAn, indicating differences in the methodology applied across these works.
Furthermore, notable discrepancies exist between Ibn ibbAnAos definition of riwAyah al-mudallas and those of other muuaddithn.
This study aims to examine Ibn ibbAn Aos definition of riwAyah al-mudallas and evaluate the consistency of his methodology in addressing these narrations.
To achieve these objectives, the research employs a qualitative approach, collecting data primarily from major uadth sources and analyzing them using both inductive and deductive methods.
The findings of this study reveal that Ibn ibbAn defines al-mudallis as a narrator who reports from a teacher they have met but narrates reports they have not directly heard or a narrator who reports from a contemporary without ever meeting them, using terminology that implies otherwise.
Moreover.
Ibn ibbAn followed his methodological principles and objectives when including riwAyah al-mudallas in his auu.
This study contributes to a deeper understanding of the concept of riwAyah al-mudallas among uadth scholars and Ibn ibbAnAos approach in addressing these narrations in his collection.
Keywords: Ibn ibbAn, auu Ibn ibbAn.
RiwAyah Al-Mudallas .
Methodology.
AoAnAoanah Abstrak:
Imam Ibn ibbAn adalah sosok terkemuka di berbagai bidang ilmu pengetahuan Islam, termasuk ilmu uadts.
Di antara karya besarnya adalah auu Ibn ibbAn.
Dalam kitab ini, serta dalam karya lainnya seperti al-ThiqAt dan al-Majrun min al-Muuaddithn, ia secara tegas menyatakan bahwa ia tidak akan menerima riwayat uadth yang diklasifikasikan sebagai riwAyah al-mudallas.
Namun, terdapat beberapa riwayat semacam itu dalam auu Ibn ibbAn, yang menunjukkan adanya perbedaan metodologi yang diterapkan dalam karya-karyanya tersebut.
Selain itu, terdapat perbedaan yang cukup signifikan antara definisi Ibn ibbAn tentang riwAyah al-mudallas dengan definisi para muuaddithn Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji definisi riwAyah al-mudallas menurut Ibn ibbAn dan mengevaluasi konsistensi metodologinya dalam menyikapi riwayat-riwayat tersebut.
Untuk mencapai tujuan ini, penelitian menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif, dengan mengumpulkan data terutama dari sumber-sumber utama uadth dan menganalisisnya melalui metode induktif dan deduktif.
Temuan A 2025.
The Author Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives BY-NC-ND: This work is licensed under a Jurnal Studi Ilmu-ilmu AlQurAoan dan Hadis Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.
0 International License .
ttps://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.
0/) which permits non-comercial use, reproduction, and distribution of the work whitout further permission provided the original work is attributed as spesified on Jurnal Studi Ilmu-ilmu Al-QurAoan dan Hadis and Open Access pages.
Adli.
Rozaimi penelitian ini mengungkapkan bahwa Ibn ibbAn mendefinisikan al-mudallis sebagai seorang perawi yang meriwayatkan dari guru yang pernah ia temui tetapi menyampaikan riwayat yang tidak ia dengar secara langsung, atau seorang perawi yang meriwayatkan dari sezaman tanpa pernah bertemu dengannya, dengan menggunakan istilah yang seolah-olah menunjukkan sebaliknya.
Selain itu.
Ibn ibbAn berpegang pada prinsip dan tujuan metodologisnya ketika memasukkan riwAyah al-mudallas dalam auu-nya.
Penelitian ini memberikan kontribusi dalam memperdalam pemahaman tentang konsep riwAyah al-mudallas di kalangan ulama uadth serta pendekatan Ibn ibbAn dalam menyikapi riwayat-riwayat tersebut dalam karyanya.
Kata Kunci: Ibn ibbAn, auu Ibn ibbAn.
RiwAyah Al-Mudallas .
Metodologi, `An`anah Introduction During the second and third centuries hijri, the evolution of uadth terminology peaked with the appearance of fundamental classifications such as auu, uasan, saf, and maws.
Advanced isnad-related terminology like al-munqai, almudallas, al-mursal, al-musal, and al-musarib1 emerged as particularly important in discussions on saf uadth, building upon these foundations.
RiwAyah al-mudallas gained prominence among them because of its close relationship to isnAd continuity, a key factor in uadth authentication.
In general terms, the definition of riwAyah almudallas is aptly articulated by Ibn ajar al-AsqalAn, who describes it as follows:
A narrator who has met his teacher transmits a report which he did not actually hear directly from that teacher, yet he relates it using ambiguous wording that gives the impression of direct auditory transmission.
This definition highlights the critical role of taru bi al-samA in verifying a studentAos direct reception of uadth from his teacher.
The absence of such a declaration renders the transmission epistemically questionable, placing the uadth in the category of saf.
However.
If the uadths in the auu Ibn ibbAn are examined more comprehensively, one will find several uadths at the level of riwAyah almudallas in the book.
The existence of these uadths is due to the fact that there are several narrators of riwAyah al-mudallas who were evaluated by Ibn ibbAn and who narrate in AoanAoanah, which indirectly makes the narrated uadth considered riwAyah al-mudallas.
Among the uadths are:
Muuammad AjjAj al-Khab.
Ul al-adth: Ulmuhu wa Mualauuhu (Beyrut: Dar Al-Fikr, 2.
Ibn ajar al-AsqalAn.
Tarf Ahl al-Taqds bi-MarAtib al-Mawf n bi-al-Tadls, ed.
`Asim `Abd Allah (Lebanon: Maktabah Al-Manar, 2.
, 16 Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26, no.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 The Consistency of Ibn ibbAn to the ujjiyyah.
Muuammad ibn Abd AllAh ibn al-Junayd transmitted to us.
Qutaybah ibn Sad narrated to us, saying: Hushaym narrated to, from umayd.
It was narrated from Anas that: The Prophet used to go round to all his wives with one bath.
Hushaym is widely recognized by major nuqqAd such as al-Ijl4.
Ibn Sad5, and Ibn ibbAn6 as a narrator who engaged in tadls.
Harald Motzki7 notes that prior to Ibn al-alAu, ananah was accepted with greater flexibility, as seen in early sources like the Muannaf of Abd al-RazzAq.
However, after the era of Ibn al-alAu scholarship, uadth scholarshipAiparticularly as represented by al-AlbAnAos method, analyzed by Muhammad AminAiadopted stricter standards, especially toward almudallis.
Consequently.
HushaymAos use of ananah has come under greater scrutiny in post-classical uadth criticism due to concerns about possible disruptions in the transmission chain.
This finding is indirectly different from the stance expressed by Ibn ibbAn at the beginning of this book, where explicitly refused to include the uadths of riwAyah al-mudallas in his work.
The following statements illustrate Ibn ibbAnAos position on his methodology, including those found in al-ThiqAt: 9 AuIn the sanads, there are al-mudallis who do not explain to a khabar .
from whom they hear it.
So indeed, the al-mudallis, as long as he does not explain that he heard from his teacher, it is not necessary to argue with the khabar because there is no certainty that the narrator heard from his teacher who is saf and the khabar becomes invalid by mentioning the name of the teacher when he is found and identified.
As long as the almudallis does not mention in the khabar AoI heardAo or Aohe has told me,Ao even though he is a thiqah, then it is not permissible to argue with his khabar.
Ay Muuammad Ibn ibban, auu Ibn ibbAn, ed.
Shuayb al-Arna, 3rd ed.
(Beyrut: Muasasah Al-Risalah, 2.
, 356.
JamAl al-Dn Ab al-ajjAj Ysuf ibn Abd al-RaumAn al-Mizz.
Tahdhb al-KamAl f AsmA al-RijAl, ed.
BashshAr AwwAd Marf.
(Lubnan: Muasassah Al-Risalah, 1.
, 283 JamAl al-Dn Ab al-ajjAj Ysuf ibn Abd al-RaumAn al-Mizz.
Tahdhb al-KamAl f AsmA al-RijAl, 283 Muhammad bin ibbAn.
Al-ThiqAt, (Beyrut: Dar Al-Kutub Al-`Illmiyyiah, 1.
, 587 Harald Motzki.
The Muannaf of Abd al-RazzAq al-anAn as a Source of Authentic AuAdth of the First Century AH.
Journal of Near Eastern Studies.
Vol.
No.
,1-22, https://doi.
org/10.
1086/373461
Kamarudin Amin.
Nasiruddin al-Albani on MuslimAos Sahih: A Critical Study of His Method.
Islamic Law and Society, 11 no 2, .
149-176, https://w.
org/stable/3399302.
Muhammad Ibn ibbAn.
Al-ThiqAt,11.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26.
No.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 Adli.
Rozaimi The same thing was also stated by Ibn ibbAn in the Al-Majrun min AlMuuaddithn 10:
AuThe narrators of thiqah al-mudallis who also hide .
he names of their teacher.
in their reports, such as QatAdah.
YauyA ibn Ab Kathr, alAmash.
Ab IsuAq.
Ibn Jurayj.
Ibn IsuAq, al-Thawr.
Hushaym, and the like, are numerous.
They are among the imams who are called pious and known for the waraAo in the religion.
They write from all teachers, narrate from whom they listen, and sometimes do al-tadls from their teachers after they hear from them in groups considered weak, so it is not permissible to argue with their khabar.
As long as the al-mudallis does not mention in his khabar, even if he is a thiqah.
Aotold to meAo or AoI heard,Ao then it is not permissible to argue with his khabar.
Ay Likewise, it is also found in the muqaddimah of the auu Ibn ibbAn11:
AuAs for the al-mudallis who belong to the thiqah and AojustAo people, we do not argue with their khabar unless they have explained what they heard from their teachers, such as al-Thawr, al-Amash.
Ab IsuAq, and the like from among the pious imams, members of the religion.
Because when we receive the khabar of al-mudallis that he did not explain what he heard from his teachers, even if they are thiqah, it means that we are also forced to accept the narrations of al-munqai and mursal in their entirety because it is not known that this al-mudallis could have done al-tadls in this khabar from a saf.
By saying his name, the khabar became saf when identified.
Ay Ibn ibbAn, based on his statements in three key works, appears to reject narrations from al-mudallis.
However.
Muhammad Abu Shualik, in ZawAid Ibn ibbAn: DirAsah wa Naqd, identifies several mudallas uadths within auu Ibn ibbAn, suggesting inconsistency in Ibn ibbAnAos own methodology.
This raises critical questions: Did Ibn ibbAn consistently apply his stated criteria? This paper critically examines selected isnAd to assess whether his practice aligns with his theoretical The term uujjiyyah here refers to the probative value of a uadth, its capacity to serve as a valid source for religious rulings or argumentation.
Clarifying this concept is central to evaluating Ibn ibbAnAos methodological consistency.
10 Muuammad Ibn ibban, al-Majrun min al-Muuaddithn, ed.
Hamdi `Abd Al-Majid, 2nd ed.
(Riyadh:
Dar Al-Shami`i, 2.
, 86.
11 Ibn ibbAn.
Sahih Ibn ibbAn, 61.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26, no.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 The Consistency of Ibn ibbAn to the ujjiyyah.
Comparison Between Mutaqaddimn and Mutaakhkhirn in adth Authentication Studies on uadth criticism among classical and modern scholars have demonstrated significant developments from the era of mutaqaddimn to mutaakhkhirn.
For instance.
Al-MuwAzanah bayna al-Mutaqaddimn wa alMutaAoakhkhirn f Tauu al-AuAdth wa TaAollihA by Hamzah al-MalbAr12 focuses on the differences between the methods accepted by earlier scholars and the newer approaches in uadth criticism.
This is particularly true when it comes to identifying factors that influence the authenticity and weakness of uadths.
Al-MalbAr highlighted how the traditional method of eAhir al-isnAd used by mutaqaddimn scholars has evolved, especially with the application of ilAl al-uadth by modern critics in assessing the soundness of both the chain and the text of the uadth.
In NaearAt Jaddah f Ulm al-adth, amzah al-MalbAr compared the approach of the mutaqaddimn, which emphasized the practical application of uadth criticism, with the theoretical perspectives adopted by the mutaAoakhkhirn, particularly in the analysis of ilAl al-uadth to assess the authenticity of uadth.
This study offers a new perspective on the development of uadth sciences from the practical to the theoretical aspects.
On the other hand, al-Manhaj al-Muqtarau li Fahm al-Mualau by Atim al-Awn 14 provides a more systematic approach to understanding the technical terms .
of uadth criticism, particularly in the context of evaluating and applying mustalau relevant to uadth studies.
Nashat Ilm al-Mualau wa al-add al-FAil bayna al-Mutaqaddimn wa al-Mutaakhkhirn by IAm d15 provided a historical analysis of the emergence of mustalau al-hadith and the clear distinctions in the approaches of mutaqaddimn and mutaAoakhkhirn in identifying authentic and weak uadths.
Meanwhile.
Hadith Criticism in the Levant in the Twentieth Century.
From eAhir al-IsnAd to IlAl al-adth by Aumad nbar16 examined the shift in the approach to uadth criticism in the Levant in the 20th century, which influenced 12 amzah Abd AllAh al-MalbAr, al-MuwAzanah bayna al-Mutaqaddimn wa al-MutaAoakhkhirn f Tauu al-AuAdth wa TaAollihA, (Lubnan: Dar Ibn Haz.
13 amzah Abd AllAh al-MalbAr.
NaearAt Jaddah f Ulm al-adth: DirAsah Naqdiyyah wa MuqAranah bayna al-JAnib al-Tabq ladA al-Mutaqaddimn wa al-JAnib al-Naear inda al-Mutaakhkhirn,(Lubnan:
Dar Ibn Haz.
14 Atim Arif al-Awn.
Al-Manhaj Al-Muqtarau li Fahm Al-Mualau, (Riyadh: Dar Al-Hijrah, 1.
, 107 15 Muuammad IAm d.
Nashat Ilm al-Mualau wa al-add al-FAil bayna al-Mutaqaddimn wa alMutaakhkhirn, (Azwiqat: Jordan, 2.
, 169.
16 Ahmad Snober.
Hadith Criticism In The Levant in the Twentieth Century: From eAhir al-IsnAd to IlAl aladth.
(Edinburgh: University Press, 2.
, 56 Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26.
No.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 Adli.
Rozaimi intellectual currents in the Islamic world, with a focus on the transition from eAhir al-isnAd to the acceptance of IlAl al-adth as a method for reinforcing the accuracy of uadth evaluation.
In Min al-Nab allA AllAhu alayhi wa sallama ilA al-BukhAr.
Ahmad Snober traced the development of uadth criticism from the time of the Prophet Muuammad (PBUH) through to the compilation of auu al-BukhAr.
The book explored how early scholars evaluated uadth and compared their methods with those employed by later scholars like al-BukhAr, highlighting shifts in criteria for authenticity and the evolution of uadth sciences over time.
In Nasiruddin al-Albani on MuslimAos Sahh: A Critical Study of His Method by Kamaruddin Amin18, the study of al-AlbaniAos methodology demonstrated how he adapted the zAhir al-isnAd method in assessing the authenticity of hadth, despite facing criticisms regarding the lack of consideration for historical context and deeper analysis of narrators.
Together, these studies form a broader and deeper understanding of the development of methodologies in hadith criticism, offering insight into how contemporary scholars renew and adjust the methods of hadth evaluation to address new challenges in hadth studies.
Scope and Methodology This article examines the consistency of Ibn HibbAnAos methodology in dealing with riwAyah al-mudallas in his Sahh.
While his preambles in Sahh Ibn HibbAn, al-ThiqAt, and al-Majrhn min al-Mudaddithn indicate a rejection of al-mudallis, research reveals the presence of several such reports transmitted via 'an'anah.
This study collects relevant narrations and analyzes them using inductive and deductive methods to evaluate whether Ibn HibbAnAos practice aligns with his stated criteria regarding al-mudallis.
Background of Writing the Book auu Ibn ibbAn As already explained, the real name of the book auu Ibn ibbAn is al-Musnad Al-auu alA Al-TaqAsim Wa Al-AnwA Min Ghayr Wujd Qa F SanadihA Wa LA Thubt Jaru F NAqilhA.
However, apart from being known as auu Ibn ibbAn, 17 Ahmad Snober.
Min al-Nab allA AllAhu alayhi wa sallama ilA al-BukhAr: DirAsah f arakah Riwayat al-adth wa Naqduhu f al-Qurn al-ThalAth al-wal (Jordan: Dar Al-Fath, 2.
, 98 18 Kamarudin Amin.
Nasiruddin al-Albani on MuslimAos Sahih: A Critical Study of His Method.
Islamic Law and Society, 11 no 2, .
149-176, https://w.
org/stable/3399302.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26, no.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 The Consistency of Ibn ibbAn to the ujjiyyah.
this book is also known as al-AnwA wa Al-TaqAsim by al-Dhahab.
Meanwhile, according to al-Suy and al-Haytham, auu Ibn ibbAn is known as Al-TaqAsim wa al-AnwA.
Ibn ibbAn compiled auu Ibn ibbAn to address the communityAos growing neglect of authentic uadth, amid a rise in fabricated reports and the mixing of valid sanad with false matan.
Concerned by this trend, he took proactive steps to collect and document authentic narrations based on his criteria of auu, aiming to preserve reliable reports and guide the public back to sound prophetic traditions.
Writing Methodology Book of auu Ibn ibbAn The compilation of auu Ibn ibbAn has provided a platform for scholars to critically examine its methodological framework.
Al-Suy, for instance, compared this work with auu Ibn Khuzaymah and regarded the latter as more authoritative, primarily due to Ibn KhuzaymahAos tawaqquf in authenticating uadths that had been subject to criticism.
20 However, contemporary uadth scholar Shaykh Shuayb alArna offered a contrasting assessment.
He observed that auu Ibn Khuzaymah contains several inauthentic uadths with weak chains of isnAd21, leading him to conclude that auu Ibn ibbAn holds a superior position in terms of uadth quality.
Furthermore, within the post-canonical era, auu Ibn ibbAn played a pivotal role in the transmission and standardization of uadth, owing to its unique structural arrangement and its sustained influence on scholarly discourse beyond the canonical Ibn ibbAn Aos Conditions of Gathering Sanad-Sanad auu in the Book Ibn ibbAn has placed five basic conditions for each narrator who is in the range of sanad in his authentic book as an indicator of the validity of a sanad.
These 19 Ajj Khalfah.
Kashf al-eunn an AsAm al-Kutub wa al-Funn, ( London: Muasassah Al-Furqan Li Turath Al-Islamiyyah, 2.
, 556.
20 Abd al-RaumAn Ab Bakr JalAl al-Dn.
Tadrb Al-RAw, ed.
Muhammad Al-Faraidi (Riyadh:
Dar Al-Minhaj, 2.
, 109.
21 Abd al-RaumAn Ab Bakr JalAl al-Dn.
Tadrb Al-RAw, 109.
22 Davidson.
Carrying on the Tradition: An Intellectual and Social History of Post-Canonical Hadith Transmission.
Brill, 2.
, 20 Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26.
No.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 Adli.
Rozaimi conditions are: the credibility of the narrator in religion is to express the beauty of what is narrated.
famous for being honest when narrating hadith.
a narrator who understands what is narrated.
knowing the things that can change meaning.
and not doing al-tadls.
Ibn ibbAnAos five conditions for authentic uadth differ from the consensus of the jumhr al-muuaddithn, who include shAdh as a key criterion.
While both require connected sanad, adAlah, and sab.
Ibn ibbAn does not explicitly mention shudhdh, making his criteria less stringent than those upheld by the majority23.
Interpreting the Narrator Majhul al-Al Ibn HibbAn was seen as mutasAhil in accrediting narrators yet mutashaddid in criticism, accepting majhl al-hAl narrators under strict conditions, unlike the stricter jumhr approach.
Compared to criteria in al-SakhAwAos works24.
Ibn HibbAnAos approach aligns with other mutasAhil scholars like al-Tirmidh.
Ibn Hazm25, and Muhammad Akmaluddn, placing him within the more lenient strand of al-jarh wa al-taAodl methodology.
According to al-MuAoallim, the assessment of thiqah set by Ibn HibbAn is based on its five main conditions.
These conditions are26:
A narrator is assessed with a clear assessment such as mustaqm aluadth, kAna mutqinAn.
The narrator was among his teachers, and Ibn ibbAn recognized the Ibn ibbAn knew the uadths narrated by a narrator and knew the position of the uadths narrated.
Ibn ibbAn personally judged and verified the narrator Ibn ibbAn only knows his name.
Al-MuallimAos criticism of Ibn ibbAnAos evaluation of majhl al-uAl narrators appears overly general and fails to adequately consider the specific technical conditions Muuammad Ab Suaylik, al-ImAm al-Afie Ab Atim Muuammad ibn ibbAn al-Bust:
Faylasf al-Jaru wa al-Tadl (Damsyik: Dar Al-Qalam, 1.
, 30.
24 Al-SakhAw.
Shams al-Dn.
Al-Mutakallimn f al-RijAl, (Beyrut: Dar Al-Basyar, 1.
, 17 25 Muuammad Akmaluddn.
Izz al-MaAl wa al-ManAzil limA f JAmi al-Tirmidh min al-IsnAd al-Al wa al-ManAzil (Indonesia.
Dar Ihya Al-Sunnah Al-Saniyyah.
, 168.
Al-ZahrAn.
Muuammad Maar.
Ilm al-RijAl: NashAatuhu wa Tatawwuruhu min al-Qarn al-Awwal ilA NihAyat al-Qarn al-TAsi (Madinah: Dar al-Khudiri, 1.
, 161.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26, no.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 The Consistency of Ibn ibbAn to the ujjiyyah.
that Ibn ibbAn explicitly outlined in al-Majrun min al-Muuaddithn.
Ibn ibbAn did not accept majhl narrators arbitrarily.
rather, he stipulated that a narrator should be deemed Adil in the absence of any known cause for discrediting him, given that the default assumption regarding a person is integrity unless proven otherwise, and that individuals are not held accountable for hidden faults that cannot be discerned.
His approach is further supported by the absence of munkar reports from such narrators and the lack of censure from established nuqqAd.
Therefore.
Ibn ibbAnAos evaluative method being more inclusive than the position of the jumhr, particularly in his acceptance of majhl al-uAl narrators with no apparent flaws, should not be simplistically characterized as mutasAhil28, but instead deserves to be examined through a more rigorous epistemological and methodological lens.
The divergence between Ibn ibbAn and Ibn ajar in evaluating thiqah status lies in their methodological orientation.
Ibn ibbAn tends to accept narrators classified as majhl al-uAl in the absence of explicit weaknesses or transmission of munkar reports, whereas Ibn ajar adopts a more cautious stance, refraining from elevating such narrators without corroborative evidence.
For instance.
Abd AllAh ibn Al ibn Sad al-Mualib is deemed thiqah by Ibn ibbAn29, yet categorized as majhl al-uAl or mastr by Ibn ajar.
Difference Tadls al-IsnAd and IrsAl al-adth When looking at the debate on al-tadls as a whole, al-tadls is divided into three main divisions, namely tadls al-isnAd, tadls al-shuykh, and tadls al-taswiyah.
However, there is a difference in the debate between tadls al-isnAd and irsAl al-uadth among al-mutaqaddimn and some al-mutaakhkhirn.
According to many works on mustalah al-hadth that have reached us today, tadls al-isnAd is commonly defined as follows by Ibn ajar al-AsqalAn:
27 Ibn ibbAn, al-Majrun min al-Muuaddithn, 12.
Nar al-Dn al-AlbAn.
Ulm al-adth (Arab Saudi: Dar Ibn Hazm, 2.
, 54.
Ibn ibbAn.
Kitab Al-ThiqAt, 34.
Ibn ajar al-AsqalAn.
Taqrb al-Tahdhb, ed.
Muuammad AwwAmah (Syria: Dar Rasyid, 2.
, 331.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26.
No.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 Adli.
Rozaimi AuA narrator has met his teacher but narrates a narration a report that he did not hear from him.
When transmitting it, he uses language that suggests he did hear it directly from that teacher.
Ay31 This is a general definition applied when there is a meeting between student and teacher in narration.
The disagreement between the mutaqaddimn and mutaAoakhkhirn arises in how they interpret this meeting, which subsequently affects their definitions of tadls al-isnAd and irsAl al-hadth.
Here are the differences between the two groups:
Mutaqaddimn Al-Dhahab holds the view that the era of the mutaAoakhkhirn began in the early 5th century Hijri .
pproximately early 400H), while the era of the mutaqaddimn ended in the late of the 3rd century Hijri .
round late 300H).
32 Based on this chronological framework.
Ibn SalAh who was born in 557H and passed away in 643H would, technically belongs to the mutaAoakhkhirn.
However, in terms of methodology, his approach to hadth classification is more consistent with the principles of the mutaqaddimn.
Ibn al-SalAh classified tadls al-isnAd into two forms and required the necessity of verified samAAo for each narration.
In contrast.
Ibn Hajar, categorized among the mutaAoakhkhirn, adopted a more flexible stance by accepting the possibility of samAAo provided that the narrator had met the teacher at least once, even if there was no direct evidence of such transmission.
He did not require explicit proof of hearing for every individual report.
This illustrates a methodological divergence reflecting distinct epistemological frameworks within the hadth tradition.
Al-BukhAr, as a leading mutaqaddim scholar, was asked by al-Tirmidh regarding the narration of SaAod ibn Ab AoArbah narrated from al-AAomash34 regarding the narration below:
Ibn ajar al-AsqalAn.
Tarf Ahl al-Taqds bi-MarAtib al-Mawf n bi al-Tadls 16.
32 Al-Dhahab.
Shams al-Dn Muuammad.
MzAn al-ItidAl f Naqd al-RijAl.
Ed.
Al Muuammad alBjAw.
(LubnAn: DAr al-Marifah, 1.
, 4.
33 Ab Amr UthmAn ibn Abd al-RaumAn.
Ulm al-adth li Ibn al-alAu, ed.
Nr al-Dn (Riyadh: Dar Ibn al-Qayyim lil-Nashr wa-al-TawziAo, 2.
, 73.
Ab sA Muuammad al-Tirmidh.
Ilal al-Tirmidh al-Kabr, ed.
Nr al-Dn Iir (Kaherah:
Maktabah al-Nahdah al-`Arabiyah, 2.
, 343.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26, no.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 The Consistency of Ibn ibbAn to the ujjiyyah.
SaAod ibn Ab AoArbah narrated to us, from al-AAomash, from Abi Wail, from AoAbd AllAh said, the Prophet PBUH said: Study the QurAoAn, for it is more apt to escape from menAos minds than animals which are Ay (Ilal al-Tirmidh al-Kab.
Based on the sanad in this narration.
Al-BukhAr said:
AuI did not know that SaAod ibn Ab AoArbah heard from al-AAomash, and he (SaAod ibn Ab AoArba.
did tadlis and narrated this narration.
Ay 35 Based on the commentary, al-BukhAr considered tadls to occur when a narrator did not hear directly from another narrator, which aligns with the definition of al-irsAl al-khaf according to Ibn Hajar al-AoAsqalAn.
In general, al-BukhAr regarded tadls and al-irsAl al-khaf as equivalent.
This view was also shared by ImAm Ahmad, who judged the transmission of SaAod ibn Ab AoArbah .
156H) from al-AAomash .
147H) as mudallas, since neither heard from the other, despite living in the same era.
In addition to al-BukhAr and Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-BazzAr stands out as another prominent scholar among the mutaqaddimn whose views are instrumental in understanding their methodological stance on tadls.
In his analysis, al-BazzAr asserts that when a transmitter narrates from someone he has not met using an ambiguous expression .
uch as Aoa.
, this is not necessarily considered tadls.
36 His emphasis shows that determining tadls is not solely based on the phrasing used but must also take into account the broader context of the narratorAos encounter and overall reliability.
This reflects the methodological flexibility and contextual sensitivity characteristic of the mutaqaddimn, in contrast to the more formalistic criteria typically adopted by mutaAoakhkhirn.
If one understand the above expression, it relates to the issue of al-irsAl alzAhir, as it involves a superficial disconnection.
Therefore, al-BazzAr has distinguished between tadls and al-irsAl al-zAhir instead of between tadls and al-irsAl al-khaf .
Thus, he saw that among tadls and al-irsAl al-khaf as having the same meaning, namely that the narrator narrates from those who lived in the same era but have never met, but the narrator narrates as if he had heard a hadth from him.
Similarly, it also applies when a narrator transmits from someone he met but reports a hadth he never actually heard.
35 Ab sA Muuammad al-Tirmidh.
Ilal al-Tirmidh al-Kabr, 343.
36 Aumad IbrAhm ibn al-Ajam, al-Tabyn li-AsmA al-Mudallsn li-Thabata ibn al-AjAm al-ShAfi, ed.
Muuammad IbrAhm DAwd al-Mawil (Beyrut: Muasassah Al-Rayyan, 1.
, 13.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26.
No.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 Adli.
Rozaimi Al-BazzArAos view, which at first appears to reject tadls, is in fact a technical formulation that aligns with the later definition by Ibn Hajar.
As clarified by al-AoIrAq, al-BazzAr refers to a narrator reporting from a teacher whom he met but from whom he did not hear the specific hadth, without indicating the disconnection.
This reflects a more nuanced and methodological approach.
Based on this expression.
Ibn Hajar al-AoAsqalAn is of the view that the understanding that has been given by al-BazzAr is in line with his own.
However, if we examine al-BazzArAos definition of tadls more deeply, there is no indication that he limits the term only to cases where the narrator met his teacher.
What is clear is that al-BazzAr stated that the narrator who narrated something he did not hear from his teacher was tadls.
However, nothing in al-BazzArAos quote denies the meaning of the tadls.
Therefore, al-BazzAr also sees that tadls and al-irsAl al-khaf have the same meaning, similar to the understanding held by al-BukhAr and Ahmad ibn Hanbal.
Mutaakhkhirn As has been explained, the mutaAoakhkhirn are those who define the meaning of tadls al-isnAd as stated by Ibn Hajar al-AoAsqalAn, namely:
AuThe difference between tadls al-isnAd and al-mursal al-khaf is very The difference lies in this: tadls is specific to the narrator who narrates from what is known that the narrator has met the narrator who is above him, while when the narrator is contemporaneous with him but it is not known that the narrator has met him, then that is the meaning of al-mursal al-khaf .
38Ay Based on this statement, the books written by him define that there should be a meeting between the narrators, not just that they live in the same era.
prove the validity of the meeting between the narrators, it must be established that they transmitted the hadth directly.
This differs from the definition given by the mutaqaddimn group, as discussed in the previous section.
The mutaqaddimn group holds the view that both meanings fall under tadls al-isnAd.
One of the narrators to describe the above situation is al-AAomash, who narrated from MujAhid.
If we examine the narrations involving these two narrators holistically, many mudallas reports from al-AAomash appear with the expression of AoanAoanah from MujAhid.
However, some narrations show that there was a meeting Zayn al-Dn al-IrAq, al-Taqyd wa al-sAu Sharu Muqaddimat Ibn al-alAu, ed.
Abd al-RaumAn Muuammad UthmAn (Beyrut: Dar al-Fikr, 2.
, 80.
Ibn ajar al-AoAsqalAn.
Nuzhat al-Naear f Tawsu Nukhbat al-Fikar, ed.
AoAl asan ibn AoAl AoAbd al-Majd, (Mesir: Dar Ibn Al-Jauzi, 2.
, 5.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26, no.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 The Consistency of Ibn ibbAn to the ujjiyyah.
between al-AAomash and MujAhid .
asrh bi al-samAA.
One of examples is found in the sahh Ibn Khuzaymah, where the expression samiAotu is used:
Ysuf ibn MsA narrated to us.
WakAo narrated to us, al-AAomash narrated to us.
I heard MujAhid narrate: from TAws, from Ibn AoAbbAs said.
The Prophet PBUH has passed through two cemeteries in Makkah or Madnah, so the Prophet PBUH has heard the voices of two people who are being punished in the graves of both, so the Prophet PBUH said.
AuThey are being punished, but they are not being punished for anything difficult to avoid.
Ay Then he said: AuIndeed, one of them used not to take care to avoid getting urine on his body or clothes, and the other used to walk around spreading Ay Then he called for a palm stalk, which he broke in two and placed a piece of it on each grave.
It was said to him: AuO Messenger of AllAh, why did you do that?Ay He said: AuMay it be reduced for them so long as this does not dry outAy or: Auuntil this dries out.
Ay39 In this hadth, it is clear that there is tasrh bi al-samAAo between al-AAomash and MujAhid.
Thus, al-AAomash represents an example relevant to both perspectives, mutaqaddimn or mutaAoakhkhirn.
One of the scholars of mutaAoakhkhirn who share a similar understanding to Ibn Hajar al-AoAsqalAn is Khatb al-BaghdAd.
Based on the book al-KifAyah f AoIlm al-RiwAyah, al-Khatb al-BaghdAd provides a detailed commentary on his methodology in the narration of tadls.
From his explanation.
Ibn Hajar interprets two key principles40: First,Aythere is no distinction among the scholars that irsAl al-hadth does not include riwAyah al-mudallas,Ay and.
Second.
Authe narration of contemporaries who never metAy and Authe narration of those who do not live contemporaneouslyAy are treated under the same ruling.
From these two main views stated above, it is clear that he and Khatb alBaghdAd share the same conceptual understanding of tadls.
Based on this.
Khatb al-BaghdAd distinguishes between the two meanings in a way that differs from most mutaqaddimn.
Ab Bakr Muuammad ibn IsuAq, auu Ibn Khuzaymah, ed.
Markaz al-Buuth wa-Taqniyat al-MalmAt (Mesir: Dar Al-Ta`sil, 2.
, 33.
Ab Bakr Aumad AoAl, al-KifAyah f AoIlm al-RiwAyah, ed.
IbrAhm amd and Ab AoAbd AllAh al-Sawraq (Madinah: Maktabah al-`Illamiyah, 2.
, 48.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26.
No.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 Adli.
Rozaimi Evaluation Between Two Definitions Based on the two definitions provided, it is clear that these two groups define tadls al-isnAd and irsAl al-uadth differently.
The mutaqaddimn believes that both previously stated meanings are included in the definition of tadls al-isnAd , whereas the mutaAoakhkhirn distinguishes between the two terms.
However, from the perspective of the mutaAoakhkhirn, the difference between the terms tadls and al-irsAl al-khaf is recognized from a specific and general Tadls al-isnAd is characterized by the presence of iham samaAo41 in the narration, whereas al-irsAl al-khaf is more broadly defined.
The latter applies when it cannot be established that any interaction between the two narrators occurredAieven if they lived during the same era, they remain disconnected.
Analysis of Hadiths RiwAyah Al-Mudallas Inside auu Ibn ibbAn Based on the statements found in al-MajrAon min al-Muhaddithn and alThiqAt, it is clearly evident that Ibn HibbAn defined al-tadls in a manner consistent with the approach of the mutaqaddimn and some mutaAoakhkhirn.
Accordingly, to better understanding of his methodology concerning the transmission of narrations by riwAyah al-mudallas in his Sahh, the analysis may be divided into two main aspects: the conditions established by Ibn HibbAn and the practical application of those conditions in his inclusion of riwAyah al-mudallas narrators within his Sahh Ibn ibbAn Aos Conditions for Including the Narrator RiwAyah AlMudallas Ibn ibbAn has specified certain rules for including narrators who perform tadls in his narration.
The al-mudallis used the phrase tasrh bi al-samAAo in his Sahh book, or it is pronounced differently elsewhere.
In this context.
Ibn ibbAn believes that the narration in AoanAoanah by the al-mudallis is one of the flaws that arise on the sanad route.
As a result.
Ibn ibbAn has stated in the mukaddimah of his authentic book that a al-mudallis must explain that he has heard straight from the narrator who is above him in the sanad.
42 To 41 The image is as if the riwAyah al-mudallas has heard from his teacher.
42 Ibn ibbAn, auu Ibn ibbAn 162.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26, no.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 The Consistency of Ibn ibbAn to the ujjiyyah.
demonstrate Ibn ibbAn Aos perspective, it can be seen in the example below:
Muuammad ibn AoAbd AllAh ibn al-Junayd narrated to us.
Qutaybah ibn SaAod narrated to us, from umayd.
It was narrated from Anas that: The Prophet used to go round to all his wives with one bath.
Ibn ibbAn narrated this uadth in his auu with the recitation of AoanAoanah.
However, there is a pronunciation of the same taru bi al-samAAo narrated in Musnad Ab YaAolA:
Ab Bakr ibn Shaybah narrated to us.
Hushaym narrated to us, umayd al-awl narrated to us, from Anas ibn MAlik:AyIndeed, the Messenger of AllAh (PBUH) surrounded his wives one night, and then he took a bath.
Ay44 The narration between Hushaym and umayd al-awl affirms the validity of taru bi al-samA, which underlies Ibn ibbAnAos decision to include an AoanAoanah report in his auu, as it is corroborated by other chains that explicitly state samA.
This demonstrates his selective and principled methodology, rather than a lenient Motzki supports this approach by showing that AoanAoanah reports in early compilations such as the Muannaf of Abd al-RazzAq are typically substantiated by taru bi al-samA.
Amin likewise defends Ibn ibbAnAos method as being grounded in a sound ul framework.
Al-MalbAr situates this approach within the manhaj of the mutaqaddimn, which is defined by methodology rather than chronology.
Scholars such as Ibn BalbAn and al-RAjiu upheld this tradition, in contrast to figures like al-AlbAn, who critiqued it without fully appreciating its epistemological The al-mudallis does not perform al-tadls except on the thiqah narrator.
Among the narrators who performed tadls exclusively from thiqah transmitters is SufyAn ibn AoUyaynah.
he ranks in the second highest position in the list of almudallis.
46 Ibn HibbAn included this narratorAos Hadths in his authentic collection, 43 Ibn ibbAn, auu Ibn ibbAn 162.
Aumad ibn AoAl ibn al-MunahA.
Musnad Ab YaAolA, ed.
SaAod Muuammad al-SannAr (Mesir: Dar AlHadith, 2.
, 381.
45 Abd alAcAzz alAcRAjiu.
DirAsAt f Manhaj Ibn ibbAn f alAcTausn wa alAcTasf (Riyadh: DAr alAcRAyah, 2.
, 62.
46 Ibn ajar al-AoAsqalAn.
TaAorf Ahl al-Taqds bi-MarAtib al-Mawf n bi al-Tadls, 32.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26.
No.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 Adli.
Rozaimi regardless of whether they feature tasrh bi al-samAAo or AoanAoanah.
An example is as Ab Khalfah narrated to us.
IbrAhm ibn BashshAr al-RamAd narrated to us.
SufyAn .
bn AoUyayna.
narrated to us, from al-Zuhr, from SaAod alMusayyib, from Ab Hurayrah.
AoUmar used to pass by in front of assAn ibn ThAbit, when he was reciting verses in the mosque, then AoUmar reprimanded him until assAn said: AuI used to recite verses in the mosque when there were more people in it.
Ay Then he turned to Ab Hurayrah and said.
AuBy AllAh, have you ever heard the Messenger of AllAh (PBUH) say:
AuReward me.
O AllAh, strengthen him with the Holy Spirit,Ay Ab Hurayrah replied: Au Yes.
Ay47 This statement indicates that Ibn ibbAn assessed AoanAoanah contextually rather than absolutely, in line with the manhaj of the mutaqaddimn, which relies on corroborative qarAAoin and supportive evidence, as explained by al-MalbAr.
Scholars such as Ibn BalbAn and al-RAjiu uphold this methodology, whereas al-AlbAn criticizes it without fully engaging with its evaluative framework.
The narration must be corroborated by mutAbaAoAt or shawAhid outside the It is well known that riwAyah al-mudallas constitutes a type of light saAof uadth that can be elevated to a better dignity if other uadths support the narrations.
The support from other uadths, whether from the point of view of sanad or matan, is what is meant by mutAbaAoAt or shawAhid.
Ibn ibbAn, when including narrations of riwAyah al-mudallas, also takes this element into account.
Among the examples of uadth in this context are as follows:
IbrAhm ibn IsuAq al-AnmA narrated to us, umayd ibn MasAoadah narrated to us.
MuAotamir ibn SulaymAn narrated to us, from DAwd ibn Ab Hind, from al-asan, from Jundub RA, indeed the Prophet PBUH said: AuWhoever performs the dawn prayer, then he is in the assurance of AllAh SWT, then be devout to AllAh SWT.
O son of Adam .
o not unti.
AllAh SWT asks you for a guarantee from His guarantee.
Ay48 This uadth is narrated by al-asan al-Bar, one of the riwAyah al-mudallas, 47 Ibn ibbAn, auu Ibn ibbAn, 532.
48 Ibn ibbAn, auu Ibn ibbAn, 532.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26, no.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 The Consistency of Ibn ibbAn to the ujjiyyah.
who uses AoanAoanah from Jundub ibn AoAbd AllAh.
However, there are other uadths that are also narrated by al-abarAn in al-MuAojam al-Kabr, which can be used as mutAbaAoAt in the uadth in auu Ibn ibbAn.
The uadth is as follows:
IbrAhm ibn NAAoilah al-AbahAn narrated to us.
AoUbayd ibn AoUbayd alTammAr narrated to us.
MuAotamir ibn SulaymAn narrated to us, from his father, from al-asram, from Ab al-uAoAr, from Jundub ibn AoAbd AllAh.
Indeed, the Prophet PBUH said:AyWhoever performs the dawn prayer, then he is in the assurance of AllAh SWT.
Ay49 This statement indicates that Ibn ibbAn did not evaluate riwAyah al-mudallas hastily or in absolute terms.
rather, he considered the presence of mutAbaAt as This reflects a critical and contextual methodology consistent with the manhaj of the mutaqaddimn, as articulated by al-MalbAr.
Objectives Related to Sanad Rejecting the Claim of Tafarrud of the Narrator in the Hadth Ibn ibbAn prepared several chapters in auu Ibn ibbAn to counter claims of tafarrud.
For example, consider the uadth related by Ibn Jurayj from al-AAomash, which includes the following AoanAoanah:
al-Mufassal ibn Muuammad ibn IbrAhm al-Janad Ab SaAod al-Shaykh al-Aliu bi Makkah narrated to us, said: AoAl ibn ZiyAd al-LAhj narrated to us, said: Ab Qurrah narrated to us, from Ibn Jurayj, from al-AAomash, from Khaythamah ibn AoAbd al-RaumAn, from AoAbd AllAh ibn AoAmr, indeed the Prophet PBUH forbade to pray in the cemetery.
Ay50 The transmission of this uadth by Ibn Jurayj through the usage of the AoanAoanah formula from al-AAomash has been a focal point in uadth evaluation.
his article.
Harald Motzki explains that Ibn Jurayj is classified as a mudallis, yet not a fabricator51.
rather, he is regarded as a thiqah transmitter who often narrates SulaymAn ibn Aumad al-abarAn.
Al-Mujam Al-Kabr ed.
Hamdi `Abd al-Majid Al-Salafi (Kaherah: Maktabah Ibn Taymiyyah, 2.
, 162.
50 Ibn ibbAn, auu Ibn ibbAn, 588.
51 Harald Motzki.
The Muannaf of Abd al-RazzAq al-anAn as a Source of Authentic AuAdth of the First Century AH.
Journal of Near Eastern Studies.
Vol.
No.
,1-22, https://doi.
org/10.
1086/373461
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26.
No.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 Adli.
Rozaimi This perspective aligns with that of Ibn BalbAn in auu Ibn ibbAn, who continues to accept most of his transmissions even without the condition of taru bi al-samAAo.
52 In contrast, al-AlbAn tends to reject uadths from al-mudalls that are transmitted solely through AoanAoanah, unless accompanied by taru bi al-samAAo.
53 AlRAjiu, meanwhile, adopts a more balanced approach by evaluating each narration individually, taking into account mutAbaAoAt and shawAhid.
Ibn HibbAnAos inclusion of this hadth challenges the view that only Hafs ibn GhiyAth transmitted it from AshAoath ibn AoAbd al-Malik, thereby negating the claim of tafarrud.
The chapter heading explicitly states:
AuThe explanation of a khabar that rejects the view of those who claim that this khabar is indeed only narrated by af ibn GhiyAth from AshAoath ibn AoAbd al-Malik.
Ay The uadth in question is:
Muuammad ibn Aumad ibn Ab AoAwn al-RayyAn narrated to us, saying HannAd ibn al-Sar narrated to us, saying, af ibn GhiyAth narrated to us, from AshAoath, from al-asan, from Anas ibn MAlik said: AuThe Prophet PBUH has forbidden to pray between the gravesAy.
Denying that al-Mudallis committed al-tadls in a narration.
When an alternative narration includes the pronunciation of taru bi alsamAAo, it indirectly refutes the occurrence of al-tadls in the sanad.
Numerous instances in auu Ibn ibbAn illustrate this situation.
The arrangement of headings in the book not only indirectly addresses the matan related to the issue of Fiqh is the same but also sheds light on the problems present in the sanad of the narration.
Thus, even though Ibn ibbAn has included a narration in his auu that features AoanAoanah from the history of al-mudallis, he has also organized a heading that denies the occurrence of al-tadls by one of the The following examples further illustrate this point:
52 Ibn ibbAn, auu Ibn ibbAn, 588.
53 Muuammad NAir al-Dn al-AlbAn.
Silsilat al-AuAdth al-Uafah wa al-Mawsah, (Riyadh: Maktabat al-MaArif, 1.
, jil.
1, 160.
Muuammad NAir al-Dn al-AlbAn.
Silsilat al-AuAdth al-Uafah wa al-Mawsah, 587.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26, no.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 The Consistency of Ibn ibbAn to the ujjiyyah.
Al-Fasl ibn al-ubAb narrated to us, saying: Muuammad ibn Kathr narrated to us, from ShuAobah, from Ab IsuAq, from al-Aswad, and Masrq, saying: We have testified that AoA Aoishah said.
AuThere is no day that the Prophet PBUH has passed, except for the Prophet .
eace and blessings of AllAh be upon hi.
to perform the prayer of two rakAoahs after the Asr prayer.
Ay55 This statement highlights Ibn ibbAnAos methodological precision in negating the possibility of tadls by strategically employing chapter headings and corroborative taru bi al-samA, reflecting the manhaj of the mutaqaddimn as explained by alMalbAr.
This approach is supported by scholars like Ibn BalbAn and al-RAjiu, while contrasting with al-AlbAnAos more literal critique.
The naration is as follows:
al-asan ibn SufyAn narrated to us, said: Muuammad ibn KhallAd alBAhil Ab Bakr narrated to us, said: Bahz ibn Asad narrated to us, said:
ShuAobah narrated to us, said: Ab IsuAq narrated to us, said: I heard both Aswad and Masrq say: we testify indeed AoA Aoishah said.
AuThere is not a day that the Messenger of AllAh (PBUH) has spent with her, unless the Prophet performs the prayer of two rakAoahs after AoarAy56 This hadith is under the heading:
AuExplaining about a khabar that rejects those who claim that Ab IsuAq did not hear this news from al-Aswad and Masrq.
Ay Objectives Related to Matan Arguing with the narration There are also several al-mudallis whose narrations Ibn ibbAn included for the purpose of deriving legal rulings from them.
The intended narration is as follows:
Aumad ibn YauyA ibn Zuhayr narrated to us.
IbrAhm ibn BastAm narrated to us.
Ab DAwd narrated to us.
ShuAobah narrated to us, from al-AAomash, and ubayb ibn Ab ThAbit, and AoAbd al-AoAzz ibn Raf Ao, from Zayd ibn Wahb, from Ab Dharr, said: The Prophet PBUH said: AuWhoever says:
AuThere is no God but AllAh.
So he went into Paradise,Ay and I asked.
AuEven though he is an adulterer and a thief?Ay The Prophet replied: Authough he is an adulterer and a thief.
Ay57 Muuammad NAir al-Dn al-AlbAn.
Silsilat al-AuAdth al-Uafah wa al-Mawsah, 122.
Muuammad NAir al-Dn al-AlbAn.
Silsilat al-AuAdth al-Uafah wa al-Mawsah, 123.
Muuammad NAir al-Dn al-AlbAn.
Silsilat al-AuAdth al-Uafah wa al-Mawsah, 483.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26.
No.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 Adli.
Rozaimi In this uadth, al-AAomash and abb ibn Ab ThAbit are narrators of almudallis.
They narrated this uadth using AoanAoanah from Ab Dharr.
However, since AoAbd al-AoAzz ibn RafAo, who is not an associate of the al-mudallis, also transmitsthis uadth, it is considered free of Aoillah tadls.
Ibn ibbAn included this narration in his auu to affirm that a servant may enter Paradise by AllAhAos mercy, even if guilty of major sins such as adultery and intoxication, provided they have declared: AuThere is no God but AllAh.
Ay This is a matter of Aoaqdah that Ibn ibbAn placed in his auu, despite it being transmitted by two narrators previously criticized for tadls.
The uadth appears under the chapter heading: AuMentioning a khabar concerning the nature of Muslims and faith by mentioning the assembly of the two branches.
Ay Scholarly evaluations, such as those by al-Muallim58 and al-Mar59 affirm that Ibn ibbAn did not treat all forms of tadls equally.
rather, he accepted certain cases under clearly defined criteria rooted in corroborative evidence and isnAd This approach aligns with the methodology of ahl al-Aoilal, as explained by al-MalbAr, who also refrains from outright rejection of mudallis narrators, opting instead for contextual scrutiny and comparative transmission analysis.
Thus, the inclusion of mudallisn narrations in auu Ibn ibbAn should not be interpreted as methodological leniency, but rather as a refined form of tadqq manhaj that integrates isnAd principles with purposeful textual arrangement and scholarly reasoning.
Conclusion The analysis of al-mudallisAo narrations in Ibn ibbAn Aos auu Book concludes that he adhered to his stated conditions when interacting with these narrations.
Although there appears to be a superficial contradiction between his declared approach and the inclusion of AoanAoanah narrations in his auu book, a holistic analysis of his methodology resolves this apparent tension.
Ibn ibbAn considered two primary factors, conditions and objectives when incorporating al-mudallisAo narrations in his auu.
Finally, the findings of this study demonstrate that there is no real contradiction between his theoretical framework and the practical inclusion of mudallis narrations in his auu.
58 Abd al-RaumAn al-Muallim al-YamAn, al-Tankl bimA f TaAonb al-Kawthar min al-AbAl, (Riyadh: DAr al-RAyah, 1.
, 236.
59 Db al-Mar, al-ImAm Ibn ibbAn wa Manhajuhu f al-Jaru wa al-Tadl, (Riyadh: DAr Ibn AffAn, 1.
Jurnal Studi Ilmu-Ilmu al-QurAoan dan Hadis 26, no.
2 (Juli 2.
: hlm 489-521 The Consistency of Ibn ibbAn to the ujjiyyah.
AuthorsAo contributions All authors contributed to the studyAos conception and design.
Author 1 provides the materials in the writing and subsequently makes comments within the writing.
Author 2 provides comments to be aligned in a scientific manner.
Both authors pour their expertise into the writing.
Data availability statement Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.
Conflicts of Interest None of the authors of this study has a financial or personal relationship with other people that could inappropriately influence or bias the content of the study.
Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
References