Orientalist Doubts Concerning the Prophetic Sunnah: Their Advocates, Their Evidence, and Their Refutation — A Critical Study (8)

شبهات المستشرقين حول السنة النبوية القائلين بها، أدلتهم، تفنيدها. دراسة نقدية

Orientalist Doubts Concerning the Prophetic Sunnah: Their Advocates, Their Evidence, and Their Refutation — A Critical Study (Part Eight)

Researcher: Sami Manshur Muhammad Saif

Translated by: Reza Ervani bin Asmanu

This paper, “Orientalist Doubts Concerning the Prophetic Sunnah: Their Advocates, Their Evidence, and Their Refutation — A Critical Study,” is included in the Science of Hadith Category

سادساً: ذكر العلماء في تعريف الصحيح والحسن شروطاً عائدة للسند، وشروطاً عائدة للمتن والسند معاً، وهناك شرطان أساسيان لقبول الحديث ويرجعان للسند والمتن معاً وهما:

Sixth: When scholars defined sahih and hasan hadiths, they mentioned conditions relating to the isnad as well as conditions relating to both the matn and the isnad. Two fundamental conditions for the acceptance of a hadith apply to both the chain and the text:

– سلامته من الشذوذ.
– وسلامته من العلة القادحة.

• It must be free from shudhudh (irregularity).
• It must be free from a detrimental ‘illah (hidden defect).

ونجدهم عندما يشرحون التعريف يقولون: إن الشذوذ قسمان: شذوذ في السند، وشذوذ في المتن، وأكثر ما يكون الشذوذ في المتن، وكذلك العلة قسمان: علة في السند وعلة في المتن، فهل بعد هذا من شك في أن المحدثين لم يعنوا بنقد المتن؟

When scholars explain these definitions, they state that irregularity is of two kinds: irregularity in the isnad and irregularity in the matn, with irregularity often occurring in the matn. Likewise, an ‘illah may occur either in the isnad or in the matn. After this, can there remain any doubt that hadith scholars paid careful attention to criticism of the matn?

سابعاً: بين العلماء في بحث الشاذ والمنكر والمعلل والمضطرب والمدرج والمقلوب وقوع الشذوذ والنكارة والعلة والاضطراب والإدراج والقلب والغـرابة في السند والمتن، ومتى تكون هذه الصفات قادحة في صحة الحديث وثبوته، ومتى تكون موجبة لرده، وقد أطلق العلماء على صنيع من يقلب الحديث سنداً ومتناً بأنه يسرق الحديث إذا قصد إليه.

Seventh: In their discussions of shadh, munkar, mu’allal, mudtarib, mudraj, and maqlub hadiths, scholars explained that irregularity, objectionability, hidden defects, inconsistency, interpolation, reversal, and unusual features can occur in both the isnad and the matn. They also explained when these characteristics undermine the authenticity and reliability of a hadith and when they require that a report be rejected. The scholars even described a person who deliberately reverses or alters a hadith in its chain or text as one who “steals hadith.”

ثامناً: إن القدح في الراوي يكون بعشرة أشياء: خمسة تتعلق بالعدالة، وخمسة تتعلق بالضبط، فالحكم على ضبط الراوي مبني على مدى حفظه للسند والمتن معاً، وهذا فقد فحص العلماء مرويات كل راوٍ وقارنوها بروايات الرواة الثقات ليحكموا على ضبط ذلك الراوي، يقول الإمام مسلم –رحمه الله تعالى– : “وعلامة المنكر في حديث المحدث إذا ما عرضت روايته على رواية غيره من أهل الحفظ والرضا خالفت روايتـه روايتهم أو لم تكد توافقها، فإذا كان الأغلب من حديثه كذلك كان مهجور الحديث غير مقبولة”،

Eighth: A narrator may be criticized for ten causes: five relating to uprightness and five relating to precision. Judging a narrator’s precision is based on how accurately he preserves both the isnad and the matn. For this reason, scholars examined the narrations of each transmitter and compared them with the narrations of trustworthy transmitters in order to assess his precision. Imam Muslim, may Allah have mercy on him, said: “The sign of an objectionable report in a narrator’s hadith is that when his narration is compared with the narration of other reliable and proficient transmitters, his report contradicts theirs or scarcely agrees with them. If this characterizes most of his hadith, then his narrations are to be abandoned and are not accepted.”

وقد ملئت كتب الجرح والتعديل بالألفاظ الجارحة للراوي بسبب الخطأ في مروياته مثل قولهم: “فلان منكر الحديث”، “يروي عن المناكير”

The books of jarh wa ta’dil are likewise filled with expressions criticizing narrators because of errors in their reports, such as: “So-and-so is munkar al-hadith,” or “He narrates objectionable reports.”¹

وما سبق ذكره لا يدع مجالاً للشك في أن علماء الحديث قد اعتنوا بفحص المتن اعتناء بالغاً كما اعتنوا بفحص السند، وبذلوا قصارى جهدهم في سبيل ذلك بحيث لا يوجد مزيد على ما قدموه،

What has been mentioned above leaves no room for doubt, according to the author, that hadith scholars devoted extensive attention to examining the matn just as they did to examining the isnad. They exerted their utmost effort in this field to such a degree that the author regards their contribution as exceptionally comprehensive.

فما يدعيه غلاة المستشرقين أن علماء الأمة اعتنوا بالشكل دون المضمون، قول من لم يَسِرِ السنة ولم يعرف حقيقتها، ولا خاض في بحارها ليعلم الحق من الباطل والصحيح من الزيف.

Therefore, the claim made by some extreme Orientalists that the scholars of the Muslim Ummah concerned themselves only with the external form of hadith — the isnad — while neglecting its substance — the matn — is, in the author’s view, the statement of those who have not truly studied the Sunnah, understood its nature, or explored the depth of its disciplines sufficiently to distinguish truth from falsehood and authentic reports from fabricated ones.

To be continued in the next part, in sha Allah

Source: Alukah

1. See: ar-Radd ‘ala Maza’im al-Mustashriqin, Abdullah al-Khatib, pp. 430–432; as-Sunnah wa Makanatuha fi at-Tashri’ al-Islami, Dr. Mustafa as-Siba’i, p. 261; and al-Istishraq wa Mawqifuhu min as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah, Fathi ash-Shubayri, p. 457.