'Ilm ur-Riwayah: The Issue Of Narrations From The Innovators


By Al-Haafiz Ibn Katheer , Edited by Dar al-Kitab wal-Hikmah Editorial Staff , on Tuesday, November 18, 2003

Al-Jarh wat-Ta`deel: The Issue Of Narrations From The Innovators
By Al-Haafiz Ibn Katheer – with notes on the text between brackets from the [‘Allaamah Ahmad Shaakir], and the [[‘Allaamah Muhammad Nasir ad-Deen al-Albaani.]] From Al-Baa`ith al-hatheethPrepared by Dar al-Kitab wal-Hikmah
In the Name of Allah The Merciful the Beneficent, and what follows is the text:

ISSUE: The mubtadi`, if his bid`ah is kufr, then there is no confusion over rejecting his narrations.

When it is not kufr, then if he allows lying, his narrations are also rejected. If he does not allow lying, then is he acceptable or not? Or is there a difference between his being a caller or not being a caller?
Regarding this, there is an early and a present-day debate. Most distinguish between the caller and one who is not a caller.
This has been mentioned in a quote from ash-Shaafi`i – and Ibn Hibbaan mentioned that there was a consensus about it, he said: “It is not allowed to use him (meaning the mubtadi` who calls to his bid`ah) as evidence with our great Imaams, and I do not know any disagreement among them about it.”
Ibn as-Salaah said: (`Uloom al-Hadeeth p. 104) “And this is the most just of opinions and the best of them, [[Al-Albaani says: “Rather it is the less-preferred view, as comes shortly from Ibn Katheer.”]], and the opinion of absolute rejection is far off, far from what is known from the Imaams of hadeeth, for their books are full of narrations from the mubtadi`ah who aren’t callers. In the Two Saheehs are many of their hadeeths, used as witnessing narrations as well as foundational narrations. And Allaah Knows best.”
I say (Ibn Katheer): Ash-Shaafi`i has said: “I accept the witness of the people of desires except for the Khattaabiyyah from the Raafidhah, because they see it permissable to bear witness to falsehood for those that agree with them.”
So in this quote, ash-Shaafi`i did not make a distinction between the callers and others.
Also, what is the difference in meaning between them? While here is al-Bukhaari who reported from ‘Imraan bin Hittaan al-Khaariji, the one who praised ‘Abdur Rahmaan bin Muljim, ‘Ali’s killer. And he is among the worst of the callers to bid`ah! And Allaah Knows best.
[Ahmad Shaakir said here: “Regarding the people of bid`ah and desires, if their bid`ah is from that which deserves the ruling of ‘kufr’ for the one who holds it, then his narrations are not accepted by consensus, as an-Nawawi mentioned. In at-Tadreeb, as-Suyooti refuted him for claiming consensus, and he quoted another view in which they are accepted absolutely, and another one in which they are accepted if they believe in the prohibition of lying.] Then he quoted from Ibn Hajr (an-Nuzhah) that he said:
[‘And what is correct is that not everyone is rejected because of his bid`ah. This is because every group claims that those that oppose them are mubtadi`ah, and they go even further and make takfeer. So if this is taken absolutely it would necessitate making takfeer of all of the groups. What is relied upon here, is that the one whose narrations are rejected is the one who rejects something mutawaatir from the law which is known from the religion by necessity, or he believes the opposite of it. As for one who is not like this – and it is added to that that he is precise in what he narrates – while having fear and taqwa, then there is nothing to prevent his being acceptable...’
What al-Haafiz said here is the truth that is acceptable upon further examination, and it is supported by correct insight. As for one whose bid`ah does not necessitate kufr, then some do not accept his narrations at all! That is extremism without evidence. Some of them accept his narrations if he does not allow lying to aide his mathhab. This opinion is narrated from ash-Shaafi`i, he said: ‘I accept the witness of the people of desires except for the Khattaabiyyah, because they consider it permissable to bear witness to falsehood for those that agree with them.’ He also said: ‘I have not seen a group of the people of desires that bears witnesses to more falsehood than the Raafidhah.’
As for this restriction – meaning that of not allowing lying – I don’t find any one who claims it. This is a restriction that is known by necessity about every narrator, for we do not accept the narrations of the narrator from whom lying is known of even once, so it is more appropriate that we reject the narration of the one who allows lying or bearing witness to falsehood.
[[Al-Albaani says here: “This response is correct. But perhaps the restriction which is being rejected is not worded like this. Rather, it is worded in a different manner that is not too easy to reject. In al-Musawwadah (p. 264), Shaykh al-Islaam said: ‘Al-Qaadhi mentioned that the narrations of the mubtadi` who calls to his bid`ah are not accepted. He said: “Because if he calls, then he is not safe from making up a hadeeth to support what he calls to!”’ The Shaykh said: “The reasoning that there is some fear of his potential lying is weak. This is because the same could also be feared from those who call to the branch (non-usool) issues in which there is a difference of opinion, as well as those who are not callers, while it is only the caller who deserves to be shunned, so he is not taken as a shaykh in knowledge.”]]
Some of them said: The narrations of the innovator are accepted if he is not a caller to his bid`ah, and they are not accepted if he is a caller. An-Nawawi held this view as being preponderant, and he said: ‘This is the predominant and most just, and the opinion of many, or most.’
Al-Haafiz Abu Ishaaq al-Jawzjaani – the shaykh of Abu Dawood and an-Nasaa’i – has restricted this opinion by accepting such person’s narrations if he does not narrate something that supports his bid`ah.
All of these opinions are speculative, and the true insight into the narrations, is that of truthfulness of the narrator and his trustworthiness, and the one who is thiqah in his religion and conduct.
The one who looks into the affairs of the narrators will see many among the people of bid`ah who are in a position of being thiqah and confident, even if they narrate something what agrees with their opinion. And, he will see many of them that are not thiqah in anything that they narrate. For this reason al-Haafiz ath-Thahabi said in al-Mizaan (vol 1 p. 4) under the biography of Abaan bin Taghlab al-Koofi: ‘A staunch Shii`. But he is sadooq, so for us is his sidq and upon him is his bid`ah.’ And his being thiqah is quoted from Ahmad and others. Then he said:
‘So one might say: How have you called a mubtadi` thiqah, while the limitations of being thiqah are that of `adaalah and precision?! So how can he be ‘adl and he is a practitioner of bid`ah?! The response to him is: Bid`ah is of two types: Minor bid`ah, like being extreme in tashayyu`, or tashayyu` without extremism or fervor – and this is widespread among the taabi`een and those who followed them – along with religion, piety, and sidq – so if the hadeeths of these are rejected, then all of the Prophetic narrations would be lost, and that is a clear evil.
Then there is major bid`ah, like complete Rafdh and extremism in that, and degrading Abu Bakr and `Umar, may Allah be pleased with them, and supplicating for this – so this is a type who are not used as evidence, nor are they given respect.
Also, among the likes of these, there are none who are trustworthy nor truthful men, rather lying is their symbol, and taqiyyah and hypocrisy are their clothing, so how can the narrations of one who’s position is like this be accepted?!
No way! So the Shii` who is extreme in the time of the salaf and their culture is the one who talks about and vilifies `Uthmaan, az-Zubayr, Talhah, and Mu`awiyyah. And a group who fought `Ali, may Allah be pleased with (these Companions). While the extreme in our time and our culture is the one who makes takfeer of these great people, and also claim that they are innocent from the Two Shaykhs (meaning Abu Bakr and ‘Umar), so this is one is misguided.’
What ath-Thahabi said – along with what Ibn Hajr said in what has preceded – is the correct opinion which agrees with the principles of narration, and Allaah Knows best.]