Very Weak Hadith: The Development ofA Concept From the Past to the Present


Creative Commons License

Zeki K., Turhan H.

KOCATEPE ISLAMI ILIMLER DERGISI, sa.1, ss.190-212, 2024 (ESCI) identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Basım Tarihi: 2024
  • Doi Numarası: 10.52637/kiid.1462316
  • Dergi Adı: KOCATEPE ISLAMI ILIMLER DERGISI
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.190-212
  • Kayseri Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

In the methodology of Hadith, the basic classification into authentic (sahih), good/fair (hasan), and weak (da'if) encompasses a wide and diverse range of narrations within the weak category. In this classification, narrations deemed weak due to breaks in the chain of transmission, as well as those transmitted by individuals frequently making mistakes, considered dissolute due to neglecting religious duties, or even known for fabricating hadiths, are theoretically placed in the same category. This raises the question of whether these narrations under a single category are equally weak and, more importantly, whether they judged to be weak have the same value within the tradition of Islamic sciences. Unlike the detailed terminology developed for sahih and hasen hadiths, such as sahih li-dhatihi (sound in itself) and sahih li-ghayrihi (sound due to external factors), the absence of a similar detailed classification for weak hadiths further highlights this issue. This article aims to examine whether there was a categorization of weak hadiths as a concept/meaning in the early periods despite the lack of such a categorization at the terminological level, and if so, in which context this understanding emerged, on the basis of which criteria the qualities of the narrations considered very weak were determined, and whether there were differences of opinion regarding the principles in a cause and effect relationship.. Although some minority views argue that there is no need to grade weak hadiths within themselves, there are important presumptions that show that weak hadiths were not considered at the same value since the second century of Hijri, when hadith narration was systematized to a great extent. . The explanations that some weak hadiths and some mursal narrations can be acted upon in matters of deeds of virtue if they are reinforced are reflections of such an understanding. Indeed, during that period, the widespread belief that certain weak narrations with specific qualities could be acted upon in certain matters, while others were completely abandoned, is indicative of a grading system for weak narrations in practice. The idea that weak narrations are not of equal level also underlies the approach that only mursal narrations with certain qualities can be strengthened and used as evidence. This understanding developed during that period has been fundamental in shaping the thought of later generations. Additionally, this study considers the responses given in early scholarly circles regarding which narrator's reports should be abandoned as the first explanations that define the theoretical framework for very weak narrations. The discussion is based not on the question 'Which narration should be abandoned?' but on 'Whose narration should be abandoned?' because the foundation of the tashih-taz'î f (authentication-weakness) system developed by hadith scholars is based on narrator criticism. The triple division of sahih, hasen, and da'if formulated by Al-KHattabi (d. 388/998), likely based on the interpretations of earlier scholars, has influenced many scholars of usul (principles), including Ibn al-Salah (d. 643/1245). In the classical period, the majority did not feel the need to create a fourth category for very weak narrations, considering it related to the definitions of sahih and hasen. Al-Dhahabi (d. 748/1348), stepping outside the traditional approach, defined two different categories for extremely weak narrations, but this expansion did not receive the expected attention. In contemporary hadith research, different classifications of weak hadiths are made based on the terminology of narrator criticism and types of weak hadiths. Classifications based on the terms of cerh (criticism) and ta'dil (accreditation) provide a quick solution but they also contain some problems. The most significant deficiency is that the critical terms represent a general judgment about the narrator, leaving specific narrations unclassified. Therefore, erroneous narrations attributed to a narrator considered trustworthy have not found a place in the classification. Similarly, the exact position of narrations with breaks in their chains within the weak hadith classification has not been clarified. The classification made by Al-Malibari (d. 991/1583) has been emphasized as preferable due to its comprehensiveness and originality.