Is the establishment of meeting a condition for continuity when a narrator narrates from his shaykh using the formula "an'anah"?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Here is a question regarding hadith, as well: Is the establishment of meeting a condition for continuity when a narrator narrates from his shaykh using the formula "an'anah"?
This issue has been a subject of scholarly disagreement among hadith scholars since early times, particularly between the two noble shaykhs, al-Bukhari and Muslim. Al-Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him) held that continuity between a narrator and his shaykh is not established by mere contemporaneity; rather, it is necessary that their meeting be established through a valid chain of narration. This was the view of Imam al-Bukhari. As for Muslim, he is satisfied with mere contemporaneity to establish continuity between the narrator and the shaykh mentioned in the hadith, and he does not require the establishment of a meeting. If the meeting is established, it is light upon light, but if this meeting is not established, the disconnection that is established by those who require meeting, namely al-Bukhari, is not proven. However, Imam Muslim and those who agree with him, who are the majority of hadith scholars, when they restricted the proof of continuity to mere contemporaneity, imposed an essential condition: that the narrator from his shaykh not be known for concealment of a defect in a chain (tadlis). If he is known for concealment of a defect in a chain, then in that case they agree with al-Bukhari in not relying on his narration. This is a discussion understood by those who have an interest in the science of hadith and narration; so we will not lengthen it beyond this.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : It is possible, I mean, to clarify for us the principle of transmission according to the majority... For example, Ibn al-Salah criticized this matter and refuted it.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : And al-Nawawi as well...
The Shaykh : Who else?
The questioner : Al-Nawawi refuted it.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : It is well known that "The Introduction of Ibn al-Salah" is the standard reference... It transmits the school of the others in agreement with the statement of the majority...
The Shaykh : Before I answer this question, the second one refuted it; what did he refute, I mean? What did he say, I mean? The school of al-Bukhari is the correct one, and the school of Muslim.
The questioner : Yes, regarding Ibn al-Salah.
The Shaykh : And the school of Muslim is not correct?
The questioner : Yes... The scholars who agreed with him were al-Bukhari and Ibn al-Madini, this...
The Shaykh : Look, my brother, I think you understood incorrectly.
The Shaykh: Broaden your understanding, my brother.
Another questioner : The seated one cannot bear more, I mean...
The Shaykh : The majority do not contradict al-Bukhari in this condition as a condition of perfection, but they contradict him in it as a condition of validity.
The questioner : As a condition, I mean, in the original validity.
The Shaykh : Yes, the majority contradict al-Bukhari in this condition as a condition of validity, meaning that if the meeting is not established by a valid narration and contemporaneity is established, the chain is weak and disconnection is established. The majority do not agree with al-Bukhari on this, but they agree with al-Bukhari that this is a condition of perfection, and it is undoubtedly, as I said earlier, light upon light. As for a man narrating from another who are contemporaries, in the same country, and all the indicators of the possibility of meeting are present and existing, but we do not have a narration that they actually met, and the hadith is rejected, this is what the majority reject.
And I do not have the exact source in mind right now to tell you who mentioned this as the school of the majority. It is possible this is with a simple review, but what I know scientifically is that this is certainly the school of the majority; because the six books, except "Sahih al-Bukhari," follow this, let alone Muslim.
The questioner : I am this.
The Shaykh : Yes, and perhaps you did not return to the introduction of Muslim; where he refutes those who hold this school. Some say: he refutes al-Bukhari himself, but he did not name al-Bukhari. And some say that he refutes al-Bukhari's shaykh, who is Ali ibn al-Madini, but he also did not name Ali ibn al-Madini. But he refutes the school adopted by al-Bukhari with arguments that no one can refute. So you read this introduction, and then afterwards, we will have another discussion or meeting, if Allah wills.
Now we return to the scientific questions...
This issue has been a subject of scholarly disagreement among hadith scholars since early times, particularly between the two noble shaykhs, al-Bukhari and Muslim. Al-Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him) held that continuity between a narrator and his shaykh is not established by mere contemporaneity; rather, it is necessary that their meeting be established through a valid chain of narration. This was the view of Imam al-Bukhari. As for Muslim, he is satisfied with mere contemporaneity to establish continuity between the narrator and the shaykh mentioned in the hadith, and he does not require the establishment of a meeting. If the meeting is established, it is light upon light, but if this meeting is not established, the disconnection that is established by those who require meeting, namely al-Bukhari, is not proven. However, Imam Muslim and those who agree with him, who are the majority of hadith scholars, when they restricted the proof of continuity to mere contemporaneity, imposed an essential condition: that the narrator from his shaykh not be known for concealment of a defect in a chain (tadlis). If he is known for concealment of a defect in a chain, then in that case they agree with al-Bukhari in not relying on his narration. This is a discussion understood by those who have an interest in the science of hadith and narration; so we will not lengthen it beyond this.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : It is possible, I mean, to clarify for us the principle of transmission according to the majority... For example, Ibn al-Salah criticized this matter and refuted it.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : And al-Nawawi as well...
The Shaykh : Who else?
The questioner : Al-Nawawi refuted it.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : It is well known that "The Introduction of Ibn al-Salah" is the standard reference... It transmits the school of the others in agreement with the statement of the majority...
The Shaykh : Before I answer this question, the second one refuted it; what did he refute, I mean? What did he say, I mean? The school of al-Bukhari is the correct one, and the school of Muslim.
The questioner : Yes, regarding Ibn al-Salah.
The Shaykh : And the school of Muslim is not correct?
The questioner : Yes... The scholars who agreed with him were al-Bukhari and Ibn al-Madini, this...
The Shaykh : Look, my brother, I think you understood incorrectly.
The Shaykh: Broaden your understanding, my brother.
Another questioner : The seated one cannot bear more, I mean...
The Shaykh : The majority do not contradict al-Bukhari in this condition as a condition of perfection, but they contradict him in it as a condition of validity.
The questioner : As a condition, I mean, in the original validity.
The Shaykh : Yes, the majority contradict al-Bukhari in this condition as a condition of validity, meaning that if the meeting is not established by a valid narration and contemporaneity is established, the chain is weak and disconnection is established. The majority do not agree with al-Bukhari on this, but they agree with al-Bukhari that this is a condition of perfection, and it is undoubtedly, as I said earlier, light upon light. As for a man narrating from another who are contemporaries, in the same country, and all the indicators of the possibility of meeting are present and existing, but we do not have a narration that they actually met, and the hadith is rejected, this is what the majority reject.
And I do not have the exact source in mind right now to tell you who mentioned this as the school of the majority. It is possible this is with a simple review, but what I know scientifically is that this is certainly the school of the majority; because the six books, except "Sahih al-Bukhari," follow this, let alone Muslim.
The questioner : I am this.
The Shaykh : Yes, and perhaps you did not return to the introduction of Muslim; where he refutes those who hold this school. Some say: he refutes al-Bukhari himself, but he did not name al-Bukhari. And some say that he refutes al-Bukhari's shaykh, who is Ali ibn al-Madini, but he also did not name Ali ibn al-Madini. But he refutes the school adopted by al-Bukhari with arguments that no one can refute. So you read this introduction, and then afterwards, we will have another discussion or meeting, if Allah wills.
Now we return to the scientific questions...
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.