Distinguishing between the younger and older Tabi'un in accepting a narration: does this have any significance?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Sometimes there is a difference between the younger Tabi'i and the older Tabi'i in accepting a narration. Does this distinction have a meaning? Does it have an impact on the narration?
The Shaykh : Regarding the acceptance of the narration, the statement is general and needs clarification. Do you mean that if he is a younger Tabi'i who narrated a hadith from a Companion, you mean "younger" and not something else?
The questioner : What is meant by the distinction, specifically in the case of a mursal hadith?
The Shaykh : I told you this was before that, because I know that this statement is not made in an absolute sense. But what happened with you? As usual, you tried to evade, and this evasion is like someone trying to hide the solution, only to find the solution later. The younger Tabi'i is not distinguished from the older Tabi'i in terms of accepting a narration, except... the younger Tabi'i is only relevant in the case of a mursal hadith. In other words, if the hadith is mursal and the one who made it mursal is an older Tabi'i, it is a proof (hujjah). If it is a younger Tabi'i, it is not a proof. This is where the younger Tabi'i is mentioned. But this distinction has no basis. What do they intend? If we go back to the previous discussion about the mursal hadith and mention the reason for not accepting it as proof, which is ignorance of who informed him or who narrated the hadith to him, now is a suitable occasion to say that those who err among the scholars of terminology, such as the author of al-Bayquniyyah, say in the definition of mursal: "That from which the Companion has dropped". This is an error, because if we imagine a mursal hadith and claim that it is mursal because the Companion is not mentioned in it, then the hadith becomes valid. Why? Because if an older Tabi'i, as they say, said "The Messenger of Allah said," and it is supposed that the Companion dropped from it, it is as if he said "A man from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah narrated to me." Who is this man from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah? It is not known. But what is known about him? That he is a Companion. Now, if we return to the definition in al-Bayquniyyah: "That from which the Companion has dropped", then the hadith circulated from the Tabi'i from the Companion. But in both examples, there is a formal difference. In the mursal hadith, he did not say "A Companion narrated to me," while in the second example, he said "A man from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah narrated to me." So, is the case of the Tabi'i who says "A man from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah narrated to me" rejected or accepted?
The questioner : According to al-Bayquni?
The Shaykh : According to al-Bayquni and other than al-Bayquni, all scholars of hadith accept the hadith in which the Tabi'i says "A man from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah narrated to me," because they say that all Companions are trustworthy (adul), so it is not necessary to know his identity or personality; they are all trustworthy. For this reason, the definition of mursal as "that from which the Companion has dropped" is an error, because if that were the case, every mursal would have to be a proof, like the hadith in which the Tabi'i said "A man from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) narrated to me." What is the definition?
The questioner : That the Tabi'i raised it to the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him).
The Shaykh : It is the statement of the Tabi'i: "The Messenger of Allah said." It is not that a Companion dropped from it, because we assume that this Tabi'i who said "The Messenger of Allah said" has a Companion between him and the Messenger, established to us in some way. The statement of al-Bayquni that a Companion dropped from it is true, but is this the nature of every mursal? The answer is no. The most memorizing of the later scholars, al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, said: "It has been established for us a mursal hadith in which there are four or five Tabi'un between it and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him): a Tabi'i from a Tabi'i from a Tabi'i from a Tabi'i from a Tabi'i who said 'A man narrated to me... the Messenger of Allah.' If this first Tabi'i had said 'The Messenger of Allah said,' it would mean that four people dropped between him and the Messenger. Therefore, it is an error to imagine that every mursal has a Companion who dropped from it."
So, let us return and ask: what is the relationship of this detail to the younger and older Tabi'i? Its relationship is that when the Tabi'i who made the hadith mursal is an older Tabi'i, the possibility that he took it from a Tabi'i is weak, and vice versa: when the mursal is a younger Tabi'i, the possibility that he took it from a Tabi'i is stronger. Nevertheless, scholars of hadith do not adopt this distinction between the older and younger Tabi'i. Why? Because an older Tabi'i may narrate from an older Tabi'i, which is not a problem, and it is known in the science of hadith that there is a type of narration called "narration of the elders from the juniors," meaning the sheikh narrates from his student, and this exists! So, if we have a mursal from an older Tabi'i, the possibility that he took it from other than a Companion does not collapse; this possibility is present. Therefore, this distinction does not benefit the issue of not using the mursal hadith as proof.
The Shaykh : Regarding the acceptance of the narration, the statement is general and needs clarification. Do you mean that if he is a younger Tabi'i who narrated a hadith from a Companion, you mean "younger" and not something else?
The questioner : What is meant by the distinction, specifically in the case of a mursal hadith?
The Shaykh : I told you this was before that, because I know that this statement is not made in an absolute sense. But what happened with you? As usual, you tried to evade, and this evasion is like someone trying to hide the solution, only to find the solution later. The younger Tabi'i is not distinguished from the older Tabi'i in terms of accepting a narration, except... the younger Tabi'i is only relevant in the case of a mursal hadith. In other words, if the hadith is mursal and the one who made it mursal is an older Tabi'i, it is a proof (hujjah). If it is a younger Tabi'i, it is not a proof. This is where the younger Tabi'i is mentioned. But this distinction has no basis. What do they intend? If we go back to the previous discussion about the mursal hadith and mention the reason for not accepting it as proof, which is ignorance of who informed him or who narrated the hadith to him, now is a suitable occasion to say that those who err among the scholars of terminology, such as the author of al-Bayquniyyah, say in the definition of mursal: "That from which the Companion has dropped". This is an error, because if we imagine a mursal hadith and claim that it is mursal because the Companion is not mentioned in it, then the hadith becomes valid. Why? Because if an older Tabi'i, as they say, said "The Messenger of Allah said," and it is supposed that the Companion dropped from it, it is as if he said "A man from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah narrated to me." Who is this man from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah? It is not known. But what is known about him? That he is a Companion. Now, if we return to the definition in al-Bayquniyyah: "That from which the Companion has dropped", then the hadith circulated from the Tabi'i from the Companion. But in both examples, there is a formal difference. In the mursal hadith, he did not say "A Companion narrated to me," while in the second example, he said "A man from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah narrated to me." So, is the case of the Tabi'i who says "A man from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah narrated to me" rejected or accepted?
The questioner : According to al-Bayquni?
The Shaykh : According to al-Bayquni and other than al-Bayquni, all scholars of hadith accept the hadith in which the Tabi'i says "A man from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah narrated to me," because they say that all Companions are trustworthy (adul), so it is not necessary to know his identity or personality; they are all trustworthy. For this reason, the definition of mursal as "that from which the Companion has dropped" is an error, because if that were the case, every mursal would have to be a proof, like the hadith in which the Tabi'i said "A man from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) narrated to me." What is the definition?
The questioner : That the Tabi'i raised it to the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him).
The Shaykh : It is the statement of the Tabi'i: "The Messenger of Allah said." It is not that a Companion dropped from it, because we assume that this Tabi'i who said "The Messenger of Allah said" has a Companion between him and the Messenger, established to us in some way. The statement of al-Bayquni that a Companion dropped from it is true, but is this the nature of every mursal? The answer is no. The most memorizing of the later scholars, al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, said: "It has been established for us a mursal hadith in which there are four or five Tabi'un between it and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him): a Tabi'i from a Tabi'i from a Tabi'i from a Tabi'i from a Tabi'i who said 'A man narrated to me... the Messenger of Allah.' If this first Tabi'i had said 'The Messenger of Allah said,' it would mean that four people dropped between him and the Messenger. Therefore, it is an error to imagine that every mursal has a Companion who dropped from it."
So, let us return and ask: what is the relationship of this detail to the younger and older Tabi'i? Its relationship is that when the Tabi'i who made the hadith mursal is an older Tabi'i, the possibility that he took it from a Tabi'i is weak, and vice versa: when the mursal is a younger Tabi'i, the possibility that he took it from a Tabi'i is stronger. Nevertheless, scholars of hadith do not adopt this distinction between the older and younger Tabi'i. Why? Because an older Tabi'i may narrate from an older Tabi'i, which is not a problem, and it is known in the science of hadith that there is a type of narration called "narration of the elders from the juniors," meaning the sheikh narrates from his student, and this exists! So, if we have a mursal from an older Tabi'i, the possibility that he took it from other than a Companion does not collapse; this possibility is present. Therefore, this distinction does not benefit the issue of not using the mursal hadith as proof.