Should there be Rijal on hadith?

The number of traditions in al-Kafi are aound 15,181; . On the basic traditions, 5,072 are considered sound (sahih) by scholars, i.e. first category; 144 are regarded as good (hasan), second category; 178 are held to be trustworthy (muwaththaq), third category; 302 are adjudged to be strong (qawi), fourth category; and 9,484 are considered weak (da'if), fifth category. The fact that a tradition is considered weak does not mean that it is not true. What it means is that the scholars of tradition have found some weakness in the tradition, usually one of the persons in the isnad, which suggests the possibility that the tradition might not go back to the Imam as claimed. The science developed by Islamic scholars of tradition in order to examine the isnads and subject matter of traditions is a very specialised study; it involves, in particular, `ilm al-rijal, the study of the backgrounds of individual traditionists who have handed on the tradition.

Out of 15 thousand traditions, nearly 9.5 thousand are considered weak! So you see, when people quote Al Kafi it does not mean that we can accept it. We must look through the hadith by its chain and then its corroboration with the Quran and then the logic and motive behind it. It is a long process and it is usually done by scholars. It is not like Bukhari where hadiths go flying with no further investigation within it.If we were to act upon and believe every hadith within it, then no doubt, our faith would no longer be anything close to Islam. This isnt limited to only Al Kafi either. Even other Sunni books. Now the issue comes to " should there be Ilme Rijal and to what limts should it be used? some people go againgst rijal all togther however many issues arise where we might face a hadith and the weaker out of the two might be with in conjunction with the Quran. For example anal intercouse, most people would agree that this act is haram, however If we would to look at the hadiths that are in line with the Quran, they are also hadith evidences which clearly support the permissibility of anal sex in Shia Islam, including:

• Narrated Abdullah bin Abi Ya'foor: I asked Abu Abdullah about approaching women from behind, he said: “No Problem”. He then recited: “Your women are as tilth unto you, so approach your tilth when (or how) ye will." (2:223)
  

• al-Hussain bin Ali bin Yaqteen said: I asked Abul-Hassan about the permissibility for the man to have anal sex with women, he said: “It was made halal (permissible) in the Book of Allah, when (Prophet) Lot said: Here are my daughters, they are purer for you (11:78), and he knew it was not them they were after."
  

• Ali bin al-Hakam said: I heard Safwaan bin Yahya saying: I said to (Imam) al-Rida: “A man among your followers requested me to ask you about a matter, which he feared and was embarrassed to ask you (directly).” He said: “What is it?” I said: “For the man to use the woman's from behind.” He said: “He may.” I said: “Do you personally do that?” He said: “We do not do that."
  

(Tafseer al-Ayyashi”, vol.1, p.110, and “Bihar al-Anwar” by al-Majlisi, vol.23, p.98, and “al-Burhaan fee Tafseer al-Qur'an” by Shaikh Hashim Al Bahrani , vol.1, p.219, and “Wasā'il al-Shīʿa” by al-Hur al-Amily, vol.3, chapter 73: An-Nikaah wa Aadabuh”Tafseer al-Ayyashi,” p.157 , and “Bihar al-Anwa ” by al-Majlisi, vol.21, p.98, and “Tafseer al-Burhaan” by Shaikh Hashim Al Bahrani, vol.2, p.230 Kitab al-Kafi fil Furoo'”: Book of Nikaah: Chapter: Women's anuses, vol.5, p.540, No.2)




This is just one example, however I can give many more...

salam

if you are going as per rijal, then atleast as per sunnis, they have good isnaad ahadeeth on both; i mean one group which says anal sex is allowed; other which says it is haram

but this is not the main issue
before you go and try to analyze isnaad; the main issue which comes is

who will tell u who was what?

say you say najashi; the question is how he came to know? did he met him? he did not met them; so what was his source? was that trustworthy itself?

so on and so forth;

that weakens the rijal issue a lot

Brother I do not know who told you that Sunnies have strong rijal in there hadiths. Many of there hadiths are weak and most of the hadith that have been narrated are by Abu Huraira. Historical texts indicate Abu Hurairah appeared in and around the Islamic camp around the end of the Battle of Khyber after the Muslim victory. Abu Hurairah was convicted of lying, whipped and instructed to not make hadiths by Umar Khattab. It's documented in Sunni texts that when a person is convicted of lying all their hadiths become void. Abu Hurairah's hadiths were based on events that took place when he was not even present or in the vicinity, for example, he would be hundreds of miles away from an event that he narrates like he is there.He also had a habit of adding his own ideas to hadiths that are often quoted as if directly from Prophet Muhammad (saw).

I think they should be a concept of Rijal, as far as I am aware they are two camps with in the Usooli Shias, one favour rijal on every hadith, the other camp just does it on matters of Fiqh. I never used to agree with it myself but I do think it is improtant specialy in areas of Fiqh.

Ya Ali Madad brothers.
What question does rijal serve?
It cant define whether a hadeeth is authentic or fabricated.
The only way to do that is to compare it to the quran.

Rijal on the other hand can never verify or discredit the matn (text) of the hadeeth.
It can only cast doubt on the truthfulness of the narrator based on another persons opinion, perspective or knowledge.
So it is created by fallibles with severe limitations and does not serve a purpose.

It doesnt serve a purpose because the quran tells us we can take information from an evil doer after close scrutiny of the information to verify its accuracy ( surah hajrat verse 6).

The quran doesnt tell us to disbelieve the information.

salam

you did not get my point

say you say that mr xyz is thiqa; from where will you get this?
how much is this authentic?
and if it, the question is, how can this be proven that he did not err?after all he is not infallible

there are many questions in this regard.

take care

Brother, a Hadeith will Always be correct! A fabricated hadeeth will not.
The quran tells us to look carefully at the information, where does it tel you to rely on any ones opinion on the persons character?

If hadeeth do not contradict the quran, then they are both to be accepted, and the conflict you see in them will be explainable according to the quran.

There is nothing to say the hadeeth must be SUPPORTED by the quran! What is said is that the hadeeth must no oppose/contradict the quran.

So if a hadeeth does not oppose/contradict the quranic injunctions regarding something, even though the quran may not explicitly it, it is to be accepted.

The whole purpose of a hadeeth is to explain something in the quran which is not apparent or clearly spelt out.
As such can you show me where in the quran it tells us to read 5 namaz or read qunoot? It doesnt, but because the hadeeth do not contradict the quran in this, we accept it as the way namaz/salat has been explained by the Aimma (as).

Now if two people relate a hadeeth, how will the personal characterisitics of one person render what he or she is saying as null and void? This opposes the quran.

Silat_warrior110 wrote:In relation to both of the above posts, what you have to also consider is that a Hadith does not always have to be correct in its content. As mentioned in surah Hujjrat that the when a wrong doer brings you information one must look carefuly. Thus the analysis on information from the person has to be attested with the Quran. If we where to simply say that there should not be any rijal, how one deal with a situation where they are two conflicting hadiths by the Aima (as) and there is nothing directly in the Quran to support it?

salam

it is possible that one may be said in taqayyya; we have ahadeeth which tells us this thing

My point exactly, so what do you do then? as we know alot of our hadith have been said under Taqqiyah...

For example In Hayat al Qulub Volume 1 page 93

"According to narrators people asked Imam Reza (as) how the generations of Adam (pbuh) continued? Imam (as) said "Hawwa became pregnant with habil and his sister. Next time she bore Qabil and his sister. Both of them got married to each other's brothers and sisters and after that marriage of one to his sister became unlawful."

If you look at the content of this hadith, it seems to make perfect sense. The reality is that Allah (swt) decides the relationship that we have to people when we come into this world. We also know that just becuase some one is a blood decendant of a holy personality that does not mean they are proctected from punishment. As he example of Prophet (as) Noah and his son. According to the Quran Allah (swt) removed him from the family. Now from the above narration it becomes rather clear that this Hadith was either a fact or said under Taqqiyh. Now the Question is what is there to say that this was not the actual case, which makes Bani Adam a result of incest?