TABLE OF CONTENTS
A) What is Tadlees [very brief definition]
The following article is compiled from the benefit shared by a group of scholars including but not limited to Shaykh ibn Bashir al-Hussainwi, Shaykh rafeeq tahir, Shaykh Anwar shah, Shaykh Khubaib, Shaykh Mubasshir Ahmad and more , whom i inquired with and requested their permission to allow me to add their fatawa/view points in my compilation and upload it for the benefit of the english speaking brothers . Also please note that the English translation from arabic regarding such technical topics is very difficult thus i will try my best to translate it in a way that explains the meaning as well instead of only the principle or the very short summarized brief replies of the aimmah. Apart from this if you do not know the mustalah of jarh wa ta`deel then perhaps you may not understand much of what is to follow :
A) What is Tadlees [very brief definition]
A Mudallis is the one who commits Tadlees which is when a narrator narrates from someone he does not directly hear from and omits the person he really hears from
[Ref: For details al-Fiyyah (1/180) of Haafidh al-A’raaqee, see also Nazhatun-Nazhar (p.82), an-Nukt (2/614) of Ibn Hajr and Tayseer Mastalah al-Hadeeth (p.78) of Dr. Mahmood at-Tahhaan.]
e.g Ahmad from (arabic : `an or عن) Omar from (`an) Khalid from (`an) Abu Huraira from (`an) the prophet…
Here ahmad did not hear from Omar directly but rather someone else who happened to be a weak narrator . And this weak narrator told Ahmad that omar narrated from khalid from abu huraira so what ahmad does is skips that someone in between who told him and directly says ” From Omar” This is one type of tadlees commonly known as Tadlees taswiyyah. there are few more types as well.
Such type of reports of Ahmad are generally called as Muanan reports Ahmad.
The GENERAL Ruling Concerning a PROVEN Mudallis Narrator by scholars is that his narrations wherein he uses the terms of narrating ahadeeth such as for example ” `an Ahmad ” will not be taken to be as a connected chain unless his hearing from Ahmad is actually confirmed.
Imaam Ibn as-Salaah (d.643H) said,
“The ruling is that the only narration of a Mudallis that will be accepted is the one in which he clarifies who he heard it from, and this is upon every that individual who commits Tadlees once.”
[Ref: Muqaddimah Ibn as-Salaah (p.60) another ed. (pg.99). ]
Imaam Yahyaa ibn Ma’een (d.233H) said,
“The Mudallis is not a proof in is Tadlees.”
[Ref: al-Kifaayah (p.362) and Sharh Ellal at-Tirmidhee (1/353) and (1/357-358)]
Imaam Nawawee said,
“If a Mudallis narrates with Ann then that narration with agreement will not be proof.”
[Ref: al-Majmoo Sharh al-Muhazzab (6/212), Nasb ur-Raayah (2/34).]
Imaam Ibn Katheer has mentioned the same that a narration in which a mudallis clarifies he heard the narration, will be accepted, and thereafter brings the statement of Imaam Ibn as-Salaah.
[Ref: Ikhtisaar Uloom al-Hadeeth (pg.46-48), al-Baa’ith al-Hatheeth (pg.62-63).]
However the above is a general rule. What follows is a specific circumstance
B) Topic : Whoever is accused of, or committs tadlees even once (or a few times) , are all his mua’nan narrations rejected?
This Topic is a point of difference between some scholars from the salaf and khalaf , especially among the Ahl al-hadeeth.
Some people say
Whoever is accused of, or committs tadlees even once (or a few times) , are all his mua’nan narrations rejected?
based on what Imam shaf`ee and some others said :
Imam Shafiee said
ومن عرفناه دلس مرة فقد أبان لنا عورته فى روايته
If We know some one has done tadlees for once, He has shown us his faults
Then he said
لا نقبل من مدلس حديثا حتى يقول فيه حدثني أو سمعت
We do not take hadeeth from a mudallis unless he say Haddathanee (Hadeeth narrated to me) or Samiatu (I heard him)
[Ref: ar-Risalah:1035, Sakhawi had same opinion see Fath ul Mughees bi Sharh al-Faqeehul hadeeth Vol 1 page 193]
This is not a strong view in accordance to the vast majority of the earlier scholars and even today. From Bukhari, to `Ali ibn al-Madeeni , to today’s Shaykh Hatim al-`Awni, Shaykh rafeeq tahir, Shaykh Muhibullah shah rashidi (rahimahullah) , shaykh Ibn Bashir al-Hussainwi, Shaykh Khubaib, Shaykh Irshad ul-Haq, Shaykh Mubasshir and many many more .
If we were to adopt this rule then a lot of narrations that were considered authentic earlier would have to be deemed weak. Many years ago the scholar of his era and time , Shaykh Muhibullah shah rashidi as-sindhi (rahimahullah) said :
(لیکن اگر اس موقف کو سامنے رکھ کر ہم دواوین حدیث کو تلاش کرنا شروع کردیں تو بہت سی روایات جن کو سلف سے لے کر خلف تک صحیح ومتصل قرار دیتے آئے ہیں ان میں سے اچھی خاصی تعداد ضعیفہ بن جائے گی)(مقالات راشدیہ ١/٣٢٨)۔
This perspective of itlaqan rejecting a qaleelul khata or qaleel ut-tadlees would be very troubling because it would then fall directly upon some major pinnacles of islamic tradition carriers such as Zuhri, Sufyan ath-thawri, `Amash and others after them
قال علي بن المديني نظرت فإذا علم الأسانيد يدور على ستة نفر .
1 – فبالمدينة محمد بن مسلم بن عبيد الله بن شهاب الزهري ويكنى أبا بكر توفي سنة أربع وعشرين ومائة رحمة الله عليه وهو بالمدينة
2 – ولأهل مكة عمرو بن دينار مولى بني جمح ويكنى أبا محمد توفي سنة ست وعشرين ومائة .
3 – ويحيى بن أبي كثير مولى طى ويكنى أبا نصر توفي سنة تسع وعشرين ومائة .
4 – ولأهل البصرة قتادة بن دعامة السدوسي ويكنى أبا الخطاب توفي سنة ست وعشرين ومائة .
5 – ولأهل الكوفة أبو إسحاق عمرو بن عبد الله السبيعي توفي سنة سبع وعشرين ومائة .
6 – وسليمان بن مهران الأعمش مولى بني كاهل من بني أسد يكنى أبا محمد توفي سنة ثمان وأربعين ومائة رحمة الله عليهم اجميعين
Now if we were to consider al-`Amash from above or sufyan at-thawri’s all muanan reports to be weak due to his tadlees then this wrong principle would make a huge number of narrations deemed weak.
This is why Imam Ibn Hajar rahimahullah seems to be accepting sufyan at-thawri’s tadlees and his statement can be seen here :
He stated that not all of the narrations of Imam Sufyan can be rejected, he also said that Imam Sufyan is amongst those mudalliseen whose mu’an’an narrations are mentioned in the Saheeh without any tasreeh bi samaa to be found. This is what shaykh Mubasshir ahmad also confirmed to me that in the saheehayn their muanan reports are not based on tashreeh bis-sama` and are accepted as such but outside saheehayn they need to be checked.
This would again stir the debate of bukhari’s usool because accepting their munanan in bukhari is one thing due to whatsoever reasons including ijmaa but then this still doesn’t relieve us from the fact that Bukhari had a specific usool he used in his saheeh which would then stir the debate regarding how Bukhari did not consider their tadlees or munanan reports to be weak enough to not include in his saheeh.
[Ref: al-Kifayah of Khateeb al-Baghdadi 2/409 No. 1190 with an authentic chain]
Before i proceed, i will quote the opinions of some scholars who have explained how Isma`eel is the best to take from when it comes to narrations from sha`bi . Meaning they have agreed upon him being one of the best sources to narrate from sha`bi.
Imam Abu Hatim ar-razi said he doesn’t prefer anyone over isma`el from the companions of sha`bi and he is trustworthy…
لا أقدم عليه أحدا من أصحاب الشعبي، وهو ثقة، أروي من بيان وفراس، وأحفظ من مجالد، لا بأس به
Scholars have opined that Isma`eel ibn Abi Khalid’s tadlees is only from Sha`bi as it has come from Imam ahmad, Yahya ibn ma`een , Yahya ibn sa`eed al-Qattan regarding the narration << دية الخطأ أخماس ما دون النفس >> they said ” Isma`eel did not hear this from Sha`bi”
قَالَ أبي كنت أسأَل يحيى بن سعيد عَن أَحَادِيث إِسْمَاعِيل بن أبي خَالِد عَن عَامر عَن شُرَيْح وَغَيره فَكَانَ فِي كتابي
Page 505-507 , or see page 484 onwards
See Shaykh Khubaibs مقالات اثرية | تاليف راقم الحروف
And many more.