MURSAL HADITH AND SCIENTISTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARDS ITS VALIDITY IN ARGUMENTATION

Abstract

Different attitudes towards defining mursal hadith have been present since the second century of hijra and period of Ibn Qattan, up to the later hadith scholars, Ibn Abdu'l-Barra, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani and others. There are also differences in regards to validity of argumentation of these kinds of hadiths. The purpose of this paper is to elucidate scholars’ attitudes on these issues by presenting various Shariah solutions as implications of those discrepancies. Since ‘irsal’ is a discontinuity of a chain of narrators (sanad), it becomes evident that the mursal hadith is a weak hadith. Certainly, the principle of presumption of innocence is not relevant for attesting the transmitter from the point of the science of hadith, because the transmitter that is ‘majhool’ (unknown narrator) is not acceptable until his faith and reliability is confirmed by an authoritative biographer or scholar of hadith of his time. On the other hand, ‘irsal’ is undoubtedly one of the least weaknesses in sanad of hadith. That is because the omitted transmitter belongs to the first generations of Islam which the Prophet (s.a.w.s) describes as best generations in the hadith: "The best of my nation is my generation then those who follow them and then those who follow them." Keywords: hadith, mursal, irsal, narration, validity

Citation

Copyright

Article metrics