Bakr Ibn Muhammad's Traditions and the Problem of Contradiction in Thirteenth Section of Tūsī's Al-Rijāl

Some individuals mentioned in thirteenth section of Tusi’s Al-Rijal. In the thirteenth section of his work, Al-Rijal, under the title of “man lam yarwi ‘anhum’” (Those who didn’t qoute from Imams), Tusi has quoted from many individuals who apparently didn’t declare traditions from Shiite Imams. This is while some of their traditions in the Shiite Hadith collections are directly recited from Imams. Although they have been considered to be Imam’s narrators, they are stated under the section of “man lam yarwi ‘anhum”. This problem which seems to result in a contrast and contradiction in Tusi’s method has been analyzed in this article. Through a comprehensive investigation of one of these narrators, Bakr Ibn Muhammad Al-Azdi, and a preview of other eleven narrators in the thirteenth section, the present study clarifies that Tusi‘s categorization of Imam’s companions under different headings of Al-Rijal is not an indication of his inadvertence and forgetfulness. The article shows that this taxonomy is due to a kind of covert and indirect disparagement of narrators. This conclusion emerges from analysis of the aforementioned traditions in respect with their text and validity along with their narrators’ personality. Tusi’s innuendos in the thirteenth section shall be better understood when their traditions, and their situations while narrating, and their method for citing Hadith are closely examined. For example, Tusi has brought these pharases: “rawa ‘an fulanin” or “rawa ‘anhu fulanun” (he quoted from someone or someone quoted from him). These show that there is some sabotage, shakiness or mixing in the path of the chain of narrator’s traditions; or the narrator is weak and Tusi has indirectly criticized him or his narrations through mentioning his name in this section in order to note slackness in their traditions. Tusi has mentioned that the path of narrations in some cases has been disconnected. His blame may be rejected when referring to Najāshi’s version which confirmed that the chain of narrators is complete. This seem to be an indication of the fact that Tusi have not utilized the complete document.