نشریه آموزه های حدیثی
سال ششم شماره 1 (پیاپی 11، بهار و تابستان 1401)

One of the important issues in ḥadīth (Arabic: حدیث‎, plural: aḥādīth) studies is the measurement and evaluation of the validity of aḥādīth (Arabic: احادیث, singular: ḥadīth), which is considered before the investigations of the jurisprudence of ḥadīth (Arabic: فقه الحدیث, Fiqh al-hadīth: A science which is related to correct understanding of hadīth in addition to explaining of its meaning) and talks about the validity and correctness of the aḥādīth of the innocent. Rain requesting is one of the texts that is of high importance and priority due to the time conditions and the needs of the faith community, and it needs validation, and so far, no such activity has occurred about it. Therefore, the present article has tried to validate these aḥādīth based on the three components of place of sayings [sources], document and text, and measure their authenticity. The result of this study shows that five texts have more authenticity among the large number of supplications quoted in Shīʿa sources and are considered among the authentic and original supplications of Ahl al-Bayt (a) (Arabic: اهل البیت, lit. 'people of the house'). The age and reputation of supplication sources, as well as the authenticity and historical correctness of their text, are among the most important evidences of this evaluation.

Ḥawla (Arabic: حولاء) is the name of a woman who turned to the Prophet (PBUH) after a challenge with her husband, and he mentioned some points to her in a long ḥadīth. This Ḥadīth has some points regarding the duties of the woman towards her husband, which necessitates a documented and textual study. This research is going to answer this question by descriptive and analytical method Is this Ḥadīth valid in terms of documents and evidence? Is its content consistent with authentic verses and narrations? Its contents in order to validate these narrations and in addition to the documentary studies have been submitted to the Qur'an and definite Sunnah based on the contents of the narrations of representation to investigate its compatibility with Quranic teachings and definitive tradition (Arabic: سنه). The results of this study indicate that in addition to the individuality in narrating this Ḥadīth and the weakness of its authenticity, some of the issues mentioned in it are not in the Qur'an and the definite tradition (Sunnah) and expressing of some of its paragraphs by Prophet (PBUH) faces a serious challenge. The disproportionateness of crime and punishment and the prominent issue of worldly and hereafter punishment in some of the paragraphs of the Ḥadīth, also confirms the fabrication of some of the paragraphs of the Ḥadīth. However, there are certain confirmations of the Qur'an and the definite tradition about some other paragraphs of the Ḥadīth.

The book Sharḥ Uṣūl al-Kāfī (Arabic: شرح اصول ٱلکافی, al-Kāfī, literally "The Sufficient") is written by Mullā Ṣadrā (Persian: ملا صدرا), a Shiite theologian philosopher in the 11th century, in which he has examined and explained the document and the text of the traditions of Uṣūl al-Kāfī (Arabic: اصول ٱلکافی). Some scholars believe that Ṣadr al- Muti'allihīn (Arabic: صدر المتالهین, authority of divine philosophers), despite being prominent in the field of philosophy and wisdom, is not proficient in the field of hierarchy of ḥadīth document and Rijāl [biographical evaluation or biography and criticism of traditionists], while extracting the types of documented and evidence study of aḥādīth (Arabic: احادیث, singular: ḥadīth) in Mullā Ṣadrā's Sharḥ (literally means "explanation" or "expounding of" usually used in commentaries on non-Qur'anic works) have criticized this view and shows his expertise in the discussions of hierarchy of ḥadīth document and Rijāl [biographical evaluation or biography and criticism of traditionists]. Mullā Ṣadrā's documentary reviews are mostly based on the topics of Rijāl science and science of critical study of transmission of tradition (Arabic: علم الدرایه). Identifying the identity of the narrator (transmitter), knowing the narrator's status, commenting on the sayings of Rijāl, determining the name of the Infallible (Arabic: المعصوم, al-Maʿṣūm) and determining the type of ḥadīth are the most important efforts of Ṣadrā in examining hierarchy of aḥādīth document. He has also cited numerous earlier and posterior Rijāl sources in his studies, some of which he has seen directly and some indirectly contrary to the views of some scholars about the sources of Mullā Ṣadrā's Rijāl.

The narrations of "deficient of women's intellect" are among the challenging narrations that have become the origin of doubts about the dignity and status of women, and therefore, have been discussed in writings. On the other hand, the aforementioned narrations have joined the issue of "the equivalence of the testimony of two women with the testimony of one man" with the issue of "deficient of women's intellect", whereas there is no such thing in the related verse in the Qur'an, and naturally this question arises, what is the relationship between these two categories? Thirdly, the narrations about intellect in ḥadīth texts also seem contradictory in some ways, including the possibility or impossibility of increasing or decreasing of one's intellect. This research, which is organized by library method and descriptive-analytical method is based on the hypothesis that the correct analysis of the narrations of deficient of women's intellect, its connection with the issue of women's testimony and consultation with women, and the elimination of some apparent conflicts is based on the analysis and correct explanation of the "usages of the word intellect" in narrations presented in this research in a well-reasoned manner. The findings of the research show that intellect has three important uses in narrations, and acquired intellect and experience, the third use, is the purpose of narrations of deficient of intellect and this meaning has nothing to do with the value and status of women and valuation in this field.

Some narrations speak of the existence of aḥādīth (Arabic: احادیث, singular: ḥadīth) that are very difficult for listener to tolerate. These traditions are known as "difficult complicated" (Arabic: صعب مستصعب, Ṣa‘b Mustaṣ‘ab) narrations. The relationship between these traditions is hidden from the general public and in some cases even from Shiites because of their taqiyya (Arabic: تقیه, taqīyah) nature and observance of people's capacity or fear of their disbelief. The objects of difficult complicated narrations are ḥadīth, science, order, secrets (mysteries), covenant (Arabic: میثاق) of Ahl al-Bayt (Arabic: اهل البیت, lit. 'people of the house') (peace be upon them) and the status (position) of the Infallible (Arabic: المعصوم, al-Maʿṣūm) Imam (a.s.). The author by studying carefully in these narrations and examining the concept and its object, concluded that difficult complicated narrations in order to the understanding of audience are divided to three categories according to which Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) had taqiyya and abstained from some mysteries and concepts to non-eligible: Aḥādīth specific to Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), aḥādīth specific to the companions (Arabic: اصحاب; aṣḥāb (of Imams (peace be upon them) and aḥādīth specific to Shiites. Therefore, the object of difficult complicated narrations, have taqiyya from the perspective of pronouncing. This article by examining narrative texts in descriptive and analytical method, deals with the examples of Ṣa‘b Mustaṣ‘ab (Arabic: صعب مستصعب, difficult complicated) narrations and explains its taqiyya direction.

Nahj al-Balagha (Arabic: نهج ٱلبلاغه Nahj al-Balāghah, 'The Path of Eloquence') is the most valuable cultural heritage of Islam after the Holy Quran. The difference in the words of Imam Ali (A.S.) and the existence of an apparent conflict in some cases have always faced different views. Some Shīʿa and Sunnī scholars have denied or have doubted the authenticity of attributing some of his words to him. It is impossible to assume the occurrence of contradiction and conflict among Imam Ali’s words by considering Imam Ali's infallibility from sin. Therefore, we should try to justify such aḥādīth (Arabic: احادیث, singular: ḥadīth) by acceptable and conventional methods and reveal their actual non-conflict. This article tries to use descriptive-analytical method, through examining the geography of speech and the situation of announcement, while emphasizing on the authenticity of aḥādīth to clarify the fact that the difference between the narrations of the Noble Book is an apparent difference that can be resolved by recognizing the situation of announcement of them. The study of some of the words of Nahj al-Balagha such as: The praise and disapproval (Arabic: مدح و ذم, Romanized: Madḥ wa Dhamm) of the world, the praise and disapproval of the people of Kufa (Arabic: الکوفه al-Kūfah), the praise and disapproval of the Second Caliph, the legitimacy and illegitimacy of the Third Caliph, the infallibility of the Imam and the confession of mistake indicates that the apparent conflict of these two types of expression is due to neglecting for the geography of the word and inaccuracy in social conditions and the requirements of the time of pronouncing the sermons and letters.

The ḥadīth of "my companions are like the stars" (Arabic: اصحابی کالنجوم, Romanized: Aṣḥābī ka 'l-nujūm) and some of the aḥādīth (Arabic: احادیث, singular: ḥadīth) related to it have been disputed and refuted and proven in terms of wording and text by Shīʿa and Sunnī for centuries and these conflicts of discussions are seen in different Islamic sciences or independently in Islamic heritage, and although this ḥadīth and related aḥādīth are from Sunnī sect and most of the disputes have been carried out by them [Sunnī sect] and had different conflicted views and Shīʿa have reacted to it at the same time and while participating in these conflicts had approaches and positions which have been sometimes conflicting with it. But what were these conflicts and approaches? What are their credentials? And what are the consequences of these approaches and positions? It is attempted in this article by a descriptive-analytical and library method to answer the above questions while presenting historical disputes and Shīʿa positions and reveals that these conflicts and approaches are not coherent and include rejection and proof like Sunnī sect, along with justification of ḥadīth and aḥādīth related to it, and the reasons for rejecting it by Shīʿa as a fabricated ḥadīth or proving it along with the definition of the meaning of "companions" (Arabic: اصحاب; aṣḥāb) to the companions Ahl al-Bayt (a) (Arabic: اهل البیت, lit. 'people of the house') or non-deviant companions were too many and the most important of them is lack of the absolute justice of the Companions, conflict with the early history of Islam, the existence of conflicting aḥādīth and citing the views of Sunnī critics about such aḥādīth, and although Shīʿa justifications for this ḥadīth may be acceptable, but, the reasons for rejecting the ḥadīth as a fabricated ḥadīth are very high, strong and unquestionable, and these justifications rely on a few aḥādīth from the Infallible (Arabic: المعصوم, al-Maʿṣūm), unfortunately, relying on a hadith that is forged and fake itself, which is justified by the distortion, but, also the fakeness of these aḥādīth.