نشریه حدیث پژوهی
پیاپی 9 (بهار و تابستان 1392)

Al-Shaykh al-Saduq is a Shia leading scholar with many works in different areas of religious knowledge among which Kamal al-Din wa Tamam al-Nimah ("the perfection of the religion and the end of the blessings") is regarded to be one of his most famous books. This book has been dedicated to Shia perspective about the occultation and age of Imam Mahdi including logical arguments along with many texts and Hadiths about occultation which are usually valid and well-ordered. The present study tries to introduce Al-Shaykh al-Saduq’s method in this book. After noting literal advantages of this book, his approach in quoting Hadiths are studied. Different traditions are also examined in terms of their context and validity. It is detected that al-Saduq has usually heard the Hadiths which are written in his book. He has also found to exercise special methods such as organizing traditions under proper headings, citing document series of all Hadith thoroughly, and stating traditions from different individuals’ view. In some cases, He employed Quranic verses to gain better understanding of traditions or described the meaning of Hadith, its vocabularies, and theological demonstration.

Due to his vast knowledge of traditional and rational sciences, Allāmeh Sha’rāni has written interpretation on different Hadith books and clarified their ambiguities. In an attempt to gain an accurate account of the infallibles’ traditions, He has focused on two main processes to discover the meaning of Hadiths, namely understanding texts of Hadith and their main goals. He has also found to be absorbed with Hadith books, specially Kitab al-Wafi when trying to find the meaning of Hadiths. Meanwhile, He has compared different versions of Hadith books with respect to their main ideas. To precisely understand the Hadith text, Allāmeh has defined and described the applied vocabularies and their combination. Besides, he has discussed literary and rhetorical rules of traditions and noted valuable points about distinguishing the goal of Hadith. He has also tried to prevent misunderstanding of traditions via pointing to different possibilities of interpretation. To perceive traditions, He has utilized those aspects of science which has been verified by wisdom or religion.

Scientific personality of Ibn al-Walid and his effect on succeeding scholars indicate of his prominent status and imply researchers’ need to overview and investigate his points of view. The present article is an introduction of Muhammad Ibn al-Hasan Ibn al-Walid and his works and a report of his perspectives in different issues. Employing a library method and descriptive-analytic approach, the current study attempts to cultivate his outstanding and notable view about the problem of exception specifically in Nawadir al-Hikmah written by Muhammad Ibn al-Ahmad Ibn al-Yahya. The results show that exception of Ibn al-Walid is aimed at warning scholars to be more cautious and careful when studying narratives.

Ibn al-Ghazāeri and al-Najāshi are assumed to be rijāl scholars of early era whose thoughts have undoubtedly affect on rijāl scholars of late era. Ibn al-Ghazāeri was dependent to rijāli views of Qom’s Hadith narrators. Analyzing their rijāli perspectives indicates a sort of similarities between them. This point results from especially describing and introducing narrators in his Kitāb al-rijāl. Meantime, cooperation of al-Najjāshi and Ibn al-Ghazāeri and their use of narrators such as Hossein Ibn Obeidallāh al-Ghazāeri, the father of Ibn al-Ghazāeri, illustrates that they have similar views in terms of their rijali method and manner. Beside their identical views about substantial issues, we can point to the influence of Ibn al-Ghazāeri on al-Najashi. Comparing these two rijāli scholars on the basis of their significant works shows their approach to Ijtihād rather than their reliance on observation when stating rijali aspects of narrators. In addition to their matching viewpoints such as their scholarly views, opposition with some Qomi narrators, the difference between validity of narrator and their Hadith, al-Najāshi and Ibn al-Ghazāeri are similar in their citation of famous theory of jarh and tadil (disparagement and crediting of narrators of Hadith). There also found to be some differences between these two scholars’ ideas. Obvious instances of these differences can be found in their opposing rijāli views. For example, Ibn al-Ghazāeri is strict in expression of rijāli views which is formed on Qomi narrators’ rijāli views, while al-Najjāshi is more moderate even in disparagement of narrators.

One of the most significant characteristics of Shia heritage is said to be the fact that it is provided in written discourse. From their outset, Hadiths that are attributed to Prophet and Imams have always been conveyed to the next generation through books and Shia’s principles. Then, Authors of Hadith bookss, especially writers of The Four Books, gathered them together and provided a written script of them so that the old sources were gradually forgotten. Nowadays, these old sources may be restored via different processes, specifically using indexes of al- Najāshi, Tusi and etc. By applying this approach, the current study attempts to restore sources of Tafsir Al-Qomi. This exegesis is assumed to be one of the most important sources of Shai’s traditionary commentaries. Attribution of the Tafsir-e Al-Qomi to the Ali Ibn Ibrahim Al-Qomi is somehow doubted. Through employing the results of resource restoring, the present article sought to elucidate on the validity of sources and authors of the books from earlier authoritie's view. The authors’ ideology has also been clarified to some extent. Meantime, attempts have been made to present precise evidences of knowing the real writer of aforementioned book.

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.

Sahih al-Bukhāri, one of the source books and references of Sunni Islam, includes a section called the book of commentary (Kitāb al-Tafsir) which is a collection of interpretive narrations. Every simple Hadith book written in early centuries is only expected to be regarded in terms of its special approach to supported tradition. The aforementioned section of Sahih al-Bukhāri, however, appears to be a display of rational (literary-rhetorical) interpretation rather than traditional interpretation. Documenting narratives, using mojtahid interpreters, choosing pure narrations, collecting interpretive narrations, and entitling them, and selecting sound traditions from others are factors which highlights Ijtihād in this exegesis. In this exegesis, most of the time, al-Bukhāri have mentioned the name of interpreter under the interpretation of the words of Quran. When the interpreter’s name is not included, it is assumed that he himself is the interpreter of that part. A few centuries later, the exegetes of Sahih al-Bukhāri attributed most of those interpretations to Abu Obeida Moammar ibn al-Muthanna. Investigating why al-Bukhari hesitate to bring the name of Abu Obeida indicates that there are two main reasons; (a) following early scholars’ method in avoiding to cite main reference of statements, and (b) attempting to decrease the size of book.

The essence of faith was one of the major problems among political and scholastic theological sects of first and early second century after Hijrah. Khawārij, Morji’ah and Shia discussed it in defferent ways. The main issues which can be provided in an integral category are as follows: indication of faith and Islam, asking about the level of accepting faith, determining the level of faith and the quality of a believer’s (Momen’s) rule in this world and future life. In this case, lots of companions’ and students’ questions have been clearly answered by Imam Sadiq in various traditions. In this article, considering the views of different sects, we explain the viewpoint of Imam Sadiq in this regard.

One of the Imami hadith required to be investigated is assumed to be a documentation attributed to Imam Mahdi. In this hadith, which is "We are sanāye' (creation/ beneficence/ and selection) of God and then people are creation/ beneficence/ selection of us" there appears to be a complicated and apparently vague phrase. The present study seeks to reach to a complete and proper understanding of this phrase. First, a document review of the narration is presented. In the next phase, Arabic literature and terminology are closely examined to detect possible definitions of this phrase. As the main keyword of this phrase, the Arabic term "sanaye'" is carefully analyzed in the subsequent stage. The results indicate that while explicit meaning of the Arabic word "sanaye'" is considered to be "creation, beneficence, and selection", its implicit meaning is found to be "training". Applying main rules of Hadith studies, the validity of these meanings are assessed and finally the first meaning is rejected and other three authentic meanings are proposed. The last presented meaning is preferred to other meanings.

Paradoxicality appears to be one of the most interesting topics in aesthetics of written rhetoric. Employing paradox is assumed to be an outstanding approach to poetic defamiliarization which cause the statements to be unfamiliar, striking, and highly effective. With a noticeably high range of paradoxical utterances, Nahj al-Balāgha has attracted the attention of linguists and rhetoricians. Thus, It seems to have the potentials of being explored from literal point of view beside religious one. It is presumed that Imam Ali (PBUH) applied this rhetorical device when he meant to elucidate on the world or provide people with knowledge of God. The main reasons of this choice is likely to be bidimensionality of world as well as impossibility of recognition of God through external senses. Additionally, when taking the form of simile, paradoxical statements may become more obvious and simple to interpret. So, the audiences can discover the beauty of the primary context. In addition to presenting a new categorization of different paradoxicalities, the current study tries to probe and compare sermons, letters and narrations in Nahj al-Balāgha in terms of their paradoxical statement. The linguistically prominent instances of paradoxicalities in Nahj al-Balāgha are also attempted to decode and analyze.