Khabar Al-Waahid (The Single Line Transmission) - Muhammad Ash-Shuwaiky

Khabar Al-Waahid (The
single line transmission)

Does not establish Ilm (definite
knowledge) and it is not taken in the
Aqaaid
Muhammad Ash-Shuwaiky
Bait ul-Maqdis
First Edition 1422h/2002
Contents:
Page 3
Page 4
Foreword
Chapter One: The First Angle: The difference between the definition of the
Mutawaatir Khabar (report) and the Khabar Al-Aahaad and its implications.
Page 6
Chapter Two: The Second Angle: The Adillah (evidences) from the Kitaab, the
Sunnah and the Ijmaa of the Sahaabah which indicate that the Khabar AlAahaad do not establish (decisive) Ilm and Yaqeen (certainty).
Page 11
Chapter Three: The Third Angle: How the Sahaabah and those who followed
them differed in respect to affirming the Khabar Al-Aahaad.
Page 23
Chapter Four: The fourth Angle: It is not permitted for there to be disagreement
in the Aqaaid which have been firmly established amongst the Muslims.
Page 43
Chapter Five: The fifth Angle: That which they thought to be an evidence (for
their argument) but is not an evidence.
Page 53
Chapter Six: The Sixth Angle: The statements of the 'Ulamaa stating that the
Khabar Al-Waahid does not ascertain and establish 'Ilm (certain knowledge):
Page 67
Chapter Seven: The Seventh Angle: Their statements in relation to not using the
Khabar Al-Aahaad as an evidence for the Aqaa'id.

All praise belongs to Allah the Lord of the worlds and prayers and peace be upon the Noblest of
creatures and upon his family, companions and those who follow them with perfection until the
Day of Judgement.
Those who have gone away from the principals of Usool and the people of knowledge from
amongst the Fuqahaa, Scholars of Hadeeth and Usool, have claimed that the Khabar Al-Aahaad
(single-line narrations) establish Ilm (i.e. definite knowledge) and are taken into the Aqaaid
according to the people of the Sunnah as a whole. Additionally they claim that only the
Jahmiyah, Mutazilah, Jabriyyah and Khawaarij differ in regards to that.
However a precise examination of the Masalah (issue) makes it apparent that their claim is Baatil
(false) and that it does not have a Daleel (evidence) from the Kitaab, the Sunnah, the Ijmaa of
the Sahaabah to support it. Rather the evidences and proofs repudiate this claim and in this small
book I will present seven angles, each of which is sufficient enough to reject their claim.
The first angle:

The first angle relates to the difference and distinction between the Khabar Al-Mutawaatir and
the Khabar Al-Aahaad in terms of their definition and their reality in regards to the Shareeah
according to the Ulamaa who have mentioned the Mutawaatir and the Aahaad. They said: The
Khabar (report) can either be a definite lie (Kadhiban Qatan) in which case it would be an
invented and fabricated (Mukhtalaq, Mawdoo) Hadeeth, or it would be definitely true (Sidqan
Qatan) and this is the Mutawaatir Hadeeth. If however the Hadeeth holds the possibility of
being Sidqan (truthful) or Kadhiban (a lie) then it is Khabar Al-Aahaad.
The second and third of these mentioned types will be the place of our study here.
Al-Khabar Al-Mutawaatir linguistically means: Consecutiveness where two or more matters
follow on from each other with a pause or delay so that one follows after the other in accordance
to the meaning of Witr which means one by one.
This meaning has come in the speech of Allah (swt):
Then we sent Our Messengers in succession (one after the other) (Al-Muminoon 44).
(Ref: Sharh of Al-Kawkab Al-Muneer p332/2 amongst other books of Usool ).
The meaning of Mutawaatir in Istilaah (Usooli terminology) is: The Khabar (report) from
a (certain) number which would normally prevent their collusion upon a lie.
(Ref: Al-Aayaat Al-Bayyinaat of Al-Ibaadiy 272/3).
Its Hukm (ruling) is that it establishes Ilm (knowledge) and Yaqeen according to the view of all
of the Fuqahaa (ref: Meezaan Al-Usool of As Samarqandiy p423 and 69/3). The one who
denies (rejects) the Khabar (report) that has been confirmed to be Mutawaatir has disbelieved.
Some of the Ulamaa have collected and recorded them like As-Suyootiy, Az-Zubaidiy and AlKataaniy.
The linguistic meaning of Khabar Al-Aahaad is: It is the plural of Ahad (one/single) and it is
a Khabar (report) that has been related by one from another one as is taken from its name.
(Ref: Meezaan Al-Usool p431).
Its Istilaahi (terminological) meaning is: The Khabar Al-Waahid which is less than the level
of the Tawaatur, and where a condition from amongst the conditions of the Tawaatur is missing.
(Ref: Sharh Al-Lam of Ash-Sheeraaziy p578/2).
Its Hukm is that it does not establish (Yufeed) Ilm and certainty (Yaqeen). The one who denies
it is not a disbeliever because it is below the level of the Mutawaatir. This is the view of the great
majority of the Ulamaa including the four Aimmah (Imaams) as we will go to make clear later
inshaa Allah. This puts to rest the claims of those who deny this about them and their students
and I have come across more than seventy from amongst them who held this view. I have added
a special chapter at the end of this study just to present these opinions of theirs alone.
The second angle:

The Adillah (evidences) from the Kitaab, the Sunnah and the Ijmaa of the Sahaabah which
indicate that the Khabar Al-Aahaad do not establish (decisive) Ilm and Yaqeen (certainty).
As for Al-Kitaab:
Allah (swt) said:

O you who believe! If a rebellious disobedient person (Faasiq) comes to you with news, verify it, lest you harm
people in ignorance, and afterwards you become regretful to what you have done. (Al-Hujuraat 6).
Abu Bakr Al-Jassaas the Hanafi Scholar in respect to this Noble Aayaah: This Aayah contains the
indication that the Khabar Al-Waahid does not oblige Ilm (knowledge) and if it obliged knowledge in itself then
it would not have been in need of verification. There are people who use this as evidence for the permissibility of
accepting the Khabar Al-Waahid of the Adl (just person). The specification of verifying the Faasiq in respect to
his Khabar (report/news) is an evidence indicating that the verification of the Khabar of the just person is not
permissible. This however is a mistaken understanding because the specification (Takhsees) of a matter does not
indicate that the Hukm of everything outside of that is the opposite.
This Aayah is therefore from amongst the evidences/proofs for those who do not adopt the
Mafhoom Al-Mukhaalafah (opposite meaning) in respect to the Khabar Al-Waahid of the Faasiq
or the Adl not establishing Ilm (decisive knowledge).
And His speech (swt):

And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses - lash them with eighty lashes (AnNoor 4).
So Allah Azza Wa Jalla does not accept the single testimony (Shahaadah) for the confirmation
and verification of the act of Zinaa (adultery/fornication). Rather He (swt) stipulated four
witnesses as the Noble Aayah has guided to. This indicates that the single testimony does not
establish (decisive) knowledge and even if it came from an Adl (just person). Rather their needs
to be a plurality, one after another (or on top of another) so that knowledge is (decisively)
established.
This Aayah has been used as evidence by those who stipulate four as being the minimum
grouping (number) for which their Khabar (report) will establish (decisive) knowledge and is
considered to be Mutawaatir.
(Ref: At-Tamheed of Al-Kaloodhaaniy 28/3, Nafaais Al-Usool Al-Faraafiy 2967/6, the
introduction of Nuzhum Al-Mutanaathir of Az-Zubaidy and many other books of Usool when
they discuss the number which satisfies the Mutawaatr).
It could be argued that this represents a specific case related to the witnesses of Zinaa alone. The
evidence to support this being that Allah Azza Wa Jalla has demanded two witnesses to
corroborate and verify murder and theft.
The answer to this argument:
This in fact represents another argument and proof (Hujjah) to support our position. This is
because Allah (swt) has demanded a plural (Jamun) and not Khabar Waahid (a single/solitary
line) for the verification of murder and theft. And two is a Jamun (plural). The Messenger of
Allah (saw) said: Two and what is greater is a Jamaaah (collective) (At-Tahaawiy in
Maaani Al-Athaar 308/1, Al-Haakim in Al-Mustadrak, Ibn Maajah in his Sunnah 972 and AlBaihaqi in his Sunan Al-Kubraa 69/3). Some of the Ulamaa used this as evidence to say that
the minimum number for the Mutawaatir (*) is two and this is a khabar waahid after waahid
(one). (*ref: Al-Kuloodhaani in At-Tamheed 29/3 and Al-Quraafiy in Nafaais Al-Usool
2967/6)
Similarly the Shara (Islamic legislation) has demanded that a Jamu (collective) of two witnesses
the Wasiyah (will) in addition to affirming the Talaaq (divorce), Zawaaj (marriage), the sighting of
the new moon according to the stronger opinion, and to verify the Dain (debt).
All of these are from amongst the Adillah (evidences) which indicate that the Khabar Al-Waahid,
even if from a just person (Adl), does not establish (decisive) knowledge and even if it
establishes the action (i.e. it is acted upon).
As for the Sunnah:

He (saw) did not accept what Al-Waleed Bin Uqbah Bin Abi Muait informed him in regards to
Bani Al-Mustaliq until he had dispatched Khaalid Bin Al-Waleed to verify his news. It was upon
this incident that the Aayah of verification in Soorah Al-Hujuraat was revealed (Ref: Tafseer of
At-Tabari of Aayah 6 of Soorah Al-Hujuraat).
It should not be said that the command to verify was only because the informant was a Faasiq
because the informant was a Sahaabi and the Sahaabah (rah) are Udool (trustworthy) whilst
those who have gone outside of this well accepted and established principle should not be relied
upon here.
Addition the Nabi (saw) did not accept the statement of Dhu l-Yadayni when he told the Nabi
(saw) that he had only prayed two Rakah for Salaatu zh-Zhohr. So he said to the Nabi (saw):
Have you shortened the prayer or did you forget? The Nabi (saw) then looked round to
the right and the left and asked the people: What is Dhu l-Yadayni saying? They
responded: He spoke the truth. You did not pray except two Rakah (Al-Bukhaari 1821/1
and Muslim 403/1 amongst others in the chapter Forgetfulness in the Salaah).
The point to not in the speech of Dhu l-Yadayni is that it came in opposition to what the
Messenger (saw) was certain in himself about whilst the Yaqeen (certainty) cannot be stood up
against by Zhann (uncertainty) but rather it must be opposed by Yaqeen (certainty). For this
reason the Nabi (saw) asked the people and they responded to him by saying that Dhu l-Yadayni
had spoken the truth. Certainty was then stood up against Yaqeen and so he (saw) prayed that
which he had forgotten and then made the Sajdah As-Sahw (prostration of forgetfulness).
Therefore it is affirmed that the Khabar Al-Waahid did not ascertain certainty in respect to the
Nabi (saw).
From this Daleel and what is similar to it the following principle was deduced: The Yaqeen does
not go away except by way of Yaqeen or The Yaqeen is not removed by the Zhann
(doubtful/speculative) or Shakk (doubt) And Allah knows best.
As for the Ijmaa of the Sahaabah:

The Ijmaa of the Sahaabah (rah) has guided to the Khabar Al-Aahaad not establishing Ilm and
Yaqeen and that they are not taken into the Aqeedah; otherwise they would have verified and
affirmed the Quraan by the solitary (Aahaad) statement in the case where this represent a pillar
of the Aqeedah.
Ahmad, At-Tabaraani, Ibn Mardawiyah and Al-Bazzaar related in a Saheeh chain from Ibn
Abbaas (ra) that Abdullah Ibn Masood (ra) used to take out the Muawidhataini (The last two
Soorahs) from the Mushaf and in a narration it stated: He used to rub out the Muawidhataini
and he would say: Do not mix the Quraan with that which is not from it. They (the two) are not
from the Book of Allah but rather the Nabi (saw) used to only command us to seek refuge with
them.
Al-Bazzaar said: No one from amongst the Sahaabah followed Ibn Masood (in regards to this
understanding).
This is a clear evidence indicating that the Sahaabah (ra) did not affirm the Quraan or any part
of it as being part of the Quraan by way of Aahaad like the statement of Ibn Masood. Rather it
had to be decisive and Mutawaatir.
Al-Haakim in his Al-Mustadrak and others related from Katheer bin As-Sult that he said: Ibn
ul-Aas and Zaib Bin Thaabit were writing the Masaahif (Quraans) and they passed a certain
Aayah and Zaid said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say: Ash-Sheikh Wash- Sheikhah (the
old man and old woman) if they commit Zinaa then stone them to death. Amr said: When this
was revealed I approached the Messenger of Allah (saw) and said Should we write it?. Shubah
said: It was as if he disliked that to be done. Amr then said: Do you see that of a Sheikh is not
married that he is lashed and that if a young man who was married committed Zinaa is stoned?.
(Ref: Al-Mustadrak of Al-Haakim 360/4).
A Riwaayah (narration) in Al-Muwatta states: Umar (ra) said: If it would not have been said
that I added to the Quraan I would have written it and in another narration: If the people
would not have said that Umar Ibn Al-Khattaab had added to the Book of Allah I would have
written it because verily we had recited it (Ref: In Al-Muwatta of Maalik in the Book of
Hudood in the chapter of stoning Hadeeth Number 10).
In spite of that the Sahaabah (rah) did not affirm this sentence as being an Aayah in the Book of
Allah TaAalaa because it had not been verified decisively but rather only by Aahaad which
represents Zhann (speculation).
Imaam Maalik also related in Al-Muwatta a narration from Aaishah (ra) that she said: From
that which was revealed was ten consecutive feeds from the breast would make us Haraam to
one another (i.e. marriage) then this was abrogated with five breast feeds and then the Messenger
(saw) passed away whilst this was being recited from the Quraan (Ref: The book of
breastfeeding Hadeeth number 17).
This sentence however was also not affirmed to be an Aayah from the Book of Allah because it
was not affirmed decisively but rather by Aahaad which is Zhann.
Ibn Al-Anbaariy and Ibn Abi Daawood collected in their books tens of sentences that were
found in the Muhafs of the Sahaabah individually but were not affirmed in the Mushaf AlImaam (the final compiled Mushaf in the time of Uthmaan (ra) which is the only Mushaf that is
considered to be the Quraan).
From these sentences was the sentence that was found in the Mushaf of Az-Zubair (ra): There is
no blame upon you for you to seek a favour/bounty from your Lord in the seasons of Hajj.
And in the Mushaf of Aaishah (ra): And safeguard the prayers and the Salaat ul Wustaa (middle
prayer) and Salaat ul Asr (Here the last part is an addition to what was affirmed and agreed
upon).
And in the Mushaf of Ubayy Bin Kab: So then fast three consecutive days as Kaffaarah for the
Yameen (broken sworn oath)
This is in addition to other sentences however the Sahaabah (rah) agreed and made consensus
upon that they were not the Quraan and the evidence for this is that they were not affirmed in
the Mushaf Al-Imaam which is what we have between our hands. It is not valid to say that they
are the Quraan because they were not verified and affirmed as being Tawaatur and decisive but
rather they were Aahaad and represented Zhann.
The Sahaabah (rah) then did something that was eye-catching which made clear that these
sentences were not considered to be the Quraan. This is when they agreed to the decision of
Uthmaan Bin Affaan (ra) to burn all of the Aahaad Masaahif (versions/copies) in the
possession of the Sahaabah which were different in their sentences to the Mushaf Al-Imaam
which they agreed upon to be the Quraan Al-Kareem and this is the position of the people of
Islaam (Ahlu-s-Sunnah) everywhere and in every time. The companion of Muslim Ath-Thuboot
said: That which has been transmitted by Aahaad (single line transmissions) is definitely not
from the Quraan and no difference is known in regards to this from a single person from the
people of the Madhaahib (Ref: The commentary of Al-Mustasfaa of Al-Ghazaali 9/2).
In this Ijmaa of action and speech (Filiy and Qawliy) from the companions of the Messenger of
Allah (saw) and that of the Madhaahib, lies the greatest evidence to support the view that the
Aqaaid of the Muslims is not affirmed by anything other than Yaqeen (certainty). The Kitaab of
Allah Azza Wa Jalla is one of the pillars of the Islamic Aqeedah which we have brought forth in
the context of the Masalah (issue) we are examining and it is sufficient to dispel those who have
said that the Aahaad establish certainty and that they are taken to affirm the Aqaaid (beliefs).
10
The third angle:

Their difference in regards to establishing the Khabar Al-Aahaad (single
line or solitary report).
Amongst the evidences establishing that the Khabar Al-Aahaad do not benefit other than
speculation, is the difference of the Sahaabah (rah) and those who came after them in regards to
verifying the Khabar Al-Waahid in terms of its rejection and acceptance. If it establishes
(decisive) Ilm and Yaqeen (certainty) then their differing upon it would hold no meaning and
some of them would have rejected this from others and condemned it. The fact that this did not
happen therefore indicates to that which we have established.
As for the Sahaabah (rah):
All of them did not accept the Riwaayah (narration) of Abdullah Ibn Masood when he did not
consider the Muawaidhataini to be from the Quraan as we have previously established in
respect to the Ijmaa of the Sahaabah upon not considering the Khabar Al-Aahaad in the
Quraan Al-Kareem whilst it represents the source of the Islamic Aqaaid (beliefs).
Other examples:
1) From the Shariah examples and evidences of the actions and statements of the Sahaabah (ra)
that occurred without anyone denying them and which indicate the permissibility of differing
upon the acceptance and non-acceptance of the Khabar Al-Aahaad is what was reported from
Umar Ibn Al-Khattaab (ra). This is when he did not accept the narration of Hafsah the Mother
of the believers in relation to the Statement of Allah (swt):

Safeguard the prayers and the middle-prayer (Al-Baqarah 238).
This is when she added Was Salaat ul Asr (And the Asr prayer). Umar (ra) said to her: Do you
have a Bayyinah (clear proof/evidence) for that? She replied: No. So he said: By Allah we will
not insert into the Quraan that which a woman has born witness to without establishing a clear
proof.
2) Umar (ra) rejected the Khabar (report) of Faatimah Bin Qais in respect to issue of Nafaqah,
residence and settlement, Imaam Muslim and others related from Ash-Shabiy that he relayed the
Hadeeth of Faatimah Bin Qais that states that the Messenger of Allah (saw)did not give her the
right of Nafaqah (spending) and residence (when she was divorced). Umar said: We will not
leave the Kitaab of our Rabb and the Sunnah of our Nabiy for the speech of a woman which we
11
do not know if she has retained (remembered) or forgotten. She (the woman) has the right of
housing and Nafaqah (spending). And he recited the speech of Allah TaAalaa:

Do not turn them out of their (husband's) homes, and they shall not (themselves) leave, unless they engaged in
some open evil lewdness (i.e. Zinaa) (At-Talaaq 1).
Aaishah (ra) also rejected this Hadeeth (Ref: Sharh of Saheeh Muslim by An-Nawawi 104/1).
3) Aaishah (ra) rejected the Khabar of Ibn Umar (ra) in relation to the punishment of the dead
due to the crying of his family over him. Al-Bukhaari and Muslim related from Abdullah Ibn
Umar (ra) that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: The dead will be punished due to the crying
of his family over him. When Aaishah (ra) heard this she said: By Allah the Messeenger of
Allah (saw) did not at all say that the dead would be punished for anyones crying.
In another narration about this Aaishah (ra) said: May Allahs mercy be upon Ibn Umar
because by Allah the Messenger of Allah (saw) did not say: Verily Allah will punish the believer
due to the crying of his family upon him. (Ref: Fath ul- Baari of Al-Asqalaaniy 152/3 and the
Sharh of Muslim by An-Nawawi 232/6).
4) Al-Bukhaari related that Hudhaifah Bin Al-Yamaan (ra) said: The Nabi (saw) went to the
place of waste of some people and urinated standing. He then called for some water and I
brought it for him and he made Wudoo. However Aaishah (ra) rejected this. Al-Haakim And
Ibn Uwaanah in their Saheeh books related that she (ra) said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) did
not urinate standing since the time that the Quraan descended. And she (ra) said: Whoever tells
you that he used to urinate whilst standing dont believe him. (Ref: Fath ul-Baari 330/1 and
Sharh of Muslim of An-Nawawi 165/3).
5) In regards to the sighting of the Nabi (saw) of his Rabb (swt) on the night of the Miraaj
(Ascension) which is from the matters of the unseen; An-Nasaai and Al-Haakim related with a
Saheeh chain from Ibn Abbaas (ra) that he said: Do you find it wondrous that the close
companionship belonged to Ibraaheem, the speech to Musaa and the sight to Muhammad.
Abdur Razzaaq related from Muammar Bin Al-Hasan that he swore that Muhammad (saw) saw
his Rabb.
Ibn Ishaq related that Ibn Umar (ra) wrote to Ibn Abbaas (ra) asking him if Muhammad (saw)
had seen his Rabb and Ibn Abbaas wrote back: Yes.
However Aaishah (ra) strongly rejected this and said: Whoever tells you that Muhammad saw
his Rabb has lied (Ref: Sharh Muslim of An-Nawawi 3/4 and Fath ul-Baari 606/8.
12
6) Imaam Muslim amongst others related from the Nabi (saw) that he said: The Salaah is cut
(broken) by (passing of) the woman, the donkey and the dog.
This reached Aaishah (ra) and she rejected it saying: You have made us similar to the donkeys
and the dogs and in another narration: You have made us equal to the dogs and the donkeys
and in another: You have made us dogs. (Ref: Sharh Muslim of An-Nawawi 228/4 and Fath ulBaari 589/1).
7) Al-Bukhaari and Muslim related from Aasim who said: I said to Anas Bin Maalik: Has it
reached you that the Nabi (saw) said that there is no Hilf (allying) in Islaam? He said: The Nabi
(saw) allied between the Quraish and the Ansaar in my dwellings and in a narration from
Muslim: ...in his house.
Ibn Hajr Al-Asqalaaniy said: The answer of Anas represents a denial of the main part of the
Hadeeth because it included the negation of the Hilf whilst what Anas said affirmed its existence
(Ref: Fath ul-Baari 501-2/10
These example are sufficient to deduce that the Akhbaar (reports) Al-Aahaad did not establish
other than Zhann amongst the Sahaabah (rah) and is this was not the case then how could it be
justified for them to have differences in respect to their acceptance and rejection whilst this was
done in front of the eyes and ears of others and they did not condemn them for this.
In addition there are many other examples of them not accepting a report without a secondary
proof or testimony which also indicates that the Khabar Al-Aahaad did not represent anything
other than Zhann for them.
Examples of this:
1) What was recorded by At-Tirmidhi, Abu Daawood and others. Qubaisah Bin Abi Dhuaib
said: The grandmother approached Abu Bakr As-Siddeeq (ra) asking him about her inheritance:
He said: You do not have in the Book of Allah TaAalaa anything and I have not known
anything in the Sunnah of the Nabi of Allah (saw) that gives you anything. So return (home) so
that I can revise the matter with the people. So he asked the people and Al-Mugheerah Bin
Shubah said: She (a grandmother) came to the Messenger of Allah (saw) and he gave her a
sixth. Abu Bakr then said: Do you have anyone else alongside you (who can confirm that)?
Then Muhammad Bin Salamah came and said the same as what Al-Mugheerah Bin Shubah had
said, and so Abu Bakr (ra) applied this upon her (Ref: Sunan Abu Daawood 121/3 in the
chapter of the grandmother and At-Tirmidhi in the chapter What has come in regards to the
inheritance of the grandmother).
2) What Al-Bukhaari and Muslim related from Abu Musaa Al-Ashariy (ra) that he sought
permission to enter upon Umar (ra) three times and it was as if he found him busy so he
returned. Umar then said: Did I not hear the voice of Abdullah Bin Qais (i.e. Abu Musaa).
Give him permission to enter. So he called him back and said: What made you do what you
did? So he (Abu Musaa) said: We were commanded to do this. Then he said: You will
definitely bring evidence (testimony) for this or I will do something to you (i.e. punish). So they
went to a gathering of the Ansaar and they said: None except our youngest will give testimony
13
upon this. So Saeed Al-Khudriy (ra) stood and said: We were commanded to do this. Then
Umar said: This command of the Messenger of Allah (saw) was hidden from me and was
distracted from it by trading in the markets (Ref: Fath ul-Baari 320/13, 27/11 and Sharh
Muslim of An-Nawawi 130/14).
3) What was recorded by Imaam Ahmad and Abu Daawood amongst others from Ali Ibn Abi
Taalib (ra) that he said: I was a man who when I heard a Hadeeth from the Messenger of Allah
(saw) that Allah would benefit me with it in the way that He wished me to benefit. And when
one of his companions informed me I would seek an oath from them and if they swore and oath
I would believe it, and Abu Bakr would inform me and Abu Bakr (ra) spoke the truth (Ref:
Musnad of Imaam Ahmad 10/1, the Sunan of Abu Daawood 86/2 and ibn Hibbaan in his
Saheeh 10/2).
Therefore as can be seen, if it wasnt for the fact that the Khabar Al-Aahaad does not affirm
certainty, there would have been no reason for Abu Bakr, Umar and Ali (ra) to seek
corroborating testimony and evidence or to take a sworn oath from their companions. This is
despite them knowing with certainty that they were truthful and that they would not attribute lies
to the Messenger of Allah (saw) because they are all Udool (trustworthy) as a whole.
It could be said that they used to accept many narrations without requesting corroborating
evidence and proof which indicates that they viewed them as being certain and even if they were
Khabar Al-Aahaad.
Answer: Their acceptance of narrations without requesting corroborating evidence guides to the
fact that they were firm in their view. They were either heard directly from the mouth of the
Messenger of Allah (saw) in which case it was certain for that person, or when the narration had
become Mutawaatir amongst them and even if only in its meaning, For this reason they did not
ask for testimony upon them and these reports are not considered by them to be Akhbaar
Aahaad and its rules do not apply upon them.
Our deduction based on the above mentioned examples about Abu Bakr, Umar and Ali in
respect to them seeking corroborative testimony and oaths for the narration has not been
presented to prove that the Khabar of two or three men establishes decisive knowledge and
certainty as this is not its context. Rather it is to indicate that had every Khabar Waahid (singly
transmitted report) established certainty in their view then why would they have asked for
corroborative testimony and proof for it and were they silent over this. This is therefore is what
we wanted to illustrate from these previous examples.
The differing of the Ulamaa after the Sahaabah:

As for the Ulamaa who came after the Sahaabah (rah) then they spoke about their difference in
respect to the acceptance and rejection of the Akhbaar Al-Aahaad and the reports that do not
reach the level of Tawaatur and Yaqeen according to their agreement. This indicates that what
14
isnt Mutawaatir is regarded to be Khabar Aahaad and that it does not establish (decisive)
knowledge and certainty, and that it establishes the action (i.e. to act by them) and not Itiqaad
(belief), otherwise it would not have been permitted for them to differ in respect to them. These
differences are many indeed and they require volumes, a matter which is well-known amongst
those who have knowledge in these areas, and amongst the scholars of Fiqh and Hadeeth.
However we will present some examples for the purpose of making the point.
1) They differed over the Hadeeth:
None of you believes until his desires are in accordance to that which I have come with.
An-Nawawi recorded it in his Forty and said that the Hadeeth is Hasan Saheeh, we have related
it from Kitaab Al-Hujjah with a Saheeh Isnaad.
Al-Haafizh Ibn Hajr said: It was brought by Al-Hasan Bin Sufyaan and other than him and its
Rijaal (transmitters) are Thiqqaat (trustworthy/sound) (Ref: Fath ul-Baari 289/13).
Ibn Rajab Al-Hanbali said: Classifying this Hadeeth as Saheeh is very remote (far off) (Ref:
Jaami Al-Uloom Wa-l-Hikam p521).
Verily Allah has overlooked for me from my Ummah the mistake, forgetfulness and upon that
which they were compelled (against their will).
An-Nawawi said: Hadeeth Hasan related by Ibn Maajah, Al-Baihaqi and others.
Al-Haakim recorded it and said: It is Saheeh upon their (two) conditionality.
Abu Haatim Ar-Raazi said: This Hadeeth is not Saheeh and its Isnaad (chain) is not
corroborated.
Al-Imaam Ahmad rejected it and Ibn Katheer said that its Isnaad was Jayyid (good/sound). (Ref:
Jaami Al-Uloom Wa-l-Hikam p501 and Tufah At-Taalib of Ibn Katheer p271).
There is no harm and harming (Laa Darara Wa Laa Diraar).
Al-Haakim said that its Isnaad was Saheeh and An-Nawawi classified it as Hasan.
Al-Haafizh Khaalid Bin Saeed Al-Andulusiy said: The Hadeeth Laa Darara Wa Laa Diraar was
not Saheeh. (Ref: The previous reference p410).
The Imaam is Daamin and the Muadhdhin is Mutamin.
Ali Bin Al-Mudaini said: It is not corroborated whilst Ibn Hibbaan classified it as Saheeh (Ref:
Nail Al-Awtaar of Ash-Shawkaani 13/2).
15

The Hudodd are not undertaken inside the Masjid and leadership is not sought in it.
Related by Ahmad and Abu Daawood with a Daeef (weak) chain.
Ibn Hajr said in his Talkhees: There is no problem with its Isnaad (Ref: Subul us Salaam AsSanaaniy 155/1).
Whoever places a judge between/amongst the people then he has slaughtered without (the use
of) a knife.
At-Tirmidhi classified it as Hasan, Ibn Khuzaimah as Saheeh whilst Ibn ul-Jawziy said: This
Hadeth is not Saheeh (Nail Al-Awtaar 1163/9).
The comparison of the kiss in Ramadhaan to the Madmadah (rinsing mouth in Wudoo).
Al-Haakim, Ibn Hibbaan and Ibn Khuzaimah related in their Sihaah (Saheeh collections).
An-Nasaaiy said: This Hadeeth is Munkar (rejected) and Al-Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal said the
same (Ref: Tuhfah Al-Ishraaf 17/8, Aun Al-Mabood 12/7, and Tuhfah At-Taalib p425).
Talqeen Al-Mayyit (Instruction of the dead).
Ibn Hajr regarded it with strength whilst Ibn ul-Qayyim classified it as Daeef (weak) (Ref: Subul
As-Salaam 113/2).
The Messenger of Allah (saw) forbade the fast of Arafah.
Ibn Khuzaimah and Al-Haakim classified it as Saheeh whilst Al-Uqaily classified it as Daeef
(Ref: Subul As-Salaam 172/2).
Seek a righteous verdict from your heart for that which gives your Nafs comfort...
An-Nawawi classified it as Hasan whilst Ibn Rajab declared it Daeef. (Ref: Jaami Al-Uloom
Wa-l-Hikam p147).
16

Are you two then blind.
Ibn Hajr said: The Hadeeth is differed upon in respect to its correctness/soundness (Sihhah)
whilst At-Tirmidhi declared it as Hasan Saheeh. (Ref: Fath ul-Baari 550/1, Sunan At-Tirmidhi
in the chapter of seeking permission and manners 192/4).
If you see a man who regularly attends the Masaajid then bear witness for his Imaan.
At-Tirmidhi said that it is a Saheeh Hadeeth and Al-Haakim and Ibn Khuzaimah classified it as
Saheeh however Al-Iraaqiy and Maghaltay (Ref: Faid Al-Qadeer of Al-Manaawiy 358/1).
My Ummah will be divided into seventy and something divisions/groupings.
At-Tirmidhi said it is Hasan Saheeh whilst Ibn Hazm said that it is not Saheeh. (Ref: Sunan AtTirmidhi 124/4 and Al-Fasl fee Al-Malal Wan Nahl of Ibn Hazm 292/3).
Seeking knowledge is a Fareedah (obligation) upon every Muslim.
As-Suyootiy classified it as Saheeh, As-Sakhaawiy said it has credence with Abu Shaheen with a
chain (sanad) where its transmitters are trustworthy and Al-Haafizh Al-Muzziy said it was Hasan,
whilst Ibn ul-Qattaan said that it is not Saheeh in any respect and An-Nawawi declared it Daef
(weak) (Ref: Faid ul-Qadeer 267/4 and Tadreeb Ar-Raawiy 149/1).
15) They disagreed about the Hadeeth forbidding singing. They were declared Daeef by Ibn ulArabi and Ibn Hazm whilst they were classified as Saheeh by other than them (Ref:Nail AlAwtaar 264/8).
Any woman who is married without the permission of her Waliy then her Nikaah (marriage) is
Baatil, Baatil, Baatil (invalid).
Ibn Katheer said that a number of the people of knowledge discussed this. Ibn Jareeh said: Then
I met Az-Zuhriy and asked him and he rejected/denied it and so they classified this Hadeeth as
Daeef based on that. He then said: This Hadeeth has been declared Saheeh by Ali Bin AlMudainiy one of the Aimmah (Notable Scholars) (Ref: Tuhfah At-Taalib p352).
17
17) They disagreed over the Hadeeth:

The example of my Ummah is like the rain, it is not known whether goodness is in ots
beginning or its end.
Ibn Abdul-Barr said that this Hadeeth is Hasan whilst An-Nawawi declared it Daeef. (Ref:
Kashf ul-Khafaa of Al-Ajlooniy 197/2).
18) They disagreed over the Hadeeth:
Do you see the sun? He replied: Yes. He (then) said: Bear witness/testimony like it (i.e. in
certainty and clarity) or leave it.
Al-Haakim declared it Saheeh whilst Ibn Adiy declared it Daeef (Subul As-Salaam of AsSanaaniy 130/4).
_____________
They also differed in respect to the Ahaadeeth of Saheeh Al-Bukhaari and Saheeh Muslim in
spite of the claim made by Abu Amr Bin As-Salaah (Rahimuhullah) when he stated that they
establish and affirm Ilm, Yaqeen (certainty) and Qat (decisiveness/definiteness) in terms of
their correctness.
Examples:
1) The Hadeeth of Al-Istikhaarah.
It was related by Al-Bukhaari and classified as weak by Al-Imaam Ahmad (Ref: Tuhfah AdhDhaakireen, Ash-Shawkaani p133).
2) The Hadeeth: Whatever has been tanned has been purified.
Related by Al-Imaam Muslim and classified as Daeef by Al-Imaam Ahmad.
3) The Hadeeth: That he (saw) prayed the prayer of eclipse with three Rukoos and four
Rukoos.
Al-Bukhaari related this and Al-Imaam Ash-Shaafiiy declared it as Daeef (weak).
4) The Hadeeth: Verily Allah created the ground (soil) on Saturday, the mountains on Sunday,
the trees on Monday, the Makrooh on Tuesday, light on Wednesday, and sent forth in it the
animals on Thursday and created Aadam on Friday.
Muslim recorded it in his Saheeh and Al-Baihaqi declared it Daeef (Ref: Ibn Taymiyyah in Ilm
ul-Hadeeth 70).
It is worth noting that the above Hadeeth has a relationship to the attributes (Siffaat) of Allah
(swt) related to creation and the Qudrah (power/ability) to bring something out of nothing, and
despite this they still differed in regards to it.
18
5) The Hadeeth: This son of mine is a Saiyid (i.e. a noble) and may Allah make peace between
two big groups of Muslims through him. (Referring to Al-Hasan Bin Ali (ra)).
Al-Bukhaari related this and it was classifies as Daeef by Al-Waleed Al-Yaajiy (The same source
as previous reference).
This Hadeeth also discusses the Ghaib (unseen) and yet there exists one who has classified it as
Daeef and not used it as evidence.
6) The Hadeeth: Then as for the fire it will not fill until Allah Subhaanahu Wa TaAalaa will put
down His foot and it (the fire) will say Qat Qat (Enough).
(Mutaffaq Alaihi i.e. Al-Bukhaari and Muslim).
Al-Jazaairiy said: This Hadeeth and others (with different meanings) which are many make it
hard for the person to say that this is Saheeh let alone have certainty in it (Ref: Tawjeeh AnNazhar Ilaa Usool Al-Athar p130).
This Hadeeth also relates to the unseen (Ghaib) and the being of Allah (swt). Despite being
Saheeh there are those who have denied/rejected it.
7) The Hadeeth: The Nabi (saw) had a horse called Luhaif.
Al-Bukhaari and classified as Daeef by Ad-Daaruqutniy, Ahmad and Ibn Moeen. (Ref: Same as
previous p332).
8) The Hadeeth: Ibraaheem (as) will meet his father Aazar on the Day of Judgement and dust
will be upon Aazars face.
Related by Al-Bukhaari in his Saheeh and Al-Ismaaeeliy said: This Khabar has questions in
regards to its correctness. (Ref: Same as previous p332).
9) The statement of Al-Haafizh Bin Hajr as a whole about the Ahaadeeth of the two Saheeh
collections which he critiqued saying: The number (of Hadeeth whose authenticity has been
questioned) in the Book of Al-Bukhaari and even if Muslim shared some of these, is 110
Hadeeth. From these Muslim recorded 32 whilst Al-Bukhaari was alone in recording 78 of them.
(Ref: Introduction of Fath ul-Baari p246). (Translators Note: This quote does not mean that
Ibn Hajr questioned the authenticity of this number of Hadeeth but rather he mentioned the
number that others had questioned).
The matter does not end here in relation to disagreement over the Sihhah
(soundness/authenticity) of the Aahaad whether they were related in the two Saheeh books or
others. Indeed it went further than that as there were Ulamaa who blatantly rejected Ahaadeeth
which were affirmed by other than them because they considered them to have been lies and
fabrications made against the Messenger of Allah (saw). These included some that were recorded
in the Saheeh collections of Al-Bukhaari and Muslim.
19
Examples:
1) Al-Imaam Muslim related: Verily Allah created the ground (soil) on Saturday, and created in it
the mountains on Sunday, the trees on Monday, the Makrooh on Tuesday, light on Wednesday,
and sent forth in it the animals on Thursday and created Aadam after Asr on Friday in the last
creation in the last hour from the hours of Jumuah (Friday) in the time between Asr and the
night
Ibn ul-Qayyim in his book Naqd Al-Manqool (Critique of what has been transmitted) in the
chapter: The opposition of the subject of the Hadeeth to what is clear in the Quraan he said:
And this appears to resemble that which error has fallen upon in regards to the Hadeeth of Abu
Hurairah: Allah created the ground on Saturday... (Ref: p78).
2) Al-Imaam Muslim recorded from Ibn Abbaas (ra) that he said: The Muslims neither looked
to Abu Sufyan (with respect) nor did they sit in his company. He (Abu Sufyan) said to the Nabi
of Allah (saw): O Allah's Nabi, grant me three things. He replied in the affirmative. He (further)
said: I have with me the most handsome and the best (woman) Umm Habiba, daughter of Abu
Sufyan; marry her, whereupon he said: Yes. And he again said: Accept Mu'awiya to serve as your
scribe. He said: Yes. He again said: Make me the commander (of the Muslim army) so that I
should fight against the unbelievers as I fought against the Muslims. He said: Yes....
Ibn Hazm said: This Hadeeth is fabricated and there is no doubt in that (Ref: Tawjeeh AnNazhar Ilaa Usool Al-Athar p137).
3) Al-Imaam Muslim recorded: If you live for a time, you would be about to see people going
out (in the morning) with the anger of Allah and returning in the evening under the curse of
Allah, and there would be in their hands (whips) like the tail of an ox.
Ibn ul-Jawziy quoted it in his Mawdooaat (collection of fabricated Hadeeth) from Ibn Hibbaan
and said: This Khabar (report) with this wording (Lafzh) is Baatil (invalid/false) (Ref: Ibn ulJawziy in his Mawdooaat Al-Kubraa 101/3).
4) Al-Bukhaari and Muslim in their books of Saheeh reported from Ibn Umar (ra) that from the
Nabi (saw) in respect to His speech TaAalaa:

If you sought forgiveness for them seventy times then Allah will (still) never forgive them (At-Taubah 80).
He (saw) said: I will then increase to over seventy.
Al-Ghazaaliy said in Al-Mustasfaa: This Khabar Waahid (single line report) does not establish a
proof in affirming the language.
20
He said in Al-Mankhool: That which has been reported in relation to the Aayah of Istighfaar
(seeking forgiveness) is a definite lie. The aim of this is to stay away from that which leads to
despair from forgiveness so how can it be thought that the Messenger (saw) would be unmindful
of that (Al-Mustasfaa 195/2 and Al-Mankhoul p212).
This is in respect to what has been found within the two Saheehs. As for other than them then
there is no hiding that they disagreed in respect to denying/rejecting them and affirming them
and even if they were related to the Aqaaid beliefs.
This is like the Ahaadeeth about the miracle of the Nabi (saw) in regards to the returning of the
sun after it had set in the Ghazwah of Khaibar.
Al-Jawzqaaniy said that it was rejected and inconsistent (Mudtarib), Al-Jawziy quoted it in his
Mawdooaat (Book of fabricated Ahaadeeth) whilst At-Tahaawiy classified it as Saheeh in his
Mushkil Al-Aathaar as did Al-Qaadi Iyaadh in his Ash-Shifaa. (Ref: Al-Masnooah of AsSuyootiy 336/1).
Whoever wishes to examine the truthfulness of what we are saying then he should look at the
book: Fawaaid Al-Majmooah Fee Ahaadeeth Al-Mawdooah of Ash-Shawkaani. It mentions in
it many Saheeh and Hasan Ahaadeeth which some of the Ulamaa have rejected and have classed
as being from the Mawdooaat (Fabricated Ahaadeeth) a matter which Ash-Shawkaani paid
attention to within this book.
There is also the book: Alaaliu ul-Masnooah Fil Ahaadeeth Al-Mawdooah by Al-Haafizh AsSuyootiy, in which he revised many of the Ahaadeeth from Ibn ul-Jawziys book: AlMawdooaat Al-Kubraa and affirmed that they were considered to be Saheeh and Hasan in the
opinion of others.
Similarly Ibn Hajr also revised Ibn Al-Jawziys book of fabricated Ahaadeeth and those which
were quoted from the Musnad of Al-Imaam Ahmad, which numbered twenty-four Ahaadeeth.
This was in his book: Al-Qawl Al-Musaddad Fi dh-Dhabb Musnad Al-Imaam Ahmad.
There is also the book Al-Mustadrak of Al-Haakim in which he quoted Ahaadeeth upon the
conditionality of Al-Bukhaari and Muslim or one of them as it appeared to him. However AdhDhahabi then followed him and revised many Ahaadeeth that he had considered to be from the
Mawdooaat.
If the examples that we have presented in this section about the Ikhtilaaf (difference and
disagreement) of the Ulamaa from the time of the Sahaabah (rah) until this time of ours in
regards to the Aahaad narrations are correct then this would represent a decisive indication in
respect to the Khabar Al-Aahaad not establishing decisiveness and Yaqeen (certainty). If this was
not the case, then how could their disagreement and their rejection been justifiable? We would
have seen some of them condemn others in a severe and strong manner in the same way that
they would have done had the issue been related to the definite and Mutawaatir. As this
condemnation did not happen it is then known with certainty that the Khabar Aahaad do not
represent other than Zhann. Indeed in addition to that we find that they were agreed upon not
21
declaring disbelief upon the one who denies the Aahaad which is not the case with the
Mutawaatir. This was mentioned by As-Sarkhasiy, Al-Jarjaaniy and the author of Fawaatih ArRahmout as will be explained later. (Ref: Sarkhasiy in his Usool 12/1 or 292, Abdu Sh-Shukoor
in Fawaatih Ar-Rahmoot, Al-Haashiyah of Al-Ghazaali 11/2, and Al-Jarjaaniy in his Tareef
p102).
Indeed there were also some who did not classify the one who rejected the Aahaad as being
Faasiq like Qaadi Abu Yalaa despite as Ijmaa being established upon this (Ref: Usool Fiqh, Abu
Yaalaa p233).
22
The fourth angle:

It is not permitted for there to be disagreement in the Aqaaid which have been firmly
established amongst the Muslims.
This issue is nearly one of the basic and obvious issues for the Ulamaa of the Muslims and the
evidences for it are abundant and Qatiy (decisive).
From them is the statement of Allah (swt):

) 051(

Verily, those who disbelieve in Allah and his Messengers and wish to make distinction between Allah and his
Messengers saying: "We believe in some but reject others" and wish to adopt a way in between. They are in truth
disbelievers and we have prepared for the disbelievers a humiliating torment (An-Nisaa 150-151).
And His statement (swt):

Then do you believe in some of the book and disbelieve in some? Then what is the recompense of those who do so
among you, except disgrace in the life of this world, and on the Day of Judgement they shall be consigned to the
most severest torment and Allah is not unaware of what you do *Al-Baqarah 82).
In a Saheeh Hadeeth related by Abu Hurairah (ra) the Nabi (saw) said: Al-Jidaal
(arguing/disputing) in respect to the Quraan is Kufr and in another Saheeh narration: AlMiraa (disputing/arguing/doubting) in respect to the Quraan is Kufr.
Al-Imaam Abu Umar Ibn Abdul Barr (rh) said: The meaning of this is that two people
argue/wrangle about an Aayah and one denies it and proceeds upon doubt. This is the type of
Miraa (disputing) that is Kufr. As for disputing in respect to the Ahkaam of the Quraan and its
meanings, then the companions of the Messenger of Allah (saw) disputed in regards to this a lot.
This therefore makes clear to you that the disputing which is Kufr is the denial/disbelief and
Shakk (doubt). This is like the speech of Allah (swt):

23
And those who disbelieve will not cease to be in doubt/disputing (Miryah) about it (this Qur'aan) (Al-Hajj 55).
And he said: And the Salaf (predecessors) forbade the disputation and arguing in regards to Allah
all Glory and Praise to him in respect to His Siffaat (attributes) and Asmaa (names). As for the
Fiqh (i.e. Shariyah rulings) then they have agreed (held a consensus Ijmaa) upon the argument
and debate in respect to it. This is because it is an Ilm (knowledge) that requires returning the
branches to the Usool (bases) due to the requirement of that whilst the Itiqaadaat (beliefs) are
not like that (Ref: Jaami Bayaan Al-Ilm Wa Fadlihi 92/2).
As for the Akhbaar Al-Aahaad then this Hukm (ruling) does not apply upon them, meaning the
ruling that applies to the beliefs (Aqaaid). As for what they claim in respect to them being from
the Aqaaid (beliefs) or take the same ruling as the Aqaaid, then their claim is Baatil (invalid) and
rejected for a number of reasons:
The first reason:
There is no Daleel (evidence) indicating that the Akhbaar Al-Aahaad are from the beliefs
whether in the Quraan, the Sunnah or the Ijmaa of the Sahaabah. Rather the previously
mentioned evidences have established the opposite to be the case.
The second reason:
The denial of some of the Sahaabah and those who came after them of many of the Akhbaar Al
Aahaad in addition to their disagreement over corroborating them as we have already mentioned
earlier in the previous chapter. If the case was as they say then it would not have been allowed
for anyone to differ and disagree or argue and dispute in respect to them. We would be seeking
error in the Sahaabah (rah) who transmitted the Deen to us and the sin/error would fall upon
the one who did that. This is inconceivable and it is rejected by the definite evidences.
The third reason:
If the Akhbaar Al-Aahaad were from the Aqaaid or evidences for the Aqaaid then the Islamic
beliefs would contain contradictions which would lead to harmful divisions in the Deen. This is
because there are Saheeh Akhbaar Aahaad which clash with the Aayaat of the Quraan or are
contradictory to them. This is like the Hadeeth related by Al-Imaam Muslim: Verily Allah
created the ground (soil) on Saturday, and created in it the mountains on Sunday, the trees on
Monday, the Makrooh on Tuesday, light on Wednesday, and sent forth in it the animals on
Thursday and created Aadam after Asr on Friday in the last creation in the last hour from the
hours of Jumuah (Friday) in the time between Asr and the night (Ref: Naql Al-Manqool Ibn ulQayyim p78 where he considers it to be in conflict with what is explicit in the Quraan).
This Hadeeth mentions that the creation was seven days whilst this contradicts the speech of
Allah (swt) in the Quraan:
24

(He it is) who created the heavens and the earth and all that is between it in six days (Al-Furqaan
59).
Similar to this is the Hadeeth of Al-Gharaaneeq Al-Ulaa: More than one of the Aimmah and
Huffaazh related this from more than one path, narration and a number of worded versions
which were classified as being Saheeh by more than one of them. The (claimed) Hadeeth
mentions: That the Messenger of Allah (saw) was in Makkah and he recited Sourah An-Najm
until he reached the Aayah: And Al-Manaat the third the other and then it came upon his
tongue to say: They are the Gharaaneeq Al-Ulaa (the highest Cranes i.e. praise) and indeed their
intercession is hoped for. The disbelievers of Makkah then said: He has not mentioned our
Gods with goodness before this day. Then he (saw) prostrated and so they all prostrated. Then
Jibreel (as) came after that and said: Present to me that which you have brought. Then when he
reached: They are the Gharaaneeq Al-Ulaa (the highest Cranes i.e. praise) and indeed their
intercession is hoped for, Jibreel (as) said: I did not bring this to you, it is from Shaytaan. Then
Allah (swt) revealed:

Never did we send a Messenger or a Prophet before you but when he desired (or hoped for) a matter Shaitaan
threw (in the path some falsehood/misguidance) in it (Al-Hajj 52).
This narration and anything similar to it is in contradiction and opposition to the speech of Allah
(swt):
) 3(
And he does not speak from his Hawaa (desires), Rather it is none other than Wahy (divine
inspiration/revelation) that is inspired (An-Najm 3-4).
It contradicts with the Ismah (infallibility) of the Nabi (saw) in respect to the conveyance of His
Message (Tableegh).
There is also the Hadeeth recorded by Al-Imaam Muslim and others: That the parents of the
Messenger of Allah are in the fire.
This contradicts with the statement of Allah:
25
And we would not punish until we had sent a Messenger (Al-Israa 15).
(Translators note: The issue here and understanding is not as clear cut as the author presents and Allah knows best
as there may be no contradiction between the meaning of the Aayah and the Hadeeth is understood differently).
There are also Saheeh Ahaadeeth which inform us that the Messenger of Allah (saw) was
affected by the Magic of a Jew (Ref: The main books of Tafseer when discussing the reason for
the revelation of the Muawwidhataini).
This however contradicts the statement of Allah (swt):

Allah will protect you from mankind (Al-Maaidah 67).
It also contradicts the Ismah (infallibility) in respect to the conveyance of the Message
(Tableegh) because the one who is enchanted is not aware of what he says or does.
Al-Imaam Muslim and others also related from Faatimah Bin Qais that she said: That the
Messenger of Allah (saw) did not allocate for her housing or Nafaqah (spending) whilst this is in
opposition to the speech of Allah (swt):

Do not turn them out of their (husband's) homes, and they shall not (themselves) leave, unless they engaged in
some open evil lewdness (i.e. Zinaa) (At-Talaaq 1).
Based upon what we have mentioned in terms of Ahaadeeth which contradict with the Noble
Quraan it is not valid for it to be said that the Akhbaar Al-Aahaad establish Yaqeen and belief.
Otherwise the Islamic beliefs would be contradictory and it would be an invitation towards
divisions occurring in the Deen which is a matter which is condemned by the Shara without
disagreement.
The Saheeh (correct) Madhhab (view) is that if the Aahaad contradict with the Quraan they are
rejected because the Akhbaar are Zhanniyah (speculative or contain some doubt) whilst the
Quraan is Qatiy (Decisive and definite). The Zhanniy cannot oppose the Qatiy in the case
where it is not possible to bring them together and reconcile them.
As for contradictions amongst the Akhbaar Al-Aahaad themselves and between the Akhbaar AlAahaad and the Mutawaatir from the Sunnah, then they are many as well. This indicates that the
Akhbaar Al-Aahaad are not Yaqeeniyyah (reach the level of certainty) or Aqadiyah (reach the
26
level of belief) and that they are not valid and suitable to establish the Aqeedah, or otherwise
there would be contradictions within the Islamic beliefs.
Examples:
1) Al-Imaam Ahmad related in his Musnad from Aaishah (ra) that she said: There was a Jewess
who used to serve her and Aaishah would not do anything kind towards her except that the
Jewess would say: May Allah protect you from the punishment of the grave. She (Aaishah)
said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) then entered my house and I asked: This Jewish lady, we do
not do anything of kindness to her except that she says: May Allah protect you from the
punishment of the grave. He (saw) said: The Jews have lied and they are the greatest liars in
respect to Allah Azza Wa Jalla. There is no punishment other than the punishment of the Day
of Judgment. It stayed like that for as long as Allah wished and then one day in the middle of
that day he (saw) went out with his Thawb whilst his eyes were red and he began to call out at
the top of his voice: O people...if you were to know that which I know then you would have
cried often and laughed little. O people, seek refuge in Allah from the punishment of the grave
for verily the punishment of the grave is the Haqq (truth) (Ref: 81/6).
Al-Haafizh Ibn Hajr Al-Asqalaaniy said that Ahmad related this upon the condition of AlBukhaari (Ref: Fath ul-Baari 236/3).
This Hadeeth is Aahaad with a Saheeh Isnaad (chain) and it denies the punishment of the grave
once and affirms it once. If it established definite certain knowledge and belief (Itiqaad) as they
claim then this would mean that we would have to believe in two opposites related to the same
issue at the same time which is inconceivable rationally and in accordance to the Shara.
If it is said that the first meaning was abrogated by the second and as such there is no
contradiction?
The answer to this would be: This is from the Akhbaar (information and beliefs) and not from
the Ahkaam (rulings) and Naskh (abrogation) does not occur in respect to them. If it was to
occur then this means that one of the reports was a lie and this is inconceivable which opposes
the Ismah (infallibility) of the Nabi (saw) in respect to Tableegh.
Az-Zarkashiy said in Al-Bahr: And secondly...This is an issue which has been attributed to
Naskh (abrogation) among the Scholars of Usool. Lets examine this; If it is from the matters
that cannot possibly be changed in the case where it can only represent one thing, like the Siffaat
(attributes) of Allah, or a Khabar (news) of the Anbiyaa and previous nations, or relate to the
final hour and its signs like the coming of Ad-Dajjaal, then it is not permitted to be abrogated by
agreement just as Abu Ishaq Al-Marooziy and Ibn Burhaan have stated, as this would lead to
lying. (Ref: Al-Bahr ul-Muheet Fee Usool Al-Fiqh 98/4).
2) Also from the conflicting Akhbaar Al-Aahaad is what Al-Imaam Muslim related from Jaabir
and Ibn Umar in respect to the Farewell Hajj and that the Nabi (saw) headed towards Makkah
27
on the Day of An-Nahr (sacrifice), that he made the Ifaadah Tawaaf and then prayed Zhohr in
Makkah before returning to Minaa.
In another narration also from the same path it stated: That he made the Ifaadah Tawaaf and
then returned and prayed Zhohr in Minaa (Ref: Related by Muslim in his Saheeh as An-Nawawi
mentioned in his Sharh 194/8 and 58/10).
Ibn Hazm said: One of these two narrations is Kadhib (lie/untrue) without doubt (Dhail AlJawaahir Al-Mudeea of Abu Al-Wafaa (428/2).
Ibn Hazm only said this because he stated that the Khabar Al-Aahaad establish (definite)
knowledge. Upon his view then the two narrations establish definite knowledge and certainty
and that would mean having Imaan in two contradictory matters. To escape from this dilemma
he declared one to be a lie but without evidence to support that.
3) What Al-Bukhaari and Muslim related in the Hadeeth of Al-Israa (journey to Al-Aqsaa) when
they related: That it had been before he had been revealed to (Ref: Fath ul-Baari 478/13).
This is whilst it is not hidden from anyone and indeed is not allowed to be hidden from anyone,
that the event of Al-Israa occurred after the Messenger (saw) had started his message and that it
occurred one year before the Hijrah. This Hadeeth therefore contradicts with the definite
Mutawaatir and whoever believes it would have brought together two opposites which
represents the Aqeedah of the ignorant.
For this reason the Ulamaa have placed down a principle for this situation. This is: If the
Zhanniy is in opposition to the Qatiy, the Zhanniy is rejected and the Qatiy is acted upon (or
taken).
4) Al-Bukhaari related in his Saheeh from Ibn Umar (ra) that he asked Bilal (ra): Did the Nabi
(saw) pray inside the Kabah? He replied: Yes, two Rakah between the pillars that were upon his
left.... he then went outside and prayed two Rakah facing the Kabah (Fath ul-Baari 500/1).
This is contradictory to what Al-Bukhaari also related from Ibn Abbaas who said: When the
Nabi (saw) entered the house (Kabah) he made Duaa in all of its places and he did not pray
until he had exited.
In another narration also recorded by Al-Bukhaari and also from Ibn Abbaas (ra) he said: So he
entered the house (Kabah) and made Takbeer in its places and he did not pray in it (Fath ulBaari 468/3).
5) Al-Bukhaari related from Jaabir (ra) the story of the stoning of Maiz in which it was said:
When the stones troubled him, he fled, but he was caught and was stoned till he died. The
Prophet spoke well of him and prayed over him (Janaazah) (Ref: Fath ul-Baari 130/12).
This Khabar however is in opposition to the report recorded by Al-Baihaqi in his Sunan in
which it was related: That he did not pray over him.
28
Al-Baihaqi said: Al-Bukhaari related it from Mahmoud Bin Ghailaan from Abdur Razzaaq and
in it he said that he (saw) prayed over him, and this is an error (Ref: Sunan Al-Baihaqi Al-Kubraa
218/9).
6) Al-Bukhaari related from Abu Hurairah (ra) that the Nabi (saw) said:
The Imaan is sixty and a few Shubah (branches) (Ref: Related in his Saheeh as has been
mentioned in Al-Fath 51/1).
However Al-Imaam Muslim related the wording: The Imaan is seventy and a few Shubah
(branches) (Ref: In his Saheeh and in the Sharh of An-Nawawi 3/2).
This is a clear contradiction between the two reports or narrations and this is what the Ulamaa
have named as Idtiraab Al-Matn (inconsistency of the text of the Hadeeth).
7) Al-Bukhaari related from Aaishah (ra) that the Nabi (saw) prayed the prayer of Kusoof
(eclipse) with them, four bowings (Rukoos) in two Sajdahs (Rakahs) (Ref: Fath ul-Baari
548/2).
However Al-Imaam Muslim related contrary to that: That the sun eclipsed during the lifetime of
the Messenger of Allah (saw) and he stood up (in prayer) for a rigorously long time. He then
bowed and then stood up and then bowed and then stood up and then bowed, thus observing
three ruku's in two rak'ahs and four prostrations.
In a third narration recorded by Muslim from Aaishah (ra) she related: That the Nabi (saw)
prayed six Rakaaat and four Sajadaat (Ref: Sharh Muslim An-Nawawi 203/6)
I order to escape from this contradiction a number of Ulamaa did not classify the narration of
Muslim as Saheeh and these included, Ash-Shaafiiy, Al-Bukhaari and Ahmad (Ref: Ibn ulQayyim in Zaad ul-Maaad 124/1 and Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned his classifying it as Daeef in his
book Ilm ul-Hadeeth p70).
8) What Al-Bukhaari related from Ibn Abbaas (ra) that the Nabi (saw): Married Maymoonah
whilst he was in (the state of) Ihraam.
However this is contrary to what was recorded by Muslim from Zaid Al-Asamm who said that
Maymoonah had told him that the Messenger of Allah (saw) had married her whilst he was
Halaal (i.e. not in the state of Ihraam).
At-Tabari said: As for the story of Maymoonah then the reports about is have been
contradictory (in opposition to each other) (Ref: Fath ul-Baari 165/9).
9) Al-Imaam Muslim and others recorded from Abdullah Bin Amr from the Nabi (saw) that he
said: The first sign would be the appearance of the sun from the west, the appearance of the
29
beast before the people in the forenoon and whichever of the two happens first, then the second
one would follow immediately after that (Ibn Katheer in his book An-Nihaayah Fil Fitan Wal
Malaahim 217/1).
However this is contradictory to narrations that mention that the first sign is the appearance of
Ad-Dajjaal. At-Tirmidhi with a Hasan Saheeh Isnaad relates from Abu Hurairah (ra) from the
Nabi (saw) that he said: If three things appear the persons Imaan will not benefit them if they
had not already believed or gained goodness in their Imaan; the Dajjaal, the Daabbah (beast) and
the rising of the sun from the West. This is amongst many other relations which dictate that the
appearance of the Dajjaal is the first of the signs (Ref: Sunan At-Tirmidhi the Kitaab (chapter)
of Tafseer 326/3 and the Nihaayah Fil Fitan Wal Malaahim of Ibn Katheer 166/1).
Additionally if the first of the signs was the sun rising from the west whilst it is known that after
its rising from the west that the door to Taubah (repentance) is closed, then what benefit would
there then be in the coming of Ad-Dajjaal after that, the coming of Isaa (as) and the appearance
of Al-Mahdi, their killing of Ad-Dajjaal and the Rule of Isaa (as) upon the earth by the Shara, as
has been mentioned in the Aahaad Ahaadeeth.
After paying attention to the inconsistency of these Ahaadeeth how can it be said that they reach
the level of decisiveness, Yaqeen (certainty) and Itiqaad (belief), whilst they bring together two
opposites??!!
As for what Ibn Katheer (rh) said that the appearance of Ad-Dajjaal is the first sign upon the
ground/earth whilst the rising of the sun from the West is the first sign from the heavens, then
this represents a Taweel (interpretation) to escape from the two opposites but it is a Taweel
(interpretation) which has no Daleel (evidence) to support it.
It would have been safer and sounder to say: All of these Akhbaar (reports/relations) are
Aahaad, they are Zhanniyah (not definite), they do not represent the Aqeedah and that the
Aqaaid are not established (affirmed) by them. After that it is then possible to provide an
interpretation and reject some of them.
10) From amongst the Akhbaar which are contradictory are the different narrations in relation to
the Basmalah (Bismillahir Rahmaanir Raheem) being an Aayah of the Quraan in every Soorah or
not?
Al-Imaam Muslim related from Anas (ra): When the Messenger of Allah (saw) was amongst us
one day he dosed off and then raised his head whilst smiling. So I asked: What has made you
laugh O Messenger of Allah? He replied: The following Soorah was just revealed upon me:
) 0(
)3(
) 2(

30
In the Name of Allah Ar-Rahmaan Ar-Raheem. Verily we have granted you Al-Kauthar. So pray to your
Lord and sacrifice. Verily the one who angers you is cut off.
This is contradicted by what Al-Imaam Muslim also related from Aaishah (ra) who said: Rge
Messenger of Allah (saw) used to open his prayer with the Takbeer and the recitation of AlHamdu Lillahi Rabbil Aalameen.
And in another report recorded by Muslim from Anas (ra): I prayed behind the Nabi (saw)and
Abu Bakr and Umar. They used begin with Al-Hamdu Lillahi Rabbil Aalameen and did not
mention Bismillahir Rahmaan Ar-Raheem, whether at the beginning of the recitation or at the
end. (Ref: These narrations and the different opinions of the Ulamaa can be found in Al-Jaami
Li Ahkaam Al-Quraan Al-Kareem, Al-Qurtubi 91/1).
As a result of this the Ulamaa differed in this issue in a clear manner and had the Ahaadeeth
established certainty then how can inconsistencies and differences occur in respect to them.
As such the Ahaadeeth of the Basmalah remain from the Aahaad category and do not reach the
level of Yaqeen (certainty) and Itiqaad (belief), otherwise you would have the situation where it
would be certain and a matter of belief that it was from the Aayaat of the Quraan whilst having
certainty and belief that it was not from the Aayaat of the Quraan, at the same time. This means
bringing together opposites and contradictions which is inconceivable in respect to the Islamic
Aqeedah and representative of a corrupt Madhhab.
The fourth reason:
If the Akhbaar Al-Aahaad were considered to be Aqeedah, or that the Aqeedah is affirmed by
them they would have declared the one who denies or rejects them as a disbeliever. However
they were explicit in respect to not declaring disbelief to the one who denies them which is
different to the one who denies the Mutawaatir. This has been agreed upon by the Ulamaa
according to what As-Sarkhasiy mentioned in his Usool, Al-Jarjaani in his Tareef and the
author of Fawaatih Ar-Rahmoot (Ref: Supplement of Al-Mustasfaa Al-Ghazaali 111/2).
There has also existed amongst the Ulamaa who did not declare the denier as a Faasiq, like AlQaadi, unless and Ijmaa has been convened in respect to it, in which case he would be Faasiq
(rebelliously disobedient).The meaning of this is that we are not Mukallifeen (legally
entrusted/responsible) to believe in the Aahaad Ahaadeeth. This is because, how can the Khabar
Al-Aahaad be Aqeedah and a Daleel for the Aqeedah whilst the one who denies it is not
declared a disbeliever in accordance to the agreement of the Ulamaa, unless they are not actually
representative of the Aqeedah and are not an evidence for the Aqeedah, and as such they do not
take its Hukm (ruling).
The fifth reason:
31
Not all of Islaam is Ahkaam related to the Aqeedah so that the Aahaad are required to be part of
these Aqaaid (beliefs). Rather Islaam includes societal, economic, criminal, judicial, political and
military Ahkaam alongside the Ahkaam related to the Aqeedah. In respect to all of these Ahkaam
the Khabar Al-Aahaad is considered a Hujjah (proof) which is different to the case of the
Ahkaam of the Aqeedah.
This differentiation is built upon the basis of the difference between the Ahkaam related to the
Aqeedah and the Ahkaam that are not related to the Aqeedah in respect to the reality, the Hukm
and the Daleel for each of them.
The Ahkaam related to the Aqeedah are those which are related to the Imaan. Its linguistic
meaning is: At-Tasdeeq (belief) and its Istilaahi (Terminological) meaning is: At-Tasdeeq AlJaazim (decisive belief) that is in conformity to the reality by way of Daleel (evidence) (AlMahsool of Ar-Raaziy 12/1, Al-Armawiy 169/1 in his Tahseel, As-Sanaaiy in his answer to the
questioner p60, the commentaries of Al-Jarjaaniy and At-Taftaazaaniy upon Ibn ul-Haajib 6061/1, Tafseer Ar-Raaziy 27-61/2 and Ash-Shakhsiyah Al-Islaamiyah An-Nabhaani 19/1).
Therefore if the Tasdeeq is by way of other that the Qatiy (definite) Daleel it would not be
Jaazim (definite/decisive) but rather it would be Zhann (indecisive) or Shakk (doubtful). This is
because Al-Jazm linguistically means: Al-Qata (decisiveness/definiteness) and it is said: He
Jazama Al-Amr Qataahu Qatan Laa Audah Feehi (He decisively decided a matter, he decided it
decisively/definitely in a definite manner in which there is no going back (reversal) (Ref: AlQamoos Al-Muheet 89/4).
And if it is not in conformity to the reality then it is Jahl (ignorance).
For this reason these two conditions are essential for Itiqaad (to establish the Aqeedah): Al-Jazm
(decisiveness) and conformity (Mutaabaqah). Otherwise the Itiqaad or the Imaan would be
Faasid (corrupted).
As for the Ahkaam (rulings) that are not related to the Aqeedah then these are known to the
Ulamaa as being the practical Ahkaam i.e. related to the actions of the Ibaad (servants/slaves) in
terms of being Halaal and Haraam and not in terms of being Kufr and Imaan.
The Ahkaam related to the Aqeedah and the Ahkaam Al-Amaliyah (practical Ahkaam related to
actions) all represent Islamic thoughts in our view. So Laa Ilaahah Illallah (There is no deity
other than Allah) is a thought whilst The dead meat (carrion) has been mad Haraam upon you
is also a thought. The difference between them is that the first is Aqeedah and relates to a matter
of Tasdeeq whilst the latter is a Hukm related to the action.
Therefore, that which has been demanded to have Imaan and Tasdeeq in, relates to the Ahkaam
of the Aqeedah and that which has been demanded to be acted in accordance to it, is considered
to be from the Ahkaam Al-Amaliyah (practical Ahkaam related to actions).
32
By examining the Shariyah Nusoos (texts) of the Kitaab and the Sunnah, the difference between
that which it has been demanded to have Imaan in and that which the action has been demanded
in accordance to it, becomes clearly evident.
So His statement (swt):

O you who believe, believe in Allah and His Messenger (An-Nisaa 136).

And believed in what was revealed upon Muhammad and it is the Haqq (truth) from their Rabb (Muhammad
2).
And:

And those who believe in that which was revealed to you and what was revealed before you and have certain belief
in the hereafter (Al-Baqarah 4).
These texts are clear in respect to them demanding Imaan alone i.e. Imaan (belief) without
action.
And Allah (swt) said:

And establish the Salaah and give the Zakaah (Al-Baqarah 44).
And:
33
And it is a duty upon mankind to Allah, to make Hajj to the House for the one who has the capability and
means to do so (Aali Imraan 77).
And:

O you who believe, when you take a loan (contract a debt) for a set time then write it down (Al-Baqarah 282).
And He (swt) said:

So then marry women of your choice (An-Nisaa 4).
And:

Fighting has been proscribed upon you even though it is disliked by you (Al-Baqarah 216).
And He TaAalaa said:

And maintain the best of conducts with your parents (An-Nisaa 46).
And:

Tell the believers to lower their gaze (An-Noor 30).
These are amongst many other Nusoos (texts) which demand to be acted in accordance with.
Therefore the Ahkaam that have been taken from these texts are called Ahkaam Amaliyah
(practical rulings) whilst the previously quoted Nusoos refer to Ahkaam which are Tasdeeqiyah,
Aqeediyah or Ilmiyyah.
34
In addition there are other Nusoos from the Kitaab which also make clear this difference:
Allah (swt) said:

Verily those who have believed and acted with righteous actions.
And He (swt) said:

Except those who have believed and acted with righteous actions.
The connection/conjunction (Atf) of the action upon the Imaan is a Daleel showing the
difference between them.
Similar to that is His speech TaAalaah:

O you who believe bow and prostrate.
And:

And establish the Salaah and give the Zakaah

Verily Allah commands justice and the best of conduct.
In these Aayaat the difference between the Rukoo (bowing) and Sujood (prostration), between
the Salaah and the Zakaah, and between the Adl (justice and Ihsaan (best conduct) is clear and
35
apparent in respect to their meanings and even if they have been connected by the Waw AlAtifah (the connecting/conjoining Waw i.e. and).
It is worth noting the Atf (connecting Waw) could occur between two nouns without this
dictating a difference between them however an Aqliy (rational) or Naqly (transmitted) Qareenah
(connotation) would then alter that:
This is like His statement (swt):

Lord of the two Easts and Lord of the two Wests.
This conflicts with the Aql (mind) and the Naql (what is transmitted) because the Rabb is One
alone. Fr this reason the Waw does not function in this Aayah as it does in the above mentioned
Aayaat. And Allah knows best.
Also His speech (swt):

So know that He is Laa Ilaaha Illallahi and seek forgiveness for your sin.
Here there is also a differentiation between the Itiqaad (what is believed in) which is that there is
no deity other than Allah, and between the seeking of forgiveness which is an action, for the
same reason.
This is similar in His statement (swt):
) 01(

Shall I guide you to a trade that will save you from a painful punishment? (That you) believe in Allah and His
Messenger, and that you perform Al-Jihaad in the way of Allah with your property (wealth) and your lives. That
is better for you if you were to know.
This is a Daleel indicating that Al-Jihaad is an action (Amal) and not Imaan and the difference
between them is established based on the same reasoning.
36
The Sunnah also guides to this differentiation as can be seen in the Hadeeth in which Jibreel (as)
asked the Nabi (saw) about Al-Islaam, Al-Imaan and Al-Ihsaan and his answer (saw) was that
Al-Islaam was: To bear witness upon Laa Ilaaha Illallah and that Muhammad is the Messenger
of Allah, to establish the Salaah, to give the Zakaa, to fast Ramadhaan and to perform Hajj of the
House if he finds the means and capability.
This is whilst Imaan was: To believe in Allah, His Malaaikah (angels), His Kutub (books), His
Rusul (Messengers), the Day of Judgement and in that the Qadr, its good and bad, was from
Allah TaAalaa.
And in respect to the Ihsaan he (saw) said: To worship Allah as if you can see Him and if you
have not seen Him then (to be aware) that He sees you (Ref: Al-Bukhaari in his Saheeh 144/6).
This Hadeeth makes clear the difference between the Ahkaam Al-Amaliyah (Rulings related to
actions) in terms of the Shahaadah, the Salaah, the Zakaah, the Sawm, the Hajj, and Ihsaan and
how it should be undertaken (and practically sought), and between the Ahkaam At-Tasdeeqiyah
(Rulings related to belief) represented in having Imaan in Allah, His angels, His books, His
Messengers, the Day of Judgement and the good and bad Qadr from Allah TaAalaa.
Ibn Taymiyyah said: So when Imaan was mentioned with Islaam it made Islaam the apparent
(outward manifesting) actions: The two Shahaadahs, the Salaah, the Zakaah, the Siyaam and the
Hajj. And it made the Imaan that which is in the heart in respect to Imaan (belief) in Allah, His
angels, His books, His Messengers, the Day of Judgment and the Qadr, its good and bad, being
from Allah TaAalaa. This is also the same (meaning) that has come in the Hadeeth related by
Ahmad from Anas (ra) from The Nabi (saw) that he said: Al-Islaam is open and AL-Imaan is in
the heart. (Ref: Ibn Taymiyyah in his book Al-Imaan p14).
Also from the Sunnah is that which Al-Bukhaari related in his Saheeh from Aaishah (ra) who
said: Verily, the first of what was revealed from it i.e. the Quraan, were the Mufassal Surahs,
mentioning Al-Jannah and An-Naar (Paradise and Hellfire). This was until the people returned to
Islaam (i.e. accepted it) and then the Halaal and the Haraam descended.
Ibn Hajr said in Al-Fath: This guides to the divine wisdom in respect to the ordering of the
revelation, as the first which was revealed from the Quraan was the call to Tawheed, giving glad
tidings to the believer and the one who is obedient with Jannah, and tidings to the disbeliever
and disobedient of the fire. Then when the souls (people) were tranquil and content with that the
Ahkaam (legal rulings) were then revealed. For this reason she said: If the first thing to be
revealed was the command not to drink Khamr they would have said: We will not leave it. (Ref:
Fath ul-Baari 40/9).
The speech of Aaishah (ra) takes the ruling of Marfoo (raised) to the Messenger of Allah (saw)
and the difference between the rulings of Jannah and Naar which are Ahkaam related to the
Aqeedah, and the Halaal and the Haraam which are the practical Ahkaam related to actions, is
made clear in it.
37
This difference that we have mentioned between the Ahkaam related to belief and those related
to actions is completely clear in respect to the great majority of the Fuqahaa, Scholars of Usool
and Hadeeth. It is clear in their publications in more than one place in a manner that cannot be
hidden from anyone who Allah (swt) has granted knowledge and piety in respect to the Deen.
Al-Hasan Al-Basriy said: Al-Imaan is that which is settled in the heart and is affirmed by the
action (Ref: Ibn Abi Shaibah related this from him in his Musannaf 189/7).
Ibn Rajab Al-Hanbaliy said: So that in which care and attention has been specified for every
Muslim, is to study that which has come from (swt) and His Messenger (saw), and to then strive
(Ijtihaad) to understand that and to take heed of its meanings. He must then believe in that if it is
from the matters of Ilm (knowledge) whilst if it is from the matters related to actions then he
must exert his effort in striving to perform what he is able to of the commands (i.e. to the best
of his ability) and abstain from what he had been forbidden from. This so that his whole concern
is turned completely towards that and not to anything else (Ref: Jaami Al-Uloom Wa-l-Hikam
p118).
Al-Qaraafiy said: And in that way the Usool (fundamentals) of the Deen being clearly apparent
and these are the matters that are learnt and not the matters that are acted upon (Ref: Nafaais
Al-Usool 121/1).
Al-Jarjaaniy said: The Aqaaid (beliefs) represents that which is believed in but not acted upon
(Ref: Tareefaat p196).
Alaa Ad-Deen As-Samarqandiy said: The place of the Khabar is the category related to action.
However if it is found in the category of beliefs and it is from the matters of Kalaam, then it will
not be a proof (Ref: Meezaan Al-Usool p434).
Ibn Al-Baaqalaaniy said: Al-Imaan according to the language is Tasdeeq (belief) and it does not
include the remaining actions of the limbs and the hearts (Ref: Al-Insaaf p34).
Due to not wanting to spend too much time quoting their statements I will suffice in mentioning
the main points of this as they have come in their publications. These are well-known and
sufficiently apparent for the one who wishes to examine them.
They include:
1) Their differentiating between the Aqeedah and the Hukm Ash-Shariy in respect to definition:
So the Aqeedah is: Al-Imaan.
And the Hukm Ash-Shariy is: The Khitaab Ash-Shaari (the address of the legislator) related to
the actions of the Ibaad (servants/slaves).
2) Their approval (acceptance) of Ikhtilaaf (difference of opinion) in respect to the Zhanniy
(non-decisive) Furoo branches and not the Qatiy (decisive) Usool (fundamentals).
38
3) Their acceptance of difference of opinion in respect to the Khabar Al-Aahaad and not the
Mutawaatir that have been agreed upon by consensus, as we have already established in this
book.
4) Their differentiation in respect to the definition of Al-Fiqh and Al-Usool.
5) Their differentiating between the Adillah (evidences) of Usool and the obligation of them
being Qatiyah, and between the branches. So Zhann is sufficient in regards to them if they are
not Qatiy and this is agreed upon amongst them.
6) Their declaration of disbelief (Takfeer) upon the one who denies a Qatiy Asl (definite origin,
fundamental) or that which must be known from the Deen by Daroorah (necessity) and this
does not apply to the Zhanny (non-decisive) Far (branch).
7) Their division of the Shareeah into categories of being Ahkaam and Aqaaid (beliefs), or
Ahkaam Amaliyyah (practical rulings) and Ahkaam Ilmiyyah (Ahkaam of knowledge), like Ibn
Rajab mentioned amongst others above.
8) Their division of the Quraan in respect to the categories of Aayaat of Ahkaam, Aayaat of
Qisas (stories) and Aayaat of Aqaaid and the unseen matters.
9) Differentiating between the Kaafir and the Muslim in respect to the Khitaab of Takleef i.e.
Are the disbelievers addressed with the Usool of the Shareeah and its branches or just one to
the exclusion of the other.
10) That the one who makes an error in the branches is rewarded which is different to the Usool
and the Qatiy in which case the one who errs is sinful.
11) The Khabar Al-Aahaad is taken for the Ahkaam but not taken for the Aqaaid as we have
mentioned in this book.
12) The Ahkaam Al-Amaliyah (those related to actions) are open and prone to abrogation
whereas the Aqaaid (beliefs) are not open to abrogation.
13) Their differentiation between the one who is killed as a Hadd punishment and the one who
is killed due to apostasy.
14) They forbade Taqleed (imitation) in the Usool (fundamentals) of the Deen whilst permitting
it in the branches (Furoo).
These are amongst some of the differentiations that guide definitely to the fact that they used to
differentiate between the Aqeedah and what was related to it, and the Ahkaam Ash-Shariyah AlAmaliyah and what is related to them.
39
As for what some say in respect to the division of Shariyah matters to Usool (fundamentals) and
Furoo (branches) being a Bidah (innovation) which the Sunnah did not come with, then this is
strange speech by which knowledge and the people of knowledge are rejected. This is because
this approach would lead to the rejection of all of the Ulamaa and their knowledge as being
Bidah because they divided the Shariah sciences into Fiqh and Usool ul-Fiqh, and they divided
it into Hadeeth and Fiqh, the divided the Fard in to Kifaayah and Ain, the Quraan into Aayaat
of Ahkaam and Aayaat of Qisas (stories), divided the commands into more than twenty
categories, divided the Hukm Ash-Shariy into the categories of Takleefiy and Wadiy, the
Sunnah into Mutawaatir and Aahaad, the Aahaad (themselves) into more than ten types, they
classified the Qawaaid (principles) into Kulliyah and Aammah, the language into Nahw, Sarf
and Balaaghah, the Sunnah into Filiyah, Qawliyah and Taqreeriyah (action, speech and
consent/approval), the Ijmaa (of the Sahaabah) into Qawli (by statement) and Sukooti (by
silence), the Uloom into Samiyah (revealed) and Aqliyah (rational/intellectual), the Adillah
(evidences) into Samiiyah and Aqliyah , the Mutawaatir into Lafzhy and Manawiy and they
divided and classified the Dalaalah (textual implication) into Iltizaam (necessary), Tadammun
(inclusive) and Mutaabah (conformity) amongst many other divisions and classifications.
All of these classifications were not quoted in the Kitaab, the Sunnah or the Ijmaa As-Sahaabah,
so does that mean that they are all Bidah!!? If that was the case then this means the demolition
and pulverisation of every one of the sciences and declaring all of the Ulamaa as being ignorant,
something that no sane and rational person would ever say.
The correct view is that these divisions and classifications only happened after examining their
reality and that Bidah is far removed from them, and its rulings and definitionsdoes not apply to
them.
As for what has been said in respect to the Imaan being Qawl (speech) and Amal (action), then
this is correct, but not from the perspective that the Imaan is an action, because this is in
opposition to the Quraan and the Sunnah as we have discussed above. Rather it is correct and
valid from the perspective that the action is an evidence for the existence of the Imaan of a
believing person who performs righteous acts. This is indicated in the speech of the Nabi (saw)
when he said: If you see a man frequenting the Masaajid then bear witness upon his Imaan. And
if you wish, read and gain understanding from His speech (swt):

The Arab Bedouins said: We have believed, Say you have not believed but rather say we have submitted, and
Imaan has yet to enter their hearts, And if you obey Allah and His Messenger nothing from your actions will be
wasted. Verily Allah is Ghafoor Raheem (Al-Hujuraat 14).
40
With this reasoning Al-Hasan said: Imaan is not by way of adornment (or being endowed) or by
way of wishes but rather it is what the heart has settled upon and what the action affirms.
Therefore the Amal (action) affirms the Imaan but is not itself the Imaan.
There is also the statement of the Messenger (saw): The Imaan is seventy and some parts, its
highest part is the statement Laa Ilaaha Illallah and its lowest part is removing the harm from the
public passageways/paths.
The meaning of this likewise is not that the Imaan and the action are one and the same matter
because this would contradict and oppose the Quraan and the Sunnah in respect to
differentiating between the Imaan and the action. The meaning can only then be that removing
the harm is a fruit from amongst the fruits of Imaan and an evidence for its existence.
The easiest way to understand the difference between the Aqeedah and the Ahkaam related to
actions in terms of its reality, ruling and evidence, is that the one who opposes or contradicts the
Aqeedah and denies it is declared a disbeliever with no difference of opinion in respect to that,
whilst the one who contravenes the Ahkaam Ash-Shariyah related to the Halaal and the Haraam
or the one who denies (a ruling) is not declared a disbeliever. He would only be considered as
being disobedient and sinful with the exception of the Mutazilah who declared the one who
committed a Kabeerah (major sin) as being a disbeliever.
Similarly learning the Halaal and the Haraam is required by the Shara and this is an action and is
not called Imaan otherwise ignorance of it or not learning it would be Kufr (disbelief), and no
Jaahil (ignorant) person would state this, let alone an Aalim (someone possessing knowledge).
The Sixth reason:
Also from amongst the evidences indicating that the Khabar Al-Aahaad do not establish and
ascertain Yaqeen (certainty) and are not taken into the Itiqaad (belief) is: That many of them
have been narrated in meaning where the narrator strove to understand what the Nabi (saw) said
and then transmitted it in his own language according to his understand, and this definitely
implies Zhann (indecisiveness). So it is not possible for it to be said that the Hadeeth which was
related by the Sahaabah in meaning establishes certainty or that it is suitable to be used as an
evidence for the Aqeedah. Otherwise the Ijtihaad of the Mujtahideen would establish it whilst
this is in opposition to the Sunnah has explicitly mentioned when it stated that the Ijtihaad is
prone to error just as it is prone to being correct, and as such it is not valid to establish the
Aqaaid by it.
An example in regards to the way a Hadeeth is related by way of meaning is what Ahmad,
Abdul-Barr and others related from Makhool who said: We entered (the place of) Waathilah Bin
Al-Asqa and we said to him: Tell us of a Hadeeth that has no addition and no omission. Hr
was angered by this and said: There is no problem if I add or omit as longs as I am correct with
its meaning.
41
It was related by Ibn Maajah and others from Anas (ra) that anytime he would relate a Hadeeth
from the Nabi (saw) he would say: Or like he said (i.e. not exact wording). He also related that
Ibn Masood (ra) would say when he related a Hadeeth: Or close to that, or more than that or
less than that.
This therefore is what they meant when they said the Hadeeth related by way of meaning.
42
The Fifth Angle:

This relates to what they thought (Zhann) was a Daleel but is not in fact a Daleel:
As for what they believed to be a Daleel (evidence) indicating that the Khabar Al-Waahid is from
the Aqaaid (beliefs) and establishes Yaqeen (certainty), then this is an illusion and does not even
rise to the level of Zhann. This is whilst the issue requires a Qatiy (decisive) Daleel and not a
Zhanny one, and it is stipulated for it be established by both the Thuboot (chain of narration)
and the Dalaalah (meaning) in order for it not to be exposed to Shakk (doubt) or Zhann
(speculation). This is because it represents the Aqeedah or what the Aqeedah is built upon.
From what they thought was a Daleel: What was recorded in the Saheehaini, the Lafzh (worded
version) of Al-Bukhaari and related by Ibn Abbaas(ra) who said: When the Nabi (saw)
dispatched Muaadh to Al-Yaman he said to him: You are going to a people from the
people of the book so let the first of what you invite them to be Tawheed in Allah (swt).
Then if they recognise that then inform them that Allah has made obligatory upon them
five prayers in their days and nights (Ref: Fath ul-Baari 347/13).
This Hadeeth is not viable to be used as an evidence in regards to the Aqaaid (beliefs) for a
number of reasons:
Firstly: The Khabar Al-Aahaad to not establish other than Zhann and is therefore not viable to
be Aqeedah or a Daleel for the Aqeedah as we have previously affirmed.
Secondly: The Riwaayah relates to inviting them to Tawheed and not to the affirmation of
Tawheed. This is based on the statement: If they then recognise it and in the narration of
Muslim: Then if they recognise Allah TaAalaa. It is known that knowing Allah TaAalaa is not
ascertained except by examination (thought) because there is no Taqleed in respect to the beliefs.
Allah (swt) has reproached the one who imitates in respect to the Aqeedah and rebukes the one
who does that with a sever rebuke:
Allah (swt) said:
) 23(

Verily we found our fathers following a certain way and religion, and we guide ourselves by their footsteps. (The
warner) said: "Even if I bring you better guidance than that which you found your fathers following?" They said:
"Verily, we disbelieve in that with which you have been sent with."(Az-Zukhruf 23-24).

43
Have you come to us to turn us away from that (Faith) we found our fathers following and so that you two will
have greatness in the land? We are not going to believe in you two (Younus 78).
) 50(

) 53(
) 52(

And indeed we bestowed aforetime on Ibraaheem (Abraham) his (portion of) guidance, and we were wellacquainted with him. When he said to his father and his people: "What are these statues to which you are
devoted?" They said: "We found our fathers worshipping them." He said: "Indeed you and your fathers have been
in manifest error." (Al-Anbiyaa 51-54).
Allah (swt) has also made clear that knowing Him (i.e. belief) occurs by way of Nazhar
(examination), Tadabbur (pondering) and Tafakkur (thought) and not by way of Taqleed
(imitation).
Allah (swt) said:

We will show them our signs in the horizons, and within their own selves, until it becomes manifest to them that it
is the truth (Al-Fussilaat 53).

And from among his signs are the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and
colours. Verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge (Ar-Room 22).

Verily! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day, there are indeed signs
for men of understanding (Aali Imraan 170).
44

) 01(

) 01(

) 01(

Do they not look at (regard) the camels, how they were created? And at the heaven, how it is has been raised?
And at the mountains, how they are have been rooted and fixed firm? And at the earth, how it has been spread
out? (Al-Ghaashiyah 17-20).

Then let man look at that from which he was created from (At-Taariq 5).
These are some of many Aayaat from the Quraan Al-Kareem which draw the attention and
examination of the human being to the creations of Allah (swt) demanding the utilisation and use
of the Aql (mind) to know (and understand) His creation. We therefore see the Aayaat stating:
For a people who can reason (Yaqil) and For a people who can think/contemplate
(yatafakkar) which is decisively in opposition to Taqleed.
In addition the Hadeeth differentiates between knowing and having knowledge of Allah (swt)
and the Ahkaam related to actions that have been mandated. This is evident when he (saw) said:
Then if they recognise Allah TaAalaa then inform them that Allah has made obligatory
upon them five prayers in their days and nights. Taqleed can be practised in respect to the
practical Ahkaam related to actions whilst it is not possible to do this with the Aqeedah. This has
been confirmed by Ijmaa (of the Ulamaa) as mentioned by Al-Qurtubi in his Jaami (Ref: In his
Tafseer 212/2).
Thirdly: The narration of Ibn Abbaas (ra) has Idtiraab (inconsistency) in its Matn (the textof the
Hadeeth). So in the version of Al-Bukhaari it states: So let the first of what you invite them to
be Tawheed in Allah (swt), whilst in a version related by Al-Imaam Muslim it is related as:
So let the first of what you invite them to be the Ibaadah (worship) of Allah and it has
been related: So call them to the Shahaadah of Laa Ilaaha Illallah and that I am the
Messenger of Allah.
There is also another inconsistency that occurs in the Isnaad (chain) of the narration of Muslim:
Abu Bakr said: Perhaps Wakee related from Ibn Abbaas...The Hadeeth. On one occasion in
the reports of Muslims the Hadeeth has been related Mawsool (chain complete all the way
through) and on another occasion it has been related as Mursal (not mentioning the name of the
Sahaabi in the chain). In the Urf (custom) of the people (scholars) of Hadeeth, the Hadeeth
which is Mudtarib (has inconsistencies) is defective and not used as a proof/evidence. AlHaafizh Adh-Dhahabi said: The Mudtarab (inconsistent) and the Muallal (defective) is that
45
which has been related upon different Awjah (faces/ways/realities) (Ref: Al-Mawqizhah of AdhDhahabi p51, Zhufr ul-Amaaniy p240.
Fourthly: The scholars of Hadeeth have discussed the Hadeeth in regards to the Isnaad of AlBukhaari as the Sanad includes Al-Fadl Bin Al-Alaa and Ad-Daaruqutniy said about him:
Katheer Al-Wahm (a lot of delusion) (Ref: Fath ul-Baari 347/13).
Therefore in accordance to the conditionality of Ad-Daaruqutniy the Hadeeth in his view is
Daeef and by greater reason it cannot establish knowledge (Ilm i.e. belief) and Yaqeen
(certainty).
Fifthly: This subject (Aqeedah) is not benefited by the Khabar At-Tawaatur in the case where
the disbeliever is not bound by anything and even if a thousand or more people approach him to
inform him that Muhammad (saw) is the Nabi and Rasool or that the Quraan is the Kalaam of
Allah which was revealed to Muhammad (saw), unless the proof of that is established upon him
in regards to these beliefs.
The issue then relating to proving and affirming the Aqeedah as being an Aqeedah is not
restricted to the mere conveyance or informing of its existence. So it can be seen that the proof
and argument was not established over the disbelievers of Makka due to them merely hearing
about the Prophethood of Muhammad (saw) from the Sahaabah (rah). Rather they brought a
miracle to them that proved his Prophethood (saw) and brought that as a proof and argument
against them and then some of them believed whilst others disbelieved.
Sixthly: Even if we assumed that the narration was free from all weakness, inconsistencies and
interpretations then the Nabis (saw) sending of Muaadh to Al-Yaman only occurred once and
this happened before the farewell pilgrimage as stated by the historians (Ref: Seerah Ibn Katheer
198/4). Muaadh (ra) did not return from there until the Khilafah of Abu Bakr As-Siddeeq (ra)
and this means that Yemen was Daar ul-Islaam. It had been opened by Khalid Bin Waleeed and
Ali Ibn Abi Taalib (rah) with their armies a number of which reached the level of Tawaatur.
Therefore Muaadh was not sent there except as a Qaadi and a teacher at the head of a delegation
that included many Muslims. As such any problems are resolved and the argument based on this
Riwaayah (narration of Muaadh) falls down in respect to this subject. This is because the
number of Muslims who were present in Yemen in addition to the commanders of the conquest,
Muaadh and his delegation reached the level of Tawaatur and their Khabar establishes Al-Qata
(decisiveness). After that there remains to meaning to their statement that Muaadh (ra) invited
them to the Aqeedah by way of the Khabar Waahid and Allah is most knowing.
Another evidence which they believed (Zhann) to be a Daleel but is not in fact an evidence is the
command to change the direction of the Qiblah. Al-Bukhaari and Muslim related from Ibn
Umar (ra) that he said: Whilst the people were praying the morning prayer in Qubaa someone
came to them and said: That the Nabi (saw) had received revelation of the Quraan in the night
and he was commanded to face towards the Kabah. And so they faced it, they had been facing
towards Ash-Shaam (i.e. Masjid Al-Aqsaa) and then they turned towards the Kabah (Ref: Nail
Al-Awtaar Ash-Shawkaani 176/2).
46
This usage of evidence and deduction is also rejected for a number of reasons:
Firstly: It assumes that the issue is one related to certainty in Aqeedah whilst it is not. Yaqeen
(certainty) and Aqeedah are not established by the Khabar Al-Waahid and the evidence for that
as we have mentioned is that the Sahaabah (rah) held a consensus in regards to not accepting the
Khabar Al-Waahid to affirm the Quraan which is a fundamental basis of the Aqeedah and I am
not aware of any difference in this regard amongst the Fuqahaa and scholars of Hadeeth and
Usool.
Secondly: The issue of the changing direction of the Qiblah is not an issue related to Imaan or
the Aqeedah but rather it is a practical issue related to implementation. For this reason the Qatiy
(definite/decisive) Daleel is not required and it is sufficient for the Daleel to be Zhanniy like the
Khabar Al-Waahid. The greatest evidence to support the fact that it is not an issue related to
Tasdeeq (belief) of the Aqeedah is that the changing of the Qiblah is considered to be an
abrogation and abrogation does not occur in respect to belief but only occurs in respect to the
Ahkaam related to actions (Al-Ahkaam Al-Amaliyah).
Thirdly: Using a Khabar Waahid as an evidence for deduction to establish that the Khabar
Waahid establishes (definite) Ilm (knowledge) and Yaqeen is a circular argument and it is not
valid to depend on it. This is in the case that it s essential for there to be a Daleel Qatiy like the
Quraan or the Mutawaatir to establish and ascertain that the Khabar Al-Waahid establishes Ilm
and Yaqeen.
Fourthly: The changing of the direction of the Qiblah and its abrogation came from the Quraan
and not the Sunnah as some have imagined. The conveyance of this ruling to the people praying
in Qubaa falls within this consideration. In the narration it was related: That the Nabi (saw) had
received revelation of the Quraan in the night and he was commanded to face towards the
Kabah. In another narration recorded by Ahmad and Abu Daawood from Anas he said: That
the Messenger of Allah (saw) used to pray towards Bait ul-Maqdis and then the following was
revealed:

Verily! we have seen the turning of your face towards the sky. Surely, we shall turn you to a Qiblah (prayer
direction) that shall please you, so turn your face in the direction of Al-Masjid- al-Haraam (Al-Baqarah 144).
A man from Bani Salamah then passed through whilst they were in the Rukoo of the Fajr prayer
after having already completed one Rakah, and he called out Verily the Qiblah has changed
direction and so they all turned as they were (i.e. in Rukoo) towards the Kabah (Ref: Nail AlAwtaar 176-177/2).
Fifthly: That the Nabi (saw) did not command that man to convey but rather what happened
was that he volunteered to do that and we was not reproached. In regards to the people of
Qubaa were fully aware that what they did was related to a practical Shariy ruling and was not a
47
matter of Aqeedah, and that it did not rest upon decisive evidence (Daleel Qatiy) and found the
transmission of one of them in this matter sufficient despite not him not having been ordered to
convey it. This is because they outweighed his truthfulness over his potential to be untruthful.
Therefore for these reasons their usage of the changing of the direction of the Qiblah in this
subject is a deduction that is not based on evidence. This is because our subject area revolves
around the Khabar Al-Waahid establishing decisive knowledge (Aqeedah) whilst the Khabar of a
man does not establish other than an action and Aqeedah is not established by it. If any of the
people of Qubaa had not obeyed him then he would not have disbelieved based on the evidence
that the Nabi (saw) did not command anyone from them (the Muslims) to repeat what they had
already performed from that Salaah before having been informed and he did not command them
to seek repentance and forgiveness. And Allah is most high and aware, and to Him is our final
destination.
Also what they have thought to be a Daleel whilst it is not a Daleel is the Hadeeth: 'Indeed
actions are by the intentions'. They said that this Hadeeth which is Khabar Aahaad was used by
the 'Ulamaa as a proof in relation to beliefs considering that the place of the Niyah is the heart
and that the place of the Aqeedah is the heart. As such the Niyah is the same as Aqeedah and
takes its ruling (Hukm).
This however is rejected and invalid from a number of angles:
Firstly: None from amongst the scholars of Arabic have stated that the Niyah (intention) is the
Aqeedah or that it is Imaan whether in its wording (Lafzh) or meaning (Ma'naa). Rather they said
that it means: Al-Qasd (that which is intended) and its place is the heart.
Secondly: In respect to the Aqeedah, when the heart is tied to it, it becomes Imaan and it is not
valid to make a reversal in regards to it; indeed any reversal from it would be considered Kufr
(disbelief). However reversing or going back on the Niyah (intention) is not considered Kufr or
even a Ma'siyah (act of disobedience) and it can even possible be Mubaah to reverse the Niyah
on some occasions even if it was within the 'Ibaadaat like the Salaah and the Naafilah Sawm
(fast). Similarly an action undertaken without the Niyah is not considered Kufr but rather it is
invalid if the validity of that action rests upon the Niyah whilst it would be considered Saheeh
(valid) if the Niyah is not stipulated as a condition, for example: returning the usurped property,
Amaanaat (trusts), divorce, freeing slaves and marriage.
Thirdly: It is necessary in regards to the Hadeeth to omit the Mudaaf (grammatical term: added
word) and the Fuqahaa have differed in regards to its evaluation. Those who have stipulated the
Niyah in the actions have evaluated it in the following way: 'Indeed the Sihhah (validity) of the
actions are by the intentions' and the actions just as they include the actions of the heart they also
include the actions of the limbs and the Hadeeth covers them. As such there is no room to
restrict them to the actions of the Qalb (heart) (Ref: Sharh 'Umdat ul-Ahkaam of Ibn Daqeeq Al'Abd 9/1). Indeed Ash-Shaafi'iy (rh) said that this Hadeeth includes within it seventy chapters of
Fiqh (Ref: At-Toofiy in his book At-Ta'yeen Fee Sharh Al-Arba'een p34).
48
Based upon this evaluation the Niyah (intention) is related to the validity of the actions and not
to their Kamaal (completion/perfection). This would not be valid in respect to the Aqaa'id
(beliefs) because a lack of perfection in them would mean a deficiency and this is Kufr may
refuge be sought in Allah from that. Therefore nothing remains except for us to say that this
Hadeeth is not (representative of) Aqeedah and that the Aqeedah is not established by it from
this angle as well.
Fourthly: The Ikhlaas (sincerity) in the action is not from the Imaan but rather it is from the
Ihsaan as has been mentioned in the Saheeh Hadeeth when he (saw) was asked about Ihsaan and
then said: 'To worship Allah as if you see Him and if you cannot see Him then that He sees you'.
This then represents illustrations of Ikhlaas (sincerity).
Ibn Taymiyyah said: 'Whoever says that the apparent (Zhaahir) actions which have been
commanded are not from Islaam, then his statement is Baatil (invalid), which is different to the
case of the Tasdeeq (belief) which is in the heart. There is nothing in the Nusoos that indicates
that it is from Islaam, rather it is from the Imaan. Islaam is only: The Deen as the Nabi (saw)
explained it in that one's face and heart submit to Allah. So have the Ikhlaas An-Niyaah (sincerity
of intention) to Allah is Islaam and this is not Tasdeeq (belief), that is from the type that is an
action of the heart whilst this is of the type that is knowledge of the heart (Ref: In his book of
Imaan p284).
Fifthly: How can this Hadeeth be Aqeedah or establish certainty whilst it is Khabar Aahaad and
the one who denies it is not a disbeliever which is different to the case of the Qur'aan and the
Mutawaatir of the Sunnah because the one who denies the Qur'aan or the Sunnah Mutawaatir is
classified with disbelief. That is because they have been established by Qat' (decisiveness) and
Yaqeen (certainty) and is Aqeedah whilst the former is not established by Qat' but rather by
Zhann (indeciciveness) and as such they are regarded differently.
Also from what they thought to be Daleel but is not a Daleel is: The speech of Allah (swt):

For there should separate from every division of them a group [remaining] so that they obtain understanding in the
religion and so that they warn [i.e., advise] their people when they return to them that they might be cautious. (AtTaubah 122).
They considered the least number for a Taa'ifah (group) to be one and the warning (to be
cautious) is related to the mention of Al-Jannah and An-Naar (the fire) which are both Aqeedah.
As such they argue that the Khabar Al-Waahid has been used in relation to the Aqaa'id (beliefs)
however this view is rejected from two angles:
Firstly: It is not agreed upon that the smallest number for the Taa'ifah (group) is one but rather
they have said that its lowest number is two and what is more than two and as such the use of
this Aayah as an evidence in this subject area is problematic.
49
Secondly: The use of Taa'ifah (group) in this Aayah is a number that it establishes the plural and
not a single person and the evidence for this is the use of the plural pronoun in the statement
yatafaqqahoo (they obtain understanding) and in His statement (swt): Liyundhiroo (so that they
warn).
Another Daleel that they thought to be a Daleel but is not one is the statement of Allah (swt):

And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight and the heart; each of them
will be questioned (Al-Israa 36).
They considered from this that everything that was brought to us by the Nabi (saw) is 'Ilm and
Qat' (decisive) in respect to us and that there is no Zhann (indecisiveness) in it.
This deduction is also rejected for a number of reasons:
Firstly: This Aayah is Zhanniy (indecisive/speculative) in its Dalaalah (import/meaning). From
its meanings is what At-Tabari related from Ibn 'Abbaas (rah): 'No one should present that
which he does not have knowledge of' and he also related from Ibn ul-Hanafiyah that is means:
'The fabricated/false witness/testimony'.
At-Tabari said: 'These two interpretations are close in meaning because the statement that the
speaker does not have knowledge of' includes the false testimony and the presenting of
falsehood and claims of hearing a matter that nobody has heard or seeing a matter that nobody
has seen to the people fall'. (Tafseer At-Tabari 110/9).
Therefore it is possible that the Aayah is not related to the conveyance of the Wahi (divine
revelation/inspiration) but rather it relates to testimonies and what is related to them.
Secondly: If we were to assume that the Aayah relates to the conveyance (Tableegh) or
legislation (Tashree') then it relates to that which leads to 'Ilm (knowledge) and Qat'
(decisiveness) like the Usool (foundations) of the Deen and it does not reale to all of the Ahkaam
Ash-Sharee'ah. The evidence for this is that Zhann is sufficient in respect to many of the
branches of the Sharee'ah like the Ahkaam which are built upon Ijtihaad and many of the
Ahkaam which are built upon Qiyaas. In respect to all of these Zhann is sufficient or that which
is most preponderant/likely (Ghalabat Azh-Zhann).
Thirdly: If we were to assume again that the Aayah relates to the Tashree' (legislation) then it is
Muhtamil (probable) to be specific to the Nabi (saw) i.e. 'do not say something in accordance to
your opinion and your Ijtihaad' which is in harmony with the fact that he does not speak from
his own desire. This is not the case with anyone else from the Ummah because it is possible for
him to give his view about the Shar'a (legislation) based on his Ijtihaad and if he makes an error
there is no fault or sin upon him and indeed he would be rewarded. This is in accordance to the
50
Saheeh Hadeeth: 'If the Haakim (judge) undertakes Ijtihaad and gets it right then he will gain two
rewards and if he undertakes Ijtihaad and gets it wrong then he will have one reward' (AlBukhaari in the Book Al-I'tisaam chapter 21). All of this relates to Zhann and there is no Qat' of
Yaqeen within it.
Another evidence which they believed to be an evidence to establish there argument but is not
an evidence is: They claimed that the Sunnah in its entirety is Akhbaar Aahaad in order tfor them
to affirm that the Aqaa'id are established by the Aahaad and not by the Tawaatur. This deduction
is also rejected for a number of reasons:
Firstly: The Aahaad are what have been related one person from another one whilst the
Tawaatur is what one after another have reported (Ref: As mentioned at the beginning of the
book).
By examining the Sunnah closely we find that two types or categories are included within it.
There are Ahaadeeth that have not been related except by one from (another) one like the
Hadeeth: 'Indeed actions are only bey the intentions' and there are Ahaadeeth that have been
related one after another one like the Hadeeth: 'Whosoever lies about me intentionally then let
him prepare his seat of the fire' which was related by more than sixty Sahaabah abd all of them
related it from the Nabi (saw) and they did not relate it one from another one from amongst
them.
Secondly: The vast majority of the Mujtahideen, scholars of Usool and Hadeeth have
established the existence of the Tawaatur within the Sunnah and it is hard to find a single work
of theirs that does not contain some mention or indication of this. More than one of them
pursued them (the Tawaatur Ahaadeeth) and collected them like As-Suyootiy in his book 'AlAzhaar Al-Mutanaathirah Fil Ahaadeeth Al-Mutawaatirah', Al-Kataaniy in his book 'Nuzhum AlMutanaathir Fil Hadeeth Al-Mutawaatir' and Az-Zubaidi in his book 'Al-Laali'u AlMutanaatharah Fil Ahaadeeth Al-Mutawaatirah'. As for what Ibn Hibbaan said in respect to the
Sunnah as a whole being Akhbaar Al-Aahaad then this is an opinion which does not have a
Daleel (to support it) and it is in opposition to the reality of the Sunnah and the vast majority of
the 'Ulamaa.
Thirdly: More than one of the 'Ulamaa affirmed the existence of the Mutawaatir Hadeeth
related to the Aqeedah like the Hadeeth: 'Whoever bears witness to Laa Ilaaha Illallah Jannah is
obligatory for him'. As-Suyootiy said that it is Tawaatur in his Al-Azhaar Al-Mutanaathirah and
Al-Kataaniy in his Nuzhum Al-Mutanaathir. This also includes the Hadeeth of the 'Hawd'
(basin), intercession and the sight of Allah Ta'Aalaa in the hereafter which Ibn Hajar and Ibn ulJawziy stated to be Mutawaatir.
This is in addition to the Hadeeth of Al-Israa and that Idrees is in the fourth heaven and the
Hadeeth of the splitting of the moon and its descent (setting) which Al-Haakim stated to be
Mutawaatir.
51
Similarly the Hadeeth of the shaking of the 'Arsh (throne) upon the death of Sa'd Ibn Mu'aadh
(ra) which was classified as being Mutawaatir by Ibn Abdul-Barr , the Hadeeth of the Haneen AlJidh'i (the yearning tree trunk) classified as Mutawaatir by 'Iyaad, the Hadeeth of the camel that
complained to the Nabi (saw) which Al-Kataaniy viewed as Mutawaatir. (Ref: All of these can be
found in Nuzhum Al-Mutanaathir in the Hadeeth Al-Mutawaatir of Al-Kataaniy). There is also
the Hadeeth related to Allah Subhaanahu being above His heavens and upon his 'Arsh, the
Hadeeth affirming the 'Arsh and the Hadeeth affirming the Siffaat of the Rabb Ta'Aalaa which
Ibn ul-Qayyim declared to be Mutawaatir (Ref: Mukhtasar As-Sawaa'iq Al-Mursalah p517).
Another of what they believed to be an evidence to support their opinion but is not evidence is
that they made a comparison between the transmitters and the Sahaabah (rah) which is a
deduction that is also rejected. This is because the Sahaabah (rah) are the first who heard the
statements of the Nabi (saw) and it was Qat'iy for each of them and there was no room for
Zhann as long as they had heard it directly from him (saw).
As for those who came after them then the statement (Qawl) of the Sahaabah is not Qat'iy
(definite/decisive) because they are not Ma'soom (infallible) from the mistake unless they are all
in agreement by Ijmaa'. The same applies to those who followed them until the era that the
Hadeeth was recorded. For this reason the science of Jarh and Ta'deel (critiquing of Hadeeth)
arose and in light of the the Ahaadeeth were classified as Saheeh and Da'eef.
Also what they thought to be an evidence but is not in fact evidence is their claim that an Ijmaa'
exists upon the Khabar Al-Aahaad establishing decisive 'Ilm (knowledge) and that an Ijmaa'
exists upon the Aahaad being taken into the 'Aqeedah. However this claim is false as it has been
confiormed since the time of recording and since the time of the four A'immah (Imaams) that
the Khabar Al-Aahaad does not establish other than Zhann (indecisiveness) and that it is not
taken into the Aqaa'id (beliefs).
In the following chapter of this brief book I have presented that which proves this point.
52
The Sixth Angle:

The statements of the 'Ulamaa stating that the Khabar Al-Waahid does not ascertain and
establish 'Ilm (certain knowledge):
The following are statements according to the well-known Madhaahib of the Ahlu-s-Sunnah:
The Maalikiy Madh'hab:

We will begin with that which has been attributed to Al-Imaam Maalik (rh) in relation to this
subject: Abu-l-Waleed Al-Baajiy said: 'The Madh'hab of Maalik (rh) is the acceptance of the
Khabar Al-Waahid Al-'Adl (from the just and trustworthy) and that iis obligatory to act without
their being decisiveness in it and this is what all of the Fuqahaa hold as their opinion' (Ref: AlIshaarah Fee Usool-ul-Fiqh p203).
It was stated in 'Iesaal As-Saalik fee Usool Al-Imaam Maalik: 'My pronouncement is upon two
categories: Qat'iy and Zhanny. The Qat'iy includes the Mushaahad (witnessed) and what has
been transmitted by way of Tawaatur whilst the Zhanny is what is transmitted by the Saheeh
Khabar Al-Aahaad and it represents a Zhanny proof whilst the Qat'iy represents a Qat'iy Hujjah
(proof/evidence)' (Ref: Muhammad Bin Yahyaa Bin 'Umar Al-Mukhtaar Bin At-Taalib p17).
Additional beneficial point:
From that which indicates that the Khabar Al-Aahaad does not establish decisive 'Ilm
(knowledge) in the view of Al-Imaaam Maalik (rh) is that he would reject it if it was in
opposition to the actions of the people of Al-Madinah as has been mentioned by Al-Qaadiy
'Iyaad and Sahnoon and they presented as an example for this the Hadeeth: 'The two traders
have a choice (to complete the trade or end it) as long as they have nor departed from one
another'. He rejected this because it was in contradiction to the actions of the people of AlMadinah (Ref: Tarteeb Al-Madaarik Wa Taqreeb Al-Masaalik of Al-Qaadit 'Iyaad 70/2).
Abu Ishaq Al-Asfraa'eeniy stated from Ibn Khuwaiz Mindaad that he had oddities attributed to
be from Maalik that did not fit with the high level of the Madh'hab and he mentioned from
amongst them the statement: 'That the Khabar Al-Waahid establishes (definite) 'Ilm (knowledge)'
(Ref: As mentioned by Ibn Hajr in 'Lisaan Al-Meezaan' 291/5).
Abu Abdullah Ash-Shaatibiy said: 'As for the second, the Zhanny which returns to a Qat'iy
origin then working with it is evident and the Akhbaar Al-Aahaad in the generality fall into this
category'.
And he also said: 'The ranking of the Sunnah comes after that of the Kitaab (Al-Qur'aan) in
consideration and the evidence for that is a number of matters:
53
Firstly: That the Kitaab is Maqtoo' Bihi (decisive/definite) whilst the Sunnah is Mazhnoonah
(Zhanny) and the Qat'i (decisiveness) in it refers to it as a whole and not in its details. This is in
contrast to the Kitaab which is Qat'iy as a whole and in its details, and that which is decisive
comes ahead of that which is Zhanniy' (Ref: Al-Muwaafaqaat 16/3 and 7/4).
Abu l-'Abbaas Al-Quraafi said: 'The chapter about Khabar Al-Waahid: It is the Khabar of a
single just person ('Adl) or just people ('Udool) which establish Zhann'.
And he said: 'And Khabar Al-Waahid does not establish other than Zhann'.
And he also said: 'And Khabar Al-Waahid is Mazhnoon (indecisive)' (Ref: Sharh Tanqeeh Al
Fusool p356).
Abu Bakr Bin Al-'Arabiy said: 'As for the second (type): That which obliges action but not
knowledge then it is the Khabar Al-Waahid which is Mutlaq (unrestricted) in regards to that
which is unique by its 'Ilm (knowledge). And some people said: 'That it obliges 'Ilm (knowledge)
just a it obliges the action like the Khabar al-Mutawaatir. They could only have arrived at this due
to two reasons: Either their ignorance of what 'Ilm is or due to their ignorance of what the
Khabar Al-Waahid is. We know by way of Daroorah (necessity) the abstention of attining 'Ilm by
way of the Khabar Al-Waahid and the possibibility of their exposure to lies and foregetfulness'.
(Ref: Al-Mahsool p115).
The Mufassir Abu Abdullah Al-Qurtubi said: 'And most of the Ahkaam Ash-Sharee'ah are based
upon Ghalabat Azh-Zhann (the most probable/preponderant) like Qiyaas, Khabar Al-Waahid
and other than them (Ref: Al-Jaami' Li Ahkaam Al-Qur'aan in the Tafseer of the Aayaah: Verily
some Zhann (speculation) is Ithm (a sin)'.
Abu l-'Abbaas Al-Qutubi in his 'Al-Mufham' in relation to the changing of the direction of the
Qiblah: 'So they left the Tawaatur for the Khabar Al-Waahid which is Mazhnoon (speculative)'
(Ref: Mufham Sharh Saheeh Muslim 125/2).
Al-Qaadi Ibn Al-Baaqalaaniy said: 'And the Aahaad to not lead to the 'Ilm (knowledge i.e. belief)'
and he also said: 'Know and may Allah give you Tawfeeq that all that knowledge has ben
demanded in does not accept within that Akhbaar Al-Aahaad' (Ref:At-Talkhees 430-434/2 and
similar to that in At-Tamheed p164).
Ibn Abdul-Barr said: 'Our people (of our Madh'hab) and others have differed in respect to the
just Khabar Al-Waahid: Does it oblige both 'Ilm and 'Amal (action)? Or does oit oblige the
action and not the knowledge?'
He said: 'The opinion of the majority of the people of proficiency is that it oblges action but not
'Ilm and this is the opinion of Ash-Shaafi'iy and the Majority of the Scholars of Fiqh and Nazhar
(examination)' (Ref: Al-Musawwadah li Aali Taymiyyah p220).
Al-Hujuwiy said: 'And the correct view is that the Khabar Al-Waahid if it is free of Qaraa'in
(other external indications) establishes Zhann which is different to the view of the Zhaahiriyah
(Madh'hab) who claimed that it establishes 'Ilm Al-Yaqeeniy (certain knowledge)' (Ref: Al-Fikr
As-Saamiy 111/1).
54
Az-Zarqaaniy said: 'So attach the impermissibility of abrogating the Qur'aan by it (i.e. the Khabar
Al-Aahaad) due to the meaning that has been mentioned which is that it it is Zhanny whilst the
Qur'aan is Qat'iy. And the Zhanny is weaker that the Qat'iy and it is not strong enough to
remove it. Those who say that it is permissible to abrogate the Qur'aan by the Sunnah AlAahaadiyah have relied upon the Qur'aan being Zhanniy in its Dalaalah (meaning/import). Their
proof (argument) is invalid because even if the Qur'aan contains that which is not Qat'iy AdDalaalah (definite in meaning/import) it is nevertheless Qat'iy Ath-Thuboot (definite in its
transmission). This is whilst the Sunnah Al-Aahaadiyah is Zhanny in Dalaalah and Thuboot
together. It is therefore weaker and so how can it replace it (the Qur'aan)?' (Ref: Manaahil Al'Urfaan 173/2).
The Hanafi Madh'hab:

We will begin with what has been attributed to Al-Imaam Abu Haneefah (rh):
Al-Hasan related from Abu Haneefah (rh) that their is no Kaffaarah upon him and if news
reached him because the Khabar Al-Waahid does not oblige certain knowledge ('Ilm Yaqeen) but
rather only obliges action because of thinking well (husn Azh-Zhann) of the one relating but not
all doubt is negated from it' (Ref: As-Sarkhasiy in his Mabsoot 80/3).
What has become well-known in respect to Abu Haneefah rejecting the Khabar Al-Waahid if it
was in opposition to the Qiyaas or if was from that which had become a general necessity.
Abu-l-Barakaat An-Nasafi in 'Kashf ul-Asraar 'Alaa-l-Manaar' said: 'As for the claim of certain
knowledge by it then this is false because we have made clear that the Mash'hoor does not
establish certainty and the Khabar Al-Waahid by greater reason. And this is because the Khabar
Al-Waahid is Muhtamal (open to question) in itself and how can certainty be established with the
existsence of this Ihtimaal (openness to being questioned)' (Ref: Kshf ul-Asraar Alaa-l-Manaar
19/2).
Al-Kamaal Bin Al-Himaam in At'Tahreer the author of Tayseer At-Tahreer: 'The view of the
majority of the Fuqahaa and the Muhadditheen is that the Khabar Al-Waahid does not establish
(definite) knowledge at all i.e. whether or not there are (supporting) Qaraa'in (indications). He
then said that the Khabar Al-Waahid could establish 'Ilm with Qaraa'in' (Ref: Tayseer At-Tahreer
76/3).
He then affirmed in Fat'hul Qadeer saying: 'The Khabar Al-Waahid does not oblige Yaqeen
(certainty) but rather it only obliges Zhann' (Ref: Fat'h-ul-Qadeer 159/3).
Abdul Hameed Al-Asmandiy stated: 'The majority held the view that it does not oblige 'Ilm in
origin and the Zhaahiris viewed that it does entail decisive Knowledge'.
Al-Asmandiy had studied the positions of all of the Madhaahib (different schools) and adopted
the opinion of the majority just as he forbade the acceptance of the Aahaad in the 'Aqeedah as
55
will be mentioned in its chapter inshaa Allah (Ref: Al-Mawsoom Badhl An-Nazhr Fil Usool
p393).
As-Sarkhasiy said: 'The Fuqahaa of the regions (rh) have said: 'The Khabar Al-Waahid Al-'Adl is
a Hujjah (proof/evidence) to be acted upon in a matter of the Deen but the 'Ilm Yaqeen (certain
knowledge) is not established by it'.
He then said: 'And we have explained previously that the certain knowledge ('Ilm Yaqeen) is not
established by the Mash'hoor reports with this meaning so how can it be established by the
Khabar Al-Waahid' his 'Usool' 329/1, 112/1 and 321/1).
Al-Khabaazi said: 'And because the Khabar Al-Aahaad entails Ghalabat Azh-Zhann
(preponderant) and obliges action due to it not fulfilling the requirements of Yaqeen in a certain
manner'(Ref: Al-Mughni Fee Usool-ul-Fiqh p195).
'Alaa Ad-Deen As-Samarqandiy said: 'And from it (i.e. the categories and types of Aahaad) are
those which are found in the subject of the action. As for when they are found in the subject
area of the beliefs and they are from the issues of Al-Kalaam then they are not a Hujjah because
they oblige Zhann and the 'Ilm (knowledge) which is most probable (to be correct) is not 'Ilm
Qat'iy (definite)' (Ref: Meezaan Al-Usool p430).
Abu Ja'far As-Sajastaaniy said: 'And the Khabar Al-Waahid: It does not oblige 'Ilm and it must
be acted upon as a blessing dues to it being attributed to the Nabi (saw)' (Ref: Al-Ghinyah Fil
Usool p38).
Fakhr ul-Islaam Al-Bazdawiy said: 'And this, meaning the Khabar Al-Waahid, obliges action and
it does not oblige certain knowledge 'Ilm Yaqeen'.
He then said: 'We have explained that the Mash'hoor does not establish certain knowledge then
this (Khabar Al-Waahid) is Awlaa (more correct to be applied to). And this is because the
Khabar Al-Waahid is Muhtamal (open to question) and their is no certainty in that which has
Ihtimaal (this openness or possibility) and whoever denies this has made himself foolish and his
intellect has strayed' (Ref: Kashf ul-Asraar 'Alaa Usool Al-Bazdawiy 370/2).
'Abdul 'Azeez Al-Bukhaari in his Sharh (explanation) of the Kalaam (speech) of Al-Bazdawiy
said: 'Meaning, it does not establish 'Ilm Yaqeen (certain knowledge) and it does not establish
'Ilm Tuma'neenah (knowedge that provides tranquillity/peace of mind). This is thye Madh'hab
of the majority of the people of knowledge and the sum of the Fuqahaa (Ref: Kashf ul-Asraar
'Alaa Usool Al-Bazdawiy 376/2).
He also said: 'The divine evidences (Adillah) are of four types: Qat'iy Ath-Thuboot and AdDalaalah (definite in transmission and meaning), Zhanny Ath-Thuboot and Qat'iy Ad-Dalaalah
(indecisiove in transmission and definite in meaning) like the Akhbaar Al-Aahaad which carry a
Qat'iy (definite) understood meaning, Zhanny Ath-Thuboot and Ad-Dalaalah (speculative
transmission and meaning) like the Akhbaar Al-Aahaad which carry a Zhanny meaning' (Ref:
Kashf ul-Asraar Alaa Usool Al-Bazdawiy 28/1).
Ibn 'Aabideen said similar to this in his Haashiyah (Ref: Haashiyah 'Alaa Radd ul-Mukhtaar
95/1).
56
Abu Ath-Thanaa Al-Maatureediy said: 'And its Hukm (the Khabar Al-Aahaad) is that is obliges
action but not 'Ilm' (Ref: His book Usool ul-Fiqh p148).
Nizhaam Ad-Deen Al-Ansaariy said: 'The majoiryt of the pople (Scholars) of Usool and from
them the three A'immah viewed that the Khabar Al-Waahid absolutely does not establish 'Ilm if
the one who did not provide the Khabar is not an infallible Prophet, and whether it was attached
to Qaraa'in (external indications) or not' (Ref: Sharh Muslim Ath-Thuboot and Haashiyah AlMustasfaa 121/2).
Abu Bakr Al-Jassaas in his statement in respect to the speech of Allah Ta'Aalaa:

If a Faasiq comes to you with news then verify it (Al-Hujuraat 6).
He said: 'And this Aayah there is an indication that the Khabar Al-Aahaad does not oblige 'Ilm
and if it obliged 'Ilm at all then why would it be in need of verification' (Ref: Ahkaam Al-Qur'aan
279/5).
Al-Kaasaaniy said: 'We have named this type Waajib and not Fard because the Fard is a name for
what its obligations has been ascertained by the Qat'iy Daleel and this type of Zakaah has not
been affirmed by a Qat'iy Daleel. Rather the Daleel for it is Shubhat ul-'Adam and it is Khabar
Al-Waahis' (Ref: Badaa'i' As-Sanaa'i' 69/2).
In another place in the same book he said: 'The Wujoob (obligation) of the Mas'h (wiping) upon
the splint/plaster is established by the Hadeeth of 'Ali (ra) and it is from the Aahaad and so
acting upon it is obliged and not 'Ilm (knowledge)' (Ref: 14/1).
Abu Zaid Ad-Daboosiy said: 'So much of desires and Bid'a occurred in respect to the Khabar AlWaahid was in regards to it being accepted in belief (I'tiqaad) or in action without placing it
before the Kitaab and the established Sunnah which was followed by then interpreting the
Kitaab to be in agreement with the Khabar Al-Waahid which made the following and building of
the Deen based upon that which certain knowledge is not obliged in. The foundation then
became 'Ilm established upon Shubhah (doubt) and so there was no increase except in Bid'ah.
The harm of this to the Deen was then greater than the harm of those who did not accept the
Khabar Al-Waahid...' (Ref: As-Sam'aaniy mentioned this from him in 'Qawaat'i Al-Adillah'
366/1).
The Shaafi'iy Madh'hab:

We will begin with that which has been attributed to l-Imaam Ash-Shaafi'iy (rh):
57
Abu Bakr As-Sairufiy said: The Khabar Al-Waahid obliges action ('Amal) and not 'Ilm
(knowledge) and this has been transmitted from the majority of the 'Ulamaa including AshShaafi'iy (Ref: Az-Zarkashiy in 'Al-Bahr ul-Muheet' 262/4).
Ibn Abdul Barr Al-Maalikiy as mentioned earlier when he attributed this to the majority of the
'Ulamaa and he said: And it is the view of Ash-Shaafi'iy.
This is in addition to what Al-Ansaariy from the Ahnaaf who we also mentioned earlier
mentioned when he stated that this is the view of three A'immah (Imaams) whilst intending: Abu
Haneefah, Maalik and Ash-Shaafi'iy.
Al-Haafizh Abu Bakr Bin Thaabit who is well-known as Al-Khateeb Al-Baghdaadiy in his book:
'A mention of the doubt of those who claim that the Khabar Al-Waahid establishes 'Ilm and
presenting its falsehood/invalidity'.
He says: 'And as for Khabar Al-Aahaad then it is what falls short of the description of the
Mutawaatir and knowledge is not Qat'iy (definite) by it and even if it was related by a group'.
And he said: 'As for the other type of collections like the Akhbaar (reports) related in the Saheeh
Books of Sunnah then these oblige action whilst they do not oblige knowledge (Ref: Al-Kifaayah
Fee 'Ilm Ar-Riwaayah p16,18 and 25 and in 'Al-Faqeeh Wa-l-Mutafaqqah' 1/96).
Abu-l-Mu'aaliy Al-Juwaini well-known as the Imaam Al-Haramaini said: 'A group from amongst
the Hanaabalah (Hanbali Madh'hab) and the Hadeeth writers viewed that the Khabar Al-Waahid
Al-Adl obliges 'Ilm and this represents a disgrace which is not hidden from any aware person'.
And he said: 'Do you permit for the 'Adl (just person) who you have characterised as such to be
mistaken and for him to make an error? They then say: No, that would be a false accusation,
dishonourable and a violation to the veil of esteem and standing and there is no need to add any
explanation beyond that. And it would be closer to say the narrators have erred and the
establishing by way of a collective/plural are not many. If the error was not conceivable then a
narrator would not recind his narration and the issue is the opposite to what they imagine it to
be'.
And he said in 'Al-Waraqaat': 'Al-Aahaad is that which obliges action ('Amal) but does not affirm
'Ilm (knowledge) due to the possibility of error within it (Ref: Al-Burhaan 606/1 and AlWaraqaat p12).
An-Nawawi in Sharh Muslim said: 'And what Ibn As-Salaah said in regards to Saheeh AlBukhaari and Muslim in this subject is in opposition to what the Muhaqqiqeen (those who
undertook critical studies) and the majority have said. They say: The Ahaadeeth of the Saheehaini
(Two books of Saheeh: Al-Bukhaari and Muslim) are not Mutawaatirah. They only establish
Zhann because they are Aahaad and the Aahaad only ascertain Zhann in accordance to what
they have decided, and there is no difference in this regard between Al-Bukhaari, Muslim and
others. The fact that the Ummah has accepted them only means that the obligation of acting in
accordance to what they contain is strengthened and this is agreed upon. Indeed the Akhbaar AlAahaad in other than these two (collections) must (also) be acted upon if the chains are Saheeh
58
(sound) and they do not establish anything other than Zhann just like the Saheehain (Two books
of Al-Bukhaari and Muslim)'.
And he also said: 'As for the Khabar Al-Waahid then it is that which does not fulfil the
conditions of the Mutawaatir whether their was one single narrator or more than one, and they
(scholars) have disagreed in regards to its Hukm (ruling). That which the majority of the Muslims
from amongst the Sahaabah, the Taabi'een and those who came after from the Muhadditheen,
Fuqahaa and scholars of Usool viewed is that the Khabar Al-Waahid Ath-Thiqqah (trustworthy)
is a Hujjah (proof/evidence) from amongst the Hujjaj (evidences) of the Shar'a (Islamic
legislation) which must be acted by and that they establish Zhann (indefiniteness) and do not
establish 'Ilm' (Sharh Saheeh Muslim An-Nawawi 20/1, 131/1).
Al-Haafizh Ibn Hajr Al-Asqalaaniy in 'Nukhbat ul-Fikr' when speaking about the Mutawaatir
said: 'All of it is acceptable to establish Al-Qat'u (Definiteness/decisiveness) in terms of the
truthfulness of the one who is informing which is not the case with other than it from the
Akhbaar Al-Aahaad' (Ref: Nukhbat ul-Fikr p38).
Ar-Raaziy said when discussing the Statemnet of Allah (swt):

For there should separate from every division of them a group (At-Taubah 122).
'We only say here that the Taa'ifah (group) mentioned here is a number whose speech does not
establish 'Ilm (knowledge) because every three is a Firqah (division) and Allah Ta'Aalaa has made
obligatory for every division a group should be taken out from them and a Taa'ifah (group) from
three means one or two whilst the statement of one or two does not establish 'Ilm'.
And he also said: 'And because we know out of necessity that the statement of one does not
establish 'Ilm'.
And he said: 'As for the Naql (transmission): Then it is either Tawaatur or Aahaad and the first
establishes 'Ilm and the second establishes Zhann' (Ref: Al-Mahsool 123-172/2 and Nafaa'is AlUsool Sharh Al-Mahsool by Al0Quraafiy 531/2).
Al-Asnawiy said: 'As for the Sunnah then the Aahaad from it does not establish (or affirm) other
than Zhann' (Ref: Nihaayat As-Su'aal 41/1 and 270/2).
Az-Zarkashi said in 'Al-Bahr': 'Indeed the Khabar Al-Waahid does not affirm 'Ilm and this is the
opinion of the majoioryt of the people of Hadeeth, opinion and Fiqh' (Ref: Al-Bahr ul-Muheet
Fee Usool ul Fiqh 262/4).
Ibn ul-Atheer said: 'And the Khabar Al-Aahaad does not affirm 'Ilm (knowledge) but we
worship in accordance to it'.
59
And he said: 'What has been said by the Muhadditheen that it inherits 'Ilm then it may be that
they intended that it establishes and affirms the 'Ilm (knowledge) that obligates action or that
they named the Zhann as 'Ilm. For this reason some of them inherit 'Ilm Azh-Zhaahir (evident)
whilst 'Ilm does not have Zhaahir and Baatin (what is evident and what is hidden), but rather it is
only Zhann (speculative)' (Ref: Jaami' Al-Usool min Ahaadeeth Ar-Rasool 69/1).
Abu Ishaq Ash-Sheeraaziy said: 'in our view: If the Khabar Al-Waahid established 'Ilm then the
Khabar of every person would be obliged and if that was also the case then it would be
obligatory for 'Ilm (knowledge) to be established by the Khabr of the one who claims
Prophethood or the one who claims that he is owed money by someone else. And as nobody has
said that then this guides to there being nothing in it that obligates knowledge ('Ilm)'.
He then said: 'And because if it was to obligate knowledge then it would be necessary for their to
be a clash if it was opposed by a Khabar Mutawaatir, and in the case where it is established and
affirmed that the Mutawaatir comes before it, then this indicates that it does not obligate 'Ilm
(knowledge)' (Ref: At-Tabsirah p299).
Abu Haamid Al-Ghazaaliy said in Al-Mustasfaa: 'So if this was defined we would say: The
Khabar Al-Waahid does not ascertain knowledge and this is known by necessity (Ma'loom Bid
Daroorah). And we do not believe everything that we hear. If we were to believe and we had two
contradictory reports then how can we believe in two opposites? What has been said about the
Muhadditheen in respect to that obliging 'Ilm then it is likely that they meant that it obliges the
'Ilm (knowledge) of the obligation to act'. (Ref: Al-Mustasfaa 145/1).
Shams ud-Deen Al-Asfahaaniy said: 'The Akhbaar (reports) related from the Messenger (saw) are
either Mutawaatirah or Aahaad. And the Mutawaatirah are impossible to be a lie and as for the
Aahaad then some of them are lies definitely'.
He then said: As for the Mulaazamah (inherence): 'Then this is because Khabar Al-Aahaad do
not establish other than Zhann'.
And he said: 'As for the Sunnah then the Aahaad from it do not establish other than Zhann
(indecisiveness) (ref: His Sharh of Minhaaj Al-Usool 536-544/2 and 41/1).
As-Sibky said: in Al-Ibhaaj: 'The Nass (text) is two categories: (The) Aahaad which do not
ascertain other than Zhann' (Ref: Al-Ibhaaj Sharh Al-Minhaaj 38/1).
And he said in Jam'u-l-Jawaami': 'Khabar Al-Waahid does not affirm 'Ilm (knowledge) unless it is
by way of a Qareenah' and then he said: 'The majority say that it does not affirm knowledge
absolutely (at all). (Ref: Jam'u-l-Jawaami' Ma'a Sharh Al-Jalaal Al-Muhallaa 130/2).
Al-Baydawiy said: 'The Mutawaatir is not abrogated by the Aahaad because the Qat' (definite) is
not removed by the Zhann (indefinite). (Ref: Al-Minhaaj Ma'a Sharhi Al-Jazariy 443/1).
Abu Bakr Bin Fawrak said: 'As for that which is from the category of the Aahaad which is valid
to be used as evidence by way of its path, trustworthiness of its transmitters, justice of its
narrators and the connection of what they have transmitted, then that, even if it does not oblige
60
Al-Qat' (definiteness), it does establish the Ghalab Azh-Zhann (the most preponderant and
likely) and allows for a Hukm (to be deduced) (ref: Muskil Al-Hadeeth Wa Bayaanuhu p44).
Al-Baghdaadi Al-Asfraa'eeniy said: 'And (in regards to) the Akhbaar Al-Aahaad, then whatever
the level of the Sihhah (soundness) of their chain (Isnaad) and its text (meaning) is not
impossible to the mind (to reconcile), then it is obligatory in respect to the action but not for
'Ilm (knowledge'. (Ref: Usool Ud Deen p12 and Al-Farq Baina l-Farq p250).
Al-Maawardiy said in Al-Haawiy: 'If it is as such, then even if it obliges action, it does not oblige
Al-'Ilm Al-Baatin (hidden) which is different to the Mustafeed and the Mutawaatir (Ref: AlHaawiy Al-Kabeer 144/20).
Al-Haafizh Zain ud-Deen Al-'Iraaqiy said: '...When the people (Scholars) of Hadeeth said that a
certain Hadeeth is Saheeh then what is apparently meant by that to us is to act in accordance to
what is evident in the Isnaad and it does not mean that it is Maqtoo' (definite) in its
soundness/correctness (Sihhah) in regards to that matter and this is because of the possibility of
mistake and forgetfulness from (even) the trustworthy. This is the correct view which the
majority of the Ahl-ul-'Ilm are upon and is in opposition to those who have said that the Khabar
Al-Waahis obliges 'Ilm Azh-Zhaahir (apparent/evident knowledge) like Hussein Al-Karaabeesiy
and others beside him (Ref: His Sharh of Al-Alfiyah Fil Hadeeth 15/1).
Safiy ud-Deen Al-Armawiy said: 'As for the Naql (transmission) then it is either Aahaad or
Tawaatur and the Aahaad do not ascertain other than Zhann (indecisiveness) (Ref: Niyaaht ulWusool 104/1).
Al-'Izz Bin Abdus Salaam in his reply to Ibn As-Salaah in regards to making the Ahaadeeth of
the two Saheehs establish Al-Qat' (deciveness) said: 'It has been transmitted from the Mu'tazilah:
That if the Ummah acts in accordance to a Hadeeth then this dictates definiteness in its Sihhah
(correctness). He said: This is a base (vile) Madh'hab' (Ref: Az-Zarkashiy in Salaasil Adh-Dhahab
p321 and Al-Haafizh Al-'Iraaqiy in At-Taqyeed and Al-Eedaah p41-42).
Al-Haithami in As-Sawaa'iq Al-Muhriqah said: 'And texts have been related about Abu Bakr amd
others like 'Ali which are contradictory in respect to their virtues and these do not establish AlQat' (definiteness) because they are all Aahaad and Zhaaniy in their Dalaalah'.
He also said: 'Because what is benfited from the Ijmaa' is Qat'iy and what is benefited from the
Khabar Al-Waahid is Zhanniy, and there is not opposition (clash) between the Zhanniy and the
Qat'iy but rather the Qat'iy is worled with whilst the Zhanniy is cancelled (Ref: As-Sawaa'iq AlMuhriqah 110/1 and 173/1).
Ibn Daqeeq Al-'Eid said: The second issue: Is it permitted abbrogating the Kitaab and the
Sunnah Al-Mutawaatirah by a Khabar Al-Waahid? This was forbidden by the majority because
the definite (Maqtoo') is not removed by the indefinite (Mazhnoon)'.
61
He also said: 'As for the second point which is related to the Khabar Al-Aahaad which is
contrary to the known Qiyaas Al-Usool then it is not obliged to work with it. This is because the
known (Ma'loom) Usool is Maqtoo' (definite) from the Shar'a whilst the Khabar Al-Aahaad are
Mazhnoon (indefinite) and the Mazhnoon does not stand against the Ma'loom (known)' (Ref:
Ihkaam Al-Ahkaam Sharh 'Umdat Al-Ahkaam 181/1 and 121/3).
Al-Jarjaaniy said: 'The Khabar Al-Aahaad is that which has been transmitted Waahid (one) from
Waahid (one) and it does not reach th level (limit) of Istish'haar (being widespread) and its Hukm
(ruling) is that it obligates actions but not 'Ilm (Ref: Ta'reefaat 131/1).
Abu Zur'ah Al-'Iraaqiy said: 'They have different views in respect to the Khabar Al-Aahaad:
Does it ascertain 'Ilm or not?
First: It ascertains knowledge if it includes Qaraa'in (external indications).
Second: It does not ascertain 'Ilm at all (absolutely) and even with Qaraa'in, and this is the view
of the majority.
Thirdly: It establishes 'Ilm absolutely.
And he said: 'If the Maqtoo' (definite) is mentioned in respect to it not being truthful (Kidhb) or
is mentioned in respect to its truthfulness (Sidq) a third category is being mentioned and it is:
The Mazhnoon (indefinite) in respect to its Sidq (truthfulness) and this is the Khabar Al-'Adl AlWaahid (trustworthy Khabar Al-Waahid)' (Ref: Al-Ghaith Al-Haami' Sharh Jam'u l-Jawaami'
491-492/2).
Ibn At-Talmasaaniy said: 'Know that what is intended by the Khabar Al-Waahid in Usool UlFiqh is: Al-Khabr (the report) that does not ascertain 'Ilm (knowledge) and Yaqeen (certainty)'
(Ref: Sharh Al-Ma'aalim Fee Usool ul-Fiqh 167/2).
Adud Al-Millah Al-Eejiy said: 'Our opinion is that the Mutawaatir is Maqtoo' (definite) and the
Aahaad is Mazhnoon (indefinite) and the Qaat'i is not met by the Mazhnoon (indefinite) (Ref:
Sharh Al-Adud 'Alaa Mukhtasar Ibn ul-Haajib p278).
The Hanbali Madh'hab:

We will begin by mentioning that which has been attributed to Al-Imaam Ahmad (rh):
Two opinions have been related from him; the first is that the Khabar Al-Aahaad does not
ascertain knowledge ('Ilm) and the second is that it does ascertain it. The first however is the
strongest amongst the Fuqahaa of his Madh'hab.
Al-Muwaffiq Ud-Deen Ibn Qudaamah Al-Maqdasiy said: 'The reports from our Imaam (AlImaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal) have differed in respect to the attainment of 'Ilm by way of the
Khabar Al-Waahid. It has been related that it does not occur in his view and this is the opinion
of the majority and the opinion of those who came later from those of our Madh'hab. This is
62
because we know by necessity that we do not believe every Khabar (report) that we hear and if it
established and ascertained 'Ilm then it would not be valid to find two reports that are
contradictory to one another due to the impossibility of two opposites being brought together
(Ref: Rawdat Un-Naazhir Wa Jannat ul-Manaazhir 260/1).
Ibn Badraan in his commentary upon 'Rawdat An-Nazhar' said: 'The chain of the second
opinion attributed to the Imaam without restriction needs to be examined just as what has been
attributed to him by Ibn ul-Haajib, Al-Waasitiy and others in respect to him saying that
knowledge is attained whenever an 'Adl (trustworthy person) informs (of a matter) and if he is
not then by Qareenah (indication/linkage). This is because this is not correct in origin and how
is it fitting for the like of an Imaam of the Sunnah to make such a claim. This is whilst there is in
any book that has been related from him a Saheeh narration and all of his narrations may Allah
be pleased with him are recorded and well-known amongst those who excel from his followers
and the author may Allah's mercy be upon him is from amongst those. With that I guide to this
(attributed) narration lying outside of his speech and then they act with them as has been
mentioned here. That has been affirmed so take a pause O fair one' (Ref: Nuzhat ul-Khaatir
'Alaa Rawdat An-Nazhar 261/1 a supplement to Rawdat An-Nazhar).
Safiy ud-Deen Al-Baghdaadiy said: 'The Aahaad is that which is not Tawaatur and 'Ilm is not
attained by it in accordance to one of the two reports (attributed to Al-Imaam Ahmad) and this
is the opinion of the majority and those who came later from his companions (i.e. from his
Madh'hab' (Ref: Qawaa'id Al-Usool Wa Ma'aaqid Al-Fusool p16).
Al-Muwaffiq ud-Deen Ibn Qudaamah Al-Maqdasiy said: 'The Khabar is that which is open to
At-Tasdeeq (to be believed/affirmed) and At-Takdheeb (disbelieved) and it has two categories:
Tawaatur and Aahaad. So the Mutawaatir ascertains 'Ilm and it is obligatory to have Tasdeeq in it
and even if no other Daleel has indicated (or guided to) it. And there is no Khabar that is known
to be truthful by itself apart from the Mutawaatir whilst the truthfulness is is only known for
anything else through another (secondary) Daleel that guides to the same Khabar (Ref: Rawdat
An-Nazhar 243/1).
Al-Qaadiy Abu Ya'laa said: 'If the khabar Al-Ahad obligated 'Ilm then it would be obligated in
any description that it was found' (Ref: Al-'Iddah Fee Usool ul-Fiqh 901/1).
Suleymaan At-Toofiy said: 'The Khabar is either Tawaatur and it affiorms 'Ilm or it is is merely
Aahaad and as such definitely does not affirm 'Ilm as has been established here (Ref: Sharh
Mukhtasar Ar-Rawdah 108/2).
Abu-l-Khitaab Al-Kaloodhaaniy said: 'The Khabar Al-Waahid does not dictate 'Ilm and this is
the opinion of the majority of the 'Ulamaa' (Ref: At-Tamheed Fee Usool ul-Fiqh).
Ibn 'Uqail said: 'The Khabar Al-Waahid does not establish 'Ilm or Darooriy (what is essential/of
necessity) or Al-Muktasib (that which attained) upon the Saheeh of the two reports attributed to
our companion (Imaam Ahmad)' (Ref: Al-Waadih Fee Usool ul-Fiqh 403/4).
63
Ibn Taymiyyah said: 'The Khabar Al-Waahid that has been met with acceptance obliges 'Ilm
according to the majority of the 'Ulamaa'.... He then said: 'This is because despite in itself not
establishing other than Zhann, however due to being tied to the Ijmaa' of the people of
knowledge in respect to the acceptance of the Hadeeth with Tasdeeq (belief/affirmation) it takes
the standing of the Ijmaa' of the people of knowledge in Fiqh in respect to a Hukm (legal ruling)
which they have beased upon the Zhaahir (what is evident), Qiyaas or Khabar Waahid. That is
then a Hukm that has become Qat'iy in the view of the majority and if it is not by 'Ijmaa
(consensus) then it is not Qat'iy' ('Ilm ul-Hadeeth p100).
And he also said: 'Nobody from those who have 'Aql (reason/intellect) has said that every
Khabar Waahid or the Khabar of anyone is truthful or establishes knowledge or that it could not
be untruthful' (Ref: Al-Jawaab As-Saheeh Liman Badal Deen ul-Maseeh 481/6 and also AlMusawwadah LiAali Taymiyyah p220).
The Zaidi Madh'hab:

Ash-Shawkaani said in Al-Irshaad: The second section: 'Al-Aahaad and it is the Khabar that does
not establish 'Ilm in itself and it is the same in respect to not establishing it in origin or
establishing it by way of external Qaraa'in (indications/linkages). This is because there is nothing
in between the Mutawaatir and the Aahaad and this is the opinion of the majority' (ref: Irshaad
Al-Fuhool 92/1).
Al-Ameer As-San'aaniy the author of Subul-us-Salaam said: 'Upon evaluation Qiyaas Al-Usool
affims Al-Qat' (definiteness) whilst the Khabar Al-Waahid does not affirm other than Zhann
(indefiniteness)'
And he also said: 'The Usool affirms Al-Qat' whilst the Khabar Al-Waahid affirms Zhann and
the definite supercedes the indefinite' (Ref: Haashiyah Ihkaam Al-Ahkaam Sharh Umdat Ahkaam
of Ibn Daqeeq Al-'Eid 53-57/4).
He said in another place: 'The correct view which the majority of the people of knowledge are
upon is that the Khabar Al-Aahaad which is the Saheeh Hadeeth is that however is not definite
at the same time and for that reason no one is legally responsible (and held to task) except for
that related to the action and not that related to 'Ilm' (Ref: Tawdeeh Al-Afkaar 24-25/1).
Muhammad Bin Ibraaheem Al-Wazeer Al-Yamaaniy in 'Al-'Awaasim Wal-Qawaasim' in his
rebuttal of As-Sayyid: ''Ilm with all of its Nusoos (texts) would only be obliged if it was obliged
to outweigh the statement: That working with Zhann is Haraam and if working with Zhann was
prohibited then working with Al-Khabar Al-Waahid would be prohibited and in that case it 'Ilm
would not be obligatory in anything from the Khabar Al-Aahaad' (Ref: 'Al-'Awaasim WalQawaasim' 286/1).
He also said: 'We have accepted that the Hadeeth is Saheeh but it is however Ahaadiy Zhanniy
whilst As-Sayyid has claimed that the issue is Qat'iy' (Ref: 'Al-'Awaasim Wal-Qawaasim' 235/2).
64
He has repeated similar statements throughout his book which can be seen by the one who reads
through it.
Mashaayikh (Scholars) from our current time:

Ash-Sheikh Taqiy-ud-Deen An-Nabhaaniy said: 'Khabar Al-Waahid: It is what a number that has
not reached the level of Tawaatur has related in the three eras and there is no significance to
what came after them. It establishes Zhann and it does not establish Yaqeen (certainty)' (Ref:
Ash-Shakhsiyah 78/3).
Ash-Sheikh Mahmoud Shaltoot said: 'This is the Tawaatur which obligates Yaqeen (certainty)
due to it being proven that it came from the Messenger of Allah (saw). If however it was Khabar
Al-Waahid or a small number and even if in some of the levels (of the chain) then it would not
be Mutawaatir and definite in regards to it being attributable to the Messenger of Allah (saw) and
it would only be Aahaadiy, its connection to the Messenger contains a Shubhah (doubt) and
therefore does not affirm and establish Yaqeen (certainty)' (Ref: Al-Islaam 'Aqeedah Wa
Sharee'ah p59).
Ash-Sheikh Abu Zahrah said: 'The Hdaeeth Al-Aahaad ascertain the most likel;y Zhanny
(indefinite) 'Ilm (knowledge) and does not ascertain the Qat'iy 'Ilm because there is Shubhah in
regards to the connection to the Nabi (saw)' (Ref: Usool ul-Fiqh p108).
Abdul Wahhaab Al-Khallaaf said: 'And the Sunnah Al-Aahaad is reported by way of Zhann from
the Messenger (saw) because its chain does not ascertain Al-Qat' (definiteness)' (Usool ul-Fiqh
p42).
Ash-Sheikh Al-Khuduriy said: 'As for the Khabar Al-Waahid it does not acertain 'Ilm in itself
whether it has been benefited by Qaraa'in (external indications) or is not benefited in origin' (Ref:
Usool ul-Fiqh p216 and 228).
Ash-Sheikh Al-Mubarakfooriy said: 'What is attained from the Khabar Al-Waahid is Zhann and
it is what is open to accept weakness and strength' (Ref: Tuhfah Al-Ahwadhiy 367/2).
Ash-Sheikh Hasan Al-Banaa said: 'That which the majority of the Muslims fro the Sahaabah, the
Taabi'een and those who came after them from the Muhadditheen, Fuqahaa and Scholars of
Usool were upon was: 'That the trustworthy (Thiqqah) Khabar Al-Waahid is a Hujjag
(proof/evidence) from amongst the Shar'i evidences that must be acted upon and that they
establish Zhann and do not establish 'Ilm'.
He then said: 'And as for those who say that it obligates 'Ilm then that is contentious to what is
perceivable' (Ref: Madhkar Mabaahith 'Uloom Al-Hadeeth p37).
Ahmad Ibraaheem Bik said: 'And from it (the Sunnah) is that which is transmitted by Aahaad
and has not become famous/widespread like the first (we discussed). It could be Mutawaatir in
65
the first line/level and then be transmitted as Aahaad. In regards to this category, if all of the
relaters did so from the Messenger until it reached us by trustworthy, just and precise people in
accordance to what they had heard, then what has reached us benefits the Hukm Ash-Shar'iy in
the issues related to actions but not the 'Aqaa'id. Its chain is established by the most probable
and the most probable Zhann is sufficient for the actions but not the Aqaa'id (beliefs) which are
based upon the Adillah Al-Qat'iyah (definite/decisive evidences)' ('Ilm Usool ul-Fiqh and
Ta'reekh At-Tashree' Al-Islaamiy p18-19).
And Sayyid Qutb (rh) said in relation to the Ahaadeeth recorded by Al-Imaam Muslim in his
Saheeh stating that the Nabi (saw) had been bewitched by the Jew Labeed Al-A'asam: He said:
'However these narration oppose the origin of the 'Ismah (infallibility) of the Prophet in regards
to his action and conveyance and they do not fit with the belief (I'tiqaad) that every action from
amongst his actions and every speech of his represents Sunnah and Sharee'ah. Similarly it in
opposition to the denial in the Qur'aan denying that he had been bewitched or enchanted when
it proved the falsehood of what the Mushrikeen used to claim in this big lie of theirs. As such
these narrations are cast away and in addition the Ahaadeeth Al-Aahaad are not adopted in the
issue of the 'Aqeedah whilst the reference point for it is the Qur'aan and the Tawaatur which is a
condition for the Ahaadeeth to be taken into the Usool of the 'I'tiqaad (belief)' (Ref: Zhilaal AlQur'aan 4008/6) when discussing Surah Al-Falaq).
66
The Seventh Angle:

Their statements in relation to not using the Khabar Al-Aahaad as an evidence for the
Aqaa'id.
Abu-l-'Abbaas Al-Qurtubi when presenting his discussion upon the Hadeeth of the visual
sighting of his Rabb on the night of the Israa and Al-Mi'raaj: 'The issue is not from those related
to the actions making it sufficient to have Zhanny evidences but rather the issue is from the
beliefs and it is not sufficient in regards to them to have other than a Qat'iy Daleel' (Ref: AlMufham Sharh Saheeh Muslim 402/1 and it was also mentioned from him by the author of
Zhufr ul-Amaaniy p120).
Safiy ud-Deen Al-Armawiy said: 'This is because what is required in regards to the Usool is 'Ilm
and Yaqeen (certainty) whilst the Khabar Al-Waahid does not establish that as we have
previously explained. This is different to the branches because Zhann is sufficient for it and the
Khabar Al-Waahid benefits that' (Ref: Nihaayat-ul-Wusool Fee Diraayat-ul-Usool 2811/7).
He also said: 'And we have made an Ijmaa' in regards to the Khabar Al-Waahid being
unacceptable in the Usool of the Deen' (Ref: Same source 2834/7).
Jamaal Ud-Deen Al-Asnawiy said: 'This is because the Aahaad narration, when it affirms it only
affirms Zhann whilst the Shaari' has only permitted the Zhann in relation to the issues related to
actions and these are the Furoo' branches without permitting this for the issues related to 'Ilm
like the principles/foundations of Usool ud-Deen' (Ref: Nihaayat As-Su'aal 270/2).
Al-Qaadi Ibn ul-Baaqalaaniy said: 'From this he deduced thta the Khabar Al-Waahid is not
accepted in the 'Aqliyyaat (rationalities) and the Usool of the 'Aqaa'id and everything related to
'Ilm'.
And he also said: 'And know, May Allah give you Tawfeeq that everything that 'Ilm is demanded
in that the Khabar Al-Aahaad are not accepted tin regards to it' (Ref: At-Talkhees 430/2).
'Alaa Ad-Deen As-Samarqandiy said: 'From them (the Ahaad) are those in which the Khabar is
found in the area of the action. As for however when it is found in the area of I'tiqaadaat
(beliefs) and it is from the issues of Al-Kalaam then it will not represent a Hujjah
(proof/evidence) because it dictates Zhann and a knowledge that it most probable in opinion
and it does not oblgate definite knowledge ('Ilm Qat'iy). It is therefore not a Hujjah
(evidence/proof) for that which is built upon the definite knowledge and the belief in reality'
(Ref: Meezaan Al-Usool p430).
As-Sibkiy said: 'That it is not from his conditions for it to be Qat'iy (definite) Mutawaatir but
rather when the Hadeeth is Saheeh, even if Zhaahir (evident) and it is from the Aahaad
narrations, it is permitted to rely upon it in regards to that because it is not from the issues of
belief in which the Qat' (definiteness) is stipulated as a condition' (Ref: Mentioned in Zhufr ulAmaaniy Sharh Mukhtasir Al-Jarjaaniy p120).
67
Abu uth-Thanaa Mahmood Al-Maatureediy said: 'And for this reason it is not a Hujjah
(proof/evidence) for the issues related to the beliuefs because it (the beliuef) is built upon the
'Ilm Al-Qat'iy whilst the Khabar Al-Waahid only dictates knowledge that is most probable in
opinion/view and even the greatest Zhann is not equal to the Qat'iy 'Ilm' (Ref: Usool ul-Fiqh
p148).
Abdul-Hameed Al-Asmandiy said: 'And if you wish to affirm Al-Qadeem Ta'Aalaa and his
Siffaat (attributes) then we say: Then the Khabar Al-Waahid is not accepted in regards to that
because if we were to accept it in relation to this then we would have accepted it in relation to
the beliefs (i'tiqaadaat) whilst it is impermissible to accept the Khabar Al-Waahid in the beliefs'
(Ref: Badhl An-Nazhar Fil Usool p406).
Abu-l-'Abbaas Al-Quraafiy said when responding to those who forbiod the Khabar Al-Waahid
in regards to the action: Our anser is: 'That that is specific to the foundations (Qawaa'id) of the
Deen, the Usool and the Qat'iy Ibaadaat' (Ref: Tanqeeh Al-Fusool p358).
Abu-l-Khitaab and Ibn 'Uqail said: 'The Akhbaar Al-Aahaad are not utilised in the Usool of the
Deen (Ref: Attributed to them by Ibn An-Najjaar in Al-Kawkab Al-Muneer 353/2).
Abu-l-Ishaq Ash-Sheeraaziy in response to those who say that if the Khabar Al-Waahid is
permitted in the Furoo' Branches) then it should also be acceptable in the Usool (fundamentals)
like Tawheed and the affirmation (Ithbaat) of the Usool said: 'The answer: It is that the issues of
Usool are Adillah 'Aqliyah that dictate definite knowledge ('Ilm Qat'iy) for a reason and so we are
in no need of the Khabar Al-Waahid (in regards to this)' (Ref: Sharh Al-Lam'i 601/2).
Al-Bazdawiy said: 'As the Khabar Al-Waahid does not ascertain certainty (yaqeen) then it is not a
Hujjah (proof/evidence) in that which relates to the belief because it (the belief) is built upon
Yaqeen (certainty) and even if it is considered as evidence (Hujjah) in that which ius related to
the action' (Ref: Kashf ul-Asraar 'Alaa Usool Al-Bazdawiy 27/3).
Al-Haafizh Ibn Hajr Al-Asqalaaniy said: 'What is apparent in the manner Al-Bukhaari proceeded
with in the Chapter of Tawheed is that he placed the Ahaadeeth related to the divine Siffaat
(attributes) by aupplementing every Hadeeth in the chapter by an Aayah from the Qur'aan so as
to indicate that the Khabar Al-Aahaad should not be left alone to be used as proof and evidence
for the beliefs (I'tiqaadaat)' (Ref: Fat'h-ul-Baari 359/13).
Al-'Ainiy in his Sharh of Saheeh Al-Bukhaari when discussing the 'Aadhaan' said: 'These matters
have only been mentioned is in order to know that the implementation of the Khabar is only in
the matters related to action (Al-'Amaliyaat) and not in the beliefs (I'tiqaadaat)' (Ref: 'Umdat ulQaari' 12/25).
Al-Mulaa 'Ali Al-Qaariy stated in related to the Hadeeth mentioning that the two parents of the
Messenger of Allah (saw) were in the fire: 'Unless it is Qat'iy in its Diraayah (meaning/text) not
Zhanny in Riwaayah (transmission) because it falls within the Baab (chapter/issue) of beliefs in
68
which the Zhanniyaat are not utilised and the Aahaad are not sufficient' (Ref: Evidences of belief
of Abu Haneefah in regards to the two parents of the Messenger of Allah (saw) p62).
Bakheet Al-Mutee'iy in his Sharh of Al-Asanawiy: 'The conclusion is that we forbid (prevent)
that the 'Illah (legal reasoning) which dictates the obligation (Wujoob) of the action by way of the
Khabar Al-Waahid in regards to the actions be present in regards to the beliefs because that
which is required in regards to the 'Amaliyaat (practical actions) is the action and Zhann is
sufficient for it whilst what is intended in relation to the I'tiqaadaat (beliefs) is the belief that is in
conformance to the reality based on that which obliges that and Zhann is not sufficient to
establish that' (Ref: In his commentary to the Sharh of Al-Asanawiy Li-Minhaaj Al-Baydaawiy
270/2).
Mahmoud Shaltoot said: 'And from here what we concluded is reaffirmed in respect to the
Ahaadeeth Al-Aahaad not benefiting (the subject of) Aqeedah and that it is not permitted to rely
upon it in relation to the unseen matters, a view which holds a consensus (agreed upon) and is
firmly established by intellectual (rational) necessity in which there is no room for dispute
amongst those who are rational' (Ref: Al-Islaam Aqeedah Wa Sharee'ah p61).
Sayyid Qutb said: 'And the Ahaadeeth Al-Aahaad are not taken in respect to the matter of the
Aqeedah and its point of reference is the Qur'aan whilst the Tawaatur is the condition (Shart) for
taking Ahaadeeth in the Usool of I'tiqaad (belief)' (Ref: Fee Zhilaal Al-Qur'aan (In the shade of
the Qur'aan) 4008/6).
Abdul Wahhaab An-Najjaar said: 'If the transmission of the Khabar is Aahaad then in it is not
valid to be a Daleel upon proving matters of belief because the intended purpose of the matters
of belief is for them to be Qat' (definite) and the Khabar which is indefinite in transmission
(Zhanny Ath-Thuboot) and indefinite in import/meaning (Zhanniy Ad-Dalaalah) does not
establish definiteness' (Ref: In the introduction of his book Qisas Al-Anbiya' (Stories of the
Prophets) Point number four).
And Abdur Rahmaan Al-Juzairiy said: When commenting on the reality of Sihr (magic): 'And
those who say that magic has a real effect do not have other than the Hadeeth of Al-Bukhaariy
related by 'Aa'ishah (ra) that stated that the Nabi (saw) had been the victim of majic and that he
had imagined that he had done something that he had not actually done. This Hadeeth is Saheeh
and none of its transmitters have been discredited and it is best to say: The like of these
Ahaadeeth are counted in the branch issues but not in the issues of I'tiqaad (belief). This is
because the 'Aqaa'id (beliefs) are not built upon other cerian evidences (Adillah Yaqeeniyah) and
however Saheeh these evidences are they are still Ahaadeeth Aahaad and do not affirm other
than Zhann' (Ref: Fiqh 'Ala Al-.Madhaahib Al-Arba'ah 391/5).
The above are what I have come across from the statements and opinions of the 'Ulamaa and I
find this quantity enough in this small book to counter the false claims that have been attributed
to the A'immah (great scholars) of the Muslims and their students and had someone wished to
69
obtain even more statements of this type then he would have been able to obtain them if he was
endowed with the ability to research and study.
And it is worth noting that I did not find a single source that stated that the Khabar Al-Aahaad
established and affirmed decisive knowledge absolutely (i.e. without any restrictions or
provisions) apart from the Zhaahiriy Madh'hab as mentioned by Ibn Hazm in his Ahkaam. As
for the remainder of thoise who said that this typr of Khabar affirms knowledge then they
restricted that to a Qareenah (external indication or support) in which the 'Ilm outweighs the
Zhann, like Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn ul-Qayyim and An-Niozhaam of the heads of the Mu'tazilah
amongst others. This is whilst making clear that in the absence of the Qareenah the Khabar AlWaahid would not affirm other than Zhann.
If it is said by some that the seventy that have been mentioned amongst others are from the
'Ulamaa of Kalaam and are not from the Ahl-us-Sunnah then it can be said to them: You have
stoked and provoked discord in that in which there is no benefit. Are Al-Qurtubiy, Ibn ulArabiy, Ash-Shaatibi, Ibn Abdul Barr and Az-Zarqaaniy of the Maalikiy Madh'hab from the
'Ulamaa of Kalaam?! Or are the Muhaddith Al-Khateeb Al-Baghdaadiy, Ibn Hajr, Ibn Daqeeq
Al-'Eid, Ibn ul-Atheer, Ibn ul-Jazariy, An-Nawawi, Ibn Abdus Salaam, Al-Maawardiy and AlAsanawiy from the Shaafi'iy Madh'hab from amongst the 'Ulamaa of Kalaam?! Are Al-Kamaal
Bin Al-Himaam, As-Sarkhasiy, Ibn 'Aabidain, Al-Kaasaaniy, An-Nasafiy, Al-Ansaariy and AlJassaas from the Hanfafi Madh'hab from the 'Ulamaa of Kalaam?! Are Ibn Qudaamah AlMaqdasiy, Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn 'Uqail, Abu-l-Khattaab, Ibn ul-Muneer and Abu Ya'laa from the
'Ulamaa of Kalaam?! Are the four A'immah also amongst the 'Ulamaa of Kalaam?!! Nobody
would ever say that apart from the most arrogant and stubborn of people and may refuge be
sought in Allah from that.
And if it is said that they are from the Ashaa'irah (upon the Ash'ariy view) in the shape of an
accusation and charge as if being from the Ashaa'irah was even an accusation, it can be said to
them in response: What we have established and presented above represents the opinions of the
Fuqahaa of the considered and well established Madhaahib (Schools of thought) as held by the
Muslims. As such, if these Madhaahib are Ash'ariyah then this means that they recognised that
the Ashaa'irah were upon the Haqq and as a result proceeded along with them. If it is then said
that these 'Ulamaa were not upon the Madh'hab of the Ashaa'irah then they should be told to
take back the accusation that they made against them.
70
Additional beneficial points for clarification:

The meaning of 'Ilm, Zhann and Yaqeen as used by the 'Ulamaa in their statements:
'Ilm (knowledge): It is the I'tiqaad Al-Jaazim Al-Mutaabiq Lil Waaqi' (The decisive belief that is
in conformity to reality) (Ref: Al-Jarjaaniy in his definitions (Ta'reefaat) p135 and As-San'aaniy in
his Sharh Baghiyat Al-Amal p22). This is what is meant when they say that the Khabar AlAahaad Laa Yufeedu l-'Ilm (does not affirm/ascertain 'Ilm). 'Ilm is also used whilst intending
Fiqh (understanding) in the Deen like that which has come in the statement of the Messenger of
Allah (saw): Talabu-l-'Ilmi Fareedah' (Seeking knowledge is an obligation) and also in the
Hadeeth: 'The Anbiyaa (prophets) do not inherit a Deenaar or a Dirham but rather they are the
inheritors of 'Ilm (knowledge)'.
Yaqeen: This is also a Mushtarak Lafzh (A word with more than one meaning) and so it is used
with the intended meaning of death:

And worship your Lord until Yaqeen (death) comes to you (Al-Hijr 99).
It is also used with the intended meaning that means the opposite to Shakk (doubt) like the
speech of Allah (swt):
Verily this is the certain truth (Al-Waaqi'ah 95).

And it is also used to mean the opposite of Zhann (an indefinite thought/belief):

They have no knowledge ('Ilm) of it except the following of Zhann (assumption) and they did not kill him for
certain (Yaqeenan) (An-Nisaa 157).
This last meaning is what is intended in the statement that: 'Khabar Al-Aahaad Laa Yufeedu-l'Ilma Wa-l-Yaqeen' (The Khabar Al-Aahaad does not affirm knowledge and certainty).
Zhann: This is also a Lafzh Mushtarak (word with more than one meaning) and it has been used
with the intended meaning of Yaqeen (certainty) like has come in the speech of Allah (swt):

71
Those who believe (Zhann) that they are going to meet their Lord and that they are to Him returning (AlBaqarah 46).
It has also been used with the intended meaning of a lie:

They are following nothing but Zhann and they are not but falsifying (Al-An'aam 116).
And it has been utilised with the intended meaning of Shakk (doubt/suspicion) like in His
speech (swt):

O You who believe keep well clear of doubt (suspicion) (Al-Hujuraat 12).
This is like the statement of the Messenger (saw): 'And beware of Zhann (doubt/suspicion)
because verily Zhann is the most deceitful of speech'.
It has also been used with the intended meaning of the I'tiqaad Ar-Raajih (the most
probable/outweighed belief):

If they believe (Zhann) that they can keep to the limits of Allah (Al-Baqarah 230).
And this last type was mentioned by Az-Zarkashiy in Al-Burhaan (Ref: Al-Burhaan Fee 'Uloom il
Qur'aan 156/4) and by Al-Ghaziy in his Itqaan (Ref: Itqaan Maa Yusin Min Al-Akhbaar AdDaa'irah Alaa-l-Alsin 476/1).
And Ash-Sheeraaziy said: 'The Zhann allows for two matters; the first is more evident than the
other and that is like the trustworthy (sound) report (Khabar) which is permitted to be Saadiq
(truthful) just as it is permitted to be untruthful (Kaadhib) in the case where the most apparent
of its states is that of truthfulness' (Ref: Sharh Al-Lam'i 150/1).
Therefore this last meaning of Zhann is that which is intended in the speech of the 'Ulamaa
whene they said that the Khabar Al-Aahaad does not ascertain other than Zhann and does not
establish Yaqeen. And Allah is the most high and aware and to him is the return.
Completed and All Praise belongs to Allah in the beginning and the end and Prayers be upon our
master Muhammad and upon his family and companions altogether.
Ramadhaan Al-Mubaarak 1422h/2001 Bait-ul-Maqdis.
72

Khabar Al-Waahid (The Single Line Transmission) - Muhammad Ash-Shuwaiky

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Khabar Al-Waahid (The Single Line Transmission) - Muhammad Ash-Shuwaiky

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Khabar Al-Waahid (The

single line transmission)

The first angle:

The second angle:

As for the Sunnah:

As for the Ijmaa of the Sahaabah:

The third angle:

The differing of the Ulamaa after the Sahaabah:

5) They differed over the Hadeeth:

11) They differed over the Hadeeth:

17) They disagreed over the Hadeeth:

The fourth angle:

And His statement (swt):

The Fifth Angle:

The Sixth Angle:

The Maalikiy Madh'hab:

The Hanafi Madh'hab:

The Shaafi'iy Madh'hab:

The Hanbali Madh'hab:

The Zaidi Madh'hab:

Mashaayikh (Scholars) from our current time:

The Seventh Angle:

Additional beneficial points for clarification:

Verily this is the certain truth (Al-Waaqi'ah 95).

You might also like