Linguistic Criticism in Zaydī Hadith Methodology

How Imam al-Manṣūr bi-llāh Abdullah ibn Ḥamzah (d. 614 AH) used the Arabic language itself as a criterion for evaluating reports

Imam al-Manṣūr bi-llāh Abdullah ibn Ḥamzah (d. 614 AH) demonstrates in al-ʿAqd al-Thamīn fī Tabyīn Aḥkām al-Aʾimmah al-Hādīn that the meaning of a hadith must be consistent not only with the Qurʾān and established doctrine, but also with the rules of the Arabic language. While responding to Imāmī Twelver reports advanced in support of the doctrine of occultation (ghaybah) of the awaited Imam—a doctrine not accepted in Zaydī Islam—Imam Abdullah ibn Ḥamzah illustrates how linguistic analysis itself can expose the weakness of a report.

The reports under discussion are found in al-Ghaybah by Shaykh Muḥammad ibn Ibrāhīm al-Nuʿmānī (d. 360 AH), a student of al-Kulaynī (d. 329 AH). This work is considered one of the earliest and most important Imāmī sources on occultation, due to its close proximity to the period of the Minor Occultation (al-Ghaybah al-Ṣughrā). Related reports also appear in Tahdhīb al-Aḥkām by Shaykh al-Ṭūsī (d. 460 AH).

The Report on al-Khunnas

One example concerns reports interpreting Allah’s statement:

“But no! I swear by al-Khunnas, al-Jawāri al-Kunnas.” Qurʾān 81:15–16

The literal meaning of al-Khunnas is “the retreating ones” or “those that withdraw” in the plural. In the context of Qurʾān 81:15–16, the expression refers to the retreating heavenly bodies, generally understood as the stars or planets that disappear from view before reappearing.

The Imāmī report states:

He transmitted through his isnād from Rashīd ibn Thaʿlab, from Umm Hānī, who said: I asked Abū Jaʿfar, peace be upon him — Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Bāqir — about the meaning of Allah’s statement: “But no! I swear by al-Khunnas, al-Jawāri al-Kunnas” (Qurʾān 81:15–16).

He said to me: “O Umm Hānī, it refers to an Imam who conceals himself until knowledge of him is cut off from the people in the year 260 AH. Then he will appear like a blazing meteor in a dark night. If you live to see that time, your eyes will be delighted.”

According to this report, al-Khunnas refers to the hidden Imam because he withdraws into concealment.

The Three Criteria of Exegesis

Imam Abdullah ibn Ḥamzah rejects this interpretation, explaining that Qurʾānic exegesis (tafsīr) can only be established through one of three sources: reason (ʿaql), transmitted evidence (naql), or the Arabic language.

He argues that this interpretation satisfies none of these criteria. There is no rational proof for it, no authentic transmitted evidence establishing it, and no support for it in the Arabic language.

Imam Abdullah ibn Ḥamzah writes that the Imam is not called Khunnas in Arabic: not lexically, not in customary usage, and not in the terminology of the Sharīʿah. Consequently, interpreting the Qurʾānic word in this way has no linguistic foundation.

The Grammar of the Verse

He strengthens his argument by examining the language of the Qurʾān itself. Allah swears by al-jawāri al-kunnas, employing a plural expression. Had the verse intended a single individual, namely the hidden Imam, a singular form such as al-Khānis or al-Khannās, meaning “the one who withdraws” or “the one who retreats,” would have been used instead.

Furthermore, al-Khannās is already a recognised Arabic description associated with Satan in the verse, “from the evil of al-Waswās al-Khannās” (Qurʾān 114:4), not a title for an Imam.

The Turning of the Falak

Imam Abdullah ibn Ḥamzah then applies the same linguistic methodology to another narration concerning the awaited Imam. The report interprets the expression “the turning of the falak” as referring to disagreement among the Shīʿah. The word falak means “the celestial sphere,” “heavenly orbit,” or “heavenly course.”

He rejects this explanation for the same reason:

Nor, he argues, can the interpretation be justified by appealing to metaphor (majāz). A word cannot be removed from its literal meaning (ḥaqīqah) and assigned a metaphorical meaning unless there is evidence requiring such a departure. Since no such evidence exists, the interpretation is linguistically invalid.

The Broader Principle

Elsewhere in the same discussion, Imam Abdullah ibn Ḥamzah also argues that the reports contradict the Book and the Sunnah by portraying the Imam as withdrawing from the Ummah, whereas the Imam’s role is to establish justice, reform the community, and command what is right. A leader charged with guiding the Muslims cannot fulfil that responsibility while remaining absent from them.

Accordingly, al-ʿAqd al-Thamīn demonstrates that linguistic criticism formed an important part of Zaydī hadith methodology. Although Imam Abdullah ibn Ḥamzah develops these arguments while refuting Twelver reports concerning the hidden Imam, the principle he employs is broader. Reports cannot assign meanings to Qurʾānic words that are unsupported by Arabic usage, nor may they depart from the established conventions of the language without compelling evidence. The Arabic language itself functions as an objective criterion for evaluating hadith, and a report that depends upon an impossible lexical or grammatical interpretation is rejected as weak.