The Impeachment of al-Zuhrī and Wāʾil ibn Ḥujr
A Discussion in the Science of Ḥadīth Criticism and Legal Theory
The impeachment of a narrator is measured against his conduct, not merely his creed. In this chapter, the author marshals the verdicts of the Imams of the household against specific transmitters — and uses those verdicts to draw a decisive conclusion about those far more culpable than the ones impeached.
Impeached for consorting with tyrants and betraying secrets
This Imam, al-Muʾayyad Billāh (peace be upon him), says in his Sharḥ al-Tajrīd1 concerning al-Zuhrī, in his exact words:
“Al-Zuhrī, in our view, has fallen to the utmost degree of discredit.”
And concerning Wāʾil ibn Ḥujr, his exact words are:3
“Wāʾil, in our view, is not to be accepted; for it is reported that he used to write the secrets of ʿAlī (peace be upon him) to Muʿāwiya — and for less than that, moral probity is forfeited.”
And Imam al-Manṣūr Billāh (peace be upon him) said in al-Shāfī, in the course of discussing certain narrators, in his exact words:4
“Whoever has allowed hatred of ʿAlī to enter his heart — the very least of his conditions is that his narration not be accepted.”
The discussion of his impeachment, and that of other Imams of guidance, by the Imams of misguidance and their followers — and the speech of the Imams of the Prophet’s household on this pattern — will follow in due course. For this is their impeachment of one who merely wrote down secrets: so what then of the one to whom those secrets were written, and the one who directly carried out killing and warfare, and those in the party of the wicked, who call to the Fire?
A ruling that was never meant for the brazen and the dissolute
As for those of the school of re-interpretation (ahl al-taʾwīl) — those who acted only out of a misapprehension — the opinions on them have differed greatly, and much has been said back and forth on the matter. The authoritative guide is the proof; and many of the later scholars have inclined toward accepting their narrations, with the proper locus of that discussion being the science of legal theory. However, those scholars did not intend by that ruling these brazen, morally dissolute individuals, against whom decisive texts have been established showing them to be among the transgressors, the hypocrites, those who have broken out of the religion, the callers to the Fire — and how wretched an abode.
Imam al-Muʾayyad Billāh, and Prince al-Ḥusayn (peace be upon him), and others, impeached al-Zuhrī for consorting with tyrants,1 and Wāʾil for writing down secrets,2 and Jarīr for joining the ranks of the wicked,3 and Qays for his hatred of the Imam of the righteous.4 Both of the former are among those who explicitly accept the narrations of the re-interpreters — yet they did not intend by that ruling those for whom there is no misapprehension, such as these misleaders.
Against those who embed obscurity and turn the known into the doubtful
I have set out this discussion at length only because there has been much confusion and conflation in this matter. Some of those who lack a proper understanding of the intentions of the great scholars — or those for whom the matter is in fact clear but who wish to create doubt in the minds of those of limited understanding — have done as one of our Imams (peace be upon him) described:
“He embeds obscurity into things of general application, and turns what is known into something doubtful, so that this succeeds against one whose footing is unsteady in the arena of reasoning, and whose comprehension cannot hold firm on the treacherous slopes of error.”
What benefit does the worldly man derive from his sight,
when light and darkness have become equal in his eyes?
— Abū al-Ṭayyib al-Mutanabbī5The aim is to discharge the obligation imposed by God Almighty — that of presenting the proof, clarifying the path, and fulfilling the duty of sincere counsel to whoever lends an ear while bearing witness. God is the Guardian of all success and right guidance.
The following footnotes are editorial additions accompanying the text and are not the author’s own words.
“This al-Zuhrī is weak in moral probity; and it is reported that he was among the guards of the wooden cross upon which Zayd ibn ʿAlī was crucified. The like of this forfeits moral probity and degrades it.”
The following footnotes are editorial additions accompanying the text and are not the author’s own words.
“al-nāẓir means the eye. He says: if a perceptive person cannot distinguish between light and darkness, what benefit does his sight afford him?”
Lawāmiʿ al-Anwār fī Jawāmiʿ al-ʿUlūm wa-l-Āthār (Radiant Lights in the Compendium of Sciences and Traditions), by Majd al-Dīn ibn Muḥammad al-Muʾayyidī (d. 1428 AH). Chapter: The Impeachment of al-Zuhrī, and of Wāʾil ibn Ḥujr.