نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری علوم قرآن و حدیث دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران
2 استاد گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث دانشکدگان فارابی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
3 دانشیار گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
This study undertakes an analytic–critical reassessment of the reliability (thiqa) of Abu Balj al-Fazari within the Sunni rijāl tradition. Methodologically, it combines explicit tawthīq—e.g., Ibn Maʿīn, al-Nasāʾī, al-Dāraqutnī, and Ibn Abī Ḥātim—with practical validations, including Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal’s reliance in the Musnad, rulings of ḥasan/ṣaḥīḥ by al-Tirmidhī and others, inclusion in Ibn Ḥibbān’s al-Thiqat, al-Bukhārī’s silence in al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr, and the authentications of al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrī and Ḍiyāʾ al-Dīn al-Maqdisī; and then probes counter-jarḥ reports: the statement attributed to al-Bukhārī (fīhi naẓar), al-Jawzajānī’s censure, Ibn Ḥibbān’s note (yakhtiʾ), and the remarks of al-Azdi and al-Dhahabī. The findings are threefold: (1) the attribution of fīhi naẓar to al-Bukhārī is isnād-problematic and—even if accepted—amounts to an ambiguous/soft jarḥ; (2) al-Jawzajānī’s criticism bears a sectarian anti-Kufan/anti-Shiʿi bias and, against the testimony of stricter validators, lacks decisive probative force; (3) Ibn Ḥibbān’s notice of “error” coheres with Abu Balj’s listing in al-Thiqat and does not negate overall acceptability. On this basis, the positive evidence (explicit tawthīq + practical authentication) outweighs non-mufassar or ideologically colored jarḥ; the resultant rijāl judgment is ḥasan al-ḥadīth / thiqa mukhtalaf fīh, with the balance favoring tawthīq. Semantically, Ibn ʿAbbās’s report in al-Mustadrak—with the clause “laysa li-aḥadin ghayruhu”—clusters key faḍāʾil (from earliest faith to Ghadīr and Sadd al-Abwāb) toward establishing the wilāya and precedence of ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib; its status is at least ḥasan, and for some authorities ṣaḥīḥ.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)