And among the Tabi’un...

And among the Tabi’un, we can refer to al-Shi’bi whose age exceeded one hundred years, and Ibn Sirin (110) and Sa’id ibn al-Musayyab (190). It is said that Shu’bah, who used to call al-Shi’bi with the title Amir al-Mu’minin in hadith, was the first to comment on rijal, and he was born in 82 H. and dead in 160H. He mentioned many critics of the 2nd century.

What he said about this century: In its beginnings there were some unreliable narrators among the Tabi’un, the weakness of most of whom often originated before their being able to control the exactitude and correctness of hadith, as they used to narrate many mursal traditions and make the mawquf as marfu’, with committing several mistakes. The most eminent critics in the end of the 2nd century were the authority Yahya ibn Sa’id al-Qattan (198) and Abd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi (198).

Since they were both trusted by people, whoever was deemed trustworthy by them would attain approval among people, and that deemed untrustworthy by them would be of no worth among people. And in regard of one concerning whom difference of opinion was there, people would refer to what they preponderated. The first one undertaking the task of collecting his utterance on jarh and ta’dil was Yahya ibn Sa’id al-Qattan.

After him, another one of his disciples, Yahya ibn Mu’in (d.233), had a commentary too, in which his opinions and expressions differed regarding some of the rijal. Among the disciples of Yahya ibn Mu’in we can refer to Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d.241) and Ali ibn al-Midyani (d.224) and others. About this subject a commend is ascribed to Muhammad ibn Sa’d (d.230), the scribe of al-Waqidi in his Tabaqat, whose statement was good and reasonable.

I am not to cite the names of all those who discussed the subject of jarh and ta’dil as this being out of scope here. Reasons of Jarh: Ibn Hajar says: Reasons of jarh are different, that can be restricted in five main things: Bid’ah (heresy), or contradiction, error, or ignorance of conditions, or claim of interruption in the sanad, as when claiming that the narrator was defrauding or giving mursal hadith.

635 Disagreement Regarding Jarh and Ta’dil: There was disagreement among ulama’ of jarh in regard of jarh and ta’dil proportionate to difference of their schools (madhahib) and conditions. Al-Hazimi, in Shurut al-A’immah al-Khamsah, says: The leaders (imams) of naql (reporting), with their multifarious madhahib and inconsistent states in usage of items, differ in most of them.