{"title":"تدليس ابن جريج بين النظرية والتطبيق: دراسة تطبيقية على صحيح ابن حبان","authors":"Majed Muhammad Abdoh","doi":"10.1163/22321969-12340101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis study discusses the accusation pointed to “Ibn Juraij” theoretically and practically; Some of these accusations were spread by many Imams of hadith but upon investigation and following the statements of the senior critics it shows that they either did not declare these accusations, or they meant the fraud. The significance of this research lies in rejecting the suspicion that Ibn Hibban was described with leniency in documenting the narrator’s accusation of changing the wording of the transmission of the hadith from someone who spoke to us or told us into a formula that blurred others or delusional information so that it was heard while he actually did not hear it. One of the most important objectives of this research is to find a scientific and specialized study of the narrators accused of this change in Sahih Ibn Hibban, and to clarify their status. This results in the correction of their hadiths in his Sahih and the discussion of those accused of discussing, such as Ibn Juri. The researcher followed historical “retrospective” approach in understanding the terminology of the hadith in which the imams contested with Ibn Hibban, such as the definition of Deception, its applications; and the critical analytical approach to discuss the sayings and rules that Ibn Hibban and the most scholars said in matters of al-Jarh and al-Tadeel, and to discuss the validity of the offender’s claim and accuse Ibn Hibban of insufficiency in his method of correctness and its degree, in accepting the narrators accused of deception. As for the most distinguished results, it was found that Ibn Juraij used to mislead the deception of the Sheikhs, only this has been proven from his sheikh Ibrahim bin Abi Yahya. However, he was not overbearing of deception.","PeriodicalId":40915,"journal":{"name":"Al-Bayan-Journal of Quran and Hadith Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Al-Bayan-Journal of Quran and Hadith Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22321969-12340101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study discusses the accusation pointed to “Ibn Juraij” theoretically and practically; Some of these accusations were spread by many Imams of hadith but upon investigation and following the statements of the senior critics it shows that they either did not declare these accusations, or they meant the fraud. The significance of this research lies in rejecting the suspicion that Ibn Hibban was described with leniency in documenting the narrator’s accusation of changing the wording of the transmission of the hadith from someone who spoke to us or told us into a formula that blurred others or delusional information so that it was heard while he actually did not hear it. One of the most important objectives of this research is to find a scientific and specialized study of the narrators accused of this change in Sahih Ibn Hibban, and to clarify their status. This results in the correction of their hadiths in his Sahih and the discussion of those accused of discussing, such as Ibn Juri. The researcher followed historical “retrospective” approach in understanding the terminology of the hadith in which the imams contested with Ibn Hibban, such as the definition of Deception, its applications; and the critical analytical approach to discuss the sayings and rules that Ibn Hibban and the most scholars said in matters of al-Jarh and al-Tadeel, and to discuss the validity of the offender’s claim and accuse Ibn Hibban of insufficiency in his method of correctness and its degree, in accepting the narrators accused of deception. As for the most distinguished results, it was found that Ibn Juraij used to mislead the deception of the Sheikhs, only this has been proven from his sheikh Ibrahim bin Abi Yahya. However, he was not overbearing of deception.
本文从理论和实践两方面探讨了针对“伊本·朱莱吉”的指控;其中一些指控是由许多圣训伊玛目传播的,但经过调查和根据高级评论家的陈述,表明他们要么没有宣布这些指控,要么就是故意欺诈。这项研究的意义在于驳斥了这样一种怀疑,即伊本·希班在记录叙述者的指控时被仁慈地描述了,叙述者指责他改变了对我们说话或告诉我们的人传递圣训的措辞,将其变成了一种模糊他人或虚假信息的公式,以便听到它,而他实际上没有听到它。本研究的一个最重要的目标是找到一个科学的和专门的研究被指控在Sahih Ibn Hibban的这种变化的叙述者,并澄清他们的地位。这导致在他的圣训中纠正他们的圣训,并对那些被指控讨论的人进行讨论,如伊本·朱里。研究人员采用历史“回溯”的方法来理解伊玛目与伊本·希班争论的圣训术语,如欺骗的定义及其应用;以及批判性分析的方法来讨论伊本·希班和大多数学者在al-Jarh和al-Tadeel问题上所说的言论和规则,讨论冒犯者主张的有效性并指责伊本·希班在他的正确方法和程度上的不足,在接受被指控欺骗的叙述者时。至于最显著的结果,人们发现Ibn Juraij曾经误导了酋长们的欺骗,只是他的酋长易卜拉欣·本·阿比·叶海亚证明了这一点。然而,他并没有欺骗别人。