In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. All praise is due to Allah. I bear witness that there is no god but Allah, alone, without partner, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His servant and Messenger ﷺ.
Continuation of the chapter on the solitary report:
In this section Imam al-Shafi’i continues his discussion of the authority of the solitary report (khabar al-wahid). He answers the objections raised against accepting it on the basis of the difference between it, testimony, and a judge’s ruling, and he explains some issues connected with it, stressing that the solitary report is a legal proof when it meets the conditions of acceptance.
The main points Imam al-Shafi’i addressed in this section:
- A judge’s ruling is a kind of binding report: Imam al-Shafi’i explains that a judge’s ruling against one person in favour of another is a kind of binding report, because it is a report of knowledge that came to him through evidence and testimony, or through admission and acknowledgement. Just as a judge’s ruling is carried out on the strength of his report, so too the solitary report concerning the lawful and the unlawful makes acting upon it binding.
- The difference between a judge’s ruling and a witness’s testimony: Imam al-Shafi’i explains the difference between a judge’s ruling and a witness’s testimony. If witnesses testify before a judge against a person whose case has not been brought before him, or the opposing party admits it, the judge is not obliged to rule on it, because the dispute has not been brought to him. If, however, the case is brought before him, he is obliged to rule according to what has been established before him by testimony or admission. Likewise, the witness does not carry out his own testimony; it requires the judge’s ruling.
- ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab abandoning his opinion for the authentic hadith: Imam al-Shafi’i mentions the story of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, abandoning his opinion on the blood money (diya) for the fingers when the hadith of the Prophet ﷺ on it reached him; likewise his abandoning his opinion on a wife’s inheritance from her husband’s blood money when the hadith of al-Dahhak ibn Sufyan reached him; and likewise his abandoning his opinion concerning the Magians (Majus) when the hadith of ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Awf reached him. He explains that this shows the obligation to abandon opinion (ra’y) and act on the authentic hadith.
- ‘Umar’s acceptance of the solitary report, may Allah be pleased with him: Imam al-Shafi’i explains that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, used to accept the solitary report, and gives examples of this, such as his accepting the report of Abu Musa al-Ash’ari on seeking permission to enter (isti’dhan), the report of ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Awf on the plague, and the report of Habl ibn Malik on the foetus. He explains that his asking, at times, for another witness alongside the narrator was by way of caution or to verify the narrator’s condition or strength, not by way of making it a condition.
- The reasons for ‘Umar asking for another witness alongside the narrator: Imam al-Shafi’i explains three reasons for ‘Umar asking for another witness alongside the narrator:
- Caution: To increase certainty and reassurance, not as a condition.
- Narration from an unknown person: If the narrator’s condition was unknown to ‘Umar, he would ask for another witness alongside him.
- Narration from a weak person: If the narrator was weak or his narration was rejected, he would ask for another witness alongside him.
- Response to those who deny that ‘Umar accepted the solitary report: Imam al-Shafi’i responds to those who deny that ‘Umar accepted the solitary report, and shows that ‘Umar’s acceptance of the solitary report is established by the proofs, and that his asking for another witness at times does not contradict this; rather, it is to be understood according to one of the three reasons mentioned.
- Indication from the Qur’an for accepting the solitary report: Imam al-Shafi’i points to an indication from the Qur’an for accepting the solitary report, and explains that the Qur’an did not prohibit accepting the solitary report; rather, it mentioned the testimony of two women in certain cases, and did not prevent accepting what is less than that when proofs establish it.
- The difference between the solitary report and testimony with respect to uprightness: Imam al-Shafi’i explains another difference between the solitary report and testimony with respect to uprightness (‘adala): the witness may be upright in himself yet have his testimony rejected in certain matters (such as the testimony of an opposing party, or of one who draws a benefit to himself or to another), whereas the narrator of hadith reports what is lawful and unlawful for the Muslims at large, and thereby draws no benefit to himself or anyone else, so this suspicion does not attach to him.
- Circumstances in which narrations are given preference: Imam al-Shafi’i explains some of the circumstances in which some narrations are given preference over others, such as the narrator relating the hadith while in his final illness, or the hadith agreeing with the narration of trustworthy, precise, and meticulous narrators.
- Knowing the truthfulness or falsehood of a hadith: Imam al-Shafi’i explains that the truthfulness or falsehood of a hadith is known, in the overwhelming majority of cases, by investigating the truthfulness or falsehood of the narrator, and that examining the text (matn) of the hadith comes into play only in a few cases, such as when the narrator relates something whose like cannot possibly be true, or something that contradicts what is more firmly established and supported by more evidence.
- The difference between narrating from the Prophet ﷺ and narrating from the Children of Israel: Imam al-Shafi’i explains the difference between narrating from the Prophet ﷺ and narrating from the Children of Israel. Narrating from the Prophet ﷺ is subject to greater strictness, so one may narrate only from a trustworthy source, whereas in narrating from the Children of Israel it is permissible to relate what is not known to be true or false, by way of supporting illustration (isti’nas), not as proof (istidlal).
Additional clarifications:
- The letter of ‘Amr ibn Hazm: This is a letter that the Prophet ﷺ had written for ‘Amr ibn Hazm and the people of Yemen, containing legal rulings. The scholars differed over the authenticity of its chain of transmission, and the preponderant view is that it is authentic.
- The practice of the people of Madinah: This is the practice of the people of Madinah in the time of the Companions and the Successors. The scholars differed over its authority, and the preponderant view is that it does not override the authentic hadith.
- Consensus (ijma’): This is the agreement of all the scholars of the Muslims in a given era on a legal ruling, and it is a definitive proof that may not be contradicted.
Final summary:
In this section Imam al-Shafi’i sets out the authority of the solitary report and answers the objections raised against accepting it. He clarifies the ways in which the solitary report differs from testimony and from a judge’s ruling, and stresses that the solitary report is a legal proof when it meets the conditions of acceptance, that the proofs indicate it is to be accepted even if it comes from only one person, and that knowing the narrator’s uprightness and precision is among the most important of these conditions.
All parts of Summary of the Explanation of al-Shafi'i's al-Risala by Dr. Yasir Burhami