. J "" (cont.)

The scholars who have approved of this hadith include the following: ibn Hibbaan,2 al-Haakim, al-Dhahabi,3 ibn Katheer,4 al-Sakhaawi,5 al­ Suyooti,6 al-Haitami,7 al-Wazeer al-Yamaani,8 al-Albaani,9 Shuaib al­ Arnaoot, 10 ibn Muhammad, 1 1 and al-Hilaali.12 However, none of those scholars attempted to determine the exact or correct wording of the hadith. It is clear that the narrations on the authority of al-Auzaai from Ataa are all of one and the same hadith. Either the word J ("for my sake") forms part of that hadith or it does not. The conclusion hereand Allah knows bestis that the word J does not form part of the hadith. It must be considered shaadh. 13 At least seven 1 Cf., ibn Hajr, Tahdheeb, vol. 3, p. 429. 2 See al-Faarisi, vol. 16, p. 202. 3 Al-Haakim, vol. 2, p. 1 98. 4 lsmaaeel ibn Katheer, Tuhfah al-Taalib bi-Marifah Ahaadeeth Mukhtasar ibn al-Haajib ঄Makkah: Daar al-Hiraa, 1406 A.H.), pp. 271 -274. al-Sakhaawi, pp. 369-371. 6 al-Suyooti, Al-Ashbaah wa al-Nadhaair, p. 206. 7 Al-Haitami, Fath, p. 274. He, like al-Nawawi, concluded that it is hasan. 8 Muhammad al-Wazeer al-Yamaani, Al-Awaasim min al-Qawaasim fi al-Dhabb an Sunnah Abi al-Qaasim (Beirut: Muassasah al-Risaalah, 1 992), vol. 1, pp. 1 92-196. 9 Al-Albaani, lrwaa, vol. 1, p. 1 23. 10 Shuaib al-Arnaoot, footnotes to al-Faarisi, vol. 16, pp. 203-203. 1 1 Ibn Muhammad, pp. 2 15-22 1 . 12 Al-Hilaali, lqaadh, pp. 528-529. 13 Shaadh is where trustworthy reporters report something in such a way that it contradicts what is proven through stronger means. Some may argue that this is a case of ziyaadat-ul-thiqa, wherein a trustworthy narrator bas narrated additional information when compared to the other narrators. In general, such additional information is considered acceptable as long as it does not negate the meaning of what the others have narrated. That is the general principle but like all other general principles, it is only applied if other evidence does not lead one to conclude something else. This is why Ahmad Shaakir wrote, "Yes, [it is possible] that the researcher notes evidence and strong circumstantial points that leads him to conclude that the additional words from the trustworthy narrator are shaadh and mistaken. However, that occurs so rarely that one cannot build a general principle upon it." [See Ahmad Shaakir, al-Baath al-Hatheeth Sharh lkhtisaar Uloom al-hadith (Damascus: Daar al-Faihaa, 1 994), p. 7 1 .] In other words, there must be some limit to the acceptability of additional words from trustworthy narrators. In this 1 198 Hadith #39: "Allah has pardoned . . . " narrators have narrated this hadith from Al-Rabee ibn Sulaiman without the word é in it while only two reported it from him with that word as part of the hadith. Furthermore, Bahr ibn Nadhr, a trustworthy narrator, is in agreement with al-Rabee in narrating this hadith from Bishr without the word é in it. In addition, the mursal report from Ataa, which is most likely the same hadith with the same chain, also does not have this word in it. Finally, the mursal reports from al-Hasan that have good chains also do not have this word in it. Hence, it must be concluded that the inclusion of this word in this particular hadith is a mistake. Most likely the source of the mistake is al-Rabee himself who, although unquestionably a trustworthy narrator, was also characterized at one time as having some great forgetfulness in his reports. 1 The correct wording or meaning of this hadith is as follows: ,,. o ,,. tM ,,,,,. ,,. ,,. I "' P ¼ I ' Commentary on the Forty Hadith of al-Nawawi him) actually said. 1 If the scholars of hadith have no evidence that will lead them to believe that the Prophet (peace be upon him) made a specific statement, they cannot then attribute that statement to the Prophet (peace be upon him). In doing so, they would be committing a grave sin by claiming the Prophet (peace be upon him) had said something that they do not have evidence to support. A second important reason is that once the wording of the Prophet (peace be upon him) is determined, then that wording can be studied to derive as many lessons and rulings as possible. If the proper wording is not first determined, then the conclusions drawn from such a hadith may be erroneous. The importance of this aspect can be seen in this particular hadith. Many of the commentators on this hadith stressed the word é ("for me") that this author concludes is not part of the hadith. For example, al-Sindi's commentary on this hadith is one of his shortest on al-Nawawi's collection, being only six lines. Besides the text of the hadith itself, half of his commentary is as follows, "Verily Allah" who gave me [the Prophet (peace be upon him)] what He gave to no one else of special miracles "pardons" out of honor for me. . .