Source: Fatāwā ʿIlmiyyah (Tawḍīḥ al-Aḥkām), vol. 2, p. 296
Does the additional wording of a thiqah (trustworthy) narrator count as opposition (mukhālafah) to other trustworthy narrators who did not mention it?
Maulānā Irshād al-Ḥaqq al-Atharī said:
“…Therefore, when Shuʿbah, Hishām, Maʿmar and others — who are more trustworthy and more precise than Sulaymān — do not mention this addition, this narration is shādh, as the definition of shādh is that a trustworthy narrator contradicts one who is more trustworthy…”
(Tawḍīḥ al-Kalām, new ed., p. 667)
From this, it appears that if one narrator mentions something and other trustworthy narrators omit it, this counts as opposition.
The question is:
Does an addition by a trustworthy narrator automatically count as opposition to others who did not mention it?
What is the definition of opposition in the context of shādh?
When is the addition of a trustworthy narrator acceptable, and when is it counted as shādh?
Al-ḥamdu lillāh, waṣ-ṣalātu wa-s-salāmu ʿalā Rasūlillāh, ammā baʿd!
Maulānā Irshād al-Ḥaqq al-Atharī’s position — that merely mentioning something not mentioned by others constitutes mukhālafah — is not correct.
Opposition (mukhālafah) occurs only when:
A trustworthy narrator narrates something contrary to the explicit wording of other multiple trustworthy or more trustworthy narrators.
Ikhtiṣār ʿUlūm al-Ḥadīth by Ibn Kathīr, 1/182 (with al-Albānī’s notes)
Mere omission by others does not equal contradiction.
In one narration it is stated that the Prophet ﷺ used to move his index finger during tashahhud.
Another narration states that he did not move his finger.
The second report is weak because:
If we were to declare every addition shādh simply because others did not mention it, we would be rejecting many authentic aḥādīth. That is incorrect.
Narration: Sulaymān al-Taymī narrated:
«وَإِذَا قَرَأَ فَأَنْصِتُوا»
“And when he recites, then remain silent.”
This narration is authentic and preserved.
Some scholars have declared it weak or defective — this is incorrect. Declaring an authentic narration in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim as ḍaʿīf or shādh is impermissible.
Some people use this narration against reciting Sūrat al-Fātiḥah behind the imām. This is wrong for two reasons:
Principle in uṣūl al-fiqh:
“A specific (khāṣṣ) text takes precedence over a general (ʿāmm) text and restricts its scope.”
Summary:
✔ Mere omission by trustworthy narrators is not opposition.
✔ True opposition occurs when one thiqah narrates in direct contradiction to multiple awthaq narrators.
✔ The addition of a trustworthy narrator is acceptable if it does not contradict stronger narrations and is free from ʿillah.
✔ Authentic narrations in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim cannot be declared weak without valid scholarly cause recognised by the muḥaddithīn.
ھذا ما عندي والله أعلم بالصواب
❖ Question
Does the additional wording of a thiqah (trustworthy) narrator count as opposition (mukhālafah) to other trustworthy narrators who did not mention it?
Maulānā Irshād al-Ḥaqq al-Atharī said:
“…Therefore, when Shuʿbah, Hishām, Maʿmar and others — who are more trustworthy and more precise than Sulaymān — do not mention this addition, this narration is shādh, as the definition of shādh is that a trustworthy narrator contradicts one who is more trustworthy…”
(Tawḍīḥ al-Kalām, new ed., p. 667)
From this, it appears that if one narrator mentions something and other trustworthy narrators omit it, this counts as opposition.
The question is:
Does an addition by a trustworthy narrator automatically count as opposition to others who did not mention it? What is the definition of opposition in the context of shādh? When is the addition of a trustworthy narrator acceptable, and when is it counted as shādh?❖ Answer
Al-ḥamdu lillāh, waṣ-ṣalātu wa-s-salāmu ʿalā Rasūlillāh, ammā baʿd!
1. Mere Omission Is Not Opposition
Maulānā Irshād al-Ḥaqq al-Atharī’s position — that merely mentioning something not mentioned by others constitutes mukhālafah — is not correct.
Opposition (mukhālafah) occurs only when:A trustworthy narrator narrates something contrary to the explicit wording of other multiple trustworthy or more trustworthy narrators.
Ikhtiṣār ʿUlūm al-Ḥadīth by Ibn Kathīr, 1/182 (with al-Albānī’s notes)Mere omission by others does not equal contradiction.
2. Example of True Opposition (Shudhūdh)
In one narration it is stated that the Prophet ﷺ used to move his index finger during tashahhud.
Another narration states that he did not move his finger.
The second report is weak because:
- It is from Muḥammad ibn ʿAjlān, who is a mudallis.
- It contradicts the authentic narration — making it shādh or munkar.
3. Why Mere Addition Should Not Be Declared Shādh
If we were to declare every addition shādh simply because others did not mention it, we would be rejecting many authentic aḥādīth. That is incorrect.
4. Important Note — Example from Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim
Narration: Sulaymān al-Taymī narrated:
«وَإِذَا قَرَأَ فَأَنْصِتُوا»
“And when he recites, then remain silent.”
This narration is authentic and preserved.
Some scholars have declared it weak or defective — this is incorrect. Declaring an authentic narration in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim as ḍaʿīf or shādh is impermissible.
5. Misuse in the Debate over Fātiḥah Behind the Imām
Some people use this narration against reciting Sūrat al-Fātiḥah behind the imām. This is wrong for two reasons:
- According to Ḥanafī principles, this ḥadīth is mansūkh (abrogated) because its narrator, Abū Hurayrah رضي الله عنه, issued a fatwā affirming Fātiḥah behind the imām.
- The narration is interpreted as referring to remaining silent for recitation other than Fātiḥah, because other authentic aḥādīth specify the recitation of Fātiḥah behind the imām.
Principle in uṣūl al-fiqh:“A specific (khāṣṣ) text takes precedence over a general (ʿāmm) text and restricts its scope.”
Summary:
✔ Mere omission by trustworthy narrators is not opposition.
✔ True opposition occurs when one thiqah narrates in direct contradiction to multiple awthaq narrators.
✔ The addition of a trustworthy narrator is acceptable if it does not contradict stronger narrations and is free from ʿillah.
✔ Authentic narrations in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim cannot be declared weak without valid scholarly cause recognised by the muḥaddithīn.
ھذا ما عندي والله أعلم بالصواب
