12.3 Mtu Ambaye Riwaya Yake Inakubaliwa na Mtu Ambaye Riwaya Yake Haikubaliwi, na Ufafanuzi wa (Elimu ya) Kukosoa na Kuthibitisha Uaminifu (al-jarh wa ta'dīl)

12.3 Mtu Ambaye Riwaya Yake Inakubaliwa na Mtu Ambaye Riwaya Yake Haikubaliwi, na Ufafanuzi wa (Elimu ya) Kukosoa na Kuthibitisha Uaminifu (al-jarh wa ta'dīl) - Utu wa Kiislamu | Quran Course

Ta'dīl ya msimulizi (kuthibitisha uaminifu wake) inakubaliwa, iwe sababu yake imetajwa au haijatajwa; tofauti na jarh (kumtia dosari). Kwa sababu ya mitazamo tofauti ya watu kuhusu sababu za mafsaqah (ufasiki), jarh haikubaliwi isipokuwa sababu yake imefafanuliwa na kubainishwa. Anayemtia dosari msimulizi (jārih) anaweza kuamini kwamba jambo fulani ni ufasiki, hivyo akamhukumu msimulizi huyo kuwa dhaifu, lakini kwa kweli huenda jambo hilo lisiwe ufasiki, au huenda lisiwe ufasiki kwa wengine; yaani, mtu anaweza kulichukulia jambo fulani kuwa sababu ya jarh kwa kuzingatia kile anachodhani kuwa jarh, ilhali kwa kweli si jarh halali. Ndiyo maana kufafanua sababu ya jarh kumewekwa kuwa sharti, ili iwezekane kuchunguza kama ni jarh halali au la. Jarh inaweza kuthibitishwa na mtu mmoja; hakuna sharti la idadi. Mtu mmoja anatosha katika kumthibitisha (ta'dīl) na kumtia dosari (tajrīh) msimulizi kuhusu adalah yake, kwa sababu hilo ni kutoa habari, na kwa habari mtu mmoja anatosha. Vivyo hivyo katika kukubali habari, ambapo mtu mmoja anatosha; idadi haishurutishwi katika kutia dosari au kuthibitisha adalah ya msimulizi. Iwapo kwa mtu mmoja zitakusanyika jarh, ambayo sababu yake imefafanuliwa, na ta'dīl, basi jarh ndiyo inayopewa kipaumbele, hata kama watu wengi wanathibitisha adalah yake. Hii ni kwa sababu anayethibitisha (mu'addil) anatoa habari ya hali ya wazi ya msimulizi, ilhali anayetia dosari (jārih) anatoa habari ya jambo lililofichika na lisilojulikana kwa anayethibitisha. Kuhusu wingi wa wanaothibitisha, hilo halina thamani, kwa kuwa hiyo si sababu ya kukubali habari. Sababu yenyewe ni kujuana (itlā') na hali ya msimulizi, au kukosekana kwa kujuana huko. Wafuqahāʼ wamezuia hili kwa wakati ambapo mu'addil (mshuhudiaji wa uadilifu) hasemi: "Ninajua sababu iliyotajwa na jārih (mwenye kumkosoa), lakini ametubu tangu hapo na hali yake imeimarika." Pale jārih anapotaja sababu maalum ya kumbatilisha mtu, mu'addil anaweza kuifuta ikiwa anajua jambo lolote linaloonyesha kwa hakika kwamba sababu hiyo imefutwa.

Attestation (ta’dīl) of a transmitter's reliability is accepted, whether the reasoning is mentioned or not; contrary to the invalidation (jarh). Due to the divergent views of people as to the causes of mafsaqah (transgression), it (jarh) is not accepted except when the reason has been explained and clarified. The one who invalidates (jārih) a transmitter may believe something to be a transgression so he judges the transmitter as weak but in reality it may not be so, or it might not be so according to others; that is, one may consider something as an invalidation based on what he believes to be an invalidation which in reality is not a (legitimate) invalidation. That is why explanation of the reason for invalidation has been made a condition so that one can look into whether it is a (legitimate) invalidation or not. The invalidation can be established by one person; there is no stipulation on the number. One person is sufficient in attesting (ta’dīl) and invalidating (tajrīh) a transmitter's adalāh because it constitutes the informing of a report for which one person is sufficient. Similarly, in the accepting of a report – rather one person is sufficient - the number is not stipulated in invalidating or attesting a transmitter’s adalāh. When there combines in one person an invalidation (jarh), the reason for which is clarified, and an attestation, then the invalidation (jarh) is given precedence, even if there are many people attesting to (the transmitter’s) adalāh because the one who attests (mu'addil) a transmitter’s reliability informs of what is apparent of the transmitter’s condition but the one who invalidates (jārih) informs of what is hidden and concealed from the one who validates. As for the number of those validating being greater that is of no value for that is not the reason (‘illah) for accepting the report. Rather, the reason is familiarity (itlā’) (with a transmitter’s condition) or the lack of familiarity. The fuqahā restricted this to when the attestator (mu’addil) does not say: ‘I know the reason mentioned by the jārih but he has since repented and his condition has improved’. When the jārih mentions a specific reason for invalidation, the mu'addil can nullify it if he knows anything that indicates definitely that the reason has been nullified.