AMBIGUOUS AUTHORIZATION IN HADITH: EVALUATIONS ABOUT THE EXPRESSION 'THE PERSON I DON'T ACCUSE'

Following the emergence of chain in the history of hadith, criticism and approval activities started and it was tried to determine whether the narrators who carried the texts to the next generations were qualified for the narration. Although their names are mentioned, the narrations of unknown persons about whom there is no information were approached with suspicion, and different opinions were expressed about the narrators whose proficiency in the science of hadith is unknown, even if their personality is known. Although it is possible to extend the said sensitivity to the general public in the period of narration, it is seen that some narrators in classical hadith sources are mentioned with expressions such as a trustworthy or the person I do not accuse that gives the impression of approval. It is controversial how these usages, which are more common especially in the first three layers of the chain, should be evaluated. While some of the scholars said that if a reputable narrator narrates, these expressions meaning the proof of trust cannot be accepted due to ignorance. And some scholars have stated that these uses of the narrator whose criticism is trusted may be acceptable.The issue of ambiguous narrators was generally handled under the title of unknown in hadith method sources and it was stated that they had the same ruling. It has been seen that the phrases that the subject of the trustworthy informed me and the person I did not accuse informed me were evaluated separately from other ambiguous words. It has been determined that the aforementioned approval expressions were used more widely, especially in the first centuries of the hijri, and this usage decreased considerably as of the third century, when the hadith literature began to include the narrations with perfect attributions. They mentioned these words, especially when transmitting from the elder narrator of the most famous figures in the history of hadith, such as Ibn Sirin (d. 110/729), Ibn Shihab (d. 124/742) and Shafi'i (d. 204/820).When the sources are scanned; there are two different ambiguous authorization approaches, such as accepting it as absolute weak or accepting it as valid with some records. Although it is mentioned that some scholars are regarded as indifferent, the credibility of the person who uses the phrase in question appears as a prerequisite for almost everyone who has an opinion on this matter. It is seen that there are negative opinions in some sources about the validity of the ambiguous expressions in the chain. In this regard, the names of Shafi'i hadith scholar and Shafi'i jurist Abu Bakr al-Sayrafi (d. 330/941) and Hatib al-Baghdadi (d. 463/1071) come to the fore, and these two names are emphasized in almost every source. It is seen that the authors of the hadith method mostly viewed the issue negatively.Ibn Ishaq, Malik b. Enes and Shafii's use of ani's-sika/from the trustworthy, men erda min ehli'l-ilm/someone with knowledge I agree with and similar expressions as well as the word the person I do not accuse causes the ambiguous subject of vindication to be discussed around them frequently. Among these uses, especially the expression ani's-sika/from the trustworthy was compared with the person I do not accuse and it was stated that although there were similarities, the person I do not accuse were at a lower level. What they have in common is that the narration conveyed by both words is considered weak if there is no attestation or parallel version. In the examination, it was seen that the expression the person I do not accuse was used more about weak narrators compared to other ambiguous words.As a result, it is necessary to make separate evaluations about each narrator regarding the use of the person I do not accuse, whom we think that there can be no absolute acceptance or rejection. Although it is sometimes possible to determine the ambiguous narrator, reasons such as the existence of more than one source from which the hadith narrating the narration in this way, ambiguous authorization should not be used only for weak narrators, sometimes using this wording by another narrator in the chain to his teacher, the fact that there are only partial determinations by his students or recent scholars about names such as Ibn Ishaq, Malik and Shafii, but no determination has been made regarding other names using this word make it difficult to determine the identity of the narrator.