تحليل الرواة المحكوم عليهم بالمطروح في كتاب ميزان الاعتدال للذهبي (دراسة استقرائية مقارنة)

An Analysis of Narrators Judged as Maṭrūḥ in al-Dhahabī’s Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl (A Comparative Inductive Study)

Abstract

This study examines the scholarly standing of narrators who are designated as mathrūḥ in Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl. Adopting a qualitative approach grounded in library research, the study draws upon primary and supporting sources analyzed through a descriptive–analytical method. The theoretical framework is anchored in the principles of jarḥ wa-taʿdīl, while the findings are derived through deductive reasoning. The study concludes that the term mathrūḥ, in its technical usage among ḥadīth scholars, denotes an extreme degree of weakness that necessitates rejecting the report and precludes its acceptance as evidence in scholarly or legal argumentation. This specialized technical meaning differs from the general linguistic sense, which does not necessarily entail censure or disparagement. In Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl by Imām al-Dhahabī, the designation mathrūḥ is employed to indicate a very severe form of jarḥ that requires the complete rejection of a narrator. Explicitly, this label appears only for two narrators: Sahl b. ʿAmmār Abū Yaḥyā al-Nīsābūrī and Ḥussām b. Miṣk al-Azdī, both judged to suffer from serious defects in transmission. There is consensus on abandoning Sahl b. ʿAmmār in practical transmission, alongside accusations of mendacity and claims of having heard from shaykhs whom he did not in fact meet, which invalidated his reports. As for Ḥussām b. Miṣk al-Azdī, the criticism directed at him is broader and more consistent: his reports were described as weak and munkar, and despite the presence of comparatively milder assessments, these were invariably coupled with remarks about poor retention and frequent errors, rendering them incapable of counterbalancing the strong and repeated jarḥ. These two cases demonstrate that mathrūḥ in Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl occupies a very low rank in the hierarchy of narrator evaluation, approaching the category of matrūk, such that the reports of anyone so designated are categorically rejected and cannot be cited as scholarly or legal proof.