The Concept and Implementation of Al-Tawaqquf in Mukhtalif Al-Hadith

The opinions of hadith scholars on the al-Tawaqquf concept in Mukhtalif al-Hadith

The word al-Tawaqquf is made out of three Arabic characters specifically Waw-Qaf-Fa which means not rushing in doing something, and then adapting to it. ( Ibn Faris, 1979). Also mentioned is Waqafa – Yaqifu – Wuquf , which means always standing. Awqafa means silent and Awqafa ‘Anhu means to refrain from speaking and to staying away ( Al-Fayruz Abadi, 2005). Al-Tawaqquf fi al-Shay’ seems to stop and observe while al-Tawaqquf ‘alayh means seeking to find evidence ( Ibn Manzur, 1993, 1414H; Al-Fayruz Abadi, 2005). Based on these definitions, al-Tawaqquf in sharia terminology means not in a hurry to make a decision, not making an opinion on a particular matter and refraining from making a decision; but continues to find strong evidence by means of conducting observation and research.

From the point of terminology, hadith scholars do not elaborate in detail the definition in the works of Mustalah al-Hadith . Instead some of them present only some clues that can be understood in the context of al-Tawaqquf . Al-Sakhawi ( 2003), al-Suyuti ( 1979) and al-Khayr Abadi ( 2011) define al-Tawaqquf as: If a Mujtahid does not find a method to Tarjih , hence Tawaqquf from practicing one of the two hadiths until everything is clear of the suitable Tarjih method applicable to one of the hadiths.

The above definition only discusses the approach to be taken in the event of a Mujtahid being unable to find a solution but it does not explicitly define al-Tawaqquf .

Ibn Hajar (2012, p. 79) offers the same view but he explains it indirectly when he differentiates between al-Tawaqquf and al-Tasaqut as follows:

“The expression of al-Tawaqquf is more important than that of al-Tasaqut (abolishing the hadith) because of the hidden al-Tarjih of one hadith against another is attributed to the researcher of that time. Whereas there is possibility that the concealed matter could be resolved by other people.”

The above is a direct criticism against the method of al-Tasaqut used by several scholars when they are unable to practice both hadiths. The term al-Tawaqquf is a more fitting term to describe the inability of Mujtahid to apply al-Tarjih upon conflicting hadiths. Ibn Hajar’s statement is supported by and further developed by a contemporary scholar Qudah ( 2001, p. 15). He explains the following:

“We should employ al-Tawaqquf until comes to us new information; nor do we say: reject both hadiths or abolish them because (that is) the manners in dealing with the hadiths of the Prophet (p.b.u.h) and due to our inability to find the appropriate methods for al-Jam’ or al-Tarjih . This does not mean that the error explicitly occurs in the textual part of the hadith, for there is possibility that the negligence could occur from our part. Perhaps after some time, it will be revealed to us the form of al-Tarjih that has been hidden at present yet perhaps there is possibility of it being discovered by others while we remain oblivious.”

Based on the assessment of Ibn Hajar and Qudah, both agree that al-Tawaqquf characteristically does not renounce or neglect any hadiths of the Prophet (p.b.u.h). In fact, it serves to put a pause on the part of the narrator from deriving any decision until a clear indication comes to light to resolve the conflict.

In addition, al-Hammadi (2012, p. 138) also offers a more structured definition as follows:

“A Mujtahid terminates pracising ( tark al-‘amal ) on any one of the two conflicting hadiths due to his weaknesses in dissolving the discrepancies between the two.”

This definition focuses on al-Tawaqquf to cease practicing of any of the two conflicting hadiths. This definition is exposed to criticism because there is a difference between al-Tawaqquf al-Nazari (theory) and al-Tawaqquf al-‘Amali (practical). According to Qudah ( 2001), the discourse about al-Tawaqquf is from the point of al-Tawaqquf al-Nazari and not from al-Tawaqquf al-‘Amali . This is particularly so because one does not exercise al-Tarjih on one hadith over another, but at the same time he cannot possibly do nothing and leave nothing. That is impossible. As such, the al-Tawaqquf meant in this discussion is the al-Tawaqquf al-Nazari .

According to Raghun ( 2014, p. 14), the definition of al-Tawaqquf is as follows:

“There can be no explanation (decision) of ruling to any problems of hadith because of unclear truth for the Mujtahid regarding the issues arising in this knowledge.”

According to the researcher, the above definition is more structured and more complete compared to other definitions, albeit too short to cover the whole spectrum of the al-Tawaqquf discussion. Furthermore, there is one important fact that he must include in the definition of al-Tawaqquf which he ignored. Finally, the researcher summarizes the definition of al-Tawaqquf in Mukhtalif al-Hadith as follows:

“ Al-Tawaqquf is an approach of a Mujtahid who is unable to reconcile conflicting hadiths by avoiding from deriving rulings and solutions therefrom. This approach ends when suitable application is found based on due diligence and scrutiny in research.”

Within the discourse on the al-Tawaqquf concept in Mukhtalif al-Hadith , hadith scholars are divided into two categories. The first group, which includes Ibn Hajar ( 2012), al-Sakhawi ( 2003), al-Suyuti ( 1979), al-Khayr Abadi ( 2011) and Qudah, (2001), enlists al-Tawaqquf as one of the concepts making up the Mukhtalif al-Hadith . The second group, which includes Ibn al-Salah ( 2010), al-Nawawi ( 1985) and Ibn al-Mulaqqin ( 1988), does not enlist the concept.

Based on the data obtained, al-Dusari ( 2011) explains that hadith scholars are unanimous on three concepts in the Mukhtalif al-Hadith , namely al-Jam‘, al-Naskh and al-Tarjih , but they differ in opinions on al-Tawaqquf . However, according to Jawwad (2001) the majority of hadith scholars enlists al-Tawaqquf as one of the aspects of Mukhtalif al-Hadith .

Although the majority of the scholars differ on the inclusion of the al-Tawaqquf concept, their differences are only theoretical. From the point of implementation, they still apply the al-Tawaqquf concept in the event of their inability to resolve the conflicts ( Al-‘Aqil, 2006). This is due to their limited ability as well as to the burden of being truthful to knowledge which compels them to not be apathetic in their tasks and to avoid dispensing rulings devoid of strong evidence. Raghun ( 2014) describes the reality of the application of al-Tawaqquf concept as the members of al-hadiths will not engage al-Tawaqquf in the problems encountered in their tasks or criticism studies due to trivial factors or minor flaws. Quite the opposite, the members of the hadiths exercise al-Tawaqquf only because they are stalled at having clear clues and strong indications (to aid them in) understanding the hadith (deep enough in order to enable them) to resolve the discrepancies. In addition, they found no compelling evidence to put weight on one of the conflicting hadiths and (the way to) the truth is not clear. On the other hand, if they exercised al-Tawaqquf without any justification by the shari’a and (at the same time) arose factors that obliged them to rise (to resolve conflict, but still they did not want to carry out their duties) indeed they have breached the trust in knowledge and wasted their duty to perform ijtihad . They in fact would fail to explain the ruling over a particular issue under the Islamic law. They are far from committing such act for indeed they are experts who are meticulous, honest and fair.

Based on the above, the application of al-Tawaqquf is not an option to continue to leave the hadiths in a situation of conflict, due to the weakness of the hadith scholar to resolve the contradictions. However, according to al-Khayr Abadi ( 2011), this concept is rarely used. Therefore, the researcher views that the hadith scholars do not enlist al-Tawaqquf as a solution component in the Mukhtalif al-Hadith , not because they reject the concept, but due to the fact that this scenario where the concept would become handy hardly ever happened. In fact, if it did happen then it was an isolated issue, only involving a specific hadith scholar.

Based on this fact, hadith scholars set up a final order to complete the Mukhtalif al-Hadith ( Ibn Hajar, 2012; Al-Sakhawi, 2003; Al-Suyuti, 1979; al-Khayr Abadi, 2011; Qudah, 2001). This concept serves as the hadith scholar’s available last resort upon failing to use earlier methods to resolve the contradictions.

The implementation of the al-Tawaqquf concept in Mukhtalif al-Hadith according to hadith scholars

In order to ensure that the implementation succeeds, three main principles of al-Tawaqquf that must be observed:-

First: Obligation to apply al-Tawaqquf in the event of failure to resolve the contradicting hadiths.

Ibn al-Mundhir ( 2009, p. 2:268) stresses twice in his books that one is obliged to implement the al-Tawaqquf concept when one cannot afford to apply al-Jam‘, al-Tarjih and elaborate on al-Nasikh wa al-Mansukh ,. He says:

“In the absence of any of the arguments we have mentioned in this chapters, in addition to discrepancies and contradiction among hadiths, therefore al-Tawaqquf becomes obligatory instead of practicing with both hadiths.”

This view is based on the words of Hammad bin Salamah ( Ibn Mundhir, 2009, p. 1:225) as follows:

“When two people come to you bringing two contradicting hadiths, and you do not know which is al-Nasikh and which is al-Mansukh , nor do you know the beginning and the end of the hadith and he does not bring forth anything (to explain the ruling) to you.”

Based on the same principle, Ibn Mundhir ( 2009) practices the approach of al-Tawaqquf in his works. Among the examples that the researcher found explicitly demonstrate the approach is in the issues of prohibition of (consuming) carcass i.e the flesh and leather contained in the chapter of Dhikr Ikhtilaf Ahl al-‘Ilm fi al-Intifa‘ bi Julud al-Maytah Mimma Yaqa‘u ‘Alayh al-Dhakat min al-An‘am wa al-Hayawan , the issues of the marriage of Maymunah (whether contracted) during legal (situation of the bride) or (when the status of the bride was a) muhrim in the chapter Dhikr al-Akhbar al-Lati Ruwiyat fi Salah Rasulillah SAW fi Maradihi al-Ladhi Mat fihi , and the issue of ending the salah in the chapter Dhikr al-Taghliz min Murur al-Himar wa al-Mar’ah wa al-Kalb al-Aswad Bayna Yaday al-Musalli .

Second: weakness is attributed to the Mujtahid

The application of the al-Tawaqquf concept for the conflicting hadiths is due to the weakness of the Mujtahid per se and not to (the flaws in) the hadiths of the Messenger. This deferment and refrain from acting on one of the hadiths is due to the Mujtahid ’s hesitance. This happened because of his weaknesses in understanding and uncovering the meaning of the sayings of Prophet Muhammad at the particular time ( Ibn Hajar, 2012; Al-Tunisi, 2009; Al-Sayfi, 2015). Hence this al-Tawaqquf concept is influenced by the knowledge possessed in relation to the hadith ( Al-Ghamidi, 2015).

In light of the above, this does not mean that all Mujtahids must apply the concept for any given problem. Sometimes a Mujtahid would apply al-Tawaqquf on a particular issue but another Mujtahid would afford to resolve the conflicts by applying al-Jam‘ or al-Tarjih . As such, the weakness may be experienced by one Mujtahid , but not necessarily by others (Al-Tunisi, 2009. Al-Sayfi, 2015. Al-Ghamidi, 2015).

One historical illustration for this would involve the question on whether the marriage between Maymunah and the Messenger (p.b.u.h) was contracted during halal or haram (Muhrim) situation. In this regard, Ibn al-Mundhir ( 2009) used the al-Tawaqquf as seen in the chapters in Dhikr al-Akhbar al-Lati Ruwiyat fi Salah Rasulillah SAW fi Maradihi al-Ladhi Mat fihi . This is mainly so because a hadith by Ibn ‘Abbas says that the Messenger married her at the time when she was Muhrim ( Al-Bukhari, 2008. Muslim, 2008), while a hadith by Yazid bin al-Asam describes that the Messenger married her when she was halal ( Muslim, 2008). Nevertheless, there is also a hadith by ‘Uthman bin ‘Affan that describes the prohibition of marrying, performing marriage and betrothal during Muhrim situation. ( Muslim, 2008).

Ibn al-Mundhir ( 2009, p. 4:204) further explains the application of al-Tawaqquf in the above historical scenario as follows:

“When there is conflict between hadiths concerning the marriage of Maymunah, some of them argue: “His Eminence married her while (she was) lawful (halal); some of them opines: ‘His Eminence married her in an illegal manner (haram), thus it is compulsory to stop from judging pertaining to the Maymunah issue when the hadiths are contradictory. Henceforth, it is compulsory to return to the hadith by ‘Uthman for his is a hadith that has no contradiction.”

Such is the view expressed by Ibn al-Mundhir in the implementation al-Tawaqquf in this issue. However, al-Shafi‘i (2011) resolved this problem by applying the method of al-Tarjih . According to him, The Messenger married Maymunah when she was lawfully halal, sourced from the narration of ‘Uthman which prohibits marriage while in Muhrim (relationship) whereby ‘Uthman was one of the earlier companions around The Prophet. By contrast, the narration that says His Holiness married Maymunah when she was haram to him was sourced from a narrator who did not belong in the circle of the Prophet until a later time after His Eminence had embarked upon a journey post to him marrying Maymunah. Furthermore, the Prophet married Maymunah before ‘ Umrah al-Qada’ . The solution to this situation is also suggested by Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr ( 1967) (1387H), al-Hazimi ( 1940) (1359H), al-San‘ani (n.d.) and others.

Third: No Obstacle to Study

The application of al-Tawaqquf is neither a method that produces answer nor a tool for finding solutions dealing with differences and discrepancies between hadiths. This is because the method is unable to dispel the differences and contradictions. It is instead a statement by the researcher regarding his inability to resolve the discrepancies. ( Al-Ghamidi, 2015).

Therefore, the method of al-Tawaqquf does not at all prohibit a Mujtahid from researching and invoking Allah The Almighty to grant him ideas so he could unravel the predicament and resolve the conflicting hadith. ( Al-Tunisi, 2009; Al-Sayfi, 2015).

Besides, the al-Tawaqquf method is not permanent because its usefulness depends on certain timeframes that could ceases with new findings. Al-Fawzan ( 2016) (1438H, p. 1:95-96) explicitly expounds this ideas:

“Know that al-Tawaqquf does not last forever, instead it has time-frame because al-Tawaqquf does not aim to invalidate the shara’ ruling and sometimes ruling should not be delayed. In light of this reality, for one whom exercises al-Tawaqquf , it is compulsory for him to research, observe and scrutinize until the solution is clear however the existence of an absolute al-Tawaqquf in perpetuity is unacceptable. In fact there must be a way to resolve the conflicting hadiths. If not, it may amount to cancellation or removal as a source (of reference).”

Al-Dusari ( 2011) echoes the statement that research and perusal be conducted in order to fix the conflicts. Once the researcher finds a solution and thereby derives rulings on acceptance or rejection, this marks the end of the application of al-Tawaqquf and so the researcher has withdrawn from the borders of al-Tawaqquf .

Based on the above principle, al-Tunisi ( 2009) finds that Ibn Khuzaymah in his authentic books chose the chapter titles pertaining to hadiths which underwent the al-Tawaqquf process by some scholars due to their suspicion on the existence of clear discord among the sources of law or there arise clear unsatisfactory phrases in the texts of the hadiths. Among the chapters mentioned are Bab Dhikr Akhbar Ghalat fi al-Ihtijaj biha Ba‘d Man Lam Yan‘am al-Nazar fi Alfaz al-Akhbar wa Lam Yastaw‘ib Akhbar al-Nabi SAW fi al-Qunut …, Bab al-Rukhsah fi al-Jam‘ Bayn al-Maghrib wa al-‘Isha’ fi al-Safar bi Dhikr Khabar Ghalat fi Ma‘nah Ba‘d Man Lam Yuhsin Sina‘ah al-Fiqh Fataawwal Hadha al-Khabar ‘ala Zahirah… , Bab Dhikr Khabar Ruwiya ‘an al-Nabi SAW fi Sifah Salatih Jalisan Hasb Ba‘d al-‘Ulama’ Innahu Khilaf Hadha al-Khabar al-Ladhi Dhakarnah and others ( Ibn Khuzaymah, 1970).