The term "not bad" according to Imam al-Nasa'i: A comparative critical study of examples of narrators in light of Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani's "Tahdhib al-Tahdhib

Abstract

This research presents a comparative critical study of the phrase "not bad" (la ba'sa bihi) as used by Imam al-Nasa'i in evaluating narrators, based on what Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani transmitted from him in his book "Tahdhib al-Tahdhib." The original material was based on a collection of forty-eight narrators, and then four cases were presented in detail: Ahmad ibn al-Azhar ibn Mani', Fitr ibn Khalifa al-Qurashi, Muhammad ibn Bashar ibn 'Uthman, and Muhammad ibn 'Uthman ibn Abi Safwan.

The study demonstrates that the phrase should not be applied to a single, fixed standard in all instances without examining the context, al-Nasa'i's other rulings, and the opinions of other critics. Furthermore, a final judgment on a narrator requires weighing the criticisms against the praise, distinguishing between explained and unexplained criticisms, and between criticism directed at a specific narration and criticism concerning the narrator in general.

As for the claim that Imam al-Nasa'i's use of the term "la ba'sa bihi" (there is nothing wrong with him) always equates to "Thiqah" (trustworthy), especially when judging his teachers, this is a hypothesis that requires testing through an examination of all forty-eight narrators. It is not valid to adopt it as a predetermined rule before examining the entire collection. If al-Nasa'i says "la ba'sa bihi" about one of his teachers, and then explicitly authenticates him elsewhere with the term "thiqah" (trustworthy), this is considered an important indication of his intended meaning of the term for that narrator. However, if al-Nasa'i says "la ba'sa bihi" about one of his teachers, and no explicit authentication is found elsewhere, it is not valid to judge him trustworthy simply because he was one of his teachers. Rather, the statements of the scholars of hadith criticism regarding him should be collected and compared with al-Nasa'i's statement. Then, all the evidence should be considered to arrive at the most likely judgment regarding his status: is he "thiqah" (trustworthy), "saduq" (truthful), or another level of authentication? The same applies to the narrators from whom al-Nasa'i narrated. It is not necessary to issue a uniform judgment on them initially, but rather to study each narrator individually by comparing al-Nasa'i's statement "there is nothing wrong with him" with the statements of other leading scholars of hadith criticism. Then, an analysis of all the rulings and evidence is conducted to arrive at a precise scholarly conclusion regarding his standing in the field of hadith criticism