Al-Khu’i places himself higher than Al-Kulaini, As-Saduq and At-Tusi

Abu l-Qasim Al-Khu’i writes:

ذهب جماعة من المحدّثين إلى أنّ روايات الكتب الأربعة (الكافي والفقيه والتهذيب والاستبصار) قطعية الصّدور

“A group of traditional scholars (Muhaddith) held the view that the traditions of the four books (Al-Kafi, Al-Faqih, At-Tahdhib and Al-Istibsar) are unquestionably authentic.” [Mu’jam-ur-Rijal, Volume 1 Page 22]

لو سلّم أنّ محمّد بن يعقوب شهد بصحّة جميع روايات الكافي فهذه الشّهادة غير مسموعة [ … ] مضافاً إلى أنّ إخبار محمد بن يعقوب بصحّة جميع ما في كتابه حينئذ لا يكن شهادة، وإنّما هو اجتهاد إستنبطه ممّا إعتقد أنّه قرينة على الصدق
“If it were to be agreed that Muhammad Al-Kulaini testified that all traditions of Al-Kafi are authentic (Sahih), this testimony would not be accepted [ …] In addition, the testimony of Muhammad Al-Kulaini about it, that everything in his book is authentic (Sahih), is by no means a proof at all, but merely an effort (Ijtihad) that he took from what he believed to be a valid indication. ” [Mu’jam-ur-Rijal, Volume 1 Page 85]

إنّ إخبار الشّيخ الصّدوق عن صحّة رواية وحجّيتها إخبار عن رأيه ونظره وهذا لا يكون حجّة في حقّ غيره
“Muhammad As-Saduq’s assertion that a tradition is authentic (Sahih) and a proof is an expression of his view and opinion and this is not a proof for others.” [Mu’jam-ur-Rijal, Volume 1 Page 88]

لو سلّمنا أنّ الشيخ شهد بصحّة جميع روايات كتابيه فلا تزيد هذه الشّهادة على شهادة الصّدوق بصحّة جميع روايات كتابه، فيجري فيها ما ذكرناه في شهادة الصّدوق من أنّ الشهادة على صحّة الحديث وحجّيته لاتكون حجّة في حقّ الآخرين

“If it were to be agreed that Muhammad At-Tusi testified that all the traditions of his two books (At-Tahdhib and Al-Istibsar) are authentic (Sahih), it would be no more significant than the testimony of As-Saduq that all the traditions of his book (Al-Faqih) are authentic (Sahih). Therefore, it is to be dealt with in the same way as we mentioned with regard to the testimony of As-Saduq, namely that the testimony that a tradition is authentic (Sahih) and a proof is not a proof for others.” [Mu’jam-ur-Rijal, Volume 1 Page 90]


 فإذا قلنا إنّ الحديث أو الطّريق صحيح فمعناه أنه معتبر وحجّة
“If we (Abu l-Qasim Al-Khu’i) say that a tradition or chain is authentic (Sahih), it means that it is acceptable and is a proof.” [Mu’jam-ur-Rijal, Volume 1 Page 14]


The testimony and evaluation of Al-Khu’i about which traditions are authentic (Sahih) or which are not, is not a proof at all, but only his effort (Ijtihad) and his personal opinion and not a proof for others. Just as he claims it about others, it can be claimed about him.

Leave a Reply