The status of the Hadith witness among the first grammarians (Abu Amr bin Al-Alaa, and Al-Khalil bin Ahmed as a model)

Abstract

The noble hadith is considered the second legislative source after the Holy Qur’an among Muslims, and despite the importance of this source among Muslims, we find that the first grammarians refused to cite it, along with their silence about the reason for their reluctance to cite it, until Abu Hayyan Al-Andalusi (d. 745 AH) came and justified it. The greatness of the narrators of the hadith and its transmission in the sense, and many grammarians did not recognize him with this saying, so we needed a deep search in the methods of the first grammarians in citing the noble hadith, and finding out the extent of their knowledge of the honorable hadith after we found that they had cited some of the honorable hadiths.
By analyzing the evidence of the hadiths that they cited in terms of the authenticity of the hadith, and in terms of the Arabness of the narrators, the short chain of transmission, the codification of the hadith, and the abundance of its paths, we found that Abu Amr bin Al-Alaa (d. 154 AH) and Al-Khalil bin Ahmed (d. 170 AH) did not have a wide knowledge In the science of hadith, and how do they have that when the authenticity has not yet been written down? Why is it famous? So we find them at times invoking a hadith that has many chains of transmission to the Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace, so he does not doubt his attribution to the Prophet, and at other times we find them citing what they describe as a hadith, which is not a hadith, not even in fabricated or weak hadiths.
What some grammarians went to in terms of challenging the evidence of the noble hadith in terms of the non-Arabity of the narrators and the narration of the hadith with the meaning, we find it present in the poetry narration as well, so the majority of the poetry narrators are from the non-Arabs, and Sibawayh (d. The issue of Al-Agmah in the narrators, but it was raised by Abu Hayyan Al-Andalusi.
And if we compare between the strictness of the hadith narrators and the strictness of the language narrators, we would find that the hadith narrators are more severe in that. Because their methodology was originally to come up with the hadith on its letters, and few of them permitted the narration with the meaning, as was the one who narrates with the meaning of an eloquent Arab, and they did not allow the narration of the hadith with the meaning for those who were not insightful in Arabic, as we see that the honorable hadith without before the poetry, and the scholars of hadith were concerned with the sincerity and justice of the narrators And control them, and this is what we do not find in the language narrators, as many of the hadith narrators were known for their eloquence.
With the evidence we have presented that the early grammarians turned away from citing the noble hadith out of fear and fear of being among those who lie about the Messenger of God, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, not impugning the validity of citing the noble hadith, as Abu Hayyan said, we find that the later grammarians neglected a rich source of reliable language that we must Scrutinizing and looking at them in terms of the large number of paths, the Arabness of the narrators, and the codification of the word hadith in the first chest, as we worked on the hadiths cited by Abu Amr bin Al-Alaa and Al-Khalil bin Ahmed in this research.