خلاصة:
When Allamah Helli selected the theory of 'authority of individual hadiths', he set the criteria of authority chain and the characteristics of the transmitter as the bases for evaluation of hadith. In this way, the legitimacy of a hadith was focused on the conditions of the transmitter. However, he did not reject the evidences for accepting a hadith (especially the practical fame). Indeed, he did not ignore the evidences for accepting a hadith, but this approach lost its effect and popularity among the scholars after him, especially in the jurisprudence of Muhaqqeq Ardabili and his disciples. Muhaqqeq Ardabili's intellectual circle had a critical approach to the theory of injibār and, on the other hand, by mentioning 'faith' as a condition in accepting the transmitter's tradition, they had restricted authority to ṣaḥīḥ (right) and ṣaḥīḥ aʿlāʾī (sublime right) hadiths. This rigidity in accepting traditions prepared the ground for reinforcing the rational aspects of the jurisprudence of Muhaqqeq Ardabili's intellectual circle and diffusing resort to the generalities and specificities of the verses on precepts and the definite tradition as well as extracting fatwas accordingly. In such an atmosphere, it is quite normal that, by putting aside a large body of traditions, some would not accept such as approach and rise against it. In this way, the Ḥilla school prepared the ground for its own decline and emergence of traditionalism.
ملخص الجهاز:
Muhaqqiq al-Ardabili's intellectual circle had a critical approach toward the theory of "Injibar" (compensation), and on the other hand, by conditioning the acceptance of a narrator's report on faith, they restricted authority to the "Sahih" and even the "Sahih A'la'i.
" This rigor in accepting narrations provided the ground for strengthening the rational aspects of the jurisprudence of Muhaqqiq al-Ardabili's intellectual circle and expanding reliance on the generalities and implications of the verses of legal rulings (Ayat al-Ahkam) and definitive Sunnah, and extracting fatwas based on them.
420) Two. The non-authority (adam hujjiyya) of Mursal narrations and the theory of "Ashab al-Ijma" (Companions of Consensus) Sahib al-Madarik does not consider Mursal narrations to be authoritative in an absolute sense, even if the mursil is Ibn Abi Umayr (Amili, 1410 AH, vol.
206) Accordingly, these characteristics became prominent in the jurisprudence of Muhaqqiq al-Ardabili and his students: attention to the science of Usul al-Fiqh (principles of jurisprudence) and the application of rational and philosophical methods in proving some of its issues; narrowing the scope of the authority of a solitary report (khabar wahid); doubting the validity of many consensus (ijma') and the famous or accepted opinions of previous jurists and criticizing them using rational methods; reliance on jurisprudential and philosophical rules in legal reasoning; and expanding the reliance on generalities (umummat) and implications (itlaqat) found in the verses of legal rulings (ayat al-ahkam) or definitive Sunnah, and deriving fatwas based on them (because the narrations that were specific (makhs) or restrictive (muqayyad) to these generalities and implications were consequently set aside due to the rigor in documenting the narrators of their chains).
2. Muhaqqiq al-Ardabili and his students had a critical approach toward the theory of "injibar" (compulsion), and by conditioning the acceptance of a narrator's report on faith (iman), they considered authority (hujjiyyah) to be limited to "sahih" and even "sahih a'lā" (the highest level of authenticity).
(
, 
, 
)
