The study dealt with the usages of common /l/ whether separated or attached. It tried to induce the meanings of /l/ linguistically and highlighted its uses in Al-Ankabūt Chapter. The study highlighted the relationship between the topics tackled in the chapter and the meanings and uses of /l/. The study eventually came to conclude that the different meanings of /l/ that reached 30 meanings for some, can actually be presumed to 6 meanings, all appearing in Al-Ankabūt Chapter in 23 verses; the non-functional /l/ in its 5 versions is initiative /l/, and it took place in 25 verses, all of them appealing to emphasis. Swearing /l/ is found in 3 verses, while Responsive /l/ that follows ‘without’ appeared once for emphasis, and Affirmative or imperative /l/ also used once for the sake of emphasis. This study also concluded that the use of /l/ in different meanings at once is possible as long as the meanings are not opposed.
This study discusses the accusation pointed to “Ibn Juraij” theoretically and practically; Some of these accusations were spread by many Imams of hadith but upon investigation and following the statements of the senior critics it shows that they either did not declare these accusations, or they meant the fraud. The significance of this research lies in rejecting the suspicion that Ibn Hibban was described with leniency in documenting the narrator’s accusation of changing the wording of the transmission of the hadith from someone who spoke to us or told us into a formula that blurred others or delusional information so that it was heard while he actually did not hear it. One of the most important objectives of this research is to find a scientific and specialized study of the narrators accused of this change in Sahih Ibn Hibban, and to clarify their status. This results in the correction of their hadiths in his Sahih and the discussion of those accused of discussing, such as Ibn Juri. The researcher followed historical “retrospective” approach in understanding the terminology of the hadith in which the imams contested with Ibn Hibban, such as the definition of Deception, its applications; and the critical analytical approach to discuss the sayings and rules that Ibn Hibban and the most scholars said in matters of al-Jarh and al-Tadeel, and to discuss the validity of the offender’s claim and accuse Ibn Hibban of insufficiency in his method of correctness and its degree, in accepting the narrators accused of deception. As for the most distinguished results, it was found that Ibn Juraij used to mislead the deception of the Sheikhs, only this has been proven from his sheikh Ibrahim bin Abi Yahya. However, he was not overbearing of deception.
This research tackles the documentation of a weak narrator in certain cases and specific bodies, and its impact on judging the narrator, determining his rank, knowing the degree of hadiths authenticity, distinguishing hadiths, and investigating all that in the light of Imam Ahmad’s extrapolation of sayings and rulings, which are among the oldest sources on hadith weaknesses and narrators. These compilations are a major reference for those who came after him, and for the classifications that adopted collecting his sayings, questions of his students to him, the analysis of those sayings and conclusions drawn from his sayings, highlighting its implications, and comparing that with that of other hadith narrators and critics. This matter is one of the most majestic issues of hadith sciences that should be well taken care of and singled out for classification, due to the need for it in weighing hadith authenticity and its narrators. The research has showed the need to take care of relative documentation that is associated with a sheikh, student, place, time, or others, because of its great impact on the narrator and the narrative, what is narrated. It is imperative to consider these aspects when judging narrators and hadiths. Some narrators according to Imam Ahmad may be in a different situation as their sheikh’s circumstances are different, or different place of their narrative, or time difference of narration. The author has tracked down these aspects and has compared them with other opinions of hadith critics who may agree or disagree with him. The research has also showed that Imam Ahmad had done relative documentation of some narrators comparing himself to other narrators. The researcher has concluded that most of these relative documenters are peers in terms of age and hadith memorization, and that their authenticity ranks are similar to each other. Hadith narrators and critics may differ with Imam Ahmad in this comparison, or agree with him.
The issue of parental rights is an important issue that must be known and applied by sons and daughters in all religions. Therefore, this study aims to study these rights as stated in the Holy Qurʾan and compares them with what is mentioned in the Bible. These rights are fully taken into account by the needs of mankind in this era, especially with the prevalence of parental disobedience in many societies. This study showed, by comparing the holy Qurʾan and the Bible concerning the rights of parents, that the rights mentioned in the Qurʾan are two times as large as what is in the Bible, and the number of verses in the Holy Qurʾan is ten times more than those in the Bible. Moreover, by comparing the texts of the Holy Qurʾan and the Bible’s, the holy Qurʾan’s verses are so accurate in mentioning and describing the rights of parents, which made it the most comprehensive in emphasizing these rights, for example mentioning the rights of charity, service, praying for them, obeying them, and being grateful. On the other hand, the Bible does not state the rights of obedience, calling to Allah’s religion, being grateful, and honoring them.