12 Aimmah Hadith

wa alaykum as salaam.

Thank you for your question! Regarding the status of the 12 Caliph narration, our scholars have said that it doesn’t reach the level of tawaatur (mass-transmitted) for one main reason. One of our contemporary scholars, Sayyid Abdullah ad-Daylami authored a treatise addressing this. He basically said that according to the ulema of hadith verification, if a report is narrated by many sub-narrators to one narrator, that narration is not considered mutawaatir. Even if a million sub-narrators report from one narrator, this doesn’t reach tawaatur status. A narration is only mutawaatir if it is narrated by multiple sub-narrators to multiple narrators. That withstanding, the narration of the 12 Caliphs is narrated from about a handful of narrators: Jaabir b. Samura, Ibn Mas’uud, Ibn Umar and, I believe, Hudhayfa. Even though multiple sub-narrators narrate it, they all come back to one of these narrators. Therefore, this report is to not be considered mutawaatir but rather ahaadi (solitarily narrated).

Indeed, the majority of reports—at least from Sunni sources—all go back to Jaabir b. Samura. Al-Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmed, at-Tabaraani, Abu Dawuud, Ibn Kathiir and others all relate the 12 Caliph narration from Jaabir b. Samura. Even though, they have multiple chains of sub-narrators, the chief narrator is Ibn Samura. So, we cannot regard this narration as mutawaatir.

Furthermore, we say that this narration is an Abbasid forgery for a number of reasons. One of which is that one of these narrations on the authority of Ibn Umar is as follows:

The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, said: ((There will be after me 12 caliphs: Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthmaan, Mu’awiya, Yaziid, as-Saffaah, Mansur, Jaabir, al-Amiin, Salaam, Mahdi and Amir al-‘Asb…)).

This is narrated in Tarikh al-Khulafaa of as-Suyuuti. Adh-Dhahabi says that Ibn Asaakir [a historian] narrates this report of Ibn Umar with a number of chains. Curiously missing from this list is Ali (as) and al-Hasan (as) but included are Mu’awiya and Yazid?! Notice how many Abbasid rulers are mentioned.

Furthermore, we say that even if the 12 Caliph narration were mutawaatir, the narrations in which the names of the 12 are mentioned are not mutawaatir. This would mean that the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, stated something vague and obscure and didn’t explain it. Of course, you would argue that he did name the 12 but that particular narration is not considered mutawaatir. So, that would leave us with the following possibilities:
A. The mention of the 12 Caliphs and their names is mutawaatir (which isn’t the case as evidenced by what we previously mentioned)
B. The mention of the 12 Caliphs is mutawaatir but the mention of their names is ahaadi (which attributes obfuscation to the Prophet)
C. The mention of the 12 Caliphs is ahaadi but the mention of their names is mutawaatir (which would be confusing and contradictory)
D. The mention of the Caliphs and their names is ahaadi (which is what we say).

Therefore, even if you could prove that the 12 Caliph narration is mutawaatir, you would have to similarly prove that the mention of their names is mutawaatir.

And Allah knows best!

IRS

Actually, Sayyid ad-Daylami did not say that it was only narrated on the authority of Jaabir b. Samura. He said that the majority of the narrations are on the authority of Ibn Samura. Indeed, if you do a search on the 12 Caliph hadith in the Musnad Ahmed for example, you would see that the vast majority of narrations are by Ibn Samura. Please read my previous post carefully.

Remember, in my original message, I said:

That withstanding, the narration of the 12 Caliphs is narrated from about a handful of narrators: Jaabir b. Samura, Ibn Mas’uud, Ibn Umar and, I believe, Hudhayfa.

All of whom were mentioned by Sayyid Abdullah. Therefore, he was not proven wrong.

Furthermore, neither of the quotes that you mentioned referred to the report as being mutawaatir, which was the gist of your original post. Therefore, Sayyid Abdullah was not proven wrong on this point either.

And Allah knows best!

IRS

Thank you for your feedback.

I'm sure that you have your own opinion regarding what constitutes an ahad or mutawaatir tradition; however, your original question was about the Zaydi criteria in assessing that. As we mentioned, the Zaydi view is that the 12 Caliph report does not reach the status of tawaatur nor is it considered authentically attributed to the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny. Despite its presence in the books of the 12ers and Ahl as-Sunnah, it appears no where in our texts and none of our imams narrate it from their ancestors. It is therefore 'suspect' to say the least.

As for the reason why the Abbassids would list Umayyads in their tradition, I don't know. They only list three but they list them nonetheless. This further substantiates our point that the listed names are completely arbitrary and up to the narrator or sub-narrator to choose whomever they please. It is therefore indecisive and cannot be used as a proof. As we said in the previous post, one would have to produce a list of names that is mutawaatir in order to justify that the 12 Caliph report is mutawaatir.

As for a narration that justifies the obligation to follow a Fatimi sayyid in the books of the Mukhalifeen, we say that those traditions narrated such as Hadith ath-Thaqalayn, Hadith an-Nujuum, Hadith as-Safinat an-Najaa and others obligate the Ummah to follow the imams of Ahl al-Bayt (as). They are narrated in the texts of the Mukhalifeen--some of which are mutawaatir.

And Allah knows best!

IRS