Addressing the Claim: Are the Yamani Narrations a Single Report?

Dar al‑Hidaya | In a previous article, a narration was mentioned in which the phrase “from Yemen” (min al‑Yaman) does not appear in parentheses. Followers of Ahmad al‑Basri, in order to escape the critique, claim that this narration and the earlier one (where min al‑Yaman is in parentheses) are in fact the same narration—one transmitted verbatim and the other transmitted in paraphrase.

The Claim of the Followers

Nazim al‑ʿUqayli, regarding the two narrations of min al‑Yaman in Kamal al‑Din, says:

“There is a very strong possibility that these two narrations are originally one narration. One transmitter narrated it verbatim and in full, while another narrated it in paraphrase and incompletely.” (Dirāsa fī Shakhṣiyyat al‑Yamānī, vol. 2, p. 16)

Explanation of al‑ʿUqayli’s justification: For example, if person “A” wants to convey his teacher’s words to person “B”:

• If “A” transmits the teacher’s exact words, this is naql bi‑naṣṣ (verbatim transmission).
• If “A” conveys only the meaning, this is naql bi‑maʿnā (paraphrase).

Al‑ʿUqayli argues that the two narrations are in fact one: once transmitted verbatim, and once transmitted in paraphrase. His evidence is the unity of the chain of transmission.

Response

If the two narrations are read carefully, it becomes clear that they speak about two separate subjects.

• First narration: Discusses the similarities between Imam al‑Mahdi (peace be upon him) and five of the prophets. At the end of this narration, only three definite signs of reappearance are mentioned:
  1. The emergence of the Sufyani
  2. The emergence of the Yamani from Yemen
  3. The heavenly cry
• Second narration: Discusses the tribulations and signs occurring before and after Imam al‑Mahdi (peace be upon him). It mentions several other signs, including:
  • The emergence of the Sufyani
  • The Yamani
  • The swallowing of the army in Baida (khasf al‑Baida)
  • The killing of the Pure Soul (nafs al‑Zakiyya)
  • The heavenly cry
  • The manner of Imam al‑Mahdi’s emergence
  • The people pledging allegiance to him

Conclusion

The beginning and end of the two narrations have no connection, and as explained, they address two different topics. If al‑ʿUqayli had some knowledge of hadith sciences, he would realize that the unity of the chain of transmission does not mean the narrations are identical. Many narrations share the same chain but discuss different subjects.

It should also be noted that the context of the narration requires the phrase “from Yemen” to be present. Before it, the location of the Sufyani’s emergence is mentioned: “and the Sufyani from Syria”. Thus, the phrase “and the Yamani from Yemen” fits the context perfectly.

Even if we assume the two narrations are one, why should the narration with “al‑Yamani min al‑Yaman” in parentheses be disregarded? Why not prefer the narration without parentheses? And if one is verbatim and the other paraphrased, why not consider the narration with min al‑Yaman as the verbatim version, and the other as paraphrase? There is no evidence to prefer one over the other. Ahmad al‑Basri’s followers here have engaged in unjustified preference (tarjīḥ bilā murajjiḥ).