(Ibn Hazm's denial of the narrators through his local book, and the extent to which his saying is considered among the scholars of wound and modification) "Collect and study". Research Summary

Narrators Whom Ibn Hazm Accused of Lying in His Book Al-Muhalla, and the Extent to Which His Opinion is Accepted by Scholars of Discrediting and Validation for Hadith Narrators– A Collection and Study
Elham Khalaf Allah Youssef Ahmed
Department of Hadith and its Sciences,
Faculty of Islamic and Arabic Studies for Girls, Al-Azhar University, Sohag
Arab Republic of Egypt.
Email: elhamyusuf.79@azhar.edu.eg
Abstract:
This study aims to identify the narrators whom Ibn Hazm Az-Zahiri (d. 456 AH) accused of lying in the narration of hadith in his book Al-Muhalla, and to assess the extent to which his judgment on these narrators aligns with the views of the esteemed scholars of discrediting and validation for Hadith narrators. The research also highlights the value of Al-Muhalla among scholarly works in terms of hadith methodology and examines the methodological reasons behind Ibn Hazm's disagreements with the scholars of his era. In this research, I have compiled a list of narrators whom Ibn Hazm explicitly labeled as liars or whom he attributed their accusations of lying to other scholars, using terms such as “mentioned as a liar” or “impugned as a liar.” I then compared his assessments with those of recognized scholars of discrediting and validation for Hadith narrators, including those who preceded Ibn Hazm and those who came after him. This comparison explores the degree of agreement or disagreement with Ibn Hazm's evaluations. The research employs a comprehensive methodology, including inductive, analytical, critical, and comparative approaches.One of the key findings of the study is that there are methodological reasons for Ibn Hazm’s differences with the prominent scholars of his time. It also reveals that Ibn Hazm exhibited considerable bias against a significant number of narrators, which often led him to dismiss their narrations altogether as a result of this bias. Consequently, his judgments on narrators, especially in matters of discrediting, should not be solely relied upon.