القواعد المستفادة من كلام ابن حجر في فتح الباري للتمييز بين السفيانين
There are no common rules among hadith transmitters about mentioning the names in isnād. Sometimes, they mention only the transmitter’s name or his father’s name or both. Sometimes, they confine oneself to telling only name and tag. Sometimes they mention the transmitter and his father’s full name. And sometimes they mention the name of transmitter’s grandfather and his nickname. All this much available in Hadith books but those names are repeated many times because of their ampleness. We sometimes can see that the name only, sometimes with father’s name and sometimes with nickname. Therefore, we feel the need of something that to distinguish the transmitters name from other names. If a name cannot be distinguished from the other names, scholars called this name as “mühmel”. The distinguishing of “mühmel” names are requiring another wisdom and knowledge. There are simple mühmel names and difficult mühmel names. It is simple the distinguish that if a name called/accepted as a mühmel name because of the difference between the schedule of hadith, as in this case it is understandable the schedule that which the transmitter belonging to. There are two sections for transmitters who are in the same schedule, or who is lived in the same century: 1. Who become different by in teacher and in student. It is simple to distinguish them each other by looking the teacher and his students. In this way, it is simply understandable the transmitters identity. 2. Who become the same by in teacher and in student. The distinguishing here is very difficult if the transmitter did not distinguish them. Because researcher needs to find some evidence for distinguish the transmitter from others. If there are two transmitters who called by same name and one of them weak, and the other is reliable, the distinguishing those two is necessary. Because, adjudging a hadith is depends on the transmitter’s identity. By the transmitter’s identity, daif (weak) hadith and sahih (correct) hadith can be distinguish each other. If those two transmitters (both of them) are reliable, then the other criteria be examined. For instance, looking at being incompletely transmitted or fraud. Therefore, the researcher can identify the transmitter’s idendity, and can adjudge the hadith. Hence this second section is more difficult from the other one. Because we are talking about the transmitter that lived in the same century and his teacher and his students similar with others. Our work is about this second section. As a sapmle, we will examine Sufyân b. Uyeyne and Sufyan b. Sa’id es-Sevrî. This two are arbiters about the defective (ma’lul) hadith’s, transmitters and law (fıqh). So, it is important the mentioning them because of modification the left out transmitter’s name. They are transmitted many hadith and these hadiths are be in the Kutub-u Sitte (The Six Standard Collections). The transmitters that reported hadith from those two, are mentioning their names unconditionally. Many scholars are make effort to distinguish their names in hadith expounds. If one of them be in isnad, the scholars recorded his name as like: Sufyan (Sevrî – Ibn Uyeyne). İbn Hâcer el-Askalânî is one of the expounder that make effort about this subject. His famous work of expound is one of the Bukhari expound called Fethu’l-Bârî. In his work Fethu’l-Bârî, İbn Hâcer has distinguish Sufyân b. Uyeyne and Sufyan b. Sa’id es-Sevrî from each other. When he had distinguished them, he also point out the reasons of prefer one to the other. As a researcher, we gathered and examined those reasons that İbn Hâcer pointed out. Indeed, this reasons and rules although concentrate this two, also important for to determining the other mühmel names. The number of this reasons and rules is fourteen.