The Impact of Discontinuity in the Chain on Juristic Derivations: An Analytical Study

According to jurists, muḥaddithūn (hadith scholars), and scholars of legal principles, there are numerous reasons that render a hadith impracticable. These reasons are generally categorized into two types: those related to the chain of narrators (isnād) and those related to the text (matn) of the hadith. External elements may contribute to this impracticability—for instance, a narrator’s weak memory, the loss of their books, the alteration of words based on personal perception or understanding, or discomposure in the wording of the hadith. These factors are considered central to defective (maʿlūl) ahadith, as they reflect external influences. As a result of such issues, certain ahadith or Prophetic traditions are deemed inapplicable or unreliable. When a muḥaddith or jurist examines a hadith through the lens of legal or critical principles, they may classify it as unviable and attribute its flaw to a hidden defect, known as an ʿillah. This ʿillah is the concealed reason that causes the hadith to be rejected and considered impracticable. Among various ʿilal (defects), one significant type is inqiṭāʿ—a break or discontinuity in the chain of narration. This discontinuity is a recognized cause for the rejection of a hadith in which it appears. Furthermore, it constitutes a fundamental reason behind the diversity of juristic opinions in deriving legal rulings within Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh). This article explores the concept of inqiṭāʿ (break in the chain of narration) and its impact on juristic differences in the interpretation and application of Shariah rulings.