the insufficiency of narrational publicity in the field of jurisprudence and ḥadīth

most of the legal theoreticians (uṣūlīs) have taken the narrational publicity as the prevalence and spread of relating traditions in books and collections of ḥadīth, according to which, the narrational publicity would not only not compensate the weakness of the sanad of the ḥadīth, but also would not be considered as among the causes and factors of preference in the contradiction of traditions, either; because the frequent relation of a ḥadīth in books is no reason for its authenticity. many are the popular matters that are baseless and have no authenticity whatsoever! narrational publicity would not create a preference for the ḥadīth by itself and without accompanying practical publicity; rather, if a generally accepted ḥadīth is repudiated by the jurists, it is regarded as a sign for its weakness.