Is tracing hadiths and discussing their defects sufficient to be called an explanation?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Well, my Shaykh, if you please, is tracing hadiths and discussing their defects sufficient to be called an explanation? For example, if we said: "Irwaa' al-Ghalil is an explanation of Manar al-Sabil"?
The Shaykh : It is not authentic.
The questioner : Is it not authentic?
The Shaykh : By custom, it is not valid except by a type of what I call "going back and forth," which is the interpretation of the text.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : It would be said, "An explanation of the defects of the hadiths in Manar al-Sabil" ... but I ... it is what comes to mind.
The student : ... our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : It is not authentic.
The questioner : Is it not authentic?
The Shaykh : By custom, it is not valid except by a type of what I call "going back and forth," which is the interpretation of the text.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : It would be said, "An explanation of the defects of the hadiths in Manar al-Sabil" ... but I ... it is what comes to mind.
The student : ... our Shaykh.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.