Discussion on the Shaykh’s weakening of a hadith in Sahih Muslim
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. How can it be consistent in your minds that the scholars, the scholars of hadith, both those who do not interpret and those who do interpret, agreed on the authenticity of this hadith?
The questioner : By Allah, we can say that one leaves the matter to the other.
The Shaykh: How.
The questioner : How much did he leave?
The student : How much did the first leave for the last? I mean, for example, you, our Shaykh, weakened a hadith that no one before you had done.
The Shaykh : No, allow me a moment, Abu Sa'd. You have the right to go back and repeat your words, and I will respond to them. If you have a response to my words, respond to them; do not just repeat your own words. I told you that I weakened a hadith, or more than one hadith, in Sahih Muslim, relying on those who came before me.
The questioner : What is it.
The Shaykh : Listen, listen. As for this hadith, the one who weakens it today contradicts all those who narrated the hadith and explicitly stated its authenticity, whether they are those who believe in the hadith according to its apparent meaning without interpretation, or those who interpret it. You are still going back and saying, "When I weaken something, I have predecessors in that." But he did not approach the hadith and study it with a scientific, hadith-based study. First, he contradicted all the scholars who spoke about this hadith, whether they spoke about it regarding its chain of narration, or regarding its implication for creed, or regarding its jurisprudential implication. Do you know that there is a jurisprudential implication in the hadith? Keep that in mind, or not?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Okay, so then all these scholars followed one another in authenticating this hadith. How can you say you weakened it?
The questioner : Okay, excellent, Professor. Now we need to know: what is the hadith in Muslim that you weakened? Who is your predecessor in this? Show us, give us something concrete.
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. Now you have strayed from the topic.
The questioner : No, but just to prove that point.
Al-Halabi : No, do not debate the Shaykh... Do you want to allow me?
The Shaykh : It is yours, my brother, but this is an error in research. I am answering him with the difference between this and that, and he is going back. This is a debate called, "You have finished this topic, move on to another." Or, this research will not end with us, even if we lived for many long years. I will bring you a hadith; I will tell you any hadith you want, and I will research it for you. But this is our topic now.
The questioner: No.
The Shaykh : Okay, so then why this deviation? May Allah reward you. There is a difference between a hadith that I weakened, for which I have hadith evidence that I have not deviated from, as some of the contemporaries do today. You must have heard of the problem with al-Ghazali, the al-Ghazali of the present age. He comes and criticizes hadiths with his mind and his opinion, without using the scientific rules established by the scholars. Thus, we say: regarding the hadith of the maidservant, "Where is Allah?" First, the scholars of the Muslims, despite their differences in schools and inclinations, followed one another in authenticating this hadith. Second, the one who weakens it does so by his opinion, under the delusion that he has contradicted this hadith with other hadiths, whereas here there are multiple contradictions. First, you raised the topic of confusion (idtirab), and I will return to it. First, no one among the scholars of the Muslims has denied this hadith. And it is established in the science of hadith terminology that a hadith narrated byThe Shaykh : one of them or both, and accepted by the Ummah, is certain in its establishment. Do you know this? Do you know this in the science of hadith? Do you not know it?
The questioner : By Allah, I know.
The Shaykh : You do not know? I am not asking you what you know. I am asking you about this.
The questioner : This one, no.
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : I know that the ahad (singular reports)...
The questioner : By Allah, we can say that one leaves the matter to the other.
The Shaykh: How.
The questioner : How much did he leave?
The student : How much did the first leave for the last? I mean, for example, you, our Shaykh, weakened a hadith that no one before you had done.
The Shaykh : No, allow me a moment, Abu Sa'd. You have the right to go back and repeat your words, and I will respond to them. If you have a response to my words, respond to them; do not just repeat your own words. I told you that I weakened a hadith, or more than one hadith, in Sahih Muslim, relying on those who came before me.
The questioner : What is it.
The Shaykh : Listen, listen. As for this hadith, the one who weakens it today contradicts all those who narrated the hadith and explicitly stated its authenticity, whether they are those who believe in the hadith according to its apparent meaning without interpretation, or those who interpret it. You are still going back and saying, "When I weaken something, I have predecessors in that." But he did not approach the hadith and study it with a scientific, hadith-based study. First, he contradicted all the scholars who spoke about this hadith, whether they spoke about it regarding its chain of narration, or regarding its implication for creed, or regarding its jurisprudential implication. Do you know that there is a jurisprudential implication in the hadith? Keep that in mind, or not?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Okay, so then all these scholars followed one another in authenticating this hadith. How can you say you weakened it?
The questioner : Okay, excellent, Professor. Now we need to know: what is the hadith in Muslim that you weakened? Who is your predecessor in this? Show us, give us something concrete.
The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. Now you have strayed from the topic.
The questioner : No, but just to prove that point.
Al-Halabi : No, do not debate the Shaykh... Do you want to allow me?
The Shaykh : It is yours, my brother, but this is an error in research. I am answering him with the difference between this and that, and he is going back. This is a debate called, "You have finished this topic, move on to another." Or, this research will not end with us, even if we lived for many long years. I will bring you a hadith; I will tell you any hadith you want, and I will research it for you. But this is our topic now.
The questioner: No.
The Shaykh : Okay, so then why this deviation? May Allah reward you. There is a difference between a hadith that I weakened, for which I have hadith evidence that I have not deviated from, as some of the contemporaries do today. You must have heard of the problem with al-Ghazali, the al-Ghazali of the present age. He comes and criticizes hadiths with his mind and his opinion, without using the scientific rules established by the scholars. Thus, we say: regarding the hadith of the maidservant, "Where is Allah?" First, the scholars of the Muslims, despite their differences in schools and inclinations, followed one another in authenticating this hadith. Second, the one who weakens it does so by his opinion, under the delusion that he has contradicted this hadith with other hadiths, whereas here there are multiple contradictions. First, you raised the topic of confusion (idtirab), and I will return to it. First, no one among the scholars of the Muslims has denied this hadith. And it is established in the science of hadith terminology that a hadith narrated byThe Shaykh : one of them or both, and accepted by the Ummah, is certain in its establishment. Do you know this? Do you know this in the science of hadith? Do you not know it?
The questioner : By Allah, I know.
The Shaykh : You do not know? I am not asking you what you know. I am asking you about this.
The questioner : This one, no.
The Shaykh: All right.
The questioner : I know that the ahad (singular reports)...
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.