Is it said that the methodology of al-Hafiz is that he does not classify a narrator as unknown, even if a single narrator narrated from him, unless that is accompanied by an indicator, such as the indicators like the explicit statement of an Imam regarding their ignorance?

The questioner : I looked at the biographies of five hundred narrators in *Al-Taqrib* and found that al-Hafiz classified eighteen of them as unknown. All of these had either an explicit statement from an Imam regarding their ignorance, like Abu Hatim, or al-Bukhari saying "he is not corroborated in his hadith," or that Ibn Hibban did not mention him in *Al-Thiqat*, or that the narrator from him is weak, or something similar, except for only two narrators. So, is it said that the methodology of al-Hafiz is that he does not classify a narrator as unknown, even if a single narrator narrated from him, unless that is accompanied by an indicator, such as the indicators mentioned previously?

The Shaykh : Is it said what?

The questioner : That the methodology of al-Hafiz.

The Shaykh : It seems the report did not come. Read the phrase: "Is it said."

The questioner : That the methodology of al-Hafiz is that he speaks about every narrator.
The student : He does not hold it.

The questioner : He does not say, yes, that he does not classify a narrator as unknown, even if a single narrator narrated from him, unless that is accompanied by an indicator, such as the indicators mentioned previously?

The Shaykh: I did not grasp it.

The questioner : I have gone through five hundred narrators from *Al-Taqrib* from its beginning and looked at those whom al-Hafiz classifies as unknown.

The Shaykh: All right.

The questioner : I found that sixteen of them were all accompanied by something from these things, either an explicit statement from an Imam regarding his ignorance, like Abu Hatim or others, or al-Bukhari saying, for example, "he is not corroborated in his hadith," or that Ibn Hibban did not mention him in *Al-Thiqat*. So, I inferred from that, except for two narrators, that they are the ones whom Ibn Hibban mentioned in *Al-Thiqat* or something similar.

The Shaykh: All right.

The questioner : So, I inferred from that that al-Hafiz does not classify a narrator as unknown, even if a single narrator narrated from him, unless this is accompanied by something from.

The Shaykh : I do not believe this is a condition for him. It does not appear to me from the practice I carried out that this is a condition for him. Also, I do not know if I noticed that he says about many whom no one has authenticated that he classifies them, for example, as truthful.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Even if no one has authenticated them.

The questioner : Even if Ibn Hibban did not mention them in *Al-Thiqat*.

The Shaykh : Yes, yes, and these are many.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : These are many. Therefore, the truth is that what prevails in my opinion is that al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar, when he compiled this book, *Al-Taqrib*, although it is a very beneficial book, especially for beginners and novices in this science, it seems he did not have the opportunity to review it, or that he did not conduct his many investigations according to the methodology he established in this book. Because you find that in many biographies, even if we go beyond this type of biographies, he may classify a man as acceptable, for example, while he has been authenticated by a trustworthy Imam who is attested to for his memorization and his prominence in this field, not like Ibn Hibban, such as Abu Zur'ah, for example, whose soundness of critique is not doubted. We find that al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar was lenient in his classification of many narrators when he says "acceptable," while in reality he is authenticated by an Imam from the critics and memorizers. Therefore, I believe that what I observed may be correct for some of the biographies and may not be correct for others. The matter of this is exactly like the matter of those whom he classifies as acceptable; that is, the one whom he classifies as unknown is like the one whom he classifies as acceptable; it does not consistently hit the methodology or rule he established in the introduction of his book. He may deviate from it in many instances. And I am as certain of the two cases I mentioned earlier, namely that he classifies many whom no one has authenticated as truthful, because he looks at the many narrators who narrated from this biography subject, whom he does not know, and we also share with him in not knowing that anyone has authenticated him, but he observes that there are many narrators from this biography subject and that there is nothing in the hadiths he narrated that is strange or weak. The soul is reassured by such a researcher who found many narrators for this narrator and that he is truthful, even if there is no memorizer who authenticated him, like Ibn Hibban. Likewise, I am as certain that in many narrators whom he may weaken or classify as unknown, he has found someone who authenticated them. So, I see that the reason for this—and peace be upon you—is that the reason for this is that al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar was not able to review this book. Perhaps I have answered your question with what I have of knowledge. Please proceed.

The questioner : So, do we understand from this that what occurred from al-Hafiz in that regard was due to negligence?

The Shaykh : ... The oversight from which no person is safe.

The questioner : But through your experience and life with this science, does this magnitude of what occurred in *Al-Taqrib* remove confidence in its rulings in this book?

The Shaykh : This is impossible. If confidence is removed from such an Imam, then there is no confidence in any Imam in any science in which a person has established himself, because the standard in such a field is the fewness of errors and the multitude of errors, exactly as we deal with the narrators of the science of hadith. Many of the Imams of hadith and their memorizers and narrators, who are said to be in trust like mountains, nevertheless, no one is safe from error and illusion among them. And therefore, the standard among the scholars of hadith in classifying the acceptable narrators and the rejected ones is that the one who is predominantly characterized by poor memorization is the weak one, and the one who is better than that is the truthful one, whose hadith is relied upon at the level of the good hadith. And from here, we connect our speech to what has passed from previous research, that those who reject the good hadith, which is known among the hadith scholars, will be very, very, very disturbed in the hundreds, if not thousands, of narrators whom the memorizers classify as "truthful, perhaps he erred," "truthful, perhaps he made a mistake," "truthful, he has illusions." Do you see how they deal with this type of narrators? Do they discard their hadiths or accept them? If they accept this type of narrators and accept their hadiths, do you see if this hadith is of the type of the authentic hadith narrated by the trustworthy one? This is not possible for a person who uses his mind and has received his knowledge well from the people of knowledge, whether they are alive in the bellies of their books or alive in the reality of their affairs. Perhaps this will benefit you in this aspect, if Allah wills.