In the words of the early scholars in their critique of narrators, it is common to combine terms of authentication with terms of criticism, such as when they say, for example:
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : My esteemed Shaykh, in the words of the early scholars in their critique of narrators, it is common to combine terms of authentication with terms of criticism, such as when they say, for example: "He was prone to many errors, yet there is no harm in him." How can these two contradictory parts be reconciled? May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : This is not a problem, because the source differs. The one who says "he was prone to many errors" is not the same as the one who says "there is no harm in him." The first term means weakening the narrator and weakening his hadith if he narrates it alone. As for the other term of authentication, "there is no harm in him," it means that the man’s hadith is to be handled with some caution; there may be some error in his hadith, so his hadith should be graded as good (hasan), neither authentic (sahih) nor weak (da'if).
Therefore, there is no problem if each of these two phrases comes from two different persons, or hadith scholars, or imams.
The Shaykh : This is not a problem, because the source differs. The one who says "he was prone to many errors" is not the same as the one who says "there is no harm in him." The first term means weakening the narrator and weakening his hadith if he narrates it alone. As for the other term of authentication, "there is no harm in him," it means that the man’s hadith is to be handled with some caution; there may be some error in his hadith, so his hadith should be graded as good (hasan), neither authentic (sahih) nor weak (da'if).
Therefore, there is no problem if each of these two phrases comes from two different persons, or hadith scholars, or imams.