What is the ruling if the statements of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil (the critique and vindication of narrators) regarding a well-known imam conflict, and the chains of narration for both the critique and the vindication are equal?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : If the critique and vindication of an imam who is well-known among the people conflict, and the chains of narration for the critique and the vindication are equal, which is given precedence? For example, what about Abu Hanifah?
The Shaykh : There are two issues here: the first is if the critique and the vindication are equal, and the second is whether the critique and the vindication of the imam Abu Hanifah (may Allah have mercy on him) were actually equal.
The answer to the first part is: if a critique conflicts with a vindication, regardless of whether they are equal, there is no difference in what follows between the critics being more numerous or the vindicators being more numerous. The rule is: the critique is given precedence if its cause is explained. That is, the critique is given precedence over the vindication, even if it comes from one person, over the vindication even if it comes from a group, provided that the critique is explained and its cause is made clear.
Then, it is not sufficient for the critique to be explained and its cause made clear; rather, it must be an acceptable critique, because not everything by which a narrator is criticized constitutes a critique that invalidates his integrity.
The Shaykh : There are two issues here: the first is if the critique and the vindication are equal, and the second is whether the critique and the vindication of the imam Abu Hanifah (may Allah have mercy on him) were actually equal.
The answer to the first part is: if a critique conflicts with a vindication, regardless of whether they are equal, there is no difference in what follows between the critics being more numerous or the vindicators being more numerous. The rule is: the critique is given precedence if its cause is explained. That is, the critique is given precedence over the vindication, even if it comes from one person, over the vindication even if it comes from a group, provided that the critique is explained and its cause is made clear.
Then, it is not sufficient for the critique to be explained and its cause made clear; rather, it must be an acceptable critique, because not everything by which a narrator is criticized constitutes a critique that invalidates his integrity.