Reading from the book *Al-Dhawabit al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil* by 'Abd al-'Aziz al-'Abd al-Latif, with commentary by the Shaykh
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The reader: This is an example the Hanafis gave, which is strange. Regarding testimony, he said: "If the original narrator denies the testimony of the branch narrator, the testimony of the branch narrator is dropped". This is a strange analogy. The Shaykh responded here by saying what? "And these two conditions are not required, according to the stronger position, due to the abundance of evidence for accepting the report of a single trustworthy narrator, and because denial in the form of forgetfulness is not a denial of the occurrence of the transmission, but its limit is merely the failure to recall. Therefore, the statement of the one who affirms is given precedence because he is categorical about what he narrates from his Shaykh". Does he mean here, Shaykh, the categorical form of the narrator?
The Shaykh : Yes, that is correct.
The questioner : If the original narrator says: "Never, and I swear to it," does this mean the narration is cut off, or does it serve as a warning to the narrator?
The Shaykh : It depends on the details mentioned previously.
The reader: Meaning, the categorical form is not considered, or...
The Shaykh : It depends on the details mentioned previously. If his student is a person of precision and memory, his narration is accepted, whether he is categorical or not.
The Shaykh : Yes, that is correct.
The questioner : If the original narrator says: "Never, and I swear to it," does this mean the narration is cut off, or does it serve as a warning to the narrator?
The Shaykh : It depends on the details mentioned previously.
The reader: Meaning, the categorical form is not considered, or...
The Shaykh : It depends on the details mentioned previously. If his student is a person of precision and memory, his narration is accepted, whether he is categorical or not.