What is your opinion regarding al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar’s authentication of Umm 'Abd Allah ibn Abi Mulaikah, given that no one narrated from her except her son?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : May Allah reward you. Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) authenticated Umm 'Abd Allah ibn Abi Mulaikah, even though no one narrated from her except her son, 'Abd Allah. How can one say what is stated in *al-Taqrib*, where he said: "Trustworthy, from the second generation", when we have not found any narrator other than her son, 'Abd Allah ibn Abi Mulaikah?!
The Shaykh : This is well known: al-Hafiz has some authentications and some denigrations that are not accepted. We find in his *al-Taqrib* the exact opposite of this; we find that he said of someone: "Unknown" or "Obscure," even though in the original source of *al-Taqrib*, which is *al-Tahdhib*, he had mentioned the authentication by some of the early imams. Despite that, he did not consider this authentication and said of him: "He is obscure." We cannot justify every error that comes from any imam in any science. It has become customary for some students, when they hear a jurisprudential discussion in which one opinion is preferred over another, and the stronger opinion has clear evidence in the Sunnah, while the weaker opinion has no evidence other than so-and-so saying such-and-such, for some of the attendees to rush and ask, "What is his proof?" It is not necessary that for every opinion whose contradiction has been established by scriptural evidence, we must have a proof cited by the proponents of that opinion about themselves or their imam. It is sufficient for us to know the truth, for the matter is as it was said: "By their opposites, things become clear". So, if we return to the mother of Abi Mulaikah and find in *al-Taqrib* that he says of her: "Trustworthy", while in *al-Tahdhib* he did not mention for her more than one narrator, then the principles he formulated, from which we learned, require us to say that she is unknown, as he said of her counterparts. There are many women for whom *al-Tahdhib* mentioned only one narrator, and he says of them: "Acceptable" or "Unknown." However, to say of her "Trustworthy" is contrary to the principle. But what was in his mind? Did he express something, or is he a human being, and humans err and hit the mark?
Accordingly, we should adhere to the principle, but along with the principle, we must verify, in case there are other narrators for this biography, whether it be a woman or a man, and al-Hafiz’s speech in *al-Tahdhib* fell short of comprehending the narrators from her. When he came to *al-Taqrib*, this detail became clear to him, and he proceeded from this discovery to this authentication. This type of case may have some examples; when we research some biographies, we find, for instance, in *al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil* more than one narrator, while al-Hafiz mentioned only one narrator. We may benefit from *al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil* regarding al-Hafiz; al-Hafiz mentions a narrator by name, and in *al-Jarh* two other narrators or more are named. These are added to that one, and we end up with a group of trustworthy narrators who narrated from that biographee. In that case, it is possible that al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar, in such a biography, noticed this observation that he did not pay attention to in *al-Tahdhib*. However, this is only a possibility and occurs in some biographies. So, in order for the student of knowledge not to be hasty in declaring al-Hafiz wrong, he must conduct such extensive research until he is convinced that this woman, for example, truly has only this one narrator in her biography.
The Shaykh : This is well known: al-Hafiz has some authentications and some denigrations that are not accepted. We find in his *al-Taqrib* the exact opposite of this; we find that he said of someone: "Unknown" or "Obscure," even though in the original source of *al-Taqrib*, which is *al-Tahdhib*, he had mentioned the authentication by some of the early imams. Despite that, he did not consider this authentication and said of him: "He is obscure." We cannot justify every error that comes from any imam in any science. It has become customary for some students, when they hear a jurisprudential discussion in which one opinion is preferred over another, and the stronger opinion has clear evidence in the Sunnah, while the weaker opinion has no evidence other than so-and-so saying such-and-such, for some of the attendees to rush and ask, "What is his proof?" It is not necessary that for every opinion whose contradiction has been established by scriptural evidence, we must have a proof cited by the proponents of that opinion about themselves or their imam. It is sufficient for us to know the truth, for the matter is as it was said: "By their opposites, things become clear". So, if we return to the mother of Abi Mulaikah and find in *al-Taqrib* that he says of her: "Trustworthy", while in *al-Tahdhib* he did not mention for her more than one narrator, then the principles he formulated, from which we learned, require us to say that she is unknown, as he said of her counterparts. There are many women for whom *al-Tahdhib* mentioned only one narrator, and he says of them: "Acceptable" or "Unknown." However, to say of her "Trustworthy" is contrary to the principle. But what was in his mind? Did he express something, or is he a human being, and humans err and hit the mark?
Accordingly, we should adhere to the principle, but along with the principle, we must verify, in case there are other narrators for this biography, whether it be a woman or a man, and al-Hafiz’s speech in *al-Tahdhib* fell short of comprehending the narrators from her. When he came to *al-Taqrib*, this detail became clear to him, and he proceeded from this discovery to this authentication. This type of case may have some examples; when we research some biographies, we find, for instance, in *al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil* more than one narrator, while al-Hafiz mentioned only one narrator. We may benefit from *al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil* regarding al-Hafiz; al-Hafiz mentions a narrator by name, and in *al-Jarh* two other narrators or more are named. These are added to that one, and we end up with a group of trustworthy narrators who narrated from that biographee. In that case, it is possible that al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar, in such a biography, noticed this observation that he did not pay attention to in *al-Tahdhib*. However, this is only a possibility and occurs in some biographies. So, in order for the student of knowledge not to be hasty in declaring al-Hafiz wrong, he must conduct such extensive research until he is convinced that this woman, for example, truly has only this one narrator in her biography.