Is the non-specialist Muslim youth content with the authentication and weakening of hadith by researchers like you?

The questioner : May Allah preserve you, O honorable Shaykh. Is the non-specialist Muslim youth content with the authentication and weakening of hadith by researchers like you? And if the answer is yes, is this taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence)?

The Shaykh : I did not understand the last part of the question. Is this taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence)? What do you mean? Because the first part is clear.

The questioner : He says: If he is content with the authentication, meaning by the researchers, is this considered taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence)?

The Shaykh : Is that what he says?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : The answer is: There is no difference but insight (basirah) varies from person to person. The insight of the scholar is higher and more refined than the insight of the student of knowledge, and the insight of the student of knowledge is higher and more refined than the insight of the general public. So for every level of insight, there is a minimum requirement. The least of it is to verify the saying of Allah the Exalted: So an individual from the general public, from the Muslims at large, asks the specialist in hadith: "Is this hadith authentic or weak?" He tells him: "It is authentic," so he adopts it and acts upon it. Or he tells him about another hadith: "It is weak," so he does not act upon it. This is his obligation, and this is the extent of the insight that Allah Blessed and Exalted is He has enabled him to possess. He cannot do more than that.
But we move from this lower level to a higher one, which is the insight of the student of knowledge. He asks, or he reads in a book that this hadith was graded authentic by, for example, Imam al-Tirmidhi, or authenticated by Ibn Hibban, or by whoever else authenticates it. But he has a background that may make him aware that those who authenticated this hadith are known for leniency in some of their authentications. So he is able to investigate to ensure whether this authentication hit the truth or is part of the leniency known about this authenticator. This is a higher level than that of the layperson, for whom it is sufficient to simply take the scholar's word as authentic or weak. As for whether this is taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) or following (ittiba'), I believe the issue is purely formal or a verbal disagreement. For example, Imam al-San'ani has a treatise on facilitating ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) in which he holds that the statement of the hadith scholar, "This hadith is authentic," is a report that must be verified and has no connection to taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence). Others say it is the very essence of taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) because it is possible to err, and it is possible that the authentication is based on the verification of a narrator who is actually in error, and the truth is that it is weak, and so on, as is known from the terminology of hadith. So I see that the disagreement on this specific point—whether it is taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) or following (ittiba')—is purely formal. The important thing is that every Muslim must verify the insight that he is capable of. I gave an example earlier of the layperson who cannot do more than ask the scholar and say to him, "Is this hadith authentic?" or ask, "Is smoking permissible or not?" He tells him: "It is forbidden (haram)." That is it; he has no ability beyond this question. Whereas the student of knowledge can say something about whether this is correct or incorrect. But if he is a scholar, then taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is forbidden for him because he is able to scrutinize the issue, just as the same man who authenticated or weakened it, or ruled that it is forbidden or permissible, did. Therefore, the statement of the Imams: "Do not follow me, and do not follow Malik, and take from where they took" is undoubtedly directed at those who are capable among the scholars, or at least the strong students of knowledge, who are able to take from where the Imams took, from the Book of Allah and the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).
As for the general public, they are not addressed with this address: "Take from where they took." Especially if we consider the lands of the non-Arabs who do not know the Arabic language at all; how can it be conceivable that such an address is directed at them? Then we come to the Arabs, the Arabs in general, who have become like the non-Arabs in their lack of knowledge of the Arabic language, and so on, in a descending order until you reach the level of the strong student of knowledge. He is able to take from where they took in some issues, but he is not able to take from where they took in other issues. So every person is obligated to do what he is capable of. Now, suppose the questioner asks the Shaykh about a hadith and he says it is authentic; is this taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) or not? If we say it is taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence), what follows from that? Is taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) forbidden? No, not in this absolute sense. Taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is forbidden for the one who is able not to follow. But to make a general statement like that, we would contradict the explicit text of the Noble Qur'an and we would contradict what the Companions were doing, where they were content with asking the scholars among them because they did not know. And Allah the Mighty and Majestic says in the previous verse: So there is an exaggeration in a place where it is not required, by some of the young people who are raised on the Book and the Sunnah, in that they forbid taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) in general. This is a serious and very dangerous negligence, because in that lies obliging people to do what they cannot bear. And Allah the Mighty and Majestic says: So the majority of the Companions were content to ask a directed question to one of their scholars and accept it without any discussion. It is not as it is today, where a person who understands nothing of the knowledge asks, "Is it permissible or not?" and immediately he is told, "What is the evidence?" He is not at the academic level to understand the evidence. And if he is told, "This hadith is authentic," he says, "What is the evidence for its authenticity?" He is told, "Go and read the books of terminology for years and the biographies of the narrators for years, and then come back and ask what is the evidence for the authenticity of this hadith." Therefore, taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is of two types: taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) that is necessary, and even the great scholars do not escape it; and the other type is making taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) a religion, by which one contradicts what Allah said and what the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, as the extremists of the schools of jurisprudence do, and others.