You mentioned that Ibn Rajab and Ibn Kathir strengthen the hadith of the unknown among the Tabi'un. Do you mean by that the one whose status is unknown?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Regarding the hadith of the unknown, and regarding the two unknowns among the Tabi'un, I mentioned that Ibn Rajab and Ibn Kathir strengthen the hadith of the unknowns. I think you mean the current ignorance, the one whose status is unknown.
The Shaykh : I do not generalize beyond that.
The questioner : Because I read in the weak hadiths.
The Shaykh : It is broader than that.
The questioner : I remember reading in the weak hadiths that the narrator must be known.
The Shaykh : How?
The questioner : This is in the weak hadiths, in the first or second part, in the refutation of al-Kawthari, where you mentioned that the ignorance must first be removed, first the ignorance of identity, and then this statement is made.
The Shaykh : This is like a rule, may Allah reward you. I agree with you in this, and I am not with Ibn Kathir or Ibn Rajab. But I mention to you examples and models from the opinion of some later hadith masters that they accept and follow the narration of the unknown Tabi'i based on the principle of assuming the best of him if he is a Tabi'i. As for the rule, I believe, and this is what I have explicitly researched recently with some distinguished scholars, that if a man of obscure status is narrated from by a group of trustworthy narrators, whether he is a Tabi'i or below that, and no denounced narration is found in what these trustworthy narrators narrated from that man of obscure status, then this man of obscure status takes the rank of a truthful narrator, if not the rank of a trustworthy narrator. I mentioned ten examples of this, I think in my book *Tammam al-Mannah fi al-Ta'liq 'ala Fiqh al-Sunnah*, quoting from al-Dhahabi and Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, how they authenticated those whom no one before them had authenticated, and they only noted in that what I mentioned to you, namely that there is a narrator in the status of one whose status is unknown, but when they found many trustworthy narrators narrating from him, they were reassured that this man of obscure status is a trustworthy and truthful narrator, because if he were not so, these trustworthy narrators would not have narrated from him, and if there had been anything denounced in his narrations, it would have become apparent through the narrations of these trustworthy narrators from him. But my previous example is that some imams, as a special view regarding the unknown of identity among the Tabi'un, accept his hadith, assume the best of it, and use it as evidence. As for the rule, it is that he has many narrators from him, and he moves from the status of one whose status is unknown to being a truthful or trustworthy narrator.
The questioner : Like al-Dhahabi, for example, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : How?
The questioner : Like al-Dhahabi, O Shaykh, who says if the unknown is among the Tabi'un, one assumes the best of him and accepts his hadith.
The student: Our brother has a continuation.
The Shaykh : Please proceed.
The questioner : Excuse me, regarding Ibn Hajar, I reviewed *al-Tahdhib* and compared *al-Tahdhib* with *al-Taqrib* in many biographies. Ahmad did not authenticate them, or Ibn Hibban alone authenticated them, and a group of trustworthy narrators narrated from them. I found that in some biographies he says "acceptable," in a few he says "trustworthy," and in many he says "acceptable."
The Shaykh : Fine.
The questioner : Yes, that is correct.
The Shaykh : Bring it so we can see what you found.
The questioner : The question is, is it a rule from Ibn Hajar?
The Shaykh : What is the rule?
The questioner : You did not mention that.
The Shaykh : No, it is not a rule.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : He is inconsistent in it, and therefore we criticize him in many of the "acceptable" ones in his work, because he contradicts what he said about others of the same status, calling them truthful or trustworthy, because the difference between the one he called "acceptable" and the one he called "truthful" is not apparent.
The questioner : But can we say that Ibn Hajar's evidence for authenticating those or judging them as truthful is derived from this, because I sometimes notice.
The Shaykh : Derived from what?
The questioner : Derived from the fact that a group of trustworthy narrators narrated from them, so he judged them from this angle.
The Shaykh : And why did he not judge the "acceptable" ones with the same judgment?
The questioner : I say if the number of biographies there is greater for those in whom he said "acceptable."
The Shaykh : We say regarding the one in whom the single description is verified, meaning if five trustworthy narrators narrated from a narrator whom no one authenticated, the hadith master said in him "truthful" or "trustworthy," and another narrator from whom five trustworthy narrators narrated, he said in him "acceptable." The reason is not in the answer except that this is his opinion and this is his independent legal reasoning. Therefore, it is difficult for some young students today when they see that I have graded a hadith as good or authentic in which there is a man about whom the hadith master Ibn Hajar said "acceptable." How did you grade it as good or authentic? My answer is as follows: My brother, this book was compiled by the hadith master Ibn Hajar, may Allah reward him with good and benefit greatly from his book. I am the first of them, but he is not the revelation of the sky, and everything he said must be adhered to by the beginners, and it is obligatory for them to adhere to the opinion of this scholar with his knowledge. But if two statements contradict, the statement of the hadith master al-Dhahabi, for example, with the statement of Ibn Hajar, then here a review must be done. If one is from the people of... I am not, nor is anyone else who is like me or whose knowledge is above my knowledge, obligated to imitate Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani exactly, step by step. Rather, in most cases he follows him, and sometimes he contradicts him, taking into account the principles of jurisprudence that they explicitly stated many of and applied some of without making them explicit, and this is of that nature.
The Shaykh : I do not generalize beyond that.
The questioner : Because I read in the weak hadiths.
The Shaykh : It is broader than that.
The questioner : I remember reading in the weak hadiths that the narrator must be known.
The Shaykh : How?
The questioner : This is in the weak hadiths, in the first or second part, in the refutation of al-Kawthari, where you mentioned that the ignorance must first be removed, first the ignorance of identity, and then this statement is made.
The Shaykh : This is like a rule, may Allah reward you. I agree with you in this, and I am not with Ibn Kathir or Ibn Rajab. But I mention to you examples and models from the opinion of some later hadith masters that they accept and follow the narration of the unknown Tabi'i based on the principle of assuming the best of him if he is a Tabi'i. As for the rule, I believe, and this is what I have explicitly researched recently with some distinguished scholars, that if a man of obscure status is narrated from by a group of trustworthy narrators, whether he is a Tabi'i or below that, and no denounced narration is found in what these trustworthy narrators narrated from that man of obscure status, then this man of obscure status takes the rank of a truthful narrator, if not the rank of a trustworthy narrator. I mentioned ten examples of this, I think in my book *Tammam al-Mannah fi al-Ta'liq 'ala Fiqh al-Sunnah*, quoting from al-Dhahabi and Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, how they authenticated those whom no one before them had authenticated, and they only noted in that what I mentioned to you, namely that there is a narrator in the status of one whose status is unknown, but when they found many trustworthy narrators narrating from him, they were reassured that this man of obscure status is a trustworthy and truthful narrator, because if he were not so, these trustworthy narrators would not have narrated from him, and if there had been anything denounced in his narrations, it would have become apparent through the narrations of these trustworthy narrators from him. But my previous example is that some imams, as a special view regarding the unknown of identity among the Tabi'un, accept his hadith, assume the best of it, and use it as evidence. As for the rule, it is that he has many narrators from him, and he moves from the status of one whose status is unknown to being a truthful or trustworthy narrator.
The questioner : Like al-Dhahabi, for example, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : How?
The questioner : Like al-Dhahabi, O Shaykh, who says if the unknown is among the Tabi'un, one assumes the best of him and accepts his hadith.
The student: Our brother has a continuation.
The Shaykh : Please proceed.
The questioner : Excuse me, regarding Ibn Hajar, I reviewed *al-Tahdhib* and compared *al-Tahdhib* with *al-Taqrib* in many biographies. Ahmad did not authenticate them, or Ibn Hibban alone authenticated them, and a group of trustworthy narrators narrated from them. I found that in some biographies he says "acceptable," in a few he says "trustworthy," and in many he says "acceptable."
The Shaykh : Fine.
The questioner : Yes, that is correct.
The Shaykh : Bring it so we can see what you found.
The questioner : The question is, is it a rule from Ibn Hajar?
The Shaykh : What is the rule?
The questioner : You did not mention that.
The Shaykh : No, it is not a rule.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : He is inconsistent in it, and therefore we criticize him in many of the "acceptable" ones in his work, because he contradicts what he said about others of the same status, calling them truthful or trustworthy, because the difference between the one he called "acceptable" and the one he called "truthful" is not apparent.
The questioner : But can we say that Ibn Hajar's evidence for authenticating those or judging them as truthful is derived from this, because I sometimes notice.
The Shaykh : Derived from what?
The questioner : Derived from the fact that a group of trustworthy narrators narrated from them, so he judged them from this angle.
The Shaykh : And why did he not judge the "acceptable" ones with the same judgment?
The questioner : I say if the number of biographies there is greater for those in whom he said "acceptable."
The Shaykh : We say regarding the one in whom the single description is verified, meaning if five trustworthy narrators narrated from a narrator whom no one authenticated, the hadith master said in him "truthful" or "trustworthy," and another narrator from whom five trustworthy narrators narrated, he said in him "acceptable." The reason is not in the answer except that this is his opinion and this is his independent legal reasoning. Therefore, it is difficult for some young students today when they see that I have graded a hadith as good or authentic in which there is a man about whom the hadith master Ibn Hajar said "acceptable." How did you grade it as good or authentic? My answer is as follows: My brother, this book was compiled by the hadith master Ibn Hajar, may Allah reward him with good and benefit greatly from his book. I am the first of them, but he is not the revelation of the sky, and everything he said must be adhered to by the beginners, and it is obligatory for them to adhere to the opinion of this scholar with his knowledge. But if two statements contradict, the statement of the hadith master al-Dhahabi, for example, with the statement of Ibn Hajar, then here a review must be done. If one is from the people of... I am not, nor is anyone else who is like me or whose knowledge is above my knowledge, obligated to imitate Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani exactly, step by step. Rather, in most cases he follows him, and sometimes he contradicts him, taking into account the principles of jurisprudence that they explicitly stated many of and applied some of without making them explicit, and this is of that nature.