The Book "Al-Jami' al-Saghir" by al-Suyuti; Do we rely on it for its extraction of all the hadiths? Or is there a difference of opinion regarding it?

The questioner : Peace be upon you, O Shaykh. The Book "Al-Jami' al-Saghir" by al-Suyuti; do we rely on it for its extraction of all the hadiths? Or is there a difference of opinion regarding it?

The Shaykh : Do you mean the extraction, and what do you mean?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : I mean the attribution...

The questioner: Correct.

The Shaykh : No, that is not the work of *Al-Jami' al-Saghir*. Are you asking about my work or al-Suyuti's work?

The questioner : No, about al-Suyuti's work.

The Shaykh : Al-Suyuti does not authenticate.

The questioner : The symbols he mentioned in his book.

The Shaykh : Yes, this is a matter of opinion. Do you mean the symbols, not the classifications of authentic, good, and weak?

The questioner : Yes, yes.

The Shaykh : The symbols?

The questioner : In His Book.

The Shaykh : Yes, the symbols are originally to be relied upon; because authenticity predominates in them, and sometimes there is a slip; either from him or from the copyist. And I, although my work in it was only to indicate the grades of the hadith, sometimes I pointed out in the commentary in the margin some of the errors that occurred in the symbols. I mention among them, notably, that in many instances the letter 'ayn shifts to the number four. The number four with him indicates the four compilers of the Sunan, and 'ayn means Abu Ya'la in his "Musnad." So this letter 'ayn shifted to four in some of the copyists, and the book was printed with it written as four; meaning: the compilers of the Sunan, whereas the hadith is not with the compilers of the Sunan. Such things happen, and this happens in every book; because as was said about Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him), "Allah refused to complete anything other than His Book."
And often the shift occurs not only in this "Jami'" but also in some books of jurisprudence. It was narrated by al-Bukhari, but the original was narrated by Ibn al-Najjar, so Ibn al-Najjar was distorted into al-Bukhari. And this is a very grave error; because the hadiths that Ibn al-Najjar narrates in his "Addition" to "The History of Baghdad" are predominantly weak if he is the sole narrator of them. So if the jurist attributed the hadith to Ibn al-Najjar, it means that the sources of extraction were extremely narrow for him; until he did not find anyone to attribute the hadith to except Ibn al-Najjar. So it appears that the copyist was a man with no culture in knowledge, and specifically in hadith and the extractors of hadiths or the narrators of hadiths; so he perhaps heard that there is a scholar named Ibn al-Najjar, and his ear was filled with al-Bukhari, so he says: this is an error by the one before him, and he changes Ibn al-Najjar and makes it al-Bukhari!
But the summary of this speech is: if there are some errors in any book from these symbols or others; then that does not negate relying on it and giving it weight; because no book is free from any error of this type or any other. Rather, the criterion is what predominates in this book, as is the case with the author of the book. The criterion is the author if his correctness is better than his error in the science in which he excelled, then he is the one to be trusted. As for seeking an author or a book that is free and infallible from error; this is contrary to the cosmic sunnah of Allah, .