If some of the imams of criticism include certain hadiths in their books, and we find that an imam other than this one says there is a liar in it, do we find a way out and an excuse for the one who included it, on the grounds that he does not consider this narrator a liar?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Shaykh, they are ordering you to do this, O Shaykh. Now, if some of the imams of criticism include certain hadiths in their books, and we find that someone other than this critic or imam says there is a liar in it, do we not find a way out and an excuse for the one who included it, on the grounds that he does not consider this person a liar?
The Shaykh : Because the hadith came through a sound chain?
The questioner : No, with this chain, for example. In our current time, a person might not have come across it with a sound chain, but this was mentioned in one of the Musnads or one of the books of the Sunnah. So he included this hadith with a chain in which there is a liar. And peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah.
The Shaykh : And upon you peace and the mercy of Allah
The questioner : So, does this chain, which contains a liar, given that he included it and he is one of the imams of criticism, and it contains this person who is accused of lying, does this not indicate that the one who included it does not consider him a liar?
The Shaykh : Perhaps, and perhaps.
The questioner : Because if he included it with your permission, for a moment, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : No, not with my permission. Complete it, because I object to others making noise, do you see? I want to clarify.
The questioner : Please go ahead.
The Shaykh : Perhaps, and perhaps.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : If the one who included that hadith with that chain, in which some of those who care about this science say there is a liar, if the author of the book stipulated that he would not narrate a hadith containing a liar, then your point is in its proper place, meaning that the author does not consider this person a liar.
But if he did not stipulate that, then it is possible to say that the statement of the one who said there is a liar in it does not contradict the author’s inclusion of this hadith, because he did not stipulate this, first of all.
And secondly, it is possible that he did stipulate it, but just as happened with the previous hadith between me and Shaykh Sa'd, it is possible that he was unable to apply the rule literally in every hadith. So now, I say I have finished the answer, and you know what I mean. Perhaps, and perhaps.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Okay, now.
The questioner : We have something else remaining.
The Shaykh : Please go ahead.
The questioner : Is it not said that a hadith in which there is a liar, if we do not find another path for it, is a lie?
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : Would one think that this trustworthy imam would narrate a fabricated hadith against the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)?
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you.
The questioner : Along with the hadith: "Whoever narrates to me a hadith..."
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you. My previous statement has gone down the drain.
The questioner : Do you know that this rule is still established, that it may be a departure from the rule?
The Shaykh : Or perhaps he did not stipulate it.
The questioner : He did not stipulate this. And even if he did not stipulate it, O Shaykh, even if he did not stipulate soundness, even if he did not stipulate the thing, the proof is, regardless of whether it is sound or good, but even if he did not stipulate this, would one think that he would narrate anything other than what we say he was distracted from the rule?
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you.
The questioner : And you, and every Muslim.
The Shaykh : How did we know the fabricated hadiths, by intellect or by chain?
The questioner : By chain, through these people.
The Shaykh : No problem, by chain. Who narrated these chains to us?
The questioner : They
The Shaykh : They did. So how is it permissible for them to narrate to us with their chains, in which there are fabricators and liars?
The questioner : Yes, from this, I say, would one not think that the one who included it does not consider this person a liar? Do the opinions differ?
The Shaykh : It is not necessary, and the answer has already been given. May Allah bless you. Otherwise, we will go around in a circle. Do you know that my answer may be that he did not stipulate it, so he is excused in what he mentions?
And perhaps you remember with me that the scholars of hadith mentioned in their terminology that if a hadith scholar narrates the chain with its chain, the responsibility is lifted from him, because he provided the means by which the scholar can know if this hadith is fabricated or not fabricated. Do you not remember this with me?
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : So then,
The questioner : The responsibility is lifted from the one who narrates the chain.
The Shaykh : That is it. So the question is not valid from the start.
The questioner : Okay, we have something else. May Allah protect you.
The Shaykh : Please go ahead.
The questioner : Regarding the discussion, as long as the discussion is about the chain.
The Shaykh : Because the hadith came through a sound chain?
The questioner : No, with this chain, for example. In our current time, a person might not have come across it with a sound chain, but this was mentioned in one of the Musnads or one of the books of the Sunnah. So he included this hadith with a chain in which there is a liar. And peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah.
The Shaykh : And upon you peace and the mercy of Allah
The questioner : So, does this chain, which contains a liar, given that he included it and he is one of the imams of criticism, and it contains this person who is accused of lying, does this not indicate that the one who included it does not consider him a liar?
The Shaykh : Perhaps, and perhaps.
The questioner : Because if he included it with your permission, for a moment, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : No, not with my permission. Complete it, because I object to others making noise, do you see? I want to clarify.
The questioner : Please go ahead.
The Shaykh : Perhaps, and perhaps.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : If the one who included that hadith with that chain, in which some of those who care about this science say there is a liar, if the author of the book stipulated that he would not narrate a hadith containing a liar, then your point is in its proper place, meaning that the author does not consider this person a liar.
But if he did not stipulate that, then it is possible to say that the statement of the one who said there is a liar in it does not contradict the author’s inclusion of this hadith, because he did not stipulate this, first of all.
And secondly, it is possible that he did stipulate it, but just as happened with the previous hadith between me and Shaykh Sa'd, it is possible that he was unable to apply the rule literally in every hadith. So now, I say I have finished the answer, and you know what I mean. Perhaps, and perhaps.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Okay, now.
The questioner : We have something else remaining.
The Shaykh : Please go ahead.
The questioner : Is it not said that a hadith in which there is a liar, if we do not find another path for it, is a lie?
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : Would one think that this trustworthy imam would narrate a fabricated hadith against the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)?
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you.
The questioner : Along with the hadith: "Whoever narrates to me a hadith..."
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you. My previous statement has gone down the drain.
The questioner : Do you know that this rule is still established, that it may be a departure from the rule?
The Shaykh : Or perhaps he did not stipulate it.
The questioner : He did not stipulate this. And even if he did not stipulate it, O Shaykh, even if he did not stipulate soundness, even if he did not stipulate the thing, the proof is, regardless of whether it is sound or good, but even if he did not stipulate this, would one think that he would narrate anything other than what we say he was distracted from the rule?
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you.
The questioner : And you, and every Muslim.
The Shaykh : How did we know the fabricated hadiths, by intellect or by chain?
The questioner : By chain, through these people.
The Shaykh : No problem, by chain. Who narrated these chains to us?
The questioner : They
The Shaykh : They did. So how is it permissible for them to narrate to us with their chains, in which there are fabricators and liars?
The questioner : Yes, from this, I say, would one not think that the one who included it does not consider this person a liar? Do the opinions differ?
The Shaykh : It is not necessary, and the answer has already been given. May Allah bless you. Otherwise, we will go around in a circle. Do you know that my answer may be that he did not stipulate it, so he is excused in what he mentions?
And perhaps you remember with me that the scholars of hadith mentioned in their terminology that if a hadith scholar narrates the chain with its chain, the responsibility is lifted from him, because he provided the means by which the scholar can know if this hadith is fabricated or not fabricated. Do you not remember this with me?
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : So then,
The questioner : The responsibility is lifted from the one who narrates the chain.
The Shaykh : That is it. So the question is not valid from the start.
The questioner : Okay, we have something else. May Allah protect you.
The Shaykh : Please go ahead.
The questioner : Regarding the discussion, as long as the discussion is about the chain.