How is the fairness of a narrator known when his precision is established through examination and tracking rather than contemporaneity?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : A question on the same topic: For a narrator to be classified as reliable, he must possess both fairness and precision. We can assess precision, and the Imams know it, for example, by examining the hadiths as you mentioned. However, there is disagreement regarding fairness. Some said: Every Muslim is fair, and all Muslims are fair except one who has been punished with a hadd. Ibn Hbban, al-'Ajli, and others are of this opinion. But some said that inner fairness must be present. Yet we see and find that the Imams classify as reliable narrators whom they did not meet. For example, Ibn Ma'in or al-'Ajli or another might classify a narrator as reliable whom he did not meet or know. It is possible to say that he examined his hadiths and found him precise, but how did he know his fairness? That is the question.
The Shaykh : What is fairness?
The questioner : Fairness means, as the Yemeni scholar al-Mu'allimi mentioned, it is: "a disposition that prevents a person from committing major sins or acts that violate human dignity".
The Shaykh : No, excuse me, I meant how is fairness known?
The questioner : Yes, knowing fairness requires inner fairness through companionship, experience, and knowledge. But if there is, for example, a hundred years between us, we cannot judge him except in terms of precision.
The Shaykh : Except in terms of what?
The questioner : Precision.
Another questioner: By examining his narrations.
The questioner : By examining his narrations.
The Shaykh : Precision, this establishes his memorization, meaning?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Do you want to say that fairness is not established?
The questioner : I want to know how they judge him?
The Shaykh : I mean, initially, you want to say it this way, not that you adopt a specific school of thought, no, yes, is it not sufficient for establishing this fairness that the man narrates the hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and narrates them in the correct manner, and the narrators receive them from him? Is this not sufficient to show that he was fair?
The questioner : It is sufficient to show that he is a Muslim, meaning the general fairness, which is Islam, is present in him. But the inner fairness, which is above the level of the unknown, how did they know it or how is it known?
The Shaykh : No, the unknown, you know the unknown is unknown in identity and unknown in status. But when you assume that he is trustworthy and it is known that he is trustworthy by another method, which is examination or narration as we mentioned earlier, he moves out of the possibility of being unknown.
The questioner : So in this case, can we say: If the precision of the narrator is known by examining his hadiths, we are satisfied with his Islam.
The Shaykh : We are satisfied with his Islam, because if this man were not a fair Muslim, they would not have narrated from him.
The Shaykh : What is fairness?
The questioner : Fairness means, as the Yemeni scholar al-Mu'allimi mentioned, it is: "a disposition that prevents a person from committing major sins or acts that violate human dignity".
The Shaykh : No, excuse me, I meant how is fairness known?
The questioner : Yes, knowing fairness requires inner fairness through companionship, experience, and knowledge. But if there is, for example, a hundred years between us, we cannot judge him except in terms of precision.
The Shaykh : Except in terms of what?
The questioner : Precision.
Another questioner: By examining his narrations.
The questioner : By examining his narrations.
The Shaykh : Precision, this establishes his memorization, meaning?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Do you want to say that fairness is not established?
The questioner : I want to know how they judge him?
The Shaykh : I mean, initially, you want to say it this way, not that you adopt a specific school of thought, no, yes, is it not sufficient for establishing this fairness that the man narrates the hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and narrates them in the correct manner, and the narrators receive them from him? Is this not sufficient to show that he was fair?
The questioner : It is sufficient to show that he is a Muslim, meaning the general fairness, which is Islam, is present in him. But the inner fairness, which is above the level of the unknown, how did they know it or how is it known?
The Shaykh : No, the unknown, you know the unknown is unknown in identity and unknown in status. But when you assume that he is trustworthy and it is known that he is trustworthy by another method, which is examination or narration as we mentioned earlier, he moves out of the possibility of being unknown.
The questioner : So in this case, can we say: If the precision of the narrator is known by examining his hadiths, we are satisfied with his Islam.
The Shaykh : We are satisfied with his Islam, because if this man were not a fair Muslim, they would not have narrated from him.