We find some of the imams authenticating and weakening narrators from among the people of hadith whom they did not live to see; on what basis did they pass judgment on them?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : That is, we see that Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him), for example, would weaken or authenticate a narrator whom he himself did not live to see.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : In fact, it may be someone from the Tabi'un or from those who came after them.
The Shaykh : This is correct.
The questioner : Does the basis of his weakening or authenticating rely on something specific, or does it mean, as they say, that they would authenticate and weaken due to a difference in madhhab or such and such of these things? We want to know the method or methodology of their weakening and authenticating, especially regarding the authenticating and weakening by the imams of those whom they did not live to see, for example. On what basis did they authenticate and weaken, for example?
The Shaykh : This is a sound question, and the answer, in my view—if Allah wills—is that what has become clear to me through investigation and tracking is that the method of authenticating and weakening returns to one of two paths:
The first is our path. Our path is the path of narration. We narrate from the imams, even through finding (wujud), that so-and-so authenticated so-and-so, or weakened so-and-so, or the like. They did the same, but they did not need to narrate through finding at that time; rather, they saw it through the chains of narration. The clearest example of this, if you recall what is in the book *al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil* by Ibn Abi Hatim, is that he narrates from his father at times, and from Yahya ibn Ma'in at other times, and sometimes—and here is the point—he says: "Abdullah ibn Ahmad narrated to me from his father." So he narrates the authentication or weakening with a chain, just as he narrates a hadith. This is one of the paths of narrating authentication or criticism.
Of course, when we say this, we say this first: hypothetically, regarding some of the narrations whose chains we see. But for some other narrations, we assume that they also received them from those before them, even if we have not come upon their chains. This is the first path.
The second path is what we observe in the authors of books on weak narrators, like Ibn Hibban in *al-Du'afa wa al-Matrukin*, like al-'Uqayli in *al-Du'afa al-Kabir*, and like Ibn 'Adi in *al-Kamil*. They track the hadiths of the subject and then say: "And he has such-and-such of the denunciations (munkarat)." As for the phrase of Ibn Hibban, it has become a byword: "He narrates denunciations from the famous, and attaches fabrications to the trustworthy", and so on. This means that he investigated the hadiths of this narrator, and it became clear to him from his investigation that this was the case. So there is one of two paths, and this is what we benefit from now if we want to imitate them based on the principle:
"So imitate them, even if you are not like them *** For imitating the noble ones is success"
So we must expand the circle of investigation beyond saying "so-and-so said this and so-and-so said that," especially when we find that the so-and-sos referred to are differing, and we find them differing. We must revive the second method, the method of investigation.
The questioner : Investigation.
The Shaykh : Yes, investigating the narrations of this narrator that they mention, which at least helps to prefer one of the two opinions: authentication or criticism.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : In fact, it may be someone from the Tabi'un or from those who came after them.
The Shaykh : This is correct.
The questioner : Does the basis of his weakening or authenticating rely on something specific, or does it mean, as they say, that they would authenticate and weaken due to a difference in madhhab or such and such of these things? We want to know the method or methodology of their weakening and authenticating, especially regarding the authenticating and weakening by the imams of those whom they did not live to see, for example. On what basis did they authenticate and weaken, for example?
The Shaykh : This is a sound question, and the answer, in my view—if Allah wills—is that what has become clear to me through investigation and tracking is that the method of authenticating and weakening returns to one of two paths:
The first is our path. Our path is the path of narration. We narrate from the imams, even through finding (wujud), that so-and-so authenticated so-and-so, or weakened so-and-so, or the like. They did the same, but they did not need to narrate through finding at that time; rather, they saw it through the chains of narration. The clearest example of this, if you recall what is in the book *al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil* by Ibn Abi Hatim, is that he narrates from his father at times, and from Yahya ibn Ma'in at other times, and sometimes—and here is the point—he says: "Abdullah ibn Ahmad narrated to me from his father." So he narrates the authentication or weakening with a chain, just as he narrates a hadith. This is one of the paths of narrating authentication or criticism.
Of course, when we say this, we say this first: hypothetically, regarding some of the narrations whose chains we see. But for some other narrations, we assume that they also received them from those before them, even if we have not come upon their chains. This is the first path.
The second path is what we observe in the authors of books on weak narrators, like Ibn Hibban in *al-Du'afa wa al-Matrukin*, like al-'Uqayli in *al-Du'afa al-Kabir*, and like Ibn 'Adi in *al-Kamil*. They track the hadiths of the subject and then say: "And he has such-and-such of the denunciations (munkarat)." As for the phrase of Ibn Hibban, it has become a byword: "He narrates denunciations from the famous, and attaches fabrications to the trustworthy", and so on. This means that he investigated the hadiths of this narrator, and it became clear to him from his investigation that this was the case. So there is one of two paths, and this is what we benefit from now if we want to imitate them based on the principle:
"So imitate them, even if you are not like them *** For imitating the noble ones is success"
So we must expand the circle of investigation beyond saying "so-and-so said this and so-and-so said that," especially when we find that the so-and-sos referred to are differing, and we find them differing. We must revive the second method, the method of investigation.
The questioner : Investigation.
The Shaykh : Yes, investigating the narrations of this narrator that they mention, which at least helps to prefer one of the two opinions: authentication or criticism.