We find that some scholars, such as al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar and others, differ in their ruling on a narrator in some places from their ruling on him in another place.

The questioner : He saysThe questioner : We find that some scholars, such as al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar and others, differ in their ruling on a narrator in some places from their ruling on him in another place; sometimes he uses his hadith as evidence in one place and weakens it in another. Do they have specific considerations they take into account in this regard?

The Shaykh : In my opinion, the explanation for such a case is one of two things, and there is no third: either it is due to the human nature of forgetfulness and error, or it is that he found a corroborating narration or corroborating narrations for the hadith he had weakened, which strengthened it, so he graded it as good or authentic. Here, due to the circumstances... he was unable to clarify what led him to this verification. The reality is that a person, as Allah the Exalted said: , cannot keep in mind that if he had weakened the chain of this hadith, then when the same hadith came to him in another place and it appeared to him to be good by virtue of other evidence or authentic by virtue of other evidence, he does not keep in mind that he had weakened it in another place. So he must now address the weakening by saying: "I had weakened it in itself, but now it has become clear to us that it is good by virtue of other evidence." We understand this often, and perhaps we often transfer a hadith from "Al-Silsilah al-Da'ifah" to "Al-Hasanah," and vice versa. Now you will see in the new edition, in the first volume of "Sahih al-Targhib wa al-Tarhib," that you will find two contradictory things in it: you will find the deletion of hadiths; that is, it has been established for us that they do not meet the conditions of "Sahih al-Targhib," and you will find a hadith or more that was neglected and left in a distant section of "Al-Targhib wa al-Tarhib" that we transferred from there and included in the new edition, because some corroborating narrations that strengthen it became clear to me. But it is not easy to keep all these matters in mind for all the hadiths that are scattered, with discussions of them in many places. So I imagine, and especially al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, who filled the world with his knowledge and his books; it is not easy for him to keep in mind that this hadith which he graded as good—for example—in "Fath al-Bari" and which he had weakened—for example—in "Takhrij al-Habir"—for example—may not be possible for him to recall... as I do sometimes, otherwise I am like him—also—I forget, and I forget more than he does. This is the second reason, and the first reason is also a reason for me, because it is the nature of man; that is, forgetfulness.
Yes.

The questioner : ... he sometimes mentions the man—for example—, sometimes he grades his hadith as good in one place, ... weakens it there, and mentions the scholars' words regarding its weakening, and in that place ... his hadith, and mentions the scholars' words regarding his authentication—for example—.

The Shaykh : This statement can be answered by adding another point, and this actually exists: if he graded it as good, it does not mean the goodness is in itself; he graded it as good as we mentioned earlier; in that case, there is no contradiction between his grading it as good and his weakening it and his statement about the man present in the chain of this hadith. We know through tracking that in many cases—he and others—he says in the chain of a hadith: "Its chain is good," even though the general terminology is that a chain is good if it is said to mean "good in itself"; but it becomes clear that it was output... .