Can a researcher, if he pauses due to a difficulty that arises in the chain of a hadith, critique it by researching and examining the science of narrator criticism to discover the cause of an anomaly or another cause that clarifies the difficulty?

The questioner : I want to say that there is a response in your words. You mentioned a phrase asking whether a researcher, while examining the text, if he is stopped by an issue that appears in the text, can return to researching the chain of narration, within the guidelines of hadith science. This issue may have been completely missed by the previous scholar, just as we research the causes (‘illah). Initially, we pause. I am hearing this text; it is not, of course, the research itself. The hadith is not, as you see and know?

The Shaykh : That is not the specific intent!

The questioner : It is not the intent, meaning, until we reach the limits of reason and an issue concerning the rules of applying hadith science. I can use the external criteria of critique, which are the spirit of the Shari'ah, reason, mass transmission (mutawatir)...

The Shaykh : You cannot!

The questioner : Excuse me, what stops me initially so that I return, perhaps to discover an anomaly or a cause or something else, exactly as in the research of causes?

The Shaykh : science allows you room for this! Hadith science allows you room for this. You know, for example, that one of the criticisms leveled against us is that I critique some hadiths in the two Sahihs. I did not use this material reason in this critique; I used the scientific, hadith-based, religious reason. So you do not need to expand the topic and bring up this specific example to finally ask whether one can critique a hadith whose authenticity is agreed upon. Perhaps I find a cause for it based on the principles of hadith scholars. I tell you, you have that right!

The questioner : I want to expand on what you started with and use the scientific, religious reason in it. How, for example, I have premises that it is impossible for a text to contradict reason; it is impossible.

The Shaykh : There is a detail here.

The questioner : Yes, with the detail, of course.

The Shaykh : What is the detail?

The questioner : The text must be definitive in its meaning, for example!

The Shaykh : Okay. And reason.

The questioner : And reason must also be definitive in its meaning, based on its content... meaning, for example, if we come to a scientific issue, as the brother mentioned to confirm his statement, it becomes a law.

The Shaykh : Okay, do we have such a thing regarding this hadith?

The questioner : No, I brought this as an example.

The Shaykh : No problem, may Allah guide you.

The questioner : Yes, yes.

The Shaykh : Is there anyone here with an answer...?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : May Allah be pleased with you, we do not want words that have no scientific benefit! We all know that you brought it as an example, but we do not all know the answer to this last question you directed at you. You should have answered instead of saying "I brought it as an example." You should have said, "Yes, this principle is correct here" or "It is not correct." Does the definitive knowledge that does not accept discussion here prove the invalidity of this hadith?

The questioner : I do not say invalidity; I say definitive knowledge...

The Shaykh : Do not argue over the words. Did it prove...?

The questioner : I prefer to be precise. I do not say the hadith is invalid initially. I want to pause on it and research. You are asking me now about my convictions. I am authenticating it for you, meaning!

The Shaykh : Okay... I am providing for your words... Look, how is your speech, my brother? May Allah be pleased with you, remove the word "invalidity."

The questioner : Okay.

The Shaykh : Allow me, give me an alternative for it.

The questioner : I pause on this hadith. This is realistic, honestly, realistically, meaning...

The Shaykh : No problem.

The questioner : I am pausing on this hadith now!

The Shaykh : Why?

The questioner : Because I correctly believe that the Nile does not originate from Paradise.

The Shaykh : This is not correct. This statement, when you say it is based on definitive knowledge!

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : How is this knowledge?

The questioner : Definitive knowledge (‘ilm al-yaqin) that geographers and researchers have agreed upon...

The Shaykh : You have returned to your old habit! My brother, we gave you the example of Dhul-Qarnayn and Ya'juj and Ma'juj!

The questioner : What is this detail, meaning, when I told you I built...

Another questioner : Two or three hundred years ago, America was not known!

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

Another questioner : You are arguing with this knowledge... that there are facts... as evidence, if the prevailing law was the smallest unit... this was a law, then it was later revealed that this law was formed based on... then the law became... it became a law... if the knowledge itself, which I believe definitively, is... it has now become one of the characteristics of the law that it is not permanent, and that there is nature and beyond nature, so the scholars expanded... No problem, I want to withdraw this position to what you say... It has been definitively proven to you that the Euphrates...

The questioner : This is not the research I want. I distinguish between the unseen (ghayb) that my senses do not relate to; I do not intervene in it. I research issues that relate to my senses. Beyond nature, I do not research it...

The Shaykh : My brother, I explained to you, and the call was repeated. The discussion was discussed and killed. The hadith has two sides. The side... his statement is correct!

The questioner : I am speaking about a principle. I want to reach a principle now. This hadith does not concern me much, as I said, I cited it as an example only.

The Shaykh : My brother, may Allah reward you and be pleased with you, this hadith concerns us because we fear your assertion that this hadith definitively contradicts reality. With this view, you will handle other hadiths, while you are mistaken in this statement. Now you are saying this hadith is definitively wrong. Why?

The questioner : I say definitively that the Nile does not originate from Paradise!

Another questioner : What is the proof!

The Shaykh: May Allah guide you.

The questioner : Definitively, it originates from the earth!

The Shaykh : And I told you definitively that the water follows al-Qasiyyun and comes from this reservoir, but I did not know that it originates from there...

The questioner : The one who used to say that the spring of al-Qasiyyun originates from al-Jawrah, it is shown to him, but he remains on his certainty! But I am honest with... yes.

The Shaykh : It is shown to you... as a Muslim who believes in the unseen, that this originates from Paradise.

The questioner : This means the issue that you enter, that I believe in the unseen, is not a field for research. Prove to me...