How do we deal with a narrator about whom al-Hafiz said: "Trustworthy," and the scholars differed regarding his criticism and vindication; such as Nu'aym ibn Hammad in a hadith
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The hadith that hinges on a single man, and this man is one about whom al-Hafiz said: "Trustworthy," and the Imams differed regarding his criticism and vindication, so the Imam has two opinions regarding him, like Nu'aym ibn Hammad al-Farqi in the hadith he narrates from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), who said: Mishkat al-Masabih 167Isnād Da'īf (Zubair `Aliza'i).
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : So what is our position regarding al-Hafiz's statement: "Trustworthy," for example?
The Shaykh : This question, when you ask: What is our position? Either the intended meaning is students of knowledge, or the intended meaning is the researching mujtahids; in that case, the answer differs. As for students of knowledge and those new to this field, they must follow the ijtihad of the early Imams; such as al-Hafiz ibn Hajar, or al-Dhahabi, or those before them, if they did not differ. And if they differed, they take the summary from the later scholars; such as al-Dhahabi, and al-'Asqalani. These people must rely on what al-'Asqalani held, for example, if he said of a man: "Trustworthy"; in that case, his hadith is strengthened and placed in the rank of a hasan hadith. This is for students of knowledge and those new to this knowledge. As for those who have practiced this knowledge for a long time, they may agree with ibn Hajar or ibn al-Dhahabi, or they may disagree with them; based on what is stronger for them in returning to the statements of the Salaf who criticized this narrator, or vindicated him. And there is no doubt that one who is at this level of knowledge will find points of criticism mentioned against ibn Hajar and others. This is a matter for him, and students of knowledge and those new to it have another matter. These people must follow, and those people must exercise ijtihad. But what you quoted confused me, as I understood it; you say: that al-Hafiz said of Nu'aym ibn Hammad: "He is trustworthy"; is that so? Or did he add something else? As if he said, for example: he makes few or many mistakes, or?
So Nu'aym ibn Hammad, in our view, his hadith does not reach the rank of a hasan hadith, rather it is weak. It is possible—I can say—that it can be cited as evidence, but that it be used as a proof—even in the rank of a hasan hadith—this is the furthest thing from correctness. As for the possibility of citing it, it is because it is known that he was one of the Imams of the Sunnah. As for not using it as a proof, it is because there is a known weakness in him, and indeed some accused him of lying. This prevents using him as a proof. And if we overlook this accusation of lying against him, we can say: he can be cited as evidence. Otherwise, this accusation stands as a stumbling block in citing him, let alone in using him as a proof. This is the answer to your question.
Please proceed.
None of you is a believer till his desire follows what I have brought
والذي نفسي بيده ؛ لا يؤمن أحدكم حتى يكون هواه تبعًا لما جئت بهThe Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : So what is our position regarding al-Hafiz's statement: "Trustworthy," for example?
The Shaykh : This question, when you ask: What is our position? Either the intended meaning is students of knowledge, or the intended meaning is the researching mujtahids; in that case, the answer differs. As for students of knowledge and those new to this field, they must follow the ijtihad of the early Imams; such as al-Hafiz ibn Hajar, or al-Dhahabi, or those before them, if they did not differ. And if they differed, they take the summary from the later scholars; such as al-Dhahabi, and al-'Asqalani. These people must rely on what al-'Asqalani held, for example, if he said of a man: "Trustworthy"; in that case, his hadith is strengthened and placed in the rank of a hasan hadith. This is for students of knowledge and those new to this knowledge. As for those who have practiced this knowledge for a long time, they may agree with ibn Hajar or ibn al-Dhahabi, or they may disagree with them; based on what is stronger for them in returning to the statements of the Salaf who criticized this narrator, or vindicated him. And there is no doubt that one who is at this level of knowledge will find points of criticism mentioned against ibn Hajar and others. This is a matter for him, and students of knowledge and those new to it have another matter. These people must follow, and those people must exercise ijtihad. But what you quoted confused me, as I understood it; you say: that al-Hafiz said of Nu'aym ibn Hammad: "He is trustworthy"; is that so? Or did he add something else? As if he said, for example: he makes few or many mistakes, or?
So Nu'aym ibn Hammad, in our view, his hadith does not reach the rank of a hasan hadith, rather it is weak. It is possible—I can say—that it can be cited as evidence, but that it be used as a proof—even in the rank of a hasan hadith—this is the furthest thing from correctness. As for the possibility of citing it, it is because it is known that he was one of the Imams of the Sunnah. As for not using it as a proof, it is because there is a known weakness in him, and indeed some accused him of lying. This prevents using him as a proof. And if we overlook this accusation of lying against him, we can say: he can be cited as evidence. Otherwise, this accusation stands as a stumbling block in citing him, let alone in using him as a proof. This is the answer to your question.
Please proceed.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.