The opinion on dividing the masters of hadith criticism into three categories: the strict, the moderate, and the lenient.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The Hafiz al-Dhahabi says: "The masters of hadith criticism are: strict, lenient, and moderate." Is this accepted in its absolute form? And how do we consider this when the statements of ... conflict?
The Shaykh : Repeat what you said to me.
The questioner : The Hafiz al-Dhahabi says: "He divided the masters of hadith criticism into strict, moderate, and lenient." Is this division accepted in its absolute form? That is: that every narrator he graded as trustworthy, every narrator he graded as weak ... is accepted in his weakening of them, and then how is this division applied in ... grading as trustworthy ...?
The Shaykh : I understand from your words that it is accepted in its absolute form.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Meaning, if this one is named as strict, is it accepted in its absolute form, and that one is moderate and that one is lenient, or what?
Another questioner : Is the division of the Hafiz al-Dhahabi accepted in the first place?
The Shaykh : This is a reality; it is accepted.
The questioner : Fine, its application? How is it applied?
The Shaykh : This is what I want to understand from you; do you mean that in an absolute sense, anyone he named as, for example, moderate, his statement is accepted that he is moderate and balanced, without research and without consideration? And the opposite for the opposite?
The questioner : ... its application ... for example, if a strict scholar graded someone as trustworthy; do we hold firmly to ... in an absolute sense? That is one matter, and then when there is a conflict, when the one who graded as trustworthy conflicts with the one who criticized, how is this applied?
The Shaykh : I do not have an answer for this right now. Please proceed.
The questioner: May Allah reward you with all good.
Another questioner : ... I read this when we came to study the subject of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil with some of the students ... We began to discover that regarding Abu Nu'aym, every time we passed a person whom someone other than Abu Nu'aym criticized, we found that Abu Nu'aym graded him as trustworthy. This caught our attention, but I want to summarize my research on the subject of Abu Nu'aym: is he strict as al-Dhahabi and those who followed him say, or is he lenient? ... Those whom Abu Nu'aym graded as trustworthy are weak in the view of others, so this led us to say that this statement is not accepted in its absolute form. We should study these layers ... as long as Abu Nu'aym ... is strict, it means ... we must reconsider.
The Shaykh : This is what I understood from your question; meaning, we take those he classified as strict in an absolute sense, and those he classified as moderate in an absolute sense, and so on, is that right? Of course, the answer is no; research is necessary.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, we must return to the rules.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is a valid hadith, and whatever it is, it is not said; the important thing is that we should return to the rules. Criticism (al-jarh) takes precedence over vindication (al-ta'dil), and vindication is accepted implicitly from those who are not known for issues like those of Ibn Hazm, so it is necessary to return to the rules.
The questioner : So, based on this ...
The Shaykh : No, we do not take it in its absolute form; each narrator must be researched individually.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Do not burden us with what we cannot bear, and may Allah reward you with all good.
The Shaykh : Repeat what you said to me.
The questioner : The Hafiz al-Dhahabi says: "He divided the masters of hadith criticism into strict, moderate, and lenient." Is this division accepted in its absolute form? That is: that every narrator he graded as trustworthy, every narrator he graded as weak ... is accepted in his weakening of them, and then how is this division applied in ... grading as trustworthy ...?
The Shaykh : I understand from your words that it is accepted in its absolute form.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Meaning, if this one is named as strict, is it accepted in its absolute form, and that one is moderate and that one is lenient, or what?
Another questioner : Is the division of the Hafiz al-Dhahabi accepted in the first place?
The Shaykh : This is a reality; it is accepted.
The questioner : Fine, its application? How is it applied?
The Shaykh : This is what I want to understand from you; do you mean that in an absolute sense, anyone he named as, for example, moderate, his statement is accepted that he is moderate and balanced, without research and without consideration? And the opposite for the opposite?
The questioner : ... its application ... for example, if a strict scholar graded someone as trustworthy; do we hold firmly to ... in an absolute sense? That is one matter, and then when there is a conflict, when the one who graded as trustworthy conflicts with the one who criticized, how is this applied?
The Shaykh : I do not have an answer for this right now. Please proceed.
The questioner: May Allah reward you with all good.
Another questioner : ... I read this when we came to study the subject of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil with some of the students ... We began to discover that regarding Abu Nu'aym, every time we passed a person whom someone other than Abu Nu'aym criticized, we found that Abu Nu'aym graded him as trustworthy. This caught our attention, but I want to summarize my research on the subject of Abu Nu'aym: is he strict as al-Dhahabi and those who followed him say, or is he lenient? ... Those whom Abu Nu'aym graded as trustworthy are weak in the view of others, so this led us to say that this statement is not accepted in its absolute form. We should study these layers ... as long as Abu Nu'aym ... is strict, it means ... we must reconsider.
The Shaykh : This is what I understood from your question; meaning, we take those he classified as strict in an absolute sense, and those he classified as moderate in an absolute sense, and so on, is that right? Of course, the answer is no; research is necessary.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, we must return to the rules.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is a valid hadith, and whatever it is, it is not said; the important thing is that we should return to the rules. Criticism (al-jarh) takes precedence over vindication (al-ta'dil), and vindication is accepted implicitly from those who are not known for issues like those of Ibn Hazm, so it is necessary to return to the rules.
The questioner : So, based on this ...
The Shaykh : No, we do not take it in its absolute form; each narrator must be researched individually.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Do not burden us with what we cannot bear, and may Allah reward you with all good.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.