The Meaning of al-Dhahabi's Statement: "Two scholars of this discipline have never agreed to authenticate a weak narrator, nor to weaken a trustworthy one."

The questioner : The second question: What is the meaning of al-Dhahabi's statement: "Two scholars of this discipline have never agreed to authenticate a weak narrator, nor to weaken a trustworthy one"?

The Shaykh : The truth is, I read this statement and did not digest it, but it means—may Allah know best—it is a deduction and quotation from his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): . From our observation of this hadith after understanding it correctly, we can understand al-Dhahabi's word. In my belief and knowledge, many people do not understand this authentic hadith: correctly. They say—these who did not understand the hadith correctly— meaning: My community will not agree upon error. They mean by this arguing by majority, arguing by what the majority holds. They understand from the hadith that it supports the majority's school, and this is a very clear error. Let us give an example to distinguish between this wrong understanding and the correct understanding, which will become clear after giving the example. If we assume the community consists of ten people, nine of them held one opinion, and one of them—the tenth—held an opinion contrary to the first. According to this wrong understanding of the hadith, the error is with the one and the truth is with the nine. But we say that the hadith means this community, which in our hypothesis is ten people, did not agree upon error; because one of them said one thing, and the nine said another. It is possible that the truth is with the one; in that case, his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): is true. And it is possible that the truth is with the nine; in that case, the hadith is even more true. But taking the hadith always and forever as proof that the majority is always and forever correct; this is an error in understanding the hadith first, and an error in applying this understanding practically to the opinions in which scholars have differed. I mean, you will not be able to find a scholar, a student of knowledge, or anyone below that rank who is a "majoritarian" in every issue. You will not find this. So if your initial understanding of the hadith is correct, you must be a "majoritarian" in every issue, and this does not exist. How many scholars have opposed the majority? How many schools have opposed other schools? How many followers have opposed the majority's opinions within the same school? And so on. Therefore, practically, adhering to the majority's opinion is not a reality. So how do you understand the hadith with a wrong understanding first, and then it does not match what you are doing in application second? This is an error. So it is not possible for the community to agree to authenticate a person who is in reality not trustworthy, and vice versa. There must be disagreement among them, with some authenticating and some weakening. And in that case, there must be weighing with the straight balance, and that is by returning to the science of hadith terminology.