The Ruling on Ahad Hadith: Does It Convey Knowledge Absolutely or Through Circumstantial Evidence?

The questioner: Excuse me, Shaykh, regarding this... apart from the few letters that some of the preservers, such as al-Daraqutni and others, criticized, he said: Because the Ummah has accepted what is in them, and the Ummah is protected from error in its consensus.

The Shaykh: Yes, that is it.

The questioner: Thus, there are four opinions regarding the knowledge conveyed by the report of a single narrator. There is the opinion of Imam al-Nawawi when he responded to Ibn al-Salah, stating that it conveys knowledge, and the researchers and the majority disagreed with him.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: They said: It conveys probability as long as it is not mass-transmitted. Then there is the opinion of Ibn al-Salah that this is specific to the majority of what is in the "Sahihayn," and the opinion of Ibn Hazm that it is absolute.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: The report of a single narrator, transmitted by a trustworthy person from his like to its end, reaching the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), necessitates knowledge and action.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: Perhaps he intended by "knowledge" here certain knowledge. Then there is the opinion of Ibn Hajar that it conveys theoretical knowledge through circumstantial evidence, contrary to those who rejected that. Based on this, does the opinion of Ibn Hazm that it conveys certainty absolutely become the stronger position?

The Shaykh: No.

The questioner: Or does it convey it through circumstantial evidence?

The Shaykh: Circumstantial evidence is necessary. And upon you be peace, Allah's mercy, and His blessings. This is something that every researcher feels: that a hasan or sahih hadith, in its isolation, does not give certainty, but rather gives the preponderance of probability.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: However, if there are circumstantial evidence surrounding the sahih or hasan hadith, which conveys the preponderance of probability, and they strengthen this preponderance of probability, making one decisive and certain; then in that case, we did not take the certainty from the ahad report, but from the circumstantial evidence that surrounded the ahad report.

The questioner : Okay...

The Shaykh: So the statement of Ibn Hazm, in reality, means that his opinion is a purely theoretical one that is not correct.


Another questioner: Please, go ahead.

The Shaykh: Please, go ahead. Oh, let us be relieved of the formalities, free us from them.

The Shaykh: We spoke about the face of the woman...


The Shaykh: From another route.

The Shaykh : Hashim: Beautiful.

The Shaykh: Other than the route that was criticized.

Another questioner: There is no tape of this one.

The Shaykh: And this other route is from the narration of Abdullah ibn Lahi'ah, and Ibn Lahi'ah is poor in memory, and some scholars grade his hadith as good in itself!

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh: So we combined this and that; thus we raised the hadith to the level of hasan, especially since there are corroborations from the life of women in the era... they used to uncover their faces and be recognized by their faces.

The Shaykh : Hashim: Oh, peace!

The Shaykh: So the hadith, then, has corroborations. This chain of narration is from the category of weak, but this hadith is called hasan li ghayrihi. Do you understand the concept of hasan li ghayrihi?

The Shaykh : Hashim: Yes, yes.

The Shaykh: Where is Professor Abdullah?

Another questioner: Abdullah.

The questioner: He mentioned in his book, the book ... .

The Shaykh: I have finished... Oh, please.

Another questioner: We will pray 'Asr and then go.

The Shaykh: Good.

The Shaykh : Hashim: Okay, I am traveling tomorrow, if Allah wills, and therefore I entrust you to Allah.