Since trustworthiness is the defining quality of justice, why do we not remove the phrase "just and precise" from the definition of an authentic hadith and say:
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Regarding the trustworthy narrator or the just and precise one, why do we not say in the definition of the authentic hadith: it is what is narrated, or whose chain of narration is connected by the transmission of the trustworthy one from his like to its end, without anomaly or a decisive defect?
The Shaykh : What is the question? You presented the definition.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : What is the question?
The questioner : The question, Shaykh, is why do we not say that the authentic hadith is what has a connected chain of narration by the transmission of the trustworthy one from his like.
The Shaykh : Why do we say "from his like"?
The questioner : Yes, why do we not say that the definition is, meaning we remove "just and precise" and say it is the trustworthy one from his like, since, Shaykh, the narrator who is trustworthy is the just and precise one, why do we not say in the definition of the authentic hadith: it is what has a connected chain of narration by the transmission of the trustworthy one from his like to its end, without anomaly or a decisive defect?
The Shaykh : Well, what is the harm if it is said "just and trustworthy"? What is the harm?
The questioner : Just and trustworthy.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : I do not know.
The Shaykh : This is a discussion called a verbal discussion. If the scholars agreed on something, such as their saying "just, precise, and memorizer," and then they express these terms collectively in a single word, which is "trustworthy," but you need to know who the trustworthy one is, so they told you: he is the just, memorizer, and precise one. Thus, "trustworthy" comes after you know what "trustworthy" means. Who is the trustworthy one? He is the just, memorizer, and precise one. You want to present the summary immediately to the beginner of the path of knowledge, and this is an error in terminology.
The Shaykh : What is the question? You presented the definition.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : What is the question?
The questioner : The question, Shaykh, is why do we not say that the authentic hadith is what has a connected chain of narration by the transmission of the trustworthy one from his like.
The Shaykh : Why do we say "from his like"?
The questioner : Yes, why do we not say that the definition is, meaning we remove "just and precise" and say it is the trustworthy one from his like, since, Shaykh, the narrator who is trustworthy is the just and precise one, why do we not say in the definition of the authentic hadith: it is what has a connected chain of narration by the transmission of the trustworthy one from his like to its end, without anomaly or a decisive defect?
The Shaykh : Well, what is the harm if it is said "just and trustworthy"? What is the harm?
The questioner : Just and trustworthy.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : I do not know.
The Shaykh : This is a discussion called a verbal discussion. If the scholars agreed on something, such as their saying "just, precise, and memorizer," and then they express these terms collectively in a single word, which is "trustworthy," but you need to know who the trustworthy one is, so they told you: he is the just, memorizer, and precise one. Thus, "trustworthy" comes after you know what "trustworthy" means. Who is the trustworthy one? He is the just, memorizer, and precise one. You want to present the summary immediately to the beginner of the path of knowledge, and this is an error in terminology.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.