Is the issue of authentication a matter of personal opinion? In other words, we find that Imam al-Hakim in his *Mustadrak* and Imam Ibn al-Jawzi in his book *al-Mawdu'at*...

The questioner: May Allah preserve you, O honorable father, is the issue of authentication a matter of personal opinion? In other words, we find that Imam al-Hakim in his *Mustadrak* and Imam Ibn al-Jawzi in his book *al-Mawdu'at* mentioned authentic hadiths; so why is there this disagreement? And what is the methodology that a researcher follows in this issue? I ask for clarification, and may Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh: This question is strange; because if we were to express it in a clear phrase, it would be like asking: Why does a scholar make a mistake? Is that a question? No one asks this question; because the nature of man is to make mistakes; so the one who is lenient made a mistake in his leniency, like al-Hakim and others, and the one who was strict weakened authentic hadiths—meaning: he judged them to be fabricated—; so that one is strict, so it is not said: Why was this one strict? And why was this one lenient?
The fundamental answer is: because he is a human being. As for the scholarly answer, it is that each of the lenient ones or the lenient group, and the strict ones, established their basis for leniency or strictness on principles and rules they were convinced of, and they were mistaken in their conviction. So the matter comes back to saying: Why did he make a mistake? The answer is: because he is a human being. As for the details, the people of knowledge know them.
For example, why does Ibn Hibban make a mistake and authenticate unknown narrators, as is known to those engaged in the science of hadith? The fundamental and convincing answer is: because he is a human being. As for the detailed scholarly answer, it is that his mistake—and this is what we believe to be a mistake—was based on a rule he was convinced of. He says: "The default for every Muslim narrator is integrity and soundness; so I say—even if I do not know his status—that he is trustworthy." The researcher finds this explicitly in his books, saying: So-and-so ibn So-and-so, I do not know him and I do not know his father. Where is this statement mentioned? In his book *al-Thiqat*; meaning: So-and-so ibn So-and-so is trustworthy, and by that he says: I do not know him and I do not know his father. So he established this authentication on a rule he was convinced of, but he was mistaken according to the majority, and he indeed made a mistake. So each of the lenient and the strict ones returns to their personal convictions, and they may be mistaken, and this is the common case, or they may be correct. The point is that the scholar must exert independent legal reasoning to know the truth; and therefore he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: .
Other than that?

The questioner: With this answer, we conclude our lesson for this day, and we say to our Shaykh: May Allah reward you with good and prolong your life, and may peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.