Al-Dhahabi's statement in *Al-Kashif* regarding a narrator: "He was authenticated," and if Ibn Hbban and al-'Ajli authenticated the narrator, and al-Sakhawi followed them, and Ibn Hajar said he is acceptable?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Al-Dhahabi's statement in *Al-Kashif* about a man, "He was authenticated"; what does this mean?
The Shaykh : It means that, generally, the one who authenticated him is Ibn Hbban, and it is not the norm for a narrator to be authenticated in this specific way; that is what it means.
The questioner : Well, Shaykh, if we find a man whom Ibn Hbban and al-'Ajli authenticated, and al-Sakhawi followed them, and the Hafiz said in *Al-Taqrib* that he is acceptable, and al-Dhahabi said "He was authenticated," and it appears to me that the Hafiz's custom is that if al-'Ajli and Ibn Hbban authenticate a man, he says he is truthful?
The Shaykh : You say, "And it is his custom"?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And your statement is contradicted by your saying that it is possible for a narrator to be authenticated by Ibn Hbban and al-'Ajli, and for the Hafiz to say he is acceptable?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Then it is not his consistent custom, so you say: Then his predominant custom is...
The questioner : Predominant, yes.
The Shaykh : And this is with leniency in expression.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Because the claim that it is a predominant custom requires investigation, and comprehensive study and exhaustive examination, and I do not think you have subjected yourself to being among those who conduct comprehensive studies or exhaustive examinations?
The questioner : No, it is not a complete comprehensive study, but I...
The Shaykh : Yes, that is it.
The questioner : Looked at the men about whom this was said, and I have, meaning, existing evidence by name for those about whom the Hafiz said "He is truthful, and he was not authenticated except by al-'Ajli and Ibn Hbban"?
The Shaykh : Well, now the detail comes to you.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Everyone about whom Ibn Hbban and al-'Ajli said he is trustworthy, the matter of the one about whom this was said revolves around whether he is known only through the narration of a single narrator from him; in this case, the authentication of al-'Ajli and Ibn Hbban is not accepted, even if Ibn Hajar agreed with them, rather, in such a case, Ibn Hajar says he is acceptable. But if the narrator about whom Ibn Hbban and al-'Ajli said he is trustworthy has narrations from a group of trustworthy narrators, it is possible in this case for the Hafiz Ibn Hajar to say he is truthful. In fact, I know through tracking that Ibn Hajar, as well as al-Dhahabi, say about some narrators, "He is not among those about whom Ibn Hbban said he is trustworthy." Rather, there is no one who authenticated him about whom the Hafiz and al-Dhahabi before him said he is truthful, even though no one authenticated him before, and their basis for that is that they found for this narrator, whose original status is that he is said to be unknown, many narrators from the trustworthy ones, so the hearts of al-Dhahabi and al-'Asqalani were reassured by the narration of this narrator because of the narrations of the trustworthy ones from him, and there is nothing beyond that.
The questioner : And if no one authenticated him?
The Shaykh : And if no one authenticated him, then it is even more so.
The questioner : And what is your opinion?
The Shaykh : This is my opinion, and it is even more so that he does that for one whom Ibn Hbban authenticated, and it is even more so, and even more so, if al-'Ajli joined Ibn Hbban in the authentication.
The questioner : This man... Shaykh.
The Shaykh : How?
The questioner : The one I am talking about, whom Ibn Hbban, al-'Ajli, and al-Sakhawi authenticated, and al-Sakhawi followed them, and the Hafiz said about him he is acceptable, and al-Dhahabi said "He was authenticated"; what is your opinion about his hadith?
Another questioner: Peace be upon you.
The questioner : And no supporting chain was found for him.
The Shaykh : And upon you be peace, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.
The Shaykh : It means that, generally, the one who authenticated him is Ibn Hbban, and it is not the norm for a narrator to be authenticated in this specific way; that is what it means.
The questioner : Well, Shaykh, if we find a man whom Ibn Hbban and al-'Ajli authenticated, and al-Sakhawi followed them, and the Hafiz said in *Al-Taqrib* that he is acceptable, and al-Dhahabi said "He was authenticated," and it appears to me that the Hafiz's custom is that if al-'Ajli and Ibn Hbban authenticate a man, he says he is truthful?
The Shaykh : You say, "And it is his custom"?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And your statement is contradicted by your saying that it is possible for a narrator to be authenticated by Ibn Hbban and al-'Ajli, and for the Hafiz to say he is acceptable?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Then it is not his consistent custom, so you say: Then his predominant custom is...
The questioner : Predominant, yes.
The Shaykh : And this is with leniency in expression.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Because the claim that it is a predominant custom requires investigation, and comprehensive study and exhaustive examination, and I do not think you have subjected yourself to being among those who conduct comprehensive studies or exhaustive examinations?
The questioner : No, it is not a complete comprehensive study, but I...
The Shaykh : Yes, that is it.
The questioner : Looked at the men about whom this was said, and I have, meaning, existing evidence by name for those about whom the Hafiz said "He is truthful, and he was not authenticated except by al-'Ajli and Ibn Hbban"?
The Shaykh : Well, now the detail comes to you.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Everyone about whom Ibn Hbban and al-'Ajli said he is trustworthy, the matter of the one about whom this was said revolves around whether he is known only through the narration of a single narrator from him; in this case, the authentication of al-'Ajli and Ibn Hbban is not accepted, even if Ibn Hajar agreed with them, rather, in such a case, Ibn Hajar says he is acceptable. But if the narrator about whom Ibn Hbban and al-'Ajli said he is trustworthy has narrations from a group of trustworthy narrators, it is possible in this case for the Hafiz Ibn Hajar to say he is truthful. In fact, I know through tracking that Ibn Hajar, as well as al-Dhahabi, say about some narrators, "He is not among those about whom Ibn Hbban said he is trustworthy." Rather, there is no one who authenticated him about whom the Hafiz and al-Dhahabi before him said he is truthful, even though no one authenticated him before, and their basis for that is that they found for this narrator, whose original status is that he is said to be unknown, many narrators from the trustworthy ones, so the hearts of al-Dhahabi and al-'Asqalani were reassured by the narration of this narrator because of the narrations of the trustworthy ones from him, and there is nothing beyond that.
The questioner : And if no one authenticated him?
The Shaykh : And if no one authenticated him, then it is even more so.
The questioner : And what is your opinion?
The Shaykh : This is my opinion, and it is even more so that he does that for one whom Ibn Hbban authenticated, and it is even more so, and even more so, if al-'Ajli joined Ibn Hbban in the authentication.
The questioner : This man... Shaykh.
The Shaykh : How?
The questioner : The one I am talking about, whom Ibn Hbban, al-'Ajli, and al-Sakhawi authenticated, and al-Sakhawi followed them, and the Hafiz said about him he is acceptable, and al-Dhahabi said "He was authenticated"; what is your opinion about his hadith?
Another questioner: Peace be upon you.
The questioner : And no supporting chain was found for him.
The Shaykh : And upon you be peace, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.