Is it sufficient for a young Muslim who is not specialized in the Islamic sciences to rely on the authentication and weakening of hadith by researchers like you? And is this considered taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence)?

The questioner: His EminenceThe Shaykh- May Allah preserve you - , is it sufficient for a young Muslim who is not specialized in the Islamic sciences to rely on the authentication and weakening of hadith by researchers like you? And if the answer is yes; is this taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence)?

The Shaykh: I did not understand the last question; how is this taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence)?

The questioner: In the books of authentication among the researchers, is this considered taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence)?

The Shaykh: The first part is clear.

The questioner: ... the researchers, is this considered taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence)?

The Shaykh: Is that what he says?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: The answer: There is no difference ... , but insight differs from person to person. The insight of the scholar is higher and more refined than the insight of the student of knowledge, and the insight of the student of knowledge is higher and more refined than the insight of the general people. So each person has an insight that is necessary for him, the least of which is realizing the statement of Allah - the Exalted - : . So an individual from the general Muslims asks the specialist in hadith: Is this hadith authentic or weak? He tells him: It is authentic. And he adopts it and acts upon it. Or he tells him about another hadith: It is weak. So he does not act upon it. This is his obligation and this is the extent of his insight which Allah - Blessed and Exalted is He - has enabled him to have. He cannot do more than that.
But we move from this lower level to a higher level, which is the insight of the student of knowledge. Or he asks or reads in a book that the Imam al-Tirmidhi said about this hadith: It is authentic, for example, or Ibn Hibban authenticated it, or so on, up to whoever authenticates it. But he has a level of culture that may make him feel that those who authenticated the hadith are known for leniency in some authentications. So he is able to research to ensure whether this statement hit the truth or is part of the leniency known about this authenticator. So this is a higher level than that of the layperson who is only satisfied with taking the word of the scholar, whether authenticator or weakener. As for whether this is taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) or following, I believe the issue is purely formal or a verbal disagreement. The Imam al-San'ani - for example - has a treatise on facilitating ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) in which he goes to the position that the statement of the hadith scholar: "This hadith is authentic" is a report that must be believed, and it has no relation to taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence). And others say that this is taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) for me, because it is possible that he errs and it is possible ... a statement on the authentication of a narrator, and the reality is that it is an error, and the correct thing is that it is weak, and so on, as is known from the terminology of hadith. So I see that the disagreement on this specific point, whether it is taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) or following, is a purely formal issue. The important thing is that every Muslim must realize the insight that he is able to. I gave an example earlier of the layperson who cannot do more than ask the scholar. So he tells him: This hadith is authentic. Or he asks him: Is it permissible - for example - to smoke or not? He tells him: It is forbidden. That is all, he has no ability to do more than this question.
Whereas the student of knowledge can say something to know if this is correct or wrong. But if he is a scholar, then at that time taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is forbidden for him; because he is able to scrutinize the issue, as the same man who authenticated or weakened or ruled that it is forbidden and that it is permissible did. Therefore, the statement of the Imams: "Do not follow me, and do not follow Malik, and take from where they took" is undoubtedly directed to those who are able among the people of knowledge - or at least the strong students of knowledge - who are able to take from where the Imams took from the Book of Allah and from the hadith of the Messenger of Allah - (peace and blessings be upon him) -. As for the general people, they are not addressed with this address, "take from where they took," especially if we imagine the lands of the non-Arabs who do not know the Arabic language at all; how can it be reasonable that such an address is directed to them? Then we come to the Arabs, the general Arabs who became non-Arabic-speaking and became like the non-Arabs in terms of not knowing the Arabic language, and so on, in a sequence until you reach the level of the strong student of knowledge. So he is able to take from where they took in some issues, and he is not able to take from other issues. So every person is obligated to do what he is able to.
As for whether if he askedThe questioner : ُ The Shaykh : about a hadith and he said: It is authentic; is this taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) or not? If we say that it is taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence); what follows from that? Ah, taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is forbidden! No, it is not on this absolute basis. Taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is forbidden for the one who is able not to follow. But making the statement absolute like that at that time contradicts the text of the Noble Qur'an: , it contradicts what the Companions were upon of asking the people of knowledge among them, being satisfied with asking them that they do not know. And Allah - Mighty and Majestic - says in the previous verse: . As for the exaggeration in a place, some of those who are raised on the Book and the Sunnah do that they forbid taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) in general; this is a serious and very serious negligence; because in that is obliging people with what they cannot bear. And Allah - Mighty and Majestic - says: . So the majority of the Companions were ... asking a question directed to one of their scholars and they would accept it without any discussion. And the matter is not as it is today; a person who does not understand anything of the knowledge asks, is it permissible or not? Immediately he tells him: What is the evidence? He is not at this scientific level to understand the evidence. He told him: This hadith is authentic. He tells him: What is the evidence for its authenticity? He is told: Go read the books of terminology ... the biographies of the men ... and then come back and ask: What is the evidence for the authenticity of this hadith? And therefore taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is of two types: taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) that is necessary, and this is something that even the great scholars do not escape from. And the other type is taking taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) as a religion, by which what Allah said and what the Messenger of Allah said is contradicted, as the extremists of the schools of jurisprudence do. Anyone else?

The questioner: I say: I am a student of knowledge, and I researched the hadith like the hadith: , so the references in front of me are al-Tirmidhi and al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, and the hadith is weak in both. Then I found you saying in "Al-Mishkat": It was narrated by Abu 'Umar al-Dani, and Abu 'Umar al-Dani is not in front of me; so do I follow you in this?

The Shaykh: This is what we were going around; taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) is necessary. As for calling it taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) or calling it following, it is not a problem; because al-San'ani - as I said earlier - you take the report of a single person, which is me. I said: Al-Dani narrated it. This is a report that I want you to accept. I said with a sound chain - also - you must accept it; because this is either correct or wrong. As for you, it is not permissible for you to rely on your narrow research and say: This hadith is weak, and you discard the work of those who preceded you to this hadith and its study, so he came with a result that contradicts what you are upon, and you will not be able to say the source in which the hadith is authentic. So it is not permissible for you to be independent in this state, but you must either follow or follow (taqlid).