Is it reliable to accept the authentication of some scholars from the people of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil (the critique and vindication of narrators) who are strict in their saying: "The hadith is authentic"?

The questioner : He says: Is it reliable to accept the authentication of some scholars from the people of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil (the critique and vindication of narrators) who are strict in their saying: "The hadith is authentic," and to concede that to them because they are strict, such that it is unlikely that there is doubt in their ruling?

The Shaykh : This is a valid point; regarding authentication and weakening, if a person is strict, then if he authenticates it, it is generally authentic. This is not a consistent rule, but rather a rule of the majority, and the opposite is exactly the same. Accordingly, beginners in the pursuit of this knowledge, let alone the general public, should proceed in this manner. As for one who has knowledge of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil (the critique and vindication of narrators), and that al-jarh (critique) takes precedence over al-ta'dil (vindication) with an explanation of its cause, and that the cause is in itself a known defect among scholars, he does not concern himself with the issue of whether the one who authenticated is strict in authentication or lenient; because his reference in that is to the rules of this science. Unlike the general public, who must follow the one who authenticated, even if he is among the lenient ones, even if he is like al-Tirmidhi, al-Hakim, or Ibn Hibban; for they are more knowledgeable than these people who have no knowledge. Therefore, it is not permissible for the general public to reject the authentication or improvement of al-Tirmidhi based on the general meaning they received from some hadith scholars that al-Tirmidhi is lenient.
Fine; lenient; are you more knowledgeable than him? You have absolutely no knowledge; so our Lord says: . So if we assume that one of the memorizers known for leniency authenticates or improves a hadith, the general public must follow him unless his error becomes apparent to them; in that case, it is not permissible to follow him.

The questioner : ... meaning, is this a justification for many people now to follow some weak hadiths, and even fabricated ones, by arguing that so-and-so from the hadith scholars or so-and-so from the people included this hadith in his book? Should these people not be advised to refer to the investigations of contemporary hadith scholars, some of the shaykhs you know who have experience in investigation and so on? Or perhaps this statement you mentioned might be a justification for some people when they are rebuked—for example, why does he not place a line—for example, on the sutrah? He calculates with this hadith, and so-and-so and so-and-so improved it?

The Shaykh : Fine; it is so, but one must not follow desire. And I said earlier, I concluded my speech: unless his error becomes apparent to him. As long as he knows that there are scholars who improved the hadith of the line, he must follow them; because they are more knowledgeable than him. But it is not permissible for him to persist in his error if it becomes apparent that its improvement or authentication is an error, and the matter is as you understood.
Yes.