Words the al-Hafiz quoted from Ibn al-Qattan... In the course of his discussion of the hasan li-ghayrihi hadith, he said: It is not the case that every hadith...

The questioner : The words the al-Hafiz quoted from Ibn al-Qattan... In the course of his discussion of the hasan li-ghayrihi hadith, he said: It is not the case that every weak hadith that is capable of being strengthened, when it comes from two or more paths, becomes a basis for argument to the extent of building rulings upon it, and so on. Rather, he says this is only taken into account in the chapter of spiritual exhortations... unless the paths are numerous... which instills in the mind the authenticity of this hadith. Then he mentioned a statement to this effect. The al-Hafiz said at the end: "My heart leans toward what Ibn al-Qattan mentioned." So I do not know, meaning, what is your opinion on this?

The Shaykh : You mentioned something and forgot something. Did the al-Hafiz mention the hasan li-ghayrihi hadith or not?

The questioner : ... the hasan li-ghayrihi hadith.

The Shaykh : Did he mention it, then?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : So what was his final position regarding the hasan li-ghayrihi hadith after this detail you have related?

The questioner : He says: It is possible to say it is hasan li-ghayrihi; but not to the degree of being used as evidence?

The Shaykh : No, that is not what he said. His statement is that the hasan li-ghayrihi hadith is sometimes used as evidence and sometimes not used as evidence.

The questioner: All right.

The Shaykh : I said: Yes, indeed, what you are saying is this.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Okay, review it. As for my opinion, this is a statement that is not well-digested.

The questioner: The words of the Hafiz?

The Shaykh : The al-Hafiz's statement, yes, is not well-digested. Why is the hasan li-ghayrihi hadith used as evidence? Because the group of paths, regardless of... the group of paths either instills in the researcher's mind a preponderance of probability regarding the establishment of this hadith, in which case it becomes evidence, or it does not become evidence. If it is said of a hadith with multiple paths that it is not hasan, then it is not evidence. If it is said that it is hasan, then it is evidence at that point. But to say that the hasan li-ghayrihi hadith, which we have described as hasan li-ghayrihi, is sometimes not evidence... this statement... there is a vast difference between saying "this hadith with these paths does not reach the rank of hasan li-ghayrihi" and "this hadith with these paths reaches the rank of hasan li-ghayrihi." That is a straight statement. But to say: "Perhaps a hasan li-ghayrihi hadith is not used as evidence," that is what is not reasonable.

The questioner : So the disagreement is only in the naming?

The Shaykh : No, the disagreement is a naming that expresses a reality. When we say: a hasan li-ghayrihi hadith has paths; what does this mean? That these paths strengthened the hadith.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : I am asking you; is this not the case?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Okay; if the hadith is strengthened by the multitude of paths, do you remove the word "hasan" from... is it used as evidence or not?

The questioner : If the paths are numerous, yes.

The Shaykh : Not just if they are numerous, but if it is strengthened. If the hadith is strengthened by the multitude of its paths, is it used as evidence?

The questioner: I have no answer.

The Shaykh : Okay; is it reasonable to say: it is used as evidence at one time and not used as evidence at another time?

The questioner : No, it is not reasonable. But this is not the statement of Ibn al-Qattan which he supported...

The Shaykh : The issue is not about this. Now I am presenting what exists in this form: a hadith that is strengthened by the multitude of paths, I called it hasan, I called it sahih. The issue is not about the naming now; because you know that names do not change the realities of the named things. Okay; is it reasonable to say that at one time the hadith is strengthened by the multitude of paths, and at another time it is strengthened by the multitude of paths but is taken into account at one time and not taken into account at another time; is this said?

The questioner : Absolutely not.

The Shaykh : Okay; that... at one time the hadith is strengthened by the multitude of paths, and at another time it is not strengthened by the multitude of paths; is there a contradiction here?

The questioner : A contradiction, yes.

The Shaykh : Okay; in the first case, if it is strengthened by the multitude of paths, what is its technical name?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Is it said that it is used as evidence at one time and not used as evidence at another time?

The questioner : No, this is not said.

The Shaykh : And this is what I said.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : If Allah wills ... .

The questioner : ... the statement revolves around one axis; which is that not every weak hadith that has more than one path becomes hasan li-ghayrihi?

The Shaykh : No, that is not the statement. This hasan hadith - that is what he says - is sometimes used as evidence, and sometimes... not used as evidence, the hasan.

The questioner : Hasan li-ghayrihi is a concept of multiple paths, but in its reality it is not hasan li-ghayrihi; meaning the hasan hadith is the weak one when its paths are multiplied; the hasan li-ghayrihi hadith, so one path and another path, both are weak, it becomes hasan li-ghayrihi; is this rule discussed or the one he discussed? This is the statement of Ibn al-Qattan which Ibn Hajar supported, not... absolutely not, but only if the paths are numerous, they are numerous...

The Shaykh : I do not know, by Allah, why the disagreement is in transmitting this issue and others... O my brother, deeds are judged by their endings. We have a hadith with paths; these paths either raise it to the rank of hasan or leave it in the rank of weakness; correct or not?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Okay; if we assume the first case; this hadith, with the sum of its paths, rose to the rank of hasan; is it always used as evidence as we say and as is said in the science of terminology, or is it not always used as evidence?

The questioner : I believe it is used as evidence.

The Shaykh : Permanently?

The questioner : Unless a contradicting evidence is found.

The Shaykh : Did you see how you stopped?

The questioner : If a contradicting evidence is found, O our Shaykh.

The Shaykh : O my brother, a hadith in the Sahih for which no contradicting evidence is found is not used as evidence. What is this stick in the wheel? Glory be to Allah! I am saying the al-Hafiz's statement is not reasonable; because he does not speak of two hadiths, one of which is strengthened by the multitude of paths so it is hasan with them, and the other is not strengthened by the multitude of paths so it is weak with them. He does not say this, this is self-evident. But he says: the hasan li-ghayrihi hadith is sometimes used as evidence and sometimes not used as evidence. The issue is very clear, this is what is not reasonable. As for a hadith having paths, at one time it is strengthened and at another time it is not strengthened, this is correct and there is no problem with it.

The questioner : I have a witness that supports what Ibn Hajar said from your excellence in some...

The Shaykh : What Allah wills! But it cannot be that kind of witness!! ... How is it?

The questioner : A hadith, as I recall, that the hadith of Abu Umamah: to the end of the hadith. This hadith was narrated from Abu Umamah, as far as I recall, from two paths, and both paths are weak. Your excellence mentioned it in "Da'if al-Jami'" and judged it as weak, and you graded it as hasan in "Al-Mishkat"; so does this not fall under the statement of Ibn Hajar; this has two paths or only two weak ones, and yet you did not grade it as hasan?

The Shaykh : Now you have established the proof against yourself; is this example of what Ibn Hajar said in his opinion?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Okay; that is: the hasan hadith is weak, and the weak hadith is hasan.

The questioner : And therefore I said, O our Shaykh.

The Shaykh : No, I am asking you - may Allah bless you - you say: "And therefore," this is an explanatory clause, does it explain your statement or my statement? I am asking you; is that so? You tell me that, this... statement, you are repeating your statement which I returned to you and said: you have established the proof against yourself. Is this hadith an example of what you understood from the al-Hafiz's statement? You said: Yes; and this means that the weak hadith is hasan, and that the hasan hadith is weak, and that the example is one. Who says this statement?

The questioner : I am asking you about your practice, O Shaykh...

The Shaykh : O my dear, this is my practice, I have already answered the professor there when we spoke about what we spoke about. This is a relative issue, when we spoke about the hasan hadith.

The questioner : The hasan hadith in itself.

The Shaykh : Listen, my brother... May Allah guide us and you... It is very interesting. We have in Syria a saying, from... a joke that is used as a proverb, and it is said: he is stubborn. But you, what Allah willed... why this haste? I am saying: if al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi says regarding the hasan li-dhatihi hadith: that it is one of the subtleties of hadith science; do you think the hasan li-ghayrihi hadith is clearer or more obscure?

The questioner : More difficult.

The Shaykh : This is the point. So what is the benefit of your speech regarding al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi's statement about the hasan hadith? This is like what is called qiyas awla (analogical reasoning by stronger evidence), so it is all the more so that you should strike them with a palm. We do not cling to the wording; because there is qiyas awla. So if al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi's statement is about the hasan hadith, and the hasan li-ghayrihi hadith is more obscure than it, then my statement remains valid. The example you brought is the hasan hadith, where opinion differs. And I, who in one place say it is hasan, and in another place say it is da'if (weak), I say this is an error; because it combines two opposites, as I said earlier; da'if equals hasan, and hasan equals da'if; this requires a mind other than our minds that cannot accommodate it.
Glory be to You, O Allah, and praise be to You. I bear witness that there is no deity but You. I seek Your forgiveness and I repent to You.