How is the method for determining the validity of the text of a hadith from its weakening? And we want you to elaborate on this issue for us?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner: What is the method for knowing the validity of the text of a hadith from its defect? And we want you to elaborate on this issue for us?
The Shaykh: Pardon me, I did not understand the question.
The questioner: The method for authenticating the text from its weakening, other than the chain of narration, we want the text?
The Shaykh: The text—as I said earlier—may come in a certain book with a weak chain of narration. If we stop at this book, we stop at the statement that the hadith is weak. But if we expand in tracing the paths of this hadith whose chain in that book is weak, other things become clear to us; we find another chain for the hadith that is authentic in itself. In the first chain, we said: the chain of the hadith is weak. In the second chain, we said: its chain is authentic. So when we stop at the first, we say: the chain of the hadith is weak. When we stop at the second chain, we say: its chain is authentic. Is this picture clear?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: Good; the second chain may not be authentic; but it may be good only, and good in itself. In that case, we say regarding the text whose first chain was weak: we say: this is an authentic hadith; because the second chain is good and gains strength from the first chain which is weak; because it is permissible to cite it as evidence, so the first chain becomes a corroborating narration for the second chain, and the hadith which the second chain corroborated with goodness rises to the rank of authenticity. Is this second picture clear?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: Good; a third picture remains; the chain of the second hadith was studied and it became clear that it is weak—also—but its weakness is like the weakness of the first chain; that is: one of the chains strengthens and corroborates the second chain, so the hadith with the total of the two chains is good, and its goodness does not originate from the first or second chain itself, but from their total. This is known among the scholars of hadith that the hadith is strengthened by the multiplicity of paths, and these paths, the more they multiply, even if their outputs are weak, the more the text of the hadith gains strength. The more the paths multiply, the more the text of the hadith gains strength; that is: it becomes authentic thereby, even if the individual paths are weak. And if it did not have many paths there, but as I exemplified earlier in the third picture, the first chain is weak and the second chain—also—is weak, but the weakness came from poor memory and not from lack of trust in his hadith; he is truthful in himself, but he had weakness in his matter, and both narrators in the two chains were likewise, both are truthful, but both—also—are poor in memory; so one strengthens the other. And for that reason it was said:
Do not fight my heart with your eyes, for two weak ones overcome a strong one.
Did you understand this?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: Ah, this third type. And therefore we may see the disagreement of scholars in the past in authenticating a hadith or grading it as good or weakening it. The way to that is to look carefully at these three examples, so the difficulty will be removed, even if in general terms. Why does this one authenticate? Why does this one grade it as good? Why does this one weaken it? The answer: what you have now known, we add to that what was explained earlier with the brotherThe questioner : whom we quoted from al-Dhahabi: "That the good hadith is one of the most subtle sciences of hadith"; because the opinion of one hadith scholar differs in it; so what do you think about the disagreement of the hadith scholars around this hadith? That is more likely and more likely.
Yes.
The Shaykh: Pardon me, I did not understand the question.
The questioner: The method for authenticating the text from its weakening, other than the chain of narration, we want the text?
The Shaykh: The text—as I said earlier—may come in a certain book with a weak chain of narration. If we stop at this book, we stop at the statement that the hadith is weak. But if we expand in tracing the paths of this hadith whose chain in that book is weak, other things become clear to us; we find another chain for the hadith that is authentic in itself. In the first chain, we said: the chain of the hadith is weak. In the second chain, we said: its chain is authentic. So when we stop at the first, we say: the chain of the hadith is weak. When we stop at the second chain, we say: its chain is authentic. Is this picture clear?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: Good; the second chain may not be authentic; but it may be good only, and good in itself. In that case, we say regarding the text whose first chain was weak: we say: this is an authentic hadith; because the second chain is good and gains strength from the first chain which is weak; because it is permissible to cite it as evidence, so the first chain becomes a corroborating narration for the second chain, and the hadith which the second chain corroborated with goodness rises to the rank of authenticity. Is this second picture clear?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: Good; a third picture remains; the chain of the second hadith was studied and it became clear that it is weak—also—but its weakness is like the weakness of the first chain; that is: one of the chains strengthens and corroborates the second chain, so the hadith with the total of the two chains is good, and its goodness does not originate from the first or second chain itself, but from their total. This is known among the scholars of hadith that the hadith is strengthened by the multiplicity of paths, and these paths, the more they multiply, even if their outputs are weak, the more the text of the hadith gains strength. The more the paths multiply, the more the text of the hadith gains strength; that is: it becomes authentic thereby, even if the individual paths are weak. And if it did not have many paths there, but as I exemplified earlier in the third picture, the first chain is weak and the second chain—also—is weak, but the weakness came from poor memory and not from lack of trust in his hadith; he is truthful in himself, but he had weakness in his matter, and both narrators in the two chains were likewise, both are truthful, but both—also—are poor in memory; so one strengthens the other. And for that reason it was said:
Do not fight my heart with your eyes, for two weak ones overcome a strong one.
Did you understand this?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: Ah, this third type. And therefore we may see the disagreement of scholars in the past in authenticating a hadith or grading it as good or weakening it. The way to that is to look carefully at these three examples, so the difficulty will be removed, even if in general terms. Why does this one authenticate? Why does this one grade it as good? Why does this one weaken it? The answer: what you have now known, we add to that what was explained earlier with the brotherThe questioner : whom we quoted from al-Dhahabi: "That the good hadith is one of the most subtle sciences of hadith"; because the opinion of one hadith scholar differs in it; so what do you think about the disagreement of the hadith scholars around this hadith? That is more likely and more likely.
Yes.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.