Ibn Hajar mentioned in *Nukhbat al-Fikr*: that justice is the one who possesses a disposition that compels him to adhere to piety

The questioner : As you know, may Allah preserve you, that the memorizers took upon themselves to establish the criteria for authentic and good hadiths regarding the justice of the narrator. Many of the memorizers, including al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar, defined justice or established the criteria for justice, saying: "It is a disposition that compels the narrator to piety and adherence to good character." He also explained piety in the same book, the book of *Nukhba*, saying: "It is abstaining from bad deeds, such as religious innovation, open sinfulness, or associating partners with Allah." Here I have a difficulty; in *al-Sahihayn*, men were found who were innovators, such as being a Khariji, a Rafidi, or a Murji'i. So, is there a contradiction here between al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar's definition of the criteria for justice and the practical examples in the books of *al-Sahih*? Yes; so what is the reconciliation between these definitions and what was found in *al-Sahih*... May Allah reward you?

The Shaykh : Yes, I think the difficulty arose from stopping at some of the terms in the definition of justice without explaining them from their originator—meaning the one who coined these terms—elsewhere. For example, religious innovation; religious innovation, according to al-Hafiz and others, in its relation to the innovator, this innovator is in one of two states: either he is a propagator of it or he is not a propagator of it. Is that clear?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Good; so if he is not a propagator of it, it does not contradict the definition I mentioned earlier; because he means the religious innovation that is propagated by the just person. Is that clear?

The questioner : Meaning, he should have qualified the religious innovation?

The Shaykh : Yes, but what is the problem? When one wants to produce a definition, if he has to qualify every phrase, it will become a lecture. So he is forced to abbreviate as much as he can and explain later in other places.

Another questioner : Good, our Shaykh, what is your opinion regarding the following definition of justice?

The Shaykh : You got ahead of me—may Allah guide you—I say: this is considering that there are two opinions regarding the innovator; either he is a propagator, or he is not a propagator. If he is not a propagator, he is just. If truthfulness and memorization are added to him, he is a proof.

Another questioner : Good; ... the narrator, as I said. I read long ago, but I do not remember the name of the narrator, that there was found in *al-Sahih* someone who is a propagator to his religious innovation!

The Shaykh : You are coming with the talk—may Allah guide you!

Another questioner: Go ahead.

The Shaykh : I am speaking regarding what was found in the terminology and as a science adopted by the majority of scholars; they divide religious innovation into two parts, and I know it.

Another questioner : Is that clear?

The Shaykh : Yes, but there is another opinion, and Ibn Hajar himself adopts it; and the consideration in narration is first of all: Islam and justice, then memorization and precision. If there is a man who is an innovator and a propagator to his religious innovation, but it is established for us that in terms of his Islam he is a Muslim, then in terms of his precision he is precise, and in terms of his truthfulness he is truthful, then he is a proof even if he is an innovator who propagates. And upon this is carried the practice ofThe Shaykh : them; if they narrated from an innovator; for example, Imam al-Bukhari is one of the most famous examples that he narrates from Imran ibn Hutan, and this is the one who means he participated in the killing of the Commander of the Faithful, 'Ali ibn Abi Talib.
So now we return and detail a second detail, it is reported: in the issue there are two opinions:
The first is: that the innovator is not used as a proof for his hadith, even if he is trustworthy, precise, and truthful, and so on.
The second opinion is: his narration is accepted as long as he is truthful, and they cite the Khawarij for that; meaning the Khawarij believe that the one who commits a major sin is a disbeliever, and therefore they are the farthest people from lying. And here is a detail, some scholars say: they say: this description is true for the early Khawarij, but after that they also began to lie to support their school of thought. So the intention in narration is two things: Islam, then truthfulness with memorization.