The Hafiz al-Dhahabi says: “The masters of critique are divided into: the strict, the moderate, and the lenient.” Is this division accepted in its absolute form?

The questioner : O Shaykh, regarding the Hafiz al-Dhahabi’s division of the masters of critique into the strict, the lenient, and the moderate, Shaykh, is this accepted in its absolute form? And how is that considered when there is a conflict between the opinion of the strict and the lenient?

The Shaykh : Repeat what you said to me.

The questioner : The Hafiz al-Dhahabi says: “The masters of critique are divided into: the strict, the moderate, and the lenient.” Is this division accepted in its absolute form? For if every narrator... is weakened by a strict critic, he needs to be weakened. Then how is this division applied in determining preference?

The Shaykh : I mean, what I understand from your words is that it is accepted in its absolute form.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : I mean, if it is said: this one is a strict critic by name, is it accepted in its absolute form? And that one is moderate, and that one is lenient; or what?

The questioner : Is the Hafiz al-Dhahabi’s division accepted in the first place?

The Shaykh : This is a matter of reality, and it is accepted.

The questioner : Fine; what about its application? How is it applied?

The Shaykh : This is what I want to understand from you; you mean the application is absolute, so that anyone he named as, for example, a moderate, his words are accepted because he is moderate and balanced, without research and without...? And the opposite is the opposite?

The questioner : The application is intentional from two sides, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : ... for example... do we apply the strict critic absolutely? That is one matter. Then when there is a conflict; the conflict...; how is it applied in this case?

The Shaykh : I do not have an answer for this right now.
Please proceed.

The questioner : I read this when we came to... al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil... this... exists. We began to discover regarding Ibn Ma'in... and others who do not authenticate him, so this drew our attention... and the unknowns... between those whom Ibn Ma'in authenticated and “the weak” and so on. This led me to say that this statement is not accepted in its absolute form. We should study these layers that al-Dhahabi mentioned... since Ibn Ma'in... Ibn Ma'in is strict; that... many things... .

The Shaykh : This is what I understood from your question; meaning, do we take those he classified as strict absolutely, and those he classified as moderate absolutely... like that? Of course, the answer is: no, research is necessary.

The questioner : Fine; and the other matter, O Shaykh, when there is a conflict. Some say: if, for example, a strict critic authenticates a trustworthy narrator and a lenient critic weakens him, his statement is discarded... .

The Shaykh : No, we must return to the rules.

The questioner : ... I said this.

The Shaykh : Yes?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : In Sahih, and whatever is not said, the important thing is that we should return to the rules; al-Jarh takes precedence over al-Ta'dil, and al-Ta'dil is accepted implicitly from those who are not known for matters like those of Ibn Hazm; it is necessary to return to the rules.

The questioner : So, based on this, we do not take the previous division.

The Shaykh : No, we do not take it in its absolute form; it is necessary to research each one individually.
... ... ... .