The Shaykh Al-Albani’s statement that the methodology of the Tahrir Party is a dangerous one, containing principles that, if applied, would befall us the same loss of religion that befell the Jews and the Christians

The Shaykh : They have adopted a methodology that is extremely dangerous. If it were truly implemented, it would befall the religion of the Muslims what befell the religion of the Jews and the Christians. Among the things they do is that they transmit some reports regarding the mursal hadith in the first, second, and third centuries. This author states that in the last of the times, in the fourth century, it is a proof. That is to say, any hadith that is said in some of the books of the Hanafis: “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said,” and between it and the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) are three centuries, is a valid hadith, because it is a mursal hadith. And they said, “Our imams, as long as it remains, the isnad has no value at all.” May Allah have mercy on Ibn Hibban. He said: “Among the proofs for not using the mursal hadith as evidence is that if we say that the mursal of a Tabi‘i is used as evidence, what is their proof? That if the mursal is trustworthy, you are confident in him and rely on him. So when he tells you: ‘The Messenger of Allah said,’ he must have heard this hadith from a trustworthy person. So a trustworthy person is relying on this trustworthy person who trusted that trustworthy person. Therefore, you must take the hadith as valid.” What did Ibn Hibban say? He said: “This necessitates that until the end of time, whenever we hear a hadith from a trustworthy person, we say: ‘The Messenger of Allah said,’ because this trustworthy person does not take it except from a trustworthy person.” And thus, the value of the science of hadith is nullified. The scholars, the memorizers among them, acknowledge this reality: that this is a distinction by which the Muslim community is unique among all nations. What is this distinction? The isnad. So the Tahrir Party, in summary, they say: “As for us, we have not written down principles upon which to base our evidence, and it is not refuted against us that you have contradicted the principles agreed upon by the scholars of hadith, because you will find principles with us.” Therefore, they remain, and we can say with complete frankness: they are a group of how? They have no governing principle. If they are followers of a school, they are neither Hanafis, nor Shafi‘is, nor Malikis, nor Hanbalis. And if they are methodological, they have no methodology, neither in the principles, nor in the principles of jurisprudence, nor in the principles of hadith. Therefore, crude ideas abound among them, which make even the bereaved laugh.