The Shaykh’s response to those who weakened the hadiths prohibiting rows between the pillars in prayer

The Shaykh: He is one of the preservers of hadith, and this is his haste. Write this down for yourself, because you need to notice the difference between the two expressions. This is his haste and lack of verification. Another says: "lack of observation and verification." Is there a difference between the two expressions? What was transmitted from Ibn Hajar in "al-Fath": "Some people disliked the row between the pillars due to the prohibition reported regarding it," and the place of dislike is when... and the wisdom in it is: either because of the breaking of the row, or because it is the place of sandals, the place of sandals. So Ibn Hajar leans toward mentioning the hadith that he weakens and authenticates. The Hafiz Ibn Hajar, so he passed over it and sat down to respond to the other scholars who weakened it. Excuse me, from those who authenticated it among the other scholars, and he does not mention the authentication of the Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani. He conceals the knowledge and reminds us of the word of Ibn Taymiyyah—also—that among the methodology of the people of desires is "that they transmit what is in their favor and not what is against them, unlike the people of the Sunnah who transmit what is in their favor and what is against them, then they respond with what they have." This is the knowledge. Yes, this man’s path is the path of the people of desires in dozens of places in this small treatise. So you have to respond to what is being responded to. Therefore, we come to the matters by the closest path, especially since we are not addressing the response to the treatise, but rather some of the hadiths that are here in "al-Sahihah" are the ones he weakens. May Allah guide us and him.
The student: Amen.

The Shaykh: Al-Hakim, one hundred and twenty-eight. What does he say? And Al-Albani, and before him al-Manawi, that al-Dhahabi did not agree with the authentication, and Shaykh Al-Albani also claimed in "al-Sahihah" andThe Shaykh : Shu'ayb al-Arna'ut in "Sharh al-Sunnah" and they followed him in thatAl-Halabi : that al-Dhahabi agreed with al-Hakim on authenticating the hadith, and this is a great error. They imitated al-Manawi in "Fayd al-Qadir." They claimed that the hadith about which al-Dhahabi was silent means he agreed with al-Hakim in it. So that we remain objective. Now, what does this statement mean? Repeat, repeat?
The student: Please, my Shaykh, repeat.

The Shaykh: Also, to give you a complete picture, here now his research focuses on the first hadith, which is Qura ibn Iyas al-Muzani. Al-Hakim narrated it, one hundred and twenty-eight. Do you have it?
The student: Yes, my Shaykh. Qura from his father. Yes.

The Shaykh: Okay, he is speaking about this hadith now from aspects. First, second, third. Of course, these aspects are in the weakening of the hadith. Fourth, fifth, sixth. And Shaykh Al-Albani also claimed in "al-Sahihah" andThe Shaykh : Shu'ayb al-Arna'ut in "Sharh al-Sunnah," part on the description, and they followed him in thatAl-Halabi : that al-Dhahabi agreed with al-Hakim on authenticating the hadith, and this is a great error. They imitated al-Manawi in *Fayd al-Qadir*. They claimed that the hadith about which al-Dhahabi was silent means he agreed with al-Hakim in it. They claimed that the hadith about which al-Dhahabi was silent means he agreed with al-Hakim in it. Do you have it in silence or in agreement?
The student: No, there is no silence. He explicitly said it is authentic.

The Shaykh: Ah, okay. So what do we say?
The student: There is no power or strength except by Allah. By Allah, my Shaykh...

The Shaykh: We say, to Allah is the return...

The Shaykh: I drew attention at the end of the tracing of the two hadiths to the fact that the two hadiths meet with a third hadith: . Note that this hadith supports the two hadiths in that the goal of the two hadiths is connecting the row, and the opposite is breaking the row, and he is saying: . So note that the meaning of this hadith supports the two hadiths. Therefore, he had to demolish it, as is his custom. So he messed up with some things, and indeed he weakened the hadith. He weakened the hadith from two sides. The first side: We have two imams: Ibn Wahb, Abdullah ibn Wahb al-Musalli, and al-Layth ibn Sa'd al-Misri. Abdullah ibn Wahb narrated it from the path of a Tabi'i from Ibn Umar. Al-Layth from the Tabi'i as a mursal. He put a mark with the Syrian expression, so the hadith is mursal. He struck the connection with a mursal. And this, as is known, conflicts with the rule that the addition of the trustworthy is accepted. If al-Layth were more memorizing than Abdullah ibn Wahb, and Abdullah ibn Wahb was one of those spoken about regarding their memorization, like some narrators, here we say, by Allah, yes. So the important thing is that he struck this hadith with the mursal. And there is something else: the narration of al-Layth does not contain: . It does not exist in the mursal narration: in . And whoever cut it off, Allah cut him off. It is not there. So this addition is shadh (anomalous). So there is shudhudh (anomaly) in the chain and shudhudh in the text. Look, Allah wants to expose this hadith. Al-Nawawi mentioned it in "al-Riyadh" ("Riyadh al-Salihin"). And you know what he did. He cut it piece by piece in "Riyadh al-Salihin." This hadith, Allah inspired him to keep it in "al-Riyadh" on the basis that it is authentic, and it is one of the few hadiths in which al-Nawawi explicitly said: "Abu Dawud narrated it with a sound chain." So he kept it in "al-Riyadh." Here, now... the word, why did he keep it? Because he did not find at that time a real 'illah (defect) to push it into his weak hadiths, so he kept it. But when he collided with those he called the Albaniyyun and found that they argue with this hadith, he fabricated for it that 'illah: the mursal, the shudhudh. So I am drawing attention here. What does it mean that you are here responding to the Albaniyyun by weakening it, and there, when you exerted all your effort to purify "Riyadh al-Salihin" from weak hadiths, you kept it? Because at that time you were not an opponent of the Albaniyyun in this issue. But from his cunning, in a hadith in "al-Riyadh," the hadith of Anas ibn Malik that the Messenger—peace be upon him—ordered them to establish the rows and said: . The hadith was narrated by al-Bukhari as in "al-Riyadh," and he said: "And in a narration of al-Bukhari: 'And one of us would press his shoulder' to the end of it." He deleted this narration.
The student: ... in "al-Riyadh" it is.

The Shaykh: He deleted it, even though it is in al-Bukhari. Why did he delete it? Be aware that at that time he knew that this wording, first: he cannot digest it, like the rest of the masses, and second: it conflicts with the hadiths of the row between the pillars, because... breaking the row, the benefit is not realized. So be aware of the narration of al-Bukhari and its deletion. He did not pay attention to the hadith he weakened in the treatise, so he kept it. So this man is a man of desire. It does not mean he is proceeding from a principle and scientific rule. He authenticates what the science requires and weakens what the science requires, as we say, for example, this is a hadith with a weak chain but a correct meaning. But because it is correct in meaning, we do not let it go. We do not let it go. We show that it is weak, because it is not permissible for us to attribute to the Messenger, whether from his saying, his doing, or his approval, if it agrees with the Shari'ah in general. We say this agrees with the Shari'ah, but its attribution to the Messenger—peace be upon him—is not authentic. And I give an example: if a person said, "The Messenger of Allah said: Eating eggplant is lawful," we say, "You lied," but eating eggplant is lawful, there is no problem. But do not say, "The Messenger of Allah said." To the end of it. This man, as long as he deleted a narration from a narration of al-Bukhari that is with the same chain as what he kept, the same chain, it is from the narration of Humayd al-Tawil from Anas. Al-Bukhari said in... he mentioned the description to the end of it.