Ibn Hajar mentioned in *Nukhbat al-Fikr* that justice is the trait that inclines one to adhere to piety, and he found narrators in the two Sahihs from among the Shi'ah and the Khawarij.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : As you know, may Allah preserve you, the scholars of hadith took up the issue of the justice of the narrator. Many of the scholars, including al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar, defined justice or outlined its characteristics, stating that it is a trait that inclines the narrator to piety and maintaining good character. He explained piety in the same book, *Nukhbat al-Fikr*, as abstaining from bad deeds, whether they be religious innovation, open sinfulness, or associating partners with Allah. Here, I have a difficulty regarding the two Sahihs: I found men who were innovators, such as a Khariji, a Rafidi, or a Murji'i. So, where is the reconciliation? There is a contradiction between Ibn Hajar's definition of the characteristics of justice and the practical examples found in the books of the Sahih. Yes, so what is the reconciliation between these definitions and what is found in the Sahih? May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : I think the difficulty arises from stopping at certain terms in the definition of justice without explaining them elsewhere by their author. For example, religious innovation: for al-Hafiz and others, regarding its connection to the innovator, this innovator is in one of two states: either he is a propagator of it or he is not. If he is not a propagator of it, then it does not contradict the definition I mentioned earlier, because he means the religious innovation that is propagated by the just person. It is clear.
The questioner : He should have qualified the term religious innovation!
The Shaykh : Yes, but the problem is, what happens when someone sets a definition? If every phrase has to be qualified, it would become a lecture. So he is forced to abbreviate as much as he can and explain in other places.
Another questioner: Well, our Shaykh, what is your opinion on the following definition of justice?
The Shaykh : You got ahead of me, may Allah guide you. I say this considering that there are two opinions regarding the innovator: either he is a propagator or he is not. If he is not a propagator, then he is just. If truthfulness and memorization are added to that, then he is a proof.
Another questioner: What is the name of the narrator? May Allah reward you.
The questioner : I read it long ago, but I do not remember the name of the narrator who was found in the Sahih as being a propagator of his innovation.
The Shaykh : ... I am speaking regarding what is found in the terminology. As a science adopted by the majority of scholars, they divide religious innovation into two categories, and I defined it, but...
There is another opinion, which Ibn Hajar himself adopts, that the criterion in narration is first Islam and justice, then memorization and precision. So, if there is a man who is an innovator and a propagator of his innovation, but it is established for us that in terms of his Islam he is a Muslim, 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 on this basis, the practice of the two Shaykhs is understood if they narrate from an innovator. For example, Imam al-Bukhari is one of the most famous examples; he narrates from 'Imran ibn Hutan, who participated in the killing of the Commander of the Faithful, 'Ali ibn Abi Talib.
So, we return and specify a second detail, and we say that there are two opinions in this issue. One is that the innovator is not accepted as a proof by his hadith, even if he is trustworthy, precise, and truthful, and so on.
The second opinion is that his narration is accepted as long as he is truthful. They cite the Khawarij as an example for this, because the Khawarij believe that the one who commits a major sin is a disbeliever. Therefore, they are the furthest people from lying. Here, some scholars make a detail: they say this description applies to the early Khawarij, but afterwards they also began to lie to support their school of thought. So, the purpose in narration is two things: Islam, then truthfulness with memorization.
The Shaykh : I think the difficulty arises from stopping at certain terms in the definition of justice without explaining them elsewhere by their author. For example, religious innovation: for al-Hafiz and others, regarding its connection to the innovator, this innovator is in one of two states: either he is a propagator of it or he is not. If he is not a propagator of it, then it does not contradict the definition I mentioned earlier, because he means the religious innovation that is propagated by the just person. It is clear.
The questioner : He should have qualified the term religious innovation!
The Shaykh : Yes, but the problem is, what happens when someone sets a definition? If every phrase has to be qualified, it would become a lecture. So he is forced to abbreviate as much as he can and explain in other places.
Another questioner: Well, our Shaykh, what is your opinion on the following definition of justice?
The Shaykh : You got ahead of me, may Allah guide you. I say this considering that there are two opinions regarding the innovator: either he is a propagator or he is not. If he is not a propagator, then he is just. If truthfulness and memorization are added to that, then he is a proof.
Another questioner: What is the name of the narrator? May Allah reward you.
The questioner : I read it long ago, but I do not remember the name of the narrator who was found in the Sahih as being a propagator of his innovation.
The Shaykh : ... I am speaking regarding what is found in the terminology. As a science adopted by the majority of scholars, they divide religious innovation into two categories, and I defined it, but...
There is another opinion, which Ibn Hajar himself adopts, that the criterion in narration is first Islam and justice, then memorization and precision. So, if there is a man who is an innovator and a propagator of his innovation, but it is established for us that in terms of his Islam he is a Muslim, 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 on this basis, the practice of the two Shaykhs is understood if they narrate from an innovator. For example, Imam al-Bukhari is one of the most famous examples; he narrates from 'Imran ibn Hutan, who participated in the killing of the Commander of the Faithful, 'Ali ibn Abi Talib.
So, we return and specify a second detail, and we say that there are two opinions in this issue. One is that the innovator is not accepted as a proof by his hadith, even if he is trustworthy, precise, and truthful, and so on.
The second opinion is that his narration is accepted as long as he is truthful. They cite the Khawarij as an example for this, because the Khawarij believe that the one who commits a major sin is a disbeliever. Therefore, they are the furthest people from lying. Here, some scholars make a detail: they say this description applies to the early Khawarij, but afterwards they also began to lie to support their school of thought. So, the purpose in narration is two things: Islam, then truthfulness with memorization.