The Shaykh’s discussion of the Tahrir Party’s refusal to accept ahad reports in matters of creed.

The Shaykh : Some Islamic parties today have been afflicted by this religious innovation, namely the Islamic Tahrir Party. They have been publishing pamphlets for more than twenty years, calling for this misguidance and explicitly stating that ahad hadiths do not establish proof in matters of creed. I said to some of them, a point that is the truth and the breaking of their backs: Yes, it is Taki al-Din al-Nabhani, but he did not say it directly because he refused to meet. We said it to some of his followers. I said to them, of course, this is as they say, "My daughters are from my imagination," but it represents the truth against them. I said to them, they claimed that an Islamic caller went to call people to Islam in Japan. He started lecturing to them, and naturally, as is the practical Sunnah of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and the directive Sunnah of his (peace and blessings be upon him) to his Companions, as in his sending of Mu'adh, he told him when he sent him to Yemen: Naturally, a Muslim who knows faith and the oneness of Allah does not start with politics, nor with morals, nor as many of the existing Islamic parties do today. He starts by planting the creed of the oneness of Allah in the correct manner as it came in the Book and the Sunnah. So this caller went to Japan and started calling and explaining to them the path of faith. This is how it came in the book of Taki al-Din al-Nabhani, *The Path of Faith*. He started with creed. Creed, of course, as you know, is faith in Allah, His angels, His books... and he mentioned among what he mentioned a creed held by them that ahad hadiths do not establish creed. So there, in a corner of the gathering, and as they say, "in the corners are secrets," a man stood up and said, "O Professor, if you hold this creed that ahad hadiths are not accepted in creed, and you are teaching us creed, then according to your creed, you must return to your country, go back to your place, and come with the number of mutawatir [narrators], and let mutawatir witness with you that what you are saying is Islam. As for you alone, the meaning of your words is that the proof is not established against us by your words." This is a valid point against him. And is it conceivable that in the religion of Islam, if any man sits in a gathering and says, "This is an authentic hadith," it is not accepted from you until you bring dozens of scholars specialized in the science of hadith to witness with you that this is a mutawatir hadith? Likewise, I said to them, and I hope you will memorize this, these are very precise scientific facts that you will not find written in a book, because these are things a person acquires through practice over time. I said to them, it is impossible for you to have a mutawatir hadith, and that means it is impossible for you to have a creed built on a mutawatir hadith. They said, "Why?" We believe in things. I said to them, if you believe in hadiths on the basis that they are mutawatir, you have returned to us in the rule, meaning you accepted ahad hadiths. Otherwise, you are contradictory. They said, "How?" I said to them, suppose thatThe Shaykh : Taki al-Nabhani, the founder of the Tahrir Party, is the al-Bukhari of his time in hadith. He said to you, "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) said: This hadith will not be mutawatir with you, nor will it be an authentic mutawatir hadith, until someone like Taki al-Din al-Nabhani witnesses with you, as he said to you. But there is something more severe: Taki al-Din al-Nabhani says, "I took this hadith from twenty scholars, and every scholar in hadith has a chain, and every chain ends with twenty of the Companions. So this hadith is mutawatir with him. But your mutawatir is not mutawatir; your mutawatir is broken. Where is it broken? AtThe Shaykh : al-Nabhani. Yes, Taki al-Din al-Nabhani is the al-Bukhari of his time, and so on, and he took the hadith from this path, from this path. We imagine that he is the al-Bukhari of his time, meaning he has dozens of shaykhs, or even hundreds of shaykhs. And many of the hadiths, he says, "So-and-so narrated to me with his chain from so-and-so, and so on, until the Companion." Then they put a "ha" [meaning conversion] to a second chain: "So-and-so narrated to me," dozens of paths from such-and-such a Companion, all of them. Then they say, "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said." This is a mutawatir hadith with the al-Bukhari of his time. But when the al-Bukhari of his time says to you, "The Messenger of Allah said," you have an ahad hadith. So you do not have a mutawatir hadith. How do you obtain a mutawatir hadith? If so, you have no creed built on a mutawatir hadith. This philosophy is very destructive, because this philosophy, in its entirety, is that ahad hadiths do not establish creed, because it is probable in its establishment. And two conditions are required in a text for creed to be taken from it: that it be certain in its establishment and that it be certain in its meaning. Now, we bring a verse from the Noble Qur'an: Paradise Seeing Allah in the Hereafter. Is this a text certain in its meaning? Certain in its establishment? Certain in its establishment: the Noble Qur'an. Is it certain in its meaning? No, it is not certain in its meaning. So it does not establish creed, even if it were explained by the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), it would not establish creed. So, certain in meaning and certain in establishment: it may be certain in meaning, like a hadith, but not certain in establishment. It may be certain in establishment, like a verse, but not certain in meaning. Therefore, we have nullified the creeds with this philosophy, relying on certain establishment and certain meaning. Was our righteous Salaf upon this? The answer is no. So we must know that the correct creed must be built on the correct Islamic methodology, not on the opinions and ideas innovated in Islam, which differ according to opinions, ideas, and methodologies. And there is only one methodology, which is: Allah said, the Messenger of Allah said. And Imam Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) did well and summarized the speech in beauty and brevity when he said: "Knowledge is: Allah said, His Messenger said, *** The Companions said; it is not by ta'wil [figurative interpretation]
Knowledge is not: you setting up foolish disagreement *** Between the Messenger and the opinion of a jurist
Nor by denial of the attributes and their negation, *** Out of fear of ta'til [denial of the divine attributes] and tashbih [likening Allah to creation]."
And perhaps this extent is sufficient, if Allah wills.
Yes