You mentioned, Your Eminence, in *Irwaa' al-Ghalil* that al-'Ajili is lenient in certifying the reliability of narrators. So when is his certification accepted and when is it not accepted if he is the sole one to certify a narrator, and what is the difference between his certification and the certification of Ibn Hibban and al-Hakim?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : You mentioned, Your Eminence, in *Irwaa' al-Ghalil* that al-'Ajili is lenient in certifying the reliability of narrators. So when is his certification accepted and when is it not accepted if he is the sole one to certify a narrator, and what is the difference between his certification and the certification of Ibn Hibban and al-Hakim?
The Shaykh : They are on the same scale, and what we said about al-'Ajili applies to Ibn Hibban. We recently recorded a detailed answer regarding the certification of Ibn Hibban: if he is the sole one to certify a narrator, the general rule is that his certification is not considered and not relied upon, except in two cases. The first case is if the one he certifies is among his sheikhs whom he kept close to and knew well and intimately. The second case is if he certifies a man from whom a group of trustworthy narrators have narrated, and nothing contradictory has appeared in the narrations of these people. In that case, the researcher's mind is reassured regarding the hadith, as Ibn al-Qayyim says, "its rank is elevated," and he is reassured to use such a narrator as evidence. As for everything else, the default rule is that it is not used as evidence. We have elaborated on this, so this brief summary is sufficient.
The Shaykh : They are on the same scale, and what we said about al-'Ajili applies to Ibn Hibban. We recently recorded a detailed answer regarding the certification of Ibn Hibban: if he is the sole one to certify a narrator, the general rule is that his certification is not considered and not relied upon, except in two cases. The first case is if the one he certifies is among his sheikhs whom he kept close to and knew well and intimately. The second case is if he certifies a man from whom a group of trustworthy narrators have narrated, and nothing contradictory has appeared in the narrations of these people. In that case, the researcher's mind is reassured regarding the hadith, as Ibn al-Qayyim says, "its rank is elevated," and he is reassured to use such a narrator as evidence. As for everything else, the default rule is that it is not used as evidence. We have elaborated on this, so this brief summary is sufficient.