The Shaykh’s (may Allah have mercy on him) response to those who criticized his book "The Description of Prayer"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : This is a question that has become widespread among some of the Salafi brothers... They say that the evidence, except for a few instances, and especially when this comes from our Shaykh Al-Albani (may Allah reward him with good), is that it does not differ from the thought of the later Salaf, who adopt this style and say... to the evidence. The evidence found in other books is...?
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive the questioner. There is a very big difference. First, regarding the followers of a specific school (mقلids), when they say that there are books that clarify the evidence, this is a referral to opinion, or even to something nonexistent, because the general masses of students of knowledge cannot access those books. And even if they did access them, they would not find evidence for every issue. How does this compare to the author of the book "The Description of Prayer"! He composed "The Description of Prayer" entirely from the hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and then summarized these hadiths in a small treatise to help people who do not have a scholarly background and to make it easier for them to understand the subject of the book "The Description of the Prophet’s (peace and blessings be upon him) Prayer." The analogy the questioner made is, unfortunately, an analogy with a difference, because "The Description of Prayer" summarized the description of the Messenger’s (peace and blessings be upon him) prayer itself in this small book. Shaykh Al-Albani did not bring any words from his own mind. A reader of "The Description of Prayer" or its summary would ask: where did this statement come from? This is from one aspect.
From another aspect. The general Muslims, and the scholars of today, do not have the desire; if they had the desire, they do not have the time to study Sahih al-Bukhari as it is, with "So-and-so narrated to us, he said, so-and-so narrated to us..." They read more of the chain of narration than the text in many cases. They do not have this time. So we came, following those who preceded us among the Imams, like al-Nawawi who summarized Muslim and the like, and al-Mundhiri. So we summarized Sahih al-Bukhari. We preserved the hadiths of al-Bukhari as they are. Can it be said that there is any deficiency or criticism in this? We did exactly the same in "The Description of Prayer." We removed the cross-references (takhrij) that even many students of knowledge cannot bear, let alone what about the scholars of knowledge? "So-and-so narrated it, and so-and-so, and so-and-so, and so-and-so narrated it, and so-and-so." We removed all these things and then summarized the hadiths that came in the upper section... the long books. So we did not bring anything from our own minds, as was said earlier. Yes.
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive the questioner. There is a very big difference. First, regarding the followers of a specific school (mقلids), when they say that there are books that clarify the evidence, this is a referral to opinion, or even to something nonexistent, because the general masses of students of knowledge cannot access those books. And even if they did access them, they would not find evidence for every issue. How does this compare to the author of the book "The Description of Prayer"! He composed "The Description of Prayer" entirely from the hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and then summarized these hadiths in a small treatise to help people who do not have a scholarly background and to make it easier for them to understand the subject of the book "The Description of the Prophet’s (peace and blessings be upon him) Prayer." The analogy the questioner made is, unfortunately, an analogy with a difference, because "The Description of Prayer" summarized the description of the Messenger’s (peace and blessings be upon him) prayer itself in this small book. Shaykh Al-Albani did not bring any words from his own mind. A reader of "The Description of Prayer" or its summary would ask: where did this statement come from? This is from one aspect.
From another aspect. The general Muslims, and the scholars of today, do not have the desire; if they had the desire, they do not have the time to study Sahih al-Bukhari as it is, with "So-and-so narrated to us, he said, so-and-so narrated to us..." They read more of the chain of narration than the text in many cases. They do not have this time. So we came, following those who preceded us among the Imams, like al-Nawawi who summarized Muslim and the like, and al-Mundhiri. So we summarized Sahih al-Bukhari. We preserved the hadiths of al-Bukhari as they are. Can it be said that there is any deficiency or criticism in this? We did exactly the same in "The Description of Prayer." We removed the cross-references (takhrij) that even many students of knowledge cannot bear, let alone what about the scholars of knowledge? "So-and-so narrated it, and so-and-so, and so-and-so, and so-and-so narrated it, and so-and-so." We removed all these things and then summarized the hadiths that came in the upper section... the long books. So we did not bring anything from our own minds, as was said earlier. Yes.