Some people spread the claim that you weaken and authenticate hadiths without standards, and the evidence for this is that you sometimes are strict in authenticating and sometimes strict in weakening.

The questioner : Some people spread the claim that you weaken and authenticate hadiths without standards, and the evidence for this is that you sometimes are strict in authenticating and sometimes strict in weakening, and sometimes you authenticate in *Sahih* and weaken in *Sahih al-Jami'*?

The Shaykh : Yes

The questioner : And you say that you have returned from such and such. What is your statement?

The Shaykh : We say that if someone is among the people of knowledge, we are ready to discuss with him what he claims. But if he is not among the people of knowledge, his words have no weight. This is from one aspect. From another aspect, I acknowledge and say, as I said earlier, if it is permissible for me to boast, I do boast, because when I realize an error, I return from it and do not persist in it as others do. It is very regrettable that a virtue today becomes a vice or an ugliness, or perhaps a defect, in some people. What is wrong with a person if he realizes his error in a book and retracts it, especially in a science like this, the tracing of hadiths and their authentication and weakening, from which millions of Muslim scholars have turned away throughout these long centuries? Why? Because of its difficulty. And I give you a very simple example, and although it relates to terminology, the example is clear. Hadiths are divided, according to the scholars of hadith, and I say that *Sahih* is divided into *Sahih bi-dhatihi* (authentic in itself) and *Sahih li-ghayrihi* (authentic due to other evidence). Likewise, the *Hasan* hadith is divided, according to the people of knowledge, into *Hasan bi-dhatihi* (good in itself) and *Hasan li-ghayrihi* (good due to other evidence). And here the question is: what does this mean, a *Hasan bi-dhatihi* hadith and a *Hasan li-ghayrihi* hadith? It means that this hadith does not have a valid chain, but it has a valid chain. This is the definition of what? The *Hasan bi-dhatihi* hadith. And the *Hasan bi-dhatihi* hadith is one in which all the conditions of the *Sahih* hadith are present, but one of its narrators has less precision and memorization than the level of memorization and precision of the narrator of the *Sahih* hadith. Therefore, they called his hadith *Hasan bi-dhatihi*. Then the example comes at the end. What is the *Hasan li-ghayrihi* hadith? It means the hadith that does not have a valid chain. Then Shaykh Al-Albani, along with others who are placed in the cage of accusation, comes to a hadith, looks at its chain, weakens it, and time passes and time passes, and he says that this is a weak hadith. And then, while he is immersed in his entire life in studying manuscripts, let alone printed books, he sees another path for this hadith. And the least that this other path benefits is that the hadith, which is weak, is raised from weakness to the rank of *Hasan li-ghayrihi*. So I say in another book that this hadith is *Hasan*. Yes, when I previously said that it was weak, and then I finally said in another book that it is *Hasan*? Because I realized something I did not know. And although a person, by nature, as Allah the Exalted described him, , but the most truthful application of such a text is for the one who works in the science of hadith, due to the multitude of paths, by the thousands. Therefore, it is obligatory for a person to search to the extent of his ability. And I did so. Perhaps I do not say this in praise, but in explanation of the reality. I searched and investigated the paths of hadiths in a way that may not exist in the present age. And many people of fairness and knowledge acknowledge this reality. But did I encompass everything with knowledge? Far from it, far from it. Much is missed by me and will be missed by me. This is a simple example. So the one who is ignorant of this reality: yes, why did Al-Albani weaken the hadith in such and such a book and then authenticate it in such and such a book? This is an example of a hadith that I weakened in one book and strengthened in another book. And the reverse is also true. It happens that perhaps I authenticate a hadith in a book, and years pass, and then I discover a hidden defect in that chain which I had authenticated. So I critique myself, or perhaps someone else critiques me, and I benefit from it, and I announce clearly that this hadith has a weak chain. If there is room for explanation, I do so and explain and elaborate, and the place for that is in the two famous books, *Silsilat al-Ahadith al-Sahihah* and *Silsilat al-Ahadith al-Da'ifah*. And if there is no room, I limit myself to stating the rank, as I did in *Sahih al-Jami'* and *Da'if al-Jami'*.
These matters are hardly noticed by the people of knowledge, let alone the students of knowledge, let alone those below them. Therefore, I advise our brothers, the students of knowledge, all of them, whatever their orientations and partisanship may be, may Allah protect us and them, to be patient in criticism and to question themselves. As criticism came to me from some brothers in some nights we spent awake abroad, where for example he criticizes me regarding a hadith, that it is the hadith of *Tatayyur* (taking an omen as a bad sign), meaning from whom does *Tatayyur* befall him So he wrote to me, meaning about a page, saying that you made a mistake when you mentioned , this is not from the hadith, but rather this is inserted, according to what he transmitted only. I said, by Allah, this is a sin. No one is free from making a mistake. When I returned to the hadith that I intended in the *Silsilah*, and I found that I had indicated the words that he is confronting me with, saying that this phrase is inserted, how did you authenticate it? And I found the words there in *Sahihah*, indicating the insertion and quoting the words of some of the Imams from whom he quoted that this addition is inserted. But I adopt the opinion of other scholars that this is not inserted, because it comes in the core of the text. This example is one of the examples. So some of our brothers persist in denial, as if the intention is merely denial and not scientific research. In summary, I may authenticate a hadith and then a defect becomes apparent to me later, and defects are many in this science. For example, there may be a hidden *Mursal* (a report missing the Companion link), and hidden *Mursal* is among the defects for which some people of knowledge say that knowing the defects of hadith in terms of *Mursal* is the most precise type of the science of hadith. Who knows this field? And its importance? And that it may be hidden from the greatest of scholars? Only the one who has practiced the matter himself knows that. In summary, this question that I heard now is not a new matter. We receive many messages and discussions, and the answer in brief is that the one who transmits this criticism, I do not think he is among the people of knowledge. And if I have a good opinion of him, he is one of our young, enthusiastic Muslims, and then he proceeds without awareness to criticism. This is if he is not among those who are afflicted with malice and hatred, with whom we are afflicted in some lands. And we ask Allah the Exalted to rectify our souls and purify our hearts from resentment, hatred, and envy, and to unite us upon the Book of Allah and the guidance of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).

The questioner : This is another question, the last question.