A discussion on the importance of the science of hadith, mentioning the reason for the scarcity of scholars of hadith in this age.

The questioner : ... So, is the collection of hadith something from which benefit is expected, or is it something from which no benefit is expected?

The Shaykh : Absolutely. Do you want us to get into a long discussion as well? Right now, all the brothers present know that we live in an age of specialization in the sciences. No one, no matter how deeply immersed in ignorance and lack of culture, is unaware that the science of medicine has many branches. Based on this science, we do not see anyone whose eye hurts going to a surgeon, or whose throat hurts going to an ear specialist, and so on. Why? Because knowledge is specialized. Likewise, the science of the Shari'ah—hadith, fiqh, tafsir, language, and so on. Well, all these people know that there are scholars of hadith, and there are scholars of fiqh. The heads of the four schools of jurisprudence, the four imams, and the heads of the imams of hadith, the six imams—who is ignorant of these facts? No one.
Well, but the unfortunate reality today—brothers—is that when one of you... and some of you may take me to task for saying "one of you," yes, what makes you think I know you? I will go back and say to him: it is the secret of the profession. One of you goes to such-and-such a Hanafi shaykh to find out if a hadith is authentic or weak. This is not his specialty in the science of hadith. How are you asking him about whether this hadith is authentic or weak? But I will excuse you again. Why? Because you do not have one of the people of hadith to whom you can turn, considering him a specialist. Likewise, say that you do not have imams of tafsir, so when you want to ask about a verse to understand its meaning, you turn to the same shaykh, and so on.
So, our problem is that the thing which people in the end of time attributed to others, and which people in the beginning of time attributed to us—imams of fiqh and hadith, and so on—we have become today neither of these nor of those. That is, we have become neither of these contemporaries who knew specialization and its value, nor of the scholars of the Salaf who knew specialization, among whom were the hadith scholar, the mufassir, and the faqih. We have become lost, neither of these nor of those. Therefore, we live in complete and very, very severe ignorance. Here the professor is asking: where are the six imams of hadith who are studying the six books? It is even said: "Al-Bukhari of his time?!" There is a Shafi'i of his time, and there is a Hanafi of his time, so where is Al-Bukhari of his time? There is none. What is the reason? There is none. Because if there were many, perhaps one of them would surpass the others, and it would be said, "By Allah, so-and-so is Al-Bukhari of his time, Muslim of his time, Abu Dawud of his time, Al-Tirmidhi of his time," and so on.
Why is this thing not present, even though a Hanafi of his time exists? Because the science of hadith has become a thing of the past! The science of hadith has reached the point where some of the fuqaha say—and I heard this with these two ears of mine, and by Allah, he asked me, I heard some of the fuqaha say today: "The science of hadith is the craft of the bankrupts!" This is the value of the science of hadith. This is a discovery of the reality of the Muslims in this bad phrase: "The science of hadith is the craft of the bankrupts." So, when the scholars of hadith specialized in hadith, they brought us hadiths, brothers—and here lies the lesson—they brought us hadiths that were missed by some of the four imams. They brought us hadiths that were missed by some of the four imams. Perhaps this statement will be rejected by at least some of you, who do not have a stomach to digest it. Why? Because for the first time, unfortunately, it is striking his ear. I say this again.
But this fact is known to everyone who has worked in the science of hadith: that among the four imams, the one most knowledgeable in hadith is Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Is that not so, our brothers, those who have some study? Ahmad is the most knowledgeable of the four imams in hadith. Why? Because he was the last of them. And what clarifies this for you is that Ahmad was a student of Imam Al-Shafi'i, and Al-Shafi'i was a student of Imam Malik. So, Ahmad combined the knowledge of Al-Shafi'i and the knowledge of Malik in hadith, at least. Even though Imam Ahmad was also a faqih among the great fuqaha of the Ummah. So, Al-Bukhari was a student of Imam Ahmad; so he combined the knowledge of the three imams: Malik, Al-Shafi'i, and Ahmad. Muslim was a student of Imam Al-Bukhari. Oh, what a thing! This is the knowledge that puts a person on the right path regarding his religion. He then knows that if he turns to the imams of hadith, he will find material that he does not find in the very books of the fiqh imams themselves. And what we know is that the scholars of each of the four schools of jurisprudence are never free from the need for the books of the imams of hadith, especially the six books. Therefore, now when you look at the takhrij of the fiqh books—for example, the book *Al-Hidayah*, and the book *Nasb al-Raayah li Ahadith al-Hidayah* by Al-Hafiz Al-Zayla'i the Hanafi—all the hadiths that he brought in *Al-Hidayah* without any attribution or takhrij at all, Al-Hafiz Al-Zayla'i says: "This hadith was narrated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim, and so on. This was narrated by Abu Dawud. This was narrated by Ahmad. This is this, this is strange and has no basis." The same Al-Hafiz Al-Zayla'i the Hanafi says about the hadiths of *Al-Hidayah*: "This was narrated by so-and-so from the six imams, but this has no basis."
You come to the book of Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani the Shafi'i, who did the takhrij of Al-Rafi'i's great book, and named his book *Takhrij al-Habir fi Takhrij Ahadith al-Rafi'i al-Kabir*. Again, the man does not dispense with the books of the six imams. So, the principles of the fiqh issues present in the four schools of jurisprudence must be referred back to the mother books, the six books. So, fiqh is based on hadith, and this hadith is based on these books that were compiled by the imams of specialization. So, what is the status of the imams of specialization today among the masses of Muslims, I mean their scholars? It is as if nothing was mentioned. And this is contrary to the saying of Allah (Mighty and Majestic): .
Yes, my sir, is this enough? Or do you still have more?

Another questioner : It is enough, professor. May Allah reward you with good.