Explaining that a report from a single narrator conveys knowledge and certainty in many cases, and explaining its examples

The Shaykh : It should be known that this is not accepted in an absolute sense, but there is a detailed explanation mentioned in its proper place. What concerns us to mention now is that a report from a single narrator (ahad) conveys knowledge and certainty in many cases. Among these are the hadiths that the Ummah accepted, including what al-Bukhari and Muslim narrated in their "Sahih" collections, which are not subject to criticism; for it is certain that they are authentic, and theoretical, certain knowledge is attained through them, as Imam Ibn al-Salah affirmed in his book "Al-Ilm al-Hadith," and al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir supported this in his "Mukhtasar," and before him, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, and al-Allamah Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah followed him in "Mukhtasar al-Sawa'iq," and he gave several examples, including the hadith of 'Umar: , and the hadith: , and the hadith of Ibn 'Umar: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) made zakat al-fitr obligatory in Ramadan upon the young and the old, the male and the female," and the like of that. Ibn al-Qayyim said: "Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said: This conveys certain knowledge to the majority of the Ummah of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), from the first to the last. As for the Salaf, there was no disagreement among them regarding this. As for the Khalaf, this is the position of the great jurists from the followers of the four Imams, and the issue is transmitted in the books of the Hanafis, Malikis, Shafi'is, and Hanbalis; such as al-Sarakhsi and Abu Bakr al-Razi from the Hanafis, and Shaykh Abu Hamid, Abu al-Tabi', and Shaykh Abu Ishaq from the Shafi'is, and Ibn Khawazmandad and others from the Malikis, and such as Qadi Abu Ya'la, Ibn Musa, and Abu al-Khattab and others from the Hanbalis, and such as Abu Ishaq al-Isfara'ini, Ibn Furak, and Abu Ishaq al-Nazzam from the theologians.
Ibn al-Salah mentioned it, verified it, and preferred it, but he did not know the number of those who held this view to be strengthened by them; rather, he stated it based on the correct evidence. Those who objected to him among the scholars who have knowledge and religion, but do not have complete expertise in this field, thought that what Abu 'Amr Ibn al-Salah said was unique to him against the majority. Their excuse is that they refer in these issues to what they find of the words of Ibn al-Hajib, and if they rise a level, they go to al-Sayf al-Amidi and al-Khatib, and if their chain rises further, they go to al-Ghazali, al-Juwayni, and al-Baqillani."
He said: "And all the people of hadith are in agreement with what Shaykh Abu 'Amr mentioned, and the evidence for the majority's position is that the Ummah's acceptance of a report with belief and action is a consensus (ijma') from them, and the Ummah does not agree on misguidance, just as if they agreed on the implication of a general or absolute term, or a real name, or the implication of an analogy; for they do not agree on error, even if one of them, if examined individually, might be prone to error, for infallibility is established by the relative consensus, just as it is possible for one of the reporters of a mass-transmitted report (tawatur) to err or lie individually, but it is not possible for the group. And the Ummah is infallible from error in their narration and their opinion."
He said: "And ahad reports in this field may be conjectures with their conditions; if they become strong, they become knowledge, and if they become weak, they become illusions and defective fantasies."
He said: "And know that the majority of the hadiths of al-Bukhari and Muslim are from this field, as mentioned by Shaykh Abu 'Amr, and before him by scholars like al-Hafiz Abu Tahir al-Silafi and others; for what the people of hadith and their scholars accepted with approval and belief is what attains knowledge and conveys certainty, and there is no consideration for those other than them among the theologians and jurists, for the consideration in consensus on every matter of religious affairs is with the people of knowledge of it, not others, just as no consideration was given in consensus on legal rulings except to the scholars of them, not the theologians, grammarians, or doctors. Likewise, no consideration is given in consensus on the truth or falsehood of a hadith except to the people of knowledge of hadith, its paths, and its defects, who are the scholars of the people of hadith who know the conditions of their Prophet, who are precise in his words and actions, and who care for them more than the followers (muqallids) care for the words of those they follow.
Just as knowledge by mass transmission (tawatur) is divided into general and specific, and what is mass-transmitted among the specialists is not known to others, let alone mass-transmitted among them; so the people of hadith, due to their intense care for the Sunnah of their Prophet and their precision in his words, actions, and conditions, know from that a knowledge in which they have no doubt, of which others have no awareness at all."
Ibn al-Qayyim said: "The denial that a report from a single narrator conveys knowledge is only approached through defective analogy, for he analogized the reporter about the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) with a general legislation for the Ummah or an attribute of the Lord (Glorified and Exalted is He) to the testimony of a witness on a specific case, and how far is the distance between them! For if the reporter about the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) were to lie intentionally or by mistake, and nothing indicating his lie appeared, it would necessitate the misguidance of creation; for the discussion is about the report that the Ummah accepted and acted upon, and by which they established the attributes and actions of the Lord; for what is obligatory to accept by the Shari'ah from reports is not false in reality, especially if the entire Ummah accepted it. And likewise, it must be said about every proof that is obligatory to follow by the Shari'ah that it is not but truth, so its indication is established in reality.
This is regarding what is reported about the legislation of the Lord (Glorified and Exalted is He) and His names and attributes, unlike the specific testimony on a specific witness; for this may not have its implication established in reality.
The secret of the issue is that it is not permissible for the report by which Allah obligated the Ummah and by which He made Himself known to them through the tongue of His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) in establishing His names and attributes to be a lie and false in reality; for it is among the proofs of Allah upon His servants, and the proofs of Allah are not lies or false, but are only truth in reality. And it is not permissible for the proofs of truth and falsehood to be equal, and it is not permissible for lying about Allah, His Shari'ah, and His religion to be confused with the revelation He sent down to His Messenger and by which He obligated His creation, such that this is not distinguished from that; for the difference between truth and falsehood, and truthfulness and lying, and the revelation of Satan and the revelation of the angel from Allah is more apparent than one being confused with the other. Has not Allah placed a light upon the truth like the light of the sun that appears to the illuminated insights, and clothed falsehood in darkness like the darkness of the night? And it is not strange that falsehood is confused with the day for one blind in sight, just as truth is confused with falsehood for one blind in insight.
Mu'adh ibn Jabal said: "Accept the truth from whoever says it; for upon the truth is a light." But when the hearts became dark and the insights became blind by turning away from what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) brought, and the darkness increased by their sufficiency with the opinions of men, truth became confused with falsehood for them. They permitted that his authentic hadiths, which were narrated by the most just and truthful of the Ummah, could be lies, and they permitted that the false, fabricated, and differing hadiths that agree with their desires could be truths, and they hid behind them."
He said: "And the theologians are people of oppression and ignorance who analogize the report of al-Siddiq, al-Farouq, and Abu ibn Ka'b with the reports of single individuals, despite the clear difference between the two reporters. Who is more oppressive than one who equates the report of a single Companion with the report of a single individual in not conveying knowledge? This is like one who equates them in knowledge, religion, and virtue. If they say: His reports and authentic hadiths do not convey knowledge; they are reporting about themselves that they did not benefit from them with knowledge, so they are truthful in what they report about themselves, but lying in their report that they do not convey knowledge to the people of hadith and the Sunnah."
He said: "Since the people of the Sunnah have not obtained from the methods by which knowledge is acquired what the others have obtained, their claim that 'we did not acquire knowledge through them' does not necessitate a general negation in that regard. This is akin to arguing that one who finds a thing and knows it is not a finder of it nor a knower of it. It is like a person who feels pain, pleasure, love, or hatred in himself, and someone stands up to argue that he is not in pain, not suffering, not loving, and not hating, and multiplies the doubts for him, the ultimate point of which is, 'I did not find what you found, and if it were true, you and I would have shared in it.' This is the very essence of falsehood. And how well it was said:
"I say to the one who blames me while offering his criticism: Taste this passion, and if you can, then blame."
... It is said to him: Direct your attention to what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) brought, and strive for it, follow it and gather it, and adhere to knowing the conditions of its transmitters and their biographies, and turn away from what is other than them, and make it the goal of your seeking and the end of your intention. Rather, strive for it with the same zeal that followers of the schools of jurisprudence have for knowing the schools of their imams, to the point that they have acquired necessary knowledge that these are the schools of their imams, to the point that they have acquired necessary knowledge that these are their schools and their sayings, and if someone were to deny that to them, they would mock him. And at that time, you will know whether the reports of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) yield knowledge or do not yield it? As for your turning away from them and from seeking them, they do not yield you knowledge. And if you said: 'They do not yield you even a suspicion,' you would be reporting your own share and portion from them." End of quote.