Discussion on the grade of the hadiths of al-Harith al-A'war.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Well, we benefit from returning to the research on what 'Abd al-'Aziz wrote about al-Harith. What is it that is good to mention from what he cites as evidence?
The questioner : He says that the refutation of al-Harith by al-Sha'bi and others is incorrect, and that they refuted him because of religious innovation. It is agreed upon by the majority of scholars that if a man is truthful and trustworthy, religious innovation does not affect him, and so on. So he says thatThe Shaykh : Nasir al-Din al-Albani says that al-Harith is one whose narrations are abandoned or a liar, meaning that in some of his narrations he is abandoned or a liar, and he rules his hadith to be fabricated. Of course, this is a summary in brief... But now, his statement is rhetorical, and if he were to look, if he were to...
The student : My teacher, there is something here, meaning it has settled in my heart, which is that I see you sometimes ruling on the hadith of al-Harith as weak.
The Shaykh : Correct.
The student : And sometimes, as the brother said...
The Shaykh : My brother, there is no contradiction in that... And perhaps you remember that I say in some hadiths, when I rule a hadith to be severely weak or fabricated, I say that this does not contradict the fact that al-Hafiz so-and-so, I think for example al-'Iraqi, said it was weak, because this does not contradict severe weakness, nor does it contradict fabrication. You know this from your recollection of the categories of hadiths: authentic, good, and weak. Weakness is divided into many categories, and therefore the general term "weak" does not contradict severe weakness, nor does it contradict fabrication. Then, the research into... I do not want to say that his wording contradicts itself, but rather that it varies, and this has reasons, some of which come from human weakness, and some from looking at the text of the hadith as well. So, when there is something in the hadith of anomaly or falsehood, here the researcher dares to declare it fabricated, even if this fabrication is not from the perspective of its chain of narration, but from the perspective of its text. This is also a style we know from our scholars (may Allah have mercy on them), when one of them says a hadith is invalid, you go back to the chain and you do not see a liar or a fabricator in it, so what led him to the ruling of invalidity? It is the text. This is a precise observation. And therefore, I say to many of the young students today who write to me and call me on the phone, my brothers, the science of hadith is not only this science written in the books of terminology. There is something a person knows by practicing this science and applying the rules to the science of hadith.
The student : The rules are not consistent in these precise matters.
The Shaykh : ... A man called me asking me about a hadith, Allah knows best that it is the hadith of 'azl (coitus interruptus), and this has been raised by some people in this recent period. They say, "You say that the authentication by Ibn Hibban is not considered, so how did you consider it in this hadith?" We told them at length, and although our answer was that, my brothers, the science of hadith is not a static science, and I mentioned thisThe questioner : with a word that came in some of the books of terminology. I mention from it a summary from a hadith of al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir, in which one of them asked 'Ali ibn al-Madini: How do you distinguish the authentic hadith from the weak one? He said to him: "Have you seen, what do they call the money changer, how he distinguishes the sound, pure dinar from the counterfeit?" This is something... in the views of these scholars, especially. The issue is not a purely material view, as is the view of such a money changer. So, he saw in many, many cases. And therefore, al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi says in his treat al-Muqaddimah that one of the most precise sciences of hadith is the good hadith, because sometimes you look at it and you lean toward grading it as good, and sometimes you lean toward grading it as weak.
The questioner : Based on the narrator.
The Shaykh : The narrator, yes... The hadith is good or it is rejected.
The questioner : A hadith of a truthful narrator who makes a mistake, for example, our teacher.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : Sometimes you rule on it like this, and sometimes like that.
The Shaykh : It is this, so many people do not notice this nuance or this lack of rigidity, so they say to me that these are matters like arithmetic operations, they do not accept what?
The student : ...
The Shaykh : Never. So, in answer to your question, I say that I call some of the hadiths of al-Harith weak, and I do not accept my other ruling, because either it is what I was recalling at that time, and I do not remember exactly what was said about it, or I noticed that this hadith might be, meaning it is narrated from a source, in the sense that its meaning is acceptable and conforms to the rules of the Shari'ah... and so on.
The questioner : He says that the refutation of al-Harith by al-Sha'bi and others is incorrect, and that they refuted him because of religious innovation. It is agreed upon by the majority of scholars that if a man is truthful and trustworthy, religious innovation does not affect him, and so on. So he says thatThe Shaykh : Nasir al-Din al-Albani says that al-Harith is one whose narrations are abandoned or a liar, meaning that in some of his narrations he is abandoned or a liar, and he rules his hadith to be fabricated. Of course, this is a summary in brief... But now, his statement is rhetorical, and if he were to look, if he were to...
The student : My teacher, there is something here, meaning it has settled in my heart, which is that I see you sometimes ruling on the hadith of al-Harith as weak.
The Shaykh : Correct.
The student : And sometimes, as the brother said...
The Shaykh : My brother, there is no contradiction in that... And perhaps you remember that I say in some hadiths, when I rule a hadith to be severely weak or fabricated, I say that this does not contradict the fact that al-Hafiz so-and-so, I think for example al-'Iraqi, said it was weak, because this does not contradict severe weakness, nor does it contradict fabrication. You know this from your recollection of the categories of hadiths: authentic, good, and weak. Weakness is divided into many categories, and therefore the general term "weak" does not contradict severe weakness, nor does it contradict fabrication. Then, the research into... I do not want to say that his wording contradicts itself, but rather that it varies, and this has reasons, some of which come from human weakness, and some from looking at the text of the hadith as well. So, when there is something in the hadith of anomaly or falsehood, here the researcher dares to declare it fabricated, even if this fabrication is not from the perspective of its chain of narration, but from the perspective of its text. This is also a style we know from our scholars (may Allah have mercy on them), when one of them says a hadith is invalid, you go back to the chain and you do not see a liar or a fabricator in it, so what led him to the ruling of invalidity? It is the text. This is a precise observation. And therefore, I say to many of the young students today who write to me and call me on the phone, my brothers, the science of hadith is not only this science written in the books of terminology. There is something a person knows by practicing this science and applying the rules to the science of hadith.
The student : The rules are not consistent in these precise matters.
The Shaykh : ... A man called me asking me about a hadith, Allah knows best that it is the hadith of 'azl (coitus interruptus), and this has been raised by some people in this recent period. They say, "You say that the authentication by Ibn Hibban is not considered, so how did you consider it in this hadith?" We told them at length, and although our answer was that, my brothers, the science of hadith is not a static science, and I mentioned thisThe questioner : with a word that came in some of the books of terminology. I mention from it a summary from a hadith of al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir, in which one of them asked 'Ali ibn al-Madini: How do you distinguish the authentic hadith from the weak one? He said to him: "Have you seen, what do they call the money changer, how he distinguishes the sound, pure dinar from the counterfeit?" This is something... in the views of these scholars, especially. The issue is not a purely material view, as is the view of such a money changer. So, he saw in many, many cases. And therefore, al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi says in his treat al-Muqaddimah that one of the most precise sciences of hadith is the good hadith, because sometimes you look at it and you lean toward grading it as good, and sometimes you lean toward grading it as weak.
The questioner : Based on the narrator.
The Shaykh : The narrator, yes... The hadith is good or it is rejected.
The questioner : A hadith of a truthful narrator who makes a mistake, for example, our teacher.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : Sometimes you rule on it like this, and sometimes like that.
The Shaykh : It is this, so many people do not notice this nuance or this lack of rigidity, so they say to me that these are matters like arithmetic operations, they do not accept what?
The student : ...
The Shaykh : Never. So, in answer to your question, I say that I call some of the hadiths of al-Harith weak, and I do not accept my other ruling, because either it is what I was recalling at that time, and I do not remember exactly what was said about it, or I noticed that this hadith might be, meaning it is narrated from a source, in the sense that its meaning is acceptable and conforms to the rules of the Shari'ah... and so on.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.