Discussion of the defects in the hadith (Indeed, Allah loves His believing, poor, dignified servant who is the father of a family), with an explanation of the ruling on Muhammad ibn Sirin hearing from Imran

Abu Ishaq: You mentioned in *Al-Da'if* that hadith number fifty-one, among the defects, is that Muhammad ibn Sirin did not hear from Imran, and you stated this contrary to Ahmad.

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.
Abu Ishaq: And the hearing of Muhammad ibn Sirin is established in *Sahih Muslim* in the hadith , and Ibn Ma'in also established the hearing from Imran in *Al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil*, meaning Ahmad and Ibn Ma'in, and for example his explicit statement...

The Shaykh: And the hadith.
Abu Ishaq: And the hadith.

The Shaykh: And the hadith first, and my speech regarding the defecting of that hadith second, I do not recall it, but it is as if I heard from you just now that I attributed defects to the hadith, among which was this.
Abu Ishaq: As far as I remember.

The Shaykh: No, I am confident in my understanding; my understanding of you is good that there is a defecting there by something other than this. Good, in that case, the distinction should be made; the precise distinction between when a hadith is defecting by a defect like this, and when it is added to other defects; in the first case, it is not permissible to rely on this defecting to weaken the hadith; because the situation then requires a specific investigation into this defect that the critic of the hadith relied upon, to prefer the opinion of those who deny the hearing or those who establish it; please proceed.
Al-Halabi: I will read to you.

The Shaykh: Ah.
Al-Halabi: The hadith . It is weak. It was narrated by Ibn Majah and al-'Uqayli in *Al-Du'afa'* through the route of Hammad ibn Musa, who narrated to us from Musa ibn 'Ubaydah or 'Azizah, I think, who informed me from al-Qasim ibn Mahrān.

The Shaykh: 'Ubaydah.
Al-Halabi: 'Ubaydah informed me from al-Qasim ibn Mahrān from Imran ibn Husayn, traced to the Prophet. And al-'Uqayli said in the biography of al-Qasim: "His hearing from Imran ibn Husayn is not established. Musa ibn 'Ubaydah narrated it from him, and he is one whose narrations are abandoned." Al-Busayri approved this in *Al-Zawa'id* and said: "This chain is weak." I said: And the hadith has two defects that became clear in al-'Uqayli's speech, which are the disconnection and the weakness of Ibn 'Ubaydah. And it has a third defect, which is the obscurity of this Ibn Mahrān. Al-Hafiz said in *Al-Taqrib*: "Unknown..."

The Shaykh: We have finished the intended point.
Al-Halabi: No, my teacher, there is still speech that has not been mentioned.

The Shaykh: All right, go ahead.
Al-Halabi: Here, I have found another route for the hadith, but it does not increase in strength by it, because it is from the narration of Muhammad ibn al-Fadl from Zayd... from Muhammad ibn Sirin from Imran ibn Husayn with it, without the phrase "father of a family." It was narrated by Ibn 'Adi and Abu Nu'aym, and it was said: "It is a strange hadith from Muhammad ibn Sirin; we did not write it except from the hadith of Zayd and Muhammad ibn al-Fadl ibn..." I said: And in the chain there are also three defects. The first is the disconnection between Imran and Ibn Sirin, for he did not hear from him, as al-Daraqutni said, contrary to what 'Abd Allah ibn Ahmad narrated from his father; the second is Zayd al-'A'ma, who is Ibn al-Hawari.

The Shaykh: No, contrary.
Al-Halabi: Contrary.

The Shaykh: Contrary, yes.
Al-Halabi: Contrary to what 'Abd Allah ibn Ahmad narrated from his father; the second is Zayd al-'A'ma, who is Ibn al-Hawari, and he is weak; and the third is Muhammad ibn al-Fadl ibn al-'Atiyyah, and he is a liar, as al-Fallas and others said.

The Shaykh: No, what concerns me is the aspect I pointed to in my previous speech. It is necessary to distinguish between defecting a hadith by the defect of disconnection and lack of hearing only, and adding this defect to other defects; in the first case, if the disconnection is disputed among the scholars, it is not permissible to defect this hadith by such a disconnection unless the side establishing the disconnection and denying the connection is preferred by the one defecting the hadith. In such a case, it is not sufficient to say as we said here; but when the hadith has other defects that are clearer and stronger than the first, this brings us back to the case I quoted from some of them previously, that it is better to defect the hadith by the higher defect. We said that this is not consistent and not permissible to state absolutely, and this is its example now; here there are three defects. The highest defect is the disputed disconnection; then the other defect, if the connection were established, the hadith would not be established. If the connection were established, the hadith would not be established. Therefore, the researcher in such a case does not rush or hasten to verify whether al-Daraqutni's opinion is the stronger and correct one, or Ahmad's opinion which contradicted him. And therefore, it is not said: "You say, for example, that Ibn Sirin did not hear from Imran ibn Husayn, and how is this when it is in *Sahih Muslim* thus and thus?" It is not said, because I was not citing or relying on this disconnection to weaken this hadith; if the matter were so, what I mentioned earlier would be a valid objection to me. And you might say now: "What is your opinion?" I tell you I have no opinion, because if I had an opinion, I would have stated it here when I mentioned the two opinions; I would say: "And al-Daraqutni's opinion is the stronger." In addition to this, and this is clear as an explanation that I do not bind myself to saying that I should be asked: "How did you defect the hadith by disconnection, when the hearing of Ibn Sirin is established in *Sahih Muslim*?" Not because my reliance was not on this defect, but because I mentioned it and mentioned the disagreement in it; but I will say a word: Do you see the hearing of Ibn Sirin attributed to *Sahih Muslim*, the hearing of Ibn Sirin from Imran ibn Husayn attributed to *Sahih Muslim*, do you see this as established? Here a question arises, because it is not sufficient for the existence of the hadith, the hadith as a whole, and it is not permissible to take the establishment of the hearing of someone in *Sahih* or in the two *Sahih*s as a proof to prefer this establishment over the opinion of the deniers; because it is possible that the narration that came in the two *Sahih*s is from the narrations that mention support and testimony, and not argumentation; there may be in *Sahih* narrations from Ibn Sirin from Imran that come as a narration under "from Ibn Sirin, Imran informed me," and this is, for example, and this is similar to what is observed in *Sahih Muslim* from the narration of Matr al-Warraq, for example. Matr al-Warraq has weakness in his memory, but Muslim narrates from him either as a companion or as a testimony; in that case, it is not correct to say: "The hearing of Ibn Sirin from Imran is established in *Sahih Muslim*." It requires a specific study. And when one of us is in the process of weakening such a hadith that is certainly weak, and this disagreement regarding the hearing or its absence becomes clear to him, it is not obligatory upon him to go now to *Sahih Muslim* or other than *Sahih Muslim* and conduct a specific verification to clarify whether his hearing is correct or not; because this is only in the first case, the case where there is no defect in the hadith except this disputed defect; this is my answer to that question.
Abu Ishaq: In *Sahih Muslim*, he said: "Yahya ibn Khalaf al-Bahili informed me." This Yahya ibn Khalaf, I think, was not authenticated except by Ibn Hibban.
Al-Halabi : Laughs.
Abu Ishaq: But here another question arises, so hereThe Shaykh : al-Mu'allimi, when he mentioned the authentication of Ibn Hibban in five grades, and you in the commentary supported it and said this is a good classification...

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.
al-Huwaini: He said: "The authentication of Ibn Hibban for the class of his sheikhs or those close to them is the same as the authentication of others, or perhaps it is stronger than the authentication of some of them; so here, the authentication of Ibn Hibban is considered reliable as the authentication of an Imam, so this..."

The Shaykh: This is sound speech; but does this mean it is like the authentication of Ibn Ma'in and Ahmad and others? No, this authentication, with respect to the known authentication of Ibn Hibban in his authentication of the unknown, is considered a significant authentication because he does not authenticate an unknown who is his sheikh; but this does not mean that his authentication is equivalent to the authentication of the other Imams; because it is not hidden from you that authentication and authenticators have grades; but with that, the research remains, which I called what? Behind? Yahya ibn Khalaf, yes, he narrates from whom, for example.
al-Huwaini: He narrates it from Ma'tamir.

The Shaykh: Good, did he single out the narration from him?
al-Huwaini: I do not remember.

The Shaykh: Ah, this is what requires research, tracing this narration...
al-Huwaini: In *Sahih Muslim*, the 'Abd al-Baqi edition.

The Shaykh: This is not sufficient for us, it is possible that Muslim did not narrate except this narration.
al-Huwaini: He narrated many others, but...

The Shaykh: If he narrated others, the proof falls in that case. Bring *Sahih Muslim*, bring what you have?
Al-Halabi: Man, at least the six books, as long asThe Shaykh : Always in need of such.
al-Huwaini: Yes.

The questioner : If Allah wills.

The Shaykh: Did you see the group of people?
Abu Layla: No, not yet.

The Shaykh : What is left? Our Shaykh, there are still questions from the brothers, questions from the brothers.
Al-Halabi : And then the return to him.
— He laughsThe Shaykh : —

The Shaykh : Okay, here on the right, do you have anything?

The questioner : There is one question.

The Shaykh : Please, this is good news for your brothers that you say there is only one question; for me, it is not good news.
— He laughsThe Shaykh : And the people of the gathering.

The Shaykh : Yes, did I make myself clear? How?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : What do you mean? Bring it so we can see.

The questioner : I mean that for them, it means there is not a long time until I take it.

The Shaykh : And for you?

The questioner : For me, it means I do not have many questions.

The Shaykh : Okay, why is it not good news for me? It is not good news because the more questions you have, the more reward I get; so for me, it is not good news; but for the others, it is good news.
— He laughsThe Shaykh : (may Allah have mercy on him) and the students.

The Shaykh : Yes, please go ahead.