And if he narrates from his group, is his narration accepted? The discussion concerns the narration of an innovator.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : My teacher, does al-Bukhari's narration from 'Imran ibn Hattan mean that he is not a Khariji?
The Shaykh : No, it does not mean that... And that is why I told you that these people are not declared disbelievers because they narrated from them; he is a well-known Khariji.
The questioner : So, regarding 'Imran's narration from his group, is the hadith rejected or does it remain valid?
The Shaykh : If his group are trustworthy like him...
The questioner : Regarding the virtue of his group, meaning the Khawarij, meaning regarding the sect, this hadith is about his sect; this weakens the hadith.
The Shaykh : Meaning, you say he narrates from another Khariji a hadith from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him).
The student : A hadith that supports his sect.
The Shaykh : It is not that he is merely reporting a hadith from the Messenger or a hadith from someone else.
The questioner : No, from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him).
The Shaykh : So, in this hadith there is support for his sect.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And this hadith is not accepted, meaning the sect is not supported by it. I think you are now describing imaginary scenarios. It is well-known in the terminology that there are statements by scholars regarding whether the narration of an innovator is accepted or not. There are statements. One of them is: if what he narrated does not contain support for his sect, and he is naturally trustworthy, then his narration is accepted. But if his narration contains support for his sect, then his narration is not accepted at that time if it contains support for his sect. This is the second statement, and it is the most famous in the terminology. But there is a third statement: as long as this narrator's integrity is established, and naturally, when we establish the integrity of a narrator, the first thing we establish is that he is a Muslim, then we establish his precision and trustworthiness in narration, and that he does not lie about the Messenger of Allah, at that point the third statement comes and says his narration is valid because his religion and integrity prevent him from lying about the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) with something he did not hear, but rather saying it without basis. And this is what I testify to before Allah. Therefore, making up hypotheticals is not necessary for us. Give us a narration narrated by 'Imran ibn Hattan with a valid chain to him, and then with a valid chain from him to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and tell us that this narration destroys Islam and supports the Khawarij. This does not exist.
The Shaykh : No, it does not mean that... And that is why I told you that these people are not declared disbelievers because they narrated from them; he is a well-known Khariji.
The questioner : So, regarding 'Imran's narration from his group, is the hadith rejected or does it remain valid?
The Shaykh : If his group are trustworthy like him...
The questioner : Regarding the virtue of his group, meaning the Khawarij, meaning regarding the sect, this hadith is about his sect; this weakens the hadith.
The Shaykh : Meaning, you say he narrates from another Khariji a hadith from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him).
The student : A hadith that supports his sect.
The Shaykh : It is not that he is merely reporting a hadith from the Messenger or a hadith from someone else.
The questioner : No, from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him).
The Shaykh : So, in this hadith there is support for his sect.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : And this hadith is not accepted, meaning the sect is not supported by it. I think you are now describing imaginary scenarios. It is well-known in the terminology that there are statements by scholars regarding whether the narration of an innovator is accepted or not. There are statements. One of them is: if what he narrated does not contain support for his sect, and he is naturally trustworthy, then his narration is accepted. But if his narration contains support for his sect, then his narration is not accepted at that time if it contains support for his sect. This is the second statement, and it is the most famous in the terminology. But there is a third statement: as long as this narrator's integrity is established, and naturally, when we establish the integrity of a narrator, the first thing we establish is that he is a Muslim, then we establish his precision and trustworthiness in narration, and that he does not lie about the Messenger of Allah, at that point the third statement comes and says his narration is valid because his religion and integrity prevent him from lying about the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) with something he did not hear, but rather saying it without basis. And this is what I testify to before Allah. Therefore, making up hypotheticals is not necessary for us. Give us a narration narrated by 'Imran ibn Hattan with a valid chain to him, and then with a valid chain from him to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and tell us that this narration destroys Islam and supports the Khawarij. This does not exist.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.