Can a hadith about which the Hafiz said "sidduq, he errs" be graded as hasan?

The questioner : From the perspective of the questions, all of them, if Allah wills, are focused on the science of hadith, takhrij, and research, and if Allah wills, we will benefit, and all the brothers, and I ask them to forgive me if I take up some of their time. The Hafiz said in al-Taqrib, "sidduq, he errs," which came within his classification of the ranks of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil. I see in the books that you improve the hadith of one about whom it is said "sidduq, he errs" or "sidduq, he has errors" or this rank, which is the fifth. I have some inquiries, and the answer, if Allah wills, I will hear after I finish speaking. So, the Hafiz (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned the phrase "sidduq, he errs" in the context of the fifth rank, which includes "he changed in his later years" and "sidduq, poor in memory." The distinction between these terms, by making some terms of the rank result in a hasan hadith and some terms of the rank not result in a hasan hadith unless it is supported by a corroborating chain, is one of the things I am inquiring about, and about its evidence. The second matter?

The Shaykh : No, let me have one after another so that you do not burden me with difficulty and hardship.

The questioner : Please go ahead.

The Shaykh : I mean, you are burdening me now to memorize from you first, second, third, and I do not know, perhaps a tenth will come. It is enough for me to answer your first question so that we can move on to the second and the third. What I understand from your question is that you think I am a follower of Ibn Hajar, and I am not?

The questioner : No, may Allah protect us, I do not think of you except good.

The Shaykh : No, you are sincere in what you say, but you are also mistaken. You are sincere in what you say, but do not hold this belief. However, your question indicates that this is the cause of the difficulty. Let me explain to you now in another phrase, and I will withdraw the first phrase, because I felt that I put you in an awkward position because you thought I attributed to you something you are not in, and that is what I hope for. But I am going around the cause of the difficulty in another phrase now. You think that I follow Ibn Hajar's terminology in that classification of his, and that is not the case. This is the meaning of my saying that you think I am a follower of Ibn Hajar. As for one about whom Ibn Hajar said "sidduq, he errs" or "sidduq, poor in memory," I, as for whether I agree with him or disagree with him: if I agree with him, your question applies; but if I disagree with him, then let our question come. So this is the cause. The cause is that you think that every narrator about whom Ibn Hajar said "sidduq, poor in memory" or "sidduq, he errs," I, although I agree with him on this, nevertheless I improve the hadith of this narrator. That is not the case. Rather, my ruling on this narrator about whom it is said "sidduq, he errs" is that I raise the "he errs" part, and it becomes what? It becomes "sidduq," meaning in the rank before it, which is the fourth rank, and he is one whose hadith can be hasan. And I think with this you have received the answer to your first question. Is that so?

The questioner : Yes, but there remains an inquiry?

The Shaykh : Yes, you may.

The questioner : "Sidduq, he errs" in your estimation is different from what it is with the Hafiz. I understood this from the answer?

The Shaykh : Not always.

The questioner : Not always. I know I did not say "always."

The Shaykh : Okay.

The questioner : But I said in one of the cases you agree with the Hafiz on "sidduq, he errs"?

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

The questioner : And in one of the cases you raise it, and I find you saying, "No, he is a thiqah." You say, "No, he is a thiqah," and the Hafiz was lenient in his case, or, "No, the man is weak," and the Hafiz was lenient in his case?

The Shaykh : Okay

The questioner : I mean, I do not say that you say about everything he says.

The Shaykh : Okay.

The questioner : But if you confirm him in what he says, that he is indeed "sidduq, he errs,"

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

The questioner : and you agree with him on this.

The Shaykh : Okay.

The questioner : The Hafiz explicitly stated that he is not relied upon as evidence.

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

The questioner : The Hafiz explicitly stated in the introduction of al-Fath.

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

The questioner : In the ninth chapter, that he is not relied upon as evidence for one about whom it is said "sidduq, he has errors."

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

The questioner : So if your eminence has agreed on "sidduq, he has errors" or "sidduq, he errs," then your eminence relies on him as evidence, and the Hafiz explicitly stated that he is not relied upon as evidence.

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

The questioner : Is this also part of the difficulty?

The Shaykh : The answer is from two aspects.

The questioner : Please go ahead.

The Shaykh : First, did you find an example for this, or is this just a theoretical question?

The questioner : No, and there is an example.

The Shaykh: And that is...

The questioner : In the biography of Isma'il ibn 'Abd Allah ibn Awis.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : He mentioned his conditions and what is in his memory of speech, and why al-Bukhari included him, and that he prioritized his arrival to al-Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him) and included from it. He said, "So on this basis, his narration is within the Sahih and is relied upon as evidence, but outside the Sahih, it is not relied upon as evidence." And he classified him in al-Taqrib as "sidduq, he errs in hadiths from his memory." So this is an example indicating that if it is within the Sahih, then what is the status of the two Sahihs, and so on. But as for outside the Sahih, he explicitly stated that it is not relied upon as evidence, and his classification in al-Taqrib falls within the fifth rank?

The Shaykh : That is it.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you. You are now speaking about al-'Asqalani, but you have not spoken about Al-Albani?

The questioner : I mean, what I understood from the question: did you find the statement theoretical from the Hafiz when he explicitly states that he is not relied upon as evidence, or are there biographies?

The Shaykh : You said about me, and I tell you, you accused me. You said about me that I agree with Ibn Hajar on his saying "sidduq, he errs," and this is the one about whom Ibn Hajar said he is not relied upon as evidence.

The questioner : Yes, exactly.

The Shaykh : Nevertheless, I relied on him as evidence. So it is as if you are saying, how do you agree with him in one aspect and disagree with him in another? My answer to you was for two reasons. First, I asked you, is this question theoretical or practical? So you did not answer me, because you started explaining Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani's opinion. But you did not bring the example that proves that I agree with Ibn Hajar in his saying "sidduq, he errs" or "sidduq, poor in memory," and in this case, he does not rely on this narrator as evidence, while I agree with him in his classification of this narrator and disagree with him in practical application, so I improve his hadith.

The questioner : We do not have an example of this at hand.

The Shaykh : This is the answer, so withdraw your first statement.

The questioner : Okay.

The Shaykh : Okay, I wanted to say the answer is from two aspects, and now we have finished the first aspect. If we assume that I actually agreed with Ibn Hajar in the classification of a certain man, but it is necessary that this classification includes Ibn Hajar explicitly stating that he is not relied upon as evidence for his hadith, and I relied on his hadith as evidence, then the answer is the same as the previous answer. If Ibn Hajar said about a certain narrator that he is, for example, a thiqah and his hadith should be sahih, and I said his hadith is hasan, then I have disagreed with Ibn Hajar here, because I do not adopt that he is a thiqah. But if I adopted that he is a thiqah and said hasan, I would fall into the contradiction that you pointed to. But if I disagree with Ibn Hajar in my ruling on a certain hadith, it is as if I disagreed with him in his ruling on a certain narrator. So what is the difficulty in that?

The questioner : Okay, since your eminence sees the lack of corroboration, because I see in some things you say, for example, "And Ibn Hajar classified him as sidduq, he errs, so on this basis, his hadith is hasan?"

The Shaykh : The same question returns.

The questioner : The Hafiz said so.

The Shaykh : The same question returns. May Allah reward you. Is this theoretical or practical?

The questioner : I do not have it at hand now.

The Shaykh : I think this is a mistake. I say that he said "sidduq, he errs" and I explain this, and on this basis, his hadith is hasan. And I know, as you know, that this rank is the rank that is not relied upon as evidence, but rather cited as a reference.

The questioner : May Allah preserve you.

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

Another questioner : On the same topic.The Shaykh : Our brother first equated the rank of "sidduq, he has errors" with the rank of "sidduq, he errs," and you always, I mean, point out the distinction between the two ranks.

The Shaykh : Which one is in a better state?

Another questioner : This is one. Second, Shaykh, there is an example I was going to ask you about, and it is very closely related to this, which is the classification of Bakr ibn Khunayth. Bakr ibn Khunayth is "sidduq, he errs" with the Hafiz, so sometimes you improved for him and sometimes you weakened for him.

The Shaykh: Yes.

Another questioner : So when I asked you, our Shaykh, you said that this specific rank, "sidduq, he errs" and "sidduq, he has errors," is among the delicate ranks, and what prevails over the critic is the narrators and the narrators from him, and the improvement of the text, or something like that, so you weigh based on these weighing factors.

The Shaykh : I mean, like the hasan hadith.

Another questioner : And the third thing is this, and our brother did not hear the thing I mentioned a little while ago regarding the issue of the hasan hadith and the words of Imam al-Dhahabi in al-Muqaddimah.

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

Another questioner : That the hasan hadith, you find the scholar sometimes improves it, and the same narrator weakens it for him. This is due to the delicacy of the hasan hadith. And the Shaykh himself, may Allah reward him with good, in al-Irwah, at the hadith of , spoke about this and mentioned that the hasan hadith is among the most delicate ranks. So the difficulty, if Allah wills, will be resolved.

The Shaykh : Okay, the second question.