What is the summary of the discussion regarding al-'Ajili's leniency? Is he like Ibn Hibban? Then the Shaykh explained his corrections regarding him in "Taysir al-Intifa'".

The Shaykh : I have no doubt that al-'Ajili is like Ibn Hibban in terms of leniency, but he is not expansive in it. As for Ibn Hibban, by the grace of Allah the Exalted, I am certain and assert that he is extremely lenient, and even contradictory in the rules he established for authenticating narrators, for he does not adhere to them. Perhaps you have come across in some of my recent writings or reports a book of mine titled "Mukhtasar Taysir al-Intifa'"; perhaps you have come across this.

The questioner : I have not come across the book, but...

The Shaykh : No, no, the book has not been published; it is merely a reference to it. This is "Taysir al-Intifa' bi Kitab Tawthiq Ibn Hibban." The point is that I arranged the trusted narrators of Ibn Hibban in the manner in which one of the contemporaries arranged them. You must have seen a book titled "Faharis Kitab al-Thiqat"; you have seen this book is printed.

The questioner : I have heard of it, but I have not come across it.

The Shaykh : The important thing is that he arranged the names of the narrators alphabetically, of course, and also indicated that he arranged the hadiths and athar in the first section of the book: the hadiths, then the athar, then the men. As for me, in the book mentioned earlier, I paid special attention to arranging the trusted Companions, of course, on their own, then I arranged the Tabi'un, and their followers, and the followers of their followers. I merged them all and arranged them alphabetically. The primary intention, which was the only thing on my mind, was to facilitate my review, because the trusted narrators of Ibn Hibban, as some of the attendees who are engaged in this science know, he arranged them by generations: a generation of Companions, Tabi'un, followers of the Tabi'un, and their followers, so that a student of knowledge can refer to the trusted narrators of Ibn Hibban when necessary. One should know in which generation [the narrator] is. This is what those who transmit from the later imams regarding him, such as al-Hafiz al-Mizzi in "Tahdhib al-Kamal," and those who came after him, such as al-Hafiz al-'Asqalani in "Tahdhib al-Tahdhib," do not mention; they only say, "Ibn Hibban mentioned him in the Thiqat," or "Ibn Hibban authenticated him." So, for you to go back and see the authentication at its source, you must know the generation. This is not easy, especially since this is a phenomenon I have noticed from him repeatedly and over and over: he may biographize the same man sometimes in the Tabi'un, sometimes in their followers, or biographize the narrator in the followers of the Tabi'un, sometimes in the followers of the followers of the Tabi'un. That is, he either lists him in the second and third generations, or in the third and fourth, twice, and he is one man. And sometimes he may confuse and give the impression that the man he listed in this generation is not the one he listed in the other generation, and that is only due to the difference in the narrators who narrated from the first and from the second, and so on. The point that became clear to me from practice is the question that cannot be refuted at all, because he explicitly states, and this is transmitted:

The questioner : It cannot be refuted.

The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.

The questioner : Or it cannot be accepted.

The Shaykh : It cannot be refuted. The question that cannot be refuted: you must have seen in some of the transmitted reports that he says about the man he lists in the Thiqat, "I do not know him, and I do not know his father. How did he become a thiqah (trusted)?" This was criticized long ago. But what I saw is that he says, "So-and-so narrated from him, and so-and-so," and the narrator from whom he narrated—he mentioned him in the fabricators. The narrator from the one he authenticated, the one he authenticated, this narrator is mentioned in the fabricators. It is not a problem for him to be a thiqah, on the basis that this is a thiqah who narrated from a man unknown to us, so perhaps he gives him some strength in the view of some. But the narrator from whom he narrated is, in the author's view, mentioned in the fabricators. He has a lot of this, and a great deal. Then I realized something I did not know except because of this current engagement with commenting on this book. When he mentions the narrator, he says, "I do not know him." He does not mention him for authentication, but so that he can see him. This is what I did not know.

The questioner : Even if he included him in the Thiqat.

The Shaykh : Yes, yes. And Abu al-Hasan? He mentioned him in the Thiqat. We say, but Abu al-Hasan greets Abu al-Hasan. The point is that Ibn Hibban's questioning is tangible, touchable. The point, Professor, is that those who have not studied Ibn Hibban and do not take into account the words of those who have studied Ibn Hibban, saying, "These are later scholars; this is their opinion." Well, who is the earlier scholar who can be relied upon and it can be said that he described Ibn Hibban as lenient? This is the truth. Questions like these come from people who do not know the value of knowledge first, and do not know the value of scholars second. Therefore, many of the young people today, as you must have noticed with us, have made this science easy and have started to write and criticize, and they are, as we mentioned earlier regarding al-Dhahabi, "wants to fly but has not yet grown feathers."

The questioner : Al-'Ajili.

The Shaykh : That he is lenient, but not to the extent that Ibn Hibban is lenient.