What is the basis for Imam Ahmad, al-Bardiiji, and others declaring a report anomalous (munkar) when a trustworthy narrator is the sole transmitter, even if the report is authentic?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Here in *Hadi al-Sari*, al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar mentions in the biography of Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al-Taymi that Imam Ahmad and others declare a report anomalous (munkar) when a trustworthy narrator is the sole transmitter?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : However, he said in *al-Nukat*: "But this is only when the sole transmitter is not on the level of one whose report is judged authentic without a supporting chain." So, this last statement—when he says "provided the sole transmitter is not on the level of one whose report is judged authentic without a supporting chain"—in my understanding, this means describing a weak narrator who is not relied upon alone, or a truthful narrator who does not reach the level of authenticity without a supporting chain. How does this reconcile with the first statement that Imam Ahmad, al-Bardiiji, and perhaps also Dahim, Yahya ibn Sa'id al-Qattan, and a group of others, declare the sole transmission of a trustworthy narrator to be anomalous (munkar), even if it is authentic?
The Shaykh : I see, and Allah knows best, that when Imam Ahmad and his like use the term "munkar" (anomalous) for a report narrated by a trustworthy narrator in our view, it implies a criticism of that trustworthy narrator. It is not necessary that the narrator be considered trustworthy even by the one who said that the report of a trustworthy narrator in our view is "munkar." Yes, and I recall, on this occasion, the hadith that Imam al-Bukhari included in his *Sahih* from the narration of Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari, who said: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) taught us the prayer for guidance in all matters, just as he taught us a chapter of the Qur'an. He said: to the end of the well-known hadith.
The questioner : Let him bow.
The Shaykh : How so? Let him pray two rak'ahs, yes, not the obligatory prayer. Yes, the point is that Imam Ahmad said this hadith is "munkar" (anomalous), and it contains a man named Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi al-Mawal, perhaps you remember this. In his biography, it is mentioned that Imam Ahmad said about this hadith of mine, which is a "munkar" hadith. So I see that reconciling the two statements is that, as we mentioned in a previous session, I think you remember this well, it is part of Imam Ahmad's convention that he says a report by a weak narrator is "munkar." So if we want to reconcile this with the other statement, we must note that when Imam Ahmad says about a man who is trustworthy in our view, or in the view of the earlier scholars among the preservers, that his report is "munkar," it means that the matter is not so in his view. There must be some doubt or some criticism regarding his memorization, at least. This is what appears to me, and Allah knows best.
Another questioner : As you did with the hadith of Yazid ibn Husayfah.
The Shaykh : Yes.
Another questioner : In the tarawih prayer.
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.
The questioner : The tarawih prayer, due to his disagreement with Muhammad ibn Yusuf.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Do you remember, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Yes, that is correct.
The questioner: If you please, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : However, he said in *al-Nukat*: "But this is only when the sole transmitter is not on the level of one whose report is judged authentic without a supporting chain." So, this last statement—when he says "provided the sole transmitter is not on the level of one whose report is judged authentic without a supporting chain"—in my understanding, this means describing a weak narrator who is not relied upon alone, or a truthful narrator who does not reach the level of authenticity without a supporting chain. How does this reconcile with the first statement that Imam Ahmad, al-Bardiiji, and perhaps also Dahim, Yahya ibn Sa'id al-Qattan, and a group of others, declare the sole transmission of a trustworthy narrator to be anomalous (munkar), even if it is authentic?
The Shaykh : I see, and Allah knows best, that when Imam Ahmad and his like use the term "munkar" (anomalous) for a report narrated by a trustworthy narrator in our view, it implies a criticism of that trustworthy narrator. It is not necessary that the narrator be considered trustworthy even by the one who said that the report of a trustworthy narrator in our view is "munkar." Yes, and I recall, on this occasion, the hadith that Imam al-Bukhari included in his *Sahih* from the narration of Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari, who said: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) taught us the prayer for guidance in all matters, just as he taught us a chapter of the Qur'an. He said:
When one of you intends to do something, let him seek refuge with Allah and say: "O Allah, I seek Your guidance by Your knowledge and I seek Your power by Your power."
إذا هم أحدكم بالأمر فليستعذ بالله فليقل اللهم إني أستخيرك بعلمك وأستقدرك بقدرتكThe questioner : Let him bow.
The Shaykh : How so? Let him pray two rak'ahs, yes, not the obligatory prayer. Yes, the point is that Imam Ahmad said this hadith is "munkar" (anomalous), and it contains a man named Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi al-Mawal, perhaps you remember this. In his biography, it is mentioned that Imam Ahmad said about this hadith of mine, which is a "munkar" hadith. So I see that reconciling the two statements is that, as we mentioned in a previous session, I think you remember this well, it is part of Imam Ahmad's convention that he says a report by a weak narrator is "munkar." So if we want to reconcile this with the other statement, we must note that when Imam Ahmad says about a man who is trustworthy in our view, or in the view of the earlier scholars among the preservers, that his report is "munkar," it means that the matter is not so in his view. There must be some doubt or some criticism regarding his memorization, at least. This is what appears to me, and Allah knows best.
Another questioner : As you did with the hadith of Yazid ibn Husayfah.
The Shaykh : Yes.
Another questioner : In the tarawih prayer.
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.
The questioner : The tarawih prayer, due to his disagreement with Muhammad ibn Yusuf.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : Do you remember, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Yes, that is correct.
The questioner: If you please, our Shaykh.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.