Supplementing the work of al-Hafiz regarding a biography in which he differed and it did not become clear to him whether it was one person or two, so he combines them in terms of criticism or vindication
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : My question now is that it is possible that I am asking you considering that you are, I mean, of recent date and a transmitter. We say, may Allah bless you, so there is nothing but, for example, Ahmad’s statement that Zayd ibn Ahmad is trustworthy, and so-and-so’s statement that Zayd ibn Muhammad is weak. There is nothing else.
The questioner : There is no doubt that this is the intent of the question. Otherwise, if there had been a third statement that he is good, and he selected the third statement to combine the two statements, I would not have asked about this. This is clear. I am only asking about two statements: trustworthy and weak. That is, he says he is good, trustworthy, and unknown, and says he is merely concealed. But if there had been a third statement from the early imams, there would have been no point to the question.
The Shaykh : And the biography is one where he combined between them.
The questioner : In the biography, he affirms it and says they are two, distinguishing between them. Ibn Hibban distinguished between them, al-Bukhari distinguished between them in al-Tarikh, and Ibn Abi Hatim distinguished between them in al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil. And al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar does not assert it. Now, can we move from this question to a word, I mean, below that? Let us leave aside the work of al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar. What do we do if we encounter a biography with this description? What do you consider stronger so that I may benefit from it and take it as an example in my own work? Let us leave aside the work of al-Hafiz. Does he do this or not? What does he do? And this is encounteredThe student : frequently.
The Shaykh : This is correct.
The questioner : It is encountered frequently.
The Shaykh : In that case, it is necessary to return to the sheikhs of the biographee and the students of the biographee who took from him. If they are unified, this strengthens the position that the one in question is a single person.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : And if they differ, and this is, of course, also a matter of independent legal reasoning, because the difference may be slight or it may be great. If the difference is great, it becomes more likely for the researcher that the biographees are two men. And the difference between the sheikhs and the students may be very slight, in which case it becomes more likely for him that they are one biography.
The questioner : And if it does not become more likely, which is the point of the question.
The Shaykh : Stopping and half of knowledge, I do not know.
The questioner : May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.
The questioner : May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : And beware of that.
The questioner : There is no doubt that this is the intent of the question. Otherwise, if there had been a third statement that he is good, and he selected the third statement to combine the two statements, I would not have asked about this. This is clear. I am only asking about two statements: trustworthy and weak. That is, he says he is good, trustworthy, and unknown, and says he is merely concealed. But if there had been a third statement from the early imams, there would have been no point to the question.
The Shaykh : And the biography is one where he combined between them.
The questioner : In the biography, he affirms it and says they are two, distinguishing between them. Ibn Hibban distinguished between them, al-Bukhari distinguished between them in al-Tarikh, and Ibn Abi Hatim distinguished between them in al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil. And al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar does not assert it. Now, can we move from this question to a word, I mean, below that? Let us leave aside the work of al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar. What do we do if we encounter a biography with this description? What do you consider stronger so that I may benefit from it and take it as an example in my own work? Let us leave aside the work of al-Hafiz. Does he do this or not? What does he do? And this is encounteredThe student : frequently.
The Shaykh : This is correct.
The questioner : It is encountered frequently.
The Shaykh : In that case, it is necessary to return to the sheikhs of the biographee and the students of the biographee who took from him. If they are unified, this strengthens the position that the one in question is a single person.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : And if they differ, and this is, of course, also a matter of independent legal reasoning, because the difference may be slight or it may be great. If the difference is great, it becomes more likely for the researcher that the biographees are two men. And the difference between the sheikhs and the students may be very slight, in which case it becomes more likely for him that they are one biography.
The questioner : And if it does not become more likely, which is the point of the question.
The Shaykh : Stopping and half of knowledge, I do not know.
The questioner : May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.
The questioner : May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : And beware of that.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.