They mention of some narrators that he has poor memory due to sleeping during the Shaykh's lesson, but they defend him by saying that he only does so in the repeated lesson. Is this

The Shaykh : And may He bless you.

The questioner: Shaykh, here they also mention of some narrators that they used to attend the gatherings of the Shaykhs and would sleep or doze off during the narrationThe Shaykh : and that his taking of the hadith is poor due to this matter sometimes. I mean, they defend them, as they mentioned regarding Ibn Wahb when he would sit in the gatherings of Ibn 'Uyaynah, that he sat for the sake of companionship and that he had previously listened to such gatherings before. And he entered, as the Shaykh al-Mu'allimi said in *al-Tankil*, wanting to hear something new, but he foundThe Shaykh : that he had started with the gathering he had heard before. So from here, he does not pay attention, either writing, I mean, during the speechThe Shaykh : or dozing off or something like that. The fact that his taking is poor in this gathering does not invalidate his narration from Sufyan in general. But if we accept this, Shaykh, does that not mean it is evidence for considering him the weaker position if he contradicts someone who is like him in Sufyan?

The Shaykh: Absolutely, in the sense that it has not become clear to us that he took this hadith while dozing or something similar to that.

The questioner: It is not clear that he took it while dozing. But if they only mention that he was dozing, and we do not know whether he took it while dozing or took it before, and we see that he contradicts someone who is in his position regarding integrity and precision.

The Shaykh: According to the rules, it appears that in this case, his position is the weaker one.

The questioner: May Allah reward you. If we suppose thatThe student : this one sat in a gatheringThe Shaykh : and heard it twenty times while being precise, and this one heard it twice and dozed off in the rest, then the one who heard it twenty times is better than the one who heard it twice.

The Shaykh: Who is the one you mean who heard it twenty times?

The questioner: The one who contradicts, for example.

The Shaykh: The one who contradicts.

The questioner : Yes, indeed.

The Shaykh: Okay, and the one who was dozing, did he hear it once or twice, or the opposite?

The questioner: Yes, the one who dozes differs from the one who did not doze.

The Shaykh: I know, may Allah reward you. The question is about two narrators: one narrator heard it twice and one narrator heard it twenty times.

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh: Who heard the less and the more, from whom?

The questioner: The one who dozes. The one who dozes heard the less, he heard the less correctly and dozed in the rest.

The Shaykh: And do you know that he heard it correctly?

The questioner: Yes, just as our Shaykh said about Ibn Wahb in his narration from Ibn 'Uyaynah.

The Shaykh: Excuse me, I want us to understand this now. It seems like a question different from what came before.

The questioner: Okay, please, may Allah preserve you.

The Shaykh: The one that came before, we say as an example, Abdullah ibn Wahb, that he was described as having heard in some gatherings while not being alert, while dozing, and so on. So if a trustworthy person like him contradicts him.

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh: I mean, one who was not described with what Ibn Wahb was described with, we said that the rules lead us to say that this trustworthy person's narration is preferred over the narration of Ibn Wahb. That is it.

The questioner: This is if Ibn Wahb's entire hearing was while his taking was poor. But if some of his hearing is established, as was defendedThe Shaykh : by al-Mu'allimi, may Allah preserve him.

The Shaykh: He researched this portion, and I told you, do you know? Did you answer? If you know, then it is so.

The questioner: If the details are known, we are done. But the problem is when there is no distinction.

The Shaykh: This is the answer.

The questioner : Yes, indeed.

The Shaykh: Because there is no distinction for us, and that one was not described with what Wahb was described with.

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh: We said previously that his narration is stronger. But now you are describing the man who is the weaker one in the previous example as having heard it twice, and that one as having heard it twenty times.

The questioner: Correctly.

The Shaykh: You do not know if he did.

The questioner : Yes, yes.

The Shaykh: This is more likely to make his narration stronger.

The questioner : Yes, may Allah bless you.

The Shaykh: But I am now doubtful in my understanding that this question is not applicable, because in the first scenario, we did not say that this trustworthy person who was not described with what Ibn Wahb was described with heard it twenty times. We did not say in the first scenario that he heard it twenty times. But we have the narration of this trustworthy person and we have the narration of that trustworthy person who was said to have dozed in his narration from so-and-so. We said the first one is stronger. If we add to that that he heard it twenty times, then this is stronger and stronger, and all the more so.

The questioner: I mean, when I spoke, I wanted to support your statement, I did not want to correct it.

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you with good.

The questioner : May Allah reward you.