The questioner : Now, here I ask about the difference between two phrases: when a man says, "A trustworthy man narrated to me," without specifying who this trustworthy man is, and a narration

The questioner : Now, here I ask about the difference between two phrases: when a man says, "A trustworthy man narrated to me," without specifying who this trustworthy man is, and a narration from a narrator who stipulated that he would not narrate except from a trustworthy man, where he mentioned his shaykh by name without there being any specific authentication of him. So which is higher: the one who says, "A trustworthy man narrated to me," and explicitly states that he is trustworthy, but the only thing is that he left him ambiguous and we do not know who is meant by the authentication? And the second one said, "I do not narrate except from a trustworthy man," and this was among the shaykhs of this narrator, of whom we did not find any statement other than this?

The Shaykh : Each has its own perspective, but in the end, I find the second matter to be higher because he stipulated, whereas the one who said, "A trustworthy man narrated to me," did not stipulate this condition. He did not stipulate such a condition and commit to it, despite the ambiguity of the trustworthy man for us. As is said regarding Imam al-Shafi'i when he narrates from Ibrahim, I think Ibn Abi Yahya al-Aslami.

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : Yes, he said, "A trustworthy man narrated to me," and then it became clear to the hadith scholars that he was not trustworthy; he is accused of lying. But if there is a man who stipulates that he will not narrate except from a trustworthy man, in my opinion, he is not among the general narrators, but rather among the imams who are qualified to assess the criticism and vindication of narrators and proceed on this basis in narration. He says, "I do not narrate except from a trustworthy man." So in my opinion, and Allah knows best, this second one is stronger by this consideration than the statement of the one who says, "A trustworthy man narrated to me."

The questioner : This is in terms of strength and in terms of rank. If he said, "A trustworthy man narrated to me," and there was a previous question, I think in the first session, which is if he narrated it uniquely from thisThe Shaykh : narrator who is known, and we gave the example that night of the hadith of Ibn Uthman and Abu Zur'ah.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : It is stronger for you, Shaykh, what is said? It is said that he is trustworthy if he said that this means he is in...

The Shaykh : I do not remember what was stronger for me, but now I say: if he is among the imams of hadith who say, "A trustworthy man narrated to me," and among the imams of criticism and vindication, then if there is no contradicting evidence, in this case, we trust his statement that he is trustworthy.The questioner : This is regarding his statement, "A trustworthy man narrated to me," the first aspect.

The Shaykh : Yes, this is it, and your question is final in this matter.

The questioner : No, I mean, I connect your answer to your first answer regarding the narration of the one who stipulated that he would not narrate except from a trustworthy man. The issue of stipulation, Allah knows best, did he fulfill it or not? Did he forget his condition during the narration, or did he not forget? Is it as al-Sakhawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said, that perhaps he did not commit to that except later? He committed to this condition later, and his first narration was before this commitment. If it was from someone who was well-established, for example, I remind you of your answer that night that you distinguished between the one described as having trustworthy shaykhs, as Abu Dawud said regarding the shaykhs of Harith ibn Uthman al-Rahibi, and the one described as selecting his shaykhs. But selection does not necessarily mean that they are trustworthy.

The Shaykh : Okay.

The questioner : This is what...

The Shaykh : This is correct, but where is the connection between this and that?

The questioner : The connection is: when you presented the one who stipulated that he would not narrate except from a trustworthy man and said that this is preferable to the one who said, "A trustworthy man narrated to us," who is ambiguous and we do not know him, I wanted to say that this is in terms of strength. But in terms of rank, I wanted to know what is stronger for you in terms of rank. Because in the first session, you distinguished between the one described as having trustworthy shaykhs and the one described as selecting among his shaykhs. But what I remember now is that you did not determine the rank. What is ruled for him? Is he ruled as one whose status is unknown, or acceptable, or concealed, or truthful? Is it the one who stipulated that he would not narrate except from a trustworthy man, or the one who selected among his shaykhs?

The Shaykh : Well, but we cannot go deeper in this case than to say that we accept his hadith and do not reject it. As for what rank we place it in, there is ambiguity in this, and we cannot classify it precisely except to say a general word that we accept his hadith with the known condition, if nothing is revealed that refutes or contradicts it.

The questioner : Also, the limits of acceptance have also been researched in my mind.

The Shaykh : Okay.

The questioner : Is it accepted through corroborating narrations and supporting chains, or is it accepted as hasan (good)?

The Shaykh : No, no, I say it alone.

The questioner : Alone means we do not accept it if a corroborating narration comes for it.

The Shaykh : I qualified my statement; I said we accept it unless something is revealed that contradicts it.

The questioner : Does that mean it is used as evidence for hasan (good)?

The Shaykh : Yes, we use it as evidence, but you seem to want precision: in what rank do we place it? Do you say trustworthy or truthful?

The questioner : No, I do not mean that. I mean it is cited as evidence. I know that sahih (authentic) is far away; sahih is far away. But what we want to know is: is it cited as evidence, or is it hasan (good)? This confronts us often, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : This is at least hasan (good). This is what I mean by my statement, because it is accepted. Yes.

The questioner : May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : And may He reward you.