The hadith "You will follow the ways of those who came before you" with the wording "step for step" was attributed by Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab to the two Sahihs, but is it not so?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : All right, Shaykh, regarding the hadith Al-Mustadrak lil-Hakim 48:176, Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab mentioned the wording "step for step" in the book al-Tawhid and referred to the two Sahihs. This wording is not found in the two Sahihs; it is found in al-Musnad through this chain, which includes 'Ali ibn al-Ja'd and Shu'ayb ibn Hushayb. The wording began with , then he mentioned . So, is the one who referred to the two Sahihs with this text considered weak, or is it considered authentic?
The Shaykh : Is the one who referred to the two Sahihs with this wording considered weak? Who is the weak one?
The questioner : This hadith with this wording is not found in the two Sahihs; I mean the wording "step for step" is not in the two Sahihs.
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you. You do not know how to ask. If you were alone, the disaster would have been lighter, but most students are like this. You asked, "Is it weak?" I am clarifying with you: what do you mean? Who is the doer? You are accustomed to changing the phrase and bringing up another cause, but I am standing by the first phrase which I did not understand from you.
The questioner : I mean the hadith "You will follow," is that not right?
The Shaykh : I am repeating your words back to you, I am repeating your words back to you so that you know I understood you, but I did not understand your last statement. Shall I repeat it back to you?
The questioner : I mean, O honorable Shaykh, I intend the hadith found in al-Musnad, and al-Musnad has this.
The Shaykh : I am asking you a question. I am repeating what you said so that you know I understood you. "Why do you not speak?" Say, say, my brother. There is no modesty in knowledge, but there is goodness in asking. You say that Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab attributed the hadith of "step for step" to the two Sahihs, and it is not in the two Sahihs, and you say that it contains so-and-so and Shu'ayb ibn Hushayb, and they are weak, and so on. I understood that from you. What is beyond that?
The questioner : I mean, this hadith, whoever refers it to the two Sahihs with this wording, is naturally weak.
The Shaykh : Who heard this statement? Who is the weak one? I am asking you, since when?
The questioner : The hadith of "step for step."
The Shaykh : You are saying in Arabic: whoever attributes this hadith to the two Sahihs is weak. Is it weak? Yes, the hadith.
The questioner : The hadith, yes.
The Shaykh : Or is the one who attributes it? This is non-Arabic speech; this is not said. You are saying "whoever attributes this," the subject and the predicate is "is weak."
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Can you not say as you said before, without the turning and twisting? Since the hadith contains Shu'ayb ibn Hushayb, and since it is not in the two Sahihs, it is weak. Do not say "who," because "who" is for a rational being, and a hadith is said with "what," not "who." So, you want to say what you said before and presented to your ears, where you said: "You say that this hadith was attributed by Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab to the two Sahihs, and it does not exist there, but it is found in some of the Sunan, such as al-Tirmidhi, and it contains Shu'ayb ibn Hushayb and another man, and they are weak, so the hadith is weak." Do you say more than this?
The questioner : No, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : All right, now let us return and say: does the mere absence of a hadith from the two Sahihs necessitate that it is weak?
The questioner : No, it does not necessitate that.
The Shaykh : Good. Does the mere fact that a hadith contains a weak man or more necessitate that it is a weak hadith?
The questioner : It does not necessitate that.
The Shaykh : So, what are you aiming at with all this speech?
The questioner : I mean, I intended that this hadith of "step for step" is famous. So, does the one who cites it, does he cite hadiths from the two Sahihs to authenticate for such men their path, the path of the two Sahihs?
The Shaykh : Now you are mentioning something new from what has passed?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : Allahu Akbar.
The questioner : Yes, yes, I am mentioning, yes.
The Shaykh : You have confused me, by Allah, you have confused me. What is the new thing? Now express it in a concise phrase so that I first understand you, and so that I can look to see if this statement is correct or not?
The questioner : The issue is when I preferred the statement of Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him), I said, "O Shaykh, you are, I think, in his wording, he went, his text is, that it is weak, it is not authentic. I think this is the meaning."
The Shaykh : Yes, he is trustworthy and not accused, yes.
The questioner : And so is the other man, who is 'Ali ibn al-Ja'd.
The Shaykh : 'Ali ibn whom?
The questioner : 'Ali ibn al-Ja'd.
The Shaykh : 'Ali ibn al-Ja'd.
The questioner : I think.
The Shaykh : No, 'Ali ibn al-Ja'd is trustworthy. Where is the hadith mentioned?
The questioner : This hadith is found in al-Musnad.
The Shaykh : No, from my books, I mean.
The questioner : No, I did not mention it.
The Shaykh : You said.
The questioner : No, I said I returned to one of the hadiths I mentioned, I authenticated it, I mentioned Ibn Hushayb and I mentioned from 'Ali ibn al-Ja'd, but Ibn Hushayb, I mentioned, I do not remember what I said...
The Shaykh : Because this 'Ali ibn al-Ja'd is trustworthy, whereas Shu'ayb is known for his poor memory. All right, and what after that?
The questioner : So I said, perhaps the Shaykh has another path that he authenticated, or something like that, but I did not find it in al-Jami'.
The Shaykh : Is the hadith mentioned in al-Jami'?
The questioner : I say I did not find it in al-Jami'; I did not find it, neither in al-Da'if nor in al-Sahih, the wording "step for step." So I said, perhaps you mentioned it in the unprinted books.
The Shaykh : By Allah, I do not know now. In the Sahih it is knownSahih al-Bukhari 3456, and the hadith of "step for step" is known, but I do not remember now if I extracted it in some of the other books. Anything else?
You will follow the ways of those who came before you, step for step.
لتتبعن سنن من كان قبلكم حذو القذة بالقذةA time will come upon my Ummah.
ليأتين على أمتي زمانstep by step
حذو القذة بالقذةThe Shaykh : Is the one who referred to the two Sahihs with this wording considered weak? Who is the weak one?
The questioner : This hadith with this wording is not found in the two Sahihs; I mean the wording "step for step" is not in the two Sahihs.
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you. You do not know how to ask. If you were alone, the disaster would have been lighter, but most students are like this. You asked, "Is it weak?" I am clarifying with you: what do you mean? Who is the doer? You are accustomed to changing the phrase and bringing up another cause, but I am standing by the first phrase which I did not understand from you.
The questioner : I mean the hadith "You will follow," is that not right?
The Shaykh : I am repeating your words back to you, I am repeating your words back to you so that you know I understood you, but I did not understand your last statement. Shall I repeat it back to you?
The questioner : I mean, O honorable Shaykh, I intend the hadith found in al-Musnad, and al-Musnad has this.
The Shaykh : I am asking you a question. I am repeating what you said so that you know I understood you. "Why do you not speak?" Say, say, my brother. There is no modesty in knowledge, but there is goodness in asking. You say that Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab attributed the hadith of "step for step" to the two Sahihs, and it is not in the two Sahihs, and you say that it contains so-and-so and Shu'ayb ibn Hushayb, and they are weak, and so on. I understood that from you. What is beyond that?
The questioner : I mean, this hadith, whoever refers it to the two Sahihs with this wording, is naturally weak.
The Shaykh : Who heard this statement? Who is the weak one? I am asking you, since when?
The questioner : The hadith of "step for step."
The Shaykh : You are saying in Arabic: whoever attributes this hadith to the two Sahihs is weak. Is it weak? Yes, the hadith.
The questioner : The hadith, yes.
The Shaykh : Or is the one who attributes it? This is non-Arabic speech; this is not said. You are saying "whoever attributes this," the subject and the predicate is "is weak."
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Can you not say as you said before, without the turning and twisting? Since the hadith contains Shu'ayb ibn Hushayb, and since it is not in the two Sahihs, it is weak. Do not say "who," because "who" is for a rational being, and a hadith is said with "what," not "who." So, you want to say what you said before and presented to your ears, where you said: "You say that this hadith was attributed by Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab to the two Sahihs, and it does not exist there, but it is found in some of the Sunan, such as al-Tirmidhi, and it contains Shu'ayb ibn Hushayb and another man, and they are weak, so the hadith is weak." Do you say more than this?
The questioner : No, our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : All right, now let us return and say: does the mere absence of a hadith from the two Sahihs necessitate that it is weak?
The questioner : No, it does not necessitate that.
The Shaykh : Good. Does the mere fact that a hadith contains a weak man or more necessitate that it is a weak hadith?
The questioner : It does not necessitate that.
The Shaykh : So, what are you aiming at with all this speech?
The questioner : I mean, I intended that this hadith of "step for step" is famous. So, does the one who cites it, does he cite hadiths from the two Sahihs to authenticate for such men their path, the path of the two Sahihs?
The Shaykh : Now you are mentioning something new from what has passed?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : Allahu Akbar.
The questioner : Yes, yes, I am mentioning, yes.
The Shaykh : You have confused me, by Allah, you have confused me. What is the new thing? Now express it in a concise phrase so that I first understand you, and so that I can look to see if this statement is correct or not?
The questioner : The issue is when I preferred the statement of Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him), I said, "O Shaykh, you are, I think, in his wording, he went, his text is, that it is weak, it is not authentic. I think this is the meaning."
The Shaykh : Yes, he is trustworthy and not accused, yes.
The questioner : And so is the other man, who is 'Ali ibn al-Ja'd.
The Shaykh : 'Ali ibn whom?
The questioner : 'Ali ibn al-Ja'd.
The Shaykh : 'Ali ibn al-Ja'd.
The questioner : I think.
The Shaykh : No, 'Ali ibn al-Ja'd is trustworthy. Where is the hadith mentioned?
The questioner : This hadith is found in al-Musnad.
The Shaykh : No, from my books, I mean.
The questioner : No, I did not mention it.
The Shaykh : You said.
The questioner : No, I said I returned to one of the hadiths I mentioned, I authenticated it, I mentioned Ibn Hushayb and I mentioned from 'Ali ibn al-Ja'd, but Ibn Hushayb, I mentioned, I do not remember what I said...
The Shaykh : Because this 'Ali ibn al-Ja'd is trustworthy, whereas Shu'ayb is known for his poor memory. All right, and what after that?
The questioner : So I said, perhaps the Shaykh has another path that he authenticated, or something like that, but I did not find it in al-Jami'.
The Shaykh : Is the hadith mentioned in al-Jami'?
The questioner : I say I did not find it in al-Jami'; I did not find it, neither in al-Da'if nor in al-Sahih, the wording "step for step." So I said, perhaps you mentioned it in the unprinted books.
The Shaykh : By Allah, I do not know now. In the Sahih it is known