How do we deal with a narrator about whom al-Hafiz said he is truthful, and the scholars differed regarding his criticism and vindication, such as Nu'aym ibn Hammad in a hadith?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The hadith that, for example, hinges on a single man, and this man is one about whom al-Hafiz said he is truthful, and the imams differed regarding his criticism and vindication. So the imam has two opinions regarding him, like Nu'aym ibn Hammad al-Farqi in the hadith he narrates from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), who said: Mishkat al-Masabih 167Isnād Da'īf (Zubair `Aliza'i) So what is our position regarding al-Hafiz's statement that he is truthful, for example?
The Shaykh : This question, when you ask "what is our position," either refers to students of knowledge or to the researching mujtahids. In that case, the answer differs. As for students of knowledge and those new to this field, they must follow the ijtihad of the early imams, such as al-Hafiz ibn Hajar or al-Dhahabi or those before them, if they did not differ. If they did differ, they should take the summary from the later scholars, such as al-Dhahabi and al-'Asqalani. These people must rely on what al-'Asqalani, for example, held. If he said of a man that he is truthful, then in that case, his hadith is strengthened and placed in the rank of a hasan hadith. This is for students of knowledge and those new to this knowledge. As for those who have practiced this science for a long time, they may agree with ibn Hajar or ibn al-Dhahabi, or they may disagree with them based on what appears stronger to them regarding returning to the statements of the Salaf who criticized this narrator or vindicated him. There is no doubt that one who is at this level of knowledge will find points of criticism mentioned against ibn Hajar and others. This is his affair, and students of knowledge and those new to it have another affair. These people must follow, and those people must exercise ijtihad. But what confused me is what you quoted, as I understood it, you said that al-Hafiz said of Nu'aym ibn Hammad that he is truthful. Is that so, or did he add something else, such as saying, for example, that he makes few or many mistakes?
The questioner : He has delusions.
The Shaykh : He has delusions. So Nu'aym ibn Hammad, in our view, his hadith does not reach the rank of a hasan hadith; rather, it is weak. I can say that it may be cited as evidence, but that it be used as a proof, even in the rank of a hasan hadith, is the furthest thing from correctness. As for the possibility of citing it, it is because it is known that he was one of the imams of the Sunnah. As for not using it as a proof, it is because there is a known weakness in him, and indeed some accused him of lying. This prevents using it as a proof. And if one looks past this accusation of lying against him, we can say it may be cited as evidence. Otherwise, this accusation stands as a stumbling block in citing it, let alone in using it as a proof. This is the answer to your question.
None of you is a believer till his desire follows what I have brought
والذي نفسي بيده لا يؤمن أحدكم حتى يكون هواه تبعا لما جئت بهThe Shaykh : This question, when you ask "what is our position," either refers to students of knowledge or to the researching mujtahids. In that case, the answer differs. As for students of knowledge and those new to this field, they must follow the ijtihad of the early imams, such as al-Hafiz ibn Hajar or al-Dhahabi or those before them, if they did not differ. If they did differ, they should take the summary from the later scholars, such as al-Dhahabi and al-'Asqalani. These people must rely on what al-'Asqalani, for example, held. If he said of a man that he is truthful, then in that case, his hadith is strengthened and placed in the rank of a hasan hadith. This is for students of knowledge and those new to this knowledge. As for those who have practiced this science for a long time, they may agree with ibn Hajar or ibn al-Dhahabi, or they may disagree with them based on what appears stronger to them regarding returning to the statements of the Salaf who criticized this narrator or vindicated him. There is no doubt that one who is at this level of knowledge will find points of criticism mentioned against ibn Hajar and others. This is his affair, and students of knowledge and those new to it have another affair. These people must follow, and those people must exercise ijtihad. But what confused me is what you quoted, as I understood it, you said that al-Hafiz said of Nu'aym ibn Hammad that he is truthful. Is that so, or did he add something else, such as saying, for example, that he makes few or many mistakes?
The questioner : He has delusions.
The Shaykh : He has delusions. So Nu'aym ibn Hammad, in our view, his hadith does not reach the rank of a hasan hadith; rather, it is weak. I can say that it may be cited as evidence, but that it be used as a proof, even in the rank of a hasan hadith, is the furthest thing from correctness. As for the possibility of citing it, it is because it is known that he was one of the imams of the Sunnah. As for not using it as a proof, it is because there is a known weakness in him, and indeed some accused him of lying. This prevents using it as a proof. And if one looks past this accusation of lying against him, we can say it may be cited as evidence. Otherwise, this accusation stands as a stumbling block in citing it, let alone in using it as a proof. This is the answer to your question.