Abu Nu'aym: If he narrates a report alone, does that weaken it?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Does he narrate it alone... Is this a rule?
The Shaykh : I understand from your question that Abu Nu'aym's wording indicates that all of them are trustworthy, and the only remaining point of consideration is Abu Nu'aym's solitary narration. So, is the hadith valid in this case or not? Is that your question?
The questioner : No, I did not intend that... Abu Nu'aym.
The Shaykh : Then what is the meaning of your question, "Abu Nu'aym narrated it alone"? The general statement does not hold with the specific limitation you mentioned to me.
The questioner : I say the problem is...
The Shaykh : Let him explain his question.
The questioner : ... And perhaps he weakened it based on the rule that says if the author of *al-Hilyah* narrates a hadith alone, it is weak. I put an exclamation mark, so I do not know, meaning, is this rule invalid?
The Shaykh : Who weakens a hadith because Abu Nu'aym narrated it alone?
The questioner : ... Perhaps you...
The Shaykh : It is fine, I do not care now what you said. I want to understand the question. What did you say? What did he say...
The questioner: Yes ...
The Shaykh : I, the hadith...
The questioner:...
The Shaykh : Listen, any hadith narrated by Abu Nu'aym al-Isfahani, if its chain of narration from him to the Companion is authentic, then it is authentic. I do not believe that a student of knowledge who knows Abu Nu'aym's trustworthiness, his memorization, his precision, and his accuracy in narration, as mentioned in his biography, along with his inclination toward some Sufism which we do not approve of, I do not believe that a student of knowledge who knows this reality will find a hadith that Abu Nu'aym narrated alone, where there is no defect in Abu Nu'aym's chain, and then he points out a defect in it and weakens it because Abu Nu'aym narrated it alone. This is my belief. As for what you are referring to, I do not know the truth of its matter.
The questioner : I ask your permission.
The Shaykh : Please go ahead.
The questioner : My teacher, perhaps at the end of the sermon of the Great Mosque by al-Suyuti, it says: "And what Ibn Asakir narrated alone in the history..." I do not know if he mentioned *al-Hilyah* or not; it is currently out of my mind. Perhaps it is from this category.
The Shaykh : No, he did not mention it, even if he mentioned it.
The questioner : It is not a consistent rule.
The Shaykh : That is it.
The questioner : Correct. It contains Ibn Asakir.The Shaykh : In more than one place in *al-Sahihah*, I will bring authentic chains from him.
The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.
The questioner : Peace be upon you
The Shaykh : And upon you be peace, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, before this statement, in *Musnad al-Firdaws*, the same statement is there.
The Shaykh : No, no, this rule is not generally consistent.
The questioner : Likewise, *Musnad al-Firdaws*.
The Shaykh : The one who studies *Musnad al-Firdaws* often finds that he comments on the hadith without providing a full chain of narration, as is the case with all or most authors. So he often says, "Abu... said."The Shaykh : Meaning al-Isfahani, and this means that he transmitted it from one of his books, most of which have not reached us today. Abu...The Shaykh : is also a memorizer like Abu Nu'aym, and of a higher rank than him. So if the chain between Abu...The Shaykh : and the Companion is authentic, then it does not harm that it is in the *Musnad* as a comment. Therefore, he says, for example, about al-Hakim, "Al-Hakim Abu 'Abdullah said," and so on. The important point is that what al-Dimyari narrated alone in *Musnad al-Firdaws* is said to be weak as a general rule, but not as a universal rule. Yes.
The questioner : My teacher, perhaps these things occupied the rules, and he was responded to from the rule mentioned by Ibn al-Jawzi that every hadith not in the primary sources and so on is from this category, and Allah knows best.
The Shaykh : Not in its absolute form.
The Shaykh : I understand from your question that Abu Nu'aym's wording indicates that all of them are trustworthy, and the only remaining point of consideration is Abu Nu'aym's solitary narration. So, is the hadith valid in this case or not? Is that your question?
The questioner : No, I did not intend that... Abu Nu'aym.
The Shaykh : Then what is the meaning of your question, "Abu Nu'aym narrated it alone"? The general statement does not hold with the specific limitation you mentioned to me.
The questioner : I say the problem is...
The Shaykh : Let him explain his question.
The questioner : ... And perhaps he weakened it based on the rule that says if the author of *al-Hilyah* narrates a hadith alone, it is weak. I put an exclamation mark, so I do not know, meaning, is this rule invalid?
The Shaykh : Who weakens a hadith because Abu Nu'aym narrated it alone?
The questioner : ... Perhaps you...
The Shaykh : It is fine, I do not care now what you said. I want to understand the question. What did you say? What did he say...
The questioner: Yes ...
The Shaykh : I, the hadith...
The questioner:...
The Shaykh : Listen, any hadith narrated by Abu Nu'aym al-Isfahani, if its chain of narration from him to the Companion is authentic, then it is authentic. I do not believe that a student of knowledge who knows Abu Nu'aym's trustworthiness, his memorization, his precision, and his accuracy in narration, as mentioned in his biography, along with his inclination toward some Sufism which we do not approve of, I do not believe that a student of knowledge who knows this reality will find a hadith that Abu Nu'aym narrated alone, where there is no defect in Abu Nu'aym's chain, and then he points out a defect in it and weakens it because Abu Nu'aym narrated it alone. This is my belief. As for what you are referring to, I do not know the truth of its matter.
The questioner : I ask your permission.
The Shaykh : Please go ahead.
The questioner : My teacher, perhaps at the end of the sermon of the Great Mosque by al-Suyuti, it says: "And what Ibn Asakir narrated alone in the history..." I do not know if he mentioned *al-Hilyah* or not; it is currently out of my mind. Perhaps it is from this category.
The Shaykh : No, he did not mention it, even if he mentioned it.
The questioner : It is not a consistent rule.
The Shaykh : That is it.
The questioner : Correct. It contains Ibn Asakir.The Shaykh : In more than one place in *al-Sahihah*, I will bring authentic chains from him.
The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.
The questioner : Peace be upon you
The Shaykh : And upon you be peace, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.
The questioner : Our Shaykh, before this statement, in *Musnad al-Firdaws*, the same statement is there.
The Shaykh : No, no, this rule is not generally consistent.
The questioner : Likewise, *Musnad al-Firdaws*.
The Shaykh : The one who studies *Musnad al-Firdaws* often finds that he comments on the hadith without providing a full chain of narration, as is the case with all or most authors. So he often says, "Abu... said."The Shaykh : Meaning al-Isfahani, and this means that he transmitted it from one of his books, most of which have not reached us today. Abu...The Shaykh : is also a memorizer like Abu Nu'aym, and of a higher rank than him. So if the chain between Abu...The Shaykh : and the Companion is authentic, then it does not harm that it is in the *Musnad* as a comment. Therefore, he says, for example, about al-Hakim, "Al-Hakim Abu 'Abdullah said," and so on. The important point is that what al-Dimyari narrated alone in *Musnad al-Firdaws* is said to be weak as a general rule, but not as a universal rule. Yes.
The questioner : My teacher, perhaps these things occupied the rules, and he was responded to from the rule mentioned by Ibn al-Jawzi that every hadith not in the primary sources and so on is from this category, and Allah knows best.
The Shaykh : Not in its absolute form.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.