Discussion of the Shaykh’s introduction to *Adab al-Zafaf* (Etiquette of the Wedding) and whether everything in the two Sahihs is considered authentic.

The questioner : The book by Mammad Sa’id...

The Shaykh : Not everything I think about am I able to address, but sometimes I seize the opportunity to respond to certain aspects related to a book of mine that is being reprinted. Right now, I have responded to him in the introduction to *Adab al-Zafaf*, which is being printed anew, because he was criticizing me regarding a hadith mentioned in *Adab al-Zafaf*. I had attributed it to Muslim, and in the tracing of the hadith, I stated: “Although it is in *Sahih Muslim*, it contains so-and-so, 'Umar ibn Hamzah,” and he meant that so-and-so and so-and-so spoke about him. So he criticized me regarding this hadith as well. I took advantage of the new printing and included in the book an introduction containing my response to two shaykhs, toThe Shaykh : Ismail al-Ansari in his thesis on the topic of the *Muhallaq* gold, and at some length in this introduction in responding to him. This Egyptian man is the second person I have responded to. In my opinion, this response is sufficient to avoid expanding on the response to him, if I could, but I am unable, because he discussed the principle on which he based the book, where he claimed that all the hadiths of Imam Muslim are authentic. The larger portion is certainly authentic because the Ummah has reached scholarly consensus on it, and the other portion is probably authentic. Therefore, Muslim does not accept discussion at all; everything in it is authentic. And I, of course, mean that he issued this from emotions and enthusiasms that do not align with correct knowledge at all, just as the Social Reform Association in Kuwait did in the past when *Al-Arabi* magazine published a study under the title: “Not Everything in *Sahih al-Bukhari* is Authentic.” They rose up as if the matter were a school assignment, putting out a small paper: “Everything in *Sahih al-Bukhari* is Authentic,” with no knowledge in it and nothing else. Issues are not addressed with these unbridled emotions that have no limits. So this man did the same in his response to me in this book.
The Shaykh: But I took a path with him where I clarified his error in his attack on me. He has a book; did I sell you the book I gave you, one book or two?

The questioner : Yes, it arrived. May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : He has a book in which he mentions the shaykhs who granted him ijazah and whom he esteems and respects. Among them isThe Shaykh : Zahid al-Kawthari, and he takes pride in having studied underThe Shaykh : 'Abd Allah al-Ghamari, and 'Abd al-'Aziz, his brother. The point is, I tracked down these al-Ghamaris andThe Shaykh : al-Kawthari in particular, and I said to him: If this is the principle you followed and on which you based your book in responding to me, then why did you not criticize these men and mention the types of authentic hadiths that these men denied, especiallyThe Shaykh : Ahmad al-Ghamari, the author of *Al-Mughir 'ala al-Jami' al-Saghir*?

The questioner : He is their master.

The Shaykh : He has very serious words in his criticism of *Sahih al-Bukhari*. So I do not know how this man’s eyes were blinded to these shaykhs whom he magnifies and exaggerates in magnifying, while they denied the authenticity of many hadiths that, if collected, would make a thesis.

The questioner : Without the Salaf.

The Shaykh : Yes, so I clarified to him that the path he took contradicts even the shaykhs whom he magnifies. Insha'Allah, a new printing of *Adab al-Zafaf* will be in the market soon, insha'Allah.

The questioner : Do you know, youThe Shaykh : ... had previously met him?

The Shaykh : No, I do not know him. He reminded me of something of the subtle and wondrous decrees of Allah. I was flipping through some of what is called the bound notebooks and found a letter to me, which I read, and it was from this man.

The questioner : Tell me about it.

The Shaykh : He told you? Strange. In it, he writes that when you went to Cairo, he was following you, and he did not miss a lecture or a session of knowledge in which you were the speaker. He also says, which is strange, that his connection to my lectures was from one side and to my books from another, and he rarely missed a book. He mentioned *Irwaa' al-Ghalil* in particular. This was one of the strong reasons that he turned to the study of the Sunnah.

The questioner : And did he mention you with his shaykhs?

The Shaykh : No, but look at this letter. He mentioned that I summarized the letter in the introduction to the thesis, how he turned around afterwards.

The questioner : And that is indicated by his book on preferring Muslim, which contains excerpts from the first series, indicating that he read it well.

The Shaykh : He is a complete follower. It appears that he is a man with academic activity, but he does not have guidance, he does not have sincerity.

The questioner : Shaykh, in general, is there anything in the book, for example, errors that you pointed out to him and so on?

The Shaykh : No, no person is free from error. And I said in my response to him: If his response had been a scholarly response without hatred, without enmity, without hostility, people would have benefited from it. But hatred drips from it, and may Allah protect us from that.