Are the reports of a single narrator (ahad) a proof, and what is the answer to those who deny this?

The questioner : The third question: The questioner says, "We spoke with one of the innovators from the Asha'irah, and the conversation reached the point where he said: 'I am a Shafi'i in madhhab.' So we asked him: 'If an authentic hadith of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) comes that contradicts the statement of al-Shafi'i, do you take the statement of al-Shafi'i or the hadith of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)?' He said: 'Of course, the statement of the Prophet, and whoever leaves the hadith of the Prophet has committed disbelief.' We then asked: 'What do you say about those who leave the authentic ahad hadiths reported from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)?' He said: 'We do not deny them or reject them, and we accept them as probable in their establishment, but we do not take them in matters of creed!'"

The Shaykh : This is a style we know from Akhzam, from the foreign knowledge introduced into Islam: dividing Islam into two parts, certain in establishment and probable in establishment. I testify by Allah and swear to what I say that the people who knew the words of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) best and were most sincere to the Messenger of Allah were Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, and he did not know this philosophy. Then, if we go down to the second tier, which is the tier of the Tabi'un, take the master of the Tabi'un, Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib, or al-Musayyib. He disliked it, he disliked being called al-Musayyib (may Allah have mercy on him). He was the most knowledgeable of the Tabi'un, or even if we leave the knowledge to Allah, we say he was among the most knowledgeable and most ascetic of the Tabi'un. He suffered what he suffered from some of the Umayyad rulers because he refused to marry his daughter to the heir apparent, as they say today. He was tortured, whereas he married her to one of his poor and needy students. The point is that this noble Tabi'i did not know this foreign philosophy in Islam, that Islam is certain in establishment and probable in establishment. From this division, the choice is arranged for the Muslim, as you heard in the question, to either take what is probable in establishment or not to take it. Was this how the righteous Salaf were? Therefore, when we say to you, "The Book, the Sunnah, and the righteous Salaf," we are emphasizing this third condition on your ears. We know for certain, just as you speak, that there is no Muslim group on the face of the earth, however deep-rooted in misguidance, that says, "We are not upon the Book and the Sunnah," as you just heard in the answer to the questioner. But there are groups, indeed the majority of Muslims today, who say, "We are with the Book and the Sunnah," and they naturally cannot say anything else. None of them says, "And upon the methodology of the righteous Salaf," except a very small group, which is the victorious group about which the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said in some authentic hadiths: Who is this group? He (peace be upon him) said: Who are they? They are those who hold fast to what the Messenger of Allah and the Companions of the Messenger of Allah were upon. Give me your attention: not just what the Messenger of Allah was upon, but also what the Companions of the Messenger of Allah were upon. This is how the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) described the saved group. When he was asked, "Who is the saved group?" two narrations came, one more authentic than the other, and there is no contradiction between them. The first said: The community is the Companions of the Messenger, obviously. The second is an explanation of the community, and he said: Therefore, whoever takes the Book and the Sunnah but does not pay attention to taking what the righteous Salaf were upon will be in clear misguidance. This is the reality of the Islamic world today and in the past regarding some groups and sects. Therefore, we keep returning to the word "the righteous Salaf." Did the righteous Salaf know this idea, theoretically or practically? Because I know that there are terms, as we said earlier in tawhid, but practically, did they, if a hadith came from one person, and this is called an ahad hadith, for example, Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib or al-Musayyib heard Abu Hurayrah narrating a hadith related to, for example, creed, for example, the grave, did they see a choice not to take it because it is an ahad hadith? Far be it from them. They did not know this philosophy at all. Rather, they knew one thing, which is what our Lord (Mighty and Majestic) indicated in His Book and His Prophet in his hadith. As for the Book, His saying (Glorified and Exalted is He): Establish it, as in another reading. In the hadith in which the Messenger (peace be upon him) said: So the Tabi'un sought to know this hadith, narrated by another Tabi'i from a Companion. All the Companions are trustworthy. So when the Tabi'i heard it directly from the Companion, there was absolutely no hesitation for him in taking this hadith, even though it is an ahad report. But I feel, from the complete philosophy of this speech, that some of you do not know what an ahad hadith means. Of course, because this is a term. An ahad hadith: now I am speaking to you, I am one person. I say: Allah said, and the Messenger of Allah said, and the Companions said, and so on. According to this philosophy, you have the choice to take it or not to take it; you are not obligated. Whereas the Messenger says: to the end of the hadith. Therefore, many effects arise from this philosophy. Many people do not believe in the punishment of the grave, saying, "We think, because the report is probable." The discussion is unfortunately long, and I fear some of you will get bored.
An ahad report: if we imagine that Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib or al-Musayyib heard a hadith from ten, or twenty, or more of the Companions of the Messenger, this hadith became mutawatir for him. What does mutawatir mean? It is narrated by a group of Muslims whose collusion in lying is impossible. So if we assume a hadith heard by someone like Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib from ten or twenty Companions of the Messenger, he has certainty that the Messenger said this hadith. But a Tabi'i, a Tabi'i of a Tabi'i, like Imam al-Zuhri, heard this hadith from whom? From Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib. Is this hadith mutawatir for him? No, because he heard it from one person. That one person heard it from ten or twenty; it is mutawatir for him, but for this Tabi'i, the Tabi'i of the Tabi'i, Imam al-Zuhri, it became an ahad report. So any report narrated by Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib, no matter how strong it is, no matter how mutawatir it is, becomes probable, meaning not certain in establishment, for the Tabi'i, the Tabi'i of the Tabi'i. This philosophy tells him that he is now free to take it or not to take it. From the complete philosophy, he said: If the hadith is related to creed, then if you take it, you take it and carry it as probable, not certain. And if it is in rulings, it is obligatory for you to take it. They distinguished between creed and distinguished between ruling, another distinction. And this distinction has many tails and effects, such that you will not be able to take creed from one of those who were influenced by this philosophical discourse, because if it is from the Quran, which is certain in establishment, he will require it to be certain in meaning. Another philosophy: certain in establishment, certain in meaning. The Quran is certain in establishment, but sometimes it is not certain in meaning. So if it is not certain in meaning either in creed, then if you wish, you take it, or if you wish, you do not take it. The discussion on this is long and very long. And I, by the grace of Allah, have two dissertations dedicated to this topic. You can ask about them and study them, if Allah wills, a good study. The important thing is that the distinction between ahad hadith and mutawatir hadith is a term that we should not build a distinction upon between whether the hadith is in creed, in which case it is not taken unless it is mutawatir, whereas if it is in rulings, it must be taken. This distinction has no basis. If a hadith comes to you from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) as authentic, it is obligatory to take it absolutely, whether it is in creed or in rulings or otherwise.

The questioner : The two dissertations?

The Shaykh : The hadith is a proof in itself, a proof in itself in creeds and rulings. And the other dissertation, by Allah, I no longer remember... Questioner: The obligation

The Shaykh : The obligation of taking it.