What is your opinion of those who doubt the hadiths that have the ruling of being marfu' (traced to the Prophet), claiming they are the opinions of the Companions and not from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)?

The questioner : Regarding the marfu' (traced to the Prophet) and what has the ruling of being marfu', I have read in some books, of course, that it is considered marfu' as a settled matter, meaning it is attributed to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). However, he says that regarding the ruling of the marfu', even though the scholars say that there is no room for opinion or ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) in it, this matter could be that this Companion brought it from here or there. So this is a matter concerning the ruling of the marfu', and it seems he wanted to strike it out.

The Shaykh : What did he want?

The questioner : He wanted to strike it out. The term, meaning the ruling of the marfu', either the hadith is marfu' or it is not. That is, we do not have anything called "having the ruling of the marfu'."

The Shaykh : Who wanted this, you or someone else?

The questioner : No one, the writers.

The Shaykh : One of the writers!

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : With this doubt that you raised, I do not think he is correct in the absolute sense, meaning in denying a hadith, even if it is just one hadith that is mawquf (stopping at a Companion) but has the ruling of being marfu'. He would not be correct if he went so far as to deny it absolutely. We see in what he says a kind of strength and plausibility. It is possible that there are some hadiths where some scholars actually say, "This is mawquf, but it has the ruling of being marfu' because it is not said from the perspective of opinion." This is often said about what is prohibited by the Shari'ah, and it may even be haram (forbidden) in the case of the haram. But actually, I find—peace be upon you—I find that this prohibition being mawquf could be due to the ijtihad of the person it is attributed to. However, it is possible to narrow the scope of this rule so that there is no way to avoid legislating it. We give an example of this: It is authentically narrated from Ibn Abbas that the Qur'an was sent down in one piece to the House of Glory in the lowest heaven, and this is mawquf. Can it be said that this could be from mere opinion and ijtihad? Put yourself in the place of that writer you referred to, and think and estimate, and extend your estimation as far as you can. What could be objected to regarding this hadith if I said, "This is mawquf but has the ruling of being marfu'"? What could he say?

The questioner : It is not possible for the noble Companion, who is known to mean, to say something like this from his own mind.

The Shaykh : I told you to put yourself in his place. You put yourself in my place.
Al-Halabi : Our Shaykh, he... you need to be patient with him a little, our teacher.

The Shaykh : No, it appears that, and perhaps this is a favor from Allah upon him, that he is not able to put himself in the place of the one who is wrong.

The questioner : May Allah honor you, our Shaykh, and bless you, and if Allah wills, we will be in good standing.

The Shaykh : The truth is that this cannot be answered absolutely. The summary of the matter is: if the report is mawquf upon a Companion, first, it relates to the unseen matters, and second, it cannot be from the Isra'iliyyat (narrations from the People of the Book), then it has the ruling of being marfu' with certainty.
The questioner: Or the causes of revelation, our Shaykh?

The Shaykh : It is included, it is included in the general rule. This is not from the Isra'iliyyat. The causes of revelation are not from the Isra'iliyyat; they are from the unseen matters. It is a legal ruling.