Discussion on the acceptance of the narration of the innovator.

The questioner : I have a question regarding the science of hadith terminology. We find that scholars of terminology, when they establish principles in their books, particularly when discussing the narration of the innovator who calls to his innovation and the one who does not, distinguish in practice between the narration of the one who calls to his innovation by rejecting his narration if it aligns with what he calls to, and they accept the narration of the one who does not call to it, whether it aligns with his innovation or not. However, when we look at the conditions of an authentic hadith, we find that scholars stipulate justice (adalah) in this, stating that the narrator's qualification is not established except by the proof of his justice, and they define justice as the likelihood of the narrator's truthfulness. Here I have a difficulty, Professor: if the innovator narrator may be accused regarding his memorization, why do we narrate from him?

The Shaykh : Excuse me, if the narrator is accused, of what?

The questioner : The innovator who calls to his innovation may be doubted in his truthfulness, or lying may occur in him, so we do not accept his narration at all, knowing that we find that scholars of hadith, when lying occurs in a narrator, reject his narration entirely. So I want this knot to be untied from my mind so that it becomes clear, and may Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : First, the distinction between the one who calls to his innovation and the one who does not is a matter on which scholars of hadith do not agree; rather, it is the opinion of some of them. It is practiced theoretically, but the contrary is clear in practice. Is the answer clear up to this point?

The questioner : It is clear up to this point.

The Shaykh : Good. If you adopt this answer, and I will present to you what helps you to adopt it, I think the difficulties will fall away, is that not so?

The questioner : Yes, indeed.

The Shaykh : First, from the same principles and rules you mentioned earlier, the definition of an authentic hadith is what is narrated by a just, precise narrator from a like him, from a like him, to its end, without being anomalous or defective. So this innovator, let us say the innovator who calls to his innovation, either the definition of an authentic hadith applies to him or it does not. If it applies to him, the problem is ended, and what remains is the addition you read in the simplified books of terminology; this is an opinion, as I mentioned at the beginning of my answer, but it is not adopted as a rule. Is that clear?

The questioner : It is clear.

The Shaykh : Then you find in practice that the just, precise narrator: the intended meaning of "just" is only the negation of the open sinner, let alone the disbeliever. He is a Muslim; the just one is the Muslim. But due to the precision of scholars of hadith, they do not accept the hadith of every Muslim because they stipulate that he be a memorizer and precise. If these two conditions are met, his hadith is treated like authentic hadiths. On this basis, the two books of consensus among scholars of Islam that they are the most authentic books after the Book of Allah the Exalted and Majestic were established. And if it is said that so-and-so is an innovator and also a caller to it, as I mentioned, we say—and here is the point that students of knowledge should pay attention to—can we, even mentally, and then looking practically, can we imagine in our minds a just, i.e., a Muslim, and a precise, memorizing, and a calling innovator? Is the question possible now?

The questioner : It is possible, Professor.

The Shaykh : Is it possible? Do you have anything else?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Just, just. Did this possible case occur or did it not occur?

The questioner : It occurred.

The Shaykh : That is it, the difficulty has fallen, because as you know, Imam al-Bukhari narrates from 'Imran ibn Hutan, who was not only a caller to his innovation but was the one who plotted to kill the Caliph of the Muslims. So, were it not for the independent legal reasoning (ijtihad) we mentioned in some sessions when we spoke about the error that comes from the independent reasoner, and that one should not distinguish between error in the fundamentals and error in the branches, saying that error in the branches is forgiven and in the fundamentals it is not forgiven, or in other words, error is forgiven in legal rulings but not in beliefs or in scientific reports, this distinction has no evidence from the Book of Allah or from the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him); rather, it is the opinion of some jurists or scholars of theology. And due to the possibility that 'Imran ibn Hutan, despite his crime, was not acting out of desire and was not from the category of This is the view of Imam al-Bukhari regarding this Khariji when he included him in his hadith, because he is a Muslim, without doubt, and because he is a precise memorizer, but he is a Khariji. If he did not persist in his innovation in narration, as for his belief, Allah is his reckoner, but in narration, they do not look at opinion, school, or belief at all, as long as the two basic conditions mentioned in the definition of an authentic hadith in all books of terminology are met. And the reality is that among the virtues of scholars of hadith and the people of the Sunnah, unlike all other sects, is that the people of the Sunnah, and especially among them the people of hadith, encompass all other Islamic sects and do not exclude them from the circle of Islam except for one who denies what is certain, while the other sects, and you have for example the Shi'ah, do not consider the most authentic books after the Book of Allah, "Sahih al-Bukhari and Muslim," which were established on precise rules and principles, to be such that some scholars of the infidel Europeans finally had to admit that the Muslim community was distinguished among all nations by a method to distinguish authentic narrations from weak ones, which is the science of isnad and the science of critique and vindication of narrators. This is missing in all other Islamic sects. And therefore, we find in our books that the Shi'ite, the Khariji, and the Murji'i are narrated from, and their opinion and school are claimed for them, and Allah the Exalted and Majestic is their reckoner, while the other sects do not accept a Sunni, even if he is from the Companions. What more do we need to say than that if he is from the Companions, they do not accept his report?! And therefore, among the perfection of the people of the Sunnah, and especially among them the people of hadith, is that when they established these precise rules and these principles, they did not stipulate anything except that he be a Muslim and that he be a precise memorizer. As for his opinion, his school, his belief, Allah, as we said, is his reckoner. And on the contrary, and this is another opposing aspect, and this also indicates their virtue from another angle, and that there is no favoritism with them in narrating the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), in that they drop the hadith of an imam among the imams of the Muslims, an imam who excelled in one of the sciences of the Shari'ah, in jurisprudence or exegesis or something similar, or in recitation, or so on. Despite that, they acknowledge his virtue and excellence in that aspect, but in hadith, they do not cite him as proof.
Abu Malik : Like Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him).

The Shaykh : Keep it secret, Professor! I fear that the earth is inhabited, O Abu Malik! But I want to give an example that may contain new benefit: it is from the great scholars of the early Muslims, a distinguished Tabi'i, excuse me, a Tabi' al-Tabi'i. The son of the father, the father is a Tabi'i, and he narrates from the Companions of the Messenger (peace be upon him). This father is 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Layla, and his son is Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Layla. This is one of the great jurists, but if he narrates a hadith, it is not accepted from him because he perfected jurisprudence and devoted all his effort to jurisprudence and deriving legal rulings from what he had of hadiths, in addition to the preserved Book of Allah. This is another aspect that indicates the fairness of scholars of hadith and their detachment, and that they do not conceal for anyone, and no one takes them in Allah for the blame of a blamer.
Abu Malik : Our Shaykh, clarification for the brothers regarding the justice of the narrators and al-Bukhari's reliance on a man or narrator like 'Imran ibn Hutan. It seems that al-Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him), due to his precision in this and other matters, and likewise other than al-Bukhari, that ...
Abu Layla : ... O young men

The Shaykh : What are we listening to, a broadcast, my brothers ...

The questioner : So I say, it seems that al-Bukhari and those like him who are firmly grounded in this science, matters regarding the conditions of these people were revealed to them, by which they judged them to have reached a level of justice such that their narration cannot be rejected. For example, among these matters that appeared to them is that they were very truthful in their calling, meaning in their innovation. They were on great truthfulness. And therefore, this truthfulness that they had is not held against them as being callers or non-callers, but rather they perceived truthfulness in their calling and zeal for it. And this is what you referred to, meaning that the man was not one of desire. So I loved to clarify this issue in truth.

The Shaykh : The scholars of hadith, as you know, also feel secure regarding the narrations of the Khawarij, because in their sect and their misguidance, they hold the view that one who commits a major sin is declared a disbeliever. There is no doubt that one of the greatest of major sins is lying about the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Therefore, if a Khariji narrates a hadith from the Messenger of Allah, it is most unlikely that he is a liar or a fabricator. This is unlike the Rafidah, regarding whom the matter is as Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah al-Harrani (may Allah have mercy on him) rightly said, "I have not found in the Islamic sects anyone more lying than the Rafidah." This is observed in the books; you will find that in many, and I do not say most, but in many of the weak and fabricated hadiths, their chain of transmission revolves around the Rafidah. It is very rare, and I say rare, and pay attention because I mean what I say, that you find a Khariji narrating a fabricated hadith, because the Khawarij's methodology developed, at least practically, in the same way as the general Muslim population. How were they before? They were truthful, meaning they were God-fearing. And how is their situation today? Likewise, in the early period of the Khawarij, there was complete confidence in the reliability of their narrations. But later on, some of them were also found fabricating hadiths in defense of their sect. However, this was not hidden from the imams of hadith, who possessed, if I may use a modern expression, a radar, and there is no equivalent to such a radar in all nations.

The questioner : In verification of your words, Professor, when Imam Malik was asked about his narrations from the Khawarij, he said a wonderful statement: "One of them would have preferred to fall from the sky rather than to lie." Yes, and this is also a verification of your other words, from the confessions of some of the later Khawarij, who said, "In later times, when they wanted to support a matter, they would make it into a hadith."

The Shaykh : That is it.