What is your opinion on weakening a hadith because it contradicts historical events, such as the hadith regarding the imposition of jizyah on the Jews?

The Shaykh: Yes.
The student : In reality, my research was essentially that I advise... I have comprehended, meaning, "The Weak Series" which has been printed, and I took your corrections regarding the texts. My research was to weaken hadiths because they contradict history, a historical event, like the famous hadith of imposing jizyah on the Jews, and the famous hadiths that contradict history. So I tried to correct all your judgments of weakness on a hadith, because usually you judge a hadith through its chain of narration, but at times you also judged the hadith as weak through its text. So, what is your opinion on this matter?

The Shaykh : Yes, what you say is correct, but there is danger in this. This is what is called in modern terminology internal criticism, which is the criticism of the text. Many of the young people today, and some of the disbelieving Orientalists, criticize the hadiths based on their meanings. These Orientalists may think that the scholars of hadith were only concerned with criticizing the hadiths through their chains of narration, and this is ignorance on their part regarding the science of hadith. The truth is that a large portion of the narrators are criticized by the preservers based on their review of their hadiths and their examination of their texts, and their opinion that they contradict what is known in Islam from the Book and the authentic Sunnah. From this came some expressions that are frequently used in the books of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil (the critique and vindication of narrators). For example, when Imam al-Bukhari says of a narrator that he is a denouncer of hadith, or that he has denunciations, and other imams use this expression as well. The most prominent one who uses expressions other than this, which indicate that he judged the subject of the biography as weak, is Ibn Hibban al-Busti, because he has different expressions, including: "He narrates denunciations from the famous," "He narrates what the beginner judges by this craft to have no basis," and so on. So the science of hadith did not stand only on the study of chains of narration, but the study of chains of narration was based on the study of texts, or to be more precise, on the study of some texts of some narrators. Otherwise, justice, precision, and memorization are known through association and companionship and the like. But the truth that cannot be denied is that the scholars of hadith poured most of their attention into the criticism of men, not into the criticism of texts. In my belief, this was a success from Allah (Mighty and Majestic) for them, because if this door had been opened as the door of criticizing men was opened, the true and the false would have been mixed up, and the right and the wrong would have been confused. For this reason, which is a very self-evident matter, there are today some contemporary young people, one of whom recently appeared with the title al-Milbari, and perhaps you have heard of him. He is a professor at a university in Algeria, and it appears that he graduated from the Islamic University. Also, there is a man in Saudi Arabia named Shaykh Abdullah Sa'd. These people are now encouraging the young people—and this is a great destruction in reality—to focus on the criticism of texts, not just chains of narration.
The student : This is also the book of al-Ghazali.

The Shaykh : Al-Ghazali follows this approach, al-Ghazali follows this approach in application, not as a directive. These people are the opposite of him. There is no doubt that al-Ghazali, unfortunately, and he has passed to the mercy of Allah and His forgiveness, if Allah wills, but he harmed Islam in hadith and in fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence). He pretends to be with the jurists, but he is not with the jurists, nor with the hadith scholars, nor with the exegetes, but rather he appears to be a nation unto himself. The point is, so it was a success from Allah (Mighty and Majestic) that He did not open the door for the scholars of hadith to focus on the criticism of texts except for very few individuals. This is from the favor of Allah (Mighty and Majestic), because as I mentioned or indicated earlier, minds, information, memorization, and precision differ completely from person to person. So if the door of criticizing texts had been opened, the Shari'ah would have been ruined, because it is established, as you know, on the Book and the explanation of the Book, which is the Sunnah. I want to say after this introduction that what I hinted at is of this nature. What is the reason? The reason is that history has not been studied scientifically, and according to the hadith methodology. You find the historians, especially the contemporary doctors today, when they write to you on a historical topic, they put the story and mention underneath it Ibn Jarir al-Tabari. The history of the nation is preferred there, may Allah reward him with good, he mentioned it with its chain, but there is so-and-so... the abandoned one... so-and-so is also abandoned, and so on. What is the benefit of this attribution? Nothing. So I fear, and I fear greatly, that we will place the criticism of hadith texts on such history. Therefore, one of two things is necessary here. One is difficult to achieve and attain, and you have surely heard that there is a movement now to purify Islamic history. But I ask, on what system and on what basis will this purification be? I say this is impossible, that history can never be purified, because it does not have rules and methodologies as is the case in the science of hadith and the science of the Sunnah. So this is impossible. But it is possible for the one who wants to enter this entrance and go through this passage to be aware that this history which he wants to apply to the hadith and weaken its text with is more established than this hadith. And is this easy, as you see?

The questioner : Please allow me, I have a problem from a long time ago.

The Shaykh : Please, in the name of Allah.
The student : A moment, but in response to the Shaykh's words, your words are connected, it is better that I forget. In reality, the issue of relying on history, specifically what the Shaykh hinted at and indicated, may Allah reward him with good, but the rules that the hadith scholars established for authenticating hadiths and judging their weakness or leaving them or preferring this over that, these suffice regarding history, they suffice greatly. That is, there is no need to use, to subject the historical text to the hadith, even if the hadith history is known, what is the abrogating and the abrogated, how is it judged?

The Shaykh : There was a dilemma.
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : Most of the historical narrations are dilemmas, and the best of them are mursal (a report missing the Companion link).
The student : And so I say, Shaykh, there is no need for it.

The Shaykh : But in that case, history will be neglected, because there is no historical material like hadith material narrated with chains of narration. The material is very little.
The student : Very little, and then, as the Shaykh indicated, the judges from the hadith scholars who were given this understanding, this understanding by which they judge the texts from... if we counted these texts that he judged by criticism, we would find them few as well.

The Shaykh : There is no doubt.
The student : Very few, and so in reality, we are sufficient with what we have of these rules. As for these rules that were agreed upon in this time, and one of them is here with us, and one in Algeria as you mentioned, and one in Saudi Arabia, this is in reality destruction, destruction of history and the Sunnah.

The Shaykh : Please, Professor.