What is the authenticity of the report from Ibn 'Abbas (disbelief less than disbelief)? Because some scholars have said that this report is weak?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : We praise Him, seek His help, and seek His forgiveness. We seek refuge in Allah from the evil of our own souls and from the evil of our deeds. Whom Allah guides, none can mislead, and whom He leaves to mislead, none can guide. And I bear witness that there is no god but Allah alone, with no partner, and that Muhammad is His slave and His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). As for what follows, I have been granted, and all praise is due to Allah, the opportunity to meet our scholar, the hadith master of the age, the honorable Shaykh and our father, Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani (may Allah guide him and bless his life), to pose some questions to him. Although I had not prepared for this interview, by the grace of Allah it took place, and then by the grace of one of our brothers from the Levant. First of all, we thank his honor for accepting the interview and posing the questions, which is a sign of his generosity and grace. Then we pose some questions that may arise here or there regarding what is called... the awakening. We direct to you, may Allah bless you, a question concerning the issue of *hakimiyyah* and the report mentioned by al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The student : ... .
The Shaykh : No, no, we have not finished yet... Today we have guests and we have specific questions.
The questioner : Regarding the issue of *hakimiyyah* and the report mentioned by Ibn Kathir from Ibn 'Abbas, that the intended meaning of disbelief is disbelief less than disbelief. Some scholars have said that this report is weak. Is there, for example, a path that supports this report, or what is the Shaykh's opinion on this report?
The Shaykh : What we believe and hold to from the scientific perspective is that this hadith is authentic, or in the precise scientific sense, that this *mawquf* report, or this *athar*, from Ibn 'Abbas is an authentic *athar*. There is no doubt that from the scientific perspective, it is not sufficient for someone to say that a certain *athar* is weak in its chain of narration. Likewise, we say, in fairness, that it is not sufficient to say that it is authentic in its chain of narration. However, since the question has been raised and we had not previously recalled what we mentioned in some of our annotations or *takhrij*, we are now left with no choice but to reiterate the settled conclusion in our memory, which is that this *athar* is authentic, without doubt or ambiguity. But I would have wished that the main reason for weakening this *athar* be mentioned, knowing that al-Hakim authenticated it and al-Dhahabi agreed with him as well, in order to examine immediately this defect that the one who weakens it clings to—the one referred to in your question. If you have in your memory any of this defect that someone might cling to, I can answer it immediately. Otherwise, I cannot address the raised issue with general statements like "the hadith is weak" or "the *athar* is weak." We ask: what is the cause of this?
The questioner : What comes to my mind, may Allah bless you, is that there is some disconnection in the chain of the *athar*, or there is some defect in it. But your opinion on this *athar* is what matters to us, and that is sufficient as an opinion.
The Shaykh : May Allah bless you. I have answered you that this *athar* is authentic. I have a continuation to the answer, but to discuss the *athar* from the hadith perspective, it is not sufficient to say "this is weak," because we will ask: what is the cause of the weakness? You say there is a disconnection; this is also a vague answer, because we will ask: where is the disconnection? Is it at the bottom, at the top, or elsewhere? Nevertheless, I can now, if it matters to you, extract the *athar* from a source of hadith and we can ask: where is the disconnection? Is it from the one who narrated it from Ibn 'Abbas, or from the one who narrated it from the narrator from Ibn 'Abbas, and so on? Do you wish this, or do we suffice for now with the previous answer, which is that what we know is that the chain of this *athar* is authentic?
The questioner : That is sufficient as an answer. And if you are going to add more... there is no harm in it.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The student : ... .
The Shaykh : No, no, we have not finished yet... Today we have guests and we have specific questions.
The questioner : Regarding the issue of *hakimiyyah* and the report mentioned by Ibn Kathir from Ibn 'Abbas, that the intended meaning of disbelief is disbelief less than disbelief. Some scholars have said that this report is weak. Is there, for example, a path that supports this report, or what is the Shaykh's opinion on this report?
The Shaykh : What we believe and hold to from the scientific perspective is that this hadith is authentic, or in the precise scientific sense, that this *mawquf* report, or this *athar*, from Ibn 'Abbas is an authentic *athar*. There is no doubt that from the scientific perspective, it is not sufficient for someone to say that a certain *athar* is weak in its chain of narration. Likewise, we say, in fairness, that it is not sufficient to say that it is authentic in its chain of narration. However, since the question has been raised and we had not previously recalled what we mentioned in some of our annotations or *takhrij*, we are now left with no choice but to reiterate the settled conclusion in our memory, which is that this *athar* is authentic, without doubt or ambiguity. But I would have wished that the main reason for weakening this *athar* be mentioned, knowing that al-Hakim authenticated it and al-Dhahabi agreed with him as well, in order to examine immediately this defect that the one who weakens it clings to—the one referred to in your question. If you have in your memory any of this defect that someone might cling to, I can answer it immediately. Otherwise, I cannot address the raised issue with general statements like "the hadith is weak" or "the *athar* is weak." We ask: what is the cause of this?
The questioner : What comes to my mind, may Allah bless you, is that there is some disconnection in the chain of the *athar*, or there is some defect in it. But your opinion on this *athar* is what matters to us, and that is sufficient as an opinion.
The Shaykh : May Allah bless you. I have answered you that this *athar* is authentic. I have a continuation to the answer, but to discuss the *athar* from the hadith perspective, it is not sufficient to say "this is weak," because we will ask: what is the cause of the weakness? You say there is a disconnection; this is also a vague answer, because we will ask: where is the disconnection? Is it at the bottom, at the top, or elsewhere? Nevertheless, I can now, if it matters to you, extract the *athar* from a source of hadith and we can ask: where is the disconnection? Is it from the one who narrated it from Ibn 'Abbas, or from the one who narrated it from the narrator from Ibn 'Abbas, and so on? Do you wish this, or do we suffice for now with the previous answer, which is that what we know is that the chain of this *athar* is authentic?
The questioner : That is sufficient as an answer. And if you are going to add more... there is no harm in it.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.