The Shaykh’s clarification of his authentication of the hadith establishing the opening of the barrier by Ya’juj and Ma’juj, and his refutation of Ibn Kathir’s claim that it contradicts the Qur’an in its statement

The Shaykh: He authenticated the chain of narration, saying: “But there is an anomaly in the text.” What is the anomaly? That the hadith establishes that Ya’juj and Ma’juj will open the barrier. Ibn Kathir says—and here is the point of strangeness—: “This contradicts the Qur’an, because the Qur’an says: ” I had responded to Ibn Kathir with some elaboration in *Sahih al-Jami'*. In reality, there is no contradiction between the verse and the hadith, because the verse speaks of what has passed, and the hadith speaks of what will happen. Despite the fact that the response was very clear, this poor man quoted [the text] before quoting Ibn Kathir’s statement. He spoke about the chain of narration as is his custom, briefly, and said: “It is a strong chain.” Good, fine. Then he quoted Ibn Kathir’s words, saying: “But there is an anomaly in the text.” Then he quoted from Ibn Kathir where the anomaly is, which we mentioned earlier. He said: “And Shaykh Nasir al-Din al-Albani erred in his response to Ibn Kathir.” And that was it.
The student : Yes.

The Shaykh: It is as if he is a man obsessed with refuting [al-Albani] at the slightest opportunity, even though he should have responded to my refutation if he had a point of view. I said: There is no contradiction between the verse and the hadith. The problem now is that he is compelled to do one of two things: First, he must retract his following of Ibn Kathir and his misleading of al-Albani, and this is the truth. Or else, he will reject the Qur’anic texts and Prophetic hadiths regarding the emergence of Ya’juj and Ma’juj at the end of time, based on the ridiculous logic: that the verse negates [it]! Well, the verse negates both: , so how do they emerge? Do you understand how?
The student : Yes.

The Shaykh: So their emergence is either by going over it or by digging through it, and in both cases there is a contradiction with what he fell into by following Ibn Kathir. So he has things like this, as if he is a man obsessed with refuting al-Albani, meaning: “A spear, even if it flies,” as they say. We seek help from Allah.
The student: But our Shaykh, regarding the *Sunan*!

The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: Regarding the *Sunan*, I read through the *Sunan*, and when I pass by a *takhrij* [tracing of a hadith], I follow the paths in it, and I find that he grades many hadiths [as weak], but in reality, if he exerted a little effort with the corroborating narrations, he would find them, and they are traced in your *Sahih al-Jami'*.

The Shaykh: Yes, indeed, he does not do it.
The student: He does not do it. I have the hadith of Usamah: Or was it Usamah! He grades it [as weak]!

The Shaykh: Mmm, may Allah guide us.
The student: Amen.

The Shaykh: The truth is that even the early scholars do not pay attention to such things, yes, indeed.
The student: Your *Sunan*, our Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: From your *Sunan*.

The Shaykh : I did not understand.
The student: From your *Sunan*, O Shaykh, may Allah honor you.

The Shaykh: Ah, but he used it in the linguistic sense, yes, indeed. Many of the early scholars do not pay attention to the weak corroborating narration, so they fall into such an error.