And is there a break in the chain of narration in that?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner: O our Shaykh, if a group of trustworthy narrators, or those of a lower status, narrated to us, is the chain of narration considered valid?
The Shaykh: Who is the one who says, "A group narrated to us"?
The questioner: A trustworthy person.
The Shaykh: A trustworthy man.
The questioner : Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh: He says, "A group narrated to us."
The questioner: A group narrated to us.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner: For example, from Ma'mar.
The Shaykh: Yes, the hadith would be established.
The questioner: And what if it is less than that?
The Shaykh : If what?
The questioner: Less than that, less than trustworthy.
The Shaykh: The same ruling applies; if his hadith is good, it is good, and if his hadith is weak, it is weak.
The questioner: Does not the phrase "a group" imply a break?
The Shaykh : How?
The questioner: Does "a group" imply a break in the chain?
The Shaykh: No, there is no break.
The questioner: Well, what is the reason for its ambiguity?
The Shaykh: A break occurs when a narrator is dropped from the chain. Here, the narrator was not dropped; rather, he was left ambiguous and not named. If the ambiguous party is a single person, the hadith is not used as evidence. However, if it is a group, it is used as evidence.
The questioner: On the basis that it constitutes mass transmission, which is the very principle of mass transmission.
The Shaykh: A group, yes.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh: Who is the one who says, "A group narrated to us"?
The questioner: A trustworthy person.
The Shaykh: A trustworthy man.
The questioner : Yes, exactly.
The Shaykh: He says, "A group narrated to us."
The questioner: A group narrated to us.
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner: For example, from Ma'mar.
The Shaykh: Yes, the hadith would be established.
The questioner: And what if it is less than that?
The Shaykh : If what?
The questioner: Less than that, less than trustworthy.
The Shaykh: The same ruling applies; if his hadith is good, it is good, and if his hadith is weak, it is weak.
The questioner: Does not the phrase "a group" imply a break?
The Shaykh : How?
The questioner: Does "a group" imply a break in the chain?
The Shaykh: No, there is no break.
The questioner: Well, what is the reason for its ambiguity?
The Shaykh: A break occurs when a narrator is dropped from the chain. Here, the narrator was not dropped; rather, he was left ambiguous and not named. If the ambiguous party is a single person, the hadith is not used as evidence. However, if it is a group, it is used as evidence.
The questioner: On the basis that it constitutes mass transmission, which is the very principle of mass transmission.
The Shaykh: A group, yes.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.