Continuation of the response to al-Turabi regarding his claim that the criteria established by the scholars of hadith are matters of independent legal reasoning (ijtihad) and are not binding on those who came after them.

The Shaykh : So, those who now claim that we should reconsider the hadithic rules upon which the Muhammadan Sunnah is established for verification and classification of weakness, and who ask where these scholars derived them, undoubtedly, at the very least, have empty minds, or rather, I would say their hearts are empty, or rather, I would say that their hearts do not believe in the obligation of following the path of the believers. Otherwise, how could they imagine that these Muslims continued for all these years on a scientific hadithic methodology, and now they want to reconsider these principles and these rules? I believe that these people, above all, either do not believe in this text: , or they are like many of these contemporaries who know the truth yet deviate at the same time. I previously gave an example regarding what the imams of hadith did when they distinguished the Companion from the Successor, and distinguished the trustworthy Successor from the one who is not trustworthy, and further distinguished the trustworthy narrator from whom one may take narration from any trustworthy narrator, or not, and so on through the previous details. These scholars undoubtedly relied on many Qur'anic texts or Prophetic hadiths when they established these rules. For example, His saying (Blessed and Exalted is He) in warning against relying on any report: , to the end of the verse: . This verification (tabayyun) is what the scholars of hadith relied upon. So, first, they distinguished the Companion from the Successor, because it follows from this that if a Successor says, "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said," this hadith is considered mursal (disconnected) in their view. Let us pause at this example. What will these people who now claim that we must reconsider these rules say about a Successor who says, "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said"? Will his report be accepted when he did not hear the report or hadith from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)? They cannot bring an argument that proves the validity of their view, which contradicts the view of the imams of hadith, because that would mean abolishing the science of chains of narration (isnad) entirely. One of the precise, meticulous scholars of hadith, in refuting the view of those who might argue for using the narration of a Successor from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) as evidence, contrary to the scholars of hadith, said: This means that we have discarded the value of the isnad itself from the science of hadith. And many scholars of hadith said, and this is the truth, as you are saying: "The isnad is part of the religion; were it not for the isnad, whoever wished would say whatever he wished." "Were it not for the isnad"—this is correct. Now, when a Successor says, "The Messenger of Allah said," we will say to him: You claim that this hadith is evidence, and you know that he is a Successor and did not hear the hadith from the Messenger (peace be upon him). He may have received it from a man who was not a Companion. He may have received it from a man who was not a Companion and was not trustworthy. In fact, some scholars of hadith, through inductive study, found in some hadiths a chain of Successor from Successor from Successor from Successor. I do not remember now if it was in the fifth or at least the fifth position, a Companion, meaning the first Successor said, "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said." It is possible that he took it from a Successor from a Successor from a Successor, then from a Companion. There are four people between the Companion and that Successor. If this type is found through inductive study, then when a hadith comes to us from a Successor who said, "The Messenger of Allah said," it is possible that there is a chain of intermediaries between this Successor and the Companion. We said that the Companions are all just (adil). The precise, meticulous Hafiz (master of hadith) says that if we accept the mursal hadith of a Successor, then by the same logic, we must also accept the hadith of the Successor of the Successor, which is called in terminology mu'dal (a hadith with two missing links). The mu'dal hadith is one where the Successor of the Successor says, "The Messenger of Allah said." This would be evidence for those who say that if a Successor says, "The Messenger of Allah said," it is evidence. So, there is no difference between this and the Successor of the Successor, until the matter reaches us today... the examples... until the matter reaches us today, a man who is a learned, virtuous, truthful, and trustworthy scholar, and so on, says, "The Messenger of Allah said." We should accept it, why? Because he transmitted it as mursal, just like the one before him, just like the one before him. So, the mursal hadith is not evidence in the view of the scholars of hadith. These people who want to help in establishing new rules, claiming to demolish the terminology of hadith and to know the authentic from the weak, and so on, either they are in the position of the scholars, or in this example of the mursal hadith, which means the hadith, they say it is not used as evidence, as we mentioned earlier regarding the possibility that there are many Successors between him and the Companion who was not mentioned, whose identities are unknown because they were not named. They may be Muslims, but they were bad in... and they may be Muslims, but they are from the open sinners (fasiq) whose hadith is not used as evidence, and so on. So, those who claim that they now want to establish these rules, either they will bring them from the Noble Qur'an and the Sunnah, and they will not find a verse or hadith that the scholars of hadith overlooked, because that is impossible, as we mentioned earlier regarding His saying (Blessed and Exalted is He): . So, the path of the believers is obligatory to follow, just as it is obligatory to follow the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). The distinction between the two means that His saying (Exalted is He) regarding the People of the Book applies to them: . Then, there is evidence that obligates them regarding this very serious claim, which is reconsidering the rules of the science of hadith. Undoubtedly, something else is obligated upon them, and by reminding them of this other thing, I think every Muslim who is concerned about his creed and religion will be convinced that this claim to look into the rules of the science of hadith and their principles means covering up the demolition of the religion under the name of knowledge. Why? Because, as they say today regarding the obligation to reconsider the rules and principles of the science of hadith, they will also claim the obligation to look into the principles of the science of jurisprudence (fiqh), because that is also a science that is progressing and advancing. At that time, the matter will be as clear as the sun at noon that behind this claim lies a very serious matter, which is the demolition of the two foundations: the principles of the science of hadith and the principles of fiqh. Why? So that the matter becomes chaos, where verses are interpreted as they wish, and hadiths are taken as they wish, interpreted, of course, and a fortiori, as they wish, because there are no correct scientific criteria and rules, because Muslims do not agree on misguidance. And here I conclude my speech. If their claim were a claim of truth, but I say, as I said in a previous speech: I hear the noise of the mill, but I do not see the flour. They should look into these rules. Well, did you look? Did you establish new rules that contradict those old rules, and did you find your new rules to be more correct and preferable? Then you did nothing. So, you did not accept the old, nor did you bring the new. And the intended point, or the crux of the matter, is the demolition of Islam by demolishing its foundations and rules.