The Rebuttal of al-Tarabi's Statement That If a Companion Narrates a Hadith in Which He Has an Interest, We Should Consider His Narration Very Weak

The student : And nothing is more indicative of this, our Shaykh, than the statement of that man which you just mentioned. He says, and he accuses the Companions of a clear and extremely serious accusation. He says, "But the evaluation of reports can be changed. Our evaluation of reports can be changed. So we say that if a Companion narrates a hadith in which he has an interest... the danger is that if he has an interest, we make his narration very weak."

The Shaykh: Allahu Akbar.
The student : Look, this is a bad word. This is an accusation against the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), and I do not think that a Muslim who has any faith would say such a thing.

The Shaykh : The matter is now clear: the group wants to destroy Islam by destroying its first narrators.
The student : Yes, when he says this word, it means removing the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them). Then he says something else: he wants to come to strengthening and relying on weak hadiths, and he says that it is not permissible for us to overlook them. So what does he say? "If we judge by the methodology of the Sunnah's jurisprudence, how do we understand the Sunnah? We address the problems of the chain of narration. In other words, if there is weakness in the hadiths, if there is weakness in the hadiths or doubt about their authenticity, we take them in a sound jurisprudential manner and link them closely to the Qur'an."

The Shaykh : What Allah willed.

The questioner : ... .
The student : I do not know; this is speech of the utmost danger and evil. If he is saying this, and I think he is, meaning this view that if hadith jurisprudence is relative, meaning we attribute the hadith to the general meanings of the religion and bring it within the interests, within the knowledge, within the jurisprudence, within the other hadiths, and within the verses, this is speech that has no meaning, just as it has no explicit text. If we know this jurisprudence of hadith, we can correct a great deal of the problems of weak hadiths.

The Shaykh : This point, this specific one... this man, the first to say this, is al-Ghazali, the contemporary. This is his claim.
The student : It is from my speech about al-Ghazali, at al-Ghazali's table...

The Shaykh : ... .
The student : Yes, it is... al-Ghazali.

The Shaykh : The metal is the same.
The student : And therefore, he, and on the occasion of mentioning the contemporary al-Ghazali... al-Ghazali, or al-Ghazali (may Allah have mercy on him), says, "And I give an example of a person who takes a great deal from weak hadiths, but he is rarely led astray by them, and that is al-Ghazali, the author of *Ihya' 'Ulum al-Din* (The Revival of the Religious Sciences)."

The Shaykh : What Allah willed.
The student : Yes, exactly.

The Shaykh: Allahu Akbar.
The student : So we also want to circle around this... these excerpts from his speech, our Shaykh. First, that he accuses the Companions by saying, if what? Yes.

The questioner : If there is an interest in it...

The Shaykh : ... .
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : ... for the rebuttal...
The student : Yes, you have done well. May Allah bless you.

The Shaykh : ... You have commented, in fact, sufficiently. It has become clear, since he is attacking the Companions and accusing them of narrating a hadith for their personal interest, it means they are lying to the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) for personal interest. There is no longer any trust in any other person.
The student : He, our Shaykh, was trying now, of course, to state explicitly what he has, and to say that the new rules that we should establish are to reject the authentic hadiths that conflict with the requirements of the age, and to strengthen the weak hadith that agrees with the requirements of the age. This is the result he wants from...

The Shaykh : This is the call of the contemporary Muhammad al-Ghazali...
The student : Then, our Shaykh, here is a question, which is also a question that must be answered. He says, of course, "We can establish other grades for the authenticity of the hadith. We establish three grades because of our feeling of not controlling this issue: weak, good, and authentic. And it is possible that we establish more grades, that we have the ability to strengthen the hadith. And in jurisprudence, we use complex strengthening, I..."

The Shaykh : Strengthening what?
The student : Complex. I do not know what this word means. I do not know its meaning. But he means, I would have really liked if we had stopped at something of his speech.

The Shaykh : This is what you said.
The student : Yes, exactly. It is not, our Shaykh, he did not come with anything but general speech. This general speech, I say frankly, has the smell of deception of this religion. This is severe deception. And I do not think that a person who hears or reads such speech would then say that this path or this line has sound intention. There is no sound intention at all.

The Shaykh: Allahu Akbar.
The student : Yes, in fact, everything this man said, and we limited ourselves to these lines or these paragraphs or short sentences, all revolves around one orbit, which is accusing the first scientific methodology, and especially the methodology of... he throws his arrow first at the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them). He says, for example, let us hear what he says about al-Bukhari. He says, "We must test his criteria, meaning al-Bukhari, upon acceptance, and not come as Muslims who are terrified of al-Bukhari." And he mocks here, saying, "Done. Whoever vouches for him is trustworthy, and whoever denounces him is denounced, and whoever vindicates him is vindicated. If the Companions said they are trustworthy, then all the Companions are trustworthy. Why?" This is another phrase.

The Shaykh : ... his ignorance of the Qur'an.
The student : Yes, he says, "If the Companions said they are trustworthy, then all the Companions are trustworthy. Why? It is not a condition. That is not required, whether in a little or a lot."