Is the report of a single narrator (khabar al-ahad) acted upon in the domain of creed (aqidah) absolutely, or is it necessary to condition its acceptance by the Muslim community?

The questioner : Is the report of a single narrator (khabar al-ahad) acted upon in the domain of creed (aqidah) absolutely, or is it necessary to condition its acceptance by the Muslim community?

The Shaykh : No, this condition is only mentioned regarding the half of the report that comes through the path of a single narrator (ahad) in the sense that it provides certainty like a mass-transmitted report (mutawatir). Is that clear? I think so? But it is not required for a report that contains a creedal matter, a hidden reality, or a legal ruling, as Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said: It is not required that it be mass-transmitted (mutawatir) by definition, or that it provide certainty in the sense we mentioned earlier, namely that the community accepted it. This condition is not required absolutely. Because, in my firm belief, there is a distinction between practical rulings and theoretical reports. What is required for the latter is not required for the former. This is undoubtedly one of the innovations of the science of theology (kalam). And as we all know from the authentic Sunnah, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to send individuals from among his Companions (peace and blessings be upon him) to teach people their religion. Among the most famous of them, and the one associated with the evidence—and peace be upon you—that necessitates taking creed even from a report of a single narrator, is Mu'adh ibn Jabal (may Allah be pleased with him). We know that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) sent him to Yemen. When he sent him there, he advised him and commanded him, as in the hadith of Anas ibn Malik, that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "When I sent Mu'adh to Yemen, I said to him: ; so he called them to creed, indeed to the root of creed, which is the oneness of Allah (tawhid). He was an individual. Therefore, such a condition has no legal evidence, even from the practice of the righteous predecessors (Salaf). Many discussions have taken place between me and some of those who adopt this condition in creed. I once said to one of them, and this is actually a refutation for them and an awakening of their consciences if they want the truth. I illustrated a scenario: I said, suppose one of you went to a foreign country like Japan and called them to Islam. Among the things he called them to was what came in the book of their Shaykh, *Nizam al-Islam* (The System of Islam), which states that it is not permissible to take creed from a report of a single narrator. If they later modified this phrase and made it "it is not obligatory" instead of "it is not permissible," I said, he is teaching them this creed which undermines their call from its root, because it is a creed not based on definitive evidence from the Book and the Sunnah. Where do we take from that a report of a single narrator is not taken in creed? There is absolutely no text from the Book or the Sunnah except what they imagine, namely that a report of a single narrator provides mere suspicion (zann). Then they follow this suspicion with the saying of Allah (Mighty and Majestic): , and the verse Allah (Mighty and Majestic) quoted from the polytheists: . They apply the term "suspicion" (zann) wherever it is mentioned to the linguistic suspicion in which a person wavers, neither believing nor denying. Whereas, by the consensus of scholars, they believe that a report of a single narrator provides the predominant suspicion (zann ghallib). So we said to them, why do you then take a report of a single narrator in rulings if it only provides suspicion, and in their claim, it is the condemned suspicion? But that is not what is intended; rather, the intended meaning is the predominant, stronger suspicion. One of them stood up—I return to the story I illustrated for one of them. One of the lecturers stood up and said to him, "O Professor, you are teaching us this creed, and according to what you taught us, you must return to your country and come to us with a mass-transmitted report (tawatur) so that they testify with you that this is a creed; otherwise, the creed becomes a report of a single narrator." And I also said to them, the general Muslim population does not have a mass-transmitted report. The general Muslim population does not have a mass-transmitted report. This is because, in the terminology of scholars, they require mass-transmission (tawatur) in every layer, in every layer from the Companion to the Successor to the generation after them, and so on. And I said, and I said, if your Shaykh, Taqi al-Din (may Allah have mercy on him) and forgive us and him, said to you: "I have traced the hadith of the punishment of the grave, for example, and its mass-transmission (tawatur) has been established for me, you must believe in it." Do you have to believe in it according to the rule established by their author or their imam? No? Because the mass-transmission (tawatur) was broken. It is one, it is one. The mass-transmitted report was broken. And this means casting doubt on Muslims regarding all creeds, especially if we remember the other jurisprudential philosophy that they—and peace be upon you—also adopt regarding the mass-transmitted report. They require that it also be definitive in meaning (dalalah). It is not sufficient for the report to be definitive in establishment (thubut); rather, it must combine two conditions: definitive establishment and definitive meaning. In that case, definitive meaning may not be found in many texts whose transmission they are certain of. But merely the fact that there are two opinions in the issue reminds us of the joke we tell when the questioner asked the ignorant mufti who, when asked on behalf of his father, "So-and-so said to his wife such and such, did he divorce her?" would say, "There are two opinions in this issue." Another asked, "Is this haram or halal?" "There are two opinions in this issue." There was a clever young man in the assembly who said to his companion, "Ask him: 'Is there any doubt in Allah?'" He said, "O my master, the Shaykh, is there any doubt in Allah?" He said: "There are two opinions in this issue." My intention with this is to introduce doubt into the texts from two aspects: from the aspect of establishment and from the aspect of meaning. And this is undoubtedly a matter that is newly invented, an innovation unknown to the Salaf. For this reason, we say that it is not required for an authentic hadith to be mass-transmitted (mutawatir), nor that it be a report of a single narrator (ahad) accepted by the community. It is sufficient that the hadith is authentic (sahih), and then we must believe in it. Here too is a scientific point, and I am saying it so that at least some of the attendees know how to argue with these deviants from the methodology of the righteous predecessors (Salaf) in their reception of the rulings of the Shari'ah. I once said to them, what do you do if an authentic report of a single narrator (ahad) comes to you, but it contains, on one hand, a creedal matter and, on the other hand, a legal ruling? If you take it because it contains a ruling, you have taken it, and it contained a creed. And if you reject it because it contains a creed, claiming that it is a report of a single narrator, you have rejected your claim that a report of a single narrator is taken in rulings. And I gave an example: the authentic hadith where he (peace and blessings be upon him) said, as in *Sahih al-Bukhari*: . The punishment of Hell is mass-transmitted (mutawatir). is not mass-transmitted according to them, and they have explicitly stated this, unfortunately. So what do you do? You seek refuge from the punishment of the grave. If you say yes, but you believe in it, then one of the results of these discussions in Damascus was that they had rented a newspaper published in Tripoli of Syria, and they were publishing their views in it. Glory be to Allah, meaning desires run in some of them as the running of the disease of rabies, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said, and I seek refuge in Allah. They came out with a new innovation. They said, "We do not permit taking a report of a single narrator in creed in the sense of belief (iman), but we make it obligatory in the sense of affirmation (tashdiq)." Playing with words, playing with words. So we ask Allah (Mighty and Majestic) to protect us from these trials, and there is no protector from them after Allah (Mighty and Majestic) except returning to the school of the righteous predecessors (Salaf). These people receive the hadiths of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and transmit them to those after them as they heard them, without the philosophy of ahad and mutawatir, and the philosophy of speculative and definitive knowledge.
Other than that?