What do we do if scholars disagree on the authenticity of a hadith?

The questioner : The question is: How can we distinguish between a hadith whose authenticity is disputed, such as the hadith of Asma bint Abi Bakr when the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said to her: You authenticate this hadith, while others weaken it, so how is it...?

The Shaykh : This is a frequently asked question, but it is certainly important, especially for the general public.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Is that not so?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Well, the general public, by the grace of Islam, we say that the door of independent legal reasoning (ijtihad) in knowledge has not been closed, while others, unfortunately, still insist on the obligation of following one of the four schools of jurisprudence and that it is not permissible for a Muslim scholar to take from each school what is most correct according to the evidence. This is undoubtedly contrary to the Book and the Sunnah. I do not wish to delve into it, but I want to use this to respond to those who say the door of ijtihad is closed. The door of ijtihad cannot be closed until the Hour. However, ijtihad varies and multiplies with the variety and multiplicity of people. There may be ijtihad in knowledge, as we mentioned earlier, distinguishing one issue in a school from another, and so on. There is ijtihad to know, for example, which doctor is specialized in treating a particular disease. Here I pause for a moment. Each one of you, no matter how different your cultures or concepts may be, is not one who, upon hearing that a certain doctor is specialized in treating eye disease, for instance, and has a relative who needs treatment, goes to that doctor without asking: Is this doctor new to medicine or experienced? Is his study old or new? What is his experience in medicine? And so on. What does he do? He researches. He exercises ijtihad, right? So, by analogy, if you want to buy cloth from the market, you do not just see a seller who has that type of cloth and buy from him. You try to find out about another seller and a type of cloth similar to this, perhaps it is stronger, perhaps it is cheaper, perhaps... and so on. All of this falls under the category of what? Ijtihad. Because what is the meaning of ijtihad? The meaning of ijtihad is to be on clear vision, not to be blind and walking through life. The person who wants to walk on clear vision, just as he walks on clear vision in his worldly affairs, should walk on clear vision in his hereafter, all the more so, especially since Allah (Mighty and Majestic) says in the Noble Qur'an: The search is to clarify that ijtihad may vary. Now, let us return to your question.The questioner : One is truly perplexed, not just in this issue, but when one says so-and-so said this hadith is authentic and so-and-so said this hadith is weak. You may hear so-and-so saying a certain issue is permissible, and another saying to you, no, it is not permissible. One says to you this is a recommended practice (sunnah), and another says it is a religious innovation (bid'ah). This disagreement exists, and this is the nature of creation, as He (Glorified and Exalted is He) said: So, your question, which you specified regarding a hadith in which scholars have disagreed, is not a problem, because the problem is more difficult and deeper in jurisprudential issues. Jurisprudential issues revolve around five rulings, as you know. As for what concerns hadith, whether it is authentic or not, what is the solution to the problem if jurists disagree on an issue with two or three opinions? Let me place you before an issue that every one of you is afflicted with. Touching a woman has three opinions from the great imams. The first opinion: The school of Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him) says it does not break the ablution (wudu') at all. The second opinion: The opinion of Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him) says it breaks the ablution at all. The third opinion: The opinion of Malik and Ahmad is with detail: if the touch is with desire, it breaks the ablution, otherwise it does not. Now, your question is: How does one who is not from the people of knowledge act with these three opinions? Now I answer you, but I give examples because we learned from what our Lord taught us in the Qur'an: "Perhaps they will understand." So I do not want any one of you to stop at this knot: so-and-so authenticated a hadith, so-and-so weakened it. What is the solution? Why...? Is it not more difficult than this? More difficult than this are jurisprudential issues, and here is the example before you: one issue with three opinions. How is it resolved? Now I answer you, not only about your question, but about a question that is much more important, concerning the disputed jurisprudential issues. I say now, whether the question concerns a hadith in which the scholars of hadith have disagreed, or a jurisprudential issue in which jurists have disagreed, what is the position of the general public? For the general public, I refer here to the previous verse: The people of knowledge, without a doubt, are the scholars. Now, just as we gave the example earlier regarding the doctor specialized in eye diseases, or the throat, or the nose, or internal medicine, or external medicine, and so on, and how many of these diseases there are, unfortunately, what does one of us do when he must be treated? He verifies which doctor he thinks is more knowledgeable than the others. Likewise in jurisprudential and hadith issues, indeed, they are more deserving of applying this standard. So I say now, I present examples of what helps the student of knowledge, even if he is from the general public but is keen on knowledge. I mention some distinguishing features. Just as we do not doubt that a doctor, meaning a physician who recently graduated from medical school, is not equal to a doctor who graduated ten years ago, and this one is not equal to one who graduated fifteen years ago. These have practice in this science. In addition to this difference, there is a second difference: a doctor may be very old, but his information is stagnant; he has no study that opens the horizons of his knowledge, and perhaps new discoveries or new medicines are presented to him. So here too, the one afflicted among us thinks about which doctor has thinking that is not stagnant, but is always in study, in progress, in expanding the circle of his medical information, and so on. These are two examples of difference: first in age, and second in what? Devotion to study or satisfaction with old study. And perhaps there are other features. For example, we may assume two people are equal in all these features, but one of them you know, for example, is a scholar of knowledge, as they say today, while the other is an employee. In my expression, he is a slave, because the employee cannot deviate from the job or from the line set for him. And we see, unfortunately, some scholars whom Imam al-Ghazali (may Allah have mercy on him) called "scholars of the stamp." What does the ruler want? He signs for him, he walks for him, and so on. So if you know two scholars in hadith or in jurisprudence, and they are equal, and this is very rare, but I assume equality to expand the circle of distinction and differentiation, they are equal in all traits: the same age, devotion to study and research, and so on, one and so on. But one of them you know is sincere to knowledge, and the other is not. These are features that help the Muslim to be free of blame if he takes the opinion of the authenticator because he distinguished himself from the weakener, or vice versa. I do not care now about the example itself.