This excerpt is taken from the book of Fazilat-ul-Sheikh Abdul Salam Rustami From Denial of Hadith to Denial of Quran.
Fifteenth Objection: All Narrators of Hadith are Defamed
Question:
One objection of the deniers of Hadith is that the authenticity of Hadith is based on the proof of Hadith, and the proof of Hadith is based on the narrators of the chain of transmission, while all narrators are subjects of criticism, meaning someone has objected to each one of them, even the scholars of Rijal have criticized each other.
Answer:
Firstly, to say that all narrators are subjects of criticism is not absolutely correct because there are narrators who are not subjects of criticism. Secondly, the criticism transmitted from the noble Imams regarding some narrators is not established as a valid criticism of the chain. Moreover, the scholars of Hadith have formulated rules and regulations for criticism and accreditation based on evidence, among which one rule is that criticism is accepted only when it is explanatory, meaning its reason is made clear. Ambiguous criticism is not accepted.
Question:
In the principles of Hadith, there is a famous rule that الجرح مقدم على التعديل (criticism precedes authentication), so how can the narration of a narrator who has been criticized and authenticated be accepted?
Answer:
The answer to this has been given by Taj al-Din Subki, may Allah have mercy on him. He states: One should be completely cautious about taking the rule of the Muhaddithin "Jarh (criticism) takes precedence over Ta'dil (praise)" in an absolute sense because the correct view is that if a person’s imamat (leadership) and integrity are established, and those who praise him are more than those who criticize him, and there is also evidence that religious bias or similar reasons are behind the criticism, then in such a case, attention will not be paid to the criticism.
Reference: Tabaqat al-Subki with reference to Zafar al-Amani in Mustalah al-Hadith by Abdul Hay Lakhnawi, p. 496
Then he writes: "We have informed you that the criticism of such a person will not be accepted even if the criticism is explanatory, whose good deeds outweigh his sins, whose praisers outnumber his critics, and whose defenders outnumber those who criticize him, while there is also evidence that the reason for the criticism is religious bias or some worldly rivalry as happens in our time. For example, the words of Ibn Abi Zib about Imam Malik, Ibn Mu'in about Imam Shafi'i, and Al-Nasa'i about Imam Ahmad will not be considered. If we apply the rule 'Jarh takes precedence over Ta'dil' absolutely, then no Imam would remain because there is no Imam who has not been criticized by detractors."
Reference: Dawabit al-Jarh wa al-Ta'dil, Tadrib al-Rawi
From this statement, it becomes clear that a decision about a narrator cannot be made immediately based solely on criticism and praise that the narration is weak or fabricated, and this rule cannot be applied absolutely that "Jarh takes precedence over Ta'dil."
The third point is that sometimes the chains of a hadith are weak, but the narrator is not accused of lying or fabrication (making up hadiths); rather, the weakness has a mild cause. In such cases, some of the multiple chains strengthen other chains of the hadith, making the hadith authentic or good and thus actionable.
Imam Ibn al-Salah, may Allah have mercy on him, says: "There are two types of weakness in hadith. One type of weakness is removed due to the presence of many chains of transmission, and this happens when the weakness is due to poor memory while the narrator is among the truthful and trustworthy. When we look at the hadith narrated from him by others, we realize that he has memorized it and there is no deficiency in his precision. Similarly, weakness due to an interrupted chain is also removed. The other type of weakness is one that is not removed because it is very strong and no reason is found to remove it. This is the weakness caused by the narrator being accused of lying or the hadith being anomalous."
Reference: Muqaddimah Ibn al-Salah with reference to Zafar al-Amani in Mustalah al-Hadith, p. 171
From this statement, it is established that the absolute weakness of a narrator does not necessarily cause the hadith to be weak; rather, it is necessary to consider levels and degrees.
From this detailed explanation, it is proven that the affirmation of a hadith is not solely dependent on the chain, and a hadith does not become weak merely due to absolute weakness in the chain. Therefore, denying the authenticity of hadiths on the pretext that the hadith depends on the narrators and that all narrators are criticized (matkallim feehum) is incorrect and false.
