Ruling on the Narrations of Trustworthy vs. Weak Narrators
Source: Fatāwā Amunpuri by Shaykh Ghulam Mustafa Zaheer Amunpuri
❖ Question:
What is the ruling on the narrations of an upright, trustworthy narrator versus a weak narrator?
❖ Answer:
The narrations of an upright and trustworthy narrator (ʿādil wa thiqah) are authentic and acceptable, unless the scholars of Hadith specifically criticize a particular narration of his.
On the other hand, the narrations of a criticized or weak narrator (majrūḥ / ḍaʿīf) are weak and therefore rejected.
Scholarly Statement
❀ Imām Ibn Ḥibbān (رحمه الله) said:
إن الجرح والعدالة ضدان فمتى كان الرجل مجروحا لا يخرجه عن حد الجرح إلى العدالة إلا ظهور أمارات العدالة عليه فإذا كان أكثر أحواله أمارات العدالة صار من العدول كذلك كذا إذا كان الرجل معروفا بالعدالة يكون جائز الشهادة فهو كذلك حتى يظهر منه أمارات الجرح فإذا صار أكثر أحواله أسباب الجرح خرج عن حد العدالة إلى الجرح وصار فى عداد من لا تجوز شهادته وإن كان صدوقا فيما يقول وتبطل أخباره الصحاح التى لم يخلط فيها .
“Jarḥ (criticism) and ʿadālah (uprightness) are opposites. If a narrator is criticized, he will only move from the category of jarḥ to that of ʿadālah when clear signs of uprightness appear in him. If the majority of his conditions show signs of uprightness, he is considered upright.
Likewise, if a narrator is known for his uprightness, his testimony (in narrating Hadith) is acceptable, until signs of jarḥ appear in him. If the majority of his state reflects causes of jarḥ, he leaves the category of uprightness and enters that of jarḥ, becoming one whose testimony is unacceptable, even if he is truthful in speech. In such a case, even his apparently sound narrations in which no error is detected are invalidated.”
(Kitāb al-Majrūḥīn: 3/104)
Conclusion:- The narrations of trustworthy narrators are authentic and acceptable unless there is a specific criticism.
- The narrations of weak narrators are rejected, even if they appear truthful, because weakness nullifies reliability.
