Why did Ibn Hajar say the satanic verses story has some basis?

what about these that are utterly weak and unacceptable and fabricated so that's something this is why i want to bring these i'll show you some of these discussions we you can see here now one of the problems was some people like was a problem here you see ibn hajj for no reason hundreds of years later 700 years we're talking after the prophet salallahu and after we're talking you

know one two centuries after khadiyah then avocado arabi and all these people and he has issues with you see it's not he doesn't have necessarily issue with quality or a workhorse but here's an issue with that school of thought the school of thought that is a hadith relativist why because ibn hajjar is an utter hadith dogmatist in fact the canonization of sahil bukhari to become the

what it is today the the the way the makam that it has the kind of cannonity of it it didn't exist before like in uh obviously sahil bukhari existed in the yards so let's say 4th century islam 5th century islam these books are there and people respect them they highly rate them it's not that they don't but it hasn't emerged to the phenomenon that people that it later becomes it becomes this it is utterly kind of

bulletproof in a way that really happens by just two people and they shafe because the shafa is hadith dogmatist they believe that if the chain is sahih nothing else matters if you bring me a sahih chain throw everything else against the wall it is it is now a fact just because one from one from one and these people are verified and the people who concretize this method who really crystallize this is first of all ibn salah but then after salah ibn salah the

real person is even he is so invested in the hadith project so invested and with sure he's got great intentions i'm not saying he's malicious or he's malignant or he's trying to spread venom he's committed to the hadith project sure and that's you know more power to you you've got a passion but sometimes you know just sometimes that as it says that mean

sometimes some passions lead you to your own destruction and i'm not saying it led ibn hajj to his destruction but this point of his was very destructive out of a kind of zid a stubbornness being upset at the yard for saying in the shift that these things are battle and even if they brought a chain throw it against the wall like we don't accept any chain that tries to disrespect our prophet he in reaction to that writes this in his fatal body he says

he says that look many chains show that this hadith has an origin so he just say look these people don't accept it however he says if a chain hadith has multiple chains even if they're weak we this shows it has a solid thing why

if i get that's the equivalent of that is saying if i got five peop if i got one person who's a liar and he says something now five people who are liars say the same thing it must therefore be right because there's five people saying but they're untrue they're not trustworthy say but now there's five but there's five untrustworth

you know if i've got a bag of money here and i say well you know i'll leave it with one but here there's five of them that is like but this but they're unreliable they're not trustworthy so how can you take unreliable people and untrust non-trustworthy people and accept them for the messenger of allah and you wouldn't accept them if they were unreliable on something let's say something very material like money but you accept these people are

unreliable but you throw a number in there now we'll accept them about allah and his messenger never now and he's upset that abu bakr ibrahim arabi and qaddad attacked the hadith kind of project on that so he says he says that i found three chains where they have the narrators of the people of the sahih india

but they don't they're not connected to the prophet now check this this is his thing back at the malik he says and then he says and he says in another point as well um that that these people accept mursal are the other accepts more because the mother of malik accepts morsel mursal is where the chain isn't connected to the prophet but the taba e says something about the prophet but he doesn't tell

you who he heard it from so he's kind of saying well these people accept mursal so why are they accepting this this is ibn hajjar's clear blind mistake that he it's and i'm not saying he he i'm not saying he did this out of malice he didn't what's ironic is he did this out of sheer passion and love for his com and his commitment to hadith the hadith project that he was so committed to the hadith

project that he didn't realize what he's saying or maybe he realized but didn't realize what he's actually saying here the absurdity the irony so you see this and just to show we'll kind of quickly go through some of these and suti does the same thing and siyuti's wording is very misleading he says

some of them the chain is but it's not you see it's just that the rijal are of the sight the sunnah there isn't a single one with the sun at sahi and there's been a lot of criticism of this sentence because he says oh and some of them the sahi no it isn't it's in the synod of people of the sahih but it's a cut chain and that too will bazaar the this one that he's trying to um that he's referring to so you can see these shafa is like ceoti is a big chef