And if the hadith critics say of a report, “It is weak,” what they mean is that the report has not been verified, may not be used as legal or theological proof, and that one may not rule it to be true. They do not mean that, by that very statement, they are pronouncing the transmitter a liar and denying what he reported.

They further clarify: “We do not make this negative judgment out of ignorance. Should conclusive evidence arise proving that what he related never occurred, we will judge accordingly; otherwise we remain silent—we neither deny it nor confirm it.”

This is a fundamental principle that must be understood, for many people fail to distinguish between (a) something they deny because evidence proves it false, and (b) something they merely refrain from affirming because no proof has established it. Instead, you see them—whenever they are unaware of proof for a matter—hastily denying it, thereby following what they have no knowledge of and uttering with their tongues what they do not know.

Such behaviour is widespread among those devoted to rational inference and speculation, as well as among specialists in isnād (chains of transmission) and reports. From the first group are people who demand a proof for every matter; if they do not find one, they deny the matter outright. Yet it is self-evident that lack of knowledge is not knowledge of non-existence, and that failure to detect something does not entail its absence—unless the searcher is in a position where detection would in fact be possible, whether with certainty or a preponderant probability.

Some of these people apply this approach to the divine attributes, claiming that whatever lacks conclusive proof for its affirmation must be definitively rejected, since—so they say—Allah’s attributes can be established only by absolute certainty. The great majority, however, disagreed with them and replied: just as it is impermissible to assert something definitively without conclusive evidence for its affirmation, it is equally impermissible to deny something definitively without conclusive evidence for its negation. Since we are forbidden to affirm except on the basis of knowledge, we are likewise forbidden to deny except on the basis of knowledge.