Applied Usul al-Hadith 2

By /

There are five aspects of classifying a hadith, one to do with attribution and four to do with authenticity.

  • Attribution: Who is the hadith attributed to?
  1. Narrators: Are the transmitters of the hadith trustworthy and reliable?
  2. Connectedness: Are all transmitters in the chain mentioned or is the chain broken?
  3. Lack of Shuzooz: Is the hadith unreasonably ghareeb (solitary)?
  4. Lack of Ilal: Are there subtle reasons for the hadith to be weak, like other narrators narrating it differently?

1. Attribution

The first thing to identify in any report is whether the report is from the Prophet or someone else. As a result, the scholars of hadith divided a hadith according to the end of its chain into three:

  1. Marfū’: The doer or speaker at the end of the chain is the Prophet (SAW).
  2. Mawqūf: The doer or speaker at the end of the chain is a companion, and he does not attribute it to the Prophet (SAW).
  3. Maqtū’: The doer or speaker at the end of the chain is someone lower than a companion.

1.1 Marfū’

Marfū’ includes five things from the Prophet:

  1. Speech
  2. Actions
  3. Tacit Approval
  4. Manners
  5. Description

If the Prophet (SAW) attributes some speech or action to Allah, that is called a Hadith Qudsi.

Ibn Umar (RA) said: The Prophet (SAW) said, “Islam is built on five: 1) testimony that there is no god except Allah and that Muhammad (SAW) is His messenger, 2) establishing prayer, 3) giving Zakah, 4) Hajj, and 5) fasting Ramadan.” (Sahih Bukhari)

Anas ibn Malik (RA) said: When the Prophet (SAW) intended to write a letter to the Romans, people said to him, “They only read letters that have seals.” So, the Prophet got a silver ring with the engraving, “Muhammad Messenger of Allah.” (Sahih Bukhari)

Thabit ibn Yazid (RA) said: A lizard was brought to the Prophet (SAW), but he neither ate it nor did he forbid people from it. (Sunan Ibn Majah)

Anas (RA) said: Whenever the Prophet (SAW) said something, he would repeat it three times, so that it would be understood. And when he came to a house, he would greet them (seeking permission to enter) three times. (Sahih Bukhari)

Anas (RA) said: The Prophet (SAW) was neither tall nor short. (Sahih Bukhari)

Abu Hurairah (RA) said: The Prophet (SAW) said: Our Lord descends every night to the lowest heaven when the last third of the night is left and says, “Who will call me so that I can respond to him? Who will ask me so that I can give to him? Who will seek forgiveness from me so that I can forgive him?” (Sahih Bukhari)

1.2 Quasi-Marfū’

Not all attribution to the Prophet (SAW) is explicit. Some examples of implicit attributions to the Prophet (SAW), in order of strength:

  1. “The sunnah is…”
  2. Some Sahabi “did raf’ of it”
  3. “We were commanded to do this in the time of the Prophet” or “we did this in the time of the Prophet”
  4. “We were commanded to do this” or “we used to do this”

Knowing this is important in preferring narrations over each other.

Salim ibn Abdullah ibn Umar said to Hajjaj ibn Yusuf while his father was nearby during Hajj, “If you wish to follow the sunnah, shorten the khutbah (at Mina) and hasten to the standing (at Arafah).” Abdullah ibn Umar said, “He is correct.” (Sahih Bukhari)

Sufyan narrated from Ibn Juraij from Ibn Abu Mulaikah from Aisha, who did raf’: The worst of men in the sight of Allah are the most argumentative. (Sahih Bukhari)

Abdullah ibn Umar (RA) said: I saw those who bought wheat with estimation (instead of proper measurement) being lashed in the time of the Prophet (SAW) if they tried to sell it without taking it home. (Sahih Bukhari)

Abu Hazim said: Sahl ibn Sa’d (RA) said: People used to be commanded to place their right hand on their left forearm in prayer. (Sahih Bukhari) Abu Hazim commented something like: I don’t know how this could be anything but from the Prophet (SAW).

Abu Hurairah (RA) said: We were told not to keep our hands on our hips in Salah. (Sahih Bukhari)

1.4 Marfū’ in Hukm

Mawquf narrations can be considered Marfū’ in Hukm if they fulfill two conditions:

  1. There is no possibility of ijtihad
  2. There is no possibility of coming from other sources (like Judeo-Christian traditions)

The strength of the narration being Marfū’ depends on the strength of these conditions being fulfilled.

Tafsir and Fatawa are not considered Marfū’ in Hukm because of the possibility of ijtihad. But, statements about the unseen or about acts of worship may be considered Marfū’ in Hukm on a case-by-case basis.

Act of Worship

Abdurrahman ibn Abdul-Qari (RA) said he heard Umar (RA) on the minbar teaching people tashahhud, saying: You should say, “التَّحِيَّاتُ لِلَّهِ الزَّاكِيَاتُ لِلَّهِ الطَّيِّبَاتُ الصَّلَوَاتُ لِلَّهِ السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْكَ أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ وَرَحْمَةُ اللَّهِ وَبَرَكَاتُهُ السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْنَا وَعَلَى عِبَادِ اللَّهِ الصَّالِحِينَ أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا عَبْدُهُ وَرَسُولُهُ.” (Muwatta Malik)

Compare to: Ibn Masud (RA) said: The Prophet (SAW) taught me tashahhud like he taught me Surahs of the Quran, with his hand in my hands, “التَّحِيَّاتُ لِلَّهِ وَالصَّلَوَاتُ وَالطَّيِّبَاتُ، السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْكَ أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ وَرَحْمَةُ اللَّهِ وَبَرَكَاتُهُ، السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْنَا وَعَلَى عِبَادِ اللَّهِ الصَّالِحِينَ، أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا عَبْدُهُ وَرَسُولُهُ‏” (Sahih Bukhari)

Unseen

Abu Hurairah (RA) said about the signs of the Day of Judgement: A woman will be taken and her stomach will be ripped open, then the content of her womb will be taken out and thrown in fear of giving birth. (Musannaf Ibn Abu Shaibah)

Abu Hurairah (RA) said: The most difficult people [to deal with] for a man on the Day of Judgement will be his slaves. (Musannaf Abdurrazzaq)

Tafsir

Ibn Abbas said about ⟪And there is none of you except he will come to [Hell] (وَارِدُهَا).⟫ (19:71): Everyone will enter it.

Ibn Abbas said about ⟪They (Yusuf’s brothers) brought false blood on his shirt⟫ (12:18): It was the blood of a lamb.

Fatawa

Abdurrahman ibn Harith ibn Hisham said (summarized): Abu Hurairah (RA) said, “Whoever wakes up in a state of junub has broken his fast for the day.” We went to Aisha (RA) to ask her, and she said, “It is not like Abu Hurairah said Abdurrahman. Do you want to leave what the Prophet used to do? I am a witness that the Prophet used to wake up in a state of junub from intercourse, not a wet dream, and he would fast that day.” Umm Salamah confirmed Aisha (RA)’s statement. Then, we went to Abu Hurairah, and he said, “I don’t have knowledge about that. Someone just told me.”

Abu Hurairah (RA) said: Wash thoroughly in wudhu because the Prophet (SAW) said, “Woe to the heels from the fire.” (Sahih Bukhari)

1.5 Asbab al-Nuzul

Asbab al-Nuzul are a category of Marfū’, but some argued they are a category of Mawquf that is Marfū’ in Hukm. There is an implicit attribution to the Prophet (SAW) since revelation only happens to him.

Ibn Abbas said: Ukkaz, Majannah, and Dhul-Majaz were markets in Jahiliyyah, so Muslims considered it a sin to trade there during Hajj time. As a result, Allah revealed ⟪There is no blame on you if you seek the bounty of your Lord⟫ (2:198) in Hajj time. (Sahih Bukhari)

Asbab al-Nuzul can also come from ijtihad.

2. Narrators of the Chain

To trust a narration or report, we need to know that the narrator or reporter is 1) honest, and 2) remembers well. These two are called ‘adalah and dabt.

All companions are considered reliable by default unless proven otherwise in a particular hadith. As for other narrators, they need to be studied and classified.

2.1 Companions

Someone being a companion is proven in two ways:

  1. History
  2. Hadith

A companion can be:

  1. Prolific in Hadith
  2. Not Prolific
  3. Somewhere in Between

Historically proven companions were Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Aisha, Umm Salamah, Abu Hurairah, Ibn Umar, and many others.

Abu Hurairah, Aisha, and Ibn Umar and others were prolific in hadith. Abu Bakr and others were not prolific in hadith. Umm Salamah and others were in between.

Some people are not proven historically and only narrated a few hadith from the Prophet (SAW) so there can be doubt about their status as companions.

Another type of doubt is doubt in the identity of a companion. It is of two types:

  1. Doubt Between Names
  2. Unnamed

The second type is generally avoided by Bukhari and Muslim.

Abd al-Rahman ibn Ghanam al-Ashari said: Abu Amir or Abu Malik al-Ashari said he heard the Prophet (SAW) say: There will be people from my ummah who legalize zina, silk, wine, and musical instruments. (Sahih Bukhari)

Sulaim ibn al-Aswad narrated from a man from Banu Yarbu who said: I came to the Prophet (SAW) and heard him speaking to people and saying: The giving hand is higher. Your mother and father, then your brother and sister, then lower then lower. (Musnad Ahmad)

Yahya ibn Ya’mar said: A man from among the companions of the Prophet (SAW) said: The Prophet (SAW) said: The first thing a person will be accounted for will be his prayer. If he fulfilled them, they will be written for him fully. If he did not fulfill them, Allah will say, “See if you can find optional prayers from my servant that can complete his obligations.” Then, Zakah will be in the same way. Then, all deeds will be taken like this. (Musnad Ahmad)

Some versions say Yahya ibn Ya’mar narrated it from Abu Hurairah (RA). (Sunan Nasai)

Yahya ibn Watthab > a man from the companions of the Prophet (SAW) > Prophet (SAW): When a Muslim mixes with people and stays patient from their harms is better than a Muslim that does not mix with people and does not stay patient from their harms. (Sunan Tirmidhi)

2.2 Narrators

2.2.1 Theory

The way we know the reliability and honesty of narrators can be divided into primary, secondary, and tertiary ways.

The primary way the scholars found the reliability and honesty of narrators is:

  1. Their reputation among their people. This would be for major narrators like Malik ibn Anas and Shu’bah ibn al-Hajjaj.
  2. Reports about their life and times. This is common for many narrators.
  3. Comparing their narrations to the narrations of other (stronger or well-known) narrators. This would be used for most narrators.
    • Do they usually match other narrators? That indicates they have good memory.
    • Do they usually have slight mistakes? That indicates deficiency in memory.
    • Do they have huge deviations? That indicates large deficiency in memory or problems in honesty.
    • Are they rarely corroborated? That places doubt in their honesty or shows huge problems in memory.
    • All of these are used to decide the reliability of that narrator.
  4. Testing them directly and seeing if they have good memory in hadith. This is rare.

Many early scholars of hadith specialized in the field of narrator-classification (Jarh wat-Ta’deel i.e. “praise and criticism”) by studying narrators and making judgements about them. The judgements of these major scholars like Imam Ahmad, Yahya ibn Maeen, Bukhari, and Abu Hatim ar-Razi are the secondary source of determining the reliability of a narrator.

Then, tertiary sources like the book Tahzeeb ul-Kamal by al-Mizzi collect the views of the early scholars along with primary sources about their lives and character. Tahzeeb ul-Kamal and books like it are what we would first refer to when determining the strength of a narrator. Taqreeb ul-Tahzeeb by Ibn Hajr is one summary of Tahzeeb.

2.2.2 Unknown Narrators

Narrators are either known or unknown. Unknown narrators, those who only appear in one hadith or one chain and the scholars of hadith do not know anything about them, are called majhul. If the scholars know who he is but do not know his status in hadith, he is called majhul al-haal.

Salim ibn Abi Ja’d narrated from Yazid ibn Bishr: Ibn Umar said, “Islam is built on five: 1) testimony that there is no god except Allah, 2) establishing prayer, 3) giving Zakah, 4) Hajj, and 5) fasting Ramadan.” A man asked, “What about Jihad in the path of Allah?” He said, “Jihad is good, but this is what the Prophet (SAW) told us.” (Musnad Ahmad)

Yazid ibn Bishr is only known for this hadith of the Prophet (SAW). Salim ibn Abi Ja’d was the only person to narrate from him, and Salim narrated one non-hadith narration from him. Ibn Abi Hatim said: I heard my father say, “He is majhul.” (Jarh wal-Ta’deel)

Walid ibn Jamee’ narrated from his grandmother from Umm Waraqah: When the Prophet (SAW) was about to go for Badr, I said to him, “Allow me to come with you so that I can treat the sick. Perhaps Allah will grant me shahadah.” He said, “Stay in your home. Allah will grant you shahadah.” (Sunan Abu Dawud)

This is the only narration by Walid’s grandmother. Ibn Hajr said, “His grandmother was Laila bint Malik who is not known.” (Taqreeb)

2.2.3 Known Narrators

Known narrators are classified into many categories and given many descriptions. However, we can summarize these into three levels.

2.2.3.1 Level 1

The highest level can be two types:

  1. Thiqah Hujjah: Extremely trustworthy and reliable. Like Imam Malik.
  2. Thiqah: Trustworthy and reliable. Most narrators of the Sahihayn.

In the absence of other problems, a hadith of this level of narrators is called Sahih (authentic).

A person rises to the level of Thiqah Hujjah if he is famous in his reliability or his narrations match his peers very closely. He is known to be Thiqah Hujjah if he is described to that level by the scholars.

A person is known to be Thiqah if he was considered reliable by the major scholars while not being weakened by anyone important. Making a few mistakes does not disqualify someone from being Thiqah or even Thiqah Hujjah. No one is free of mistakes.

Abd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi said, “The imams of our time are four: 1) Sufyan al-Thawri in Kufa, 2) Malik in Hijaz, 3) Awza’i in Sham, and 4) Hammad ibn Zaid in Basrah.” (Jarh wal-Ta’deel)

Hadith: Hanzalah ibn Abi Sufyan > Ikrimah ibn Khalid > Ibn Umar: The Prophet (SAW) said, “Islam is built on five (pillars).”

Hazalah ibn Abi Sufyan: Ahmad ibn Hanbal said, “Whenever Wakee’ came to a hadith of Hanzalah, he would say, ‘Hazalah ibn Abi Sufyan narrated, and he was thiqah thiqah.'” Ibn Maeen said, “He was thiqah hujjah.” (Tahzeeb ul-Kamal)

Ikrimah ibn Khalid: According to Tahzeeb, Ishaq ibn Mansur, Ibn Maeen, Abu Zur’ah, and Nasa’i considered him thiqah. No one accused him of mistakes. (Tahzeeb ul-Kamal)

2.2.3.2 Level 2

The middle level can be three types:

  1. Saduq Hasan ul-Hadith: Trustworthy but not as reliable in his memory as the first level.
  2. Saduq Mukhti’: Honest but known to make many mistakes.
  3. Maqbul: Narrated only a few hadith and there is no reason to reject them.

In the absence of other problems, a hadith of this level of narrators is called Hasan (fair).

There are different kinds of narrators in the middle level. Some are directly described as honest or hasan ul-hadith by the scholars. Some are strengthened by a group and weakened by a group. The numbers on each side decide the narrator’s classification. Some are only strengthened by a few scholars that do not allow them to rise to the first level.

Hadith: Su’air ibn al-Khims > Habib ibn Abi Thabit > Ibn Umar: The Prophet (SAW) said, “Islam is built on five (pillars).”

Su’air ibn al-Khims: Ali ibn al-Madini said, “He had roughly 10 narrations.” Ibn Maeen said, “He was thiqah.” Abu Hatim said, “He was salih ul-hadith. His hadith are written, but he is not used as (independent) evidence.” (Tahzeeb ul-Kamal)

Habib ibn Abi Thabit: Ali ibn al-Madini said, “He had roughly 200 hadith.” Ibn Maeen said, “He is thiqah hujjah.” Someone asked, “Is he thabt?” Ibn Maeen said, “Yes, he only narrated two mistaken hadith.” Sufyan al-Thawri said, “Habib narrated to us, and he was a pillar.” (Tahzeeb ul-Kamal)

Hadith: A’mash > Abu Sa’d > Abdullah ibn Amr: The Prophet (SAW) said, “The Muslim is the one from whose tongue and hands (other) Muslims are safe.”

Abu Sa’d al-Azdi: Ibn Hibban mentioned him in Thiqaat. But, no one else praised or criticized him. Ibn Hajr called him Maqbul. (Tahzeeb ul-Kamal)

Sulaiman al-A’mash: Ibn Uyaynah said, “A’mash surpassed his companions in four qualities: he was the most proficient of them in reciting the Qur’an, the most memorizing of hadith, the most knowledgeable of them regarding the laws of inheritance,” and he mentioned one other trait. Al-Mawsuli said, “None of the muhadditheen were more reliable than A’mash.” (Tahzeeb ul-Kamal)

Musayyab ibn Wadhih: Ibn Hibban mentioned him in Thiqaat and said, “He used to make mistakes.” (Thiqaat) Ibn Abi Hatim said, “My father and Abu Zur’ah used to narrate from him.” Abu Hatim was asked about him and said, “He was saduq, but he used to make a lot of mistakes and would not accept correction.” (Jarh wal-Ta’deel) Ibn Adi listed many narrations where Musayyab made a mistake and said, “Musayyab had many hadith from his teachers, and most of the narrations he opposed people in are what I mentioned to you and he did not do it intentionally. Rather, he got confused in them. So, there’s no harm in using him.” (Al-Kamil)

2.2.3.3 Level 3

The last level can be three types:

  1. Daeef (Weak): Makes too many mistakes to be reliable, even if he is honest. Can be used for corroboration.
  2. Matruk (Abandoned): Makes too many mistakes to be used at all.
  3. Kazzab (Liar): Proven to fabricate or accused of fabricating hadith.

In the absence of other problems, a hadith of this level of narrators is called Daeef (weak) or Matruh (very weak) or Mawdhu’ (fabricated).

There are many descriptions given to weak narrators, including “weak in hadith” or “munkar in hadith” or “not used as evidence.” Weakness is also derived from the decision of major scholars to leave the hadith of a narrator. The severity of the descriptions decides a narrator’s level.

A weak narrator can be pious or honest. As a result, Daeef narrators can be used for corroboration. But, Matruk narrators are generally not used even for corroboration.

The reason for a narrator’s weakness can range from his bad memory to his dishonesty to his skipping of weak narrators.

Ibn Lahee’ah: Humaidi said, “Yahya ibn Saeed did not use to think he was anything (reliable).” Muhammad ibn al-Muthanna said, “I never heard Abd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi narrate anything from Ibn Lahee’ah.” Imam Ahmad said, “The hadith of Ibn Lahee’ah are not hujjah. But, I write a lot of what I write so that I can use them for corroboration. Some of them strengthen others.” Sufyan al-Thawri said “I went on many pilgrimages just to meet Ibn Lahee’ah.” Ibn Wahb said, “Ibn Lahee’ah narrated to me, and he was by Allah pious and honest.” (Tahzeeb ul-Kamal)

Kharijah ibn Mus’ab: Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal said, “My father forbade me from writing down any hadith from Kharijah ibn Mus’ab.” Ibn Maeen said, “He is not thiqah.” Once, he said, “He is a liar.” Once, he said, “He is weak.” Bukhari said, “Ibn al-Mubarak and Wakee’ abandoned him.” Nasa’i said, “Matruk in hadith.” Yahya ibn Yahya said, “Kharijah according to us is sound in hadith. We only criticized the hadith he narrated from Ghiyath with tadlees (not mentioning Ghiyath).” (Tahzeeb ul-Kamal)

2.3 Important Narrators

2.3.1 Narrators of Hadith

Isnad revolves around six people:

  1. Al-Zuhri Ibn Shihab in Madinah (d. 124 AH)
  2. Amr ibn Dinar in Makkah (d. 126 AH)
  3. Qatadah ibn Diamah in Basrah (d. 117 AH)
  4. Yahya ibn Abi Kathir in Yamamah (d. 132 AH)
  5. Abu Ishaq al-Sabee’i in Kufa (d. 129 AH)
  6. Al-A’mash Sulaiman ibn Mihran in Kufa (d. 148 AH)

Then, the knowledge of these people went to major scholars and writers of the next generation:

In Madinah:

  1. Malik ibn Anas (d. 179 AH)
    • Learned from Zuhri
  2. Muhammad ibn Ishaq (d. 152 AH)
    • Learned from Zuhri and A’mash

In Makkah:

  1. Ibn Juraij (d. 151 AH)
  2. Sufyan ibn Uyaynah (d. 198 AH)
    • Learned from Zuhri, Amr ibn Dinar, Abu Ishaq, and A’mash

In Basrah:

  1. Saeed ibn Abi Arubah (d. 159 AH)
  2. Hammad ibn Salamah (d. 168 AH)
  3. Abu Awanah (d. 175 AH)
  4. Shu’bah ibn al-Hajjaj (d. 160 AH)
  5. Ma’mar ibn Rashid (d. 154 AH)
    • Learned from Zuhri, Amr ibn Dinar, Qatadah, Yahya ibn Abi Kathir, and Abu Ishaq

In Kufa:

  1. Sufyan al-Thawri (d. 161 AH)

In Sham:

  1. Al-Awza’i Abd al-Rahman ibn Amr (d. 151 AH)

In Wasit:

  1. Hushaim ibn Bashir (d. 183 AH)

Then, the knowledge of these twelve spread but was concentrated heavily in six:

  1. Yahya ibn Saeed al-Qattan (d. 198 AH)
  2. Yahya ibn Zakariyyah ibn Abi Zaa’idah (d. 182 AH)
  3. Wakee’ ibn Jarrah (d. 199 AH)
  4. Abdullah ibn Mubarak (d. 181 AH)
  5. Abd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi (d. 198 AH)
  6. Yahya ibn Adam (d. 203 AH)

2.3.2 Scholars of Fiqh

There were six major judges among the Sahabah:

  1. Umar ibn al-Khattab
  2. Ali ibn Abi Talib
  3. Abdullah ibn Masud
  4. Zaid ibn Thabit
  5. Abu Musa al-Ashari
  6. Ubay ibn Ka’b

Three of the companions had many students around them who followed their methodology: 1) Ibn Masud, 2) Zaid ibn Thabit, and 3) Ibn Abbas.

Ibn Masud settled in Kufa, and his major students were: 1) Ubaidah, 2) Harith, 3) Masruq, 4) Alqamah, and 5) Shuraih. Ibrahim al-Nakha’i was the most learned from them. A’mash and Abu Ishaq were the most learned after his generation. Sufyan al-Thawri was the most learned in the generation after them.

Ibn Abbas settled in Makkah, and his major students were: 1) Ata, 2) Tawus, 3) Mujahid, 4) Jabir ibn Zaid, 5) Ikrimah, and 6) Saeed ibn Jubair. Amr ibn Dinar was the most learned from them. Ibn Uyaynah and Ibn Juraij were from the generation after them.

Zaid ibn Thabit settled in Madinah, and the scholars who followed his methodology were many: 1) Saeed ibn al-Musayyab, 2) Urwah ibn Zubair, 3) Qabisah, 4) Kharijah ibn Zaid ibn Thabit, 5) Sulaiman ibn Yasar, 6) Aban ibn Uthman, 7) Ubaidullah ibn Abdullah, 8) Qasim ibn Muhammad, 9) Salim ibn Abdullah ibn Umar, 10) Abu Bakr ibn Abd al-Rahman, 11) Abu Salamah ibn Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf, and 12) Talhah ibn Abdullah. Only Saeed, Urwah, Qabisah, Kharijah, Aban, and Sulaiman met Zaid, but the rest followed his methodology. After them, no one was more knowledgeable in Madinah than Zuhri, Yahya ibn Saeed al-Ansari, Abu al-Zinad, and Bukair ibn Abdullah. After them, no one was more knowledgeable than Malik ibn Anas.

2.4 Scholars of Narrator Classification

The scholars of Jarh and Ta’deel were around the generation of Imam Ahmad. Some were before him, and many were after him.

2.4.1 Difference of Classification

When the scholars differ about the grading of a narrator, that can be for three reasons:

  1. Difference in Information
  2. Difference in Methodology or Judgement
  3. Difference in Wording

The first is when a scholar has some information about a narrator that another scholar does not. As a result, the one who has more information is preferred in his judgement.

The second is when two scholars had the same information but came to different conclusions based on that information.

For example, if a narrator is known to make some mistakes, one might consider him still reliable because the mistakes are few and another might consider him weakened. Some scholars were known to be strict, some were known to be moderate, and some were known to be lenient.

Sometimes, a scholars weakened a narrator for something that is not a reason for weakness in reality, like mild bidah.

The third is when two scholars agree about the actual status of a narrator but word it differently.

For a reliable narrator, one might say, “He is thiqah,” and another might say, “There’s no problem with him.” For a hasan narrator, one might say, “He is not strong,” and one might say, “He is honest.” For a weak narrator, one might say, “He is weak,” and another might say, “He is honest.”

The same terms can apply to narrators of entirely different levels. As a result, it is important to understand how different scholars used terms and compare multiple gradings of the same narrator.

Some of the strict scholars were (in general order of strictest to least strict):

  1. Abu Hatim
  2. Ibn Maeen
  3. Yahya al-Qattan
  4. Ibn Kharrash

Some of the moderate scholars were (in general order of strictest to least strict):

  1. Ahmad
  2. Abu Zur’ah
  3. Bukhari
  4. Ali ibn al-Madini
  5. Tirmidhi

Some of the lenient scholars were:

  1. Daruqutni
  2. Hakim in the Mustadrak

Ibn Hibban included in his book Thiqaat anyone whose hadith had the possibility of being accepted. It is not uncommon to find even majhul narrators in his book.

Gradings are also derived from whether major scholars like Shu’bah, Malik, or Sufyan al-Thawri avoided narrating from a narrator or chose to narrate from him.

Moderate scholars are generally preferred over strict or lenient ones in their grading. But, when there is widespread difference about the grading of a narrator, that indicates he is of the second level.

A good book to understand the wordings of the different scholars is Tahreer Ulum al-Hadith by Abdullah al-Judai’.

2.4.2 Sources of Narrator Criticism

The secondary sources of narrator criticism are divided into many books by different authors.

The early scholars like Yahya al-Qattan, Ahmad, Ibn Main, and Ali ibn al-Madini did not author books on the subject of narrators. However, their views are found by referring to the narrations of their students. Some of those have been turned into books.

One of the earliest works on the subject is Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat. However, Ibn Sa’d was not an expert in the subject.

Tarikh al-Kabir by Bukhari contains a list of narrators and brief notes about their teachers and students. Occasionally, Bukhari mentions grades. Bukhari also has the books Tarikh al-Awsat and Du’afa al-Sagheer. In the latter, he mentions weak narrators.

Ibn Hibban wrote two books: 1) Thiqaat and 2) Majruhin. He listed narrators of the first and second levels in Thiqaat in addition to majhul narrators that had no criticism against them. He listed narrators of the third category (weak and unusable) in Majruhin. Sometimes, he adds details on their reliability.

Jarh wal-Ta’deel by Ibn Abi Hatim contains Ibn Abi Hatim’s questions to his father Abu Hatim and Abu Zur’ah about many different narrators. It is the earliest work that attempts to be somewhat comprehensive.

There are other books in this genre including Du’afa of Ibn Adi and Thiqaat by al-Ijli.

There are also implicit secondary sources.

If Bukhari or Muslim use a narrator as evidence (rather than as corroboration), that is evidence they consider that narrator reliable. The same applies to Nasa’i.

If Tirmidhi declares a hadith with a narrator Hasan Sahih, that is evidence he considers him at least honest. If he declares a hadith Hasan, that is evidence he does not consider him Matruk. If he considers a hadith Ghareeb because of a narrator, that is evidence he considers him weak.

If Bukhari or Muslim stay away from using a narrator, that may indicate the narrator does not meet their standards of reliability.

Similar applies to scholars like Ibn Khuzaymah and Ibn Hibban that wrote Sahihs, but their judgement is weaker than the judgements of Bukhari and Muslim.

The tertiary sources are also divided into a few books.

The most important book on this subject is Tahzeeb ul-Kamal by al-Mizzi. It is largely limited to the narrators of the six books. Many people wrote books adding to or summarizing Tahzeeb ul-Kamal. Al-Mizzi’s student wrote Ikmal al-Tahzeeb to add information that al-Mizzi missed in his book. Ibn Hajr also wrote Tahzeeb ul-Tahzeeb which added information that al-Mizzi missed. He also wrote the extremely summarized Taqreeb ul-Tahzeeb which included only brief information about every narrator’s grade, generation, and year of death. Another useful summary is Khulasat Tazheeb Tahzeeb ul-Kamal.

Another important book is Mizan ul-Itidal by Dhahabi. In this book, Dhahabi discussed narrators that were criticized in some way and compared the statements of different scholars on them.

3. Connectedness of the Chain

Since the authenticity of a hadith depends on the narrators of the hadith, we need to know every narrator who brought the hadith from the Prophet (SAW).

If there is any break in the chain where a narrator is skipped or not mentioned or not named, that hurts the authenticity of the hadith, because we cannot determine whether the missing source was strong or weak.

As a result, the scholars divided a hadith according to the connectedness of its chain into some types:

  1. Mawsūl or Muttasil: The chain is connected with no breaks in it.
  2. Munqati’: The chain is broken with some people missing in the middle.

Mursal: When someone from the second generation (that did not meet the Prophet but met his companions) reports something about the Prophet without mentioning a source.

3.1 Mursal Hadith

3.1.1 Mursal of the Companions

If a companion narrates from the Prophet (SAW) indirectly, the missing person in the middle is almost certainly another companion. Since the person in the middle is resolved to be someone reliable, the hadith remains authentic. However, its level of authenticity is lower than a hadith that is completely connected.

A hadith in terms of its connectivity at the level of the companion can be divided into three types:

  1. Clearly connected
  2. Unclear
  3. Clearly disconnected

An example of clearly connected is when the companion is explicit with his direct hearing of the hadith.

Aisha (RA) reported that: The Prophet entered her house when a woman was there. He asked, “Who is this?” She said, “This is fulan” and talked about how much this woman prayed. The Prophet said (disapprovingly), “Do things that are within your capacity. Allah does not tire (from giving reward) until you tire (of doing good deeds).” (Sahih Bukhari)

An example of clearly disconnected is when it is impossible for the companion to have been a witness.

Anas ibn Malik (RA) said: Abu Jahl said, “⟪If this is truth from you, send down a shower of stones upon us from the sky or bring a painful punishment⟫,” then Allah revealed ⟪Allah would never punish them while you (O Prophet) are among them, and Allah would never punish them while they seek forgiveness.⟫ (8:33)

Anas ibn Malik (RA) was an Ansari and was a young boy when the Prophet migrated to Madinah, and no one could have reported this to Anas other than a companion.

In the unclear category are narrations where the companion only narrates from the Prophet (SAW) without specifying anything that indicates direct connection. This is the majority of narrations, and being unclear in their connection does not stop them from being Sahih.

Ibn Umar (RA) said: The Prophet (SAW) said: “Islam is built on five (pillars).” (Sahih Bukhari)

However, narrations in this category can be stronger or weaker in terms of their connectivity depending on the age of the companion (or when he accepted Islam), the wording of the narration, and other context. So, a hadith from Umar (RA) or Aisha (RA) is often stronger in connectivity than one from younger companions like Ibn Abbas (RA) or Anas (RA).

This information is useful when preferring between narrations, but all narrations from the companions achieve the status of Sahih.

Example of Connected Being Preferred Over Disconnected

Ibn Abbas (RA) said: The Quraish said to the Jews, “Give us something that we can ask this man about.” They said, “Ask him about the Ruh.” When they asked him about the Ruh, Allah revealed ⟪And they ask you, [O Muhammad], about the soul. Say, “The soul is of the affair of my Lord. And mankind have not been given of knowledge except a little.”⟫ (17:85) (Sunan Tirmidhi)

Ibn Abbas (RA) was too young to witness this event in Makkah.

Ibn Masud (RA) said: When I was with the Prophet (SAW) in a field, while he was leaning on a palm tree stalk, some Jews passed by. They said to each other, “Ask him about the Ruh.” [..] They asked him and the Prophet (SAW) stayed quiet and did not reply, and I realized he was receiving revelation, so I stood up. When the verse was revealed, he said ⟪And they ask you, [O Muhammad], about the soul. Say, “The soul is of the affair of my Lord. And mankind have not been given of knowledge except a little.”⟫ (17:85) (Sahih Bukhari)

Ibn Masud (RA) was a direct witness, so his narration is preferred in this clash.

Example of Two Unclears

Ibn Umar (RA) said: The Prophet (SAW) stood at the well of Badr and said, “Have you found what Allah promised you to be true?” Then, he said, “They can hear what I am saying right now.”

Aisha (RA) heard of this narration from Ibn Umar and said: The Prophet (SAW) only said, “They know now that what I am saying was true.” She recited: ⟪You cannot make the dead hear.⟫ (27:80) (Sahih Bukhari)

3.1.2 Mursal of the Tabi’oon

Mursal more generally refers to any disconnected narration, however, it has been technically defined as: When a Tabi’i narrates from the Prophet (SAW).

The second generation of Muslims can be divided into senior, intermediate, and junior. There is debate over the authenticity of all Mursal narrations, but the narrations of the senior Tabi’oon are more likely to be authentic than the later Tabi’oon.

The reason they are not authentic is that the person in the middle could be another Tabi’i who is weak. However, the Mursal of the senior Tabi’oon is more likely to be authentic because the person in the middle is more likely to be a companion.

Senior Tabi’oon whose Mursal narrations tend to be authentic include:

  1. Saeed ibn al-Musayyab
  2. Masruq
  3. Ata ibn Yasar

Senior Tabi’oon whose Mursal narrations are criticized include Mujahid, Sha’bi, and Hasan al-Basri.

Ata ibn Yasar said: The Prophet (SAW) forbade preparing nabidh (fermented juice) from ripe and unripe dates together or dates and raisins together. (Muwatta Malik)

This is narrated from several companions including Abu Qatadah: The Prophet forbade the mixing of ripe and unripe dates and dates and raisins, and nabidh should be prepared from them separately. (Sahih Bukhari)

Saeed ibn al-Musayyab said: The Prophet (SAW) said: People will remain on good as long as they hasten to break their fast. (Muwatta Malik)

This has also been narrated from Sahl ibn Sa’d (RA) with the same words. (Sahih Bukhari)

Mujahid said: The Prophet (SAW) said: The one who commits zina with his mahram will not enter Jannah. (Musannaf Abd al-Razzaq)

This hadith is not confirmed by any Sahih narration.

However, there are accurate Mursal narrations from them as well.

Mujahid said: The Prophet (SAW) forbade sales with uncertainty. (Musannaf Abd al-Razzaq)

This has been narrated from Saeed ibn al-Musayyab also Mursal and has been narrated from Abu Hurairah (RA) in some narrations. (Sahih Muslim)

Intermediate Tabi’oon include Ibrahim al-Nakha’i.

Ibrahim al-Nakha’i said: I have been told the Prophet was never seen just fasting the 10th (of Dhul-Hijjah). (Musannaf Abd al-Razzaq)

Imam Ahmad said: The mursalāt of Sa’eed ibn al-Musayyab are the most authentic mursalāt. The mursalāt of Ibrahim al-Nakha’i are ok (لا بأس بها). But, no mursalāt are weaker than the mursalāt of Hasan al-Basri and Ata ibn Abi Rabah. They used to take from everyone!

Yahya ibn Saeed al-Qattan said: Saeed ibn al-Musayyab from Abu Bakr is like the air (in weight).

Junior Tabi’oon include Qatadah, Zuhri, and Humaid al-Taweel. They often have two people between them and the Prophet (SAW), so their Mursal narrations are the weakest.

3.2 Muttasil Hadith

3.2.1 Theory of Ittisal

There are four concepts to understand:

  1. Actual Ittisal of the Narrators
  2. Actual Ittisal of the Hadith
  3. Assumed Ittisal of the Narrators
  4. Assumed Ittisal of the Hadith

Actual Ittisal of the Narrators means one narrator actually met or learned from the one above him. This is proven in several ways:

  1. Fame and Reputation. E.g. Malik > Nafi
  2. Historical Reports of Meeting
  3. A Hadith Where Actual Ittisal of the Hadith Is Mentioned

Actual Ittisal is disproven by reports or by the time and place being too far to allow the possibility of ittisal.

Actual Ittisal of the Hadith is a higher level and means one narrator received the particular hadith in question directly from the one above him. This is proven only if a narrator directly says “my teacher narrated to me” or something similar.

Assumed Ittisal of the Narrators refers to the different pieces of evidence that indicate actual ittisal:

  1. Narrating from Other Teachers of the Same Time and Place
  2. Being Prolific in Narrating from that Teacher
  3. Student and Teacher Being in Similar Time and Place

Assumed Ittisal of the Hadith comes from two pieces of evidence:

  1. Actual Ittisal of the Narrators
  2. Assumed Ittisal of the Narrators

3.2.2 Reception

3.2.2.1 Types of Reception

A narrator can receive a hadith from his source either 1) directly or 2) indirectly.

Receiving a hadith directly would include: hearing it directly, reading out the teacher’s book to him while he approves, or hearing it being read out to the teacher.

Receiving a hadith indirectly would include: hearing someone else tell you what the teacher said or reading notes (supposedly) written by the teacher.

For a hadith to be muttasil, every narrator must have received the hadith from his teacher directly. Any break in the chain or indirect reception would cause the hadith to be munqati’.

3.2.2.2 Words of Reception

A narrator can use different words to describe reception. Words like haddathanā (he narrated to us), sami’tu (I heard), akhbarakanā (he informed us), and qaala lī (he said to me) all explicitly indicate direct reception.

If an honest narrator uses any of these words of reception, that proves direct reception of the hadith. If someone uses one of these words and it is proven he did not actually hear the hadith from his source, that narrator would be a liar.

Words like ‘an (according to) and qaala (he said) imply direct reception in some contexts but do not explicitly state it. This type of wording to describe reception is called ‘an’anah.

When the one being quoted is a teacher that the speaker heard other hadith from, these words strongly imply direct reception.

3.2.3 Tadlees

Some narrators were not careful (despite being honest) and would use words that imply direct reception even when they did not directly hear a hadith from that source. Someone who did this a lot is known as a mudallis (misleading narrator) and this action is called tadlees. Careful narrators would make it clear they received that information indirectly.

There are different levels of Mudallis narrators.

  • Some narrators were known to do some tadlees but most of their narrations are accepted as reliable.
    • Bukhari said: “I don’t know Sufyan al-Thawri doing tadlees from Habib ibn Abi Thabit or Salamah ibn Kuhail or Mansur (he mentioned more narrators). How little is his tadlees.”
    • In this case, unless there is evidence to prove tadlees in a specific case, the hadith remains Sahih due to likelihood being on the side of connection.
  • Some narrators did tadlees but were reliable if the ittisal between them and their teachers was known.
    • Hasan al-Basri was known to narrate from a lot of people he did not meet. However, when he narrated from someone he did meet, he was considered reliable. Those hadith are included in the Sahihayn.
  • Some narrators were known for so much tadlees they became unreliable.
    • Abu Hatim said: “I analyzed Ibn Laheeah’s narrations and realized that he used to do tadlees by narrating from weak narrators [without naming them] from reliable narrators he saw.” As a result, Ibn Laheeah, despite being honest, is considered a weak narrator, and his narrations are often mistaken.

Even if the hadith of a mudallis remains reliable, the risk of tadlees is one factor that makes a link weaker than another link. As a result, if a hadith of a mudallis contradicts a hadith of a non-mudallis when they are both reliable, the non-mudallis would be preferred.

Baqiyyah ibn Waleed: Abu Zur’ah said, “Baqiyyah is strange. When he narrates from thiqaat, he is thiqah. But, as for majhuleen, he narrates from people that are not known and are not reliable.” He also said, “His only flaw is narrating too much from majhuleen. As for honesty, he is not criticized for that.” Nasai said, “When he says ⟪حَدَّثَنَا⟫ or ⟪أَخْبَرَنَا⟫, he is thiqah. But, when he says ⟪عَنْ⟫, he is not taken from, because he does not know whom he took it from.” (Tahzeeb ul-Kamal)

3.2.4 How to Know Ittisal

Ittisal and Inqita’ are also derived from the scholars of Jarh and Ta’deel.

Maraseel of Ibn Abi Hatim is an important source, especially for early scholars. Tahzeeb ul-Kamal and other sources of Jarh also include information about ittisal or inqita’.

Hadith: Habib ibn Abi Thabit > Ibn Umar: The Prophet (SAW) said, “Islam is built on five (pillars).” (Sunan Tirmidhi)

This hadith only uses عَنْ between the narrators.

Habib ibn Abi Thabit (d. 120 AH) was from Kufa, and Ibn Umar (d. 73 AH) was from Madinah. Madinah was a hub, so this is not a problem.

Yazid ibn Abi al-Ja’d > Habib ibn Abi Thabit: I heard Ibn Umar say… (Sunan Nasai) Ata narrates the same from Habib with عن. (Sunan Nasai) Yazid was a hasan narrator, while Ata was thiqah hujjah.

Habib only narrated four or five narrations from Ibn Umar, all of them supported by other people, including this hadith of the five pillars.

Habib > Tawus > Ibn Umar: The Prophet (SAW) was asked about prayer at night. He said, “Two by two. When you think the dawn is about to come, then pray one.”

Ibn Maeen said, “Habib heard from Ibn Umar and Ibn Abbas.” (Tarikh Ibn Maeen) Ibn Hibban said, “He narrated from Ibn Umar and Ibn Abbas.” (Thiqaat by Ibn Hibban) Al-Ijli said, “He heard from Ibn Umar several things, and also heard from Ibn Abbas.” (Thiqaat by Ijli)

Ali ibn al-Madini said, “Habib ibn Abi Thabit met Ibn Abbas and heard from Aisha, but he did not hear from any other companion of the Prophet (SAW).” (Ilal Ibn al-Madini)

Habib narrated a hadith from the Madinan Urwah ibn al-Zubair (d. 94), and it was severely mistaken. As a result, Bukhari said, “Habib ibn Abi Thabit did not hear from Urwah ibn al-Zubair.” (Ilal Kabeer by Tirmidhi) Ibn Maeen and Ahmad also said Habib did not hear from Urwah. (Maraseel by Ibn Abi Hatim)

Hadith: Mujahid > Aisha: The Prophet (SAW) said, “Don’t curse the dead. They have reached what they put forward.” (Sahih Bukhari)

This hadith only uses عَنْ between the narrators.

Mujahid was born in 19 AH and died in 102 AH. Aisha (RA) died in 57 AH.

Yahya ibn Maeen said, “Mujahid never heard from Aisha (RA).” Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal said, “I heard my father say: Shubah used to deny Mujahid hearing from Aisha (RA).” Yahya al-Qattan said, “I told Shubah about the narration of Musa al-Juhani that Mujahid said ⟪Aisha came to us⟫ or ⟪Aisha narrated to me⟫ but he denied it.” (Maraseel by Ibn Abi Hatim)

Ali ibn al-Madini said, “I don’t deny that Mujahid met many companions and he also heard from Aisha (RA).” (Tahzeeb ul-Tahzeeb by Ibn Hajr)

Tahzeeb ul-Kamal mentions that the connection of Mujahid to Aisha (RA) is included by both Bukhari and Muslim: “رَوَى عَن: […] عائشة زوج النَّبِيّ ﷺ (خ م د س ق).” (Tahzeeb ul-Kamal)

Mansur ibn al-Mu’tamir > Mujahid said: Urwah ibn al-Zubair and I entered the masjid and saw Abdullah ibn Umar sitting against the wall of Aisha (RA)’s room. Urwah asked, “Abu Abdurrahman, how many times did the Prophet do umrah?” He said, “Four umrahs with one in Rajab.” We did not want to say he made a mistake or respond to him. Then, we heard Aisha (RA) brushing her teeth in her room. Urwah said, “Don’t you hear what he said Umm al-Mumineen?” She said, “What did he say?” He said, “He says the Prophet did umrah four times with one in Rajab.” She said, “May Allah have mercy on Abu Abdurrahman, the Prophet never did umrah except that he was with him, but he never did umrah in Rajab.” (Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim)

Mansur was thiqah hujjah. A’mash narrated the same hadith, summarized, from Mujahid without the explicit ittisal.

3.3 Levels of Connection

A particular connection or chain can be stronger or weaker than other connections or chains. This can be because of a closer relationship between two people or because the ittisal between two people is more strongly proven.

3.3.1 Case Study: Students of Abu Hurairah

Ali ibn al-Madini was asked about the highest students of Abu Hurairah. He began with Saeed ibn al-Musayyab, then said, “After him, Abu Salamah ibn Abdurrahman, Abu Salih al-Siman, and Ibn Sireen.” Then, Ali ibn al-Madini was asked, “What about al-A’raj?” He said, “He was reliable but below them.” Then, he was asked, “What about Abdurrahman ibn Yaqub?” He said, “He was reliable but below them.”

Ali ibn al-Madini also said: The students of Abu Hurairah are these six: Saeed ibn al-Musayyab, Abu Salamah, al-A’raj, Abu Salih, Muhammad ibn Sirin, and Tawus. And Hammam’s hadith resembled theirs except a bit.

Based on this, a possible ranking of Abu Hurairah’s students might be:

  1. Saeed ibn al-Musayyab
  2. Abu Salamah, Abu Salih, and Ibn Sireen
  3. Tawus
  4. Al-A’raj
  5. Hammam and Abdurrahman ibn Yaqub

Then, even lower than students would be those who only narrate sparse narrations from Abu Hurairah or even only one. All of them might be authentic narrations if there is connection and reliability, but knowing the strength of the connection is important when preferring one over another.

Imam Muslim records the following three narrations side-by-side to compare.

Abu Salamah > Abu Hurairah > the Prophet: Tasbeeh is for men and clapping is for women. (Sahih Bukhari)

Abu Salih > Abu Hurairah > the Prophet: Tasbeeh is for men and clapping is for women. (Sunan Tirmidhi)

Hammam ibn Munabbih > Abu Hurairah > the Prophet: Tasbeeh is for men and clapping is for women in Salah. (Sahih Muslim)

You can see that Hammam’s addition of “in Salah” is probably not correct in words although it is correct in meaning.

This difference is trivial, but there are examples where the difference becomes important.

Thus, the narration of the main students of Abu Hurairah is not as strong as the narration of someone like Ubaid ibn Hunain.

Utbah ibn Muslim from Ubaid ibn Hunain from Abu Hurairah: When a fly falls into a drink, then dip it in then take it out, because one wing has disease and the other has cure. (Sahih Bukhari)

Malik from Ubaidullah ibn Abdurrahman from Ubaid ibn Hunain from Abu Hurairah: I was walking with the Prophet (SAW) and he heard a man recite Surah Ikhlas. So, he said, “It became obligatory.” I said, “What became obligatory?” He said, “Jannah.” (Sunan Tirmidhi)

These are the only two narrations of Ubaid ibn Hunain from Abu Hurairah. So, his narrations are not as strong as narrations of Abu Salih or al-A’raj.

3.3.2 Golden Chains

Based on the levels of connections, scholars offered views on the best chains of hadith.

Some of the best chains are:

  • Malik > Nafi > Ibn Umar
  • Zuhri > Salim > Ibn Umar
  • Mansur > Ibrahim al-Nakhai > Alqamah > Abdullah ibn Masud
  • Sufyan > A’mash > Abu Wail > Ibn Masud
  • Zuhri > Saeed > Abu Hurairah
  • Abu al-Zinad > al-A’raj > Abu Hurairah
  • Zuhri > Urwah > Aisha
  • Hisham ibn Urwah > Urwah > Aisha
  • Ibn Abi Arubah or Shu’bah > Qatadah > Anas

However, that does not mean other chains cannot be preferred over these in specific narrations according to the context.

3.3.3 Contextual Weakness

Some narrators are known to be weaker from specific narrators despite being strong in general. This is usually due to how they received hadith from that narrator.

Hadith: Ibn Ajlan > Nafi > Abu Salamah > Abu Saeed al-Khudri > Prophet: When three leave on a journey, they should appoint one to be their leader. (Sunan Abu Dawud)

Nafi and Abu Salamah were thiqah hujjah.

Other students of Nafi narrated this hadith from Nafi from Abu Salamah from the Prophet (SAW) without mentioning the companion Abu Saeed al-Khudri.

Ahmad, Abu Hatim, Nasa’i, and Ibn Ma’in and others called Ibn Ajlan thiqah. Abu Zur’ah said, “Ibn Ajlan was honest and average (وسط).” (Tahzeeb ul-Kamal)

Yahya al-Qattan said, “Ibn Ajlan was mudhtarib in the hadith of Nafi. He did not have that value when narrating from him.” (Dhu’afa by Uqayli)

Hadith: Ibn Abi Zi’b > Zuhri > Urwah > Aisha: The Prophet (SAW) used to fast Ashura and tell people to fast it. (Sunan Ibn Majah)

Others > Zuhri > Urwah > Aisha: They used to fast Ashura before Ramadan was obligated. When Allah obligated Ramadan, the Prophet (SAW) said, “Whoever wants to fast (Ashura) can fast, and whoever wants to leave it can leave it.” (Sahih Bukhari)

Others > Zuhri > Humaid ibn Abd al-Rahman > Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan: I heard the Prophet (SAW0 say, “This is the day of Ashura, but Allah did not obligate you to fast it. I am fasting. Whoever wants can fast. Whoever wants can choose not to fast.” (Sahih Bukhari)

Ibn Abi Zi’b apparently combined the two narrations.

Imam Ahmad said, “Ibn Abi Zi’b was thiqah, honest, and better than Malik ibn Anas, except that Malik was more careful with narrators. Ibn Abi Zi’b did not care whom he narrated from.”

Yaqub ibn Shaibah said, “Ibn Abi Zi’b was thiqah and honest, except that his narrations from Zuhri specifically were criticized by people. People said there was idthirab in them. Some mentioned that his reception from Zuhri was only presentation (the narrations were read to Zuhri). But, presentation is authentic according to every scholar I met.”

Yaqub asked Ali about Ibn Abi Zi’b’s reception from Zuhri. Ali ibn al-Madini said, “It was presentation.” I asked, “Even if it was reception, how is it?” He said, “It is mutaqarib (ok).”

Abu Bakr al-Marwazi said: I asked Ahmad about Ibn Abi Zi’b. He said, “He was thiqah.” I asked, “And from Zuhri?” He said, “He narrated some hadith in which he was opposed.”

Yahya ibn Maeen was asked, “What’s Ibn Abi Zi’b’s status in Zuhri?” He said, “Ibn Abi Zi’b is thiqah.”

Ibn Maeen said, “Yahya al-Qattan did not approve of the hadith of Ibn Abi Zi’b from Zuhri.” (Tahzeeb ul-Kamal)

4. Gharabah

4.1 Types of Gharabah

Gharabah is of two types: 1) Nisbi (contextual) or 2) Mutlaq (complete). The first is to a specific narrator while the second is to the Prophet (SAW).

If a hadith is attributed to someone (e.g. someone says Imam Malik narrated from Nafi from Ibn Umar from the Prophet something), there are three possibilities:

  1. Only one person narrates the hadith from him. This is called Ghareeb (to Malik).
  2. Two people narrate the hadith from him. This is called Azeez (to Malik).
  3. Three or more people narrate the hadith from him. This is called Mashhur (to Malik).

Similarly, if a hadith is attributed to the Prophet (SAW), there are three possibilities:

  1. There is only one chain to him or the chain goes through one person at any point. This is also called Ghareeb (Mutlaq).
  2. Two chains narrate the hadith from him or the chain goes through at least two people the whole chain. This is also called Azeez (Mutlaq).
  3. Three or more chains narrate the hadith from him or the chain goes through three or more people the whole way. This is also called Mashhur (Mutlaq).

4.2 Justification of Gharabah

Gharabah can be 1) justified or 2) unjustified.

4.2.1 Justification of Gharabah Mutlaqah

In the early generation, there were no classes or gatherings specifically for hadith. People taught hadith in personal situations or when giving fatwa or when questions were asked.

This was the situation in the time of the companions and early successors. That is why most narrators in this generation had a close personal connection with their teacher. For example, Urwah ibn Zubair narrated from his aunt Aisha.

Then, slowly the science of hadith grew. Some people became prolific teachers like Zuhri and then Imam Malik. Then, the science of hadith grew even more.

If the chain of a hadith is solitary in the early generations, like the companions, their successors, and their successors, the Gharabah is usually justified. That is the majority of hadith, and the authenticity is not affected.

If the hadith is solitary too late in time without corroboration, the Gharabah would be unjustified.

Most hadith are solitary till the period of 120-160 AH. However, even solitary narrations till the death of Imam Malik (~180 AH) are acceptable. When a hadith is solitary till after Imam Malik, it becomes suspicious.

4.2.2 Justification of Gharabah Nisbiyyah

Narrators were of different kinds. Some were simple transmitters who learned from people and had a few students who learned from them. Others were major teachers of hadith who had hundreds of students.

The more prolific a narrator, the more unjustified it is if only one student narrates a hadith from him. This becomes a larger concern later in time, because prolific teachers in the generation of Imam Malik and after could have up to a thousand students. As a result, the weakness caused by the Gharabah increases.

If only one student narrates a hadith from a prolific teacher with many students, the hadith would be accepted or justified if the student is reliable enough to match the weakness caused by the Gharabah. It becomes easier to justify if there are corroborations of the hadith from other sources.

4.3 Takhreej

Takhreej, collecting the chains of different versions of a hadith from their sources, is the first step in determining Gharabah and finding Ilal. After Takhreej, it is useful to draw the chains of the hadith to visualize them.

4.3.1 Madars and Roots

After Takhreej, there can be up to a hundred narrators in a diagram. However, not all those narrators are important to the analysis of the hadith. That is why we identify the Madar(s) and root(s) of the hadith.

A Madar is someone who popularized a particular version of the hadith with a particular chain. A root is that Madar’s chain for the hadith back to the Prophet (SAW). Determining the Madar is not an exact science. It depends on what you are trying to analyze or show.

Sometimes, if a chain is only found in one book, you can assume the Madar to be the teacher of the writer or the teacher of the teacher depending on your purpose.

The purpose of identifying the roots is that the authenticity of the hadith depends on the narrators in the roots, not the narrators below the roots. The narrators below them are corroborated enough not to matter.

Hadith: Urwah ibn al-Zubair > Aisha: The Prophet (SAW) married me when I was six and consummated the marriage when I was nine.

The full chains of the hadith are as follows:

You can choose to identify the Madars as Hisham ibn Urwah and Ma’mar. You can also choose to identify the Madar as Urwah ibn al-Zubair himself.

The root of Hisham would be: Hisham > Urwah > Aisha. The root of Ma’mar would be: Ma’mar > Zuhri > Urwah > Aisha.

Hadith: Qatadah > Anas > Prophet: None of you believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself. (Sahih Bukhari)

You can choose to identify the Madars as Shu’bah, Husain, and Hammam. You can also choose to identify the Madar as Qatadah.

4.3.2 Sources of Takhreej

The primary sources of Takhreej are the books of hadith that collect hadith with chains. Sahih Muslim in particular is useful because Muslim lists different major routes of the same hadith one after another. Sunan Nasai also does the same sometimes.

The secondary sources include:

  1. Books of Atraaf
    • Main book in this genre is Tuhfat ul-Atraaf by al-Mizzi. It is organized by companion and notes different routes of each hadith. This information can be used to find the routes in the primary sources.
  2. Books of Ilal
    • Books like the Ilal of Daruqutni and Ilal of Ibn Abi Hatim discuss different routes when describing the ilal of a hadith.
    • These are especially important because they sometimes include chains that have been lost to time.
  3. Takhreej by the Editors of Different Books
    • The Takhreej of Musnad Ahmad by al-Arnaut in the footnotes is extremely useful. He mentions the different routes of a hadith and where they are found.

4.3.3 Method of Takhreej

Drawing isnads by hand is tedious but can be done and is still done by many scholars and students of hadith. I have created the tool Sanadi to make drawing isnads much faster and easier.

Finding different versions of the same hadith requires work because not all versions are worded or phrased in the same way. As a result, just searching the text of a hadith on a site like shamela or turath can miss wordings you do not know.

So, it is first important to use the secondary sources to get familiarity with the different wordings of a hadith.

Then, you should choose search phrases based on those wordings that fulfill two conditions: 1) they are unique enough to exclude unrelated hadith or texts as much as possible, and 2) they are as small or simple as possible to include as many versions of the hadith as possible.

Choosing a search prompt that is too long or specific will exclude slightly different wordings of the same hadith.

Choosing a search prompt that is too short or generic will include too many unrelated results to sift through.

4.4 Sources of Gharabah

The primary way of determining that a hadith only comes from a particular narrator or route is to do Takhreej yourself.

The secondary way is to refer to some of the following sources:

  1. Hadith Collections that Have Commentary
    • Sunan Tirmidhi since he often comments on Gharabah
    • Musnad Bazzar and Mu’jam of Tabarani also commonly note Gharabah
  2. Books of Ilal
    • Ilal of Daruqutni
    • Ilal of Ibn Abi Hatim
    • Ilal of Tirmidhi

4.5 Corroboration

A hadith can be corroborated in three ways:

  1. Corroboration of the same hadith from the same Sahabi
  2. Corroboration of the same hadith from a different Sahabi
  3. Corroboration of the same words from a different Sahabi
  4. Corroboration of the message but not the hadith

The first is called a Mutaba’ah. The second, third, and fourth are called Shawahid.

4.5.1 Mutaba’aat

Corroboration of the same hadith from the same Sahabi is the strongest type of corroboration for a hadith since it confirms the authenticity of the same account of the same event.

A hadith being corroborated to someone is not the same as that person being the Madar. A Madar is someone who popularized the hadith, but corroborations are more singular. The line between the two is not exact, but the distinction is useful. Every Madar has the hadith corroborated to him by multiple people but not every corroboration makes someone a Madar.

Hadith: The Prophet was asked, “Which deed is best?” He said, “Iman in Allah and His Messenger.” He was asked, “Then what?” He said, “Jihad in the path of Allah.” He was asked, “Then what?” He said, “An accepted Hajj.” (Sahih Bukhari)

The hadith has the following roots/routes:

It is corroborated to Abu Hurairah with three routes. The first route is Sahih in itself, and the second two routes are Hasan by themselves. However, when combined, the hadith becomes strongly Sahih.

4.5.2 Shawahid

Shawahid are of three types:

  1. Same Hadith, Different Sahabi
  2. Same Wording, Different Sahabi
  3. Same Message, Different Hadith

The first is the rarest. It is when two companions narrate the same event from different perspectives.

The second is more common but still rare. It is when two companions narrate the same words from the Prophet (SAW). It is possible they are narrating the exact same statement of the Prophet (SAW) or the Prophet (SAW) repeated himself.

The third is the most common. It is when two companions narrate the same message from the Prophet (SAW) but with different words.

4.5.3 Useful vs. Non-Useful Corroboration

It is not uncommon for narrations to develop shawahid or mutaba’aat over time due to the mistakes of narrators. As a result, useful corroboration is only when a route is reliable enough and the Madars are close in time enough that the two routes provide genuine corroboration.

If a route is unreliable or a narrator is known to mix up chains and the two Madars are far enough apart that it is likely one actually received the hadith from the other (directly or indirectly), the corroboration is not useful.

5. Ilal, Ikhtilaf, and Idhtirab

5.1 Definition of Illah

Ilal are subtle defects in a hadith.

They are of four types:

  1. Internal Ilal
  2. Gharabah Ilal
  3. Disagreement Ilal
  4. Contradiction Ilal

Internal Ilal are subtle problems in the reliability of a narrator or the connection of the hadith. The details of uncovering these were discussed in their respective sections.

Gharabah Ilal are problems caused to the reliability of a hadith due to its unjustified Gharabah. The details were discussed in the section of Gharabah.

Disagreement Ilal are the problems in a hadith uncovered by the disagreement of two routes or narrators of the hadith. The problem can be in either the isnad or the matn.

Contradiction Ilal are the problems in a hadith indicated by it contradicting the Quran or famous Sunnah.

Some ilal are signs of a problem in the hadith while other ilal tell you the cause of the problem. A hadith contradicting the clear Quran or being Ghareeb too late in time can be signs of a problem in the hadith, but a narrator being unreliable from a particular teacher would be the cause of a hadith’s mistake.

5.2 Types of Hadith Mistakes

There are four ways a hadith can be mistaken:

  1. Complete Fabrication
  2. Misattribution
  3. Mistakes in Isnad
  4. Mistakes in Matn

Complete Fabrication is when a completely made-up statement is attributed to the Prophet (SAW) with a false isnad. It could be intentional or unintentional.

Misattribution is when an existing statement or hadith is given an incorrect chain. A statement of a companion might be incorrectly attributed to the Prophet (SAW). Or a hadith of the Prophet (SAW) may be incorrectly given a new chain that does not belong to that hadith. This can also be intentional or unintentional.

Mistakes in Isnad and Matn are smaller mistakes in the two which do not involve completely new chains or entirely fabricated content. This will be discussed more in the section of Disagreement Ilal.

5.3 Disagreement Ilal

5.3.1 Disagreement Types

Narrators can disagree about either the isnad or the matn.

In the isnad, the common topics of disagreement are:

  1. Marfu’ vs. Mawquf
  2. Muttasil vs. Mursal
  3. Narrators in the Root

In the matn, the common types of disagreement are:

  1. Elaborate vs. Summarized
  2. Addition vs. Subtraction
  3. Different Contexts
  4. Different Content

5.3.2 Principles of Preference

In addition to using ilal of gharabah and contradiction, there are six principles used in tandem to prefer one side of a disagreement over the other:

  1. Principle of Numbers: The version with more narrators is preferred.
  2. Principle of Strength: The version with more reliable narrators is preferred.
  3. Principle of Commonality: The version that is less common (in terms of isnad or matn) is preferred.
  4. Principle of Easier Change: The version that is harder to change into from the other version is preferred.
  5. Principle of Addition: The addition of a reliable narrator is preferred over the silence of others.
  6. Principle of Preservation: Versions that are less likely to be preserved are preferred over those that are more likely to be preserved.
5.3.2.1 Principle of Numbers

The Principle of Numbers is more important than the principle of strength unless the numbers come from weak narrators.

If multiple weak narrators narrate a hadith in a certain way, that is not valuable information because they could have gotten it from each other.

If multiple reliable narrators transmit a hadith in a certain way, you would need strong evidence from the other principles to argue the version of multiple narrators is inaccurate.

For example, when one narrator transmits a hadith as Mursal and another transmits it Muttasil, that casts doubt on the hadith being Muttasil.

If two narrators transmit it as Mursal and one narrator transmits it Muttasil, the principle of numbers leads us to accept the Mursal version.

If two narrators transmit it Mursal and three narrators transmit it Muttasil, the fact that two separate students narrated it Mursal and three narrated it Muttasil means you need strong evidence to choose between the two. It is not enough to prefer Muttasil because three is larger than two.

5.3.2.2 Principle of Strength

The Principle of Strength depends on the judgement of the scholars of Jarh and Ta’deel about the relative reliability of different scholars.

If Imam Malik narrates a hadith one way and Ibn Abi Zi’b (who was thiqah) narrates it another way, the hadith of Imam Malik would be preferred because he is thiqah hujjah.

5.3.2.4 Principle of Commonality

The Principle of Commonality indicates that common isnads are less preferred over unique isnads because it is hard to explain why a narrator transmitted a unique isnad instead of a common one.

It is common for Zuhri to narrate from Salim from Ibn Umar.

So, if one person narrates from Zuhri from Salim from Ibn Umar and another narrates from Zuhri from Khalid ibn Aslam (who is hasan) from Ibn Umar, the narration of Khalid would be preferred. That is because it is easy for someone to misremember the chain into Zuhri > Salim > Ibn Umar but comparatively difficult to misremember it as Zuhri > Khalid ibn Aslam > Ibn Umar.

Similarly, if one person narrates a hadith from Zuhri from Ibn Umar directly (i.e. disconnected) and another person narrates it from Zuhri from Salim from Ibn Umar, the disconnected version is preferred.

This principle is a subset of the coming Principle of Easier Change.

5.3.2.4 Principle of Easier Change

The Principle of Easier Change indicates that when there are two matns where one is easier for a narrator to turn into the other in his memory, the one that is not easy is preferred.

For example, if there are two narrations where one says “He rode his Ferrari to the mosque” and one says “He rode his car to the mosque,” the former is preferred because it is hard for “car” to turn into “Ferrari” in transmission but easy for “Ferrari” to turn into “car.”

5.3.2.5 Principle of Addition

The Principle of Addition indicates we generally accept the addition of reliable narrators, since another narrator not mentioning something does not mean he denies or contradicts it.

However, this acceptance has limits and does not extend to when the other principles strongly indicate the addition to be a mistake.

If one reliable narrator mentions two statements in a hadith and one reliable narrator only mentions one statements, the addition is accepted.

However, if five people do not mention an important part of a hadith and only one person does, that is cause for concern.

5.3.2.6 Principle of Preservation

The Principle of Preservation indicates that some types of narrations are more likely to be preserved in extant books than other types. The main consequence is that Mursal and Mawquf narrations are less likely to be preserved because most of the major collections we have today intend to record Muttasil Marfu’ hadith. As a result, those that are less likely to be preserved are given more weight.

If the writers of the Sunan (through one reliable student of Zuhri) record Zuhri narrating a hadith from Urwah from Aisha from the Prophet (SAW) but the Musannaf of Abd al-Razzaq records Zuhri narrating the same hadith from the Prophet (SAW) directly (i.e. disconnected), the disconnected version is preferred. The only reason the Sunan did not record it is their purpose was to record connected narrations.

5.3.3 Sources of Resolving Disagreement

The primary method of resolving disagreement is using the principles of preference and other ilal.

The secondary way is to refer to the statements of the hadith scholars. This includes:

  1. Books of Ilal
    • Ilal of Daruqutni
    • Ilal of Ibn Abi Hatim
    • Ilal of Tirmidhi
  2. Comments by the Authors of Collections
    • Abu Dawud
    • Tirmidhi
    • Bayhaqi
  3. Indications by the Authors of the Sahihs
    • Bukhari and Muslim’s choices indicate their preferred side of a particular disagreement.

Most early Ilal books concentrate on the mistakes of isnad rather than matn. The Ilal of Daruqutni is probably the most comprehensive classical book on ilal.

The tertiary way is to refer to books like Al-Musnad al-Musannaf al-Mu’allal which collects ilal discussions on every hadith.

5.3.4 Examples

5.3.4.1 Marfu’ vs. Mawquf

Hadith: Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan: The Prophet (SAW) said, “Laylat ul-Qadr is the 27th night.”

Abu Dawud al-Sijistani: Ubaidullah ibn Muaz > Muaz > Shu’bah > Qatadah > Mutarraf > Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan > Prophet (SAW)

Abu Dawud al-Tayalisi: Shu’bah > Qatadah > Mutarraf > Muawiyah

Daruqutni said:

Muaz ibn Muaz narrated it > Shu’bah > Qatadah > Mutarraf > Muawiyah Marfu’.

Likewise, Fahd ibn Sulaiman narrated it > Amr ibn Marzuq & Abbad ibn Ziyad > Uthman ibn Umar > Shu’bah.

It is not authentic from Shu’bah as Marfu’.

Ilal of Daruqutni

5.3.4.1 Muttasil vs. Mursal
5.3.4.1 Narrators or Chains

5.3.4.1 Elaborate vs. Summarized
5.3.4.1 Addition vs. Subtraction
5.3.4.1 Different Contexts
5.3.4.1 Different Content

Sometimes, students from a source or teacher disagree and differ with each other. That is why it is important to collect all chains of a hadith before passing judgement.

When there is a disagreement between narrators, the stronger or more numerous narrators are generally preferred.

When a weak narrator is proven incorrect by a strong narrator, the incorrect version is called Munkar and the correct version is called Ma’ruf.

When a strong narrator is proven incorrect by someone stronger than him or multiple strong narrators, the incorrect version is called Shaaz and the correct version is called Mahfuz.

The difference between these two sets of terms is not very important. Shaaz and Munkar could be used interchangeably, and Ma’ruf and Mahfuz could be used interchangeably.

When narrators differ such that you cannot decide the correct version, the hadith is called Mudhtarib.

Difference between narrators can be in the isnad or the matn. Differences of isnad include differing over whether a hadith is Marfu’ or Mawquf or including a person in the chain or not.

Mistakes or problems in the hadith uncovered by Takhreej are called Ilal.

Ilal (singular: illah) are of two types:

  1. Ilal Qadihah: Ilal that hurt the authenticity of a hadith. A hadith with this type of illah is called Mu’allal.
    • E.g. Majority of narrators consider a hadith Mawquf but only a weak person narrated it Marfu’. The Marfu’ version would be Mu’allal.
  2. Ilal Ghair Qadihah: Ilal that do not hurt the authenticity of a hadith
    • E.g. One narrator says “Zuhri > Abu Salamah > Abu Hurairah” and the other says “Zuhri > Saeed > Abu Hurairah” but both Abu Salamah and Saeed are reliable, so it does not matter which one is correct.

6. Categories of Authenticity

The hadith scholars divided a hadith in terms of its authenticity into three overarching categories: sahih (authentic), hasan (fair), and da’eef (weak).

Learning the definitions of these combines all the concepts of the previous sections.

A Sahih hadith is a Muttasil hadith of Thiqah narrators that is not Shaaz and has no Ilal Qadihah.

Muttasil means “fully connected.” Thiqah means narrators of the first level who have adalah (honesty) and dabt (reliability in narration). Not being Shaaz means not being unjustifiably Ghareeb (solitary) or contradicting stronger narrators. Not having Ilal Qadihah means there are no defects in the hadith that hurt the authenticity uncovered by other chains of the hadith.

So, a Sahih hadith is popularly said to have five conditions:

  1. Being fully connected
  2. Every narrator in the chain having adalah
  3. Every narrator in the chain having dabt
  4. Not being Shaaz
  5. Not having Ilal Qadihah

This is also called Sahih li-Dhatihi (Sahih in itself).

A lot of fuqaha and later scholars were laxer in their conditions for a hadith and did not require the last two conditions. So, they called a hadith Sahih if it was Muttasil and by Thiqah narrators. This is also called Sahih al-Isnad.

A Hasan hadith is a hadith which fulfills the same conditions as Sahih but some of its narrators are only of the second level (Saduq) rather than all being Thiqah. Because the narrators have some problems in memory, the hadith is lowered to the level of Hasan. This is also called Hasan li-Dhatihi (Hasan in itself).

When multiple narrators of the level of Hasan support one another on a particular hadith, the hadith is called Sahih li-Ghayrihi (Sahih due to external evidence).

A Daeef hadith is a hadith that is disconnected (Munqati’) or has a weak narrator in the chain or is Shaaz or Munkar or has an Illah Qadihah that makes it weak. Essentially, it fails one of the conditions of Sahih entirely.

However, if multiple Daeef chains support each other on a particular hadith, the hadith can be called Hasan li-Ghayrihi (Hasan due to external evidence). A lot of later hadith scholars were too lenient with making hadith Hasan li-Ghayrihi.

If the weakness is strong, the hadith is called Matruh. This type of hadith should not be used even for encouragement.

If its fabrication is largely proven (like if one of the narrators is a known fabricator), the hadith is called Mawdu’.

7. Differences in Grading

Sometimes, scholars differ about the grading or category of a hadith. This can be for three reasons:

  1. Difference in terminology or conditions
  2. Difference in application or judgement
  3. Difference in intention

As for the first, we already saw that some scholars conditioned different things for Sahih. Bukhari and Muslim required all five conditions for Sahih, while scholars like al-Hakim in his Mustadrak only required the first three conditions.

Tirmidhi had the term Hasan Sahih, and scholars differed about what it means. Some said it means a hadith between Hasan and Sahih or Tirmidhi was unsure whether it was Hasan or Sahih. Some said it means a hadith that has two chains, one Hasan and one Sahih. In reality, it just means Sahih.

Tirmidhi had the term Hasan, and he defined it to be any hadith whose meaning is confirmed by other sources and that has no liar in the chain and is not Shaaz. So, he would include hadith by weak but honest narrators in Hasan. He was the first to use the term Hasan. Then, the term evolved to the definition we have for it today.

Tirmidhi had the term Ghareeb, and he usually used it to refer to Matruh (extremely weak) hadith.

There are other terms Tirmidhi used which require more study.

Some scholars used the word Sahih to also include what we call Hasan hadith. Tirmidhi was one of these scholars. So, he would call both Hasan and Sahih hadith Sahih or Hasan Sahih.

As for the second (difference in application), scholars might differ about a narrator’s rank or whether two people met or whether a hadith is Shaaz or Mu’allal.

Additionally, many later scholars were much laxer in evaluating Shuzooz and Illah compared to earlier scholars. They were also laxer in turning Hasan hadith into Sahih li-Ghayrihi and Daeef hadith into Hasan li-Ghayrihi.

As for the third (difference in intention), there may be a hadith that is mostly supported and corroborated by others but one part is unique to that hadith.

One scholar might grade the hadith Sahih li-Ghayrihi or Hasan li-Ghayrihi intending the broader hadith, while another scholar might grade the hadith Shaaz or Munkar intending the specific unique part of the hadith which is unsupported or even contradicted by stronger narrators.

In conclusion, there are some ahadith that the vast majority agree are Sahih (like the hadith in the Sahihayn), there are some the vast majority agree are weak (like most hadith outside the six books and the Musnad of Imam Ahmad), then there are some where there is no vast majority for either side.

Hadith: Shu’bah > A’mash > Ibrahim al-Nakha’i > Alqamah > Ibn Masud: When the verse ⟪Those who believe and don’t mix their belief with wrongdoing⟫ (6:82) was revealed, the companions of the Prophet (SAW) said, “Which of us does not do wrong?” So, Allah revealed ⟪Indeed, shirk is great wrongdoing.⟫ (31:13) (Sahih Bukhari)

Other students of A’mash > A’mash > Ibrahim > Alqamah > Ibn Masud: When the verse ⟪Those who believe and don’t mix their belief with wrongdoing⟫ (6:82) was revealed, we said, “O Prophet (SAW), which one of us does not do wrong?” The Prophet (SAW) said, “It is not what you are thinking. Wrongdoing means shirk. Didn’t you hear Luqman saying to his son ⟪O my son, do not associate [anything] with Allah. Indeed, shirk is great wrongdoing⟫?” (Sahih Bukhari)

Shu’bah was thiqah hujjah and the imam of hadith in his time. There was no one comparable to him.

Imam Ahmad said, “Shu’bah was better in hadith than Thawri. There was no one in Shu’bah’s time comparable to him in hadith, nor as good in narration.”

Ibn Uyaynah said, “Shu’bah should be titled Amir ul-Mumineen in hadith.” (Ikmal al-Tahzeeb)

However, there were a few mistakes in his narrations from A’mash.

Post Views: 8

Leave a Comment

Scroll to Top