muqaddima

Allah, in the name of The Most Affectionate, the Merciful.

An introduction to the explanation of some of the terminologies of Hadīth sciences, which would suffice in explaining the book, without lengthiness and verbosity.

Know that, Hadīth in the terminology of most of the scholars of Hadīth applies to the speech of the Prophetﷺ, his actions and his tacit approval.

Tacit approval means that someone did or said something in his presence and he didn’t reject him or prohibit him from that; rather he remained silent and acquiesced.

Similarly it applies to the speech of the companion[1], his actions, his acquiescence, and to the speech of the tābayī[2], his actions and his acquiescence.

1)      The hādīth which goes back to the Prophetﷺ is called Marfū (the raised chain)

2)      That which goes back to the companion is called Mawqūf (the halted chain). As it is said Ibn ‘Abbās [3] said, did, or acquiesced or on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbās or Mawqūf on Ibn ‘Abbās.

3)      That which goes back to a tābayī is called Maqtū (severed chain).

Some of the scholars made Hadīth specific to Marfū’ and Mawqūf (only) as Maqtū’ is called Athār [4](non-prophetic hadīth).

Athār could apply to Marfū’ also, as the supplications which have come from the Prophetﷺ are called ‘A’dīyul Māthurah’.

Imām Tahāwi[5] named his book ‘Sharah M’ānī al-āthār’ which contains ahādīth of the Prophetﷺ and athār of companions.

Imām Sakhāwi[6] said that: There is a book named “Tahzīb ul-āthār” by Imam Tibrani[7] though it is specific to marf’ū ahādīth.  Whatever Mawqūf ahādith are mentioned, they are by way of abidance and intrusion.

Khabar[8] and Hadīth popularly have the same meaning.

Some scholars termed Hadīth specific to what has come from the authority of the Prophet, the companions and tābayīn and Khabar is specific to which is narrated about the news of the kings, sultans and the old days.

Hence, the one who engages with Sunnah is called a ‘Muhaddith’ and the one who engages with histories is called ‘Akhbāri’.

Raf’a[9] could (either) be explicit or indirect.

As to being explicit in speech, is like the companion’s saying: ‘I heard the messenger of Allah saying so and so’ or like his or someone else’s saying: ‘The messenger of Allah …’ or from the authority of the messenger of Allah that he said such and such.

Explicit in action, like the companion’s saying: ‘I saw the messenger of Allah did such and such” or from the authority of the messenger of Allah that he did such and such; or from the companion or someone else by the way of marfū’ or he made it marfū’ that:  he did such and such.

And by tacit approval by the companion or someone else saying: ‘Such and such or someone did such and such in the presence of the messenger of Allah and he doesn’t mention that he rejected it.

As to (be) indirect, it is like a companion who was not informed of the previous (revealed) books telling about something, for which there is no room for reasoning, about the past events like information about the prophets or those to come like the wars, tribulations, the terrors of the day of judgement, or about a specific reward or punishment being based on an action, as there is no way to find out about them except hearing it from the prophet.

Or that the companion does something which has no room for reasoning or the companion informs that they used to do such and such during the time of the Prophet because it is apparent that he came to know of that while revelation descended concerning it.

Or they say ‘and it is from the Sunnah such and such’ because it is apparent that ‘the Sunnah’ is the Sunnah of the messenger of Allah.

Some said that it could be the Sunnah of the companions or righteous caliphs’, as the term ‘sunnah’ is also applied to it.

Section 2

Sanad is the path of the Hadīth and it is the men who narrate it.

Isnād has the same meaning. It could come with the meaning of mentioning sanad and telling the path of the Matan.

Matan is at what Isnād ends.[10]

1)      If no narrator is missing from between the narrators then the Hadīth is Muttasil (uninterrupted) and (state of) being no narrators missing (from sanad) is called Ittisāl.[11]

2)      If one or more narrators are missing then the Hadīth is Munqati’ (suspended), and this missing (of narrator) is called Inqitā’.[12]

Absence of a narrator can either be at the beginning of the Sanad and it is termed ‘Mu’allaq’ and this absence is called Tā’līq.[13]

The absence (of narrator) could be one or more and sometimes whole sanad could be omitted as is the customary of authors, they say: ‘The messenger of Allah said…’

There many Ta’līqāt in the chapter headings of Sahih al-Bukhāri and they have the ruling of Ittisāl because he ensured that he doesn’t mention any hadith in this book except sahīh. However they are not in the level of his Masānīd except what he mentioned as musnad in another place in his book.

It could be differentiated between them in that which he mentioned by the way ‘assertion and familiarity’, like his saying “So and so said…” or “So and so mentioned…” indicates that its’ Isnād is established as per him, so it is definitely Sahīh.

What he mentioned in wordings of ‘doubt and in the passive voice like “It has been said”, “It is said” and “It was mentioned” then there, as per him, is doubt concerning its authenticity.

But since he narrated it in this book its origin is proved. Due to this they said: the Ta’liqāt of al-Bukhāri are Muttasil and Sahīh.

If a Hadīth has an omission (of narrator) at the end of the sanad, even if it is after Tāba’ī, it is called Mursal (loose)[14].

This act is called Irsāl, like the Tāba’ī saying: ‘The messenger of Allah said…’

Sometimes Mursal and Munqati’(ahadīth) could have same meaning for Muhaddithīn. The first terminology is more popular.

The ruling of Mursal hadith is to ‘be silent’ according to most of the scholars because it’s not known if the omitted narrator is trustworthy or not, as Tāba’ī could narrate from another Tāba’ī and amongst Tāba’īn there are trustworthy and as well unreliable.[15]

According to Imām Abu Hanīfah and Imām Mālik Mursal hadīth is accepted unconditionally. They say: he did Irsāl only due to reliability and certainty. The hādīth is reliable as if it wasn’t Sahīh according to him, he would not have done Irsāl and he wouldn’t have said: ‘The messenger of Allah said…’

According to Imām Shāfa’ī if it is supported by another way; Mursal or Musnad, even if it is weak, it is accepted.

There are two opinions of Imām Ahmad bin Hambal:

If it is known that the habit of that tāba’ī is that he doesn’t do Irsāl except from reliable people and if his habit is to do Irsāl from reliable people as well as from non-reliable, then its ruling, as it is said, is to be silent as per consensus.

There is more detail in it as mentioned by Imām Sakhāwi in ‘Sharah Alfiyah’.

If the narrator is missing from in-between the Isnād, then if it be two consecutive narrators, it is called Mu’dal (problematic) with fatah of dua’d.[16]

If one or more (narrators are missing) different places (in isnād), then it is called Munqati(suspended).

According to this the Munqati’ would be a type from that which is not Muttasil, and Munqati’ could be whatever is not Muttasil including all of the types and with this meaning it is made divided.

(I.e. it is not one type, but it includes all the types of inqit’ā)

Inqitā’ and omission of a narrator is known by knowing that the narrator and the person he is narrating from didn’t meet, either because they didn’t live during the same time or didn’t meet or the Shaykh not giving permission (to the person to narrate from them) governed by the knowledge of history which details the birth and death dates of the narrators and their period of study and travel, because of this the knowledge of history became a source and reliance to Muhaddithīn.

From the types of the Munqati’ is the

Mudallas[17] (misrepresented hadīth) with a Dammah on meem and a Fathah on Laam with a Shaddah, this action is termed Tadlīs and the one who does it is a Mudallis, with a Kasrah on Laam.

It is case is that the narrator doesn’t name his Shaykh from whom he heard it but rather he narrates it from the one above him with statement that makes one believe that he heard it yet is not labelled lying; like him saying : from so and such said. [18]

Tadlās linguistically is hiding the defect of a product while trading. It could be said that it comes from word ‘al-Dalas’ which is the combination of darkness and its intensity. It is called this because of their having hidden-ness in common.

The Shaykh (Hafiz Ibn Hajar Asqalāni) said: The ruling of the person whose Tadlīs is established, is that no hadīth is accepted from him, except he explicitly states that he was narrated (the hadīth)

Imam Shamny said: Tadlīs is Harām according to the Imams.

It was narrated from Wakī’ that he said: It is not permissible to do Tadlīs of a garment, then how about with a Hadīth? And Shu’ba exaggerated in dispraise of it. [19]

The scholars have difference of opinion in accepting the narrations of the Mudallis.

One group of scholars of hadīth and Fiqh say that Tadlīs is Jarh and that whoever is known for it, his hadīth is not accepted under any circumstances.

It is said that it is accepted. The majority of scholars hold the opinion to accept Tadlīs of the one who only does it from someone reliable, like Ibn Uyaynah, and to reject the one that does Tadlīs from people who were considered weak and others; until that he heard it by saying “I heard” or “He told us” or “He informed us”. [20]

The motive behind Tadlīs could be for corrupt aim for some people, like hiding hearing from the Shaykh due to his young age or him not being famous and his status amongst the people.

Which occurred from some of the senior scholars is not because of something like this, nay instead stemming from their trust in the authenticity of the Hadīth and from lack of need due to the popularity of state.

Imam Shamni said: it could be that he heard the Hadīth from a group of reliable people and from that man. So he sufficed with mentioning him from mentioning one of them or all of them due to his assurance on authenticity of the Hadīth in it as the Mursal does.

If a difference occurs between the narrators in the Isnād or Matn by something preceding and a deferment or an addition and omission or switching one narrator in the place of the other or a text in place of a text or a mispronunciation in the names of the Sanad or parts of the Matn or by a summation or omission or the likes of that then the Hadīth is Mudtarib. [21]

If it is possible to join between them, then it is fine, and if not then be silent (regarding it).

If the narrator inserts his words or someone else’s word from a companion or taba’ī, for example, with an aim like clarifying the language or explanation of a meaning or restricting the unrestricted or the likes of that, then the Hadīth is Mudraj.[22]

This discussion draws us to narrating and transmitting a Hadīth by the meaning. There is difference of opinion (among scholars) in this regard. Most of them hold the opinion that it is permissible from the one who is knowledgeable in Arabic, proficient in the phrasing of speech, acquainted with special compositions (of words) and understandings of dialogue, so as to not make error by way of addition or deletion.

It is said: it is permissible in words and letters and not in sentences.

It is said: it is permissible for the one, who remembers the words so that he will be able to change them.

It is said: it is permissible for the one who has memorized the meaning of the Hadīth and forgot its actual wordings, for necessity in obtaining rulings.

The one who has memorised the actual wordings of hadith, it is not permissible for him, as it is not required.

This difference of opinion is in regards to permissibility and impermissibility.

As to the preference of narrating the actual wordings (of a hadīth) without change in it, it is agreed upon because of the Prophet’s saying: “May Allah enlighten the face of an individual who has heard my speech, took it in then gave it as he heard.”

Narration of hadith by meaning is present in six books (of ahādīth) and other books.[23]

An’anah is narrating the Hadīth with words “from the authority of so and from the authority of so”.[24]

The Mu’an’an is a Hadīth narrated by the method of ‘An’anah.

The condition (for a hadith) to be an’anah is:

1)      Living in the same period according to Imām Muslim,

2)      Meeting according to Imām Bukhāri,

3)      Acquiring (hadīth) according to other group of scholars.

Imām Muslim refuted both the groups severely and exaggerated in doing so.

‘An’anah of the Mudallis is unacceptable.

Each Marfū’ Hadīth whose Isnād is Muttasil is Musnad[25]. This is what is popular and relied upon.

Some of the scholars call every Muttasil Hadeeth as Musnad, even if it is Mawqūf or Maqtū’.

And some called the Marfū’ as Musnad, even if it was Mursal, Mu’dal, or Munqati’.

Section 3

From the types of Hadīth are the Shādhdh, Munkar, and Mu’allal.

Shādhdh[26] linguistically means “he who separated from the group and left it.”

In terminology (is the hadīth) which is narrated contrary to what the trustworthy narrate.

If the narrators are not reliable then it is Mardūd (rejected hadīth).

If they are reliable then, way of preference will be employed due to superior retentiveness, accuracy or greater number (of sanads) and other reasons for preference.

The one which is preferred is called Mahfūz (preserved hadīth) and the (hadīth) over which it is preferred (is called) Shādhdh (anomalous hadīth).

Munkar (disclaimed hadīth) is a Hadīth narrated by a weak narrator opposing (the hadīth narrated by) who is weaker than him.

Opposite of it is Ma’rūf (well recognized hadīth).

So the narrators of Munkar and Ma’rūf both are weak and one of them is weaker than the other.

Shādhdh & Mahfūz (hadīth) are abasement and Munkar & Mahfūz (hadīth) are preponderant.

Some muhaddithīn did not make it a condition in Shādhdh and Munkar that they contradict with another narrator, weather (the narrator is) strong or weak. They said Shādhdh is that which a reliable transmitter narrated solely, and there is no basis for its agreement and support. This would hold true for the single trustworthy sound narrator.

Some muhaddithīn do not consider (the narrators to be) trustworthy and (weather they) oppose (each other for a hadīth to be shādhdh)

Similarly (for) Munkar they didn’t make it specific to the mentioned definition. They named discredited Hadīth due to transgression, excessive heedlessness and frequent mistakes (of the narrtor) as Munkar.

There is no dispute (between muhaddithīn) in these terminologies.

Mu’al’lal (defective), with a fathah on the lām, is an isnād with defects and subtle uneasily discernible reasons which hurt the authenticity of the Hadīth (of which only) the proficient and sagacious (scholars) of high calibre (are aware) like Irsāl in the Mawsūl and Waqf in the Marf’ū and the likes.

The expression of the Mu’al’lil, with a kasra on lām, might fall short of establishing evidence for his claim, like the money changer in regards to the Dinār and Dirham.

If a narrator narrates a Hadīth and another narrator narrates a hadīth in agreement with it, then this Hadīth is called a Mutābi’ (corroborative), in the form of active particle. This is the meaning of what the Muhaddithīn say: “X followed (this hadīth)”

There are many places where Imām Bukhāri says in his Sahīh and they say: “it has Mutābi’āt.”

Mutāba’ah (corroboration) necessitates strengthening and support. The Mutābi’ doesn’t have to be equal in ranking to the original (Hadīth), even if it is lesser, it is suitable for Mutāba’ah.

Mutāba’ah could be in the narrator himself or it could be in a Shaykh above him, and the first (type) is closer to perfection than the second, because weakness in the beginning of the Isnād is more common and frequent.

Mutābi’ if it agrees with the original (Hadīth) in words and in meaning, it is called “mithlahu” and if it agrees in meaning but not in words it is called “Nahwahu”.

It is a condition in Mutāba’ah that the two Hadīth be from one Sahābi.

If they (hadīth)are from two (different) Sahābis it is called a Shāhid like it is said “It has a Shāhid from the Hadīth of Abu Hurairah” and “It has Shawāhid” and “The Hadīth of X and X bears witness to it”.

And some of them (i.e. muhaddithīn) make Mutāba’ah specific to agreement in words (of the hadīth) and Shāhid in meaning (meaning of the hadīth), whether it came from one Sahābi or two.

Term Shāhid and Mutābi’ could apply to same meaning. The affair in that is clear, and following up the routes of the Hadīth and their chains with the intention of knowing of a Mutābi’ or Shāhid is called ‘I’tibār’ (evaluation).

Section 4

The basic categories of hadīth are:

·         Sahīh (sound)

·         Hasan (fair)

·         Da’īf (weak)

Sahīh hadīth is of highest rank, Da’īf is of low rank and Hasan is of intermediate rank. All the types of hadīth which we have mentioned are subsumed in these three categories.

Sahīh is the hadīth which is established by an upright and thoroughly accurate narrator and which doesn’t contain an impairing defect and is not anomalous.

If these qualities are present to the level to perfectness and entirety, then the hadīth is called Sahīh li-dhātihi (i.e. shahīh in itself)

If a hadīth has some sort of deficiency and there exists something which can repair this deficiency by the way of multitude of like chains, is called Sahīh li-ghayrihi (i.e. sahīh because of some extraneous evidence) and if it (i.e. something which can repair the deficiency in hadīth) doesn’t exist then it is hasan li-dhātihi (i.e. fair in itself).

A hadīth which is devoid of all or a few conditions considered for sahīh hadīth is called Da’īf hadīth.

If a da’īf hadīth has multitude of like chains and its weakness is repaired is called hasan li-ghayrihi (i.e. fair because of some extraneous evidence)

The apparent statement of scholars is that, it is possible that all the qualities mentioned for sahīh hadīth be absent in hasan hadīth, but as per research, the deficiency which is considered for hasan is (only) lack of accuracy and remaining qualities (required fo sahīh hadīth) will remain same.

Section 5

Adālah (integrity) is the innate ability of a person to adhere to the sanctitude and gallantry.

The meaning of taqwah (piety) is abstaining from evil deeds like polytheism, transgression and innovation. There is difference of opinion in (condition of) avoiding minor sins (for piety). The preferred opinion that it is not the condition as it is beyond the ability (of a person to avoid them) except persisting upon it as then it becomes a major sin.

The meaning of marū’ah (gallantry) is being free of lowly affairs and defects which are contrary to the requisite of general moral virtues. The example of marū’ah is what is allowed (but not preferred) in religious affairs like eating and drinking in bazar and urinating on streets etc.

It should be known that Ad’l in narrating (a hadīth) is more general than ad’l in case of witness. Ad’l of witness is specific to free man and ad’l in narration is common to free man and slave.

The meaning of dhabt (accuracy) is memorization of whatever is heard and preventing it from escaping and disruption so that it can be recalled.

There are two types of dhabt:

·         Dhabt of memory (literally dhabt of chest)

·         Dhabt of book

Dhabt of chest is memorising and grasping by heart.

Dhabt of book is preserving it till the time of delivery.

As for integrity (adālah), there are 5 reasons for aspersions (tā’n) associated with it.

·         The narrator lying (kizb)

·         Being accused of lying

·         Being morally corrupt (fāsiq)

·         Being unknown (jahālah)

·         Being an innovator (bida’h)

By ‘narrator lying’ it is meant that his lying is proved with regard to the prophetic traditions either by acceptance of the forger (of hadīth) or any other evidence beside that.

Hadīth of the one accused of lying is called mawdū (the forged hadīth)

Whosoever is proved to be deliberately lying regarding hadīth, his narrations will never be accepted even if it is once in the lifetime and he repented from it unlike the one who gives false witness and repents.

The Meaning of mawdū hadīth, as per the terminology of muhaddithīn is this (what is said above) and is not that lying of a narrator is known and established for a specific hadīth. 

This issue is hypothetical. The ruling of forgery and falsity is given by overpowering thought (zanne ghalib) and no way conclusively and certainty, as a liar could speak the truth. With this the confusion is removed regarding what is said of forgery by the acceptance of forger, that, it is possible that he is lying in this confession as its verity is known by overpowering thought. Were it not for this, it would not be permissible to kill who confesses to murder or to stone to death who admits to fornication. Ponder upon this point.   

As to narrator being accused of lying is being famous for lying and known for lying in conversations with people but his lying is not established in the prophetic narrations. As said by scholars, this ruling is also applicable to the narrations which are against the established principles of Islamic laws. This type of hadīth is called discarded report (matrūk) like it is said ‘his report is discarded’ or ‘X’s hadīth is abandoned’.

If this narrator (who is accused of lying) repents, his repentance is accepted and it is allowed to listen to his hadīth if the signs of integrity appear in him.

The one who lies rarely in his general conversations but not in prophetic hadīth, still his narrations will not be called forged or discarded, even though it is a sin. 

As for being morally corrupt, it is meant corruption of morals and not beliefs, as it falls under bidah (innovation). Mostly the term bidah is applied to corruption of beliefs. Lying is considered separately even though is also transgression due its aspersion being more severe and extreme. 

Unknown narrator is also a cause of aspersion in hadīth, as, if his name and identity is not known his state cannot be known and if he is reliable or dodgy as it is said ‘A man narrated to me’ or ‘A Shaykh narrated to me’. This is hadīth is called anonymous report (mubham).

The hadīth of an anonymous narrator is not accepted, except if it is a companion of the Prophet as all his companions are just, even if he is mentioned with qualities of honesty and integrity, like it is said ‘An upright person reported to me’ or ‘a reliable person narrated to me’. There is difference of opinion in this case and the most correct opinion is that it is not accepted as the anonymous narrator may be upright in his view but not in reality. However if a proficient scholar narrates with these words, the hadīth will be accepted.

The meaning of bidah (innovation) is to believe in a new matter which is against what is known in religion, which is reported by the Prophet and his companions with a sort of suspicion and interpolation and not by the way of denial and rejection, as that is disbelief (kuf’r)    

Hadīth of an innovator rejected as per consensus. According to some scholars it will be accepted if the narrator is characterized by integrity of dialect and safeguarding of tongue. Some have said that if he rejects established and known matters of Islam knowing that it from the requisite of religion, he is mardūd (rejected) and if he doesn’t have this trait (and is attributed) with the presence of (quality of) accuracy, piety, piousness, vigilance and retention, the his hadīth can be accepted even if his opponents accuse him of disbelief.

The preferred opinion is, if an innovator invites people to his innovations and propagates it, his reports are rejected else they are accepted.  If he narrates something which support and strengthen his innovations then he is rejected with surety. In general scholars have difference of opinion in acquiring hadīth from innovators and egotistical whims.

Author of Jāmi’ul Usūl writes: A group of hadīth scholars have acquired hadīth from khwārij, those affiliated with qad’r, tasha’yy, rif’d and all other sects of innovators and egotistical whims while other group of hadīth scholars were careful and abstained from acquiring any hadīth from these sects. Both these group had their own intentions (in acquiring or not acquiring hadīth from these sects).

There is no doubt that hadīth was acquired from these sects only after thorough investigation and accuracy though precaution was taken in not acquiring hadīth from them as it is proved that these sects used to forge hadīth to propagate their beliefs. They used to admit this after repenting and reverting. Allah knows best.

Causes of aspersion due to dhabt (accuracy)

The causes of aspersion which are related to accuracy are also five.

1.      Excessive heedlessness

2.      Frequent mistakes

3.      Opposing reliable transmitter

4.      Delusion

5.      Chronically forgetfulness

Excessive heedlessness and frequent mistake are closer in meaning. Heedlessness is in listening and acquiring the hadīth while mistake occurs in dictation and conveyance of hadīth.

Opposing reliable transmitter in isnād and matan could be in many ways causing anomalous. It is considered a cause of aspersion related to accuracy as the reason for opposing reliable transmitter is lack of precision and memory and bereft of safeguarding it from change and alternation.

The aspersion with respect to delusion and forgetfulness which the narrator was mistaken by, and narrated it by the way of delusion. If that can be discovered by evidences indicating the cause of defects.

This is the most vague and finest part of ulūm ul-hadīth. Nobody can do it except the one who is granted intelligence, vast memory, and complete knowledge of the ranks of narrators and state of asānīd and mutūn like old scholars of this subject until it ended at (Imām) Dār Qutni. It is said that no one similar has come after him in this affair. Allah knows best.

As to bad memory, the scholars have said: what is meant by it is that, his accuracy doesn’t not overcome his mistakes, memory, absent mindlessness and forgetfulness. That is, if his mistakes and forgetfulness overcome or is equal to his accuracy and precision, it will fall under having a bad memory.So what is relied upon is accuracy, precision and its abundance.     

If bad memory is dominant over him at all the times and all of his life his reports will not be relied upon. As per some scholars this hadīth would also fall under shādhdh.

If bad memory arises due to some factors like impairment of memory due to old age, loss of eye sight or losing his book. This is called mukh’talit.

Whatever reports were transmitted before the memory impairment and disorder are accepted, which are distinguished from what he transmitted post this state. If it can’t be distinguished then no action is taken. Similarly when it is unclear.

If muta’baad and shawahid reports are found for this type of report, it rises from the state of non-acceptance to acceptance and superiority. This ruling is with regards to mastūr, mudallis and mursal ahadīth.

Section 9

Inferring of legal rulings by sound, fair and weak hadīth

There is consensus of scholars in inferring sound hadīth for legal rulings. Fair hadīth also has this consensus by most scholars.   It is grouped with sound hadīth in inferring of legal rulings, even though it is below in status.

Weak hadīth which has reached the rank of hasan li-ghairihi due multitude of like chains also has consensus of scholars.

Inferring by weak hadīth[27]

What has become popular that weak hadīth is considered in moral virtues but not in other cases[28]. Intend (of this statement) is (is with regard to) single weak narration and not collective narration as it falls under the category of fair hadīth and not under weak. Scholars have clearly mentioned it.

Some scholars have said: If the weakness in hadīth is due to defect in retentiveness of transmitter, or mixing up of words by narrator, or due to misinterpretation with the presence of righteousness and sanctity (of narrator), it can be repaired by the multitude of like chains.

If (weakness of hadīth) is due to indictment of lie, or anomalousness, or excessive errors, (then) it cannot be repaired by the multitude of like chains and the hadīth is judged as weak and acted upon in righteous deeds.

It is suitable in this case (the statement of scholars) “supplement of a weak hadīth with another doesn’t benefit it in strengthening” could be applied. Otherwise this statement is obviously incorrect. Reflect on this point.

Section 10

The six well known established books in Islām, which are called Sihāh Sitta are:

1.      Sahīhul Bukhāri

2.      Sahīh Muslim

3.      Jāmi by at-Tirmidhi

4.      as-Sunan by Abū Dāwūd

5.      an-Nasāī

6.      Sunan of Ibn Mājah

And as per some muhaddithīn al-Mu’atta instead of Ibn Majah and the author of Jāmi’ul-Usūl chose al-Muwatta.

In these four books (i.e. other than sahīhain) are types of ahādīth from Sihāh, Hisān, and Di’āf; and they are named as-Sihāhus-Sitta by way of Taghlīb.

The author of Masābīh as-Sunnah called ahādīth of other than the two Shaykhs (i.e. Imām Bukhāri and Imām Muslim) as Hisān and it is close in this regard to the linguistic meaning or it’s a new terminology from him.

Some of them said ad-Dārmi’s book is more appropriate and fitting to be made the sixth of the books because its narrators have less weakness, the presence of munkar and shādh hadīth are rare, it has Asānīd ‘aliyah and its Thulāthiyyāt are more than the Thulāthiyyāt of Al-Bukhāri.

These (above) mentioned books are the most famous books and there are many other books which are very popular. Imām Suyūti narrated in Jam’ il-Jawāmi’ from many books exceeding fifty consisting of Sihāh, Hisān and Di’āf, and he said I have not narrated in it a hadīth with forgery which the Muhaddithīn have agreed upon leaving it and rejecting it, and Allah knows the best.

And the author of Mishkāt ul-Masabīh mentioned in the introduction of his book, a group of the proficient Imams and they are Bukhāri, Muslim, Imām Mālik, Imām Shāfī, Imām Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Tirmidhi, Abū Dāwūd, Nasāī, Ibn Mājah, Dārimī, Dāraqutni, Bayhaqi, Razīn and others are mentioned very briefly. I have written about their states in a separate book named Al-Ikmāl BiDhikri Asmā ir-Rijāl and success is from Allah and help is sought in him in the beginning and the return.

As to al-Ikmāl fī Asmā ir Rijāl by the author of Al-Mishkāt, it is attached to the end of this book.

  

---

[1] A companion is he who ever encountered the Prophetﷺ, believing in him and died as a Muslim, even if his Islam was interrupted by apostasy according to strongest opinion. (Nukhba tul-Fik’r)

[2] A tābay’ī is anyone who met one of the companions and died as a Muslim. (Nukhba tul-Fik’r)

[3] Abdullah bin Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib, son of the uncle of the Prophetﷺ. He was born at Mecca and grew up during the life time of the Prophetﷺ. He was present with Hazrat Ali during the battles of Jamal and Siffīn. There are 1660 ahādīth narrated by him present in Sahihayn and other books.

[4] There two definitions of athar. 1) It is same as hadith,as marfū’, maqtū and mawqūf ahadīth are all narrated the same way. 2) It is specific to speech, actions and tacit approval of companions and tabayīn. A muhaddith is also called ‘athari’.

[5] Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Salāmah Abu Jā’far Tahāwi. He was initially Shaf’ī and later became Hanafi. He is one of the most edurite scholars of Ahnāf. He authored ‘Saharh M’āni al-āthār’, ‘Ahkām ul-Qurān’, al-‘Mukhtasar fil Fiqh’ etc.

[6] Shamsuddin Muhammad bin Abdur Rahmān bin Muhammad Sakhāwi. He was a proficient scholar of Hadīth, Tafsīr and Adab. He authored a number of works which include ‘al-Maqāsid ul-Hasnah’, ‘al-Qaul ul-Bad’ī’.

[7] Sulaymān bin Ahmad bin Ayyūb Abul Qasim al-Lakhmi al-Tibrāni. He was a muhaddith of high calibre and has written many books which includes ‘al-Mu’ājim us-Salāsah’ al-Kabīr, al-Awsat & as-Saghīr.

[8] There are three views regarding khabar and hadīth 1) both have same meaning. 2) Which comes from the Prophet is hadīth and which comes from other than him is khabar. 3) khabar is common term and hadith is specific. It means what comes from the Prophet is hadīth and what comes from him as well as others is khabar or in other words every hadīth is khabar but every khabar is not hadīth.

[9] (or) Marf’ū hadīth (raised hadīth) applies exclusively to the hadīth attributed to the Prophet. The raised hadīth may be 1) uninterrupted (muttasil) 2)interrupted(muqati’) or 3)loose(mursal)

[10] An example of this is the hadith narrated by Shaykhain and words are of Abu Dawūd, Sulaymān bin Harb narrated to me, Hammad ul-Ayyub narrated to him from the authority of Nā’fey from the authority of Umar, he said, the Prophet said : 'Do not forbid the female slaves of Allah from (going into) the mosques of Allah.' Here the part of hadīth from ‘Sulaymān bin Harb narrated to me’ to ‘from the authority of Umar’ is sanad and the part of hadīth which contains actual words of the Prophet i.e. 'Do not forbid the female slaves of Allah from (going into) the mosques of Allah.' is matan.

[11] The uninterrupted hadīth is also called “connected” (mawsūl). The term when used without qualification, may be applied to both raised (marfū’) and halted hadīth (mawqūf). It is the hadīth with an isnād which is interrupted because each of its transmitters heard the hadīth from the person above him up to its point of termination.  

[12] Most correct definition of munqat’ī hadīth is: A hadīth in which narrator(s) is missing from sanad or an unknown narrator(s) is mentioned in sanad. Munqat’ī hadīth is za’īf hadīth as it is not muttasil.

Example of the hadīth in which a narrator is missing from  the sanad is the hadīth which Abdul Razzāq narrated from Sawri, who narrated from Abu Ishāq, who narrated from Zayd and he narrated from Huzaif’ā (marfu’an) that he said :”If you appoint Abu Bak’r a caliph then he is strong and honest”. Here a narrator named Sharīq is missing between Sawri and Abdul Razzāq as Sawri did not hear this hadīth directly from Abu Ishaq but from Sharīq and Sharīq heard is from Abu Ishāq.

Example of the hadīth in which unknown narrator is mentioned is, the Prophet said: O my lord I seek firm resolve in the matter…’ This hadīth is narrated by Abul U’lā bin Abdullah, who narrated from two men, who narrated from Shaddād bin Aws. Here muhaddithīn are unanimous upon the fact that these ‘two men’ are unknown.

[13] Mu’allaq is the hadīth in which there is consecutive omission of one or more narrators from the start of sanad, and the hadīth is attributed to the narrators who come after them. Allāmah Ibn Hajar writes in ‘Nuzhat un-Nazar’: Among the forms of mu’allaq ahadīth are: (a) Where the entire isnād is omitted, so it says for example: “The Messenger of Allah said…” (b)Where the entire isnād is omitted and only the name of the Sahābi or the names of the Sahābi and Tāba’ī are left. (c)Where the name of the one who narrated it is omitted and it is attributed to someone who came above him (in the isnād).

[14] A loose hadīth is treated as if it were weak unless its source is established as sound by the relation of the text through another line of transmission.

[15] The doctrine which the majority of the hadīth experts and critics has settled on is that a loose hadīth may not be cited as a proof and is judged to be weak. Imām Muslim writes in his introduction to sahīh, “The loose hadīth does not constitute a proof according to the principles of my doctrine and that of those knowledgeable about reports.

[16] Problematic is the name of a particular type of interrupted hadīth. Every problematic hadīth is interrupted (munqati) but not every interrupted hadīth is problematic. The problematic hadīth consists of the hadīth having an isnād lacking two or more transmitters. 

[17] There are two sub categories of misrepresentation. The first is misrepresentation in the isnād (tadlīs al-isnād). This consists either of a transmitter relating from someone he met but did not hear hadīth from him, giving erroneous impression that he heard the hadīth directly from him. The second sub-category is misrepresentation of teachers (tadlīs al-shuyūkh). This consists of a transmitter relating from a teacher a hadīth he did not hear from him and referring to him by unfamiliar name, paidonymic, gentilic or a description to conceal his identity. 

[18] This is misrepresentation in isnād. It is extremely detestable and majority of scholars condemn it. An illustration of that is the report we heard from Ali bin Khashram in which he said, “we were with Sufyān bin Uyayna and he said, ‘Zuhrī said.’ Someone asked him ‘Zuhrī transmitter to you?’ He fell silent and then said, ‘Zuhrī said.’ Then someone asked him, ‘Did you hear it from Zuhrī?’ He said ‘No, I did not hear it from Zuhrī, nor I heard it from someone who heard it from Zuhrī. Abdul Razzāq related it to me from Ma’mar from Zuhrī.

[19] It is narrated from Imam Shāfi’ī that Shu’ba said “Misrepresentation is the brother of falsehood.” We also heard that Shu’ba said “I would rather commit adultery than misrepresentation.” Shu’ba’s excessive zeal to suppress and deter misrepresentation carried him into hyperbole.

[20] One faction of hadīth scholars and legal experts discredit the misrepresentor, saying his transmission is not to be accepted under any circumstances, whether he makes clear that he heard a particular hadīth from his teacher or not.   The correct course is to make a distinction. The hadīth a misrepresenter relates with an equivocal expression which doesn’t make clear the audition and cohesion of the hadīth is treated like the various types of       loose hadīth (mursal). The hadīth he relates with an expression that clearly indicates cohesion – like “I heard” (sami’tu), he transmitted to us (haddathanā), he informed us (akhbaranā) and similar ones – may be accepted and employed as a proof. There are very many hadīth of this kind in the two Sahīhs and other well respected books.  This is because misrepresentation is not falsehood; rather it is a kind of deliberate obfuscation through use of equivocal expression. 

[21] A disrupted hadīth is one transmitted in different forms. One of its transmitters relates it one way and another relates it a different way from the first. We call it disrupted only when the two transmissions are equal. If one of the two relations is preferable to the extent that the other can no longer stand up against it because its transmitter is more retentive, studied with the teachers longer or there exists some other cogent reason for favouring it, the verdict is in the favour of the preferable transmission. In that case hadīth may not be characterized as “disrupted” without qualification and it is not treated in the same way. Sometimes the disruption occurs in the text of the hadīth and sometimes in the isnād. Sometimes it comes from a single transmitter and sometimes it occurs among a number of its transmitters. Disruption makes a hadīth weak, since it indicates that it was not accurately preserved.

[22] There are several subcategories of interpolated hadith. One consists of the remarks of one of the transmitter of a hadīth of the Prophet being interpolated into the hadīth itself. This happens because the companion or someone later offered some of his own comments immediately after relating the hadīth and later transmitters related those comments as a continuation of the hadīth, without separating them by identifying the speaker. The matter is confusing for someone who doesn’t know the reality of the situation and that person may erroneously believe that the entire text is from the Prophet.

[23] It is not permissible to practise any form of the interpolation of hadīth deliberately.

[24] Mu’an’an is the hadith in which transmitter narrates the hadīth from his teacher but without mentioning the way he received it from him. The transmitter doesn’t mention if he heard it from his teacher, or his teacher narrated to him, or his teacher reported to him.

[25] A grounded hadīth is a hadīth that a companion raised to the Prophet with a chain that has the outward appearance of being connected. If the number (of narrators in the chain) are few, either it will end with:

1)       The Prophet.

2)       Or an Imām with a distinguished description.

First is called absolute elevation (‘ulūw mutlaq) and second is relative elevation (‘ulūw nisbī) (Nukhba tul-Fik’r)

[26] A hadīth can have anomaly in matan as well as sanad.  

[27] The Scholars have three different views with regard to acting on weak hadīth. The first view is that it is of absolutely no value and shouldn’t be followed whether in reference to moral virtues or to legal rules. The second view validates weak hadīth generally and considers that acting upon a weak hadīth is preferable to acting on personal opinion and ra’ay. The third view which is preferred by scholars and legal experts has it that a weak hadīth may be followed in moral virtues but not in legal injunctions, provided that it fulfils certain conditions, namely that none of its narrators are implicated in lying and distortion of hadīth, nor known as matrūk al-hadīth, that its message is in conformity with the valid norms and principles of Islam, and that acting on it is not accompanied by dogmatic belief. 

[28] Imām Nawawī writes in “al-azkār”: Scholars of hadīth, legal experts and others have said: It is allowed and recommended to act on weak hadīth in moral virtues, encouragement to good and discouragement to evil which is not forged. However, in case of legal injunctions like halāl, harām, business transactions, marriage and divorce etc. only sound and fair will be accepted.